United States 

Department of

Agriculture

Forest 

Service

September

2012

Final Environmental 

Impact Statement

Ogden Vegetation Management Project

and Forest Plan Amendments

Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District, Deschutes National Forest

Deschutes County, Oregon

Legal Location: T 22S, R15 E, Sections 21, 22, 26-29, 31-36; T 23 S, R 14 E, 

Sections 11-14; T 23 S, R 15 E, Sections 1-18; Willamette Meridian

 

 

 
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and 

activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political 

beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all 

programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of 

program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET 

Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write 

USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and 

Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and 

TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Ogden Final EIS  i

Final Environmental Impact Statement

Deschutes National Forest 

Deschutes County, Oregon

Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service

Responsible Official: John Allen, Supervisor, Deschutes National Forest

For Information Contact: Beth Peer, Environmental Coordinator

63095 Deschutes Market Road

Bend, OR 97701

(541) 383-4769

Abstract: This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) contains the Forest Service’s proposal 

to implement treatments that would move the area towards a more resilient landscape and provide a 

diversity of habitats closer to what historically occurred. The treatments would reduce forest density 

and fuels in order to promote and sustain late and old structured forest stands, and increase 

resilience to insects, disease, and stand-replacing wildfire. The project units are located within a 

26,521 acre project area of Deschutes National Forest Lands approximately 15 miles south of the city 

of Bend within Deschutes County, Oregon. Three alternatives were analyzed in this FEIS, a no 

action alternative and two action alternatives. Approximately 14,182 acres would be treated under 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and approximately 14,422 acres would be treated under Alternative 3. 

Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative. 

Two Forest Plan Amendments (FPA) are proposed for Scenic Views Management Area (M9) 

foreground. The first would amend LRMP, S&G M9-27 to allow visible effects of harvest cleanup and 

fuels reduction for approximately five years rather than “... not be visible to the casual forest visitor for

one year after the work has been completed.” The second would amend LRMP, S&G M9-90 that 

would allow burning acreages that are larger than the “...small, normally less than 5 acres,...” as 

provided within the Scenic Views Management Area foreground. 

 
Ogden Final EIS  ii
Ogden Final EIS  iii

READER’S GUIDE

This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) contains information about a project proposal that 

will reduce forest density and fuels in order to promote and sustain late and old structured forest 

stands, and increase resilience to insects, disease, and stand replacing wildfire.

The information in this FEIS is organized to facilitate consideration of the environmental effects by 

the public, and by the Forest Supervisor of the Deschutes National Forest, who is responsible for 

deciding whether or not to implement the Proposed Action or another alternative considered for this 

proposal.

Understanding the structure of this document is important to an overall understanding of the 

information required in an EIS. The following provides an overview of the components of this 

document.

Table of Contents: A table of contents is presented at the beginning of the document. Lists of tables 

and figures are also included.

Executive Summary: The summary of the Final EIS provides a concise overview of the Purpose 

and Need for action, the Key Issues that became apparent during the 30-day public scoping period, 

and a comparison of the three alternatives.

Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need: Chapter 1 describes the Purpose and Need for the proposal, and the 

Proposed Action. It includes Management Direction for the project, and the Decision Framework. 

Public Involvement and the Issues generated by public comments are explained here.

Chapter 2 – Alternatives: Chapter 2 includes a description of the alternative development process, 

and discussions on alternatives and actions considered but eliminated from detailed analysis. The 

focus of this chapter is Alternatives Considered in Detail, including the No Action (Alternative 1), the 

Proposed Action (Alternative 2) as developed by the Forest Service that focused the analysis for this 

project, and one additional alternative developed by the Forest Service, Alternative 3, which responds 

to several planning issues. Mitigation measures to reduce potential resource impacts are documented 

in this chapter. Also included in this chapter is a comparison of alternatives that summarizes data in a 

table format. Finally, sale area improvement projects and monitoring needs are presented at the end 

of this chapter that will provide important information regarding the specificity and effectiveness of 

treatments and mitigations.

Chapter 3 – The Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences: Chapter 3 describes 

current physical, biological, and social and economic environments within the area of influence of the 

Proposed Actions. This information provides the baseline for assessment and comparison of the 

potential impacts of the action alternatives. In addition, this chapter provides a comprehensive 

scientific and analytical comparison of the potential environmental impacts of the action alternatives 

to the No Action Alternative. In order to facilitate comparison of information provided, this chapter 

is organized and subdivided into resource areas/disciplines in a manner appropriate to the affected 

environment for this area.

Chapter 4 – List of Preparers and Coordination: Chapter 4 lists the individuals, Federal, State and 

local agencies and tribes that the Forest Service consulted during the development of this FEIS. It 

also discloses the distribution of the document including Federal Agencies, federally recognized 

tribes, State and local governments and organizations and individuals representing a wide range of 

views. The references, glossary, and index are in the last part of this chapter.

Appendices: The appendices provide more detailed information to support the analyses presented in 

the EIS. Additional documentation, including more detailed analyses of project area resources, may 

be found in the project planning record located at the Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger Station in Bend, Oregon.
Ogden Final EIS  iv

Acronyms used in this Document:

BA Biological Assessment

BCC Birds of Conservation Concern

BE Biological Evaluation

BI Beneficial Impact

BMP Best Management Practices

BO Biological Opinion

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CWM Coarse Woody Material

CWPP Community Wildland Protection Plan

DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement

DEQ Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

DBH Diameter at Breast Height

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

ESA Endangered Species Act of 1973

FS Forest Service

FSH Forest Service Handbook

FSM Forest Service Manual

FVS Forest Vegetation Simulator

GTR Green Tree Replacement

HRV Historic Range of Variability

IDT Interdisciplinary Team

INFISH Inland Native Fish Strategy

LAA Likely to Adversely Affect

LFR Ladder Fuels Reduction

LMZ Lower Management Zone

LOS Late and Old Structure

LRMP Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1990)

MA Management Area

MIIH May Impact Individuals or Habitat but Will Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing 

or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species

MIS Management Indicator Species

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

MPP Maximum Population Potential

MSA Management Strategy Area
Ogden Final EIS  v

MST Mechanical Shrub Treatment

MVUM Motor Vehicle Use Map

NE No Effect

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NFMA National Forest Management Act

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NI No Impact

NNVM Newberry National Volcanic Monument

ODFW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

OGMA Old Growth Management Area

OHV Off-Highway Vehicle

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Association

PAG Plant Association Group

PDC Project Design Criteria from the Programmatic Biological Assessment

PFA Post Fledgling Area

PM Particulate Matter

PSO Peter Skene Ogden

RHCA Riparian Habitat Conservation Area

SDI Stand Density Index

SOC Species of Concern

TES Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive

UMZ Upper Management Zone

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
Ogden Final EIS  vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 1: Purpose and Need for Project ............................................................................... 1

Changes Between Draft and Final .................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Context for Purpose and Need ................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Purpose and Need for Action ..................................................................................................................... 5

1.4 Proposed Action.......................................................................................................................................... 5

1.5 Public Involvement / Scoping Process Used.............................................................................................. 6

1.6 Planning Issues .......................................................................................................................................... 7

1.7 Planning Framework..................................................................................................................................10

1.8 Other Law, Regulation, Policy...................................................................................................................12

1.9 Other Informing Documents......................................................................................................................14

1.10 Project Record..........................................................................................................................................14

1.11 Decision Framework................................................................................................................................15

Chapter 2: Alternatives....................................................................................................... 18

Changes Between Draft and Final EIS ............................................................................................................18

2.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................18

2.2 Alternatives Considered In Detail..............................................................................................................18

2.3 Description of Activities Common to Alternative 2 And Alternative 3....................................................29

2.4 Connected Actions Common to Alternatives 2 and 3 ...............................................................................36

2.5 Resource Protection Measures Common to Alternative 2 and Alternative 3.............................................37

2.6 Comparison of the Alternatives Analyzed in Detail ..................................................................................49

2.7 Monitoring Common to Alternatives 2 and 3 ...........................................................................................53

2.8 Summary of Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed in Detail ............................................................55

2.9 Sale Area Improvement Projects..............................................................................................................57

Chapter 3: Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences................................... 60

Changes Between Draft and Final EIS ............................................................................................................60

3.1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................60

3.2 Basis for Effects Analysis..........................................................................................................................60

3.3 Forested Vegetation ...................................................................................................................................68

3.4 Fire and Fuels...........................................................................................................................................137

3.5 Air Quality ...............................................................................................................................................177

3.6 Wildlife ..................................................................................................................................................181

3.7 Soils........................................................................................................................................................357

3.8 Fisheries and Hydrology .........................................................................................................................381

3.9 Scenic Resource ......................................................................................................................................407
Ogden Final EIS  vii

3.10 Botany – Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plants......................................................................414

3.11 Botany – Invasive Plants / Noxious Weeds ...........................................................................................415

3.12 Roads and Access ..................................................................................................................................419

3.13 Recreation..............................................................................................................................................423

3.14 Inventoried Roadless Areas, Potential Wilderness Areas, and Other Undeveloped Lands .................430

3.15 Cultural Resources.................................................................................................................................444

3.16 Economic Analysis................................................................................................................................448

3.17 Other Disclosures..................................................................................................................................455

CHAPTER 4: PUBLIC Notification & Participation ................................................................461

Changes Between Draft and Final EIS ..........................................................................................................461

4.1 Public Participation.................................................................................................................................461

4.2 Public Comment Period ..........................................................................................................................461

4.3 Consultation with Other Agencies..........................................................................................................462

4.4 Preparers / Interdisciplinary Team..........................................................................................................463

Literature cited ..................................................................................................................467

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Units and Prescriptions listed for each Alternative

Appendix B – Wildlife: Supporting Information for Deadwood Analysis and Paulina Creek Old 

Growth Management Area Plan; Road Density Evaluation

Appendix C – Soils Estimated Detrimental Conditions by Unit and Alternative

Appendix D – Map of Geothermal-Exploration Activities and Lease Areas within Ogden Project 

Area

Appendix E – Additional Stand Data

Appendix F – Response to Comments on the Draft EIS

TABLE OF TABLES

Table 1: Summary of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Thinning/Harvest* and Fuels Treatment** Acres ..........6

Table 2: LRMP Management Area Acres in Ogden Project Area........................................................................11

Table 3: Summary of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Activities.........................................................................19

Table 4: Summary of Alternative 3 Activities.....................................................................................................24

Table 5: Summary of Alternative 3 Changes to Thinning Treatments from Alternative 2..................................25

Table 6: Lower Management Zone (LMZ) and Minimum Stocking Density following proposed thinning and 

fuels treatments.....................................................................................................................................................30

Table 7: Roads within Project area and Activities for each Action Alternative ..................................................36

Table 8: Summary Comparison of the Two Action Alternatives ........................................................................50

Table 9: Summary of Treatment by Cover Type and Treatment Objective ........................................................50

Table 10: How the Alternatives Address the Purpose and Need .........................................................................52

Table 11: How the Alternatives Address the Key Issues......................................................................................52
Ogden Final EIS  viii

Table 12: Past Actions and Events that Contribute to the Current Conditions in the Project Area and Cumulative 

Effects Area ..........................................................................................................................................................63

Table 13: Ongoing or Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions, in the Project Area and Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed that may contribute to Cumulative Effects. ........................................................................................64

Table 14: Tree Densities by Size Class in early 1900s Ponderosa Pine Stand near LaPine (from Munger, 1917)

..............................................................................................................................................................................71

Table 15: Ponderosa Pine Eastside Old-Growth Reference Condition (from Youngblood et al. 2004)..............71

Table 16: Stand Density Reference Conditions and Measures of Site Productivity ............................................73

Table 17: Diameter Growth Reference Condition Expressed in Terms of Basal Area........................................74

Table 18: Existing (2010) and future (2015) stand age class distribution within lodgepole pine analysis area ...78

Table 19: Existing Condition of the Six Selected Units Grouped by Ponderosa Pine PI Classification..............86

Table 20. Units with connectivity corridors proposed for treatment and their associated treatments and 

conditions. ............................................................................................................................................................91

Table 21: Alternatives 2 and 3 Thinning and Fuels Treatments Summarized by Three Ponderosa Pine Stocking 

Levels ...................................................................................................................................................................93

Table 22: Historic Range of Variability .............................................................................................................114

Table 23: Structural Stage by Alternative Compared to Historic Range of Variability......................................117

Table 24: Principles of Fire Resilient Forests (Agee 2002 and Hessburg & Agee 2003)..................................138

Table 25: Protection Areas of Interest and Corresponding Acres......................................................................143

Table 26: Fire and Fuels Related Goals, Standards and Guidelines ..................................................................144

Table 27: Condition Class Descriptions ............................................................................................................152

Table 28: Acres by Fire Regime and Condition Class Ogden Project Area. .....................................................153

Table 29: Wildfire Hazard Rating Matrix..........................................................................................................159

Table 30: Existing Condition/No Action Hazard Ratings and Acreage.............................................................160

Table 31: Percentage of Landscape with Low Fire Hazard Potential ................................................................164

Table 32: Percentage of Landscape with Low Fire Hazard Potential ................................................................165

Table 33: Wildfire Risk rating as measured by Burn Probability within the existing condition of the Ogden 

project area .........................................................................................................................................................167

Table 34: Wildfire Risk rating as measured by Burn Probability within Alternative 2 of the Ogden project area

............................................................................................................................................................................170

Table 35: Wildfire Risk rating as measured by burn probability within Alternative 3 of the Junction project area

............................................................................................................................................................................171

Table 36: Cumulative effects within the Ogden EIS .........................................................................................176

Table 37: Amount of burning proposed by alternative. .....................................................................................179

Table 38: Estimated Smoke Emissions – Wildfire under Extreme Conditions – Prescribed Fire under Springlike Conditions Following Thinning and Mowing..............................................................................................179

Table 39: Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate Animal Species known to Occur or May Occur on the BendFt. Rock Ranger District.....................................................................................................................................186

Table 40: Fisher habitat within the subwatersheds and project area..................................................................190

Table 41: The following Region 6 Sensitive animal species are either known to occur or may potentially occur 

on the Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District.................................................................................................................192

Table 42: Acres of bald eagle habitat in the project area, proposed units, and the Deschutes National Forest. 195

Table 43: Peregrine Falcon Nesting Habitat on the Deschutes National Forest ................................................197

Table 44: Acres of waterfowl habitat at the Forest, watershed, subwatershed and project scales. ....................200

Table 45: Partners In Flight (PIF) Summary of the White-headed Woodpecker Species Assessment Scores for 

the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (http://www.rmbo.org/pif/pifdb.html). ...........................................203

Table 46: Existing snag distribution >10”dbh in white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat on the Deschutes 

NF.......................................................................................................................................................................204

Table 47: Existing snag distribution >20”dbh in white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat on the Deschutes 

NF.......................................................................................................................................................................204

Table 48: Comparison of existing white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat(>20”dbh) to HRV....................205

Table 49: Nesting habitat for white-headed woodpeckers displayed in increasing landscape scales. ...............206
Ogden Final EIS  ix

Table 50: Summary Table of Snag Distributions within white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat (for the series 

of tables that have supplied the detail here see Appendix A of the Biological Evaluation). ..............................207

Table 51: Alternative 2 proposed thinning acres within white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat.................209

Table 52: Alternative 3 proposed thinning acres within white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat.................210

Table 53: Lewis’ Woodpecker Nest Tree Characteristics. ................................................................................214

Table 54: Nesting habitat for Lewis’ woodpeckers displayed in increasing landscape scales ..........................216

Table 55: Summary of Effects to Threatened, Endangered, Candidate and Region 6 Sensitive Species..........221

Table 56: Summary of Determinations of Threatened, Endangered, Candidate, and Region 6 Sensitive Species

............................................................................................................................................................................222

Table 57: Wildlife Species Considered (Those in Bold Receive Further Consideration) .................................223

Table 58: Goshawk nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales...................................................231

Table 59: Acreage breakdown for each of the stand categories in the goshawk territories. Each category gets 

progressively bigger and encompasses the categories above it (e.g. Alternate Nest = Nest Core + other stands; 

PFA = Alternate + other stands; etc.) .................................................................................................................233

Table 60: Stand structure breakdown (ac) for each goshawk territories............................................................234

Table 61: Other activities (proposed and existing) within the goshawk territories with potential effects. ........235

Table 62: Acres of Alternative 2 proposed activities within the goshawk territories (inclusive of the foraging 

areas). Some areas propose multiple treatments (e.g. timber harvest and mowing). .........................................236

Table 63: Alternative 3 proposed activities within the goshawk territories. Some areas propose multiple 

treatments ...........................................................................................................................................................238

Table 64: Alternative 3 proposed activities within the goshawk post-fledging areas (PFAs). Some areas 

propose multiple treatments................................................................................................................................238

Table 65: Summary of short-term impacts to goshawk nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales ........240

Table 66: Cooper’s hawk nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales..........................................242

Table 67: Acres of proposed treatments within mapped Cooper’s hawk nesting habitat by action alternative.243

Table 68: Summary of impacts to Cooper’s hawk nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales................244

Table 69: Sharp-shinned hawk nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales..................................245

Table 70: Acres of proposed treatments within mapped Sharp-shinned hawk nesting habitat by action 

alternative ...........................................................................................................................................................246

Table 71. Summary of impacts to Sharp-shinned hawk nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales........247

Table 72: Great gray owl nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales ..........................................248

Table 73: Summary of impacts to great gray owl nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales .................250

Table 74: Great blue heron nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales .......................................251

Table 75: Summary of impacts to great blue heron nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales ..............252

Table 76: Red-tailed hawk nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales........................................253

Table 77: Summary of impacts to red-tailed hawk nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales ...............254

Table 78: Osprey nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales (acres with nesting structure was not 

reported for the watershed or subwatershed scale).............................................................................................256

Table 79: Summary of effects to osprey nesting habitat with nesting structure ................................................258

Table 80: Summer Range Standards and Guidelines relevant to the Ogden Planning Area..............................261

Table 81: Mule Deer Summer Range habitat at different landscape scales.......................................................261

Table 82: Summarized impacts of proposed treatments on hiding cover for Alternative 2...............................263

Table 83: Summarized impacts of proposed treatments on hiding cover for Alternative 3...............................267

Table 84: Summary of proposed activities’ effects by alternative.....................................................................268

Table 85: Structures (%) used as resting and denning sites by American marten in lodgepole pine dominated 

sites in the Oregon Cascade Mountains..............................................................................................................269

Table 86: Relative range of snag and tree sizes used by American marten for denning and resting in the Blue 

Mountains and Washington Cascades. ...............................................................................................................271

Table 87: Relative snag densities at American marten occupied sites in the Blue Mountains, Eastside Mixed 

Conifer Forest, and Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, Larger Trees, and Lodgepole Pine Forest, Small/medium 

Trees vegetation condition classes. ....................................................................................................................271

Table 88: Relative size range of hollow down logs used by American marten for denning and resting in the 

Blue Mountains, Eastside Mixed Conifer Forest and Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, Larger Trees vegetation 
Ogden Final EIS  x

condition class. (No data for down wood size associated with marten use are available for the Lodgepole Pine 

wildlife habitat types) .........................................................................................................................................271

Table 89: Forestwide ≥ 5” dbh log densities compared with Historic Range of Variability (HRV) .................272

Table 90: Forestwide >20” dbh log densities compared with Historic Range of Variability (HRV) ................272

Table 91: Marten denning habitat at different landscape scales based on forest vegetation..............................273

Table 92: Distribution of snags ≥ 20 in./ac by tolerance intervals for marten denning habitat on the landscape

............................................................................................................................................................................275

Table 93: Forest-wide historic range of variability and existing percentage of habitat types used by marten with 

large diameter snags ...........................................................................................................................................275

Table 94: Comparison of Ogden Planning Area landscape to historic range of variability (highlighted represent 

densities used by marten)....................................................................................................................................277

Table 95: Summary of Alternative 2 effects to potential marten denning habitat .............................................279

Table 96: Summary of Alternative 3 effects to potential marten denning habitat .............................................281

Table 97: Existing snag distribution >10”dbh in Williamson’s sapsucker nesting habitat on the Deschutes NF 

(Highlighted density reflects current Standard and Guidelines).........................................................................295

Table 98: Existing snag distribution >20”dbh in Williamson’s sapsucker nesting habitat on the Deschutes NF 

(Highlighted density reflects current Standard and Guidelines).........................................................................295

Table 99: HRV analysis of the Deschutes National Forest with >20”dbh snags in the Eastside Mixed Conifer 

habitat type. (Highlighted density reflects current Standard and Guidelines) ....................................................295

Table 100: Comparison of existing Williamson’s sapsucker nesting habitat to HRV (snags >20” dbh)...........296

Table 101: Williamson’s sapsucker nesting habitat at different landscape scales based on forest vegetation ..297

Table 102: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for Williamson’s sapsucker for snags>20”dbh.

............................................................................................................................................................................297

Table 103: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for Williamson’s sapsucker for snags>10”dbh.

............................................................................................................................................................................298

Table 104: Comparison of alternatives impacting Williamson’s Sapsucker nesting habitat .............................299

Table 105: Tolerance levels for snag density >3”dbh and >10”dbh for the hairy woodpecker as reported in 

DecAID in post-fire habitats (T.L. = Tolerance Level) ......................................................................................301

Table 106: Existing snag distribution >10”dbh in hairy woodpecker nesting habitat on the Deschutes NF. ....301

Table 107: Comparison of existing hairy woodpecker nesting habitat to HRV. ...............................................302

Table 108: Hairy woodpecker nesting habitat at different landscape scales based on forest vegetation ...........303

Table 109: Snag Distribution for Hairy Woodpeckers for snags >10”dbh. .......................................................303

Table 110: Proposed actions within hairy woodpecker nesting habitat by alternative. .....................................305

Table 111: Tolerance levels (T. L.) for snag density >10” and 20” dbh for the three-toed woodpecker as 

reported in DecAID in green stands and post fire stands for snags >10”. ..........................................................306

Table 112: Tolerance levels for snag size used by three-toed woodpeckers by habitat type. ............................307

Table 113: Existing snag distribution >10”dbh in three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat on the Deschutes NF 

(highlighted is the density that the Standard and Guidelines fall within) ...........................................................307

Table 114: Existing down wood distribution >5”dbh in three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat on the Deschutes 

NF.......................................................................................................................................................................308

Table 115: HRV analysis of the Deschutes National Forest with >10”dbh snags in the Eastside Mixed Conifer 

habitat type. (Highlighted represents the Standard and Guidelines)...................................................................308

Table 116: HRV analysis of the Deschutes National Forest with down wood >5”dbh in the Eastside Mixed 

Conifer habitat type. (Highlighted represents the Standard and Guidelines)......................................................309

Table 117: Comparison of existing three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat to HRV. .......................................309

Table 118: Comparison of existing three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat to HRV. .......................................309

Table 119: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for three-toed woodpeckers for snags>10”dbh.

............................................................................................................................................................................310

Table 120: Down Wood Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for three-toed woodpeckers for logs 

>5”dbh. ...............................................................................................................................................................311

Table 121: Summary of proposed actions under Alternative 2 within potential three-toed woodpecker nesting 

habitat effects to snag densities ..........................................................................................................................312
Ogden Final EIS  xi

Table 122: Summary of proposed actions under Alternative 3 within potential three-toed woodpecker nesting 

habitat effects to downed wood density..............................................................................................................313

Table 123: Summary of proposed actions within potential three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat effects to snag 

densities..............................................................................................................................................................317

Table 124: Summary of proposed actions within potential three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat effects to 

downed wood density .........................................................................................................................................318

Table 125: Summary of proposed activities’ effects within higher elevation lodgepole pine habitat by 

alternative. ..........................................................................................................................................................320

Table 126: Tolerance levels for snag size used by black-backed woodpeckers for nesting, roosting, or foraging.

............................................................................................................................................................................321

Table 127: Tolerance levels (T. L.) for dead wood for the black-backed woodpecker as reported in DecAID in 

green stands. .......................................................................................................................................................321

Table 128: Existing snag distribution >10”dbh in black-backed woodpecker nesting habitat on the Deschutes 

National Forest. ..................................................................................................................................................322

Table 129: Existing down wood distribution >5”dbh in black-backed woodpecker nesting habitat on the 

Deschutes NF. ....................................................................................................................................................323

Table 130: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for black-backed woodpeckers for 

snags>10”dbh. ....................................................................................................................................................324

Table 131: Down Wood Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for black-backed woodpeckers for 

logs >5”dbh. .......................................................................................................................................................324

Table 132: Alternative 2 effects to snag habitat within potential black-backed woodpecker habitat................327

Table 133: Acreage proposed for salvage of lodgepole logs down to Standard and Guideline levels under 

Alternative 2 .......................................................................................................................................................327

Table 134: Alternative 3 effects to snag habitat within potential black-backed woodpecker habitat................328

Table 135: Acreage proposed for salvage of lodgepole logs down to Standard and Guideline levels under 

Alternative 3 .......................................................................................................................................................329

Table 136: Summary of black-backed habitat acres removed by Alternative ...................................................330

Table 137: Northern flicker nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales ......................................331

Table 138: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for pileated woodpeckers for snags>20”dbh.

............................................................................................................................................................................335

Table 139: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for pileated woodpeckers for snags>10”dbh.

............................................................................................................................................................................335

Table 140: Down Wood Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for pileated woodpeckers for down 

wood >5”dbh. .....................................................................................................................................................335

Table 141: Comparison of existing pileated woodpecker nesting habitat to HRV............................................336

Table 142: Comparison of existing pileated woodpecker nesting habitat to HRV. ...........................................336

Table 143: Summary of effects to selected wildlife species..............................................................................338

Table 144: Acres of Wildlife Habitat watershed and the Relative Potential for Dead Wood Influenced by Fire 

Regime and Topographic Position......................................................................................................................341

Table 145: Current distribution of snag densities (# snags >10 in. dbh/acre) within the watersheds (Long 

Prairie, Lower Little Deschutes, respectively) represented by percent of the habitat type with each density. ..343

Table 146: Current distribution of log densities (% cover of log >5 in. LED) within the watersheds (Long 

Prairie, Lower Little Deschutes, respectively) represented by percent of the habitat type with each density. ..343

Table 147: Comparison of CWM Directed and DecAID Levels........................................................................344

Table 148: Summary of Dead Wood transects in the Ogden Project area.........................................................345

Table 149: Comparison of Dead Wood in the Ogden Project area to thresholds displayed in literature and 

Standards and Guidelines. ..................................................................................................................................346

Table 150: Estimated GTRs (trees per acre or “tpa”) required to meet current direction..................................347

Table 151: Size Class and Species Distribution within the Paulina Creek OGMA...........................................351

Table 152: Units within connectivity corridors proposed for treatment and their associated treatments and 

conditions. ..........................................................................................................................................................355

Table 153: Monitoring of Past Harvest Activities within the Ogden Project Area ...........................................363

Table 154: Equivalent Clearcut Area (ECA) Calculation for the Action Alternatives......................................387

Table 155: Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) Treatment Units Summary.......................................392
Ogden Final EIS  xii

Table 156: Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) Unit Slopes .............................................................394

Table 157: Summary of Stream Attributes - Paulina Creek Stream Survey (2002) ..........................................399

Table 158: Interim Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs)..........................................................................402

Table 159: Interim Objectives for Pool Frequency............................................................................................402

Table 160: Units within the Paulina Creek Eligible W&S River Corridor........................................................403

Table 161: Description of areas where the inventoried visual quality objective is retention or partial retention 

(Scenic View Foreground Management Area) and underburning is proposed); includes units in both Alternative 

2 and Alternative 3. Both amendments described above are proposed for these areas......................................411

Table 162: Known Weed Sites in the Ogden Planning Area .............................................................................415

Table 163: Road System Density before and after Proposed Closures of the Lava Rock OHV Project. ..........419

Table 164: Travel Analysis - Road Types ..........................................................................................................420

Table 165: Highway Safety Act (HSA) Roads in Project Area .........................................................................420

Table 166: Highway Safety Act (HSA) Pre-Haul Maintenance Needs.............................................................421

Table 167: Collector Road Maintenance Needs ................................................................................................421

Table 168: Units that overlap a PWA and the activities that will occur under Alternative 2. There is no overlap 

of Alternative 3 units with the PWA. .................................................................................................................440

Table 169: Comparison of effects to the PWA by alternative, using values/features that often characterize IRAs 

(36 CFR 294.11).................................................................................................................................................440

Table 170: Volume Removed in 1,000s of Board Feet (Scribner Log Scale). Source: Oregon Department of 

Forestry (http://www.oregon.gov/ODF/index.shtml...........................................................................................449

Table 171: Related Project Treatment Costs .....................................................................................................450

Table 172: Alternative 2 Economic Measures...................................................................................................451

Table 173: Alternative 3 Economic Measures...................................................................................................452

Table 174: Estimated Volume by Alternative ....................................................................................................453

Table 175: Estimated Employment and Lodgepole Pine (LP) and Other Species (OS) Fiber Volume ..............454

Table 176: The Strategic Framework has seven goals to address climate change:............................................458

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Vicinity Map for the Ogden Project Area, Deschutes National Forest, Bend, Oregon .........................xv

Figure 2: Land and Resource Management Plan. The Ogden Project area is primarily within the General Forest 

management area. .................................................................................................................................................16

Figure 3: Ogden - Alternative 2 - Proposed Units and Vegetation Treatments....................................................21

Figure 4. Ogden - Alternative 2 - Proposed Units Fuels Treatments...................................................................22

Figure 5: Ogden - Alternative 3 - Proposed Vegetation Treatments.....................................................................27

Figure 6. Ogden - Alternative 3 - Proposed Fuel Treatments..............................................................................28

Figure 7: Forest Plan Amendment – Units within Scenic Views Retention and Partial Retention Foreground 

Management Areas...............................................................................................................................................35

Figure 8: Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) Zones (Looking Downstream and West)......................46

Figure 9: Existing stands within analysis area less than 40 years old..................................................................81

Figure 10: Photographic examples of stand age classes used in the analysis of Key Issue 1. ..............................82

Figure 11: Stands less than 40 years old in the year 2015 ....................................................................................83

Figure 12: Proportion of Alternative 2 Thinning Acres Stocked Less than the Lower Management Zone (LMZ) 

in 2020..................................................................................................................................................................87

Figure 13. Proportion of Alternative 3 Thinning Acres Stocked Less than the Lower Management Zone (LMZ) 

in 2020..................................................................................................................................................................88

Figure 14: Existing Condition of Sample Units...................................................................................................94

Figure 15: Unit 10 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)97

Figure 16: Unit 10 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification) 98

Figure 17: Unit 36 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)99

Figure 18: Unit 36 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

............................................................................................................................................................................100
Ogden Final EIS  xiii

Figure 19: Unit 209 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

............................................................................................................................................................................101

Figure 20: Unit 209 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

............................................................................................................................................................................102

Figure 21: Unit 251 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (Variable Ponderosa Pine Stocking 

Classification).....................................................................................................................................................103

Figure 22: Unit 251 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (Variable Ponderosa Pine Stocking 

Classification).....................................................................................................................................................104

Figure 23: Unit 254 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

............................................................................................................................................................................105

Figure 24: Unit 254 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

............................................................................................................................................................................106

Figure 25: Unit 949 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking) ..................107

Figure 26: Unit 949 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

............................................................................................................................................................................108

Figure 27. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and associated watershed boundaries. ...........................................110

Figure 28. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and forest types mapped in 1930 (Harrington 2003a). ..................111

Figure 29. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and plant association groups..........................................................112

Figure 30. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and associated biophysical environments. .....................................116

Figure 31: Alternative 1 ponderosa pine 2020 stand structures and densities summarized................................118

Figure 32: Alternative 1 mixed conifer 2020 stand structures and densities summarized..................................119

Figure 33: Alternative 2 ponderosa pine 2020 stand structures and densities summarized...............................120

Figure 34: Alternative 2 mixed conifer 2020 stand structures and densities summarized..................................121

Figure 35. Alternative 3 ponderosa pine 2020 stand structures and densities summarized. ..............................122

Figure 36. Alternative 3 mixed conifer 2020 stand structures and densities summarized. ................................123

Figure 37: Projected large trees/high density in ponderosa/lodgepole pine stands with prior harvest (Unit 10, 

254).....................................................................................................................................................................126

Figure 38: Projected large trees/high density in ponderosa/lodgepole pine stands with no prior harvest (Unit 

209, 251).............................................................................................................................................................127

Figure 39: Projected large trees/high density in ponderosa pine stands with prior harvest (Units 36 and 949). 128

Figure 40: Desired Future Condition and Example of Light Underburning ......................................................143

Figure 41: Desired future condition ponderosa pine with grass/shrub understory ...........................................143

Figure 42: Light intensity underburn in ponderosa pine with grass/shrub understory.......................................143

Figure 43: This picture shows the difference in results from a wildfire in stands untreated (to the left of road) 

and treated (to the right of road). The stand on the left was untreated prior to a wildfire that resulted in 90% 

mortality. The stand on the right had been precommercial thinned, mowed and underburned; the resulting low 

intensity wildfire resulted in little to no mortality in the overstory. ...................................................................144

Figure 44: Fire History in the Ogden area large fires 150+ acres shown in red. Ignition sources vary across the 

landscape. ...........................................................................................................................................................149

Figure 45: Fire Regimes for the Ogden Project Area ........................................................................................151

Figure 46: Current Condition Class for the Ogden project area ........................................................................153

Figure 47: Paulina Creek existing vegetation and fuels conditions. ..................................................................157

Figure 48: Existing Condition Fire Hazard .......................................................................................................161

Figure 49: Potential Fire Hazard for Alternative 2 ............................................................................................164

Figure 50: Potential Fire Hazard of Alternative 3 .............................................................................................165

Figure 51: Existing Condition Wildfire Risk as measured by Burn Probability................................................168

Figure 52: Major Travel Pathways of Existing Condition.................................................................................169

Figure 53: Alternative 2 Wildfire Risk as measured by Burn Probability .........................................................171

Figure 54: Alternative 3 Wildfire Risk as measured by Burn Probability .........................................................172

Figure 55: Major Travel Pathways of Alternative 2 ..........................................................................................173

Figure 56: Major Travel Pathways of Alternative 3 ..........................................................................................175

Figure 57: Cumulative Effects Area by Planning Area .....................................................................................184

Figure 58. Cumulative Effects Area by Watershed Unit ...................................................................................185

Figure 59. Ogden project area distribution in watersheds, and Ogden project area by subwatershed. ..............186
Ogden Final EIS  xiv

Figure 60: Relative amount of Ogden project area within two watersheds (left); Relative amount of Ogden 

project area within subwatersheds (right). ..........................................................................................................206

Figure 61: Alternative 1 (No Action) – Snag Recruitment Over Time..............................................................212

Figure 62: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) - Snag Recruitment over Time – Following Treatment................213

Figure 63: Alternative 3 - Snag Recruitment over Time – Following Treatment..............................................213

Figure 64: Existing goshawk territories within the Ogden planning area..........................................................233

Figure 65: Spatial representation of Alternative 2 proposed activities within the goshawk territories..............237

Figure 66: Spatial representation of Alt. 3 proposed activities within the goshawk territories. ........................239

Figure 67: Current hiding cover within the Ogden project area. .......................................................................262

Figure 68: Hiding cover removed (in light blue) after implementation of Alternative 2...................................264

Figure 69: Hiding cover removed (in light blue) after implementation of Alternative 3...................................266

Figure 70: Existing marten habitat within the Ogden project area based on Forest vegetation data. ................274

Figure 71: Alternative 2 unit overlap with existing marten habitat within the Ogden project area. Habitat not 

impacted by proposed actions is represented in a maroon color, habitat still functioning after proposed actions is 

shown in blue, and habitat altered by proposed actions is in pink. .....................................................................280

Figure 72: Alternative 3 unit overlap with existing marten habitat within the Ogden project area. ..................282

Figure 73: Alternative 3 unit overlap with existing marten habitat within the Ogden project area. Blue 

highlighted portions are units with a prescription that is not likely to impact marten denning habitat ..............283

Figure 74: Marten denning habitat (in purple) within the overlapping watersheds and adjacent watersheds in 

vicinity of the Ogden planning area....................................................................................................................285

Figure 75: Alternative 2 affects to potential three-toed woodpecker habitat (based on snags)..........................316

Figure 76: Proposed Alternative 3 activities within potential three-toed woodpecker habitat. .........................319

Figure 77: Three-toed woodpecker habitat (in purple) in relation to the NNVM..............................................320

Figure 78: Potential black-backed woodpecker habitat within the Ogden Planning Area.................................326

Figure 79: Spatial display of Ogden Project Area in relation to Watersheds and Habitat Types ......................342

Figure 80: Dead wood transects in relation to plant associations ......................................................................345

Figure 81: Location of Dead Wood transects in relation to the proposed actions. ............................................349

Figure 82: Size Class and Canopy Closure Distribution within the Paulina OGMA.........................................351

Figure 83: Connectivity Corridors within and Adjacent to the Project Area .....................................................353

Figure 84: Inherent Soil Productivity within the Ogden Project Area ................................................................361

Figure 85: Paulina Creek within the 1998 McKay Fire Area (Photo taken in 2009)..........................................390

Figure 86: Paulina Creek and Typical Riparian Zone within the Project Area...................................................392

Figure 87: Hillslopes within Alternative 2 RHCA Units East Side of Project Area. Alt. 2 also includes units 

shown for Alternative 3 in Figure 88..................................................................................................................395

Figure 88: Hillslopes within Alternative 2 and 3 RHCA Units ..........................................................................396

Figure 89: Units within the Paulina Cr. Eligible Wild and Scenic River Interim Mgmt. Corridor....................404

Figure 90: Developed Recreation Sites and Trails within the Ogden Project Area. ..........................................425

Figure 91: 1943 Aerial Photo of Ogden area, showing railroad grades, roads, and heavy logging. ..................432

Figure 92: Location of Inventoried Roadless Areas in proximity to the Ogden Project Area; Alternative 2 on the 

left, and Alternative 3 on the right. Two treatments units lie directly adjacent to the North Paulina Inventoried 

Roadless Area (76 and 78)..................................................................................................................................433

Figure 93: Areas meeting the criteria for Potential Wilderness in relation to Alternative 2 Units. ...................435

Figure 94: Areas meeting the criteria for Potential Wilderness in relation to Alternative 3 Units. ...................436

Figure 95: Old aerial photograph displaying Oregon Wild’s unroaded polygon (Pink). The heavily logged area 

labeled Shevlin-Hixon Company was acquired by the Forest Service in a 1944 land exchange........................437

Figure 96: Newer aerial image displaying Oregon Wild’s unroaded polygon, the PWA, and the Inventoried 

Roadless Area boundary. ....................................................................................................................................438
Ogden Final EIS  xv

Figure 1: Vicinity Map for the Ogden Project Area, Deschutes National Forest, Bend, Oregon

Executive Summary

Ogden Draft EIS  ES-1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The 26,521-acre Ogden project area is located within the Deschutes National Forest on the western 

flank of the Newberry Crater, approximately 12 miles south of Bend, Oregon. It is bounded by private 

property to the west and the Newberry National Volcanic Monument (NNVM) to the east. 

Valuable resources within the Ogden project area include Paulina Creek (an eligible Wild and Scenic 

River); popular recreation sites such as McKay, Ogden, and Prairie campgrounds and the Peter Skene

Ogden National Scenic Trail; archaeological sites; and goshawk habitat and active nest sites. The main 

route into Newberry Crater (State Highway 21) passes through the project area. The project area is 

immediately adjacent to the North Paulina Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA) and within approximately 

one-half mile of the South Paulina IRA. 

The Forest Service has identified the following needs: 

There is a need to reduce forest vegetation density and fuels to increase resilience to insects, 

disease, and stand-replacing fire, to improve growth and health of residual trees, and to increase 

the proportion of LOS ponderosa pine.

There is a need to contribute to the local and regional economies by providing timber and other 

wood fiber products and associated jobs.

This project proposes to conduct vegetation and fuels management activities that will protect, maintain, 

and/or enhance the Forest’s natural resources and recreational opportunities. This project proposes to 

treat areas to promote and sustain late and old structured (LOS) forest stands, reduce susceptibility to 

bark beetles and dwarf mistletoe infestation, and reduce the fuels and resultant fire risk within the 

planning area. Proposed vegetation activities will provide timber and other wood fiber products and 

associated jobs.

The Forest Service, in December 2009, proposed to address identified needs by: regenerating lodgepole 

pine stands, removing lodgepole pine seed trees, thinning immature stands of pine and true fir, mowing 

shrubs, and underburning. These treatments, proposed separately and in combination, are located 

strategically across the project area. A total of 14,182 acres of treatment were proposed.

The proposal described one thinning treatment for use in a variety of stand conditions. With this 

thinning treatment, stocking would be reduced to the lower management zone favoring ponderosa pine 

for retention. Where ponderosa pine stocking is less than the lower management zone, lodgepole pine 

or white fir would be retained, only as needed, to meet the minimum stocking level, a stocking level less 

than the lower management zone. In most cases, thinned stands would then be burned, separately or in 

combination with the mowing of shrubs. Mortality resulting from the burn could cause additional 

reductions in stocking.

Included in the proposal are two Forest Plan Amendments (FPAs) for the Scenic Views Management 

Area (M9) foreground. The first would amend LRMP, S&G M9-27 to allow visible effects of harvest 

cleanup and fuels reduction for approximately five years rather than “... not be visible to the casual 

forest visitor for one year after the work has been completed.” The second would amend LRMP, S&G 

M9-90 that would allow burning acreages that are larger than the “...small, normally less than 5 

acres,...” as provided within the Scenic Views Management Area foreground. 

Public response to the proposal led the interdisciplinary team to consider the following key issues 

associated with the proposed action which were then used to develop an alternative to the proposed 

action:

Key Issue #1 - Regeneration harvest in late seral lodgepole pine. Alternative 3 defers regeneration 

harvest, which includes seed tree harvest and stand clearcut in lodgepole pine dominated stands in the 

eastern portion of the project area. 
Executive Summary

Ogden Draft EIS  ES-2

Key Issue #2 - Thinning level in mixed stands of ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine and true fir. 

Alternative 3 varies the thinning treatment and in some cases the fuels treatment. Within stands not 

considered strategically important for breaking up fire spread, more lodgepole and/or white fir would be 

retained as necessary to keep stocking at the lower management zone. 

Key Issue #3 - Air quality impacts from burning. Air quality would likely be affected from proposed 

underburning, and burning slash material that would be piled and burned. Alternative 3 reduces the 

amount of underburning, limiting this treatment to stands considered most strategically important to the 

protection of valuable resources within the Ogden project area. To minimize the burning of slash 

material, Alternatives 2 and 3 emphasize utilization whenever possible.

Key Issue #4 – Treatments within OGMA, RHCA, and unroaded areas. The proposed action 

involves thinning in an Old Growth Management Area (OGMA), riparian habitat conservation area 

(RHCA), and an area that was identified during public scoping as a place to avoid except for hand 

thinning and underburning because of its apparent unroaded character. Alternative 3 drops all proposed 

treatment units within the area identified during scoping as having unroaded character. These dropped 

treatment units also overlap the OGMA and the RHCA.

Key Issue #5 - Goshawk habitat management. Alternative 3 contrasts with the proposed action by 

including treatment within 343 acres of post-fledgling area (PFA) stands. The stands of the PFA are not 

sustainable in their current condition as goshawk habitat for the long term. Alternative 3 treatments in 

PFAs are designed to maintain the largest ponderosa pine trees (potential nest trees), by thinning the 

understory and opening the canopy.

Alternative Comparisons

When comparing alternatives, there are several notable differences and similarities.

To meet the identified needs within the project area, Alternative 3 would treat slightly more total 

acres (approximately 2 percent) than Alternative 2 (Table ES-1). Alternative 3 would treat fewer 

acres in the lodgepole pine and mixed pine and true fir cover types, but it would treat more acres 

within the ponderosa/lodgepole pine cover type and the ponderosa pine cover type. Additionally, in 

some areas the alternatives propose different treatment combinations to meet a given objective.

All alternatives have potential for the proportion of ponderosa pine LOS to increase to within the 

historic range of variability by the year 2060 (Table ES-2). With Alternative 1, the no action 

alternative, this proportion would be within the lower range of HRV. With Alternatives 2 and 3, 

this proportion would be higher, falling within the middle range of HRV. With all alternatives, 

future reductions in stocking level may be necessary to maintain potential for developing ponderosa 

pine LOS to proportions that are within HRV.

Alternative 3 increases the proportion of ponderosa pine having potential to develop into LOS 

slightly more than Alternative 2 (Table ES-2). Alternative 3, however, thins fewer acres outside of 

plantations (Table ES-3, Issue 2). The slightly higher potential for LOS development even with 

fewer thinning acres reflects that, compared to Alternative 2, a higher proportion of the areas 

proposed for thinning with Alternative 3 are stocked densely enough to make them susceptible to 

bark beetle attack.

Alternatives 2 and 3 reduce fire behavior potential by increasing the proportion of the project area 

with low flame length potential. Alternative 2 converts 38% and Alternative 3 converts 37% of the 

landscape to a low potential fire behavior, resulting in 68% (Alt. 2) or 67% (Alt. 3) of the project 

area meeting typical standards for safe and effective suppression efforts. The greatest difference 

between these alternatives is how much of the project area moves to a condition with low flame 

length potential. Alternative 2 moves the largest proportion of the project area towards this 

condition. The alternatives are similar in reducing the proportion with potential for active crown 

fire, with Alternative 3 resulting in a slightly larger decrease.
Executive Summary

Ogden Draft EIS  ES-3

Alternatives 2 and 3 provide a similar amount of timber and other wood fiber products and create a 

similar number of associated jobs (Table ES-2). See Chapter 3, Section 3.16.6, Employment.

Table ES-1: Summary of treatment by cover type

Cover Type and Treatment Objective

Alternative 2

(Acres)

Alternative 3

(Acres)

Lodgepole pine

Continue development toward even-aged stands of an intermediate

age/size class.

Minimize mistletoe spread to developing young lodgepole pine.

1,316 1,292

Continue development of an intermediate age/size class.

Maintain existing vertical diversity for wildlife habitat. 233 233

Create a new age class of trees.

Reduce spread of dwarf mistletoe to adjacent, recently regenerated 

stands.

362 16

Subtotal Acres 1,911 1,541

Ponderosa and lodgepole pine

Move towards PP dominated stands and continue development 

towards an intermediate age/size class (plantations).

95 138

Move towards PP dominated stands and continue development 

towards large tree structure. 5,879 6,088

Move toward PP dominated stands and maintain large tree 

structure.

227 217

Subtotal Acres 6,201 6,443

Ponderosa pine

Maintain or increase ponderosa pine dominance and continue 

development towards an intermediate age/size class. 1,451 1,451

Maintain or increase ponderosa pine dominance and continue 

development towards large tree structure. 3,745 4,245

Maintain or increase PP dominance and maintain large tree 

structure.

18 18

Subtotal Acres 5,214 5,714

Mixed pine and true fir

Maintain or increase ponderosa pine dominance and continue 

development towards an intermediate age/size class. 20 20

Maintain or increase ponderosa pine dominance and continue 

development towards large tree structure. 796 679

Maintain or increase PP dominance and maintain large tree 

structure.

40 25

Subtotal Acres 856 724

Treatment Total Acres 14,182 14,422
Executive Summary

Ogden Draft EIS  ES-4

Table ES-2: Summary of how alternatives meet the purpose and need

Purpose & Need Element Alternative 1 

No Action Alternative 2 Alternative 3

There is a need to reduce forest vegetation density and fuels to increase resilience to insects, disease, and 

stand-replacing fire, and to increase the proportion of LOS ponderosa pine.

Increase resilience to bark beetles. Measured by percent of 

ponderosa pine in HRV analysis area closest to developing 

into LOS at risk to bark beetle attack.

45% 33% 32%

Increase resilience to dwarf mistletoe. Measured by acres 

within project area with lodgepole pine seed tree removal 

harvest.

0 acres 968 acres 954 acres

Move towards ponderosa pine single or multi-stratum LOS 

being within HRV (25-82%). Measured by percent in HRV 

analysis area with most potential to develop into LOS.

38% 50% 52%

Move towards ponderosa pine single-stratum LOS being 

within HRV (20-60%). Measured by percent in HRV analysis 

area with most potential to develop into single-stratum LOS.

27% 35% 37%

Change fire behavior by increasing area with low-flame 

length potential. Measured by percent of project area with 

low flame length potential.

30% 68% 67%

Change in fire behavior be reducing major travel pathways 

of wildfires. Measured by percent of fire risk lessened from 

random ignition.

0% 75% 75%

There is a need to contribute to the local and regional economies by providing timber and other wood fiber products and 

associated jobs.

Number of Jobs Created 0 174 170

Timber Volume Produced (Million board feet) 0 32.5 mmbf 29.2 mmbf

Table ES-3: Summary of how the alternatives address the key issues

Key Issue Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

#1 – Regeneration 

Harvest in 

Lodgepole Pine

0 acres regen harvest

Older LP at 76% of analysis 

area.

0 acres < 10 years old by 2015.

362 acres regen harvest in LP; 

35 in mixed con.

Older LP reduced by 3% in 

analysis area to 73%.

Slight increase in age class 

diversity.

0 acres regen harvest in LP.

Older LP at 76% of analysis area.

0 acres < 10 years old by 2015.

#2 – Stocking in 

stands with mix of 

ponderosa pine, 

lodgepole pine, 

and/or true fir

0 acres thinned.

Stocking remains above LMZ.

Units stocked above UMZ at 

risk to mountain pine beetle 

attack.

10,145 acres thinned outside 

plantations.

Of thinned acres, ponderosa 

pine stocking is high on 26%, 

low on 48%, and variable on 

26%.

Lodgepole pine likely to be 

retained to meet minimum 

stocking on 74% of thinned 

acres. Burning to follow on 

73% of the 74% thinned 

acres.

Following treatments, 

stocking less than LMZ 

9,494 acres thinned outside 

plantations.

Of thinned acres, ponderosa 

pine stocking is high on 30%, 

low on 42%, and variable on 

28%.

Lodgepole pine likely to be 

retained to meet minimum 

stocking or LMZ on 70% of 

thinned acres (21% minimum; 

49% LMZ). Burning to follow on 

45% of the 70% thinned acres.

Following treatments, stocking 

less than LMZ common on 5% of 
Executive Summary

Ogden Draft EIS  ES-5

Key Issue Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

common on 47% of thinned 

acres.

thinned acres.

#3 – Air Quality 

Impacts from 

Burning

No burning (piles or landscape) 

under prescription. Wildfire 

would create more particulates 

and smoke impacts to 

neighboring communities.

10,595 acres Rx burn.

Air quality standards met.

7,948 acres Rx burn.

Air quality standards met.

#4a – Paulina Cr. 

RHCA

Two RMOs not being met 

under current conditions

(LWD, temperature).

No TES aquatic species 

present.

0 acres treated.

248 acres RHCA treatment.

159 acres commercial 

thinning. 90 acres small tree 

hand thinning. Health of 

residual trees improved.

Two RMOs benefitting in the 

future from thinning: large 

wood material (by larger tree 

growth) and water 

temperature (by shade).

212 acres RHCA treatment. 

141 acres commercial thinning. 

72 acres small tree hand 

thinning. Health of residual 

trees improved.

Two RMOs benefitting in the 

future from thinning: large 

wood material (by larger tree 

growth) and water temperature

(by shade).

#4b – Old Growth 

Management Area

No treatment according to 

OGMA Plan for indicator 

species. Habitat deterioration 

due to 1998 wildfire and 

blowdown. High risk of 

wildfire on western end.

455 acres treatment designed 

to address habitat needs for 

indicator species. Wildfire 

risk reduced. Sustainability of 

stands benefit. Temp. road 

construction short-term 

negative impact.

83 fewer acres treated than 

Alternative 2.

No temp road access necessary 

(units 110-117 dropped).

#4c – IRA / PWA 

and Unroaded / 

Undeveloped Areas

0 acres treated in IRA

0 acres treated in Potential 

Wilderness Area.

0 acres treated in IRA

25 acres of three units 

overlap areas meeting criteria 

of potential wilderness.

67 acres other undeveloped 

lands treated.

0 acres treated in IRA

0 acres treated in areas meeting 

criteria of potential wilderness.

74 acres other undeveloped 

lands treated.

#5 Goshawk habitat 

management

No treatment within PFAs or 

territories.

No risk of disturbance or 

habitat alteration.

No reduction of fire or beetle 

risk within PFAs or territories.

Current condition of stands is 

unsustainable in the long-term 

and there is potential for loss

of goshawk habitat given risk 

to stands.

No treatment within PFAs, 

but treatments in territories.

No disturbance or habitat 

alteration within PFAs.

Long term movement to older 

structural stages in territories, 

which are lacking. Reduction 

of wildfire moving into PFAs 

and nest stands. Continued 

risk within PFAs of loss of 

habitat.

343 acres PFA treatment in 

addition to territory treatments.

Promotes larger tree structure 

in PFAs. Reduces wildfire risk 

and promotion of new nesting 

habitat in territories as in 

Alternative 2. More short-term 

impacts (e.g. open canopy, 

disturbance) for long-term gains 

(e.g. large tree sustainability).
CHAPTER 1

PURPOSE AND NEED
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Final EIS  1

CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT

The primary changes made between draft and final EIS were: background and existing condition 

narrative was improved upon with more information on existing structural stages across the project area, 

the historic range of variability; and the descriptions of the key issues are clarified. Minor editing also 

occurred throughout the chapter.

The 26,521-acre Ogden project area is located on the 

western flank of the Newberry Crater, approximately 12 

miles south of Bend, Oregon. It is bounded by private 

property to the west and the Newberry National Volcanic 

Monument (NNVM) to the east. The area lies primarily 

within the Lower Little Deschutes 10th field watershed and 

partially within the Long Prairie 10th field watershed. The 

legal description is: Township 22 S, Range 15 E, Sections 

21, 22, 26-29, 31-36; T 23 S, R 14 E, Sections 11-14; T 23 

S, R 15 E, Section 1-18.

There are many valuable resources within the Ogden project 

area: Paulina Creek which is an eligible Wild and Scenic 

River; popular recreation sites such as McKay, Ogden, and 

Prairie campgrounds and the Peter Skene Ogden National Scenic Trail; archaeological sites; and 

goshawk nesting habitat and nests. The main route into Newberry Crater, County Highway 21, passes 

through the project area.

No inventoried roadless areas (IRA) exist within the planning area, although the planning area is 

immediately adjacent to the North Paulina IRA and approximately one-half mile from the boundary of

the South Paulina IRA. There are no threatened or endangered species present within the planning area. 

This Environmental Impact Statement describes the Deschutes National Forest’s proposal to conduct 

vegetation and fuels management in the Ogden project area which is intended to protect and maintain 

valuable natural resources and recreational opportunities. This project proposes treatments that will 

promote and sustain late and old structured forest stands, reduce susceptibility to bark beetles and dwarf 

mistletoe infestation, and reduce the fuels and resultant fire risk within the Ogden planning area. 

Existing Forested Condition

Forested vegetation in the Ogden project area varies west to east as the elevation rises from about 4,240 

feet to 6,200 feet. In the western quarter of the project, the vegetation cover type is a mix of ponderosa 

and lodgepole pine, with the proportion of each varying considerably. The west central quarter, gaining 

elevation, transitions to a ponderosa pine cover type. In the east central quarter of the project, the cover 

type transitions to a mix of ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine and white fir (mixed conifer cover type). 

The proportion of each species varies considerably, with ponderosa pine most dominant on southerly 

aspects, white fir proportion highest on northerly aspects, and lodgepole pine present on all aspects. 

The eastern most quarter, located at the highest elevations in the project area, is a lodgepole pine cover 

type.

Mid-seral structural stages dominate the project area. Large trees are not common within these 

structural stages, however, a component of medium diameter trees with potential to develop into large 

The Ogden Project Area was heavily 

logged by the Shevlin-Hixon Timber 

Company in the first half of the twentieth 

century, mostly by clear-cutting and 

removing large ponderosa pine.

The forests that have grown up since 

that time are 70 to 80 years old and very 

dense where not yet thinned. Remnant 

railroad grades now often serve as road 

and trail beds.
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

2  Ogden Final EIS

trees are present. Within the project area, the mid-seral structures are closest to developing into late or 

old structures, however, they are not resilient to bark beetle attack or stand-replacing fire. With the 

exception of recently thinned stands, high stocking now or within 20 years will exceed the thresholds 

for bark beetle attack. Current fuel conditions, consisting in part of tree and shrub canopy cover and 

needle accumulation, are high and contribute to a high flame length potential and difficult suppression. 

With mid-seral structures dominating the project area, there is potential for large-scale mortality from 

insects or wildfire. Mortality of medium and large trees could slow the development of these structures 

into late and old (LOS) structures.

Mid-seral structural stage stands within the Ogden project area currently provide habitat for goshawks, a 

Management Indicator Species (MIS) whose status is considered to be vulnerable. Goshawk nest stands 

identified in these mid-seral structural stages have multiple canopy layers, with scattered mature 

ponderosa pine in the uppermost canopy layer and lodgepole pine making up a relatively large 

proportion of the lower canopy layers. Stand densities are relatively high. These conditions, however, 

contribute to a lack of resilience to bark beetle attack or stand-replacing fire. Mid-seral stand conditions 

also dominate goshawk PFAs. Conditions can be variable in terms of number of canopy layers and 

presence of mature ponderosa pine in the uppermost canopy layer, however potential for mortality from 

insects or wildfire remains.

Much of the mid-seral structural stages outside of the lodgepole pine cover type in the eastern portion of 

the project area can be attributed to historic logging practices. Much of this area was clearcut logged in 

the 1920s when owned by the Shevlin-Hixon timber company. As a result, large ponderosa pine that 

was once abundant on the landscape is now rare. The Deschutes National Forest acquired most of the 

land owned by the Shevlin-Hixon and Brooks-Scanlon companies between 1934 and 1944. The trees 

that have grown back since that time are now about 70-80 years old and very dense where thinning has 

not taken place. Fire suppression has also played a role in the development of the current fuel condition.

Mid-seral structural stages found in the lodgepole pine cover type in the eastern portion of the project 

area lack large diameter trees needed for classification as “late-seral.” These stands, however, have 

other stand characteristics commonly associated with “late seral” conditions, including multiple tree 

canopy layers, maturing trees in the upper canopy layer, establishment of trees in gaps or under the 

upper canopy layer, and varying levels of dead wood, both standing and down. These stands are 

generally no longer capable of optimum growth performance and have varying levels of dwarf mistletoe 

infection. These stands can contribute towards mistletoe spreading into interspersed stands of young, 

regenerated lodgepole pine. Current fuel conditions, consisting in part of tree canopy cover and down 

dead wood, can be high and contribute to a high flame length potential and active crown fire potential.

The early seral structural stage makes up a relatively small proportion of the project area. Early seral 

stand conditions are attributable to regeneration harvest treatments dating to the 1970s and standreplacing wildfires dating from 1998 and 2000. Early seral stand conditions originating from harvest 

treatments are found primarily in the eastern half of the project area in the mixed conifer and lodgepole 

pine cover types. Early seral conditions originating from wildfires are found throughout the project 

area, with sizes ranging to over 1,000 acres. Wildfires have been planted with ponderosa pine as have 

some of the regeneration harvest areas. To varying degrees, lodgepole pine and a variety of shrub 

species, including greenleaf manzanita and snowbrush, are regenerating areas of early seral condition. 

Densities of establishing trees and shrubs can be high enough to adversely affect the growth of 

developing trees, potentially slowing development towards mid-seral conditions.

The McKay Fire, which burned in 1998, was the largest wildfire to create early seral conditions, burning 

approximately 1,150 acres within the central portion of the project area. It burned on both sides of 

Highway 21, the main route into Newberry Crater. North of the highway, the fire burned across Paulina 

Creek and the Peter Skeen Ogden National Scenic Trail and through the old growth area bisected by 

Paulina Creek. The fire was over a mile wide where it crossed Paulina Creek and it burned 

approximately 26 percent of the 1,264-acre old growth area. This was a stand replacing burn resulting 
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Final EIS  3

in a gap in the continuous mature forest along the riparian area. Habitat for the marten and goshawk 

was lost as a result of this fire. Following the fire, salvage occurred outside of the old growth area (see 

FEIS Appendix B). Ponderosa pine was planted throughout the fire, including within the old growth 

area. Lodgepole pine is regenerating the fire, as is a dense layer of shrubs. Dead wood remains within 

the fire, much of it down, with highest levels of dead wood within the old growth area.

The early seral structural stage includes lodgepole plantations in the eastern portion of the project area 

where seed trees were left for stand regeneration. The average seed tree is 8 to 10 inches dbh and in 

some cases infected with dwarf mistletoe. Stands have successfully regenerated and mistletoe infected 

overstory trees together with mistletoe from adjacent stands can contribute towards accelerated spread 

and intensification in the recently regenerated lodgepole pine understory.

The Paulina Creek Old Growth Management Area (OGMA) includes three habitat types (lodgepole, 

ponderosa pine, and mixed conifer). The OGMA is largely made up of smaller size classes of trees 

(<15”average dbh) and lower canopy closures (< 40%). The McKay fire deteriorated much of the 

habitat quality in the OGMA, and the lower end of the OGMA has a high risk of additional wildfire.

Riparian Habitat Conservation Area 

Riparian vegetation occurs in a very narrow band along Paulina Creek, usually less than 10 feet wide. 

The Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) extends beyond the riparian vegetation to 300 feet on 

either side of the edge of the creek. Paulina Creek is considered water-quality limited because water 

temperatures exceed the State standard. The RHCA is at elevated risk to wildfire because of high 

recreation use (dispersed campsites, developed campgrounds, and a heavily-used non-motorized trail)

that increase the human risk factor. The McKay fire removed live tree canopy from along one mile of 

Paulina Creek (approximately 14 percent of the entire RHCA), eliminating nearly all shade, which is an 

important component of the RHCA vegetation. In addition to the need for fire hazard reduction, there 

are areas within the RHCA that need thinning and improved health and resilience of trees in order to 

improve shading over the long-term and to promote large woody debris in the future. 

Departure from Historic Range of Variability

Species composition within the HRV analysis area has changed from historic conditions (see Chapter 

3.3.9). Within the lower to mid elevations of the HRV analysis area, lodgepole pine and white fir 

stocking is higher than it was historically. At these elevations, timberland types mapped in 1930 (Figure 

28, page 102) were classified as ponderosa pine (Harrington 2003a). Other tree species such as 

lodgepole pine or white fir, if present, would have been less than 20 percent of the standing volume 

(Harrington 2003b). While ponderosa pine is still present at these elevations, it is not uncommon for 

lodgepole pine to make up more than 20 percent of the standing volume, particularly within stands 

where no treatments have occurred within the last 70 to 80 years. Fire suppression has contributed to 

the increase in lodgepole pine and white fir from historic conditions.

The proportion of structural stages within the HRV analysis area has also changed from historic 

conditions. Within the HRV analysis area, the amount of ponderosa pine and mixed conifer late and old 

structure (LOS), both multi and single stratum, is below the HRV. Correspondingly, mid-seral 

structures are above the HRV. Much of the shift from a landscape dominated by LOS to one dominated 

by mid-seral structures resulted from the 1920’s historic logging practices. Within the analysis area, 

only lodgepole pine LOS is within HRV.

The patch size of ponderosa pine early seral structural stage within the HRV analysis area has also 

changed from historic conditions, increasing from what usually would have been present. The HRV 

analysis area includes past regeneration harvest treatments and a number of relatively large wildfires. 

The proportion of early seral structural stage within the analysis area is within the HRV, even with these 

stand replacing disturbances. The most common patch size is between 10 and 50 acres. The largest 

block, created by a wildfire, is located within the ponderosa pine biophysical environment. It’s 
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

4  Ogden Final EIS

approximately 1,460 acres in size. Historically, this large of a block would have been unusual within 

this biophysical environment.

Disturbance processes are best kept within proportions that historically occurred. If not, they have 

potential to remove important habitat structure, including large trees that are desired over the long-term. 

The HRV is important to wildlife populations as well because the distribution, quality, and quantity of 

habitat largely determine the potential for a wildlife species to exist at viable levels. The wildlife in the 

area evolved within conditions across the landscape that developed through various disturbance 

processes such as low-intensity and frequent fire in ponderosa pine, and events that maintained 

lodgepole in a range of conditions including single story to dense and multi-story trees. 

Landscape Priority

The Forest recently conducted an analysis of the federal lands in Central Oregon and prioritized 

watersheds for fuels hazard reduction, ecosystem restoration, and production of forest products. The 

Ogden project area falls within the Lower Little Deschutes watershed that was ranked 12th out of 126 

watersheds for fuels hazard, was rated a moderate priority for restoration, and was the highest ranked 

watershed in Central Oregon for forest products (USFS 2011a).

On the Forest, restoration priorities have been identified through a broad-scale analysis of how far 

forests and stands are departed from the natural range of variation (Fire Learning Network 2010). Areas 

of past harvest practices and fire exclusion are a high priority for restoration because of the departure 

from the natural range of variation. That assessment identifies priority areas of ponderosa pine and 

mixed conifer within the project area that are in need of restoration.

Desired Condition for Forested Vegetation

The Forest Service desired condition for forested vegetation in the Ogden project area is guided by the 

direction in the Deschutes Land and Resource Management Plan as amended by the Eastside Screens. 

Healthy landscapes, which have adapted over time to have higher resilience to local disturbance and 

lower susceptibility to catastrophic events, are necessary to sustain the Forest for the uses of present and 

future generations. The following describe the desired condition of the various species compositions.

Mixed conifer stands and ponderosa pine stands: Ponderosa pine is resilient to fire. Undesirable 

impacts from insects and disease are greatly reduced. Where they occur, they are the result of a 

decision framework that considers the desirable and undesirable roles of insects and disease in the 

context of integrated resource management objectives. Tree arrangement includes a groupy-patchy 

stem pattern. 

Lodgepole pine stands: Across the landscape these stands would be even-aged in a variety of age 

and size classes. Stand conditions, including canopy closure and healthy crowns, contribute to a 

diverse mosaic of relatively uniform textures desired for lodgepole pine scenic view middlegrounds 

and backgrounds.

A mix of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine stands: Composed of a mosaic of even-aged and 

uneven-aged stands with single and multi-story stand structures with a variety of size and age 

classes. Lodgepole pine can dominate areas with little or no slope that accumulates cold air. In 

these cold air pockets, large diameter ponderosa pine is at least widely dispersed. Elsewhere, 

ponderosa pine would dominate, with large trees common and lodgepole pine may or may not be 

present. 

Ponderosa pine stands: Composed of primarily uneven-aged stands with large trees being common. 

Stands are most commonly made up of small groups of even-aged, single story aggregations that 

vary in age and size. Ponderosa pine dominates, with lodgepole pine absent or a minor component 

of the stand. Late and old structure within the RHCA would be enhanced to increase and maintain 

shade and large woody material recruitment.
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Final EIS  5

Mixed ponderosa pine and white fir Stands: These stands would be a mosaic of even-aged and 

uneven-aged stands with single and multi-story stand structures with a variety of size and age 

classes. Ponderosa pine commonly dominates and with large trees common, while white fir and 

lodgepole pine are present at varying levels. Stand densities would be below the level at which 

mortality from mountain pine beetle can become serious. 

The Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) as amended by the 

Eastside Screens provides the basis for actively addressing restoration towards the historic range of 

variability, increasing the long-term health and integrity of the project area, and supporting economic 

and social needs of the public.

In order to address the watershed condition and move the existing condition towards the desired 

condition,

Across the Ogden project area there is a need to reduce forest vegetation density and fuels to increase 

resilience to insects, disease, and stand-replacing fire, to improve growth and health of residual trees, 

and to increase the proportion of LOS (late and old structure) ponderosa pine.

The general purpose of entering the project area is to move the area towards a more resilient landscape. 

Currently, values and features associated with and adjacent to the project area such as recreation sites, 

Old Growth Management Areas, scenic views, wildlife habitat, Paulina Creek and the associated 

riparian corridor, Newberry National Volcanic Monument, and adjacent Inventoried Roadless Areas are 

susceptible to a wide-scale disturbance. There is a need to break up fuel continuity and strategically 

place treatments to account for these values and features. The purpose of density reduction is to reduce 

susceptibility to insects and disease and to improve the growth and health of the stands. The need for 

reducing density and fuels and increasing resilience applies to all allocations in the project area (General 

Forest, Old Growth, Scenic Views, and Eligible Wild and Scenic River).

The project area and larger landscape are below the HRV for LOS ponderosa pine while there is an 

overabundance of ponderosa pine in the “multi-stratum without large trees” structural stage. Past 

thinning has put some of these stands on the trajectory towards becoming LOS in many places. The 

purpose of this project is to maintain that trajectory as well as start it for stands that have not been 

thinned in the past and are therefore not on that trajectory. 

The Forest Plan (as amended) supports proactive maintenance and enhancing the vigor of the forest in 

preventing a stand replacement event, rather than waiting. The goal for forest health under the Forest 

Plan is “to maintain and enhance the vigor of the forest ecosystem through the control of forest pests. 

There is a need to contribute to the local and regional economies by providing timber and other wood 

fiber products and associated jobs now and in the future.

The Forest Plan (as amended) supports management of timber resources and recognizes the value in a 

way that is consistent with other resource objectives, environmental constraints, and economic 

efficiency (LRMP 4-37). Approximately 75% of the project area is within Management Area 8 –

General Forest, which emphasizes timber production while providing for other uses (LRMP 4-117). 

The Forest Service proposes to address the identified needs by: thinning immature stands of pine and 

true fir, regenerating lodgepole pine stands, removing lodgepole pine seed trees, mowing shrubs, and 

underburning. These treatments, proposed separately and in combination, are located strategically 

across the project area, and are designed to minimize unwanted impacts to other resources and the 

public. The following design elements were used to guide the selection of treatment areas, proposed 

treatment, and extent of treatment:
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

6  Ogden Final EIS

Fuel treatments would fragment the landscape fuel loads (see Brown et al. 2004) and be

strategically positioned to account for high value areas such as recreation sites and important travel 

routes. 

In the ponderosa pine biophysical environment, upwards of 60% would be resilient to fire and 

mountain pine beetles. This proportion is also the high end of the range that would have historically 

been in an open LOS condition. 

Use of variable density thinning. Variable density thinning mimics the clumped distribution and 

associated processes found in pre-1850 stands. Existing stand conditions and site productivity 

would drive variable stocking levels following thinning treatments. Gaps would be created where 

lodgepole pine stocking is higher or where dwarf mistletoe is more prevalent. Clumps would be 

retained where trees exhibit desirable characteristics.

In some lodgepole pine stands a new stand of trees will be established focusing on stands with low 

vigor and no previous harvest. In lodgepole pine stands that have been previously harvested under 

seed tree prescriptions, a portion of these stands would be retained in a two-storied stand structure to

provide desired wildlife habitat; in the remaining stands the seed trees would be removed and the 

understory thinned. 

Thinning would include the cutting of trees less than 21 inches dbh. Thinning and removal of cut 

trees could be accomplished through timber sales, firewood sales, or post and pole sales. Thinning 

of small trees could provide material for biomass and/or personal use firewood. 

Fuel treatments would reduce fuel loadings and increase fire resilience within stands by: reducing 

surface fuels, increasing height to live crown, decreasing crown density, and maintaining large, 

resistant tree species. 

Table 1 provides a summary of the acres proposed for treatment under Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 

for thinning/harvest and fuels treatments.

This proposed action involves active vegetation management over approximately 54% of the project 

area. Details of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) are provided in Chapter 2.

Included in the proposal are two Forest Plan Amendments (FPA) that would allow burning larger 

acreages within the Scenic Views Management Area foreground and would allow more than one year 

for clean-up activities.

Table 1: Summary of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Thinning/Harvest* and Fuels Treatment** Acres

Action Acres

Thinning/Harvest and Fuel Treatments in Combination 11,370

Thinning/Harvest Treatments without Fuel Treatments 2,448

Fuels Treatments without Thinning/Harvest Treatments 364

Total Treatment Acres 14,182

*Thinning from below in ponderosa pine and ponderosa/lodgepole stands, and regeneration harvest in lodgepole pine stands. 

**Slash treatment, mowing, and underburning. 

The scoping process formally began when a Notice of Intent to prepare an environmental impact 

statement was published in the Federal Register on December 31, 2009 (Vol. 74, No. 250, p. 69325). 
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Final EIS  7

The Ogden project was announced in the January 2010 issue of the Schedule of Projects for the 

Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests and Prineville District BLM and the proposed action was 

presented in a letter dated January 7, 2010 to Tribes, and January 11, 2010 to 73 addresses of 

individuals, organizations, and other agencies. The NOI and scoping letter were also posted to the 

Forest Service web site.

The scoping letter resulted in six responses from individuals, organizations, and agencies. All 

comments were considered and categorized as either a key issue, analysis issue, or a non-significant 

issue that will not be considered further. This categorization is located in the project file. These issues 

were used in developing alternatives (see following section). Following development of the 

alternatives, a letter was sent August 17, 2010 updating the public and other agencies on the issues, 

alternatives, and timeline, and asking people to notify the Forest Service if they wanted to receive the 

Draft EIS. Subsequent correspondence was received from ARFC and Oregon Wild.

The Draft EIS was distributed for a public comment period that started on July 22, 2011. Information 

on the comment period is provided in Chapter 4.2 and Appendix F.

Issues are points of discussion, debate, or dispute about environmental or social effects that may occur 

as a result of the proposed action. Issues provide focus and influence alternative development, 

including development of mitigation measures to address potential adverse effects. Issues are also used 

to compare the effects between the proposed action and the alternatives regarding a specific resource 

element. Issues are generally divided into Key Issues and Analysis Issues:

1.6.1 Key Issues

Key issues are those that represent a point of debate or concern that cannot be resolved without 

consideration of the trade-offs involved. These issues spur the design of alternatives to the proposed 

action that provide a different path to achieve project objectives. Trade-offs can be more clearly 

understood by developing alternatives and displaying the relative impacts of these alternatives weighed 

against the proposed action.

Key Issue #1 – Regeneration Harvest in Lodgepole Pine

Late-seral lodgepole pine provides ecological value for certain wildlife (e.g. black-backed woodpecker, 

three-toed woodpecker, pine marten) that some scoping respondents feel should be fostered and 

retained. Under the proposed action, a regeneration harvest method in lodgepole pine is proposed on 

362 acres, which would involve removing most trees within the stand (throughout this document this is 

also referred to as clearcut with seed trees reserved). Alternative 3 defers this type of regeneration 

harvest in these stands, which are the closest to a “late seral” condition in the lodgepole stands. Stands 

of lodgepole in the age class greater than 40 years offer the best potential to provide late seral 

conditions. Alternative 3 also drops 35 acres of a regeneration harvest method in mixed conifer which 

includes removing all lodgepole pine and retaining desirable ponderosa pine and white fir. This issue is 

analyzed in section 3.3.7.

Measurement: Five stand age classes are reported: 1) 1-10 years, 2) 11-20 years, 3) 21-30 years, 4) 31-

40 years old, and 5) greater than 40 years. The number of acres within each age class is reported. These 

acres are also expressed as a percent of the area where lodgepole pine is present in either a dominant or 

subordinate position (12,205 acres). 

Key Issue #2 – Thinning Level in Mixed Stands of Ponderosa Pine, Lodgepole Pine or 

True Fir

The project proposes thinning in ponderosa pine mid-seral stands with a mixture of ponderosa pine, 

lodgepole pine, and/or true fir, where LOS conditions can be accelerated and to move the area towards a 
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

8  Ogden Final EIS

more resilient landscape. Under the proposed action the move towards historic LOS structure is 

accelerated because stands will reach the historic stocking levels quickly and individual tree growth is 

expected to improve. However, by removing lodgepole pine and/or white fir, some stands will be taken 

to below the Lower Management Zone (LMZ), and lodgepole pine and white fir are retained as need to 

meet the minimum stocking level.

1

 Several scoping responses also included a desire to see variability 

and diversity within stands and across the landscape. The concern being that the proposed action may 

homogenize the forest. 

Under Alternative 3 stands that have a mix of ponderosa and lodgepole pine are thinned to the LMZ 

favoring ponderosa pine for retention; however, more lodgepole pine and/or white fir are retained and 

the resulting density is at the LMZ. These stands will retain more species diversity. For those units, the 

fuel treatment will be modified and underburning may not occur in order to protect residual lodgepole 

pine which is not resistant to fire, or lighting patterns would be limited to within the driplines of 

ponderosa pine. This issue is analyzed in section 3.3.8. 

Measurement 1: Acres and percent of thinning treatment and associated mowing or burning reported by 

level of ponderosa pine stocking present within treatment unit.

Measurement 2: Stand stocking, relative to the lower management zone, in the year 2020.

Key Issue #3 – Air Quality Impacts from Burning

With the proposed action, slash and small material will be piled and burned which can create soil 

impacts and puts smoke into the air, which can affect air quality. The project emphasizes utilization 

whenever possible however, the proposed action also involves a large amount of underburning, which 

will also put smoke into the air. Smoke management rules are followed under both alternatives to 

preserve air quality. Under Alternative 3, more areas will be left with a higher basal area and mix of 

lodgepole pine than the proposed action (see Issue #2). Fewer of these areas will be underburned, 

therefore less smoke will be produced. If these areas burn during a wildfire, it is quite likely that the 

amount of smoke and associated particulate would be higher. This issue is analyzed in section 3.5.

Measurement: Number of acres of prescribed underburning, number of acres with slash pile burning

and PM10 (Particulate Matter) created. 

Key Issue #4 – Treatments within OGMA, RHCA and Unroaded Areas

The proposed action involves thinning in an Old Growth Management Area (OGMA), riparian habitat 

conservation area (RHCA), and an area that was identified during public scoping as a place to avoid 

except for hand thinning and underburning because of its apparent unroaded character. 

Thinning prescriptions within 248 acres of the Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) and 455 

acres of Old Growth Management Area (OGMA) are designed to promote riparian management 

objectives and/or address habitat needs for indicator species. Scoping revealed some public opposition 

to using any mechanized equipment in these areas because of the perceived potential for adverse 

impacts. Project design will limit mechanized equipment within a certain distance of riparian vegetation 

in all RHCAs; nevertheless, there is an area where RHCA and OGMA partially overlap and there is 

currently a lack of adequate existing roads. This area was also identified as having unroaded 

characteristics. Alternative 3 foregoes the treatments within this area. Under Alternative 3, eight units 

(83 acres in OGMA and 36 acres of RHCA, overlapping) are dropped from treatment as well as the 

temporary road access that would be necessary. 

 

1 The upper and lower management zones are based on concepts described by Cochran et al. (1994) for use in 

estimating density limits. The lower management zone is often set at 67% of the upper management zone and is 

the zone which maintains enough stocking to capture a significant portion of the site resources in tree growth.
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Final EIS  9

Measurement: Acres treated mechanically within the RHCA (see section 3.8), OGMA (see section 

3.6.8), the number of miles of temporary road constructed (see section 3.13), and the acres of treatment 

within Potential Wilderness areas (see section 3.14) and other undeveloped lands.

Key issue #5 – Goshawk Habitat Management

Management direction allows for harvest activities to occur within goshawk post-fledgling areas 

(PFAs). The proposed action avoids treatment within PFAs of three newly-discovered goshawk nest 

stands. Alternative 3 contrasts with the proposed action by including treatment within 7 units (totaling 

343 acres) of PFA stands. The stands of the PFA are not sustainable in their current condition as 

goshawk habitat for the long term. Best available science is used in Alternative 3 to design treatments 

that will maintain the largest ponderosa pine trees (potential nest trees), by thinning the understory and 

opening the canopy.

Measurement: This issue is studied by showing the acres of treatment by alternative within goshawk 

territories and PFAs and the long-term sustainability of the habitat for goshawks. See Section 3.6.6-

Management Indicator Species. 

1.6.2 Analysis Issues

Analysis issues are environmental components that are considered in the Chapter 3 analysis. These 

issues are used as a way to compare the alternatives, though they did not result in differing design 

elements between alternatives. These issues: 1) are generally less focused on the elements of Purpose 

and Need, than are the Key Issues; 2) reflect the discussions of the effects of the proposed activities to 

those resources; and 3) are important for providing the Responsible Official and the public with 

complete information about the effects of the project.

Wildlife: The following items were analyzed and compared by alternative: 

Threatened, Endangered, Candidate and Sensitive Species

Management Indicator Species

Neotropical Migratory Birds

Dead Wood Habitats (Snags, Logs, and Green Tree Replacements)

Late Seral and Old Growth Habitat, OGMA, and Connectivity Corridors

Botany and Invasive Plants: Potential effects to Proposed, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive 

(PETS) plant species were considered and no PETS plants were found in the project area. Proposed 

management activities have the potential to spread invasive plants or create disturbed ground that could 

allow the introduction of invasive plants into areas that have not previously had a recent history of 

invasive plants. 

Cultural Resources: Proposed activities may have an effect on cultural resources. Portions of the 

analysis area have been identified with cultural resource sites. Proposed ground-disturbing activities 

such as commercial harvest have been designed to avoid sites or conducted to avoid adverse effects.

Water Quality and Fisheries: Paulina Creek is a 303(d) stream for water temperature. There are no

Threatened or Endangered fish species or native fish populations that inhabit Paulina Creek, which does 

not directly merge with the Little Deschutes River. Project activities would be directed to protect or 

improve the water quality and fisheries and expected to provide long-term enhancement and protection 

of shade and instream wood habitat.

Recreation: Proposed activities would provide for public safety for those utilizing developed and 

dispersed areas of the project area. The EIS considers potential impacts to the recreational use.

Soil Quality: Soil quality is addressed through the effects of project activities and soil compaction. 

Effects are minimized and, following activities, are within stated LRMP Standards and Guides.
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

10  Ogden Final EIS

Transportation: Roads are discussed in relation to road density and LRMP Standards and Guides for 

wildife, and for project and public access within the project area.

Economics: The associated costs and the viability of the project are displayed and discussed. 

Development of this Environmental Impact Statement follows implementing regulations of the National 

Forest Management Act (NFMA); Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 219 (36 CFR 219); Title 

36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 220 (36 CFR 220); Council of Environmental Quality, Title 40; 

CFR, Parts 1500-1508, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This section describes applicable 

Forest Plan management direction as well as current laws, regulation, and executive order.

1.7.1 Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan

The 1990 Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP), as amended, 

guides all natural resource management activities and provides standards and guidelines for the 

Deschutes National Forest. The Ogden project area includes several Management Areas (MAs): 

General Forest, Scenic Views, Old Growth, and Paulina Creek Eligible Wild and Scenic River (see 

Figure 2 and Table 3).

General Forest (MA-8, 20,078 acres): Within the General Forest MA, timber production is to be 

emphasized while providing forage production, visual quality, wildlife habitat, and recreational 

opportunities for public use and enjoyment. The objective is to continue to convert unmanaged stands 

to managed stands with the aim of having stands in a variety of age classes with all stands utilizing the 

site growth potential. This is achieved through stand treatments which include (but are not limited to) 

controlling stocking levels; maintaining satisfactory growth rates; protecting stands from insects, 

disease, and damage; controlling species composition; and regenerating stands that are no longer 

capable of optimum growth performance. (LRMP, page 4-117)

Scenic Views (MA-9, 5,062 acres): The project area contains retention and partial retention scenic 

views. The goal of scenic views management areas is to provide high quality scenery representing the 

natural character of central Oregon. The general theme and objectives of scenic views is for landscapes 

seen from selected travel routes and use areas are to be managed to maintain or enhance their 

appearance. To the casual observer, results of activities either will not be evident, or will be visually 

subordinate to the natural landscape. Timber harvest is permitted, but only to protect and improve the 

visual quality of the stands both now and in the future. For species other than ponderosa pine, the 

desired condition requires obtaining visual variety through either spatial distribution of age classes and 

species mixes, through density manipulation, or through a mixture of age classes within a stand. 

(LRMP, page 4-121)

Old Growth (MA-15, 1,264 acres): The old growth forest is to be managed to provide 1) large trees, 2)

abundant standing and downed dead trees, and 3) vertical structure except in LP where a single canopy 

is common. The distribution and size of the OGMAs are based upon habitat requirements for pine 

martens in mixed conifer, goshawk in ponderosa pine, and three-toed woodpecker in the lodgepole pine. 

Vegetation can be manipulated to perpetuate or enhance old growth characteristics.

Paulina Creek Eligible Wild and Scenic River Corridor (2,164 acres): Paulina Creek, from its source 

just downstream of Paulina Lake to where it leaves the project area at the Forest boundary (8 miles), is 

considered eligible to be a Wild and Scenic River because it is free-flowing and possesses two 

outstandingly-remarkable values (Hydrological/Geological and Scenic). Appendix D (p. D-7) of the 

Deschutes LRMP FEIS describes Paulina Creek in detail. The corridor includes all lands within 1⁄4 mile 

of the banks of the river. It overlaps MA-15 (Old Growth) and MA-9 (Scenic Views), and includes all 

of the area designated as Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA). The lands within the corridor 

will be managed in accordance with Management Area 17 (Wild and Scenic Rivers) until further study 

is completed and the Forest Plan is amended. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Final EIS  11

Table 2: LRMP Management Area Acres in Ogden Project Area

Management Area Acres Percent of 

Project Area

General Forest 20,078 76%

Scenic Views Retention Foreground 3,206 12%

Scenic Views Partial Retention Foreground 431 2%

Scenic Views Partial Retention Middleground 1,425 5%

Old Growth 1,264 <5%

Other Ownership 117 <1%

Total Acres 26,521

*Paulina Creek Eligible Wild and Scenic River Corridor 2,164 8%

*This portion of the project area acres is included in the Total Acres.

Revised Continuation of Interim Management Direction Establishing Riparian, 

Ecosystem and Wildlife Standards for Timber Sales (Eastside Screens)

The entire project area lies east of the spotted owl range, and is subject to this amendment, also known 

as the Eastside Screens. The Eastside Screens amendment was the result of a large-scale planning effort 

to determine the best approach for maintaining future options concerning wildlife habitat associated 

with late and old structural stages, fish habitat, and old forest abundance. The Eastside Screens contain 

guidelines for management of timber sales in late-old structure (LOS) relative to the Historic Range of 

Variability (HRV), wildlife corridors, snags, coarse woody debris, and goshawk management. 

Although intended as interim direction in 1995, it remains an applicable amendment to our LRMP.

Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH)

The riparian management guidelines of the Forest Plan were amended by the Inland Native Fish 

Strategy (INFISH, 1995). INFISH was intended to be interim direction to protect habitat and 

populations of resident native fish and to provide for options for management. The INFISH delineated 

RHCAs where riparian-dependent resources receive primary emphasis. These Riparian Habitat 

Conservation Areas (RHCAs) include traditional riparian corridors, wetlands, intermittent streams, and 

other areas that help maintain the integrity of aquatic ecosystems. These areas are to be managed to 

maintain or restore water quality, stream channel integrity and channel processes, sediment regimes, in 

stream flows, diversity and productivity of plant communities in riparian zones, and riparian and aquatic 

habitats to foster unique genetic fish stocks that evolved within the specific region. RHCAs run through 

and are overlaid on other allocations. Paulina Creek is the only surface water in the Ogden project area, 

with about 496 acres of RHCA. The standards and guidelines of INFISH apply to the RHCA and to 

projects or activities that have potential to degrade RHCAs; however, there are no inland native fish in 

Paulina Creek. The project area is not in a priority watershed. Attainment of Riparian Management 

Objectives (RMOs) can be aided by thinning, and development and maintenance of large trees. Section 

3.8 covers activities within the RHCA and compliance with INFISH standards and guidelines.

Newberry National Volcanic Monument Plan

The east side of the Ogden project boundary is coincident with the Newberry National Volcanic 

Monument (NNVM) boundary (see Figure 2). The NNVM Comprehensive Management Plan (USFS 

1994) provides goals and standards/guidelines for activities within the Monument which was established 

to preserve and protect Newberry’s remarkable geologic landforms and to provide for the conservation, 

protection, interpretation, and enhancement of its ecological, botanical, scientific, scenic, recreational, 
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

12  Ogden Final EIS

cultural, and fish and wildlife resources. No activities are proposed within the NNVM with this project, 

and therefore there are no expected impacts to the goals of the Monument.

Analysis and documentation has been done according to direction contained in the National Forest 

Management Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Council on Environmental Quality 

regulations, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations, The Endangered Species Act, 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation And Management Act of 2000, the National Historic 

Preservation Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Clean Water Act, and the Rescissions act, Public Law 104-

19, Section 504.

The following is a brief explanation of each of these laws and their relation to the current project 

planning effort.

The American Antiquities Act of 1906: The American Antiquities makes it illegal to appropriate, 

excavate, injure, or destroy any historic, prehistoric ruin or monument, or any object of antiquity, 

situated on lands owned by the Government of the United States, without permission of the Secretary of 

the Department of the Government having jurisdiction over the lands on which said antiquities are 

situated.

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended: The National Historic Preservation

Act requires Federal agencies to consult with American Indian Tribes, State and local groups before 

nonrenewable cultural resources, such as archaeological and historic structures, are damaged or 

destroyed. Section 106 of this Act requires Federal agencies to review the effects project proposals may 

have on the cultural resources in the Analysis Area.

The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended: The Endangered Species Act is to “provide a 

means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be 

conserved, to provide a program for the conservation of such endangered species and threatened species, 

and to take such tests as may be appropriate to achieve the purpose of the treaties and conventions set 

forth in subsection (a) of this section.” The Act also states “It is further declared to be the policy of 

Congress that all Federal departments and agencies shall seek to conserve endangered species and 

threatened species and shall utilize their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of this Act.”

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended: The National Environmental 

Policy Act is “To declare a national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony 

between man and his environment, to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damaged to the 

environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; to enrich the understanding of 

the ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nations; and to establish a Council on 

Environmental Quality” (42 U.S.C. Sec. 4321). The law further states “it is the continuing policy of the 

Federal Government, in cooperation, to use all practicable means and measures, including financial and 

technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, to create and 

maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, 

economic, and other requirements of the present and future generations of Americans. This law 

essentially pertains to public participation, environmental analysis, and documentation.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) promulgated the regulations for implementing NEPA (40 

CFR parts 1500-1508). The CEQ has recently provided guidance on considering past actions in 

cumulative effects analysis (Memo to Heads of Federal Agencies, June 24, 2005).

The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) of 1976: The National Forest Management Act 

guides development and revision of National Forest Land Management Plans and has several sections to 

it ranging from required reporting that the Secretary must submit annually to Congress to preparation 

requirements for timber sale contracts. There are several important sections within the act, including 
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Final EIS  13

Section 1 (purpose and principles), Section 19 (fish and wildlife resources), Section 23 (water and soil 

resources), and Section 27 (management requirements).

The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968: The purpose of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act is to 

implement the declared policy of the United States to preserve certain rivers for the benefit and 

enjoyment of future generations and to prescribe mechanisms by which additional rivers may be added. 

A wild, scenic, or recreational river area eligible to be included in the system is a free-flowing stream 

with one or more Outstandingly Remarkable Values.

Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960: The Multiple Use – Sustained Yield Act of 1960 requires 

the Forest Service to manage National Forest System lands for multiple uses (including timber, 

recreation, fish and wildlife, range, and watershed). All renewable resources are to be managed in such 

a way that they are available for future generations. The harvesting and use of standing timber can be 

considered a short-term use of a renewable resource. As a renewable resource, trees can be reestablished and grown in again if the productivity of the land is not impaired.

Migratory Bird E.O. 13186: On January 10, 2001, President Clinton signed an Executive Order (E.O. 

13186) titled “Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds.” This E.O. requires the 

“environmental analysis of Federal actions, required by NEPA or other established environmental 

review processes, evaluates the effects of actions and agency plans on migratory birds, with emphasis 

on species of concern.”

Executive Order 13112 (invasive species): This 1999 order requires Federal agencies whose actions 

may affect the status of invasive species to identify those actions and within budgetary limits, “(i) 

prevent the introduction of invasive species; (ii) detect and respond rapidly to and control populations of 

such species... (iii) monitor invasive species populations... (iv) provide for restoration of native species 

and habitat conditions in ecosystems that have been invaded;...(vi) promote public education on 

invasive species... and (3) not 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 had determined and made public... 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 of harm will be taken in conjunction with the actions.”

The Clean Water Act, as amended in 1977 and 1982: The objective of the Clean Water Act (CWA) 

of 1972 is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of all waters. Under 

Section 319 of the 1987 CWA Amendments, States are required to determine those waters that will not 

meet the goals of the CWA, determine those non-point source activities that are contributing pollution, 

and develop a process on how to reduce such pollution to the “maximum extent practicable”. Section 

303(d) of the CWA requires that a list be developed of all impaired or threatened waters within each 

state. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) is responsible for compiling the 

303(d) list, assessing data, and submitting the 303(d) list to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

for federal approval. Management direction for federal land management agencies regarding 303(d) 

listed waterbodies is that project activities should protect and not further degrade the parameters for 

which it is listed. 

The following executive orders are included within the Clean Water Act:

Executive Order 11988: requires agencies to avoid adverse impacts associated with the 

occupancy and modification of floodplains.

Executive Order 11990: requires agencies to avoid adverse impacts associated with the 

destruction or modification of wetlands.

Executive Order 12088: requires Federal compliance with pollution control standards (such as 

the Clean Water Act).

The Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990: The purposes of The Clean Air Act are “to protect and 

enhance the quality of the Nation’s air resources so as to promote the public health and welfare and the 
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

14  Ogden Final EIS

productive capacity of its population; to initiate and accelerate a national research and development 

program to achieve the prevention and control of air pollution; to provide technical and financial 

assistance to state and local governments in connection with the development and execution of their air 

pollution prevention and control programs; and to encourage and assist the development and operation 

of regional air pollution prevention and control programs.” 

Community Wildfire Protection Plan

The Greater La Pine Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) was recently updated on March 19,

2010. The CWPP was prepared under the authorities of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act by a 

collaborative group of representatives from the La Pine Rural Fire Protection District, the City of La 

Pine, Oregon Department of Forestry, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, Deschutes 

County, and Project Wildfire. The Plan describes wildland urban interface (WUI) which overlaps a 

portion of the Ogden Project area, and provides priorities and goals for reducing risk of high-intensity 

wildfire by managing forests and wildlands for hazardous fuels reduction and fire resilience. 

The WUI receives considerable attention because of recent increases in both the number of structures 

destroyed and the area burned annually by wildfire. This WUI zone poses increased risk to life, 

property and infrastructure in associated communities and is one of the most dangerous and complicated 

situations firefighters encounter. The WUI and areas adjacent are where most human-caused fire 

ignitions are most common. The National Fire Plan, the Cohesive Strategy, the Healthy Forest Initiative 

and the Ten-Year Comprehensive Strategy for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to Communities and the 

Environment place a priority on working collaboratively within communities in the WUI to reduce their 

risk from large-scale wildfire. 

Priorities and Goals set forth by the East & West Steering Committee are as follows:

Reduce hazardous fuels on public lands

Reduce hazardous fuels on private lands (both vacant and occupied

Reduce structural vulnerability

Increase education and awareness of wildland fire threat

Identify, improve and protect critical transportation routes

10–Year Comprehensive Strategy, August 2001; Implementation Plan, December 2006.

This strategy reflects the views of a broad cross-section of government and non-government 

stakeholders. It outlines a comprehensive approach to the management of wildland fire, hazardous 

fuels, and ecosystem restoration and rehabilitation on Federal and adjacent State, tribal and private 

forest and range lands. Congress directed the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture to work with the 

Governors to develop this strategy in the FY 2001 Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act 

(P.L. 106-291). The primary goals of the 10-year Comprehensive Strategy are: Improve prevention and 

suppression; reduce hazardous fuels; Restore fire adapted ecosystems; promote community assistance.

This EIS hereby incorporates by reference the Project Record (40 CFR 1502.21). The Project Record 

contains Specialist Reports and other technical documentation used to support the analysis and 

conclusions in this EIS. Chapter 3 provides a summary of the Specialist Reports in adequate detail to 

support the decision rationale; appendices provide supporting documentation.

Incorporating these Specialist Reports and the Project Record help implement the Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations provision that agencies should reduce NEPA paperwork (40 
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Final EIS  15

CFR 1500.4), that the document shall be “analytic rather than encyclopedic,” and that the document 

“shall be kept concise and no longer than absolutely necessary” (40 CFR 1502.0). The objective is to 

furnish adequate site-specific information to demonstrate a reasoned consideration of the environment 

impacts of the alternative and how these impacts can be mitigated, without repeating detailed analysis 

and background information available elsewhere. The Project Record is available for review at the 

Bend-Fort Rock District Office, 63095 Deschutes Market Road, Bend, Oregon, Monday through Friday 

7:45 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

The scope of the project and the decision to make are limited to management of forested vegetation, 

connected action, and necessary mitigation. Chapter 2 details the design of these actions. The project is 

limited to National Forest System land. 

The Responsible Official for this proposal is the Forest Supervisor of the Deschutes National Forest. 

Based on response from the 45-day comment period, any changes made to the Final EIS, and the 

disclosed analysis with mitigation, the Responsible Official will make a decision and document it in a 

Record of Decision. The Responsible Official can decide to:

Select one of the action alternatives that has been considered in detail, or

Modify the selected alternative, or

Select the no action alternative, and

Identify what mitigation measures would apply.

The decision regarding which alternative to implement will be determined by comparing how each 

factor of the project purpose and need is met and the manner in which each alternative responds to the 

issues and public input.
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

16  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 2: Land and Resource Management Plan. The Ogden Project area is primarily within the General Forest management area.
CHAPTER 2

ALTERNATIVES
Chapter 2 Alternatives

18  Ogden Final EIS

CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES

The primary changes made in this chapter were in response to public comment. An additional project 

design has been added to both action alternatives: reserving ponderosa pine less than 21” dbh that have 

old-tree characteristics (see resource protection measure #2), and retaining down wood in five units that 

would have had surface fuel reduction (see resource protection measure #66). Also, the descriptions of 

activities and treatments have been clarified. The Sale Area Improvement list has been added to and 

prioritized. The summary comparisons of the alternatives (2.6.1, 2.6.2) have been modified to reflect 

changes and updates in the Chapter 3 analysis.

This chapter describes and compares the alternatives considered for the Ogden Project. It includes a 

description and map of each alternative considered. This section also presents the alternatives in 

comparative form, defining the differences between each alternative in order to provide a clear basis for 

choice by the decision maker. Some of the information used to compare the alternatives is based upon 

the design of the alternative and some of the information is based upon the environmental effects of 

implementing each alternative.

2.2.1 Alternative 1 (No Action)

This alternative is required by law and serves as a baseline for comparison of the effects of all of the 

alternatives. Under Alternative 1, current management plans would continue to guide management. 

There would be no change in the level of ongoing management activities within the project area. All 

custodial activities such as road maintenance, law enforcement, and response to emergencies, including 

wildfire, would continue. The Purpose and Need of this proposed project would not be met because no 

treatment would be implemented to reduce stand density and fire risk.

2.2.2 Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

The proposed action includes vegetation management activities across approximately 14,182 acres 

(about 54% of the Ogden project area). Actions include thinning, regeneration harvest, slash-treatment, 

mowing, and underburning. Approximately 1,365 acres of regeneration harvests within lodgepole and 

mixed conifer are proposed (Table 3). Thinning is the primary tree treatment covering 12,453 acres. Of 

these, 248 acres are located within the Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) of Paulina Creek. 

Across most of the acres of thinning, ponderosa pine is the dominant species and thinning will move the 

area towards the historic range of variability for that biophysical environment. 

One thinning treatment is proposed for use in a variety of stand conditions. With this thinning 

treatment, stocking would be reduced to the lower management zone favoring ponderosa pine for 

retention. Where ponderosa pine stocking is less than the lower management zone, lodgepole pine or 

white fir would be retained only as needed to meet the minimum stocking level, a stocking level less 

than the lower management zone (10,083 acres, Table 3). In most cases, thinned stands would then be 

burned, separately or in combination with the mowing of shrubs. Descriptions of the silvicultural 

treatments are included in this Chapter following the description of Alternative 3.

The fuel treatment design follows the principles of fire-resilient forests: reducing surface fuels, 

increasing height to live crown ratio, decreasing crown density, and keeping large trees of resistant 

species. Strategies involved in designing the proposed action are included in Chapter 3.4. Refer to

Figure 3 for locations of Alternative 2 units. Descriptions of fuels treatments are included in this 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  19

Chapter following the description of Alternative 3. This alternative includes two Forest Plan 

Amendments to the Scenic Views standard and guidelines. These amendments are described in Chapter 

2.3.3.

This Alternative has been modified slightly since scoping. Further field review and interdisciplinary 

team work led to minor adjustments, primarily changes include additional fuels reduction prescriptions 

in units proposed for underburning. Some unit boundaries were adjusted to utilize roads as boundaries, 

and some units have been dropped upon further field review of the existing conditions.

The following table lists all of the activities proposed under Alternative 2. Harvest is followed by slash 

treatment (lop and scatter, hand pile and burn, or machine pile and burn, described in section 2.3.2). 

Harvest is also sometimes in combination with natural fuels treatment. Appendix A lists the specific 

combination of activities for each treatment unit.

Table 3: Summary of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Activities

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Thinning/Harvest and Fuel Treatments Measurement

Regeneration Harvest Treatments (Acres)*

Even-aged method, with lodgepole pine seed tree removal 968

Even-aged seed tree method, with lodgepole pine seed trees 

reserved 362

Two-aged method, with ponderosa pine and white fir reserved 35

Total Regeneration Harvest Acres 1,365

Thinning Treatments (Acres)

 Outside RHCA and Goshawk PFA

Thin, favoring ponderosa pine for retention. Lodgepole pine and 

true fir retained as needed to meet minimum stocking levels. 10,083

Thin, favoring ponderosa pine for retention. Lodgepole pine and 

true fir retained as needed to meet lower management stocking 

levels. 

7

Thin, within plantations and other areas where excess stocking is 

primarily small diameter trees. 2,115

Subtotal 12,205

 Thin within Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) 248

 Thin within goshawk Post Fledging Area (PFA) 0

Total Thinning Acres 12,453

Total Thinning/Harvest Acres 13,818

Fuel Treatments (Acres) (occurring alone or in combination with thinning/harvest)

Mechanical Shrub Treatment (MST) 1,178

Ladder fuels reduction/Mow 0

Mow/Underburn 10,308

Ladder fuel reduction/Mow/Underburn 0

RHCA Underburn 248

Total Fuels Acres 11,772

*See narrative description below
Chapter 2 Alternatives

20  Ogden Final EIS

Silviculture Treatments Unique to Alternative 2

Regeneration Cutting – Clearcut with Lodgepole Pine Seed Trees Reserved

The seed tree regeneration method (clearcut with seed trees reserved) would be conducted in lodgepole 

pine stands where there is an intent to establish a new stand of trees of essentially the same age class. 

The treatment is planned in lodgepole pine stands either with no prior harvest or previously harvested to 

utilize trees killed by mountain pine beetle. Stands proposed for this treatment are generally of low 

vigor, with individual trees having small live crown ratios and varying levels of dwarf mistletoe 

infection. Approximately 28 lodgepole pine per acre (40 foot spacing) would be retained evenly 

dispersed throughout the stand to provide for seed production and to produce a new age class of 

lodgepole pine. To provide green tree replacements in patches, approximately 10 percent of the 

treatment unit would be retained in untreated clumps (2.5 acres).

Regeneration Cutting – Two-aged Method with Desirable Ponderosa Pine and White Fir Reserved

The two-aged regeneration method is conducted in areas where there is an intent to establish a new 

stand of trees under an older age class of tree. The intent includes maintaining the older age class of 

trees. Through time, the resulting stand may tend towards an uneven-aged condition. In the Ogden 

project, this treatment is used on 35 acres only in Alternative 2 (Proposed Action). This treatment is 

planned in stands in the mixed conifer and ponderosa pine plant association groups that are currently 

dominated by lodgepole pine and that are capable of being dominated by ponderosa pine. Ponderosa 

pine stocking is generally present at less than minimum stocking levels. True fir stocking is variable. 

With this treatment, relatively vigorous ponderosa pine and true fir in any canopy layer would be 

retained. Low vigor ponderosa pine and true fir would be removed. All lodgepole pine would be 

removed. Ponderosa pine and true fir would provide dispersed green tree replacements within the 

treatment units. Ponderosa pine would be planted as needed to bring stocking levels up to desired 

levels.
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  21

Figure 3: Ogden - Alternative 2 - Proposed Units and Vegetation Treatments

11 x 17 TO BE INSERTED
Figure 3. Ogden Alternative 2 – Proposed Units with Tree Treatments.
Figure 4. Ogden Alternative 2 Fuels Treatments
Chapter 2 Alternatives

22  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 4. Ogden - Alternative 2 - Proposed Units Fuels Treatments

11 x 17 TO BE INSERTED
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  23

2.2.3 Alternative 3

Alternative 3 was developed to respond to the key issues listed in Chapter 1.6.1, and would treat a total of 

14,422 acres, approximately 240 more than Alternative 2. The area treated with timber harvest (12,947 

acres) would be approximately 871 acres less harvest than Alternative 2, the configuration of some units 

has changed, and the prescription for much of the ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine mixed stands is 

changed. See Table 5 for a summary of the changes from Alternative 2 to Alternative 3. Under 

Alternative 3 a different proportion of stands at higher densities are thinned. 

In response to the issue of regeneration (clearcut) treatments in lodgepole pine (Issue #1), 

Alternative 3 drops 362 acres of regeneration harvest (clearcut with seed trees reserved). Another 

14 acres of seed tree removal harvest is dropped where it overlaps the OGMA. And 35 acres of 

mixed conifer regeneration harvest with reserve trees is also dropped under this alternative.

In response to the issues of thinning level in ponderosa and lodgepole mixed stands (Issue #2), 

Alternative 3 leaves more stands with a mixture of ponderosa pine with lodgepole pine and white 

fir. Alternative 3 varies the thinning treatment, and in some cases the fuels treatment, within stands 

where there may be insufficient ponderosa pine to stock stands at the lower management zone. As 

with the proposed action, stocking would be reduced to the lower management zone favoring 

ponderosa pine for retention. Lodgepole pine or white fir would be retained as needed to keep 

stocking at the lower management zone rather than the minimum stocking level proposed with 

Alternative 2. Within stands not considered strategically important for breaking up fire spread, this 

thinning treatment would not be followed by mowing and burning. However, within stands 

considered strategically important, mowing and/or burning would follow this thinning treatment.

In contrast to Alternative 2, which would retain lodgepole and white fir if needed to meet minimum 

stocking levels on 10,083 acres, Alternative 3 uses this type of thinning on only 4,270 acres. With 

thinning unique to Alternative 3, lodgepole pine or white fir would be retained as needed to keep 

stocking at the lower management zone rather than the minimum stocking level on 5,154 acres.

To address the issue of air quality impacts (Issue #3), approximately 2,608 fewer acres will be 

underburned (10,556 acres under Alternative 2 vs. 7,948 acres under Alternative 3).

In response to the issue of commercial operations within RHCA, OGMA and Unroaded Areas 

(Issue #4), eight units are dropped that partially or completely overlap these designations, including 

units that would require additional access in the RHCA (Units 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 

117).

In response to the goshawk habitat issue (Issue #5), this alternative has the addition of 310 acres of 

thinning and fuels treatments within Goshawk post-fledgling areas (PFAs), (in contrast to 

Alternative 2 where PFAs go untreated). Three PFAs are defined within the Ogden Project area 

and will be treated as follows: 

 McKay Butte PFA – thinning to occur in the PFA; lop and scatter only; no piling, mowing, 

or burning; and no treatments within the current nest stand or alternate nest stand. 

 My PFA – thinning to occur in the PFA and an alternate nest stand; no underburning in any 

of the PFA (relating to Units 909, 913, 966 in order to retain lodgepole). Mowing is allowed 

and slash from thinning would be piled and burned. 

 Finley Butte PFA – Alternate nest stand will be treated with thinning and underburning. 

This alternative will also include Forest Plan Amendments to the scenery standards and guidelines as 

described for Alternative 2 at Chapter 2.3.3. The table on the following page lists all of the activities 

proposed under Alternative 3. Harvest is followed by slash treatment (lop and scatter, hand pile and burn, 

or machine pile and burn, described in section 2.3.2). Harvest treatments also can occur in combination 
Chapter 2 Alternatives

24  Ogden Final EIS

with natural fuels treatments. Appendix A lists the specific combination of activities for each treatment 

unit. The units are displayed in Figures 5 and 6. 

Table 4: Summary of Alternative 3 Activities

Alternative 3 Thinning/Harvest and Fuel Treatments* Acres

Regeneration Harvest Treatments

Even-aged method, with lodgepole pine seed tree removal 954

Even-aged seed tree method, with lodgepole seed trees reserved 0

Two-aged method, with ponderosa pine and white fir reserved 0

Total Regeneration Harvest Acres 954

Thinning Treatments

 Outside RHCA and Goshawk PFA

Thin, favoring ponderosa pine for retention. Lodgepole pine and true fir 

retained as needed to meet minimum stocking levels 4,270

Thin, favoring ponderosa pine for retention. Lodgepole pine and true fir 

retained as needed to meet lower management stocking levels. 5,154

Thin, within plantations and other areas where excess stocking is primarily 

small diameter trees. 2,014

SUBTOTAL 11,438

 Thin within Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) 212

 Thin within goshawk Post Fledging Area (PFA) 343

Total Thinning Acres 11,993

Total Thinning/Harvest Treatment Acres 12,947

Fuel Treatments (occurring alone or in combination with thinning/harvest)

Mechanical Shrub Treatment (MST) 1,107

Ladder fuels reduction/Mow 83

Mow/Underburn 7,001

Ladder fuel reduction/Mow/Underburn 735

RHCA Underburn 212

Total Fuels Treatment Acres 9,138

*See narrative descriptions below in Section 2.3, page 30.

Alternative 3 leaves a different proportion of stands at higher densities than Alternative 2. Where some 

units were dropped from treatment others were added. The following table details how Alternative 3 

differs by treatment and unit (Table 5).

Fuels Treatments Unique to Alternative 3

Ladder Fuel Reduction (LFR) 

Ladder fuels reduction involves mechanically cutting understory trees in the lower most canopy layer of a 

stand to reduce potential for fire to move into the crowns of trees in the middle to upper canopy layers. 

For that reason, the LFR occurs generally within the drip line of the middle and upper canopy layer trees. 

In the Ogden project, this treatment is planned in previously thinned stands that have an understory of 

lodgepole pine developing. Small diameter lodgepole pine (generally less than 4 to 6 inches dbh) with 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  25

potential to carry fire into the crowns of ponderosa pine in the middle to upper canopy levels would be cut 

and left on the site. Resulting slash would be treated by lopping and scattering. This treatment would be 

followed by mowing or prescribed fire, separately or in combination.

Table 5: Summary of Alternative 3 Changes to Thinning Treatments from Alternative 2

Alternative 3 Changes from Alternative 2 Acres Units1

Thinning and fuels treatments dropped.

Thinning and fuels treatment dropped from previously 

managed stands. Low to moderate priority areas for 

thinning or fuels.

-331 8, 10, 11, 57, 59, 213, 270, 272, 284, 

348, 350, and 357

Thinning and fuels treatment dropped from stands with 

no prior management. Not priority areas for fuels. Unit 

271 dropped to retain wildlife cover.

-22 271 and 327

Thinning and fuels treatment. Priority for treatment, but 

dropped due to roadless and RHCA issues.

-83 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, and 

117

Subtotal -436

Thinning dropped. Fuels treatments retained.

Thinning dropped from stands thinned within the last 10 

years. Mowing/underburning retained. Thinning dates 

from 2001 to 2009, with most done in 2004.

-260 216, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 275, and 

277

Thinning dropped from stands thinned approximately 20 

years ago. Mowing/underburning retained. Treatment of 

ladder fuels added to facilitate burning. Past thinning 

dates from 1983 to 2003, with most occurring in 1988 to 

1989. Lodgepole pine understory establishing in gaps. 

-733

173, 199, 204, 205, 206, 215, 228, 

230, 232, 234, 238, 242, 243, 247, 

249, 250, 252, 254, 264, 337, and 338

Subtotal -993

Plantation thinning.

Thinning treatment dropped from lower priority stands. 

Natural regeneration (LP/WF/PP) in Unit 340 is low to 

moderate. Unit 354 previously thinned.

-77 Unit 340 and 354

Thinning treatment dropped. Treatment changed to 

ladder fuels reduction to facilitate fuels treatment. -67 Unit 346

Thinning treatment added to a stand planted in 1994 to 

ponderosa pine. +43 Unit 924

Subtotal -101

Thinning treatment added.

Thin acres not previously managed. (Note: Unit 306 

seedtree harvest with Alternative 3) +265 306, 901, 904, 907, 916, 923, 928, 929, 932, and 969

Thin previously managed stands with moderate to high 

priority for treatment. Past treatments date from 1972 to 

2000.

+462

902, 905, 906, 912,914, 918, 919, 920, 

921, 922, 925, 927, 931, 933, 934, 

935, 943, and 964.

Thin acres not previously managed within goshawk Post 

Fledging Area (PFA). +139 913, 946, and 966

Thin previously managed stands within goshawk PFA. 

Past thinning dates from 1972 to 1990. +204 53, 909, 949, and 965

Subtotal +1,070

NET CHANGE in Alternative 3 thinning acres -460

Thinning changed to retain lodgepole pine as needed to 

meet desired stocking levels (No change in acres thinned)
Chapter 2 Alternatives

26  Ogden Final EIS

Alternative 3 Changes from Alternative 2 Acres Units1

Burn treatment dropped. -1,533

9, 14, 16, 17, 28, 29, 52, 54, 55, 56, 

97, 108, 118, 121, 122, 124, 134, 135, 

136, 157, 208, 209, 212, 227, 269, 

273, 331, 342, 351, 352, 370, 926, and 

951

Burn/No burn treatment retained. 3,156 A total of 75 units, including Unit 251
Figure 5. Ogden Alternative 3 – Proposed Units with Tree Treatments.
Figure 6. Ogden Alternative 3 Fuels Treatments
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  27

Figure 5: Ogden - Alternative 3 - Proposed Vegetation Treatments

11x17 TO BE INSERTED
Chapter 2 Alternatives

28  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 6. Ogden - Alternative 3 - Proposed Fuel Treatments

11x17 TO BE INSERTED
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  29

2.3.1 Silvicultural Treatments

Harvest Operations

The project proposes thinning and regeneration treatments that include the cutting and removal of 

sawtimber or other wood products. Cutting would be limited to trees less than 21 inches dbh (4.5 feet 

above the ground)2. Cutting would generally be done with a mechanical tracked harvester and removal 

would be with ground based logging systems. Mechanical and ground based logging systems would be 

limited to those areas where the slope is less than 30% or where the slope is greater than 30% is less 

than 100’ in length. Skid trails would be located on average 100’ apart. Whole tree yarding would

occur. A harvester/forwarder is an optional harvest system that could be utilized in place of a 

shear/skidder system. Landings where trees are de-limbed, sorted, or processed into chips would be 

needed at a rate of one acre per ten to fifteen acres. Hand thinning will be done within treatment areas 

adjacent to Paulina Creek. Hand thinning could also be done within young plantations where trees are 

too small to be utilized.

Thinning

Thinning is conducted to reduce tree density, primarily to maintain or improve tree growth, maintain or

enhance forest health, and control species composition. Thinning is also used to reduce ladder fuels and 

decrease the continuity of crowns to reduce the chances of initiation and continuity of crown fires. 

Thinning will generally be from below, varying spacing to ensure the best, most dominant trees with the 

least amount of dwarf mistletoe are retained. Ponderosa will generally be favored for retention over 

lodgepole pine or true fir. Resource protection measures #56 and 57 (p. 43) describes how thinning is 

modified along Paulina Creek.

With a thinning from below, the smallest diameter trees in the stand and/or the shortest trees are 

generally priority for removal. Exceptions would be where: 1) ponderosa pine are overtopped by 

lodgepole pine or true fir, or 2) where the largest diameter trees in the upper most canopy levels are not 

the healthiest, most vigorous trees. In these cases the smaller ponderosa pine or the smaller, healthier 

trees will be retained. Where the removal of trees from the lower crown class will not reduce stocking 

to desired levels, trees from the dominant and codominant crown classes will be removed to favor the 

best trees of those same crown classes. 

With both Alternatives 2 and 3, thinning will reduce stocking to the lower management zone favoring 

ponderosa pine for retention. Lower management zone varies depending on site productivity. With 

Alternative 2, where ponderosa pine stocking is less than the lower management zone, lodgepole pine or 

white fir would be retained only as needed to meet the minimum stocking level, a stocking level less 

than the lower management zone. Alternative 3 varies this thinning treatment within stands where there 

may be insufficient ponderosa pine to stock the stand at the lower management zone. Instead of 

retaining lodgepole pine or white fir as needed to meet the minimum stocking level, these species would 

be retained as needed to keep stocking at the lower management zone.

Density following thinning and fuels treatments will vary depending on size of trees in the stand and site 

productivity. Stand density concepts are discussed under Key Issue #2 (page 6) and in the Forest 

Vegetation discussion, Chapter 3. Table 6 displays the stocking levels used in this document (lower 

 

2 The Eastside Screens prohibits including trees greater than 21” in timber sales. However, during harvest of 

timber, there may be an occasional tree over 21” diameter that is required to be felled and removed for operational 

needs such as landings, temporary roads, and skid trails. These instances are reviewed by the Line Officer.
Chapter 2 Alternatives

30  Ogden Final EIS

management zone and minimum stocking level) in terms of “trees per acre” and “basal area per acre” 

which are values more easily measured on the ground than stand density index (SDI).

Dead lodgepole pine, standing and down, excess to wildlife standards and guidelines will be removed. 

Excess dead woody material is present primarily in stands with no history of thinning or regeneration 

treatments. 

Table 6: Lower Management Zone (LMZ) and Minimum Stocking Density following proposed thinning 

and fuels treatments. 

Thinning 

Treatment

Prescription 

Code*

Stocking Levels**

Lower Management Zone Minimum Stocking

Higher Productivity Sites (Mixed Conifer PAG)

Thinning 

plantations with 

smaller diameter 

trees

MC_SPC

180 to 435 TPA, depending on tree 

diameters. Fewer TPA associated 

with larger trees; higher TPA 

associated with smaller trees.

N/A

Thinning 

stands with 

larger diameter 

trees

MC_1, MC_2

70 BA in trees >=10” DBH or

80 BA in trees >=18” DBH. 

Depending on tree diameters, this 

would be 25 – 130 TPA.

If less <70 – 80 BA in >=10” dbh trees, 

retain 25 smaller TPA where available 

for each 10 BA lacking. Total of all 

size trees not to exceed 140 TPA.

20 BA in trees >=10” DBH or

30 BA in trees >=18” DBH. 

Depending on tree diameters, this 

would be 8 – 40 TPA.

If less <20 – 30 BA in >=10” dbh trees, 

retain 25 smaller TPA where available 

for each 10 BA lacking. Total of all 

size trees not to exceed 100 TPA.

Lower Productivity Sites (Ponderosa or Lodgepole Pine PAGs)

Thinning 

plantations with 

smaller diameter 

trees

LP_SPC, 

PP_SPC, 

PP_LP_SPC

120 to 435 TPA, depending on tree 

diameters. Fewer TPA associated 

with larger trees; higher TPA 

associated with smaller trees.

N/A

Thinning

stands with 

larger diameter 

trees

PP_1, 

PP_LP_1, 

PP_2, 

PP_LP_2, 

LP_4

50 BA in trees >=10” DBH or

60 BA in trees >=18” DBH. 

Depending on tree diameters, this 

would be 20 – 90 TPA.

If less <50 – 60 BA in >=10” dbh trees, 

retain 25 smaller TPA where available 

for each 10 BA lacking. Total of all 

size trees not to exceed 120 TPA.

20 BA in trees >=10” DBH or

30 BA in trees >=18” DBH. 

Depending on tree diameters, this 

would be 8 – 40 TPA.

If less <20 – 30 BA in >=10” dbh trees, 

retain 25 smaller TPA where available 

for each 10 BA lacking. Total of all 

size trees not to exceed 100 TPA.

*See Appendix A for code definition and unit prescription. 

** TPA: Trees per acre; BA/AC: Basal Area (expressed in square feet) per Acre; DBH: Diameter Breast Height.
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  31

Regeneration Cutting – Even-aged method with Seed Tree Removal3

The removal of seed trees is conducted in areas intended to be single story stands but where currently an 

understory of saplings or seedlings established under an overstory of widely distributed trees. In the 

Ogden project, this treatment is planned in past seed tree harvests where the intent of the seed tree 

harvest was to produce a new age class of trees. Seed tree removal is planned where an understory of 

lodgepole pine seedlings and saplings has established and the lodgepole pine overstory, generally 8 to 

12 inches dbh, is no longer needed to provide seed. Typically a portion of the overstory is infected with 

mistletoe.

There would be no removal of standing or down dead trees. To provide green tree replacements for 

species that favor patches of snags, patches or clumps (generally larger than 2.5 acres) outside and 

adjacent to treatment areas would be designated and tracked. Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and 

Alternative 3 vary in the way individual dispersed wildlife green tree replacements are provided. 

Alternative 2 would retain 2 to 3 lodgepole pine overstory trees per acre within the seed tree removal 

units to provide future snag habitat for species that favor single trees. Alternative 3 would retain no 

lodgepole pine overstory within the treatment units, depending on the broader landscape level to provide 

for individual dispersed habitat structure.

2.3.2 Fuel Treatments

Lop and Scatter (LOP) 

Lop and scatter commonly occurs in light thinning slash where prescribed fire will be used as a final 

fuels treatment. An exception to this is lodgepole pine units that call for lopping and scattering. These 

units are not underburned. Lopping consists of cutting the limbs off of thinned trees rearranging the fuel 

bed to 15” or less off the ground. Lopped slash located beneath residual trees will be manually scattered 

out from below tree canopies to ensure low fire intensities in these areas during prescribed fire 

operations. 

Hand Piling 

Hand Piling consists of piling natural and activity-created fuels (slash) by hand. Completed pile 

dimensions will be approximately 6’ long by 6’ wide by 5’ high. The amount of piles per acre will 

fluctuate along with fuel loadings and are expected to occur at a rate of 18 to 24 piles per acre. Piles 

will be burned in the late fall or winter season when moisture levels minimize fire spreading to 

surrounding areas.

Machine Piling 

Machine Piling consists of piling natural fuels and activity created fuels utilizing mechanized equipment

such as a grapple piler. Pretreatment fuel loading will generally be greater than 16 tons per acre where 

machine piling occurs and completed pile dimensions will be approximately 12’ long by 12’ wide by 8’ 

high, and will occur at a rate of 6 to 10 piles per acre. Piles will be burned in the late fall or winter 

season when moisture levels minimize fire spreading to surrounding areas.

Mechanical Shrub Treatment or “Mowing”

Mechanical Shrub Treatment consists of mowing shrubs within forested stands. On flatter ground a 

rubber tired tractor equipped with a rotary mower will be utilized for MST treatments. Slopes over 20% 

 

3

In order to avoid confusion, it should be pointed out that “regeneration” is a silvicultural term used to classify 

harvest methods. Three harvest methods in the Ogden project fall within the regeneration classification: Two are 

specific to Alternative 2 only (clearcut with seed trees reserved in lodgepole pine; and clearcut with ponderosa and 

white fir reserved in mixed conifer). Those two methods that are described on page 20 are not included in 

Alternative 3. Alternative 3 includes only the seed tree removal harvest which is also classified as a regeneration 

method.
Chapter 2 Alternatives

32  Ogden Final EIS

will require a light tracked machine with a front mounted mow deck in order to access the steeper 

slopes. The targeted shrub species are bitterbrush and manzanita. Mechanized equipment will mow, 

cut, chop, grind, or otherwise reduce shrub or ground fuel vertical structure to a height of less than 8” 

and may occur on up to 70% to 80% of the area within specified units.

Underburning 

Underburning consists of burning natural fuels and activity produced fuels located in timbered stands. 

Ignition occurs under predetermined weather conditions in order to minimize tree mortality of residual 

stands. Underburning can occur as a sole treatment and in combination with other treatments developed 

to meet fuel reduction objectives. Season of burning and general approach (e.g. “drip line”) are 

determined by the post-sale stand conditions (e.g. amount of residual lodgepole following thinning). 

More than one entry with fire may be needed to meet the initial desired condition. 

Due to abnormally high fuel loadings, initial fire entries often include jackpot burning, or burning larger 

woody material during the wet season to reduce fire intensity and mortality. A typical underburn would 

follow the jackpot burning. Another multiple entry burn might include first burning during higher 

relative humidity to decrease fire intensity. The second entry would occur during lower relative 

humidity to help consume more fine fuels and remove ladder fuels. Multiple entry burns often take 

several years to complete, due to weather and scheduling.

Once initial underburning is complete, additional treatments may be necessary to maintain current stand 

conditions. Regular reentries of burning, or maintenance burning can be used to sustain the reduced fuel 

loadings. Any future maintenance proposals would be assessed through the NEPA process.

2.3.3 General Succession of Activities

Project implementation is likely to take several years to complete. For stands with a commercial timber 

component, the first phase of treatment is the overstory treatment (e.g. commercial thinning). Where 

units are small tree thinning or natural fuels treatment only, they could begin at the same time as the 

timber sale units.

2.3.4 Forest Plan Amendments

Both action alternatives will include two amendments to standards and guidelines for the Scenic Views 

Management Area described in the Deschutes LRMP (fewer units are included in the amendment under 

Alternative 3 than Alternative 2). The current Land and Resource Management Plan standards and 

guidelines for maintaining visual quality restrict the activities that can be visible to the “casual 

observer” within certain areas, including scenic view zones of retention and partial retention in the 

Scenic Views management allocations that occur along the corridors of Roads 21, 22, and 2120 (refer to 

Figure 7). It is expected that activities proposed under this project may not meet these standards;

therefore, two site-specific, short-term amendments to these standards and guidelines are proposed. See 

Timber 

Harvest

Overstory 

Treatment

Small Tree 

Thinning

Slash Piling 

and Burning

Understory 

Treatment

•Mowing

•Prescribed 

Underburni

ng

Natural 

Fuels 

Treatment

Subsoiling of 

primary 

logging 

facilities

Soil 

Restoration
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  33

Chapter 3, under Scenery - Forest Plan Amendments, for an analysis of effects of the changes. There 

will be benefits to the scenic views in the long-term.

Scenic Views Management Area Goals and Objectives from the LRMP

Goals: To provide Forest visitors with high quality scenery that represents the natural character of 

Central Oregon.

General Theme and Objectives of Scenic Views: Landscapes seen from selected travel routes and use 

areas will be managed to maintain or enhance their appearance. To the casual observer, results of 

activities either will not be evident or will be visually subordinate to the natural landscape.

Landscapes will be enhanced by opening views to distant peaks, unique rock forms, unusual vegetation, 

or other features of interest. Timber harvest is permitted, but only to protect and improve the visual 

quality of the stands both now and in the future. Timber stands, which have remained unmanaged in the 

past because of their visual sensitivity, will begin receiving treatment to avoid loss of the stand to 

natural causes. Landscapes containing negative visual elements, such as skid roads, activity residue, or 

cable corridors, will be rehabilitated.

The desired condition for ponderosa pine is to achieve and maintain visual diversity through variations 

of stand densities and size classes. Large, old-growth pine will remain an important constituent, with 

trees achieving 30 inches in diameter or larger and having deeply furrowed, yellowbark characteristics.

For other species, the desired condition requires obtaining visual variety through either spatial 

distribution of age classes and species mixes, through density manipulation, or through a mixture of age 

classes within a stand.

Standard & Guidelines and Reasons for Amending

M9-27 (LRMP 4-125) states: In Retention Foregrounds, slash from a thinning or tree removal activity, 

or other visible results of management activities, will not be visible to the casual forest visitor for one 

year after the work has been completed. In Partial Retention foregrounds, logging residue or other 

results of management activities will not be obvious to the casual forest visitor two years following the 

activity.

Although activity fuels would be treated as soon as possible, especially along travel corridors, the use of 

prescribed fire will create visible impacts (e.g. blackened, scorched vegetation and tree trunks, slash and 

slash piles) for approximately five years, which exceeds the amount of time management actions can be 

visible within retention and partial retention allocations. The decision to authorize this project would 

amend this standard to allow visible effects of harvest cleanup and fuels reduction for approximately 

five years in all or portions of the following units. Alternative 2: 21-26, 155, 158-160, 162, 166, 168-

172, 175-178, 182, 183, 187-193, 196-207, 313, 314, 322, 325, 334, 335, 337, 338, 373, 374, 377, 380, 

382, 384-388, 331, 333, 327, 346, 348, 257-265, 268, 110-117, 136-144, 161; Alternative 3: 21-26, 155, 

158-160, 162, 175-178, 182, 183, 188-193, 196-207, 313, 314, 322, 325, 334, 335, 337, 338, 373, 374, 

377, 380, 382, 384-388, 331, 333, 346, 257-268, 136-144, 161, 933, 934, 943 (see Figure 7 next page).

M9-90 (LRMP page 4-131) states: Low intensity prescribed fires will be used to meet and promote the 

Desired Visual Condition within each stand type. Prescribed fire and other fuel management 

techniques will be used to minimize the hazard of a large high intensity fire. In foreground areas, 

prescribed fires will be small, normally less than 5 acres, and shaped to appear as natural occurrences. 

If burning conditions cannot be met such that scorching cannot be limited to the lower 1/3 of the forest 

canopy, then other fuel management techniques should be considered.

Limiting acreage for the use of prescribed fire to 5 acres or less in foreground areas of Scenic Views 

would not meet the goal of reducing wildfire risk, providing safety corridors for the public, or creating a 

defensible fuel break for an advancing fire. It is necessary to amend the 5-acre general limitation for 

fuels treatments to meet stand and fire management objectives. These areas would remain at substantial 

risk to mortality from wildfire without a more comprehensive and intensive system of treatments, 
Chapter 2 Alternatives

34  Ogden Final EIS

including prescribed fire. The scenic corridor also coincides with the major access to the Newberry 

Crater and many recreation sites, which is an important corridor for ingress and egress. The maximum 

acres proposed for treatment within foreground areas of Scenic Views MA is 2,376. 

The units this amendment would apply to are the following: Alternative 2: 21-26, 155, 158-160, 162, 

166, 168-172, 175-178, 182, 183, 187-193, 196-207, 382, 384-388, 331, 333, 327, 346, 348, 257-265, 

268, 110-117, 136-144, 161; Alternative 3: 21-26, 155, 158-160, 162, 175-178, 182, 183, 188-193, 196-

207, 313, 314, 322, 325, 334, 335, 337, 338, 373, 374, 377, 380, 382, 384-388, 331, 333, 346, 257-268, 

136-144, 161. 

To maintain scorching below 30% of the crown, treatments would be based on the following:

If stand density is too dense to burn without substantial mortality, thinning with follow-up slash 

pile and burning.

If shrubs are present and stand density is low, mowing would be followed with prescribed 

burning. Some mortality could occur.

If stand density is low and no shrubs are present, the area would be assessed to determine if 

treatment is needed.

To achieve under burning objectives, more than one season of burning may be necessary.

 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  35

Figure 7: Forest Plan Amendment – Units within Scenic Views Retention and Partial Retention Foreground Management Areas
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

36  Ogden Final EIS

Road Activities

A road condition report was prepared for the Ogden project area. The report details the road work 

necessary for implementation of the project. The following table summarizes the road condition report. 

Table 7: Roads within Project area and Activities for each Action Alternative

Road Work

Alternative 2

(Proposed Action)

Alternative 3

Arterial and Collector Road System (9735, 9736, 

2120, 2121, 2215, 9745, 9750, 2205) (Project Area 

and Access) – Potential for Pre-Haul Maintenance

38.7 miles 38.7 miles

Local Road System – Potential for Pre-Haul 

Maintenance 135 miles 135 miles

Temporary Road – Re-use 5.5 miles 4.5 miles

Temporary Road – New impact 6 miles 5 miles

Road Maintenance: Pre-haul maintenance would occur for the two action alternatives. Forest Road 

2120 requires resurfacing on about 1.3 miles prior to implementation. Resurfacing would be completed 

with aggregate sourced on Forest. Other needed road maintenance work involves brushing, blading, 

ditch reconditioning, spot surfacing placement, danger and downed tree removal, and brush removal. 

Details are included in the roads report. Federal and State of Oregon safety regulations require that 

danger trees along project area travel routes be felled prior to activities taking place. Roadside danger 

trees would be felled along these travel routes and where activity units border the road system. Felled 

trees would then be removed. Roads are displayed in Figures 3, 4, 5, and 6. Four system roads that are 

currently in the Maintenance category 1 (administratively closed roads) will be-opened for use in this 

project, and then re-closed after project activities are complete. These roads are 2215-090, 9750-300, 

9730-299, and 9750-133. Road closure methods are described in the Deschutes National Forest “Road 

Closure Guide.” All temp roads will be rehabilitated by subsoiling or some other method.

Temporary Roads: Logging systems will include temporary roads. Estimated temporary road 

locations are displayed in Figures 3 and 5. The temporary road shown for accessing Unit 84 already 

exists because it was built for geothermal exploration activities. In Table 7 above, “re-use” refers to 

existing skid trails and temporary roads (some created during railroad era logging) and “new impact” 

refers to new temporary road location or areas that were used as skid trails during the railroad logging 

era that have recovered to acceptable conditions of productivity. Temporary roads are roads used to 

access further reaches of timber sale units to extract timber more efficiently and reduce ground based 

impacts from skidding long distances without the use of a road system. Temporary roads are built to 

low specification, just enough to get equipment into landings and are closed or obliterated at the end of 

the timber sale activity. These roads would be built on relatively flat ground and would be constructed 

to the lowest possible standard capable of supporting log haul in order to minimize ground disturbance. 

In most instances, temporary roads would be constructed on top of previously established skid trails to 

minimize additional soil compaction associated with use of heavy equipment. This would result in little 

extra disturbance within the unit beyond what would already be experienced as a result of the 

employment of ground-based yarding systems. 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  37

Fireline construction

Fireline would be constructed using either a hand type fireline that would be approximately 20” in width 

or a skid-steerer that would be approximately 5’ in width. Fire lines may be necessary to keep fire from 

spreading outside of unit boundaries. Fire lines would be rehabilitated following fire activities by 

pulling displaced surface material back over them, including soil, rocks, and woody material; also, soil 

berms would be scattered back across the firelines.

All of the Alternatives would meet direction in relevant laws and policies, and the standards and 

guidelines in the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan as amended by the 

Eastside Screens, except where noted on page 21 (Forest Plan Amendments). In addition, the 

Alternatives comply with the project design criteria for the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests 

Programmatic Biological Assessment (2006 – 2009). Resource Protection Measures are listed here to 

describe project design considerations and best management practices that will reduce or eliminate 

unwanted effects and ensure protect activities are implemented to comply with Forest Plan standards 

and guidelines.

The sources of these measures include but are not limited to: Forest Plan goals, objectives, or standards 

& guidelines; Project Design Criteria from the Programmatic BA; Best Management Practices; 

conservation strategies; Invasive Plant Prevention Practices.

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

1. To preserve ongoing research, Ecology Plots will be excluded from treatment. 35, 36

2. Retain ponderosa pine trees less than 21” dbh with old tree characteristics (from Van 

Pelt 2008) except where they are either: 1) ladder fuels which pose a threat to larger 

diameter trees or 2) dwarf mistletoe infected and contribute to infection potential of 

desired understory trees. Ponderosa pine old tree characteristics include all of the 

following: 1) orange bark with plates generally more than three times wider than the 

darker fissures that separate them, 2) rounded crown, and 3) below the main crown, 

few if any dead branches present and knots not noticeable.

All units

To ensure public safety and awareness during operations

3. Warning signs and public notices will be posted when burning or logging during 

hunting season or other times when public use of the area is high. To help ensure 

public safety during burning operations, signs or other traffic control measures would 

be used, in accordance with Oregon Department of Transportation permit 

requirements. Signs will be posted at either end of the Peter Skene Ogden NRT, at 

trailheads, and at McKay Campground. Trails and developed sites may be closed 

during these activities.

Units in and near 

developed recreation 

sites.

4. Private landowners, vendors, contractors, permit holders, and cooperators that may be 

impacted by underburning operations will be notified in advance of beginning any 

burning activities adjacent to their lands or areas of interest.

All

5. Burn areas adjacent to private land will be patrolled before leaving the site following 

ignition and daily thereafter until the unit fuels specialist and/or fire management 

officer determines there is no further threat to private land.

Along western 

boundary
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

38  Ogden Final EIS

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

6. Hazard trees created by underburning will be felled and left on site. All

7. Operations will be coordinated with special use permit holders and concessionaires in 

the project area.

All

8. Operations will be coordinated with geothermal operators and lease holders in the 

project area. Where exploration sites occur within treatment units, the site will be 

excluded from the activity area.

78, 84, 89, 107, 118, 

331, 377, 99, 93, 320 

9. To help ensure public safety during thinning and mowing operations within 

plantations, especially within units adjacent to high traffic areas such as Road 21, limit 

mechanical brush-cutting, thinning, and shredding equipment to those whose design 

minimizes the distance debris is thrown during operations. For operations occurring 

away from high traffic areas, measures could also include the posting of warning signs 

or the closing of roads during operations.

Units 371-381 (Road 

21 units)

To preserve air quality

10. All prescribed burning operations would be coordinated with the Oregon State 

Department of Environmental Quality and the Oregon State Department of Forestry 

through FASTRACS, the State of Oregon smoke management program. Anticipated 

weather conditions would be favorable for smoke dispersion.

All

To protect trees while burning 

11. To reduce potential for direct fire-related mortality, bark beetle induced mortality, and 

fire damage which could result in long-term growth loss, conduct burns in a manner 

that will result in 1) retention of at least 40 percent live crown ratio on dominant and 

codominant trees, with crown scorch generally less than 50 percent, and 2) minimal 

cambium scorching of lodgepole pine. Measures will include: 1) initiating burns 

outside the time of bud elongation (generally between mid-May to early June 

depending on weather conditions), 2) initiating burns when weather and fuel moisture 

conditions are favorable for meeting fuel reduction objectives and minimizing damage, 

and 3) utilizing lighting techniques expected to meet fuel reduction objectives while 

minimizing damage to residual trees. To minimize cambium scorching of lodgepole 

pine, lighting techniques to include avoiding direct ignition under lodgepole pine.

All units with 

prescribed 

underburning.

To protect Peter Skene Ogden (PSO) National Scenic Trail

12. To marginalize harvest impacts from view, mechanical harvest may occur up to 25 feet 

from the trail with equipment tracks remaining as far from the trail as possible, except 

where a trail-protected crossing is necessary.

PSO Mitigation 

Units:

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

13. Cut all trees to leave the lowest stump possible within visual distance from either side 

of the PSO trail. For any cut vegetation within 10 feet of either side of the trail, cut 

vegetation stumps flat and flush to the ground to prevent creating a hazard to trail 

users. At a minimum, following completion of all treatment activities, forest staff 

would review and evaluate the trail conditions to ensure that they meet safety 

standards.

PSO Mitigation 

Units:

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

14. Avoid creating sharply diverse vegetation conditions immediately adjacent to one side 

of the trail compared to the other. Completed operations should promote and 

PSO Mitigation 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  39

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

emphasize a "natural" look of the forest as viewed from the trails and developed sitesminimizing natural disturbances and a mosaic of conditions where terrain and 

vegetation allow. Wherever possible, utilize techniques such as natural terrain features, 

or wet holding lines off the trail and construct new fireline out of site from the PSO 

trail.

Units:

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

15. Cross trails with machinery at intervals no closer than 200 feet apart along the length 

of the trail within the affected unit and guard the trail tread with slash where crossing 

must occur when snow depth does not protect tread. Inspect with recreation staff to 

ensure trail tread has been protected during operations and rehabilitated where 

affected.

PSO Mitigation 

Units:

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

Paulina Plunge Units: 

141,162,163,166, 

167,180

16. Coordinate landing, skid trail, slash pile and staging area locations with recreation staff 

prior to approval. Whenever possible, landings, slash piles, and other discordant visual 

evidence of harvest and treatment activities should not be visible from the PSO trail or 

developed recreation facilities following completion of operations. E.g. Avoid slash 

piles tree scorch in multiple trees seen from or along the trails or within sight of the 

developed sites. Yard vegetation away from the PSO trail. See also visual standards 

for Retention and Partial Retention. 

PSO Mitigation 

Units:

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

Paulina Plunge: 

141,162,163,166, 

167,180

17. Where stewardship or other implementation tools allow for long-term (one month or 

more) on-site storage of bundles or decks, do not approve long-term storage of bundles 

or decks within visibility of the PSO trail, developed or dispersed sites or facilities 

unless approved by the District Recreation staff. When possible, require swift removal 

and rehabilitation of piles and landings visible from PSO trail and recreation sites and 

short time spans between sale and post-sale operations.

PSO Mitigation 

Units:

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

18. Obliterate and subsoil existing unauthorized travelways where motorized travel spurs 

(primarily off of FSR 2120, 2120-300, 2120-100, and 9735-174) contribute to 

motorized access of the Riparian Habitat Conservation Area and across the PSO.

Not limited to 

emphasis units: 159, 

160, 168, 143, 142, 

141

19. Obliterate and subsoil FSR 2120-300 and 2120-100 (except for the western most 

segment currently serving as parking for a special use permit operation) to help control 

motorized access to the RHCA.

Units 159, 160, 168

20. Leave a combination of natural barriers (including selective retention of large trees, 

un-treated clusters, downed wood or other natural barriers) 1) along FSR 2120 (up to 

1⁄4 mile beyond the east end of 2120-300), and 2) at McKay Crossing interface with 

PSO (to reduce potential for user-created roads and OHV travel in the RHCA and 

across the PSO). 

138, 140, 159, 160, 

168

21. Avoid creating vegetative conditions that would facilitate creation of unauthorized 

trails, or that would facilitate access from a designated route. Ensure that temporary 

roads used for project administration do not become future unauthorized trails by 

effective obliteration after use. Utilize opportunities during operations to obliterate 

unauthorized routes.

PSO mitigation units:

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

plus 160, 168

To protect recreation sites, facilities, and trails
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

40  Ogden Final EIS

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

22. If hauling occurs between December 1 and March 31, include Road Use Permit 

stipulations to establish appropriate safety conditions where snowmobiles are using the 

area. Such stipulations should include consideration of ramping snow berms to 

facilitate designated crossings of plowed routes, limiting haul on snowmobile trails to 

one lane to allow for grooming of the snow berm or other appropriate conditions to 

ensure safe use of the area during and following project operations. Applies to 

snowmobile trail #11 and Ponderosa Rim Nordic trail.

330-333, 336

23. Identify any unavoidable conflicts with summer and winter uses and logging or fuel 

reduction operations. Sign the high-use areas, trailheads and facilities affected in the 

project area that would be affected in advance of operations. 

182, 183, 331, 332, 

333

24. Coordinate with Recreation and Lands Staff regarding closure of Ogden, Prairie or 

McKay campgrounds, and PSO trailhead if logging or burning operations are being 

implemented within 1 mile of the site. Closure of the sno-parks should occur if 

operations might conflict with the safety of the visitor or visitors’ vehicles and 

equipment.

Ogden CG: 20, 21, 

24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 

156, 15, 7, 158, 159, 

160, 165, 166, 167, 

168, 169, 170, 171, 

172, 173; McKay 

CG: 134, 135, 136, 

137, 138, 139, 140, 

141, 142, 143, 144, 

145, 146, 147, 152, 

153, 154, 155, 161, 

162, 184, 185, 186, 

187, 188, 189, 377, 

378

25. Coordinate with Recreation and Lands Staff to 1) identify hazard trees adjacent to and 

within recreations sites, and power lines to consider volume additions stemming from 

hazard trees. 2) Notify all special use permit holders in the area prior to project 

activities occurring.

138, 140, 171, 172, 

182, 331, 333

Paulina Plunge: 

141,162,163,166, 

167,180

26. Emphasize retention of trail defining vegetation, including trees and brush. Retain 

trees over 8” within 6 feet of the trail tread edge, except where crossing is essential. 

This vegetation is part of the trail infrastructure and should be protected. Special

attention will be paid to areas with sparse vegetation or soil conditions that offer fewer 

opportunities to define trail width and location. 

PSO mitigation units: 

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

27. To the extent possible, retain trees that hold signs (including diamonds that mark 

winter trails). Inventory and replace any signs that may be damaged or removed during 

logging or burning operations.

PSO mitigation units: 

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

28. Hand pile and burn slash where otherwise scattered slash would be within visual 

distance of campgrounds, sno-parks, trailheads, and trails. Prioritize slash treatment 

for units containing these features.

PSO mitigation units:

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

Plus 138, 140, 171, 

172, 182, 331, 333

Paulina Plunge: 

141,162,163,166, 

167,180
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  41

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

29. Treatment unit boundaries should not be evident from summer and winter trails 

or developed sites following completion of operations. This should include 

techniques such as marking unit boundaries utilizing small diameter trees of 6” 

or less; using dots rather than lines where paint is employed; and removing all 

signs of unit boundaries from trees (or the small diameter trees themselves) 

visible from the summer or winter trails, recreation sites, travel corridors and 

otherwise visually sensitive areas.

PSO mitigation units:

111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 

137, 138, 140, 141, 144, 159

plus 182, 183, 331, 332, 333

FSR 21 units: 9, 16, 21, 23, 

24, 25, 167, 168, 170, 171, 

172, 177, 182, 183, 189, 

190, 191, 192, 197, 199, 

201, 204, 206, 207, 314, 

323, 331, 333, 334, 372, 

373, 375, 380, 382, 374, 

385, 386, 969, 933

30. Use all blue paint marking techniques and mark ‘take’ trees rather than ‘leave’ trees 

for units containing or visually adjacent to the PSO, campgrounds and sno-parks.

PSO mitigation units:

111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 137, 138, 140, 

141, 144, 159

plus 171, 172, 182, 

331, 332, 333

FSR units (see #29)

To Preserve Visual Quality

31. Underburning activities in Foreground areas would be designed to avoid scorching 

more than 1/3 of the live crown of dominant and codominant trees. Activities such as 

pruning of lower branches may be used to guard against crown fire.

176, 177, 199, 201,203, 

204, 206, 207

To protect soil

32. Surface Drainage on Temporary Roads: minimize the erosive effects of concentrated 

water through the proper design and construction of temporary roads (Road BMP R-7. 

9, 91, 21, 22, 28, 36, 37, 

64, 65, 71, 73, 77, 84, 

88, 91, 105, 106, 115, 

124, 126, 146, 148, 162, 

170, 180, 238, 247, 251, 

265, 277, 278, 291, 293, 

300, 303, 317, 340, 342, 

346, 350, 352, 949

33. Surface Drainage on Skid trails: Assure that water control structures are installed and 

maintained on skid trails that have gradients of 10 percent or more; Ensure erosion 

control structures are stabilized and working effectively (LRMP SL-1; Timber 

Management BMP T-16, T-18).). 

All harvest units.

34. Road Maintenance: conduct regular preventive maintenance on all haul routes to avoid 

deterioration of the road surface and minimize the effects of erosion and sedimentation 

(Road BMP R-18, R-19).

Prescribed Burn Operations

35. Protect Soils and Water during prescribed burn operations – Comply with all 

applicable LRMP standards and guidelines and Best Management Practices in burn 

plans completed before the initiation of prescribed fire treatments in planned activity 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

42  Ogden Final EIS

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

areas. Include soil moisture guidelines to minimize the risk of intense fire and adverse 

impacts to soil and water resources from prescribed burning (LRMP SL-1 & SL-3; 

Timber BMP T-2, T-3 & T-13; Fuels Management BMP F-2, F-3).

Retaining Coarse Woody Debris/Down Wood

36. Minimize disturbance and piling of woody debris during fuel treatments to retain 

adequate organic matter reservoirs for nutrient cycling and maintenance of long-term 

site productivity. For sites in general forest outside of Wildland Urban Interfaces 

(WUIs) reference USDA Forest Service General Technical Reports “Photo Series for 

Quantifying Forest Residues” for target ranges for fuels in the 0.25 to 3.0 inch size 

classes and coarse woody debris up to 9.0 inches in diameter. Acceptable fuel loading 

should include levels between 5 and 10 tons per acre across these size classes for

ponderosa pine and ponderosa/lodgepole sites [4-PP-1-TH (PNW-52)], and 10 to 15 

tons per acre on mixed conifer [3-MC-3-PC (PNW-95] and higher elevation lodgepole 

sites: [3-LP-3-PC (PNW-52)]. These levels are not attached to post-burn conditions in 

units where underburn prescriptions are implemented. Options to maintain these 

levels include limiting the travel of grapple piling machines to existing skid trails in 

units in which higher detrimental impacts from mechanized harvest are anticipated.

Maintaining Duff Layer

37. Strive to maintain fine organic matter less than 3-inches in diameter (commonly 

referred to as the duff layer) over at least 65 percent of an activity area following both 

harvest and post-harvest operations. Adjust minimum amounts to reflect vegetative 

capabilities if the potential natural plant community on site is not capable of producing 

fine organic matter over 65 percent of the area (LRMP SL-6; Fuels Management BMP 

F-2; Timber Management BMP T-13).

Minimize the extent of new soil disturbance from mechanical treatments

38. Implement appropriate design elements for avoiding or reducing detrimental soil 

impacts from project activities. Options include using some or all of the following: 

 Use old landings and skidding networks whenever possible. Designate locations 

for new yarding and transportation systems prior to the logging operations, 

including temporary roads, spur roads, log landings, and primary (main) skid trail 

networks. (LRMP SL-1 & SL-3; Timber Management BMP T-11, T-14 & T-16).

 Maintain spacing of 100’-150’ for all primary (main) skid trail routes, except 

where converging at landings, to minimize soil impacts. Closer spacing due to 

complex terrain must be approved in advance by the Timber Sale Administrator. 

Main skid trails spaced an average of 100’ apart to limit soil impacts to 11% of the 

unit area. For activity areas larger than 40 acres that can accommodate wider 

spacing distances, it is recommended that distance between main skid trails be 

increased to average 150’ to reduce the amount of detrimentally disturbed soil to 

7% of the unit area (Froelich, 1981, and Garland, 1983).

 Restrict grapple skidders and harvester/forwarders to roads, landings, and 

designated skid trails. Restrict grapple pilers to designated routes used for harvest 

operations where post harvest fuel loads are predicted to be moderate or low. 

Limit the amount of traffic from other specialized equipment off of designated 

areas, including harvester shears, excavators used for mechanical shrub treatments 

or grapple pilers in units where post harvest fuel loads are predicted to be high, to 

no more than two equipment passes on any site-specific area to accumulate or 

All proposed activity 

areas
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  43

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

process materials.

 Avoid equipment operations in units with slopes greater than 20% during times of 

the year when soils are extremely dry and subject to excessive soil displacement.

 Avoid equipment operations during periods of high soil moisture, as evidenced by 

saturated mineral soil or equipment tracks sinking deeper than normal during dry 

or frozen conditions.

 Operate equipment over a sufficient amount of frozen ground or compacted snow 

to protect mineral soil when available. Equipment operations should be 

discontinued when frozen ground begins to thaw or when equipment begins to 

cause severe rutting damage.

 Recommend full suspension yarding to minimize cumulative soil resource damage 

if winter logging conditions are not available.

12, 14, 16, 20, 21, 23, 

32, 33, 35, 36, 39, 47, 

50, 53, 56, 59, 67, 70

12, 14, 16, 20, 21, 23, 

32, 33, 35, 36, 39, 47, 

50, 53, 56, 59, 67, 70

39. Where feasible, machine pile fuels on logging facilities (i.e. skid trails and landings) 

that already have detrimental soil conditions in order to minimize additional soil 

impacts within activity areas.

40. Slopes greater than 30 percent: 

 Prioritize for leave areas within units. Exceptions for areas that make up less than 

10 percent of an activity area would be subject to Forest Service approval. There 

would be no exceptions made within the RHCA (i.e. no mechanized equipment on 

slopes > 30% in RHCAs).

 Prohibit any new development of temporary roads, minimize designated skid 

trails, and restrict mechanical disturbance to existing roads and designated skid 

trails at all times. 

 Directionally hand fall trees that cannot be reached by shears from designated skid 

trails and suspend the leading end of logs while accumulating or skidding. 

 Skid trails used by the purchaser shall be reclaimed by applying appropriate 

erosion control measures such as the placement of slash in conjunction with, or in 

place of, waterbars for rehabilitation. 

41. Reclaim all machine-built fire lines by redistributing displaced topsoil and unburned 

woody debris over the disturbed surface.

42. Apply restoration treatments (subsoiling) to primary logging facilities in order to meet 

LRMP standards or reduce overall impacts. Units with prior entries and elevated 

existing detrimental conditions are likely to need subsoiling restoration treatments of 

previous impacts as a Sale Area Enhancement to meet LRMP standards for soil 

productivity.

Harvest activity units 

with prior entries and 

elevated existing 

detrimental conditions.

43. Rehabilitate all temporary roads created for the current entry. This may include 

utilizing excavator bucket teeth to loosen compacted soils or pulling slash and woody 

materials over treated surfaces to establish effective ground cover protection where 

available. Subsoiling may occur as a post sale area improvement activity where 

conditions are appropriate.

9, 91, 21, 22, 28, 36, 37, 

64, 65, 71, 73, 77, 84, 

88, 91, 105, 106, 115, 

124, 126, 146, 148, 162, 

170, 180, 238, 247, 251, 

265, 277, 278, 291, 293, 

300, 303, 317, 340, 342, 

346, 350, 352, 949

To Protect Water Quality and Riparian Vegetation 

Applicable to all Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs):

Alternative 2: Units 111, 112, 113, 114, 138, 140, 141, 159, 172

Alternative 3: Units 138, 140, 141, 159, 172
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

44  Ogden Final EIS

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

44. BMP Veg-2. Erosion Prevention and Control

Within the RHCA:

Operate equipment when soil compaction, displacement, erosion, and sediment runoff 

would be minimized. Avoid ground equipment operations on unstable, wet, or easily 

compacted soils and on steep slopes unless operations can be conducted without 

causing excessive rutting, soil puddling, or runoff of sediments directly into 

waterbodies. No mechanized equipment will operate on slopes greater than 30% 

within the RHCA.

Evaluate site conditions frequently to assess changing conditions and adjust 

equipment operations as necessary to protect the site while maintaining efficient 

project operations.

45. BMP Road -10

Develop or use existing fuel management plans (e.g. spill response plan) when 

assigning the equipment and refueling and servicing sites.

To prevent pollutants from entering water, all servicing and refueling of equipment 

shall occur outside of RHCAs. Storage of fuels and other toxicants used during 

management activities shall be stored outside of RHCAs.

46. BMP Road -5

No temporary roads will be constructed within RHCAs. Temporary roads will be 

obliterated after use, with the surface deeply ripped; natural drainage features reestablished, road effectively drained and blocked; and road returned to native 

vegetation through either replanting or natural succession.

47. Maximize skid trails perpendicular to slope within the RHCA.

48. BMP Veg-4. Ground-based skidding and yarding operations

Within the RHCA: Locate skid trails outside of the RHCA to the extent practicable. 

When within the RHCA, maximize skid trails perpendicular to slope. Avoid long 

runs on steep slopes.

Use existing road and skid trail network to the extent practicable.

Use suitable measures to stabilize and restore skid trails after use. Reshape surface to 

promote dispersed drainage, mitigate soil compaction o improve infiltration and 

revegetation conditions, and apply soil protective cover on disturbed areas where 

accelerated erosion may occur.

Directionally fall hand-thinned trees away from Paulina Creek to limit streamside 

disturbance (do not drag off streambanks).

Retain maximum number of snags in the RHCA. For hazard trees (that need to be 

felled), with potential to fall into Paulina Cree, fall toward stream and leave on-site.

49. BMP Fire-2. Use of Prescribed Fire

Keep high-intensity fire out of the RHCA. To minimize potential sedimentation, 

plan prescribed fire with an intensity that will not result in hydrophobic soils or 

excessive consumption of ground cover and downed coarse wood. Meet these 

objectives by burning RHCA in spring. Exception would be near McKay 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  45

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

Campground where retention of downed coarse wood can be minimized.

No mechanized fireline construction within the RHCA. Hand line construction 

allowed where needed to contain underburn. Construct handline to the minimum size 

and standard necessary to contain the prescribed fire and meet overall project 

activities. Maintain firebreaks in a manner that minimizes exposed soil to the extent 

practicable. All hand lines will be rehabilitated immediately after underburn is 

completed.

Ignitions during underburning should be at least 50 feet or more from Paulina 

Creek. Fire is allowed to creep toward Paulina Creek.

Handpiling is allowed 50 feet or greater from Paulina Creek. Placement of handpiles 

would focus on upslope areas and avoid areas of washes and depressions that may 

facilitate water run-off toward streams. Burning would occur under conditions that 

do not allow excessive creeping from the pile, generally 10 feet or less. Handpiles 

should not exceed 50 ft2.

Evaluate the completed burn to identify sites that may need stabilization treatments or 

monitoring to minimize soil and site productivity loss and deterioration of water 

quality both on and off the site. Provide for rapid revegetation of any denuded areas 

through natural processes supplemented by artificial revegetation where necessary.

Machine or grapple piling is allowed 150 feet or greater from Paulina Creek. Locates 

slash piles in areas where the potential for soil effects is lessened and that do not 

interfere with natural drainage patterns. 

Consult fisheries biologist or hydrologist prior to implementation of prescribed 

underburns within the RHCA.

50. Leave higher density stocking and un-thinned leave areas on north sides of spur roads 

2120-100 and 2120-300 for screening and preventing user-created roads to the creek.

Units: 160, 171

51. Retain all aspen and other hardwood species in the RHCA.

52. BMP Veg-3. Aquatic Management Zones (AMZ): 

Design silvicultural or other vegetation management prescriptions and operations in 

the AMZ to maintain or improve the riparian ecosystem and adjacent waterbody. 

Retain trees as necessary for canopy cove rand shading, bank stabilization, and as a 

source of large woody debris within the AMZ.

The RHCA (300 feet slope distance on both banks of Paulina Creek) is the Aquatic 

Management Zone for the Ogden Project. The RHCA is divided into zones for the 

purpose of applying Best Management Practices. The number of zones differs 

between north and south sides of Paulina Creek. Refer to Figure 8, page 46, for a 

diagram of these zones that are referenced in the following project design features. 

North side of Paulina Creek RHCA

Zone 1 (high water line of stream edge to 12 feet): No thinning of trees of any size. 

This zone includes a narrow band of riparian vegetation typically less than 10 feet 

wide and often 3-4 feet wide along the streambank, composed primarily of sedges and 

grasses. Ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine area also located within this zone, with 

root masses being incorporated into the streambank. Vegetation quickly transitions 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

46  Ogden Final EIS

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

into ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine, and bitterbrush away from the streambank.

Zone 2 (12 feet from stream to machinery boundary 75-100 feet or more from stream 

edge): Hand thinning only of trees less than 10” dbh to spacing with no height 

limitation. Machinery excluded. Stand data has shown that trees < 10” dbh are under

60 feet tall. The vegetation in this zone is upland species and similar to that outside 

of the RHCA, composed primarily of ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine, and bitterbrush, 

with mixed conifer at higher elevations.

Zone 3 (from machinery boundary of Zone 2 to outer limit of RHCA, which is 300 

feet slope distance from stream): Thinning of trees less than 21” dbh with machinery 

allowed. Thinning prescription can be the same as adjacent unit located outside the 

RHCA. Vegetation in this zone is similar to Zone 2.

South Side of Paulina Creek RHCA (north facing: this side provides shade to 

stream)

Zone 1 (high water line of stream edge to 12 feet): No thinning of trees of any size. 

Vegetation is similar to that described above for Zone 1 of the north side of Paulina 

Creek.

Zone 2 (12 feet to 28 feet): Hand thinning of trees less than 20 feet tall allowed. 

Machinery is excluded. Vegetation is similar to that described above for Zone 2 of 

the north side of Paulina Creek.

Zone 3 (28 feet to machinery boundary, generally 75-100 feet as with north side of 

creek): Hand thinning of trees less than 10” dbh with no height restriction. 

Machinery excluded. Vegetation is similar to that described for Zone 2 of the north 

wide of Paulina Creek.

Zone 4 (machinery boundary to outer limit of RHCA, which is 300 feet slope 

distance from stream): Thinning of trees less than 21” dbh with machinery allowed. 

Thinning prescription can be the same as adjacent unit located outside the RHCA. 

Vegetation is similar to that described above for Zone 2 of the north side of creek.

Zone 1 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3

Zone 4 Zone 3

South

Side of

Paulina Creek

North

Side of

Paulina Creek

BoundaryMachinery BoundaryMachinery 

Zone 2

Figure 8: Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) Zones (Looking Downstream and West)
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  47

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

To Minimize Impacts to Wildlife 

Raptors

To prevent disturbance to nesting birds during breeding season

53. To protect nesting raptors and their habitat, any raptor encountered before or during 

management activities will be reported to a Bend/Ft. Rock wildlife biologist; 

additional protection may be necessary. New raptor nests found during management 

activities will be protected from disturbance in accordance with the timeframes 

displayed in the following m measure.

54. Any active raptor nest stands found during management activities will be protected 

from disturbing activities within 1⁄4 mile of the nest, including negative smoke impacts 

to known nesting raptor sites during the nesting periods by restricting site disturbing 

operations during the following periods:

Cooper’s hawk April 15-August 31 (WL-19)

Sharp-shinned April 15-August 31 (WL-19)

Northern goshawk March 1-August 31 (WL-3) 

Red-tailed hawk March 1-August 31 (WL-3)

Osprey April 1-August 31 (WL-3)

Golden Eagle January 1-August 31 (M3-15) 

Goshawk Units 909, 

949, 965, 966 (Alt. 3 

only);

Red-tailed Units 22, 

23

55. To avoid negative impacts to nesting raptors, prescribed burning should be conducted 

under wind conditions that do not carry smoke loads to known active nest areas during 

nesting periods. (See nesting restriction periods below)

56. Maintaining the forested character of an area at least 300 feet in radius around the nest 

will protect any new or active osprey and/or red-tailed hawks nest sites. While timber 

management may occur, maintain an average of at least 4 dominant overstory trees per 

acre suitable for nest and perch trees; ponderosa pine favored where possible (WL-2).

57. Underburning within post-fledging areas (PFAs) would be conducted between 

September 1 and March 1. Burning in the PFA would be coordinated with the wildlife 

biologist. No direct ignition of large woody debris; down logs would be maintained.

Units 909, 949, 965, 

966

58. Seasonal restrictions may be waived on an annual basis if a nest inventory determines 

that there is no active breeding.

Dead Wood: Snags, Coarse Woody Material, Green Tree Replacements

59. To provide for primary and secondary cavity nesters as well as coarse wood dependent 

mammalian species such as American marten and a variety of rodents, maintenance of 

snags, course woody material (CWM), and green tree replacements (GTRs) are 

needed. The snags and CWM can be randomly distributed over the unit, in clumps, 

singles, and not met in every acre but totaled for the combined acreage. An average of 

1 slash pile (approximately 100 square feet) or concentration (approximately 200 

square feet) per acre will be retained to supplement qualifying logs (LRMP WL-73). 

Some units will not have machine piling or hand piling so pile retention will be on a 

site-specific basis. 

60. Retain all existing snags as supplemental wildlife trees for roosting and foraging 

except when they pose a hazard, other resource protection, or project logistics 

(Wildlife and Log Implementation Strategy, LRMP Standard WL-38). Efforts will be 

made to incorporate snags and logs into retention areas.

61. Retain all down logs in Units 54, 285, 342, 947, and 951. 

Elsewhere, retain at least 3-6 logs per acre greater than 12” diameter at the large end in 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

48  Ogden Final EIS

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

ponderosa pine habitats, at least 15-20 logs per acre greater than 12” diameter at the 

large end in mixed conifer habitat, and at least 15-20 logs per acre greater than 8” 

diameter at the large end in lodgepole pine habitats (Screens Direction).

62. Retain at least one slash pile per acre within units proposed for hand or grapple 

piling (WL-73).

63. Where fuels treatment is dependent on whole tree yarding and/or grapple piling, these 

units will be reviewed by Fuels and Wildlife specialists post harvest to ensure fuel 

loadings meet Screens direction for course woody material (CWM).

64. Develop prescribed burn prescriptions to minimize charring of logs (LRMP Standard 

WL-72). Fire prescription parameters will ensure that consumption will not exceed 3 

inches total (1.5 inches per side) of diameter reduction in featured logs.

Connectivity Corridors 

65. Specific to Alternative 2: Within LOS connectivity corridors, in order to retain canopy 

closures within the top one-third of site potential, maintain stocking levels between the 

upper and lower management zones (Table 16). Where there is not enough ponderosa 

pine to stock corridors at the lower management zone, retain lodgepole pine or true fir 

where available to supplement ponderosa pine. Where planned treatment includes 

mow/underburn, limit treatment to mowing if a post-thin assessment determines 

underburning would reduce stocking in corridor below the lower management zone

118, 124, 158

Landbirds

66. For natural fuels units (mow and/or burn prescriptions), retain 10% of the unit in 

untreated islands, 2-10 acres in size, distributed throughout the unit to provide for 

movement of ground nesting birds as well as maintaining nesting habitat (this is 

generally considered a “mosaic burn”).

67. Where possible minimize natural fuels and logging operations during spring and early 

summer (April 15 – August 1) to limit disturbance to nesting birds.

To Prevent the Introduction and Spread of Invasive Plants

68. Clean all equipment before entering National Forest System lands. Remove mud, dirt, 

and plant parts from project equipment before initially moving it into project units and 

before proceeding to the next project.

All

69. The district botanist or designee will inspect all fill material for the presence of weeds 

prior to use and transport.

All road work

70. If a significant weed site is located on a landing or skid trail, an alternate, uninfested 

site will be used.

All

71. The weed sites at Ogden Group Camp, 10-mile sno-park, along Road 21, geothermal 

well pad (T21S, R12E, Section 21, on the 9735-695 road), and McKay Creek crossing 

will be treated prior to project initiation, either by hand pulling or if possible, by means 

identified in 2012 Invasive Plant EIS.

Adjacent to EIS units 

25, 73, 137, 139, 158, 

159, 162, 167, 170, 

177, 182, 183, 197, 

331, 332, 333, 334, 

385, 386, 933 (alt. 3).

72. Any water source proposed for this project will be evaluated for weeds by the district 

botanist or her designee and if weeds are found, another source may be recommended, 

or if possible, the site will be treated prior to use.

All road work
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  49

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

For Protection of Range Resources

73. Protect the range study plot – Condition and Trend Transect #3; T21S, R11E, Section 

16 SW 1⁄4. INFRA improvement #01036515. Site (approximately one acre) will be 

flagged by range program and excluded from any treatment.

Unit 32

To Protect Cultural Resources and to avoid potential effects on eligible and unevaluated sites

74. Sites to be avoided will be flagged prior to project unit layout and site locations will be 

provided to the contracting representative. Units affected are 

identified in the 

heritage resource 

report, located in the 

project file.

75. In the event that previously unknown sites or artifacts are found during project 

implementation, they will be flagged and operations in the area avoided until an 

archaeologist is consulted.

76. When using heavy equipment, known cultural sites that are to be avoided (as detailed 

in the Heritage Report) will be provided a spatial consistent with treatment. Such 

buffers are typically 30 meters. This includes harvest, grapple piling, mechanical 

brush treatment (mowing) temporary road building and subsoiling, and creation of skid 

roads and landings.

77. Within archaeological sites where harvest is required over snow, snow depths should 

be sufficient to protect surface artifacts or other site features (approximately 12” in 

depth with 2” of frozen ground). The alternative is site avoidance as described in #71 

above.

78. Prescribed burning activities in areas of cultural sensitivity (as detailed in the Heritage 

Report) should be conducted in spring or fall-like conditions when burn conditions 

would be coolest to limit burn temperatures. Multiple entries at lower temperatures 

are acceptable when conducted to limit burn temperatures.

79. All historic sites (as detailed in the Heritage Report) should be avoided by fuel 

implementation activities to protect glass, ceramic and historical period artifacts. Sites 

will be flagged prior to project activities and identified in the burn plan.

80. Slash piles will not be placed within any site boundaries in order to avoid extreme heat 

on sites and artifacts.

81. Fire hand-line construction will be built outside of site boundaries using a 30 meter 

buffer. 

82. Danger trees identified within known sites will be directionally felled to avoid impacts 

to the site and left in place. When possible, trees will be felled toward access routes. 

Lifting a tree in its entirety is a preferred method of preventing displacement and 

mixing of site sediments and artifacts. Complete suspension of smaller lengths is 

another method. If either method is not feasible, felled trees will be left in place.

Vegetation management in the Ogden project area includes both silvicultural (tree) and fuels treatment 

methods. The following table summarizes the acres of tree and fuel treatments for both action 

alternatives (Table 8).
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

50  Ogden Final EIS

Table 8: Summary Comparison of the Two Action Alternatives

Treatments

Alternative 2

Acres

Alternative 3

Acres

1) Tree and fuel treatments in combination 11,372 7,663

2) Tree treatments without fuel treatments 2,448 5,284

3) Fuel treatments without tree treatments 364 1,475

Total 14,182 14,442

Total tree treatments (1+2) 13,818 12,947

Total fuel treatments (1+3) 11,736 9,138

2.6.1 Comparison of the Alternatives by Cover Type and Treatment 

Objective

The following table displays a summary of the acres of treatment by alternative for each kind of cover 

type (i.e. lodgepole pine, ponderosa pine, or mixed pine). 

Table 9: Summary of Treatment by Cover Type and Treatment Objective

Cover Type and Treatment Objective

Alternative 2

(Acres)

Alternative 3

(Acres)

Lodgepole pine

Continue development toward even-aged stands of an intermediate 

age/size class.

Minimize mistletoe spread to developing young lodgepole pine.

1,316 1,292

Continue development of an intermediate age/size class.

Maintain existing vertical diversity for wildlife habitat. 233 233

Create a new age class of trees.

Reduce spread of dwarf mistletoe to adjacent, recently regenerated 

stands.

362 16

Subtotal Acres 1,911 1,541

Ponderosa and lodgepole pine

Move towards ponderosa dominated stands and continue 

development towards an intermediate age/size class (plantations).

95 138

Move towards ponderosa dominated stands and continue 

development towards large tree structure. 5,879 6,088

Move toward ponderosa dominated stands and maintain large tree 

structure.

227 217

Subtotal Acres 6,201 6,443

Ponderosa pine

Maintain or increase ponderosa pine dominance and continue 

development towards an intermediate age/size class. 1,451 1,451

Maintain or increase ponderosa pine dominance and continue 

development towards large tree structure. 3,745 4,245

Maintain or increase ponderosa dominance and maintain large tree 

structure.

18 18

Subtotal Acres 5,214 5,714

Mixed pine and true fir
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  51

Cover Type and Treatment Objective

Alternative 2

(Acres)

Alternative 3

(Acres)

Maintain or increase ponderosa pine dominance and continue 

development towards an intermediate age/size class. 20 20

Maintain or increase ponderosa pine dominance and continue 

development towards large tree structure. 796 679

Maintain or increase PP dominance and maintain large tree 

structure.

40 25

Subtotal Acres 856 724

Treatment Total Acres 14,182 14,422
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

52  Ogden Final EIS

2.6.2 Comparison of how each Alternative Meets the Purpose and Need 

and Key Issues

In the following two tables, all alternatives are compared by how well each addresses the purpose and 

need and key issues described in Chapter 1.

Table 10: How the Alternatives Address the Purpose and Need

Purpose & Need 

Element

Alternative 1 – No 

Action Alternative 2 Alternative 3

There is a need to reduce forest vegetation density and fuels to increase resilience to insects, disease, and 

stand-replacing fire, and to increase the proportion of LOS ponderosa pine.

Thinning to increase 

resilience to insects and 

disease

Threshold for bark 

beetle attack will be 

exceed for all stands by 

the year 2040

No beetle influence for 20-50 

years on 10,145 acres

No beetle influence for 20-

50 years on 9.494 acres.

Movement towards HRV

27% of ponderosa 

stands with most 

potential to develop into 

single or multi-stratum 

with large trees.

50% of ponderosa stands have 

most potential to develop into 

single or multi-stratum large trees 

structure. 

52% of ponderosa stands 

have most potential to 

develop into single or 

multi-stratum large trees 

structure. 

Single-Stratum Ponderosa 

Pine LOS

Potential development 

of moderately-stocked 

stands (27% ) into LOS, 

subject to bark beetle 

activity.

Within the middle range of HRV 

by 2060.

Within the middle range of 

HRV by 2060, slightly more 

than Alt. 2

Change in fire behavior

6,895 acres (26% low 

fire behavior potential.

21.560 acres in 

Condition Class 2 and 3

18,034 acres (68%) low flame 

length potential. 

11,253 acres restored to 

Condition Class 1

15,117 acres (57%) at low 

flame length potential.

11,681 acres restored to 

Condition Class 1

There is a need to contribute to the local and regional economies by providing timber and other wood fiber products and 

associated jobs.

Number of Jobs Created or 

maintained 0 174 170

Timber Volume Produced 0 32.5 mmbf 29.2 mmbf

Table 11: How the Alternatives Address the Key Issues

Key Issue Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

#1 – Regeneration 

Harvest in Lodgepole 

Pine

0 acres regen harvest

Older LP at 76% of analysis 

area.

0 acres < 10 years old by 2015.

397 acres regeneration

harvest (362 acres clearcut 

with reserve trees in 

lodgepole and 35 acres in 

mixed conifer with ponderosa 

and white fir reserved).

Older LP reduced by 3% in 

analysis area to 73%.

Slight increase in age class 

diversity.

0 acres regeneration harvest in 

LP or MC

Older LP at 76% of analysis 

area.

0 acres < 10 years old by 2015.

#2 – Thinning Level in 

Stands of Mixed 

Ponderosa and 

0 acres thinned.

Total stand stocking remains 

above LMZ.

10,145 acres thinned outside 

plantations.

Stocking less than LMZ 

9.494 acres thinned outside 

plantations.

Stocking less than LMZ 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  53

Lodgepole Pine Units above UMZ will be at risk 

to mtn. pine beetle attack.

common on 48% of area. common on 5% area.

#3 – Air Quality 

Impacts from Burning

No burning (piles or landscape) 

under prescription. Wildfire 

would create more particulates 

and smoke impacts to 

neighboring communities.

10,595 acres Rx burn.

7,39 acres pile burn.

Air quality standards met.

7.948 acres Rx burn.

7,237 acres pile burn.

Air quality standards met.

#4 – Paulina Cr. RHCA

Some RMOs not being met 

under current conditions.

No TES aquatic species 

present.

0 acres treated.

248 acres RHCA treatment.

159 acres commercial 

harvest.

Two RMOs benefitting in the 

future from thinning: large 

wood material and water 

temperature.

212 acres RHCA treatment. 

141 acres commercial harvest.

Two RMOs benefitting in the 

future from thinning: large 

wood material and water 

temperature.

#4 – Old Growth 

Management Area

No treatment according to 

OGMA Plan for indicator 

species. Habitat deterioration 

due to 1998 wildfire and 

blowdown. High risk of 

wildfire on western end.

455 acres treatment designed 

to address habitat needs for 

indicator species. Wildfire 

risk reduced. Sustainability of 

stands benefit. Temp. road 

construction short-term 

negative impact.

83 fewer acres treated than 

Alternative 2.

No temp road access necessary 

(units 110-117 dropped).

#4 – Unroaded Areas

No entry 25 acres of three units 

overlap a Potential 

Wilderness Area.

0 acres treated in Potential 

Wilderness Area.

#5 Goshawk habitat 

management

No risk of disturbance or 

habitat alteration.

No reduction of fire or beetle 

risk within PFAs or territories.

Current condition of stands is 

unsustainable in the long-term 

and there is potential loss of 

goshawk habitat given risk to 

stands.

No treatment within PFAs. 

No disturbance or habitat 

alteration within PFAs.

Long term movement to older 

structural stages in 

territories, which are lacking. 

Reduction of wildfire moving 

into PFAs and nest stands. 

Continued risk within PFAs of 

loss of habitat.

343 acres PFA treatment. 

Promotes larger tree structure 

in PFAs. Reduces wildfire risk 

and promotion of new nesting 

habitat in territories as in 

Alternative 2. More short-term 

impacts (e.g. open canopy, 

disturbance) for long-term 

gains (e.g. large tree 

sustainability).

Forest Fuels

A total of 10% of the underburning units will be sampled after the first season and at completion of 

activities to measure residue profiles and to determine effective ground cover for the protection of soils. 

Areas to be considered for specific monitoring include:

Paulina Creek (RHCA – includes shade and ground cover monitoring)

Mixed Conifer stands

Along Forest Road 21 (designated Scenic View MA9)

Fixed (Control) plots in Ponderosa pine, 

Historical fire scars (both treated and untreated areas)

Core Attributes 

1. Changes in the fuels complex (watershed, subwatershed, and stand scales)

a. Surface fuels – downed wood, piles, litter and duff
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

54  Ogden Final EIS

b. Ladder fuels – shrubs, conifer regeneration, lichens, and needle drape

c. Live fuels – grass, forbs, shrubs, and trees of all sizes and types

2. Invasive species

3. Stand density – trees and shrubs

4. Stand health – insects, disease, wind throw or wind damage, and other disturbance factors for 

tree and shrubs

5. Snags

6. The mix of seral structure stages/fuel characteristic classes 

7. Direct effects (stand scale)

a. Mortality of targeted or protected species, size classes, etc.

b. Emissions of PM10 and PM2.5

c. Soil heating, compaction or displacement

d. Dead fuel consumption (downed wood, litter, duff, etc.) 

e. Residual stand damage (nonlethal scorch, cat faces, etc.)

Prescribed Underburn Monitoring Item

Objective: Monitor effectiveness of Resource Protection Measure #10 in 1) maintaining at least 40%

live crown ratio on dominant and codominant trees and minimizing scorch to less than 50% of the live 

crown, and 2) minimizing cambium scorching of lodgepole pine. Identify areas where mitigation 

objectives were not achieved. Determine why objectives were not achieved. As needed, initiate 

development of a reforestation plan, report reforestation need, and request appropriated funding for 

reforestation. For still to be implemented prescribed underburns, determine if additional mitigations are 

needed or if burn treatment needs to be modified or discontinued.

Monitoring Elements: 1) Identify areas where live crowns have either been reduced below 40 percent 

or have been reduced by 50% from pre-burn conditions or where lodgepole pine cambium has been 

scorched, and 2) within identified areas, monitoring survival of damaged trees for up to two years after 

burn.

Type of Monitoring: Implementation and effectiveness monitoring

Methods/Parameters: Qualitatively assess burn areas to identify: 1) where either crown scorch or 

crown loss exceed specified levels or 2) where groups of lodgepole pine have scorched cambiums. Map 

areas exceeding 2 to 3 acres in size where tree survival is not assured to be greater than minimum 

stocking levels.

Frequency/Duration: Annually after bud burst and needle elongation, for up to 2 years following 

burn.

Projected Costs: $6,000 or approximately $5 per acre, based on an assumption of monitoring 21 units 

(1,204 acres with crew of 3 to 5 people ($3,000 per year for two years).

Responsibility: 1) Fuels, identification of areas with tree damage, and 2) Silviculture operations, 

development of reforestation plan, reporting of reforestation need and requesting appropriated funding.

Cultural Resource Monitoring

Objective: To evaluate effectiveness of protective measures and to identify changes to sites that may 

have been caused by project activities. Monitoring is an important component of the protection 

recommendations agreed to by the SHPO because it provides an objective basis for the evaluation of

effectiveness of avoidance and mitigation measures. Monitoring will provide an opportunity to update 

site information with data regarding changes that may derive from implementation of project activities 

and to locate nine sites which could not be relocated during project survey.
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  55

Type of Monitoring: Implementation and Effectiveness

Methods: Sample based monitoring will occur where over-snow logging, fuels burning, and adjacent 

ground disturbance will occur, and have been implemented. Sample-based post-burn survey/monitoring 

will be implemented in certain treatment units that have not been previously inventoried. Units where 

monitoring will occur are specified in the Cultural Resources Inventory Report. Approximately 20-30% 

of sites will be monitored. 

Water Quality: Long-term water temperature monitoring has been established on Paulina Creek. This 

monitoring will continue biennially at a minimum. Underburning units within the RHCA along Paulina 

Creek would be monitored post-treatment, including shade and ground cover. Additionally, stream 

habitat surveys of Paulina Creek would continue at intervals of approximately 10-15 years.

Federal agencies are required by NEPA to rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable 

alternatives and to briefly discuss the reasons for eliminating any alternatives that were not developed in 

detail (40 CFR 1502.14). Public comments received in response to the Proposed Action expressed 

concerns they had with the proposed action and in some cases provided suggestions for a different 

course of action. Some of these alternatives may have duplicated the alternatives considered in detail or 

were determined to be unable to meet the project’s Purpose and Need. Alternatives that were 

considered but dismissed from detailed consideration are summarized below.

No commercial logging, utilize fire and small-tree thinning only. 

Some scoping comments suggested that the project area be treated with only small tree thinning and 

prescribed fire. The purpose and need for the Ogden project includes providing timber and other forest 

products to the local and regional economies. Therefore, an alternative that would involve no 

commercial logging would not meet the purpose and need and was not analyzed in detail. The IDT did 

analyze an alternative that dropped commercial logging in certain units (Old Growth Management Area, 

for example). Additionally, restoration principles identified by the Upper Deschutes Basin Fire 

Learning Network include making by-products of forest restoration treatments available for utilization 

in ways that support local businesses and workers and that build local capacity to implement further 

restoration work. 

Minimum Treatment – conduct fuels reduction only where the highest priority.

Some scoping respondents felt that the proposed action was too large in scale and would create 

homogeneous conditions across the landscape. Other concerns with the large scale of the project are 

interrupting mortality processes, reducing structural complexity, and reducing wildlife cover. These 

concerns are considered objectives for this project and are addressed with the design of the two action 

alternatives. Also, Alternative 3 was developed to address several issues (see Chapter 2.2.3) and 

specifically dropped treatments in several areas. The Ogden IDT also determined what the highest 

priority stands would be for fuels reduction in order to assess what proportion of the landscape would be 

involved (e.g. ingress/egress, around developed recreation sites, etc). An alternative of treating only the 

highest priority areas for fuels reduction was considered; however, because so much of the project area 

has been affected by past logging and fire suppression, the existing condition and potential for 

disturbance is far outside the historic range of variability across a large area. The fuels reduction 

strategy, (which aims to break up fuels continuity and reduce the risk of high intensity, standreplacement wildfire) requires a focus on stands in Condition Class 2 and 3. Moving a large number of 

these acres to Condition Class 1 meets the fuels objectives in this project; but there are areas of 

Condition Class 2 and 3 that are not treated, leaving surface fuels and retaining the species mix, while 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

56  Ogden Final EIS

still breaking up fuels continuity. There are additional needs in the project area for thinning across the 

project area in stands that are above the Upper Management Zone and to promote more LOS ponderosa 

pine that are in addition to the fuels reduction.

No temporary road construction or re-construction of existing little-used roads.

The purpose and need of this project would not be met without the use of temporary road construction. 

It is necessary to provide temporary roads for the removal of merchantable material, in its different 

forms. Leaving merchantable material or other material from thinning treatments would increase the 

fuel loading and would not effectively improve the fire risk and safety conditions. Temporary roads are 

generally closed or rehabilitated following project activities. Alternative 3 involves less temporary road 

use than alternative 2, but the use of temporary roads cannot be eliminated altogether.

Limit diameter of trees to be removed with thinning

The Sierra Club stated that the Forest Service should employ the use of “diameter limits.” The 

suggested limit on the size of trees that should be removed varied from 8” dbh to 18” dbh; with an 

indication that thinning to a maximum of 16” dbh in ponderosa pine would be sufficient to meet project 

goals. 

This alternative is substantially similar to the other action alternatives. With either action alternative, 

thinning from below in combination with the 21 inch diameter limit established by the Eastside Screens 

already provides for the retention of larger diameter trees within treatment units. While not all medium 

sized trees 16 to 20.9 inches diameters would be retained, the proportion of trees removed in these size 

classes would be relatively small in comparison to the proportion retained. This is supported by 

projections for the Ogden treatments and monitoring of similar treatments implemented in similar stand 

conditions:

Cut/Leave histograms for Ogden sample stands show majority of trees to be cut would be in the 

less than 16 inch diameter size class. For ponderosa pine, a higher proportion of trees in the 

greater than 16 inch diameter class are retained compared to cut. Actual number of trees per 

acre in the greater than 16 inch diameter class is relatively small.

Monitoring of similar stands in the Sonny Timber Sale, which did not have diameter limits, 

shows the same pattern.

Additionally, both action alternatives use diameter limits within treatment units adjacent to Paulina 

Creek to provide for the retention of shade and future snag recruitment. Both alternatives limit removal 

to trees less than 10” dbh or 20 feet tall, depending on the side of the creek the unit lies on. Both action 

alternatives would also retain old ponderosa pine trees, regardless of their size (resource protection 

measure #2).

Other reasons for not considering a diameter limit alternative in detail involve the limits it places on 

meeting some aspects of the purpose and need. 1) Limiting cutting to less than 16 inches dbh would 

limit the option for reducing lodgepole pine stocking. 2) While relatively few trees in the 16 to 20.9 

inch diameter classes are harvested, these trees can help contribute to the economic viability of a 

commercial timber sale. 3) Diameter limits would reduce the ability to reduce stocking to the lower 

management zone. Resilience to bark beetles would still be increased, but the period of resilience 

would be shorter. To maintain resilience, future thinning would have to occur sooner (cut/leave 

histograms for six sample units show that within all units, removal of trees greater than 16 inches dbh is 

necessary to reduce stocking to desired levels.) 

Girdling of mistletoe-infected overstory rather than removing by harvest

Some scoping respondents suggested that overstory trees infected with mistletoe should be girdled 

rather than removed by the timber harvest because of the potential for damage to the residual 

understory. Potential damage to the understory with any tree removal operation is a reality; however, 

this alternative was not analyzed in detail because: 1) the snags that would be created would be small 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  57

(about 28 per acre 8-10” dbh). Snags of this size have limited benefit because they are in an open seed 

tree unit and usually only remain standing for a short period of time. 2) the timber sale is at no cost to 

the government, whereas girdling would incur a cost; 3) there would be an adequate number of green

trees retained in the overstory for future snag. Where these mistletoe trees exist, the understory is 

presently overstocked and it is a currently a good time to remove the mistletoe infected trees rather than 

allowing the mistletoe to infect the understory.

Amendment to the Eastside Screens

The interdisciplinary team proposed treatment within several units (totaling about 40 acres) that were 

later determined to have enough trees greater than 21” dbh to meet the definition of Late and Old 

Structure (LOS). The analysis in Chapter 3.3.9 shows that within the mixed conifer and ponderosa pine 

biophysical environments, both multi-stratum with large trees and single-stratum with large trees LOS 

are below the historic range of variability (HRV). Direction in the Eastside Screens does not allow 

commercial harvest under this circumstance, so in order to move forward with thinning in those stands, 

an amendment to the Screens would be necessary. These stands are a small component of the larger 

project area strategies and not treating them will not prevent attainment of the purpose and need; 

however, these stands are susceptible to fire and would likely be lost in the event of a wildfire. The 

alternative of amending the Eastside Screens was not carried forward for detailed analysis and the units 

were dropped.

Money may be collected from the timber sales to complete certain projects such as required mitigation, 

and enhancement and restoration projects in the vicinity of the timber sale areas. Required reforestation 

items (R) and mitigation measures (M) have the highest priority for funding, but may be funded by other 

means such as appropriated funds to insure that requirements are accomplished. Other items are 

considered enhancement (E).

This list is intended to serve as an overall guide for the analysis area. As timber sales are defined, 

specific priorities may be adjusted to meet the needs for each sale area. This priority setting should be 

documented briefly in the implementation file for each timber sale. Some projects listed here were not 

analyzed as part of this project and would require documentation through a separate NEPA process.

1. Subsoil – Restoration/Enhancement – Sale Area Improvement (M/E). Approximately 24 acres 

of the soil resource within proposed activity areas (Unit #s 12, 14, 16, 20, 21, 23, 32, 33, 35, 36, 

39, 47, 50, 53, 56, 59, 67 and 70) are likely to need subsoiling restoration treatments of previous 

impacts as a Sale Area Improvement in order to meet LRMP standards for soil productivity. These 

activities would be a mandatory part of the proposed actions associated with Alternatives 2 and 3. 

Subsoiling treatments on skid trails and log landings additional to these acres in any units 

receiving mechanical harvest treatments would further reduce the cumulative amount of 

detrimentally compacted soil and result in a net improvement in soil quality over a larger portion 

of the project area. 

2. Whipfelling and associated piling (R). Site preparation to facilitate reforestation efforts. 

Treatments are part of the regeneration harvest treatments under Alternative 2. Whipfelling 

follows commercial harvest and consists of felling submerchantable whips that are diseased, poor 

vigor, or excess to retention requirements. Piling of fuels excess to desired fuel loadings done 

either by hand or grapple piling. 

3. Stocking surveys (R). Stocking surveys to monitor progress in establishing a new stand 

following all regeneration harvest treatments.
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

58  Ogden Final EIS

4. Shrub mowing (E). Mowing of shrubs within plantations to enhance growth (Identified for units 

in Alternative 2 and 3).

5. Precommercial (small-diameter) thinning and associated slash piling (E). A component of 

the thinning treatments analyzed with Alternatives 2 and 3 consists of the cutting of trees too 

small to have commercial value, as identified in EIS Appendix A. Treatment follows a timber 

sale or occurs separately within plantations.

6. Removal of cattle guards (E). The Sugar Pine allotment is no longer active. Because grazing is 

no longer occurring, and fences have already been removed, it is unnecessary to retain and 

maintain cattle guards within the project area. The following four cattleguards can be removed: 

1. Road 012 (T.21S., R.11E., Section 20, SE quarter)

2. Road 9725-100 (T.21S., R.11E., Section 20, SE quarter)

3. Road 9725-175 (T.21S., R.11E., Section 23, SW quarter)

4. Road 9736 (T.21S., R.11E., Section 23, SE quarter)

7. Rehabilitation of unauthorized trails and user-created roads (E). Some unauthorized 

motorized access conflicts with the Peter Skene Ogden Trail and provide access to user-created 

dispersed campsites. Spurs that have developed off of the following roads would be rehabilitated

(obliterate and subsoil): 2120, 2120-300, 2120-100, and 9735-174. Other spurs coming from the 

Peter Skene Ogden trailhead and McKay Crossing with the PSO trail would also be rehabilitated. 

Natural barriers are the preferred method.

8. Invasive plant control and effectiveness monitoring (E). Sites identified at Ogden Group 

Camp, 10-Mile Snopark, Road 21, McKay Crossing and near Road 9736-100, and Road 9735-695

are to be treated prior to other project work. Treatment will be either by hand pulling, or 

according to the 2012 Invasive Plant FEIS.

9. Monitoring of post-sale improvement projects for weed introduction (E). Areas where 

equipment is used in subsoiling (road decommissioning, landings, skid trails, and temporary 

roads). 

10. Control of existing weed sites and monitoring effectiveness of control of weed sites. (E)

11. Scenic Views Enhancements (E). Update the interpretive sign located at the overlook on 

Highway 21.
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Final EIS  59

CHAPTER 3

Affected Environment and 

Environmental Consequences
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

60  Ogden Final EIS

CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The primary changes made in Chapter 3 since the Draft EIS was published were in response to public 

comment. In particular, analysis for the Forested Vegetation has been clarified and updated to address 

comments that some of the analysis was confusing. The economic analysis was updated to address 

comments about how jobs related to implementation of the project were estimated. In addition, the 

Management Indicator Species analysis has been updated to reflect recent completion of a Forest-wide 

assessment report. Other minor edits have been made throughout the chapter.

This section of the environmental assessment considers the environmental consequences of 

implementation of the various alternatives. The following discussion of effects follows CEQ guidance 

for scope (40 CFR 1508.25(c)) by categorizing the effects as direct, indirect, and cumulative. The focus 

is on cause and consequences. For this analysis, in general, direct and indirect effects have been 

discussed in the context that most readers are accustomed to: those consequences which are caused by 

the action and either occur at the same time and place, or are later in time or farther removed in distance 

but are still reasonably foreseeable (40 CFR 1508.8). Cumulative effects are discussed where there is an 

effect to the environment which results from the incremental effect of the action when added to other 

past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions (40 CFR 1508.7).

Measures to mitigate or reduce adverse effects caused by the implementation of any of the actions 

proposed are addressed in Chapter 2, Resource Protection Measures. Effective mitigation avoids, 

minimizes, rectifies, reduces, or compensates for potential effects of actions. After mitigation is 

applied, any unavoidable adverse effect to each resource area is addressed in the section titled “Other 

Disclosures” in this chapter of the EIS. The temporal and spatial scale of the analysis is variable 

depending upon the resource concern being evaluated, particularly for cumulative effects. The 

landscape within the Ogden project area boundary is the focus of this EIS, but adjacent lands are 

considered in portions of this analysis process.

3.2.1 Specialist Reports

The interdisciplinary team (IDT) includes Forest specialists for each discipline (see Chapter 4, section

4.4 for team members and their qualifications). Specialists on the IDT prepared technical reports to 

address the affected environment and expected environmental consequences of proposed actions of the 

Ogden project. All reports are maintained in the project file, located at the Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District office in Bend, Oregon. In some cases, this chapter provides a summary of the report and may 

only reference technical data upon which conclusions were based. In all instances, the majority of each 

of the specialist reports are included in this FEIS. When deemed appropriate, those parts of specialist 

reports that are not included in this FEIS are incorporated by reference (40 CFR 1502.41).

3.2.2 Role of Science 

Science information improves the ability to estimate consequences and risks of decision alternatives. 

The effects of each alternative are predicted based on science literature and the professional experience 

of the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) specialists. The conclusions of the IDT specialists are based on the 

best available science and current understanding. Relevant and available scientific information is 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  61

incorporated by reference and a complete bibliography is included at the end of this FEIS. Referenced 

material is a consideration of the best available science.

3.2.3 Cumulative Effects 

The Environmental Consequences disclosures in this FEIS include discussion of cumulative effects. 

Where there is an overlapping zone of influence, or an additive effect, this information is disclosed. In 

order to understand the contribution of past actions to the cumulative effects of the proposed action and 

alternatives, this analysis relies on current environmental conditions as a proxy for the impacts of past 

actions. This is because existing conditions reflect the aggregate impact of all prior human actions and 

natural events that have affected the environment and might contribute to cumulative effects. Most of 

these actions and natural events are displayed in Table 12.

The cumulative effects analysis in this FEIS does not attempt to quantify the effects of past human 

actions by adding up all prior actions on an action-by-action basis. There are several reasons for not 

taking this approach. First, a catalog and analysis of all past actions would be impractical to compile 

and unduly costly to obtain. Current conditions have been impacted by innumerable actions over the 

last century (and beyond), and trying to isolate the individual actions that continue to have residual 

impacts would be nearly impossible. Second, providing the details of past actions on an individual basis 

would not be useful to predict the cumulative effects of the proposed action or alternatives. In fact, 

focusing on individual actions would be less accurate than looking at existing conditions, because there 

is limited information on the environmental impacts of individual past actions, and one cannot 

reasonably identify each and every action over the last century that has contributed to current 

conditions. Additionally, focusing on the impacts of past human actions risks ignoring the important 

residual effects of past natural events, which may contribute to cumulative effects as much as human 

actions. 

By looking at current conditions, we are sure to capture all the residual effects of past human actions 

and natural events, regardless of which particular action or event contributed those effects. Finally, the 

Council on Environmental Quality issued an interpretive memorandum on June 24, 2005 regarding 

analysis of past actions, which states, “agencies can conduct an adequate cumulative effects analysis by 

focusing on the current aggregate effects of past actions without delving into the historical details of 

individual past actions.” 

The cumulative effects analysis in this EIS is also consistent with Forest Service National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Regulations (36 CFR 220.4(f)) (July 24, 2008), which state, in part: 

“CEQ regulations do not require the consideration of the individual effects of all past actions to 

determine the present effects of past actions. Once the agency has identified those present effects of 

past actions that warrant consideration, the agency assesses the extent that the effects of the 

proposal for agency action or its alternatives will add to, modify, or mitigate those effects. The final 

analysis documents an agency assessment of the cumulative effects of the actions considered 

(including past, present, and reasonable foreseeable future actions) on the affected environment. 

With respect to past actions, during the scoping process and subsequent preparation of the analysis, 

the agency must determine what information regarding past actions is useful and relevant to the 

required analysis of cumulative effects. Cataloging past actions and specific information about the 

direct and indirect effects of their design and implementation could in some contexts be useful to 

predict the cumulative effects of the proposal. The CEQ regulations, however, do not require 

agencies to catalogue or exhaustively list and analyze all individual past actions. Simply because 

information about past actions may be available or obtained with reasonable effort does not mean 

that it is relevant and necessary to inform decision making. (40 CFR 1508.7) 

The following table lists the groups of actions that have contributed to the existing conditions within the 

project area. The effects analysis throughout this Chapter considers these past actions as contributing to 

the current condition. For example, the discussion of existing soil conditions (Chapter 3.8.5) and the 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

62  Ogden Final EIS

tables in Appendix C, which shows existing detrimental soil conditions are based on GIS data and the 

information in Table 12. Table 13 lists ongoing or reasonably foreseeable future projects.
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  63

Table 12: Past Actions and Events that Contribute to the Current Conditions in the Project Area and Cumulative Effects Area

Past Actions Timing Description Residual Effects

Road Access

Forest System Roads

All within project area

1920s to Present Road system developed

175.1 miles of open road; 6.1 miles of closed 

road (maintenance level 1).

Current transportation system road density is 

4.22 miles per square mile; provides public 

and agency access; fragments habitat; wildlife 

disturbance

Wildfire

All within project area

1918 Paulina Prairie wildfire 2,827 acres Contributed to current tree size/structure and 

species composition. The McKay fire is in the 

center of the project area and comprised 

primarily of shrubs and planted regeneration.

PCT and mowing are planned in the Ogden 

project.

1918 Paulina Creek wildfire 169 acres

1994 Ogden wildfire 13 acres

1998 McKay wildfire 1,150 acres

1999 Black Bark wildfire 79 acres

2000 Newberry 2 wildfire 548 acres

Vegetation Management / Fuels Reduction Projects

Industrial Timber Operations

1920s-1930s Extensive railroad logging across project area, 

primarily clearcutting.

Extensive areas of single-story ponderosa pine. 

Lodgepole pine in extensive plantations and 

has expanded its stocking substantially –

particularly within Ogden to the West and 

outside Ogden to the South. 

Thinning and other harvest

1970s

1980s

1990s

Thinning, regeneration harvest, and other 

management has occurred throughout the 

planning area since it was added to the 

Deschutes NF.

Past harvest has contributed to the current 

vegetative structure in the area and is 

reflected in the current condition assessment 

for forested vegetation and fuels.

Lava Cast Project DN signed 2007

Alternative 3

Commercial thinning and fuels reduction 

analyzed for 9,515 acres north of project area. 

Harvest complete. Commercial and small tree 

thinning. Fuels Treatments ongoing. Prescribed 

burning including pile and underburning. Two 

of the three sales (Bon and Dice Timber Sales) 

have completed fuels treatments

More open stands of ponderosa pine with 

substantial reduction of stand density. Basal 

area at lower management zone.

Stand density reduction with 1) reduced risk of 

tree mortality as a result of beetle attack and 

2) reduced risk of stand replacement wildfire.

Crossings

Decision Memo 

signed 7/2006.

Fuels reduction within the LaPine Wildland 

Urban Interface (WUI) Community Wildfire 

Protection Plan (CWPP) – the western edge of 

project area. 1,000 acres of ladder fuel 

reduction, low thinning, hand piling and 

Fuel treatments in this area will be effective 

for approximately 7-10 years. Surface fire 

after this time would be fast moving with 

some torching of trees.
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

64  Ogden Final EIS

Past Actions Timing Description Residual Effects

mowing. All project work completed in 2010.

Range

Sugarpine Allotment

Sand Flat Allotment

SP - Closed 2007

SF - Vacant

Two range allotments have had activity within 

the project area. The Sugarpine Allotment has 

been closed. The Sand Flat Allotment is vacant. 

All Sugarpine Allotment fences have been 

removed; risk to wildlife and humans reduced. 

Two cattle guards have been removed and 

others are planned for removal, reducing

maintenance costs.

Geothermal Exploration and Other Misc. 

Newberry Geothermal Pilot 

Project FEIS/ROD

ROD signed 

6/30/1994

Authorized exploration and development on 

CalEnergy leases (currently owned by Ormat)

Three drill pads were constructed and two pads 

were partially constructed for surface 

disturbance of 31 acres. One water well, three 

production wells, and two temperature 

gradient exploration wells were drilled. 

Resource not developed; Sites undergoing 

reclamation. Two pads have been recontoured and prepped for natural 

regeneration; three pads anticipated for recontouring and prepped for natural 

regeneration in 2011.

Three of the wells have been plugged and 

abandoned. One well and the water well have 

not been plugged or abandoned.

USGS Permanent Volcanic 

Monitoring Stations

Categorical 

Exclusion 

completed Aug. 

2011; stations 

installed.

Monitoring stations to track seismic activity. 

Stations located in areas not obvious to the 

general public. One station to be located at 

NNVM visitor center or Newberry Crater.

Structures minimize detraction of the 

surrounding area. Ground disturbing area 

does not exceed 100-200 feet.

Table 13: Ongoing or Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions, in the Project Area and Lower Little Deschutes Watershed that may contribute

to Cumulative Effects.

Project Name / Activity Status/Timing Description Predicted or Ongoing Effects

Geothermal Exploration

Newberry Geothermal Exploration 

Project

DN signed by BLM in 

2007

The improvement of required Forest Service 

access roads; construction of three well pad 

sites, including drilling pads and a reserve pit 

for the storage of waste drilling mud and 

fluid; the drilling (and re-drilling, as may be 

necessary) of up to nine geothermal resource 

exploration wells; testing of each drilled well; 

Three well pads, each 5 acres in size. All three 

currently in exploration; one well pad has

geothermal exploration ongoing and is being 

considered for use in the Newberry Volcano 

EGS Demonstration Project. Continued access 

needed. Existence of temporary road. 

Potential short-term disruption of recreation 
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  65

Project Name / Activity Status/Timing Description Predicted or Ongoing Effects

and the continued monitoring of well 

pressure and other data in each well.

or management activities on access roads for 

road maintenance and equipment moving.

Drilling, Testing, and Monitoring of 

up to 12 Temperature Gradient / 

Passive Seismic Geothermal 

Exploratory Wells

DN signed by BLM in 

April 2010; 

Drill up to 12 temperature gradient / passive 

seismic monitoring wells, each to depths of 

approximately 2,500 to 3,500 feet. Relatively 

shallow wells; small diameter (4.5” or less).

Small clearings in vegetation totaling about 

2.5 acres; Work to be completed summer 

2011; wells maintained and monitored 

through 2012. See road access discussion 

above.

Micro-Seismic Testing

Forest Service CE signed 

Jan. 2010 for Special Use 

Permit

Testing ongoing

12 stations each 2 feet wide by 1 to 4 feet in 

depth; data collection at each site.

Currently collecting data. Stations are to be 

removed 4 to 10 months following installation 

and will become holes instead of surface sites.

See road access discussion above.

Forest Service Consent to Lease

Planning

EA expected to be 

completed in 2012

Forest Service assessing which parcels to 

consent to leasing for geothermal exploration

and identifying mitigations measures if 

developed. All parcels outside NNVM.

No ground-disturbing actions will be 

authorized. Programmatic decision and no 

effects that can be considered in the 

cumulative effects analysis. Future 

development would undergo further NEPA.

Existing Leases Ongoing / Existing

Lease areas are shown in Appendix D of this 

FEIS. No development of the geothermal 

resource has been proposed.

No ground-disturbing actions are authorized, 

so there are no effects that can be considered 

in the cumulative effects analysis. 

Development of the resource would undergo 

further NEPA.

Enhanced Geothermal (EGS) 

Demonstration Project

Implementation. BLM 

EA and Decision 

document completed 

2012. 

An array of micro-seismic monitoring stations 

would be installed in boreholes drilled to a 

depth of up to 1,500 ft. surrounding Well Site 

55-29, or installed in pre-existing wells to 

monitor injection activities. Up to 9 MSA 

bore holes would be drilled using a truckmounted rotary drilling rig. Where possible, 

existing wells or well sites will be used to 

minimize surface disturbance.

Work will occur starting in summer 2012 for 

about two years. Up to six sites overlap 2010 

MSA permit sites and would require new 

clearing (maximum of 100’x100’). Up to 4 

sites will use existing temperature gradient 

well sites. The remainder of the activity would 

occur on the previously permitted and 

constructed well site, 55-29.

Ormat Temperature Gradient Well 

Proposal

BLM EA and Decision 

document completed in 

March 2012.

A special use authorization is proposed to be 

issued to Ormat Technologies, Inc. to drill up 

to seven temperature gradient wells for the 

purpose of geothermal resource exploration. 

Well sites (about 100 X 100 feet) have 

Project effects are outside of the Ogden 

project area and outside the wildlife 

cumulative effects analysis area.
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

66  Ogden Final EIS

Project Name / Activity Status/Timing Description Predicted or Ongoing Effects

experienced previous disturbance and are 

mostly clear of vegetation, and do not 

require any site grading or conditioning to 

perform drilling operations. 

Invasive Plant Treatment

Invasive Plant Treatment Deschutes 

& Ochoco National Forests

Record of Decision 

signed May 2012.

Across both National Forests, approves sitespecific treatment of existing weed sites with 

ten new effective herbicides; also approves 

an early-detection / rapid response strategy.

Implementation will include treatment of 

invasive plants with herbicide, primarily along 

roads. Reduction in extent of invasive plant 

sites and better prevention of introduction 

and spread.

Recreation

Lava Rock OHV Trail Project Planning –On Hold

41.9 miles of motorized trail to be designated 

within project area; 101.5 miles of motorized 

trail to be designated within the Little Lower 

Deschutes watershed. 58.5 miles of level 2 FS 

roads would become level 1 roads. Timing of 

implementation currently unknown.

Potential increase of user-created trails in 

areas that are thinned and/or underburned, 

with potential for increased motorized use 

into RHCA. Less overall cross-country use 

throughout project area because of trail 

designation and travel mgmt. restrictions.

Developed Recreation Seasonal, Ongoing

McKay Campground

Ogden Group Camp

Prairie Campground

Peter Skene Ogden trailhead

Paulina Plunge

Ongoing recreational use by public, primarily 

during Spring through Fall. Soil compaction of 

immediate areas. When campgrounds are 

full, use is spread to other areas, particularly 

on user created roads, often into riparian 

habitat.

Dispersed Recreation

Seasonal, Ongoing

Peter Skene Ogden trail; 7.08 miles of nonmotorized trails; OHV use occurring in area; 

User created dispersed campsites, including 

along Paulina Creek

Areas possibly more accessible as result of 

thinning: 1) user created trails; 2) campsites 

etc. This could result in disturbance to wildlife,

soils, RHCA, other resources.

Seasonal, Ongoing –

Winter use only

6 Mile Sno Park

10 Mile Sno Park

29.39 miles of winter trail

3.13 of Nordic Trails

26.26 miles of snowmobile trail grooming

None. Sno parks adjacent to Forest Road 21. 

Snowmobile trails over snow do not add to 

soil compaction.

Roads
Chapter 3 - Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  67

Project Name / Activity Status/Timing Description Predicted or Ongoing Effects

Road Closures Planning

58.5 miles of maintenance level 2 roads 

would become level 1 roads under the Lava 

Rock OHV Project EIS, currently in the 

planning stages, with implementation timing 

unknown.

Reduction in road density. Reduces habitat 

fragmentation. 

Deschutes-Ochoco Travel 

Management Project

ROD signed; 

Implementation began 

in 2011

Implementation of the Travel Rule. 

Motorized travel in Central Oregon is

restricted to designated roads and trails only. 

Access to dispersed camping will have special 

provisions to limit access to sensitive areas. 

Reduces disturbance to vegetation and 

wildlife off of designated roads and trails.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

68  Ogden Final EIS

3.3.1 Introduction 

There are two primary differences between Alternatives 2 and 3 related to proposed vegetation treatments. 

The first difference pertains to how the alternatives treat mature, lodgepole pine stands in the eastern 

portion of the project area (Issue 1). Alternative 2 would regenerate 397 acres of lodgepole pine stands 

while Alternative 3 would not. The second difference pertains to how the two alternatives promote large 

tree structure within stands with a mix of ponderosa and lodgepole pine and less frequently white fir (Issue 

2). Alternative 2 proposes to use primarily one thinning treatment regardless of existing species 

composition. This thinning treatment would retain species other than ponderosa pine only as needed to 

meet minimum stocking levels (see table 19 for stocking level definitions). Thinned units would then be 

mowed and burned. In contrast, Alternative 3 proposes to vary thinning and burning treatments depending 

on existing species composition. Compared to Alternative 2, most thinning with Alternative 3 would retain 

more lodgepole pine or white fir in stands where ponderosa pine stocking is sparse or variable. Trees of 

these species would be retained as needed to keep stocking at the lower management zone rather than 

minimum levels. Only a portion of these thinned mixed species units would then be mowed and burned.

The terms “minimum stocking level” and “lower management zone” and “upper management zone” relate 

to stand stocking. They are used with this project to describe thinning treatments. They are also used in 

this analysis to evaluate utilization of site growth potential (Issue 2) and risk to bark beetle attack (Purpose 

and Need). Alternative 2 would thin to the “minimum stocking level” if ponderosa pine is sparse. 

Alternative 3 would thin to the “lower management zone” by leaving lodgepole pine or white fir if 

ponderosa pine is sparse. When evaluating resilience to bark beetle attack, stand stocking relative to the 

“upper management zone” will be referenced. These terms are further described in the following section 

titled “Reference Conditions” under the subsection titled “Stand Density.”

3.3.2 Regulatory Framework

The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 as amended by the National Forest 

Management Act of 1976 states that “it is the policy of Congress that all forested lands in the National 

Forest System shall be maintained in appropriate forest cover with species of trees, degree of stocking, rate 

of growth, and conditions of stand designed to secure the maximum benefits of multiple use sustained yield 

management in accordance with land management plans.” One relevant aspect of this law is the 

maintenance of a planned and controlled degree of stocking in managed forests (USDA Forest Service 

2004a).

National Forest Management Act (NFMA)

This act includes, in part, the following provisions pertaining to timber harvest from National Forest Lands:

1) ...insure that timber will be harvested from National Forest System lands only where there is 

assurance that such lands can be adequately restocked within five years after harvest (16 USC 

1604(g)(3)(E)(ii)), and

2) ... insure that timber will be harvested from National Forest System lands only where the harvesting 

system to be used is not selected primarily because it will give the greatest dollar return or the greatest 

unit output of timber(16 USC 1604(g)(3)(E)(iv)).

3.3.3 Analysis Methods

Stand delineations and attributes from the Deschutes National Forest Photo Interpretation (PI) vegetation 

mapping project were used to estimate species composition and stand structure. The PI vegetation mapping 

project used 1995 color aerial photos (scale 1:12,000). Accuracy of the PI measured attributes is 

documented in a report describing the PI mapping project (Forest Data Incorporated 2001). Of the PI 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  69

measured attributes used in this analysis, species identification was the most difficult to maintain desired 

accuracy standards. The next most difficult was size class identification. Accuracy of species 

identification was measured at 80 percent and was considered limiting enough to require field visits to 

verify species identification. Field verification was considered particularly important in areas of species 

transitional zones. With the PI size class measure there were minor problems in maintaining reasonable 

accuracy. Data limitations were considered minor to moderate, with field verification of data suggested. 

For identifying canopy layers and crown cover there were negligible problems in maintaining reasonable 

accuracy. Field verification of these measures was not considered necessary. Even with described data 

limitations, accuracy of PI measured attributes was considered adequate for this analysis. The PI data 

documents relative differences between neighboring stands visually evaluated and measured by a photo 

interpreter. These visually evaluated and measured differences are considered a benefit of using the PI 

data.

Six units were selected to portray the primary thinning and burning treatment differences between 

alternatives. To select these six units, units were first identified where these treatments or combination of 

treatments vary by alternative. Units with available stand exam data were identified. Available stand 

exams date from 1995 to 2010. From the units with stand exams, six units were selected to portray a range 

of stand conditions and treatment combinations. Inventory data for the six selected units was analyzed 

using a computer model to estimate the relative change in stand conditions as a result of proposed 

treatments. From the six sample stands, the relative differences or similarities between model projections 

were used to make inferences for all units proposed for treatment. The six selected units adequately portray 

the range of effects that would be expected for the range of stand conditions that would be treated with each 

action alternative.

Computer model projections include proposed thin and burn treatments. Projections were run to the year 

2080, the time when most ponderosa pine in the upper canopy levels will be 150 years old. This is the 

reference age for ponderosa pine old growth (Hopkins et al. 1993). The only future treatments assumed 

were maintenance burns done on 12 year intervals. While there will be future harvest opportunities, 

particularly with Alternative 3, future harvests were not modeled. The sensitivity of future stand conditions 

to burn model inputs was tested. Four scenarios were run using different assumptions for: 1) percent of 

area burned in a given stand, and 2) the maintenance burn interval. Scenarios are described in detail in 

Appendix A of the Silviculture report.

Selection of the Six Sample Units

Since Alternative 2 and 3 treatments differ most within units with a mix of ponderosa and lodgepole pine, 

the focus was on selecting units with a mix of ponderosa and lodgepole pine. Four of the six units selected 

have a mix of ponderosa and lodgepole pine and different treatments by alternative. Two of the four units 

have been harvested within the last 30 years. The other two have not been treated since they were logged 

in the 1930s. The four units with their associated thin and burn treatments are considered to adequately 

portray: 1) the range of ponderosa pine stocking within mixed ponderosa and lodgepole pine units, and 2) 

the combination of treatments that would occur with each action alternative.

Alternatives 2 and 3 treatments differ least within units stocked predominantly with ponderosa pine. 

Thinning, where proposed, would be the same with both Alternative 2 and 3. The difference between 

alternatives would be whether units are proposed for thinning or not. The remaining two of the six units 

selected are predominately ponderosa pine. They were selected to portray the effects of thinning or no 

action. One of the selected units is within a goshawk post fledging area that would be thinned with 

Alternative 3, but not with Alternatives 1 or 2. Both selected units have been thinned within the last 20 

years. They are primarily single-story immature (approximately 70 to 80 year old) ponderosa pine stands. 

A relatively large block of this stand condition is found in the north central portion of the Ogden project 

area and would be thinned with Alternatives 2 and 3. The two selected units in ponderosa pine adequately 

portray conditions in these single story immature stands and allow a comparison between alternatives.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

70  Ogden Final EIS

Computer Model and Associated Extensions

Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVSS) software (USDA) Forest Service (2010) was used to analyze stand 

exam data for the six sample units. This software includes the following:

1) The Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) Growth and Yield Model (Version 6.21), South Central 

Oregon/Northeast California (SORNEC) variant,

2) Fire and Fuels Extension (FFE) to the Forest Vegetation Simulator (Version 1.0), and 

3) Stand Visualization System (SVS) (Version 3.36).

The Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) is a computer model that can be used to predict forest vegetation 

dynamics (Dixon 2002). Since its initial development in 1973, it has become a system of highly integrated 

analytical tools (USDA Forest Service 2011). These tools are based upon a body of scientific knowledge 

developed from decades of natural resources research (USDA Forest Service 2011). The Fire and Fuels 

Extension (FFE) simulates fuel dynamics and potential fire behavior over time, in the context of stand 

development and management (Reinhardt and Crookston 2003). The Stand Visualization System (SVS) 

generates images depicting stand conditions represented by a list of individual stand components such as 

trees, shrubs, and down material (McGaughey N.d.). The images produced by SVS, while somewhat 

abstract, provide a readily understood representation of stand conditions and help communicate silvicultural 

treatments and forest management alternatives (McGaughey N.d.).

For this analysis, FVS and FFE were used to analyze existing stand conditions and to predict future stand 

conditions under various management actions. FFE was used specifically to model burns proposed with 

the Ogden project and subsequent maintenance burns that could occur in the future. SVS was used to 

provide visual images of the relative difference the alternative treatments, including no action, make on 

stand condition. The outputs from FVS, FFE, and SVS are considered useful in estimating relative 

differences between the alternatives. Outputs, however, do not reflect mortality that could result from bark 

beetle attacks. To assess risk to bark beetle attack, model projections for stand density are compared to 

reference conditions for beetle risk. Details on the use of FVS, FFE, and SVS (including user input values) 

are included in the appendices to the Silviculture Specialist Report, project record.

3.3.4 Terms Used to Describe Vegetation

Two related terms used to describe vegetation in this analysis include “plant associations” and “plant 

association groups.” Plant association groups (PAGs) are plant associations combined by their climax 

species, site potential, and temperature and moisture similarities. Another term for plant associations, not 

used in this analysis, is “potential natural communities.” Hall (1998) defines a potential natural community 

as “the biotic community that one presumes would be established and maintained over time under present 

environmental conditions, if all successional sequences were completed without additional human-caused 

disturbance.” Hall (1998) also states potential natural communities are descriptions of what would be 

established or maintained without disturbance by natural elements, including fire (Hall 1998). Thus, plant 

associations and their associated PAGs are based on potential vegetation that would occupy a site in the 

absence of fire.

3.3.5 Reference Conditions

Ponderosa Pine Late and Old Structural (LOS) Stages

Three reference conditions are used in this analysis to compare how well each alternative promotes 

ponderosa pine late and old structural stages. Two of the references describe historic conditions in old 

growth ponderosa pine stands. Munger (1917) describes historic old growth conditions based on 

observations in the early 1900s. Youngblood et al. (2004) describes historic old growth conditions based 

on a retrospective study of current conditions. The third reference describes conditions associated with old 

growth forest conditions, though not necessarily “historic” conditions. It is the Region 6 interim old 

growth definition for ponderosa pine which is based on ecological data from a number of east-side Region 

6 forests (Hopkins et al. 1993).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  71

Munger (1917) gives an indication of the average number of trees per acre and the distribution of diameter 

classes in representative stands in various parts of the state of Oregon. The site conditions associated with 

the stand located near La Pine may be most representative of the conditions present within the area of the 

Ogden project area. Table 14 displays tree densities by size measured in the La Pine stand. Munger (1917) 

notes “yellow-pine forests are so irregular in density that figures for the average stand per acre or per 

quarter section are apt to be misleading. Though the volume of timber may be very high on an area of an 

acre or so, there are usually openings in the forest, groups of young growth, glades, or barren spots, which 

reduce the average per acre volume of any large tract.”

Table 14: Tree Densities by Size Class in early 1900s Ponderosa Pine Stand near LaPine (from Munger, 

1917)

Size Class (Diameter at Breast Height) Number of Ponderosa Pine per acre

2 to 10 inches 2.04

12 to 14 inches 0.60

16 to 20 inches 1.32

22 inches and larger 9.95

Total 13.91

Youngblood et al. (2004) describe the historic (pre-1900) stand structure present in pumice-dominated 

eastside old-growth ponderosa pine forests (Table 15). Youngblood et al. (2004) made a generalization that 

trees alive and in the upper canopy at the beginning of the study were present in 1900 and represent “old 

growth” trees. The Ogden project is within the range of ponderosa pine sampled by Youngblood et al. 

(2004). This eastside reference condition is based on three study areas (Table 15), with Pringle Butte Study 

Area being the closest geographically to the Ogden project area (9 miles west).

Table 15: Ponderosa Pine Eastside Old-Growth Reference Condition (from Youngblood et al. 2004)

Location

Upper Canopy Live Tree Density Upper Canopy Live Tree Size

Trees/Hectare Trees/Acre1DBH (cm) DBH (inches)1

Metolius Study Area 34 - 94 14 - 38 12.0 – 133.1 4.7 – 52.4

Pringle Butte Study Area 35 - 79 14 - 32 16.0 – 121.9 6.3 – 48.0

Blacks Mountain Study Area 15 - 73 6 – 30 29.5 – 129.8 11.6 – 51.1

Reference Condition 50 + 3.5 20 + 1.4 60.0 + 1.55 23.6 + 0.61

1 English equivalents of the reported metric measurements using the following conversions:

(Trees/Hectare) * (0.405) = Tree/Acre; (Centimeters)* (0.394) = inches

The Region 6 interim ponderosa pine old growth definition (Hopkins et al. 1993) applies to climax 

ponderosa pine forests located east of the Cascades in Oregon and Washington. The definition presents 

attribute values indicative of climatic climax stands developing with fire suppression. According to the 

Region 6 definition, old growth ponderosa stands have dominant trees at least 150 years in age and greater 

than 21 inches dbh. Dominant trees number at least 13 trees per acre and typically range from 18-40 trees 

per acre. Gap size is described as being at least one-half acre in size.

Stand Density

Stand density measures how thickly trees grow (Davis and Johnson 1987). Stand density is a quantitative 

measure of stocking expressed either absolutely or relative to some standard condition (Helms 1998). 

Trees per acre and basal area per acre are measures of absolute density. Basal area and trees per acre, when 

considered alone, do not express the degree of crowding (competition) existing within a stand (Curtis 

2010). Relative density, however, does describe the “degree of crowding” within a stand (Ernst and Knapp 

1985). It is the ratio of the measured absolute density of a given stand to some reference level specific to 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

72  Ogden Final EIS

that forest type (Ernst and Knapp 1985). When the evaluation of two stands results in the same relative 

stand density, they can be thought of as being at the same degree of crowding, even though they may differ 

in age, stand size, or species composition (Ernst and Knapp 1985).

Three stand density reference conditions are used to evaluate how treatments would affect the utilization of 

site growth potential (Issue 2) and the susceptibility to bark beetle attack (Purpose and Need). These 

reference conditions are: 1) the upper management zone, 2) the lower management zone, and 3) the 

minimum stocking level. These reference conditions are also used to describe thinning treatments proposed 

with action alternatives. Stand density index (Reineke 1933), a measure of relative stand density, is used to 

describe the three reference conditions. The average reference conditions used in this analysis are 

summarized in Table 16, following page.

The upper and lower management zones are based on concepts described by Cochran et al. (1994) for use 

in estimating density limits. Upper density limits or upper management zones (UMZs) often are 

determined by establishing the relative density level at which a suppressed class of trees begins to develop. 

For ponderosa pine, mortality due to mountain pine beetle is not confined to intermediate and suppressed 

trees. Empirical stocking level curves for ponderosa pine suggest that tree mortality due to mountain pine 

beetle remains at a low level until a critical stand density is reached. Upper management zones for 

ponderosa pine can be established at those stand densities above which mortality from mountain pine beetle 

can become serious. The lower density limits of management zones (LMZs) often are set at 67 percent of 

the UMZ. This lower limit or zone maintains enough stocking to capture a significant portion of the site 

resources in tree growth.

The upper management zone reference condition is used in this analysis to identify stands whose density 

makes them susceptible to mountain pine beetle attacks. How long stands remain above the upper 

management zone before mountain pine beetles attack and tree mortality becomes serious is extremely 

variable. Classifying a stand as susceptible to bark beetle attack does not mean bark beetles will surely 

attack. It only means attacks are very likely to occur (USDA Forest Service 1996). This likelihood of 

attack is a function of beetle presence, abundance and distribution.

The minimum stocking level is the stocking needed to carry out the least intensive silviculture strategies 

used in the construction of the managed yield tables for the 1990 Deschutes National Forest LRMP (USDA 

Forest Service 2004). Silvicultural prescriptions, which must meet requirements of NFMA, are to identify 

minimum stocking level for all stands where regeneration harvests are applied (Deschutes LRMP standard 

TM-6). The minimum level is also a reference point below which a thinning treatment would be heavy 

enough to begin the regeneration process.

Procedure Used to Determine Management Zones

The upper management zones were determined using the procedure described by Booser and White 

(undated) for calculating maximum stand density indexes for Deschutes National Forest plant associations 

(Volland 1985). This procedure adapts for use on stands in the Deschutes National Forest the method 

described by Cochran et al. (1994) for setting upper management zones. Upper management zones (Table 

16) appropriate for site conditions found in the Ogden Project Area were determined using plant association 

measures of growth basal area and site index (Simpson 2007). These measures of site productivity were 

used in the procedure described by Booser and White (undated). Growth basal area measured in the Ogden 

project area is similar to that described for the plant associations (Simpson 2007).

Lower management zones were set at 67 percent of the upper management zone. The minimum stocking 

level is based on the level identified for ponderosa pine stands managed on the Deschutes National Forest 

(36.5 SDI) using the uneven-aged harvesting method (USDA Forest Service 1994).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  73

Table 16: Stand Density Reference Conditions and Measures of Site Productivity

Plant Association (Simpson 2007)

Site Productivity

(Simpson 2007)

Reference Conditions

Stand Density Index3(SDI)

GBA1 Site 

Index2

Upper 

(UMZ)

Lower 

(LMZ) Minimum

Ponderosa pine/bitterbrush/fescue 105 77 105 70 40

Ponderosa pine/manzanita 120 84 130 90 40

Ponderosa pine average reference condition 110 80 120 80 40

White fir-grand fir/common princes pine (ABCO-ABGR/CHUM) 182 91 200 135 40

White fir-grand fir/greenleaf manzanita 137 87 154 103 40

Mixed Conifer average reference condition 160 90 180 120 40

1Growth Basal Area (GBA): An index of stand stockability. It is the basal area per acre at which dominant trees grow in 

diameter at the rate of 1 inch per 10 years at age 100 (Hall 1984).

2

Site Index: a species-specific measure of forest productivity expressed in terms of the average height of trees at a given age. 

Table value is for ponderosa pine at age 100.

3

Stand Density Index: relative density expressing relationship of number of trees to stand quadratic mean diameter.

Additional Stand Density Index Concepts

The method described by Cochran et al. (1994) to determine upper management zones uses the stand 

density index for “normal” or “fully stocked” even-aged stands. This index can be considered an “averagemaximum” level of competition (Powell 1999). For ponderosa pine, this SDI normal value is 365 (Cochran 

et al. 1994). This value is less than the biological maximum for the species. For ponderosa pine, a

reasonable approximation of the biological maximum value (maximum stand density index) is an SDI 

value of 450 (Long 2005). This analysis used the 450 maximum SDI value as an input variable for the FVS 

model (see Appendix A of the silviculture report for additional details).

Diameter Growth

In addition to the upper management zone reference condition, basal area at which dominant trees grow at 

the rate of 1.5 inches per 10 years is used in this analysis as a reference condition for susceptibility to bark 

beetle. For ponderosa pine, recent diameter growth can be a good indicator of susceptibility to bark beetle 

attack and a threshold of 1.5 inches diameter growth per decade can be used (Eglitis 2010).

For this analysis, the concepts of growth basal area (GBA) (Hall 1987) were used to approximate diameter 

growth of trees. A diameter growth rate of 1.5 inches per decade can be predicted for stands stocked at 67 

percent of GBA (Hall 1987). Using plant association GBAs, basal area reference condition at which the 

diameter growth rate would be 1.5 inches was determined (Table 17).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

74  Ogden Final EIS

Table 17: Diameter Growth Reference Condition Expressed in Terms of Basal Area

Plant Association (Simpson 2007) Growth Basal Area 

(Simpson 2007)

Basal Area (Ft2/Acre) 

Reference Condition

for

1.5 inches diameter growth 

per decade1

Ponderosa pine/bitterbrush/fescue 105 70

Ponderosa pine/manzanita 120 80

Ponderosa pine average reference condition 110 74

White fir-grand fir/common princes pine (ABCO-ABGR/CHUM) 182 122

White fir-grand fir/greenleaf manzanita 137 92

Mixed Conifer average reference condition 160 107

1Basal Area for 1.5 inches diameter growth per decade = (Growth Basal Area)*(.67)

3.3.6 Summary Key Findings

Key Issue 1 – Regeneration Harvest in Lodgepole Pine

Changes to stand age classes in lodgepole pine are analyzed by alternative. Within and adjacent to the 

eastern portion of the project area, relatively old stands of lodgepole pine are currently abundant. With all 

alternatives, lodgepole pine late or old structural stages will remain within the historic range of variability. 

In the absence of stand replacement wildfires, young stands characteristic of the stand initiation structural 

stage will remain at the low end of the historic range of variability. With Alternative 2, proposed 

regeneration of older lodgepole pine stands would create a new age class of lodgepole pine and contribute 

to a slight increase in age class diversity on the landscape. There would be a one percent increase in the 

stand initiation structure stage. Three of the regeneration harvest units (Units 317, 320 and 321) are located 

in strategically important areas for controlling fire spread.

Key Issue 2 – Thinning Level in Mixed Stands of Ponderosa and Lodgepole Pine

With Alternative 2, a large proportion of the acres planned for thinning and burning outside of plantations 

have low to varying levels of ponderosa pine stocking. Due to sparse and variable stocking of ponderosa 

pine and the proposal to retain lodgepole pine only if needed to meet minimum stocking levels, thinning 

and burning could result in areas being stocked less than the lower management zone. Stocking would 

however remain above minimum stocking levels. Growth loss associated with stocking levels less than the 

lower management zone could be variable. While 

growth can remain fairly constant over a wide range 

of densities, this generalization may not hold for 

stands with sparse or variable ponderosa pine 

stocking. Removal of lodgepole pine to the extent 

proposed could result in such a heavy thinning that 

these stands will not soon regain full occupancy of 

the growing site. It could take up to 20 years for 

stocking to increase to the level where a significant 

portion of the site resources is captured in tree 

growth. The resource protection measure specific 

to Alternative 2 for connectivity corridors would 

ensure stocking within corridors would be retained within the top one-third of site potential where 

ponderosa pine stocking is low or variable and less than 400 feet of the corridor would remain untreated.

Proportion of acres with low to variable 

ponderosa pine stocking that could be stocked less 

than the lower management zone (LMZ) following 

thin/burn treatments. Alternative 3 would have 

the fewest acres stocked less than LMZ.

Alternative 2: 7,436 of 10,145 acres (74%)

Alternative 3: 2,027 of 9,494 acres (21%)
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  75

With Alternative 3, a smaller proportion of the acres planned for thinning and burning outside of 

plantations would be stocked less than the lower management zone following treatments. Where ponderosa 

pine stocking is sparse, retaining lodgepole pine, and in some cases white fir, at the level proposed with this 

alternative will keep average stand stocking at the lower management zone for the majority of treatment 

areas. Lodgepole pine and white fir stocking would be less than 20 percent of the total stand basal area, 

approximating conditions present at the time of the 1930’s forest resource survey (USDA Forest Service 

2003). Where stand stocking is retained at or above the lower management zone, a significant portion of 

the site resources will continue to be captured in tree growth.

Historic Range of Variability and Late and Old Structure (LOS)

With all alternatives, ponderosa pine and mixed conifer late and old structure (LOS) stages will remain 

below the historic range of variability (HRV) in the short term. Structure stages with best potential to 

develop into LOS (understory reinitiation and multistory without large trees) are currently above the HRV. 

Stands in these conditions originated after 

historic logging in the 1930s. In the 

absence of stand replacing events, these 

stands will reach the reference old growth 

age of 150 years (Hopkins et al. 1993) 

around the year 2080. Reference 

conditions for large tree size and density 

(Hopkins et al. 1993, Munger 1917, 

Youngblood et al. 2004) could be reached 

as early as the year 2060. By this time, if 

only large tree density is considered, there 

is potential for ponderosa pine and mixed 

conifer LOS, to be within or above HRV. 

Realizing this potential, however, will be 

dependent on bark beetles and stand 

replacing wildfires exerting little influence 

on stand development during the next 50 years. Due to low bark beetle hazard, moderately stocked stands 

presently have the best potential for achieving reference conditions for large tree size and density.

By the year 2020, Alternative 1 would have the least amount of area in stands with moderate densities and 

structures with best potential to develop into LOS. Alternative 2 and 3 thinning treatments would increase 

the number of acres with moderate 

densities within the ponderosa pine and 

mixed conifer biophysical environments. 

Increases would be within the understory 

reinitiation and multi-stratum without 

large tree structures, those structure stages 

with best potential to develop into LOS. 

Greatest increase would be realized with 

Alternative 3, even though this alternative 

thins fewer acres than Alternative 2. This 

reflects that a higher proportion of the 

ponderosa pine areas proposed for 

thinning with Alternative 3 are densely 

stocked. Moderate density stands

overlaying ponderosa pine plant 

associations are assumed most likely to 

develop into ponderosa pine singlestratum large tree structure.

Understory reinitiation and multi-stratum without large tree 

structures with moderate stand densities have best potential to 

develop into LOS.

By 2020, proportion of HRV analysis area with moderate 

density in structures with best LOS potential in:

Ponderosa pine (PP) biophysical environment

Alternative 1: 38%, 27% overlaying PP plant associations

Alternative 2: 50%, 35% overlaying PP plant associations

Alternative 3: 52%, 37% overlaying PP plant associations

Mixed conifer biophysical environment

Alternative 1: 17%

Alternative 2 and 3: 25%

Ponderosa pine single-stratum LOS is assumed most likely to 

develop where stands with moderate density and structures 

with best LOS potential overlay ponderosa pine (PP) plant 

associations.

By 2060, if only large tree density is considered, proportion of 

ponderosa pine LOS that could potentially be present:

Single-stratum with large trees (20 – 60% HRV)

Alternative 1: 27%

Alternative 2: 35%

Alternative 3: 37%

Multi-stratum with large trees (5 – 30% HRV)

Alternative 1: 11%

Alternative 2: 15%

Alternative 3: 15%

Disturbances could affect realizing this potential.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

76  Ogden Final EIS

Proposed thinning in combination with mowing and prescribed fire follows the principles for creating fireresilient forests. These principles include in the order listed: reducing surface fuels, increasing height to 

live crown, keeping larger trees, and decreasing crown density (Fitzgerald 2005). Treatments, however, 

will create favorable conditions for the re-establishment of understory vegetation, specifically shrubs and 

tree seedlings. Reduced canopy cover together with seedbeds created by prescribed burning could create 

conditions favorable for germination of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine seeds. To retain these fireresilient forests, maintenance will be necessary.

By the year 2060, with all alternatives there is potential for ponderosa pine LOS to be within the HRV if 

only large tree density is considered. Realizing this potential, however, will be dependent on the extent to 

which disturbances, such as fire and beetles, influence stand development during the next 50 years. For 

moderate density stands, maintaining a trajectory towards single or multi-stratum structure will be 

dependent on the frequency of future low intensity fire or mechanical treatments. In the absence of these 

disturbances, establishing lodgepole pine will put stands on a trajectory towards ponderosa pine multistratum large tree structure. Development of ponderosa pine single-stratum large tree structure is assumed 

most likely within areas overlaying ponderosa pine plant associations, where an understory of lodgepole 

pine would be less likely to develop. The highest proportion of ponderosa pine LOS would be associated 

with Alternatives 2 and 3, with a slightly higher proportion associated with Alternative 3. In areas where 

ponderosa pine stocking is presently sparse, future density of large trees may just be approaching the lowest 

historic reference condition (Munger 1917).

3.3.7 Key Issue #1– Regeneration Harvest in Lodgepole Pine

Introduction

Alternative 2 proposes to regenerate 397 acres of lodgepole pine dominated stands in the eastern portion of 

the project area. Of this, 362 acres are located within the lodgepole pine dry plant association group 

(PAG). The silvicultural term for this regeneration harvest is “even-aged method with seed trees reserved” 

also known as “clearcut with seed trees reserved.” Regeneration of new trees would be accomplished by 

retaining approximately 28 lodgepole pine trees per acre to provide seed for natural regeneration. The 

remaining 35 acres of lodgepole pine dominated stands are located within the mixed conifer and ponderosa 

pine PAGs, and the silvicultural term for this treatment is “two-aged method with seed trees reserved.” On 

these acres, all lodgepole pine would be removed. Regeneration would be accomplished by planting 

ponderosa pine following harvest.

During scoping the question was asked why there is a need to hasten the onset of early seral conditions in 

lodgepole pine stands. It was stated there are important ecological values provided by late-seral lodgepole 

pine that should be fostered and retained. It was suggested late-seral lodgepole pine provides important 

values for such species as black-backed woodpecker, three-toed woodpecker, and pine marten. Comments 

also suggested that allowing fire to burn within lodgepole (rather than logging to reduce the risk) could 

create post-fire wildlife habitat.

Alternative 3 responds to this issue by forgoing the proposed regeneration harvest treatments on 397 acres. 

This allows a comparison between the alternatives of the resulting structural stages and relative amount of 

habitat provided for species that use late seral lodgepole pine.

Spatial and Temporal Scale of Analysis

The analysis boundary was established to include proposed regeneration harvest units and the adjacent 

lodgepole pine stands. Existing conditions (2010) and conditions present following harvest (2015) are 

analyzed.

The analysis area is 13,225 acres in size. Lodgepole pine is present in either a dominant or subordinate 

position to ponderosa pine and white fir on approximately 92 percent (12,205 acres) of the analysis area. 

The analysis area includes the lodgepole pine PAG surrounding the treatment areas and is bound to the east 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  77

by the mountain hemlock PAG. The western boundary of the analysis area extends into mixed conifer and 

ponderosa pine PAGs to include those stands adjacent to treatment areas where lodgepole pine is present in 

either a dominant or subordinate position.

Measure

Stand age class distribution within the analysis area is measured to analyze how regeneration harvest will 

affect early and late seral habitat. Five stand age classes are reported: 1) 1-10 years, 2) 11-20 years, 3) 21-

30 years, 4) 31-40 years old, and 5) greater than 40 years. The number of acres within each age class is 

reported. These acres are also expressed as a percent of the area where lodgepole pine is present in either a 

dominant or subordinate position (12,205 acres).

For reporting 10 year age classes, the break at 40 years was selected based on the approximate age of the 

oldest early seral stands within the analysis area. These stands, which were created by regeneration harvest 

treatments dating to 1978, are approximately 32 to 34 years old. Stands with no recorded regeneration 

harvest or fire disturbance are classified into the greater than 40 year age class. These stands have the 

oldest age classes of live lodgepole pine and offer the best potential to provide late seral conditions.

Measure Index

For context, an index measure is provided that assumes an equal distribution of ten-year age classes. The 

index assumes twelve, ten-year age classes equally distributed across the analysis area. This assumes a 

maximum stand age of 120 years. With the 5 size classes reported in this analysis, this index equates to 8.3 

percent of the area (100 percent divided by 12 age classes) in each of the less than 40 year size classes. The 

greater than 40 year age class would include 8 ten-year age classes (41-50, 51-60, 61-70, 71-80, 81-90, 91-

100, 101-110, and 111-120). Consequently, approximately 64% of the analysis area would be within the 

greater than 40 year age class (8.3% within each of the 8 ten-year age classes).

Index assumptions are based on the Deschutes LRMP and lodgepole pine old growth definitions. The 

assumption of an equal distribution of age classes is based on the LRMP (Page 4-5) which describes a 

desired future condition of forest vegetation in which there is a progression of size and age classes 

consistently growing at such rates that an equal number of harvestable trees are regularly available. The 

assumed maximum age of 120 years is based on lodgepole pine old growth definitions (Hopkins et al. 

1993).

Methods

To establish the analysis boundary, presence of lodgepole pine was mapped using species data from 1995 

aerial photo interpretation. To estimate age class distribution within the analysis area, the disturbance dates 

were obtained from activity and fire data bases. Age classes were assigned based on date of planting or 

date of disturbance (regeneration harvest or fire). Areas with no prior treatment or recorded fire 

disturbance were classified into the greater than 40 year age class. Existing areas cleared for geothermal 

exploration are assumed to remain in a non-forested condition.

Existing Condition

Harvests and wildfires over the last 40 years have resulted in 24 percent of the lodgepole analysis area 

being in less than 40 year old stands (Table 18 and Figure 9). These disturbance events have increased 

stand age class diversity within the analysis area. The remaining 76 percent of the analysis area consists of 

older stands.

Beginning in 1978, treatments were implemented in lodgepole pine stands affected by the mountain pine 

beetle. Treatments included regeneration harvest and salvage. Past regeneration harvest has resulted in 

primarily single story, even-aged stands, with the oldest stands being 34 years old. Seed trees remain in 

some units. Salvage treatments focused on the removal of dead wood excess standards and guidelines. 

Subsequent to treatment, lodgepole pine regeneration has filled the gaps, resulting in multi-story, unevenaged stands. Much of the remaining untreated lodgepole pine stands are multi-story, uneven-aged stands 

with heavy accumulations of down, dead wood. Residual lodgepole pine trees in the upper canopy layers 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

78  Ogden Final EIS

of these stands are greater than 40 years old. Figure 10 shows existing condition of some of these age 

classes.

Wildfires have also created stands less than 40 years old within the analysis area. These disturbance events 

occurred in 1995 (Newberry) and 1996 (Roman Nose).

Approximately 60 percent (223 acres) of the acres proposed for regeneration harvest are located in stands 

that have been previously harvested (Units 72, 74, 75, 81, 89, 105, 295, 300, 303, 321, 950, 952, 954, 961, 

962). Unit 295, one of the previously harvested units, is pictured in Figure 10. Harvest methods included 

salvage and partial removal. The remaining acres (174 acres) are in stands that have had no prior harvest 

(Units 69, 77, 83, 85, 88, 294, 297, 299, 301, 302, 304, 306, 317, 320, 324, 328, 355, 356, 358, and 963).

Table 18: Existing (2010) and future (2015) stand age class distribution within lodgepole pine analysis area

Stand Age Class Index

Measure

2010 Condition (Existing)

2015 Condition

Alternatives 1 and 3 Alternative 2

Acres % Acres % Acres %

Geothermal

Pads --- 38 <1 38 <1 38 <1

1 – 10 years 8% 94 1 --- --- 397 3

11 – 20 years 8% 1,631 13 651 5 651 5

21 – 30 years 8% 1,175 10 1,899 16 1,899 16

31 – 40 years 8% 3 <1 353 3 353 3

>40 years 64% 9,264 76 9,264 76 8,867 73

TOTAL 96% 12,205 100% 12,205 100% 12,205 100%

Direct and Indirect Effects–Alternative 1 (No Action) and Alternative 3

With Alternatives 1 and 3 there would be no creation of a new age class of lodgepole pine. By 2015, there 

would be no stands less than 10 years old within the analysis area (Table 18 and Figure 11, page 83). 

Alternative 3 includes treatment Unit 306 (8 acres). The regeneration treatment proposed with Alternative 

2 in this unit is changed to a thinning treatment with Alternative 3. With Alternative 3, the age of the 

residual stand in this unit would not be changed. Late seral lodgepole pine stands will continue to be 

abundant.

Direct and Indirect Effects–Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Proposed regeneration harvest (clearcut with seed trees reserved) would create a new age class of lodgepole 

pine, decreasing the amount of older lodgepole pine stands by three percent (362 acres, Table 18) in the 

analysis area. This would contribute to a slight increase in age class diversity on the landscape. The 

amount of new age class created, however, is 5 percent less than needed each decade to have a landscape 

with an equal distribution of age classes. Majority of the analysis area would remain in an older age class 

of lodgepole pine. Proposed regeneration treatments are primarily located adjacent to existing stands less 

than 40 years old, creating more contiguous blocks of young stands (Figure 11). These larger, contiguous 

blocks will help reduce the spread of dwarf mistletoe into the developing stands. Large contiguous blocks 

of older lodgepole pine habitat would remain (Figure 11) on the landscape. Regeneration harvest would 

modify fuel loadings, reducing resistance to control in the event of a wildfire. Units 317, 320 and 321 are 

located in strategically important areas for controlling fire spread.

Forest Plan Consistency – Alternative 2

Regeneration harvest is proposed in areas where natural regeneration will meet minimum stocking levels 

within 10 years. Evidence for this is found in the successful regeneration of past regeneration harvests in 

the area. Openings created by regeneration harvest will range in size from 1 to 58 acres, with a median size 

of 8 acres. Unit 105, previously harvested to treat mortality created by mountain pine beetle, is the only 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  79

unit that exceeds 40 acres. When considered in combination, only Units 299 through 304 (Figure 11)

would create an opening that exceeds 40 acres (68 acres). Foregoing treatment in Unit 301 (7 acres), which 

has not been previously harvested, would result in two created openings less than 40 acres in size (24 and 

37 acres). Proposed regeneration harvest units are adjacent to older regeneration harvest units. Trees 

within these older units are at least four and one-half feet tall. By definition, these older units are no longer 

considered created openings.

Minimum Stocking (TM-50). Natural regeneration shall be prescribed where it will meet the 

minimum stocking levels during the specified time period (TM-49, 10 years for lodgepole pine) with a 

first time success of 80 percent or greater.

Opening Size (TM-58). Created openings can exceed 40 acres in lodgepole pine to treat the 

catastrophic situation created by the mountain pine beetle epidemic. Units will be shaped to blend with 

the natural terrain.

Adjacency to Previously Created Openings (TM-59). Created openings will be separated by blocks 

of land generally not classed as created openings. ... Harvest units will no longer be considered 

openings when trees reach four and one-half feet tall.

Uniform Structural Conditions (TM-61). This standard and guideline (TM-61) applies to even-aged 

regeneration harvest units with regeneration less than 4.5 feet tall (J. Booser, 1999, personal 

communications). Timber management activities that create essentially uniform structural conditions 

should generally not exceed 100 contiguous acres on >95% of each implementation unit. Harvest units 

larger than 100 acres, however, may be prescribed on <5% of each implementation compartment.

NFMA Consistency – Alternative 2

Adequately Restocking Lands following Final Regeneration Harvest. There is assurance that lands 

proposed for regeneration harvest can be adequately restocked within five years of harvest (16 USC 

104(6)(3)(E) and FSM 1921.16 (2006)). Evidence for this is found in the successful regeneration of 

past regeneration harvests in the area.

Appropriateness of regeneration harvest. Proposed regeneration harvest is appropriate for meeting 

the objectives and requirements of the management areas of the relevant plan (16 USC 

1604(g)(3)(F)(i)). Regeneration harvest is proposed in the General Forest and Scenic View (Partial 

Retention, Middleground). Regeneration harvest will meet a General Forest objective of regenerating 

stands no longer capable of optimum growth. Regeneration harvest will contribute to providing the 

desired visual condition in Scenic View, Partial Retention, Middleground lodgepole pine stands by 

providing a mosaic of relatively uniform textures.

Shape of regeneration harvest units. Seed tree harvest units would be shaped and blended to extent 

practicable with the natural terrain (16 USC 1604(g)(3)(F)(iii)). Treatments are proposed on relatively 

flat to rolling ground and are generally irregularly shaped. Unit boundaries would be straight where 

units adjoin the Newberry National Volcanic Monument (NNVM).

Culmination of Mean Annual Increment. Growth within the stands proposed for regeneration 

harvest has culminated (16 USC 1604(m); FSM 1921.12f; FSH 1909.12, ch.60). Culmination of mean 

annual increments, as defined by Forest Service Manual direction, is the age at which the stand 

achieves at least 95 percent of the cubic foot volume at culmination (FSM 1921.12f.).

Total age of dominant and codominant trees within stands proposed for treatment is at least 40 to 50 years. 

For unmanaged lodgepole pine stands in south-central Oregon, net total cubic foot volume mean annual 

increments have been found to culminate at 70 years (total age) (Cochran and Dahms 2000 and Dahms 

1964). Volume increment was found to culminate at this age regardless of site index (Dahms 1964). Using 

Dahms’ (1964) mean annual increments as a basis, unmanaged lodgepole pine stands achieve at least 95 

percent of the cubic foot volume at culmination between ages 40 and 50 (total age). Equivalent breast 

height ages would be 30 to 40 years.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

80  Ogden Final EIS

Cumulative Effects

Past geothermal exploration has affected less than 1 percent of the analysis area. Future geothermal 

exploration within the analysis area could be widespread, but would affect a relatively small percent of the 

analysis area. Geothermal exploration would continue to affect less than 1 percent of the lodgepole pine 

analysis area.

Much of the older lodgepole pine habitat is located within Newberry National Volcanic Monument and the 

North Paulina Roadless Area. These areas will continue to provide multi-story stand structures with high 

amounts of down wood. Wildfires could contribute to an increase in early seral habitat. Within NNVM 

and the Roadless Area, dead wood resulting from fires would persist. In these areas as fires regenerate, 

early seral habitat with a heavy component of dead wood would be provided.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  81

Figure 9: Existing stands within analysis area less than 40 years old.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

82  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 10: Photographic examples of stand age classes used in the analysis of Key Issue 1.

0-10 year age class

(Ogden Unit 289)

11-20 years

(Ogden Unit 293)

21-30 years

(Planted in 1981)

31-40 years

(No Picture Available)

Greater than 40 years – Prior 

salvage treatment

(Ogden Unit 295)

Greater than 40 years – No prior 

treatment

(East of Ogden Unit 295)
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  83

Figure 11: Stands less than 40 years old in the year 2015
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

84  Ogden Final EIS

3.3.8 Key Issue #2 – Thinning Level in Mixed Stands of Ponderosa Pine 

and Lodgepole Pine

Introduction

The project proposes thinning in areas where LOS conditions can be accelerated in order to meet the 

purpose and need. Thinning within some units where there is a mixture of lodgepole pine would reduce 

stand density to below the Lower Management Zone, particularly within units with relatively low 

ponderosa pine stocking. In some units, average stocking following thinning and burning may not be high 

enough for a significant portion of the site resources, such as water and nutrients, to be captured in tree 

growth. Consequently, site growth potential may not be fully realized. Most of the proposed thinning is 

within the General Forest Management Area, which has an objective of managed stands utilizing the site 

growth potential. The remainder of the thinning would be done within Scenic View and Old Growth 

Management Areas which do not have the objective of utilizing site growth potential. Under Alternative 3,

stands with a mix of ponderosa and lodgepole are thinned to a higher basal area than under Alternative 2 

(because more lodgepole are retained), the mix of ponderosa and lodgepole is retained, and the resulting 

density is above the LMZ. For those units, the fuel treatment is also modified and underburning may not 

occur in order to protect residual lodgepole pine which is less resistant to fire.

Management Direction

Thinning is proposed within the General Forest, Scenic View and Old Growth Management Areas. The

objective of timber management in the General Forest Management Area is to “continue to convert 

unmanaged stands to managed stands”. The aim is to have managed stands “utilizing the site growth 

potential.” Within the Scenic View Management Area, the objective for ponderosa pine is to “achieve and 

maintain visual diversity through variations of stand densities and size classes”. Diversity in species, where 

biologically possible, is desirable (Standard and Guideline M9-4). Occasional stands of fir or lodgepole 

pine are desirable for added visual interest (S&G M9-4). In retention foregrounds, “management practices 

will normally not focus on maximum growth... stand densities may be heavier or lighter than what would 

be considered necessary for optimum growth” (S&G M9-9). Within the Old Growth Management Area, 

the objective is to provide large trees, abundant standing and downed trees, and vertical structure.

Alternative 2 Thinning Treatment

Alternative 2 proposes to thin a variety of stand conditions to meet the purpose and need, specifically to 

promote late and old structured forest stands and increase resilience to mountain pine beetles. Included for 

treatment are stands with and without prior management activities. Stand stocking levels vary as do the 

levels of ponderosa pine. Primarily one thinning treatment is described for all stand conditions. Where 

stands are dominated by ponderosa pine, stocking would be reduced to the lower management zone. 

Where stands are a mix of ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine, or white fir, thinning would favor the retention 

of ponderosa pine. If ponderosa pine stocking is less than the lower management zone, lodgepole pine or 

fir would be retained only as needed to meet the minimum stocking level. This level of stocking would be 

less than the lower management zone. In most cases, thinned stands would then be burned, separately or in 

combination with the mowing of shrubs. Mortality resulting from the burn could cause additional 

reductions in stand stocking. 

Alternative 3 Thinning Treatment

Alternative 3 also proposes to thin a variety of stand conditions to promote late and old structured forest 

stands and increase resilience to mountain pine beetles. It would do so, however, by varying treatments 

depending on stand condition. Alternative 3 responds to Key Issue 2 in the following ways:

1) Thinning is dropped from previously managed stands where the average stand density is relatively low

and trees to be harvested consist of scattered lodgepole pine and ponderosa pine growing in denser 

clumps. Stands are presently on a trajectory towards developing into large tree structure and will 

remain so for the next 10 years. Proposed fuel treatments are retained in those stands located in 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  85

strategically important areas for breaking up fire spread. Where stands are of less strategic importance, 

both thinning and proposed fuel treatments are dropped.

2) Thinning and fuel treatments are varied to better ensure, following treatment, stocking is at or above 

the lower management zone. Thinning treatment is changed within stands where there may not be 

enough ponderosa pine to stock the stand at the lower management zone. Lodgepole pine or true fir 

would be retained as needed to keep stocking at the lower management zone rather than minimum 

levels. Proposed fuel treatments are retained in stands located in strategically important areas. In some 

cases, mowing will be the only treatment. In many cases, burning, separately or in combination with 

mowing will follow thinning.

Changes to thinning and fuels treatments incorporated into Alternative 3 in response to this issue are 

summarized in Chapter 2. Alternative 3 also includes additional acres for thinning that have had no prior 

management or have moderate to high stocking levels. 

Temporal and Spatial Scale of Analysis

Spatial scale of analysis is the collective units of Alternative 2 and 3 where thinning is proposed outside of 

plantations. It is only within these units outside of plantations that there is potential for thinning and 

burning treatments to reduce stocking below the lower management zone. Temporal scale extends to the 

year 2020, the time when proposed thinning and burning treatments are assumed for this analysis to be 

completed.

Measure

Issue Measure 1: Acres and percent of thinning treatment and associated mowing or burning reported by 

level of ponderosa pine stocking present within treatment unit.

Issue Measure 2: Stand stocking, relative to the lower management zone, in the year 2020. The lower 

management zone is the lower limit that maintains enough stocking to capture a significant portion of the 

site resources in tree growth (Cochran et al. 1994).

Methods

Species canopy cover from 1995 photo interpretation data was used to estimate ponderosa pine stocking 

within proposed treatment units. Three classifications are used to describe relative levels of ponderosa pine 

stocking: low, high, and variable. Units are classified as “low” if 80% or more of the unit has less than 

20% ponderosa pine canopy cover. Units are classified as “high” if 80% or more of the unit has 20% or 

more ponderosa pine canopy cover. Units meeting neither of the criteria are classified as having “variable” 

ponderosa pine stocking. Given the PI data limitations of correctly identifying species especially in species 

transitional zones (Forest Data Incorporated 2001), classifications for “high” ponderosa pine stocking 

would be most accurate.

Model Projections

The following six units proposed for thinning were selected for detailed analysis using FVS, FFE, and 

SVS: Units 10, 36, 209, 251, 254, and 949. Units 10 through 254 were selected to sample the range of 

stand conditions proposed for thinning with Alternative 2. Unit 949 samples one of the units added to 

Alternative 3 for thinning. With the variety of stand conditions and treatments represented in these six 

sample units, inferences drawn from the model outputs were used to describe treatment effects associated 

with each alternative. The six selected units and the stand conditions they portray are summarized below.

Stand Conditions: Mixed ponderosa and lodgepole pine:

Units 10 and 254: managed stands, with light to moderate stand stocking and ponderosa pine stocking.

Units 209 and 251: unmanaged stands, with high stand stocking and moderate to high ponderosa pine 

stocking.

Stand Conditions: Ponderosa pine-dominated. High stand and ponderosa pine stocking commonly found 

in the Ogden single-story immature ponderosa pine stands:
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

86  Ogden Final EIS

Unit 36: managed stand, with minor amount of lodgepole pine.

Unit 949: managed stand, with minor amount of lodgepole pine and white fir. Located within a 

goshawk post fledging area that would be thinned with Alternative 3. No treatment would occur with 

Alternative 2.

Existing Condition

Units proposed for thinning have stocking levels currently above the lower management zone. 

Approximately 40 to 50 percent of the acres to be thinned are in units classified as having low ponderosa 

pine stocking. Approximately 25 to 30 percent of the acres are in units classified as having variable 

ponderosa pine stocking. The remaining 25 to 30 percent are in units classified as having high ponderosa 

pine stocking. The greatest range of ponderosa pine stocking is found in the low and variable ponderosa 

pine stocking classifications. In these classifications, existing ponderosa pine stocking can be either above 

or below the lower management zone. In units where ponderosa pine is below the lower management zone, 

it is lodgepole pine that brings the total stand stocking above the lower management zone. In units 

classified as having high ponderosa pine stocking, existing ponderosa pine stocking generally exceeds the 

lower management zone.

Modeled Units

Table 19 summarizes existing condition of the six sample units. All units are currently stocked above the 

lower management zone. Ponderosa pine density, as measured by basal area, is variable. Greatest 

variability is within units classified with PI data as having low to variable ponderosa pine stocking. In this 

grouping of units, Unit 251 is an example of a unit that actually has a high density of ponderosa pine 

stocking. Unit 251 is classified from PI data as having variable ponderosa pine stocking. According to 

stand exam data, while ponderosa pine makes up only 66 percent of the total stand density, ponderosa pine 

density is relatively high with 85 square feet of basal area. This unit portrays accuracy limitations of the PI 

species data within species transitional zones. Descriptions and visual representations of existing 

conditions in the six sample units are displayed in Figure 14, beginning page 94. This figure also includes 

a brief description of the treatment alternatives for each unit.

Table 19: Existing Condition of the Six Selected Units Grouped by Ponderosa Pine PI Classification

Units

Grouped by

Ponderosa pine 

PI Classification

Treatment

History

Stand Stocking 

relative to upper 

management zone*

Basal Area (Square Feet per Acre)

Other Species 

Present Stand Density

Ponderosa pine 

Density and

Percent of Stand Total

Low or Variable ponderosa pine stocking

10 (Low) Managed 85% 37 18 (49% of total)

Lodgepole 

pine

209 (Low) Unmanaged 235% 108 57 (53% of total)

251 (Variable) Unmanaged 293% 128 85 (66% of total)

254 (Low) Managed 121% 60 53 (88% of total)

Range of 

Conditions 37 - 128 18 – 85 (49-88% of total)

High ponderosa pine stocking

36 Managed 122% 77 75 (97% of total) Lodgepole 

949 Managed 149% 109 104 (95% of total) Lodgepole 

White fir

Range of 

Conditions 77 - 109 75 – 104 (95 – 97% of total)

* Lower Management Zone is 67 percent of the upper management zone.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  87

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: No management treatments would occur to reduce existing stand density. By 

2020, total stand stocking levels will have increased as trees increase in diameter. Total stand stocking will 

remain above the lower management zone. A significant portion of the site resources will continue to be 

captured in tree growth. While site growth potential would be utilized, units stock above the upper

management zone would be at risk to mountain pine beetle attack.

Model Projections

Descriptions and visual representations of the 2020 stand conditions associated with Alternative 1 are 

displayed in:

Figure 15 – Unit 10 Figure 21 – Unit 251

Figure 17 – Unit 36 Figure 23 – Unit 254

Figure 19 – Unit 209 Figure 25 – Unit 949

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Thinning and burning proposed with Alternative 2 could result in a large 

portion of the treatment acres being stocked less than the lower management zone in 2020 (Figure 12). 

With Alternative 2 retaining lodgepole pine only as needed to meet minimal stocking levels, there is 

potential for all acres with low or variable ponderosa pine stocking to drop below the lower management 

zone. Approximately 74 percent of treatment acres are in these classifications. Stocking less than the 

lower management zone would be most common on the 48 percent of treatment acres having low 

ponderosa pine stocking. Only within areas having high ponderosa pine stocking (26%) would it be 

unlikely for stand stocking to drop below the lower management zone following thinning and burning.

Following thinning, Alternative 2 proposes to burn most of the acres with low or variable ponderosa pine 

stocking (73 of the 74 percent treatment acres, Table 21). Projected stocking in 2020 reflects reductions 

associated with thinning as well as reductions associated with proposed underburn. Within units classified 

as having low or variable ponderosa pine stocking, varying amounts of scattered or clumped lodgepole pine 

would remain following thinning. Relative to ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine is less resistant to fire (Agee 

1993). Fire most commonly kills ponderosa pine through crown fire (Agee 1993). Fire also commonly 

kills lodgepole pine through crown fire and due to its thin bark, through the scorching of its cambium

(Agee 1993). Based on observations of local prescribed underburns, Resource Protection Measure #8 

would be moderately (60 to 80 percent) to highly (greater than 90 percent) effective in reducing crown 

scorch. The measure would be moderately effective in reducing cambium scorch of lodgepole pine. 

Implementation and effectiveness of the protection measure would be monitored and modified if necessary 

to achieve the mitigation objective (Prescribed Underburn Monitoring Item).

Figure 12: Proportion of Alternative 2 Thinning Acres Stocked Less than the Lower Management Zone 

(LMZ) in 2020.

48%

26%

26%

10,145 acres of thinning outside plantations

Existing PP stocking level classified low

Stand stocking less than LMZ could be common (48%)

Existing PP stocking level classified variable

Stand stocking less than LMZ could occur (26%)

Existing PP stocking level classified high

Stand stocking less than LMZ unlikely (26%) Stocking less than LMZ
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

88  Ogden Final EIS

In areas stocked less than the lower management zone, site resources not captured in tree growth would be 

available for establishment and growth of understory vegetation, including grasses, shrubs, and tree 

regeneration. In units stocked less than the lower management zone, it could take up to 20 years for 

stocking to increase to a level where a significant portion of the site resources will be captured in tree 

growth. If maintenance burns do not occur during this time period, resilience to stand replacing wildfires 

will diminish as the understory develops.

Growth loss associated with stocking levels less than the lower management zone could be variable. In 

discussing stand response to new growing space, Cochran et al. (1994) indicate once stands adjust to 

additional growing space, total cubic volume growth is fairly similar over a fairly wide range of densities. 

Smith (1962) similarly describes a generalization that the total production of cubic volume by a stand of 

given age and composition on a given site is, for all practical purposes, constant and optimum for a wide 

range of density of stocking. Smith (1962) notes, however, this generalization cannot hold for stands that 

are heavily thinned that they do not soon regain full occupancy of the growing space.

Model Projections

Units 10 and 254 (previously managed) and Units 209 and 251 (no prior management) are examples of 

units classified as having low to variable ponderosa pine stocking. In 2020, stocking levels in Units 10 and 

209 are projected to be less than the lower management zone following proposed thinning and burning 

treatments. Conversely, stocking levels are projected to be above the lower management zone in Units 251 

and 254. Unit 36 (previously managed) is an example of a unit classified as having high ponderosa pine 

stocking levels. In 2020, stocking level will be above the lower management zone. Descriptions and visual 

representations of stand conditions are displayed in Figure 15 (Unit 10), 

Figure 17 (Unit 36), Figure 19, (Unit 209), Figure 21 (Unit 251) and Figure 23 (Unit 254).

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Compared to Alternative 2, a much smaller portion of treatment acres would

be stocked less than the lower management zone in 2020 (lower management zone.

Figure 13). While 70 percent of Alternative 3 treatment acres are classified as having low or variable levels 

of ponderosa pine stocking, only 21 percent have potential to drop below the lower management zone

following proposed treatments. Thinning and burning in these areas would be the same as Alternative 2. 

Lodgepole pine would be retained only as needed to meet minimum stocking levels. Stocking less than the 

lower management zone would be most common on the 5 percent of treatment acres having low ponderosa 

pine stocking.

On the remaining 49 percent of acres with low (37%) or variable (12%) ponderosa pine stocking, it would 

be uncommon to drop below the lower management zone. With Alternative 3 proposing to thin to the 

lower management zone, regardless of species mix, stocking less than the lower management zone would 

be uncommon. Thinning patches with relatively high ponderosa pine stocking would not differ from 

Alternative 2. In these areas of relatively high ponderosa pine density, stocking levels in 2020 will be at or 

above the lower management zone.

Figure 13. Proportion of Alternative 3 Thinning Acres Stocked Less than the Lower Management Zone 

(LMZ) in 2020.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  89

Histograms showing 

projected cut/leave and 

fire related mortality by 

species and diameter class 

can be found in Appendix 

E of this Final EIS.

In contrast to Alternative 2, which proposes to follow thinning with burning on almost all thinned acres 

with low or variable ponderosa pine stocking, Alternative 3 proposes less burning and a diversity of 

thinning and burning combinations (Table 20). Following thinning, Alternative 3 proposes to burn 45 of 

the 70 percent treatment acres with low or variable ponderosa pine stocking. Of the 45 percent treatment 

acres proposed for burning, 15 percent would be thinned retaining lodgepole pine only as needed to meet 

minimum stocking requirements (the same as Alternative 2) and 30 percent would be thinned to the lower 

management zone, regardless of species mix. While both thinning treatments would leave varying amounts 

of scattered or clumped lodgepole pine, highest levels would be associated with the thinning which would 

retain stocking at the lower management zone regardless of species composition.

Projected stocking in 2020 reflects reductions associated with thinning as well as reductions associated 

with proposed underburn. Within those treatment acres with low or variable ponderosa pine stocking, 

projections for stocking at or above the lower management zone are dependent on the retention of 

lodgepole pine to supplement ponderosa pine stocking. Within those treatment acres with low or variable 

ponderosa pine stocking, projections for stocking at or above the lower management zone would be 

relatively certain within those areas where thinning would not be followed by burning. Where thinning, 

however, would be followed by burning, realizing stocking level projections would be dependent on the 

effectiveness of Resource Protection Measure #8 in reducing tree mortality and damage, particularly to the 

relatively fire sensitive lodgepole pine. Implementation and effectiveness of the protection measure would 

be monitored and modified if necessary to achieve the mitigation objective (Prescribed Underburn 

Monitoring Item).

In areas stocked at or above the lower management zone, tree growth 

would capture much of the site resources, making fewer resources 

available for the establishment and growth of understory vegetation. This 

could slow understory development and potentially increase the time 

stands remain resilient to stand replacement wildfire. These areas, 

compared to those stocked below the lower management zone, would grow 

more quickly to the upper management zones. There would be a shorter 

thinning interval to maintain resilience to bark beetles and correspondingly there would be a shorter 

interval between providing future timber and other wood fiber products and associated jobs.

Model Projections

Units 209 and 251 (no prior management) are examples of units classified as having low to variable 

ponderosa pine stocking levels. With Alternative 3, lodgepole pine would be retained in both units as 

needed to augment ponderosa pine stocking. Unit 209 is also an example of a unit in Alternative 3 where 

thinning would not be followed by burning. Projections for Unit 209 indicate 2020 stocking level will be 

above the lower management zone. This is in contrast to the Alternative 2 projection which shows stocking 

being below the lower management zone. Unit 251 is an example where there would be no difference 

between Alternatives 2 and 3. In this unit, lodgepole pine did not need to be retained to augment ponderosa 

pine stocking. Units 36 and 949 (previously managed) are examples of units classified as having high 

ponderosa pine stocking levels. Unit 949 is also an example of a unit added to Alternative 3 for thinning. 

5%

37%

16%

12%

30%

9,494 acres of thinning outside plantations

Existing PP stocking level classified low

Stand stocking less than LMZ could be common (5%)

Stocking less than LMZ uncommon (37%)

Existing PP stocking level classified variable

Stand stocking less than LMZ could occur (16%)

Stand stocking less than LMZ uncommon (12%)

Existing PP stocking level classified high

Stand stocking less than LMZ unlikely (30%)

Stocking

less than 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

90  Ogden Final EIS

Projections for both units indicate 2020 stocking levels will exceed the lower management zone. 

Descriptions and visual representations of stand conditions are displayed in 

Figure 17, page 99 (Unit 36); Figure 19, page 101 (Unit 209), Figure 21, page 103 (Unit 251) and Figure 

25, page 107 (Unit 949).

Cumulative Effects

None of the actions contributing to cumulative effects would combine with the Ogden treatments to change 

stocking levels relative to the lower management zone. Ongoing and reasonably foreseeable geothermal 

exploration could create small openings, generally less than 1 acre in size, in some of the units proposed for 

thinning. Small openings would be widely dispersed, with no more than one located within a unit. This 

would not be enough to change unit stocking levels relative the lower management zone.

Forest Plan Consistency: Connectivity Corridors – Alternatives 2 and 3

The Eastside Screens interim wildlife standard directs that the current level of connectivity between late 

and old structure (LOS) be maintained or enhanced between LOS stands and all Forest Plan designated old 

growth areas. According to the screens, connectivity corridors do not necessarily meet the same 

description of “suitable” habitat for breeding, but allow free movement between suitable breeding habitats. 

The screens describe connectivity corridor stands as those in which medium diameter or larger trees are 

common and canopy closures are within the top one-third of the site potential. With the relatively dry site 

conditions within the project area, the “top one-third of the site potential” is interpreted as the top one-third 

of sustainable conditions, equivalent to stocking levels between the upper and lower management zones

(Table 16). In the absence of these types of stands, the next best stands are to serve as connectivity. 

According to the screens, stand widths should be at least 400 feet wide at their narrowest point. The 

Eastside Screens permit harvest within connectivity corridors provided desired canopy closures and stand 

widths can be met and if some scattered amount of understory, if any occurs, is left in patches or scattered 

to assist in supporting stand density and cover.

Alternatives 2 and 3 propose thinning and natural fuels treatments within a number of units that overlay 

connectivity corridors, with Alternative 3 proposing the most treatment within corridors (Table 20). Units 

within corridors are a mix of ponderosa and lodgepole pine, and in some cases white fir, with ponderosa 

pine stocking ranging from low to high. Thinning would be to the lower management zone, which varies 

depending on site productivity. Within the project area, lower productivity is associated with ponderosa 

and lodgepole pine PAGs and higher productivity with the mixed conifer PAG.

Corridor Mitigation Specific to Alternative 2

Within LOS connectivity corridors, in order to retain canopy closures within the top one-third of site 

potential, maintain stocking levels between the upper and lower management zones (Table 16). Where 

there is not enough ponderosa pine to stock corridors at the lower management zone, retain lodgepole pine 

or true fir where available to supplement ponderosa pine. Where planned treatment includes 

mow/underburn, limit treatment to mowing if a post-thin assessment determines underburning would 

reduce stocking in corridor below the lower management zone. (Units affected: 25, 118, 124, and 158).

Medium and larger diameter trees. With Alternatives 2 and 3, medium and larger diameter ponderosa 

pine would be favored for retention, with all trees greater than or equal to 21 inches dbh being retained. 

Stocking of medium and larger diameter trees will be lowest within Unit 66, a plantation proposed for 

thinning (Table 20).

Top one-third of site potential. With Alternatives 2 and 3, stocking levels would be retained within the 

top one-third of site potential within at least a 400 foot width of the connectivity corridor. With Alternative 

2, modification of the thinning treatment within corridors (as described in the corridor mitigation) would 

ensure stocking would be retained within the top one-third of site potential in units where ponderosa pine 

stocking is low or variable and less than 400 feet of the corridor would remain untreated (Table 20). While 

Alternative 3 would treat more areas within corridors than Alternative 2, Alternative 3 has little to no 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  91

potential to reduce stocking to less than the top one-third of site potential. With Alternative 3, stocking less 

than the lower management zone would be uncommon due to 1) proposed thinning to the lower 

management zone regardless of species mix, and 2) the relatively high proportion of ponderosa pine 

stocking in many of the units proposed for treatment.

Corridor width. Units proposed for treatment cover the entire width of effected corridors with the 

exception of units 25, 97, 933, 934, and 943 (Table 20). Alternative 2 thinning treatment in unit 97 could 

reduce corridor width. Thinning in this unit, which is classified as having low ponderosa pine stocking, 

could create patches within the corridor where canopy cover is less than the top one-third of site potential, 

resulting in discontinuous canopy cover. More than 400 feet of the corridor width would remain untreated, 

however, and would continue to serve as connectivity. The remaining thinning treatments proposed in 

corridors with Alternatives 2 and 3 would retain stocking levels within the top one-third of site potential 

and consequently corridor width would not be affected.

Scattered understory. While both alternatives would retain scattered understory, Alternative 3 has the 

best potential to retain scattered and patches of understory trees and shrubs. With Alternative 3, thinning to 

the lower management zone regardless of species mix would retain more understory stocking and the 

forgoing of mowing or underburning would also retain more shrub canopy cover.

Table 20. Units with connectivity corridors proposed for treatment and their associated treatments and 

conditions.

Unit Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Ponderosa pine 

PI Classification Untreated Width of Corridor

25 PP_LP_1 / Mow_underburn PP_LP_2 / 

Mow_underburn Low 300 to 510 feet

66 PP_SPC/ None PP_SPC / None Low O feet; Entire corridor width 

treated

97 MC_1 / Mow_underburn MC_2 / None Low > 500 feet

118 MC_1 / Mow_underburn MC_2 / None Variable O feet; Entire corridor width 

treated

124 MC_1 / Mow_underburn MC_2 / None Low O feet; Entire corridor width 

treated

158 PP_LP_1 / Mow_underburn PP_LP_2 / 

Mow_underburn Low O feet; Entire corridor width treated

903 --- Mow_underburn Low O feet; Entire corridor width 

treated

904 --- PP_LP_2 / None Low O feet; Entire corridor width 

treated

914 ---

MC_2 / 

Mow_underburn High O feet; Entire corridor width treated

920 ---

MC_1 / 

Mow_underburn High O feet; Entire corridor width treated

924 ---

PP_LP_2 / 

Mow_underburn Low O feet; Entire corridor width treated

925 ---

MC_1 / 

Mow_underburn High O feet; Entire corridor width treated

932 ---

PP-LP_2 / 

Mow_underburn Variable O feet; Entire corridor width treated

933 --- PP_LP_2 / None High 260 feet

934 --- PP_LP_2 / None High 140 to 340 feet

935 ---

PP_1 / 

Mow_underburn High O feet; Entire corridor width treated

943 --- PP-LP_2 / None High 280 to 520 feet
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

92  Ogden Final EIS

PP_LP_1: Thin to lower management zone (80 SDI or approximately 50 sq. ft. BA/AC), retaining lodgepole pine only if needed to 

meet minimum stocking (40 SDI or approximately 20 sq. ft. BA/AC).

PP_LP_2: Thin to lower management zone (80 SDI or approximately 50 sq. ft. BA/AC) regardless of species composition.

PP_SPC: Thin plantations, retaining 120 to 435 trees per acre depending on tree diameter.

MC_1: Thin to lower management zone (120 SDI or approximately 70 BA sq. ft. BA/AC), retaining lodgepole pine or white 

fir only if needed to meet minimum stocking (40 SDI or approximately 20 sq. ft. BA/AC).

MC_2: Thin to lower management zone (120 SDI or approximately 70 sq. ft. BA/AC) regardless of species composition.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  93

Table 21: Alternatives 2 and 3 Thinning and Fuels Treatments Summarized by Three Ponderosa Pine Stocking Levels

Thinning/Fuels 

Treatment

Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification1

Trtmnt

Total

Acres

Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification1

Trtmnt

Total

Acres

Low Variable High Low Variable High

Acres

% 

Thin 

Total 

Acres

Acres

% 

Thin 

Total 

Acres

Acres

% 

Thin 

Total 

Acres

Acres

% 

Thin 

Total 

Acres

Acres

% 

Thin 

Total 

Acres

Acres

% 

Thin 

Total 

Acres

Thin, retaining 

lodgepole pine to 

meet minimum

With burn 4,724 47% 2,613 26% 2,685 26% 10,022 284 3% 1,155 12% 1,708 18% 3,147

With mowing 29 <1% 3 <1% --- --- 32 --- --- --- --- --- --- 0

No mow/burn 64 1% 3 <1% --- --- 67 222 2% 366 4% 535 6% 1,123

SUBTOTAL 4,817 48% 2,619 26% 2,685 26% 10,121 506 5% 1,521 16% 2,243 24% 4,270

Thin, retaining 

lodgepole pine to 

meet lower 

management zone

With burn --- --- --- --- --- --- 0 2,278 24% 586 6% 357 4% 3,221

With mowing --- --- --- --- --- --- 0 --- --- --- --- --- --- 0

No mow/burn 24 <1% --- --- --- --- 24 1,225 13% 543 6% 235 2% 2,003

SUBTOTAL 24 <1% --- --- --- --- 24 3,503 37% 1,129 12% 592 6% 5,224

TOTAL 4,841 48% 2,619 26% 2,685 26% 10,145 4,009 42% 2,650 28% 2,835 30% 9,494

Thinning Total 

Acres --- --- ---- --- --- --- 10,145 --- --- --- --- --- --- 9,494

1Classifications for ponderosa pine stocking (low, variable, and high) based on estimates from 1995 Photo Interpretation. Classifications are defined as follows:

Low: Greater than or equal to 80 percent of the unit has less than 20% canopy cover in ponderosa pine.

Variable: Less than 80 percent of the unit has greater than or equal to 20% canopy cover in ponderosa pine.

High: Greater than or equal to 80 percent of the unit has greater than or equal to 20% canopy cover in ponderosa pine.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

94  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 14: Existing Condition of Sample Units

Unit (Exam) Existing Condition (SVS Representation) Treatment History/Existing Condition Alternative Alternative Treatment

Unit 10

(Exam 010)

Treatment History: Overstory removal in 

1985. Precommercial thinned in 1986.

Existing condition: Two-storied stand of 

ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine (LP), with 

LP the dominant species in trees less than 15 

inches dbh. Total stand basal area (BA) 37 

square feet per acre, with 18 BA (49%) in PP. 

Stand stocked at 85% of upper management 

zone. This is above the lower management 

zones. There are 696 trees per acre (TPA)

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

1 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 24”) and

5 tpa >= 15 and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Below thresholds for Stand 

Density Index and dominant tree growth.

Table 21. PP stocking: Low

1 and 3 No Action

2

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet minimum 

stocking levels.

Mow/Burn.

Unit 36

(Exam 694)

Treatment History: Partial harvest in 1969. 

Commercial thinned in 1975. Precommercial 

thinned in 1976. Another thin with product 

removed in 1989.

Existing condition: Primarily single story 

ponderosa pine (PP) stand with minor amount 

of lodgepole pine (LP). LP stocking is 

primarily trees < 2 inches dbh. Total stand 

basal area (BA) is 77 square feet per acre, with 

75 BA (97%) in PP. Stocking 122% of upper 

management zone. There are 167 TPA.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

1 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 21”) and

19 tpa >= 15 and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Above threshold for Stand 

Density Index. Below threshold for dominant 

tree growth.

Table 21. PP stocking: High

1 No Action

2 and 3

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet minimum 

stocking levels.

Mow/Burn.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  95

Unit (Exam) Existing Condition (SVS Representation) Treatment History/Existing Condition Alternative Alternative Treatment

Unit 209

(Exam 102)

Treatment History: No treatment following 

historic logging.

Existing condition: Multi-story stand of 

ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine. Dead trees 

reflect beetle caused mortality measured at time 

of stand exam. Total stand basal area (BA) is 

108 square feet per acre, with 57 BA (53%) in 

PP. Stand stocked at 235% of the upper 

management zone. There are 1,229 TPA.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

7 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 27”) and

6 tpa >= 15 and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Above thresholds for Stand 

Density Index and dominant tree growth.

PP stocking: Low

1 No Action

2

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet minimum

stocking levels.

Mow/Burn.

3

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet desired

stocking levels.

No burn.

Unit 251

(Exam 103)

Treatment History: No treatment following 

historic logging.

Existing condition: Multi-story stand of 

ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine. Total 

stand basal area BA is 128 square feet per acre, 

with 85 BA (66%) of this in PP. Stand stocked 

at 293% of the upper management zone. There 

are 1,836 TPA.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

10 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 25”) and

7 tpa >= 15 and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Above thresholds for Stand 

Density Index and dominant tree growth.

PP stocking: Variable

1 No Action

2

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet minimum

stocking levels.

Mow/Burn.

3

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet desired

stocking levels.

Mow/Burn.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

96  Ogden Final EIS

Unit (Exam) Existing Condition (SVS Representation) Treatment History/Existing Condition Alternative Alternative Treatment

Unit 254

(Exam 254)

Treatment History: Overstory removal in 

1988. Precommercial thinned in 1989.

Existing condition: Primarily a single story 

stand of ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine, 

with an understory of lodgepole pine 

establishing in open areas. Total stand basal 

area (BA) is 60 square feet per acre, with 53 

BA (88%) in PP. Stand stocked at 121% of the 

upper management zone. 449 TPA.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

2 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 23”) and

8 tpa >= 15 and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Above threshold for Stand 

Density Index. Below threshold for dominant 

tree growth.

PP stocking: Low

1 No Action

2

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet minimum

stocking levels.

Mow/Burn.

3

Reduce ladder fuels.

Mow/Burn.

Unit 949

(Exam (698)

Treatment History: Partial harvest in 1969. 

Precommercial thinned in 1972. Commercial 

thinned in 1985. Another thin with product 

removed in 1990.

Existing condition: Single story ponderosa 

pine (PP) stand with minor amount of 

lodgepole pine and white fir. Total stand basal 

area is 109 square feet per acre, with 104 BA 

(95%) in PP. Stand stocked at 149% of the 

upper management zone. 129 TPA.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

2 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 22”) and

23 tpa >= 15 and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Above thresholds for Stand 

Density Index and dominant tree growth.

PP stocking: High

1 and 2 No Action

3

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet minimum

stocking levels.

Mow/Burn.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  97

Figure 15: Unit 10 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 and 3 (Exam 010) Alternative 2 (Exam 010)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Remains a two-storied stand of ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole 

pine, with lodgepole the dominant species in trees less than 15 inches dbh. 

Total stand basal area (BA) is 55 square feet per acre, with 22 BA (40%) in 

PP. Stand is stocked at 125% of the upper management zone. There are a 

projected 696 trees per acre (tpa).

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

3 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 22”) and

6 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

Beetle Risk: Above threshold based on Stand Density Index (SDI

Below threshold based on dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: None

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with lodgepole pine retained as 

needed to meet minimum stocking level. Mow/burned after thinning 

treatment.

Condition: Open, two-storied stand of ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine 

(LP), with LP stocking much reduced. Ponderosa pine dominates the 

overstory, but a few lodgepole remain. Clumped and scattered overstory trees 

are interspersed through relatively open stand conditions. Total stand basal 

area (BA) is 25 square feet per acre, with 19 BA (76%) in PP. Stand is 

stocked at 41% of the upper management zone. This is less than the lower 

management zone but higher than the minimum stocking level. There are a 

projected 60 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

2 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 23”) and

5 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

Beetle Risk: Below threshold based on Stand Density Index (SDI).

Below threshold based on dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: Density of ponderosa pine greater than or equal to 

15” dbh is not sensitive to assumptions used for burn treatment.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

98  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 16: Unit 10 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 and 3 (Exam 010) Alternative 2 (Exam 010)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Two-storied stand of ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine (LP), 

with LP remaining the dominant species in trees less than 15 inches dbh. 

Total stand basal area (BA) is 192 square feet per acre, with 61 BA (32%) in 

PP. Mortality is occurring in both the overstory and understory. As modeled, 

mortality is the result of self-thinning. It does not reflect mortality from bark 

beetle attacks. Stand is stocked at 296% of the upper management zone. 

There are a projected 361 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

13 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 26”) and

No trees >= 15” and < 20” dbh

Beetle Risk: For the prior 40 years, stand above thresholds based on Stand 

Density Index and dominant tree growth. During this time, projections show 

50 to 60 LP per acre greater than or equal 8 inches dbh are present in stand. 

By 2080, stocking in this size class is projected to exceed 100 trees per acre.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model bark beetle attacks. With 

the number of lodgepole pine greater than 8 inches dbh, extensive mortality 

from beetle attack is likely to have occurred prior to this point in time.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with lodgepole pine retained as 

needed to meet minimum stocking level. Mow/burned after thinning 

treatment. This 2080 projection assumes maintenance burns in 2029, 2041, 

2053, 2065, and 2077.

Condition: Open, two-storied stand of ponderosa and lodgepole pine. 

Ponderosa (PP) dominates the overstory, but a few lodgepole (LP) remain. 

Clumped and scattered overstory trees are interspersed through relatively 

open stand conditions. Understory a mix of PP and LP, with LP dominating. 

Stand basal area (BA) is 48 square feet per acre, with 40 BA (83%) in PP. 

Stand is stocked at 83% of the upper management zones. This a above the 

lower management zone. Projected 183 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

9 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 28”) (7-12 tpa depending on burn scenario).

No trees >= 15 and < 20” dbh (0-2 tpa depending on burn scenario).

Beetle Risk: Below threshold based on Stand Density Index (SDI).

 Below threshold based on dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: Density of ponderosa pine greater than or equal to 

15” dbh is sensitive to assumptions used for burn treatment. Understory 

condition is also sensitive to burn assumptions.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  99

Figure 17: Unit 36 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 (Exam 694) Alternative2 and 3 (Exam 694)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Remains primarily a single story ponderosa pine (PP) stand with 

minor amount of lodgepole pine (LP). LP stocking is primarily trees less than 

8 inches dbh. Total stand basal area (BA) is 90 square feet per acre, with 

87 BA (97%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 139% of the upper management 

zone. There are a projected 166 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

2 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 21”) and

27 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Above threshold based on Stand Density Index (SDI).

Above threshold based on dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model bark beetle attacks.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with lodgepole pine retained as 

needed to meet minimum stocking level. Mow/burned after thinning 

treatment.

Condition: Single story ponderosa pine (PP) stand with incidental lodgepole 

pine. Total stand basal area (BA) is 53 square feet per acre, with 52 BA 

(98%) in PP. Stand stocked at 67% of the upper management zone. This is 

above the lower management zone. There are a projected 37 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

2 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 28”) (No difference by burn scenario).

22 tpa >= 15 and < 20” dbh (21-22 tpa depending on burn scenario).

Beetle Risk: Below threshold based on Stand Density Index (SDI).

Below threshold based on dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: Density of ponderosa pine greater than or equal to 

15” dbh is not sensitive to assumptions used for burn treatment.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

100  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 18: Unit 36 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 (Exam 694) Alternative 2 and 3 (Exam 694)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Remains primarily a single story ponderosa pine (PP) stand with 

minor amount of lodgepole pine (LP). LP stocking is primarily trees less than 

8 inches dbh. Total stand basal area (BA) is 186 square feet per acre, with 

171 BA (92%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 271% of the upper management 

zone. There are a projected 267 trees per acre (tpa).

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

31 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 22”) and

34 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

Beetle Risk: Stand density above thresholds based on Stand Density Index 

and dominant tree growth. For the prior 60 years, stand basal area projections 

exceed100 square feet.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model bark beetle attacks. With 

the prior extended period of high basal areas, mortality from beetle attack is 

likely to have occurred prior to this point in time.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with lodgepole pine retained as 

needed to meet minimum stocking level. Mow/burned after thinning 

treatment. This 2080 projection assumes maintenance burns in 2029, 2041, 

2053, 2065, and 2077.

Condition: Primarily a single story ponderosa pine (PP) stand. Gaps and 

areas with lighter stocking are regenerating with ponderosa and lodgepole 

pine. This regeneration is less than 2 inches dbh and is dominated by 

lodgepole pine. Total stand basal area (BA) is 79 square feet per acre, with 

78 BA (99%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 128% of the upper management 

zone. There are a projected 183 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

25 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 23”) (23-30 depending on burn scenario).

4 tpa >=15 and <20” dbh (QMD =18”) (3-5 tpa depending on burn 

scenario).

Beetle Risk: Above threshold based on Stand Density Index (SDI).

At the threshold based on dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: Density of ponderosa pine greater than or equal to 

20” dbh is sensitive to assumptions used for burn treatment.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  101

Figure 19: Unit 209 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 (Exam 102) Alternative 2 (Exam 102) Alternative 3 (Exam 102)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Remains a dense multi-story stand of 

ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine (LP). Tree 

mortality being projected is the result of stand selfthinning. Total stand basal area (BA) is 127 square 

feet per acre, with 66 BA (52%) in PP. Stand 

stocked at 270% of upper management zone. 

There are a projected 1,227 trees per acre (tpa).

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

8 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 26”) and

5 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

Beetle Risk: Above stand density index and 

dominant tree growth thresholds. Projections show 

approximately 40 LP per acre greater than or equal 

8 inches dbh.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model 

bark beetle attacks. With high density and LP 

greater than 8 inches dbh, additional mortality than 

what is modeled is likely.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with 

lodgepole pine retained as needed to meet 

minimum stocking level. Mow/burned after 

thinning treatment.

Condition: Open, multi-story stand of ponderosa 

pine (PP). No lodgepole pine remains. Clumped 

and scattered trees are interspersed through 

relatively open stand conditions. Total stand basal 

area (BA) is 38 square feet per acre. Stand stocked 

at 48% of upper management zone. This is less 

than the lower management zone but higher than 

the minimum stocking level. There are a projected 

25 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

6 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 27”) and

4 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

Beetle Risk: Below stand density index and 

dominant tree growth thresholds.

Model Considerations: None

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with 

lodgepole pine retained as needed to meet desired 

stocking level. No post treatment burn.

Condition: Multi-story stand of ponderosa (PP) 

and lodgepole pine. Trees clumped and scattered 

with some interspersed gaps. Total stand basal 

area (BA) is 50 square feet per acre, with 41 BA 

(82%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 79% of the upper 

management zone. This is above the lower 

management zone. There are a projected 106 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

7 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 27”) and

4 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

Beetle Risk: Below stand density index and 

dominant tree growth thresholds.

Model Considerations: None
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

102  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 20: Unit 209 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 (Exam 102) Alternative 2 (Exam 102) Alternative 3 (Exam 102)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Remains a dense multi-story stand of 

ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine. Tree mortality 

being projected is the result of stand self-thinning. 

Total stand basal area (BA) is 206 square feet per 

acre, with 112 BA (54%) in PP. Stand stocked at 

361% of upper management zone. There are a 

projected 766 trees per acre (tpa).

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

8 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 26”) and

5 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

Beetle Risk: Since 2010, above stand density 

index and dominant tree growth thresholds. By 

2040, projections show approximately 70 LP per 

acre greater than or equal 8 inches dbh. By 2060, 

stocking in this size class is projected to exceed 

100 trees per acre.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model 

bark beetle attacks. With the number of lodgepole 

pine greater than 8 inches dbh, additional mortality 

from beetle attack is likely to have occurred prior 

to this point in time.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with 

lodgepole pine (LP) retained to meet minimum 

stocking level. Mow/burned. Projection assumes 

maintenance burns in 2029, 2041, 2053, 2065, and 

2077.

Condition: Clumped and scattered overstory 

ponderosa pine (PP) interspersed through open 

stand conditions. LP and PP regenerating open 

areas, with LP most common. Total stand basal 

area (BA) is 49 square feet per acre, with 48 BA 

(98%) in PP. Stand stocked at 84% of upper 

mgmnt zone. This is above the lower mgmnt zone. 

There are a projected 163 trees per acre (tpa).

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

10 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 28”)

(10 – 11 depending on burn scenario) and

2 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

(1- 5 depending on burn scenario)

Beetle Risk: Below stand density index and 

dominant tree growth thresholds.

Model Considerations: Persistence of open 

conditions and density of trees 15-20” dbh are 

sensitive to burn assumptions.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with 

lodgepole pine retained as needed to meet desired 

stocking level. No post treatment burn.

Condition: Multi-story stand of ponderosa (PP) 

and lodgepole pine. Overstory trees clumped and 

scattered. Gaps in stand have filled in with 

predominantly lodgepole and some ponderosa pine. 

Total stand basal area (BA) is 122 square feet per 

acre, with 86 BA (70%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 

219% of the upper management zone. There are a 

projected 504 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

11 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 28”) and

5 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 16”)

Beetle Risk: Since 2060, above stand density 

index and dominant tree growth thresholds.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model 

bark beetle attacks.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  103

Figure 21: Unit 251 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (Variable Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 (Exam 103) Alternative 2 (Exam 103) Alternative 3 (Exam 103)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Multi-story stand of ponderosa (PP) 

and lodgepole pine (LP). Total stand basal area 

BA is 146 square feet per acre, with 95 BA (65%) 

of this in PP. Stand is stocked at 325% of upper 

management zone. There are a projected 1,836 

trees per acre (tpa).

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

11 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 25”) and

10 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Above stand density index and 

dominant tree growth thresholds. Projections show 

approximately 35 LP per acre greater than or equal 

8 inches dbh.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model 

bark beetle attacks. With high density and LP 

greater than 8 inches dbh, additional mortality than 

what is modeled is likely.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with 

lodgepole pine retained as needed to meet 

minimum stocking level. Mow/burned after 

thinning treatment.

Condition: Multi-story stand of ponderosa (PP) 

with only incidental lodgepole pine. Total stand 

basal area BA is 58 square feet per acre, with 56 

BA (96%) of this in PP. Stand is stocked at 72% of 

the upper management zone. This is above the 

lower management zone. There are a projected 42 

tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

10 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 25”) and 

6 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 16”)

Beetle Risk: Below stand density index and 

dominant tree growth thresholds.

Model Considerations: None

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with 

lodgepole pine retained as needed to meet desired

stocking level. Mow/burned after thinning 

treatment.

Condition: Multi-story stand of ponderosa (PP) 

and lodgepole pine with only incidental lodgepole 

pine. Total stand basal area BA is 59 square feet 

per acre, with 56 BA (95%) of this in PP. Stand is 

stocked at 79% of the upper management zone. 

This is above the lower management zone. There 

are a projected 62 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

10 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 25”) and 

6 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 16”)

Beetle Risk: Below stand density index and 

dominant tree growth thresholds.

Model Considerations: None
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

104  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 22: Unit 251 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (Variable Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 (Exam 103) Alternative 2 (Exam 103) Alternative 3 (Exam 103)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Multi-story stand of ponderosa (PP) 

and lodgepole pine (LP). Tree mortality being 

projected is the result of stand self-thinning. Total 

stand basal area BA is 188 square feet per acre, 

with 123 BA (65%) of this in PP. Stand is stocked 

at 352% of upper management zone. There are a 

projected 980 trees per acre (tpa).

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

14 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 26”) and

12 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

Beetle Risk: Since 2010, above thresholds based 

on Stand Density Index (SDI) and dominant tree 

growth. By 2040, projections show approximately 

50 LP per acre greater than or equal 8 inches dbh.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model 

bark beetle attacks. With high density and LP 

greater than 8 inches dbh, additional mortality than 

what is modeled is likely.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with 

lodgepole pine retained to meet minimum stocking 

level. Mow/burned. Projection assumes 

maintenance burns in 2029, 2041, 2053, 2065, and 

2077.

Condition: Multi-story stand of ponderosa (PP) 

with only incidental lodgepole pine. Total stand 

basal area BA is 66 square feet per acre, with 64 

BA (97%) of this in PP. Stand is stocked at 110% 

of the upper management zone. There are a 

projected 196 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

10 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 28”)

(10 – 11 depending on burn scenario) and

10 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

(8 – 13 depending on burn scenario)

Beetle Risk: Below thresholds based on Stand 

Density Index (SDI) and dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: Persistence of open 

conditions and density of trees 15-20” dbh are 

sensitive to burn assumptions.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with 

lodgepole pine retained to meet desired stocking 

level. Mow/burned. Projection assumes 

maintenance burns in 2029, 2041, 2053, 2065, and 

2077.

Condition: Multi-story stand of ponderosa (PP) 

and lodgepole pine with only incidental lodgepole 

pine. Total stand basal area BA is 65 square feet 

per acre, with 63 BA (97%) of this in PP. Stand is 

stocked at 108% of the upper management zone. 

There are a projected 183 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

10 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 28”)

(10 – 12 depending on burn scenario) and

8 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

(8 - 13 depending on burn scenario)

Beetle Risk: Below thresholds based on Stand 

Density Index (SDI) and dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: Persistence of open 

conditions and density of trees 15-20” dbh are 

sensitive to burn assumptions.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  105

Figure 23: Unit 254 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 (Exam 254) Alternative 2 (Exam 254) Alternative3 (Exam 254)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Primarily a single story stand of 

ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine, with an 

understory of lodgepole pine establishing in open 

areas. Total stand basal area (BA) is 84 square feet 

per acre, with 67 BA (80%) in PP. Stand is 

stocked at 154% of upper management zone. 

There are a projected 448 trees per acre (tpa).

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

3 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 23”) and

17 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Above threshold based on Stand 

Density Index (SDI) and at threshold based on 

dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model 

bark beetle attacks.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with 

lodgepole pine retained as needed to meet 

minimum stocking level. Mow/burned after 

thinning treatment.

Condition: Single-story stand of ponderosa (PP) 

with some gaps. Total stand basal area (BA) is 50 

square feet per acre. Stand is stocked at 68% of 

upper management zone. This is above the lower 

management zone. There are a projected 50 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

3 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 23”) and

14 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Below thresholds based on Stand 

Density Index (SDI) and dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: None

Ogden Treatment: Ladder fuels selectively cut. 

Mow/burn followed ladder fuels treatment.

Condition: Primarily a single-story stand of 

ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine (LP), with an 

understory of LP persisting in open areas. Total 

stand basal area (BA) is 68 square feet per acre, 

with 60 BA (88%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 116% 

of upper management zone. There are a projected 

209 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

3 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 23”) and

16 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Above threshold based on Stand 

Density Index (SDI) and at threshold based on 

dominant tree growth.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model 

bark beetle attacks.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

106  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 24: Unit 254 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Primarily a single story stand of 

ponderosa (PP) and lodgepole pine, with an 

understory of lodgepole pine establishing in open 

areas. Total stand basal area (BA) is 201 square 

feet per acre, with 128 BA (64%) in PP. Stand is 

stocked at 290% of upper management zone. 

There are a projected 273 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

27 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 23”) and

21 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

Beetle Risk: Since 2030, Stand Density Index and 

dominant tree growth thresholds exceeded.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model 

bark beetle attacks. With the prior extended period 

of beetle risk, mortality from beetle attack is likely 

to have occurred prior to this point in time.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with 

lodgepole pine retained to meet minimum stocking 

level. Mow/burned. Projection assumes 

maintenance burns in 2029, 2041, 2053, 2065, and 

2077.

Condition: Gaps interspersed between a primarily 

single-story stand of ponderosa (PP). Lodgepole 

pine (LP) and PP regenerating stand gaps, with LP 

most abundant. Total stand basal area (BA) is 94 

square feet per acre, with 91 BA (97%) in PP. 

Stand is stocked at 148% of upper management 

zone. There are a projected 200 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

26 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 24”)

(24 – 30 depending on burn scenario) and

4 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

(4 – 11 depending on burn scenario)

Beetle Risk: Since 2060, Stand Density Index and 

dominant tree growth thresholds exceeded.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model 

bark beetle attacks.

Ogden Treatment: Ladder fuels selectively cut. 

Mow/burned. Projection assumes maintenance 

burns in 2029, 2041, 2053, 2065, and 2077.

Condition: Gaps interspersed between a primarily 

single-story stand of ponderosa (PP) with 

incidental lodgepole pine (LP). LP and PP 

regenerating stand gaps, with LP most abundant. 

Total stand basal area (BA) is 109 square feet per 

acre, with 104 BA (96%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 

142% of upper management zone. There are a 

projected 88 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

27 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 24”)

(25 - 32 depending on burn scenario) and

10 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

(7 - 19 depending on burn scenario)

Beetle Risk: Since 2040, Stand Density Index and 

dominant tree growth thresholds exceeded.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model 

bark beetle attacks. Mortality from beetle attack 

possible prior to this point in time.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  107

Figure 25: Unit 949 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking)

Alternative 1 and 2 (Exam 698) Alternative 3 (Exam 698)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Primarily a single story stand of ponderosa (PP) with minor 

amount of lodgepole pine and white fir. Total stand basal area (BA) is 121 

square feet per acre, with 117 BA (97%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 149% of 

upper management zone. There are a projected 130 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

4 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 22”) and

36 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Above stand density index and dominant tree growth 

thresholds.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model bark beetle attacks.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with lodgepole pine retained as 

needed to meet minimum stocking level. Mow/burned after thinning 

treatment.

Condition: Single-story stand of ponderosa (PP) with some gaps. Minor 

amount of white fir present. Total stand basal area (BA) is 56 square feet per 

acre, with 53 BA (95%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 67% of upper management 

zone. This is above the lower management zone. There are a projected 34 

tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

3 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 22”) and

29 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 17”)

Beetle Risk: Below stand density index and dominant tree growth 

thresholds.

Model Considerations: None
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

108  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 26: Unit 949 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)

Alternative 1 and 2 (Exam 698) Alternative 3 (Exam 698)

Ogden Treatment: No Action

Condition: Primarily a single story stand of ponderosa (PP) with minor 

amount of lodgepole pine and white fir. Total stand basal area (BA) is 210 

square feet per acre, with 198 BA (94%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 252% of 

upper management zone. There are a projected 130 tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

38 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 22”) and

44 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 18”)

Beetle Risk: Since 2010, above stand density index and dominant tree 

growth thresholds.

Model Considerations: Projections do not model bark beetle attacks. With 

the prior extended period of beetle risk, mortality from beetle attack is likely 

to have occurred prior to this point in time.

Ogden Treatment: Thinned from below, with lodgepole pine retained as 

needed to meet minimum stocking level. Mow/burned after thinning 

treatment. Projection assumes maintenance burns in 2029, 2041, 2053, 2065, 

and 2077.

Condition: Single-story stand of ponderosa (PP) with some gaps. Minor 

amount of white fir present. Total stand basal area (BA) is 56 square feet per 

acre, with 53 BA (95%) in PP. Stand is stocked at 67% of upper management 

zone. This is above the lower management zone. There are a projected 197 

tpa.

Ponderosa pine stocking includes:

25 tpa >= 20”dbh (QMD = 23”)

(24 - 30 depending on burn scenario) and

1 tpa >= 15” and < 20” dbh (QMD = 19”)

(1 - 2 depending on burn scenario)

Beetle Risk: Above stand density index threshold and at the dominant tree 

growth threshold.

Model Considerations: Density of trees greater than or equal to 20” dbh is 

sensitive to burn assumptions. Maintenance of gaps in stand is sensitive to 

frequency of maintenance burns.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  109

3.3.9 Historic Range of Variability (HRV) and Late and Old Structure

Introduction

The Eastside Screens interim ecosystem standard directs a proposed timber sale and its associated 

watershed be characterized for patterns of stand structure by biophysical environment. This 

characterization is to be compared to the Historic Range of Variability (HRV). The HRV should be 

developed for large landscapes across which forest types, environmental settings, and disturbance 

regimes (fire and insects/disease) are relatively uniform. It should be based on conditions in the presettlement era. Where late and old structural stages are found to be below HRV, the Eastside Screens 

interim wildlife standard provides direction for timber sale activities. This direction includes no net loss 

of late and old structure (LOS), retention of live trees greater than or equal to 21 inches dbh, moving 

vegetative structure towards LOS, and maintaining open, park-like stand conditions where this occurred 

historically. In 2003, guidance was issued that reaffirmed the Eastside Screen objective of increasing 

the number of large trees and LOS stands on the landscape (USDA Forest Service 2003).

Temporal and Spatial Scale of Analysis

Figure 27 displays the Ogden project in relation to two associated watersheds. The majority of the 

Ogden project is within the Lower Little Deschutes River Watershed. The southern portion of the 

project extends slightly into one subwatershed (Lower Long Prairie) of the Long Prairie Watershed. 

Across these two watersheds, forest types and environmental settings are not relatively uniform. 

Consequently, a subset of these watersheds is identified for this HRV analysis. The subset is relatively 

uniform in terms of forest types, environmental settings, and disturbance regimes. The analysis area is 

83,295 acres in size.

The HRV analysis area includes the portion of the Lower Little Deschutes River Watershed east of the 

Little Deschutes River (Figure 27). It also includes a portion of the Lower Long Prairie subwatershed. 

The boundary between Forest Service and other land owners forms the western boundary of the analysis 

area. This boundary closely approximates a change in timberland types mapped in the 1930s

(Harrington 2003a) (Figure 28). The eastern boundary of the analysis area coincides with the analysis 

boundary for the lodgepole pine issue (Key Issue #1). The HRV analysis area excludes much of the 

Newberry caldera.

Figure 29 displays the Deschutes National Forest mapping of plant association groups (PAGs) within 

and adjacent to the Ogden HRV analysis area (USDA Forest Service 2000). There are four PAGs 

within the HRV analysis area: lodgepole pine, mixed conifer, mountain hemlock, and ponderosa pine. 

Within the lodgepole pine PAG, there are plant associations with and without potential to support 

ponderosa pine. Lodgepole pine plant associations in the western portion of the analysis area occur at 

lower elevations and have bitterbrush as the dominant shrub species. In these plant associations, 

ponderosa pine can also be found (Volland 1985). Where these associations occur in the Ogden project 

area, ponderosa pine stocking levels are variable. Ponderosa pine stocking as high as 50 to 90 percent 

of the total stand basal area can be found. Lodgepole pine plant associations in the eastern portion of 

the analysis area occur at higher elevations and do not have bitterbrush as the common shrub species. 

Ponderosa pine is generally not found in these lodgepole pine plant associations (Volland 1985).

The temporal scale of analysis extends to the year 2080. At this time, ponderosa pine regenerated 

following historic logging will be approaching 150 years in age. For ponderosa pine, this is the 

youngest age considered to be late seral (Hopkins et al. 1993).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

110  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 27. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and associated watershed boundaries.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  111

Figure 28. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and forest types mapped in 1930 (Harrington 2003a).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

112  Ogden Final EIS

 Figure 29. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and plant association groups.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  113

Measures

Measure 1: Structural stage proportions within each HRV analysis biophysical environment in the year 

2020, the time when proposed treatments are assumed to be completed.

Measure 2: In the year 2020, the proportion of the understory reinitiation and multi-stratum without 

large trees structural stages within the ponderosa pine and mixed conifer biophysical environments 

classified into low, moderate, and high density. See methods section for description of density 

classifications.

These two similar structural stages, with their component of medium sized trees, are the structures most 

likely to develop most quickly into late and old structure. By the year 2080, ponderosa pine regenerated 

following historic logging will be approaching 150 years in age, the youngest age considered to be late 

seral. The Eastside Screens definition for late and old structure describes, in part, stands in which large 

trees are common. This condition is considered to be met if dominant trees are at least 21 inches dbh 

and number at least 13 trees per acre (Hopkins et al 1993). This condition is between the historic 

reference conditions described by Munger (1917) and Youngblood et al. 2004). Stand density is 

expressed qualitatively to evaluate potential to develop into large and old structure.

Methods

Figure 30 displays the extent of biophysical environments used in this analysis. Characterizing 

biophysical environments was based on: 1) the Deschutes National Forest mapping of plant association 

groups (PAGs) and their corresponding plant associations (Volland 1985), and 2) the mapping of the 

1930’s survey of forest resources. For this analysis, portions of the lodgepole pine PAG were classified 

into the “ponderosa pine” biophysical environment. This was done where lodgepole pine plant 

associations with potential to support ponderosa pine overlay areas classified in the 1930 survey as 

ponderosa pine dominated (Figure 28). This resulted in 13,491 acres of lodgepole pine plant 

associations being classified with the ponderosa pine PAG into the ponderosa pine biophysical 

environment. Acres with potential to support lodgepole pine and variable levels of ponderosa pine are 

29 percent of the total ponderosa pine environment mapped in the HRV analysis area. Most of these 

acres are located within and to the south of the Ogden project. Remaining lodgepole pine plant 

associations where ponderosa pine is generally not found are classified into the “lodgepole pine” 

biophysical environment. The mixed conifer PAG is classified into the “mixed conifer” biophysical 

environment.

Existing stand structure is derived from classifications based on 1995 photo interpretation (PI). Stands 

overlaying ponderosa pine or mixed conifer biophysical environments were classified as large tree 

structure if at least 15 percent canopy cover was present in size classes larger than 21 inches dbh (PI 

size class 11 and larger). Stands overlaying the lodgepole pine biophysical environment were classified 

as large tree structure if at least 10 percent canopy cover was present in size classes larger than 9 inches 

dbh (PI size class 7 and larger). Classifications based on PI data were updated to reflect management 

treatments and wildfires that have occurred since 1995 (see Table 44 in the Silviculture Specialist 

Report).

Three qualitative classifications of stand density (low, moderate, high) are used to evaluate potential for 

stand reinitiation and multi-stratum without large tree structures to develop into large tree structure. 

Classifications are based on past and proposed thinning treatments and total canopy cover from 1995 

photo interpretation data. Classification methods are summarized below.

Moderate Density

1) Areas where: a) the PI canopy cover is greater than 10 percent, and b) thinning has occurred 

since 1995 or thinning is proposed with the Ogden project.

2) Areas where the PI canopy cover is greater than 10 percent and less than 20 percent and areas 

have not been treated since 1995 and will not be thinned with the Ogden project.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

114  Ogden Final EIS

High Density

Areas where: a) the PI canopy cover is greater than or equal to 20 percent, and b) no thinning 

treatments have occurred since 1995 and will not occur with the Ogden project.

Low Density

Areas not meeting the moderate or high density criteria are classified as “low” density.

Development of future large tree structure is assumed to be most likely within stands classified as 

“moderate” density. This would be due to: 1) medium sized trees currently being relatively common, 

2) moderate stocking allowing for relatively good diameter growth rates in medium sized trees, and 3) 

current low risk to bark beetle attack. There would be less potential within stands classified as “low” 

and “high” density. Reduced potential in “low” density stands would be due to low density of medium 

sized trees. Reduced potential in “high” density stands would due to high stand densities putting stands 

at risk to bark beetle attack and potential mortality of medium to large diameter trees.

Historic Range of Variability and Historic Conditions

The Historic Range of Variability (Table 22) described by Powers (2006) is used as the basis for 

comparing current and projected conditions to historic conditions. Powers (2006) characterized the 

historic structure for a relatively large area within the Lower Little Deschutes watershed. The area 

characterized by Powers (2006) is similar to the HRV analysis area identified for the Ogden project 

(Powers 2011). Biophysical environments used for the Ogden analysis are similar to those used by 

Powers (2006) to characterize the historic structures (Powers 2011).

Table 22: Historic Range of Variability

Structural Stage

Biophysical Environment

Ponderosa Pine Mixed Conifer Lodgepole Pine

Stand Initiation 0 – 13% 7 – 18% 16 – 48%

Stem Exclusion Closed Canopy 2 – 14% 5 – 51% 1 – 28%

Understory Reinitiation 2 – 19% 5 – 11% 11 – 20%

Multi-stratum without large trees 4 – 31% 6 – 48% 4 – 31%

Multi-stratum with large trees 5 – 30% 5 – 27% 2 – 10%

Single-stratum with large trees 20 – 60% 5 – 15% 0 – 32%

The 1930s survey of forest resources in state of Oregon produced a map of timberland types (Harrington 

2003a). In eastern Oregon, the survey commenced in 1934 (Harrington 2003b). By this time, historic 

logging in the northern portion of the HRV analysis area would have already begun. The majority of 

the Ogden HRV analysis area was classified as ponderosa pine (Figure 28). Other tree species such as 

lodgepole pine or white fir, if present, would have been less than 20 percent of the standing volume 

(Harrington 2003b). Mapped lodgepole pine timber types were located primarily in the eastern portion 

of the HRV analysis area and immediately west of the analysis area boundary (Figure 28). The 

lodgepole pine classification was defined as forests containing at least 50 percent, by volume, of 

lodgepole pine, often almost pure. Mountain hemlock stand structures will not be compared to the 

historic range of variability. Mountain hemlock is a minor portion of the HRV analysis area and no 

mountain hemlock PAG is within the Ogden project area.

Existing Condition

Species composition and proportion of stand structural stages within the HRV analysis area has changed 

from historic conditions. Lodgepole pine and white fir stocking is higher within the ponderosa pine and 

mixed conifer biophysical environments. The amount of large ponderosa pine structure, both multi and 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  115

single stratum, is below the historic range of variability. Correspondingly, the two ponderosa pine 

multi-stratum stand structures with relatively few large trees are above the historic range. These 

structures, with their component of medium sized trees, are on a trajectory towards large tree structure. 

High stocking in these multi-stratum structures, now or in the near future, put the medium and large 

trees at risk to bark beetle attack. Mortality of medium and large trees could slow the development of 

these structures into large tree structures.

Of the three biophysical environments characterized for patterns of stand structure, only the lodgepole 

pine has large tree structure within the HRV (Table 23). In both the ponderosa pine and mixed conifer, 

the proportion of multi and single stratum large tree structure is currently below the HRV (Table 23). In 

these biophysical environments, the understory reinitiation and the multi-stratum without large trees 

stand structures (Table 23) are closest to developing into large tree structure. By definition, large trees 

are not common in these structures. Average stocking of trees greater than 21 inches dbh ranges from 1 

to 10 trees per acre. These stand structures include a component of medium diameter trees that have 

potential to develop into large trees. In both of these structures the overstory canopy is discontinuous 

and two or more canopy layers are present. Understory trees include seedling, saplings and poles. 

Where there are gaps in the crown canopy, lodgepole pine is the most common species establishing in 

the gaps. In the mixed conifer biophysical environment, white fir can also be found establishing in the 

understory. With the exception of recently thinned stands, high stocking within these multi-stratum 

structures now or within 20 years will exceed the thresholds for bark beetle attack.

The HRV analysis area includes past regeneration harvest treatments and a number of relatively large 

wildfires. Even with these stand replacing disturbances, the proportion of stand initiation structural 

stage is within the historic range of variability for all biophysical environments. Patch size ranges from 

less than 10 acres to greater than 1,000 acres. For all biophysical environments, the most common patch 

size is between 10 and 50 acres. The largest block, created by a wildfire, is located within the 

ponderosa pine biophysical environment. It’s approximately 1,460 acres (590 hectares) in size. 

Historically, this large of a block would have been unusual within the ponderosa pine biophysical 

environment. Agee (1993) states under certain conditions intense fires may have historically occurred 

in low severity fire regimes such as ponderosa pine. In support of this, Agee (1993) makes reference to 

reports of even-aged stands of several hundred hectares having been identified in the Pringle Butte area 

(9 miles west of the Ogden project area). While these stand replacing fires may have occurred 

historically, Agee (1993) states large blocks of even-aged stands are unusual in ponderosa pine forest.

Model Units

Descriptions and visual representations of the existing condition of sample units are displayed in Figure 

14. All sample units are within the ponderosa pine biophysical environment. The structural stage 

classifications for each sample unit are summarized below.

Unit 10 - Multi-stratum without large trees Unit 251 - Combination of Understory reinitiation and 

Multi-stratum without large trees

Unit 36 - Understory reinitiation Unit 254 - Multi-stratum without large trees

Unit 209 - Multi-stratum without large trees Unit 949 - Stem exclusion closed canopy
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

116  Ogden Final EIS

The highest stocking of large diameter trees is found in units 209 (7 trees per acre) and 251 (10 trees per 

acre). Both units have not been treated since being logged in the 1930s. The remaining four units have 

been harvested since the 1930s and have the lowest stocking of large diameter trees (1 to 2 trees per 

acre). Modeled units are representative of the various structural stages.

 

Figure 30. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and associated biophysical environments.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  117

Table 23: Structural Stage by Alternative Compared to Historic Range of Variability

Biophysical 

Environment 

(BioEnv) and 

Structural Stage1

Historic 

Range of 

Variability 

(HRV)

Existing Condition and 

Alternative 1 

in 2020

Alternative 2 

in 2020

Alternative 3 

in 2020

Percent

of

BioEnv (ac)

Relation

To

HRV

Percent

of

BioEnv (ac)

Relatio

n

To

HRV

Percent

of

BioEnv (ac)

Relation

To

HRV

Ponderosa Pine

Stand Initiation 0 – 13% 6% (2,743) Within 6% (2,768) Within 6% (2,763) Within

Stem Exclusion 

Closed Canopy 2 – 14% 7% (3,383) Within 6% (2,896) Within 6% (2,654) Within

Understory 

Reinitiation 2 – 19% 46% (21.423) Above 57% (26,670) Above 57% (26,706) Above

Multi-stratum 

without large trees 4 – 31% 41% (19,102) Above 30% (14,317) Within 31% (14,528) Within

Multi-stratum

with large trees 5 – 30% <1% (271) Below <1% (271) Below <1% (271) Below

Single-stratum

with large trees

20 – 60% <1% (31) Below <1% (31) Below <1% (31) Below

100% (46,953) 100% (46,953) 100% (46,953)

Mixed Conifer

Stand Initiation 7 – 18% 14% (2,315) Within 15% (2,385) Within 14% (2,385) Within

Stem Exclusion 

Closed Canopy 5 – 51% 20% (3,216) Within 17% (2,797) Within 17% (2,797) Within

Understory 

Reinitiation 5 – 11% 30% (4,749) Above 36% (5,686) Above 36% (5,686) Above

Multi-stratum 

without large trees 6 – 48% 34% (5,382) Within 30% (4,795) Within 30% (4,795) Within

Multi-stratum

with large trees 5 – 27% 2% (308) Below 2% (308) Below 2% (308) Below

Single-stratum

with large trees 5 – 15% <1% (34) Below <1% (34) Below <1% (34) Below

100% (16,004) 100% (16,004) 100% (16,004)

Lodgepole Pine 

Stand Initiation 16 – 48% 16% (2,336) Within 17% (2,542) Within 16% (2,346) Within

Stem Exclusion 

Closed Canopy 1 – 28% 30% (4,450) Above 30% (4,438) Above 30% (4,436) Above

Understory 

Reinitiation 11 – 20% 34% (4,937) Above 33% (4,763) Above 34% (4,962) Above

Multi-stratum 

without large trees

4 – 31% 9% (1,383) Within 9% (1,382) Within 9% (1,382) Within

Multi-stratum

with large trees 2 – 10% 8% (1,196) Within 8% (1,175) Within 8% (1,175) Within

Single-stratum

with large trees 0 – 32% 2% (220) Within 2% (220) Within 2% (220) Within

100% (14,521) 100% (14,521) 100% (14,521)

1

Stand Initiation: Growing space reoccupied following a stand replacing disturbance. One dominant cohort of seedlings or 

saplings. Stem exclusion, closed canopy: Occurrence of new tree stems is excluded. One or more layers of pole, small, or 

medium diameter trees. Understory re-initiation: Two or more canopy layers. Upper layer of pole, small, medium diameter 

trees. Large trees (>21” dbh) are uncommon. Multi-story without Large Trees: Similar to understory reinitiation. Less 

growing space for new trees in understory. Multi-stratum with Large Trees (LOS): Two or more canopy layers present. 

Large trees (>21” dbh) are common. Single stratum with Large Trees (LOS): One dominant canopy layer. Large trees 

(>21” dbh) are common.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

118  Ogden Final EIS

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: By the year 2020, in the absence of wildfires, there will be no change in 

the current proportion of structural stages within the HRV analysis area. Large tree structure within the 

ponderosa pine and mixed conifer biophysical environments will continue to be below HRV. An 

insufficient number of trees will have grown to diameters exceeding 21 inches for stands to be classified 

as late and old structure. It could take until the year 2060 for a sufficient number of trees to grow to this 

size. High stand stocking levels will put trees at risk to bark beetle attack. If an outbreak of mountain 

pine beetle occurs, up to half the trees and up to 67 percent of the current basal area, mostly in the 

largest trees, could have expected mortality (Barrett 1979). Depending on the level of mortality, the 

time for large tree structure to increase to reference conditions could be further delayed. If standreplacement wildfires do occur, they too could delay the development of large tree structure to reference 

condition by converting large patches to early seral conditions.

Potential for developing large tree structural conditions would be low in densely stocked stands, 

particularly those with no prior management. In discussing the results of a 35-year study on ponderosa 

pine response to thinning and understory removal, Cochran and Barrett (1999) state “the reduction of 

growth rates of even the largest trees with increasing stand densities indicates that unmanaged stands 

that escape thinning through fire or other disturbances will progress very slowly toward mid- or lateseral conditions.”

Ponderosa Pine Biophysical Environment

Within the ponderosa pine biophysical environment, 87 percent is classified as either understory 

reinitiation or multi-stratum without large trees (Table 23 and Figure 31). These structures are closest to 

developing into large tree structure. In these structural stages, varying stand densities influence the 

potential to develop large tree structure. Of the 87 percent in these two combined structure stages, 

approximately 38 percent is classified as having moderate stand density (Figure 31). These moderately 

stocked areas are considered to have the best potential to develop into single or multi-stratum large tree 

structure by the year 2080. Of the 38 percent, 11 percent overlays lodgepole pine plant associations. In 

the absence of frequent, low intensity fire, these areas would likely develop into multi-stratum large tree 

structure with lodgepole pine dominating the lower canopy layers. This would be within the lower 

range of the historic range of variability (5 – 30%). Of the 38 percent, the remaining 27 percent 

overlays ponderosa pine plant associations and could potentially develop into single-stratum large tree 

structure. This structural stage could also be within the lower range of the historic range of variability 

(20 – 60%). Realizing this potential will be subject in part to future bark beetle activity.

Figure 31: Alternative 1 ponderosa pine 2020 stand structures and densities summarized.

6%

7%

4%

38%

45%

87%

Proportion of Ponderosa Pine Biophysical Environment

Structure Stage

Stand Initiation (6%)

Stem Exclusion (7%)

Understory Reinitiation and Multi-stratum

without large trees (87%)

Density of Understory Reinitiation and

Multi-stratum without large trees

Low Density (4%)

Moderate Density (38%)

High Density (45%)

Densities of Understory 

Reinitiation and Multi-stratum

without large trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  119

Mixed Conifer Biophysical Environment

Within the mixed conifer biophysical environment, 64 percent is classified as either understory 

reinitiation or multi-stratum without large trees (Table 23 and Figure 32). Of the 64 percent in these 

two combined structure stages, approximately 17 percent is classified as having moderate stand density 

(Figure 32). These areas with moderate density are considered to have the best potential to develop into 

single or multi-stratum large tree structure by the year 2080. In the absence of frequent, low intensity 

fire, these acres would likely develop into multi-stratum large tree structure with lodgepole pine 

dominating the lower canopy layers. This could increase the existing multi-stratum with large tree 

structure from 2 percent to 19 percent. This proportion would be within the upper half of the HRV (5-

27%). Realizing this potential will be subject in part to future bark beetle activity.

Figure 32: Alternative 1 mixed conifer 2020 stand structures and densities summarized.

Model Projections

By the year 2060 all projections show ponderosa pine greater than 20 inches dbh exceeding the Munger

(1917) reference condition. The year 2040 was the earliest this reference condition was met (Figure 38, 

Unit 251). Unit projections, however, do not model mortality from bark beetle attacks. Stand density 

projections indicate thresholds for bark beetle attack will be exceeded for all stands by the year 2040. 

Units with no prior management activity are currently at risk to bark beetles (Figure 38) as is one 

previously thinned ponderosa pine stand (Figure 39, Unit 949). Some level of mortality from bark 

beetles is likely during the 20 to 50 year time period prior to achieving large tree density in excess of the 

reference condition.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Proposed harvest activities will change the existing proportion of 

structural stages within the HRV analysis area (Table 23). The largest change will occur within the 

ponderosa pine biophysical environment. Multi-stratum without large tree will be reduced by 11 

percent, with a corresponding increase in the amount of understory reinitiation structural stage. 

Proposed regeneration harvest of lodgepole pine stands, including seed tree harvest and seed tree 

removal, will increase the amount of stand initiation structural stage by 1 percent within the lodgepole 

pine and mixed conifer biophysical environment (Table 23). In both environments this structural stage 

will remain within the HRV. Within the lodgepole pine biophysical environment, this structural stage 

will remain at the low end of the HRV.

Outside of plantations, Alternative 2 thinning treatments will reduce lodgepole pine stocking to less than 

20 percent of the total stand basal area. Resulting conditions would approximate those present at the 

time of the 1930’s forest resource survey. Many of these thinned areas would remain at low risk to bark 

14%

20%

2% 5%

17%

42%

64%

Proportion of Mixed Conifer Biophysical Environment

Structure Stage

Stand Initiation (14%)

Stem Exclusion (20%)

Understory Reinitiation and Multi-stratum

without large trees (64%)

Multi-stratum with large Trees (2%)

Density of Understory Reinitiation and

Multi-stratum without large trees

Low Density (5%)

Moderate Density (17%)

Densities of Understory 

Reinitiation and Multistratum without large trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

120  Ogden Final EIS

beetle outbreak for the next 60 to 70 years. By reducing stand density and risk of bark beetle outbreak, 

proposed thinning will improve the potential for developing future large tree structure.

Ponderosa Pine Biophysical Environment

Within the ponderosa pine biophysical environment, 87 percent would be classified as understory 

reinitiation or multi-stratum without large trees by the year 2020 (Table 23 and Figure 33). The 

combined proportion of these structures would be the same as Alternative 1 (Figure 32). The 

alternatives differ, however, in that Alternative 2 thinning would increase moderately stocked areas to 

50 percent as compared to 38 percent with Alternative 1. Moderately stocked areas would have the best 

potential to develop into single or multi-stratum large tree structure by the year 2080. Of the 50 percent 

moderately stocked areas, 15 percent overlay lodgepole pine plant associations and 35 percent overlay 

ponderosa pine plant associations. Development of single or multi-stratum structure would be 

dependent on future disturbances that influence understory development, such as low intensity fire.

Within the 15 percent overlaying lodgepole pine plant associations, scattered or clumped ponderosa pine 

may be stocked at less than desired levels. By the year 2060, large trees will be more common than they 

are presently, but in some areas their numbers may be too low for classification as large tree structure. 

In the absence of future disturbances such as frequent, low intensity fire, these areas would be most 

likely to develop into multi-stratum structures with lodgepole pine dominating the lower canopy layers. 

If enough large trees are present for classification as large tree structure, 15 percent multi-stratum large 

tree structure would be within the middle of the historic range of variability (5 – 30%).

Within the 35 percent overlaying ponderosa pine plant associations, ponderosa pine would likely be 

well distributed at desired levels (lower management zone). By the year 2060, large ponderosa pine 

would be common and areas could likely be classified as large tree structure. Assuming these areas 

remain primarily single stratum, 35 percent single-stratum large tree structure would be within the 

middle of the historic range of variability (20 – 60%). Realizing this potential will be subject in part to 

future bark beetle activity.

Figure 33: Alternative 2 ponderosa pine 2020 stand structures and densities summarized.

Mixed conifer biophysical environment

Within the mixed conifer biophysical environment, 66 percent would be classified as either understory 

reinitiation or multi-stratum without large trees (Figure 34 and Table 23) by the year 2020. This would 

be slightly higher than Alternative 1. Not only would Alternative 2 have a higher proportion in these 

combined structures, but a higher proportion of these structures would be moderately stocked. Of the 66 

6%

6%

4%

50%

33%

87%

Proportion of Ponderosa Pine Biophysical Environment

Structure Stage

Stand Initiation (6%)

Stem Exclusion (6%)

Understory Reinitiation and Multi-stratum without

large trees (87%)

Density of Understory Reinitiation and

Multi-stratum without large trees

Low Density (4%)

Moderate Density (50%)

High Density (33%)

Densities of Understory 

Reinitiation and Multi-stratum

without large trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  121

percent in these two combined structure stages, approximately 25 percent would be classified as having 

moderate stand density (Figure 34).

These areas of moderate density would have the best potential to develop into single or multi-stratum 

large tree structure by the year 2080. In some areas, however, scattered or clumped ponderosa pine may 

be stocked at less than desired levels. By the year 2060, large trees will be more common than they are 

presently, but in some areas the numbers may be too low for classification as large tree structure. In the 

absence of future disturbances, such as low intensity fire, these moderate density areas would be most 

likely to develop into multi-stratum structures with lodgepole pine dominating the lower canopy layers. 

If enough large trees are present for classification as large tree structure, these areas could increase 

multi-stratum with large tree structure from the existing 2 percent (Figure 34 and Table 23) to 27 

percent in the future. This proportion would be at the upper end of the historic range of variability (5 –

27%).

Figure 34: Alternative 2 mixed conifer 2020 stand structures and densities summarized.

Model Projections

Projected development of large trees and corresponding stand density through the year 2080 are 

displayed in Figure 37, Figure 38, and Figure 39. All projections but one (Figure 37, Unit 254) indicate 

bark beetle risk will remain low through the year 2080.

Units in the ponderosa pine biophysical environment overlaying lodgepole pine plant associations and 

potential range of large trees in the year 2080 are displayed in Figure 37 (Units 10 and 254) and Figure 

38 (Units 209 and 251). Of these four units, only one (Unit 254) is projected to exceed Hopkins 

reference condition or large tree structure. Large trees are projected to be less common in the other 

three (Units 10, 209, and 251), approximating Munger’s historic reference condition. These projections 

are sensitive to the assumptions used for modeling the burn treatment following thinning and subsequent 

maintenance burns. Average number of large trees could be higher or lower than those shown 

depending on burn assumptions. 

Units in the ponderosa pine biophysical environment overlaying ponderosa pine plant associations are 

displayed in Figure 38. Projections indicate large trees will exceed Hopkins reference condition for 

large tree structure as well as Youngblood’s historic reference condition in both of the sample units.

Depending on fire occurrence, stand structure could be either single or multi-stratum. Unit 209 (Figure 

20) portrays these effects on future stand structure. Alternative 2 projections assume burns occur every 

12 years. In 2080 stand structure is open and park-like. In contrast, Alternative 3, which was thinned 

but not burned, has developed into a multi-canopy large tree structure.

15%

17%

2% 5%

25%

36%

66%

Proportion of Mixed Conifer Biophysical Environment

Structure Stage

Stand Initiation (15%)

Stem Exclusion (17%)

Understory Reinitiation and Multi-stratum

without large trees (66%)

Multi-stratum with large Trees (2%)

Density of Understory Reinitiation and

Multi-stratum without large trees

Low Density (5%)

Moderate Density (25%)

High Density (36%)

Densities of Understory 

Reinitiation and Multistratum without large trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

122  Ogden Final EIS

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Proposed harvest activities will change the existing proportion of 

structural stages within the HRV analysis area (Table 23). The largest change will occur within the 

ponderosa pine biophysical environment. Multi-stratum without large tree will be reduced by 10 

percent and the understory reinitiation structural stage will increase by 11 percent. Removal of 

lodgepole pine seed trees will create more stand initiation structural stage but the increase will not be 

enough to change the proportion of this structural stage (Table 23).

Outside of plantations, Alternative 3 thinning treatments will reduce lodgepole pine stocking to less than 

20 percent of the total stand basal area, approximating condition present at the time of the 1930’s forest 

resource survey. Acres thinned with Alternative 3 would remain at low risk to bark beetle outbreak for 

the next 30 to 70 years. Future reduction of stand density may be necessary in some areas to reduce 

potential for bark beetles to slow development of large tree structure.

Ponderosa Pine Biophysical Environment

Within the ponderosa pine biophysical environment, 88 percent would be classified as understory 

reinitiation or multi-stratum without large trees (Table 23 and Figure 35) by the year 2020. This 

combined proportion would be one percent higher than Alternative 2. In addition to a slightly higher 

proportion in these structures, Alternative 3 thinning would increase the proportion of moderately 

stocked areas to 52 percent (Figure 35) as compared to 50 percent with Alternative 2 (Figure 33). This 

slightly higher proportion reflects that while Alternative 3 would thin fewer acres than Alternative 2, a 

higher proportion of the areas proposed for thinning with Alternative 3 are densely stocked. Moderately 

stocked areas would have the best potential to develop into single or multi-stratum large tree structure 

by the year 2080. Of the 52 percent moderately stocked areas, 15 percent overlay lodgepole pine plant 

associations and 37 percent overlay ponderosa pine plant associations. Development of single or multistratum structure would be dependent on future disturbances that influence understory development, 

such as low intensity fire.

As described for Alternative 2, if areas overlaying lodgepole pine plant associations develop into multistratum structures, there is potential by the year 2080 for 15 percent of the ponderosa pine biophysical 

environment to be classified as multi-stratum large tree structure. This proportion would be within the 

middle of the historic range of variability (5 – 30%). If areas overlaying ponderosa pine plant 

associations develop into a single-stratum structure, there is potential by the year 2080 for 37 percent of 

the ponderosa pine environment to be classified as single-stratum large tree structure. This proportion 

would also be within the middle of the historic range of variability (20 – 60%). Realizing these 

potentials will be subject in part to future bark beetle activity.

Figure 35. Alternative 3 ponderosa pine 2020 stand structures and densities summarized.

6%

6%

4%

52%

32%

88%

Proportion of Ponderosa Pine Biophysical Environment

Structure Stage

Stand Initiation (6%)

Stem Exclusion (6%)

Understory Reinitiation and Multi-stratum without

large trees (88%)

Density of Understory Reinitiation and

Multi-stratum without large trees

Low Density (4%)

Moderate Density (52%)

High Density (32%)

Densities of Understory 

Reinitiation and Multi-stratum

without large trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  123

Mixed conifer biophysical environment

Within the mixed conifer biophysical environment, there would be no difference between Alternatives 2 

and 3 in the amount of understory reinitiation and multi-stratum without large tree stand structures that 

would be present in the year 2020 or in the proportion with moderate density (Table 23). With 

Alternative 3, 66 percent would be classified as either understory reinitiation or multi-stratum without 

large trees (Table 23 and Figure 36) by the year 2020. Of the 66 percent in these two combined 

structure stages, approximately 25 percent would be classified as having moderate stand density (Figure 

36). As described for Alternative 2, assuming these areas of moderate density develop into multistratum with large tree structure, by 2080 these areas could increase multi-stratum with large tree 

structure from the existing 2 percent to 27 percent. This proportion would be at the upper end of the 

historic range of variability (5 – 27%).

Figure 36. Alternative 3 mixed conifer 2020 stand structures and densities summarized.

Model Projections

Projected development of large trees and corresponding stand density through the year 2080 are 

displayed in Figure 37, Figure 38, and Figure 39. Projections indicate some units will remain at low 

risk to bark beetle through the year 2080 while others will become at risk as early as the year 2030.

Model projections for Alternatives 2 and 3 vary the most within those units in the ponderosa pine 

biophysical environment overlaying lodgepole pine plant associations. Projections for these units are 

displayed in Figure 37 (Units 10 and 254) and Figure 38 (Units 209 and 251). Of these four units, two 

are projected to be at or above Hopkins reference condition for large tree structure by the year 2080 

(Units 10 and 254). This is in contrast to Alternative 2, where only Unit 254 would exceed Hopkins 

reference condition. Large trees are projected to be less common in the other two units (Units 209 and 

251), approximating Munger’s historic reference condition. These projections are sensitive to the 

assumptions used for modeling the burn treatment following thinning and subsequent maintenance 

burns. Average number of large trees could be higher or lower than those shown depending on burn 

assumptions. Potential range of large trees in 2080 is described in Figure 20 (Unit 209) and Figure 22

(Unit 251).

Cumulative Effects – Alternatives 1, 2 and 3

None of the actions contributing to cumulative effects would combine with the Ogden treatments to 

change the proportion of structural stages present in the year 2020 within the biophysical environments 

analyzed. Ongoing and reasonably foreseeable geothermal exploration could create small openings, 

generally less than 1 acre in size. Small openings would be widely dispersed. These opening would not 

be large enough to change structural stage classification of the surrounding stands.

14%

17%

2% 5%

25%

36%

66%

Proportion of Mixed Conifer Biophysical Environment

Structure Stage

Stand Initiation (14%)

Stem Exclusion (17%)

Understory Reinitiation and Multi-stratum

without large trees (66%)

Multi-stratum with large Trees (2%)

Density of Understory Reinitiation and

Multi-stratum without large trees

Low Density (5%)

Moderate Density (25%)

Densities of Understory 

Reinitiation and Multistratum without large trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

124  Ogden Final EIS

Forest Plan Consistency – Alternatives 2 and 3

Ponderosa pine and Mixed Conifer Biophysical Environments

Within the Ogden HRV analysis area, both of the late and old structural (LOS) stages fall below the 

HRV within the ponderosa pine and mixed conifer biophysical environments. Scenario A of the 

Eastside Screens interim wildlife standard applies in these biophysical environments. Under this 

scenario, there is to be no net loss of late and old structure. No timber sale harvest activities are allowed 

within LOS stages below HRV. Outside of LOS, timber harvest is allowed, with the intent of 

maintaining and/or enhancing LOS components as much as possible. This intent would be met by 

retaining live trees greater than or equal to 21 inches dbh, moving stand structure toward LOS, and 

maintaining open, park-like conditions.

No net loss of late and old structure (LOS). Within the ponderosa pine and mixed conifer PAGs there 

will be no harvest within LOS, there would therefore be no reduction in the amount of multi-stratum or 

single-stratum large tree structure (Table 23).

No timber sale harvest activities within LOS stages below HRV. Alternatives 2 and 3 do not 

propose timber harvest within any areas classified as large tree structure. Units originally proposed for 

harvest that were determined to be multi-stratum large tree structure have since been dropped from the 

project. 

Maintain all remnant late and old seral and/or live trees greater than or equal to 21 inches dbh. 

Proposed harvest treatments in Alternatives 2 and 3 would retain all live trees greater than or equal to 21 

inches dbh.

Manipulate vegetative structure to move it towards LOS. Proposed harvest in Alternatives 2 and 3 

will move stands towards large tree structure. With both alternatives, thinning would favor the retention 

of the best, most dominant trees. These dominant and codominant trees, generally the larger trees in the 

unit, will most quickly achieve diameters of at least 21 inches dbh. Reduced stand density will maintain 

or accelerate diameter growth on these trees. Additionally, dominant and codominant trees will be at 

reduced risk of being killed by bark beetles before larger diameters are achieved. Accelerated diameter 

growth and reduced beetle risk will enhance the potential for large trees to become more common in the 

future.

Maintain open, park-like stand conditions where this occurred historically. Alternatives 2 and 3 

will manipulate vegetation in a manner to encourage the development and maintenance of large 

diameter, open canopy structure. Proposed harvest will create more open stand conditions. Both 

alternatives propose harvest in primarily single story immature ponderosa stands. Treatments will make 

these stands more open and encourage development of large trees. Continued scarcity of understory 

trees will contribute to park-like stand conditions. Both alternatives propose harvest in multistory 

stands with a mix of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine. Some stands additionally include a component 

of white fir. Harvest treatments would create more open stand conditions while maintaining varying 

amounts of understory trees. Maintaining open conditions will be dependent on future occurrence of 

low intensity burning.

Lodgepole Pine Biophysical Environment

Within the Ogden HRV analysis area, both of the lodgepole pine late and old structural (LOS) stages are 

within the HRV. Scenario B of the Eastside Screens interim wildlife standard applies in the lodgepole 

pine biophysical environment. Under this scenario, timber harvest can occur within the late and old 

structural stages as long as LOS conditions do not fall below HRV. Under this scenario, the intent of 

the wildlife screen direction is to maintain options by impacting large and/or contiguous stands of LOS 

as little as possible, while meeting other multiple use objectives.

Retain LOS conditions within HRV. Alternative 2 and 3 treatments within the lodgepole pine PAG 

will not reduce the amount of LOS below HRV.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  125

Retain large and/or contiguous LOS as much as possible. Alternatives 2 and 3 would primarily 

harvest areas not classified as lodgepole pine LOS. The only lodgepole pine LOS that would be 

harvested with either alternative is found in Unit 174. This unit is 121 acres in size and is located within 

a draw. The unit has both lodgepole and ponderosa pine. In this unit the lodgepole pine LOS, 

approximately 8 acres in size, is a small, isolated patch. The area surrounding the patch of LOS is on 

more elevated ground and ponderosa pine is more prevalent. Both alternatives propose to favor 

ponderosa pine for retention when thinning in the unit. The alternatives vary in the amount of lodgepole 

pine that would be retained. Where ponderosa pine is sparse, Alternative 2 would only leave lodgepole 

pine as needed to meet the minimum stocking level. Alternative 3, in contrast, would leave more 

lodgepole pine where ponderosa pine is sparse, retaining lodgepole pine as needed to maintain stocking 

at or above the lower management zone. With both alternatives, harvest would change stand structure 

to understory reinitiation. The loss of this small patch of lodgepole pine LOS is not enough to change 

the existing proportion of LOS within the Ogden HRV analysis area (Table 23).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

126  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 37: Projected large trees/high density in ponderosa/lodgepole pine stands with prior harvest 

(Unit 10, 254).

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

2010 2020 2040 2060 2080 2010 2020 2040 2060 2080

Alternative 1 and 3 Alternative 2

Trees per Acre

Live Trees per Acre greater than or equal to 20 Inches DBH

Unit 10 (Exam 010) by Alternative and Year

PP Live LP Live

Munger 

Reference 

Condition

Youngblood

Reference 

Condition

High density 

and beetle 

risk present

Hopkins 

Reference

Condition

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

2010 2020 2040 2060 2080 2010 2020 2040 2060 2080 2010 2020 2040 2060 2080

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Trees per Acre

Live Trees per Acre greater than or equal to 20 Inches DBH

Unit 254 (Exam 254) by Alternative and Year

PP Live LP Live

Munger 

Reference 

Condition

Youngblood

Reference 

Condition

High density 

and beetle 

risk present

Hopkins 

Reference 

Condition
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  127

Figure 38: Projected large trees/high density in ponderosa/lodgepole pine stands with no prior harvest 

(Unit 209, 251).

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

2010 2020 2040 2060 2080 2010 2020 2040 2060 2080 2010 2020 2040 2060 2080

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Trees per Acre

Live Trees per Acre greater than or equal to 20 Inches DBH

Unit 209 (Exam 102) by Alternative and Year

PP Live LP Live

Munger 

Reference 

Condition

Youngblood

Reference 

Condition

High density 

and beetle 

risk present

Hopkins

Reference 

Condition

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

2010 2020 2040 2060 2080 2010 2020 2040 2060 2080 2010 2020 2040 2060 2080

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Trees per Acre

Live Trees per Acre greater than or equal to 20 Inches DBH

Unit 251 (Exam 103) by Alternative and Year

PP Live LP Live

Munger 

Reference 

Condition

Youngblood

Reference 

Condition

High density 

and beetle 

risk present

Hopkins 

Reference 

Condition
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

128  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 39: Projected large trees/high density in ponderosa pine stands with prior harvest (Units 36 and 

949).

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

2010 2020 2040 2060 2080 2010 2020 2040 2060 2080

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 and 3

Trees per Acre

Live Trees per Acre greater than or equal to 20 Inches DBH

Unit 36 (Exam 694) by Alternative and Year

PP Live LP Live

Munger 

Reference 

Condition

Youngblood

Reference 

Condition

High density 

and beetle 

risk present

Hopkins 

Reference 

Condition

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

2010 2020 2040 2060 2080 2010 2020 2040 2060 2080

Alternative 1 and 2 Alternative 3

Trees per Acre

Live Trees per Acre greater than or equal to 20 Inches DBH

Unit 949 (Exam 698) by Alternative and Year

PP Live LP Live WF Live

Youngblood 

Reference 

Condition

Munger 

Reference 

Condition

High density

and beetle 

risk present

Hopkins 

Reference 

Condition
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  129

3.3.10 Canopy Structure

Measures

Measures of canopy structure focus on the following key components of canopy structure identified by 

Peterson et al. (2005) as being related to crown-fire hazard: canopy base height and canopy bulk 

density.

Existing Condition

Within the project area, highest crown base heights and lowest crown bulk densities are found in areas 

that have been previously thinned. Within these thinned stands, growth of shrubs and regenerating 

lodgepole pine are reducing crown base heights. Lowest crown base heights and highest crown bulk 

densities are found in areas that have had no treatments since they were historically logged.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: In areas with low stand stocking, lodgepole pine and to a lesser extent 

ponderosa pine and white fir will continue to regenerate. Establishing regeneration will contribute to 

the increase of ladder fuels and the reduction in crown base height. Existing shrub understories may 

provide favorable microsites for the recruitment of ponderosa pine seedlings. Keyes and Maguire 

(2005) reviewed the results of regeneration field studies located in central Oregon which analyzed the 

relationship of shrubs to ponderosa pine regeneration. Summarizing the study findings, Keyes and 

Maguire (2005) indicate understory shrubs help in securing natural regeneration of ponderosa pine. 

They state “dense shrub understories are likely to continue to contributing to the development of ladder 

fuels by their positive effect on seedling recruitment.”

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Thinning as proposed would increase the height to live crown and 

decrease crown bulk density. Least gain in height to live crown would be in those areas where trees in 

the lower canopy need to be retained to meet minimum stocking requirements (Alternative 2) or stay 

above the lower management zone (Alternative 3). This generally would be within stands with a mix of 

ponderosa and lodgepole pine.

Thinning, underburning and mowing will create conditions favorable for the re-establishment of 

understory vegetation, specifically shrubs and tree seedlings. Reduced canopy cover together with 

seedbeds created by prescribed burning could create conditions favorable for germination of ponderosa 

pine and lodgepole pine seeds. Low precipitation common for the area together with low shrub cover 

would limit survival of germinants. Reduced tree canopy cover would favor the re-establishment of 

bitterbrush and greenleaf manzanita. Where stands have been thinned and mowed, shrubs will likely 

grow to pre-treatment levels (approximately 30 percent canopy cover) within 10 to 13 years. Growth of 

shrubs will likely be slower where thinning is followed by burning, with shrubs canopy cover growing 

to approximately 10 to 15 percent within 10 to 13 years of burning. Recruitment of ponderosa and 

lodgepole pine seedlings could occur more slowly than that of the shrubs.

Shrub response to thinning and underburning has been measured in a long-term study evaluating the 

effects of prescribed fire and thinning in central Oregon ponderosa pine forests. This study includes 

plots in site and stand conditions similar to those found in the Ogden project. In reporting fifteen year 

results from the study, Busse and Riegel (2005) indicate shrub cover increased more than 200 percent 

due to thinning. Antelope bitterbrush, in particular, responded to thinning. Busse and Riegel (2005) 

report average cover of bitterbrush after 13 years was 7 percent on unthinned plots compared to 25 

percent on thinned plots. Maximum bitterbrush cover on thinned plots reached 50 percent. Where 

thinning was followed with fire, bitterbrush cover was severely reduced. Post-fire seed germination led 

to partial recovery of the bitterbrush. By 10 years following the burn, bitterbrush cover on burned plots 

averaged 13 percent compared to 25 percent on the unburned plots.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

130  Ogden Final EIS

Keyes and Maguire (2005) describe some of the factors capable of limiting seedling recruitment in 

ponderosa pine forests. Of the factors described, Keyes and Maguire indicate moisture stress represents 

the most significant of practicably controllable factors. Citing Headman (1992), Keyes and Maguire 

(2005) state “the primary obstacle to regeneration of this species throughout its natural range is 

drought... Annual precipitation in the western and southwestern United States is generally adequate for 

tree growth but erratic distribution during the year makes seedling establishment difficult.” As shrubs 

redevelop in the understory, recruitment of ponderosa pine regeneration may increase (Keyes and 

Maguire 2005).

3.3.11 Insects and Diseases

Bark Beetles

Introduction

Bark beetles can act as agents of change, affecting ecosystems directly and indirectly. These changes 

are summarized by Samman and Logan (2000).

Direct effects include individual tree death, changes in forest stand densities, changes in coarse 

woody debris, changes in forest floor litter, and changes in the amount of light reaching the forest 

floor. Indirect effects include timing, scale, and intensity of fire, changes in water quality and 

quantity, changes in wildlife use of the forest, changes in species composition, age, and size of 

remaining trees, and changes in commodity and/or amenity values.

Effects of bark beetles within the Ogden Project would be similar to those described by Sammon and 

Logan (2000) for ponderosa pine forest ecosystems in the Rocky Mountain area.

Endemic beetle populations have minimal effects on ponderosa pine stands, killing individual and 

occasionally small groups of trees. If populations build to outbreak levels, 40 to 60 percent of the 

stand can be killed, depending on the age and size classes within the stand. Historically, endemic 

populations of low-level outbreaks have provided the fuel necessary for the periodic low-intensity 

fires that help perpetuate uneven-aged ponderosa pine stands. However with the exclusion of fire, 

stand densities increase and age-class diversity decreases, making these stands more susceptible to 

beetle population outbreaks. When a large-scale outbreak does occur, fuel loads will increase, 

leading to large-scale crown fires and replacement of tree cover with grasses and shrubs.

Sammon and Logan (2000) state “although bark beetle outbreaks are important in the ecological 

development of a forest landscape, resulting levels of tree mortality may exceed desirable levels, 

affecting multiple resource objectives including timber, wildlife, and recreation.”

Rating systems for bark beetles are intended to serve as general guides that aid in the identification of 

susceptible stands (Fettig et al. 2007). For forest stands, hazard relates to factors which affect the 

likelihood of bark beetle occurrence such as tree species composition, age-size structure, stand density 

and precipitation (Fettig et al. 2007). Risk is a function of insect presence, abundance and distribution 

as it relates to stand hazard or potential for tree mortality (Fettig et al. 2007).

Where mixed conifer plant associations are found within the Ogden project area, mean annual 

precipitation has ranged from 26 to 32 inches per year (for the years 1971 to 2000). At these 

precipitation levels, there may not be adequate moisture to maintain a white fir component that is 

resilient to beetles. A levels-of-growing stock study in central Oregon by Cochran (1998) raised doubts 

about growing white fir stands on sites with mean annual precipitation below 32 inches, even if stand 

densities are kept very low. Results of the study were influenced by a general drought that prevailed 

over the study areas from the late 1970s to mid-1990s. Cochran (1998) referenced a system for rating 

risk of mortality from the fir engraver beetle based on annual precipitation. According to this risk rating 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  131

system, areas with mean annual precipitation amounts of 40 inches or more would have a low risk of 

mortality resulting from the fir engraver beetle.

Existing Condition

Mountain pine beetles (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) are currently causing tree mortality of both 

ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine within the Ogden project area. The 2010 Aerial Survey (USDA 

Forest Service 2010) mapped scattered patches of beetle induced mortality within and immediately 

adjacent to the Ogden project area. Mapped patches of mortality range from approximately 2 to 300 

acres, with the median patch size being 2 acres. Mortality levels range from less than 1 tree per acre to 

5 trees per acre, with a median value of 1 tree per acre. Highest mortality levels are associated with 

lodgepole pine.

Lodgepole pine and ponderosa pine occur together within many of the stands within the Ogden project 

area. Larger diameter lodgepole pine trees are of a size and age that make them attractive to the 

mountain pine beetle (Eglitis 2010). On the Deschutes National Forest, it has been found repeatedly 

when larger lodgepole pine trees occur within a stand, mountain pine beetle seem to find them and kill 

them, sometimes infesting adjacent ponderosa pine at the same time (Eglitis 2010).

Environmental Consequences

Alternatives 1, 2, and 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: 

Mountain pine beetle would continue to attack and kill larger diameter trees (greater than 8 inches dbh). 

Western pine beetle (Dendroctunus brevicomis LeConte) and red turpentine beetle (Dendroctunus 

valens LeConte) could also kill large diameter pines that are slow growing, lightning struck, or heavily 

infected with mistletoe. Potential for beetle 

activity would be highest in those stands, or 

portions of stands, where densities are above the 

upper management zone. Thinning associated 

with Alternatives 2 and 3 would reduce the 

proportion of the HRV analysis area stocked 

above the upper management zone, with the 

greatest reduction associated with Alternative 3. 

Scattered, incidental mortality from beetles 

would also occur in stands stocked below the 

UMZ, primarily due to stress induced by 

lightning strikes or high levels of mistletoe 

infection. Mortality from beetles would most 

likely occur in periods of both normal and 

below normal precipitation, with accelerated 

tree mortality rates possible during periods of 

low precipitation.

In the absence of stand disturbing events (i.e. 

thinning, fire, bark beetle attack), projections indicate stand density, as measured by basal area and 

stand density index, will increase through time as trees grow in diameter. With time, beetle risk will 

increase within stands stocked between the upper and lower management zone. Moderately stocked 

stands close to the upper management zone could be at risk to bark beetle attack within at little as 10 

years. Moderately stocked stands closer to the lower management could remain at low risk to bark 

beetle attack for at least the next 15 to 20 years. Regardless of density, lodgepole pine greater than 9 

inches dbh can be susceptible to bark beetles. If attacked, adjacent ponderosa pine could be at increased 

risk of being killed by bark beetles.

The high density classification used in the HRV 

analysis (Section 3.3.9) approximates stands 

stocked above the upper management zone (UMZ).

By 2020, within the HRV analysis area the 

proportion of stands classified as understory 

reinitiation or multi-stratum without large trees and 

classified as high density would be approximately:

Ponderosa pine high density stands (above UMZ)

Alternative 1: 52%

Alternative 2: 38%

Alternative 3: 36%

Mixed conifer high density stands (above UMZ)

Alternative 1: 66%

Alternatives 2 and 3: 54%
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

132  Ogden Final EIS

In describing bark beetle-tree interactions 

and forest health, Fettig et al. (2007) 

indicate as growing space diminishes, a 

tree’s photosynthates are allocated to 

different uses in an order of priorities. They 

indicate that while the hierarchy is not 

absolute, photosynthates are allocated lastly 

to insect and disease resistance mechanisms. 

They summarize that production of insect 

resistance mechanisms may be 

compromised when growing space becomes 

limited by one or more factors.

Effects Common to Alternative 2 

(Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Thinning Treatment

Direct and Indirect Effects: Reductions in 

stand densities associated with thinning treatments would change one of the factors that contribute to the 

likelihood of bark beetle occurrence. Vigor of trees would be maintained or improved, increasing the 

ability of trees to survive beetle attack. Burning could increase beetle attacks, but if scorch is 

maintained below 50 percent of the live crown, mortality as a result of the attacks would be expected to 

be low.

Thinning would maintain or improve the vigor of residual trees, making more of a tree’s photosynthates 

available for production of insect resistance mechanisms (Fettig et al. 2007). Thinning would also 

change the physical environment within the stands, potentially resulting in increased temperatures and 

wind speeds. Increased temperatures and wind speeds may accelerate the development of certain bark 

beetle species and force them to overwinter in stages that are more susceptible to freezing (Fettig et al.

2007). Lower stand densities could result in unstable layers of air and multi-directional movement of 

air. As described by Fettig et al. (2007), this type of air movement dilutes pheromone concentrations 

and could result in reductions in beetle aggregation. Fettig et al. (2007) indicate a significant number of 

pioneer beetles are required to overcome host defenses and a lack of beetle recruitment often results in 

unsuccessful attacks.

Reduced insect activity in thinned stands has been observed in a long-term study evaluating the effects 

of prescribed fire and thinning in central Oregon ponderosa pine forests. This study includes plots in 

site and stand conditions similar to those found in the Ogden project. In reporting fifteen year results 

from the study, Busse et al. (2006) indicate tree mortality was absent in thinned plots, while insectcaused mortality was noted during the second-half of the study in unthinned stands (4 percent of 

unthinned trees).

Fettig et al. (2007) reviewed tree and stand factors associated with bark beetle infestations and analyzed 

the effectiveness of vegetation management practices for mitigating the negative impacts of bark beetles 

on forest ecosystems. Their review drew from 498 scientific publications. Among the conclusions 

reported by Fettig et al. (2007) was the following regarding the effect of thinning on bark beetle 

susceptibility:

“Factors involving tree density are consistently associated with the occurrence and severity of bark 

beetle infestations. ...thinning has long been advocated as a preventative measure to reduce the 

amount of bark beetle-caused tree mortality and its effectiveness for this purpose is supported by the 

scientific literature. Some studies of the efficacy of thinning have failed to detect significant 

differences among treatments, and others are limited to anecdotal evidence. However, to date there 

The moderate density classification used in the 

HRV analysis (Section 3.3.9) approximates stands 

stocked between the upper and lower management 

zones.

By 2020, within the HRV analysis area proportion 

of stands classified as understory reinitiation or 

multi-stratum without large trees and classified as 

moderate density would be:

Ponderosa pine moderate density stands

Alternative 1: 44%

Alternative 2: 57%

Alternative 3: 59%

Mixed conifer moderate density stands

Alternative 1: 26%

Alternatives 2 and 3: 38%

Histograms showing projected densities related to 

management zones can be found in Appendix D.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  133

are no reports of significant increases in the amount of Dendroctonus spp. – caused tree mortality in 

response to thinning treatments. ...”

Black (2005) reports findings seemingly contrary to Fettig et al. (2007) in a synthesis of reviewed 

research (sometimes referred to as the Xerces Report). Black (2005) reports there is mixed evidence of 

thinning being effective as a long-term solution to controlling bark beetles. Forest Service 

entomologists (USDA Forest Service 2006b) after reviewing the Black report conclude the report 

includes many examples of erroneous statements that are not even supported by the report’s cited 

literature and the report may be viewed as refuting hundreds of published papers on effectively 

managing forest insects and diseases, which it does not.

Underburn Treatment

Use of prescribed fire has the potential to increase beetle attacks within the burn area. Fire can kill 

foliage and buds in the crown, heat the trunk to such an extent to where part or all of the cambium is 

killed, and heat and kill the roots (Agee 1993). Trees damaged by fire, would be most susceptible to 

insect attack. As a general rule, if ponderosa pine trees retain at least 50 percent of the live crown that 

was present prior to the burn, mortality resulting from beetle attacks should be minimal (A. Eglitis, 

Zone Entomologist, 1999, personal communication). If less than this live crown is retained, particularly 

if less than 30 percent is retained, the survival of the tree is dependent on a number of factors, one of 

which is climatic conditions. (A. Eglitis, Zone Entomologist, 1999, personal communication)

The majority of trees within burn units would incur some level of crown and bole scorch. Following the 

burns, attacks by a variety of bark beetles could increase. Turpentine beetle attacks would not be 

expected to kill the trees but would make trees more susceptible to other insects. Increase in attacks by 

the pine engraver beetle (Ips pini), the western pine beetle, and the mountain pine beetle could occur. 

The pine engraver beetle can be the most significant mortality agent following an underburn. Beetle 

damage could continue up to 1 to 2 years. Increase in beetle activity would not be expected to expand 

into unburned stands. Within the burns, undamaged trees would generally not be susceptible to insect 

damage (A. Eglitis, Zone Entomologist, 1999, personal communication). If crown scorch on dominant 

and co-dominant trees is generally less than 50 percent, increased beetle activity would be expected to 

cause minimal mortality.

Mitigation measures to minimize crown scorch is considered moderately effective in minimizing fire 

damage to dominant and codominant trees. Even with this mitigation, variable fuels and changing 

weather conditions, can result in high intensity burning occurring within portions of a stand. This can 

result in crown scorch in excess of 50 percent and in some cases complete killing of foliage. Areas 

where scorch exceeds stated limits would be monitored for mortality resulting directly from the fire or 

indirectly from bark beetle attack.

Cumulative Effects

Past thinning has moved some stands to below the UMZ. The current status of those stands is reflected 

in the Existing Condition description. None of the reasonably foreseeable projects or ongoing actions 

would combine with the actions of the Ogden project to cumulatively affect bark beetle risk. 

Dwarf Mistletoe

Alternatives 2 and 3 propose the removal of lodgepole pine seed trees. Alternative 2 proposes this 

treatment on 968 acres. Alternative 3 proposes 954 acres of treatment. In the Ogden project, this 

treatment is planned in areas previously regenerated using the seed tree method. Seed tree removal is 

planned where an understory of lodgepole pine seedlings and saplings has established and the lodgepole 

pine overstory is no longer needed to provide seed. Typically a portion of the overstory is infected with 

mistletoe. Both alternatives would retain two to three lodgepole pine overstory trees per acre within the 

seed tree removal units to provide future snag habitat for species that favor single trees.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

134  Ogden Final EIS

Introduction

Dwarf mistletoe is a parasitic plant that affects the health, vigor, and growth of infected trees. It spreads 

fastest from infected overstory trees to understory trees. Understory trees greater than three feet in 

height (or more than 10 years old) and generally within 30 feet of an infected overstory tree are at the 

greatest risk of infection. The extent to which mistletoe affects the host tree depends largely upon the 

age when the tree is initially infected. Trees that are older and larger when first infected initially

experience little or no obvious effects whereas younger and smaller trees can experience significant 

reduction in height and diameter growth. Seedlings and saplings are severely damaged by infection 

with even a few mistletoe plants (Geils et al. 2002). Depending on management objectives and 

priorities, the effects of dwarf mistletoe are interpreted as positive, negative, or usually of mixed 

consequence (Geils et al. 2002).

Effects dwarf mistletoes have on their hosts include: 1) reduced height and diameter growth, 2) 

increased mortality, 3) reduced seed production and reduced seed viability, 4) reduced wood strength 

and increased knot size, 5) increased susceptibility to attack by insects, particularly bark beetles, and 6) 

increased flammability (Hawksworth 1978).

Effects dwarf mistletoes can have on stands are varied. Heavy mistletoe infection in a stand can 

adversely impact some wildlife species through a decrease in cover, tree regeneration and growth, and 

cone/seed output (Bull et al. 1997). Hawksworth and Wiens (1996) describe stand effects as follows: 

“By inducing formation of witches’ brooms and causing topkill and mortality of host trees, dwarf 

mistletoes affect the species composition, vertical crown structure, and spacing of trees within infected 

stands. These direct effects, in turn, have numerous consequences on the physical structure and 

functioning of the ecosystem. For example, the brooms provide forage, nesting, and cover for birds and 

mammals, but also increase the likelihood of ground fires becoming crown fires. Canopy gaps caused

by mistletoe–induced mortality increase within-stand diversity but also reduce the interior-forest area.” 

Koonce and Roth (1980) describe effects mistletoe has on the flammability of ponderosa pine stands as 

follows. “Mistletoe may influence the frequency of fire by making stands more flammable. Mistletoe 

infected branches are often laden with resinous spindles and brooms which form fuel ladders leading to 

crowning fires. Fallen brooms persist in slash, increasing the amount of large, resinous, partially rotten, 

highly flammable material. In decadent stands, dwarf mistletoe increases the amount of dry, dead aerial 

fuel.”

Within single-story stand structures, mistletoe has been found to intensify at a rate of approximately one 

dwarf mistletoe rating class every 14 to 18 years (Parmeter 1978 and Hawksworth and Johnson 1989). 

At this rate it would take approximately 40 to 55 years for dwarf mistletoe infection levels to reach a 

mistletoe rating of three (DMR 3). As a rule, the threshold level for diameter growth reduction seems to 

be class 3, or when about one-half of the crown becomes infected (Hawksworth and Johnson 1989).

In multi-story conditions, the upper crowns of understory trees rarely remain free of increasing mistletoe 

populations, and reduction in tree growth with further increase in mistletoe infection is almost certain 

(Parmeter 1978). Rate of mistletoe intensification in an understory growing beneath an infected 

overstory has not been quantified in studies on mistletoe. It would be expected, however, within 30 to 

60 feet of infected overstory, intensification of mistletoe in understory trees would be faster than rates 

observed in single-story stands.

Hawksworth and Wiens (1996) indicate removing infected overstory trees before regeneration is 1 

meter tall (approximately 3 feet tall) or 10 years old is a strategy that reduces the likelihood of dwarf 

mistletoe spreading to the understory. Giels et al. (2002) also present this as a strategy for preventing 

spread of mistletoe into cut blocks. A prevention method they also list is to avoid leaving single trees or 

small clumps of residual infected trees throughout the harvest area. Scattered overstory trees are a 

significant inoculum source for young, understory regeneration.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  135

Scale of Analysis

The scale of analysis is the area proposed for treatment and the area immediately adjacent (within 30 

feet). Beyond this area, the effects of treatments on mistletoe spread are not considered to be 

qualitatively meaningful.

Measure

Level of dwarf mistletoe infection is expressed qualitatively in terms of the average dwarf mistletoe 

rating of infected trees.

Dwarf mistletoe spread and intensification will be expressed in qualitative terms. Spread is the increase 

in the number of trees infected with dwarf mistletoe. Intensification is the increase in the number of 

mistletoe plants on infected trees.

Existing Condition

According to the FEIS for the Deschutes LRMP (USDA Forest Service 1990), dwarf mistletoe is widely 

distributed on the Deschutes National Forest. It is the group of pathogens most impacting the Forest 

(USDA Forest Service 1990). Based on the 1985 Vegetative Resource Survey, dwarf mistletoe was 

present on an estimated 34 percent of the inventoried acres of ponderosa pine type, 73 percent of the 

mixed conifer type, and 66 percent of the lodgepole pine type (USDA Forest Service 1990).

Lodgepole pine dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium americanum) and ponderosa pine dwarf mistletoe

(Arceuthobium campylopodum) is present within some of the areas proposed for treatment. Lodgepole 

pine dwarf mistletoe is most commonly present.

Within multi-story stands with mistletoe infection, the crowns of shorter trees are being exposed to 

mistletoe seeds from taller trees. Without treatment or a high intensity wildfire, this cycle of infection 

will likely continue indefinitely, causing increased reductions in stand growth and increased mortality 

rates. There is reduced potential for trees in the understory to: a) utilize site growth potential and b) 

develop into relatively large green trees, one of the ecologically valuable components of late 

successional forests.

Ponderosa pine dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium campylopodum) is present within some of the areas 

proposed for thinning. Where mistletoe is present, stand dwarf mistletoe ratings (DMR) are generally 

less than 2. As a reference, thinning to eliminate dwarf mistletoe is recommended only where stand 

DMR is 3 or less (Hawksworth and Wiens 1996).

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative would have no direct or indirect effects on the current rate 

of dwarf mistletoe spread and intensification.

Within single-story stands with mistletoe infection, dwarf mistletoe would continue to spread vertically 

in the crown of the tree. Severity of dwarf mistletoe infection would increase over time. Lateral spread 

of trees would occur in denser stands.

Within multi-story stands with mistletoe infection, the crowns of shorter trees would continually be 

exposed to mistletoe seeds from taller trees. The upper crowns of understory trees would rarely remain 

free of increasing mistletoe populations, and reduction in tree growth with further increase in mistletoe 

infection would almost be certain (Parmeter 1978). Without treatment or a high intensity wildfire, this 

cycle of infection would continue indefinitely, causing increased reductions in stand growth and 

increased mortality rates. Mortality patterns would vary from isolated trees to clumps of trees.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

136  Ogden Final EIS

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Thinning would remove trees with heavier dwarf mistletoe ratings, but 

overall stand dwarf mistletoe rating would remain relatively unchanged. Simplified canopy structure 

and reduced stand density associated with thinning would reduce the probability of mistletoe seed 

dispersal to susceptible understory hosts and lateral spread among host trees (Hessburg et al. 1994).

Mowing and burning treatments would have little effect on stand dwarf mistletoe rating. According to 

Koonce and Roth (1980), scorch heights of 30 to 60 percent of the crown length are required to 

significantly reduce dwarf mistletoe infestations. They also state low intensity fires, appropriate for 

prescribed understory burning, are generally insufficient to sanitize the dominant trees, including oldgrowth, whose crowns are above the mean scorch height.

Treatments to remove lodgepole pine seedtrees would reduce, but not eliminate, the spread of mistletoe 

to understory trees within the interior of the units. A portion of the live trees retained to provide future 

snag habitat would likely be infected with dwarf mistletoe. Mistletoe would continue to spread and 

intensify in understory trees within 30 to 60 feet of the few remaining infected overstory trees. Birds 

and mammals would also continue to spread minor amounts of mistletoe seed into the interior the 

treatment units. Mistletoe spread to understory trees would also occur along the edge of stands where 

adjacent stands are infected with mistletoe. Stands larger than 20 acres would have the least proportion 

of their area influenced by the edge (Hawksworth and Johnson 1989). Alternative 2, with its proposed 

regeneration treatments, would create larger, more contiguous blocks of young stands. These larger, 

contiguous blocks would have the least proportion of their area influenced by the spread of mistletoe 

along the edges.

Removal of lodgepole pine seedtrees would reduce, but not eliminate, the spread of mistletoe to 

understory trees. With Alternative 2, a portion of the live trees retained to provide future snag habitat 

would likely be infected with dwarf mistletoe. Mistletoe spread to understory trees would occur along 

the edge of stands where adjacent stands are infected with mistletoe. Stands larger than 20 acres would 

have the least proportion of their area influenced by the edge (Hawksworth and Johnson 1989). Birds 

and mammals would continue to spread minor amounts of mistletoe seed into the interior of treatment 

units. Alternative 3, with its proposal to remove all seedtrees, will be most effective in reducing 

mistletoe spread. Spread will occur primarily along the edge of the stands.

Thinning of the understory following seedtree removal would reduce, but not eliminate, mistletoe that 

may currently be present in the understory. Infected understory trees less than 6 feet tall pose little 

threat of the spread of mistletoe to adjacent understory trees; infections are generally located in the 

lower half of the crown and dwarf mistletoe spread is minimal (Hawksworth and Wiens 1996).

Cumulative Effects

Past actions in lodgepole pine that affected the spread of dwarf mistletoe are reflected in the description 

of the Existing Condition. None of the reasonably foreseeable projects or ongoing actions could 

contribute to affecting the spread of dwarf mistletoe; therefore there would be no cumulative effects.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  137

3.4.1 Introduction 

The Ogden project area exhibits a wide range of fuel conditions. The project area has various fuel 

types, plant associations and structure. The western lowlands are dominated by ponderosa pine with 

lodgepole pine and a brush understory (including bitterbrush, manzanita, and ceanothus). The middle 

portion of the project area (approximate one-third) has ponderosa pine with mixed conifer, with

variability of stand structure, fuel profile and fuel loading. The higher elevation eastern 1/3rd begins to 

transition to mixed conifer stands on north slopes with a greater amount of lodgepole pine in various age 

classes, densities and surface fuel loading. Areas where the fuel profile would allow a light intensity 

underburn to meet objectives and desired future condition are considered to be in a maintenance 

condition established by past management. Other areas are in need of extensive treatment and may need 

multiple entries of fire to move to historic condition or a condition that would allow fire to burn across 

the landscape producing desirable effects.

This fire and fuels analysis addresses the effects to fuels and fire behavior as a result of the no action 

and two action alternatives. The analysis for units is bounded by the Ogden project area boundary. The 

cumulative analysis considers recent activities that have occurred within or adjacent to the project area 

(see Tables 12 and 13). The attributes used to evaluate the alternatives are: amount of condition class 2 

and 3 acres treated to return landscape to condition class 1; percentage of landscape rated as low fire 

hazard; amount of landscape rated as low wildfire risk, reduction in major travel pathways; and air 

quality/particulate production. 

Project Area Strategies for Fuel Reduction

Within the Ogden project area, the emphasis for fuel treatment is on treating large blocks while also 

leaving large blocks untreated (for habitat development, biodiversity, and spatial variability, allowing 

processes to continue without disturbance). This is because when larger areas are treated, variability 

within those treated areas can be developed on the landscape; the smaller the treatment unit, the less 

variability that can occur within that given area. 

The project area (26,521 acres) has approximately 15,275 acres or 58% proposed for various fuels 

treatments. Of these 15,275 acres 5,979 acres were analyzed for strategic placement. Consideration 

factored into the placement of treatment: 1) Maximizing the opportunity to protect values of interest 

(Ogden Group Camp, Prairie Campground, McKay Crossing Campground, 10 mile snow park, Paulina 

Creek Riparian Habitat Conservation Area RHCA, Wildlife connectivity corridors, Goshawk habitat, 

Cultural & Heritage sites and designated Old Growth ); 2) spatially and strategically arranging 

treatment areas to minimize fire spread that would produce undesired effects; 3) development of a 

treatment sequence that would produce long term benefits for maintaining resiliency to wildfire and 

begin the development of a trajectory for the purposes of enhancing and promoting growth of large trees 

as well as improving forest health; 4) enhancement of scenic values on Forest Service Roads 21 and 22 

while providing a safety corridor for access and egress of fire personnel and public. 

Consideration was also given to recent treatment in the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) (Crossings 

Project 2008 to present). Areas adjacent to the WUI within the Ogden project were placed to further 

provide a barrier to fire spread from public land to private property. Additionally, the Lava Cast project 

north of the Ogden project boundary was considered as treatments were placed across the landscape. 

Efforts were made to minimize amount of treatment applied adjacent to recently completed activities in 

the Lava Cast project to fragment the management on the landscape and minimize cumulative effects.

Evaluation and prioritization was given to areas that would achieve the goals set forth within the Ogden 

Vegetation Management Project. The priority areas are developed to maximize benefits gained from 

fuel treatments, both in terms of reducing the threat of wildfire to high use areas and improving 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

138  Ogden Final EIS

ecological integrity. Placement of fuel treatments on every acre within a landscape is not economically 

feasible nor would it be desirable given other resource management requirements. 

Wildfire hazard can be thought of as the potential fire behavior and effects predicated on existing fuel 

condition. Reduced wildfire hazard is the primary goal of forest fuel reduction treatments. In order to 

effectively achieve this goal, fuel treatments need to address both local and landscape scales with 

attention to requirements for long-term sustained management. At the stand level, prescriptions need to 

be designed to reduce the potential for high fire behavior and initiation of a crown fire. The landscape 

scale, fuel treatments need to be strategically placed to protect values of interest, fragment the landscape 

while providing for resiliency and sustainability and not to eliminate fire altogether. Fire in the 

ecosystems within the Ogden area had been omitted to best extent possible. The landscape and its 

functions are fire dependent and therefore needs a return of frequent low intensity fire. The degree of 

reduction that can be achieved requires consideration of a variety of factors and ecosystem values at risk 

from undesired fire effects. 

Long-term planning must take into account sustained management so that treatments maintain their 

effectiveness over time. In all cases, the goal is to reduce wildfire hazard, not remove fire from the 

landscape. Even though most fuel treatments occur on a stand level, it is important to consider each 

treatment in a landscape context, especially since many wildfires have the capability to overwhelm the 

size of individual fuel treatment projects and cross jurisdictional boundaries. The prioritization of fuels 

treatment is designed to not only meet the needs of short term point protection of valued assets but also 

set the landscape up for future fire events that can be managed under a broad range of strategic and 

tactical options.

The landscape within the project area should display a mosaic of strategically placed areas that are 

based on the principles of Fire Resilient Forests as shown in Table 24. 

Restoration of historical fire regimes in ponderosa pine ecosystems. The absence of fire over the 

last 100 years combined with the development of shrubs and dense thickets of regeneration in the 

understory has placed the ponderosa pine stands at high risk to stand replacing wildfire. Reintroduction 

of fire in these ponderosa pine type stands would be used as needed to achieve the desired conditions. 

Prescriptions would be developed for low intensity prescribed fire to start a return to historic conditions, 

subsequent prescribed fire entries would be conducted through time to create a fire resistant stand and 

maintain a condition that would help defend adjacent private lands and help preserve the ponderosa pine 

stand type. Multiple prescribed fire entries would be needed to return the stands to the historical fire 

regime. Subsequent burns would be needed every 8 to 15 years, depending on fuel accumulation; these 

areas should regenerate ponderosa pine slowly through time as they did historically (Agee 1993). 

Related prescribed burning should keep naturally regenerated lodgepole pine and white fir in low 

numbers through time. Not only does prescribed fire reduce wildfire severity, but when a wildfire burns 

through a site previously burned under prescription, fire suppression costs were also less compared to 

adjacent land where fire had been excluded (Moghaddas 2006). Mechanical shrub treatments may be 

used in addition to/or in lieu of burning if the shrub size and densities could cause severe scorch or 

mortality of residual stands.

Table 24: Principles of Fire Resilient Forests (Agee 2002 and Hessburg & Agee 2003) 

Principles Effects Advantage Concerns

Reduce surface fuels Reduce potential flame 

length

Control easier, less 

torching1

Surface disturbance, 

less with fire than 

other techniques

Increase height to live 

crown

Requires longer flame 

length to begin 

Less torching Opens understory, may 

allow surface wind to 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  139

Principles Effects Advantage Concerns

torching increase2

Decrease crown 

density

Makes tree-to-tree 

crown fire less 

probable

Reduces crown fire 

potential

Surface wind may 

increase and surface 

fuels may be drier2

Keep larger trees Thicker bark and taller 

crowns

Increases survivability 

of trees

Removing smaller trees 

is economically less 

profitable

1

Torching is the initiation of crown fire.

2 Where thinning is followed by sufficient treatment of surface fuels, the overall reduction in expected fire 

behavior and fire severity usually outweigh the changes in fire weather factors such as wind speed and fuel 

moisture (Weatherspoon 1996).

The principles are designed to reduce fire behavior potential, aide in the suppression of wildland fire 

(i.e. provide defensible space), and increase protection to valuable resources on forest lands. Following 

these principles will improve fire-resilience in Ponderosa pine ecosystems by (in sequence); reducing 

surface fuels, removing ladder fuels, leaving large, fire resistant trees and spacing tree crowns. These 

conditions can be achieved with a variety of methods including prescribed burning, mowing and 

thinning.

Those areas managed for reduced fire behavior potential would include a number of associated desired 

conditions. The structures of stands desired would be where crown bulk density and the continuity of 

the forest canopy could not sustain a crown fire occurrence. Trees within stands would have a canopy 

base height well enough above shrub cover in order to reduce potential for crown fire initiation. The 

shrub layer would be maintained at a height that would lower flame length to below four foot for direct 

attack by hand crews and reduce the potential for crown fire initiation. Within these areas across the 

landscape, defensible space of at least 500 feet (as per the East & West Deschutes County CWPP) wide 

on either side of access roads would be a working condition for suppression forces, safe egress for the 

public, as well as a potential fuel break to the fire. Fuel models 141 and 161 (Scott and Burgan 2005) 

are fuel models that most exemplify the fuel characteristics conducive to low fire behavior and 

successful suppression by direct attack of hand crews. These fuel models would be considered the 

desired condition for the area. It is also a desired condition for this area that the Fire Regime Condition 

Class is returned to a Condition Class 1, where there is a return to a natural or historical range of 

variability of vegetation characteristics.

Given the existing condition and desired future condition based upon management direction, the 

following strategies have been developed to move toward the desired future condition and to help direct 

treatment types and locations. Proactive fuel treatments combined with other management strategies are 

needed to restore the resiliency and sustainability of these stands. Manual and mechanical treatments, 

along with prescribed burning need to be implemented to reduce fuel loads, alter fuel distribution, and 

favor fire resistant species:

Three objectives need to be evaluated to determine appropriate level and location of treatments. 

1. Identify assets and protection targets

2. Define the “problem fire” and locate potential ignition locations

3. Design treatment patterns that would break up the potential for large undesired fire effects 

Areas identified and treatment intensity varies for individual protection targets. The treatments will 

allow effective suppression action to be taken, provide for firefighter and public safety, provide safe 

access/ egress and utilize adjacent fuel treatments to reduce fire spread and intensity of fire behavior 

which would allow multiple tactical considerations.

1) Protection targets (point protection) areas of interest. Ranked by priority
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

140  Ogden Final EIS

1. Wildland Urban Interface as identified in the Greater LaPine Community Wildfire 

Protection Plan (CWPP) (Newberry Estates subdivision). Proposed treatment would 

provide protection to assets identified in the East & West Deschutes County CWPP, 

however, areas are not directly incorporated within the Ogden project but would have 

indirect effect. Future planning (projects) will need to be addressed to further enhance the 

treatments adjacent to areas of interest, specifically identified in the Newberry National 

Volcanic Monument (NNVM).

2. McKay Crossing Campground 

3. Forest Service Road 21 from forest boundary to Monument boundary

4. Ogden Group Camp

5. Paulina Creek in various stands from Ogden Group Camp to Newberry National Volcanic 

Monument (NNVM) adjacent to the Peter Skene Ogden trail.

6. Forest Service Road 22 from forest boundary to forest service road 2215 

7. Prairie Campground

Defensible Space (fuel break/safety corridor): Road systems allow ground suppression forces 

(engines, crews and equipment) to access wildfires. When fuel conditions allow surface fires to get into 

the canopies of the trees, contributing to extreme fire behavior (torching, crowning and long range 

spotting), direct attack by ground forces becomes ineffective. Wildland fires under these conditions will 

cross any road system with such intensity that suppression forces have little chance of containing the 

fire from the road. Retardant alone will only slow a wildfire for a short period of time. Suppression 

forces from the ground need to quickly reinforce the effect of the retardant to contain a wildfire. Roads 

provide a good area for retardant to be utilized by suppression forces as it strengthens and widens the 

potential fire break. Large rural fire engines have responded to aid in the suppression efforts, these 

engines have low clearance and cannot operate on most local forest roads due to narrow road widths and 

uneven, unpaved road surface conditions. Use of major roads in a defensible space strategy is 

recommended, especially in the WUI where public safety and evacuation is of high concern. This 

strategy also allows for safe ingress/egress to and from a fire for firefighters.

By reducing crown densities through thinning and reducing surface fuels and ladder fuels through either 

mechanical shrub treatment (mowing), ladder fuels reduction, underburning, piling slash and burning 

the piles within this 500 foot wide fuel break; fire behavior would be reduced to primarily a surface fire 

that suppression forces will have greater success to control. Thinning of dense canopies allows 

retardant to be more effective by allowing retardant to penetrate surface fuels without being absorbed in 

the canopy. Snags should not be retained near the roads (within a tree length) that remain open to the 

public. Down wood or slash piles should not be retained within 200 feet of roads or boundaries with 

private ownership to minimize falling snags, ember production, ember receptor and spotting 

mechanism.

Subjective Ranking determination for the seven protection targets

Firefighter safety in terms of resistance to control by expected fire behavior, tactical/operational 

options and suppression effectiveness.

Public safety as it relates to notification, evacuation and egress to safety. Reduced fire 

behavior would potentially facilitate suppression response and decrease the likelihood of 

initiating an evacuation of public.

Access/Egress corridor treatment for the purposes of providing safe evacuation of public, viable 

access for emergency apparatus and tactical consideration for firing operations.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  141

Returning low to moderate intensity prescribed fire to Paulina Creek Riparian Habitat 

Conservation Area (RHCA) for the purposes of reducing the severity and undesired fire effects.

2) Identifying the “Problem” Fire

A weather scenario representing 97th percentile conditions (Lava Butte RAWS 352618) was generated 

in Fire Family + then entered and evaluated using FlamMap. These weather parameters would 

generally initiate a “problem” fire given an ignition, available fuels and topographic influence. The fire 

behavior outputs evaluated were; flamelength and crown fire potential as indicators of fire hazard, burn 

probability of random ignitions and major travel pathways of four potential ignition sources as 

indicators of fire risk.

The fire behavior associated with problem fires include: 

Rate of Spread (ROS) greater than 12 chains/hour (800 ft/hour). This rate exceeds standard 

initial attack response production rates.

Crown fire, once fire transitions from surface fire to crown, safety of firefighters is 

compromised. Longer range spotting and intense fire is observed. Direct attack with ground 

based resources is ineffective. Mechanized equipment and aerial suppression support is required 

and is not always effective.

Flame lengths (greater than 4 feet). Fire suppression efforts may be limited due to the 

availability of the type of equipment that may be necessary to be successful. At four to eight 

foot flame lengths a fire exceeds the capabilities of hand crews, handline cannot be relied on to 

hold the fire, and equipment (such as bulldozers, engines, and retardant aircraft) would become 

ineffective. Indirect attack is the only safe and viable option. Spotting becomes problematic at 

flame lengths greater than 8 feet.

Problem fires limit suppression strategic and tactical options because: Rates of spread are so high that 

the fire cannot be contained by initial attack resources. Crown fires cannot be attacked directly; tactics 

must be indirect with burnout operations or wait until the crown fire transitions back to the ground and 

becomes a surface fire meeting the flame length and rates of spread criteria before direct attack can be 

initiated. Flame lengths greater than 4' are too intense for direct attack; handlines cannot be relied on to 

hold fire. Flame lengths greater than 8' may present serious control problems; control efforts at the head 

of the fire will probably be ineffective.

Other management issues associated with a problem fire: Problem fires pose a high risk to public and 

firefighter safety. Problem fires have the potential to create extensive resource damage. Problem fires 

usually require multiple days and potentially months to contain and control as seen in the Newberry 2 

(2000), McKay (1998), Lava Surveyor (1993) and Finley (1990) fires.

3) Design and Placement of Treatment Units 

Fuel reduction and altering distribution of surface fuels. Areas with existing dead and down 

material, dense stands of trees, dense shrubs and heavy needlecast can create extremely hazardous 

conditions. When these conditions exist over large areas a wildfire can be extremely difficult to control. 

Under unfavorable weather conditions, the fire would burn until it reached an area where fuels were 

lighter and control tactics are more likely to be achieved. In 2001, Dr. Mark Finney published the paper 

Design of Regular Landscapes Fuel Treatment Patterns for Modifying Fire Growth and Behavior. The 

paper presents the idea that strategically placed fuel treatments could achieve much greater results at 

minimizing large fire growth than randomly placed fuel treatments, particularly when only a percentage 

of the area could be treated. The idea suggests that when treating just a percentage of the total 

landscape, the juxtaposition of fuel treatment areas in relation to one another was more important than 

the total amount of area treated. At this time, there is no scientific evidence supporting a conjecture that 

treating a smaller amount of acres within a landscape, even when the treatments are strategically placed, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

142  Ogden Final EIS

would provide the same level of protection or restoration benefits as treating a majority of the 

landscape. According to Finney, treating in a spatially strategic pattern would increase effectiveness in 

minimizing large fire spread and buy time to complete treatments on additional areas before they burn.

Thinning to reduce crown fire susceptibility and long range spotting. Crown fires are some of the 

most intense wildfires and usually produce long range spotting that challenges the control efforts. 

Dense stands of timber support independent crown fires allowing fire to burn through the canopy of the 

trees independent of the surface fire. Torching and crowning with support of the surface fire is also a 

common problem during wildfires in less dense to dense stands of timber. Breaking up the connectivity 

of the timber canopy through thinning greatly decreases the chance of an active or passive crown fire, 

thus reducing long range spotting, resistance to control, and damage to the stand. By maintaining stands 

at crown bulk densities of <0.10 kg m3, active or independent crown fire activity can be limited (Agee

1996). Thinning from below, leaving dominant and co-dominant trees with thick bark and high crowns 

significantly changes the potential for fire to move from surface up into the tree crowns (Fitzgerald 

2002). Thinning from below most effectively alters fire behavior by reducing crown bulk density, 

increasing crown base height, and changing species composition to lighter crowned and fire-adapted 

species (Graham et al. 1999). Fuel treatments would be placed in high use, focusing primarily on high 

priority areas that are frequently visited by forest users and major travel corridors within the Ogden 

project boundary. These areas are considered protection targets prioritized and identified by fire 

management. Emphasis was given to a lesser extent to general forest (with little recreation impact), 

Goshawk PFAs, wildlife corridors, heritage/cultural sites, old growth stands and the Newberry National 

Volcanic Monument Boundary. This is unless aligned with major fire spread potential then 

consideration is given to disrupt continuity of fuels to temper fire behavior, with the least impact across 

the landscape as possible. The likelihood of large fire growth with high severity and intensity will 

remain on the landscape, so long as current fuel conditions continue to accumulate, forest health 

continues to degrade and an ignition in the right location during 97th percentile weather conditions and 

topographic orientation are all in alignment. This could be minimized with strategic and careful 

placement of treatments. 

Management of landscapes does not end with the initial implementation of strategically-placed fuel 

treatments across the landscape. Long-term planning is needed to ensure that the effectiveness of 

treatments is maintained. Once initial fuel treatments have sufficiently reduced fuel loads to promote 

low intensity fire, maintenance of low fuel loads should then be accomplished with repeated fuel 

treatments. The frequency of maintenance treatments will vary by unit and can be determined by the 

rates of fuel accumulation or need to support other resource management objectives.

Several published articles and peer review suggest that to effectively treat a landscape for the purposes 

of modifying fire behavior, duration and intensity approximately 20% of the planning area can be 

treated if treatments are strategically placed (Finney 2001; Finney 2006(a)). This is commonly referred 

to as Strategic Placement of Treatments (SPOTs). This analysis is not a SPOTS analysis but is modeled 

similarly with regards to providing some protection to areas of interest. 

Table 25 is a summation of acres with corresponding to protection areas of interest. Note the total 

acreage is 5,979 acres representing approximately 23% of the Ogden project boundary landscape.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  143

Table 25: Protection Areas of Interest and Corresponding Acres

Treatment 

Acres Description

150 RHCA 300 foot buffer – approximately 150 feet on either side of Paulina 

Creek.

941 RHCA Shoulder – Treat areas adjacent to Paulina Creek, not considered as 

RHCA. 

1,089 Egress – Travel Corridors, may or may not be with Scenic View Management 

Allocation.

1,387 Developed Recreation Buffer. Distance around developed Rec. Sites varies 

by existing fuel conditions.

2,415 WUI/NNVM boundary. Utilize previous treatment units and current 

vegetation to aide minimum treatment needs.

Total 5,979 acres ~ 23% of landscape within project boundary.

Treatments within these areas alone would not meet purpose and need or achieve desired condition. A 

spots analysis was developed but not analyzed as one of the alternatives and was only used for a 

baseline comparison of designing treatments.

Figure 40: Desired Future Condition and Example of Light Underburning

Figure 41: Desired future condition ponderosa pine 

with grass/shrub understory

Figure 42: Light intensity underburn in ponderosa 

pine with grass/shrub understory
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

144  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 43: This picture shows the difference in results from a wildfire in stands untreated (to the left

of road) and treated (to the right of road). The stand on the left was untreated prior to a wildfire that 

resulted in 90% mortality. The stand on the right had been precommercial thinned, mowed and 

underburned; the resulting low intensity wildfire resulted in little to no mortality in the overstory.

3.4.2 Regulatory Framework

Management Direction

Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 

(LRMP)

For many land allocations, the LRMP provides management direction specifically addressing fuel 

loadings and the treatment of slash. The following section describes management direction relative to 

the Ogden Project relating specifically to fire and fuels management (Table 26).

Table 26: Fire and Fuels Related Goals, Standards and Guidelines

Deschutes NF LRMP (Forest Plan) 1990

Goal: To provide a well-managed fire 

protection and prescribed fire program that is 

cost efficient, responsive to land stewardship 

needs, and resource management goals and 

objectives pg.4-73.

Fire and Fuels Management

FF-1: Prevention of human caused wildfire 

will focus on areas of high use and high risk.

FF-5: All wildfires will receive a timely and 

energetic suppression response that 

minimizes suppression costs plus resource 

losses, and best meets multiple use standard 

M8-27: Slash will be treated to reduce the chances of 

fire starts and rates of spread to acceptable levels, but 

will not be cleared to the point that the forest floor is 

devoid of all slash and logs. Some slash and larger 

dead material will be left for ground cover for soil 

protection, microclimates for establishment of trees, 

and small mammal habitat.

Scenic Views

M9-8: In retention areas, slash from a thinning or tree 

removal activity, or other visible results of 

management activities, will not be visible to the casual 

forest visitor one year after the work has been 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  145

and guidelines for each management area. 

Those fires that threaten life, private 

property, public and firefighter safety, 

improvements or investments shall be given 

high priority and suppressed to minimize 

losses.

FF-6: All wildfires will require an appropriate 

suppression response. Appropriate 

suppression strategies are identified in the 

Fire Management Action Plan. (COFMS Fire 

Management Plan 2010). 

General Forest

M8-24: In Ponderosa pine stands (except for 

reproduction stands) emphasis should be 

placed on burning out roads and natural 

barriers rather than constructing new 

firelines.

M8-25: Prescribed fire may be used to 

protect, maintain, and enhance timber and 

forage production. The broadest application 

of prescribed fire will occur in the Ponderosa 

pine type. 

completed.

M9-90: Low intensity prescribed fires will be used to 

meet and promote the desired visual condition within 

each stand type. Prescribed fire and other fuel 

management techniques will be used to minimize the 

hazard of a large high intensity fire. In foreground 

areas, prescribed fires will be small, normally less than 

5 acres (Proposed Forest Plan Amendment 2010), and 

shaped to appear as natural occurrences. If burning 

conditions cannot be met such that scorching cannot 

be limited to the lower 1/3 of the forest canopy, then 

other fuel management techniques should be 

considered.

M9-91: If at any time during the course of the 

prescribed burn it appears that the objectives for the 

burn are not being met, all burning will cease.

Old Growth 

M15-19: Prescribed fire is not appropriate in 

lodgepole pine stands. In Ponderosa pine and mixed 

conifer stands, prescribed fire may be used to achieve 

desired old growth characteristics. It may also be 

used there to reduce unacceptable fuel loadings that 

potentially could result in high intensity wildfire.

The Ogden project western boundary extending east 1 1⁄2 miles is characterized as Wildland Urban 

Interface (WUI). There is an interface between urban growth and the national forest, where there is 

urban and suburban development in or in proximity to wildland vegetation inherent risks and challenges 

for wildland fire managers are imminent as it relates to the ability to control threats to the natural 

resources and private structures. This area is known as the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). The WUI 

definition in the Federal Register was developed to identify communities at risk in the vicinity of public 

lands. According to this definition, “the Wildland Urban Interface is the area where houses meet or 

intermingle with undeveloped wildland vegetation,” (USDA and USDI, 2001). 

The WUI receives considerable attention because of recent increases in both the number of structures 

destroyed and the area burned annually by wildland fire. This WUI zone poses increased risk to life, 

property and infrastructure in associated communities and is one of the most dangerous and complicated 

situations firefighters encounter. The WUI and areas adjacent is where most human-caused fire 

ignitions are most common (Radeloff, Hammer et al. 2005). The National Fire Plan (updates to the 

Cohesive Strategy) and the Ten-Year Comprehensive Strategy for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to 

Communities and the Environment place a priority on working collaboratively within communities in 

the WUI to reduce their risk from large-scale wildfire. 

In 2001, the Federal Register listed the communities at risk from wildland fire within the United States. 

Deschutes County had over 90 communities on the list. After the Federal Register was published, the 

list of communities was evaluated and updated by local fire managers and subsequently increasing the 

list to over 125 communities. Each community was buffered by one and one-half miles to identify the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

146  Ogden Final EIS

WUI boundary. The Deschutes National Forest lands which share a common border between the Ogden 

project and Newberry Estates is categorized as WUI. 

East and West Deschutes County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)

When congress passed the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) of 2003 into legislation, the WUI 

became increasingly important with regard to fire management direction, and the definition for WUI 

was redefined as “...an area within or adjacent to an at-risk community that has been identified by a 

community in its wildfire protection plan.” (Project Wildfire 2007). In response to the HFRA, 

collaboration occurred to develop Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPP) that included the 

identification and prioritization of areas needing hazardous fuels treatment. 

Community members of Bend, Oregon, City of Bend Fire Department, Deschutes County Rural Fire 

Protection District #2, Oregon Department of Forestry, US Forest Service, USDI Bureau of Land 

Management, and Deschutes County collaborated to develop the plan applicable to the Ogden area; East 

& West Deschutes County CWPP (signed in 2007). The CWPP identified the following goals for 

Federal lands:

Treat Condition Class 2 and 3 lands with the goal of returning the landscape to Condition Class 

1 and reduce the potential of extreme fire behavior by reducing fuel loads to that which can 

produce flame lengths of less than four feet;

Starting within a 1⁄4 mile buffer of adjacent communities at risk, and working out in 1⁄4 mile 

increments, until the WUI boundary is reached;

Within 500 feet of any critical transportation route or ingress/egress that could serve as an 

escape route from adjacent communities at risk. See Appendix for county definition of critical 

transportation route.

The E/W Deschutes County CWPP- ODF ranking of hazard rated the hazard of wildfire for the 

evacuations routes in East Deschutes County as extreme. The ODF rankings of assessment of hazard

indicate that there is a high resistance to control once a wildfire ignites. The composite ODF assessment 

of risk and condition class with consideration for population and structures rated the same evacuation 

routes second in risk next only to Paulina and East Lakes. The composite ranking identifies and assigns 

priorities for treatments.

10 – Year Comprehensive Strategy, August 2001; Implementation Plan, May 2002: This strategy 

reflects the views of a broad cross-section of government and non-government stakeholders. It outlines 

a comprehensive approach to the management of wildland fire, hazardous fuels, and ecosystem 

restoration and rehabilitation on Federal and adjacent State, tribal and private forest and range lands. 

Congress directed the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture to work with the Governors to develop this 

strategy in the FY 2001 Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act (P.L. 106-291). The primary 

goals of the 10-year Comprehensive Strategy are:

Improve prevention and suppression

Reduce hazardous fuels

Restore fire adapted ecosystems

Promote community assistance

A National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy, May 2012

An update to the 2001 National Fire Plan, the “Cohesive Strategy” identifies the vision for the next 

century as “Safely and effectively extinguish fire, when needed; use fire where allowable; manage our 

natural resources; and as a Nation, live with wildland fire.” Three primary factors were identified as 

presenting the greatest challenges and the greatest opportunities for making a positive difference in 

addressing the wildland fire problems to achieve the vision. They are:

Restoring and maintaining resilient landscapes
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  147

Creating fire-adapted communities

Responding to wildfires

Clean Air Act

The 1990 Clean Air Act is an amended federal law first passed in 1970. Under this law, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) protects and enhances the quality of the nation’s air resources 

by setting limits on how much of a pollutant (particulate matter) can be in the air based on scientific 

studies that have established a link between the particulate matter and public health. The pollutants 

thought to affect human health include particulate matter emitted in smoke that is less than 10 microns 

in diameter (PM10 and PM2.5). See the following section of this EIS (Chapter 3.5) for the analysis of 

air quality and a discussion of smoke management.

3.4.3 Analysis Methods 

Fuels Conditions, Type, and Evaluation

Remote sensing satellite imagery (2004) was updated to reflect activities accomplished since 2004 and 

reflect field reconnaissance of the project area (primarily the McKay fire scar and Newberry 2 fire scar). 

This data represents existing stand conditions and fuel models for the fire behavior analysis. Any 

updates to stand conditions as a result of work already completed, or in order to reflect proposed actions 

under action alternatives were as a result of advisement by project silviculturist, Barbara Schroeder (see 

Appendix Section 3 of the Fire/Fuels Report). Any updates to fuel conditions as a result of work 

already completed, or in order to reflect proposed actions under action alternatives were based on 

expertise of fuels specialist, Deana Wall, field reconnaissance of similar projects, as well as the 

reference Standard Fire Behavior Fuel Models: A Comprehensive Set for Use with Rothermel’s Surface 

Fire Spread Model (Scott & Burgan 2005) (see Appendix Section 3 of the Fire/Fuels Report).

Fire History and Occurrence

Historical fire analysis using Fire Family Plus 4.1 and geographic information systems (GIS) databases 

were used to collect, analyze and display large fire history and fire occurrence. 

Geospatial Analysis for Predicting Fire Behavior

FlamMap v. 3.0 (Finney et al. 2006), a fire behavior mapping and analysis program that computes fire 

behavior characteristics was used to predict potential fire behavior using existing fuels conditions, as 

well as post-treatment conditions for each alternative. ArcFuels (Ager et al. 2011) was utilized to 

modify stand and fuel conditions in order to reflect changes that occurred during activities identified in 

the action alternative(s), as well as build the landscapes with necessary data inputs for each of the 

alternatives. The data inputs necessary for FlamMap v 3.0 include aspect, slope, elevation, fuel model, 

canopy height, canopy base height, crown bulk density, and crown class. 

Fire Weather Analysis for Fire Behavior Analysis

Fire Family Plus 4.1 is a windows program that combines fire climatology and occurrence analysis. 

This program has an extensive data filter system that allows evaluation and development of fire danger 

percentile ratings, generate fire history data and perform queries on weather stations and associated 

weather conditions using climatology. Historical weather and fire occurrence data was extracted by 

using KCFAST a data warehouse supported by FAMWEB the Fire and Aviation Management Web 

Applications Team. The Lava Butte Remote Automated Weather Station (RAWS 352618), located 13 

miles north of the Ogden project, was selected to best represent weather and fuel conditions for the 

Ogden project area. Round Mountain RAWS was analyzed but did not best represent winds or 97th 

percentile fuel conditions and was subsequently dropped. Wind data was extracted from the Western 

Regional Climate Center for the purposes of developing a windrose, which shows predominant wind 

speeds and directions. A fuel moisture conditioning period of 9/2 at 1200 was used. The weather (.wtr) 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

148  Ogden Final EIS

and wind (.wnd) files used for fuel moisture conditioning are for Lava Butte and can be referenced in 

Section 2 of the Appendix to the fuels report. A typical fire season on the Bend-Ft. Rock Ranger 

District is defined as May 15th – September 30th. See appendix for detailed fuel moisture and wind 

conditions.

General Assumptions Made in Effects Analysis

Alternative development and environmental effects are based on the following assumptions:

Lightning will remain a source of potential ignitions.

The earth has entered an era of rapid environmental change and global warming that present 

unknown challenges (Millar et al. 2007) 

An increase in average tree diameter of the stand reduces fire severity. Larger trees have thicker 

bark and are more resistant to flame scorch from surface fuels. The more acres thinned from 

below, the greater the average diameter of remaining trees.

Treatment of natural surface fuels will reduce fire severity.

Wildland fire will not be eradicated in these ecosystems. A successful strategy will be built upon 

designing a vegetative environment, including species and structural characteristics that will 

produce desired, safely manageable fire behavior in the event of an unplanned ignition.

There are no ecosystems that are completely “fire safe.” Certain combinations of ignition, fuel 

moisture in the live and dead vegetation, wind, and relative humidity can combine under extreme 

circumstances to threaten any vegetated ecosystem.

Public and firefighter safety is the top priority in fuels and fire management. Treatments in the 

forest will focus on creating a safe working environment for fire suppression forces.

Ground suppression forces can operate safely adjacent to flames that are 4 feet in length and less. 

Extreme fire behavior, including crown fire, rapid surface spread and long range spotting, create 

an unsafe environment for the public and firefighters.

The Ogden Planning Area is valued for a variety of reasons, including wildlife habitat, unique 

vegetative communities and visual quality among others. Any management done in the name of 

hazardous fuels reduction in that zone must also consider the other objectives.

Weather conditions at the 97th percentile for FlamMap analysis are defined as the combination of 

temperature, relative humidity, and wind speed on a summer day that is warmer, drier, and 

windier than 97% of all other recorded summer days. “Fire season” is defined as the period 

between May 15th and September 30th, during which most fires and acres burn. Under 97th

percentile conditions, there will be about 3 days on average that are hotter, drier, and windier than 

those 97th percentile conditions.

For the analysis in this document, the effects of treatments are assumed to cover 100% of the 

treatment area. There is currently no way to spatially analyze untreated areas within treatment 

units (i.e. it is not possible to capture the analysis of the effect of leaving 10 or 20% of mowing 

units unmowed). Leaving certain areas of units untreated would likely reduce the effectiveness of 

hazard fuel reduction indicated in the analysis, but to what extent is unknown. 

Any analysis completed FlamMap model adopts all limitations and assumptions of the model 

itself (see Finney et al. 2006).

Mortality from potential wildfire is not predicted by any of the models used in this analysis, and 

thus mortality from potential wildfire is not measured in any quantifiable way. It is assumed from 

best available science that fuels treatments reduce fire severity and crown scorch (Pollet & Omi 

1999; Ritchie, Skinner & Hamilton, 2007). It is assumed from best available science that larger 

diameter and taller trees generally survive greater levels of fire damage (Wyant et al., 1986; 

Harrington, 1993; Regelbrugge and Conard, 1993; Stephens and Finney, 2002; Thies et al., 2005). 

It is also assumed from best available science that fire damage to the crown and bole influences a 

tree’s probability of surviving fire, and that either crown scorch, consumption or a combination of 

the two are important to mortality of ponderosa pine trees (Dieterich, 1979; Wyant et al., 1986; 

Saveland and Neuenschwander, 1990; Stephens and Finney, 2002; Wallin et al., 2003; McHugh 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  149

& Kolb, 2003; McHugh et al., 2003). Ground fire severity is also assumed to be linked with 

postfire mortality (Swezy & Agee, 1991; McHugh & Kolb, 2003), as well as beetles that may be 

attracted to fire-damaged trees (McCullough et al., 1998, Parker et al., 2006).

3.4.4 Affected Environment

Fire History

Forest ecosystems have changed over the last century. Fire exclusion, grazing, logging, and increased 

human interaction within the forests have significantly altered the landscape. There has been a notable 

increase in insect outbreaks, fuel loading, hazardous fires and other major disturbances. This has created 

higher severity fires with longer lasting effects.

Both natural and human caused fire has shaped much of the landscape in and adjacent to the Ogden 

project. Most recently noted fires with larger spatial and severity complexity include: Newberry 2, 548 

acres (2000), McKay 1,150 acres (1998), Newberry 150 acres (1995), Labor 131 acres (1995), Lava 

Surveyor 705 acres (1993) and Finley 1,319 acres (1990) fires (Figure 44). More historic fires that 

helped shape the landscape include; Paulina Prairie 2,827 acres (1918), Paulina Creek 169 acres (1918) 

and Ned Angland 639 acres (1922). On an average 10.5 lightning, 2 abandoned campfires, 1 smoking 

related and 2 undetermined (human) caused fires occur annually within the project boundary. Fire has 

been an integral part of shaping the landscape and will continue in the future as lightning is common to 

this area and recreational use and human interaction increases. 

Figure 44: Fire History in the Ogden area large fires 150+ acres shown in red. Ignition sources vary 

across the landscape. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

150  Ogden Final EIS

Fire Regimes and Condition Classes 

Natural fire regimes in central Oregon prior to Euro-American settlement differed among forest types. 

Lower and drier ponderosa pine forests experienced frequent, low-severity fires. Mixed conifer forests 

grew at mid-elevations above the ponderosa pine forests. They were very productive and experienced 

mixed-severity fires, with more frequent fire in drier areas. High elevation forests were less productive 

due to cold temperatures but received the greatest moisture. They experienced infrequent but severe 

fires. Lodgepole pine forests occupied areas ranging from high to low elevation and were characterized 

by periodically severe stand-replacement fires. 

Fire regimes are identified based on the average number of years between fires combined with the 

amount of the dominant overstory vegetation replaced by fire. A condition class is a classification that 

measures the degree of departure from natural or historic fire regime (Hann and Bunnell 2001). Each 

fire regime has three coarse-scale condition classes: low (Condition Class 1); moderate (CC 2) and high 

(CC 3). The fire regime and condition class concept was designed to be used at the landscape scale, not 

at the stand level, and is a measure of ecological trends, not a fire hazard metric. The Ogden project 

area at 26,521 acres is an appropriate size landscape to assess the Fire Regime Condition Class.

A fire regime is a generalized classification of the role fire would play across a landscape in the absence 

of modern human intervention but including the possible influence of aboriginal fire use, characterized 

by fire frequency, predictability, seasonality, intensity, duration, and scale (Agee 1993; Brown 1995; 

Brown & Smith 2000). 

Fire Regime I: 0-35 years, Low severity: Typical climax plant communities include ponderosa pine, 

eastside/dry Douglas-fir; where surface fires are most common. Large stand-replacing fire can occur 

under certain weather conditions, but are rare events (i.e. every 200+ years).

Fire Regime II: 0-35 years, Stand-replacing, non-forest: Includes true grasslands and savannahs 

with typical return intervals of less than 10 years; mesic sagebrush communities with typical return 

intervals 25-35 years and occasionally up to 50 years and mountain shrub communities (bitterbrush, 

snowberry, ninebark, ceanothus, Oregon chaparral; etc.), with typical return intervals of 10-25 years. 

Fire severity is generally high to moderate. Grasslands and mountain shrub communities are not 

completely killed, but usually only top-killed and re-sprout.

Fire Regime III: 35-100 years, Mixed severity: This regime usually results in heterogeneous 

landscapes. Large, stand replacing fires may occur but are usually rare events. Such stand-replacing 

fire may “reset” large areas (10,000-100,000 acres) but subsequent mixed intensity fires are important 

for creating landscapes’ heterogeneity. Within these landscapes a mix of stand ages and size classes are 

important characteristics; generally the landscape is not dominated by one or two age classes.

Fire Regime IV: 35-100+ years Stand-replacing: Seral communities that arise from or are maintained 

by stand-replacement fire, such as lodgepole pine, aspen, western larch, and western white pine, often 

are important components in this fire regime. Dry sagebrush communities also fall within this fire 

regime. Natural ignitions within this regime that results in large fires may be relatively rare, particularly 

in the Cascades north of 45 degrees latitude.

Fire Regime V: >200 years, Stand-replacing: This fire regime occurs at the environmental extremes 

where natural ignitions are very rare or virtually nonexistent or environmental conditions rarely result in 

large fires. Sites tend to be very cold, very hot, very wet, very dry or some combination of these 

conditions. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  151

Figure 45: Fire Regimes for the Ogden Project Area

The Fire Regime map at Figure 45 is consistent with the plant association group layer found in GIS. 

These current values suggest that lodgepole pine dominates the lower 1/3 of the project area. Historical 

maps, data and photo interpretation from the 1930s (see silviculture report) reveal that these areas 

currently in Fire Regime IV were historically Fire Regime I ponderosa pine.

Frequent low to mixed intensity and severity fire burned in Fire Regime I, fire exclusion and timber 

harvest has altered the stand type to the point that the Fire Regime does not mimic natural process. 

Figure 45 shows 35-100+ year fire frequency and high severity, which would not support the purpose 

and need or the intent to move the stands into a resilient and sustainable trajectory. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

152  Ogden Final EIS

Table 27: Condition Class Descriptions

Condition Class Attributes Example Management 

Options

Condition Class 1

 Fire regimes are within or near an historical range.

 The risk of losing key ecosystem components is low.

 Fire frequencies have departed from historical 

frequencies (either increased or decreased) by no 

more than one return interval.

 Vegetation attributes (species composition and 

structure) are intact and functioning within an 

historical range.

Where appropriate, these 

areas can be maintained 

within the historical fire 

regime by treatments such 

as fire use.

Condition Class 2

 Fire regimes have been moderately altered from their 

historical range.

 The risk of losing key ecosystem components has 

increased to moderate.

 Fire frequencies have departed (either increased or 

decreased) from historical frequencies by more than 

one return interval. This change results in moderate 

changes to one or more of the following: fire size, 

frequency, intensity, severity, or landscape patterns.

 Vegetation attributes have been moderately altered 

from their historical ranges.

Where appropriate, these 

areas may need moderate 

levels of restoration

treatments, such as fire 

use and hand or 

mechanical treatments, to 

be restored to the 

historical fire regime.

Condition Class 3

 Fire regimes have been significantly altered from their 

historical range.

 The risk of losing key ecosystem components is high.

 Fire frequencies have departed (either increased or 

decreased) by multiple return intervals. This change 

results in dramatic changes to one or more of the 

following: fire size, frequency, intensity, severity, or 

landscape patterns.

 Vegetation attributes have been significantly altered 

from their historical ranges.

Where appropriate, these 

areas need high levels of 

restoration treatments, 

such as hand or 

mechanical treatments. 

These treatments may be 

necessary before fire is 

used to restore the 

historical fire regime.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  153

Figure 46: Current Condition Class for the Ogden project area

Table 28: Acres by Fire Regime and Condition Class Ogden Project Area.

Fire 

Regime Description ConditionClass Acres

I

1-35 year return, low to mixed 

severity, 25-75% overstory 

replacement

1 176

2 5938

3 2569

III 35-100 year return, mixed to low 

severity

1 3217

2 3642

3 100

IV 35-100 year return, high severity, 

stand replacement

1 1556

2 7378

3 1288

Non-veg 645

Total 26,509*

*The difference of 12 acres from the project area total acres represents an analysis error 

Less than 0.001% and are minute pieces of ground that get dropped during GIS analysis.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

154  Ogden Final EIS

Table 28 shows the acres associated with the degree of departure which is best represented in Condition 

Class 2 and 3. Of the 26,521 acres analyzed in the Ogden project 64% rate out as Condition Class 2 and 

15% of Condition Class 3 (Figure 46).

3.4.5 Environmental Consequences

Environmental Consequences are measured in this analysis by the following:

1. Amount of Condition Class 2 and 3 acres that are being treated with the intent of returning the 

landscape to Condition Class 1 acres by utilizing prescribed burning and/or mowing.

2. Percentage of Landscape Rated as Low Fire Hazard

3. Amount of Ogden landscape rated as Low Wildfire Risk from Random Ignition; Reduction in 

Major Travel Pathways of wildfires from Four Ignition Sites

Effects common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

This section describes effects that are common to both action alternatives. Difference in effects is 

addressed beginning on page 155. Precommercial thinning of ladder fuels would increase Canopy Base 

Height (CBH) and decrease Canopy Bulk Density (CBD), as well as canopy cover, and would have a 

direct affect to reducing fire behavior potential by elevating torching and crown fire thresholds. There 

could be biomass utilization opportunities in some of these units. Thinning would generally be followed 

by mowing and/or prescribed fire. These treatments are intended to move stands toward a condition 

where canopy and surface fuels will not contribute to undesired fire behavior. Subsequent prescribed 

burns may be needed to meet desired condition. 

Handpiling would primarily occur in units not identified as harvest units unless the ground is 

inaccessible to ground based machinery. 

Machine piling would primarily occur in harvest units unless inaccessible due to steep slopes or in areas 

where excessive soil displacement would occur. 

Lop and Scatter treatments would occur in areas with relatively low levels of activity created slash and 

in lodgepole pine reproduction stands of low fuels treatment priority. Where prescribed fire would be 

applied, fuel loadings would be low enough to accomplish objectives with prescribed fire. In lodgepole 

pine reproduction stands, lopped slash would be scattered and left to fall apart and compress over time.

Mechanical Shrub Treatment (MST) would reduce surface fuel bed depth and increase CBH. This 

increases the tolerance of fire to the residual stands.

Pile burning would occur in areas that have received hand piling or machine piling treatments. Burning 

the piles is the most economic and effective method of removing slash piles. There may or may not be a 

period of time, typically ranging from 3 to 16 months, between non-commercial thinning and 

consumption of the fuels resulting from the non-commercial thin where resultant fuels are allowed to 

cure in order to allow for maximum potential consumption. During this short period of time, potentially 

increased fuel loading may result in an increased fuel hazard. Upon consumption of the resultant fuels, 

the fuel hazard would be decreased to a fuel hazard equal to or less than that of pre-non-commercial thin 

conditions.

Underburning would reduce surface fuels, increase CBH and potentially decrease CBD. The 

prescriptions, guidelines, and specifications for the Paulina Creek Riparian Habitat Conservation Area 

(RHCA) are incorporated in the Fisheries/Hydrologist Report and would be adhered to. Where there is 

sufficient material to warrant piling, hand piles would be constructed and burned away from creek to 

void any undesired effects. In areas deficient in surface fuels, either natural or activity related, 

underburning would be allowed within the RHCA. Firing operations would cease 50 feet from the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  155

creek channel but would be allowed to naturally back down to creek. Direct ignition to coarse down 

woody material, rock out crops and snags would be avoided by ignitions crews. Best efforts would be 

placed to avoid constructing handline within the RHCA, no machine line would be built within the 

RHCA corridor. 

A Forest Plan Amendment is proposed in order to allow for visible effects of harvest cleanup and fuels 

reduction for approximately five years in units that fall within scenic views retention/partial retention 

foregrounds. The Amendment also proposes to amend the 5 acres maximum general limitation for fuels 

treatment. The areas falling under scenic views allocation are primary routes of ingress/egress for 

public to Newberry Crater, as well as numerous recreation sites along Road 21. They are also primary 

routes of ingress/egress for firefighters. Treating areas adjacent to these primary routes of 

ingress/egress allow opportunities for safe evacuation of public, as well as opportunities for safe and 

active fire suppression. Treating these areas also answer to the East/West Deschutes County CWPP 

priorities for treatment. Roads 21, 22 and 2120 fall under the definition of a critical transportation route, 

as determined by the CWPP and have been identified by the CWPP as having extreme hazard and are 

second in priority for this area, next to Paulina and East Lakes (not in this project area). Because 

treatments necessary to achieve objectives related to reducing hazard in these areas require multiple 

entries, it would be necessary to amend the current standard and guidelines. Because these critical 

transportation routes continue for many miles within the project area, in order to achieve objectives, it 

would also be necessary to treat larger areas than 5 acres. Prescriptions and guidelines for fuels 

treatments proposed within the Scenic View Allocation are described in Chapter 2 of the EIS, also See 

Forest Plan Amendment for description. Best efforts would be made to utilize natural features, roads 

and trail systems for control lines. Hand line and/or machine line would only be considered if no other 

options are available or fire spread needs immediate check. Where there is sufficient material to 

warrant piling, piles would be constructed and burned to minimize scorch to residual stand. In general, 

remaining unburned or partially burned material would be disposed of. Underburning would occur in 

favorable conditions that would minimize scorch, mortality and smoke impacts. See Air Quality section 

(Chapter 3.5).

Fuels treatments in lodgepole pine where slash is being treated would alter fuel conditions so that fires 

burn primarily in the surface fuels with slower rates of spread and lower intensity. Fuel treatments will 

not eliminate the possibility of wildfire occurring within these stands. In areas of lodgepole pine where 

underburning is proposed it is understood that due to the thin bark of lodgepole pine some mortality 

would likely occur. Direct ignition under lodgepole pine would be discouraged, however, if prescribed 

fire naturally burns through pockets of lodgepole pine, control line would not be constructed unless fire 

behavior warrants such action. See the silviculture specialist report for details on post-underburning 

mortality in sample stands.

Fuels treatments in ponderosa pine would alter fuels conditions to levels where subsequent fires burn 

primarily in the surface fuels with the exception of wildlife leave areas or wildlife corridors where once 

fire enters these areas, dense thickets of small diameter trees and brush would provide a ladder fuel for 

surface fire to transition into the crowns aiding the development of fire brands and increasing spotting 

potential. Direct ignition would be avoided in these areas but fire would be allowed to back into these 

“leave” areas unchecked unless fire behavior and effects deemed it necessary to contain and control. 

Control lines would need to be constructed to minimize (keep) fire from entering wildlife corridors. 

On underburn units; roads, trails, natural fuel breaks or constructed fuel breaks would be utilized as 

much as possible and where feasible. Handline and machine line would only be constructed in areas 

that fire would not be allowed to enter or that may cause undesired effects that would impact other 

resource values. 

3.4.5 Measure #1- Amount of Condition Class 2 and 3 acres that are being treated with 

the intent of returning the landscape to Condition Class 1 Acres by utilizing prescribed 

burning and/or mowing.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

156  Ogden Final EIS

Alternative 1 (No Action) Ecological Trend

Under the no action alternative, management activities would not occur with the exception of fire 

suppression, continued geothermal exploration and the proposal of an Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) 

project. Prescribed burning and/or mowing would not occur unless future projects incorporate these 

management actions. 

Fire Regime Condition Class would continue to deviate further from the current condition with a steady 

but gradual increase in vulnerability to a stand replacing wildfire. Acres that are classified as Condition 

Class 3 would remain in Condition Class 3 and continue to depart further from their historical range. 

Currently an estimated 4,949 acres of Condition Class I would over time and without the introduction of 

wildfire transition to Condition Class 2 and 3 acres. Most of these Condition Class 1 acres occur in the 

mixed conifer and Lodgepole pine stands. Current estimate of approximately 21,560 acres of Condition 

Class 2 and 3 acres are in need of restoring that currently would continue to further depart from their 

historical fire regimes. By missing multiple return intervals, significant changes result to one or more of 

the following: fire size, frequency, intensity, and severity and/or landscape. This continued change to 

an infrequent and intense fire regime would take place in a fire dependent ponderosa pine ecosystem 

that historically had frequent low intensity fire. Fires that escape initial suppression actions would cycle 

a high portion of the landscape to an early seral stage with high mortality of the overstory trees 

regardless of tree size or species. 

Under this alternative current management strategies would continue. Trees would be removed if they 

restricted motorized travel along open or administrative use forest roads. Fuels would follow the current 

trend of a condition class 3, with more ladder fuels which results in continuous canopy cover. Fires 

would continue to be suppressed as long as firefighter safety is not compromised. The ability to hold a 

wildfire outside of private land or areas of high interest would continue to be difficult and escape routes 

for forest users would be compromised. Fire regime condition classes would continue to depart from 

their natural regime, and species composition would change over time. Goals and desired conditions 

mentioned in the East & West Deschutes County Community Wildfire Protection Plan would not be 

achieved. 

Past forest fuels treatments such as small tree thinning and slash pile burning have reduced fuels in 

some areas but condition class would continue to deviate from historic levels and stands would remain 

at risk from large fire events. 

Paulina Creek will continue to be invaded by small trees in the absence of fire and competition will 

reduce tree size. Riparian plants such as willow and aspen which require bare mineral soil to regenerate 

will continue to decline. Site productivity will lessen as mineral soil becomes less exposed, timber litter 

accumulates and encroachment of brush and invasive species will continue. The combination of timber 

litter, brush and the establishment of small diameter trees provide a good fuel ladder to affect larger 

diameter trees and increase the risk of higher intensity fires. In the absence of fire and/or management, 

it is reasonable to foresee these trends continuing and the hazard will only escalate.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  157

Figure 47: Paulina Creek existing vegetation and fuels conditions.

The No Action Alternative does not meet the purpose and need of the project; further deviation from 

historical range will continue in the project area. The No Action Alternative would not move the project 

area towards the desired condition, and it would have a high probability for a large, high-severity crown 

fire in historically low and mixed severity regimes.

The No Action Alternative encourages a species shift from ponderosa pine to a mix of lodgepole pine. 

More lodgepole pine would increase a stands susceptibility to defoliating insects such as Mountain Pine 

Beetle. Repeated attacks can add to the fuel loading making more fire adapted ponderosa pine 

susceptible to stand-replacing fires. High stocking levels can also stress ponderosa pine, due to limited 

moisture and nutrients, making the pine more susceptible to bark beetle attack.

The No Action Alternative also encourages a species shift from ponderosa pine to mixed conifer, 

especially white fir. More white fir would increase a stands susceptibility to defoliating insects such as 

spruce budworm. Repeated defoliation of the fir species can result in fir mortality that can add to the 

fuel loading within the mixed conifer stands, making the more fire adapted ponderosa pine susceptible 

to stand-replacing fires. High stocking levels in fir and can also stress ponderosa pine, due to limited 

moisture and nutrients, making the pine more susceptible to bark beetle attack.

There is evidence of scattered bark beetle outbreaks and mistletoe infestation throughout the project 

area. This is currently occurring and is expected to continue to expand in the foreseeable future. 

Exclusion of fire as well as other management action will further propagate the degradation of the 

existing condition further altering the condition class. 

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 2

Under Alternative 2, 11,253 acres of restoration would occur in Condition Class 2 and 3. Various 

treatment combinations of thinning, mowing and underburning would initiate the transition from 

Condition Class 2 and 3 to Condition Class 2 and 1. Additionally, 2,774 acres of Condition Class 1 

within the project area would be treated to lessen the fire behavior potential; these treatments would be 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

158  Ogden Final EIS

considered maintenance to the existing condition. Condition Class assesses overstory condition and does 

not consider surface fuel conditions, it remains important to treat the surface fuels within these acres 

that present high fire behavior potential. Treatment within the Condition Class 1 acres will reduce 

resistance to fire suppression and the potential for crown fire initiation.

Alternative 2, 248 acres would be treated within the Paulina Creek Riparian Habitat Conservation Area 

(RHCA). Approximately 67% of the RHCA is considered Condition Class 2 or 3. Various 

combinations of thinning, piling and underburning will occur to reduce ladder fuels, disrupt fuel 

continuity, remove excessive fuel loading and restore the riparian area to Condition Class 1. 

Direct and Indirect Effects–Alternative 3

Under Alternative 3, 11,681 acres of restoration would occur in Condition Class 2 and 3. Various 

treatment combinations of thinning, piling, mowing and underburning would initiate the transition from 

Condition Class 2 and 3 to Condition Class 2 and 1. Additionally, 2,605 acres of Condition Class 1 

acres within the project area would be treated to lessen the fire hazard and risk potential in these areas. 

Condition Class assesses overstory condition and does not consider surface fuel conditions, it remains 

important to treat the surface fuels within these acres that present high fire behavior potential. 

Treatment within the Condition Class 1 acres will reduce resistance to fire suppression and the potential 

for crown fire initiation.

Alternative 3, 212 acres would be treated within the Paulina Creek Riparian Habitat Conservation Area 

(RHCA). Approximately 67% of the RHCA is considered Condition Class 2 or 3. Various 

combinations of thinning, piling and underburning will occur to reduce ladder fuels, disrupt fuel 

continuity, remove excessive fuel loading and restore the riparian area to Condition Class 1. 

Cumulative Effects - Amount of condition class 2 and 3 acres that are being treated to return to 

condition class 1 through underburning and/or mowing.

Mechanical fuel reduction activities create measurable amounts of dead and down woody residue. Both 

action Alternatives 2 and 3 include integrated fuel treatments which dispose of the residues created by 

vegetation management as well as natural accumulation of fuels.

There would be no negative long-term cumulative effects on fuel loadings from the combination of both 

action Alternatives 2 and 3 because once the treatments are complete, all fuel loadings produced by 

precommercial or commercial thinning will be either removed and utilized, or burned on-site. There is a 

positive cumulative effect from the overall decrease in fuel loading. This will eventually begin to 

decrease over time and maintenance will be needed to sustain the benefits of the treatments. 

There would be no negative short term cumulative effects from any commercial thinning treatments. 

All fuel resulting from commercial thin would be machine harvested and yarded to the landing, where it 

would be utilized or the material remaining will be piled and burned on site. There would be short-term 

negative cumulative effects from a temporary increase in fuel loading on the ground from noncommercial thinning. The increase in fuel loading across the treatment unit will either be piled and 

burned or left on site. Additional disposal would be facilitated by underburning or left onsite for natural 

decay. If piled, fuel loading would be accumulated as piles and would be short term until disposed of. 

Mowing alone does not reduce fuels, the value to mowing is in rearranging fuels to lower the fuelbed 

depth, which results in lower flame lengths, less scorch and in expedites the decomposition process of 

forest residues. Over a period of time mowing alone has short term affect, subsequent mowing and 

underburning is needed to maintain Condition Class 1.

Stands currently in Condition Class 3 may require two or three entries of fire to accomplish the 

objective of improving transitory range. Due to high fuel loadings in some of these stands, early spring 

or late fall underburning would be used to reduce woody material greater than three inches in diameter 

when the fine fuels are too wet to burn. This would be followed by a second entry of fire when the 

smaller fuels are dry enough to consume. A third entry may be needed to further reduce heavy duff 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  159

layers and ladder fuels by increasing the canopy base height. These multiple entries may take several 

years to complete, due to scheduling and unpredictable weather patterns.

The Lava Cast project north of the Ogden project has had scattered treatments across the landscape. 

These treatments would also contribute to a larger change in Condition Class and provide a much larger 

spatial distribution to restore, sustain and make a resilient landscape. As a result, fire behavior would 

behave in a more historic role in the ecosystems. Decreased crown fire potential would reduce to much 

smaller isolated areas across the landscape.

The Riparian Habitat Conservation Area would not have negative cumulative effects from any proposed 

treatment. A light intensity underburn to reduce fuels and disrupt horizontal and vertical continuity 

would provide ecological benefits to the riparian vegetation while maintaining and enhancing desired

vegetation.

Conditions have been altered as a result of geothermal exploration. Exploratory pads and new roads 

have been constructed further disrupting fuel continuity by providing fuel breaks and large open areas. 

There would not be any negative cumulative effect from any reasonably foreseeable action related to 

geothermal exploration.

The areas not treated for the purposes of converting Condition Class 2 and 3 will be allowed to continue 

to respond to natural processes and provides variability across the landscape. Fuel loading will continue 

to increase as needles, twigs and branches cast. Snags would be created then in time would degrade and 

drop producing pockets of heavy fuel loads, resulting in fire behavior potential producing moderate to 

high intensity and severity. 

3.4.5 Measure #2- Percentage of Landscape Rated as Low Fire Hazard

Affected Environment – Expected Fire Behavior

Fire behavior predicted for the existing conditions of the Ogden Planning Area has been analyzed by 

using the fire behavior model FlamMap, as described in Section 3.4.3 of this report- Analysis Methods.

Potential fire behavior within the Ogden planning area is described, in part, by wildfire hazard. Hazard 

describes the resistance to control once a fire starts. Fire hazard has been qualified into the following 

hazard ratings of low, moderate, high and extreme. The hazard ratings are determined by the potential 

flame length and fire type at any given pixel (Table 29) (Vaillant et al. 2012).

Table 29: Wildfire Hazard Rating Matrix

Flame length potential (ft)

Fire Type 0-4 4-8 8-11 11+

Surface Low Moderate High Extreme

Passive Crown Low Moderate High Extreme

Active Crown Extreme Extreme Extreme Extreme

Potential fire behavior hazard ratings start with flame length potential. Flame length potential ratings of 

0-4 ft, 4-8 ft, 8-11 ft, and 11 ft plus are determined based on Fire Behavior Characteristics Charts found 

in the Appendix B of the National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) Fireline Handbook (2006). 

Fire Behavior Characteristics Charts are used by firefighters to determine a fire’s resistance to control 

and spread rates. Built into the hazard ratings along with flame length potential is fire type. Fire type is 

related to the potential for a crown fire and a firefighters ability to engage. Surface fire types are those 

where a surface fire potential existing with no potential for either type of crown fire. A passive crown 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

160  Ogden Final EIS

fire is a surface fire with individual tree torching. An active crown fire is a fire involving the crowns of 

trees with support from a surface fire.

Potential fire hazard that rates as low generally allows fire suppression resources to safely and 

efficiently attack the fire at the head with hand tools. This is not a guide to personal safety. Fires can be 

dangerous at any level. Wilson (1977) has shown that most fatalities occur in light fuels on small fires 

or isolated sections of large fires.

Multiple operational alternatives can be considered such as aggressive full perimeter control, point 

source protection or utilizing barriers either natural or manmade. Moderate fire behavior is fire 

behavior where fire suppression efforts may be limited, due to the availability of the type of equipment 

that may be necessary to be successful. At four to eight foot flame lengths you have exceeded the 

capabilities of hand crews, handline cannot be relied on to hold the fire and equipment, such as 

bulldozers, engines and retardant aircraft, would be necessary. High hazard fire behavior presents 

serious control issues related to torching, crowning and spotting. Control efforts become ineffective. 

Extreme hazard fire behavior does not allow for safe working conditions for any type of fire suppression 

resources directly related to the fire. 

Table 30: Existing Condition/No Action Hazard Ratings and Acreage

HAZARD ACRES*

Low 7,869

Moderate 17,660

High 437

Extreme 549

*There is a difference of 6 acres between the total acres for the project (26521 acres) and the total analysis acres 

for existing condition (26515 acres), these acres represent minute pieces of ground that get dropped during GIS 

analysis and represent an analysis error of less than 0.001%.

Table 30 shows the predicted fire hazard of existing conditions in acres for the Ogden Planning Area 

using the parameters and indicators shown in Table 29. Figure 48 is a spatial map of the existing 

condition fire hazard.

Currently, approximately 70% of the project area has moderate to extreme fire hazard under 97th

percentile weather and fuel conditions. Wildfire suppression in these areas would be costly, potentially 

hazardous to firefighters, and damaging to resources valued on the landscape compared to those areas of 

low fire hazard. The historical McKay (1998) fire scar where heavy dead and down fuels remain, most 

notably displays high to extreme fire hazard. Under 97th percentile conditions this fire would not serve 

as a barrier to fire spread and may contribute to making control efforts difficult without mechanized or 

aerial support. 

The remaining 30% of the project area currently rates as low hazard fire potential. Low hazard potential 

is the desired condition that best allows safe, efficient, provides least cost and achieves the best results 

with regards to fire effects. Areas of low hazard may still need treatment in order to maintain their low 

hazard quality.

The Newberry Subdivision west of the forest boundary has had extensive treatment adjacent to the 

private land. The combination of the recently completed Crossings project and the general wind 

direction favor suppression effectiveness to protecting private lands. Expected fire behavior in untreated 

stands adjacent to the Crossings project shows a moderate potential. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  161

Figure 48: Existing Condition Fire Hazard

Direct and Indirect Effects - Percentage of Landscape with Potential Fire Hazard Rated Low

Alternative 1- No Action Alternative

The No Action alternative will allow natural processes to take place. Under this alternative no 

management activities would occur, other than fire suppression. Fuels will continue to accumulate, dead 

fuels will gradually degrade fall and provide surface fuel loading, and live fuels will continue to grow at 

a slower rate, eventually provide a ladder fuel and consequently will become available to support 

torching and crowning. Shrubs and grass would continue to grow, increasing the biomass. Lodgepole 

pine mortality associated with mountain pine activity would continue. Ponderosa pine would die off 

through natural selection from beetles, disease, fire, and competition. Both of these situations would 

increase the number of snags and ultimately downed wood across the landscape and project area. The 

No Action alternative will steadily decline the 7,869 acres rated as low hazard potential and shift to 

moderate or high hazard potential rating.

The impacts on wildlife habitat, soils, water, forest health, public and firefighter safety would continue 

to increase. The only way that fuels reduction would occur is with a wildfire that under the no action 

alternative could be intense with high flame lengths, torching and spotting over more than half the area, 

making suppression difficult, costly and potentially hazardous to firefighter safety. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

162  Ogden Final EIS

Direct and Indirect Effects – Percentage of Landscape with Potential Fire Hazard Rated Low

Alternative 2 and 3 Common to both action alternatives

A wildfire occurring after stands have been treated by thinning, material removed, and /or prescribed 

burning would display much less aggressive behavior than in untreated stands. Fire would remain on 

the surface with occasional isolated (passive) torching. DeBano et. al. (1998) noted that fire intensity 

increases as fuel loadings increase. Conversely, a reduction in fuel loading can limit the intensity of a 

fire. Fuel characteristics affecting fire behavior are: vegetative density, species composition, amount of 

surface fuel, arrangement of fuels and moisture content (Rothermel 1983). Fuels contribute to the rate 

of spread of a fire, the intensity/flame length of the fire, how long a fire is held over in an area, and the 

size of the burned area (Rothermel 1983). Treatments that reduce surface fuel loads have been shown to 

decrease fire behavior and severity (Graham et al. 1999; Pollet and Omi 1999). Van Wagtendonk 

(1996) found in fire simulations that a reduction in fuel loads reduce surface fuel loads have been shown 

to decrease fire behavior and severity (Graham et al. 1999; Pollet and Omi 1999). Van Wagtendonk 

(1996) found in fire simulations that a reduction in fuel loads decreased fire behavior, increased fire line 

control possibilities, and decreased fire suppression costs.

In stands that will be burned under prescription subsequent (maintenance) burns would be needed to 

keep fires at the surface. Without maintenance underburning, regeneration will grow and cause fire 

behavior to increase to passive or active crown fire within 20 years. Reduced fire behavior means that 

suppression resources will be more effective in containing a fire or utilizing predetermined barriers 

(natural or manmade) to assist with less impact suppression. The need for future maintenance burns or 

light intensity unplanned ignitions will be needed to reach desired condition.

Treatments will not prevent a fire from starting but will be expected to slow the progress by causing it to 

drop to the surface rather than spread through the crown or through heavy concentrations of fuel. This 

not only allows for effective tactical alternatives but provides the safest fire behavior to suppress with 

ground based resources. Should a high-severity wildfire start outside of and not enter the treated areas 

(where it is anticipated to drop to the ground), the effects would be the same as for the No Action 

Alternative with wildfire.

Forest management that involves the creation of activity fuels (slash) can increase fire behavior 

parameters such as rate of spread and flame length. However, treatment of slash (e.g. burning, chipping, 

removal, isolation) reduces fire behavior and fire intensity (Omi and Martinson 2002). Graham et al. 

(1999) reports that thinning from below and intermediate tree harvest can effectively alter fire behavior 

by reducing crown bulk density and ladder fuels, but would not reduce crown fire potential unless tree 

densities are substantially reduced. He also states that all intermediate treatments should be 

accompanied by surface fuel modification, and the most success is achieved when using prescribed fire 

for such treatments. There are units within alternative 2 and 3 that are of low priority for treatment to 

reduce hazardous fuels, but are in need of treatment to respond to insect and disease issues. In some of 

these units (194, 222, 224, 225, 237), lop and scatter is the proposed action to disperse fuels and allow 

them to break down naturally over time. For any acres of lop and scatter without a follow-up fuels 

treatment proposed, a fuel model 202 was used to represent the increase in fuel loading. Post treatment 

analysis of the lop and scatter units shows that generally fire hazard does not increase. The only unit 

where fire hazard is predicted to increase from a low to moderate hazard over the entire unit is #270 in 

the Newberry 2 fire scar.

Alternative 2 treatments convert 38% of the landscape to a potential fire behavior hazard rating of low. 

Treatments under alternative 2 would result in 68% (18,064 acres) of the landscape meeting typical 

standards for safe and effective suppression efforts (Table 31). Reduced fire effects such as decreased 

mortality, scorch, soil disturbance and smoke emissions are the result under these conditions. This 

rating allows ground based firefighting resources to safely and efficiently take action at the head of the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  163

fire. This conversion created by various treatment combinations, thinning, piling, underburning would 

support the transition of fuels to a much more manageable level. Subsequent treatments, specifically 

underburning, are needed to maintain resiliency to undesired fire effects. 

Alternative 3 treatments convert 37% of the landscape to a potential fire behavior hazard rating of low 

Treatments under alternative 3 would result in 67% of the landscape meeting typical standards for safe 

and effective suppression efforts (Table 32). Reduced fire effects such as decreased mortality, scorch, 

soil disturbance and smoke emissions are the result under these conditions. This rating allows ground 

based firefighting resources to safely and efficiently take action at the head of the fire. This conversion 

created by various treatment combinations, thinning, piling, underburning would support the transition 

of fuels to a much more manageable level. Subsequent treatments specifically underburning are needed 

to maintain resiliency to undesired fire effects.

In comparing fire hazard between Alternative 2 and 3, across the landscape both alternatives effectively 

reduce fire hazard to a low rating. There is only a 1% difference in low hazard rating between 

alternatives, representing 340 acres. In response to issues, were acres of thinning dropped in some 

areas, and acres of thinning added in others for Alternative 3. In addition, underburning, and in some 

places mowing, was removed from acres as a treatment in Alternative 3. The combination across the 

project area of added and removed treatments resulted in only the difference of 1% in low hazard rating 

between the two alternatives. The change in thinning prescriptions between the two alternatives had no 

apparent effect to low hazard rating. Thinning prescriptions (Table 6, p. 30, provides an estimate of the 

number of trees per acre that will be retained in thinning units) generally go to or below recommended 

levels of recent science regarding fuel treatment effectiveness (Johnson et al. 2011). The most 

important factor in the changing of fire hazard between the two alternatives was the reduction of 

underburning and mowing acres.

Figure 49 illustrates the effects of the treatments designed in Alternative 2. The green indicates 

potential fire behavior hazard rated low. Most of the ponderosa pine dominated stands are converted to 

a lower intensity fire than that in present condition. These treatments and changes to fuels and species 

favor ponderosa pine where fuels conditions will promote low intensity underburns and the natural fire 

return interval can be maintained. Additionally, areas identified as protection targets or areas of concern 

also see reduced flame length potential. Forest Service road 21 (main access/egress for Paulina and East 

Lake) displays reduced fire behavior to the point where it would allow safe evacuation, adequate access 

for fire personnel and apparatus, and opportunities to use road systems as either fuel break or barrier to 

fire spread. Additionally, the fire behavior modification fragments the landscape to minimize 

aggressive fire behavior over a large area. Isolated areas that remain moderate to high potential either 

are not planned for treatment or are ecologically within historic range of variability i.e. lodgepole pine 

with jackpots of dead down woody. These areas would be left for habitat and maintaining landscape 

diversity. Areas that did not receive treatment remain unchanged. It is implied that in the event of fire 

burning from untreated stands adjacent to treated stands fire behavior would lessen as it entered those 

treated stands bringing passive and in some cases active crown fire down to the surface fire.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

164  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 49: Potential Fire Hazard for Alternative 2

Table 31: Percentage of Landscape with Low Fire Hazard Potential

Low Fire Hazard

Acres Percent

Existing Condition 7,869 30

Alternative 2 18,064 68

Figure 50 illustrates the effects of treatments in Alternative 3. The green indicates potential low fire 

hazard. A majority of the ponderosa pine dominated stands are converted to a lower intensity fire than 

that of present conditions. Similarly to Alternative 2 areas identified as protection targets or areas of 

concern also see reduced flame length potential. The greatest concern would be located on the west side 

of the Newberry National Volcanic Monument boundary. This area displays potential moderate fire 

behavior to the point where it may not allow safe evacuation or adequate access for fire personnel and 

apparatus. Adjacent fuels would be modified enough to minimize aggressive fire behavior on a larger 

spatial scale. The same holds true in Alternative 3 as in Alternative 2, isolated areas that remain 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  165

moderate to high potential either are not planned for treatment or are ecologically within historic range 

of variability i.e. lodgepole pine with jackpots of dead down woody.

Figure 50: Potential Fire Hazard of Alternative 3

Table 32: Percentage of Landscape with Low Fire Hazard Potential

Figures 49 and 50 show subtle changes in fire hazard between the alternatives, however, in Alternative 3 

less underburning occurs and more lodgepole pine remain. It is reasonable to predict various levels of 

mortality in the lodgepole pine where underburning is planned. 

All proposed treatments for both alternatives within identified priority areas are modeled to effectively 

reduce fire hazard to a low hazard rating. There are three units (units #901, 929, 930) that fall within 

the identified priority areas that were not proposed to be treated under Alternative 2, but proposed 

treatments under Alternative 3 effectively reduce fire hazard to a low hazard rating.

Low

Acres Percent

Existing Condition 7869 30

Alternative 3 17724 67
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

166  Ogden Final EIS

All proposed treatments for both alternatives in the scenic view allocation reduce fire hazard to a low 

hazard rating. Areas within the scenic view allocation have also been defined as priority areas to treat 

by the E/W Deschutes County CWPP. Reducing fire hazard to a low hazard rating (see table 6) would 

meet the CWPPs desire for reducing fuel loads to that which can produce flame lengths of less than four 

feet. Four foot flame lengths generally allows fire suppression resources to safely and efficiently attack 

the fire at the head with hand tools.

Lodgepole pine has thin bark and is less resistance to fire then that of ponderosa pine. Mortality in 

lodgepole pine could occur and serve as wildlife snags and eventually coarse woody debris. Direct 

ignition in lodgepole pine during prescribed fire operations would not occur, but it is recognized that 

second order fire effects could cause mortality in the lodgepole pine. 

As in Alternative 2 areas that did not receive treatment remain unchanged, alternative 3 leaves more 

(8791) acres at moderate to extreme fire hazard potential.

Fire hazard would be lessened on approximately 40% of the project landscape; 10,000-12,000 acres. 

Short term positive effects would provide the opportunity for suppression resources to effectively make 

safe decisions to take direct attack suppression action. Wildfire could be allowed to play its role in the 

ecosystem due to the less severe fire behavior and fire effects. There could also be opportunities for fire 

managers to use planned and unplanned ignitions in order to maintain low fire hazard areas on the 

landscape, adding protection while maintaining protection to high interest values.

Effects to fire risk would gradually degrade over the course of a decade. Brush responds rapidly to 

mowing when not followed up with subsequent mowing and/or underburning. The need to maintain the 

conditions will be important in keeping fire risk low. The effects on areas that are treated with mowing 

alone will greatly reduce the fire risk for approximately 5-7 years. Areas treated with underburning are 

remain low in fire risk for 7-15 years. Maintenance treatment by means of mowing and/or underburning 

would be needed within the next 15-20 years. Further delay could set those low rated stands into 

moderate or high within 20 years. 

Areas that do not receive treatment will continue to degrade, however should a fire start in a treated 

area, suppression action could be taken to keep fire to treated area or lessen the risk/exposure to 

firefighters by retreating and allowing fire to burn in untreated stands. Subsequently, in the event of a 

fire beginning in an untreated stand, fire could burn to treated areas and could be managed using a 

variety of management responses. Units and treatments have been designed to further fragment the 

landscape. Other past management activities and ongoing projects will reinforce the intent of breaking 

up the continuous fuel loading. A principal goal of locating treatments with various intensities is to not 

remove fire from the landscape completely but to minimize the impacts, effects and scale of undesired 

fire characteristics. 

Cumulative Effects - Percentage of Landscape with Potential Fire Hazard Rated Low

Cumulative effects are assessed for the Ogden project area. Table 36 shows some specific projects that 

involve fuel treatments in the area that could contribute to cumulative effects. These and the projects in 

Table 13 primarily contribute to fragmenting the landscape. Geothermal exploration, the potential for 

development of an Off Highway Vehicle trail system, recent treatments in the Crossings project, 

Lavacast and Prairie Dog also contribute to fragmenting the landscape. This provides a greater 

opportunity to keep fires confined to smaller, much more manageable, areas utilizing past treatment, 

trails and exploration pads as containment lines or potential barriers.

3.4.5 Measure #3- Amount of Ogden landscape rated as Low Wildfire Risk from 

Random Ignition; Reduction in Major Travel Pathways of wildfires from Four Ignition 

Sites
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  167

 

Affected Environment 

Amount of Ogden Landscape rated as Low Wildfire Risk from Random Ignition

Fire risk describes the likelihood of a fire occurring at any point in a given landscape. Risk considers 

ignition potential and travel times of fires. 

In order to measure fire risk from random ignition, burn probability is used. Burn probability is an 

additional output to FlamMap and is a part of the minimum travel time fire growth model. Burn 

probability is used as an indicator of potential fire spread rates, i.e. landscape attributes, like fuel 

conditions, that contribute to higher spread rates resulting in a higher burn probability. High burn 

probabilities can be related to the sizes of fires that occur on a given landscape. So under the same 

conditions, large fires produce higher probabilities than small fires. Since fire size is a function of the 

gross spread rate and duration of the fire, treatments or conditions that reduce the spread rate will lower 

the burn probability (Finney et al., 2006)

Burn probability was calculated within the model using the same 97th percentile weather and fuel 

conditions from Round Mountain RAWS, as well as with 1000 random ignitions and an 8 hour burn 

duration across the entire analysis area, which is approximately a 1 1⁄2 mile buffered area surrounding 

Ogden project area. A larger analysis area for the purpose of burn probability allows the model to 

consider ignitions from outside the Junction area and model that potential without bias. Burn 

probability is output as a decimal number between 0 and 1 for every 120 meter pixel within the project 

area. Those decimals were classified into 5 equal divisions and reclassified into a number from 1 to 5, 1 

represents acreage with the lowest burn probability and 5 represents the highest, so that any increases or 

decreases in burn probability due to proposed treatments could be shown with relative ease. Then, 

outputs specific to the Ogden project area were clipped from the rest of the analysis area. This is done 

to better show effect of any proposed treatments to burn probability within the project area. Table 33

shows the existing condition’s burn probability for the project area. 

Table 33: Wildfire Risk rating as measured by Burn Probability within the existing condition of the 

Ogden project area

Wildfire risk rating Burn probability classification Amount of Acres*

Low 1 4056

Moderate (low) 2 17083

Moderate (high) 3 4552

High 4 628

Very High 5 201

*There is a difference of 1 acre between the total acres for the project (26521 acres) and the total analysis acres for 

existing condition (26520 acres), this acre represents minute pieces of ground that get dropped during GIS analysis 

and represent an analysis error of less than 0.1%.

Table 33 shows that relative to the entire analysis area (an area that includes approximately a mile and a 

half around Ogden), the project area itself is predicted to have moderate to very high chances 

(classification of 2 to 5) for large fires across the majority of the area (22,464 acres). Figure 51 is a map 

of the burn probability for the existing condition across the analysis area. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

168  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 51: Existing Condition Wildfire Risk as measured by Burn Probability

Reduction in Major Travel Pathways of wildfires from Four Ignition Sites

Four ignition points were selected to represent potential key fire spread concerns within Ogden. 

Ignition points were selected by areas of concern (high resource value) identified by resource 

specialists. The four sites selected were; Ogden Group Camp, Forest boundary east of Newberry 

subdivision, McKay Butte and a selected location along Forest Service Road 21 (main travel route into 

the Newberry National Volcanic Monument).

Figure 52 shows the Major Travel Pathways of the selected four ignitions’ spread and distance after 8 

hours of burning for the Existing Condition under all of the same modeling conditions within FlamMap 

as the predicted Fire Hazard (please see Section 3.4.3-Analysis Methods for those details). Major 

Travel Pathway outputs are produced only for the area within the spreading fire and are affected by the 

direction of fire movement, revealing heading, flanking, and backing spread. All fire growth 

calculations across the landscape are performed assuming independence of fire behavior among 

neighboring cells (e.g. the travel time across a cell does not depend on the behavior in adjacent cells). 

From looking at the map at Figure 52, one can see that the fire spread after 8 hours is for each ignition 

point approximately 2 miles at their furthest point. The potential fire spread was predicted under the 

predominant southwest wind, so spread from those four ignition points is generally in a northeasterly 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  169

direction. High flame lengths and torching associated with predicted moderate fire hazards across the 

project area could make checking or stopping these travel pathways difficult. 

 Figure 52: Major Travel Pathways of Existing Condition

Direct and Indirect Effects - Amount of Ogden landscape rated as Low Wildfire Risk from 

Random Ignition; Reduction in Major Travel Pathways of wildfires from Four Ignition Sites

Alternative 1- No Action Alternative

The No Action alternative will allow natural processes to take place. Under this alternative no 

management activities would occur, other than fire suppression. The predicted minimum travel 

pathways for these four ignition sites and for current conditions would mean that fire could continue to 

travel over 2 miles in one burning period. High flame lengths and torching associated with predicted 

moderate fire hazards across the project area could make checking or stopping these travel pathways 

difficult. Two miles of wildfire travel could potentially compromise public and firefighter safety along 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

170  Ogden Final EIS

Road 21 and Road 2120. Prairie campground would continue to be at risk from a fire coming out of 

Ogden Group Site. McKay Crossing campground would also continue to be at risk from a fire coming 

from the Road 21 corridor. Over time, as fuels accumulate, rates of spread of potential wildfire would 

continue to increase. This would further increase the current 2 mile travel pathway of wildfire in one 

burning period. 

Direct and Indirect Effects – Amount of Ogden landscape rated as Low Wildfire Risk from 

Random Ignition; Reduction in Major Travel Pathways of wildfires from Four Ignition Sites

Alternative 2 and 3 Common to both action alternatives

Amount of Ogden landscape rated as Low Wildfire Risk from Random IgnitionBurn probability, as an indicator of wildfire risk from random ignitions, was calculated for Alternative 2 

in the same fashion as the burn probability for the existing condition (no action alternative). Table 33

compares the burn probability for Alternative 2 with the burn probability of the existing condition.

Table 34: Wildfire Risk rating as measured by Burn Probability within Alternative 2 of the Ogden

project area

Wildfire risk Alternative 2 Acres* Existing Condition 

Acres*

Low 23,687 4,056

Moderate (low) 2,410 17,083

Moderate (high) 378 4,552

High 45 628

Very High 0 201

*There is a difference of 1 acre between the total acres for the project (26521 acres) and the total analysis acres for 

existing condition and alternative 2 (26521 acres), these acres represent minute pieces of ground that get dropped 

during GIS analysis and represent an analysis error of less than 0.1%.

When comparing Alternative 2’s wildfire risk from random ignition with the risk for the existing 

condition, it can be seen that treatments proposed under Alternative 2 would lower the risk substantially 

across the treatment area. All 201 acres of the project area with a risk of ‘Very High’ are reduced to a 

classification of ‘High’ or lower. The majority of those acres were brought down to at least the 

‘Moderate (high)’ level. Still more acres within the project area were reduced from their previous 

‘Moderate (high)’ and ‘Moderate (low)’ acres to a ‘Low’ risk. The difference in low wildfire risk acres 

between alternative 2 and existing condition is 19,631 acres, or 74% of the landscape. The reduction of 

wildfire risk shown in Table 34 is a considerable reduction. This reduction in wildfire risk means that 

with Alternative 2 actions, a considerable amount of work would be done to slow fire’s forward rate of 

spread and increase firefighter’s abilities to suppress the fire.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  171

Figure 53: Alternative 2 Wildfire Risk as measured by Burn Probability

Burn probability, as an indicator of wildfire risk from random ignitions, was calculated for Alternative 3 

in the same fashion as the burn probability for the existing condition (no action alternative). Table 35

compares the burn probability for Alternative 3 with the burn probability of the existing condition.

Table 35: Wildfire Risk rating as measured by burn probability within Alternative 3 of the Junction 

project area

Wildfire risk Alternative 3 Acres* Existing Condition Acres*

Low 24,704 4,056

Moderate (low) 1,591 17,083

Moderate (high) 139 4,552

High 77 628

Very High 11 201

*There is a difference of 1 acre between the total acres for the project (26521 acres) and the total analysis acres for 

alternative 3 (26522 acres), these acres represent minute pieces of ground that were added during GIS analysis and 

represent an analysis error of less than 0.1%.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

172  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 54: Alternative 3 Wildfire Risk as measured by Burn Probability

When comparing Alternative 3’s wildfire risk from random ignitions with the risk for the existing 

condition it can be seen that treatments proposed under Alternative 3 would lower the risk substantially 

across the treatment area. Nearly all 201 acres of the project area with a risk of ‘Very High’ are reduced 

to a classification of ‘High’ or lower. The majority of those acres were brought down to at least the 

‘Moderate (high)’ level. Still more acres within the project area were reduced from their previous 

‘Moderate (high)’ and ‘Moderate (low)’ acres to a ‘Low’ risk. The difference in low wildfire risk acres 

between alternative 3 and existing condition is 20,648 acres, or 78% of the landscape. The reduction of 

wildfire risk shown in Table 34 is a considerable reduction. This reduction in wildfire risk means that 

with Alternative 3 actions, a considerable amount of work would be done to slow fire’s forward rate of 

spread and increase firefighter’s abilities to suppress the fire.

Reduction in Major Travel Pathways of wildfires from Four Ignition SitesMajor travel pathways for Alternative 2 and 3 were modeled in the same fashion as described for the 

existing condition major travel pathways.

Figure 55 shows the Major Pathways of the same four selected ignition points after Alternative 2 

proposed treatments are complete. When comparing Figure 55 with Figure 52, a dramatic reduction in 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  173

Major Travel Pathways can be seen at three of the four ignition sites. The Major Travel Pathways for 

the ignition site selected just east of Newberry subdivision within the Crossings project remains 

unchanged until the pathways reach proposed treatments of Ogden planning project. The first 

treatments proposed east of this location are effective in stopping Major Travel Pathways from 

continuing into the project area. Major Travel Pathways from the ignition point on McKay Butte are 

significantly reduced. Pathways are not entirely reduced because there is a no treatment area proposed 

down-wind from the ignition site under Alternative 2, primarily due to a historic site located within the 

area. There is also a unit adjacent to this area (unit 49) where canopy conditions would remain 

unchanged under Alternative 2, and only mowing would occur. These unchanged conditions lead to the 

resulting Major Travel Pathways. Although a potential wildfire would continue to have a forward rate 

of spread in this area, the associated predicted fire hazard is primarily low (especially in unit 49), and 

therefore fire suppression efforts are likely to be safe and effective. Proposed treatments under 

alternative 2 are shown to effectively stop Major Travel Pathways from ignition sites at Ogden Group 

Camp and along Road 21.

Figure 55: Major Travel Pathways of Alternative 2

Figure 56 shows the Major Pathways of the same four selected ignition points after Alternative 3 

proposed treatments are complete. When comparing Figure 56 with Figure 52, a dramatic reduction in 

Major Travel Pathways can be seen at two of the four ignition sites. The Major Travel Pathways for the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

174  Ogden Final EIS

ignition site selected just east of Newberry subdivision within the Crossings project remains unchanged 

until the pathways reach proposed treatments of Ogden planning project. The first treatments proposed 

east of this location are effective in stopping Major Travel Pathways from continuing into the project 

area. Major Travel Pathways from the Road 21 ignition are not as effectively stopped in the alternative 

3 prediction. Proposed treatments to surface fuels in unit 183 in alternative 2 (mow/burn) were dropped 

in alternative 3, allowing for fire travel to continue through the unit under alternative 3. Under 

Alternative 3, fire is then allowed to travel into and through the adjacent no treatment area to the north 

of unit 183. Predicted fire hazard in this area is primarily moderate, and could pose problems to a safe 

and effective fire suppression operation. Major Travel Pathways from the ignition point on McKay 

Butte are significantly reduced. Pathways are not entirely reduced because there is a no treatment area 

proposed down-wind from the ignition site under Alternative 3, primarily due to a historic site located 

within the area. There is also a unit adjacent to this area (unit 49) where canopy conditions would 

remain unchanged under Alternative 3, and only mowing would occur. These unchanged conditions 

lead to the resulting Major Travel Pathways. Although a potential wildfire would continue to have a 

forward rate of spread in this area, the associated predicted fire hazard is primarily low (especially in 

unit 49), and therefore fire suppression efforts are likely to be safe and effective. Proposed treatments 

under alternative 2 are shown to effectively stop Major Travel Pathways from the ignition site at Ogden 

Group Camp. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  175

Figure 56: Major Travel Pathways of Alternative 3

Summary- Amount of Ogden landscape rated as Low Wildfire Risk from Random Ignition; 

Reduction in Major Travel Pathways of wildfires from Four Ignition Sites

Fire risk from random ignition would be lessened on over 75% of the project landscape. Major travel 

pathways from potential ignition sources within the project area were greatly reduced where proposed 

treatments were adjacent to those sites. Upon project completion, short term effects would provide the 

opportunity for suppression resources to effectively make safe decisions to take direct attack 

suppression action. Rates of spread of wildfire would significantly be lessened. Wildfire could be 

allowed to play its role in the ecosystem due to the lessened risk. By returning the landscape into a low 

fire risk rating would mean that fires could be managed at smaller sizes. There could also be 

opportunities for fire managers to use planned and unplanned ignitions in order to maintain low fire risk 

areas on the landscape, adding protection while maintaining protection to high interest values.

Effects to fire risk would gradually degrade over the course of a decade. Brush responds rapidly to 

mowing when not followed up with subsequent mowing and/or underburning. The need to maintain the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

176  Ogden Final EIS

conditions will be important in keeping fire risk low. The effects on areas that are treated with mowing 

alone will greatly reduce the fire risk for approximately 5-7 years. Areas treated with underburning are 

remain low in fire risk for 7-15 years. Maintenance treatment by means of mowing and/or underburning 

would be needed within the next 15-20 years. Further delay could set those low rated stands into 

moderate or high within 20 years. 

Areas that do not receive treatment will continue to degrade, however should a fire start in a treated 

area, suppression action could be taken to keep fire to treated area or lessen the risk/exposure to 

firefighters by retreating and allowing fire to burn in untreated stands. Subsequently, in the event of a 

fire beginning in an untreated stand, fire could burn to treated areas and could be managed using a 

variety of management responses. Units and treatments have been designed to further fragment the 

landscape. 

Cumulative Effects

Past projects are incorporated into the Major Travel Pathways modeling shown in Figures 55 and 56. 

The combination of the Ogden action alternatives with past management activities and ongoing projects 

will reinforce the intent of breaking up the continuous fuel loading. A principal goal of locating 

treatments with various intensities is to not remove fire from the landscape completely but to minimize 

the impacts, effects and scale of undesired fire characteristics. 

Table 36 shows the activities that were reviewed for actions that could contribute to the cumulative 

effects analysis. Geothermal exploration, the potential for development of an Off Highway Vehicle trail 

system, recent treatments in the Crossings project, Lava Cast and Prairie Dog also contribute to 

fragmenting the landscape. This provides a greater opportunity to keep fires confined to smaller, much 

more manageable, areas utilizing past treatment, trails and exploration pads as containment lines or 

potential barriers.

Table 36: Cumulative effects within the Ogden EIS 

Activity/Project Description of Action General Effect

Pre-commercial 

thin Proposed management action Excess fuels will be piled burned and/or utilized

Commercial Thin Proposed management action Excess fuels will be piled, burned and/or 

utilized

Final Removal Proposed management action Excess fuels will be piled, burned and/or 

utilized

Prairie Dog 

Timber Sale

Completed timber sale and 

associated activities

Implementation complete, subsequent 

burns needed for maintenance

Crossings CE Completed hazardous fuels 

reduction project

Implementation complete, additional 

treatment reinforces community protection

Newberry 

Geothermal 

Exploration

Single point well drilling Scale of project will not impact fuels 

implementation

Bon Timber Sale 

Implementation

Adjacent to the north of the 

Ogden project. Ongoing 

treatment including thinning, 

piling and underburning

No unit overlap between projects

Lava Rock OHV 

trail project

Proposed development of OHV 

trails to accommodate 

recreation use (planning phase)

No fire or fuels effects

Firewood cutting Users usually remove larger concentrations, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  177

benefiting fuel loading levels

Dice Timber Sale 

Implementation

Adjacent to the north of the

Ogden project. Ongoing 

treatment including thinning, 

piling and underburning

No unit overlap between projects

Travel 

Management 

Rule 

Implementation

Motor vehicles limited to 

designated roads and trails

Reduces cross-country travel; no impacts to 

fire/fuels.

Key Issue #3: Air Quality Impacts from Burning

With the proposed action, small diameter material will be piled and burned which can create soil 

impacts and puts smoke into the air, which can affect air quality. The project emphasizes utilization 

whenever possible however, the proposed action also involves a large amount of underburning, which 

will also put smoke into the air. Under Alternative 3, more areas will be left with a higher basal area 

and mix of lodgepole pine than the proposed action (see Issue #2). These areas will not all be 

underburned, therefore less smoke produced. If these areas burn during a wildfire, it is quite likely that 

the amount of smoke and associated particulate would be higher.

Measurement: Number of acres of prescribed underburning, number of acres with slash pile burning at

approximately 10-15 piles per acre (2-25 tons per acre), and PM10 (Particulate Matter) created. 

3.5.1 Introduction

All burning activities must comply with National Ambient Air Quality Standards and would be 

conducted under the rules and regulations of the Oregon Smoke Management Plan administered by the 

Oregon Department of Forestry. Rules and regulations limit the amount and timing of all burning 

activities. Such activities would be conducted only when prevailing and predicted wind patterns would 

not result in measurable impacts to either the Three Sisters Wilderness class I airshed or the Bend 

Designated Area. The prevailing winds tend to be either a westerly or northwesterly flow, away from 

these areas.

Applicable units of measure (indicators) used in this report and in the field are tons per acres, tons per 

acre of emissions, acres treated. These units of measure will serve to show results of treated areas. 

Tons per acre will be used exclusively to express the density of fuel loadings in forested areas, treated 

and untreated, mechanically or with prescribed fire.

For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed that Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 would be similar 

enough in treatments and area to use the same smoke emissions results. 

3.5.2 Regulatory Framework

Clean Air Act

The 1990 Clean Air Act is an amended federal law first passed in 1990. Under this law, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) protects and enhances the quality of the nation’s air resources 

by setting limits on how much of a pollutant (particulate matter) can be in the air based on scientific 

studies that have established a link between the particulate matter and public health. The pollutants 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

178  Ogden Final EIS

thought to affect human health include particulate matter emitted in smoke that is less than 10 microns 

in diameter (PM10 and PM2.5). 

The Prevention of Significant Deterioration provisions of the Act requires “measures, to preserve, 

protect, and enhance the air quality for areas designated as ‘Class 1’ airshed (42 U.S.C. 7475(d)(2)(B)).” 

The closest Class 1 airshed to the project area is the Three Sisters Wilderness Area, located 32 miles to 

the west-northwest of the project area.

The Act also requires that smoke intrusions into “designated areas” be minimized to avoid adversely 

affecting air quality. Bend and Redmond are Smoke Sensitive Receptor Areas.

In the State of Oregon, the Oregon Department of Forestry is the state agency responsible for insuring 

compliance with the Clean Air Act for actions associated with burning.

Oregon Smoke Management Plan

This plan includes regional monitoring and regulation of pollutants less than 10 and 2.5 (PM 10 and PM 

2.5) micrometers in size. By law, the Forest Service is required to follow directions of the State 

Forester in conducting prescribed burning. This is to assure compliance with all aspects of the Clean 

Air Act. This is to be done in conjunction with the Clean Air Act for actions associated with burning.

3.5.3 Analysis Methods

FOFEM 5, the First Order Fire Effects Model, is a computer program that provides quantitative fire 

effects information for tree mortality, fuel consumption, mineral soil exposure, smoke and soil heating. 

This program assists in the projection and production of particulate particles. CONSUME 3 is a 

decision-making tool designed to assist in planning for prescribed fire, wildland fire for resource 

benefit, and wildfire. Consume predicts fuel consumption, pollutant emissions, and heat release based 

on a number of factors including fuel loadings, fuel moisture, and other environmental factors. Using 

these predictions determination can be made when and where to conduct a prescribed burn or plan for a 

wildland fire to achieve desired objectives, while reducing the impact on other resources.

3.5.4 Affected Environment

In order to determine the differences in particulate matter released during wildfire compared to 

prescribed fire, analysis is done using FOFEM (First Order Fire Effects Model) computer model to 

estimate tons/acre of fuel consumed for each given fuel type. Then, the amount of fuel consumed is 

multiplied by the emission factor for each given fuel type. The emission factor is a number that

represents the mass of pollutant produced per mass of fuel consumed, and is calculated and documented 

for each of the major phases of combustion and fuel type (NWCG, 2001). The result of that calculation 

is the amount of pollutant produced per acre burned. 

During high intensity wildfires, smoke emissions of particulate matter could range from 756-1374

pounds per acre depending upon the fuel loading and location. As shown in Table 38, this is at least 2-3 

times the amount then that of mowing and prescribed underburning on the same acre. Where down 

woody fuels have accumulated or stands are particularly dense; particulate matter production of PM10

and PM2.5 would exceed these estimates.

3.5.5 Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: The effects on air quality would occur when higher quantities of PM10 and 

PM2.5 are released as wildfire burns through the project area. These quantities of particulate matter are 

much higher then what would be released under prescribed fire conditions. This can be attributed to the 

fact that weather conditions are typically, windier, hotter and drier in the summer and in the case of a 

wildfire a greater amount of surface and canopy fuels are consumed. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  179

Smoke would continue to potentially impact the communities of LaPine, Sunriver and Bend in the event

of a wildfire. Wildfires burn without regard to dispersion, even with the predominant winds out of the 

west northwest, smoke would settle impacting not only the communities but Highway 97, the Deschutes 

River and Paulina and East lake resort.

Suppression action would continue consistent with current direction and acreage loss due to fire would 

be kept to smallest extent possible.

With no fuel treatments in this project area, the potential for smoke from a large wildland fire is 

increased. The 2003 fire season displayed the adverse effects large wildfires can have on air quality. 

The size, duration, timing and air quality conditions of wildland fires cannot be predicted.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Underburning or pile burning would be used in both action alternatives to 

treat fuels. Although there are fewer acres proposed to be underburned with Alternative 3, neither 

action alternative would result in violation of air quality standards or the Air Quality Act. All burning 

activity would be conducted in compliance with National Ambient Air quality Standards and Oregon 

Department of Environmental Quality regulations and restrictions. The impact of all private and agency 

burning is assessed daily during the burning season, thru the coordination of the Oregon Department of 

Forestry. 

Table 37: Amount of burning proposed by alternative.

Acres 

Prescribed 

Burning or 

Pile Burning 

Alternative 2

Acres Prescribed 

Underburning 

Alternative 2

Acres Prescribed 

Underburning 

Alternative 3

Acres Pile Burning 

Alternative 2

Acres Pile Burning 

Alternative 3

0 10,595 7,948 7,399 7,237

Alternative 2 implements 7,399 acres of pile burning followed with 10,595 acres of underburning (Table 

37). While alternative 3 implements considerably fewer acres of underburning than Alternative 2, pile 

burning only decreases by 162 acres. The reduction in acres of Alternative 2 to Alternative 3 results 

from the elimination of some units from Alternative 3 while still maintaining a mosaic of fuel treatments 

across the landscape. Fuel treatments within the wildland urban interface remain a priority in both 

alternatives to help create defensible space to private lands and major routes of travel through the forest. 

Strategically placing units and creating larger blocks to treat provides flexibility to use either planned 

ignitions or contain an unplanned ignition. Larger treatment units that utilize roads and natural features 

allow for ceasing or adjusting ignition if objectives are not being met. Greater smoke and particulate 

production would occur from having a larger land area treated, but again the activities would be 

conducted in compliance with regulations.

Table 38: Estimated Smoke Emissions – Wildfire under Extreme Conditions – Prescribed Fire under 

Spring-like Conditions Following Thinning and Mowing

Fire Condition Pounds PM10/Acre Fuel 

Produced

Pounds PM2.5/Acre Fuel 

Produced

Average Consumption 

(tons/acre)

Wildfire 892-1,374 756-1,165 20-30

Prescribed Fire 337-560 362-660 5-15
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

180  Ogden Final EIS

Weather and smoke dispersion conditions outlined in the prescribed burn plan should alleviate much of 

the potential adverse smoke effects. All burning would occur under conditions designed to ensure good 

smoke dispersal. The Paulina and East Lake Resorts could be inconvenienced by smoky conditions for 

short periods during prescribed burning operations. 

Once desired conditions are attained, periodic underburning or pile burning may be desired to maintain 

the fuel conditions. Future prescribed burning would require additional environmental review, but 

would likely produce light smoke emissions.

Smoke from wildfires within the project area would likely impact the communities of LaPine, Sunriver, 

and Bend; smoke, most likely, would not disperse under unfavorable conditions. Paulina Creek Falls 

and the developed trail system could be adversely impacted by wildfire smoke when tourism and 

recreation use are at their highest. A reduction in fuels through management would reduce the impact.

Prescribed burning would be implemented during good smoke transport and dispersion conditions and 

would be accomplished over time, which should minimize any adverse effects from prescribed burning 

smoke emissions. Through the use of mowing prior to burning, emissions could be reduced. For 

example, 500 acres of mowing and underburning produce approximately six tons of PM 10 versus 16 

tons when burning without mowing. 

Mechanized harvest areas would only have materials considered un-utilizable left on site. Most of those 

materials would be on landings and would be piled. These piles would have the potential of being 

removed and/or utilized, instead of being burned. Due to the concentration of fuels on those sites, levels 

of combustion are more efficient, resulting in much lower levels of particulate production.

Cumulative Effects

The amount of smoke and particulate matter permitted under the Clean Air Act as administered by the 

State of Oregon would be strictly adhered to. The State of Oregon regulations limit the levels of 

burning based on current and projected weather conditions. Smoke emissions produced by the 

implementation of an action alternative, road dust, and vehicle emissions could combine with air 

pollutants from other activities, such as other prescribed burning west of the project area. Not all 

agencies or private landowners are under the regulations as the USFS. Because smoke management 

regulations would control the timing of burning, impacts to local communities and people with 

respiratory problems would be expected to be much lower than those associated with a wildfire event 

occurring on those same acres.

A study of the cumulative effect of emissions in the Central Oregon area shows that slash burning 

contributes less than 0.5 percent (0.34 percent) of the PM 10 and less than 1 percent (0.64 percent) of 

the carbon monoxide in Central Oregon. Burning would be conducted to ensure that there would be few 

or no cumulative effects on air quality. In areas where restoration of historic fire regimes is planned, 

prescribed fire would likely need to occur. 

When conditions indicate potential adverse or poor smoke dispersion, firefighters and the public are at 

risk due to increased smoke exposure, burning could be required to occur over the course of multiple 

days. Additional burning days could increase the risk of smoke adversely impacting individuals with 

respiratory problems. Emission levels would not exceed air quality standards so both the number of 

individuals affected and the level of impact would be expected to be relatively low.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  181

3.6.1 Introduction

The following sections meet the direction provided by the (Forest Service Manual FSM 2600), the 

Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Plan (LRMP)[1990] and Ecosystem and Wildlife 

Standards for Timber Sales (Eastside Screens)[1995]. It specifically addresses the project’s effects upon 

federal candidate, threatened, or endangered species, forest-wide sensitive species, Management 

Indicator Species [LRMP, (MIS)], ecological indicators (FSM, species and/or habitats), Birds of 

Conservation Concern and Landbirds of the East-Slope of the Cascades and the components of these 

species’ habitats. A separate Biological Evaluation (BE) using the 2008 Region 6 Regional Forester 

Special Status Species List has been prepared for this project.

The Ogden project area does not contain any habitat for any threatened or endangered species. The 

project area does contain habitat for a number of sensitive species, Management Indicator Species 

(MIS), and neotropical migratory bird species. The proposed actions will benefit some species while 

negatively impacting others. Some of the negative impacts are magnified by other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions within the area.

This section of the EIS will address the following categories of wildlife species and habitat:

Federally Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species (Table 39)

Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species (listed in Table 41)

Management Indicator Species (listed in Table 57)

Birds of Conservation Concern (listed in Table 57)

Dead Wood Habitat (Snags, Logs, and Green Tree Replacements)

LOS Habitat, Old Growth Management Area, and Connectivity

3.6.2 Regulatory Framework

Generally three documents provide guidance or species lists for consideration in the management of 

federal lands. Management actions should minimize negative impacts, promote habitat development or 

provide habitat protection to some degree for those species that occur within the habitats of federally 

managed land. The three documents and associated species lists include the Deschutes National Forest 

– Management Indicator Species, the US Fish and Wildlife Service Birds of Conservation Concern, and 

a Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and 

Washington. Species listed in these documents overlap with each other as well as the federal 

threatened, endangered and sensitive species lists (see Tables 38, 40, and 57).

There is currently an Executive Order (13186) that provides for enhanced cooperation between the 

Forest Service and USFWS in regards to addressing impacts to neotropical migratory birds in 

conjunction with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Specific activities are identified where cooperation 

between the parties will substantially contribute to conservation and management of migratory birds, 

their habitat, and associated values, and thereby advances many of the purposes of the Executive Order. 

In response to this Executive Order and subsequent compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the 

Deschutes National Forest is currently following guidelines from the “Conservation Strategy for 

Landbirds of the East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington” (Altman 2000). 

This conservation strategy addresses key habitat types as well as biological objectives and conservation 

strategies for these habitat types and the focal species that are associated with these habitats found in the 

East Slope of the Cascades. The key habitats are: 1) Ponderosa Pine, 2) Mixed Conifer (Late 

Successional), 3) Oak-Pine Woodland, and 4) Unique Habitats (Lodgepole Pine, White Bark Pine, 

Meadows, Aspen, and Subalpine Fir). There is no Oak-Pine Woodland, White Bark Pine, Aspen, 

Meadows, or Subalpine Fir habitat within the proposed treatment areas.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

182  Ogden Final EIS

In 2008 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released “Birds of Conservation Concern 2008” (BCC)

which identifies species, subspecies, and populations of all migratory nongame birds that, without 

additional conservation actions, are likely to become candidates for listing under the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) of 1973. Bird species listed in this report include nongame birds, gamebirds without 

hunting seasons, subsistence-hunted nongame species in Alaska, and Endangered Species Act candidate, 

proposed endangered or threatened, and recently delisted species. While all of the bird species included 

in BCC 2008 are priorities for conservation, the list makes no finding with regard to whether they 

warrant consideration for ESA listing. The goal is to prevent or remove the need for additional ESA 

bird listings by implementing proactive management and conservations actions (USFWS 2008). From 

this publication, Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) were developed based on similar geographic 

parameters. See “Landbird” discussion for a list of the bird species of concern for each area, the 

preferred habitat for each species, and whether there is potential habitat for each species within the 

proposed treatment areas. Species on these lists are discussed within this document if they were known 

to or potentially could occur within the proposed treatment areas.

Habitat manipulation affects species differently. An action that may increase habitat for one species 

may decrease habitat for another species. Federal threatened, endangered, and regionally sensitive 

species lists are always consulted first. Species that do not appear on these lists but show up as a 

management indicator species or focal species, or species of concern may have persistence issues at a 

regional or national level but may not have persistence issues at the state or local level. This list also 

shows the connection between the species and its different habitat components analyzed, particularly 

those components seen as being limiting factors for the species. For example, the white-headed 

woodpecker is not only listed with its status, but is also shown to be associated with ponderosa pine 

habitat and large snags.

3.6.3 Analysis Methods 

This report has considered and applied the best science available; including papers, reports, literature 

reviews, review citations, peer reviews, science consistency reviews, and results of ground-based 

observations. The best available science was used to determine species or habitat presence and effects. 

A complete list of the science used can be found within the species discussions and in the Literature 

Cited section of this document.

In the absence of scientifically rigorous surveys for all species listed within the different tables, a 

species was presumed present unless proven absent. The assumption is if appropriate habitat 

components are available, then that species occupies or could occupy the habitat. Analysis focused on 

the habitat components. Examples of specific habitat components analyzed include: snag/coarse woody 

material (CWM), green tree replacements (GTRs), late/old structural habitat (LOS). Conclusions as to 

the whether the proposed actions would or would not cause a trend towards federal listing were 

determined by assessing how the alternatives impact the structure and function of the vegetation (i.e. 

habitat components) relative to the current and historic habitat availability, individual territory or home 

range size (as reported in the literature) in conjunction with state conservation status information and 

ranking for the species in the Natureserve (2010) database (http://www.natureserve.org/explorer). 

Rankings are given for global, national, and state levels. Only the state rankings will be used in this 

analysis in order to determine the proposed project’s contribution to population trends. 

Some wildlife habitats required a more detailed analysis and discussion. Level of analysis depended on 

the existing habitat conditions (i.e. limited habitat availability versus widespread habitat availability), 

the magnitude and intensity of the effects of the proposed actions (i.e. would the proposed actions cause 

a loss, no change, or increase in habitat), the risk to the resources (sustainability and availability of the 

habitat), and the issues identified during the formulation of the alternatives (see Chapter 1.6). These 

factors were used to form conclusions as to how the information, in regards to the effects, would be 

useful and relevant in the process of making an informed decision. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  183

A Forest-wide assessment for Management Indicator Species (MIS) was completed for the Deschutes 

NF (USFS 2012). An assessment was completed for each species based on the amount of potentially 

suitable habitat that occurs across the Forest, associated threats, and population trend data where it was 

available. See Wildlife Report for more details of the best available science used. The Viable 

Ecosystem Model was used to determine live tree component of habitat and formed the basis of acres of 

existing nesting/denning habitat. For certain species, snag components of habitat were determined using 

a variety of sources including gradient nearest neighbor (GNN) data and DecAID, as well as Viable. 

Information from the species assessments formed the baseline for the Ogden project. The Ogden project 

analysis incorporates those assessments by reference where noted in the species-specific analysis.

Field reviews to assess habitat conditions for the species considered have been ongoing since 2005 by a

variety of field personnel (e.g. wildlife biologists, biological technicians, silviculturists, and forest 

technicians). Habitat information has been gathered formally and informally. Formal habitat 

information has been gathered using stand exams, and systematic plots for dead wood (snags and logs). 

There have also been formal surveys for goshawks in 2009 and 2010, with known nest checks in 2011. 

Often during these surveys, other species will respond. Any wildlife observations were always noted 

during any formal effort. Informal habitat assessments have been ongoing during project and alternative 

development. The project’s Silvicultural Report (incorporated into Chapter 3.3) details the historical 

patterns and structure within the planning area. Field reconnaissance information, current analysis tools, 

recent literature, and Geographical Information System databases provided additional information. 

Tables 12 and 13 of this chapter list the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions that were used 

for the analysis of cumulative effects. The effects of past projects prior to those listed have been 

included in the existing condition discussion under each subject heading and do not appear as separate 

projects. These past actions are either no longer having effects that would overlap the effects of the 

proposed action in time and space, or if their effects are ongoing, these effects have been incorporated 

into the existing habitat conditions and it is not useful nor relevant to the decision making process to 

analyze them separately. Specific past projects that overlap in time and space with the proposed actions 

and do contribute effects that are additive to the proposed actions and may be useful and relevant to the 

decision-making process are listed and analyzed. 

Because the effects deal with forest development which inherently involves multiple decades, shortterm impacts are addressed over less than a 20-30 year time span while long-term impacts are addressed 

for over a time span greater than 30 years. Similarly, the timeframes used to address cumulative effects 

may vary by species but will generally include a time span of 20 years, which would roughly equate to 

more than one generation of the species. The spatial boundary for cumulative effects is dependent on 

the species and potential additive effects with the proposed action(s). Spatially, cumulative effects will 

generally start at the general project area boundary (approximately 26,521 acres) and then, depending on 

the former criteria, may include adjacent subwatersheds and nearby planning areas (Figure 57 and 58). 

These cumulative effects boundaries will provide for a range of habitat conditions that occur on the 

landscape that generally encompass at least a few home ranges of a species. 

The “Flat” project borders the Ogden planning area to the south. This planning area was not included in 

the cumulative effects bounding because it is still in the initial phase of planning and no proposed 

activities have been put forth in which to analyze how the actions proposed under the Ogden EIS may 

have additive effects. Recent past planning projects in the southern portion that have recently been 

implemented and whose potential additive effects have been considered include Bon, Dice, and Eb 

timber sales (Lava Cast Environmental Analysis), Crossings Fuels Reduction, Prairie Dog, and Long 

Prairie Mistletoe Reduction. Prairie Dog and Crossings lie entirely within the same Implementation 

Unit as the Ogden project and is considered in the cumulative effects bounding. The northern portion of 

the Long Prairie Mistletoe Reduction project area also falls within the potential cumulative effects 

boundary.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

184  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 57: Cumulative Effects Area by Planning Area
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  185

Figure 58. Cumulative Effects Area by Watershed Unit
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

186  Ogden Final EIS

Much of the project-specific effects will be put into context with the overlapping subwatersheds and 

watersheds, and ultimately to the Forest. The following figures illustrate the relative make-up of the 

planning area within the hydrological unit (Figure 59). 

Figure 59. Ogden project area distribution in watersheds, and Ogden project area by subwatershed.

3.6.4 Federally Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species

Table 39: Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate Animal Species known to Occur or May Occur on the 

Bend-Ft. Rock Ranger District

Species Federal and Forest 

Classification Habitat Natureserve Ranking

Presence in Project 

Area

Oregon Spotted Frog

(Rana pretiosa)

USFWS Candidate, 

S, R6 Sensitive

Wetlands, riparian 

areas, slow water S2 No habitat

Wolverine

(Gulo gulo luteus)

USFWS Candidate, 

S, R6 Sensitive MIS

Cirque basins for 

denning, mixed conifer, 

high elevation

S1 Yes, habitat available 

(no denning)

Northern Spotted 

Owl

(Strix occidentalis)

USFWS Threatened

Old growth with 

Douglas-fir and true 

firs

S3 No habitat

Northern Spotted 

Owl Critical Habitat 

Unit

None

Greater (Western) 

Sage Grouse

(Centrocercus 

urophasianus 

phaeios)

USFWS Candidate, 

R6 Sensitive, Bird 

of Conservation 

Concern

Sagebrush Flats S3 No Habitat

Long 

Prairie 

Watershed

8%

Lower 

Little 

Deschutes 

Watershed

92%

Ogden Project Area

26,251 ac

Finley 

Butte

7%

Paulina 

Peak 

South

1%

Kawak 

Butte 

5% Town of 

Lapine

1%

Lower 

Paulina 

Creek

55%

Wickiup 

Junction

29%

Upper 

Paulina 

Creek

2%

Ogden Project Area by Subwatersheds
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  187

Pacific Fisher

(Martes pennanti)

USFWS Candidate, 

R6 Sensitive

Mixed conifer forest, 

Complex forest 

structure

S2 Yes, habitat available

Key to abbreviations: MIS = Management Indicator Species; USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Oregon Sensitive Species determined from the Natureserve database for Oregon: S1, critically imperiled, S2 = imperiled, S3 

= vulnerable, S4 = apparently secure, S5 = secure, B = breeding, N = non-breeding

Oregon Spotted Frog

The Oregon spotted frog inhabits the margins of lakes, marshes, and pools in streams where there is an 

abundant growth of vegetation (Csuti et al. 2001). Literature cited in the Conservation Assessment 

(Cushman and Pearl 2007) describes spotted frog breeding habitat as moderate to large wetlands with 

extensive emergent marsh coverage that warms substantially during seasons when Oregon spotted frogs

are active on the surface (February to May). Sites always include some permanent water juxtaposed to 

seasonally inundated habitat. In literature cited within USFWS Species Assessment and Listing Priority 

Assignment Form (October 2005), the Oregon spotted frog inhabits emergent wetland habitats in 

forested landscapes, although it is not typically found under the forest canopy. This type of habitat is 

not present within or adjacent to the Ogden project area. 

The Ogden project area does not contain the type of riparian and wetland habitat this species of frog 

uses. For much of its length, Paulina Creek is a flowing, narrow stream. Paulina Creek loses some 

water as it travels downstream due to the porous nature of the volcanic soils. As it approaches the forest 

boundary it meets with the Ogden Group Camp area that was once a gravel quarry. Evidence suggests 

that this quarry channelized the creek. This channelization along with the pumice-like soils of the 

floodplain in the adjacent downstream area does not allow for the creation of wetland pools that this 

frog species utilizes. For these reasons, implementation of any alternative would have no impact on the 

Oregon spotted frog or their habitat.

Northern Spotted Owl

The range of the northern spotted owl does not extend to the Deschutes River or east of the Deschutes

River. The Ogden area is entirely east of the Deschutes River (approximately 8 miles) therefore no 

habitat exists within or is within the vicinity of the proposed action area. Because there is a lack of 

habitat, there are no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to the northern spotted owl, or its habitat. 

There is no effect to spotted owls and no effect to any critical habitat.

Greater Sage Grouse

Greater sage grouse are found in foothills, plains, and mountain slopes where sagebrush is present and 

the habitat contains a mixture of sagebrush, meadows, and aspen in close proximity. Winter habitat 

(palatable sagebrush) is probably the most limited seasonal habitat in some areas (Natureserve 2010). 

This habitat type does not occur within the project area. Implementation of any of the alternatives 

would have no impact on greater sage grouse.

Wolverine

Existing Condition

Deschutes National Forest

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Wolverine for the 

Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

The wolverine is a holartic species found in high-elevation habitats. It’s home range can be very large; 

at least approximately 30 sq. miles. Threats to wolverine populations include climate change and 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

188  Ogden Final EIS

alteration of alpine habitats, disturbance from recreation and roads (especially during the denning 

season), and isolation of individuals or small populations.

Denning habitat can vary. The dens in Alaska were usually long, complex snow tunnels with no 

associated trees or boulders. In contrast, dens in Idaho were always associated with fallen trees or 

boulders. Dens in both states were covered with at least one meter of snow. With few exceptions, they 

reported wolverine dens described to date were located in alpine, subalpine, taiga, or tundra habitat and 

reports of dens in low elevation, densely forested habitats are rare.

Denning habitat was determined using the model developed by Jeff Copeland of the Idaho Department 

of Fish and Game. Maps were generated using the following parameters:

Areas above 5,500 feet (with flexibility for adjustment up or down by the Forest depending on 

local conditions and knowledge),

Slopes with a north aspect (>320 degrees, <120 degrees),

Large cobble/rubble substrate (rock or snow), and

Concave curvature (cirque basins).

Using the above model, denning habitat for the Deschutes National Forest included the alpine dry, 

alpine meadow, glacier and rock, north aspect of 0-22.5 degrees and 337.5-360 degrees. The results 

from this were clipped using only the acres above 5500 feet in elevation. This resulted in a total of 1656 

acres of potential denning habitat on the Deschutes National Forest. The potential denning habitat is 

generally in small disjunct areas adjacent to the peaks of the Cascade crest and Paulina Peak. The 

greatest amount of potential denning habitat (756 acres) is located within the Headwaters Squaw Creek 

subwatershed of the Squaw Creek watershed near Three Sisters. The modeled acreage across the entire 

forest may overestimate potential acres of wolverine denning habitat due to current levels of disturbance 

that may be occurring particularly within the Newberry National Volcanic Monument. 

Management recommendations include protection of natal denning areas, and limiting disturbance or 

access to areas of suitable denning habitat and the immediate area around it.

According to the large scale viability assessments used in the Species Assessment Report(USFS, 2012), 

source habitat for the wolverine is increasing in the Southern Cascades and Columbia Plateau ecological 

reporting unit. The Deschutes National Forest is within these units. However, also within this report is 

the qualification that climate changes and increasing dispersed recreation in high elevation habitat may 

limit this increasing trend.

Ogden Project Area

Within the watersheds and subwatersheds that contain the Ogden project area there are 190 acres (Upper 

Paulina Creek watershed within the Lower Little Deschutes River Watershed) of potential denning 

habitat. None of these acres are within the project area or within proposed units.

There is an unverified sighting of a wolverine within the Newberry Crater. This is plausible because the 

Crater itself (Paulina Peak, East and Paulina Lakes) has the high elevation and talus habitat utilized by 

wolverines. Also the eastern flanks of the crater are largely undeveloped and roadless. Conversely, the 

portion of the crater closest to the project area is heavily utilized by human (roads, resorts, 

campgrounds, trails), and does not provide the solitude with which this species seems to be associated.

Because the wolverine has an extremely large range, it is reasonable to assume that an individual may 

travel through the project area as it disperses across the Cascades and Oregon. Effects of the project 

largely concern this aspect of wolverine use since there is no denning habitat within the project area. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  189

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects 

This alternative would have no direct or indirect effects to wolverines or their habitat. Wolverine use of 

the area would continue to be limited by the high degree of human recreation use in the project area and 

Newberry Crater. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Effects to wolverines from timber harvest and prescribed fire are largely unknown. However, for the 

most part wolverine habitat tends to be located at high elevations and in rugged topography that is 

unsuitable for intensive timber management and is already in a management status such as wilderness or 

national park that provide some protection from management, industrial and recreational activities. The 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concluded that these types of land management activities listed above do 

not constitute a threat to the wolverine (Federal Register Vol. 75, No. 239, Tuesday, December 14, 

2010). 

There are no proposed actions within any wolverine habitat. The proposed actions do not directly or 

indirectly impact wolverines.

Cumulative Effects

In considering the cumulative effects area by watershed and planning area (Figures 57 and 58), 

wolverine use is limited in the area due to density of roads, trails, and human traffic. Because there are 

no direct or indirect impacts to wolverines or their habitat there are no cumulative or additive impacts.

Determination

Based on the lack of direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, the proposed action under either action 

alternative would have no impact to California wolverines. Similarly, the Ogden project will not 

contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Deschutes National Forest.

Pacific Fisher

Existing Condition

The Pacific fisher primarily uses mature, closed-canopy coniferous forests with some deciduous 

component, frequently along riparian corridors (Csuti et al. 2001). Weir and Corbould (2010) found 

that fishers were limited by the openness of the stand; one reason being that escape cover (i.e. trees for 

climbing) are far apart making fishers further susceptible to terrestrial predators. In Ruggiero et al. 

(1994), it is suggested fishers prefer closed-canopy (greater than 60%), late-successional forests with 

large physical structures (live trees, snags, and logs), especially if associated with riparian areas. A 

2004 Species Assessment by the US Fish and Wildlife Service documents key aspects of fisher habitat 

as those associated with late-successional forests (i.e. high canopy closure, large trees and snags, large 

logs, hardwoods, and multiple canopy layers). Distribution of fishers is limited by elevation and snow 

depth (Krohn et al. 1997 in US Fish and Wildlife Service Species Assessment). Fishers generally avoid 

areas of high human disturbance, primarily high road density or recreational developments. Fishers are 

fairly large, weighing 3 to 13 lbs and 29 to 47 inches long. This may suggest a need of larger log sizes 

for dens than other animals with similar needs (e.g. marten). Aubry and Raley (2006) found in 

southwestern Oregon, fishers were found denning and resting at 4,000 feet elevation, more than 80% 

canopy closure, and more than 16 snags and 67 logs at least 20” DBH per acre; supporting the 

suggestion that this species utilizes large to very large structure. Denning and resting sites were also 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

190  Ogden Final EIS

observed in large live trees (mostly Douglas-fir) with mistletoe brooms, limb clumping, rodent nests, or 

some other deformity. They also found fishers were preying upon woodpeckers, jays, grouse, quail, 

squirrels, hare, porcupine, and skunks. Most of these prey species can be found in the area.

There are no known fishers in the project area. Based on habitat descriptions in the literature and using 

the 2004 Satellite Imagery vegetation data, there is approximately 3030 acres of quality habitat (multistoried stands; greater than 20” average stand DBH; and greater than 55% canopy closure) in the 

cumulative effects planning area (Figure 57). A total of 4,681 acres of potential habitat exists by 

including multi-storied, high canopy closure (greater than 55%) stands with at least 15” average DBH. 

Fishers generally have large territories (a minimum of 10 square km or 2,500 acres). Within the project 

area there are approximately 403 acres of potential habitat with 307 acres of this being what may be 

considered quality habitat. Based on the territory size reported in the literature, there is habitat for 

approximately 1-2 fishers in the larger cumulative effects area (Figure 57) by planning area, with the 

project area making up part of one of these territories.

In regards to other habitat attributes, there is a wide range of log densities present throughout the 

watershed. Sampling within the project area found a range of 5-27 logs per acre >12 in. diameter. Most 

logs were lodgepole or ponderosa pine ranging from 7-48” diameter (overall average 12”); of the logs 

>12” the average diameter on the small end was 16 inches. This is on the smaller end for fisher 

utilization. There was an average of 1-2 snags per acre greater than 10” DBH, with an average of 

approximately 0.5-1 snag larger than 20” DBH per acre. Most snags were lodgepole pine and 

ponderosa pine, but there were large fir snags present. Not recorded as part of this sampling effort were 

trees larger than 20” DBH that were not dead, but mostly dead or with decay and/or defects. Species 

such as the fisher, or its prey, could utilize these for habitat. In the DecAID advisor (Mellen et al. 

2009), information on fisher use of dead wood is provided in the montane mixed conifer habitat type. In 

studies cited in this tool, 50% of the areas with a fisher population had 5.6 % downed wood cover 

(Table MMC_L.sp-24) 5-9” diameter and 2.7 snags per acre larger than 20” DBH (Table MMC_S/L.sp22). Existing estimates within the project area are 12% downed log cover and an average of 1-2 snags 

per acre >10”dbh. This would suggest that fisher habitat within the project area, from the perspective of 

the snag and log components, is at the lower tolerance level for snags but higher tolerance levels for 

logs. Only within the Newberry Crater and the OGMA is there habitat with no scheduled timber harvest 

(37% of the cumulative effects area). These are areas where it may be more prudent to manage for high 

dead wood levels. The largest patches of potential fisher habitat are found within these areas. Of these 

areas a majority are within habitat types used by fishers, although it has not been determined how much 

quality or potential habitat is within each allocation. 

Table 40: Fisher habitat within the subwatersheds and project area

Fisher Habitat Definition Project Area Cumulative Area

Multi-storied stands with >15” dbh and 

>55% canopy closure 403 ac 4681 ac

Multi-storied stands with >20” dbh and 

>55% canopy closure (“high quality”) 307 ac 3030 ac

Even in the stands within the project area that meet the high quality habitat definitions, they would 

actually serve as marginal fisher habitat, because of the high degree of recreation use, and the current 

road and trail densities. The habitat is not located in one large clump, but scattered as smaller parcels 

throughout the project area.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  191

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects 

No action would retain more dead wood in potential fisher habitat, barring a wildfire that consumes 

dead wood. Current areas of heavy concentrations of downed logs would remain that support fisher 

habitat. In some areas, canopies experiencing bark beetle attack will die and overall canopy closure will 

decrease. Fishers are known to use areas with high canopy closure, thus this would negatively impact 

fisher habitat. No action would not address any impacts occurring from the current recreation use within 

the project area (i.e. habitat would remain marginal, limiting the ability of fishers to use the area in case 

of wildfire and/or further beetle outbreak).

Alternative 2

Direct and Indirect Effects

This alternative proposes treatments within 87.5 acres of potential fisher habitat in scattered parcels of 

less than approximately 20 acres. The proposed treatments will directly reduce the multi-storied 

canopies and reduce downed wood by favoring ponderosa pine development and underburning. This 

removes potential fisher habitat. Although this represents 22% of the habitat within the project area; it 

is a much smaller proportion of the potential habitat within the cumulative effects area (2%) and 

represents approximately 3-4% of an average territory. 

Overall most of the proposed treatments are within the drier ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine habitats 

– not types commonly associated with good fisher habitat; whereas a majority of the potential fisher 

habitat in the project area is within the mixed conifer habitats. Therefore this project would have few 

direct or indirect impacts to fishers.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects

This alternative treats slightly more acres of habitat (91 acres) but the consequences of these impacts 

would be the same as those described under Alternative 2.

Cumulative Effects

Not only are the impacts of the treatments proposed within potential fisher habitat additive to other 

vegetation management projects within the cumulative effects area (Figure 57, e.g. Lava Cast); but they 

are also additive to the proposals to add or improve recreation opportunities (e.g. Lava Rock OHV trail 

system) and geothermal developments and monitoring which require the improvement and maintenance 

of roads in the project area. These additive impacts reduce the suitability of the project area for fishers; 

reducing the areas of highly suitable habitat to roadless areas within the Newberry Crater. This may 

restrict or narrow east/west movements of fishers that would otherwise promote dispersal and expanding 

populations.

Determination

Based on the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, the proposed actions under either action alternative 

may impact individuals or habitat of the Pacific fishers but are not likely to contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing. The amount of habitat removed in the long-term represents marginal habitat and 

a small (<5%) portion of a single fisher territory. 

3.6.5 Sensitive Species

The following table lists the Region 6 Regional Forester sensitive species (2008 list); all of the species 

that are federally threatened, endangered, or a candidate for listing area also considered regionally 

sensitive (Table 41). These species have been addressed separately in the section above. As shown, the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

192  Ogden Final EIS

species, their ranking on other lists, short habitat summary, and habitat presence in the Ogden project 

area are displayed. Only those species with potential habitat within the project area will be further 

analyzed. 

Table 41: The following Region 6 Sensitive animal species are either known to occur or may potentially 

occur on the Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District.

Species

Federal and 

Forest 

Classification

Habitat Natureserve 

Ranking

Presence in 

Project Area

Birds

Northern Bald Eagle

(Haliaeetus 

leucocephalus)

S, MIS Lakeside or riverside with 

large trees S4B, S4N Yes, habitat available

American Peregrine 

Falcon

(Falco peregrinus 

anatum)

S, MIS Riparian, cliffs S2B Yes, habitat 

available

Bufflehead

(Bucephala albeola) S Lakes, snags S2B, S5N No habitat

Harlequin Duck

(Histrionocus 

histrionicus)

S Rapid streams, large trees S2B, S3N Yes, habitat 

available

Horned Grebe

(Podiceps auritus) S

Lakes, emergent 

vegetation S2B, S5N No habitat

Yellow Rail

(Coturnicops 

noveboracensis)

S Marshes S1B No habitat

Tricolored Blackbird

(Agelaius tricolor) S Lakeside, bullrush S2B No habitat

White-headed 

Woodpecker

Picoides albolarvatus

S*, MIS, 

Landbird focal 

species

Mature ponderosa pine 

forests; weak excavator S2 Yes, habitat available

Lewis Woodpecker

Melanerpes lewis

S*, MIS, 

Landbird focal 

species

Ponderosa pine forests, 

burned forests S2 Yes, habitat 

available

Northern Waterthrush

Seiurus noveboracensis S

Riparian vegetation; bogs, 

wetlands S2 Yes, habitat available

Mammals

Pygmy Rabbit

(Sylvilagus idahoensis)

S Sagebrush flats S2 No habitat

Townsend’s Big-Eared 

Bat

Corynorhinus 

townsendii

S, MIS Caves S2 No habitat

Invertebrates

Crater Lake tightcoil

Pristiloma arcticum 

crateris 

S Riparian and wet areas S1 Yes, habitat 

available

Silver-bordered 

fritillary

Boloria selene

S

Open riparian bogs and 

marshes S2 No habitat

Johnson’s hairstreak

Callophrys johnsoni

S

Conifer (western hemlock, 

red firs, and gray or digger 

pines) forests with the 

S2 No habitat
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  193

Species

Federal and 

Forest 

Classification

Habitat Natureserve 

Ranking

Presence in 

Project Area

mistletoe Arceuthobium

Key to abbreviations: S=USFS Region 6 Sensitive, MIS=Management Indicator Species, Birds of Conservation 

Concern

Oregon Sensitive Species determined from the Natureserve database for Oregon: S1, critically imperiled, S2 = imperiled, 

S3 = vulnerable, S4 = apparently secure, S5 = secure, B = breeding, N = non-breeding

Rationale for species not further analyzed

Implementation of any of the alternatives would have no impact on the following species because 

habitat does not occur within the project area: horned grebes, buffleheads, tri-colored blackbird, 

yellow rail, greater sage grouse, pygmy rabbits, Townsend’s big-eared bats, silver-bordered 

fritillary, Johnson’s hairstreak. For more specific discussion regarding habitat for these species refer 

to the Wildlife Biological Evaluation beginning on page 13.

Discussion for Species Further Analyzed

Bald Eagle

Existing Condition

Deschutes National Forest

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Bald Eagle for the 

Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

Bald eagles exhibit a strong territorial and nest-site fidelity; breeding areas are often reused in 

successive years. In Oregon, nest sites are usually associated with large bodies of water, but can occur in 

any habitat with available prey. Nests are usually built in live trees or snags, consist of bulky stick 

platforms built in the super-canopy of live trees, but are also rarely built on cliff faces or on the ground 

in treeless areas.

Breeding season home ranges recorded throughout Oregon range from the mean of 1.75 mi2 (4.53 km2) 

at to the average of 8.38 mi2 (21.7 km2).

Winter habitat suitability is defined by the availability of food, presence of adequate roosts with 

protection from inclement winter weather, and absence of human activity (Buehler 2000). Throughout 

their range bald eagles select large, super-canopy trees for winter roost sites that are open and accessible 

(Buehler 2000). 

Aquatic habitats are favored for foraging, and bald eagles prefer fish to other prey. They prey on a wide 

variety of species, though, including rabbits and hares, muskrats, reptiles and amphibians, crustaceans, 

and a variety of avian species, particularly waterfowl. Bald eagles acquire food by three means: 1) 

stealing prey from others, 2) scavenging on carrion, and 3) hunting and killing. 

Potential threats or risks to eagle habitat proposed by the Ogden project include: timber management, 

fire, and recreational activities. Direct or indirect disturbances of habitat or food supplies can also occur 

from human-related activities.

Timber management activities have the potential to affect bald eagles in a variety of ways. Timber 

harvesting in or near breeding or winter grounds can remove trees that are valuable as nesting, roosting, 

or perching sites. Harvesting or other mechanical activities near nest sites may disturb breeding birds, 

potentially resulting in abandonment of the nest, as well as an abandonment of use of winter-roosting 

and foraging areas. Road building near breeding or winter habitats to access timber management areas 

may be an unacceptable disturbance for resident eagles (USDA Forest Service 2004). 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

194  Ogden Final EIS

Harvesting activities can also affect the prey base for eagles. Increased sedimentation can decrease the 

quality of fish habitat. Changes in structural characteristics of the forest may also affect the quality of 

habitat for other potential prey species, such as hares, rabbits and a variety of bird species (USDA 

Forest Service 2004)

Fire suppression can create conditions that increase the risk of stand-replacement fires. These fires can 

eliminate suitable nesting and roosting habitat. Additionally, sedimentation created by large-scale fires 

can degrade fish habitat, thus reducing the abundance of favored prey species

Small-scale and less intense wild fires, and prescribed fire, can improve conditions for alternate prey 

and potentially increase the number of snags available for perching. Prescribed fire and low-intensity 

natural fire can reduce the overall risk of stand-replacement fires that could destroy existing or 

potentially suitable habitat. It can also promote larger trees for future nesting and roosting habitat by 

reducing competition from the understory and also reducing losses to insects. 

If wildfire or prescribed fire were to occur during the nesting season, the smoke created by these actions 

could negatively affect bald eagles by causing them to abandon their nests and occupied territories. 

Increased human activity due to fires may also have the same effect

Many recreational activities, such as hunting, hiking, fishing, boating, bird-watching, and OHV travel

are concentrated in areas near water features that are favored by bald eagles for nesting, roosting, and 

foraging. Disturbance impacts increase with increasing duration and frequency of the activity. 

Pedestrian activities tend to be more disruptive than other forms of recreation.

Habitat on the Deschutes National Forest was mapped using the Gradient Nearest Neighbor (GNN) 

vegetation prediction model and then used to determine availability of nest trees based on criteria 

utilizing green trees ≥20” (50 cm) dbh. Using GIS, a one mile (1.61 km) buffer around large fishbearing lakes and reservoirs and fish-bearing rivers was used. The one mile buffer did not include 

aquatic habitat used for foraging.

Based on the GIS/GNN habitat model, there are 155,006 acres of potential bald eagle reproductive 

habitat on the Forest, with 97,868 acres (63% of the total acres) meeting the size criteria of green trees 

>20” (50 cm) dbh (see Table 42).

Bald eagle populations have been increasing in the nation and in Oregon. On the Deschutes National 

Forest, populations of breeding bald eagles have steadily increased since the first surveys began in the 

early 1970s. In 1971, there were 12 breeding pairs, while in 2009 the Deschutes National Forest had 49 

pairs.

Ogden Project Area

There has been an active bald eagle territory within the Newberry Crater since the late 1970s. It is 

believed that both Paulina and East Lakes serve one territory with a pair of bald eagles using a nest site 

at each lake in different years (i.e. one year they are at Paulina Lake, another year they are at East Lake; 

both lakes have not recorded an active nest in the same year). Paulina Lake is within 1 air mile of the 

proposed action areas, while East Lake is approximately 3 miles. There is a Bald Eagle Management 

Area (BEMA) located on the north end of East Lake.

Paulina Creek runs through the proposed action area and can serve as roosting, dispersal, and foraging 

habitat for the eagles at the lakes, although the fisheries and foraging opportunities at the lakes are 

considerably better. Bald eagle use along the creek is likely rare because of the prey availability within 

the lakes.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  195

Table 42: Acres of bald eagle habitat in the project area, proposed units, and the Deschutes National 

Forest.

Forest

(ac)

Watershed 

Level (ac)

Subwatershed 

Level (ac)

Planning 

Area (ac)

Alt 2 

Units

(ac)

% in 

Units

Alt 3 

Units

(ac)

% in 

Units

(ac)

Bald Eagle 

Habitat w/out 

structure

57,137 5,260 5,191 8 0.4 <0.01 0.4 <0.01

Bald Eagle w/ 

Nesting 

structure

97,868 3,577 3,557 8 0.4 <0.01 0.4 <0.01

Total 155006 8837 8748 16 0.8 0.8

Bald eagle habitat within the project area represents less than 1% (0.2%) of the habitat available at the 

watershed or subwatershed level; on the Forest it represents 0.01% of the habitat. The amount of habitat 

within an actual proposed unit is even less.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects

The no action alternative is not likely to have direct or indirect adverse effects to bald eagles. Because 

part of the purpose and need of the project is to increase resilience to stand-replacing fire, the current

lack of resilience and subsequent potential stand-replacing fire may reduce nesting habitat within the 

watershed. Should a wildfire burn through the planning area and into the NNVM, there is the 

possibility that human competition with bald eagles for the fisheries resource might be reduced because 

a burned over area would be less desirable as a recreation destination and reduced amount of 

recreational fishing. There is also the probability that roost and nest trees would be lost along Paulina 

Creek.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects

There are actions proposed along Paulina Creek. These actions involve reducing the small diameter fuel 

loading around the larger trees, especially ponderosa pine. Although there may be some short-term 

disturbance to an eagle that may be using the creek during project implementation, it is considered 

unlikely. There is considerable recreation use within the caldera as well as along the creek that may 

reduce the suitability of the habitat being used by bald eagles. Because the proposed actions near the 

creek will limit the use of machines, the level of disturbance is not likely to rise above what eagles 

experience there much of the year. 

Protection of the larger pine and increasing resilience of the riparian area to stand-replacing fire, 

indirectly benefits the BEMA and alternate nest site at Paulina Lake. As illustrated in the Purpose and 

Need section, the RHCA is at elevated risk to wildfire. By allowing firefighters to more easily stop a 

fire before it reaches the caldera, the eagle habitat around the lakes is better protected.

There are no proposed actions within the Monument caldera, therefore there are no anticipated 

disturbance effects to nesting bald eagles.

The proposed actions may disrupt eagle activities within the project area (day roosting or foraging) 

along Paulina Creek. However, based on the scientific literature in the report (US Forest Service 2012) 

stating that pedestrian activities tend to be the most disruptive, user along the Peter Skene Ogden trail 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

196  Ogden Final EIS

are likely already disrupting any eagle use within the RHCA, thus the added impact of the proposed 

actions are minimal.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects

All effects of the proposed actions under this alternative to bald eagles and their habitat are similar to 

those discussed under Alternative 2, except that this alternative treats fewer acres within the riparian

habitat conservation area along Paulina Creek.

Cumulative Effects

In considering cumulative effects to bald eagles, the boundary focused on the project area, the entire 

length of Paulina Creek and the Newberry Crater portion of the monument. These are the only areas on 

the Fort Rock portion of the district that contain water features commonly associated with bald eagles. 

There are two other bald eagle territories more than 22 miles to the south and southeast of the project 

area. Because of the distance from the proposed actions, cumulative effects to these two territories are 

not likely.

As stated earlier, the proposed action area and lakes receive a high degree of recreational use year 

round. Paulina and East Lakes are popular camping and fishing spots, with Paulina Lake Resort and 

East Lake Resort each operating. McKay campground and the Ogden National Scenic Trail are along 

Paulina Creek. The “Paulina Plunge” is a mountain biking service along Paulina Creek. The area is 

crisscrossed with snowmobile trails and OHV trails, the Paulina Lake Resort offering cabin rentals in 

the winter as well as the rest of the year. Each of these recreational activities has the likelihood of 

disturbing bald eagles at different points in their breeding season. It is not likely that bald eagles winter 

at the lakes because of the elevation and the lakes often freeze over.

In addition, the Newberry Monument and the proposed action area fall under areas being considered for 

geothermal exploration and seismic testing and monitoring. Although these activities will have minimal 

direct effects, the indirect effects of establishing the sites, some proposing the use of helicopters, can 

have more intense disturbance effects to eagles actually within the caldera.

In considering the location of the known eagle activity, and the high degree of potential disturbance 

from other activities within the area, any beneficial additive effects from the proposed actions are 

minimal.

Determination

Because the proposed actions would have minimal cumulative impacts to bald eagles by contributing a 

net loss of 0.8 acres (0.2%) of the habitat in the watershed that overlap the project area (i.e. Lower Little 

Deschutes and Long Prairie) and <0.01% of the habitat on the Forest, the overall direct, indirect, and 

cumulative effects will result in a small negative trend in habitat and increase in disturbance while 

project activities are underway. The project may impact individuals but would not likely contribute 

towards a trend to federal listing. The loss of habitat and increase in disturbance will be insignificant 

at the scale of the Forest. The Ogden project is consistent with the LRMP, and thus continued viability 

of bald eagles is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

American Peregrine Falcon

Existing Condition

Deschutes National Forest

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Peregrine Falcon for the 

Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  197

American peregrine falcons often nest on ledges or holes on the face of rocky cliffs or crags in a variety 

of forested and open areas, overlooking or within several kilometers of a large body of water, river, 

riparian area, marsh, sandy shore, or tidal area. On the DNF, breeding territories are found almost 

exclusively on cliff walls in river gorges and ledges along mountainsides. A definite preference is noted 

for southern facing, inaccessible cliffs with multiple ledges, which are used for nesting, roosting, eating, 

and food transfer.

Home ranges are quite large and may vary from 6 to 19 square miles. Peregrines may range as far as 18 

miles from the nest site during hunting forays. The size of the home range appears to vary with the 

local peregrine population density, which in turn, is probably related to prey availability. Territoriality 

around the nest is typically limited to a diameter of hundred yards. However, individuals have been 

known to attack intruders up to a mile from the nest site. 

There are approximately 17,590 acres of potential nesting habitat for peregrine falcons on the Deschutes 

National Forest (Table 43). This figure may be slightly over-estimated because there was not the ability 

to query “cliffs” but instead percent slope was queried. When mapped, there was close correlation with 

known current or historical nest sites.

Table 43: Peregrine Falcon Nesting Habitat on the Deschutes National Forest

Number of 

Subwatersheds

# of 

Subwatersheds 

With Nesting 

Habitat

Total FS Acres on 

Deschutes NF

Nesting Habitat 

Acres

% of Forest with 

Nesting Habitat

135 109 1,611,146 17,590 1%

Due to the peregrine’s large foraging range, timber management would generally not be considered a 

major threat to peregrine. However, intensive landscape level harvesting that decreases overall avian 

abundance could degrade the quality of peregrine foraging habitat. Removal of tall snags and mature 

trees in productive foraging areas can eliminate perching opportunities on the breeding grounds and 

eliminate roosting sites in post-breeding habitat. Harvesting activities in proximity to eyries during the 

breeding season can disrupt nesting activities or cause nest abandonment. Additionally, harvesting in 

habitats near eyries could decrease prey abundance in proximity to the nest. Associated activities such 

as road building near nest sites can also increase the level of human disturbance, which could be 

detrimental to breeding activities. 

Timber management can also have a positive effect on peregrine habitat. In homogeneous cover, 

harvesting can create a mosaic of habitat types, which can improve conditions necessary to maintain an 

abundance of avian prey species. Thinning in overly dense forest cover can reduce the risk of largescale stand replacement fires, thus protecting key foraging areas.

According to the species assessment report (USDA Forest Service 2012), little information was found 

regarding fire effects and the effects of fire management on the peregrine falcon. Peregrines capture 

prey in open areas above the forest canopy or in openings within the canopy. Wildfire plays an 

important role in creating and maintaining mosaics of openings within forested landscapes. Long-term 

fire suppression can lead to unbroken forest canopies that may be less effective for foraging peregrines.

Potential recreational activities that could cause disturbance to peregrine include rock climbing, hiking, 

biking, motorized ORV travel, and horse travel. 

Peregrine falcon populations may be limited on the Forest largely due to the availability of nest sites. 

Statewide, populations of the peregrine have recovered enough to become delisted from the state and 

federal endangered species lists. The 2003-2007 Peregrine Falcon Breeding Area Monitoring in Oregon 

results suggested that the population of peregrine falcons nesting in Oregon was stable or increasing, but 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

198  Ogden Final EIS

statewide surveys during that time have focused on monitoring known breeding areas with no 

systematic effort to search for new breeding areas. Consequently, actual size of the statewide breeding 

population, and the trajectory and magnitude of population change were unknown. The minimum 

breeding population size in 2007 was 106 breeding pairs, an increase of 23% since 2003.

Ogden Project Area

Potential falcon habitat is only found on Paulina Peak within the Newberry Crater. Although the Forestwide mapping effort suggests there are 3 acres of peregrine habitat within the project area; these acres 

are on McKay Butte which does not have the cliff structure commonly associated with peregrine 

nesting. This is an example of the over-estimation mentioned earlier due to the inability to query 

“cliffs” in ArcGIS. There is no peregrine falcon habitat within the proposed project area. Even the 

habitat within the Newberry Crater has moderate potential, based on an assessment by J. Pagel, Region 

6 peregrine falcon specialist, in 1993. In records going back to the 1950s there has not been any 

sightings of peregrine falcons in Newberry Crater. 

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects

This alternative, and the inherent risks it maintains, is not anticipated to have any direct or indirect 

effects to the American peregrine falcon because of the limited amount of potential habitat. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects

This alternative does not propose any actions directly affecting peregrine falcon habitat. There is no 

known or potential nesting habitat within the proposed action area.

Indirectly, the proposed actions could influence prey availability and diversity. Peregrine falcons feed 

primarily on birds (medium sized passerines up to small waterfowl; Natureserve 2010). The proposed 

actions (thinning, and underburning) may alter prey habitat, but prey abundance is expected to remain 

largely unchanged. The falcon is not directly reliant any one species or guild of bird species, therefore 

effects to habitat for different types of passerine birds is not expected to have effects to peregrine 

falcons.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects

In a broad sense, the effects of this alternative are the same as those discussed for Alternative 2. In 

relation to peregrine falcon prey habitat, this alternative would have slightly different effects to different 

prey habitat (i.e. not as much thinning in lodgepole pine habitat). Overall the direct and indirect effects, 

or the lack thereof, are similar to those described in Alternative 2.

Cumulative Effects

The cumulative effects boundary used to discuss effects to peregrine falcons includes the Newberry 

Crater (encompassing Paulina Peak, East and Paulina Lakes), the surrounding land within the 

Monument and the project area. This boundary was chosen because of the potential nesting habitat on 

Paulina Peak, and the likelihood that a falcon would forage over the lakes for small waterfowl and in the 

surrounding land within the Monument (a 2-3 air mile ring around the lakes).

Based on the rationale that falcons are not dependent upon one particular type of bird prey species, and 

that a variety of habitat and structure exists within the cumulative effects area, the proposed actions, in 

conjunction with the list of projects on page 56-59, will not have measurable cumulative effects. The 

proposed actions will not affect falcon nesting habitat. The cumulative changes in different prey species 

habitat is not expected to reduce overall prey availability for falcons.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  199

Determination

The proposed actions under either alternative will have no impact to peregrine falcons. Although 

timber harvest and prescribed fire can alter habitat for prey species, these same actions can help reduce 

the risk of a large wildfire, and create mosaics of habitat for a variety of prey species. Therefore, the 

Ogden Project will not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Deschutes National Forest for 

peregrine falcons. 

Harlequin Duck

Existing Condition

Deschutes National Forest

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for waterfowl for the Deschutes 

National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

They nest along fast-moving rivers and mountain streams on rocky islands or banks. Streams are 

braided to reticulate with many riffles and rapids (Cassirer et al. 1993). This species requires relatively

undisturbed, low gradient, meandering mountain streams with dense shrubby riparian areas (greater than 

50% streamside shrub cover), and woody debris for nesting and brood rearing. They also needs midstream boulders or log jams and overhanging vegetation for cover and loafing; indicator of high water 

quality (Spahr et al. 1991). They sometimes nest beside mountain lakes and lake outlets. 

They will nest in a hollow, usually under the cover of bushes within about 30 m (98 feet) of water, in a 

rock crevice among boulders, a rock cavity in cliff face, a tree cavity (Cassirer et al. 1993), a puffin 

burrow, or similar hidden sites (Ehrlich et al. 1992). They tend to breed in the same area in successive 

years.

Harlequin duck’s diet is almost exclusively benthic aquatic invertebrates; but also take crustaceans and 

mollusks, and a few small fishes.

Although still globally widespread, the Atlantic population may be reaching critically low levels and the 

Pacific population has experienced substantial declines. Harlequins may exhibit high breeding and 

wintering site fidelity and small local breeding populations, and are thus subject to local extirpations. 

Declining overall populations may provide little chance of re-colonization. Because of the lack of 

records of harlequin ducks on the Deschutes National Forest, it is difficult to determine whether any 

population exists and whether it is increasing or decreasing.

The species fact for harlequin ducks on the Interagency Pacific Northwest website 

(http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp) states “the primary factors thought to be responsible for local 

declines in the number of harlequin ducks are the degradation of breeding streams, such as damming, 

and human disturbance (such as rafting and other river-associated recreation) during the breeding 

season. In many areas, the vast majority of harlequin ducks breed on National Forest System lands, thus 

human recreation use of breeding streams during the summer months has the potential to cause stream 

abandonment or to decrease reproductive success (Wiggins 2005). In general, recommendations for 

forest management practices to reduce threats to this species and aid harlequin ducks generally fall 

under two categories (Wiggins 2005):

maintain the quality of breeding habitat, and 

minimize disturbance along breeding streams.

The following table illustrates the amount of waterfowl habitat at various scales (note it covers many 

waterfowl species not just harlequin ducks) (Table 44).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

200  Ogden Final EIS

Table 44: Acres of waterfowl habitat at the Forest, watershed, subwatershed and project scales.

Forest HUC 10 

(watershed)

HUC 12 

(subwatershed)

Planning 

Area

Alt 2 

Units

% in 

Units

Alt 3 

Units

% in 

Units

Deschutes

Long Prairie 

& Lower 

Little 

Deschutes

Kawak Butte-Lil 

Deschutes; Lower 

Paulina; Lapine-Lil 

Deschutes; Wickiup 

Jxn; Finley ButteLong Prairie; Paulina 

Peak South; Upper 

Paulina Peak

Waterfo

wl 

Species 71,206 877 873 496 250 0.3 217 0.3

Ogden Project Area

Paulina Creek could be considered potential habitat for the harlequin duck. Stream survey sampling has 

shown that aquatic invertebrates (mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies) do exist within the creek. 

However, as compared to streams and creeks on the Deschutes National Forest, Paulina Creek may be 

marginal habitat. Some other creeks & rivers on the Deschutes National Forest considered to have 

potential habitat include Candle Creek, Jack Creek, Metolius River. These other creeks and rivers are 

colder and contain higher populations of invertebrates that are relatively intolerant of less-than pristine 

conditions. Paulina Creek, on the other hand, is warmer and contains higher populations of 

invertebrates that can tolerate less pristine habitat. There is riparian vegetation and woody debris along 

sections of Paulina Creek as well as exposed rocks and boulders that would allow some resting sites 

within the creek. Therefore, although Paulina Creek could be potential habitat for the harlequin duck, 

its present condition (i.e. warmth and invertebrate populations) makes it of marginal quality.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects

This alternative would not change the current marginal quality of the harlequin duck habitat (i.e. Paulina 

Creek). Maintenance of the risk to fire and the current quality of the habitat would forego an 

opportunity to improve this potential habitat for a regionally sensitive species by addressing fuel loading 

issues and increasing resilience to wildfire.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects

This alternative proposes to thin and underburn 248 acres within the Riparian Habitat Conservation 

Area (RHCA). Only the zones of the RHCA directly adjacent to the creek are within potential harlequin 

duck habitat because this species is heavily connected to the water: loafing and resting on boulders 

within the creek, and nesting under vegetation and logs adjacent to the creek. Thus, not all of the 

proposed 248 acres are directly within potential habitat. The proposed actions in zones closest to the 

creek will not use mechanized harvest equipment and burns would be lit higher up in the slopes and then 

be allowed to back down closer to the water.

Specifically the proposed actions are to thin trees less than 10 inches dbh in order to promote large tree 

development in ponderosa pine and mixed conifer stands. There would be no thinning within the first 

12 feet adjacent to the creek. There would no mechanized equipment within approximately 100 feet of 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  201

the creek unless the existing trail and/or the past railroad grade is within 100 feet because these features 

can block overland flow of sediments.

In the short-term, the proposed actions may directly disturb any harlequin ducks using the creek, and 

directly remove some vegetative cover near the creek through the thinning and fire, reducing some 

potential nesting habitat. In the long-term, there would be improvement to the quality of the habitat 

along the creek (i.e. improved riparian vegetation growth and shading to cool water temperatures that 

support prey species) and increased protection from a wildfire running up the stream channel. However, 

this benefit is tempered by the continual dispersed recreational use (camping, dirt bikes, mountain bikes, 

hiking) within the creek corridor (see cumulative effects). 

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Direct and indirect effects of this alternative are similar to those discussed 

for Alternative 2. Alternative 3 proposes fewer actions within the RHCA and potential harlequin duck 

habitat (36 acres less underburning and 36 acres less thinning). However, the zone distances are the

same. This decrease in acreages is expected to result in very minimal differences in effects between the 

alternatives.

Cumulative Effects

Considering the Ogden project area itself and based on the above information, the degree of recreation 

pressure on Paulina Creek appears to be the biggest detriment to harlequin ducks establishing a nesting 

area. The Peter Skene Ogden national Scenic Trail, Paulina Plunge, McKay and Ogden Campgrounds, 

as well the numerous dispersed sites along the creek all contribute to the human disturbance along the 

creek. These are the projects listed in Cumulative Effects Table page 56-59 and the proposed actions 

may have additive effects.

Although there could be a short-term additive disturbance as the proposed actions carried out, this 

additive effect could be neutralized by the displacement of humans from the trails, roads, and 

campgrounds while the project is being implemented. Similarly the benefits of setting the stage for 

more resilient habitat may be neutralized by the cumulative impacts of recreational activities along the 

creek.

The proposed actions begin to address the recommendations in the fact sheet by maintaining (or likely 

improving) the quality of the breeding habitat through fuels reduction, and improved growth of riparian 

vegetation that will increase shading and cooling stream temperatures that may favor prey species.

Determination

Because of the lack of established populations and/or records of harlequin ducks in the watersheds and 

subwatersheds, the overall direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, the proposed actions under either 

action alternative may impact individuals or habitat and will result in a small negative trend of 

habitat. The loss of habitat is minimal at the scale of the Forest. The Ogden Project is consistent with 

the LRMP, and thus continued viability of harlequin duck is expected on the Deschutes National Forest. 

White-headed Woodpecker

Existing Condition

Deschutes National Forest

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the White-headed 

Woodpecker for the Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

Nesting Habitat

This species is often associated with old-growth ponderosa pine habitats. Research has found whiteheaded woodpecker densities increased with increasing old-growth ponderosa pine trees and showed a 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

202  Ogden Final EIS

positive association with large ponderosa pine. However, other studies have documented white-headed 

woodpecker use in younger ponderosa pine stands with remnant large diameter ponderosa pine present. 

Several studies have documented that white-headed woodpeckers prefer lower to mid elevation 

ponderosa pine forests on flat or gently sloping terrain.

White-headed woodpeckers nest primarily in ponderosa pine trees or snags. Other known tree species 

used for nesting include both live and dead aspen, grand fir, Douglas-fir, sugar pine, and ponderosa and 

lodgepole pine stumps. Most nests are found in snags and nest snag diameter is generally greater than 

the average snags diameter in the plot. In a summary of nest tree characteristics for this species, the 

range of nest tree sizes was 7-25” dbh. Out of all the literature cited in USFS (2012), the lower end of 

this range was represented by only two nests, whereas the majority of nests were in snags >20” dbh 

(70+ nests).

Roosting Habitat

White-headed woodpeckers did not use the same kind of tree for nesting as they did for roosting. Nest 

trees were typically dead, had broken tops, were shorter in height, contained more cavities, and had a 

higher percentage of bark present than roost trees. 

White-headed woodpeckers roost in ponderosa pine habitats with an average canopy closure of 57.4 +

1.9% canopy closure. In addition, most (65%) roost sites were located on flat ground and found on the 

lower one-third of the slope or bottom slope (89%) with slopes ranging from 0-40% and an average of 7 

+ 1%. Roost site elevations ranged from 2900-4311 feet with an average elevation of 3382 + 39 feet. 

Roost trees diameters averaged 24 + 1” dbh and ranged from 7 to 45” dbh while heights ranged from 6 

to 164 feet and averaged 66 + 3 feet tall. Tree diameter at cavity height ranged from 2 to 30” in 

diameter and averaged 17 + 2” dbh while cavity heights averaged 8.6 + 1 feet tall and ranged from 5.5 

to 20 feet.

Foraging Habitat

Foraging habitat is usually found in association with nesting habitat. It has been surmised because 

white-headed woodpeckers are primarily bark gleaners and feed on ponderosa pine seeds throughout the 

winter, large diameter and old-growth ponderosa pine may be more important to white-headed 

woodpeckers because these trees have a greater bark foraging area, higher insect abundance, and greater 

and more frequent cone production than smaller trees.

White-headed woodpeckers do feed on tree sap. Sap trees were found to be shorter and smaller than 

non-used trees (2.4-14.6 inches or 8.8 inches on average).

Post-fire Habitat

A mosaic of burn severities across the landscape may improve white-headed woodpecker habitat by 

opening forest canopies in higher severity burned areas while retaining decayed snags created before 

wildfire and live cone-producing trees in unburned or low severity burned areas.

This species selected for the largest and most heavily decayed snags compared to other woodpeckers. 

Studies reviewed for the assessment report (USFS, 2012) show the mean diameter of nest snags for this 

species ranges from 14.6 to 16.7” dbh. Nest success was equal for nests in both logged and unlogged 

burned areas. Nest survival rates were higher in burned areas than nest success reported for unburned 

forests in central Oregon, and white-headed woodpeckers selected for nest snags >20”dbh from 

unburned or low severity burned areas that contained live trees. 

Threats to individuals and habitats

The golden-mantled ground squirrel and yellow pine chipmunk are known nest predators. Goldenmantled ground squirrels are positively associated with down wood volume and yellow pine chipmunks 

are positively associated with shrub cover (Wightman et al. 2010).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  203

A study referenced in the assessment report (USFS, 2012) monitored 18 individual birds from July 

through December in central Oregon and found as the amount of old-growth within a home range or 

within a study area increased, the home range size decreased. Mean individual home range sizes in 

continuous habitat were 257 acres compared to 793 acres in fragmented habitat and home range size 

ranged from 116 to 1,100 acres. 

Habitat degradation is the primary threat to this species. Loss of large diameter, old ponderosa pine 

from logging, planting of even-aged stands, fire suppression (which favors replacement of pines by firs), 

snag removal and forest fragmentation have contributed to local declines. Fire suppression has altered 

fire regimes so that ponderosa pine forests are no longer maintained by natural fire and are being 

replaced by fir species in the understory as well as leading to increased shrub densities. Increased shrub 

densities may be a factor leading to increased mammalian nest predation and increased risk of avian 

predation on adults. This species does persist in burned or cutover forests with residual snags and 

stumps and populations are more tolerant than those species associated with closed-canopy forest. 

Incidental disturbance at nest and roost sites occurs around recreation sites but this species is tolerant of 

human activity in the nest vicinity as long as activity does not involve the nest tree. Birds become 

extremely agitated if the nest itself is disturbed and activity is not prolonged.

Large Scale Trend Analyses

The species assessment report for the white-headed woodpecker reported on nation-wide (broken into 

sub-regions) trends for populations and habitat. The following are a summary from two of them.

Table 45: Partners In Flight (PIF) Summary of the White-headed Woodpecker Species Assessment 

Scores for the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (http://www.rmbo.org/pif/pifdb.html). 

Vulnerability Factor Score Qualitative Definition

Threats to Breeding 4 Severe deterioration in the future suitability of 

breeding conditions is expected.

Population Trend 4 Possible or moderate population decrease

Regional Combined Score for the 

Breeding Season*

18 Regional Species of Concern

* The regional combined score for the breeding season is the sum of 5 scores and can range from 5 to 25. The species is 

considered of regional concern if the score is >13, it has a high regional threat (>3), and occurs regularly in significant number 

in the BCR (RD>1).

According to the Source Habitats for Terrestrial Vertebrates of Focus in the Interior Columbia Basin, 

(2000; the Forest is found in the Southern Cascades and Columbia Plateau Ecological Reporting Unit), 

declines in old forest single and multi-story interior ponderosa pine are occurring in ERU 2 – Southern 

Cascades. There are similar findings for ERU 5 – Columbia Plateau with old forest single-story interior 

ponderosa pine showing declines in source habitats. Declines can be attributed to timber harvest, fire 

suppression, and snag loss.

There has been widespread change of Pacific and interior ponderosa pine old forests to mid-seral stands 

of Douglas-fir and grand fir/white fir. Throughout the basin, mid-seral shade tolerant forests are nearly 

twice that of historical levels. Timber harvest also resulted in the favoring of shade tolerant tree species 

due to the removal of shade intolerant species (ponderosa pine). Shade tolerant species (grand fir, white 

fir, Douglas fir) are more susceptible to fire, insects and disease. Declines in large snags (9-21” dbh) 

are also reduced basin-wide due to roads and timber harvest resulting in the reduction of nesting 

substrates. Roads lead to fewer snags due to timber harvest and firewood cutting. Additional loss of 

snags in areas where snags are already in low density could limit populations. 

White-headed woodpecker nesting habitat was mapped using ponderosa pine dominated forests which 

include all ponderosa pine plant association groups (PAGs) in all seral stages (early, mid, late) in

addition to other PAGs (i.e. dry white fir) in the early and mid seral stages where ponderosa pine is 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

204  Ogden Final EIS

dominant. In addition, stand size had to be a minimum diameter of 10” dbh or greater and have open 

stand characteristics (based on the canopy cover level thresholds for each PAG) to be mapped as 

potential habitat. Recent fires (less than 5 years old) with stand replacement or mixed severity were also 

classified as habitat. Recent (since 2002) forest management activities that resulted in conditions other 

than described above were removed from mapped potential habitat. The resulting nesting habitat was 

then quantified by applying the DecAID PPDF_S/L.sp22 table tolerance levels. For a comprehensive 

description of tolerance levels see USFS, 2012; or the DecAID website at 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid

The following Table 46 shows approximately 49% of all the white-headed woodpecker habitat on the 

Deschutes National Forest are providing ≥ 10”snags at some level (>0 per acre). However when only 

considering snags ≥20”, the amount of nesting habitat mapped on the Forest drops to 26% (Table 46). 

Table 48 puts this species-specific data into context with the historic range of variability for snags ≥20” 

showing that historically there was always some large snag habitat being provided (23-30% had >0-3.8 

snags/acres that were ≥20”dbh) and currently the Forest is approaching the upper limit of habitat that 

had no snags ≥ 20” dbh (74% existing, with HRV range of 66-75%). Potential causes of this has been 

discussed earlier under “threats”. The highlighted values are those that reflect current Standard & 

Guideline direction (2.25 snags/ac >15” dbh).

Table 46: Existing snag distribution >10”dbh in white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat on the 

Deschutes NF.

Tolerance Level Snags/Acre

Total Forest-wide Potential 

WHWO Nesting Habitat Acres % of Habitat

0 0 101,219 51%

0-30% 0-0.5 2,930 1%

30-50% 0.5-1.9 36,722 19%

50-80% 1.9-4 16,243 8%

80%+ 4+ 41,215 21%

Total 198,329 100%

Based on DecAID Version 2.1: Table PPDF_S/L.sp-22

Table 47: Existing snag distribution >20”dbh in white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat on the 

Deschutes NF.

Tolerance Level Snags/Acre

Total Forest-wide 

Potential WHWO Nesting 

Habitat Acres

% of Habitat

0 0 147,469 74%

0-30% 0-0.5 4,749 2%

30-50% 0.5-1.8 24,014 12%

50-80% 1.8-3.8 7,545 4%

80%+ 3.8+ 14,555 7%

Total 198,332 99%

Based on DecAID Version 2.1: Table PPDF_S/L.sp-22
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  205

Table 48: Comparison of existing white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat(>20”dbh) to HRV.

Snag Density (snags/acre)

0 0-3.8 (DecAID) 

0-4.0 (HRV)

3.8+ (DecAID)

4.0+ (HRV)

HRV 66-75% 23-30% 5%

Existing WHWO Nesting 

Habitat

74% 18% 7%

According to the species assessment report (USFS, 2012), based on population trends, large-scale 

habitat assessments, risk factors, and snag analysis, white-headed woodpecker populations are highly 

distributed and dispersed across the Forest with low abundances. Projects consistent with the Deschutes 

National Forest LRMP, Northwest Forest Plan, and Eastside Screens standards and guidelines should be 

expected to maintain viability of the white-headed woodpecker.

The white-headed woodpecker is listed as a strategy (Oregon Conservation Strategy) species for the 

East Cascades eco-region in which the Deschutes National Forest occurs. Limiting factors identified 

include population declines and local extirpations, loss of mature ponderosa pine trees and snags, habitat 

degradation from encroaching trees and shrubs and lack of recruitment of young ponderosa pine into 

larger size classes, and egg predation in areas with high predator densities with shrubs and down wood. 

Conservation actions listed in the strategy include the retention of existing or managing to meet 

conditions of large tracts (>700 acres outside old growth) of open (canopy closure 10-40%) mature (>10 

trees/acre >21” dbh and 1.4 snags/acre >8”dbh) woodland; retention of snags and high cut stumps in 

management; and the elimination or restrict fuelwood cutting of stumps and snags in suitable habitat.

The PIF Landbird Conservation Strategy, Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East Slope of the 

Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington (Altman 2000) addresses focal species and conservation 

issues and measures for the majority of the Deschutes National Forest. According to Altman (2000), 

this is a focal species of large patches of old ponderosa pine forest with large snags. Conservation 

issues for this species include: loss of large diameter ponderosa pine trees to logging; lack of 

recruitment of young ponderosa pine due to fire suppression that has allowed understory encroachment 

of firs; increased fuel loads that predisposes ponderosa pine stands to stand-replacement fires; loss of 

snags and downed wood; and fragmented habitat increases energy expenditure and risk of predation to 

individual woodpeckers. 

Conservation strategies relevant to the proposed actions include: inventory to identify stands meeting 

desired conditions and stands that can be managed to meet desired conditions; conduct thinning, partial 

cuts, group selection cuts, shelterwood, planting, snag creation, or prescribed burning as appropriate to 

meet desired conditions but not clear cuts or overstory removal; manage for large diameter trees through 

wider tree spacing and longer rotation periods; retain all snags and high cut stumps >10” dbh, soft 

snags, broken-topped snags, leaning logs, high stumps, downed logs, and all ponderosa pine trees >17” 

dbh (Altman, 2000).

Ogden Project Area

Much of the project specific effects will be put into context with the overlapping subwatersheds and 

watersheds (for cumulative effects), and ultimately to the Forest. The following figures illustrate the 

relative make-up of the planning area with the overlapping hydrological unit (Figure 60). The 

subsequent table shows how the hydrological units fit within the context of species habitat over the 

Forest (Table 49).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

206  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 60: Relative amount of Ogden project area within two watersheds (left); Relative amount of 

Ogden project area within subwatersheds (right). 

Table 49: Nesting habitat for white-headed woodpeckers displayed in increasing landscape scales.

Landscape Level Acres of nesting habitat Percentage of all 

Forest Habitat*

Deschutes National Forest 198,332 100%

Long Prairie Watershed (total) 4,736 2%

Finley Butte Subwatershed 574 0%

Paulina Peak South Subwatershed 1,291 1%

Lower Little Deschutes Watershed (total) 14,669 7%

Kawak Butte Subwatershed 2,046 1%

Lower Paulina Creek Subwatershed 1,737 1%

Upper Paulina Creek Subwatershed 35 0%

Wickiup Junction Subwatershed 1,402 1%

Town of LaPine Subwatershed 1,183 1%

Ogden Project Area (total) 3,607 2%

Proposed Alternative 2 Units 1,606 0.8%

Proposed Alternative 3 Units 1,638 0.8%

*percentages are not cumulative (i.e. column will not add to 100%) nor are subwatershed acres to watershed. Watersheds and 

subwatersheds are those in which the project area overlaps.

Long Prairie 

Watershed

8%

Lower 

Little 

Deschutes 

Watershed

92%

Finley 

Butte

7%

Paulina 

Peak 

South

1%

Kawak 

Butte 

5%

Town of 

Lapine

1%

Lower 

Paulina 

Creek

55%

Wickiup 

Junction

29%

Upper 

Paulina 

Creek

2%
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  207

Table 50: Summary Table of Snag Distributions within white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat (for 

the series of tables that have supplied the detail here see Appendix A of the Biological Evaluation).

Toleran

ce 

Interval

Snag

/acr

e 

>10”

Snags

/acre 

>20”

% of Habitat in 

project area with 

density and 

tolerance level

% of Habitat in 

watersheds with 

density and 

tolerance level

% of Habitat in 

Forest with density 

and tolerance level

HRV in PPDF

>10”dbh >20”dbh >10”dbh >20”dbh >10”dbh >20”dbh >10”dbh

*

>20”dbh

0 0 0 47% 85% 49% 77% 51% 74% 55-61% 66-75%

0-30% 0-0.4 0.5 1% 1% 2% 3% 1% 2%

19-27% 23-30%

30-50%

0.4-

2.0

0.5-

1.8 22% 11% 26% 16% 19% 12%

50-80% 2.0-4

1.8-

3.8 9% 3% 9% 0% 8% 4%

80+% 4+ 3.8+ 21% 0% 15% 4% 21% 7% 16-22% 2-5%

*HRV for PPDF >10” had a different breakdown of snag levels . The densities here best match the other data (0, 0-6, 6+) 

From the above table, currently a majority of the landscape both at the local level (project area) and 

landscape level (Forest) lacks large diameter snags for nesting white-headed woodpeckers (Table 50). 

A greater percentage of the project area meets this condition (85%) than at the higher landscape levels 

(74-77%). The project area’s distribution of smaller diameter snags (>10”dbh) is comparable to the 

larger landscape area. The Standard and Guideline amount of 2.25 snags per acre roughly equates to the 

density at the 50-80% tolerance interval. Approximately 12-30% of the project area is meeting the 

Standard and Guidelines for ponderosa pine habitat. In addition, the project area is also below the HRV 

for large diameter snags, although there is a larger percentage of the project area that is providing some 

habitat >10” dbh than there was historically (47% of project are has 0 snags/ac whereas HRV shows 

slightly more, 55-66%, of the habitat type had 0 snags/ac). Therefore there is a need to retain all large 

snags in PPDF habitat within the project area considering the project area alone represents 2% of the 

white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat on the Forest (Table 50). Based on the field sampling, current 

densities of large diameter snags are at levels lower than would be optimal for white-headed 

woodpecker habitat (0.65-1.1 snags >20” dbh per acre); this reflects the 11% within the 30-50% 

tolerance level within Table 49.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects

White-headed woodpecker habitat would continue to develop in the area as a result of past treatments 

that overlap the project area (e.g. Prairie Dog project). These past projects did not have fuels treatments 

associated with them, the result being a current high density of shrubs in the understory (e.g. bitterbrush, 

manzanita). As stated earlier, this understory density may serve as hiding cover for white-headed 

woodpecker nest predators.

This alternative does address some of the conservation strategies for the white-headed woodpeckers, 

with the exception of prescribed fire. Snags may be lost as a result of hazard tree removal in this 

heavily recreated project area. It is also likely that some snags would be removed as hazards to 

geothermal and volcanic monitoring equipment.

The degree of recreation use within the project would remain high. This keeps the likelihood of a 

human-caused wildfire elevated. Previous timber sale projects within the Ogden area did not 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

208  Ogden Final EIS

incorporate fuels treatments (i.e. mowing and prescribed burning), thus fuel levels remain high in areas 

away from the Wildland Urban Interface. High fuel loads coupled with elevated risk of human-caused 

fire increases the likelihood of wildfire events in this area. A large wildfire in the Ogden area may 

benefit white-headed woodpeckers within the first 5 years; but as snags within a heavily burnt area fall, 

there would be a large gap (hundreds of years) before trees grow large and die again.

Figure 61 shows the recruitment of snags, and white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat, under this 

alternative. The stand exams illustrated are the same FVS stands used in the Forest Vegetation Section. 

As the chart shows, currently (year 2010) there are few snags > 20” dbh, but over 5 snags per acre 

between 15 and 20” dbh. Over time the density of snags between 15 and 20” dbh falls while there is 

little change in the amount of large diameter snags being recruited. This modeling suggests that the no 

action alternative would not provide nesting habitat for white-headed woodpeckers at greater than the 

30% tolerance level.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects

This alternative would not directly affect white-headed woodpecker habitat (i.e. falling of large snags) 

except in the case of a safety issue. There is a separate process by which trees and snags are identified 

as “hazard trees” and require falling (e.g. Region 6 Danger Tree Roadside Policy Forest Service Manual 

7700, Chapter 30 – Operations and Maintenance). Generally, hazard trees are identified along roads and 

within developed recreation sites (e.g. campgrounds, sno-parks). Identification and removal is made on 

a case-by-case or individual basis, therefore it is difficult to quantify at this stage of the project 

planning. Qualitatively, the more developed recreation sites and more roads being used increases the 

likelihood of impacts to white-headed woodpecker habitat.

The Proposed actions would indirectly affect 1,606 acres of potential white-headed woodpecker nesting 

habitat. Generally, this may correlate to 1-14 home ranges. The acres impacted, however, are spread 

out and not concentrated in one area. Thus rather than the 1,606 acres severely impacting one home 

range, the impacts are diluted and spread out across all of the potential home ranges within the project 

area.

Proposed actions which focus on thinning within current plantations (i.e. any prescription with “_SPC” 

or precommercial thinning) are not likely to negatively impact white-headed woodpecker habitat 

because the activity focuses on the smallest size class of trees. These areas may be mapped as nesting 

habitat because they met the early seral stages with some of the remaining trees being >10”dbh. 

Conversely, by thinning these plantations, the growth of the retained largest trees will continue, creating 

habitat in many decades (>40 years). There are 172 acres of mapped habitat within units with this 

prescription over 44 units. Very few of these units (approx. 20 acres) contain snag densities at the 

>50% tolerance level, especially for snags >20” dbh. The units with this type of treatment and higher 

tolerance level of snags are largely within the northeast corner of the project area and have a mixed 

conifer (i.e. fir and pine) component.

Proposed actions within the white-headed woodpecker habitat include thinning of trees 7-12” dbh where 

ponderosa pine, regardless of size would be favored or accentuated (1,328 acres), with lodgepole pine 

and true firs being favored for removal. The proposed actions would build on the trend of creating 

stands of larger diameter ponderosa pines. The proposed actions would increase diameter growth on the 

remaining trees before the stands reach a density whereby beetle mortality would again become 

imminent (above the upper management zone). This would create more white-headed habitat decades 

(>40 years) from now. Gaines et al. (2010) found that white-headed woodpecker detections were 

greater in areas that were thinned or thinned and burned.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  209

Table 51: Alternative 2 proposed thinning acres within white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat.

Proposed Thinning Prescription*

DecAID Tolerance level (>0%)

Acres within Rx at Tolerance 

Level

>10” dbh >20” dbh Snags/ac 

>10” Snags/ac >20”

MC_1, MC_2, MC_3 0-30 0-0.4 0.5 8 12

30-50 0.4-2.0 0.5-1.8 142 66

50-80 2.0-4 1.8-3.8 28 15

80+ 4+ 3.8+ 74 0.2

Total acres in prescription providing 

habitat 252 93.2

PP_1, PP_LP_1 0-30 0-0.4 0.5 4 6

30-50 0.4-2.0 0.5-1.8 106 66

50-80 2.0-4 1.8-3.8 75 3

80+ 4+ 3.8+ 113 0

Total acres in prescription providing 

habitat 298 75

*MC = mixed conifer; PP = ponderosa pine; PP_LP = ponderosa pine with lodgepole pine. _1 = thin, favoring ponderosa pine 

for retention. Lodgepole pine and true fir retained as needed to meet minimum stocking levels; _2 = Thin, favoring 

ponderosa pine for retention. Lodgepole pine and true fir retained as needed to meet lower management stocking levels. 

_3 = mixed conifer regeneration with reserve trees.

As shown in Table 51, a majority of the nesting habitat being affected by thinning is within the mixed 

conifer prescriptions. These areas will favor retention and development of ponderosa pine while 

removing the lodgepole pine and fir component. As long as snags are retained, this prescription will 

provide nesting habitat. These units appear to be clustered along the southern portion of the project area 

in the Lower Little Deschutes-Wickiup Junction subwatershed.

In other areas where thinning treatments are proposed yet are not currently providing nesting habitat 

(0% tolerance level; 737-1,134 acres), the objectives will promote ponderosa pine development that 

ultimately improved habitat for white-headed woodpeckers (i.e. more ponderosa pine >21” dbh). Based 

on projections of growth and when the ponderosa pine stands would again become highly susceptible to 

beetle mortality (see Forest Vegetation Section), habitat for white-headed would be improved. Within 

the Forest Vegetation analysis (pages 68, 117-119), it has been estimated that by the year 2060, more 

ponderosa pine stands would likely meet the reference conditions for old-growth ponderosa pine and 

maintain some level of beetle risk.

Comparing Figure 62 with the No Action Alternative, a steady supply of snags are recruited throughout 

the years albeit at densities around the 50% tolerance level and a greater proportion of recruited snags 

being >20” dbh. More white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat would be recruited under this 

alternative than under the no action alternative.

Proposed fuels treatments, especially underburning may improve habitat for white-headed woodpeckers 

by reducing the shrubs that can hide nest predators. The challenge with fuels treatments is to maintain 

the snag density, especially not to lose any snags >20” dbh due to burn operations.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

210  Ogden Final EIS

This alternative would not directly affect white-headed woodpecker habitat (i.e. falling of large snags) 

except in the case of a safety issue (see discussion under Alternative 2). The proposed actions would 

indirectly affect 1,638 acres of potential white-headed woodpecker habitat. 

Proposed actions which focus on thinning within current plantations (i.e. any prescription with _SPC) 

are not likely to negatively impact white-headed woodpecker habitat because the activity focuses on the 

smallest size class of trees. These areas may be mapped as nesting habitat because they met the early 

seral stages with some of the remaining trees being >10”dbh. Conversely, by thinning these plantations, 

the growth of the retained largest trees will continue, creating habitat in many decades (>40 years). 

There are 157 acres of mapped habitat within units with this prescription over 42 units. Very few of 

these units (18-26 acres) contain snag densities at the >50% tolerance level, especially for snags >20” 

dbh. The units with this type of treatment and higher tolerance level of snags are largely within the 

northeast corner of the project area.

Proposed actions within the white-headed woodpecker habitat include thinning of trees 7-12” dbh where 

ponderosa pine, regardless of size would be favored or accentuated (1,074 acres), with lodgepole pine 

and true firs being favored for removal. The proposed actions would build on the trend of creating 

stands of larger diameter ponderosa pines. The proposed actions would increase diameter growth on the 

remaining trees before the stands reach a density whereby beetle mortality would again become 

imminent (above the upper management zone). This would create more white-headed habitat decades 

(>40 years) from now. Gaines et al. (2010) found that white-headed woodpecker detections were 

greater in areas that were thinned or thinned and burned. 

Table 52: Alternative 3 proposed thinning acres within white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat.

Proposed Thinning Prescription*

DecAID Tolerance level (>0%)

Acres within Rx at Tolerance Level

>10” dbh >20” dbh Snags/ac 

>10”

Snags/ac 

>20”

MC_1, MC_2, MC_3 0-30 0-0.4 0.5 8 11

MC_LFR 30-50 0.4-2.0 0.5-1.8 135 64

50-80 2.0-4 1.8-3.8 27 18

80+ 4+ 3.8+ 82 0.2

Total acres in prescription 

providing habitat 252 93.2

PP_1, PP_LP_1 0-30 0-0.4 0.5 3 5

PP_LP_LFR 30-50 0.4-2.0 0.5-1.8 57 25

50-80 2.0-4 1.8-3.8 39 4

80+ 4+ 3.8+ 47 0

Total acres in prescription 

providing habitat 146 34

*In addition to descriptions from previous table, _LFR = ladder fuels reduction (similar to pre-commercial thinning).

As shown in Table 52, a majority of the nesting habitat being affected by thinning is within the mixed 

conifer prescriptions. These areas will favor retention and development of ponderosa pine while 

removing the lodgepole pine and fir component. As long as snags are retained, this prescription will 

provide nesting habitat. These units appear to be clustered along the southern portion of the project area 

in the Lower Little Deschutes-Wickiup Junction subwatershed.

In other areas where thinning treatments are proposed yet are not currently providing nesting habitat 

(0% tolerance level; 682-1,261 acres), the objectives will promote ponderosa pine development that 

ultimately improved habitat for white-headed woodpeckers (i.e. more ponderosa pine >21” dbh). Based 

on projections of growth and when the ponderosa pine stands would again become highly susceptible to 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  211

beetle mortality (see Forest Vegetation Section), habitat for white-headed would be improved. Within 

the Forest Vegetation analysis (Chapter 3.3), it has been estimated that by the year 2060, more 

ponderosa pine stands would likely meet the reference conditions for old-growth ponderosa pine and 

maintain some level of beetle risk.

This alternative has similar effects as Alternative 2 because the objectives for harvest within the 

potential white-headed woodpecker habitat are the same.

Comparing Figure 63 with the No Action Alternative, a steady supply of snags are recruited throughout 

the years with densities approaching the 80% tolerance level and a greater proportion of recruited snags 

being >20” dbh. More white-headed woodpecker nesting habitat would be recruited under this 

alternative than under the No Action Alternative or Alternative 2.

Cumulative Effects

Recent timber sale projects within the cumulative effects area (Figure 57; e.g. Lava Cast and Prairie 

Dog) have focused on managing for ponderosa pine development and sustainability. The Ogden project 

adds to these efforts, and in the long-term, will favor white-headed woodpecker habitat. In the shortterm, the challenge will be to maintain current habitat (i.e. advanced decayed, large diameter snags). 

Although the proposed alternatives do not propose any harvest of snags, there may still be some falling 

of snags due to human safety concerns. A large part of the safety concerns is due to the amount of 

recreation traffic throughout the area, however the proposed alternatives may add to this through the 

prescribed burning. Prescribed burning does not have the objective to create snags (generally live tree 

mortality is avoided), but it does have an obligation to firefighter safety that may necessitate the falling 

of snags. This latter situation would be additive to the falling of snags, and potential white-headed 

woodpecker habitat, for human safety concerns.

The activities associated with Lava Cast and Prairie Dog project areas were accounted for in the Forest 

level habitat mapping effort. Therefore this project would impact an added 1606-1638 acre of habitat as 

a result of Alternatives 2 and 3 respectively within the subwatersheds, watersheds, and Forest. These 

acres reflect <1% of the nesting habitat on the Forest and 8% of the nesting habitat within the 

watersheds (Table 49). 

Over time, the effects are beneficial as ponderosa pine is favored and its development is encouraged. 

However, the potential impact of the need to fall snags for safety reasons during implementation as well 

as the ongoing need due to protect the recreating publics underscores the mitigative need to protect 

and/or avoid current large snags rather than have them removed for safety or fallen for reasons related to 

fire (safety, stability compromised by burn) and try to artificially create them. Research by Wightman 

et al. (2010) suggests that snags created slowly by insect or disease reach the level of advanced decay 

important to white-headed woodpecker habitat. Mitigation to retain existing large snags will help 

maintain habitat for this sensitive species over time. 

Both alternatives address the conservation strategies: inventory to identify stands meeting desired 

conditions and stands that can be managed to meet desired conditions; conduct thinning, partial cuts, or 

prescribed burning as appropriate to meet desired conditions; manage for large diameter trees through 

wider tree spacing and longer rotation periods; retain all snags and high cut stumps >10” dbh, soft 

snags, broken-topped snags.

Modeling of tree growth and snag recruitment in six selected ponderosa pine stands (see Forest 

Vegetation Section) supports the conclusions that the action alternatives will, in the long-term, recruit 

more large diameter snags in the ponderosa pine habitat types (see Figures 61-63) because thinning 

increases the growth and vigor of residual trees. The modeling includes mortality from prescribed fire 

and natural mortality, but not mortality from beetle infestation. See Appendix E of this FEIS for more 

analysis of prescribed fire-related mortality.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

212  Ogden Final EIS

Determination

The Ogden project may impact individuals or habitat but is unlikely to contribute towards a trend to 

federal listing. Because this project impacts <1% of the suitable habitat across the Forest, the overall 

direct, indirect and cumulative effects will result in a small negative trend of habitat. The loss of habitat 

will minimal at the scale of the Forest. The Ogden Project is consistent with the Forest Plan, and thus 

continued viability of the white-headed woodpecker is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

Figure 61: Alternative 1 (No Action) – Snag Recruitment Over Time; absent mortality from beetle 

attack

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

010 103 694 010 103 694 010 103 694 010 103 694 010 103 694 010 103 694

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

No Action

Snags per Acre

Year

Snag Recruitment over time - No Action Alternative

Snags >=15

and < 20

Snag >=20
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  213

Figure 62: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) - Snag Recruitment over Time – Following Treatment

Figure 63: Alternative 3 - Snag Recruitment over Time – Following Treatment

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

010 103 694 102 254 010 103 694 102 254 010 103 694 102 254

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

Alt 2

Snags per Acre

Year

Snag Recruitment over time - Alternative 2

Snags >=15

and < 20

Snag >=20

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

010 103 694 010 103 694 010 103 694 010 103 694 010 103 694 010 103 694

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060

Alt 3

Snags per Acre

Year

Snag Recruitment over time - Alternative 3

Snags >=15

and < 20

Snag >=20
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

214  Ogden Final EIS

Lewis’ Woodpecker

Existing Condition

Deschutes National Forest

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Lewis’ Woodpecker for 

the Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

Habitat for the Lewis’ woodpecker, a migrant in this part of its range, is old-forest, single-storied 

ponderosa pine. The Lewis’ woodpecker has been identified as a focal species for riparian woodlands 

with large cottonwood snags for the Columbia Plateau Landbird Strategy. This habitat is extremely rare 

to absent on the Deschutes National Forest. In addition, this species was also identified as a focal 

species for ponderosa pine with patches of burned old forests for the East Cascades Landbird Strategy, 

as it is highly associated with post-fire environments. Burned ponderosa pine forests created by standreplacing fires provide highly productive habitats as compared to unburned pine. In fact, Lewis’ 

Woodpeckers have been termed “burn specialists” because the large majority of this species’ nests have 

been found within snags in burned pine forests. Therefore, this species will be discussed as it relates to 

post-fire environments regardless of plant association. Riparian cottonwood habitat will not be 

discussed as this habitat type doesn’t occur on the Deschutes National Forest. 

Post-fire Habitats – Nesting and Foraging

Snags are a special habitat feature for the Lewis’ woodpecker. Suitable conditions for nesting include 

increased arthropod populations, shrubby understories, open canopies, and nest cavities created by 

strong excavators. Lewis’ woodpeckers feed on flying insects and are not strong cavity excavators. As 

such, they require large snags in an advanced state of decay that are easy to excavate, or they use old 

cavities created by other woodpeckers, primarily northern flickers and hairy woodpeckers. It has been 

suggested that the main priorities for habitat use by Lewis’ woodpeckers are perch availability, open 

canopy, and a brushy understory with the optimal canopy closure being less than 30%. 

The Lewis’ woodpecker is abundant in recent (2-4 years) and older burns (10-30 years post-fire). It is 

the most abundant cavity nester in burns but is rarely found in unlogged areas. It is positively 

associated with large diameter and higher snag densities in ponderosa pine patches in more open or 

salvage logged areas. Use of relatively open stands allows for shrub development and arthropod prey, 

good visibility and perch sites for foraging, and space for foraging maneuvers. 

Table 53: Lewis’ Woodpecker Nest Tree Characteristics.

Mean Nest Snag Diameter Range of Snag 

Diameters Used Tree Species Used

44.7 + 1.8 cm (17.5 + 0.7” dbh) NA NA

61.9 + 6.63 cm (24.3 + 2.6” 

dbh)

NA NA

58 cm (23”dbh) 38-99 cm (15-39” 

dbh)

Ponderosa Pine

47.5 + 1.1 cm (18.7 + 0.4” dbh) NA Ponderosa Pine

Nest densities averaged 2.03 + 0.32 nests/40 ha (253 nests) in unlogged areas compared to 3.03 + 0.30 

nests/40 ha (483 nests) in logged areas. Nest densities increase with time since fire in both logged and 

unlogged areas as vegetation growth after fires results in increased arthropod levels and food 

availability. However, nesting densities shifted from logged to unlogged areas in the late post-fire time 

period (9-10 years) due to a saturation of nest densities in logged areas and an increased snag fall rate.

Home Range Information
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  215

No empirical data are available on home range size and use by Lewis’ woodpeckers. Thomas et al. 

(1979) reported home range size of breeding birds as ranging from 1 to 6 ha (2-15 acres) in the Blue 

Mountains of Washington and Oregon, but this estimate does not have documentation of sample size or 

methods. Territorial behavior is limited to the area immediately surrounding the nest site, meaning it is 

not uncommon to see extensive overlap in the foraging areas of this species. 

Threats

The loss of breeding and wintering habitats in the form of burned pine forests, park-like ponderosa pine 

forests, riparian cottonwood stands and oak woodlands is thought to be the primary threat to the longterm persistence of populations. Primary causes of habitat degradation are likely timber harvest, fire 

suppression, cattle grazing, and human development. These activities may result in the loss of nest and 

storage substrates, a reduction in the understory shrub community, a decrease in prey availability or an 

increase in forest stand density (making them unsuitable for breeding habitat). Dense forest stands and 

grazing may reduce shrub and grass understories, which in turn may cause declines of associated insect 

prey. Timber harvest and firewood collection may impact the availability of large snags used for 

nesting and mast storage. Post-fire salvage logging and firewood collection influence the openness and 

distribution of snags suitable for nesting and perching sites and can be beneficial. For example, postfire salvage logging can enhance nesting habitat if large diameter snags are maintained in a clumped 

distribution.

Natural disturbances (i.e. wildfires) and subsequent management activities (i.e. salvage logging) may 

have different impacts on habitat quality and availability for the Lewis’s woodpecker. Wildfire in lower 

montane forests has the potential to enhance the quality of breeding habitats for this species depending 

on pre-fire forest structure, burn severity and size, geographic area, and post-fire age. Burned 

ponderosa pine forest created by stand-replacing fires appears to be highly productive source habitat. 

Post-fire salvage logging influences the openness of the habitat and the distribution of suitable snags for 

nesting, perching, and foraging. However, depending on the snags retained and their distribution, this 

preferred habitat may vary in its suitability. Lewis’ woodpeckers were found nesting in sites where 

snags were distributed in clumps, in appropriate stages of decay, and of suitable size based on the 

availability of such snags.

Fire suppression in ponderosa pine forests has resulted in stands with increased stem densities (with 

more shade tolerant species), reduced shrub and grass understories, and increased canopy closures. This 

resulting forest structure is not suitable nesting habitat due to the reductions in insect populations and 

limited space for foraging maneuvers.

Firewood cutting, depending on restrictions and enforcement, may increase opportunities to cut and 

gather wood due to increased road densities and motorized recreation (Wisdom et al. 2000). Cutting of 

dead and dying trees results in the reduction of potential nest sites and large snags are most attractive to 

birds and humans. As with salvage logging, firewood collection can have both beneficial and negative 

impacts on habitat quality. 

Potential threats to the Lewis’ woodpecker on the Deschutes National Forest and specifically the Ogden 

Project Area include the loss of large snags, fire suppression, timber harvest, human development in 

breeding and wintering habitat, and human disturbance at nest sites. In addition, minor threats may 

include competition for nest cavities with European starlings.

Conservation Issues and Strategies

The Lewis’ woodpecker is identified in the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East-Slope of the 

Cascades Mountains in Oregon and Washington as a focal species for patches of burned old forest in 

ponderosa pine (Altman 2000). Reflecting stated threats in other studies, conservation issues described 

in the Strategy include fire suppression resulting in dense young stands, salvage logging of burned 

ponderosa pine trees, habitat composition, fuelwood cutting, increasing road networks, and loss of old 

ponderosa pine trees before decay and snag formation occur. The biological objectives for habitat, 

where ecologically appropriate, through natural events (i.e. wildfires) or management (i.e. prescribed 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

216  Ogden Final EIS

fire) are to maintain >1% of the landscape as post-fire old ponderosa pine forest habitat and >50% of the 

post-fire landscape as unsalvaged. Where ecologically appropriate, initiate actions in old forest habitat 

to maintain or provide approximately 24 snags/acre >9”dbh and of these approximately 6 snags/acre 

should be >20”dbh. Provide recruitment snags particularly in areas with high risk of stand replacement 

fires and provide shrub cover with >13% cover. 

Population Trends

The Lewis’ woodpecker is a regional species of concern. The Lewis’ woodpecker is a species of 

Continental Concern which includes those species most vulnerable at the continental scale, due to a 

combination of small and declining populations, limited distributions, and high threats throughout their 

ranges. It is also identified as a Continental Stewardship species as well. This list is defined as species 

that have a disproportionately high percentage of their world population within a single avifaunal biome 

during either the breeding season or the non-migratory portion of the non-breeding season. In addition, 

they are in turn listed as both Regional Species of Concern and Regional Stewardship species. 

Immediate management has been recommended for this species. This indicates conservation action is 

needed to reverse or stabilize significant, long-term population declines for this species where the lack 

of action may put this species at risk of extirpation. Population and habitat trends are decreasing.

Habitat Mapping

Lewis’ woodpecker nesting habitat was mapped using the drier ponderosa pine forests in the early, mid 

and late seral stages. In addition, other plant association groups where ponderosa pine is the dominant 

species in the early and mid seral stages was mapped as habitat. Stand size had to be a minimum 

diameter of 15”dbh or greater and have open stand characteristics to be mapped as potential habitat. 

Older fires (greater than 5 years old) were added as habitat. Recent (since 2002) forest management 

activities that resulted in conditions other than described above were removed from mapped potential 

habitat. Acres of potential nesting habitat was then mapped by watershed and subwatershed. Habitat 

was not quantified by applying the DecAID tolerance levels as there was no information regarding snag 

densities in green stands for this species and snag densities in post-fire habitat was not modeled. 

There are approximately 84,978 acres of potential Lewis’ woodpecker nesting habitat on the Forest. 

Four subwatersheds on forest contain 40% habitat or greater (Canyon Creek, Abbot Creek, First Creek, 

and Spring Creek). The B&B fire of 2003 occurred within these four watersheds providing post-fire 

habitat. These watersheds account for 26% of the total potentially suitable habitat on forest. An 

additional five watersheds (Candle Creek, Jack Creek, Upper Lake Creek, Lower Odell Creek, and Pine 

Lake) contain between 20-40% habitat. Most of these watersheds occur within fire areas (B&B and 

Davis Fires of 2003) while the remaining watershed (Pine Lake) occurs on the forest fringe. These five 

watersheds account for approximately 19% of the total potentially suitable habitat and combined, these 

9 watersheds account for approximately 45% of the total potentially suitable habitat on forest. None of 

these watersheds or subwatersheds overlap the Ogden Project Area.

Ogden Area

The following illustrates the nesting habitat availability at various landscape scales:

Table 54: Nesting habitat for Lewis’ woodpeckers displayed in increasing landscape scales

Landscape Level Acres of nesting habitat Percentage of all 

Forest Habitat*

Deschutes National Forest 84,978 100%

Long Prairie Watershed (total) 183 0.2

Finley Butte Subwatershed 24 0.02

Paulina Peak South Subwatershed 37 0.02

Lower Little Deschutes Watershed (total) 509 0.5

Kawak Butte Subwatershed 54 0.02
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  217

Lower Paulina Creek Subwatershed 91 0.02

Upper Paulina Creek Subwatershed 22 0.02

Wickiup Junction Subwatershed 41 0.02

Town of LaPine Subwatershed 12 0.02

Ogden Project Area (total) 119 0.1

Proposed Alternative 2 Units 68 0.02

Proposed Alternative 3 Units 69 0.02

*percentages are not cumulative (i.e. column will not add to 100%) nor are subwatershed acres to watershed. Watersheds and 

subwatersheds are those in which the project area overlaps.

Within the last 30 years there have been approximately 7 wildfires within the watersheds that overlap 

the Ogden Project Area; with three wildfires within the Project Area (see page 149 Fire and Fuels 

Section). The most recent of these wildfires was in 2000. Lewis’ woodpeckers were observed during 

the nesting season within the project area and within this 2000 fire perimeter. The habitat in this area 

matched what is described in the literature (large, well-decayed ponderosa pine snags). This area was 

being considered for proposed actions, but was dropped, in part, due to the presence of the Lewis’ 

woodpeckers. Although there are post-fire landscapes within the project area as a whole, they are not 

part of any proposed commercial harvest. There is pre-commercial thinning (_SPC) and mowing 

proposed under both alternatives. There are pockets of Lewis’ woodpecker nesting habitat, not 

associated with a wildfire area that are part of a commercial harvest unit.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects

The no action alternative may address some of the conservation issues and strategies in the sense that 

there are currently areas of old burns providing habitat, a shrubby understory is being promoted as well 

as mid-sized pines currently on a trajectory to grow larger in areas of past thinning. However, the 

conservation strategies to allow wildfires to burn, retaining dead or diseased trees where they occur and 

closing roads are difficult to attain because of the current understory and fuels conditions compounded 

with the degree of recreation use and other demands (e.g. geothermal monitoring and development) 

within the project area. Therefore, Lewis’ woodpecker habitat will likely develop in the areas of 

previous harvest. Due to the degree of infrastructure (e.g. roads, developed recreation sites, geothermal 

equipment) it is highly likely that a wildfire, should it break out, would be a priority to suppress and/or 

minimize the area impacted. This limits the amount of Lewis’ woodpecker habitat created by natural 

disturbance.

Loss of snags because they are a safety hazard to humans will have the largest impact on Lewis’ 

woodpeckers because they often utilize the large, well-decayed snags that are often identified as the 

highest safety risk. Seemingly, the only way to avoid this is to not place humans (recreationists or forest 

workers) in areas that risk the loss of Lewis’ woodpecker habitat. Because of the number of recreation 

sites (trails, campgrounds (dispersed and designated), snoparks), and infrastructure (roads and 

geothermal sites) even the no action alternative may have little impact in reducing the number of trees 

fallen for safety reasons. Forest level analysis of >20” dbh snag densities within ponderosa pine habitat 

shows that for the Long Prairie and Lower Little Deschutes Watersheds clusters (>1/ac) are uncommon.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects

Similar to the white-headed woodpecker, the proposed actions under this alternative would not have 

direct impacts to Lewis’ woodpecker habitat (i.e. no snag removal proposed except for human safety 

concerns). There is commercial thinning planned within currently known Lewis’ woodpecker habitat 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

218  Ogden Final EIS

(46 acres). The proposed actions within the ponderosa pine habitat would keep the stands on a 

trajectory of having larger average diameters. It is estimated that under this alternative, it would be 

another 50 years before the stands of larger diameter trees would be susceptible to beetle mortality. 

Only when these newly created larger pine have been dead for years and in further stages of decay, 

would new Lewis woodpecker habitat be created; that is unless another wildfire occurs within the 

project area. Thus the beneficial impacts to Lewis’ woodpecker nesting habitat would not be realized 

for many decades.

There are 59 acres of mowing and/or underburning proposed within mapped Lewis’ woodpecker nesting 

habitat. There is also mowing proposed within 586 acres within the older wildfire areas. Each of these 

proposed units had been salvage logged immediately after the fire, and the density of remaining snags is 

variable. Lewis’ woodpeckers have been observed using some of this habitat. Prescribed fire is a 

conservation strategy to develop Lewis’ woodpecker habitat in order to promote large ponderosa pine 

habitat however it can impact shrub density that is habitat for prey species. Mowing has similar impacts 

to Lewis’ woodpecker habitat in that it reduces shrub density.

The immediate threat to the scattered portions of potential Lewis’ woodpecker habitat outside of these 

old burns is the falling of snags for safety reasons. It is especially relevant for Lewis’ woodpeckers 

because they utilize snags with advanced decay and these types of snags are often identified as the most 

risky to humans. As displayed under the white-headed woodpecker analysis, the proposed actions may 

increase the likelihood of the falling of these “danger trees” because the proposed actions would put 

forest workers closer to these types of trees. The impact to Lewis’ woodpeckers is the loss of nest 

structure. 

Although the amount of Lewis’ woodpecker habitat impacted by proposed actions is small when 

considering the amount of habitat on the Forest, it does represent a substantial portion of the habitat 

within the representative watersheds. 

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects

The effects of the proposed actions under this alternative would be the same as described under 

Alternative 2.

Cumulative Effects

As with the white-headed woodpecker habitat, the proposed actions have cumulative benefits to Lewis’ 

woodpecker habitat over the watersheds (Figure 58) because of the focus on developing and maintaining 

the growth of the ponderosa pine. With Lewis’ woodpeckers, however, the development of new habitat 

would take longer (>50 years) because of this species utilization of well-decayed snags. 

Although the proposed actions may cumulatively add to the likelihood that snags may be cut for safety 

reasons, there are a number of conservation strategies that are addressed: use prescribed burning and 

understory thinning to maintain existing old forest ponderosa pine stands and accelerate development of 

mid-successional stages to old forest (many of the past projects and a large part of the proposed actions 

under each alternative address this); prohibit or limit salvage logging to retain both hard and soft snags 

in clumps (an area initially proposed for salvage was dropped from this consideration); and thin young 

pines in dense stands. 

Determination

Mowing may reduce arthropod abundance within Lewis’ woodpecker nesting habitat within the wildfire 

areas. Snags may be fallen due to safety reasons, however at this time the number of snags that may 

meet this qualification (i.e. a safety risk) is not available. It is policy to document the process in 

determining the risk a snag poses to safety “when an employer or manager is faced with danger trees, 

there should be people available with sufficient knowledge, training and experience, to follow a process 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  219

for dealing with them. A qualified person is defined as a person who has knowledge, training, and 

experience in identifying danger trees, their potential failure zones, and measures to eliminate the 

danger” (Toupin, R., G. Filip, T. Erkert, US Forest Service- Pacific Northwest Region, and M. Barger. 

2008. Field Guide for Danger Tree Identification and Response. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Pacific 

Northwest Region. Page 8).

Based on the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, the proposed actions under either action alternative 

may impact individuals or habitat of the Lewis’ woodpeckers but not likely contribute to a trend towards 

federal listing. Similarly, because this project measurably impacts <1% of the suitable nesting habitat 

across the Forest and <10% of the suitable nesting habitat across the watersheds, the overall direct, 

indirect and cumulative effects will result in a small negative trend of habitat. The Ogden Project is 

consistent with the Forest Plan, and thus continued viability of Lewis’ woodpeckers is expected on the 

Deschutes National Forest.

Northern Waterthrush

Existing Condition

The northern waterthrush inhabits riparian habitat, often with willow and alder (Natureserve, 2010). 

Short stretches of Paulina Creek provide this habitat within the project area. Within the cumulative 

effects area, Paulina Creek and the shorelines around East and Paulina Lakes provide the only potential 

habitat for this species. 

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative would have no direct effects, beneficial or detrimental, to 

potential northern waterthrush habitat along Paulina Creek. Risks to the riparian area from fire would 

remain. Maintenance of the risk to fire and the current quality of the habitat would forego an 

opportunity to improve this potential habitat for a regionally sensitive species.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative proposes to thin and underburn 248 acres within the 

Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA). Only the zones of the RHCA directly adjacent to the 

creek are within potential waterthrush habitat because this is where willow and alder may most likely be 

found. Thus, not all of the proposed 248 acres are directly within potential habitat. The proposed 

actions in zones closest to the creek will not use mechanized harvest equipment and burns would be lit 

higher up in the slopes and then be allowed to back down closer to the water. Therefore very little of 

the potential waterthrush habitat would be impacted.

Specifically the proposed actions are thin trees less than 10 inches dbh in order to promote large tree 

development in ponderosa pine and mixed conifer stands. There would no thinning within the first 12 

feet adjacent to the creek. There would no mechanized equipment within 100 feet of the creek unless 

the existing trail and/or the past railroad grade is within approximately 100 feet because these features 

can block overland flow of sediments.

In the short-term, the proposed actions may directly disturb any northern waterthrush using the creek, 

and directly remove some vegetative cover near the creek through the thinning and fire. In the longterm, there would be improvement to the quality of the habitat along the creek and increased protection 

from a wildfire running up the stream channel. 

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Direct and indirect effects of this alternative are similar to those discussed 

for Alternative 2. Alternative 3 proposes fewer actions within the RHCA and potential waterthrush 

habitat (36 acres less underburning and 36 acres less thinning). However, the zone distances are the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

220  Ogden Final EIS

same. This decrease in acreages is expected to result in very minimal differences in effects between the 

alternatives.

Cumulative Effects: The effects of the proposed actions under each of the alternatives would be 

additive to the current actions within the RHCA. There are no reasonably foreseeable actions within the 

RHCA. Because of the current risks to the riparian area from wildfire due to recreation use (abandoned 

campfires and fuel loadings); there would be some cumulative beneficial effects to treating the RHCA. 

Cumulative effects would be minimized because there are fewer actions proposed within potential 

waterthrush habitat.

Determination: Based on the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, the proposed actions under either 

action alternative may impact individuals or habitat of the northern waterthrush but not likely contribute 

to a trend towards federal listing. There may be beneficial impacts to the northern waterthrush as a 

result of the fuels and vegetative treatments within the RHCA. 

Crater Lake Tightcoil

Existing Condition

The Crater Lake Tightcoil is a Survey and Manage species of the NWFP that has also been given

Sensitive Species status on the Deschutes National Forest and is included on the Region 6 Sensitive 

Species list. “The Crater Lake Tightcoil may be found in perennially wet situations in mature conifer 

forests, among rushes, mosses and other surface vegetation or under rocks and woody debris within 10 

m. of open water in wetlands, springs, seeps and riparian areas, generally in areas which remain under 

snow for long periods during the winter. Riparian habitats in the Eastern Oregon Cascades may be 

limited to the extent of permanent surface moisture, which is often less than 10 m. from open water” 

(Duncan et al. 2003). This habitat type does occur within the project area at the upper reaches of 

Paulina Creek. 

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Because this alternative does not propose any actions, there would be no 

impact to Crater Lake tightcoils. However, there is acknowledged risk to the riparian habitat (i.e. the 

potential tightcoil habitat) due to wildfire largely due to the presence of dispersed and designated 

campsites further downstream of the habitat. This alternative would forego the opportunity to address 

this risk at this time.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 2 proposes to treat within the Paulina Creek riparian corridor. 

A majority of the corridor treated is downstream of the potential habitat. Approximately 83 acres of 

potential habitat is proposed for treatments under this alternative. Although thinning, piling, and 

burning will occur in the zone of 12-33 feet (4-10 m), no treatment would occur in the first 12 feet of the

creek and only thinning, piling, and burning by hand would occur within the next zone up to 33 feet. 

Potential tightcoil habitat is at its most suitable within the first 12 feet of the creek because the creek 

channel becomes more of a canyon with small falls as one moves upstream. The steeper slopes focus 

the perennially moist habitat closer to the creek. As one moves upstream the conifer habitat changes 

from drier ponderosa pine to mixed pine and fir to true firs; therefore the potential for impacts to 

tightcoils is within these 83 acres and in the zones closest to the creek.

Because the proposed actions within the potential habitat involve hand-work and burning may be 

allowed to back down, the impacts to tightcoils will be minimal (potential to remove vegetative cover in 

habitat and/or directly burn individuals). These minimal impacts would lend to the determination that 

this alternative may impact individuals or habitat but not likely contribute to a trend towards federal 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  221

listing. There would be beneficial impacts to tightcoils, indirectly, by reducing the fuel loads 

downstream near the campsites because these areas pose a high risk of starting a wildfire.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative drops the 83 acres of treatment within the Paulina Creek 

corridor that is considered potential tightcoil habitat. Therefore this alternative would have no direct 

impact to Crater Lake tightcoils or habitat. There would be beneficial impacts indirectly to tightcoil 

habitat for the same reasons as stated in Alternative 2.

Cumulative Effects: The proposed actions will likely have beneficial cumulative effects within the 

project area in the sense that the proposed actions are additive, or more appropriately will off-set, the 

negative impacts that recreation use along the riparian corridor is having or has the potential to have. 

The dispersed and designated campsites along the creek pose a risk to starting a wildfire. Proposed 

treatments will reduce the risk and/or severity of a wildfire along the RHCA. Other recreation impacts 

occurring along the creek are a number of hikers and mountain bikers that can access the perennially 

wet habitat along the creek and slowly contribute to compaction in these areas. The proposed actions 

would not necessarily have cumulative impacts to this type of recreation use; although overall an 

objective to treat the RHCA is to improve stream habitat (see Fisheries report) and this will off-set some 

of these recreational impacts.

Determination: Based on the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, the proposed actions under either 

action alternative may impact individuals or habitat of the Crater Lake tightcoil but are not likely 

contribute to a trend towards federal listing. There may be beneficial impacts to the Crater Lake 

tightcoil as a result of the fuels and vegetative treatments within the RHCA. 

Summary of Findings & Conclusions

The following two tables (Table 55 and Table 56) summarize effects and determinations to Threatened, 

Endangered, Candidate and Region 6 Sensitive Species.

Table 55: Summary of Effects to Threatened, Endangered, Candidate and Region 6 Sensitive Species

Species No Action Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Alternative 3

# ac habitat 

altered

# ac 

habitat 

removed

# ac habitat 

altered

# ac habitat 

removed

# ac 

habitat 

altered

# ac habitat 

removed

Spotted Owl N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Spotted Frog N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Peregrine 

Falcon

N/A N/A 0 0 0 0

Horned Grebe N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Bufflehead N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Harlequin Duck N/A N/A 0 0 0 0

Bald Eagle N/A N/A 0.8 0 0.8 0

Fisher N/A N/A N/A 87.5 N/A 91

Western Sage 

Grouse 

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Yellow Rail N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

222  Ogden Final EIS

Species No Action Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Alternative 3

Tri-colored 

Blackbird

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Wolverine N/A N/A 0 0 0 0

White-headed 

Woodpecker

N/A N/A 1606 0 1638 0

Northern 

Waterthrush

N/A N/A <248 0 <212 0

Lewis’ 

Woodpecker

N/A N/A 68 0 69 0

Crater Lake 

Tightcoil

N/A N/A 83 0 0 0

Pygmy Rabbit N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Silver-bordered 

Fritillary

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Johnson’s 

Hairstreak

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Townsend’s 

big-eared bat

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Table 56: Summary of Determinations of Threatened, Endangered, Candidate, and Region 6 Sensitive 

Species

Species Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3

Northern Spotted Owl NE NE NE

Oregon Spotted Frog NI NI NI

Northern Bald Eagle NI MIIH MIIH

Horned Grebe NI NI NI

Bufflehead NI NI NI

Harlequin Duck NI MIIH MIIH

American Peregrine Falcon NI NI NI

Western Sage Grouse NI NI NI

Yellow Rail NI NI NI

Tri-colored Blackbird NI NI NI

White-headed Woodpecker NI MIIH MIIH

Lewis Woodpecker NI MIIH MIIH

Northern Waterthrush NI MIIH MIIH

California Wolverine NI NI NI

Pacific Fisher NI MIIH MIIH

Pygmy Rabbit NI NI NI

Crater Lake Tightcoil NI MIIH BI

Silver-bordered Fritillary NI NI NI

Johnson’s Hairstreak NI NI NI
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  223

Species Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat NI NI NI

NE = No Effect; NI = No Impact; MIIH = May impact individuals or habitat, but will not likely contribute 

to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability to the population or species; BI = Beneficial Impact

3.6.6 Management Indicator Species including Neotropical Migratory 

Birds

Table 57: Wildlife Species Considered (Those in Bold Receive Further Consideration)

Species Status Habitat Presence

Northern 

goshawk 

MIS

S3 Vulnerable

Mature and old-growth forests; 

especially high canopy closure and 

large trees

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas

Cooper’s hawk MIS

S4 Apparently 

secure

Similar to goshawk, can also use 

mature forests with high canopy 

closure/tree density

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas

Sharp-shinned 

hawk 

MIS

S4 Apparently 

secure

Similar to goshawk in addition to 

young, dense, even-aged stands

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas

Great gray owl MIS

S3 Vulnerable

Mature and old growth forests 

associated with openings and 

meadows

Potential Habitat within or adjacent to 

proposed treatment areas

Great blue 

heron 

MIS

S4 Apparently 

secure

Riparian edge habitats including 

lakes, streams, marshes and 

estuaries

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas

Golden eagle MIS, BCC

S4 Apparently 

secure

Large open areas with cliffs and 

rock outcrops

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Red-tailed hawk MIS

S5 Secure

Large snags, open country 

interspersed with forests

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas

Osprey MIS

S4 Apparently 

secure

Large snags associated with fish 

bearing water bodies

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas

Elk MIS

S5 Secure

Mixed habitats Habitat in proposed treatment areas

American 

marten

MIS

S3 Vulnerable

Mixed conifer or high elevation 

late-successional forests with 

abundant down woody material

Potential Habitat within or adjacent to 

proposed treatment areas

Mule deer MIS

S5 Secure

Mixed habitats Habitat in proposed treatment areas

Snags and 

Downed Wood 

associated 

species and 

habitat

MIS Snags and down woody material Habitat in proposed treatment areas
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

224  Ogden Final EIS

Species Status Habitat Presence

Pygmy nuthatch Landbird focal 

species

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Mature ponderosa pine forests and 

snags

Habitat in proposed treatment areas

Chipping 

sparrow

Landbird focal 

species

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Open understory ponderosa pine 

forests with regeneration

Habitat in proposed treatment areas

Brown creeper Landbird focal 

species

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Large trees in mixed conifer forests Potential habitat within or adjacent to 

proposed treatment areas

Flammulated 

owl

Landbird focal 

species, BCC

S3B Vulnerable -

breeding

Interspersed grassy openings and 

dense thickets in mixed conifer 

forests

Potential habitat within or adjacent to 

proposed treatment areas

Hermit thrush Landbird focal 

species

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Multi-layered/dense canopy in 

mixed conifer forests

Potential habitat within or adjacent to 

proposed treatment areas

Olive-sided 

flycatcher

Landbird focal 

species

S3B Vulnerable -

breeding

Edges and openings created by 

wildfire in mixed conifer forests

Potential habitat within or adjacent to 

proposed treatment areas

Waterfowl Species:

Common loon MIS

SHB, S5N – Possibly 

ExtirpatedBreeding, Secure 

Non-breeding

Edges of remote freshwater ponds 

and lakes

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Pied-billed grebe MIS

S5 Secure

Edge of open water in freshwater 

lakes, ponds, sluggish rivers and 

marshes

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Horned grebe MIS

S2B, S5N –

Imperiled breeding, 

Secure –nonbreeding

Open water with emergent 

vegetation

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Red-necked 

grebe

MIS

S1B, S4N – Critically 

imperiled breeding, 

Apparently secure 

nonbreeding

Lakes and ponds in forested areas No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Eared grebe MIS

S4 Apparently 

secure

Open water with emergent 

vegetation

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Western grebe MIS

S3B, S2S3N –

Vulnerable 

breeding, 

Imperiled/Vulnerabl

Marches with open water and 

lakes and reservoirs with emergent 

vegetation

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  225

Species Status Habitat Presence

e-nonbreeding

Canada goose MIS

S5 Secure

Variety of habitat: shores of lakes, 

rivers, and reservoirs especially 

with cattails and bulrushes

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Wood duck MIS

S4 Apparently 

secure

Cavity nester No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Gadwall MIS

S5 Secure

Concealed clumps of grasses in 

meadows and tall grasslands

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

American 

wigeon

MIS

S5 Secure

Clumps of grasses in meadows or 

tall grasslands

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Mallard MIS

S5 Secure

Open water with emergent 

vegetation

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Blue-winged teal MIS

S4 Apparently 

secure

Marshes, lakes, ponds, slowmoving streamsNo Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Cinnamon teal MIS

S5 Secure

Cover of vegetation near shoreline No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Northern 

shoveler

MIS

S5 Secure

Grassy areas near water No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Northern pintail MIS

S5 Secure

Open areas near water No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Green-winged 

teal

MIS

S5 Secure

Freshwater marshes with 

emergent vegetation

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Canvasback MIS

S4 Apparently 

secure

Emergent vegetation No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Redhead MIS

S4 Apparently 

secure

Freshwater marshes and lakes 

concealed in vegetation

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Ring-necked 

duck

MIS

S3 vulnerable

Thick emergent vegetation on 

shorelines

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Lesser scaup MIS

S3B, S4N –

Vulnerable 

breeding, 

apparently Secure 

nonbreeding

Dry grassy areas near lakes at least 

10 ft. deep

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Common 

goldeneye

MIS

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Cavity nester No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Barrow’s 

goldeneye

MIS

S3B, S3N –

Vulnerable 

Cavity nester No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

226  Ogden Final EIS

Species Status Habitat Presence

breeding, 

Vulnerablenonbreeding

Hooded 

merganser

MIS

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Cavity nester No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Common 

merganser

MIS

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Cavity nester No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Ruddy duck MIS

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Freshwater marshes, lakes, ponds 

in dense vegetation

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Woodpecker Species

Williamson’s 

sapsucker

MIS, Landbird Focal 

species, BCC

Mature or old growth conifer 

forests with open canopy cover; 

weak excavator

Potential habitat within or adjacent to 

proposed treatment areas

Red-naped 

sapsucker

MIS

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Riparian hardwood forests No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Downy 

woodpecker

MIS

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Riparian hardwood forest No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Hairy 

woodpecker

MIS

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Mixed conifer and ponderosa pine 

forests

Habitat in proposed treatment areas

Three-toed 

woodpecker

MIS

S3 Vulnerable

High elevation and lodgepole pine 

forests

Potential habitat within or adjacent to 

proposed treatment areas

Black-backed 

woodpecker

MIS, Landbird focal 

species

S3 Vulnerable

Lodgepole pine forests, burned 

forests

Habitat in proposed treatment areas

Northern flicker MIS

S5 Secure

Variety of forest types but more 

associated with forest edges 

Habitat in proposed treatment areas

Pileated 

woodpecker

MIS

S4 Apparently 

Secure

Mature to old-growth mixed 

conifer forests

Potential habitat within or adjacent to 

proposed treatment areas

Other

Species

Swainson’s hawk BCC Open country

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Ferruginous 

hawk

BCC Open sagebrush flats; open 

country

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Prairie falcon BCC Rimrock, cliffs in open country No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  227

Species Status Habitat Presence

Greater sage 

grouse

BCC Sagebrush flats No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

American golden 

plover

BCC, Shorebird Upland tundra, rare in OR in dry 

mudflats, fields and pastures

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Snowy plover BCC, Shorebird Sandy beaches No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

American avocet BCC Shallow water No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Solitary 

sandpiper

BCC, Shorebird Small, freshwater mudflats No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Whimbrel BCC, Shorebirds Grassy marshes and tidal flats No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Long-billed 

curlew

BCC, Shorebird Dry grasslands No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Marbled godwit BCC Expansive mudflats and sandflats 

on beaches

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Sanderling BCC, Shorebird Sandy beaches with wave action No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Wilson’s 

phalarope

BCC, Shorebird Shallow ponds within grassy 

marshes

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Yellow-billed 

cuckoo

BCC Riparian hardwoods No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Burrowing owl BCC Open grassland or agricultural land No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Black swift BCC Damp coastal cliffs No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Loggerhead 

shrike

BCC Open habitat with scattered trees 

and shrubs

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Gray vireo BCC Rocky, dry hillsides with scattered 

trees

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Virginia’s 

warbler

BCC Mountain mahoghany No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Brewer’s 

sparrow

BCC Sagebrush habitats No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Sage sparrow BCC Sagebrush habitats No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Piping plover Shorebird Rare in OR on sandy beaches No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Mountain plover Shorebird Shortgrass prairies No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

228  Ogden Final EIS

Species Status Habitat Presence

Buff-breasted 

sandpiper

Shorebird Nests in tundra, forages on 

shortgrass prairie

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Black 

oystercatcher

Shorebird Coastal rocks No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Upland 

sandpiper

Shorebird Grassy fields (4-8” tall) with open 

patches

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Bristle-thighed 

curlew

Shorebird Rare in OR in marshes or beaches. 

Nests in Alaska tundra

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Hudsonian 

godwit

Shorebird Mudflats and shallow water; nests 

around spruce woods

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Marbled godwit Shorebird Prairie ponds, mudflats and 

sandflats

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Black turnstone Shorebird Tundra, winters on rocky, coastal 

shores

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Surfbird Shorebird Nests on barren gravel hilltops, 

winters on rocky shorelines

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Western 

sandpiper

Shorebird Mudflats and sandy beaches No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Rock sandpiper Shorebird Rocky shorelines No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Short-billed 

dowitcher

Shorebird Mudflats and shallow muddy 

ponds along coast

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

American 

woodcock

Shorebird Damp, brushy woods No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Wilson’s plover Shorebird Rare in OR on sandy beaches, 

sandflats or mudflats away from 

shoreline

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

American 

oystercatcher

Shorebird Rare in OR on rocky coasts No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Bar-tailed godwit Shorebird Low tundra in western Alaska No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Ruddy turnstone Shorebird Rocky and sandy shorelines No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Red Knot Shorebird Sandy beaches No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Dunlin Shorebird Sandy beaches and mudflats No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Calliope 

hummingbird

BCC Open montane forest, mountain 

meadows, and willow thickets

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Black swift BCC Waterfalls, wet cliffs, caves No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Sage thrasher BCC Juniper, sagebrush shrublands. 

Mt. mahogany and aspen

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Loggerhead 

shrike

BCC Open country with scattered trees 

and shrubs

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  229

Species Status Habitat Presence

Nashville 

warbler

BCC Open deciduous and coniferous 

woodland, forest edge and 

undergrowth

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Black-chinned 

sparrow

BCC Desert, shrubland/chapparal No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Willow 

flycatcher

BCC Brushy areas with willow and 

riparian shrubs

No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Pinyon jay BCC Pinyon/juniper woodland No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Green-tailed 

towhee

BCC Sagebrush shrublands No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Black rosy-finch BCC Alpine rocky, grassy areas No Habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

Landbird focal species come from the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and 

Washington (Altman 2000); Management Indicator Species come from the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Plan (LRMP)[1990]; 

Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) come from the US Fish and Wildlife Service Birds of Conservation Concern – BCR 9 (Great Basin) [2008]; 

and Shorebirds come from the 2004 US Fish and Wildlife Service U. S. Shorebird Conservation Plan.

Rationale for Species Not Considered in Detail

Analyses of potential effects to the white-headed woodpecker, Lewis’ woodpecker, and wolverine have 

been fully analyzed in the Biological Evaluation (see previous section).

The following provides the rationale and clarification to the “Presence” column in Table 57. In this 

section conclusions are made as to the presence or absence of the species based on habitat availability 

and suitability. Those species that have suitable habitat within or in the vicinity of the proposed 

treatment areas will be further analyzed/discussed (those shown in bold in Table 57 above) in the 

following sections.

Generally, golden eagles occur in grass-shrub, shrub-sapling, and young woodland growth stages of 

forested areas, or in forest with open lands nearby for hunting. Essentially it needs only a favorable nest 

site, usually a large tree or cliff, a dependable food supply, mainly of medium to large mammals and 

birds, and broad expanses of open country for foraging. It especially favors hilly or mountain country, 

where take off and soaring are facilitated by updrafts; deeply cut canyons rising to open sparsely treed 

mountain slopes and crags represent ideal habitat (Johnsgard 1990). The proposed treatment areas do 

not provide any cliffs for potential nest sites, or broad expanses of open country for foraging. A lack of 

habitat assumes a lack of presence and therefore any actions or no action within the proposed treatment 

areas would have no effect to this species. The Ogden Project will not contribute to a negative trend in 

viability on the Deschutes National Forest for this species.

The following species are waterfowl that rely heavily on habitat adjacent to an actual body of water 

(often a marsh or lake) as shown in Table 57: Canada Goose, Wood duck, Gadwall, American wigeon, 

Mallard, Blue-winged teal, Cinnamon teal, Northern shoveler, Northern pintail, Green-winged teal, 

Canvasback, Redhead, Ring-necked duck, Lesser scaup, Common goldeneye, Barrow’s goldeneye, 

Hooded merganser, Common merganser, and Ruddy duck. None of the proposed treatment areas are 

within 300-600 feet of a marsh or lake. A lack of habitat assumes a lack of presence and therefore any 

actions or no action within the proposed treatment areas would have no effect to these species. The 

Ogden Project will not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Deschutes National Forest for 

these species.

Implementation of any of the alternatives would have no effect on the following species because a lack 

of habitat assumes a lack of presence: red-naped sapsucker, downy woodpecker, Swainson’s hawk, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

230  Ogden Final EIS

ferruginous hawk, prairie falcon, American golden plover, snowy plover, American avocet, solitary 

sandpiper, whimbrel, Long-billed curlew, sanderling, Wilson’s phalarope, yellow-billed cuckoo, 

burrowing owl, gray vireo, Virginia’s warbler, Brewer’s sparrow, sage sparrow, Piping plover, 

mountain plover, buff-breasted sandpiper, black oystercatcher, upland sandpiper, bristle-thighed curlew, 

Hudsonian godwit, Marbled godwit, black turnstone, surfbird, Western sandpiper, rock sandpiper, shortbilled dowitcher, American woodcock, Wilson’s plover, American oystercatcher, bar-tailed godwit, 

ruddy turnstone, red knot, dunlin, calliope hummingbird, black swift, sage thrasher, black-chinned 

sparrow, green-tailed towhee, black rosy-finch, loggerhead shrike, Nashville warbler, willow flycatcher, 

and pinyon jay. For more specific discussion regarding habitat for these species refer to the Wildlife 

Report.

Discussion for Species Further Analyzed

Northern Goshawk – Key Issue #5

Existing Condition

Deschutes National Forest 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Northern Goshawk for 

the Deschutes National Forest. (USDA Forest Service 2012).

The goshawk has a holarctic distribution, nesting in forested areas of Eurasia and North America and as 

far south as the Mexican highlands. In Oregon and Washington goshawks occur in suitable habitat in all 

forest zones, except they may be absent from the northern Oregon Coast Range. They are more 

common on the east side of the Cascades in both states.

Source habitats for goshawk are old forest and unmanaged young forests in montane, lower montane, 

and riparian woodland communities. Important habitat attributes of goshawk prey species include 

snags, down logs, woody debris, large trees, openings, herbaceous and shrubby understories and an 

intermixture of various forest structural stages. 

Goshawks use broad landscapes that incorporate multiple spatial scales to meet their life requisites 

(Squires and Kennedy 2006). At least three levels of habitat scale are recognized during the breeding 

season: (1) a nest area, composed of one or more forest stands or alternate nests; (2) a post fledging area 

(PFA), which is an area around the nest used by adults and young from the time of fledging, when the 

young are still dependent on the adults for food, to independence; and (3) a foraging area that comprises 

the breeding pair’s entire home range. In general, goshawk nest areas are unique in structure, with large 

trees, dense canopies, and high canopy closure. Nesting habitat encompasses approximately 200 acres 

(81 ha) of forest with a 2.5-acre (1.01 ha) core area of highest basal area and canopy closure, surrounded 

by approximately 75 acres (30 ha) in stem exclusion or understory re-initiation with high canopy 

closure. The outlying 125 acre (51 ha) area should contain a mix of forest structure with significant 

areas of open canopy mixed with more closed forest.

Numerous authors have described the size of the PFAs. The PFA ranges from 296-593 acres (120-240 

ha). The PFA is potentially important to the persistence of goshawk populations, as it provides 

fledgling hiding cover and foraging opportunities as fledglings learn to hunt and may correspond to the 

area defended by the breeding pair. 

Foraging areas are typically 4,900 acres -5,900 acres (1,985 – 2,390 ha) comprising a forest mosaic that 

must support a wide range of suitable prey. Foraging areas are usually more open than nesting areas, 

but should contain large trees, snags, down logs, vegetative layering, and other structural elements 

important to prey species. 

The following are identified potential threats to goshawk habitat and persistence:
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  231

 Timber harvest is the principal threat to breeding goshawk populations due to their reliance on 

mature and old-growth timber, especially for nesting, although not exclusively.

 Fire suppression may lead to increased susceptibility of stand-replacing fire and insect and 

disease outbreaks, which can result in the deterioration or loss of nesting habitat.

 Loss of foraging habitat due to dense conifer understory as a result of fire suppression. Dense 

understories may obstruct flight corridors used by goshawks to hunt prey.

 Predation on goshawks by other raptors including Red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), great 

horned owl (Bubo virginianus), and long-eared owl (Asio otus) which invade habitat following 

canopy reduction by logging. 

 Disturbance due to logging activities conducted near nests during the incubation and nestling 

periods can cause nest failure due to abandonment.

 High road densities may result in loss of snag and down wood habitat important to goshawk 

prey.

Forest-wide northern goshawk nesting habitat was modeled using all plant association groups (PAGSs) 

except juniper, mountain hemlock, and vegetation at higher elevations; dense stands and all vegetative 

seral stages were included. The minimum diameter structure was defined as 10 inches except in 

lodgepole pine where the minimum diameter was set at 5 inches. Lower diameter limits were used 

because the region-wide vegetation database (GNN) quantifies average diameter of the majority of 

species even though the stand may have sufficient large trees within that meet the needs for nesting. 

This may over estimate nesting habitat in lodgepole stands, as lodgepole plantations would meet this 

definition and not have any large trees mixed in. Mountain hemlock at 6,168 feet or above 9,199 feet is 

considered secondary habitat and was not mapped. The resulting layer was updated by removing stand 

replacement fire and recent management activities within the last 5 years. The acres of goshawk habitat 

were calculated at the subwatershed level (see Table 58). 

Table 58: Goshawk nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales

Landscape Scale overlapping 

the Ogden Project Area

Acres of goshawk 

nesting habitat

% of Subwatershed 

WITH Nesting Habitat

% of Ogden Planning Area 

falling within

Deschutes National Forest 446,402 Planning area habitat 

represents 2% of the Forest

Long Prairie Watershed 20,404 8

Finley Butte 2,349 23 7

Paulina Peak South 6,427 41 1

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

30,188 92

Kawak Butte 4,846 43 5

Lower Paulina 6,770 39 55

LaPine 587 16 1

Wickiup Junction 3,783 42 29

Upper Paulina Peak 5,066 40 2

Ogden Planning Area 9,929 (38% of planning area 

with nesting habitat)
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

232  Ogden Final EIS

Ogden Planning Area 

Within “Scenario A of the Eastside Screens Standard and Guides” as it amends the Deschutes LRMP, 

the direction for management is as follows:

Protect every known active and historically used goshawk nest-site from disturbance. 

“Historically” refers to known nesting activity occurring at the site in the last 5 years. Seasonal 

disturbance restrictions may be implemented at sites.

30 acres of the most suitable nesting habitat surrounding all active and historical nest tree(s) 

will be deferred from harvest.

A 400 acres “Post Fledging Area” (PFA) will be established around every known active nest 

site. While harvest activities can occur within this area, retain the LOS stands and enhance 

younger stands toward LOS condition, as possible. 

Initial surveys were conducted in 2005, under a previous project proposal (Paulina). In 2009 and 2010 

new surveys were conducted within the proposed Ogden project area, using the method outlined in 

Woodbridge and Hargis (2006); broadcast calls were made from June through August at 203 different 

stations (some stations were along roads, some had to be hiked to). One confirmed nest and another 

nest attempt were discovered in 2009. The nest attempt was a poorly built nest with a pair of goshawks 

in the vicinity. Later season visits did not reveal any sign of young (no whitewash) the nest had fallen 

apart and no adults were seen in the area. In 2010, a newly discovered nest was found and successfully 

fledged young; the 2009 active nest was not active nest this year and a new nest area was not discovered 

(although in 2010, outside the survey season, an adult goshawk was observed in the vicinity of the 2009 

nest); and an active nest that fledged young was discovered in the vicinity of the 2009 nest attempt. 

Based on surveys and observations, there are 3 active goshawk territories within the project area (see 

Figure 64).

Each territory was assigned a name, a core area, a post-fledging area (PFA), and alternate nest stands 

(Table 59). Nest core areas are the stands containing the active nest. Alternate nest stands are those 

stands adjacent to and most closely resemble the characteristics of the active nest core. Post-fledging 

areas are those stands surrounding the nest stands that meet the definitions in Youtz, et al. 2007 (closecanopied, mature forest). Surrounding and encompassing the PFAs, nest cores, and alternate nest stands 

are goshawk foraging areas ranging in size from 5401-6192 acres (also based on information in Youtz et 

al. 2007). Although Youtz et al. (2007) is based in the fire-adapted forest ecosystems of the Southwest 

United States, subsequent habitat descriptions in Northern Idaho (Moser and Garton 2009) and the 

inland Pacific Northwest (DeStefano et al. 2006) either make reference to the Southwest guidelines 

(DeStefano et al. 2006) or use similar territory size and descriptions (Moser and Garton 2009). Youtz et 

al. (2007) relate the findings that an ideal MRNG (Management Recommendations for the Northern 

Goshawk) landscape had home ranges spaced approximately 2.5 miles between centers. Interestingly, 

the three known nest sites within the Ogden planning area are approximately 2.5 miles apart (see Figure 

64 and Table 59), and they overlap the queried habitat for the Forest-wide mapping effort.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  233

Figure 64: Existing goshawk territories within the Ogden planning area.

Table 59: Acreage breakdown for each of the stand categories in the goshawk territories. Each 

category gets progressively bigger and encompasses the categories above it (e.g. Alternate Nest = Nest 

Core + other stands; PFA = Alternate + other stands; etc.)

Finley Butte* McKay** My

Nest Core 30 20 30

Alternate Nest 249 191 188

PFA 631 446 445

Foraging 5973 6192 5401

Activity Last active 2009; multiple 

alternate nests in territory

Active in 2011, 2010, 

nest core defended in 

2009; Territory active in 

2012, alternate nest 

area used

Active in 2010 and 2011, 

not active in 2012

*Goshawk responses were recorded within this PFA during the 2005 Paulina survey effort.

**The nest stand used by this pair is 20 acres in size. Although this is not the recommended 30 acres, the PFA 

and foraging area compensates by being larger than recommended, and there is at least another 10 acres of PFA 

immediately adjacent to the nest stand that is not part of any proposed treatment.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

234  Ogden Final EIS

The difference in acreages for each category between the Eastside Screens guidance and the mapped 

amounts is because the categories here are based on stand boundaries. Using the stand boundaries 

allows for a more logical (determined by the trees and land) and cross-disciplined (used by silviculture, 

fuels specialists, etc.) use of the database. As one can see in Table 59 above, the total acres for nesting 

stands is at least 180 acres (as recommended by the literature) and the foraging area of 5,400 acres.

The existing conditions within each territory and PFA are as follows:

Table 60: Stand structure breakdown (ac) for each goshawk territories. 

Finley Butte McKay My

Territory PFA Territory PFA Territory PFA

Open -

Seedling/Sapling

(stand initiation)

1453 24% 98 15% 1345 22% 11 2% 1082 20% 8 2%

Young

(stem exclusionclosed canopy)

2727 46% 341 54% 2165 35% 170 38% 2495 46% 213 48%

Mid-aged

(understory 

reinitiation)

1678 28% 180 28% 2220 36% 147 33% 1375 25% 176 39%

Mature

(multi-stratum 

w/o large trees)

112 2% 12 2% 460 7% 116 26% 446 8% 48 11%

Old

(multi- or single 

stratum with 

large trees)

1 <1% 0 0% 2 <1% 0 0% 3 <1% 0 0%

Total 5973 631 6192 446 5401 445

As seen in Table 60 above, the PFAs generally have similar or greater proportions of older aged stands,

most notable in the McKay PFA in the mature age class (average tree diameters of 15-20”). This table 

also quantifies the general lack of the older age classes (average tree diameters of 20”) within the 

territories and PFAs; similar to the lack of large tree structure found in the HRV analysis (Table 23, 

page 117).

Within the literature (Youtz et al. 2007, DeStefano et al. 2006), it is recommended that a mix of 

vegetation structural stages will support goshawks and their prey while also being sustainable on the 

landscape. Youtz et al. (2007) recommend a mix of 20% of the territory within each age class and 

thinning treatments be focused in the younger/smaller age classes in order to attain the larger sizes and 

interlocking crowns. This research also supports and builds on the Deschutes LRMP (Standard and 

Guideline[S & G] WL-3) in limiting human activity in nesting areas and PFAs during the breeding 

season March 1-September 30.

Scientific controversy regarding goshawk habitat management

Since the release of the Ogden DEIS, there has been added scientific controversy about the efficacy of 

the Management Recommendations for the Northern Goshawk in the Southwestern United States 

(MRNG) as put forth by Reynolds et al.(1992) and referenced in Youtz et al. (2007) in providing for 

increasing or stable populations.

Greenwald et al. (2005) and Beier et al. (2008) both conclude that goshawks are not habitat generalists. 

Although the species may use a variety of stand species or plant associations, they are specialists for 

closed canopied, large-tree structure. Their research does not support the conversion of mature stands to 

early seral stands in order to promote prey abundance; that goshawk nest sites were selected in denser, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  235

mature stands with higher dead wood densities than surrounding stands. Reynolds et al. (2012) 

published a response to Beier et al. (2008) specifically suggesting their methods did not adequately 

represent their conclusions. Beier and Ingraldi (2012) responded to this saying, in effect, that the degree 

of decline they observed in 2008 may be argued, but they can conclude that there was a decline. They 

supported Reynolds et al. (2012) response that the original nest sites used to establish the 1992 

recommendations should be monitored in their entirety in order to adequately test the recommendations.

For the Ogden Project analysis, the designations of the PFA, alternate nest stands and territories around 

each known nest site do match the size and descriptions used in these publications, and more 

importantly McGrath et al. (2003) that uses more region-specific data. The project does not propose to 

create any early seral stands (stand initiation) within the known territories, and the effects are focused 

on the resulting quality of the nest stand, alternate nest stands, and PFAs. The project analysis also 

agrees with other aspects of Beier et al. (2008), Greenwald et al. (2005), and McGrath et al. (2003) that 

competition with red-tailed hawks and great horned owls, human infrastructure (roads, trails, 

developments, etc.) and disturbance (especially during the breeding season) can negatively affect 

goshawk reproduction.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

The No Action alternative would not cause any risk of disturbance effects or habitat alteration because it 

does not propose any treatments within the goshawk territories associated with this project. This is not 

to say, however, that these effects will not happen. Other potential disturbance vectors currently exist 

(e.g. open roads, trails, geothermal test drill sites), and there are further proposals for trails and 

geothermal monitoring (Table 61). Although the extent of each of these existing and proposed projects 

may be small, they do come with associated maintenance issues/expectations that would extend the 

duration of their effect.

This alternative also forgoes the current need and objective to treat fuel levels around particularly risky 

or sensitive sites (campgrounds, ingress/egress routes) that would also benefit the sustainability of

goshawk habitat. Some stands within the current goshawk PFAs are showing increased levels of beetle 

activity (beetle activity present in understory and moving into the larger tree canopy). It is reasonably 

foreseeable that these stands will in the short-term become dominated by snags in the understory and the 

large trees used for nesting will soon die. This decreases the suitability of the stand to sustain a 

goshawk territory in the long-term. Also, these areas would contribute to the risk of wildfire.

Table 61: Other activities (proposed and existing) within the goshawk territories with potential effects.

Finley Butte McKay My

Trails (hiking, biking, 

OHV, & snowmobile) ~2 miles ~4.5 miles ~7 miles

Geothermal Sites 0 5 4

Developed Rec Sites 1 1 2

Proposed OHV Trail* ~8 miles ~7 miles ~11 miles

*Based on early draft proposals under the Lava Rock OHV project.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Alternative 2

This alternative does not propose any activities within the goshawk PFAs. It does propose treatments 

within the territories (see Table 62 and Figure 65). A majority of the proposed actions within the 

territories are within the smaller size classes (<15” average stand diameter) and stands with lower 

canopy closure (<40%). This may be in large part because the PFA and nest stands focused on the most 

suitable goshawk habitat (i.e. stands with higher canopy closure and relatively large trees). 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

236  Ogden Final EIS

Table 62: Acres of Alternative 2 proposed activities within the goshawk territories (inclusive of the 

foraging areas). Some areas propose multiple treatments (e.g. timber harvest and mowing).

Nesting Habitat 

Project Area-wide Finley Butte McKay My

Timber Harvest 5110 1916 2507 1205

Pre-commercial 

thin 107

408 605 569

Mow 159 138 558 275

Underburn or Mow 

& Underburn

5031 1897 2223 964

Total of Proposed 

Activities (% 

habitat or territory 

treated)

5390 (54%) 2324 (39%) 3476 (56%) 1775 (33%)

A bulk of the proposed actions occur within the structural ages that are overrepresented as seen in Table

60 (e.g. the young and mid-age stages are consistently >20% of the goshawk territory). Youtz et al.

(2007) recommends a relatively even mix of structural stages for goshawk prey diversity and goshawk 

nesting and fledging habitat.

In the short-term, the goshawk territories outside the PFAs will be more open due to timber harvesting, 

pre-commercial thinning and underburning. In the long-term, these actions will help move the stands 

towards the older structural stages which are currently lacking; however this would take decades and the 

remaining goshawk habitat would have to provide the nesting areas in the interim. It is projected that by 

year 2060, large trees will be more common than they are presently in the stands that are currently 

classified as mid-aged (see Forested Vegetation section).

Indirectly, treatments will reduce the risk of a wildfire moving into the PFAs and nest stands. Areas 

proposed for underburning were selected based on their risk and strategic placement on the landscape. 

The objective is to treat the fuel levels in these stands in order to minimize the speed and intensity of a 

wildfire (Chapter 3.4). This will provide a measure of protection for the goshawk’s fledging and nesting 

areas. This alternative takes a more pro-active approach to goshawk habitat in retaining the stands that 

are currently being used while providing a measure of protection and creating future nesting habitat in 

the areas being used for foraging.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  237

Figure 65: Spatial representation of Alternative 2 proposed activities within the goshawk territories.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Alternative 3

This alternative differs from the previous one by proposing treatments within each of the PFAs and, in 

some cases, the alternate nest stands (Tables 63 and 64). Neither action alternative proposes to treat the 

nest core.

The Eastside Screens direction allows for harvest activities to occur within the PFAs. Scenario A (5) (c) 

states “A 400 acre “Post Fledging Area” (PFA) will be established around every known active nest site. 

While harvest activities can occur within this area, retain the LOS stands and enhance younger stands 

towards LOS condition, as possible.” As seen in the existing condition discussion earlier, there is no 

LOS currently within the PFAs and little to no LOS is the goshawk territories. The few acres that are 

within the territories are scattered, fractions of an acre (<0.15 ac) parcels and not a clump that can be 

logistically managed. The objectives for treatments within the PFAs are to promote larger tree 

structure, focusing on the more fire resistant ponderosa pine. In many of the stands within the PFAs, the 

large tree component is made up of ponderosa pines (all nest trees were dominant/co-dominant 

ponderosa pines) with an understory of 8-12” dbh lodgepole pines, occasionally white fir. In these 

stands, especially evident in the My PFA, beetles have currently moved from the more vulnerable 

lodgepole understory into the larger ponderosa pines. Some of the larger ponderosa pines have already 

died. Beetles will continue to kill the lodgepole pine (>9” dbh) and kill ponderosa pine that are adjacent 

to these lodgepole pine (B. Schroeder, pers. commun. August, 2010). In its current condition these 

stands are not sustainable as goshawk habitat for the long term. This PFA is trending towards complete 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

238  Ogden Final EIS

loss of goshawk habitat, given the risk to the larger diameter ponderosa pine and the current beetle 

mortality and infestation in the mid-upper story lodgepole pine. Proposed treatments within the PFA 

will reduce the risk to the larger ponderosa pine that currently serve as potential nest trees although it 

would have the short-term impact of removing some the close-canopied characteristics that favor 

nesting. Replacing the large ponderosa pine used for nesting would take longer should this stand 

succumb to the activity seen.

Table 63: Alternative 3 proposed activities within the goshawk territories. Some areas propose 

multiple treatments

Nesting Habitat 

Project Area-wide Finley Butte McKay My

Timber Harvest

 Acres within PFA

5096 ac 1712 ac

50 ac (alt. nest)

2327 ac

146 ac

1183 ac

114 ac (PFA & alt nest)

Pre-commercial 

thin*

Acres within PFA

426 ac 778 ac

0 ac

605 ac

0 ac

552 ac

0 ac

Mow

Acres within PFA

133 ac 133 ac

0 ac

527 ac

0 ac

318 ac

0 ac

Underburn or Mow 

& Underburn

Acres within PFA

3892 ac 1440 ac

50 ac (alt. nest)

1209 ac

0 ac

617 ac

114 ac (PFA & alt. nest)

Total of Proposed 

Activities (% of 

habitat or territory 

treated)

5829 ac (59%) 2685 ac (45%) 3442 ac (55%) 1919 ac (35%)

PFA or nest 

(% PFA treated)

N/A 50 ac (8%) 146 ac (33%) 114 ac (26%)

*Includes the proposed action “Ladder Fuels Reduction” or LFR which is a removal of small trees from 

around larger ponderosa pine without a density target.

Table 64: Alternative 3 proposed activities within the goshawk post-fledging areas (PFAs). Some areas 

propose multiple treatments

Finley Butte McKay My

Timber Harvest 50 ac (within alt. nest 

area)

146 114 ac (PFA & alt. nest

area)

Pre-commercial thin* 0 0 0

Mow 0 0 0

Underburn or Mow & 

Underburn 50 ac (within alt. nest 

area)

0 114 ac (PFA & alt. nest 

area)

PFA or nest 

(% PFA treated) 50 ac (8%) 146 ac (33%) 114 ac (26%)

This alternative provides the same levels of protection from wildfire and the creation or promotion of 

new nesting habitat as Alternative 2. This alternative, however, is more aggressive in treating the areas 

currently used by goshawks for fledging (Figure 66). Thinning and fuels treatments within these stands 

will reduce the canopy and open up the stand. Generally goshawks utilize and, as an accipiter, are built 

for a more close-canopied, tightly spaced forest. Anecdotal observations made on the Bend-Fort Rock 

Ranger District are that the areas where goshawks have been to known to nest or fledge are relatively 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  239

dense with little to no shrubs in the understory. The treatments may favor the in-growth of shrubs (e.g. 

manzanita and ceanothus) that can serve as hiding cover for goshawk prey. The more open canopy 

may also allow for goshawk competitors such as the red-tailed hawk and great-horned owl to more 

readily use the area. The trade-offs of this alternative are long-term gains for more extensive/intensive

short-term impacts.

Figure 66: Spatial representation of Alt. 3 proposed activities within the goshawk territories.

Cumulative Effects 

The proposed actions are cumulative to other existing and reasonably foreseeable projects within the 

project area and larger cumulative effects area (see Figure 57). Additive impacts may result both from 

disturbance and habitat alteration.

The proposed actions have cumulative habitat altering impacts with the series of Lava Cast timber sales 

to the north and the Long Prairie and Prairie Dog sales to the south; these projects have been accounted 

for in the Forest-wide mapping effort. Each of these more recent sales have treated (e.g. thinned) within 

goshawk territories, but not within PFAs. The objectives of the treatments were similar to those in this 

proposal (i.e. reduce risk to wildfire and promotion of ponderosa pine). Long Prairie was an exception. 

Although the project still treated within goshawk habitat, the focus of the project was in lodgepole pine 

stands with heavy mistletoe infestation. Under the Prairie Dog and Long Prairie projects, there was no 

prescribed burning or mowing; only the slash created was treated. The Lava Cast sales, on the contrary, 

did thin and proposed prescribed burning, mowing or pile burning. This more closely matches the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

240  Ogden Final EIS

proposals and objectives of the Ogden project area. The cumulative effects to goshawk habitat are the 

further extension of land area whereby long-term benefits (larger trees, more resilient) are the trade-off 

for the short-term negative impacts of reducing the density of the stands (increase brush growth that 

hide prey; increased competition from other raptors). Because Alternative 3 proposes to treat within the 

PFAs, the cumulative effects to goshawk populations in the area more directly and negatively impact 

nesting and fledging than Alternative 2. To a smaller extent, these habitat impacts are also cumulative 

with the habitat impacts from the geothermal drilling. Although the footprint for these test sites are 

designed to be small, there would still be some openings created. Based on the existing conditions of 

the goshawk territories (see Table 4), open habitat is not currently lacking in the area, and reducing the 

density of stands has already been stated as an impact from the proposed actions. Cumulative impacts 

from test drilling are only relevant to the McKay and My goshawk territories.

Human disturbance is another potential cumulative impact to nesting goshawks. The proposed actions 

under both Alternatives and the other timber sales in the cumulative effects area (e.g. Lava Cast) have 

the mitigation measure of a seasonal restriction on all activities within 1⁄4 mile of a nest core during the 

goshawk breeding season (March 1 through August 31st). There are no seasonal restrictions on any 

recreational activity currently ongoing in the area. Each of the existing goshawk territories are impacted 

by recreation use. In fact, the McKay nest tree was located based on reports from a local mushroom 

hunter that was “getting harassed” (i.e. eliciting a defensive response) by an adult goshawk during the 

nestling period. Additive to the ongoing recreational disturbance, is the reasonably foreseeable proposal 

to designate miles of OHV trails. Each of the existing territories is impacted by this proposal, with a 

proposed trail running adjacent to or through the PFA and an alternate nest stand.

Although the proposed actions do not have a disturbance impact on goshawk, cumulatively the habitat 

alteration impacts, together with the disturbance impacts from ongoing and proposed recreation use, 

reduce the quality of the existing goshawk habitat. Alternative 3, because it proposes treatments within 

the PFAs, would have more intensive cumulative impacts with the ongoing and foreseeable recreation 

use.

Alternative 3, once implemented, may cause a shift in where a goshawk pair may nest (i.e. select a 

different nest stand). The alteration of 5,390-5,829 acres of habitat (Alternatives 2 and 3 respectively), 

appears to be equivalent to one territory, but these acres are spread out over the entire project area (26, 

251 acres). Project-specific analysis shows that under Alternative 3, the McKay territory is most 

heavily treated, including the post-fledging area. The Finley Butte territory is the least impacted 

territory from the proposed actions.

The northern goshawk is considered vulnerable in Oregon. On a landscape and Forest-wide basis, the 

effects of the proposed alternatives are similar (see Table 65). Because this project impacts 1% of the 

suitable habitat across the Forest, the overall direct, indirect, and cumulative effects will result in a small 

negative trend of habitat. The loss of habitat will be minimal at the scale of the Forest. The Ogden 

Project is consistent with the Forest Plan, and thus continued viability of the goshawk is expected on the 

Deschutes National Forest.

Table 65: Summary of short-term impacts to goshawk nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales

Landscape Scale Existing acres of 

Habitat (Alt.1)

Acres of habitat 

remaining in shortterm after Alt. 2

(% net reduction)

Acres of habitat 

remaining in shortterm after Alt. 3 (% 

net reduction)

Ogden Project Area 9,929 4539 (-54%) 4, 100 (-59%)

Subwatersheds 29,828 24,438 (-18%) 23,999 (-19%)

Watersheds 50,592 45,202 (-11%) 44,763 (-11%)

Forest 446,402 441,012 (-1%) 440,573 (-1%)
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  241

Cooper’s Hawk

Existing Condition

Deschutes National Forest 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Cooper’s Hawk for the 

Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012). 

Cooper’s hawk was chosen as a terrestrial management indicator species (MIS) for the DNF for 

providing stand diversity and retention of small blocks of habitats within 50 – 80 year old black bark 

pine stands and mixed conifer stands (Land and Resource Management Plan—LRMP, DNF 1990, p. 4-

53).

The tree species composition of Cooper’s hawk nest sites varied from pure stands of ponderosa pine at 

lower elevations, to mixed stands of ponderosa pine and white fir at mid-elevations, to mixed and pure 

stands of white fir and lodgepole pine at high elevations. Stands of all age classes in each timber type 

were represented, however the most common type was mature ponderosa pine overstory with mixed 

understory of ponderosa pine and white fir. 

Nests were built in trees with high crown volume, utilizing mistletoe for nest structures. Diameter at 

breast height (dbh) of the trees used averaged 14-16 inches; and mistletoe was selected as the platform 

50-70% of the time.

Several studies have compared nesting habitat use between coexisting accipiters in North America. 

Where these species coexist, a relationship occurs in which tree height and DBH of nest trees increases 

in proportion to accipiter body size. For example, sharp-shinned hawk nest sites in Oregon were 

characterized as dense, 40 to 60-year-old even-aged conifer stands while Cooper’s hawk nest sites were 

50 to 80-year-old conifer stands with somewhat larger, more widely spaced trees, and goshawk nest 

sites were dense, mature conifer stands with varying densities of mature, overstory trees. However, high 

interspecific overlap occurs between the species in the use of nest site characteristics such as basal area, 

canopy cover, and tree density. 

Currently, the single most imminent threat to accipiters is that of habitat alteration and/or destruction. 

Habitat loss decreases the availability of nest sites, which can limit Accipiter populations. However, the 

impacts of habitat alteration are somewhat controversial, as Cooper’s hawks have been documented to 

successfully breed in urban environments such as Tucson. Habitat loss can decrease prey abundance 

and prey availability, which can also limit accipiter populations.

Research suggests that active and prospective nest sites should not be precommercially or commercially 

thinned, because this will result in reduced stand densities and deeper tree crowns. Reduced stand 

densities and deeper tree crowns could increase the vulnerability of Cooper’s hawks to predation. 

Additionally, several studies have documented that sapling-sized trees are a common characteristic of 

nest sites. Even though the level of Cooper’s hawk dependence upon these saplings is not understood, it 

is important to acknowledge that saplings could be an important component of their habitat during the 

breeding season. Precommercial harvest might also negatively impact Cooper’s hawks if the operation 

occurred in areas adjacent to nest stands during the nesting season. 

Prescribed burns simulate natural forms of disturbance that occur periodically across the landscape. 

These forms of disturbance are likely to be important in providing future nest sites for Cooper’s hawks. 

Forest-wide Cooper’s hawk nesting habitat was modeled in Wildhab using all plant association groups 

(PAGSs), except juniper, and mountain hemlock and vegetation at higher elevations. All seral stages 

and dense stands with minimum structure of 10-inch dbh (structure class 4) were used, except in 

lodgepole pine where the minimum dbh used was 5 inches (structure class 3). The maximum dbh used 

was 20-inches (note: structure class 6 or 7 was not included). In addition, hardwood stands where the 

canopy cover was greater than 50% was included into the model. The resulting layer was updated by 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

242  Ogden Final EIS

removing stand replacement fire and recent management activities within the last 5 years. The acres of 

suitable habitat were calculated at the subwatershed level (Table 66).

Table 66: Cooper’s hawk nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of Cooper’s 

hawk nesting habitat % of Subwatershed 

WITH Nesting Habitat

% of Ogden Planning Area 

falling within

Deschutes National 

Forest

275,340 Planning area habitat 

represents 2% of the Forest

Long Prairie Watershed 15,859 8

Finley Butte 1,790 18 7

Paulina Peak South 5,136 32 1

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

22,942 92

Kawak Butte 3,750 33 5

Lower Paulina 4,929 29 55

LaPine 457 13 1

Wickiup Junction 2,822 32 29

Upper Paulina Peak 4,693 37 2

Ogden Planning Area 7,071 (27% of planning area 

with nesting habitat)

Ogden Project Area

There are no known Cooper’s hawks nests within or adjacent to the proposed treatment areas. Surveys 

for goshawks, often can disclose Cooper’s hawk territories, and any Cooper’s hawk responses were 

noted during goshawk surveys. Cooper’s hawks were observed during the 2005, 2009, and 2010 survey

efforts but no Cooper’s hawk nests were found. In 2012 a Cooper’s hawk nest was found within a stand 

with large overstory ponderosa pine and a dense understory/mid-story of ponderosa pine and lodgepole 

pine.

Based on the Forest-wide mapping effort, the project area may have up to 5 pairs of Cooper’s hawks 

when using the larger territory size. 

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

Similar to the discussion for the goshawk, this alternative would have little to no impact to the existing 

Cooper’s hawk habitat. The risk of losing habitat as a result of wildfire would remain elevated. Some 

habitat would continue to develop in the areas recently thinned as part of other projects (e.g. Lava Cast 

and Prairie Dog). 

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

Alternatives 2 and 3 directly treat approximately 3,961and 4,189 acres of potential Cooper’s hawk 

habitat, respectively. Treatments (i.e. thinning, mowing, and underburning) would make stands less 

dense, reduce canopy closure, and remove some mistletoe infected trees that may serve as nest trees. 

Based on research within the Forest Service (2012) report, precommercial and commercial harvest has a 

greater impact in altering nesting habitat than mowing or underburning alone. Impacts to habitat reflect 

where some sort of precommercial or commercial harvest is taking place and not where mowing or 

underburning alone are taking place (3,812 ac and 3,918 acres of this in Alternative 2 and 3, 

respectively). Commercial and precommercial thinning directly reduces the suitability of the stand to 

serve as nesting habitat.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  243

In accordance with the LRMP, a 15-acre nest core was established around the known 2012 Cooper’s 

hawk nest.

Table 67: Acres of proposed treatments within mapped Cooper’s hawk nesting habitat by action 

alternative

Proposed Treatment Alternative 2

(acres)

Alternative 3

(acres)

Summary of Impacts

Precommercial

thinning/Ladder Fuels 

Reduction

59 362 Habitat altered. Alt 3 has greater 

impacts since it proposes more of 

this type of treatment

Commercial Harvest 3753 3556 Habitat altered. Alt 2 has greater 

impacts since it proposes more of 

this type of treatment

Mowing and/or 

Underburning only

149 271 As proposed by itself, research 

suggests this type of treatment has a 

neutral effect to habitat

Total proposed treatments 

in nesting habitat

3961 4189

The acres treated represent approximately 54-55% of the Cooper’s hawk habitat within the project area

(representing 1-2 nest territories across the entire project area). A majority of the potential habitat 

treated is within the ponderosa pine plant association group. Objectives for ponderosa pine growth and 

sustainably often conflict with the most suitable Cooper’s hawk habitat. Being an accipiter like the 

goshawk, the Cooper’s hawk niche is being able to fly and hunt prey effectively in more dense, mature 

forested stands. Being a smaller bird than the goshawk, it can also occupy dense stands with smaller 

trees. Retaining dense, small ponderosa pine stands are not objectives for this project and a large part of 

this habitat is in areas that also have a higher human safety risk due to wildfire (e.g. McKay 

campground, stands near the National Forest boundary). More suitable Cooper’s hawk habitat will be 

retained in smaller, untreated pockets within the ponderosa pine types, and in the mixed conifer habitat 

types where dense stands of smaller sized trees are more sustainable.

In the long-term, habitat for the Cooper’s hawk will become more limited to plant associations on more 

productive sites where dense stands of mature trees are sustainable (e.g. mixed conifer and lodgepole 

pine). In plant associations outside of these associations (e.g. dry ponderosa pine), Cooper’s hawk 

habitat will be limited to the untreated pockets retained for deer hiding cover, or retained for other 

reasons not wildlife related (e.g. cultural resource sites).

Cumulative Effects 

Cumulatively the proposed actions would reduce Cooper’s hawk habitat by an additional 3-4% within 

the subwatersheds (Figure 58). Past and ongoing vegetation treatments (including fuels treatments) 

have commonly focused on sustaining and promoting large ponderosa pine habitat. The Cooper’s hawk 

is able to take advantage of mid-seral, denser forest habitat that is more common today, especially in the 

lower elevation ponderosa pine. As projects are implemented in these habitats, Cooper’s hawk habitat 

may become limited to the higher mixed conifer stands in the larger area, and in areas retained for other 

purposes unrelated to wildlife (e.g. archaeology sites, areas of steep terrain). Although there are not 

many treatments proposed in the mixed conifer habitats, geothermal developments are more common in 

these areas, and there will be cumulative impacts to habitat in this habitat type because the geothermal 

development does require some site alteration to allow for the equipment to safely operate.

Similar to the discussion for goshawks, the current and foreseeable recreation projects have cumulative 

effects with the proposed actions. Although there is mitigation in this proposal to reduce disturbance, 

recreational use overlaps many of the treatment areas on which there are no seasonal restrictions. 

Cumulatively, human disturbance and habitat alteration reduce the quality of the habitat.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

244  Ogden Final EIS

Table 68: Summary of impacts to Cooper’s hawk nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales

Landscape Scale Existing acres of habitat 

(Alternative 1)

Acres of habitat 

remaining in short-term 

after Alternative 2

(% net reduction) 

Acres of habitat 

remaining in short-term 

after Alternative 3

(% net reduction)

Ogden Project Area 7,071 3,259 (-54%) 3,153 (-55%)

Subwatersheds 23,577 19,765 (-16%) 19,659 (-17%)

Watersheds 38,801 34,989 (-10%) 34,883 (-10%)

Forest 275,340 271,528 (-1%) 271,422 (-1%)

The effects of the habitat alteration resulting from the proposed alternatives is additive to the other 

current activities (recreation, geothermal monitoring/development, recent completed timber sales). 

Habitat within multiple territories may be impacted by the cumulative effects of many ongoing and 

foreseeable actions.

These effects are reduced across the subwatersheds. Recreational and geothermal cumulative effects are 

most pronounced within the subwatersheds that overlap the project the most. This to say, the Upper 

Paulina, Lower Paulina, and Wickiup Junction Subwatersheds contain a bulk of the recreational and 

geothermal impacts within the Lower Little Deschutes watershed. This also happens to be the 

watershed that most overlaps the Ogden project area, thus impacts to Cooper’s hawk habitat for this 

project area may not be representative over multiple watersheds. This is reflected in Table 67, showing 

how on a Forest level scale, impacts to Cooper’s hawk habitat in the project area represents 

approximately 1% of the nesting habitat on the Forest. 

Because this project impacts 1% of suitable habitat across the Forest, the overall direct, indirect, and 

cumulative effects will result in a small negative trend of habitat. The loss of habitat will be minimal at 

the scale of the Forest. The Ogden Project is consistent with the Forest Plan, and thus continued 

viability of Cooper’s hawk is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

Sharp-shinned Hawk

Existing Condition 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Sharp-shinned Hawk for 

the Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

The sharp-shinned hawk was chosen as a terrestrial management indicator species (MIS) for providing 

stand diversity and retention of small blocks of habitats within 40 – 60 year old ponderosa pine stands 

and mixed conifer stands with a dense canopy (Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource

Management Plan—LRMP, pp. 4-54). 

Sharp-shinned hawk nest sites are characterized as dense, conifer stands (1-14 ha; 2.5-34 ac), that have

dense overstories and sparse understories (most nests were in young (25-50 years), even-aged conifer 

stands with single-layered canopies). Nest concealment and protection was cause for nest placement in 

dense conifer crowns. The growth form of trees may be the most reliable parameter by which to

characterize nest sites of sharp-shinned hawks. The vegetation at nest sites is usually in the early

successional stages and extremely dense. Nest stands are dominated by trees 7.5 – 37.5 cm (3-15 inches) 

DBH and average 2,286 trees/ha (926 trees/ac).

The tree species composition varies from pure stands of ponderosa pine at lower elevations, to mixed 

stands of ponderosa pine and white fir at mid-elevations, to mixed and pure stands of white fir and 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  245

lodgepole pine at high elevations. Stands of all age classes in each timber type are represented, however 

the most common type was mature ponderosa pine overstory with mixed understory of ponderosa pine 

and white fir. 

Habitat loss decreases the availability of nest sites, which can limit populations. Habitat loss may also

decrease prey abundance and availability, which would limit populations as well.

Two forms of habitat loss include development and timber harvest. A less apparent form of habitat loss 

to sharp-shinned hawks is caused by the growth of forests beyond the early seral stages. Sharp-shinned

hawks nest in habitats with specific structure. This specificity makes them susceptible to changes in

forest stands brought about by timber harvest. It should be noted though that impacts of timber harvest

to sharp-shinned hawks will be unique from site to site depending on the structure of the forest at the

time of harvest, the form and intensity of harvest, and the temporal perspective.

Active and prospective nest sites should not be precommercially or commercially thinned, because this 

will result in reduced stand densities and deeper tree crowns. Additionally, precommercial harvest could

negatively impact sharp-shinned hawks if the operation occurred in areas adjacent to nest stands during

the nesting season.

Forest-wide sharp-shinned hawk nesting habitat was modeled using the following plant association 

groups (PAGSs): white fir, grand fir, Douglas-fir, lodgepole pine, and ponderosa pine, including a dense 

canopy with trees at a minimum 5-inch dbh, structure classes 3, 4, and 5 with a 20-inch dbh maximum. 

The resulting layer was updated by removing stand replacement fire and recent management activities 

within the last 5 years. The acres of suitable habitat were calculated at the subwatershed level. Home 

range size ranged from 679 acres to 1,136 acres (Table 69).

Table 69: Sharp-shinned hawk nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of sharpshinned hawk 

nesting habitat

% of Subwatershed 

WITH Nesting Habitat

% of Ogden Planning Area falling 

within the landscape scale

Deschutes National 

Forest

486,138 Planning area habitat represents 

2% of the Forest

Long Prairie Watershed 28,504 8

Finley Butte 3299 33 7

Paulina Peak South 7299 46 1

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

31,509 92

Kawak Butte 5326 48 5

Lower Paulina 7684 45 55

LaPine 555 15 1

Wickiup Junction 3822 43 29

Upper Paulina Peak 4798 38 2

Ogden Planning Area 10,738 (40% of planning area 

with nesting habitat)

Ogden Project Area

Based on habitat descriptions and territory size, the project area has 10,738 ac of habitat (approximately 

6-9 pairs).4 In 2006, two potential nest areas were located based on the observation of at least one adult 

 

4 Between Draft and Final EIS, the Forest-level mapping effort was completed. The Forest-level mapping used 

similar parameters as the DEIS; however it used a broader definition of canopy closure related to plant associated 

and picked up substantially more habitat in ponderosa pine and ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine associations; 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

246  Ogden Final EIS

and one fledgling. These observations were made in August, however, and no actual nest tree(s) was 

located. During the more recent 2009 and 2010 goshawk surveys, no sharp-shinned activity was 

reported. These 2006 observations are located in areas mapped as sharp-shinned habitat, providing 

some verification of the effort.

Environmental Consequences

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

Habitat conditions for this species generally favor the no treatment option. Often proposed treatments 

will reduce density and canopy closure. By not doing this (i.e. the no action alternative), current sharpshinned habitat will be retained. Without consideration to stand-replacing fire, sharp-shinned hawk 

habitat would continue to develop in the project area.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

Both alternatives treat the units, where the historic observations were made in the same way. That is, 

Units 166, 174, and 207 propose thinning favoring ponderosa pine with mowing and underburning,

Table 70 details the activities proposed within sharp-shinned hawk habitat under each alternative. 

Outside of small patches retained for deer hiding cover or other resource needs, retention of sharpshinned hawk habitat runs counter to the promotion and growth of large ponderosa pine that is often the 

objective in this habitat type. The proposed treatments would alter 5,689 and 5,854 acres of sharpshinned hawk habitat, assuming that mowing and underburning alone would not alter habitat or have 

neutral effects. Because of the productivity of the mixed conifer habitat and the sustainability of dense 

stands, sharp-shinned hawk habitat could develop in these areas over many years. 

As a result of the proposed actions, sharp-shinned hawk habitat will become more limited within the 

project area. In the lower elevation, ponderosa pine dominated stands sharp-shinned hawk will likely 

find less suitable nesting habitat. Local populations of sharp-shinned hawks will likely trend towards 

the upper elevations where mixed conifer and more dense stands of mixed conifer and lodgepole pine 

are found.

Table 70: Acres of proposed treatments within mapped Sharp-shinned hawk nesting habitat by action 

alternative

Proposed Treatment Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Summary of Impacts

Precommercial 

thinning/Ladder Fuels 

Reduction

201 512 Habitat altered. Alt 3 has greater impacts 

since it proposes more of this type of 

treatment

Commercial Harvest 5487 5342 Habitat altered. Alt 2 has greater impacts 

since it proposes more of this type of 

treatment

Mowing and/or 

Underburning only

213 367 As proposed by itself, research suggests this 

type of treatment has a neutral effect to 

habitat

Total proposed treatments 

in nesting habitat

5902 6221

 

whereas the DEIS primarily showed larger patches of potential habitat in mixed conifer associations. This more 

recent effort is better at picking up the smaller clumps of dense habitat and is therefore used in this FEIS. 

Consequently, as the amount of mapped potential habitat increased, so did the amount of potential habitat 

impacted by the alternatives. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  247

Cumulative Effects 

Similar to the discussion for the Cooper’s hawk, although the intensity of the impact is greatest at the 

project level scale, the intensity drops off markedly as the landscape scale increases. The project area is 

largely made up of 2 subwatersheds (see Table 71), but to give context to the effects on a widespread 

scale, habitat may not be limiting on the Forest or in the watershed. As recent and ongoing vegetation 

projects continue to focus on large ponderosa pine development, higher elevation mixed conifer areas 

will become more important for sharp-shinned hawks. 

Table 71. Summary of impacts to Sharp-shinned hawk nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales

Landscape Scale Existing acres of habitat 

(Alternative 1)

Acres of habitat

remaining in short-term 

after Alt. 2 (% net 

reduction)

Acres of habitat 

remaining in short-term 

after Alt. 3 (% net 

reduction)

Ogden Project Area 10,738 5,049 (-53%) 4,884 (-54%)

Subwatersheds 32,783 27,094(-17%) 26,929 (-18%)

Watersheds 60,013 54,324 (-9%) 54,159 (-10%)

Forest 486,138 480,449 (-1%) 480,284 (-1%)

Because this project impacts 1% of suitable habitat across the Forest, the overall direct, indirect, and 

cumulative effects will result in a small negative trend of habitat (Table 71). The loss of habitat will be 

minimal at the scale of the Forest. The Ogden Project is consistent with the Forest Plan, and thus 

continued viability of the sharp-shinned hawk is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

Great Gray Owl

Existing Condition

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Great Gray Owl for the 

Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service, 2012).

Great gray owls were chosen as a terrestrial management indicator species (MIS) to monitor habitat 

comprised of forests 30 acres and larger adjacent to riparian and meadow ecosystems. The Deschutes 

National Forest Land Resource Management Plan (LRMP) requires enough habitat to sustain 8 great 

gray owl nesting pairs. The LRMP assumes that if enough habitat is present to maintain the pairs, then 

adequate habitat also exists for other species who share similar habitat requirements (LRMP 4-55). 

The great gray owl distribution is circumpolar and unevenly distributed throughout their range. For 

Oregon, they are near openings 3,000 feet and above in the Cascades Mountains. The availability of nest 

sites and suitable foraging habitat are considered the most important factors; and since foraging and 

nesting habitat can be quite different, proximity of these key components may be important as well.

Great gray owls use mature coniferous forests within proximity 0.1 to 0.2 miles (161-321m) of an open, 

typically wet meadow. In central Oregon, great gray owls also occupy old lodgepole pine or 

ponderosa/lodgepole pine mix forests in proximity to openings. A study in the Cascades found the 

openings great gray owl use range in size, anywhere from 15-250 acres (6-101 ha). Juxtaposition of 

foraging habitat and nesting habitat is important. Although great gray owls have been observed 

foraging up to 3.2 km (2 mi) from the nest, it is reasonable to suppose breeding success decreases as this 

distance increases.

Nesting habitat may have a sufficiently open understory to allow for grass and forbs, which in turn 

support vole (Microtus and Clethrionomys) and pocket gopher (Thomomys) populations. This 

culmination allows for the same area to function as both nesting and foraging habitat. Typically, the nest 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

248  Ogden Final EIS

stand may not provide foraging habitat but may be near openings, meadows, and young plantations. 

Great gray owls in northeast Oregon were observed foraging in stands with 11-59 percent canopy 

closure. The dominate understory of the foraging stands is grass. While foraging, they will use perches, 

both live trees and snags, 10-16 ft (3-5 m) off the ground in open forests and meadows. The Deschutes 

LRMP defines this owl’s habitat as being: lodgepole pine dominated overstory, overstory tree density of 

67 trees per acre for trees greater than 12 inches diameter at breast height, canopy cover of 60% (50-

70%), and distance to nearest meadow 440 (63-1,070ft.) feet (LRMP WL-31). 

Dense canopy cover and leaning trees are important habitat components for fledglings. Since fledglings 

leave the nest before being able to fly, leaning trees enable the owlets to climb above the ground, 

making them less susceptible to predation. There is a correlation of great gray owl presence with dense 

canopy cover (50-90 percent). 

Great gray owls do not construct nests or carry nesting materials (though females may scratch a 

depression in the bottom of a nest such as a snag. Great gray owls depend on pre-existing nest. These 

nests include stick nests built by the common raven (Corvus corax) and hawks (Buteo and Accipiter), 

squirrel (Sciurus) nests, broken-top snags, the platforms caused by infections of dwarf-mistletoe 

(Arceuthobium), and artificial platforms. Eggs, nestlings and fledglings are preyed upon by a variety of 

predators, but principally common ravens (Corvus corax), northern goshawks (Accipter gentilis), redtailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), and great horned owls (Bubo virginianius).

Threats

It has been reported that an extensive amount of great gray habitat was lost from urban sprawl in central 

Oregon. Analysis of source habitat issues for the great gray owl through literature search derive five 

major issues: (1) decline of late- and early-seral stages of montane and subalpine forests, particularly in 

the northern and eastern parts of the Interior Columbia Basin; (2) decline in availability of large trees 

and snags in all seral stages of montane and subalpine forests; (3) encroachment of conifers into natural 

meadow systems, eliminating potential foraging habitat; (4) reduced duration of early-seral stages 

because of intensive planting and thinning; and (5) decline in prey resulting from use of poisons to 

control pocket gophers.

Fire can aid in the enhancement habitat for the great gray owl and their prey species habitat. In 

meadows and small openings fire can reduce conifer encroachment, create snags, and stimulate growth 

in vegetation. Within forests, fire can reduce overcrowding in stands, decrease canopy cover to benefit 

the understory, and stimulate tree growth in fire-dependent species, ponderosa pine.

For the Forest-wide mapping effort, the definition used to map nesting habitat was all forest types with 

tree diameters equal to or greater that15 inches at all seral stages with an open or dense canopy cover, 

and forests within 0.35 mi from an opening. Openings have to be 10 acres and greater, with fire or manmade openings equal to or less than 5 years of age. Modeling resulted in 197,847 of potential great gray 

owl nesting habitat. This may over-estimate nesting habitat due to the low end of open canopy cover 

being a wide range, but only including the dense stands (high canopy closure) would exclude habitat 

near meadow or opening edges.

Table 72: Great gray owl nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of sharpgreat gray owl 

nesting habitat

% of Subwatershed WITH 

Nesting Habitat

% of Ogden Planning 

Area falling within

Deschutes National 

Forest

197,847 Planning area habitat 

represents 2% of the 

Forest

Long Prairie Watershed 0 8

Finley Butte 0 0 7

Paulina Peak South 0 0 1
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  249

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

2,426 92

Kawak Butte 0 0 5

Lower Paulina 1,084 6 55

LaPine 10 0 1

Wickiup Junction 3 0 29

Upper Paulina Peak 1,031 8 2

Ogden Planning Area 1, 092 (4% of planning area with 

nesting habitat)

Ogden Planning Area

Great gray owl habitat is limited in the planning area to stands surrounding Ogden meadow (Paulina 

Prairie) and some of the recently burned areas that are not covered in shrubs. This latter may be an 

important distinction because there is a large burned area within the planning area but it is covered in 

manzanita and ceanothus. The literature suggests that great gray owls forage more successfully in more 

grassy openings and meadows, not shrubfields. 

The planning area contains a bulk of the habitat within the larger, overlapping watersheds. The Lower 

Paulina Creek subwatershed acres are almost entirely within the Ogden planning area. The amount of 

habitat within the planning area equates to approximately 1 great gray owl territory.

There are no records of great gray owls within the planning area. Great gray owls are known to nest in 

areas near LaPine State Park (approximately 5-7 miles from the project area) where they have been 

observed hunting over the openings along the river and meadow habitat. Fledglings, and the suspected 

nest tree, have been seen in the dense lodgepole pine habitat stands around the park and nearby 

neighborhoods. This type of habitat is not commonly found within the project area near the meadows 

and openings. It is suspected that great gray owls in the area are finding better habitat closer to the river 

and off the Ft Rock Ranger District. The mapped habitat may also be less desirable to a great gray owl 

due to a known red-tailed hawk nest within it. Red-tailed hawks are a known predator to great gray owl 

nests and young

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

Habitat conditions for this species generally favor the no treatment option. Often proposed treatments 

will reduce density and canopy closure. By not doing this (i.e. the no action alternative), current greatgray owl habitat will be retained. However, a majority of the stands within the planning area are in a 

mid-seral stage that these owls do not use, and often the understories are made up of shrubs, not the 

open grassy/forb that favor owl prey species. Habitat in the planning area would likely remain limited.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

Both alternatives treat the same number of acres the same way within the mapped great gray owl 

habitat. Treatments include commercial thinning to minimum stocking levels that favor ponderosa pine 

coupled with mowing and underburning the understory. A total of 980 acres will be treated. 

Considering the subwatershed and watershed scale, this is 90% of the habitat in the planning area.

Although the thinning and underburning will open up the stands and reduce the shrub cover that may 

improve forage conditions for great gray owls, potential for nesting will likely be lost. Thinning to 

minimal stocking levels and then following up with underburning will not retain the high canopy 

densities and leaning trees that provide protective habitat for fledglings. This may be especially relevant 

in an area where predators of great gray owl young are known to nest (e.g. red-tailed hawks and 

goshawks).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

250  Ogden Final EIS

Cumulative Effects 

The bulk of the mapped habitat for this species surrounds the small portion of the meadow (Paulina 

Prairie) and Paulina Creek as it leaves the planning area (i.e. the west end). The Peter Skene Ogden 

Trail runs through here. The area does receive considerable recreation use. Opening of the stands may 

create new disturbance vectors for any great gray owls that use the area.

Table 73: Summary of impacts to great gray owl nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales

Landscape Scale Existing acres of habitat 

(Alternative 1)

Acres of habitat remaining in 

short-term after Alternatives 

2 and 3 (% net reduction)

Ogden Project Area 1092 112 (-90%)

Subwatersheds 2128 1148 (-46%)

Watersheds 2426 1446 (-40%)

Forest 197,847 196,867 (-0.5%)

The Forest-wide analysis and mapping illustrate that great gray owl habitat on the Bend Ft Rock District 

is patchy and focused on smaller wet meadows along creeks and rivers. The Sisters Ranger District 

appears to have the bulk of the habitat. Connectivity of these smaller pieces is important for the species. 

The Little Deschutes River and Paulina Creek/Paulina Prairie may provide some connectivity of habitat 

for great gray owls. Based on the mapping parameters, it is likely that the habitat within the Ogden area 

would still be mapped as habitat. Great gray owls have an uncertain population trend status across their 

range in the region (some areas increasing and some decreasing). The proposed treatments would 

decrease the quality of the habitat for nesting, but there may be opportunities for nest stands off of the 

Forest, and those owls may use the area for foraging. The Ogden Project is consistent with the Forest 

Plan, and activities may decrease habitat by less than 1% across the Forest. For these reasons, continued 

viability of great gray owls is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

Great Blue Heron

Existing Condition 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Great Blue Heron for the 

Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

Great blue herons will nest in trees, bushes, on the ground and on artificial structures, usually near 

water. It prefers to nest in vegetation on islands or in swamps, probably to avoid ground predators. In 

Oregon, nest locations were determined primarily by proximity and availability of food, however nestsite fidelity is weak.

Humans impact great blue herons by destruction and degradation of habitat, by disturbance of nesting 

colonies and key feeding areas, and by causing direct mortality. Human activity can disturb nesting 

great blue herons but disturbance does not always lead to adverse impacts at the population level. 

Nevertheless, human disturbance in general has been linked to reduced nesting productivity. Several 

studies have linked abandonment of great blue heron colonies to human activity, including housing and 

industrial development, highway construction, logging, vehicle traffic, and repeated human intrusions

Mapping of great blue heron habitat focused on rookery habitat, and involved buffering all riparian and 

wet meadow habitat. Great blue heron nesting habitat was defined as forested areas within 1⁄2 mile of 

all water sources and 1⁄4 mile from disturbance (e.g. recreation sites). All lakes, ponds, wet meadows, 

streams, and rivers were buffered 1⁄2 mile to develop a preliminary habitat layer. Campgrounds, boat 

ramps, subdivisions, trails and trailheads were buffered by 1⁄4 mile and excluded where they overlap with 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  251

habitat buffer. This was to address the known impact human disturbance can have on nesting success. 

Wildfire areas and areas with recent (within five years) activities were excluded.

There are approximately 210,194 acres of heron habitat on the Deschutes National Forest. This habitat 

exists within 59% of the subwatersheds (80 out of 135); with very little habitat on the Fort Rock portion 

of the Forest largely due to the lack of water bodies. There are 9 to 10 known rookery sites across the 

Forest and at least 1-3 of these sites has been active in the last 30 years. None of these rookeries are 

found within the planning area.

Table 74: Great blue heron nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of sharpgreat blue heron 

nesting habitat

% of Subwatershed WITH Nesting 

Habitat

% of Ogden Planning 

Area falling within

Deschutes National 

Forest

210,194 Planning area habitat 

represents 2% of the 

Forest

Long Prairie Watershed 0 8

Finley Butte 0 0 7

Paulina Peak South 0 0 1

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

3,090 92

Kawak Butte 0 0 5

Lower Paulina 2,109 6 55

LaPine 0 0 1

Wickiup Junction 15 0 29

Upper Paulina Peak 926 8 2

Ogden Planning Area 2,055 (8% of planning area with nesting 

habitat)

Ogden Planning Area

Paulina Creek is the only riparian habitat within the project area. The creek dries up as it leaves 

National Forest land and approaches the Little Deschutes River. There is no wetland, or marsh habitat 

within or adjacent to the project area. The planning area does have 2,055 acres of mapped habitat. 

However, the acres of mapped habitat are all 1⁄4 mile away from Paulina Creek. This is due to the fact 

that the Peter Skene Ogden National Scenic Trail runs along one side of the creek, and along the other is 

a service road for the power line that is used by mountain bikers and the Paulina Plunge operator. The 

habitat provided away from the creek is less optimal than habitat elsewhere on the Forest.

Heron use of Paulina Creek is likely ancillary to their use of the Little Deschutes River and the habitat 

surrounding Paulina and East Lakes. A heron may stop along Paulina Creek to hunt for prey. There is 

no known rookery along the creek, or within the mapped habitat, and the degree of recreation use along 

this creek likely precludes the establishment of one.

Habitat on the Fort Rock portion of the Bend Ft Rock Ranger District is naturally limited because there 

is limited riparian habitat (one creek – Paulina Creek; two lakes – East and Paulina). A bulk of the 

habitat on the Forest is found the major water bodies on the east slope of the Cascade crest.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

No action would have little to no direct or indirect effects to herons. Because their use of the area is 

focused on the creek itself, the maintenance or improvement of water quality would benefit herons. 

This alternative forgoes the opportunity to improve habitat along the creek despite the known risks from 

dispersed recreation sites and elevated fuel loadings.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

252  Ogden Final EIS

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 2 and Alternative 3

Although Alternative 2 proposes more treatments within the RHCA, potential heron use is focused on 

the creek itself due to the lack of potential nesting habitat. Neither alternative proposes treatments 

directly adjacent to the creek; therefore heron use would be minimally impacted by the alternatives. 

There are 1,493and 1,445 acres of treatments proposed within the mapped habitat for the heron 

(Alternatives 2 and 3, respectively). As stated earlier, this is not optimal habitat. Thinning of the stands 

may open them up and remove nesting cover.

Protecting the riparian habitat along the creek by treating the fuels will benefit heron foraging by 

maintaining the stream conditions and adjacent vegetation for heron prey species. Improved and better 

protected riparian habitat benefits the species that heron prey upon.

Cumulative Effects 

Similar to the discussions for other species that utilize riparian habitat (e.g. harlequin duck, Crater Lake 

tightcoil), the effects of the proposed actions under each of the alternatives would be additive to the 

current actions within the RHCA. There are no reasonably foreseeable actions within the RHCA. 

Because of the current risks to the riparian area from wildfire due to recreation use (abandoned 

campfires and fuel loadings), there would be some cumulative beneficial effects to treating the RHCA. 

Cumulative effects would be minimal because there are fewer actions proposed within potential heron 

habitat.

Table 75: Summary of impacts to great blue heron nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales

Landscape Scale Existing 

(Alternative 1)

Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Ogden Project Area 2,055 acres 72% affected 70% affected

Subwatersheds 3,050 acres 49% affected 47% affected

Watersheds 3,090 acres 48% affected 47% affected

Forest 210,194 acres 1% affected 1% affected

Although a majority of the mapped habitat in the planning area and overlapping watersheds are affected 

by the proposed actions (Table 75), the greatest impacts are likely already taking place by the 

recreational use along Paulina Creek. This use along the creek likely precludes a heron rookery 

establishing itself. In relation to the whole Forest, because this projects impacts 1% of the habitat, the 

overall direct, indirect and cumulative effects will result in a small negative trend of habitat. This effect 

will be minimal at the scale of the Forest. The Ogden Project is consistent with the Forest Plan, thus 

continued viability of great blue herons is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

Red-tailed Hawk

Existing Condition 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Red-tailed Hawk for the 

Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

The LRMP determined the red-tailed hawk to be a non-game species of special interest and was chosen 

as a Management Indicator Species for large trees in mixed structural habitat. Red-tailed hawks 

generally nest in the largest, tallest tree available that provides unobstructed views within their territory. 

They inhabit an array of forested to open land ecosystems and elevations from alpine down to desert 

ecosystems. Tundra and dense forests ecosystems are avoided. The red-tail hawk has increased in 

numbers and expanded its range since Euro-American settlement.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  253

Preferred habitats are open to semi-open coniferous, deciduous and mixed forests, forest edges, 

grasslands, parklands, rangelands, river bottomlands, and agricultural fields with scattered trees. Forest 

clearings, alpine meadows, estuaries, marshes, agricultural lands, clear cuts, sagebrush plains, and high 

elevation environments are also used, though less commonly. Nesting occurs in large mature trees, 

usually at a forest edge or near an opening in canopy.

Limiting factors in preferred habitat selection are availability of suitable perches and hunting grounds 

open enough to locate and catch ground prey. Perches can be any object that provides an unobstructed 

view of a red-tailed hawk territory. These objects are usually high and can be natural, e.g. tree, snag, 

cliff, rock, or man-made, e.g. utility pole, tower, fence. The perches were used for foraging, roosting, 

resting, mating, and defending territory. 

Logging, rural development, and agricultural lands have increased the availability of open habitat which 

red-tailed hawks prefer.

The definition used for the Forest-wide mapping effort included all forest types with tree diameters 15 

inches and greater in seral stages 5-7, with an open canopy cover. Additionally, modeling also included 

dense canopy cover in ponderosa pine and mixed-conifer forest types. Modeling removed stand 

replacement fire and added or removed activities in the last 5 years, dependent on the type of activity. 

Modeling resulted in 192,492 acres (77,899 ha) of potential red-tailed hawk nesting habitat on the 

Deschutes National Forest (Table 76).

Table 76: Red-tailed hawk nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of red-tailed 

hawk nesting 

habitat

% of Subwatershed WITH 

Nesting Habitat

% of Ogden Planning 

Area falling within the 

andscape scale

Deschutes National 

Forest

192,492 Planning area habitat 

represents 2% of the 

Forest

Long Prairie Watershed 2,484 8

Finley Butte 273 3 7

Paulina Peak South 513 3 1

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

6,140 92

Kawak Butte 1,053 9 5

Lower Paulina 1,086 6 55

LaPine 168 5 1

Wickiup Junction 957 11 29

Upper Paulina Peak 249 2 2

Ogden Planning Area 2,099 (8% of planning area with 

nesting habitat)

Ogden Planning Area

The planning area provides 2,099 acres of mapped potential nesting habitat and foraging habitat. There 

is one known nest near the western boundary of the project area. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

254  Ogden Final EIS

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

Because of the generalist nature of this species, the no action alternative would not likely have any 

direct or indirect effects.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 2

The known nest site will be protected by a 300 ft. no treatment buffer as directed by the LRMP (WL-2) 

and seasonal restriction within 1⁄4 mile (WL-3; see mitigation measures p. 47). Any new nests found 

during implementation, would also be protected by these standard and guidelines. Because of the 

standards and guidelines, no direct impacts are anticipated to red-tailed hawks.

This alternative treats within 1,073 acres of mapped habitat. Indirectly, habitat may improve for redtailed hawks. The thinning, ladder fuels reduction, and fuels treatments (mowing and burning), would 

create more open stand conditions on which this species can capitalize. Currently, red-tailed hawks 

compete with other raptors (notably the goshawk) for prey and nesting habitat. Because the red-tailed 

hawk can utilize more open conditions and this will likely be the result of many of the proposed actions, 

in the short-term, nesting habitat for red-tailed hawks will become more widespread.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 3

Impacts from the action proposed under this alternative are similar to Alternative 2. Alternative 3 

proposes slightly more treatments than Alternative 2 (1,197 acres under Alternative 3). All of the 

treatments would result in less dense, more open stands; therefore because this alternative treats more 

acres, this alternative would have even more widespread beneficial impacts. 

Cumulative Effects 

In general, past, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable vegetation treatments have favored habitat 

conditions for the red-tailed hawk. The proposed actions would add to the area whereby red-tailed 

hawks may be able to out-compete other raptors for prey and nest sites. This effect may be temporary, 

as the stands grow back and become dense again.

The proposed actions are not expected to have cumulative impacts with ongoing and foreseeable 

recreation projects. Although red-tailed hawks may find new nest sites closer to human recreation 

areas, the increase in habitat will likely off-set any negative disturbance impacts that may result. A 

neutral trend in population effects is expected. The Ogden Project will not contribute to a negative trend 

in viability on the Deschutes National Forest for red-tailed hawks (Table 77).

Table 77: Summary of impacts to red-tailed hawk nesting habitat across multiple landscape scales

Landscape Scale Existing (Alternative 1) Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Ogden Project Area 2,099 acres +51% +57%

Subwatersheds 4,299 acres +25% +28%

Watersheds 8,624 acres +12% +14%

Forest 192,492 acres +0.5% +0.6%

Osprey

Existing Condition 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Osprey for the Deschutes 

National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

The osprey is specialized for catching fish and nesting occurs primarily along rivers, lakes, reservoirs, 

and seacoasts. Nesting distances from fish sources vary from 0.3 miles (0.48 km), 2 miles (3.2 km), and 

up to 9 miles (14.5 km). They have relatively long wings for their body mass and require very open nest 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  255

sites which they need for both landing and an unobstructed view from the nest. They build large bulky 

stick nests, which are often reused in subsequent years. Preferred nest sites are usually snags or dead 

topped trees near or surrounded by water, presumably to deter mammalian predation. The tree species 

used for nesting does not appear to be important. Rather, preferred structural components include largediameter dead or live trees (broken top). Breeding ospreys do not defend large territories and normally 

only defend the nest tree in use or under construction, the immediate surroundings, and accessory 

perches.

Historic declines to nesting osprey reproduction and habitat include lowered productivity due to 

organochlorines, shooting, egg/skin collection, habitat loss from shoreline, agriculture, and logging, and 

disturbance from timber operations and recreation. In North America, the osprey declined rapidly from 

1940-1970 but rebounded significantly beginning in the 1980s due to the decline of organochlorines, 

proliferation of reservoirs, and use of artificial nesting structures.

Several studies have demonstrated that human disturbance can cause nest site abandonment or 

reproductive failure. The responses to disturbance are variable depending on the timing, type, distance, 

and degree of habituation by individuals. Ospreys are most sensitive to disturbance during incubation 

and the first 3-4 weeks after hatching. Other osprey individuals who initiate nests near human activities 

appear to have a greater tolerance for disturbance. Disturbance can come from a variety of human 

activities associated with Forest vegetation management activities (logging, prescribed fire, danger tree 

removal), recreational uses in forests, streams, and lakes (developed sites, dispersed sites, and trails), 

and proximity to roads. 

Osprey were not reported to occur on the Forest until the 1940s. Construction of the dams at Crane 

Prairie and Wickiup Lake in the early 20th century likely significantly improved habitat for osprey by 

increasing shallow standing water and flooding lodgepole pine trees that eventually became snags

suitable for osprey nesting. By the late 1960s, the osprey population at Crane Prairie Reservoir was 

considered to be the largest in the state of Oregon. 

On the Bend-Ft. Rock (BFR), concentrations of nests are found at Crane Prairie Reservoir, along the 

Deschutes River between Wickiup Dam and Pringle Falls, Browns Creek, and Paulina Creek/East Lake. 

In general, osprey nest locations are now more dispersed over the Forest than when earlier nesting 

studies were conducted in several different years from 1969 to 1991. Nesting preferences have likely 

shifted away from Crane Prairie Reservoir, in response to loss of suitable nests (overwater or large 

diameter) and recreational use at the reservoir and/or both. Across the Forest, there has been a decline 

in the amount of large-diameter trees and snags, particularly for ponderosa pine, due to past logging, 

disease, and large-scale wildfires. Establishing nests further from primary water sources increase 

osprey foraging distances and could result in decreased productivity due to increased energy 

expenditure required for flight.

Osprey nesting on the lakes and rivers on the BFR and Crescent RD are not separated by geographic or 

habitat barriers. Breeding individuals are able to interact with each other, although distinct populations 

may occur. Osprey nesting on the Sisters RD likely represent a separate population due to a distance of 

30 miles (48 km) between known nests south of Suttle Lake on Sisters and nests on Hosmer Lake on the 

BFR. Generally, ospreys are not known to forage more than 8-10 miles (13-14 km) from their nest 

sites.

For the Forest-wide mapping effort, a one mile (1.61 km) buffer around large fish-bearing lakes and 

reservoirs and fish-bearing streams was used. Fish-bearing lakes include Big Lava Lake, Charlton 

Lake, Crane Prairie Reservoir, Crescent Lake, Cultus Lake, Davis Lake, East Lake, Elk Lake, Hosmer 

Lake, Lake Billy Chinook, Little Cultus Lake, Little Lava Lake, North Twin Lake, Odell Lake, Paulina 

Lake, South Twin Lake, Sparks Lake, Suttle Lake, and Wickiup Reservoir. For fish-bearing streams, 

the GIS fish distribution layer (Class 1 and 2 streams) was used. The one mile buffer did not include 

aquatic habitat used for foraging.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

256  Ogden Final EIS

The LRMP S&G M59 for MA5 specified an average rate of 2 trees per acre with dead or dying tops, 

with ponderosa pine favored, and did not specify the size of the trees. All snags and trees were used in 

the model because it was not possible to query for trees with dead or dying tops. Based on previous 

habitat data collected on the Forest and other literature, large-diameter (≥20 inches dbh (50.9 cm) snags 

and trees were used. The LRMP S&G WL-2 requirement outside M5-2 specified a minimum of 4 

dominant trees at least 300 feet in radius around the nest, with ponderosa pine favored. The model did 

not account for more than 4 dominant trees and included all snags and trees ≥20 inches (50.9 cm) dbh.

Based on the mapping effort, there are 496,233 acres of potential osprey nesting habitat on the Forest, 

with 275,697 acres (56% of the total acres) meeting the required LRMP nesting structure (Table 78). 

There is no MA5 within the Ogden planning area. Outside of MA5, 274,021 acres have the required 

nesting structure of 4 large trees/snags for nesting or 56% of the potential nesting habitat.

On the BFR, the model may underestimate overwater lodgepole pine nest snags at Crane Prairie 

Reservoir because the model did not incorporate aquatic habitat. There are also a few scattered nest 

locations south and northwest of Paulina Lake, the Little Deschutes River, and other scattered nests > 1 

mile (1.61 km) from the Deschutes River that were not incorporated into the model. Mapped 

watersheds that do not have known osprey nests include Lower Tumalo Creek, Upper Tumalo Creek, 

Soda Creek, Quinn Creek, Elk Lake, and small areas in Pine Mountain Observatory and Wickiup 

Junction. 

Osprey nesting habitat is well-distributed on the Forest across multiple lakes/reservoirs and large rivers 

on all three ranger districts. Osprey nesting behavior appears to be similar to other osprey populations 

described in the literature—most nests are within 1 mile (1.61 km) of a large waterbody; some 

individuals initiate nests and successfully fledge young in moderate or high use areas; and others appear 

to nest several miles away from a waterbody either due to sensitivity to disturbance, a lack of adequate 

nesting structure near the waterbody, and/or both. The existing habitat is of sufficient quality to support 

a population (or populations) of nesting osprey that are able to interact with each other and reproduce on 

the Forest.

Table 78: Osprey nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales (acres with nesting structure 

was not reported for the watershed or subwatershed scale)

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of 

osprey 

nesting 

habitat

% of 

Subwatershed

Acres of 

Subwatershed

WITH Nesting 

Structure (4 trees 

or snags >20” dbh 

per acre

% WITH Nesting 

Structure (4 trees 

or snags >20” dbh 

per acre

% of Ogden 

Planning Area 

falling within

Deschutes National 

Forest

496,233 275,697 56% of nesting 

habitat with 

structure

Planning area 

habitat 

represents 2% 

of the Forest

Long Prairie Watershed 0 0 8

Finley Butte 0 0 7

Paulina Peak South 0 0 1

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

20,692

92

Kawak Butte 101 1 5

Lower Paulina 10,138 59 55

LaPine 314 9 1

Wickiup Junction 539 6 29

Upper Paulina Peak 8,171 65 2

Ogden Planning Area 9,061 36% of 3,850 14% of planning 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  257

planning area area

Ogden Planning Area

Osprey have been known to nest along the upper reaches of Paulina Creek. They will forage or hunt 

over Paulina and East Lakes. Osprey nests, that did not show recent signs of use, exist within the 

RHCA upstream of McKay campground. There are records of 6 nests occurring within the Paulina 

Creek drainage. Although not all of these have been active at the same time, the records show some use 

since the mid-1980s. Of these nests approximately 2-3 different nests were built in the “classic” osprey 

form of a large stick nest perched atop a large diameter, often dead, ponderosa pine. 

The Ogden planning area does not contain the MA5 land allocation (Osprey Management). According 

to the LRMP, areas outside of MA5 are to “maintain an average of at least 4 dominant overstory trees 

per acre suitable for nest and perch trees—with ponderosa pine favored, where available.” (WL-2; 

LRMP pg. 4-52). Of the 9,061 acres within one mile of Paulina Creek, there are 3,850 acres scattered 

within with the nesting structure described in the LRMP and shown to be most utilized by osprey.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

This alternative would have no direct effects to osprey because of the lack of proposed actions. This 

alternative does forego the opportunity to treat within the RHCA, reducing the fuels and promoting the 

development of the type of tree structure used by this species for nesting. In the event of a wildfire, the 

osprey habitat that currently exists in the RHCA would be at risk. 

This alternative would also preclude the need to fall hazard trees along haul routes and where activity 

units border the road system. This would favor the retention of osprey habitat.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 2

Alternative 2 directly proposes treatments in areas where there are osprey nests; and within 2,580 acres 

(67%) of the 3,850 acres of habitat with nesting structure. The thinning proposed is not anticipated to 

have direct or indirect effects to osprey nesting structure. Indirectly, the structure desired by the 

proposed prescriptions is the same as that used by osprey. Underburning, on the other hand, can put this 

structure at risk, especially large diameter snags. Because the level of risk is related to the specific burn 

conditions (weather at time of burning, location of potential on slope, level of risk to human safety) it is 

extremely difficult to give an accurate, quantitative impact to this habitat structure. Underburning is 

proposed within 2,307 acres of osprey habitat containing nesting structure. Standard and Guidelines 

(WL-2 & 3, and Eastside Screens direction) would protect these trees, and if active, a seasonal 

restriction would be placed 1⁄4 mile around the tree (see Mitigation Measures). 

Part of the objectives for treatments within the RHCA is to promote the development of large structure. 

This will promote the creation of future osprey nest trees. Another objective is to reduce fuel loading 

within the RHCA. It has been established that the RHCA is at risk of a wildfire due to escaped 

campfire. A wildfire that starts within the RHCA (i.e. from a campfire) would put osprey habitat 

upstream at risk. Reducing the fuel loadings would help create conditions whereby a fire may be able to 

be stopped before it reaches there. 

This alternative could necessitate the falling of hazard trees along haul routes and where activity units 

border the road system or a developed recreation area (173.7 miles are proposed for pre-haul 

maintenance). This may directly impact potential osprey nest trees. The need to cut down a hazard tree 

is made on an individual tree basis through a separate process. It cannot be determined at this point in 

the analysis exactly how many potential osprey nest trees may be deemed a hazard that needs removing. 

Generally, large ponderosa pine (the kind most often used by osprey) pose the lowest risk. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

258  Ogden Final EIS

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 3

This alternative has the same effects as Alternative 2 with the exception that it drops the units directly 

adjacent to the known nest structures, and it treats fewer acres within habitat with nesting structures 

(2,506 acres treated within habitat with nesting structure; 1,698 acres of this underburned). Therefore 

this alternative can achieve the same benefits as Alternative 2 but without the potential disturbance 

effects.

This alternative could necessitate the falling of hazard trees along haul routes and where activity units 

border the road system or a developed recreation area, similar to Alternative 2 (same number of miles of 

pre-haul maintenance). This may directly impact potential osprey nest trees.

Cumulative Effects 

The proposed actions would have minimal additive disturbance and habitat effects to osprey within the 

watersheds (Figure 58). Currently the disturbance and habitat effects to osprey habitat come as a result 

of recreational activities and the need to provide for human safety. The Peter Skene Ogden Trail 

follows Paulina Creek on one side and a powerline road used for the Paulina Plunge follows the other 

side. Most of the before-mentioned nest trees are along Paulina Creek. With current recreational 

activities having some disturbance effects, the added treatments, especially under Alternative 2, would 

create another source of disturbance during implementation of the project. Mitigation measures to 

conduct activities within 1⁄4 mile of an active nest to outside of the osprey nesting season (April 1 – Aug 

31st) would avoid disturbance effects.

It has also already been demonstrated that osprey nest trees can pose a hazard to recreation sites and 

road ways. The proposed actions, along with the current recreational uses (hiking, biking, and 

snowmobiling) and foreseeable Lava Rock OHV system, create a network of trails and roads with the 

potential for hazard tree removal.

Table 79: Summary of effects to osprey nesting habitat with nesting structure

Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Percentage of osprey 

nesting habitat with 

structure within a 

proposed unit

67% (2580 ac) 65% (2506 ac)

Acres of osprey nesting 

habitat with structure 

proposed for 

underburning

60% (2307 ac) 44% (1698 ac)

Percentage of osprey 

habitat within the 

watershed impacted by 

proposed actions

11-12% 

(<1% at Forest level)

8-12%

(<1% at Forest level)

Because this project impacts less than 1% of the suitable habitat across the Forest, the overall direct, 

indirect and cumulative effects will result in a small negative trend of habitat and increase in 

disturbance. The potential loss of habitat due to haul road maintenance and underburning, and increase 

in disturbance due to activities along Paulina Creek, will be minimal and secondary to the larger impacts 

of existing recreational use in the project area. This species is ranked as apparently secure in Oregon 

and the Ogden project is consistent with the Forest Plan, thus continued viability of osprey is expected 

on the Deschutes National Forest.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  259

Big Game (Elk & Mule Deer)

Existing Condition 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessments for Elk and Mule Deer for the 

Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

Elk

The elk was chosen as a terrestrial management indicator species (MIS) identified in the Deschutes 

Land and Resource Management Plan (Deschutes LRMP) for its socio-economic importance to the 

hunting community within Central Oregon as well as other neighboring communities. Elk management 

objectives (MO’s) were developed with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. The Department 

and Forest will cooperate in determining the level of habitat effectiveness needed to meet these 

objectives. Population objectives for both summer populations and winter populations are identified; 

annually monitoring is conducted by ODFW to determine the annual huntable population associated 

with the Deschutes National Forest LRMP WL-42.

Although there is no land management allocation specific to elk, the Deschutes LRMP identified 11 key 

elk habitat areas (KEHA) totaling 59,825 acres. Within these areas, management will provide 

conditions needed to support at least 1,500 summering elk and 240 wintering elk (WL-42). Elk 

population estimates within the Paulina/E Fort Rock Wildlife Management Unit (the units overlapping 

the project area) show a slightly increasing trend.

There are no KEHAs within the Ogden Planning Area. Direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to elk 

will be addressed with the mule deer habitat.

Mule Deer

Like elk, the mule deer was chosen as a terrestrial management indicator species (MIS) identified in the 

Deschutes Land and Resource Management Plan (Deschutes LRMP) for its socio-economic importance 

to the hunting community within Central Oregon as well as other neighboring communities. The 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife established herd management objectives (MO) based on winter 

population; annual herd composition conducted by ODFW was used to set these objectives for the 

Deschutes National Forest LRMP (4-9). 

The entire Ogden Planning Area is within deer summer range. Deer summer range includes the entire 

Deschutes National Forest outside MA 7 (winter range), although some use during summer takes place 

in transition/winter range areas. Management of deer habitat outside of Management Area 7 is designed 

to provide adequate habitat quantity and quality to meet MOs. This requires a mosaic of forested 

conditions.

Mule deer populations exhibit different strategies in response to seasonal variation of resources. Mule 

deer populations may be entirely residential, entirely migratory, or contain both migratory and 

residential deer. Residential deer may shift areas of activity within their home ranges seasonally and 

may share winter range areas with migratory deer. Migrating deer may move through the summer and 

winter ranges of other deer, which complicates interpretation of distribution and movement patterns. 

However, deer movement appears to be more unidirectional in some populations, as influenced by 

landscape-level topographic and vegetative patterns.

Migratory mule deer exhibit high fidelity to summer and winter ranges. During migration, deer tend to 

follow broad corridors, influenced by topographic features, which become less distinct as the distance 

from winter range increases. In addition, transition ranges may be important for weight gain during 

migration in some years. Winter range, corridors, and transition areas may be important to mule deer 

survival in severe winters, thus need to be evaluated for potential impact by development and other land 

use activities.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

260  Ogden Final EIS

Threats

Regionally, responses to climate change may include expanded distribution of woody species, reduced 

nutritional quality of forage, increased frequency of stand-converting wildfires, and spread of invasive 

plants and insects. These changes and trends have increased in the past 150 years, resulting in different 

biotic communities and interactions between species. As global warming progresses, the extent of these 

changes and altered biological interactions will increase. Although the causes for mule deer population 

declines over the past century are varied, some of the decline can be attributed to weather extremes 

including large-scale droughts and severe winters.

Elk populations throughout Oregon have been increasing and monitoring results over 20 years from 

1984 to 2004 disclose that elk populations have increased by 29% from 92,000 to 119,000. A research 

study conducted on the Starkey Experimental Forest in Northeast Oregon looked at spatial portioning 

between deer and elk and open road disturbance. Although elk were highly susceptible to motorize 

disturbance and would avoid open roads, mule deer would occupy areas adjacent to motorized 

disturbance just to avoid elk. This suggests deer avoid areas used by elk more than areas next to 

motorized disturbance.

The human population is increasing rapidly as many people move to the area because of the natural 

beauty, desirable climate, job opportunities, and recreational opportunities. High land prices make 

subdividing ranches an appealing alternative for many landowners. More people results in more roads, 

infrastructure, and fragmentation that compounds habitat loss. Lower elevation winter range areas are 

being most impacted by development. 

Central Oregon provides a variety of outdoor recreation opportunities and as a result the Deschutes 

National Forest receives over 1 million recreationists annually. An ever increasing number of people are 

recreating on public lands in the area and use of motorized transportation in the backcountry is 

becoming more popular every year. Humans on foot are more disturbing to ungulates than humans on 

horseback, on bicycles, or in cars. Other human activity impacts directly tied to increased roadways 

include increased poaching of mule deer, unregulated off-highway travel, and ignition of wildfires. 

Roads also serve as corridors for dispersal of invasive plants that degrade habitats. With its beauty and 

recreation opportunities Central Oregon has tripled its human population size in the period 1990 to 

2010. 

In 2006, ODFW began a study focusing on mule deer habitat selection between summer and winter 

range (East Slope Cascades Mule Deer Project). The study specifically looked at habitat selection 

between summer and winter range as it relates to various land use, such as major highways (specifically 

Hwy 97), urban development, open road densities, OHV activity, vegetative treatments, and other 

human related alterations to the landscape. Results from data gathered October 2005 to November 2010, 

showed the three primary factors that directly removed deer from the total number of deer collared 

(excluding legal harvest) #1 - poaching associated with open road densities, #2 –predation from cougars 

and #3 -high traffic volumes and high deer mortality on Highways 97 and 31. Highway 97 is within 2 

miles of the Ogden Planning area.

The overall trend for mule deer populations for the state of Oregon and the Deschutes National Forest 

has been declining. As a direct response there has also been a decline in allowable harvest for both 

antlered and antlerless portions of the population in the Paulina unit (this unit overlaps the project area). 

Deer summer range was identified under Management Indicator Species to provide management 

direction in forested stands at higher elevations which mule deer occupy from late spring to late fall. 

High quality forage is essential in summer range, providing nutrients for antler growth, milk production 

for lactating does, providing energy for breeding season in late fall and maintaining reserves to assist 

with winter survival. This type of high quality forage is provided by the development of nutrient rich 

early seral forbs and shrubs. High quality forage is produced by prescribed fire and wildfires, and tree 

thinning which open stands enhancing shrub and forb production by reducing shading. Two primary 

S&Gs which are associated with summer range includes hiding cover and open road densities. Hiding 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  261

cover is a habitat attribute which provides escapement from predation as well as avoidance from 

harassment potential by hunters and other recreation use. Road densities are used mitigate habitat 

impacts from vegetation management, and where hiding cover S&Gs cannot be met, road densities are 

used to further eliminate disturbance from an area. The guidelines for hiding cover states, “Hiding area 

must be present over 30% of National Forest Land in each implementation unit, resulting in 70% of 

each implementation unit existing as a hiding area or within 600 feet of a hiding area. The following 

Table (80) addresses Standards and Guides for Mule Deer Summer Range specific to the management 

of viable summer range habitat.

Table 80: Summer Range Standards and Guidelines relevant to the Ogden Planning Area.

Hiding Cover: 30% Suitable hiding cover must meet one of the 

following criteria.

Open Road Densities

Six acre or larger Stand Capable of hiding 90%of a standing adult deer at 

200 feet.

Six acres or larger stand with an average height of 6 feet and has not < 2.5 mi. per sq. mile 

been thinned in 15 years

Residual clumps of 1⁄2 acre or larger stands within units with advanced 

regeneration and at least 12 greater than 7 dbh per acre remaining after 

harvest. Clumps should be located away from roads.

Summer range habitat was quantified by 10th and 12th field sub-watershed to correlate habitat to a similar 

scale as a Forest vegetation management projects. 

Hiding cover for summer range exceeds Forest standards with 45% of the entire summer range area 

providing hiding cover. Hiding cover was assessed on 10th field watersheds and 12th field subwatersheds associated with National Forest System (NFS) lands. This is a large portion of NFS lands 

totaling 1,592,631 acres. The 12th field sub-watersheds are comparable in size to an annual vegetation 

management project on Deschutes National Forest. By assessing habitat across entire 10th field 

watersheds, it provides enough land base to assess cumulative impact across entire watersheds. In 

review of the summer range assessment, the majority of each watershed and sub-watersheds exceed 

cover standards. Commonly, those watersheds and sub-watershed that are significantly below hiding 

cover standards have typically received landscape scale stand replacing fire in the last 10 years. 

Road densities for summer range vary drastically by watershed. Some sub-watersheds which are highly 

associated with wilderness areas have very low road densities. Approximately, 49% of all 12th field 

sub-watersheds meet Forest Plan objectives for open road densities.

Table 81: Mule Deer Summer Range habitat at different landscape scales 

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of 

Hiding cover % of 

Subwatershed 

Open Road 

Density (mi./sq. 

mi.) 

Deschutes National 

Forest

715,226

Long Prairie Watershed 49,715

Finley Butte 6,229 62 4.03

Paulina Peak South 10,394 66 3.74

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

38,613

Kawak Butte 5,890 53 2.84

Lower Paulina 9,228 54 3.31
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

262  Ogden Final EIS

LaPine 1,320 37 4.61

Wickiup Junction 4,595 51 4.30

Upper Paulina Peak 8,155 64 1.13

Ogden Planning Area 13,308 50 4.22

The current road density in the Ogden project area is 4.22 miles per sq. mile. An additional total of 8.5-

11.4 miles (in 0.09-0.8 mile segments) of temporary road will be built in order to access 33-43 different 

units (Table 81).

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife have been conducting deer movement studies in the general 

project area since 2005 through February 2009. Their data from radio-collared deer show specific areas 

where deer tend to congregate and move through the area. It is in these places where hiding cover may 

be most valuable and road closures most effective for improving deer habitat.

Figure 67: Current hiding cover within the Ogden project area.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  263

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

There would be no direct effects to big game hiding cover as a result of this alternative. Indirect effects 

would be the loss of hiding cover as a result of a wildfire human or lightning caused.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 2

The proposed actions are anticipated to remove hiding cover if it exists in the unit. Implementation of 

this alternative would substantially reduce the overall amount of hiding cover in the project area and 

implementation unit, although levels would remain above Standard and Guideline levels and the areas 

with high concentrations of deer use will retain hiding cover.

An objective of the proposed actions, especially the fuels treatments, was to treat larger blocks that were 

operationally more effective while at the same time leave larger blocks of hiding cover. The intent of 

this objective is to meet the Standard and Guidelines for cover, while reducing fuel loadings and their 

operational costs, and providing larger blocks of cover than small patches within the unit. Figure 68

illustrates the effects from alternative 2.

Not all proposed treatments are anticipated to impact hiding cover equally. Lodgepole seed tree 

removal will not remove hiding cover directly. The seed trees are scattered throughout the unit and it is 

the small tree regeneration that is providing the hiding cover. In order to remove the seed trees, some of 

these small trees will be trampled. Lodgepole pine seed tree harvest will remove mature lodgepole. 

This will open the canopy to allow for dense regeneration that may provide more hiding cover than is 

currently being provided. This influx of hiding cover would not be realized for at least a decade, 

however. Commercial thinning within mixed conifer and ponderosa pine stands will reduce hiding 

cover where understory fir and lodgepole pine are also taken either through sale activity or if fuels 

treatments are prescribed. Mowing and underburning remove small trees and shrubs that may be 

providing hiding cover. Precommercial thinning may remove hiding cover. If the unit contains young 

trees that have not self-pruned (i.e. lower branches died), then precommercial thinning would not 

remove hiding cover because the full-crowns would still hide a deer. If there has been self-pruning, 

then thinning would remove any hiding cover value. These types of conditions are scattered throughout 

the planning area. Table 82 summarizes these effects.

Table 82: Summarized impacts of proposed treatments on hiding cover for Alternative 2

Proposed Treatment

Total Acres 

proposed with 

hiding cover value

Anticipated result

Lodgepole pine seed tree removal 712 Minor impacts to hiding cover value mainly due to 

trampling. 

Lodgepole pine seed tree harvest 292 Delayed increase in hiding cover due to the canopy 

being opened up allowing for regeneration

Thinning to minimum stocking 

levels 5022 Hiding cover removed especially when combined with fuels treatments.

Thinning to lower management 

levels 0

Hiding cover largely removed especially when 

combined with fuels treatments. Patches may 

remain where fir a lodgepole retained.

Precommercial thinning 373 Hiding cover removed where fuels treatments also 

proposed

Mowing and/or Underburning (as 

the only treatment) 184 Hiding cover largely removed. Patches of cover may remain as part of a mosaic.

Total Hiding Cover Removed 5579 Seed tree removal and harvest not counted towards 

removal (see discussion)
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

264  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 68: Hiding cover removed (in light blue) after implementation of Alternative 2.

As shown in Figure 68 big game hiding cover will be concentrated in the southern and eastern portions 

of the planning are as a result of this alternative. Areas where deer concentrate and move through the 

area are generally protected. During project development, deference was given to the fuels treatment 

objective and the strategic areas where a wildfire could be contained or controlled or where there was 

the potential for human safety issues (i.e. a recreational development at risk or wildland urban 

interface).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  265

The action alternatives will not change the road density in the project area; although all temp roads will 

be closed upon completion of the project. Implementation of the Access and Travel Management Plan 

reduces use on 0.05 mi/sq. mile of roads (i.e. roads closed under previous NEPA decisions not showing 

up on maps).

A roads analysis associated with the foreseeable Lava Rock OHV proposal, recommends 58 miles of 

road closure within the Ogden planning area. The resulting road density after the proposed 58 miles of 

road closure will be 2.8 mi/square mile; slightly more than the LRMP recommended level of 2.5 

mi/square mile. This would meet the intent of the LRMP to move towards the 2.5 mi/square mile 

density. However, recent literature (Frair et al. 2008) has suggested that the threshold of approximately 

0.8 mi/sq. mi. (0.5 km/sq. km) or less had the highest probability of elk occurrence where elk were 

hunted. Road effects began to saturate the landscape at 1.6-2.4 mi/sq. mi (1-1.5 km/sq. km), and higher 

densities may be tolerated if human access were managed (e.g. seasonal closures). Although the 

proposed road closures under the Lava Rock OHV project would help meet the intent of the LRMP, this 

is a future project and does not address the current situation. Therefore impacts to big game (e.g. more 

movement, less security, and more mortality) will continue to occur.

The action alternatives do not add to the current road density (i.e. temporary roads will be removed 

upon project completion). However, the current high density and existing recreational and management 

use of the roads underscores a need to retain large patches of cover for big game.

Direct and Indirect Effects – Alternative 3

This alternative has similar treatment effects as those discussed under Alternative 2. Alternative 3 

proposes fewer fuels treatments within hiding cover; thus more hiding cover is retained (Figure 69). 

Specifically, more hiding cover is retained in those areas shown to be used by mule deer.

Road density impacts as a result of this alternative are the same as described for Alternative 2.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

266  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 69: Hiding cover removed (in light blue) after implementation of Alternative 3.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  267

Table 83: Summarized impacts of proposed treatments on hiding cover for Alternative 3

Proposed Treatment Total Acres proposed 

with hiding cover value Anticipated result

Lodgepole pine seed tree 

removal 704 Minor impacts to hiding cover value mainly due to trampling. 

Lodgepole pine seed tree 

harvest 0

Delayed increase in hiding cover due to the 

canopy being opened up allowing for 

regeneration

Thinning to minimum stocking 

levels 1073 Hiding cover removed especially when combined with fuels treatments.

Thinning to lower management 

levels 2049

Hiding cover largely removed especially when 

combined with fuels treatments. Patches may 

remain where fir a lodgepole retained.

Precommercial thinning 660 Hiding cover removed where fuels treatments 

also proposed

Mowing and/or Underburning 

(as the only treatment) 192 Hiding cover largely removed. Patches of cover may remain as part of a mosaic.

Total Hiding Cover Removed 4678 Seed tree removal and harvest not counted 

towards removal (see discussion)

Cumulative Effects 

Alternative 3 has fewer additive effects than Alternative 2 because it treats fewer acres of hiding cover 

with fuels prescriptions. Big game use of the area may shift spatially as a result of either alternative and 

effort was made to maintain large patches of hiding cover in areas where it has been shown deer use. 

The reduction of hiding cover as a result of the proposed actions coupled with the ongoing recreational 

use and proposed creation of OHV trails will cause big game to either move through the area faster or 

remain in areas with cover and without disturbances, or both. This may put pressure on the foraging 

conditions in these areas. The larger geothermal developments would add to this effect in the case of 

drilling pads being constructed.

Permanent road closures (i.e. obliterations) within the Ogden project area are difficult to achieve 

because of other resource needs (e.g. fire management) and the degree of recreation use in the area 

throughout the year. The project area is popular in spring, summer, and fall for camping, hunting, and 

hiking/biking. In the winter, it is a popular area for snowmobiling and cross-country skiing. Although 

deer and elk may minimally using the area in the winter, the infrastructure for the winter activities are 

there year round (e.g. snoparks, routes, etc.). The added use of the area for geothermal exploration and 

volcanic monitoring also contributes to the need for roads. 

A formal roads analysis was associated with the foreseeable Lava Rock OHV proposal. It recommends 

58 miles of road closure within the Ogden planning area. The resulting road density after the proposed 

58 miles of road closure will be 2.8 mi/square mile; slightly more than the LRMP recommended level of 

2.5 mi/square mile. This would significantly enhance conformance with the LRMP to move towards the 

2.5 mi/square mile density. But because this does not current road density that exceeds the threshold 

level, a further evaluation was conducted and can be found in FEIS Appendix B.

The cumulative effects of the proposed actions with the ongoing and foreseeable recreational uses and 

geothermal developments will decrease the number of acres of refugia or areas of habitat without 

disturbance. Although the hiding cover will grow back, the recreational use will likely increase, off-
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

268  Ogden Final EIS

setting some of the short-term nature of the proposed actions. This may result in a shift in use patterns 

for big game and likely have a negative effect on big game population trends on the Forest.

Table 84: Summary of proposed activities’ effects by alternative. 

Existing/No Action Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Hiding Cover (acres)

Forest (in summer range) 715,226 (45%) 709,647 (45%) 710,548 (45%)

Representative Subwatersheds 45,811 (58%) 40,232 (51%) 41,133 (52%)

LRMP Standard & Guideline 30% 30% 30%

Road Density (mi/sq. mi.)

Range over Subwatersheds 1.08-4.56 1.72 – 4.51* 1.72 – 4.51*

Project Area 4.22 4.17 4.17

Standard & Guideline 2.5 2.5 2.5

*There is a net reduction of 0.05 mi/sq.mi of road in the project area. This figure represents the range of the 

subwatersheds that make up the largest part of the project area (i.e. Lower Paulina Creek and Wickiup Junction).

Although the proposed actions would have negative impacts on deer and elk due to the removal of 

hiding cover and exceeding the threshold for open road density, hiding cover would remain above the 

Standard and Guideline level for the subwatersheds overlapping the project area (WL-54 states “Hiding 

areas must be present over at least 30 percent of the National Forest in each implementation unit”). 

Therefore, the project is compatible with Forest Plan wildlife objectives and an amendment is not 

required (TS-13). Wildlife objectives in the Forest Plan would be best met with implementation of the 

road closures proposed within the analysis conducted for the Lava Rock OHV proposal.

American Marten

Existing Condition 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessments for Marten for the Deschutes 

National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

The Deschutes Land and Resource Management Plan established Old Growth Management Areas (MA15) to provide habitat for the pine (American) marten and other old growth associated species. In all, 

32,800 acres were allocated with the intention to maintain landscape ecology needs, preserve aesthetic 

or social old growth values, and provide old-growth habitat for wildlife. It was estimated that over the 

long-term (projected as remaining after 5 decades) that old-growth forest would amount to 

approximately 270,200 acres (LRMP, FEIS ROD pp. 20-21).

Martens are closely associated with forested habitats that have complex physical structure near the 

ground. Open areas, such as regeneration logging units, recent severely burned areas, and natural 

openings are avoided, especially during the winter. Martens cross and re-cross their own tracks to 

investigate micro habitat features, such as stumps, logs, and brush piles that might contain food. They 

often use fallen logs as runways. Forested riparian habitats are used disproportionately higher than they 

are available, which indicates their importance as travel corridors.

Martens tend to be wide-ranging within their home range during the snow-free portions of the year, 

when they use a variety of habitats. They also are more active during summer than winter, but they do 

not hibernate. Summer rest sites may be in hollow trees, squirrel nests, mistletoe brooms, ground 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  269

burrows, and stumps. During winter, martens are highly associated with late-successional forest habitat 

within their home range.

Much of their time during winter is spent resting or hunting beneath the snow in subnivean spaces 

created by physical structure close to the ground. This complex structure is more characteristic of older 

forest structural stages than younger forests. These conditions are also more characteristic of moist and 

cold forest types where fire return intervals are greater, allowing time for dead wood to be recruited and 

accumulate. Large logs may be particularly important as winter resting structures. 

Martens are extremely susceptible to predation and are reluctant to venture into openings. Martens 

seem to be sensitive to patch size, and usually avoid open habitats dominated by grasses, forbs, and 

saplings, especially in winter. These areas do not provide the structure necessary for a network of travel 

ways under the snow, nor do they offer access to this subnivean zone. A lack of over- story cover offers 

little protection from predators. These open habitats also have more severe microclimatic conditions 

than areas with forest canopy cover.

Marten use a variety of structures for resting and denning sites. Resting and denning sites offer 

protection from predation and thermal stress; thus, availability of quality denning sites likely increases 

the rates of survival and fecundity in marten. Two types of dens are recognized in the literature: natal 

dens, in which parturition takes place, and maternal dens, which are occupied by the mother and young 

but are not whelping sites. A variety of structures are used for dens, with trees, logs, and rocks 

accounting for 70 percent of the reported den structures (Table 85). In virtually all cases of dens in 

trees, snags, or logs, dens were found in large structures characteristic of late-successional forests. 

Stands used by martens had higher densities of large snags (> 20 inches dbh) and trees > 10 inches dbh. 

They selected unharvested, closed canopy (50-75%), old structure stands in subalpine fir and spruce 

forests.

In the Cascades, marten selected sites with higher canopy closure during snow periods than during 

snow-free periods. In Oregon, canopy closure at rest sites in lodgepole pine dominated stands averaged 

36% in snow periods and 27% in snow-free periods. Down wood and slash piles were important resting 

and denning structures in the eastern Cascades of central Oregon. 

Table 85: Structures (%) used as resting and denning sites by American marten in lodgepole pine 

dominated sites in the Oregon Cascade Mountains.

Structure Resting 

Sites

Den 

Sites Comments

Live Tree 7 19

Snag 9 16

Logs 21 32

Slash pile 43 29

Rock 1 0

Subnivean 15 0During winter, subnivean use for rest 

sites increased to 76%.

Other 4 4

Sample size 261 31
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

270  Ogden Final EIS

Threats

Factors that can influence marten populations include mortality from intraspecific strife during 

territorial interactions, predation by raptors and other terrestrial carnivores as previously mentioned, and 

fluctuations in prey abundance and availability.

Range-wide, past extensive logging and trapping led to extirpations in some areas and loss/degradation 

of habitat due to timber harvest remains a threat in some areas. Loss of down wood and a resultant loss 

in prey availability and subnivean access due to fuels treatments can impact marten populations. 

Fragmentation of habitat remains an issue to marten. 

Motorized disturbance appeared to have no impact to martens based on a literature review by Claar et 

al. (1999). Zielinski et al. (2007) conducted a research study on snowmobile and OHV effects on 

martens and concluded OHVs had no effect. However, Claar et al. (1999) found from their literature 

review, studies suggesting marten were susceptible to overharvesting from trapping. Roads and 

motorized trails including snowmobile trails open for winter use could provide trapping access into 

marten habitats. Other research has indicated that home range sizes tended to be larger as the road 

density increased (Godbout and Ouellet 2008).

Habitat Mapping – Forest Vegetation

Denning habitat was modeled using all plant association groups (PAGs) except juniper and ponderosa 

pine without the presence of lodgepole pine. Only dense stands were considered denning habitat expect 

in the lodgepole pine and dry cold white fir PAGs where open and dense were deemed suitable for 

denning. Those PAGs where lodgepole pine is an early seral species were also considered suitable 

denning habitat. Minimum average diameter of trees within the stand was defined as equal to or greater 

than 5 inches (Class 3) for lodgepole pine and equal to or greater than 15 inches (class 5) for the other 

PAGs. 

Although marten use den sites with canopy cover down to 30 percent, the model only uses one canopy 

cover figure between open and dense stands per PAG, the fir and hemlock PAGs with 55 percent being 

the break between open and dense would tend to under-represent the amount of potential denning 

habitat. However, this analysis may also tend to over-estimate the amount of denning habitat because it 

does not account for the presence or absence of down wood. Therefore, DecAid analysis will also be 

incorporated into the habitat assessment.

Modeling results indicate there are approximately 433,973 acres of potential marten denning habitat on 

the Deschutes National Forest. Habitat connectivity shows large fairly well connected blocks 

particularly on the Crescent and Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger Districts. The Sisters Ranger District as the 

northern end of the Deschutes National Forest has been heavily impacted by the beetle outbreaks in the 

1980s followed by wildfires between 2000 and 2009. The B&B and Eyerly Fires especially, resulted in 

reduced connectivity to the National Forest lands to the south as well as northward onto the Warm 

Springs Tribal Lands. 

The 433,973 acres modeled as denning habitat used only green tree data. However, snags and down 

wood are important habitat components for marten denning and foraging habitat. When you look at the 

distribution of snags on the 433,973 acres, 22 percent of this acreage (93,951 acres) does not have the 

presence of snags and therefore, may be less likely used for denning purposes. Modeling also shows 

approximately 28,514 acres (7%) of the mapped denning habitat has up to 2.8 snags per acre (0-30% 

tolerance interval) capable of providing lower quality denning habitat. A total of 307,417 acres (70%) 

of mapped denning habitat has between 2.8 to 15.2 snags per acre (30-80% tolerance interval) which 

equates to moderate to high quality habitat. Only one percent of the mapped denning habitat has greater 

than 15.2 snags per acre equating to very high quality marten habitat. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  271

Table 86: Relative range of snag and tree sizes used by American marten for denning and resting in 

the Blue Mountains and Washington Cascades.

Snag size (dbh in inches)

Type of Use range mean

Montane Mixed Conifer

Denning 27.3-53.8 38.2 DecAID Tables MMC_L.sp-18 (MellenResting 20.9 McLean et al. 2009) -46.8 31.2

Eastside Mixed Conifer

Denning and 

resting 23.9-40.5 30.6

DecAID Tables EMC_L.sp-18

(Mellen-McLean et al. 2009)

Lodgepole Pine

Denning 20.8-46.6 31.6 DecAID Tables LP_S.sp-17 & 18 (MellenResting 3.8 McLean et al. 2009) -57.11

25.7

1 The 30% and 80% tolerance level are likely a result of high variance in the sample. It is not physically possible 

for a marten to rest inside a 3.8 inch dbh snag.

Table 87: Relative snag densities at American marten occupied sites in the Blue Mountains, Eastside 

Mixed Conifer Forest, and Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, Larger Trees, and Lodgepole Pine Forest, 

Small/medium Trees vegetation condition classes.

Snag density snags/ha (snags/acre)

Snag Size 30% tl mean

>25 cm dbh 29.4 -36.0 (11.8-14.4) 32.0 (12.8) DecAID Table EMC_S/L.sp-22, 

MMC_S/L.sp-22, and LP_S.sp-22 

(Mellen-McLean et al. 2009)

>50 cm dbh 9.2 -11.2 (3.7-4.5) 10.0 (4.0)

As stated earlier, 22 percent of the modeled denning habitat does not have snag presence. However, the 

presence of down wood may at least partially compensate since marten are documented to use down 

logs as denning habitat as well as provide prey base habitat for voles, mice, chipmunks and squirrels 

marten prey upon. The presence of down wood was modeled forest-wide for the East-Side Mixed 

Conifer, Lodgepole Pine, and Montane Mixed Conifer habitat types. 

Table 88: Relative size range of hollow down logs used by American marten for denning and resting in 

the Blue Mountains, Eastside Mixed Conifer Forest and Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, Larger Trees 

vegetation condition class. (No data for down wood size associated with marten use are available for 

the Lodgepole Pine wildlife habitat types)

Type of Use

Down wood diameter (inches)

Citations

range mean

Denning and 

resting 20.7-33.2 26.1 DecAID Table EMC_L.sp-21 and MMC_L.sp-21 (Mellen-McLean et al. 2009)

Literature has suggested that martens in the montane mixed conifer habitat types will likely utilize an 

area with 8% downed wood cover (Mellen-McLean et al. 2009; Table MMC_S.sp-24); in lodgepole 

pine types 11-45% downed wood cover (Mellen-McLean et al. 2009; Table LP_S.sp-10). In relation to 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

272  Ogden Final EIS

the historic range of variability this can be a relatively rare occurrence on the landscape (highlighted 

portions of Tables 89 and 90).

Table 89: Forestwide ≥ 5” dbh log densities compared with Historic Range of Variability (HRV)

Forest Wide % of Landscape for dwd ≥5" (12.5cm) dbh 

in % down wood cover 

Habitat Type % Cover 0 0-4 4-8 8-10 10-16 >16 

EMC

HRV 22-30 53-54 13-19 2-3 1-3 0

Existing 3% 57% 30% 6% 4% 0%

LP

HRV 5-16 46-59 17-23 5-7 4-8* 0

Existing 9% 63% 18% 4% 5% 0%

MMC

HRV 34-71 26-41 3-17 0-3 0-6 0-1

Existing 6% 56% 26% 6% 5% 0%

Information from DecAID tables (unharvested plots for down wood ≥5" (12.5cm) dbh) EMC_ECB_O.Inv-16., 

EMC_ECB_S.Inv-16, EMC_ECB_L.Inv-16, LP_O.Inv-16, LP_S.Inv-16, MMC_O.Inv-16, MMC_S.Inv-16, MMC_L.Inv-16 

and weighted by structure and HRV information from Viable

*Relation of downed wood densities utilized by martens are reported in the literature to the historic range of 

variability (8% in montane mixed conifer and 11-45% in lodgepole pine), illustrating that these densities are 

relatively rare.

Table 90: Forestwide >20” dbh log densities compared with Historic Range of Variability (HRV)

Forest Wide % of Landscape for dwd ≥20" (50cm) dbh 

% down wood cover 

Habitat Type % Cover 0 0-4 4-10 >10 

EMC

HRV 61-72 27-36 1-3 0

Existing 55% 42% 3% 1%

LP

HRV 63-84 10-16 1-2 0

Existing 80% 20% 0% 0%

MMC

HRV 14-49 11-15 13-19* 7-13

Existing 51% 43% 6% 0.0%

Information from DecAID tables (unharvested plots for down wood ≥20" (50cm) dbh) 

EMC_ECB_O.Inv-17, EMC_ECB_S.Inv-17, EMC_ECB_L.Inv-17, LP_O.Inv-17, LP_S.Inv-17, 

MMC_O.Inv-17, MMC_S.Inv-17, MMC_L.Inv-17 and weighted by structure and HRV information 

from Viable. 

*Relation of downed wood densities utilized by martens as reported in the literature to the historic 

range of variability (8% in montane mixed conifer and 11-45% in lodgepole pine), illustrating that 

these densities are relatively rare.

To estimate numbers of female marten home ranges on the Deschutes National Forest, a 1,433 acres 

female home range was used, denning habitat must be present within a 1,433 acre area, and assumed no 

home range overlap. Research concluded marten presence was not detected in suitable habitat patch 

sizes smaller than 83 ha (205 acres). Even though this study was conducted in a different forest type 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  273

with smaller marten home ranges, the 205 acre figure of consolidated habitat block for determining how 

many female marten home ranges may be accommodated on the Deschutes National Forest. If a 1433 

acre area had at least a 205 acre patch of consolidated denning habitat present, it was assumed it was 

capable of supporting a female marten. Using these assumptions, it appears the Deschutes National 

Forest is capable of supporting approximately 562 female martens with the denning habitat 

configuration currently present on the forest. This is within the range of 450-1285 pairs the LRMP 

predicted in 1990 even though updated home range acreage is nine times greater than was used in the 

LRMP. 

Ogden Planning Area

The project area does contain habitat for marten. According to the forest-level modeling, a bulk of the 

habitat is on the east and west wends of the project area where there is the bulk of the mixed conifer and 

lodgepole pine habitat (Figure 70). On the west end of the project area the stands are made up of 

lodgepole and ponderosa pine. Lodgepole pine has grown up in the understory of ponderosa pine. In 

these conditions the quality of marten habitat is low, and the silvicultural objective is to favor the 

ponderosa pine which is generally not considered marten habitat. It is estimated that the project area 

contains 2% of the potential denning habitat on the forest.

Table 91: Marten denning habitat at different landscape scales based on forest vegetation

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of marten 

denning habitat

% of Subwatershed

Maximum # of 

potential female 

territories (# ac 

habitat/1,433)

% Denning 

habitat on 

Forest

Deschutes National 

Forest

433,973 562 (from species 

assessment)

100%

Long Prairie Watershed 33,270 23 7.7%

Finley Butte 3,436 34 2 0.79

Paulina Peak South 6,568 41 5 1.51

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

26,898 19 6.2%

Kawak Butte 4,103 37 3 0.95

Lower Paulina 5,070 29 3 1.17

LaPine 1,731 48 1 0.4

Wickiup Junction 3,880 43 3 0.89

Upper Paulina Peak 6,999 55 5 1.61

Ogden Planning Area 8,644 33% of

planning area

6 2%

As shown on the denning habitat map (Fig 70), the most consolidated habitat lies along the western edge 

of the project area; although this may be an artifact of the Newberry National Volcanic Monument 

(NNVM) not being displayed. The portion of the NNVM immediately east of the project area is largely 

made up of lodgepole and montane mixed conifer habitat types. The Ogden Planning Area does not 

contain any montane mixed conifer habitat, and the figure illustrates marten habitat within forest types 

classified as lodgepole pine and eastside mixed conifer. Analysis of snag and log habitat will focus on 

these two habitat types. Despite what the LRMP predicted for forest lands east-side of Highway 97, 

denning habitat is still available particularly near and within the Newberry National Volcanic 

Monument. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

274  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 70: Existing marten habitat within the Ogden project area based on Forest vegetation data. 

Having the stand structure and tree species type is not the only indicator of marten habitat across the 

forest. Marten are known to use a variety of structures (snags, live trees, logs, and piles) for denning as 

well. As shown in Table 867 marten particularly use large diameter snags when available (it is often 

rare to have a >20” lodgepole pine snag) at fairly robust densities (the mean, or 50% tolerance interval 

is 4/ac, Table 86). Table 91 illustrates the availability of this habitat for marten on the landscape and the 

planning area. As shown, it is currently uncommon to have the large snag densities at the >50% 

tolerance interval for marten in the Ogden Planning Area (e.g. in the watersheds that overlap the 

planning area 3-4% of the total area meet the 30-50% tolerance interval, and only 39 acres of the Ogden 

Planning Area meet this tolerance interval for large snag density). In a cursory look at the existing and 

historic range of variability within the habitat types used by marten on the forest (i.e. EMC, MMC, and 

LP), less than 20% of the LP and EMC habitat type currently have densities at or above the 50% 

tolerance interval. Higher densities of large snags appear more common, within the MMC habitat type 

(Table 90).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  275

Table 92: Distribution of snags ≥ 20 in./ac by tolerance intervals for marten denning habitat on the 

landscape

Snags/ac % Landscape

Landscape Scale 0 0-

30%

30-

50%

50-

80%

80%

+

0 0-

30%

30-

50%

50-

80%

80%+

0 0-2.8 2.8-

7.7

7.7-

15.2

15.2

+

0 0-

2.8

2.8-

7.7

7.7-

15.2

15.2+

Deschutes 

National Forest

 

231,98

0 

 

93,95

1 

 

75,43

7 

 

28,514 

 

4,09

2 

53% 22% 17% 7% 1%

Long Prairie 

Watershed 27,293 5,063 914 0 0

82% 15% 3% 0% 0%

Finley Butte 2,763 616 57 0 0 80% 18% 2% 0% 0%

Paulina Peak South 5,251 1,146 170 0 0 80% 17% 3% 0% 0%

Lower Little 

Deschutes 

Watershed 19,541 6,276 1,080 0 0

73% 23% 4% 0% 0%

Kawak Butte 3,436 564 104 0 0 84% 14% 3% 0% 0%

Lower Paulina 4,365 653 53 0 0 86% 13% 1% 0% 0%

LaPine 1,500 231 1 0 0 87% 13% 0% 0% 0%

Wickiup Junction 3,390 488 2 0 0 87% 13% 0% 0% 0%

Upper Paulina Peak 4,539 2,270 190 0 65% 32% 3% 0% 0%

Ogden Planning 

Area 7,323 1,282 39 0 0 85 15 0 0 0

Table 93: Forest-wide historic range of variability and existing percentage of habitat types used by 

marten with large diameter snags

Forest Wide % of Landscape for snags ≥20" (50.5cm) dbh snag/acre (snags/ha)

Habitat Type

Snag 

Density

0

(0)

0-4 

(0-10)

4-8 

 (10-20)

8-12 

(20-30)

12- 16

(30-40)

16+ 

(40+)

EMC

HRV 32-44 29-35 14-22 7-10 2-3 1-2

Existing 37% 48% 11% 3% 1% 0.2%

LP

HRV 72-83 15-20 1-7 0-2 0 0

Existing 81% 17% 1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1%

MMC HRV 14-47 16-30 9-25 6-18 2-7 2-7
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

276  Ogden Final EIS

Existing 21% 33% 29% 11% 4% 2%

30-50% tolerance 

interval 50-80% tolerance interval 80%+ tolerance interval

Information from DecAID 2.0 tables (unharvested plots for snags ≥20" (50cm) dbh) EMC_ECB_O.Inv-15., 

EMC_ECB_S.Inv-15, EMC_ECB_L.Inv-15, LP_O.Inv-15, LP_S.Inv-15, MMC_O.Inv-15, MMC_S.Inv-15, MMC_L.Inv15, and modified with HRV information from Viable

Large snags are not the only landscape feature important for marten habitat. Large logs and downed 

wood are also important features for denning, resting, and hunting (Table 85). As shown earlier, 

although large logs (>20” large end diameter) and high densities of logs (% cover) are important habitat 

features, the levels at which marten are most apt use them (50%+ tolerance interval) are not common on 

the forest (Tables 88-90).

In analyzing the Ogden Planning Area, downed wood densities were considered at various scales. In 

order to compare the planning area with the forest-wide data by habitat type, an adequate representation 

of that habitat that included the planning area was used. This is to say, in order to correctly utilize the 

information in DecAID for analysis of effects due to the proposed actions, a watershed level or higher 

look needed to be addressed in order for the effects to be put into context with the landscape (using the 

DecAID tool). For the lodgepole habitat type (LP), the Long Prairie watershed and Lower Little 

Deschutes watershed overlapped the Ogden planning area and contained enough of the habitat type in 

order to use the DecAID tool. For the mixed conifer type (EMC), a grouping of multiple watersheds 

was used because this habitat type is much more scattered across the eastern portion of the Bend-Fort 

Rock Ranger District. Montane Mixed Conifer (MMC) was not analyzed to this level because the 

Ogden Planning area does not overlap any of this habitat type on the Forest. 

Over the more immediate landscape, of which the Ogden Planning area is part of, it appears there is 

downed wood habitat for martens in both size classes and it more often exceeds the HRV than falls 

below (Table 94). A planning area specific analysis was undertaken to determine existing downed log 

densities stratified by the subjective need to remove logs as opposed to habitat type (see dead wood 

habitat discussion). The results of this survey indicated a current condition whereby there are areas with 

4.5-30% cover of logs >8” dbh, with overall average of roughly 12% cover.

In relation to downed wood densities used by marten as reported in the literature (11-45%), the Ogden 

planning area is within the HRV for these densities. However as Table 93 illustrates, these densities are 

rare in the planning area and that landscape that overlaps it. Eleven percent (11%) of the Long Prairie 

watershed contains a 10-16% downed wood percent cover for logs >5” diameter which is higher than 

the historic range of variability (4-8% of the landscape would have this density). Four percent (4%) of 

the Lower Little Deschutes watershed contains a 10-16% downed wood percent cover for logs >5” 

diameter which is within the historic range. A greater proportion of the Ogden planning area falls 

within the Lower Little Deschutes.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  277

Table 94: Comparison of Ogden Planning Area landscape to historic range of variability (highlighted represent 

densities used by marten)

Habitat 

Type Log size % downed wood cover

Comparison 

with HRV

% Landscape with 

downed wood cover 

(HRV)*

Comments

EMC >20” 0 Within 69 (61-72)

0-4 Within 28 (27-36)

4-10 Below 0 (1-3)

>10 Above 2 (0)

>5” 0 Below 4 (22-30) Actually means more 

of the landscape has 

logs because less of 

the area has zero 

percent cover

0-4 Above 65 (53-54)

4-8 Above 22 (13-19)

8-10 Above 6 (2-3)

10-16 Within 3 (1-3)

16+ Within 0 (0)

LP >20” 0 Within 82,76 (63-84) Long Prairie, Lower 

Little Deschutes 0-4 Above 18, 23 (10-16)

4-10 Below 0 (1-2)

>10 Within 0 (0) This habitat type may 

not be capable of 

producing this many 

logs/acre >20” dbh

>5” 0 Within 8, 10 (5-16) Long Prairie, Lower 

Little Deschutes 0-4 Within to 

Above

62, 58 (46-59)

4-8 Below to 

Within

14, 22 (17-23)

8-10 Below to 

Within

4, 6 (5-7)

10-16 Above to 

Within

11, 4 (4-8)

16+ Within 0, 0 (0)

Information from DecAID tables (unharvested plots for down wood ≥20" (50cm) dbh, ≥5" (12.5cm) dbh) EMC_ECB_O.Inv-16., 

EMC_ECB_S.Inv-16, EMC_ECB_L.Inv-16 , EMC_ECB_O.Inv-17, EMC_ECB_S.Inv-17, EMC_ECB_L.Inv-17, LP_O.Inv-16 and LP_S.Inv-16 

, LP_O.Inv-17, LP_S.Inv-17 and weighted by structure and HRV information from Viable.

*Number presented outside of parentheses is the percent of the watershed (both Lower Little Deschutes and Long Prairie). 

Where there are two numbers, the “Comments” columns shows which watershed is shown first (Long Prairie watershed 

%, Lower Little Deschutes %).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

278  Ogden Final EIS

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

The no action alternative would maintain the current marten habitat at least in the short-term. This 

alternative would not address the fire risk that would also pose a risk to existing marten habitat. 

Although a wildfire would consume logs and eventually recruit logs, it would have more long-term 

impacts to canopy closure and tree size, especially in the case of a stand-replacing event. Much of the 

existing marten habitat is located in habitat types in which a stand-replacing event may not be 

uncharacteristic (e.g. lodgepole and montane mixed conifer). The areas with a high density of downed 

logs, often as a result of beetle mortality, are likely creating the conditions for this next stand-replacing 

event. Thus, although a stand-replacing event may not be uncharacteristic in these stands of marten 

habitat, it would reduce the suitability of the stands as marten habitat thereby potentially limiting marten 

movement and/or isolating patches of suitable habitat.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 2

This alternative proposes actions that will reduce the quality on 4042 acres of potential marten denning 

habitat. The thinning, mowing, and underburning will effectively reduce canopy closures and downed 

log densities below what martens are likely to utilize readily. This impacts approximately 47% of the 

existing marten denning habitat in the project area; affecting 2-3 marten territories.

Thinning, mowing and burning will reduce canopy closure and densities of smaller diameter downed 

wood. It is unlikely that these actions would remove large diameter wood (>20” dbh), however in the 

long-term by promoting healthy stands, it will be critical to retain this large downed wood where 

available for it will take multiple decades to replace. Proposed actions within current ponderosa 

pine/lodgepole pine mixed stands (much of the west side of the planning area) will remove marten 

habitat. Similarly, these types of actions within mixed conifer habitat will reduce canopy closures and 

downed wood levels, effectively reducing the marten habitat.

Proposed actions within current lodgepole pine stands include seed tree removal, pre-commercial 

thinning, and seed tree harvest. Any habitat within the seed tree removal or pre-commercial thinning 

will likely stay habitat. Marten habitat within these types of stands is marginal. The canopy closures are 

low, especially with snow depths, and the areas have been treated heavily in the past that little downed 

wood remains. Mowing and underburning is not proposed for lodgepole stands. Piling of slash is 

proposed, and leaving one slash pile per acre (Standard & Guideline WL-73) would alleviate some of 

the detrimental effects to marten habitat in other parts of the planning area. Seed tree harvest will 

reduce canopy closures and remove a source of downed wood, thereby reducing marten habitat 

suitability. No mowing or underburning is proposed within these units, thus there is the opportunity to 

off-set the loss of log recruitment by leaving some piles.

Within all habitat types there is the proposal to remove downed lodgepole pine logs where they are in 

excess of standard and guideline levels (i.e. >8” dbh; 15-20 pieces per acre or ~0.06-0.11% cover), 

except in five units (see project design feature #66). This would remove the structure that provides the 

subnivean access marten use for hunting and resting, as well as remove escape cover from predators. In 

relation to Tables 88, 89, and 93, this figure is low in terms of providing for high quality marten habitat.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  279

Table 95: Summary of Alternative 2 effects to potential marten denning habitat

Proposed Rx Proposed Fuels Rx

# Acres within 

potential marten 

denning

Comments

Lodgepole seed tree 

removal & precommercial thinning 

(LP_1 and LP_SPC)

Piling (by hand or machine) 642 Opportunity to leave one 

pile/ac

No habitat effects

Seed tree harvest (LP_3) Piling (by hand or machine) 216 Opportunity to leave one 

pile/ac

Thinning (MC_1, PP_1, 

PP_LP_1, MC_2)

Mowing, burning, piling or 

scattering (Mow, Mow_UB, 

Mow_UB_2, Lop_Scatter 

Hand_Grapple_Pile)

3658 Habitat quality reduction

Precommercial thinning 

(MC_SPC, PP_SPC, 

PP_LP_SPC)

Mowing, burning, and/or 

piling (Mow, Mow_UB, 

Mow_UB_2, 

Hand_Grapple_Pile)

95 Opportunity to leave one 

pile/ac

Removal of logs in 

excess of standard and 

guidelines

1988 Habitat quality reduction. 

This is part of some of the 

MC_1, MC_2, PP_1 and 

PP_LP_1 acres & not additive 

to those acres

Thinning in RHCA 

(RHCA_MC, 

RHCA_PP_LP)

Underburning 73

As seen in Figure 71 below, marten habitat will still be available within the project area: habitat not 

impacted by proposed actions is represented in a maroon color, habitat still functioning after proposed 

actions is shown in blue, and habitat altered by proposed actions is in pink. Much of the potential 

habitat overlaps areas with high log densities. Marten utilize downed logs to hunt for prey and shelter 

within or hide from predators. High log densities (jack-strawed or piled logs) allow more space for 

these activities both for the marten and their prey especially in winter and areas of high snowpack.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

280  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 71: Alternative 2 unit overlap with existing marten habitat within the Ogden project area. 

Habitat not impacted by proposed actions is represented in a maroon color, habitat still functioning 

after proposed actions is shown in blue, and habitat altered by proposed actions is in pink.

In relation to marten denning structure, most of the proposed actions would reduce the downed wood 

density over 7% of the watersheds (Long Prairie and Lower Little Deschutes) to the 0-4% cover. Some 

of these acres may be meeting that level already. A more in-depth analysis was made for denning 

structure using large snags. As stated earlier, much of the planning area and larger landscape does not 

contain large snag densities at the tolerance intervals whereby marten presence is more assured (50% + 

tolerance interval; Tables 23 and 93). This is also reflected in the HRV. The proposed actions also do 

not enter the montane mixed conifer habitat mapped in the forest-wide analysis. This habitat type is 

most likely to provide the high downed wood density (downed wood of any size) and large snag habitat 

utilized by marten.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  281

There are approximately 654 acres of potential marten habitat within proposed units that contain large 

snag habitat (23 acres provide it at the 30-50% tolerance interval). Thinning is proposed within these 

acres, with mowing and underburning associated with the thinning in the ponderosa pine, mixed conifer, 

riparian habitat conservation area (RHCA), and ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine habitat. This represents 

nearly half of the potential marten denning habitat that provides large snags. Although the proposed 

actions do not propose to remove any snags, the stands will be converted away from providing marten 

habitat (i.e. favoring more open ponderosa pine habitat). The proposed actions will reduce canopy 

closures and complex forest structure making them less suitable as marten habitat. This will restrict the 

availability of the remaining suitable habitat, the establishment of any new marten territories, and 

potentially the number of marten in the planning area.

Mitigation measures included in the action alternatives to reduce the impact to marten denning habitat 

include:

1. Retain at least one slash pile per acre within units proposed for hand or grapple piling (WL73).

2. Do not remove downed wood in excess of standards and guidelines within Units 54, 285, 342, 

947, and 951.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 3

Similar to Alternative 2, this alternative proposes actions that will reduce the quality on 3,917 acres of 

potential marten denning habitat. The thinning, mowing, and underburning will effectively reduce 

canopy closures and downed log densities below what martens are likely to utilize readily. This impacts 

approximately 45% of the existing marten denning habitat in the project area; affecting 2-3 marten 

territories. The impacts are similar as described for Alternative 2 (see Table 96).

This alternative proposes actions within goshawk territories. The prescriptions are similar to other 

thinning treatments. An argument may be made that treatments within a known goshawk territory may 

benefit marten because the goshawk is a known predator of martens. This argument is quickly proven 

false, however, because the treatments proposed within the territory (e.g. thinning, mowing, 

underburning, and log removal) are the same as those already determined to negatively impact marten 

habitat.

Within all habitat types there is the proposal to remove downed lodgepole pine logs where they are in 

excess of standard and guideline levels (i.e. >8” dbh; 15-20 pieces per acre or ~0.06-0.11% cover). This 

would remove the structure that provides the subnivean access marten use for hunting and resting, as 

well as remove escape cover from predators. In relation to Tables 88, 89, and 93, this figure is low in 

terms of providing for high quality marten habitat.

Table 96: Summary of Alternative 3 effects to potential marten denning habitat

Proposed Rx Proposed Fuels Rx

# Acres within 

potential marten 

denning

Comments

Lodgepole seed tree removal 

& pre-commercial thinning 

(LP_1 and LP_SPC)

Piling (by hand or machine) 641 Opportunity to leave one 

pile/ac

No habitat effects

Seed tree harvest (LP_3) Piling (by hand or machine) 0 Opportunity to leave one 

pile/ac

Thinning (MC_1, PP_1, 

PP_LP_1, MC_2, LP_4, 

GSHK_PFAmc, GSHK_NST)

Mowing, burning, piling or 

scattering (Mow, Mow_UB, 

Mow_UB_2, Lop_Scatter 

Hand_Grapple_Pile)

3093 Habitat quality reduction

Precommercial thinning Mowing, burning, and/or 752 Opportunity to leave one 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

282  Ogden Final EIS

(MC_SPC, PP_SPC, 

PP_LP_SPC, MC_LFR, 

PP_LP_LFR)

piling pile/ac

Removal of logs in excess of 

standard and guidelines

2021 Habitat quality reduction. 

This is part of some of the 

MC_1, MC_2, GSHK_PFAmc, 

GSHK_NST PP_1 and PP_LP_1 

acres & not additive to those 

acres

Thinning in RHCA 

(RHCA_MC, RHCA_PP_LP)

Underburning 72

Figure 72: Alternative 3 unit overlap with existing marten habitat within the Ogden project area.

As seen in Fig. 73 below, marten habitat will still be available within the project area. Habitat not 

impacted by proposed actions is represented in a maroon color, habitat still functioning after proposed 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  283

actions is shown in blue, and habitat altered by proposed actions is in pink. Much of the potential 

habitat overlaps areas with high log densities. Marten utilize downed logs to hunt for prey and shelter 

within or hide from predators. High log densities (jack-strawed or piled logs) allow more space for 

these activities both for the marten and their prey especially in winter and areas of high snowpack.

Figure 73: Alternative 3 unit overlap with existing marten habitat within the Ogden project area. Blue 

highlighted portions are units with a prescription that is not likely to impact marten denning habitat

In relation to marten denning structure, most of the proposed actions would reduce the downed wood 

density over 7% of the watersheds (Long Prairie and Lower Little Deschutes) to the 0-4% cover. Some 

of these acres may be meeting that level already. A more in-depth analysis was made for denning 

structure using large snags. As stated earlier, much of the planning area and larger landscape does not 

contain large snag densities at the tolerance intervals whereby marten presence is more assured (50% + 

tolerance interval; Tables 92 and 93). This is also reflected in the HRV. The proposed actions also do 

not enter the montane mixed conifer habitat mapped in the forest-wide analysis. This habitat type is 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

284  Ogden Final EIS

most likely to provide the high downed wood density (downed wood of any size) and large snag habitat 

utilized by marten (Tables 88 and 92).

There are approximately 636 acres within proposed units that contain large snag habitat (24 acres 

provide it at the 30-50% tolerance interval). Thinning is proposed within these acres, with mowing and 

underburning associated with the thinning in the ponderosa pine, mixed conifer, riparian habitat 

conservation area (RHCA), and ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine habitat. This represents nearly half of 

the potential marten denning habitat that provides large snags. Although the proposed actions do not 

propose to remove any snags, the stands will be converted away from providing marten habitat (i.e. 

favoring more open ponderosa pine habitat). Similar to the discussion under Alternative 2, this 

conversion of habitat will reduce the availability of habitat there by reducing the establishment of new 

territories and potentially reducing the number of marten in the planning area.

Mitigation measures included to reduce the impact to marten denning habitat include:

1. Retain at least one slash pile per acre within units proposed for hand or grapple piling 

(WL-73).

2. Do not remove downed wood in excess of standards and guidelines within Units 

54,285, 342, 947, and 951.

Cumulative Effects 

The amount of habitat with the project area represents approximately 2% of the available denning 

habitat on the forest. As seen in Fig 74, a majority of the marten habitat is found outside of the project 

area in the NNVM (Upper Paulina Creek Subwatershed; Paulina and East Lakes). The proposed actions 

would have small cumulative effects to marten habitat outside of the project area. This is to say, that 

although the proposed actions would remove 45-47% of the habitat within the project area, cumulatively 

it reflects approximately 1% of the habitat on the Forest and 6-7% within the larger watershed area (that 

include Upper Paulina Creek Subwatershed). A bulk of the habitat removal is on the west side of the 

planning area where the emphasis is on sustaining ponderosa pine where it is co-dominant with 

lodgepole pine. Although there would still be habitat available, the narrowing of the habitat available 

(due to proposed actions) may begin to isolate the marten population using the Fort Rock portion of the 

Forest, relying on connectivity to the south. As illustrated in the HRV, marten habitat in the area has 

probably been centered on the upper elevations, montane and lodgepole pine habitat within and 

surrounding the Newberry Crater.

The effects of the habitat removal are cumulative to other ongoing and reasonably foreseeable projects. 

Although Godbout and Ouellet (2008) found that partial logging did not affect territorial selection by 

martens, they did find a direct correlation with marten territory size and road density; martens tended to 

have larger territories in areas of higher road density. A species will generally try to minimize their 

territory size to a size that meets all of their needs while minimizing energy costs and exposure to 

predators. The existing road density, OHV and snowmobile trails and need for roads for “suitable and 

safe access within leased areas” for geothermal exploration (see comment letter by Mr. Perry, President 

of Davenport Newberry Holdings LLC, February 10, 2010) coupled with the proposed actions to 

remove some downed wood and underburn in marten habitat may contribute to marten territory sizes 

becoming larger, and may restrict movements or dispersal of martens to and from the NNVM, which 

then restricts population size.

The proposed actions cumulatively with other large vegetation management projects in the area, 

geothermal exploration, recreational impacts, and volcanic monitoring will contribute to a downward 

trend in local marten populations. This is largely due to the reductions in dead wood levels in efforts to 

reduce fire risk, sustain and develop old growth ponderosa pine stands, and maintain access for other 

uses (recreation and development). The Ogden project is consistent with the Forest Plan, and although 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  285

the project contributes a 1% reduction of marten denning habitat on the Forest, continued viability of 

marten is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

Figure 74: Marten denning habitat (in purple) within the overlapping watersheds and adjacent 

watersheds in vicinity of the Ogden planning area.

Pygmy Nuthatch

Existing Condition 

Pygmy nuthatches are a focal species for large trees in the ponderosa pine stand types (Altman 2000). It 

is likely that they can be found in the proposed units. Most of the units are of the ponderosa pine plant 

associations and pygmy nuthatches have been observed in similar habitats.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

286  Ogden Final EIS

According to the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East-Slope of the Cascades (hereinafter 

referred to as the Conservation Strategy), the desired condition in ponderosa pine forest is a large tree, 

single layered canopy with an open, park-like understory dominated by herbaceous cover with scattered 

shrub cover and pine regeneration. Ponderosa pine forest within the East-Slope Cascades Landbird 

Conservation planning unit occurs extensively at low elevations in all the sub-provinces except 

Columbia Foothills where it is a minor component. The proposed units fall into the range of this 

strategy.

There is an estimated 43,358 acres of habitat for pygmy nuthatch in the cumulative effects area (Figure 

57); 19,279 acres of habitat within the project area. Habitat definitions used were ponderosa pine 

habitat types with average stand diameters >9 inches. Although this diameter may seem too small for a 

species with a conservation focus of large trees, much of the habitat within the project area and larger 

cumulative effects area may appear open but with scattered large ponderosa pine. The satellite data may 

not have been able to pick up such fine detail. 

Pygmy nuthatches can be found at densities of 4-19 pairs per 40 ha (99 acres) in suitable habitat and are 

ranked as ‘apparently Secure” in Oregon (Natureserve 2010).

Pygmy nuthatches are cavity nesters and although they can utilize smaller and well-decayed ponderosa 

pine snags, pygmy nuthatches do compete with other cavity nesters such as the white-breasted nuthatch 

and white-headed woodpecker for ponderosa pine snags. It has been demonstrated that snags are 

limiting in the project area; and it is this aspect of their habitat needs that may be adversely impacted 

rather than the general habitat type of ponderosa pine.

Landbird conservation in ponderosa pine forests emphasizes maintaining healthy ecosystems through 

representative focal species for three habitat conditions mentioned above (i.e. large trees, large snags, 

and open understory).

Conservation strategies for management of this habitat include: use of prescribed burning and/or 

thinning when and where appropriate to reduce fuel loads and accelerate development of late-seral 

conditions; retain all large trees, especially ponderosa pine >20” dbh; initiate snag creation and 

recruitment where necessary; retain all existing snags and broken-topped trees in units; implement road 

closures (obliteration); and minimize invasion of exotic and noxious weeds and soil erosion.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

Pygmy nuthatch habitat would continue to develop in the area despite no action being proposed in this 

alternative because of past treatments with similar actions (e.g. thinning) that overlap the project area 

(e.g. Prairie Dog project). 

This alternative does address some of the conservation strategies for pygmy nuthatches, with the 

exception of prescribed fire and road closures. Snags may be lost as a result of hazard tree removal in 

this heavily recreated project area. It is also likely that some snags would be removed as hazards to 

geothermal and volcanic monitoring equipment.

The degree of recreation use within the project would remain high. This keeps the likelihood of a 

human-caused wildfire elevated. Previous timber sale projects within the Ogden area did not 

incorporate fuels treatments (i.e. mowing and prescribed burning), thus fuel levels remain high in areas 

away from the Wildland Urban Interface. High fuel loads coupled with elevated risk of human-caused 

fire increases the likelihood of wildfire events in this area. 

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 2

This alternative proposes treatments within 10,343 acres of potential pygmy nuthatch habitat. This is 

such a large portion of the existing habitat because the objectives of the proposed actions were to 

continue the stands on a trajectory towards large ponderosa pine. The pygmy nuthatch is a focal species 

of large ponderosa pines, and this project proposes to create this habitat. In other words, many of the 

proposed actions are focused in ponderosa pine stands that are currently serving as potential pygmy 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  287

nuthatch. Although there may be short-term impacts due to actual project implementation (e.g. 

disturbance, or tree removal that may provide foraging substrate), the long-term impact may be 

improvement of pygmy nuthatch habitat (i.e. large ponderosa pines) over the 10,343 acres treated.

The proposed actions address all of the conservation strategies except snag creation. Snags may be 

fallen if they pose a safety hazard; however some snags may be created through the prescribed burning 

portion of the project.

Pygmy nuthatches can use a variety of ponderosa pine stands so long as there are larger or older 

ponderosa pines present within it. Thinning may remove foraging substrate (i.e. stressed trees with 

insects) and underburning may create smaller snags in the short term, but in the long-term habitat will 

be improved over these acres treated through the development and growth of larger ponderosa pines. 

The proposed actions will create a variety of stand age classes that will provide pygmy nuthatch habitat 

in the short and long term resulting in 10,343 acres of improved habitat.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 3

Alternative 3 proposes to treat within 10,677 acres of potential pygmy nuthatch habitat. This is slightly 

more than Alternative 2. Other than this increase of approximately 340 acres of habitat, the effects to 

pygmy nuthatches would be the same.

Cumulative Effects 

The proposed actions will cumulatively add habitat for the pygmy nuthatch. The proposed actions will 

treat within 68-70% of the existing pygmy nuthatch habitat in the project area and 24-25% of the 

potential habitat in the larger cumulative effects area. This project, in conjunction with recent past 

projects (e.g. Lava Cast and Prairie Dog), focuses a majority of the treatments in the ponderosa pine 

habitat type and promoting the development of large ponderosa pines. This is a cumulative benefit.

This project does have the connected action of falling trees and snags that pose a hazard to human 

safety. Cumulatively, this action adds to the effect of potential snag habitat loss. Developed recreation 

sites, existing trails and roads are also areas where hazard trees are fallen. The proposed actions extend 

the area where hazard trees may be fallen into the prescribed burn units and in units adjacent to 

roadways. The effect of this on pygmy nuthatches is the potential for increased competition for nest 

sites (i.e. ponderosa pine snags). Increased competition for a limited resource can displace individuals 

of a population. It is uncertain in this example whether white-headed woodpeckers, white-breasted 

nuthatches or pygmy nuthatches may be displaced. Because the pygmy nuthatch can be found at higher 

densities and in a wider variety of settings (pygmy nuthatches can be found within the Bend city limits) 

than either the white-woodpecker or white-breasted nuthatch and its populations within Oregon are 

apparently secure, the proposed actions would likely have a neutral effect on population trends for this 

species.

Chipping Sparrow

Existing Condition 

Chipping sparrows are a focal species of more open ponderosa pine stands with active regeneration. 

They are a species that will nest relatively close to the ground in young pine trees (e.g. 4-8 ft. tall). 

Their habitat is limited by the more even-aged, tall, and high density stand structure of the proposed 

treatment units.

Conservation issues and strategies for this focal species are the same as the ones for white-headed 

woodpeckers and pygmy nuthatches.

Amount of habitat for chipping sparrows was more difficult to assess with the 2004 satellite data 

because this species utilizes more of an understory component that does not show up well with the data. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

288  Ogden Final EIS

Data queries focused on ponderosa pine habitats with sapling (5” dbh) sized trees or greater. Results 

indicate approximately 20,295 acres of habitat in the project area and 75,878 acres of habitat in the 

larger cumulative effects area. These large numbers make sense from the standpoint that a bulk of the 

project area and proposed actions are within the lower elevation ponderosa pine types. Other habitat 

types such as lodgepole pine and mixed conifer are found in more narrow bands as the elevation 

increases towards Newberry Crater. Chipping sparrows are apparently secure within Oregon 

(Natureserve, 2010), and effects to habitat will be made more on a qualitative rather than quantitative 

basis.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

This alternative is not expected to impact chipping sparrows. There is currently a large amount of 

habitat for this species in the project area and larger landscape. Chipping sparrows would be negatively 

impacted by a large wildfire, at least in the short-term, because the understory will burn in most wildfire 

scenarios. This alternative maintains this risk to wildfire.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

Many of the proposed actions is within habitat for this species. Silvicultural treatments, themselves, are 

not expected to have many negative impacts to chipping sparrow habitat because the actions are focused 

on removing the taller trees that this species does not use for nesting. The associated pre-commercial 

thinning will directly impact chipping sparrow by making it less dense, but there would still be habitat. 

Mowing and prescribed burning pose the greatest risk to chipping sparrow habitat because it is focused 

on the understory and its removal. Together, the proposed actions will impact chipping sparrow habitat. 

Gaines et al. (2010) found that chipping sparrow responses were lower after spring burning.

Habitat will remain in the areas not treated, especially the areas where there are no fuels treatments.

Cumulative Effects 

Within the larger cumulative effects area (Figure 57), silvicultural treatments have focused on the 

development of chipping sparrow habitat. The recent Prairie Dog project treated ponderosa pine habitat 

silviculturally without burning or mowing and habitat for chipping sparrows sis present. However, with 

recent emphasis on protecting communities (Community Wildfire Protection Plans) and recreationists 

(ingress/egress concerns) from wildfire, burning and mowing has been prescribed and chipping sparrow 

habitat has been altered. Within the larger cumulative effects area this represents 14% of the current 

chipping sparrow habitat being altered (10,443-10,761 acres of chipping sparrow habitat being treated 

with mowing, underburning, or both).

Brown Creeper

Existing Condition 

Brown creepers are a focal species for large trees within mixed conifer (i.e. white or Douglas-fir) plant 

association. Marshall et al. (2003) cites literature that suggests creeper numbers are reduced by clear 

cutting and thinning, but will utilize closed canopied stands. To determine potential habitat, white or 

Douglas-fir associations with some larger trees (greater than 15” dbh) and at least 40% canopy closure 

were considered. Information in Mellen-McLean et al. (2009) suggests that brown creepers will utilize 

snags 9 to 20” dbh (Figure EMC_L.sp17), but there was no information in regards to densities. There is 

an estimated 408 acres of habitat found within the project area, and 1,594 acres of habitat within the 

larger cumulative effects area (Figure 57). Such a small figure for habitat within the project area is 

largely due to the lack of mixed conifer habitat (<25% of the project area). According to snag survey 

data in the project area, there are 1-2 snags/acre greater than 10” dbh and approximately 1 snag greater 

than 20” dbh for every two acres. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  289

Brown creepers have been observed in other forested habitats than just mixed conifer. It is likely that 

brown creeper populations within the project area use more than the mixed conifer habitat, but for this 

analysis brown creeper habitat will be focused on mixed conifer habitat because the creeper is a focal 

species for this kind of habitat. A majority of the mixed conifer stands within the project area are not 

Douglas-fir, white fir and ponderosa pine (commonly associated with the mixed conifer association) but 

white fir, lodgepole pine and ponderosa pine.

According to Altman (2000), conservation issues for this species include: loss of large diameter trees 

(especially Douglas-fir) to logging; and indications that it may be a forest interior species (i.e. avoids 

edges and openings). 

Conservation strategies discussed in Altman (2000) include: maintaining stands in largest tracts possible 

to reduce the amount of edge and fragmentation; designate areas of unmanaged late-successional forest 

likely to provide the most suitable nesting habitat; managing for large diameter trees through longer 

rotation periods; and in harvest units retained trees should be clumped rather than dispersed and should 

be primarily Douglas-fir.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

Because this alternative does not propose any actions, there would be no effects to the existing brown 

creeper habitat in the project area. 

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 2

Alternative 2 proposes actions within 91 acres of brown creeper habitat. The largest blocks of habitat 

treated are within Units 54-56, 342, 386, and 387. Habitat in other units is scattered into <3 acres 

patches. The proposed actions will reduce the density of the trees and favor white fir for removal. 

Effectively this alternative removes 91 acres of brown creeper habitat.

This alternative does not address many of the conservation strategies for this focal species. A majority 

of the existing habitat is in small patches and does not contain Douglas-fir. This alternative does not 

propose any actions within the largest blocks of habitat.

Similar to discussions for other species that utilize snags, the falling of hazard trees can indirectly 

impact brown creepers by removing nesting habitat. Brown creepers can also use large live trees for 

nesting because they do not drill a cavity but will forage and nest within crevices or slits in the bark if 

firs. Some trees exhibiting this kind of bark may be deemed hazardous.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 3

Alternative 3 proposes actions within 96 acres of habitat. The units are the same as Alternative 2 with 

the exception that there is brown creeper habitat within the one of the goshawk PFAs (Units 909, 966, 

and 913). Only this alternative proposes to treat within a PFA. Otherwise the effects of this alternative 

are the same as discussed for Alternative 2.

Cumulative Effects 

The proposed actions affect approximately 6% of the brown creeper habitat in the larger cumulative 

effects area (Figure 57). Similar to the project area, brown creeper habitat, as defined as a focal species, 

is limited by the lack of Douglas-fir in many of the mixed conifer stands. 

This project is additive to the recently completed Lava Cast sales to the north that also treated within the 

mixed conifer. Both project areas had similar prescriptions and objectives to promote the ponderosa 

pine, while leaving white fir, and retaining a higher density of trees than in the drier ponderosa pine 

habitat.

Cumulatively, the proposed actions add to the altering of brown creeper habitat and do not effectively 

address the conservation strategies.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

290  Ogden Final EIS

Flammulated Owl

Existing Condition 

Flammulated owls are a focal species of grassy openings and dense thickets within late-successional 

mixed conifer plant associations. Flammulated owls are not known to occur in the project area. 

There is an estimated 44,193 acres of potential habitat (as defined as ponderosa pine component, large 

to medium sized trees, and at least 10% canopy closure to represent openings) within the cumulative 

effects area (Figure 57) and 15,137 acres of habitat in the project area. Snag densities within this habitat 

type are the same as those detailed under the Brown Creeper. In 1989 and 1990 flammulated owl(s) 

were heard in the northeast portion of the project area. These are the only records for this species in the 

project area. 

Literature cited within Natureserve (2010) report for Oregon flammulated owl nesting densities of 1 nest 

per 100 ha (247 ac). Using this figure, there is habitat for over 60 flammulated owl nests in the project 

area. This is inflated however, because it does not consider the availability of large snags/cavities, an 

important habitat component for this species. If large diameter snags were not limited in the ponderosa 

pine habitat, there would be habitat for up to 60 flammulated owl nests.

According to Altman (2000), conservation issues for this species include: loss of mature and old-growth 

trees and snags for nest and roost sites; loss of open understory because of invasion of exotics and fire 

intolerant species; requires small patches of dense thickets for roosting; creation of large areas of evenaged stands is detrimental; fuelwood collection reduces the densities of snags. 

Some of the conservation strategies relevant to the proposed actions include: target conservation efforts 

near grassland or dry meadow openings; leave patches of dense sapling thickets to function as roost 

sites; retain large snags (greater than 12 “ dbh); create snags or use nest boxes as a short-term 

supplement; and maintain grassy openings. 

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

Although this alternative would not impact the existing flammulated owl habitat, it also does not take a 

proactive approach in promoting or sustaining habitat. Because of the risk of fire in some areas, the 

flammulated owl habitat there would also be at risk. A fire that burned in a more mosaic pattern of 

intensities may benefit habitat, but a large stand-replacing fire would remove habitat.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

There are no proposed units overlapping where past observations of this species have been.

The proposed actions under each alternative will treat a majority of the potential flammulated owl 

habitat (56-60%). The proposed actions will address the conservation strategies by not cutting trees 

over 21”dbh and mowing and prescribed burning to create an open understory. Although the prescribed 

thinning will attempt to maintain the current level of “clumpiness” of trees within the stand, after project 

implementation it is likely that the stand will appear more even-aged. The patches of dense thickets that 

flammulated owls can capitalize on, will be more prominent on a landscape level as opposed to a stand 

level.

Although there are no snags proposed for harvesting, snags could be fallen if determined to be a hazard 

tree. Flammulated owls are a secondary cavity nester, using cavities previously excavated by 

woodpeckers. A lack of nesting habitat for woodpeckers would likely mean a lack of nesting habitat for 

flammulated owls. As a secondary cavity user, this species’ nesting habitat may be more at risk to 

hazard tree falling because the snag is that much older (i.e. a cavity in dead wood had already been 

created, used and abandoned before the flammulated owl uses it).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  291

Cumulative Effects 

Cumulatively the proposed actions add to the other treatments that have occurred in the ponderosa pine 

habitat (e.g. Lava Cast sales, and Prairie Dog). All of these projects are likely to improve habitat for 

flammulated owls in the long term, in the short-term habitat may be limited. Many of the proposed and 

recent completed treatments have thinned the ponderosa pine stands and appear more even aged, open 

and less “clumpy”. Provisions within each of these project areas for big game hiding cover has 

provided the small dense patches that flammulated owls use. In the Ogden project area, the hiding 

cover is in much larger patches. It is uncertain whether this satisfies the needs of flammulated owls or if 

the patches are too large and widespread.

The Ogden project is also cumulative to the need to protect humans by falling hazard trees. The 

proposed actions add to the need to remove hazard trees by placement of units directly next to heavily 

used roadways. This is additive to the hazard tree removal around developed recreations sites, trails, 

and proposed trails. It is reasonable to assume that some of the hazard trees that may be removed could 

be potential flammulated owl habitat.

The proposed actions, in conjunction with other forest management projects in the project area, are 

expected to increase the density of large diameter snags in ponderosa pine habitats (see discussion for 

white-headed woodpecker). This would contribute to a trend towards increasing populations of 

flammulated owls, a species vulnerable in Oregon. However, the associated risk of snags being lost 

because they may be a hazard to human safety could neutralize this increasing trend.

Hermit Thrush

Existing Condition 

Hermit thrushes are a focal species of multi-layered, dense mixed conifer stands. Hermit thrushes have 

been observed within the project area. No nesting was confirmed but it is assumed because of the 

presence of suitable habitat and the observations of adults in suitable habitat during the breeding season.

Potential habitat for this species was defined as multi-layered habitat in montane, eastside, and 

ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir mixed conifer stands. Only areas in these associations with greater than 

40% canopy closure and medium to large sized trees were considered in order to fully account for a 

multi-layered stand. Using this definition, there are 9,254 acres of potential habitat in the cumulative 

effects area (Figure 57) and 1,132 acres within the project area. Often the limiting characteristic(s) of 

hermit thrush habitat in the area were the high canopy closure coupled with larger trees. Most of the 

potential habitat is within the Newberry National Volcanic Monument

Conservation issues associated with this species include the loss or alteration of habitats (loss of 

understory and structural complexity) from fire, grazing, and winter recreational activities. 

The conservation strategy listed to address the issues for this species is to retain tracts of forest as 

unmanaged or lightly managed to ensure structural diversity. 

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

Although directly this alternative would have no impact to hermit thrush habitat, indirectly it may hinder 

the faster development of the large tree component. This alternative does retain the close-canopied, 

mixed conifer stands. Maintaining the risk of wildfire, also risks the existing hermit thrush habitat.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

The proposed actions will treat approximately 357-389 acres of hermit thrush habitat. The proposed 

prescriptions will reduce tree density and remove the multi-storied canopies within these habitats. 

Habitat will remain in the untreated areas where there are larger blocks of habitat, but overall habitat for 

hermit thrushes will become more limited. In the long-term ( >20 years), the canopies would close 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

292  Ogden Final EIS

again and an understory would return. However, it is within an area of high recreation use (e.g. 

geothermal development, developed site or trail), there may be a priority to retain a more open 

appearance in order to reduce fire risk.

The proposed alternatives do not address the conservation strategies.

Cumulative Effects

The amount of habitat removed as a result of the proposed actions represents approximately 4% of the 

habitat in the larger cumulative effects area. Much of the suitable habitat for this species is within the 

Newberry Crater where there is no regulated timber harvest, and the habitat types naturally sustain a 

multi-canopied, dense appearance (mixed conifer and montane mixed conifer). These areas in the 

Monument, represent the conservation strategy to retain tracts of unmanaged or lightly managed forests.

The proposed actions are additive to the conservation issues regarding habitat alteration from fire, 

grazing, and winter recreation. Although there is no grazing, fire is a proposal under the Ogden project 

and winter recreation is an ongoing use within the project area and Newberry Crater.

Olive-sided Flycatcher

Existing Condition 

This species will perch and hunt from dead trees within an open area and usually nest within the forest 

surrounding the opening (Natureserve, 2010). There are areas within the project area that have been 

burned recently and provide this kind of habitat. Olive-sided flycatchers have been observed within the 

project area.

Olive-sided flycatchers are a focal species of edges and openings created by wildfires (Altman, 2000). 

Conservation issues associated with this species include: changes in fire regimes that have resulted in 

fewer but larger fires that reduce amount of edge between early and late seral forest; and brush control 

limits understory growth that provides insect productivity. 

Some of the Conservation Strategies in Altman (2000) for this focal species and relevant to the proposed 

actions include: 1) using prescribed fire with manual understory clearing where appropriate to create a 

patchy mosaic of burned forest; 2) increase the level of acceptable opportunities to allow wildfires to 

burn or ignite fires when conditions and opportunities exist; 3) where possible, prohibit salvage logging 

to occur in post-fire habitat; 4) for protection of snags, close roads or restrict fuelwood permits in areas 

where large snags are present; 5) retain standing dead or diseased trees where they occur; 6) If snags are 

limiting, create suitable snags through girdling, topping, etc.;7) minimize brush control; 8) selective 

logging can be used to increase suitability of habitat as long as sufficient large living and dead trees are 

retained; and 9) eliminate or minimize pesticide spraying near nesting pairs which may reduce insect 

prey base. 

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

This alternative would not have any direct impacts to olive-sided flycatchers or their habitat. Indirectly, 

there may be impacts because this alternative does not address any of the conservation strategies.

Direct and Indirect Effects - Alternatives 2 and 3

The proposed actions under the action alternatives will create some habitat for the olive-sided flycatcher 

by thinning and opening stands creating more edge, while also preventing the creation of habitat through 

wildfire. The fuels objectives within the project area are to create conditions whereby wildfires can be 

fought more effectively (i.e. resistance to control is lowered). These objectives run counter to the 

creation of edges and openings by wildfire, the habitat type for which this species is a focus. Wildfires 

would still occur in the area, the proposed actions may make the fires less extensive.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  293

The following discusses how the proposed actions address, or not, the conservation strategies:

1) Using prescribed fire with manual understory clearing where appropriate to create a patchy mosaic 

of burned forest. The proposed action of mowing and prescribed burning will achieve this strategy.

2) Increase the level of acceptable opportunities to allow wildfires to burn or ignite fires when 

conditions and opportunities exist. The proposed actions will achieve this indirectly by prioritizing 

fuels treatments in areas where the need or strategic placement is greatest. 

3) Where possible, prohibit salvage logging to occur in post-fire habitat. The proposed actions do not 

propose post-fire salvage logging. 

4) For protection of snags, close roads or restrict fuelwood permits in areas where large snags are 

present. There are no designated firewood cutting areas within or adjacent to the project area. No snags 

are proposed to be cut except where they pose a hazard to human safety. This alternative does propose 

58 miles of road closures. 

5) Retain standing dead or diseased trees where they occur. A connected action with the proposed 

actions is the falling of hazard trees. This will not meet this conservation strategy. 

6) If snags are limiting, create suitable snags through girdling, topping, etc. There are no current 

proposals for the creation of snags.

7) Minimize brush control. Mowing is proposed as part of the fuels treatments objectives. As part of 

haul route and road maintenance, brushing along the sides is commonly done. 

8) Selective logging can be used to increase suitability of habitat as long as sufficient large living and 

dead trees are retained. This strategy is met in the project area in retaining trees >21” dbh and no snags 

are proposed to be harvested. Large trees may be fallen if they are deemed a hazard to human safety.

9) Eliminate or minimize pesticide spraying near nesting pairs which may reduce insect prey base. No 

spraying is proposed. 

In conclusion, the alternatives propose actions that will both meet and deter from the conservation 

strategies. Olive-sided flycatcher habitat is not seen as limited in the project area. The components of 

shrub control and snag retention will be negatively impacted by the proposed actions; however these 

actions will not remove all of these components on the landscape. More open habitat will be created 

and this will favor olive-sided flycatcher habitat (Gaines et al. 2010).

Cumulative Effects 

The proposed actions are cumulative to other recent, ongoing, or reasonably foreseeable actions in the 

project in how the conservations are or are not addressed. Brushing along roads and trails and hazard 

tree falling to protect and maintain recreation sites and recreating people is cumulative with the 

proposed actions. 

Williamson’s Sapsucker

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for Williamson’s Sapsucker for 

the Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

The Williamson’s sapsucker is included with the woodpecker group which was chosen as management 

indicator species for the Deschutes National Forest. This group was chosen to represent all wildlife 

species which use cavities for nesting and denning. The woodpeckers, as well as many of the secondary 

cavity nesters, consume forest insects thereby contributing a valuable suppression influence on 

destructive forest pests (USFS 1990, p. 3-17).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

294  Ogden Final EIS

Habitats for the Williamson’s sapsucker can be old forest interior ponderosa pine, old forest aspen, and 

old forest cottonwood-willow, as well as, old forest single and multi-strata grand/white fir, and interior 

Douglas-fir. In northeastern Oregon, most nests found in the grand fir forest type in stands with less 

than 75% canopy cover, 2 to 3 canopy layers, and more than one dead tree per hectare. Across their 

range, Williamson’s sapsuckers have been found to use a variety of habitat types for nesting including 

aspen.

In central Oregon, sapsucker densities were much greater in lightly harvested areas compared to 

intensively harvested stands; that while nests were located in managed stands, they were generally 

found in denser patches of forest containing high snag densities:

30-80% tolerance interval for snag density >10” dbh for the Williamson’s sapsucker as 

reported in DecAID in green stands = 14 - 49.7/ac (28.4 for the 50% tolerance level)

30-80% tolerance levels for snag density >20” dbh for the Williamson’s sapsucker as reported 

in DecAID in green stands = 3.0-16.6/ac 

Breeding territories may be determined by the presence of suitable nesting structure rather than forest 

density. Snag size used by Williamson’s sapsucker for nesting by habitat type (range represents 30-80% 

tolerance interval):

Eastside Mixed Conifer (EMC) = 16 - 37” dbh

Ponderosa Pine/ Douglas-Fir (PPDF) = 19 - 31.7” dbh

Many studies have shown they use both live and dead trees about equally. Live trees used by the 

Williamson’s sapsucker for nesting usually contain advanced heartwood decay as they are weak 

excavators. Williamson’s sapsuckers prefer old, large trees. These trees may have more opportunity for 

fungi invasion and heartwood decay. This may suggest that the decay condition is more important than 

the tree species. Of the nests in dead trees, most retained much of the original bark suggesting the trees 

had been dead less than 3 years. Approximately 59% of nest trees in northern Washington were in 

decay class 1 (recently dead) while 24% were found in decay classes 2 and 3 (little to moderate decay).

Williamson’s sapsuckers fed at sap wells three quarters of the time and pecked or gleaned on live trees 

the remainder of the time. Mean feeding height is 33 feet. This high foraging height enables birds to 

reach the phloem through a thin layer of bark compared to that at the base of the tree.

Williamson’s sapsucker nesting habitat was mapped using ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, grand fir, and 

white fir dominated forests which include all plant association groups (PAGs) in all seral stages (early, 

mid, late). In addition, stand size had to be a minimum diameter of 20”dbh or greater and have either 

open or dense stand characteristics (based on the canopy cover level thresholds for each PAG) to be 

mapped as potential habitat. Both open and dense canopy thresholds were used to capture most habitat. 

There will be some over-estimation of habitat due to this. Recent fires and forest management activities 

(since 2002) that resulted in conditions other than described above were removed from mapped potential 

habitat. The resulting nesting habitat was then quantified by applying the DecAID EMC_S/L.sp-22 

table tolerance levels.

There are approximately 243,364 acres of potential nesting habitat on the Forest. Currently, 34% of 

potential nesting habitat that may have snags >10”dbh and 53% of potential nesting habitat that may 

have snags >20”dbh do not contain any snag habitat making it unlikely to be suitable nesting habitat 

(Tables 97 and 98). The remaining 66% of the habitat with snags >10”dbh and 47% of the habitat with 

snags >20”dbh provides varying levels of habitat for individuals (Tables 97 and 98). Very little nesting 

habitat on forest (approximately 397 acres) provides for the majority of individuals as this habitat 

contains snags >20”dbh which are preferred by this species for nesting according to the literature (80% 

tolerance level see Table 98 below). However, approximately 3% of the nesting habitat provides for 50-

80% of the individuals (Table 98). 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  295

Table 97: Existing snag distribution >10”dbh in Williamson’s sapsucker nesting habitat on the 

Deschutes NF (Highlighted density reflects current Standard and Guidelines)

Tolerance Level Snags/Acre

Total Forest-wide 

Potential WISA Nesting 

Habitat Acres

% of Habitat

0 0 82,713 34%

0-30% 0-14.0 126,319 52%

30-50% 14.0-28.4 23,263 10%

50-80% 28.4-49.7 8,284 3%

80%+ 49.7+ 2,785 1%

Total 243,364 100%

Based on DecAID Version 2.1: Table EMC_S/L.sp-22

 

Table 98: Existing snag distribution >20”dbh in Williamson’s sapsucker nesting habitat on the 

Deschutes NF (Highlighted density reflects current Standard and Guidelines)

Tolerance Level Snags/Acre

Total Forest-wide 

Potential WISA Nesting 

Habitat Acres

% of Habitat

0 0 128,190 53%

0-30% 0-3.3 83,437 34%

30-50% 3.3-8.6 24,788 10%

50-80% 8.6-16.6 6,552 3%

80%+ 16.6+ 397 0%

Total 243,364 100%

Based on DecAID Version 2.1: Table EMC_S/L.sp-22

An HRV (historical range of variability) analysis of snag density was completed for the forest using 

information from DecAID and the Viable Ecosystems model. HRV was based on the existing condition 

for snag density and not the reference condition. The following table displays HRV information for the 

percent of the landscape with snags >20”dbh in the Eastside mixed conifer habitat type. This is the 

dominant habitat type and size used by this species.

Table 99: HRV analysis of the Deschutes National Forest with >20”dbh snags in the Eastside Mixed 

Conifer habitat type. (Highlighted density reflects current Standard and Guidelines)

Habitat 

Type

% of Landscape for Snags >20”dbh

Snags/Acre

Snag 

Density

0 0-4 4-8 8-12 12-16 16+

EMC

HRV 32-44 29-35 14-22 7-10 2-3 1-2

Existing 37 48 11 3 1 0.2

As seen from Table 99, the existing condition (37%) for the percentage of the landscape with no snags 

is within the historical range of variability documented for historic levels (32-44%). However, the 

existing condition for the low density snag category (0-4 snags/acre) is above HRV at 48% while the 

moderate to high snag density categories are all below HRV. This is likely due to a combination of 

factors. Snag loss or reductions have occurred due to vegetation management activities including 

historic clear-cut harvesting where lower snag levels were retained, thinning, prescribed fire, and 

firewood collection, as well as illegal cutting of large snags and loss of snags in green forests due to 

wildfire (see threats).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

296  Ogden Final EIS

When considering just potential Williamson sapsucker nesting habitat (species specific data), 

approximately 53% of the potential Williamson’s sapsucker nesting habitat contains no snags >20”dbh 

(Table 100). The existing condition is higher than the percent of the landscape with no snags >20”dbh 

(32-44%) displayed for HRV for eastside mixed conifer habitat type. When comparing the 0-8.6 

snags/acre category to the corresponding 0-8 snags per acre HRV category, the existing condition (44%) 

is within the HRV values of 43-57%. The opposite is true for percent of the landscape with higher snag 

densities. The existing condition for percent of the landscape with 8.6+ snags/acre (3%) is well below 

that of the corresponding HRV values of 8+ snags per acre (10-15%) which has negative impacts to the 

Williamson’s sapsucker. 

Table 100: Comparison of existing Williamson’s sapsucker nesting habitat to HRV (snags >20” dbh).

Snag Density (snags/acre)

0 0-8.6 (DecAID) 

0-8 (HRV)

8.6+ (DecAID)

8.0+ (HRV)

HRV 32-44% 43-57% 10-15%

Existing WISA Nesting 

Habitat

53% 44% 3%

The Williamson’s sapsucker is not listed as federally threatened or endangered nor is it a candidate 

species. In addition, it is not listed as a sensitive species for Region 6 or the State of Oregon. This 

species is listed as focal species for the Partners in Flight Conservation Strategy for Landbirds on the 

East-Slope of the Cascades Mountains in Oregon and Washington and is a priority species on the 

USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern. 

Population trend data from the North American Breeding Bird Surveys indicate the Williamson’s 

sapsucker shows a slight increasing population trend in the Great Basin but a decreasing population 

trend in Oregon. The Partners in Flight species assessment database indicates this is a Regional Species 

of Concern, and a Regional Concern Species where Management Attention has been recommended.

Based on population trends, large-scale habitat assessments, risk factors, and snag analysis, 

Williamson’s sapsucker populations are highly distributed and dispersed across the forest with low 

abundances. Projects consistent with the Deschutes National Forest LRMP, Northwest Forest Plan, and 

Eastside Screens standards and guidelines should be expected to maintain viability of the Williamson’s 

sapsucker.

Threats

Although this species is highly adaptable and able to withstand considerable disturbance, it is likely that 

the condition (i.e. heartwood decay), structural characteristics (such as tree diameter and height), and 

abundance of suitable nest trees are limiting factors influencing distribution and abundance in some 

areas of their range. 

Primary threats include forest management practices or activities that remove large snags and the 

impacts of fire suppression. This species is threatened by a loss of large diameter snags to logging, 

firewood removal, and danger tree removal. Snag management policies on managed lands are often 

deficient in large snags required by this species unless recruitment snags are maintained through the 

rotation. The loss of large snags impacts nest site availability and thus population levels.

Fire suppression has resulted in a shift from shade intolerant species (western larch, western white pine, 

and ponderosa pine) to shade tolerant species (white fir, grand fir, and Douglas-fir). This shift has 

resulted in over-stocked stands which inhibit the growth of large trees that are more susceptible to loss 

from fire, insects, and disease. And because the Williamson’s sapsucker prefers softer substrate for 

excavation, these structures are more readily lost to fire, including prescribed fire.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  297

Ogden Planning Area

The Ogden planning area, and the watersheds it is part of, are a small percentage of the total available

habitat on the Forest (Table 101). The planning area does not contain many areas with high densities of 

large snags (Tables 102 and 103). However, the EMC habitat type is uncommon in the planning area 

(<5%), thus Williamson’s sapsucker habitat may be naturally limited within it.

Table 101: Williamson’s sapsucker nesting habitat at different landscape scales based on forest 

vegetation

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of sapsucker 

nesting habitat % of 

Subwatershed 

% of Watershed with snag 

structure for nesting

% Nesting 

habitat on 

Forest

>10” dbh >20”dbh

Deschutes National Forest 243,364 100

Long Prairie Watershed 3,920 53 20 1.6

Finley Butte 433

Paulina Peak South 1,261

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

12,992 59 28 5.3

Kawak Butte 1,863

Lower Paulina 559

LaPine 1,129

Wickiup Junction 1,270

Upper Paulina Peak 67

Ogden Planning Area 2,310 9% of planning 

area

1

Furthermore, in comparison to the Forest and HRV levels the planning area is low in providing habitat 

for Williamson’s sapsuckers; 80% of the planning area is not providing snag structure (Table 103). This 

is a compounded effect of the rarity of the mixed conifer habitat and the lack of large diameters trees 

and snags due to historical logging, slow growth due to dense stands, wildfires, and hazard tree falling 

(related to recreation use).

Table 102: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for Williamson’s sapsucker for 

snags>20”dbh.

Nesting Acres by Watershed

Tolerance Interval 0 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80+% Total Acres

Snags/Acre 0 0-3.3 3.3-8.6 8.6-16.6 16.6+

Long Prairie 3,129

(80%)

760

(19%)

31

(1%)

0

(0%)

0

(0%)

3,920

Lower Little Deschutes River 8,644

(66%)

3,587

(28%)

761

(6%)

0

(0%)

0

(0%)

12,992

Ogden Planning Area 1854 

(80%)

448

(19%)

8

(0%)

0

(0%)

0

(0%)

2,310

Existing across Deschutes NF 53% 44% 3%

HRV 32-44% 43-57% 10-15%
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

298  Ogden Final EIS

Table 103: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for Williamson’s sapsucker for 

snags>10”dbh.

Nesting Acres by Watershed

Tolerance Interval 0 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80+% Total Acres

Snags/Acre 0 0-14 14-28.4 28.4-

49.7

49.7+

Long Prairie 1,824

(46%)

2,022

(52%)

50

(1%)

24

(1%)

0

(0%)

3,920 (100%)

Lower Little Deschutes River 5,366

(41%)

7,330

(56%)

244

(2%)

52

(0%)

0

(0%)

12,992 (100%)

Ogden Planning Area 874 

(38%)

1,429 

(62%)

7

(0%)

0.2

(0%)

0

(0%)

2,310 (100%)

According to Altman (2000), conservation issues for this species relevant to the proposed actions 

include: loss of large diameter snags to logging; snag management policies on managed lands are often 

deficient in large snags required by this species unless recruitment snags are maintained through the 

rotation; and fire suppression has resulted in closed understories which inhibit growth of large trees.

Conservation strategies include: 

Extend rotation ages to retain snags;

Retain largest live trees, particularly dying or defective trees in harvest units;

Retain known or suitable nesting and roosting snags;

Restrict access from fuelwood cutters.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

This alternative would not alter the current lack of habitat for this species. Snags levels may increase in 

areas not thinned, but the majority of tree sizes in these areas are still below the large size utilized by 

this species, and it may take considerable time in the more dense stands to achieve the larger tree sizes. 

As the tree sizes increase and crowns in areas that were previously thinned begin to close, more habitat 

for this species will develop.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

The purpose and need of the proposed actions within Williamson’s sapsucker habitat is to increase the 

resilience of the stands to insects, disease, and wildfire, and maintain a trajectory of increased growth 

and health of residual trees. Because this species utilizes decaying and dead large trees, the purpose and 

need for action would not address its immediate habitat needs. Actions proposed within sapsucker 

habitat would result in larger trees in the future, but because the stands would become more resilient to 

the agents that favor creation of dead and dying trees, there would be a gap in habitat availability within 

these units. The alternatives propose treatments within approximately 721 acres (Alternative 2) and 744 

acres (Alternative 3) of the total potential sapsucker habitat (2,310 acres). This amounts to 31% and 

32% of the available habitat, respectively (Table 104).

However, as shown earlier in regards to availability of large snags, the proposed actions are impacting 

less habitat when considering habitat that has the structure for nesting.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  299

Table 104: Comparison of alternatives impacting Williamson’s Sapsucker nesting habitat

Alternative 1 - Existing Alternative 2 Alternative 3

# Acres of Habitat with a 

proposed Treatment 0 721 744

# Acres of Habitat with Treatment 

With no snags >10” 874 245 225

With no snags >20” 1854 551 580

With >10” snags at the 0-30% 

tolerance interval 1429 473 487

With >20” snags at the 0-30% 

tolerance interval 448 168 163

With >10” snags at the 30-50% 

tolerance interval 7.2 3 3

With >20” snags at the 30-50% 

tolerance interval 8 2 1

Total acres of habitat treated 

with some snag structure 1436.2 476 519

The proposed actions will retain large trees and snags (with the exception if the tree or snag is deemed a 

hazard to human safety). Although there are actions proposed within potential sapsucker habitat, the 

actions retain the large trees and snags and the loss of such structure is the dominant threat to this 

species. The alternatives are not expected to change the total amount of habitat in the short-term. As 

discussed under the white-headed woodpecker, proposed thinning is anticipated to make the stand more 

resilient to insects and disease for approximately 20 years. In that time it is also anticipated that tree 

diameter growth will be providing larger trees. This will help create sapsucker habitat in the future

(about 20 years).

Cumulative Effects 

Cumulatively, Williamson’s sapsucker habitat is limited in the watersheds. Mixed conifer habitat forms 

a thin band on the western flank of Newberry Crater, thus sapsucker habitat is naturally limited in the 

area. Ongoing and recent treatments within the mixed conifer habitat have created conditions to allow 

larger tree sizes, however it will still be many years before sapsucker habitat is created. 

There are areas in the mixed conifer habitat that are not part of any currently proposed or ongoing 

silvicultural treatments; however some of the components of sapsucker habitat are still at risk to hazard 

tree falling, recreational trail building, and geothermal development/monitoring. These recreational and 

geothermal uses are different from the silvicultural treatments because they will not provide any 

sapsucker habitat. That is to say, these uses will not develop sapsucker habitat in the future, and the 

retention of snags is not compatible with the use. Each of these individual actions is small, but they are 

widespread throughout the cumulative effects area to have widespread impacts to sapsucker habitat. 

The Ogden project area contains many of the conservation issues associated with these species, but does 

not directly address many of the conservation strategies outside of the retention of large trees. There are 

no proposals to specifically target dead or defective trees; these are often identified as hazard trees. 

Large snags will be retained except where deemed a hazard. There is no legal firewood cutting areas 

within the project area. Although the proposed thinning is designed to maximize the rotation by 

thinning to low stocking levels, but this may limit the more immediate recruitment of new snags.

The proposed actions, in conjunction with other forest management projects in the project area, are 

expected to increase the density of large diameter snags in ponderosa pine habitats (see discussion for 

white-headed woodpecker) over the long-term (> 20 years). This would contribute to a trend towards 

increasing populations of Williamson’s sapsucker, a species apparently secure in Oregon. However, the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

300  Ogden Final EIS

associated risk of snags being lost because they may be a hazard to human safety could neutralize this 

increasing trend.

Cumulatively, the acres of Williamson’s sapsucker habitat with snags impacted by the proposed actions 

amounts to a potential decrease in <1% of the available habitat on the Forest. This < 1% reflects the 

general lack of habitat for the sapsucker in the project area but the proposed connected action of 

treatments to remove hazard trees. The overall direct, indirect, and cumulative effects will result in a 

small negative trend of habitat. The loss of habitat will be insignificant at the scale of the Forest. The 

Ogden project is consistent with the Forest Plan, and thus continued viability of Williamson’s 

sapsuckers is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

Hairy Woodpecker

Existing Condition 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for Hairy Woodpecker for the 

Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service, 2012).

The hairy woodpecker in included in the woodpecker group that was chosen as terrestrial management 

indicator species (MIS) on the DNF.

Hairy woodpeckers are found primarily in mixed conifer and ponderosa pine forests and can use 

deciduous stands during the breeding season. They have been observed nesting in relatively open stands 

with low basal area, low stem densities, and open canopies (39% canopy cover). There are usually more 

snags at nest sites. Nests are surrounded by open forest conditions characterized by few trees and large 

snags and low canopy cover. 

Ponderosa pine is a preferred nest tree but hairy woodpeckers are known to nest in other species 

(lodgepole pine, western larch, Douglas-fir, and aspen) except grand fir. Most nests are in dead trees 

less than 5 years and preferred snags are 10-20” dbh. 

Hairy woodpeckers prefer unlogged post-fire habitats with medium to high densities of snags. Mean 

nest tree diameter in post-fire environments is similar to those found in green forests. Mean diameter of 

nest trees is 14.5” dbh with a range of 11-34” dbh. Mean nest tree heights were 52-65 feet average 

(range 24-133 feet) a high occurrence of nests in snags with broken tops – 62%. Most nests were in 

snags that ranged from recently dead to moderately decayed (Decay Class 2). 

Hairy woodpeckers use both live and dead trees for foraging. Hairy woodpeckers foraged primarily by 

scaling (75%) but also excavated, pecked, and gleaned. This species pecked and probed (29% each) 

primarily on live trees and pecked (63%) primarily on snags. Hairy woodpeckers used similar foraging 

activities as black-backed woodpeckers but the feeding location on the tree differed as black-backed 

woodpeckers primarily foraged on the tree trunk where hairy woodpeckers primarily foraged higher on 

the tree trunk and used branches as well. It was also noted that hairy woodpeckers fledged young the 

earliest and black-backs the latest. These temporal differences may help augment the demand for food 

at different times by these two species. 

Hairy woodpeckers are abundant in recently post-fire burned areas. This species also had greater 

relative abundance in high severity areas than in moderate severity areas. The increase in hairy 

woodpecker relative abundance following fire may be due to an increase in bark and wood borer larvae. 

However, abundance decreased with increasing burn age and reached abundances of unburned areas by 

years 4-7 probably due to a decrease in food.

Hairy woodpeckers use tree cavities for roosting and winter cover, and they will excavate new cavities 

in the fall to be used for roosting. Hairy woodpeckers prefer old-growth or unthinned stands in the 

winter. Hairy woodpeckers used roost trees with more bark. The retention of charred bark likely 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  301

provides thermoregulatory benefits because temperatures under fire blackened bark are higher than noncharred bark. This difference could reduce winter energy expenditures of individuals. In addition, bark 

on smaller trees may also provide some insulation value versus larger trees with less bark.

The following snag densities (snags >10”dbh) reflect the ability to provide hairy woodpecker nesting 

habitat:

0/acre = no nesting habitat

0.1/acre = minimal nesting habitat

3.7/acre = nesting habitat

>3.7/acre = optimal nesting habitat

The density of snags providing optimal habitat is also the density required with the LRMP Standard and 

Guidelines. For post-fire habitats, the density of snags providing habitat increases considerably (Table 

105).

Table 105: Tolerance levels for snag density >3”dbh and >10”dbh for the hairy woodpecker as reported in 

DecAID in post-fire habitats (T.L. = Tolerance Level)

Snag Size 30% T.L.

Snag Density (#/acre)

50% T.L.

Snag Density (#/acre)

80% T.L.

Snag Density (#/acre)

>3” dbh 31.1 61.5 106.3

>10” dbh 42.9 67.2 104.1

From DecAID Version 2.1: Tables EMC_PF.sp-22, PPDF_PF.sp-22, and MMC_PF.sp-22

Hairy woodpecker nesting habitat was mapped using mixed conifer, ponderosa pine, and lodgepole pine 

plant association groups (PAGs) in early, mid and late seral stages. In addition, stand size had to range 

from 11-20”dbh in mixed conifer and ponderosa pine and range from 5-20”dbh in lodgepole pine and 

have open stand characteristics (based on the canopy cover level thresholds for each PAG) to be mapped 

as potential habitat. Recent fires (less than 5 years old) with stand replacement severity were added as 

habitat. Recent (since 2002) forest management activities that resulted in conditions other than 

described above were removed from mapped potential habitat. 

There are approximately 507,920 acres of potential nesting habitat on the Forest. Currently, 51% of 

potential nesting habitat with snags >10”dbh do not actually contain any snag habitat (0 snags/acre) 

making it unlikely to be suitable nesting habitat (Table 106). The remaining 49% of the habitat with 

snags >10”dbh provides varying levels of habitat for individuals (Table 106). Approximately 19% of 

the Forest provides for optimal nesting habitat (and Standard and Guideline density).

Table 106: Existing snag distribution >10”dbh in hairy woodpecker nesting habitat on the Deschutes 

NF.

Snags/Acre Total Forest-wide Potential Nesting Habitat (Acres) % of Habitat

0 259,208 51%

0-0.1 NA* 0%

0.1-3.7 154,193 30%

3.7+ 94,520 19%

Total 507,920 100%

* No data fit this category

As seen in Table 106, approximately 51% of the potential hairy woodpecker nesting habitat contains no 

snags. When comparing the remaining snags per acre categories to the corresponding snags per acre 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

302  Ogden Final EIS

HRV categories, the existing condition (49%) is lower than the HRV values of 70-86% which is not 

beneficial for the hairy woodpecker. 

Table 107: Comparison of existing hairy woodpecker nesting habitat to HRV.

Snag Density (snags >10” dbh/acre)

0 >0+ 

HRV 15% 70-86%

Existing Nesting Habitat 51% 49%

The hairy woodpecker is not listed as federally threatened or endangered nor is it a candidate species 

and is listed as apparently secure for the state of Oregon. In addition, it is not listed as a sensitive 

species for Region 6 or for the State of Oregon. This species is not listed as focal species for the 

Partners in Flight Conservation Strategy for Landbirds on the East Slope of the Cascades Mountains in 

Oregon and Washington and is not a priority species on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern. 

Population trend data from the North American Breeding Bird Surveys indicate the hairy woodpecker 

shows an increasing population trend in both the Great Basin and Oregon. The Partners in Flight 

species assessment database indicates this is not a Regional Species of Concern. 

Threats

Primary threats to the hairy woodpecker include fire suppression, loss of old-growth and large snags, 

and salvage of fire-killed trees. Other threats include predation and competition for nest cavities.

Fire suppression has decreased suitable snag habitat that may have burned in small to large pockets 

across the landscape given a historic fire regime. Which results in a reduction of snags created through 

secondary mortality agents (i.e. insects) from moderate severity fire. Snags created through these agents 

have greater longevity than those created by high severity. Therefore, suitable nesting sites may be 

limited. In addition, fire suppression increases the risk of loss of habitat due to over-stocked stand 

conditions that may result in mortality from insect attack or wildfire. Salvage of fire-killed trees results 

in a reduction of both nesting and foraging habitat.

Forest management practices, such as thinning to a very low basal area, may result in the loss of suitable 

habitat. Dense forested patches with large snags are needed as winter roosting habitat and the loss of 

late and old stands decreases habitat.

Opportunistic predation has been documented by all three accipiters, as well as, several owl species, 

squirrels, snakes, and house sparrows. House sparrows, European starlings, and other woodpeckers also 

compete with hairy woodpeckers for nest cavities. 

Ogden Planning Area

Although the planning area contains wildfire areas, these were more than 5 years ago and are not 

providing the type of post-fire habitat discussed earlier. The Ogden Planning area, and the watersheds it 

is part of, are a small percentage of the total available habitat on the Forest (Table 108). The planning 

area does have similar percentages of land base with snag habitat as compared with data from the 

subwatershed and watershed level.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  303

Table 108: Hairy woodpecker nesting habitat at different landscape scales based on forest vegetation

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of sapsucker 

nesting habitat

% of 

Watershed/subwatershe

d with snag structure for 

nesting

% Nesting habitat 

on Forest

>10” dbh

Deschutes National Forest 507,920 100

Long Prairie Watershed 31,810 46 6

Finley Butte 2886 30 1

Paulina Peak South 5802 56 1

Lower Little Deschutes 

Watershed

35,462 49 7

Kawak Butte 5946 56 1

Lower Paulina 7972 45 2

LaPine 2425 53 0

Wickiup Junction 4548 48 1

Upper Paulina Peak 389 89 0

Ogden Planning Area 13,162 50% of planning area

Furthermore, in comparison to the breakdown of snag densities, Forest, and HRV levels, the planning 

area is similar in providing habitat for hairy woodpeckers; 48% of the planning area is providing nesting 

structure (Table 109). 

Table 109: Snag Distribution for Hairy Woodpeckers for snags >10”dbh.

Nesting Acres by Watershed & Subwatershed

no nesting 

habitat

providing 

minimal 

nesting

providing 

nesting 

habitat

providing 

optimal 

nesting 

habitat

Total Acres

Snags/Acre 0 0-0.1 0.1-3.7 >3.7

Long Prairie 17,206

(54%)

9,280

(29%)

5,324

(17%) 31,810

Finley Butte 1,378

(48%)

865 

(30%)

643

(22%) 2,886

Paulina Peak South 2,582

(44%)

1,830

(32%)

1,390

(24%) 5,802

Lower Little Deschutes 

River

17,972

(51%)

12,269

(35%)

5,220

(15%) 35,462

Kawak Butte 2,641

(44%)

2,161

(36%)

1,144

(19%) 5,946

Lower Paulina 4,393

(55%)

2,489

(31%)

1,089

14%) 7,972

LaPine 1,140

(47%)

992

(41%)

294

12%) 2,425

Wickiup Junction 2,366

(52%)

1,417

(31%)

765

(17%) 4,548

Upper Paulina Peak 43

(11%)

12 

(3%)

334

(86%) 389
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

304  Ogden Final EIS

Nesting Acres by Watershed & Subwatershed

no nesting 

habitat

providing 

minimal 

nesting

providing 

nesting 

habitat

providing 

optimal 

nesting 

habitat

Total Acres

Snags/Acre 0 0-0.1 0.1-3.7 >3.7

Ogden Planning Area 6,945 (53%) 4,150 

(32%)

2,067 (16%) 13,162

Existing across 

Deschutes NF 52% 31% 17%

HRV 15% 70-86%

The eastern most portion of the planning area (Upper Paulina Creek subwatershed) meets the HRV. 

This Subwatershed is most made up of the habitat types that tend to contain more habitat with longer 

fire regimes (e.g. Montane Mixed Conifer) and where dead wood can persist longer. This Subwatershed 

also predominantly lies within the Newberry National Volcanic Monument where scheduled timber 

harvest is not the common land allocation; thus more snags are retained on the landscape.

There is habitat for this species within the project area. Hairy woodpeckers have been observed within 

the project area. Because of its wide use of plant associations, in general, habitat is not limited for this 

species within the watershed. What is limiting in the area is snag habitat at the optimal densities for 

nesting (2,067 acres scattered across the planning area). There are 1-2 snags per acre >10”dbh within 

the project area and 1-4 snags per acre >8” dbh in the project area; based on dead wood surveys in 2010. 

The range in densities illustrates the fact that snag levels are not uniform across the project area. The 

higher densities of snags tend to be in the lodgepole pine and mixed conifer habitat types.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

The No Action alternative would have no direct or indirect short-term effects to hairy woodpeckers. In 

the long-term, more hairy woodpecker habitat would be created as snags are recruited through natural 

processes such as wildfire and beetle mortality. Because this species can utilize snags of the size most 

common in the project area, the recruitment of snags would favor this species; especially in the event of 

a natural disturbance in the short-term that may create high densities of smaller (10” dbh) snags.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

Alternatives 2 and 3 propose actions within 24% and 26% of the potential hairy woodpecker habitat 

(that contain snags) in the project area, respectively. Commercial thinning may impact hairy 

woodpecker habitat by limiting the creation of new snags through the development of more resilient 

stands at least for the short-term (0-20 years). When proposed in combination with fuels treatment the 

resilience is heightened. There may be new snags created by prescribed burning, but these creations 

may be off-set by the removal of hazard trees.

Thinning within plantations, or mowing of shrubs for fuels reduction is not expected to impact hairy 

woodpecker habitat. These stands are often younger and/or no longer have the snag structure within 

them. Past activities within some of these stands were part salvage sales more than 15 years ago and the 

snag structure may be reduced. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  305

Table 110: Proposed actions within hairy woodpecker nesting habitat by alternative.

Proposed Treatment Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Lodgepole seed tree harvest or removal (LP_1, LP_3)

200 166

# acres within optimal habitat

(contains 3.7+ snags/ac > 10” dbh

168 127

Thin favoring ponderosa pine for retention with 

follow up fuels treatments (PP_LP_1, PP_1, MC_1, 

MC_3, MC_2, LP_2, LP_4, RHCA_MC, RHCA_PP_LP, 

Mow_UB, GSHK_PFAmc, 

GSHK_NSTmc, GSHK_PFA)

2631 2566

# acres within optimal habitat

(contains 3.7 + snags/ac > 10” dbh)

699 719

TOTAL 2831 2732

Cumulative Effects 

As discussed before, the proposed actions have cumulative effects with other recent, ongoing, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions when considering snag habitat. The current level of human use in the 

project area, added with proposals to increase human activity in the area (e.g. trail creation, jobs created 

through project implementation, protection of infrastructure), will increase identification of and 

exposure to hazard trees and the need to cut them down. Exact cumulative effects of this action to hairy 

woodpecker populations are uncertain because this species can utilize a variety of habitat types and snag 

sizes. 

Snag recruitment is still expected to occur throughout the project area and larger cumulative effects area

(Figure 57 and 58). However, the cumulative risk of snags being lost because they may be a hazard to 

human safety could neutralize this potential increase in recruitment. Nesting habitat for hairy 

woodpeckers is generally below the historic range across the project area, subwatersheds, and Forest 

(Table 109) and this action may contribute to this situation.

Because this project impacts 1% of the nesting habitat across the Forest (acres of habitat with snag 

structure), the overall direct, indirect, and cumulative effects will result in a small negative trend of 

habitat. The loss of habitat will be minimalat the scale of the Forest. The Ogden project is consistent 

with the Forest Plan, and thus continued viability of hairy woodpeckers is expected on the Deschutes 

National Forest. 

Three-toed Woodpecker

Existing Condition 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the American Three-toed 

Woodpecker for the Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

The three-toed woodpecker was chosen as a management indicator species (MIS) on the DNF to 

represent other species found in the mature and old-growth lodgepole pine forest type. In addition, 

three-toed woodpeckers are included with the woodpecker group which was also chosen as management 

indicator species for the DNF. 

The three-toed woodpecker is listed as an Oregon Conservation Strategy species for the East Cascades 

eco-region in which the Deschutes National Forest occurs. Limiting factors identified include small, 

often disjunct populations, specific habitat requirements, and reductions in snag availability due to fire 

suppression and forest health management. There is one conservation action listed in the strategy –

Maintain areas of high snag density in wildfire and other disturbance areas, especially above 5,000 feet, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

306  Ogden Final EIS

where compatible with other forest objectives (e.g. maintain bark beetle infested trees in areas of low 

risk of insect infestation into adjacent forests).

The American three-toed woodpecker has been identified as a “bark beetle specialist” found in high 

elevation forests near the Cascade crest. The three-toed woodpecker is highly associated with post-fire 

environments but is also found in unburned forests. The three-toed woodpecker and black-backed 

woodpecker are sympatric and have overlapping ranges. One way this woodpecker competes with other 

woodpecker species, specifically the black-backed woodpecker, is by utilizing higher elevation habitat. 

Three-toed woodpeckers occupy areas between 4500-5600’ elevation while the black-backed 

woodpecker occupied lower elevations. 

The three-toed woodpecker is a year round resident that occurs in the upper elevations of the Columbia 

Basin. Source habitats were defined as late-seral subalpine and montane forests including old forests of 

lodgepole pine, grand-fir/white-fir, Engelmann spruce/subalpine fir, whitebark pine, and mountain 

hemlock. In the western half of its North American range, American three-toed woodpeckers prefer 

mature, unlogged conifer forests as well as conifer forests that have undergone some form of 

disturbance (e.g., burn, flood, windthrow). This species uses higher elevation habitats of mature 

lodgepole pine stands or stands with a lodgepole component, although forest type may not be as 

important as the presence of bark beetles.

Management for three-toed woodpeckers is tied to the maintenance of decay and disease. They found 

this species of woodpecker used stands with a mean diameter of 8”dbh for nesting with a mean nest tree 

diameter of 11”dbh suggesting selection for single-storied mature/over-mature stands (see Table 110 

and 112). All nests in the study were in lodgepole pine stands and appeared to have heart rot. Both live 

and dead trees were used for nesting.

Three-toed woodpeckers to forage in mixed conifer, mixed conifer dominated by lodgepole pine, grand 

fir forest types containing lodgepole pine, and lodgepole pine forest types. This species selected for 

mature and over-mature stands and foraged approximately 97% of the time in unlogged stands. Threetoed woodpeckers primarily forage on dead trees (88-95% of the time) that are recently dead (<3 years). 

Three-toed woodpecker populations increase 3-5 years post-fire; common in burned areas 1 to 2 years 

after the fire but declining in years 3 and 4 post-fire. This species generally established territories in 

moderately burned areas containing patches of live and dead trees and were less common in unburned 

forests in large, severely burned areas lacking live trees.

This species foraged on standing dead trees 99% of the time while rarely foraging on logs (1%) this 

species was more abundant in burned forest than it was in adjacent unburned forest, and 85% of 

foraging was done on trees >9” (23 cm) dbh although trees of that size made up less than 40% of the 

overall area.

Intra-specific home range overlap between males and females is limited to non-existent. Inter-specific 

home range overlap was common. Three-toed woodpeckers were frequently observed foraging, without 

aggressive displays, near black-backed and hairy woodpeckers, northern flickers, and three sapsuckers 

(Williamson’s, red-naped, and red-breasted). 

Table 111: Tolerance levels (T. L.) for snag density >10” and 20” dbh for the three-toed woodpecker as 

reported in DecAID in green stands and post fire stands for snags >10”.

Snag Size 30% T.L.

Snag Density (#/acre)

50% T.L.

Snag Density (#/acre)

80% T.L.

Snag Density (#/acre)

>10” dbh 2.5 13.6 29.2

>10” dbh 44.4-57.2 64.4-82.4 94.3-119.2

>20” dbh 0 1.4 5.7

From DecAID Version 2.1: Tables EMC_S/L.sp-22 and PPDF_S/L.sp-22; Tables EMC_PF.sp-22 and PPDF_PF.sp-22
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  307

Table 112: Tolerance levels for snag size used by three-toed woodpeckers by habitat type.

Habitat Type

Tolerance Levels

30% 

Snag Size (dbh in)

50%

Snag Size (dbh in)

80%

Snag Size (dbh in)

Eastside Mixed Conifer 8.8-11.4 10.8-14.7 14.0-19.7

Eastside Mixed Conifer

Post-fire 9.7 12.0 15.9

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir

(Foraging) 7.5 9.4 12.1

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir

Post-fire 9.6 12.1 15.8

Down Wood 

Three-toed woodpeckers also used areas with measurable downed log densities and are known to forage 

on downed logs. In looking at down wood density relative to the three-toed woodpecker for down wood 

>5” dbh in Eastside Mixed Conifer (EMC_S/L), Lodgepole Pine (LP_S/L), and Mixed 

Montane,(MMC_S, MMC_L) for green habitats the 30-80% tolerance interval is 6.5-32% downed wood 

cover.

The downed wood cover levels may be higher than what one would experience commonly because the 

Lodgepole Pine and Montane Mixed Conifer forest habitat types tend to have higher down wood 

percent cover than those on Eastside Mixed Conifer sites, and these data were collected during a 

mountain pine beetle outbreak (thus dead wood levels were elevated).

Three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat was mapped using lodgepole pine dominated forests which 

include all lodgepole pine plant association groups (PAGs) in all seral stages (early, mid, late) in 

addition to other PAGs (i.e. mixed conifer and mtn. hemlock) in the early and mid seral stages where 

lodgepole pine is dominant. In addition, stand size had to range from 5-15” dbh and be open or closed 

(based on the canopy cover level thresholds for each PAG) to be mapped as potential habitat. Recent 

fires (less than 5 years old) with stand replacement or mixed severity were also classified as habitat. 

Recent (since 2002) forest management activities that resulted in conditions other than described above 

were removed from mapped potential habitat. 

There are approximately 367,499 acres of potential nesting habitat on the Forest. Currently, 39% of 

potential nesting habitat does not contain any snag habitat >10” dbh making it unlikely to be suitable 

nesting habitat (Table 113). The remaining 61% of the habitat with snags >10”dbh provides varying 

levels of habitat for individuals (Table 113). Approximately 4% of the nesting habitat provides for the 

majority of individuals as this habitat contains snags >10”dbh at densities which are preferred by this 

species for nesting according to the literature.

Table 113: Existing snag distribution >10”dbh in three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat on the 

Deschutes NF (highlighted is the density that the Standard and Guidelines fall within)

Tolerance Level Snags/Acre

Total Forest-wide Potential 

Nesting Habitat Acres % of Habitat

0 0 143,498 39%

0-30% 0-2.5 71,201 19%

30-50% 2.5-13.6 112,784 31%

50-80% 13.6-29.2 24,512 7%

80%+ 29.2+ 15,504 4%

Total 367,499 100%

Based on DecAID Version 2.1: Table EMC_S/L.sp-22
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

308  Ogden Final EIS

Down wood distribution was also analyzed on 367,499 acres of potential nesting habitat on the Forest. 

Currently, 9% of potential nesting habitat does not contain any downed wood habitat >5”dbh making it 

unlikely to be suitable nesting habitat (Table 114). The remaining 91% of the habitat with down wood 

>5”dbh provides varying levels of habitat for individuals (Table 114). 

Table 114: Existing down wood distribution >5”dbh in three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat on the 

Deschutes NF.

Tolerance Level Down Wood/Acre

Total Forest-wide Potential 

Nesting Habitat Acres % of Habitat

0 0 33,709 9%

0-30% 0-6.5 279,740 76%

30-50% 6.5-17 54,050 15%

50-80% 17-32 0 0%

80%+ 32+ 0 0%

Total 367,499 100%

Based on DecAID Version 2.1: Table EMC_S/L.sp-22

The following table displays HRV information for the percent of the landscape with snags >10”dbh in 

the Eastside Mixed Conifer habitat type. Information for the lodgepole pine habitat type was not 

available for either the three-toed or black-backed woodpecker. Therefore, in order to compare habitat 

modeled using DecAID parameters and HRV, the Eastside Mixed Conifer habitat was used.

Table 115: HRV analysis of the Deschutes National Forest with >10”dbh snags in the Eastside Mixed 

Conifer habitat type. (Highlighted represents the Standard and Guidelines)

Habitat 

Type

% of Landscape for Snags >10”dbh

Snags/Acre

Snag 

Density

0 0-6 6-12 12-24 24-36 36+

EMC

HRV 18-25 28-31 15-16 16-22 6-10 5-7

Existing 15% 30% 24% 16% 8% 8%

As shown above, the existing condition (15%) for the percentage of the landscape with no snags is 

slightly less than documented for historic levels (18-25%). In addition, the existing condition for the 6-

12 snags/acre category is also above HRV at 24% and the high snag density category (36+) is slightly 

greater than HRV. This is likely due to a combination of factors. Lodgepole pine, primarily within the 

wilderness areas has been experiencing high mortality due to a mountain pine beetle epidemic which 

results in higher snag levels. In addition, increased stand densities often lead to higher mortality in the 

smaller sized snags due to competition for resources.

The following table displays HRV information for the percent of the landscape with down wood >5”dbh 

in the Eastside Mixed Conifer habitat type (Table 116).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  309

Table 116: HRV analysis of the Deschutes National Forest with down wood >5”dbh in the Eastside 

Mixed Conifer habitat type. (Highlighted represents the Standard and Guidelines)

Habitat 

Type

% of Landscape for Down Wood >5”dbh

Down Wood Percent Cover

Down 

Wood % 

Cover

0 0-4 4-8 8-10 10-16 16+

EMC

HRV 22-30 53-54 13-19 2-3 1-3 0

Existing 3% 57% 30% 6% 4% 0

As shown above, the existing condition (3%) for the percentage of the landscape with no down wood is 

less than documented for historic levels (22-30%). However, the existing conditions for the remaining 

down wood percent cover categories except 16% or greater are above HRV at 57%, 30%, 6%, and 4% 

respectively. All of this suggests that currently within the habitat type there is more dead wood than 

there was historically. This is likely due to a combination of factors. Fire suppression, in addition to 

insect and disease events, has resulted in high mortality in the smaller size class trees. These smaller 

sized trees have a high fall down rates and thus end up as down woody material.

In relation to three-toed woodpecker habitat, approximately 39% of the potential three-toed woodpecker 

nesting habitat contains no snags >10”dbh (Table 117). This is higher than the HRV for the Eastside 

mixed conifer habitat type. When comparing the other ranges, the existing snag density is lower than 

the HRV which has negative implications for the three-toed woodpecker. 

Table 117: Comparison of existing three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat to HRV.

Snag Density (snags/acre)

0 0-29.2 (DecAID) 

0-24 (HRV)

29.2+ (DecAID)

24.0+ (HRV)

HRV 18-25% 59-69% 11-17%

Existing Nesting Habitat 39% 57% 4%

As seen in Table 118, approximately 9% of the potential three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat contains 

no down wood >5”dbh. This is lower than the percent of the landscape with down wood >5”dbh (%) 

displayed for HRV for the Eastside mixed conifer habitat type. When comparing the other down wood 

cover categories to the corresponding HRV categories, the existing condition is higher. This suggests 

the same condition when looking at the entire habitat type; there are currently greater amounts of 

downed wood now than what would have been expected historically which is beneficial for the threetoed woodpecker. 

Table 118: Comparison of existing three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat to HRV.

Down Wood Percent Cover

0 0-6.5 (DecAID)

0-8 (HRV)

6.5+ (DecAID)

8.0+ (HRV)

HRV 22-30% 66-73% 3-6%

Existing Nesting Habitat 9% 76% 15%

Threats 

Potential threats to this species include timber harvesting (removal of habitat), forest fragmentation, fire 

suppression, salvage logging, and suppression logging. Timber harvesting or the removal of old 

lodgepole pine forests and fragmentation results in reduced food availability and may contribute to 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

310  Ogden Final EIS

population declines due to this woodpecker’s association with unpredictable disturbances and having 

large home ranges. 

Salvage logging (cutting of burned trees) and suppression logging (cutting of insect infested trees) 

reduce and remove dead and dying trees on which this species depends. Trees with heartrot are 

necessary for nests and dying and decayed trees are necessary for a sufficient prey base. The 

availability to shifting food resources (wood boring beetles) could be affected by salvage logging of 

large fires and beetle infested stands. In addition, the natural pattern of beetle outbreaks has been 

altered through silvicultural practices. Silvicultural practices include those aimed at maximizing wood 

production and harvesting trees before they are susceptible to bark beetle attacks, and salvage logging of 

beetle-killed, fire-killed, and wind-killed trees. These practices have reduced the occurrence of beetles 

in some areas and may alter three-toed woodpecker distributions.

Ogden Planning Area

Habitat for this species is found in the Newberry National Volcanic Monument (NNVM) and lodgepole 

pine stands within the project area. Assessment of current habitat was similar to that described for the 

black-backed woodpecker. The NNVM serves as the largest tract of continuous habitat for this species.

This is reflected in Tables 119 and 120 where the Upper Paulina Creek Subwatershed shows the least 

amount of area with no snags and no downed logs (31% and 4% of the total habitat, respectively) and 

the most amount of area with the highest levels of snags and downed logs (7% of the Subwatershed at 

the 80%+ tolerance interval; and 36% of the subwatershed at the 30-50% level).

Table 119: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for three-toed woodpeckers for 

snags>10”dbh.

Percent 

of Total 

Nesting 

Habitat

Nesting Acres by Watershed

Tolerance Interval 0 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80+% Total 

Acres

Snags/Acre 0 0-2.5 2.5-13.6 13.6-

29.2

29.2+

10% Long Prairie 17,776 9,694 6,926 304 1,042 35,741

1.5% Finley Butte-Long Prairie 2,459 1,410 1,457 140 121 5,586

1.7% Paulina Peak South 2,546 1,572 1,968 50 172 6,308

8% Lower Little Deschutes River 10,979 7,666 11,183 550 626 31,004

1.2%

Kawak Butte-Little Deschutes 

River 1,483 952 1,833 57 28 4,353 

2.3% Lower Paulina Creek 3,323 2,111 2,597 77 202 8,310 

0.5%

Town of Lapine-Little Deschutes 

River 835 784 256 4 1,879 

1.5% Upper Paulina Creek 1,740 400 2,874 185 373 5,573 

1.3% Wickiup Junction 1,961 1,388 1,224 46 4 4,622 

3% Ogden Planning Area 5,575 3,760 3,388 131 19 12,873

100% Grand Total 143,498 71,201 112,784 24,512 15,504 367,499
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  311

Table 120: Down Wood Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for three-toed woodpeckers 

for logs >5”dbh.

Percent 

of Total 

Nesting 

Habitat

Nesting Acres by Watershed

Tolerance Interval 0 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80+% Total 

Acres

Down Wood Percent Cover 0 0-6.5 6.5-17 17-32 32+

10% Long Prairie 2,822 25,806 7,114

N/A

35,741

2% Finley Butte-Long Prairie 512 4,279 795 5,586 

2% Paulina Peak South 425 4,648 1,235 6,308 

8% Lower Little Deschutes River 3,470 21,779 5,755 31,004

1%

Kawak Butte-Little Deschutes 

River 407 3,253 693 4,353 

2% Lower Paulina Creek 988 5,823 1,499 8,310 

1%

Town of Lapine-Little Deschutes 

River 113 1,743 24 1,879 

2% Upper Paulina Creek 237 3,328 2,008 5,573 

1% Wickiup Junction 876 3,363 383 4,622 

3% Ogden Planning Area 1,966 9,343 1,563 12,872

100% Grand Total 33,709 279,740 54,050 367,49

9

There have been no major disturbances within the project area in the last 10 years. The most recent 

wildfires were in 2000 and there have been a series of salvage sales from the 1980s to late 1990s within 

the project area. This suggests not only that snag densities within three-toed woodpecker habitat have 

been reduced, but also that the years of insect outbreak are well past and the high snag density areas are 

likely >5 years old (past peak use for three toed woodpecker use). Widespread insect attack may be 

over in the planning area, but insects are still creating small pockets of habitat for woodpeckers.

The three-toed woodpecker is often associated in higher elevation lodgepole and montane habitats; the 

most suitable habitat is within the NNVM. Along the western edge of the planning area there is mapped 

habitat although this is largely at the lower elevations three-toed woodpeckers use (the planning area 

goes down to 4240 feet and this species generally ranges above 4500 at least). The habitat along this 

western edge is mixed lodgepole and ponderosa pine, where the lodgepole pine is either in the 

understory or sometimes co-dominant with ponderosa pine. The Historic Range of Variability and Late 

and Old Structure discussion within the Forest Vegetation analysis (page 109) provides an analysis if 

these stands showing that in the 1930s many of these stands were classified within a ponderosa pine 

association. Management activities proposed in this kind of ponderosa and lodgepole mixed stands 

(PP_LP) have different objectives than activities proposed within higher elevation lodgepole pine 

habitat.

Areas proposed for seed tree removal or precommercial thinning in the higher elevation lodgepole pine 

type is not habitat for this species due to their current early seral condition. Many of these areas were 

also salvage logged that probably removed many of the snags at the time. Three-toed woodpeckers 

avoided logged areas even for foraging. It is estimated that a lodgepole pine would not attain the 8” dbh 

commonly used by this species for nesting until the tree was at least 40 years old. Many of these past 

regeneration cuts (seed tree or clear cuts now to be precommercially thinned) and salvage cuts have 

been within the last 30 years. Although the salvage cuts may still have mature trees within them that 

provide habitat (see pictures page 82); the quality of the habitat may be poorer (lower snag density) than 

areas with no prior treatment.

There have been wildfires within the planning area. However, the last wildfire was over 10 years ago 

and earlier discussions show that three-toed woodpecker use of fire areas decrease substantially after 5 

years. Because of this, the effects analysis will focus on the green tree data and not the post fire data. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

312  Ogden Final EIS

Proposed actions are concentrated in the green stands, salvage of snags is not proposed, and three-toed 

woodpeckers are most likely to be impacted in the green stands as opposed to the past fire areas.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

This alternative would provide habitat for three-toed woodpeckers. As a species that can capitalize on 

beetle outbreaks and dense stands with lodgepole and mixed conifer, habitat will be provided in the area 

through time. There will remain other risks to habitat in the area such as wildfire, geothermal 

development, and recreational uses. Wildfire risk and occurrence may be a benefit to this species, but 

only for a short period of time, as literature has shown three-toed woodpecker populations decreasing as 

the age of the snags increase.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 2

This alternative proposes treatments within 6,551 acres of potential habitat. The following is a 

breakdown of the treatments proposed within the different habitat types (PP_LP representing the 

westernmost and lowest elevation stands of habitat, and the MC and LP being the higher elevation 

stands on the eastern side of the planning area near the border with the NNVM).

Table 121: Summary of proposed actions under Alternative 2 within potential three-toed woodpecker 

nesting habitat effects to snag densities

Proposed 

Action

# Ac habitat proposed

Habitat Effects

Tolerance 

Interval (%)

0 0-30 30-50 50-80 80+

Snag Density 

(# 

>10”dbh/acr

e)

0

0-2.5 2.5-13.6 13.6-

29.2 29.2+

LP_1 (seed tree removal) 348 123 216 4 0 previous regeneration harvest 

or salvage harvest within the 

last 30 years reduces the quality 

of the habitat

LP_3 (seed tree harvest) 141 39 73 0 0 Removes current habitat with 

effects lasting 40+ yrs until trees 

mature to ~8”dbh

LP_SPC (precommercial thin in 

plantations)

177 51 143 12 3 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat 

may exist in small pockets.

MC_1 (Thin in mixed conifer to 

minimum stocking levels; favor PP)

452 375 209 16 4 389 acres with dead wood 

habitat have been previously 

treated. Treatment would 

remove habitat.

MC_2 (Thin in mixed conifer to 

lower mgmt stocking levels)

5 1 7 0 0 Habitat quality reduced but may 

not be removed because no 

fuels treatments associated. 

Low dead wood densities may 

reflect prior salvage.

MC_3 (regen cut with reserve trees 

in mixed conifer)

12 6 12 0 0 Habitat removed. 30 acres last 

treated >40 yrs ago

MC_SPC (precommercial thin in 

mixed conifer stands)

63 26 45 16 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat 

may exist in small pockets.

Fuels treatment only 83 73 70 8 0 Previously thinned ~20-30 yrs 

ago. Any current habitat would 

remain post treatment

PP_1 (Thin in ponderosa pine to 

minimum stocking levels; favor PP)

87 81 21 0 0 Any current habitat would be 

removed.

PP_LP_1 (Thin in ponderosa 1252 1022 820 1 0 Any current habitat would be 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  313

pine/lodgepole pine to minimum 

stocking levels; favor PP)

removed.

PP_LP_SPC (precommercial thin in 

ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine 

stands)

14 5 2 0 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat 

may exist in small pockets.

PP_SPC (precommercial thin in 

ponderosa pine stands)

157 85 59 2 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat 

may exist in small pockets.

RHCA_MC (Thin in riparian habitat 

conservation area – mixed conifer 

stands)

19 30 5 0 0 Habitat degraded when 

combined with fuels treatments

RHCA_PP_LP (Thin in riparian 

habitat conservation area –

ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine 

stands)

53 14 6 1 0 Habitat degraded when 

combined with fuels treatments

Total Anticipated Habitat 

Removal

141* 1523 1135 21 4

Degraded 2228* 168 234 5 0

*with a current lack of snag habitat being provided, these acres reflect the impact of creating more resilient stands that will 

preclude the development of habitat for decades. The acres removed are solely the acres of seed tree harvest in currently 

mature stands of lodgepole pine.

For the downed wood component of habitat for this species, the proposed actions will likely degrade 

habitat because of the proposal to remove downed lodgepole pine logs in excess of standards and 

guidelines. As shown earlier, standard and guideline levels provide this component of their habitat at 

the lowest tolerance levels (0-30%). Although three-toed woodpeckers have been shown to forage on 

downed logs only 1% of the time, the high densities shown in tolerance levels may be an indication of 

this species use of dense stands that have undergone a disturbance event (e.g. insects, fire). There is 

uncertainty what role downed log densities play in the quality of three-toed woodpecker habitat other 

than being a structural component present in research of nesting habitat. Three-toed woodpeckers have 

been shown to use downed logs for foraging, therefore a reduction of downed log density, especially 

where it may be at the 50+% tolerance level, would at least degrade habitat.

Table 122: Summary of proposed actions under Alternative 3 within potential three-toed woodpecker 

nesting habitat effects to downed wood density

Proposed 

Action

# Ac habitat proposed

Habitat Effects

Tolerance 

Interval 

(%)

0 0-30 30-50 50-80 80+

Downed 

Log 

Density 

(% cover 

5”dbh)

0

0-6.5 6.5-17 17-32 32+

LP_1 (seed tree removal) 73 503 115 0 0 Previous regeneration harvest or 

salvage harvest within the last 30 

years reduces the quality of the 

habitat

LP_3 (seed tree harvest) 17 118 119 0 0 Removes current habitat with effects 

lasting 40+ yrs until trees mature, die, 

fall

126 ac are proposed for salvage down 

to S&G level (0.3-0.4% cover)

LP_SPC (precommercial thin in 32 277 76 0 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat may 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

314  Ogden Final EIS

Proposed 

Action

# Ac habitat proposed

Habitat Effects

Tolerance 

Interval 

(%)

0 0-30 30-50 50-80 80+

Downed 

Log 

Density 

(% cover 

5”dbh)

0

0-6.5 6.5-17 17-32 32+

plantations) exist in small pockets.

MC_1 (Thin in mixed conifer to 

minimum stocking levels; favor 

PP)

118 731 208 0 0 594 acres are proposed for salvage 

down to S&G level (0.3-0.4% cover) 

Treatment would remove habitat.

MC_2 (Thin in mixed conifer to 

lower mgmt stocking levels)

0 5 7 0 0 Habitat quality reduced but may not 

be removed because no fuels 

treatments associated. Low dead 

wood densities may reflect prior 

salvage. 11 ac are proposed for 

salvage down to S&G level (0.3-0.4% 

cover)

MC_3 (regen cut with reserve 

trees in mixed conifer)

1 22 8 0 0 Habitat removed. 30 acres last treated 

>40 yrs ago. 2 ac are proposed for 

salvage down to S&G level (0.3-0.4% 

cover)

MC_SPC (precommercial thin in 

mixed conifer stands)

3 124 22 0 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat may 

exist in small pockets.

Fuels treatment only 13 209 10 0 0 Previously thinned ~20-30 yrs ago. 

PP_1 (Thin in ponderosa pine to 

minimum stocking levels; favor 

PP)

50 117 23 0 0 Any current habitat would be 

removed. 18 ac are proposed for 

salvage down to S&G level (0.3-0.4% 

cover)

PP_LP_1 (Thin in ponderosa 

pine/lodgepole pine to 

minimum stocking levels; favor 

PP)

677 2404 14 0 0 Any current habitat would be 

removed. 1,488 ac are proposed for 

salvage down to S&G level (0.3-0.4% 

cover)

PP_LP_SPC (precommercial thin 

in ponderosa pine/lodgepole 

pine stands)

7 13 1 0 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat may 

exist in small pockets.

PP_SPC (precommercial thin in 

ponderosa pine stands)

36 240 27 0 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat may 

exist in small pockets. 17 ac are 

proposed for salvage down to S&G 

level (0.3-0.4% cover)

RHCA_MC (Thin in riparian 

habitat conservation area –

mixed conifer stands)

7 37 10 0 0 Habitat degraded when combined 

with fuels treatments 55 ac are 

proposed for salvage down to S&G 

level (0.3-0.4% cover)

RHCA_PP_LP (Thin in riparian 

habitat conservation area –

ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine 

stands)

11 60 3 0 0 Habitat degraded when combined 

with fuels treatments. 75 ac are 

proposed for salvage down to S&G 

level (0.3-0.4% cover)

Total Anticipated Habitat 

Degraded

0* 4372 429 0 0 2386 ac are proposed for salvage 

down to S&G level (0.3-0.4% cover)

*there is not downed log habitat being provided, thus none of this habitat can be degraded. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  315

This alternative proposes the larger number of actions within the largest block of potential three-toed 

woodpecker habitat (in the northeast and southeast sections; see Fig. 75). Not every proposed action 

would remove potential habitat. 

Seed tree removal (LP_1) is proposed within lodgepole dominated stands that were previously cut (in 

late 1990s) with the seed tree prescription. In these areas, the seed tree prescription converted a mature 

stand to a new, open stand of young lodgepole with occasional mature trees left as a seed source. At the 

point of the original harvest the stand was no longer three-toed woodpecker habitat. The new age class 

that is developing is not necessarily mature enough to provide habitat. The remnant overstory contains 

trees with mistletoe, thus the prescription for this alternative is to remove some of the infected overstory 

trees. Two to three overstory trees per acre will be retained within these units in order to provide some 

woodpecker habitat as the new age class of trees approaches maturity and the size more commonly used 

by three-toed woodpeckers (i.e. greater than 8 inches dbh; 40+ years). Although these units do not 

currently provide nesting habitat for three-toed woodpeckers, habitat will develop and the proposed 

actions may aid in the development by removing some of the mistletoe overstory. If the new age class 

becomes heavily infected with mistletoe, it will be unlikely that habitat for this species would develop 

because the trees may become stunted and remain small. Associated with this prescription is thinning 

(LP_SPC) of the new age class to reduce density related mortality and continue the understory on a 

trajectory towards providing habitat. Removal of seed trees will alter habitat for the three-toed 

woodpecker because it does remove some mature lodgepole pine that may serve foraging habitat for 

three-toed woodpeckers. These prescriptions were determined to degrade habitat in the short term but 

habitat would develop in the long-term.

Alternative 2 proposes regeneration cutting (e.g. seed tree cutting: LP_3) within 385 acres of three-toed 

woodpecker habitat. Because this prescription harvests mature lodgepole pine and re-initiates the stand, 

woodpecker habitat is removed. The severity of this impact is reduced by the retention of clumps and 

individual green trees to provide some habitat within the next regenerating stand; however the fact 

remains that it removes current habitat.

This alternative proposes to develop and retain existing clumps of habitat (LP_SPC) on 254 acres of 

lodgepole pine habitat. Emphasis in these areas will be to maintain the existing vertical diversity (i.e. 

multi-storied canopy). These areas had been selectively salvage logged in the early 1990s. These areas 

are relatively unique in the area because although they have been logged before, they also still provide 

some habitat and may provide the best three-toed woodpecker habitat in the short-term. The understory 

will be thinned and continue to develop while the overstory will remain to provide the nesting structure. 

These areas differ from the seed-tree harvest areas by the higher density of retained mature lodgepole 

pines. It is within these units that the most potential in providing near-term habitat.

The largest patches of habitat are in the northeast and southeast corners of the project area; the large 

patches of habitat in the southwest portion of the project area are within the lower elevations, and 

ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine mix that historically were more associated with ponderosa pine; thus the 

highest quality habitat is displayed in Figure 75. In considering the activities within potential nesting 

habitat that degrade or remove snag and/or log habitat, the amount of habitat negatively impacted by 

this alternative represents approximately 42% of the habitat in the project area and 1.5% of the habitat 

on the Forest.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

316  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 75: Alternative 2 affects to potential three-toed woodpecker habitat (based on snags).

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 3

This alternative proposes actions within fewer acres of potential habitat, 6,413 ac (Tables 123 and 124). 

Under this alternative, three-toed woodpeckers would retain a greater block of habitat than under 

Alternative 2 (Figure 76). As a species that can capitalize and utilize large blocks of higher elevation 

lodgepole –associated habitats, Alternative 3 would have fewer impacts to local three-toed woodpecker 

populations.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  317

Table 123: Summary of proposed actions within potential three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat 

effects to snag densities

Propos

ed 

Action

# Ac habitat proposed

Habitat Effects

Tolerance Interval (%) 0 0-30 30-50 50-80 80+

Snag Density 

(# >10”dbh/acre) 0 0-2.5 2.5-13.6 13.6-

29.2 29.2+

LP_1 (seed tree removal) 344 118 214 4 0 Although some mature LP, previous 

regeneration harvest or salvage 

harvest within the last 30 years 

reduces the quality of the habitat

LP_3 (seed tree harvest) 0 0 0 0 0 Removes current habitat with 

effects lasting 40+ yrs until trees 

mature to ~8”dbh

LP_SPC (precommercial thin in 

plantations)

177 51 143 12 3 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat 

may exist in pockets.

LP_4 (Thin in mixed conifer to 

lower mgmt stocking levels)

2 0 0 0 0 Habitat quality reduced but may not 

be removed because no fuels 

treatments associated. Low dead 

wood densities may reflect prior 

salvage

MC_1 (Thin in mixed conifer to 

minimum stocking levels; favor 

PP)

193 145 41 6 0 Treatment would remove habitat.

MC_2 (Thin in mixed conifer to 

lower mgmt stocking levels)

276 221 181 13 0 Habitat quality reduced but may not 

be removed because no fuels 

treatments associated. Low dead 

wood densities may reflect prior 

salvage.

MC_3 (regen cut with reserve 

trees in mixed conifer)

0 0 0 0 0 Habitat removed. 30 acres last 

treated >40 yrs ago

MC_SPC/ MC_LFR 

(precommercial thin or ladder 

fuels reduction in mixed conifer 

stands)

40 24 26 4 0 Regen or salvage cut 20-30 yrs ago. 

Habitat may exist in small pockets.

Fuels treatment only 125 119 109 8 0 Previously thinned ~20-30 yrs ago. 

Any current habitat would remain 

post treatment

PP_1 (Thin in ponderosa pine to 

minimum stocking levels; favor 

PP)

85 60 13 0 0 Any current habitat would be 

removed.

PP_LP_2 (Thin in ponderosa 

pine/lodgepole pine to lower 

stocking levels; favor PP)

1019 815 626 0 0 Any current habitat would be 

removed.

PP_LP_SPC/ PP_LP_LFR 

(precommercial thin in 

ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine 

stands)

247 215 181 6 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat 

may exist in small pockets.

PP_SPC (precommercial thin in 

ponderosa pine stands)

157 85 59 2 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat 

may exist in small pockets.

RHCA_MC (Thin in riparian 

habitat conservation area –

mixed conifer stands)

8 16 1 0 0 Habitat degraded when combined 

with fuels treatments

RHCA_PP_LP (Thin in riparian 

habitat conservation area –

ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine 

stands)

53 14 6 1 0 Habitat degraded when combined 

with fuels treatments

GSHK_Rxs (thinning within 63 63 19 1 0 Treatment would remove habitat.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

318  Ogden Final EIS

goshawk habitat) 

Total Anticipated Habitat 

Removal

0* 1083 699 7 0

Degraded 2789* 369 402 18 0

*with a current lack of snag habitat being provided, these acres reflect the impact of creating more resilient stands that will preclude the 

development of habitat for decades. The acres removed are solely the acres of seed tree harvest in currently mature stands of lodgepole pine.

Table 124: Summary of proposed actions within potential three-toed woodpecker nesting habitat 

effects to downed wood density

Proposed 

Action

# Ac habitat proposed

Habitat Effects

Tolerance Interval 

(%)

0 0-30 30-50 50-80 80+

Downed Log 

Density 

(% cover 5”dbh) 0 0-6.5 6.5-17 17-32 32+

LP_1 (seed tree removal) 72 493 115 0 0 Previous regeneration harvest or 

salvage harvest within the last 30 years 

reduces the quality of the habitat

LP_3 (seed tree harvest) 0 0 0 0 0

LP_SPC (precommercial thin in 

plantations)

32 277 76 0 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat may 

exist in small pockets.

LP_4 (Thin in mixed conifer to lower 

mgmt stocking levels)

0 2 0 0 0 2 ac are proposed for salvage down to 

S&G level (0.3-0.4% cover)

MC_1 (Thin in mixed conifer to 

minimum stocking levels; favor PP)

64 272 49 0 0 18 acres are proposed for salvage down 

to S&G level (0.3-0.4% cover) 

MC_2 (Thin in mixed conifer to lower 

mgmt stocking levels)

48 476 165 0 0 Habitat quality reduced but may not be 

removed because no fuels treatments 

associated. 588 ac are proposed for 

salvage down to S&G level (0.3-0.4% 

cover)

MC_3 (regen cut with reserve trees in 

mixed conifer)

0 0 0 0 0

MC_SPC/ MC_LFR (precommercial 

thin or ladder fuels reduction in mixed 

conifer stands)

1 81 12 0 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat may 

exist in small pockets.

Fuels treatment only 39 311 11 0 0 Previously thinned ~20-30 yrs ago. 

PP_1 (Thin in ponderosa pine to 

minimum stocking levels; favor PP)

43 93 23 0 0 Any current habitat would be removed. 

18 ac are proposed for salvage down to 

S&G level (0.3-0.4% cover)

PP_LP_1 (Thin in ponderosa 

pine/lodgepole pine to minimum 

stocking levels; favor PP)

0 0 0 0 0

PP_LP_2 (Thin in ponderosa 

pine/lodgepole pine to lower stocking 

levels; favor PP)

447 1998 15 0 0 Any current habitat would be removed. 

1,575 ac are proposed for salvage down 

to S&G level (0.3-0.4% cover)

PP_LP_SPC/ PP_LP_LFR 

(precommercial thin in ponderosa 

pine/lodgepole pine stands)

199 444 5 0 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat may 

exist in small pockets. 9 ac are 

proposed for salvage down to S&G level 

(0.3-0.4% cover)

PP_SPC (precommercial thin in 

ponderosa pine stands)

36 240 27 0 0 Regen cut 20-30 yrs ago. Habitat may 

exist in small pockets. 17 ac are 

proposed for salvage down to S&G level 

(0.3-0.4% cover)

RHCA_MC (Thin in riparian habitat 

conservation area – mixed conifer 

stands)

2 17 7 0 0 Habitat degraded when combined with 

fuels treatments 26 ac are proposed for 

salvage down to S&G level (0.3-0.4% 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  319

Proposed 

Action

# Ac habitat proposed

Habitat Effects

Tolerance Interval 

(%)

0 0-30 30-50 50-80 80+

Downed Log 

Density 

(% cover 5”dbh) 0 0-6.5 6.5-17 17-32 32+

cover)

RHCA_PP_LP (Thin in riparian habitat 

conservation area – ponderosa 

pine/lodgepole pine stands)

11 60 3 0 0 Habitat degraded when combined with 

fuels treatments. 75 ac are proposed 

for salvage down to S&G level (0.3-0.4% 

cover)

GSHK_Rxs (thinning within goshawk 

habitat) 

24 58 12 0 0 Treatment would remove habitat. 105 

ac are proposed for salvage down to 

S&G level (0.3-0.4% cover)

Total Anticipated Habitat Degraded *0 3913 394 0 0 2433 ac are proposed for salvage down 

to S&G level (0.3-0.4% cover)

*there is not downed log habitat being provided, thus none of this habitat can be degraded. 

Figure 76: Proposed Alternative 3 activities within potential three-toed woodpecker habitat.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

320  Ogden Final EIS

The amount of habitat impacted by this alternative represents approximately 42% of the habitat in the 

project area and 1.5% of the habitat in the larger cumulative effects area.

Cumulative Effects

A bulk of the habitat for three-toed woodpeckers is found within the NNVM (see Figure 77). Habitat 

within the project area and adjacent areas are still important to retain habitat for movement and dispersal 

across the landscape. Because this species utilizes large patches of active beetle and disease activity, it 

is often difficult to retain habitat while also meeting other landscape objectives such as timber 

management, public protection, and fuels reduction. The effects of the proposed actions are additive to 

the ongoing accomplishment of these other landscape objectives. 

 Figure 77: Three-toed woodpecker habitat (in purple) in relation to the NNVM

In focusing on the lodgepole pine components of habitat, the Alternative 2 removes the most habitat 

(Table 125). In considering the proposal to salvage downed lodgepole logs in excess of standard and 

guidelines, the alternatives are similar. The result is that under either action alternative, habitat for 

three-toed woodpeckers would remain at the lower tolerance levels thus providing habitat for minimal 

populations. 

Table 125: Summary of proposed activities’ effects within higher elevation lodgepole pine habitat by 

alternative. 

Existing/No 

Action

Alternative 

2

Alternative 

3

Acres of Habitat Developed (thin understory maintain 

existing vertical diversity for wildlife LP_SPC)

0 385 385

Acres Altered (move to intermediate LP_1 minimize 

spread of mistletoe LP_SPC)

0 1,076 1,064

Acres Removed (stand initiation LP_3 LP_4) 0 254 2

Acres proposed for salvage down to S&G level (0.3-

0.4% cover)* 

0 2,386 2,433

Cumulative effects may be the further concentration of habitat in land allocations without scheduled 

timber harvest (timber management objectives) and with reduced infrastructure and human use (public 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  321

protection and fuels reduction objectives). Habitat would continue to exist outside of these areas but in 

smaller patches. 

These cumulative effects would contribute to a downward trend, albeit a small contribution (<2% of 

habitat), in local three-toed woodpecker populations because of other landscape objectives that limit or 

discourage large beetle outbreaks. The Ogden project is consistent with the Forest Plan, and thus 

continued viability of three-toed woodpeckers is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

Black-backed Woodpecker

Existing Condition 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Black-backed 

Woodpecker for the Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

The black-backed woodpecker was chosen as a terrestrial management indicator species (MIS) on the 

Deschutes National Forest to represent other species found in the mature and old-growth lodgepole pine 

forest type.

The black-backed woodpecker is a unique species. It is identified it as a focal species for old-growth 

lodgepole pine for the East Cascades Landbird Strategy. Although it is also highly associated with postfire environments, no post-fire environments are proposed for harvest in the planning area. Therefore, it 

will be discussed as it relates to green forests. The black-backed woodpecker and northern three-toed 

woodpecker are similar woodpeckers and are sympatric having overlapping ranges. However, the threetoed woodpecker occupied areas between 4500-5600’ elevation while black-backed woodpeckers 

occupied lower elevations. 

Nests on the Deschutes were found in lodgepole pine trees and 89% of these nests were located in 

lodgepole pine stands with the remaining nests found in mixed conifer stands dominated by lodgepole 

pine (other nest trees include ponderosa pine). Black-backed woodpeckers used stands with a mean 

diameter of 8”dbh for nesting with a mean nest tree diameter of 11”dbh suggesting selection for singlestoried mature/over-mature stands (Tables 126 and 127). Based on these tables, habitat assurance was 

highest (80% tolerance level) with snags at least 13” dbh at a density of 29/acre and high downed wood 

cover. 

Table 126: Tolerance levels for snag size used by black-backed woodpeckers for nesting, roosting, or 

foraging.

Use

Tolerance Levels

30% 

Snag Size (dbh in)

50%

Snag Size (dbh in)

80%

Snag Size (dbh in)

Nesting 8.1- 8.8 10.7-13.2 13.5-20.5

Roosting 6.7-6.9 10.9 16.5-16.8

Foraging 8-12.0 12.1-14.8 18.2-19.2

Table 127: Tolerance levels (T. L.) for dead wood for the black-backed woodpecker as reported in 

DecAID in green stands.

Dead Wood 30% T.L. 50% T.L. 80% T.L.

>10” dbh Snags (#/ac) 2.5 13.6 29.2

>5.5-6” dbh (% cover) 4.7 13 25.1

From DecAID Version 2.1: Tables EMC_S/L.sp-22 and PPDF_S/L.sp-22; Tables EMC_S/L.sp-24 and LP_S/L.sp-24
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

322  Ogden Final EIS

Black-backed woodpeckers use the least decayed trees and snags for nesting (decay class 1). Anecdotal 

observations have been made showing black-backed woodpeckers using a dead portion or wound in an 

otherwise live tree for nesting. This use of green trees is not captured in the DecAID data.

Black-backed woodpeckers foraged in all forest types with lodgepole pine. Mountain pine beetles had 

infested 81% of the trees used for foraging. Recently dead trees (<2 years) or live trees were used for 

foraging, preferring lodgepole pine. This species forages almost exclusively on larvae of bark beetles 

(Scolytidae) and wood borers (Cerambycidae and Buprestridae). Prey is obtained from tree trunks 

primarily by scaling or flaking bark and excavating logs and the bases of large diameter trees. 

Woodpecker use declines 2-3 years after mortality when trees dry out and bark beetles decline. 

Populations are irruptive in response to bark beetle outbreaks in recently fire-killed forests or where 

trees are susceptible to bark beetle attacks due to maturity.

Intra-specific home range overlap between black-backs was very limited or non-existent in central 

Oregon, whereas inter-specific home range overlap between species was common. Black-backed 

woodpeckers have been seen foraging without aggressive displays near three-toed woodpeckers, hairy 

woodpeckers, northern flickers, and three sapsuckers (Williamson’s, red-breasted, and red-naped). 

This woodpecker has a strong association with prey abundance. The importance of food accounts for 

the ephemeral use of areas moving in a short time after disturbance with occupation for only 3-5 years 

while bark beetles and wood borers are abundant. Abundance of wood borers was four times greater at 

occupied territories than available territories and black-backs used territories that contained higher 

densities of mountain pine beetle infected trees than available territories. 

Black-backed woodpecker nesting habitat was mapped using lodgepole pine dominated forests which 

include all lodgepole pine plant association groups (PAGs) in all seral stages (early, mid, late) in 

addition to other PAGs (i.e. mixed conifer and ponderosa pine) in the early and mid seral stages where 

lodgepole pine is dominant. In addition, stand size had to range from 5-20” dbh and be open or closed 

(based on the canopy cover level thresholds for each PAG) to be mapped as potential habitat. Recent 

fires (less than 5 years old) with stand replacement or mixed severity were also classified as habitat. 

Recent (since 2002) forest management activities that resulted in conditions other than described above 

were removed from mapped potential habitat. 

Table 128: Existing snag distribution >10”dbh in black-backed woodpecker nesting habitat on the 

Deschutes National Forest.

Tolerance Interval Snags/Acre Total Forest-wide 

Potential Nesting Acres

% of Habitat

0 0 187,931 42%

0-30% 0-2.5 92,581 21%

30-50% 2.5-13.6 126,256 28%

50-80% 13.6-29.2 24,145 5%

80%+ 29.2+ 15,090 3%

Total 446,003 99%

Based on DecAID Version 2.1: Tables EMC_S/L.sp-22 and PPDF_S/L.sp-22
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  323

Table 129: Existing down wood distribution >5”dbh in black-backed woodpecker nesting habitat on 

the Deschutes NF.

Tolerance Interval % Cover

Total Forest-wide 

Potential Nesting Acres % of Habitat

0 0 48,286 11%

0-30% 0-4.7 300,173 67%

30-50% 4.7-13 89,834 20%

50-80% 13-25.1 7,710 2%

80%+ 25.1+ 0 0%

Total 446,003 100%

Based on DecAID Version 2.1: Table EMC_S/L.sp-24 and LP_S/L.sp-24

The Historical Range of Variability (HRV) analysis shows the amount of nesting habitat for the blackbacked woodpecker and the percent of the landscape with snags >10” dbh falls below historical 

estimates for low to moderate snag densities as well as high density patches. Further analysis using the 

DecAID tolerance intervals indicates that most nesting habitat on forest contains moderate snag 

densities with only 3% providing for the majority of individuals (Table 128; 80%+ tolerance interval). 

In addition, down wood percent cover falls outside historical estimates for down wood cover. Table 129

shows that a majority of the habitat on the forest contains the lower downed log cover, but compared to 

the HRV, there is more habitat with some downed wood cover than none (i.e. the existing percentage at 

0 is less than the HRV percentage with 0). 

Threats

Threats include timber harvest, fire suppression, salvage of fire and bug-killed trees, and conversion of 

mature and old-growth forests to young stands with little decay. 

The black-backed woodpecker is listed as a strategy species for the East Cascades eco-region (in which 

the Deschutes National Forest occurs) within the Oregon Conservation Strategy. Limiting factors 

identified include small, often disjunct populations, specific habitat requirements, and reductions in snag 

availability due to fire suppression and forest health management. There is one conservation action 

listed in the strategy – Maintain areas of high snag density in wildfire and other disturbance areas, 

especially above 5,000 feet, where compatible with other forest objectives (e.g. maintain bark beetle 

infested trees in areas of low risk of insect infestation into adjacent forests).

According to Altman (2000), conservation issues for this species include: reduction in mature and oldgrowth lodgepole pine trees due to logging, insect outbreaks, fire suppression, overstocked stands; and 

salvage logging.

Conservation strategies detailed in Altman (2000) include: in burns and bug-killed forest, leave 

unsalvaged or if salvaging, maintain greater than 40% as unsalvaged; exempt areas from commercial or 

salvage timber management, and manage these areas to retain late-successional characteristics as long as 

possible. These conservation strategies mirror the recommendations set forth in Goggans et al. (1988) 

to exempt areas (956 acres in size) from salvage and commercial logging. 

Ogden Planning Area

Habitat for black-backed woodpeckers is more extensive in the watershed than habitat for three-toed 

woodpeckers because they can use a wider range of habitat types and elevations. There are 

approximately 42,142 acres of potential black-backed woodpecker habitat within the larger 

subwatershed areas and 15,024 acres within the project area (Tables 130 and 131). Upper Paulina Creek 

Subwatershed contains the largest percentage of high snag densities (8% of area meeting 80%+ 

tolerance level), while the Lower Paulina Creek Subwatershed contains the highest downed log levels 

(5% of the area meets the 50-80% tolerance level).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

324  Ogden Final EIS

Table 130: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for black-backed woodpeckers for 

snags>10”dbh.

Percent 

of Total 

Nesting 

Habitat

Nesting Acres by Watershed

Tolerance Interval 0 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80+% Total 

Acres

Snags/Acre 0 0-2.5 2.5-13.6 13.6-29.2 29.2+

11% Long Prairie 24,037 13,437 8,508 339 1,196 47,518

1% Finley Butte-Long Prairie 2,837 1,644 1,422 143 60 6,107 

2% Paulina Peak South 3,255 2,135 2,219 55 215 7,880 

8% Lower Little Deschutes River 13,691 8,919 12,267 825 654 36,357

1%

Kawak Butte-Little Deschutes 

River 2,126 1,280 2,320 99 41 5,866 

2% Lower Paulina Creek 4,105 2,457 2,781 88 102 9,534 

0%

Town of Lapine-Little 

Deschutes River 896 867 282 5 2,050 

1% Upper Paulina Creek 1,731 300 2,584 305 453 5,374 

1% Wickiup Junction 2,395 1,550 1,334 48 4 5,331 

3% Ogden Planning Area 6778 4324 3763 138 21 15,024

100% Forest Wide 187,931 92,581 126,256 24,145 15,090 446,003 

Table 131: Down Wood Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for black-backed woodpeckers 

for logs >5”dbh.

Percent 

of Total 

Nesting 

Habitat

Nesting Acres by Watershed

Tolerance Interval 0 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80+% Total 

Acres

Down Wood Percent Cover 0 0-4.7 4.7-13 13-25.1 25.1+

10% Long Prairie 4,112 31,443 10,685 1,278 0 47,518 

2% Finley Butte-Long Prairie 592 4,559 696 259

N/A

 6,107 

2% Paulina Peak South 526 5,556 1,581 217 7,880 

8% Lower Little Deschutes River 4,537 23,162 7,643 1,014 0 36,357 

1%

Kawak Butte-Little Deschutes 

River 656 3,957 1,116 138

N/A

 5,866 

2% Lower Paulina Creek 1,238 6,113 1,706 477 9,534 

1%

Town of Lapine-Little 

Deschutes River 132 1,609 308 0 2,050 

2% Upper Paulina Creek 205 2,583 2,426 160 5,374 

1% Wickiup Junction 1,017 3,749 409 156 5,331 

3% Ogden Planning Area 2344 10437 1520 724 0 15,024

100% Grand Total

 

48,286 

 

300,173 

 

89,834 

 

7,710 

 

- 446,003 

Similar to the three-toed woodpecker, this species may only be limited by the number of standing snags, 

although this species has been observed utilizing other species of snags than just lodgepole pine. Field 

sampled, current snags levels within the proposed action areas may be meeting the 30% tolerance level 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  325

for this species (1-2 snags greater than 10” dbh per acre and 0.5 snags greater than 20” dbh per acre) 

which is represented in the Forest-wide modeling (Table 129). Field-sampled downed log densities

were 4-30% cover of logs greater than 8” diameter at the large end. Current Screens direction (Standard 

and Guidelines) provides log densities at less than the 30% tolerance level and as a pieces/acre estimate. 

Current log densities averaged over the project area are meeting the 80% tolerance level (Table 130). 

This is not represented in the forest-wide modeling, except in the instance that the Ogden Planning Area 

is made up largely of the Lower Paulina Creek Subwatershed (Figures 58 and 59). Goggans et al. 

(1988) reported the percent cover of downed logs at black-backed and three-toed woodpecker nest sites 

solely as a site characteristic. Therefore, the downed log density may not be a critical component of 

black-backed woodpeckers. 

Habitat for the black-backed woodpecker within the planning appears similar to the three-toed 

woodpecker. This is expected because both are indicators of lodgepole pine habitat. The woodpecker 

habitat with the highest density of dead wood appears to be in the eastern, higher elevation portions 

(Figure 78). The black-backed woodpecker is associated with the lower elevations. As discussed in the 

three-toed woodpecker section and discussed within the Forest Vegetation Analysis, this lower elevation 

habitat is mixed lodgepole and ponderosa pine. This project proposes to manage the area to favor 

ponderosa pine which will reduce lodgepole pine densities and increase resilience to insects for decades. 

These areas would then not provide black-backed woodpecker habitat until lodgepole pine grows back 

in and densities increase beetle risk (20+ years).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

326  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 78: Potential black-backed woodpecker habitat within the Ogden Planning Area

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

By retaining the existing conditions and proposing no new actions, this alternative retains the most 

black-backed woodpecker habitat. This may be a temporary situation, however, because the underlying 

management allocations within project area support active stand management and tree health. These 

allocations would not necessarily support the retention of large blocks of black-backed woodpecker 

habitat, although foregoing fuels reduction in the project area may support a larger wildfire which would 

have some benefit to black-backed woodpeckers.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 2

The conservation strategies for this species emphasize the retention of large blocks of habitat (i.e. no 

salvaging); specifically beetle-killed or fire-killed areas.

Effects of proposed treatments to black-backed woodpeckers are similar to those discussed for threetoed woodpeckers (Alternative 2 proposes actions within 7670 acres of habitat). In many of the areas of 

potential habitat, the proposed action would alter the habitat. In addition to the actions detailed in the 

three-toed woodpecker discussion, the proposed activities within the ponderosa pine and mixed conifer 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  327

associations would alter or remove habitat because lodgepole pine will largely be removed. Habitat 

would still exist in the larger blocks retained for hiding cover or otherwise not proposed for treatment 

(e.g. goshawk PFAs, connectivity corridors).

Table 132: Alternative 2 effects to snag habitat within potential black-backed woodpecker habitat

Proposed 

Activity

Acres of Nesting Habitat Effect

Tolerance Interval (%) 0 0-30 30-50 50-80 80+

Snags >10” dbh/ac 0 0-2.5 2.5-13.6 13.6-29.2 29.2+

Thinning (PP_LP, PP, MC), Seed Tree 

Harvest (LP_3), Regen cut with 

reserve trees (MC_3)

2492 1778 1304 20 4 Habitat removed

Fuels Only (Mow, Mow_UB) 89 77 76 8 0 Altered/Degrade

LP_SPC (precommercial thinning) 184 55 144 12 4 Develop

LP_1 (Seed tree removal), RHCA 

(thin within RHCA)*

457 183 224 10 0 Alter/Degrade

PP PP_LP MC_SPC (precommercial 

thinning)

277 134 116 19 0 No effects to 

snags

Total Removed 2492 1778 1304 20 4 Total removed in 

the 0 column 

reflects mgmt. 

favoring 

ponderosa pine

Total Degraded 546 260 300 18 0

*Thinning within the RHCA is more restrictive than the level of thinning in other plant associations

Alternative 2 would have negative impacts to snag densities in black-backed woodpecker habitat within 

6,722 acres. The commercial thinning proposed favors long-term management of ponderosa pine 

stands. This equates, in the short-term, to low density stands that decrease tree competition and increase 

resilience to fire and insects. This low density/increased resilience does not favor creation of blackbacked woodpecker habitat, a species known to capitalize on insect outbreaks. Habitat would not return 

for decades, when the trees grow larger and an understory re-established that causes increased 

competition again. Regeneration cutting in some mixed conifer stands and lodgepole stands would 

immediately remove habitat for this species for decades, until the stand matures (40+ years). Seed tree 

removal and areas of only fuels treatments are marginal habitat to begin with. Some of these are past 

salvage or regeneration cuts or past thinning units with low canopy closure. Thinning within the RHCA 

is less intensive than other areas proposed; some habitat within these units is likely to remain.

Table 133: Acreage proposed for salvage of lodgepole logs down to Standard and Guideline 

levels under Alternative 2

Tolerance Level 

(%)

Downed wood >5” large end 

density (% cover)

Ac proposed for 

salvage

0 0 345* LP_3, MC_1, PP_LP_1, PP_1, 

PP_SPC, RHCA_MC, RHCA_PP_LP

0-30 0-4.7 2056 LP_3, MC_1, PP_LP_1, PP_1, 

PP_SPC, RHCA_MC, RHCA_PP_LP

30-50 4.7-13 303 LP_3, MC_1, PP_LP_1, PP_SPC, 

RHCA_MC, RHCA_LP_PP, MC_2

50-80 13-25.1 120 LP_3, MC_1, MC_3, RHCA_MC, 

MC_2, PP_LP_1

80+ 25.1+ 0

Total 2,824

*Although the Forest level modeling data does not show downed wood densities, field checking in 2010 determined there were areas with log 

densities above LRMP guidelines
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

328  Ogden Final EIS

The proposal to salvage downed lodgepole pine logs in excess of the LRMP Standard and Guidelines 

(as amended by the Eastside Screens), is a combined action along with the proposed actions (e.g. 

thinning, regeneration harvest, etc.). The acres displayed in Table 133 are not in addition to the acres 

displayed in Table 132; rather it illustrates that of the total nesting habitat being treated, 2,824 of these 

acres will have the connected action within the particular unit to salvage logs. Although it has not been 

demonstrated that black-backed woodpeckers actually use logs for foraging, unlike three-toed 

woodpeckers, it is a component of their habitat and for a species that can capitalize on disturbance 

event, a high-fuel loading may set up conditions for the creation of habitat.

Fuels reduction efforts would reduce likely result in smaller wildfires, although it is noted that wildfires 

would still occur in the project area. This would result in the creation of smaller blocks of habitat for 

this species.

As an indicator of old-growth lodgepole pine habitat, this alternative impacts the most acres of habitat. 

Spatial representation of this would be similar to Figure 75 under the analysis for three-toed 

woodpecker. More acres are removed for this species because the proposed treatments within the lower 

elevation ponderosa pine/lodgepole and mixed conifer more directly impact this species. Three-toed 

woodpeckers, on the other hand, are more associated with the higher elevation lodgepole stands, 

therefore effects analysis focused more on those areas.

Connected actions associated with this alternative and Alternative 3 includes road maintenance and the 

falling of hazard trees. Often the trees utilized by black-backed woodpeckers are the dead and diseased 

trees that contribute to a hazard. If these trees are near a road, they will likely be fallen as a hazard.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 3

Similar to the discussion for three-toed woodpeckers, this alternative retains more lodgepole pine habitat 

(for which it is a focal species) than Alternative 2. This alternative proposes treatments within 7586 

acres of black-backed woodpecker habitat. The difference between alternatives is largely because of the 

increased amount of mature lodgepole treated within Alternative 2.

Table 134: Alternative 3 effects to snag habitat within potential black-backed woodpecker habitat

Proposed 

Activity

Acres of Nesting Habitat

Effect

Tolerance Interval (%) 0 0-30 30-50 50-80 80+

Snags >10” dbh/ac 0 0-2.5 2.5-

13.6

13.6-

29.2

29.2+

Thinning (PP_LP, PP, MC, LP_4, GSHK) 2153 1537 1040 24 0 Habitat removed

Fuels Only (Mow, Mow_UB), PP, 

PP_LP, MC_LFR (ladder fuel 

reduction)

414 366 319 12 0 Altered/De-grade

LP_SPC (precommercial thinning) 182 54 144 12 4 Develop

LP_1 (Seed tree removal), RHCA (thin 

within RHCA)*

439 162 223 5 1 Alter/De-grade

PP PP_LP MC_SPC (precommercial 

thinning)

265 126 93 10 0 No effects to snags

Total Removed 2153 1537 1040 24 0 Total removed in the 0 column 

reflects mgmt. favoring 

ponderosa pine

Total Degraded 853 528 542 17 0

*Thinning within the RHCA is more restrictive than the level of thinning in other plant associations
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  329

Table 135: Acreage proposed for salvage of lodgepole logs down to Standard and Guideline levels 

under Alternative 3

Tolerance Level 

(%)

Downed wood >5” large end 

density (% cover)

Ac proposed for 

salvage

0 0 362* MC_2, PP_LP_2, PP_1, GSHK, 

PP_SPC, RHCA, PP_LP_LFR

0-30 0-4.7 2190 LP_4, MC_1, MC_2, PP_LP_2, PP_1, 

GSHK, PP_SPC, RHCA, PP_LP_LFR

30-50 4.7-13 280 MC_1, MC_2, PP_LP_2, PP_SPC, 

GSHK, RHCA, PP_LP_LFR

50-80 13-25.1 0

80+ 25.1+ 0

Total 2832

*Although the Forest level modeling data does not show downed wood densities, field checking in 2010 determined there were areas with log 

densities above LRMP guidelines

This alternative proposes more area for fuels reduction treatments than Alternative 2. A large portion of 

the areas targeted for fuels reduction may be utilized by black-backed woodpeckers because these lower 

elevation sites are a mix of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine. Lodgepole pine is targeted for removal 

in these units and would not likely survive the underburning proposed. There may be an initial pulse of 

small diameter snags as lodgepole pine are killed by underburning, but the objective is maintain these 

stands as ponderosa pine (i.e. not black-backed woodpecker habitat). The fuels reduction treatments 

may also reduce the size and intensity of a wildfire. This species is known to capitalize on recently 

burned areas. Fuels reduction limit the size of this type of habitat created.

Alternative 3 would retain more areas with higher log densities (50%+ tolerance level) and snag 

densities (30%+ tolerance level) than Alternative 2. These areas are clustered on the eastern side of the 

planning area where most of the lodgepole pine specific treatments are proposed (e.g. LP_1 and LP_3). 

As seen in Table 68 for the three-toed woodpecker, Alternative 3 treats fewer acres overall in this 

habitat type.

Discussion of connected actions can be found under Alternative 2.

Cumulative Effects 

Because habitat for this species tends to be found in lower elevations than the similar three-toed 

woodpeckers, there are more cumulative impacts to this species as a result of the action alternatives. 

Much of the fuels reduction proposal is within potential black-backed woodpecker habitat. These 

treatments, added to the needs for hazard tree falling along roads and trails either from new projects 

(e.g. Lava Rock OHV trails, geothermal development and volcanic monitoring) or ongoing/existing 

projects, will alter or remove potential black-backed habitat. Hazard tree removal along roads and trails 

potentially removes black-backed nest or forage trees. 

Emphasis on growth and development of ponderosa pine, favors the removal of lodgepole pine either 

through thinning or burning. The thinning and fuels treatments proposed, are additive to other similar 

projects in the larger cumulative effects area (i.e. Lava Cast and Prairie Dog projects).

The following table summarizes the overall impacts of the proposed action under each alternative. The 

table focuses on black-backed woodpecker habitat with snag habitat (i.e. tolerance interval >0) and 

actions that would remove habitat.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

330  Ogden Final EIS

Table 136: Summary of black-backed habitat acres removed by Alternative 

Existing Alternative 2 (-3106 ac) Alternative 3 (-2601 ac)

Project Area 8,246 5158 (-38%) 5645 (-31%)

Watersheds 46,145 43,039 (-7%) 43,544 (-6%)

Deschutes National 

Forest

258,072 254,966 (-1%) 255,471 (-1%)

Similar to the discussion under three-toed woodpeckers, the cumulative impact of the proposed 

activities with other ongoing or reasonably foreseeable activities may result in a restriction of large 

blocks of black-backed woodpecker habitat to areas where of reduced human use and access. Together 

with other landscape objectives that limit or discourage large beetle outbreaks, the project would 

contribute to a small negative trend in black-backed woodpecker habitat (1% reduction in habitat) across 

the Forest. The Ogden Project is consistent with the Forest Plan, and thus continued viability of blackbacked woodpeckers is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

Northern Flicker

Existing Condition 

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Northern Flicker for the 

Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

Northern flickers are perhaps the most common resident woodpecker in Oregon, and can use a variety 

of habitat types from wilderness to backyards. They can be found in a range of terrestrial habitats but 

are generally abundant in open forests and forest edges adjacent to open country. They typically avoid 

dense forest. This species is also associated with post-fire environments. 

The northern flicker nests in large diameter snags and live trees with moderate to heavy decay. The 

flicker most frequently nests in ponderosa pine forest types, but will also nest in old-growth to midsuccessional juniper stands. Most studies have found flickers prefer to nest in open habitats 

characterized by low basal area, low canopy cover, large snags, and high herbaceous cover. Ponderosa 

pine stands provided nest sites adjacent to grasslands where flickers foraged. In addition, stands used 

for nesting contained an average of 7% log cover of logs greater than 10”dbh.

The northern flicker is a unique species as it forages almost exclusively on the ground during the 

summer specializing on ants and beetle larvae. Foraging locations are characterized by short vegetation 

and bare ground with tall vegetation being uncommon. Since flickers move along the ground by 

hopping and occasionally running, taller vegetation may make locomotion more difficult and 

energetically costly. Foraging changed to excavating in dead and down woody material in the fall. This 

reflects a decrease in ground insect availability. Flickers also excavated, pecked, gleaned, and harvested 

seeds in live and dead trees, down woody material, and stumps. This variety of foraging strategies 

suggests versatility and the opportunistic nature of this species.

This species provides more cavities than any other cavity nester for secondary cavity users. They 

excavate larger cavities that can be used by a wide variety of species. In addition, they often re-use their 

cavities for nesting (29%) and don’t create new cavities each breeding season. 

Northern flicker nesting habitat was mapped using plant association groups from juniper, lodgepole 

pine, ponderosa pine, grand/white fir, and Douglas-fir in all seral stages. In addition, stand size had to 

be a minimum diameter of 10”dbh or greater in lodgepole pine and 15” dbh in all other PAGs and have 

open stand characteristics (based on the canopy cover level thresholds for each PAG) to be mapped as 

potential habitat. Recent fires (less than 5 years old) with stand replacement or mixed severity were also 

classified as habitat. Recent (since 2002) forest management activities that resulted in conditions other 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  331

than described above were either removed from or added to mapped potential habitat depending on the 

resulting outcome of the treatment.

There are approximately 219,576 acres of potential northern flicker nesting habitat on the Forest. 

Habitat is fairly evenly distributed across the watersheds on forest ranging from 0-13%. Of the four 

sub-watersheds on forest contain 40% habitat or greater, one overlaps, to a small degree, the Ogden 

Planning Area (Town of LaPine – Little Deschutes River). 

The northern flicker is a common resident throughout Oregon. It is secure at the global, national, and 

state scales (NatureServe 2010). The northern flicker is not listed as federally threatened or endangered 

nor is it a candidate species. It is not listed as a sensitive species for Region 6 or for the State of 

Oregon. It is not listed as focal species for the Partners in Flight Conservation Strategy for Landbirds 

on the East-Slope of the Cascades Mountains in Oregon and Washington, nor is it a priority species on 

the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern or as a strategy species in the Oregon Conservation 

Strategy.

Threats

Northern flicker populations have shown declines since 1966 (Sauer et al 2011) however, the specific 

reasons for the declines are largely unknown; hypotheses include competition from European starlings 

for nest cavities which may impact reproductive success, pesticide use may impact ant colonies which 

are a main food source, and introduction of non-native fire ants have the potential to impact native ant 

populations and reduce potential prey resources for this species.

Northern flickers require open space for nesting and foraging. Open space or open habitat has been lost 

due to fire suppression leading to over-stocked stands of trees and shrubs. In addition, this leads to 

increased risk of loss of large trees (future snags) and snags from wildfire. Forest management 

activities also result in the loss of large, decayed snags which reduces potential nesting habitat and could 

lead to further population declines. 

Ogden Planning Area

Northern flickers have been observed within the project area. The following is a breakdown of the 

habitat availability across multiple landscape scales:

Table 137: Northern flicker nesting habitat availability at different landscape scales

Landscape Scale 

overlapping the Ogden 

Project Area

Acres of Northern 

flicker with nesting 

habitat

% WITH Nesting 

Structure

% of Ogden Planning Area 

falling within

Deschutes National Forest 219,575 Planning area habitat 

represents 2% of the Forest

Long Prairie Watershed 8860 4 8

Finley Butte 1,174 12% 7

Paulina Peak South 1,757 11% 1

Lower Little Deschutes 18492 8 92

Kawak Butte 2,579 23% 5

Lower Paulina 2,804 16% 55

LaPine 1,742 48% 1

Wickiup Junction 2595 29 29

Upper Paulina Peak 229 2 2

Ogden Planning Area 6043 (total habitat)

There are some older post-fire environments that can provide large diameter snags for flicker nesting. 

These areas are not proposed for any treatments, thus the effects analysis will focus on live stands.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

332  Ogden Final EIS

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

This alternative would not alter the current lack of habitat for this species. Snags levels may increase in 

areas not thinned, but the majority of tree sizes in these areas are still below the large size utilized by 

this species. As the tree sizes in areas that were previously thinned begin to increase, more habitat for 

this species will develop.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

Actions are proposed within 2,938 and 2,960 acres of potential nesting habitat under Alternatives 2 and 

3, respectively. This equates to approximately 49% of the habitat within the entire planning area and 

1% of the habitat with nesting structure on the Forest.

Both action alternatives will create stand conditions that will favor the creation of habitat for northern 

flickers. Thinning will reduce the competition among the trees for nutrients, allowing for increased 

growth. The larger trees will be retained which will aid in the creation of larger trees that will become 

snags for flicker habitat. Many of the proposed actions focus on the growth and development of 

ponderosa pine. Ponderosa pines have the potential for providing large and long-standing snags. This 

will benefit northern flickers. Currently a bulk of the open nesting habitat with large snags exists within 

the older burn areas. These areas are not proposed for treatment, and although in some of these areas 

the shrub cover is dense, the snags will not be removed thus nesting habitat will remain but there is 

currently not quality foraging for flickers.

Fuels treatments, both mowing and burning, will reduce shrub cover within stands. This will create 

more open foraging conditions for this species.

Hazard tree falling is the only proposed action (a connected action) that has the potential to negatively 

impact flickers. Snags used by flickers for nesting may be deemed a hazard to humans working or 

recreating in the project area and would be cut.

Cumulative Effects 

Although the Town of LaPine-Little Deschutes River Subwatershed overlaps the planning area, only 3% 

of the total northern flicker habitat on the Forest is within the Ogden Planning Area (Table 80). The 

proposed actions have cumulative benefits to northern flickers when considering that many of the recent 

and ongoing projects within the subwatersheds, especially within the ponderosa pine habitat types, have 

the objective to sustain and develop ponderosa pine habitat. The flicker can utilize open habitats, thus 

the density of trees after thinning would not likely have impacts to their use of the habitat. Northern 

flicker cavities will be re-used by secondary cavity users such as American kestrels, northern flying 

squirrels, bats, mice, and nuthatch species (Gentry and Vierling, 2008). Benefits to northern flicker 

habitat will ultimately have benefits to other species of wildlife too.

The falling of hazard trees poses the greatest risk to flicker habitat. The proposed actions are 

cumulative to other ongoing and foreseeable actions that will require the falling of hazard trees. The 

proposed actions will place workers within stands that may contain snags identified as hazard trees, as 

well as units placed next to roads which will then be looked at for hazards. Hazard tree falling is 

ongoing in the project area as part of road and developed recreation site maintenance (including trails).

Because of this species versatility in its use of habitats, the recruitment of large diameter snags as results 

of the proposed actions, and that it is ranked as secure in Oregon (Natureserve 2011) coupled with the 

risk of falling snags that pose a hazard, the proposed actions would cumulatively have a neutral effect to 

northern flicker habitat, and would not contribute to a negative trend in viability on the Deschutes 

National Forest .

Pileated Woodpecker

Existing Condition 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  333

The following information is summarized from the Species Assessment for the Pileated Woodpecker for 

the Deschutes National Forest (USDA Forest Service 2012).

The pileated woodpecker is considered a keystone habitat modifier in the Pacific Northwest. A 

keystone habitat modifier is a species whose activities substantially alter the physical structure of the 

environment influencing both available habitat for other species and various ecosystem processes. The 

pileated woodpecker is a keystone habitat modifier because of the effects of its excavations on habitat 

for many other species. This species provides nesting and roosting habitat for secondary cavity users 

through the excavation of nest cavities and cavity starts, excavation of openings into roost cavities, and 

foraging excavations.

Pileated woodpeckers show a preference for grand fir forest types in stands with two or more canopy 

layers, higher basal area, and larger trees and snags than the surrounding forests. The density of snags 

>20”dbh was the best predictor of pileated woodpecker density. In addition, logging activity, canopy 

closure, and successional stage were also significant indicators for this species. Pileated woodpecker 

abundance increased as the amount of forests with no logging, >60% canopy closure, and old growth 

increased.

Nest stands were found to have significantly more large diameter (>21” dbh) live trees and snags. 

These nest stands were more frequently found in older forests although this species will use a variety of 

stand sizes if large snags and downed wood are available.

This species selected for the largest dead trees available, generally >54 cm or > 21” dbh. Ponderosa 

pine and western larch were favored nest tree species. Lodgepole pines are avoided because they are 

too small to accommodate a pileated nest cavity. Pileated woodpecker cavities average 8” wide by 22” 

deep, therefore needing a large diameter tree to accommodate this large nest. In addition, grand fir and 

Douglas-fir are avoided because they retain their bark and limbs. Numerous limbs may hinder 

movement up or down the trunk and may enhance access by predators. Grand fir commonly suffers 

heart rot resulting in hollow trees that may not be sound enough to accommodate a large nest. However, 

these may be fine to roost in (see roosting habitat description below). Ponderosa pine tends to decay 

primarily in the thick sapwood layer which is more suitable for pileated nests.

Nesting areas are fairly stationary over time if habitat hasn’t been altered and is likely these areas may 

be occupied subsequently by offspring or dispersing birds. Pileated woodpeckers continued to occupy 

landscapes with extensive tree mortality from insect outbreaks 15 years after the initial outbreak. 

Nesting density was positively associated with the amount of area in late structural stages and 

negatively associated with the amount of area in regeneration harvest or ponderosa pine forest types. 

These areas lack an abundance of snags and down woody material needed for foraging. Insect 

outbreaks are a natural disturbance event that are integral in maintaining nesting, roosting, and foraging 

habitat as it provides a supply of down wood. 

The pileated woodpecker forages on logs, live trees, and. Grand fir forest types are preferred with 64% 

of the feeding sites occurring in the forest type in northeastern Oregon. Feeding sites in dead down 

material were in logs with decay and the diameter, length, and tree species at these feeding sites differed 

from available down material. They used Douglas-fir and western larch logs >25 cm dbh (9.8” dbh) and 

15 meters (49.2 feet) long disproportionately in northeastern. Carpenter ants frequently nest in larger 

logs, stumps, and snags >30cm dbh (11.8” dbh). Smaller material lacks permanence, decays faster, and 

forces ants to move more frequently. Pileateds foraged extensively on downed structures with the 

average diameter and length with recent excavations ranged from 20-22cm dbh (7.8-8.6” dbh) and 5-9 

meters (16-29.5 feet) long respectively. Pileated woodpeckers also selected for larger and longer logs 

and logs greater in diameter and length provide better habitat for wood-dwelling arthropods over a 

longer period than smaller logs. The selection for large diameter snags provides a greater volume of 

carpenter ants and beetle larvae. Ants need room for colony growth and beetle larvae feed on dead 

wood for several years before pupating into adults. Therefore, larger structure may provide better 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

334  Ogden Final EIS

habitat for wood-dwelling arthropods for a longer time than smaller structure. In addition, most 

foraging occurred in decay class 2 and 3 snags which might provide better habitat for prey species. 

Pileated woodpeckers expend considerable energy searching for suitable foraging structures and 

excavating to obtain prey. Therefore, to maximize energy returns, birds may select areas with high 

densities of potential foraging structures and wood-boring arthropods may be more abundant in these 

areas.

Adults always roosted in a cavity at night. Roost trees are typically large diameter live or dead trees 

with hollow interiors. Of 60 trees climbed, 95% had a hollow interior created by decay rather than 

being excavated while the remaining 5% had been excavated. The majority of roost trees were found in 

live grand fir (40%). Dead ponderosa pine, grand fir, western larch, and Engelmann spruce as well as 

live western larch were also used as roost trees. The average diameter and height measured 71 cm dbh 

(27.9” dbh) and 22 meters (72 feet) respectively. Each tree had 1 to 16 entrance holes in the trunk that 

pileated woodpeckers excavated to reach the hollow interior. The majority (80%) of roost trees had 

more than 1 entrance hole and the majority of those trees with only one entrance had broken tops which 

allowed birds to enter or exit at this point as well. The inside of the hollow chamber was fairly large, 

averaging 11” in diameter and 14 feet long. Indian paint fungus conks were seen on 92% of roost trees 

in grand fir. This fungus is a reliable indicator of the presence of advanced decay. In addition, over 

80% of roosts in live trees had an old injury above the roost hole. It takes about 20 years to create a 

hollow chamber so it’s important to retain these trees.

Roost trees were surrounded predominantly by old-growth stands of grand fir with little to no logging. 

Approximately 88% of the roost trees were in grand fir stands, 72% were found in old-growth, 73% in 

stands with >60% canopy cover, and 82% in stands that were unlogged or had only been high-graded. 

The forest type and successional stage surrounding roost trees differed from random selection with 

grand fir and old-growth used in higher proportion than expected. Logging activity differed between 

roosts and available habitat. Unlogged or high-graded stands were preferred over partial overstory 

removals or shelterwood cuts. In addition, canopy cover also differed from random selection where 

denser stands were preferred (average canopy cover equaled 62.5%). 

Roost trees showed differences from nest trees in tree species, diameter, and the number of entrance 

holes they had. Roost trees were primarily in grand fir, were smaller in size, and had more entrance 

holes. But the main difference was roost trees were in hollow trees primarily while nests were found in 

trees with solid wood. 

Pileated woodpecker nesting habitat was mapped using mixed conifer dominated forests which include 

all mixed conifer and mountain hemlock plant association groups (PAGs) in mid and late seral stages. 

In addition, stand size had to be a minimum diameter of 15”dbh or greater and have dense stand 

characteristics (based on the canopy cover level thresholds for each PAG) to be mapped as potential 

habitat. Recent fires (less than 5 years old) with stand replacement severity were removed as habitat. 

Recent (since 2002) forest management activities that resulted in conditions other than described above 

were also removed from mapped potential habitat. 

There are approximately 178,480 acres of potential nesting habitat on the Forest. Currently, 3% of 

potential nesting habitat has no snags >10”dbh and 16% of potential nesting habitat has no snags 

>20”dbh making it unlikely to be suitable nesting habitat (Tables 138 and 139). The remaining 97% of 

the habitat with snags >10”dbh and 84% of the habitat with snags >20”dbh provides varying levels of 

habitat for individuals. Approximately 2% of the nesting habitat provides for the majority of individuals 

as this habitat contains snags >20”dbh which are preferred by this species for nesting according to the 

literature (see Table 137: 80%+ tolerance interval).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  335

Table 138: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for pileated woodpeckers for snags>20”dbh.

Percent 

of Total 

Nesting 

Habitat

Nesting Acres 

Tolerance Interval 0 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80+% Total 

Acres

Snags/Acre 0 0-3.5 3.5-7.8 7.8-18.4 18.4+

0% Long Prairie 38 31 8 0 0 78

1% Lower Little Deschutes River 362 1,515 694 0 0 2,572

0% Ogden Planning Area 2 18 0.2 0 0 20.2

100% Forest Total 29,405 63,658 53,580 28,676 3,161 178,480

From DecAID Version 2.1: Tables EMC_S/L.sp-22 and PPDF_S/L.sp-22

Table 139: Snag Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for pileated woodpeckers for 

snags>10”dbh.

Percent 

of Total 

Nesting 

Habitat

Nesting Acres 

Tolerance Interval 0 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80+% Total 

Acres

Snags/Acre 0 0-14.9 14.9-30.1 30.1-

49.3

49.3+

0% Long Prairie 1 73 2 1 0 78

1% Lower Little Deschutes River 55 2,376 137 4 0 2,572

0% Ogden Planning Area 1 19 0.2 0.2 0 20.2

100% Forest Total 6,136 85,881 66,372 13,007 7,084 178,480

From DecAID Version 2.1: Tables EMC_S/L.sp-22 and PPDF_S/L.sp-22

Down wood distribution was also analyzed on 178,480 acres of potential nesting habitat on the Forest. 

Currently, 6% of potential nesting habitat does not contain any downed wood habitat making it unlikely 

to be suitable nesting habitat (Table 140). The remaining 94% of the habitat with down wood >5”dbh 

provides varying levels of habitat for individuals. 

Table 140: Down Wood Distribution by Watershed by Tolerance Levels for pileated woodpeckers for 

down wood >5”dbh.

Percent 

of Total 

Nesting 

Habitat

Nesting Acres 

Tolerance Interval 0 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80+% Total 

Acres

Down Wood Percent Cover 0 0-4 4-4.5 4.5-5.1 5.1+

0% Long Prairie 0 63 0 7 7 78

1% Lower Little Deschutes River 38 1,251 76 937 270 2,572

0% Ogden Planning Area 0.4 13 7 1 0 21.4

100% Forest Total 11,302 93,567 11,339 12.529 49,743 178,480

From DecAID Version 2.1: Tables EMC_S/L.sp-24

As seen in Table 140, approximately 16% of the potential pileated woodpecker nesting habitat as 

mapped contains no snags >20” dbh. This is below the percent of the landscape with snags >20”dbh 

(32-44%) displayed for HRV for the eastside mixed conifer habitat type (Table 141), meaning there is 

more potential habitat providing some level of snags than there may have been historically. When 

comparing the 0-7.8 snags/acre category to the corresponding 0-8 snags per acre HRV category, the 

existing condition (66%) is slightly higher than the HRV values of 43-57%. The same is true for 

percent of the landscape with slightly higher snag densities. The existing condition for percent of the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

336  Ogden Final EIS

landscape with 7.8+ snags/acre (18%) is slightly higher than the corresponding HRV values of 8+ snags 

per acre (10-15%) which is beneficial for the pileated woodpecker. 

Table 141: Comparison of existing pileated woodpecker nesting habitat to HRV.

Snag Density (snags/acre)

0 0-7.8 (DecAID) 

0-8.0 (HRV)

7.8+ (DecAID)

8.0+ (HRV)

HRV 32-44% 43-57% 10-15%

Existing Nesting Habitat 16% 66% 18%

Down Wood

As seen in Table 142, approximately 6% of the potential pileated woodpecker nesting habitat as mapped 

contains no down wood. This is lower than the percent of the landscape with down wood >5”dbh (%) 

displayed for HRV for the Eastside mixed conifer habitat type, meaning there is more potential habitat 

providing some level of downed wood than there may have been historically. When comparing the 0-

4.5 percent down wood cover category to the corresponding 0-4 percent down wood cover HRV 

category, the existing condition (58%) is slightly higher than the HRV values of 53-54%. The same is 

true for percent of the landscape with higher down wood percent cover. The existing condition for 

percent of the landscape with 4.5+ percent down wood cover (35%) is more than the corresponding 

HRV values of 4+ percent down wood cover (16-25%) which is beneficial for the pileated woodpecker. 

Table 142: Comparison of existing pileated woodpecker nesting habitat to HRV.

Down Wood Percent Cover

0 0-4.5 (DecAID)

0-4 (HRV)

4.5+ (DecAID)

4.0+ (HRV)

HRV 22-30% 53-54% 16-25%

Existing Nesting 

Habitat

6% 58% 35%

Population trend data from the North American Breeding Bird Surveys indicate the pileated woodpecker 

shows an increasing population trend in both the Great Basin and Oregon. The Partners in Flight 

species assessment database indicates this is a Regional Species of Concern. The broad-scale source 

habitat analysis conducted by Wisdom et al. (2000) indicated that there have been basin-wide increases 

of source habitat for the pileated woodpecker in the interior Columbia Basin. Increases in source habitat 

have occurred in both Ecological Reporting Units (ERUs) that cover the Deschutes National Forest due 

to a shift from shade intolerant to shade tolerant trees species within the lower montane and montane 

communities.

The Historical Range of Variability (HRV) analysis shows the amount of nesting habitat for the pileated 

woodpecker and the percent of the landscape with snags >20” dbh falls outside historical estimates for 

moderate to high snag densities. Further analysis using the DecAID tolerance intervals indicates that 

most nesting habitat on forest contains moderate snag densities with only 2% providing for the majority 

of individuals. In addition, down wood percent cover falls outside historical estimates for down wood 

cover with the majority of the forest containing moderate to high down wood densities. 

Threats

Threats to the pileated woodpecker can be classified into four main categories – predation risk, timber 

harvest/modification of habitat, human threats, and other. Known predators include northern goshawks 

(Accipiter gentilis), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), great 

horned owl (Bubo virginianus), American marten (Martes Americana), gray fox (Urocyon 

cinereoargenteus), and barred owl (Strix varia). Pileated woodpeckers readily leave or abandon roost 

trees when predators are near and rarely re-use these structures.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  337

Timber harvest poses the most significant threat to the pileated woodpecker (Bull and Jackson 1995, 

Marshall et al. 2003). The removal of large diameter live and dead trees, down woody material, and 

canopy closure eliminates nest and roost sites, foraging habitat, and cover. In addition, forest 

fragmentation likely reduces population density and makes birds more vulnerable to predation as they 

fly between forest patches. Conversion of stands dominated by grand fir to early seral species like 

ponderosa pine reduces the amount of suitable habitat. 

In addition, prescribed fire may eliminate or reduce the number of snags, logs, and cover. Prescribed 

fire and mechanical fuel reduction treatments were found to reduce the amount of foraging habitat 

(snags, stumps, and down logs) and abundance of ants (prey) of the pileated woodpecker in the short 

term (1 to 3 years). Firewood collection and snag felling along roadsides also reduces the availability of 

snags for nesting and roosting. Snag numbers were lower adjacent to roads due to removal for safety 

considerations, removal as firewood, and other management activities. 

Ogden Planning Area

Habitat for this species is naturally limited within the planning area due to the lack of mixed conifer (fir 

and pine) stands. This type of habitat is restricted to a narrow elevational band on the flanks of 

Newberry Crater. The limited extent of this habitat type, coupled with the requirement for large trees, 

further supports the limited potential for pileated woodpeckers. Habitat (20-21 ac) for this species is 

found is small scattered parcels.

Current snags estimates in proximity to the proposed action acres suggest that current dead wood levels 

are less than the 30% tolerance level for this species (Tables 138 and 139). There is a general lack of 

large diameter snags within the project area. There are recently burned areas that have snags but not the 

canopy closure often associated with this species. Only small pockets of potential habitat exist mainly 

within the narrow band of mixed conifer habitat in the eastern portion of the project area. This is also 

true for habitat over the watersheds (i.e. habitat in the mixed conifer associations). A majority of the 

mapped potential habitat for pileated woodpeckers on the easternmost portion of the Forest is within the 

Newberry National Volcanic Monument.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1

This alternative would not alter the current lack of habitat for this species. Snags levels may increase in 

areas not thinned, but the majority of tree sizes in these areas are still below the large size utilized by 

this species. As the tree sizes and crowns in areas that were previously thinned begin to close, more 

habitat for this species will develop.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

The alternatives propose treatments within approximately 1 to 2 acres (Alternative 2 and 3, respectively) 

of mapped potential pileated habitat. A majority of the habitat contains dead wood habitat at the lower 

tolerance levels (0-30% tolerance interval). Treatments include commercial thinning favoring 

ponderosa pine retention, mowing with underburning, and salvage of lodgepole pine logs in excess of 

Standard and Guideline levels. Some of the potential pileated woodpecker habitat overlaps nesting 

habitat for the known goshawk pairs. Goshawks are a known predator of pileated woodpeckers, 

therefore this may further reduce the suitability of the habitat. 

The proposed actions will retain large trees and snags (with the exception if the tree or snag is deemed a 

hazard to human safety). As discussed under the Williamson’s sapsucker, proposed thinning is 

anticipated to make the stand more resilient to insects and disease for approximately 20 years. In that 

time it is also anticipated that tree diameter growth will providing larger trees and crowns will close. 

This will help create pileated woodpecker nesting habitat (i.e. larger snags) in the future. However if 

large trees and snags are lost as hazard trees, it will take multiple decades for them to be replaced.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

338  Ogden Final EIS

Cumulative Effects – Pileated Woodpecker

Cumulatively, pileated woodpecker habitat is limited in the larger area. Mixed conifer habitat forms a 

thin band on the western flank of Newberry Crater, thus pileated woodpecker habitat is naturally limited 

in the area. Ongoing and recent treatments within the mixed conifer habitat have created conditions to 

allow larger tree sizes, however it will still be many years before pileated woodpecker habitat is created. 

Pileated woodpeckers utilize stands with higher canopy closure and large snags. The proposed actions, 

along with recent timber sales, favor the dominance of ponderosa pine. As the larger pine decline or 

die, nesting habitat for pileated woodpeckers will develop. However, ponderosa pine favors a less dense 

stand condition and this species utilizes stands with higher canopy closures. Therefore, although the 

larger structure may develop, the resulting habitat may not be of the highest quality because the stands 

are more open.

There are areas in the mixed conifer habitat that are not part of any currently proposed or ongoing 

silvicultural treatments; however some of the components of woodpecker habitat are at risk to hazard 

tree falling, recreational trail building, and geothermal development/monitoring. These recreational and 

geothermal uses are different from the silvicultural treatments because they will not provide any 

woodpecker habitat. Each of these individual actions is small, but they are widespread throughout the 

cumulative effects area to have widespread impacts to habitat. 

Natureserve ranks this species as “apparently secure” in Oregon. The proposed actions would add few 

negative impacts to the already small habitat levels within the project area and watersheds. The 

proposed actions, together with other ongoing forest management actions, would recruit more large 

snags into the landscape after several decades. Because this project impacts less than 1% of the habitat 

across the Forest, the overall direct, indirect and cumulative effects will result in a small negative trend 

of habitat. The Ogden Project is consistent with the Forest Plan, and thus continued viability of pileated 

woodpeckers is expected on the Deschutes National Forest.

Table 143: Summary of effects to selected wildlife species

Species Affected Habitat 

Attributes Determination/ Trend Comments

Fisher Canopy closure, mixed 

conifer habitat, dead 

wood habitat

May impact individuals or habitat but 

are not likely to contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing

Limited by lack of high 

canopy closure stands with 

large wood

White-headed 

woodpecker

Large snags (current 

and developing)

May impact individuals or habitat but 

are not likely to contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing. Small 

negative trend

Limited by lack of large 

snags

Lewis’ 

woodpecker

Large snags (current 

and developing)

May impact individuals or habitat but 

are not likely to contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing. Small 

negative trend

Limited by lack of large 

snags

Crater Lake 

tightcoil

Riparian Habitat May impact individuals or habitat but 

are not likely to contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing

Alt 2 treats an extra area 

along the creek

Harlequin duck Riparian Habitat May impact individuals or habitat but 

are not likely to contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing

Alt 2 treats an extra area 

along the creek

Northern 

waterthrush

Riparian Habitat May impact individuals or habitat but 

are not likely to contribute to a trend 

towards federal listing

Alt 2 treats an extra area 

along the creek

Goshawk Actions within 

territories that open up 

canopies; downed log 

Small negative trend Alt 3 treats within 

alternate nest stands
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  339

Species Affected Habitat 

Attributes Determination/ Trend Comments

removal affects prey 

habitat

Cooper’s hawk Reduction of canopy 

closure and tree density

Small negative trend Limited by lack of high 

density stands with larger 

trees

Sharp-shinned 

hawk

Reduction of canopy 

closure and tree density

Small negative trend Limited by lack of high 

density stands

Elk/Deer Reduction of hiding 

cover

Neutral to small negative trend Fuels treatments largely 

remove cover; cumulative 

impacts with rec use and 

geothermal development

Marten Actions that open up 

canopies; downed log 

removal affects habitat

Small negative trend Limited by lack of high 

canopy closure area and 

large downed logs

Pygmy 

nuthatch

Snag habitat Conservation issues and strategies 

addressed except for large snag 

creation in short-term

Limited by lack of large 

snags

Brown creeper Actions that treat 

within mixed conifer 

favoring ponderosa 

pine

Conservation issues and strategies 

largely addressed, a lack of Douglasfir limits attainment of all strategies

Limited by lack of large 

trees in mature mixed 

conifer habitat

Flammulated 

owl

Large snag habitat Conservation issues and strategies 

addressed except for large snag 

creation in short -term

Limited by lack of large 

snags in ponderosa pine 

habitat

Hermit thrush Actions that treat 

within mixed conifer 

favoring ponderosa 

pine

Conservation issues and strategies 

largely not addressed.

Limited by lack of mature, 

multi-storied mixed conifer 

habitat

Williamson’s 

sapsucker

Large snag habitat Small negative trend Limited by lack of large 

snags 

Hairy 

woodpecker

Small negative trend Limited by lack of snags

Three-toed 

woodpecker

Actions increase 

resilience to insect 

outbreaks may limit 

habitat development

Small negative trend Alt 2 proposes regen. 

Harvest within woodpecker 

habitat

Black-backed 

woodpecker

Actions increase 

resilience to insect 

outbreaks may limit 

habitat development

Small negative trend Alt 2 proposes regen. 

Harvest within woodpecker 

habitat

Northern 

flicker

Overall habitat 

improvement

Neutral trend Limited by lack of large 

snags

Pileated 

woodpecker

Large snag habitat and 

opening of canopies in 

mixed conifer habitat

Small negative trend Limited by lack of large 

snags and reduction of firs
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

340  Ogden Final EIS

Dead Wood Habitat (Snags, Logs, and Green Tree Replacements)

Existing Condition 

Dead wood habitat as it relates to a specific species’ use (e.g. nesting, roosting, foraging, or denning) 

has been addressed under each species-specific analysis. Each analysis referenced the Species 

Assessment Report for the Deschutes National Forest which, in turn, used the best available science to 

describe habitat requirements and conditions. It also included a discussion on the use and interpretation 

of the DecAID tool as well as the limitations of the current Forest Plan Standard and Guidelines, as 

amended.

The species-specific analyses did not, however, address how the proposed project addresses specifically 

address the Standard and Guidelines for dead wood. Although these Standard and Guidelines exist as a 

measure to address wildlife species needs, they reference back to the measure of “maximum population 

potential” (or biological potential) which has since been determined to be a flawed technique. This 

section will address effects to dead wood levels as they relate to Standards and Guidelines.

Snags 

Information in regards to existing snag and log densities and sizes were gathered through field sampling 

and aerial insect and disease maps.

The following is a summary of the Standards and Guidelines for snags (Appendix A of the Wildlife 

Report gives a full description as to how these numbers were determined): 

Lodgepole pine: 6 per acre >10” dbh

Ponderosa pine, mixed conifer: 4/acre (3 /acre > 10” dbh; 1/ac >20”dbh)

Forest and Watershed level information was gathered from the Forest-wide analysis for MIS species. 

As shown earlier, the Ogden Planning Area overlaps the Long Prairie and Lower Little Deschutes 

watersheds. The Forest level data was summarized using the habitat types and density groupings found 

within the DecAID inventory data.

The DecAID analysis tool relies on a landscape level approach. As detailed in Appendix 3, the 

information gathered from Forest-level data (FVS and GNN data) by watershed was used for the snag 

portion of this analysis. Within the Ogden Planning Area there is ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine, and 

eastside mixed conifer habitat. There is no montane mixed conifer habitat within the planning area, thus 

the analysis will not address this habitat type because there are no actions that would impact dead wood 

in this habitat type.

Ponderosa pine and Lodgepole pine habitat types are the largest represented types within the proposed 

treatment areas and watershed (Table 144, Figure 79). The inventory data within the specific habitat 

types displayed in DecAID were used to analyze the current condition within the planning area in its 

relation to meeting Standards and Guidelines. In characterizing the landscape, several links within the 

DecAID advisor were used including “Relative potential for dead wood within wildlife habitat types as 

influenced by fire regime, sub-series, and topographic position” found in the DecAID Implementation 

Guide. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  341

Table 144: Acres of Wildlife Habitat watershed and the Relative Potential for Dead Wood Influenced 

by Fire Regime and Topographic Position. 

Habitat Type Potential Dead 

Wood Levels

Total Acreage in 

Watersheds

% Watershed Within 

Habitat Type

Lodgepole (LP)

Long Prairie 

Lower Little Deschutes

High

46,916

27,533

27

52

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir

(PPDF)

Long Prairie 

Lower Little Deschutes

Low-High

27,343

37,248

16

34

Eastside Mixed Conifer – East 

Cascades Blue Mts (EMC_EB)*

Long Prairie

Lower Little Deschutes

Low-Moderate

2036

3877

1

3

*Appropriate landscape levels to use all of the data is at the 20,000 acres scale or larger. For the Ogden Planning 

Area this may mean incorporating multiple watersheds.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

342  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 79: Spatial display of Ogden Project Area in relation to Watersheds and Habitat Types

Table 144 shows that a majority of the watersheds (Long Prairie watershed and Lower Little Deschutes 

watershed) are providing some level of snag habitat (0-6/ac or 0-4/acre) with few areas exceeding 

standard and guidelines (>4/ac or >6/ac). The exception is the ponderosa pine habitat, where at least 

half of the acres within this habitat type are not providing snag habitat (56% of the Long Prairie and 

50% of the Lower Little Deschutes); thus not meeting standard and guidelines. However, this is also 

true for the historic range of variability. Areas with high densities of snags, regardless of habitat type, 

are relatively rare in the watershed. Therefore habitats for species associated with high densities of 

snags are also relatively rare in the watershed (see species analyses). This is also reflected in the 

historic range of variability estimates at the highest snags densities.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  343

Table 145: Current distribution of snag densities (# snags >10 in. dbh/acre) within the watersheds 

(Long Prairie, Lower Little Deschutes, respectively) represented by percent of the habitat type with 

each density.

DecAID Habitat

Snag Density (# per acre)

0 0-6 6-12 12-24 24-36 36+

EMC

Current (%) 41, 12 45,61 8, 14 1, 8 0, 3 5, 1

HRV (%) 18-25 28-31 15-16 16-22 6-10 5-7

LP

Current (%) 53, 38 38, 37 7, 20 0, 3 2, 1 0, 1

HRV (%) 23-32 12-17 12-20 11-15 5-11 5-9

PPDF

0 0-4 4-12 12-24 24-36 36+

Current (%) 56, 50 31, 37 12, 12 0,1 1,0 0,0

HRV (%) 55-61 19-27 13-15 3-5 0-1 0-1

Most of the within the proposed action areas are within habitat types with a moderate to high frequency 

fire regime. There is a high degree of topography from gentle slopes to draws and canyons with north 

and south-facing aspects. This suggests that the relative potential levels of dead wood would be low to 

high. The higher potential (for dead wood) levels would be in the more mesic or moist habitat types

(e.g. EMC), higher elevation types (e.g. MMC), and the north and east aspects largely because of the 

increased moisture and productivity of sites with relatively long fire return intervals. 

Coarse Woody Materials (CWM)

As illustrated in the table below, a majority of the planning area is providing some level of downed log 

habitat (e.g. 83% of the Long Prairie watershed is providing downed wood at 0-4% cover in the EMC 

habitat type). It is estimated that standard and guidelines call for 0.06-0.4 % cover (Table 146). Based 

on the Long Prairie and Lower Little Deschutes watershed level of analysis, the area is meeting current 

direction for downed log densities.

Table 146: Current distribution of log densities (% cover of log >5 in. LED) within the watersheds (Long 

Prairie, Lower Little Deschutes, respectively) represented by percent of the habitat type with each 

density.

DecAID Habitat

Log Density (% cover)

0 0-4 4-8 8-10 10-16 >16 

EMC

Current (%)* 2,1 83, 37 10, 53 3, 3 2, 6 0

HRV (%) 22-30 53-54 13-19 2-3 1-3 0

LP

Current (%) 8 ,10 62 , 58 14 ,22 4, 6 11 ,4 0

HRV (%) 5-16 46-59 17-23 5-7 4-8 0

PPDF Current (%) 13, 25 75 ,64 7, 9 3, 1 2 ,2

HRV (%) 37-46 51-60 2-3 0 0

*percentage of habitat type within each watershed

Table 147 displays the comparison of current LRMP direction for downed logs/CWM with the best 

science available in the DecAID tool. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

344  Ogden Final EIS

 Table 147: Comparison of CWM Directed and DecAID Levels. 

Pieces/ac % Cover/ac

Current 

Direction

LRMP/Eastside Screens PP: 3-6

Mix Con.: 15-20

LP: 15-20

0.06-0.11%

0.3-0.4%

DecAID Wildlife Data Level* 4.2-32% : black-backed & threetoed woodpeckers

8-45%: marten

0.8-5%: golden-mantled ground 

squirrel

Inventory Data Level

(PPDF as the dominant 

type in project area)

0-2% cover on 87-91% of area

>2% cover on 9-13% of area

*The information for % cover levels from DecAID was taken from the wildlife and inventory data. The wildlife data source 

either had limited sources (PPDF – one species); or source was from within a active beetle outbreak (LP). The ranges given 

reflect the 30-80% tolerance levels for all the structural stages. Percent cover calculation for East side Screens is an 

approximation using the formulas within the DecAID Advisor “Why Down Wood Percent Cover?” 

(http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/pages/Why-Down-Wood-Percent-Cover.html)

Ogden Planning Area

Dead wood (snag and log) surveys were conducted within the project area in 2010 using the methods 

outlined in Bate et al. (2008) in response to the proposed action to remove dead and downed lodgepole 

pine where it is in excess of LRMP standards and guidelines. The survey helped determine what 

proposed areas had snag and log levels in excess of standards and guidelines (S & Gs) and the relative 

uniqueness of these areas of higher densities on the landscape.

Transects were stratified (categorized) into three types: dead wood levels likely low (not in excess to S 

& Gs); dead wood levels likely high (in excess of S & Gs); and uncertain. Each category received 10 

transects, scattered throughout the project area (see Fig 80). An effort was made to represent each 

general plant association including areas within a proposed unit and areas not in a proposed unit.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  345

Figure 80: Dead wood transects in relation to plant associations

Table 148: Summary of Dead Wood transects in the Ogden Project area.

Category

Avg. Snags >=10” 

dbh per acre

(>=20”dbh per acre)

Avg. Log density >=8” LED (>=12”LED)*

Pieces/ac % cover Tons/acre

Uncertain 2.3 (1.1) 56.3 (27.2) 30 75.5

Low Density 0.8 (0.5) 11.8 (5.4) 4.5 13.5

High Density 2.3 (0.8) 43.6 (27.2) 24 60

Average over entire project 

area

1.35 (0.65) 25 (13) 12.4 49.7

*LED = Large End Diameter. For LP habitat the standard and guide uses an 8” minimum; for PP and MC habitat it is a 12” 

minimum.

Results of the snag survey show the current level of snags are below the LRMP direction (Table 148). 

The survey results for snags compliment the comparisons for the watershed (Table 144).

Based on the survey, the project area is currently meeting or exceeding CWM guidelines in most areas. 

In considering the DecAID information (Table 146), for many wildlife species this density of downed 

wood in some areas is meeting the upper tolerance levels (the higher end of the range in the wildlife 

data portion of Table 149). However, these levels also suggest that current fuel loadings, as averaged 

over the project area and using the driest habitat type, are contributing to higher risks of wildfire.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

346  Ogden Final EIS

The existing low density of snags coupled with the importance of large diameter snags to many of the 

MIS species, emphasizes the need to retain all existing snags as possible in the planning area, as well as 

creating conditions that will favor the recruitment of large snags (i.e. create conditions for accelerated 

tree diameter growth). Snags are proposed to be retained unless they pose a hazard to human safety.

Research by Brown et al. (2003) suggests that the optimum quantity of coarse woody debris for fuel 

loading and wildlife habitat needs is 5 to 10 tons per acre for warm, dry ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir 

types (this reflects the PPDF habitat type in DecAID); 10 to 20 tons per acre for cool Douglas-fir types 

(EMC_EB); and 8-24 tons/ac for cool lodgepole pine and lower subalpine fir types (LP and MMC). 

Table 149: Comparison of Dead Wood in the Ogden Project area to thresholds displayed in literature 

and Standards and Guidelines.

Category Avg. Snags >=10” dbh 

per acre (>=20”dbh)

Avg. Log density >=8” LED (>=12”LED)

Pieces/ac % cover* Tons/acre

East side Screens

Direction

6 LP

4 PP & MC

3-6 PP

15-20 LP & MC

0.06-0.11%

0.3-0.4%

DecAID Information 0.3-15 for 30% 

tolerance level of all 

species

0.8-45% (wildlife 

data)

2% (inventory data)

Fuel Loading:

Brown et al. (2003) 5-24

Existing

Average over entire

project area

1.35 (0.65) 25 12.4 49.7

*% cover calculation for East side Screens is an approximation using the formulas within the DecAID Advisor “Why Down 

Wood Percent Cover?” (http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/wildlife/decaid/pages/Why-Down-Wood-Percent-Cover.html) 

In summary, there is snag habitat being provided albeit at lower levels than current direction; and 

observations made during the data collection had shown there are a few small, dense patches of snags. 

Downed wood levels generally appear to be meeting standard and guidelines. A majority of transects 

met or exceeded the directed level of downed wood for the habitat type. 

Green Tree Replacements (GTRs) 

Green tree replacements are trees retained, or managed through time, to provide snag or CWM habitat at 

some point in the future. The treatment unit is the area of accountability for meeting GTR objectives 

(Deschutes National Forest Wildlife Tree and Log Implementation Strategy [WLTL], 1994). The 

objective for treatment units is to provide patches of habitat, or GTRs in a distribution pattern suitable 

for home range needs of primary cavity excavators (WLTL 1994). According to the WLTL, green tree 

replacements do not need to be provided on every acre in the forested ecosystem. A mosaic distribution 

across the landscape maintaining viable populations and ecological functions is the desired condition. 

The desired condition is based on the assumptions that: 1) deficits or surpluses, whether natural or 

related to past management activities, will continue to be part of the landscape; 2) treatment units will 

be designed to meet WLTL objectives each entry or treatment; and 3) that some treatment units will not 

provide WLTLs due to preference given to other resource issues. 

The Eastside Screens direction requires all sale activities (including intermediate in both even-age and 

uneven-age systems) to maintain GTRs of >21 inches dbh, or the representative dbh of the overstory 

layer if less than 21 inches, at 100 percent maximum potential population levels (MPP) of primary 

cavity excavators. As shown in Table 150, this 100% MPP is estimated to be 4 snags/acre for 

ponderosa pine and mixed conifer habitat types and 6 snags/acre for lodgepole pine habitat types. Table 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  347

150 illustrates the number of GTRs per acre that would be needed to meet current direction assuming 

the average diameter of the stands after harvest is at least 13 inches. 

Table 150: Estimated GTRs (trees per acre or “tpa”) required to meet current direction 

Habitat Type

Ponderosa Pine Mixed Conifer Lodgepole Pine

Current Direction 

(100% MPP based on more 

recent research)

4 snags/acre 4 snags/acre 6 snags/acre

GTRs

@ 13-19” residual stand* 8 tpa 8 tpa 6 tpa

*This concurs with the 10-19” average dbh for the small/medium structure stage defined in DecAID and is the 

dominant structure type within the project area.

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1 

Insect mortality would continue to occur, ensuring steady recruitment of new snags and logs in the less 

than 20” size classes since that is the predominant size class represented in stands. Wildfires would 

create more dead wood as well as consume the existing dead wood. More large snags would likely be 

available as the large green trees currently present in the project area are killed by a fire. There is 

evidence of larger snag recruitment through insect mortality in stands with a widely scattered overstory 

of larger ponderosa pine and a dense understory of lodgepole pine (e.g. the “My” goshawk PFA; see 

Northern goshawk discussion)

The amount of this steady recruitment is influenced by other uses within the area that would likely 

impact existing dead wood levels (e.g. maintenance of recreation sites and trails, protection and 

maintenance of geothermal developments and monitoring equipment). These other uses may dictate a 

need to fall snags and dying trees that pose a safety risk to humans or equipment.

The No Action alternative would maintain green tree replacements in the current condition during the 

short-term (<20 years). However, natural disturbances such wildfire, wind events, insect and disease 

pathogens, and lightning would recruit snag and CWM habitat through time in the project area. High 

tree density in some of the ponderosa pine stands would not only retard the development of large 

diameter (>21”) ponderosa pine trees and future snags but also may hasten the development of smaller 

diameter snags and CWM as a result of mortality from bark beetles or fire. This is illustrated in the 

white-headed woodpecker discussion, and supported (for insect mortality) by the results portrayed in 

Klenner and Arsenault (2009). 

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternatives 2 & 3

The proposed silvicultural treatments would indirectly affect snag and log levels and directly affect 

green tree replacements. Proposed thinning within the ponderosa pine, mixed conifer, and ponderosa 

pine/lodgepole pine associations will not only reduce the number of green trees available for immediate 

or short term (<20 years) snag and log replacement but also create larger green tree replacements for 

snags and logs in the long-term (>20 years) as the retained trees grow in diameter as a result of the 

thinning. In time, the stands will once again close in (i.e. become more dense and the trees compete 

more directly for resources), the trees will have become larger and make for the size of snags and logs 

currently lacking in the area. Discussions within the Forest Vegetation sections show that this could 

take many decades.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

348  Ogden Final EIS

Thinning may reduce the immediate recruitment of snags and logs on a large scale, however scattered 

trees will continue to die and fall over. Lightning and insect activity will continue to kill trees. Areas 

not proposed for activities would be the likeliest areas for insect mortality. Storms will continue to blow 

over trees. These events, however, will occur in smaller patches or to individual trees, rather than as 

stand level events.

Commercial thinning in the ponderosa pine and mixed conifer habitat would retain GTRs within the 

units. The remnant basal areas would be providing GTRs at the 8 green trees per acre needed to meet 

standard and guidelines (Table 149).

In the snag and log habitat of the higher elevation lodgepole pine habitat, there will be greater impacts 

under Alternative 2, because it proposes more extensive treatments of stand regeneration. Seed tree 

removal will remove some of the green tree replacements in previously-harvested stands. The targeted 

overstory trees to remove are those most heavily infected with mistletoe. Although this action 

immediately removes potential GTRs, mistletoe infection in the understory would have longer lasting 

GTR impacts. The young trees would remain stunted and not grow to the size that can be used by 

cavity nesters (see Forest Vegetation: Dwarf Mistletoe discussion). The effects of the proposed 

overstory removal are reduced by the retention of 2-3 mature trees per acre scattered throughout the 

stand; the GTRs will be made up of these mature trees and the younger understory trees. In Alternative 

3 the impacts are further reduced by the retention of no-treat, mature stands of lodgepole pine as well as 

maintaining 203 GTRs per acre within the unit. These areas provide the short-term habitat (more 

immediate snag recruitment, higher canopy closure, and more mistletoed trees) while the treated stands 

develop to provide the long-term habitat.

Both alternatives will meet LRMP S&Gs for green tree retention. The WLTL (1994) supports the 

retention of GTRs in groups and scattered. The design within lodgepole pine dominated units will meet 

this condition where GTRs will be provided scattered within the units and provided in clumps adjacent 

to the units because the remnant mature trees within the units are currently not in a clumped pattern.

Alternative 2 proposes to create a new age class of trees in mature lodgepole pine stands by removing 

most of the mature overstory. This action directly removes mature lodgepole pine habitat that can be 

currently used by species such as the three-toed woodpecker and black-backed woodpecker (see species 

–specific discussions). Although, there will still be mature lodgepole pine habitat available in the area, 

this proposed action under Alternative 2 would limit this type of habitat until the young trees mature 

(>40 years). 

Alternative 3 retains the most current mature lodgepole pine habitat, by not proposing this type of 

regeneration harvest prescription (lodgepole seed tree harvest), and including the retention of mature 

lodgepole regardless of health for habitat and structural diversity. This alternative has less intense direct 

impacts to lodgepole pine habitat and less intense indirect impacts to cavity-nesters that use this habitat 

type.

Each of the action alternatives propose thinning in the young understory (SPC), whip falling, and/or 

ladder fuel reduction across all habitat types (ponderosa pine, mixed conifer, lodgepole pine). This type 

of thinning would not have impacts to snags, logs, and GTRs in the short-term, but may have some 

beneficial impacts to these habitat components in the long-term. This type of thinning will create stand 

conditions that will allow further growth and development of larger tree structure and future snags and 

logs, than if these small trees were not thinned. 

Mowing and underburning proposed under each action alternative have the potential to impact GTRs 

and the availability of snags and logs. Underburning can create as well as consume snags and logs. 

This action may also create the need to fall snags for safety reasons within the units. Underburning can 

also affect GTRs by killing residual trees, or parts of trees, in the unit. This is not necessarily a negative 

effect, however, because snags are currently at low densities in the area and the definition of GTR is to 

provide dead wood habitat. Hessburg et al. (2010) found that thinning and underburning increased snag 

abundance, except those in the largest size categories, and favored the clumpiness of retained trees (e.g. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  349

GTRs). Indirectly underburning and mowing contribute to the ability to control a wildfire thereby 

reducing the potential for widespread snag recruitment. There are wildlife species that can capitalize on 

recently burned forests (e.g. Lewis woodpecker, black-backed woodpeckers, olive-sided flycatchers). 

Controlling the extent and severity of wildfires can subsequently control the extent of habitat for these 

species. Many other cavity nesters and wildlife species can capitalize on the conditions created by a 

mixed-severity wildfire that may damage or kill individual trees (e.g. woodpeckers, marten). 

Controlling the extent of wildfire that may create these conditions may also limit the extent of habitat 

for these species. Russell et al. (2009) found that black-backed woodpecker and hairy woodpecker nests 

were more common in burned areas when compared to unburned areas. Wildfires would still occur on 

the landscape, but as a result of the proposed actions, they may become less extensive and habitat for the 

species that can use burned areas would become less extensive.

Each of the action alternatives proposes to remove dead and downed lodgepole pine in units where 

densities are in excess of LRMP S & Gs. As shown from surveys in 2010 and portrayed in the existing 

condition discussion, the project area is exceeding downed log S & Gs when averaged over the area. 

This average is made up of areas where log densities may be below S&Gs (e.g. low density areas) and 

areas where there are high densities. As shown in Fig. 81 below, these areas of high densities and low 

densities (based on the transect information) can be found within proposed units and areas not treated. 

Figure 81: Location of Dead Wood transects in relation to the proposed actions.

Although there are areas where the current downed log densities exceed S&Gs, some of these areas are 

meeting the higher tolerance levels for wildlife in the DecAID tool and areas of higher log densities 

have a place/role on the landscape. This illustrates the fact that areas with high densities of downed logs 

are important for some wildlife species, and downed log densities may be inherently variable across the 

landscape and habitat types. This is to say, the densities LRMP S&Gs may not be met on every acre, 

but they represent an average of high density areas and low density areas. The proposed actions will 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

350  Ogden Final EIS

reduce the extent of areas that exceed standard and guidelines and although meeting the LRMP S&Gs 

for downed wood, create a trend where downed log densities are more uniform and low on average 

across the project area.

Cumulative Effects 

The proposed actions’ connected action to fall hazard trees within units (in the case of underburning, 

harvest operation landings, and haul route maintenance) is additive to the ongoing need to fall hazard 

trees and keep roads, trails, parking areas, and campgrounds open and safe for recreation uses; and the 

foreseeable need to allow access for and protect geothermal and volcanic monitoring equipment. The 

impact is may lead to a reduction of current snag levels within the project area that appears to be below 

LRMP S&G levels. The degree of human activity within the project area drives the need to create or 

facilitate safer conditions (reduce risk to human safety) over the needs to provide wildlife habitat. 

Wisdom and Bate (2008) found that stands not adjacent to roads had almost 3 times the density of snags 

as stands adjacent to roads. Although dead wood habitat will continue to exist and be created in the 

project area, the Ogden project highlights the ongoing impacts to dead wood habitat in areas where there 

is heavy recreation use, an expectation to provide wood products, and the relatively new interest in 

geothermal development and volcanic monitoring. Each of these uses requires a degree of infrastructure 

maintenance and protection that incrementally can reduce snag and log habitat. Bull et al. (1997) speaks 

to this rationale by suggesting large dead wood is difficult to provide because of safety reasons, and 

suggests that snags be retained in clusters with live trees in order to address a worker safety issue. 

The removal of hazard trees and taking of downed logs may contribute to a cumulative reduction of 

current and future downed logs. This effect may be reduced however, because the proposed actions 

propose to retain ponderosa pine and fir logs and close some roads.

The proposed harvest activities are also additive to other harvest activities within the area (e.g. Lava 

Cast sales and Prairie Dog sales). Each of these projects has similar objectives to promote ponderosa 

pine and large tree development, and to reduce fuel loadings in order to reduce the risk of standreplacing wildfire. These activities will collectively create larger GTRS, leading to larger snags, 

ultimately leading to larger logs; with similar short-term impacts to slow recruitment of smaller snags. 

The cumulative benefits of these actions (larger ponderosa pine, reduced risk to wildfire) are tempered 

within the Ogden project area by myriad other uses (recreation, geothermal development and 

monitoring) and because it will take many decades to realize these benefits.

3.6.7 Late Seral and Old Growth Habitat including the Paulina Creek 

Old Growth Management Area (OGMA) and Connectivity Corridors

Key Issue #4 – As described in Chapter 1, a key issue involving treatment within the Old Growth 

Management Area allocation is addressed with Alternative 3 by dropping some units. The effects to the 

OGMA are discussed in the following section.

Existing Condition

An OGMA plan was developed for the Paulina Creek OGMA (see Appendix B of this FEIS for full 

spatial representation of habitats). The management indicator species for the OGMA are the blackbacked woodpecker in lodgepole forest, goshawk in ponderosa pine forest, and the American marten in 

the mixed conifer forest. All three forest types can be found within the Paulina OGMA (Table 151 and

Figure 82).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  351

Table 151: Size Class and Species Distribution within the Paulina Creek OGMA

Ponderosa Pine Mixed Conifer Lodgepole Pine Ponderosa Pine 

Lodgepole Pine

Open, Grass 

or Shrub

Total (acres) 408 104 371 49 330

Size Class:

Large 21 0 2 0

Medium 56 48 9 1

Small 198 48 19 6

Pole 133 8 322 43

Seed/Sap 0 0 18 0

Figure 82: Size Class and Canopy Closure Distribution within the Paulina OGMA

A large part of the OGMA is made up of the smaller size classes (<15” average dbh) and lower canopy 

closures (< 40%). For the focal species this condition is not ideal particularly for the American marten 

or goshawk. Marten favors an understory with high levels of dead and down wood and a dense 

overstory canopy (Maser 1998). Martens prefer mature forests with closed canopies, but sometimes use 

openings in forests, if there are sufficient downed logs to provide cover. The type of forest is less 

important to martens than forest structure (Csuti et al., 2001). Small mammals are a large portion of 

their diet, so the understory micro-habitats to support shrews, voles, rabbits, chipmunks, etc. are 

important. Both pine (Douglas) squirrels and chipmunks were observed in the OGMA. Berry 

producing shrubs are also important (Maser 1998). The McKay Fire in 1998 burned through the 

OGMA. This was a stand replacing burn resulting in a gap in the continuous mature forest along the 

riparian area. Habitat for the marten and goshawk was lost as a result of this fire.

The black-backed woodpecker prefers mature lodgepole pine habitats with dead or dying trees, but will 

utilize other types (Csuti et al. 2001). The species is strongly associated with natural fire cycles 

(Marshall et al. 2006). The burnt forest once provided both abundant forage opportunities, as well as 

nesting sites for black-backs. However, the burned area provides good foraging habitat for only a few 

years. The present condition of the OGMA does not provide an adequate amount of habitat because 

snags have blown down. 

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Total Acres

Size Class

Acres

25-40% Canopy closure

40-55%

55-70%
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

352  Ogden Final EIS

The black-backed has a home range from 100 to 400 acres but may expand in areas with bark beetle 

outbreaks to 173-810 acres (Marshall et al., 2001). They use mature ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine 

habitat types at relatively low elevations (Goggins et al. 1988). Older forests with greater amounts of 

snags and down wood, which host wood-boring insects (average 59-74% of total diet), ants, beetles, and 

spiders, provide more foraging resources for this species (Csuti et al., 2001) than younger, managed 

forests. Both focal species are very mobile, and the OGMA will meet their needs on the landscape as 

time progresses and conditions change. The OGMA may act as a transition area of habitat to the east 

where the higher elevations has not received fire and have a mix of forest types and size classes to 

provide habitat.

In summary, the habitat quality of the original OGMA has deteriorated due to the fire and subsequent 

blow down. At the lower or western end there is a high risk wildfire due the presence of a developed 

campground and smaller dispersed campsites along the creek. 

Corridors have been established according to Eastside Screens direction (Figure 83). Late seral habitat 

exists in small patches outside of these areas. The Eastside Screens provide guidance for establishing 

connectivity between OGMA stands. In general, old growth areas are to be connected in a network 

pattern in at least two different directions; a corridor should be at least 400 ft. wide, made up of stands 

in which medium to large diameter trees are common (or the next best stands if these type of stands are 

not available), and canopy closures are within the top 1/3 of site potential. Harvest activities are 

allowed inside the connectivity corridors if large trees remain common and the canopy closure is within 

the upper 1/3 of the site potential (site potential is determined, in part, by plant association).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  353

Figure 83: Connectivity Corridors within and Adjacent to the Project Area

Alternative 1

Direct and Indirect Effects: Although this alternative would not have any direct or indirect effects to 

the OGMA because it does not propose any actions, it also forgoes the opportunity to treat within it in 

order to reduce the likelihood of another stand-replacing fire. This alternative also forgoes the 

opportunity to designate connectivity corridors through the area and treat around them.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

354  Ogden Final EIS

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 2 proposes actions within 455 acres within OGMA and 328 

acres within corridors. The OGMA overlaps the RHCA. Any proposed actions within the OGMA meet 

the descriptions and limitations outlined for the RHCA.

The activities proposed within the OGMA all involve thinning and favoring the retention of ponderosa 

pine. A majority of the thinning is proposed on the south-facing aspects within the OGMA that tend to 

the drier, warmer conditions favoring ponderosa pine. Temporary road reconstruction would be 

required to reach proposed units 110-117, upstream of McKay campground. Fuels treatments proposed 

include underburning.

This OGMA contains the feature whereby the south-facing slopes contain largely ponderosa pine and 

other hot, dry favoring species. The south-facing slopes east of the 1998 burn, in particular, contain 

groves of large ponderosa pine. Whereas the north-facing slopes contain the true fir, Douglas-fir, and 

western white pine associated with cooler, moister sites. This is unique to the watershed. The proposed 

actions will help maintain this size-class and tree species diversity in a relatively small area (1,263 

acres), by proposing fuel-reduction and thinning treatments within groves of large ponderosa pine on the 

south facing slopes.

The proposed actions within the OGMA will reduce the risk of wildfire within it through mowing and 

underburning. The risk of wildfire comes largely from dispersed recreation use throughout the RHCA 

and OGMA. The proposed thinning is largely focused within the dry ponderosa and mixed conifer 

associations. The thinning will favor the growth and development of ponderosa pine, while retaining 

more of the fir and lodgepole pine on the north-facing slopes.

Alternative 2 will largely benefit the sustainability of the stands within the OGMA. The proposed 

actions may reduce some of the suitability of the current habitat for old-growth focal species such as the 

goshawk, marten, and black-backed woodpecker. The scope of this effect is reduced by the 

concentration of activities around known recreation sites and the south-facing slopes that are not 

necessarily providing high quality habitat. This Alternative does propose actions in an area where 

temporary road re-use and/or new impact (see page 36 of FEIS) would be necessary (Units 110-117). 

This would negatively impact the OGMA by providing another access point for recreationists and 

potential dispersed campers that are already have been identified as a potential risk of wildfire. The 

road re-use/new impact would contribute to more disturbance to wildlife using the area, an potential 

reduction in habitat due to the possibility of new dispersed camp sites and/or user created trails.

As seen in Table 152, there are six proposed units that overlap a corridor to some degree. In the case of 

Units 25 and 97, the width of the corridor not overlapping is wide enough (i.e. averaging >400 ft.) and 

still meets S&Gs for the corridor. Unit 66 is a ponderosa pine plantation thinning and the largest, 

healthiest trees will be retained. Pre-commercial thinning in this unit will help attain better function of 

this corridor at this point. Of the remaining three units (Units 118, 124, and 158) each propose thinning 

with ponderosa pine being favored for retention. These units differ from the others, however, because 

the current stocking of ponderosa pine may be too low to meet corridor S&Gs (1/3 of the site potential). 

In order to mitigate this effect, lodgepole pine and/or white fir within the stand will be retained to ensure 

the 1/3 site potential is attained and a determination will be made post-harvest if fuels treatments can 

occur while also maintaining the corridor characteristics (retention of lodgepole pine and white fir). 

With these mitigations, compliance with the Eastside Screens for corridors is achieved.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  355

Table 152: Units within connectivity corridors proposed for treatment and their associated treatments 

and conditions.

Unit Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Untreated Width of Corridor

25 PP_LP_1 / Mow_underburn PP_LP_2 / 

Mow_underburn 300 to 510 feet

66 PP_SPC/ None PP_SPC / None 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

97 MC_1 / Mow_underburn MC_2 / None > 500 feet

118 MC_1 / Mow_underburn MC_2 / None 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

124 MC_1 / Mow_underburn MC_2 / None 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

158 PP_LP_1 / Mow_underburn PP_LP_2 / 

Mow_underburn 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

903 --- Mow_underburn 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

904 --- PP_LP_2 / None 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

914 --- MC_2 / Mow_underburn 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

920 --- MC_1 / Mow_underburn 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

924 ---

PP_LP_2 / 

Mow_underburn 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

925 --- MC_1 / Mow_underburn 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

932 --- PP-LP_2 / Mow_underburn 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

933 --- PP_LP_2 / None 260 feet

934 --- PP_LP_2 / None 140 to 340 feet

935 --- PP_1 / Mow_underburn 0 feet; Entire corridor width treated

943 --- PP-LP_2 / None 280 to 520 feet

PP_LP_1: Thin to lower management zone (80 SDI or approximately 50 sq. ft. BA/AC), retaining lodgepole pine 

only if needed to meet minimum stocking (40 SDI or approximately 20 sq. ft. BA/AC).

PP_LP_2: Thin to lower management zone (80 SDI or approximately 50 sq. ft. BA/AC) regardless of species 

composition.

PP_SPC: Thin plantations, retaining 120 to 435 trees per acre depending on tree diameter.

MC_1: Thin to lower management zone (120 SDI or approximately 70 BA sq. ft. BA/AC), retaining lodgepole 

pine or white fir only if needed to meet minimum stocking (40 SDI or approximately 20 sq. ft. 

BA/AC).

MC_2: Thin to lower management zone (120 SDI or approximately 70 sq. ft. BA/AC) regardless of species 

composition.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 3 proposes actions within 372 acres within OGMA and 515 

acres within corridors. The direct and indirect impacts to the functionality of the corridors as a result of 

the proposed actions are similar to those discussed for Alternative 2 except under Alternative 3 they are 

more intense because this alternative treats more acres within more corridors. Alternative 3 impacts two 

more corridors than Alternative 2.

Conversely, Alternative 3 treats fewer acres within the OGMA. Specifically, this alternative does not 

propose actions within the units that would require the temporary road reconstruction (Units 110-117). 

Indirectly this benefits the OGMA by not creating another access point for dispersed recreation and 

other uses. Subsequently this also reduces the potential disturbance impacts to wildlife using the area.

Similar to Alternative 2, units proposed under Alternative 3 do overlap connectivity corridors (see Table 

152). Alternative 3 has the same concerns and mitigations for units 118, 124, and 158. There are 

eleven more units proposed under this alternative and eight of them completely overlap the corridor (i.e. 

the entire width of the corridor is taken up by the unit). These eight units do not require the same 

mitigation as 118, 124 and 158 because they are either retaining more lodgepole pine or white fir in the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

356  Ogden Final EIS

stand to meet the 1/3 site potential or there is enough stocking of ponderosa pine such that this part of 

the corridor will still be within the upper 1/3 of the site potential. This is to say that proposed 

treatments, along with current stand conditions, will be able to meet corridor S&Gs post-treatment.

Cumulative Effects

As the sole stream course in this watershed, it is vital to protect this OGMA despite its current 

conditions that lack some overall old-growth characteristics (such as large trees common, high canopy 

closures). It does contain more species, size class, and canopy closure diversity than many of the other 

areas within the watershed. Protecting it does involve fuels management within and around it in order 

to reduce the risk of losing more habitat to wildfire. All of the proposed actions are within the scope 

and intent of the LRMP standard and guidelines for this management allocation.

The 1998 McKay wildfire illustrated what could happen with other parts of the OGMA. Although this 

old-growth management area is marginal habitat for focal species such as goshawks and marten (see 

Appendix B), it is nonetheless a valuable corridor for dispersing individuals and a prey source. 

Retention of the stand diversity and cover is important in maintaining this function.

As the sole stream course, the OGMA is also heavily used by recreationists. The Peter Skene Ogden 

National Scenic Trail runs through the OGMA. There is one designated campground, McKay, which 

receives heavy use nearly all year. There are at least two other dispersed recreation sites within the 

OGMA. The stream corridor is used by hikers, mountain bikers, and horseback riders. The advertised 

feature called the “Paulina Plunge” is a recreation opportunity whereby bikers can be shuttled to the 

crater and then ride down along the powerline on bikes with “jaunts” into the stream corridor. Many of 

these “jaunts” are within the OGMA and the trip can accommodate large groups (30-50 bikers). In 

summary, this OGMA does not give a feeling of seclusion or solitude, especially for wildlife species 

that are sensitive to human disturbance.

Because of this heavy recreation use, especially the camping, there is high risk of another wildfire 

burning through the OGMA. The 1998 fire was lightning started and ran north to south. Should a fire 

start from an ill-tended campfire, it would certainly burn up through the stream course. Fuels reduction 

efforts in the vicinity of the developed campground and dispersed sites would benefit the OGMA by 

reducing the risk of these ongoing actions.

The impacts to corridors from the proposed actions are cumulative to other ongoing and foreseeable 

uses within the project area. The Lava Rock OHV project proposes trails that cross the corridors. 

Snowmobile, biking, and hiking trails cross the corridors, that incrementally contribute to a reduction in 

the functioning of the corridor to provide movement of or dispersal habitat for wildlife species that 

utilize thousands of acres (e.g. wolverine) to species that utilize just a few acres (e.g. snakes, small 

mammals). In the Ogden project area it is difficult to locate a corridor that meets the stand conditions 

outlined in the Eastside Screens and do not cross some sort of road or trail. 

The geothermal development proposals and volcanic monitoring stations also have incremental impacts 

to corridor function. There are three proposed test drill sites (MSAs) located within the corridors. 

Similar to roads and trails, it is difficult to locate corridors in that meet Eastside Screens direction while 

also trying to avoid geothermal monitoring or development. Interest in geothermal development and 

monitoring is relatively new in the area, and all of the locations were not foreseeable when determining 

corridors. The geothermal developments and volcanic monitoring stations require space (i.e. openings) 

and maintenance (e.g. access roads) that can negatively impact the functioning of the corridor.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  357

3.7.1 Introduction

Proposed Actions affecting the Soils Resource

Proposed activities are intended improve vegetative resiliency to large-scale disturbance events such as 

insect, disease, and wildfire by reducing forest vegetation density and addressing tree species 

composition. Proposed vegetation management activities include mechanized harvest and yarding of 

trees, pre-commercial hand or mechanical thinning, machine and/or hand piling of slash materials, 

mowing of brush and understory trees, burning of slash piles and prescribed fire to reduce hazardous 

fuel accumulations.

Specific actions with potential effects to the soil resource include: 

Mechanized cutting and yarding on approximately 13,873 acres would occur using a feller

buncher/grapple skidder or a cut to length harvester/forwarder system. Cutting machinery would 

be limited to designated trails or limited single out and back passes off of trails. Skidding 

operations would be restricted to existing or designated logging facilities (i.e., skid trails, 

landings) and roads.

Machine piling may occur on 4,932 unit acres harvested for merchantable timber with machine 

travel limited to skid-trails, landing areas and limited single out and back passes off trails. This 

activity could also occur on 1,200 unit acres proposed for pre-commercial thinning, depending 

on the utilization status of this material.

Road Maintenance on approximately 4 miles of haul routes.

Temporary Roads: creation of approximately 6 miles and use of approximately 5.5 miles to 

reopen to provide necessary access for hauling commercial material. These temporary roads 

would be closed and/or rehabilitated upon completion of harvest activities; No newly 

constructed system roads would occur.

Mowing and underburn treatments would occur to reduce the continuity and height of fuel loads 

across the landscape. 

o Mowing of shrubs and small trees using a small ASV or tractor mower and 

underburning: approximately 10,057 acres harvested for commercial timber; 

o Mowing and underburning: approximately 199 acres pre-commercially thinned; 

o Mowing only: approximately 37 acres harvested for commercial timber; and 

o Mowing only: approximately 867 acres that were pre-commercially thinned. 

o Mowing: approximately 364 acres that would not receive harvest treatments. 

o Underburn prescriptions: approximately 248 acres within the Riparian Habitat 

Conservation Area (RHCA) boundaries.

Soil restoration treatments, including subsoiling, may be implemented on approximately 11.5

miles of temporary roads or on primary skid trails and landings within activity areas 

mechanically harvested with ground based machinery where conditions are determined to be 

appropriate for this operation. 

3.7.2 Management Direction 

The Deschutes Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) includes Forest-wide standards and 

guidelines that direct land management activities to promote the maintenance or enhancement of soil 

productivity. Forest Standards and Guidelines applicable to this project include: 

Leaving a minimum of 80 percent of an activity area in a condition of acceptable productivity 

potential following the implementation of proposed activities (Forest Plan Standard and 

Guidelines SL-1 and SL-3; p. 4-70); 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

358  Ogden Final EIS

The use of rehabilitation measures when the cumulative impacts of management activities are 

expected to cause damage exceeding soil quality standards and guidelines on more than 20 

percent of an activity area (SL-4); and

Limiting the use of mechanical equipment in sensitive soil areas (SL-5). 

The Pacific Northwest Region developed soil quality standards and guidelines to limit detrimental soil 

disturbances associated with management activities (FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement No. 2500-98-1). 

Region 6 guidance supplements the Forest LRMP standards and guidelines designed to protect or 

maintain soil productivity and describes detrimental soil impacts as those that meet the criteria described 

below:

Detrimental Compaction: for volcanic ash/pumice soils - an increase in soil bulk density of 

20%, or more, over the undisturbed level.

Detrimental Puddling: loss of soil structure when the depth of ruts or imprints exceeds six 

inches.

Detrimental Displacement: the removal of more than 50% of the A horizon from an area 

greater than 100 square feet, which is at least 5 feet in width.

Severe Burned Damage: soils are considered to be detrimentally disturbed when the mineral 

soil surface has been significantly changed in color, oxidized to a reddish color, and the next 

one-half inch blackened from organic matter charring by heat conducted through the top layer.

The Regional supplement to the Forest Service Manual (FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement No. 2500-98-1) 

provides policy for planning and implementing management practices which maintain or improve soil 

quality. This Regional guidance is consistent with Deschutes LRMP interpretations for standards and 

guidelines SL-3 and SL-4 that limit the extent of detrimental soil conditions within activity areas.

When initiating new activities:

Design new activities that do not exceed detrimental soil conditions on more than 20% of an 

activity area. (This includes the permanent transportation system).

In activity areas where less than 20% detrimental soil impacts exist from prior activities, the 

cumulative amount of detrimentally disturbed soil must not exceed the 20 percent limit 

following project implementation and restoration.

In activity areas where more than 20% detrimental soil conditions exist from prior activities, the 

cumulative detrimental effects from project implementation and restoration must, at a 

minimum, not exceed the conditions prior to the planned activity and should move conditions 

toward a net improvement in soil quality.

3.7.3 Desired Landscape Condition

The primary management goal for the soil resource is to maintain or enhance soil conditions at 

acceptable levels without impairment of the productivity of the land. A desirable landscape effectively 

absorbs and distributes water, and erosion rates occur within natural ranges of variability. The extent of 

detrimental soil disturbances should be minimized through the application of management requirements, 

design criteria and mitigation measures designed to minimize, avoid or eliminate potentially significant 

impacts in order to reduce the need for restoration techniques to rectify impacts in site-specific areas. 

The biological productivity of soils is ensured by management prescriptions that retain adequate 

supplies of surface organic matter and coarse woody debris without compromising fuel management 

objectives or the risk of soil damage from surface wildfire.

Although soil productivity was not considered a Key Issue used to formulate alternatives, project 

planning must include provisions for minimizing ground disturbances and rehabilitating site specific 

areas where activities are expected to cause resource damage that exceeds Regional and LRMP 

standards and guidelines. A summary of the soil productivity issue, including background information

and measures used for tracking this issue, is provided below.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  359

Background: The long term sustainability of forest ecosystems depends on the productivity and 

hydrologic function of soils. Ground disturbing management activities can directly affect these soil 

properties by compacting and displacing soil, changes which may adversely affect the natural capability 

of soils and their potential responses to use and management. The reduction of soil porosity as a result 

of compaction, and/or the displacement of organic or mineral surface layers, can reduce the soils ability 

to supply nutrients, moisture, and air necessary to support soil microorganisms and the growth of 

vegetation. The biological productivity of the soil resource can also be affected by the amount of surface 

organic matter and coarse woody debris retained or removed from a site.

Soil Productivity Measures:

Ground-based equipment can affect soil productivity by increasing the amount and distribution of 

detrimental soil conditions within individual activity areas proposed for mechanical treatments.

Changes to the extent of detrimental soil conditions following proposed mechanical harvest and 

rehabilitation treatments within individual activity areas. 

Amount of coarse woody debris (CWD) and surface organic matter that would likely be retained 

to protect mineral soil from erosion and provide both short and long-term nutrient supplies for 

maintaining soil productivity on treated sites. 

The probable success of the design and implementation of management requirements and design 

criteria to minimize adverse impacts to soil productivity. 

3.7.4 Affected Environment

Landscape and Soil Characteristics

The Ogden project area is located on the western side of the Newberry Mountain complex. The 

landforms, rocks, and soil in this valley are primarily products of volcanism and historic water 

movement off the slopes of the Newberry Complex. The project area includes a number of finger ridges 

comprised of volcanic basalt flows from Newberry and local cinder buttes in the area. Paulina Creek has 

down cut through these flows to create a narrow canyon running east to west through the center of the 

planning area. Slopes range from nearly level to over 30 percent on cinder buttes and the edges of lava 

escarpments. Elevation ranges from about 4,300 feet along the western edge to 6,200 feet along the 

northeastern slopes of the planning area. Mean annual precipitation ranges from approximately 20 to 30 

inches. 

Soils within the project area have been mapped in a Soil Resource Inventory (SRI) based on similarities 

in soil, landforms, geology, and climatic conditions that influence defined patterns of soil and vegetation 

(Larsen, 1976). The project area includes a variety of landtype units that primarily contain dominant 

surface soils developed from volcanic pumiceous ash deposits ejected from Mt. Mazama 7,600 years 

ago. Mineral soil consists mainly of sand-sized soil particles with little or no structural development due 

to the relatively young geologic age of the volcanic parent materials. Surface and subsurface textures of 

the ash-influenced soils are primarily sandy loams and loamy sands. Soils are non-cohesive (loose), 

have naturally low bulk densities with a relatively low to moderate susceptibility to compaction and 

generally vary in depth from 20 to 60 inches.

Soils within the project area have high infiltration and percolation rates that readily drain excess 

moisture from storm events or snowmelt. Subsurface bedrock materials and underlying residual soils 

comprised of older ash have a moderate capacity to store water but are not likely to be impermeable at 

depth. As a result, lands within the project area yield little to no surface water. Paulina Creek is fed 

almost exclusively from water contained in Paulina Lake which receives water from surface and 

subsurface sources within the Newberry Caldera.

Landtype Interpretations

The biophysical characteristics of SRI landtype units can be interpreted during planning to identify 

potential hazards, management suitability, and productivity potentials related to implementing 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

360  Ogden Final EIS

management activities. SRI landtypes within the Ogden project area include SRI units 5, 10, 14, 35, 38, 

41, 42, 45, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69, 70, 73, 81, 82, 4A, 6B, 6J, 7A, 7F and complexes GU (41, 35), GV (42, 

38), LZ (77, 70), and MP (63, 41). The majority of soil types stratify as units with loamy to sandy 

pumiceous ash over hard basalts. Units 41 and 35 represent similar surface soils over outwash material 

and Unit 14 represents the steep and exposed edges of lava flows. For a detailed map, refer to the 

Project Record, Soils report, page 7, Figure1, Soils Resource Inventory.

Potential hazards implementing management activities include the susceptibility of the soil resource to 

compaction, displacement, and erosion as a result of mechanical disturbances. The predominantly 

sandy-loam textured soils within the project area are not susceptible to soil puddling damage due to their 

lack of plasticity and cohesion. The ash influenced soils are moderately susceptible to compaction, 

displacement and erosion as a result of mechanical disturbances. The project area is generally covered 

by loose, non-cohesive ash deposits that overlay thin residual soils in some areas that are formed from 

the weathering of basaltic lavas. Surface soils have sandy loam textures with little or no structural 

development within the principal root development zone (4 to 12 inches in depth) where changes in soil 

compaction (bulk density) are assessed according to Regional direction (FSM 2521.03). 

The bulk density or strength of the mineral soil is typically affected by mechanical forces that either 

reduce or improve soil porosity in the compaction zone. Although multiple passes of harvest, yarding 

and piling machinery can reduce soil porosity and increase the soil strength of sandy loam soils to levels 

that affect vegetative growth, compacted conditions can be mitigated by physical tillage with a winged 

subsoiler when soil profiles have moderate to low rock content (Powers, 1999). Ash derived soils in the 

project area are generally suited for tillage treatments (subsoiling), although subsoiling may not be 

available as a mitigation restoration measure in some areas due to variable depths over the underlying 

volcanic basalt bedrock. Subsoiling, where appropriate, loosens compacted soil layers and improves the 

soils ability to supply nutrients, moisture, and air that support vegetative growth and biotic habitat for 

soil organisms. 

The susceptibility of soils within the planning area to displacement is moderate to high due to the coarse 

textured surface layers present in the project area. Surface organics and mineral surface horizons can be 

easily displaced by equipment operations, especially when machinery maneuvers on slopes during dry 

moisture conditions. However, the extent of displacement is generally localized and rarely in excess of 

acceptable LRMP and R6 standards (USFS Soil Monitoring). This material is more often mixed

together at the surface or within the less developed subsurface horizons as a result of localized 

equipment displacement. 

Surface erosion by water is of low to moderate concern within the project area. Surface erosion occurs 

at very low rates within the project area because of high infiltration rates, moderate slopes and sufficient 

vegetative cover and organic litter layer accumulation on the surface. However, soils derived from 

volcanic ash are easily eroded by raindrop impacts and overland flows when bare mineral soil is 

exposed by machine disturbances. As a result, landtypes on steeper slopes have moderate erosion hazard 

ratings that reflect potential erosion rates during thunderstorms following disturbances that reduce 

vegetative cover, displace organic surface layers, or reduce soil porosity through compaction. 

Inherent Soil Productivity

Dominant landtypes within the Ogden planning area generally have moderately deep, ash-influenced 

soils and moderate inherent productivity. Landtypes 5, 65, 67, 69, and 82 represent areas with high 

inherent productivity, while Landtype 7F is the only area with a low potential for timber production, 

primarily due to high elevation (Figure 84).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  361

Figure 84: Inherent Soil Productivity within the Ogden Project Area

Land Suitability 

The suitable lands database for the Deschutes National Forest LRMP identifies areas of land which are 

considered to be suitable for timber production using criteria affecting reforestation potential (FSH 

2409.13). This data was developed to designate a broad-scale timber base area for forest-wide planning 

purposes. Lands that do not meet these criteria are considered unsuitable or partially suitable for timber 

harvest due to regeneration difficulties or the potential for irreversible damage to resource values from 

management activities. All activity areas proposed for commercial and/or non-commercial thinning 

treatments in the Ogden planning area meet the criteria for land suitability that would allow them to be 

regenerated or resist irreversible resource damage. None of the proposed activity areas have landtypes 

with site conditions and soil properties considered to be unsuitable for timber production. 

Sensitive Soil Types

Criteria for identifying sensitive soils are included in the Deschutes Forest Plan (Deschutes LRMP 

(Appendix 14, Objective 5). Sensitive soils within the Ogden project area include soils on slopes greater 

than 30% that are susceptible to soil displacement. Miscellaneous landtypes in the Ogden project area 

have localized areas of slopes exceeding 30% within the SRI map unit that were queried out from the 

Digital Elevation Model (DEM) in GIS. For a detailed map of slopes that exceed 30%, the relation to 

project units, and more detailed discussion, refer to Project Record, Soils Report, pages 9 and 10, Figure 

4 and Table 1.

Sensitive soils within the Ogden project area are generally confined to cinder buttes, edges of lava flow 

escarpments and valley walls of the Paulina Creek drainage within the project area. Areas of slope 

exceeding 30% have high ratings for surface erosion when surface mineral soil is disturbed or 

vegetative and litter cover is lost. Sensitive soil areas that occur within proposed activity areas are 

discussed under the direct and indirect effects of implementing the management activities proposed 

under the action alternatives.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

362  Ogden Final EIS

Existing Condition of the Soil Resource 

The existing condition of the soil resource reflects the extent of detrimental conditions incurred by 

natural and managed disturbances within the area. Natural disturbances such as wildfire and wind events 

have not been observed to directly incur extensive detrimental impacts to the soils on the Deschutes 

National Forest but have often been followed by mechanical harvest activities capable of incurring 

detrimental impacts. Management disturbances, such as timber harvest, prescribed burning, road 

building and associated activities, and recreational activities, can alter physical and biological 

components associated with soil productivity by displacing organic surface layers, incurring soil 

compaction (reducing soil porosity) or removing vegetative cover.

Natural Disturbances

There is currently little evidence of detrimental soil conditions from natural disturbance events within 

the Ogden project area. No major windthrow events have occurred within the project area and landslides 

have not been observed as a disturbance regime in this terrain. Recent large fires within the project area 

include the 1,150 acre McKay fire in 1998 and the 548 acre Newberry 2 fire in 2000. Both fires were 

observed to have incurred minimal detrimental impacts to the soil resource as a direct result of the fire. 

Mistletoe and beetle activity within the planning area have increased the amount of coarse woody debris 

(CWD) on the surface in some areas of the planning area, primarily within mid and upper elevation 

lodgepole and mixed conifer stands. CWD levels are also high in areas of the McKay fire that were not 

salvaged (e.g. the Old Growth Management Area). Existing vegetation and forest litter are providing 

adequate sources of ground cover to protect mineral soil from water and wind erosion in the majority of 

the planning area. Overall, natural soil disturbances have not been observed to be measurable sources of 

detrimental soil conditions within any of the activity areas proposed for this project.

Management Disturbances

Activities associated with timber harvest are the primary management disturbance within the Ogden 

project area. Ground-based railroad logging was used to harvest large-diameter ponderosa pine across 

the western two-thirds of the project area during the early to mid 1900s. Although photographic 

evidence indicates that extensive dendritic and parallel networks of skid trails were created during the 

railroad era logging, soil probes and the productivity of existing black bark stands in these areas 

indicates that natural processes have gradually restored soil quality over the past 70 to 80 years. Skidtrails from the railroad era that were not converted to existing system roads have generally returned to 

near-natural soil density levels as a result of frost heaving, wetting-drying cycles, rodent activity and 

root penetration of trees, shrubs and grasses. Vegetative growth and forest litter has covered many of 

these areas.

Portions of the project area were re-entered during the 1970s, 80s and 90s under a variety of intensive 

silvicultural prescriptions utilizing ground-based machinery to harvest and yard material from the site. 

Skid trails from many of these mechanical harvests are identifiable on the ground and retain 

detrimentally compacted conditions observable in the field. Salvage harvest of the McKay and 

Newberry 2 fires incurred variable amounts of disturbance to the soil resource, much of which was 

rehabilitated by the active subsoiling of the skid trails and landings. The growth of trees re-planted 

within the McKay fire indicates that detrimental impacts from salvage activities have not reduced the 

productivity of the soil on site. 

A variety of fuels treatment projects have been implemented within the planning area over the past

decade, including the mowing of brush and the use of prescribed burning in study plots to reduce fuels 

and provide a forest structure more resistant to wildfires. Equipment used for mowing is considerably 

smaller than that used to harvest timber and typically does not result in detrimental impacts to the soil 

resource. Although prescribed burning does remove some of the surface organic matter from the site, 

Burn Plan prescriptions help minimize the loss of duff and replicate a relatively low intensity fire 

historically associated with these ecosystems. Brush mowing and prescribed burning have reduced 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  363

ground fuel conditions in treated areas without incurring measurable detrimental impacts to the soil 

resource.

Existing Condition Assessments

Field investigations of a subset of previous management activities within the project area were utilized 

in combination with the proportionate overlap of past harvest activities to estimate the extent of existing 

detrimental conditions within each proposed Ogden unit area. Soil disturbance levels from the subset of 

units that were field monitored were used to represent existing levels of impact in other previously 

entered units with similar past harvest prescriptions. A full summary of the estimated detrimental 

conditions for all proposed Ogden units is included in FEIS Appendix C.

Five units were monitored for detrimental soil disturbance levels to provide a representation of impacts 

from past activities within the project area. Visual assessments and shovel probes were used to record 

surface soil disturbance and compaction levels along transects within these units. Table 153 summarizes 

the monitoring results. 

Table 153: Monitoring of Past Harvest Activities within the Ogden Project Area

Unit # Acres Year of Harvest Harvest Prescription Detrimental Soil Conditions (%)

(Ogden #208) 12 1985 HCC - Clear Cut 21%

(Ogden #38) 26 1975 HTH - Black Bark Thinning 17%

(Ogden #19) 56 1985 HFR – Final Removal 19%

(Ogden #173) 29 1988 HOR – Overstory Removal 19%

(Ogden #281) 91 2000 HTH – Black Bark Thinning 18%

(Ogden #170) 135 1930s Clear Cut (Railroad Logging) 8%

Conditions observed within the HTH (commercial thinning) units were determined to be representative 

of conditions in other areas covered by this prescription, as well as those likely to be incurred by the 

HTH prescriptions proposed for the Ogden project in units that have not had entry since the railroad era 

activities. Disturbance levels measured in the HCC unit and the railroad logged unit indicates that 

compaction levels have recovered to some degree since the original prescription was implemented. 

Proposed Ogden units were also assessed for the presence, pattern and percentage of railroad era skid 

trails and logging facilities and queried for the occurrence of more recent harvest prescriptions from the 

Forest Service Forest Activity database (FACTs). Despite coverage in some areas of up to 20% from 

skid trails associated with past railroad era logging observed from 1943 aerial photographs the impacts 

attributable to the railroad era were estimated to be approximately 5% of the area due observations in 

the field of recovery during the 70 to 80 years since those activities. 

The primary FACTs activity prescription queried for each unit area is included in the unit summary 

table of this FEIS (Appendix C). A total of 105 proposed units have had no FACTs prescriptions 

recorded within their boundaries since the railroad era activities. A total of 262 proposed units have 

more recent harvest prescriptions that overlap 75% or more of their acreage and exhibit varying levels 

of detrimental soil disturbance as a result of compaction from machine harvesting and yarding 

operations. Most of these management activities utilized the extensive system of railroad era skid trails 

and landings for their logging facilities, with impact levels generally ranging from 15 to 25%. Units that 

did not have extensive railroad era logging within their boundaries utilized new systems and generally 

incurred detrimental impacts to the soil resource on less than 20% of their area.

Site Preparation and Reforestation Activities

Mechanical disturbances from site preparation and reforestation activities can also reduce site 

productivity through soil compaction and displacement of surface organic layers. Reforestation 

activities within the project area most recently entailed hand planting on relatively bare ground within 

the McKay fire and incurred very little peripheral damage to the soil resource. It is expected that much 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

364  Ogden Final EIS

of the original ground disturbance was likely hand tool removal of shrubs and bunch grasses. Planting 

density appears to average 12x12 spacing and growth rates are likely slowing as result of competition 

rather than soil disturbance. Landtypes in this area have moderate productivity ratings for ponderosa 

pine.

Roads and Quarries

Approximately 175 miles (approximately 256 acres; 1% of project area) of existing open system roads 

cross through the project area (26,521 acres). Dedicated system roads are considered to be 

detrimentally disturbed and road surfaces adjacent to or within proposed activity areas are included in 

the existing conditions estimates for individual units. Existing system roads proposed for use as haul 

routes for this project would be surveyed for improvements to correct drainage problems that could be 

exacerbated by truck traffic. The project area contains four quarries, including a cinder, gravel, rock 

and borrow pit. The McKay crossing borrow pit #3066 lies within proposed activity area unit #375, 

while the other three pits are outside proposed activity area boundaries. 

Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) Activities

Current recreational activities in the planning area include motorized OHV riding on system roads and 

user created trails within the project area. It is estimated that less than 0.1% of the proposed unit acres 

have user created trails. The extent of detrimental soil conditions associated with recreation use is 

relatively minor in comparison to the transportation system and past logging disturbances. Soil 

disturbances from these trails are not expected to have a measurable effect on site productivity within 

the individual activity areas proposed for this project. Soil disturbances are generally confined to 

relatively narrow strips where the trail treads have no vegetative cover.

Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) and Surface Organic Matter

The effects of management activities on long-term soil productivity can also be measured by the amount 

of coarse woody debris (CWD) and surface organic matter retained or removed from a site. Balancing 

fuel management objectives and adequate amounts of CWD is an important goal for maintaining longterm soil productivity. Surveys for CWD were conducted by wildlife specialists within the planning area 

in order to determine whether CWD levels within proposed activity areas were in excess of LRMP 

guidelines and could be removed as salvage material. These surveys show a spectrum of levels, with 

high levels primarily in lodgepole and mixed conifer communities where recent beetle activity mortality 

has occurred. Many of the proposed units are homogeneous black bark stands that currently have 

relatively low amounts of CWD on site. CWD on the ground in these areas would be retained where 

levels are at or below accepted minimums for wildlife habitat and soil productivity. 

Although CWD less than 10” diameter (large end) may be removed as part of the contract in units with 

excessive CWD levels, sufficient amounts of CWD greater than 10” in diameter would be retained to 

provide microsite habitat for microbial functions on site. Decaying wood and organic matter on the 

forest floor provides biotic habitat for microorganisms and contributes to the soils ability to retain 

moisture and contribute to short and long-term nutrient supplies. Research studies using mycorrhizal 

fungi as a bio-indicator of forest soil productivity developed conservative recommendations for 

sufficient CWD levels following management activities (Graham et al. 1994, Brown et al. 2003). 

Recommendations include retaining a minimum of 5 to 10 tons per acre of coarse woody debris (greater 

than 3” diameter) on dry, ponderosa pine sites and 10 to 15 tons of CWD per acre on mixed conifer sites 

to maintain soil productivity. References to fuel loadings represented in “Photo Series for Quantifying 

Forest Residues” (USDA GTR PNW-52 and 95) have been included in the Design Criteria for this 

project as a guide to manage fuels treatments within the various Forest Types in which the proposed 

Ogden unit areas are located.

Conserving surface litter (i.e., organic materials such as leaves, twigs and branches less than 3 inches in 

diameter) is also important for maintaining soil productivity. Surface litter provides on-site moisture 

retention, protects mineral soil from erosion and supplies nutrients that support the growth of vegetation 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  365

and soil organisms. Surface litter can also help to buffer the effects of soil compaction from machine 

traffic. Annual deposition of shrub leaves, conifer needles, and small woody forest litter have generated 

sufficient organic matter levels on all sites for short-term nutrient cycling and productive growth of 

these stands. 

Project Design and Mitigation

Cumulative levels of existing and predicted amounts of new soil disturbance need to be considered to 

determine whether soil quality standards will be met following project implementation. For activity 

areas that have already been impacted by previous management, project plans need to include options 

for avoiding, Resource Protection Measures, Chapter 2, beginning on page 37).

3.7.5 Analysis Methods

Soil condition assessments utilize previous monitoring reports, observations of similar types of harvest 

systems, research references, and field surveys to predict the potential extent of detrimental soil 

disturbance associated with this project proposal. Estimates also account for the cruised volume 

removed per acre, the type of logging equipment likely to be used, the spacing of skid trails, and the 

extent (surface area) of temporary roads, log landings, and designated skid-trails used to facilitate 

yarding activities within each of the commercial thinning activity areas. 

Scope of the Analysis

The soil resource may be directly, indirectly, and/or cumulatively affected by actions proposed under 

the alternatives of the Ogden Environmental Impact Statement. The scope of the soil resource effects 

analysis is encompassed by the bounds of each activity area proposed within the project area. An 

activity area is defined as “the total area of ground impacted activity, and is a feasible unit for sampling 

and evaluating” (FSM 2520 and DLRMP, page 4-71). The activity area boundaries are considered to be 

the smallest identified area within which measurable potential effects of different management practices 

would occur. As a result, the discussion of effects to the soil resource within the context of the LRMP 

and Regional soil quality standards are focused on the proposed units designated for silvicultural and 

fuel reduction treatments. The effects discussion may expand to include the entire planning area to 

provide additional context when relevant to watershed concerns and the issues identified for the soil 

resource. 

The best information about the proposed actions from the EIS Alternative descriptions was used in 

conjunction with the location of activities to analyze the potential effects on the soil resource. Issue 

measures identified in the planning process were evaluated with quantitative field analyses and 

professional judgment to compare existing conditions to the anticipated conditions resulting from 

implementing the proposed actions. The potential for detrimental changes to soil physical properties was 

quantitatively analyzed by estimating the extent (surface area) of temporary roads, log landings, and 

designated skid-trail systems that would likely be used to facilitate harvesting, yarding and fuels 

treatment activities within each of the activity areas proposed for management. 

Analysis of effects to the soil resource also considered the effectiveness and probable success of 

implementing management requirements, resource protection measures, and Best Management Practices 

(BMPs) designed to avoid, minimize or reduce potentially adverse impacts to soil productivity. 

Professional judgment was used to evaluate changes in the amount and composition of coarse woody 

debris (CWD) and surface organic matter. The temporal scope of the analysis defines short-term effects 

as changes to soil properties that would generally revert to pre-existing conditions within 5 years or less, 

and long-term effects as those that would remain identifiable for 5 years or longer. 

Analysis Assumptions

Harvest operations: Mechanical harvest and accumulation would likely be accomplished using a 

ground-based machine equipped with a felling head (harvester shear). Machine traffic off of designated 

logging facilities would be limited in extent by project design features (PDFs) included in the document 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

366  Ogden Final EIS

that limit mechanical harvesters to two or fewer equipment passes on any site-specific area off of main 

skid trails or away from log landings. Felled trees would be accumulated along the main skid trail 

networks by the feller/buncher and then whole-tree yarded to landings using grapple skidders. Skidding 

equipment would be restricted to designated skid trails at all times while mechanical shears would 

traffic off of trails with out and back or loop passes. Skid trail patterns from this system are generally 

parallel before converging as they near the landings. A harvester/forwarder is an optional harvest system 

that could be utilized in place of a shear/skidder system. This system tends to create a more 

symmetrical, parallel designated skid trail system with fewer passes off of these trails. 

Fuels Reduction Activities: Landing slash, hand-thinned accumulations, and existing down wood 

may be machine piled in unit areas where overall fuels levels were not reduced to adequate levels 

following harvest activities. The majority of this activity is likely to be limited to landing areas within 

mechanically harvested and yarded units where whole trees would be accumulated and processed. The 

majority of material would be machine grapple piled on skid trails or landing areas already 

detrimentally compacted or mixed by the yarding and processing operations. However, travel off of skid 

trails may occur within units where fuel loads exceeded minimum amounts recommended for wildlife 

habitat and soil productivity needs. Additional impact from these activities would be expected to be 

relatively minimal in extent (< 1% of the activity area) if implemented following the design features, but 

could be up to 5% of the activity area as a result of the cumulative impacts of off trail traffic.

3.7.6 Environmental Consequences

The magnitude and duration of potential effects to the physical and biological parameters of soil 

productivity depend on the intensity of site disturbance, the timing and location of activities, and the 

inherent properties of the volcanic ash-influenced soils within activity areas affected by the proposed 

actions. Direct effects such as soil displacement and compaction from equipment operations occur at 

essentially the same time and place as the actions that cause soil disturbance. Indirect effects occur 

sometime after or some distance away from the initial disturbance, such as increased surface erosion as 

a result of compaction or loss of vegetative cover. Cumulative effects include all past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions that cause soil disturbance within the same activity areas proposed with 

this project. The environmental effects are presented and tracked by the issue measures used to evaluate 

the estimated impacts on soil productivity.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Measure #1: Detrimental Soil Disturbance

Direct and Indirect Effects: The management activities proposed in this document would not take 

place. No additional land would be removed from production for temporary roads or logging facilities 

for harvest and yarding operations. There would be no cumulative increase in detrimental soil 

conditions above existing levels. Although disturbed soils would continue to recover naturally from the 

effects of past management, the current extent of detrimental soil conditions would likely remain 

unchanged for the short-term. 

Soil productivity would not change appreciably as a result of this alternative since no management 

induced detrimental soil conditions would occur. The productivity of the soil resource may decrease 

over time in the absence of wild or prescribed fires that provide a cyclical flush of nutrients in dry forest 

systems (Fire Effects Summary, 2003). Although ground fuels have been reduced in some previously 

managed areas, fire exclusion has resulted in undesirable vegetation conditions and excessive fuel 

loadings in other portions of the project area (see Fire/Fuels Section). Alternative 1 would defer fuel 

reduction opportunities at this time. 

There is an elevated risk producing intense ground-level heating as CWD is consumed during standreplacing wildfires when compared to the action alternatives. Wildfires would have the potential to 

incur a slightly greater extent of localized detrimental changes to chemical, physical, and biological 

components of the soil where existing levels of CWD have been identified to be in excess of wildlife 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  367

habitat needs. Wildfires across the Deschutes National Forest have been observed to incur detrimental 

conditions on up to 5% of the burned over landscape, primarily underneath CWD located on the soil 

surface. Although the extended duration of extreme temperatures would be expected where CWD on the 

soil surface was consumed, the “Styrofoam” characteristic of the pumiceous ash prevents deep 

penetration of heat induced by fire, resulting in very short-term effects to the productivity of the soil. 

More pronounced direct effects are the loss of protective ground cover and the possibility of localized 

hydrophobicity, both of which increase the risk for accelerated wind and water erosion until the return 

of vegetative cover during the first few growing seasons subsequent to the fire. Localized increases in 

surface runoff and subsequent erosion are likely to be indirect effects as a result of wildfire under this 

alternative.

Measure #2: Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) and Surface Organic Matter

Direct and Indirect Effects: In the short term, the amount of coarse woody debris and surface litter are 

likely to increase under the No Action alternative as a result of natural mortality, windthrow, and fallen 

snags over time. Natural mortality is expected to be highest under this alternative due to higher stand 

densities that will maintain conditions susceptible to bark beetle attacks in all vegetation types within 

the project area. This would likely result in more dead trees falling to the ground in the next few 

decades. Although many black bark stands are at risk of bark beetle outbreaks at current densities, they 

have low levels of CWD, snags or dying trees in the stand and would be much slower to accumulate 

CWD for an extended period of time. Short-term nutrient sources would increase across the project area 

through the accumulation of small woody material from shrub and tree branches, annual leaf and needle 

fall, and decomposition of grass and forb plant materials. This alternative would maintain a higher 

density of trees throughout the project area capable of providing annual litter fall compared to the action 

alternatives.

In the long term, the accumulation of CWD in the dense lodgepole and mixed conifer stands would 

increase the fastest and increase the potential for intense wild land fires capable of consuming heavy 

concentrations of fuel and ground cover vegetation. High-to-extreme fire hazard and potential for 

excessive soil heating exists when downed woody debris exceeds 30 to 40 tons per acre (Brown et al., 

2003). Intense ground-level fire can adversely affect ground cover conditions and create localized areas 

of severely burned soil underneath consumed CWD. Although nutrient transformations as a result of 

recent fires have been observed to generate substantial herbaceous re-growth during the first few 

growing seasons (B&B, Evans West fires), there would likely be a higher risk for accelerated wind 

erosion and water runoff in the short-term associated with wildfire under this alternative. Over time, 

burned areas not salvaged would have increased levels of CWD as fire killed trees are recruited to the 

forest floor. 

Measure #3: Project Design and Mitigation

Implementation of project design features and mitigation measures included in the action alternatives 

would not be necessary. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Measure #1: Detrimental Soil Disturbance 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The use of ground-based equipment for vegetation management treatments 

would increase the amount and distribution of soil impacts within the activity areas proposed for harvest 

treatments. The development and use of temporary roads, log landings, and skid trail systems are the 

primary sources of new soil disturbance capable of affecting soil productivity. Most soil impacts would 

occur on and adjacent to these heavy-use areas where multiple equipment passes typically cause 

detrimental soil compaction. Resource protection measures, including Best Management Practices 

(BMPs), Project Design Features (PDFs), and mitigations, would be applicable to all proposed activity 

units and are designed to avoid or minimize the extent of soil disturbance between main skid trails and 

away from log landings and mitigate these impacts on skid trails and landings when necessary to meet 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

368  Ogden Final EIS

LRMP standards. As a result, the proposed activities are expected maintain soil productivity within all 

activity units proposed for harvest and/or fuels treatments.

Harvest and Yarding: Direct effects to the soil resource are primarily related to disturbance from

ground-based machinery used to harvest and yard trees. The nature of these effects would primarily 

consist of compaction to mineral soil on heavy use areas such as temporary roads, log landings, and 

main skid trails and would be similar within all units in which ground-based machinery operated. 

Detrimental compaction is generally incurred by more than 3-5 equipment passes over the same piece 

of ground (McNabb and Froehlich, 1983) and research studies and local soil monitoring show that soil 

compaction and soil displacement account for the majority of detrimental soil conditions resulting 

from ground-based logging operations on ash soils (Page-Dumroese, 1993; Geist, 1989; Powers, 

1999; USDA 1995; Deschutes Monitoring Report 2010).

The ash-influenced soils throughout the project area are moderately susceptible to compaction forces 

capable of increasing soil strength. Soil strength on primary skid trails, landings and temporary roads 

would be expected to be increased to levels meeting detrimental criteria and capable of affecting root 

growth, water infiltration, and moisture holding capacity on site. This is expected to occur on 

approximately 15% of the activity area following ground-based harvest, yarding and processing 

activities, including a conservatively high 13% of the unit in skid trails averaging 100’ spacing and 12 

foot widths, and 2% of the unit in landings averaging 100’ x 100’ for each 15 acres of harvested 

ground. Although impacts on skid trails are not always detrimental across their entire width or length, 

their average spacing tends to lessen as they converge toward a landing. All skid trails and landings 

would be considered to be in a detrimental condition following harvest, skidding and fuels treatment 

activities under this proposal.

The extent of direct effects on the soil resource would vary between activity areas based on the 

harvest prescription, which determines the trees per acre removed, and the amount of existing 

disturbance, which can influence the cumulative amount of disturbance following the implementation 

of proposed management activities. Past monitoring on the Deschutes National Forest has shown that 

detrimental soil conditions increase each time a stand is treated with mechanical equipment 

(Deschutes Soil Monitoring Reports 1996, 1997, and 1999). Although there are opportunities to re-use 

existing skid trail networks and log landings in the units previously entered by mechanized groundbased systems, additional impacts are likely to be incurred that would temporarily push detrimental 

levels to or above LRMP and R6 Standards for maintaining soil productivity following harvest and 

yarding activities. Even with careful planning and implementation of project activities, the extent of 

detrimental soil conditions can be expected to increase by 5-10% with each successive entry into a 

stand (Craigg, 2000).

Additional impacts within units with existing disturbance are generally a result of re-oriented skid trail 

networks and localized off trail tracks from harvester shears. Additional detrimental impacts from offtrail traffic by harvester shears are expected to be localized and minimal in extent as a result of PDFs 

that limit the number of passes by off trail traffic over the same piece of ground. Although the 

maneuvering of tracked equipment on dry ash soils can displace or mix the surface soil and organic 

matter with subsurface horizons, it is typically localized and rarely exceeds the requirement of 

displacement over an area a minimum of 100 square feet in size and at least 5 feet in width to meet 

detrimental criteria (FSM 2521.03 and the R-6 Supplement). As a result, detrimental displacement is 

not expected to be a measurable contributor to soil disturbance levels within proposed activity areas. 

Off trail traffic has been observed to incur localized additional detrimental compaction within an 

activity area (Lower Jack Monitoring; Sunny #46), and the effects of off trail trips by the harvester 

shears may add to the overall levels of detrimental disturbance within the proposed unit areas.

Levels of detrimental disturbance are predicted to increase under all harvest treatment prescriptions, 

primarily as a result of detrimental compaction incurred on the soil resource by ground-based 

machinery. Tables in Appendix C display the percentages of existing and predicted detrimental soil 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  369

conditions following harvest and yarding activities. Proposed Ogden units with low existing 

detrimental disturbance levels are expected to meet the 20% LRMP standard for maintaining soil 

productivity under either light or moderate volume prescriptions. The mechanical thinning of other 

black bark stands in the area at similar volumes has incurred detrimental impacts on 15 to 20% of an 

activity area when implemented on ground with low existing impacts (USDA 1995; Deschutes 

Monitoring Report 2010).

Proposed Ogden units with high existing detrimental disturbance levels may temporarily exceed the 

20% LRMP standard for maintaining soil productivity following harvest and yarding activities under 

either light or moderate volume prescriptions. In general, activity areas with lower volumes proposed 

for removal would have fewer machine trips to harvest and yard material and incur lower levels of 

detrimental disturbance. However, proposed activity areas with lighter prescription volumes have had 

more intensive activity in the past and higher existing levels of disturbance that may or may not be 

completely utilized as skid trails under the current entry. Predicted detrimental conditions following 

mechanical harvest and yarding activities within units with higher existing levels of detrimental 

disturbance are likely to be near or above the 20% LRMP standard for detrimental disturbance. Units 

identified in Appendix C (FEIS) as temporarily exceeding 20% detrimental disturbance would have 

primary skid trails and landings re-used for the current operations subsoiled to reduce detrimental 

compaction and bring overall detrimental soil disturbance below the 20% threshold.

Temporary Roads: Approximately 41 activity units proposed in the Ogden project under this 

alternative would require the creation (6 miles) or re-use (5.5 miles) of temporary roads for access and 

haul. The majority of newly created temporary roads would be placed on railroad era roads or skid 

trails that have recovered to varying degrees from previous detrimental levels, while some portions of 

these roads would be on ground with no previous impacts. The re-use of old temporary roads or skid 

trails of more recent activities would occur on ground that is already detrimentally impacted. All of 

the proposed temporary road miles would be subject to multiple trips by skidders and/or log trucks 

and incur short term direct effects in the form of compaction and displacement. Approximately 16 

acres of the soil resource would be detrimentally impacted as a result of these actions. 

All temporary road surfaces would receive restoration treatments following their use to rehabilitate 

compacted and displaced conditions. Treatments could include subsoiling to de-compact subsurface 

and surface layers where soil depths were sufficient to accommodate the subsoiler wings. Subsoiling 

would immediately reduce compaction (measured as soil strength or resistance to penetration) to 

below natural levels for the majority of the profile, with a gradual return to natural levels as the 

profile settled from moisture percolation and the weight of snow. As a result, these acres would be 

immediately capable of infiltrating water and would be set on a trajectory of recovery capable of 

supporting vegetation within the following growing seasons.

Treatment of temporary roads could also include the use of the bucket rake of an excavator to decompact the surface of the soil, replace woody material to provide cover, and re-smooth or re-contour 

mineral soil displaced to the edges. Although acres treated with the bucket rake of an excavator would 

be capable of infiltrating water into the surface layers, the soil strength of the subsurface profile would 

take longer to return to natural conditions and may limit further infiltration or root growth into the 

long term. Acres treated in this manner are not likely to return to a full productive capacity in the short 

term, although re-smoothing of displaced mineral soil and freeze/thaw mechanisms within the profile 

will help improve soil conditions over time.

System Roads: Neither action alternative proposes to close or decommission system roads within the 

project area.

Fuels Treatment: Fuels treatments proposed under this decision include the possibility of machine 

grapple piling within 4,932 unit acres proposed for timber harvest and 1,200 unit acres proposed for 

pre-commercial thinning. These unit acres have been identified with higher levels of residual ground 

fuels that may need to be grapple piled when combined with whip felled material. The actual amount 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

370  Ogden Final EIS

of acreage on which machines utilized for piling would travel would be much less than the total unit 

acres as a result of the location of material to be piled and recommendations under Resource 

Protection Measures (beginning on page 37) to limit the travel of these machines. Grapple piling 

would occur primarily on landings within units proposed for timber harvest where whole tree yarding 

prescriptions would generate large amounts of slash. Grapple piling of slash concentrations in excess 

of recommended fuel loadings may also occur within the interior of these units following mechanical 

harvest.

Machinery utilized for piling can incur direct effects to the soil resource in the form of compaction. 

However, machine travel for piling on landings would occur on ground already impacted by logging 

traffic and would not result in a net increase in detrimental soil conditions. Operation of this 

machinery to treat slash within the interior of the units would occur primarily from skid trails utilized 

or created by the harvest activities in most units. Travel off of skid trails may occur under restricted 

single out and back passes to limit direct impacts on the soil resource from this activity. Travel over 

areas where excavator harvesters had previously operated to cut and accumulate material may become 

detrimentally compacted as a result of the cumulative passes. Monitoring of grapple operations has 

showed the potential for measurable increases in the amount of detrimental disturbance incurred on 

similar soils in black bark ponderosa stands to the northwest of the Ogden planning area (Monitoring 

report, 2010). As a result, grapple piling has the potential to increase detrimental soil conditions by an 

additional 1 to 5% of the activity area.

Project design features also recommend that machine piles be located on landings and skid trails 

where possible (beginning on page 37). Burning large landing piles would incur elevated ground-level 

heating capable of volatilizing soil nutrients and altering physical soil properties. However, impacts 

would be localized to the footprint of the pile and overlap detrimentally compacted soil conditions 

incurred by the harvest and yarding operations. The burning of smaller grapple piles would also be 

expected to cause localized impacts to the soil resource on skid trails that are already detrimentally 

compacted. As a result, the majority of detrimental conditions resulting from burning landing or 

grapple piles would not be additive to the totals incurred from harvest operations.

Lop and scatter, hand thinning and hand piling treatments are also proposed within a number of 

activity areas under this proposal. Hand piling could occur within the 6,132 activity area acres 

identified for machine grapple piling if fuel loads are deemed to be within acceptable levels following 

harvest activities. Approximately 5,591 activity area acres are identified for no slash treatments or lop 

and scatter of whips felled following thinning activities. Hand slash treatment activities would not 

incur detrimental impacts to the soil resource, although piled slash would be burned and may incur 

localized heating impacts to the soil resource. However, since the piles are relatively small and loosely 

compressed, they generate only slightly elevated ground-level heating that is unlikely to volatilize 

nutrients or detrimentally alter soil properties that affect long-term site productivity. Ash soils conduct 

heat poorly and have been observed to be covered with the moss Funeria hygrometrica after the 

growing season following burning under these types of piles, indicating minimal impacts and 

relatively steady recovery of these areas. As a result, hand piles are not likely to impact the soil 

resource to a measurable degree as a result of elevated temperatures and heat penetration into the soil 

profile.

Mowing treatments are proposed within approximately 10,356 unit acres to reduce the heights and 

continuity of the brush component prior to underburn prescriptions. Mowing would also occur on 

approximately 1,269 additional activity area acres not proposed for subsequent underburning. This 

activity is not likely to cause detrimental soil displacement or consequential increases in soil bulk 

density from single or double pass traffic by the ASV tractor (Soil Monitoring Report, 1997). The low 

ground pressure of the tractor, the limited amount of traffic (one or two equipment passes), and the 

variable cushioning effect of surface organic matter are the primary factors that limit soil compaction 

and displacement from this operation.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  371

Prescribed underburning would be used to reduce fuel accumulations in the majority of activity areas 

proposed for mechanical harvest and pre-commercial thinning (10,356 unit acres) and in areas not

proposed for harvest (about 248 acres in RHCAs). Detrimental impacts to the soil resource are 

expected to be very localized in extent (less than 1%) under post harvest conditions that have reduced 

stand densities and fuel loading within the activity areas to levels within a range receptive to the 

spread of low to moderate intensity fire. Planned ignitions would also occur within applicable LRMP 

standards and guidelines and under Best Management Practices (BMPs) included in prescribed burn 

plans to minimize effects to the soil resource. Prescribed burn plans would include soil moisture and 

duff retention guidelines to minimize the risk for intense ground-level heating and exposure of 

mineral soil. It is expected that adequate retention of fine organic matter (litter and duff layer) would 

remain on the surface following burn operations for protecting mineral soil from erosion and 

supplying nutrients for vegetative and soil microbial growth.

Although mowing operations will add fine fuels to existing levels of natural fuel accumulations on the 

soil surface within some activity units, shrub heights and continuity will be reduced to minimize 

subsequent flame heights generated during a burn. Natural and mowed fine fuel accumulations (i.e., 

decadent brush, tree branches, and needle cast litter) typically do not burn for long durations or cause 

excessive soil heating (Maxwell, Ward, 1980). Soil heating is expected to be minimal during burn 

operations under the fuel type (grass, brush, trees), density, and nature of the litter and duff layers 

(thickness, moisture content) present at the time of ignition.

The risk of elevated soil heating during prescribed burn operations is localized to areas underneath 

coarse woody debris (CWD). Although high-to-extreme fire hazard and potential for excessive soil 

heating exists when CWD on the surface exceeds 30 to 40 tons per acre (Brown et al., 2003), overall 

levels of CWD prior to the implementation of prescribed burning are expected to range from about 5 

to 12 tons of per acre over most of the activity areas (Ogden Fuels specialist report). Soil heating is 

likely to be minimal regardless of the season of burn since higher moisture levels are generally present 

during spring burns and fall burns would be conducted following brief periods of precipitation. 

Prescribed burns also incur a risk of excessive consumption of CWD present on the soil surface. This 

risk is relatively low since low-intensity prescribed burns do not readily consume material much 

larger than 3 inches in diameter, and charring does not substantially interfere with the decomposition 

or function of CWD (Graham et al., 1994). As a result, it is expected that there would be little or no 

detrimental changes in soil properties or CWD levels from prescribed burning.

Direct effects to the soil resource from implementing prescribed burns include the construction of 

containment line. Although burn blocks would be designed to incorporate multiple activity areas and 

utilize roads as containment line as much as possible, line would need to be constructed by hand or 

with a low-ground pressure ATV along the edges of units or wildlife corridors. The construction of 

line by hand or with an ATV machine pulling a small wedge-shaped plow would expose mineral soil 

in widths of approximately 1.5 and 3 feet, respectively. The use of hand tools or a single machine 

equipment pass are not likely to compact the soil but would remove the vegetative and surface organic 

cover from these areas. 

The extent of soil disturbance associated with machine and hand line activities would not remove 

surface organic layers in large enough areas to qualify as detrimental soil displacement as defined in 

FSM 2520. The impacts would also be mitigated to some degree by the redistribution of displaced 

topsoil and unburned woody debris over mechanical fire lines following prescribed burning activities. 

Litter from adjacent trees, coupled with the establishment of herbaceous grasses, forbs, shrubs, and 

tree seedlings over time would provide new sources of fine organic matter for humus development in 

the mineral soil on either machine or hand created lines. The extent of disturbed soil would be limited 

to the minimum necessary to achieve fuel management objectives and is estimated to be less than 1% 

of any one activity area.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

372  Ogden Final EIS

Summary of effects from Harvest and Fuels treatment activities

The extent of detrimental soil conditions in all activity areas would increase above existing conditions 

following the implementation of proposed project activities. The percentage of the soil resource in a 

detrimental condition would increase to the greatest extent within activity areas that have low existing 

disturbance levels and few existing skid trails or logging facilities available for re-utilization. This 

would occur in units that have not had mechanical harvest since the railroad era and that currently have 

levels of detrimental disturbance below 10%. Units with low existing detrimental impacts are likely to 

meet the Regional guidance for the soil resource provided in FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement No. 2500-98-1 

following harvest, yarding and fuels treatment activities under this decision. 

Units with existing detrimental disturbance levels above 10% are likely to be near or cumulatively 

exceed the LRMP 20% threshold for the soil resource as a result of impacts from harvest, yarding and 

fuels treatment activities. Although skid trails and landings are available for re-use under this entry, 

these units are likely to incur a 5 to 15% increase in the extent of detrimentally compacted acres as a 

result of implementing harvest and fuels treatments proposed under the action alternatives (Craigg, 

2000). Units proposed for machine grapple piling would incur the largest increase of impacts in this 

range, primarily as a result of travel off of landings and skid trails created during the harvest entry. 

These units are likely to be at or slightly above the 20% threshold following the fuels treatment 

activities and have been identified as likely candidates for restoration treatments to reduce these impacts 

and meet the LRMP threshold for the soil resource. Units with fuels treatments other than machine 

grapple piling are expected to incur minimal additional detrimental impacts following harvest activities 

and would meet the LRMP threshold without restoration treatments. 

Soil Restoration Treatments on Logging Facilities and Temporary Roads 

Individual activity areas with elevated existing levels of detrimental disturbance that are proposed for 

machine harvest and machine piling activities are likely to need soil restoration treatments (subsoiling) 

in order to reduce the cumulative amount of detrimentally compacted soil and comply with LRMP 

standards SL-3 and SL-4, and Regional policy under FSM 2520 and R-6 Supplement No. 2500-98-1 for 

maintaining or enhancing soil productivity. Soil restoration treatments may be applied to previously 

impacted areas utilized as primary skid trails and landings during this entry as a Sale Area Improvement 

measure in order to reduce the cumulative levels of detrimental soil conditions anticipated from this 

project proposal and comply with LRMP and Regional policy. As a result of subsoiling, all activity units 

are expected to meet the Regional guidance for the soil resource provided in FSM 2520, R-6 

Supplement No. 2500-98-1 following proposed harvest, yarding, fuels and restoration or enhancement 

treatment activities. Subsoiling restoration treatments may also be implemented to rehabilitate up to 

11.5 miles (16.7 acres) of temporary roads where appropriate conditions allow for effective operations.

Subsoiling restoration treatments are capable of rehabilitating physical and hydrologic properties of the 

soil to conditions better capable of supporting vegetative growth on site. Subsoiling would be 

implemented with a self-drafting winged subsoiler, which is effective at fracturing compacted mineral

soil located at various depths in the soil profile. This specialized equipment has been shown to lift and 

shatter compacted soil layers in greater than 90 percent of the compacted zone with one equipment pass 

(Craigg, 2000). The winged subsoiling equipment used on the Deschutes National Forest has operated 

with good success where rock fragments are absent on the surface and minimal within the soil profile. 

Soils within the Ogden project area are conducive to subsoiling due to their low rock fragment content 

and moderately deep to deep profiles. Subsoiling treatments are expected to initially reduce soil 

strengths below natural soil strengths before settling of the mineral soil occurs from seasonal rain and 

snow. Soil conditions following subsoiling are expected to be below threshold values that affect 

productivity and on a path to pre-impact status within the short-term (less than 5 years) through natural 

recovery processes.

A winged subsoiler produces nearly complete loosening of compacted soil layers without causing 

substantial displacement. Although some displacement and mixing of surface organic matter can occur 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  373

from these operations, the clearance between the tool bar and the surface of the ground generally allows 

smaller logging slash to pass through without building up. The process can also bring rocks located in 

the soil profile to the surface. However, material that is moved and mixed is not removed off site and 

generally does not result in detrimental soil displacement. Although the biological significance of 

subsoiling is less certain, these restoration treatments likely improve subsurface habitat by restoring the 

soils ability to supply nutrients, moisture, and air that support soil microorganisms. Research studies on 

the Deschutes National Forest have shown that the distributions and composition of soil biota 

populations rebound back toward pre-impact conditions following subsoiling treatments on compacted 

skid trails and log landings (Moldenke et al., 2000). 

Sensitive Soils

The majority of activity areas proposed for mechanical vegetation treatments do not occur on landtypes 

that contain sensitive soils. Sensitive soils within the project area include ash soils on slopes exceeding 

30% that have a high risk for displacement from mechanized traffic and a high hazard rating for surface 

erosion when cover is lost or mineral soil disturbance occurs. Proposed harvest, yarding and fuels 

treatments would have minimal effects on the sensitive soils within these activity areas, primarily as a 

result of avoidance through site-specific project design features that restrict the operation of machinery 

on steep slopes and favor these slopes for designated wildlife leave areas. 

Treatments in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs)

Impacts to the soil resource within RHCAs would be minimized as a result of Project Design Features 

that limit disturbance to the soil resource primarily as a result of no treatments in Zone 1, hand 

treatments and directional felling in Zone 2, and the restriction and design of harvest infrastructure to

the extent possible in Zone 3. No soil disturbance is expected to occur within 12 feet of the stream 

(Zone 1). 

Soil disturbance would be very low within Zone 2 as a result of the thinning and piling of all material by 

hand within approximately 65 total acres. Some disturbance of surface organics and mineral soil would

occur in Zone 2 from foot traffic involved in felling, bucking and piling thinned trees. The piling of 

material is likely to create the most soil disturbance within Zone 2 as workers drag and move bucked 

material into piles. However, the extent of disturbance would be localized due to the restriction of pile 

locations to at least 50 feet from the streambank. Although the burning of handpiles would result in a 

short term exposure of bare mineral soil, the buffer of relatively undisturbed surface organics 

maintained adjacent to the stream channel and the location of piles outside of washes or depressions that 

may facilitate water run-off to the stream would reduce the risk of these areas contributing sediment to 

Paulina Creek in the short term. The small size and loose construction of handpiles would also 

minimize the intensity and duration of soil heating and initially allow for the re-colonization of these 

areas by Fusarium fungal species and subsequently by herbaceous forb and grass species. 

Soil disturbance would be higher in Zone 3 as a result of machine traffic used to thin, accumulate and 

yard trees within approximately 148 acres of RHCA. PDFs are included to contour primary skid trails 

parallel to the stream channel as much as possible within this zone to minimize the downslope length of 

this disturbance and reduce the potential connection to the stream channel. These skid trails would also 

be actively restored by either subsoiling or placing tree tops and branches on the surface following their 

use to provide surface roughness and barriers to overland flow. Although additional machine grapple 

piling could occur within Zone 3, impacts from this operation would be minimized by restricting 

operation of this machinery to skid trails created or used by the harvest and yarding operations.

Approximately 248 acres in Zones 2 and 3 of the RHCA that are proposed for thinning treatments

would be underburned under Alternative 2. Impacts to the soil resource are expected to be minimal as a 

result of limiting ignitions to at least 50 feet away from the stream in order to promote downhill creep of 

the fire within Zone 1 and 2, and burning under spring moisture conditions to reduce fire intensity and 

consumption rates. No additional detrimental soil disturbance would be expected as a result of the 

proposed underburn treatments. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

374  Ogden Final EIS

Measure #2: Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) and Surface Organic Matter

Existing CWD on the ground is variable across the planning area but generally exceeds LRMP 

standards in the lodgepole and mixed conifer stands (see Wildlife section in Chapter 3 of the EIS). 

Proposed activity areas identified with CWD amounts in excess of recommended habitat levels are 

likely to have some CWD material salvaged by the operational harvest activities or piled by the fuels 

treatments, except areas identified as Marten habitat (Resource Protection Measure # 64). Lodgepole or 

ponderosa pine CWD that has fallen to the ground proximate to the time of harvest may also be 

removed for commercial utilization in these units. Unit areas with existing levels at or below 

recommended levels would have existing CWD protected from disturbance and retained on site to the 

extent possible (Resource Protection Measure #62).

The retention of CWD and surface organic matter on site were used as surrogates for assessing the 

effects of proposed activities on soil productivity in this analysis. Changes to the CWD levels and 

associated effects to soil productivity were evaluated qualitatively based on the probable success of 

implementing recommended Resource Protection Measures and appropriate Best Management Practices 

(BMPs) listed in Chapter 2 of the EIS. Wildlife Resource Protection Measure #64 would retain 

sufficient amounts of downed trees per acre to meet LRMP direction for CWD as amended by the 

Eastside Screens. As a result, the minimum number of down logs retained per acre would maintain 

tonnages of CWD on site in line with amounts recommended by research to support mycorrhizal species 

and their associated benefits in all three forest communities proposed for treatment. 

Harvest Activities: Approximately 4,217 activity area acres have been identified for the possible 

salvage of CWD on the ground in excess of that necessary to meet LRMP Standards. Machines used 

to accumulate this material would primarily operate from skid trails created at recommended intervals 

but may also travel off of these trails during this process. As a result, activity areas in which both 

mechanized salvage and thinning occurred are likely to have the highest levels of detrimental soil 

disturbance following these activities. 

The removal of existing CWD from within the unit areas would incur some localized displacement 

and mixing of surface organics and mineral soil. The extent of this disturbance is expected to be 

contained to skid trails, landing areas and portions of off trail tracks within the unit area and total less 

than 20% of the activity unit acreage. Although whole tree yarding prescriptions would move the 

majority of limbs and tops of thinned material to the log landings, none of the existing fine material 

on the ground would be transported off site. It is expected that the mechanized accumulation and 

yarding activities would also recruit some finer sized organic matter to the forest floor from the 

breakage of limbs and tops that would help contribute to levels conducive to supporting chemical and 

biological productivity of the soil resource on site. As a result, overall nutrient availability, 

mycorrhizal activity and effective ground cover are not expected to be detrimentally affected by the 

proposed harvest and salvage activities.

Fuels Treatments: Fuels treatments proposed under the Ogden project would have a variety of 

effects on the levels of CWD and surface organic matter within the activity areas. Grapple piling 

would directly reduce the amount of CWD on site but PDFs are included to maintain minimum levels 

for wildlife habitat that are sufficient for onsite soil productivity. The mowing of shrubs would cause 

a short term increase in the level of fine fuels on site until prescribed burn treatments consumed a 

portion of the mowed and existing natural fuel accumulations on site. Prescribed burns are unlikely to 

reduce CWD levels or negatively affect decomposition cycles since moisture conditions 

recommended in Burn Plans minimize the consumption of material larger than 3 inches in diameter 

and charring does not substantially interfere with the decomposition or function of CWD (Graham et 

al., 1994). Although prescribed burn treatments can produce variable mortality in the existing stand, 

these trees would be a source of CWD when they eventually fall to the ground. Depending on the rate 

of decay and local wind conditions, many of small-diameter trees killed by the fire could fall to the 

ground within the short-term (less than 5 years). Prescribed burns are also likely to increase the short 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  375

term nutrient availability on site and improve biotic habitat for mycorrhizal fungi and 

microorganisms. 

Measure #3: Project Design Features and Mitigation

The management requirements, mitigation measures, and project design elements built into Alternative 

2 are all intended to avoid, minimize, or rectify adverse impacts to the soil resource from grounddisturbing management activities. Most of these elements would be implemented during and following 

project activities to meet the stated objectives for protecting and maintaining soil productivity.

Operational guidelines for equipment use are included in project design features to limit the amount of 

surface area covered by logging facilities and confine impacts to known locations of activity areas. 

These guidelines include: 1) Re-utilizing existing logging facilities to the extent possible; 2) Confining 

grapple skidders to operate on designated skid trails spaced on average of 100 feet apart except where

converging at log landings; 3) Avoid or strategize equipment operations in random locations of activity 

areas that contain sensitive soils on slopes over 30%; and 4) minimize off trail traffic of mechanized 

harvesters and grapple pilers to two or fewer passes. An additional guideline option available for 

minimizing impacts to the soil resource includes operating equipment over frozen ground or a sufficient 

amount of compacted snow. 

All of these operational guidelines have been successfully implemented in the past to minimize 

detrimental impacts to the soil resource. The re-use of existing logging facilities minimizes the extent of 

new detrimental impacts. Designated skid trails limit the extent of detrimental soil compaction to known 

locations across less than 13% of the activity area. Avoidance or strategic operation of machine traffic 

on steep slopes keeps surface organic material and mineral soil in place in those areas. The short-term 

effects of two passes or fewer by specialized machinery off of designated skid trails do not generally 

create a detrimental soil condition. Natural processes, such as frost heaving and freeze-thaw cycles, can 

ameliorate the slightly increased levels of soil strength incurred by limited machine passes near the soil 

surface in the short term. 

The recommended use of winter logging operations has been observed to minimize the extent of soil 

compaction, rutting, displacement, or loss of protective plant and litter cover within activity areas when 

compared to operating during moist or dry season conditions. Additional guidelines intended to 

minimize potential effects to the soil resource include prescribed burn plans with moisture guidelines to 

minimize the potential for intense ground-level heating and adverse effects to soil properties; adequate 

retention of coarse woody debris and fine organic matter to assure both short-term and long-term 

nutrient cycling on treated sites; and avoidance of equipment operations during periods of high soil 

moisture. 

The successful implementation of all applicable management practices and guidelines would help 

minimize the estimated percentages of detrimental soil conditions displayed Appendix C (FEIS) and 

may allow LRMP standards for soil productivity to be met without the need for subsoiling in some 

activity areas. Soil restoration treatments (subsoiling) are highly effective in restoring detrimentally 

compacted soils and the dominant soils within the project area are well suited for tillage treatments due 

to their depth and lack of rock fragments. Restoration treatments are designed to promote the 

maintenance or enhancement of soil quality, and are consistent with Regional policy (FSM 2520, R-6 

Supplement) and LRMP interpretations of standards and guidelines SL-3 and SL-4. 

All reasonable Best Management Practices (BMP’s) would be applied to minimize the effects of road 

systems and timber management activities on the soil resource. A variety of BMP’s are available to 

control erosion on roads and logging facilities. The BMP’s are tiered to the Soil and Water Conservation 

Practices Handbook (FSH 2509.22), which contains conservation practices that have proven effective in 

protecting and maintaining soil and water resource values. The Oregon Department of Forestry 

evaluated more than 3,000 individual practices and determined a 98% compliance rate for BMP 

implementation, with 5% of these practices exceeding forest practice rules (National Council for Air

and Stream Improvement, 1999).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

376  Ogden Final EIS

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative impacts to the soil resource include the sum total of activity induced disturbance from past 

and proposed management activities within each activity unit. Estimates of the cumulative predicted 

levels of detrimental soil disturbance for each proposed Ogden unit are summarized in Appendix C 

(FEIS). Project design features and LRMP management requirements are built into the action 

alternatives to minimize the extent of direct impacts to the soil resource and ensure that long-term 

productivity will not be impaired by the application of short-term management practices. Activity areas 

with lower existing levels of detrimental soil disturbance are expected to meet the LRMP standard of 

20% following implementation of proposed harvest, yarding and fuels treatment activities. All activity 

areas are expected to be consistent with the Deschutes LRMP and Region 6 Standards and Guidelines 

for the soil resource following the implementation of all proposed activities, including Sale Area 

improvement restoration treatments such as subsoiling. As a result, the combined effects of all past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable management activities within each of the proposed activity areas are 

expected to meet allowable limits set by Regional direction and LRMP standards and guidelines for

protecting and maintaining soil productivity. 

Future management activities are assumed to occur as planned in the schedule of projects for the 

Deschutes National Forest. No future timber sales are currently scheduled within the Ogden planning 

area. No on-going fuel reduction activities are currently planned within the project area boundaries. 

There are no designated Firewood Areas within the Ogden project area. The Flat Vegetation 

Management Project is currently being planned for tree thinning, fuels reduction and prescribed burning 

within the Long Prairie watershed immediately to the south of the Ogden project area. None of the 

activities proposed under the Flat project would incur detrimental compaction or disturbance within 

activity areas proposed under the Ogden project. 

Other foreseeable future activities include the designation of recreational OHV trails and the 

administrative closure of approximately 58 miles of system roads under the Lava Rock OHV project. 

Future soil disturbances from recreational OHV use would be confined to relatively small areas along 

trail edges that have a relatively minor effect on overall site productivity. Standard road maintenance 

operations would also occur within the Ogden project area that would minimize watershed impacts or 

reduce accelerated erosion rates associated with drainage problems on specific segments of road 

proposed for use as a haul route. Surface erosion can usually be controlled by implementing appropriate 

Best Management Practices (BMPs) that reduce the potential for indirect effects to soils in areas 

adjacent to roadways. There are no site-specific mitigation measures or post harvest activities 

recommended by other resource specialists that would cause additional soil impacts from ground 

disturbing activities. 

Measure #1: Detrimental Soil Disturbance 

The combined effects of existing disturbances and those anticipated from implementing the multiple 

activities proposed in the Ogden project are cumulative within the boundary of each activity unit. 

Estimates of existing and predicted cumulative amounts of detrimental soil conditions are displayed in 

Appendix D (FEIS) for each activity area. Existing levels of detrimental soil conditions within activity 

areas proposed for mechanical treatments range from 5 to 20%.

Ground-based equipment used for mechanical harvest and yarding activities proposed under 

Alternative 2 would incur direct soil disturbance during this entry. Detrimental disturbance would be 

expected on primary skid trails (11% of the activity area) and landings (2% of the activity area) as a 

result of multiple machine passes. Additional detrimental impacts may be incurred where machinery 

used to harvest or pile material between skid trails overlaps previous machine disturbance that does 

not yet meet detrimental criteria. Although this traffic is not expected to incur detrimental damage to 

the soil resource if traveling over ground that is not impacted, the additional one or two pass traffic off 

of skid trails from machinery could cumulatively result in detrimental compaction where these passes 

overlapped with existing impacts or additional trips from off trail grapple piling traffic between skid 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  377

trails. This additional detrimental disturbance has been observed to range from 1-5% of the activity 

area. As a result, the cumulative sum of detrimental impacts following harvest, yarding and machine 

piling within an activity area are expected to cover approximately 18% of the soil resource. 

Mowing, whole tree yarding, hand piling, hand thinning, pile burning and prescribed burning 

treatments are not expected to cause cumulative detrimental impacts to the soil resource. Mowing 

machinery is not expected to incur cumulative detrimental disturbance due to the lower ground 

pressure of this machinery and observations of operations where displacement of soil surface layers is 

not large enough to qualify as a detrimental soil disturbance. Whole tree yarding to log landings 

would localize machine piling disturbances to landing areas and burning would occur on disturbed 

soils that already have detrimentally compacted or displaced conditions. Hand thinning, hand piling 

and slash burning would cause a minimal increase in detrimental soil conditions because machinery 

would not be used and the burning of smaller piles between skid trails would not be expected to cause 

severely burned soil. Larger machine piles would occur on landings and skid trails that are already 

detrimentally impacted. There would also be no cumulative effects from proposed prescribed burn 

treatments since they will be conducted at times and under conditions that result in low to moderate 

intensity burns that do not cause detrimental changes in soil properties. 

The cumulative effects to the soil resource within all mechanical treatment units with low existing 

detrimental conditions are expected to be within LRMP standards for maintaining soil productivity 

following harvest, skidding and fuels related activities. Units with high existing detrimental conditions 

may temporarily exceed the 20% LRMP standard following harvest, skidding and fuels related 

activities and would need restoration treatment (subsoiling) of impacts from previous entries in order 

to meet LRMP standards for maintaining soil productivity.

Measure #2: Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) and Surface Organic Matter

As previously described for the direct and indirect effects, it is expected that Alternative 2 would meet 

LRMP standards for soil productivity and comply with the recommended management guidelines that 

ensure adequate retention of snags, coarse woody debris, and fine organic matter following both 

harvest and fuels treatments. The retention of these components will provide effective surface cover, 

substrate for biological activity (including mycorrhizae), and available nutrients to maintain soil 

productivity on treated sites. 

Measure #3: Project Design Criteria and Mitigation

Under Alternative 2, project implementation includes the application of management requirements, 

project design elements and mitigation measures during and following project activities to meet stated 

objectives for protecting and maintaining soil productivity. Operational guidelines for equipment use 

provide options for limiting the amount of surface area covered by logging facilities and controlling 

equipment operations to locations and ground conditions that are less susceptible to detrimental soil 

impacts within activity areas. 

Alternative 2 is not expected to create any impacts that would cause irreversible damage to soil 

productivity. There is no risk for mechanical disturbances to cause soil mass failures (landslides) due 

to the inherent stability of dominant landtypes and the lack of seasonally wet soils on steep slopes. 

Careful planning and the application of Best Management Practices and project design features would 

be used to prevent irreversible losses of the soil resource. The development and use of temporary 

roads and logging facilities would incur a temporary detrimental loss of soil productivity on those 

areas until their functions have been served and disturbed sites are set back on a path of recovery 

through rehabilitation treatments. Approximately 16.7 acres of the soil resource will be impacted as a 

temporary roads and subsequently rehabilitated.

Under Alternative 2, equipment operations would cause some new soil disturbances in portions of 

previously managed areas where ground-based logging is proposed for this entry. As discussed under 

direct and indirect effects, the project design features, management requirements, and Best 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

378  Ogden Final EIS

Management Practices (BMPs) built into this alternative are all designed to avoid or minimize 

potentially adverse impacts to the soil resource. The amount of disturbed soil associated with 

temporary roads and logging facilities would be limited to the minimum necessary to achieve 

management objectives. Compliance with LRMP standard and guideline SL-5 is addressed by 

excluding small portions of activity areas with sensitive soils on steep slopes from random machine 

traffic. All reasonable Best Management Practices for Timber Management and Road Systems would 

be applied to protect the soil surface and control erosion on, and adjacent to, roads and logging 

facilities used during project implementation. These conservation practices are to be implemented 

during and following project activities to help ensure that the stated objectives for protecting and 

maintaining soil productivity are met.

All reasonable BMPs would be applied to minimize the effects of road systems, fuels and timber 

management activities on the soil resource. The BMPs are tiered to the Soil and Water Conservation 

Practices Handbook (FSH 2509.22), which contains conservation practices that have proven effective 

in protecting and maintaining soil and water resource values. Restoration treatments, such as 

subsoiling, are designed to promote maintenance or enhancement of soil quality, and these 

conservation practices are consistent with both LRMP management direction and Regional policy. 

Alternative 2 includes subsoiling to improve the hydrologic function and productivity on soils that 

were detrimentally disturbed to create temporary roads, primary skid trails and log landings. Other 

rehabilitation methods include scarifying of surface compaction with the bucket of an excavator and 

the replacement of fine and coarse woody debris on those surfaces to promote physical and biological 

recovery of the soil resource.

Alternative 3

Effects summary: Alternative 3 would spatially change the location of effects to the soil resource 

within the Ogden project area by dropping some activity areas included in Alternative 2 and adding new 

activity areas. It would also change the extent of effects within some activity areas as a result of 

dropping the tree thinning prescriptions included in Alternative 2. Although Alternative 3 would treat 

approximately 255 more total acres than Alternative 2, it would have slightly reduced overall effects to 

the soil resource as a result of treating 3,745 fewer acres with a combined tree and fuel treatment. Direct 

and cumulative effects on the soil resource would be similar for each individual or combination of 

treatments described under Alternative 2.

Effects to the soil resource would be reduced compared to Alternative 2. Approximately 993 unit acres 

would treat fuels but not thinned under this alternative. Effects would be reduced within approximately 

2,302 unit acres that would have the mow and underburn fuels treatments dropped. The proposed

changes in prescriptions under Alternative 3 would lower the overall number of machine trips and 

reduce the amount of detrimental soil disturbance incurred within approximately 3,259 unit acres. The 

993 unit acres in which thinning prescriptions were dropped would have reduced impacts incurred as a 

result of not having skid trails and landings created by machine harvesting and yarding activities. The 

logging system within the 2,302 unit acres proposed for thinning without fuels treatments would still 

require the same amount of skid trails and landings to process material and levels of impact incurred 

from harvest and yarding activities would likely be similar to those predicted under Alternative 2. 

However, these activity areas would not incur additional machine impacts as a result of grapple piling 

and overall impacts to the soil resource would be less under this alternative.

Approximately 450 unit acres proposed for thinning and fuels treatments under Alternative 2 would be 

completely dropped under Alternative 3. These areas would not incur any soil disturbance as a result of 

this change. Conversely, approximately 1,099 acres of combined thinning prescriptions and fuels 

treatments would be added under this alternative on approximately 343 acres of goshawk PFA habitat 

and approximately 756 acres of general forest areas not proposed for treatment under Alternative 2. The 

soils within these unit areas are similar to those present within Alternative 2 units and impacts incurred 

on the soil resource in the added unit acres would be similar to those described for combined thinning 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  379

and fuels treatments under Alternative 2. Units with higher levels of existing impact would also likely 

need restoration treatments following proposed activities in order to meet LRMP standards for 

maintaining soil productivity. A summary of existing and predicted levels of soil disturbance for activity 

areas in Alternative 3 are included in Appendix C.

Alternative 3 would also increase the amount of acres in which either fuels treatments or tree treatments 

would be the only actions to occur. Approximately 2,889 more acres would receive tree treatments 

without subsequent fuels treatments and approximately 1,110 more acres would receive fuels treatments 

without tree treatments under this alternative compared to Alternative 2. The effects to the soil resource 

would be similar to those described under Alternative 3 for the respective individual proposed thinning 

or fuels treatments.

Measure #1: Detrimental Soil Disturbance 

The use of ground-based equipment for vegetation management treatments would increase the amount 

and distribution of soil impacts within the activity areas proposed for harvest treatments. The 

development and use of temporary roads, log landings, and skid trail systems are the primary sources of 

new soil disturbance capable of affecting soil productivity. Most soil impacts would occur on and 

adjacent to these heavy-use areas where multiple equipment passes typically cause detrimental soil 

compaction. Resource protection measures, including Best Management Practices (BMPs), Project 

Design Features (PDFs), and mitigations, would be applicable to all proposed activity units and are 

designed to avoid or minimize the extent of soil disturbance between main skid trails and away from log 

landings and mitigate these impacts on skid trails and landings when necessary to meet LRMP 

standards. As a result, the proposed activities are expected maintain soil productivity within all activity 

units proposed for harvest and/or fuels treatments under Alternative 3.

Direct and Indirect Effects

Harvest and yarding effects: Direct and indirect effects to the soil resource under Alternative 3 

would be the same as those described for Alternative 2 within units proposed for silvicultural 

prescriptions using mechanical ground-based equipment and/or fuels treatment prescriptions. 

Alternative 3 would spatially change the location of harvest and yarding effects within the watershed 

by dropping 450 unit acres analyzed in Alternative 2 and adding 1,099 new unit acres for thinning and 

fuels treatments. Existing levels of detrimental disturbance listed for these units under Alternative 2 in 

Appendix C would remain unchanged across the 450 acres dropped in this alternative. Direct effects 

on the soil resource within the 1,099 unit acres added under this alternative would be similar to those 

described for the cumulative thinning and fuels treatments in units analyzed under Alternative 2. 

Whole tree yarding would occur in all units added under Alternative 3 and require the same extent of 

skid trails and landings to process this material as those predicted for Alternative 2. As a result, 

detrimental soil impacts in these units would be similar to those described for the various thinning and 

fuels treatments prescriptions analyzed under Alternative 2. Existing and predicted detrimental 

disturbance levels for units included in Alternative 3 are listed in Appendix C (FEIS). All unit areas 

would comply with LRMP and Region 6 standards for the soil resource following thinning, fuels and 

restoration treatments as a result of these actions.

Temporary Roads: Alternative 3 would have the same miles of temporary roads as described for 

Alternative 2, incurring the same short term effects to the soil resource. All temporary road miles 

would be rehabilitated by subsoiling or other restoration treatments to minimize the short and long 

term effect of compaction and the removal of surface organics on these surfaces.

System Roads: Neither action alternative proposes to close or decommission system roads within the 

project area. 

Fuels treatment: Fuels treatments would have the same effects on the soil resource under Alternative 

3 as those described under Alternative 2. Some units would have reduced direct effects as a result of 

dropping the fuels treatment proposed under Alternative 2, but would have a greater risk of indirect 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

380  Ogden Final EIS

effects on the soil resource as a result leaving existing fuel loads within these units and increasing the 

potential behavior, intensity and duration of wildfire through heavy accumulations of down woody 

debris. However, although these changes to fire characteristics have the potential to incur detrimental

burn damage to the soil resource, it would be expected to occur over a relatively low percentage of the 

actual acreage. Recent wildfires across the Deschutes have generally been observed to incur 

detrimental burn damage over less than 5% of the actual fire acreage, primarily directly underneath 

down logs lying directly on the soil surface.

Treatments in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs): Approximately 212 acres within 

the Paulina Creek RHCA would be thinned and treated for fuels. The designation of treatment zones 

and the inclusion of Project Design Features would be the same as under Alternative 2, with similar 

effects to the soil resource as those described for Alternative 2. The primary difference would be a 

reduction of 36 acres on which soil disturbance would occur within the RHCA. As a result, there 

would be slightly less soil disturbance within the RHCA under Alternative 3.

Measure #2: Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) and Surface Organic Matter

Direct and Indirect Effects: Levels of coarse woody debris and surface organic matter would change 

within the proposed activity areas in a similar manner to that described under Alternative 2. Harvest, 

yarding and fuels treatments would reduce CWD levels (approximately 4,963 acres) according to the 

same wildlife Project Design Features included in Alternative 2, which appear to be sufficient to provide 

microbial habitat and moisture retention and contribute to maintaining soil productivity on site. 

Although whole tree yarding, slash piling and pile burning would remove a source of surface organic 

matter from each activity area, overall levels are expected to remain sufficient to provide cover and a 

source of nutrients on site. The residual stand within each activity area following proposed treatments 

would also be a source of needles and branches over time to maintain or build the levels of organic 

matter on the soil surface. As a result, the proposed treatments under Alternative 3 would reduce the 

levels of CWD and surface organic matter to levels still capable of contributing to soil productivity on 

site.

Measure #3: Project Design and Mitigation

The design of activity areas and features included to minimize the impacts of proposed activities on the 

soil resource would be the same as those discussed under Alternative 2. As a result, the direct and 

cumulative effects on the soil resource under this alternative would be similar to those described under 

Alternative 2 and all activity areas would meet LRMP and Region 6 standards for the soil resource.

Cumulative effects:

The cumulative effects to the soil resource under Alternative 3 would be expected to be similar as those 

described under Alternative 2 for all three analysis measures. The types and intensity of treatments 

proposed are similar to those analyzed under Alternative 2 and would occur on similar soils under 

similar treatment combinations within a particular unit. Operations would also occur within the 

framework of the same Project Design Features included for Alternative 2. As a result, the cumulative 

total of effects to the soil resource within each individual activity area are expected to be within LRMP 

standards for maintaining soil productivity following all harvest, fuels and restoration treatments 

proposed under this alternative. 

The effects from the actions proposed under Alternatives 2 or 3 of the Ogden project, combined with all 

past, present, and reasonably foreseeable management activities, are not expected to incur cumulative 

detrimental soil impacts that would exceed LRMP and Region 6 standards and guidelines for 

maintaining soil productivity within the project area or specific activity area units. Consequently, there 

would be no measurable cumulative increase in the extent of detrimental soil conditions beyond the 

predicted levels displayed for each of the proposed activity areas in Appendix C (FEIS).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  381

3.8.1 Introduction

The project area is located on the western flank of the Newberry Volcano, and is primarily within the 

110,288 acre (87,398 acres federal) 10th field Lower Little Deschutes River watershed (HUC 1707030207) 

but also extends into the Long Prairie watershed. This watershed is further divided into 6 sub-watersheds, 

but the project area lies primarily within the Upper Paulina Creek, Lower Paulina Creek, and Wickiup 

Junction sub-watersheds. Groundwater flow direction in the Deschutes basin above Bend is influenced by 

complex, underlying geology, and is not closely associated with the surface topography in some areas. 

Groundwater movement on Newberry Volcano within the project area is generally northward (Lite and 

Gannett 2002). Precipitation in the Ogden project area, primarily snowfall, is approximately 20-30 inches 

annually. Evapotranspiration of groundwater is rare in this area of the basin (Gannett et al. 2001). 

Groundwater level fluctuations in the basin are driven primarily by decadal climatic cycles (Gannett et al, 

2001). Paulina Creek is the only stream or water body in the Ogden project area.

Vegetation management activities (harvesting, skidding, landings, road building, underburning) have 

potential for causing hydrological effects in a watershed. The pathways by which water moves to stream 

channels is affected by vegetation management through its influences on snow accumulation and melt rates, 

influences on evapotranspiration and soil water, and influences on soil structure that affect infiltration and 

water transmission rates (Meehan 1991). This in turn can lead to changes in the timing, duration, and 

volume of peak flows in a stream, which influences changes in bank erosion and channel forming processes 

within the stream. Vegetation management also has the potential to modify stream processes by mass 

movements of sediment, bank destabilization from vegetation removal, and loss of instream large wood 

from direct removal or debris torrents. Effects from vegetation management activities are influenced by the 

proximity of treatments to streams and slope. Changes in water quality (suspended sediment, temperature, 

dissolved oxygen, nutrients) have potential to be affected by vegetation management activities (Meehan

1991). Hydrologic and stream morphology changes ultimately influence fish habitat and fish populations. 

Prescribed fire generally has low severity effects and reduced hydrologic effects compared to wildfire. 

Mowing of underbrush generally has minor hydrologic effects to a watershed, as ground cover is retained. 

Some soil compaction occurs during these operations.

Hydrological effects from vegetation management activities do not typically occur on Newberry Crater 

which includes the Ogden Project area. Runoff is a relatively small component of the total water budget in 

the basin due to the high infiltration rates of the highly permeable volcanic soils (Gannett et al. 2001). The 

fractured nature of the lavas allows rapid movement of groundwater to lower elevations. Surface water 

drainages are uncommon in the basin, and are primarily spring-driven. Paulina Creek is the only stream on 

the Newberry Volcano (over 500 square miles) and drains Paulina Lake. There are no other springs, seeps, 

wetlands or riparian areas within the project area.

The long-term sustainability of fisheries and other aquatic species populations depends largely on habitat 

conditions and water quality, both of which are influenced by activities instream, on the floodplain, and 

within the uplands of the watershed. Land use activities, such as vegetation management, road 

construction, and recreation have potential to adversely affect fish and other aquatic species populations 

and habitat by reducing shade, overhead cover, and future instream recruitment of large woody material, 

introducing fine sediments, pollutants, and nutrients, and altering the timing and volume of streamflows.

3.8.2 Regulatory Framework

This analysis of hydrological and aquatic resources was guided by management direction found in: (1) 

1990 Record of Decision for Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) 

and Final Environmental Impact Statement; and (2) the 1995 Decision Notice and Finding of No 

Significant Impact for the Environmental Assessment known as the Inland Native Fish Strategy (INFISH), 

which amended the Forest Plan. The 1972 federal Clean Water Act, Executive Orders 11988 (Floodplains) 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

382  Ogden Final EIS

and 11990 (Wetlands), and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (amended 

1996) were also considered. 

Forest Plan: Standards and Guidelines include RP 1-RP 4, RP 6–RP 8, RP 10–RP 16, RP 33-RP 35, RP 47, 

FI 5, and WT 1-2, and are incorporated by reference. In general, they provide for maintenance or 

enhancement of floodplains, riparian areas and riparian-dependent resources, water quality, fish habitat, 

and future shade and large woody recruitment to riparian areas.

Paulina Creek from the outlet at Paulina Lake to the forest boundary 8.0 miles downstream is eligible for 

inclusion into the national Wild and Scenic River system, classified as Recreational. The stream and the 

designated 1⁄4 mile corridor on both sides of the stream are to be managed in accordance with Management 

Area 17 of the Forest Plan (Wild and Scenic Rivers, MA-17).

INFISH: The project area is east of the owl line, and lies within the management area of the Inland Native 

Fish Strategy (INFISH), although there are no native fish populations in Paulina Creek. Management 

direction within INFISH requires Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCAs) to be delineated for 

watersheds. They are portions of watersheds where riparian-dependent resources receive primary 

emphasis, and management activities are subject to specific standards and guidelines. Paulina Creek is a 

fish bearing stream and would have a Category 1 RHCA and is the only RHCA in the project area.

Category 1 areas (fish-bearing streams) will consist of a riparian area that incorporates the stream and the 

area on either side of the stream extending from the edges of the active stream channel to the top of the 

inner gorge, or to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, or to the outer edges of riparian vegetation, or 

to a distance equal to the height of two site potential trees, or 300 feet slope distance (600 feet, including 

both sides of the stream channel), whichever is greatest.

Standard and Guidelines from INFISH include TM-1, FM-1, and FM-4: TM-1 states “Prohibit timber 

harvest, including fuelwood cutting, in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas except as described below:

 b. Apply silvicultural practices for Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas to acquire desired vegetation 

characteristics where needed to attain Riparian Management Objectives. Apply silvicultural practices in a 

manner that does not retard attainment of RMOs, and that avoids adverse effects on inland native fish.”

FM-1 requires fuel treatments to be designed to not prevent attainment of RMOs. FM-4 states “Design 

prescribed burn projects and prescriptions to contribute to the attainment of the Riparian Management 

Objectives.”

NPDES Permits: With the Consolidated Appropriations Act (2012, § 429, Pub. L. No. 112-74, 125 Stat. 

786 1046-1047), Congress has temporarily suspended the permitting requirement imposed by the Ninth 

Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in Northwest Environmental Defense Center (NEDC) v. Brown. In 

NEDC v. Brown, the court held that stormwater runoff associated with logging roads is not exempt from 

the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting requirements of the Clean Water 

Act. At this time, it is uncertain whether any NPDES permitting requirements apply, or will apply in the 

future, to stormwater discharges from logging roads. 

3.8.3 Analysis Methods

The analysis of the aquatic and hydrological resources was driven by three primary issues. The issues 

related to hydrological and aquatic resources were identified during public scoping and internal review and 

are listed below. Public concerns were focused on protection of fisheries habitat, riparian areas, stream 

shade, and water quality. Issues were used to drive Project Design Features. Quantitative analyses and 

professional judgment were used to evaluate the issue measures by comparing existing conditions to the 

anticipated conditions from implementing the three alternatives. This analysis also considered the 

effectiveness and probable success of implementing the project design features, which are designed to 

avoid, minimize or reduce potentially adverse impacts to water quantity and quality, and fisheries 

populations and habitat.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  383

Issue #1: Fuels and vegetation management activities have the potential to affect water quantity by causing 

changes in the timing, duration, and volume of peak flows in a stream, which influences changes in bank 

erosion and channel forming processes within the stream. This component was assessed by calculating 

acres of treatments for both action alternatives within the RHCA, evaluating soil permeability and potential 

for run-off within the RHCA units, and calculating an Equivalent Clearcut Area (ECA) for both action 

alternatives.

Issue #2: Fuels and vegetation management activities have the potential to affect water quality by 

modifying stream processes by mass movements of sediment, bank destabilization from vegetation 

removal, and loss of instream large wood from direct removal or debris torrents. Effects from vegetation 

management activities are influenced by the proximity of treatments to streams and slope. Suspended 

sediment, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and nutrients are parameters of water quality that could 

potentially be affected by vegetation management and fuels reduction activities. Similar to Issue #1 above, 

Issue #2 was assessed by calculating acres of treatments and associated slopes within the RHCA for both 

action alternatives, and evaluating soil permeability and potential for overland flow of sediments within 

RHCAs. Potential to affect shade was also assessed.

Issue #3: Hydrologic, stream morphology, and water quality changes from vegetation and fuels 

management ultimately influence fish habitat and fish populations. Fuels and vegetation management have 

the potential to adversely affect fish and other aquatic habitat and populations in the short and long term. 

Evaluation of this issue was closely associated with effects to issues #1 and #2. In addition, an assessment 

was completed of effects to the Riparian Management Objectives of INFISH.

Past activities in the watershed are included in the Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Future 

Projects table in the EA. Past activities were included in the analysis of the existing conditions for water 

quantity, water quality, and fish habitat and populations. The analysis also considered the effects to Wild 

and Scenic River eligibility of Paulina Creek, Wetlands and Floodplains (Executive Orders 11988 and 

11990), and effects to Essential Fish Habitat of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Act.

The analysis considered data from a 2002 stream survey of Paulina Creek, Oregon Department of Fish and 

Wildlife (ODFW) fisheries records, 1976 soil resource inventory, GIS generated data including valley 

sideslopes, aerial photography, water temperature data for Paulina Creek, the 2008 Region 6 Regional 

Forester’s Special Status Species List, and streamflow data from a USGS operated gauging station on 

Paulina Creek. Numerous publications were researched and used to determine effects. 

Cumulative effects analysis considered past, present, and reasonably foreseeable activities. The ECA

methodology was used to help evaluate potential cumulative watershed effects that might occur at the 10th 

field watershed scale from implementing action alternatives. 

3.8.4 Summary of Key Findings 

Issue #1: Vegetation and fuels treatments proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3 would not measurably 

affect water quantity. Calculated ECA values for the two action alternatives were minimal. 3.2% and 2.8% 

of the watershed for Alternatives 2 and 3 respectively, and not expected to change the volume, timing, or 

duration of peak flows.

Issue #2: Vegetation and fuels treatments proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3 would not measurably 

affect water quality. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 303(d) water temperature 

parameter would not be further degraded from the action alternatives.

Issue #3: Paulina Creek is not inhabited by native fish, including redband trout (ODFW 1996), nor any 

other threatened, endangered, proposed, or candidate aquatic species. There are populations of non-native 

fish species present. A Biological Evaluation was conducted for the Region 6 sensitive species Pristine 

springsnail, which was included on the 2008 Region 6 Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List. The 

findings determined that no habitat exists within the project area for this freshwater snail. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

384  Ogden Final EIS

Some of the RMOs of INIFSH are not being met under present conditions. Alternatives 2 and 3 include 

vegetation and fuels treatments within the RHCA of Paulina Creek that would benefit the attainment of two 

of the RMOs in the future (large woody material and water temperature). There would be No Effect to 

Essential Fisheries Habitat from implementing either action alternative.

None of the alternatives would change the eligibility status of Paulina Creek to be included in the Wild and 

Scenic Rivers System, or adversely affect wetlands and floodplains.

3.8.5 Water Quantity

Affected Environment

Surface water drainages are uncommon in the Lower Little Deschutes River watershed as Paulina Creek is 

the only stream. Paulina Creek originates at the outlet of Paulina Lake and flows westerly through the 

project area for 8 miles. The stream enters private land beyond the forest and project boundaries where 

water is utilized for irrigation purposes. There is no surface connection to the Little Deschutes River, but 

there may have been historically (ODFW 1996) prior to agricultural development. 

Streamflow records for Paulina Creek are limited. A gauging station was operated on Paulina Creek near 

the lake outlet from 1982 to 1995. No gauging station downstream was ever established. The average flow 

was 17.8 cubic feet/second (cfs) with a minimum of 0.23 cfs on 11/23/1983 and a maximum flow of 59 cfs 

on 4/30/1983. Streamflow fell below 5 cfs for 243 days at various times during the 13 year period of 

record. Streamflows measured during Deschutes National Forest stream surveys were 14.1 cfs on 

8/19/1989, 17.4 cfs on 8/30/1989, 8.2 cfs on 9/9/2002, and 8.5 cfs on 6/24/2003. Paulina Creek within the 

project area loses flow to the underlying strata, primarily within the first two miles below Paulina Lake. 

Losses to the substrate amount to 1.7 - 6.1 cubic feet/second, depending on the time of year (Morgan et al.

1997). Irrigation rights exist for 3,780 acre feet of storage in Paulina Lake with a delivery rate in Paulina 

Creek of 7.5 cfs (USDA 1990). The irrigation diversions occur on private land downstream of the Ogden 

project. On occasion in recent years, all flow from the lake outlet has been shut off temporarily after 

irrigation season has ended to increase storage (Dachlter and Bizjak 2003). 

Road density in the Ogden Project area is 4.05 miles per square mile, and 0.62 miles per square mile within 

the RHCA of Paulina Creek. The only road crossings of Paulina Creek within the project area are Road 21 

and Forest road 9736, while there are three footbridge crossings. The road network has had minimal effects 

on increasing the drainage network within the project area because of the lack of crossings, lack of roads 

within the RHCA, and porous soils that absorb road run-off. 

The project area was extensively logged 70-90 years ago. Past major vegetation management projects 

within the watershed that are documented in the database date back to the 1960s. Much of the past activity 

removed large volumes of ponderosa pine, fir, and lodgepole pine. These projects each implemented 

various activities including salvage of dead and dying timber, commercial harvest, commercial and noncommercial thinning, prescribed underburning, closing and decommissioning of roads, and mechanical 

treatment of shrubs. Minor vegetation management projects have included campground and roadside 

hazard tree removals, campground and snow-park construction, and test sites for geothermal exploration. 

These minor projects have had no to minimal effect on the hydrology of Paulina Creek such as increased 

peak flows or water temperature. An Equivalent Clearcut Acreage (ECA) value for the existing conditions 

for the Ogden Project was not generated but likely falls below a threshold where hydrologic effects have 

resulted because of the groundwater-driven nature of the watershed (See Cumulative Effects section). In 

addition, there has been minimal disturbance from wildfires within the Lower Little Deschutes River 

watershed in the past 50 years (approximately 3,000 acres or less than 3%).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  385

Environmental Consequences – Water Quantity

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Timing, Duration, and Volume of Peak/Base Flows and Water Yield

Direct and Indirect Effects: Changes in flow are influenced by downstream irrigation needs. Paulina 

Creek has been shown to lose flow to the substrate. Streambanks are stable, indicating a stable channel. 

The timing and volume of peak and base flows and the total water yield of Paulina Creek are primarily 

influenced by climatic conditions and the operation of the dam at Paulina Lake outlet. There would be no 

direct effects to peak flows and water yield to the streams within the project area from selecting the No 

Action alternative. Any changes in peak flows and water yield would be the result of natural climatic 

variations and water storage practices, or other causes. 

There is potential for indirect effects to occur under this alternative. Over time, continued forest health 

deterioration and fuels build-up within the project area could lead to stand-replacing wildfires near Paulina 

Creek that have the potential to change peak/base flows and water yield because of decreased infiltration. 

Changes in flow would depend on variables such as size, timing, location, and severity of fire, and climatic 

conditions post-fire. A fire of high severity, which results in severe heating of soils, reduces ground cover 

and can form a water repellant layer (hydrophobic) that restricts infiltration and percolation, resulting in 

increased surface runoff. Severely burned soils are more likely to occur in the mixed conifer and lodgepole 

pine stands than the ponderosa pine dominated stands because of the greater ground fuels accumulation. 

The potential for hydrophobicity of the ash dominated soils within the RHCA’s of the project area is 

generally considered to be low (See Soils section for more information). In addition, reduced evapotranspiration and interception by the tree canopy could compound runoff (Ice, 2003). However, hydrologic 

changes would be limited and may be immeasurable because of the groundwater dominated nature of the 

landscape due to highly permeable soils, and gentle near-stream slopes in much of the drainage that results 

in restricted surface runoff. Ponderosa pine dominated stands, which are common in the project area, are 

more likely to experience a crown fire than a surface dominated high severity fire under existing 

conditions. The 1998 McKay Fire was located within 2nd growth ponderosa pine stands and did not result 

in widespread severely burned or hydrophobic soils. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Timing, Duration, and Volume of Peak/Base Flows and Water Yield

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternatives 2 and 3 would include vegetation management and fuels 

activities within 248 and 212 RHCA acres of Paulina Creek, respectively. These acres represent 50% and 

43% of the total RHCA acres within the project area. Operation of ground-based equipment, including 

within the RHCA, has potential to increase soil compaction that could increase overland runoff to streams. 

Harvest of live trees reduces evapotranspiration which can increase available water to streams. However, 

based on the character of the soils and hydrogeology of the Ogden Project area, and the design of the 

proposed activities including project design features under Alternatives 2 and 3, there would be no 

measurable direct and indirect effects to the timing, duration, or volume of peak and base flows, and water 

yield ̧ of Paulina Creek. Additional water yielded as a result of reduced evapotranspiration from vegetation 

management activities would be expected to rapidly move into the groundwater rather than into Paulina 

Creek. Alternative 2 treats 36 more RHCA acres than Alternative 3 but there would be no measurable 

differences in effects to water quantity between the two. Soil types within the RHCA units adjacent to 

streams are dominated by Landtypes 35, 38, and GU (Larsen 1976). These soils are in Hydrologic Group A 

and Water yield class I, meaning they have a high infiltration rate, consisting of well to excessively drained 

soils with low run-off potential. Little water is yielded to peak flows until detention capacity is exceeded or 

unless soils are initially saturated or frozen. Soils are composed of pumice and ash over sands and gravels. 

Sedimentation yield potential is low to moderate (Larsen 1976). 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

386  Ogden Final EIS

Infiltration of precipitation may be decreased in localized areas where soils become compacted as a result 

of management actions, such as at landings which would be located outside of Riparian Habitat 

Conservation Areas. Puddling of water is unlikely because of the sandy-textured soils. The compacted 

areas at landings, would not add to an increase in the stream drainage network as they would occur on flat 

to gentle ground. Post-project sub-soiling would alleviate much of the areas with detrimental soil 

compaction. 

As summarized below, there would be no measurable direct or indirect effects to the stream systems water 

quantity (timing, duration, yield) as a result of implementing these two alternatives:

Highly permeable volcanic surface soils allowing high infiltration of precipitation. Soils are primarily 

rated as Class I for Water Yield.

Source of discharge in Paulina Creek is primarily from the Paulina Lake basin. The stream loses flow 

to the substrate.

Lack of runoff and stream surface water in the project area, even in areas of moderate slopes. The 

youthful and fractured nature of the volcanic results in rapid infiltration of precipitation and snowmelt, 

resulting in a lack of drainage development (Lite and Gannett 2002). Project area is dominated by 

groundwater flow.

Past management in the project area and adjacent lands has only minimally increased the stream 

drainage network, therefore not measurably increasing surface flows to Paulina Creek. 

There are only three road crossings of Paulina Creek, two in the project area. Road crossings can 

contribute overland flow from roads during storm events and snow melt.

High infiltration rates limit volume of precipitation that can be evaporated near the surface or taken up 

by plants as it moves through the soil to the groundwater. Post-project sub-soiling would increase 

infiltration rates in disturbed areas.

Precipitation is limited compared to similar elevations in the Cascade Mountains to the west, 

(approximately 20 to 30 inches annually), coming primarily as snowfall.

Design of project activities, project design features, and management requirements to protect soil and 

water resources would limit overland flow and an increase in the stream network. A stream buffer for 

commercial operations, limitation of landings and temporary roads within the RHCA, and most skid 

trails perpendicular to the slope within the RHCA are project design features that would limit overland 

flow of water and sediment to Paulina Creek.

The potential for severity of fire effects (hydrophobic soils, decreased ground cover, severely burned soils) 

is decreased over that of the No Action alternative, thus decreasing the potential for changes in peak/base 

flows or water yield as a result of stand replacing wildfires, although changes would be limited. As 

described under the No Action alternative, the potential for changes in peak flows would be limited by the 

highly porous soils on the landscape. 

Cumulative Effects

Cumulative Effects for hydrologic and fisheries resources are bound in space by the 10th field Lower Little 

Deschutes River watershed and in time by a 50 year hydrologic recovery period. The Equivalent Clearcut 

Area (ECA) methodology is a tool used to determine where cumulative watershed effects might occur at 

the 10th field watershed scale. For the Ogden Project, most of the activities for both action alternatives 

occur within the Lower Little Deschutes Watershed (approximately 93% for Alternative 2 and 94% for 

Alternative 3). The ECA methodology is defined as a watershed index of snowmelt and evapotranspiration 

rates relative to baseline condition where tree stands are considered fully canopied. ECA was designed as a 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  387

planning tool to aid the Forest Service in assessing the cumulative effects of land management activities 

(Bettinger et al. 1998).

The influential factor in computing ECA is the amount of area altered by land management activities or 

factors, such as wildfires or timber harvest. The amount of area that can be described as a clearcut is 

defined in terms of the density of residual vegetation. Each particular land use area is assigned a “clearcut 

equivalent factor” (CEF), which is multiplied by the area disturbed to arrive at an ECA value (Bettinger et 

al. 1998). For example, clearcuts and roads are generally given a CEF value of 1.0, and partial cuts are 

given a CEF from 0.0 to 1.0, depending on the density of residual vegetation. The more open the unit is, 

the more it emulates the snowmelt and evapo-transpiration rates of a similar stand that is clearcut. Over 

time, through regrowth of vegetation, the stands become hydrologically recovered. A time frame of 50 

years for complete hydrologic recovery has been used for pine dominated stands on the Bend/Ft. Rock 

Ranger District based on personal communication with Troendle in 1999.

Research by Troendle and Olson (1993), Troendle and King (1985, 1987), and Troendle (1983) found that 

there is no one specific threshold as to how much a watershed can be clearcut before a change in peak flow 

can be documented. ECA thresholds, in relation to changes in peak flow, have been documented as low as 

25 percent and as high as 40 percent. However, this threshold is highly dependent upon the physical 

characteristics of the watershed. A value for the existing conditions for the watershed is generated from the 

past activities. Present and Reasonably Foreseeable activities, which are similar in nature to past activities, 

are then accounted for in the calculation of the ECA value for the existing condition. Although this is just 

one tool to assess possible cumulative effects, its use is limited for the Upper Deschutes River basin 

because of its groundwater-driven nature. Activities on this landscape are unlikely to reflect measurable 

changes in hydrologic characteristics such as timing and volume of peak flow, and water yield. The ECA 

threshold for the Lower Little Deschutes River watershed is unknown, but is expected to be at the high end 

of the range and would likely be above what Troendle and King observed due to the groundwater nature of 

the watershed. 

Increases in peak flows can lead to streambank instability. Field visits to the project area did not reveal 

riverbank degradation and the 2002 stream survey found bank stability to be 98% or greater (See 7 of

stream attributes below) indicating peak flows are stable. An ECA value for the existing conditions for the 

Ogden Project was not generated but likely falls below a threshold where hydrologic effects have resulted 

because of the groundwater-driven nature of the watershed, altered flow regime to meet irrigation needs, 

and the observed stability of the streambanks. Any additional water generated as a result of activities 

proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3 would be rapidly infiltrated through the porous soils and lost to deep 

percolation rather than contribute to streamflow.

For the Ogden Project, the ECA calculation for the two action alternatives (Table 154) were based on 

vegetation treatments including ladder fuels reduction, but did not consider mowing and underburning 

which have minor effects to the ECA calculation. Silvicultural prescriptions are described in Table 6, page 

30. The ECA calculations for both alternatives also included proposed road closures under the Lava Rock 

OHV Project, which would close a total of 85 acres of roads (58 miles). Road closures have a beneficial 

effect to hydrologic recovery by increasing infiltration. 

Table 154: Equivalent Clearcut Area (ECA) Calculation for the Action Alternatives

Silvicultural 

Prescription

Alternative 

2 Acres

Alternative 3 

Acres

ECA 

Coefficient

Total Alternative 2 

ECA Acres

Total 

Alternative 3 

ECA Acres

LP_1 938 924 0.4 375 370

LP_3 326 0 0.9 293 0

MC_3 35 0 0.9 32 0

HTH (MC_1, PP_1, 

PP_LP_1) 9,233 4,270 0.3 2,770 1,281

HTH(LP_4, MC_2, 24 4,397 0.3 7 1,319
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

388  Ogden Final EIS

Silvicultural 

Prescription

Alternative 

2 Acres

Alternative 3 

Acres

ECA 

Coefficient

Total Alternative 2 

ECA Acres

Total 

Alternative 3 

ECA Acres

PP_LP_2)

SPC (LP, MC, PP_LP, 

PP) 2,043 1,942 0.02 41 39

HTH (RHCA) 248 212 0.3 74 64

HTH (PFA) 0 343 0.3 0 103

Ladder Fuels Reduction 0 818 0.01 0 8

Totals 12,847 12,907 - 3,592 3,184

Lava Rock Road Closures 85 85 - (85) (85)

Final ECA Acres 3,507 3,099

Alternative 2 ECA calculation totals 3,507 acres, or 3.2% of the 110,288 acre watershed, and Alternative 3 

ECA calculation totals 3,099 acres, or 2.8% of the watershed. These increases to the existing condition 

ECA are considered minimal for this groundwater dominated watershed and would not likely exceed a 

threshold where changes in peak flows and subsequent streambank erosion would be observed. Control of 

the flows at the Paulina Lake outlet would be more of a factor in determining peak and base flows than 

changes in the ECA. 

From the table of Ongoing and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects (Table 13), ongoing and reasonably 

foreseeable activities such as the Newberry Geothermal Exploration Projects and road maintenance have 

minimal ground disturbance and would be inconsequential to the calculated ECA values for both 

Alternatives 2 and 3. The Lava Rock OHV Trail System Project would include some trail construction but 

would result in at most 50 acres of new ground disturbance, (0.05% of the watershed), and again would be 

inconsequential to the calculated ECA values. Within the project area, The Lava Rock OHV project (Table 

13) proposes to close 58 miles of road. Closing roads would benefit hydrologic recovery of the watershed 

by allowing increased infiltration. 

3.8.6 Water Quality

Affected Environment

Clean Water Act

Paulina Creek is included on the 2010 Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) list of water 

quality impaired streams (303(d) list) for the parameter of high water temperatures, year-round (nonspawning), in compliance with the Clean Water Act. The objective of the Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 

is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of all waters. Under Section 319 

of the 1987 CWA Amendments, states are required to determine those waters that will not meet the goals of 

the CWA, determine those non-point source activities that are contributing pollution, and develop a process 

on how to reduce such pollution to the “maximum extent practicable.” Section 303(d) of the CWA requires 

that a list be developed of all impaired or threatened waters within each state. The ODEQ is responsible for 

compiling the 303(d) list, assessing data, and submitting the 303(d) list to the EPA for federal approval. 

Management direction for federal land management agencies regarding 303(d) listed rivers is that project 

activities should protect and not further degrade the parameters for which it is listed. In addition, Water 

Quality Restoration Plans (WQRP) are to be developed that address impaired waters (USFS, BLM 1999). 

A draft WQRP has been developed for the Little Deschutes 8th field sub-basin. 

Beneficial uses are documented according to criteria developed by the ODEQ (ODEQ 1998). A beneficial 

use is a resource or activity that would be directly affected by a change in water quality or quantity. Water 

quality standards are established to protect the beneficial uses of the State’s waters. Beneficial uses are 

designated by basin. The beneficial uses for the basin above Bend include public domestic water supply, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  389

private domestic water supply, industrial water supply, irrigation, livestock watering, fish and aquatic life, 

wildlife and hunting, fishing, boating, water contact recreation, and aesthetic quality (ODEQ 2011). Water 

quality for beneficial uses is maintained and protected through the implementation of the Deschutes 

National Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines including Best Management Practices (BMPs), and the 

INFISH Standards and Guidelines and the Riparian Management Objectives.

The project design of the two action alternatives, including management requirements and mitigation 

measures, was structured to minimize cumulative effects. The design of Alternatives 2 and 3 includes 

stream buffers for machinery operation, slope limitations, and logging systems requirements within 

Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas to limit potential adverse impacts to riparian vegetation, water quality, 

and fisheries populations and habitat. No new system roads are planned. Landings and temporary roads 

are located outside of the RHCA. See pages 45-46 for a description of the Aquatic Management zone and 

associated setbacks. 

Water temperature data collected in Paulina Creek during 2001 and 2002 exceeded the state standard and 

resulted in the stream being included on the 303(d) list. Paulina Creek exceeds the standard at its outlet 

from Paulina Lake due to warm surface waters of the lake. Paulina Creek is also included on the draft 2010 

303(d) list for the parameter of algae due to the presence of potentially toxic blue-green algae blooms in 

Paulina Lake. Only the first 1.65 miles below the lake are included, ending near the eastern portion of the 

Ogden project area. 

Environmental Consequences – Water Quality

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: The water quality of Paulina Creek is influenced by surface water releases at 

Paulina Lake. There would be no direct effects to the 303(d) parameter of water temperature for Paulina 

Creek from selecting the No Action alternative. Any changes in water quality including temperature in 

Paulina Creek would be the result of natural climatic variations or other causes. 

There would be no direct or indirect effect to the 303(d) list parameter from algae in Paulina Creek as 

potentially toxic algae blooms originate in Paulina Lake upstream of the project.

No action increases the likelihood of two potential risk scenarios: (1) high severity wildfire, including 

within the RHCA of Paulina Creek, and (2) insect and disease damage to timber stands within the RHCA.

Wildfire Scenario

There is potential for adverse effects to water quality when a stand-replacing wildfire occurs. 

Approximately 67% of the RHCA acres in the project area are in Fire Condition Class 2 or 3 (see Fuels 

section). The zone of riparian vegetation adjacent to Paulina Creek is generally narrow (frequently < 10 

feet and often 3-4 feet), composed of primarily grasses and sedges with sparse woody shrubs. The riparian 

area would likely experience fire behavior and severity similar to upland conditions. Following is a 

description of effects to water quality should stand replacing wildfires occur near Paulina Creek. 

Effects to water temperature: During the course of a wildfire within the RHCA, water temperature would 

be increased from the heat of the fire itself. The increase would depend on the intensity of the fire, size of 

the fire, proximity to Paulina Creek, discharge at the time of the fire, and duration of the fire. Post-fire, 

shade would be reduced, which would allow increased solar radiation and increased water temperatures in 

the summer and decreased winter temperatures due to the loss of buffering capacity. Albin, 1979, found 

that water temperatures increased an average of 1.5 C in a burned watershed 35 years after the fire. This 

research was conducted on small 1st and 2nd order streams similar to Paulina Creek . Summer maximum 

water temperatures have been shown to remain significantly elevated for at least a decade following 

wildfire (Dunham, et al 2007). The McKay Fire eliminated nearly all shade for about 1 mile along Paulina 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

390  Ogden Final EIS

Creek. No continuous water temperatures of Paulina Creek were collected prior to the fire, therefore no pre 

and post fire comparison is available. 

Effects to dissolved oxygen: During the course of wildfire dissolved oxygen would be decreased as water 

temperatures increase. Post-fire, dissolved oxygen would be decreased as water temperatures increase from 

the lack of shade until vegetation recovers to heights capable of shading. Full shade recovery could take 

several decades. Oxygen could also be depleted from metabolism of increased runoff of organic matter, 

until ground cover becomes re-established to limit runoff.

Effects to turbidity: During the fire, turbidity may be increased from toppling of trees that are growing on 

the riverbank, introducing sediment as they fall. Turbidity from this action is likely to result in minimal 

increases in turbidity and may be immeasurable in the streams. Rashin and others (2006) found that 

windthrow trees were a minor contributor to the total extent of chronic (long term small inputs) sediment 

delivery from harvest sites. A weather storm that resulted in heavy precipitation soon after a fire could 

introduce overland flow of sediments within the RHCA into Paulina Creek that would measurably increase 

turbidity. Chronic inputs of sediment from the RHCA that increase turbidity could continue for several 

years until vegetation groundcover is re-established. Chronic sediment inputs would likely be 

immeasurable in the river due to limitations of equipment and techniques of sampling. However, fine 

sediment volumes within substrates of streams may show a measurable increase after several years. Highly 

permeable soils and flat to gentle slopes within much of the RHCAs within the project area would limit the 

volume of sediments introduced into the streams from overland flow.

Figure 85: Paulina Creek within the 1998 McKay Fire Area (Photo taken in 2009)

Consumption of riverbank vegetation by wildfire could lead to decreased riverbank stability, increasing 

bank erosion and sediment introduction (Shakesby and Doerr 2006) that could increase turbidity until 

riverbank vegetation and stability recover. Decreased riverbank stability was not observed on Paulina 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  391

Creek after the 1998 McKay Fire that burned adjacent to approximately one mile of Paulina Creek on both 

banks. This fire may have been somewhat atypical in that it burned from north to south. The prevailing 

winds are from the west and southwest which would lend itself to driving a fire up the drainage with a 

chimney effect into the upper elevation mixed conifer stands with steeper sideslopes and greater 

accumulations of surface fuels. Severity would be greater here with increased adverse effects to riverbank 

stability and overland flow of sediments.

Effects to sedimentation: The pathways for sedimentation and the effects of the fire on sedimentation are 

similar to those listed under turbidity above. Sedimentation occurs as suspended and other larger sediments 

deposit on and in the river substrate.

Effects to chlorophyll a: During the fire, ash and smoke could introduce nutrients (nitrogen and 

phosphorus) to the stream. After the fire, overland flow of sediment and organic debris could introduce 

additional nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, organic carbon). The nutrients would increase primary 

production, primarily by algae, which would increase the concentration of chlorophyll a. Once ground 

cover is re-established, overland flow would be reduced. As mentioned previously, the potential for 

overland flow is limited by lack of slope and highly permeable soils.

Insect and Disease Scenario

With No Action, the ponderosa pine dominated stands within the RHCA of Paulina Creek would be at 

increased risk of insect and disease damage and reduced vigor and growth (see Vegetation section of the 

EA). Presently the stocking exceeds the Upper Management Zone in all the RHCA units. These secondgrowth stands have not previously been thinned and fire has been excluded with the exception of the 1998 

McKay Fire. These stands are currently at risk of insect and disease damage. Increased mortality of trees 

would reduce shade, potentially increasing water temperature, and would in turn increase the severity of 

wildfire effects discussed above. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: The management activities that are proposed under these alternatives are 

described in the Alternative Descriptions (EA, Chapter 2), and are summarized below and Table 155:

Actions: 

Commercial harvest activities within the RHCA of Paulina Creek. Activities include using machinery 

such as a feller-buncher and whole tree yarding. Treatments would occur within 10 units totaling 

approximately 159 acres within the RHCA for Alternative 2 and within 6 units totaling 

approximately 141 acres under Alternative 3. 

Small tree hand-thinning (<10” dbh), hand piling, and pile burning within the RHCA near Paulina 

Creek, on up to 90 acres under Alternative 2 and up to 72 acres under Alternative 3. These acres 

represent the area between the stream and the machinery boundary. 

Underburning within the RHCA of Paulina Creek on up to 248 acres for Alternative 2 and 212 acres 

for Alternative 3.

Obliterate segments of FS roads 2120-300 and 2120-100 (<0.2 mile) and unauthorized travelways 

leading to the RHCA of Paulina Creek.

The actual RHCA acres implemented on the ground for the activities above would be approximately 10% 

less after accounting localized areas of high slope restricting machinery access and hand crew operations, 

and cultural resource sites. 

Alternatives 2 and 3 reduce potential for two risk scenarios occurring within the RHCA of Paulina Creek: 

high severity wildfire and insect and disease outbreaks within tree stands. Effects to aquatic resources 

under both these scenarios were described above under the No Action alternative. Thinning of stands and 

reducing ladder fuels within the RHCA would change fire behavior from a crown fire or passive crown fire 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

392  Ogden Final EIS

to a lower intensity surface fire, making the RHCA more resilient, and increasing the vigor and growth of 

residual trees. Presently the stocking exceeds the upper management zone (UMZ) in all the RHCA units. 

Most of the activities within the RHCA would occur in stands dominated by ponderosa pine where the 

treatment objective is to maintain or increase ponderosa pine dominance and continue development toward 

large tree structure. In mixed conifer stands within the RHCA the objective is similar. 

Large trees would be maintained and large tree structure would be promoted, which would in turn improve 

shading of Paulina Creek and provide for future recruitment of instream large wood meeting the INFISH 

standard (> 12” diameter, > 35 foot length). The INFISH RMOs of large woody debris and water 

temperature, which are not met under existing conditions, would benefit from the management actions, and 

the attainment of the RMOs of pool frequency and width/depth ratios would not be prevented. The water 

temperature RMO would benefit from an improvement in shade over time with the development of large 

tree structure.

Figure 86: Paulina Creek and Typical Riparian Zone within the Project Area

Table 155: Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) Treatment Units Summary

Unit Total 

Acres

Alternative 2 

RHCA 

Commercial 

Harvest Acres

Alternative 3 

RHCA 

Commercial 

Harvest Acres

Alternative 2 

RHCA Acres 

with small tree 

hand thinning

Alternative 3 

RHCA Acres with 

small tree hand 

thinning

Length parallel 

to Paulina Creek 

(both banks) 

miles

111 9 7 N/A 2 N/A .25

112 5 5 N/A 0 N/A 0

113 8 2 N/A 6 N/A .49

114 14 4 N/A 10 N/A .41

138 27 19 19 8 8 .78
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  393

140 9 5 5 4 4 .28

141 84 51 51 34 34 2.44

159 80 56 56 24 24 2.39

172 11 9 9 2 2 .32

326 1 1 1 0 0 0

Totals 248 159 141 90 72 -

The treated acreage (total of 248 acres for Alternative 2 and 212 acres for Alternative 3 between fuels and 

vegetation management) represents 50 % and 43%, respectively, of the RHCA of Paulina Creek within the 

project area (496 RHCA acres total). The activities under Alternative 2 would occur linearly along 7.36 

miles of streambank of Paulina Creek (counting banks both sides of stream), representing 53% of the total 

streambanks within the project area, and under Alternative 3, 6.21 miles or 44% of the total streambanks. 

(Only activities approximately 100 feet or closer to Paulina Creek were considered for this calculation). 

Changes and Effects: Logging operations near streams has potential to disturb ground cover and soils, 

facilitating overland flow of sediments to streams. Overland flow of sediment to streams can affect water 

quality by increasing turbidity and fine sediment volumes of stream substrates, which in turn can affect fish 

and other aquatic life habitat.

Rashin and others (2006) studied effects of timber harvesting on sedimentation of streams in Washington 

state. Sediment routing surveys found that 19 of 22 sites had no sediment delivery by the 2nd year 

following harvest by heavy equipment when a stream buffer was used. The only three sites that exhibited 

any chronic sediment input were where streams were crossed by timber yarding practices. This practice 

would not occur under any alternative in the Ogden Project. The stream buffers in the study had one-sided 

widths ranging from 23 to 216 feet, with an average width of 82 feet, and 75% between 33 and 115 feet. 

Near-stream slopes ranged between 4-75%, with half of the sites >36% slope. Near-stream slopes within 

treatment units under Alternatives 2 and 3 of the Ogden Project are nearly all <20%, with considerable 

areas less than 10% (See Table 155 below). The authors concluded from their study that a 33 foot setback 

of ground disturbance from streams prevented sediment delivery to streams from about 95% of harvest 

related erosion features. The buffers were thought to be effective in limiting sediment delivery in that they 

keep the active erosion sites away from the immediate streamside area and that they intercept and filter 

sediment from upslope erosion sites, as long as drainage is not concentrated in gullies, channels, or 

equipment skid trails. As much as possible, equipment skid trails would be perpendicular to the hillslope 

near Paulina Creek to limit overland flow of sediments to the stream.

Lakel and others (2010) concluded from a study of streams in Virginia that stream buffers as little as 25 

feet were effective in limiting sedimentation after timber harvest but recommended a minimum of 50 feet. 

The machinery setback from Paulina Creek is approximately 75 -100 feet, often aligning with the Peter 

Skene Ogden trail, and greater where slope is moderately steep to steep. Where adjacent to the trail, the 

total setback from the stream would be approximately 100-125 feet with the additive 25 foot setback 

required by the trail Resource Protection Measure. Sediment delivery to streams as a result of management 

actions would be none to negligible (also see Soils section on the RHCA). This is because of the project 

design features including the machinery buffer and the logging systems design, slope restrictions for 

machinery, flat to gentle slopes near streams, high infiltration rates and low erosion potential of soils. 

Riparian vegetation and ground cover would be protected to provide filtering capacity and streambank

stability. Along with Table 155, Figures 87 and 88 below demonstrate the predominance of gentle slopes 

within the RHCA of Paulina Creek within activity units. Gentle slopes are less likely to result in overland 

flow of sediments from upland areas to Paulina Creek as a result of management activities. Alternative 2 

includes more RHCA units than Alternative 3, which are located at the upper reaches of Paulina Creek. 

There is increased hillslope within these units than observed at downstream areas. Slopes are less than 

20% on 65 of the 97 acres (67%), for the near stream areas planned for hand-only treatments for 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

394  Ogden Final EIS

Alternative 2. Under Alternative 3, slopes are less than 20% on 63 of the 79 acres (80%) for hand 

treatment areas. Slopes are less than 20% on 79% and 85% of the areas planned for mechanized harvest for 

Alternatives 2 and 3, respectively. 

Vegetation treatments on slopes greater than 30% within the RHCA of Paulina Creek would be minimal 

under both alternatives (Table 156). Under Alternative 2, 14 acres exceed 30% slope for areas identified 

for hand treatments and <5 acres for mechanical treatment areas. Under Alternative 3, 5 acres of hand 

treatment areas exceed 30% slope and 1acre for mechanical treatment areas. Mechanized equipment would 

not operate on slopes greater than 30%. 

Table 156: Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) Unit Slopes

Activities

Slope

Total Acres

0-10% 10-20% 20-30% 30-40% 40-50% 50+%

Alternative 2 RHCA acres and 

% of total acres for hand 

treatments

26/27% 39/40% 18/18% 9/10% 4/4% 1/1% 97*

Alternative 3 RHCA acres and 

% of total acres for hand 

treatments

26/33% 37/47% 11/14% 3/4% 1/1% 1/1% 79*

Alternative 2 RHCA acres and 

% of total acres for mechanized 

treatments

53.5/34% 72/45% 29/18% 4/2.5%** .5/0.5% 0/0% 159

Alternative 3 RHCA acres and 

% of total acres for mechanized 

treatments

51/36% 69/49% 20/14% 1/0.7%** 0/0% 0/0% 141

*Includes 7 acres near Paulina Creek that were not included in activity units. These areas were within 0-10% slope range. 

**These acres would not be treated with mechanized equipment due to slope restrictions in RHCA.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  395

Figure 87: Hillslopes within Alternative 2 RHCA Units East Side of Project Area. Alt. 2 also includes units shown for Alternative 3 in Figure 88.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

396  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 88: Hillslopes within Alternative 2 and 3 RHCA Units
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  397

Alternative 3 treats 36 fewer RHCA acres than Alternative 2 (18 acres hand treatments and 18 acres 

mechanical treatments) and has less activities on steeper slopes (slopes >20%), therefore potential for 

overland flow of sediments to Paulina Creek would be less. Differences between the alternatives would be 

minimal.

Fuels would be reduced across the landscape under both alternatives, lowering potential for stand replacing 

wildfires, such as the McKay Fire. Alternative 2 has more fuels treatments than Alternative 3. Wildfire is 

expected to eventually enter the Ogden Project area, including within the RHCA and riparian areas, but the 

proposed treatments under both alternatives would break up the continuous fuels, lowering the intensity and 

severity of wildfire and associated adverse effects to resources, including soils and riparian areas. Reduced 

fuel loadings across the landscape, including within the RHCA, would improve the efficiency of fire 

suppression efforts and limit the potential adverse effects of wildfire to water quality, particularly water 

temperature from loss of shade, and limit adverse effects to the water temperature parameter for which 

Paulina Creek is listed. By increasing the effectiveness of fire suppression and reducing the spread of 

wildfire, these alternatives also reduce the risk of toxic fire retardant reaching aquatic systems during firefighting operations.

Historically, the fire regime and fire behavior in the RHCA of Paulina Creek was similar to areas outside of 

the RHCA due to the very narrow zone of riparian vegetation. Riparian areas along the stream likely 

burned at a similar intensity and severity as upland areas. Most of the RHCA stands within the project area 

are ponderosa pine-dominated and would have a Fire Regime I classification (low severity). The mixed 

conifer present in the eastern portion of the project area would be classed as Fire Regime II (mixed 

severity). Historically, fire played a role similar in ecosystem function within the RHCA as it did outside 

of the RHCA. Underburning is proposed within the RHCA of Paulina Creek to return a natural process that 

would aid in creating a fire resilient landscape.

Underburning and hand pile burning within the RHCA would reduce ground cover and some of the coarse 

woody debris. Reduced ground cover can lead to increased overland flow of sediments to streams, 

increasing turbidity and sedimentation of stream substrates. Implementing project design features such as 

stream setbacks for ignition and piling, and burning under conditions that limit consumption of ground 

cover and coarse woody debris, would mitigate this potential effect and minimize overland flow of 

sediment to Paulina Creek. The underburn is expected to burn in a mosaic pattern, leaving areas of ground 

cover untouched. Arkle and Pilliod (2009) found no detectable changes in periphyton, macroinvertebrates, 

amphibians, fish, and riparian and stream habitats after a prescribed fire in stream corridors when compared 

to unburned reference streams. The prescribed fire occurred in ponderosa pine forests in Idaho. Beche et 

al (2005) studied effects of a prescribed fire within a riparian area of a stream in Colorado in a mixed 

conifer forest. Conclusions were that the fire either had no impacts or short term (<1 year) impacts to the 

stream and its riparian zone. 

Alternatives 2 and 3 reduce the potential for indirect effects to occur as described above under the No 

Action alternative. Fire Condition Class 1 would be restored or maintained in most of the RHCA. Project 

design features prescribed under both action alternatives are designed to avoid, minimize, or rectify 

potentially adverse effects to water quality, including the 303(d) list water temperature parameter. These 

include stream setbacks buffers for mechanized equipment, underburning ignitions, and hand piling, tree 

height based restrictions for thinning, and logging system requirements.

Effects to Paulina Creek water temperatures: Despite vegetation and fuels treatments within the RHCA of 

Paulina Creek, effective stream shade would be maintained under this alternative, therefore not adversely 

affecting water temperature. Effective stream shade is defined as the total solar radiation blocked over a 

twenty-four hour period (USFS, BLM 2012). Stream shading is broken down into two zones, primary and 

secondary. The period of greatest solar radiation occurs between 10:00 am and 2:00 pm (USFS, BLM 

2012). Trees located in the primary shade zone nearest the stream provide shade all day and are the only 

trees providing shade during this critical 4 hour period. Paulina Creek has an east-west orientation. During 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

398  Ogden Final EIS

the summer months, trees adjacent to the stream on the south side will provide benefits to shade during this 

period of greatest solar radiation while trees on the north side would have no to minimal benefit to shade.

Trees in the secondary shading zone (beyond the primary zone) can provide some shading when the sun is 

lower in its arc. The amount of shading in the secondary zone will depend on stand density. Within this 

zone, there is no added benefit to shade from over stocked stands because of the “tree behind a tree” 

concept, where one tree can cancel any shade benefit from another tree (USFS, BLM 2012).

For slopes less than 30% and tree heights of 60-75 feet, typical of the ponderosa dominated RHCA of 

Paulina Creek, the primary shade distance is a minimum 28-50 feet from the stream edge (USFS, BLM 

2012). Small tree thinning and ladder fuels reduction would occur within the primary shading zone. There 

would be no effect to shade from small tree thinning or ladder fuels reduction of trees <10” dbh due to the 

project design criteria that provides for height-based cutting restrictions (trees < 20 feet = 12 foot setback, > 

20 feet = 28 foot setback (USFS, BLM 2012). Stand data in the project area has shown that trees less than 

10” diameter at breast height (dbh) are typically less than 60 feet tall; therefore these trees can be thinned to 

within 28 feet of Paulina Creek and still maintain existing shade. Trees less than 10” dbh can be thinned 

closer to Paulina Creek on the north bank as they provide no to negligible shade.

Effects to shading in the secondary shading zone would be none to negligible as there is still an overstory 

present and the “tree behind a tree” concept. Trees left after thinning would increase in growth, vigor, and 

height and susceptibility to insect and disease would be reduced. Eventually trees would reach their site 

potential height of approximately 90 feet (Barrett 1978) and shade would be maximized, potentially 

decreasing water temperatures. 

Effects to dissolved oxygen: Water temperatures affect dissolved oxygen concentrations. These 

alternatives maintain or improve water temperatures, therefore maintaining or increasing dissolved oxygen. 

Effects to turbidity and sedimentation: There would be none to negligible effects to overland flow of 

sediments within the project area from both alternatives, therefore there would be no short or long term 

measurable increase in turbidity and sedimentation from implementing these alternatives. Alternative 2 

treats more RHCA acres than Alternative 3 and on slightly steeper slopes overall, so would have greater 

potential for overland flow of sediments to Paulina Creek and increased turbidity and sedimentation. 

Differences in effects between the alternatives would be minimal. Riparian vegetation would be left intact 

to filter potential surface run-off and overland flow of sediments. Vegetation and fuels treatments near 

Paulina Creek are generally on flat to moderately sloped terrain (generally <20% slope), which, along with 

permeable soils and abundant ground cover, limits surface run-off as a result of management activities. 

Road decommissions are located away from streams, therefore no potential for overland flow of sediments 

while this activity would occur. 

Obliteration of segments of FS roads 2120-300 and 2120-100, and unauthorized travelways leading to the 

RHCA and Paulina Creek would reduce soil compaction and disturbance to riparian areas. This would 

reduce sedimentation into Paulina Creek but the effects would be minimal. Thinning activities proposed 

under both alternatives adjacent to Forest Road 2120 would increase the potential for vehicles to travel 

cross-country including towards Paulina Creek, and result in disturbed soils and degraded ground cover and 

riparian vegetation. Should these activities occur, there is potential for increased overland flow of 

sediments to Paulina Creek. The potential for sedimentation of Paulina Creek would depend on how 

widespread user created roads become and localized conditions such as slope and soil types. Increases in 

sedimentation and turbidity of Paulina Creek from cross-country travel are likely to be immeasurable. 

Resource protection measure #50 will limit the ability of vehicles to access streamside areas from Forest 

Road 2120.

Effects to chlorophyll a: There would be no measurable increase in nutrient loading, which can occur with 

overland flow of sediments, and no increase in solar radiation, therefore there would be no effect to primary 

production and chlorophyll a concentrations. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  399

Effects to 303(d) list parameter of algae: There would be no effect to potentially toxic algae blooms in 

Paulina Creek as these blooms originate upstream out of the project area within Paulina Lake. Toxins 

break down as they move downstream out of the lake.

Cumulative Effects Alternatives 2 and 3

Water quality at Paulina Lake and the altered flow regime are the factors that most influence water quality 

in Paulina Creek. Water quality at the lake undergoes seasonal changes in temperature, pH, dissolved 

oxygen, nutrients, and mineral concentrations. The lake also experiences algal blooms during the summer 

months, including potentially toxic blue-green algae blooms that affect water quality. Ongoing recreational 

use of trails and campgrounds contributes minimal sediment to Paulina Creek. The Lava Rock OHV Trail 

Project as proposed would only have one stream crossing on a bridge and effects to sedimentation would be 

minimal. Adverse effects to water quality from activities proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3 would be 

none to negligible, therefore there would be no measurable cumulative effects. 

3.8.7 Aquatic Species Habitat and Populations

Affected Environment

Fish Populations: There are no native fish populations within Paulina Creek and it is unknown if there ever 

were (ODFW 1996). Native fish may have inhabited the lower reaches but were limited in upstream 

distribution due to the first set of impassable waterfalls at about river mile 7.0. Populations of introduced 

brown trout (Salmo trutta), which are outmigrants from Paulina Lake, inhabit the stream. Kokanee salmon, 

blue chub, three-spined sticklebacks, and rainbow trout also at times come downstream from the lake. 

There may also be a self-sustaining small population of eastern brook trout in Paulina Creek (ODFW

1996). A review of the Region 6 Regional Forester’s Special Status Species list determined that there are 

no known threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, or sensitive fish species within Paulina Creek.

Pristine springsnail: Also known as the pristine pyrg (Pristinicola hemphilli), this aquatic snail typically 

inhabits small coldwater springs or seeps and occasionally larger springs, spring outflow channels, and 

spring-influenced stream reaches. Springs are usually in semiarid sagebrush-dominated habitat with basalt 

substrates, but some sites are in dense Douglas-fir forests. Habitat is characterized by cobble substrates, 

slow to moderate flows, and very shallow, cold, clear water. Sites are relatively undisturbed (Frest and 

Johannes 1999). This type of habitat does not exist within the Ogden project area. 

Fisheries Habitat: Fisheries habitat is poor to fair, limited by low flows, high water temperatures, 

numerous migrational barriers, and a lack of quality pool habitat, instream large wood, and riparian 

vegetation. There is no surface connection to the Little Deschutes River. The 2002 stream survey of 

Paulina Creek documented that only 1 reach of 6 met the INFISH standard for instream large wood (met 

minimum) and one reach had no instream large wood (Table 157). Water temperatures exceed the state 

water quality standard which is based on fisheries requirements.

Table 157: Summary of Stream Attributes - Paulina Creek Stream Survey (2002)

Reach Miles 

Surveyed

Sinuosity Channel 

Gradient 

Percent

Pool 

Habitat 

Percent

Pools 

per 

mile

Average 

bankfull 

width 

(feet)

Bankfull 

W/D 

Ratio

Pieces 

Large 

Wood/mile 

(INFISH)

Bank 

Instability 

Percent

1 0.73 1.06 0.5 1.6 4.1 14 13.2 0 0.5

2 1.49 1.01 2.6 6.4 12.1 20 15.7 1.3 0.3

3 0.9 1.07 5.6 15.9 21.1 17 9.5 20 0.2

4 1.27 1.14 2.0 14.8 16.5 22 16.9 4.7 0.3

5 1.43 1.01 10.5 24.7 42.6 18 17.1 10.5 0.2

6* 3.05 1.02 3.9 12.4 30.5 23 29.6 19 1.4

*Most of Reach 6 Upstream of Ogden Project area 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

400  Ogden Final EIS

Environmental Consequences – Aquatic Species Habitat and Populations

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Fish and other aquatic species habitat and populations are largely influenced 

by water quality and water quantity. The No Action alternative would have no direct effects to fish habitat 

or populations. Effects to habitat or populations would be from natural causes, fish management actions, or 

other causes. There would be No Impact to the pristine springsnail as no spring or seep habitat exists 

within the project area.

Under current conditions, most stands within the RHCA of Paulina Creek are overstocked and at risk of 

insect and disease infestations which could lead to increased fire risk. Under No Action there is a greater 

risk of stand replacing wildfires, including within the RHCA of Paulina Creek. Research has shown that 

fire can result in direct mortality to fish (Gresswell 1999). There is potential for indirect effects to fish 

habitat and populations from stand replacing wildfire. These effects are primarily tied to water quality, 

effects on which were discussed previously. Increased water temperatures and decreased dissolved oxygen 

can affect fish by increasing mortality, promoting disease, decreasing growth, and decreasing embryo 

survival. Suspended sediment can be abrasive to fish gills and reduce foraging ability. Fine sediments 

accumulated in riverbed substrates can limit survival of developing fish embryos and limit the production 

of aquatic macroinvertebrates, which provide forage for fish (Bjornn and Reiser 1991, in Meehan 1991). 

Fine sediments in the streambed were shown to impair growth and survival of steelhead juveniles (Suttle

2004).

A decrease in bank stability and riparian vegetation after a stand replacing wildfire would decrease 

overhead cover for fish. There would be a benefit to fish habitat from an increase in large woody material 

from fire-toppled trees and increased windfalls for several years after the fire. Instream large wood 

provides hiding cover for fish, reduces velocities to provide microhabitats, and provides habitat and a food 

source for aquatic macroinvertebrates. There would be a reduction in future recruitment of large woody 

material until the stands recover to maturity. An increase in primary productivity as a result of fireintroduced nutrients could increase the abundance of macroinvertebrates, thus increasing the food base for 

fish. Increases in macroinvertebrate abundance and diversity would likely be short term. Minshall (2003) 

summarized changes to macroinvertebrate communities are generally restricted to the first 5-10 years. 

The 1998 McKay Fire burned across and along Paulina Creek for approximately one mile. This fire was 

largely in second growth in ponderosa pine stands. While resulting in mortality of nearly all the shade 

trees, the soils were not severely burned and did not result in streambank erosion (2002 survey notes only 

0.3% streambank erosion in Reach 4 which includes the fire area – see Table 69 above.) 

As mentioned previously under effects to water quality, there is also the risk of fire retardant and foaming 

agents reaching aquatic systems during fire-fighting operations. Fire retardant can persist in soils and 

produce toxic effects to fish for weeks, especially in sandy soils (Luce, 2005). During August of 2002, fire 

retardant was inadvertently dropped in nearby Fall River while attempting to extinguish a small fire (<5 

acres). A large fish kill was observed, estimated at 21,000 fish by the Oregon Department of Fish and 

Wildlife (ODFW). Aquatic invertebrates were also adversely affected. Recovery of the fish population 

was anticipated by ODFW to take up to nine years.

Insect and disease damage would likely increase over time, resulting in greater tree mortality. As these 

snags become windfalls, many would fall instream. However, many would be of small diameter and would 

not meet the INFISH minimum size requirement (12” diameter at small end, 35’ length) to be classified as 

large woody material. Paulina Creek is especially lacking in instream wood of 20” or greater diameter.

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Fish and other aquatic species habitat and populations are largely influenced 

by water quality, water quantity, and timing of streamflows. Water quality and water quantity are 

maintained under these alternatives, therefore maintaining these important components of fish habitat. Fuel 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  401

loading is reduced and suppression effectiveness is increased which would reduce the potential for stand 

replacing wildfires that would reduce shade and future instream large wood recruitment, and potentially 

adversely affect riparian areas and stream channels. As a result, riverbank stability, shade, future long term 

large wood recruitment, and spawning gravels are maintained along large areas of Paulina Creek. A few 

hazard trees may be felled into Paulina Creek as part of project activities that would minimally improve 

fisheries habitat. These alternatives reduce stocking levels of tree stands that decreases the risk of insect 

and disease infestations and increases growth rates and vigor of trees that would provide shade and future 

large wood recruitment. Alternative 2 treats more acres within the RHCA than Alternative 3 so would have 

greater benefits to shade and future large wood recruitment to Paulina Creek. Other effects to habitat or 

populations would be from natural causes, fish management actions, or other causes. An indirect effect of 

implementing this alternative would be reducing the potential for short term gain in large wood recruitment 

as a result of wildfire. 

Hand thinning of trees < 10” dbh near Paulina Creek (with prescribed setbacks) would reduce potential 

instream recruitment of wood in the short term (20 years) as some of these trees may eventually become 

windthrows. However, these trees, being of smaller diameter, would not meet the INFISH definition of 

large woody debris (> 12” diameter, 35’ length).

Surveys have not been conducted for the pristine springsnail, but this species requires spring and seep 

habitat not found within the project area. If the species did happen to exist within the project area, the 

resource protection measures to protect water quality and riparian vegetation would protect springsnail 

populations and habitat. There would be No Impact to the pristine springsnail.

Essential Fish Habitat: There would be no effects to Essential Fish Habitat from these alternatives. There 

are no present or historical records of Chinook salmon populations in the Little Deschutes River or Paulina 

Creek. 

Cumulative Effects

The altered flow regime and the elevated water temperatures are two of the main factors influencing fish 

and other aquatic species populations and habitat. There would be no measurable cumulative effects to fish 

habitat and populations, because of no measurable cumulative effects to water quality and quantity. These 

alternatives reduce the potential for stand replacing wildfire that could reduce shade and long term large 

woody material recruitment, and potentially severely burn within the RHCA if the fire were to move into 

mixed conifer stands that could have short and long term adverse effects to overhead cover, streambank and 

channel stability, spawning gravel quality, and large wood recruitment. 

3.8.8 INFISH and Riparian Management Objectives

Affected Environment

Although there are no native fish in the Ogden project area, project design features have been incorporated 

into Alternatives 2 and 3 to comply with INFISH Standards and Guidelines and Riparian Management 

Objectives (Table 158). The Riparian Management Objectives for a forested system are pool frequency, 

water temperatures, large woody debris, bank stability, and width/depth ratio. Under existing conditions, 

pool frequency and water temperatures are not being met in any of the 6 reaches of Paulina Creek. Large 

woody debris and width/depth ratios are met in only one reach. Bank stability is met in all reaches. Pool 

frequency and width/depth ratios of Paulina Creek may be influenced somewhat by the altered flow regime, 

but it is unknown if these parameters would be met under natural conditions. Water temperatures are 

largely influenced by the temperature of Paulina Lake at the outlet, which is in turn influenced somewhat 

by irrigation storage practices. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

402  Ogden Final EIS

Table 158: Interim Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs)

Habitat Feature Interim Objectives

Pool Frequency Varies by channel width (See Table below)

Water Temperatures No measurable increase in maximum water temperature (7-day moving average of 

daily maximum temperature measured as the average of the maximum daily 

temperature of the warmest consecutive 7-day period.) Maximum water 

temperatures below 59° F within adult holding habitat and below 48° F within 

spawning and rearing habitats.

Large Woody Debris 

(forested systems)

East of Cascade Crest in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Nevada, and western Montana: 

>20 pieces/mile; >12” diameter; >35’ length.

Bank Stability (nonforested systems)>80 per cent stable.

Lower Bank Angle (nonforested systems)>75 per cent of banks with <90° angle (i.e., undercut).

Width/Depth Ratio <10, mean wetted width divided by mean wetted depth

Table 159: Interim Objectives for Pool Frequency

Wetted width (feet) 10 20 25 50 75 100 125 150 200

Pools per mile 96 56 47 26 23 18 14 12 9

Environmental Consequences INFISH and RMOs

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: The No Action alternative would have no direct effects to the Riparian 

Management Objectives (RMOs). Under the scenario of stand replacing wildfire both short term (during 

fire) and long term (>5 years) increases in water temperature may occur (See discussion under Water

Quality); width/depth ratio may increase if bank erosion were to occur; and minimal changes in pool 

frequency would be expected. Large woody debris would increase in the short term (<5-10 years), but 

future recruitment would be decreased for decades. In the long term, large wood recruitment from some 

stands may be diminished because overstocked stands within the RHCA are not receiving vegetation 

treatments to increase resistance to insect and disease and increase vigor and growth of remaining trees.

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternatives 2 and 3 take action to reduce the potential for effects to the 

objectives from stand replacing wildfire by promoting healthier stands in the watershed and a more fire 

resilient landscape although Alternative 3 treats fewer acres than Alternative 2. Two of the objectives 

(large woody debris and water temperatures) could potentially be improved by management actions 

proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3. Management activities within the RHCA would maintain or not 

degrade the other objectives. Shade is maintained and increased over time to potentially decrease water 

temperatures. Large wood recruitment is maintained and improved in the long term (>20 years). These 

alternatives are consistent with INFISH Standard and Guideline TM-1 applying silvicultural practices 

within the RHCA to acquire desired vegetation characteristics to help attain RMOs of water temperature 

and large woody debris. Attainment of other RMOs would not be retarded and there would be no adverse 

effects to inland native fish. There are no native fish species in Paulina Creek. These alternatives are 

consistent with Standards and Guidelines FM-1 and FM-4 as fuel treatments have been designed to not 

prevent attainment of RMOs. Disturbance to riparian ground cover and vegetation is minimized through 

the project design features of underburning during moist conditions, a stream buffer for ignition points, and 

fire line construction by hand only. Prescribed fire would reduce ladder fuels and contribute to the 

development of large tree structure to help attain RMOs of large woody debris and water temperature. 

Management outside of the RHCA would incorporate project design features, especially soil design 

features, which would limit effects to the RHCA and not adversely affect RMOs.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  403

Cumulative Effects

There would be no cumulative effects to the Riparian Management Objectives as there were no adverse 

direct or indirect effects and no foreseeable projects that would also these RMOs.

3.8.9 Wild and Scenic Rivers

Affected Environment

Management Area 17 (Wild and Scenic River)

Paulina Creek from the outlet at Paulina Lake to the forest boundary 8.0 miles downstream is eligible for 

inclusion into the national Wild and Scenic River system, classified as Recreational. To be eligible for 

inclusion in the Wild and Scenic Rivers system, a stream must be free-flowing and have one or more 

“Outstandingly Remarkable Value” (ORV). The stream and the 1⁄4 mile corridor on both sides of the 

stream are to be managed in accordance with Management Area 17 of the Forest Plan (Wild and Scenic 

Rivers) to protect the ORVs and not to preclude Paulina Creek’s inclusion into the Wild and Scenic River 

system until suitability can be determined. The identified ORVs for Paulina Creek are 

Hydrological/Geological and Scenic, but these ORVs only occur within the first 0.5 mile below Paulina 

Lake within the Newberry National Volcanic Monument, an area outside of the Ogden Project boundary

(USFS 1990a). The Hydrological/Geological is an ORV because of an unusual example of a stream that 

drains an expended crater and the associated Paulina Creek falls. Scenic is an ORV because of the 

exceptional and unique Paulina Creek Falls and lower falls. Appendix D of the Forest Plan describes 

Paulina Creek in detail. The corridor within the project area largely overlays Old Growth Management 

Area and Scenic Views allocations.

Environmental Consequences – Wild and Scenic Rivers

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: The No Action alternative would have no direct effects to the ORVs or 

eligibility status of Paulina Creek. There is increased risk of stand replacing wildfires under this alternative 

which may affect scenic values but not hydrological/geological. Due to the falls, scenic values would still 

remain. Paulina Creek would remain eligible for inclusion into the Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

The following table displays the units that overlap the Paulina Creek Eligible W&S River Corridor. 

Appendix A of this FEIS lists the vegetation and fuels treatments proposed in each unit listed below (Table 

160). Alternatives 2 and 3 propose 1187 and 1101 acres, respectively, of vegetation and fuels treatments 

within the eligible Wild and Scenic River corridor of Paulina Creek. This is displayed in Figure 89.

Table 160: Units within the Paulina Creek Eligible W&S River Corridor 

Unit w/i corridor

Alt. 2

Acres w/i 

corridor Alt. 2 Unit w/i corridor Alt. 3 Acres w/i 

corridor Alt. 3

24, 25, 84, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 116, 117, 135, 136, 137, 138, 

139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 

151, 153, 154, 155, 157, 158, 159, 

160, 161, 162, 163, 166, 167, 168, 

170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 324, 325, 

326, 328, 331, 377, 384, 386, 387, 

388

1,187

24, 25, 84, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 

139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 

151, 153, 154, 155, 157, 158, 159, 

160, 161, 162, 163, 165, 166, 167, 

168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 

325, 326, 330, 331, 377, 384, 385, 

386, 387, 388

1,101
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

404  Ogden Final EIS

 

 

Figure 89: Units within the Paulina Cr. Eligible Wild and Scenic River Interim Mgmt. Corridor.

Direct and Indirect Effects: About 1,187 acres under Alternative 2 and 1,101 acres under Alternative 3 

would be treated by combinations of thinning, mowing, and burning. Compared to the total acres of the 

eligible wild and scenic river corridor within the Ogden project area (2,164), the alternatives treat 54 

percent and 50 percent respectively. Effects of thinning, mowing, and burning are described for forested 

vegetation and other resources throughout this chapter. 

Neither alternative would affect the Hydrological/Geological or Scenic ORVs as these occur outside of the 

project area (ORVs are present in first 0.5 miles of creek below Paulina Lake, within the Newberry 

National Volcanic Monument). The nearest management action proposed under this project is located over 

1 mile from the area the ORVs occur and would not be visible from this area. Neither alternative would 

affect the free-flow nature of Paulina Creek. The hydrology/water quality section discusses stream 

setbacks for mechanized equipment and other restrictions to preserve water quality and avoid any adverse 

effects. There are no treatments planned that would cause a change in the course of the stream or alter 

surface or sub-surface flows to affect the free-flow nature (see water quantity section). Scenery is

discussed in Chapter 3.9; it is disclosed that the scenic views will be enhanced over the long term. The 

eligibility status of Paulina Creek would not be changed under either alternative through the 8 mile long 

corridor. 

Cumulative Effects
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  405

There would no cumulative effects from implementing either alternative since there are no adverse direct or 

indirect effects to the ORVs of Hydrological/Geological and Scenic. Cumulative effects to other values 

within the Paulina Creek corridor are discussed throughout this chapter.

3.8.10 Wetlands and Floodplains 

Affected Environment

Floodplains: Executive Order 11988 provides direction to avoid adverse impacts associated with the 

occupancy and modification of floodplains. Floodplains are defined by this order as, “. . . the lowland and 

relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters, including flood prone areas of offshore islands, 

including at a minimum, that area subject to a one percent [100-year recurrence] or greater chance of 

flooding in any one year.”

Wetlands: Executive Order 11990 is to avoid adverse impacts associated with destruction or modification 

of wetlands. Wetlands are defined by this order as, “. . . areas inundated by surface or ground water with a 

frequency sufficient to support and under normal circumstances does or would support a prevalence of 

vegetative or aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and 

reproduction. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas such as sloughs, 

potholes, wet meadows, river overflows, mud flats, and natural ponds.”

Floodplains and wetlands within the project area are associated with Paulina Creek. Floodplains adjacent 

to the Paulina Creek are primarily narrow (<10 feet wide), transitioning quickly into upslope vegetation 

stands of ponderosa or lodgepole pine and bitterbrush. There are no other wetlands or floodplains within 

the project area.

Environmental Consequences – Wetlands and Floodplains

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: There would be no direct effects to wetlands and floodplains. Stand replacing 

wildfire potential in floodplains and wetlands would increase and could result in short term effects to 

vegetation. Wildfires routinely enter wetlands and floodplains.

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: There would be no direct or indirect effects. There would be no machinery 

operated in wetlands and floodplains. There would be no destruction, modification, or occupancy of 

wetlands and floodplains.

Cumulative Effects – Wetland and Floodplains

There would be no cumulative effects to wetlands and floodplains as there were no direct or indirect 

effects. 

3.8.11 Consistency with the LRMP

The action alternatives (2 and 3) are consistent with the Forest Plan:

S & Gs RP 1-4 as riparian areas would be maintained, protected, and enhanced in the long term. 

S & Gs RP 6,7 as no adverse effects to water temperature would occur and actions proposed would 

provide long term benefits to shade and thus water temperatures. Best Management Practices are 

being utilized

S & G RP 8 as cumulative effects to water quantity, water quality, stream channel conditions, and 

fish habitat were evaluated. Measures to avoid adverse effects to these resources are included in 

the design.

S & G RP 10 as woody debris and riparian vegetation would be managed to maintain stream 

channel and bank structure and provide structural habitat for resident fish.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

406  Ogden Final EIS

S & Gs RP 11-16 as there would be no scheduled timber harvest in riparian zones, within 

approximately 100 feet of streams, ground cover disturbance is minimized, channel conditions and 

water quality would be protected through project design criteria and mitigation measures, and 

future large woody debris inputs to streams, shade, and streambanks would be maintained. 

Scheduled timber harvest is described as what meets the criteria of allowable sale quantity (ASQ). 

ASQ was calculated for the Forest Plan over the entire forest but only certain management areas 

were considered for scheduled harvest. These calculations did not include timber within riparian 

zones or 100 feet of streams.

S & G RP-33-35 as only hand piling of burn piles of small size would occur near riparian areas, 

prescribed burning will be of low intensity, and adequate numbers of residual live trees larger than 

5 inches would be left intact to provide for streambank stability, shading, and fish and wildlife 

habitat. No-cut stream buffers were included in the design. No machine firelines would be 

constructed in the RHCA.

S & G RP-47 as natural floodplain characteristics would be maintained. 

S & G FI-5 as site-specific prescriptions are proposed within the RHCA that enhance the 

recruitment of large woody debris to streams and protects and improves shade to enhance water 

temperatures. 

S & Gs WT-1,2 as Water Quality Best Management Practices would be implemented and 

monitored.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  407

3.9.1 Introduction

This report provides an effects analysis and visual impact assessment of the proposed thinning and fuel 

treatments. It will analyze the anticipated effects on scenery, aesthetics, and visitor experience within 

the Scenic Views management areas along Road 21 (Paulina Lake Road), Road 22 (South Ice Cave 

Road), Paulina Creek, McKay Butte, and northeast areas of the project that are adjacent to the Newberry 

National Volcanic Monument boundary. 

3.9.2 Management Direction 

The Forest Plan for the Deschutes National Forest provides standards and guidelines for management 

areas. The Scenic Views management areas are used to describe the desired future conditions of various 

settings and how these are to be met by various activities or actions. The Scenery Management System 

(SMS) includes social impacts to recreation visitors and considers the visitor experience an integral part 

of the visual impact assessment. This current and more holistic system (1995) is the methodology used 

and in place for scenic resource analysis although the outdated (1974) Visual Quality System (VQS) is 

referenced. 

The Forest Service implementing regulations currently establish a variety of Scenic Integrity Levels for 

Scenic Views – MA9 (LMRP page 4-121). These standards and guidelines include:

SMS - Natural Appearing Landscape with High Scenic Integrity Level 

(VQS - Retention, MA 9, SV-1 Foreground, SV-3 Middleground)

SMS - Slightly Altered Landscape with Medium Scenic Integrity Level 

(VQS - Partial Retention, MA 9, SV-2 Foreground, SV-4 Middleground)

SMS - Altered Landscape with Low Scenic Integrity Level 

(VQS - Modification or General Forest, MA 8, GFO within Foreground and Middleground)

Scenery Management Objectives are defined in terms of Scenic Integrity Levels which describe existing 

conditions and whether the landscape is visually perceived to be “complete” or not. The most complete,

or highest, rating for Scenic Integrity Levels means having little or no deviation from the landscape 

character that makes it appealing and attractive to visitors and local residents. In addition to describing 

existing conditions, Scenic Integrity Levels also describe the level of development allowed and ways to 

mitigate deviations from the area’s landscape character.

The goal of the Scenic Views management area is to provide high quality scenery representing the 

natural character of Central Oregon. The general theme and objectives of Scenic Views is for 

landscapes seen from selected travel routes and use areas to be managed to maintain or enhance the 

appearance of the areas being viewed. To the casual observer, results of activities will either not be 

evident or will be visually subordinate to the natural landscape. Timber harvest is permitted but only to 

protect and improve the scenic quality for the stands in both the short-term and long-term time frames. 

Timber stands, which have remained unmanaged in the past because of their visual sensitivity, will 

begin receiving treatment to avoid loss of the stand to natural causes. Landscapes containing negative 

visual elements, such as skid roads, activity residue, or cable corridors, will be rehabilitated. 

The desired condition for ponderosa pine is to achieve and maintain visual diversity through variation of 

stand densities and size classes. Large, old- growth pine will remain an important constituent, with trees 

achieving 30 inches in diameter or larger and having deeply furrowed, yellowbark characteristics. 

For species other than ponderosa pine, the desired condition requires obtaining visual diversity through 

either spatial distribution of age classes and mix of species through density manipulation or openings, or 

through a mixture of age classes within stands.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

408  Ogden Final EIS

3.9.3 Analysis Methods

Methodology used for analyzing impacts to scenic resources is the Scenery Management System which 

uses “Landscape Aesthetics: A Handbook for Scenery Management.” Issued in 1995, this new 

handbook replaces “Agriculture Handbook 462 – The Visual Management System” which was issued in 

1974. While many of the basic inventory elements of the Visual Management System are retained, the 

Scenery Management System incorporates both the natural and human processes into the ideas of 

managing for ecosystems. 

3.9.4 Affected Environment

The Ogden project area is located on the western flank of the Newberry Volcano, with private property 

forming its west boundary and the Newberry National Volcanic Monument (NNMV) forming its east 

boundary. The project area contains 6,072 acres of Scenic Views management areas which includes 

3,749 acres of Scenic Views Foreground areas and 2,323 acres of Scenic Views Middleground areas. 

Scenic Views Foreground areas are located along Road 21 (Paulina Lake Road), Road 22 (South Ice 

Cave Road), and Paulina Creek. Scenic Views Middleground areas are located along the northeast 

boundary where the project area meets the NNVM boundary and on McKay Butte. There are Old 

Growth management areas located adjacent to the Scenic Views Foreground areas along Paulina Creek. 

Leaving Highway 97 and traveling east on Road 21 through private lands, the landscape character of the 

area is dominated by ponderosa pine intermixed with lodgepole pine with a brush understory along both 

sides of the road. There are no open views to surrounding topographical features. Upon entering the 

western lowlands portion of the project area, Scenic View Foreground areas are fairly uniform with 

continuation of more ponderosa pine intermixed with lodgepole pine with a brush understory along both 

sides of a straight stretch of road for approximately three miles. When Road 21 crosses Paulina Creek 

at McKay Crossing, there are views to flat open field areas surrounding the creek as it crosses under the 

road and continues to the southwest. Once you pass Paulina Creek and the open area that surrounds it, 

the road continues to be straight through a fairly uniform landscape that is once again more of the same 

landscape character that was previously viewed upon driving on Road 21 at the junction with Highway 

97 and then entering the project area. 

Approximately 5 miles into the project area, the drive along Road 21 becomes more interesting with 

elevation changes and more curves in the road. The topography along the south side of the road begins

to change with steeper slopes, undulating terrain, and more diverse vegetation with increased numbers 

of larger ponderosa pine mixed in with nicer looking green clumps of lodgepole pine. The area 

surrounding the 6-mile sno-park becomes more visually diverse as the road alignment begins to curve 

even more and climb higher in elevation. The existing conditions on this lowlands portion of the project 

area present some good opportunities for scenic view enhancement. 

3.9.5 Scenic View Enhancement Opportunities

When considering scenic view enhancement opportunities for the larger landscape level, the lowlands 

portion of the project area along Road 21 (west boundary to 6-mile Sno-Park) would benefit the most 

from treatments that are designed to create more visual diversity along this scenic travel corridor. The 

middle portion of the project area along Road 21 has visual diversity in terms of greater variability in 

larger ponderosa pine with mixed conifer stands, topographical changes and landform, and a much more 

interesting drive with many more curves as the road climbs in elevation. The upper portion of the 

project area along Road 21 has visual diversity in terms of mixed conifer stands, a greater amount of 

lodgepole pine in various age classes and densities, and larger openings for vistas and scenic views to 

surrounding features in the landscape.

The opportunities that exist to enhance scenic views along Road 21 include opening views to areas with 

interesting terrain, showing off the large ponderosa pine, creating visual diversity through maintaining 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  409

full-crowned green lodgepole pine, and creating larger openings through underburning areas larger than 

five acres. A Forest Plan amendment (described below and in Chapter 2) allows for more widespread 

treatment throughout the project area by allowing burn areas that are greater than five acres in selected 

units. 

Interpretation at the kiosk at the entrance to the Monument on Road 21 or at the overlook is needed to 

describe the need to reduce forest vegetation density and fuels to create a more resilient landscape and 

to create more visual diversity along a scenic travel corridor.

3.9.6 Environmental Consequences

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Because no mowing or burning would occur along the lowlands portion of 

Road 21 in units 176, 177, 199, 201, 203, 204, 206, and #207, High Scenic Integrity (Retention) in 

Foreground areas would be met. 

One of the primary objectives on the Forest is to highlight large ponderosa pine. Removing lodgepole 

pine would provide more open views of the Forest and larger ponderosa pine trees in units 176, 177, 

199, and 201. This would be consistent with the LRMP by emphasizing these trees in the foreground 

views, an important element of scenic views. By retaining clumps of green lodgepole pine in units 204 

and 206, visual diversity would be achieved. 

Short-term effects due to the prescribed treatments for reducing stand density and fuels would be light 

stumps and slash and much more open views through the forest instead of a dense wall of vegetation. 

These short-term effects would be very visible for at least 5 years. Annual growth from 5 to 10 years of 

remaining trees, young trees and shrubs would be greener and slightly fill in the open views. This 

would lessen the short-term impact of the proposed activities to scenic views. 

In all other units within the Scenic Views Management Area, prescribed treatments would enhance the 

character of the landscape over the long term which is 10 to 20 years after the proposed activities have 

occurred. By reducing stand density and fuels that could contribute to a high intensity wildfire, green 

trees would more likely be sustained over the long-term. Ponderosa pine would have more opportunity 

to develop into large trees with the reduction in stand density. The long-term scenic views would more 

closely resemble the natural character desired for this Scenic Views management area and consistent 

with the standards and guidelines in the LRMP.

Cumulative Effects: The McKay Butte Fire fragmented the Scenic Views – Foreground management 

area along Forest Road 21 that provides access to Newberry Volcano from Highway 97. The remaining 

vegetation in the burned area is primarily shrubs which provides a strong visual contrast to the adjacent 

high density forested area. The scenic views through this area are mostly Middleground and 

Background. Thinning of these high density forested areas would open up views to larger tree species 

and especially highlight larger ponderosa pine which would meet one of the primary objectives for 

Scenic Views in Foreground areas. 

There are several geothermal projects planned throughout the areas surrounding and within NNVM. 

Most of these activities will not be within Scenic Views – Foreground management areas and are 

located in small existing clearings throughout the area. They are accessed by less traveled Forest Roads 

and not a main scenic corridor such as Forest Road 21. The short-term impacts to scenic views will be 

mitigated so long-term cumulative effects will meet standards and guidelines for Scenic Views 

management areas. 

Paulina Creek is an eligible Wild and Scenic River corridor, with the Outstandingly Remarkable Values 

located within the first 0.5 miles downstream from Paulina Lake (and outside of the project area). The 

zoned project design features for the Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas that covers 300 feet on both 

banks of the creek will result in enhanced cumulative effects to scenic views over the long-term. The 

proposed activities for this area will have short-term visual impacts for at least 5 to 10 years and these 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

410  Ogden Final EIS

changes will be less noticeable over the long-term for the next 10 to 20 years because of more open 

views to the water and through the forest with larger highlighted trees such as ponderosa pine and other 

species. 

3.9.7 Scenic Views Forest Plan Amendments

The description of the alternatives in Chapter 2 includes two Forest Plan Amendments being proposed 

in order to implement Alternatives 2 and 3 (Table 161). These amendments deal with standards and 

guidelines in the Scenic Views management area that restrict the use of prescribed fire. The use of fire 

in the ponderosa pine forest type is key to restoring the area to historic conditions, including the 

promotion of late and old structure. 

Goals of Scenic Views MA: To provide Forest visitors with high quality scenery that represents the 

natural character of Central Oregon.

General Theme and Objectives of Scenic Views: Landscapes seen from selected travel routes and use 

areas will be managed to maintain or enhance their appearance. To the casual observer, results of 

activities either will not be evident or will be visually subordinate to the natural landscape.

Landscapes will be enhanced by opening views to distant peaks, unique rock forms, unusual vegetation, 

or other features of interest. Timber harvest is permitted, but only to protect and improve the visual 

quality of the stands both now and in the future. Timber stands, which have remained unmanaged in the 

past because of their visual sensitivity, will begin receiving treatment to avoid loss of the stand to 

natural causes. Landscapes containing negative visual elements, such as skid roads, activity residue, or 

cable corridors, will be rehabilitated.

The desired condition for ponderosa pine is to achieve and maintain visual diversity through variations 

of stand densities and size classes. Large, old-growth pine will remain an important constituent, with 

trees achieving 30 inches dbh or larger and having deeply furrowed, yellowbark characteristics.

For other species, the desired condition requires obtaining visual variety through either spatial 

distribution of age classes and species mixes, through density manipulation, or through a mixture of age 

classes within a stand.

Standard & Guidelines and Reasons for Amending

1) M9-27 (LRMP 4-125) states: In Retention Foregrounds, slash from a thinning or tree removal 

activity, or other visible results of management activities, will not be visible to the casual forest visitor 

for one year after the work has been completed. In Partial Retention foregrounds, logging residue or 

other results of management activities will not be obvious to the casual forest visitor two years 

following the activity.

Although activity fuels would be treated as soon as possible, especially along travel corridors, the use of 

prescribed fire will create visible impacts (e.g. blackened, scorched vegetation and tree trunks) for 

approximately five years, which exceeds the amount of time management actions can be visible within 

retention and partial retention allocations. This standard would be amended to allow visible effects of 

harvest cleanup and fuels reduction for approximately five years.

2) M9-90 (LRMP page 4-131) states: Low intensity prescribed fires will be used to meet and promote 

the Desired Visual Condition within each stand type. Prescribed fire and other fuel management 

techniques will be used to minimize the hazard of a large high intensity fire. In foreground areas, 

prescribed fires will be small, normally less than 5 acres, and shaped to appear as natural occurrences. 

If burning conditions cannot be met such that scorching cannot be limited to the lower 1/3 of the forest 

canopy, then other fuel management techniques should be considered.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  411

Limiting acreage for the use of prescribed fire to five acres or less in foreground areas of Scenic Views 

would not meet the goal of reducing wildfire risk, providing safety corridors for the public, or creating a

defensible fuel break for an advancing fire. It is necessary to amend the five acre limitation for fuels 

treatments to meet stand and fire management objectives. This standard would be amended to allow 

prescribed fire to occur on areas larger than five acres. These areas would remain at substantial risk to 

mortality from wildfire without a more comprehensive and intensive system of treatments, including 

prescribed fire. 

The maximum acres proposed for treatment within foreground areas of Scenic Views MA is 1,909. To 

maintain scorching below 30% of the crown, treatments would be based on the following:

If stand density is too dense to burn without substantial mortality, thinning with follow-up slash 

pile and burning.

If shrubs are present and stand density is low, mowing would be followed with prescribed 

burning. Some mortality could occur.

If stand density is low and no shrubs are present, the area would be assessed to determine if 

treatment is needed.

To achieve under burning objectives, follow-up fuels treatments may be necessary.

Ecologically, the reintroduction of fire is consistent with the restoration concept of more frequent low 

intensity fire on the landscape. Historically, fire played the bigger role in influencing forest succession. 

Interfering with one disturbance agent (fire) has increased the influence of other disturbance agents 

(insect and disease) (Gara 2000). These agents now exhibit their influence over entire landscapes in 

episodes lasting decades, which is a result of replacing open stands of shade intolerant tree species with 

dense, closed stands of shade-tolerant species (Agee 1993).

Table 161: Description of areas where the inventoried visual quality objective is retention or partial 

retention (Scenic View Foreground Management Area) and underburning is proposed); includes units 

in both Alternative 2 and Alternative 3. Both amendments described above are proposed for these 

areas.

Area Description

Treatment acres 

proposed for use of 

prescribed fire Distance

Scenic 

Views

Gross Unit 

Acres

SV 1 – Retention Foreground

1

Both sides of Road 21 from Forest 

boundary to Ogden Group Camp.

Units 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26

311 424 1.4 miles along Road 21.

2

Area north of Road 2120 from Ogden 

Group Camp to McKay Campground. 

Includes area north of Paulina Creek and 

Peter Skene Ogden Trail.

Units 155, 158, 159, 160

271 341

1.2 miles along Peter 

Skene Ogden 

Trail/Paulina Creek.

3

Area south of Road 2120 and both sides 

of Road 21 from Ogden Group Camp to 

approximately Road 9736.

Units 162, 166, 167, 168,1 169, 170, 171, 

172, 175, 176, 177, 178, 182, 183, 187, 

866 1,354

4.0 miles along Road 21.

2.3 miles along Road 

2120.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

412  Ogden Final EIS

Area Description

Treatment acres 

proposed for use of 

prescribed fire

Distance

188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 196, 197, 

198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 

206, 207

4

Area north of Road 21 from east edge of 

McKay Fire.

Units 382, 384, 385, 386, 387, 388

89 117 1.1 miles along Road 21.

5

Area north of Road 21 and east of 10 

Mile Snow Park.

Units 331, 333

59 0.5 miles along Road 21.

6

Two units north of Road 21 and 

immediately west of NNVM boundary. 

(Note: Burning in these units may not be 

pursued.) 323, 327

26 26 110 feet along Road 21.

7

Two units 600 to 1,000 feet south of 

Road 21. Topography and distance 

makes it unlikely units will be visible 

from Road 21.

Units 346, 348

12 82 N/A 

SV 2 – Partial Retention Foreground

8

Area north of Road 22 from power line 

to Road 2215.

Units 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 

264, 265, 268

275 551 2.8 miles along Road 22.

Total 1,909 2,895

Anticipated Effects to Scenic Views due to Amendments

The following discussion considers the effects of amending both M9-27 and M9-90. The objectives for 

providing high quality scenery (including open, park-like stands of ponderosa pine and enhancement of 

existing large pine trees) will be met in the long-term (longer than 5 years). Overall, reducing the fuels 

within foreground scenic views will help to feature the large ponderosa pine with old-growth 

characteristics. This will be consistent with the Goal, General Theme and Objectives, and the Standards 

and Guidelines of Scenic Views for Ponderosa Pine – Foregrounds (LRMP, pages 4 – 121-123). 

Scorching will likely remain below 30% crown scorch, meeting Standard and Guide M9-90, although 

some mortality could occur to smaller trees. Larger trees that might experience mortality from burning 

would remain to provide snag habitat. Prescribed burning would occur during periods of cooler burning 

periods to keep burn intensity and scorch heights down. 

The effects of the amendment are similar with both action alternatives. Units that the amendment 

applies to are as follows: Alternative 2: 21-26, 155, 158-160, 162, 166, 168-172, 175-178, 182, 183, 

187-193, 196-207, 313, 314, 322, 325, 334, 335, 337, 338, 373, 374, 377, 380, 382, 384-388, 331, 333, 

327, 346, 348, 257-265, 268, 110-117, 136-144, 161; Alternative 3: 21-26, 155, 158-160, 162, 175-178, 

182, 183, 188-193, 196-207, 313, 314, 322, 325, 334, 335, 337, 338, 373, 374, 377, 380, 382, 384-388, 

331, 333, 346, 257-268, 136-144, 161, 933, 934, 943 (see Figure 7 page 35).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  413

The lack of thinning and prescribed fire in these units leaves larger trees vulnerable to the potential 

effects of wildfire and insects and therefore unable to maintain high quality scenery of large pine trees.

The desired visual condition in these foreground areas will maintain a visual mosaic of numerous, large 

diameter, yellow-barked trees with stands of younger trees, providing visual diversity and sense of 

depth, consistent with Standard and Guide M9-4. In the short-term, the visible signs of management 

may be noticeable to the casual forest visitor (up to about five years). 

This amendment will also be consistent with the objectives of the Eastside Screens. This amendment 

will reduce ground and ladder fuels within the foreground scenic view to reduce the risk from wildfire 

to large (21 inches and greater dbh) ponderosa pine and those ponderosa pine less than 21 inches dbh 

with old growth characteristics. This will reduce the tendency for fires to burn through the crowns of 

trees that remain after treatment. 

In accordance with FSM 1926.51, the following items describe non-significant amendments with a 

discussion of how the actions address these items:

1. Actions that do not significantly alter the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and 

resource management;

By reintroducing fire to this frequent fire regime, the consequence of the reduction of highly 

flammable surface fuels, shrubs, and ladder fuels within Scenic Views will provide long-term 

protection and resiliency to ponderosa pine that are large and have old growth characteristics. 

This also will allow larger immature ponderosa pine to eventually grow and replace the existing 

old growth ponderosa pine. Providing and maintaining the natural character of Central Oregon is 

a central premise of and is consistent with the goals and objectives of Scenic Views. 

2. Adjustments of management area boundaries or management prescriptions resulting from further 

on-site analysis when the adjustments do not cause significant changes in the multiple-use goals 

and objectives for long-term land and resource management;

Adjusting the Standard and Guideline M9-27 and M9-90 will allow for long-term land and 

resource management by reducing the risk of high intensity wildfire that would likely cause 

widespread tree mortality, including large, old growth ponderosa pine. Maintaining these large, 

old-growth ponderosa pine is essential to being consistent with the goals and objectives of Scenic 

Views.

3. Minor changes in standards and guidelines; and/or

This is a minor change in two Standard and Guidelines. This change will contribute to the longterm protection, enhancement, and meeting the goals and objectives of Scenic Views.

4. Opportunities for additional projects or activities that will contribute to achievement of the 

management prescriptions.

By reintroducing fire at this time, fire can be used periodically to maintain the Scenic View 

management area as needed.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Botany

414  Ogden Final EIS

–

3.10.1 Summary

There are no known threatened, endangered, or sensitive (TES) plant sites within the project area. The 

closest known site is the pumice moonwort (Botrychium pumicola), about 3.5 direct miles away, within 

Newberry Crater. There is no high-probability habitat for this or other TES plant species within the 

project area.

3.10.2 Introduction

The Odgen project as regards TES plant species is consistent with the Deschutes LRMP (1990). 

Records were checked for previously known TES plant populations (TE-1); suitable habitat was located 

(TE-2); and a field reconnaissance was performed to try to locate populations within the project area, 

and at the proper time of year when TES plant species in question would be found (TE-3). The 

remaining standards and guidelines for TES plant species do not apply to the Odgen project.

This biological evaluation (BE) documents consideration of TES plants related to the Ogden project. It 

is prepared in compliance with the Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2672.4 and the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973 (Subpart B; 402.12, section 7 consultation). 

Effects of the project activities are evaluated for those TES plant species on the current Regional 

Forester’s Sensitive Species List (FSM 2670.44, January 2008) that are documented or suspected to 

occur on the Deschutes National Forest.

3.10.3 Affected Environment

Approximately 40% of the project area received TES plant species surveys throughout the 1990s prior 

to implementation of other projects (Prairie Dog, Fishhook, Bug Lite, Newberry Geothermal projects, 

miscellaneous special uses), and no TES plants were located. The areas surveyed were deemed to be 

those with the highest potential for carrying TES plant species habitat.

Little of the project area offers high-quality habitat for any TES plant species. Surveys were conducted 

by a Forest Service botanist along Paulina Creek in 2009 and 2010, with no high-probability TES 

habitat or TES plants being located. 

3.10.4 Environmental Consequences

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects – All Alternatives: None have been identified, because TES 

plant species have not been located within the project. There is no high-probability habitat within the 

project area.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  415

–

3.11.1 Summary

A noxious weed risk assessment was conducted and it determined that the action alternatives for the 

Ogden project have a high risk of introducing noxious weeds into the project area. This risk is mitigated 

with prevention practices described in Chapter 2.5

3.11.2 Introduction

Forest Service Manual (FSM) direction requires that Noxious Weed Risk Assessments be prepared for 

all projects involving ground-disturbing activities. For projects that have a moderate to high risk of 

introducing or spreading noxious weeds, Forest Service policy requires that decision documents must 

identify noxious weed control measures that will be undertaken during project implementation (FSM 

2081.03).

Aggressive non-native plants, or noxious weeds, can invade and displace native plant communities 

causing long-lasting management problems. Noxious weeds can displace native vegetation, increase 

fire hazards, reduce the quality of recreational experiences, poison livestock, and replace wildlife 

forage. By simplifying complex plant communities, weeds reduce biological diversity and threaten rare 

habitats. Potential and known weeds for the Deschutes National Forest are listed in Appendix A of the 

Invasive Plant report.

In addition to noxious weeds, which are designated by the State, there is a group of non-native plants 

that are also aggressive though are not officially termed "noxious". These species are also considered in 

this assessment.

3.11.3 Affected Environment

An invasive plant field reconnaissance of the project area was conducted in the summer of 2009. The 

previously-known weed sites, but no new ones, were located. Refer to 162 for the known weed sites.

Table 162: Known Weed Sites in the Ogden Planning Area

Known Weed Sites in the Ogden Planning Area

Species Site

Spotted knapweed (4 Sites) Ogden Group Camp

Spotted knapweed Paulina Creek Near Ogden Group Camp

Spotted knapweed, Dalmatian toadflax 10 mile sno-park

Spotted knapweed (10 Sites) Forest Road 21

Canada thistle (1 Site) Forest Road 21

St. Johnswort (3 Sites) Forest Road 21

Spotted knapweed McKay Crossing

Dalmatian toadflax Forest Road 9735-695

Spotted knapweed Near Forest Road 9736-100

Canada thistle Well pad pond

3.11.4 Risk Ranking

The following factors were considered in determining the level of risk for the introduction or spread of 

noxious weeds. 

Vectors (if contained in project proposal) ranked in order of weed introduction risk:

1. Heavy equipment (implied ground disturbance)

2. Importing soil/cinders
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

416  Ogden Final EIS

3. Off-Highway Vehicles

4. Grazing (long-term disturbance)

5. Pack animals (short-term disturbance)

6. Plant restoration

7. Recreationists (hikers, mountain bikers)

8. Forest Service project vehicles

The project proposal and exisitence of vectors was reviews to determine if the risk if high, moderate, or 

low. Following are the definitions:

High

Known weeds in / adjacent to project area; AND

Any of vectors #1-8 in project area; AND

Project operation in/adjacent to weed populations.

Moderate Any of vectors #1-5 present in project area.

Low

Any of vectors #6-8 in porject area; OR

Known weeds in/adjacent to project area iwthout vector presence.

A risk ranking of HIGH is appropriate for this project because heavy equipment will be brought into 

the area (which brings a risk of importing weed seeds or parts with it) and because there are known 

weed sites present. (See Mitigations, page one).

3.11.5 Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Because no actions would occur, there would be no identifiable direct or 

indirect effects from choosing this alternative. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: The largest concern is that weed parts or seeds may be brought into the 

project on the equipment used to implement the project, or that project equipment may spread known 

populations via their tires. This includes water tenders that would bring in water for dust abatement. 

The mitigations requiring clean equipment in the project area and to inspect water intake sources for 

dust abatement are helpful in preventing this; despite this, the risk is not reduced to zero.

Cumulative Effects: The scale of analysis for this section is the project boundary, so chosen 

because it offers a landscape of reasonable size in which to determine effects. 

Although there have been many opportunities for invasive plant introductions in the past, the issue had 

not reached the tipping point until the past fifteen years or so, when invasive plant populations in Bend 

in particular have increased exponentially. Because Bend is the nearest large community from which 

harvest-related vehicles and other recreational vehicles would come from or through, this has resulted in 

a higher probability of weed introductions into the current project area than had previously been the 

case. The Invasive Plant Treatment project was authorized in May 2012. Implementation includes 

herbicide treatment of weeds along Road 21, which bisects the project area. The activities of the action 

alternatives have potential to introduce and spread invasive plants (see project design features 71 – 75). 

Treating invasive plant sites within the Ogden project area reduces the seed source available for spread 

throughout the treatment units. 

3.11.6 Consistency with the LRMP

In 2005, the Deschutes LRMP was amended by the R6 Invasive Plant ROD. This proejct complies with 

Standards and guidelines for preventing the introduction and spread of invasive plants by incorporating 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  417

prevention measures into project design as described in the next section.

The Ogden project meets the Forest Service Manual direction stating that for any project with a 

moderate to high risk of weed invasion, control measures must be in place. Ogden has a high risk, and 

control measures are in place that addresses that concern (see Project Design, Chapter 2).

3.11.6 Prevention Strategy 

A Record of Decision for Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants was signed in October 2005, 

amending the Forest Plan of the Deschutes National Forest by adding standards and guidelines for 

prvvention and treatment. Three of those standards specifically address prevention of weed 

introductions (#’s 1, 2, and 7) into projects of the type that the Ogden project represents. These 

standards obligate the Forest Service to incorporate weed prevention into its planning documents and 

implementation phase. This includes the inspection of fill material (see Mitigations, page one).

The following goals and guidelines, relative to timber harvest and recreation, are listed in the USDA 

Forest Service Guide to Noxious Weed Prevention Practices. This guide discusses weed prevention 

practices that support the 2/3/99 Executive Order on Invasive Species. Each of these items are followed 

by a description of what is being done relative to the Ogden Project. 

Timber Harvest Operations 

Forest Veg 1. Treat weeds on projects used by contractors, emphasizing treatment of weed 

infestations on existing landings, skid trails, and helibases before activities commence.

Weeds will be treated where they are identified to have potential for being spread by contractors’ 

equipment as covered with existing NEPA decisions.

Forest Veg 2. Train contract administrators to identify noxious weeds and select lower risk sites for 

landings and skid trails.

The contract administrators are aware of the noxious weed problem and what the most likely weeds 

look like, and take them into account when selecting landings and skid trails.

Forest Veg 3. Encourage operators to maintain weed-free mill yards, equipment parking, and staging 

areas.

Noxious weeds are discussed at pre-work meetings; most operators are aware of the problem and 

the prevention practices that are required. 

Forest Veg 4. Use standard timber sale contract provisions such as B(T) 6.35 to ensure appropriate 

equipment cleaning.

This clause is used on all contracts.

Forest Veg 5. Minimize soil disturbance to no more than needed to meet project objectives. Logging 

practices to reduce soil disturbance include, but are not limited to:

Over-snow logging: Logging during a snow period will be a recommendation, but it is not a 

requirement of this sale for weeds. 

Skyline or helicopter logging: There will be no skyline or helicopter logging because it is not 

economical or necessary to accomplish this project.

Reuse landings, skid trails and helibases when they are weed free.: Existing landings and skid 

trails will be reused for the Ogden project, and are not known to contain weeds. In the event that 

weeds are found there, the site will not be used. Also of note is that the ground is relatively flat in 

this area, which reduces the amount of soil displacement during harvest operations, and thus the 

potential for weed spread or introduction. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

418  Ogden Final EIS

Forest Veg 6. Minimize period from end of logging to site preparation, revegetation, and contract 

closure.

There will be site preparation in units in Alternative 2. As a general rule, site preparation occurs

within 2 to 3 years of harvest. Planting occurs within 3 to 4 years of harvest.

Road Management

Road 1. For timber sale purchaser road maintenance and decommissioning, use standard timber sale 

contract provisions such as B(T) 6.35 to ensure appropriate equipment cleaning.

This clause is used on all contracts.

Road 5. Avoid acquiring water for dust abatement where access to the water is through weed-infested 

sites. 

At present it is not known where water for dust abatement will be drawn from. Regardless of the 

site proposed, it will be evaluated for weed presence and if weeds are present, another site may be 

recommended, or the site will be treated prior to use if that is practical and possible. 

Road 8. Treat weeds in road decommissioning and reclamation projects before roads are made 

impassable. Reinspect and follow-up based on initial inspection and documentation.

There will be rehabilitation of temporary roads. Where subsoiling is used to reclaim temporary 

raods, these areas within the Ogden project area will be included in the invasive plant program for 

monitoring.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  419

3.12.1 Travel Analysis

Planning for the Lava Rock OHV Trail project, which completely overlaps the Ogden project area,

included work on a travel analysis, in order to look for opportunities to work towards the goal of the 

“Minimum Road System” necessary to meet the needs for recreation and natural resource management. 

This included looking to reduce habitat fragmentation and mitigating both the reduction of hiding cover 

and the low levels of thermal cover. Because the two project areas overlap, the travel analysis can be 

used to discuss the transportation system in the Ogden project area.

Approximately 181.20 miles of existing system roads were analyzed within the Ogden Project area, with 

a current open road density of 4.22 miles per square mile (Table 163). After evaluating the road system, 

57.82 miles of road were proposed for closure with the Lava Rock OHV project proposed action (a 

reasonably-foreseeable future action), which would reduce the open road mileage to 117.25 and reduce 

the density to 2.8 miles per square mile (Table 163).

5

 Closed roads play a vital role to both the 

immediate and long term implementation and continuing support within this project area. When no 

longer needed for project support, the identified roads will be closed until needed for future 

management activities. Closed roads can be used for purposes such as permit administration, fire 

suppression, management activities etc.

Table 163: Road System Density before and after Proposed Closures of the Lava Rock OHV Project.

Pre-Travel Analysis Post-Travel Analysis

Open Miles 175.07 Proposed Open Miles 117.25

Currently Closed

Miles 6.13 Proposed Closed Miles 57.82

Ogden Project 

Area Square Miles 41.44 Currently Closed miles 6.13

Current Density

(miles/sq. mile) 4.22 Post-Analysis Density(miles/sq. mile) 2.83

The following lists the criteria used for the Travel Analysis. Table 73 shows the miles of roads and type 

bordering and within this planning area. 

Travel Analysis – Criteria

Maintain at Current Maintenance Level

Upgrade maintenance Level

Decrease Minimum Maintenance Level

Restrict Travel/Seasonal Closure

Close

Decommission

Convert to Other Uses

 

5 Because the road closures proposed in the Lava Rock OHV project appeared in a proposed action that was 

scoped with the public, it is considered in the cumulative effects analysis throughout this document as a reasonably 

foreseeable future action. Completion of that planning process and implementation of the road closures is subject 

to completion of the NEPA analysis and decision-making process. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

420  Ogden Final EIS

Table 164: Travel Analysis - Road Types

Road Types Total Miles

Arterial (HAS) Roads 14.38

Other (HAS) Roads 1.48

Collector Roads 22.84

Local Roads 142.78

Closed Roads 6.13

3.12.2 Regulatory Framework 

Direction for the management of the road system is found in the 1990 Deschutes National Forest Land 

and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). According to the LRMP, the goal of the Forest’s 

transportation system is “to plan, design, operate, and maintain a safe and economical transportation 

system providing efficient access for the movement of people and materials involved in the use and 

protection of National Forest Lands.” (LRMP pg. 4-71) 

The Forest Service Manual (FSM 7730) covers road operations and maintenance and states that the goal 

is to “operate and maintain NFS roads in a manner that meets road management objectives (RMOs) and 

that provides for: 1. Safe and efficient travel; 2. Access for the administration, utilization, and protection 

of NFS lands; and 3. Protection of the environment, adjacent resources, and public investment.

3.12.3 Affected Environment

Project Area Access

Ogden is located in the middle of the west side of Fort Rock portion of the District, and is easily 

accessed using various State, County, Forest Service (FS) highways and roads. Roads that border the 

planning area providing access include FS road 9735 on the north and FS highway 22 making the main 

southern access along with FS road 2215. Deschutes County Highway 21 splits the project and State 

Highway 97 borders the west. Table 165 shows Forest roads that are listed as Highway Safety Act

(HSA) and are held to a higher standard within and bordering the project area. 

Table 165: Highway Safety Act (HSA) Roads in Project Area

HSA Roads in Project Area

Road

Number

Maintenance

Level From Mile To Mile TotalMiles Jurisdiction

22 4 Mile point 1.220 1.22 FS Road 2215 5.60 4.38 FS

2120 3 County Hwy 21 0.00 FS Road 9735 2.54 2.54 FS

2100050 3 County Hwy 21 0.00 Ogden Group Site 0.47 0.47 FS

2100055 3 County Hwy 22 0.00 Ogden Group Site 0.17 0.17 FS

2100060 3 County Hwy 23 0.00 Prairie South CG 0.39 0.39 FS

2100200 3 County Hwy 24 0.00 6 Mile Snopark 0.13 0.13 FS

2100400 3 County Hwy 25 0.00 10 Mile Snopark 0.32 0.32 FS

Road Maintenance 

Highway Safety Act roads

The types of maintenance that is needed varies road by road. Deferred maintenance consists of road 

needs that have been identified but, may or may not necessarily be essential for timber hauling as part of 

project management. Another form of maintenance includes those items that need attention prior to 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  421

timber haul, without which the Forest Service would not be able to implement project activities. The 

degree of maintenance needed ranges from a full reconstruction to just routine general maintenance. 

Table 166 shows the maintenance needs. To support this project, this maintenance needs be performed 

to reduce further damage to the road. 

Table 166: Highway Safety Act (HSA) Pre-Haul Maintenance Needs

Highway Safety Act (HAS) Deferred Road Maintenance Needs

Road Number From To Miles Need

22 1.28 5.6 4.32 Light roadside brushing, danger trees.

2120 1.250 2.540 1.29 Resurface; general maintenance –

shaping roadway, cleaning and 

maintenance of drainage, light brushing.

2100060 0.000 0.390 0.39 Crack and Chip Seal

Collector Roads 

Approximately 4.02 miles (Table 166) of the 24.04 miles of Collector road access within the planning

area is deficient in surfacing. To support proposed work it is recommended these miles be resurfaced.

With the instability of the current timber markets and operating expenses, the purposed road work may 

have to be mitigated by other alternatives.

Table 167: Collector Road Maintenance Needs

Collector Road Maintenance Needs – Miles

Spot Surfacing

Forest Road 9736 1.89

Surfacing

Forest Road 2121 0.21

Surfacing Needs - Miles 2.10

Local Roads

Local roads, in general, are routes that are mostly native surfaced and receive very limited maintenance. 

Within this project area there are 135.17 miles of local open road. These roads would receive a very 

limited amount of additional work to support this project. Maintenance items would consist of what is

necessary to sustain the road during the life of the project. These may consist of blading, brushing and 

spot surfacing to protect roadways. As this project nears post haul activity it is highly recommended 

that these roads receive adequate maintenance to achieve a self-maintaining state. Construction and 

restoration of drainage and drainage structures (rolling dips, waterbars and lead outs) are critical 

elements to achieve the desired effect. Other associated maintenance on these road types would include 

limited brushing, pre and post haul blade and shaping of roadway.

3.12.4 Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action) Alternative

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects: Under Alternative 1, no road maintenance to support 

project activities would take place. Road maintenance to support other work and activities in the area 

would continue (for geothermal exploration for example). The proposed Lava Rock OHV project, 

including road closures on the Ogden project area, would take place pending completion of that NEPA 

analysis. No roads in the project area would be needed for timber hauling, therefore there would be no 

impacts from log truck travel. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

422  Ogden Final EIS

Effects common to Alternatives 2 and 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: There would be very little change in the Forest road system as a result of 

this project. Use would most likely remain essentially the same, with any change in use associated with 

changes in Central Oregon population or visitor use. The closure of 0.2 mile of spur roads that currently 

provide access to the riparian area of Paulina Creek is a minor change that will affect about 0.1% of the 

open road system in the project area. This change will prevent some people from accessing streamside 

dispersed recreation sites with a vehicle, and will prevent resource damage that occurs when vehicles go 

off of these spur roads, including into the stream. The dispersed recreation areas are still accessible by 

foot. Maintenance across the project area would likely change. The change would reflect increased

maintenance costs with an associated decrease in maintenance.

Project activities such as hauling timber with log trucks can create impacts to the road system. As a 

function of use during harvest activities, road maintenance activities would be conducted on roads 

designated for use. As a direct effect, some roads that do not receive recurring maintenance, primarily 

low standard roads in the Maintenance Level 2 category, would see some improvements in both safe 

drivability and in their ability to handle surface runoff. The type of work that would be expected as 

maintenance in timber sale contract provisions include: brushing for improved sight distances, removal 

of hazard trees, blading and shaping of traveled way, restoring existing surface drainage features (e.g. 

drain dips), cleaning culverts and ditches, and installing water bards. Dust can be an issue when nativesurface roads are used for haul. Dust abatement, primarily using water as the dust palliative, would be 

performed as necessary to maintain safe driving conditions. This would have a secondary effect of 

maintaining a relatively well-bonded road surface free of the highly erosive pulverized ash “flour” that 

can occur on native surface roads under heavy use conditions. The intensity of these effects are 

essentially the same for both alternatives. 

Where ground-based yarding systems are used to remove logs to landings, temporary roads are 

customarily constructed to provide access to the landings that are not immediately adjacent to existing 

portions of the transportation system. Temporary roads in the Ogden project would be constructed 

primarily on flat ground (slopes < 10%) and excavation and construction of embankments would be 

negligible. Temporary roads would be built to low construction standards, with constraints of grade, 

curve radius, compaction, surfacing, and width being tailored to the minimum capabilities of the 

intended user vehicles. Alternative 2 would utilize about 10.8 miles of temporary roads that would 

subsequently be restored; and Alternative 3 would utilize about 7.9 miles of temporary roads that would 

subsequently be restored. Where railroad grades and other older logging system impacted areas are 

present, they will be used instead of created new impacts. Impacts to soil from temp roads are 

addressed in the Soils section (Chapter 3.7).

Cumulative Effects: Road system effects were analyzed at the project area scale. This scale was 

chosen because transportation systems are affected locally by decommissioning and closure. Past, 

present and reasonably foreseeable future activities listed in Tables 12 and 13 were analyzed. The 

present activity that may affect the road system is the new Travel Management Rule and Motor Vehicle 

Use Map (MVUM). This map and the associated rules will make enforcement of road closures and offroad prohibitions more straightforward. These activities will result in a reduction in user-created roads

and impacts from cross-country travel. As described at the beginning of this section, a project that is in 

the analysis process (Lava Rock OHV Trail System) proposes closing about 58 miles of Forest roads, 

reducing access for cars and trucks. The overall effect will be a reduction in the number of roads open 

(both user created, and system roads) in the area (see Table 163); however, overall, the project area 

remains accessible to vehicles. Effects of open road density are assessed in the big game analysis.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  423

3.13.1 Introduction 

The public uses the Ogden planning area primarily for camping (dispersed and developed), hiking, 

Nordic skiing, mountain biking, big game hunting, OHV and snowmobile riding, driving for pleasure 

and gathering firewood. Other activities include, but are not limited to caving, cross-country skiing, 

snowshoeing, and wildlife viewing. Use of the developed recreation facilities is relatively low, with 

dispersed activities being more popular, especially along the Peter Skene Ogden National Recreation

Trail. This area has not seen the dramatic increase in use that other areas of the Bend-Fort Rock District 

have seen. This is likely due to the lack of facilities and water bodies, location, and amount/variety of 

recreation opportunities available. 

3.13.2 Regulatory Framework

The Ogden project area has several land management allocations designated within the Deschutes 

National Forest Land and Resources Management Plan (LRMP): General Forest (includes the dispersed 

campsites and trails), Scenic Views (adjacent to Road 21), and Old Growth (along and near Paulina 

Creek.). 

MA8: General Forest (includes the dispersed campsites and trails). MA8 will be managed in 

accordance with Roaded-Natural or Roaded-Modified classifications of the Recreation Opportunity 

Spectrum (ROS).. 

M8-1 Stands on these sites will be treated to retain the character that contributes to the value of the site 

for recreation.

M8-2 Traditional informal campsites.... Will be recognized as being significant in producing dispersed 

recreation opportunities. Prescriptions for harvesting, cleanup, site preparation, and thinning will 

consider the environmental setting that contributes to the attraction of the sites for recreation purposes. 

The attempt will be made to retain this attractive character during and after treatment.

M8-3 Recreation use can be discouraged or prohibited In areas where timber harvesting activities are 

occurring; where public safety is threatened; or where resource damage from recreation activity is 

occurring or may occur.

MA 9: Scenic Views (adjacent to Road 21 and includes 6-mile and 10-mile Sno Parks): MA9 will 

normally be managed in accordance with Roaded-Natural, but may include Primitive, Semi-Primitive 

Non-Motorized, Semi-Primitive Motorized and Semi-Primitive Motorized Winter-Only classifications. 

MA 15: Old Growth (along and near Paulina Creek.).

M 15-2: Vegetative manipulation to maintain the old growth character of some areas may conflict with 

recreation use, but such occurrences should be limited in size and number.

Recreation Opportunity Spectrum Excerpts:

Roaded-Natural area is characterized by predominately natural-appearing environment with moderate 

evidence of the sights and sounds of humans. Such evidence usually harmonizes with the natural 

environment. Interaction among users may be low to moderate, but with evidence of other users 

prevalent. Resource modification and utilization practices are evident, but harmonize with the natural 

environment. Conventional motorized use is provided for in construction standards and design of 

facilities. Large mammals tolerant of humans may be present; those not tolerant present infrequently. 

There is a prevalence of smaller wildlife species.

Roaded-Modified area is characterized by a setting that is heavily modified by human activity. Access 

is generally easy for highway vehicles. The setting is generally the result of intensive commodity 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

424  Ogden Final EIS

production. There is no size criterion. Concentration of users is low, but there is considerable evidence 

of others. Users have a moderate degree of isolation from the sights and sounds of other people.

Other management direction comes from the Eastside Screens and Management Area 17 in the LRMP, 

Wild and Scenic Rivers. A segment of Paulina Creek just downstream of Paulina Lake is considered 

eligible to be a Wild and Scenic River because it is free-flowing and possesses two outstandinglyremarkable values (Hydrological/Geological and Scenic). 

Peter Skene Ogden (PSO) Trail carries additional protection. Deschutes National Forest LRMP Trail 

Standards and Guidelines referencing Specially Designated Trails include TR-26: When resource 

activities occur immediately adjacent to or across the trail, the integrity of the trail proper will be 

protected by modified management practices.

3.13.3 Developed Recreation

Affected Environment

There are two campgrounds (Prairie and McKay Crossing), one group camp (Ogden Group), one 

trailhead (Peter Skene Ogden; PSO) and two sno-parks (6-Mile and 10-Mile) in or immediately 

surrounded by the Ogden project area (Figure 90). The campgrounds receive the most use of all of the 

developed facilities. The PSO trailhead is low use and accommodates non-motorized users allowed on 

the moderately used PSO trail. Use for all facilities except for the sno-parks, occur primarily in the 

summer camping season. The 6-Mile sno-park is used sporadically in the winter and is dependent upon 

snow levels. The 10- Mile Snopark is heavily used in the winter and used lightly by the general public 

during the summer months. A special use permit holder utilizes McKay Crossing Campground to 

conduct mountain bike outfitter guide operations. 

All of the developed facilities would generally benefit from vegetation management. There are dense 

stands adjacent to McKay Crossing that could be at risk from a human caused fire. McKay 

Campground, with large-diameter lodgepole pine, has experienced tree mortality from bark beetles.

Motorized intrusion from developed sites and authorized roads into the general forest is an on-going 

management concern. Modest design efforts have been employed to eliminate intrusions, but require 

monitoring and repair on regular basis. Vegetation serves as natural barriers limiting motorized 

intrusion from recreation sites, unauthorized roads or authorized roads.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  425

Figure 90: Developed Recreation Sites and Trails within the Ogden Project Area.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

426  Ogden Final EIS

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Current conditions would persist. Scenic integrity within the 

campgrounds would not improve. The risk of a wildfire in dense stands adjacent to McKay Crossing 

Campground would persist. Existing vegetation would continue to serve as a motorized intrusion 

barrier.

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed treatments would improve views for recreationists and 

campers from the developed recreation sites. Short term, close range aesthetic qualities would be, in 

part, compromised by logging and post-sale treatment effects such as slash, stumps, tracks and burning. 

Long term aesthetic qualities are expected to improve.

Logging and burning operations adjacent to developed sites would negatively affect the visitors 

experience. Logging traffic, chainsaw and timber felling noise, and smoke would likely disrupt 

recreational activities in the project area. This, coupled with any potential recreation site closures would 

displace visitors otherwise seeking recreation opportunities in the Ogden area. 

There is also potential for campfire wood to be made available after the logging activities are 

completed. 

The threat of wildfire advancing on the recreation facilities would be reduced from treatments that are 

proposed to occur adjacent to the campgrounds and trailheads. 

Where trees are thinned and burning occurs immediately adjacent to the developed recreation sites, 

motorized intrusion could occur during attempted access to Paulina Creek. The potential for increased 

motorized intrusion into non-roaded areas would increase where natural vegetation barriers are removed 

from perimeters surrounding developed recreation sites. Mitigations and project design would likely 

minimize this potential effect.

Cumulative Effects

The direct and indirect effects do not overlap in time or space with any residual effects from past 

projects or expected effects from foreseeable future projects with regard to developed recreation. No 

cumulative effects are expected to occur. 

3.13.4 Dispersed Recreation

Affected Environment

Dispersed recreation activities make up the majority of use in the Ogden project area. Long-time users 

of the area include La Pine area residents. Area users prefer the informal management and facilities that 

this area provides and many frequent traditional campsites or areas that they frequent off and on 

throughout the year. Most come to this area to camp or engage in some form of motorized recreation. 

Dispersed camping is very popular, with dozens of dispersed sites in the project area. The most heavily 

used sites are within the Paulina Creek corridor along the PSO Trail between Ogden Group Camp and 

McKay Crossing Campground. They are located primarily within ponderosa pine stands, with some in 

mixed conifer, and riparian vegetation. A majority of the sites provide for large group camping 

opportunities. 

Most of the sites are poorly located, in or very near riparian habitat. These have been developed and 

used by Forest visitors over a long period, and are accessed by user created roads and trails. Popularity 

of these user-created dispersed sites has resulted in soil compaction, a loss or degradation of vegetation

(vegetation for fires), sanitation problems (i.e. litter, human waster near the creek, water pollutants), and 

a change in site character (scenic quality reduction), especially those in the riparian areas. It is likely 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  427

that surface runoff with sedimentation into Paulina Creek is occurring at the larger, more heavily 

impacted sites near the water. 

Trails in the area consist of the Peter Skene Ogden (PSO) Trail, which is open to non-motorized use 

including hiking, horse riding, skiing/snow shoeing, and mountain biking (uphill only). PSO is the 

primary east/west route tying Ogden Group Campground and Paulina Lake together in 8.6 miles, with 

three bridges within this stretch of trail. Other trails in the area are winter snowmobile trails and Nordic 

ski trails, which utilize 6-Mile and 10-Mile sno-parks as trailheads. 

Unauthorized, user-created roads are prolific in the area, providing recent and historical access to 

dispersed camping sites as well as riparian areas. The PSO Trail is crossed by these roads in several 

locations, conflicting with the management objectives of a National Recreation Trail. 

Authorized roads within the project area provide access for a variety of activities: driving for pleasure, 

4-wheel driving, big game hunting, forest product gathering, and wildlife viewing, to name a few. Two 

short authorized roads (FSR 2120-100 and FSR 2120-300) align parallel and redundant to FSR 2120. 

The two roads apparently serve to provide access to a dispersed campsite and unauthorized routes 

leading directly to dispersed campsites between the PSO and Paulina Creek.

The western most segment of FSR 2120-100 serves the Paulina Plunge special use permit operations by 

providing vehicle parking immediately off of FSR 2120.

There are some unauthorized, user-created trails providing links and loops between roads and facilities. 

There is also a non-system single track bike trail authorized for construction and maintenance by special 

use permit for the outfitter/guide operation called the Paulina Plunge. The trail runs East/West from the 

McKay campground South of and paralleling FSR 2120.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: No actions are proposed that would affect dispersed recreation activities. 

Existing sites and roads would still be utilized, including those that are causing environmental 

degradation or concern. No measures are proposed that would preclude the development of new sites 

within the proposed Wild and Scenic River corridor. As described in the Dispersed Recreation section 

above, overuse and associated impacts (loss of vegetation, soil compaction and erosion, etc.), could 

change the condition or site character of those adjacent to the river.

There would be no changes made to road access in this alternative. Current use and associated impacts 

(erosion, vegetation degradation, scenic quality, litter) to sensitive areas (physical, social, or biological) 

would continue and increase as use increases. 

There would be no vegetative management, therefore the trail corridor vegetation and scenery would not 

change. Natural succession of species would occur which would result in the mortality of various 

species in small quantities over time. The trail itself would not be affected by treatments or 

management practices.

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Other than short term visual quality effects, the proposed activities would 

have minimal effects on the dispersed campsites themselves, though some of the proposed vegetation 

management activities may occur within and/or adjacent to the sites themselves. Views would be 

opened at dispersed campsites adjacent to treatment units. This may increase the satisfaction for visitors

where views are improved to Paulina Creek, buttes, rock outcroppings or other interesting geologic 

features. 

The proposed thinning and subsequent fuels treatment would open up treated areas that could facilitate 

an increase in use, unauthorized access construction to or expansion of dispersed campsites, and/or the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

428  Ogden Final EIS

development of new sites. This is of most concern near Paulina Creek where there is currently 

authorized roads feeding unauthorized motorized access to dispersed campsites. 

Obliteration of unauthorized roads would also prevent access to some upland dispersed campsites and 

vegetation management may affect the character of others. Users of these sites may be displaced 

causing:

Increased utilization of other existing dispersed campsites.

Development of new user-created sites and access roads.

Camping and recreating in other dispersed areas (e.g. the Wickiup or Crane Prairie reservoirs, 

etc.) on the forest.

Increased use of developed campgrounds in the area.

Restoration and obliteration of unauthorized user-created roads would reduce impacts to scenery and 

aesthetics, restore vegetation and provide for visitor safety. It would reduce undesignated route access 

for OHV enthusiasts, yet aligns with forthcoming Access Travel Management goals. This is likely to 

result in dissatisfaction of some visitors that used the non-designated roads for dispersed camping, sightseeing, big game hunting, gathering forest products and other recreational activities. Some users, who 

are accustomed to few restrictions, will likely go to other areas to engage in this activity, continue to use 

and/or re-open obliterated access routes, or create new access. The proliferation of route building and 

use of unacceptable dispersed camp sites would be compounded by the removal of standing trees or 

other natural barriers to widths allowing full size vehicle or OHV passage. 

Obliteration and restoration of FSR 2120-100 and FSR 2120-300 (totaling less than 0.2 miles) would 

dramatically reduce the proliferation of user-created roads leading toward Paulina Creek and crossing 

the PSO trail. Routes identified for obliteration and restoration would reduce existing access and 

driving opportunities for recreation. Road closures from other projects in the area and across the 

Bend/Fort Rock Ranger District exacerbate this condition. However, restoration efforts are proposed in 

such a way to secure continued driving opportunities for motorists and to provide access for fire crews. 

Access to areas adjacent to route obliteration would still be welcome via non-motorized means. The 

overall effect to the public is that there would be fewer access routes to drive than there were 

previously. Consequently, there is potential for new user created road construction to continue.

The PSO trail would be affected by: 1) mechanical harvest above the trail and away from Paulina 

Creek; 2) mechanical harvest below the PSO trail (units 115, 137, 138, 140, 144); 3) harvest by hand 

(10 inches in diameter and smaller) of material below the trail and toward the creek; and 4) prescribed 

burning adjacent to the trail. In many places the trail serves as the unit boundary. The mechanical 

treatment allowed near the trail would cause ground disturbance and visual impacts. Proposed 

treatments are moving stands to the desired visual condition as described for Scenic Views, ponderosa 

pine foregrounds. Changes, however, will be noticeable – the forest will be more open versus the dense 

forest that is currently viewed. 

Standard and guide TR-26 of the LRMP requires that “When resource activities occur immediately 

adjacent to or across the [specially-designated] trail, the integrity of the trail proper will be protected by 

modified management practices as needed.” The measures listed in Chapter 2.5, such as establishing a 

modified logging area where mechanical harvest may not occur within 25 feet of the PSO trail, and 

limiting crossing the trail will protect the integrity of the trail. The difference between Alternative 2 and 

Alternative 3 is that units 110-117, which are located in the Old Growth Management Area, would not 

be treated under Alternative 3. A portion of the trail through this area is on an old railroad grade. To 

harvest within units 111, 112, and 117 and to avoid the PSO trail would require an option such as the 

use of a forwarder to skid trees uphill away from the trail and away from the creek. 

Effects to the PSO trail would include effects on recreationists from the Paulina Lake area and from 

McKay Campground down on the lower creek area. Access points may change, temporarily, as route 

obliteration and harvest activities change accessibility on or off road.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  429

The aesthetic value of the trail would be changed by thinning and the residual stumps and slash left 

adjacent to the trail. Burning adjacent to the trail would also leave the area adjacent to the trail with 

effects from blackened ground vegetation and potential scorching of trees from pile burning. Measures 

are included to minimize tree scorch (see Chapter 2.5). There would be short term trail closures and 

rehabilitation needed, both short and long term as a result of the harvest activities, especially when the 

trail is crossed or used as a harvest road.

Logging and burning operations around the PSO trail and dispersed campsites would negatively affect 

the visitor’s experience. Logging traffic, chainsaw and timber felling noise, and smoke would likely 

disrupt recreational activities in the project area. This, coupled with any potential trail closures would 

displace visitors otherwise seeking recreation opportunities in the Ogden area.

Winter trails, including snowmobile trail #11 and Ponderosa Rim Nordic trail will be affected by 

thinning in units 330-333 and 336 (refer to mitigations in Chapter 2.5).

Cumulative Effects

The proposal from the Ogden project coupled with the Forest Travel Management plan and the Lava 

Rock OHV System project designate open roads and trails for motorized uses, close the area to cross 

country travel and establish conditions for shared use. 

The Lava Rock project area overlaps portions of the Ogden area, proposing an OHV trail system both 

through Ogden and areas adjacent to the project area. A result of the Lava Rock project would be the 

designation of motorized trails in the area as well as road closures.

There are a number of geothermal exploration activities authorized within and adjacent to the planning 

area. Any new or temporary road building associated with geothermal exploration activities coupled 

with temporary road building and vegetation management within the Ogden planning area could

encourage motorized travel off of designated roads or trails. The effect could create additional localized 

challenges for implementing Forest Travel Management Plan.

The cumulative effect of the management activities would reduce the amount of area available to 

motorized access and connected dispersed camping opportunities.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

430  Ogden Final EIS

Key Issue #4 – The Key Issues identified in Chapter 1, included some groups’ concerns with treating 

inside certain allocations or area, including “unroaded areas.” This issue is discussed in this section and 

the effects compared by alternative. To address the issue, the Forest is analyzing effects to three 

resource topics (Inventoried Roadless Areas, potential wilderness areas, and other remaining 

undeveloped lands). The alternatives differ in how each impact potential wilderness areas.

3.14.1 Introduction 

This section of the FEIS discloses the affected environment and environmental consequences for the 

North Paulina and South Paulina Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs), areas that meet the criteria for 

potential wilderness (PWAs), and other remaining undeveloped lands. There is no Wilderness in or 

near the Ogden project area; therefore Wilderness is not addressed in the analysis.

Oregon Wild and the Sierra Club submitted comments about “uninventoried roadless” areas and 

suggested that proposed commercial thinning would not be appropriate because there is already an 

overabundance of lands that have been roaded and logged as opposed to lands that have had no such 

activity. The areas they identified fall either in potential wilderness areas, other remaining undeveloped 

lands, or have evidence of past harvest and/or roads and are therefore not included in the analysis. 

3.14.2 Regulatory Framework

The three topics (IRAs, PWA, and other undeveloped lands) are defined as follows:

Topic

Regulation or 

Policy 

Reference

Definition

Inventoried 

Roadless Area

36 CFR 294.11 Identified in the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, 

mapped in the Roadless Area Conservation FEIS (November 

2000). Set aside through administrative rulemaking with 

provisions for the protection of inventoried roadless areas. 

Primarily the same as in the Deschutes Forest Plan FEIS 

Appendix C.

Potential Wilderness

Area

FSH 1909.12 

Chapter 71

PWAs are identified following inventory procedures in the 

Forest Service Handbook. Essentially, they are defined by 

size, past activities, manageability as an ecosystem, and 

roads. These areas are not a land designation and there is 

no particular level or management direction or protection. 

PWAs typically overlap or are contiguous with IRAs.

Other Undeveloped 

Lands

None No apparent history of harvest activity, do not contain 

forest roads6, and are not designated as Wilderness or 

inventoried as PWA.

 

6 Forest road –A road wholly or partly within or adjacent to and serving the National Forest System that the Forest 

Service determines is necessary for the protection, administration, and utilization of the National Forest System 

and the use and development of its resources. Road – A motor vehicle route over 50 inches wide, unless identified 

and managed as a trail (36 CFR § 212.1).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  431

3.14.3 Analysis Methods 

Mapping was done with Deschutes National Forest’s Geographic Information System, using corporate 

data sources. Databases for the existing road system and past harvest were combined with examination 

of aerial photography to determine areas where areas that might meet the inventory criteria for potential 

wilderness: 

1) More than 5,000 acres in size

2) Area contains less than 5,000 acres but can meet one or more of the following:

2a) Area can be preserved due to physical terrain and natural conditions or is a self-contained 

ecosystem, such as an island, that can be managed as a separate unit of the National Wilderness 

Preservation System.

2b) Area is contiguous to existing wilderness, inventoried roadless area, primitive area, etc. 

regardless of size. (see Potential Wilderness Inventory Report, project file).

Alternatives are assessed and compared by the amount of treatment within IRAs, PWAs, or other 

undeveloped lands. For PWAs, the change to PWA acres is also assessed. The following values and 

features are used to describe the effects to the IRAs and PWAs because these are the values and features 

that often characterize roadless areas (36 CFR 294.11):

High quality or undisturbed soil, water, and air

Sources of public drinking water

Diversity of plant and animal communities

Habitat for threatened, endangered, proposed, candidate, and sensitive species and for those 

species dependent on large, undisturbed areas of land

Primitive, semi-primitive, non-motorized and semi-primitive motorized classes of dispersed 

recreation

Reference landscapes

Natural-appearing landscapes with high scenic quality, natural integrity, and apparent 

naturalness, solitude and remoteness

Traditional cultural properties and sacred sites, and

Other locally identified unique 

characteristics or special features. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

432  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 91: 1943 Aerial Photo of Ogden area, showing railroad grades, roads, and heavy logging.

3.14.4 Summary of Key Findings 

The majority of the project area has been logged and roaded in the past. There will be no direct, 

indirect, or cumulative impact from either action alternative to the Inventoried Roadless Areas to the 

east of the Ogden project. One Potential Wilderness Area (PWA) in the Ogden project only occurs

where contiguous to the North Paulina Roadless Areas. Alternative 2 has relatively minor impacts to 

the PWA, and Alternative 3 avoids the PWA entirely. Other undeveloped lands are small and scattered 

and are for the most part not entered by the action alternatives.

3.14.5 Affected Environment

Because the project area was private timberlands prior to becoming National Forest System lands, there 

is very little area that has not been heavily harvested in the past. Even areas that would appear 

somewhat natural today, upon closer review, there is evidence of the railroad logging that took place 

decades ago. The photo on the previous page is a 1943 aerial photo of the central portion of the Ogden 

Project area, with railroad grades and skid trail system evident.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  433

Inventoried Roadless: Two Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) are located immediately to the east of 

the project area as shown in Figure 92- North and South Paulina. Two treatment units lie directly 

adjacent to the North Paulina IRA. The South Paulina IRA is separated from the project area by about 

1,700 feet at the closest point, and therefore no treatment units are adjacent to that IRA. No treatments 

are proposed within either of these IRAs. The two IRAs are displayed in the following map. 

Figure 92: Location of Inventoried Roadless Areas in proximity to the Ogden Project Area; Alternative 

2 on the left, and Alternative 3 on the right. Two treatments units lie directly adjacent to the North 

Paulina Inventoried Roadless Area (76 and 78).

Potential Wilderness Areas: The project area was reviewed for evidence of past harvest activity and 

road construction. Areas that showed no evidence of those activities were reviewed for potential 

wilderness criteria at FSH 1909.12 Chapter 71. This process is described in the Potential Wilderness 

Inventory Report, which is located in the project file. Thirty-two polygons were assessed. One 

potential wilderness area (PWA) was identified. The PWA consists primarily of the North Paulina IRA, 

with the addition of contiguous lands along the western boundary and a peninsula of land that goes 

along Paulina Creek. The total acres of the PWA is 20,472. About 278 acres fall within the Ogden

project area boundary (Figure 93). The area within the Ogden project boundary overlaps the Old 

Growth and Scenic Views Partial Retention Foreground MAs, with some slivers of General Forest MA. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

434  Ogden Final EIS

The following maps display the PWA in relation to treatments units of Alternative 2 and Alternative 3

(Figures 93 and 94). 

The PWA polygon coincides with much of the area identified by Oregon Wild as important for 

maintaining unroaded characteristics. However, Oregon Wild’s area included the Paulina Fire that 

burned in 1998 and was subsequently salvaged and planted. The portions of Oregon Wild’s unroaded 

area that has evidence of past industrial logging, fire salvage, or lodgepole harvest are not included in 

the PWA polygon (see Figures 95 and 96).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  435

 

 

Figure 93: Areas meeting the criteria for Potential Wilderness in relation to Alternative 2 Units.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

436  Ogden Final EIS

 

Figure 94: Areas meeting the criteria for Potential Wilderness in relation to Alternative 3 Units.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  437

Figure 95: Old aerial photograph displaying Oregon Wild’s unroaded polygon (Pink). The heavily logged area labeled Shevlin-Hixon Company 

was acquired by the Forest Service in a 1944 land exchange.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

438  Ogden Final EIS

Figure 96: Newer aerial image displaying Oregon Wild’s unroaded polygon, the PWA, and the Inventoried Roadless Area boundary. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  439

Other Undeveloped Lands: An outcome of the PWA inventory process described earlier was the 

identification of isolated polys of other undeveloped lands. Of the 32 polygons assessed in the PWA 

inventory process, one meets the inventory criteria for potential wilderness (and is described on page 

433). The other 31 polygons do not meet the inventory criteria for potential wilderness but do not show 

evidence of past harvest and/or road construction and total approximately 717 acres. These acres are 

distributed in small (1 to 154-acre) patches throughout the project area; it is likely that some of these 

areas were actually harvested in the past, but records are lacking (see Figure 95 showing logging that 

occurred prior to Forest Service ownership). The polygons are within the lodgepole pine forest type at 

the higher elevations of the Ogden project area, interspersed with treated areas. They are not unique on 

the landscape and do not have any unique characteristics relative to the surrounding landscape. Maps of 

these areas are located in the project file. All are managed consistent with their management allocation 

standards (see Figure 2, Chapter 1) and Forest-wide standards. The other undeveloped lands fall within 

General Forest and Scenic Views management allocations. 

3.14.6 Environmental Consequences

Inventoried Roadless Areas

Direct and Indirect Effects – Alternative 1

There would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to IRAs. No timber harvest or road 

construction would take place, and the current condition of IRA and unroaded values would not change. 

Ecological trends would continue as described under No Action for all of the resources in this EIS.

Direct and Indirect Effects–Alternative 2 and Alternative 3

Effects are the same for both action alternatives. There would be no direct impact to the IRAs that lie 

adjacent to the project area. Where Unit #76 and Unit #78 lie adjacent to the IRA there could be 

indirect effects. Potential indirect effects do not include effects to any of the values and features that 

often characterize IRAs, listed above. 

Activities proposed within the vicinity of the two units adjacent to the IRA include thinning, salvage, 

and hand and grapple piling. These actions are intended to promote healthy stands of lodgepole pine, 

and sustain large tree structure in the mixed conifer. People recreating in the North Paulina IRA could 

experience the noise and dust of operations; these would be short-term temporary impacts lasting only 

as long as the operations. Smoke during pile burning could be evident from these adjacent areas, but the 

Forest Service is required to follow smoke management weather forecasts and instructions, as provided 

by the Oregon Smoke Management Plan to protect air quality. Longer term, the impacts of activities 

such as visible stumps or more open areas would continue to be noticeable to people near the IRA 

boundaries; however the change in experience for people would be negligible, particularly considering 

that there are no recreation sites in that portion of the IRA that would attract people to that particular 

location. People in the vicinity would most likely be using the snowmobile trail, however, and there’s 

little chance they would encounter operations in the winter because of the amount of snow at that 

elevation. 

Cumulative Effects – Alternative 2 and Alternative 3

The activities listed in Table 13 at the beginning of this chapter were reviewed to determine if the 

Ogden project could create cumulative effects. The cumulative effects analysis is limited to the N. 

Paulina IRA. Immediately adjacent Unit 78, which lies adjacent to the North Paulina IRA, geothermal 

exploration activities have occurred and more are ongoing or planned. Two drilling sites create small 

clearings at the eastern edge of unit 78, directly along the boundary of the IRA. Unit 78 is a lodgepole 

plantation which is proposed for small tree thinning. Although limited in size, the small clearings 

needed for geothermal exploration are a more dramatic intrusion on the forest than the proposed 

plantation thinning will be. The plantation thinning will add slightly to the forest openings along the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

440  Ogden Final EIS

IRA boundary, but there would be no direct impacts to the IRA itself. People within the IRA could hear 

project operations, and see or smell smoke from any burning operations. 

Potential Wilderness Areas

Direct and Indirect Effects – Alternative 1

There would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to Potential Wilderness Areas (PWAs). No 

timber harvest or road construction would take place, and the current condition of values associated with 

these areas would not change. Ecological trends would continue as described under No Action for all of 

the resources in this EIS.

Direct and Indirect Effects–Alternative 2

The potential for effect to potential wilderness is assessed for the one PWA (associated with the N. 

Paulina IRA, Figure 93, where treatments are proposed. The activities that may create effects are listed 

in the following table (Table 168).

Table 168: Units that overlap a PWA and the activities that will occur under Alternative 2. There is no 

overlap of Alternative 3 units with the PWA.

Treatment 

Unit

Timber Harvest 

w/i PWA

Non-commercial 

thin or ladder fuel 

reduction w/i PWA

Temp road 

construction 

w/i PWA

Mowing 

w/i PWA

Prescribed 

fire w/i 

PWA

83 ~ 20 acres 

lodgepole 

regeneration

0 acres none 0 acres 0 acres

116 ~ 3 acres mixed 

continue/ sustain 

large tree 

structure

0 acres on edge ~ 3 acres ~ 3 acres

113 ~ 2 acres RHCA 

sustain large tree 

structure

0 acres on edge 0 acres ~2 acres

Total ~ 25 acres 0 acres none 0 acres ~ 5 acres

Table 169: Comparison of effects to the PWA by alternative, using values/features that often 

characterize IRAs (36 CFR 294.11).

Values Associated 

with Unroaded 

Areas

Alt. 1 - No Action Alt. 2 – Proposed 

Action Alternative 3

High quality or 

undisturbed soil, 

water and air

No effect 25 acres of tree 

treatment. Soils are 

estimated at 5% 

detrimental disturbance 

which will increase to 10-

15%. Water and air 

No effect
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  441

quality are protected.

Sources of public 

drinking water

The project area is not a 

source of public drinking 

water. 

The project area is not a 

source of public drinking 

water.

The project area is not a 

source of public drinking 

water.

Diversity of plant and 

animal communities

Current trend is for 

continued homogeneity 

of dense forest due to 

lack of disturbance. This 

trend also puts the 

forest vegetation at risk 

of loss to a large scale 

disturbance such as 

wildfire or insect and 

disease event.

Project will not affect 

diversity of plant and 

animal communities in 

the PWA. Limited shortterm impacts to wildlife 

habitat are described in 

previous sections. 

Same as No Action within PWA

Habitat for 

threatened, 

endangered, 

proposed, candidate, 

and sensitive species 

and for those species 

dependent on large, 

undisturbed areas of 

land.

The area does not 

provide habitat for 

threatened or 

endangered species. 

Fuel hazard within these 

areas is high.

The area does not provide 

habitat for endangered 

species. No Effect to T&E 

species.

The area does not provide 

habitat for endangered 

species. No Effect to T&E 

species.

Primitive, SemiPrimitive NonMotorized, and SemiPrimitive Motorized 

classes of dispersed 

recreation

Existing travel use would 

continue.

No effect on existing 

travel use, no change to 

existing dispersed 

recreation classes.

No effect on existing travel 

use, no change to existing 

dispersed recreation classes.

Reference landscapes Current vegetation 

conditions reflect the 

absence of natural 

disturbance processes.

Vegetation conditions

would begin movement to 

those more reflective with 

natural disturbance 

processes on a limited 

portion of PWA.

The vegetation conditions 

continue to reflect the absence 

of natural disturbance 

processes.

Natural appearing 

landscapes with high 

scenic quality

No change to existing 

conditions.

Impacts to scenic quality 

in the short term. See 

Scenic Views section.

No direct impacts to scenic 

quality in the PWA.

Traditional cultural 

properties and sacred 

sites.

No change to existing 

conditions.

Traditional cultural 

properties and sacred 

sites would be protected, 

no effects are anticipated.

No Effect to any cultural 

properties.

Other locally 

identified unique 

characteristics

No change to existing 

conditions.

Eligible Wild and Scenic 

River overlaps PWA area. 

Outstandingly Remarkable 

Values are not impacted 

(see Chapter 3.8.9).

No effects to any unique 

characteristics.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

442  Ogden Final EIS

Only Alternative 2 will have some effect to areas that meet inventory criteria of potential wilderness

(Table 168 and 169). The impacts include harvest activity, including associated skid trails and roads, 

where there currently is no evidence of it. These impacts occur across a small area because there 

historically has been extensive logging in the project area and very few unharvested patches remain. Of 

the 20,472 –acre PWA, about 25 acres (0.12%) are proposed for timber harvest in the Ogden project. 

These acres will no longer meet the inventory criteria for potential wilderness. The size of the area 

meeting inventory criteria for potential wilderness would change from 20,472 acres to 20,447 acres.

Units 113 and 116 that slightly overlap the PWA also overlap the Old Growth Management Area. 

Effects to the OGMA and its focal species habitats are described in Chapter 36.7. 

Cumulative Effects - Alternative 2

The activities listed in Table 13 at the beginning of this chapter were reviewed to determine if the 

Ogden project could create cumulative effects. The cumulative effects analysis is limited to the Ogden 

project area and the forested areas that meet inventory criteria of wilderness potential. 

Immediately adjacent to Unit 78, which lies adjacent to the North Paulina IRA, geothermal exploration 

activities have occurred and more are ongoing or planned. Two drilling sites create small clearings that 

will impact the very edge of the PWA; however Unit 78 is a lodgepole plantation which is proposed for 

small tree thinning. There are no other ongoing or foreseeable projects within the PWA that overlap 

Ogden project units, therefore there will be no other cumulative effects to the PWA from the Ogden 

project.

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects – Alternative 3

There would be no effects to any potential wilderness under Alternative 3 because no treatment units 

overlap the PWA. There would be no changes to the potential wilderness inventory.

Other Undeveloped Lands

Direct and Indirect Effects - Alternative 1

There would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to other undeveloped lands. No timber harvest 

or road construction would take place, and the current condition of these stands would not change in the 

short term. Ecological trends would continue as described under No Action for all of the resources in 

this EIS.

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects – Alternative 2

The majority of the other undeveloped lands are allocated to Forest Plan management area M8 –

General Forest, which allows timber management as proposed in the Ogden project. There is a total of 

717 acres across 31 polygons; the largest polygon is 154 acres. Approximately 67 acres are proposed 

for treatment under Alternative 2 where portions of eight units overlap the undeveloped lands polygons. 

Thirty-three acres of the treatments proposed are regeneration harvest in lodgepole pine; the others are

thinning to favor ponderosa pine. Stumps and skid trails will be created by removing trees and 

delivering the logs to landings. This will reduce the size or eliminate some of these smaller 

undeveloped lands polygons. The environmental consequences to the values and resources of these 

areas are included in all of the other resource sections of Chapter 3 (e.g. wildlife habitat, water quality, 

fire risk, etc.). The 67 acres will be converted from unmanaged stands to managed stands, which is the 

objective for this area described in the Forest Plan (LRMP 4-117). The majority of other undeveloped 

lands (646 acres) remain untreated in Alternative 2. None of eight units that impact undeveloped lands 

occur where there are ongoing or reasonably foreseeable projects, so there will be no cumulative effects. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  443

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects –Alternative 3

Approximately 74 acres are proposed for treatment under Alternative 3 where portions of six units 

overlap the undeveloped lands polygons. All of the treatments proposed are thinning to favor ponderosa 

pine and to either develop or sustain large tree structure. Stumps will be created by removing trees. 

Skid trails to deliver the logs to landings will also be created. This will reduce the size or eliminate 

some of these smaller undeveloped lands polygons. The majority of other undeveloped lands remain 

untreated in Alternative 3. The environmental consequences to the values and resources of these areas 

are included in all of the other resource sections of Chapter 3 (e.g. wildlife habitat, water quality, fire 

risk, etc.). The 74 acres will be converted from unmanaged stands to managed stands, which is the 

objective for this area described in the Forest Plan (LRMP 4-117). The majority of other undeveloped 

lands (639 acres) remain untreated in Alternative 3. None of six units that impact undeveloped lands 

occur where there are ongoing or reasonably foreseeable projects, so there will be no cumulative effects. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

444  Ogden Final EIS

3.15.1 Introduction

Management direction for heritage resources is found in the Deschutes National Forest Land and 

Resource Management Plan, in Forest Service Manual section 2360, in Federal Regulations 36CFR64 

and 36CFR800 (amended December 2000), and in various federal laws including the National Historic 

Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (as amended), the National Environmental Policy Act, and the 

National Forest Management Act. In addition, the 2004 Programmatic Agreement among the United 

States Forest Service R6, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the State Historic Preservation 

Office provides a regulatory framework for project review. 

The goal for Cultural Resources is “To provide for the protection and preservation of prehistoric and 

historic sites, buildings, objects, and antiquities of local, Regional, or National significance” (LRMP, 

Cultural Resources, page 4-34).

The desired condition is protecting cultural resources to the reasonable extent possible. 

3.15.2 Analysis Methods 

Background research, historic literature reviews, and archaeological survey of the Ogden Vegetation 

Management Project were conducted in order to comply with the laws and regulations cited above.

Prior to the field investigation, the District/Forest Master Survey Map(s) (MSM), references in the 

District cultural resources library, and Historic Inventory Maps(s) (HIM), were reviewed in order to 

identify and evaluate prior archaeological surveys, known cultural resources, and area sensitivities. The 

Deschutes County Historical Society’s historic database was also consulted. 

Approximately 3,704 acres within the project area have been previously inventoried for cultural 

resources. The previous inventories were associated with Section 106 compliance projects that included 

vegetation management, geothermal development, and recreation projects. An additional 3,427 acres 

were inventoried for the Ogden Vegetation Management Project. Pedestrian surveys for the Ogden 

project occurred in the summer and fall of 2010. The survey strategy was developed using a number of 

factors to determine areas that were likely to contain cultural resources. These areas included: 

proximity to known heritage sites, physiographic features such as extensive tool-stone sources, 

culturally significant plants and animals, game migration corridors, potential rock art locations, 

proximity to water sources, slope, ground visibility, and primary and secondary ridge systems 

(Claeyssens n.d). Transects of 10 to 20 meters were utilized in areas of high and low sensitivity. “Boot 

scrapes” were employed at intervals of approximately 0-20 meters to remove thick surface layers of 

duff. 

3.15.3 Affected Environment

Approximately 7,131 acres of the proposed treatment acres have been inventoried for cultural resources. 

A total of 78 cultural resources were recorded from past surveys and an additional 71 cultural resources 

were discovered from the new survey; totaling 149 cultural resource sites. Fifty isolated artifacts were 

also identified in the inventories. Two of the cultural resources located within the Ogden project area 

have been evaluated for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places. Because a formal 

determination of eligibility has not been made, the Forest Service assumes that some sites are eligible. 

Thirty historic sites have been determined not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

There were 71 prehistoric lithic scatters that were recorded within the project area. The open-air lithic 

dominated site type that is represented is a result of the abundant tool-stone sources found locally. 

Obsidian quarries and secondary materials are common within portions of the project area. These 

prehistoric sites suggest that the area was used for procuring important and significant tool-stone 

resources used for trade and everyday activities. Artifacts manufactured from these sources have been 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  445

recovered from archaeological sites in the Great Basin and Cascades as well as the Columbia River area. 

In general, exploitation and use of resources by native inhabitants extends back thousands of years 

within the project area.

A total of 71 historic sites were recorded as a result of the surveys. The historic sites represent primarily 

railroad logging camps, can dumps, and railroad grades. Seven sites are multi-component, containing 

both prehistoric and historic artifacts and/or features. By 1916 the Shevlin-Hixon Manufacturing 

Company had accumulated nearly 215,000 acres of Oregon timber (Gregory 2001:21). At that time, the 

timber company had constructed a large modern mill in Bend, Oregon and had begun large scale timber 

harvesting operations in the area. The project area is located in the area where the Shevlin-Hixon 

Company would have been operating out of the Cliff (1928-1932) and La Pine (1932-1942) logging 

camps (Gregory 2001:43 and 45). The project area was not logged again until the 1970s and 1980s due 

to the lack of timber. 

Historic logging used a series of railroad grades that connected Bend to the logging camps and logging 

operations within the Forest. Pumice was scraped from the surrounding areas to form berms on which 

the tracks were laid. Evidence of the railroad logging systems consists of segments of railroad grades,

camps, and trash dumps. Larger sites are linked to smaller can dumps and other debris and 

transportation routes that can be found within the project boundaries. Black and white aerial 

photographs from the 1940s show evidence of earlier railroad logging systems that were used in the 

area. These sites and features help us understand how and where the historical railroad logging systems 

in the project area operated. 

Other historic activities included early exploration, transportation, livestock use and stock driveways, 

recreational and hunting use, and Forest Service administration projects. These activities, for the most 

part, particularly logging and associated activities, livestock, recreation, and the illegal collecting and 

looting of artifacts have all had some effect to the integrity of the heritage resource.

3.15.4 Environmental Consequences

The proposed management activities could have both negative and positive effects to the heritage 

resources within the project area. 

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Because there would be no action, there would be no direct effect o any 

cultural resources. Indirectly, effects would occur from unmanaged fuels consumed during a wildfire 

event. By not treating the fuels, burn temperatures are likely to be extreme, thus endangering 

cultural/heritage resource sites and artifacts. The analysis value of obsidian artifacts for chronology and

sourcing information would be compromised by extreme temperatures. Metal, ceramic, and glass 

artifacts would be further oxidized, fractured, or destroyed, becoming more brittle and/or heavily 

damaged. Organic materials such as wood, shell, bone, antler, horn, leather and fabric may be 

consumed by fire or altered by smoke. Physical damage or destruction of artifacts or sites during 

wildfire suppression activities could occur, such as fire lines, temporary roads, staging areas, or other 

disturbances from machinery and vehicles placed within a site’s boundaries. Loss of site and artifact 

integrity can result from displacement, compaction, churning, and mixing of surface and subsurface 

soils and deposits of archaeological materials, either historic or prehistoric. 

Changes in road configurations, construction of new roads, and management level following a wildfire 

can affect heritage resources, such as sites becoming more vulnerable to looting and vandalism due to 

easier access. This effect applies even if closure or rehabilitation of the temporary road directly impacts 

a site. The loss of surface litter from high intensity wildfire and increased hydrophobic soil conditions 

can cause erosion from runoff of surface water. Erosion across sites can remove artifacts and deposits 

sediment from uphill slopes.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

446  Ogden Final EIS

Alternately, obscuring vegetation does lend a certain level of protection to otherwise high visibility 

objects on the ground surface. In the event of a large wildfire, much of this vegetation would be 

removed by burning or during suppression activities such as fire line construction. Higher visibility of 

sensitive materials at cultural resource sites would then be more vulnerable to looting and theft. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Proposed thinning and fuels treatment acreage proposed in Alternative 3 is more than that proposed in 

Alternative 2. The effects discussion applies to either alternative.

Direct and Indirect Effects: Treatment activities that use heavy equipment for harvest or grapple piling 

could affect heritage site integrity due to damage by crushing, breaking, mixing, displacing, compacting, 

and otherwise disturbing the context of the artifacts and the associated soils on and in which they are 

deposited (Foster-Curley and Horne 2008). Felling danger trees along travel routes may have an effect 

on sites due to the potential use of equipment off of existing disturbed areas. The effects of machinery 

on site integrity would be similar to other proposed treatments using heavy equipment. Additionally, 

there may be effects similar to that from cable yarding if the trees or portions thereof are dragged to the 

road. Additional treatment activities such as hand thinning, lop and scatter, skid trails, and landings also 

affect heritage site integrity, cultural artifacts, and their matrix.

Mowing equipment causes some churning, mixing, and displacement of soils when turning. The tighter 

the turn, the greater the amount of disturbance to the existing soils. Mowing and underburning shrubs 

and burning slash material from harvest increases surface visibility. These activities may inadvertently 

expose artifacts on the ground surface that are currently obscured by ground vegetation. However, 

reducing fuels provides a benefit for resource protection due to decreased risk of wildfires.

Inadvertent discovery of new heritage resource sites during project implementation could result in site 

destruction or damage because the site was not identified in advance and protected. Following surface

duff and soil removal, artifacts could be uncovered resulting in theft and destruction. Often, by the time 

that such a site is discovered, some physical damage has already occurred, since increased visibility 

through mechanical disturbances can lead to discovery. 

Underburning poses a potential effect where fuels are greater than 2.5 tons per acre, due to the effects of 

the higher temperatures on artifacts. Slash disposal using burn piles can affect both more “durable” 

artifacts (inorganic materials) and perishable artifacts (organic materials). Burn temperatures reached in 

slash piles (up to 800 degrees F) are much higher than those in an underburn in light fuels conditions 

(250 to 300 degrees F). When fuels are reduced around perishable artifacts or site features, it provides a 

level of protection from wildfire effects (extreme heat or fire suppression activities). 

Fire line construction by hand could affect site integrity from displacement, churning, mixing, and 

breakage of artifacts (loss of artifact association and context). Hand line construction typically is more 

limited in effect than using machinery since a much smaller area is affected. 

Temporary road development through a site would affect site integrity from crushing, breaking, mixing, 

displacing, compacting, and otherwise disturbing the heritage site’s context. Road reconstruction and 

road maintenance in or through a heritage resource site would have an effect on site integrity with 

potential damage from crushing, breaking, mixing, displacing, compacting, and otherwise disturbing the 

context of the artifacts. Effects may be limited to potential impacts from restoring drainage features 

when they are related to the out-sloping or water barring needed in association with culverts as well as 

without culverts. 

Activities that occur within an established road prism, applying surface treatments of any sort, or slope 

stabilization within the road prism could have additional negative effects on a heritage site. 

Reconstruction activities may impact previously undisturbed site areas. Heritage sites that straddle or 

exist underneath the roadbed could be further compromised by additional road grading, berm work such 

as widening or possible staging of heavy equipment within the existing site boundaries that extend 

beyond or below the existing road berm.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  447

If a road crosses a site and water bars or culvert maintenance occurs outside the road prism disturbing 

new areas of the site, site integrity could be affected. The loss of integrity is similar to that damaged by 

using machinery for harvest activities. Sites located down slope and outside of a harvest unit may be 

affected by erosion and or the re-deposition of sediments from the treatment unit. Tree harvesting and 

vegetation management activities over time also have the potential to impact heritage sites.

The potential for disturbance or damage to sites will be substantially reduced, or eliminated, through 

mitigations listed in FEIS, Chapter 2, Resource Protection Measures, Heritage Resources, pages 48-49. 

Adhering to the listed measures will result in a no adverse effect.

Cumulative Effects: 

Cumulative effects under current management from actions or activities by agencies or entities other 

than Forest Service could affect cultural resources. Not all of the Ogden Vegetation Management 

Project has been inventoried for cultural resources. It is difficult to determine whether more significant 

cultural resources exist. Many areas within the Ogden project area were logged prior to the creation of 

the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. Therefore a number 

of cultural resources have likely been affected by past activities. 

Geothermal applications are being processed for lands within the Ogden project area and the 

surrounding area. The area of disturbance for geothermal applications is small and cultural sites may be 

avoided. 

Cumulative loss of significant resources might affect the eligibility of resources for listing on the 

National Register of Historic Places and Alternatives 2 and 3 could contribute to cumulative impacts to 

cultural resources. However, implementation of the proposed protection measures would reduce or 

eliminate these effects. Therefore, the proposed action and protection measures, when combined with 

impacts from other sources, would not contribute to any measurable effects to cultural resources. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

448  Ogden Final EIS

3.16.1 Introduction and Background

Three aspects of economic and social impacts are analyzed: financial feasibility of a potential timber 

sale, cost efficiency of a timber sale and all other project activities, and impacts to the local 

employment. Financial feasibility is dependent on costs and revenues associated with a particular 

timber sale. Cost efficiency includes the costs and revenue associated with a timber sale, planning costs 

and related projects. Impacts to the local economy are a reflection of Forest harvest levels and 

associated employment. Timber sales, fuel treatments, and associated resource work can generate 

employment and stimulate the local economy.

Forest Sector Employment

Oregon’s forest products industry is an important part of Oregon’s economy and a major player in the 

National’s wood products market (Gebert et al. 2002). Although the decade from 1990 to 2000 saw a 

10% decrease in total forest sector employment in Oregon (with a loss of approximately 9,600 jobs 

statewide), the industry is still an important contributor to the local economies of Central Oregon. Also, 

as jobs in the primary and secondary forest product sectors have declined, there has been a reported 

employment growth in firefighting, ecological restoration and other contract services that fall within the 

forestry services sector (USFS 2007).

Forest sector employment has far more impact in Central Oregon than for the State of Oregon as a 

whole. Wood products manufacturing is still the single largest industrial employer in Jefferson County 

and the second largest industry in Crook County. In Deschutes County, according to the 2005 Oregon 

Employment Department, 1,798 people were employed in wood products manufacturing. This places it 

a distant third behind tourism (7,772 jobs) and Health and Social Assistance (6,062 jobs), but these jobs 

do represent the seventh highest average paying jobs in the county and 9 per cent of primary industrial 

jobs, a far higher average than for Oregon as a whole.

Both Crook and Jefferson Counties, with smaller populations and a less diversified economic base, are

much more dependent on the timber industry. In Crook County, 1,007 people were employed in wood

products manufacturing in 2005, placing it second behind Distribution and Warehousing (Les Schwab).

This accounts for 24 percent of all primary industrial employment in the county, and represents the third

highest paying jobs in the county. In Jefferson County, 1,798 people were employed in wood products

manufacturing and related industries in 2005. This accounts for a substantial 49 percent of primary

industrial employment in the county while also representing the third highest paying jobs in the county.

Timber Harvest by Land Ownership

Timber harvesting has been a key use of forests in Deschutes County. In 1990, it was noted in the 

LRMP that “Mills in Deschutes County are heavily dependent on timber supplied by the Forest.” 

(LRMP 2-2). Production of timber within Deschutes County has dropped over the last two decades. In 

1986 more than 117 million board feet were harvested, of which 86% were from National Forest System 

land. In 2010, approximately 19 million board feet were harvested in Deschutes County. Of that, 14 

million board feet (74%) was harvested from Forest Service land. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  449

Table 170: Volume Removed in 1,000s of Board Feet (Scribner Log Scale). Source: Oregon 

Department of Forestry (http://www.oregon.gov/ODF/index.shtml.

Year Forest 

Industry

Other 

Private

Native 

American State BLM USFS Other Public Total

2005 2,019 41 0 0 0 26,235 0 28,295

2006 6,905 2,623 0 2 0 15,426 0 24,956

2007 10,864 660 0 0 0 10,924 16 22,464

2008 6,201 474 0 0 0 28,895 510 36,080

2009 66 29 0 0 0 14,040 540 14,675

2010 2,207 2,274 0 0 0 14,378 0 19,339

Since 2005, across all Oregon counties east of the Cascades, timber from National Forest System lands 

has accounted for 20 to 30 percent of the total timber harvest. The proportion from National Forests 

land in Deschutes County has been substantially higher than that, ranging from 62% to 96% of the total 

timber harvest in the county. Saw mills and other processors near the Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District are 

located in Gilchrist, LaPine John Day, and Prairie City. At the time comments were solicited on the 

Draft EIS, the mill in Gilchrist was operating at 75% capacity and the company attributed that to a lack 

of sawlogs being offered by the Forest Service in central Oregon. 

3.16.2 Management Direction

Forest Service Handbooks (FSH) 1909.17, 2409.18, and Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2400-Timber 

Management, Chapter 2430 direct the evaluation of Economic Feasibility for timber sales and related 

costs and Cost Efficiency for proposed projects and all related costs. 

3.16.3 Analysis Methods

The economic analysis compares present net revenues and present net costs. Present net value and 

present net cost were calculated using TEA.ECON (USDA Forest Service 2011) which is an economic 

analysis tool. The program uses the most recent product log values and appraisal costs to evaluate 

timber sale and project economics. A 4% discount rate is used to value all costs and benefits to present 

value. The analysis can be used to compare alternatives, but not to give any absolute numbers for the 

outputs.

Revenue

Revenue is based on harvest volume and value. The harvest volumes and species mix are estimates 

from the silvicultural prescriptions. Volumes were estimated using stand exams and past volume yields 

from similar treatments in the project area. The stand exams were from the project area and modeled 

using the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS). Timber values from TEA.ECON dated from February 

2011 were calculated using the current Product Quality Adjustment (PQA) for delivered logs, in eastern 

Oregon saw mills.

This analysis does not place a monetary value (revenue) on benefits which may occur from actions other 

than the timber sale. These benefits include but are not limited to increased future yields resulting from 

reduced stocking and reduced risk of stand replacing wildfire. Benefits associated with other actions are 

described elsewhere in the EIS.

Costs

The FSM (2000) directs the timber sale financial feasibility to be conducted, including costs only 

associated with the timber sale. Timber sale costs are a subset of the project cost efficiency costs. 

Timber sale costs include; stump to truck, haul costs, essential KV, road maintenance and brush 

disposal. Stump to truck logging costs were estimated by the Deschutes/Ochoco Timber Sale Zone 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

450  Ogden Final EIS

Appraiser at $89.14/ccf for ground based logging. Brush disposal and haul costs were determined from 

the most current Transaction Evidence Appraisal Cost File (Version 811 TEA 02-08 R6 TEA dated 

February 2011). Brush disposal costs were set at $6.64/ccf and haul costs were set at $25.50/ccf (Vickie 

Dunaway Zone Appraiser). Road maintenance and reconstruction costs were based on the logging 

systems analysis for the sale. Road maintenance costs were set at $2.51/ccf, road reconstruction costs 

were set at $3.07/ccf.

The project cost efficiency includes all costs for the project. These costs include: timber sale financial 

feasibility, planning, (NEPA planning, sale preparation and administrative costs), and related projects 

costs. The related projects are not part of the logging and are therefore considered non-timber costs

(Table 171). Non-timber costs include:

Natural Fuel Treatments which will reduce the fuels loadings. These include:

o Mechanical Shrub treatment with mowing type machinery.

o Ladder Fuels Reduction (LFR)

o Underburning 

Subsoiling of landings, temporary roads, and main skid trails 

Precommercial thinning of plantations and understory trees in harvest units.

o Slash treatment including grapple and hand piling and burning of piles. 

Table 171: Related Project Treatment Costs

Activity Cost Unit of Measure Natural Fuels Treatments

Mechanical Shrub Treatment (MST) $65.00 Per acre

Ladder Fuels Reduction (LFR) $125.00 Per acre

Underburning (UB) $200.00 Per acre

Subsoiling $45.00 Per acre

Precommercial thinning (SPC) $60.00 Per acre

Slash Treatment

Hand piling $379.00 Per acre

Grapple piling $200.00 Per acre

Lop & Scatter $90.00 Per acre

Piling in the RHCA $425.00 Per acre

Reforestation surveys $2.50 Each

Discounted Revenues and Costs

The benefits and costs specific to each analysis (timber sale financial feasibility and project cost 

efficiency) were entered into TEA.ECON which computed discounted benefits, discounted costs, and 

present net value for each alternative. 

Local Employment

This analysis was calculated using two different methods. The first utilizes numerical values from the 

LRMP, which assumed 8.6 jobs created for each million board feet of ponderosa pine harvested and 2.5 

jobs per million board feet for all other species (USDA Forest Service 1990). The volume for lodgepole 

pine sawlog and fiber of all species was combined for the calculations, but the volume for ponderosa 

pine was not combined with any other. The estimated volume for each alternative was used to estimate 

how many timber industry jobs each of the alternatives could provide or maintain.

The alternate method was used in response to comments received from the timber industry during the 

comment period of the Draft EIS. This method assumes sawlog coefficients to be the same regardless 

of the species harvested. The numerical value of 8.6 jobs per million board feet was used for both 

ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine sawlog volume. Fiber value was kept at 2.5 jobs per million board 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  451

feet. The volume for ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine sawlog volume were combined for calculations, 

but fiber volume remained separate.

3.16.4 Timber Sale Financial Feasibility and Project Cost Efficiency

It is important to note that the economic analysis presented here is a best estimate of costs. Actual 

appraised value may change over time and depend on how one or more sales are presented. It may be 

possible to produce one or more viable sales out of a project that appears, as a whole, to be non-viable. 

Market conditions may fluctuate throughout the year, and depending on the season a sale is offered for 

auction, the current estimates may or may not be accurate. This could have an impact on the final sale 

values. Rising energy and fuel costs could create a substantial increase in sale operation and 

manufacturing costs.

Timber Sale Feasibility

Timber sale financial feasibility utilizes only a subset of the project discounted costs. These costs 

include; stump to truck, haul costs, essential KV, road maintenance and brush disposal. Financial 

feasibility only includes the revenue from timber products, which is the only revenue for this project. 

When the predicted high bid is greater than the minimum bid price the timber sale is considered 

feasible. 

Project Cost Efficiency

Cost efficiency is the project as a whole and includes revenue from timber products and all costs for the 

project. Timber products are the only revenue for this sale. All associated project costs include timber 

sale financial feasibility and Forest Service planning.

3.16.5 Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative would not harvest any timber; therefore would not support 

employment, contributions to local economies or any other quantitative benefits from related projects. 

Current downward trends in timber harvesting from National Forests lands would continue into the 

future. Employment rates in the wood products sector of the local economy would remain unchanged.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: The timber sale is financially feasible with a positive net present value of 

$783,789. This value is approximately three percent ($24,168) greater than Alternative 3. 

The project costs associated with Alternative 2 are the highest of all the alternatives. When the entire 

project is considered, Alternative 2 is more costly due to the reforestation and fuels treatments costs. 

The project net present value is negative, creating a deficit that is approximately 10 percent higher of a 

discounted cost than Alternative 3 (Table 172). 

Table 172: Alternative 2 Economic Measures

Project Type Discounted Cost Discounted Revenue Net Present Value

Timber Sale Financial Feasibility $40,406 $824,195 $783,789

Project Cost Efficiency Including Timber 

Sale $7,231,204 $824,195 $(-6,407,009)

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Similar to Alternative 2, the timber sale for Alternative 3 is financially 

feasible, with a positive net present value of $759,621. The net present value of the timber sale for 

Alternative 2 is higher, but at the project level Alternative 3 is less cost to the government. The cost 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

452  Ogden Final EIS

efficiency project discounted cost is approximately 10 percent lower than Alternative 2. This cost 

reduction is mostly due to decreased acres of natural fuel, KV and regeneration treatments.

Table 173: Alternative 3 Economic Measures

Project Type Discounted Cost Discounted Revenue Net Present Value

Timber Sale (Financial Feasibility) $1,990 $761,611 $759,621

Project Feasibility including Timber Sale $6,462,297 $761,611 $(-5,700,686)

Cumulative Effects 

Other employment would continue to occur as a result of other timber sales in progress, recreation 

activities, and other special use receipts across the Forest. Commercial collection of non-timber forest 

products could continue to occur, although the quantity of harvest is unknown. Overall, none of the 

alternatives would result in economic-related cumulative effects. 

3.16.6 Employment

Over the last 10 years, an annual average of approximately 68.2 million board feet of timber has been 

sold from the Deschutes National Forest (DNF). For the near future, the amount of timber offered for 

sale is expected to be near this annual average. The DNF is expected to continue offering timber for 

sale and is expected to continue making contributions to the local economy as a result of timber harvest 

activities. 

The DNF provides timber and non-timber forest products to the local community and state. The Forest 

products include timber, firewood, vegetative material and more. The project plans to provide timber 

and possibly biomass. The timber offered from this project would be included in the DNF offer. 

Biomass produced from the tops and less than merchantable material could be removed by purchasers if 

a market exists. Biomass was not included as a commodity since it is considered slash and not a 

saleable product.

Although the past decade has seen a significant reduction in employment within the lumber and wood 

products industry, this industry is still an important contributor to local economies. Wood products 

manufacturing is still the single largest industrial employer in Jefferson County and the second largest 

industry in Crook County. In Deschutes County, according to the 2005 Oregon Employment 

Department, 1,798 people were employed in the wood products manufacturing.

This analysis assumes 8.6 jobs created for each million feet of ponderosa pine harvested and 2.5 jobs 

per million board feet for all other species (USDA Forest Service 1990). The estimated volume for each 

alternative was used to calculate how many jobs each of the alternatives could provide or maintain. The 

volume for lodgepole pine and fiber was combined for the calculations.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative would not contribute to the Deschutes National Forest 

timber sold. No maintenance or increase in employment is imputed with this alternative.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 2 produces the greatest amount of volume and therefore 

creates or maintains the largest amount of jobs. The number of jobs created is sensitive to the 

assumption used in the calculations, but regardless of the assumption used, Alternative 2 is estimated to 

maintain or create between two and ten percent more timber industry jobs than Alternative 3.

Alternative 2 would produce 32.5 million board feet of timber. The volume is estimated to be 15.3 

million board feet of ponderosa pine sawlog, 10.1 million board feet lodgepole pine sawlog and 7.1 

million board feet of fiber. Using the LRMP method, Alternative 2 is estimated to maintain or create 

174 timber industry jobs. Using the alternate method which assumes sawlog coefficients to be the same 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  453

regardless of the species harvested, Alternative 2 is estimated to maintain or create 279 timber industry 

jobs.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 3 would produce 29.2 million board feet of timber, which is 

approximately 10 percent less volume than Alternative 2 (Table 174). Due to the decrease in timber 

volume, Alternative 3 produces approximately 2 to 10 percent less jobs than Alternative 2. 

The volume is estimated to be 16 million board feet of ponderosa pine sawlog, 8.7 million board feet 

lodgepole pine sawlog and 4.5 million board feet of fiber. Using the LRMP method, Alternative 3 

estimated to maintain or create 170 timber industry jobs. Using the alternate method which assumes 

sawlog coefficients to be the same regardless of the species harvested, Alternative 3 is estimated to 

maintain or create 251 timber industry jobs.

Table 174: Estimated Volume by Alternative

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Ponderosa Pine Sawlog

 CCF 0 31,814 33,234

 MBF 0 15,271 15,952

 MMBF* 0 15.3 16.0

Lodgepole Pine Sawlog

 CCF 0 21,080 18,215

 MBF 0 10,118 8,743

 MMBF 0 10.1 8.7

Fiber

 CCF 0 14,732 9,365

 MBF 0 7,071 4,495

 MMBF** 0 7.1 4.5

Ponderosa 

Pine/Lodgepole Pine 

Sawlog**

 CCF 0 52,894 51,449

 MBF 0 25,389 24,696

 MMBF 0 25.4 24.7

Lodgepole Pine 

Sawlog/Fiber

 CCF 0 35,812 27,580

 MBF 0 17,190 13,238

 MMBF* 0 17.2 13.2

Alternative Total

 CCF 0 67,626 60,814

 MBF 0 32,460 29,191

 MMBF 0 32.5 29.2

* Used in the Forest Plan Calculations

** Used in the Alternate Method Calculations
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

454  Ogden Final EIS

Table 175: Estimated Employment and Lodgepole Pine (LP) and Other Species (OS) Fiber Volume

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Forest Plan 0 174 170

Alternate Assumption 0 279 251
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  455

3.17.1 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources 

Irreversible commitments of resources are those that cannot be regained, such as the extinction of a 

species or the removal of mined ore. Irretrievable commitments are those that are lost for a period of 

time such as the temporary loss of timber productivity in forested areas that are kept clear for use as a 

power line right-of-way or road.

The action alternatives are not expected to create any impacts that would cause irreversible damage to 

soil productivity. The development and use of temporary roads and logging facilities is considered an 

irretrievable loss of soil productivity until their functions have been served and disturbed sites are 

returned back to a productive capacity. Both action alternatives include soil restoration activities that 

would improve the hydrologic function and productivity on detrimentally disturbed soils. There would 

be no irretrievable losses of soil productivity associated with these reclamation treatments. 

3.17.2 Prime Farmland, Rangeland, and Forestland

All alternatives were consistent with the Secretary of Agriculture memorandum 1827 for the 

management of prime farmland. The Ogden Project area does not contain any prime farm land or 

rangelands. Prime Forest Land, as defined in the memorandum, is not applicable to lands within the 

National Forest System.

3.17.3 Energy Requirements of the Alternatives

Under the action alternatives, additional consumption of fossil fuels and human labor would be 

expended for the use of vehicles transporting Forest workers, chainsaws, heavy equipment and trucks. 

Fossil fuel would not be a retrievable resource. There are no irregular energy requirements involved in 

implementing any of the action alternatives.

3.17.4 Civil Rights and Environmental Justice

Civil Rights legislation and Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice) direct an analysis of the 

proposed alternatives as they relate to specific subsets of the American population. The subsets of the 

general population include ethnic minorities, people with disabilities, the elderly, and low-income 

groups. Environmental Justice is defined as the pursuit of equal justice and protection under the law for 

all environmental statutes and regulations, without discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or 

socioeconomic status. The minority and low income populations groups living in counties surrounding 

the project area work in diverse occupations. Some minorities, low income residents, and Native 

Americans may rely on forest products or related forest activities for their livelihood. This is especially 

true for those individuals that most likely reside in the rural communities adjacent to National Forest 

Lands, such as La Pine, Crescent, and Gilchrist, Oregon.

Alternative 1 would continue the local economic situation as described in the section titled Economics. 

Opportunities for employment of minority and low income workers may arise through contract activities 

for various forest work, such as thinning, hand piling, and various small business contracts related to 

work outside the project area, but there are no known disproportionately high effects to any ethnic 

minorities, people with disabilities, and low-income groups.

Under both action alternatives there would be no known adverse effects that would be 

disproportionately high to any ethnic minorities, people with disabilities, and low-income groups as a 

result of implementation of either action alternative in the Ogden project. Within the social context 

presented, the action alternatives developed for this project have the potential to bring in workers from 

the outside to perform logging and post-harvest activities such as small tree thinning and hand piling. 

While the outside workforce is more likely to be racially diverse than the local resident population, the 

residents have worked effectively with and supported anticipated fluctuations in the workforce expected 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

456  Ogden Final EIS

with the implementation of an action-based alternative. The primary services needed by the workers 

would be food and shelter. Local businesses that can supply food (grocery stores and restaurants) and 

other services would capture most of the money being spent by the workers in the area. Since these 

businesses have supported similar workforces in the past, capitol expansion would probably not be 

required.

3.17.5 Human Health & Safety

Under each action alternative, danger trees would be removed from along all haul routes. The signing 

of project activity areas, in addition to notification of additional project-related traffic, would promote a 

safe environment for forest visitors during project implementation. Implementation of action 

alternatives would increase the potential for encounters on roadways between forest visitors and 

equipment associated with harvest. This elevated level of risk would be present for the short-term 

(approximately 5 years). Safety measures such as informational signing, flaggers, and road maintenance 

activities, such as brushing roads for increased visibility, would be enforced in the timber sale contract.

The work environment during all phases of logging operations would be physically demanding and 

potentially hazardous; effects to worker health and safety would be possible. Activities with the highest 

potential for serious injury would include tree felling and helicopter operations (helicopter may be used 

for prescribed fire ignition). All project activities carried out by Forest Service and Forest Service 

contract employees would comply with State and Federal Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA) standards. All Forest Service project operations would be consistent with 

Forest Service Handbook 6709.11 (Health and Safety Code).

The Clean Air Act lists 189 hazardous air pollutants to be regulated. Some components of smoke, such 

as polycyclic aromic hydrocarbons (PAH) are known to be carcinogenic. Probably the most 

carcinogenic component is benzo-a-pyrene (BaP). Other components, such as aldehydes, are acute 

irritants. In 1994 and 19977, air toxins were assessed relative to the exposure of humans to smoke from 

prescribed and wildfires. The five toxins most commonly found in prescribed fire smoke were:

Particulate matter - Particulates are the most prevalent air pollutant from fires, and are of the most 

concern to regulators. Research indicates a correlation between hospitalizations for respiratory 

problems and high concentrations of fine particulates (PM2.5, fine particles that are 2.5 microns in 

diameter or less). Particulates can carry carcinogens and other toxic compounds. Overexposure to 

particulates can cause irritation of mucous membranes, decreased lung capacity, and impaired lung 

function. Particulate matter is analyzed for each alternative in Chapter 3.3.2 Air Quality.

Acrolein - An aldehyde with a piercing, choking odor. Exposure severely irritates the eyes and upper 

respiratory tract.

Formaldehyde - Low-level exposure can cause irritation of the eyes, nose and throat. Long-term 

exposure is associated with nasal cancer.

Carbon Monoxide - CO reduces the oxygen carrying capacity of the blood, a reversible effect. Low 

exposures can cause loss of time awareness, motor skills, and mental acuity. Also, exposure can lead to 

heart attack, especially for persons with heart disease. High exposures can lead to death due to lack of 

oxygen.

Benzene - Benzene causes headache, dizziness, nausea and breathing difficulties, as well as being a 

potent carcinogen. Long-term exposure can cause anemia, liver and kidney damage, and cancer. The 

closest Designated Area to the analysis area is the city of Bend, Oregon; the communities of Sunriver

and La Pine are closer to the analysis area but are not as highly populated.

 

7 Results of an April 1997 conference to review the results of health studies and develop a risk management plan for the 

protection of fire crews were published by Missoula Technology Development Center in Health Hazards of Smoke, Technical 

Report 9751-2836-MTDC.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  457

The greatest risk of exposure to airborne toxins from prescribed fires or wildfires would be to 

firefighters and forest workers implementing the prescribed burning. It is unlikely the general public 

would be exposed to toxin levels adverse to human health during implementation of prescribed burning 

operations in the Ogden analysis area because of the distance from populated areas and the application 

of prescriptions designed to lessen the release of particulate matter. People who suffer from breathing 

ailments may experience some difficulty during periods of prescribed burning, especially during 

atmospheric conditions that do not favor dispersion of smoke. The Forest Service voluntarily follows 

the guidelines assigned by Oregon Smoke Management to limit state-wide exposure on a cumulative 

basis, in compliance with the Clean Air Act.

Forest workers and firefighters can face unhealthy levels of smoke when patrolling or holding fire lines 

on the downward edge of a wildfire or prescribed fire, or while mopping intense hot spots. In most 

cases, measures such as education on the effects of short and long term exposure, rotation out of the 

smoke, and the use of respirators can reduce exposure levels. OSHA regulates exposure to hazardous 

materials in the workplace. All project activities carried out by Forest Service and Forest Service 

contract employees would comply with State and Federal OSHA standards.

3.17.6 Climate Change

Introduction 

The impacts on forests from climate change and the effects on climate change from forest management 

are complex and sometimes negated by the different factors involved. The most expected condition in 

Central Oregon is a warming time and potentially less snowfall. The best comparison to the average 

condition is the drought cycles experienced in this area due to the pacific decadal oscillation (also 

known as El Nino and La Nina) (Hessl et al. 2004).

According to the Climate Impacts Group8, based out of the University of Washington, climate modeling 

for the Pacific Northwest predicts a future rate of warming of approximately 0.5 degrees Fahrenheit per 

decade for the Pacific Northwest through at least 2050, relative to the 1970-1999 average temperature. 

Temperatures are projected to increase across all seasons, although most models project the largest 

temperature increases in summer (June – August), and the average temperature s could increase beyond 

the year-to-year variability observed in the Pacific Northwest during the 20th century as early as the 

2020s.

With climate change, increases in drought, fires, and greater vulnerability to insects and diseases can be 

expected (Brown 2008). Thinning of stands to reduce competition for resources and favoring droughttolerant species (such as ponderosa pine) will reduce the impacts of drought cycles on tree mortality, 

and increase resistance to insect and fire mortality (Ritchie 2008).

Regulatory Framework

The Forest Service does not have a national policy or guidance for managing carbon, and the tools for 

estimating carbon and sequestration are not fully developed. Current direction for addressing climate 

change issues in project planning and the NEPA process is provided in the document Climate Change 

Considerations in Project Level NEPA Analysis (USFS 2009). This document outlines the basic 

considerations for assessing climate change in relation to project-level planning.

 

8

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Their reports (2007) provide the authoritative scientific 

basis for subsequent Forest Service analysis of this phenomenon. Information specific to the Forest Service can be 

found in the latest Synthesis and Assessment Product 4.4.24.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

458  Ogden Final EIS

Forest Service Strategic Framework for Responding to Climate Change

The Forest Service mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the National’s forests 

and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations. The agency has developed the 

Strategic Framework for Responding to Climate Change9because climate change threatens our ability 

to fulfill that mission (USFS 2008). The Strategic Framework describes several inter-related programs 

of the agency to help forests, grasslands and humans mitigate and adapt to global climate change.

Table 176: The Strategic Framework has seven goals to address climate change:

Foundational

Science - Advance our understanding of the environmental, economic, and social 

implications of climate change and related adaptation and mitigation activities on 

forests and grasslands.

Education - Advance awareness and understanding regarding principles and 

methods for sustaining forests and grasslands, and sustainable resource 

consumption, in a changing climate.

Structural

Alliances - Establish, enhance, and retain strong alliances and partnerships with 

federal agencies, State and local governments, Tribes, private landowners, nongovernmental organizations, and international partners to provide sustainable 

forests and grasslands for present and future generations.

Policy - Integrate climate change, as appropriate, into Forest Service policies, 

program guidance, and communications and put in place effective mechanisms to 

coordinate across and within Deputy Areas.

Action

Sustainable Operations - Reduce the environmental footprint of Forest Service 

operations and be a leading example of a green organization.

Adaptation - Enhance the capacity of forests and grasslands to adapt to the 

environmental stresses of climate change and maintain ecosystem services.

Mitigation - Promote the management of forests and grasslands to reduce the 

buildup of greenhouse gases, while sustaining the multiple benefits and services of 

these ecosystems.

Existing Condition

The existing vegetation conditions are described throughout Chapter 3. There is uncertainty about how 

the climate will change within the project area in the future. This portion of central Oregon has gone 

through at least five distinct periods of warming climate over the past 110 years (NASA Global Climate 

Change Website http://climate.jpl.nasa.gov ). In the Western United States and at the continental scale 

(1 km), long-term satellite data show consistently earlier onsets of spring greening and corresponding 

increases in length of growing season (Forest Service Climate Change Resource Center:

http://www.fs.fed.us/ccrc).

Lengthening of the fire season due to early snow melt and warmer summers appears to be causing a 

trend of larger and more frequent fires in the western US; and increased winds may make the fires more 

severe (Westerling et al. 2006 in Brown). 

 

9 To see the complete strategic framework, go to http://www.fs.fed.us/climatechange/documents/strategicframework-climate-change-1-0.pdf. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Final EIS  459

Direct and Indirect Effects –Alternative 1 

Although there is uncertainty about what the climate future may be, the predicted climate change 

scenario for this area would exacerbate the conditions for the forests in the project area. Under the 

warmer/drier scenario of future climate, ponderosa pine will be the most impacted because of its 

sensitivity to density. Under the No Action alternative, there would be no direct changes to the forested 

vegetation, and no releases of greenhouse gasses would occur.

Direct, Indirect, and Cumulative Effects –Alternatives 2 and 3

The trajectory of these stands should lead to more resilience should the climate become warmer and 

drier as predicted. Thinning of stands under both alternatives will reduce competition for resources (see 

section 3.4). Favoring drought-tolerant species such as ponderosa pine would reduce the impacts of 

future drought cycles on tree mortality, and increase resistance to insect and fire mortality (Ritchie 

2008). Also, if a crown fire burns through a forest that was thinned to a low density, the fire may 

change from a crown fire to a surface fire, where many trees can often survive. In contrast, many or all 

of the trees in an unthinned stand would be killed by a crown fire.

The scope and degree of change from either action alternative is minor relative to the amount of forested 

land available as a whole. A project of this magnitude (about 12% of watershed) would have such 

minimal contributions of greenhouse gasses that its impact on global climate change would be 

infinitesimal. Therefore, at the global scale, the proposed action’s direct and indirect contribution to 

greenhouse gasses and climate change would be negligible, and therefore the project’s cumulative 

effects on greenhouse gasses and climate change would also be negligible.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has summarized the contributions to climate change of 

global human activity sectors in its Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC 2007). The top three 

anthropogenic (human-caused) contributors to greenhouse gas emissions (from 1970-2004) are: fossil 

fuel combustion (56.6% of global total), deforestation (17.3%), and agriculture/waste/energy (14.3%). 

IPCC subdivides the deforestation category into land use conversions, and large scale deforestation. 

Deforestation is defined as removal of all trees, most notably the conversion of forest and grassland into 

agricultural land or developed landscapes (IPCC 2000). 

This vegetation management project does not fall within any of these main contributors of greenhouse 

gas emissions. Forested land will not be converted into a developed or agricultural condition. In fact, 

forest stands are being retained and thinned to maintain a vigorous forested condition that can continue 

to support trees and sequester carbon long-term.

The net carbon balance is extremely difficult to quantify for a forest project. Adaptation and Mitigation 

can have positive and negative influences on each other’s effectiveness (Klein et. al. 2007 in Joyce et. 

al. 2008). This project is also consistent with IPCC recommendations for land use to help mitigate 

climate change. The 2007 IPCC report summarizes sector-specific key mitigation “technologies.” For 

the forestry sector, the report recommends forest management, including management to “improve tree 

species” and increase biomass. The two action alternatives are consistent with these recommendations.

Timber management projects can influence carbon dioxide sequestration in three main ways: (1) by 

increasing new forests (afforestation), (2) by avoiding their damage or destruction (avoided 

deforestation), and (3) by manipulating existing forest cover (managed forests). Land-use changes, 

specifically deforestation and regrowth, are by far the biggest factors on a global scale in forests’ role as 

sources or sinks of carbon dioxide, respectively (IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 

2000). Projects that create forests or improve forest conditions and capacity to grow trees are positive 

factors in carbon sequestration. The action alternatives fall into this category.
CHAPTER 4

CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION
Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination

Ogden Final EIS  461

CHAPTER 4: PUBLIC NOTIFICATION & 

PARTICIPATION

This chapter has been updated with information on the public comment period and the outcome of 

consultation with other agencies.

During the initial scoping (see Chapter 1.5), a number of comments and questions were received. 

Responses varied from those who wanted more clarification to specific suggestions for project 

implementation. Comments from scoping were used to help develop the planning issues and alternatives 

(see Chapter 1.5 and 1.6). 

The scoping letter resulted in six responses from individuals, organizations, and agencies. Following 

development of the alternatives, a letter was sent August 17, 2010 updating the public and other 

agencies on the issues, alternatives, and timeline, and asking people to notify the Forest Service if they 

wanted, and in what format, to receive the Draft EIS. All correspondence is part of the Project Record, 

located at the Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District office. 

A 45-day public comment period is offered on the Draft EIS per NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1503; 

1506.10). The following individuals, agencies, and organizations were either notified of the availability 

of the Draft EIS, or sent a copy of the document: 

The Klamath Tribes

Will Hatcher, Acting Director, Natural Resources 

Department

Joseph Kirk, Chairman, Tribal Council

Les Anderson, Cultural Resources 

Perry Chocktoot, Director, Cultural and Heritage 

Department

Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs

Brigette M. Whipple, Tribal Anthropologist

Sally Bird, Manager, Cultural Resources

Ron Suppah, Tribal Chairman

Clay Penhollow, Dept. of Natural Resources

Lonny Macy, Natural Resources Policy Planner

Robert Brunoe, General Manager, Natural 

Resources

Scott Turo, Off Reservation Habitat Biologist

Burns Paiute Tribe

Amos Firstraised, Natural Resources

Dean Adams, Chairman, Tribal Council

Wanda Johnson, Chairperson, Tribal Council

Teresa Peck, Cultural Resources

Lawrence Schwabe, Director, Natural Resources

Kenton Dick, Cultural Programs Specialist

Diane Teeman, Cultural Resources

Individuals, Organizations, and Agencies

Brad Chalfant, Deschutes Basin Land Trust

Tim Lillebo, Oregon Wild

Don Mercer, Upper Deschutes River Natural 

Resources Coalition

Ryan Houston, Upper Deschutes Watershed 

Council

Amy Waltz, The Nature Conservancy

Northwest Environmental Defense Center

Chandra LaGue, Oregon Wild

Scott McCaulou, Deschutes River Conservancy 

Jim Larsen, Upper Deschutes River Coalition

Marilyn Miller

Larry Pennington, Oregon Chapter Sierra Club

Mike Riley, Central Oregon Climate Alliance

Susan Jane Brown

Karen Coulter, Blue Mountains Biodiversity 

Project

Josh Laughlin, Cascadia Wildlands Project

John Morgan, Ochoco Lumber

Chuck Burley, American Forest Resource 

Council

Flip Houston, Scott Logging Inc.

Ms. Lynne Breese, Eastern Oregon Forest 

Protection Association
Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination

462  Ogden Final EIS

Pat Schatz, Mickey Finn Guide Service

Craig Vaage, Bigfoot Guide Service

David Nissen, Wanderlust Tours

The Paulina Plunge Inc.

Bruce Cunningham, Moon Country 

Snowmobilers

Rick Bozarth, Bozarth's Offroad Service 

Specialties

Ed Duffy, Deschutes County 4-Wheelers

Art Uecker

Larry Ulrich

Billy Toman

Jim Anderson

David Pitts

Scott Walley

Vic Russell

Robert Speik

Patricia Moore

David Tjomsland

Mr. & Mrs. Scott O'Neill

Wade N. Foss

Fred Tanis

Scott Odgers

Daryle Sharkey

Robert Mullong

Stu Garrett, MD

Kreg Lindberg

East Lake Resort

Norman Stone, Paulina Lake Summer Homes

Paulina Lake Lodge

Douglas Perry, President, Davenport Power LLC

Paul Stern, PLS Environmental LLC

Gregory McClarren, Consultant, Davenport 

Power LLC

Darwin Thurston, Midstate Electric Cooperative

Alice Tye, Consultant, Davenport Power LLC

Brian Pasko, Oregon Chapter Sierra Club

Kate Ramsayer

The Bulletin

KTVZ

Senator Jeff Merkley

Senator Ron Wyden

Justin Rainey for Congressman Greg Walden

Nancy Gilbert, USDI Fish & Wildlife Service

Deborah Norton, USDI Bureau of Land 

Management

Stuart Otto, Oregon Dept. of Forestry

Rick Williams, Oregon Department of 

Transportation

Glen Ardt, Oregon Department of Fish and 

Wildlife

Joe Stutler, Forester, Deschutes County

LaPine Chamber

LaPine Rural Fire Protection District

Steve Fitzgerald, Oregon State University

Extension Service

Mark Dunaway, Pine Mountain Observatory, 

University of Oregon

Katie Lighthall, Project Wildfire

Lisa Clark, Fire Mitigation Specialist

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10

Federal Aviation Administration, NW Mtn. 

Region

Federal Highway Administration

National Marine Fisheries Service

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Northwest Power Planning Council

U.S. Army of Engineers

U.S. Dept. of Energy

U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Office of 

Environmental Policy

USDA APHIS PPD/EAD

USDA National Agricultural Library

A total of ten letters were received during the 45-day comment period which ran from July 22, 2011 to 

September 6, 2011. Comments were reviewed by the Interdisciplinary Team and District Ranger and 

substantive comments are responded to directly in Appendix F. Comments were also responded to by 

making correction, clarifications, or improvements to the EIS. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

The initial response from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) during the scoping phase 

included a list of analyses to include and factors to consider in the EIS. Per Forest Service regulations, 

the DEIS was filed with the EPA’s Office of Federal Activities in Washington, DC, who published a 

notice of availability in the Federal Register on July 22, 2011. The EPA provided comments on the 

DEIS in a letter dated September 6, 2011 (see Appendix F, page 46). The EPA gave the FEIS a rating 

of Lack of Objections.
Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination

Ogden Final EIS  463

Oregon State Historic Preservation Office

Consultation has occurred with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) following guidelines in 

the Regional Programmatic Agreement among USDA-Forest Service, the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation, and the Oregon SHPO. In a letter dated October 6, 2011 the SHPO concurred with the 

Forest’s recommended protection procedures and the monitoring program outlined in the report 

submitted to them. The SHPO agreed that the project will have no adverse effect on any known cultural 

resources. 

Beth Peer

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Environmental Coordinator

Education: BS, Anthropology, University of Oregon (1990)

Experience: 20 years professional experience

Contribution: Interdisciplinary Team Leader

Barbara Schroeder

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Silviculturist

Education: BS, Renewable Natural Resources, University of Nevada (Reno, 1981)

Experience: 33 years professional experience

Contribution: Forest Vegetation Analysis

Jason Loomis

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Fuels Specialist

Education: AAS, Fire Science, Chemeketa Community College, Technical Fire 

Management, Colorado State University (2006)

Experience: 16 years professional experience

Contribution: Fire and Fuels Analysis

Deana Wall

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Fuels Specialist

Education: B.A. Biology, minor Chemistry, Lewis and Clark College

Experience: 14 years with USFS (Umpqua, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie, Deschutes NFs), 12 

years in Fire and Fuels, 4 years as a fuels specialist.

Contribution: Fire and Fuels Analysis

Barbara Webb

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Wildlife Biologist

Education: BS, Environmental & Forest Biology, SUNY College (1990)

Experience: 15 years professional experience 

Contribution: Wildlife Analysis

Peter Sussmann

Position: USDA, Forest Service Deschutes National Forest Supervisor’s Office, Soils 

Scientist

Education: BA, Agronomy and Soils, University of Illinois (1986

Experience 15 years professional experience
Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination

464  Ogden Final EIS

Contribution: Soils Analysis

Tom Walker

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Fisheries Biologist

Education: BS, Fisheries Science, Oregon State University (1983)

Experience 24 years professional experience

Contribution: Fisheries and Hydrology Analysis

Robin Gyorgyfalvy

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Landscape Architect

Education: BA, Sculpture, Mt. Holyoke College (1973); BLA/MLA, Landscape 

Architecture, University of Oregon (1978)

Experience: 30 years professional experience

Contribution: Scenic Views Analysis

Charmane Powers

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, District Botanist

Education: Bachelor of Science from The Evergreen State College (1984)

Experience: 20 years botany, 5 years wildlife (birds)

Contribution: TES and Invasive Plants Analysis

Steve Bigby

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, District Roads Manager

Education: Oregon Institute of Technology

Experience: 23 years professional experience

Contribution: Roads Analysis

Scott E. McBride

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Recreation Specialist

Education: BS, Industrial Technology, Southern Illinois University (1993); Graduate 

Studies in Ecosystem Management, University of Utah and Wilderness 

Management, University of Montana.

Experience: 12 years professional experience

Contribution: Recreation Analysis

Janine McFarland

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, District Archaeologist

Education: BA, Anthropology, Oregon State University (1984); MA, Interdisciplinary 

Studies (Anthropology, History, Geography), Oregon State University, (1989)

Experience: 25 years professional experience

Contribution: Heritage Resources

Maureen Durrant

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, District GIS Specialist

Education: BS, Environmental Science, University of Redlands (2002); Post-Baccalaureate 

Certificate, GIS, Central Oregon Community College, (2007)

Experience: 6 years professional experience

Contribution: Geographical Information Services
Chapter 4 - Consultation and Coordination

Ogden Final EIS  465

David Frantz 

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Environmental Specialist

Education: BS, Forest Management, Northern Arizona University (1974); MS, Forest 

Entomology, Northern Arizona University (1988)

Experience: 20 years professional experience

Contribution: Writer/Editor
LITERATURE CITED
Literature Cited

Ogden Final EIS  467

LITERATURE CITED

Agee J.K.1993. Fire Ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests. Washington, DC: Island Press. 493 p.

Agee J.K.2002. Fire Behavior and Fire Resilient Forests. Fire in Oregon’s Forests: Risks, Effects, and 

Treatment Options, Fitzgerald S.A., ed. Oregon Forest Resources Institute.

Agee, J. K., Bahro, Berni, Finney, Mark A., Omi, Philip N., Sapsis, David B., Skinner, Carl N., van 

Wagtendonk, Jan W., Weatherspoon, C. Phillip. The Use of Fuelbreaks in Landscape Fire

Management. http://www.qlg.org/pub/miscdoc/agee.htm.

Agee, J.K. 1996. The influence of forest structure on fire behavior. Presented at the 17th Annual Forest 

Vegetation Management Conference, Redding CA. January 16-18, 1996.

Ager, A.A., Vaillant N.M., Finney M.A. 2011. Integrating fire behavior models and geospatial analysis 

for wildland fire risk assessment and fuel management planning. Journal of Combustion. In press.

Aikens, C. Melvin and Dennis L. Jenkins. 1994. Archaeological Researches in the Northern Great 

Basin: Fort Rock Archaeology Since Cressman. University of Oregon Anthropological Papers 50. 

University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon.

Albin, D.P. 1979. Fire and Stream Ecology in Some Yellowstone Tributaries. California Fish and 

Game 65:216-238.

Allen, A. W. 1987. The relationship between habitat and furbearers. In: Novak, M.; Baker, J.A.; 

Obbard, M.E. eds. Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. North Bay, 

Ontario: Ontario Trappers Association: 164-179.

Allen, C.D.; Savage, M.; Falk, D.A.; Suckling, K.F.; Swetnam, T.W.; Schulke, T.; Stacey, P.B.; 

Morgan, P.; Hoffman, M.; Klingel, J.T. 2002. Ecological restoration of southwestern ponderosa pine 

ecosystems: a broad perspective. Ecological Applications. 12(5): 1418-1433. 

Altman, B. 2000. Conservation strategy for landbirds of the east-slope of the Cascade mountains in 

Oregon and Washington. Version 1.0 Oregon-Washington Partners In Flight. 

Altman, B. 2003. Inventorying black swift populations at waterfalls in the northern pacific rainforest 

bird conservation region – final report. 8 p. Unpublished document. On file with: American Bird 

Conservancy 4249 Loudoun Ave. The Plains, VA 20198-2237.

Anderson, H.E. 1982. Aids to determining fuel models for estimating fire behavior. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

INT-122. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and 

Range Experiment Station. 22 p. 

Andrews, P. L. 1986. BEHAVE: Fire behavior prediction and fuel modeling system — BURN 

Subsystem, Part 1. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-194. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 130 p.

Anthony, R.G., R.J. Steidl, and K. McGarigal. 1995. Recreation and bald eagles in the Pacific 

Northwest. In: R.L. Knight and K.J. Gutzwiller, eds. Wildlife and recreationists: coexistence 

through management and research. Island Press, Washington D.C. 372 pp.

Arkle, R.S. and D.S. Pilliod. 2010. Prescribed fires as Ecological Surrogates for Wildfires: A Stream 

and Riparian Perspective. Forest Ecology and Management 259 (2010) 893-903.

Aubry, K. and C. Raley. 2006. Update to the study Ecological Characteristics of Fishers (Martes 

pennanti) in the Southern Oregon Cascade Range. Olympia ,WA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 30 p.

Aubry, K. B., K. S. McKelvey, and J. P. Copeland. 2007. Distribution and broadscale habitat relations 

of the wolverine in the contiguous United States. Journal of Wildlife Management. 71(7): 2147-2158.
Literature Cited

468  Ogden Final EIS

Barrett, James W. 1978. Height growth and site index curves for managed even-aged stands of 

ponderosa pine in the Pacific Northwest. USDA Forest Service Research Paper PNW-232, 14pp., 

Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experimental Station, Portland, Oregon.

Barrett, J.W. 1979. Silviculture of ponderosa pine in the Pacific Northwest: the state of our knowledge. 

USDA Forest Service. Gen. Tech. Report. PNW-97. 106p.

Beche, L.A., S.L. Stephens, and V.H. Resh. 2005. Effects of Prescribed Fire on a Sierra Nevada 

(California, USA) Stream and its Riparian Zone. Forest Ecology and Management 218 (2005) 37-59.

Beier, P., E.C. Rogan, M.F. Ingraldi, and S.S. Rosenstock. 2008. Does forest structure affect 

reproduction of northern goshawks in ponderosa pine forests. J. Appl. Ecol. 45:342-350.

Beier, P., and M.F. Ingraldi. 2012. There is no evidence that the Forest Service’s goshawk 

recommendations improve goshawk nest productivity. Wildlife Soc. Bull. 36(1):153-154.

Bettinger, P., Johnson K. N., and Sessions J. 1998. Evaluating the Association Among Alternative 

Measures of Cumulative Watershed Effects on a Forested Watershed in Eastern Oregon. Journal of 

Applied Forestry, 13, (1): pp. 15-22.

Bisby, T. 2005. Letter to the Files regarding Field Reconnaissance and average size of Grapple Piles in 

Unit 18 of the Pickle Timber Sale. 

Black, S.H. 2005. Logging to control insects: the science and myths behind managing forest insect 

“pests”. A synthesis of independently reviewed research. The Xerces Society for Invertebrate 

Conservation, Portland, OR. 82p.

Bonnot, T. W., J. J. Millspaugh, M. A. Rumble. 2009. Multi-scale nest-site selection by black-backed 

woodpeckers in outbreaks of mountain pine beetles. Forest Ecology and Management. 259 (2009): 

220-228.

Booser, J. and White, J. Undated. Calculating maximum stand density indexed (SDI) for Deschutes 

National Forest plant associations. 9p.

Brown, J. K.; E. D. Reinhardt; K. A. Kramer. 2003. Coarse woody debris: managing benefits and fire 

hazard in the recovering forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-105. Ogden UT: U. S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 16 p.

Brown, J.K. 1995. Fire regimes and their relevance to ecosystem management. Proceedings of Society 

of American Foresters National Convention; 1994 Sept. 18-22; Anchorage, AK. Washington D.C.: 

Society of American Foresters: 171-178.

Brown, J.K. and K.J. Smith. 2000. Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on flora. Ogden, UT: 

US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

RMRS-GTR-42; vol. 2.

Brown, R.T.; Agee, J.K.; Franklin, J.F. 2004. Forest restoration and fire: principles in the context of 

place. Conservation Biology 18(4):903-912.

Brown, Rick. 2008. The Implications of Climate Change for Conservation, Restoration, and 

Management of National Forest Lands; National Forest Restoration Collaborative, University of 

Oregon.

Bull, E. L.; S. R. Peterson, and J. W. Thomas. 1986. Resource partitioning among woodpeckers in 

Northeastern Oregon. Research Note PNW-444. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Pacific Northwest Research Station. La Grande, OR. 17 p.

Bull, E. L. and R. S. Holthausen. 1993. Habitat Use and Management of Pileated Woodpeckers 

Northeastern Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management 57(2):335-345.
Literature Cited

Ogden Final EIS  469

Bull, E.L., C.G. Parks, and T.R. Torgerson. 1997. Trees and logs important to wildlife in the interior 

Columbia River basin. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-39. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 55pp.

Buskirk, S.W., and R.A. Powell. 1994. Habitat Ecology of Fishers and American Martens. In: Buskirk, 

S.W., A.S. Harestad, M.G. Raphael, eds. Martens, Sables, and Fishers: Biology and Conservation. 

Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY: 283-296.

Busse M. and Riegel, G. 2005.Managing ponderosa pine forests in central Oregon: who will speak for 

the soil? In: Ritchie, M.W.; Maguire, D.A.; Youngblood, A., technical coordinators. Proceedings of 

the symposium on ponderosa pine: issues, trends, and management. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. 

Report PSW-GTR-198. 109-122.

Busse, M.; Riegel, G.; Johnson, W. 2006. Long-term effects of prescribed fire and thinning in central 

Oregon ponderosa pine forests. Proceedings of the Third International Fire Ecology and Management 

Congress, Nov. 13-17, 2006. San Diego, CA. 

http:www.emmps.wsu.edu/2006firecongressproceedings (Contributed Papers, Fuels Management 

Section).

Butler and Cohen 1998. Reducing the Wildland Threat to Homes: Where and How Much? Research 

Physical Scientist, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Rocky Mountain Research, pp. 7

Cafferata, Peter H. 1983. The Effects of Compaction on the Hydrologic Properties of Forest Soils in the 

Sierra Nevada. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region Watershed Management Staff; Earth 

Resources Monograph 7. 

Claeyssens, Paul. n.d. nventory Design Summary for the Central Oregon Heritage Group. Ochoco and 

Deschutes National Forest. Report on file, Bend/Fort Rock Ranger District, Deschutes National 

Forest, Bend, Oregon. 

Clayton, J.L., 1990. Soil Disturbance Resulting from Skidding Logs on Granitic Soils in Central Idaho, 

USDA Research Paper INT-436, Ogden, Utah. 9 pages.

Cochran, P.H.; Geist, J.M.; Clemens, D.L.; Clausnitzer, R.R.; Powell, D.C. 1994. Suggested stocking 

levels for forest stands in northeastern Oregon and southeastern Washington. USDA Forest Service 

PNW-RN-513. 21p.

Cochran P.H. 1998. Examples of mortality and reduced annual increments of white fir induced 

by drought, insects, and disease at different stand densities. USDA Forest Service Res. Note 

PNW-RN-525. 19p.

Cochran P.H. and Barrett J.W. 1999. Thirty-five-year growth of ponderosa pine saplings in response to 

thinning and understory removal. USDA Forest Service. Research Paper PNW-RP-512. 28p.

Cochran, P.H. and Dahms, W.G. 2000. Growth of lodgepole pine thinned to various densities on two 

sites with differing productivities in central Oregon. USDA Forest Service Res. Pap. PNW-RP-520. 

59p.

Copeland, J. P., J. M. Peek, C. R. Groves, W. E. Melquist, K. S. McKelvey, G. W. McDaniel, C. D. 

Long, and C. E. Harris. 2007. Seasonal habitat associations of the wolverine in central Idaho. 

Journal of Wildlife Management 71(7):2201-2212.

Cottrell, M. J. 1981. Resource partitioning and reproductive success of three species of hawks (Buteo

spp.) in an Oregon prairie. In Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2003. Birds of 

Oregon: A General Reference, Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR: 768 pp.

Craigg, T.L., 2000. Subsoiling to restore compacted soils. In: “Proceedings, Twenty-first Annual Forest 

Vegetation Management Conference”, January 2000; Redding, CA. Forest Vegetation Management 

Conference, Redding, CA.
Literature Cited

470  Ogden Final EIS

Csuti Blair, Oneil T.A., Shaughnessy M.M., Gaines E.P., Hak J.C. 2001. Atlas of Oregon Wildlife 

Distribution, Habitat, and Natural History. Oregon State University, Corvallis Oregon. 525 pp.

Curtis, R.O. 2010. Effect of diameter limits and stand structure on relative density indices: a case study. 

Western Journal of Applied Forestry. 25(4). 169-175.

Cushman, K. A. and C. A. Pearl. 2007. A Conservation Assessment for the Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana 

pretiosa). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Region 6 and U.S. Department of Interior

Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and Washington: 46 pages.

Dachtler, N. and J. Bizjak 2005. Deschutes River Survey. Deschutes National Forest, Bend Oregon. 

Dahms, W.G. 1964. Gross and net yield tables for lodgepole pine. USDA Forest Service. Res. Pap. 

PNW-8. 14p.

Davis, L.S. and Johnson, K.N. 1987. Forest Management. McGraw-Hill, Inc. 790p.

Davis, Carl. 1983. Deschutes National Forest Cultural Resources Inventory Plan. Cultural Resources 

Inventory Plans: Documenting Inventory Strategies. Edited by James D. Keyser. Studies in Cultural 

Resource Management No.4. USDA Forest Service, Region 6. Portland, Oregon.

Davis, Carl, et al. 1988. Life beyond Inventory: Cultural Resource Site Protection on National Forest 

Lands in Oregon. Presented at the International Symposium on Vandalism: Research, Prevention, and 

Social Policy. Seattle, Washington. Report on file, Bend-Fort Rock Ranger District, Deschutes 

National Forest, Bend, Oregon.

DeBano, Leonard F., Daniel G. Neary, Peter F. Folliott. 1998. Fire Effects on Ecosystem. John Wiley 

and Sons, Inc. New York. 332pp.

DeStefano, Stephen, Michael T. McGrath, Sonya K. Daw, and Steven M. Desimone. 2006. Ecology and 

habitat of breeding northern goshawks in the inland Pacific Northwest: A summary of research in the 

1990s. Studies in Avian Biology 31:75-84.

Deschutes County. 1996. Deschutes County Prehistoric Context Statement. Deschutes County 

Preservation Planning Department: Bend, Oregon.

Deiterich, J.H. 1979. Recovery potential of fire-damaged southwestern ponderosa pine. US 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Res. Note RM-379. 8 p.

Diebert, W. J., M. J. Griffith, and K. Zahl. 1970s. Fieldbook of Selected Wildlife. U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region. 97pp.

Dixon, G.E. 2002. Essential FVS: A user’s guide to the Forest Vegetation Simulator. USDA Forest 

Service. Forest Management Service Center. 205 p. (Last Revised: January 2006)

Dixon, Rita D. 1995. Ecology of white-headed woodpeckers in the central Oregon Cascades. Moscow, 

ID: University of Idaho. 148p. M.S. thesis.

Dixon, Rita D. 1995. Density, nest-site and roost-site characteristics, home-range, habitat-use, and 

behavior of white-headed woodpeckers: Deschutes and Winema National Forests, Oregon. Oregon 

Department of Wildlife, Nongame Project No. 93-3-01. 71 pp and Appendices.

Dunaway, Vickie, Personal Communication, US Forest Service Timber Sale Appraiser Bend/ Fort Rock 

Ranger District.

Duncan, N., T. Burke, S. Dowlan, and P. Hohenlohe. 2003. Survey Protocol for Survey and Manage 

Terrestrial Mollusk Species from the Northwest Forest Plan V3.0. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Region 6, Portland, OR: 70 p.
Literature Cited

Ogden Final EIS  471

Dunham, J.B., A.E. Rosenberger, C.H. Luce, and B.E. Rieman. 2007. Influences of Wildfire and 

Channel Reorganization on Spatial and Temporal Variation in Stream Temperature and the 

Distribution of Fish and Amphibians. Ecosystems (2007) 10:335-346. 

Edelman, F. and J. Copeland. 1999. Wolverine distribution in the northwestern United States and a 

survey in the Seven Devils mountains of Idaho. Northwest Science, Vol. 73, No. 4: 295-300.

Eglitis, A. 2010 (2 November). Internal Memo to District Ranger, Bend/Fort Rock Ranger District. 

Entomologist site visit to Ogden planning area. On file with: Forest Service. Deschutes National 

Forest. File Code 3400. 4p

Ehrlich, P. R., D. S. Dobkin, and Darryl Wheye. 1988. The Birder’s Handbook: A Field Guide to the 

Natural History of North American Birds. Simon and Schuster Inc., New York, New York. 785 p.

Ernst, R.L. and Knapp, W.H. 1985. Forest stand density and stocking: concepts, terms, and the use of 

stocking guides. USDA Gen. Tech. Report WO-44. 8p.

Fettig, C.J., Klepzig, K.D., Billings, R.F., Munson, A.S., Nebeker, T.E., Jose F.N., Nowak, J.T. 2007. 

The effectiveness of vegetation management practices for prevention and control of bark beetle 

infestations in coniferous forests of the western and southern United States. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 238. 24-53.

Fiedler, C. E., K. L. Metlen, and E. K. Dodson. 2010. Restoration treatment effects on stand structure, 

tree growth, and fire hazard in a ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forest in Montana. Forest Science 56(1): 

18-31.

Finney, Mark 2001. Design of Regular Landscape Fuel Treatment Patterns for Modifying Fire Growth 

and Behavior. Forest Sciences 2001. 

Finney, Mark A. 2006 (a). A Computational Method for Optimizing Fuel Treatment Locations. In: 

Andrews, Patricia L.; Butler, Bret W., comps. 2006. Fuels Management-How to Measure Success: 

Conference Proceedings. 28-30 March 2006; Portland, OR. Proceedings RMRS-P-41. Fort Collins, 

CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 221-236.

Finney, Mark A., An Overview of FlamMap Fire Modeling Capabilities, 2006(b). In: Andrews, Patricia 

L.; Butler, Bret W., comps. 2006. Fuels Management-How to Measure Success: Conference 

Proceedings. 28-30 March 2006; Portland, OR. Proceedings RMRS-P-41. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Finney, Mark, Brittain, Stuart, and Rob Seli. 2006. FlamMap Version 3.0. Joint Fire Sciences 

Program, Rocky Mountain Research Station, US Bureau of Land Management, Systems for 

Environmental Management.

Fire Effects Summary, 2003, White Paper Entitled After the Fire: Indirect Effects on Forest Soil. 

Located on the web at: http://northernrockiesfire.org/effects/soilindi.htm.

Fire Learning Network. 2010. Restoration Priority Areas Analysis Deschutes National Forest. Located 

on the web at http://nw.firelearningnetwork.org/publications. 

Fitzer, Linda. 2011. Forest Service Representative, Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests.

Fitzgerald, S.A., 2002. Fire in Oregon’s Forests: Risks, Effects, and Treatment Options A synthesis of 

current issues and scientific literature, Fitzgerald S.A., ed. Oregon Forest Resources Institute.

Fitzgerald, S.A. 2005. Fire ecology of ponderosa pine and the rebuilding of fire-resilient ponderosa pine 

ecosystems. In: Ritchie, M.W.; Maguire, D.A.; Youngblood, A., technical coordinators. Proceedings 

of the symposium on ponderosa pine: issues, trends, and management. USDA Forest Service Gen. 

Tech. Report PSW-GTR-198. 197-225.
Literature Cited

472  Ogden Final EIS

Flenniken, Jeffrey J. 1987. The Lithic Technology of the East Lake Site, Newberry Crater, Oregon. 

Report on file, Deschutes National Forest, Bend, Oregon.

Forest Data Incorporated. 2001. Deschutes National Forest – Region 6. 1997 – 2000 Forest-wide 

vegetation mapping project report. A guide to understanding the design, implementation and database 

of the PI vegetation mapping project. Corvallis, Oregon. 69 p.

Foster-Curley, Cheryl and Stephen Horne. 2008. A Preliminary Report on the Effects of Juniper 

Harvesting at Prehistoric Archaeological Sites in Northeastern California. MS on File. Alturas Field 

Office, Bureau of Land Management. Alturas, California.

Frair, J. L., E. H. Merrill, H. L. Beyer, and J. M. Morales. 2008. Thresholds in landscape connectivity 

and mortality risks in response to growing road networks. Journal of Applied Ecology (45):1504-

1513

Frest, T.J. and E.J. Johannes. 1999. Mollusk survey of southwestern Oregon, with emphasis on Rogue 

and Umpqua River drainages. Prepared for Oregon Natural Heritage Program. Seattle, Washington. 

Froehlich, H.A., D.E. Aulerich, R. Curtis, 1981. Designing Skid Trail Systems to Reduce Soil Impacts 

from Tractive Logging Machines, Research Paper 44, Forest Research Laboratory, Corvailis, Oregon. 

13 pages. 

Gabrielson, I. N., and S. G. Jewett. 1940. Birds of Oregon. In Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. 

Contreras. Eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Oregon State University Press, 

Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Gaines, W., M. Haggard, J. Begley, J. L. Lehmkuhl, and A. Lyons. 2010. Short-term effects of 

thinning and burning restoration treatments on avian community composition, density, and nest 

survival in the Eastern Cascades dry forests, Washington. Forest Science 56(1): 88-99.

Gannett, M.W., K.E. Lite, Jr., D.S. Morgan, and C.A. Collins. 2001. Ground-Water Hydrology of the 

Upper Deschutes Basin, Oregon. Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4162. U.S. Geological 

Survey. 

Garland, John J. 1983. Designated Skidtrails to Minimize Soil Compaction. 

Gebert, Krista M.; Keegan, Charles E., III; Willits, Sue; Chase, Al. 2002. Utilization of Oregon’s 

timber harvest and associated direct economic effects. 1998. Gen. Tech. Rep PNW-GTR-532. 

Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 

16 p.

Geils, B.W.; Tovar, J.C.; Moody, B. (Tech. Coords.). 2002. Mistletoes of North American conifers. 

USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-98. 123p.

Geist, Michael J., J.W. Hazard, and K.W. Seidel; 1989. Assessing Physical Conditions of Some Pacific 

Northwest Volcanic Ash Soils After Forest Harvest. 5 pages.

Gentry, D. J. and K. T. Vierling. 2008. Reuse of woodpecker cavities in the breeding and non-breeding 

seasons of old burn habitats in the Black Hills, South Dakota. American Midland Naturalist 160:413-

429.

Gilligan, J., M. Smith, D. Rogers, and A. Contreras. 1994. Birds of Oregon: status and distribution. In

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Godbout, G. and J. Ouellet. 2008. Habitat selection of American marten in a logged landscape at the 

southern fringe of the boreal forest. Ecoscience 15(3):332-342.

Goddard, Linda, Richard Bryant and John Nelson. 1979 Cultural Resource Overview: Deschutes 

National Forest. Report on file at Deschutes National Forest, Bend, Oregon.
Literature Cited

Ogden Final EIS  473

Goggans, R., R.D. Dixon, and L.C. Seminara. 1988. Habitat use by three-toed and black-backed 

woodpeckers, Deschutes National Forest, Oregon. Nongame Project # 87-3-02, 84 p. Unpublished

report. On file with: Oregon Department Fish and Wildlife, Parrell Rd., Bend, OR, 97702. 

Graham, Russel T., Alan E. Harvey, Martin F. Jurgensen, Theresa B. Jain, Jonalea R. Tonn, Deborah S. 

Page-Dumroese. 1994. Managing Coarse Woody Debris in Forests of the Rocky Mountains. USDA 

Forest Service Research Paper INT-RP-477. Pages 1-13.

Graham, R.T., Alan E. Harvey, Threasa B. Jain, Jonalea R. Tonn. 1999. The Effects of Thinning and 

Similar Stands Treatments on Fire Behavior in the Western Forest. USDA Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. PNW GTR-463. 28pp.

Greater Lapine Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), 2010.

Greenwald, D.N., D.C. Crocker-Bedford, L. Broberg, K.F. Suckling, and T. Tibbitts. 2005. A review 

of the northern goshawk habitat selection in the home range and implications for the forest 

management in the western United States. Wildlife Soc. Bull. 33(1):120-129.

Gregory, Ronald L. 2001. Life in Railroad Logging Camps of the Shevlin-Hixon Company, 1916-

1950. Anthropology Northwest No. 12, Department of Anthropology, Oregon State University, 

Corvallis.

Gresswell, R.E. 1999. Fire and Aquatic Ecosystems in Forested Biomes of North America. 

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, Volume 128, pp. 193-221.

Hagar, J. 2007. Assessment and management of dead wood habitat: USGS Administrative Report 

2007-1054, p. 1-32. 

Hall, F.C. 1987. Growth basal area handbook. USDA Forest Service R6-Ecol-181b-1984. 84 p.

Hall, F.C. 1998. Pacific Northwest ecoclass codes for seral and potential natural communities. USDA 

Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-418. 290 p.

Hann, W.J.; Bunnell, D.L. 2001. Fire and land management planning and implementation across 

multiple scales. International Journal of Wildland Fire. 10: 389-403.

Harrington, M.G. 1993. Predicting Pinus ponderosa mortality from dormant season and growing season 

fire injury. Int. J. Wildl. Fire. 3: 65-72.

Harrington, C.A. (Compiler). 2003a. The 1930s survey of forest resources in Washington and Oregon. 

[CD-ROM]. Coversizecl shapefile. USDA Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-584. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/publications/pnw_gtr584. [Date accessed unknown].

Harrington, C.A. (Compiler). 2003b. The 1930s survey of forest resources in Washington and Oregon. 

Appendix C. Pacific Northwest Experiment Station Forest Research Notes No 25. USDA Gen. Tech. 

Rep. PNW-GTR-584. 27p. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/publications/pnw_gtr584. [Date accessed 

unknown].

Hawksworth, F.G. 1978. Biological factors of dwarf mistletoe in relation to control. In: Proceedings of 

the symposium on dwarf mistletoe control through forest management. USDA Forest Service Gen. 

Tech. Rep. PSW-31. 5-15.

Hawksworth, F.G. and Johnson, D.W. 1989. Biology and management of dwarf mistletoe in lodgepole 

pine in the Rocky Mountains. USDA Forest Service. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-169. 38p.

Hawksworth F.G. and Wiens, D. 1996. Dwarf mistletoes: biology, pathology, and systematics. USDA 

Forest Service. Ag. Hndbk. 709. 410 p.

Helms, J.A. (Editor). 1998. The Dictionary of Forestry. The Society of American Foresters. 210 p.
Literature Cited

474  Ogden Final EIS

Henny, C. J. Cooper’s Hawk. Pp 149-150 in D. B. Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, Eds. 

Birds of Oregon: A General Reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 

Hessburg, P.F.; Mitchell, R.G.; and Filip, G.M. 1994. Historical and current roles of insects and 

pathogens in Eastern Oregon and Washington forested landscapes. PNW Gen. Tech. Rep. 327. 72p.

Hessburg, P. F., N. A. Povak, and R. B. Salter. 2010. Thinning and prescribed fire effects on snag 

abundance and spatial pattern in an Eastern Cascade Range dry forest, Washington, USA. Forest 

Science 56(1): 74-87.

Hessl, Amy E., Don McKenzie, Richard Schellhaas. 2004. Drought and Pacific decadal oscillation 

linked to fire occurrence in the inland Pacific Northwest. Ecological Applications 14(2) pp. 425-442.

High Desert Rails. n.d. Shevlin-Hixon Lumber Company. Electronic Document, 

http://www.trainweb.org/highdesertrails/shlco.html, accessed September 21, 2010.

Holmes, A. L. and G. R. Geupel. 1998. Avian population studies at naval weapons systems training 

facility Boardman, Oregon. In Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2003. Birds of 

Oregon: A General Reference, Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Hopkins, B.; Simon, S.; Schafer, M. Lillybridge, T. 1993. Region 6 interim old growth definition for 

ponderosa pine series. In: Region 6 interim old growth definition for Douglas-fir series, grand 

fir/white fir series, interior Douglas fir, lodgepole pine, pacific silver fir, ponderosa pine, port-orfordcedar and tanok (redwood), subalpine fir, and western hemlock series. USDA Forest Service. Pacific 

Northwest Region.

Hornocker, M.G. and H.S. Hash. 1981. Ecology of the wolverine in northwestern Montana. Canadian 

Journal Zoology. 59:1286-1301.

Ice, G.G. 2003. Effects of Wildfire on Soils and Watershed Processes. Conference on Post-Fire 

Restoration and Salvage Harvesting: Applying Our Knowledge and Experience. Bend, Oregon, 

October 21-23, 2003. 

IPCC. 2007. Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change.

Janes S. W. 1985a. Behavioral interactions and habitat relations among grassland and shrub steppe 

raptors. In Marshall, M.G. Hunter, and A.L. Contreras. eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General 

Reference, Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Janes S. W. 1985b. Habitat selection in raptorial birds. In Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. 

eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 

pp.

Joyce, L.A., G.M. Blate, J.S. Littell, S.G. McNulty, C.I. Millar, S.C. Moser, R.P. Neilson, K. 

O’Halloran, and D.L. Peterson. 2008. National Forests. In: Preliminary review of adaptation options 

for climate-sensitive ecosystems and resources. A Report by the U.S. Climate Change Science 

Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change research (Julius, S.H., J.M West (eds.), J.S. Baron, 

B. Griffith, L.A. Joyce, P. Kareiva, B.D. Keller, M.A. Palmer, C.H. Peterson, and J.M. Scott 

(Authors)]. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC, USA. Pp 3-1 to 30127.

Johnson, M.C., M.C. Kennedy and D.L. Peterson. 2011. Simulating fuel treatment effects in dry forest 

of the western United States: testing the principles of a fire-safe forest. Can. J. For. Res. 41:1018-

1030.

Keyes, C.R. and Maguire, D.A. 2005. Positive seedling-shrub relationships in natural regeneration of 

ponderosa pine. In: Ritchie, M.W.; Maguire, D.A.; Youngblood, A., technical coordinators. 

Proceedings of the symposium on ponderosa pine: issues, trends, and management. USDA Forest 

Service Gen. Tech. Report PSW-GTR-198. 95-107.
Literature Cited

Ogden Final EIS  475

Klenner, W. and A. Arsenault. 2009. Ponderosa pine mortality during a severe bark beetle (Coleoptera: 

Curculionidae, Scolytinae) outbreak in southern British Columbia and implications for wildlife habitat 

management. Forest Ecology and Management 2585:S5-S14.

Koonce, A.L. and Roth, L.F. 1980. The effects of prescribed burning on dwarf mistletoe in ponderosa 

pine. In: Proceedings, 6th conference on fire and forest meteorology, April 22-24, 1980. Seattle, WA. 

Washington , DC; Society of American Foresters: 197-203.

Krebs, J., E.C. Lofroth, and I. Parfitt. 2007. Multiscale habitat use by wolverines in British Columbia, 

Canada. Journal of Wildlife Management 71(7): 2180-2192.

Krohn, W., W. J. Zielinski, R.B. Boone. 1997. Relations among fishers, snow, and martens in

California: results from a small-scale spatial comparisons. In Proulx, G., H.N. Bryant, and P.M. 

Woodward, eds. 1997. Martes: Taxonomy, Ecology, Techniques, and Management. Provincial 

Museum of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Pp 211-232.

Lakel III, W.A., W.M. Aust, M.C. Bolding, C.A. Dollof, P. Keyser, and R. Feldt. 2010. Sediment 

Trapping by Streamside Management Zones of Various Widths after Forest Harvest and Site 

Preparation. Forest Science 56(6), pp. 541-551. 

Larsen, D. 1976. Deschutes National Forest Soil Resource Inventory. Bend, Oregon. 

Lebow, Clayton G., et al. 1990. A Cultural Resource Overview for the 1990s, BLM Prineville District, 

Oregon. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Cultural Resources Series No.5, Portland, Oregon.

Lite, K.E., Jr. and M.W. Gannett. 2002. Geologic Framework of the Regional Ground-Water Flow 

System in the Upper Deschutes Basin, Oregon. Water-Resources Investigations Report 02-4015. 

U.S. Geological Survey. 

Littlefield, C. D. 1990. Birds of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Oregon. In Marshall, M. G. 

Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Oregon State 

University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Logan, R. 2002. Oregon’s forest protection laws: an illustrated manual. Oregon Forest Resources 

Institute. Portland, OR. 160 p. http://www.oregonforests.org

Long, J.N. 2005. A density management diagram for even-aged ponderosa pine stands. West. J. Appl. 

For. 20(4): 205-215.

Luce, C. 2005. Fuels Management Planning Considering Spatial Cumulative Watershed Effects. 

Presentation to course “Advanced Concepts in Aquatic Ecosystem Analysis”. Utah State University, 

May 2005. 

Lundsten, J. 1996. Solitary Sandpiper nesting in Marion County, Oregon? In Marshall, M. G. Hunter, 

and A. L. Contreras. eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Oregon State University 

Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Marcot, B. G., J. L. Ohmann, K. L. Mellen-McLean, and K. L. Waddell. 2010. Synthesis of regional 

wildlife and vegetation field studies to guide management of standing and down dead trees. Forest 

Science 56(4) pp. 391-404.

Marshall, D. B. 1997. Status of the white-headed woodpecker in Oregon and Washington. 

Unpublished document. On file with: Audubon Society of Portland, 5151 NW Cornell Rd, Portland, 

Oregon 97210. 29 pp.

Marshall, D. B., M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, Eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Maser, Chris. 1998. Mammals of the Pacific Northwest: from the coast to the high Cascades. Oregon 

State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 406 p.
Literature Cited

476  Ogden Final EIS

Matz, Stephan E. 1991. Interim Cultural Resource Overview Update, Fort Rock Ranger District, 

Deschutes National Forest. Report on file at the Bend-Fort Rock Ranger District, Deschutes National 

Forest, Bend, Oregon.

Maxwell, Wayne, Ward, F., 1980. Photo Series for Quantifying Natural Forest Residues in Common 

Vegetation Types of the Pacific Northwest. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW105.

McCullough, D.G., R.A. Werner and D. Neumann. 1998. Fire and insects in northern and boreal forest 

ecosystems of North America. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 43:234-253.

McFarland, Janine R. 1989. An Analysis of Two Post-Mazama Prehistoric Flaked Stone Scatters in the 

Upper Deschutes River Basin in Central Oregon. MA Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, 

Oregon.

McGaughey, R.J. [N.d.]. Stand Visualization System [SVS]. Version 3.30. [User Guide]. USDA Forest 

Service. Pacific Northwest Research Station. 141 p. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/fmsc/fvs/documents/gtrs/WinSVS3_3.pdf. (April 20, 2011).

McGrath, M.T., S. DeStefano, R.A. Riggs, L.L. Irwin, and G.J. Roloff. 2003. Spatially explicit 

influences on northern goshawk nesting habitat in the Interior Pacific Northwest. Wildlife 

Monographs No. 154. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 64(4). 63 pages.

McHugh C.W., Kolb T.E. Ponderosa pine mortality following fire in northern Arizona. International 

Journal of Wildland Fire, 2003. 12:7-22

McHugh Charles W.; Kolb Thomas E. 2003. Ponderosa pine mortality following fire in northern 

Arizona. International Journal of Wildland Fire. pp.17

McNabb, D.H., Froehlich, H.A., 1983. Conceptual Model for Predicting Forest Productivity Losses 

from Soil Compaction. 

Meehan, W.R. 1991. USDA Forest Service. Influences of Forest and Rangeland Management on 

Salmonid Fishes and Their Habitat. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19.

Mellen-McLean, K., B. G. Marcot, J. L. Ohmann, K. L. Waddell, S. A. Livingston, E. A. Willhite, B. 

B. Hostetler, C. Ogden, and T. Dreisbach. 2009. DecAID, the decayed wood advisor for managing 

snags, partially dead trees, and down wood for biodiversity in forests of Washington and Oregon. 

Version 1.10. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region and Pacific 

Northwest Research Station; U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon State 

Office; Portland, Oregon. http//wwwnotes.fs.fed.us:81/pnw/DecAID/DecAID.nsf 

Millar, Constance I., Nathan L. Stephenson, Scott L. Stephens. 2007. Climate Change and Forests of 

the Future: Managing in the Face of Uncertainty. Ecological Applications: Vol. 17, No. 8. pp. 2145-

2151.

Miller, J.C. and P.C. Hammond. 2007. Butterflies and moths of Pacific forests and woodlands: rare, 

endangered, and management-sensitive species. Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team 

Technology Transfer Species Identification FHTET-2006-07. Unpublished document. On file with: 

Oregon State University, Department of Rangeland Ecology and Management, 202 Strand Hall, 

Corvallis, OR 97331-2218. 234 p.

Miller, G. S.; R. J. Small, and E. C. Meslow. 1997. Habitat selection by spotted owls during natal 

dispersal in western Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management 61(1): 140-150.

Minshall, G.W. 2003. Responses of Stream Benthic Macroinvertebrates to Fire. Forest Ecology and 

Management Volume 178, pp. 155-161. 

Moghaddas, Jason J. 2006. A fuel treatment reduces potential fire severity and increases suppression 

efficiency in a Sierran mixed conifer forest. In: Andrews, Patricia L.; Butler, Bret W., comps. Fuels 
Literature Cited

Ogden Final EIS  477

management--how to measure success: conference proceedings; 2006 March 28-30; Portland, 

OR. Proceedings RMRS-P-41. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Research Station: 441-449. [65172]

Moldenke, Andrew, Pajutee, M., Ingham, E. 2000. The Functional Roles of Forest Soil Arthropods: The 

Soil Is a Lively Place. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-GTR-178. 16 Pages.

Morgan, D.S., D.Q. Tanner, and M.D. Crumrine. 1997. Hydrologic and Water Quality Conditions at 

Newberry Volcano, Deschutes County, Oregon, 1991-1995. U.S. Geologic Survey. Water Resources 

Investigations report 97-4088. 

Moser, B. W. and E. O. Garton. 2009. Short-term effects of timber harvest and weather on northern 

goshawk reproduction in northern Idaho. J. Raptor Res. 43(1):1-10.

Munger, T. T. 1917. Western yellow pine in Oregon. US Department of Agriculture. Bulletin 418. 48 p.

Mutch, R.W.; Arno, S.F.; Brown, J.L; Carlson, C.E.; Ottmar, R.D.; Peterson, J.L. 1993. Forest health in 

the Blue Mountains: a management strategy for fire adapted ecosystems. GTR-PNW-310, pp 14.

National Council for Air and Stream Improvement. 1999. Silviculture and Water Quality: A Quarter 

Century of Clean Water Act Progress. Special Report No. 99-06. 

National Fire Plan. 2000. Managing the Impacts of Wildfires on Communities and the Environment, 

Sept. 8, 2000. http://www.forestandrangelands.gov/

National Wildfire Coordination Group (NWCG). 2001. Smoke Management Guide for Prescribed and 

Wildland Fire 2001 Edition. NFES 1279. Boise, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. 

Department of the Interior, National Association of State Foresters. 226 p.

National Wildfire Coordination Group (NWCG). 2006. NWCG Fireline Handbook Appendix B Fire 

Behavior. PMS 410-2, NFES 2165.

Natureserve. 2010. Natureserve Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 

4.7 Natureserve, Arlington, VA. Available at http:www.natureserve.org/explorer

Ohmann, J. L. and K. L. Waddell. 2002. Regional patterns of dead wood in forested habitats of Oregon 

and Washington. U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research 

Station. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-181. Pp 535-560.

Omi, Philip N., Martinson, Erik J. 2002. Effectiveness of thinning and prescribed fire in reducing 

wildfire severity. Western Forest Fire Research Center, Colorado State University. Presented at 

Sierra Nevada Science Symposium, October 7-9, 2002, North Lake Tahoe, CA

Oregon Covered Employment & Payrolls by County and Industry, Oregon Employment Department, 

and US Bureau of Labor Statistics

Oregon Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Division. Smoke Management Program.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 1998. Oregon Administrative Rules 1998 Compilation, 

Water pollution, Division 41, State-Wide Water Quality Management Plan; Beneficial Uses, Policies, 

Standards, and Treatment Criteria For Oregon 340-041

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2004-2006. Database of Waterbodies considered for 

303(d) Listing in Oregon.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2011. http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/standards/uses.htm

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1996. Upper Deschutes River Sub-basin Fish Management 

Plan. Bend, Oregon. 

Oregon Labor Market Information System. 2011. Deschutes County Covered Employment and Wages, 

Summary Report. March 2, 2011. http://www.qualityinfo.org/olmisj
Literature Cited

478  Ogden Final EIS

Oregon Revised Statute 477.013. Oregon Department of Forestry. Smoke Management Plan. Available 

at: http://www.oregon.gov/ODF/FIRE/SMP/477013.shtml

Page-Dumroese, D.S. 1993. Susceptibility of Volcanic Ash-Influenced Soil in Northern Idaho to 

Mechanical Compaction. USDA Forest Service Research Note INT-409, Ogden, Utah. 5 pages.

Pampush, G. J. 1981. Breeding chronology, habitat utilization, and nest site selection of the Longbilled Curlew in north central Oregon. In Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. eds. 2003. 

Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Parker, T.J., K.M. Clancy and R.E. Mathiasen. 2006. Interactions among fire, insects and pathogens in 

coniferous forests of the interior western United States and Canada. Agric. For. Ent. 8(3): 167-189.

Parks, C. G., D. A. Conklin, L. Bednar, and H. Maffei. 1999. Woodpecker use and fall rates of snags 

created by killing ponderosa pine infected with dwarf mistletoe. Research Paper PNW-RP-515. 

Portland, Oregon: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station. 

11pp

Parmeter, J.R. 1978. Forest stand dynamics and ecological factors in relation to dwarf mistletoe spread, 

impact, and control. In: Proceedings of the symposium on dwarf mistletoe control through forest 

management. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-31. 190p.

Peterson, D.L.; Johnson, M.C.; Agee, J.K.; Jain, T.B.; McKenzie, D.; Reinhardt, E.D. 2005. Forest 

structure and fire hazard in dry forests of the western United States. USDA Forest Service. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. PNW-GTR-628. 30 p.

Pollet, Jolie and Philip N. Omni. 1999. Effects of Thinning and Prescribed Burning on Wildfire 

Severity in Ponderosa Pine Forest. 5pp.

Popper, K.J. 2001. Abundance and distribution of yellow rails in the Deschutes and Northern Great 

Basins of south-central Oregon. Unpublished report. On file with: United States Department of 

Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon State Office 2600 S.E. 98th Ave, Ste 100 Portland, OR 

97266.

Powell, D.C. 1999. Suggested stocking levels for forest stands in northeastern Oregon and southeastern 

Washington: an implementation guide for the Umatilla National Forest. USDA Forest Service. Tech. 

Pub. F14-SO-TP-03-99. 300p.

Powers, P.V. 2006. Historic condition and historic structure determination. In: Lava Cast silviculture 

vegetation report. Bend/Fort Rock Ranger District. Deschutes National Forest. 10-12.

Powers, P.V. 2011. Personal communication. Silviculturist. Deschutes National Forest. Bend-Fort Rock 

Ranger District. 1230 NE Third Street. Suite A-262. Bend, OR. 97701.

Powers, R.F., T.M Alves, T.H. Spear. 1999. Soil Compaction: Can it be Mitigated? Reporting a Work in 

Progress. Proceedings, Twentieth Annual Forest Vegetation Management Conference, Redding, CA. 

Project Wildfire. 2007. East & West Deschutes County Community Wildfire Protection Plan.

Radeloff, V.C., R.B. Hammer, S.I. Stewart, J.S. Fried, S.S. Holcomb, J.F. McKeefry. 2005. The 

Wildland-Urban Interface in the United States. Ecological Applications: Vol. 15, No. 3. pp. 799-805.

Raphael, M. G. and M. White. 1984. Use of snags by cavity-nesting birds in the Sierra Nevada. 

Wildlife Monographs 86.

Rashin, E.B., C. Clishe, A.T. Loch, and J.M. Bell, 2006. Effectiveness of Timber Harvest Practices for 

Controlling Sediment Related Water Quality Impacts. Journal of the American Water Resources 

Association (JAWRA) 42(5):1307-1327.

Regelbrugge, J.C. and S.G. Conard. 1993. Modeling tree mortality following wildfire in Pinus 

ponderosa forests in the central Sierra Nevada of California. Int. J. Wildl. Fire. 3: 139-148.
Literature Cited

Ogden Final EIS  479

Reineke, L.H. 1933. Perfecting a stand density index for even-aged forests. Journal of Agricultural 

Research 46(7):627-638.

Reinhardt, E.D.; Crookston, N.L., Tech. Eds. 2003. The Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest 

Vegetation Simulator. [User Guide]. USDA Forest Service. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-116. 133 p.

Reynolds, R.T., D.A. Boyce, Jr., R.T. Graham. 2012. Ponderosa pine forest structure and northern 

goshawk reproduction: response to Beier et al. (2008). Wildl. Soc. Bull. 36(1):147-152.

Rheinberger, Steve (2009). Sale/Project Economics Evaluation (TEA.ECON econ52.xls 12/01/09)

[Software]. Available from http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/fp /FPWebPage/FP70104A/Programs.htm

Ritchie, M.W., Skinner, C.N. and T.A. Hamilton. 2007. Probability of tree survival after wildfire in an 

interior pine forest of Northern California: Effects of thinning and prescribed fire. For. Eco. & Mgmt. 

247: 200-208.

Ritchie, M., Brian Wing, Todd Hamilton. 2008. Stability of the large tree component in treated and 

untreated late-seral interior ponderosa pine stands. Canadian Journal of Forest Resoruces: 38; 919-

923.

Robinson, J. A., L. W. Oring, J. P. Skorupa, and R. Boettcher. 1997. American Avocet (Recurvirostra 

Americana). In A. Poole and F. Gill, eds. The birds of North America, No. 27. In Marshall, M. G. 

Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Oregon State 

University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Rose, C. L., B. G. Marcot, T. K. Mellen-McLean, J. L. Ohmann, K.L. Waddell, D. L. Lindley, and B. 

Schreiber. 2001. Decaying wood in the Pacific Northwest forests: concepts and tools for habitat 

management. Pp 580-623 in D.H. Johnson and T. A. O’Neil, editors. Wildlife-habitat relationships in 

Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR.

Rothermel, Richard C. 1983. How to predict the spread and intensity of forest and range fires. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. INT-143. Ogden, UT: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest 

and Range Experiment Station. 

Rothermel, Richard C. 1991. Predicting Behavior and Size of Crown Fires in the Northern Rocky 

Mountains. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. Ogden, UT. Research Paper INT438. 46pp

Ruggiero, L.F., K.B. Aubry, S.W. Buskirk, J.L. Lyon, and W.L. Zielinski, tech eds. 1994. The scientific 

basis for conserving forest carnivores: American marten, fisher, lynx, and wolverine in the western 

United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-254. Ft. Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and range Experiment Station. 184pp.

Ruggiero, L. F., K. S. McKelvey, K. B. Aubry, J. P. Copeland, D. H. Pletscher, and M. G. Hornocker. 

2007. Wolverine conservation and management. Journal of Wildlife Management 71(7): 2145-2146.

Russell, R. E., V. A. Saab, J. J. Rotella, and J. G. Dudley. 2009. Detection probabilities of woodpecker 

nests in mixed conifer forests in Oregon. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 121(1):82-88.

Saab, V. A. and J. G. Dudley. 1998. Responses of cavity-nesting birds to stand-replacement fire and 

salvage logging in ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests of southwestern Idaho. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP11. Ogden, UT; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 

17 p.

Sammon, S. and Logan, J., Tech. Eds. 2000. Assessment and response to bark beetle outbreaks in the 

Rocky Mountain area. Report to Congress from Forest Health Protection , Washington Office, Forest 

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-62. 46p.

Saveland, J.M. and L.F. Neuenschwander. 1990. A signal detection framework to evaluate models of 

tree mortality following fire damage. For. Sci. 36:66-76.
Literature Cited

480  Ogden Final EIS

Sawyer, M. 1981. Solitary Sandpiper: probable nesting in Oregon. In Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. 

L. Contreras. eds. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Oregon State University Press, 

Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Schmidt, Kirsten M.; Menakis, James P.; Hardy, Colin C.; Hann, Wendall J.; Bunnell, David L. 2002. 

Development of coarse-scale spatial data for wildland fire and fuel management. USDA Forest Service, 

RMRS-GTR-87.

Scott, Joe H.; Burgan, Robert E. 2005. Standard fire behavior fuel models: a comprehensive set for use 

with Rothermel’s surface fire spread model. GTR-RMRS-153, pp 72.

Shakesby, R.A. and S.H. Doerr 2006. Wildfire as a Hydrological and Geomorphological Agent. EarthScience Reviews 74:3-4, pgs. 269-307. 

Sibley, D. A. 2005. The Sibley Field Guide to Birds of Western North America. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. 

New York. 474 p.

Simpson, M. 2007. Forested plant associations of the Oregon East Cascades. USDA Forest Service. 

Pacific Northwest Region. R6-NR-ECOL-TP-03-2007.

Smith, D.M. 1962. The practice of silviculture, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 578 p.

Stalmaster, M. 1987. The Bald Eagle. New York: Universe Books. 227 p.

State of Oregon noxious weed list at website: http://oregon.gov/ODA/PLANT/WEEDS/statelist2.shtml

Stephens, S.L. and M.A. Finney. 2002. Prescribed fire mortality of Sierra Nevada mixed conifer tree 

species: Effects of crown damage and forest floor combustion. For. Ecol. Manage. 162: 261-271.

Stone, James. 2010. Dice Timber Sale Independent Review. 15p. Unpublished report. On file with: 

Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District, Deschutes National Forest, 63095 Deschutes Market Road, Bend, OR, 

97701.

Stratton, Richard D. 2006. Guidance on spatial wildland fire analysis: models, tools, and techniques. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-183. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Research Station. 15 p.

Suttle, K.B., M.E. Power, J.M. Levine, and C. McNeely, 2004. How Fine Sediment in Riverbeds 

Impairs Growth and Survival of Juvenile Salmonids. Ecological Applications, 14(4), pp. 969-974.

Swezy, M.D. and J.K. Agee. 1991. Prescribed-fire effects on fine-root and tree mortality in old-growth 

ponderosa pine. Can. J. For. Res. 21:626-634.

Taggart, Michael W. 2002. Upper Deschutes River Basin Prehistory: A Preliminary Examination of 

Flaked Stone Tools and Debitage. MA Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

Thies, W.G., D.J. Westlind, M.L. and G. Brenner. 2005. Season of prescribed burn in ponderosa pine 

forests in eastern Oregon: Impact on pine mortality. Int. J. Wild. Fire. 14: 223-231.

Thomas, J.W., ed. 1979. Wildlife habitats in managed forests: The Blue Mountains of Oregon and 

Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook 553. 

Troendle, C. A. 1983. The potential for water yield augmentation from forest management in the 

Rocky Mountains. Water Resource Bulletin. 19 (3): 359-373.

Troendle, C.A.; and Olsen, W. K. 1993. Potential Effects of Timber Harvest and Water Management 

on Streamflow Dynamics and Sediment Transport. In: Sustainable Ecological Systems: 

Implementing an Ecological Approach to Land Management, July 12-15, 1993, Flagstaff, Arizona, 

pp. 34-41. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General 

Technical Report RM-247.
Literature Cited

Ogden Final EIS  481

Troendle, C. A.; King, R. M. 1985. The Fool Creek Watershed—thirty years later. Water Resources 

Research. 21 (12): 1915-1922.

Troendle, C. A.; King, R. M. 1987. The Effect of Partial and Clearcutting On Streamflow At Deadhorse 

Creek, Colorado. Journal of Hydrology. 90 (1987): 145-157.

USDA Forest Service, Larsen. 1976. Soil Resource Inventory, Deschutes National Forest, Pacific 

Northwest Region. 

USDA Forest Service, Volland. 1982. Plant Associations of the Central Oregon Pumice Zone, Pacific 

Northwest Region. 

USDA Forest Sevice. 1988. FSH 2509.22, Forest Service Soil and Water Conservation Practices 

Handbook. 

USDA Forest Service. 1988. General Water Quality Best Management Practices, Pacific Northwest 

Region.

USDA Forest Service. 1990a. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Land and Resource Management 

Plan. Deschutes National Forest. Pacific Northwest Region.

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

Pacific Northwest Region.

USDA, Forest Service. 1993. Region 6 Interim Old Growth Definitions.

USDA Forest Service. 1994a. Deschutes National Forest minimum stocking guidelines (94 Draft) for 

uneven-aged management. 3 p.

USDA Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest. 1994b. Deschutes National Forest Wildlife Tree and 

Log Implementation Strategy.

USDA Forest Service. 1994c. Newberry National Volcanic Monument Comprehensive Management 

Plan. Pacific Northwest Region, Deschutes National Forest.

USDA Forest Service, Region 6. 1995. Revised Environmental Assessment for the Continuation of 

Interim Management Direction Establishing Riparian Ecosystem and Wildlife Standards for Timber 

Sales.

USDA, Forest Service. 1995. Inland Native Fish Strategy, Decision Notice and Finding of No 

Significant Impact. Interim Environmental Assessment.

USDA Forest Service. 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1999. Soil Monitoring Reports. Deschutes National Forest, 

Pacific Northwest Region.

USDA Forest Service. 1996. Landscape Aesthetics, A Handbook for Scenery Management

USDA Forest Service. 1996. Memo (1 p.) with an enclosed white paper (8 pp.) regarding definition 

and procedures for classifying stands as imminently susceptible to insect attack and wildfire to 

Executive Team of the Deschutes National Forest. Signed by Sally Collins. 

USDA Forest Service. 1998. FSM 2520, Forest Service Soil Quality Standards, Region 6, R-6 

Supplement No. 2500-98-1. 

USDA Forest Service. 2000. Unpublished map of plant associations (Volland 1985) of the Deschutes 

National [ArcInfo Coverage]. On electronic file with: USDA Forest Service, Region 6, Deschutes 

National Forest. T:\FS\Reference\GIS\r06_des\Data\pag. (April 18, 2011).

USDA Forest Service. July 5, 2001, Guide to Noxious Weed Prevention Practices

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2002. Timber sale project development-Gate 1. FSH 

2409.18. Amend 2409.18,20. Washington, DC.
Literature Cited

482  Ogden Final EIS

USDA Forest Service. 2003. Ochoco and Deschutes National Forests, Crooked River National 

Grassland. Road Analysis Report, Forest-Wide Assessment.

USDA Forest Service. 2003a. Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (Healthy Forest Initiative - HFI)

USDA Forest Service. 2003b. Memo regarding guidance for implementing eastside screens to Forest 

Supervisors of the Colville, Deschutes, Malheur, Ochoco, Umatilla, Wallowa-Whitman, WenatcheeOkanogan, and Winema-Fremont National Forests. Signed by Mike Ash for Linda Goodman. 1p.

USDA Forest Service. 2004a. National forest silviculture practices manual. FSM 2479.01. Amend. 6. 

Washington D.C.

USDA Forest Service. 2004b. National forest silviculture practices manual. FSM 2471.31. Amend. 6. 

Washington D.C.

USDA Forest Service. 2005. Region 6 Record of Decision, Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants, 

USDA Forest Service. 2006a. National forest land management planning handbook. FSH 1909.12 

amend. 7. Sec. 64.2. Washington, D.C.

USDA Forest Service. 2006b [2005]. Review of Logging to Control Insects: The science and myths 

behind managing forest insect ‘pests’, a report by Scott H. Black, 2005, Xerces Society for 

Invertebrate Conservation, Portland, Oregon. Memo dated January 4, 2005 with enclosure dated 

November 2005 to Regional Foresters, Station Directors, Area Director, IITF Director, File Code 

3400/4000 from Ann M. Bartuska, Deputy Chief for Research and Development.

USDA Forest Service. 2007. Environmental Impact Statement, Five Buttes Project. Crescent Ranger 

District, Deschutes National Forest.

USDA Forest Service. 2008. Strategic Framework for Responding to Climate Change. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/climatechange/documents/strategic-framework-climate-change-1-0.pdf. 

USDA Forest Service. 2009. Sale/Project Economics Evaluation (TEA.ECON econ52.xls 12/01/09). 

Portland, Oregon. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/fp /FPWebPage/FP70104A/Programs.htm. (March 5, 

2011).

USDA Forest Service. 2009b. Climate Change Considerations in Project Level NEPA Analysis.

USDA Forest Service. 2010. FVS [Forest Vegetation Simulator] software. Version 2010.10.14. 

SORNEC Variant. Fort Collins, CO. Forest Management Service Center. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/fmsc/fvs/. 

(November 18).

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2011. An Assessment of Geographical Priorities for 

Integration of Vegetation Management on Federal Lands in Central Oregon. Deschutes and Ochoco 

National Forests and Prineville District Bureau of Land Management.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2010. Timber management. FSM 2400. Washington, 

DC.

USDA Forest Service. 2011. Forest insect and disease aerial survey data. 2010 100k survey maps. 

USGS 100K Quad; LaPine – E143121; 4K. April 2011. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/fid/as/quad06/quad4jfinal2010.pdf.

USDA Forest Service. 2011. FVS [Forest Vegetation Simulator] description. Fort Collins, CO. Forest 

Management Service Center. http://www.fs.fed.us/fmsc/fvs/description/index.shtml. (April 20).

USDA Forest Service. 2011. Region 6 Cut and Sold Reports and Volume Under Contract. March 2, 

2011. http://www.fs.fed.us/forestmanagement/reports/sold-harvest/index.shtml
Literature Cited

Ogden Final EIS  483

USDA Forest Service. 2012. National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on 

National Forest System Lands. Volume 1: National Core BMP Technical Guide FS-990a. 

USDA Forest Service, Deschutes and Ochoco National Forest. August 2010. Joint Aquatic and 

Terrestrial Programmatic BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT April 2010 – April 2013.

USDA Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest. 2012. Species Assessments.

USDA, Forest Service and USDI, BLM, 1999. Protocol for Addressing Clean Water Act Section 

303(d) Listed Waters. 

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2006. A Collaborative Approach for 

Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to Communities and the Environment, 10-Year Strategy 

Implementation Plan. http://www.forestandrangelands.gov.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2012. Northwest Forest Plan 

Temperature TMDL Implementation Strategy.

USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2008. Interagency Fire Regime Condition 

Class FRCC) Guidebook. Version 1.3.0

US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. United States Department 

of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, VA. 85 

pp. http://www.fws.gev/migratorybirds/

Vaillant, Nicole M.; Ager, Alan A.; Anderson, John; Miller, Lauren. 2012. (revised January 9, 2012). 

ArcFuels User Guide: for use with ArcGIS 9.X. Internal Report. Prineville, OR: US Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Western Wildland Environmental 

Threat Assessment Center, 247 pg.

Van Wagtendonk, J.W., 1996. Use of a deterministic fire growth model to test fuel treatments. In: Sierra 

Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final Report to Congress, vol. II. Assessments and Scientific Basis for 

Management Options. University of California, Davis. Centers for Water and Wildland Resources, pp. 

1155±1165.

Volland, Leonard A. 1985. Plant associations of the central Oregon Pumice zone. USDA Forest Service. 

Pacific Northwest Region. R6-ECOL-104-1985. 138 p.

Wallin, K.F., T.E. Kolb, K.R. Skov, and M.R. Wagner. 2003. Effects of crown scorch on ponderosa 

pine resistance to bark beetles. Environ. Entomol. 32: 652-661.

Weatherspoon, C.P. 1996. Fire-silviculture relationships in Sierra forests. In: Sierra Nevada Ecosystem 

Project, Final Report to Congress, II: Assessments, scientific basis for management options, ed., vol. 

II: Assessments and scientific basis for management options. Centers for Water and Wildland 

Resources, University of California, Davis, Water Resources Center Report No. 37, pp. 1167–1176.

Weir, R. D. and F. B. Corbould. 2010. Factors affecting landscape occupancy by fishers in NorthCentral British Columbia. Journal of Wildlife Management 74(3):405-410.

White Scheuering, R. and G. McAtee. Sharp-shinned Hawk. Pp 146-148 in Marshall D.B., M. G. 

Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, eds. Birds of Oregon: A General Reference. Oregon State University 

Press, Corvallis, OR.

Wiens, J. A., and J. T. Rotenberry. 1981. Habitat associations and community structure of birds in 

shrub-steppe environments. In Birds of Oregon: Marshall, D. B.; M. G. Hunter; and A. L. Contreras. 

Eds. 2003. A General Reference, Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp.

Wiggins, D. (2005, October 17). Harlequin duck (Histrionicus histrionicus): a technical conservation 

assessment. [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/harlequinduck.pdf [17 September 2010]. 
Literature Cited

484  Ogden Final EIS

Wightman, C. S.; C. Forristal; K. Mellen-McLean; and A. Markus. 2010. White-headed woodpecker 

nesting ecology after wildfire. Journal of Wildlife Management 74(5):1098-1106.

Wildland Fire Leadership Council (WFLC). 2012. A National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management 

Strategy. http://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/

Wilson, CC. 1977. Fatal and near-fatal forest fires: the common denominators. International Fire 

Chief. 43(9). 6 p.

Wisdom, M. J. and L. J. Bate. 2008. Snag density varies with intensity of timber harvest and human 

access. Forest Ecology and Management 255 (2008) 2085-2093.

Woodbridge, B. and C. D. Hargis. 2006. Northern goshawk inventory and monitoring technical guide. 

Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-71. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 80 p.

Wyant, J.G., P.N. Omi and R.D. Laven. 1986. Fire induced tree mortality in a Colorado ponderosa 

pine/Douglas-fir stand. Can. J. For. Res. 32: 49-59.

Youngblood, A.; Max, T.; Coe, K. 2004. Stand structure in eastside old-growth ponderosa pine forests 

of Oregon and northern California. Forest Ecology and Management 199:191-217.

Youtz, J. R. T. Graham, R.T. Reynolds, and J. Simon. 2007. Implementing northern goshawk habitat 

management in southwestern forests: a template for restoring fire-adapted forest ecosystems. Pp 173-

191 In Deal, R. L. tech ed. 2008. Integrated restoration of forested ecosystems to achieve 

multiresource benefits: proceedings of the 2007 national silviculture workshop. Gen Tech Rep. PNWGTR-733. Portland OR: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research 

Station. 306 p.
A

air quality, 8, 23, 38, 137, 147, 177, 178, 179, 180, 439, 

440

American marten, ix, 47, 223, 269, 271, 336, 350, 351, 

472, 479

B

bald eagle, viii, 193, 194, 195, 196, 467

bark beetle, 1, 2, 4, 1, 2, 38, 52, 56, 68, 70, 72, 73, 75, 89, 

98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 

114, 115, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 130, 131, 

132, 133, 134, 157, 191, 306, 310, 322, 323, 347, 352, 

367, 424, 471, 475, 479, 483

biomass, 6, 154, 161, 452, 459

C

California wolverine, 189

civil rights, 455

Clean Air Act, 12, 13, 147, 177, 178, 180, 456, 457

climate change, xii, 187, 188, 260, 457, 458, 459

Community Wildfire Protection Plan, 14, 63, 140, 146, 

156, 288, 473, 478

condition class, ix, x, 137, 146, 150, 156, 157, 158, 271

Crater Lake Tightcoil, 220, 222

crown fire, 2, 29, 41, 87, 130, 134, 138, 139, 141, 142, 

148, 154, 157, 158, 159, 162, 163, 385, 391, 459

cumulative effects, 61

D

danger tree, 456

DecAID, 190

dwarf mistletoe, 1, 3, 4, 1, 2, 3, 6, 20, 29, 37, 50, 78, 133, 

134, 135, 136, 348, 473, 475, 478

E

Eastside Screens, 4, 11, 47, 48, 109, 124, 181, 352, 356,

424

F

fire regime, 115, 138, 150, 152, 156, 180, 203, 292, 302, 

304, 340, 343, 397, 413

flame length, 2, 4, 2, 52, 138, 139, 141, 146, 158, 159, 

160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 166, 169

Forest Plan Amendment, 1, i, xii, 1, 6, 19, 23, 32, 33, 35, 

37, 144, 155, 410

FVS (Forest Vegetation Simulator), iv, 70, 73, 85, 208, 340, 

449, 470, 482

G

geothermal, 36, 38, 48, 64, 65, 77, 80, 90, 123, 156, 159, 

191, 196, 207, 217, 235, 240, 243, 244, 267, 284, 286, 

292, 299, 312, 329, 338, 339, 347, 350, 356, 384, 409, 

421, 429, 439, 442, 444, 447

goshawk, ix, xiv, 1, 2, 5, 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 19, 23, 24, 25, 

47, 53, 69, 86, 223, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 

237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 246, 254, 281, 289, 

317, 319, 327, 337, 347, 350, 351, 354, 378, 468, 473, 

476, 477, 479, 484

greenhouse gas, 458, 459

H

harlequin duck, 199, 200, 201, 252

Historic Range of Variability, iv, 3, 11, 109, 114, 117

HRV (historic range of variability, iv, viii, x, xi, xiii, 2, 4, 3, 

4, 5, 11, 52, 57, 75, 76, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 

115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 122, 124, 125, 131, 204, 205, 

207, 234, 272, 275, 276, 277, 280, 283, 284, 295, 296, 

297, 302, 303, 304, 308, 309, 323, 335, 336, 343

I

INFISH (Inland Native Fish Strategy), iv, 11, 381, 382, 383, 

389, 392, 399, 400, 401, 402

invasive plants, 9, 66, 260, 416

IRA (Inventoried Roadless Area), vii, xiv, 1, 5, 1, 5, 430, 

432, 433, 438, 439, 440, 442

L

late and old structure, 109

LOS (late and old structure), i, iii, iv, 1, 2, 4, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 

11, 48, 52, 56, 57, 70, 75, 76, 84, 90, 109, 113, 117, 

118, 124, 125, 181, 182, 232, 237, 311, 410

M

management indicator species, iv, 2, 9, 60, 181, 183, 187, 

193, 223, 229, 252, 260

McKay Crossing, 39, 58, 137, 140, 170, 408, 415, 424, 426

N

Neotropical Migratory Birds, 9, 223

Newberry National Volcanic Monument, v, 1, 5, 11, 79, 

80, 140, 142, 164, 168, 188, 273, 291, 304, 310, 337, 

403, 404, 407, 408, 481

NFMA (National Forest Management Act), v, 10, 12, 68, 

72, 79

noxious weed, 286, 415, 417
O

OGMA (Old Growth Management Area), v, vii, xi, xiv, 2, 5, 

3, 5, 8, 9, 23, 53, 55, 84, 181, 190, 268, 350, 351, 352, 

353, 354, 355, 356, 362, 403, 428, 442, 485

OSHA, 456, 457

overstory removal, 205, 334, 348

P

Pacific fisher, 189, 191

Paulina Creek, vii, xi, xii, xiii, xiv, 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 10, 11, 18, 

29, 44, 45, 46, 53, 55, 56, 63, 66, 137, 140, 141, 143, 

149, 154, 156, 157, 158, 180, 187, 188, 194, 195, 196, 

200, 201, 206, 217, 219, 220, 221, 249, 250, 251, 252, 

255, 257, 258, 268, 284, 304, 310, 311, 323, 324, 325, 

350, 351, 359, 361, 373, 380, 381, 382, 383, 384, 385, 

386, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 397, 398, 399, 

400, 401, 402, 403, 404, 405, 407, 408, 409, 411, 414, 

415, 422, 423, 424, 426, 427, 428, 433

Paulina Lake, 10, 188, 194, 195, 196, 198, 219, 255, 256, 

359, 381, 382, 384, 385, 386, 388, 389, 399, 401, 403, 

404, 407, 408, 409, 424, 427, 428, 462

Pauline Plunge, 39, 40, 66, 196, 201, 251, 258, 356, 427, 

462

Peter Skene Ogden, v, 1, 37, 38, 58, 66, 140, 195, 201, 

250, 251, 258, 356, 393, 411, 423, 424, 427

PFA (Post-fledgling Area), v, ix, 2, 5, 9, 19, 23, 24, 25, 47, 

53, 230, 232, 233, 234, 235, 237, 238, 240, 289, 305, 

347, 378, 388

Potential Wilderness, vii, xiv, 5, 9, 53, 430, 431, 432, 433, 

435, 436, 440

prescribed fire, 25, 31, 33, 41, 44, 45, 55, 76, 129, 132, 

133, 138, 141, 144, 154, 155, 162, 166, 177, 178, 180, 

189, 194, 199, 207, 211, 216, 255, 260, 286, 292, 293, 

295, 296, 337, 357, 366, 397, 410, 411, 413, 456, 457, 

469, 474, 477, 479

purpose and need, 4, 15, 52, 55, 56, 57, 84, 143, 151, 157, 

195, 298

R

regeneration harvest, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 18, 23, 52, 57, 63, 72, 

74, 76, 77, 78, 79, 115, 119, 312, 313, 317, 318, 328, 

333, 348, 442

Responsible Official, i, 9, 15

restoration, 152

RHCA (riparian habitat conservation area), v, xi, xii, xiv, 2, 

5, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 39, 43, 44, 45, 

46, 53, 55, 66, 137, 141, 143, 154, 158, 195, 196, 200, 

201, 219, 220, 221, 252, 257, 279, 281, 282, 284, 305, 

313, 314, 317, 318, 319, 327, 328, 329, 354, 357, 373, 

380, 382,383, 384, 385, 386, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 

393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 400, 401, 402, 406, 440, 

450

riparian, v, xi, xii, xiv, 3, 8, 10, 11, 18, 19, 24, 39, 43, 137, 

141, 154, 156, 158, 159, 192, 200, 214, 219, 220, 223, 

226, 227, 338, 357, 373, 380, 382, 383, 386, 389, 392, 

393, 394, 397, 398, 401, 402, 403, 409, 467, 468, 481

riparian habitat conservation area, v, xi, xii, 2, 3, 8, 10, 11, 

18, 19, 24, 39, 43, 137, 141, 154, 158, 159, 196, 200, 

219, 281, 284, 313, 314, 317, 318, 319, 357, 373, 380, 

382, 386, 389, 392, 394, 409

road closure, 262, 265, 267, 268, 286, 293, 387, 419, 421, 

422, 429

road decommissioning, 58, 418

road maintenance, 18, 36, 64, 258, 293, 328, 376, 388, 

418, 421, 422, 446, 449, 451, 456

S

salvage, xi, 3, 77, 78, 82, 214, 215, 218, 292, 293, 302, 

304, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 317, 318, 319, 

320, 323, 327, 328, 329, 337, 362, 364, 374, 384, 434, 

439, 474, 479

Scenic Views, i, xii, 1, 5, 6, 10, 11, 19, 32, 33, 35, 58, 144, 

403, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413, 423, 428, 433, 

439, 441, 464

scoping, vi, 6, 8

SDI (Stand Density Index), v, 30, 72, 73, 92, 97, 98, 99, 

100, 104, 105, 355, 468

Sensitive species, 192

surface fire, 140, 141, 142, 150, 155, 159, 163, 392, 459, 

480

T

temporary road, 8, 9, 29, 36, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 49, 56, 58, 

64, 262, 265, 354, 355, 357, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 

372, 377, 378, 379, 386, 389, 418, 422, 429, 445, 450, 

455

U

UMZ (Upper Management Zone), v, 4, 52, 72, 73, 131, 

133, 392

underburning, xii, 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 18, 19, 23, 25, 32, 37, 38, 

45, 48, 53, 63, 84, 90, 91, 129, 140, 154, 155, 157, 158, 

162, 163, 165, 166, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 191, 

198, 201, 209, 218, 219, 236, 242, 246, 249, 258, 263, 

278, 281, 284, 287, 288, 329, 337, 348, 350, 354, 357, 

370, 371, 381, 384, 387, 397, 402, 409, 411, 446

V

volume (timber), 3, 40, 71, 79, 88, 114, 202, 241, 333, 

365, 369, 381, 383, 385, 386, 387, 390, 449, 450, 452, 

453

W

white-headed woodpecker, viii, ix, 182, 201, 202, 203, 

204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 217, 218, 

229, 286, 287, 291, 299, 347, 470, 475

Wild and Scenic, xiv, 1, 5, 10, 11, 13, 382, 383, 384, 403, 

404, 409, 424, 427, 441

WUI (Wildland Urban Interface), 14, 63, 137, 140, 143, 

145, 146
APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: Units and Prescriptions listed for each Alt.

APPENDIX B: Supporting Information for Deadwood Analysis 

and Paulina Cr. Old Growth Management Area 

Plan

APPENDIX C: Soils Estimated Detrimental Conditions by Unit 

and Alternative

APPENDIX D: Geothermal Exploration Activities and Lease 

Areas 

APPENDIX E: Additional Stand Data

APPENDIX F: Response to Comments on DEIS