United States 

Department of

Agriculture

Forest 

Service

July 2011

Draft 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 Draft EIS  i

Draft 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

1230 N.E. 3rd St., Suite A-262

Bend, OR 97701

(541) 383-4769

Abstract: This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) 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 DEIS, 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. 

Comments: This DEIS is made available for a 45-day Comment Period, under the provisions of the 

National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1500-1508), and Notice, Comment, and Appeal 

Procedures for National Forest System Projects and Activities, (36 CFR 215). The Forest Service will 

accept comments as provided in §215.6(a)(4), beginning on the day following the date of publication 

of the Notice of Availability (NOA) in the Federal Register. The official comment period timelines will 

be posted in The Bulletin newspaper, and on the Deschutes National Forests’ Web site

http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/project_list.php?forest=110601. 

Mail Comments to: John Allen, Forest Supervisor

c/o Shane Jeffries, District Ranger

1230 N.E. 3rd St., Suite A-262

Bend, OR 97701

E-mail Comments to: comments-pacificnorthwest-deschutes-bend-ftrock@fs.fed.us

Fax: 541-383-4700

Date Comments Must Be Received: 45 days following Federal Register Notice of Availability 

which is estimated to be July 22, 2011.
Ogden Draft EIS  ii

Important Notice: Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and 

addresses of those who comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposed action 

and will be available for public inspection. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and 

considered; however, those who only comment anonymously will not have standing to appeal the 

subsequent decision under 36 CFR Part 215. Reviewers must provide the Forest Service with their 

comments during the review period of this Draft Environmental Impact Statement. This will enable 

the Forest Service to analyze and respond to the comments at one time and to use information 

acquired in the preparation of the final environmental impact statement, thus avoiding undue delay in 

the decision-making process. Reviewers have an obligation to structure their participation in the 

National Environmental Policy Act process so that it is meaningful and alerts the agency to the

reviewer’s position and contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 

553 (1978). Environmental objections that could have been raised at the draft stage may be waived if 

not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact statement. City of Angoon, v. Hodel 

(9th Circuit, 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). 

Comments on the draft environmental impact statement should be specific and should address the 

adequacy of the statement and the merits of the alternatives discussed (40 CFR 1503.3). 
Ogden Draft EIS  iii

READER’S GUIDE

This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) 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 DEIS 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 Draft 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, 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 DEIS. 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 Draft 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 Draft 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 Draft EIS  vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT...............................................................................................1

1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 CONTEXT FOR PURPOSE AND NEED............................................................................................................. 1

1.3 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION ............................................................................................................... 4

1.4 PROPOSED ACTION ...................................................................................................................................... 5

1.5 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT / SCOPING PROCESS USED ...................................................................................... 6

1.6 PLANNING ISSUES ....................................................................................................................................... 6

1.6.1 Key Issues........................................................................................................................................... 6

1.6.2 Analysis Issues.................................................................................................................................... 8

1.7 PLANNING FRAMEWORK.............................................................................................................................. 9

1.7.1 Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan ..................................................... 9

1.8 OTHER LAW, REGULATION, POLICY ...........................................................................................................11

1.9 OTHER INFORMING DOCUMENTS ................................................................................................................13

1.10 PROJECT RECORD .....................................................................................................................................13

1.11 DECISION FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................................................14

CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES...............................................................................................................................17

2.1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................17

2.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL ....................................................................................................17

2.2.1 Alternative 1 (No Action) ..................................................................................................................17

2.2.2 Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) ........................................................................................................17

2.2.3 Alternative 3.......................................................................................................................................23

2.3 DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES COMMON TO ALTERNATIVE 2 AND ALTERNATIVE 3 ....................................29

2.3.1 Silvicultural Treatments.....................................................................................................................29

2.3.2 Fuel Treatments..................................................................................................................................30

2.3.3 Forest Plan Amendments ...................................................................................................................32

2.4 CONNECTED ACTIONS COMMON TO ALTERNATIVES 2 AND 3 ....................................................................35

2.5 RESOURCE PROTECTION MEASURES COMMON TO ALTERNATIVE 2 AND ALTERNATIVE 3..........................36

2.6 COMPARISON OF THE ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN DETAIL .....................................................................45

2.6.1 Comparison of the Alternatives by Cover Type and Treatment Objective .......................................46

2.6.2 Comparison of how each Alternative Meets the Purpose and Need and Key Issues ........................47

2.7 MONITORING COMMON TO ALTERNATIVES 2 AND 3 ..................................................................................48

2.8 SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT NOT ANALYZED IN DETAIL ............................................49

2.9 SALE AREA IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.......................................................................................................51

CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .............................53
Ogden Draft EIS  vii

3.1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................53

3.2 BASIS FOR EFFECTS ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................53

3.2.1 Specialist Reports...............................................................................................................................53

3.2.2 Role of Science ..................................................................................................................................53

3.2.3 Cumulative Effects.............................................................................................................................54

3.3 FORESTED VEGETATION .............................................................................................................................61

3.3.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................61

3.3.2 Regulatory Framework ......................................................................................................................61

3.3.3 Analysis Methods...............................................................................................................................61

3.3.4 Terms Used to Describe Vegetation.................................................................................................63

3.3.5 Reference Conditions.......................................................................................................................63

3.3.6 Summary Key Findings ...................................................................................................................67

3.3.7 Key Issue #1– Regeneration Harvest in Lodgepole Pine .................................................................69

3.3.8 Key Issue #2 – Thinning Level in Mixed Stands of Ponderosa Pine and Lodgepole ......................77

3.3.9 Historic Range of Variability (HRV) and Late and Old Structure ..................................................100

3.3.10 Canopy Structure ...........................................................................................................................120

3.3.11 Insects and Diseases......................................................................................................................121

3.4 FIRE AND FUELS .......................................................................................................................................128

3.4.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................128

3.4.2 Regulatory Framework ...................................................................................................................131

3.4.3 Analysis Methods.............................................................................................................................132

3.4.4 Desired Condition ...........................................................................................................................133

3.4.5 Existing Condition ...........................................................................................................................136

3.4.6 Environmental Consequences..........................................................................................................141

3.5 AIR QUALITY............................................................................................................................................157

3.5.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................157

3.5.2 Regulatory Framework ....................................................................................................................157

3.5.3 Analysis Methods............................................................................................................................158

3.5.4 Existing Condition ..........................................................................................................................158

3.5.5 Environmental Consequences.........................................................................................................158

3.6 WILDLIFE................................................................................................................................................161

3.6.1 Summary........................................................................................................................................161

3.6.2 Introduction....................................................................................................................................161

3.6.3 Regulatory Framework ..................................................................................................................161

3.6.4 Analysis Methods...........................................................................................................................163

3.6.5 Federally Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species...........................................................165

3.6.6 Sensitive Species..............................................................................................................................167

3.6.7 Management Indicator Species including Neotropical Migratory Birds..........................................186
Ogden Draft EIS  viii

Dead Wood Habitat (Snags, Logs, and Green Tree Replacements)..........................................................245

3.6.8 Late Seral and Old Growth Habitat including the Paulina Creek Old Growth Management Area 

(OGMA) and Connectivity Corridors.......................................................................................................254

3.7 SOILS......................................................................................................................................................260

3.7.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................260

3.7.2 Management Direction.....................................................................................................................260

3.7.3 Desired Landscape Condition .........................................................................................................261

3.7.4 Affected Environment.....................................................................................................................262

3.7.5 Existing Condition of the Soil Resource .........................................................................................265

3.7.6 Analysis Methods.............................................................................................................................268

3.7.7 Environmental Consequences..........................................................................................................270

3.8 FISHERIES AND HYDROLOGY ...................................................................................................................286

3.8.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................286

3.8.2 Regulatory Framework.....................................................................................................................286

3.8.3 Analysis Methods.............................................................................................................................287

3.8.4 Summary of Key Findings ..............................................................................................................288

3.8.5 Water Quantity................................................................................................................................288

3.8.6 Water Quality...................................................................................................................................292

3.8.7 Aquatic Species Habitat and Populations........................................................................................302

3.8.8 Wild and Scenic Rivers...................................................................................................................305

3.8.9 INFISH and Riparian Management Objectives................................................................................306

3.8.10 Wetlands and Floodplains.............................................................................................................307

3.8.11 Consistency with the LRMP ..........................................................................................................308

3.9 SCENIC RESOURCE....................................................................................................................................310

3.9.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................310

3.9.2 Management Direction.....................................................................................................................310

3.9.3 Analysis Methods.............................................................................................................................311

3.9.4 Existing Condition ...........................................................................................................................311

3.9.5 Scenic View Enhancement Opportunities........................................................................................311

3.9.6 Environmental Consequences..........................................................................................................312

3.9.7 Scenic Views Forest Plan Amendments..........................................................................................312

3.10 BOTANY – THREATENED, ENDANGERED, AND SENSITIVE PLANTS.........................................................317

3.10.1 Summary ........................................................................................................................................317

3.10.2 Introduction....................................................................................................................................317

3.10.3 Affected Environment....................................................................................................................317

3.10.4 Environmental Consequences........................................................................................................317

3.11 BOTANY – INVASIVE PLANTS / NOXIOUS WEEDS....................................................................................318
Ogden Draft EIS  ix

3.11.1 Summary........................................................................................................................................318

3.11.2 Introduction....................................................................................................................................318

3.11.3 Affected Environment....................................................................................................................318

3.11.4 Risk Ranking..................................................................................................................................318

3.11.5 Environmental Consequences........................................................................................................319

3.11.6 Prevention Strategy........................................................................................................................320

3.12 ROADS AND ACCESS...............................................................................................................................322

3.12.1 Travel Analysis..............................................................................................................................322

3.12.2 Regulatory Framework ..................................................................................................................323

3.12.3 Project Area Access.......................................................................................................................323

3.12.4 Road Maintenance..........................................................................................................................323

3.12.5 Environmental Consequences........................................................................................................324

3.13 RECREATION...........................................................................................................................................325

3.13.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................325

3.13.2 Regulatory Framework ..................................................................................................................325

3.13.3 Developed Recreation....................................................................................................................325

3.13.4 Dispersed Recreation .....................................................................................................................327

3.14 INVENTORIED ROADLESS AREAS, POTENTIAL WILDERNESS AREAS, AND OTHER UNDEVELOPED LANDS

.......................................................................................................................................................................331

3.14.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................331

3.14.2 Regulatory Framework .................................................................................................................331

3.14.3 Analysis Methods...........................................................................................................................332

3.14.4 Summary of Key Findings............................................................................................................332

3.14.5 Affected Environment...................................................................................................................332

3.14.6 Environmental Consequences.......................................................................................................334

3.15 CULTURAL RESOURCES ..........................................................................................................................338

3.15.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................338

3.15.2 Analysis Methods...........................................................................................................................338

3.15.3 Existing Condition .........................................................................................................................338

3.15.4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES....................................................................................339

3.16 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS.............................................................................................................................342

3.16.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................342

3.16.2 Management Direction...................................................................................................................342

3.16.3 Analysis Methods...........................................................................................................................342

3.16.4 Timber Sale Financial Feasibility and Project Cost Efficiency.....................................................343

3.16.5 Environmental Consequences........................................................................................................344

3.16.6 Employment...................................................................................................................................345

3.17 OTHER DISCLOSURES.............................................................................................................................347
Ogden Draft EIS  x

3.17.1 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources............................................................347

3.17.2 Prime Farmland, Rangeland, and Forestland ................................................................................347

3.17.3 Energy Requirements of the Alternatives......................................................................................347

3.17.4 Civil Rights and Environmental Justice ........................................................................................347

3.17.5 Human Health & Safety .................................................................................................................348

3.17.6 Climate Change.............................................................................................................................349

INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................349

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ...............................................................................................................................350

CHAPTER 4: PUBLIC NOTIFICATION & PARTICIPATION.............................................................................354

4.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ............................................................................................................................354

4.2 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD .......................................................................................................................354

4.3 CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES .................................................................................................355

4.4 PREPARERS / INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM..................................................................................................356

LITERATURE CITED..............................................................................................................................................360

GLOSSARY OF TERMS..........................................................................................................................................375

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Units and Prescriptions listed for each Alternative

Appendix B – Supporting Information for Deadwood Analysis and Pauline Creek Old 

Growth Management Area Plan

Appendix C – Soils Estimated Detrimental Conditions by Unit and Alternative

Appendix D – Map of Geothermal-Related Activities within Ogden Project Area

TABLE OF TABLES

Table 1. Summary of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Thinning/Harvest* and Fuels Treatment** Acres ......... 5

Table 2: LRMP Management Area Acres in Ogden Project Area........................................................................10

Table 3: Summary of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Activities..........................................................................18

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

Table 5. Summary of Alternative 3 Changes to Thinning Treatments from Alternative 2..................................24

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 ..................................................35

Table 8: Summary Comparison of the Two Action Alternatives .........................................................................45

Table 9: Summary of Treatment by Cover Type and Treatment Objective.........................................................46

Table 10: How the Alternatives Address the Purpose and Need ..........................................................................47

Table 11: How the Alternatives Address the Key Issues......................................................................................47
Ogden Draft EIS  xi

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

Effects Area..........................................................................................................................................................56

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

Watershed that may contribute to Cumulative Effects. ........................................................................................58

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

..............................................................................................................................................................................64

Table 15: Ponderosa Pine Eastside Old-Growth Reference Condition (from Youngblood et al. 2004)...............64

Table 16: Stand Density Reference Conditions and Measures of Site Productivity.............................................66

Table 17: Diameter Growth Reference Condition Expressed in Terms of Basal Area.........................................67

Table 18: Existing (2010) and future (2015) stand age class distribution within lodgepole pine analysis area ...71

Table 19: Summary of Existing Condition of the Six Selected Units Grouped by Ponderosa Pine PI 

Classification ........................................................................................................................................................79

Table 20: Alternatives 2 and 3 Thinning and Fuels Treatments Summarized by Three Ponderosa Pine Stocking 

Levels...................................................................................................................................................................83

Table 21: Historic Range of Variability .............................................................................................................105

Table 22: Structural Stage by Alternative Compared to Historic Range of Variability .....................................116

Table 23: Fuels Treatment Priorities included in Alternatives 2 and 3...............................................................128

Table 24: Principles of Fire Resilient Forests (Agee, 2002)...............................................................................130

Table 25: Fire and Fuels Related Goals and Standards and Guidelines .............................................................131

Table 26: 97th Percentile Projected Weather Conditions, Ogden Project Area .................................................133

Table 27: Acres by Fire Regime and Condition Class Summary for the Ogden Project Area ...........................138

Table 28: Fire Suppression Effectiveness According to Predicted Flame Length..............................................139

Table 29: Rate of Fire Spread.............................................................................................................................139

Table 30: Flame Scorch Height in Feet Associated with Flame Length for 97% Weather Conditions.............140

Table 31: Fire Behavior Condition Ratings and the Associated Indicator.........................................................140

Table 32: Existing Condition - Predicted Fire Behavior ....................................................................................140

Table 33: Alternative 2 - Percentage of Landscape with Potential Flame Length Rating Low Compared to No 

Action. ................................................................................................................................................................148

Table 34: Alternative 3 - Percentage of Landscape with Potential Flame Length Rating Low Compared to No 

Action .................................................................................................................................................................149

Table 35: Existing Condition – Crown Fire Potential ........................................................................................151

Table 36: Alternative 2 - Reduction in Crown Fire Potential.............................................................................153

Table 37: Alternative 3 - Reduction in Crown Fire Potential - Fire Behavior....................................................154

Table 38: Potential Cumulative Actions Affecting Fuels Analysis....................................................................155

Table 39: Amount of burning proposed by alternative......................................................................................159

Table 40: Estimated Smoke Emissions – Wildfire under Extreme Conditions – Prescribed Fire under Springlike Conditions Following Thinning and Mowing .............................................................................................159

Table 41: Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate Animal Species known to Occur or May Occur on the BendFt. Rock Ranger District.....................................................................................................................................165

Table 42: Region 6 Sensitive Species known to Occur or May Potentially Occur on the Bend-Fort Rock Ranger 

District................................................................................................................................................................167
Ogden Draft EIS  xii

Table 43: Fisher Habitat Within the Subwatersheds and Project Area ...............................................................182

Table 44: Summary of Effects to Threatened, Endangered, Candidate and Region 6 Sensitive Species...........185

Table 45: Summary of Determinations of Threatened, Endangered, Candidate, and Region 6 Sensitive Species

............................................................................................................................................................................185

Table 46: Wildlife Species Considered (Those in Bold Receive Further Consideration) .................................186

Table 47: Acreage Breakdown for each of the Stand Categories in the Goshawk Territories............................195

Table 48: Stand Structure Breakdown (Acres) for each Goshawk Territory......................................................195

Table 49: Other Activities (Proposed and Existing) within the Goshawk Territories with Potential Effects.....196

Table 50: Alternative 2 Proposed Activity Acres within Goshawk Territories..................................................196

Table 51: Alternative 3 Proposed Activities within Goshawk Territories..........................................................198

Table 52: Alternative 3 Proposed Activities Within Goshawk Post-Fledging Areas (PFAs).............................198

Table 53: Summary of Proposed Activity Effects by Alternative ......................................................................214

Table 54: Three-Toed Woodpecker – Summary of Proposed Activity Effects by Alternative ..........................234

Table 55: Summary of Effects to Selected Wildlife Species..............................................................................243

Table 56: Acres of Wildlife Habitat in the Watershed and the Relative Potential for Dead Wood Influenced by 

Fire Regime and Topographic Position ..............................................................................................................245

Table 57: Current Distribution of Snag Densities within the Watershed Represented by Percent of the Habitat 

Type with each Density ......................................................................................................................................246

Table 58: Percent of Watershed Meeting the Tolerance Level for Selected Species..........................................247

Table 59: Percent of Watershed and Landscape with Snag Density Using Inventory Data within DecAID......248

Table 60: Comparison of Coarse Woody Material Directed and DecAID Levels..............................................248

Table 61: Summary of Dead Wood Transects in the Ogden Project Area .........................................................249

Table 62: Summary of Dead Wood in the Ogden Project Area..........................................................................250

Table 63: Estimated Green Tree Replacements (Trees per Acre) required to meet Current Direction ..............251

Table 64: Size Class and Species Distribution within the Paulina Creek OGMA..............................................254

Table 65: Monitoring of Past Harvest Activities within the Ogden Project Area...............................................266

Table 66: Equivalent Clearcut Area (ECA) Calculation for the Action Alternatives........................................292

Table 67: Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) Treatment Units Summary.........................................297

Table 68: Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) Unit Slopes ...............................................................298

Table 69: Summary of Stream Attributes - Paulina Creek Stream Survey (2002) .............................................303

Table 70. Units within the Paulina Creek Eligible W&S River Corridor..........................................................305

Table 71: Interim Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs)............................................................................306

Table 72: Interim Objectives for Pool Frequency..............................................................................................307

Table 73. Description of areas where the inventoried visual quality objective is retention or partial retention 

(Scenic View Foreground Management Area and Old Growth Management Areas) and underburning is 

proposed (see attachment for list of units)..........................................................................................................314

Table 74: Known Weed Sites in the Ogden Planning Area................................................................................318

Table 75: Road System Density before and after Proposed Closures................................................................322

Table 76: Travel Analysis - Road Types............................................................................................................322
Ogden Draft EIS  xiii

Table 77: Highway Safety Act (HSA) Roads in Project Area............................................................................323

Table 78: Highway Safety Act (HSA) Deferred Road Maintenance Needs.......................................................323

Table 79: Collector Road Maintenance Needs...................................................................................................324

Table 80. Units that overlap a PWA and the activities that will occur under Alternative 2. .............................335

Table 81. Comparison of effects to the PWA by alternative. ............................................................................335

Table 82. Related Project Treatment Costs .......................................................................................................343

Table 83: Alternative 2 Economic Measures......................................................................................................344

Table 84: Alternative 3 Economic Measures......................................................................................................344

Table 85: Estimated Employment and Ponderosa Pine (PP) Volume ................................................................345

Table 86: Estimated Employment and Lodgepole Pine (LP) and Other Species (OS) Fiber Volume................346

Table 87. The Strategic Framework has seven goals to address climate change:..............................................350

TABLE OF FIGURES

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

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

management area..................................................................................................................................................15

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 - Scenic Views Management Area and Proposed Burning Treatments.........34

Figure 8: Riparian Habitat Conservation Area (RHCA) Zones (Looking Downstream and West)......................42

Figure 9: Existing stands within analysis area less than 40 years old..................................................................74

Figure 10: Photographic examples of stand age classes used in the analysis of Key Issue 1. ..............................75

Figure 11: Stands less than 40 years old in the year 2015....................................................................................76

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

in 2020..................................................................................................................................................................81

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

in 2020..................................................................................................................................................................82

Figure 14: Existing Condition of Sample Units ...................................................................................................84

Figure 15: Unit 10 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)88

Figure 16: Unit 10 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (Low Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification) 89

Figure 17: Unit 36 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)90

Figure 18: Unit 36 Projected Condition in 2080 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking Classification)91

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

..............................................................................................................................................................................92

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

..............................................................................................................................................................................93
Ogden Draft EIS  xiv

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

Classification).......................................................................................................................................................94

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

Classification).......................................................................................................................................................95

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

..............................................................................................................................................................................96

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

..............................................................................................................................................................................97

Figure 25: Unit 949 Projected Condition in 2020 by Alternative (High Ponderosa Pine Stocking).....................98

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

..............................................................................................................................................................................99

Figure 27. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and associated watershed boundaries. ...........................................101

Figure 28. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and forest types mapped in 1930 (Harrington 2003a). ..................102

Figure 29. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and plant association groups..........................................................103

Figure 30. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and associated biophysical environments. .....................................107

Figure 31: Alternative 1 ponderosa pine 2020 stand structures and densities summarized................................108

Figure 32: Alternative 1 mixed conifer 2020 stand structures and densities summarized..................................109

Figure 33: Alternative 2 ponderosa pine 2020 stand structures and densities summarized...............................110

Figure 34: Alternative 2 and 3 mixed conifer 2020 stand structures and densities summarized. .......................111

Figure 35. Alternative 3 ponderosa pine 2020 stand structures and densities summarized...............................113

Figure 36: Projected large trees/high density in ponderosa/lodgepole pine stands with prior harvest (Unit 10, 

254).....................................................................................................................................................................117

Figure 37: Projected large trees/high density in ponderosa/lodgepole pine stands with no prior harvest (Unit 

209, 251).............................................................................................................................................................118

Figure 38: Projected large trees/high density in ponderosa pine stands with prior harvest (Units 36 and 949). 119

Figure 39. Proposed Action Units identified as highest priority for fuels reduction, taking into account recent 

fuels reduction treatments...................................................................................................................................129

Figure 40: Existing Condition of Paulina Creek RHCA Vegetation and Fuels Looking Upstream...................130

Figure 41: Left: Desired Future Condition of Surface Fuels - Ponderosa Pine with Grass/Shrub Understory 

(stand density is hgher than reference conditions discussed in Forested Vegetation section). Right: Light 

Intensity Underburn in Ponderosa Pine with Grass/Shrub Understory...............................................................135

Figure 42. Large fire history, Ogden project area..............................................................................................136

Figure 43: Existing Condition Flame Length Potential ......................................................................................146

Figure 44: Alternative 2 - Potential Flame Length Based on 97th Percentile Weather Conditions with 

Associated Table 35............................................................................................................................................148

Figure 45: Alternative 3 - Potential Flame Length Based on 97th Percentile Weather Conditions with 

Associated Table 34............................................................................................................................................149

Figure 46: Existing Condition - Crown Fire Potential under 97th Percentile Conditions and Associated Table 35.

............................................................................................................................................................................151

Figure 47: Alternative 2 - Potential Crown Fire and Associated Table 36.........................................................153

Figure 48: Alternative 3 - Potential Crown Fire with Associated Table 37........................................................154
Ogden Draft EIS  xv

Figure 49: Fire Response to Untreated (left) and Treated (right) Stands. The untreated stand on the left 

experienced 90% mortality from a wildfire. The treated stand had been precommercial thinned, mowed and 

underburned; resulting in a low intensity wildfire with no mortality. ................................................................156

Figure 50: Spatial Bounding for Cumulative Effects to Wildlife .......................................................................164

Figure 51: Alternative 1 (No Action) – Snag Recruitment Over Time...............................................................176

Figure 52: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) - Snag Recruitment over Time – Following Treatment.................177

Figure 53: Alternative 3 - Snag Recruitment over Time – Following Treatment...............................................177

Figure 54: Existing goshawk territories within the Ogden planning area...........................................................194

Figure 55: Alternative 2 - Spatial Representation of Proposed Activities within the Goshawk Territories.......197

Figure 56: Alternative 3 - Spatial Representation of Proposed Activities within Goshawk Territories.............201

Figure 57: Current Hiding Cover within the Ogden Project Area ......................................................................211

Figure 58: Remaining Hiding Cover Following Implementation of Alternative 2.............................................212

Figure 59: Remaining Hiding Cover Following Implementation of Alternative 3.............................................213

Figure 60: Existing Marten Habitat within the Ogden Project Area...................................................................217

Figure 61: Alternative 2 - Unit Overlap with Existing Marten Habitat..............................................................219

Figure 62: Alternative 3 - Unit Overlap with Existing Marten Habitat..............................................................220

Figure 63: Potential Marten Habitat within the Larger Cumulative Effects Area ..............................................221

Figure 64: Alternative 2 - Proposed Activities within Potential Three-toed Woodpecker Habitat.....................236

Figure 65: Alternative 3: Proposed Activities within Potential Three-toed Woodpecker Habitat......................237

Figure 66: Cumulative Boundary of Potential Three-toed Woodpecker Habitat ...............................................238

Figure 67: Graphical Representation of the Relative Abundance of Habitat Types within the Watershed........246

Figure 68: Dead Wood Transects in Relation to Plant Associations..................................................................249

Figure 69: Location of Dead Wood Transects in Relation to the Proposed Actions..........................................253

Figure 70: Size Class and Canopy Closure Distribution within the Paulina OGMA .........................................255

Figure 71: Connectivity Corridors within and Adjacent to the Project Area......................................................257

Figure 72: Inherent Soil Productivity within the Ogden Project Area................................................................264

Figure 73: Paulina Creek within the 1998 McKay Fire Area (Photo taken in 2009)..........................................294

Figure 74: Paulina Creek and Typical Riparian Zone within the Project Area ..................................................296

Figure 75: Hillslopes within Alternative 2 RHCA Units East Side of Project Area. Alt. 2 also includes units 

shown for Alternative 3 in Figure 77..................................................................................................................299

Figure 76: Hillslopes within Alternative 2 and 3 RHCA Units..........................................................................300

Figure 77. Developed Recreation Sites and Trails within the Ogden Project Area...........................................326

Figure 78. Location of Inventoried Roadless Areas in proximity to the Ogden Project Area. Two treatments 

units lie directly adjacent to the North Paulina Inventoried Roadless Area. ......................................................333

Figure 79. Potential Wilderness Area in Relation to Alternative 2 and 3 Units. ...............................................334
Executive Summary

Ogden Draft EIS  ES-xvi

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 onehalf mile of the South Paulina IRA. 

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 that will 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. 

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. 

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, 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.

The Forest Service in December 2009 proposed to address forest health and resilience through a 

combination of thinning trees, mowing shrubs, and underburning across the project area in a strategic 

manner. A total of 14,182 acres of treatment were proposed.

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

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

Regeneration harvest in late-seral lodgepole pine - Alternative 3 defers regeneration harvest, which 

includes seed tree harvest and stand clearcut, in these areas, which are the closest to a “late seral” condition 

in the lodgepole stands.

Thinning level in mixed stands of ponderosa and lodgepole pine –Alternative 3 leaves more lodgepole 

in stands that are mixed ponderosa and lodgepole so that the density remains at or above the lower 

management zone.

Air quality would likely be affected from burning slash material that would be piled and burned. The 

project emphasizes utilization whenever possible however, the proposed action also involves a substantial

amount of underburning, which would also put smoke into the air. Under Alternative 3, underburning is 

reduced because more areas would be left with a higher basal area and mix of lodgepole pine than the 

proposed action (see Issue #2). 

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 a number of units that overlap these areas.
Executive Summary

Ogden Draft EIS  ES-2

Traditionally, vegetation management is not undertaken in goshawk post-fledgling areas (PFAs), and this 

is reflected in the proposed action which avoids treatment within PFAs of three newly discovered goshawk 

nest stands. Alternative 3 contrasts with the proposed action by including treatment within 343 acres of 

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

Table ES-1: 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 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-3

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.

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.

53% of project area 

subject to crown fire 

potential.

18,034 acres (68%) low flame 

length potential. 

19% having potential for active 

crown fire.

15,117 acres (57%) at low 

flame length potential.

17% having potential for 

active crown fire.

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 0 154 160

Timber Volume Produced 0 32 mmbf 29 mmbf

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

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
Executive Summary

Ogden Draft EIS  ES-4

Change in fire behavior

6,895 acres (26% low 

fire behavior potential.

53% of project area 

subject to crown fire 

potential.

18,034 acres (68%) low flame 

length potential. 

19% having potential for active 

crown fire.

15,117 acres (57%) at low 

flame length potential.

17% having potential for 

active crown fire.

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 0 154 160

Timber Volume Produced 0 32 mmbf 29 mmbf

CHAPTER 1

PURPOSE AND NEED
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Draft EIS  1

CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT

1.1 Introduction

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, State 

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 to treat areas 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. 

1.2 Context for Purpose and Need

Existing Forested Condition

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

4,240 feet to 6,200 feet. Compared to the forest structure that would have been sustained historically, midseral stages are greatly over-represented and what was once mostly pure ponderosa pine forest in the lower 

2/3 of the project area is now a mixture of lodgepole and ponderosa pine. Declining forest health and 

heavy fuels create conditions that could support large-scale mortality from insects, disease, or wildfire. 

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.

Much of the current condition can be attributed to historic logging practices. A large proportion of the 

project 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 condition, described below for each stand type.

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 Draft EIS

Ponderosa Pine - Within the single and multistory ponderosa pine stands, large diameter trees are 

uncommon and there are varying amounts of lodgepole pine in the stands. Presently, stocking levels 

exceed the upper management zone (UMZ) in many stands1

. For many other stands, the UMZ will be 

exceeded within 10 years. These stands include areas with and without prior recorded treatments. 

Mixed Ponderosa Pine and Lodgepole Pine - Young mixed stands of ponderosa and lodgepole pine show 

variable structural conditions. Some areas have been planted or naturally regenerated, and some of these 

stands have been subsequently thinned (2003). 

Older, single and multistory stands of ponderosa and lodgepole pine include some areas that have been 

previously thinned (1972 to 2004). Large diameter trees are common in some areas that were thinned in 

1992.

Mixed Conifer - In those stands that are primarily young mixed conifer (ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine,

white fir) there are varying structural conditions and age classes. Natural regeneration following prior 

partial harvests (1966 and 1995) has contributed to size and age class diversity within the stands. As with 

other previously described conditions, greenleaf manzanita and snowbrush are establishing within some 

stands to densities high enough to adversely affect growth of ponderosa pine.

In these mixed conifer stands some stand stocking exceeds UMZ while other stands will likely exceed 

UMZ within 10 years. Partial harvest (1966 to 2000) has occurred in various parts of the planning area. 

Regeneration harvest occurred in one area and was planted in 1985 and thinned in 1997.

In some multistory stands of mixed conifer, large diameter trees are common and there has been no recent 

recorded history of treatment. In these stands, stocking currently exceeds the UMZ.

Lodgepole Pine - Mature stands (~ 80 years old) of lodgepole pine average 6 to 8 inches diameter at breast 

height (dbh, 4.5 feet above ground on high side of slope) and include areas with and without prior harvest. 

Records of prior harvests date from 1966 through 2000, with a majority of those being salvage harvests of

beetle killed trees. These stands are generally no longer capable of optimum growth performance, 

interspersed between young, regenerated stands of lodgepole pine and have varying levels of dwarf 

mistletoe infection.

In lodgepole plantations 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. Some areas have been reforested by planting 

ponderosa pine between 1985 and 2000, primarily following stand replacing wildfires and regeneration 

harvests. In these younger regeneration stands, lodgepole pine, greenleaf manzanita, and snowbrush are 

establishing to densities high enough to adversely affect the growth of planted ponderosa pine.

Riparian Habitat Conservation Area 

Riparian vegetation occurs in a very narrow band along Paulina Creek. The Riparian Habitat Conservation 

Area (RHCA) extends beyond the riparian vegetation to 300 feet on either side of the center of the creek. 

Paulina Creek is considered water-quality limited because water temperatures exceed the State standard. 

Shade is an important component of the RHCA vegetation; there are areas within the RHCA that need 

thinning in order to improve shading over the long-term. 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.

 

1 The Upper Management Zone (UMZ) represents the level of stocking or relative density beyond which there is 

imminent risk of catastrophic loss of overstory trees to bark beetles. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Draft EIS  3

Departure from Historic Range of Variability

The historic range of variability (HRV) shows that only the lodgepole pine plant association group (PAG)

has large tree structure within the HRV (Table 22, page 116). In both the ponderosa pine and mixed 

conifer PAGs, the proportion of multi and single stratum large tree structure is currently below the HRV. 

This condition can be attributed to past industrial logging discussed earlier. In these PAGs, the understory 

reinitiation and the multi-stratum without large trees stand structures are closest to developing into large 

tree structure. Where there are gaps in the crown canopy, lodgepole pine is the most common species 

establishing in the gaps. In the mixed conifer PAG, 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.

Industrial logging and fire suppression has shifted the structural stages outside of the HRV. The largest 

departures are shown in the ponderosa pine, where large-diameter open ponderosa pine stands were once 

distributed across approximately 85% percent of the landscape, with lodgepole pine and mixed conifer 

representing relatively minor components on the landscape. Ponderosa pine is still present across that 

approximate percent but dominate approximately 30-40% of the landscape. Lodgepole pine (to the west 

and south) and mixed conifer (in the higher elevations to the east) stands have increased in those areas 

where ponderosa pine has decreased (Table 22, page 116). Many of these dense, single-story stands 

originated from clearcut logging in the early part of the 20th century where the large trees were removed 

and the stands re-initiated. 

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 lowintensity 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 2010). 

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 2009). 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 
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

4  Ogden Draft EIS

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 unevenaged 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. 

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

1.3 Purpose and Need for Action

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

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

overabundance of mid-seral ponderosa pine. Past thinning has put some mid-seral 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 
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Draft EIS  5

(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). 

1.4 Proposed Action

The Forest Service proposes to address forest health and resilience through a combination of thinning trees, 

mowing shrubs, and underburning across the planning area in a strategic manner, while also being sensitive 

to the needs of the other resources and the public. In order to meet the purpose and need across the Ogden 

landscape, the following design goals are proposed:

• 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 stands, upwards of 60% would be moving towards being resilient to fire and 

mountain pine beetles. This will include stands where ponderosa pine is already the dominant species 

or where it is the largest component. 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. From Brown et al (2004), variable density thinning mimics the 

clumped distribution and associated processes found in pre-1850 stands. Gaps would be created where 

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

• In lodgepole pine stands that have been previously harvested under seed tree prescriptions, the seed 

trees would be removed and the understory thinned. 

• Commercial thinning would include produce commercial firewood sales, post and pole sales, and 

traditional saw log material. Small tree harvest will 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. Treatments include machine piling and burning, hand piling, underburning 

and/or whole tree yarding to landings where the material would be utilized or burned. 

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

thinning/harvest and fuels treatments.

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. 

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.
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

6  Ogden Draft EIS

1.5 Public Involvement / Scoping Process Used

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). 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.

1.6 Planning Issues

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 scoping respondents feel should be fostered and retained. Under 

the proposed action, regeneration harvest in lodgepole pine is proposed on 362 acres, which would involve 

removing most trees within the stand. Alternative 3 defers regeneration harvest, which includes seed tree 

harvest and stand clearcut, 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. 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 and Lodgepole

The project proposes thinning in ponderosa pine where LOS conditions can be accelerated and to move the 

area towards a 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, some stands will be taken to below 
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Draft EIS  7

the Lower Management Zone (LMZ).2 Under Alternative 3 stands that have a mix of ponderosa and 

lodgepole pine are thinned to a higher basal area than under the proposed action (because more lodgepole 

pine are retained), the mix of ponderosa and lodgepole is retained, and the resulting density is above the 

LMZ. 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. 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) 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. 

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).

Key issue #5 – Goshawk Habitat Management

Traditionally, vegetation management is not undertaken in goshawk post-fledgling areas (PFAs), and this is 

reflected in the proposed action which 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 

 

2 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

8  Ogden Draft EIS

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 3.7.7-

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.

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. 
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Draft EIS  9

1.7 Planning Framework

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 al 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

10  Ogden Draft EIS

Table 2: LRMP Management Area Acres in Ogden Project Area

Management Area Acres

General Forest 20,078

Scenic Views Retention Foreground 3,206

Scenic Views Partial Retention Foreground 431

Scenic Views Partial Retention Middleground 1,425

Old Growth 1,264

Other Ownership 118

Total Acres 26,521

*Paulina Creek Eligible Wild and Scenic River Corridor 2,164

*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 ripariandependent 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 will 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.

This direction applies to the RHCA for Paulina Creek (496 acres) or to areas outside the RHCA that could 

degrade it. The Ogden project does not involve any priority watersheds.

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, 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.
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Draft EIS  11

1.8 Other Law, Regulation, Policy

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 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 
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

12  Ogden Draft EIS

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 re-established 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 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 
Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Ogden Draft EIS  13

control programs; and to encourage and assist the development and operation of regional air pollution 

prevention and control programs.” 

1.9 Other Informing Documents

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 Dept. of Forestry, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land management, Deschutes County, and 

Project Wildfire. The Plan describes wildland urban interface 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, 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.

1.10 Project Record

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 

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 
Chapter 1 Purpose and Need

14  Ogden Draft EIS

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, 1230 NE Third Street, Suite A-242, Bend, Oregon, Monday through Friday 7:45 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

1.11 Decision Framework

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

Ogden Draft EIS  15

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

ALTERNATIVES
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  17

CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES

2.1 Introduction

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 Alternatives Considered In Detail

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, slashtreatment, mowing, and underburning. Approximately 1,365 acres of regeneration harvests within 

lodgepole and mixed conifer are proposed (Table 4). Thinning is the primary tree treatment covering 

11,993 acres. Of these, 248 acres are located within the Riparian Habitat Conservation Area 

(RHCA) of Paulina Creek. Across nearly 12,326 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. Descriptions of the silvicultural and fuels 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, Fire and 

Fuels and Appendix B. Refer to Figure 3 for locations of Alternative 2 units.

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 treatments occur 

in combination with fuels treatments. Appendix A lists the specific combination of activities for 

each treatment unit.
Chapter 2 Alternatives

18  Ogden Draft EIS

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

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Thinning/Harvest and Fuel 

Treatments Measurement

Regeneration Harvest Treatments (Acres)

• Lodgepole pine seed tree removal 968

• Lodgepole pine seed tree seed harvest 362

• Regeneration with reserve trees in mixed conifer 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

Silviculture Treatments Unique to Alternative 2

Regeneration Cutting – Seed Tree Harvest

A seed tree harvest would be conducted in areas 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 – Mixed Conifer with Reserve Trees
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  19

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

20  Ogden Draft EIS

This page intentionally left blank.
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  21

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

11 x 17 TO BE INSERTED
Chapter 2 Alternatives

22  Ogden Draft EIS

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

11 x 17 TO BE INSERTED
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  23

2.2.3 Alternative 3

Alternative 3 was developed to respond to the key issues listed in Chapter 1.6.1. The total 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 6 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 treatments in lodgepole pine (Issue #1), Alternative 3 drops 

362 acres of seed tree harvest. Another 14 acres of seed tree removal harvest is dropped where it 

overlaps the OGMA. And 35 acres of mixed conifer regen 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. Whereas Alternative 2 retained lodgepole and white fir only to meet minimum stocking levels 

on 10,083 acres, Alternative 3 will retain lodgepole and true fir to meet minimum stocking levels 

on 4,270 acres. Conversely, under Alternative 3, on 5,154 acres, the stands that are thinned to favor 

ponderosa will have lodgepole and white fir retained to meet lower management stocking levels. 

(At minimum stocking levels there are fewer trees per acre than lower management zone stocking 

levels).

• 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), the eight units are dropped that partially or completely overlap these designations, 

including units that would require additional access in the RHCA.

• 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), whereas the PFAs, nest 

stands, and alternative nest stands go untreated under Alternative 2. 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. The table on the following page lists all of the activities proposed under 

Alternative 3. Harvest treatments occur in combination with fuels treatments. The units are displayed in 

Figures 5 and 6. Appendix A lists the specific combination of activities for each treatment unit.
Chapter 2 Alternatives

24  Ogden Draft EIS

Table 4: Summary of Alternative 3 Activities

Alternative 3 Thinning/Harvest and Fuel Treatments Measurement

Regeneration Harvest Treatments (Acres)

• Lodgepole pine seed tree removal 954

• Lodgepole pine seed tree seed cut 0

• Mixed conifer regeneration with reserve trees 0

Total Regeneration Harvest Acres 954

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 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 (Acres) (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

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. 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 -83 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, and 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  25

Alternative 3 Changes from Alternative 2 Acres Units1

dropped due to roadless and RHCA issues. 117

Subtotal -450

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 +1,099

NET CHANGE in Alternative 3 thinning acres -445

Thinning changed to retain lodgepole pine as needed to meet 

desired stocking levels (No change in acres thinned)

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 251
Chapter 2 Alternatives

26  Ogden Draft EIS

This page intentionally left blank.
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  27

Figure 5: Ogden - Alternative 3 - Proposed Vegetation Treatments

11x17 TO BE INSERTED
Chapter 2 Alternatives

28  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 6. Ogden - Alternative 3 - Proposed Fuel Treatments

11x17 TO BE INSERTED
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  29

2.3 Description of Activities Common to Alternative 2 And 

Alternative 3

2.3.1 Silvicultural Treatments

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’ dbh (4.5 feet 

above the ground)3

. 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 slope greater than 

30% is less than 100’ in length. Whole tree yarding would occur. Skid trails would be located on 

average 100’ apart. 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 or 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.

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. Desired density following thinning and 

fuels treatments varies depending on size of trees in the stand and site productivity (Table 7); and 

refer to Forest Vegetation discussion, Chapter 3.

Stand density concepts are discussed under Key Issue #2 (page 6). The following table displays the 

stocking levels used in this document (lower management zone and minimum stocking level) in 

terms of “trees per acre” which is a value that is easily measured on the ground. 

 

3 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 Draft EIS

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

thinning and fuels treatments.

Thinning 

Treatment

Prescription 

Code (see 

Appendix A 

for Units)

Stocking Levels by Size Class

Lower Management Zone Minimum Stocking

>=10” DBH <10” DBH >=10” DBH <10” DBH

Thinning of 

plantations in MC 

PAG

MC_SPC N/A 180 to 435 tpa N/A N/A

Thinning of 

plantations in LP or 

PP PAGs

LP_SPC, 

PP_SPC, 

PP_LP_SPC

N/A 120 to 435 tpa N/A N/A

Thinning of stands 

with larger 

diameter trees in 

MC PAG

MC_1, MC_2

70-80 BA, 

leaving 80 BA 

where trees 

>=18”dbh

(25 - 130 TPA)

25TPA 

for each 

10 BA/AC 

lacking in trees 

>=10” dbh

(0-150 TPA)

20-30 BA, 

leaving 30 BA 

where trees 

>=18”dbh

25TPA for 

each 10 

BA/AC lacking 

in trees >=10” 

dbh

(0-150 TPA)

Thinning of stands 

with larger 

diameter trees in 

LP or PP PAGs

PP_1, 

PP_LP_1, 

PP_2, 

PP_LP_2, LP_4

50-60 BA, 

leaving 60 BA 

where trees 

>=18”dbh

(20-90 TPA)

Regeneration Cutting – Seed Tree Removal

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 

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

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 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  31

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 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.

Lop and Scatter (LOP) 

Lop and scatter typically occurs in light thinning slash where prescribed fire will be used as a final 

fuels treatment. 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. 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% 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.
Chapter 2 Alternatives

32  Ogden Draft EIS

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 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. 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 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 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  33

for approximately five years in the following units: 176, 177, 199, 201, 203, 204, 206, 207 (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, 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 1,937. 

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

34  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 7: Forest Plan Amendment - Scenic Views Management Area and Proposed Burning Treatments
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  35

2.4 Connected Actions Common to Alternatives 2 and 3

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-construction* 8.5 miles 5.6 miles

Temporary Road – New Construction 2.3 miles 2.3 miles

*Includes railroad era logging system impacted areas

Road Maintenance: Pre-haul maintenance would occur for the two action alternatives. Forest 

Road 2120 requires resurfacing prior to implementation. 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.

Temporary Roads: Logging systems will include temporary roads. Estimated temp road locations 

are displayed in Figures 3 and 5. 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.

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.
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

36  Ogden Draft EIS

2.5 Resource Protection Measures Common to Alternative 2 

and Alternative 3

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

1. To preserve ongoing research, Ecology Plots will be excluded from treatment. 35, 36

To ensure public safety and awareness during operations

2. 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.

3. 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

4. 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

5. Hazard trees created by underburning will be felled and left on site. All

6. Operations will be coordinated with special use permit holders and concessionaires in 

the project area.

All

To preserve air quality

7. 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 

8. To reduce potential for long-term growth loss and bark beetle induced mortality 

following proposed underburns, conduct burns in a manner that will result in retention 

of at least 40 percent live crown ratio on dominant and codominant trees. This should 

generally result in crown scorch less than 50 percent. 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.

All

To protect Peter Skene Ogden (PSO) National Scenic Trail

9. Establish a modified logging area where mechanical harvest may not occur closer than 

25 feet from the PSO trail with equipment tracks remaining as far from the trail as 

possible to marginalize harvest impacts from view.
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  37

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

10. 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.

11. Avoid creating sharply diverse vegetation conditions immediately adjacent to one side 

of the trail compared to the other. Completed operations should promote and 

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.

12. Cross trails with machinery at intervals no closer than 200 feet apart along the length 

of the trail within the effected 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.

13. 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 . 

14. 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

15. Rehabilitate unauthorized travelways where motorized travel spurs (primarily off of 

FSR 2120, 2120-300, 2120-100, and 9735-174) contributes to motorized access of the 

Riparian Habitat Conservation Area.

16. 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 

the east end of 2120-300), 2120-100, and 2120-300 and 2) at PSO trailhead and 

McKay Crossing interface with PSO (to reduce potential for user-created roads and 

OHV travel in the Riparian Habitat Conservation Area).

17. 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.

To protect recreation sites, facilities, and trails

18. 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 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

38  Ogden Draft EIS

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

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.

19. 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.. Identify any temporary 

closures to recreation facilities that may occur in order to allow for safe and efficient 

operations.

20. Coordinate with Recreation and Lands Staff to 1) identify hazard trees adjacent to and 

within recreations sites, Paulina Plunge, 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.

21. Emphasize retention of trail defining vegetation, including trees (see: standards for 

identifying trail defining trees) and brush. 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.

Retain trees that hold signs (including diamonds that mark winter trails). Prior to 

activities occurring, inventory signs and GPS trail location to ensure that trails are 

restored to original location if damage occurs during operations. Replace trail signs 

that may be damaged or removed during project operations and ensure that trail 

location matches original GPS location. 

22. Avoid leaving evidence of activity-generated slash within visible distance of 

campgrounds, snoparks, trailheads and designated trails. Design slash utilization and 

disposal activities to avoid activities such as scattering activity slash or machine piling 

slash within sight of these facilities. If slash piles cannot be created outside the visible 

area, use slash disposal techniques that will minimize ground disturbance such as hand 

piling and burning. Promote rapid elimination of slash concentrations within view of 

recreation facilities.

23. Treatment unit boundaries should not be evident from the PSO trail or developed sites 

following completion of operations. In concert with other project design, where unit 

boundaries cross or are within sight of the PSO trail or developed sites, employ 

techniques that will be highly visible only during operations. This should include 

techniques such as marking unit boundaries utilizing small diameter trees of 6” or less 

and/or removing all signs of unit boundaries from trees visible from the trails

24.

To Preserve Visual Quality

25. 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

26. 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, 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  39

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

170, 180, 238, 247, 251, 

265, 277, 278, 291, 293, 

300, 303, 317, 340, 342, 

346, 350, 352, 949

27. 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.

28. 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

29. 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 

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

30. 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

31. 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

32. 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 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

40  Ogden Draft EIS

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

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 

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.

All proposed activity 

areas

33. 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.

34. 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.

• 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. 

35. Reclaim all machine-built fire lines by redistributing displaced topsoil and unburned 

woody debris over the disturbed surface.

36. 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 

Harvest activity units 

with prior entries and 

elevated existing 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  41

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

previous impacts as a Sale Area Enhancement to meet LRMP standards for soil 

productivity.

detrimental conditions.

37. 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 

Apply appropriate Best Management Practices to all ground-disturbing activities

38. T-21 Servicing and Refueling of Equipment: To prevent pollutants from entering 

water, all servicing and refueling of equipment shall occur outside of RHCAs.

General Water 

Quality Best 

Management 

Practices, Pacific 

Northwest Region 

1988

39. R-23 Obliteration of Temporary Roads and Landings: Measures are: road surface 

deeply ripped; natural drainage features reestablished, road effectively drained and 

blocked; and road returned to native vegetation through either replanting or natural 

succession.

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

40. No landings or temporary roads will be located within RHCAs. All Units in RHCA

41. Machine or grapple piling is not allowed within 100 feet of Paulina Creek. All Units in RHCA

42. Directionally fall hand-thinned trees away from Paulina Creek to limit streamside 

disturbance (do not drag off streambanks).

All Units in RHCA

43. Hand piling is allowed 50 feet or greater from Paulina Creek. Placement of hand 

piles would focus on upslope areas and avoid areas of washes and depressions that 

may facilitate water run-off toward stream. Burning would occur under conditions 

that do not allow excessive creeping from the pile, generally 10 feet or less. Hand 

piles should not exceed 50 square feet.

All Units in RHCA

44. No direct ignitions within 50 feet of Paulina Creek. Fire is allowed to creep toward 

the stream.

All Units in RHCA

45. No mechanized fireline construction within RHCA. Hand line construction allowed 

where needed to contain underburn. All hand lines will be rehabilitated immediately 

after underburn is completed.

All Units in RHCA

46. Leave higher density stocking and un-thinned leave areas on north sides of spur roads 

2120-100 and 2120-300 to reduce potential for user-created road creation toward 

Paulina Creek (for screening and preventing user-created roads to the creek).

Units: 160, 171

The RHCA (which is 300 feet slope distance on both banks of Paulina Creek) is divided into zones for the purpose of 

applying project design features. The number of zones differs between north and south sides of Paulina Creek. Refer to 

Figure 8, page 42, for a diagram of these zones that are referenced in the following project design features. 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

42  Ogden Draft EIS

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

47. North side of Paulina Creek RHCA

Zone 1 (high water line of stream edge to 12 feet): No thinning of trees of any size.

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.

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.

48. South Side of Paulina Creek RHCA (provides shade to stream)

Zone 1 (high water line of stream edge to 12 feet): No thinning of trees of any size.

Zone 2 (12 feet to 28 feet): Hand thinning of trees less than 20 feet tall allowed. 

Machinery excluded.

Zone 3 (28 feet to machinery boundary): Hand thinning of trees less than 10” dbh

with no height restriction. Machinery excluded.

Zone 4 (machinery boundary to outer limit of RHCA, 300’ each side of stream): 

Thinning of trees less than 21” dbh with machinery allowed. Thinning prescription 

can be the same as adjacent unit located outside the RHCA.

To Minimize Impacts to Wildlife 

Raptors

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 Draft EIS  43

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

To prevent disturbance to nesting birds during breeding season

49. 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.

50. 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-tail Units 22, 23

51. 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)

52. 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).

53. Underburning within 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

54. 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

55. 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, CWM, and 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. 

56. 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.

57. Retain at least 3-6 logs per acre greater than 12” diameter at the large end in 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).
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

44  Ogden Draft EIS

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

58. 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).

59. 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.

Landbirds

60. 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”).

61. 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

62. 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

63. The district botanist or designee will inspect all fill material for the presence of weeds 

prior to using on the project.

All road work

64. If a significant weed site is located on a landing or skid trail, an alternate, uninfested 

site will be used.

All

65. 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.

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).

66. 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

For Protection of Range Resources

67. 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

68. 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.

69. 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.

70. When using heavy equipment, known cultural sites that are to be avoided (as detailed 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  45

Measure 

Number

Protection Measure Units affected

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.

71. 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.

72. 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.

73. 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.

74. Slash piles will not be placed within any site boundaries in order to avoid extreme heat 

on sites and artifacts.

75. Fire hand-line construction will be built outside of site boundaries using a 30 meter 

buffer. 

76. 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.

2.6 Comparison of the Alternatives Analyzed in Detail

Table 8: Summary Comparison of the Two Action Alternatives

Treatments

Alternative 2

Proposed Action

Alternative 3

Acres 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
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

46  Ogden Draft EIS

2.6.1 Comparison of the Alternatives by Cover Type and Treatment 

Objective

Vegetation management in the Ogden project area includes both silvicultural and fuels treatment 

methods. The objectives, for each of the cover types, are described in the following Tables 9 

through 13.

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 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
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  47

2.6.2 Comparison of how each Alternative Meets the Purpose and 

Need and Key Issues

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 multistratum 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.

53% of project area 

subject to crown fire 

potential.

18,034 acres (68%) low flame 

length potential. 

19% having potential for active 

crown fire.

15,117 acres (57%) at low 

flame length potential.

17% having potential for 

active crown fire.

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 0 154 160

Timber Volume Produced 0 32 mmbf 29 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.

362 acres regen harvest in LP.

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 – Thinning Level in 

Stands of Mixed 

Ponderosa and 

Lodgepole Pine

0 acres thinned.

Total stand stocking remains 

above LMZ.

Units above UMZ will be at risk 

to mtn. pine beetle attack.

10,145 acres thinned outside 

plantations.

Stocking less than LMZ 

common on 48% of area.

9.494 acres thinned outside 

plantations.

Stocking less than LMZ 

common on 5% area.

#3 – Air Quality 

Impacts from Burning

No burning (piles or landscape) 

under prescription. Wildfire 

would create more particulates 

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.
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

48  Ogden Draft EIS

and smoke impacts to 

neighboring communities.

#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).

2.7 Monitoring Common to Alternatives 2 and 3

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 – Not only but would include 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

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
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  49

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 #8 in maintaining at least 40%

live crown ratio on dominant and codominant trees and minimizing scorch to less than 50% of the 

live crown. Identify areas where mitigation objective was not achieved. If needed, initiate 

development of a reforestation plan, report reforestation need, and request appropriated funding for 

reforestation.

Monitoring Elements: 1) Identification of areas where live crowns have either been reduced below 

40 percent or have been reduced by 50% from pre-burn conditions, and 2) Monitoring survival of 

trees with greater than 50% crown scorch or less than 40% live crown for two years after burning.

Type of Monitoring: Implementation and effectiveness monitoring

Methods/Parameters: Survey burn areas to identify where either crown scorch or crown loss 

exceed specified levels. Map areas exceeding 2 to 3 acres (J. Booser, Forest Silviculturist, 2007, 

personal conversation) where tree survival is not assured.

Frequency/Duration: Annually after bud burst and needle elongation, for 2 years following burn.

Projected Costs: $6,000 or approximately $5 per acre, based on the following assumptions:

• Monitor 21 burn units totaling 1,204 acres with a fire crew of 3 to 5 people.

o $75 per hour (fire crew of 3 to 5 people, including engine or vehicle).

o 40 hours (5 days x 8 hours) to survey burn areas.

o Annual cost: $75 x 40 = $3,000 per year.

o Two years of monitoring ($3,000 x 2) = $6,000 total.

Responsibility: 1) Fuels, identification of areas with greater than 50% crown scorch, and 2) 

Silviculture operations, development of reforestation plan, reporting of reforestation need and 

requesting appropriated funding.

2.8 Summary of Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed in 

Detail

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 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

50  Ogden Draft EIS

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. This was not analyzed in detail because not removing merchantable material would 

not begin the process of restoration within the project area. Stand density would not be reduced to a 

level that effectively moves stands toward HRV or decreases the continuity of the crowns (crown 

bulk density that would allow crown fire to occur under the 97th percentile fire weather conditions). 

Stand density is such that by not reducing the density, which includes trees over 9” dbh, the risk of 

loss to insects, disease, and wildfire would be too great. In the ponderosa pine dominated stands, to 

move toward HRV and to be effective in reducing the risk of loss, removing trees up to the 21” dbh 

limit is important, even though smaller diameter and understory removal is the focus.

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 

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, 

stand-replacement 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 still breaking up fuels continuity.

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 forest would be sufficient to 

meet project goals. Based on their reconnaissance of the project area, they believe that trees greater 

than 16” dbh are not contributing to excess stand density. However, all trees contribute to stand 

density. In the areas where many of the treatments are proposed, the stands are relatively uniform in 

age, diameter and height. In the Ogden project, the focus is on first removing smaller understory but 

not limiting removal to 16” or 18” dbh. The retained mid-sized trees have the potential to become 

large trees by reducing the stand density. Generally, the trees that are between 16” and 21” are 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

Ogden Draft EIS  51

contributing to stand density, are mistletoe-diseased, and have larger neighboring trees that are more 

important to retain. The current limit from the Eastside Screens is 21” dbh, and the Forest Service 

believes that based on the existing condition in the project area, the thinning objectives can be met 

without needing to remove any trees greater than 21” dbh. 

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 (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.

2.9 Sale Area Improvement Projects

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 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. Items marked with 

an (E) are considered enhancement.

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. 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. Removal of cattle guards. The Sugar Pine allotment is no longer active. Because grazing is 

no longer occurring, it is unnecessary to retain and maintain cattle guards within the project 

area.

3. Rehabilitation of unauthorized trails and user-created roads. Some unauthorized 

motorized access conflicts with the Peter Skene Ogden Trail and provide access to usercreated dispersed campsites. 
Chapter 2 – Alternatives

52  Ogden Draft EIS

CHAPTER 3

Affected Environment and 

Environmental Consequences
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Draft EIS  53

CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

3.1 Introduction

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 Basis for Effects Analysis

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 DEIS. When deemed 

appropriate, those parts of specialist reports that are not included in this DEIS 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 incorporated by reference and a complete bibliography is 

included at the end of this DEIS. Referenced material is a consideration of the best available 

science.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

54  Ogden Draft EIS

3.2.3 Cumulative Effects 

The Environmental Consequences disclosures in this DEIS 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 13.

The cumulative effects analysis in this DEIS 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 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Draft EIS  55

(Chapter 3.8.5) and the tables in Appendix D, which shows existing detrimental soil conditions are 

based on GIS data and the information in Table 13. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

56  Ogden Draft EIS

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; access, habitat 

fragmentation

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 

mowing. All project work completed in 2010.

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

Ogden Draft EIS  57

Past Actions Timing Description Residual Effects

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

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 re-contoured 

and prepped for natural regeneration; three 

pads anticipated for re-contouring 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

58  Ogden Draft EIS

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; 

and the continued monitoring of well pressure 

and other data in each 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. Potential short-term disruption of 

recreation 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 

signed 2011

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. Future 

development would undergo further NEPA.

Enhanced Geothermal (EGS) 

Demonstration Project

BLM EA expected to be 

complete May 2011

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 2011 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.

Miscellaneous
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Draft EIS  59

Project Name / Activity Status/Timing Description Predicted or Ongoing Effects

USGS Permanent Volcanic 

Monitoring Stations

Categorical Exclusion to

be completed fall 2010

Monitoring stations to track seismic activity. 

Stations to be located in areas not obvious to 

the general public. One station to be located at 

NNVM visitor center or Newberry Crater.

Structures will be provided that either do not 

or minimize detraction of the surrounding area. 

Ground disturbing area will likely not exceed 

100-200 feet

Recreation

Lava Rock OHV Trail Project Planning

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.

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

Paulina Plunge

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

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.

Reduction in road density. Reduces habitat 

fragmentation. 

Deschutes-Ochoco Travel 

Management Project

Draft EIS; 

Implementation 

expected in 2011

Implementation of the Travel Rule.

Motorized travel in Central Oregon would be 

restricted to designated roads and trails only. 

Access to dispersed camping would have 

special provisions to limit access to sensitive 

areas.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

60  Ogden Draft EIS
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  61

3.3 Forested Vegetation

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

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 

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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

62  Ogden Draft EIS

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 (blackbark) 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 blackbark stands and allow a comparison between alternatives.

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:
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  63

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,

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 Forested Vegetation

64  Ogden Draft EIS

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/Acre1 DBH (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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  65

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 

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. This likelihood of attack is a function of beetle 

presence, abundance and distribution.

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 Forested Vegetation

66  Ogden Draft EIS

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)

Growth 

Basal 

Area1

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 1

Growth Basal Area: 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 (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 growth basal area (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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  67

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 1

Basal Area for 1.5 inches diameter growth per decade = (Growth Basal Area)*(.67)

3.3.6 Summary Key Findings

Alternative 1

Within and adjacent to the eastern portion of the project area, relatively old stands of lodgepole pine are 

currently abundant. 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.

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 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, particularly 

multi-story 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. Approximately 38 percent of the ponderosa 

pine and 17 percent of the mixed conifer biophysical environments have moderate stand densities in those 

structures with best potential to develop into LOS. 

Assuming these stands develop into multi-stratum large tree structure, ponderosa pine multi-stratum large 

tree structure could be above HRV (5 – 30%) and mixed conifer multi-stratum large tree structure could be 

within HRV (5 – 27%) by the year 2060. Thinning may be needed within the next 50 years to keep these 

moderately stocked stands resistant to bark beetle attack. Single-stratum large tree structure would likely 

remain below the HRV for ponderosa pine (20 -60%) and mixed conifer (5 – 15%).

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. In the absence of stand 

replacement wildfires, the stand initiation structural stage would remain at the low end of the historic range 

of variability.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

68  Ogden Draft EIS

Ponderosa pine and mixed conifer late and old structure (LOS) stages will remain below the historic range 

of variability in the short term. By 2060, if only large tree density is considered, there is potential for 

ponderosa pine and mixed conifer LOS, particularly multi-story LOS, to be within HRV. Compared to 

Alternative 1, Alternative 2 will increase the number of acres unlikely to be influenced by beetles during 

the next 20 to 50 years. Approximately 50 percent of the ponderosa pine and 25 percent of the mixed 

conifer biophysical environments would have moderate stand densities in those structures with best 

potential to develop into LOS. 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).

In addition to increasing beetle resistance in those stands with best potential to develop into LOS, 

Alternative 2 thin and burn treatments will increase the likelihood that ponderosa pine single-stratum large 

tree structure will develop in the future. By the year 2060, both the multi-stratum and single-stratum large 

trees structures could be within the HRV. Of the 50 percent ponderosa pine biophysical environment with 

moderate stand densities, 15 percent overlays lodgepole pine plant associations and 35 percent overlays 

ponderosa pine plant associations. Assuming single-stratum structure develops within areas overlaying 

ponderosa pine plant associations (35%), single-stratum large tree structure could be within HRV (20 –

60%) by the year 2060. Assuming multi-stratum large tree structure develops in the stands overlaying 

lodgepole pine plant associations (15%), multi-stratum with large tree structure could also be within HRV 

(5 – 30%).

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.

Alternative 3

As with Alternative 1, 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.

Of the 9,494 acres outside of plantations proposed for thinning and burning, 70 percent have low to varying 

levels of ponderosa pine stocking. In contrast to Alternative 2, only 21 percent of the acres proposed 

thinning and burning could be stocked less than the lower management zone following treatments. 

Retaining lodgepole pine, and in some cases white fir, where ponderosa pine stocking is sparse 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.

Ponderosa pine and mixed conifer late and old structure (LOS) stages will remain below the historic range 

of variability in the short term. By 2060, if only large tree density is considered, there is potential for 

ponderosa pine and mixed conifer LOS, particularly multi-story LOS, to be within HRV. Compared to 

Alternative 1, Alternative 3 will increase the number of acres unlikely to be influenced by beetles during 

the next 20 to 50 years. Approximately 52 percent of the ponderosa pine and 25 percent of the mixed 

conifer biophysical environments would have moderate stand densities in those structures with best 

potential to develop into LOS. The proportion of ponderosa pine with moderate stocking is two percent 

higher than Alternative 2. This 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. Thinning 

may be needed in the future to keep moderately stocked stands resistant to bark beetle attack. In areas 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  69

where ponderosa pine stocking is presently sparse, future density of large trees may just be approaching the 

lowest historic reference condition (Munger 1917).

As with Alternative 2, Alternative3 thin and burn treatments would also increase the likelihood that 

ponderosa pine single-stratum large tree structure will develop in the future. By the year 2060, both the 

multi-stratum and single-stratum large trees structures could be within the HRV. Of the 52 percent 

ponderosa pine biophysical environment with moderate stand densities, 15 percent overlays lodgepole pine 

plant associations and 37 percent overlays ponderosa pine plant associations. Compared to Alternative 2, a 

slightly higher proportion (2%) could develop into single-stratum structure with Alternative 3. Assuming 

single-stratum structure develops within areas overlaying ponderosa pine plant associations (37%), singlestratum large tree structure could be within HRV (20 – 60%) by the year 2060. Assuming multi-stratum 

large tree structure develops in the stands overlaying lodgepole pine plant associations (15%), multistratum with large tree structure could also be within HRV (5 – 30%).

As with Alternative 2, thinning in combination with mowing and prescribed fire will create fire-resilient 

forests. Conditions will favor the re-establishment of understory vegetation. To retain these fire-resilient 

forests, maintenance will be necessary.

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). Regeneration 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. 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. 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 

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

70  Ogden Draft EIS

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 30 to 32 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 32 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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  71

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 76). 

Alternative 3 includes for 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 would create a new age class of lodgepole pine, decreasing the amount of 

older lodgepole pine stands by three percent (Table 18). 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 Forested Vegetation

72  Ogden Draft EIS

unit that exceeds 40 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 were 

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.

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  73

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 

amount 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 Forested Vegetation

74  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 9: Existing stands within analysis area less than 40 years old.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Ogden Draft EIS  75

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 Forested Vegetation

76  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 11: Stands less than 40 years old in the year 2015
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  77

3.3.8 Key Issue #2 – Thinning Level in Mixed Stands of Ponderosa Pine 

and Lodgepole

Introduction

The project proposes thinning in stands of ponderosa pine 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

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 not 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

78  Ogden Draft EIS

remain so for the next 10 years. Proposed fuel treatments are retained in those stands located in 

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  79

Stand Conditions: Ponderosa pine-dominated. High stand and ponderosa pine stocking commonly found 

in the Ogden single-story immature (blackbark) ponderosa pine stands:

• 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 20 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 14Figure 14. This figure also includes a brief 

description of the treatment alternatives for each unit.

Table 19: Summary of Existing Condition of the Six Selected Units Grouped by Ponderosa Pine PI 

Classification

Units

Grouped by

Ponderosa pine 

PI Classification

Treatment

History

Treatment

Stand Stocking 

relative to upper 

management zone*

Basal Area (Square Feet per Acre)

Other 

Species 

Stand Density Present

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
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

80  Ogden Draft EIS

Units

Grouped by

Ponderosa pine 

PI Classification

Treatment

History

Treatment

Stand Stocking 

relative to upper 

management zone*

Basal Area (Square Feet per Acre)

Other 

Species 

Stand Density Present

Ponderosa pine 

Density and

Percent of Stand Total

36 Managed 122% 77 75 (97% of total) Lodgepole 

pine

949 Managed 149% 109 104 (95% of total)

Lodgepole 

pine

White fir

Range of 

Conditions 77 - 109 75 – 104 (95 – 97% of total)

*Lower management zone is 67 percent of the upper management zone.

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: Acres and the percent of treatment are reported by ponderosa pine stocking 

level in Table 20. Thinning and burning proposed with Alternative 2 will result in a portion of the 

treatment acres being stocked less than the lower management zone in 2020 (Figure 12). Greatest potential 

for this to occur will be in the units classified as having low or variable ponderosa pine stocking levels. Of 

the acres proposed for thinning in Alternative 2, approximately 74 percent are in these classifications. 

Stocking less than the lower management zone would be most common within those areas classified as 

having low ponderosa pine stocking (Figure 12). The remaining 26 percent are classified as having high 

ponderosa pine stocking levels. In 2020, stocking levels in units with this classification will be at or above 

the lower management zone. A detailed accounting of treatment acres by ponderosa pine stocking level 

can be found in Table 21.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  81

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

(LMZ) in 2020.

Growth loss associated with lower stocking levels could be minimal. 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.

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.

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 smaller portion of Alternative 3 units proposed 

for thinning will be stocked less than the lower management zone in 2020 (Figure 13) . Of the acres 

proposed for thinning, a total of 70 percent are classified as having low to variable levels of ponderosa pine 

stocking (Table 20, page 83). Of this, 21 percent would be treated the same as Alternative 2. Lodgepole 

pine would be retained only as needed to meet minimum stocking. As with Alternative 2, there would be 

potential for a portion of these acres to be stocked below the lower management zone. On the remaining 49 

percent of acres, lodgepole pine would be retained as needed to meet the lower management zone. Of this, 

19 percent would be thinned, with no burn to follow (Table 20, page 83). Units with relatively high 

ponderosa pine stocking would differ little from Alternative 2 as there would be little need to retain 

lodgepole pine to augment ponderosa pine stocking levels. Where ponderosa pine stocking is relatively 

low, Alternative 3 residual stocking will be higher as compared to Alternative 2. The retention of 

lodgepole pine and the reduced use of fire in areas with a mix of ponderosa and lodgepole pine will help 

assure stand stocking remains at or above the lower management zone.

48%

26%

26%

10,145 acres of thinning outside plantations

Stocking less than LMZ could be common. 

Existing PP stocking classified low. 

Stocking less than LMZ could occur. 

Existing PP stocking classified variable. 

Stocking less than LMZ unlikely. 

Existing PP stocking classified high. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

82  Ogden Draft EIS

Of the thinning proposed in Alternative 3, approximately 30 percent is classified as having high ponderosa 

pine stocking levels. This proportion, as well as the treatment acres, is slightly higher than what is 

proposed with Alternative 2 (Table 20, page 83). 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.

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. 

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 90 (Unit 36);

Figure 19, page 92 (Unit 209), Figure 21, page 94 (Unit 251) and Figure 25, page 98 (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 

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.

5%

16%

37%

12%

30%

9,494 acres of thinning outside plantations

Stocking less than LMZ could be common. 

Existing PP stocking classified low. 

Stocking less than LMZ could occur. 

Existing PP stocking classified variable. 

Stocking less than LMZ uncommon. 

Existing PP stocking classified low. 

Stocking less than LMZ uncommon. 

Existing PP stocking classified variable. 

Stocking less than LMZ unlikely. 

Existing PP stocking classified high. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  83

Table 20: 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

1

Classifications 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 Forested Vegetation

84  Ogden Draft 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.

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  85

Unit (Exam) Existing Condition (SVS Representation) Treatment History/Existing Condition Alternative Alternative Treatment

Table 21. PP stocking: High

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.

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.

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 

1 No Action

2

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet minimum

stocking levels.

Mow/Burn.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

86  Ogden Draft EIS

Unit (Exam) Existing Condition (SVS Representation) Treatment History/Existing Condition Alternative Alternative Treatment

Density Index and dominant tree growth.

PP stocking: Variable

3

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet desired

stocking levels.

Mow/Burn.

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.

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 

1 and 2 No Action
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  87

Unit (Exam) Existing Condition (SVS Representation) Treatment History/Existing Condition Alternative Alternative Treatment

upper management zone.

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

3

Thin, retaining lodgepole as 

needed to meet minimum

stocking levels.

Mow/Burn.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

88  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  89

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

90  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  91

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

92  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  93

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.

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

94  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  95

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.

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

96  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  97

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.

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

98  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  99

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.

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.

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 Forested Vegetation

100  Ogden Draft EIS

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 volcano.

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 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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  101

Figure 27. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and associated watershed boundaries.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

102  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 28. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and forest types mapped in 1930 (Harrington 2003a).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  103

Figure 29. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and plant association groups.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

104  Ogden Draft EIS

Measures

Measure 1: Structural stage proportions within each HRV analysis biophysical environments 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 

with potential to develop into late and old structure by the year 2080.

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 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  105

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.

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 21: 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

106  Ogden Draft EIS

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 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 22). In both the ponderosa pine and 

mixed conifer, the proportion of multi and single stratum large tree structure is currently below the 

HRV (Table 22). In these biophysical environments, the understory reinitiation and the multistratum without large trees stand structures (Table 22) 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 PAG, 

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 plant association groups. Patch size 

ranges from less than 10 acres to greater than 1,000 acres. For all PAGs, the most common patch 

size is between 10 and 50 acres. The largest block, created by a wildfire, is located within the 

ponderosa pine PAG. It’s approximately 1,460 acres (590 hectares) in size. Historically, this large 

of a block would have been unusual within a ponderosa pine PAG. 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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  107

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 14).

 Figure 30. Ogden HRV analysis boundary and associated biophysical environments.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

108  Ogden Draft 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. 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.

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 late-seral 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). These structures are closest to 

developing into large tree structure. In these combined 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 Stand Initiation

Stem Exclusion

Combined structures, 

Low Density

Combined structures, 

Moderate Density

Combined structures, 

High Density

Understory 

Reinitiation

and

Multi-stratum 

without large 

trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  109

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 27 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 37, 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 

37) as is one previously thinned ponderosa pine stand (Figure 38, 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 PAG (Table 23). In both environments this structural stage will 

remain within the HRV. Within the lodgepole pine PAG, this structural stage will remain at the low 

end of the HRV.

14%

20%

2%

4%

18% 42%

64%

Proportion of mixed conifer biophysical environment Stand Initiation

Stem Exclusion

Multi-stratum 

with Large Trees

Combined structure, 

Low Density

Combined structure, 

Moderate Density

Combined structure, 

High Density

Understory 

Reinitiation

and 

Multi-stratum 

without large 

trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

110  Ogden Draft EIS

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 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 (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. Assuming 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.

6%

6%

4%

50%

33%

87%

Proportion of ponderosa pine biophysical environment Stand Initiation

Stem Exclusion

Combined structures, 

Low Density

Combined structures, 

Moderate Density

Combined structures, 

High Density

Understory 

Reinitiation

and

Multi-stratum 

without large 

trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  111

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 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. Assuming 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 and 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 36, Figure 37, and Figure 38. All projections but one (Figure 36, 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 

are displayed in Figure 36 (Units 10 and 254) and Figure 37 (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. Potential range of large trees in the year 2080 is described in Figure 15 (Unit 10), 

Figure 17 (Unit 209) and Figure 19 (Unit 251).

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 

15%

17%

2%

5%

25%

36%

66%

Proportion of mixed conifer biophysical environment Stand Initiation

Stem Exclusion

Multi-stratum 

with Large Trees

Combined structure, 

Low Density

Combined structure, 

Moderate Density

Combined structure, 

High Density

Understory 

Reinitiation

and 

Multi-stratum 

without large 

trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

112  Ogden Draft EIS

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 17) 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.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Proposed harvest activities will change the existing proportion of 

structural stages within the HRV analysis area (Table 20). 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 stands will create more stand initiation structural stage but the increase will not be 

enough to change the proportion of this structural stage (Table 20).

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 21 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 multistratum 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 multi-stratum 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 

multi-stratum 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  113

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

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 21 and Figure 34). With Alternative 3, 66 percent would be classified as either understory 

reinitiation or multi-stratum without large trees (Table 21 and Figure 34) 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 34). As described for Alternative 2, assuming these areas of 

moderate density develop into multi-stratum 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%).

Model Projections

Projected development of large trees and corresponding stand density through the year 2080 are 

displayed in Figure 36, Figure 37, and Figure 38. 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 36 (Units 10 and 254) and Figure 37 (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 17 

(Unit 209) and Figure 19 (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.

6%

6%

4%

52%

32%

88%

Proportion of ponderosa pine biophysical environment Stand Initiation

Stem Exclusion

Combined structures, 

Low Density

Combined structures, 

Moderate Density

Combined structures, 

High Density

Understory 

Reinitiation

and

Multi-stratum 

without large 

trees
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

114  Ogden Draft EIS

Forest Plan Consistency – Alternatives 2 and 3

Ponderosa pine and Mixed Conifer PAGs

Within the Ogden HRV analysis area, both of the late and old structural (LOS) stages fall below the 

historic range of variability within the ponderosa pine and mixed conifer plant association groups 

(PAGs). Scenario A of the Eastside Screens interim wildlife standard applies in these PAGs. 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 would be no reduction in the amount of multi-stratum or single-stratum large tree structure

(Table 20).

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. 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 ponderosa blackbark 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 PAG

Within the Ogden HRV analysis area, both of the lodgepole pine late and old structural (LOS) stages 

are within the historic range of variability. Scenario B of the Eastside Screens interim wildlife 

standard applies in the lodgepole pine PAG. 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  115

Retain LOS conditions within HRV. Alternative 2 and 3 treatments within the lodgepole pine 

PAG will not reduce the amount of LOS below HRV.

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 

21).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

116  Ogden Draft EIS

Table 22: 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

Relation

To

HRV

Percent

of

BioEnv

Relation

To

HRV

Percent

of

BioEnv

Relation

To

HRV

Ponderosa Pine

Stand Initiation 0 – 13% 6% Within 6% Within 6% Within

Stem Exclusion 

Closed Canopy 2 – 14% 7% Within 6% Within 6% Within

Understory 

Reinitiation 2 – 19% 46% Above 57% Above 57% Above

Multi-stratum 

without large 

trees

4 – 31% 41% Above 30% Within 31% Within

Multi-stratum

with large trees 5 – 30% <1% Below <1% Below <1% Below

Single-stratum

with large trees 20 – 60% <1% Below <1% Below <1% Below

Mixed Conifer

Stand Initiation 7 – 18% 14% Within 15% Within 14% Within

Stem Exclusion 

Closed Canopy 5 – 51% 20% Within 17% Within 17% Within

Understory 

Reinitiation 5 – 11% 30% Above 36% Above 36% Above

Multi-stratum 

without large 

trees

6 – 48% 34% Within 30% Within 30% Within

Multi-stratum

with large trees 5 – 27% 2% Below 2% Below 2% Below

Single-stratum

with large trees 5 – 15% <1% Below <1% Below <1% Below

Lodgepole Pine 

Stand Initiation 16 – 48% 16% Within 17% Within 16% Within

Stem Exclusion 

Closed Canopy 1 – 28% 30% Above 30% Above 30% Above

Understory 

Reinitiation 11 – 20% 34% Above 33% Above 34% Above

Multi-stratum 

without large 

trees

4 – 31% 9% Within 9% Within 9% Within

Multi-stratum

with large trees 2 – 10% 8% Within 8% Within 8% Within

Single-stratum

with large trees 0 – 32% 2% Within 2% Within 2% Within

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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  117

Figure 36: 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 Forested Vegetation

118  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 37: 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 Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  119

Figure 38: 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 Forested Vegetation

120  Ogden Draft EIS

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 reestablishment 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  121

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.

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).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

122  Ogden Draft EIS

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

Alternative 1 (No Action)

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. 

Scattered, incidental mortality from beetles would also occur in stands that are 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 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.

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. Effect of increasing stand density on beetle risk varies depending on existing 

stand density. In previously thinned stands with relatively low density, it will take 15 to 20 years for 

both stand density index and basal area to increase to levels where stands would be considered at risk 

to bark beetle outbreak. Other previously thinned stands have currently higher density levels. These 

stands are either at risk to beetles now or will be at risk within 10 years. Stands with no prior 

thinning also have high density levels and are currently at risk to bark beetle outbreak. 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.

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  123

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 insect-caused 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 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) 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

124  Ogden Draft EIS

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 be 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

None of the actions that could contribute to cumulative effects would combine to change bark beetle 

effects. 

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. The alternatives vary in how many seed trees would be retained to provide 

individual dispersed wildlife green tree replacements. Alternative 2 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. Alternative 3 would retain no lodgepole pine overstory 

within the treatment units, depending on the broader landscape to provide for individual dispersed 

habitat structure. The differing level of seed tree retention has implications in terms of the spread 

and intensification of dwarf mistletoe in the understory trees.

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).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  125

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 on-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.

Spatial and Temporal 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

126  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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 

old-growth, whose crowns are above the mean scorch height.

Treatments to remove lodgepole pine seedtrees would remove mistletoe infected overstory story 

trees. With a reduced overstory source of mistletoe, fewer understory trees would have their upper 

crowns exposed to mistletoe seed. There would be greater potential for these understory trees to 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Forested Vegetation

Ogden Draft EIS  127

outgrow or at least stay even with the vertical spread of mistletoe. Intensification of mistletoe in the 

understory would be more comparable to rates of intensification in even-aged stands.

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 the 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 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

None of the actions that could contribute to cumulative would affect the spread of dwarf mistletoe. 

There would be no cumulative effects.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

128  Ogden Draft EIS

3.4 Fire and Fuels

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 (Table 38, page 155). The attributes used to evaluate the analysis were 

condition class, fire behavior and crown fire potential. 

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. 

Priority areas were identified where benefits could be maximized by reducing the threat of wildfire 

to high use areas, providing safe ingress and egress, while providing interdisciplinary 

considerations for other resources. Prioritizing is important because placement of fuel treatments 

on every acre within a landscape is not economically feasible nor would it be desirable given other 

resource management requirements. Table 23 provides a summation of the high priority fuels 

reduction areas.

Table 23: Fuels Treatment Priorities included in Alternatives 2 and 3.

Paulina Creek RHCA: 300 foot buffer – each side. See Figure 40.

Paulina Creek RHCA Shoulder: Areas adjacent to but not considered RHCA. 

Ingress/Egress: Travel Corridors, including Scenic Views Management Area

Developed Recreation: Buffer varies by existing fuel conditions around sites.

WUI/NNVM boundary: Previous treatment units and current vegetation aide minimum treatment 

needs.

Consideration for the placement of treatment included:

• 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 ); 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  129

• Spatially and strategically arranging treatment areas to minimize fire spread that would 

produce undesired effects;

• Development of a treatment sequence that would produce long term benefits for maintaining 

resiliency to stand replacing fire and begin the development of a trajectory for the purposes 

of enhancing and promoting growth of large trees as well as improving forest health

• 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. 

• Recent treatment in the Crossings Project (2008 – present) within the Wildland Urban 

Interface (WUI). Areas adjacent to the WUI have been designated to provide a larger barrier 

to fire spread from public land to private property. 

• Recent treatment in the Lava Cast project north of the project boundary. Efforts were made 

to minimize the amount of treatment for this project that are adjacent to recently completed 

activities to reduce fragmentation of wildlife habitat on the landscape and minimize 

cumulative effects.

Figure 39. Proposed Action Units identified as highest priority for fuels reduction, taking into 

account recent fuels reduction treatments.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

130  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 40: Existing Condition of Paulina Creek RHCA Vegetation and Fuels Looking Upstream

Principles of Fire Resilient Forests

The goal is to reduce wildfire hazard while working towards returning the landscape to the 

appropriate Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC), not to 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. Long-term planning must take into account sustained management so that 

treatments maintain their effectiveness over time.

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 (Agee 2002). 

Table 24: Principles of Fire Resilient Forests (Agee, 2002)

Principles Effects Advantage Concerns

Reduce surface fuels Reduce potential flame length Control easier, less 

torching

Surface disturbance, less with 

fire than other techniques

Increase height to 

live crown

Requires longer flame length

to begin torching

Less torching Opens understory, may allow 

surface wind to increase

Decrease crown 

density

Makes tree-to-tree crown fire 

less probable

Reduces crown fire 

potential

Surface wind may increase and 

surface fuels may be drier

Keep larger trees Thicker bark and taller crowns Increases 

survivability of 

trees

Removing smaller trees is 

economically less profitable
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  131

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.

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.

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.

3.4.2 Regulatory Framework

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 table lists management direction relative to the 

Ogden Project relating specifically to fire and fuels management.

Table 25: Fire and Fuels Related Goals and 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 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 

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 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, see 2.3.3), and 

shaped to appear as natural occurrences. If burning 

conditions cannot be met such that scorching cannot be 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

132  Ogden Draft EIS

Deschutes NF LRMP (Forest Plan) 1990

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. 

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.

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 (Chapter 3.5) for 

the analysis of air quality and a discussion of smoke management.

3.4.3 Analysis Methods 

Professional support and empirical judgment from local Fire Management Specialists, the most up 

to date scientific data and fire behavior modeling was used to support comparison of the 

alternatives. The measurement criteria used for interpreting fire behavior for each alternative 

included crown fire activity potential and flame length. 

Fuels 

Estimates of current fuel loading within treatment units were based on ocular surveys, software 

analysis suite Fuels Management Analyst 3.0.1 (Carlton 2005) and fuel estimation photo series

guides PNW 52 and 105. Estimates of future fuel loadings as a result of project activities are based 

on field reconnaissance of similar projects and utilizing Pacific Northwest residues photos series 

guide PNW 52. Fuel models were chosen based on geographic information system (GIS) database 

mapping remote sensing satellite imagery (2004), LANDFIRE fuels data, and field reconnaissance. 

Fire Behavior

FlamMap v. 3.0, a fire behavior mapping and analysis program that computes fire behavior

characteristics, was used to predict potential fire behavior using existing fuels conditions. 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. 

ArcMap 9.3 was utilized to explore data, visually display various datasets and modify fuels to 

reflect changes that occurred during activities identified in the action alternative. 

Behave Plus 4.0 was the model used for evaluating and determining flame length, scorch height,

and mortality rate.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  133

Remote sensing satellite imagery from 2004 was extracted, converted and analyzed in the 

FlamMap program under specific fuel moisture conditions. 

Fire Weather

Fire Family Plus 4.1 combines fire climatology and occurrence analysis. This program allows 

evaluation and development of fire danger percentile ratings, generates fire history data, and 

perform queries on weather stations and associated weather conditions using climatology. 

Data was extracted from the Western Regional Climate Center for the purposes of developing a 

windrose analysis. This climatological data is used to compute windspeed and direction for a given 

time, this data is then used to determine various windspeed for the 97th percentile days and is an 

input to the FlamMap fire behavior program.

Historical weather data was collected from the Lava Butte weather station 13 miles north of the 

Ogden project. A typical fire season on the Bend-Ft. Rock Ranger District is defined as May 15th 

– September 30th. The Lava Butte Remote Automated Weather Station (RAWS 352618) was 

selected to best represent weather conditions for the Ogden project area. Round Mountain RAWS 

was analyzed but not used because it did not represent wind or a 97th percentile condition.

Based on the 97th percentile predicted weather, Table 26 presents variables that describe conditions 

on the 3 percent of the warmest and driest conditions during this time period. The average data 

from 1986 to 2009 showed that most winds are southwesterly with a wind speed of 9 MPH but can 

reach much higher wind speeds. Weather for 97% conditions (Temperature and Wind) was used 

with a .4 mid flame wind adjustment factor to account for treated stands in the fire behavior 

analysis. 

Table 26: 97th Percentile Projected Weather Conditions, Ogden Project Area

Fuel Moisture Conditions 97th Percentile Predicted Weather*

1-hour Moisture Content 3%

10-hour Moisture Content 4%

100-hour Moisture Content 7%

Live Herbaceous Moisture Content 35%

Live Woody Moisture Content 65%

Temperature Maximum 93 oF

Relative Humidity Minimum 13%

20 Foot Wind Speed 13 MPH

*The 97th percentile, 3 percent of the days would be expected to be warmer and drier.

3.4.4 Desired Condition

Those areas managed for reduced fire behavior potential would include a number of associated 

desired conditions. 

• The Stand Structure would have crown bulk density and forest canopy continuity that

could not sustain a crown fire occurrence. 

• The trees within stands would have a canopy base height high enough above shrub cover to 

reduce the potential for crown fire initiation. 

• The shrub layer would be maintained at a height that would lower flame length to below 

four feet to allow direct attack by hand crews and reduce the potential for crown fire 

initiation. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

134  Ogden Draft EIS

• The fuel model would be Fuel model 8, which exemplifies the fuel characteristics 

conducive to low fire behavior and successful suppression by direct attack of hand crews. 

• 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.

• Within these areas across the landscape, defensible space of at least 500 feet 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. 

Figure 41, page 135, provides a visual display of the desired condition for a grass and shrub 

understory. This desired condition would allow a low intensity burn, either wildfire or planned 

ignition within ponderosa pine. Under that condition, fire suppression crews can safely attempt to 

control wildfire. Prescribed burning is also safely used to maintain fuels accumulations at reduced 

levels, mimicking historical conditions where fire occurred with more frequency, in stands that 

have had relatively recent management activities or natural events
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  135

Figure 41: Left: Desired Future Condition of Surface Fuels - Ponderosa Pine with Grass/Shrub Understory (stand density is hgher than reference 

conditions discussed in Forested Vegetation section). Right: Light Intensity Underburn in Ponderosa Pine with Grass/Shrub Understory.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

136  Ogden Draft EIS

3.4.5 Existing Condition

Fire History and Occurrence

Fire Family Plus 4.1 and geographic information systems (GIS) databases were used to collect and 

analyze large fire history and fire occurrence. The following map displays large fires that have 

occurred in and around the Ogden project area. About 4,000 acres have burned under wildfire 

conditions since 1990 and over 7,600 acres have burned under wildfire conditions since the 

Deschutes National Forest large fire record began around 1904. 

Figure 42. Large fire history, Ogden project area.

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. 

Forest ecosystems have changed over the last century. Fire suppression, grazing, logging, and 

increased human interaction within the forests have altered the landscape. There has been a 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  137

notable increase in insect outbreaks, fuel loading, stand replacing 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). Other fires that helped shape the 

landscape include Paulina Prairie 2,827 acres (1918), Paulina Creek 169 acres (1918) and Ned 

Angland 639 acres (1922) (Figure 41). On average 10 lightning, 2 abandoned campfires, 1smoking 

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.

Presently, one of the project area’s greatest concern is located on the north side of Forest Service 

road 21 and the Newberry National Volcanic Monument boundary. This area displays potential 

high fire behavior where it would not allow safe evacuation, adequate access for fire personnel and 

apparatus, or opportunities to use road systems as either fuel break or barrier to fire spread.

Fire Regimes and Condition Classes 

A fire regime is a generalized classification of the role fire would play across a landscape –

characterized by fire frequency, predictability, seasonality, intensity, duration and scale (USDA 

and USDI 2002, Central Oregon Fire Management Plan 2010). 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. 

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). The 

majority of the project area, (About 11,846 acres) is made up of the ponderosa pine PAG, based 

on plant associations by Volland (1985). This PAG is categorized as Fire Regime I.

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 standreplacing 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. Approximately 7,556 acres of the project area are within 

lodgepole pine PAGs, which are categorized as Fire Regime III.

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. 

The Fire Regimes described here are based on Volland (1985) plant associations. These plant 

associations suggest that lodgepole pine makes up more than 20% of the canopy cover of the 

overstory or the understory in the lower 1/3 of the project area. Historical maps, data and photo 

interpretation from the 1930s (see silviculture report) reveal that areas currently categorized as 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 have altered the stand type and this Fire Regime does not mimic natural process. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

138  Ogden Draft EIS

This map shows 35-100 year or more 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.

Each fire regime can be put into condition classes based on the amount of departure from the 

natural regime of vegetation characteristics; fuel composition; fire frequency, severity and pattern, 

and other disturbances. This departure is due to fire exclusion and other past management 

activities, and can cause the alteration of key ecosystem components such as species composition, 

structural stage, and canopy closure. Condition Class 1 represents areas that fall most within their 

natural or historical regime of characteristics. Condition Class 2 and 3 represent areas that have 

moderate and high departures from the natural or historical regime of characteristics. 

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 project area is 

an appropriate size landscape to assess the Fire Regime Condition Class. Because of the 

controversy and simplicity of using Fire Regime/Condition Class (Morrison and Smith 2005; 

Veblen 2003), It is not used for prescribing treatment alternatives. 

In order to simplify the concepts behind condition classes within each fire regime, the three 

condition classes have been grouped into two descriptive categories of acres: restoration acres and 

maintenance acres. Restoration acres are those that fall into condition class 2 and 3. These acres 

are at an elevated risk of loss of components that define those systems as unique. Maintenance 

acres are assumed to be functioning within expected parameters with respect to overstory 

condition. Often, maintenance acres are still in need of treatment due to their surface conditions, 

i.e. a well-developed shrub layer presenting high flame lengths and the potential for crown fire 

initiation. Table 28 provides a summary of the Fire Regimes in the Ogden project area and their 

current condition: maintenance or restoration.

Table 27: Acres by Fire Regime and Condition Class Summary for the Ogden Project Area

PAG / Fire 

Regime Description

Maintenance 

Condition 

Acres

% of 

Regime

Restoration 

Acres

% of 

Regime

Total 

Acres in 

Regime

Ponderosa 

Pine – Fire 

Regime I

0-35 yr. return, 

low intensity 2,712 23% 9,134 77% 11,846

Mixed 

Conifer –

Fire Regime 

III

35-100 yr

return, mixed 

severity

5,251 74% 1,868 26% 7,119

Lodgepole 

Pine- Fire 

Regime IV

35-100+ yr

standreplacing 

severity

1,360 18% 6,196 82% 7,556

Total Acres 26,521

Existing Condition Expected Fire Behavior Potential

Fire behavior is the manner in which a fire reacts to the influences of fuels, weather and 

topography. Fire behavior is typically modeled at the flaming front of the fire and described in 

most simply terms of fireline intensity (flame length) and in rate of forward spread. The 

implications of observed or expected fire behavior are important components of suppression 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  139

strategies and tactics, particularly in terms of the difficulty of control and effectiveness of various 

suppression resources. 

The following parameters of fire behavior are discussed for the existing condition in the Ogden 

project area: Flame Length, Rate of Spread, and Fire Effects Associated with Scorch Height.

Flame Length: Predicted flame length (Table 28) given the relationship between 97th percentile 

weather and existing fuels conditions. The fuel models selected for this run were extracted from 

ArcMap using the 2004 remote sensing data. The fuels data was then converted into an LCP file in 

FlamMap. Table 28 and Figure 44, page 148, and Figure 45, page 149, illustrate that most of the 

area sees a variance of flame lengths between 4-8 feet.

Table 28: Fire Suppression Effectiveness According to Predicted Flame Length.

Flame Length Resistance to Control – Implications to Fire Suppression Effectiveness

0-4 Feet Direct attack with ground resources is succesful

4-8 Feet Direct attack ineffective withour mechanized or aerial support

8-11 Feet Aerial support required to be effective – Indirect attack only safe option

11+ Feet Indirect attack with mechanized support and extensive preperation needed to 

support control efforts.

Rate of Spread: Four ignition points were selected to represent fire spread across the landscape. 

Ignition points were selected by areas of concern (high resource value) identified by resource 

specialists. The four sites selected; Ogden Group Camp, Forest boundary East of Newberry 

subdivision, Mckay Crossing Campground and along Forest Service Road 21 (main travel route 

into the Newberry National Volcanic Monument).

The paths of modeled fire ignitions showing spread and distance after 8 hours of burning under 97th

percentile weather and current fuel conditions (Flammap v 3.0); these 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). The approximate distance of fire 

travel after eight hours to the furthest point is approximately 2 1⁄2 miles (200 chains) from ignition 

point.

The rate of spread would exceed initial attack production rates under 97th percentile weather 

conditions. Table 29 shows the rates of spread and forward spread distance. The four major flow 

paths show the potential path and distance the fire could spread after 8 hours; the furthest distance 

is approximately 200 chains (2.5 miles) ÷ 8 hours = 25 chains/hour. This exceeds initial attack 

response capabilities and requires additional resource commitment; larger area burned and typically 

increased suppression cost.

Table 29: Rate of Fire Spread

Rate of Spread (Chains per Hour)* Forward Spread Rate (Distance)**

0-10 < 1/8 mile per hour

10-20* 1/8 to 1/4 mile per hour

20-40* 1/4 to 1/2 mile per hour

40+* 1/2 mile per hour +

*1 chain = 66 feet

**Rate of Spread (ROS) greater than 12 chains/hour (800 feet/hour) typically exceeds initial attack response production 

rates
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

140  Ogden Draft EIS

Scorch Heights: Table 30 displays flame lengths and associated scorch heights. Fire damage to 

the crown and bole influences a tree’s probability of surviving. Usually crown scorch or 

consumption, or a combination, is important to predicting post-fire mortality (McHugh et al. 2003). 

Table 30: Flame Scorch Height in Feet Associated with Flame Length for 97% Weather Conditions

Flame Length 

(Feet) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Scorch Height 

(Feet) 6 14 25 38 52 67 83 100 117 136 155

Fire behavior conditions that rate as low allow fire suppression resources to safely and efficiently 

attack the fire at the head. Multiple operational alternatives can be considered such as aggressive 

full perimeter control, point source protection or utilizing barriers either natural or manmade.

The fire behavior condition ratings shown in Table 31 for flame length and rate of spread 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. 

Condition ratings for fire type correspond with the potential for a crown fire. A low rating is for 

areas where a surface fire potential exists with no potential for either type of crown fire. A 

moderate rating is for areas where a passive crown fire (a surface fire with individual tree torching) 

may exist. A high rating is for areas where the potential for an active crown fire (a fire involving 

the crowns of trees with support from a surface fire) exists.

Table 31: Fire Behavior Condition Ratings and the Associated Indicator

Fire Behavior Indicator Fire Behavior Rating

Low Moderate High

Flame Length 0-4 ft 4-8 ft 8 ft +

Fire Type Surface Passive Crown Fire Active Crown Fire

Table 32 displays the acreage and percentage each fire behavior type in the Ogden project area.

• Flame lengths are evaluated when considering the resistance to control fire. 

• Fire type is evaluated if the concern is fire in the canopy.

Table 32: Existing Condition - Predicted Fire Behavior

Indicator Low Moderate High

Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent

Flame Length 6,895 26 12,465 47 7,161 27

Fire Type Surface Passive Crown Fire Active Crown Fire

1,856 7 11,054 41 13,791 52

The result of the existing predicted fire behavior is that the majority of the project area (70-90%) 

would have moderate to high flame lengths with passive to active crown fire runs that would be 

difficult to control. The greatest fire behavior potential occurs in the mixed conifer in designated 

old growth, adjacent to Forest Road 21, in the RHCA and in mixed conifer and lodgepole 

dominated stands. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  141

FlamMap Analysis shows that for the existing condition, 26% of the landscape has low flame 

length potential, which could safely and effectively be suppressed by initial attack resources under 

97th percentile weather and fuels conditions. Typically flame lengths less than 4 feet can be 

suppressed at the head of the fire. Any flame length greater than 4 feet needs to be attacked at the 

flank and usually indirectly, resulting in more severity and quantity of undesired effects.

There are two stages to the crown fire process: the first is torching, or movement of fire into the 

crown (passive crown fire), the second is active spread of the crown fire where fire moves from 

tree crown to tree crown through the canopy (active crown fire) (Fitzgerald 2005). Approximately 

52% of the analysis area is susceptible to active crown fire. This type of fire behavior produces the 

greatest challenges to suppression efforts as resistance to control are extremely difficult, fires 

typically leave undesired effects, are much more costly and most importantly elevates the risk and 

exposure to the firefighter. Passive crown fires, although not as intense as an active crown fire, can 

make suppression difficult due to high flame lengths and short and long range spotting. Just over 

11,000 acres, representing 41% of the project area is predicted to have passive crown fire potential. 

Ninety-three percent of the project area is predicted to have either active or passive crown fire 

potential.

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 to high potential. 

3.4.6 Environmental Consequences

Condition Class

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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. 

The stands 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 9,323 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 

17,198 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. 

• Fire regime condition classes would continue to depart from their natural regime, and 

species composition would change over time. 

• Fuels would continue the current trend toward condition class 3, with increases in ladder 

fuels and canopy cover. 

• Fires suppression activities would continue. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

142  Ogden Draft EIS

• The ability to hold a wildfire outside of private land or areas of high interest would 

continue to be difficult. Escape routes for forest users would be compromised. 

• 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. Exclusion of fire will further propagate the degradation of the 

existing condition further altering the condition class. 

The riparian habitat of Paulina Creek would continue to have small trees establish in the absence of 

fire. 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.

Further deviation from historical range will continue in the project area. This 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.

This alternative allows the trend to continue from ponderosa pine to a mix of lodgepole pine. More 

lodgepole pine would increase stand susceptibility to Mountain Pine Beetle. There is evidence of 

scattered bark beetle outbreaks and mistletoe infestation throughout the project area. Increased tree 

mortality from bark beetles could add to the fuel loading, increasing the susceptibility of ponderosa 

pine stand-replacing fires. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Restoration treatments would occur on 8,414 acres of 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, 5,823 acres of 

Condition Class 1 within the project area would be treated to lessen the fire behavior potential; 

these treatments would be 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 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Restoration treatments would occur on 10,856 acres 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, 3,636 acres of Condition Class 1 acres within the project area would be treated to 

lessen the fire behavior 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.

Effects common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Fire behavior would be lessened in the project area. Units and 

treatments have been designed to fragment the landscape. Past management activities and ongoing 

projects in adjacent areas reinforce the intent of breaking up the continuous fuel loading. The 

intent is to not remove fire from the landscape completely but to minimize the impacts, effects and 

scale of undesired fire characteristics. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  143

Precommercial thinning of ladder fuels would increase Canopy Base Height (CBH) and decrease 

Canopy Bulk Density (CBD). This would reduce the risk of torching and crown fire. 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. 

Returning the landscape into a low fire behavior potential rating would provide multiple options to 

manage planned and unplanned fire for resource benefit. Fire behavior and effects would be less

severe. Short term, it would be safer for direct attack suppression action. 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. 

The effects on areas that are treated would greatly reduce the fire behavior for 5-7 years, gradually 

losing effectiveness. Maintenance treatment (mowing and/or underburning) would be needed 

within the next 15-20 years. Maintaining conditions would be important in keeping fire behavior 

low. Delay of maintenance activities could allow treated stands to develop into moderate or high 

within 20 years. Brush responds rapidly to mowing when not followed up with subsequent 

mowing and/or underburning. Maintaining fire behavior at low levels also provides increased 

protection to those values identified as high interest. Safe public evacuation and ecological 

benefits can be expected with a low fire behavior rating.

Approximately 65% of the RHCA is considered Condition Class 2 or 3. Treatments within the 

RHCA will disrupt fuel continuity, remove excessive fuel loading and restore the riparian area to 

Condition Class 1, where treated. In areas where surface fuels are low, either natural or activity 

related, underburning would be allowed. Firing operations would cease 50 feet from the creek 

channel but would be allowed to naturally back down to creek. If handline is needed, it would be 

placed on either end of a targeted burn area to keep the fire within the targeted burn area.

Direct ignition to coarse down woody material, rock out crops and snags would be avoided by 

ignitions crews to maintain special habitats. 

Prescriptions and guidelines for fuels treatments proposed within the Scenic View allocation are 

described in this DEIS, Chapter 2, Forest Plan Amendment. Underburning would occur during

favorable conditions within the Scenic View allocation to minimize scorch, mortality and smoke 

impacts. 

Fuels treatments in ponderosa pine would alter fuels conditions to levels where fires burn primarily 

in surface fuels, with the exception of wildlife leave areas or wildlife corridors. Dense stands of 

small diameter trees and brush in these areas would provide ladder fuel for surface fire to transition 

into tree crowns. Direct ignition would be avoided in these areas but fire would be allowed to back 

into “leave” areas unchecked unless fire behavior and effects deemed it necessary to contain and 

control. Control lines might be needed to minimize fire from entering wildlife corridors. 

Fuels treatments in lodgepole pine would alter fuel conditions so that fire would burn primarily in 

the surface fuels with slower rates of spread and lower intensity. Direct ignition will not occur and 

control lines will not be constructed unless fire behavior warrants such action. If fire naturally 

burns through these stands tree mortality would likely occur. To maintain minimal stocking levels, 

fire induced mortality will be minimized.

Vegetation management activities can create measurable amounts of dead and down woody 

residue. Fuel loadings produced by precommercial or commercial thinning will be commercially

utilized, burned on-site, or rearranged to meet fuels objectives. There would be short-term negative 

effects from slash remaining from non-commercial thinning. The slash would either be piled and 

burned or left on site. Additional disposal would be facilitated by underburning or left onsite for 

natural decay. If piled, the piles would be short term (generally 1-3 years) until disposed of. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

144  Ogden Draft EIS

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. Mowing alone has short term affect from 5-7 years. 

Subsequent mowing and/or underburning will be needed to maintain Condition Class 1. There will 

be positive long-term effects on fuel loadings with maintenance treatments to sustain the benefits 

of fuel reduction treatments. 

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 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 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 and 

with time would degrade and fall producing pockets of heavy fuel loads, resulting in fire behavior 

potential producing moderate to high intensity and severity.

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 to minimize short-term impacts to scenic foreground areas. 

Cumulative Effects

The Lava Cast project north of the Ogden project has had recent 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 would 

behave in a more historic role in the ecosystem. Crown fire potential would be reduced to much 

smaller isolated areas across the landscape.

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 to condition class from any 

reasonably foreseeable action related to geothermal exploration. The geothermal activities are 

expected to continue into the future.

Amount of Project area that would Exhibit Low Fire Behavior

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 mortality would continue.

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 shift areas that are currently rated as 

low fire behavior potential to a moderate or high potential fire behavior rating.

Fire suppression would remain compliant with agency standards and guidelines, direct attack

would be the desired option with ground based resources so long it is safe and effective; acreage 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  145

burned would be larger with greater costs, exposure and risk to fire personnel would continue to 

increase. 

Figure 43 on the following page shows that only 6,895 acres (26%) within the project area 

(depicted in green) exhibit low flame length potential on 97th percentile days. The larger blocks of 

low fire behavior correlate with the most recent wildfire events in the project area (see Figure 42). 

It is noticeable that much of the land immediately adjacent to the identified protection targets 

(recreation sites and travel corridors) are rated at a moderate or high flame length potential. 

Passive and in some cases active crown fire could be expected in these areas. Ground based 

resources would be unable to employ direct attack methods in most of these areas and would need 

to assess indirect or point protection alternatives. In the event of wildfire, expedient evacuation of 

public would be necessary in McKay Campground along the Peter Skene Ogden trail and in 

portions of Forest Service Road 21, 2121 and 9735. Early detection and warning would be critical 

for safe location and dispersal of forest users.

There may be a period of time between the thinning activity and the subsequent slash treatment 

where increased fuel loadings could occur resulting in a temporary increase in fire behavior 

potential. Also, a reduction in forest canopy by thinning will likely result in a minimal increase in 

eye-level winds and allow surface fuels to dry at a slightly increased rate.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

146  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 43: Existing Condition Flame Length Potential

* Flame Length Potential: Green = Low; Yellow = Moderate; Red = High

Effects of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 decreased fire behavior, increased fire line control 

possibilities, and decreased fire suppression costs. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  147

In stands that will be prescribed burned 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. 

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. 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. 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.

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. 

Intensive forest management that involves the creation of activity fuels (slash) can indeed increase 

fire behavior conditions 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). 

Following Alternative 2 treatments (thinning, piling, underburning), 68% of the landscape (Table 

33, page 148) will have a potential fire behavior rating of low (flame length of 4 feet or less). 

Alternative 3 treatments convert 57% of the landscape to a potential fire behavior rating of low. 

Associated fire effects would also be reduced, such as tree mortality and scorch, soil disturbance,

and smoke. Ground based firefighting resources would be able to safely and efficiently take action 

at the head of the fire. Subsequent treatments specifically underburning are needed to maintain 

resiliency to undesired fire effects. 

Figure 44 illustrates the effects of the treatments in Alternative 2. The green indicates potential fire 

behavior rated low as it relates to flame length. 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. Areas identified as protection 

targets or areas of concern also see reduced flame length potential. Forest Service road 21 (main 

ingress/egress for Paulina and East Lake) displays reduced fire behavior 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. 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 would lessen the fire behavior as it entered 

those treated stands bringing passive and in some cases active crown fire down to the surface fire.

Figure 44 and Figure 45 show subtle changes in flame length between the alternatives. In 

Alternative 3 less underburning occurs and more lodgepole pine remains within stands. It is 

reasonable to predict various levels of mortality in the lodgepole pine where underburning is 

planned. Lodgepole pine has thin bark and is less resistance to fire then that of ponderosa pine. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

148  Ogden Draft EIS

Mortality in lodgepole pine could occur and provide snags and eventually down coarse woody 

debris. Direct ignition during prescribed fire operations would not occur, but it is recognized that 

second order fire effects could cause mortality in the lodgepole pine. 

Figure 44: Alternative 2 - Potential Flame Length Based on 97th Percentile Weather Conditions

with Associated Table 33

Table 33: Alternative 2 - Percentage of Landscape with Potential Flame Length Rating Low

Compared to No Action.

Alternative

Potential Flame Length of Low

Acres Percent Project 

Area

Alternative 1 (No Action) 6,895 26

Alternative 2 18,034 68

Figure 45 illustrates the effects of treatments in Alternative 3. Similar to Alternative 2, areas 

identified as protection targets or areas of concern also see reduced flame length potential. The 

same holds true in Alternative 3 as in Alternative 2, 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. Alternative 3 leaves more (2,917) acres at 

moderate or high fire behavior potential; although the high priority areas (see Figure 39) are 

modified to low fire behavior the same as Alternative 2.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  149

Figure 45: Alternative 3 - Potential Flame Length Based on 97th Percentile Weather Conditions

with Associated 

Table 34.

Table 34: Alternative 3 - Percentage of Landscape with Potential Flame Length Rating Low

Compared to No Action

Cumulative Effects 

Table 38, page 155, shows the activities that were reviewed for actions that could contribute to the 

cumulative effects analysis. The potential for development of an Off Highway Vehicle trail 

system, recent treatments in the Crossings, Lava Cast, and Prairie Dog projects 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.

Alternative Flame Length Potential Rating Low

Acres Percent of Project Area

Alternative 1 (No Action) 6,895 26

Alternative 3 15,117 57
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

150  Ogden Draft EIS

Crown Fire Potential

To determine crown fire potential, each forest polygon in the geographic database for the Ogden 

analysis area was rated in terms of its potential to express crown fire behavior during a fire event. 

Crown fire potential was assessed using stand density thresholds related to the crown bulk density 

of canopy foliage (Agee 1996).

Fire behavior calculations were made based on a “worst case” scenario for weather and fuel 

loadings because these are conditions that would contribute to a problem fire. Fuels conditions 

were selected based on the loading, distribution and type as it relates to primary carrier/contributor 

to fire spread.

Crown fires can occur in a wide variety of forest types (Agee 1993). Increasingly, crown fires are 

taking place in forest types not historically prone to crown fires, such as ponderosa pine forests 

(Mutch and others 1993). Crown fires are very problematic because they are more difficult to 

control than surface fires. The rate of fire spread is several times faster than surface fires 

(Rothermel 1983). Spotting is frequent and can occur over long distances. Greater flame heights 

from crown fires dictate larger firefighter safety zones (Butler and Cohen 1998). Spotting and 

increased radiation make structures more difficult to defend from crown fire than surface fire 

(Cohen and Butler 1998). 

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Under current conditions high stand densities, needle draped brush 

and presence of dwarf mistletoe and fire exclusion would continue to make contributions to fuel 

loading. Incoming reproduction would continue to add to stand densities and ladder fuels, 

increasing the susceptibility to crown fire. Crown fire activity is likely to occur on 53% of the 

project area and conditions would support an active crown fire.

With an increase in ladder fuel development and canopy closure, the 7% of acres currently 

exhibiting surface fire potential would transition over time to the potential for passive crown fire. 

The 40% of acres currently exhibiting passive crown fire potential would transition over time to the 

potential for more active crown fire, due to the same conditions. The effects of a crown fire would 

be more severe and lasting than surface fire. Near total tree mortality should be expected. Smoke 

production will be greater, and foliar nutrients may be lost from the site.

A significant risk to life and property exists wherever forest stands prone to crown fire lie in 

proximity to residential or recreational development. 

Current conditions, as illustrated in Figure 46 (in red) and Table 35, show that 53% of the project 

area is at high risk to crown fire. All species are susceptible, especially the mixed conifer stands 

where typically, overstocking and fuels loads are greatest. 

Only those stands recently treated or that are of lower densities produce passive crown fire. The 

green areas in Figure 46 are fuel conditions that support surface fire. These areas are primarily 

found in the more recent fire areas of Mckay (1998) and Newberry 2 (2000). The remaining 

potential surface fire areas are confined to isolated areas that may be void of any fuels or may be 

dominated by grass/shrub fuels.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  151

Figure 46: Existing Condition - Crown Fire Potential under 97th Percentile Conditions and 

Associated Table 35.

Table 35: Existing Condition – Crown Fire Potential 

Existing Condition – Fire Behavior

Fire Type

Low (surface) Moderate (passive) High (active)

Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent

1,856 7 10,694 40 13,971 53

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed treatments in Alternative 2 would affect all areas where 

there is a potential for a passive and active crown fire by lowering the threat to a surface fire. 

These treated areas would only support a surface fire, with a greatly reduced threat of any type of 

crown fire. This is due primarily to the thinning from below treatment followed by mowing and/or 

underburning. These areas represent a change of 12,286 acres (93% to 47% of the project) from an 

existing potential of passive and active crown fire to a potential of surface fire. Refer to Table 35

(Existing condition fire behavior) and Table 36 (Alternative 2 fire behavior) for the differences in 

acres for each of the fire types. Figure 46 also shows the crown fire potential across the entire 

planning area for post treatment Alternative 2 conditions. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

152  Ogden Draft EIS

Post treatment fuel models changed to fuel model 8 in lodgepole pine and fuel model 6 or 9 for 

ponderosa pine. 

With the reduction in crown fire potential:

• Spotting frequency and distance is reduced, 

• Direct attack becomes a viable control method, 

• Less burn severity (less mortality in fire dependent species),

• Reduced exposure to firefighters.

Post treatment fuel models changed as follows: by converting the fuel model to either fuel model 8 

in lodgepole pine or fuel model 6 or 9 for ponderosa pine. If fuel model 5 or 6 was the primary 

contributor to fire spread; mowing and/or underburning was planned then the fuel model selected 

was fuel model 9. In areas that were represented by fuel model 6 and mowing was planned, then 

the change to Fuel Model 121 was determined to best represent mowing treatment, fine fuel 

loading 0 -1/4 inch diameter and 1⁄4 - 1 inch remained the same but was rearranged to better reflect 

treatment. Fuel Model 121 is the primary carrier of fire is grass and shrubs combined. Shrubs are 

about 1 foot high, grass load is low. Spread rate is moderate and flame length is low (Scott and 

Burgan 2005). 

Reducing the crown fire potential would allow both planned and unplanned ignitions as a tool to 

manage for multiple resource objectives. Fire would be allowed to burn on the landscape with less 

intensity and less undesired consequences. The fragmented nature and spatial distribution of 

treatments would keep crown fire activity much smaller in scale and the overall impacts would be 

less severe on the landscape.

It is expected that the beetle activity would continue to increase without treatment, leading to a 

subsequent increase in beetle killed pine. This would potentially affect stands that are not treated 

and is reasonable to predict crown fire in those areas.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  153

Figure 47: Alternative 2 - Potential Crown Fire and Associated Table 36.

Table 36: Alternative 2 - Reduction in Crown Fire Potential

Alternative 2 – Fire Behavior

Fire Type Low (surface) Moderate (passive) High (active)

Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent

Existing 1,856 7 10,694 40 13,971 53

Alternative 2 14,142 53 7,353 28 5,026 19

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed treatments in Alternative 3 would change fuels and 

have similar effects as Alternative 2, allowing a surface fire, with a reduced threat of crown fire. 

This would change 11,821 acres (93% to 48% of the project area) from potential passive and active 

crown fire to potential surface fire. Refer to Table 35, page 151 (Existing condition fire behavior) 

and Table 37, page 154 (Alternative 3 fire behavior) for the differences in acres for each of the fire 

types. Figure 48 also shows the crown fire potential across the entire planning area for post 

treatment Alternative 3 conditions. Similar to Alternative 2, this reduction in potential will provide 

multiple opportunities for fire managers to manage fire on the landscape. 

It is also reasonable to predict that fire beginning in treated stands and entering untreated stands 

would see increased crown fire; however, the fragmented nature and spatial distribution of 

treatments would keep crown fire activity much smaller in scale and the overall impacts would be 

less severe on the landscape.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

154  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 48: Alternative 3 - Potential Crown Fire with Associated Table 37.

Table 37: Alternative 3 - Reduction in Crown Fire Potential - Fire Behavior

Alternative 3 Fire Behavior

Fire Type Low (surface) Moderate (passive) High (active)

Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent

Existing Condition 1,856 7 10,694 40 13,971 53

Alternative 3 13,677 52 8,179 31 4665 17

Cumulative Effects

The geographic scale of crown fire potential extends beyond the Ogden project boundary. The 

recently completed Dice and Bon timber sales (Lava Cast EA) north of the project will have fuels 

treatments to reduce the potential of crown fire. The Crossings CE hazardous fuels reduction 

project to the west of the Ogden planning area will also provide the needed fuel break and canopy 

reduction that would reduce the risk of crown fire. These recently treated areas combined with the 

Ogden project would provide a reduced risk of active crown fire on a landscape of approximately 

50,000 acres. Wildfires have occurred in this area and it is reasonable to forecast future fires on 

this landscape. Treatments will provide a reduced risk of crown fire, it is recognized and expected 

that areas on the landscape will continue to see passive torching and in isolated instances active 

crown fire. The areas impacted by undesired crown fire would be much smaller in scale. 

Treatments focused on ponderosa pine minimize the potential for sustained crown fire. In areas 

dominated by lodgepole pine or in mixed conifer, fuels treatment would be completed on a lesser 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequence Fire and Fuels

Ogden Draft EIS  155

scale. Fire that burns actively and transitions into crown fire in lodgepole pine and mixed conifer 

is within the ecological norm. Increased mortality in the lodgepole pine and in mixed conifer 

stands would be expected.

It is implied that treatments in the Lava Cast and Crossings projects will be additive to the 

treatments in Ogden, by lowering predicted fire behavior for the entire Ogden planning area. 

Treatment effects would likely last longer in areas in which vegetation development is slower than 

in areas with high productivity. For short periods after treatment, fuels changes produce dramatic 

differences in fire behavior. Van Wagtendonk and Sydoriak (1987) concluded that prescribed 

burning would be required at least every 11 years to maintain fuel loads below their pre-burn 

condition. Van Wagtendonk (1995) also reported reductions in fire spread and intensity of fires up 

to 14 years after previous burns in mixed conifer. 

Table 38: Potential Cumulative Actions Affecting Fuels Analysis

Activity/Project Description of Action General Effect

Prairie Dog Timber Sale

Adjacent to and in SW portion of 

project area; Completed timber sale 

and associated activities; 

Implementation complete, subsequent burns 

needed for maintenance

Crossings CE Adjacent to the West boundary; 

hazardous fuels reduction completed

Implementation complete, additional 

treatment reinforces community protection

Lava Cast Project

Adjacent to the north boundary; 

Thinning, piling and underburning; 

some ongoing

A larger fragmented landscape of fuels 

reducing the ability of fire to burn in high 

intensities across larger areas.

Travel Management Road Access

Closing roads could reduce quick access for 

firefighting resources. Fire will move across 

the landscape as vegetation encroaches roads

Firewood cutting Users usually remove larger 

concentrations of firewood Reduction of fuel loading levels
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels

156  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 49: Fire Response to Untreated (left) and Treated (right) Stands. The untreated stand on 

the left experienced 90% mortality from a wildfire. The treated stand had been precommercial 

thinned, mowed and underburned; resulting in a low intensity wildfire with no mortality.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Air Quality

Ogden Draft EIS  157

3.5 Air Quality

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 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Air Quality

158  Ogden Draft EIS

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 Existing Condition

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 40, 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. 

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Air Quality

Ogden Draft EIS  159

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 39: 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 39). 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 40: 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

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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Air Quality

160  Ogden Draft EIS

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 Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  161

3.6 Wildlife 

3.6.1 Summary

The Ogden project area does not contain any habitat for any threatened, endangered, or candidate 

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.

3.6.2 Introduction

This section of the EIS will address the following:

• Federally Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species

• Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species

• Management Indicator Species

• Birds of Conservation Concern

• Snags and Coarse Woody Material

• LOS Habitat and Connectivity

3.6.3 Regulatory Framework

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 federally proposed or listed candidate, threatened, or endangered species, forest-wide 

sensitive species, Management Indicator Species [LRMP, (MIS)], ecological indicators (FSM, 

species and/or habitats), and Species of Concern [Fish and Wildlife Service designation, (SOC)] 

and the components of these species’ habitats. Projects proposed that may be within any occupied 

or potential habitat of any federal candidate, threatened, or endangered species on the Forest must 

be consistent with the Project Design Criteria (PDC) for the Joint Aquatic and Terrestrial 

Programmatic Biological Assessment (BA) for Fiscal Years 2010-2013 (U.S. Department of 

Agriculture et al.. 2010), hereafter referred to as the Programmatic BA, in order to require no 

further consultation. Projects that affect the species addressed by the document, and do not meet 

the applicable PDCs, must initiate the appropriate level of consultation with the U. S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service. PDCs for proposed species may be included in the BA but are optional for the 

management agencies. 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. 

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

162  Ogden Draft EIS

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 found in the East Slope of the 

Cascades, and the focal species that are associated with these habitats. The conservation strategy 

lists priority habitats: 1) Ponderosa Pine 2) Mixed Conifer (Late Successional) 3) Oak-Pine 

Woodland 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.

Another publication became available in 2002 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service entitled 

“Birds of Conservation Concern 2002” (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 

considered for inclusion on lists 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 2002 are priorities for conservation action, 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 2002).

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.

Each section contains a table that contains the name, status, a brief habitat description, and the 

presence of habitat relative to this project of each of the wildlife species considered in this 

document. Following this table is a brief review of the rationale for the “No habitat within or 

adjacent to proposed treatment areas” conclusion for each of the species for which this was made, 

and no further analysis is done. Those species with any other conclusion are further analyzed in 

this document.

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  163

3.6.4 Analysis Methods 

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 this project’s Environmental Impact Statement). 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. 

Field reviews to assess habitat conditions for the species considered have been ongoing since 2005. 

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. 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 (Barbara Schroeder 2010) 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, 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 involve multiple decades, shortterm impacts are addressed over a less than 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

164  Ogden Draft EIS

Implementation Units and nearby planning areas (total area of approximately 105,225 acres; Figure 

50). 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.

Figure 50: Spatial Bounding for Cumulative Effects to Wildlife

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 EA), 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, and to 

the point that the proposed actions under the Ogden EIS would be additive.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  165

3.6.5 Federally Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species

Existing Condition

Table 41: Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate Animal Species known to Occur or May Occur on 

the Bend-Ft. Rock Ranger District

Threatened, Endangered, or Candidate 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

Oregon Spotted Frog

(Rana pretiosa)

USFWS Candidate, 

S

Wetlands, riparian 

areas, slow water S2 No habitat

California 

Wolverine

(Gulo gulo luteus)

USFWS Candidate, 

S, 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

Key to abbreviations: 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 = nonbreeding

Oregon Spotted Frog

Existing Condition

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 cumulative effects to the northern spotted owl, or its habitat.

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 is 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. 

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action), Alternative 2 (Proposed Action), and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: The Ogden project area does not contain the type of riparian and 

wetland habitat for this species of frog. 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, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

166  Ogden Draft EIS

implementation of the No Action or any Action Alternative proposed in the Ogden Project area 

would have no effect on the Oregon spotted frog or their habitat.

Cumulative Effects: Because there is a lack of effects as a result of the proposed actions, or no 

action, there are no cumulative effects to the Oregon spotted frog or habitat.

California Wolverine

Existing Condition

The wolverine is the largest member of the weasel family (weasels, martens and fishers), and is 

known to be a solitary and wide-ranging species. Wolverines utilize downed logs and rock 

crevices or talus for denning. Prey is not a limiting factor for wolverines because they are 

opportunistic carnivores that also eat a variety of berries and roots (Natureserve 2009). They 

utilize high elevation (7,000 to 9,000 feet), alpine habitat where snow coverage remains well into 

the denning season (spring) with only slight variations in habitat use between summer and winter 

(Copeland et al. 2007; Aubry et al. 2007). They have a large home range, averaging 422 square km 

(104,000 acres) and, even with the best habitat, are found in low densities. Wolverines tend to 

avoid areas of high human population or road densities (Krebs et al. 2007). It has been suggested 

timber harvesting, backcountry skiing, snowmobiling, roads and other forms of human disturbance 

can have a negative association with wolverine occurrence in research cited by Ruggiero et al. 

(2007). Hornocker and Hash (1981) concluded that wolverine populations should be treated as 

regional rather than local. However, Edelman and Copeland (1999) suggest that wolverine 

populations move along corridors of mountainous habitats and that features such as the Columbia 

River Gorge and shrub-steppe habitats serve as barriers to dispersal. They also conclude that 

sightings occurring across the arid mountains of Central Oregon may suggest a movement corridor 

from the Cascade Mountains to the Wallowa Mountains.

Diebert et al. (1970s) recorded wolverine observations in the area of Three-Fingered Jack (1965), 

Broken Top (1969), Many Lakes Basin (1972), and Willamette Pass (1973). More recently, 

wolverine tracks were found in the Deschutes Bridge area during winter track surveys by the 

Oregon Department Fish and Wildlife (ODFW; Glen Ardt, personal communication, 4/20/2007). 

Aubry et al. (2007) shows the last verifiable and documented wolverine sighting in Oregon was in 

1992. This paper also shows that in breakdowns of decades going back to 1900, there have been 0 

to 2 records of sightings per decade for Oregon.

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.

For this project analysis it was assumed the Montane Mixed Conifer and alpine non-forest types 

adequately represent potential wolverine habitat (this representation would encompass the cirque 

basins that are most often described as habitat), there are 5800 acres of potential wolverine habitat 

in the cumulative effects area and only 3 acres within the Ogden project area. 

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, but there may be denning habitat within the Newberry Crater.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  167

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: There are no proposed actions within any wolverine habitat. The 

proposed actions do not directly or indirectly impact wolverines.

Cumulative Effects

Wolverines are probably limited in the cumulative effects area due the 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.

3.6.6 Sensitive Species

Table 42: Region 6 Sensitive Species known to Occur or May Potentially Occur on the Bend-Fort 

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

Greater Sage Grouse 

(Centrocercus 

urophasianus)

S∗ Sagebrush flats S3 No habitat

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 S*, MIS, Ponderosa pine forests, S2 Yes, habitat 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

168  Ogden Draft EIS

Species

Federal and 

Forest 

Classification

Habitat Natureserve 

Ranking

Presence in 

Project Area

Melanerpes lewis Landbird focal 

species

burned forests available

Northern Waterthrush

Seiurus noveboracensis S Riparian vegetation; bogs, wetlands S2 Yes, habitat available

Mammals

Pacific Fisher

(Martes pennanti)

S Mixed conifer forest, 

complex forest structure S2 Yes, habitat available

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 

mistletoe Arceuthobium

S2 No habitat

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, silverbordered fritillary, Johnson’s hairstreak. For more specific discussion regarding habitat for 

these species refer to the Wildlife Report beginning on page 10.

Discussion for Species Further Analyzed

Bald Eagle

Existing Condition

Essential habitat elements for the continued recovery of the northern bald eagle are nest sites, 

communal night roosts, foraging areas, and perch sites. On the Deschutes National Forest, 

ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir trees averaging >32 inch dbh with live large, open limb structure 

are preferred for nesting. Nests consist of bulky stick platforms built in the super-canopy of such 

trees, or less frequently on cliffs. They are typically constructed within one mile of appropriate 

foraging habitat, which includes rivers and large lakes and reservoirs. Bald eagles are sit-and-wait 

predators, which predominantly capture prey from perches over water; ideal perches are large trees 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  169

and snags within 330 ft. (100 m) of water (Anthony et al. 1995). Prey items include fish, 

waterfowl and other birds, small mammals, and carrion (Stalmaster, 1987). 

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 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.

Environmental Consequences

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This 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 lack of resilience and subsequent stand-replacing fire may reduce human 

competition with bald eagles for the fisheries resource as a result of an assumed reduction in the 

amount of recreational fishing.

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 using the creek during 

project implementation, it is considered unlikely. There is considerable recreation use within the 

caldera as well as along the creek. 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 fuels 

section, fire is likely to run up the creek and into the Monument (caldera). By allowing firefighters 

to more easily stop a fire before it reaches the caldera, the eagle habitat around the lakes is better 

protected.

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.

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.

The proposed actions have the potential for beneficial effects through the reduction of wildfire risk

(Cumulative Effects tables 12 and 13). As stated earlier, the proposed action area and lakes receive 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

170  Ogden Draft EIS

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

Based on the lack of direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, the proposed action under either 

action alternative would have no impact to bald eagles.

American Peregrine Falcon

Existing Condition

American peregrine falcons often nest on ledges or holes on the face of rocky cliffs or crags. They 

are commonly situated on ledges of vertical cliffs, commonly with a sheltering overhang. This 

habitat type is only found on Paulina Peak within the Newberry Crater. There is no peregrine 

falcon habitat within the proposed project area.

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 and its location well outside of the proposed area. 

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 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  171

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 is 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 (tables 12 and 13) 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.

Determination

Based on the lack of direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, the proposed action under either 

action alternative would have no impact to peregrine falcons.

Harlequin Duck

Existing Condition

Harlequin ducks winter in rough coastal waters, especially along rocky shores or reefs; summering 

non-breeders also occur in this habitat. Harlequins also nest along fast-moving rivers and mountain 

streams on rocks or banks and feed on aquatic invertebrates, small fish, and insects (Natureserve 

2010; Interagency Pacific Northwest website – species fact sheet 2009). There are no documented 

sightings of harlequin ducks on the Bend-Ft Rock Ranger District. There have been sightings on 

the Deschutes National Forest, and the Bend-Ft Rock District does have potential habitat.

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. Therefore, 

although Paulina Creek could be potential habitat for the harlequin duck, its present condition 

makes it of marginal quality.

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.

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

172  Ogden Draft EIS

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 8 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 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. In the 

long-term, there would be improvement to the quality of the habitat along the creek and increased 

protection from a wildfire running up the stream channel. Where possible, dispersed campsites

will be closed and rehabilitated, which would also improve habitat by reducing disturbance.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Direct and indirect effects of this alternative are similar to those 

discussed for Alternative. Alternative 3 proposes fewer actions within the RHCA and potential 

harlequin duck habitat (17 acres less underburning and 14 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

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):

1. maintain the quality of breeding habitat, and 

2. minimize disturbance along breeding streams.”

Based on the above information, the degree or recreation pressure on Paulina Creek appears to be 

the biggest detriment to harlequin ducks. 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. The proposed actions along with the projects 

listed in Cumulative Effects (Tables 12 and 13) 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. 

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.

Determination

Based on the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, the proposed actions under either action 

alternative may impact individuals or habitat of the harlequin duck but not likely contribute to a 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  173

trend towards federal listing. There may be beneficial impacts to the harlequin duck as a result of 

the fuels and vegetative treatments within the RHCA. 

White-headed Woodpecker

Existing Condition

White-headed woodpeckers utilize both live and dead ponderosa pines. They will forage on both 

live and dead pines often selecting the large diameter pines because they have more seeds and 

make more suitable nesting habitat. Raphael and White (1984) reported this species has a reliance 

on mature, cone-producing pines for foraging in the winter. Having large ponderosa pine does not 

assure this species’ presence. Indications have been made that a well-developed understory of trees 

and shrubs may encourage mammalian predation on nests (Marshall, 1997). White-headed 

woodpeckers are absent from early seral ponderosa pine stands. These woodpeckers are poor 

excavators and generally select for a more moderately decayed or softer snag in which to nest 

(Dixon, 1995). Wightman et al. (2010) state that based on their research of white-headed 

woodpecker nesting ecology after wildfire: “pre-fire management activities that open forest 

canopies and create forest conditions conducive to a mosaic burn pattern by wildfire may 

encourage white-headed woodpecker nest occupation.” (page 1, 104). They also point out that 

snags existing before wildfire are critical habitat components because snags created by fire have 

lower retention rates and may not reach levels of decay favored by this species.

In order to determine the extent of potential white-headed woodpecker habitat, satellite imagery 

data collected in 2004 was used. This imagery data proved more reliable than the photo-interpreted 

data from 1995 because it is more recent and the amount of change in the forest conditions for the 

last 6 years is negligible. The imagery data held up to field verification. The satellite data was 

queried for areas of ponderosa pine habitat and trees larger than 15 inches dbh and a canopy 

closure of at least 10 percent. There are stands with large ponderosa pines (live and dead) in the 

project area, thus potential habitat is present (approximately 1,784 acres in the project area and 

4,978 acres in the cumulative effects area). There have been no known observations of whiteheaded woodpeckers in the project area.

A review of information within the Natureserve (2010) online database reports that in central 

Oregon the average home range for this species in a fragmented forest is 321 hectares (ha) (793 

acres). This suggests that there is habitat for 2-3 white-headed woodpecker home ranges. The 

habitat components that are likely limiting white-headed woodpeckers are large ponderosa pine 

(i.e. >15”dbh) coupled with large diameter ponderosa pine snags.

Mellen-McLean et al. (2009) show that for this species the 30% tolerance level is 0.3 snags >10” 

dbh per acre and the 50% level is 2 snags >10” dbh per acre and 4 snags >10” dbh per acre at the 

80% tolerance level (Figure PPDF_PF.sp20). Tolerance level represents the percentage of each 

species’ population that uses particular sizes or amounts of snags and downed wood (Marcot et al. 

2010). Using the sampling data gathered within the project area in 2010, the current snag (> 10” 

dbh) density is 1.35/acre (range 0.8-2.3/acre) with 0.65 snags/acre (0.5-1.1/ac) being >=20”. This 

currently meets the 30% tolerance level for the smaller snags and for snags >20”dbh. Based on 

these figures, the project area has a low likelihood of white-headed woodpeckers utilizing the area 

based on the overall ponderosa pine snag density. 

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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

174  Ogden Draft EIS

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).

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 

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 are fall, there would be a large gap (hundreds of years) before trees grow large and 

die again.

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. The proposed actions would 

indirectly affect 745 acres of potential white-headed woodpecker habitat.

Superficially, this correlates to one home range. The acres impacted ,however, are spread out and 

not concentrated in one area. Thus rather than the 745 acres severely impacting one home range, 

the impacts are diluted and spread out across all of the potential home ranges within the project 

area.

Based on the 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). Proposed 

actions within the ponderosa pine habitat include thinning of trees 7-12” dbh where ponderosa 

pine, regardless of size would be favored or accentuated. The proposed actions would build on the 

trend to creating stands of larger dbh ponderosa pines. The proposed actions would increase 

diameter growth on the remaining trees before the stands reach a density whereby beetle mortality 

would be imminent. This would create more white-headed habitat. Gaines et al. (2010) found that 

white-headed woodpecker detections were greater in areas that were thinned or thinned and burned.

In other areas where treatments are proposed, 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 Silviculture Report), habitat for white-headed 

would be improved.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  175

Alternative 3

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. The proposed actions would 

indirectly affect 841 acres of potential white-headed woodpecker habitat. These acres also reflect 

two of the larger patches (approximately 32 and 94 acres) of habitat in the project area.

This alternative has similar effects as Alternative 2 because the objectives for harvest within the 

potential white-headed woodpecker habitat are the same.

Cumulative Effects

Recent timber sale projects within the cumulative effects area (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 

short-term, 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.

Cumulatively the proposed actions contribute to an additional 15-17% of potential white-headed 

woodpecker habitat affected. Based on the analysis of the effects to ponderosa pine LOS in the 

Lava Cast project area, the cumulative impact of the 15-17% in the Ogden proposal equates to an 

approximate 30% of the potential habitat treated. This assumes that old-growth ponderosa pine 

equates to potential white-headed woodpecker habitat. In large part, 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 current large snags. As 

stated earlier, in Wightman et al. (2010) suggest 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 discussion) supports the conclusions that the action alternatives will, in the long-term, 

recruit more large diameter snags in the ponderosa pine habitat types (Figure 52, page 177, and 

Figure 53, page 177). 

The No Action alternative (Figure 51, page 176) appears to support the findings in Klenner and 

Arsenault (2009) that showed an initial pulse of snags created within the first 20 years of beetle 

attack and then a decrease in large snags recruitment for the next 30 years.

Determination

Based on the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, the proposed actions under either action 

alternative may impact individuals or habitat of the white-headed woodpeckers but not likely 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

176  Ogden Draft EIS

contribute to a trend towards federal listing. There may be some beneficial impacts to the whiteheaded woodpeckers as a result of the fuels and vegetative treatments. 

Figure 51: Alternative 1 (No Action) – Snag Recruitment Over Time

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

Snags per Acre

Year

Snag Recruitment over time - No Action Alternative

Snags >=15 

and < 20

Snag >=20
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  177

Figure 52: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) - Snag Recruitment over Time – Following Treatment

Figure 53: 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

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

Snags per Acre

Year

Snag Recruitment over time - Alternative 3

Snags >=15 

and < 20

Snag >=20
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

178  Ogden Draft EIS

Lewis’ Woodpecker

Existing Condition

This species utilizes dead wood (large snags) in open forests (ponderosa pine and in some cases 

riparian) that may have been logged or burned (Winkler, et. al. 1995; Natureserve, 2009; Saab et. 

al. 2002). Marshall, et. al. (2003) reports that this species is associated with open woodland 

habitat near water. It primarily breeds in Oregon white oak, ponderosa pine, and riparian 

cottonwood communities. Important components of breeding habitat include an open woodland 

canopy and large-diameter dead or dying trees. Potential habitat, as described in the literature, is 

found within the project area. There is little to no cottonwood habitat within the RHCA. This 

analysis will focus on the ponderosa pine habitat.

Also for this project analysis, the Lewis’ woodpecker habitat is the same as the habitat described 

for the white-headed woodpecker. Lewis’ woodpeckers may tolerate more open stand conditions 

than white-headed woodpeckers. There are stands with large ponderosa pines (live and dead) in 

the project area, thus potential habitat is present (approximately 1,784 acres in the project area and 

4,978 acres in the cumulative effects area). This maybe an underrepresentation of the entire 

available habitat because there is a large area of a past burn (McKay Fire, 1998) that is currently 

providing habitat, but because it does not have a canopy closure it was not part of the satellite 

imagery query (see white-headed woodpecker discussion). Lewis’ woodpeckers were observed 

during the nesting season within the project area in another area of an old burn (Newberry 2, 2000 

or Paulina Fire 1918). 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, to the presence of the Lewis’ woodpeckers. Mellen-McLean et al. (2009) show 

that for this species the 30% tolerance level is 24 snags >10” dbh per acre and the 80% level is 63 

snags >10” dbh per acre and 16 snags >20” dbh per acre (Figure PPDF_PF.sp20). Current snag 

densities estimated within and adjacent to the proposed units does not meet the snag densities at the 

30% tolerance level. The DecAID densities were taken from research in a post-fire landscape. 

Natureserve (2010) cites a study from the Blue Mountains of Oregon (Thomas et al. 1979) 

suggesting a breeding season territory size of 6 ha (15 acres). The best habitat for Lewis’ 

woodpeckers in the project area is centered on the areas that have seen wildfire within the last 20 

years.

According to Altman (2000), this species is a focal species for patches of burned old ponderosa 

pine forest, and conservation issues for this species relevant to the proposed actions include: fire 

suppression; salvage logging of burned ponderosa pine trees; alteration of old ponderosa pine forest 

to young forest due to logging or fire suppression; increased competition with European starlings 

for nest sites; and lack of advanced decay snags or ones with cavities already present.

Conservation strategies relevant to the proposed actions include: increase levels of acceptable 

opportunities to allow wildfires to burn; use prescribed burning and understory thinning to maintain 

existing old forest ponderosa pine stands and accelerate development of mid-successional stages to 

old forest; prohibit or limit salvage logging to retain both hard and soft snags in clumps; close 

roads where large ponderosa pine snags are present; retain standing dead or diseased trees where 

they occur; promote a shrubby understory; thin young pines in dense stands ; and retain large living 

and dead trees (Altman, 2000).

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  179

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. 

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). The proposed actions within the ponderosa pine habitat would keep the stands on a 

trajectory to having larger average diameters. It is estimated that within a couple of decades the 

stands would not only have trees a few inches larger in diameter, but also be at density whereby 

they would be susceptible to beetle mortality. Only when these newly created larger pine have 

been dead for a few years and in further stages of decay, would new Lewis woodpecker habitat be 

created. Thus the beneficial impacts would not be realized for many years.

No treatments are planned within any of the currently known Lewis’ woodpecker habitat. The 

recent burns still contain numerous standing ponderosa pine snags with advanced decay. Lewis’ 

woodpeckers have been observed using this habitat.

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 

prescribed burning portion may put firefighters closer to these types of trees. Although it is 

acknowledged that prescribed fire is a conservation strategy to develop Lewis’ woodpecker habitat.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: The effects of the proposed actions under this alternative would be 

the same as described under Alternative 2 with the only exception being that this alternative treats 

slightly more acres of potential habitat. 

Cumulative Effects

As with the white-headed woodpecker habitat, the proposed actions have cumulative benefits to 

Lewis’ woodpecker habitat 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 because of this species utilization of well-decayed snags. 

Loss of snags because they are safety hazard to humans may have a larger impact on Lewis’ 

woodpeckers because they often utilize the large, well-decayed snags that are often pose the most 

safety risk.

Although the proposed actions may cumulatively add to the likelihood that snags may be cut for 

safety reasons (e.g. firefighter safety during prescribed burns), 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 consideration); thin young pines in dense stands ; 

and retain large living and dead trees (no trees greater than 21” dbh will be cut and mitigation for 

snags retention).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

180  Ogden Draft EIS

Determination

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. As illustrated under the analysis for white-headed woodpeckers, 

there may be some beneficial impacts to the Lewis’ woodpeckers as a result of the fuels and 

vegetative treatments. Larger ponderosa pine snags will be recruited over the project area, 

although this benefit will not be realized for many years.

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 243 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 226 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 8 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 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 long-term, 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 (17 acres less underburning and 14 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  181

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. 

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%), latesuccessional 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 3-13 

pounds and 29-47 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’ 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 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 (multi-storied stands; greater than 20” average stand dbh; and greater than 55% canopy 

closure) in the cumulative effects area.. A total 4681 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, 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

182  Ogden Draft EIS

Most logs were lodgepole or ponderosa pine ranging from 7-48” diameter (overall average 12”); of 

the logs greater than or equal to 12” dbh 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. 2006), 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 and 13 snags per acre larger than 10” dbh. Existing 

estimates within the project area are 12% downed log cover and an average of 1-2 snags per acre. 

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 43: 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 still probably serve as 

marginal fisher habitat, because of the high degree of recreation use, road and trail densities.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: No actions would retain more dead wood, barring any wildfire, in 

potential fisher habitat. Areas of heavy concentrations of downed logs would remain. In some 

areas, canopies experiencing bark beetle attack will die and overall canopy closure will decrease. 

No action would not address any impacts occurring from the current recreation use within the 

project area (i.e. habitat would remain marginal).

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative proposes treatments within 87.5 acres of 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  183

Cumulative Effects

Although there treatments proposed within potential fisher habitat and the impacts of these 

treatments are cumulative to other projects that have treated within the cumulative effects area (e.g. 

Lava Cast); the larger cumulative effects issue is the proposed treatments being additive with the 

continuing proposals to add or improve recreation opportunities (e.g. Lava Rock OHV trail system) 

and geothermal developments and monitoring that would require the improvement and 

maintenance of roads in the area. These additive impacts reduce the suitability of the project area 

for fishers and focus the habitat to roadless and limited access areas within the Newberry Crater. 

This may restrict or narrow east/west movements of fishers.

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 not likely contribute to a 

trend towards federal listing. The amount of habitat altered represents marginal habitat and a small 

(<5%) portion of a single fisher territory

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. 

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

184  Ogden Draft EIS

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. 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 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 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 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. 

The following two tables (Table 44 and Table 45) summarize effects and determinations to 

Threatened, Endangered, Candidate and Region 6 Sensitive Species.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  185

Summary of Findings & Conclusions

Table 44: Summary of Effects to Threatened, Endangered, Candidate and Region 6 Sensitive 

Species

Species

Alternative 1 (Acres) Alternative 2 (Acres) Alternative 3 (Acres)

Habitat 

Altered

Habitat 

Removed

Habitat 

Altered

Habitat 

Removed

Habitat 

Altered

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 0 0 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

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 745 0 841 0

Northern Waterthrush N/A N/A <243 0 <212 0

Lewis’ Woodpecker N/A N/A 745 0 841 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 45: Summary of Determinations of Threatened, Endangered, Candidate, and Region 6 

Sensitive Species

Species Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Northern Spotted Owl NE NE NE

Oregon Spotted Frog NI NI NI

Northern Bald Eagle NI NI NI

Horned Grebe NI NI NI

Bufflehead NI NI NI

Harlequin Duck NI MIIH/BI MIIH/BI

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/BI MIIH/BI

Lewis Woodpecker NI MIIH/BI MIIH/BI

Northern Waterthrush NI MIIH/BI MIIH/BI

California Wolverine NI NI NI

Pacific Fisher NI MIIH MIIH
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

186  Ogden Draft EIS

Species Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Pygmy Rabbit NI NI NI

Crater Lake Tightcoil NI MIIH/BI BI

Silver-bordered Fritillary NI NI NI

Johnson’s Hairstreak NI NI NI

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

3.6.7 Management Indicator Species including Neotropical 

Migratory Birds

Table 46: Wildlife Species Considered (Those in Bold Receive Further Consideration)

Wildlife Species Considered

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

Pygmy nuthatch Landbird focal 

species

S4 Apparently Secure

Mature ponderosa pine 

forests and snags

Habitat in proposed 

treatment areas
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  187

Wildlife Species Considered

Species Status Habitat Presence

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 

Extirpated-Breeding, 

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 –

non-breeding

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/Vulnerablenonbreeding

Marches with open water and 

lakes and reservoirs with 

emergent vegetation

No Habitat within or 

adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

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
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

188  Ogden Draft EIS

Wildlife Species Considered

Species Status Habitat Presence

American widgeon 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 breeding, 

Vulnerablenonbreeding

Cavity nester No Habitat within or 

adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

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
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  189

Wildlife Species Considered

Species Status Habitat Presence

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

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
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

190  Ogden Draft EIS

Wildlife Species Considered

Species Status Habitat Presence

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

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 

No Habitat within or 

adjacent to proposed 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  191

Wildlife Species Considered

Species Status Habitat Presence

tundra 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
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

192  Ogden Draft EIS

Wildlife Species Considered

Species Status Habitat Presence

Loggerhead shrike BCC Open country with scattered 

trees and shrubs

No Habitat within or 

adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas

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

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 in bold in Table 46above) 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 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 1: Canada Goose, Wood duck, Gadwall, American 

widgeon, 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  193

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, 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, short-billed 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 beginning on page 31.

Discussion for Species Further Analyzed

Northern Goshawk – Key Issue #5

Existing Condition

In Oregon, goshawks tend to select mature or old-growth stands of conifers for nesting, typically 

those having a multi-layered canopy with vegetation extending from a few meters above ground to 

more than 40 meters high. Generally nesting sites are chosen that are near a source of water and 

are on moderate slope, usually having northerly aspects. This habitat type is quite similar to that 

used by the Cooper’s hawk, but the trees tend to be older and taller and have a better-developed 

understory of coniferous vegetation (Reynolds, Meslow, and Wight, 1982 in Csuti et al., 2001). 

Foraging generally occurs within these mature stands where small openings occur. These birds 

generally forage on passerines (e.g. songbirds), but often utilize small mammals such as rodents as 

well as the occasional snowshoe hare. Some gallinaceous bird species are also preyed upon such as 

blue and ruffed grouse. Species and abundance of gallinaceous prey varies in the range of the 

goshawk depending on elevation and latitude. 

Within “Scenario A of the Eastside Screens Standard and Guides” as it amends the 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 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

194  Ogden Draft EIS

discovered in the vicinity of the 2009 nest attempt. Based on surveys and observations, there are 3 

active goshawk territories within the project area.

Each territory was assigned a name, a core area, a post-fledging area (PFA), and alternate nest 

stands Table 47. 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. Postfledging areas are those stands surrounding the nest stands that meet the definitions in Youtz, et al. 

2007 (close-canopied, mature forest). Surrounding and encompassing these areas are goshawk 

foraging areas ranging in size from 5,401-6,192 acres (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 eta l (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 54).

Figure 54: Existing goshawk territories within the Ogden planning 

area.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  195

Table 47: Acreage Breakdown for each of the Stand Categories in the Goshawk Territories

Stand Category* Finley Butte** McKay*** My

Nest Core 30 20 30

Alternate Nest 249 191 188

PFA 631 446 445

Foraging 5,973 6,192 5,401

* Each category gets progressively bigger and encompasses the categories above it (e.g. Alternate Nest = Nest Core + 

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

**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.

The difference in acreages for each category between the Eastside Screens direction and the 

mapped amounts is due to the decision to base the categories on stand boundaries. Using the stand 

boundaries allow for a more logical (determined by the trees and land) and cross-discipline (used 

by silviculture, fuels specialists, etc.) use of the database. From Table 47, 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 displayed in Figure 62.

Table 48: Stand Structure Breakdown (Acres) for each Goshawk Territory

Finley Butte McKay My

Territory PFA Territory PFA Territory PFA

Open -

Seedling/Sapling

1,453 24% 98 15% 1,345 22% 11 2% 1,082 20% 8 2%

Young 2,727 46% 341 54% 2,165 35% 170 38% 2,495 46% 213 48%

Mid-aged 1,678 28% 180 28% 2,220 36% 147 33% 1,375 25% 176 39%

Mature 112 2% 12 2% 460 7% 116 26% 446 8% 48 11%

Old 1 <1% 0 0% 2 <1% 0 0% 3 <1% 0 0%

Total 5,973 631 6,192 446 5401 445

Table 48 shows that 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 (page 

100).

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.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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. This is not to say 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. Although 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

196  Ogden Draft EIS

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). These areas would contribute to this risk.

Table 49: Other Activities (Proposed and Existing) within the Goshawk Territories with Potential 

Effects

Activity Finley Butte McKay My

Trails (hiking, biking, OHV, & snowmobile) ~2 miles ~4.5 miles ~7 miles

Geothermal Sites 0 5 4

Developed Recreation Sites 1 1 2

Proposed OHV Trail* ~8 miles ~7 miles ~11 miles

*Based on early draft proposals under the Lava Rock OHV project.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative does not propose any activities within the goshawk 

PFAs. It does propose treatments within the territories (Table 50 and Figure 55, page 194). A 

majority of the proposed actions are within the smaller size classes (less than 15” average stand 

diameter) and stands with lower canopy closure (less than 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).

Table 50: Alternative 2 Proposed Activity Acres within Goshawk Territories

Activity Finley Butte McKay My

Timber Harvest 1,916 2,507 1,205

Pre-commercial thin 408 605 569

Mow 138 558 275

Underburn or Mow & Underburn 1,897 2,223 964

Total Treatment Acres in each Territory (% Treated)* 2,324 (39%) 3,476 (56%) 1,775 (33%)

*Multiple treatments in some areas.

A bulk of the proposed actions (Table 50) occur within the structural ages that are overrepresented 

(e.g. the young and mid-ages stages are consistently greater than 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 appear 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. It is projected that 

in the stands that are currently classified as mid-aged (9-15”average diameters); within 20-30 years 

the average stand diameters could be 12-18”diameter, which is the mature classification.

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. 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

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  197

Figure 55: Alternative 2 - Spatial Representation of Proposed Activities within the Goshawk Territories
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

198  Ogden Draft EIS

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative differs from the previous one by proposing 

treatments within each of the PFAs and, in some cases, the alternate nest stands. Neither 

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 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 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 (less than 

0.15 acres) 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 (greater than 9” dbh) and kill ponderosa pine that are adjacent to these lodgepole 

pine (B. Schroeder, personal communication August, 2010). In its current condition these stands 

are not sustainable as goshawk habitat for the long term. This PFA is trending towards complete 

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 the longest.

Table 51: Alternative 3 Proposed Activities within Goshawk Territories

Activity Finley Butte McKay My

Timber Harvest 1,712 2,327146 1,183

Pre-commercial thin* (No PFA Acres) 778 605 552

Mow (No PFA Acres) 136 527 318

Underburn or Mow & Underburn 1,440 1,209 617

Total Proposed Acres (% territory treated)* 2,685 (45%) 3,442 (55%) 1,919 (35%)

PFA or Nest Acres (% PFA treated) 50 (8%) 146 (33%) 147 (33%)

*Multiple treatments in some areas. Includes Ladder Fuels Reduction (LFR) – a removal of small trees from around 

larger ponderosa pine without a density target.

Table 52: Alternative 3 Proposed Activities Within Goshawk Post-Fledging Areas (PFAs)

Activity Finley Butte

(Unit 946)

McKay

(Units 53, 949) 

My

(Units 909, 913, 965, 966)

Timber Harvest 50 (within alt. nest area) 146 147 (PFA & alt. nest 

area)

Pre-commercial thin* 0 0 0

Mow 0 0 0

Underburn or Mow & 

Underburn 50 (within alt. nest area) 0 147 (PFA & alt. nest 

area)

PFA or nest 

(% PFA treated) 50 (8%) 146 (33%) 147 (33%)
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  199

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. 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 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 redtailed hawk and great-horned owl to more readily use the area. The trade-offs of this alternative are 

long-term gains for more extensive short-term impacts.

Cumulative Effects

The proposed actions are cumulative to other existing and reasonably foreseeable projects within 

the project area and larger cumulative effects area. 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. 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 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 (Table 48), 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 geothermal 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 (Figure 56, page 201) 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

200  Ogden Draft EIS

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, cumulatively 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  201

Figure 56: Alternative 3 - Spatial Representation of Proposed Activities within Goshawk Territories
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

202  Ogden Draft EIS

Cooper’s Hawk

Existing Condition

The Cooper’s hawk prefers coniferous, mixed and deciduous forests, as well as riparian, juniper, 

and oak woodlands. Vegetative profile around nests are trees 30-60 and 50-70 years old in 

northwest and eastern Oregon, respectively with tree density of 265/ac. and 469/ac. Coopers hawks 

commonly nest in deformed trees infected with mistletoe. (Marshall et al. 2003). 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 considering the vegetative conditions within proposed units, potential habitat for this species is 

similar as the goshawk. Within the larger 105,225 acre area, there are approximately 7632 acres of 

potential Cooper’s hawk habitat (913 acres within the project area and 257-276 acres of this within 

proposed units) when using the LRMP definition of a stand has a “mean canopy cover of 60% or 

greater, tree density of at least 365 trees per acre, stand age of 50-80 years (LRMP WL-17). A 

Cooper’s hawk territory can be 200-1700 ac in size; with ranking in Oregon being “apparently

secure” (Natureserve, 2010). This information would suggest that the larger area may have up to 5

pairs of Cooper’s hawks when using the larger territory size. 

In comparing where Cooper’s hawk have been observed with the habitat descriptions from the 

literature, it appears that for the Ogden project area, average size class of trees within the stand is a 

better determinant of habitat than canopy closure. The local data show that Cooper’s hawks 

observations were in areas with trees averaging >=9” dbh and at least 25% canopy closure (this 

latter stand characteristic was less reliable than size class).

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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). 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternatives 2 and 3 directly treat approximately 257 and 276 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 mistletoed 

trees that may serve as nest trees.

The acres treated represent approximately 28-30% of the Cooper’s hawk habitat within the 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 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  203

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%. 

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.

The amount of habitat impacted by the proposed alternatives does not equal an entire territory. 

Habitat within multiple territories may be impacted by the cumulative effects of many ongoing and

foreseeable actions.

Sharp-shinned Hawk

Existing Condition

Sharp-shinned hawks, in Oregon, breed in a variety of forest types that have a wide range of tree 

species, though most are dominated by conifers. Nests have been located at elevations that range 

from roughly 300 to 6000 feet. Vegetative characteristics found at nest sites, include high tree 

density and high canopy cover, which produce cool, shady conditions. Nest stands preferred by 

sharp-shinned hawks are younger than those preferred by Coopers’ and goshawk, usually 25-50 yr 

old, even-aged stands. In eastern Oregon all nest sites found by Reynolds et al. (1982) in Marshall, 

2003 were in even-aged stand of white fir, Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, or aspen, with ground 

vegetation limited to grasses and creeping barberry (Marshall et al. 2003). Natureserve reports 

that the sharp-shinned hawk has a ranking of “apparently secure” in Oregon. The Deschutes 

LRMP defines sharp-shinned hawk habitat as stands with a mean canopy cover of 65% or greater, 

tree density of at least 475 trees per acre, stand age 40-60 years (LRMP WL-25). Using the 2004 

satellite data for the project area and larger cumulative effects area, sharp-shinned nesting habitat 

was defined as areas with greater than 55%, and an average tree diameter of greater than 5”. 

Sharp-shinned hawks have similar home range sizes to Cooper’s hawks (i.e. 1,700 acres; 

Natureserve 2010). 

There are approximately 731 acres of potential habitat within the project area and a total of 7,062 

acres of sharp-shinned habitat within the watersheds. The high canopy closure appears to be the 

limiting factor for sharp-shinned hawk habitat in the area. The largest patches of habitat with this 

canopy closure are in the mixed conifer associations. Based on habitat descriptions and territory 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

204  Ogden Draft EIS

size, the project area does not have habitat for one complete territory (approximately 1,700 acres) 

but there is habitat for approx 4-5 sharp-shinned hawks in the larger cumulative effects area. 

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 sharp-shinned habitat will be retained. Without consideration to 

stand-replacing fire, sharp-shinned hawk habitat would continue to develop in the project area.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions largely stay out of the high canopy closure, 

mixed conifer stands that would provide the highest quality habitat for this species. Treatments are 

proposed within 167 and 181 acres (Alternatives 2 and 3, respectively) of the available sharpshinned habitat and approximately 25% of the total mixed conifer habitat. 

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 that habitat type. The proposed treatments would remove sharp-shinned 

hawk habitat on the 167 and 181 acres. 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 lodgepole pine are 

found.

Cumulative Effects

Proposed actions within the potential sharp-shinned hawk habitat represent approximately 2-3% of 

the available potential habitat in the larger cumulative effects area. Similar to the project area, the 

habitat within the larger area is mainly within the mixed conifer, higher elevations outside of 

allocations with regulated timber harvest (e.g. Newberry Crater). 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. 

Great Gray Owl

Existing Condition

Great Gray Owl nest stands vary in stand type from mixed stands of ponderosa pine and 

lodgepole pine to mixed conifer. Within these stands, for optimum nesting habitat, canopy cover 

ranges from 50-70%. Nest stands are generally associated with open forest containing canopy 

closure ranging from 11-59% dominated with grasses, open grassy habitat, including bogs, 

selective and clear-cut logged areas, and natural meadows (Bull and Henjum 1990 in Marshall et 

al.. 2003). 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” dbh, canopy cover of 

60% (50-70%), and distance to nearest meadow 440 (63-1,070 feet) feet (LRMP WL-31). There 

are a few natural openings within the project area or adjacent to the project area. 

Current great owl survey protocol does not recommend surveying areas over 6,000 feet in 

elevation. This limits the potential great gray habitat in the project area to being in the mixed pine 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  205

habitats in the lower elevations. The natural opening here are the Ogden meadow, and the recent 

burn areas.

Based on the habitat descriptions within the LRMP, there are approximately 4 acres of habitat in 

project area; 12 acres in the cumulative effects area.

Common to all Alternatives

Direct and Indirect Effects: Although there are some natural openings within the project area, the 

surrounding forested stands do not contain the density of trees utilized by great gray owls for 

nesting. 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. 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 of the Ft Rock Ranger District.

No direct or indirect effects are anticipated to great gray owls.

Cumulative Effects

Because of the lack of direct and indirect effects, the proposed actions would not have cumulative 

effects to great gray owls or their habitat. Because of the lack of effects, the proposed actions 

would not contribute to a downward trend in local populations of great gray owls.

Great Blue Heron

Existing Condition

Great blue herons can be found in nearly any meadow, grassland, marsh, riparian thicket, lake, 

river, or pond within every habitat type, including agriculture, pasture, and urban areas. Nests are 

commonly located in coniferous or deciduous trees, but also can be found on cliff ledges or even 

on the ground in thick marsh vegetation (Csuti et al. 2001). 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. 

Heron use of Paulina Creek is likely ancillary to their use of the Little Deschutes and the habitat 

surrounding Paulina and East Lakes. A heron may stop along Paulina Creek to hunt for prey. 

There is no know rookery along the creek and the degree of recreation use along this creek likely 

precludes the establishment of one.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Although Alternative 2 proposes more treatments within the RHCA, 

potential heron use is focused on the creek itself. Neither alternative proposes treatments directly 

adjacent to the creek; therefore current heron use would not be impacted by the alternatives.

Protecting the riparian habitat along the creek by treating the fuels will benefit heron foraging. 

Improved and better protected riparian habitat benefits the species that heron prey upon.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

206  Ogden Draft EIS

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 minimized because there are fewer actions 

proposed within potential heron habitat

Because of the lack of effects, the proposed actions would not contribute to a downward trend in 

local populations of great blue herons.

Red-tailed Hawk

Existing Condition

Red-tailed hawks have an extremely wide tolerance for habitat variation. Red-tails are largely perch 

hunters. Red-tailed hawks typically utilize habitat types that provide suitable perches (trees, utility 

poles, outcrops, etc.) and are open enough to permit the detection of ground-dwelling prey. Redtails frequent woodland, agricultural land, clearcuts, grasslands, sagebrush plains, alpine 

environments, and urban areas. They construct nests in a variety of situations including tree, utility 

poles cliffs, and place their nests higher than other broad-winged hawks (Marshal et al. 2003). The 

planning area provides nesting and foraging habitat, there is one known nest near the western 

boundary of the project area. Natureserve (2010) ranks this species as “secure” in most of 

continental United States, including Oregon.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Because of the generalist nature of this species, this alternative would 

not likely have any direct or indirect effects.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: The known nest site will be protected by a 300 ft. no treatment buffer 

as directed within the LRMP (WL-2) and seasonal restriction within 1⁄4 mile (WL-3; see resource 

protection measures, beginning on page 36). 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.

Indirectly, habitat may improve for red-tailed 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-tail 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.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Impacts from the action proposed under this alternative are similar to 

Alternative 2. Alternative 3 proposes slightly more treatments than Alternative 2. 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  207

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-tail 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.

Osprey

Existing Condition

Osprey historically nested only in forested regions of Oregon because of its selection for large live 

trees (broken top) or dead trees (snags) for nest sites. Nests in Oregon are usually located within 2 

mi of water with an accessible fish population. Nest sites on utility poles are common due to land 

clearing for agriculture and lack of suitable habitat for nesting. They will also use nest platforms 

developed for Canada Geese, which was noted to occur at wildlife refuges (Marshall et al. 2003).

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 were approximately 2-3 different nests, built 

in the “classic” osprey form of a large stick nest perched atop a large diameter, often dead, 

ponderosa pine. A known osprey nest tree in the project area that had been occupied within the last 

3 years was cut down last year because it posed a hazard to recreationists at the Ten Mile Sno-park.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 2 directly proposes treatments in areas where there are 

osprey nest platforms. Standard and Guidelines (WL-2 & 3) would protect these trees, and if 

active, a seasonal restriction would be placed 1⁄4 mile around the tree (resource protection measures, 

page 36).

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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

208  Ogden Draft EIS

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. This may directly impact potential 

osprey nest trees.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative has the same effects as Alternative 2 with the 

exception that it drops the units directly adjacent to the known nest structures. 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. This may directly impact potential 

osprey nest trees.

Cumulative Effects

The proposed actions would have additive disturbance and habitat effects to osprey. Currently the 

disturbance and habitat effects osprey come largely as a result of recreational activities. 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.

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.

Cumulatively the proposed actions would contribute to a neutral or downward trend for osprey. 

This species, however, is ranked as apparently secure and impacts from the proposed actions are 

minimal and secondary to the larger impacts for recreational use in the project area.

Big Game (Elk & Mule Deer)

Existing Condition

The Ogden project area is summer and transition range for mule deer and elk. 

For the purposes of this analysis, effects to these species will be addressed concurrently and 

focused on habitat uses (i.e. hiding cover, foraging habitat) since many similarities in habitat 

requirements exist. Because the LRMP more directly addresses elk and deer habitat under a 

variety of topics, the format for addressing effects is different than that used for other species.

Hiding Cover

Hiding cover is defined as vegetation capable of hiding 90 percent of a standing adult deer or elk 

from view of a human at a distance equal to or less than 200 feet (Thomas, 1979, LRMP WL-54). 

Hiding cover provides security to big game and protection from predators. Hiding cover is 

especially important for reducing vulnerability to hunting and poaching pressure by providing 

concealment in areas that have high open road densities and easy access by hunters (e.g., the 

proposed treatment areas). Hiding cover is evaluated in deer summer range (the entire Forest 

outside the Deer Habitat management allocation) on an Implementation Unit basis, per LRMP 

direction. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  209

Estimates of the amount of hiding cover within the proposed action areas and the watershed were 

derived from satellite imagery data and then a sampling was field verified or modified. For the 

purposes of querying the vegetation data, hiding cover was defined as multi-storied stands within 

the following size classes: seedling/sapling/pole (less than 5” dbh), pole (5-9” dbh), small (9-15” 

dbh), medium (15-20” dbh), and large (greater than 20” dbh). The key element in forested stands 

was the multi-storied characteristic. Based on the field verification, the shrub stands also serve as 

hiding cover. It is estimated that 79% of the implementation unit, and 79% of the project area is 

hiding cover or has hiding cover value. 

Road Density 

Current LRMP standards and guidelines call for a further evaluation of road density/management 

in order to make a final judgment in compliance with the LRMP. Currently the LRMP WL-53

states that “Target open road densities are 2.5 miles per square mile to achieve deer summer range 

habitat effectiveness targets unless impacts on deer can be avoided or the proposed project would 

result in a net benefit to deer habitat. The density will be applied as an average for an 

implementation unit and will be used as a threshold requiring further evaluation”. The current road 

density in the Ogden project area is 3.94 miles per sq. mile. The current open road density for the 

Implementation Unit averages 3.7 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.

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.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

This alternative foregoes the opportunity to physically close roads, although implementation of the 

Access and Travel Management system will administratively close many of the roads. Other 

activities will continue to impact deer and elk (e.g. Lava Rock OHV proposal, recreational 

activities, etc.).

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 58, page 212 illustrates the effects from alternative 2.

As shown in Figure 58 big game hiding cover will be concentrated in the southern and eastern

portions of the Implementation Unit as a result of this alternative. Areas where deer concentrate 

and move through the area are generally protected. Deference was given to the fuels treatment 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

210  Ogden Draft EIS

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).

The current road density will improve (i.e. be reduced) as a result of the action alternatives. The 

resulting road density after the proposed 58 miles of road closure will be 2.8 mi/square mile which 

is slightly more than the LRMP recommended level of 2.5 mi/square mile (over the 

Implementation Unit the road density would drop below the 2.5 level to 2.2 mi/sq. mile). This also 

meets 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 will help meet the intent of the LRMP, there will still be impacts to big game (e.g. 

more movement, less security, and more mortality).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  211

Figure 57: Current Hiding Cover within the Ogden Project Area
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

212  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 58: Remaining Hiding Cover Following Implementation of Alternative 2
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  213

Figure 59: Remaining Hiding Cover Following Implementation of Alternative 3

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative has similar effects as those discussed under 

Alternative 2. There are fine spatial differences with this alternative, but the amount of hiding 

cover treated remains similar (Figure 59, page 213). Road density impacts as a result of this 

alternative are the same as described for Alternative 2.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

214  Ogden Draft EIS

Cumulative Effects

Big game use of the area may shift spatially as a result of this alternative. 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.

Although the open road densities will decrease as a result of the action alternatives, cumulatively 

this will have minimal benefits to big game. The effectiveness of the road closures may be 

compromised by the need to provide safe and suitable access to geothermal actions being 

conducted or planned within the project area (letter from Mr. Perry, President Davenport Newberry 

Holdings LLC, February 10, 2010), and the maintenance and expansion of snowmobile and OHV 

trails, which are not necessarily factored into road density estimates. These ongoing and 

foreseeable actions contribute to negative impacts to big game security and potentially survivability 

(i.e. hunting mortality).

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-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 neutral affect on big game population trends on 

the Forest.

Table 53: Summary of Proposed Activity Effects by Alternative

Existing/No Action Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Hiding Cover (Acres)

Implementation Unit 33,831 (79%) 22,517 (52%) 22,282 (52%)

Project Area 20,975 (79%) 9,661 (36%) 9,426 (35%)

LRMP Standard & Guideline 30% 30% 30%

Road Density (Mile/Square Mile – Standard and Guideline 2.5)

Implementation Unit 3.7 2.2 2.2

Project Area 4.34 2.8 2.8

American Marten

Existing Condition

American martens occupy a narrow range of habitat types, living in or near coniferous forest (Allen 

1987). More specifically, they associate closely with late-successional stands of mesic (moist or 

wet) conifers, especially those with complex physical structure near the ground (Buskirk and 

Powell 1994). The information synopsis in Natureserve (2010) states that fallen logs and debris are 

special habitat features, and that an average territory size is approximately 10 sq. km (4 sq. mi or 

2,560 acres) with densities as high as 1-2 per sq. kilometer (approx. 250-500ac) in the fall. Other 

literature suggests a territory size of 642-1,829 acres (Godbout and Ouellet, 2008). Home range 

sizes tended to be larger as the road density increased. Complex physical structure addresses 

important life needs. It provides protection from predators, access to the subnivean (below snow) 

space where most prey are captured in winter, and provides protective thermal microenvironments 

(Buskirk and Powell 1994). In the western U.S. in winter, most prey is captured beneath the snow 

surface. In these areas, structure near the ground is important in providing access to subnivean 

spaces (Corn and Raphael 1992 in Ruggiero et al. 1994). Desirable forest types of the marten are 

large, somewhat dense, stands of lodgepole pine, mixed conifer, and mountain hemlock. Abundant 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  215

coarse woody material in these stands is important to support a rodent prey base (LRMP WL-61). 

Natureserve (2010) ranks this species as being “vulnerable” in Oregon.

Based on the types of habitats used by marten described in the literature and the LRMP, there is 

approximately 728 acres of habitat in the project area and 6,934 acres of habitat in the larger 

cumulative effects area (average stand tree diameter >9” with >55% canopy closure; or >20” 

average tree diameter and >40% canopy closure). Much of the potential marten habitat within the 

project area is within the mixed conifer habitat type; which is largely a function of the mixed 

conifer habitat types having the higher canopy closures. Similarly, a bulk of the potential habitat 

also lies within the Newberry National Volcanic Monument as this area does have land for 

allocated timber harvest and is higher elevation with the habitat types more conducive to martens 

(montane mixed conifer). Suitable habitat within the project area probably contributes to the 

territory of 1-2 martens. In the larger cumulative effects area, there is suitable habitat for 

approximately 3-4 marten territories.

Marten are an indicator species for downed wood in mixed conifer, lodgepole pine, and mountain 

hemlock habitat types. The Dead Wood section of this report (page 245) analyzes, in more detail, 

the current amounts of downed wood within the project area. 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. 2006; Table MMC_S.sp-24); in lodgepole pine types 11-45% downed wood 

cover (Mellen-McLean et al. 2006; Table LP_S.sp-10). Currently there are areas with 4.5-30% 

cover (an overall average of roughly 12% cover).

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: The no action alternative would maintain the current marten habitat at 

least in the short-term. This alternative would 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. The existing marten habitat is located in habitat types in which a standreplacing 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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative proposes actions within 172 acres of potential marten 

habitat. The thinning, mowing, underburning and/or grapple piling will effectively reduce canopy 

closures and downed log densities below what martens utilize. This impacts approximately 23% of 

the existing marten habitat in the project area affecting 1-2 marten territories.

As seen in Figure 61, marten habitat will still be available within the project area. Many of the 

largest blocks of habitat are outside of any unit. 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 (jackstrawed or piled logs) allow more space for these activities both 

for the marten and their prey especially in winter and areas of high snowpack.

There are 12 units that overlap marten habitat (54, 55, 124, 285, 323, 333, 342, 351, 386, 947, 967, 

951). Six (6) of these units overlap relatively large patches of habitat (Units 285, 342, 386, 951, 

947, and 54), with four of these units (Unit 54, 285, 342, and 386) overlapping some of the better 

habitat within the project area (larger trees, high canopy closure, and downed log cover). Most of 

the log transects closest to marten habitat (Figure 61, page 219) and the overlapping proposed units 

had the higher log densities (24-30% cover) that indicated higher likelihood of marten use in the 

literature (Mellen-McLean et al. 2006). A connected action of the proposed treatments is to 

remove lodgepole pine logs in units where there is an excess in Standard & Guideline levels. This 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

216  Ogden Draft EIS

action combined the prescription to burn and pile would effectively remove the marten habitat 

because Standard and Guideline levels (0.3-0.4%) are below the levels of marten habitat use as 

reported in the literature (8-45%). 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  217

Figure 60: Existing Marten Habitat within the Ogden Project Area

The darkest areas are where canopy closure is high (>55%) and the average tree size is >20”dbh = better marten habitat.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

218  Ogden Draft EIS

This effect (i.e. removal log habitat) can be mitigated by not conducting this action within the four 

units listed above (54, 285, 342, and 386). The mitigation could go further by not removing logs in 

any of the 12 units overlapping marten habitat. However, this may preclude fuels treatments within 

these units; Units 386 and 333 were identified as a high priority for meeting fuels objectives.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Similar to Alternative 2, this alternative proposes to treat 187 acres 

of marten habitat or 26% of the marten habitat within the project area. This is the one of the only 

ways this alternative differs from Alternative 2 seeing as the treatments and connected actions 

remain the same. Alternative 3 contains 13 units that overlap marten habitat (54, 55, 124, 285, 333, 

342, 351, 386, 928, 947, 966, 967, 951). Three (3) of these units are not proposed under 

Alternative 2 (Units 966, 967, and 928). The units that overlap the largest patches of habitat are the 

same as described for Alternative 2. Otherwise, the impacts are similar as described for Alternative 

2; Units 386, 333, and 967 were identified as a high priority for meeting fuels objectives.

Cumulative Effects

The amount of habitat with the project area represents approximately 12% of the habitat within the 

larger cumulative effects area. As seen in Figure 63, a majority of the marten habitat is found 

outside of the project area in the NNVM. 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 23-25% of the habitat within the project area, it reflects approximately 3% 

of the habitat within the larger cumulative effects area. 

Within the project area, however, 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 is not conducive to maintaining quality marten habitat. This 

may restrict movements or dispersal of martens to and from the NNVM.

The proposed actions, with proposed mitigations, by themselves would have neutral effects to the 

local marten population because a majority of the suitable habitat is outside of the project area. 

However, the proposed action cumulatively with other large vegetation management projects in the 

area, geothermal exploration, recreational impacts, and volcanic monitoring may contribute to a 

downward trend in local marten populations. This is largely due to the reductions in downed wood 

levels in efforts to reduce fire risk and maintain access for these other uses.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences

Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  219

Figure 61: Alternative 2 - Unit Overlap with Existing Marten Habitat
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

220  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 62: Alternative 3 - Unit Overlap with Existing Marten Habitat
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  221

Figure 63: Potential Marten Habitat within the Larger Cumulative Effects Area

Marten Habitat = >15”average dbh and >55% canopy closure

Pygmy Nuthatch

Existing Condition

Pygmy nuthatches are a focal species for large trees in the ponderosa pine stand types. 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.

According to 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 subprovinces 

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; 

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).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

222  Ogden Draft EIS

Landbird conservation in ponderosa pine forest 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.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Similar to the white-headed woodpecker, pygmy nuthatch habitat 

would continue to develop in the area as a result of past treatments 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. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

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. The proposed actions will create a variety of stand age classes 

that will provide pygmy nuthatch habitat in the short and long term.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  223

Pygmy nuthatches, however, are cavity nesters and although they can utilize smaller and welldecayed 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.

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 than either the white-woodpecker or whitebreasted 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). This kind of habitat can be found in small pockets within the Experimental 

Forest. 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. 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.

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

224  Ogden Draft EIS

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: A bulk 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 the larger 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, silvicultural treatments have focused on the development 

of chipping sparrow habitat. The recent Prairie Dog project treated ponderosa pine habitat by 

thinning and without burning or mowing and habitat for chipping sparrows is present. However, 

with recent emphasis 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.

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. 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. 

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 latesuccessional 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  225

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Because this alternative does not propose any actions, there would be 

no effects to the existing brown creeper habitat in the project area. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 3 proposes actions within 96 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. 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.

Flammulated Owl

Existing Condition

Flammulated owls are a focal species of grassy openings and dense thickets within latesuccessional 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 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

226  Ogden Draft EIS

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. 

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 oldgrowth 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 even-aged 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 shortterm supplement; and maintain grassy openings. 

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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).

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). 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  227

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 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. 

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions will treat approximately 357-389 acres of 

hermit thrush habitat. The proposed prescriptions will reduce tree density and remove the multistoried 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 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

228  Ogden Draft EIS

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. 

Alternative 1

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  229

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 focusing 

fuels treatments in areas where the need or strategic placement is greatest and recognizing that 

there are areas in the project area where fires may naturally achieve resource objectives.

3) Where possible, prohibit salvage logging to occur in post-fire habitat. The proposed actions do 

not address 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. Recent activities adjacent to the project area (e.g. Lava Cast sales and Prairie 

Dog) have reduced fuels over many acres. This may allow for fire to play a role in achieving 

resource objectives where before it could not.

Williamson’s Sapsucker

Existing Condition

Williamson’s sapsuckers are a focal species for large snags in mixed conifer habitat. They will 

often utilize ponderosa pine habitat, specifically dead and live trees for foraging and select for large 

(greater than 20”dbh) snags for nesting (Bull et al. 1986). 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

230  Ogden Draft EIS

To determine potential habitat, the 2004 satellite Imagery data was queried for areas with some 

ponderosa pine and large tree components and greater than 40% canopy closure. There are 1,136

acres of potential habitat for Williamson’s sapsuckers within the cumulative effects area and 323 

acres within the project area. The potential habitat is scattered throughout the area in small patches 

(<10 acres). Similar to the discussion for brown creepers, there is currently limited habitat in the 

project area because of the existing lack of large trees juxtaposed with high canopy closure. Larger 

trees are often in areas that had been previously thinned and the canopies have not closed in. There 

are at least 1-2 snags/acre greater than 10” dbh with at least one of greater than 20” dbh for every 

two acres. Mellen-McLean et al. (2009) show this species utilizes large diameter snags at high 

densities (nesting in snags 20 to 34” dbh). The 30% tolerance level for this species is 14 snags 10” 

dbh per acre and 3 snags greater than 20” per acre; and at the 80% tolerance level 50 snags greater 

than 10” dbh per acre and 17 snags greater than 20” dbh per acre (PPDF_S/L.sp17). Based on snag 

densities, the project area is currently providing Williamson’s sapsucker habitat at less than the 

30% tolerance level. This suggests that Williamson’s sapsucker presence in the project area is 

uncommon. Higher snag levels and more habitat may be present within the Newberry Crater. 

Literature cited within Natureserve (2011) reports a relatively small home range for Williamson’s 

sapsuckers (4-9 ha or 10-22 ac). This suggests Williamson’s sapsuckers being limited in the 

project area due to the lack of snags and stands with relatively high canopy closure.

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 and restrict access from fuelwood cutters.

Alternative 1

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative proposes treatments within approximately 67 acres 

(Alternative 2) and 72 acres (Alternative 3) of potential sapsucker 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 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.

Cumulative Effects

Cumulatively, Williamson’s sapsucker habitat is limited in the larger area. 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  231

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 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. Each of these individual actions is small, but they are 

widespread throughout the cumulative effects area to have widespread impacts to sapsucker 

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 

Williamson’s sapsucker, a species apparently secure in Oregon. However, the associated risk of 

snags being lost because they may be a hazard to human safety could neutralize this increasing 

trend.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

232  Ogden Draft EIS

Hairy Woodpecker

Existing Condition

Bull et al. (1986) reported hairy woodpeckers using both lodgepole and ponderosa pine habitats 

and a variety of snags sizes. This species would be in mature stands and utilize (i.e. nest and 

forage) snags greater than 10 inches in diameter. 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 (76,570

acres which is more than half of the cumulative effects are and 19,995 acres in the project area). 

What is limiting in the area is snag habitat. 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.

Alternative 1

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternatives 2 and 3 propose actions within 52% and 53% of the 

potential hairy woodpecker habitat in the project area, respectively. This relatively high percentage 

reflects the objectives of the project to promote large tree structure and reduce fuel loadings in the 

ponderosa pine dominated stands.

Similar to the discussions for other woodpecker species, the proposed treatments, in general, would 

not impact hairy woodpecker habitat with the exception of the need to fall hazard trees for human 

safety. The prescribed burning may create some snags of the size that this species can utilize. This 

may off-set the loss of snags due to hazard tree falling.

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. How these cumulative effects will 

affect hairy woodpecker populations is uncertain because this species can utilize a variety of 

habitat types and snag sizes.

The proposed actions, would have a neutral effect on populations trends for the hairy woodpecker, 

a species “apparently secure” in Oregon (Natureserve 2011), because of the woodpeckers 

versatility in using different habitat types and snag sizes. Snag recruitment is still expected to 

occur throughout the project area and larger cumulative effects area. However, the cumulative risk 

of snags being lost because they may be a hazard to human safety could neutralize this potential 

increase in recruitment.

Three-toed Woodpecker
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  233

Existing Condition

This species uses higher elevation habitats of mature lodgepole pine stands or stands with a 

lodgepole component (Goggans et al., 1988; Bull et al. 1986). Habitat for this species, in this 

analysis, 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 (73% of the total available three-toed woodpecker habitat). There are approximately 

32,376 acres of habitat within the larger cumulative effects area and 4,855 acres of habitat within 

the project area. Habitat set asides suggested in Goggans et al. (1988) would result in habitat for 

approximately 5 pairs of three-toed woodpeckers in the project area (34 in the larger cumulative 

effects area). 

The three-toed woodpecker is often associated with the black-backed woodpecker. Both species 

utilize smaller diameter snags for foraging and nesting. One way this woodpecker competes with 

other woodpecker species, specifically the black-backed woodpecker, is by utilizing higher 

elevation habitat (Bull et al. 1986). When using Goggans et al. (1988) to compare this species 

habitat with the black-backed woodpecker, it appears that the three-toed woodpecker does not 

generally occupy a wide range of habitat conditions. Therefore, black-backed woodpecker habitat 

would not necessarily be three-toed woodpecker habitat. As expected, due to elevations and stand 

types, the most suitable habitat is within the NNVM. 

A majority of the proposed treatment acreage in the higher elevation lodgepole pine type is not 

habitat for this species due to their early seral condition. Goggans et al. (1988) reported that threetoed woodpeckers avoided logged areas even for foraging. 

Alternative 1

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative would provide habitat for three-toed woodpeckers. 

As a species that can capitalize on beetle outbreaks and dense stands of lodgepole and montane 

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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative proposes treatments within 1,911 acres of potential 

habitat. The largest patches of habitat are in the northeast and southeast corners of the project area. 

The amount of habitat impacted by this alternative represents approximately 37% of the habitat in 

the project area and 6% of the habitat in the larger cumulative effects area.

This alternative proposes the larger number of actions within the largest block of current and 

potential three-toed woodpecker habitat (in the northeast and southeast sections; see Figure 64, 

page 236 and Table 54, page 234). Not every proposed action would negatively impact 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 acres 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). Although these units do not currently provide nesting habitat for three-toed 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

234  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

Alternative 2 proposes regeneration cutting (e.g. seed tree cutting: LP_3) within 362 acres of threetoed 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 233 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 1990’s. 

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 shortterm. 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.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative proposes considerably less current habitat alteration 

or removal (370 fewer acres). Under this alternative, three-toed woodpeckers would retain a 

greater block of habitat than under Alternative 2. 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.

Alternative 3 proposes treatments within 1,541 acres of potential habitat. The largest patches of 

habitat are in the northeast and southeast corners of the project area. The amount of habitat 

impacted by this alternative represents approximately 34% of the habitat in the project area and 5% 

of the habitat in the larger cumulative effects area.

Table 54: Three-Toed Woodpecker – Summary of Proposed Activity Effects by Alternative

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

Acres of Habitat Developed (thin understory 

maintain existing vertical diversity for wildlife)

0 233 233

Acres Altered (move to intermediate;

minimize spread of mistletoe)

0 1,316 1,292

Acres Removed (stand initiation) 0 362 16

Total Acres Impacted 0 1,911 1,541

Cumulative Effects

A bulk of the habitat for three-toed woodpeckers is found within the NNVM (Figure 66, page 238). 

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  235

actions are additive to the ongoing accomplishment of these other landscape objectives. The result 

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 protection 

and fuels reduction objectives). Habitat would continue to exist outside of these areas but 

potentially in smaller patches. These cumulative effects would contribute to a downward trend, 

albeit a small contribution (less than 5% of habitat), in local three-toed woodpecker populations 

because of other landscape objectives that limit or discourage large beetle outbreaks.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

236  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 64: Alternative 2 - Proposed Activities within Potential Three-toed Woodpecker Habitat
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  237

Figure 65: Alternative 3: Proposed Activities within Potential Three-toed Woodpecker Habitat
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

238  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 66: Cumulative Boundary of Potential Three-toed Woodpecker Habitat
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  239

Black-backed Woodpecker

Existing Condition

According to Goggans (1988) and Bull et al. (1986), the black-backed woodpecker uses mature 

ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine habitat types at relatively low elevations (less than 4,500 feet), 

but can be found at higher elevations. Altman (2000) designates black-backed woodpeckers as a 

focal species for old-growth lodgepole pine. The black-backed woodpecker will use smaller snags 

for nesting as well as foraging. Bull et al. (1986) suggested the use of smaller diameter snags for 

nesting is a way of competing with other woodpecker species in the same habitat (e.g. whiteheaded woodpecker, northern flickers, etc.). The planning area and adjacent areas have snags of 

this size class that can serve as potential habitat. Saab and Dudley (1998) found black-backed 

woodpeckers selecting for clumps of snags and unlogged control plots in their study on fire and 

salvage logging. As mentioned under the discussion for three-toed woodpeckers, Goggans et al.

1988 study was conducted on the Bend/Ft. Rock RD, but not within the Ogden project area or 

NNVM. Similar to the three-toed woodpecker, the black-backed woodpecker “key in” on stands 

currently undergoing mountain pine beetle infestations, and will either nest in these areas or in 

areas adjacent to where the infestation has already moved through but snags exist. The blackbacked woodpecker co-exists with the three-toed woodpecker by being able to utilize habitats at 

lower elevations.

Habitat for black-backed woodpeckers is more extensive in the watershed than habitat for threetoed woodpeckers because they can use a wider range of habitat types and elevations. There are 

approximately 74,307 acres of potential black-backed woodpecker habitat within the cumulative 

effects area and 19,279 acres within the project area. Bonnot et al. (2009) reported a territory size 

of 48 acres for this species. Goggans et al. (1988) reported home range sizes of 61-328 hectares

(151-810 acres) and suggested set aside areas of approximately 950 acres. 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. MellenMcLean et al. (2009) reports that snag densities for species range from 2.5 to 29 snags greater than 

10” dbh per acre for the 30 to 80 tolerance levels, and 0 to 6 snags greater than 20” dbh per acre for 

the 30 to 80% tolerance level. Current snags levels within the proposed action areas may be 

meeting the 30% tolerance level for this species (1-2 snags greater than 10” dbh per acre and 0.5

snags greater than 20” dbh per acre). Downed log densities were 4-30% cover of logs greater than 

8” diameter at the large end. Current Screens direction 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 (Mellen-McLean et al. 2009, Figure LP_S.sp-10 and Table 

LP_S/L.sp-24). 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. 

According to Altman (2000), conservation issues for this species include: reduction in mature and 

old-growth 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, and the findings in Bonnot et al. (2009) that regulating insect populations via removal of 

dead trees will reduce key food resources for this species during nesting. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Wildlife

240  Ogden Draft EIS

Using the recommended exempt acreage size to reflect one pair of black-backed woodpeckers, 

there is habitat available for an estimated 20 pairs within the project area.

Alternative 1

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 I 

the project area may support a larger wildfire which would have some benefit to black-backed 

woodpecker habitat.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 

three-toed woodpeckers (Alternative 2 proposes actions within 1,911 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 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).

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.

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.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 1,541 acres of black-backed woodpecker habitat. The 

difference between alternatives is largely because of the increased amount of mature lodgepole 

treated within Alternative 2.

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.

Discussion of connected actions can be found under Alternative 2.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  241

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).

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. The 

proposed actions would impact habitat for approximately 2 pairs of black-backed woodpeckers. 

Together with other landscape objectives that limit or discourage large beetle outbreaks, the project 

would contribute, albeit a small contribution, to a downward trend in black-backed woodpecker 

populations.

Northern Flicker

Existing Condition

Northern flickers are perhaps the most common woodpecker resident in Oregon. They can be 

found in a range of terrestrial habitat but are generally abundant in open forests and forest edges 

adjacent to open country (Marshall et al. 2003). Being a large cavity nester (12.5” long according 

to Sibley, 2005); they require large snags or large trees with decay in order to build their nests. 

Northern flickers have been observed within the project area. Potential habitat for this species is 

considered any plant association with large trees (average greater than 20”dbh). Using this as a 

definition for habitat, there are approximately 4,553 acres of habitat in the larger cumulative effects 

area, and 893 acres within the project area. Although this species is a generalist in the habitat types 

it can use, the relatively low estimate of habitat is likely a reflection of the lack of stands dominated 

by large trees.

The northern flicker is a relatively common species that can utilize a variety of habitat types from 

wilderness to back yards. Marshall et al.(2003) report that flickers require open space. It is a 

relatively large bird, thereby requiring large snags in which to nest. The requirement of large snags 

may limit flicker populations. Mellen-McLean et al. (2009) recorded data for this species in the 

mixed conifer types utilizing snags from 17-29” dbh. There is less than 1 snag greater than or 

equal to17” dbh per acre within the project area.

Alternative 1

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 will develop for this species.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Wildlife

242  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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

The proposed actions have cumulative benefits to northern flickers when considering that many of 

the recent and ongoing projects within the larger cumulative effects area, 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 kestrals, northern flying squirrels, bats, mice, and nuthatch species (Gentry 

and Vierling, 2008). Benefits to northern flicker habitat will 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 trend in northern flicker populations.

Pileated Woodpecker

Existing Condition

The pileated woodpecker is associated with forest habitats that have large trees, especially snags, 

for nesting and foraging. It is most common in old-growth ponderosa pine/mixed conifer forests in 

eastern Oregon (Csuti et al. 2001). 

Using habitat information in Bull and Holthausen (1993) and the 2004 satellite imagery data, there 

are approximately 1,563 acres of potential habitat in the larger cumulative effects area and 402 

acres of habitat in the project area. The relatively low estimate of habitat is likely a reflection of 

the lack of stands dominated by large trees. According to literature cited in Natureserve (2011) a 

pileated woodpecker’s home range in Oregon is reported to be 128-240 ha (316-593 acres). 

Mellen-McLean et al. (2009) report that for this species, that snags densities for the 30 to 80% 

tolerance level would be 15 to 49 snags greater than 10” dbh per acre and 3.5 to 18 snags greater 

than 20” dbh per acre; pileated woodpeckers nest in trees 26 to 37” dbh. 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. 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 

entire cumulative effects area (i.e. habitat in the mixed conifer associations).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  243

Alternative 1

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative proposes treatments within approximately 60 acres 

(Alternative 2) and 64 acres (Alternative 3) of potential pileated 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.

Cumulative Effects

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 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 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 population and habitat levels within the project area and 

larger cumulative effects area. The proposed actions, together with other ongoing forest 

management actions, would recruit more large snags into the landscape. The proposed actions, 

cumulatively with other actions within the area, will likely have a neural effect on population 

trends.

Table 55: Summary of Effects to Selected Wildlife Species

Species Existing 

Habitat 

(Acres)

Alternative

1 (Acres)

Alternative 2

(Acres)

Alternative 3

(Acres)

Comments

Fisher 403 0 treated 87.5 treated 91 treated Limited by lack of 

high canopy closure 

stands with large 

wood

White-headed 

woodpecker

1,784 0 treated 745 treated 841 treated Limited by lack of 

large snags

Lewis’ 1,784 0 treated 745 treated 841 treated Limited by lack of 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Wildlife

244  Ogden Draft EIS

Species Existing 

Habitat 

(Acres)

Alternative

1 (Acres)

Alternative 2

(Acres)

Alternative 3

(Acres)

Comments

woodpecker large snags

Crater Lake 

tightcoil

Paulina 

Creek 

riparian area

0 treated 83 treated 83 treated Alt 2 treats an extra 

area along the creek

Harlequin 

duck

Paulina 

Creek

0 treated 243 treated 212 treated Alt 2 treats an extra 

area along the creek

Northern 

waterthrush

Paulina 

Creek

0 treated 243 treated 212 treated Alt 2 treats an extra 

area along the creek

Goshawk 3 territories 0 treated PFA not 

treated

PFA treated Alt 3 treats within 

alternate nest stands

Cooper’s hawk 913 0 treated 257 treated 276 treated Limited by lack of 

high density stands 

with larger trees

Sharp-shinned 

hawk

731 0 treated 167 treated 181 treated Limited by lack of 

high density stands

Elk/Deer 83% hiding 

cover

0 treated 36% hiding 

cover

35% hiding 

cover

Fuels treatments 

largely remove cover

Marten 728 0 treated 172 treated 187 treated Limited by lack of 

high canopy closure 

area and large downed 

logs

Pygmy 

nuthatch

19,279 0 treated 10,343 treated 10,677 treated Limited by lack of 

large snags

Brown creeper 408 0 treated 91 treated 96 treated Limited by lack of 

large trees in mature 

mixed conifer habitat

Flammulated 

owl

15,137 0 treated 8,508 treated 9,023 treated Limited by lack of 

large snags in 

ponderosa pine habitat

Hermit thrush 1,132 0 treated 357 389 Limited by lack of 

mature mixed conifer 

habitat

Williamson’s 

sapsucker

323 0 treated 67 treated 72 treated Limited by lack of 

large snags 

Hairy 

woodpecker

19,995 0 treated 10,332 treated 10,678 treated Limited by lack of 

snags

Three-toed 

woodpecker

4,855 0 treated 1,911treated 1,541 treated Alt 2 proposes regen. 

Harvest within 

woodpecker habitat

Black-backed 

woodpecker

19,279 0 treated 2,037 treated 1,885 treated Alt 2 proposes regen. 

Harvest within 

woodpecker habitat

Northern 

flicker

893 0 treated 334 treated 338 treated Limited by lack of 

large snags

Pileated 

woodpecker

402 0 treated 60 treated 64 treated Limited by lack of 

large snags and 

reduction of firs
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  245

Dead Wood Habitat (Snags, Logs, and Green Tree Replacements)

Existing Condition

Snags 

Numerous species of animals use snags and coarse woody material (CWM) for foraging, nesting, 

denning, roosting and resting. A snag is defined as a dead tree that is over 10 inches dbh and taller 

than 10 feet. Coarse woody material is considered to be dead and down material that is greater 

than 5 inches in diameter (Ohmann and Waddell, 2002; Marcot et al. 2010). The most notable 

species using snags and CWM are the primary cavity nesters (e.g. woodpeckers and nuthatches) 

that excavate nest cavities in decayed wood in standing trees. Vacated cavities are subsequently 

used by many other birds and small mammals (i.e. secondary cavity users such as marten, bats, and 

owls). Selected wildlife species known or suspected to occur in the proposed action areas that

utilize these habitats are listed in the various tables and can be found in the earlier discussions 

under each species (e.g. hairy woodpecker, three-toed woodpecker, flammulated owl, etc.).

Snag and CWM habitat conditions were analyzed and compared using current direction and newer 

research, including the DecAID Advisory tool (Marcot, et al. 2010). The DecAID Advisor is a 

planning tool intended to help specialists manage snag and log levels best suited for their 

management area’s habitat types and associated wildlife species. This tool uses the best available 

science and most recent research for species dependent on snags and coarse woody material. 

Densities are given in the form of wildlife species tolerance levels at the 30%, 50%, and 80% 

levels. For example, assuming normally distributed data, if 20% of a species’ nests were in areas 

with greater than 18 snags per acre, then 80% of the nests were found in areas with 0 to 18 snags 

per acre, and 18 snags per acre is the 80% tolerance level (see Appendix B). Information in 

regards to existing snag and log densities and sizes were gathered through field sampling and aerial 

insect and disease maps.

The DecAID analysis tool relies on a landscape level approach. As detailed in Appendix B, the 

information gathered from Forest-level data (FVS and GNN data) by watershed was used for the 

snag portion of this analysis. Forest level data was not consolidated for downed logs. The 

cumulative effects boundary area used throughout this analysis was similar in size and habitat type 

proportions as the 10th field watershed (Lower Little Deschutes River). For the sake of the snag 

portion of this analysis, watershed is synonymous with cumulative effects area (see Appendix 3 for 

a more complete reconciling of watershed and cumulative effects area).

Ponderosa pine and Lodgepole pine habitat types are the largest represented types within the 

proposed treatment areas and watershed. The wildlife and 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 providing habitat for the various species. 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. 

Table 56: Acres of Wildlife Habitat in the Watershed and the Relative Potential for Dead Wood 

Influenced by Fire Regime and Topographic Position

Habitat Type Potential 

Dead Wood 

Levels

Total Acreage 

in Watershed

% Within 

Watershed

% Within a 

Proposed 

Unit

Non-Forest N/A 10,556 12.36 14

Lodgepole (LP) High 32,312 37.58 20

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir (PPDF) Low-High 22,397 26.24 61
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Wildlife

246  Ogden Draft EIS

Eastside Mixed Conifer – East 

Cascades Blue Mts (EMC_EB)

Low-Moderate 16,698 19.56 14

Montane Mixed Conifer (MMC) High 3,403 3.99 0

Figure 67: Graphical Representation of the Relative Abundance of Habitat Types within the 

Watershed

Table 57 shows that a majority of the watershed, and thus landscape, has relatively low snags 

densities (0-12/acre). Similarly, areas with high densities of snags, regardless of habitat type, are 

relatively rare in the watershed. Therefore habitat for species associated with high densities of 

snags (e.g. Williamson’s sapsuckers using area with 14-50 snags/acre according to the wildlife data 

table PPDF_S/L.sp-22) is also relatively rare in the watershed.

Table 57: Current Distribution of Snag Densities within the Watershed Represented by Percent of 

the Habitat Type with each Density

DecAID Habitat Snag Density (# per acre)

0 0-6 6-12 12-18 18-36 36+

EMC 32% 48% 9% 5% 5% 0%

LP 52% 32% 15% 1% 1% 0%

MMC 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

NONE 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Snag density 0 0-4 4-8 8-12 12+

PPDF 59% 33% 6% 0% 2%

*density ranges reflect the histogram data within the DecAID tool for each habitat type

The habitat types found within the proposed action areas and watershed are within 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, higher elevation types, and the north and east aspects largely 

because of the increased moisture and productivity of sites and the relative long fire return 

intervals. It also suggests that the project area would have varying capabilities of providing 

densities of downed wood; some areas meeting the lower 30% tolerance level for wildlife and other 

areas capable of meeting the higher 80% tolerance level.

Table 58 shows how the watershed is meeting species-specific snag needs by using the wildlife 

data within DecAID and comparing that to the watershed’s existing density of snags in each habitat 

type.

EMC

LP

MMC

NONE

PPDF

Habitat Type
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  247

Table 58: Percent of Watershed Meeting the Tolerance Level for Selected Species

Species by Habitat Type1 Meeting the 30% 

Tolerance Level

(%) of watershed

Meeting the 50% 

Tolerance Level

(%) of watershed

Meeting the 80% 

Tolerance Level

(%) of watershed

Lodgepole Pine

American Marten (12-14/ac) 2 2 2

Standard and Guideline (6/ac) 17

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir

Black-backed Woodpecker (2.5-29/ac) 41 8 8

Cavity Nesting Birds (1-10/ac) 41 8 8

Pileated Woodpecker (15-49/ac) 2 2 2

Pygmy Nuthatch (1-12/ac) 41 8 2

White-headed Woodpecker (0.3-4/ac) 41 41 8

Williamson’s Sapsucker (14-50/ac) 2 2 2

Standard and Guideline (4/ac) 8

Eastside-Mixed Conifer

Black-backed Woodpecker 2.5-29/ac) 68 10 5

Pileated Woodpecker (15-49/ac) 10 5 0

Pygmy Nuthatch (1-12/ac) 68 19 10

White-headed Woodpecker (0.3-4/ac) 68 68 68

Williamson’s Sapsucker (14-50/ac) 10 5 0

American Marten (12-14/ac) 10 10 10

Standard and Guideline (4/ac) 68

Montane Mixed Conifer

American Marten (12-14/ac) 0 0 0

Pacific Fisher (13/ac) 0 0 0

Standard and Guideline (4/ac) 0

1. 30-80% tolerance level represented as # snags greater than 10” dbh per acre next to species name

According to the above table (Table 58), white-headed woodpeckers appear to have the greatest 

amount of habitat (i.e. higher percentages of the watershed meet the higher tolerance levels), this 

may be due to the fact that the literature cited within DecAID showing white-headed woodpecker 

using areas with relatively low densities of snags (0.3-4 snags/acre) as compared to a species such 

as the Williamson’s sapsucker that utilizes areas with 14-50 snags per acre.

In relation to Standard & Guideline levels, a majority of the Eastside Mixed Conifer habitat type 

appears to be meeting the standard and guideline levels. The watershed is deficient in meeting the 

standard and guideline levels in the Lodgepole, Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir, and Montane Mixed 

Conifer habitats.

In comparing the inventory data within DecAID, each habitat type is displayed with the only 

unharvested plots and then all plots (which include harvested and unharvested). The inventory data 

can give a comparison of the watershed with the larger landscape at a given snapshot in time (i.e. 

when the plot measurements were taken). This is useful when comparing the watershed 

information with the larger landscape in order to determine the uniqueness of the relatively focused 

watershed densities with the regional inventory densities. The densities were derived from the 

histograms within the DecAID tool for the small/medium habitat type (tree dbh averaging 10-19 

inches) for this best represented the average size classes within the project area:
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Wildlife

248  Ogden Draft EIS

Table 59: Percent of Watershed and Landscape with Snag Density Using Inventory Data within 

DecAID

DecAID Habitat Number of Snags greater than 10 “ dbh per acre1

0 0-6 6-12 12-18 18-36 36+

EMC Watershed 32% 48% 9% 5% 5% 0%

Unharvested plots 15% 25% 17% 18% 19% 7%

All Plots 28% 31% 18% 10% 10% 3%

LP Watershed 52% 32% 15% 1% 1% 0%

Unharvested plots 26% 13% 23% 11% 17% 9%

All Plots 33% 21% 21% 9% 11% 5%

MMC Watershed 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Unharvested plots 5% 14% 19% 15% 32% 15%

All Plots 6% 17% 20% 14% 29% 12%

0 0-4 4-8 8-12 12+

PPDF Watershed 59% 33% 6% 0% 2%

Unharvested plots 54% 30% 10% 3% 3%

All Plots 60% 26% 9% 2% 1%

1. Unharvested and Harvested Plots; 

Only the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat type within the watershed closely matches the plot 

data. All of the habitat types are proportionately at the lower densities in the watershed than those 

for the landscape. A majority of the watershed has low densities of snags and thus provides snag 

habitat at the lowest tolerance levels for many species.

Coarse Woody Materials (CWM)

Table 60 displays the comparison of current LRMP direction with the best science available in the

DecAID advisor. 

Table 60: Comparison of Coarse Woody Material 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 & three-toed 

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)

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 (PPDF); 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). 

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 in excess of wildlife needs (i.e. removal in excess to LRMP standards and 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  249

guidelines). The survey helped determine what proposed units had snag and log levels in excess of

standards and guidelines (S & Gs) and the relation 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 (Figure 68). An effort was made to 

represent each plant association and area proposed for treatment and areas of no treatments.

Figure 68: Dead Wood Transects in Relation to Plant Associations

Table 61: Summary of Dead Wood Transects in the Ogden Project Area

Category

Average Snags Greater than or 

equal to 10” dbh per acre 

(>=20”dbh)

Average Log density >=8” LED 

(>=12”LED)*

Pieces/Acre

Percent 

Cover

Tons/Acre

Uncertain 2.3 (1.10) 56.3 (27.2) 30 75.5

Low Density 0.8 (0.50) 11.8 (5.4) 4.5 13.5

High Density 2.3 (0.80) 43.6 (27.2) 24.0 60.0

Average over entire 

area

1.35 (0.65) 25 (13.0) 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, in comparison with the wildlife data in DecAID, show that in the Ogden 

project area current snag densities are providing snags for white-headed woodpeckers at the 30-

50% tolerance level; at the 30% level for pygmy nuthatches and general cavity nesters; at the <30% 

tolerance level for black-backed woodpeckers; and at less than the <30% tolerance level for the 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Wildlife

250  Ogden Draft EIS

marten, fishers, pileated woodpecker, and Williamson’s sapsucker. The current level of snags are 

below the LRMP direction (Table 61). The survey results for snags compliment the DecAID 

comparisons for the watershed (see earlier snag discussion).

Based on the above tables, the project area is currently meeting or exceeding CWM guidelines in 

most areas. In considering the DecAID information, for many wildlife species this density of 

downed wood in some areas is meeting the 50% -80% tolerance levels. However, these levels also 

suggest that currently fuel loadings, as averaged over the project area and using the driest habitat 

type, are exceeding the optimum quantity.

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.

In summary, there is snag habitat being provided albeit at lower levels than may be optimal for 

many MIS species however, there are a few dense patches of snags. Downed wood levels 

generally appear to be meeting wildlife needs. A majority of transects met or exceeded the directed 

level of downed wood for the habitat type. 

Table 62: Summary of Dead Wood in the Ogden Project Area

Category

Average Snags 

>=10” dbh per acre 

(>=20”dbh)

Average Log density >=8” LED** (>=12”LED)

Pieces/Acre % cover* Tons/Acre

East side Screens* 6 LP

4 PP & MC

3-6 PP

15-20 LP & MC

0.06-0.11%

0.3-0.4%

DecAID 0.3-15 for 30% 

tolerance level

0.8-45% (wildlife 

data)

2% (inventory data)

Fuel Loading:

Brown et al. (2003)

5-24

Existing

Average over entire 

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) 

**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.

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) 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  251

of primary cavity excavators. As shown in Table 63, this 100% MPP is estimated to be 4 snags per 

acre for ponderosa pine and mixed conifer habitat types and 6 snags per acre for lodgepole pine 

habitat types. Table 63 illustrates the number of GTRs per acre that would be needed to meet 

current direction assuming the average diameter of the stands after is at least 13 inches. 

Table 63: Estimated Green Tree Replacements (Trees per Acre) 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* 5 Trees/Acre 5 Trees/Acre 6 Trees/Acre

*MPP = Maximum Population Potential

**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.

Alternative 1

Direct and Indirect Effects: Insect mortality would continue to occur, ensuring steady recruitment 

of new snags and logs. 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 are killed by a fire 

throughout the area. 

Other uses within the area would continue to occur 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).

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. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: 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 snag and log replacement but also create larger green tree 

replacements for snags and logs as the retained trees grow in diameter as a result of the thinning. 

This will create a condition when the stands once again close in (i.e. become more dense and the 

trees compete more directly for resources), they will be larger and make for the size of snags and 

logs currently lacking in the area.

Thinning may reduce the immediate recruitment of snags and logs on a large scale, however, trees 

will continue to die and fall over. Lightning and insect activity will continue to kill trees. 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.

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 (proposed on 948 and 934 acres Alternatives 2 and 3 respectively) will remove 

green tree replacements in previously harvested stands. The targeted overstory trees to remove are 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Wildlife

252  Ogden Draft EIS

those 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. The effects of the 

proposed overstory removal are reduced by the retention of 2-3 trees per acres scattered throughout 

the stand. In Alternative 3 the impacts are further reduced by the retention of no-treat, mature 

stands of lodgepole pine. These areas provide the short-term habitat while the treated stands 

develop to provide the long-term habitat.

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 it until the young 

trees mature (>20 years). 

Alternative 3 retains the most current mature lodgepole pine habitat, by not proposing any 

regeneration harvest prescriptions, 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 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 would have 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 the 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 lacking 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. GTRs). Indirectly underburning and mowing contribute to the 

ability to control a wildfire. 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 subsequently controls the extent of habitat for these species. 

Many other cavity nesters and wildlife species can capitalize on the conditions created by a mixedseverity 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 propose to remove dead and downed lodgepole pine in excess of 

wildlife needs (i.e. 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 higher densities. As shown in Figure 69 below, these 

areas of high densities and low densities (based on the transect information) can be found within 

proposed units and areas not treated. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  253

Figure 69: 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 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.

In order to reconcile the opportunity to take downed logs in units where there is a high density of 

logs with the need to meet LRMP S&Gs and provide habitat for those species that utilize higher 

levels of downed logs (50-80% tolerance levels), the following is recommended: 

• in LP and MC take only downed LP up to 8” dbh; take >8” dbh LP where 39 pieces/ac can 

be retained in order to compensate for areas not meeting S&Gs. (39 pieces per acre ~0.8% 

cover)

• In PP take only downed LP up to 12”dbh; take >12” LP where 8 pieces/ac can be retained in 

order to compensate for areas not meeting S & Gs. (8 pieces per acres ~0.2% cover)

• Pieces retained through all treatments (including piling and underburning) will be of the 

largest represented in the unit.

Cumulative Effects

The proposed actions 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 for recreation uses; and the 

foreseeable need to allow access for and protect geothermal and volcanic monitoring equipment. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Wildlife

254  Ogden Draft EIS

The impact is a further 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 the creation of safer conditions 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 in the project 

area, the Ogden project highlights the ongoing effects to dead wood in area 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. 

Hagar (2007) supports this rationale by suggesting large dead wood is difficult to provide because 

of past harvest and safety reasons. 

The removal of hazard trees may contribute to a cumulative reduction of current and future downed 

logs. This effect is minimal however, because the proposed actions propose to remove lodgepole

logs and retain ponderosa pine and fir logs.

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 reducing fuel loadings and risk of stand-replacing 

wildfire. These activities will collectively create larger GTRS, leading to larger snags, ultimately 

leading to larger logs. The cumulative benefits of these actions are tempered within the Ogden 

project area by myriad other uses.

3.6.8 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 DEIS for 

full spatial representation of habitats). The management indicator species for the OGMA are the 

black-backed 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 64 and Figure 70).

Table 64: 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
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  255

Figure 70: 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. 

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.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Total Acres

Size Class

Fig. 1 Size Class & Canopy Closure Distribution within 

the Paulina OGMA

Acres

25-40% Canopy closure

40-55%

55-70%
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Wildlife

256  Ogden Draft EIS

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 71). 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 Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  257

Figure 71: 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.

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 2 proposes actions within 455 acres within OGMA and 

328 acres within corridors. The OGMA is a shared allocation with the RHCA. Any proposed 

actions within the OGMA meet the descriptions and limitations outlined for the RHCA.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

Wildlife

258  Ogden Draft EIS

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. 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 

road reconstruction 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 identified pose a risk of wildfire.

Of the proposed actions within the connectivity corridors, four (4) units overlap the corridor and 

may reduce the function of the corridor by thinning. Units 25, 118, 124, and 158 each propose 

thinning. Units 118 and 124 are within a mixed conifer association and will retain a higher basal 

area (up to 130 trees per acre). Although this is within the upper 1/3 of the site potential, it will 

likely reduce the canopy closure and habitat suitability for species that utilize much denser stands. 

The fuels reduction treatments within these units will also reduce the suitability of the corridor for 

species that utilize downed wood and/or shrub cover. Units 25 and 158 are within the ponderosa 

pine associations. While the effects to corridors are the same as the other units, the density of trees 

per acre (up to 90) retained is lower. He result is a much more open stand. This may favor 

ponderosa pine growth, but will reduce the suitability of the stand as a corridor until the canopies 

once again growth together and forest floor cover (logs and/or shrubs) return.

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 road reconstruction (Units 110-117). 

Indirectly this benefits the OGMA by not creating another access point for dispersed recreation and 

other uses.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Wildlife

Ogden Draft EIS  259

Cumulative Effects

As the sole stream course in this watershed, it is vital to retain this OGMA despite its current 

conditions that lack some overall old-growth characteristics (i.e. 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.

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. 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 Soils

260  Ogden Draft EIS

3.7 SOILS

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: 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  261

• 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); 

• 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

262  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  263

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 

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

264  Ogden Draft EIS

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, ashinfluenced 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 72: 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 forestwide 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  265

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.

3.7.5 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. 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. Skid-trails from the railroad era that were not converted to existing system 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

266  Ogden Draft EIS

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 replanted 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 ground fuel conditions in treated areas without incurring 

measurable detrimental impacts to the soil resource.

Existing Condition Assessments

The estimated detrimental soil conditions for each proposed Ogden unit area are displayed in 

Appendix C of the DEIS. The extent of these conditions was determined from field investigations 

of previously managed areas and the proportionate overlap of past harvest activities within each 

unit area. Each proposed unit area was assessed for the presence, pattern and percentage of railroad 

era skid trails and logging facilities using 1943 aerial photographs. Although the percent coverage 

of skid trails from past railroad era logging was upwards of 20% in some unit areas, they were 

attributed with 5% detrimental impacts from this era as a result of observations in the field of 

recovery after 70 to 80 years. 

Proposed Ogden units were also queried for the occurrence of more recent harvest prescriptions 

from the Forest Service Forest Activity database (FACTs). The primary FACTs activity 

prescription for each unit area is included in the unit summary table of this DEIS (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 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. Although more recent 

management activities utilized the extensive system of railroad era skid trails and landings for their 

logging facilities in most cases, impact levels generally range from 20 to 25%. Some units did not 

have extensive railroad era logging within their boundaries and utilized new systems.

Five units were monitored for detrimental soil disturbance levels to provide a representation of 

impacts from activities within the project area. Visual assessments and shovel probes were used to 

record surface soil disturbance and compaction levels at 5 foot intervals along transects within 

these units. Table 65 summarizes the monitoring results. 

Table 65: Monitoring of Past Harvest Activities within the Ogden Project Area

Unit # Acres Year of Harvest Harvest Prescription Detrimental Soil Conditions (%)

(Ogden #75) 12 1971 HCC - Clear Cut 15%

(Ogden #56) 83 1985 HTH - Black Bark Thinning 15%
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  267

(Ogden #21) 45 1990 HTH - Black Bark Thinning 16%

(Ogden #23) 83 1991 HTH - Black Bark Thinning 19%

(Ogden #67) 70 1988 HOR - Overstory removal 25%

(Ogden #27) 87 1930s Clear Cut (Railroad Logging) 7%

Detrimental disturbance levels within the units range from 15-19%. Conditions within the HTH 

units averaged 15% and were determined to be representative of conditions in other unit areas 

covered by this prescription. These areas are also representative of conditions 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. The levels measured in the HCC unit indicates that the soil resource has 

likely recovered somewhat since the original prescription was implemented. Soil disturbance levels 

from this field monitoring were used to represent existing levels of impact in the 20 other 

previously entered units with similar past harvest prescriptions. A full summary of the conditions 

for all proposed Ogden units is included in DEIS, Appendix D.

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 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 long-term 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

268  Ogden Draft EIS

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 onsite moisture retention, protects mineral soil from erosion and supplies nutrients that support the 

growth of vegetation 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, reducing, and mitigating adverse impacts from project activities to 

meet soil quality standards (see Mitigation Measures and Project Design Criteria, Chapter 2, 

beginning on page 36).

3.7.6 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  269

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 that limit mechanical harvesters to two or fewer equipment passes on any sitespecific 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

270  Ogden Draft EIS

3.7.7 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 

stand-replacing 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 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  271

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 regrowth 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 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 (PageDumroese, 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

272  Ogden Draft EIS

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 ground-based 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 off-trail 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 displays the percentages of existing and 

predicted detrimental soil 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  273

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 (DEIS) 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 6 miles of new temporary road would be constructed to 

access and haul from 41 proposed activity units under this alternative. The majority of temporary 

roads would be placed on railroad era roads or skid trails that are not detrimentally impacted or 

on temporary roads (5.4 miles) or skid trails of more recent activities that are detrimentally 

impacted. These roads 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 on approximately 16 acres 

of soil across the 41 unit areas.

All temporary road surfaces would receive restoration treatments following their use to 

rehabilitate compacted and displaced conditions. Treatments could include subsoiling to decompact subsurface and surface layers where soil depths were sufficient to accommodate the 

subsoiler wings. Subsoiling would immediately reduce the soil strength below natural levels for 

the majority of the profile and gradually return to natural levels as the profile settled from 

moisture percolation and the weight of snow. Conditions capable of infiltrating water would be 

returned immediately to the subsoiled acres, which 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 horizon, replace woody material to provide cover, and re-smooth or recontour mineral soil displaced to the edges. Acres treated with the bucket rake of an excavator 

would be capable of infiltrating water into the surface layers in the short term, but 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 productive capacity in the short term, although freeze/thaw mechanisms and resmoothing of displaced mineral soil will help improve 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 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 36) 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

274  Ogden Draft EIS

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 36). Burning large landing piles would incur elevated groundlevel 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.

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  275

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.

Summary of effects from Harvest and Fuels treatment activities

The percentages of detrimental soil conditions following implementation of project activities would 

increase above existing conditions in all proposed activity areas. Detrimental levels would increase 

the greatest 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

276  Ogden Draft EIS

Units with existing detrimental disturbance levels above 10% are likely to be near or cumulatively 

exceed 20% 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, the activities proposed under 

Alternative 2 are likely to increase the acres of detrimental compaction in these units from between 

5 to 15% as a result of implementing harvest and fuels treatments in units with previous entries 

(Craigg, 2000). Machine grapple piling could incur additional impacts depending on the amount of 

travel of these machines off of landings and skid trails utilized for this harvest entry. Fuels 

treatments proposed under this alternative other than machine grapple piling are not expected to 

incur additional detrimental impacts within these or any other units.

Soil Restoration Treatments on Logging Facilities and Temporary Roads 

Soil restoration treatments may be applied within individual activity areas in order to reduce the 

cumulative levels of detrimental soil conditions anticipated from this project proposal and comply 

with LRMP and Regional policy. Subsoiling restoration treatments may also be implemented to 

decommission approximately 11.5 miles (about 16.7 acres) of temporary roads where appropriate 

conditions allow for effective operations. Individual activity areas with elevated existing levels of 

detrimental disturbance are likely to need soil restoration treatments (subsoiling) to de-compact 

primary skid trails and landings following proposed activities 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. 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 treatment activities.

Subsoiling is a restoration activity intended to improve 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 shortterm (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 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). 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  277

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 would be minimized as a result of Project Design Features that limit 

disturbance to the soil resource 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 would 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. 

Measure #2: Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) and Surface Organic Matter

The measure for CWD and surface organic matter was evaluated qualitatively based on the 

probable success of implementing recommended guidelines and appropriate Best Management 

Practices (BMPs) listed under Project Design Features in Chapter 2 of the EIS that address 

adequate retention of these important landscape components to meet wildlife habitat objectives (see 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

278  Ogden Draft EIS

Chapter 3, Wildlife Section). Wildlife PDFs are included to maintain a minimum amount of 5 to 10 

tons per acre of CWD on ponderosa pine sites and 10-15 tons per acre on mixed conifer or 

lodgepole pine sites for habitat which would ensure desirable biological benefits for maintaining 

soil productivity without creating an unacceptable fire hazard.

Existing CWD on the ground is variable across the planning area but generally exceeds 

recommended wildlife levels in the lodgepole and mixed conifer stands (see Wildlife Specialist 

Report). Existing CWD would be protected from disturbance and retained on site to the extent 

possible within unit areas with existing levels at or below recommended wildlife levels. Proposed 

activity areas identified with CWD amounts in excess of recommended habitat levels are likely to 

have some CWD material removed by the operational harvest activities or piled by the fuels 

treatments. Lodgepole or ponderosa pine CWD that has fallen to the ground proximate to the time 

of harvest may also be removed for commercial utilization. 

• Harvest Activities: Approximately 4,217 activity area acres have been identified for the 

salvage of CWD on the ground in excess of that necessary to meet wildlife habitat 

recommendations. The removal of existing CWD from within the unit areas would incur some 

disturbance to the soil resource in the form of localized displacement and mixing of surface 

organics and mineral soil. Operations are likely to use shovel loaders to accumulate material on 

the ground into bunches for yarding. Machines would primarily utilize skid trails to operate but 

may travel off of these trails to accumulate some of this material. Activity areas in which both 

mechanized salvage and thinning occurred are likely to have elevated levels of detrimental soil 

disturbance following these activities due to the increased amount and extent of machine activity. 

Potential sources of future CWD would be reduced in some activity areas by the proposed 

harvest activities where prescriptions included the removal of standing mortality in excess of 

snag guidelines. However, thinning prescriptions would leave sufficient numbers of live and

existing dead trees per acre as sources of snags and/or CWD through natural mortality and 

windthrow. 

The disturbance of surface organic matter is expected to be contained to skid trails, landing areas 

and portions of off trail tracks within the unit area. The extent of disturbance is expected to be 

less than 20% of the activity unit acreage and none of the existing fine material on the ground 

would be transported off site. Although whole tree yarding prescriptions would move the 

majority of limbs and tops of thinned material to the log landings and reduce the amount of 

biomass on site, the mechanized accumulation and yarding activities would recruit some finer 

sized CWD to the forest floor through breakage of limbs and tops. It is expected that broken 

branches and whip felled small-diameter trees would contribute to surface organic matter and 

maintain 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, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  279

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 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 ground-disturbing 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 (DEIS)

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

280  Ogden Draft EIS

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).

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 (DEIS). 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 (DEIS) for each activity area. Existing levels of 

detrimental soil conditions within activity areas proposed for mechanical treatments range from 5 

to 20%.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  281

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 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

282  Ogden Draft EIS

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 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  283

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 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

284  Ogden Draft EIS

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 (DEIS). 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 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 35 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Soils

Ogden Draft EIS  285

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 (DEIS).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

286  Ogden Draft EIS

3.8 Fisheries and Hydrology 

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 25-30 inches 

annually. Evapo-transpiration 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). 

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 evapo-transpiration 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 occurring 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) 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  287

and Final Environmental Impact Statement; (2) and 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 LRMP. The 1972 federal Clean Water Act, Executive Orders 11988 (Floodplains) 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).

INFISH: The project area is east of the owl line, and lies within the management area of INFISH. 

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.

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 within RHCAs, with exceptions. One exception is applying silvicultural practices that acquire 

desired vegetation characteristics where needed to attain the Riparian Management Objectives (RMOs). 

The application of silvicultural practices should not retard attainment of RMOs or adversely affect inland 

native fish. FM-1 and FM-4 state fire and fuels treatments are allowed if they are designed to not prevent 

attainment of, or they contribute to, the attainment of RMOs. 

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.

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.

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

288  Ogden Draft EIS

sediment, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and nutrients are parameters of water quality that could 

potentially be affected by vegetation management and fuels reduction activities.

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.

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), effects to Essential Fish Habitat of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Act, and effects to 

the Riparian Management Objectives of INFISH.

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, and streamflow data from a

USGS operated gauging station on Paulina Creek. Numerous publications were researched and used in 

determining effects. 

Cumulative effects considered past, present, and reasonably foreseeable activities. The Equivalent Clearcut 

Area (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 

Paulina Creek is not inhabited by redband trout (ODFW, 1996), nor any other threatened, endangered, 

proposed, or candidate species. A Biological Evaluation was conducted for the Region 6 sensitive species 

pristine springsnail. The findings determined that no habitat exists within the project area for this 

freshwater snail. There would be No Impact to the pristine springsnail for all three alternatives. Some of 

the RMOs of INFISH are not being met under present conditions. The action alternatives 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). Vegetation and fuels treatments 

would not measurably affect water quantity, water quality, fish habitat, or fish populations. Calculated 

ECA values for the two action alternatives were minimal, 3.2% and 2.8% of the watershed for Alternatives 

2 and 3 respectively. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 303(d) water temperature 

parameter would not be further degraded from the action alternatives. 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, floodplains, or Essential Fisheries Habitat. 

3.8.5 Water Quantity

Existing Condition

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. Paulina Creek within the project area loses flow to the surrounding 

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  289

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 4.34 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 at Forest 

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 none 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). 

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%). The McKay fire burned approximately 

one-mile of the riparian habitat, approximately 14% of the RHCA (7 miles, 8 miles total to 

Paulina Lake) within Ogden.

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

290  Ogden Draft EIS

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: Alternative 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 RHCAs within the project area. Operation of ground-based equipment, including within RHCAs, has 

potential to increase soil compaction that could increase overland runoff to streams. Harvest of live trees 

reduces evapo-transpiration 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 evapo-transpiration 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). 

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.

• 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, approximately 25 to 30 inches annually. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  291

• 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 RHCAs, and most skid trails 

perpendicular to the slope within RHCAs 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. 

Within the project area, nearly 58 miles of road are proposed for closing under both Alternative 2 and 3. 

Closing roads will benefit hydrologic recovery of the watershed by allowing increased infiltration. 

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 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 Table 66
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

292  Ogden Draft EIS

of stream attributes below). 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. 

For the Ogden Project, the ECA calculation for the two action alternatives Table 66) were based on 

vegetation treatments including ladder fuels reduction, but did not consider mowing and underburning 

which have minor effects to the ECA calculation. The ECA calculation also included road closures. Both 

alternatives would close a total of 85 acres of roads (58 miles), which would have a beneficial effect to 

hydrologic recovery by increasing infiltration. 

Table 66: 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, 

PP_LP_2) 24 4,397 0.3 7 1,319

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 Past, Present and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects, 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, or 0.05% of the watershed, and again would be 

inconsequential to the calculated ECA values. 

3.8.6 Water Quality

Existing Condition

Clean Water Act

Paulina Creek is included on the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality list of water quality 

impaired streams (303(d) list) for the parameter of high water temperatures, year-round (non-spawning), in 

compliance with the Clean Water Act (refer to description in Chapter 1, heading 1.8 Other Law, page 11). 

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  293

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 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 Oregon Department of 

Environmental Quality, (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, 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 RHCAs. 

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.

Environmental Consequences

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.

No Action increases the likelihood of a stand replacing wildfire, including within the RHCA of Paulina 

Creek. There is potential for adverse effects to water quality when a stand replacing wildfire occurs. The 

zone of riparian vegetation adjacent to Paulina Creek is generally narrow (frequently <10 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.

During the course of a wildfire within the RHCA, water temperature would be increased from the heat of 

the fire itself. The increase in temperature would depend on the intensity of the fire, size of the fire, 

proximity to the 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

294  Ogden Draft EIS

wildfire (Dunham, et al 2007). No continuous water temperatures of Paulina Creek were collected prior to 

the McKay Fire, therefore no pre and post fire comparison is available. 

Figure 73: Paulina Creek within the 1998 McKay Fire Area (Photo taken in 2009)

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 RHCAs into Paulina Creek that would measurably 

increase turbidity. Chronic inputs of sediment from RHCAs 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.

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  295

riverbank vegetation and stability recover. Decreased riverbank stability was not observed on Paulina 

Creek after the 1998 McKay Fire that burned adjacent to approximately 1 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.

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 Table 2 below and 

Vegetation section of the EA). These 2nd growth 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. 

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:

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 6 units totaling 

approximately 159 acres within the RHCA for Alternative 2 and within 10 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.

The actual RHCA acres implemented on the ground for the activities above will be approximately 10% less 

after accounting for wildlife leave areas, localized areas of high slope restricting machinery access and 

hand crew operations, and cultural resource sites. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

296  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 74: Paulina Creek and Typical Riparian Zone within the Project Area

The objectives for treating within the RHCAs are to change fire behavior from a crown fire to lower 

intensity surface fire, promote the development of late old structure (LOS), and reduce the risk of insect 

and disease damage. Large tree development near Paulina Creek will recruit future large wood instream 

and improve stream shade. Under current conditions, large woody material is lacking and state water 

temperature standards are exceeded. The INFISH Riparian Management Objectives of large woody 

material and water temperature are not currently being met. 

Reducing tree stocking density within the RHCA will reduce the risk of insect and disease. Presently the 

stocking exceeds the Upper Management Zone in all the RHCA units. Most of the activities within the 

RHCAs 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. Mixed conifer 

stands within the RHCAs have similar objectives.

Treating the ponderosa pine dominated stands within the RHCAs is expected to change the expected fire 

behavior from stand replacing crown fires to a lower intensity ground fire. Fire resilient stands would 

continue to provide shade and large woody recruitment into the future. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  297

Table 67: 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

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 249 159 141 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 RHCAs 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 68 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. Sediment delivery to streams as a 

result of management actions would be none to negligible. This is because of the project design features 

including the machinery buffer and the logging systems design, slope restrictions for machinery, flat to 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

298  Ogden Draft EIS

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 68, Figures 75 and 76 below demonstrate the predominance of gentle slopes within the RHCAs 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 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. 

Vegetation treatments on slopes greater than 30% within the RHCAs of Paulina Creek would be minimal 

under both alternatives. 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 68: 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  299

Figure 75: Hillslopes within Alternative 2 RHCA Units East Side of Project Area. Alt. 2 also includes units shown for Alternative 3 in Figure 77.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

300  Ogden Draft EIS

Figure 76: Hillslopes within Alternative 2 and 3 RHCA Units
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  301

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. Alternative 2 has more fuels treatments than Alternative 3. Wildfire is expected to eventually 

enter the Ogden Project area, including within the RHCAs 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 RHCAs, 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 fire-fighting operations.

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 minimize overland flow of sediment to Paulina Creek. 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. The 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 

RHCAs 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 2005). 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 2005). 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 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 little 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 2005).

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 

2005). 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

302  Ogden Draft EIS

project design criteria that provides for height-based cutting restrictions (trees < 20 feet = 12 foot setback, > 

20 feet = 28 foot setback (USFS, BLM 2005). Stand data in the project area has shown that ponderosa pine 

trees less than 10” diameter at breast height (dbh) are typically less than 60 feet tall. 

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 100 feet (source from Barb S.??) 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. 

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.

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

Existing Condition

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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  303

distribution due to the first set of impassable waterfalls. Populations of introduced brown trout (Salmo 

trutta), which are outmigrants from Paulina Lake, inhabit the stream. Kokanee salmon, blue chub, threespined 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). There are no 

known threatened, endangered, proposed, or candidate 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. Water temperatures exceed the state water quality 

standard which is based on fisheries requirements.

Table 69: 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 

Environmental Consequences

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 RHCAs 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). 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

304  Ogden Draft EIS

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 1 mile. This fire was 

largely in 2nd 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 9 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 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 

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. 

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  305

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 RHCAs 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 Wild and Scenic Rivers

Existing Condition

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. 

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.

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. 

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 DEIS lists the vegetation and fuels treatments proposed in each unit. Alternatives 2 and 

3 propose 1187 and 1101 acres, respectively, of vegetation and fuels treatments within the eligible Wild 

and Scenic River corridor.

Table 70. 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, 

24, 25, 84, 134, 135, 136, 137, 

138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 

145, 151, 153, 154, 155, 157, 158, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

306  Ogden Draft EIS

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

1,187 159, 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

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 nor 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. 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). The eligibility status of Paulina Creek would not be changed under either alternative

through the 8 mile long corridor. 

Cumulative Effects

There would no cumulative effects from implementing either alternative since there are no 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.

3.8.9 INFISH and Riparian Management Objectives

Existing Condition

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. 

Table 71: 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
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  307

Table 72: 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

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 catastrophic 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 RHCAs 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. Management activities within the RHCAs would maintain or not degrade the 

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 RHCAs 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. 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 and a 

stream buffer for ignition points. Prescribed fire will reduce ladder fuels and contribute to the development 

of large old structure trees to help attain RMOs of large woody debris and water temperature. 

Cumulative Effects

There would be no cumulative effects to the Riparian Management Objectives as there were no adverse 

direct or indirect effects.

3.8.10 Wetlands and Floodplains 

Existing Condition

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.”
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Aquatic Species and Hydrology

308  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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.

• 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 firelines would be constructed in 

RHCAs.

• S & G RP-47 as natural floodplain characteristics would be maintained. 

• S & G FI-5 as site-specific prescriptions are proposed within RHCAs 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 Aquatic Species and Hydrology

Ogden Draft EIS  309
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Scenic Resource

310  Ogden Draft EIS

3.9 Scenic Resource

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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Scenic Resource

Ogden Draft EIS  311

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.

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 Existing Condition

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 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 Newberry National Volcanic 

Monument 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Scenic Resource

312  Ogden Draft EIS

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 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. 

In all other units within the Scenic Views Management Area, prescribed treatments would enhance 

the character of the landscape over the long term. By reducing stand density and fuels that could 

contribute to a high intensity wildfire, green trees would more likely be sustained over the longterm. Ponderosa pine would have more opportunity to develop into large trees with the reduction 

in stand density.

Cumulative Effects: The McKay Butte Fire fragmented the foreground scenic views along Forest 

road 21 that runs from Highway 97 to Newberry Crater. Vegetation in the fire area is primarily 

shrubs, contrasting with the adjacent forested area. This area provides long distance and 

middleground views. By thinning the adjacent areas, more large trees would be visible.

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. 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Scenic Resource

Ogden Draft EIS  313

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) for approximately 5 years, which exceeds the amount of time management actions can be 

visible within retention and partial retention allocations. The District recommends amending this 

standard to allow visible effects of harvest cleanup and fuels reduction for approximately 5 years.

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 

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, including prescribed fire. 

The maximum acres proposed for treatment within foreground areas of Scenic Views MA is 1,937. 

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Scenic Resource

314  Ogden Draft EIS

• 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 73. Description of areas where the inventoried visual quality objective is retention or 

partial retention (Scenic View Foreground Management Area and Old Growth Management 

Areas) and underburning is proposed (see attachment for list of units).

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. 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.

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.

866 1,354

4.0 miles along Road 21.

2.3 miles along Road 

2120.

4 Area north of Road 21 from east 

edge of McKay Fire. 89 117 1.1 miles along Road 21.

5 Area north of Road 21 and east of 

10 Mile Snow Park. 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.)

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.

12 82 N/A 

SV 2 – Partial Retention Foreground
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Scenic Resource

Ogden Draft EIS  315

8 Area north of Road 22 from power 

line to Road 2215. 275 551 2.8 miles along Road 22.

OGMA – Retention Foreground

9

Old Growth Management Area on 

both sides of Paulina Creek 

extending east from McKay 

Campground.

456 505

Area extends 

approximately 4.7 miles 

along Paulina Creek. Two 

blocks of treatment 

proposed within the 

area. One block extends 

1.7 miles, with treatment 

proposed on both sides 

of the creek. The other 

block extends 1.1 miles 

along the north side of 

the creek.

Total 2,376 3,462

Anticipated Effects to Scenic Views due to Amendments

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 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. 

This amendment will also be consistent with the Eastside Screens, Alternative 2, Effects on Forest 

Health and Catastrophic Wildfire. 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 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 black bark to eventually grow and replace the existing old growth 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Scenic Resource

316  Ogden Draft EIS

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 M9-90 will allow for long-term land and resource 

management by reducing the risk of high intensity, stand replacement 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 

long-term 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 

Ogden Draft EIS  317

3.10 Botany – Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive 

Plants

3.10.1 Summary

There are no known 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 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive 

(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 highprobability 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 Botany

318  Ogden Draft EIS

3.11 Botany – Invasive Plants / Noxious Weeds

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.

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 Table 74 for the known 

weed sites.

Table 74: 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

Factors considered in determining the level of risk for the introduction or spread of noxious weeds 

are:

___X__HIGH 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Botany

Ogden Draft EIS  319

Combination of the following three factors:

1. Known weeds in/adjacent to project area.

2. Any of vectors* #1-8 in project area. 

3. Project operation in/adjacent to weed population.

______MODERATE 

1. Any of vectors #1-5 present in project area. 

______LOW 

1. Any of vectors #6-8 present in project area.

 OR

2. Known weeds in/adjacent to project area without 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.

3.11.6 Consistency with the LRMP

There are no Standards and Guidelines included in the 1990 Deschutes National Forest Land and 

Resource Management Plan addressing the weed issue. 

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).
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Botany

320  Ogden Draft EIS

3.11.6 Prevention Strategy 

A Record of Decision for Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants was signed in October 2005, 

and incorporates its standards into the Forest Plan of the Deschutes National Forest. 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.

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. 

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Botany

Ogden Draft EIS  321

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 weedinfested 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 rehabitation of temporary roads. Where subsoiling is used to reclaim temporary 

raods, these areas within the Ogden project area will be inventoried for weeds after subsoiling 

as budget permits and treated if found.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Roads and Access

322  Ogden Draft EIS

3.12 Roads and Access

3.12.1 Travel Analysis

Planning for the Lava Rock OHV Trail project included 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. In addition to looking to reduce habitat 

fragmentation and mitigate both the reduction of hiding cover and the low levels of thermal cover. 

The Lava Rock OHV Trail project overlaps the Ogden project area; therefore, 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. 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 change the open road mileage to 117.25 and 

reduce the density to 2.8 miles per square mile. 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 75: Road System Density before and after Proposed Closures 

Pre-Travel Analysis Post-Travel Analysis

Open Miles 175.07 Proposed Open Miles 117.25

Currently Closed 6.13 Proposed Closed Miles 57.82

Ogden Square 

Miles

41.44 Currently Closed 6.13

Current Density 4.22 Post-Analysis Density 2.83

The following lists the criteria used for the Travel Analysis. Table 76 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

Table 76: 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
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Roads and Access

Ogden Draft EIS  323

3.12.2 Regulatory Framework 

• FSM (Forest Service Manual) 7733

• Forest Wide Roads Analysis (USFS 2003)

3.12.3 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 77 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 77: Highway Safety Act (HSA) Roads in Project Area

HSA Roads in Project Area

Road

Number

Maintenance

Level

From Mile To Mile Total

Miles

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

3.12.4 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 management project. Another form of maintenance includes those items that need attention 

prior to 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 78 shows the deferred maintenance needs. To support this project, this maintenance needs 

be performed to reduce further damage to the road. 

Table 78: Highway Safety Act (HSA) Deferred Road Maintenance Needs

Highway Safety Act (HAS) Deferred Road Maintenance Needs

Road Number From To Miles Need

2120 1.000 2.540 1.54 Resurface

2100060 0.000 0.390 0.39 Crack and Chip 

Seal

Total Maintenance Needs - Miles 1.93

Collector Roads 

Approximately 4.02 miles (Table 79) 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Roads and Access

324  Ogden Draft EIS

Table 79: 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 selfmaintaining state. Construction and restoration of drainage and drainage structures (rolling dips, 

waterbars and leadouts) 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.

3.12.5 Environmental Consequences

All Alternatives

Direct and Indirect Effects: There would be no 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. Maintenance would likely change with 

increased costs with an associated decrease in maintenance.

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 off-road prohibitions more straightforward. These activities will result in a reduction 

in user created roads. The overall effect will be a reduction in the number of roads open (both user 

created, and system roads) in the area. Effects will not significantly affect the transportation 

system, although user access will be reduced. A project that is in the analysis process (Lava Rock 

OHV Trail System) would likely close Forest roads, reducing access for cars and trucks.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Recreation

Ogden Draft EIS  325

3.13 Recreation

3.13.1 Introduction 

The existing social character and condition (setting), as well as on recreation opportunities and 

experiences for the area are the focus of this discussion. 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.). 

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 

outstandingly-remarkable 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

Existing Condition

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 the Ogden project 

area. 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 ongoing management concern. Modest design efforts have been employed to eliminate intrusions, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Recreation

326  Ogden Draft EIS

but require monitoring and repair on regular basis. Vegetation serves as natural barriers limiting 

motorized intrusion from recreation sites, unauthorized roads or authorized roads.

Figure 77. Developed Recreation Sites and Trails within the Ogden Project Area.

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.

There is also potential for campfire wood to be made available after the logging activities are 

completed. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Recreation

Ogden Draft EIS  327

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

No cumulative effects are expected to occur. 

3.13.4 Dispersed Recreation

Existing Condition

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 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Recreation

328  Ogden Draft EIS

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 would increase the 

satisfaction for those campers in sites 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 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, sight-seeing, big game hunting, gathering forest products and other 

recreational activities. Some users, who are accustomed to few restrictions, will likely go to other 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Recreation

Ogden Draft EIS  329

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. 

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 (12 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.

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 affects 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.

Winter trail, 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Recreation

330  Ogden Draft EIS

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 IRAs and PWAs

Ogden Draft EIS  331

3.14 Inventoried Roadless Areas, Potential Wilderness 

Areas, and Other Undeveloped Lands

Key Issue #4 – The Key Issues identified in Chapter 1, included concerns with treating inside 

certain allocations or area, including unroaded areas. This issue is discussed in this section and the 

effects compared by alternative. Alternative 3 does not include any units that overlap 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), potential wilderness 

areas, and other remaining undeveloped lands. There is no Wilderness in or near the Ogden project 

area; therefore Wilderness is not addressed in the analysis.

The analysis will compare the effects by alternative, to the IRAs, the potential wilderness 

inventory, and other undeveloped lands, focusing on values and features that often characterize 

IRAs. 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 Forest 

Plan FEIS Appendix C.

Potential 

Wilderness Area

36 CFR 219.17

FSH 1909.12 

Chapter 71

PWAs are identified following inventory procedures in 

the Forest Service Handbook. Essentially, they are 

defined by size and absence of roads. These areas are 

not a land designation and there is no particular level or 

management direction or protection. PWAs typically 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences IRAs and PWAs

332  Ogden Draft EIS

overlap or are contiguous with IRAs.

Other Undeveloped 

Lands

None No apparent history of harvest activity, do not contain 

forest roads4

, and are not designated as Wilderness or 

inventoried as PWA.

3.14.3 Analysis Methods 

Indicators used to compare the effects of the alternatives to PWAs and IRAs are the values and 

features that often characterize IRAs (36 CFR 294). The potential for impact to these values and 

features are compared by alternative:

• 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. 

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. Potential Wilderness 

Areas (PWAs) in the Ogden project 

only occur where contiguous to the 

North Paulina Roadless Areas. Both 

alternatives have relatively similar 

and minor impacts to the PWA, but 

Alternative 3 treats less area of the 

PWA.

3.14.5 Affected 

 

4 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 IRAs and PWAs

Ogden Draft EIS  333

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.

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.

Inventoried Roadless: Two Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs) are located immediately to the 

east of the project area as shown in figure 1. Two treatment units lie 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 78. Location of Inventoried Roadless Areas in proximity to the Ogden Project Area. Two 

treatments units lie directly adjacent to the North Paulina Inventoried Roadless Area.

Potential Wilderness Inventory: The project area was reviewed for evidence of past harvest 

activity and road construction. Areas that showed no evidence of those activities were reviewed 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences IRAs and PWAs

334  Ogden Draft EIS

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. 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 79). 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. The following maps display the PWA in relation to treatments units of Alternative 2 and 

Alternative 3. 

Figure 79. Potential Wilderness Area in Relation to Alternative 2 and 3 Units.

 

Other Undeveloped Lands: Lands that do not meet the potential wilderness criteria but do not 

show evidence of past harvest and/or road construction total approximately 717 acres. These acres 

are distributed in small (1 to 157-acre) patches throughout the project area; it is likely that some of 

these areas were actually harvested in the past, but records are lacking. The polygons are within 

the lodgepole pine forest type at the higher elevations of the Ogden project area, interspersed with 

treated areas. Maps of these areas are located in the project file.

3.14.6 Environmental Consequences

Direct and Indirect Effects–Alternative 1

There would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to IRAs, PWAs, or other undeveloped 

lands. 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 

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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences IRAs and PWAs

Ogden Draft EIS  335

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 trails or recreation sites in 

that portion of the IRA that would attract people to that particular location.

The potential for effect to potential wilderness is assessed for the one PWA (associated with the N. 

Paulina IRA, Figure 79, where treatments are proposed. The activities that may create effects are 

listed in the following table.

Table 80. Units that overlap a PWA and the activities that will occur under Alternative 2.

Treatment 

Unit

Timber 

Harvest w/i 

PWA

Noncommercial 

thin or ladder 

fuel reduction

w/i PWA

Temporary 

road 

construction

w/i PWA

Mowing

w/i PWA

Prescribed 

fire w/i PWA

83 ~ 20 acres 

lodgepole 

regen.

0 acres none 0 acres 0 acres

116 ~ 3 acres 

mixed con. 

Sustain large 

tree structure

0 acres none ~ 3 acres ~ 3 acres

113 ~ 2 acres 

RHCA sustain 

large tree 

structure

0 acres none 0 acres ~2 acres

Total ~ 25 acres 0 acres none 0 acres ~ 5 acres

Table 81. Comparison of effects to the PWA by alternative.

Resource Criteria 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 

quality are protected.

No effect

Sources of public The project area is not a The project area is not a The project area is not a 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences IRAs and PWAs

336  Ogden Draft EIS

drinking water source of public drinking 

water. 

source of public drinking 

water.

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. 

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. 

No effects to any unique 

characteristics.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences IRAs and PWAs

Ogden Draft EIS  337

Only Alternative 2 will have some effect to areas that meet inventory criteria of potential 

wilderness. The impacts include the addition of 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. 

Direct and Indirect Effects–Alternative 3

No effect to any potential wilderness under Alternative 3.

Cumulative Effects

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. 

There are no other ongoing or foreseeable projects within the PWA that overlap Ogden project 

units, therefore there will be no cumulative effects to the PWA from the Ogden project.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Cultural Resources

338  Ogden Draft EIS

3.15 Cultural Resources 

3.15.1 Introduction

Management direction for heritage resources is found in the Deschutes National Forest 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 toolstone 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 Existing Condition

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Cultural Resources

Ogden Draft EIS  339

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 toolstone resources used for trade and everyday activities. Artifacts manufactured from these sources 

have been 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 multicomponent, containing both prehistoric and historic artifacts and/or features. By 1916 the ShevlinHixon 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 Ogden Vegetation 

Management 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, 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Cultural Resources

340  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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). 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Cultural Resources

Ogden Draft EIS  341

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.

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 DEIS, Chapter 2, Resource Protection Measures, Heritage Resources, 

page 36. 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 the Proposed Action 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 Economic Analysis

342  Ogden Draft EIS

3.16 Economic Analysis 

3.16.1 Introduction

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.

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 

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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Economic Analysis

Ogden Draft EIS  343

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 are therefore considered nontimber costs. 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 82. 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 assumes 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 estimated 

volume for each alternative by species 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, but the volume for ponderosa pine was not combined with any other.

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 nonviable. 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Economic Analysis

344  Ogden Draft EIS

Timber Sale Feasibility

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, 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: This timber sale is financially feasible with a positive net present 

value of $783,789 and is estimated three percent ($24,168) greater than Alternative 3. Project costs 

associated with Alternative 2 are the highest of the alternatives. The negative net present value, 

which makes it a discounted cost, is approximately 10% higher than Alternative 3. 

Table 83: Alternative 2 Economic Measures

Project Type Discounted Cost Discounted Revenue Net Present Value

Timber Sale (Financial Feasibility) $40,406 $824,195 $783,789

Project Feasibility including Timber Sale $7,231,204 $824,195 $(-6,407,009)

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: Similar to Alternative 2, the timber sale is financially feasible, with a 

positive NPV of $759,621. The net present value for Alternative 2 is higher, but at the project level 

Alternative 3 is less cost to the government. The cost efficiency project discounted cost is 

approximately 10% lower than Alternative 2. This cost reduction is mostly due to decreased acres 

of natural fuel, KV and regeneration treatments.

Table 84: 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. 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Economic Analysis

Ogden Draft EIS  345

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). In 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: This alternative would produce 32.46 million board feet of timber. 

The volume is estimated to be 14.92 million board feet of ponderosa pine and 10.47 million board 

feet combined lodgepole pine and fiber. The ponderosa pine volume from Alternative 2 is 

estimated to maintain or create 128 timber industry jobs. The lodgepole pine/fiber volume from 

Alternative 2 is estimated to maintain or create 26 timber industry jobs.

Alternative 3

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative 3 would produce 29.19 million board feet of timber. 

The volume is estimated to be 16.08 million board feet of ponderosa pine and 8.62 million board 

feet combined lodgepole pine and fiber. The ponderosa pine volume from Alternative 3 is 

estimated to maintain or create 138 timber industry jobs. The lodgepole pine/fiber volume from 

Alternative 2 is estimated to maintain or create 22 timber industry jobs.

Table 85: Estimated Employment and Ponderosa Pine (PP) Volume

Alternative PP Volume (CCF) PP Volume (MMBF) Estimated Employment (Jobs)

Alternative 2 31,091 14.92 128

Alternative 3 33,498 16.08 138
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Economic Analysis

346  Ogden Draft EIS

Table 86: Estimated Employment and Lodgepole Pine (LP) and Other Species (OS) Fiber Volume

Alternative LP and OS Fiber Volume 

(CCF)

LP and OS Fiber Volume 

(MMBF)

Estimated Employment (Jobs)1

Alternative 2 21,804 10.47 26

Alternative 3 17,957 8.62 22 1 Calculated using figures for the Deschutes National Forest Plan from Appendix B. Excluding firewood from the 

volume harvested on the Deschutes National Forest, an estimated 8.6 jobs per million board feet ponderosa pine and 2.5 

jobs per million board feet for all other species were maintained or created.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Other Disclosures

Ogden Draft EIS  347

3.17 Other Disclosures

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 lowincome 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.

The no action alternative 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 
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Other Disclosures

348  Ogden Draft EIS

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 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 shortterm (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 19975

, 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.

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.

 

5 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 Other Disclosures

Ogden Draft EIS  349

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.

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 Group6

, 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 20gh 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 drought-tolerant 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).

 

6 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 Other Disclosures

350  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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 Change7 because 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 87. 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 

 

7 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 Other Disclosures

Ogden Draft EIS  351

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). 

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). And 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.
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Other Disclosures

352  Ogden Draft EIS

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
Ogden DEIS Chapter 4: Consultation and Coordination

354  Ogden Draft EIS

CHAPTER 4: PUBLIC NOTIFICATION &

PARTICIPATION

4.1 Public Participation

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. 

4.2 Public Comment Period

A 45-day public comment period is offered on this DEIS 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

Pat Schatz, Mickey Finn Guide Service

Craig Vaage, Bigfoot Guide Service

David Nissen, Wanderlust Tours

The Paulina Plunge Inc.

Bruce Cunningham, Moon Country 

Snowmobilers
Chapter 4 Consultation and Coordination

Ogden Draft EIS  355

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

4.3 Consultation with Other Agencies

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 will be filed with the EPA’s Office of Federal Activities in Washington, DC, 

who published a notice of availability in the Federal Register.

Oregon State Historic Preservation Office

Consultation is ongoing 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. A finding of No Historic Properties Affected is 

made for this draft EIS. 
Ogden DEIS Chapter 4: Consultation and Coordination

356  Ogden Draft EIS

4.4 Preparers / Interdisciplinary Team

Beth Peer

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Environmental Coordinator, 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

Nick Swagger

Position: USDA, Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger 

District, Fuels Specialist

Education: BS, Forest Management, Oregon State University (2003)

Experience: 13 years professional experience

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

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
Chapter 4 Consultation and Coordination

Ogden Draft EIS  357

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); PostBaccalaureate Certificate, GIS, Central Oregon Community College, 

(2007)

Experience: 6 years professional experience

Contribution: Geographical Information Services

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
Ogden DEIS Chapter 4: Consultation and Coordination

358  Ogden Draft EIS

Contribution: Writer/Editor
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

LITERATURE CITED
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

360  Ogden Draft EIS

LITERATURE CITED

Agee J.K.1993. Fire Ecology of Pacific Northwest Forest. Island Press, Covelo, CA.

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.cof.orst.edu/research/safefor/fuelbrek.doc

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.

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.

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.

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.
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

Ogden Draft EIS  361

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.

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 blackbacked 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.

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.

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. 
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

362  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

Central Oregon Fire Management Plan, 2010 

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. 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-RP512. 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. PNWRP-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.

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, 
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

Ogden Draft EIS  363

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.

Deschutes County. 1996. Deschutes County Prehistoric Context Statement. Deschutes County 

Preservation Planning Department: Bend, Oregon.

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.

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. 

East and West Deschutes County Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), December 2009.

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. 
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

364  Ogden Draft EIS

Finney, Mark A., An Overview of FlamMap Fire Modeling Capabilties, 2006. 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.

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.

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.

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. 

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.
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

Ogden Draft EIS  365

Gentry, D. J. and K. T. Vierling. 2008. Reuse of woodpecker cavities in the breeding and nonbreeding 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.

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.

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, 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].
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

366  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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. 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.

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, portorford-cedar 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. 

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.

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.

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.
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

Ogden Draft EIS  367

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.

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.

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.
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

368  Ogden Draft EIS

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 PNW-105.

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).

McHugh Charles W.; Kolb Thomas E. Ponderosa pine mortality following fire in northern Arizona. 

International Journal of Wildland Fire, 2003. 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 

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 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. 

Munger, T. T. 1917. Western yellow pine in Oregon. US Department of Agriculture. Bulletin 418. 

48 p.
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

Ogden Draft EIS  369

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-PNW310, 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, Cohesive Strategy. 2000. The Pacific Northwest Wildfire Coordinating Group.

National Wildfire Coordinating Group Appendix B Fireline Handbook (2006)

Natureserve. 2010. Natureserve Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. 

Version 4.7 Natureserve, Arlington, VA. Available at http:www.natureserve.org/explorer

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

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.

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-RP515. 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.

Peer, Beth, Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District Environmental Coordinator and Ogden IDT 

Leader/writer-editor.
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

370  Ogden Draft EIS

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. 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. 

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.

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.

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

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. 1991. Predicting Behavior and Size of Crown Fires in the Northern Rocky 

Mountains. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. Ogden, UT. Research Paper 

INT-438. 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 
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

Ogden Draft EIS  371

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-RP-11. 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.

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. 

Development of coarse-scale spatial data for wildland fire and fuel management. USDA Forest 

Service, RMRS-GTR-87, 2002

Scott, Joe H.; Burgan, Robert E. 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. 

Earth-Science 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.

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

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.

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.

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. 
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

372  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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. 1990. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Land and Resource 

Management Plan. Deschutes National Forest. Pacific Northwest Region.

USDA, Forest Service. 1993. Region 6 Interim Old Growth Definitions.

USDA Forest Service. 1994. Deschutes National Forest minimum stocking guidelines (Draft) for 

uneven-aged management. 2 p.

USDA Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest. 1994. Deschutes National Forest Wildlife Tree 

and Log Implementation Strategy.

USDA Forest Service. 1994. 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. 1998. FSM 2520, Forest Service Soil Quality Standards, Region 6, R-6 

Supplement No. 2500-98-1. 

USDA Forest Service. 1990. Land and Resource Management Plan, Deschutes National Forest, 

Pacific Northwest Region.
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

Ogden Draft EIS  373

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

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, 

Wenatchee-Okanogan, and Winema-Fremont National Forests. Signed by Mike Ash for Linda

Goodman. 1p.

USDA Forest Service. 2005. Region 6 Record of Decision, Preventing and Managing Invasive 

Plants, 

USDA Forest Service. 2006 [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. 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).

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

USDA Forest Service, Deschutes and Ochoco National Forest. August 2010. Joint Aquatic and 

Terrestrial Programmatic BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT April 2010 – April 2013.

USDA Forest Service. 2003. Ochoco and Deschutes National Forests, Crooked River National 

Grassland. Road Analysis Report, Forest-Wide Assessment.

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. 2005. Northwest Forest Plan 

Temperature TMDL Implementation Strategies.

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/
Ogden DEIS Literature Cited

374  Ogden Draft EIS

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.

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]. 

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.

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.

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.
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

Ogden Draft EIS  375

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

- A -

ACCESS – Usually refers to a road or trail route over which a public agency claims a right-of-way for public 

use; a way of approach. 

ACTIVITY – An action, measure or treatment undertaken that directly or indirectly produces, enhances, or 

maintains forest and rangeland outputs, or achieves administrative or environmental quality objectives. An 

activity can generate multiple outputs.

ACTIVITY FUELS – Fuels generated or altered by a management activity.

ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT – An area under the administration of one line officer, such as a District 

Ranger, Forest Supervisor, or Regional Forester.

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD – The official project record file. 

ADVANCED REGENERATION - Small trees, usually less than 1 inch in diameter, which are growing 

under mature trees prior to planned harvest activities.

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT – The natural and physical environment and the relationship of people to 

that environment that will or may be changed by proposed actions.

AGE CLASS -An interval, usually 10 to 20 years, into which the age ranges of vegetation are divided for 

classification or use. 

AIRSHED - A geographic area that, because of topography, meteorology, and climate, shares the same air.

ALLOCATION - See Land Use allocation or Resource allocation.

ALLOTMENT - See Range allotment.

ALL TERRAIN VEHICLE (ATV) – A vehicle characterized by its ability to negotiate most kinds of 

terrain, by virtue of traction devices such as wide tracks, large, low-pressure rubber tires and/or four-wheel 

drive.

ALTERNATIVE – One of several policies, plans, or projects proposed for decision-making.

AMENITY – An object, feature, quality, or experience that gives pleasure or is pleasing to the mind or 

senses. The terms “amenity values” or “amenity resources” are typically used in land management planning 

to describe those resources for which monetary values are not or cannot be established (such as clean air and 

water, or scenic quality).

ANALYSIS AREA – The basic land unit of analysis that is used to allocate and schedule management 

prescriptions.

ARTERIAL ROAD - Primary traffic route serving a large area and providing travel efficiency for many 

activities. Arterial roads are non-project roads, usually built with Agency funds.

ARTIFACT - An object made or modified by humans. 

- B -

BARK BEETLE – An insect that bores through the bark of forest trees to eat the inner bark and lay its eggs.

BASAL AREA - The area of the cross-section of a tree stem near the base, generally at breast height and 

inclusive of bark. 

BENEFIT - The value of the expected outputs. 

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP) - A practice or combination of practices that is the most 

effective and practical means (including technological, economic, and institutional considerations) of 

preventing or reducing negative environmental impacts that may result from resource management activities. 

For example, Best Management Practices are used to reduce the amount of pollution generated by non-point 

sources to a level compatible with water quality goals.
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

376  Ogden Draft EIS

BIG GAME - Large mammals hunted for sport. On the Deschutes National Forest these include animals 

such as deer and elk. 

BIG GAME SUMMER RANGE - A range, usually at higher elevation, used by deer and elk during the 

summer. Summer ranges are usually much more extensive than winter ranges. 

BIG GAME WINTER RANGE - A range, usually at lower elevation, used by migratory deer and elk 

during the winter months; usually more clearly defined and smaller than summer ranges.

BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY – The number and abundance of species found within a common 

environment. This includes the variety of genes, species, ecosystems, and the ecological processes that 

connect everything in a common environment. The variety of life and its processes within communities and 

ecosystems.

BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION (BE) – Describes and displays the effects to Proposed, Endangered, 

Threatened, and Sensitive (PETS) flora and fauna species.

BOARD FOOT (BF) - The amount of wood equivalent to a piece of wood one foot by one foot by one inch 

thick. 

BROWSE - Twigs, leaves, and young shoots of trees and shrubs on which animals feed; in particular, those 

shrubs that are used by big game animals for food. 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT (BLM) - An agency within the Department of the Interior, with 

land management responsibility for the Public Domain lands.

- C -

CABLE LOGGING – Refers to methods used to skid or pull logs to a central landing or collection area by a 

cable connected to a remote power source. 

CANOPY – The more-or-less continuous cover of branches and foliage formed collectively by the crown of 

adjacent trees and other woody growth. 

CANOPY BASE HEIGHT – The height above the ground of the first canopy layer where the density of the 

crown mass within the layer is high enough to support vertical movement of a fire. Low canopy base heights 

have been shown to initiate crown fire behavior.

CANOPY BULK DENSITY - Canopy bulk density (CBD) describes the density of available canopy fuel in 

a stand. It is defined as the mass of available canopy fuel per canopy volume unit.

CANOPY CLOSURE – The progressive reduction of space between crowns as they spread laterally, 

increasing canopy cover.

CANOPY COVER – The percentage of a fixed area covered by crowns of plants delimited by a vertical 

projection of the outermost perimeter of the spread of the foliage.

CAVITY - The hollow excavated in trees by birds or other natural phenomena, used for roosting and 

reproduction by many birds and mammals. 

CHARACTERISTIC LANDSCAPE - In reference to the U.S.D.A. Forest Service visual management 

system; the overall impression created by a landscape's unique combination of visual features (land, 

vegetation, water, structures), as seen in terms of form, line, color, and texture; synonymous with “visual 

landscape character.”

CLOSURE - An administrative order restricting either location, timing, or type of use in a specific area.

COARSE WOODY MATERIAL (CWM) – Dead and down material greater than 10 inches DBH at the 

small end.

CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR) - A codification of the general and permanent rules 

published in the Federal Register by the Executive departments and agencies of the federal government.

COLLECTOR ROADS - Roads constructed to serve two or more elements but which do not fit into the 

other two categories (arterial or local). These roads serve smaller land areas, are usually connected to a 
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

Ogden Draft EIS  377

Forest arterial or public highway, and are operated for constant service. They collect traffic from Forest 

roads or terminal facilities.

COMMERCIAL HARVEST – The removal of commercial wood fiber through commercial thinning and 

regeneration cuts (small clearcuts that leave all trees greater than or equal to 21 inches dbh).

COMMERCIAL THINNING - Any type of tree thinning that produces merchantable material at least equal 

in value to the direct costs of harvesting.

COMMODITIES – Transportable resources with commercial value; all resource products that are articles of 

commerce. 

COMMUNITY STABILITY - A community’s capacity to handle change without major hardships or 

disruptions to component groups or institutions. Measurement of community stability requires identification 

of the type and rate of proposed change and an assessment of the community’s capacity to accommodate that 

level of change.

COMPACTION – The packing together of soil particles by forces exerted at the soil surface, resulting in 

increased soil density.

COMPETING VEGETATION – Vegetation that seeks and uses the limited common resources (space, 

light, water, and nutrients) of a forest site needed by preferred trees for survival and growth.

CONDITION CLASS - 1) Timber: a grouping of timber strata into size-age-stocking classes for Forest 

planning. 2) Range: one of a series of arbitrary categories used to classify range conditions, usually expressed 

as excellent, good, fair, or poor. 

CORRIDOR - A linear strip of land identified for the present or future location of transportation or utility 

rights-of-way within its boundaries. 

COST EFFECTIVENESS - Achieving specified outputs or objectives under given conditions for the least 

cost.

COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (CEQ) - An advisory council to the President 

established by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. It reviews federal programs for their effect 

on the environment, conducts environmental studies, and advises the President on environmental matters.

COVER/FORAGE RATIO - The mixture of cover and forage areas on a unit of land, expressed as a ratio. 

The optimum cover/forage mix for deer on summer range is 60:40.

CRITICAL HABITAT – That portion of a wild animal's habitat that is critical for the continued survival of 

the species. Areas designated for the survival and recovery of federally listed threatened or endangered 

species. 

CROP TREES -Trees which are considered suitable to meet long term management objectives for an 

analysis area. These may also be referred to as healthy or manageable trees. This may include both the 

physical make-up of the tree as well as the species.

CROWN – The part of a tree, or other woody plant, bearing live branches and foliage.

CROWN HEIGHT - In a standing tree, the vertical distance from ground level to the base of the crown, 

measured either to the lowest live branch whorl, or to the lowest live branch (excluding shoots arising 

spontaneously from buds on the stem of a woody plant), or to a point halfway between. 

CRYIC - Soils in this temperature regime have a mean annual temperature higher than 0°C but lower than 

8°C.

CUBIC FOOT (CF) - The amount of timber equivalent to a piece of wood one foot by one foot by one foot. 

CULTURAL RESOURCE - The remains of sites, structures, or objects used by humans in the past-historic 

or prehistoric. 

CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OR IMPACTS - Cumulative effect or impact is the impact on the environment 

that results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (federal or nonfederal) or person undertakes such other 
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

378  Ogden Draft EIS

actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking 

place over a period of time. 

CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AREA (CEA) – The portion of a study area on which the effects from 

implementing project activities are expected to occur (and may occur outside the project analysis area).

CYCLE - As applied to uneven-aged management, it is the time interval between harvest entries. It should 

be noted that harvest entries in uneven-aged management are to leave residual levels of growing stock which 

should not need treatment for at least one cycle length. 

- D -

DATA – Any recorded measurements, facts, evidence, or observations reduced to written, graphical, tabular, 

or computer form. The term implies reliability, and therefore provides an explanation of source, type, 

precision and accuracy. 

DecAID – An advisory tool that has been developed to replace the biological potential models for species 

that utilize dead and partially dead trees and down wood. It is an internet-based summary, synthesis, and 

integration of published scientific literature, research data, wildlife databases, forest inventory databases, and 

expert judgment and experience. It offers a way of estimating or evaluating levels of dead wood habitat that 

provide for a wide array of species and ecological processes. The DecAID Repository is located on the 

Internet at http://www.fs.fed.us/wildecology/decaid/decaid_background/decaid_home.htm.

DECOMMISSION – Activity that results in the stabilization and restoration of unneeded roads to a more 

natural state. 

DEER WINTER RANGE – See BIG GAME WINTER RANGE.

DEPENDENT COMMUNITIES – Communities where social, economic, or political life would change in 

important respects if market or non-market outputs from the National Forests were substantially decreased.

DESIRABLE SPECIES – Any species of plant or animal which is considered to be compatible with 

meeting management goals and objectives. 

DESIRED CONDITION – A description of the desired human dimension, production, and 

physical/biological characteristics to be achieved on an area.

DEVELOPED RECREATION – Recreation that requires facilities that, in turn, result in concentrated use 

of an area. Examples of developed recreation areas are campgrounds and ski areas; facilities in these areas 

might include roads, parking lots, picnic tables, toilets, drinking water, ski lifts, and buildings. 

DEVELOPED RECREATION SITE – Relatively small, distinctly defined areas where facilities are 

provided for concentrated public use; e.g. campgrounds, picnic areas, swimming areas, and downhill ski 

areas. 

DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (dbh) – The diameter of a tree measured 4 feet 6 inches above the 

ground.

DISPERSED RECREATION – A general term referring to recreation use outside developed recreation 

sites; this includes activities such as scenic driving, hiking, backpacking, hunting, fishing, snowmobiling, 

horseback riding, cross-country skiing, and recreation in primitive environments. 

DISTANCE ZONE – One of three categories used in the Visual Management System to divide a view into 

near and far components. The three categories are: (1) foreground, (2) middleground, and (3) background.

DISTURBANCE (Ecosystem) – Refers to events (either natural or human caused) that alter the structure, 

composition, or function of terrestrial or aquatic habitants.

DIVERSITY – The distribution and abundance of different plant and animal communities and species 

within the area covered by a land and resource management plan. 

DIURNAL - Active during the daytime, resting during the night.

DOMINANT – Trees with crowns extending above the general level of the canopy and receiving full light 

from above and partly from the side; taller than the average trees in the stand with crowns well developed. 
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

Ogden Draft EIS  379

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS) – The draft statement of environmental 

effects that is required for major federal actions under Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act, 

and released to the public and other agencies for comment and review. 

DUFF – Organic matter in various stages of decomposition on the floor of the forest. 

- E -

EARLY FOREST SUCCESSION - The early stage or condition of a plant community that occurs during 

its development from bare ground to climax.

EARLY SERAL - Plants which inhabit a disturbed site within the first few years subsequent to the 

disturbance.

ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS - An analytical method in which discounted benefits are 

compared with discounted costs.

ECOSYSTEM - An interacting system of organisms considered together with their environment; for 

example, marsh, watershed, and lake ecosystems.

ECO-TYPE – Groupings of soil and potential vegetation. Areas that have similar site potentials and are 

expected to have similar responses to treatments. 

EFFECTS - Environmental changes resulting from a proposed action. Included are direct effects, which are 

caused by the action and occur at the same time and place, and indirect effects, which are caused by the 

action and are later in time or further removed in distance, but which are still reasonably foreseeable. 

Indirect effects may include growth-inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the 

pattern of land use, population density, or growth rate, and related effects on air and water and other natural 

systems, including ecosystems.

Effects and impacts as used in this EIS are synonymous. Effects include ecological (such as the effects on 

natural resources and on the components, structures, and functioning of affected ecosystems), aesthetic 

quality, historic, cultural, economic, social, or healthy effects, whether direct, indirect, or cumulative. Effects 

may also include those resulting from actions that may have both beneficial and detrimental effects, even if

on balance the agency believes that the effects will be beneficial. 

ENDANGERED SPECIES - Any species of animal or plant that is in danger of extinction throughout all or 

a significant portion of its range. Plant or animal species identified by the Secretary of the Interior as 

endangered in accordance with the 1973 Endangered Species Act. 

ENHANCEMENT - See VISUAL QUALITY OBJECTIVE.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) - The concise public document required by the regulations for 

implementing the procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) - A statement of the environmental effects of a 

proposed action and alternatives to it. It is required for major federal actions under Section 102 of the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and released to the public and other agencies for comment and 

review. It is a formal document that must follow the requirements of NEPA, the Council on Environmental 

Quality (CEQ) guidelines, and directives of the agency responsible for the project proposal. 

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE - The pursuit of equal justice and equal protection under the law for all 

environmental statutes and regulations, without discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic 

status.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA) - An agency of the Executive Branch of the 

Federal Government which has the responsibility for environmental matters of national concern.

EPHEMERAL DRAW - A drainage-way that conveys surface water for short periods of time in direct 

response to snowmelt or rainfall runoff.

EQUIVALENT CLEARCUT AREA - Watershed index of snowmelt and evapotranspiration rates relative 

to baseline condition where tree stands are considered fully canopied.
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

380  Ogden Draft EIS

EROSION - (1) The wearing away of the land surface by running water, wind, ice, or other geologic agents, 

including such processes as gravitation creep; or (2) detachment and movement of soil or rock fragments by 

water, wind, ice, or gravity. The following terms are used to describe different types of erosion:

Accelerated erosion - Erosion which is much more rapid than natural erosion, with the increase in 

erosion rate resulting primarily from the influence of human activities, or, in some cases, of other 

events that expose mineral soil surfaces, such as wildfire.

Gully erosion - The erosion process whereby water accumulates in narrow channels, and, over short 

periods, removes the soil from this narrow area to considerable depths, ranging from 4 inches to as 

much as 75 to 100 feet.

Rill erosion - An erosion process in which numerous small channels less than 4 inches deep and 6 

inches wide are formed.

Sheet erosion - The removal of a fairly uniform layer of soil from the land surface by runoff water.

EXCESS TREES - Trees which are considered not needed in the stand in order to meet management 

objectives. 

EXISTING CONDITION – A description of present-day human dimensions, production, 

physical/biological characteristics of an area.

EXTENDED ATTACK - When a fire has not been contained by the initial attack resources dispatched to 

the fire, will not have been contained within the management objectives that are established for that zone or 

area, and has not been contained within the first operational period.

EXTIRPATED - Local extinction.

EXTREME FIRE BEHAVIOR – “Extreme” implies a level of fire behavior characteristics that ordinarily 

precludes methods of direct control action. One or more of the following is usually involved: high rate of 

spread, prolific crowning and/or spotting, presence of fire whirls, strong convection column. Predictability is 

difficult because such fire often exercise some degree of influence on their environment and behave 

erratically, sometimes dangerously.

- F -

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT - The final version of the statement of 

environmental effects required for major federal actions under section 102 of the National Environmental 

Policy Act. It is a revision of the draft environmental impact statement to include public and agency 

responses to the draft.

FIRE INTENSITY – The nature of a fire in terms of its rate of energy release. These are physical 

descriptions of the fires, rather than ecological effects. “Fire intensity is a term that is used to describe the 

rate at which a fire produces thermal energy. Fire intensity is influenced by the amount of fuel available for 

burning, local weather conditions before and at the time of the fire, and the topography of the burning site. 

The limiting factor in fire intensity is the amount of energy stored in the fuel. As a consequence, the greater 

the fuel loading, the more intensely a fire is likely to burn” (DeBano et al 1998 p. 56-57.).

FIRE MANAGEMENT - All activities required for protection of resources from fire and for the use of fire 

to meet land management goals and objectives. 

FIRE FREQUENCY - Refers to the number of fires in a specified time an area.

FIRE REGIME - A function of the historical frequency of fire and the degree of severity of those fires. 

FIRE SEVERITY or BURN SEVERITY - Refers to the degree which a site has been altered or the 

successional process disrupted by fire. Fire severity is a product of fire time and intensity (DeBano et al., 

1998).

Severity also describes the fire-caused damage to the soil. The severity ratings are based on the following 

standards (BAER Handbook, FSH 2509.13): 
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

Ogden Draft EIS  381

High severity – More than 40 percent of the area exhibits soil features likely to significantly increase 

runoff and erosion (such as., absence of duff layer, hydrophobic soils, soil discoloration).

Moderate severity – Less than 40 percent of the area exhibits high severity indicators. Duff layers may 

be absent or mostly absent. 

Low severity – Duff layers are burned but intact. Unburned areas are intermingled with lightly burned 

areas.

FIXED COSTS - Costs incurred that are not expected to change significantly with the production of outputs, 

or over the range of alternatives. They are not tied to specific management activities and are usually a small 

component of the overall budget.

FORAGE - All browse and non-woody plants that are available to livestock or game animals and used for 

grazing or harvested for feeding. 

FORB - Any herb other than grass. 

FOREGROUND - A term used in visual management to describe the portions of a view between the 

observer and up to 1/4 to 1/2 mile distant. 

FOREST HEALTH – A measure of the robustness of forest ecosystems. Aspects of forest health include 

biological diversity; soil, air, and water productivity; natural disturbances; and the capacity of the forest to 

provide a sustaining flow of goods and services for people. 

FOREST LAND - Land at least 10 percent occupied by forest trees or formerly having had such tree cover 

and not currently developed for non-forest use. Lands developed for non-forest use include areas for crops, 

improved pasture, residential, or administrative areas, improved roads of any width, and adjoining road 

clearings and powerline clearings of any width. 

FOREST SERVICE HANDBOOK (FSH) - For Forest Service use, directives that provide detailed 

instructions on how to proceed with a specialized phase of a program or activity. 

FOREST SERVICE MANUAL (FSM) - A system of manuals that provides direction for Forest Service 

activities.

FOREST SYSTEM ROADS - Roads that are part of the Forest development transportation system, which 

includes all existing and planned roads as well as other special and terminal facilities designated as Forest 

development transportation facilities. See ARTERIAL ROADS, COLLECTOR ROADS, and LOCAL 

ROADS.

FRAGMENTATION – Breaking up of a continuous area into progressively smaller patches of increasing 

degrees of isolation.

FUEL BREAK - A zone in which fuel quantity has been reduced or altered to provide a position for 

suppression forces to make a stand against wildfire. Fuel breaks are designated or constructed before the 

outbreak of a fire. Fuel breaks may consist of one or a combination of the following: natural barriers, 

constructed fuel breaks, constructed barriers. 

FUEL MANAGEMENT - The practice of planning and executing the treatment or control of living or dead 

vegetative material in accordance with fire management direction.

FUEL MODELS - Fuel models are a tool used to standardize discussion of fuel conditions on a landscape. 

FUEL TREATMENT - The rearrangement or disposal of natural or activity fuels (generated by 

management activity, such as slash left from logging) to reduce fire hazard. Fuels are defined as both living 

and dead vegetative materials consumable by fire (See Fire and Fuels, Chapter 3, for a definition of various 

fuel treatment methods).

FUELS - Combustible wildland vegetative materials. While usually applied to above-ground living and 

dead surface vegetation, this definition also includes roots and organic soils such as peat. 

- G -

GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) – Computer software that provides database and 

spatial analytic capabilities.
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

382  Ogden Draft EIS

GEOMORPHOLOGY - The science that deals with land and submarine relief features of the earth's surface 

and seeks a genetic interpretation of them, using the principles of physiography in its descriptive aspects and 

dynamic and structural geology in its explanatory phases. 

GOAL - A concise statement that describes a desired condition to be achieved sometime in the future. It is 

normally expressed in broad, general terms and is timeless in that it has no specific date by which it is to be 

completed. Goal statements form the principal basis from which objectives are developed. 

GOODS AND SERVICES - The various outputs, including on-site uses, produced from forest and 

rangeland resources.

GOSHAWK FORAGING AREA – Areas where prey are searched for and captured by goshawks. Desired 

size of foraging areas is approximately 5400 acres (not including nest stand and post fledgling area).

GOSHAWK NEST AREA – The nest tree and stand surrounding the nest that contains prey handling areas, 

perches and roosts. Often referred to as the nest stand, usually approximately 30 acres in area. 

GRASS/FORB - An early forest successional stage where grasses and forbs are the dominant vegetation.

GREEN TREE REPLACEMENT (GTR) – Trees retained, or managed through time, to provide snags or 

CWM habitat at some point in the future. 

GROUND FUELS – All combustible materials below the surface litter layer. These fuels may be partially 

decomposed, such as forest soil organic layers (duff), dead mosses and lichen layers, punky wood, and deep 

organic layers (peat), or may be living plant material, such as tree and shrub roots.

GROUND-BASED HARVESTING SYSTEMS – Logging systems that employ ground-based equipment 

such as feller-bunchers, skidders, and forwarders.

GROUP SELECTION CUTTING - See UNEVEN-AGED SILVICULTURAL SYSTEMS.

GROWING SEASON - That part of the year when temperature and moisture are favorable for vegetation 

growth.

GUIDELINE - An indication or outline of policy or conduct; i.e. any issuance that assists in determining the 

course of direction to be taken in any planned action to accomplish a specific objective. 

GUZZLER - A device for collecting and storing precipitation for use by wildlife or livestock. Consists of an 

impenetrable water collection area, a storage facility, and a trough from which animals may drink. 

- H -

HABITAT - The place where a plant or animal naturally or normally lives or grows. 

HABITAT DIVERSITY - The distribution and abundance of different plant and animal communities and 

species within a specific area.

HABITAT TYPE – An aggregation of all land areas potentially capable of producing similar climax plant 

communities.

HAND PILING – The use of personnel to manually gather accumulated fuels (usually smaller fuels such as 

woodcutting slash or small thinning slash) and place it in a pile to be burned or retained for wildlife. 

HAZARD – Any real or potential condition that can cause injury, illness, or death of personnel, or damage to 

or loss of equipment or property.

HIDING COVER - Vegetation that will hide 90 percent of a deer from the view of a human at a distance of 

200 feet or less. The distance at which the animal is essentially hidden is called a “sight distance.”

HISTORIC RANGE OF VARIABILITY (HRV) – The historical pattern and abundance of structural 

stages within watersheds, using pre-settlement (1800-1900) conditions as a reference point. 

HISTORIC SITE - Site associated with the history, tradition, or cultural heritage of national, state, or local 

interest, and of enough significance to merit preservation or restoration. 

- I -
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

Ogden Draft EIS  383

ID TEAM - See INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM.

IMPACTS - See EFFECTS.

INCREMENT – The increase in diameter, basal area, height, volume, quality or value of individual trees or 

stands during a given period. 

INDICATOR SPECIES - See MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES.

INDIRECT OUTPUTS -Outputs caused by an action, but which are later in time or farther removed in 

distance, although still reasonably foreseeable. See EFFECTS.

INDIVIDUAL TREE SELECTION - A stand management method in which silviculturists identify 

individual trees that need to be removed from a stand of trees. In this method specific types, sizes, or 

qualities of trees are identified for either removing from the stand or remaining in the stand. 

INITIAL ATTACK – The fire suppression effort that takes place as soon as possible following a wildland 

fire report.

INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT - A process for selecting strategies to regulate forest pests in 

which all aspects of a pest-host system are studied and weighed. The information considered in selecting 

appropriate strategies includes the impact of the unregulated population on various resource values, 

alternative regulation tactics and strategies, and benefit/cost estimates of those alternative strategies. 

Regulatory strategies are based on sound silvicultural practices and ecology of the pest-host system, and 

consist of a combination of tactics such as timber stand improvement plus selective use of pesticides. 

INTENSIVE MANAGEMENT (INTENSIVE FOREST MANAGEMENT) - A high investment level of 

timber management that includes use of precommercial thinnings, commercial thinnings, genetically 

improved stock, and control of competing vegetation. 

INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM (ID TEAM) - A group of individuals with different training assembled to 

solve a problem or perform a task. The team is assembled out of recognition that no one scientific discipline 

is sufficiently broad to adequately solve the problem.

INTERMEDIATE CUTTING - Any removal of trees from a stand between the time of its formation and 

the regeneration cut. Most commonly applied intermediate cuttings are release, thinning, improvement, and 

salvage.

INTERMITTENT STREAMS - A stream which flows only at certain times of the year when it receives 

water from some surface source, such as melting snow in mountainous areas.

INVENTORY DATA AND INFORMATION COLLECTION - The process of obtaining, storing, and 

using current inventory data appropriate for planning and managing the Forest. 

IRRETRIEVABLE - Applies to losses of production, harvest, or commitment of renewable natural 

resources. For example, some or all of the timber production from an area is irretrievably lost during the 

time an area is used as a winter sports site. If the use is changed, timber production can be resumed. The 

production lost is irretrievable, but the action is not irreversible.

IRREVERSIBLE - Applies primarily to the use of nonrenewable resources, such as minerals or cultural 

resources, or to those factors that are renewable only over long time spans, such as soil productivity. 

Irreversible also includes loss of future options. 

ISSUE - A point, matter, or question of public discussion or interest to be addressed or decided through the 

planning process. See also PUBLIC ISSUE. 

- L -

LADDER FUELS – Fuels that provide vertical continuity between the surface fuels and crown fuels in a 

forest stand, thus contributing to the ease of torching and crowning. 

LAND MANAGEMENT - The intentional process of planning, organizing, programming, coordinating, 

directing, and controlling land use actions.

LANDING - Any place where round timber is assembled for further transport, commonly with a change of 
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

384  Ogden Draft EIS

method. 

LANDSCAPE LEVEL – A watershed, or series of interacting watersheds or other natural biophysical 

(ecological) units, within the larger Land and Resource Management Planning areas. This term is used for 

conservation planning and is not associated with visual landscape management and viewscape management. 

LAND USE ALLOCATION - The commitment of a given area of land or a resource to one or more specific 

uses, for example, to campgrounds or wilderness. 

LATE FOREST SUCCESSION – A stage of forest succession where the majority of trees are mature or 

over-mature.

LEAVE-TOP-ATTACHED-YARDING (LTA) – All trees meeting Utilization Standards which are 60 feet 

in length or longer are required to have tops (and limbs) attached to the last log while being yarded to the 

landing. Portions of live trees which break during felling or yarding, and are greater than 8 feet in length 

shall be yarded to the landing.

LOGGING RESIDUES - See SLASH.

LOPPING AND SCATTERING – Lopping the slash created after felling and spreading it more or less 

evenly over the ground.

LATE AND OLD STRUCTURE (LOS) – Late and old structural stages are defined by the Eastside 

Screens as multi-strata stands with large trees and single strata stands with large trees. 

- M -

MANAGEMENT AREA - Tracts of land grouped into one category having a particular management 

emphasis. 

MANAGEMENT CONCERN - An issue, problem, or condition that influences the range of management 

practices identified by the Forest Service in the planning process.

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION - A statement of multiple use and other goals and objectives, and the 

associated management prescriptions, and standards and guidelines for attaining them. 

MANAGEMENT EMPHASIS - That portion of a management scheme that receives the most stress or is of 

the greatest significance or importance. It may be the resources being produced, or it may be the way in 

which they are produced.

MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES – A species selected because its welfare is presumed to be an 

indicator of the welfare of other species using the same habitat. A species whose condition can be used to 

assess the impacts of management actions on a particular area. 

MANAGEMENT PRACTICE – A specific activity, measure, course of action, or treatment. 

MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTION – The management practices and intensity selected and scheduled for 

application on a specific area to attain multiple use and other goals and objectives. 

MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENT (MR) – Minimum standards for resource protection, vegetation 

manipulation, silvicultural practices, even-aged management, riparian areas, soil and water diversity that are 

to be met to accomplish National Forest System goals and objectives. 

MASS MOVEMENT – A general term for any of the variety of processes by which large masses of earth 

material are moved downslope by gravitational forces - either slowly or quickly. 

MATURE TIMBER – Trees that have attained full development, particularly height, and are in full seed 

production.

MEAN ANNUAL INCREMENT OF GROWTH – The total volume of a tree or stand of trees up to a 

given age divided by that age.

MECHANICAL PILING – The use of mechanized equipment to gather accumulated fuels, usually activity 

fuels created by thinning, harvest or woodcutting and places it in a pile configuration to be either utilized, 

burned or left for wildlife habitat. 
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

Ogden Draft EIS  385

MECHANICAL SHRUB TREATMENT (MST) – Use of mechanized equipment to mow, cut, chop, grind 

or otherwise reduce shrub or ground fuel vertical structure. Equipment and attachments would be chosen 

based on soils (compaction and displacement potential), terrain, other resource concerns, cost and 

availability.

MECHANICAL THINNING - Reducing the number of trees in a stand. 

MIDDLEGROUND – A term used in visual management to describe the portions of a view extending from 

the foreground zone out to 3 to 5 miles from the observer. 

MINERAL MATERLALS - Deposits such as sand, stone, gravel, and clay. 

MINERAL SOIL - Weathered rock materials, usually containing less than 20 percent organic matter.

MITIGATION MEASURES - Actions to avoid, minimize, reduce, eliminate, or rectify adverse impacts of 

management practices.

MODEL - A representation of reality used to describe, analyze, or understand a particular concept. A 

“model” may be a relatively simple qualitative description of a system or organization, or a highly abstract 

set of mathematical equations.

MODIFICATION - See VISUAL QUALITY OBJECTIVE.

MONITORING AND EVALUATION - The periodic evaluation of LRMP management practices on a 

sample basis to determine how well objectives have been met.

MORTALITY - In wildlife management, the loss in a population from any cause, including hunter kill, 

poaching, predation, accident, and disease. In forestry, trees in a stand that die of natural causes. 

MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE - A tiny black insect, ranging in size from 1/8 to 3/4 inch, which bores its 

way into a tree's cambium and cuts off its supply of nutrients, thus killing the tree.

MULTI-COHORT – a stand with two or more age classes or cohorts. 

MULTIPLE USE - The management of all the various renewable surface resources of the National Forest 

System so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the needs of the American people; 

making the most judicious use of the land for some or all of these resources or related services over areas 

large enough to provide sufficient latitude for periodic adjustments in use to conform to changing needs and 

conditions; that some lands will be used for less than all of the resources; and harmonious and coordinated 

management of the various resources, each with the other, without impairment of the productivity of the land 

and with consideration being given to the relative values of the various resources; and not necessarily the 

combination of uses that will give the greatest dollar return or the greatest unit output. 

- N -

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA) OF 1969 - An Act to declare a National policy 

that will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between humankind and the environment, to promote 

efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and 

welfare of humanity, to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to 

the nation, and to establish a Council on Environmental Quality.

NATIONAL FOREST LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN - A Plan which “...shall 

provide for multiple use and sustained yield of goods and services from the National Forest System in a way 

that maximizes long-term net public benefits in an environmentally sound manner.”

NATIONAL FOREST MANAGEMENT ACT (NFMA) - A law passed in 1976 as an amendment to the 

Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act, requiring the preparation of Regional Guides and 

Forest Plans and the preparation of regulations to guide that development.

NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM (NFS) - A nationally significant system of federally owned units of 

forest, range, and related land consisting of National Forest, Purchase Units, National Grasslands, and other 

lands, waters, and interest in lands which are administered by the Forest Service or designated for 

administration through the Forest Service.
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

386  Ogden Draft EIS

NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM (NFS) LANDS – National Forests, National Grasslands, or Purchase 

Units and other federal lands, that have been designated by Executive Order or statute as lands under the 

management of the Forest Service, including experimental areas and Bankhead-Jones Title 111 lands. 

NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES - A listing (maintained by the U.S. National Park 

Service) of areas that have been designated as being of historical significance. The Register includes places 

of local and state significance as well as those of value to the Nation. 

NATURAL BARRIER - A natural feature that restricts livestock or wildlife movements, such as a dense 

stand of trees or a cliff.

NATURAL DISTURBANCE REGIMES – The historic patterns (frequency and extent) of fire, insects, 

wind, landslides and other natural processes in an area. 

NATURAL REGENERATION - Reforestation of a site by natural seeding from the surrounding trees. 

Natural regeneration may or may not be preceded by site preparation.

NET PUBLIC BENEFITS - An expression used to signify the overall long-term value to the nation of all 

outputs and positive effects (benefits) less all associated inputs and negative effects (costs), whether they can 

be quantitatively valued or not. Net public benefits are measured by both quantitative and qualitative criteria 

rather than a single measure or index. The maximization of net public benefits to be derived from 

management of units of the National Forest System is consistent with the principles of multiple use and 

sustained yield. 

NON-FOREST LAND - Lands that never have had or that are incapable of having 10 percent or more of the 

area occupied by forest trees; or lands previously having such cover and currently developed for non-forest 

use.

NON-GAME SPECIES – Animal species that are not hunted, fished, or trapped.

NOXIOUS WEEDS – Undesirable plant species that are unwholesome to the range or to animals. The 

Forest Service Manual describes a noxious weed as a plant that is aggressive and difficult to manage, 

poisonous, toxic, parasitic, a carrier of host of serious insects or disease, and being native or new to, or not 

common to the United States or parts thereof (USDA, Forest Service, 1995c).

- O -

OBJECTIVE – A concise, time-specific statement of measurable planned results that respond to preestablished goals. An objective forms the basis for further planning to define the precise steps to be taken 

and the resources to be used in achieving identified goals.

OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE (OHV) – Vehicle such as motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, four-wheel drive 

vehicles, and snowmobiles, synonymous with Off-road vehicle (ORV).

OLD-GROWTH ATTRIBUTES – Structural features and other characteristics of old-growth forests, 

including: large trees for the species and site; wide variation in tree sizes and spacing; accumulations of large 

dead standing and fallen trees; multiple canopy layers; canopy gaps and understory patchiness; elements of 

decay such as broken or deformed tops or trunks and root decay; and the presence of species characteristic of 

old growth. 

OLD-GROWTH HABITAT – Habitat for certain wildlife that is characterized by overmature coniferous 

forest stands with large snags and decaying logs.

OPPORTUNITY – A statement of general actions, measure, or treatments that addresses a public issue or 

management concern in a favorable way.

OUTPUTS – The goods, services, products, and concerns that are measurable and capable of being used to 

determine the effectiveness of programs and activities in meeting objectives. Goods, end products, or 

services that are purchased, consumed, or utilized directly by people. A broad term for describing any result, 

product, or service that a process or activity actually produces.

OVERSTORY – That portion of the trees, in a forest or in a stand of more than one story, forming the upper 

or uppermost canopy.
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

Ogden Draft EIS  387

- P -

PARTIAL RETENTION – See VISUAL QUALITY OBJECTIVE.

PARTICULATES – Small particles suspended in the air and generally considered pollutants. See TOTAL 

SUSPENDED PARTICULATES.

PERCENTILE WEATHER - The weather conditions that can be expected of X% of the days during a fire 

season. The standard percents are Low (0%-15%), Moderate (16%-89%), High (90%-96%) and Extreme 

(97% and higher). Low percentile weather is the average suite of weather conditions that would occur less 

than 15% of the time.

PERENNIAL STREAM – A stream that flows year round.

PERMITTEE – Any person or business formally allowed to graze livestock on the land of another person or 

business (e.g.; on state or federal land).

PERSONAL USE – Normally used to describe the type of permit issued for removal of wood products 

(firewood, post, poles, and Christmas trees) from National Forest Land when the product is for home use and 

not to be resold for profit.

PLANNED IGNITION - A fire started deliberately, and controlled to accomplish a resource management 

objective 

PLANNING AREA - The contiguous area within defined boundaries that is determined to be logical for 

analysis of the existing condition and proposed activities. 

PLANNING CRITERIA - Criteria prepared to guide the planning process. Criteria applied to collection 

and use of inventory data and information, analysis of the management situation, and the design, formulation, 

and evaluation of alternatives. 

PLANNING RECORDS - The body of information documenting the decisions and activities that result 

from the process of developing an EIS, Forest Plan, or significant amendment (also referred to as the Project 

Record).

PLANT ASSOCIATION GROUP (PAG) – Combine plant associations by climax species, site potential, 

and temperature and moisture similarities. 

POLE/SAPLING – A Forest successional stage in which trees between five and nine inches in diameter are 

the dominant vegetation. See also SIZE CLASS.

POLE TIMBER - Trees of at least five inches in diameter at breast height, but smaller than the minimum 

utilization standard for sawtimber. See also SIZE CLASS.

POLICY - A definite course or method of action selected by a governmental agency, institution, group, or 

individual from among alternatives and, in the light of given conditions, to guide and usually determine 

present and future decisions. A specified decision or set of decisions designed to carry out such a chosen 

course of action. 

POST-FLEDGLING AREA (PFA) – The area of concentrated use by the goshawk family after the young 

leave their nest. The desired area is approximately 420 acres.

PRACTICES - Those management activities that are proposed or expected to occur.

PRECOMMERCIAL THINNING - The practice of removing some of the trees less than marketable size 

from a stand so that the remaining trees will grow faster. 

PREHISTORIC SITE - An area that contains important evidence and remains of the life and activities of 

early societies that did not record their history.

PRESCRIBED FIRE - A fire burning under specified conditions that will accomplish certain planned 

objectives. 

PRESCRIPTION - A written direction for various Forest management activities, such as tree harvest and 

fuels reduction activities.
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

388  Ogden Draft EIS

PRESERVATION - A visual quality objective that allows only for ecological changes. 

PROGRAM - When spelled with a capital, the Renewable Resource Program required by the RPA. In the 

general sense, sets of activities or projects with specific objectives, defined in terms of specific results and 

responsibilities for accomplishment. 

PROGRAMMATIC MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT - An agreement between the U.S.D.A. Forest 

Service, Pacific Northwest Region, the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation on the management of two types of cultural resource sites found on the 

Forest: Depression-era administrative structures and prehistoric lithic scatters.

PROJECT RECORD - The body of information documenting the decisions and activities that result from 

the process of developing an EIS, Forest Plan, or significant amendment (also referred to as the Planning 

Record).

PROJECTS - Work schedules prescribed for a project area to accomplish management prescriptions. 

Projects can be for operation, maintenance, and protection (OMP), or for investment purposes. OMP projects 

are for ongoing work and are generally considered one year at a time. Investments can be of multi-year 

duration. A project is organized for managerial convenience, and is described by location, activities, outputs, 

effects, work force, dollars, time, and responsibility for execution.

PUBLIC ACCESS – Refer to Access

PUBLIC ISSUE - A subject or question of widespread public interest relating to management of the 

National Forest System. 

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION - Meetings, conferences, seminars, workshops, tours, written comments, 

responses to survey questionnaires, and similar activities designed and held to obtain comments from the 

public about Forest Service planning. 

- R -

RAPTORS – Predatory birds such as falcons, hawks, eagles, and owls.

RANGER DISTRICT – A sub-unit of a National Forest for management and administration purposes.

RECORD OF DECISION - A document separate from but associated with an Environmental Impact 

Statement which states the decision, identifies all alternatives, specifying which were environmentally 

preferable, and states whether all practicable means to avoid environmental harm from the alternative have 

been adopted, and if not, why not. 

REGENERATION - The renewal of a tree crop, whether by natural or artificial means. Also, the young 

crop itself, which is commonly referred to as reproduction. 

REGULATIONS - Generally refers to the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36, Chapter II, which covers 

management of the Forest Service. 

REHABILITATION - Action taken to restore, protect, or enhance site productivity, water quality, or other 

resource values over a period of time.

RELEASE CUTTING – Removal of competing vegetation to allow a desired tree species to grow. 

RESIDUAL STAND - The trees remaining standing after some activity such as selection cutting.

RESOURCE - Anything which is beneficial or useful, be it animal, vegetable, mineral, a location, a labor 

force, a view, an experience, etc. Resources, in the context of land use planning, thus vary from such 

commodities as timber and minerals to such amenities as scenery, scenic viewpoints, or recreation 

opportunities. 

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN - A Plan developed prior to the LRMP that outlined the activities 

and projects for a particular resource element independently of considerations for other resources. Such 

Plans are superseded by the LRMP.

RESOURCE PLANNLNG ACT (RPA) - The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 

1974. Also refers to the National Assessment and Recommended Program developed to fulfill the 
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

Ogden Draft EIS  389

requirements of the act. 

RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL - The Forest Service employee who has been delegated the authority to carry 

out a specific planning action.

RETENTION - See VISUAL QUALITY OBJECTIVE.

RIPARIAN - Pertaining to areas of land directly influenced by water. Riparian areas usually have visible 

vegetative or physical characteristics reflecting this water influence. Stream sides, lake borders, or marshes 

are typical riparian areas. 

RIPARIAN AREA - Geographically delineated areas, with distinctive resource values and characteristics 

that are comprised of aquatic and riparian ecosystems.

ROADED NATURAL (RN) - A classification of the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum that characterizes a 

predominately natural environment with evidence of moderate permanent alterations and resource utilization. 

Evidence of the sights and sounds of people is moderate, but in harmony with the natural environment. 

Opportunities exist for both social interaction and moderate isolation from the sights and sounds of people. 

ROTATION - A pre-determined time frame in which an even-aged forest stand will reach maturity and be 

harvested. 

RURAL - A Recreation Opportunity Spectrum classification for areas characterized by a substantially 

modified natural environment. Sights and sounds of people are evident. Renewable resource modification 

and utilization practices enhance specific recreation activities or provide soil and vegetative cover protection.

- S -

SALE PREPARATION COSTS - Costs associated with preparing a timber harvest on Forest Service lands 

for sale to the public; usually include all administrative costs for developing sale layout, writing an 

Environmental Assessment and selling the timber sale.

SALVAGE - Activity, usually removal or chipping, of material killed by a disturbance event such as insects, 

fire, wind, etc. Where possible, this material is used as some form of forest product of commercial value, 

such as firewood, pulp, and/or chips.

SCARIFIED - Land in which the topsoil has been broken up or loosened in preparation for regenerating by 

direct seeding or natural seedfall. Also refers to ripping or loosening road surfaces to a specified depth for 

obliteration or “putting a road to bed.” 

SCOPING PROCESS -A part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process; early and open 

activities used to determine the scope and significance of the issues, and the range of actions, alternatives, 

and impacts to be considered in an Environmental Impact Statement.

SECOND GROWTH – Forest growth that has become established following some interference, such as 

cutting, serious fire, or insect attack, with the previous Forest crop.

SEDIMENT – Earth material transported, suspended, or deposited by water.

SEEDLINGS AND SAPLINGS – Live trees less than five inches in diameter at breast height. See also 

SIZE CLASS.

SENSITIVE SPECIES – Plant or animal species that are susceptible or vulnerable to activity impacts or 

habitat alterations. Those species that have appeared in the Federal Register as proposed for classification or 

are under consideration for official listing as endangered or threatened species, that are on an official State 

list, or that are recognized by the Regional Forester as needing special management to prevent placement on 

Federal or State lists.

SERAL – A biotic community which is a developmental, transitory stage in an ecological succession.

SERAL STAGES - Seral stage describes the phase of development of a plant community. Early seral 

species are those species you would expect to find on a site soon after a major disturbance, like fire. 

SILVICULTURAL EXAMINATION – The process used to gather the detailed in-place field data needed 

to determine management opportunities and direction for the forest resource within a small subdivision of a 
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

390  Ogden Draft EIS

Forest area, such as a stand. Also, Stand Exam.

SIVICULTURAL SYSTEM – A management process whereby Forests are tended, harvested, and replaced, 

resulting in a Forest of distinctive form. Systems are classified according to: 1) the method of carrying out 

tree falling that remove the mature crop and provide for regeneration, and 2) the type of forest thereby 

produced.

SILVICULTURE – The art and science of controlling the established, composition, and growth of forests.

SITE - A specific location where management activity is considered, planned, or operating. 

SITE INDEX – A numerical evaluation of the quality of land for plant productivity, based on the height of 

dominant trees in a stand at an arbitrarily chosen age.

SITE POTENTIAL - The specific ability of a site to grow vegetation. It includes the soil, topographic, and 

climatic conditions that determine the resources available for growing vegetation.

SITE PREPARATION – An activity (such as prescribed burning, disking, and tilling) performed on a 

reforestation area, before introduction of reforestation, to ensure adequate survival and growth of the future 

crop.

SITE PRODUCTIVITY – Production capability of specific areas of land.

SIZE CLASS – For the purposes of Forest planning, size class refers to the intervals of tree stem diameter 

used for classification of timber in the LRMP database.

Seedling/sapling = less than five-inch diameter

Pole/sapling or pole timber = five-inch to nine-inch diameter

Sawtimber = greater than nine-inch diameter

SKIDDING – A general term for hauling loads by sliding, not on wheels, as developed originally from 

stump to roadside, deck, skidway, or other landing.

SLASH – The residue left on the ground after tree felling and tending, and/or accumulating there as a result 

of storm, fire, girdling, or poisoning. It includes unutilized logs, uprooted stumps, broken or uprooted stems, 

the heavier branchwood, etc.

SMALL GAME – Birds and small mammals normally hunted or trapped.

SNAG – A standing dead tree.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC – Pertaining to, or signifying the combination or interaction of social and economic 

factors.

SOIL – The portion of the earth’s surface consisting of disintegrated rock and humus.

SOIL PRODUCTIVITY – The capacity of a soil to produce a specific crop such as fiber or forage under 

defined levels of management. Productivity is generally dependent on available soil moisture and nutrients, 

and length of growing season.

SOIL RESOURCE INVENTORY - See SOIL SURVEYS.

SOIL SURVEYS - Systematic examinations of soils in the field and in laboratories, their description and 

classification; the mapping of kinds of soil; the interpretation according to their adaptability for various 

crops, grasses, and trees, their behavior under use or treatment for plant production or for other purposes, and 

their productivity under different management systems. 

SOIL TEXTURE - The relative proportions of the various soil separates in a soil, described by the classes of 

soil texture. Twelve basic soil texture classes are recognized, such as “loam.” The textural classes may be 

modified by the addition of suitable adjectives when coarse fragments are present in substantial amounts; for 

example, “stony loam.”

STAND (TREE STAND, TIMBER STAND) - An aggregation of trees or other vegetation occupying a 

specific area and sufficiently uniform in species composition, age arrangement, and condition as to be 

distinguishable from the forest or other vegetation or land cover on adjoining areas.
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

Ogden Draft EIS  391

STAND COMPOSITION – The proportion of each tree species in a stand expressed as a percentage of 

either the total number, basal area or volume of all tree species in the stand. 

STAND DENSITY – A relative measure of the amount of stocking on a forest area. Often described in terms 

of stems per acre, basal area, or stand density index.

STAND DENSITY INDEX (SDI) – The number of trees per acre that a stand would have at a quadratic 

mean diameter of 10 inches. SDI=(trees/acre)*(Dq/10)1.66 where Dq is the quadratic mean diameter for the 

stand or portion thereof. (See SDImax)

STAND DIVERSITY - Any attribute that makes one timber stand biologically or physically different from 

other stands. This difference can be measured by, but not limited to: different age classes; species; densities; 

or non-tree floristic composition. 

STAND DYNAMICS - The changes in forest stand structure with time, including stand behavior during and 

after disturbances (Oliver, 1996).

STAND EXAMINATION SURVEYS - Procedures to collect data on Forest stands. 

STAND STRUCTURE – The distribution of trees in a stand, which can be described by species, vertical or 

horizontal spatial patterns, size of trees or tree parts, age, or a combination of these. 

STANDARD - A statement that describes a condition when a job is done properly. Standards show how 

well something should be done, rather than what should be done. 

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES - Principles specifying conditions or levels of environmental quality to 

be achieved.

STRATUM – A distinct layer of vegetation within a forest community; canopy layer. 

SUITABILITY - The appropriateness of applying certain resource management practices to a particular area 

of land, as determined by an analysis of the economic and environmental consequences and the alternative 

uses foregone. A unit of land may be suitable for a variety of individual or combined management practices. 

SUITABLE FOREST LAND - Land to be managed for timber production on a regulated basis. 

SUPPRESSED VEGETATION – Trees or shrubs with crowns receiving no direct light either from above 

or from the sides, and that will not respond to release. Usually crowns are entirely below the general level of 

the canopy. 

SUPPRESSION - The process of extinguishing or confining fire. 

SURFACE FUELS - Loose surface litter on the soil surface, normally consisting of fallen leaves or needles, 

twigs, bark, cones, and small branches that have not yet decayed enough to lose their identity; also grasses, 

forbs, low and medium shrubs, tree seedlings, heavier branchwood, downed logs, and stumps interspersed 

with or partially replacing the litter.

SUSTAINABILTY - The ability of forested systems to withstand or resist rapid and widespread structural 

change due to fire, insects, and disease.

- T -

TEMPORARY ROAD - Roads authorized by contract, permit, lease, other written authorization, or 

emergency operation not intended to be a part of the forest transportation system and not necessary for long 

term resource management (36CFR 212.1).

THERMAL COVER - Cover used by animals to ameliorate effects of weather; for deer, a stand of 

coniferous trees 5 feet or taller with an average crown closure of 75 percent or more, or a pole-size or larger 

stand with 60 percent or more closure.

THINNING - A felling made in an immature stand primarily to maintain or accelerate diameter increment 

and also to improve the average form of the remaining trees without permanently breaking the canopy. An 

intermediate cutting. 

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED (T&E) SPECIES - See THREATENED; see ENDANGERED
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

392  Ogden Draft EIS

THREATENED SPECIES - Those plant or animal species likely to become endangered species throughout 

all or a significant portion of their range within the foreseeable future. See also ENDANGERED SPECIES.

THRIFTY TREES - Trees which have at least a 40% live crown ratio and with little or no evidence of 

disease or insects are called thrifty. They should also show evidence of good growth with long leaders and a 

good color, usually dark green.

TIERING - Refers to the coverage of general matters in broader environmental impact statements (such as 

national program or policy statements) with subsequent narrower statements or environmental analyses (such 

as Regional or Forest program statements, or ultimately, site-specific statements) incorporating, by reference, 

the general discussions and concentrating solely on the issues specific to the statement subsequently 

prepared.

TIMBER PRODUCTION - The purposeful growing, tending, harvesting, and regeneration of regulated 

crops of trees to be cut into logs, bolts, or other round sections for industrial or consumer use. For purposes 

of Forest planning, the term “timber production” does not include production of fuelwood or harvest of 

unsuitable lands. 

TIMBER STAND IMPROVEMENT (TSI) - Measures such as thinning, pruning, release cutting, 

prescribed fire, girdling, weeding, or poisoning of unwanted trees aimed at improving the growing condition 

of the remaining trees. 

TOPOGRAPHY - The configuration of a surface including its relief, elevation, and the position of its 

natural and human-created features 

TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATES (TSP) - Any finely divided material (solid or liquid) that is 

airborne with an aerodynamic diameter smaller than a few hundred micrometers.

TRACTOR LOGGING - Any logging method that uses a tractor as the motive power for transporting logs 

from the stumps to a collecting point, whether by dragging or carrying the logs. 

TRADE-OFF -The combination of benefits and costs that are gained and lost in switching between 

alternative courses of action. Trade-offs include only those portions of benefits and costs that are not 

common to all alternative courses of action under consideration.

TREATMENTS – Any planned manipulation of plant materials. Prescribed burning, thinning, logging, 

lopping are all examples of vegetation treatments.

TREES PER ACRE – The number of trees of a specific diameter on an acre of land. 

- U -

UNCLASSIFIED ROAD - Roads on National Forest System lands that are not managed as part of the forest 

transportation system, such as unplanned roads, abandoned travelways, and off road vehicle tracks that have 

not been designated and managed as a trail; and those roads that were once under permit or other 

authorization and were not decommissioned upon the termination of the authorization (36 CFR 212.1).

UNDERBURNING (UB) – Use of prescribed fire under a stand of trees to decrease or remove accumulated 

ground fuels during periods of spring like moisture to reduce risk of wildfire

UNDERSTORY - The trees and other woody species growing under a more-or-less continuous cover of 

branches and foliage formed collectively by the upper portion of adjacent trees and other woody growth. 

UNDESIRABLE SPECIES - Any species of plant or animal which is NOT considered to be compatible 

with meeting management goals and objectives.

UNPLANNED IGNITION - A fire started at random by either natural or human causes, or a deliberate 

incendiary fire.

UNROADED AREA - Any area, without the presence of a classified road, of a size and configuration 

sufficient to protect the inherent characteristics associated with its roadless condition. Unroaded areas do not 

overlap with inventoried roadless areas. 

UPPER DENSITY LIMIT - The density level at which a suppressed class of trees begins to develop.
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

Ogden Draft EIS  393

UPPER MANAGEMENT ZONE – Refer to Upper Density Limits

UPPER MANAGEMENT ZONE – UMZ –The level of stocking or relative density beyond which there is 

imminent risk of loss of overstory trees to bark beetles.

USTIC - A soil moisture regime in which moisture is limited but is present at a time when conditions are 

suitable for plant 

- V -

VARIABLE COSTS - Costs that vary according to the activity or output level. They may be expressed as a 

cost per acre or cost per unit of output.

VEGETATIVE MANAGEMENT - Activities designed primarily to promote the health of the crop forest 

cover for multiple-use purposes.

VIABLE POPULATIONS - That number of individuals of a species sufficient to ensure the long-term 

existence of the species in natural self-sustaining populations adequately distributed throughout the planning 

area. 

VISUAL RESOURCE - The composite of basic terrain, geologic features, water features, vegetative 

patterns, and land use effects that typify a land unit and influence the visual appeal the unit may have for 

visitors. 

- W -

WATERSHED - The entire land area that contributes water to a drainage system or stream. 

WETLANDS - Areas that are inundated by surface or ground water often enough to support, and usually do 

support, primarily plants and animals that require saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth 

and reproduction.

WHOLE-TREE-YARD (WTY) – All trees meeting utilization standards less than 60 feet in length are 

required to be whole tree yarded to the landing. Portions of live trees which break during felling or yarding, 

and are greater than 8 feet in length shall be yarded to the landing.

WILDERNESS - Areas designated by congressional action under the 1964 Wilderness Act. Wilderness is 

defined as undeveloped federal land retaining its primeval character and influence without permanent 

improvements or human habitation. Wildernesses are protected and managed to preserve their natural 

conditions, which generally appear to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature with the imprint of 

human activity substantially unnoticeable; have outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and 

unconfined type of recreation; are of sufficient size to make practical their preservation, enjoyment, and use 

in an unimpaired condition, and may contain features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value as 

well as ecologic and geologic interest.

WILDFIRE - Any wildland fire that is not a prescribed fire. See also PRESCRIBED FIRE.

WILDLIFE – All non-domesticated mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians living within a natural 

environment, and include both game species and non-game species. Animals, or their progeny, which one 

were domesticated but escaped captivity and are running wild (i.e., feral animals), such as horses, burros, and 

hogs, are not considered wildlife.

WILDLIFE HABITAT DIVERSITY – The distribution and abundance of different plant and animal 

communities and species within a specified area.

WINTER RANGE HABITAT UNIT (WRHU) – Areas in the biological winter range of mule deer ranging 

from 15,000 to 20,000 acres.

WOOD FIBER PRODUCTION - The growing, tending, harvesting, and regeneration of harvestable trees.

WOODY DEBRIS - Dead pieces of woody vegetation such as stems, limbs, or leaves which are on a site.

- X, Y, Z -
Ogden DEIS Glossary of Terms

394  Ogden Draft EIS

XERIC - A soil moisture regime in which soil is dry for 45 or more consecutive days in the 4 months 

following the summer solstice, and moist for 45 or more consecutive days in the 4 months following the 

winter solstice.

YARDING - Hauling timber from the stump to a collection point. 

YARDING TOPS ATTACHED – This refers to hauling the tops and limbs left attached to the last log of 

each tree as it is yarded to the landing for processing and is done to reduce accumulations of logging fuels 

within the harvest unit.
Ogden DEIS Appendices

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: Units and Prescriptions

APPENDIX B: Wildlife – Snags; OGMA

APPENDIX C: Soils

APPENDIX D: Geothermal Activities
396  Ogden Draft EIS