United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

Forest 

Service 

July 2009 

Environmental Impact Statement 

Draft 

Deadlog Vegetation Management Project 

Bend/Ft. Rock Ranger District, Deschutes National Forest 

Deschutes County, Oregon 

Legal: Township 22S Range 15E and Township 23S Ranges 14E and 15E 

Willamette Meridian 

Ponderosa Pine 
Deadlog Project DEIS

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. 
Deadlog Project DEIS

i

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

Deschutes National Forest 

Deschutes County, Oregon 

Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service 

Responsible Official: John Allen, Forest Supervisor, Deschutes National Forest, 

For Information Contact: Terry Craigg, Project Leader 

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

 Bend, OR 97701 

 (541) 548-7749 

Abstract: This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) contains the Forest Service’s proposal 

to implement treatments that would reduce the risk of high intensity, stand replacement wildfire and 

the risk of heavy tree mortality from insects and disease. The project units are located within an 

approximately 16,055 acre project area of Deschutes National Forest Lands within Deschutes County, 

Oregon. The project area is located approximately 35 miles southeast of the city of Bend. 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 fuel loading within the 

Deadlog planning area. Three alternatives were analyzed in this DEIS, a no action alternative and two 

action alternatives. Approximately 10,752 acres would be treated under Alternative 2 (Proposed 

Action) and approximately 11,281 would be treated under Alternative 3. Alternative 3 is the preferred 

alternative. 

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 Federal Register, and on the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests’ Web site 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/centraloregon/projects/units/bendrock/index.shtml. 

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 
Deadlog Project DEIS

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). 
Deadlog Project DEIS

iii

Reader’s Guide 

This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) contains information about a project proposal that 

will create forest conditions that: restore or maintain fire-dependent ecosystems and move toward 

Historic Range of Variability (HRV), and maintain the forest in a healthy condition as anticipated in 

the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP). 

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 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The following provides an 

overview of the components of this document. 

Executive Summary: The summary of the DEIS provides a concise overview of the Purpose and 

Need for action, Key Issues that were determined from scoping, and a comparison of three 

alternatives. 

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

and figures are also included. 

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 also discussed. 

Chapter 2 – Alternatives: Chapter 2 includes a description of the developed alternatives, and a 

discussion regarding any potential alternative that was 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), developed by the Forest Service that drove 

analysis for this project, and Alternative 3, developed by the Forest Service following public scoping. 

Alternative 3 was developed after consideration of all public comments, including field trips with 

interested organizations, and further review and internal discussion by Forest Service specialists. 

Alternative 3 responds to the issue of the need for more fuels reduction and the economic concern 

regarding cable logging. Resource Protection Measures that would reduce impacts to resources are 

documented in this chapter. This section includes a summary of data and a comparison of alternatives 

considered in detail, in a table format. 

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 activities. This current information provides the baseline for assessing and comparing the 

potential impacts of the 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 and the effects that would occur with no Forest activities proposed in this EIS. In 

order to facilitate comparison of the information that is provided, this chapter is organized and 

subdivided into resource 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 representing a wide range of views. The references, 

glossary, and index are also included in this chapter. 

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

Chapter 3 of this DEIS. 
Deadlog Project DEIS

iv 

Appendix A – Displays tables of units proposed in Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3. 

Appendix B – Soils: Displays tables of units with the percent of soil disturbance, current and postactivity. 

Appendix C – Fire and Fuels: Displays tables of units with the type of fuel reduction activity. 

Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency provides resource tables that display project consistency with 

Standards and Guides. 

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 District in Bend, Oregon. 
Deadlog Project DEIS

v

FREQUENTLY USED ACRONYMS 

ABSPC After Burning Precommercial Thinning 

BA Basal Area 

BA Biological Assessment 

BE Biological Evaluation 

BLM Bureau of Land Management 

BMP Best Management Practices 

CCF Hundred Cubic Feet 

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality 

CF Cubic Feet 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CT Condition and Trend 

CWD Coarse Woody Debris 

DBH Diameter at Breast Height 

DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

DEQ Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 

DMTR Dwarf Mistletoe Rating 

EA Environmental Assessment 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

ESA Endangered Species Act of 1973 

FEID Idaho Fescue 

FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement 

FS Forest Service 

FSH Forest Service Handbook 

FSM Forest Service Manual 

GBA Growth Basal Area 

GIS Geographic Information Systems 

GPS Global Positioning System 

GTR Green Tree Replacement 

HOR Overstory Removal 

HP Handpile 

HPSB High Priority Shorebirds 

HSV Commercial Salvage 

HRV Historical Range of Variability 

HTH Commercial Thin 

IU Implementation Unit 

LFR Ladder Fuels Reduction 

LOS Late and Old Structure 

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

MBF Thousand Board Feet 

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 

MM Mitigation Measure 

MMBF Million Board Feet 

MP Mechanical Pile 

MPP Maximum Population Potential 

MR Management Requirement 

MST Mechanical Shrub Treatment 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NFMA National Forest Management Act 
Deadlog Project DEIS

vi 

NLAA May Affect, but Not Likely to Adversely Affect 

NOI Notice of Intent 

ODFW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 

OGMA Old Growth Management Area 

PAG Plant Association Group 

PDC Project Design Criteria from the 2006-2009 Programmatic Biological Assessment 

PUTR Antelope Bitterbrush 

ROD Record of Decision 

S&G Standard and Guide 

SDI Stand Density Index 

SPC Pre-commercial Thin 

TES Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive 

TPA Trees per Acre 

UB Underburn 

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 

WRHU Winter Range Habitat Unit 
Deadlog Project DEIS

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED...............................................................................................................6

INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................6

DESIRED CONDITION.....................................................................................................................................6

EXISTING CONDITION ...................................................................................................................................7

PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION..............................................................................................................8

PROPOSED ACTION ........................................................................................................................................9

SCOPING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT....................................................................................................10

IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES.......................................................................................................................10

KEY ISSUES ...............................................................................................................................................11

ANALYSIS ISSUES....................................................................................................................................12

PLANNING FRAMEWORK............................................................................................................................12

DECISION TO BE MADE................................................................................................................................14

CHAPTER 2 – ALTERNATIVES......................................................................................................................17

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................17

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITIES ...............................................................................................17

ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTIONS ..................................................................................................................21

ALTERNATIVE 1 (NO ACTION)..............................................................................................................21

ALTERNATIVE 2 (PROPOSED ACTION)...............................................................................................21

ALTERNATIVE 3 .......................................................................................................................................27

CONNECTED ACTIONS COMMON TO BOTH ACTION ALTERNATIVES.......................................32

FOREST PLAN AMENDMENT......................................................................................................................35

RESOURCE PROTECTION MEASURES COMMON TO ACTION ALTERNATIVES...............................35

SMOKE MANAGEMENT ..........................................................................................................................36

FOREST VEGETATION............................................................................................................................36

WILDLIFE..................................................................................................................................................37

SOILS ..........................................................................................................................................................39

RANGE........................................................................................................................................................43

CULTURAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................45

INVASIVE PLANT PREVENTION...........................................................................................................46

RECREATION & SCENERY.....................................................................................................................46

MONITORING.................................................................................................................................................47

COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................................48

SUMMARY TABLE – COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ......................................................................51

ALTERNATIVES NOT CONSIDERED IN DETAIL......................................................................................52

CHAPTER 3 - AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES................54

FIRE AND FUELS REPORT............................................................................................................................56

FOREST VEGETATION – TREES..................................................................................................................75

PATHOLOGY ..................................................................................................................................................97

WILDLIFE – BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION ...............................................................................................105

WILDLIFE – MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES AND HABITAT ...................................................112

MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES...............................................................................................119

LANDBIRD FOCAL SPECIES................................................................................................................142

BIRDS OF CONSERVATION CONCERN .............................................................................................145

SHOREBIRDS ..........................................................................................................................................146

SOILS .............................................................................................................................................................150

CULTURAL RESOURCES............................................................................................................................180

RANGE...........................................................................................................................................................186

BOTANY – BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION..................................................................................................194

BOTANY - INVASIVE SPECIES ..................................................................................................................201
Deadlog Project DEIS

viii 

FOREST ROADS ...........................................................................................................................................207

RECREATION ...............................................................................................................................................210

SCENIC ..........................................................................................................................................................213

WATER/FISHERIES RESOURCES..............................................................................................................217

ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY ...........................................................................................................................218

CIVIL RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE..................................................................................225

OTHER DISCLOSURES ...............................................................................................................................226

FOREST PLAN AMENDMENT....................................................................................................................229

LONG-TERM CLIMATE CHANGES...........................................................................................................231

LITERATURE CONSIDERED FROM SCOPING COMMENTS.................................................................233

CHAPTER 4 - CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION ........................................................................238

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION .............................................................................................................................238

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ...........................................................................................................................240

PREPARERS / INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM............................................................................................240

GLOSSARY OF TERMS .................................................................................................................................243

INDEX ................................................................................................................................................................267

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................................268

APPENDIX A: PROPOSED UNITS AND ACTIVITIES.............................................................................283

APPENDIX B: SOILS......................................................................................................................................294

APPENDIX C: FIRE AND FUELS ................................................................................................................303

APPENDIX D: FOREST PLAN CONSISTENCY........................................................................................315
Deadlog Project DEIS

ix

TABLE OF TABLES 

Table 1: Deadlog Forest Plan Management Areas................................................................... 14 

Table 2: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Acres of Treatment Type....................................... 21 

Table 3: Alternative 3 Acres of Treatment Type ..................................................................... 27 

Table 4: Deadlog Forest Road Closure .................................................................................... 33 

Table 5: Deadlog Forest Road Decommissioning ................................................................... 33 

Table 6: Implementation Unit (IU) Hiding Cover Assessment outside of Black-bark Pine, 

MA-7, and Non-NFS Land. ..................................................................................................... 35 

Table 7: Summary of Operating Season Restrictions .............................................................. 37 

Table 8: Heritage Coordination and Monitoring Activities ..................................................... 48 

Table 9: Deadlog Alternative Harvest Prescriptions (Rx) ....................................................... 48 

Table 10: Comparison of Treatments by Alternative............................................................... 50 

Table 11: Comparison of Alternatives to Purpose and Need and Key Issues.......................... 51 

Table 12: Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions ................................................ 55 

Table 13: Fire Severities .......................................................................................................... 58 

Table 14: Fire Frequencies....................................................................................................... 59 

Table 15: Natural Historic Fire Regime Groups...................................................................... 59 

Table 16: Existing Fuel Models by Acres and Fire Severity ................................................... 61 

Table 17: Appropriate Fire Suppression Strategies ................................................................. 62 

Table 18: Existing Flame Lengths ........................................................................................... 62 

Table 19: Existing Fire Types.................................................................................................. 63 

Table 20: Existing Fire Rate of Spread.................................................................................... 63 

Table 21: Principles of Fire Resistance for Dry Forests (adapted from Agee, 2002 and 

Hessburg and Agee, 2003) ....................................................................................................... 64 

Table 22: Treatment Acres by Alternative............................................................................... 65 

Table 23: Canopy Fuels Characteristics by Alternative........................................................... 68 

Table 24: Flame Length by Alternative and Percent of Area .................................................. 68 

Table 25: Fire Type by Alternative.......................................................................................... 69 

Table 26: Rate of Spread by Alternative.................................................................................. 69 

Table 27: Flame Lengths with Associated Scorch Heights in 97% Weather Conditions........ 70 

Table 28: Probability of Mortality in Ponderosa Pine by DBH and Flame Length (%).......... 70 

Table 29: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 Flame Length by Size Class in 

Ponderosa Pine Units ............................................................................................................... 71 

Table 30: Emissions by Alternative ......................................................................................... 73 

Table 31: Cumulative Effects................................................................................................... 74 

Table 32: Deadlog Plant Associations and Associated Basal Areas........................................ 78 

Table 33: Structural Stages ...................................................................................................... 86 

Table 34: Deadlog Stand Structure .......................................................................................... 88 

Table 35 Alternative Comparison of Structure Deadlog Project Area .................................... 89 

Table 36: Current Structure Acreage ....................................................................................... 90 

Table 37: Alternative 2 – Change in Forest Structure.............................................................. 91 

Table 38: Alternative 3 – Structure Change............................................................................. 93 

Table 39 Deadlog Cumulative Effects Actions....................................................................... 96 

Table 40: Alternative 1 (No Action) Modeled Indicators of Stand Productivity and Conditions 

through Time.......................................................................................................................... 101 
Deadlog Project DEIS

x 

Table 41: Alternative 2 Modeled Indicators of Stand Productivity and Conditions through 

Time ........................................................................................................................................102 

Table 42: Alternative 3 Modeled Indicators of Stand Productivity and Conditions through 

Time ........................................................................................................................................103 

Table 43: Current Severity and Distribution of Western Dwarf Mistletoe by Stand and Plot103 

Table 44: Summary of Conclusions for Species Considered Under the Biological Evaluation 

for the Deadlog Project Area ..................................................................................................105 

Table 45: Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species List .............................................106 

Table 46: Cumulative Effect Summary ..................................................................................110 

Table 47: Management Indicator Species (MIS)....................................................................119 

Table 48: Summary of Current Deer Hiding Cover in Implementation Unit (IU) .................125 

Table 49: Summary of Current Deer Hiding Cover in Implementation Unit.........................125 

Table 50: Current Deer Hiding Cover Summary....................................................................127 

Table 51: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 Effects to Deer Hiding Cover 128 

Table 52: Snag and Log Transect Summary...........................................................................132 

Table 53: DecAID Desired Conditions for Snags and Down Logs........................................133 

Table 54: Management Indicator Species - Woodpeckers .....................................................137 

Table 55: Management Indicator Species - Waterfowl ..........................................................140 

Table 56: Deschutes National Forest Landbird Focal Species ...............................................142 

Table 57: Birds of Conservation Concern ..............................................................................145 

Table 58: Shorebirds...............................................................................................................146 

Table 59: Cumulative Effects Summary for the Wildlife Resource.......................................147 

Table 60: Summary 1 of Net Change in Detrimental Soil Conditions following Mechanical 

Harvest and Soil Restoration (Subsoiling) Treatments...........................................................169 

Table 61: Summary of Foreseeable Future Actions on Soil Productivity ..............................177 

Table 62: Grazing Allotments within the Deadlog Project Area and their Status..................187 

Table 63: Region 6 Sensitive Plant Species Documented or Suspected – Deschutes National 

Forest.......................................................................................................................................195 

Table 64: Invasive Plant Species Documented to Occur on Deschutes National Forest........202 

Table 65: Invasive Plant Species Present within Deadlog Project Boundary (Forest GIS)....203 

Table 66: Potential Sources of Cumulative Weed Effects for the Deadlog Project ...............206 

Table 67: Deadlog Road Summary.........................................................................................207 

Table 68: Deadlog - Forest Roads Closure and Decommissioning ........................................208 

Table 69: Cumulative Effects to the Recreation Resource for the Deadlog Project...............211 

Table 70: Comparison of Activities by Alternative...............................................................218 

Table 71: Logging Cost per CCF by Logging System and Alternative (Stump to truck) .....219 

Table 72: Forest Service and Purchaser Timber related costs ...............................................220 

Table 73: Non logging Treatment Costs................................................................................220 

Table 74: Summary of economic efficiency analysis............................................................221 

Table 75: Biomass removal and Fuels treatment cost Comparison.......................................223 

Table 76: Biomass to Electricity Computation......................................................................223 

Table 77: Deadlog Implementation Unit (IU) Hiding Cover Assessment outside of Black-bark 

Pine, Deer Habitat (MA-7), and Non-National Forest Service Land .....................................229 

Table 78: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Proposed Activities ............................................283 

Table 79: Alternative 3 Proposed Activities...........................................................................288 
Deadlog Project DEIS

xi

Table 80: Appendix B - Alternative 2: Estimates of Detrimental Soil Conditions Following 

Mechanical Harvest and Soil Restoration Treatments by Activity Areas.............................. 294 

Table 81: Appendix B - Alternative 3 - Estimates of Detrimental Soil Conditions Following 

Mechanical Harvest and Soil Restoration Treatments by Activity Areas.............................. 298 

Table 82: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Fuels Treatments by Unit Number and Total Acres

................................................................................................................................................ 303 

Table 83: Alternative 3 Fuels Treatments by Unit Number and Total Acres ........................ 304 

Table 84: Resource Tables for Forest Plan Consistency........................................................ 315 
Deadlog Project DEIS

xii 

TABLE OF FIGURES 

Figure 1: Project Area Vicinity...................................................................................................7 

Figure 2: Ponderosa Pine Stand in the Deadlog Project Area ....................................................8 

Figure 3: Deadlog LRMP Management Areas.........................................................................15 

Figure 4: Deadlog Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Harvest Units..........................................23 

Figure 5: Deadlog Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Fuels Treatment Units............................24 

Figure 6: Deadlog - Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Timber Stand Improvement (TSI)........25 

Figure 7: Deadlog Alternative 2 Temporary Road Placement..................................................26 

Figure 8: Alternative 3 Harvest Units.......................................................................................28 

Figure 9: Alternative 3 Fuels Treatment Units .........................................................................29 

Figure 10: Deadlog - Alternative 3 Stand Improvement ..........................................................30 

Figure 11: Deadlog Alternative 3 Temporary Road Placement................................................31 

Figure 12: Deadlog Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 Proposed Road 

Closures and Decommissioning................................................................................................34 

Figure 13: Large Tree Structure Representing Reference Conditions......................................79 

Figure 14: Typical Blackbark Existing Conditions - Deadlog..................................................80 

Figure 15: Deadlog Beetle Detection Survey ...........................................................................81 

Figure 16: Alternative 1 (No Action) Display of Area at Risk to Beetle Mortality .................82 

Figure 17: Display of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Area at Risk to Beetle Mortality – Post 

Treatment ..................................................................................................................................83 

Figure 18: Display of Alternative 3 Area at Risk to Beetle Mortality – Post Treatment .........85 

Figure 19: Current Structure Chart ...........................................................................................90 

Figure 20: Alternative 2 – Post Treatment Structure Chart ......................................................92 

Figure 21: Alternative 3 – Post-Treatment Structure Chart......................................................93 

Figure 22: Summary of Comparison of Calculated DMR and DMI Values by Alternative ..100 

Figure 23: Alternative 1 (No Action) – Wildfire Crown Fire Potential without Treatment...305 

Figure 24: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) – Wildfire Crown Fire Potential Following 

Treatment ................................................................................................................................306 

Figure 25: Alternative 3 - Wildfire Crown Fire Potential Following Treatment....................307 

Figure 26: Alternative 1 (No Action) - Wildfire Flame Length Potential in Feet ..................308 

Figure 27: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) - Wildfire Flame Length Potential in Feet ........309 

Figure 28: Deadlog Alternative 3 – Wildfire Flame Length Potential in Feet .......................310 

Figure 29: Alternative 1 (No Action) – Wildfire Rate of Spread Potential in Chains (66 Feet) 

per Hour ..................................................................................................................................311 

Figure 30: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) – Wildfire Rate of Spread Potential in Chains (66 

Feet) per Hour.........................................................................................................................312 

Figure 31: Alternative 3 - Wildfire Rate of Spread Potential in Chains (66 Feet) per Hour..313 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Executive Summary 

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This section is a brief summary of the contents of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) 

in accordance with 40 CFR 1502.12. 

INTRODUCTION 

The Responsible Official of this DEIS proposes to implement treatments that would reduce the risk of 

high intensity, stand replacement wildfire and the risk of heavy tree mortality from insects and disease. 

The project units are located across approximately 16,055 acres of Deschutes National Forest Lands 

within Deschutes County, Oregon. The project area is located approximately 35 miles southeast of the 

city of Bend. Refer to Figure 1, page 7. 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 fuel loading within the Deadlog planning area. 

BACKGROUND 

The project area is located approximately 35 miles southeast of Bend, Oregon. The area is primarily 

accessed by Forest Roads 22 and 23. Elevations range from approximately 4,800 feet to 6,260 feet. 

Precipitation is relatively low. and supports xeric plant communities including ponderosa pine, 

lodgepole pine, and mountain shrub communities including bitterbrush, sagebrush, mountain 

mahogany, green manzanita, ceanothus, and mixed associations. Topography is variable with the 

primary feature being Quartz Mountain which has a series of ridges radiating from a central area of 

higher elevation. Other prominent terrain features include Sixteen Butte, Deadlog Butte, Dry Butte, 

Roger’s Butte, and the No Name Buttes. 

The Deadlog area is dominated by ponderosa pine plant associations, but also includes about 3,000 

acres of lodgepole pine plant associations. Large diameter ponderosa pine trees older than 160 years 

and having old tree characteristics are common on the Deadlog landscape. Brush is common in the 

understory and usually comprised of bitterbrush or ceanothus and manzanita. 

Most ponderosa pine stands in the project area have a well-established understory of young ponderosa 

pine and lodgepole pine trees. These stands currently are sustaining a higher density of understory 

trees than they would historically. This higher density of understory trees increases the demand for 

limited resources like availability of limited water. This in turn places a stress on trees and increases 

their susceptibility to bark beetle mortality. Large diameter trees are unable to compete with the 

younger, more vigorous trees for available resources. 

Ponderosa pine forest are well adapted to frequent low intensity surface fire. Young ponderosa pines 

have an outer corky bark that helps them resist the heat from light intensity surface fires. The bark of 

mature ponderosa pine is thick and exfoliates or sloughs off helping to protect the tree cambium tissue. 

Ponderosa pines also have deep roots that are protected from fire and a crown structure that allows 

dissipation of heat during a fire. While these forest are well adapted to frequent low intensity surface 

fire the conditions for this type of fire no longer exist due to decades of fire suppression. Increases in 

the numbers of understory trees and brush combined with a high degree of buildup of natural debris on 

the forest floor provide fuels, including ladder fuels that contribute to an increasing risk of high 

intensity wildfire. 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Executive Summary 

2 

DESIRED FUTURE CONDITIONS 

Actions proposed for this project are intended to move the project area toward the desired future 

condition. Forest health treatments would reduce stand densities to discourage infestation by bark 

beetles. Forest treatments would also slow the rate of spread of dwarf mistletoe. Forest thinning 

associated with these treatments would enhance the health and growth of existing large trees as well as 

the development of future large trees that will contribute to late and old forest structure. Thinning and 

furl treatments would also reduce forest fuels in areas where fuel models indicate a high to moderate 

risk for stand replacement fire. 

PURPOSE AND NEED 

There is a need to reduce the density of forest vegetation to reduce the risk of high intensity, 

widespread disturbance events, such as insects, disease, and wildfire that could lead to large-scale loss 

of forested habitat. 

As with many areas on the Deschutes National Forest, forest density has increased and species composition 

has changed with the forest becoming more at risk to and less resistant to wildfire. Other areas nearby have 

exhibited high intensity wildfire with little subsequent successful reforestation. 

Many forest stands in the project area are sustaining a higher density of understory trees than would 

have historically occurred. These stands are susceptible to substantial bark beetle mortality. Large 

diameter trees are unable to compete with the younger, more vigorous trees for available resources. 

Also, understory trees and brush combined with a high degree of buildup of natural fuels on the forest 

floor are contributing to the risk of uncharacteristically severe fire behavior, should a wildfire start in 

the planning area. The Forest Plan (as amended) supports proactive maintenance and enhancing the 

vigor of the forest in preventing a stand replacement event from occurring (4-36). 

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 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 (4-37). 

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

On April 4, 2008 the Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to 

document and disclose the potential environmental effects of proposed thinning and fuels reduction 

treatments appeared in the Federal Register (Volume 73, No. 66, April 4, 2008, pages 18493-18494). 

Public involvement and collaboration has occurred throughout the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) process. The project has been included in the Schedule of Proposed Actions distributed by 

the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests since the April 2008. 

The proposal for this project was presented in a scoping letter that was sent to approximately 170 

individuals, organizations, tribes and other agencies. It summarized the Purpose and Need for the 

proposal, introduced the Proposed Action, and invited interested parties to submit written, facsimile, 

or electronic comments. The scoping letter was also placed on the Forest website for wider 

distribution. 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Executive Summary 

3

Through early public involvement and collaboration, potential issues have been discussed and a third 

alternative developed to address key issues. Field trips and discussion with some of those voicing 

their concerns have occurred on several occasions. 

KEY ISSUES 

The following issues were identified through public scoping and internal evaluation and are studied in 

detail in this EIS and used to compare the alternatives. These issues are discussed in Chapter 1. These 

issues also led to the development of Alternative 3. 

Shelterwood Harvest / Overstory Removal: Some members of the public expressed concerns with 

doing shelterwood or overstory removal type treatments. A description of shelterwood harvest and 

overstory removal is provided in Chapter 2. 

Cable Logging: There is a concern with the economics of doing cable logging, as well as the need for 

road reconstruction and temporary road construction that it would require. 

Biomass Utilization within Plantations: Older plantations (approximately 40 years) would be thinned, 

producing substantial amounts of biomass that would not be of sawlog size. There may be an 

opportunity to utilize this material; the tradeoff would be the additional soil disturbance that would 

result from removal of this material. 

Other Issues Analyzed: The DEIS also analyzes the effects of treatments to wildlife species and 

habitat, vegetation, soils, botany, range, cultural resources, scenery, recreation, and economics. 

ALTERNATIVES 

In addition to the No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) and the Proposed Action (Alternative 2), one 

additional action alternative, Alternative 3, was developed. Both Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and 

Alternative 3, the Preferred Alternative, are designed to meet the Purpose and Need for the project 

addressing the buildup of fuels and insect and disease Forest health concerns. Alternative 3 would 

implement more fuels treatments on additional acres. 

Alternative 1 (No Action): This alternative is legally required and provides the basis for comparison 

with the action alternatives. Under this alternative, there would be no change in current management 

direction or in the level of ongoing management activities. For example, road maintenance, hazard 

tree removal, fire suppression, and livestock grazing would continue whether or not this project is 

approved. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action): This alternative was described in the Notice of Intent published in 

the Federal Register on April 4, 2008 and the scoping letter sent out for public review and comment on 

April 9, 2008. To achieve the objectives of the Purpose and Need, approximately 10,752 acres would 

be treated using a combination of project activities that include commercial thinning of trees up to 21” 

in diameter at breast height, non-commercial thinning of trees, lopping and scattering slash, pruning, 

hand piling and burning, underburning to reduce ground fuels, and mechanical shrub treatment 

(mowing). On slopes greater than 30 percent trees would be cable logged. Temporary roads and 

landings would be rehabilitated. Approximately 39 miles of Forest roads would be closed and left 

available for administrative use or would be decommissioned. 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Executive Summary 

4 

Alternative 3 (Preferred Alternative) – This alternative proposes to meet the same objectives as 

Alternative 2, but increases the number of acres to treat to approximately 11,271. To more fully meet 

the objectives and to address issues raised during scoping: 

 The acreage was increased to provide more protection of areas from stand replacement fire; 

 Areas proposed for thinning on steep slopes would not occur under this alternative because the 

economic efficiency of cable logging; 

 Biomass utilization is proposed in this alternative. 

FOREST PLAN AMENDMENT 

Deer hiding cover: Within the Deadlog planning area, the existing deer hiding cover in summer range 

is approximately 18 percent, below the Forest Plan standards (WL-54) of 30 percent. A Forest Plan 

Amendment is proposed that would allow the hiding cover to be reduced to approximately 4.2 percent 

for each action alternative. 

DECISION FRAMEWORK 

The Forest Supervisor of the Deschutes National Forest is the official responsible for deciding the type 

and extent of management activities in the Deadlog project area. The responsible official can decide 

on several courses of action ranging from no action, to one of the action alternatives or combinations 

of treatment options. The responsible official will also identify which mitigation measures will apply 

to project implementation. 

The responsible official will base his decision on review of the Final Environmental Impact Statement 

(FEIS) and consideration of the following factors: 1) How well the alternatives meet the purpose and 

need of the project; 2) How well the alternatives respond to the issues; 3) The likely environmental 

effects of the proposed fuels reduction, thinning, and connected actions; 4) If the purpose and need of 

the project can be adequately met without a Forest Plan amendment; and 5) Which is the most 

economical fully analyzed alternative that meets the purpose and need of the project. 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

5

CHAPTER 1 

PURPOSE AND NEED 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need 

6 

CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED 

INTRODUCTION 

The Deadlog planning area, 16,055 acres, is located in the southeastern part of the Bend/Ft. Rock 

Ranger District of the Deschutes National Forest, approximately 36 miles southeast of Bend, Oregon. 

Within the planning area are interesting geologic features including Sixteen, Rogers, and Deadlog 

Buttes and Quartz Mountain. The planning area is bounded by Forest Road 22 on the north and west, 

and Forest Road 23 on the east and south. 

The legal description is: 

 T 22 S, R 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 

The planning area lies outside the range of the Northwest Forest Plan boundaries. As classified by the 

Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1990), no inventoried (RARE II) 

roadless areas exist within the planning area, the nearest being approximately 12 miles to the 

northwest. There are no threatened or endangered species present within the planning area. There are 

no perennial or fish bearing streams, lakes, or other water bodies within the planning area. 

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 fuel loading within the 

Deadlog planning area. 

DESIRED CONDITION 

The desired condition is a healthy forest with a significant amount of late and old structured stands. 

Desired characteristics include: 

 Stand densities that reduce tree susceptibility and mortality related to widespread insect 

infestations and dwarf mistletoe infections, while retaining a minor component these agents 

as a part of a healthy functioning ecosystem; 

 Stand densities that encourage the development and maintenance of large diameter trees with 

spacing between trees to allow for openings between tree crowns; 

 An arrangement of natural fuels such that in the event of a wildfire, the fire intensity and rate 

of spread would allow opportunities for either fire suppression or allowing low intensity fire 

to be utilized to maintain low levels of natural fuels, ground and ladder fuels. 

The actions that are proposed for this project are intended to move the project area toward the desired 

condition. Forest health treatments would reduce stand density to discourage infestation by beetles 

and slow the rate of spread within areas that are infected with dwarf mistletoe. Forest thinning 

associated with these treatments would enhance the health and growth of existing large trees as well as 

the development of future large trees that will contribute to late and old forest structure. 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need 

7

Figure 1: Project Area Vicinity 

EXISTING CONDITION 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need 

8 

The Deadlog area is dominated by ponderosa pine plant associations, but also includes about 3,000 

acres of lodgepole pine plant associations. Large diameter ponderosa pine trees older than 160 years 

and having old tree characteristics are common on the Deadlog landscape. Shrubs are common in the 

understory and usually comprised of bitterbrush or ceanothus and manzanita. 

Most ponderosa pine stands in the project area have a well-established understory of young ponderosa 

pine and lodgepole pine trees. These stands currently are sustaining a higher density of understory 

trees than they would historically, and are susceptible to mountain pine beetle and western pine beetle 

mortality. Large diameter trees are unable to compete with the younger, more vigorous trees for 

available resources. In addition, understory trees and shrubs combined with a high degree of buildup 

of natural debris on the forest floor provide fuels, including ladder fuels, which contribute to the risk 

of a high intensity wildfire. 

Figure 2: Ponderosa Pine Stand in the Deadlog Project Area 

PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 

As with many areas on the Deschutes National Forest, changes in forest dynamics have occurred within the 

Deadlog planning area landscape during the past 100 years. Although fire exclusion has been a primary 

factor in these changes, other management practices have contributed as well. As a result, forest density has 

increased and species composition has changed with the forest becoming more at risk to and less resistant to 

wildfire and insect and disease problems. Other areas nearby have exhibited high intensity wildfire with 

little subsequent successful reforestation, such as the Aspen Fire of 1959 (15,575 acres), that touches 

deadlog in the southeast part of the planning area. The goal of this proposed project is to move toward a 

more stable forest ecosystem by creating conditions that are resilient and resistant to disturbance. 

The purpose and need for this project is to restore and maintain fire dependent ecosystems and 

maintain the forest in a healthy condition as directed by the Deschutes National Forest Land and 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need 

9

Resource Management Plan as amended. Treatments would promote and sustain late and old 

structured forest stands, reduce susceptibility to bark beetles and dwarf mistletoe infestation, and 

reduce fuel loading within the Deadlog planning area. 

1. There is a need to reduce the density of forest vegetation to reduce the risk of high intensity, 

widespread disturbance events, such as insects, disease, and wildfire that could lead to large-scale 

loss of forested habitat. 

Many forest stands in the project area are sustaining a higher density of trees than would have 

historically occurred. Mountain pine beetle and western pine beetle historically impacted different 

stand types throughout the Deadlog planning area. Mountain pine beetle morality is common in 

over stocked lodgepole pine, ponderosa pine, and mixed species stands. Mortality has occurred in 

large and small older and younger trees. Western pine beetle typically attack areas of high density 

larger diameter ponderosa pine. Large diameter trees are unable to compete with the younger, 

more vigorous trees for available resources. Also, understory trees and brush combined with a 

high degree of buildup of natural fuels on the forest floor are contributing to the risk of 

uncharacteristically severe fire behavior, should a wildfire start in the planning area. The Forest 

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

preventing a stand replacement event, rather than waiting (LRMP 4-36). The purpose of the 

project is to: 

 Manage stands of late old structure ponderosa pine to promote sustainability over the long term; 

 In dense stands dominated by ponderosa pine, return stands toward historic conditions 

addressing tree species composition, stocking levels and resistance to insects, disease and fire 

mortality; 

 Address stand conditions in both ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine to improve resistance and 

resilience to bark beetles and dwarf mistletoe; 

 Reduce fuels throughout the planning area, including surface and ladder fuels, to levels that will 

not sustain stand replacing fires; 

2. 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 Plan (as amended) supports management of 

timber resources and recognizes the value in a way that is consistent with other resource 

objectives, environmental constraints, and economic efficiency (LRMP 4-37). 

PROPOSED ACTION 

This is the alternative that was provided for comment during scoping in April 2008. Approximately 

10,752 acres are proposed for treatment within the 16,055 acre planning area. The Forest Service 

proposes to employ overstory removal, shelterwood, commercial thinning harvests, small-diameter 

thinning, mowing, underburning and piling in different combinations across the planning area. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) proposed activity areas and treatment types and activity summaries 

are explained in more detail in Chapter 2. 

Wood fiber that is removed from units would be hauled offsite and utilized for: wood products, energy 

production, habitat improvements, or firewood. Fiber that remains, and is above the amount that is 

determined necessary for soil and wildlife objectives, would be piled and burned. 

In mixed conifer and ponderosa pine stands, treatments are proposed to reduce the risk of surface fires 

moving into the upper canopy level and initiating crown fires or torching of individual trees. Live 

trees in the lower and middle layers would be targeted for removal. Thinning would preferentially 

leave fire resistant species. Additional reductions in stocking level would be achieved by thinning 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need 

10 

from below, targeting trees in the lower and middle layers for removal. 

No permanent, system roads would be created. Road reconstruction and road work would be required 

to maintain acceptable conditions for hauling forest products. Temporary roads would be needed to 

access treatment areas and then would then be obliterated and rehabilitated following treatments. 

The project would be implemented through a combination of service contracts, stewardship contracts, 

government account crews, timber sales and partnerships. 

The management themes contained in the Eastside Screens and the Forest Plan that relate to this 

project may conflict with the Forest Plan goals for management of big game habitat. Forest Plan 

Standard and Guide (S&G) WL-54 (Forest Plan page 4-58) may not be met if the other management 

themes for this project are addressed. This S&G provides for deer hiding cover in summer range to 

“be present over at least 30 percent of National Forest land...” Presently cover is at 18 percent and 

would be reduced further within this project area. A Forest Plan amendment that addresses this S&G 

for big game hiding cover in summer range is proposed. 

SCOPING AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

The proposal for this project was presented to the public for comments during April 2008. A notice of 

intent to prepare an environmental impact statement was published in the Federal Register on April 4, 

2008. Through early public involvement and collaboration, potential issues have been discussed and a 

third alternative developed. Alternative 3 is the result of key issues that were identified during the 

scoping process; these are provided in the next discussion under Identification of Issues. Field trips 

and discussion with those that voiced their concerns have occurred on several occasions. 

Various Tribal groups and State and Federal Agencies have been contacted and include The 

Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs (Warm Springs, Oregon), The Burns Paiute Tribe (Burns, 

Oregon), and the Klamath Tribe (Chiloquin, Oregon). Federal and State Agencies contacted include 

the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(USFWS). 

Several individuals or groups have expressed interest in this project. The Fire Learning Network 

(FLN), which is comprised of various groups and individuals, has been involved in a collaborative 

process through meetings and field trips. 

IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES 

Issues are points of discussion, debate, or dispute about environmental effects that may occur as a 

result of a proposed action. Issues provide focus and may influence alternative development, 

including development of mitigation measures to address potential environmental effects, particularly 

potential negative effects. Issues are also used to display differing effects between the proposed action 

and the alternatives regarding a specific resource element. 

Many of the public comments have been used to focus the analysis in areas where the public desired a 

specific resource to be addressed. Some comments were used to formulate issues and to design 

alternative activities and mitigations. Many comments that did not change the alternatives and were 

noted to be important have been addressed in the analysis of the effects of actions. Internal Forest 

Service comments were also used in the development of alternatives and subsequent analysis. Some 

comments were used to explore alternatives that were not developed in detail. 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need 

11

Comments were placed into categories to help track issues and responses. The issues are categorized 

as Key Issues or Analysis Issues. 

KEY ISSUES 

Key issues represent a point of debate or concern that cannot be resolved without consideration of the 

trade-offs involved. These issues are the basis for 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 

displaying the relative impacts of the alternatives weighed against the proposed action. Key Issues 

provide the primary focus for alternative development and comparison. 

The following is a list of key issues related to the proposed action that have been identified. 

 Key Issue #1: Shelterwood Harvest / Overstory Removal

Some members of the public expressed concerns with doing shelterwood and overstory removal 

harvest in lodgepole stands. Shelterwood is a regeneration harvest proposed in mature lodgepole 

stands that are susceptible to high mortality from mountain pine beetles. Overstory removal is 

proposed in lodgepole where the overstory is infected with mistletoe and is in poor condition. 

These types of treatments leave a simplified stand structure and public comments expressed a 

desire to have an alternative without these treatments. This issue is addressed with the design of 

an alternative that modifies these treatments. The indicators used to measure this issue will be: 

 Acres of regeneration harvest. 

 Acres of lodgepole pine at risk to mountain pine beetle mortality. 

 Key Issue #2: Costs of Cable Logging and Associated Access 

The Proposed Action includes 420 acres of cable yarding on steeper slopes. Cable logging smaller 

diameter trees may not be economically feasible in the units where this is proposed because of the 

cost of providing this type of harvest system - contractors would need to bring the equipment from 

the west side of the Cascade mountain range, as there are no equipment capable of cable logging 

on the east side of the Cascade mountains. Cable logging would also increase the amount of road 

reconstruction and temporary road construction required. This issue is addressed with the design 

of an alternative that eliminates commercial harvest activities in units that would require cable 

logging. Indicators used to measure this issue will be:

 Total cost per CCF of cutting and removing timber. 

 Acres of ponderosa pine at higher risk of loss to insect and disease based on stand density. 

 Acres of cable logging. 

 Key Issue #3: Biomass Utilization within Plantations

The proposed action calls for thinning in older plantations (approximately 40 years). This would 

produce substantial amounts of biomass that would not be of sawlog size. Under the proposed 

action, the material would be piled and burned. The potential for the utilization of the biomass 

that results from thinning could provide product that would benefit the local economy. Even 

though the market for biomass is not guaranteed, the interdisciplinary team developed an 

alternative that includes utilizing the material. This alternative would create more soil disturbance 

as a result of the removal of this material. The indicators used to measure this issue will be:

 The amount (CCF – hundred cubic feet) of biomass that would be utilized. 

 Acres of detrimental soil impacts. 

 Tons of particulate emissions (PM10). 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need 

12 

ANALYSIS ISSUES 

Analysis issues are those that did not result in different alternatives or design elements were 

considered during the analysis process. These are discussed in the various resource sections of 

Chapter 3. These issues: 1) are generally less focused on the elements of Purpose and Need, than are 

the Key Issues and 2) reflect the discussions of the effects of the proposed activities to those resources. 

Wildlife: The following items were analyzed and compared by alternative: 

 Threatened, Endangered, Candidate and Sensitive Species 

 Management Indicator Species 

 Late and Old Structure Forest Habitat 

 Late and Old Structure Connectivity 

 Snags, Coarse Woody Material, and Green Tree Snag Replacements 

Recreation: Proposed activities would provide for public safety for those utilizing dispersed areas of 

the project area. The EIS considers potential impacts to the recreational use. 

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. Burning, thinning, and mowing would 

be conducted to avoid adverse effects. 

Water Quality: There is no surface water in the project area, including 303(d) streams. The closest 

body of water is approximately 15 miles from the project area boundary. 

PLANNING FRAMEWORK 

Current Laws and Regulations 

Development of this Environmental Assessment follows implementing regulations of the National 

Forest Management Act (NFMA); Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 219 (36 CFR 219); 

Council of Environmental Quality, Title 40; CFR, Parts 1500-1508, National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA). Federal and state laws, including the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Act 

(RPA), The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Endangered Species Act, and Clean Air Act 

also guide this analysis. A list and brief explanation of applicable laws may be found in Appendix C 

of this DEIS. 

National Fire Plan 

The National Fire Plan (2000) was developed with the intent of actively responding to severe wildland 

fires and their impacts to communities while ensuring sufficient firefighting capacity for the future. 

The National Fire Plan addresses five key points: 1) firefighting, 2) rehabilitation, 3) hazardous fuels 

reduction, 4) community assistance, and 5) accountability. An integral part of the Fire Plan was the 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need 

13

establishment of an intensive, long-term hazardous fuels reduction program. Hazardous fuels 

reduction treatments are designed to reduce the risks of catastrophic wildland fire to people, 

communities, and natural resources while restoring forest and rangeland ecosystems to closely match 

their historical structure, function, diversity and dynamics. Such treatments accomplish these goals by 

removing or modifying wildland fuels to reduce the potential for severe wildland fire behavior, lessen 

the post-fire damage, and limit the rapid spread of invasive species and diseases. 

Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) 

The LRMP, as amended by the Revised Continuation of Interim Managemnt Direction Establishing 

Riparian, Ecosystem and Wildlife Standards for Timber Sales (Eastside Screens 1995), guides all 

natural resource management activities and provides standards and guidelines for the Deschutes 

National Forest. The project area is entirely within the following management areas as identified in 

the LRMP (Refer to Figure 3, page 15): 

 General Forest (approximately 14,439 acres; LRMP MA-8, pages 4-117 through 4-120): 

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 

(Forest Plan, page 4-117). 

 Old Growth (approximately 938 acres; LRMP MA-15, 4-149 through 4-151): Old Growth 

Management areas are intended to provide naturally-evolved old growth forest ecosystems for (1) 

habitat for plant and animal species associated with old growth forest ecosystems, (2) 

representations of landscape ecology, (3) public enjoyment of large, old tree environments, and (4) 

the needs of the public from an aesthetic spiritual sense. They will also contribute to the 

biodiversity of the Forest (Forest Plan, page 4-149). 

 Deer Habitat (approximately 587 acres; LRMP MA-6, pages 4-113 through 4-116): The goal of 

the Deer Habitat management area is to manage vegetation in order to provide optimum habitat 

conditions on deer winter and transition ranges, while providing some domestic livestock forage, 

wood products, visual quality, and recreation opportunities (Forest Plan, page 4-113). 

 Scenic Views (approximately 91 acres; LRMP MA-9, pages 4-121 through 4-131): The project 

area contains a small amount of foreground and middleground scenic views. The goal of scenic 

views management areas is to provide high quality scenery representing the natural character of 

central Oregon. 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 (Forest Plan, page 4-121). 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need 

14 

Table 1: Deadlog Forest Plan Management Areas 

Management Area Description Acres 

General Forest 14,439 

Old Growth 938 

Deer Habitat 587 

Scenic View Partial Retention Middleground 57 

Scenic View Partial Retention Foreground 34 

Total 16,055 

Revised Continuation of Interim Management Direction Establishing Riparian, 

Ecosystem and Wildlife Standards for Timber Sales (Eastside Screens) 

The project area lies east of the spotted owl range, and is subject to this amendment, also known as the 

Eastside Screens. This 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 LOS relative to the Historic Range of Variability (HRV), wildlife 

corridors, snags, coarse woody debris, and goshawk management. 

The Eastside Screens are not applicable to fish habitat for this project; there is no perennial streams or 

fish habitat present within the project area.. 

DECISION TO BE MADE 

The Forest Supervisor of the Deschutes National Forest is the official responsible for deciding the type 

and extent of management activities in the Deadlog project area. The responsible official can decide 

on several courses of action ranging from no action, to one of the action alternatives or combinations 

of treatment options. The responsible official will also identify which mitigation measures will apply 

to project implementation. 

The decision would determine if the LRMP would be amended so that proposed activities would be 

allowed to not only meet the Purpose and Need, but in doing so would allow big game hiding cover to 

be further reduced below the LRMP Standard and Guidelines. 

The responsible official will consider the following factors in making his decision: 

 How well the alternatives meet the purpose and need of the project; 

 How the alternatives respond to the issues; 

 The likely environmental effects of the proposed fuels reduction, thinning, and connected 

actions; 

 If the purpose and need of the project can be adequately met without a Forest Plan 

amendment; 

 And, which is the most economical fully analyzed alternative that meets the purpose 

and need of the project. 
Deadlog Project DEIS – Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need

Figure 3: Deadlog LRMP Management Areas 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

16 

CHAPTER 2 

ALTERNATIVES 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

17

CHAPTER 2 – ALTERNATIVES 

INTRODUCTION 

This chapter describes and compares the developed alternatives. A description of each of the actions, 

or design elements of those actions is provided. Maps of each action alternative are also included. 

This chapter also discloses any alternative that may have been considered but not further developed 

because it would not meet the purpose and need. 

At the end of the chapter, alternatives are presented in comparative form, defining the differences 

between each alternative and providing a clear basis for choice among options to the decision maker 

and the public. The information used to compare the alternatives is based upon the design of the 

alternative (such as unit location and treatment differences). 

Precision of Information and Adjustments 

Quantifiable measurements, such as acres and miles, and mapped unit boundaries used to describe the 

alternatives and effects are based on the best available information. The analysis presented in this 

document is based on consideration of the full extent of the acres, miles, and other quantities depicted 

in the alternatives. Information used in designing the alternatives was generated from a mix of field 

reconnaissance, aerial photos, satellite remote sensing, Global Positioning System (GPS) technology, 

Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and various resource-specific databases. 

Adjustments have been made to the original proposal primarily based on additional site-specific 

information derived from ongoing field verification. Site-specific information is subject to change 

over time with any further information that could come forward. 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTIVITIES 

The Forest Service proposes to implement the following activities in order to meet project objectives: 

overstory removal, shelterwood, commercial thinning harvests, small diameter thinning, mowing 

shrubs, underburning and piling in different combinations across approximately 10,752 acres of the 

16,055 acre planning area. The following is a brief description of the planned treatments: 

 Harvest Commercial Thin (HTH, Prescriptions 1-5, 8, 10) is thinning of trees over 7 inches 

diameter at breast height (dbh) to reduce susceptibility to bark beetle outbreaks, stabilize dwarf 

mistletoe infections, reduce competition with larger, older trees, and decrease the continuity of 

crowns to reduce the likelihood of crown fires. Commercial thinning in the Deadlog project area 

would be a thinning from below which favors leaving the largest healthy ponderosa pine trees. 

The maximum diameter to cut is 21”. 

 Within stands where the slope is less than 30 percent, commercial harvest will include cutting of 

trees with mechanical tracked harvester and removal with ground based logging systems. Within 

stands where the slope is more than 30 percent, commercial harvest would be accomplished with 

hand falling of trees and removal with cable logging systems (Alternative 2 – Proposed Action), 

which elevate at least one end of the logs removed. Landings where logs are de-limbed and sorted 

will be needed at a rate of one acre per ten to fifteen acres. Whole tree yarding will occur and 

down dead firm wood lodgepole will be removed. Average skid trails will be located 100 feet 

apart. 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

18 

Logging systems will include temporary roads. Temporary roads are roads used to access further 

reaches of timber sale units to extract timber more efficiently. Temporary roads are built to low 

specification, just enough to get equipment into landings and are obliterated at the end of the 

timber sale activity. 

 Harvest Shelterwood (HSH, Prescription 7) is planned in stands where natural regeneration of 

the stand is desired. Overstory trees left in a shelterwood harvest are intended to provide seed and 

some amelioration of heat and frost for natural regeneration. Within the Deadlog project area, 

shelterwood harvest is proposed in lodgepole stands. Due to large numbers of mature trees these 

stands are susceptible to mountain pine beetle outbreaks that would result in high tree mortality. 

 Harvest Overstory Removal (HOR, Prescription 6) is planned on areas that are intended to be 

single story stands but currently have an understory of saplings or seedlings. In the Deadlog 

project area, overstory removal is proposed in lodgepole pine stands where the overstory is 

infected with mistletoe and is in poor condition. Removing the mistletoe infected over story trees 

will allow the understory saplings and seedlings to grow without being infected by mistletoe that 

would falling from infected overstory trees. 

 Harvest Salvage (HSV) is planned in areas where down and dead lodgepole pine has been killed 

by mountain pine beetle. the removal of down firm wood lodgepole pine in excess of wildlife and 

soil productivity standards. In the Deadlog project area salvage is proposed in areas where 

amounts of down wood exceed the amount needed for wildlife and soil productivity. 

 Precommercial Thin (SPC, Prescription 20) is used in two different situations. One is in 

regeneration stands which are now stocked with saplings. The second situation is in stands where 

there is an overstory and an understory that competes with the overstory. These stands also act as 

ladder fuels in the event of a wildfire. Precommercial thinning in the Deadlog area will be used in 

both these situations. Within plantations which were planted two to three decades ago the 

stocking of the trees is at a level where there is inter-tree competition which is causing reduced 

growth and self-pruning of lower branches. These stands also would not likely survive a light 

underburn or wild fire due to the lower tree densities and wide spatial arrangement of other fuels 

including brush. Thinning in these stands would leave trees on 16 to 25 foot spacing in order to 

increase growth. This would be followed-up with fuel treatments that would also increase the 

chance of these managed stands surviving fires. 

In the Deadlog project precommercial thinning would also be used to manage the understory in 

over stocked stands that have multi-canopy characteristics. Thinning treatments would reduce 

competition and leave the biggest trees on a 20 to 30 foot spacing. In stands where underburning is 

planned, burning may occur prior to thinning. Trees that are killed by the underburn would then 

be removed thus reducing the chance of killing desired trees following the thinning treatment. 

Biomass Removal (BIOMASS, Prescription 9) is planned in some of the action alternatives. This 

will be done in plantations with large enough material for utilization and in commercial harvest units 

where less than commercial size material occurs and could be removed in conjunction with the 

commercial harvest. Biomass removal will use similar technologies as ground based logging except 

for landings which will not sort logs but will chip onsite the material for removal. Within commercial 

harvest units including commercial thinning, overstory removal and shelterwood the logging 

infrastructure of skid trails, temporary roads and landings will be the same. Within plantations 

landings and skid trails will be required. Temporary roads will not likely be required since all 

plantations currently are accessed by system roads. In some instances units in which biomass has been 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

19

removed may still require treatment of the remaining fuels to reduce the risk of fire to an acceptable 

level. 

Whip Falling (Prescription 20) is planned in shelterwood harvest units. Following a shelterwood 

harvest whip falling would remove non-merchantable trees that are undesirable due to disease or poor 

condition including small crowns, bole damage or very poor growth. Whip falling treatments also 

remove trees that have been suppressed for long periods of time that are unlikely to respond to reduced 

stand density following the removal of overstory trees. 

 Underburning (UB, Prescription 20) consists of burning natural fuels and slash in forest stands, 

and is accomplished during specific weather conditions in order to minimize tree mortality. 

Underburning would occur as a sole treatment and in combination with other treatments. 

Prescribed fire treatments will need to be maintained over time to manage natural fuels to levels 

which are conducive to low intensity surface fire. The need for maintenance treatments will be 

based on fuels accumulations. It is anticipated that prescribed fire units will need additional 

treatments 3 years to 10 years following the initial prescribed fire treatment. Maintenance 

treatments will focus primarily on reducing natural fuels in the 0.0 to 3.0 inch dbh size classes and 

reducing the amount of understory seedlings and saplings. 

A published photo series guide with pictures showing different levels of fuel loading will be used to 

determine optimum natural fuel loadings for different land allocations (Maxwell 1980). In Deer 

Winter Range optimum natural fuel loadings will be guided by photo series 8PP4 and 3PP3. 

General Forest fuel loadings will be guided by photo series 3PP3 and 2PP3. The Old Growth Area 

fuel loadings will be guided by photo series 5PP4 and 8PP4. 

 Mechanical Shrub Treatment (MST, Prescription 20) consists of mowing brush in and around 

ponderosa pine stands. On flatter ground a rubber tired tractor equipped with a rotary mower will 

be utilized for MST treatments. Slopes over 20 percent will require a light tracked machine with a 

front mounted mow deck in order to access the steeper slopes. The targeted brush species are 

bitterbrush and manzanita. Brush is mowed to a height of 8 inches and may occur on up to 70 to 

80 percent of the area within units. 

 Piling (Pile, Prescription 20) – Two types of slash piling are proposed: 

o Hand Piling (HP) consists of piling natural fuels and activity created fuels by hand. 

Completed pile dimensions will be approximately 6’ long by 6’ wide by 5’ in height. 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 prevent fire spreading to surrounding areas. 

o Machine Piling (MP) consists of piling natural fuels and activity created fuels utilizing a 

Grapple Machine. Pretreatment fuel loading will generally be greater than 16 tons per acre 

where machine piling occurs and completed pile dimensions will be approximately 12 feet 

long by 12 feet wide by 8 feet in height 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 prevent fire 

spreading to surrounding areas. 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

20 

 Ladder Fuel Reduction (LFR, Prescription 20) 

o Thinning involves mechanically cutting understory trees 7 inch dbh and less at a 

predetermined spacing. The desired residual stocking of trees less than 7 inch dbh varies 

and is dependant on the overall stand density and structure. LFR treatments are designed to 

reduce ladder fuels, thus reducing the potential for crown fire initiation. 

o 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 inches 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. 

o Pruning removes the lower branches of trees and lifts the crown. This is done to reduce 

mistletoe infection levels and improve future wood quality. 

 Temporary Road Development: Commercial harvest operations are expected to require the use 

of temporary roads, roads built to facilitate ground-based harvest systems for the singular purpose 

of removing forest products from a treated stand. After use, temporary roads would be subsoiled 

(tilling soil for road rehabilitation) following the project activities. The amount of temporary 

roads varies by alternative and is displayed with the alternative descriptions. Even though this 

document estimates where actual temporary road locations would be, the final locations are 

determined through agreement by the Forest Service during timber sale contract administration. 

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. 

METHODOLOGY FOR SELECTING FUELS TREATMENTS AREAS 

Stands selected for fuels treatments have been identified as stands which, if treated, would bring the 

landscape back into a more frequent fire interval and stands which in their current fuels condition 

would not survive a wildfire. These stands were selected using the methodology of location and stand 

characteristics which would lend a stand to high mortality with a wildfire. The fuels characteristics 

assessed were surface fuels, ladder fuels and crown fuels. The fuels in that order affect the fire 

resistance for dry forests (Agee 2005). Many of these stands in order to facilitate the implementation 

of fuels treatments were identified as having a need to commercially reduce the stocking level of the 

stand in order to reduce crown and ladder fuels. 

Fuel treatments are designed to produce the following: 

 Flame lengths of 4 feet or less (Agee et al. 2000) 

 Crown base height of 6 feet or greater (Agee et al. 2000) 

 Crown bulk density of 0.037 kg/m3 or less (Sando and Wick, 1972) 

The minimum crown base height needed varies depending on foliar moisture content. The crown bulk 

density at which crown fires will not initiate or spread is more difficult to define since it is more 

species specific, but current crown fire models use 0.0023 lbs per cubic foot (Carlton 2001). As a 

rough guide, this crown bulk density represents tree crowns that are just touching. 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

21

The Fire Behavior Prediction System Fuel Models most commonly associated with such low flame 

lengths are (Anderson 1982): 

 2 (timber or brush with grass understory), 

 5 (low brush) 

 8 (short needle conifer litter, light loading), and 

 9 (long needle conifer or hardwood litter). 

ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTIONS 

Alternatives were developed to address the Purpose and Need and key issues that were brought 

forward through public and internal comment. Three alternatives are analyzed in detail. Action 

alternatives meet the purpose and need for action in varying degrees. 

ALTERNATIVE 1 (NO ACTION) 

Alternative 1 is the No Action alternative. 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. No additional treatment would be 

implemented to accomplish project goals. 

ALTERNATIVE 2 (PROPOSED ACTION) 

This alternative was developed following pre-analysis within the planning area. Included in the preanalysis was the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS), fieldwork and surveys, and historical 

use of the area. The proposed action includes vegetation management activities across approximately 

10,752 acres. Refer to Figure 2-1 for locations of Alternative 2 units. There have been minor 

adjustments to the proposed action since scoping. Primarily, the changes were with additional fuels 

reduction prescriptions in units proposed for underburning. Additionally, some unit boundaries were 

adjusted to utilize roads as boundaries. Approximately 14.8 miles of temporary road (Figure 7) would 

be needed for the removal of logs from the following commercially thinned and harvested units: 3, 4, 

6, 9, 21-23, 29-31, 35, 38, 41, 43, 46, 47, 49, 52, 54, 59, 60, 63, 65, 66, 72, 80, 82-87, 91, 99, 106, 

110, 117, 130, 132, 141, 143, 144, 147, 171, 174, 189, 192, and 206. These roads would be subsoiled 

following completion of harvest and associated activities

Table 2: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Acres of Treatment Type 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action): Treatments and Acres 

Harvest Type 1 Acres 

Overstory Removal (HOR) 157 

Shelter Wood (HSH) 332 

Commercial Thin (HTH) 6,430 

Total Harvest Acres 6,919 

Stand Improvement Type 2 Acres

Precommercial Thinning (SPC) 7,985 

Whipfell 458 

Pruning 50 

Total Stand Improvement Acres 8,493 

Fuel Treatment Type 3 Acres 4 

Lop Branches 765 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

22 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action): Treatments and Acres 

Harvest Type 1 Acres 

Hand Pile Slash and Burn 2,334 

Machine Pile Slash and Burn 5,061 

Mow Shrubs 5,874 

Underburn 8,912 

1. No fuels treatment on 688 acres. In addition, approximately 420 acres of skyline logging in commercial thin units is proposed on slopes 

greater than 30 percent 

2. Timber Stand Improvement Type: Whipfell = in regeneration units to remove remaining non-merchantable trees; Pruning = removing 

lower limbs. 

3 Fuel Treatment Type: Mow = mechanical mowing of shrubs; UB = burning under trees; Pile = piling slash; Burn = burning slash piles. 

4. Harvest, stand improvement, and fuel treatments would be conducted and arranged in combinations across the project area. . 
Deadlog Project – 

Figure 4: Deadlog Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Harvest Units 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

24 

Figure 5: Deadlog Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Fuels Treatment Units 
Deadlog Project – 

Figure 6: Deadlog - Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Timber Stand Improvement (TSI) 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

26 

Figure 7: Deadlog Alternative 2 Temporary Road Placement 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

27

ALTERNATIVE 3 (PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE) 

This alternative was developed to address the key issues as discussed in Chapter 1. Approximately 

11,281 acres would be treated through various project activities. 

Key Issue #1: Shelterwood Harvest / Overstory Removal: In this alternative, the shelterwood 

treatments are changed to commercial thinning. 

Key Issue #2 Cable Logging & Access: Eliminates commercial harvest activities in 420 acres of units 

requiring cable logging; these units become fuels treatment only (136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 144). 

Key Issue #3: Biomass Utilization within Plantations: With this alternative, on 899 acres of plantation 

thinning and within 417 acres of commercial thinning units, the material would be removed for 

utilization, rather than being piled and burned. 

Approximately 15.3 miles of temporary (Figure 11) road would be needed for the removal of logs 

from the following commercially thinned and harvested units: 3, 6, 9, 21-23, 29-31, 35, 38, 41, 43, 46, 

47, 49, 52, 54, 59, 60, 63, 65, 66, 72, 80, 82-87, 91, 99, 106, 110, 117, 130, 132, 143, 147, 149, 152, 

156, 160, 171, 174, 189, 192, and 206. These roads would be subsoiled following completion of 

harvest and associated activities. 

Table 3: Alternative 3 Acres of Treatment Type 

Alternative 3: Treatments and Acres 

Harvest Type Acres 

Overstory Removal (HOR) 157 

Shelterwood (HSH) 0 

Commercial Thin/Salvage (HTH/HSV) 592 

Commercial Thin (HTH) 5,489 

Commercial Thin (HTH)/Biomass 417 

Biomass 899 

Total Harvest Acres 7,554 

Timber Stand Improvement Type 1 Acres

Precommercial Thinning (SPC 8,586 

Whipfell 535 

Pruning 50 

Total Stand Improvement Acres 9,171 

Fuel Treatment Type 2 Acres 3 

Lop Branches 928 

Hand Pile Slash and Burn 1,691 

Machine Pile Slash and Burn 6,114 

Mow Shrubs 6,668 

Underburn 9,443 

1. Timber Stand Improvement Type: SPC = precommercial thin; ABSPC = precommercial thinning after burning; Whipfell = 

in regeneration units to remove remaining non-merchantable trees; Pruning = removing lower limbs. 

2 Fuel Treatment Type: Mow = mechanical mowing of shrubs; UB = burning under trees; Pile = piling slash; Burn = burning 

slash piles. 

3 Harvest, stand improvement, and fuel treatments would be conducted and arranged in combinations across the project area. 

No fuels treatment on 46 acres 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

28 

Figure 8: Alternative 3 Harvest Units 
Deadlog Project – 

Figure 9: Alternative 3 Fuels Treatment Units
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

30 

Figure 10: Deadlog - Alternative 3 Stand Improvement 
Deadlog Project – 

Figure 11: Deadlog Alternative 3 Temporary Road Placement 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

32 

CONNECTED ACTIONS COMMON TO BOTH ACTION 

ALTERNATIVES 

Connected actions are actions associated with other proposed activities. These activities would not 

occur unless the activities proposed in Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) or Alternative 3 occur. Road 

reconstruction and temporary road development would not occur unless commercial harvest activities 

would occur. 

 Openings: Openings caused by treatment activities larger than 6 acres will be evaluated for 

planting. (MR). 

An area is considered an opening when: 

 It is wider than 250 feet 

 Stocking is less than a stand density index (SDI) of 36.5 

o 100 trees per acre for seedlings 

o 31-69 trees per acre with 7–11 inch dbh or 20 basal area for trees greater than 12 inches 

dbh (Deschutes National Forest 1991) 

 Stand Reentry: To reduce the spread of mistletoe, 3 years following thinning and prescribed 

burning treatments, girdle remaining live infected trees that are greater than or equal to 21” dbh 

above gaps and smaller tree cohorts. Girdled trees would remain as snags. (PDC)

 Danger Tree Removal: 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. 

 Road Reconstruction: Approximately 3.0 miles of open Forest system roads would be 

reconstructed. Road reconstruction activities would include the restoration of drainage features, 

slope stabilization, guardrail replacement, applying spot surfacing, a multi-layer bituminous 

surface treatment, or resurfaced with crushed aggregate prior to hauling products from commercial 

harvest activities on identified roads. 

 Road Maintenance: In addition to road reconstruction work, other roads that would be used for 

timber haul would require maintenance, primarily blading and shaping of the roadbed and brush 

removal. Some roads would require more extensive maintenance using engineering methods to 

protect natural resources. All activities would remain within the road prism and all affected areas 

would be restored upon project completion. 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

33

 Road Closure and Decommissioning: Table 4 and Table 5 display miles of Forest roads 

proposed for closure and decommissioning.

Table 4: Deadlog Forest Road Closure 

Road Number Road Closure 

(Miles) 

2268200 2.710 

2268300 1.330 

2268668 0.600 

2268700 0.910 

2268750 0.930 

2268920 0.500 

2269260 1.190 

2269280 0.840 

2269750 0.930 

Road Number Road Closure 

(Miles) 

2269850 2.000 

2269852 0.061 

2300705 0.230 

2300706 0.910 

2316600 1.160 

2316700 1.520 

2316790 0.200 

2316800 1.400 

Total Miles 17.421 

Table 5: Deadlog Forest Road Decommissioning 

Road Number Road Decommissioning- 

(Miles) 

2259000 1.100 

2259730 1.360 

2259800 0.590 

2259950 1.080 

2268020 0.550 

2268120 0.950 

2268150 0.200 

2268220 0.570 

2268450 0.380 

2268800 1.300 

2268810 0.101 

2268820 0.130 

2268900 1.840 

2268920 0.055 

2268930 0.470 

2268940 0.300 

2268945 0.265 

2269210 0.300 

2269220 0.190 

2269225 0.230 

Road Number Road Decommissioning- 

(Miles) 

2269230 0.400 

2269240 0.141 

2269255 0.270 

2269260 1.330 

2269410 0.840 

2269440 0.490 

2269460 0.420 

2269560 0.200 

2269600 0.950 

2269840 1.000 

2300701 0.570 

2300703 0.190 

2300704 0.680 

2300720 0.270 

2300730 0.585 

2300300 0.380 

2300335 0.810 

Total 21.487 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

34 

Figure 12: Deadlog Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 Proposed Road Closures and Deco
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

35

FOREST PLAN AMENDMENT 

Both action alternatives will require a non-significant Forest Plan Amendment to waive Standard and 

Guide WL-54, which requires that 30 percent of the National Forest System land within summer range 

of big game within each Implementation Unit (IU) be in hiding cover. Hiding cover is defined as a 

stand capable of hiding 90 percent of a standing adult deer from view of a human at a distance of 200 

feet (Thomas 1979). Generally, this will result in 70 percent of each implementation unit existing 

either as a hiding area or within 600 feet of a hiding area. The calculation of cover excludes the acres 

of 50 to 80 year old ponderosa pine (aka black-bark pine) within each implementation unit as well as 

MA-7, which is addressed with a different standard and guideline. 

Preliminary analysis determined that the cover standard WL-54 will not be met within the IUs (Table 

6) because the three implementation units are currently short on big game hiding cover and the 

proposed thinning and underburning will further reduce the hiding cover ratio. Thinning will target 

densely stocked stands that, as expected, provide the hiding cover. The existing proportion of hiding 

cover within the Deadlog planning area is similar to the proportion in the IUs, at 11 percent. The 

Record of Decision for either action alternative would amend the Forest Plan, so that the WL-54 

standard requiring 30 percent hiding cover in an IU would not apply to the Deadlog Project. Some 

mitigation through managing open road density and retaining 10 to 20 percent of units untreated is 

also included in both alternatives. 

Table 6: Implementation Unit (IU) Hiding Cover Assessment outside of Black-bark Pine, MA-7, 

and Non-NFS Land. 

Implementation Unit Implementation Unit 

Analysis Acres 

Implementation Unit 

Hiding Cover Acres 

Implementation Unit 

Percent Hiding Cover 

IU #62 10,602 1,920 18% 

IU #63 6,919 759 10% 

IU #69 3,037 425 13% 

Totals 20,558 3,104 15% 

RESOURCE PROTECTION MEASURES COMMON TO ACTION 

ALTERNATIVES 

Resource Protection Measures are an integral part of each of the action alternatives. As such, they are 

considered when determining effects in Chapter 3. They fall into one or more of the following three 

categories. 

 Management Requirements (MR): represent standard operating procedures that are required 

practices. Requirements are to comply with guidance provided typically by LRMP standards and 

guidelines, Best Management Practices (BMPs), State, Regional, and National direction. 

 Project Design Criteria (PDC): Considered routine and have been used on similar projects and 

proven effective. These are not specifically required by LRMP direction, although they have 

previously been utilized to reduce or eliminate environmental concerns. 

 Mitigation Measures (MM): are site specific actions that could be taken to minimize, avoid or 

eliminate potentially significant impacts to resources affected by proposed activities, or rectifying 

the impact by restoring the affected environment (40 CFR 1508.02). 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

36 

Mitigation Measures are generally unit-specific protection measures. They are rated as high, 

moderate, or low for effectiveness in preventing or reducing impacts, considering the following 

criteria: a) Literature and Research, b) Administrative Studies (local or within similar ecosystem), 

c) Experience (judgment of qualified personnel by education and/or experience, and d) Fact 

(obvious by reasoned, logical response). 

High: Practice is highly effective (greater than 90 percent), meets one or more of the rating 

criteria, and documentation is available. 

Moderate: Documentation shows that practice is 60 to 90 percent effective; or Logic indicates that 

practice is highly effective, but there is little or no documentation. The practice will be modified 

if necessary to achieve the mitigation objective. 

Low: Effectiveness is unknown or unverified, and there is little or no documentation; or applied 

logic is uncertain and practice is estimated to be less than 60 percent effective. This practice is 

speculative and needs both effectiveness and validation monitoring. 

The proposed action alternatives would comply with direction in relevant laws and policies, and the 

standards and guidelines in the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan as 

amended by the Eastside Screens. In addition, the Alternatives either comply with the Deschutes and 

Ochoco National Forests Programmatic Biological Assessment (2006 – 2009), or, if there are 

proposed deviations from the Biological Assessment, were reviewed by US Fish and Wildlife Service. 

SMOKE MANAGEMENT 

1. The Forest Service (USFS) is required by law to follow State air quality guidelines when 

conducting burning operations. The Oregon Smoke Management Plan and the Operational 

Guidance for the Oregon Smoke Management Program provides smoke management weather 

forecasts and instruction guidelines (Directive 1-4-1-601) as follows: Burning would be 

conducted under the State of Oregon Smoke Management System to track smoke and would be 

coordinated through Oregon Department of Forestry (MR). 

FOREST VEGETATION 

1. No trees greater than 21 inches dbh will be cut. (MR). 

2. Openings caused by treatments within Late Old Structure (LOS) stands will not be planned to 

exceed 0.5 acre in size (Eastside Screens Scenario B-3) (MR)

3. To reduce potential for long-term growth loss and bark beetle induced mortality of ponderosa 

pine 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. (PDC) 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

37

WILDLIFE 

Table 7: Summary of Operating Season Restrictions 

O = Open Season; X = Closed Season Mitigation 

J F M A M J J A S O N D 

Goshawk O O X X X X X X O O O O 

Cooper’s Hawk O O O X X X X X O O O O 

Sharp-Shinned Hawk O O O X X X X X O O O O 

Golden Eagle O X X X X X X O O O O O 

Red-Tailed Hawk O O X X X X X X O O O O 

Big Game – Management Area 7 (Deer Habitat) 

1. Limit the amount of annual prescribed burning treatments to no more than 338 acres per year 

in Units 199, 200, 201, and 202 to meet the annual 2.0-2.5 percent limitation within Deer 

Habitat, MA7 (MR). The Forest has determined that this restriction applies to ODFW deer 

herd units (South Paulina). 

Retention Areas

1. Provide 20 percent retention in non-black bark stands in the following (Units: 10, 15, 22, 28, 

39, 41, 47, 80, 82, 83, 84, 86, 88, 89, 97, 102, 109, 112, 191, 174). Retain 10 percent retention 

in all other stands. Retain cover in patches of 6 acres or larger or if advanced regen one-half 

acre or larger. Clumps of un-thinned forest in treated black bark stands of one-half acre or 

larger. (MR) 

2. Maintain all remnant late and old seral and/or structural live trees >,= 21” dbh (note: proposed 

large tree girdling must be coordinated with wildlife to document the benefits); manipulate 

vegetative structure that does not meet late and old structure (LOS) conditions; maintain open, 

parklike stands where this condition occurred historically; manipulate vegetation in a manner 

to encourage the development and maintenance of large diameter, open canopy structure 

(keeping understory trees for future stands); and maintain connectivity (extensive detailed 

requirements including maintenance of minimum canopy levels). Reference corridor maps 

and silviculture report. Note: the corridors cross dozens of units, so it is imperative to address 

their protection and treatment during layout, marking, and implementation. This includes both 

silvicultural and fuels treatments. 

3. Within the OGMA travel corridors, maintain where available all hiding cover up to 20 percent 

of the corridor in clumps from 0.25 to 0.5 acre, if overlapped by harvest or natural fuels units 

(PDC). 

4. To prevent losing cover within retention areas, options will be coordinated during prescribed 

fire operations. Options include, but are not limited to: lining, burning in such a way to 

maintain cover, and avoidance. 

5. Within the OGMA, larger patch sizes are preferable for the benefit of goshawk.(Units: 15, 

37-43, 53, 141, 193, 239) (PDC) 

6. Distribute retention patches across the unit and avoid skid trails, landings, roads, etc. 

Placement on slopes is acceptable provided that it has cover or the best available. Retention 

areas should be strategically located to retain desired wildlife habitat elements (such as unique 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

38 

habitats, cover patches) and other resources (such as cultural heritage sites, or allotment 

improvements). (PDC) 

7. Providing cover patches of at least 10 acres at nest sites will meet the direction for sharpshinned hawk and 15 acres will meet the direction for Cooper’s hawk within General Forest 

allocations (Units 40, 43, 139). (MR). 

Shrub Habitat and Special or Unique Habitats 

1. Avoid burning mature shrubs in the ecotone between the forest habitat and adjacent rock 

outcrops or cliffs (PDC). (Units 77, 117, 124, 170, 304, 305 or where encountered). All 

notable rock outcrops or cliffs within or adjacent to unit boundaries that have vertical height of 

8 feet or more. Buffer them by a minimum of 50 feet. 

2. Remove ponderosa pine from around mountain mahogany and do not burn through mountain 

mahogany patches (Units 77, 117, 124, 170, 304, 305). (PDC). 

Snags, Logs, Down Wood, Green Tree Replacements 

1. Retain all soft and hard snags (MR), except where snags must be felled for temporary and 

Maintenance Level 1 roads, log landings, or occupational safety. Protect large snags and logs 

(greater than or equal to 20 inches dbh) from prescribed fire by avoiding ignition within 50 

feet of a snag or lining around it. Avoid direct ignition of smaller size classes. 

2. Maintain, where available, logs and down wood at the prescribed minimum levels. Reference 

Table 53, page 133in the Wildlife Report for levels which are specific for both ponderosa pine 

and lodgepole pine habitat types. (MR) 

3. Within lodgepole regeneration units (Units: 28, 82-89, 91, 102, 109, 112, 130, 174) retain 

green tree replacements for future snag and log recruitment as follows: 24 per acre with a 

minimum diameter of 10 inches dbh. Coordinate layout with wildlife biologist (MR). 

4. Where monitoring shows that down logs and wood are below the minimum requirements 

retain available slash piles of 100 square feet or slash concentrations covering 200 square feet. 

(MR). 

5. Create snags where needed to mitigate losses from treatment activities, leaving live 

replacement trees in groups preferred. GTRs must meet the 100 percent maximum population 

potential level in the long-term at levels specified by DecAID for the forest type. All units. 

Road Management 

1. Restrict logging operations and other management activities on administratively closed roads 

during the Fox Butte Cooperative Travel Management period (i.e. Green Dot closures) for 

deer (Entire project area). (PDC). 

2. Temporary road placement will avoid goshawk, sharp-shinned hawk and Cooper’s hawk nest 

sites (Units 1, 138, 301, 40, 43, 139). (MR).
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

39

Raptors 

1. Goshawk habitat: Potentially disturbing activities (e.g. equipment operation, log trucks, chain 

saws etc.) near known or discovered raptor nests (0.25 mile radius) must observe the seasonal 

restrictions (3/1-8/31) within habitat (430 acres) and disturbance protection of active nests (As 

needed if found). There is one site located adjacent to project boundary (Site affects Units 1, 

138, 301). The nest core area is partially within project (30 acres) will require protection. The 

post-fledgling area (PFA) (400 acres) is located outside project area. No temp road 

construction through sites. (MR). 

2. Cooper’s hawk habitat: Potentially disturbing activities (e.g. equipment operation, log trucks, 

chain saws etc.) near known or discovered raptor nests (0.25 mile radius) must observe the 

seasonal restrictions (4/1-8/31) within habitat (15 acres) and disturbance protection of active 

nests. There are two sites that affect Units 40, 43 and 139. No temp road construction thru 

sites. (MR) 

3. Golden eagle and red-tailed hawk habitat: Potentially disturbing activities (e.g. equipment 

operation, log trucks, chain saws etc.) near known or discovered raptor nests (0.25 mile 

radius) must observe the seasonal restrictions (2/1-7/31 and 3/1-8/31 respectively) within 

habitat (300 acres) and disturbance protection of active nests (As needed if found). There are 

currently no known sites within the project area. (MR). 

4. Sharp-shinned hawk habitat: Potentially disturbing activities (e.g. equipment operation, log 

trucks, chain saws etc.) near known or discovered raptor nests (0.25 mile radius) must observe 

the seasonal restrictions (4/1-8/31) within habitat (15 acres) and disturbance protection of 

active nests. There are currently no known sites within the project area. No temporary road 

construction through sites. (MM). 

5. Minimize smoke that could impact documented active raptor nests. (PDC) 

Wildlife Guzzlers 

1. Protect the three guzzlers within the project boundary with a buffer of 100 feet where tree 

canopy and structure will be managed for complexity (birds) and for cover (deer and elk) 

(Units 9, 43, 71, 304) (PDC summer range, MR winter range). 

SOILS 

Management Requirements 

Apply appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to all ground-disturbing management 

activities, as described in General Water Quality BMPs (Pacific Northwest Region, 1988). Specific 

BMPs commonly used to minimize the effects of road systems, fuels and timber management 

activities on the soil resource are briefly described for this project proposal. 

1. Use old landings and skidding networks whenever possible. 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) (Effectiveness: High).

2. In all proposed activity areas, locations for new yarding and transportation systems would be 

designated prior to the logging operations. This includes temporary roads, spur roads, log 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

40 

landings, and primary (main) skid trail networks. (LRMP SL-1 & SL-3; Timber Management 

BMP T-11, T-14 & T-16) (Effectiveness: Moderate).

3. 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) 

(Effectiveness: Moderate). 

4. Road Maintenance – conduct regular preventive maintenance to avoid deterioration of the 

road surface and minimize the effects of soil erosion (Road BMP R-18, R-19) (Effectiveness: 

Moderate to high).

5. Protect Soils during prescribed burn operations – A burn plan addressing compliance with all 

applicable LRMP standards and guidelines and BMPs will be completed before the initiation 

of prescribed fire treatments in planned activity areas. Prescribed burn plans need to include 

soil moisture guidelines to minimize the risk of intense fire and adverse impacts to the soil 

resource (LRMP SL-1 & SL-3; Timber BMP T-2, T-3 & T-13; Fuels Management BMP F-2, 

F-3) (Effectiveness: Moderate to high).

6. Coarse Woody Debris (CWD)/Down Wood - Retain adequate supplies of coarse woody debris 

(greater than 3 inches in diameter) to provide organic matter reservoirs for nutrient cycling 

following the completion of all project activities (LRMP SL-1). It is recommended that a 

minimum of 5 to 10 tons per acre of CWD be retained on Ponderosa Pine sites, and 10 to 15 

tons of CWD per acre should be retained on mixed conifer and lodgepole pine sites to help 

maintain long-term site productivity. These amounts are less than the recommended levels to 

be left for wildlife habitat objectives (Effectiveness: Moderate). 

7. Maintain duff layer – Strive to maintain fine organic matter (organic materials less than 3 

inches in diameter; commonly referred to as the duff layer) over at least 65 percent of an 

activity area (pertains to both harvesting and post-harvest operations). If the potential natural 

plant community (i.e., site) is not capable of producing fine organic matter over 65 percent of 

the area, adjust minimum amounts to reflect potential vegetation site capabilities (LRMP SL6; Fuels Management BMP F-2; Timber Management BMP T-13). (Effectiveness: 

Moderate). 

Project Design Criteria 

A. Minimize the extent of new soil disturbance from mechanical treatments by implementing 

appropriate design elements for avoiding or reducing detrimental soil impacts from project activities. 

Options include using some or all of the following: 

1) Use existing log landings and skid trail networks (whenever possible) or designate locations 

for new skid trails and landings. 

2) Maintain spacing of 100 to 150 feet for all primary (main) skid trail routes, except where 

converging at landings. Closer spacing due to complex terrain must be approved in advance by 

the Timber Sale Administrator. Main skid trails spaced 100 feet apart would limit soil impacts 

to 11 percent of the unit area. For the larger activity areas (greater than 40 acres) that can 

accommodate wider spacing distances, it is recommended that distance between main skid 

trials be increased to 150 feet to reduce the amount of detrimentally disturbed soil to 7 percent 

of the unit area (Froehlich, 1981, Garland, 1983). This would reduce the amount of surface 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

41

area where restoration treatments, such as subsoiling, would be required to mitigate impacts to 

achieve soil management objectives. 

3) Restrict grapple skidders to designated areas (i.e., roads, landings, designated skid trails) at all 

times, and limit the amount of traffic from other specialized equipment off designated areas. 

The use of harvester machines will be authorized to make no more than two equipment passes 

on any site-specific area to accumulate materials. 

4) Avoid equipment operations during times of the year when soils are extremely dry and subject 

to excessive soil displacement. 

5) Avoid equipment operations during periods of high soil moisture, as evidenced by equipment 

tracks that sink deeper than during dry or frozen conditions. 

6) Operate equipment over frozen ground or a sufficient amount of compacted snow to protect 

mineral soil. Equipment operations should be discontinued when frozen ground begins to 

thaw or when there is too little compacted snow and equipment begins to cause soil puddling 

damage (rutting). 

7) Prevent additional soil impacts in random locations of activity areas, between skid trails and 

away from landings, by machine piling and burning logging slash on existing log landings and 

skid trails that already have detrimental soil conditions. 

Objective: Reduce displacement and compaction damage to soils by limiting the amount of 

surface area covered by logging facilities, and limiting equipment operations to specified areas and 

ground conditions. 

B. Restrict mechanical disturbance to existing roads and skid trails at all times on portions of activity 

areas that contain slopes greater than 30 percent. Prohibit any new development of temporary roads 

and/or designated skid trails on sensitive soils with steep slopes. Require operators to winch logs to 

skidders with at least 75 feet of bull line. Hand felled trees shall be directionally felled toward preapproved skid trails, and the leading end of logs shall be suspended while skidding. Sustained slopes 

longer than 200 feet would be excluded from mechanized harvest. Exceptions for areas that make up 

less than 10 percent of an activity area would be subject to Forest Service approval. 

The following activity areas are proposed for conventional ground-based logging and portions of 

these EIS Units contain slopes over 30 percent: 

Alternative 2: EIS Units 4, 9, 117, 165 and 171. 

Alternative 3: EIS Units 4, 9, 117, 152, 160, 165, 171 and 193. 

Under Alternative 2, partial suspension of logs would be achieved through cable (skyline) yarding 

systems. Disturbed areas in skyline corridors shall be stabilized by applying appropriate erosion 

control treatments. 

The following activity areas are proposed for cable (skyline) yarding: on slopes over 30 percent: 

Alternative 2: EIS Units 136–141 and 144. 

Objective: Reduce displacement and compaction damage to soils by limiting equipment 

operations to specified areas and ground conditions (Effectiveness: High). 

Enforcement Mechanism: Timber Sale Contract 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

42 

Basis: Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines (SL-1 and SL-3); Timber Management BMPs T-2, T4, T-9, T-11 and T-12; Forest Service Soil and Water Conservation Practices Handbook (FSH 

2509.22); Froehlich et al 1981; Clayton, 1990; Experience 

C. Under Alternative 2, ensure that surface runoff from roads and landing areas is not directly 

channeled into skyline corridors within EIS Units 136-141 and 144. Stabilize disturbed areas within 

skyline corridors by any or all of the following treatments: water barring, check dams, or slash 

placement (various diameter classes) into areas of exposed mineral soil.

Objective: Reduce accelerated surface erosion and prevent rill and gully formations in disturbed 

areas of skyline corridors (Effectiveness: Moderate). 

Enforcement Mechanism: Timber Sale Contract 

Basis: Experience 

Mitigation Measure 

Reclaim specific segments of local system roads, all temporary roads, and some log landings and 

primary (main) skid trails by applying appropriate rehabilitation treatments in activity areas where 

detrimental soil conditions are expected to exceed the Regional Policy guidelines. Decommission 

(obliterate) logging facilities that will not be needed for future management. Options for 

mitigating the effects of project activities include the use of subsoiling equipment to loosen 

compacted soils on temporary roads and logging facilities, redistributing humus-enriched topsoil 

in areas of soil displacement damage, and pulling available slash and woody materials over the 

treated surface to establish effective ground cover protection. 

Reclaim all temporary roads and some of the logging facilities in portions of the following activity 

areas which are expected to exceed allowable limits of detrimental soil conditions following the 

mechanical treatments proposed with this project. 

Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 EIS Units (Commercial Harvest): 

EIS Units 3-27, 30, 31, 34, 36, 38-45, 48-58, 61, 63, 65, 66, 68, 69, 73-78, 80, 81, 98-103, 106-

110, 112, 126, 128-133, 143, 147, 156, 161, 165, 171, 190, 191, and 196. 

Alternative 2 units only: 136-141 and 144. 

Alternative 3 units only: 134, 146, 159, 160, 175-177, 180-184, and 186. 

Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 EIS Units (Forest system road decommissioning with 

subsoiling): 15 (0.4 miles), 19 (0.3 miles), 20 (0.4 miles), 23 (0.1 miles), 37 (0.1 miles), 41 (1.1 

miles), 48 (0.4 miles), 55 (0.4 miles), 56 (0.6 miles), 61 (0.2 miles), 63 (0.2 miles), 69 (0.5 miles), 

74 (0.3 miles), 80 (0.1 miles), 101 (0.5 miles), 133 (0.2 miles) and 161 (0.1 miles). 

Objectives: Reduce the extent of detrimentally disturbed soil to meet management objectives. 

Restore and stabilize detrimentally disturbed soils prior to seasonal runoff events (Effectiveness: 

High). 

Basis: Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines for Soil, Water and Riparian Resources (SL-1 and 

SL-4); Watershed Management BMP W-1; Cafferata, 1983; Garland, 1983; Experience. 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

43

RANGE 

Fences 

For more specific location, refer to the Project File, Range Report, Table 5E, pages 53-55.

1. Mechanical Shrub Treatment: Avoid all fences (PDC). 

2. Prescribed Fire: Wood components of fences such as posts, corner braces, and tree scabs 

should be avoided and/or protected during burning operations by lining the braces and trees as 

needed (PDC). 

3. Leave all live trees that are part of the existing fence (wires, tree scabs, etc. attached to the 

tree). With leave tree marking (LTM), mark trees with orange paint. Shear all dead or dying 

trees that are part of the fence at 50 inches or higher above the ground (PDC). 

Fences are located in units 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 28, 29, 32-35, 43-45, 47, 48, 54, 55, 58, 59, 66, 

76-78, 82, 83, 88, 89, 91, 93, 98, 99, 101, 106, 109,112, 116, 129, 130, 141, 144, 166-168, 

174, 192, 196, 201, 235, 306; 

Condition and Trend (CT) Plots 

For more specific location, refer to the Project File, Range Report, Table 2A, page 11 and Table 5D, 

page 52.

1. The range manager on the Forest must flag the CT study plots prior to treatment to avoid 

disturbance to plot stakes and should be on site during implementation if possible (MM, Units 

64, 150, 156). 

2. Mechanical Shrub Treatment: Avoid the site specific flagged CT plot to protect stakes used to 

locate the plot and transects. The area can be treated at low intensity, if the ground identifiers 

are not compromised (MM, Units 64, 150, 156). 

3. Prescribed Fire: No burning would occur on CT plot. Protect by providing a three acre buffer 

centered on the actual transect (MM, Units 64, 150, 156). 

Allotment Access 

1. If vegetation project activities occur during an active grazing season, any gates must be closed 

by contractors and administrative personal on pastures where livestock are present (PDC). 

2. Avoid dragging surface materials such as dirt, cinders or gravel into or over cattleguard decks 

or grates that would cause them to “fill-up” and require additional future work (PDC). 

3. Where access is needed through an existing fence by equipment (PDC): 

a. Cut fence at strategic locations where there is a tree or other solid support to maintain 

fence strength and allow for a tight fence when repaired. 

b. Repair all fences prior to livestock grazing in the area. 

c. Reclaim temporary roads that go through fences in a manner that does not encourage the 

public to “re-cut” fences following repair. 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

44 

Waterlines 

1. In units where the waterline is present, where access to units is needed that would require 

crossing or traveling over the waterline, and on roads where the waterline is buried beneath 

them, it is recommended that the waterline would not be crossed or used by any mechanized 

equipment in these areas unless (MM): 

a. Fill material is placed on top of the waterline at designated crossings or along the length of 

any travel routes to mitigate potential damage. To be effective, this material should be a 

minimum of 12” in depth. 

b. Any waterline damage during project activities is repaired prior to the grazing season. 

Testing of the waterline for damage can only be done between June and September, when 

the China Hat system is operational. 

c. Following treatments where waterlines are present, no subsoiling would occur over any 

waterline. 

Waterlines are located in units 46-48, 56, 102, 109, 129, 130, 132, 143, 156, 164, 189, 191, 

300; For more specific location and mitigation information, refer to the Project File, Range 

Report, Table 5A, pages 46-48. 

Water Sets and Water Troughs 

1. If cheatgrass is present, leave a 25 foot buffer around the water set and troughs to prevent 

spread under all treatment methods (MM). Otherwise, treatment can occur up to water sets 

and troughs. Watersets are located in units 16, 65, 77, 113, 150, 154, 180, 195, 199, 201, 303; 

Water troughs are located in units 46, 65, 129, 130, 143, 156; for more specific location and 

mitigation information, refer to the Project File, Range Report, Tables 2A an 2B, pages 11, 18, 

and 19 and Tables 5A-C, pages 47-51. 

Other 

1. Schedule harvest activities when grazing is not occurring within units, if possible (PDC). 

2. Where vegetation treatments require a period of rest from livestock grazing a precise treatment 

schedule needs to be developed and the exact period of rest needs to be specified by treatment 

unit. The individual treatment unit(s), with their associated period of rest, will need to be 

grouped by pasture and allotment to evaluate the effect on grazing operations on the affected 

pasture(s)/allotment(s) (PDC). 

3. Manage treatment activities so that no more than one pasture a year would require non-use by 

the permittee during a given grazing season (PDC). 

4. To maintain healthy rangeland conditions, do not treat non-forested southern or southeastern 

facing slopes of buttes and mountains with fall burning or with burning intensities that would 

alter vegetation conditions and cause exotics such as cheatgrass to invade and takeover the site 

(PDC). 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

45

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

1. Prescribed burning over prehistoric sites will only occur during the coolest burning conditions 

available. Make every attempt to avoid needing fire lines. Build them outside of site 

boundaries to the extent practical. Cultural resource sites will be monitored and/or rerecorded by archaeologists prior to burning or other thinning activities. All significant 

artifacts will be collected using standard field techniques during the monitoring/re-recording 

activities. Sites will be re-monitored after burning to locate newly identified and exposed 

artifacts, burials, or features (PDC). 

2. Burn piles will not be placed within site boundaries, eliminating extreme heat on sites and 

artifacts (PDC). 

3. Coordination between fuels and heritage staff will occur on all levels, especially in relation to 

researching predicted vs. achieved burn temperatures. Burn plans will be reviewed by the 

District archaeologist prior to implementation to provide awareness of cultural resource 

values. (PDC) 

4. Minor thinning and pruning of small diameter brush and trees on heritage sites will be 

conducted using hand crews. No piling of fuel or woody materials will occur within cultural 

resource site boundaries. Activities will be implemented over the course of several years 

utilizing a conservative fuel removal approach rather than heavy loading of ground fuels 

(completed within a single year) resulting in prescribed burns that reach temperatures over 300 

degrees F. Alternatively, a “light on the land” approach will be used (PDC). 

5. Danger trees within known sites will be directionally felled towards access routes. Lifting a 

tree in its entirety is a preferred method of preventing displacement, churning, and mixing of 

site sediments and artifacts. If this is not feasible, smaller lengths that can be completely 

suspended is another method of limiting effects on site integrity. 

6. Undiscovered and unrecorded cultural resources that are discovered during project 

implementation will be protected and evaluated by the Bend-For Rock District Archaeologist 

(PDC). 

7. In locations of commercial timber operations, cultural resource sites can be managed through 

a program of avoidance using standard site avoidance techniques. Cultural resource site 

boundaries will be identified and flagged by the project archaeologists, their on-ground 

locations provided to the project manager, and avoided by project activities. There will be no 

effect on these sites if the site avoidance practices are appropriately implemented (PDC). 

8. In units identified for mechanical brush treatment (mowing), the equipment will not make 

turns within site boundaries, eliminating the impacts from turning the equipment around 

(MM).

9. Place a layer of geotextile cloth directly on the waterline/temporary road surface where FR 

2268.200 crosses one site. Placement of the foreign (gravel) material would reduce the 

potential for intruding into site deposits and helps contain the gravel to the desired footprint, 

lessening the amount of soil displacement. (MM)

10. Since equipment will be prohibited from entry to sites, road maintenance that adds gravel or 

drainage features to a previously native surfaced road through a site should not occur. (PDC) 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

46 

Site buffers will initially be flagged using Heritage program flagging. Prior to project implementation, 

this flagging will be replaced by the appropriate flagging or signs (harvest or fuels related). This 

method will protect sites during harvest, slash piling, mowing, subsoiling, or other operations 

involving mechanical equipment while retaining greater anonymity from the general public because of 

law enforcement issues in the area. (MM)

INVASIVE PLANT PREVENTION 

1. Use clean-equipment contract clauses (local and regional) to minimize the introduction and 

spread of noxious weeds by contractors (PDC) 

2. Known weed sites will be shown on the Sale Area Map. Do not locate landings, skid trails, 

parking or staging areas within knapweed or Canada thistle sites (PDC). 

3. Any fill materials should be gathered only at weed-free quarries or other weed-free source 

sites (Refer to the Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program, Preventing and 

Managing Invasive Plants, Record of Decision, 2005, Appendix 1, Standard 7, page 1-4 

(MR). 

4. Before ground-disturbing activities begin, and annually during multi-year projects, prioritize 

and treat weed infestations in or near project operating areas and along access routes within 

the project area (refer to Appendix C, Invasive Plant Report, Project Record). (PDC) 

5. Minimize soil disturbance and retain native vegetation, in and around project activity areas, to 

the extent possible consistent with project objectives (PDC). 

6. To the extent possible, do not locate landings, skid trails, parking or staging areas within bull 

thistle sites; consult with District Weed Coordinator if this appears impractical (PDC). 

7. To the extent possible, avoid the use of machinery, including mowers, in obvious patches of 

cheatgrass, or other invasive plant sites, documented or newly discovered, within project 

treatment units (PDC). 

8. To the extent possible, avoid patches of cheatgrass during prescribed burning operations. In 

units with a burn-under-tree prescription, do not intentionally ignite areas under trees where 

cheatgrass occurs (PDC). 

RECREATION & SCENERY 

1. Slash clean-up within view of dispersed campsites on main roads (two or four digit) should be 

done with a low impact machine, or by hand piling (PDC). Dispersed campsites should be 

left in a safe condition. Safety hazards created from vegetation treatment, such as “widow 

makers” and other hazards should be removed (PDC). 

2. Design fuel and vegetation units to minimize ground disturbance and damage to vegetation in 

foreground treatment areas for the first 300 feet in units 90 and 103 (First 300 feet) (MM, 

Effectiveness: High). 

3. Minimize the amount of marking paint that is visible from dispersed recreation sites on Forest 

Road 23 (MM, Effectiveness: High). 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

47

4. Clean-up activities in foreground treatment areas, including landings, skid trails, and slash 

piles, should be completed within two years post-treatment in units 90 and 103 (MM, 

Effectiveness: High). 

5. Locate slash piles for burning in areas that will minimize scorching within foreground 

treatment areas in units 90 and 103. Severely damaged or burned trees (more than two-thirds 

live crown scorch) shall be removed as part of post-treatment activities within two years. 

Locate grapple piles on logging facilities (MM, Effectiveness: High). 

6. Remove flagging that is visible from roads when unit activities are completed in units 90 and 

103 (MM, Effectiveness: High). 

MONITORING 

Wildlife 

 All applicable Management Requirements and approved Project Design Criteria to determine 

effectiveness and to implement adaptive management in the event that changes are needed. 

 Coordination with implementation staff on: unit boundary layout, tree marking, retention 

patch identification and marking, prescribed and pile burn plans, sale contracts, corridor 

protection, and/or restrictive prescriptions, etc.

 Snag/log transects to document increases and/or decreases relative to different treatment 

prescriptions and to quantify the net snag losses to meet the specified management 

requirements.

 Field checks to confirm raptor site activity prior to management activities.

 Field checks to confirm effectiveness of road/trail closures. 

Soils 

Project monitoring focuses primarily on implementation monitoring to ensure the selected 

alternative, including mitigation measures, are properly implemented on the ground as designed 

and achieve the desired results. 

Soil Quality Objective: To determine if post-project subsoiling mitigation was effectively 

accomplished and reduced the extent of detrimentally compacted soil in a representative sample of 

EIS Units. 

Monitoring Elements: Surface area treated on temporary roads and primary logging facilities. 

Area of Consideration: Individual activity areas (EIS Units). 

Suggested Methodology: Combination of visual survey and shovel probing. 

Heritage 

Coordination with other resource departments and Heritage Program personnel will ensure 

protection of all eligible or unevaluated sites within the project boundary. Table 8 lists whether 

monitoring or coordination or both is required to be fully successful with the goals of site 

protection and mitigation. 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

48 

Table 8: Heritage Coordination and Monitoring Activities 

Heritage Coordination and Monitoring Activities 

Alternative Activity Description Coordination Monitoring

Heavy equipment/machinery Y Y 

Mower turns Y Y 

Temporary road development Y Y 

Burn piles Y Y 

Underburning ** Y Y 

Danger tree felling Y Y 

Fire line construction by hand Y N 

Mowing - visibility increased Y Y 

Range - covering waterlines Y Y 

Erosion/sedimentation below units Y Y 

Subsoiling temporary roads Y N 

Road maintenance through sites Y N 

Adding gravel to native-surfaced roads Y N 

Adding drainage to roads Y N 

Alternative 2 - 

(Proposed Action) 

and 

Alternative 3

Harvest in plantations Y N 

Alternative 2 only Cable yarding on steep slopes Y N 

Alternative 3 only Biomass removal Y Y 

** One of the monitoring aspects of fuels treatments that will be conducted in coordination with the fuels specialists is the 

determination of actual temperatures reached during an initial and any subsequent entry for underburning of slash on cultural 

resource sites. Selected sites and non-site areas (as a control sample) will have temperature gauge sensors placed prior to 

conducting the prescribed burns. They will be collected following each burn and compared with each other. This 

information may provide useful documentation of our approach towards underburning over sites with light fuel conditions 

present. 

On-the-ground monitoring would occur for cultural resource sites that are flagged for protection. A 

list of these sites and specific monitoring needs will be included in the cultural resource 

inventory/consultation report. Part of the monitoring would occur through coordination with other 

specialists. Monitoring will also occur following project implementation for compliance with the 

mitigations. 

COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES 

The total number of acres proposed for treatment would increase from approximately 10,752 acres in 

Alternative 2 to approximately 11,281 acres in Alternative 3. Approximate commercial volume would 

be 61,309 CCF in Alternative 2 and 58,403 CCF in Alternative 3. The expression of volume is in CCF 

or hundred cubic feet. 

Table 9: Deadlog Alternative Harvest Prescriptions (Rx) 

Prescription Description of Harvest Prescriptions 1 Through 10 1 Alternative 2 

Acres 2 

Alternative 3 

Acres 2 

1 

Commercial thin (HTH) from below ponderosa pine (PP), 

removing lodgepole pine (LP). This will leave 40 square 

feet of basal area per acre (BA/A), retaining 

approximately 30 to 50 trees per acre with openings less 

657 626 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

49

Prescription Description of Harvest Prescriptions 1 Through 10 1 Alternative 2 

Acres 2 

Alternative 3 

Acres 2 

than 5 acres through the stands. 

2 

Commercial thin (HTH) from below PP, removing all LP 

and white fir (WF) leaving 40 BA/A. Where mistletoe is 

present, reduce to minimum stocking levels (as low as 20 

(BA/A). Remove trees with heaviest dwarf mistletoe 

infection (DMTR greater than or equal to 3). Removing 

trees with DMTR greater than or equal to 4, openings less 

than 4 acres will occur within the stands. 

2,309 1,955 

3 

Commercial thin (HTH) from below PP to 40 BA/A 

removing LP and WF (within 22’ of PP under 12” dbh 

and 30’ of trees greater than 12” dbh). Thin from below 

LP and WF to 60 BA/A (25 foot spacing). Healthiest 

trees with the most full crowns will be left. 

573 573 

4 

Commercial thin (HTH) from below in ponderosa pine 

stands with large structure. Thin from below to 40 BA/A 

in younger cohort less than 150 years old cut all 

lodgepole pine. Thin from below leaving largest older 

cohort to 60 BA/A. Space smaller younger trees at least 

35 feet from larger old trees. (thin in LOS) 

661 633 

5 

Commercial thin (HTH) from below in ponderosa pine 

stands with large structure. The term cohort is used to 

represent trees of different age classes within a stand. 

Thin from below to 40 BA/A in younger cohort less than 

150 years old. Where mistletoe is present, reduce 

mistletoe infection by removing trees with the heaviest 

dwarf mistletoe infection (DMTR greater than or equal to 

3) and spacing infected trees at least 30 feet. Reduce 

stocking levels to minimum stocking levels (as low as 20 

BA/A) to remove trees with DMTR greater than or equal 

to 4 openings less than 1/2 acre will occur through the 

stands. Thin from below leaving largest older cohort to 

60 BA/A. Space smaller younger trees at least 35 feet 

from larger old trees or 50 feet where larger trees contain 

mistletoe. (thin in LOS with DMT) 

2,230 2,023 

6 Harvest overstory (HOR) lodgepole pine leaving 3-5 

overstory trees per acre (wildlife direction). 157 157 

7 

Harvest Shelterwood (HSH) lodgepole pine leaving 35 

trees per acre for seed source and temperature 

modification leave all ponderosa pine spacing lodgepole 

pine 35 feet from manageable ponderosa pine. 

332 0 

8 

Lodgepole pine commercial thin (HTH) leaving largest 

healthiest crowns on a 25 foot spacing Leave all 

ponderosa pine and space lodgepole pine 30 from 

manageable ponderosa pine. (HTH in LP) 

0 332 

9 

Biomass (BIOMASS) removal of material which is less 

than merchantable size thinning of this material will meet 

SPC specifications thinning from below and harvesting 

the material cut. 

0 899 

10 

Commercial thin(HTH) from below to 40 basal area per 

acre and remove all lodgepole pine and white fir. Where 

mistletoe is present, reduce mistletoe infection by 

removing trees with the heaviest dwarf mistletoe 

infection (DMTR greater than or equal to 3). Reduce 

0 289 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

50 

Prescription Description of Harvest Prescriptions 1 Through 10 1 Alternative 2 

Acres 2 

Alternative 3 

Acres 2 

stocking levels to minimum stocking levels (as low as 20 

basal area per acre) to remove trees with DMTR greater 

than or equal to 4 openings less than 4 acres will occur 

through the stands. BIOMASS removal of material which 

is less than merchantable size thinning of this material 

will meet SPC specifications thinning from below and 

harvesting the material cut. (Blackbark with DMT & LP 

with biomass removal) 

20 Fuels or thinning activity only 3,833 3,794 

Total Treatment Acres 10,752 11,281 

1. All harvest activities will remove down dead firm lodgepole pine to reduce down fuels levels. DMTR = dwarf mistletoe 

rating; BA/A = Basal area /acre 

2. Acres displayed for treatments are gross unit acres. Gross acres will be reduced for wildlife leave areas and protection of 

other resources 

Table 10 provides an overall comparison of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 in 

relation to the proposed activities. 

Table 10: Comparison of Treatments by Alternative 

Treatment Alternative 1 

(No Action) 

Alternative 2 

(Proposed Action Alternative 3 

Total Treatment Acres 0 10,752 11,281 

Harvest Type Acres 

Overstory Removal (HOR) 0 157 157 

Shelterwood (HSH) 0 332 0 

Commercial Thin/Salvage (HTH/HSV) 0 0 592 

Commercial Thin (HTH) 

(Cable Logging) 

0 

(0) 

6,430 

(941) 

5,489 

(0) 

Commercial Thin (HTH)/Biomass 0 0 422 

Biomass 0 0 899 

Total Acres 0 6,919 7,559 

Total Volume – Hundred Cubic Feet 

(CCF) 

0 61,309 

(6,919 acres) 

58,403 

(6,660 acres) 

Timber Stand Improvement Type 1 Acres

Precommercial Thinning (SPC) 0 7,985 8,586 

Whipfell 0 458 535 

Pruning 0 50 50 

Fuel Treatment Type 2 Acres 

Lop Branches 0 765 928 

Hand Pile Slash and Burn 0 2,334 1,691 

Machine Pile Slash and Burn 0 5,061 6,114 

Mow Shrubs 0 5,874 6,668 

Underburn 0 8,912 9,443 

Road Activity Miles 

Road Closure 0 17.4 17.4 

Road Decommissioning 0 21.5 21.5 

Temporary Road Development 0 14.8 15.3 

Acres are approximate. More than one activity may occur on a single unit. Actual acres treated within a unit would be 

reduced by no thinning retention areas and the percent of a unit that can be mowed or burned. 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

 

51

SUMMARY TABLE – COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES 

Table 11: Comparison of Alternatives to Purpose and Need and Key Issues 

Purpose & Need Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

Manage stands of late old 

structure ponderosa pine 

to promote sustainability 

over the long term 

High stand density 

would continue to 

provide the opportunity 

for large scale stand 

replacing events to 

occur. 

LOS ponderosa pine to be 

treated with stocking 

reduction and fuels 

treatments for long-term 

sustainability. 

LOS ponderosa pine to be 

treated with stocking 

reduction and fuels 

treatments for long-term 

sustainability. 

In dense stands dominated 

by ponderosa pine, move 

stands toward historic 

conditions by addressing 

tree species composition 

and stocking levels 

Dense stands of 

ponderosa pine and 

mixed conifer would 

continue. Areas that 

once supported large 

ponderosa pine with 

dispersed stands of 

younger trees and 

ground vegetation of 

grass would not have the 

opportunity to develop 

into those desired 

characteristics. 

Dense stands of 

ponderosa pine would be 

thinned to allow for 

greater and quicker 

diameter growth. 

Thinning would reduce 

the risk of bark beetle 

mortality and increase the 

tree resistance. Thinning 

and fuels reduction 

activities would reduce 

the potential for loss from 

wildfire. 

Dense stands of 

ponderosa pine would be 

thinned to allow for 

greater and quicker 

diameter growth. 

Thinning would reduce 

the risk of bark beetle 

mortality and increase the 

tree resistance. Thinning 

and fuels reduction 

activities would reduce 

the potential for loss from 

wildfire. 

Address stand conditions 

in both ponderosa pine 

and lodgepole pine to 

improve resistance and 

resilience to bark beetles 

and dwarf mistletoe 

No stand density 

reduction would occur 

that would improve 

stand resilience. 

Mistletoe would 

continue to spread. It is 

likely that bark beetles 

would continue to 

increase populations to 

epidemic proportions. 

Tree mortality would 

increase fuels. 

Reducing stand density 

would substantially 

reduce the risk of loss 

from pine beetle outbreak 

by improving tree 

resistance. Reducing 

density would reduce the 

spread of mistletoe to 

younger cohorts of trees. 

Reducing stand density 

would substantially 

reduce the risk of loss 

from pine beetle outbreak 

by improving tree 

resistance. Reducing 

density would reduce the 

spread of mistletoe to 

younger cohorts of trees. 

Reduce fuels throughout 

the planning area, 

including surface and 

ladder fuels, to levels that 

will not sustain stand 

replacing fires 

There would be no 

planned fuels reduction 

treatments. High 

intensity, stand replacing 

wildfires could 

substantially alter the 

forest and associated 

wildlife habitat and other 

resources. 

Thinning 7,894 acres of 

dense stands, mowing 

5,890 acres of highly 

flammable shrubs, and 

underburning 8,912 acres 

would substantially 

reduce the risk of a high 

intensity, stand 

replacement wildfire. 

Thinning 8,580 acres of 

dense stands, mowing 

6,684 acres of highly 

flammable shrubs, and 

underburning 9,443 acres 

would substantially 

reduce the risk of a high 

intensity, stand 

replacement wildfire. 

There is a need to 

contribute to the local and 

regional economies by 

providing timber and 

other wood fiber products 

and associated jobs. 

There would be no wood 

fiber cut that would be 

used for would products. 

No jobs would be 

created that would 

provide wages that 

would be spent in the 

local communities. 

61.3 CCF wood fiber. 

Approximately 294 jobs 

would be created or 

maintained. Income 

generated would be 

approximately $9.3 

million. 

58.4 CCF wood fiber and 

biomass. Approximately 

278 jobs would be created 

or maintained. Income 

generated would be 

approximately $8.8 

million. 

Key Issues Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 

Regeneration Harvest in 

Lodgepole Pine Stands 

No treatments would 

occur. 

489 acres of regeneration 

harvest. 

157 acres would have the 

overstory removed. 
Deadlog Project – Chapter 2 – Alternatives 

52 

Cable Logging No treatments would 

occur. 

941 acres would be cable 

logged. Stand density 

would be reduced. The 

cost would be $200 per 

CCF. 

No cable logging would 

occur. Stand density 

would not be reduced. 

Understory fuels would 

be reduced. 

Biomass Utilization No Biomass Utilization 

would occur. No 

benefits would occur, 

such as jobs and 

associated income that 

would help sustain the 

local economy. 

Biomass Utilization could 

occur. Unmerchantable 

material will be piled and 

burned. 

Biomass Utilization 

would occur on 899 acres. 

Depending on market 

wood fiber would be 

utilized at regional/local 

mills providing jobs, 

power and/or products. 

ALTERNATIVES NOT CONSIDERED IN DETAIL 

DIAMETER LIMIT OF 14” 

During scoping the Sierra Club raised an issue about the size of trees that would be cut and removed 

within the Deadlog planning area. The Sierra Club asked that a limit of 14” diameter at breast height 

(dbh) be placed on trees to be cut and removed following their walkthrough surveys and observations. 

An alternative was considered to address public concerns regarding the diameter of trees to be 

removed, but was not analyzed in detail for the following reasons: 

Estimates from stand exams indicate the majority of trees that would need to be removed for density 

management and/or due to disease are less than 14” dbh. However, because old growth stands within 

the planning area are heavily infected by dwarf mistletoe, imposing a 14” diameter limit would make 

it difficult to meet the objective of stand resistance to dwarf mistletoe and insects because overstory 

trees infected by mistletoe provide a source of continued inoculation of dwarf mistletoe. Imposing a 

14” diameter limit impedes the forester’s flexibility to remove a tree between 14” and 21” dbh that has 

mistletoe high in the crown and where the tree is topping other trees that are being left for future old 

growth recruitment. 
53

CHAPTER 3 

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences 

54 

CHAPTER 3 - AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

This section of the environmental assessment considers the environmental consequences of 

implementation of the various alternatives. The following discussion of effects follows The Council 

on Environmental Quality (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 DEIS. 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 Deadlog project area boundary is the focus of this EIS, but adjacent lands are 

considered in this analysis process. 

BASIS FOR CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ANALYSIS 

Cumulative Effects Considerations of Past Actions (40 CFR 1508.7): In accordance with the CEQ 

Guidance Memorandum on Consideration of Past Actions in Cumulative Effects Analysis dated June 

24, 2005: 

The Environmental Consequences disclosures in this DEIS include discussion of cumulative effects. 

The cumulative effects discussion is based on the Forest Service NEPA regulations at 365 CFR 220 

and Forest Service Handbook, 1909.15. 

The analysis of cumulative effects begins with consideration of the direct and indirect effects on the 

environment that are expected or likely to result from the alternative proposals for agency action. 

Agencies then look for present effects of past actions that are, in the judgment of the agency, relevant 

and useful because they have a significant cause-and-effect relationship with the direct and indirect 

effects of the proposal for agency action and its alternatives. 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 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences 

55

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. (36 CFR 220.4 (f)) 

Table 12 displays those projects that are in the planning process and those that have been wholly or 

partially implemented, as well as other human-caused events that have affected the landscape. Effects 

of these projects are considered in the cumulative effects analysis for each resource. 

Table 12: Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Actions 

Actions Timing of Actions Activity Description 

Aspen Project Vegetation 

Treatments 

Implementation The nearest activities are within 2 miles of 

the Deadlog project boundary. Prescribed 

burns, mowing, and thinning of plantations 

– In progress 

Opal mine Ongoing Located in SW portion of Quartz Mountain. 

Active annually. Includes camp site. 

Wildlife Improvement 

Maintenance 

Ongoing and part of the existing 

condition 

Maintenance on two wildlife guzzlers. 

Road Maintenance Ongoing and part of the existing 

condition

Ongoing road maintenance. Danger tree 

removal, roadside brushing, drainage 

repair, spot surfacing. 

BPA power line 

Maintenance 

Ongoing and part of the existing 

condition

Power line maintenance every 3-5 years, 

including mowing brush and seedlings and 

scattered tree and snag removal. Removing 

trees that are a potential hazard to power 

lines.. 

Cluster II Grazing 

Allotment. Grazing 

allotment Maintenance 

and Improvement 

Ongoing and part of the existing 

condition

Grazing, fence maintenance, water sets, 

waterline repair and reconstruction. 

Green Dot road Closure Ongoing and part of the existing 

condition 

Administrative closure of roads during 

Hunting season 

KO Timber Sale Implementation Plantation Fence Maintenance and removal 

and Big Game Repellant application. 

Dwarf Mistletoe control activities (pruning 

and girdling). Past harvest and thinning. 

Travel Management Future Decision Travel Management EIS possible signature 

within 2 years. Shared use roads. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

56 

FIRE AND FUELS REPORT 

INTRODUCTION 

Fire has been a disturbance factor in the Deadlog Planning Area for thousands of years. 

Fire Suppression over the last century has eliminated most of the naturally occurring low intensity 

fires. As a result the amount of fuel loadings and the density of forest stands have increased. 

While fire occurrence within the area has not changed substantially from pre-settlement times, the area 

burned and size of fires has been significantly reduced. Fire may occur in a variety of ways ranging 

from low intensity, creeping ground fire to high intensity stand replacement fires encompassing large 

acreages. 

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION 

DESCHUTES NATIONAL FOREST LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 

PLAN

Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines 

The emphasis in the Deadlog area is identified by the General Forest, Old Growth, Scenic Views and 

Deer Habitat management areas. These management areas do not preclude managing for other 

resource objectives common throughout forest lands yet they do give direction for the desired outputs 

and conditions. Emphasis for each of the management areas is as follows. 

Deer Habitat MA7

M7-26 The prescribed use of fire will be necessary to maintain diversity within the plant communities. 

Burning prescriptions will provide for the reestablishment of bitterbrush within 20 years. 

Approximately 2.0 – 2.5 percent of this Management Area could be burned annually. 

M7-27 In that portion of the Management Area designated nonsuitable for timber, the preferred slash 

treatment method is to lop and scatter. In areas of heavey slash, machine piling and burning may be 

necessary. Crushing is the least preferred method for treating slash. 

General Forest MA8. 

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. 

M8-26 The lowest cost option which meets the Silvicultural, soil, water, and fire objectives should be 

selected. 

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 MA9

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, and shaped to appear as natural occurrences. If burning conditions cannot 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

57

be met such that scorching cannot be limited to the lower one third 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 Reserve MA15

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. 

M15-20 Prescribed fire is the preferred method of fuel treatment. However, if prescribed fire cannot 

reduce unacceptable fuel loadings, other methods will be considered. 

M15-21 Natural Fuel Loading will normally be the standard. 

COHESIVE STRATEGY 

The Cohesive Strategy addresses hazards and risks from the accumulations of fuels and wildfires that 

are more frequently burning at high intensities and severity and are outside of their historic range of 

variability (HRV). Page 30 of the Cohesive Strategy lists the federal laws and regulations used to 

guide National Forest management, including the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, the 

Clean Air Act, and the National Forest Management Act which together provide the legal basis for 

maintaining sustainability of ecosystems. 

The Forest Service Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Strategic Plan (2000 revision) 

bridges law and Forest Service activities. The Cohesive Strategy anchors to the following specific 

objectives from the GPRA Strategic Plan. 

 Improve watershed conditions and restore hydrological processes 

 Improve habitat quality; and conserve fish, wildlife and plant populations 

 Improve ecosystem resiliency associated with fire adapted ecosystems 

HISTORIC CONDITION 

Historic condition assumes that the compliment of native species and the vegetative conditions that 

existed prior to European settlement was viable; that is, the historic ecosystems possessed a high level 

of resilience to the effects of insects, disease, and fire. The pre-European settlement forest provides 

the most scientifically sound model because it was based on thousands of years of development, it 

existed during a period of similar climate, and is more easily documented than forests from any earlier 

time (Bonnicksen 2000). 

Historic condition implies that the character of disturbance agents were different in the past. 

Historically, fire played the bigger role in influencing forest succession, and the influence of insect and 

disease agents was short-lived and patchy. But 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). 

Historic condition does not imply the absence of human influence, i.e. “natural” forests, in which 

humans have played no significant role. According to MacCleery (USDA 1999), under that definition 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

58 

there would have been few natural forests, even in 1500 (at the beginning of European occupation). 

Humans have occupied and influenced America’s forests (by, for example, their frequent application 

of fire) since the time these forests migrated northward behind the retreating continental glaciers at the 

end of the ice last age. In the Northwest, one of the common patterns of the Native American use of 

fire was widespread burning by inland (Columbia Plateau) tribes east of the Cascades (Langston 

1995). So, “historic condition” strongly implies a human role in the shape of the landscape. 

According to Thomas (1993), in the fire-prone ecosystems of the west, Native American burning 

created an element of ecosystem stability that otherwise would not have existed without it. Frequent, 

low intensity, human-caused fires substantially reduced the amount and range of less frequent, highintensity, stand replacing fires that otherwise would have occurred. So, historic conditions represent a 

reasonable point of reference to assess change caused by both nature and humans. 

EXISTING CONDITION 

On the Deschutes National Forest, deviations from historic conditions due to the interruption of fire 

cycles have displaced fire regimes out of their historic range of variability. Because of changes in 

species composition, stand structure, density and fuel loading, the existing levels of fire severity (low, 

moderate, stand replacement) are out of their historic proportion to each other. The fire effects that 

occur as a result of this imbalance are outside their historic range; fewer acres are burning at low 

intensities, and more acres are (or have the potential to burn) at moderate or high intensities. 

To obtain and verify current conditions in the Deadlog Project area several ground reconnaissance 

have been performed as well as review of aerial photos, Geographical Information System (GIS) data, 

and past activity records. From a fire and fuels management perspective several key elements receive 

focused attention to adequately describe current condition. 

Fire Regimes 

Fire regimes describe the role fire plays in an ecosystem in terms of frequency and severity. Fire 

regimes are based on environmental gradients of temperature and moisture, similar to the way plant 

associations are grouped. The assignment of a specific fire regime to a specific seral/structure stage is 

a product of fire ecology literature, historical fire records and local fire experience. There are three 

levels of fire severity; non-lethal (low) severity, mixed (moderate) severity, and stand replacement 

(high) severity. Table 13 describes fire severities. 

Table 13: Fire Severities

Fire Severity Description of Effects on Vegetation 

Non-lethal More than 70% of the basal area or more than 90% of the canopy cover that existed 

prior to the fire still remains after the fire. 

Mixed Fires of intermediate effects, often resulting from a mosaic of varying conditions. 

Stand Replacement Less than 20% of the basal area or less than 10% of the canopy cover of the 

overstory remains after the fire. 

There is a historic fire frequency associated with each level of severity. Frequency is divided into four 

categories, and each category is associated with a mean fire interval. Mean fire interval is the average 

number of years between two successive fire events in a given area. Table 14 describes fire 

frequencies. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

59

Table 14: Fire Frequencies 

Fire Frequency Mean Fire Interval 

Very Frequent Less than 25 years 

Frequent 26 - 75 years 

Infrequent 76 - 150 years 

Very Infrequent 151 – 300 years 

A fire scar analysis has been initiated for the Deadlog area by Bend Chapter of The Nature 

Conservancy. Although incomplete at this time, early indications from the samples that have been 

analyzed indicates that there is an average return interval of 12.2 years (Waltz, 2009).

Plant Association Groups and Fire Regime Groups 

The Deadlog area is dominated by approximately 13,024 acres of ponderosa pine stands and 

approximately 2,945 acres of lodgepole pine stands. 

The ponderosa pine plant association group is best characterized as Fire Regime Group I, non-lethal 

fire severity with a frequency between 0 and 35 years (13,024 acres). Historically, the fires were 

mostly non-lethal severity fires, which maintained the open park-like stands dominated by Ponderosa 

Pine. Fire exclusion has changed the vegetation and structure. Currently these stands are dominated 

by dense thickets and storied structures with an increase in the lodgepole pine component. 

The area also contains a significant amount lodgepole pine forest characterized as Fire Regime Group 

IV, stand replacement severity fire with a mean fire return interval between 35 and 100 years (2,945 

acres). Historically, the fires were mixed and stand replacement fires, which contributed to 

fragmenting forested areas with varying seral/structure stages. Fire exclusion has changed the 

vegetation and structure. Currently much of the landscape is dominated by dense thickets and storied 

structures that are more continuous with fewer breaks in the canopy. 

The fire regime groups are an extension of the plant association groups and have been identified for 

the area. Table 15 describes Fire Regime Groups. 

Table 15: Natural Historic Fire Regime Groups 

Fire Regime 

Group 

Acres PAG Fire Return Interval (years) Fire Severity 

I 13,024 Ponderosa pine 0-35 (frequent) Non-lethal 

IV 2,945 Lodgepole pine 35-100 (infrequent) Stand Replacement 

Fire Occurrence 

Large Fire history records indicate that there have been 2 large fires in the planning area since 1913. 

These include the Quartz Mountain Fire of 1913 which burned 138 acres, approximately 69 acres of 

which were in the planning area; and the South Ice Cave Fire of 1915 which burned 11,910 acres with 

3,958 acres in the planning area. 

Fire Occurrence Rate (FOR) is the probability of a fire occurring on a given area per year. For 

comparison reasons, it is referred to in terms of fires per thousand acres per year. The FOR is usually 

a fraction, with zero and one being the low and high range limits. Numbers close to zero indicate a 

low fire probability, and numbers closer to one are indicative of a high fire probability. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

60 

The FOR for Deadlog was figured by counting the number of recorded fires occurring within the 

planning area from 1983 thru 2001. 

The FOR is: 31 fires/15.4 thousand acres/19 years = .1059FOR, or a 10.6 percent chance of a fire 

occurring within any 1,000 acre block of the Deadlog Planning Area each year. 

Surface Fuels

Existing fuel conditions have been quantified and qualified (modeled) to estimate the current potential 

of surface fire behavior. Fuel Models were selected from the 13 Fire Behavior Prediction System 

(FBPS) models that are organized into four groups: grass, shrub, timber, and slash. They are further 

described by fuel load <3-inch, dead fuel load 1⁄4 inch, live fuel load of foliage and fuel bed depth 

(Anderson 1982). 

The following surface fuel models were used to characterize the range of surface fuel conditions in the 

project area: 

Fuel Model 1 (276 acres) – Fire spread is governed by the fine, very porous, and continuous 

herbaceous fuels that have cured or are nearly cured. Fires are surface fires that move rapidly through 

the cured grass and associated material. Very little shrub or timber is present, generally less than onethird the area. Annual and perennial grasses are included in this fuel model. 

Fuel Model 2 (1,652 acres) – Fire spread is primarily through the herbaceous fuels, either curing out or 

dead. These are surface fires where the herbaceous material, in addition to litter and dead-down stem 

wood from the open shrub or timber overstory, contribute to the fire intensity. Open shrub lands and 

pine stands or scrub oak stands that cover one-third to two-thirds of the area may generally fit this 

model; such stands may include clumps of fuels that generate higher intensities and that may produce 

firebrands. Some pinyon-juniper may be in this model. 

Fuel Model 6 (13,056 acres) – Fires carry through the shrub layer where foliage is more flammable 

than fuel model 5, but this requires moderate winds, greater than 8 mph at mid-flame height. Fire will 

drop to the ground at low wind speeds or at openings in the stand. The shrubs are older, but not as tall 

as shrub types of fuel model 4, nor do they contain as much fuel as fuel model 4. This fuel model 

considers a broad range of shrub conditions. 

Fuel Model 8 (560 acres) – Slow burning ground fires with low flame lengths are generally the case, 

although the fire may encounter an occasional “jackpot” or heavy fuel concentration that can flare up. 

Only under severe weather conditions involving high temperatures, low humidities, and high winds do 

the fuels pose a fire hazard. Closed canopy stands of short-needle conifers or hardwoods that have 

leafed out support fire in the compact litter layer. This layer is mainly needles, leaves, and 

occasionally twigs because little undergrowth is present in the stand. Representative conifer types are 

white pine, and lodgepole pine, spruce, fir and larch. 

Fuel Model 9 (168 acres) – Fires run through the surface litter faster than model 8 and have longer 

flame length. Both long-needle conifer stands and hardwood stands are typical. Closed stands of 

long-needle pine like Ponderosa, Jeffery, and red pines are grouped in this model. Concentrations of 

down-dead woody material will contribute to possible torching out of trees, spotting, and crowning. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

61

Fuel Model 10 (172 acres) – The fires burn in the surface fuels with greater fire intensity than the other 

timber litter models. Dead-down fuels include greater quantities of 3 inch or larger limbwood 

resulting from over maturity or natural events that create a large load of dead material on the forest 

floor. Crowning out, spotting, and torching of individual trees is more frequent in this fuel situation, 

leading to potential fire control difficulties. Any forest type may be considered if heavy down 

material is present; examples are insect or disease-ridden stands, wind-thrown stands, overmature 

situations with deadfall, and aged light thinning or partial-cut slash. 

Table 17 displays existing acres and potential fire behavior for each fuel model represented in the 

Deadlog area. 

Table 16: Existing Fuel Models by Acres and Fire Severity 

Deadlog Existing Fuel Models 

Fuel Model Acres Fire Behavior Potential 

1 267 Moderate 

2 1,652 Moderate 

6 13,056 High/Extreme 

8 560 Low 

9 168 Moderate 

10 172 High 

99 Non-forested 175 

The majority of the project area is FM6, which exhibits a high/extreme fire behavior potential. These 

fuel models only account for the surface fuels by size classification and tons per acre of available fuel. 

There is a heavy bitterbrush component throughout the area which is classified as fuel model 6. 

Where bitterbrush occurs below ponderosa pine, the brush collects needle cast from the pine. These 

needles are an aerial component of dead fuel that is intertwined and draped over the brush which 

dramatically increases fire behavior in fuel model 6 beyond what is described in the preceding surface 

fuel descriptions. 

Furthermore, much of the project area is dominated by ponderosa pine stands and lodgepole pine 

stands with dense understories. These understories provide an aerial fuel component that serves as a 

ladder of available fuel, which enables fire to move from the surface fuels to the canopy, thus resulting 

in crown fire. Densities associated with many stands in the project area provide a high probability of 

sustained crown fire under typical summer weather conditions. 

METHODOLOGY FOR EFFECTS ANALYSIS 

Stand information was collected from stand exam data and processed with Forest Vegetation 

Simulator (FVS) to generate canopy fuels information for comparing existing condition and the action 

alternatives. FlamMap, a fire behavior mapping and analysis program that computes fire behavior 

characteristics (rates of spread, flame length, crown fire potential, etc.), was used to determine the 

existing stand conditions potential fire behavior. Remote sensing satellite imagery from 2004 was 

analyzed in the computer model under specific fuel conditions. The data inputs necessary for 

FlamMap include aspect, slope, elevation, fuel model, canopy height, canopy base height, crown bulk 

density, and crown class. Fire Family Plus was used to determine 97th percentile weather conditions 

utilizing weather data from Cabin Lake weather station. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

62 

Existing Fire Behavior 

Flame Length 

As related to wildfire; as flame length and rate of spread increase the fireline intensity increases 

dramatically. Any thing that changes about a fire (fuel type as fire burns into new area, such as wind 

shift or increase) can result in dramatic changes in fire behavior. The following table displays flame 

lengths and associated fire suppression strategies. 

Table 17: Appropriate Fire Suppression Strategies 

Flame Length and Fireline Intensity 

Flame Lengths Fire Suppression Strategy 

< 4’ Fire can easily be attacked at head as well as flanks. 

4’ - 8’ Head too intense for handtools. Dozers, engines and aircraft can be effective. 

8’ - 11’ Fire could present control problem--especially in afternoon. Control very difficult. 

Attempting to control head of fire may be ineffective. 

11’+ Control efforts on head will be ineffective. Crowning, long-range spotting and 

major runs are probable. Do not attack head--only the flank. Plan where and how 

you can control head at dusk and when flames become shorter or, at a barrier in 

front of the fire. 

Table 18 illustrates that the complexity of suppressing wildfires increases and the probability of 

successful initial attack decreases as flame length and fireline intensity increase. 

As flame length increases so does a fires resistance to control. Also increasing will be the severity of 

mortality to tree species that are normally known to be fire tolerant. The following table displays the 

probable flame lengths for the area. 

Table 18: Existing Flame Lengths 

Flame Length (Feet) Existing Area (Percent) Existing Area (Acres) 

0 - 4 12 1,948 

4 - 8 87 13,928 

8 - 12 <1 143 

12 + <1 39 

The Flame Lengths in Table 18 illustrate that the majority of the planning area has a probable flame 

length of 4 to 8 feet and fires burning in the 97th percentile weather conditions will likely require 

dozers, engines, and aircraft for successful initial attack. While the use of these types of mechanized 

equipment is necessary for the suppression of fires burning at high intensities there is generally more 

resource damage that occurs with equipment when compared to handwork. 

Fire Type 

The type of fire weighs heavily on successful suppression and the severity of tree mortality in 

ponderosa pine. The following table provides representation of existing fire type for Deadlog as 

analyzed with Flammap. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

63

Table 19: Existing Fire Types 

Fire Type Existing Area (%) Existing Area (ac) 

Surface Fire 22 3,495 

Passive Crown Fire 77 12,361 

Fire behavior analysis is showing that 22 percent (3,495 acres) of the area is in a condition that 

supports surface fire. A surface fire is one that burns in the surface fuel layer, which lies immediately 

above the ground fuels but below the canopy, or aerial fuels. Surface fuels consist of needles, leaves, 

grass, dead and down branch wood and logs, shrubs, low brush, and short trees (Brown and others 

1982). Surface fire behavior varies widely depending on the nature of the surface fuel complex. 

A passive crown fire, also called torching, is one in which individual or small groups of trees torch 

out, but solid flame is not consistently maintained in the canopy. Passive crown fire encompasses a 

wide range of fire behavior, from the occasional tree torching out to a nearly active crown fire. The 

increased radiation to surface fuels from passive crowning increases flame front spread rate, especially 

at the upper end of the passive crown fire range. Embers lofted during passive crowning can start new 

fires downwind, which make containment more difficult and increase the overall rate of fire growth. 

Passive crowning is common in many forest types, especially those with an understory of shadetolerant conifers (lodgepole pine and juniper). 

The larger portion of the Deadlog area or 77 percent (12,361 acres), is in a condition that supports 

passive crown fire. Crown fires present special problems to fire managers. Crown fires are more 

difficult to control than surface fires. Their rate of spread is several times faster than surface fires 

(Rothermel 1983). Spotting is frequent and can occur over long distances. Larger flames 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). 

Effects of crown fire are 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. 

Rate of Spread 

A fire’s rate of spread (ROS) is the relative activity of a fire in extending its horizontal dimensions. 

For the Deadlog analysis, ROS is expressed as the forward rate of spread of the fire front and is 

expressed in chains per hour. 

Table 20: Existing Fire Rate of Spread 

Rate of Spread (chains per hour) Existing Area (Percent) Existing Area (Acres) 

Less than 5 8 1,266 

5-15 42 6,696 

15 or greater 50 8,096 

The rates of spread for this analysis were selected purely as benchmarks for alternative comparison. 

The ROS Chart shows that 50 percent (8,096 acres) has a ROS greater than 15 chains per hour. 92 

percent (14,792 acres) of the area is in a condition that supports a ROS greater than 5 chains per hour. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

64 

PURPOSE OF FUELS TREATMENTS 

Preliminary fire behavior analysis exhibits mortality to dominant and co-dominant trees which exceed 

acceptable levels during fire events occurring within typical fire season weather parameters. The 

Deadlog planning area is included in the Brothers Wildland Fire Use Plan. In the plan, natural ignition 

fires could be allowed to burn under prescribed conditions. The proposed treatments for the area are 

intended to reduce surface fuel loadings, increase canopy base heights, and decrease stand densities 

thus, setting the stage for low intensity fire during wildfire and fire use fire in the area. Table 21 

outlines treatment principles, treatment effects to fire behavior, advantages related to fire behavior, 

and less desirable treatment effects.

Table 21: Principles of Fire Resistance for Dry Forests (adapted from Agee, 2002 and Hessburg 

and Agee, 2003) 

Principle Effect Advantage Concerns 

Reduce surface 

fuels

Reduces potential flame 

length

Control easier; less 

torching1

Surface disturbance less with 

fire than other techniques

Increase height to 

live crown

Requires longer flame 

length to begin 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 drier2

Keep big trees of 

resistant species

Less mortality for same 

fire intensity

Generally restores 

historic structure

Less economical; may keep trees 

at risk of insect attack 1

 Torching is the initiation of crown fire. 

2 Where thinning is followed by sufficient treatment of surface fuels, the overall reduction in expected fire behavior and fire

severity usually outweigh the changes in fire weather factors such as wind speed and fuel moisture (Weatherspoon, 1996). 

Fuels treatments in the Deadlog planning area are designed to reduce fire caused mortality within 

treated stands. This will be accomplished by reducing scorch heights and reducing the risk of crown 

fire by affecting one or more elements of the fuels complex that support greater flame lengths and 

crown fire development. These are fuel loading, crown base height, and crown bulk density. Fuel 

loading consists of the downed woody and live fuel available to support the start and spread of fires 

and is usually expressed as tons per acre. The greater the fuel loading, the more intense fire burns and 

the greater the associated flame lengths. Crown base height is the distance between the surface fuels 

and the average bottom level of tree crowns and is usually expressed in feet. The greater the crown 

base height, the longer the flame length needed to scorch or ignite the crowns. Crown bulk density is 

the amount of crown fuels within a given area and is usually expressed as pounds of foliage per cubic 

foot. The greater the crown bulk density, the easier for crown fires to ignite and propagate. 

ASSUMPTIONS AND RATIONALE 

During the development of proposed unit treatments and the treatment effects analysis the following 

assumptions were made: 

 Wildland fire will not be eradicated in these ecosystems. A successful strategy will be built 

upon designing a vegetative environment, including species and structural characteristics that 

will produce desired, safely manageable fire behavior in the event of an unplanned ignition. 

 There are no forest’s that are completely “fire safe.” Certain combinations of ignition, fuel 

moisture in the live and dead vegetation, wind, and relative humidity can combine under 

extreme circumstances to threaten any vegetated ecosystem. 

 A reasonable target is for public and firefighter safety under 97th percentile weather 

conditions. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

65

 Weather conditions at the 97th percentile are defined as the combination of temperature, 

relative humidity, and wind speed on a summer day that is warmer, drier, and windier than 97 

percent of all other recorded summer days. “Fire season” is defined as the 122 day period 

between June 1st and September 30th, during which most fires and acres burn. Under 90th

percentile conditions, there will be about 12 days on average that are hotter, drier, and windier 

than those 97th percentile conditions. 

 Public and firefighter safety is the top priority in fuels and fire management. Treatments in 

the wildland urban interface will focus on creating a safe working environment for fire 

suppression forces. 

 Ground suppression forces can operate safely adjacent to flames that are 4 feet in length and 

less. Extreme fire behavior, including crown fire, rapid surface spread and long range 

spotting, create an unsafe environment for the public and firefighters. 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

All harvest activities would remove existing down dead firm lodgepole pine to reduce surface fuels 

levels. For a description of fuel treatment activities refer to Chapter 2, page 18. For a description of 

treatment prescriptions, refer to Table 9, page 48. 

Treatments of surface and canopy fuels have been prescribed for units identified as being at risk in the 

planning area. Table 22 summarizes fuels treatment acres for the planning area for each action 

alternative. In the table, “Total Unit Acres” is displayed and represents the acres of the planning area 

proposed for treatment. Many of the units have multiple treatments prescribed to achieve desired fuel 

conditions. Because of these multiple treatments, the total for acres of fuels treatments exceeds the 

total unit acres. 

Table 22: Treatment Acres by Alternative 

Alternative Total 

Unit 

Acres 

LFR and 

PCT 

Hand 

piling 

Machine 

Piling 

Lop 

And 

Scatter 

Mechanical 

Shrub 

Treatment 

Pile 

Burn 

Under

burn 

2 10,752 7,985 2,334 5,061 765 5,874 7,395 8,912 

3 11,281 8,586 1,691 6,114 928 6,668 7,805 9,443 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Under this alternative no management activities would occur, other than 

fire suppression. 

In ponderosa Fire Regime Group I (approximately 81 percent of the project area) surface fuels and 

bitterbrush would continue to accumulate. These fuels are believed to have been historically kept at 

low levels in areas with frequent fire intervals. When excessive amounts of bitterbrush and surface 

fuels accumulate below ponderosa pine trees for many years, fires can burn with such intensity that 

mortality from crown scorch is likely. Fuel accumulations at the base of trees can cause mortality of 

ponderosa pine through cambium heating during less intense wildfires that might not have killed them 

otherwise. With no fuel treatments, fuel reductions will only occur during wildfires and these are 

likely to be large and intense events similar to the Skeleton Fire, Evans West Fire and the 18 Fire of 

recent years that have occurred in ponderosa pine stands that were largely untreated. Stands of large 

mature ponderosa pine currently existing within the project area are at risk to wildfire. If these trees 

were to be lost in any disturbance, with the current brush and fuel conditions, replacement stands 

would unlikely survive wildfire effects through time. Very few stands would survive wildfires for the 

required 200 to 300 years needed by the ponderosa pine in order to reach old/large structure. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

66 

Continuation of an infrequent and stand replacement severity fire regime will take place in fire 

dependent ecosystems that historically had frequent non-lethal severity fire regimes. 

Approximately 19% is in lodgepole pine stands. Structure and density play a key role in how fire carries 

through this fuel. The lodgepole pine areas are continuous in density with few changes in structural 

pattern enabling fire to carry well. With no fuels treatments in these stands, fuel characteristics will 

continue to support high to extreme fire behavior and fire movement across the landscape. 

Suppression actions will continue to be hazardous for fire fighters and suppression strategies will be 

limited due to lack of escape routes and safety zones. The effectiveness of aerial delivered retardants 

will be limited because of high fire intensity and long range spotting. Dozer line construction will be 

required instead of hand constructed fireline because of high fire intensity, long range spotting and 

limited safe access. 

Roads allow access to most areas for fire suppression within the project area. Existing fuel conditions 

adjacent to the roads do not provide a defensible area for suppression forces to effectively attack a 

moderate to high intensity wildfire. Most roads currently do not provide safe access and egress routes for 

suppression forces or the public. The public’s safety will be compromised due to limited safe egress 

routes. 

During a high intensity wildfire, smoke emission particulate matter of 10 microns and less in size (PM 

10) could range from 240 pounds to 2,000 pounds or more per acre. Where down fuels have 

accumulated and/or stands are dense the PM 10 production may exceed these estimates. PM 10 

describes particulate matter 10 microns and less in size; these particles are small enough to enter the 

human respiratory system. Smoke from a large wildfire could impact the communities of Fort Rock, 

Christmas Valley, Brothers, and La Pine. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Treatment effects to the canopy have been modeled utilizing the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS). 

Canopy Base Heights, Canopy Bulk Densities, and Canopy Closures have been averaged for each 

prescription group. This data is used to analyze fire effects in treated stands for each prescription 

group. Prescription group 6 and 9 are plantations with about 350 trees per acre. There is not sufficient 

stand data for further fire behavior analysis. However, these are proposed for small diameter thinning 

to a stocking level of about 100 trees per acre. There could be biomass utilization opportunities in 

these units. Thinning will be followed with mowing, and prescribed fire in some of these stands. 

These treatments are intended to move the stands toward a condition where canopy fuels will not 

contribute towards fire behavior. 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Precommercial thinning of ladder fuels would increase Canopy Base 

Heights (CBH) and decrease Canopy Bulk Densities (CBD) and would have a direct affect to reducing 

fire behavior potential by elevating the torching indices and crown fire thresholds. 

Handpiling would occur primarily in units not identified as harvest units unless the harvest units are 

inaccessible to ground based machinery because of steep slopes. Treating existing surface fuels and 

activity created fuels reduces surface fuel loadings and changes surface fuel models, thus reducing flame 

length potential and undesired fire effects to residual stands. 

Machine piling would occur primarily in Harvest Units unless areas are inaccessible to ground based 

machinery because of steep slopes. Treating existing surface fuels and activity created fuels reduces 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

67

surface fuel loadings and changes surface fuel models, thus reducing flame length potential and 

undesired fire effects to residual stands. 

Lop and Scatter treatments would occur in areas with relatively low levels of thinning slash. Fuel 

loadings are low enough allowing surface fuels to be treated with prescribed fire during underburning 

operations. Treating these surface fuels changes surface fuel models, thus reducing flame length 

potential and undesired fire effects to residual stands. 

Mechanical Shrub Treatment (MST) would would reduce the surface fuel bed depth and increase CBH. 

MST treatments will reduce the flame length potential and increase fire tolerance in residual stands. 

Pile Burning would occur in areas that have received handpiling or machine piling treatments. Burning 

the piles is the most economic method of removing slash piles and facilitates the removal of canopy 

fuels that have been treated with thinning. This treatment is part of the progression for increasing CBH 

and decreasing which in turn increases the residual stands tolerance to fire. 

Underburning would reduce surface fuels, increase CBH, and decrease CBD. The effects from 

underburning in regards to fire behavior, is that potential flame lengths would decrease and the stands 

resistance to fire would increase. Because of the changes to CBH and CBD there is a lower probability 

for crown fire initiation. 

In Deer Winter Range it is anticipated that on average 50 to 60 percent of the area within treatment units 

would be mowed and burned by prescribed fire, retaining the remaining 40 to 50 percent as untreated 

open grown bitterbrush. Additional treatments include precommercial thinning, handpiling, and pile 

burning. 

The proposed treatments in Deer Winter Range would reduce natural fuel accumulations at the base of 

individual trees and under groups of trees. Where ponderosa pine is widely scattered this treatment 

would not reduce the risk of large acreage wildfires occurring due to contiguousness of untreated 

bitterbrush, but it would provide some protection for the mature trees. Under extreme fire behavior 

conditions, fires within these treated areas with untreated areas containing high brush densities would 

burn intensely and long range spotting would likely create control problems. 

Fuels treatments in lodgepole pine would alter fuel conditions so that fires burn primarily in the surface 

fuels with slower rates of spread and lower intensities when compared to the fire behavior potential with 

existing conditions. Fuel treatments will not eliminate the possibility of fire occurring within these 

stands. With fire in these stands, lodgepole pine being a thin barked species, will likely suffer high 

mortality (stand replacement) during future fire events. 

Fuels treatments in ponderosa pine would alter fuels conditions to levels where subsequent fires burn 

primarily in the surface fuels with the exception being wildlife leave islands (10 or 20 percent of 

treatment unit area) where once fire enters these areas, dense thickets of small diameter trees reserved 

for wildlife cover would provide a ladder of fuel for surface fire to transition into tree crowns with 

crown fire and the development of fire brands increasing spot fire potential. 

On prescribed burn units, in efforts to reduce fire behavior potential mowing treatments may occur on 

unit perimeters and generally be 12 feet and less in width from existing roads edges or unit boundaries. 

Mowing would be accomplished utilizing ground based machinery. 

Proposed treatments would reduce the risk of large acreage losses from wildfire by disconnecting and 

fragmenting continuous high risk ground fuels. These treatments would reduce untreated block size and 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

68 

provide areas where suppression resources have opportunities to safely anchor fireline, increasing the 

chances for control of subsequent wildfires. 

Canopy Fuels 

Table 23 displays canopy attributes which contribute to fire behavior and the changes in the attributes 

for each prescription group and by alternative. 

Table 23: Canopy Fuels Characteristics by Alternative 

Canopy Base Height (feet) Canopy Bulk Density (kg/m3)

Alternative

Harvest Prescription 

Group

1 2 3 1 2 3 

1 10 33.8 33.5 .073 .019 .019 

2 10.7 28.3 28.3 .083 .022 .022 

3 7 26 26 .053 .024 .024 

4 7.2 36.3 32.1 .067 .017 .017 

5 7.2 36.3 32.1 .067 .017 .017 

7 9.5 11.5 22 .046 .029 .027 

8 9.5 11.5 22 .046 .029 .027 

10 7.2 36.3 32.1 .067 .017 .017 

20 10.2 13 13 .075 .053 .053 

In both action alternatives, the increase in “Canopy Base Heights” will reduce tree torching because 

the treated stands now require longer flame lengths to initiate torching. The reduction in “Canopy 

Bulk Densities” reduces crown fire potential by making tree to tree crown fires less probable. 

Fire Behavior 

Flame Length: Table 24 displays the comparison of the three alternatives after modification of 

surface fuels, canopy base height, and canopy bulk density. Flame length is expressed in feet . Percent 

of area is the area within the project area boundary that displays the various flame lengths. 

Table 24: Flame Length by Alternative and Percent of Area 

Alternative – Percent of Area 1 Flame Length (ft) 

1 2 3 

0 - 4 12 73 67 

4 - 8 87 26 32 

8 - 12 Less than 1 Less than 1 Less than 1 

12 or more Less than 1 Less than 1 Less than 1 

1. Percent of area is within plus or minus 1%. 

Treatments in Alternative 2 increase the total amount of the landscape which will support 0 to 4 foot 

flame lengths to 73 percent; an increase of 61 percent when compared to existing conditions. This 

change comes primarily by reducing the amount of flame lengths in the 4 to 8 foot range to 26 percent 

(down 61 percent) of the area. 

In Alternative 3, the total amount of area that supports 0-4 foot flame lengths is 67 percent; an increase 

of 55 percent compared to existing conditions. Again, this is primarily because of reducing the 

amount of flame lengths in the 4-8 foot range to 32 percent (down 55 percent) of the area. As 

referenced in Table 18, page 62 a fire with flame lengths less than 4 feet can easily be attacked at the 

head or flanks by firefighters. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

69

Fire Type: Table 25 displays fire type and compares the three alternatives after modification of 

surface fuels, canopy base height, and canopy bulk density. Percent of area is the area within the 

project area boundary that displays the various fire types. 

Table 25: Fire Type by Alternative 

Alternative – Percent of Area 1 Fire Type 

1 2 3 

Surface 22 77 73 

Passive 77 22 26 

1. Percent of area is within plus or minus 1%. 

Treatments in Alternative 2 increase the total amount of the landscape which will support surface fire 

to 77 percent; a substantial increase of 55 percent when compared to existing conditions. This is 

directly related to reducing the amount of passive crown fire to 22 percent (down 55 percent) of the 

area. 

In Alternative 3, the total amount of area that supports surface fire is 73 percent; an increase of 51 

percent compared to existing conditions. Again, this is because of reducing the amount of passive 

crown fire to 26 percent (down 51 percent) of the area. 

Rate of Spread: Table 26 displays rate of spread and compares the three alternatives after 

modification of surface fuels, canopy base height, and canopy bulk density. Percent of area is the area 

within the project area boundary that displays the various rates of spread 

Table 26: Rate of Spread by Alternative 

Alternative – Percent of Area 1 Rate of Spread 

(chains/hour) 1 2 3 

<5 8 64 60 

5-15 42 14 13 

15+ 50 22 27 

1. Percent of area is within plus or minus 1%. 

Treatments in Alternative 2 increase the total amount of the landscape which will support a fire rate of 

spread of 5 chains (one chain equals 66 feet) per hour and less to 64 percent; an increase of 56 percent 

when compared to existing conditions. This is directly related to reducing the rates of spread in the 5 

to 15 chains per hour and 15 or more chains per hour categories to 14 percent and 22 percent of the 

area respectively; a reduction of 28 percent each. Of the project area, 36 percent has a rate of spread 

greater than 15 chains per hour. 

In Alternative 3, the total amount of area that supports rates of spread 5 chains per hour and less is 60 

percent; an increase of 52 percent compared to existing conditions. Again, this is because of reducing 

the rates of spread in the 5-15 chains per hour category to 13 chains per hour (down 29 percent), and 

reducing the 15 or more chains per hour category to 27 percent (down 23 percent). 40 percent of the 

area has a rate of spread greater than 15 chains per hour. 

By reducing the rate of spread, fires would burn with less intensity and implementation of the Brothers 

Wildfire Use Plan for resource benefit would be more likely to successfully occur. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

70 

Fire Effects to Ponderosa Pine 

Fire damage to the crown and bole influences a tree’s probability of surviving fire. Previous studies 

have consistently ranked crown damage, usually crown scorch or consumption, or a combination, as 

important to predicting postfire mortality of ponderosa pine trees (Dieterich 1979, Wyant et al. 1986, 

Saveland and Neuenschwander 1990, Stephens and Finney 2002, Wallin et al. 2003, McHugh and 

Kolb 2003, McHugh et al. 2003). 

Most mortality models developed for mixed conifer and ponderosa pine forests have used variables 

that characterize above-ground damage from fire (scorch height, bark char height, percent crown 

volume scorched). These variables are related to flaming combustion and fireline intensity (Stephens 

and Finney 2002). 

BehavePlus 3.0.2 is a fire modeling system that is a collection of models that describe fire behavior, 

fire effects, and the fire environment, and has been used to determine crown scorch based on flame 

lengths for the planning area. 97th percentile weather attributes (temperature and winds) were used 

with a .4 mid-flame wind reduction factor to account for treated stands providing less sheltering to the 

wind. Table 27 displays flame lengths and associated scorch heights. 

Table 27: Flame Lengths with Associated Scorch Heights in 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

Ponderosa Pine Mortality 

The principal cause of mortality following fire is crown scorch rather than damage to the cambium or 

roots. The size of tree determines its ability to withstand scorch. A model has been developed to 

predict mortality using tree dbh and scorch heights as independent variables. Fire effects are also 

dependent upon other factors such as season, site condition, tree age and vigor, available moisture, and 

occurrences of insect and disease attack (Saveland, Neuenschwander 1989). 

Table 28 focuses on the 7 to 14 inch dbh tree size class to illustrate the relationship between tree 

diameter at breast height (dbh), flame length, and mortality. 

Table 28: Probability of Mortality in Ponderosa Pine by DBH and Flame Length (%) 

Tree Flame Length (feet) 

DBH 

(inches) 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 

7 1.7 2.6 6.2 20.8 86.9 100 100 100 

8 .6 1 2.4 8.1 33.6 100 100 100 

9 .3 .4 .9 3.1 13 60.7 100 100 

10 .1 .2 .4 1.2 5 23.5 100 100 

11 .04 .06 .1 .5 2 9.1 47.2 100 

12 .01 .02 .05 .2 .8 3.5 18.3 100 

13 .01 .01 .02 .07 .3 1.4 7.1 41.7 

14 0 0 .01 .03 .1 .5 2.7 15.9 

All diameters within this size class survive reasonably well when flame lengths are less than 4 feet. 

As flame lengths increase so does the mortality rate, especially in the smaller diameter trees. Trees in 

the size classes less than 7 inches dbh are not included in this mortality analysis because of their 

inherent vulnerability to scorch and it’s assumed that flame lengths in the 0–4 foot range will 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

71

generally cause high mortality in these size classes of ponderosa pine. At the other end of the 

diameter spectrum is ponderosa pine greater than 14 inches dbh. Larger diameter pine is not further 

analyzed and is assumed to have a high survival rate with flame lengths up to 8 feet’. 

The following table compares treatment effects to flame lengths for each size class in ponderosa pine 

units for Alternative 2 and Alternative 3. This analysis was modeled in FlamMap with GIS 

information. Output acres are a compilation of 30m2 pixels representing the dominant flame length 

and size class within each pixel. Pixels were then stratified by size class and flame length, and 

summed by acres. The acreage amounts represent how much of a condition is distributed throughout 

the treatment units. 

Table 29: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 Flame Length by Size Class in 

Ponderosa Pine Units 

Deadlog Flame Length by Size Class in Ponderosa Pine Units 

Size Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

Class 

 

Flame 

Length 

(ft) 

Pre-treatment 

Acres 

Post-treatment 

Acres 

Pre-treatment 

Acres 

Post-treatment 

Acres 

0-4 58 94 52 84 

4-8 37 2 35 3 

8-12 0 0 0 0 0-4" 

12+ 0 0 0 0 

0-4 32 741 30 561 

4-8 778 76 599 71 

8-12 4 0 3 0 4"-7" 

12+ 2 0 1 0 

0-4 290 1743 295 1335 

4-8 1445 22 1042 20 

8-12 9 0 7 0 7"-14" 

12+ 21 0 11 0 

0-4 678 5360 684 5521 

4-8 4644 21 4803 21 

8-12 56 0 53 0 14"-21" 

12+ 2 0 2 0 

0-4 206 2201 209 2279 

4-8 1986 7 2062 7 

8-12 14 0 14 0 21"+ 

12+ 2 0 2 0 

Following treatments, the amount of area that supports flame lengths less than 4 feet, in all tree size 

classes, has been increased significantly in Alternative 2 and Alternative 3. The amount of area that 

supports flame lengths in the 4-8 foot range has been significantly reduced in both action alternatives. 

The amount of area that supports flame lengths longer than 8 feet is eliminated from treated units in both 

of the action alternatives. 

For Alternative 2, after treatment, 10,139 acres within treatment units would support flame lengths less 

than 4 feet; an increase of 8,875 acres compared to existing conditions. 129 acres of the area within 

treatment units would support flame lengths between 4-8 feet; a decrease of 6,775 acres. Of the 129 

acres with 4-8 foot flame lengths, 78 acres is comprised of fire vulnerable trees less than 7 inches dbh 

ponderosa pine distributed throughout the treatment units. The potential for flame lengths longer than 8 

feet is not great enough to round up to a whole number and is represented as 0. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

72 

For Alternative 3, after treatment there would be 9,870 acres within treatment units would support flame 

lengths less than 4 feet; an increase of 8,809 acres compared to existing conditions. 122 acres of 

treatment units would support flame lengths between 4 and 8 feet; a decrease of 6,350 acres. Of the 122 

acres with 4 to 8 feet flame lengths, 74 acres is comprised of fire vulnerable less than 7 inch dbh 

ponderosa pine distributed throughout the treatment units. The potential for flame lengths longer than 8 

feet is not great enough to round up to a whole number so it’s represented as 0. 

Under both action alternatives there is a substantial increase in the amount of area that supports less than 

4 foot flame lengths. As reference in Table 24, page 68, a fire with flame lengths of less than 4 feet can 

easily be attacked at the head or flanks by firefighters. 

Prescribed Fire Maintenance Treatments 

Prescribed fire treatments will need to be maintained over time to manage natural fuels to levels which 

are conducive to low intensity surface fire. The Fire Behavior Prediction System Fuel Models most 

commonly associated with low flame lengths are (Anderson 1982): 

 2 (timber or brush with grass understory), 

 5 (low brush) 

 8 (short needle conifer litter, light loading), and 

 9 (long needle conifer or hardwood litter). 

The need for maintenance treatments would be based on fuels accumulations. It is anticipated that 

prescribed fire units would need additional treatments 3 years to 10 years following the initial prescribed 

fire treatment. Maintenance treatments would focus primarily on reducing natural fuels in the 0.0 to 3.0 

inch size classes and reducing the amount of understory seedlings and saplings. 

Air Quality 

Fuel loadings for surface fuels have been estimated for each stand using the “Photo Series for 

Quantifying Natural Forest Residues in Common Vegetation Types of the Pacific Northwest”, PNW-105 

(Maxwell, Ward, 1980). Canopy fuel loads have been estimated utilizing stand data and “Forest 

Vegetation Simulator” (FVS). Total emissions have been estimated by combining surface fuel loading 

data with canopy fuels and utilizing the “Prescribed Burning Emissions Calculation Matrix – Simple 

Method” (Peterson, year unkown). 

Underburning in ponderosa pine stands is currently the most economical method of reducing surface fuel 

loadings in the Deadlog Area. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Under wildfire conditions, factoring in both canopy fuels and surface fuels, 

emissions could be 560 pounds and greater of PM 10 per acre due to the extent of consumption and the 

torching and crowning of tree canopies. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

73

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Prescribed fire smoke emissions created from underburning and pile 

burning are of concern and would produce approximately 214 pounds of particulate matter 10 microns 

(PM 10) and less in size per acre. 

Table 30 displays the estimated total tons of emissions in both PM 2.5 and PM 10 for each action 

alternative. PM 10 estimates account for all particulate matter 10 microns and smaller; PM 2.5 

emissions are included with PM 10, thus the PM 10 estimates should be interpreted as the total tonnage 

of emissions smaller than 10 microns for the project area. 

Table 30: Emissions by Alternative 

Alternative Emissions (tons) 

PM 2.5 PM 10 

2 956 1,087 

3 1,063 1,208 

Burning would be conducted in compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Oregon 

Department of Forestry Smoke Management regulations and restrictions. Burning would occur during 

favorable weather conditions, with the transport winds necessary to disperse smoke away from 

populated areas. 

Cumulative Effects: Cumulative Effects of foreseeable activities in the area are primarily beneficial to 

reducing fire behavior potential and improving firefighter safety. Table 31 identifies the foreseeable 

activities in the Deadlog vicinity and the expected effects for fire and fuels. 

The effects of fuels treatments in the Deadlog area are geographic in scope and limited to the stands that 

are treated; therefore cumulative effects are addressed at the stand level. The timeframe is 

approximately 15 years because effects from fuels treatments are no longer detectable after that amount 

of time. Cumulative effects would then be the potential within that time and space to accumulate or 

interact with effects from other ongoing or reasonably foreseeable projects. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Fire and Fuels 

74 

Table 31: Cumulative Effects 

Activity/ Project Action Description General Effects 

KO Timber Sale Reforestation 

maintenance 

Fence Maintenance or removal and Big 

Game Repellant application. Dwarf 

Mistletoe control Pruning and Girdling. 

Pruning will raise canopy base heights, 

thus increasing the stands tolerance to 

fire. Snags created by girdling may 

produce fire brands and spot fires 

when exposed to fire. 

Wildlife Improvement Maintenance Guzzler maintenance on two guzzlers. No fire and fuels effects. 

Cluster II Grazing allotment EA 

2006.-Grazing allotment 

Maintenance and Improvement 

Fence Repair, Fence building, Water sets, 

Cattle Grazing, waterline installation and 

maintenance. 

Grazing reduces the accumulation of 

fine fuels thus reducing fire behavior 

potential. 

Aspen Project Fuels Treatments Adjacent to planning area Machine Shrub 

treatment and thinning. 

Fuels treatments will reduce fire 

behavior adjacent to the deadlog area 

and will affect fire movement across 

the landscape. 

Buick Project Fuels Treatments Adjacent to SW tip of planning area. 

Small tree thinning, handpiling, burning, 

underburning and Machine Shrub 

treatment. 

Fuels treatments will reduce fire 

behavior adjacent to the deadlog area 

and will affect fire movement across 

the landscape. 

Brothers Wildfire Use Area Use of wildfire to meet resource 

objectives through area. 

The reduction of surface fuels and 

ladder fuels will enable wildfire to play 

a more natural role across the 

landscape while meeting resource 

objectives. 

Road Maintenance Ongoing road maintenance. Danger tree 

removal, roadside brushing, drainage 

repair, spot surfacing. 

Maintaining roads will enable fire 

resources to access the area. No fuels 

effects. 

Travel Management Travel Management EIS possible 

signature within 2 years. Shared use 

roads. 

Closing roads will limit access for fire 

fighting resources. Fires will move 

across the landscape as roads grow 

over. 

Green Dot road Closure Administrative closure of roads Hunting 

season. 

No fire and fuels effects. 

Opal mine Opal mine operations on mine claim 

including camping site. 

Evacuation issues during wildfires. No 

fuels effects. 

BPA power line Maintenance Power line maintenance within right of 

way includes mowing of brush and 

seedlings and scattered tree and snag 

removal. Outside of the right of way 

individual hazard trees would also be 

removed. Cycle varies 3 - 5 years. 

Power line maintenance will provide a 

fuel break which may be of use when 

suppressing wildfires. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

75

FOREST VEGETATION – TREES 

EXISTING CONDITION 

The Deadlog area is dominated by ponderosa pine stands with some stands dominated by lodgepole 

pine. The area is characterized as being dry with average precipitation levels below 15 inches per year. 

This dry zone historically was dominated by ponderosa pine and conditions which allowed frequent 

fires causing little stand level mortality. The stands were characterized by widely spaced large 

diameter trees, grass and forb dominated understories, low susceptibility to bark beetle outbreaks and 

low levels of mistletoe infection. There are some historical records which document some of the 

Deadlog area at the turn of the Century. A survey by township in 1913 of the T23S, R15E gave a 

description. “Pure yellow pine, with exception of about a section of lodgepole in northeastern part. 

Yellow pine 31,100 MBM. saw timber. Very little reproduction of any kind.... Fire damage, none” 

(Cogder 1913). A more eloquent description of T22S, R15E and 16E which is the northern half of the 

area from 1902 reads: 

“The soil, which was of a pumice stone formation, with a solid foundation, and covered with a heavy 

growth of wild grass about four inches high, was very prolific. The timber embraced one of the finest 

bodies of yellow pine anywhere, the trees being very uniform in size, averaging about three feet in 

diameter, and running from 50 to 75 feet to the first limb, indicating the quantity of clear lumber each 

tree would produce. All appeared perfectly sound, and I do not believe there was a windfall on the 

entire tract.” (Puter 1908) 

The distribution of the large ponderosa pine on the landscape and other general stand conditions are 

generalized through a few studies of stands and the arrangement of large trees and stumps. Locally 

Youngblood (Youngblood et al 2004) has analyzed stands in central Oregon while Agee (Agee 2003) 

and Arno (Arno 1995) have analyzed stands in Washington and Montana. The same theme carries 

through each study with trees spread throughout the area with few smaller young trees, fire scars 

indicating frequent fire, gaps and clumps of trees at varying frequency. One characteristic which does 

follow between the reports is the lessening of clumps and increase in random placement of trees with 

lower precipitation areas. This would be expected with increased competition for moisture and 

increased stress on closer spaced trees (Agee 1993). 

Past Management 

The area has had different management activities over the decades. Portions of the area were owned by 

Brooks Scanlon Timber Company and were logged heavily before 1930. These properties were 

obtained by the Forest Service between 1934 and 1941 and constitute more than 5,200 acres 

(33 percent) of the Deadlog Planning area. The whole area has been managed by the Forest Service 

since the 1930s. Management has included partial cutting of at risk trees, regeneration harvest of 

mistletoe infected stands, commercial and non-commercial thinning of younger stands of ponderosa 

pine and fire reintroduction and suppression. The area where partial cutting of at risk trees covers the 

most area and was conducted mostly in the 1960s, Regeneration harvests has occurred on a smaller 

area and was conducted from the late 1960s into 1980s. Thinning of stands especially those 

established following the harvest activities in the 1920s and 1930s covered the most area. Grazing and 

fire suppression, has resulted in the stocking of large areas, due to natural regeneration, with 50 to 90 

year old trees of varying densities. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

76 

Current Stand Conditions 

Ponderosa pine dominates the area with most trees being less than 16 inches diameter. Understories 

are dominated by higher fuel loads than historically occurred including in many stands, bitterbrush, 

manzanita and ceanothus while many stands which have large overstory trees have heavy stocking of 

small diameter ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine. Mistletoe infection is high and widespread through 

many stands. These stands have a preponderance of trees which are smaller diameter than historically 

were present. These stands are also stocked with more trees than were present historically. The density 

of stands ranges from 200 to 500 trees per acre where historically large trees had densities less than 60 

trees per acre (Arno 1995 and Youngblood 2004). The species composition in the majority of the 

Deadlog area (except for cold air drainages) was ponderosa pine. The majority of stands in the 

Deadlog area have some lodgepole pine throughout. 

Methodology for Selecting Treatments Areas 

Selection of areas for silviculture treatment was based on a focus factor of ponderosa pine and 

lodgepole pine stands which were susceptible to insect attacks. Tree density is a main factor for 

susceptibility to bark beetle outbreak and mortality which can be managed (Cochran 1994). These 

stands included stands which were established following the heavy harvests of the 1930s (blackbark 

stands as defined in USFS 1990) and stands with large overstory trees where the understory grew in 

since the reduction of wildfire. Stands with large tree overstory and small tree understory where 

stocking is high were selected in order to sustain and increase vigor of the large trees and maintain old 

tree or old growth on the landscape (Kolb et al 2007, Ritchie et al. 2007, McDowell et al 2003). 

Stands which are the most susceptible to insect outbreak and mortality were selected. Some stands 

were dropped following field review if they had too much mistletoe to be manageable. Further stands 

for treatments were selected for fuels needs. This was identified as stands which if treated would bring 

the landscape back into a more frequent fire interval and stands which in their current fuels condition 

would not survive a wildfire. These stands were selected using the methodology of location and stand 

characteristics which would lend a stand to high mortality with a wildfire. The fuels characteristics 

assessed were surface fuels, ladder fuels and crown fuels. The fuels in that order affect the fire 

resistance for dry forests (Agee 2005). Many of these stands, in order to facilitate the implementation 

of fuels treatments, were identified as having a need to reduce the stocking level in order to reduce 

crown and ladder fuels. Open ponderosa stands were selected for treatments though in portions the 

ladder and crown fuels were not a problem. Returning these stands to light surface fire conditions to 

conserve them was the objective (Spies et al. 2006). 

METHODS FOR COMPARING STAND CONDITION 

The existing conditions discuss the characteristics which are used to compare alternatives and whether 

the alternatives move toward the desired condition. For forest vegetation three main themes for 

existing condition are discussed: 

 Stand resistance to insects and disease 

 Comparison to historic condition 

 Stand resistance to fire mortality. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

77

STAND RESISTANCE TO INSECTS 

Introduction 

As occurs today, continuous acreage of young trees (less than 200 years) were historically uncommon 

on the Deadlog landscape. Historically, in ponderosa pine types, small areas of stand replacement fires 

occurred in pockets of mortality resulting from insects and disease. When stand replacement events 

did occur the stand would be replaced in small areas and scattered remnant trees would remain through 

the stand as seed sources (Arno 1995). The stands were typically characterized by widely spaced large 

diameter trees with grass and forb dominated understories. These stands had low susceptibility to bark 

beetle outbreaks and were considered as light to moderate an epidemic when mortality was 50 to 200 

trees per section (640 acres) (Grant 1939). This level of mortality is the same as one tree per 3 to 12 

acres. Presently, in stands with large diameter trees and heavy stocking, the mortality of the large tree 

component is higher than 2 trees per acre. Refer to Figure 13 showing large tree structure. 

Stand resistance to insects, primarily bark beetles, is mostly related to tree vigor and density. The 

amount of moisture allowed for a stand must be apportioned to all the plants and trees growing on a 

site. The lower the moisture levels in a stand for the same tree density the less resilience to insects 

attack and mortality. Plant associations indicate the level of moisture and soil depth. This helps 

identify the tree stocking levels which are not susceptible to beetle mortality (Cochran 1994). Mistletoe 

infection in stands has also been observed to increase stand susceptibility to bark beetle mortality. 

Competition between trees is identified through stand density. Mountain pine beetle and western pine 

beetle historically impacted different stand types. 

Throughout the Deadlog planning area mountain pine beetle mortality is commonly found in all stand 

types including lodgepole pine, ponderosa pine, mixed species stands and both managed and 

unmanaged stands. Mountain pine beetle is strongly associated with mortality in lodgepole pine 

stands which have at least 100 trees per acre greater than 9 inches dbh. This occurrence can be at the 

clump, stand or landscape level for trees to be affected. More currently, mountain pine beetle is 

associated with tree mortality in heavily stocked ponderosa pine stands, both older and younger 

(blackbark), and large diameter and smaller diameter trees, which have a component of lodgepole 

pine. Scattered clumps are now, occasionally, extending to the stand level of mortality. 

Western pine beetle will typically attack larger diameter ponderosa pine where densities are high for 

clumps. The large diameter mortality may occur to the least healthy tree or a larger tree. The number 

of trees in clumps which die can be singular or can include the whole clump (Personal Communication 

Eglitis). 

Scope and Scale of Analysis 

The scope of the analysis for resistance to insects, primarily bark beetles, focuses on the condition 

within each stand. The overall landscape of the Deadlog area susceptible to mountain pine beetle is 

analyzed for each alternative. 

Measures 

Stand Density Index (SDI) and Basal Area (BA) are two methods for comparing the level of 

vegetation on a site. Competition, especially between trees, is identified through stand density. 

Higher tree density in a stand means more competition and less resistance to insect and disease. Stand 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

78 

densities in lower moisture areas have relatively higher competition than the same densities on higher 

moisture areas. SDI values in different plant associations will have different competition and stress 

inferences (Cochran 1994). SDI values and BA ranges for each plant association that are above levels 

where beetle mortality or outbreak may occur are shown in Table 32. 

Table 32: Deadlog Plant Associations and Associated Basal Areas 

Plant Association Group Plant Association Acres Upper Management Zone 1

 /BA 2 

Lodgepole Pine Fescue 62 

 Sage/ Fescue 1,275 

 Bitterbrush/ Fescue 1,608 137/ 71-83

Mixed Conifer Snowbrush-manzanita 83 143/ 74-87

Ponderosa Pine Bitterbrush- Sage/ Fescue 1,369 73/ 38-44

 Bitterbrush/ Fescue 6,226 115/ 60-70

 Bitterbrush/ Needlegrass 14 111/ 57-67

 Bitterbrush – Manzanita/ Needlegrass 103 92/ 48-57

 Bitterbrush – Manzanita/ Fescue 5,306 124/ 64-75

Bitterbrush – Snowbrush/ Needlegrass 6 145/ 75-88

1. Upper Management Zone – The density level at which a suppressed class of trees begins to develop. 

2. Booser & White undated: basal areas ranges 8-16 inches dbh 

Methods 

Dense ponderosa pine stands were identified using Photo Interpretation (PI) data. Stands identified 

from the PI data with more than 20% total crown closure were selected as stands which were above 

the Upper Management Zone (UMZ) for ponderosa pine and susceptible to beetle mortality. 

Comparison of alternatives uses satellite data from 2004 which has been calibrated to show stand 

characteristics of similar reflectance where actual stand data is available. The comparison of the pixels 

which are above the Upper Management Zone and the treatment of stands which will reduce the stand 

densities to less than the Upper Management Zone. The data description is found on the web at 

http://www.fsl.orst.edu/lemma/common/dataDictionary.php . 

Stand density index (SDI) values were derived and compared with the Upper Management Zone for 

the plant associations. This information identified 56% of the area as over the threshold of resistance 

to bark beetle attack. This does not include areas which are near the upper management zone and may 

be at risk within a decade. 

For more detailed description of methods, refer to the Project Record, Silviculture Report, page 19. 

Existing Condition 

Stands of blackbark pine that were established in the 1920s and 30s, which have not been managed, 

tend to be dense stands of poles with heavy fuels from beetle mortality. The fuels are mostly lodgepole 

pine from previous infestations; however ponderosa pine mortality is becoming more common due to 

tree stress. Managed stands of ponderosa pine have been precommercially or commercially thinned 

and are now 60 – 130 square feet of basal area. These stands have responded to lower stocking levels 

with increased growth, crown volume and understory tree and brush establishment. 

Stands which have a component of large old trees typically have been partially harvested since 1940. 

With limiting fire, good overstory seed production and an even more open condition, the understory of 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

79

most stands in the area currently have heavy understory tree densities. The understory trees are a mix 

of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine and all size classes from seedlings and saplings to larger 20” 

diameter trees. The stocking levels and species mix in both types of ponderosa stand leave the stands 

susceptible to beetle attack. 

Figure 13: Large Tree Structure Representing Reference Conditions 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

80 

Figure 14: Typical Blackbark Existing Conditions - Deadlog 

The current condition in Deadlog planning area is an area dominated by overstocked stands with 

reduced vigor and high susceptibility to bark beetle mortality or outbreak. Currently mountain pine 

beetle and western pine beetle are infecting stands and causing mortality throughout the planning area. 

Aerial surveys mapping beetle infestations identified 227 acres of beetle infestation in 2006, 1,594 

acres in 2007, and 1,127 acres in 2008. This impact is occurring in lodgepole pine, ponderosa pine and 

mixed lodgepole and ponderosa pine stands. This infestation is dominated by mountain pine beetle 

though areas of western pine beetle mortality were identified mostly causing mortality to large trees. 

Field visits have identified 30% of the stands with some level of beetle mortality; 51 percent of the 

stands visited had some stocking of lodgepole pine. Combined, 57 percent of the stands had beetle 

mortality and/or lodgepole pine present in the stand. These two factors alone identify a large part of 

the planning area with risk to mortality from bark beetles. 

Typically, the mountain pine beetle attacks trees less than 16 inches in diameter. Mountain pine beetle 

causes substantially less mortality of trees greater than 16 inches dbh. If lodgepole pine is present all 

tree sizes can be affected. Dense stands of ponderosa pine blackbark trees are susceptible with or 

without lodgepole pine present. The mortality in these conditions will include the largest trees in the 

stand, extending the time where stands are dominated by large trees. 

Western pine beetle tends to attack the larger older ponderosa pine. Within dense old tree clumps the 

impacts of western pine beetle can be highly variable and it is hard to predict which trees would be 

attacked. Mortality should tend to be in the less vigorous trees, although there are many examples of 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

81

healthy tree mortality. Typically, one or two trees in a clump are killed even though a whole clump 

can be killed. 

Figure 15: Deadlog Beetle Detection Survey 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Summary of Comparison of Alternatives 

Alternative 1 (No Action) leaves the area as it is with beetle activity and mortality rising. Alternative 2 

(Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 would reduce the area susceptible to mortality for about two or 

more decades. Alternative 2 treatments would have longer effectiveness in the stands with large old 

trees. Shorter effectiveness in Alternative 3 is due to leaving all trees with old tree characteristics with 

few exceptions, heavy stocking in clumps not being one of those exceptions. Though not treating all 

the same acres, both action alternatives would have a similar landscape effect on stand vigor and 

sustainability. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

82 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The No Action alternative would keep the Deadlog Planning area in the 

same condition as it is in now. The current level of beetle risk would remain the same and the current 

level of beetle mortality in all size groups of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine would accelerate. This 

wide impact of bark beetle can be expected to continue because of high stand densities and the 

intermixing of lodgepole pine in ponderosa pine stands. Bark beetle mortality would reduce the 

number of large overstory old trees on the landscape and increase the time it takes for other stands to 

develop large tree structure. 

The area at risk to beetle mortality based on SDI is shown in Figure 16. This is based on analysis using 

satellite imagery and comparing the upper management zone SDI of the plant associations. This risk is 

increasing as stand densities increase with tree growth. High Risk was identified was greater than 175 

percent of the upper management zone SDI. This level of stocking is where current beetle mortality 

was consistently observed in the Deadlog planning area. 

Lodgepole pine seems to attract attack even when scattered through a unit. These attacks have been 

observed on the Deschutes National Forest to instigate mortality of adjacent ponderosa pine of all 

diameters and commonly trees larger than 16 inches dbh. 

Bark beetle mortality can expect to continue to cause lodgepole and ponderosa pine mortality in all 

size trees. This has good potential to deplete the old large diameter trees throughout the planning as 

well as reducing the average diameter of the remaining stand. This would delay the growth of 

ponderosa pine into larger diameter classes through reduce growth of trees from competition and 

mortality of larger trees. Modeling of stand exam data shows that all stands where exams were 

available were above the upper management zone and would remain at beetle risk until some form of 

mortality changes the stand density. 

Figure 16: Alternative 1 (No Action) Display of Area at Risk to Beetle Mortality 

Deadlog Alternative 1 (No Action) Beetle Risk

Low Risk

44% 

Moderate

Risk 

37% 

High Risk

19% 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

83

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative would treat 6,919 acres of ponderosa pine and lodgepole 

pine to levels which would reduce stocking levels and bark beetle mortality risk. By reducing stand 

density and removing lodgepole pine where possible within ponderosa pine stands, risk to bark beetles 

would be reduced for at least two decades. Reduced risk and mortality would promote large tree 

survival and recruitment in small diameter stands into the larger diameter groups more quickly. 

The area at risk to beetle mortality following treatments is shown in Figure 17, showing a change of 

nearly 30 percent of the area into a low risk category. This does not show the reduction of risk within 

the low risk category. Stands where treatments occur tend to have a concentration of moderate and 

high risk but also have areas where within a decade or less they would be at risk. Whole units would 

have the density reduced, except for areas set aside for wildlife habitat or resource protection. 

Beetle activity would be expected to be noticeably reduced. High density stands would be reduced by 

at least 30 percent, but would continue on 10 percent of the area (refer to Figure 17) due to the need 

for wildlife corridors, protection areas, and habitats which are uncommon on the landscape. Both 

moderate and high risk identified areas are scattered through the planning area and are not in 

concentrations which would justify treating all these areas, leaving approximately 73 percent of the 

area at low risk to beetle mortality. 

Figure 17: Display of Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Area at Risk to Beetle Mortality – Post 

Treatment 

Enhancement of the lowered beetle risk in ponderosa pine stands would occur through the removal of 

lodgepole pine in mixed stands of ponderosa and lodgepole pine. Ponderosa pine treatments would 

occur on 6,042 acres with 3,715 acres (61 percent) having lodgepole pine removed. This would reduce 

the risk of ponderosa pine mortality due to beetles attracted to stands with lodgepole pine present. 

Further reduction of acres susceptible to bark beetle mortality would occur with overstory and 

shelterwood harvest in lodgepole pine stands on 490 acres. These regeneration treatments would 

return the stands to a condition where smaller lodgepole are predominant, reducing beetle risk. 

Deadlog Alternative 2 

(Proposed Action) Beetle Risk

Low Risk

73% 

High Risk Moderate 10% 

Risk 

17% 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

84 

Bark beetle mortality can be expected to be greatly reduced though the moderate and high risk that 

would continue on 27 percent of the area. This reduction of beetle risk and mortality would occur over 

a broad area of the planning area. Especially important with the desired condition described in the 

Eastside Screens is the sustainability of the large trees present on the landscape especially those in 

stands identified as LOS. Growth of trees into large diameter sizes would be increased due to 

increased growth response and lowered mortality through stocking level reduction. 

Bark beetle susceptibility can be expected to remain in stands where fuels reduction, with no thinning, 

is prescribed and the current SDI is above the upper management zone SDI. These treatments do not 

reduce stand SDI where it is above the upper management zone to a level below the upper 

management zone (Refer to Project Record, Silviculture Report, Table 5, page 27. 

Plantation thinning would improve the long term bark beetle resistance. Plantation thinning would 

typically occur in stands which are not above the upper management zone SDI. Stocking levels would 

allow at least two decades of growth before the stands enter the upper management zone SDI. 

Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 3 would treat 6,488 acres of ponderosa pine and lodgepole 

pine to reduce stocking levels and bark beetle mortality risk. This reduction similar to Alternative 2 

would have a defined effect on the area which is at risk to beetle mortality and would allow future 

growth of that area without becoming at risk for over two decades. This reduced risk is brought about 

by reducing stand density and removing where possible the lodgepole pine component of ponderosa 

pine stands. The reduced bark beetle mortality would promote large trees to survive and recruit the 

larger trees in small diameter stands into the larger diameter groups faster than leaving them alone. 

Overall, the benefit to reducing bark beetle susceptibility would be less than Alternative 2 though 

substantially better than the no action alternative. 

The area at risk to beetle mortality following treatments is shown in Figure 18. For the Deadlog 

planning area this is the same as Alternative 2, a change of 30 percent of the area into a low risk 

category. What this does not show is the reduction of risk within the low risk category. Stands where 

treatments occur tend to have a concentration of moderate and high risk but also have areas where 

within a decade or less they would be at risk. The whole unit except for areas set aside would have the 

density reduced. 

Current beetle activity with Alternative 3 can be expected to be noticeably reduced. High density 

stands were selected for treatments and would be reduced by at least 30 percent. High risk areas would 

continue on 10 percent of the area that was avoided due to the need for corridors, protection areas and 

habitats which are uncommon on the Deadlog landscape. Both moderate and high risk identified areas 

are scattered through the planning area and are not in concentrations which would justify treatments. 

Following treatments more than 70 percent of the area would be at low enough densities to be at low 

risk to beetle mortality. LOS stands in would continue to have pockets of high density old trees, 

leaving all trees with old tree characteristics. In these stands of LOS ponderosa pine, it is common for 

the pockets to be well above the upper management zone SDI, remaining at risk to bark beetle 

mortality. Though some stocking reduction would occur, many of the clumps would remain at risk to 

bark beetles. 

Enhancement of the lowered beetle risk in ponderosa pine stands would occur through the removal of 

lodgepole pine in mixed stands of ponderosa and lodgepole pine. A total of 5,650 acres in ponderosa 

pine were examined for treatment with 3,354 acres (59 percent) identified for lodgepole pine removal. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

85

This would likely reduce ponderosa pine mortality due to beetles attracted to stands where lodgepole 

pine is present. This is slightly less than Alternative 2. 

Lodgepole pine overstory removal in lodgepole pine stands would reduce susceptibility to bark beetle 

mortality on 157 acres. These regeneration treatments would greatly reduce host material size, 

reducing beetle risk. Commercial thinning of 332 acres of lodgepole stands that are approximately 90 

years old would leave the largest diameter lodgepole pine and would not guarantee resistance to bark 

beetles. These stands would exhibit increased vigor although bark beetles would still target host trees 

of that size and age. It is uncertain whether beetles would cause mortality in these stands. 

Observations on the Bend Fort Rock district have shown where thinned lodgepole pine stands 

sometimes seem resistant to beetles while in other stands heavy mortality occurs despite thinning 

efforts. 

Bark beetle mortality can be expected to be greatly reduced though the risk would still be present on 

30 percent of the planning area. This reduction of beetle risk and mortality would occur over a broad 

area of the planning area. Especially important with the desired condition described in the Eastside 

Screens is the sustainability of the large trees present on the landscape especially those in stands 

identified as late old structure. Growth of trees into the large diameter sizes would be increased due to 

increased growth response and lowered mortality through stocking level reduction. 

Commercial thinning would be deferred on 400 acres of steeper slopes; fuels treatments would take 

place. Bark beetle susceptibility would be expected to remain in stands where fuels reduction is the 

only action and the current SDI is above the upper management zone SDI. Modeling shows that fuels 

treatments, focusing on ladder fuels and surface fuels to reduce stocking of trees less than 7 inches 

dbh, does not reduce stand SDI to a level below the upper management zone SDI. Refer to Project 

Record, Silviculture Report, Table 5, page 27. 

Plantation thinning would improve long term bark beetle resistance. The plantations that would be 

thinned in Alternative 3 are the same as Alternative 2. Plantation thinning typically would occur in 

stands that are not above the upper management zone SDI. The stocking levels this treatment would 

leave would allow at least two decades of growth before the stands would enter the upper management 

zone SDI. In Alternative 3 biomass would be removed. This would reduce scorch to trees from 

burning slash. Biomass removal would not cause any difference in the affects of beetle resistance. 

Figure 18: Display of Alternative 3 Area at Risk to Beetle Mortality – Post Treatment 

Deadlog - Alternative 3 Beetle Risk

Low Risk

73% 

Moderate

Risk 

17% 

High Risk

10% 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

86 

COMPARISON TO HISTORIC CONDITION (HISTORIC RANGE OF 

VARIABILITY – HRV) 

Introduction 

The Historic condition is based on a landscape level. While any individual stand may be within the 

historic range of conditions on the landscape, the amount the area which currently matches the 

conditions which were historically present is the basis of comparison. Within different plant 

associations, the historic condition was different. This analysis tries to identify the ranges of condition 

which may have occurred and not just a snap shot at one time. The ranges of condition are considered 

the Historic Range of Variability (HRV). Historic condition of the vegetation can be classified with 

four main identifiers. The four identifiers are: 

 Average tree age or size 

 Stand density 

 Species composition 

 Fuel loading. 

The tree size or age and density have been aggregated into definitions of structure. Structure has been 

defined in the Eastside Screens into seven levels. The seven levels are stand initiation, stem exclusion 

open canopy, stem exclusion closed canopy, understory reinitiation, multi-stratum without large trees, 

multi-stratum with large trees and single stratum with large trees (Refer to Table 33). 

Table 33: Structural Stages 

Label Structural Stage Definition Description 

1 Stand Initiation Growing space is reoccupied 

following a stand replacing 

disturbance. Typically by seral 

species. 

One canopy stratum, one dominant 

cohort of seedlings or saplings. Grass, 

forbs, or shrubs may also be present with 

early seral trees 

2 Stem Exclusion 

Open Canopy 

Occurrence of new tree stems is 

excluded (moisture limited). 

Crowns are open grown. Canopy is 

discontinuous. This structure can 

be maintained by frequent 

underburning or management 

One discontinuous canopy stratum. One 

cohort of trees. New tree stems excluded 

by competition. Trees may be poles or of 

small or medium diameter. Understory 

shrubs, grasses, or forbs may be present. 

3 Stem Exclusion 

Closed Canopy 

Occurrence of new tree stems is 

excluded (light or moisture 

limited). Crowns are closed and 

abrading. 

Canopy layer is closed and continuous. 

One or more canopy strata may be 

present. Lower canopy strata, if present, 

is the same age class as the upper 

stratum. Trees may be poles or of small 

or medium diameter. Understory shrubs, 

grasses, or forbs may be present. 

4 Understory 

Reinitiation 

A second cohort of trees is 

established under an older typically 

seral, overstory. Mortality in the 

overstory creates growing space 

for new trees in the understory. 

Large trees are uncommon. 

The overstory canopy is discontinuous. 

Two or more canopy layers are present. 

Two or more cohorts of trees are present. 

Overstory trees may be poles or of small 

or medium diameter. Understory trees 

are seedlings, saplings or poles. 

5 Multi-stratum, 

without large trees 

Several cohorts of trees are 

established. Large overstory trees 

are uncommon. Pole, small, and 

medium sized trees dominate. 

The overstory canopy is discontinuous. 

Two or more canopy layers are present. 

Large trees are uncommon in the 

overstory. Horizontal and vertical stand 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

87

Label Structural Stage Definition Description 

structure and tree sizes are diverse. The 

stand may be a mix of seedlings, 

saplings, poles, or small or medium 

diameter trees. 

6 Multi-stratum, with 

large trees 

Several to many cohorts and strata 

of trees are present. Large trees are 

common. 

The overstory canopy is broken or 

discontinuous. Two or more canopy 

layers are present. Two or more cohorts 

of trees are present. Medium and large 

sized trees dominate the overstory. Trees 

of all sizes may be present. Horizontal 

and vertical stand structure and tree sizes 

are diverse. 

7 Single stratum, 

with large trees 

A single stratum of large trees is 

present. Large trees are common. 

Young trees arte absent or few in 

the understory. Park-like 

conditions may exist. 

The single dominant canopy stratum 

consists of medium sized or large trees. 

One or more cohorts of trees may be 

present. An understory may be absent or 

consist of sparse or clumpy seedlings or 

saplings. Grasses, forbs, or shrubs may 

be present in the understory. 

Scope and Scale of Analysis 

The Eastside screens direct using a large landscape where forest types, environmental settings and 

disturbance regimes are relatively uniform (USFS 1995). This area is and was fairly similar in 

responses, plant association, and weather patterns. To the south and east the stands tend to be drier and 

more prone to contain sagebrush. To the west and north the landscape pattern, soil and weather 

patterns provide for more lodgepole pine types. Quartz Mountain influences the landscape pattern 

through the Deadlog area with ridges and draws dominating. Throughout the surrounding landscape 

simple cinder buttes and flatter topology dominate. The analysis considers the following issue – The 

classification of structure compared to historic range. 

Classification of Historic Structural Stage 

The Deadlog planning area was used for comparing the current condition to historical or reference 

condition. Historical records were used to identify what the distribution of structure types may have 

been. Three sources of information were used for this analysis. One source is the land survey notes 

from the original surveys of the area in 1880. A second source was 1930 forest survey data. The 

methodology for interpreting these two surveys is covered in Appendix B of the Silviculture Report, 

Project Record. A third source of information is the modeling of the biophysical setting (Bps). The 

HRV for the Bps was done for ponderosa pine woodland and savanna in the Brothers Wildfire Use 

Plan (USDI 2007). 

Classification of Existing Structural Stage 

Stand delineations and stand attributes from the Deschutes National Forest Photo Interpretation (PI) 

vegetation mapping project were used to classify structural stages in the Deadlog planning area. The 

vegetation mapping project used 1995 color aerial photos (scale 1:12,000). For details on the mapping 

project refer to the mapping project report (Forest Data Incorporated, 2001). This information was 

used to identify stands by their structure where a minimum of 10 large trees (greater than 21” dbh) per 

acre in contiguous stands greater than 10 acres (USFS 1993) is considered old growth or LOS. The 

LOS was divided into two groups; multi-canopy or single canopy dominance. The younger and 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

88 

smaller diameter stands were classified depending on the size and density of the trees present in closed 

canopy, multi-size, understory reinitiation or stand initiation phases. Typically, blackbark stands, if 

dense, were multi-story stands and thinned stands were understory reinitiation. The choice to place 

thinned blackbark stands into Understory Reinitiation instead of Stem Exclusion Open Canopy is due 

to the ensured need of future understory burns to maintain the understory without regeneration. In dry 

ponderosa pine both structure stages can move towards Single Story with Large Tree Structure Stage. 

This is detailed in Appendix B of the Silviculture Report, Project Record. 

Measures 

The structure of the landscape was measured with the current stand condition and the changes of 

structure by treatments. Fuels only treatments would not change the structural classification. 

Commercial thinning in blackbark stands would maintain or move these stands into understory 

reinitiation. Thinning treatments in multi-story stands with large trees would not change the structure 

identified since all stories would remain only the density would change. Overstory removal treatments 

would move stands to stand initiation stage. 

Reference Condition 

The Deadlog area around the time of European settling was dominated by open ponderosa pine stands 

with large diameter trees. Stands with smaller diameters and dense stocking were few on the 

landscape. Disease and mortality due to fires or insects were confined to pockets throughout the 

landscape, few larger than a few acres (Agee 1993). The pockets of mortality would eventually 

become stocked and would eventually fill in with a new cohort (trees). The open pine condition with 

fire would keep fuels and disease levels, including mistletoe, and bark beetle outbreaks at a low level. 

During the 1930s, the start of an outbreak of bark beetles was considered to be when more than 50-100 

trees were killed per square mile (Grant 1939). This level is equivalent to less than one tree per six 

acres. Higher levels of infestation occurred when they were in pockets and was the reason why 

sampling and reporting occurred over the section. Open stand conditions allows for high vigor with 

limiting factors being mostly by nutrients and moisture. Stand vigor is tied to beetle mortality 

resistance and stand sustainability. 

Existing Condition 

Within the Deadlog Planning area, Table 34 displays the current stratification of Structure. This is 

done by Plant association though there is less than a determinant amount on the landscape in the 

Lodgepole pine plant association group being about 10% of the planning area (1,580 acres). 

Table 34: Deadlog Stand Structure 

Structure Structure Description Acres Current Percent Ranges of HRV 1 

1 Stand Initiation 1,459 9% 7-18% 

2 Stem Exclusion Open Canopy 0-1% 

3 Stem Exclusion Closed Canopy 232 1% 0-8% 

4 Understory Reinitiation 6,460 40% 0-20% 

5 Multi-story without Large trees 5,912 37% 0% 

6 Multi-story with Large trees 1,782 11% 10-52% 

7 Single Story with Large trees 206 1% 41-69% 

1. Refer to Table 8, page 33, Silviculture Report, Project Record for ranges of HRV determinations. 

It is estimated that there are 9,205 acres of blackbark in the planning area. This is about 60 percent of 

the area. Blackbark stands which have been thinned are commonly considered Understory Reinitiation 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

89

while thick unthinned stands can be considered Multi-story without Large Trees. These two structures 

dominate the Deadlog landscape. 

Comparison of Alternatives 

The action alternatives increase the amount of ponderosa pine stands which would become open large 

structure. The sustainability of large trees on the landscape is increased with reduction of competition 

in stands through increased vigor and reduced competition (Kolb et al 2007, Ritchie et al 2008, 

McDowell et al 2003). Because of the selection for all size trees in bark beetle outbreaks due to 

competition, more open stands similar to understory reinitiation have the highest opportunity to grow 

large trees and become Late Old Structure (BLM 2007). 

All the alternatives have Stand Initiation, Stem Exclusion Closed Canopy and Multi-story with Large 

trees stand structures within the Historic Range of Variability. The largest differences between the No 

Action alternative and action alternatives is between the Understory Reinitiation and Multi-story 

without Large tree stand structures. There is a major shift from Multi-story without Large tree 

structure to Understory Reinitiation structure with the action alternatives. The difference in this change 

between action alternatives is very little and does not change the percentages noticeably. The reduction 

in stand density is not designed to initiate understory regeneration, but to bring the stand into a level of 

stocking which is sustainable. 

Understory regeneration has not been observed under canopies in ponderosa pine which are younger 

than 120 years. This lack of successful regeneration and the application of prescribed fire would move 

these stands into the open pine type with large trees desired in eastside screen direction. Between 

Alternatives 2 and 3 there is little difference in acreage moving towards late old structure. The largest 

difference is the potential for less diameter increment. Alternative 3 would leave more trees especially 

in old clumps. This higher level of stocking would reduce the potential for tree growth. These higher 

clump stockings would be similar to the historical condition and would leave more old trees at 

stocking levels which could attract western pine beetle. This may allow more individual trees or entire 

clumps at higher risk to attack than in Alternative 2. Alternative 3, because of leaving more trees in 

clumps, can be expected to have less longevity in reducing beetle susceptibility. 

Table 35 Alternative Comparison of Structure Deadlog Project Area 

Structure Structure Description Ranges of HRV - % Alternatives - % Structure 

1 2 3 

1 Stand Initiation 7-18 9 10 10 

2 Stem Exclusion Open Canopy 0-1 0 0 0 

3 Stem Exclusion Closed Canopy 0-8 1 0.5 0.5 

4 Understory Reinitiation 0-20 40 60 59 

5 Multi-story without Large trees 0 37 17 18 

6 Multi-story with Large trees 10-52 11 11 11 

7 Single Story with Large trees 41-69 1 1.5 1.5 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The same structure mix as is present would remain. Compared to the 

HRV, there is an abundance of understory reinitiation and multi-story without large trees and also a 

scarcity of large open tree structure (Table 35). This scarcity, with the direction from the Eastside 

Screens, indicates a lack of meeting the objective of managing for large open structure in the long 

term. Within the Multi-story with large tree structure group there is a chance in the future of losing the 

current level of this structure due to overstory mortality of the large trees present. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

90 

The opportunity for stands to develop into late old structures of 6 and 7 is dependent on the structures 

with smaller diameter trees growing from stages 3, 4, and 5. Typically, understory reinitiation has a 

high chance of growing into large structure especially with fire (BLM. 2008). Multi-story without 

large trees and closed canopy stem exclusion take longer and have the chance of not developing into 

large trees because of mortality. The structural stages which are overstocked in ponderosa pine type 

have a high probability of beetle mortality and reduced diameter growth. For average diameters and 

the future expected diameters refer to page 36, Silviculture Report, Project Record. The expected 20 

year dbh growth is 1.5 inches. 

Currently the area which is susceptible to bark beetles would not grow into LOS. Stands in these 

structure classes would typically not grow into LOS due to the chronic and sometimes outbreak levels 

of mortality from bark beetles. Using GBA Handbook and calculations estimating growth was 

developed and shows that in 20 years it is not expected that on average the stands would grow into an 

average diameter large enough to be old growth. 

Within the plant associations which were historically dominated by ponderosa pine there are many 

acres which currently have lodgepole pine as codominant or dominant species. This is increasing with 

mortality to overstory ponderosa pine and larger lodgepole pine to current bark beetle mortality and 

the continued ingrowth of lodgepole pine in the understory. 

Table 36: Current Structure Acreage 

Structure Total Acres 

0 147 

1 1,312 

3 232 

4 6,460 

5 5,912 

6 1,782 

7 205 

Total 16,050 

Figure 19: Current Structure Chart 

Current Structure

0

1% 1

8%

3

1%

4

41%

5

37%

6

11%

7

1% 0

1

3

4

5

6

7
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

91

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 2 would move stands towards HRV by managing stands into 

a condition with more potential to become open ponderosa pine. The largest structure type to move 

towards the open condition is the dense multi-layer stands (structure 5). Through thinning this would 

become understory reinitiation (structure 4). The increase in understory reinitiation of over 3,000 

acres has more potential to become open large pine structure in the future (BLM 2008). The reduction 

of stocking levels for all structures increases growth and vigor and reduces mortality potential. This 

growth increase has the potential of increasing the number of stands with large diameter trees more 

quickly. Thinning from below increases the average stand diameter by removing many of the smaller 

trees. The increase in growth with thinning prescriptions would keep the 10 year growth average 

above 1.5 inches per decade. Growth for would average 2.7-4.6 inches dbh over 20 years and 

commonly be above four inches dbh growth within the first two decades following treatments. This 

increase in average diameter growth is much larger than that for Alternative 1 (1.5 inches dbh) because 

of the average diameter in that alternative and the level of competition between trees. For more 

detailed information refer to Table 13, page 38 Silviculture Report, Project Record. 

The long term sustainability of the large trees present and LOS condition would be increased with 

thinning. Thinning and releasing large old trees has been shown to increase vigor and stand 

sustainability (Ritchie et al 2008, McDowell 2003). According to Kolb et al (2007), the main 

drawback to maintaining the large trees on the landscape is with the use of prescribed fire. Forest 

Service observations in the Flattop project (south of the Deadlog area) has shown very little large tree 

mortality following prescribed burning in the spring. Stand stocking following treatments would make 

the stands more resistant to mortality during common drought cycles which follow a decadal pattern 

(Hessl et al 2003). The drought cycles can increase moisture stress and the landscape level of risk of 

wildfire. Thinning and fuels treatments would reduce the chance of high mortality of all sizes of 

ponderosa pine. The stands treated under Alternative 2 would remain below the upper management 

zone SDI for more than two decades. 

Table 37: Alternative 2 – Change in Forest Structure 

Current 

Structure 

After treatment 

Structure 

Treatment 

Acres 

Structure Acres Post 

Treatment 

Percent of Area by

Structure - Percent

0 0 12 147 1 

1 1 337 1,466 9 

3 3 15 89 0.5 

4 143 

4 1 46 9,551 59 

4 4,052 

5 1 107 2,814 17 

4 3,090 

5 1,258 

6 6 1,487 1,783 11 

7 7 205 205 1 

Total 10,752 16,055 100% 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

92 

Figure 20: Alternative 2 – Post Treatment Structure Chart 

Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 3 effects to structure are similar to Alternative 2. There are 

approximately 100 fewer acres of structure class 5 structure that would move into structure class 4, 

understory reinitiation. This change is due to the reduction of acres that would receive a commercial 

thin, although this does not change the percentage of area in either structure class. In Alternative 3, 

units with slopes greater than 30 percent were removed from the commercial thinning treatments. 

These would still receive some fuels treatments of surface and ladder fuels however this would not 

reduce stocking enough to reduce the risk to mortality from beetles or increase long term growth. 

Alternative 3 does have two units added for commercial thinning and these have the same potential of 

growing into large structure as other commercially thinned stands. 

The average diameters expected to be left in Alternative 3 are higher than the current condition, since 

as in Alternative 2, thinning from below reduces the stocking of smaller diameter trees. In alternative 3 

the growth and diameters in the blackbark thinning is expected to be the same. Where there is a 

difference is in the stands which contain late old structure. In LOS stands, smaller trees with old tree 

characteristics would be left. Many of these trees have smaller diameters and are found in clumps. 

This would leave higher stocking in some places with smaller diameter trees that may have been 

removed in a thin from below with no exceptions as in Alternative 2. In LOS, overall diameter and 

growth would be expected to be less in Alternative 3 than Alternative 2. 

Leaving all old trees in some clumps may leave the stocking levels of the clumps susceptible to bark 

beetle mortality through higher densities. The mortality in these overstocked clumps may be expressed 

as individual trees or all the trees in the clumps due to the mortality patterns caused by western pine 

beetles. In the Quartz Mountain Old Growth Area, over 60 percent of the large tree clumps had stand 

densities above the upper management zone SDI. Many of the clumps had younger trees which would 

be removed in this alternative, although many of the clumps had old trees which would not be cut to a 

level near or below the upper management zone SDI. 

Similar to Alternative 2, the long term sustainability of the large trees present and Late Old Structure 

condition would be increased with thinning. The main drawback to maintaining the large trees on the 

landscape is with the use of prescribed fire (Kolb et al 2007). Stand stocking following treatments 

would make the stands more resistant to mortality during common drought cycles which follow a 

decadal pattern (Hessl et al 2003). The drought cycles can increase moisture stress and the landscape 

Alternative 2 – Post-Treatment Structure

0

1% 1

9% 3

1%

4

59%

5

18%

6

11%

7

1% 0

1

3

4

5

6

7
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

93

level of risk of wildfire. For stands treated under Alternative 3, stand density would remain below the 

upper management zone SDI for more than two decades for most prescriptions. In large structure 

stands leaving old character trees in the upper management zone SDI is reached in a majority of the 

stands within 20 years. The longevity of the treatments in Alternative 3 has the potential to be less 

than for Alternative 2. 

Table 38: Alternative 3 – Structure Change 

Current 

Structure 

After Treatment 

Structure 

Treatment 

Acres 

Post Treatment 

Structure Acres

Percent Area by 

Structure - Percent 

0 0 12 147 1 

1 1 385 1,466 9 

3 3 87 132 1 

4 100 0 

4 1 46 9,506 59 

4 4,325 0 

5 1 107 2,812 18 

4 2,992 

5 1,534 

6 6 1,487 1,782 11 

7 7 206 206 1 

Total 11,281 16,055 100% 

Figure 21: Alternative 3 – Post-Treatment Structure Chart 

STAND RESISTANCE TO FIRE 

Introduction 

For this report, tree resistance to fire and increase in diameter were analyzed. Other factors were 

analyzed in the fuels section and discussion of this DEIS. Tree resistance to fire, especially surface 

fire, is influenced by tree diameter and bark thickness. The bark on many western conifers provides 

insulation for growing tissue from the heat of fire. Typically larger and older trees have thicker bark 

making them more resistant to fire mortality. Lodgepole pine is an exception with thin bark in all sizes 

and age classes. 

Alternative 3 – Post Treatment Structure 

0

1% 1

9%

3

1%

4

59%

5

18%

6

11%

7

1%

0

1

3

4

5

6

7
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

94 

Scope and Scale of Analysis 

The analysis of treatment effects is on the stand level. Estimates of the effect to fuels would be made 

over the planning area in order to assess the fire resilience of the landscape. 

Measures 

Alternatives are compared for resistance to fire, which is measured by average diameter of trees. 

Methods 

Vegetative analysis and estimates of stand conditions were done using stand exam data from 2007 and 

2008. These were entered into the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) provided by the Forest Service. 

The documentation, description, instructions, and software for this program are available on the 

internet at www.fs.fed.us/fmsc/fvs. FVS at its most basic level is a family of forest growth simulation 

models. Since its initial development in 1973, it has become a system of tightly linked analytical 

tools. These tools are based upon a growing body of scientific knowledge gleaned from decades of 

natural resources research and are based on the Prognosis growth and yield model. Fire and Fuels 

Extension (FFE) to FVS simulates fuel dynamics and potential fire behavior over time and can be used 

to simulate and predict snag fall down rates, fuel loadings, and parameters affecting fire behavior and 

fuels accumulation and decay. 

This model was used to compare alternative actions including timber harvest and treating fuels. The 

SORNEC variant version 2008.12.3.0 was used. This variant of the model is based on studies 

measuring stand characteristics throughout the northwest and has specific adaptations for the central 

Oregon area. 

Reference Condition 

Historically, in ponderosa pine types, few stand replacing fires occurred though pockets of mortality 

would occur. When stand replacement events did occur the stand would be replaced in small areas and 

scattered remnant trees would remain through the stand as seed sources (Arno 1995). The snag and 

down fuels present in historic large ponderosa pine stands were low, typically less than 2.2 tons per 

acre of fuels with fewer than 2 snags per acre (Agee 2002). Historically the down fuels were light with 

small areas of concentrations, which had short residence burn time due to frequent low intensity fires 

(Agee 2002). Historical conditions had lower fuels levels than generally occur today. Historical 

records such as the description by Puter and the forest survey of 1913 give the idea of an understory 

dominated by grasses. The land surveys documents areas, especially associated with the buttes, as 

having understories of manzanita and “greasewood” (probably ceanothus) and windfall trees in some 

locations. 

The surface fuel loads are represented by fuel models to identify the fuels arrangement and the fire 

characteristics under varying weather conditions. Expected fuels levels would be low as documented 

in the ponderosa pine type described in studies. Open stands had low Crown Bulk densities and high 

crown canopies. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation

95

Existing Condition 

Currently the ponderosa pine stands are dominated by 60-80 year old ponderosa pine with lodgepole 

pine. Unmanaged stands, which have not been managed, tend to be dense stands of poles with heavy 

fuels from beetle mortality. The fuels are mostly lodgepole pine from previous mortality. Ponderosa 

pine mortality is becoming more common due to tree stress. Managed stands of ponderosa pine have 

been precommercially or commercially thinned and are now 60–130 square feet of basal area. These 

stands have responded to lower stocking levels with increased growth, crown volume, and understory 

tree and brush establishment. The release favors brush and typically lodgepole pine seedlings. The 

brush is bitterbrush in lower elevations transitioning to ceanothus and manzanita in upper elevations. 

Where large trees dominate, understory tree and brush density has increased with the lack of fire. The 

understory trees tend to be ponderosa and lodgepole pine and are younger than 100 years. Historically 

the understory was comprised of low stocking of brush and seedlings due to frequent fires reducing 

seed sources for brush and fire intolerant tree species. These frequent fire stands had forbs and grasses 

dominating the understory vegetation. 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Using the Growth Basal Area (GBA) Handbook, growth estimates show 

that in 20 years it is not expected that, on average, stands would grow much more than a 1.5 inches. 

This rate of growth would not add much to the resistance of the trees over that 20 years. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The growth increase from treatments has the potential of increasing the 

number of stands which have large diameter trees sooner. Thinning from below increases the average 

stand diameter by removing many of the smaller trees. The increase in growth with thinning 

prescriptions would keep the 10 year growth average above 1.5 inches per decade. Typical growth for 

the different prescriptions is commonly above four inches in diameter within the first two decades 

following treatments. This increase in average diameter growth is much larger than that for the no 

action alternative because of the average diameter in that alternative and the level of competition 

between trees. The increase in diameters would improve the fire resilience of the stands much more 

than found with Alternative 1 (No Action). 

Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The average diameters expected to be left in Alternative 3 are higher 

than the current condition, since as in Alternative 2, thinning from below reduces the stocking of 

smaller diameter trees. In alternative 3 the growth and diameters in the blackbark thinning is expected 

to be the same. Where there is a difference is in the stands which contain late old structure. In LOS 

stands, smaller trees with old tree characteristics would be left. Many of these trees have smaller 

diameters and are found in clumps. This would leave higher stocking in some places with smaller 

diameter trees that may have been removed in a thin from below with no exceptions as in Alternative 

2. In LOS, overall diameter and growth would be expected to be less in Alternative 3 than 

Alternative 2. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Vegetation 

96 

Cumulative Effects 

Cumulative Effects are past, ongoing and foreseeable activities that may incrementally cause effects 

when considered with the proposed action. Past activities have been included with the existing 

condition. Cumulative Effects of foreseeable and ongoing activities are limited to the stand level in 

the Deadlog area for most silviculture metrics. Structure effects are measured on the landscape level 

which for this was defined as the Deadlog planning area. Table 39 identifies the foreseeable and 

ongoing activities in the Deadlog vicinity and the expected effects for silviculture. 

Table 39 Deadlog Cumulative Effects Actions 

Activity/ Project Action Description General Effects 

KO Timber Sale Reforestation 

maintenance 

Fence Maintenance or removal and Big 

Game Repellant application. Dwarf 

Mistletoe control Pruning and Girdling. 

Will reduce individual stand 

mistletoe and stocking on other than 

Deadlog Units. Over the planning 

area may decrease the intensification 

of mistletoe infection 

Wildlife Improvement 

Maintenance 

Guzzler maintenance on two guzzlers. Maintaining cove around guzzlers 

may increase stand beetle risk 

though not in Deadlog units 

Cluster II Grazing allotment EA 

2006.-Grazing allotment 

Maintenance and Improvement 

Fence Repair, Fence building, Water sets, 

Cattle Grazing, waterline installation and 

maintenance 

No silvicultural effects 

Aspen Project Fuels Treatments Adjacent to planning area Machine Shrub 

treatment and thinning 

No silvicultural effects in Deadlog 

planning area 

Road Maintenance Ongoing road maintenance. Danger tree 

removal, roadside brushing, drainage 

repair, spot surfacing. 

May remove individual trees but will 

not affect stand level conditions. 

Green Dot road Closure Administrative closure of roads Hunting 

season 

No silvicultural effects 

Opal mine Opal mine operations on mine claim 

including camping site. 

No silvicultural effects away from 

excavation site. 

Travel Management Travel Management EIS possible signature 

within 2 years. Shared use roads. 

No silvicultural effects. 

BPA power line Maintenance Power line maintenance within right of 

way includes mowing of brush and 

seedlings and scattered tree and snag 

removal. Outside of the right of way 

individual hazard trees would also be 

removed. Cycle varies 3 - 5 years. 

May remove individual trees but will 

not affect stand level conditions. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Pathology

97

PATHOLOGY 

SUMMARY 

Western dwarf mistletoe (WDM, Arceuthobium campylopodum) infected blackbark stands and WDMinfected stands with at least some component of Late Old Structure (LOS) represent approximately 74 

percent of the project area (Powers 2009, Deadlog silviculture report). 

A spatial analysis was conducted that evaluated the severity and distribution of WDM throughout the 

analyzed stands. The spatial analysis indicated that WDM occurs in a patchy distribution in most 

blackbark and LOS stands (Figure 2, Pathology report, Project Record) and at mixed levels of severity. 

On average, 54 percent of stand exam plots had no infection in stands where WDM occurred, 14 

percent were lightly infected, 21 percent moderately, and 11 percent were heavily infected in 

evaluated stands. These are likely more severe levels of WDM infection than occurred historically in 

central Oregon in ponderosa pine (Roth 1953). 

Modeling indicated that the effects of WDM alone would not prevent the development of old growth 

conditions (Hopkins et al. 1992) within 50 to 60 years (data not shown) on an average stand basis 

where it occurs under any of the 3 alternatives. This result indicates that the negative impacts of 

WDM alone are likely not sufficient to prevent the development of old growth stands. WDM 

infection in conjunction with high stand susceptibility to bark beetle attack (Miller and Keen 1960, 

Cochran 1994, Booser and White 1996) and higher probability of stand replacing fire due to increased 

fuel loadings as a result of fire exclusion, increases the probability that many stands (or portions of 

stands) will not develop into old growth conditions. 

Modeling indicated that under both Alternative 2 and 3 for blackbark and LOS stands one year after 

treatment, dwarf mistletoe rating (DMR) and dwarf mistletoe infection (DMI) values will be lower 

than Alternative 1 values. The difference between Alternative 2 and 3 after treatment are essentially 

the same in both blackbark and LOS stands. Under Alternative 3, however, the DMR and DMI values 

will remain lower than both Alternative 1 and 2 for 40 years in blackbark stands. Alternatives 1, 2, 

and 3 have essentially the same projected values 20 and 40 years from now in LOS stands. These 

results suggest that Alternative 3 would be the best option to reduce the deleterious effects of WDM in 

blackbark stands. The retention of ponderosa pine with old tree characteristics (Van Pelt 2008) and 

the increased distance between residual trees prescribed in Alternative 3 would likely allow for 

quicker development of old growth stands.

INTRODUCTION 

The most significant disease in the Deadlog project area is Western dwarf mistletoe (WDM, 

Arceuthobium campylopodum) in ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa). Lodgepole pine dwarf mistletoe 

(Arceuthobium americanum) also occurs in the lodgepole pine, but is not significant in this analysis 

because of its scheduled removal from stands. Field surveys within the project area revealed that 

approximately 50 percent of stands had some level of WDM infection which occurs in stands 

dominated by ponderosa pine with blackbark characteristics as well as in stands that have at least some 

component of Late Old Structure (LOS) (Powers, personal communication). WDM occurs in all size 

classes and throughout the tree crowns where it occurs. 

Ponderosa pine infected with WDM exhibits reduced volume and height growth (Hawksworth 1996, 

Maffei and Jacobi 1986), reduced viable seed set and cone production (Hawksworth 1996), increased 

susceptibility to fire caused mortality (Conklin and Geils 2008), and increased susceptibility to 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Pathology 

98 

successful western and mountain pine beetle attack (Miller and Keen 1960, Eglitis 2009, personal 

communication) proportional to increasing levels of infection. These direct and indirect negative 

effects of WDM decrease the likelihood that a heavily infected stand of ponderosa pine will develop 

into old growth characteristics (Hopkins 1992). Severity of infection of dwarf mistletoes is measured 

with a Dwarf Mistletoe Rating (DMR) on a scale from 1 (light) to 6 (severe) (Hawksworth 1977). 

Individual trees with a DMR of 3 or less and stands with an average DMR of less than or equal to 2 

have a higher likelihood of being effectively managed through thinning treatments and attaining old 

growth characteristics. Left untreated, dwarf mistletoe severity will increase within the stand and it 

will spread laterally to uninfected areas of the stand at a rate of one to two feet per year (Hawksworth 

1996). Even-aged (“blackbark”) stands are much more likely to respond positively to management 

where WDM infected trees have been selectively removed and the residual basal area reduced within 

the stand to increase tree vigor. This relationship also holds true for stands with a significant uneven 

age structure and a large tree component (LOS) except that it is more complicated with the localized 

effects of infected overstory trees infecting understory regeneration. Understory trees that are infected 

from above will not develop into mature trees due to high levels of WDM infection, would serve as 

ladder fuel, reduce the vigor of the older trees through competition, and make them more susceptible 

to attack from western and mountain pine beetle. These factors taken together would reduce the 

productivity in the portion of the stand where the infected overstory occurs and throughout the stand 

exceeding 10 percent loss in productivity (stand DMR less than or equal to 2 and DMI less than or 

equal to 3), which is above the guidelines in the Deschutes Forest Plan (USFS 1990). Management 

actions to reduce the effects of dwarf mistletoe would typically call for the removal or girdling of all 

infected overstory trees at the time of or within 10 years of treatment (Schmitt 1996). This is likely 

not possible because of restrictions from the “eastside screens” policy (USFS 1995), which requires 

that all trees greater than or equal to 21 inches dbh be retained on site, including trees that are infected 

with WDM. In order to simultaneously meet eastside screens and the Deschutes forest plan 

requirement of “...dwarf mistletoe stabilized indefinitely at a low infection level...” with “...no more 

than a 10% loss in productivity...” for unevenaged management, it is necessary to treat these stands. 

SCOPE AND SCALE OF ANALYSIS 

The scope of the analysis for resilience to disease within the Deadlog planning area focuses on the 

condition of WDM within a selection of affected blackbark and LOS stands. The stands were 

evaluated using Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) for factors relating to stand productivity (see 

methods), whether or not the stands reached old growth characteristics, and distribution and severity of 

WDM infection within the stand. Under the three alternatives, stands were evaluated from the current 

condition, 20, 40, and 100 years into the future. Under Alternatives 2 and 3, stands were also evaluated 

one year following treatment. 

METHODS 

Stand exam data was collected during 2007 and 2008 in the Deadlog project area. Only stands that 

had dwarf mistletoe infection were recorded and analyzed. Two types of stands were selected to 

represent the current conditions in the project area and used in the analysis (Table 43, page103): 1) 

Blackbark Stands that are primarily composed of ponderosa pine with blackbark characteristics, but 

have scattered trees larger than 21 inches dbh; and 2) LOS stands. The LOS stands all have some 

significant component of trees larger than 21 inches” dbh. Ten of each type was selected to be 

analyzed. All stands were analyzed using Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS) version 6.21 with the 

Southern Oregon Northern California (SORNEC) variant 4/29/08 (Dixon 2002). The effects 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Pathology

99

(mortality, snag creation, volume loss) seen in the results presented here are due to dwarf mistletoe. 

Measures of the effects of WDM on ponderosa pine fall under four categories: 

 The effects of western dwarf mistletoe infection on stand “productivity” 

 The effects of western dwarf mistletoe on the development of the affected stand into old 

growth or late seral conditions (Hopkins et al. 1992). 

 The effects of western dwarf mistletoe under the three alternatives. 

 Spatial Analysis: Western dwarf mistletoe severity at the plot level within stands 

REFERENCE CONDITION 

Under the historic large open ponderosa pine stand conditions that occurred throughout the species 

range, frequent low intensity ground fire likely reduced historical dwarf mistletoe infestations directly 

by selectively removing heavily infested trees and branches via torching and indirectly by simplifying 

forest structure and increasing average inter-tree spacing (Hessburg et al. 1994). These low density 

and simply layered stands also slowed local and lateral spread of dwarf mistletoe (Hessburg et al. 

2008). There are no known historic surveys for WDM conditions conducted in the project area to 

compare against these criteria. The earliest and closest known survey was conducted in 1953 in an old 

growth ponderosa pine stand at the current Pringle Falls Experimental Forest (35 miles west of the 

project area). The stand was extensively sampled for WDM distribution and severity in ponderosa 

pine. The researchers found WDM in a patchy distribution on a total of 41 percent of the area 

surveyed (107 of 260 acres) with 58 percent of the affected area being very lightly infected, 29 percent 

lightly, 12 percent moderately, and only 1 percent heavily infected (Roth 1953). 

EXISTING CONDITION 

Currently at least 50 percent of visited Deadlog stands are infected with WDM which comprise about 

30 percent (4,815 acres) of the project area (Powers, personal communication). WDM occurs in a 

patchy distribution across the landscape, in varying severities (Table 43, page 103), and in all size 

classes of ponderosa pine (data not shown). Stand exam data indicate that sampled blackbark stands 

are slightly more severely infected than stands with some component of LOS, but that the affected area 

is very similar within both types (Table 43, page 103). In comparison to Roth’s 1953 Pringle Falls 

survey, stand exam data indicate that affected stands within the Deadlog project area have very similar 

affected areas on the landscape, 46 percent Deadlog and 41 percent Pringle Falls. The severity of the 

WDM in the project area, however, is currently significantly higher with two percent, 20 percent, 59 

percent, and 19 percent in the very lightly infected, lightly, moderately, and heavily infected 

categories. These same categories had 58 percent, 29 percent, 12 percent, and one percent respectively 

in the Pringle Falls survey 55 years ago. This imperfect comparison may suggest that although the 

proportional occurrence of dwarf mistletoe has not changed much across the landscape, the severity of 

infection, where it occurs, has increased dramatically in the last 55 years. This observation is what 

would be expected with the known lack of fire and selective cutting practices that are known to have 

taken place in the project area in that period of time (see Reference Condition). 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Field observations within the project area and literature indicate that WDM has the ability to 

explosively disseminate its seeds and effectively infect understory trees to an average lateral distance 

of 50 feet from an average height of 45 feet (Hawksworth 1996). The majority of seeds fall and infect 

understory or adjacent trees within 33 feet or less (Hawksworth 1996). This lateral distance of 

potential spread decreases the lower the source of infection occurs in the infected tree. Left untreated, 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Pathology 

100

it can be expected that current infected areas will spread laterally through the stand at a rate of 1 to 2 

feet per year and that infected areas will increase in severity due to inter- and intra-tree spread 

(Hawksworth 1996). Evidence for this can be seen in the increasing stand DMR and DMI values and 

the increasing percent of board foot volume that has been affected by WDM calculated by the model at 

20, 40, and 100 years under all three alternatives (Figure 22; Table 40, page 101; Table 41, page 102; 

Table 42, page 103). 

The modeling used in this analysis is only intended to be representative of the possible effects of 

WDM at the stand level. It does not model the localized effects of WDM at the plot level. Further 

investigations at the plot level would be required to better understand this relationship. FVS modeling 

with the SORNAC variant is also known locally to underestimate the increased growth that is 

attributable to thinning compared to what has consistently been observed in the field by local experts 

(Powers 2009, personal communication). This suggests that actual growth will be better following 

thinning treatments than that projected by the model. It is likely that this will be favorable to even 

further reducing the deleterious effects of the residual WDM projected by the model in the field 

overtime. The projections from the model are most accurate at 20 years and less accurate at 40 years. 

Projections at 100 years are not reliable, but are instructive for illustrating the time frames required for 

the development of old growth conditions (Hopkins et al. 1992) and what may happen over longer 

time periods without other unpredictable disturbances to the stand and are presented here strictly for 

illustrative purposes. 

Figure 22: Summary of Comparison of Calculated DMR and DMI Values by Alternative 

Note: Dotted lines are inserted at 40 year projected DMI values for alternative 1 for ease of comparison with 

values calculated in alternatives 2 and 3. 

Alternative 1 

Direct and Indirect Results: Results indicate that the current percent distribution of WDM in 

ponderosa pine across the landscape is very similar to known historical surveys (Maffei and Beatty 

1988), but that the severity of the disease has increased where it occurs (Roth 1953). This result is 

consistent with what would be expected to occur with fire suppression and selection cutting practices 

that have both occurred in the project area. This result would suggest that where WDM occurs it will 

have a more deleterious effect on the stand than it would have historically. These effects will take the 

form of reduced volume and height growth (Hawksworth 1996), reduced viable seed set and cone 

Alternative 1: Blackbark

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 20 40 100

DMR

DMI

Alternative 2: Blackbark

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 20 40 100

DMR

DMI

Alternative 3: Blackbark

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 20 40 100

DMR

DMI

Alternative 1: LOS

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 20 40 100

DMR

DMI

Alternative 2: LOS

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 20 40 100

DMR

DMI

Alternative 3: LOS

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 20 40 100

DMR

DMI
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Pathology

101

production (Hawksworth 1996), increased susceptibility to fire-caused mortality (Conklin and Geils 

2008), and increased susceptibility to successful western and mountain pine beetle attack (Miller and 

Keen 1960, Eglitis 2009, personal communication). 

Table 40: Alternative 1 (No Action) Modeled Indicators of Stand Productivity and Conditions 

through Time 

Years 

Since 

Treatment 

DMR DMI 

% BFV 

Loss 

From DM 

Residual 

Live 

Trees 

≥ 21” 

Residual 

Live 

Trees 

≥ 31” 

DM 

Created 

Snags 

≥ 14” 

Meets R6 

Definition Of Old 

Growth (OG) or 

Late Seral (LS) 

All Dwarf Mistletoe Affected Stands 

0 1.1 * 3.1 0.0 4 1 0 NO 

20 1.6 2.3 0.3 5 1 2 NO 

40 * 2.3 2.9 9.3 7 1 3 NO 

100 * 3.5 * 4.1 * 19.2 16 2 5 LS 

All Dwarf Mistletoe Affected Blackbark Stands 

0 1.2 * 3.0 0.3 2 0 0 NO 

20 1.6 2.5 9.4 4 0 2 NO 

40 * 2.1 2.9 * 20.1 7 0 4 NO 

100 * 2.7 * 3.5 * 48.8 20 1 5 OG 

All Dwarf Mistletoe Affected Late Old Structure (LOS) Component Stands 

0 0.7 * 3.3 0.3 6 1 0 NO 

20 1.4 2.2 7.8 7 2 1 NO 

40 * 2.4 2.9 * 16.5 8 2 2 NO 

100 * 4.0 * 4.5 * 51.1 15 3 5 LS 

≥ = greater than or equal to 

* Forest Vegetation Simulator calculated value is above guidelines of greater than 10 percent volume loss due to 

dwarf mistletoe infection recommended in the forest plan (USFS 1990) (DMR greater than or equal to 2, DMI 

greater than or equal to 3, percent BFV loss from dwarf mistletoe greater than 10 percent). 

DMI values under alternative 1 were predicted to decrease without treatment in both blackbark and 

LOS stands (Table 40). This is due to the higher mortality that occurs in the model in the smaller 

diameter dwarf mistletoe infected trees from model years 0 to 20 (2 to 5 times more in LOS and 

blackbark stands respectively) compared to model years 20 to 40. While this dwarf mistletoe caused 

mortality initially reduced the DMI values in the model, average stand DMR values increased as 

expected in the model. 

Modeling indicated that the affected stands will achieve old growth characteristics (Hopkins et al. 

1992) in 50 to 60 years (data not shown) on an average stand basis even with the stand left untreated. 

This is likely due to the generally patchy distribution of mistletoe within the stand, affecting perhaps 

46 percent of the stand area in mixed severities (assuming plot data are representative of the true 

distribution of WDM within the stand), and the 54 percent that is left unaffected. On average, such 

stands would be expected to achieve old growth conditions barring disturbance from bark beetles 

and/or fire. 

The increasing severity of infection over time, the increasing stand densities, and the increased fuel 

loading together make it much less likely that old growth conditions will be achieved or maintained in 

many of the stands over time without treating the stand. Areas within the stand that are affected by 

WDM will serve as “stressed” pockets that will be more likely to draw attacks from beetles which will 

then subsequently attack healthy portions of the stand due to the close proximity and increased 

populations of beetles. This will be even more likely in drought years due to the already low 

precipitation that the project area receives. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Pathology 

102

The WDM affected portions of the stand will be more prone to crown fire due to high numbers of 

infected and suppressed understory trees and the low hanging witches’-brooms that create fuel ladders. 

The results of this analysis indicate that the DMR and DMI values as well as the percent of board foot 

volume loss will continue to increase even with treatment; however, they will remain at a lower level 

through the stand because of treatment. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Results: Treatments proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3 will increase the 

distance between residual trees (residual trees in Alternative 3 will be even more widely spaced than 

Alternative 2), remove heavily infected trees, reduce the overall stand density, and reintroduce fire into 

the stands. This will reduce the direct and indirect negative effects the mistletoe will have on the 

resiliency of the stand where it occurs and on average throughout the stand by reducing the overall 

amount of mistletoe within the stand. 

Modeling indicates that DMR and DMI values will be lower than alternative 1 values one year after 

treatment under both Alternatives 2 and 3 for blackbark and LOS stands (Figure 22, page 100; Table 

40, page 101; Table 41, page 102; Table 42, page 103). By opening up the stand the lateral spread 

between the remaining infected trees will be slowed. By simultaneously removing the heavily 

infected trees (DMR greater than or equal to 4) the overall amount and severity of mistletoe left in the 

stand will decrease. Where it remains in lightly and moderately infected trees, the open stand 

conditions will increase the trees’ ability to grow faster in height. This will make it more likely that 

lightly to moderately infected trees will eventually outgrow infection, which has been shown to be 

possible in infected released ponderosa pine (40 to 70 years of age) when 10 to 12 inches of height 

growth per year over the last 5 years is achieved upon release (Barrett and Roth 1985, Maffei, personal 

communication). This relationship is less certain for more mature trees (Roth and Barrett 1985). Field 

observations within the project area indicate that, on average, infected ponderosa trees with a DMR of 

1 or 2, an 11 inch dbh, 43 feet tall, will have 9 inches (range 5-14 inches) height growth in the last five 

years. This observation is taken only under current overstocked conditions and does not take into 

consideration the effects of release, which will likely vary depending on site conditions. It suggests 

that 10 to 12 inches of height growth is possible in the project area with infected blackbark trees under 

some conditions. 

Table 41: Alternative 2 Modeled Indicators of Stand Productivity and Conditions through Time

Years Since 

Treatment DMR DMI 

% BFV 

Loss From 

DM 

Residual 

Live 

Trees 

≥ 21” 

Residual 

Live 

Trees 

≥ 31” 

DM 

Created 

Snags 

≥ 14” 

Meets R6 Definition 

Of Old Growth (OG) 

or Late Seral (LS) 

All Dwarf Mistletoe Affected Stands 

0 1.1 3.1 0.3 4 1 0 NO 

1 0.6 1.9 8.6 4 1 0 NO 

20 1.4 2.2 * 15.2 5 1 1 NO 

40 * 2.2 2.9 * 23.2 7 1 2 NO 

100 * 3.2 * 4.0 * 53.2 18 1 5 OG 

All Dwarf Mistletoe Affected Blackbark Stands 

0 1.3 3.0 0.4 2 0 0 NO 

1 0.8 1.7 * 12.5 2 0 0 NO 

20 1.3 2.1 * 18.0 3 0 1 NO 

40 * 1.9 2.7 * 25.5 6 0 2 NO 

100 * 2.9 * 3.7 * 50.2 19 1 5 OG 

All Dwarf Mistletoe Affected Late Old Structure (LOS) Component Stands 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Pathology

103

Years Since 

Treatment DMR DMI 

% BFV 

Loss From 

DM 

Residual 

Live 

Trees 

≥ 21” 

Residual 

Live 

Trees 

≥ 31” 

DM 

Created 

Snags 

≥ 14” 

Meets R6 Definition 

Of Old Growth (OG) 

or Late Seral (LS) 

0 0.7 3.7 1.4 6 1 0 NO 

1 0.6 2.2 4.5 6 1 0 NO 

20 1.4 2.3 * 11.7 7 1 1 NO 

40 * 2.3 * 3.0 * 20.7 8 2 2 NO 

100 * 3.6 * 4.3 * 55.1 17 2 6 LS 

Table 42: Alternative 3 Modeled Indicators of Stand Productivity and Conditions through Time

Years Since 

Treatment DMR DMI 

% BFV 

Loss From 

DM 

Residual 

Live 

Trees 

≥ 21” 

Residual 

Live 

Trees 

≥ 31” 

DM 

Created 

Snags 

≥ 14” 

Meets R6 Definition 

Of Old Growth (OG) 

or Late Seral (LS) 

All Dwarf Mistletoe Affected Blackbark Stands 

0 1.3 2.9 0.4 2 0 0 NO 

1 0.7 1.5 * 12.6 2 0 0 NO 

20 1.3 2.0 * 18.6 3 0 1 NO 

40 1.8 2.5 * 25.5 7 0 3 NO 

100 * 2.8 * 3.5 * 49.6 21 1 5 OG 

All Dwarf Mistletoe Affected Late Old Structure (LOS) Component Stands 

0 0.9 3.0 0.3 6 1 0 NO 

1 0.6 2.2 4.5 6 1 0 NO 

20 1.3 2.2 * 12.0 7 1 1 NO 

40 * 2.3 2.9 * 21.0 8 2 2 NO 

100 * 3.6 * 4.3 * 55.1 17 2 6 LS 

The Forest Vegetation Simulator calculated value (Table 41, page 102, Table 42) is above guidelines 

of greater than 10 percent volume loss due to dwarf mistletoe infection recommended in the forest 

plan (USFS 1990) (DMR greater than or equal to 2, DMI greater than or equal to 3 percent BFV loss 

from dwarf mistletoe greater than 10 percent). 

Spatial Analysis 

Table 43: Current Severity and Distribution of Western Dwarf Mistletoe by Stand and Plot

Stand 

Number Acres 

Number Of 

Sampled 

Plots 

Acres 

Represented 

by Each 

Plot 

* 

Percent 

With No 

Infection 

* * 

Percent 

With Light 

Infection 

*** 

Percent With 

Moderate 

Infection 

**** 

Percent With 

Heavy 

Infection 

Average of all Stands 

All Stands 2,005 477 4 54 14 21 11 

Blackbark 

Stands 692 207 3 53 11 22 14 

LOS Stands 1,313 270 5 55 16 20 9 

Black Bark Stands 

3 100 25 4 20 20 40 20 

4 71 20 4 60 30 10 0 

5 33 15 2 80 13 0 7 

6 20 15 1 67 0 20 13 

9 104 25 4 4 8 36 52 

15 40 15 3 100 0 0 0 

19 53 21 3 43 10 33 14 

47 90 35 3 85 6 9 0 

62 47 15 3 86 7 0 7 

139 134 21 6 14 10 57 19 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Pathology 

104

Stand 

Number Acres 

Number Of 

Sampled 

Plots 

Acres 

Represented 

by Each 

Plot 

* 

Percent 

With No 

Infection 

* * 

Percent 

With Light 

Infection 

*** 

Percent With 

Moderate 

Infection 

**** 

Percent With 

Heavy 

Infection 

LOS Stands 

18 37 25 1 64 12 16 8 

38 129 30 4 23 27 30 20 

41 254 45 6 56 16 16 13 

56 45 15 3 27 27 40 6 

60 70 20 4 80 15 5 0 

63 96 25 4 72 20 4 4 

64 52 20 3 70 20 5 5 

81 28 15 2 27 40 26 7 

145 198 35 6 58 0 31 11 

155 404 40 10 90 0 10 0 

* Percent With No Infection = Percentage of sampled plots with no dwarf mistletoe. 

** Percent With Light Infection = Percentage of sampled plots with a calculated DMI of 1-1.9 

*** Percent With Moderate Infection = Percentage of sampled plots with a calculated DMI of 2-3.9 

**** Percent With Heavy Infection = Percentage of sampled plots with a calculated DMI of 4-6. 

The difference between Alternatives 2 and 3 after treatment are essentially the same in both blackbark 

and LOS stands. Under Alternative 3, the DMR and DMI values would remain lower than either 

Alternatives 1 and 2 for 40 years in blackbark stands (Figure 22, page 100, Table 40, page 101; Table 

41, page 102; Table 42, page 103). Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 have essentially the same projected values 

20 and 40 years from now in LOS stands. 

Modeling indicates that the percent board foot volume loss due to infection of WDM is variable under 

the three alternatives. Alternative 1 indicates that percent board foot volume loss will not be above 

standards and guidelines (no more than 10 percent loss in productivity) (USFS 1990) for 

approximately 30 years in blackbark and LOS stands (Table 40, page 101). Alternatives 2 and 3 are 

projected to always be above LRMP standards and guidelines in blackbark stands, but not for 

approximately another 20 years in LOS stands (Table 41, page 102, Table 42, page 103). This is 

likely due to the affect of mistletoe infection in the larger residual trees following treatment which 

show a relatively greater affect of percent board foot volume loss (PBFVL) in comparison with the 

higher proportion of smaller diameter trees infected under Alternative 1. 

The results of this analysis, a review of literature, and professional opinion suggest that 

Alternative 3 will be the best option to reduce the deleterious effects of WDM in blackbark and LOS 

stands for the following reasons: 

 Modeling indicates that the effects of western dwarf mistletoe alone will not hinder blackbark and 

LOS stands from achieving old growth characteristics (Hopkins et al. 1992) on average within the 

Deadlog project area. Without treatment, however, it is far more likely that the stands will be 

more susceptible to bark beetle and fire related mortality and that dwarf mistletoe will spread and 

increase in severity over time. Treatment will reduce these risks and deleterious effects. 

 In both Alternatives 2 and 3, DMR and DMI values will be reduced following treatment compared 

to Alternative 1 in blackbark and LOS stands. This will reduce the deleterious effects of dwarf 

mistletoe where it occurs within the stand. 

 Alternative 3 will create more spacing between residual trees and therefore reduce between tree 

spread of mistletoe and likely increase the possibility of lightly infected trees of outgrowing 

mistletoe infection. 

 The retention of mistletoe free ponderosa pine with old tree characteristics (Van Pelt 2008) and the 

greater distance between residual trees prescribed in Alternative 3 will likely allow for quicker 

development of old growth stands (Hopkins et al. 1992). 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife BE

105

WILDLIFE – BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION 

SUMMARY OF EFFECTS INCLUDING THE BIOLOGICAL 

EVALUATION (BE) 

The Wildlife biological evaluation (BE) summarized the determinations for each alternative in Table 

44. It was determined that implementation of all of the proposed activities will have no effect and 

would have no impact on any sensitive wildlife species or associated habitat. 

Table 44: Summary of Conclusions for Species Considered Under the Biological Evaluation for 

the Deadlog Project Area 

Species Alternative 1 

(No Action) 

Alternative 2 

(Proposed Action) 

Alternative 3 - 

Northern Bald Eagle No Impact No Impact No Impact 

Northern Spotted Owl No Effect No Effect No Effect 

American Peregrin Falcon No Effect No Effect No Effect 

Johnson’s Hairstreak Butterfly No impact No impact No impact 

Lewis’ Woodpecker No impact No impact No impact 

White Headed Woodpecker No impact No impact No impact 

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat No impact No impact No impact 

* All Project Design Criteria (PDCs) in the 2006-2009 Programmatic BA are met. Consultation is not necessary. 

INTRODUCTION 

This report meets the direction provided by the Forest Service Manual (FSM 2600), the Deschutes 

National Forest Land and Resource Plan (LRMP, 1990) as amended. It specifically addresses the 

project’s effects upon federally proposed or listed candidate, threatened, or endangered species and 

forest-wide sensitive species (TES species). Management Indicator Species (MIS, USDA 1990), 

Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC, Fish and Wildlife Service designation), High Priority 

Shorebirds (Fish and Wildlife Service designation), Focal Landbird Species, and the components of 

these species’ habitats are addressed by the Wildlife Report for the project. 

Projects proposed in 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 2006-09 (USDA et al. 

2006), 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 

project is designed to meet the applicable Programmatic BA’s PDCs. 

This report has considered and applied the best science available, including papers, reports, literature 

reviews, review citations, peer reviews, science consistency reviews, results of ground-based 

observations or surveys, and the use of GIS (PAGs, forest structure, tree density, road density, etc.). 

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 Referenced or 

Reviewed section of this document. 

It may include required mitigation measures or optional recommendations designed to eliminate or 

reduce negative effects. A professional-level wildlife biologist has completed this Biological 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife BE 

106

Evaluation (BE), and it has been reviewed and approved by a journey-level biologist. It will be filed 

with the originating request for Pre-Field Review and included in the project’s files with the 

supporting NEPA documentation. 

LOCATION DESCRIPTION 

The project is within the East Cascades Ecoregion (ODFW 2006). It is specifically designated as EC08 Sixteen Butte. The identified special features are: 1) winter range for deer and elk; and 2) the area 

has some of the largest tracts of older-aged ponderosa pine forest in the ecoregion. Key Habitats 

include ponderosa pine woodlands and Key Species include Lewis’ woodpecker and white-headed 

woodpecker. 

Only a small portion of the project area is classified as Deer Habitat (MA7, winter range, 586 acres, 

3.6 percent) with the majority of it summer range. 

SPECIES AND HABITATS EVALUATED

The following species (Table 45) and their habitats were considered in the preparation of this 

document. Those with bolded type are known, suspected or have some potential to occur within the 

project’s boundaries. There are no known current sites occupied, no known historic sites, and no 

current or potential habitats for those species that are not in bold. 

Table 45: Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species List 

Species (Scientific) Species (Common) Classification 

Strix occidentalis caurina Northern spotted owl T, MIS 

Rana pretiosa Oregon spotted frog C, OR/S

Martes pennanti pacifica Pacific fisher C, S, SOC, OR/S

Haliaeetus leucocephalus Northern bald eagle S, OR/T, MIS

Pristiloma arcticum var. crateris Crater Lake tightcoil S 

Pristinicola hemphilli Pristine springsnail S 

Boloria selene atrocostalis Silver-bordered fritillary S 

Mitoura johnsoni Johnson’s hairstreak butterfly S

Podiceps auritus Horned grebe S 

Podiceps grisegena Red-necked grebe S, OR/S

Bucephala albeola Bufflehead S 

Cotumicops noveboracensis Yellow rail S 

Agelaius tricolor Tricolored blackbird S 

Seiurus noveboracenis Northern waterthrush S 

Melanerpes lewis Lewis’ woodpecker S, OR/S, MIS

Picoides albolarvatus White-headed woodpecker S, OR/S, MIS

Centrocercus urophasianus Greater sage-grouse S, SOC, OR/S

Falco peregrinus anatum American peregrine falcon S, OR/E, MIS

Gulo gulo luteus California wolverine S, SOC, OR/T, MIS

Sylvilagus idahoensis Pygmy rabbit S, SOC, OR/S

Corynorhinus townsendii Townsend’s big-eared bat S, OR/S, MIS

*Federally listed and Regional Forester Sensitive species come from the Region 6 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive species list for 

the Deschutes National Forest; E=Endangered, T=Threatened, S= Sensitive; C=Candidate for Federal listing, P=Proposed for Federal listing, 

SOC=USFWS Species of Concern, S=USFS Region 6 Sensitive, OR/T,E,S = State of Oregon status. *Petitioned for listing but found to not 

be warranted by the USFWS (USDI 2003,), currently under review by the FWS; MIS = Management Indicator Species. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife BE

107

Johnson’s Hairstreak Butterfly 

Existing Condition 

This butterfly species can be found in coniferous forests, especially old growth. Their occurrence and 

distribution is limited to trees in stands with mistletoe infections. The primary caterpillar host is the 

pine dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthoblum campylopodum) that grows on conifers. It is likely that several 

species of dwarf mistletoes are utilized (USDA 2008). The butterfly lays its eggs on and the 

caterpillarand feeds on all exposed parts of the plant. The chrysalids hibernate in the mistletoe mass 

(Opler et al. 2006). This species is uncommon with a limited distribution in the Pacific Northwest. In 

eastern Oregon it has only been confirmed in the northeast near Baker City, approximately 200 miles 

to the northeast of the project area, although surveys have been limited and identification is difficult. 

It has an overlapping range with other species that are very similar in appearance. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: If present in the area, there would be no adverse effects to the hairstreak 

unless catastrophic wildfire would eliminate a large area of forest on the landscape. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Due to the dependence of hairstreak butterflies on mistletoe for critical 

life functions, the project’s reduction of trees with mistletoe may have some minor, short-term affects 

to them. The entire project area is not being treated and not all mistletoe infected trees would be 

removed. Retention patches for deer and other species would also have infected trees within them. 

Very little is known about this species and its distribution which leaves the effects question unclear. 

Consistency with LRMP Standards and Guidelines as Amended

No specific LRMP guidance for this species. Reference the Management Requirements/Project 

Design Criteria in the Wildlife Report for additional information. 

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, 2006; Saab et al. 

2002). Marshall et al. (2006) 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 open woodland canopy and largediameter dead or dying trees. It can excavate its own nest chamber but prefers to use an existing 

abandoned woodpecker hole. The population has declined due to the loss of nesting and food storage 

trees, and increased competition for nest cavities from introduced European starlings (Csuti et al. 

2001). 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Stand density would continue to increase, which would continue to 

reduce open habitat conditions desired by Lewis’ woodpeckers. There would be a slow degradation in 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife BE 

108

the numbers of large green trees and snags as insect and competition related mortality increased with 

time. The loss of understory trees from mistletoe mortality would also contribute to this decline across 

the landscape. Potential catastrophic wildfires would create a large pulse of snags for foraging and 

nesting, although within 10 years or less a large number of them would fall. Recovery of green trees 

and future snags would require decades to provide suitable habitat conditions. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions would have some direct effects to Lewis’ 

woodpecker habitat due to the loss of snags to prescribed fire, temporary road construction, and safety 

issues. Some snag recruitment would occur from mortality of green trees from prescribed burns. 

Salvage cutting of snags would not occur. Reducing stand density to create more open conditions with 

larger trees would be beneficial and increase available habitat in the long-term. Future potential nest 

trees would be provided through time from recruitment of and retention of green trees. Adverse 

effects listed above may impact individuals in the short-term but would not likely be significant at the 

population scale. 

Consistency with LRMP Standards and Guidelines as Amended

All applicable standards and guidelines will be met. However, current snag levels are estimated to be 

below recommended levels from DecAID. Monitoring after harvest and burning operations will 

determine if snag creation is necessary. Some snags will be created through girdling as well (see 

Connected Actions). Refer to the Management Requirements/Project Design Criteria and K-V 

Projects sections in the Wildlife Report. 

White-headed Woodpecker

Existing Condition 

This woodpecker is the only one that relies heavily on the seeds of ponderosa pine. They prefer open 

ponderosa pine or mixed-conifer forests dominated by ponderosa pine. Their numbers increase with 

large diameter old growth ponderosa pine and will use both contiguous and fragmented habitats. 

However, many seemingly good habitats are unoccupied, and they are considered uncommon across 

their range. Managed forests, including shelterwood or seed tree cuts, will be used if large pine trees 

are retained. Snags, stumps, leaning trees and dead tops are all used for nesting, which is usually in a 

very open, low canopy situation (Marshall et al. 2006). Nest trees average 18 inches dbh and foraging 

occurs on larger dbh trees. This species has suffered a severe population decline due to the loss of 

mature ponderosa pine forests (Csuti et al. 2001). 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife BE

109

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Stand densification will continue which will further reduce the open 

habitat conditions desired by white-headed woodpeckers. There would be a slow degradation in the 

numbers of large green trees and snags as insect and competition related mortality increased with time. 

The loss of understory trees from mistletoe mortality will also contribute to this decline across the 

landscape. Potential catastrophic wildfires would create a large pulse of snags, although this species is 

more dependent upon foraging in green trees. Recovery of green trees and future snags would require 

decades to provide suitable habitat conditions. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions would have some direct effects to white-headed 

woodpecker habitat due to the loss of snags to prescribed fire and safety issues. Some snag 

recruitment would occur from mortality of green trees resulting from prescribed burns, but the number 

cannot be estimated. Salvage cutting of snags would not occur. Reducing stand densities to create 

more open conditions with larger trees would be beneficial and increase available habitat in the longterm. Future potential nest trees would be provided through time from recruitment of retention green 

trees. Additionally, the thinning of large areas of black bark ponderosa pine would result in larger 

trees with higher seed production. This would benefit white-headed woodpeckers during the winter 

months. Adverse effects may impact individuals in the short-term but would not likely be significant 

at the population scale. 

Consistency with LRMP Standards and Guidelines as Amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines will be met. However, current snag levels are estimated to be 

below minimum requirements. Snag creation is a possible mitigation tactic. Refer to the Management 

Requirements/Project Design Criteria and K-V Projects sections in the Wildlife Report.

Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat 

Existing Condition 

Two subspecies of Townsend’s are found in Oregon, including one east of the Cascade Mountains. 

The presence of suitable roost sites is more important than the vegetation type in determining the 

distribution of this bat. It roosts in buildings, caves, mines and bridges. They have been documented 

to utilize tree cavities and lava outcrop overhangs in Central Oregon (Dogkin et al. 1995). They 

primarily feed on moths but will take other insects. Capture is usually on the wing, but they take 

insects from foliage (Csuti et al. 2001). Human disturbance may cause bats to permanently abandon 

caves (Graham 1966 in Maser et al. 1981). Populations have steadily declined (Csuti et al. 2001), 

which has been observed in trend monitoring in local caves. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: No effect unless large-scale catastrophic wildfire eliminated potential 

forage resources (i.e. insects associated with shrubs). 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife BE 

110

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Presently there are no known cave habitats for roosts for the big-eared 

bat within the project area. If discovered, these habitats would be protected. Big-eared bats are 

known to utilize cliffs, rock outcrops and snags/trees for day roosting. Potential forage resources 

would be protected by measures developed for other species. Reference the Mitigation 

Measures/Project Design Criteria in the Wildlife Report. 

Consistency with LRMP Standards and Guidelines as Amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines will be met. 

Cumulative Effects 

Table 46 broadly summarizes potential landscape-scale effects of past and foreseeable actions in the 

vicinity of the project on wildlife, including the species assessed in this report. 

Table 46: Cumulative Effect Summary 

Management 

Activities/Natural 

Events/Foreseeable 

Actions* 

Description Effects Upon Wildlife Species 

1. KO Timber 

Sale/Reforestation 

Plantation fence maintenance 

and big game repellent 

applications. Dwarf mistletoe 

control activities (pruning and 

girdling of infected trees). Past 

harvest/thinning effects. 

Reductions of hiding cover for deer and 

snags/logs for dependent species including 

white-headed and Lewis’ woodpeckers. 

Mistletoe control may have adverse effects 

on hairstreak butterflies if present. Local 

impacts on individual species but no longterm adverse effects on populations. 

2. Road maintenance within 

and adjacent to the project 

area. 

System roads that remain in 

place with associated human use 

and periodic maintenance 

activities. Management actions 

past, present and future via 

travel management (Green Dot) 

and physical closures to mitigate 

negative effects. 

Direct and indirect (i.e. disturbance, habitat 

effectiveness reduction) losses of habitat for 

deer and other species. Permanent adverse 

effects to individuals at the local scale but 

unlikely to have measurable effects at the 

population level. No effects on whiteheaded, Lewis’ woodpeckers or 

Townsend’s big-eared bat. 

3. Grazing by livestock and 

associated improvements and 

maintenance activities 

(Quartz Mountain and Sand 

Springs Allotments). 

Active cow allotment. Several 

water sets are within or adjacent 

to the planning area. Buried 

water lines cross the area in 

several locations. Extensive 

fencing is present. 

Affects upon herbaceous and shrub 

vegetation that may affect dependent 

species. Potential effects on Townsend’s 

big-eared bat insect forage, however, 

essentially a very minor effect. Generally, 

proper utilization management and pasture 

rotations reduce the adverse effects to 

infrequent local impacts to individuals. 

Water sets are the most impacting to 

vegetation but occupy a very small area. 

Managed grazing is not likely to affect 

populations. 

4. Aspen Project vegetation 

treatments. 

Within a few miles of the project 

boundary. Includes prescribed 

burns, mowing and thinning of 

pine plantations that have been 

Effects upon wildlife species were 

addressed and the appropriate mitigation 

measures were adopted to reduce potential 

adverse effects. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife BE

111

Management 

Activities/Natural 

Events/Foreseeable 

Actions* 

Description Effects Upon Wildlife Species 

done and will continue into the 

future until completed. 

5. Wildfires At least 6 fires greater than 100 

acres have happened since 1913 

within or near the project area. 

The fires having occurred within 

the boundary include: South Ice 

Cave (S, SW portions of area in 

1915) and Quartz Mt. (NE and 

central portions in 1913 and 

1918). The most recent large 

fire was the Aspen Flat fire of 

1959 to the east of the project 

area. 

Habitat related alterations by past fires have 

been included in assessments done for the 

project area including hiding cover, 

structural stage classification, etc. Fires are 

a natural disturbance and many species have 

evolved with them and depend upon fire 

created habitat conditions. Atypically hot 

fires may be damaging to soils and result in 

erosion and loss of site productivity which 

may have long-term adverse effects on 

many species. No known effects on species 

assessed by the BE. 

6. Opal mine Located in the SW portion of 

Quartz Mountain. Active 

annually. 

Permanent habitat losses but a very small 

site. 

7. Past fuels treatments Wigtop area. Conversion of shrub habitats to grass 

domination in the short to mid-term 

depending upon site and intensity of 

treatments. Variable effects on wildlife 

with some adversely affected and some 

benefited. Potential but minor effects on 

Townsend’s big-eared bat forage insects. 

8. Forest Access and Travel 

Management EIS 

Reviews all system roads on the 

Forest. Final decision will 

specify closed unless posted 

open. Prohibits cross country 

travel. 

Benefits many species sensitive to human 

disturbance. 

9. Miscellaneous Cinder pits, power line corridor, 

illegal motorcycle trails, 

dispersed camp sites, wildlife 

guzzlers, cone collection, 

firewood (snag/log) thefts, 

noxious/exotic weeds, etc. 

Permanent loss of habitat, disturbance, and 

fragmentation. Effects variable by species 

resulting in losses of some individuals but 

unlikely to adversely affect populations. 

Effects are very limited on species 

addressed by the BE. 

10. Weed Control EIS Will allow chemical control of 

noxious and exotic weeds when 

approved. 

Benefits 

* Notes: Additional detail for individual management activity/natural events by respective reference numbers: 

1. Past changes in habitats (e.g. structural stage, crown cover, etc.) are reflected in hiding cover indices, LOS assessments, 

etc. thereby incorporating cumulative effects where the measurements were done, e.g. Implementation Units and the 

project area. Currently the ODFW population indices for mule deer indicate a stable population for the South Paulina 

deer herd subunit, which is near their Management Objective (MO). 

2. Road/motorized trail density assessments (e.g. Implementation Units) and effects determinations for those species where 

applicable meet the quantification aspect of cumulative effects for this activity. Reference the Wildlife, MIS for details. 

3. Bounding was generally limited to the Implementation Units. 

Specifically, for the foregoing TES species addressed by this report, there are no cumulative effects 

from preceding, ongoing or known future activities that would adversely affect any of the species 

potentially in the project area. Effects may impact individuals in the short-term but not population 

viability.
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

112

WILDLIFE – MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES AND 

HABITAT 

SUMMARY OF EFFECTS ANALYSIS CONCLUSIONS 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

 Species dependent upon more complex forest structure and higher canopy cover would benefit in 

the short to mid-term, e.g. forest accipiter hawks, American marten. 

 Species dependent upon open habitats associated with frequent, low intensity wildfires would 

decline (white-headed woodpecker, flammulated owl, chipping sparrow, etc.). 

 Shrub habitats would likely decline due to shading by the increasing densities of trees which 

would adversely affect dependent species (green-tailed towhee, fox sparrow). The lack of natural 

disturbance such as low intensity fire would result in more decadent shrub communities with less 

age class diversification.

 Deer hiding and thermal cover would slowly increase with stand densification. However, browse 

forage (e.g. bitterbrush) would likely decline slowly in both abundance and quality due to shading 

and competition. 

 Snag and log densities would likely increase as competitive stresses upon trees result in more 

mortality. Snag/log diameters would however slowly decrease due to the limited resources 

available to each tree to grow as stand densification increases. Species that utilize small diameter 

snags would benefit, e.g. black-backed woodpecker, while those requiring larger snags or more 

open habitats would decline, e.g. northern flicker. 

 Fragmentation from past timber harvest activities is presently low and would continue to decline. 

The fragmentation and disturbance affects due to roads is presently high, which would continue as 

none would be closed. 

 Unauthorized motorcycle trail impacts (cutting of trees and damages to other vegetation and soils), 

including disturbance, would likely increase with time. 

 In the mid to long-term the risks of epidemic insect impacts and/or catastrophic wildfires would 

increase and if they occur there would be long-term negative impacts to a large number of species 

that are dependent upon forest and shrub habitats. A few species that utilize burnt forests would 

benefit until the trees fall, e.g. black-backed woodpecker, Lewis’ woodpecker, olive-sided 

flycatcher. The magnitude and duration of these effects depend upon the size and intensity of the 

stochastic events of insect epidemics and/or wildfires. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

 Both action alternatives have very similar effects on wildlife species, as there is only a minor 

difference in acreage treated and each utilizes the same types of vegetative treatment prescriptions.

 Species dependent upon more complex forest structure and higher canopy cover would likely 

decline affecting individuals but not populations, e.g. forest accipiter hawks, American marten. 

 Species dependent upon open habitats and large ponderosa pine trees associated with frequent, low 

intensity wildfires would increase, e.g. northern flicker, flammulated owl, Lewis’ woodpecker, 

white-headed woodpecker, etc. 

 Shrub habitats would be reduced in the short-term due to disturbance including prescribed fire, 

mowing, and logging, which would likely negatively affect shrub dependent species (green-tailed 

towhee, fox sparrow, dark eyed junco, etc.). The more decadent shrub communities would be 

regenerated in the mid to long-term. Thus, the effects would be temporary affecting individuals 

but not populations. Species favoring grassy habitats, e.g. chipping sparrow, should increase. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

113

 Deer hiding and thermal cover would decrease. However, road closures would improve solitude 

and habitat effectiveness. 

 Snag and log densities would likely decrease due to prescribed fire and logging. Future snag 

diameters would slowly increase due to the reduction of competitive stresses between trees with 

thinning. Species that utilize large diameter snags would benefit, e.g. northern flicker, in the longterm. Mortality from bark beetles would be reduced in treated areas, which may affect species that 

specialize in the smaller diameter snags. Retention patches, however, would still have some 

mortality in the smaller trees from competition. 

 Fragmentation from past timber harvest activities is presently low and would likely remain stable 

or improve with road closures. 

 Motorcycle trail impacts to vegetation would likely increase with time. 

 In the mid to long-term, the risks of epidemic insect impacts and/or catastrophic wildfires would 

be significantly decreased on 70% of the project area. A few species that utilize burnt forests, e.g. 

black-backed woodpecker, Lewis’ woodpecker, olive-sided flycatcher, mountain blue bird, may be 

affected without large pulses of fire killed trees, however prescribed burns and small wildfires 

would likely mitigate this effect. 

 The reduction of stand densities by harvest and thinning activities would reduce competitive 

stresses between trees and reduce the adverse effects of mistletoe infestations. In the long-term, 

single story LOS (i.e. Stage 7) would evolve towards the HRV levels common to xeric ponderosa 

pine communities. This would greatly benefit wildlife species that are highly dependent upon this 

habitat type including: white-headed woodpecker, Lewis’ woodpecker, pygmy nuthatch, 

flammulated owl, etc. All of these species have declining population trends. 

 There would be some impacts associated with soil compaction and direct mortality of shrubs by 

logging activities. Temporary roads, skid trails and landings would also have adverse but 

localized effects upon habitats. Sub-soiling the landings and temporary roads would mitigate 

these effects. 

 Fuel reduction activities following commercial and non-commercial tree thinning would reduce 

the risks of future large, intensity wildfires and promote the establishment of herbaceous plants in 

the understory. In addition, the exposure of mineral soil from prescribed burning would enhance 

the potential for conifer regeneration, particularly where there are older overstory pine trees. 

 Shrub community effects from fuel treatments may be adverse in the short to mid-term depending 

upon the type, intensity and timing of treatments. Low quality sites (i.e. xeric, shallow soils) for 

bitterbrush would require 15-25 years for full recovery, which may be impacting to deer and shrub 

dependent species of birds and mammals. Mitigation retention patches would alleviate these 

effects. 

 Cable logging on steep slopes (Alternative 2) would not have a substantial difference in effects on 

habitats when compared to the fuel treatments in Alternative 3. Both alternatives would reduce 

tree density and canopy cover. 

 Fuel reduction treatments using mechanical mowing, ladder fuel reduction, and prescribed burns 

in units without preceding commercial harvest would have effects similar to those described for 

post-logging treatments on soils, shrubs, and understory trees. There would likely be losses of 

some trees, snags and logs to prescribed fire with the resulting adverse impacts to deer hiding 

cover and snag/log dependent species. Both prescribed fire and mowing of shrubs may cause 

direct mortality to nesting birds if conducted in the spring. The extent, intensity, and timing of 

treatments would vary and so would the effects upon habitats and wildlife species. Multiple 

treatments (logging, pile and burn, mowing, broadcast burning) in units will have the most 

pronounced and long lasting effects on understory vegetation. 

 Overall, fuel treatments would benefit those species dependent upon open forested habitats, 

maintained by frequent low intensity fire. Those species oriented to complex forest structure and 

high canopy cover would be negatively affected but the magnitude depends upon the variables of 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

114

treatments and the mitigation measures implemented. Individuals would be affected but not 

populations. 

 The potential for large-scale intense wildfires in the project area is very high currently. The 

effects upon wildlife from wildfires would be much more adverse in terms of duration and the 

number of species affected than the local, short to mid-term effects of treatments, particularly if 

mitigated. 

 The proposed treatments would result in the return to a more natural vegetation disturbance cycle 

that would benefit those species dependent upon relatively frequent, low intensity fire and open 

forest conditions. Many of the species assessed by this report are presently in a negative 

population trend situation due to the lack of providing these habitat conditions at the landscapescale. Therefore, overall the project would have many more benefits to wildlife from the action 

alternatives than the no action option. 

INTRODUCTION

This Wildlife Report meets the direction provided by the Forest Service Manual (FSM 2600), the 

Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Plan (LRMP; USDA, 1990), and the Environmental 

Assessment for the Continuation of Interim Direction Establishing Riparian, Ecosystem and Wildlife 

Standards for Timber Sales (referenced as the “Eastside Screens”; USDA, 1995). 

This report specifically addresses the project’s effects upon the following species groups and their 

habitat: 

 Management Indicator Species (MIS, LRMP designation), 

 Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC), 

 Focal Bird Species, 

 High Priority Shorebirds (HPSBs) 

This report has considered and applied the best science available, including papers, reports, literature 

reviews, review citations, peer reviews, science consistency reports, and results of ground-based 

observations or surveys. The available information was used to determine species or habitat presence 

or effects. A complete list of the science used can be found within the species discussions and in the 

Literature Cited or Reviewed section of this document. 

Neotropical migratory birds have become species of interest, due to the downward trend of landbirds 

in the western United States. The declines of these populations are a result of many complex issues, 

but factors believed to be responsible include the loss, fragmentation, and alteration of historic 

vegetation communities. Other probable causes to the decline include predation from feral species, 

nest parasitism, and use of pesticides associated with agriculture areas. There is currently an 

Executive Order (13186) that provides enhanced cooperation between the Forest Service and U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service (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 advance 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 associated with these habitats. The conservation strategy lists priority habitats including: 1) 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

115

Ponderosa Pine, 2) Mixed Conifer (late successional), 3) Oak-Pine Woodland, 4) Unique Habitats 

(Lodgepole Pine, White Bark Pine, Meadows, Aspen, and Subalpine Fir). 

Another publication recently became available from the USFWS titled “Birds of Conservation 

Concern 2008” (BCC), which identifies species, subspecies, and populations of all migratory nongame birds that, without additional conservation actions, are likely to become candidates for listing 

under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. Bird species considered for inclusion on lists in 

this report (and the companion Biological Evaluation) include non-game birds, game birds without 

hunting seasons, subsistence-hunted non-game species in Alaska, and ESA candidates, proposed 

endangered or threatened, and recently delisted species. While all of the bird species included in BCC 

2008 are priorities for conservation action, the list makes no finding in 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 conservation actions (USFW 2008). 

From the BCC publication, Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) were developed based on similar 

geographic parameters. One BCR encompasses the Bend-Fort Rock Ranger District—BCR 9, Great 

Basin. Species on these lists are discussed within this document if they are known to or potentially 

could occur within the proposed treatment areas. 

In 2004, a publication titled “High Priority Shorebirds—2004” became available, also by the USFWS. 

This publication identifies U.S. and Canadian shorebird populations that are considered highly 

imperiled or of high conservation concern by the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan as of August 2004. 

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 may have persistence issues at a regional or national 

level but may not have persistence issues at the state or local level. In order to get an idea of the level 

of concern for these species, rankings were obtained from Natureserve Explorer: an online 

encyclopedia of life, available at http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. Rankings are given for global, 

national, and state levels. Only the state rankings are used in this analysis. This source has been 

incorporated in the Wildlife Species Review List (Table 47). 

The project is within the East Cascades Ecoregion (ODFW 2006), EC-08 Sixteen Butte. The 

identified special features are: 1) winter range for deer and elk; and 2) some of the largest tracts of 

older-aged ponderosa pine forest in the ecoregion. Key habitat includes ponderosa pine woodlands 

and key species include Lewis’ Woodpecker and White-headed woodpecker. 

EXISTING CONDITION 

Plant Association Groups (PAGs) 

Dry ponderosa pine is the dominate plant association group (PAG) within the project area. Dry 

lodgepole pine is next in dominance but much more limited in its spatial scope and stand sizes 

(approximately 18% of area). Lodgepole pine is often associated with stands dominated by ponderosa 

pine. A very small mixed conifer stand is located on the upper north slope of Quartz Mountain. Xeric 

shrub communities are relatively small and normally located on the tops of buttes or south slopes of 

ridges (e.g. Sixteen Butte). Mountain mahogany is present in small patches in these areas and often 

associated with rock outcrops. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

116

Structural stages have been classified by the project silviculturist and described in detail in that report. 

In general, structural stages 4 and 5 are dominate on the landscape (approximately 80 of the area) and 

are referred to as “black bark” or mid-aged stands that have not evolved long enough to be considered 

old-growth (i.e. stages 6 and 7). As noted, stage 6 accounts for 12.4 percent of the area and stage 7 

only 1.5 percent. A few open, single-storied ponderosa pine stands are very near the stage 7 

classification. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

117

Analysis Methodology 

Deer Cover 

To assess deer cover, each proposed treatment unit was field reviewed to determine if they met criteria 

to be classified as deer hiding and/or thermal cover. Thermal cover is applicable on winter range 

(Deer Habitat MA-7). 

Hiding cover is defined using the Thomas (1979) definition. Three classes were utilized including 

non-cover, marginal, and acceptable. At least 50 percent of a stand/unit must provide hiding cover to 

meet the definition of marginal and at least 75 percent to meet acceptable. The stands/units are 

quantified as follows: non-cover equals 0 acres; marginal equals 50 percent of the stand/unit acreage; 

and acceptable equals 100 percent of the stand/unit acreage. This approach has been adopted to better 

reflect the patchy environment common to the xeric site conditions common to Central Oregon. It has 

been developed over a period of about 10 years by professional biologists on a number of projects 

affecting low elevation xeric (dry) habitat types. 

Thermal cover classification has also been modified to reflect the low site productivity of the xeric 

conifer stands in the project area and must meet at least 30 percent crown cover. Crown cover 

exceeding 30 percent in dry ponderosa pine sites are at extremely high risk of bark beetle infestations. 

These areas are most likely only a temporary benefit to deer and other species. 

Species Surveys 

It was assumed that if habitat conditions were present in the project area, that habitat could support a 

species if they were present in the area, even if lacking direct observation of their presence. Species 

that would only briefly visit the area during migration, or extremely rare in the area, were not assessed 

for effects upon habitats by the project. Other assumptions made in the determinations of effects are 

documented in the following discussions. 

Surveys established for northern goshawk (Woodbridge et al. 1993) were utilized in two consecutive 

years assessing the project area. One northern goshawk nest site and two Cooper’s hawk sites were 

located. No other formal surveys for species were conducted. General reconnaissance in the field 

noted many species that would be expected for the habitat types present in the project area. 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Old Growth Management Areas (OGMA)/Corridors 

There is one OGMA located within the project boundary of approximately 937 acres that is on Quartz 

Mountain. The OGMA primarily features ponderosa pine habitat with some small inclusions of 

lodgepole pine and mixed conifer. Presently, the OGMA is experiencing some mortality of larger 

overstory ponderosa pine due to competition from small trees in the understory. Additionally, there 

are significant areas with atypical amounts of dwarf mistletoe infestations. Fuel accumulations have 

placed the OGMA at high risk to catastrophic insect infestations and/or wildfire. The indicator species 

for the OGMA is the northern goshawk as specified by the LRMP (MA8, General Theme and 

Objectives, 4-149) for old-growth ponderosa pine. One active nest was located adjacent to the project 

area. Other species that should be considered as indicators of this habitat type include the whiteheaded woodpecker and flammulated owl. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

118

Prior to this project, there have been no previously designated/mapped OGMA corridors within the 

project area but several terminated adjacent to the project boundary. Corridors to link LOS stands and 

OGMAs are required by the Eastside Screens. Corridors connecting the OGMA within the project 

area to others outside of it have been designated for this project. LOS outside of the OGMA is 

essentially non-existent and no corridors were designated for this category. 

Late and Old Structure (LOS) 

Ponderosa pine structural stages 4 and 5 are dominate on the landscape (approximately 80% of the 

planning area) and are referred to as “black bark” or mid-aged stands that have not evolved long 

enough to be considered old-growth (stages 6 and 7). A few open, single-storied ponderosa pine 

stands are very near the stage 7 classification. Ponderosa pine LOS in stage 6 multi-storied structure is 

1,702 acres (approximately 12.4 percent of the planning area) and stage 7 single storied structure is 

206 acres (approximately 1.5 percent of the planning area). The historic range of variability (HRV) 

for stage 6 in ponderosa pine is estimated to be 10 percent and stage 7 is 55 percent. The Eastside 

Screens require an analysis of HRV, and in this situation Scenario A is applicable because a LOS stage 

(either or both) is below the minimum. Stage 5 ponderosa pine is presently estimated to be 5,444 

acres (approximately 34 percent of the planning area). 

Lodgepole pine stage 5 is 403 acres (approximately 2.5 percent of the planning area) and stage 6 is 28 

acres (less than 1.8 percent of the planning area). This stage has an HRV of only 5 percent so there is 

good future potential for LOS ponderosa pine as these stands mature. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat connectivity would remain favorable, unless a catastrophic 

wildfire was to occur within the project area or within the portions of the corridors outside the project 

boundary. Without wildfire there would likely be a slow degradation in the numbers of large green 

trees and canopy cover as insect and competition related mortality increased with time. Also losses of 

understory trees from mistletoe will also contribute to this decline across the landscape. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3: 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Where possible unit boundaries avoided designated corridors. The 

Eastside Screens require a minimum amount of tree canopy equivalent to the upper on-third. of the 

site’s productivity. In addition, the corridors must be at least 400 feet in width. The density of 

retention trees to meet the standard were determined by the team’s silviculturist, and the respective 

prescriptions where units overlay corridors will meet this objective. Therefore, effects by thinning 

activities within corridors will be minimal and their function will remain intact. 

Species and Habitats Evaluated 

Species that are listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered, or are on the Regional 

Forester’s sensitive species list are analyzed in the Biological Evaluation for the project (Refer to the 

previous section; Wildlife – Biological Evaluation). 

A variety of mammals and birds utilize the habitat available within and adjacent to the project area. 

Refer to the following tables for a listing of species with special status that have been reviewed. 

Management Indicator Species (Table 47; Table 54, page 137; Table 55, page 140) come from the 

Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Plan (LRMP)[1990]; Landbird Focal Species (Table 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

119

56, page 142) come from the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East-Slope of the Cascade 

Mountains in Oregon and Washington (Altman 2000); Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC, Table 

57, page 145) come from the US Fish and Wildlife Service Birds of Conservation Concern – BCR 9 

(Great Basin) [2002]; and Shorebirds (Table 58, page 146) come from the 2004 US Fish and Wildlife 

Service U. S. Shorebird Conservation Plan. 

Conclusions are made as to the lack of presence of individual species based on habitat availability and 

suitability. Species bolded have known or potential habitat within the project area and will be further 

evaluated to determine potential impacts from the project. 

MANAGEMENT INDICATOR SPECIES 

Table 47: Management Indicator Species (MIS) 

Management Indicator Species 

Species Status Habitat Presence 

Northern goshawk MIS Mature and old-growth forests; 

especially high canopy closure and 

large trees 

Habitat in proposed treatment areas 

Cooper’s hawk MIS Similar to goshawk, can also use 

mature forests with high canopy 

closure/tree density 

Habitat in proposed treatment areas 

Sharp-shinned 

hawk 

MIS Similar to goshawk in addition to 

young, dense, even-aged stands 

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas 

Golden eagle MIS, BCC Large open areas with cliffs and 

rock outcrops 

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas. 

Red-tailed hawk MIS Large snags, open country 

interspersed with forests 

Habitat in proposed treatment areas. 

Townsend’s bigeared bat 

MIS Caves and old dwellings Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas. Refer to the BE for details. 

Elk MIS Mixed habitats Habitat in proposed treatment areas 

Mule deer MIS Mixed habitats Habitat in proposed treatment areas 

American marten MIS Mixed conifer or high elevation 

late-successional forests with 

abundant down woody material 

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas. 

Great gray owl MIS Mature and old growth forests 

associated with openings and 

meadows 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Great blue heron MIS Riparian edge habitats including 

lakes, streams, marshes and 

estuaries 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Osprey MIS Large snags associated with fish 

bearing water bodies 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Snags and downed 

wood associated 

species and habitat 

MIS Snags and downed woody material Habitat in proposed treatment areas 

*Federally listed and Regional Forester Sensitive species come from the Region 6 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive species list for 

the Deschutes National Forest (refer to the BE for details); 

Rationale for Species not Considered in Detail 

Townsend’s big eared bat was discussed under the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species List in the 

previous section – Wildlife, Biological Evaluation - of this EIS. 

For the following species, there is no habitat within or adjacent to proposed treatment areas. A lack of 

habitat assumes a lack of presence and therefore any actions or no action within the proposed 

treatment areas would have no affect to the following species: Great gray owl, great blue heron, 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

120

Osprey. For more specific information refer to the Project Record, Wildlife Report, beginning on page 

20. 

Species Receiving Further Considered 

Northern Goshawk: MIS, S3 Vulnerable 

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. Goshawks generally forage on 

songbirds, but often utilize small mammals such as rodents as well as the occasional snowshoe hare. 

Other bird species are also preyed upon such as blue and ruffed grouse. 

Within “Scenario A of the Eastside Screens Standard and Guides” (i.e. LOS stages 6 and/or 7 are 

below HRV) as it amends the Deschutes LRMP, the direction for management is as follows: 

 Protect every known active and historically used goshawk nest-site from disturbance. 

“Historically” refers to known nesting activity occurring at the site in the last 5 years. 

Seasonal disturbance restrictions may be implemented at sites. 

 30 acres of the most suitable nesting habitat surrounding all active and historical nest tree(s) 

would be deferred from harvest. 

 A 400 acres “Post Fledging Area” (PFA) would 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. 



Surveys of potential northern goshawk habitat in the proposed treatment areas used the method 

outlined by Woodbridge et al. (1993). There was one goshawk site located adjacent to the project 

area. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The current condition of the area provides relatively high canopy cover 

and complex stand structure, which may be utilized by goshawks. In the event of future insect 

epidemics and/or catastrophic wildfire, large areas could be adversely impacted and require many 

decades to recover to the quality of habitat preferred by goshawks. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed treatments would substantially reduce canopy cover and 

simplify stand structure, which would likely reduce the potential for goshawk nesting. Alternative 2 

treats approximately 48 percent (7,685 acres) and alternative 3 approximately 51 percent (8,220 acres) 

of the heavily forested stands in the planning area to reduce tree density and correspondingly the 

canopy coverage and structure. About 27 poercent (4,335 acres) of the project area would remain 

untreated that presently has higher tree density, however the majority of this acreage is fragmented 

slivers or otherwise unmanageable. The larger untreated stands (i.e. matrix polygons) may provide 

nesting habitat for goshawks and other accipiters (i.e. Cooper’s and sharp-shinned hawks). The 

LRMP requirements for deer hiding cover (WL-54 and 59) and structural diversity (WL-74, TM-56) 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

121

would provide some potential nesting sites and edges for foraging by goshawks. The non-black bark 

pine units within the OGMA will have 20% of their area retained in a non-thinned condition to 

mitigate effects on goshawks and other species oriented to more complex structure habitat. 

The one nest site is within a designated Old Growth Management Area but adjacent to it outside of the 

project boundary. A portion of the designated nest core (30 acres) would be within the project 

boundary but all of the post-fledgling area (400 acres) would be outside of it. The proposed treatments 

will not affect the nest core area. 

Cooper’s Hawk: MIS, S4 Apparently Secure 

The Cooper’s hawk prefers coniferous, mixed and deciduous forests, as well as riparian, juniper, and 

oak woodlands. The vegetative profile around nests are trees 30-60 and 50-70 years old in northwest 

and eastern Oregon, respectively with tree density of 265 per acre and 469 per acre. Cooper’s hawks 

commonly nest in deformed trees infected with mistletoe (Marshall et al. 2006). Surveys for 

goshawks, often can disclose Cooper’s hawk territories. There are two known Cooper’s hawk nests 

within the planning area. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The current condition of the area provides relatively high canopy cover 

and complex stand structure, which may be utilized by Cooper’s hawks. In the event of future insect 

epidemics and/or catastrophic wildfire, large areas could be adversely impacted and require many 

decades to recover to the quality of habitat preferred by Cooper’s hawks. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions are not expected to impact any known nest sites or 

dispersing Cooper’s hawks as they move through the area. As noted for goshawks, there will be a 

substantial reduction of canopy cover across the planning area that will limit future nesting habitat for 

Cooper’s hawks. The LRMP requirements for deer hiding cover (WL-54 and 59) and structural 

diversity (WL-74, TM-56) would provide some potential nesting sites and edges for foraging. An 

untreated nest core area of 15 acres would be retained around each of the two known nest sites. 

Reference the file map. 

Sharp-shinned Hawk: MIS, S4 Apparently Secure 

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 6,000 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 Cooper’s and goshawk, usually 25-50 year old, even-aged 

stands. The Deschutes LRMP defines sharp-shinned hawk habitat as stands with a mean canopy cover 

of 65 percent or greater, tree density of at least 475 trees per acre, stand age 40-60 years (LRMP WL25). In eastern Oregon all nest sites found by Reynolds et al. (1982) were in even-aged stands of white 

fir, Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, or aspen, with ground vegetation limited to grasses and creeping 

barberry (Marshall et al. 2006). Natureserve reports that the sharp-shinned hawk has a ranking of 

“apparently secure” in Oregon. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

122

Direct and Indirect Effects: The current condition of the area provides relatively high canopy cover 

and complex stand structure, which may be utilized by sharp-shinned hawks. In the event of future 

insect epidemics and/or catastrophic wildfire, large areas could be adversely impacted and require 

many decades to recover to the quality of habitat preferred by sharp-shinned hawks. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions would not be expected to impact any nest sites or 

dispersing sharp-shinned hawks as they move through the area. As noted for goshawks there will be a 

substantial reduction of canopy cover across the planning area that will limit future nesting habitat for 

sharp-shinned hawks. The LRMP requirements for deer hiding cover (WL-54 and 59) and structural 

diversity (WL-74, TM-56) would provide some potential nesting sites and edges for foraging. 

Golden Eagle: MIS, BCC, S4 Apparently Secure

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 they need 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. They especially favor 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). 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Tree densification is likely reducing the amount of potential foraging 

habitat and the availability of large overstory trees for nest sites due to competition and insect related 

mortality. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would likely be improved by reducing tree densities 

and the potential for large-scale wildfires that could eliminate potential nest trees. Refer to the 

Mitigation Measures/Project Design Criteria section for additional information (e.g. protection of 

cliffs). 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

123

Red-tailed Hawk: MIS, S5 Secure

Red-tailed hawks have an extremely wide tolerance for habitat variation, frequenting woodland, 

agricultural land, clearcuts, grasslands, sagebrush plains, alpine environments, and urban areas. Redtails are largely perch hunters, supported by habitat types that provide suitable perches (trees, utility 

poles, outcrops, etc.) and are open enough to permit the detection of ground-dwelling prey. They 

construct nests in a variety of situations including trees and cliffs, placing their nests higher than other 

broad-winged hawks (Marshal et al. 2006). The planning area provides abundant foraging habitat. 

Red-tails are commonly observed soaring above the planning area and across the district. There are no 

known nest sites that occur within the planning area. Natureserve (2006) ranks this species as 

“secure” in most of continental United States, including Oregon. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Tree densification is likely reducing the amount of potential 

foraging habitat and the availability of large overstory trees for nest sites due to tree density 

and insect related mortality. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would likely be improved by reducing tree densities 

and the potential for large-scale wildfires that could eliminate potential nest trees. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met. 

Elk: MIS, S5 Secure. 

Elk are uncommon within the project area. They are most likely to be present during spring and fall 

migration. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: There would be no known or expected short-term adverse effects. 

Without forest health treatments the risk of catastrophic wildfire would increase in the future. 

Catastrophic wildfire could place elk cover at risk over potentially large areas of the landscape. 

Recovery time from wildfire could take years, if not decades. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Effects of the action alternatives on elk would likely have little overall 

impact due to the low use in the area. Effects upon mule deer habitat have some applicability to elk. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended: This is not applicable as there are no 

designated Key Elk Area. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

124

American (Pine) Marten: MIS, S3 Vulnerable 

There are no known historic sightings of American marten within the planning area. 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). In these areas, structure 

near the ground is important in providing access to spaces below the snow (Corn and Raphael 1992 in

Ruggiero et al. 1994). The information synopsis in Natureserve (2006) states that fallen logs and 

debris are special habitat features. 

An average territory size is approximately four square miles (2,560 acres), with densities as high as 1-

2 per 250-500 acres in the fall. Complex physical structure addresses important life needs: 1) 

providing protection from predators; 2) access to below snow space where most prey are captured in 

winter; and 3) providing protective thermal microenvironments (Buskirk and Powell 1994). The more 

desirable forest types of the marten are large, somewhat dense, stands of lodgepole pine, mixed 

conifer, and mountain hemlock. Abundant coarse woody material in these stands is important to 

support a rodent prey base (LRMP WL-61). Natureserve (2006) ranks this species as being 

“vulnerable” in Oregon. 

Ponderosa pine habitats are not likely to have extensive utilization by marten, although they may be 

used as martens move through an area. Down logs and concentrations of dead wood may be important 

to marten during these times for both security and foraging. The latter activity is focused upon small 

rodents which depend upon down logs, shrubs and other forest floor cover for concealment. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would remain unaffected and continue to improve 

where canopy cover and down woody debris accumulations increase, provided that catastrophic 

wildfires do not impact large areas of habitat. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Treatments within preferred lodgepole pine habitat would likely reduce 

the potential quality of the sites for marten due to reductions in canopy cover and impacts to existing 

or future large woody debris on the forest floor. Many of the lodgepole stands will have 20 percent of 

their area in retention patches to meet deer cover objectives, which should also potentially benefit 

marten. The stands are isolated and have poor connections to upper elevation habitats. Lodgepole 

habitats are approximately 18 percent of the project area. The likelihood of occupancy by marten is 

therefore low. Adverse effects may affect individuals but will not likely be significant at the 

population scale. 

Mule Deer: MIS, S5 Secure. 

Mule deer are known to use the proposed treatment areas for hiding and thermal cover and foraging. 

 Existing Hiding and Thermal 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 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

125

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 for deer summer range (the entire Forest outside the Deer Habitat 

management, MA7 allocation – winter range), per LRMP direction. 

For winter range, cover used by big game to moderate cold weather conditions and to assist in 

maintaining a constant body temperature is referred to as thermal cover (Thomas 1979). Tree canopy 

cover conditions that provide optimal thermal cover are considered to be greater than 75 percent 

canopy cover in seedling and sapling stands that are greater than 5 feet in height or canopy cover 

greater than 60 percent in pole sized (5-9 inches dbh) trees and larger (Thomas 1979). Tree canopy 

cover conditions for optimal thermal cover on the Deschutes National Forest have been compromised 

somewhat due to low site productivity for tree growth and the risk of insect-pest epidemics killing or 

severely damaging tree stands (LRMP M7-5). Crown cover greater than 40 percent with trees 30 feet 

tall is recommended for thermal cover on the Deschutes National Forest (LRMP M7-13). As noted 

earlier the minimum crown cover adopted for the xeric pine sites in the project is 30 percent. 

Ideally, hiding and thermal cover stands would be in close proximity to foraging areas and would 

make up approximately 40 percent of the land area (LRMP, Thomas 1979). The optimum distance 

between cover stands for maximum use by big game is thought to be approximately 1,200 feet with 

stand sizes ranging from 6 to 26 acres (Thomas 1979). 

 Implementation Unit Hiding Cover Analysis 

The LRMP requires that deer cover analysis be based upon Implementation Units (IUs), which are 

large areas generally bounded by roads. The Deadlog Project area intersects portions of IU #62 

(18,235 acres); IU #63 (25,031 acres); and IU #69 (34,418 acres). IUs are not required for hiding 

cover assessments in Deer Habitat (MA-7), which totals 40,568 acres. The net acreage which was 

assessed for hiding cover is 20,558 acres (not including private land) and summarized in Table 48. 

Table 48: Summary of Current Deer Hiding Cover in Implementation Unit (IU) 

IU IU Net Hiding Cover Classes (acres) by Structural Stage 

Acreage No Cover & Early Mid Late 

62 10,602 1,146 8,613 (net 6,178 without lpp) 843 

63 6,919 856 4,819 (net 4,441 without lpp) 1,244 

69 3,037 23 2,498 (net 2,191 without lpp) 516 

Total 20,558 2,025 15,930 (net 12,810 without 

lodgepole pine) 

2,603 

Note: *Reference file map for subdivisions. No Cover includes xeric shrublands, rocky areas, meadows, cinder pits, etc. that 

are incapable of growing trees for cover. lpp = lodgepole pine. 

Table 49: Summary of Current Deer Hiding Cover in Implementation Units 

IU Lodgepole acres Hiding Cover Classes (acres) 

(mid structural 

stage) 

Non-Cover Marginal and Acceptable Cover Acres 

62 2,435 8,171 acres (77%) 553 acres (5%) 1,878 acres (18%) 

63 378 5,782 acres (84%) 442 acres (6%) 695 acres (10%) 

69 307 2,427 acres (80%) 211 acres (7%) 399 acres (13%) 

Totals Acreage = 20,558 16,380 acres (80%) 1,206 acres (6%) 2,972 acres (14%) 

Based upon experience in cover classification within the Deadlog planning area the following assumptions were made in the 

allocation process 

1) All No Cover & Early acreages = non-cover; 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

126

2) Mid is generally equivalent to black bark ponderosa pine which on average provides 10% acceptable cover and 8% 

marginal cover; lodgepole pine present in the IU, which has superior cover and is generally mid-structure is estimated to 

provide 50% hiding cover (added as acceptable cover); 

3) Late is on average providing 5% acceptable cover and 7% in marginal cover (due to open pine stands; no mixed conifer is 

within the IUs). It is assumed that the non-black bark category used in the Deadlog analysis included early stages which 

would be include in the non-cover acreages for that category, i.e. no effect on proportions in cover categories. Early = stages 

1, 2; Mid = stages 3, 4, 5; and Late = stages 6, 7. Crown cover is not a reliable indicator of hiding cover, as black bark 

commonly has higher crown cover but often with understories that exhibit slow growth. Understory conifers provide the best 

hiding cover for deer which are not totally measured by vertical projection methodology. Therefore, structural stage is used 

here as the better indicator. 

Approximately 20 percent of the Implementation Units are in cover, with 6 percent marginal and 14 

percent acceptable. These figures appear to be reasonable given the dry xeric pine stands with a 

dominance of black bark and late seral open forest conditions. Lodgepole pine is a strong contributor 

to hiding cover but is lacking in two of the IUs assessed. The more exhaustive analysis for the 

planning area resulted in 7 percent marginal and 11 percent acceptable for approximately 18% total 

cover. Therefore, the methodology employed for the IUs appears to be reasonable, given the 

similarities between the project habitat conditions (i.e. dominated by xeric, low elevation ponderosa 

pine) and the assessed portions of the IUs. 

Using the assumption that the “mid” category is equivalent to black bark pine and deducting those 

stands with a lodgepole pine component there is a balance of approximately 12,810 acres in pure 

ponderosa pine (i.e. Table 2A, net mid without lodgepole). The balance of 3,120 acres would be black 

bark pine with the lodgepole component, which generally provides superior hiding cover. In total, the 

black bark structural stage is providing approximately 18 percent hiding cover. The LRMP 

requirement is 10 percent un-thinned screening clumps in black bark treatment units, which will be 

met. The non-black bark forested habitat is only providing 12 percent hiding cover (i.e. 5 percent 

acceptable and 7 percent marginal). The LRMP requirement for non-black bark in summer range is 30 

percent hiding cover, so the area is deficit for this component of summer range. 

 Deer Habitat – MA-7 (Winter Range) 

The LRMP requires optimization of habitat conditions within designated Deer Habitat (winter range). 

It recommends a minimum of 40 percent of the winter range to provide cover with 10 percent as 

hiding cover and 30 percent as thermal cover. Only 3.6 percent of the project area is designated as 

winter range, which is part of the adjoining Wigtop Winter Range Habitat Unit. WRHUs were 

developed in order to better assess habitat conditions for mule deer in accord with their home range 

size on winter ranges (USDA 1988), but not to determine LRMP consistency. 

Because the project affects such a small portion of the Wigtop WRHU (approximately 4 percent, 585 

acres), the entire unit was not assessed. The LRMP suggests a minimum habitat assessment area of 

3,000 acres (M7-11). Field reconnaissance of the area concluded that both hiding and thermal cover 

are extremely limited and unquantifiable. Cover exists only in very small, scattered patches of denser 

trees, which is primarily due to the low precipitation of the site. Canopy cover requirements of the 

LRMP to meet thermal cover (i.e. 40 percent minimum) are unrealistic in low productivity ponderosa 

pine sites and are generally unattainable or present only for a short term. Areas with high canopy 

cover are very prone to insect infestations as the trees are stressed by competition. Deer use indices of 

the area, including shrub browsing and pellet groups, suggest low use there, which is likely related to 

the site being at an upper elevation for winter range. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

127

 Summer Range 

The project area is dominated by deer summer range (96 percent). The LRMP requires retention of 

trees for hiding cover with a minimum of 30 percent in non-black bark designated summer range. 

Black bark pine forest must retain 10 percent Deer Habitat (MA-7, winter range) in un-thinned 

screening clumps within individual treatment units. Approximately 9,547 acres (59 percent) of the 

project area is classified as black bark leaving approximately 6,472 acres (41 percent) in non-black 

bark. The estimate for hiding cover across the entire planning area is approximately 17.6 percent. 

Stratification of the project area indicates that approximately 19% of the black bark is hiding cover 

and 16% of the non-black bark is hiding cover. It is assumed by the LRMP that hiding cover in 

summer range will meet any thermal cover requirements by mule deer. Table 50 summarizes the 

current condition assessment of deer hiding cover for the project. 

Table 50: Project Area Current Deer Hiding Cover Summary 

Hiding Cover Classes (Acres) 1 Forest Types 

Acres Acceptable Marginal Non-Cover 2 Total Cover 

Acres 

Black Bark (9,547) 980 789 7,778 1,769 (19%) 

Non-Black Bark (6,472) 771 282 (566) 5,419 1,053 (16%) 

Totals 3: 16,019 1,751 (11%) 1,071 (7%) 13,197 (82%) 2,822 (18%) 

1 - Cover acreage calculations are as follows: Acceptable = 100% of the stand/polygon acreage, Marginal = 50% of the stand/polygon

acreage, and Non-Cover = 0% of the stand/polygon acreage. Cover was defined using the Thomas (1979) definition where the cover is 

capable of hiding 90% of a deer at 200 feet. In order to quantify hiding cover that is available to deer where vegetation is clumped or has a 

patchy distribution the following classification was employed: Acceptable = 75%+ of the stand/polygon provides cover; Marginal = 50-74% 

is cover; and Non-Cover is 0-49%. This methodology has been developed over a period of about 10 years addressing a number of 

vegetative/fuels projects in the eastern portion of the District. It is the professional judgment of the project biologist to be the best method of 

assessing hiding cover in dry forest habitat types and has been reviewed and supported by State biologists. 

2 - The Non-Cover acreage includes the 50% not counted as cover for the marginal category (50% of 1,577 gross acres for Black Bark and 

50% of 566 gross acres for Non-Black Bark). Planning area acreage = 16,055 acres. Without Deer Habitat = 15,469 acres. . 

3 - Totals will not equal the project planning acreage due to GIS “slivers” or blanks in calculating each individual polygon. Gross acreage, 

excludes xeric shrublands. 

The planning area is currently providing an estimated 2,822 acres of deer hiding cover. The black 

bark forest type is providing 63 percent of the total cover and the non-black bark type 37 percent. The 

very small winter range area (586 acres) was deducted from the planning area gross acreage in doing 

the calculations. The winter range currently has no hiding cover. The combination of low site 

productivity, open mature pine stands, and lack of regeneration in black bark ponderosa pine all 

contribute to the low amount of hiding cover currently present in the planning area. Lodgepole pine, 

which often provides superior cover due to its rapid understory establishment, is very limited in the 

planning area (approximately 10 percent of the area). The few pine plantations present in the area 

were machine planted in rows which compromised their ability to provide cover. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Without forest health treatments the risk of catastrophic wildfire would 

increase in the future placing deer cover at risk over potentially large areas of the landscape with a 

resulting recovery time of years if not decades. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Assuming that all treatments would eliminate the existing hiding cover, 

the reduction of cover is determined by the amount of it remaining in the untreated areas (i.e. matrix 

polygons) and untreated units (i.e. changes with alternative). The mitigation measure for hiding cover 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

128

is to leave a minimum of 10 percent hiding cover in un-thinned visual screening clups in each unit 

dominated by black bark. Non-black units may leave 10 to 20 percent in hiding cover which is 

specified by unit in the section of this report on Resource Protection Measures. Given the area’s lack 

of hiding cover, deer movement corridors were not designated. However, the OGMA corridors will 

meet some of this need. Table 51 summarizes the effects of the action alternatives. 

Table 51: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 Effects to Deer Hiding Cover 

Units/Matrix Hiding Cover (acres) 

Acceptable Marginal 

Net (Gross) 

Non-Cover 

(no effect)* 

Notes 

16,055 gross acres 1,751 1,071 (2,143) 12,136 Current hiding cover = 2,822 

acres - 18%. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 

Units treatments 

reductions 

1,437 936 -- 2,373 acres of hiding cover 

reduction. 

Matrix retained cover 306 125 (249) -- -- 

Percentages 2% 0.8% 97.2% -- 

Net percentages with 

10% retention** 

2.8% 1.4 % 95.8% Post-treatment residual hiding 

cover ~4.2% 

Alternative 3 

Units treatments 

reductions 

1,445 946 -- 2,391 acres of hiding cover 

reduction. 

Matrix retained cover 306 125 (249) -- -- 

Percentages 2.0% 0.8% 97.2% -- 

Net percentages with 

10% retention** 

2.8% 1.4% 95.8% Post-treatment residual hiding 

cover ~4.2% 

Note: It is assumed that ALL treatments (i.e. harvest, stand improvement, and fuels prescriptions of all types) would 

eliminate or substantially impact hiding cover to the point that it no longer meets the standard definition. 

*Hiding cover may be present but not in sufficient quantity (i.e. minimum of 50% of the unit/polygon) to meet the definition 

of marginal cover. 

**The 10% acreage retention for mitigation is calculated upon the actual cover acreages and not the gross treatment acreages. 

There is essentially no difference between the action alternatives on effects to deer hiding cover. 

Alternative 2 treats 529 acres fewer acres than Alternative 3. Only 18 acres are classified as hiding 

cover in the 7 additional units. The above calculations are based upon the entire project area with 

black bark, non-black bark, winter range, and summer range combined. The distinctions between 

these components are essentially not important due to the low levels of hiding cover within the project, 

and particularly after treatments. The estimated amount of hiding cover in the non-black bark portions 

of the matrix polygons (untreated areas) is 145 acres or less than 1 percent of the project area. For the 

non-black forest within treatment units there are currently 959 acres or 6 percent of the project area in 

hiding cover. The forest health issue for the project area causes a focus on the over stocked stands, 

which provide nearly all the hiding cover in the area for deer. 

It is difficult to quantify effects upon deer numbers because of the number of variables that affect deer 

herds and their migratory nature which extends their range outside of the project area. Cover is 

important for deer security particularly during hunting season. The proposed road density reductions 

(reference following section) and the existing Fox Butte Cooperative Travel Management Area (i.e. 

Green Dot road closures system) during hunting season would help compensate for cover reductions. 

Overall the reduction of risk to catastrophic wildfire would likely have less adverse impacts to deer 

numbers than if wildfire eliminated large areas of cover and forage resources. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

129

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

The treatments would reduce the current hiding cover level from approximately 18 percent to 

approximately 4 percent in the project area. Given that some specific units to be identified in nonblack bark may retain more cover (20 percent vs. 10 percent) and the un-quantified hiding cover in 

units designated as No Cover (i.e. less than 50 percent cover), the effect would be somewhat 

mitigated. The LRMP requirement to provide 30 percent hiding cover in non-black bark summer 

range would not be met, which would necessitate an amendment of the LRMP. Where available in 

black bark dominated units, the LRMP requirement to retain 10 percent hiding cover in un-thinned 

visual screening clumps within each treatment unit would be met. 

After the project area is treated by Alternative 3, the affected Implementation Units (i.e. all three, 

gross 37,116 acres without MA7) would have an estimated 13 percent hiding cover (approximately 

4,849 acres). Alternative 2 is nearly identical. Thus, an LRMP amendment is still applicable. The 

cumulative effects on hiding cover are addressed by this analysis. 

The small portion of winter range is not included in the data summary presented. There is no hiding 

cover present and the small patches of thermal cover do not meet current definitions. An LRMP 

amendment is not recommended due to the very small size (586 acres or 3.6 percent of the project 

area) of the affected Winter Range Habitat Unit (Wigtop, 4.3 percent of 13,500 acres) and because 

treatments within it will not reduce any hiding or thermal cover (there is presently no cover meeting 

definitions. 

 Road/Motorized Trail Densities 

A fragmentation analysis was not conducted on the current condition of the project area. Nearly the 

entire area has been harvested by past timber sales, which included the development of an extensive 

network of roads and skid trails. There is also a unauthorized (user created), unmapped motorcycle 

trail system in the project area. 

The vast majority of the area was selectively logged in the 1930s and 1940s with very little 

regeneration harvest prescriptions. Several plantations were established following past wildfires (e.g. 

Sixteen and Deadlog buttes). Plantations that are within the project area provide some edge effect 

where located near more mature forest. High edge contrasts are lacking except along roadways. 

Because of this, fragmentation due to past management activities is low. Core area habitats have been 

more impacted by road construction than timber management activities. 

Roads and trails that provide motorized access adversely affect habitat effectiveness for big game due 

to motorized disturbance. Animals are most vulnerable during hunting season and to poaching. 

Habitat fragmentation and loss of core habitat areas is another important adverse impact from roads 

and trails. Current road density across the project area is approximately 4.7 miles per square mile. 

The overall average of the IUs is 3.6 miles per square mile, although these IUs extend beyond the 

project area boundary. The LRMP goal is to road densities towards 2.5 miles per square mile upper 

limit on deer summer range and 1.0-2.5 miles per square mile on winter range. The winter range 

within the project area was not assessed for road density due to its small area. Unauthorized 

motorcycle trails have been constructed across the project area, but their density is unknown. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

130

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: There would be no reduction in the current road density of 4.7 miles per 

square mile, which exceeds the LRMP goal of 2.5 miles per square mile. The effects on deer are 

negative but unquantifiable at the population scale due to the small area affected relative to the acreage 

of the South Paulina Management Unit. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed road closures for both action alternatives would reduce the 

current density to 3.2 miles per square mile. During hunting season the cooperative Green Dot closure 

also reduces open road densities: IU 62 to 0.41 mile per square mile, IU 63 to 0.5 mile per square mile, 

IU 69 to 0.25 mile per square mile, and the project area to 1.2 mile per square mile. The user created 

motorcycle trails across the project area add to the negative cumulative effects of disturbance on deer 

and other wildlife. Other areas with high road/motorized trail densities have increased levels of 

poaching and evidence of contributing to population declines. The trails have not been inventoried or 

mapped and a large portion of these trails go cross country adding to habitat fragmentation and loss of 

vegetation. 

There are 14.8 miles of proposed temporary roads within the project area for Alternative 2 and 15.3 

miles for Alternative 3. After management activities these roads would be obliterated and revegetated. 

These roads would result in only short-term, temporary impacts to deer habitat effectiveness and other 

wildlife. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

The LRMP direction (WL-53, TS-11 thru TS-14) requires and an evaluation and recommendation 

from a biologist that is then presented to the responsible line officer for a decision. The evaluation 

was conducted by the project interdisciplinary team and resulted in recommendations lowering road 

density to 3.2 miles per square mile. The biologist field reviewed all roads within the planning area 

and supports the team recommendation. The large portion of the project area that is on nearly level 

terrain with low, xeric vegetation would make road closures very difficult in many situations. The 

roads selected for closure or decommissioning would result in large blocks of un-fragmented habitat 

for deer and other wildlife. 

The LRMP direction is specific to Implementation Units. The current road densities for the 

Implementation Units are: IU #62, 4 miles per square mile; IU#63, 3.5 miles per square mile; and IU 

#69, 3.5 miles per square mile. The overall average is 3.6 miles per square mile. The Green Dot 

Closure system reduces the densities during the hunting season to approximately 0.77 mile per square 

mile across the entire area. The project would reduce the densities only within its boundary leaving 

the balance of the IUs (approximately 79 percent) unchanged. 

 Deer Forage 

The condition of does and cows is very important for reproduction and the health of fawns and calves. 

Adequate amounts of high quality forage are critical to deer and elk in winter range. Forage is also 

important on summer range for animals to accumulate adequate amounts of fat reserves for winter 

months. Deer utilize a higher percentage of herbaceous species during the summer than in the winter 

when woody browse is critical. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

131

Surveys of shrub habitats were not done within the project area. Lower elevations are dominated by 

bitterbrush, the key forage species utilized by both deer and elk in the local area. Higher elevations 

are dominated by green manzanita and ceanothus, less desirable browse. Due to the lack of wildfires 

in the project area the majority of shrub stands are mature to decadent in age/structure, but there are 

extensive areas of mixed age classes. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Current forage conditions would remain unaltered in the short-term. In 

the longer term there is potential for catastrophic wildfire which could convert large areas to early 

seral conditions that would require an extensive period of time for full recovery. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The action alternatives treat 67 percent and 70 percent of the project area 

respectively. All treatments would impact shrub (browse) forage in particular. It is estimated that for 

commercial timber sale activities that at least 25 percent of the shrubs would be impacted. For 

prescribed burns or mechanical mowing it would range from 50-70 percent. Combination treatments 

would have the most impact and could affect over 80 percent of individual units. 

Prescribed burning would result in a significant increase in grasses, which are preferred by elk but less 

important to mule deer. Shrubs at least 18 inches in height are critical on winter ranges for deer. 

Bitterbrush regeneration varies by the type of treatment, the intensity of the treatment and the 

productivity of the site. In general, recovery to current canopy coverage to height levels would require 

a minimum of 10 years on good sites and likely over 25 years on the xeric sites common to the project. 

Designing treatments to leave a mosaic of treated and untreated shrubs would reduce forage impacts 

and improve long-term forage conditions as shrubs regenerate and provide more nutritious browse. 

The cumulative effects of the treatments are unknown as the surrounding area (IUs summer range) 

were not evaluated for the conditions of forage resources. The most critical portion of the project area 

for forage is the winter range, 3.6 percent of the project area. The adjacent winter range area (Wigtop 

Winter Range Habitat Unit) has had extensive natural fuels treatments in the past, converting 

bitterbrush stands to dominance by Idaho fescue. The WRHU was not evaluated so the 

acreage/percentage of impacts to shrub habitats are unknown. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

This is not applicable for deer summer range. Refer to the analysis of other species dependent upon 

shrub habitats. 

On winter range within the project area the LRMP requires optimization of habitat conditions and has 

specific direction on maximum treatment unit sizes, spacing and recovery periods. There is an annual 

limitation on the percentage of the winter range to be treated. Refer to Resource Protection Measures, 

DEIS, Chapter 2. 

Snags and Downed Wood Associated Species and Habitat: MIS, WLTL, 

Eastside Screens

Snag and log surveys were conducted throughout the project area. Procedures recommended by the 

DecAID program (Mellen et al. 2006) for these resources were utilized. The specific methodology is 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

132

complex and generates a significant amount of data (Bate et al. 1999). Transects were randomly 

stratified to ensure that all representative plant association groups (PAGs) and structural stages were 

sampled. The results are displayed in Table 52. 

Table 52: Snag and Log Transect Summary – Existing Condition 

Categories 1 Plant Association Groups 

Snags Ponderosa Pine Lodgepole Pine White Fir 

Notes 

Snags less than 8” dbh 0.30 per acre 0.10 per acre 0 Low probability of use by 

most species except for 

foraging 

Snags 8”-21” dbh 1.30 per acre 0.70 per acre 0.40 per acre 

Snags greater than 21” 

dbh 

0.60 per acre 0.02 per acre 0.03 per acre 

Snags greater than 21” 

dbh dominated by PP 

(92.5%) 

Logs Ponderosa Pine Lodgepole Pine White Fir Notes 

Log average/acre 5.6 12 25 The majority of ponderosa 

pine logs in advanced 

decay 1 13 transects were surveyed with 59 segments (each equal to 1 acre with a length of 328 feet). 

 Ponderosa pine - 8 transects; lodgepole pine - 2 transects; white fir - 1 transect; unclassified stands - 2 transects. 

 OGMA: Structural stage 5 (mid) average 9 snags/acre; Structural stages 6 and 7 (late) averaged 2.2 snags/acre 

Snags 

The LRMP requirements for snag densities are established by the Wildlife Tree and Log 

Implementation Strategy (WLTL, USDA 1994). For ponderosa pine and mixed conifer, the range is 

from 0.3 to 1.9 hard snags per acre, depending upon the bird species at the 100 percent of Maximum 

Population Potential (MPP) which is applicable to the Old Growth Management Area. For lodgepole 

pine habitat the range is 1.2 to 1.9 hard snags per acre (100 percent MPP). 

Mixed conifer habitat should provide a range of .3 to 1.9 hard snags per acre (100% MPP). For the 

General Forest Management Area the standard is a minimum of 40 percent of MPP. However, the 

Eastside Screens amended the LRMP and established new standards for all sale activities. The 

standard is to provide 100 percent MPP. Therefore, the requirement across the entire project area is 

the same regardless of management area designation. The Eastside Screens also specify that the 100% 

MPP level is to be “...determined using the best available science on species requirements as applied 

through the best available science on species requirements as applied through current snag models or 

other documented procedures.” The WLTL snag numbers cited above are based upon research done 

over 15 or more years ago (Thomas et al. 1979). It has now been replaced by the database of research 

summarized in the DecAID program, which fully meets the direction to utilize the best applicable 

science for the assessment of project effects on snag and log habitats. 

In referencing the DecAID program (Mellen et al. 2006), it is suggested that caution be applied in 

selecting a population objective. It is not realistic to select habitat type/site if it is not productive 

enough to provide the amount of habitat needed (i.e. xeric ponderosa pine common to the project 

area). For this project area the 50 percent tolerance level and the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir open 

category was selected as being the best representation of habitats in project area. The estimate is 

approximately 3.5-10 snags per acre that are greater than 10 inches in diameter (Table 53). It is 

concluded that presently the project area is, on average, snag deficit, particularly for the larger 

diameter snags (i.e. greater than 21 inches dbh). Table 53 displays some variables affecting 

recommendations for snags. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

133

Table 53: DecAID Desired Conditions for Snags and Down Logs 

Habitat 

Type/Structure 

Tolerance 

Levels 

Snag Density Snag Size (dbh) Percent Cover Down 

Wood 

Ponderosa 

Pine/Douglas-Fir 

(Large) 

80% (productive 

sites, e.g. north 

slopes) 

13 per acre greater than 

10" dbh and 11 per acre 

greater than 20" dbh. 

Increase numbers for 

pileated woodpecker. 

12-57 inches 4.1% (10-19.7 

diameter average, 14" 

mean, with some to 

45" dbh) 

Ponderosa 

Pine/Douglas-Fir 

(Large) 

50% (all other 

areas) 

1.7-30.7 per acre greater 

than 10" dbh and 1.8-7.7 

per acre greater than 20" 

dbh. Averages 6.3 per acre 

and 3.7 per acre 

respectively. 

10-32 inches 1.8% (4.9-19.7" dbh 

average, 10" mean). 

~784 square feet per 

acre. 

Ponderosa 

Pine/Douglas-Fir 

(Small-Medium) 

50% (all areas) 2.7/acre >10" dbh and 

1.1/acre > 19.7" dbh. High 

density clumps in low fire 

risk areas: 32/acre > 10" 

dbh and 8/acre > 19.7" 

dbh. 

9.8-43 inches 3% (8-10" diameter 

average with some to 

37" diameter) 

Lodgepole Pine 50% 10/acre>10” dbh (with 

2.7>19.7” dbh) for birds; 

13/acre (with 4/acre>20” 

dbh) for Amer. marten 

11-32 inches 4.4% (greater than 

4.9” diameter with 

range 21-33” 

diameter for marten) 

For the lodgepole pine habitat type, the Eastside Screens recommend snags greater than or equal to 

12" dbh for the 100 percent potential population level, which is 180 snags per 100 acres (59 per 100 

acres greater than 12 inches dbh and 121 per 100 acres greater than 10 inches dbh; also reference 

Thomas 1979 Appendix 22). Lodgepole habitat is limited (1,580 acres, 18 percent of the area) within 

the project area. As noted earlier these snag densities are based upon older research and have been 

updated by the DecAID reference program. They are only provided here to note the changes in 

requirements. 

Logs 

The LRMP standard for down logs is a minimum of 3-6 logs per acre that are at least 12 inches in 

diameter at the small end and greater than 6 feet in length in ponderosa pine. The DecAID 

recommendations are based upon more current science. Given the estimated 5.6 logs (large) per acre in 

ponderosa pine habitats presently, the percentage of cover is estimated to be less than 1 percent. 

Lodgepole pine is also less than 1 percent coverage. Therefore, it is concluded that the current 

condition is below the minimums recommended by DecAID. Lower inputs of hard snag falls to the 

ground are likely to lead to a log deficit in the future. Also, as noted, the majority of the logs are very 

old and in an advanced decay condition. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Existing snag levels, which are below the requirements of most species. 

There would likely be an increase of snags due to bark beetle mortality. The current levels of logs are 

also below the minimum recommended levels (DecAID). Potential catastrophic wildfire could result 

in large pulses of snags, which would benefit some species in the short to mid-term, but the loss of 

green tree recruitment would ultimately be an adverse affect to all species dependent upon snags. 

Mistletoe infestations would also be detrimental in the long-term due to the mortality of infected 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

134

understory trees, which would reduce the future supply of large snags and logs. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Losses of existing hard snags to prescribed fire may further reduce levels 

depending upon fire mortality recruitment of green trees. Additionally, prescribed fire would reduce 

existing log levels particularly to large, more degenerated structures. Any losses of snags due to safety 

issues would add to the cumulative negative effects to both habitat components. 

Also refer to the following species discussions on woodpeckers which serve as suggorates for the 

effects upon snags for all the forested habitat types within the project. 

There are no specific Management Indicator Species in the LRMP for downed wood. For the purpose 

of this evaluation refer to the previous discussion for the American marten, which would suitably 

address these effects by alternative, especially for lodgepole pine habitats. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met provided that the net snag losses (i.e. accounting 

for snags created by prescribed burns) are mitigated by snag creation. Snag creation will in the longterm also mitigate any losses of down logs to prescribed fire. Refer to the Resource Protection 

Measures, Chapter 2. 

Green Tree Replacements (GTRs): WLTL, Eastside Screens

Green Tree Replacements provide future snags and down logs. For variables used to determine target 

trees per acre, refer to the Project Record, Wildlife Report, 

page 8. In general, the target for trees per acre for ponderosa pine is approximately 10-30 trees per 

acre. Fewer trees are needed as mean diameter increases. For the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir habitat 

type DecAID estimates a range of 17 to 43 trees per acre depending upon population objective (i.e. 

tolerance level) and stand structure/size. Presently, the project area tree densities greatly exceed this 

range, so GTRs are not limiting. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The present green tree stocking densities would not be altered in the 

short-term. In the mid to long-terms it is likely that there would be losses to insects or catastrophic 

wildfires. Fires originating within the project area would have the potential to affect much larger 

areas. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: All of the proposed treatments in each action alternative would retain 

adequate numbers of green trees (ranging from 15 to 50 tree per acre) for future snag/log recruitment. 

The potential for large-scale losses to insect epidemics and/or catastrophic wildfire would be greatly 

reduced. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

135

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines including the Eastside Screens would be met. 

Species Associated with Various Plant Communities and Successional 

Stages: 

The addition of focal species to this evaluation would partially meet this category. 

Most notably the shrub communities of the project area provide habitat for a variety of species 

including: green-tailed towhee, spotted towhee, bushtit, house wren, fox sparrow, dusky flycatcher, 

gray flycatcher, dark-eyed junco, deer mouse, yellow-pine chipmunk, long-tailed weasel, and 

snowshoe hare. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The shrub communities would not be affected except for potential 

catastrophic wildfires. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: All of the proposed treatments 67 percent of the planning area by 

Alternative 2 and 70 percent by Alternative 3) would impact shrub communities with mowing and 

prescribed fire causing the most adverse effects, particularly in combination or following logging 

activities. Retaining a mosaic of treated and untreated areas across the landscape would mitigate 

adverse effects to these species by leaving undisturbed areas. 

Structural stage 6 (multi-story) and stage 7 (single story) as related to HRV and direction by the 

Eastside Screens are addressed in detail in the silviculture report (Project Record and discussion in 

DEIS titled Forest Vegetation – Trees). Species that orient to these habitat types and are potentially 

affected by the action alternatives are addressed in this report, including both MIS and focal 

designated species. 

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met where possible. Refer to the sections on Deer 

(Elk) Forage and Mitigation Measures/Project Design Criteria. 

Species with Special or Unique Habitats 

There are no riparian, aspen or other special habitats within the project area. The only unique habitats 

are the rocky outcrops and cliffs throughout the area. Small caves are potentially present but none 

were located during field surveys. Species potentially using these areas include bobcat, mountain lion, 

bats, bushy-tailed woodrat, canyon mouse, American pika, lizards and various birds (e.g. rock and 

canyon wrens, raven, golden eagle, cliff swallow). 

Other habitats associated with the project area are: 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

136

 Buttes 

There are a number of buttes within the project area including Rogers, Deadlog, Sixteen, Dry, No 

Names (3) and several that have no designation. For more information regarding habitat for these 

buttes refer to the Project Record, Wildlife Report, pages 6 and 7. 

 Rock Outcrops and Cliffs 

Rock outcrops and cliffs are scattered throughout the project area, varying in size and complexity. 

Quartz Mountain is the most significant geological feature present and is really a complex of ridges. 

Most of the buttes have rock outcrops with those on Sixteen Butte and the southern most No Name 

Butte having the most significant features with associated unique plants. For brief descriptions of the 

buttes, refer to page 8 of the Wildlife Report, Project Record. 

 Xeric shrublands and pumice flats 

These areas are small, localized and often associated with buttes. The largest is Coyote Flat on the 

south side of Quartz Mountain. The soils there are very dry and loose, which support a diversity of 

plants. 

 Water sources 

There are three manmade water catchments or guzzlers within the project area that provide a water 

source for deer and many birds through the dry summer months. 

There are no riparian, aspen or other special habitats within the project area. Rocky outcrops and 

cliffs occur throughout the area. Small caves are potentially present but none were located during 

field surveys. Species potentially using these areas include bobcat, mountain lion, bats, bushy-tailed 

woodrat, canyon mouse, American pika, lizards and various birds (e.g. rock and canyon wrens, raven, 

golden eagle, cliff swallow). 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The habitats would not be affected except for potential catastrophic 

wildfires. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Treatments such as mowing or timber harvest would generally avoid 

direct impacts provided that the special habitats are excluded from treatment units or protected. 

However, the rock outcrops or cliffs within proposed prescribed burns may be impacted if vegetation 

is removed from the ecotone between the rock and adjoining areas or by direct consumption of 

vegetation within the rock habitat. In particular, there are unique mountain mahogany patches and 

rock associated herbaceous plants that are found only in these habitats niches. 

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met. Refer to Resource Protection Measures, DEIS, 

Chapter 2. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

137

Woodpecker Species 

Table 54: Management Indicator Species - Woodpeckers 

Woodpecker Species 

Species Status Habitat Presence 

Lewis’ woodpecker MIS, Landbird 

focal species, BCC, 

R6 Sensitive 

Ponderosa pine forests, burned 

forests 

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas. Refer to the Biological 

Evaluation. 

Williamson’s 

sapsucker 

MIS, Landbird 

Focal species, BCC 

Mature or old growth conifer 

forests with open canopy cover; 

weak excavator 

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas. 

Hairy woodpecker MIS Mixed conifer and ponderosa 

pine forests 

Habitat in proposed treatment areas 

White-headed 

woodpecker 

MIS, Landbird 

focal species, BCC, 

R6 Sensitive 

Mature ponderosa pine forests; 

weak excavator 

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas. Refer to the Biological 

Evaluation. 

Black-backed 

woodpecker 

MIS, Landbird 

focal species 

Lodgepole pine forests, burned 

forests 

Habitat in proposed treatment areas 

Northern flicker MIS Variety of forest types but more 

associated with forest edges 

Habitat in proposed treatment areas 

Red-naped sapsucker MIS Riparian hardwood forests; 

especially quaking aspen. 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Downy woodpecker MIS Riparian hardwood forests, 

aspen; uncommon in ponderosa 

pine. Will use recent burns. 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Three-toed 

woodpecker 

MIS High elevation lodgepole pine 

forests 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Pileated woodpecker MIS Mature to old-growth mixed 

conifer forests 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Rationale for Species Not Considered In Detail 

The Lewis’ woodpecker is discussed in the previous section of this DEIS, Wildlife – BE. 

For the following species, there is no habitat within or adjacent to proposed treatment areas. A lack of 

habitat assumes a lack of presence and therefore any actions or no action within the proposed 

treatment areas would have no affect to the following species: Three-toed woodpeckers, pileated 

woodpecker, red-naped sapsucker, downy woodpeckers. For more specific information refer to the 

Project Record, Wildlife Report, beginning on page 20. 

Species Receiving Further Consideration 

Hairy Woodpecker: S4 Apparently Secure 

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. Ponderosa pine is preferred over lodgepole pine for nesting. Old 

growth or un-thinned stands are more heavily utilized during the winter. Otherwise, they use open 

stands more than those that are dense and would readily utilize burns (Marshall et al. 2006). 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

138

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would remain favorable, unless a catastrophic wildfire 

was to occur within the project area. A wildfire would cause a pulse of snags for foraging and 

potential nesting in the short-term, but eventually there would be a shortage of suitable snags as they 

fell. Without wildfire, there would likely be a slow degradation in the numbers of large green trees 

and snags as insect and competition related mortality increased with time. The loss of understory trees 

from mistletoe mortality would also contribute to this decline across the landscape. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions would have some direct effects to hairy 

woodpecker habitat due to losses of snags to prescribed fire and safety issues. Some snag recruitment 

would occur from mortality of green trees from prescribed burns, but the number cannot be estimated. 

Salvage cutting of snags would not occur. Reducing stand density to create more open conditions 

would be beneficial. Future potential nest trees would be provided through time from recruitment of 

retention green trees. Adverse effects may affect individuals but would not likely be significant at the 

population scale. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met where possible. Current snag levels are 

estimated to be below minimum requirements. Snag creation is a possible mitigation tactic. Refer to 

the Resource Protection Measures, Chapter 2. 

Black-backed Woodpecker: S3 Vulnerable 

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 (generally 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 would use smaller snags 

for nesting as well as foraging. Bull et al. (1986) suggested that this use of smaller diameter snags for 

nesting is a way of competing with other woodpecker species in the same habitat (e.g. white-headed 

woodpecker, northern flickers, etc.) that require large snags. The project 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 un-logged control plots in their study on fire and 

salvage logging. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would remain favorable to black-backed woodpeckers 

in the lodgepole pine stands that are present in the project area. Eventually, insect mortality and/or 

wildfires would provide high quality habitat in the short-term but the benefits would be reduced as the 

snags created fell. There would be a significant period of time for the recovery of the green trees and 

snag recruitment of sizes sufficiently large to support black-backed woodpecker nesting. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions would have some direct effects to black-backed 

woodpecker habitat due to losses of snags to safety issues. Prescribed burns in stands dominated by 

ponderosa pine with inclusions of lodgepole pine would reduce snags. Some snag recruitment would 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

139

occur from mortality of green trees from prescribed burns, but the number cannot be estimated. 

Salvage cutting of snags would not occur. Reducing stand densities may reduce the future mortality of 

lodgepole from bark beetles, which may have a short-term adverse effect. In the long-term, larger 

lodgepole pine would likely result from thinning and would eventually be killed by bark beetles and 

provide habitat. Adverse effects may affect individuals but would not likely be significant at the 

population scale. This is particularly true given that only 18% of project area has lodgepole pine 

dominated stands. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met provided that the net snag losses (accounting for 

snags created by prescribed burns) are mitigated by snag creation. Refer to the Resource Protection 

Measures, Chapter 2. 

Northern Flicker: S5 Secure 

Northern flickers are perhaps the most common woodpecker resident in Oregon. They can be found in 

a range of terrestrial habitats but are generally abundant in open forests and forest edges adjacent to 

open country (Marshall et al. 2006). Being a large cavity nester (12.5 inches long according to Sibley 

2005); they require large snags or large trees with decay in order to build their nests. Large snags are 

relatively rare within and adjacent to the proposed treatment areas. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would remain favorable to northern flickers in semiopen stands and likely decline where trees are dense. Large wildfires would cause a pulse of snags for 

foraging and potential nesting in the short-term, but eventually there would be a shortage as suitable 

snags fall. Without wildfire, there would likely be a slow degradation in the numbers of large green 

trees and snags as insect and competition related mortality increased with time. The loss of understory 

trees from mistletoe mortality would also contribute to this decline across the landscape. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions would have some direct effects to northern flicker 

habitat due to the loss of snags to prescribed fire and safety issues. Some snag recruitment would 

occur from mortality of green trees due to prescribed burns, but the number cannot be estimated. 

Salvage cutting of snags would not occur. Reducing stand density to create more open conditions with 

larger trees would be beneficial. Future potential nest trees would be provided through time from 

recruitment of retention green trees. Adverse effects may affect individuals but would not likely be 

significant at the population scale. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met provided that the net snag losses (accounting for 

snags created by prescribed burns) are mitigated by snag creation. Refer to the Resource Protection 

Measures, Chapter 2. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

140

Williamson’s Sapsuckers: S4 Apparently Secure

Willamson’s sapsuckers are a focal species for large snags in mixed conifer habitat. They would often 

utilize ponderosa pine habitat. They use dead and live trees for foraging and select for large (greater 

than 20 inchesdbh) snags for nesting (Bull et al. 1986). 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would remain favorable, unless a catastrophic wildfire 

was to occur within the project area. A wildfire would cause a pulse of snags for foraging and 

potential nesting in the short-term, but eventually there would be a shortage as suitable snags fall. 

Without wildfire, there would likely be a slow degradation in the numbers of large green trees and 

snags as insect and competition related mortality increased with time. The loss of understory trees 

from mistletoe mortality would also contribute to this decline across the landscape. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions would have some direct effects to sapsucker habitat 

due to the loss of snags to prescribed fire and safety issues. Some snag recruitment would occur from 

mortality of green trees due to prescribed burns, but the number cannot be estimated. Salvage cutting 

of snags would not occur. Reducing stand density to create more open conditions with larger trees 

would be beneficial. Future potential nest trees would be provided through time from recruitment of 

retention green trees. Adverse effects may affect individuals but would not likely be significant at the 

population scale. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met provided that the net snag losses (accounting for 

snags created by prescribed burns) are mitigated by snag creation. Refer to the Resource Protection 

Measures, Chapter 2. 

Waterfowl Species 

Table 55: Management Indicator Species - Waterfowl 

Waterfowl Species 

Species Status Habitat Presence 

Common loon MIS Edges of remote freshwater ponds 

and lakes 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Pied-billed grebe MIS Edge of open water in freshwater 

lakes, ponds, sluggish rivers and 

marshes 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Horned grebe MIS Open water with emergent 

vegetation 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Red-necked grebe MIS Lakes and ponds in forested areas No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Eared grebe MIS Open water with emergent 

vegetation 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Western grebe MIS Marches with open water and lakes 

and reservoirs with emergent 

vegetation 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Canada goose MIS Variety of habitat: shores of lakes, 

rivers, and reservoirs especially 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

141

Waterfowl Species 

Species Status Habitat Presence 

with cattails and bulrushes 

Wood duck MIS Cavity nester No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Gadwall MIS Concealed clumps of grasses in 

meadows and tall grasslands 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

American widgeon MIS Clumps of grasses in meadows or 

tall grasslands 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Mallard MIS Open water with emergent 

vegetation 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Blue-winged teal MIS Marshes, lakes, ponds, slowmoving streams No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Cinnamon teal MIS Cover of vegetation near shoreline No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Northern shoveler MIS Grassy areas near water No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Northern pintail MIS Open areas near water No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Green-winged teal MIS Freshwater marshes with emergent 

vegetation 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Canvasback MIS Emergent vegetation No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Redhead MIS Freshwater marshes and lakes 

concealed in vegetation 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Ring-necked duck MIS Thick emergent vegetation on 

shorelines 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Lesser scaup MIS Dry grassy areas near lakes at least 

10 ft. deep 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Common goldeneye MIS Cavity nester No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Barrow’s goldeneye MIS Cavity nester No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Hooded merganser MIS Cavity nester No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Common merganser MIS Cavity nester No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Ruddy duck MIS Freshwater marshes, lakes, ponds 

in dense vegetation 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Rationale for Species Not Considered In Detail 

For the species listed in Table 55, there is no habitat within or adjacent to proposed treatment areas. A 

lack of habitat assumes a lack of presence and therefore any actions or no action within the proposed 

treatment areas would have no affect to this species. The following species of waterfowl and other 

aquatic oriented species rely heavily on habitat adjacent to a body of water (often a marsh or lake): 

common loon, pied-billed grebe, horned grebe, red-necked grebe, eared grebe, 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. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

142

LANDBIRD FOCAL SPECIES 

Table 56: Deschutes National Forest Landbird Focal Species 

Landbird Focal Species 

Species Status Habitat Presence 

Pygmy 

nuthatch 

Landbird focal 

species 

Mature ponderosa pine 

forests and snags 

Habitat in proposed treatment areas. 

Chipping 

sparrow 

Landbird focal 

species 

Open understory 

ponderosa pine forests 

with regeneration 

Habitat in proposed treatment areas. 

Brown creeper Landbird focal 

species 

Large trees in mixed 

conifer forests 

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas. 

Flammulated 

owl 

Landbird focal 

species, BCC 

Interspersed grassy 

openings and dense 

thickets in mixed conifer 

forests 

Potential habitat in proposed treatment 

areas. 

Hermit thrush Landbird focal 

species 

Multi-layered/dense 

canopy in mixed conifer 

forests 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Olive-sided 

flycatcher 

Landbird focal 

species 

Edges and openings 

created by wildfire in 

mixed conifer forests 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Clark’s 

nutcracker 

Landbird focal 

species 

High elevation old growth 

whitebark pine but often 

uses other habitats 

especially during 

migration. 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Blue grouse Landbird focal 

species 

Subalpine fir but will also 

use mixed conifer forests. 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. 

Sandhill crane Landbird focal 

species 

Meadows (wet and dry) 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) 

Rationale for Species Not Considered In Detail 

For the species listed in Table 56, there is no habitat within or adjacent to proposed treatment areas. A 

lack of habitat assumes a lack of presence and therefore any actions or no action within the proposed 

treatment areas would have no affect to the following species: hermit thrush, olive-sided flycatcher, 

Clark’s nutcracker, blue grouse, and Sandhill crane. For more specific information regarding refer to 

the Project Record, Wildlife Report. 

Species Receiving Further Detail 

Pygmy Nuthatch 

A focal species for large mature trees in open ponderosa pine forests and mixed conifer forests that 

have a significant ponderosa pine component (Altman 2000). They some times forage in young 

ponderosa pine. They may excavate their own cavities in snags for nesting or utilize woodpecker 

holes (Marshall et al. 2006). The conservation strategies for this species include managing for large 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

143

diameter trees, restricting firewood cutting, and retaining all snags greater than 10 inches dbh and all 

ponderosa pine greater than 17 inches dbh. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would remain favorable, unless a catastrophic wildfire 

was to occur within the project area. A wildfire would cause a pulse of snags for foraging and 

potential nesting in the short-term, but eventually there would be a shortage of suitable snags as they 

fall. Without wildfire, there would likely be a slow degradation in the numbers of large green trees 

and snags as insect and competition related mortality increased with time. The loss of understory trees 

from mistletoe mortality would also contribute to this decline across the landscape. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions would have some direct effects to nuthatch habitat 

due to the loss of snags to prescribed fire and safety issues. Some snag recruitment would occur from 

mortality of green trees due to prescribed burns, but the number cannot be estimated. Salvage cutting 

of snags would not occur. Reducing stand density to create more open conditions with larger trees 

would be beneficial. Future potential nest trees would be provided through time from recruitment of 

retention green trees. Adverse effects may affect individuals but would not likely be significant at the 

population scale. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met provided that the net snag losses (accounting for 

snags created by prescribed burns) are mitigated by snag creation. Refer to the sections on Mitigation 

Measures/Project Design Criteria and K-V Projects. 

Chipping Sparrow 

A focal species for open understory habitat with regenerating pines in ponderosa pine and mixed 

conifer habitats (Altman 2000). Grassy openings or other areas of low foliage are preferred for 

foraging. They will also use juniper and lodgepole pine forests. They often prefer young forests with 

openings over more mature, denser forests (Marshall et al. 2006). Conservation strategies are to 

conduct understory removal and burning outside the nesting season thinning (April 15-July 15) and 

overstory thinning to promote large diameter trees and ponderosa pine. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would remain favorable, unless a catastrophic wildfire 

was to occur within the project area. Without wildfire, there would likely be a slow degradation as 

tree densification continued with the loss of open understories important to this species. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Thinning and prescribed fire prescriptions that create more open 

conditions and promote grassy habitats and conifer regeneration which would benefit chipping 

sparrows. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

144

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

No specific requirements, however the provisions for structural diversity and uneven-aged 

management (TM-56 and 63) would meet chipping sparrow needs. Refer to the section on Mitigation 

Measures/Project Design Criteria. 

Brown Creepers 

This is a focal species for large trees within mixed conifer (i.e. white or Douglas-fir) plant association 

(Altman 2000). They are also associated with mature ponderosa pine forests (Csuti et al. 2001). 

Creepers nest under loose bark of green trees or snags that are usually of large diameter. Generally, 

they are more abundant in mature forests (Marshall et al. 2006). 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would remain favorable, unless a catastrophic wildfire 

was to occur within the project area. Without wildfire there would likely be a slow degradation in the 

numbers of large green trees and snags as insect and competition related mortality increased with time. 

Also losses of understory trees from mistletoe would also contribute to this decline across the 

landscape. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed actions would have some direct effects to creeper habitat 

due to losses of snags to prescribed fire and safety issues. Some snag recruitment would occur from 

mortality of green trees due to prescribed burns, but the number cannot be estimated. Salvage cutting 

of snags would not occur. Reducing stand density to create more open conditions with larger trees 

would be beneficial. Future potential nest trees would be provided through time from recruitment of 

retention green trees. Adverse effects may affect individuals but would not likely be significant at the 

population scale. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met provided that the net snag losses (accounting for 

snags created by prescribed burns) are mitigated by snag creation. Refer to the sections on Mitigation 

Measures/Project Design Criteria and K-V Projects. 

Flammulated Owls 

A focal species of grassy opening and dense thickets within late-successional mixed conifer plant 

associations. Ponderosa pine forests are also important. Drier forests with limited understories appear 

to be the key attribute. Nesting is most common in stands with moderate to high levels of canopy 

cover. The majority nest in snags but will also use green trees (Marshall et al. 2006). 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Habitat conditions would remain favorable, unless a catastrophic wildfire 

was to occur within the project area. Without wildfire there would likely be a slow degradation in the 

numbers of large green trees and snags as insect and competition related mortality increased with time. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

145

Also losses of understory trees from mistletoe would also contribute to this decline across the 

landscape. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Thinning and prescribed fire prescriptions that create more open 

conditions and promote grassy habitats and conifer regeneration would benefit flammulated owls. 

Consistency with LRMP standards and guidelines as amended 

All applicable standards and guidelines would be met provided that the net snag losses (accounting for 

snags created by prescribed burns) are mitigated by snag creation. Refer to the sections on Resource 

Protection Measures, Chapter 2. 

BIRDS OF CONSERVATION CONCERN 

Table 57: Birds of Conservation Concern 

Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) 

Species Status Habitat Presence 

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, R6 

Sensitive 

Sagebrush flats No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas. Refer to the Biological 

Evaluation. 

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, Shorebird Grassy marshes and tidal 

flats 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Long-billed 

curlew 

BCC, Shorebird Dry grasslands No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Marbled godwit BCC, Shorebird 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 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

146

Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) 

Species Status Habitat Presence 

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; 

uncommon in Oregon. 

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 

Rationale for Species Not Considered In Detail 

For the species listed in Table 57, there is no habitat within or adjacent to proposed treatment areas. A 

lack of habitat assumes a lack of presence and therefore any actions or no action within the proposed 

treatment areas would have no affect to this species. For more specific information regarding the 

Swainson’s hawk, ferruginous hawk, Prairie falcons, American golden plover, snowy plover, 

American avocet, solitary sandpiper, whimbrel, and Long-billed curlew, marbled godwits, sanderlings, 

Wilson’s phalarope, yellow-billed cuckoo, burrowing owl, black swift, loggerhead shrike, gray vireo, 

Virginia’s warbler, Brewer’s sparrow, sage sparrow, refer to the Project Record, Wildlife Report. 

SHOREBIRDS 

Table 58: Shorebirds 

Shorebirds 

Species Status Habitat Presence 

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 

tundra 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

Hudsonian 

godwit 

Shorebird Mudflats and shallow 

water; nests around spruce 

woods 

No habitat within or adjacent to proposed 

treatment areas 

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 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

147

Shorebirds 

Species Status Habitat Presence 

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 

Rationale for Species Not Considered In Detail 

For the species listed in Table 58 there is no habitat within or adjacent to proposed treatment areas. A 

lack of habitat assumes a lack of presence and therefore any actions or no action within the proposed 

treatment areas would have no affect to this species. For more specific information regarding Piping 

plover, mountain plover, buff-breasted sandpipers, black oystercatchers, upland sandpipers, bristlethighed curlew, Hudsonian godwits, black turnstone, surfbird, Western sandpiper, rock sandpiper, 

short-billed dowitcher, American woodcock, Wilson’s plover, American oystercatcher, bar-tailed 

godwits, ruddy turnstone, red knots, and dunlins refer to the Project Record, Wildlife Report beginning 

on page 20. 

CUMULATIVE EFFECTS 

The following table summarizes the known management activities and natural events (e.g. wildfires) 

that could potentially contribute to the effects of the project’s proposed action alternatives on wildlife 

and habitats. 

Table 59: Cumulative Effects Summary for the Wildlife Resource 

Cumulative Effects 

Management Activities 

and Natural Events* 

Description Effects Upon Wildlife Species 

1. KO Timber Sale and 

Reforestation 

Plantation fence maintenance and big 

game repellent applications. Dwarf 

mistletoe control activities (pruning and 

girdling of infected trees). Past 

harvest/thinning effects. 

Reductions of hiding cover for deer and 

snags/logs for dependent species. Local 

impacts on individual species but no 

long-term adverse effects on populations. 

2. Road maintenance 

within and adjacent to 

the project area. 

System roads that remain in place with 

associated human use and periodic 

maintenance activities. Management 

actions past, present and future via 

travel management (Green Dot) and 

physical closures to mitigate negative 

effects. 

Direct and indirect (i.e. disturbance, 

habitat effectiveness reduction) losses of 

habitat for deer and other species. 

Permanent adverse effects to individuals 

at the local scale but unlikely to have 

measurable effects at the population level. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS 

148

Cumulative Effects 

Management Activities 

and Natural Events* 

Description Effects Upon Wildlife Species 

3. Grazing by livestock 

and associated 

improvements and 

maintenance activities. 

(Quartz Mountain and 

Sand Springs 

Allotments) 

Active cow allotment. Several water 

sets are within or adjacent to the 

planning area. Buried water lines cross 

the area in several locations. Extensive 

fencing is present. 

Affects upon herbaceous and shrub 

vegetation that may affect dependent 

species. Generally, proper utilization 

management and pasture rotations reduce 

the adverse effects to infrequent local 

impacts to individuals. Water sets are the 

most impacting to vegetation but occupy 

a very small area. Managed grazing is 

not likely to affect populations. 

4. Aspen Project 

vegetation treatments. 

Within a few miles of the project 

boundary. Includes prescribed burns, 

mowing and thinning of pine 

plantations that have been done and 

would continue into the future until 

completed. 

Effects upon wildlife species were 

addressed by the project EA and the 

appropriate mitigation measures were 

adopted to reduce potential adverse 

effects. 

5. Wildfires At least 6 fires greater than 100 acres 

have happened since 1913 within or 

near the project area. The fires having 

occurred within the boundary include: 

South Ice Cave (S, SW portions of area 

in 1915) and Quartz Mt. (NE and 

central portions in 1913 and 1918). 

The most recent large fire was the 

Aspen Flat fire of 1959 to the east of 

the project area. 

Habitat related alterations by past fires 

have been included in assessments done 

for the project area including hiding 

cover, structural stage classification, etc. 

Fires are a natural disturbance and many 

species have evolved with them and 

depend upon fire created habitat 

conditions. Atypically hot fires may be 

damaging to soils and result in erosion 

and loss of site productivity which may 

have long-term adverse effects on many 

species. 

6. Opal mine Located in the SW portion of Quartz 

Mountain. Active annually. 

Permanent habitat losses but a very small 

site. 

7. Past fuels treatments Wigtop area. Conversion of shrub habitats to grass 

domination in the short to mid-term 

depending upon site and intensity of 

treatments. Variable effects on wildlife 

with some adversely affected and some 

benefited. 

8. Forest Access and 

Travel Management EIS 

Reviews all system roads on the Forest. 

Final decision will specify closed 

unless posted open. Prohibits cross 

country travel. 

Benefits many species sensitive to human 

disturbance. 

9. Miscellaneous Cinder pits, power line corridor 

maintenance/expansion, illegal 

motorcycle trails, dispersed camp sites, 

wildlife guzzlers, cone collection, 

firewood (snag/log) thefts, 

noxious/exotic weeds, etc. 

Permanent loss of habitat, disturbance, 

and fragmentation. Effects variable by 

species resulting in losses of some 

individuals but unlikely to adversely 

affect populations. 

10. Weed Control EIS Will allow chemical control of noxious 

and exotic weeds when approved. 

Benefits by reducing competition with 

native plant species. 

* Notes: Additional detail for individual management activity/natural events by respective reference numbers: 

1. Past changes in habitats (e.g. structural stage, crown cover, etc.) are reflected in hiding cover indices, LOS assessments, 

etc. thereby incorporating cumulative effects where the measurements were done, e.g. Implementation Units and the project 

area. Currently the ODFW population indices for mule deer indicate a stable population for the South Paulina deer herd 

subunit, which is near their Management Objective (MO). 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Wildlife MIS

149

2. Road/motorized trail density assessments (e.g. Implementation Units) and effects determinations for those species where 

applicable meet the quantification aspect of cumulative effects for this activity. 

3. Bounding was generally limited to the Implementation Units where specific effects on mule deer were addressed. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

150

SOILS 

INTRODUCTION 

The long-term sustainability of forest ecosystems depends on the productivity and hydrologic 

functioning of soils. Ground-disturbing management activities directly affect soil properties, which 

may adversely change the natural capability of soils and their potential responses to use and 

management. A detrimental soil condition often occurs where heavy equipment or logs displace 

surface organic layers or reduce soil porosity through compaction. Detrimental disturbances reduce 

the soils ability to supply nutrients, moisture, and air that support soil microorganisms and the growth 

of vegetation. The biological productivity of soils relates to the amount of surface organic matter and 

coarse woody debris retained or removed from affected sites. Maintenance or enhancement of soil 

productivity is an integral part of National Forest management. Therefore, an evaluation of the 

potential effects on soil productivity is essential for integrated management of forest resources. 

SOIL PRODUCTIVITY 

The proposed use of ground-based equipment can potentially increase the amount and distribution of 

detrimental soil conditions within the individual activity areas proposed for mechanical treatments. 

The removal of trees from activity areas can potentially cause adverse changes in organic matter 

levels. 

Soil productivity measures are: 

1. Change in extent of detrimental soil conditions following proposed harvest and mitigation 

treatments within the individual activity areas proposed for mechanical treatments. 

2. 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. 

SCOPE OF THE ANALYSIS 

The soil resource may be directly, indirectly, and cumulatively affected within each of the activity 

areas 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 Forest Plan, page 

4-71). For this project proposal, activity area boundaries are considered to be the smallest identified 

area where the potential effects of different management practices would occur. Thus, the discussion 

of soil effects and soil quality standards will be focused on the EIS units (activity areas) proposed for 

silvicultural and fuel reduction treatments. The activity areas range in size from approximately 5 acres 

to 400 acres. 

Quantitative analyses and professional judgment were used to evaluate and compare existing 

conditions to anticipated conditions following project implementation. The Geographic Information 

System (GIS) was used to assess disturbed areas associated with the transportation system and logging 

facilities. 

The temporal scope of the analysis is defined as 1) short-term effects: changes to soil properties that 

would generally revert to pre-existing conditions within 5 years or less, and 2) long-term effects: 

substantial effects that would remain for 5 years or longer. The analysis also considered the 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

151

effectiveness and probable success of implementing management requirements, mitigation measures, 

and Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to avoid, minimize or reduce potentially adverse 

impacts to soil productivity. 

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 

Landscape Characteristics 

The Deadlog planning area covers approximately 16,055 acres east of Newberry Crater in the 

southeastern portion of the forest. All landforms, rocks, and soil are products from volcanic events 

that occurred over various time periods. Approximately 80 percent of the planning area is comprised 

of gently sloping plains and uneven lava flows that lie below and surround cinder cones, buttes and 

mountain side slopes that account for about 20 percent of the total acreage. Dominant landforms have 

average slope gradients that range from 0 to 30 percent. Steeper slopes (30 to 70 percent) are 

associated with cinder cones, escarpments of buttes and mountains, and the edges of lava flows. 

Volcanic ash and pumice deposits from Mount Mazama (Crater Lake) and Newberry Crater volcanoes 

have covered most of the planning area, except for a few barren lava flows of minor extent. Elevation 

ranges from about 4,800 feet in the southwestern portion of the planning area to approximately 6,150 

feet on the upper ridges of Quartz Mountain. Mean annual precipitation varies across the landscape 

due to changes in elevation, but it generally ranges from about 12 to 20 inches. Topography affects 

climate by creating a moisture gradient of lower precipitation along the desert fringe that increases 

with elevation. Topography also affects climate where cold air drainages influence cooler soil 

temperatures that reflect differences in vegetation. 

Most of the water yielded from these lands is delivered to streams as deep seepage and subsurface 

flows that emerge at lower elevations. The sandy textures of these ash-influenced soils have high 

infiltration and percolation rates that account for low amounts of overland flow. Surface runoff 

generally occurs only in areas with shallow soils and disturbed sites during high intensity storms or 

when the ground is frozen. There are no known perennial or intermittent streams within the planning 

area. Any surface flows within ephemeral channels are discontinuous and of short duration. There are 

no riparian areas or riparian-dependent resources within the planning area. 

The project area contains 15 landtype units based on similarities in landforms, geology, and climatic 

conditions that influence defined patterns of soil and vegetation (Soil Resource Inventory, Larsen, 

1976). Except for some of the youngest lava flows, the majority of the planning area (over 90 percent) 

has been covered by volcanic ash and pumice deposits that consist mostly of sand-sized soil particles. 

Previously developed soils typically overlay hard bedrock that consists dominantly of basalt and 

andesite lava. Cindery soil materials are generally exposed on the top portions of cinder cones and 

buttes, while ash deposits have accumulated to greater depths on the northern and mid-to-lower slope 

positions of all aspects due to wind and dry ravel erosion. The more productive soils are commonly 

found on north and east aspects, and on concave slope positions such as toe slopes, swales and 

depressions. The less productive soils consist mainly of barren lava flows, non-vegetated slopes of 

cinder cones and buttes with south and west aspects, or other sparsely vegetated sites with scattered 

non-commercial trees. Approximately 25 percent of the project area is comprised of landtypes that 

contain shallow soils (less than 20 inches) and areas of exposed bedrock. 

Dominant soils are moderately deep (20 to 40 inches) to deep (greater than 40 inches) with loamysand textures and moderate productivity potential for the growth of vegetation. These soil types tend 

to be non-cohesive (loose) and they have very little structural development due to the young geologic 

age of the volcanic parent materials. Soils derived from volcanic ash have naturally low bulk densities 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

152

and low compaction potential. However, mechanical disturbances can reduce soil porosity to levels 

that limit vegetative growth, especially where there is a lack of woody debris and surface organic 

matter to help cushion the weight distribution of equipment. Due to the absence of rock fragments on 

the surface and within soil profiles, these ash-influenced soils are well suited for tillage treatments 

(subsoiling) that loosen compacted soil layers and improve the soils ability to supply nutrients, 

moisture, and air that support vegetative growth and biotic habitat for soil organisms. The sandy 

surface layers are easily displaced by equipment operations, especially during dry moisture conditions. 

The maneuvering of equipment is most likely to cause soil displacement damage on the steeper 

landforms. The dominant sandy-textured soils within the planning area are not susceptible to soil 

puddling damage due to their lack of plasticity and cohesion. 

On undisturbed sites with gentle slopes, surface erosion occurs at naturally low rates because soils are 

protected by vegetation and organic litter layers. At the present time, soils within the planning area are 

adequately protected to control erosion rates within tolerable limits. Surface erosion by water is not a 

concern because dominant landtypes have low-to-moderate erosion hazard ratings. Accelerated surface 

erosion is usually associated with disturbances that reduce vegetative cover, displace organic surface 

layers, or reduce soil porosity through compaction. Soils derived from volcanic ash are easily eroded 

where water becomes channeled on disturbed sites such as road surfaces, recreation trails, and logging 

facilities. 

Land Suitability and Inherent Soil Productivity 

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). 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. 

Dominant landtypes within the planning area generally have moderate productivity ratings. All 

activity areas proposed for commercial timber harvest and non-commercial thinning treatments meet 

criteria for land suitability that would allow them to be regenerated or resist irreversible resource 

damage. The locations of proposed activity areas exclude areas of exposed bedrock on rocky lava 

flows, sparsely-vegetated cinder cones and other miscellaneous landtypes with site conditions and soil 

properties which are too variable for classifying a suitability rating. 

Sensitive Soil Types 

Based on criteria for identifying sensitive soils to management (Deschutes LRMP (Appendix 14, 

Objective 5), sensitive soils within the planning area include the following categories: 

 Soils on slopes greater than 30 percent (582 total landtype acres): forested cinder cones (south 

aspects) and escarpments/side slopes (ridges, buttes and edges of lava flows, and steep side slopes 

of mountains and lava domes). 

 Soils associated with frost pockets in cold air drainages and basins: 1,778 acres on plains with 

ponderosa pine and 1,492 acres on plains with mixed ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine. 

 Soils that occur in localized areas of rocky lava flows: 1,101 acres of ponderosa pine, site index 50 

to 80 with areas of barren lava flows. 

It should be emphasized that only portions of these total landtype acres actually contain sensitive soils. 

Areas with sensitive soils are typically confined to specific segments of the dominant landform and 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

153

they are generally too small to delineate on maps. Sensitive soil areas that occur within proposed 

activity areas are discussed under the direct and indirect effects of implementing the action 

alternatives. 

EXISTING CONDITION 

Natural Events 

There is currently no evidence of detrimental soil conditions from natural disturbance events within 

the Deadlog planning area. Fire history data indicate that the 1915 South Ice Cave Fire (11,910 acres), 

the Quartz Mt. Fire (138 acres) and the Quartz Butte Fire (1918) burned vegetation and natural fuels 

over extensive portions of the planning area. There is currently no evidence of severely burned soil. 

Enough time has passed that the recovery of native vegetation and forest litter are providing adequate 

ground cover protection and surface erosion rates have returned to natural levels. 

There are no natural or management-related landslides known to exist within the planning area. 

Dominant landtypes do not meet criteria for landslide prone terrain and the high permeability of the 

volcanic ash-influenced soil generally precludes the buildup of hydraulic pressures that could trigger 

landslides. 

Management-Related Disturbances 

 Detrimental Soil Disturbance 

o Timber Management 

The existing condition of the soil resource has mainly been influenced by the transportation system 

and ground-based logging facilities which were used between 1963 and 1999. Previous silvicultural 

treatments included approximately 130 acres of commercial thinning and salvage, 3,057 acres of 

intermediate (partial removal), and 6,238 acres of regeneration harvest. Ground-based logging 

equipment disturbed soils on portions of 109 of the 132 EIS units proposed for mechanical harvest 

under Alternative 2, and 120 of the 146 EIS units proposed under Alternative 3. There was no overlap 

of previously harvested areas within the remaining EIS units proposed under either of the action 

alternatives. 

Ground-based railroad logging was used to selectively harvest ponderosa pine in portions of the 

project area during the 1920s and early 1930s. Natural regeneration of tree seedlings was successful 

and adequate stocking of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine currently exists throughout the area. 

Most soil impacts occurred on and adjacent to heavy-use areas (such as roads, railroad grades, main 

skid trails) where surface soils were displaced and multiple equipment passes caused compaction. 

Visual evidence of old logging facilities from that period is difficult to observe due to the abundance 

of ground cover vegetation and forest litter. Since volcanic ash soils have naturally low bulk densities 

and compaction potential, it is expected that natural processes have gradually restored soil quality over 

the past 70 to 80 years. Soils on previously compacted sites have likely returned to near-natural 

density levels through root penetration, frost heaving, rodent activity, freeze-thaw and wetting-drying 

cycles. The establishment of native vegetation and accumulation of organic matter has improved areas 

of past soil displacement. Therefore, these older soil disturbances are not included as existing sources 

of detrimental soil conditions within any of the activity areas proposed for this project. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

154

The primary sources of detrimental soil conditions are associated with the transportation system and 

existing logging facilities which were used for timber harvest and yarding activities. Temporary 

roads, log landings, and primary skid trails were constructed and used to access individual harvest 

units of past timber sales. Most project-related impacts to soils occurred on and adjacent to these 

heavy-use areas where mechanical disturbances removed vegetative cover, displaced organic surface 

layers, or compacted soil surface layers. Much of the random disturbance between main skid trails and 

away from landings has decreased naturally over time. Research studies and local soil monitoring 

have shown that soil compaction and soil displacement account for the majority of detrimental soil 

conditions resulting from ground-based logging operations (Page-Dumroese, 1993; Geist, 1989; 

Powers, 1999; Deschutes Soil Monitoring Reports). 

The extent of detrimentally disturbed soil is dependent on a number of variables including the types of 

silvicultural prescriptions, the intensity of equipment use with each entry, and the spacing distances 

between main skid trails. Local knowledge and experience with past and current harvest practices, 

research references, local monitoring reports, and field investigations were used to estimate 

detrimental soil conditions within each of the activity areas planned for this project. Soil monitoring 

results on local landtypes and similar soils have shown that 15 to 30 percent of the unit area can be 

detrimentally disturbed by ground-based harvest systems depending on harvest prescriptions and soil 

conditions at the time of harvest (Deschutes Soil Monitoring Reports, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1999). 

Soil condition assessments were conducted for a representative sample of past harvest treatments that 

included commercial thinning, intermediate (partial removal) and regeneration harvest prescriptions. 

The primary objective was to verify previous monitoring results of similar management practices on 

similar landscapes and volcanic-ash soils of the Deschutes National Forest. Qualitative assessments of 

soil surface conditions were made by establishing line transects and recording visual evidence of soil 

disturbance at 5 foot intervals. Detrimental soil compaction was the primary disturbance category 

observed where equipment operations were intensive. Shovel probing was used to assess compaction 

using resistance to penetration as a measure. Soil displacement, as defined by FSM 2521.03, was 

more difficult to distinguish due to the establishment of native vegetation and the accumulation of 

forest litter. Observations suggested that equipment turns or movement generally caused more mixing 

of soil and organic matter than actual removal from a site. Results showed that the average amount of 

soil impacts was actually less than monitoring results from previous soil condition assessments of past 

thinning, intermediate, and regeneration harvest treatments. Based on the proportionate extent of 

overlap of sampled areas with the proposed activity areas, these field assessment results are included 

in the percentages of existing detrimental soil conditions displayed in Appendix B (Table 80 and Table 

81). 

Since multiple entries have been made in some past harvest areas and most soil disturbances occurred 

prior to LRMP direction (1990), conservative estimates were used to predict how much surface area is 

currently impacted by existing roads and logging facilities within each of the activity areas proposed 

for this entry. The majority of past harvest treatments were intermediate (partial removal) and 

regeneration harvest prescriptions that typically cause more soil disturbance than thinning 

prescriptions because equipment use is more intensive throughout activity areas (Deschutes Soil 

Monitoring Reports 1996, 1997, and 1999). Activity areas which were managed with intermediate 

harvest prescriptions generally have about 23 percent detrimental soil conditions associated with 

existing roads and logging facilities. Past regeneration treatments (e.g., shelterwood, seed tree harvest, 

final removal, and overstory removal) generally cause about 6 percent more detrimental soil impacts 

(29 percent) and commercial thinning treatments result in about 6 percent less soil impacts (17 

percent) than disturbed area estimates based solely on the design of skid trail systems and log 

landings. Based on the proportionate extent of overlap of past treatments within the proposed activity 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

155

areas, these percentages were used to calculate existing amounts of detrimental soil conditions within 

the activity areas planned for this project. 

Much of the random disturbance between main skid trails and away from landings has decreased 

naturally over time. Research has shown that the detrimental effects of soil compaction generally 

require more than 3 to 5 equipment passes over the same piece of ground (McNabb, Froehlich, 1983). 

Where logs were skidded with only 1 or 2 equipment passes, soil compaction was shallow (2 to 4 

inches) and the bulk density increases did not qualify as a detrimental soil condition. Frost heaving 

and freeze-thaw cycles have gradually restored soil porosity in areas with slight to moderately 

compacted layers near the ground surface. Other factors that have helped the recovery process include 

root penetration, rodent activity, wetting and drying cycles, and surface organic matter. The 

establishment of vegetative ground cover and the accumulation of litter and organic matter has also 

been improving areas of past soil displacement. 

There is no evidence that mechanical site preparation and/or brush removal treatments caused any 

long-term, detrimental soil displacement within any of the activity areas proposed for this project. 

There is no evidence that post-harvest, broadcast burn treatments caused any severely burned soil in 

random locations off designated logging facilities in previously managed areas. The extent of illegal 

firewood cutting in this planning area has been relatively minor compared to other areas on the district 

that have better quality firewood. Random disturbances from woodcutting activities are not included 

as existing sources of detrimental soil conditions within any of the activity areas proposed for this 

project. 

Subsoiling treatments have rehabilitated detrimentally compacted soil on temporary roads and primary 

logging facilities in portions of 40 past harvest areas within the planning area. Soil restoration 

treatments were conducted in seven of the activity areas proposed under Alternative 2, and nine 

activity areas which are now scheduled for re-entry under Alternative 3. Disturbed area estimates for 

these activity areas are balanced because subsoiled areas are expected to reach full recovery through 

natural processes within the short-term. Therefore, soil restoration acres were deducted in the 

calculated estimates of existing detrimental soil conditions (Appendix B, Table 80 and Table 81). 

Soils committed to existing logging facilities in other portions of the project area would remain in a 

detrimental condition until reclamation activities are implemented to improve the hydrologic function 

and productivity on disturbed sites with compacted soils. 

Based on the best available information regarding past harvest and soil restoration activities, the 

overall extent of soil impacts associated with existing logging facilities is estimated to be 

approximately 1,154 acres under Alternative 2, and 1,286 acres under Alternative 3. It was concluded 

that 75 of the 132 proposed activity areas (Alternative 2) and 83 of the 146 activity areas (Alternative 

3) currently have detrimental soil conditions that exceed 20 percent of the unit area. 

o Roads, Mine Site, and Rock Borrow Pits 

Roads detrimentally disturb soil properties and convert the soil resource to a non-productive condition. 

Most of the precipitation that falls on compacted road surfaces is transmitted as surface runoff, and 

roads are primary sources of accelerated surface erosion. The project area contains approximately 120 

miles of classified system roads. This equates to approximately 191 acres or 1.0 percent of the 

planning area. Segments of existing roads, ranging from less than 0.1 to 2.2 miles (0.2 to 3.3 acres), 

cross through portions of 101 activity areas (Alternative 2) and 110 activity areas (Alternative 3) 

proposed for mechanical harvest treatments. The estimated amount of detrimentally disturbed soil 

committed to existing system roads is included in acres and percentages of existing soil impacts in 

shown in Table 80 and Table 81 of Appendix B. Road surveys will be conducted to identify where 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

156

maintenance may be necessary to correct drainage problems on existing system roads that would be 

used as haul routes for this project. Several segments of local system road are recommended for longterm road closures and road decommissioning (subsoiling) treatments. 

Soil has been removed from production from an opal mine site and associated camping area 

(approximately 1 acre), two cinder or rock borrow pits (approximately 3 acres each), and a water tank 

and pump house (approximately one-quarter acre). This equates to a total of approximately 7 acres or 

less than 0.1 percent of the planning area. None of these disturbed sites are located within any of the 

activity areas proposed for mechanical harvest treatments under either of the action alternatives. 

o Recreation Activities 

Current recreational activities include dispersed camping, hiking, mountain biking, horseback riding, 

and off-highway vehicle (OHV) use. There are no developed recreation facilities, including 

campgrounds, day-use picnic areas, motorized or non-motorized system trails. Soil impacts from 

dispersed recreation activities are usually found along existing roads, trails and other management 

facilities where vegetation has been cleared and soils have been previously disturbed by other land use 

activities. Campfires usually consume available sources of down woody debris. Livestock water 

developments (water sets) often become dispersed campsites because vegetation has already been 

cleared on relatively level ground, so dispersed activities do not cause a cumulative increase in 

detrimental soil conditions. The extent of user-created trails within individual activity areas is 

unknown. Many of these disturbances often occur on or adjacent to existing roads and old skid trail 

networks of past harvest areas. Conservative estimates were used to account for soil disturbances 

from existing roads and logging facilities. Due to the average size of the EIS units, the minor extent of 

soil disturbances from dispersed camping and other incidental recreation uses would not be expected 

to have a measurable effect on site productivity. Therefore, soil disturbances from dispersed 

recreation activities were not included as existing sources of detrimental soil conditions within any of 

the individual activity areas proposed for this project. 

o Livestock Grazing 

The planning area contains portions of the Quartz Mountain and Sand Springs Allotments. Current 

range records indicate that forage conditions are generally good with a vegetative trend that is stable. 

There are no site-specific areas where livestock movement and grazing effects have caused 

unsatisfactory soil conditions. Livestock impacts to the soil resource are found mainly in localized 

areas of concentrated use, such as around water developments, salt licks, bedding areas, and major 

travel routes. The majority of detrimental soil conditions are confined to relatively small areas (about 

1.0 acre) around water developments (six historic water-set locations and three water troughs) needed 

to manage livestock. Salt licks are commonly placed in the immediate vicinity of water sets and these 

sites are often used as bedding areas, especially where scattered trees exist to provide shade. Eight 

water developments occur within EIS Units 16, 65, 69, 70, 77, 129, 130, and 132 proposed for 

mechanical harvest under each action alternative. One acre of disturbed soil is included in the 

estimated amounts of existing detrimental soil conditions for each of these eight activity areas 

(Appendix B, Table 80 and Table 81). 

Summary of Detrimental Soil Disturbances 

The primary sources of detrimental soil conditions are associated with the transportation system and 

existing logging facilities which were used for past timber harvest activities. The extent of 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

157

detrimentally disturbed soil associated with recreation use and livestock grazing is relatively minor in 

comparison. 

Based on the extent of overlap with past activity areas, it was concluded that 75 of the 132 proposed 

activity areas (Alternative 2) and 83 of the 146 activity areas (Alternative 3) currently have detrimental 

soil conditions that exceed 20 percent of the unit area. Existing detrimental soil conditions for these 

activity areas range from 21 to 32 percent with an average of 27 percent. The remaining EA units (57 

units in Alternative 2 and 63 units in Alternative 3) have existing detrimental soil conditions that range 

from 0 to 20 percent and average 6 percent. 

The extent of existing soil impacts associated with roads, logging facilities, and livestock water 

developments is included in the estimated acres and percentages shown in Appendix B, column 3 of 

Table 80, page 294 and Table 81, page 298. 

Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) and Surface Organic Matter 

The effects of management activities on soil productivity also depend on the amount of coarse woody 

debris (CWD) and surface organic matter retained or removed on affected sites. Decaying wood on the 

forest floor is critical for maintaining the soils ability to retain moisture and provide both short and 

long-term nutrient supplies and biotic habitat for microorganism populations. Mycorrhizal fungi and 

other soil organisms depend upon the continuing input of woody debris and fine organic matter. A 

balance between fuel management objectives and ensuring adequate amounts of CWD is an important 

goal for maintaining long-term soil productivity. Using mycorrhizal fungi as a bio-indicator of 

productive forest soils, research studies were used to develop conservative recommendations for 

leaving sufficient CWD following management activities (Graham et al. 1994, Brown et al. 2003). A 

minimum of 5 to 10 tons per acre of coarse woody debris (greater than 3 inches in diameter) should be 

retained on dry, ponderosa pine sites and 10 to 15 tons of CWD per acre on mixed conifer sites to 

maintain soil productivity. A sufficient number of standing dead snags and/or live trees should also be 

retained for future recruitment of organic matter. 

Conserving surface litter (i.e., organic materials such as leaves, twigs and branches less than 3 inches 

in diameter) is also important for protecting mineral soil from erosion, buffering the effects of soil 

compaction, and supplying nutrients that support the growth of vegetation and native populations of 

soil organisms. Surface litter also provides on-site moisture retention. 

Current levels of coarse woody debris and surface litter are not known for site-specific locations 

throughout the planning area. However, it is expected that adequate amounts of each currently exist to 

protect mineral soil from erosion and provide nutrients for maintaining soil productivity within the 

majority of previously managed areas. There are some older activity areas, prior to LRMP direction 

(1990), where management activities likely resulted in less than desired amounts of coarse woody 

debris (CWD) on the ground. In other portions of the project area, fire suppression has resulted in 

vegetation conditions that have fuel loadings in excess of historic pre-settlement conditions. Levels of 

CWD and surface litter in forested areas have been improving towards optimum conditions as 

additional woody materials have accumulated through natural mortality, windfall, and recruitment of 

fallen snags over time. Annual leaf/needle fall, small diameter branches, twigs and other forest litter 

have increased organic matter levels for short-term nutrient cycling and humus development in the 

mineral soil (Cochran and Hopkins 1990). 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

158

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION 

The Pacific Northwest Region developed soil quality standards and guidelines that limit detrimental 

soil disturbances associated with management activities (FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement No. 2500-98-1). 

This Regional guidance supplements the Deschutes Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) 

standards and guidelines and provides policy for planning and implementing management practices 

which maintain or improve soil quality. It is consistent with LRMP interpretations for standards and 

guidelines SL-3 and SL-4 that limit the extent of detrimental soil conditions within activity areas. 

Standard and Guideline (SL-4) directs 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. Standard and Guideline (SL-5) limits the use of 

mechanical equipment in sensitive soil areas. 

Management direction requires that when initiating new activities: 

 Design new activities that do not exceed detrimental soil conditions on more than 20 percent of an 

activity area, including the permanent transportation system; 

 In activity areas where less than 20 percent 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 percent 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. 

Detrimental soil conditions are those that meet the following criteria: 

 Detrimental Compaction in volcanic ash/pumice soils is an increase in soil bulk density of 20 

percent, or more, over the undisturbed level. 

 Detrimental Puddling occurs when the depth of ruts or imprints is six inches or more. 

 Detrimental Displacement is the removal of more than 50 percent of the A horizon from an area 

greater than 100 square feet, which is at least 5 feet in width. 

 Severely Burned 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 on an area 100 

square feet or greater with a width of at least five feet. 

TARGET LANDSCAPE CONDITION 

The primary goal for managing the soil resource is to maintain or enhance soil conditions at acceptable 

levels without impairment of the productivity of the land. The extent of detrimental soil disturbances is 

minimized through the application of project design elements, management requirements and 

mitigation measures designed to minimize, avoid or eliminate potentially significant impacts, or 

rectifying impacts in site-specific areas by restoring the affected environment. The land effectively 

takes in and distributes water, and erosion rates are controlled to near-natural levels. The biological 

productivity of soils is ensured by management prescriptions that retain adequate supplies of surface 

organic matter and coarse woody debris without compromising fuel management objectives and the 

risk of soil damage from large-scale stand replacement wildfire. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

159

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Introduction 

The magnitude and duration of potential effects, both physical and biological changes in 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 affected activity areas. Direct effects 

occur at essentially the same time and place as the actions that cause soil disturbance, such as soil 

displacement and compaction from equipment operations. Indirect effects occur sometime after or 

some distance away from the initial disturbance, such as increased runoff and surface erosion from 

previously compacted areas. Cumulative effects include all past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions that cause soil disturbance within the same activity areas proposed with this project.

The potential for detrimental changes to soil physical properties was quantitatively analyzed by the 

extent (surface area) of temporary roads, log landings, and designated skid-trail systems that would 

likely be used to facilitate yarding activities within each of the proposed activity areas. Professional 

judgment was used to evaluate changes in the amount and composition of coarse woody debris and 

surface organic matter. This analysis also considered the effectiveness and probable success of 

implementing the soil mitigation and resource protection measures which are designed to avoid, 

minimize or reduce potentially adverse impacts to soil productivity. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

 Detrimental Soil Disturbance 

The extent of detrimental soil conditions would not increase above existing levels because no 

additional land would be removed from production to build roads or other management facilities. 

Implementation of project design criteria and mitigation measures would not be necessary. The 

existing amount of detrimentally disturbed soil associated with roads, logging facilities, and livestock 

water developments is included in the unit-specific information in Appendix B and the summarized 

estimates in Table 60, page 169. 

Although disturbed soils would continue to recover naturally from the effects of past management, the 

current percentages of detrimental soil conditions would likely remain unchanged for an extended 

period of time. This alternative would defer opportunities for soil restoration treatments that reduce 

existing impacts and help move conditions toward a net improvement in soil quality. 

Soil productivity would not change appreciably unless stand-replacing wildfires cause severely burned 

soils from intense ground-level heating. Detrimental changes to soil properties typically result from 

extreme surface temperatures of long duration, such as the consumption of stumps and large diameter 

logs on the forest floor. Although hazardous 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 planning area (see Fire/Fuels Section). Alternative 1 would defer fuel reduction 

opportunities at this time. 

If a large amount of fuel is present during a future wildfire, soil temperatures can remain high for an 

extended period of time and excessive soil heating would be expected to produce detrimental changes 

in soil chemical, physical, and biological properties. Severe burning may cause soils to repel water, 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

160

thereby increasing surface runoff and subsequent erosion. The loss of protective ground cover would 

also increase the risk for accelerated wind erosion on the loose, sandy textured soils which are 

widespread throughout the planning area. The loss of soil nutrients from fire volatilization would 

likely have the greatest impact on soil productivity during the fire recovery period. Recent research 

studies within experimental plots burned by the 2002 Biscuit Fire showed that losses of carbon and 

nitrogen from intense soil heating were much higher than most previous estimates 

(Bormann et al. 2008). 

 Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) and Surface Organic Matter 

In the short term, the amount of coarse woody debris and surface litter would gradually increase or 

remain the same. In forested areas, coarse woody materials would continue to increase through natural 

mortality, windfall, and recruitment of fallen trees and snags over time. Short-term nutrient sources 

would also increase 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. 

In the long term, fuel loadings would continue to increase thereby increasing the potential for an 

uncharacteristic, high intensity wildfire. Existing and projected high fuel loadings would be expected 

to support a future wildfire that is capable of killing and/or consuming large areas of vegetation, coarse 

woody material, and surface organic matter. Intense ground-level fire would likely create areas of 

severely burned soil and increase the potential for accelerated wind and water erosion. The loss of 

surface organic matter would adversely affect ground cover conditions and the nutrient supply of 

affected sites. Over time, at least some of the CWD losses in timber stands would be replaced as fire 

killed trees are recruited to the forest floor. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Important Interactions 

The action alternatives are similar because the same types and locations of soil disturbance would 

occur on the same landtypes and existing soil conditions. There is little difference between 

Alternatives 2 and 3 in terms of the number of activity areas and treatment acres proposed for 

mechanical harvest (Alternative 2: 132 activity areas totaling 6,919 acres and Alternative 3: 146 

activity areas totaling 7,559 acres). The primary differences between alternatives are: 1) Alternative 2 

proposes approximately 420 acres of commercial harvest on steep slopes where skyline logging would 

be used to minimize soil disturbance by partial suspension of logs during transport. 2) Under 

Alternative 3, approximately 1,321 acres of biomass removal would be used in tree plantations and 

where smaller diameter trees occur in some activity areas proposed for commercial harvest. Biomass 

removal would require log landings and designated skid trails similar to conventional ground-based 

harvest systems. The nature of the effects to the soil resource is similar for project activities that use 

mechanical harvest equipment to accomplish management objectives. After project implementation, 

including subsoiling mitigation, Alternative 3 is expected to result in approximately 152 acres more 

detrimental soil conditions than Alternative 2. 

The development and use of temporary roads, log landings, and skid trail systems are the primary 

sources of physical disturbance that would result in adverse changes to soil productivity. Soil 

condition assessments for similar soils and the same types of ground-based harvest systems, research 

references, local monitoring reports (including the effectiveness of subsoiling treatments), Deadlog 

field investigations, and personal communications with local, sale administration personnel were used 

to predict the potential extent of detrimental soil disturbance within activity areas. Research studies 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

161

and local soil monitoring have shown that soil compaction and soil displacement account for the 

majority of detrimental soil conditions resulting from ground-based logging operations (PageDumroese, 1993; Geist, 1989; Powers, 1999; Deschutes N.F., Soil Monitoring Reports). For the 

commercial harvest prescriptions proposed for this entry, conservative estimates were used to predict 

how much surface area would likely be impacted by logging facilities that would be needed to 

accommodate the harvest and yarding activities. 

Under Alternative 2, road reconstruction (widening) would likely be required to provide access in 

activity areas proposed for skyline yarding. Reconstruction of existing roads has substantially less 

impacts than new construction. Design standards and Best Management Practices would be used to 

stabilize disturbed sites and control soil erosion. 

No new roads would be constructed and retained as part of the transportation system. Some currently 

closed roads may be opened to provide necessary access, but these roads would be re-closed following 

harvest activities. Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 propose closing an additional 16 miles of local 

system road following project activities. Road closures do not change the number of acres of 

detrimentally disturbed soil because the road prism remains in place. Under Alternatives 2 and 3, 

approximately 21 miles of local system road would be subsoiled and decommissioned from the 

transportation system following their use. Segments of these existing roads (0.1 to 1.1 miles) cross 

through portions of 17 activity areas proposed for commercial harvest. 

Under Alternative 2, approximately 14.8 miles (total) of temporary roads would be established or reestablished to allow access to 54 activity areas proposed for commercial harvest. Under Alternative 3, 

about 15.3 miles of temporary road would be required to allow access to 55 proposed activity areas. 

Over half of these temporary roads, approximately 8 miles (Alternative 2) and 9 miles (Alternative 3), 

would consist of reopening segments (less than 0.1 to 0.8 miles) of old access roads from previous 

entries. The re-use of existing road prisms would not cause additional soil impacts because machinery 

access would occur on previously disturbed sites. Temporary roads are built to low specification with 

the amount of surface area limited to the minimum necessary to get equipment into log landing areas. 

On gentle to moderately sloping terrain, the magnitude of soil disturbance associated with temporary 

roads would be essentially the same as the disturbed widths of primary skid trails. Under Alternative 

2, some temporary road locations would likely require excavation of cut-and-fill slopes on the steeper 

portions of activity areas proposed for skyline yarding. Alternative 3 avoids temporary road locations 

on slopes over 30 percent because no activity areas are proposed for skyline logging. Design 

standards and Best Management Practices would be used to minimize short-term negative effects 

during construction and use. All temporary road segments would be subsoiled (obliterated) following 

their use, so disturbed area estimates are balanced by restoration treatments which are designed to 

improve soil quality by reclaiming and stabilizing compacted road surfaces. 

Commercial harvest would likely be accomplished using a tractor-mounted feller buncher equipped 

with a felling head (harvester shear). Mechanically harvested trees would be whole-tree yarded to 

main skid trail networks and rubber-tired grapple machines would then transport the bunched trees to 

landings for processing and loading. The grapple skidding equipment would be restricted to 

designated skid trails at all times. 

It is estimated that skid trails would have an average disturbed width of 12 feet and the average 

spacing distance between main trails would be approximately 100 feet. On moderately flat ground 

with small timber, research found that skid trail spacing of 100 feet would account for approximately 

11 percent of the unit area (Froehlich, 1981, Garland, 1983). The primary skid trails are not 

constructed trails where the terrain is gentle to moderately sloping, so surface organic layers are not 

scraped away by equipment blades or removed off site. These organic materials are either retained 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

162

near the top of the skid trail, or through operations fluffed to the edges of the trail. It is not mixed 

deeper into the soil profile, and these organic materials are easily redistributed onto the skid trails 

during rehabilitation treatments. Based on personal communications with timber sale administrators, 

the Forest average for log landings is one landing (100 feet by 100 feet) for 10 acres of harvest 

(approximately 2 percent of the unit area). Disturbed area calculations for log landings are added to 

the acreage estimates for main skid trails to determine the overall soil disturbance. 

The majority of soil impacts would consist of soil compaction on heavy use areas (i.e., roads, log 

landings, and main skid trails) in known locations that can be reclaimed when these facilities are no 

longer needed for future management. In unmanaged portions of the proposed activity areas where 

slopes are less than 30 percent, the development and use of new logging facilities would result in 

approximately 13 percent of the harvest unit areas (11 percent in skid trails plus 2 percent in log 

landings). This amount was used to analyze the proportionate extent of detrimental soil conditions 

which are expected to occur in unmanaged portions of activity areas proposed for mechanical harvest 

treatments. 

Machine traffic off designated logging facilities would be limited in extent. Mechanical harvesters 

would only be allowed to make no more than two equipment passes on any site-specific area between 

main skid trails or away from log landings. Physical impacts to the soil resource incurred by off-trail 

machine traffic are generally considered to be detrimental where multiple passes are made by heavy 

equipment. Research has shown that the detrimental effects of soil compaction generally require more 

than 3 to 5 equipment passes over the same piece of ground (McNabb and Froehlich, 1983). 

Therefore, the effects of only two passes are not expected to qualify as a detrimental soil condition. 

On gentle to moderately sloping terrain, the maneuvering of equipment generally does not remove soil 

surface layers in areas that are at least 5 feet in width to qualify as detrimental soil displacement (FSM 

2520, R-6 Supplement). Smaller areas of displacement or the mixing of soil and organic matter does 

not constitute a detrimental soil condition.

Past monitoring information was used to predict the extent of new soil disturbance in activity areas 

that overlap with previously managed areas. The estimates of detrimental soil conditions account for 

the expected amount of volume removal, the type of logging equipment, the spacing of skid trails, the 

number of log landings that would be needed to deck accumulated materials, and the fact that not all 

existing logging facilities can be reutilized due to their orientation within units. For the mechanical 

harvest prescriptions proposed for this entry, conservative estimates were used to predict how much 

surface area would likely be impacted by additional logging facilities that would be needed to 

accommodate the yarding of commercial material. Although existing skid trail networks and log 

landings would be used wherever possible, soil condition assessments have shown that the extent of 

detrimental soil conditions can be expected to increase by 5 to 10 percent with each successive entry 

into a stand (Craigg, 2000). An average increase of 7 percent detrimental soil conditions associated 

with additional logging facilities was used to analyze the proportionate extent of overlap for 

previously managed areas that occur within activity areas proposed for commercial thinning, 

regeneration harvest prescriptions (e.g., overstory removal, and shelterwood treatments) and biomass 

removal. Appendix B (Table 80 and Table 81) displays acres and percentages of detrimental soil 

conditions for existing conditions and the predicted effects from project implementation, including soil 

restoration treatments, for each of the activity areas proposed for commercial harvest. 

Under Alternative 2, activity areas proposed for skyline yarding (approximately 420 acres) are 

expected to incur lower levels of detrimental soil conditions than those estimated for conventional 

ground-based logging. No skyline logging is proposed under Alternative 3. Harvested trees would be 

hand-felled and yarded material would be pulled to landings with one-end log suspension. Skyline 

corridors would average 15 feet in width and the average spacing distances between corridors would 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

163

be approximately 150 feet. Skyline systems generally involve only minor areas mineral soil exposure 

or mixing of litter and soil by logs. This degree of disturbance is usually of little consequence unless it 

occurs on highly erodible soils. None of the proposed activity areas overlap landtypes that contain 

soils with high erosion hazards. A mitigation measure for soil disturbances in skyline corridors is 

included in Chapter 2. It is expected that the greater number of log landings within skyline units 

would impact more surface area than landings used for conventional ground-based systems. It is 

estimated that log landings for skyline yarding would detrimentally disturb soils on approximately 5 

percent of the unit area in EIS Units 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, and 144. All temporary roads and 

log landings used for skyline units would be subsoiled (obliterated) following their use. 

Pre-commercial thinning and ladder fuel reduction treatments on approximately 7,985 acres 

(Alternative 2) and 8,586 acres (Alternative 3) would be accomplished by hand felling small-diameter 

trees with chainsaws following commercial harvest treatments. Manual thinning treatments would not 

cause cumulative increases in detrimental soil conditions because machinery would not be used for 

yarding non-commercial materials. Mitigation and resource protection measures would not be 

necessary for these non-mechanical treatments. Some of these trees would remain on the ground to 

provide surface cover and a source of nutrients as these organic materials gradually decompose. Fuel 

accumulations from these activities would not be expected to increase the risk of wildfire to an 

unacceptable level. This would have beneficial effects to site productivity by improving the soils 

ability to resist surface erosion and providing fine organic matter for humus development in mineral 

soil. 

 Fuel Reduction Activities 

Recent research studies within experimental plots burned by the 2002 Biscuit Fire showed 

that losses of carbon and nitrogen from intense soil heating were much higher than most 

previous estimates (Bormann et al. 2008). Under both action alternatives, a combination of 

various fuel reduction treatments would be implemented to reduce the potential for intense wildfires 

and their rates of spread. Fuel treatments include thinning trees and ladder fuel reduction treatments, 

mechanical and hand piling and burning slash materials, mechanical shrub/slash treatments (mowing), 

and the use of prescribed fire. 

Most of the slash generated from commercial harvest would be machine piled and burned on log 

landings and/or main skid trails. Burning large concentrations of machine-piled logging slash would 

cause severely burned soil because heat is concentrated in a localized area. However, this slash 

disposal method would not result in a net increase in detrimental soil conditions because burning 

would occur on previously disturbed sites. Therefore, there would be no cumulative increase from the 

predicted amount of detrimentally disturbed soil associated with the mechanical harvest and yarding 

activities. 

Machine piling from designated logging facilities is proposed in portions of 84 activity areas that total 

approximately 5,061 acres under Alternative 2 and approximately 6,114 acres in 103 activity areas 

under Alternative 3. Machine piling on temporary roads or main skid trails would have no effect on 

the extent of detrimentally disturbed soil because equipment would operate off the same logging 

facilities used during yarding operations. The same designated skid trail systems would be used as 

primary travel routes. The use of specialized equipment such as tracked excavators and small 

backhoes with grapple arms are capable of accumulating woody materials without moving appreciable 

amounts of topsoil into slash piles. This fuel reduction method would not cause additional soil 

impacts because the piling and burning would occur on previously disturbed sites that already have 

detrimental soil conditions. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

164

The proposed management activities also include hand treatments for reducing and/or rearranging 

activity-created fuels where fuel accumulations would not increase the risk of wildfire to an 

unacceptable level. Lopping and scattering slash materials would be used in portions of 28 activity 

areas that total approximately 765 acres under Alternative 2 and approximately 928 acres in 28 activity 

areas under Alternative 3. The rearrangement of logging slash by the lop-and-scatter method helps 

protect the soil surface from erosion, and these woody materials also provide a source of nutrients as 

they gradually decompose. 

The hand pile-and-burn method would be used to burn small concentrations of slash materials that are 

well-distributed within portions of 34 activity areas that total approximately 2,334 acres under 

Alternative 2 and 19 activity areas that total approximately 1,691 acres under Alternative 3. This nonmechanical fuels treatment does not cause soil displacement or compaction damage. Due to the 

relatively small-size of hand piles, ground-level heating is usually not elevated long enough to 

detrimentally alter soil properties that affect long-term site productivity. These activities are conducted 

at times and under conditions that reduce the risk of resource damage, including impacts to soils and 

understory vegetation. Soil heating is reduced when the soil surface layer is moist, so piles are 

typically burned following periods of precipitation. Nutrient releases may actually benefit site 

productivity in small localized areas. Conservative estimates were used to account for the cumulative 

amount of surface area that could be potentially impacted from harvest and yarding activities. The 

cumulative effects to soils from this activity would be minor in comparison. Therefore, the overall 

extent of detrimental soil conditions is not expected to increase above the predicted levels in any of the 

activity areas proposed for this post-harvest treatment. 

Specialized machinery with attachments for mowing would be used to reduce the height of tall shrubs 

and small trees to within six to eight inches of the ground. These activities are proposed in portions of 

80 activity areas that total approximately 5,874 acres under Alternative 2 and 92 activity areas that 

total approximately 6,668 acres under Alternative 3. Brush mowing activities may occur on as much 

as 70 percent to 80 percent of an activity area. Only brush and light fuels would be mowed leaving 

any large-diameter downed logs in place. Brush mowing does not cause detrimental soil displacement 

and increases in soil bulk density are inconsequential. The primary factors that limit soil compaction 

are the low ground pressure of the tractor and mowing heads, the limited amount of traffic (one 

equipment pass), and the cushioning effect of surface organic matter. These activities have been 

monitored in the past, and results show that increases in soil displacement and compaction do not meet 

the criteria for detrimental soil conditions (Soil Monitoring Report, 1997). 

Prescribed fire would be used to reduce fuel accumulations in activity areas proposed for mechanical 

harvest as well as other treatment units where prescribed burning would be used to treat the shrub 

layer. Prescribed underburning would be implemented in portions of 161 activity areas that total 

approximately 8,912 acres under Alternative 2 and 168 activity areas that total approximately 9,443 

acres under Alternative 3. Underburning would occur as a sole treatment or it may be implemented in 

combination with other fuel reduction treatments in other activity areas. Prescribed burning activities 

are conducted at times and under conditions that maximize benefits while reducing the risk of resource 

damage. The degree of soil heating depends upon fuel type (grass, brush, trees), fuel density, nature of 

the litter and duff layers (thickness, moisture content), and burn conditions at the time of ignition. For 

the treatment areas proposed within harvest areas, natural fuel accumulations consist mainly of fine 

fuels (i.e., decadent brush, tree branches, and needle cast litter) that typically do not burn for long 

duration and cause excessive soil heating. Ponderosa pine logs and existing snags would be retained to 

meet coarse woody debris requirements for wildlife habitat and soil productivity. It is expected that 

adequate retention of coarse woody debris and fine organic matter (duff layer) would still exist for 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

165

protecting mineral soil from erosion and supplying nutrients that support the growth of vegetation and 

populations of soil organisms. 

Prescribed burn plans would comply with all applicable LRMP standards and guidelines and Best 

Management Practices (BMPs) prior to initiation of burn treatments. Soil moisture guidelines would 

be included in burn plans to minimize the risk for intense ground-level heating. Duff moisture levels 

of approximately 50 percent are typical during light intensity underburns. Soil heating during spring 

burns would be negligible because higher moisture levels at this time of year generally result in cooler 

burns with lower potential for causing severely burned soil. Ground cover vegetation is expected to 

recover rapidly, and it is not anticipated that these burn treatments would accelerate surface erosion 

above tolerable limits. Fall burning would be conducted following brief periods of precipitation. 

Prescribed underburns in timber stands would be accomplished under carefully controlled conditions 

to minimize damage to standing trees. These activities are planned to meet fuel and visual 

management objectives without exposing extensive areas of bare mineral soil through the complete 

consumption of surface organic matter. It is expected that adequate retention of coarse woody debris 

and fine organic matter (duff layer) would still exist for protecting mineral soil from erosion and 

supplying nutrients that support the growth of vegetation and populations of soil organisms. Therefore, 

it is expected that there would be no detrimental changes in soil properties. The successful 

implementation of prescribed underburning would likely result in beneficial effects by reducing fuel 

loadings and wildfire potential as well as increasing nutrient availability in burned areas. 

It is anticipated that fire lines, both mechanical and hand lines, would be used in conjunction with 

existing roads and natural barriers to effectively control the spread of fire within treatment units. The 

extent of disturbed soil would be limited to the minimum necessary to achieve fuel management 

objectives. In locations where mechanical fuel breaks are necessary, a low-ground pressure machine 

would pull a small plow to expose mineral soil in areas approximately 2.5 feet to 3 feet wide. No 

mechanical fire line would be constructed on sensitive soils or steep slopes over 30 percent. Hand 

lines would likely be less than 18 to 24 inches in width. Neither method would result in the removal 

of surface organic layers in large enough areas, at least 5 feet in width as defined in FSM 2520, to 

qualify as detrimental soil displacement. Soil compaction is not a concern because this activity would 

be accomplished with a single equipment pass. Displaced topsoil and unburned woody debris would 

be redistributed over mechanical fire line following prescribed burning activities. Litter from adjacent 

trees, coupled with the establishment of herbaceous grasses, forbs, shrubs, and tree seedlings would 

provide new sources of fine organic matter for humus development in the mineral soil. 

 Soil Restoration Treatments on Temporary Roads and Logging Facilities 

Soil restoration treatments would be applied with a self-drafting winged subsoiler to reduce the 

cumulative amount of detrimentally compacted soil within 93 activity areas proposed under 

Alternative 2 and 100 activity areas proposed under Alternative 3 to comply with management 

direction. This would include subsoiling all temporary roads and some of the primary skid trails and 

log landings following post-harvest activities. The majority of existing and new soil impacts would be 

confined to known locations in heavy use areas which facilitates where subsoiling treatments would 

need to be implemented on compacted sites. The tables in Appendix B (column 5) display the number 

of acres within each harvest unit that would be subsoiled and the percentage of detrimental soil 

conditions that would remain upon completion of the subsoiling treatment. These restoration activities 

comply with Regional policy (FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement No. 2500-98-1) by reducing the cumulative 

levels of detrimental soil conditions anticipated from this project proposal. 

Under Alternatives 2 and 3, approximately 21 miles of local system road would be subsoiled and 

decommissioned from the transportation system following their use. Segments of these existing roads, 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

166

ranging from 0.1 to 1.1 miles (0.2 to 1.7 acres), cross through portions of 17 activity areas proposed 

for commercial harvest. Five of these activity areas only require subsoiling to meet road 

decommissioning objectives for each of the action alternatives. Road closure and decommissioning 

treatments that include subsoiling result in a further reduction in the amount of detrimentally 

compacted soil within activity areas. Soil restoration acres were deducted from the disturbed area 

estimates for these EIS Units (Appendix B, Table 80 and Table 81) because subsoiled areas are 

expected to reach full recovery within the short-term. Decommissioned road segments outside of 

activity areas also help reduce the overall amount of detrimental soil conditions within the larger 

project area. 

Soil restoration treatments were previously implemented in seven of the activity areas proposed under 

Alternative 2, and nine proposed activity areas which are now scheduled for re-entry under Alternative 

3. Subsoiled logging facilities within previously managed areas would be avoided, as much as 

possible, to protect established vegetation. However, some of these reclaimed sites may need to be reused to facilitate yarding activities, depending upon their orientation within activity areas. Since 

disturbed or undisturbed soils both lack structural development, it is expected that subsequent 

subsoiling on these sites would have similar effects as described below. The primary effects would be 

a temporary reduction in existing ground-cover vegetation. 

Subsoiling treatments are designed to promote maintenance or enhancement of soil quality. Subsoiling 

directly fractures compacted soil layers, thereby reducing soil strength and increasing macro pore 

space with the soil profile. Subsequently, this contributes to increased water infiltration, enhanced 

vegetative root development, and improves the soils ability to supply nutrients, moisture, and air that 

support vegetative growth and biotic habitat for soil organisms. Additional treatment options for 

improving soil quality on disturbed sites include redistributing topsoil in areas of exposed mineral soil 

and pulling available logging slash and woody materials over the treated surface. These conservation 

practices comply with Regional policy and LRMP interpretations for Forest-wide standards and 

guidelines SL-3 and SL-4 that limit the extent of detrimental soil conditions. 

As previously described under Affected Environment, extensive areas of the planning area have been 

covered by loose, non-cohesive ash and pumice deposits that consist mostly of sand-sized soil 

particles. These coarse-textured soils have 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). Dominant soils are well suited for tillage 

treatments due to their naturally low bulk densities, low compaction potential, and absence of rock 

fragments on the surface and within soil profiles. These are the soil properties which are typically 

affected by mechanical forces that either reduce or improve soil porosity in the compaction zone. 

Although equipment traffic during harvest operations can decrease soil porosity on these soil 

materials, compacted sites can be mitigated physically by tillage with a winged subsoiler (Powers, 

1999). 

Monitoring of past subsoiling activities on the Deschutes National Forest has shown that these 

treatments are highly effective in restoring detrimentally compacted soils. The winged subsoiling 

equipment used locally 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). Field observations have 

shown that bulk densities return to natural levels after a year or two of physical settling and moisture 

percolation through the soil profile (Deschutes Soil Monitoring, 1995). Most of the surface organic 

matter remains in place because the equipment is designed to allow adequate clearance between the 

tool bar and the surface of the ground for allowing smaller logging slash to pass through without 

building up. Any mixing of soil and organic matter does not cause detrimental soil displacement 

because these materials are not removed off site. Since the winged subsoiler produces nearly complete 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

167

loosening of compacted soil layers without causing substantial displacement, subsoiled areas on this 

forest are expected to reach full recovery within the short-term (less than 5 years) through natural 

recovery processes. 

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 

composition and distributions of soil biota populations rebound back toward pre-impact conditions 

following subsoiling treatments on compacted skid trails and log landings (Moldenke et al., 2000). 

The subsoiling specialist and trained crew members work with the equipment operator to identify 

locations of detrimentally compacted soil. Implementation and effectiveness monitoring is then 

conducted on treatment areas to assure that soil restoration objectives have been met. 

 Effects of Implementing Sale Area Improvement Activities 

Sale area improvement opportunities include road closures, weed monitoring, stocking surveys, 

flagging removal, wildlife guzzler maintenance, and non-commercial thinning. Road closures that use 

signs or barriers do not reduce the number of acres of detrimentally disturbed soil because the road 

prism remains in place. Road decommissioning treatments that include subsoiling result in a reduction 

in the amount of detrimentally compacted soil. This would have a beneficial effect to site productivity 

by reducing the potential for erosion damage and promoting the recovery of native vegetation on 

disturbed sites in other portions of the planning area. Manual thinning treatments would not require 

mitigation or resource protection measures. None of the remaining activities would increase the extent 

of detrimental soil conditions within any of the proposed activity areas. There would be no 

cumulative increase in the estimated percentages of detrimental soil conditions disclosed in Appendix 

B (Table 80 and Table 81). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

 Detrimental Soil Disturbance 

The nature of the effects to the soil resource was previously described under Effects Common to 

Alternatives 2 and 3 (Important Interactions). The use of ground-based equipment for commercial 

harvest activities would increase the amount and distribution of soil impacts within the proposed 

activity areas (Table 60 and Appendix B). The development and use of temporary roads, log landings, 

and skid trail systems are the primary sources of new soil disturbance that would result in adverse 

changes to 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 (EIS Chapter 2) would be applied to avoid or minimize the extent of soil disturbance in 

random locations between main skid trails and away from log landings. Non-commercial thinning by 

hand felling small-diameter trees with chainsaws would not cause additional soil impacts because 

machinery would not be used for yarding activities. Under the action alternatives, the overall extent of 

detrimental soils conditions from post-harvest fuel reduction activities is not expected to increase 

above the predicted levels following commercial harvest within any of the proposed activity areas. 

The amount of surface area committed to temporary roads and new logging facilities would be limited 

to the minimum necessary to achieve management objectives. Although existing facilities would be 

used to the extent possible, temporary roads and some additional skid trails and log landings would be 

needed to accommodate harvest and yarding activities in all activity areas proposed for mechanical 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

168

harvest. A total of approximately 14.8 miles (22.2 acres) of temporary road would be established or 

re-established to allow access to 54 activity areas proposed for commercial harvest under Alternative 2 

and about 15.3 miles (23.0 acres) of temporary road would be required to allow access to 55 activity 

areas proposed under Alternative 3. Over half of these temporary roads, approximately 8 miles 

(Alternative 2) and 9 miles (Alternative 3), would consist of reopening segments of old access roads 

from previous entries. The re-use of existing road prisms would not cause additional soil impacts 

because machinery access would occur on previously disturbed sites. All temporary road segments 

would be subsoiled (obliterated) following their use, so the disturbed area estimates are balanced by 

restoration treatments which are designed to improve soil quality by reclaiming and stabilizing 

compacted road surfaces. 

Conservative estimates indicate that a total of approximately 700 acres of soil would be removed from 

production to establish designated skid trail systems and log landings within portions of the 132 

activity areas proposed under Alternative 2. Approximately 772 acres in 146 activity areas would be 

detrimentally disturbed by logging facilities under Alternative 3. Appendix B (Table 80 and Table 81) 

display existing and predicted amounts of detrimental soil conditions in acres and percentages for each 

of the individual activity areas following mechanical harvest and subsoiling mitigation treatments. 

Under both action alternatives, soil restoration treatments would be applied with a self-drafting winged 

subsoiler to reduce the cumulative amount of detrimentally compacted soil within proposed activity 

areas which are expected to exceed the Regional guidance provided in FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement 

No. 2500-98-1. Surface area calculations (acres) of designated areas such as roads, main skid trails, 

and log landings determine how much area needs to be reclaimed within individual activity areas of 

known size. 

Under Alternative 2, portions of 93 activity areas would receive subsoiling treatments to rehabilitate 

approximately 411 acres of compacted soil on all temporary roads and some of the primary skid trails 

and log landings. Under Alternative 3, it is predicted that approximately 463 acres of compacted soil 

would be subsoiled within portions of 100 activity areas to comply with management direction. 

Subsoiling would also be implemented within portions of 5 activity areas to decommission existing 

road segments that total approximately two acres under both action alternatives. Since commercial 

thinning is proposed under both action alternatives, the transportation system (including main skid 

trails and log landings) is typically left in place so these facilities can be reused for future entries. For 

regeneration harvest prescriptions, such as overstory removal, all or most of the logging facilities are 

typically subsoiled due to a much longer time period before the next return entry. Activity areas that 

would receive soil restoration treatments are identified by unit number in a site-specific mitigation 

measure (EIS, Chapter 2). 

Following soil restoration treatments (subsoiling), the analysis indicates that the extent of detrimental 

soil conditions relative to existing conditions would either: 1) remain the same, 2) increase, but remain 

within the LRMP standard of 20 percent, or 3) decrease levels below existing conditions. 

Table 60 summarizes current, post-harvest, and post-rehabilitation soil conditions within the proposed 

vegetation treatment units under both Alternatives 2 and 3. This summarized information from 

Appendix B reflects the net change in detrimental soil conditions for the total area of soil impacts for 

the combined number of activity areas (EIS units) proposed with the action alternatives. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

169

Table 60: Summary 1

 of Net Change in Detrimental Soil Conditions following Mechanical 

Harvest and Soil Restoration (Subsoiling) Treatments 

Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

Detrimental Soil Conditions Detrimental Soil Conditions 

Net Change in 

Detrimental Soil 

Conditions from 

Existing Condition 

<=20% >20% Total <=20% >20% Total 

Existing Condition 57 units 

262 acres 

75 units 

976 acres 

132 units 

1,238 acres 

63 units 

268 acres 

83 units 

1,108 acres 

146 units 

1,376 acres 

Following Harvest 41 units 

296 acres 

91 units 

1,558 acres 

132 units 

1,854 acres 

46 units 

323 acres 

100 units 

1,735 acres 

146 units 

2,058 acres 

Post-Project Condition 

Following Subsoiling 

77 units 

642 acres 

55 units 

799 acres 

132 units 

1,441 acres 

80 units 

627 acres 

66 units 

966 acres 

146 units 

1,593 acres 1

 Summarizes unit specific information found in Appendix B of this DEIS. . 

The following conclusions summarize the potential increases in detrimental soil conditions associated 

with additional logging facilities that would be needed to accommodate commercial harvest and 

yarding operations. 

Under Alternative 2, it is anticipated that ground-based logging equipment would be used in portions 

of 132 activity areas that total approximately 6,919 acres. An estimated total of approximately 1,238 

acres of soil are currently impacted by existing roads, livestock water developments, log landings, and 

skid trail systems within 122 of the 132 activity areas. The analysis indicates that 75 of these activity 

areas have pre-harvest detrimental soil conditions in excess of 20 percent of the unit area. It is 

predicted that the direct effects of the proposed harvest and yarding activities would result in a total 

increase of approximately 616 acres of additional soil impacts associated with skid trail systems and 

log landings. Soil compaction would account for the majority of these impacts and the total amount of 

detrimental soil conditions would be approximately 1,854 acres prior to soil restoration activities. 

Portions of 98 activity areas would receive subsoiling treatments to rehabilitate approximately 413 

acres of detrimentally compacted soil on specific local system roads, all temporary roads and some of 

the primary logging facilities. This would include 93 activity areas which are expected to exceed the 

LRMP standard plus five (5) additional activity areas where subsoiling would be used to 

decommission short segments of existing system roads following mechanical harvest activities. 

Following subsoiling mitigation, the total amount of detrimentally disturbed soil associated with 

management facilities is predicted to be approximately 1,441 acres. 

The analysis concludes that after project implementation, including subsoiling mitigation, 77 activity 

areas would have percentages of detrimental soil conditions that are less than or equal to 20 percent of 

the unit area. It is estimated that 52 activity areas would increase levels above existing conditions by 

approximately 1 to 13 percent but detrimental soil conditions would remain within the LRMP 

standard. Four activity areas would maintain existing percentages of detrimental soil conditions. 

Seventy six activity areas would result in a 1 to 7 percent net improvement in soil quality (less than 

existing conditions) following soil restoration treatments: Twenty three of these EIS Units would be at 

or below the 20 percent standard. Fifty three EIS units would maintain percentages of detrimental soil 

conditions above the LRMP standard, but they would not exceed existing conditions following 

subsoiling mitigation (Table 60 and Appendix B, Table 80 and Table 81). 

Under Alternative 3, it is anticipated that ground-based logging equipment would be used in portions 

of 146 activity areas that total approximately 7,559 acres. An estimated total of approximately 1,376 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

170

acres of soil are currently impacted by existing roads, livestock water developments, log landings, and 

skid trail systems within 134 of the 146 activity areas. The analysis indicates that 83 of these activity 

areas have pre-harvest detrimental soil conditions in excess of 20 percent of the unit area. It is 

predicted that the direct effects of the proposed harvest and yarding activities would result in a total 

increase of approximately 682 acres of additional soil impacts associated with skid trail systems and 

log landings. Soil compaction would account for the majority of these impacts and the total amount of 

detrimental soil conditions would be approximately 2,058 acres prior to soil restoration activities. 

Portions of 105 activity areas would receive subsoiling treatments to rehabilitate approximately 465 

acres of detrimentally compacted soil on specific local system roads, all temporary roads and some of 

the primary logging facilities. This would include 100 activity areas which are expected to exceed the 

LRMP standard plus five additional activity areas where subsoiling would be used to decommission 

short segments of existing system roads following mechanical harvest activities. Following subsoiling 

mitigation, the total amount of detrimentally disturbed soil associated with management facilities is 

predicted to be approximately 1,593 acres. 

The analysis concludes that after project implementation, including subsoiling mitigation, 80 activity 

areas would have percentages of detrimental soil conditions that are less than or equal to 20 percent of 

the unit area. It is estimated that 58 activity areas would increase levels above existing conditions by 

approximately 2 to 13 percent but detrimental soil conditions would remain within the LRMP 

standard. Five activity areas would maintain existing percentages of detrimental soil conditions. 

Eighty two activity areas would result in a 1 to 13 percent net improvement in soil quality (less than 

existing conditions) following soil restoration treatments: Twenty one of these EIS Units would be at 

or below the 20 percent standard. Sixty one EIS units would maintain percentages of detrimental soil 

conditions above the LRMP standard, but they would not exceed existing conditions following 

subsoiling mitigation (Table 60 and Appendix B, Table 80 and Table 81). 

There is little difference between Alternatives 2 and 3 in terms of the percentage of harvested acres 

with detrimental soil impacts following mechanized harvest and soil rehabilitation activities. 

Implementation of Alternative 3 would result in a greater extent of detrimental soil conditions 

(approximately 204 acres) than Alternative 2 following harvest activities due to more activity areas 

and treatment acres. Following subsoiling mitigation, however, the total number of acres with 

detrimental soil conditions is predicted to be approximately 1,441 acres under Alternative 2 and 1,593 

acres under Alternative 3 or a difference of 152 acres. Compacted soils on main skid trails and log 

landings would be reclaimed back to a productive status because subsoiled areas are expected to reach 

full recovery within the short-term. 

Although a few activity areas (55 EIS units in Alternative 2 and 66 EIS units in Alternative 3) would 

exceed the 20 percent standard following project implementation, the intent for this project is to move 

toward and eventually meet the 20 percent standard over time. Since thinning treatments are mainly 

proposed for these EIS units, the transportation system (including main skid trails and log landings) is 

typically left in place so these facilities can be reused for future entries. 

The harvest and restoration treatments (subsoiling) proposed in both action alternatives are consistent 

with Regional policy (FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement) and LRMP interpretations for Forest-wide 

standards and guidelines SL-3 and SL-4 that limit the extent of detrimental soil conditions (Final 

Interpretations, Document 96-01, Soil Productivity, 1996). In harvest units where less than 20 percent 

detrimental impacts exist from prior activities, the cumulative amount detrimentally disturbed soil 

would not exceed the 20 percent limit following project implementation and restoration activities. In 

harvest units where more than 20 percent detrimental impacts currently exist from prior activities, the 

cumulative detrimental effects would not exceed conditions prior to the planned activity and some 

units would result in a net improvement in soil quality. Both action alternatives balance the goal of 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

171

maintaining and/or improving soil quality following project implementation and soil restoration 

activities. 

 Sensitive Soils 

Most activity areas proposed for mechanical vegetation treatments do not occur on landtypes that 

contain sensitive soils. Under Alternative 2, approximately 356 acres (5 percent) of the 6,919 total 

acres proposed for commercial harvest treatments are located on landtypes that contain sensitive soils 

on steep slopes (greater than 30 percent). Under Alternative 3, approximately 72 acres (1 percent) of 

the 7,559 total acres of proposed activity areas occur on landtypes with steep slopes. As previously 

discussed under Affected Environment, areas with sensitive soils are typically confined to specific 

segments of the dominant landform and only portions of these total landtype acres contain localized 

areas with sensitive soils. Limitations for equipment use would be enforced to avoid and/or minimize 

potentially adverse effects in activity areas that contain steep slopes with sensitive soils (EIS, Chapter 

2). None of the proposed activity areas overlap landtypes that contain sensitive soils with a high 

hazard for surface erosion or potentially wet soils with seasonally high water tables that would require 

special mitigation. 

Compliance with LRMP standard and guideline SL-5 is addressed by avoiding or controlling the use 

of mechanical equipment in areas with sensitive soils. With the exception of seven activity areas 

proposed for skyline yarding under Alternative 2, activity area boundaries would be adjusted to 

prohibit equipment operations on the steeper portions of activity areas (greater than 30 percent slopes) 

proposed for conventional ground-based logging. Ground-based equipment would be restricted to 

existing roads and designated skid trails at all times and operators would be required to winch logs to 

skidders (Chapter 2, Project Design Criteria). There would be no new development of temporary 

roads or logging facilities on the steeper portions of activity areas proposed for conventional groundbased logging. It is expected that many of the steep portions of proposed harvest units would be 

included as untreated patches to meet wildlife objectives. 

Under Alternative 2, skyline logging would be used to minimize soil disturbance by partial suspension 

of logs during transport. Seven activity areas (EIS Units 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, and 144) 

proposed for skyline yarding are expected to incur lower levels of detrimental soil conditions than 

those estimated for conventional ground-based logging. Some temporary road locations would likely 

require excavation of cut-and-fill slopes but design standards and Best Management Practices would 

be used to minimize short-term negative effects during construction and use. All temporary roads and 

log landings used for skyline units would be subsoiled and reclaimed following their use. A 

mitigation measure for soil disturbances in skyline corridors is also included in Chapter 2. No skyline 

logging is proposed under Alternative 3. 

The majority of overlap of landtypes with sensitive soils (approximately 85 to 95 percent) occurs 

where the potential for successful regeneration is limited by variable soil depths on rocky lava flows or 

where climatic factors such as frost pockets and cold air drainages affect site productivity. Under both 

action alternatives, all proposed activity areas currently have adequate stocking levels and meet 

criteria for land suitability that would allow them to be regenerated or resist irreversible resource 

damage. This indicates that management concerns associated with these sites were successfully 

addressed by past silvicultural practices. Dominant soils generally have moderate productivity ratings 

and actual treatment areas would exclude areas of barren lava and other site conditions which are 

considered to be unsuitable for timber production. With the thinning prescriptions proposed for this 

entry, reforestation objectives are not a major concern. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

172

Subsoiling treatments would occur on portions of some activity areas that overlap landtypes 

containing soils with variable depths on rocky lava flows. Subsoiling would not be required in areas 

of exposed bedrock. Soils in areas with high amounts of rock fragments near the soil surface are 

typically not susceptible to deep, determintal compaction because the rock in the soil acts sas a 

cushion against the forces of equipment traffic.Although rock fragments on the surface and within soil 

profiles can limit subsoiling opportunities, hydraulic tripping mechanisms on winged subsoiling 

equipment helps reduce the amount of subsurface rock that could potentially be brought to the surface 

by other tillage implements. Most of the surface organic matter and smaller logging slash would 

remain in place because the equipment is designed to allow adequate clearance between the tool bar 

and the surface of the ground. 

Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) and Surface Organic Matter 

CWD and surface organic matter were evaluated qualitatively based on the probable success of 

implementing appropriate Best Management Practices and recommended guidelines that address 

adequate retention of these important landscape components to meet soil productivity and wildlife 

habitat objectives (see Wildlife Section and Chapter 2, Resource Protection Measures). A minimum 

amount of 5 to 10 tons per acre of CWD on ponderosa pine sites and 10 to 15 tons per acre on mixed 

conifer or lodgepole pine sites is recommended to ensure desirable biological benefits for maintaining 

soil productivity without creating an unacceptable fire hazard (Brown et al., 2003, Graham et al. 

1994). Based on guidelines for estimating tons per acre of CWD (Brown, 1974 and Maxwell, Ward, 

1980), the levels of CWD retention to meet wildlife habitat objectives (Eastside Screen direction) 

would also meet objectives for maintaining soil productivity. 

The proposed harvest activities would reduce potential sources of future CWD, especially where 

mechanized whole-tree yarding is used in activity areas. However, both action alternatives would 

likely retain sufficient amounts of CWD following post-harvest activities to meet recommended 

guidelines. Existing down woody debris would be protected from disturbance and retained on site to 

the extent possible. Harvest activities would recruit CWD to the forest floor through breakage of 

limbs and tops during felling and skidding operations. Understory trees, damaged during harvest 

operations, would also contribute woody materials that provide ground cover protection and a source 

of nutrients on treated sites. It is expected that enough broken branches, unusable small-diameter 

trees, and other woody materials would likely be available after harvest activities to provide ground 

cover protection and a source of nutrients for maintaining soil productivity on treated sites. 

Fuel reduction treatments would also reduce CWD by burning logging slash at the log landings. Some 

of the logging slash generated from commercial harvest may also be machine piled and burned on 

temporary roads, main skid trails or other previously disturbed sites. Burning small concentrations of 

logging slash by the hand-pile-and-burn method would have only a minor effect on the overall amount 

of CWD and surface organic matter within the proposed activity areas. 

Post-harvest review by fuel specialists would determine the need for prescribed underburn treatments, 

especially where fine fuel accumulations increase the risk of wildfire to unacceptable levels. If 

prescribed fire is recommended, burning would occur during moist conditions to help ensure adequate 

retention of CWD and surface organic matter following treatment. Fuel reductions achieved through 

planned ignitions usually burn with low-to-moderate intensities that increase nutrient availability in 

burned areas. Low intensity fire does not easily consume material much larger than 3 inches in 

diameter, and charring does not substantially interfere with the decomposition or function of coarse 

woody debris (Graham et al., 1994). Although prescribed burn treatments are not intended to kill 

residual trees, tree mortality in varying amounts would likely occur during project implementation. 

Any dead trees killed from prescribed burn treatments would eventually fall to the ground and become 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

173

additional sources of CWD. Depending on the rate of decay and local wind conditions, many of the 

small-diameter trees (less than 10 inches) would be expected to fall within the short-term (less than 5 

years). Alternative 3 proposes the use of underburn treatments on more acres than Alternative 2. 

Assuming the same or similar burning prescriptions and conditions, the beneficial effects in short-term 

nutrient availability would be somewhat greater under Alternative 3 than Alternative 2. In the long 

term, there is likely to be no measurable difference in the quantity or distribution of CWD associated 

with fuel treatments under either action alternative. 

A cool-temperature prescribed burn would remove some of the surface litter and duff materials 

without exposing extensive areas of bare mineral soil. Some of the direct and indirect beneficial 

effects to the soil resource include: 1) a reduction of fuel loadings and wildfire potential, 2) increased 

nutrient availability in localized areas, and 3) maintenance of organic matter that supports biotic 

habitat for mycorrhizal fungi and microorganism populations. 

 Project Design Criteria and Mitigation 

Under both action alternatives, project implementation includes the application of management 

requirements, project design elements, and mitigation measures (refer to Chapter 2, Resource 

Protection Measures) to avoid, minimize, or rectify potentially adverse impacts to the soil resource 

(EA, Chapter 2). Various references and Forest Service Manual direction were used as guidance to 

determine project design and mitigation needs for the Deadlog Vegetation Management project. 

These information sources are based on the best available technical data, past monitoring of similar 

activities on representative soils, Forest Plan direction, and nationally and regionally approved soil 

quality standards and guidelines. 

Operational guidelines for equipment use are included in project design elements to provide options 

for limiting the amount of surface area covered by logging facilities and controlling equipment 

operations to minimize the potential for soil impacts in random locations of activity areas. Existing 

logging facilities would be reutilized to the extent possible. Grapple skidders would only be allowed to 

operate on designated skid trails spaced on average of 100 feet (11 percent of the unit area). Machine 

traffic off designated logging facilities would be limited in extent. The short-term effects of only two 

passes by mechanical harvesters and other specialized machinery off designated logging facilities are 

not expected to qualify as a detrimental soil condition. Natural processes, such as frost heaving and 

freeze-taw cycles, can generally offset soil compaction near the soil surface. Conventional groundbased logging operations would be avoided in random locations of activity areas that contain sensitive 

soils on steep slopes over 30 percent. Other requirements include avoiding equipment operations 

during periods of high soil moisture and operating equipment over frozen ground or a sufficient 

amount of compacted snow. The successful application of these management practices would help 

lower the estimated percentages of detrimental soil conditions displayed in (Table 60 and Appendix B, 

Table 80 and Table 81). 

The direct and indirect effects to soils is greatly reduced or eliminated by skidding over frozen ground 

or compacted snow. Best results are achieved by skidding over frozen ground (at least 6 inches in 

depth) or on a compacted snow base (at least 12 inches in depth) if the soil is not frozen. Skidding 

over shallower snow packs should only be considered during snow accumulation periods and not 

during melt periods. If the compacted snow base begins to melt due to warmer temperatures or rainon-snow events, skidding operations would be discontinued until freezing temperatures and/or 

additional snowfall allows operations to continue. There is no potential for soil puddling damage 

because the dominant, sandy textured soils lack plasticity and cohesion. If project implementation 

includes the use of winter logging operations, it is anticipated that there would be very little or no 

visual evidence of soil compaction, rutting, displacement, or loss of protective plant and litter cover. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

174

All reasonable Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be applied to minimize the effects of road 

systems and timber management activities on the soil resource. A variety of BMPs are available to 

control erosion on roads and logging facilities. 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. The Oregon 

Department of Forestry evaluated more than 3,000 individual practices and determined a 98 percent 

compliance rate for BMP implementation, with 5 percent of these practices exceeding forest practice 

rules (National Council for Air and Stream Improvement, 1999). 

Soil restoration treatments (subsoiling) would be applied with a self-drafting winged subsoiler to 

rectify impacts by reclaiming and stabilizing detrimentally disturbed soils committed to roads, log 

landings, and main skid trails. The majority of existing and new soil impacts would be confined to 

known locations in these heavy use areas which facilitates where soil restoration treatments need to be 

implemented on compacted sites. The predicted amount of detrimental soil conditions was evaluated 

for each activity area proposed for commercial harvest. Individual activity areas that would receive 

subsoiling treatments are identified by unit number in a site-specific resource protection measure 

(DEIS, Chapter 2). The predicted amount of subsoiled acres within specific activity areas were used 

for deductions in the estimated percentages of detrimental soil conditions in Table 60 and Appendix B 

(Table 80 and Table 81). 

Monitoring of past subsoiling activities on the Deschutes National Forest has shown that these 

treatments are highly effective in restoring detrimentally compacted soils. Restoration treatments, such 

as subsoiling, are designed to promote maintenance or enhancement of soil quality, and they are 

consistent with Regional policy (FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement) and LRMP interpretations of standards 

and guidelines SL-3 and SL-4. 

Soil moisture guidelines would be included in prescribed burn plans to minimize the potential for 

intense ground-level heating and adverse effects to soil properties. Under both action alternatives, 

guidelines for adequate retention of coarse woody debris and fine organic matter are included as 

management requirements to assure both short-term and long-term nutrient cycling on treated sites. 

Cumulative Effects 

 Detrimental Soil Disturbance

The combined effects of past and current disturbances and those anticipated from implementing the 

proposed actions were previously addressed under existing conditions and the discussion of direct and 

indirect effects. The effects of future management activities are addressed in a following subsection 

entitled Foreseeable Actions Common to All Alternatives. 

Under Alternative 1 (No Action), the extent of detrimental soil conditions would not increase above 

existing levels because no additional land would be removed from production to build temporary roads 

and logging facilities. The unit-specific information in Appendix B, Table 80 and Table 81. 

Alternatives 2 and 3 would both cause some new soil disturbances where ground-based equipment is 

used for mechanical harvest and yarding activities during this entry. The primary sources of 

detrimental soil conditions from past management are associated with existing roads and ground-based 

logging facilities which were used for harvest activities between 1963 and 1999. Likewise, the 

majority of project-related soil impacts from this entry would also be confined to known locations in 

heavy use areas (such as roads, log landings, and main skid trails) that can be reclaimed through 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

175

subsoiling treatments. Appendix B displays acres and percentages of detrimental soil conditions for 

existing conditions and the predicted effects from project implementation, including soil restoration 

treatments, for each of the activity areas proposed for commercial harvest under the action 

alternatives. The net change in detrimental soil conditions is associated with additional logging 

facilities that would be retained following post-harvest soil restoration treatments. 

As previously described for the direct and indirect effects, the combined effects of slash disposal and 

other fuel reduction treatments are not expected to cause cumulative increases in detrimental soil 

conditions beyond the predicted levels displayed for each of the proposed activity areas in Appendix B 

(Table 80 and Table 81). 

There are no violations of Regional policy (FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement) or LRMP Standards and 

Guidelines SL-3 and SL-4 under either action alternative because the project would not cause an 

activity area to move from a detrimental soil condition less than 20 percent to one that is greater than 

20 percent; nor would the project increase detrimental soil conditions in activity areas that currently 

exceed 20 percent of the unit area. 

 Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) and Surface Organic Matter 

Under Alternative 1, the amount of coarse woody debris and surface organic matter will gradually 

increase over time. In the long term, the accumulation of CWD and forest litter would increase the risk 

for wild land fires. 

It is expected that Alternatives 2 and 3 would both comply with the recommended management 

guidelines (refer to Chapter 2, Resource Protection Measures) that ensure adequate retention of snags, 

coarse woody debris, and fine organic matter for surface cover, biological activity, and nutrient 

supplies for maintaining soil productivity on treated sites. 

 Foreseeable Actions Common to Alternatives 

Future management activities are assumed to occur as planned in the schedule of projects for the 

Deschutes National Forest. From what is known about reasonably foreseeable future actions, no out 

year timber sales or fuel reduction projects, including timber sales associated with the Opine and 

Aspen projects, are currently scheduled in areas that would overlap with any of the activity areas 

proposed within the Deadlog planning area. 

Reforestation activities associated with the KO Timber Sale would overlap with some of the activity 

areas proposed with this project. The localized effects of fence maintenance and the application of 

protective measures for plantation trees would have no measurable effect on site productivity within 

planted units. Manual treatments that prune or girdle mistletoe infected trees would not cause ground 

disturbances because the use of machinery would not be necessary. Consequently, reforestation 

activities would not result in a cumulative increase in detrimental soil conditions above the predicted 

levels in any of the affected activity areas. 

The planning area contains portions of the Quartz Mountain and Sand Springs Allotments. Livestock 

grazing and associated development of structural improvements were previously accounted for under 

existing conditions. There are no site-specific areas where livestock movement and grazing effects 

have caused unsatisfactory soil conditions within the forested, transitional range sites. Fence lines 

have local, site-specific effects on soils, but they are not considered to be structures that convert the 

soil to a non-productive condition. The majority of detrimental soil conditions are confined to 

relatively small areas (about 1.0 acre) around water developments needed to manage livestock. The 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

176

limited amount of ground disturbance from past waterline installation did not result in a measurable 

increase in detrimental soil conditions. One acre of disturbed soil is included in the estimated amounts 

of existing detrimental soil conditions for eight activity areas proposed for mechanical harvest under 

each of the action alternatives (Appendix B). Maintenance of existing structural improvements would 

not increase the extent of detrimentally disturbed soil above the predicted levels in any of the proposed 

activity areas. 

There are three water developments (guzzlers) used for wildlife management within the planning area. 

As previously discussed under Effects of Implementing Sale Area Improvement Activities, 

maintenance of these existing facilities would not result in a cumulative increase in detrimental soil 

conditions above the existing levels. 

The Noxious Weed Control EIS would likely implement various treatments to control invasive plants 

in site-specific areas within the planning area. These future activities are not expected to cause any 

detrimental changes in soil properties. Hand removal of individual plants would result in small areas 

of soil displacement or the mixing of soil and organic matter which would not meet criteria considered 

detrimental to soil productivity. It is also unlikely that herbicide treatments would cause any adverse 

direct or indirect effects to soil productivity (18 Fire Herbicide Treatment Environmental Assessment, 

Soils Report, 2005). 

The Forest Access Management Plan will address travel management issues and the need to change 

current policy and management direction regarding OHV use. There is no accurate inventory of the 

number or miles of existing user-created roads and trails within the planning area. The proposed new 

direction would identify a system of roads and trails for motorized travel and eliminate cross-country 

motorized travel except on designated routes or areas. The exact locations of these travel routes are 

unknown at this time. Future implementation of this new direction would have a beneficial effect on 

the soil resource because it would help prevent cumulative increases in the extent of detrimental soil 

conditions in random locations off authorized roads and trails. None of these future actions are 

expected to result in a cumulative increase in the extent of detrimental soil conditions beyond the 

predicted levels displayed for each of the proposed activity areas in Appendix B (Table 80 and Table 

81). 

Other foreseeable future activities include continued recreation use, standard road maintenance, and 

prescribed maintenance burning to reduce fuel densities and the risk for future wildfires. 

The effects of recreation use would be similar to those described for Existing Condition of the Soil 

Resource. Future soil disturbances would be confined mainly to small concentration areas that would 

have a relatively minor effect on overall site productivity. Impacts from dispersed recreation activities 

are usually found along existing roads and trails where vegetation has been cleared on or adjacent to 

old logging facilities in past harvest areas. Future impacts from dispersed camping and incidental use 

by hikers and mountain bikers are expected to occur in similar locations. Soil disturbances from 

future recreation use are not expected to have a measurable effect on site productivity within the 

individual activity areas proposed for this project. There are no major soil-related concerns associated 

with the combined effects of these future activities. 

Road maintenance activities would reduce accelerated erosion rates where improvements are 

necessary to correct drainage problems on specific segments of existing road. 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 major soil-related 

concerns associated with the combined effects of these future activities. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

177

The effects of prescribed maintenance burning would be similar to those described for the direct and 

indirect effects common to Alternatives 2 and 3. These complimentary activities would be conducted 

under carefully controlled conditions that maximize benefits while reducing the risk for resource 

damage. Prescribed burn plans would comply with all applicable LRMP standards and guidelines and 

BMPs prior to initiation of burn treatments. Soil moisture guidelines would be included in burn plans 

to minimize the risk of intense heating of the soil surface. The successful implementation of these 

proposed activities would likely result in beneficial effects by reducing fuel loadings and wildfire 

potential as well as increasing nutrient availability in burned areas. 

Under Alternatives 2 and 3, the cumulative effects from the proposed actions combined with all past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable management activities comply with Regional policy (FSM 2520, 

R-6 Supplement) and LRMP direction for planning and implementing management practices in 

previously managed areas. There are no measurable cumulative effects expected on the amount or 

presence of CWD and surface organic matter associated with any reasonable and foreseeable actions. 

Table 61 summarizes reasonably foreseeable future actions that could potentially cause cumulative 

effects within the proposed activity areas. 

Table 61: Summary of Foreseeable Future Actions on Soil Productivity 

Activity/Project Action Description Effects on Soil Productivity 

KO Timber Sale and 

Reforestation/Maintenance 

Activities 

Plantation fence maintenance, 

Repellent applications, and Dwarf 

Mistletoe control activities 

(pruning/girdling infected trees) 

Past harvest accounted for under existing 

conditions. No measurable adverse 

cumulative effects from manual treatments. 

Wildlife Improvement 

Maintenance 

Maintenance on three wildlife 

guzzlers. 

Addressed under Effects of Sale Area 

Improvement Activities. No measurable 

adverse cumulative effects from 

maintenance activities. 

Livestock grazing and 

Maintenance of Structural 

Improvements 

Portions of Quartz Mt. and Sand 

Springs Allotments. Cattle 

grazing, fence maintenance, water 

developments and buried 

waterlines within planning area. 

Livestock grazing and existing 

improvements accounted for under existing 

conditions. No measurable adverse 

cumulative effects from maintenance of 

existing facilities. 

Aspen Project Fuels 

Treatments 

Ongoing maintenance activities 

include prescribed burns, mowing 

and thinning 

No adverse cumulative effects; 

No overlap with activity areas proposed 

with Deadlog project. 

Road Maintenance Ongoing road maintenance. 

Danger tree removal, roadside 

brushing, drainage repair, spot 

surfacing. 

System roads are accounted for under 

existing conditions. Maintenance on 

existing road beds and brushing or hand 

felling hazard trees in adjacent areas would 

have no measurable adverse cumulative 

effects. 

Green Dot road Closure Administrative closure of roads 

during hunting season. 

Road closures have no adverse cumulative 

effects because the road prism remains in 

place. 

Opal mine including 

Camp Site, Cinder/Rock 

Borrow Pits 

Opal mine operations are active 

annually. 

Accounted for under existing conditions. 

None of these disturbed sites are located 

within proposed activity areas 

Travel Management Access Management Plan will 

identify a system of roads and 

trails for motorized travel. This 

would change current policy 

regarding OHV use. 

No cumulative adverse effects on soil 

productivity. Implementation would have 

beneficial effects to soils by reducing the 

extent of user-created roads and trails. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils 

178

Activity/Project Action Description Effects on Soil Productivity 

BPA power line 

Maintenance 

Power line maintenance within 

right of way includes mowing of 

brush and seedlings and scattered 

tree and snag removal. Outside of 

the right of way individual hazard 

trees would also be removed. 

Cycle varies 3 - 5 years. 

Access roads for maintaining power lines 

are accounted for under existing conditions. 

Maintenance on existing road beds and 

hand felling hazard trees in adjacent areas 

would have no measurable adverse 

cumulative effects. 

LRMP (FOREST PLAN) CONSISTENCY 

LRMP Management Areas MA-7, MA-8, MA-9, and MA-15 do not contain specific standards and 

guidelines for the soil resource in this area. The Forest-wide standards and guidelines apply to this 

project proposal. 

Under the action alternatives, equipment operations would cause some new soil disturbances in 

portions of previously managed areas where ground-based logging is proposed for this entry. As 

previously discussed under direct and indirect effects, the project design elements, management 

requirements, and Best Management Practices (BMPs) built into the action alternatives 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 avoiding or controlling the use of mechanized equipment in activity areas with sensitive 

soils. With the exception of seven activity areas proposed for skyline yarding under Alternative 2, 

activity area boundaries would be adjusted to prohibit equipment operations on the steeper portions of 

activity areas proposed for conventional ground-based logging. There would be no new development 

of temporary roads or logging facilities on the steeper portions of activity areas proposed for 

conventional ground-based logging. None of the proposed activity areas overlap landtypes that 

contain soils with a high erosion hazards or potentially wet soils with seasonally high water tables that 

would require special mitigation. 

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 

that would be used during project implementation. These conservation practices are to be implemented 

during and following project activities to meet the stated objectives for protecting and maintaining soil 

productivity. 

Soil restoration treatments would be applied to rectify impacts by reducing the amount of 

detrimentally compacted soil dedicated to existing roads, all temporary roads, and some of the primary 

logging facilities within specific activity areas. Restoration treatments, such as subsoiling, are 

designed to promote maintenance or enhancement of soil quality. These conservation practices comply 

with LRMP interpretations of Forest-wide standards and guidelines SL-3 and SL-4. Subsoiling 

mitigation is also supported by the Forest Service Manual and Regional direction for planning and 

implementing management activities (FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement No. 2500-98-1). 

Some activity areas (53 EA units in Alternative 2 and 61 EA units in Alternative 3) would still have 

detrimental soil conditions that exceed the 20 percent standard. However, there are no violations of 

Regional policy (FSM 2520, R-6 Supplement) or LRMP Standards and Guidelines SL-3 and SL-4 

because the project would not cause an activity area to move from a detrimental soil condition less 

than 20 percent to one that is greater than 20 percent; nor would the project increase detrimental soil 

conditions in activity areas that currently exceed 20 percent of the unit area. Both action alternatives 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Soils

179

balance the goal of maintaining and/or improving soil quality following project implementation and 

soil restoration activities. 

The proposed actions are also expected to comply with recommended guidelines for snags and coarse 

woody debris retention following both harvest and fuel reduction treatments. 

Under all alternatives, the combined effects of all past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

management activities would be within allowable limits set by Regional direction and LRMP 

standards and guidelines for protecting and maintaining soil productivity within each of the proposed 

activity areas. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Cultural 

180

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION AND FINDING OF EFFECT

This summary follows the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Consultation and 

Finding of Effect under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Following guidelines 

in our 2003 Regional Programmatic Agreement among USDA-Forest Service, the Advisory Council 

on Historic Preservation, and the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, a finding of No Historic 

Properties Affected has been determined for this project. This finding is based on the knowledge that 

although cultural resource sites may be impacted by the proposed undertaking, site avoidance and 

project design criteria will provide protection of eligible site characteristics. The probability that 

certain eligible sites may be impacted during project activities leads to this finding of effect as 

described in 36CFR800.5 (b) and 36CFR800.16(i) (Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 239; Tuesday, 

December 12, 2000; pages 77730 & 77738). 

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION 

Management direction for cultural resources is found in the Deschutes National Forest Resource 

Management Plan, in the 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. 

The Forest Service is directed to consider the effects on cultural resources when proposing projects 

that fall within the Forest’s jurisdiction. Further direction indicates that the Forest will determine what 

cultural resources are present on the forest, evaluate each resource for eligibility to the National 

Register of Historic Places (National Register), and protect or mitigate effects to resources that are 

eligible. 

Relevant Forest Plan Standards and Guides include: 

 CR-2 states that cultural resource properties located during inventory will be evaluated for 

eligibility to the National Register. 

 CR-3 states that in concert with inventories and evaluations the Forest will develop thematic 

National Register nominations and management plans for various classes of cultural resources. 

 CR-4 indicates that project level inventories or the intent to conduct such shall be documented 

through environmental analysis for the project. 

DESIRED CONDITION 

The desired condition is not clearly stated in the Forest Plan but can be derived from the implied goals 

of the Standards and Guides and the Monitoring Plan. It would be desirable to know the location and 

extent of all cultural resources, to have evaluated each one for eligibility to the National Register, and 

to have developed management plans for all eligible properties that would provide protection or 

mitigate effects that would occur to the resources. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Cultural

181

EXISTING CONDITION 

Previous and recently conducted cultural resource inventory survey in the Deadlog Project area has 

covered approximately 44 percent (7,082 acres) of the proposed 16,055 acre project area. Roughly 

5,591 acres of this coverage represents past surveys and approximately 1,491 acres is from recent 

(2008) surveys in high probability areas. 

As a result of these inventory surveys, 111 previously identified and new cultural resource sites have 

been documented. Fifty-one of the sites have been evaluated for eligibility to the National Register 

and of these, 49 are eligible while two are not eligible. The remaining 60 sites have not been 

evaluated for eligibility. There are 101 prehistoric sites, three historic sites, and seven sites that have 

components from both time periods. 

Prehistoric site types currently identified in the project area include tool stone quarries (obsidian flows 

and outcrops), lithic scatters, lithic scatters with flaked stone tools, lithic scatters with ground stone 

tools, and lithic scatters with flaked and ground stone tools. Historic era sites represent early Forest 

Service administrative use and extensive railroad logging operations on formerly private timberlands. 

A fire lookout, a telephone line, historic debris dumps and scatters, and railroad grades are examples 

of the historic site types present in the project area. According to historic records, an active homestead 

was located in the project area, although it has not yet been verified on the ground. Additionally, there 

are two historic wagon roads within the project area that have not been field verified. 

PROPOSED TREATMENTS 

Connected actions common to the two action alternatives involve removal of danger trees, road 

reconstruction, road maintenance, and temporary road development where commercial harvest is 

proposed. Danger trees along project area travel routes are removed prior to project activities 

commencing. Road reconstruction takes place within the existing road prism and involves restoring 

drainage features, slope stabilization, guardrail replacement, and applying spot surfacing, a multi-layer 

bituminous surface treatment, or resurfacing with crushed aggregate prior to commercial hauling on 

specific roads 

Road maintenance (blading and shaping the roadbed and brush removal) would occur on roads used 

for commercial timber hauling. Temporary roads would be needed for commercial harvest operations. 

These roads would be subsoiled following the project activities. Subsoiling is a method of tilling the 

compacted sediments for rehabilitation. 

Danger trees along project area travel routes and where treatment units border the road system must be 

felled prior to harvest as per Federal and State safety regulations. 

During project treatments in units where a waterline is present as part of the range management 

program, a mitigation measure has been identified to place fill material on top of the waterline at 

designated crossings or along the length of any travel routes to protect the waterline. This material 

must be a minimum of 12 inches deep. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Cultural 

182

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: No treatments of any type would occur under this alternative. There 

would be no change in current management direction or in the level of ongoing management activities. 

Effects would derive from unmanaged fuels consumed during a wildfire event. By not treating the 

fuels, burn temperatures in many areas would likely be extreme, endangering cultural resource sites 

and artifacts. The analysis value of obsidian artifacts for chronology and sourcing information would 

be compromised by extreme temperatures. Metal artifacts would be further oxidized, becoming more 

brittle. Glass melts and fractures. Ceramic objects fracture and lose decorative elements from smoke 

and heat. Organic materials such as wood shell, bone, antler, horn, leather and fabric may be 

consumed by fire or altered by smoke. 

None of the following sites have been identified in the project area: 1) Potential sites for radiocarbon 

sampling would be contaminated by modern carbon and ash from a wildfire and 2) Sensitive site 

features such as rock art panels made with pigment or etched into the stone would also likely have 

negative effects from the heat and carbon residue of a wildfire, especially if vegetation is touching the 

decorated rock panels. 

Physical damage or destruction of artifacts or sites during wildfire suppression activities could occur 

from fire control lines, temporary roads, staging areas, or disturbances from machinery and vehicles 

placed within site boundaries are all sources of damage. Loss of site and artifact integrity can result 

from displacement, compaction, churning, and mixing of surface and subsurface soils and deposits of 

archaeological materials, historic and prehistoric. 

If a new “temporary” road developed for suppression activities that provides easier access to a site is 

not immediately closed or rehabilitated, the site becomes more vulnerable to looting and vandalism 

due to the easier access. This effect applies whether closure or rehabilitation of the temporary road 

occurs or not. 

Restoration of hand or bulldozer created fire lines, staging areas, temporary roads, and other firerelated disturbances constitute additional impacts to non-renewable cultural resources. Every time 

soils containing previously undisturbed deposits of cultural resources are moved, compacted, churned, 

mixed, or rearranged, there is a loss of integrity to the archaeological context of those materials. 

Integrity refers to both the deposits themselves and the individual artifacts or features (from breakage 

and or destruction). Features are site components that would be destroyed if they were collected or 

rearranged in any way (e.g. a fire hearth, a rock cairn, a panel of rock art, a cache pit, a hunting blind, 

etc.). 

Obscuring vegetation provides 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. Suppression activities, such as fire line construction, can also expose these objects. Higher 

visibility of sensitive materials at cultural resource sites would then be more vulnerable to looting and 

vandalism, an on-going problem on public lands in Central Oregon. 

The loss of surface litter from intense wildfire combined with increased hydrophobic soil conditions 

could lead to erosion due to runoff of surface water. Erosion across sites can remove artifacts or 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Cultural

183

deposit sediment from slopes above. Increased trampling from deer and elk on thinner forest floors 

has also resulted from wildfires. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

For known sites, these areas are to be excluded from treatment unless it is determined that there would 

be no effect. The following discussion of effects (direct, indirect, and cumulative) assumes, that for 

other presently unknown sites, what the effects could be. 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Treatment activities that use heavy equipment machinery for harvest or 

grapple piling could have a direct effect on cultural resource 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. An exception to this is the machinery used to 

mow brush. This will be discussed further. 

With cable logging (Alternative 2), dragging either end of a log up a slope would cause a direct effect 

to a cultural resource site by gouging, displacing, crushing, breaking, or otherwise affecting the 

integrity of site materials. 

Two types of machinery are used for mechanical shrub treatments (mowing). The first is a rubber 

tired tractor using a rotary mower for slopes under 20 percent. Steeper slopes require a light tracked 

machine with a front-mounted mow deck that provides greater stability. The weight rating for the 

equipment is low, between 4 to 5 pounds per square inch (psi), and has a limited potential to cause 

damage more typical of the heavier skidders, shearing machines, and biomass machinery. The one 

function of the mowing equipment that causes some churning, mixing, and displacement of soils is 

when the machinery makes a turn; the tighter the turn the greater the amount of disturbance. The only 

direct effect anticipated from mowing would be when the equipment turns around. 

Slash disposal using burn piles directly effects the more “durable” artifacts (made of inorganic 

materials) as well as perishable artifacts (made from organic materials). Burn temperatures reached in 

slash piles (up to 800 degrees F) are much higher than those in a broadcast underburn in light fuels 

conditions (250 to 300 degrees F). Placing burn piles within known cultural resource site boundaries 

can affect artifact integrity as a result of high burn temperatures. 

Underburning poses a potential effect where fuels are greater than 2.5 tons per acre, or classified as 

more than light fuels. Research on prescribed fire and obsidian indicates that hydration rind analysis 

results are not affected when temperatures are 149 degrees C (300 degrees F) or less (Benson 2002; p. 

100). Obsidian sourcing analysis using trace elements does not appear to be affected at temperatures 

below 1000 degrees C (1832 degrees F; Shackley and Dillian 2002; p. 128). Trembour (1979; in Agee 

1993, p.185) notes that obsidian hydration rinds are obliterated at temperatures over 425 degrees C 

(797 degrees F). 

Fire line construction by hand poses a potential for direct effects on significant cultural resource sites 

from displacement, churning, mixing, and breakage of artifacts. Loss of artifact associations and 

context are examples of lost site integrity. Hand line construction is more limited in effect than using 

machinery, since it is generally a much smaller fuel break. 

Road reconstruction, road maintenance, and temporary road development in or through a cultural 

resource site would have a direct effect on site integrity with damage from crushing, breaking, mixing, 

displacing, compacting, and otherwise disturbing the context of the artifacts. Road reconstruction 

effects may be limited to potential impacts from restoring drainage features when they are related to 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Cultural 

184

the out sloping or water barring needed in association with culverts as well as without culverts. If a 

road crosses a site and water bars or culvert maintenance occurs outside the road prism disturbing new 

areas of the site, there is a direct effect on site integrity from the equipment used to complete the work. 

The loss of integrity is similar to that lost by using machinery for harvest activities. 

Activities that occur within an established road prism, including guardrail replacement, applying 

surface treatments of any sort, watering and blading, or slope stabilization within the road prism 

should not have any new effects on a site, even if the road goes through a known site. The damage has 

already occurred during initial construction, while the reconstruction activities do not impact 

previously undisturbed site areas. 

Temporary road development through a site, either by advance preparation or through actual use by 

equipment, has a direct effect on site integrity from crushing, breaking, mixing, displacing, 

compacting, and otherwise disturbing the site’s context. Once the harvest and associated activities are 

complete, the temporary roads are subsoiled by tilling to loosen compacted sediments and make the 

routes undesirable for unauthorized travel. 

Falling danger trees along travel routes and where units border roads may have a minor, direct effect 

on cultural resource 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 a direct effect, similar to that from cable yarding, if the trees or 

portions thereof are dragged to the road. 

Should any new cultural resource site be discovered during project implementation, there would likely 

be an effect because the site was not discovered in advance. An example of this could be a small site 

that had previously only been identified as an isolated find due to a limited number of artifacts (less 

than 10 items) observed at the time of initial discovery. Often, by the time that such a site is relocated, 

some physical damage has already occurred, since increased visibility through mechanical 

disturbances lead to discovery. 

Mowing shrubs and underburning the resulting slash material would remove vegetation that currently 

obscures artifacts on the ground surface and increases surface visibility. Greater visibility that exposes 

sensitive materials affects site integrity, since these materials would become more vulnerable to 

looting and vandalism. 

Mitigating the potential breakage of the waterlines with 12 inches or more of imported material, to 

protect range improvements from equipment at crossings or along a travel route, a foreign substance is 

introduced to site deposits. These materials eventually migrate into subsurface deposits that may 

contain artifacts. Even though the intent would be to just cover the waterlines that have already 

impacted a site’s deposits, those materials eventually move beyond the waterline’s disturbance 

“footprint” because of displacement and churning by equipment tread and tracks. 

Cultural resource sites located on sloping ground below treatment units may experience erosion and 

run-off of surface water, melting snow, and heavy rains. While not a direct effect of harvest, fuels, or 

reforestation activities, a site located down slope and outside of a harvest unit may be affected by 

either erosion or the depositing of sediments from outside the site proper, or both 

Cumulative Effects: Road maintenance using a blade on native surfaced roads that cross cultural 

resource sites adds a cumulative effect to the original road construction or development. Blading a 

disturbed surface tends to remove additional undisturbed deposits along with material that may have 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Cultural

185

slumped or blown into the roadbed. The original effect of building a road through a site is 

compounded through additional equipment operation for maintenance. 

Road maintenance that adds gravel or drainage features (culverts, water bars, etc.) to a previously 

native surfaced road through a cultural resource site would affect the site. The impacts may also occur 

in a larger area than the original impact from the road itself if culverts or water bars are placed to drain 

across the site. Deposition of sediments in new locations on the site and erosion could occur in 

previously undisturbed portions of the site, leading to loss of artifact context and integrity. 

Subsoiling temporary roads following use would affect a site due to the initial, direct effect of building 

the road. Subsoiling would add another level of effect because the tiller teeth tend to extend below the 

compacted zone of soil deposits created by road development and or use. 

Harvesting, thinning, or otherwise treating plantations when cultural resource sites have been 

identified after the plantation was established constitutes a cumulative effect on the site. Since the site 

was initially impacted during the first harvest, followed by creation of the plantation, another 

harvest/thinning entry compounds the previous damage. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 

Alternative 2 proposes to treat 10,752 acres (Refer to Table 10, page 50). This alternative proposes to 

use cable logging methods, where one end of the log is suspended, on slopes over 30 percent. The 

other end of the log would be dragged up the slope. All other harvest or commercial thinning would 

be done with ground based equipment. Some of the modern equipment “grabs” one or more trees, 

cuts it, and then places it on the ground. 

Alternative 2 proposes to treat 2,334 acres with hand piling and burning of slash and 5,061 acres of 

machine piling and burning slash. All other fuels treatments would be greater in Alternative 3. Some 

of the treatment units would have more than one entry for fuel reduction to provide cooler underburn 

temperatures. Equipment would be used for mowing and machine piling of slash; all other fuels 

treatments would be accomplished by hand with chain saws. 

Alternative 2 proposes TSI treatments on 8,493 acres. Timber stand improvement (TSI) activities 

occur following harvest and fuels treatments and include precommercial thinning of small diameter 

trees, whip felling, and pruning branches. These activities are done using hand tools and chain saws. 

Alternative 3 

Alternative 3 proposes to treat 11,281 acres (Refer to Table 10, page 50). There would be no cable 

logging or harvest on slopes greater than 30 percent. There would be 900 acres of biomass removal. 

There would be 530 acres of additional underburning that would occur in more open ponderosa pine 

stands. All harvest, thinning, and biomass removal would be done with ground based equipment. 

Biomass removal would occur in plantations and commercial harvest units. Similar technologies 

would be used as for ground based logging. Landings and skid trails would be needed in plantations 

for on-site chipping for removal; temporary roads would not be needed since plantations are currently 

accessible by system roads. 

The types of proposed fuels treatments in Alternative 3, including possible hand line construction, are 

the same as in Alternative 2. More acres would be treated in Alternative 3 by each treatment type, 

except approximately 645 fewer acres of hand piling and burning of slash, than in Alternative 2. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Range 

186

RANGE 

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION 

All of the project area is within active grazing allotments with term grazing permits, where grazing is 

permitted annually. “Livestock grazing both sheep and cattle would be permitted with associated 

range improvements such as fences and water developments (1990 LRMP, page 4-113)”. 

Current livestock grazing activities utilize the available forage in the allotments while meeting the 

following Forest Plan Goals: to manage the forage resources for long-term sustained productivity 

through attainment of upward or stable vegetative trends, to protect basic soil and water resources, 

and to meet public needs for multiple resource outputs (LRMP, page 4-49). 

 RG-7: Annual operating plans (instructions) will be prepared with each permittee. They will 

identify specific permittee responsibilities and will schedule livestock distribution and use 

patterns to prevent or resolve resource conflicts. 

 RG-10: Improvements will be maintained as assigned and to the standards Identified in the 

grazing permit and AMP.

 RG-12: Transitory range will be managed in coordination and cooperation with timber 

management. Forage may be enhanced where no conflict with reforestation goals will result.

 RG-13 Allotment Management Plans will be monitored using allotment Inspections, utilization 

studies/checks, and condition and trend studies.

 M7-8: Forage utilization by livestock would be maintained at a level so that sufficient forage is 

available to support the desired number of deer. Grazing systems ... would be designed to be 

compatible with or complementary to the habitat management objective

 M7-9: Allotment management plans will be written to reflect the management direction for this 

Management Area. They will include the grazing system to be used, season of use, class of 

livestock, stocking levels, range improvements needed, and forage production and utilization 

standards. 

 M8-9 Timber harvesting and post-harvesting activities...should be scheduled to accommodate 

grazing systems.

 M8-10 Allotments will be managed to achieve or maintain a forage condition rating of fair or 

better to the site’s capacity. 

 M8-14 Transitory range will be managed in conjunction with timber management to achieve 

higher levels of forage production and the desired level of forage utilization. Livestock grazing 

on transitory ranges will take place under the following situations; 

o Where forage occurs as a result of site disturbance and/or timber canopy removal on a 

continuing basis. 

o Where disturbed sites and/or areas under timber management can be seeded with species 

which improve forage production and do not restrict tree establishment and growth. 

 M9-75 Utilization standards will be established to avoid an over-used appearance. 

 M9-76 Salt blocks, water developments, or other improvements which attract livestock and 

result in a trampled appearing setting should be avoided in highly scenic areas. New corrals and 

loading chutes will be made of native materials and will be designed to be visually pleasing. 

 M15-7 Livestock grazing is generally not compatible with old growth areas. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Range

187

RANGE OVERVIEW 

Livestock grazing was historically a common use of the Deadlog Project Area. Official Forest Service 

records document that grazing occurred as early as the 1930s. The project area overlaps portions of 

two grazing allotments. The present Allotment Management Plans for the Quartz Mountain, and Sand 

Springs Allotments were adopted in 2006 and are based on the Cluster II Environmental Assessment. 

The allotments were each designed to operate at the upper limit of 600 cow/calf pairs, are in active 

status, and use a rest rotation grazing system. Grazing can occur on an annual basis from June 1 to 

September 30. Forage utilization by livestock is maintained at a level such that sufficient forage is 

available to support the desired number of deer. Grazing systems, stocking levels, forage use 

standards and range improvement projects are designed to be compatible with or complementary to the 

deer habitat objectives (M7-8, page 4-114). Heavy snow accumulations in severe winter conditions on 

winter mule deer range would concentrate herds and can cause over use of shrubs in specific areas. 

The rest-rotation system provides flexibility in all but the most extreme conditions where early 

removal of livestock from an allotment may be required as it was in 2002 on the Quartz Mountain 

Allotment. Early removal comes at some cost to the permittee. In some situations and under 

agreement with the permittee, rangelands have been rested for a growing season to allow for recovery. 

Water haul and the China Hat Water System provide the only sources of water. Within the project 

area, most livestock water is hauled in by the permittee to established waterset locations or through the 

water pipeline (32.5 miles) to established water troughs. There are 17 historic waterset locations and 

one water trough on the two allotments within the project area. Some livestock water is also provided 

by rainwater catchments called trick tanks. Other improvements include barbed wire fences, 

cattleguards, OHV cattleguards, range study enclosures, and condition & trend study plots. 

Table 62: Grazing Allotments within the Deadlog Project Area and their Status 

Allotment Acres Livestock Type, Status, 

Year Last Grazed 

Acres Within 

Project Area 

Quartz Mountain 34,087 Cattle, Active, 2007 9,328 

Sand Springs 55,967 Cattle, Active, 2008 6,727

Total Acres 90,054 16,055 

CURRENT ALLOTMENT CONDITIONS 

Historic records about vegetation on the District area prior to 1910 consist mostly of photo evidence 

and are limited, especially in regards to the specific area under consideration. Given the proximity of 

the area to Bend where much of the photo record exists one could presume that the area was mainly 

forested by large ponderosa pine trees and that the understory was mainly grasses and forbs with some 

shrub component. Along the fringe of the forested areas the shrub component naturally increased. 

There is no indication that juniper was ever present as a major vegetation component but it possible 

that it existed on some ridges such as those found on the slopes of Sixteen Butte or Deadlog Butte. 

Fire was frequent played a significant role in shaping vegetation communities. 

Logging began around 1920 and lasted into the 1940s, removing some of the tree component and 

opening up the canopy. Logging was moderate on the west side of the project area and as it moved 

south and east the number of stems per acre that were removed decreased as a more selective harvest 

method was implemented. 

Utilization of forage is within the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines (RG-13 (D), page 4-50), 

which suggest a maximum utilization of 50%. Allotment Management Plans and the Condition and 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Range 

188

Trend (CT) Analysis Plots indicate that the forage condition on the allotments is generally good and 

the trend stable. CT plots indicate vegetation changes over time in areas where management actions 

have occurred and vegetation has evolved under livestock grazing and fire exclusion. The trend is for 

shrubs to increase on these sites. Grasses have tended to be stable or increased in conjunction with the 

changes in the shrub component. 

Monitoring has shown that areas with resource impacts caused by livestock are water set locations, 

water haul roads, and resting or bedding areas. These areas contain compacted soils and less diverse 

plant communities (occasionally, dominated by cheatgrass) and are also used intermittently by 

campers. Impacted areas are estimated to be less than 0.08 percent of the total analysis area. 

In forested areas there has been an increase in the tree canopy, often in both percent cover and in the 

number of stems per acre. In shrublands, a few sites have been invaded by pine or juniper. Soil 

conditions have remained fairly stable with some increase in bare soil as plant communities mature on 

some sites. 

The present grazing system allows for full rest of at least one pasture in each allotment per grazing 

season and use on each pasture is rotated (occurs at a different time period) during the grazing season. 

This allows for grazed plants to periodically complete one season or growth stage unencumbered by 

domestic livestock. The objective is to manage rangeland vegetation on a sustainable basis to not only 

provide feed for grazing livestock, but also to hold soil in place, to filter water, and recycle nutrients. 

The current condition of the forage species (grasses and forbs) is in fair to good production. Most of 

the allotment is classified as transitional range due to the overstory of lodgepole pine, ponderosa pine, 

and antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata – PUTR). The understory (grasses and forbs) are subject 

to increased competition. Forage quality is declining, except in areas where vegetation management 

activities such as tree harvest, tree thinning, prescribed burning and brush mowing have occurred. 

Wildfires temporality increase forage quality and quantity. 

Cattle are primarily grazers, as opposed to browsers, preferring grass species when available. What is 

generally accepted is that when forage grasses dry out and go dormant, cattle shift to shrubs as they 

contain higher protein levels (Severson and Urness, 1994). Within primary range areas livestock and 

big game are allowed to utilize up to 50 percent of annual shrub production (1990 LRMP, page 4-50). 

Due primarily to its abundance and palatability to cattle, Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis – FEID) is 

the primary grass species available to cattle. FEID is a perennial bunch grass that begins new growth 

early in the spring, produces seed in mid July, and goes dormant in the fall. Based on the life cycle of 

FEID and palatability of the plant, grazing is permitted during the growing season between May and 

October each year. FEID is the key indicator species for pasture management. In order to utilize the 

existing forage resource on these public lands, the 1990 LRMP allows for cattle to remove up to 50 

percent of the annual growth on FEID. 

Based on photo records and CT plots, the current age of many existing shrublands within the project 

area are from 25 to 90 years of age. Foliage production of PUTR is reported by McConnell and Smith 

(1977) to peak at around 60 years of age with early season grazing (Clements and Young 2001). 

Some acres contain shrubs that are within their most productive age range, 25 to 30 years old. Areas 

that provide optimum browse conditions are generally areas where wildfire and vegetation treatments 

have altered conditions in the last 20 to 40 years. Shrub recovery on activity and wildfire sites is 

taking in excess of eight years but is likely to be completed after 25 years in conjunction with grazing 

and fire suppression activities. Recovery is variable depending on the micro site and the climate over 

the recovery period. Grasses and forbs respond well to these disturbances, initially increasing their 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Range

189

production and sustaining this well into mature vegetation conditions in shrubland areas. Bare soil is 

almost always increased and reduction takes longer than eight years to occur. Invading trees are 

reduced or eliminated, reducing competition with grasses and forbs. 

Livestock operations usually require “improvements” to facilitate the control of livestock and to allow 

for controlled vegetation management. All existing range improvements for the two allotments, 

including those within the project area are displayed in Table 2A and 2B, Range Report, Project 

Record. The Sand Springs Allotment is classified as an intensive management level allotment and 

includes high investment improvements such as the China Hat Water System. The China Hat Water 

System includes over 32 miles of waterline and water distribution features such as troughs and tanks. 

Sections of this system lie within the project area and need protection. 

Invasive species have not been found on the CT plots. Populations of spotted knapweed and Canada 

thistle are the primary invasive species found in this area but have not been found at watersets used for 

livestock watering within the project area. Current grazing practices within the project area, along 

with existing management strategies for the control of noxious weeds, do not appear to support the 

concept of widespread invasive species invasions into these native communities. 

Exotic plant species such as cheatgrass have been found on some CT plots and where wildfire has 

been a factor near existing populations and records going back to the 1950s document the presence of 

cheatgrass. Small areas, primarily watersets and random livestock resting/bedding sites within the 

project area, have been heavily used by livestock over a long period of time and are detrimentally 

compacted. Cheatgrass, horehound, and quackgrass do well at sites that are compacted and 

continually disturbed. These areas have plant communities with fewer species of plants than adjacent 

areas and comprise approximately 0.1 percent (17 acres) of the project area. The same watersets are 

used each season as needed to achieve proper livestock distribution. Occasionally watersets are rested, 

allowing for some recovery. 

Another rangeland monitoring system, other than CT plots and photos, provides a separate method of 

determining vegetative responses to livestock use in relation to native ungulate use. Study enclosures 

on the east side of the Bend & Fort Rock Ranger District were established in the 1950’s and 1960’s to 

track range condition as affected by livestock and deer exclusion. Much of the area where these 

enclosures are located is mule deer winter range habitat. Sites indicate a trend to older decadent 

shrubs and, in some cases, an increase in ponderosa pine trees within the enclosures. 

Fire was frequent, shaping vegetative communities. This would seem to indicate that along with 

frequent ground type fires, occasionally large wildfires occurred such as the 1959 Aspen Flat Fire that 

burned to the east of the Deadlog Project Area. This mix of conditions would seem to indicate that 

where pine stands existed and large stand replacement fires occurred there were areas between stands 

of mature ponderosa pine where areas of vegetation recovery from wildfire occurred. In such 

locations grasses likely flourished for 10 to 20 years. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Range 

190

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 

ALTERNATIVE 1 (NO ACTION) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Vegetation conditions would continue to change in a direction that 

would not be beneficial to livestock forage production over the long run. Canopy closure would 

increase and forage species such as FEID and PUTR would decline. Without the influence of a 

catastrophic event such as wildfire, ecosystems within the Deadlog Project Area would evolve toward 

older climax communities. The expected result would be decreased availability of forbs, grasses and 

shrubs. The existing quantity of browse for winter range would be unaffected. 

The status of existing roads would not be changed and access for permittees would remain the same. 

If catastrophic wildfires become the dominant influence on ecosystems by changes in the intensity 

and/or frequency then native ecosystems may be replaced with non-native species. With the presence 

of exotic and invasive species, control of wildfires is important. 

With the passing of time and the continued lack of fire influence, grasslands would begin to give way 

to a shrub component and eventually convert to a shrubland community. Then after 30 to 40 years 

pine trees would begin to return to the burn areas and eventually these sites in the absence of fire 

would convert to forests which have lower levels of preferred forage. 

The annual removal of forage vegetation through grazing by livestock at allowed levels combined with 

the mixing and incorporation of organic materials into the soil through the hoof action of cattle 

reduces hazardous fuels. Research indicates that “Livestock also reduced the frequency of surface fire 

consuming the herbaceous vegetation, which otherwise will have dried into fine fuels necessary to 

carry the fire (Belsky & Blumenthal 1997)” in western rangelands. 

ALTERNATIVE 2 (PROPOSED ACTION) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 2 would improve existing range conditions once recovery 

from project activities begins. Over the long term project implementation will be beneficial to 

rangeland management. 

Cattle would utilize treatment areas differently, depending on various factors such as the size and 

pattern of the treatment areas, the type of vegetation area treated, treatment intensity,and timing of 

treatment. Implementation of treatment activities would, in general, benefit rangelands by increasing 

available and palatable forage. This would be accomplished by reducing tree and shrub overstory, 

allowing grasses and forbs to increase. Fuels treatment reducting PUTR production generally benefits 

grazing providing greater amounts of available forage. Activities would reduce the density of juniper 

and slow the conversion of mixed shrubland communities to forested communities. 

Livestock utilize PUTR to some degree depending on season of use, animal preference, and 

availability of preferred quality forage. Cattle are generally attracted to and prefer to graze open areas 

that have palatable grasses and forbs. Cattle would tend to utilize treatment areas such as prescribed 

burn and mow units and thinning areas where grass species would increase their production after 

treatment. This preferential grazing would to some degree offset cattle utilization of PUTR that 

remains on site after treatment. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Range

191

In the short-term, treatment activity could reduce the existing amount of available browse for a period 

of a decade or more (response of shrubs is variable and very dependent on local site conditions). A 

reduction of PUTR browse available for wintering mule deer might lead to a reduction of livestock 

use. This activity is a trade-off, as treatment reduces fuel loads and wildfire concerns, allowing stands 

of older shrubs to “regenerate” and provide more viable browse in the future. 

Treating additional vegetation in a unit that was previously treated would alter livestock grazing 

patterns in the short-term as they respond to a more open vegetative condition and use of the area 

would likely increase. Successive years or months of treatment and/or multiple types of treatment 

such as mow/burn could extend vegetative recovery time. 

Roads are used to trail livestock from pasture to pasture and from the allotment. Changes in road 

status and the resultant changes in access would impact the permittees by reducing standard vehicle 

access into to some areas. This would be offset by the permittees using alternative modes of 

transportation such as horses and ATV’s. Reduced motorized access can also reduce vandalism to 

range fences and improvements. 

Implementation of treatments over ten years could conflict with livestock operations by shared and 

increased use of roads and road systems during activities. Closed gates that control livestock 

movement could be left open, water haul may be difficult from shared road use, livestock are more 

vulnerable to injury or death by equipment on roadways or in treatment units, and livestock use 

patterns may be altered by activities. Although conflicts could occur, impacts would be expected to be 

limited to the time when treatments are being implemented with no measurable impacts on grazing. 

Water sets are often used for camping and parking locations, particularly in the fall during hunting 

season when this area sees its greatest use period. OHV users also select these sites and a concern 

arises that they may use livestock trails accessing the water sets as OHV trails. 

Alternative 3 (Preferred Alternative) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Alternative 3 would treat an additional 529 acres in seven additional 

units. Actual treatments may vary unit by unit between Alternative 2 and Alternative 3. This 

alternative would improve existing range conditions once recovery from project activities begins. 

Over the long term project implementation will be beneficial to rangeland management. 

Because some planned fuel treatment units are large, overlap more than one pasture, or because 

multiple units may be treated within one year, or successive years, an adaptive implementation plan 

would minimize impact to range permittees. This would be accomplished by managing treatment 

activities so that no more than one pasture of each of the two affected allotments (up to two pastures in 

a given year) within the project area would require non-use by a single permittee during a given 

grazing season (Range, Resource Protection Measures). Other possibilities, such as permittee agreed 

non-use of more than one pasture in a given season, use of alternative pastures/allotments and deferred 

rotation may be used to meet treatment objectives. 

Cumulative Effects – Alternative 2(Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Cumulative effects, such as slow vegetative recovery due to multiple entries, wildfire impacts, and 

declines in mule deer populations, may facilitate the need for longer rest periods and repetitive impacts 

to livestock operations such as altered pasture rotation or shortened use periods. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Range 

192

The future use of roads and trails by the public, as well as uncontrolled off-road use, will likely result 

in the introduction and/or spread of invasive plants within the project area. 

The effect of prolonged drought may include an increase in plant species which are drought tolerant 

and have a competitive edge during periods of drought over other vegetation. This could include both 

native and non-native species. 

A number of miles of Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) powerline transmission line rights-ofway traverse the eastern portion of the project area. BPA has a periodic need to control vegetation 

within and adjacent to the right-of-way and substation. This commonly includes mowing or manual 

cutting of brush and small trees within the right-of-way corridor. Occasional removal of larger trees 

that could potentially fall and strike lines and/or transmission towers also occurs with the slash lopped 

and scattered and left on site. Cattle are generally attracted to these areas as they are more open then 

the surrounding forest and tend to produce more forage (grasses and shrubs). When moisture content 

of the air is high (humidity) such as during thunderstorm development, cattle will sometimes leave the 

area when static electricity is detected. There are multiple instances where the corridors are used as 

locations to water cattle and troughs are actually placed under towers. 

Table 6 Deadlog Cumulative Effects Action 

Activity/ Project Action Description General Effects to Rangeland Management 

KO Timber Sale 

Reforestation 

maintenance 

Fence Maintenance or removal and Big 

Game Repellant application. Dwarf 

Mistletoe control Pruning and Girdling. 

No effect. 

Wildlife 

Improvement 

Maintenance 

Guzzler maintenance on three guzzlers. No effect. 

Cluster II Grazing 

allotment EA 2006. 

Grazing allotment 

Maintenance and 

Improvement 

Fence Repair, Fence building, Water 

sets, Cattle Grazing, waterline 

installation and maintenance 

No effect. 

Aspen Project Fuels 

Treatments 

Adjacent to planning area Machine 

Shrub treatment and thinning 

No effect. 

Road Maintenance Danger tree removal, roadside brushing, 

drainage repair, and spot surfacing. 

Minimal effect with protection and the 

maintenance of cattleguards. 

Green Dot road 

Closure 

Closure of roads during hunting season Livestock are generally removed from the 

forest by the time hunting season begins. 

Administrative use is permitted. 

Opal mine Opal mine operations on mine claim 

including camping site. 

Livestock use the area. A waterset is located 

along the 600 road that can concentrate 

livestock around the mine. Harvest activities 

would open up the stands around the mine 

and could increase cattle use of the area,. No 

effect is expected. 

Travel Management Travel Management EIS. Shared use 

roads. 

The East Fort Rock OHV area lies to the west 

of the project area. This managed motorized 

use area has in general had negative effects on 

the allotments it overlaps by competing for 

resources such as waterset locations that 

become OHV camps, access routes that 

become trails, and impacts to existing roads 

through increased use and no change in 

maintenance level causing shared route to 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Range

193

Activity/ Project Action Description General Effects to Rangeland Management 

become almost impassable to standard 

vehicles and water haul trucks. These effects 

are associated with designated routes and 

system roads. 

An increase in public use impacts grazing 

operations by potentially increasing accidents 

between users and livestock. There is a 

potential to disturb livestock using shared 

travel routes. Camping use is generally not 

controlled which leads to user created trails. 

Travel management will establish 

management guidelines for the Deschutes 

National Forest. Travel management rules for 

off road vehicle use and camping restrictions 

along roads will be beneficial for rangeland 

management activities. 

BPA power line 

Maintenance 

Power line maintenance within right of 

way includes mowing of brush and 

seedlings and scattered tree and snag 

removal. 

No Effect. 

Since the allotments will likely be in an active status within the implementation cycle of Deadlog, 

there may be an effect on implementation activities, mainly timing and shared use. Some alterations, 

such as changing annual operating plans for grazing and managing (maintaining, repairing) existing 

improvements, may be needed for range activities that may be compromised by proposed activities. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Sensitive Species 

194

BOTANY – BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION 

SUMMARY OF EFFECTS TO SENSITIVE SPECIES 

Threatened, Endangered, or Rare Plant Species: No adverse impacts to Threatened, Endangered or 

Rare (TES) species, or to their potential habitat, are anticipated due to the implementation of this 

project 

INTRODUCTION 

Direction to conserve plant species on Deschutes National Forest is found in several sources. 

Direction for the conservation of Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive (TES) plant species is found 

in the Forest Service Manual (FSM Sections 2670.5 and 2672.4), the Endangered Species Act of 1973 

Subpart B; 402.12, Section 7, Consultation), and the LRMP (4-60 and 4-61). The FSM states that 

habitats for all existing native and desired non-native plants, fish and wildlife should be managed, at 

minimum, to maintain viable populations for each species. The FSM and the LRMP each direct that 

habitat for sensitive plant and animal species be managed to ensure that these species not trend toward 

being listed as Federal Endangered or Threatened species. 

DESIRED FUTURE CONDITION 

Habitat for late seral, rare, and uncommon plant species, and special habitat (such as wetlands) is well 

distributed and of high quality. For local late seral, rare, and uncommon plant species, connectivity of 

habitat and availability of vectors for spores, pollen, seed or vegetative propagules would allow 

genetic exchange between populations, and/or establishment of new populations, both within and 

beyond the borders of the project area. Local populations would be sufficiently robust and resilient to 

permit loss of some individuals or habitat, and natural disturbances would not threaten persistence of 

the species at other than a local scale within the project area. 

The extent of non-native, invasive plant species would be in decline. Direction within the existing 

Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests and Crooked River National Grassland Invasive Plant EIS 

would allow effective treatment of existing sites and prompt treatment of newly discovered sites. 

Forest staff, contractors and recreationists would be aware of the primary importance of prevention as 

a means of limiting the spread of invasive plant species. 

EXISTING CONDITION 

The relatively dry climatic regime in the area is reflected in the flora, which is predominately Dry 

Ponderosa Pine (89 percent) and Dry Lodgepole Pine (10 percent). Less than 1 percent of vegetation 

cover is classified as Dry Mixed Conifer, while only six acres of Wet Ponderosa Pine are documented 

in GIS. The most extensive plant associations documented within the project area are ponderosa 

pine/bitterbrush/Idaho fescue-pumice (38.8 percent), ponderosa pine/bitterbrush-greenleaf 

manzanita/Idaho fescue-pumice (33.1 percent), lodgepole pine/bitterbrush/Idaho fescue-pumice 

(10.0 percent), ponderosa pine/bitterbrush-big sagebrush/Idaho fescue-pumice (8.5 percent) and 

lodgepole pine/big sagebrush/Idaho fescue-pumice (7.9 percent). These five plant association types 

account for 98.3 percent of vegetative cover within the project area. Several other plant associations 

are recognized within the project area, all present in essentially trace amounts (less than 1 percent). Of 

these, the association reflecting the dampest/coolest sites within the project area is white 

fir/snowbrush-greenleaf manzanita-pumice. Perennial water features such as streams, springs and 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Sensitive Species

195

seeps are lacking within the project area. The absence of these features significantly limits potential 

botanical biodiversity within the Deadlog project area. 

Threatened, Endangered or Sensitive (TES) Plants 

The R6 Regional Forester's Sensitive Species List (RFSSL) was officially updated on January 31, 

2008. In accordance with options provided by the Regional Forester, in a letter accompanying the new 

List (USFS, 2008), the Deadlog Vegetation Management Project is using the 2004 R6 Sensitive 

Species List that was in effect at the date of this project's formal initiation. There are no federally 

listed Threatened or Endangered plant species known to exist on Deschutes National Forest. With 

reference to the 2004 RFSSL, the Deschutes National Forest Sensitive Plant List includes 31 taxa, 

either known (18) or suspected (13) to occur on the Forest. Relevant information concerning 

Deschutes National Forest Sensitive Plant Species, and an assessment of the probabilities of their 

occurrence within the Deadlog Vegetation Management Project, is presented in Table 63. 

Table 63: Region 6 Sensitive Plant Species Documented or Suspected – Deschutes National 

Forest 

R6 Sensitive Plant 

Species 

Documented or 

Suspected on 

Deschutes 

National Forest 1 

Range within Pacific 

Northwestern 

United States 

Habitat Known to 

Occur in 

Project 

Area/ On 

Forest? 

Probability of 

Occurrence in 

Project Area 

Agoseris elata 

(VP)

Cascades: Oregon, 

California 

Washington, 

Somewhat diverse; 

typically lower 

elevation forest 

openings and alluvial 

terraces.

No/Yes Low; potential 

habitat lacking.

Arabis 

suffrutescens var. 

horizontalis 

(VP)

Southern to central 

Oregon; California

Alpine to subalpine 

meadows, woods; 

summits, ridges; steep 

exposed rock 

outcrops.

No/No Low; generally at 

higher and 

moister sites than 

present in project 

area; project may 

be north and east 

of the OR 

Cascades 

distribution of 

this taxon.

Arnica viscosa 

(VP)

Southern to central 

Cascades of Oregon; 

California

Subalpine or higher 

scree, talus gullies 

and slopes w/ 

seasonal water runoff; 

lava flows; may be in 

moraine lake basins 

or crater lake basins.

No/Yes Low; generally at 

higher and 

moister sites than 

present in project 

area.

Artemisia 

ludoviciana ssp. 

estesii 

(VP)

Central Oregon Upper riparian zone, 

away from aquatic 

plants.

No/Yes Low; riparian 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Sensitive Species 

196

R6 Sensitive Plant 

Species 

Documented or 

Suspected on 

Deschutes 

National Forest 1 

Range within Pacific 

Northwestern 

United States 

Habitat Known to 

Occur in 

Project 

Area/ On 

Forest? 

Probability of 

Occurrence in 

Project Area 

Astragalus peckii 

(VP)

Southern to central 

Oregon

Basins, benches, 

gentle slopes, pumice 

flats; generally nonforest but known from 

five sites in lodgepole 

pine openings.

No/Yes Moderate; some 

lodgepole pine 

habitat w/in 

project area is 

fairly similar to 

habitat occupied 

by ASPE4 

elsewhere on 

DES NF.

Botrychium 

pumicola 

(VP)

Central Oregon Alpine-subalpine 

ridges, slopes and 

meadows. Montane 

forest openings, open 

forest in basins with 

frost pockets, pumice 

flats.

No/Yes High; a 

documented 

habitat type 

(CLS2-14) well 

represented (1600 

acres) within 

project area; 

known sites 

within 2000m of 

project boundary.

Calamagrostis 

breweri 

(VP)

Western Cascades of 

Oregon; California

Subalpine to alpine 

meadows, open 

slopes, stream banks, 

lake margins.

No/No Low; riparian 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Calochortus 

longebarbatus var. 

longebarbatus

(VP)

Cascades of Northern 

California, Oregon 

and Southern 

Washington

Lodgepole and 

ponderosa pine forest 

openings and forest 

edges of vernally 

moist grassy 

meadows, 

occasionally along 

seasonal streams.

No/No Low; available 

moisture levels 

probably too low 

to provide 

suitable habitat.

Carex hystericina 

(VP)

Oregon, Idaho, 

Washington and 

California

Mid-elevations in wet 

to moist conditions in 

riparian zones; in or 

along ditches/canals 

in prairies and 

wetlands.

No/Yes Low; riparian 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Carex livida 

(VP)

Oregon, Idaho, 

Washington and 

California

All forest types; 

peatlands, wet 

meadows with still or 

channeled water.

No/No Low; riparian 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Castilleja 

chlorotica 

(VP)

Central Oregon Ponderosa pine, 

lodgepole pine and 

mixed conifer forest 

openings; PP at lower, 

LP at middle to upper, 

mixed conifer at 

highest elevations.

No/Yes Moderate; a 

documented 

habitat type 

(CPS2-12) 

present within 

project area, but 

rare (13 acres).
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Sensitive Species

197

R6 Sensitive Plant 

Species 

Documented or 

Suspected on 

Deschutes 

National Forest 1 

Range within Pacific 

Northwestern 

United States 

Habitat Known to 

Occur in 

Project 

Area/ On 

Forest? 

Probability of 

Occurrence in 

Project Area 

Cicuta bulbifera 

(VP)

Eastern Cascades of 

Oregon and 

Washington; 

California

Shoreline marshes. No/No Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Collomia mazama 

(VP)

Southern to central 

Cascades, Oregon

Mid- to high 

elevations,; meadows, 

stream banks and 

bars, lakeshores and 

vernal pool margins, 

forest edges and 

openings.

No/No Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Eucephalus 

gormanii 

(VP)

Western Cascades, 

Oregon

Rocky ridges, 

outcrops, or rocky 

slopes in alpine or 

subalpine mixed 

conifer forest.

No/Yes Low; available 

moisture levels 

probably too low 

to provide 

suitable habitat.

Gentiana newberryi 

(VP)

Eastern and western 

Cascades of Oregon; 

California

Alpine to subalpine 

mixed conifer 

openings, wet to dry 

montane meadows, 

sometimes adjacent to 

springs, streams, or 

lakes.

No/Yes Low; available 

moisture levels 

probably too low 

to provide 

suitable habitat.

Lobelia dortmanna 

(VP)

Eastern Cascades, 

Oregon; Washington

In water of lake, 

pond, slow river or 

stream, or wet 

meadow.

No/Yes Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Lycopodiella 

inundata 

(VP)

Oregon, Idaho, 

Washington, 

California

Deflation areas in 

coastal back-dunes; 

montane bogs, less 

often, wet meadows.

No/Yes Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Lycopodium 

complanatum 

(VP)

Oregon, Idaho, 

Washington

Middle elevations; 

edge of wet meadow; 

dry, forested 

midslope. 

No/No Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Ophioglossum 

pusillum 

(VP)

Oregon, Washington, 

California

Low to midelevations in dune 

deflation planes, 

marsh edges, vernal 

ponds and stream 

terraces in moist 

meadows.

No/No Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Sensitive Species 

198

R6 Sensitive Plant 

Species 

Documented or 

Suspected on 

Deschutes 

National Forest 1 

Range within Pacific 

Northwestern 

United States 

Habitat Known to 

Occur in 

Project 

Area/ On 

Forest? 

Probability of 

Occurrence in 

Project Area 

Penstemon peckii 

(VP)

Central Oregon Ponderosa pine or 

mixed conifer with 

ponderosa pine, in 

openings or in 

relatively open stands; 

on recovering fluvial 

terraces and shallow 

intermittent drainages.

No/Yes Low; likely that 

available 

moisture levels 

too low, 

elevations too 

high, to support 

suitable habitat 

for this taxon.

Pilularia 

americana 

(VP)

Oregon, California Alkali and other 

shallow vernal pools; 

not recently used 

stock ponds; reservoir 

shores.

No/No Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Rorippa columbiae 

(VP)

Oregon, Washington, 

California

Low to midelevations; wet to 

vernally moist sites; 

meadows, fields, 

playas, lakeshores, 

intermittent stream 

beds, banks of 

perennial streams, 

along irrigation 

ditches, river bars and 

deltas.

No/No Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Scheuchzeria 

palustris ssp. 

americana 

(VP)

Washington, Oregon, 

Idaho, California

Mid-elevations; opencanopied bogs, fens, 

and other wetlands 

where often in 

shallow water.

No/Yes Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Schoenoplectus 

subterminalis 

(VP)

Washington, Oregon, 

Idaho, California

Generally submerged 

to emergent in quiet 

water 2-8 decimeters 

deep, in peatlands, 

sedge fens, creeks, 

ditches, ponds and 

lakes.

No/Yes Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Thelypodium 

howellii 

(VP)

East of Cascade crest 

in Oregon; 

Washington, 

California

Marshes at midelevations in 

ponderosa pine and fir 

forests.

No/No Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Rhizomnium nudum 

(B)

Oregon and 

Washington Cascades

Mid-elevation forests 

on humus or mineral 

soil in seepages, 

seasonally wet 

depressions or 

intermittently wet, 

low gradient 

channels.

No/Yes Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Sensitive Species

199

R6 Sensitive Plant 

Species 

Documented or 

Suspected on 

Deschutes 

National Forest 1 

Range within Pacific 

Northwestern 

United States 

Habitat Known to 

Occur in 

Project 

Area/ On 

Forest? 

Probability of 

Occurrence in 

Project Area 

Schistostega 

pennata 

(B)

Oregon, Idaho, 

Washington

Usually on mineral 

soil in crevices on 

lower and more 

sheltered parts of root 

wads of fallen trees. 

Often near streams or 

other wet areas. High 

local humidity 

essential.

No/Yes Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Scouleria 

marginata 

(B)

Oregon, Washington, 

California

Often forming dark 

mats on exposed to 

shaded rocks in 

perennial streams; 

seasonally submerged 

or emergent.

No/No Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Dermatocarpon 

luridum 

(L)

Oregon, Washington On rocks or bedrock 

in streams or seeps; 

usually submerged or 

inundated for most of 

the year.

No/Yes Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Leptogium 

cyanescens 

(L)

Oregon, Washington Generally riparian but 

recently documented 

in upland settings on 

vine maple, big leaf 

maple and intermixed 

with moss on white 

oak. 

No/No Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

Ramaria amyloidea 

(F)

Oregon, Washington, 

California

Associated with fir 

species, Douglas fir, 

and western hemlock; 

on humus or soil; 

fruits in fall.

No/Yes Low; suitable 

habitat lacking 

within project 

area.

1

 Codes: "VP = vascular plant; "B" = bryophyte; "L" = lichen; "F" = fungus. 

No sensitive plant species are known to exist within the project area (Table 63), and all but three of the 

31 sensitive plant species that are documented or suspected to occur on Deschutes National Forest are 

considered to have a low probability of occurrence within the project area. Plant association types, in 

which two sensitive species are known to occur elsewhere on the Bend/Ft. Rock District, occur within 

the project area. 

Montane populations of Botrychium pumicola occurring in previously logged sites are typically in the 

lodgepole pine/bitterbrush/fescue plant association. This plant association represents about 10 percent 

of the project area and is included, at least in part, in 65 of the 200 proposed treatment units. 

Castilleja chlorotica is known to occur in the ponderosa pine/bitterbrush/needlegrass-pumice plant 

association. This plant association has been recognized on only 13 surveyed acres within the project 

area, and all within a single proposed treatment unit. Based on the acreage of these habitat types 

within the project area it is reasonable to anticipate that there is a high probability of occurrence of 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Sensitive Species 

200

Botrychium pumicola, and a low to moderate probability of occurrence of Castilleja chlorotica within 

the project area. 

Surveys conducted in 1990, 1998 and 2005, which targeted high-probability habitat for these species, 

resulted in no detections. Collectively, these surveys covered nearly 1,700 acres, including a high 

percentage of high-probability habitat for Botrychium pumicola, within the project area. 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Alternative 1 (No Action), Alternative 2 (Proposed Action), and Alternative 3 

Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects. No effects have been identified because no TES plants are 

known to occur within or closely adjacent to the project area. While abundant suitable habitat for 

Botrychium pumicola appears to occur within the project area, surveys within much of this habitat 

have failed to locate this species. And while this habitat may be regarded as potentially available for 

colonization by Botrychium pumicola, there appears to be little evidence to suggest that the activities 

proposed in this project will significantly alter the quality of this habitat (Powers, 2006). This project 

would have No Impact to any TES species. A summary of anticipated effects to TES species is 

presented in Appendix A of the Botany BE, page 18 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Invasive Species

201

BOTANY - INVASIVE SPECIES 

SUMMARY OF EFFECTS 

This project has a HIGH risk ranking for the introduction and spread of invasive plant species. 

Included mitigations will reduce, but not eliminate, the invasive plant species risk associated with this 

project. 

INTRODUCTION 

Aggressive, non-native, invasive plant species can displace native plant communities causing longlasting management problems. In displacing native vegetation, invasive plant species can 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. 

It should be noted that the terms "noxious weed" and "invasive plant species" are not, in current use, 

synonymous. The former term is used by the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) and is used in 

many older USDA/USFS documents. Not all non-native plants that are causing economic and/or 

ecological damage in the state of Oregon are listed in the ODA "Noxious Weed Index". Examples of 

damaging, non-native, non-listed plant species include cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) and ventenata 

grass (Ventenata dubia). The term "invasive plant species" is currently widely used to include all nonnative plant species currently causing, or capable of causing, local economic and/or ecological 

damage, regardless of their status on any particular state list. Invasive plant species known to occur on 

Deschutes National Forest are listed in Table 64, page 202. 

National Direction 

The Forest Service Manual 2080 (1995) requires that Noxious Weed Risk Assessments be prepared 

for any project that includes ground-disturbing activities. For projects anticipated to have a moderate 

to high risk of introducing or spreading noxious weeds, decision documents must identify noxious 

weed management measures that will be undertaken during project implementation. The Forest 

Service Guide to Noxious Weed Prevention Practices (2001) presents a large number of desirable 

weed prevention actions that should be evaluated for efficacy, and compatibility with project 

objectives, during the process of project planning. 

Regional Direction 

A USFS Region 6 Invasive Plant Program Record of Decision was signed in 2005. This ROD has 

forest-level significance as noted below. 

Forest Direction 

The Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (1990) includes limited general 

and specific directives regarding noxious weed management. The 1998 Deschutes National Forest 

Noxious Weed Control Environmental Assessment (EA) includes a Noxious Weed List, a 

supplemental Integrated Weed Management Plan (IWMP), and direction and authority for 

management of noxious weeds This EA and IWMP identify and promote specific actions to be 

associated the general weed management practices of prevention, early treatment, maintenance, and 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Invasive Species 

202

education. Associated products of this EA and IWMP included a formalized weed risk analysis 

process to be utilized during project planning, and a cooperative agreement with the Oregon 

Department of Agriculture for the application of herbicides at selected sites on Deschutes National 

Forest. Development of the Invasive Plant Treatments on Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests 

and Crooked River National Grassland Final EIS is in its final stages. This document is tiered to the 

2005 Region 6 Invasive Plant Program ROD. When implemented, the ROD of the former document 

will increase the number of treatment options for local invasive plant species. 

DESIRED FUTURE CONDITION 

The extent of non-native, invasive plant species would be in decline. Direction within the existing 

Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests and Crooked River National Grassland Invasive Plant EIS 

would allow effective treatment of existing sites and prompt treatment of newly discovered sites. 

Forest staff, contractors and recreationists would be aware of the primary importance of prevention as 

a means of limiting the spread of invasive plant species. 

EXISTING CONDITION 

Twenty three invasive plant species are known to occur on Deschutes National Forest. This list was 

extracted from the FEIS for Invasive Plant Treatments, Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests and 

Crooked River National Grassland (2007). 

Table 64: Invasive Plant Species Documented to Occur on Deschutes National Forest 

Species Common Name Code 

Cardaria pubescens hairy whitetop CAPU6 

Centaurea biebersteinii spotted knapweed CEBI2 

Centaurea diffusa diffuse knapweed CEDI3 

Centaurea solstitialis yellow star-thistle CESO3 

Cirsium arvense Canada thistle CIAR4 

Cirsium vulgare bull thistle CIVU 

Convolvulus arvensis field bindweed COAR4 

Cynoglossum officinale hound's tongue CYOF 

Cytisus scoparius Scotch broom CYSC4 

Elymus repens quackgrass ELRE4 

Euphorbia esula leafy spurge EUES 

Hypericum perforatum St. Johnswort HYPE 

Iris pseudacorus yellow flag iris IRPS 

Kochia scoparia kochia KOSC 

Linaria dalmatica Dalmatian toadflax LIDA 

Linaria vulgaris butter & eggs LIVU2 

Melilotus officinale yellow sweetclover MIOF 

Onopordum acanthium Scotch thistle ONAC 

Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass PHAR3 

Phalaris arundinacea var. picta ribbongrass PHARP 

Salsola kali Russian thistle SAKA 

Senecio jacobaea tansy ragwort SEJA 

Taeniatherum caput-medusae medusahead TACA8 

Review of a 2006 Forest invasive plants GIS layer indicates the presence of three invasive plant species 

within the project area. Information available in this GIS layer is included in Table 65. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Invasive Species

203

Table 65: Invasive Plant Species Present within Deadlog Project Boundary (Forest GIS) 

Site ID Location/Unit(S) Comments Gross Acres 

6110012CEBI2 In 77 At jct. 2268/2268-600 roads. 1.4 

6110094CEBI2 In 144 Along 2268-500 road, about 370 m 

SW of jct. w/ 2268 road. 

0.05 

6110254CEBI2 Not in unit Along 23 road, NE of jct. w/ 2325-330 

road. 

0.1 

6110369CEBI2 In 44,45 Along 2268-600 road, S of jct. w/ 

2269-465 road. 

0.1 

6110370CEBI2 In 41,45 Along 2268-600 road, between 2269-

410 and 2269-465 roads. 

0.1 

6110049CIAR4 Not in unit Along 2325-300 road, about 300 m E 

of jct. w/ 23 road. 

1.0 

6110201CIAR4 Not in unit Along 2325-300 road, about 150 m E 

of jct. w/ 23 road. 

1.0 

6110202CIAR4 Not in unit Immediately E of 2325-300 road, about 

350 m E of jct. with 23 road. 

1.0 

6110203CIAR4 Not in unit Along 2325-300 road, about 570 m SE 

of jct. w/ 23 road. 

1.0 

6110012CIVU In 77 At jct. 2268/2268-600 roads. 1.4 

6110025CIVU In 49,50 Along 22 road, shortly S of jct. w/ 

2268-660 road. 

3.5 

6110045CIVU Not in unit Along 2316 road, about 350 m NW of 

jct. w/ 2316-700 road. 

3.0 

6110048CIVU Not in unit Along 2269 road, about 350 m SW of 

jct. w/ 2269-300 road. 

1.4 

6110049CIVU Not in unit Along 2325-300 road, about 300 m E 

of jct. w/ 23 road. 

1.0 

Centaurea biebersteinii (CEBI2): Spotted knapweed and its close relative, diffuse knapweed (C. 

diffusa) are understood to be among the most abundant and aggressive invasive plants, in upland 

settings, on Deschutes National Forest. It is common, particularly on private land adjacent to the 

Forest, to see sites where communities composed of a mix of native and introduced plants have been 

displaced by near-monocultures of knapweed. Spotted knapweed lives for multiple years, dying back 

to a basal rosette of leaves each winter, and producing a more profuse and taller array of flowering 

branches with each successive year. Although tap-rooted, plants can be very resistant to hand-pulling, 

and plants recover well from incomplete removal of the tap root. Sites occupied for several years by 

large numbers of plants can have seed beds that will produce many new plants annually, for a decade 

or more, even if annual mechanical treatments prevent further fruit set at those sites. 

Cirsium arvense (CIAR4): Canada thistle is of particular concern at sites with high soil moisture 

levels during much of the growing season. The plant is commonly found in riparian zones, damp 

meadows and in or adjacent to wetlands of various types. Its spiny habit makes it difficult to treat 

manually, and its deep, creeping roots allow plants to persist even when the above-ground shoots have 

been pulled or cut. Rates of local spread and length of persistence at individual sites is not well 

documented. 

Cirsium vulgare (CIVU): Local observations over the past decade have led to the understanding that 

bull thistle is not long persistent at specific sites. Although this tap-rooted, biennial species may be 

quick to establish itself in very recently disturbed settings, it seems to be rather soon displaced by 

herbaceous natives. Occurrences of this species in the proximity of Sensitive plant species, or in highuse recreational areas are of concern, but occurrences elsewhere are not consistently recorded. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Invasive Species 

204

Wildfire, Burn Intensity and Weed Risk 

There is anecdotal evidence on Deschutes NF, that with the presence of pre-existing weed populations, 

wildfire tends to promote the spread of noxious weeds. At this time, it is assumed that weed risk 

increases in a direct relationship with burn intensity. The relationship between burn intensity and risk 

of introduction and/or spread of noxious weeds is not clearly documented on the Forest. While there 

may be a direct relationship between burn intensity and weed seed survivorship, it is currently 

assumed that this possible risk-lowering factor is more than offset by the increasing level of 

disturbance associated with increasing levels of burn intensity. As burn intensities increase, 

survivorship/cover of existing native vegetation declines, reducing, in turn, the effectiveness of local 

native plant species in their competition with invasive weed species. It is reasonable to predict an 

increased risk of spread of invasive plants species within burned areas due to 1) ground disturbance 

and loss/reduction of competitive native vegetation, 2) introduction or spread of weed seed from 

within or outside of the burned area, by vectors associated with fire suppression efforts and 3) 

introduction or spread of weed seed from within or outside of the project area, by project and nonproject-related vectors in the several years immediately subsequent to the fire. 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Forest Service Manual 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 measure that will be undertaken during project implementation (FSM 

2081.03.29; November 1995). 

Discussion of Ranking: This project has been given a HIGH risk ranking for the introduction and 

spread of noxious weeds because noxious weed sites exist adjacent to and within proposed treatment 

units in both action alternatives, and project operations will include the use of heavy equipment. 

Risk Ranking: Deschutes National Forest has developed a standardized noxious weed risk 

assessment process to be conducted as a part of the project planning process. Risk rankings are based 

on the following sets of criteria. 

 High Risk results if: 

1. Known weeds in or adjacent to project area. 

2. Any of vector #s 1-8 in project area. 

3. Project operations in or adjacent to weed sites. 

 Moderate Risk results if: 

1. Any of vector #s 1-5 are present in project area. 

 Low Risk results if: 

1. Any of vector #s 6-8 present in project area, 

OR 

2. Known weeds present in or adjacent to project area, even if vectors lacking. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Invasive Species

205

Vectors ranked in order of weed introduction/spread risk: 

1. Heavy equipment (implied ground disturbance). 

2. Importing soil/cinders/gravel. 

3. Use by OHVs. 

4. Grazing (long-term disturbance). 

5. Pack animals (short-term disturbance) 

6. Plant restoration. 

7. Use by recreationists. 

8. Presence of USFS project vehicles. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Under this alternative, no actions would be taken that would directly 

promote the spread of noxious weeds. It is reasonable to anticipate that no action within the project 

area would leave the included plant communities at least somewhat more susceptible to intense and 

extensive wildfire within the near future (0-20 years). As noted earlier, wildfire is associated with its 

own set of actions and consequences that promote the introduction and spread of noxious weeds. It is 

anticipated that the plant communities would experience a reduced level of disturbance (soils, native 

plants) if subjected to wildfire. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

While minor differences in type and extent of treatments exist between Alternatives 2 and 3, each 

alternative is similar with regard to both the type and extent of principal ground disturbing and weedvectoring activities, as well as total acres of disturbance. The level of weed risk posed by each 

alternative is also similar. 

Direct and Indirect Effects: With no consideration of the potential for, and possible effects of, 

wildfire in the project area in the near future (0-20 years), it is anticipated that the Action alternatives, 

relative to the No Action alternative, pose the greater risk of introduction and spread of invasive plant 

species. When wildfire is considered, the relative weed risk associated with the No Action and Action 

alternatives becomes rather ambiguous, as discussed below. 

The vegetation management activities proposed in the action alternatives would result in soil 

disturbance and a reduction in native vegetative cover and litter. These habitat alterations would 

potentially promote establishment of invasive plant species. The heavy equipment used in affecting 

these habitat alterations would, locally at least, cause a high risk of inadvertent dispersal of any 

existing weed propagules within the project area. The mitigation measures and project design criteria 

will reduce, but not eliminate weed risks associated with this project. 

Cumulative Effects: The noxious weed sites that are documented within the project boundary are 

relatively few and small in area. There are no documented noxious weed sites within a two mile 

perimeter beyond the project area boundary and very few sites within a six-mile perimeter. This is 

likely due to several factors, including the dryness of the area, its remoteness, and possibly special 

features, which probably has long been associated with relatively low visitation by both agency staff 

and the public. While past, present and future activities can be identified (Table 66), the rate, scale, 

and intensity likely provide a relatively low rate and area of ground disturbance. This provides a low 

level of opportunities for introduction and spread of noxious weeds and invasive plant species in 

general. Cattle grazing may represent one of the most persistent and significant local causes of ground 

disturbance and spread of weeds. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Botany – Invasive Species 

206

Table 66: Potential Sources of Cumulative Weed Effects for the Deadlog Project 

Activity/Project Action Description General Effects 

KO Timber Sale 

Reforestation maintenance 

Fence Maintenance or removal and Big 

Game Repellant application. Dwarf 

Mistletoe control Pruning and Girdling. 

Relatively minor ground 

disturbance. Relatively low 

volume opportunities for 

vectoring of weed propagules. 

Wildlife Improvement 

Maintenance 

Guzzler maintenance on two guzzlers. Relatively intense, but localized 

ground disturbance may be 

associated with dense 

occurrences of cheatgrass which, 

in turn, is available for vectoring 

to outlying areas by wildlife and 

cattle. 

Cluster II Grazing 

allotment EA 2006.-

Grazing allotment 

Maintenance and 

Improvement 

Fence Repair, Fence building, Water 

sets, Cattle Grazing, waterline 

installation and maintenance 

Cattle appear to be particularly 

effective agents of localized 

ground disturbance and vectoring 

of invasive plant species. 

Aspen Project Fuels 

Treatments 

Adjacent to planning area Machine 

Shrub treatment and thinning 

Low to moderate local ground 

disturbance. Moderate to high 

level of opportunity for local 

weed vectoring (perhaps 

particularly for cheatgrass). 

Road Maintenance Ongoing road maintenance. Danger tree 

removal, roadside brushing, drainage 

repair, spot surfacing. 

Low to high levels ground 

disturbance. Moderate to high 

probability of linear vectoring of 

weed propagules, both by road 

maintenance machinery and other 

vehicular traffic. 

Green Dot road Closure Administrative closure of roads Hunting 

season 

Temporary but annually recurring 

reduction of opportunity for 

vectoring of current season's 

weed propagules. 

Opal mine Opal mine operations on mine claim 

including camping site. 

Continuing ground disturbance 

and opportunities for vectoring 

locally established weeds. 

Travel Management Travel Management EIS possible 

signature within 2 years. Shared use 

roads. 

Planned reduction in miles of 

road available for recreational use 

should reduce opportunities for 

introduction and spread of 

invasive plant species. 

BPA power line 

Maintenance 

Power line maintenance within right of 

way includes mowing of brush and 

seedlings and scattered tree and snag 

removal. Outside of the right of way 

individual hazard trees would also be 

removed. Cycle varies 3 - 5 years. 

Regularly recurring, low to high 

levels of ground disturbance with 

moderate to high probability of 

linear vectoring of any existing 

weeds. No noxious weeds 

currently documented along 

power line route adjacent to 

project area. Cheatgrass likely to 

be present. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Roads 

207

FOREST ROADS 

SUMMARY 

The Deadlog EA area encompasses several previous and recent planning areas. The road system 

within the planning area is above the minimum necessary to meet Forest objectives. The total “open 

road” density for this planning area is 4.77 miles per square mile. 

Roads categorized as maintenance level 1 (Closed roads blocked to all traffic) would be utilized as 

necessary to support project needs. Danger tree reduction would be in accordance to FSM (Forest 

Service Manual) 7733. Upon project completion these roads would be returned to level 1 status and 

condition for future needs. Road closure and decommissioning is proposed within the project area. 

DEADLOG ROAD CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

One-third (33 percent) of the open roads within the project area are proposed for closure or 

decommissioning. Table 67 provides a summary of the Deadlog project area Forest road system, preand post-analysis.

Table 67: Deadlog Road Summary 

Deadlog Road Summary 

Deadlog Project Area (Acres) 16,055.000 

Deadlog Project Area (Square Miles) 25.086 

Arterial Roads (Miles) 10.336 

Collector Roads (Miles) 11.989 

Local Roads (Miles) 97.727 

Closed Roads (Miles) 2.480 

Total Deadlog Road Miles 120.052 

Total Deadlog Open Road Miles, Pre-Analysis 117.572 

Pre-Analysis Miles per Square Mile 4.687

Road Miles Proposed for Closure 17.421 

Road Miles Proposed for Decommissioning 21.490 

Total Open Road Miles, Post-Analysis 78.664 

Post-Analysis Miles per Square Mile 3.136

 Forest Service Collector System Roads 

Forest Service Collector Roads, 39.78 miles, were analyzed in the Forest Wide Roads Analysis. The 

need and degree of general maintenance to accommodate use is more extensive. Most of these roads 

would need routine maintenance. Road work related maintenance items along these routes shall 

consist of; roadside brushing, ditch cleaning, reclaiming of clearing limits for site distance, and falling 

danger trees along traveled routes bordering and within this project boundary. Danger trees which are 

felled would be removed to avoid additional fuel loading and help reduce the potential of intensifying 

fire effects, in addition to providing defensible space along these main travel corridors. Danger tree 

reduction would be in accordance to FSM (Forest Service Manual) 7733. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Roads 

208

 Forest Service Local Roads 

Local roads are, in general, routes that are mostly native surfaced and receive limited maintenance. 

Within this project there are 101.02 miles of this type of road. This type of road would receive a very 

limited amount of additional work to support this project. Maintenance items shall consist of that 

necessary to sustain this road during the life of the project. As this project nears completion it is 

highly recommended that these roads receive the adequate amount of maintenance to achieve a state to 

be self-maintaining. Construction and restoration of drainage and drainage structures (Rolling Dips, 

Waterbars and leadouts) are a critical element 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. Danger tree reduction would be in accordance to FSM (Forest Service Manual) 7733. 

 Road Closure and Decommissioning

A project level roads analysis was completed to determine access needs within the project area. Table 

68 summarizes proposed Forest road closure and decommissioning miles. Table 4 page 33, Table 5, 

page 33, and Figure 12 page 34 display proposed road closure and decommissioning. As displayed in 

Table 67, the open road density would be reduced from approximately 4.7 to 3.1 miles per square 

mile. 

Table 68: Deadlog - Forest Roads Closure and Decommissioning 

Activity Road Miles 

Forest Roads Proposed for Closure 17.42 

Forest Roads Proposed for Decommissioning 21.48 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Normal maintenance activities that include road blading, shaping, and 

drainage activities and hazard tree removal would continue. Usual Forest access would continue to be 

provided for both federal management activities and historical use of public activities. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Open road miles would be decreased through road closures and 

decommissioning. Approximately 17.4 miles of road would be closed and 21.5 miles of road would 

be decommissioned. There would be no new permanent road construction. The most economical and 

effective method for road inactivation that meets management objectives would be used for closure of 

temporary roads. Road reconstruction and maintenance activities would occur under both action 

alternatives. These activities would include, cutting hazard trees adjacent to identified roads and haul 

routes. Road reconstruction activities would restore proper drainage to the road template and improve 

road surface conditions where identified as deficient. 

Roads that are proposed for closure, Table 4, page 33, and decommissioning, Table 5, page 33, would 

be closed or decommissioned following completion of vegetation treatments. 

The closure and decommissioning of roads would reduce access for Forest management activities and 

historical public uses. Access for camping and hunting sites would be limited to non-motorized in 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Roads 

209

those areas where public motorized access has been discontinued. Use of areas with historical 

camping sites, that are no longer accessible, would likely shift to other areas that are similar in terrain, 

vegetation, and previous accessibility. 

Cumulative Effects: The Travel Management EIS will provide direction regarding public use of 

Forest roads. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Recreation 

210

RECREATION 

INRODUCTION

The public uses the Deadlog planning area primarily for dispersed recreation use, such as big game 

hunting, camping, OHV riding, and driving for pleasure. There are no developed recreation facilities 

in the project area. 

EXISTING CONDITION 

Statistically valid use figures for dispersed recreation are unavailable since there are no fees charged, 

or any other methods used to track use. Dispersed campsites have not been inventoried for this 

project, though it is known that many dispersed hunter camps exist throughout the planning area. 

Based on observation by Forest Service staff, use levels are relatively stagnant in the Deadlog project 

area. Dispersed campers and day use visitation is much lower in this area of the forest. Even with the 

population and popularity of central Oregon continuing to rise, it is unlikely there will be a noteworthy 

increase in the recreation use in this area. This is likely because of the location, lack of facilities, 

water bodies, and amount and variety of available recreation activities. The area does provide 

opportunities for solitude and quiet. 

Long-time users of the area are generally made up of La Pine area residents. They prefer the lack of 

management or facilities development. They favor the freedom to choose campsites and picnic areas 

or they have traditional campsites or areas that they frequent at various times of the year. 

Most visitors come to this area to hunt big game, but roads within the project area provide access for a 

variety of other activities, such as: driving for pleasure, 4-wheel driving, forest product gathering, and 

wildlife viewing. Maintaining open roads is a strong desire with many of the publics that frequent this 

area of the forest. 

Dispersed camping is very popular in the project area, especially in the fall during big game hunting 

seasons. Most dispersed sites are located off Forest roads in the interior of the planning area, although 

some occur along major travel routes. Most sites are in areas of large ponderosa pine overstory. A 

majority of the sites are large, providing for families or group camping opportunities. 

Use at some of these sites has resulted in sanitation problems, soil compaction, and a loss or 

degradation of vegetation. This is caused primarily by: user-created roads and trails, pit toilet 

development, use of vegetation for firewood and other camp use (construction of furniture, lean-tos, 

etc.). 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Alternative 1 (No Action)

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative would continue current management practices and 

policies. Recreation opportunities would remain relatively unchanged. No actions are proposed to 

close, restrict, relocate, or rehabilitate roads within the project area under this alternative. Existing 

campsites and roads (including user-created) would continue to be utilized and/or developed. Use and 

overuse of some dispersed campsites could change the condition or site character of some. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Recreation

211

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: In general, the amount of road closures being proposed reduces driving 

opportunities for sightseeing and other activities. There would continue to be many driving 

opportunities for motorists and access would continue for fire crews. Even though proposed closures 

would eliminate motor vehicle access to areas that were once available to the public, access would 

continue to be available via another open road or horseback, hiking, or biking. This would likely to 

result in some visitor dissatisfaction. The overall effect to the public is that there would be fewer 

roads to drive. Road closures would likely be disregarded by some campers and recreationists who are 

accustomed to few or no use restrictions, or want to continue to access areas used in the past. 

Closing roads, other than temporary closures during hunting season, which provide access to dispersed 

campsites, would likely change the camping opportunity for some. Road closures could lead to an 

increase in competition for the remaining campsites or camp areas that are accessible. Most road 

closures are roads that are not heavily used or are not necessary for regular administrative use. Most 

heavily used campsites would not be impacted. 

Those campers and other recreationists that frequent the affected sites on a regular basis (i.e. at least 

one visit per year) would likely be inconvenienced. For motor vehicle campers that would be 

displaced from specific sites, it is likely they would take one of the following actions: 

 Utilize campsites that remain accessible. 

 Develop new sites and access roads in other areas. 

 Breach road closures to access campsites. 

 Camp and recreate at another location other than this area. 

Improvements for dispersed campsites that would be associated with closing roads would be: 

 Reduced impacts (erosion, pollutants, trampling, rutting) to vegetation and soil resources by 

defining travel routes. 

Vegetation treatments would likely have a short-term (3 to 10 years) effect to the visual quality of the 

treatment areas adjacent to dispersed campsites. Slash piles would be burned when optimal burning 

conditions arise. Post-burn visual conditions could include tree scorch and evidence of burning of 

shrubs. Shrub mowing would be evidenced until the shrubs regain height and vigor. Mowing and 

prescribed burning for maintenance would likely provide the same effect, likely with less scorch to 

trees. 

Cumulative Effects: Table 69 summarizes the cumulative effects to the recreation resource of other 

activities within or near the project area. 

Table 69: Cumulative Effects to the Recreation Resource for the Deadlog Project 

Deadlog – Recreation – Cumulative Effects 

Activity/ Project Action Description General Effects 

KO Timber Sale Plantation Fence Maintenance and removal and Big 

Game Repellant application. Dwarf Mistletoe control 

activities (pruning and girdling). Past harvest and 

thinning. 

N/A 

Wildlife Improvement 

Maintenance 

Maintenance on three wildlife guzzlers. N/A 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Recreation 

212

Deadlog – Recreation – Cumulative Effects 

Activity/ Project Action Description General Effects 

Cluster II Grazing 

Allotment. Grazing 

allotment Maintenance 

and Improvement 

Grazing, fence maintenance, water sets, waterline 

repair and reconstruction. 

N/A 

Aspen Project Vegetation 

Treatments 

Within approximately 2 miles of the project 

boundary. Prescribed burns, mowing, and thinning of 

plantations – In progress 

N/A 

Road Maintenance Ongoing road maintenance. Danger tree removal, 

roadside brushing, drainage repair, spot surfacing. 

N/A 

Green Dot road Closure Administrative closure of roads during hunting season N/A. On-going program 

that’s been in effect and 

accepted for many years. 

Opal mine Located in SW portion of Quartz Mountain. Active 

annually. Includes camp site. 

N/A 

Travel Management Travel Management EIS possible signature within 2 

years. Shared use roads. 

Dispersed campsites 

would remain accessible. 

Project road closures and 

decommissioning could 

affect camping 

opportunities. 

BPA power line 

Maintenance 

Power line maintenance every 3-5 years, including 

mowing brush and seedlings and scattered tree and 

snag removal. Removing trees that are a potential 

hazard to power lines.. 

N/A 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Scenic

213

SCENIC 

INTRODUCTION 

The project area is located on the southeastern flank of Newberry National Volcanic Monument. The 

most prominent feature with an elevation of 6,160 feet is Quartz Mountain. There are several other 

buttes within the project area including Dry Butte, Deadlog, Sixteen, No Name Butte, Dry, and Rogers 

Butte. This area is predominantly ponderosa pine with some lodgepole and dry mixed conifer. 

Located on the east portion of the project area are approximately 90 acres within the Scenic Views 

Management Area (LRMP, MA 9). These 90 acres are classified as Medium Scenic Integrity

(formerly partial retention) in the Scenery Management System (SMS). 

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION 

The USDA Forest Service developed a Handbook for Scenery Management System (SMS--USDA FS 

1995) to use to protect and enhance scenic resources which may be diminished by human activities, 

such as vegetation management, recreation and/or administrative facility development. The analysis 

takes into consideration the balance between Social (human) and Ecological (natural) needs within the 

analysis area. 

The Forest Service implementing regulations currently establish a variety of Scenic Integrity Levels 

for Scenic Views—MA 9. These standards include: 

 Natural Appearing Landscape with High Scenic Integrity Level (formerly Retention) 

 Slightly Altered Landscape with Medium Scenic Integrity Level (formerly Partial Retention) 

 Altered Landscape with Low Scenic Integrity Level (formerly Modification) 

Foreground areas cover a viewing distance zone up to 1⁄2 mile. Middleground areas cover a distance of 

0.5 to 5 miles. 

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 (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. 

Usually, the most effective way to meet Scenic Integrity Levels is to repeat visual form, line, color, 

texture, pattern, and scale common to the scenic values of the landscape character being viewed. For 

example, in natural and natural appearing landscapes, deviations such as created openings can 

sometimes be visually enhanced through repetition of size, shape, spacing, surface color, edge effect, 

and pattern of natural openings common to the existing landscape character. 

LRMP – Scenic Views – Management Area 9 

Objectives (LRMP, page 4-121): 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 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Scenic 

214

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. 

M9-4: Ponderosa pine in Foreground Scenic Views MA areas will be managed to maintain or create a 

visual mosaic of numerous, large diameter, yellow-barked trees with stands of younger trees offering 

visual diversity and a sense of depth in landscapes viewed from travel routes, recreation use areas and 

other sensitive viewer locations. Old growth characteristics, such as yellow, deeply fissured bark are 

desirable. Diversity in species, where biologically possible, is desirable. Species such as vine maple, 

aspen and occasional stands of fir or lodgepole pine are desirable for added visual interest. Small, 

natural-appearing open spaces help provide a sense of depth and are a desirable visual component in 

these landscapes. 

In Partial Retention areas management activities may be noticeable to the casual forest visitor. 

However, visual changes will not be so obvious as to dominate a particular portion of a landscape. 

Any area that does not meet the desired visual condition because of past management activities should 

be reviewed by a landscape architect to determine management strategies needed to achieve the 

desired visual condition. 

M9-5: Where there is an existing mosaic of tree sizes, size class diversity will be perpetuated by 

managing some of the trees within each size class. Where visual diversity is lacking, diversity will be 

gradually introduced to ultimately produce the desired mosaic. Although the numbers of trees will 

change through time, those stands that currently have a large number of large-diameter, yellow-barked 

trees will continue to have large numbers of the same trees. In order to accomplish this, trees may be 

removed where necessary to: 

 Perpetuate the desired visual condition Control insect and disease problems. 

 Create vista points or enhance a unique landscape feature, such as a rock outcrop or unique 

vegetation. 

 Provide for safety along travel routes and in recreation use areas. 

 Provide access for special uses, mineral activities, and administrative purposes. 

M9-6: Management emphasis will focus on leaving the largest diameter trees and the healthiest 

crowns and forms in every stand. Visual variety will be provided by leaving occasional gnarly, old, 

overmature 'character trees'. 

M9-7: Any proposed activity in Foregrounds will be reviewed by a landscape architect. An analysis 

will be developed by the landscape architect to determine: 

 What treatment is necessary to achieve or retain the desired visual condition. 

 If cleanup activities can realistically be completed within the specified time limits. 

 Where existing pockets of dead and dying trees should be enlarged to produce the desire 

visual condition of small, natural-appearing open spaces. 

 What measures may be necessary to meet the desired visual condition, such as winter logging, 

special slash treatment, etc. 

 What the predicted visual condition will be following the activity. 

M9-8: In Partial Retention areas, logging residue or other results of management activities will not be 

obvious to the casual forest visitor two years following the activity. Thinnings and other tree removal 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Scenic

215

practices will be done to maintain species diversity, and to promote the health and visibility of larger 

old growth trees. 

M9-42: The management emphasis in middleground and background will focus on maintaining or 

creating a continuous tree canopy while providing species and size class diversity. 

M9-43: Except for routine sanitation/salvage treatments, proposed activities in middleground and 

background will be reviewed by a landscape architect. 

M9-51: On this forest, older lodgepole pine stands normally lack visual diversity. They do not have 

diversity in size class, and rarely have other species growing among the older lodgepole pines. 

Because their crowns are relatively small, and the older trees tend to have a deteriorating appearance, 

management emphasis in lodgepole pine foregrounds will not be to produce large diameter, older 

trees. Instead, the emphasis will be on managing healthier, fuller crowned, younger trees. 

Diversity in size classes, and the presence of natural-appearing openings that appear to rotate through 

time as younger stands grow up, will permit “depth” in these foreground landscapes. Instead of the 

traditional “wall” of mature lodgepole along travel routes and adjacent to recreation use areas, younger 

lodgepole stands will eventually replace the older mature trees to create a transitional effect. The 

viewer will be able to see back into the forest without having the feeling of driving through an 

unsightly clearcut. 

Many of the mature and overmature lodgepole stands on the Forest have been heavily impacted by the 

ongoing mountain pine beetle epidemic. Some landscapes have been severely changed as a result of 

catastrophic losses due to mountain pine beetles. 

M9-52: In mature stands of pure lodgepole pine, it will not be possible to meet the Retention visual 

quality standard during all phases of treatment. 

M9-53: To produce or perpetuate the desired visual condition through time, lodgepole pine stands may 

require frequent treatment, Pre-commercial thinnings and other tree removal practices will be done to 

achieve size class and species diversity, and to promote full, healthy crowns in younger trees and to 

provide larger-scale diversity through a mosaic of size classes throughout a landscape. 

M9-56: For scenic lodgepole pine, management emphasis will focus on achieving and maintaining a 

condition where trees have healthy crowns and natural forest debris is controlled. 

M9-58: In Medium Scenic Integrity Foreground areas, logging residue or other results of management 

activities will not be obvious to the casual forest visitor two years following the activity. 

M9-64: On the Forest, options to manage lodgepole stands for long periods of time are limited by the 

time lodgepole stands reach approximately 80 to 100 years of age. Increased susceptibility to insects 

and diseases normally requires a regeneration treatment to maintain these landscapes in a healthy 

appearance. Because the life expectancy for these trees is relatively short, more acres will be in a 

recently-regenerated appearance at any single point in time. 

M9-86: Landscapes seen from selected travel routes and use areas will be managed to maintain or 

enhance their appearance. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Scenic 

216

DESIRED CONDITION 

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. 

The desired visual condition is a mosaic of even-aged stands with additional visual diversity provided 

by occasional groups of other tree and shrub species. Natural-appearing openings of varying sizes are 

desirable. Whenever biologically feasible, the re-introduction of Ponderosa pine in stands that have 

reverted to pure lodgepole pine is also desirable. 

EXISTING CONDITION 

This is considered a more remote location with few recreational amenities and fewer visitors than 

other parts of the Bend/Fort Rock District. It is an ideal place for those wanting to be away from 

crowds and any recreational development. Activities such as hunting and dispersed camping are 

common as well as riding of off-road motorized vehicles. Wildlife viewing and sightseeing also occur 

here. 

Most of the views in this project area are from the road. There are some buttes offering some 

topographical interest although nothing very extreme, in terms of elevation changes, occur here. To 

those seeking solitude and connecting with nature, the views from Road 23 would be important in the 

Scenic Views portion located in the east portion of the project area. 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Views from the road would have no short-term impacts due to natural 

vegetation changes occurring over time. Any dramatic short-term changes affecting scenic views 

would be due to unforeseen situations caused by fire, insects, and disease. Long-term impacts would 

also be naturally occurring. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: The proposed vegetation treatments would have no negative impacts on 

scenic views from travel routes in the Scenic Views Management Area. Although treatments would 

most likely be visible from the roads, neutral of positive, there would be no changes that would create 

a distraction from the surrounding characteristic landscape of the area. 

Cumulative Effects: There would be no cumulative effects to Scenic Views (M9) as a result of 

treatment activities. None of the actions listed in Table 12, page 55 of Chapter 3 would have a 

cumulative effect with proposed project activities in regards to M9. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Water and Fisheries

217

WATER/FISHERIES RESOURCES 

INTRODUCTION: 

The project area is within the Devils Garden (HUC 1712000507) and Badlands (HUC 1707030506) 

5th field watersheds. 

MANAGEMENT DIRECTION: 

INFISH: The project area is east of the owl line, and lies within the management area of the Inland 

Native Fish Strategy (INFISH), which amended the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource 

Management Plan in 1995. 

EXISTING CONDITION 

There are no lakes, ponds, reservoirs, riparian areas, wetlands, perennial streams, or intermittent 

streams within or adjacent to the project area. There are no known ephemeral streams within or 

adjacent to the project area. Paulina Creek, approximately 16 miles northwest of the project area, and 

East Lake, approximately 13 miles northwest, are the nearest waterbodies. There are no Oregon 

Department of Environmental Quality 303(d) listed streams or lakes within or immediately adjacent to 

the project area. There are no fish populations within or immediately adjacent to, the project area. 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES: 

There would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to surface water resources, fisheries, 

wetlands, and riparian areas from the No Action or any of the action alternatives as these resources are 

not found within the project area. Evapotranspiration rates would be reduced as a result of vegetation 

management activities but there would be no measurable effects to groundwater. There would be no 

effects to Essential Fish Habitat from any alternative. 

There would be no effects to any ODEQ 303(d) listed waterbodies, since there would be no effects to 

water resources. 

RIPARIAN MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES COMPLIANCE 

Since there are no known stream systems within the project area, there would be no effects to the 

Riparian Management Objectives listed under INFISH. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Economic Efficiency 

218

ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY 

INTRODUCTION 

Although the past decade has seen a significant reduction in employment within the lumber and wood 

products industry, the industry is still an important contributor to the local economies. In 1999 in 

Crook County 1,510 people were employed in the lumber and wood products industry and in 

Deschutes County 4,770 people. 

Over the last 10 years, an annual average of approximately 68.2 MMBF of timber has been sold from 

the Deschutes National Forest. In the near future, the amount of timber offered for sale is expected to 

be near this annual average. The Deschutes National Forest 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. 

Forest Service Handbooks 1909.17 and 2409.18 direct the evaluation of Economic Efficiency for 

proposed projects. To assess economic efficiency of Alternatives 2 and 3, the anticipated timber 

volumes and costs were entered into TEA.ECON, a spreadsheet developed by the Forest Service to 

assess economic efficiency. The analysis can be used to compare alternatives, not to give an absolute 

number for the outputs. Numbers useful for comparing alternatives include a benefit/cost ratio, 

discounted benefits, discounted costs, and present net value. Effects on the local economy include 

estimated number of jobs created or maintained. 

This analysis does not place a value on indirect benefits which may occur (such as increased future 

yields resulting from reduced stocking and reduced risk of stand replacing wildfire). Other amenity 

values, such as dispersed recreation or wildlife habitat, were included in the discussion, though the 

actual values were not developed. Table 70 displays some of the activities which are proposed and 

used in the financial efficiency analysis. 

Table 70: Comparison of Activities by Alternative 

Action Alternative 1 

(No Action) 

Alternative 2 

(Proposed Action) 

Alternative 3 

Commercial Thin (Acres) 0 7,339 6,660 

Logging Systems (acres) 

Ground-Based 0 6,919 6,660 

Skyline 0 420 0 

Biomass removal 0 0 1,321 

Fuels Reduction (Acres) 0 10,593 11,235 

MST 5,874 6,668 

Piling -hand 0 2,334 1,691 

Piling -grapple 0 5,061 6,114 

Lop & Scatter 0 765 928 

Prescriptive Burning 0 8,912 9,443 

Precommercial Thinning (Acres) 7,985 8,586 

Sub Soiling (Acres) 0 413 465 

Reforestation Surveys (Acres) 0 489 157 

Road Management (Miles) 

Temporary Road Construction 0 14.8 15.3 

Road Closure 0 17.4 17.4 

Road Decommissioning 0 21.5 21.5 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Economic Efficiency

219

The volume of timber removed (Table 70, page 218) in this project is the only source of positive cash 

flow. Timber is not the only benefit to be gained from the project. The value of the benefits of other 

activities has not been determined. Volumes were estimated using stand exams of representative 

stands by prescription. Volumes by prescription were averaged and applied to the acreages for each 

prescription. Volumes are merchantable volume and do not include possible biomass or non saw 

timber volume. The cost of cable systems analysis is covered under the heading CABLE LOGGING 

ANALYSIS. 

Biomass removal acreages represent plantations where biomass may be removed and stands which 

contain a large component of trees to be removed less than seven inches. Biomass removal on these 

units may occur at the same time as timber harvest or later so the cost calculation is left out of the 

project as a whole. Analysis of biomass removal is discussed under BIOMASS ANALYSIS. 

COST ANALYSIS 

The cost analysis considers all costs (expenditure costs) through the stage of processing, at which the 

benefits are valued or environmental effects are achieved. When evaluating differences in costs 

(logging, transport, and other access costs of forest users) all costs do not need to be included unless 

differences in costs are incorporated into output values. An emphasis is made on variable costs, which 

differ among the alternatives being considered and affecting the decision process. Costs are assigned 

to each treatment or activity. These include costs of all specific inputs, and include labor supplies, 

equipment, fuel, and other expenditures. Forest service costs for overhead and administration are 

developed on the forest level and used in all projects. 

Logging Costs 

Logging costs to the purchaser were developed using logcost100.xls, Updated 10/08 (Rheinberger, 

2008) (http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/fp/FPWebPage/FP70104A/Programs.htm). It is a stump-to-truck 

costing program (cost per CCF, MBF, Tons). This program includes costing routines for skyline, 

tractor, mechanized, loader (shovel), and helicopter yarding systems. The spreadsheet is capable of 

estimating costs for individual harvest units and by logging system. The outputs generated the costs 

per hundred cubic feet (CCF) for each prescription type and logging type to remove the material. The 

following table shows the average cost per CCF to get timber to the road by system for each action 

alternative. 

Table 71: Logging Cost per CCF by Logging System and Alternative (Stump to truck) 

Logging System Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Alternative 3 

Cost per CCF Volume 

(CCF) 

Cost per CCF Volume 

(CCF) 

Skyline $151.30 4,242 NA NA 

Ground- based $88.23 57,067 $88.15 58,403 

Average/Total $92.59 61,309 $88.15 58,403 

Costs incurred by the Forest Service and expected to be incurred by the purchaser of the commercial 

portions of this project are included in the costs for logging, Table 72. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Economic Efficiency 

220

Table 72: Forest Service and Purchaser Timber related costs 

Cost Description Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 

Costs 

Alternative 3 

Costs 

Planning NEPA $10.45 $10.45 

Sale Preparation $10.18 $10.18 

Sale Administration $5.36 $5.36 

Stump to Truck $88.23/$151.30 $88.15 

Log Haul $28.66 $28.66/ 14.26 

Road Maintenance $8.65 $8.65 

BD $3.96 $3.96 

Temp Road 

con/decommission 

$3.60 $3.93 

Discount Rate 4.0% 4.0% 

Non-Logging Costs 

Additional costs of activities which with the timber sale are intended to meet the resource objectives of 

the project. These are considered non-timber costs since they are not part of logging but are tied to the 

desire to manage stands and fuels to levels which meet resource objectives. These include: 

 Fuels Treatments which will reduce the potential fuels loadings to levels where prescribed fire and 

natural fire processes can develop. These include: 

o Grapple piling and burning (on ground-based harvest units) with machinery along skid 

trails. 

o Hand piling and burning of slash in treated units. 

o Mechanical Shrub treatment of brush and surface fuels with mowing type machinery. 

o Ladder Fuels Reduction LFR cutting of small diameter trees. 

o Lop and scatter of LFR or precommercial thinned trees. 

o Under burning of natural and created surface fuels. 

 Reforestation monitoring of overstory removal and shelterwood treatments to ensure prescription 

meets reforestation standards. 

 Precommercial thinning of plantations and understory trees in harvest units. 

 Road closure and decommissioning of roads not needed following activities. 

 Subsoiling of landings, temporary roads, main skid trails and road decommissioning in units and 

roads designated to reduce detrimental soil conditions and increase soil productivity 

The following table identifies the costs used which include overhead assessments. These are nontimber projects and activities: 

Table 73: Non logging Treatment Costs 

Activity Cost Unit of Measurement 

Fuels Treatments 

Piling- Grapple $317 Per acre 

Piling- Hand $552 Per acre 

Lop & Scatter $92 Per acre 

Whip falling $199 Per acre 

LFR $199 Per acre 

MST $166 Per acre 

Underburning $479 Per acre 

Precommercial Thinning $178 Per acre 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Economic Efficiency

221

Activity Cost Unit of Measurement 

Road Closure $500 Each 

Sub soiling $210 Per acre 

Reforestation surveys $21 Per acre 

Economic Comparison 

Table 74: Summary of economic efficiency analysis 

Economic Measure Alternative 1 (No Action) Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

Benefits 

Acres of Commercial Harvest 0 6,919 acres 6,660 acres 

Volume Total (CCF) 

Saw Timber (CCF) 

Saw Timber (MBF) 

0 

0 

61,309 

49,047 

24,523 

58,403 

46,722 

23,361 

Discounted Benefits 1 $0 $671,314.00 $610,311.00 

Costs 

Environmental Analysis $600,000.00 $640,679.00 $610,311.00 

Sale Preparation $0.00 $624,125.00 $594,542.00 

Sale Administration $0.00 $328,616.00 $294,935.00 

Regeneration Surveys $0.00 $10,269.00 $3,297.00 

Discounted Timber Sale Costs $600,000.00 ($1,582,769.00) ($1,502,614.00) 

 

Sale Area Projects 

Subsoiling $0.00 $39,235.00 $44,175.00 

Pre-commercial thinning $0.00 $1,026,170.00 $850,128.00 

Road Decommissioning $0.00 $52,500.00 $52,500.00 

Road Closure $0.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 

 Fuels Treatments 

Underburning $0.00 $4,268,848.00 $4,523,197.00 

Lop & Scatter $0.00 $67,160.00 $82,156.00 

Mechanical Shrub Treatment $0.00 $977,740.00 $1,109,544.00 

Ladder Fuel Reduction $0.00 $423,671.00 $756,996.00 

Hand piling $0.00 $1,263,528.00 $933,432.00 

Grapple piling $0.00 $1,615,432.00 $1,949,233.00 

Sale area Improvement and 

Discounted Fuels Costs 

($7,239,065.00) ($7,619,740.00) 

Total Discounted Costs 1 $600,000.00 $8,821,834.00 $9,121,354.00 

 

Summary 

Benefit/Cost Ratio 1 without 

fuels treatments 

0 0.42 0.42 

Benefit/Cost Ratio 1 with fuels 

treatments 

0 0.08 0.07 

Present Net Value 1 without fuels 

treatment 

0 ($911,455.00) ($872,059.00) 

Present Net Value 1 ($600,000.00) ($8,150,520.00) ($8,490,799.00) 

Jobs maintained or created 2 0 294 278 

Estimated Employee Income 3 0 $9,352,434.00 $8,843,458.00 1

 Assumes 4% discount rate. 

2

 Calculated using figures for the Deschutes National Forest from Appendix B-5 of the FY 1997 Timber Sale Program 

Annual Report. Excluding firewood from the volume harvested on the Deschutes National Forest, an estimated 9.6 jobs per 

million board feet were maintained or created. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Economic Efficiency 

222

3

 Derived by multiplying (a) the number of jobs maintained or created by (b) $31,811, the average 1999 salary in Central 

Oregon for lumber and wood products jobs. Source of salary information: Oregon Covered Employment & Payrolls by 

County and Industry, Oregon Employment Department, and US Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

The economic analysis of the project which compares economic features such as Present Net Benefits, 

Present Net Costs, Present Net Value and Benefit cost ratios was calculated using econ52.xls 

(Rheinberger, 2009) available at http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/fp /FPWebPage/FP70104A/Programs.htm. 

The program allows evaluation of timber sale economics based on current and or future sale data. 

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative would forgo any addition to the timber supply in the 

area. No new jobs would be added to the local economy. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: Timber proposed for harvest with Alternative 2 would be approximately 

36 percent and Alternative 3 would be approximately 34 percent of the Forest’s annual average timber 

sale program. This timber would be expected to be sold over the course of more than one year. 

Alternative 2 would provide 294 jobs and Alternative 3 would provide 278 jobs associated with the 

timber wood products industry. Not included in these estimates are jobs related to over 7 million 

dollars in thinning and fuels treatments. Alternative 2 provides more jobs and a higher level of 

estimated timber related income than Alternative 3. The difference between action alternatives is less 

than 6 percent, when measured by jobs created or employee income. The costs of Alternative 3 are 

higher by three percent. 

The timber benefits accrued from each alternative is similar although Alternative 3 removes less 

timber and has commercial harvest on fewer acres. The selling of timber would bring some money to 

the Forest Service although it would not pay for the whole project. The project as a whole would cost 

more under Alternative 3 as a result of an increase in fuels treatments acres. 

The economic effects of the fuels treatments beyond the scope of the timber sold are dependent on the 

risk and probability of wildfire. Wildfires and management of wildfires will continue in the area. 

With treatments there is a higher probability that wildfires could be managed to meet management 

objectives with reduced suppression costs. Without treatment fires will continue to be a threat. The 

threat of losing habitat and timber value due to wildfire was not part of this analysis. 

BIOMASS ANALYSIS 

The need for energy generation and reduction in CO2 emissions provided the issue to analyze the 

possibilities of biomass removal in Alternative 3. This was kept separate from the rest of the analysis 

in order to determine the values and costs of the specific treatments. Biomass treatment is compared 

with the treatments needed to meet the fuels objectives. Biomass removal would require mechanical 

harvesting, removal to a landing, processing into chips and hauling the chips to a generation facility 

and subsoiling 15 units for a total of 73 acres (Deadlog Soils Report). Depending on the amount of 

material removed from the site, there may or may not be a need to further treat the fuels following 

treatment. The assumption in this analysis is that there is no further treatment of activity fuels. Both 

the biomass removal and fuels treatment would treat current natural fuels following thinning. At this 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Economic Efficiency

223

time the nearest facility that utilizes biomass is Warm Springs. Prineville is not as far but a facility has 

not yet been built. LaPine is presently assessing the feasibility of a biomass facility. 

Economic efficiency analysis for the removal of Biomass used the following assumptions: 

 average diameter removed 7 inches dbh, ponderosa pine only removed, 

 303 trees per acre removed, 

 2.9 cubic feet of material per tree (Delany, 2007) 

 1 CCF is equivalent to 1.5 Bone Dry Tons (BDT) (Delany, 2007), 

 electricity generation should be equivalent to 1BDT = 1 mega watt hour (mWh), 

 electricity avoidance cost (peak) is $0.048/kilowatt hour (kWh)(Bilek, 2005). 

 Total electricity potential generation is 17,412 mWh (11,608 CCF * 1.5 BDT/CCF * 1 

mWh/BDT). 

 Averaging the subsoiling cost of $210 on 73 acres over the whole of the biomass removal was 

rounded to $12 per acre. 

Table 75: Biomass removal and Fuels treatment cost Comparison 

Biomass Removal Cost per Hundred 

Cubic Feet (CCF) Total CCF Cost per Acre Total Cost per Acre 

Stump to Truck 

Process 

$61.57 11,608 $541.00 $541.00 

Sub Soiling N/A N/A $12.00 $12.00 

Site to Prineville $552.00 N/A $125.00 $677.00 

Site to Warm 

Springs 

$18.48 N/A $162.00 $715.00 

Fuels Treatments 

Precommercial 

thinning 

N/A N/A $175.00 $175.00 

Hand Piling & 

Burning 

N/A N/A $552.00 $552.00 

Total Fuels 

Treatment 

N/A N/A $727.00 $727.00 

Table 76: Biomass to Electricity Computation. 

Biomass 

Removal 

Cost per 

Thousand 

Cubic Feet 

Total 

CCF 

Cost per 

Acre 

Total 

Acres 

Total BDT 

& mWh 

Total Biomass 

removal Cost 

Avoided Cost of 

Electricity @ 

$.048/kWh 

Site to Warm 

Springs 

$80.05 11,608 $715.00 1,321 17,412 $928,663.00 $835,776.00 

Site to 

Prineville 

$75.83 11,608 $677.00 1,321 17,412 $879,786.00 $835,776.00 

This analysis shows that the cost of fuels treatments may be more than the cost to deliver chips to 

Warm Springs or Prineville. Equipment operations are efficient with the removal of biomass since the 

move in costs is shared with the logging operation. The biomass costs were calculated for stands with 

no timber removed. Estimates for the total amount of biomass removed are low since the calculations 

do not include the needles and branches. Branches and needles would nearly double the volume 

removed. The largest difference between fuels treatments and biomass removal tends to be in the 

method of fuels consumption. Piles burnt in fuels treatments would not have emission limitations. 

The consumption in an energy generation plant would have higher temperatures and fewer emissions. 

In biomass conversion, electricity is produced where with fuels only treatments only the removal of 

fuels is accomplished. The value of electricity is provided to show the available opportunity. The 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Economic Efficiency 

224

comparison of Biomass removal to the value of electricity in Table 76 does not estimate the actual cost 

of producing electricity at a plant just the value of electricity from the Public Utility Regulatory 

Policies Act of 1978. 

CABLE LOGGING ANALYSIS 

The economic efficiency of removing the timber on slopes greater than 30 per cent slope with cable 

logging was included in the overall comparison of alternatives. Here it will be separated out to 

identify the cost and benefit. 

Alternative 2 proposes commercial thinning to reduce stand density and fuels on 420 acres with slopes 

greater than 30%. Cable system equipment that is currently available is in the Willamette Valley. 

Costs would be incurred to move in, set up and hand fall the timber. Ground based logging systems 

are locally available. The differences in the overall costs of cutting and removing timber would 

increase with cable logging. The calculated cost, “Stump to Truck” cost, for the cable system is 

$151.30 per CCF while the stump to truck cost of ground based systems is $88.23. The issue, at this 

time, is the low value of timber in slow economic times. The ponderosa pine index timber value 

averaged on the Deschutes is $180.00 per CCF, with the value reported from local mills at $117.00 per 

CCF (Vickie Dunaway, 2009, personal communication). Transportation to the nearest mill from the 

project area is would cost at least $29.00 per CCF. To log and transport timber using a cable system 

would cost more than the timber is worth. This is without adding in more costs incurred by the logger 

which include required road maintenance, brush disposal, temporary road construction and removal. 

Total costs for logging using a cable system is estimated at approximately $200.00 per CCF. 

A large part of being effective in the Deadlog project is to remove large amounts of timber to reduce 

overall stand density on a landscape level, including on slopes over 30 %. Because of costs associated 

with cable logging, cable logging would reduce the overall viability of finishing the projects. 

Decreasing the profitability for or the number of logging entities that would provide bids to those with 

the equipment could possibly make the project infeasible for commercial removal of large wood fiber. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Civil Rights and Environmental Justice

225

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, disabled people, and low-income groups. 

Environmental Justice is defined as the pursuit of equal justice and protection under the law for all 

environmental statutes and regulations, without discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or 

socioeconomic status. Minority and low-income populations groups, living in counties that surround 

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. 

Alternative 1 (No Action) 

Direct and Indirect Effects: This alternative would not provide jobs that would improve the local 

economic situation as described under the heading “Economic Efficiency Analysis.” In the event of a 

large scale wildfire, local firefighting groups could be employed for suppression and post-suppression 

activities. 

Effects Common to Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) and Alternative 3 

Direct and Indirect Effects: There would be no discernable impacts among the alternative in the 

effects on Native Americans, women, other minorities, or the Civil Rights of any American citizen. 

Opportunities for employment of minority and low-income workers may occur through the various 

activities, such as thinning and hand piling of small diameter material. The action alternatives 

developed for this project have the potential to bring in workers from the outside to perform thinning 

and related activities. 

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 the majority of the 

financial output of the workers in the area. It is not likely that businesses would need to increase their 

employment, either by temporarily adding employees, or giving present employees more hours. 

Resources gathered for subsistence or of cultural importance, such as edible plants or animals, or 

materials for shelter, are not likely affected by any federal action proposed within the fire area. Road 

decommissioning would reduce the opportunity for motorized access for traditional hunting and 

camping opportunities. Even though areas that have been used for dispersed camping along proposed 

road closures and decommissioning would no longer be utilized, many areas would continue to be 

accessible. 

The Proposed Action does not appear to have a disproportionately high or adverse effect on minority 

or low-income populations. Scoping did not reveal any issues or concerns associated with the 

principles of Environmental Justice. No mitigation measures to offset or improve adverse affects to 

these populations have been identified. All interested and affected parties will continue to be involved 

with the public involvement and decision process. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Other Disclosures 

226

OTHER DISCLOSURES 

SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 

NEPA requires consideration of the relationship between short-term uses of man’s environment and 

the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity (40 CFR 1502.16). As declared by 

Congress, this includes using all practicable means and measures 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 present and future generations of 

Americans (NEPA Section 101). 

Maintaining the productivity of the land is a complex, long-term objective. The action alternatives 

meet the purpose and need to protect the long-term objective of the project area through the use of 

specific Forest plan Standards and Guidelines, mitigation measures, and BMPs. Long-term 

productivity could change as a result of the various management activities proposed in the alternatives. 

Timber management activities would have a direct, indirect, and cumulative effect on the economic, 

social, and biological environment. Those effects are disclosed in Chapter 3 of this analysis. 

Soil is a key factor in ecosystem productivity. This resource would be protected in Alternative 2 and 

Alternative 3 to avoid damage that could take many decades to rectify. Sustained growth of trees, 

wildlife habitat, and other renewable resources all rely on maintaining long-term soil productivity. 

Long-term productivity would not be impaired by the application of short-term management practices. 

The action alternatives would improve soil productivity in specific areas where soil restoration 

treatments (subsoiling) are implemented on soils committed to roads and logging facilities. 

All alternatives would provide wildlife habitat that is necessary to contribute to the maintenance of 

viable, well-distributed populations of existing native and non-native vertebrate species. The 

abundance and diversity of wildlife species depends on the quality, quantity, and distribution of 

habitat, whether for breeding, feeding, or resting. Management Indicator Species are used to represent 

the habitat requirements of all fish and wildlife species found within the project area. By managing 

habitat of indicator species, the other species associated with the same habitat would also benefit. 

The no action alternative would likely continue to provide slower tree growth rates, affecting the longterm productivity, for both resources, such as wildlife, and economics, of timber resources. The action 

alternatives would likely provide an environment that would protect trees and enhance associated 

growth rates, attaining late and old structure more quickly and providing structural diversity for 

wildlife. Although the length of time and success rates could vary and be dependent upon natural 

processes, trees would be regenerated to provide more desirable wildlife habitat. 

UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS 

Several expected adverse effects, including some that are minimal and/or short term, were identified 

during the analysis. Resource protection measures were identified and considered for each of these as 

a means to lessen or eliminate such effects on specific resources. Refer to Resource Protection 

Measures in Chapter 2. Resources that have been determined to have potential adverse effects 

(resulting from any of the alternatives) are documented within the appropriate Environmental 

Consequences sections of each resource in Chapter 3. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Other Disclosures

227

IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF 

RESOURCES

NEPA requires that environmental analysis include identification of “. . . any irreversible and 

irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be 

implemented.” Irreversible and irretrievable resource commitments are related to the use of 

nonrenewable resources and the effects that the use of these resources have on future generations. No 

significant irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources would occur under Alternative 2 

(Proposed Action) or Alternative 3. 

 Irreversible: Those resources that have been lost forever, such as the extinction of a species or 

the removal of mined ore. The proposed activities would result in a commitment of rock for road 

reconstruction from local rock pits. 

The action alternatives are not expected to create any impacts that would cause irreversible damage to 

soil productivity. There is low 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 elements would 

be used to prevent irreversible losses of the soil resource. 

 Irretrievable: Those resources 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 rights-of-way or 

road. 

The proposed activities would result in few direct and indirect commitments of resources; these would 

be related primarily to thinning operations. A temporary, short-term loss of the shrub component 

would also be lost 

There would be an irretrievable loss of firm wood fiber over the long-term under Alternative 1 (No 

Action), as existing dead lodgepole pine deteriorates in value and is unable to be utilized for 

commercial firm wood fiber. 

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 (subsoiling) 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. 

PRIME FARMLANDS, RANGELANDS, FORESTLANDS 

The Secretary of Agriculture issued memorandum 1827 which is intended to protect prime farm lands 

and rangelands. The project area does not contain any prime farmlands or rangelands. Prime 

forestland is not applicable to lands within the National Forest System. National Forest System lands 

would be managed with consideration of the impacts on adjacent private lands. Prime forestlands on 

adjacent private lands would benefit indirectly from a decreased risk of impacts from wildfire. There 

would be no direct, indirect, or cumulative adverse effects to these resources and thus are in 

compliance with the Farmland Protection Act and Departmental Regulation 9500-3, “Land Use 

Policy”. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Other Disclosures 

228

HUMAN HEALTH AND SAFETY 

No significant adverse effects to public health or safety have been identified. The effects of 

implementation of the alternatives are well known, not highly controversial, and do not involve any 

unique or unknown risks. Although State air quality standards would be met or exceeded, some risk 

remains for forest workers. 

An elevated wildfire risk would remain a concern along public escape routes. Fine airborne 

particulate matter could increase the incidence of respiratory problems during wildfires. Proposed 

activities would improve human health and safety by: 1) the reduction of the risk of entrapment from 

wildfire and 2) the reduction of the risk of increased airborne particulates from wildfire (refer to Fire 

and Fuels discussion). 

EXECUTIVE ORDERS 11988 (FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT) AND 

11990 (PROTECTION OF WETLANDS) 

Executive Orders 11988 and 11990 direct Federal agencies to avoid, to the extent possible, both shortterm and long-term adverse impacts associated with the modifications of floodplains and wetlands. 

All alternatives have no specific actions that adversely affect wetlands and floodplains. Proposed 

activities are compliant with the orders and USDA Departmental Regulation 9500-3. There are no 

floodplains or wetlands within the project area. Refer to discussions related to this topic in the soils, 

fisheries, and hydrology resource sections in Chapter 3 for more information. 

COMPATIBILITY WITH STATE AND LOCAL LAWS 

Implementation of all alternatives would be consistent with State and local laws, land use, and 

environmental policies. Action alternatives follow State of Oregon requirements in accordance with 

the Clean Water Act for protection of waters. There are no lakes or perennial streams within the 

project area. The nearest body of water is East Lake within the Newberry National Volcanic 

Monument, approximately 15 miles to the northwest of the project area. 

INVENTORIED ROADLESS AREAS AND WILDERNESS 

The project area does not contain any Inventoried Roadless Areas or Wilderness. Activities would not 

directly or indirectly affect any of the resources or values of those areas. The nearest IRA is in the 

Newberry National Volcanic Monument, the North and South Paulina IRA, approximately 13 miles to 

the Northwest of the project area. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Plan Amendment

229

FOREST PLAN AMENDMENT 

INTRODUCTION 

The purpose and need of this project is to: restore or maintain fire-dependent ecosystems and maintain 

the forest in a healthy condition. Treatments would promote and sustain late and old structured forest 

stands, reduce susceptibility to bark beetles and dwarf mistletoe infestation, and reduce fuel loading. 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) would involve active management on approximately 10,752 acres and 

Alternative 3 on approximately 11,281 acres. Activities would include thinning, mechanical shrub 

treatment (MST – shrub mowing), slash piling, and underburning. 

PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND RATIONALE 

This proposed non-significant Forest Plan Amendment would waive Standard and Guide WL-54, 

which requires that 30 percent of the National Forest System land within summer range of big game 

within each Implementation Unit (IU) be in hiding cover. Generally, this would result in 70 percent of 

each implementation unit existing either as a hiding area or within 600 feet of a hiding area. The 

calculation of cover excludes 50-80 year old ponderosa pine (aka black-bark pine) within each 

implementation unit as well as Deer Habitat (MA-7), which is addressed with a different standard and 

guideline. 

Preliminary analysis determined that the cover standard WL-54 would not be met within the 

implementation units (Table 77) because the three implementation units currently do not meet big 

game hiding cover standards. The proposed thinning and underburning would further reduce the 

hiding cover ratio. Thinning would target densely stocked stands that, as expected, provide the hiding 

cover. The existing proportion of hiding cover within the Deadlog planning area is approximately 

11 percent. Some mitigation through managing open road density and retaining 10 percent of units 

untreated is also proposed in the EIS. 

Table 77: Deadlog Implementation Unit (IU) Hiding Cover Assessment outside of Black-bark 

Pine, Deer Habitat (MA-7), and Non-National Forest Service Land 

Implementation Unit Analysis Area Acres Hiding Cover Acres 

within Analysis Area 

% Cover within 

Analysis Area 

IU #62 10,602 1,920 18% 

IU #63 6,919 759 10% 

IU #69 3,037 425 13% 

Related Standards and Guidelines: The open road density for the implementation units and 

the project area is above the objective of 2.5 miles per square mile. However, an amendment 

of the WL-53 is not requested because a further analysis (as described in WL-53 and TS-14) 

will show that LRMP wildlife objectives will be met for the project when considering: the 

existing green dot system; proposed road closures to mitigate opening the forest through 

thinning; and thinning will not change amount of stage 6 LOS. Also, the project area includes 

a very small piece of MA-7 (Deer Habitat) where cover is to be provided at 40 percent of the 

Management Area. Because there will be no harvest of trees within this Management Area 

under the Deadlog project, and it is a small fraction of the larger management area, there will 

be no effect to cover and no LRMP amendment is being requested. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Forest Plan Amendment 

230

SIGNIFICANCE 

It is assumed that the proposed change in big game hiding cover will not significantly change the 

forest-wide impacts disclosed in the Deschutes National Forest Plan Environmental Impact Statement. 

FSM 1926.51 describes non-significant amendments as: 

1. Actions that do not significantly alter the multiple-use goals and objectives for long-term land and 

resource management; 

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; 

3. Minor changes in standards and guidelines; and/or 

4. Opportunities for additional projects or activities that would contribute to achievement of the 

management prescriptions. 

The Forest Plan’s goals and objectives for the applicable Management Areas for this area are: 

 The goal for General Forest (MA-8) is to emphasize timber production while providing forage 

production, visual quality, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities for public use and 

enjoyment. The amendment would not have an impact on this goal and it does provide for 

activities that contribute to meeting the General Forest objectives including controlling 

stocking levels; maintaining satisfactory growth rates; protecting stands from insects, disease, 

and damage. 

 The goal for Scenic Views (MA-9) is to provide Forest visitors with high quality scenery that 

represents that natural character of Central Oregon. The proposed amendment would not have 

any impact to the goals or objectives of Scenic Views. 

 The goal for Old Growth (MA-15) is to provide naturally evolved old growth forest 

ecosystems and the case of the Deadlog area, for old-growth ponderosa pine. The amendment 

would allow activities to proceed in the OGMA that help to achieve these objectives. For 

example, thinning in structure stage 5 (dense multi-layer stands) will start over 3,000 acres 

towards structure stage 7 (single-story with large trees). 

The proposed amendment would allow thinning and burning activities that would promote restoration 

and maintenance of this dry ponderosa pine fire-dependent ecosystem. This would allow the area to 

be more sustainable, resilient, and resistant to wide spread wildfire and beetle infestation. The EIS 

will show beneficial effects for other species that depend more on open habitats and large ponderosa 

pine trees associated with frequent, low-intensity fire, such as white-headed woodpecker. 

Because this amendment does not significantly alter goals and objectives, is a minor change in a 

standard considering the size of the landscape, and provides an opportunity for contributing to 

achievement of the long-term goals and objectives, it meets the definition of a non-significant 

amendment. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Long-Term Climate Changes

231

LONG-TERM CLIMATE CHANGES 

Existing Condition 

Although El Niño/Southern Oscillation and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation comprise the 

primary factors for climate variability in the Pacific Northwest (Climate Impacts Group 

20061

), the influence from global climate change is a growing concern. According to the 

Climate Impacts Group, 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 

temperatures could increase beyond the year-to-year variability observed in the Pacific 

Northwest during the 20th century as early as the 2020s. 

 

Direct and Indirect Effects: 

This project is designed with the intent of keeping portions of all of the current species and 

structures on this landscape. Whether and how increasing temperatures resulting from global climate 

change would alter predicted forest response to the proposed commercial thinning under any of the 

action alternatives would depend on specific site conditions in relation to temperature and soil 

moisture availability on tree growth. If temperature were to increase while precipitation changes 

minimally, as predicted by the Climate Impacts Group, tree evapotransporation would increase 

nonlinearly, leading to more frequent drought stress (Climate Impacts Group 2004). A moderate 

density commercial thinning could decrease competition for water during the summer while limiting 

additional evaporation from the soil and transpiration from the understory in the summer. Such 

thinning could also maximize the duration of snowpack in spring by having an open enough canopy 

that more snow accumulates in the ground rather than on the forest canopy, yet, is still shaded from 

melting by the sun in the spring. The resulting increased available moisture, in turn, could reduce the 

risk of dead or drought-stressed trees created by increasing temperatures and changes in precipitation 

caused by climate change and that would be susceptible to fire and disease in the near-term. Latesuccessional and old-growth forests are generally thought to be more resilient to climate change. This 

project would not reduce stands classified as LOS or designated as Old Growth. Further, prescriptions 

are designed in a way that would promote these conditions and, if not increase, would be neutral to 

forest habitat connectivity, allowing species to reach new locations as climate change alters existing 

habitat (Climate Action Group 2004a). 

The range of species within the analysis area over the past few hundred years appears to have been 

similar to today, based on the variety of species of the older trees. While there is much discussion 

among scientists about global climate change, the reality for management of existing forests is that 

they are a result of the past and present climatic influences (Shugart, et al, 2003). The current climate 

limits what can be done with forest trees at this point in time. To be able to respond to the influences 

of global climate changes, it is best to maintain the full range of native species now present on this 

 

1 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Their reports (2007) provide the authoritative scientific basis for subsequent 

Forest Service analysis of the phenomenon. Information specific to the Forest Service can be found in the latest Synthesis and

Assessment Product 4.4.1 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Long-Term Climate Changes 

232

analysis area. Regardless of the climatic changes, a full suite of species remaining on the analysis area 

ensures adaptability for a wide range of climatic conditions. 

Shugart et al (2003) state that the ecological responses to climate change is extremely complicated and 

understanding how ecological systems will respond to climate change remains a challenge. Hence, we 

do not know the direction, effects, and magnitude of the climatic changes of the future as they pertain 

to this analysis area, and establishing species adapted to a climate differing from the present would be 

potentially very costly in time and resources. Therefore, the most prudent approach in the context of 

this project would appear to be to “keep all of the pieces” (Leopold, 1949). 

Since the proposed management actions in this project would leave the treated stands fully stocked 

after implementation (fully capable of utilizing the available moisture, nutrients, and growing space on 

the treated sites), vegetation would continue normal respiration processes and effects to atmospheric 

CO2 levels would be expected to be inestimable on a regional, national, or global scale. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Literature Considered from Scoping

233

LITERATURE CONSIDERED FROM SCOPING COMMENTS 

During scoping, commenters suggested that the following references be reviewed and utilized during 

analysis. Following is a discussion that briefly summarizes the reference content and a brief 

discussion explaining why the reference was not further considered for use in the analysis. 

 Reed F Noss, Jerry F Franklin, William L. Baker, Tania Schoennagel, and Peter B Moyle. 

2006. Managing fire-prone forests in the western United States. (Frontiers in Ecology) Front 

Ecol Environ 2006; 4(9): 481-487 

This is a general overview of managing fire landscapes, fire and post fire activities and ecological 

processes. This paper reviews other papers dealing with restoration of forests in western wildlands. 

For dry western forests which originally had frequent fire this paper recommends restoring this 

condition and process where alterations in ecosystem structure, function or composition have deviated. 

This restoration would allow fire and other processes to play characteristic roles. 

The Deadlog project did not use this paper because of its general approach to management but the 

general ideas are used. Restoring open stands where they once were and reintroducing fire so wildfire 

can resume its original role. 

 Talbert & Marshall. 2005 Plantation Productivity in the Douglas-fir Region Under Intensive 

Silvicultural Practices: Results from Research and Operations. Journal of Forestry. March 

2005. PP 65-70 

This paper synthesizes research in productivity and economic comparisons of the west coast Douglasfir region to the other wood producing countries. The growth study referenced in the article compared 

different thinning regimes and densities to identify if differences in volume production in Douglas-fir 

plantations would occur with different densities. It found that thinning can reduce the overall volume 

production of Douglas-fir sites. Suppression induced mortality was not more than the gross volume 

loss from thinning. The overall basis of the Talbert and Marshall paper is that to be competitive in the 

wood fiber world market, the west coast Douglas-fir growers need to improve on site productivity 

through intensive management though with reduced costs and improved product. 

This paper was not used due to the fact that it was a west side plantation thinning exercise in coastal 

Douglas-fir plantations. The thinning regimes were a test of growth and volume estimations for 

different thinning densities and to identify weather volume would be the same in all thinnings which 

left stands stocked. The Deadlog project is in low precipitation areas where competition or suppression 

mortality is not the loss expected. Losses expected are due to density and insect interactions and 

potential wild fire impacts due to an increase in fuel loading. Timber volume production in plantations 

in Deadlog may be a concern however survival of plantations from drought induced stress and insect 

mortality is a larger issue. Moving stands towards large diameter condition which will benefit wildlife 

and be more resistant to fire mortality are the larger goals. 

 Noss, Reed: The Ecological Effects of roads: 

This paper chronicles the effects of all road types. The information is gleaned from numerous reports 

ranging across many different habitats and types of fauna. For effects on animal habitats, references 

range from African Elephants, Mohave rodents, and wolf responses to roads. The areas include 

Florida, Africa, Michigan and many more states. Road types causing effects include a variety of roads, 

including interstate highways through dirt roads. The mitigations presented are focused mostly on 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Literature Considered from Scoping 

234

highways though they include roads found on public land. On public lands closing roads are 

recommended especially for temporary roads and landings used for timber sales. Seasonal restrictions 

were also identified as a method desired to reduce road disturbance if road closures could not occur. 

This paper makes recommendations in road use and closure. This is similar to processes in place with 

management activities with temporary roads and landings being subsoiled and roads which are excess 

to management needs being closed. 

 www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/10/011030230203.htm 

This is a general overview of insects and effects in western forests stands. The implication is the 

condition of stands is the problem. Insects are just taking advantage of stands that are in a stressed 

condition and the insect outbreaks may actually be moving stands to a more sustainable condition. 

This reference was not used because of its general approach to insect outbreaks and tree mortality. 

However indications that insect outbreaks and risk of stand loss is mostly due to stand condition is 

realized in the Deadlog project. The treatments in Deadlog try to indirectly affect insect impacts 

through stand management and not by trying to control insects directly.

 Insect Ecology – An Ecosystem Approach. ed Timothy Schowalter Academic Press. 2000 

This is a textbook on insect ecology and forest management. Highlighted for the application here is the 

effects of current forest practices and the impacts of insects populations. Generally dense stands which 

were historically open with fire as the main mortality agent are now having insect mortality as the 

main agent. This is due to stocking levels which favor bark beetle success in colonizing trees and 

causing mortality.

This book was not used though the general ideas are used in the design of the Deadlog project design. 

This is removing less adapted trees of dry sites (lodgepole pine a) and reducing density of stands 

which were historically lower stocked density of intolerant tree species (ponderosa pine) 

 Schowalter TD, Jay Withgott, 2001, Rethinking Insects: What would an ecosystem approach 

look like?. 2001 Conservation Biology in Practice 2(4): 11-16 

This paper is a generalized approach to insect interactions in forests. The main emphasis is the premise 

that past management has set up insect outbreaks and impacts. It does also generalize the ecosystem 

services insects provide. The main emphasis the paper brings forward in more than one place is the 

identification of native insects and outbreaks as not a problem in itself but a problem with the 

management or stand condition on the landscape. 

This paper was not used because of its generalities and their being more specific papers on the 

influence and stand conditions which mountain and western pine beetle form outbreaks. However the 

ideas from this paper are relevant in the sense that dense stands were not historically common in the 

ponderosa pine types and are currently in need of management to make them less susceptible to beetle 

outbreaks. 

 Tiedemann, A.R., J.O.Klemmedson, Evelyn L. Bull, Solution of forest health problems with 

prescribed Fire: Are forest productivity and wildlife at risk?, Forest Ecology and 

Management 127 (2000) 1 = 183 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Literature Considered from Scoping

235

This paper is an overview of the concerns using prescribed fire as a tool to over large landscapes in the 

Blue Mountains. The main focus is the conversion of current stands dominated by grand and Douglas 

fir to ponderosa pine. Three threads are dealt with in this paper. One is whether or not the conversion 

is the right thing to do. Another is the effect of burning with short intervals on site productivity and the 

third is the effects of the change and fire on wildlife. 

This paper was not used since it s focused on conversion of areas which were ponderosa pine 

dominated in the past but are not currently. The Deadlog Project is not converting stands just 

enhancing the ponderosa pine present. However many of the concerns presented in the paper are 

considered in the Deadlog project including burning when duff moisture will not be totally consumed 

(spring burning), burning with techniques to maintain snags and large down wood and using identified 

burning intervals specific to the area. Other recommendations including using mechanical methods for 

reducing fuels is preferred. This is used in the Deadlog project in many stands though not all. . 

 Spies, T.A. 2006. Maintaining old-growth forests. In: Haynes, R.W.; Borman, B.T.; Lee, 

D.C; Martin, J.R., tech. eds. 2006. Northwest Forest Plan – the first 10 years (1994-2003): 

synthesis of monitoring and research results. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. 

PNW-GTR-651. 292 p. 

Spies addresses in this chapter of the synthesis the following questions regarding old-growth forests: 

1) what was expected, 2) what are the status and trends and what differences were found between 

expectations and observations from effectiveness monitoring, and 3) are the plan’s assumptions and 

approaches still valid. 

The chapter includes a section addressing the role of silviculture in restoring ecological diversity and 

accelerating old-growth development in plantations. According to Spies, “results thus far show that 

thinning plantations is important to restoring structural and compositional diversity on federal lands.” 

He indicates the goals of thinning include diversifying young stands now and accelerating the 

development of old-growth characteristics in the future. He states it’s believed that thinning for 

biodiversity goals should seek to promote spatial heterogeneity in stands, rather than uniform spacing 

and density. He states caution needs to be exercised in applying the same spatial pattern of thinning in 

all areas and at all spatial scales, since scientific research on this practice is only in the early stages. 

Spies states the effects of thinning on development of old-growth characteristics in plantations are 

only partially understood. It is recognized growth of trees into larger diameter classes will increase as 

stand density declines. If thinning is too heavy, however, it could effect development of old-growth 

characteristics by: 1) reducing the number of larger trees later in succession to levels lower than what 

is observed in current old-growth stands, 2) creating a dense layer of regeneration, and 3) reducing the 

potential for future snag recruitment. Spies states “thinning should allow for future mortality in the 

canopy trees.” 

One of the assumptions and approaches evaluated in this chapter was the treatment of the matrix for 

both ecological values and commodity production. Spies states the ecological value of leaving large 

live trees as individuals and groups as a way of supporting older forest species in areas managed for 

timber production has been supported by habitat studies of individual species. Spies states “no new 

scientific evidence has emerged that the standards and guidelines for the matrix, which allowed cutting 

of old trees, would not meet the ecological and viability goals of the Plan.” 

Consideration: This paper was not used, though it validates the purpose and need for the project and 

promotes treatments similar to those proposed with the action alternatives. This paper adds no 

additional concepts to consider in designing fuel treatments outside of late-successional reserves. 
Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences Literature Considered from Scoping 

236

While the paper suggests thinning in plantations should allow for future mortality in canopy trees, it 

offers no specific density levels appropriate for local site conditions. This paper covers the area within 

the Northwest Forest Plan boundary, located approximately 30 miles to the west of the project area. 

 Curtis, Robert O, David Marshall, John Bell. 1997, Logs: a pioneering Examples of 

Silvicultural Research in Coastal Douglas-fir. Journal of Forestry 95(7):19-25 

This paper is relates intensive management techniques in high productivity stands in coastal Douglas 

fir. The study compared stand volume net and gross from different thinning regimes. The thinning 

levels varied but were conducted intensively following every ten feet of growth. The comment 

mentioned in scoping about thinning and bonus volume has to do with thinning at a point where 

waiting for volume to accumulate is not capturing more volume than what would be lost to 

suppression based mortality. The volume measured was the total stand level of volume not board foot 

volume. 

This paper was not used due to the fact that it was a west side plantation thinning exercise in coastal 

Douglas-fir plantations. The thinning regimes were a test of growth and volume estimations for 

different thinning densities and to identify weather volume would be the same in all thinnings which 

left stands stocked. The Deadlog project is in low precipitation areas where competition or suppression 

mortality is not the loss expected. Losses expected are due to density and insect interactions. Timber 

volume production in plantations in Deadlog may be a concern however survival of plantations from 

drought induced stress and insect mortality is a larger issue. Moving stands towards large diameter 

condition which will benefit wildlife and be more resistant to fire mortality are the larger goals. 
Chapter 4 Consultation and Coordination Public Notification and Participation

237

CHAPTER 4 

CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION
Chapter 4 Consultation and Coordination Public Notification and Participation 

238

CHAPTER 4 - CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION 

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION 

Initial Scoping 

Ms. Susan Jane Brown 

Mr. Josh Laughlin - Cascadia Wildlands Project 

Ms. Karen Coulter - Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project 

Ms. Chandra LaGue - Oregon Wild 

Mr. Tim Lillebo - Oregon Wild 

Ms. Marilyn Miller - Sierra Club - Juniper Group 

Mr. Scott Silver - Wild Wilderness 

Ms. Libby Johnson - Bonneville Power Administration 

Mr. Ken Wienke - Boise Cascade 

Mr. John Morgan - Ochoco Lumber 

Mr. Flip Houston - Scott Logging Inc. 

Ms. Kate Ramsayer - The Bulletin 

Mr. Pat Schatz - Mickey Finn Guide Service 

Mr. Craig Vaage - Bigfoot Guide Service 

Mr. David Nissen - Wanderlust Tours 

Mr. Jerry Reid - Emerald Trail Riders Association 

Mr. Tom Street - Tom's World of Wheels 

Mr. Ed Duffy - Deschutes County 4-Wheelers 

Mr. Rick Bozarth - Bozarth's Offroad Service Specialties 

Ms. Joani Dufourd - RecConnect LLC 

Ms. Joni Mogstad - Blue Ribbon Coalition 

Ms. Peggy Spieger - Oregon State Snowmobile Association 

Mr. Mark Dunaway - Pine Mountain Observatory 

Mr. Darwin Thurston - Midstate Electric Cooperative, Inc. 

Mr. James Reeves - Century Telephone 

Ms. Patti Gentiluomo - Environmental Manager - Sunriver 

Mr. Bruce Cunningham - Moon Country Snowmobilers 

Ms. Lynne Breese - Eastern Oregon Forest Protection Association 

Mr. Dan Kruse - Cascadia Wildlands Project 

Mr. David Lexow - Motorcycle Riders Association 

Northwest Environmental Defense Center 

Sunriver Owners Association - Public Affairs Committee Chair 

Mr. Charlie Larson - Oregon Grotto 

Mr. Dennis Glasby - Willamette Valley Grotto 

Mr. David Lexow 

Motorcycle Riders Association 

Mr. Steven J. McNulty - Gas Transmission NW Corp. 

Dr. Steve Fitzgerald - Oregon State Universtity Extension Service 

Alex Robertson - Prineville BLM 

Ms. Kathleen Cushman - Bureau of Reclamation 

Mr. Glen Ardt - Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 

Mr. Stuart Otto - Oregon Dept. of Forestry 

Ms Letha Sanderson - Oregon Parks and Recreation Department 

Mr. Gene Keane - Warm Springs Forest Products 

Mr. Dean Adams - Tribal Chairman - Burns Paiute Tribe 

Ms. Wanda Johnson - Burns Paiute Tribe 

Mr. Amos Firstraised - Burns Paiute Tribe 

Mr. Ron Suppah - Tribal Chairman - Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs 

Mr. Clay Penhollow - Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs 

Mr. Robert Brunoe - Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs 

Ms. Sally Bird - Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs 

Mr. Lonny Macy - Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs 

Mr. Scott Turo - Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs 

Ms. Brigette M. Whipple - Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs 
Chapter 4 Consultation and Coordination Public Notification and Participation

239

Mr. Allen Foreman . Chairman, Tribal Council - The Klamth Tribes 

Mr. Will Hatcher - The Klamath Tribes 

Mr. and Mrs. Donald Kerr 

Mr. Andrew H. Ulven 

Mr. Scott Walley 

Mr. Tim Hester 

Mr. Don Rooper 

Mr. & Mrs. Jon Pyland 

Ms. Charla Q. Ranch 

Mr. Dean Richardson 

Mr. Robert Waer 

Mr. Ed Graham 

Ms. Patricia Moore 

Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Hart 

Mr. Keith Cloudas 

Mr. Vic Russell 

Mr. John Zachem 

Mr. Ken Copeland 

Mr. and Mrs. Frank Pennock 

Mr. and Mrs. John Emerson 

Mr. Edward Kerber 

Mr. Wes Pyne 

Mr. Jim Anderson 

Mr. Jim Anderson 

Mr. Earl Nichols 

Ms. Loren Smith 

Mr. Chris Kerber 

Mr. Jerry Powell 

Mr. Rod Bjorvik 

Ms Sandra Swanlund 

Ms. Winona Wright 

Wildfire 

Mr. David Pitts 

Mr. & Mrs. Scott O'Neill 

Ms. June Ramey 

Mr. Mark Davis 

Mr. Robert Speik 

Mr. E. Clark Matschek 

Mr. William Tye 

Mr. Irwin Holzman 

Mr. & Mrs. Keith Nash 

Mr. Stephen Roth 

Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth Holmes 

Wade Nelson 

Dick Nelson 

Joanna Nelson 

Mr. & Mrs. John Pindar 

Ms. Kathryn J. Nachand 

David and Janette Roth 

Mr. & Mrs. Dennis Krakow 

Mr. Ray Hatton 

Mr. Leonard Houston 

Mr. Arlie Holm 

Mr. & Mrs. David Scharfenberg 

Mr. Franklin Engel 

John Kreuger - Quartz Mountain Grazing Group 

Mr. Larry McGlocklin 

Mr. C. Norman Winningstad 

Mr. Lawrence Huntley 

Mr. Scott Odgers 

Mr. Paul Hammerquist 

John Peila 

Mr. Jon Cain 

Mr. George Law 

Mr. Larry Ulrich 

Mr. Billy Toman 

Mr. Stan Summers 

Mr. Randy J. Zustiak 

Mr. Gordon Baker 

Mr. Robert Mullong 

Dennis Holt 

Robert Loveland 

Walter Hogan 

Mr. Dyarle Sharkey 

Kenneth Burbank 

Mr. Wade N. Foss 
References 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 240

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 

During the initial scoping, a number of comments and questions were received. Responses varied 

from those who wanted more clarification to specific suggestions for project implementation. 

Comments were used to help develop the planning issues and an additional action alternative. 

Those who responded regarding the proposed action are listed below: 

Joanna Nelson 

Asante Riverwind, Sierra Club 

Elizabeth O’Connell 

Perry Chocktoot, Klamath Tribes 

Chandra LeGue, Oregon Wild 

Theo Mbabaliye, US Environmental Protection Agency 

Following scoping, various field trips and meetings were held with the public that had expressed 

interest in this project during the scoping period. Those that were involved with these activities are 

listed below: 

March 17, 2008 – Meeting with Perry Chocktoot of the Klamath Tribes 

June 26, 2008 – Meeting with Amy Waltz of the Fire Learning Network 

July 9, 2008 – Field Trip with the Fire Learning Network 

September 5, 2008 – Field Trip with Glen Ardt of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 

October 24, 2008 – Field Trip with the Fire Learning Network 

November 12, 2008 – Attended Fire Learning Network meeting 

PREPARERS / INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM 

Steve Bigby 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, District Roads Manager 

Education: Oregon Institute of Technology 

Experience: 20 years professional experience 

Contribution: Roads Analysis 

Terry Craig 

Position: Sisters RD, Soils Scientist 

Education: BA, Chemistry and Biology, Chico State University (1985), MS, Soil Science, 

University of California Davis (2005) 

Experience 20 years professional experience 

Contribution: Interdisciplinary Team Leader

Rick Dewey 

Position: Forest Supervisors Office, Botanist 

Education: BS, Zoology, San Diego State University (1969); BS, Natural Resources, 

Humboldt State University (1975); MA, Biology, Humboldt State University 

(1979); PhD, Botany, Texas A&M University (1986). 

Experience: 20 years professional experience 

Contribution: Botany Analysis 
241

John Erwert 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, Fuels Specialist 

Education: Technical Fire Management, Colorado State University (2003) 

Experience: 30 years professional experience 

Contribution: Fuels Analysis 

David Frantz 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, Environmental Specialist 

Education: BS, Forest Management, Northern Arizona University (1974); MS, Forest 

Entomology, Northern Arizona University (1988) 

Experience: 19 years professional experience 

Contribution: Writer/Editor

Leslie M. Hickerson 

Position: Crescent RD, Archaeologist 

Education: BS, Anthropology, Oregon State University (1976); MA Anthropology, 

University of Arizona (1989) 

Experience: 23 years professional experience 

Contribution: Heritage Project Input for Cultural Resources 

Rod Jorgensen 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, District Soils Scientist 

Education: BS, Soil Science, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona (1977) 

Experience: 31 years professional experience 

Contribution: Soils analysis 

Jason Loomis 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, Fuels Specialist 

Education: AAS, Fire Science, Chemeketa Community College, Technical Fire 

Management, Colorado State University (2006) 

Experience: 14 years professional experience 

Contribution: Fuels FLAMAP Analysis 

Jim Lowrie 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, Wildlife Biologist, District Program Lead 

Education: BS, Wildlife Science, Oregon State University (1975). 

Experience: 31 years professional experience 

Contribution: Wildlife analysis 

Janine McFarland 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, Archaeologist, District Program Lead 

Education: BA, Anthropology, Oregon State University (1984); MA, Interdisciplinary 

Studies (Anthropology, History, Geography), Oregon State University, (1989) 

Experience: 24 years professional experience 

Contribution: Heritage Project Input for Cultural Resources 
Chapter 4 Consultation and Coordination 

242

Les Moscoso 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, Recreation Specialist 

Education: BS, Outdoor Recreation management, Colorado State University (1988) 

Experience: 18 years professional experience 

Contribution: Recreation analysis 

Beth Peer 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, NEPA Coordinator 

Education: BS, Anthropology, University of Oregon (1990) 

Experience: 18 years professional experience 

Contribution: NEPA oversight 

Peter V. Powers 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, Silviculture Forester 

Education: BS, Forestry, Washington State University (1979) 

Experience: 22 years professional experience 

Contribution: Vegetation (Trees) analysis 

Don Sargent 

Position: Bend/Ft. Rock RD, Range Technician, District Program Manager 

Education: BS, Forest Resource Management, Humboldt State University (1980) 

Experience: 16 years professional experience 

Contribution: Range analysis 

Aaron Smith 

Position: Forest Supervisors Office, Plant Pathology 

Education: BS, Biology, University of Oregon (2003); MS, Plant Pathology, Oregon 

State University (2007) 

Experience: 3 years professional experience 

Contribution: Tree disease analysis 
Glossary 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 243

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. 

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 fourwheel 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. 
Glossary 

244

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. 

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. 
Glossary 

245

CANOPY – The more-or-less continuous cover of branches and foliage formed collectively by the 

crown of adjacent trees and other woody growth. 

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 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. 
Glossary 

246

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. 

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. 

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 pasthistoric 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 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). 

- 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. 
Glossary 

247

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 whose social, economic, or political life would 

change in important respects if market or non-market outputs from the National Forests were 

substantially decreased. 

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. 

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. 
Glossary 

248

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. 

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. 
Glossary 

249

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. 

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. 

EXISTING CONDITION – A description of present-day human dimensions, production, 

physical/biological characteristics of an area. 

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 
Glossary 

250

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 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): 

 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. 
Glossary 

251

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 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. 

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. 
Glossary 

252

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. 

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. 

HABITAT TYPE – An aggregation of all land areas potentially capable of producing similar climax 

plant communities. 
Glossary 

253

- I - 

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. 

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 pesthost 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 
Glossary 

254

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 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 
Glossary 

255

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. 

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.

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. 
Glossary 

256

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. 

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. 

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. 
Glossary 

257

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. 
Glossary 

258

OVERSTORY – That portion of the trees, in a forest or in a stand of more than one story, forming the 

upper or uppermost canopy. 

- P - 

PARTIAL RETENTION – See VISUAL QUALITY OBJECTIVE. 

PARTICULATES – Small particles suspended in the air and generally considered pollutants. See 

TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATES. 

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. 
Glossary 

259

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. 

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. 
Glossary 

260

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 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 
Glossary 

261

from the sights and sounds of people. 

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. 

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. 

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 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 the fellings 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 INDEX – A numerical evaluation of the quality of land for plant productivity, based on the 
Glossary 

262

height of dominant trees in a stand at an arbitrarily chosen age. 

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. 
Glossary 

263

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 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. 

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. 
Glossary 

264

- 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 

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. 

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. 
Glossary 

265

TREATMENTS – Any planned manipulation of plant materials. Prescribed burning, thinning, 

logging, lopping are all examples of vegetation treatments. 

- 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. 

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 LIMITS - The density level at which a suppressed class of trees begins to 

develop. 

UPPER MANAGEMENT ZONES – Refer to Upper Density Limits

- 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 longterm 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. 
Glossary 

266

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. 

- X, Y, Z - 

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. 
Glossary 

267

INDEX 

bark beetle, 9 

biomass, 11, 19, 218, 221 

commercial thin, 18 

crown fire, 64, 65, 68 

cumulative effect, 74 

cumulative effects, 55 

CWM, 247 

danger tree, 33 

DecAID, 242 

dwarf mistletoe, 6, 9 

Eastside Screens, 10 

fire frequency, 60, 245 

fire regime, 60, 61, 67 

fuel model, 61 

goshawk, 38, 39, 122, 254 

Mechanical Shrub Treatment, v, 20, 43, 44, 68, 

220 

Old Growth, 13 

overstory removal, 19 

Precommercial Thin, 19 

prescribed burning, 257 

recreation, 12, 47, 210 

road closure, 34 

road decommissioning, 34 

road maintenance, 33 

road reconstruction, 33 

salvage, 19 

shelterwood, 11, 19, 219 

smoke management, 37 

temporary road, 9, 33 

underburning, 20 
References 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 268

REFERENCES 

Agee, James. 1993. Fire Ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests. Island Press: Washington, D. C. 

Agee, James 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. 

Agee, J. 2002. Fire as a coarse filter for snags and logs. In: Laudenslayer, William F., Jr.; Valentine, 

Brad; Weatherspoon, C. Philip; Lisle, Thomas E., technical coordinators. Proceedings of the 

symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in western forests. 1999 November 204; 

Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-181. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, 

Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

Agee, James K. 2003. Historical range of variability in eastern Cascades forests, Washington USA. 

Landscape Ecology 18: 725-740 

Agee, J. Carl N. Skinner. 2005. Basic principles of forest fuel reduction treatments. Forest Ecology 

and Management. 

Aldrich, J. W. 1963. Geographic orientation of American Tetraonidae. In Birds of Oregon: A 

General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University 

Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Altman, B. June 2000. Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East-Slope of the Cascade 

Mountains in Oregon and Washington. Oregon-Washington Partners In Flight. 

Arno, S. 1995. Age-Class Structure of Old Growth Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir Stands and its 

Relationship to Fire History. INT-RP-481. 

Barbour, R. W. and W. H. Davis. 1969. Bats of America. University of Kentucky Press. 

Lexington, KY. 286 pp. 

Barrett, J.W. and Roth, L.F. 1985. Response of dwarf mistletoe-infested ponderosa pine To 

thinning: 1: Sapling growth. Research Paper PNW-330. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Forest and Range Experimental Station. Portland, OR. 15p. 

Bate, L.J. 1995. Monitoring woodpecker abundance and habitat in the Central Oregon Cascades. 

Masters Thesis. Univ. of Idaho, Moscow. 116pp. 

Bate, L.J., E.O. Garton, and M. J. Wisdon. 1999. Estimating snag and large tree densities and 

distributions on a landscape for wildlife management. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station, General Technical Report, Portland, Oregon. PNW-GTR-425. 76 pp. 

Belsky, J. A., A. Matzke, and S. Uselman. 1997. Survey of livestock influences on stream 

and riparian ecosystems in the western United States. Oregon Natural Desert Association, 

Portland, Oregon. 
References 

269

Belsky, J. A., and D. M. Blumenthal. 1997. Effects of livestock grazing on stand dynamics 

and soils in upland forests of the interior west. Conservation Biology, Volume 11: 315 – 327. 

Belsky, J. A. and J. L. Gelbard. 2000. Livestock grazing and weed invasions in the arid West. 

Scientific report published by the Oregon Natural Desert Association, 31pages. 

Bend-Fort Rock District Project Surveys and Wildlife Sightings Records. 

Benson, Arlene. 2002. Meadow Canyon Prescribed Burn: Effects of Fire on Obsidian Hydration 

Bands IN The Effects of Fire and Heat on Obsidian. Papers presented at the 33rd Annual Meeting of 

the Society for California Archaeology, April 1999, Sacramento, California. Janine M. Loyd, Thomas 

M. Origer, and David A. Fredrickson, editors. 

Bigby, Steve. 2009. Personal Communication, US Forest Service, Road manager, Bend/Fort Rock 

Ranger District. 

Bilek E.M., Kenneth Skog, Jeremy Fried, Glen Christensen. 2005. Fuel to Burn: Economics of 

Converting Forest Thinnings to Energy Using BioMax in Southern Oregon. US Forest Service Forest 

Products Laboratory GTR-157 

Bishop, C., E. O. Garton, and J. W. Unsworth. 2001. Bitterbrush and cheatgrass quality on 3 

southwest Idaho winter ranges. Journal of Range Management, Volume 54: 595 – 602. 

Bolsinger, C.L.1978. The extent of dwarf mistletoe in sex principal softwoods in California, Oregon 

and Washington, as determined from forest survey records. In: Hessburg, P.F., Povak, N.A., Salter, 

R.B. 2008. Thinning and prescribed fire effects dwarf mistletoe severity in an eastern Cascade Range 

dry forest, Washington. Forest Ecology and Management 255 (2008) 2907-2915. 

Booser, Joanne, Jim White. 1996. Calculating Maximum Stand Density Indexes (SDI) for Deschutes 

National Forest Plant Associations. 

Bormann, Bernard T., Homann, P.S., Darbyshire, R.L., Morrissette, B.A. 2008. Intense forest 

wildfire sharply reduces mineral soil C and N: the first direct evidence. Canadian Journal of 

Forest Research 38: 2771-2783 (2008). 

Brown, James K., E.D. Reinhardt, K.A. Kramer; 2003. Coarse Woody Debris: Managing Benefits 

in the Recovering Forest. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-105. 

Brown, James K. 1974. Handbook for Inventorying Downed Woody Material. USDA Forest Service 

General Technical Report INT-16. 

Bull, E.L. 1980. Resource partitioning among woodpeckers in northeastern Oregon. Doctoral thesis. 

Univ. of Idaho, Moscow. 109pp. 

Bull, E.L., and M.G. Henjum. 1990. Ecology of the Great Gray Owl. In Birds of Oregon: A 

General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University 

Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 
References 

270

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. USDA 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, comps. eds. Martens, Sables, and Fishers: Biology and 

Conservation. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. p283-296. 

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. 

Clements, C. D. and J. A. Young. 2001. Antelope bitterbrush seed production and stand age. Journal 

of Range Management. Volume 54: No. 3, 269 – 273. 

Cochran, P.H., Hopkins, W.E. 1990. Does Fire Exclusion Increase Productivity of 

Ponderosa Pine? Symposium on Management and Productivity of Western-Montane Forest 

Soils. 

Cochran, P. et al. 1994. Suggested Stocking Levels for Forest Stands in Northeastern Oregon and 

Southeastern Washington. Pacific Northwest Research Station PNW-RN-513. 

Cogder, W.W. 1913. Summary of Report on Paulina National Forest. USFS Portland Oregon 

Conklin, D. A. and Geils, B. W. 2008. Survival and Sanitation of Dwarf Mistletoe-Infected 

Ponderosa Pine Following Prescribed Underburning. Western Journal of Applied Forestry. 23(4) 216-

222. 

Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST). 2002. Task force Members: Wouldiam 

C. Krueger (Cochair), Department of Rangeland Resources, Oregon State University, Corvallis; Matt 

A. Sanderson (Cochair), U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, University 

Park, Pennsylvania; James B. Cropper, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, University Park, Pennsylvania; Mary Miller-Goodman, Department of Agronomy and 

Soils, Auburn University, Alabama; Claudia E. Kelley, Department of Rangeland Resources, Oregon 

State University, Corvallis; Rex D. Pieper, Department of Animal and Range Sciences, New Mexico 

State University, Las Cruces; Pat L. Shaver, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, Corvallis, Oregon; M. J. Trlica, Department of Rangeland Ecosystem Science, 

Colorado State University, Fort Collins. Reviewers: Vivien G. Allen, Department of Plant and Soil 

Science, Texas Tech University, Lubbock; Dwight Fisher, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Agricultural Research Service, Watkinsville, Georgia; Kris M. Havstad, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Las Cruces, New Mexico; Phillip L. Sims, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Woodward, Oklahoma. Environmental impacts of 

livestock on U. S. grazing lands. Task force report, No. 22:1-16. 

Cottrell, M. J. 1981. Resource partitioning and reproductive success of three species of hawks (Buteo

spp.) in an Oregon prairie. In Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. 

L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 
References 

271

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. 

Delaney, Matt 2007. Developing volume-to-biomass factors for small diameter tree species in Central 

Oregon: Progress Report 3; Delaney Forestry Services. 

Deschutes National Forest. 1991. Deschutes National Forest Minimum Stocking Guidelines 

(8/19/91) 

Dixon, G. 2002. Forest Vegetation Simulator. Version 6.21. Southern Oregon Northern 

California SORNEC variant. http://www.fs.fed.us/fmsc/fvs/software/varfiles.php. 

Dixon, Gary E. comp. 2002. Essential FVS; A user’s guide to the Forest Vegetation Simulation. 

Internal Rep. Fort Collins Co.: USFS, Forest Management Service Center. 

Dixon, Rita Dianne. 1995. Ecology of white-headed woodpeckers in the central Oregon Cascades. 

Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. M.S. thesis. 148pp. 

Dobkin, D., Gettinger, R., Gerdes, M. 1995. Springtime movements, roost use, and foraging activity 

of Townsend’s big-eared bat (Plecotus townsendii) in central Oregon. Great Basin Naturalist 55(4). 

pp. 315-321. 

Dunaway, Vickie. 2009. Personal Communication, US Forest Service Timber Sale Appraiser Bend/ 

Fort Rock Ranger District. 

Eglitis, Andris. 2008. Personal communication. 

Eglitis, A. 2009. Forest Entomologist. Forest Health Protection, USDA Forest Service, Central 

Oregon Service Center. Deschutes National Forest, Bend, Oregon. 

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 pp. 

Erickson, J.L., and S.D. West. 1995. Managed forests in the western Cascades: the effects of seral 

stage on bat habitat use patterns. In: B.M.R. Barclay and R.M. Brigham, eds. Bats and Forests 

Symposium. Victoria, British Columbia. p.215-227. 

Fitzer, Linda. 2009. Personal Communication, US Forest Service Timber Contract Representative, 

Deschutes National Forest. 

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 Birds of Oregon: A General 

Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, 

Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 
References 

272

Garland, John J. 1983. Designated Skidtrails to Minimize Soil Compaction. 

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. 

Gilligan, J., M. Smith, D. Rogers, and A. Contreras. 1994. Birds of Oregon: status and 

distribution. In Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. 

Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

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, Oregon Dept. Fish 

and Wildlife, Bend, OR. 84pp. 

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. 

Grant, R.C. 1939. Report of Pine Beetle Surveys on the Deschutes National Forest, Oregon 1931-

1938. Forest Service Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine. 

Hawksworth, F.G. 1977. The 6-class dwarf mistletoe rating system. US Forest Service General 

Technical Report RM-48. 7p. In: Conklin, D. A. and Geils, B. W. 2008. Survival and Sanitation of 

Dwarf Mistletoe-Infected Ponderosa Pine Following Prescribed Underburning. Western Journal of 

Applied Forestry. 23(4) 216-222. 

Hawksworth, F.G., Moir, W.H., Janssen, J.E. 1992. Effects of dwarf mistletoe in old-Growth 

lodgepole pine stands at Fraser Experimental Forest, Colorado. In: Kaufmann, M.R., Moir, W.H., 

Bassett, R.L., tech. cords. Old-growth forest in the Southwest and Rocky Mountain Regions, 

Proceedings of a Workshop; 1992 March 9-13; Portal, AZ. General Technical Report RM-213. U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experimental Station: 

60-65. In: Hawksworth, F.G., Wiens, D. 1996. Dwarf Mistletoes: Biology, Pathology, and 

Systematics. Agriculture Handbook 709. USDA Forest Service. 410 p. 

Hawksworth, Frank G. Delbert Wiens. 1996. dwarf Mistletoes: Biology, Pathology , and 

Systematics. Agriculture Handbook 709. 

Henny, C. J. 2006. Cooper’s Hawk. Pp 149-150 in Birds of Oregon: A General Reference. D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, Eds. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 

Hessburg, P.F., Mitchell, R.G., Filip, G.M. 1994. Historical and current roles of insects and 

pathogens in eastern Oregon and Washington forested landscapes. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report PNW-327, 72 pp. 

Hessburg, P.F., Povak, N.A., Salter, R.B. 2008. Thinning and prescribed fire effects dwarf mistletoe 

severity in an eastern Cascade Range dry forest, Washington. Forest Ecology and Management 255 

(2008) 2907-2915. 

Hessburg, P.F., Smith, B.G., Kreiter, S.D., et al. 1999. Historical and current forest and range 

landscapes in the interior Columbia River Basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins. Part I. 

Linking vegetation patterns and landscape vulnerability to potential insect and pathogen disturbances. 
References 

273

USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report PNW-458, 357 

pp. In: Hessburg, P.F., Povak, N.A., Salter, R.B. 2008. Thinning and prescribed fire effects dwarf 

mistletoe severity in an eastern Cascade Range dry forest, Washington. Forest Ecology and 

Management 255 (2008) 2907-2915. 

 

Hessburg, P.F., Smith, B.G., Salter, R.B., Ottmar, R.D., Alvarado, E. 2000. Recent changes 

(1930s-1990s) in spatial patterns of interior northwest forests, USA. Forest Ecology and Management. 

136, 53-83. In: Hessburg, P.F., Povak, N.A., Salter, R.B. 2008. Thinning and prescribed fire effects 

dwarf mistletoe severity in an eastern Cascade Range dry forest, Washington. Forest Ecology and 

Management 255 (2008) 2907-2915. 

Hessl, Amy E, Don McKenzie, Richard Schellhaas; 2004. Drought and Pacific Decadal Oscillation 

Linked to Fire Occurrence in the Inland Pacific Northwest; Ecological Applications 14(2) pp. 425-442 

Holmes, A. L. and G. R. Geupel. 1998. Avian population studies at naval weapons systems training 

facility Boardman, Oregon. In Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and 

A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Hopkins, B., Simon, S., Schafer, M., Lillybridge, T. 1992. Region 6 Interim Old Growth 

Definition for Ponderosa Pine Series. 

Hopkins, B., S. Simon, M. Schafer, and T. Lillybridge. 1993. Region 6 Interim Old Growth 

Definitions for Grand fir/White fir series, Lodgepole series, and Ponderosa pine series. 

Janes S. W. 1985a. Behavioral interactions and habitat relations among grassland and shrub steppe 

raptors. In Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Marshall, M.G. Hunter, and A.L. Contreras. Eds. 

2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Janes S. W. 1985b. Habitat selection in raptorial birds. In Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, 

OR. 768 pp. 

Johnsgard, P. A. 1987. Diving birds of North America. In Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, 

OR. 768 pp. 

Johnsgard , Paul A. 1990. Hawks, Eagles, and Falcons of North America. Smithsonian Institution 

Press, Washington D.C. pp. 164-182. 

Kolb, T.E., J.K. Agee, P.Z. Fule, N.G. McDowell, K.Pearson, A. Sala, R.H.Waring, 2007. 

Perpetuating Old ponderosa pine. Forest ecology and Management 249 141-157 

Littlefield, C. D. 1990. Birds of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Oregon. In Birds of Oregon: A 

General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University 

Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Lundsten, J. 1996. Solitary Sandpiper nesting in Marion County, Oregon? In Birds of Oregon: A 

General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University 

Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 
References 

274

Maestas, J. D., R. L. Knight, and W. C. Gilgert. 2002. Cows, condos, or neither; What’s best for 

rangeland ecosystems? Rangelands, Volume 24(6):36 – 42. 

Maffei, H. 2009. Forest Pathologist. Forest Health Protection, USDA Forest Service, Central Oregon 

Service Center. Deschutes National Forest, Bend, Oregon. 

Maffei, H.M. and Beatty, J. 1988. Changes in the incidence of dwarf mistletoe over 30 years in the 

southwest. Proceedings of the 36th Annual Western International Forest Disease Work Conference. 

Maffei, H.M., and Jacobi, W.R. 1986. The effect of dwarf mistletoe infection on growth and 

mortality rates of ponderosa pine growing in unevenaged-irregular stands in Colorado. Proceedings of 

the 34th Annual Western International Forest Disease Work Conference, Juneau, AK. September 9-12. 

Marshall, D. 1992. Status of the Northern Goshawk in Oregon and Washington. Audubon Soc., 

Portland, Oregon. 34pp. 

Marshall, D. 1992. Status of the black-backed woodpecker in Oregon and Washington. Audubon 

Society of Portland, Oregon. 32pp. 

Marshall, D. B. 1996. Species at risk. In Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Marshall, M. G. 

Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Marshall, D. B., M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, Eds. 2006. Birds of Oregon: A General 

Reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Maxwell, Wayne, Ward, F., 1980. Photo Series for Quantifying Natural Forest Residues in Common 

Vegetation Types of the Pacific Northwest. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW105. 

McDowell, N., J.R. Brooks, S.A. Fitzgerald, B.J.Bond, 2003. Carbon isotope discrimination and 

growth response of old Pinus ponderosa trees to stand density reductions. Plan, Cell and Environment 

26, 631-644 

McNabb, D.H., Froehlich, H.A., 1983. Conceptual Model for Predicting Forest Productivity Losses 

from Soil Compaction. 

Mellen, K., B. G. Marcot, J. L. Ohmann, K. L. Waddell, S. A. Livingston, E. A. Willhite, B. B. 

Hostetler, C. Ogden, and T. Dreisbach. 2006. 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. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region and Pacific Northwest Research 

Station; USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon State Office; Portland, Oregon. 

http//wwwnotes.fs.fed.us:81/pnw/DecAID/DecAID.nsf 

Miller, J. M.; Keen, F. P., 1960. Biology and control of the western pine beetle. Misc. Publ. 800. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture; 381 p. 

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. 
References 

275

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. 

Natureserve. 2006. Natureserve Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 

4.7 Natureserve, Arlington, VA. Available at http:www.natureserve.org/explorer 

Oregon Covered Employment & Payrolls by County and Industry, Oregon Employment 

Department, and US Bureau of Labor Statistics 

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 2004-2006. Database of Waterbodies Considered 

for 303(d) Listing in Oregon. 

Ormsbee, P.C. 1995. Characteristics, use, and distribution of day roosts selected by female Myotis 

volans (long-legged myotis) in forested habitat of the Central Oregon Cascades. In: B.M.R. Barclay 

and R.M. Brigham, eds. Bats and Forests Symposium. Victoria, British Columbia. p. 124-131. 

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 Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Marshall, M. G. 

Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Peek James M., Korol, Jerome J., Gay Donald, Hershey Terry. 2000. Overstory-understory 

biomass changes over a 35-year period in south central Oregon. Forest Ecology and Management. 

150:267-277. 

Perlmeter, S. 1996. The 1996 Bat Project: Final Report. Deschutes National Forest, Oregon. 

Perlmeter, S. 1998& 1999. Patterns of Roost Selection by Long-Legged Myotis Bat Year 1&2 

Powers, Charmane. 2006. Draft Conservation Strategy for Pumice Grape-Fern (Botrychium 

pumicola). Deschutes and Fremont-Winema National Forests and Prineville District, Bureau of Land 

Management. 

Powers, P.V. 2008. Personal Communication. Deadlog Project Silviculturist. Deschutes National 

Forest, Bend Fort Rock Ranger District. peterpowers@fs.fed.us. 541-383-4774. 

Powers, P.V. 2009. Deadlog Silviculture Report. USDA Forest Service. 

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. 

Puter S.A.D., Horace Stevens. 1908. Looters of the Public Domain. The Portland Printing House 

Publishers Portland, Oregon. 

Rey, M. 2002. Federally owned rangelands: Are there new grounds for common ground? (Speech) by 

Under Secretary of Agriculture Mark Rey , 67th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources 

Conference Dallas, Texas; April 4, 2002. 
References 

276

Reynolds, T. D., T. D. Rich, and D. A. Stephens. 1999. Sage Thrasher (Oreoscoptes montanus). In

The Birds of North America, No. 463 (A. Poole and F. gill, eds.). The Birds of N. Am., Inc., 

Philadelphia, PA. In Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. 

Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Rheinberger Steve 2009. TEA.ECON econ52.xls http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/fp 

/FPWebPage/FP70104A/Programs.htm US Forest Service Region 6 

Rheinberger Steve 2008. logcost100.xls http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/fp 

/FPWebPage/FP70104A/Programs.htm US Forest Service Region 6 

Ritchie, M, Brian Wing, Todd Hamilton. 2008. Stability of the Large Tree Component in Treated 

and Untreated Late-Seral Interior Ponderosa Pine Stands. Canadian Journal of Forest Resources: 38; 

919- 923 

Robinson, J. A., L. W. Oring, J. P. Skorupa, and R. Boettcher. 1997. American Avocet 

(Recurvirostra Americana). In The birds of North America, No. 275 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). In

Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Rochelle, James A. 1999. Forest Fragmentation: Wildlife Implications. Koninklijke Brill NV, 

Leiden, The Netherlands. 

Rose, C. L., B. G. Marcot, T. K. Mellen, 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. 

Roth, L.F. 1953. Pine dwarf mistletoe on the Pringle Falls Experimental Forest. USDA Pacific 

Northwest Forest and Range Experimental Station. No. 91, 1-3. 

Roth, L.F. and Barrett, J.W. 1985. Response of Dwarf Mistletoe-infested ponderosa pine To 

Thinning: 2. Dwarf Mistletoe Propagation. USDA Forest Service. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range 

Experiment Station. Research Paper PNW-331. 

Ruggiero, L.F., K.B. Aubry, S.W. Buskirk, J.L. Lyon, and W.L. Zielinski, tech eds. 1994.

American marten, fisher, lynx, and wolverine in the western United States. USDA Forest Service, 

Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-254. 184pp. 

Saab, V., R. Brannon, J. Dudley, L. Donohoo, D. Vanderzanden, V. Johnson, and H. Lachowski. 

2002. Selection of fire-created snags at two spatial scales by cavity-nesting birds. In: Laudenslayer, 

William F., Jr.; Valentine, Brad; Weatherspoon, C. Philip; Lisle, Thomas E., technical coordinators. 

Proceedings of the symposium on the ecology and management of dead wood in western forests. 1999 

November 2-4; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-181. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research 

Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/gtr-181/062_Saab.pdf

Savory, A. 2002. With careful management, grazing can help restore the western range. Headwaters 

News, March 13, 2002. 
References 

277

Sawyer, M. 1981. Solitary Sandpiper: probable nesting in Oregon. In Birds of Oregon: A General 

Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, 

Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Schmitt, C.L. 1996. BMPMZ Management Guide, Management of Ponderosa Pine Infected with 

Western Dwarf Mistletoe in Northeastern Oregon. Blue Mountains Pest Management Zone. WallowaWhitman National Forest. BMZ-96-07. 

Severson, K. E. and P. J. Urness. 1994. Livestock grazing: a tool to improve wildlife habitat. 

Ecological Implications of Livestock Herbivory in the West. Pages 232 – 249. 

Shackley, Steven M. and Carolyn Dillian. 2002. Thermal and Environmental Effects on Obsidian 

Geochemistry: Experimental and Archaeological Evidence IN The Effects of Fire and Heat on 

Obsidian. Papers presented at the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Society for California Archaeology, 

April 1999, Sacramento, California. Janine M. Loyd, Thomas M. Origer, and David A. Fredrickson, 

editors. 

Spies, T.A., M.A. Hemstrom, A. Youngblood, S. Hummel, 2006. Conserving Old-Growth Forest 

Diversity in Disturbance-Prone Landscapes. Conservation Biology vol. 20, No.2, 351-362 

Sussmann P. 2005. 18 Fire Herbicide Treatment Environmental Assessment, Soil Specialist Report, 

Deschutes National Forest, Pacific Northwest Region. 

Thomas, J.W., ed. 1979. Wildlife habitats in managed forests: The Blue mountains of Oregon and 

Washington. USDA Forest Service, Ag. Handbook 553. 

Toupin, Rick. 2009. Personal Communication, US Forest Service Region 6 Portland Oregon. 

USDA Forest Service, R6. 2008. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/nr/fid/data.shtml R6 Aerial Surveys – 

USFS, R6, Natural Resources, Forest Health Protection 

USDA Forest Service. Larsen. 1976. Soil Resource Inventory, Deschutes National Forest, Pacific 

Northwest Region. 

USDA Forest Service. 1988. General Water Quality Best Management Practices, Pacific Northwest 

Region. 

USDA Forest Service. 1990. Land and Resource Management Plan, Deschutes National Forest, 

Pacific Northwest Region. 

USDA Forest Service. 1993. Interim Old Growth Definitions. For Douglas-fir Series, Grand/White 

Fir Series, Lodgepole Pine Series, Pacific Silver Series, Ponderosa Pine Series, Port-Orford-Cedar 

Series, Tanoak Series, Subalpine Fir Series, and Western Hemlock Series. 

USDA Forest Service. 1994. The Scientific Basis for Conserving Forest Carnivores in the Western 

United States. American Marten, Fisher, Lynx, and Wolverine. 

USDA Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest. 1994. Deschutes National Forest Wildlife Tree 

and Log Implementation Strategy (WLTL), 53pp. 

USDA Forest Service, 1995. Inland Native Fish Strategy, Decision Notice and Finding of No 

Significant Impact. Interim Environmental Assessment. 
References 

278

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, 1996, 1997 and 1999. Soil Monitoring Reports. Deschutes National 

Forest, Pacific Northwest Region. 

USDA Forest Service. 1996. Final Interpretation of Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines SL-3 and 

SL-4, Document 96-01, Soil Productivity. 

USDA Forest Service. 1998. Deschutes National Forest. Integrated Natural Fuels Management 

Strategy. Vol. II. Appendix D. 

USDA Forest Service. 1998. Deschutes National Forest Noxious Weed Control Environmental 

Assessment. Bend, Oregon. 

USDA Forest Service. 1998. FSM 2520, Forest Service Soil Quality Standards, Region 6, 

R-6 Supplement No. 2500-98-1. 

USDA Forest Service. 2001. Guide to Noxious Weed Prevention Practices. USDA Forest Service, 

Washington, D.C. 

USDA Forest Service. 2005. Record of Decision, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Pacific 

Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program, Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants. Portland, 

Oregon. 

USDA Forest Service. 2006. Cluster II Environmental Assessment, Deschutes National Forest.. 

USDA Forest Service. 2006. Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests and Crooked River National 

Grassland Invasive Plant Prevention Practices. 

USDA Forest Service. 2007. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Invasive Plant Treatments, 

Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests, Crooked River National Grassland. 

USDA Forest Service. 2008. Update of the Regional Forester's Sensitive Species Lists and 

Transmittal of Strategic Species List. Pacific Northwest Region. Portland, Oregon. 

USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 2008. Regional forester’s special status species 

list. Portland, OR. Memo with 2 enclosures. 

USDI Bureau of Land Management. 2008. Land Status and Cadastral Survey Records- Field Note 

Volume OR-R0436, http://www.blm.gov/or/landrecords/survey

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Status Review of the Northern Goshawk in the Forested 

West. Office of Technical Support – Forest Resources. Portland, OR. Unpublished report. 250 pages. 

http://www.fws.gov/pacific/news/gh_sr.pdf 

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service 2008. Birds of conservation concern 2008. Arlington, Virginia. 87 

pp. 
References 

279

USDI Prineville District Bureau of Land Management, USDA Deschutes National Forest: 2007

Brothers Wildland fire Use Plan 

Van Pelt, Robert, 2008. Identifying Old Trees and forests in Eastern Washington. Washington State 

Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, WA. 

Waring, R.H., Pitman G.B. 1985. Modifying Lodgepole Pine Stands to Change Susceptibility To 

Mountain Pine Beetle Attack. Ecology. 66(3):889-897. 

Watkins, W. 1988. Population density and habitat use by Red-necked Grebes on Upper Klamath 

Lake, Klamath County, Oregon. In Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, 

and A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Wells, Carol G., Ralph E. Campbell, Leonard F. DeBano, Clifford E. Lewis, Richard L. 

Fredriksen, E. Carlyle Franklin, Ronald C. Froelich, Paul H. Dunn. 1979. Effects of Fire on Soil, 

A State-of-Knowledge Review prepared for the Forest Service National Fire Effects Workshop, 

Denver, Colo., April 1978. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report WO-7. U. S. 

Government Printing Office: Washington, D. C. 

White Scheuering, R. and G. McAtee. 2006. Sharp-shinned Hawk. Pp 146-148 in Birds of Oregon: 

A General Reference. D. B. Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, Eds. Oregon State 

University Press, Corvallis, OR. 

Wicker, E.F., Hawksworth, F.G. 1988. Relationships of dwarf mistletoes and Intermediate stand 

cultural practices in the Northern Rockies. In: Schmidt, W.C., comp. Proceedings, Future forests of 

the Mountain West: a stand culture symposium; 1986 September 29-October 3; Missoula, MT. 

General Technical Report INT-243. Ogden, UT: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Intermountain Research Station. 402 p. In: Hawksworth, F.G., Wiens, D. 1996. Dwarf Mistletoes: 

Biology, Pathology, and Systematics. Agriculture Handbook 709. USDA Forest Service. 410 p. 

Wiens, J. A., and J. T. Rotenberry. 1981. Habitat associations and community structure of birds in 

shrub-steppe environments. In Birds of Oregon: A General Reference, Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and 

A. L. Contreras. Eds. 2006. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 768 pp. 

Winkler, H., D. A. Christie, and D. Nurney. 1995. Woodpeckers: An identification guide to the 

woodpeckers of the world. Houghton Mifflin Co., New York, New York. 406 pp. 

Wisdom, M.J. Technical Editor. 2005. The Starkey Project: a synthesis of long-term stucies on elk and 

mule deer. Alliance Communications Group, Lawrence, Kansas, USA. 

Wisdom, M. J., R. S. Holthhausen, B. K. Wales [and others]. In Press. Source habitats for 

terrestrial vertebrates of focus in the Interior Columbia Basin: broad-scale trends and management 

implications. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-xxx. Portland, OR: U. S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. (Quigley, T. M. tech. ed.; The Interior Columbia 

Basin Ecosystem Management Project: Scientific Assessment). Volume 1 221 pp. Volume 2 393 pp. 

Woodbridge, B., G. Silovsky, and K. Austin. 1993. Survey procedure for northern goshawk on National 

Forest Lands in the Pacific Northwest. 12 pp. 
References 

280

Woodbridge, B. and C. D. Hargis (Vojta). 2005. Northern Goshawk Inventory and Monitoring 

Technical Guide. USDA Forest Service, Washington Office, Ecosystem Management Coordination 

Staff, Wildlife Fish Watershed Air Staff. pp 31-53. 

Woolf, J. C. 2003. Effects of thinning and prescribed burning on birds and small mammals. M. S. 

Thesis. University of Montana, Missoula. 141 pages. 

Youngblood, Andrew, Timothy Max, Kent Coe 2004: Stand structure in eastside old-growth 

ponderosa pine forests of Oregon and Northern California. Forest Ecology and Management Volume 

199, pp 191-217. 
Appendices 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 281

APPENDICES 

APPENDIX A: PROPOSED UNITS AND ACTIVITIES – PAGE 283 

APPENDIX B: SOILS – PAGE 294 

APPENDIX C: FIRE AND FUELS – PAGE 303 
Appendix A – Silviculture 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 282

APPENDIX A 
Appendix A Proposed Units and Activities 

283

APPENDIX A: PROPOSED UNITS AND ACTIVITIES 

The silviculture prescriptions are described in DEIS Chapter 2, pages 12-14. 

Table 78: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Proposed Activities 

Unit Acres Harvest 

Treatments 

Silviculture 

Prescriptions Pile Type Fuels Treatments 

Timber Stand 

Improvement 

Treatments 

1 9 NT 20 HP UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB SPC 

2 28 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

3 100 HTH 2 LOP/UB SPC 

4 71 HTH 2 UB NT 

5 33 HTH 1 UB NT 

6 20 HTH 2 MST/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

7 27 HTH 2 LOP/UB SPC 

8 34 HTH 1 PILE/BURN/UB NT 

9 104 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

10 13 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

11 18 HTH 5 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

12 24 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

13 11 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

14 94 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

15 40 HTH 3 MP MST/PILE/BURN SPC 

16 39 HTH 4 MP PILE/BURN/MST/UB SPC 

17 22 HTH 2 MST/UB NT 

18 37 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

19 53 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

20 58 HTH 1 UB NT 

21 38 HTH 1 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

22 88 HTH 1 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

23 62 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

24 32 HTH 2 MP MST/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

25 11 HTH 2 UB NT 

26 40 HTH 2 PILE/BURN/UB NT 

27 64 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

28 17 HSH 7 LOP WHIP 

29 51 HTH 4 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

30 61 HTH 2 MP MST/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

31 24 HTH 1 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

32 26 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

33 16 HTH 1 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

34 31 NT 20 UB NT 

35 19 HTH 4 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

36 49 NT 20 LOP/UB SPC 

37 58 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

38 129 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

39 93 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

40 15 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 
Appendix A Proposed Units and Activities 

284

Unit Acres Harvest 

Treatments 

Silviculture 

Prescriptions Pile Type Fuels Treatments 

Timber Stand 

Improvement 

Treatments 

41 254 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

42 51 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

43 65 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

44 43 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

45 58 HTH 2 MST/UB NT 

46 95 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

47 90 HTH 3 MP PILE/BURN SPC 

48 140 HTH 3 MP PILE/BURN SPC 

49 57 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

50 11 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

51 21 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

52 55 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

53 60 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

54 56 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

55 63 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

56 45 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

57 55 HTH 2 PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

58 23 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

59 37 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

60 70 HTH 5 PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

61 62 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

62 47 HTH 1 MST/UB NT 

63 96 HTH 5 MP MST/UB/PILE/BURN ABSPC 

64 52 NT 20 HP UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB ABSPC 

65 48 HTH 2 UB NT 

66 28 HTH 2 UB NT 

68 17 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

69 114 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

70 33 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

71 39 HTH 5 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

72 54 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

73 19 HTH 1 LFR/LOP/UB NT 

74 19 HTH 1 PILE/BURN/UB NT 

75 41 HTH 2 UB NT 

76 12 HTH 2 UB NT 

77 46 HTH 2 MST/UB NT 

78 54 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

79 20 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

80 39 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

81 28 HTH 4 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

82 27 HSH 7 MP PILE/BURN WHIP 

83 16 HSH 7 MP PILE/BURN WHIP 

84 23 HSH 7 LOP WHIP 

85 37 HSH 7 LOP WHIP 

86 10 HSH 7 LOP WHIP 

87 30 HSH 7 NT NT 
Appendix A Proposed Units and Activities 

285

Unit Acres Harvest 

Treatments 

Silviculture 

Prescriptions Pile Type Fuels Treatments 

Timber Stand 

Improvement 

Treatments 

88 13 HSH 7 LOP WHIP 

89 21 HSH 7 LOP WHIP 

90 5 HTH 1 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

91 83 HSH 7 LOP SPC 

92 20 HTH 1 MST/UB NT 

93 17 HTH 1 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

94 31 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

95 13 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

97 16 HTH 1 NT NT 

98 16 HTH 3 UB NT 

99 42 HTH 3 UB NT 

100 30 HTH 1 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

101 44 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

102 23 HOR 6 MP PILE/BURN SPC 

103 35 HTH 3 LOP SPC 

106 20 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

107 32 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

108 20 HTH 1 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

109 23 HSH 7 MP PILE/BURN WHIP 

110 20 HTH 2 MST/UB NT 

112 7 HSH 7 MP PILE/BURN WHIP 

113 25 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

115 29 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

116 11 NT 20 HP LFR/MST/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

117 50 HTH 2 MST/UB PRUNE 

119 29 NT 20 HP LFR/MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

121 33 HTH 5 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

122 33 NT 20 HP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

123 14 NT 20 UB NT 

124 31 NT 20 UB NT 

125 18 NT 20 UB NT 

126 67 HTH 2 PILE/BURN/UB NT 

128 49 HTH 2 UB NT 

129 57 HTH 2 UB NT 

130 134 HOR 6 MP PILE/BURN SPC 

131 26 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

132 84 HTH 5 UB NT 

133 19 HTH 2 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

134 25 NT 20 MST/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

135 51 NT 20 HP PILE/BURN SPC 

136 46 HTH 2 UB NT 

137 21 HTH 2 NT NT 

138 23 HTH 2 UB NT 

139 134 HTH 2 UB SPC 

140 36 HTH 2 HP PILE/BURN SPC 

141 68 HTH 2 HP PILE/BURN SPC 
Appendix A Proposed Units and Activities 

286

Unit Acres Harvest 

Treatments 

Silviculture 

Prescriptions Pile Type Fuels Treatments 

Timber Stand 

Improvement 

Treatments 

143 35 HTH 1 MP MST/UB/PILE/BURN ABSPC 

144 92 HTH 1 UB NT 

145 198 NT 20 HP MST/UB/PILE/BURN ABSPC 

146 112 NT 20 HP MST/PILE/BURN SPC 

147 400 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

148 65 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

149 235 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/ SPC 

150 228 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

151 35 NT 20 HP MST/PILE/BURN SPC 

152 65 NT 20 HP PILE/BURN SPC 

153 192 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

154 199 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

155 404 NT 20 HP MST/UB/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

156 167 HTH 5 MP MST/UB/PILE/BURN ABSPC 

159 32 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN SPC 

160 120 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN SPC 

161 153 HTH 4 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB ABSPC 

163 56 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

164 57 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

165 46 HTH 1 MST/UB SPC 

166 48 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

167 92 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

168 26 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

169 60 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

170 58 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

171 129 HTH 3 MP PILE/BURN SPC 

172 13 NT 20 LFR/LOP/UB NT 

173 22 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

174 25 HSH 7 MP PILE/BURN WHIP 

175 30 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN SPC 

176 43 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN SPC 

177 27 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN SPC 

179 109 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

180 45 NT 20 MST/UB SPC 

181 24 NT 20 HP MST/UB/LFR/PILE/BURN SPC 

182 20 NT 20 HP UB/LFR/PILE/BURN SPC 

183 31 NT 20 HP MST/UB/LFR/PILE/BURN SPC 

184 7 NT 20 HP UB/LFR/PILE/BURN SPC 

186 22 NT 20 HP UB/LFR/PILE/BURN SPC 

189 371 HTH 4 MP MST/UB/PILE/BURN ABSPC 

190 68 HTH 3 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

191 13 HTH 3 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

192 72 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

193 36 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

195 111 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

196 64 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 
Appendix A Proposed Units and Activities 

287

Unit Acres Harvest 

Treatments 

Silviculture 

Prescriptions Pile Type Fuels Treatments 

Timber Stand 

Improvement 

Treatments 

197 5 NT 20 UB NT 

198 25 NT 20 UB NT 

199 84 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

200 62 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

201 115 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

202 87 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

206 15 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

207 9 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB SPC 

219 16 NT 20 UB NT 

221 28 NT 20 UB NT 

235 9 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

239 14 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB SPC 

246 7 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

252 8 NT 20 UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB SPC 

257 11 NT 20 UB NT 

263 5 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB SPC 

269 32 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB SPC 

300 9 NT NT NT 

301 19 NT NT NT 

302 105 NT NT NT 

303 145 NT NT NT 

304 160 NT NT NT 

305 83 NT NT NT 

306 8 NT NT NT 
Appendix A Proposed Units and Activities 

288

Table 79: Alternative 3 Proposed Activities 

Unit Acres Harvest 

Treatments 

Silviculture 

Prescriptions Pile Type Fuels Treatments 

Timber Stand 

Improvement 

Treatments 

1 9 NT 20 UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

2 28 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

3 100 HTH 2 LOP/UB SPC 

4 71 HTH 2 UB NT 

5 33 HTH 1 UB NT 

6 20 HTH 2 MST/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

7 27 HTH 2 LOP/UB SPC 

8 34 HTH/HSV 1 PILE/BURN/UB NT 

9 104 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

10 13 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

11 18 HTH 5 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

12 24 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

13 11 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

14 94 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

15 40 HTH 3 MP MST/PILE/BURN SPC 

16 39 HTH/HSV 4 MP PILE/BURN/MST/UB SPC 

17 22 HTH 2 MST/UB NT 

18 37 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

19 53 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

20 58 HTH 1 UB NT 

21 38 HTH 1 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

22 88 HTH 1 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

23 62 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

24 32 HTH 2 MST/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

25 11 HTH 2 UB NT 

26 40 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

27 64 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

28 17 HTH 8 LOP WHIP 

29 51 HTH 4 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

30 61 HTH 2 MST/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

31 24 HTH 1 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

32 26 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

33 16 HTH 1 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

34 31 NT 20 UB NT 

35 19 HTH 4 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

36 49 NT 20 LFR/LOP/UB SPC 

37 58 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

38 129 HTH/HSV 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

39 93 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

40 15 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

41 254 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

42 51 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

43 65 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 
Appendix A Proposed Units and Activities 

289

Unit Acres Harvest 

Treatments 

Silviculture 

Prescriptions Pile Type Fuels Treatments 

Timber Stand 

Improvement 

Treatments 

44 43 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

45 58 HTH 2 MST/UB NT 

46 95 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

47 90 HTH/HSV 3 MP PILE/BURN SPC 

48 140 HTH/HSV 3 MP PILE/BURN SPC 

49 57 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

50 11 HTH/HSV 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

51 21 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

52 55 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

53 60 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

54 56 HTH/BIOMASS 10 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

55 63 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

56 45 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

57 55 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

58 23 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

59 37 HTHBIOMASS 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

60 70 HTH/HSV 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

61 62 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

62 47 HTH 1 MST/UB NT 

63 96 HTH/BIOMASS 5 MP MST/UB/PILE/BURN ABSPC 

64 52 NT 20 UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

65 48 HTH 2 UB NT 

66 28 HTH 2 UB NT 

68 17 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

69 114 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

70 33 HTH/BIOMASS 10 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

71 39 HTH 5 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

72 54 HTH/BIOMASS 10 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

73 19 HTH 1 LFR/LOP/UB NT 

74 19 HTH/HSV 1 PILE/BURN/UB NT 

75 41 HTH 2 UB NT 

76 12 HTH 2 UB NT 

77 46 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

78 54 HTH/BIOMASS 10 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

79 20 HTH/BIOMASS 10 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

80 39 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

81 28 HTH/BIOMASS 10 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

82 27 HTH 8 MP PILE/BURN WHIP 

83 16 HTH 8 MP PILE/BURN WHIP 

84 23 HTH 8 LOP WHIP 

85 37 HTH 8 LOP WHIP 

86 10 HTH 8 LOP WHIP 

87 30 HTH 8 NT NT 

88 13 HTH 8 LOP WHIP 

89 21 HTH 8 LOP WHIP 

90 5 HTH/HSV 1 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 
Appendix A Proposed Units and Activities 

290

Unit Acres Harvest 

Treatments 

Silviculture 

Prescriptions Pile Type Fuels Treatments 

Timber Stand 

Improvement 

Treatments 

91 83 HTH 8 LOP SPC 

92 20 HTH 1 MST/UB NT 

93 17 HTH 1 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

94 31 HTH/BIOMASS 10 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

95 13 HTH/BIOMASS 10 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

97 16 HTH 1 NT NT 

98 16 HTH 3 UB NT 

99 42 HTH 3 UB NT 

100 30 HTH 1 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

101 44 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

102 23 HOR 6 MP PILE/BURN SPC 

103 35 HTH 3 LOP SPC 

106 20 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

107 32 HTH 2 MP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

108 20 HTH 1 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

109 23 HTH/HSV 8 MP PILE/BURN WHIP 

110 20 HTH 2 MST/UB NT 

112 7 HTH/HSV 8 MP PILE/BURN WHIP 

113 25 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

115 29 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

116 11 NT 20 HP LFR/MST/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

117 50 HTH 2 MST/UB PRUNE 

119 29 NT 20 HP LFR/MST/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

121 33 HTH 5 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

122 33 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

123 14 NT 20 UB NT 

124 31 NT 20 UB NT 

125 18 NT 20 UB NT 

126 67 HTH 2 MP PILE/BURN/UB NT 

128 49 HTH 2 UB NT 

129 57 HTH 2 UB NT 

130 134 HOR 6 MP PILE/BURN SPC 

131 26 HTH 2 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

132 84 HTH 5 LOP/UB ABSPC 

133 19 HTH 2 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

134 25 HTH 1 MST/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

135 51 BIOMASS 9 MP LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

136 46 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN/MST/UB NT 

137 21 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN/MST/UB NT 

138 23 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN/MST NT 

139 134 NT 20 UB NT 

140 36 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

141 68 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

143 35 HTH 1 MP MST/UB/PILE/BURN ABSPC 

144 92 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

145 198 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB ABSPC 
Appendix A Proposed Units and Activities 

291

Unit Acres Harvest 

Treatments 

Silviculture 

Prescriptions Pile Type Fuels Treatments 

Timber Stand 

Improvement 

Treatments 

146 112 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

147 400 HTH 5 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

148 65 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

149 235 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

150 228 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

151 35 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

152 65 BIOMASS 9 MP LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

153 192 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

154 199 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

155 404 NT 20 HP MST/UB/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

156 167 HTH 5 MP MST/UB/PILE/BURN ABSPC 

159 32 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

160 120 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

161 153 HTH 4 MP MST/PILE/BURN/UB ABSPC 

163 56 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

164 57 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

165 46 HTH 1 MST/LOP/UB SPC 

166 48 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

167 92 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

168 26 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

169 60 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

170 58 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

171 129 HTH 3 MP PILE/BURN SPC 

172 13 NT 20 LFR/LOP/UB NT 

173 22 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

174 25 HTH/HSV 8 MP PILE/BURN WHIP 

175 30 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

176 43 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

177 27 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

179 109 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

180 45 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

181 24 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/UB/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

182 20 BIOMASS 9 MP UB/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

183 31 BIOMASS 9 MP MST/UB/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

184 7 BIOMASS 9 MP UB/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

186 22 BIOMASS 9 MP UB/LFR/PILE/BURN NT 

189 371 HTH 4 MP MST/UB/PILE/BURN ABSPC 

190 68 HTH 3 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

191 13 HTH 3 MP PILE/BURN/UB SPC 

192 72 HTH 20 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

193 36 HTH 1 MP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

195 111 NT 20 HP LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

196 64 HTH 5 MP PILE/BURN/UB WHIP 

197 5 NT 20 UB NT 

198 25 NT 20 UB NT 

199 84 NT 20 MST/UB NT 
Appendix A Proposed Units and Activities 

292

Unit Acres Harvest 

Treatments 

Silviculture 

Prescriptions Pile Type Fuels Treatments 

Timber Stand 

Improvement 

Treatments 

200 62 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

201 115 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

202 87 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

206 15 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

207 9 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

219 16 NT 20 UB NT 

221 28 NT 20 UB NT 

235 9 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

239 14 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

246 7 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

252 8 NT 20 UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

257 11 NT 20 UB NT 

263 5 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

269 32 NT 20 MST/UB/LFR/LFR/LOP/UB NT 

300 9 HTH 2 MST/UB NT 

301 19 HTH 2 MST/UB NT 

302 105 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

303 145 NT 20 MST/UB NT 

304 160 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

305 83 NT 20 HP MST/LFR/PILE/BURN/UB NT 

306 8 NT 20 UB NT 

 
Appendix B 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 293

APPENDIX B 

SOILS 
Appendix B – Soils 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 294

APPENDIX B: SOILS 

Appendix B displays quantitative, unit-specific information that shows the predicted amounts of detrimental soil 

conditions before and after implementation of project activities proposed under both action alternatives. The 

detailed information in Appendix A is summarized in Table 3-1 of the Soil Specialist Report. 

The acres and percentages of existing soil impacts are shown in Column 4. The cumulative increases in 

detrimental soil conditions following mechanical harvest are shown in Column 5. The net changes following 

soil mitigation (subsoiling treatments) are shown in Column 6. The subsoil acres are determined by multiplying 

the estimated percentage (after restoration) by the unit acres (Column 3) and subtracting this amount from the 

disturbed acres in Column 5. Surface area calculations of designated areas such as roads, main skid trails, and 

log landings determine how much area needs to be subsoiled within individual activity areas of known size. 

Table 80: Appendix B - Alternative 2: Estimates of Detrimental Soil Conditions Following 

Mechanical Harvest and Soil Restoration Treatments by Activity Areas. 

EIS Unit 

Number 

Proposed 

Activity 

Regen Cuts: 

HOR, HSH 

Thin/Biomass: 

HTH, BIO, 

HTH/HSV 

Unit 

Acres 

Existing Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Harvest 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Restoration 

Subsoil Acres % of Unit 

2 HTH 29 1.8 6 % 3.8 13 % 0.0 13 % 

3 HTH 101 29.8 30 % 37.4 37 % 9.1 28 % 

4 HTH 71 18.3 26 % 23.4 33 % 6.4 24 % 

5 HTH 33 7.8 24 % 10.2 31 % 3.6 20 % 

6 HTH 20 5.2 26 % 6.6 33 % 2.6 20 % 

7 HTH 27 6.8 25 % 8.6 32 % 3.2 20 % 

8 HTH 34 8.3 24 % 10.5 31 % 3.7 20 % 

9 HTH 104 30.0 29 % 37.4 36 % 9.3 27 % 

10 HTH 13 2.8 22 % 3.8 29 % 1.2 20 % 

11 HTH 18 4.5 25 % 5.8 32 % 2.2 20 % 

12 HTH 24 6.8 28 % 8.4 35 % 2.4 25 % 

13 HTH 11 2.9 26 % 3.6 33 % 1.0 24 % 

14 HTH 94 28.7 31 % 35.7 38 % 9.4 28 % 

15 HTH 40 6.6 17 % 9.6 24 % 1.6 20 % 

16 HTH 39 11.5 30 % 14.4 37 % 3.5 28 % 

17 HTH 22 6.0 27 % 7.5 34 % 2.0 25 % 

18 HTH 37 9.5 26 % 12.2 33 % 3.3 24 % 

19 HTH 53 14.4 27 % 17.8 34 % 4.4 25 % 

20 HTH 58 17.6 30 % 21.5 37 % 5.3 28 % 

21 HTH 38 6.7 18 % 10.3 27 % 2.7 20 % 

22 HTH 33 0.0 0 % 4.3 13 % 0.0 13 % 

23 HTH 88 1.4 2 % 9.2 15 % 0.2 10 % 

24 HTH 32 8.5 27 % 10.9 34 % 2.9 25 % 

25 HTH 11 2.6 25 % 3.5 32 % 1.3 20 % 

26 HTH 40 8.3 21 % 11.7 29 % 3.7 20 % 

27 HTH 64 9.8 15 % 16.2 25 % 3.4 20 % 

28 HSH 17 0.3 1 % 2.4 14 % 0.0 14 % 
Appendix B – Soils 

295

EIS Unit 

Number 

Proposed 

Activity 

Regen Cuts: 

HOR, HSH 

Thin/Biomass: 

HTH, BIO, 

HTH/HSV 

Unit 

Acres 

Existing Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Harvest 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Restoration 

Subsoil Acres % of Unit 

29 HTH 51 1.4 3 % 7.7 15 % 0.0 15 % 

30 HTH 62 16.6 27 % 21.2 34 % 5.7 25 % 

31 HTH 24 5.4 23 % 7.3 30 % 2.5 20 % 

32 HTH 26 2.5 10 % 5.3 20 % 0.0 20 % 

33 HTH 16 0.3 2 % 2.4 15 % 0.0 15 % 

34 HTH 31 6.8 22 % 9.0 29 % 2.8 20 % 

35 HTH 19 0.2 1 % 2.7 14 % 0.0 14 % 

36 HTH 52 13.5 26 % 17.3 33 % 4.8 24 % 

37 HTH 58 12.8 22 % 16.8 29 % 5.2 20 % 

38 HTH 129 30.5 24 % 40.0 31 % 11.6 22 % 

39 HTH 93 21.8 23 % 27.9 30 % 9.3 20 % 

40 HTH 15 4.4 29 % 5.4 36 % 1.6 25 % 

41 HTH 254 63.3 25 % 81.3 32 % 17.8 25 % 

42 HTH 51 9.7 19 % 13.3 26 % 3.6 19 % 

43 HTH 65 18.6 29 % 23.4 36 % 5.8 27 % 

44 HTH 43 13.1 30 % 15.9 37 % 3.9 28 % 

45 HTH 58 17.1 30 % 21.5 37 % 5.3 28 % 

46 HTH 96 0.7 1 % 13.0 14 % 0.0 14 % 

47 HTH 90 0.9 1 % 12.4 14 % 0.0 14 % 

48 HTH 140 3.7 2 % 21.8 16 % 0.6 15 % 

49 HTH 57 16.7 29 % 20.5 36 % 5.1 27 % 

50 HTH 11 3.9 36 % 4.7 43 % 1.4 30 % 

51 HTH 21 5.6 27 % 7.1 34 % 1.8 25 % 

52 HTH 55 16.2 30 % 20.4 37 % 5.0 28 % 

53 HTH 60 17.8 30 % 22.2 37 % 5.4 28 % 

54 HTH 56 8.6 15 % 12.3 22 % 1.1 20 % 

55 HTH 63 19.8 31 % 23.9 38 % 6.3 28 % 

56 HTH 45 14.6 32 % 17.6 39 % 4.1 30 % 

57 HTH 55 12.5 23 % 17.2 31 % 6.2 20 % 

58 HTH 23 5.7 25 % 7.6 33 % 3.0 20 % 

59 HTH 37 0.9 2 % 5.5 15 % 0.0 15 % 

60 HTH 70 1.1 2 % 10.0 14 % 0.0 14 % 

61 HTH 62 0.8 1 % 8.7 14 % 0.3 14 % 

62 HTH 47 1.0 2 % 7.1 15 % 0.0 15 % 

63 HTH 96 11.7 12 % 22.2 23 % 3.0 20 % 

65 HTH 48 14.0 29 % 17.5 36 % 4.5 27 % 

66 HTH 28 8.1 29 % 10.1 36 % 3.1 25 % 

68 HTH 17 4.1 24 % 5.5 32 % 2.1 20 % 

69 HTH 114 33.4 29 % 42.0 37 % 11.2 27 % 

70 HTH 33 1.2 4 % 5.6 17 % 0.0 17 % 

71 HTH 39 0.3 1 % 5.5 14 % 0.0 14 % 

72 HTH 54 1.1 2 % 8.0 15 % 0.0 15 % 

73 HTH 19 5.1 27 % 6.6 35 % 1.8 25 % 
Appendix B – Soils 

296

EIS Unit 

Number 

Proposed 

Activity 

Regen Cuts: 

HOR, HSH 

Thin/Biomass: 

HTH, BIO, 

HTH/HSV 

Unit 

Acres 

Existing Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Harvest 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Restoration 

Subsoil Acres % of Unit 

74 HTH 19 0.5 3 % 3.0 16 % 0.5 13 % 

75 HTH 41 12.1 30 % 15.2 37 % 3.7 28 % 

76 HTH 12 3.2 27 % 4.1 34 % 1.3 23 % 

77 HTH 46 11.6 25 % 15.6 34 % 5.0 23 % 

78 HTH 54 11.5 21 % 15.1 28 % 4.3 20 % 

79 HTH 20 0.0 0 % 2.6 13 % 0.0 13 % 

80 HTH 39 11.3 29 % 14.0 36 % 3.5 27 % 

81 HTH 28 4.9 16 % 7.8 28 % 2.2 20 % 

82 HSH 27 0.6 2 % 3.0 11 % 0.0 11 % 

83 HSH 16 0.2 1 % 1.9 12 % 0.0 12 % 

84 HSH 23 0.0 0 % 3.0 13 % 0.0 13 % 

85 HSH 37 0.0 0 % 4.8 13 % 0.0 13 % 

86 HSH 10 0.0 0 % 1.3 13 % 0.0 13 % 

87 HSH 30 1.8 6 % 4.3 14 % 0.0 14 % 

88 HSH 13 0.7 5 % 2.2 17 % 0.0 17 % 

89 HSH 21 0.0 0 % 2.7 13 % 0.0 13 % 

90 HTH 5 0.0 0 % 0.7 13 % 0.0 13 % 

91 HSH 83 0.5 1 % 11.6 14 % 0.0 14 % 

92 HTH 20 0.3 2 % 3.0 15 % 0.0 15 % 

93 HTH 17 0.3 2 % 2.6 15 % 0.0 15 % 

94 HTH 31 0.3 1 % 4.3 14 % 0.0 14 % 

95 HTH 13 0.6 2 % 2.2 15 % 0.0 15 % 

97 HTH 16 0.5 9 % 2.0 12 % 0.0 12 % 

98 HTH 16 3.6 23 % 4.8 30 % 1.6 20 % 

99 HTH 42 4.8 11 % 8.8 21 % 2.5 15 % 

100 HTH 30 1.7 6 % 5.5 18 % 0.0 18 % 

101 HTH 44 12.9 29 % 15.8 36 % 3.9 27 % 

102 HOR 23 4.0 17 % 5.5 24 % 4.6 4 % 

103 HTH 35 0.0 0 % 4.6 13 % 0.0 13 % 

106 HTH 20 5.8 29 % 7.2 36 % 2.2 25 % 

107 HTH 32 10.1 32 % 12.5 39 % 3.2 29 % 

108 HTH 20 5.8 29 % 7.2 36 % 2.2 25 % 

109 HTH 23 6.6 29 % 8.3 36 % 2.3 26 % 

110 HTH 20 5.2 26 % 6.7 34 % 2.1 23 % 

112 HTH 7 2.1 30 % 2.6 37 % 1.0 23 % 

117 HTH 50 0.0 0 % 6.5 13 % 0.0 13 % 

121 HTH 33 0.2 1 % 4.6 14 % 0.0 14 % 

126 HTH 67 19.0 28 % 23.5 35 % 6.7 25 % 

128 HTH 49 6.5 13 % 10.4 21 % 0.6 20 % 

129 HTH 57 11.3 20 % 15.4 27 % 4.0 20 % 

130 HOR 134 21.5 16 % 30.8 23 % 17.4 10 % 

131 HTH 26 7.7 30 % 9.6 37 % 2.3 28 % 

132 HTH 84 21.5 26 % 27.5 33 % 7.3 24 % 
Appendix B – Soils 

297

EIS Unit 

Number 

Proposed 

Activity 

Regen Cuts: 

HOR, HSH 

Thin/Biomass: 

HTH, BIO, 

HTH/HSV 

Unit 

Acres 

Existing Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Harvest 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Restoration 

Subsoil Acres % of Unit 

133 HTH 19 6.1 32 % 7.4 39 % 2.1 28 % 

136 HTH 46 10.9 24 % 13.3 29 % 4.1 20 % 

137 HTH 21 5.5 26 % 6.5 31 % 2.3 20 % 

138 HTH 23 6.9 30 % 8.1 35 % 1.9 27 % 

139 HTH 134 37.1 28 % 44.2 33 % 9.4 26 % 

140 HTH 36 9.6 27 % 11.5 32 % 2.5 25 % 

141 HTH 68 18.0 27 % 18.4 32 % 1.4 25 % 

143 HTH 35 8.5 24 % 11.1 32 % 3.4 22 % 

144 HTH 92 17.4 19 % 22.1 24 % 8.3 15 % 

147 HTH 400 60.6 15 % 100.2 25 % 20.2 20 % 

156 HTH 167 27.1 16 % 43.1 26 % 9.7 20 % 

161 HTH 153 8.6 6 % 27.4 18 % 0.2 18 % 

165 HTH 46 13.1 29 % 16.6 36 % 4.2 27 % 

171 HTH 129 39.1 30 % 47.7 37 % 9.0 30 % 

174 HSH 25 0.0 0 % 3.3 13 % 0.0 13 % 

189 HTH 371 14.7 4 % 58.5 16 % 0.0 16 % 

190 HTH 68 20.4 30 % 25.2 37 % 8.2 25 % 

191 HTH 13 3.3 25 % 4.2 32 % 1.6 20 % 

196 HTH 64 15.9 25 % 20.5 32 % 5.8 23 % 
Appendix B – Soils 

298

Table 81: Appendix B - Alternative 3 - Estimates of Detrimental Soil Conditions Following 

Mechanical Harvest and Soil Restoration Treatments by Activity Areas 

EIS Unit 

Number 

Proposed 

Activity 

Regen Cuts: 

HOR, HSH 

Thin/Biomass: 

HTH, BIO, 

HTH/HSV 

Unit 

Acres 

Existing Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Harvest 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Restoration 

Subsoil Acres % of Unit 

2 HTH 29 1.8 6 % 3.8 13 % 0.0 13 % 

3 HTH 101 29.8 30 % 37.4 37 % 9.1 28 % 

4 HTH 71 18.3 26 % 23.4 33 % 6.4 24 % 

5 HTH 33 7.8 24 % 10.2 31 % 3.6 20 % 

6 HTH 20 5.2 26 % 6.6 33 % 2.6 20 % 

7 HTH 27 6.8 25 % 8.6 32 % 3.2 20 % 

8 HTH/HSV 34 8.3 24 % 10.5 31 % 3.7 20 % 

9 HTH 104 30.0 29 % 37.4 36 % 9.3 27 % 

10 HTH 13 2.8 22 % 3.8 29 % 1.2 20 % 

11 HTH 18 4.5 25 % 5.8 32 % 2.2 20 % 

12 HTH 24 6.8 28 % 8.4 35 % 2.4 25 % 

13 HTH 11 2.9 26 % 3.6 33 % 1.0 24 % 

14 HTH 94 28.7 31 % 35.7 38 % 9.4 28 % 

15 HTH 40 6.6 17 % 9.6 24 % 1.6 20 % 

16 HTH/HSV 39 11.5 30 % 14.4 37 % 3.5 28 % 

17 HTH 22 6.0 27 % 7.5 34 % 2.0 25 % 

18 HTH 37 9.5 26 % 12.2 33 % 3.3 24 % 

19 HTH 53 14.4 27 % 17.8 34 % 4.4 25 % 

20 HTH 58 17.6 30 % 21.5 37 % 5.3 28 % 

21 HTH 38 6.7 18 % 10.3 27 % 2.7 20 % 

22 HTH 33 0.0 0 % 4.3 13 % 0.0 13 % 

23 HTH 88 1.4 2 % 9.2 15 % 0.2 10 % 

24 HTH 32 8.5 27 % 10.9 34 % 2.9 25 % 

25 HTH 11 2.6 25 % 3.5 32 % 1.3 20 % 

26 HTH 40 8.3 21 % 11.7 29 % 3.7 20 % 

27 HTH 64 9.8 15 % 16.2 25 % 3.4 20 % 

28 HTH 17 0.3 1 % 2.4 14 % 0.0 14 % 

29 HTH 51 1.4 3 % 7.7 15 % 0.0 15 % 

30 HTH 62 16.6 27 % 21.2 34 % 5.7 25 % 

31 HTH 24 5.4 23 % 7.3 30 % 2.5 20 % 

32 HTH 26 2.5 10 % 5.3 20 % 0.0 20 % 

33 HTH 16 0.3 2 % 2.4 15 % 0.0 15 % 

34 HTH 31 6.8 22 % 9.0 29 % 2.8 20 % 

35 HTH 19 0.2 1 % 2.7 14 % 0.0 14 % 

36 HTH 52 13.5 26 % 17.3 33 % 4.8 24 % 

37 HTH 58 12.8 22 % 16.8 29 % 5.2 20 % 

38 HTH/HSV 129 30.5 24 % 40.0 31 % 11.6 22 % 

39 HTH 93 21.8 23 % 27.9 30 % 9.3 20 % 

40 HTH 15 4.4 29 % 5.4 36 % 1.6 25 % 
Appendix B – Soils 

299

EIS Unit 

Number 

Proposed 

Activity 

Regen Cuts: 

HOR, HSH 

Thin/Biomass: 

HTH, BIO, 

HTH/HSV 

Unit 

Acres 

Existing Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Harvest 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Restoration 

Subsoil Acres % of Unit 

41 HTH 254 63.3 25 % 81.3 32 % 17.8 25 % 

42 HTH 51 9.7 19 % 13.3 26 % 3.6 19 % 

43 HTH 65 18.6 29 % 23.4 36 % 5.8 27 % 

44 HTH 43 13.1 30 % 15.9 37 % 3.9 28 % 

45 HTH 58 17.1 30 % 21.5 37 % 5.3 28 % 

46 HTH 96 0.7 1 % 13.0 14 % 0.0 14 % 

47 HTH/HSV 90 0.9 1 % 12.4 14 % 0.0 14 % 

48 HTH/HSV 140 3.7 2 % 21.8 16 % 0.6 15 % 

49 HTH 57 16.7 29 % 20.5 36 % 5.1 27 % 

50 HTH/HSV 11 3.9 36 % 4.7 43 % 1.4 30 % 

51 HTH 21 5.6 27 % 7.1 34 % 1.8 25 % 

52 HTH 55 16.2 30 % 20.4 37 % 5.0 28 % 

53 HTH 60 17.8 30 % 22.2 37 % 5.4 28 % 

54 HTH 56 8.6 15 % 12.3 22 % 1.1 20 % 

55 HTH 63 19.8 31 % 23.9 38 % 6.3 28 % 

56 HTH 45 14.6 32 % 17.6 39 % 4.1 30 % 

57 HTH 55 12.5 23 % 17.2 31 % 6.2 20 % 

58 HTH 23 5.7 25 % 7.6 33 % 3.0 20 % 

59 HTH/BIO 37 0.9 2 % 5.5 15 % 0.0 15 % 

60 HTH 70 1.1 2 % 10.0 14 % 0.0 14 % 

61 HTH 62 0.8 1 % 8.7 14 % 0.3 14 % 

62 HTH 47 1.0 2 % 7.1 15 % 0.0 15 % 

63 HTH/BIO 96 11.7 12 % 22.2 23 % 3.0 20 % 

65 HTH 48 14.0 29 % 17.5 36 % 4.5 27 % 

66 HTH 28 8.1 29 % 10.1 36 % 3.1 25 % 

68 HTH 17 4.1 24 % 5.5 32 % 2.1 20 % 

69 HTH 114 33.4 29 % 42.0 37 % 11.2 27 % 

70 HTH/BIO 33 1.2 4 % 5.6 17 % 0.0 17 % 

71 HTH 39 0.3 1 % 5.5 14 % 0.0 14 % 

72 HTH/BIO 54 1.1 2 % 8.0 15 % 0.0 15 % 

73 HTH 19 5.1 27 % 6.6 35 % 1.8 25 % 

74 HTH/HSV 19 0.5 3 % 3.0 16 % 0.5 13 % 

75 HTH 41 12.1 30 % 15.2 37 % 3.7 28 % 

76 HTH 12 3.2 27 % 4.1 34 % 1.3 23 % 

77 HTH 46 11.6 25 % 15.6 34 % 5.0 23 % 

78 HTH/BIO 54 11.5 21 % 15.1 28 % 4.3 20 % 

79 HTH/BIO 20 0.0 0 % 2.6 13 % 0.0 13 % 

80 HTH 39 11.3 29 % 14.0 36 % 3.5 27 % 

81 HTH/BIO 28 4.9 16 % 7.8 28 % 2.2 20 % 

82 HTH 27 0.6 2 % 3.0 11 % 0.0 11 % 

83 HTH 16 0.2 1 % 1.9 12 % 0.0 12 % 

84 HTH 23 0.0 0 % 3.0 13 % 0.0 13 % 

85 HTH 37 0.0 0 % 4.8 13 % 0.0 13 % 
Appendix B – Soils 

300

EIS Unit 

Number 

Proposed 

Activity 

Regen Cuts: 

HOR, HSH 

Thin/Biomass: 

HTH, BIO, 

HTH/HSV 

Unit 

Acres 

Existing Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Harvest 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Restoration 

Subsoil Acres % of Unit 

86 HTH 10 0.0 0 % 1.3 13 % 0.0 13 % 

87 HTH 30 1.8 6 % 4.3 14 % 0.0 14 % 

88 HTH 13 0.7 5 % 2.2 17 % 0.0 17 % 

89 HTH 21 0.0 0 % 2.7 13 % 0.0 13 % 

90 HTH/HSV 5 0.0 0 % 0.7 13 % 0.0 13 % 

91 HTH 83 0.5 1 % 11.6 14 % 0.0 14 % 

92 HTH 20 0.3 2 % 3.0 15 % 0.0 15 % 

93 HTH 17 0.3 2 % 2.6 15 % 0.0 15 % 

94 HTH/BIO 31 0.3 1 % 4.3 14 % 0.0 14 % 

95 HTH/BIO 13 0.6 2 % 2.2 15 % 0.0 15 % 

97 HTH 16 0.5 9 % 2.0 12 % 0.0 12 % 

98 HTH 16 3.6 23 % 4.8 30 % 1.6 20 % 

99 HTH 42 4.8 11 % 8.8 21 % 2.5 15 % 

100 HTH 29 1.7 6 % 5.5 18 % 0.0 18 % 

101 HTH 44 12.9 29 % 15.8 36 % 3.9 27 % 

102 HOR 22 4.0 17 % 5.5 24 % 4.6 4 % 

103 HTH 35 0.0 0 % 4.6 13 % 0.0 13 % 

106 HTH 20 5.8 29 % 7.2 36 % 2.2 25 % 

107 HTH 32 10.1 32 % 12.5 39 % 3.2 29 % 

108 HTH 20 5.8 29 % 7.2 36 % 2.2 25 % 

109 HTH/HSV 24 6.6 29 % 8.3 36 % 2.3 26 % 

110 HTH 20 5.2 26 % 6.7 34 % 2.1 23 % 

112 HTH/HSV 7 2.1 30 % 2.6 37 % 1.0 23 % 

117 HTH 50 0.0 0 % 6.5 13 % 0.0 13 % 

121 HTH 33 0.2 1 % 4.6 14 % 0.0 14 % 

126 HTH 67 19.0 28 % 23.5 35 % 6.7 25 % 

128 HTH 49 6.5 13 % 10.4 21 % 0.6 20 % 

129 HTH 57 11.3 20 % 15.4 27 % 4.0 20 % 

130 HOR 134 21.5 16 % 30.8 23 % 17.4 10 % 

131 HTH 26 7.7 30 % 9.6 37 % 2.3 28 % 

132 HTH 84 21.5 26 % 27.5 33 % 7.3 24 % 

133 HTH 19 6.1 32 % 7.4 39 % 2.1 28 % 

134 HTH 25 4.9 20 % 7.0 28 % 2.0 20 % 

135 BIO 51 0.2 < 1 % 6.6 13 % 0.0 13 % 

143 HTH 35 8.5 24 % 11.1 32 % 3.4 22 % 

146 BIO 111 33.6 30 % 41.1 37 % 10.0 28 % 

147 HTH 400 60.6 15 % 100.2 25 % 20.2 28 % 

149 BIO 235 68.3 29 % 84.6 36 % 16.4 29 % 

151 BIO 35 8.7 26 % 11.5 33 % 3.4 23 % 

152 BIO 65 17.3 27 % 22.3 34 % 6.7 24 % 

156 HTH 167 27.1 16 % 43.1 26 % 9.7 20 % 

159 BIO 32 9.4 29 % 11.8 37 % 3.2 27 % 

160 BIO 120 28.0 23 % 37.8 31 % 13.8 20 % 
Appendix B – Soils 

301

EIS Unit 

Number 

Proposed 

Activity 

Regen Cuts: 

HOR, HSH 

Thin/Biomass: 

HTH, BIO, 

HTH/HSV 

Unit 

Acres 

Existing Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Harvest 

Disturbed 

Acres % of Unit 

Estimated Detrimental 

Soil Conditions 

After Restoration 

Subsoil Acres % of Unit 

161 HTH 153 8.6 6 % 27.4 18 % 0.2 18 % 

165 HTH 46 13.1 29 % 16.6 36 % 4.2 27 % 

171 HTH 129 39.1 30 % 47.7 37 % 9.0 30 % 

174 HTH 25 0.0 0 % 3.3 13 % 0.0 13 % 

175 BIO 30 8.1 27 % 10.4 35 % 2.9 25 % 

176 BIO 43 6.4 15 % 9.7 23 % 1.1 20 % 

177 BIO 27 7.3 27 % 9.4 35 % 2.6 25 % 

180 BIO 45 8.1 18 % 11.4 25 % 2.4 20 % 

181 BIO 24 6.6 28 % 8.4 35 % 2.4 25 % 

182 BIO 20 5.2 26 % 6.7 34 % 1.9 24 % 

183 BIO 31 9.0 29 % 11.2 36 % 2.8 27 % 

184 BIO 7 2.0 29 % 2.5 36 % 1.0 21 % 

186 BIO 22 6.4 29 % 7.9 36 % 2.2 26 % 

189 HTH 371 14.7 4 % 58.5 16 % 0.0 16 % 

190 HTH 68 20.4 30 % 25.2 37 % 8.2 25 % 

191 HTH 13 3.3 25 % 4.2 32 % 1.6 20 % 

192 HTH 72 3.5 5 % 12.1 17 % 0.0 17 % 

193 HTH 36 9.6 27 % 12.2 34 % 3.2 25 % 

196 HTH 64 15.9 25 % 20.5 32 % 5.8 23 % 

300 HTH 9 0.0 0 % 1.2 13 % 0.0 13 % 

301 HTH 19 0.0 0 % 2.5 13 % 0.0 13 % 
Appendix C 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 302

APPENDIX C 

FIRE AND FUELS 
Appendix C – Fire and Fuels 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 303

APPENDIX C: FIRE AND FUELS 

Table 82: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) Fuels Treatments by Unit Number and Total Acres 

Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) 

Treatment Unit # Acres

Ladder Fuel Reduction 

And 

Precommercial Thinning 

1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 28,

29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49,

50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72

73, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95, 100, 

101, 102, 103, 106, 107, 108, 109, 112, 116, 119, 121, 122, 130, 131, 

133, 134, 135, 140, 141, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 151, 152, 155, 

156, 159, 160, 161, 165, 166, 167, 168, 170, 171, 172, 174, 175, 176, 

177, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 195, 196, 

202, 207, 235, 239, 246, 252, 263, 269 

7,985

Handpiling 1, 64, 116, 119, 122, 135, 140, 141, 145, 146, 148, 149, 151, 152, 155,

159, 160, 166, 167, 168, 170, 175, 176, 177, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 

186, 192, 193, 195, 202 

2,334

Machine 

Piling 

2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32,

37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56,

57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 90,

93, 94, 95, 100, 101, 102, 106, 107, 108, 109, 112, 121, 126, 130, 131,

133, 143, 147, 156, 161, 171, 174, 189, 190, 191, 196 

5,061

Lop 

and 

Scatter 

1, 3, 6, 7, 24, 28, 30, 33, 35, 36, 64, 73, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 91, 103, 

134, 172, 207, 235, 239, 246, 252, 263, 269 

765

Mechanical 

Shrub 

Treatment 

6, 15, 16, 17, 22, 23, 24, 27, 30, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 53, 62, 63, 69, 

77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 92, 100, 101, 106, 110, 113, 115, 116, 117, 119, 

121, 122, 131, 133, 134, 143, 145, 147, 148, 149, 150, 153, 154, 155, 

156, 159, 160, 161, 163, 164, 165, 167, 168, 169, 173, 175, 176, 177, 

179, 180, 181, 183, 189, 192, 193, 199, 200, 201, 202, 206, 207, 235, 

239, 246, 263, 269 

5,874

Pile Burn 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, 31, 

32, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55,

56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82,

83, 90, 93, 94, 95, 100, 101, 102, 106, 107, 108, 109, 112, 116, 119, 

121, 122, 126, 130, 131, 133, 135, 140, 141, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, 

149, 151, 152, 155, 156, 159, 160, 161, 166, 167, 168, 170, 171, 174, 

175, 176, 177, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 

195, 196, 202 

7,395

Underburn 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23,

24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43,

44, 45, 46, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64,

65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 90, 92, 93,

94, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 106, 107, 108, 110, 113, 115, 116, 117, 119, 

121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133, 134, 136, 138, 

139, 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 150, 153, 154, 155, 156, 159, 161, 163, 

164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 172, 173, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 

186, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 

206, 207, 219, 221, 235, 239, 246, 252, 257, 263, 269, 

8,912
Appendix C – Fire and Fuels 

304

Fuel treatments for each unit and summarized acreages for Alternative 3 are displayed in the following 

table. 

Table 83: Alternative 3 Fuels Treatments by Unit Number and Total Acres 

Alternative 3 

Treatment Unit # Acres 

Ladder Fuel Reduction 

And 

Precommercial Thinning

1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27,

28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48,

49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 64, 68, 69, 71, 72,

73, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95, 

100, 101, 102, 103, 106, 107, 108, 109, 112, 116, 119, 121, 122, 130, 

131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 140, 141, 143, 144, 145, 146, 

147, 148, 149, 151, 152,155, 156, 159, 160, 161, 165, 166, 167, 168, 

170, 171, 172, 174, 175, 176, 177, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 189, 

190, 191, 192, 193, 195, 196, 202, 207, 235, 239, 246, 252, 263, 269, 

304, 305 

8,586 

Handpiling 116, 119, 122, 136, 137, 140, 141, 144, 145, 148,155, 166, 167, 168,

170, 195, 202, 304, 305 

1,691 

Machine Piling 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32,

37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56,

57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83

90, 93, 94, 95, 100, 101, 102, 106, 107, 108, 109, 112, 121, 126, 130, 

131, 133, 135, 143, 146, 147, 149, 151, 152, 156, 159, 160, 161, 171, 

174, 175, 176, 177, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 189, 190, 191, 192,

193,196 

6,114 

Lop and Scatter 1, 3, 6, 7, 24, 28, 30, 33, 35, 36, 64, 73, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 91, 103, 

122, 132, 134, 165, 172, 207, 235, 239, 246, 252, 263, 269 

928 

Mechanical Shrub 

Treatment 

6, 15, 16, 17, 22, 23, 24, 27, 30, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 53, 62, 63, 69, 

77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 92, 100, 101, 106, 110, 113, 115, 116, 117, 119, 

121, 122, 131, 133, 134, 136, 137, 138, 140, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, 

149, 150, 151, 153, 154, 155, 156, 159, 160, 161, 163, 164, 165, 167, 

168, 169, 173, 175, 176, 177, 179, 180, 181, 183, 189, 192, 193, 199, 

200, 201, 202, 206, 207, 235, 239, 246, 263, 269, 300, 301, 302, 303, 

304, 305 

6,668 

Pile Burn 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32,

37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56,

57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83,

90, 93, 94, 95, 100, 101, 102, 106, 107, 108, 109, 112, 116, 119, 121, 

122, 126, 130, 131, 133, 135, 136, 137, 138, 140, 141, 143, 144, 145, 

146, 147, 148, 149, 151, 152, 155, 156, 159, 160, 161, 166, 167, 168, 

170, 171, 174, 175, 176, 177, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 189, 190, 

191, 192, 193, 195, 196, 202, 304, 305 

7,805 

Underburn 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23,

24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43,

44, 45, 46, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64,

65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 90, 92, 93,

94, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 106, 107, 108, 110, 113, 115, 116, 117, 119, 

121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133, 134, 136, 137, 

139, 140, 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 150, 153, 154, 155, 156, 161, 163, 

164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 172, 173, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 

186, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 

206, 207, 219, 221, 235, 239, 246, 252, 257, 263, 269, 300, 301, 302, 

303, 304, 305, 306 

9,443 
Appendix C – Fire and Fuels 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 305

Figure 23: Alternative 1 (No Action) – Wildfire Crown Fire Potential without Treatment 
Appendix C – Fire and Fuels 

306

Figure 24: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) – Wildfire Crown Fire Potential Following Treatme
Appen

Figure 25: Alternative 3 - Wildfire Crown Fire Potential Following Treatment 
Appendix C – Fire and Fuels 

308

Figure 26: Alternative 1 (No Action) - Wildfire Flame Length Potential in Feet 
Appen

Figure 27: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) - Wildfire Flame Length Potential in Feet 
Appendix C – Fire and Fuels 

310

Figure 28: Deadlog Alternative 3 – Wildfire Flame Length Potential in Feet 
Appen

Figure 29: Alternative 1 (No Action) – Wildfire Rate of Spread Potential in Chains (66 Feet) per H
Appendix C – Fire and Fuels 

312

Figure 30: Alternative 2 (Proposed Action) – Wildfire Rate of Spread Potential in Chains (66 Feet) p
Appen

Figure 31: Alternative 3 - Wildfire Rate of Spread Potential in Chains (66 Feet) per Hour 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 314

APPENDIX D 

FOREST PLAN CONSISTENCY 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

Deadlog Vegetation Management DEIS 315

APPENDIX D: FOREST PLAN CONSISTENCY

RESOURCE CONSISTENCY WITH THE DESCHUTES NATIONAL FOREST LAND 

AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN (LRMP) FOR THE DEADLOG 

VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECT 

The following are selected standards and guides from the Deschutes National Forest LRMP (USFS 

1990). These were selected along with the goals listed for management areas and the eastside screens 

earlier in this document. The following table is a listing of standards and guides as a comparison table 

by alternative.

Table 84: Resource Tables for Forest Plan Consistency 

FIRE AND FUELS

Standards and 

Guidelines

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

M8 General Forest

M8-22 Suppression 

practices will be designed 

to protect the investment 

in managed tree stands to 

prevent losses of large 

acreages to wildfire. 

No increase in protection 

to managed tree stands. 

The area remains in a 

condition that mostly 

supports stand 

replacement/high 

intensity fire. No 

reduction in potential fire 

behavior and fire growth. 

Meets 

During fire episodes, 

tactical options related to 

fire suppression will 

increase with the increase 

in area that supports low 

severity/ low intensity 

fire. Most fires will be 

able to be attacked at the 

head and flanks by 

firefighters. 

Meets 

During fire episodes, 

tactical options related to 

fire suppression will 

increase with the increase 

in area that supports low 

severity/ low intensity 

fire. Most fires will be 

able to be attacked at the 

head and flanks by 

firefighters. 

M8-24 In ponderosa pine 

stands (except for 

reproduction stands) 

emphasis should be 

placed on burning out 

from existing roads and 

natural barriers rather 

than construction new 

firelines. 

Without treatments, 

defensible areas where 

fire fighter can safely 

work are limited and will 

continue to decline 

throughout the area. 

Meets 

Treatments that support 

low severity/ low 

intensity fire have been 

designed along existing 

roads and will provide 

defensible areas where 

firefighters can use these 

roads as firelines. 

Meets 

Treatments that support 

low severity/ low 

intensity fire have been 

designed along existing 

roads and will provide 

defensible areas where 

firefighters can use these 

roads as 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. 

Criteria for utilizing fire 

are as follows: 

To reduce risk of 

conflagration fire. 

To increase soil 

productivity by cycling 

bound nutrients. 

No prescribed fire will 

occur in the area. 

Timbered stands will 

remain at risk to large, 

stand replacement fires. 

Encroachment of 

lodgepole pine and 

juniper into ponderosa 

pine stands will continue. 

Shrubs will continue to be 

in the late seral stages 

with no improvement to 

palatability. 

Meets 

In ponderosa pine, 

prescribed fire will be 

utilized to protect, 

maintain, and enhance 

timber and forage 

production. 

The risk of large stand 

replacement fires will be 

reduced. 

Soil productivity will be 

increased with nutrient 

cycling. 

Competition of less 

desirable tree species will 

be reduced in ponderosa 

Meets 

In ponderosa pine, 

prescribed fire will be 

utilized to protect, 

maintain, and enhance 

timber and forage 

production. 

The risk of large stand 

replacement fires will be 

reduced. 

Soil productivity will be 

increased with nutrient 

cycling. 

Competition of less 

desirable tree species will 

be reduced. 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

316

FIRE AND FUELS

Standards and 

Guidelines

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

To prevent encroachment 

of less desirable, 

competing tree species. 

To increase palatability 

and cover of desirable 

forage species. 

To prepare sites for 

reforestation. 

pine stands. 

Early seral shrub 

conditions will increase in 

bitterbrush, thus an 

increase in young plants 

and palatability. 

Early seral shrub 

conditions will increase in 

bitterbrush, thus an 

increase in young plants 

and palatability. 

M8-26 The lowest cost 

option which meets the 

silvicultural, soil, water, 

and fire objectives should 

be selected. 

No treatment cost 

associated with non 

action. The monetary 

cost per acre of no 

treatment will increase 

dramatically with the 

occurrence of large fire 

and related suppression 

expenses. 

Meets 

Treatments have been 

developed, designed, and 

mitigated to meet the 

Deschutes LRMP S & 

G’s and the objectives of 

wildlife, archeology, 

silviculture, fire and fuels, 

soils, botany, and range 

resources. 

Meets 

Treatments have been 

developed, designed, and 

mitigated to meet the 

Deschutes LRMP S & 

G’s and the objectives of 

wildlife, archeology, 

silviculture, fire and fuels, 

soils, botany, and range 

resources. 

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. 

Does not meet 

No accumulations of 

activity related slash will 

occur. Natural fuels will 

continue to accumulate. 

The chances of fire starts 

will not change without 

treatments but the 

potential rate of spread 

for fires will continue to 

increase. 

Meets 

Activity fuels and natural 

fuels will be treated. 

Treatments will provide 

for large wood to meet 

wildlife needs as well as 

smaller diameter woody 

material to provide for 

soils productivity. 

Meets 

Activity fuels and natural 

fuels will be treated. 

Treatments will provide 

for large wood to meet 

wildlife needs as well as 

smaller diameter woody 

material to provide for 

soils productivity. 

M15 Old Growth Area 

M15-18 The low intensity 

burn acre objective for 

each old growth area will 

be the same as the 

adjacent management 

area with the lowest burn 

acre objective. 

No treatments or 

management activity will 

occur. Wildfires will not 

be low intensity and are 

likely be stand 

replacement events. 

Meets 

Fuels treatments within 

Old Growth and 

adjacent General Forest 

will shift potential fire 

severity from stand 

replacement to low 

intensity/low severity. 

Meets 

Fuels treatments within 

Old Growth and 

adjacent General Forest 

will shift potential fire 

severity from stand 

replacement to low 

intensity/low severity. 

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 

No prescribed fire 

treatments will occur. 

Ponderosa pine will 

continue to have limited 

growth potential because 

of dense understories 

competing for resources. 

Fuel loadings will 

perpetually support stand 

replacement fire until 

such fires occur. 

Meets 

There are no prescribed 

fire treatments in 

lodgepole pine. Old 

growth ponderosa pine 

stands will have 

prescribed fire applied in 

order to reduce 

competition for resources 

and to create conditions 

that support low intensity 

fire. 

Meets 

There are no prescribed 

fire treatments in 

lodgepole pine. Old 

growth ponderosa pine 

stands will have 

prescribed fire applied in 

order to reduce 

competition for resources 

and to create conditions 

that support low intensity 

fire. 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

317

FIRE AND FUELS

Standards and 

Guidelines

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

intensity wildfire. 

M15-20 Prescribed fire is 

the preferred method of 

fuel treatment. However, 

If prescribed fire cannot 

reduce unacceptable fuel 

loadings, other methods 

will be considered. 

No fuels treatments will 

occur. Unacceptable fuel 

loadings currently exist 

and will continue to exist 

until a wildfire event 

occurs. 

Meets 

Prescribed fire by itself 

will not reduce surface 

fuels and canopy fuels to 

levels conducive to low 

intensity/low severity fire. 

Thinning treatments will 

occur to reduce canopy 

fuels and ladder fuels to 

reduce the probability of 

stand replacement fire. 

These treatments will be 

followed with prescribed 

fire to treat surface fuels. 

Meets 

Prescribed fire by itself 

will not reduce surface 

fuels and canopy fuels to 

levels conducive to low 

intensity/low severity fire. 

Thinning treatments will 

occur to reduce canopy 

fuels and ladder fuels to 

reduce the probability of 

stand replacement fire. 

These treatments will be 

followed with prescribed 

fire to treat surface fuels. 

M15-21 Natural fuel 

loading will normally be 

the standard. 

Does not meet 

Natural fuel loadings will 

continue to exist at levels 

conducive to stand 

replacement fire until a 

fire occurs. 

Meets 

Treatments will occur that 

lead to low intensity fire. 

Activity related fuels and 

natural fuels will be 

treated and reduced to 

acceptable levels. 

Meets 

Treatments will occur that 

lead to low intensity fire. 

Activity related fuels and 

natural fuels will be 

treated and reduced to 

acceptable levels. 

M9 Scenic Views 

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, 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. 

Does not meet 

No treatments will occur. 

Prescribed fire will not be 

used. The visual 

condition will continue to 

be unrepresentative to the 

historical appearance in 

ponderosa pine stands. 

The potential for large, 

stand replacement fires 

will not be reduced and 

will perpetuate over time. 

Meets 

Prescribed fire treatments 

will occur in foreground, 

middle ground, and 

background view areas. 

Thinning, and slash piling 

will occur in areas where 

prescribed fire alone will 

not meet the desired 

visual condition. Fuel 

treatment in Ponderosa 

pine will convert the area 

from stand replacement 

fire to low severity fire. 

Prescribed fire 

prescription will be 

developed that limit 

scorch to the lower 1/3 of 

the canopy. 

Meets 

Prescribed fire treatments 

will occur in foreground, 

middle ground, and 

background view areas. 

Thinning, and slash piling 

will occur in areas where 

prescribed fire alone will 

not meet the desired 

visual condition. Fuel 

treatment in Ponderosa 

pine will convert the area 

from stand replacement 

fire to low severity fire. 

Prescribed fire 

prescription will be 

developed that limit 

scorch to the lower 1/3 of 

the canopy. 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

318

SILVICULTURE

Standard and Guide Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3

TM-10 Pest Management 

Strategies

No improvement on 

forest pests

Increases resistance to 

forest pests

Increases resistance to 

forest pests

Mistletoe Mistletoe impacts will 

continue to expand and 

intensify

Mistletoe impacts will 

decrease in spread rates. 

Intensity short term will 

decrease.

Mistletoe impacts will 

decrease in spread rates. 

Intensity short term will 

decrease.

Bark Beetles Bark beetle mortality will 

increase with increasing 

stand densities

Bark Beetle risk will be 

reduced to 30% of area 

and will generally be low 

for two decades.

Bark Beetle risk will be 

reduced to 30% of area 

and will generally be low 

for two decades.

TM-32 Uneven-aged 

Management with DMT

Late Old Structure stands 

will remain infected. 

Mistletoe impacts will 

continue to expand and 

intensify

Late Old Structure stands 

will have mistletoe 

reduced and where multiage cohorts occur spread 

should be reduced by 

wide thinning.

Late Old Structure stands 

will have mistletoe 

reduced and where multiage cohorts occur spread 

should be reduced by 

wide thinning.

FH-1 Document and 

mitigate the effects of 

forest pests to acceptable 

levels.

No mitigation of forest 

pest effects

Bark beetle and mistletoe 

effects mitigated through 

wide thinning.

Bark beetle and mistletoe 

effects mitigated through 

wide thinning.

FH-3 Prevention of pest 

problems.

Pest especially bark 

beetles will continue and 

increase in impacts.

Pest infection of bark 

beetles in stands reduced 

with thinning wide and 

leaving fewer lodgepole 

pine mixed stands.

Pest infection of bark 

beetles in stands reduced 

with thinning wide and 

leaving fewer lodgepole 

pine mixed stands.

M8-27 Manage Slash to 

acceptable levels.

No slash produced none 

treated

Whole tree yarding and 

piling reduces slash loads.

Whole tree yarding, 

biomass utilization and 

piling reduces slash loads.

M9-56 Manage lodgepole 

pine for healthy 

appearance.

No lodgepole pine 

overstocked stands 

treated.

Lodgepole pine will be 

youngest growth with 

some overstory trees left.

Lodgepole pine will be 

managed for regeneration 

on some acres and 

thinning may look healthy 

on other acres.

M9-64 Options to manage 

lodgepole pine on long 

times is limited.

No lodgepole pine 

overstocked stands 

treated.

Lodgepole pine older 

stands will be converted 

with overstory removal 

and shelterwood stands to 

young healthy stands

Lodgepole pine with 

overstory will be 

converted to younger 

stands while commercial 

thinning will keep older 

stands.

M15-9 Manage snags at 

100 percent level

All snags remain. Salvage of snags not 

planned for removal.

Salvage of snags not 

planned for removal.

M15-23 Monitor pests to 

prevent damage to 

adjacent areas.

Pests moving from 

Deadlog to adjacent areas 

not present.

Pests moving from 

Deadlog to adjacent areas 

not present.

Pests moving from 

Deadlog to adjacent areas 

not present.

M15-24 Practices 

compatible with Old 

Growth objectives

Old Growth objectives 

may not be met if 

mortality of large old 

trees accelerates

Old Growth objectives of 

maintaining large old tree 

and structure maintained.

Old Growth objectives of 

maintaining large old tree 

and structure maintained 

more than Alt 2
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

319

WILDLIFE 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

Diversity of Plant and Animal 

Communities: TM-55 (provide habitat 

diversity including horizontal, vertical 

and vegetative species) 

Meets (long-term 

loss of stage 7, 

single-story) 

Meets with mitigation 

(retention patches and 

unique habitat 

protection) 

Meets with mitigation 

(retention patches and 

unique habitat 

protection) 

TM-56 (maintain forest structural and 

species diversity....wildlife habitat 

surrogate) 

Meets (long-term 

loss of stage 7, 

single-story) 

Meets with mitigation 

(retention patches) 

Meets with mitigation 

(retention patches) 

Horizontal Diversity: TM-57 (harvest 

unit size greater than 40 ac. will 

provide horizontal diversity for deer 

and elk; employ variable spacing and 

variable unit sizes; exception stand 

health via density control but maintain 

minimum S&Gs for deer and elk). 

Link to WL-52 to provide a mosaic of 

habitats. 

Not Applicable Meets with variable tree 

spacing (check 

prescriptions) and cover 

retention patches. 

Note: no prescriptions 

for regen openings. 

Meets with variable tree 

spacing (check 

prescriptions) and cover 

retention patches. 

Note: no prescriptions 

for regen openings. 

TM-61 (timber management 

restrictions on creation of uniform 

structural conditions will generally not 

exceed 100 contiguous acres on >95% 

of each implementation unit). 

Not Applicable Small units for 

overstory and 

shelterwood removal 

Small units for 

overstory and 

shelterwood removal 

Vertical Diversity: TM-62 (provide 

habitat for cavity nesters and song 

birds via uneven-aged management or 

a mix with even-aged) 

Not Applicable Meets with mitigation 

(retention patches and 

OGMA/LOS 

prescriptions to 

maintain SS6) 

Meets with mitigation 

(retention patches and 

OGMA/LOS 

prescriptions to 

maintain SS6) 

Species Diversity: TM-64 (maintain a 

diversity of tree species for cavity 

dependent species and song birds with 

an emphasis on stands which typically 

exhibit broad species diversity) 

Not Applicable Meets with mitigation 

(retention patches with 

both p. pine and 

lodgepole). No 

treatment of mixed 

conifer PAG. 

Elimination of juniper 

in low productivity sites 

a potential issue. 

Meets with mitigation 

(retention patches with 

both p. pine and 

lodgepole). No 

treatment of mixed 

conifer PAG. 

Elimination of juniper 

in low productivity sites 

a potential issue. 

TM-65 (maintain long term health and 

vigor of mixed conifer stands for 

wildlife species diversity) 

Meets (shortterm, likely 

degeneration 

long-term) 

Meets (not applicable 

due to no treatment, 

long-term degeneration) 

Meets (not applicable 

due to no treatment, 

long-term degeneration) 

TM-66 (silvicultural activities in 

ponderosa pine/lodgepole pine 

assocations should emphasize 

establishment and maintenance of p. 

pine with retention of large tree 

component to meet cavity dependent 

wildlife species; diversity measured by 

needs of cavity dependent spp.) 

Not Applicable Meets (appropriate 

prescriptions developed 

to promote large 

ponderosa pine trees 

and retain adequate 

numbers of GTRs; 

protection of existing 

snags mitigation 

measures) 

Meets (appropriate 

prescriptions developed 

to promote large 

ponderosa pine trees 

and retain adequate 

numbers of GTRs; 

protection of existing 

snags mitigation 

measures) 

Golden Eagles, Redtail Hawk and 

Osprey: WL-2 (guidance to protect 

forested character around nests; timber 

management acceptable; provide 

Meets 

None known 

Meets 

none known, 

Meets 

none known, 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

320

WILDLIFE 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

dominate overstory and ponderosa 

pine where available) 

WL-3, 4, 5 (guidance to protect active 

nests from disturbing activities within 

1/4th. mile; dates by species; site 

evaluation and restriction guidance) 

Not Applicable Meets 

none known, 

Meets 

none known, 

Northern Goshawk: WL-6 thru 12

(guidance on number of pairs by 

habitat type; emphasis management 

areas specified; newly found nests; 

nest site characteristics, avoid roading; 

disturbing activities restricted; active 

nest determination) 

Meets Meets (apply restriction 

period if new nests 

found and to existing 

adjacent site if active) 

Meets (apply restriction 

period if new nests 

found and to existing 

adjacent site if active) 

Eastside Screens for N. Goshawk:

Timber Harvest, Interim Wildlife 

Standards, Scenario A, S&G 5) a)-c)

(guidance on historic sites, seasonal 

restrictions, establishment of core and 

post- fledgling areas (PFA), retain 

LOS stands and enhancement of 

younger stands towards LOS within 

PFA) 

Not Applicable 

No nest sites 

known within 

project; partial 

overlap of 

adjacent 

designated nest 

core area. 

Meets 

Apply applicable S&Gs 

if new nests 

discovered.) 

Meets 

Apply applicable S&Gs 

if new nests discovered) 

Cooper’s Hawk: WL-13 thru 20

(guidance on number of pairs, 

preferred stand types, emphasis 

management areas, use of big game 

cover areas in General Forest to 

provide habitat, nest site 

characteristics , identification of 

prospective sites prior to thinning, 

avoid roading, disturbing activities 

restricted) 

Meets 

Two known nest 

sites; 

Meets 

Restrictions on 

disturbance of active 

nests, nest cores of 15 

acres each protected; 

invoke protection 

measures on newly 

discovered nests) 

Meets 

Restrictions on 

disturbance of active 

nests, nest cores of 15 

acres each protected; 

invoke protection 

measures on newly 

discovered nests) 

Sharp-shinned Hawk: WL-21 thru 

WL-29 (guidance on number of pairs, 

nest groves description, emphasis 

management areas, use of big game 

cover in General Forest to provide 

habitat, nest stand characteristics, 

identification of prospective sites prior 

to thinning, avoid roading, disturbing 

activities restricted) 

Meets 

None known 

Meets 

S&Gs applicable if 

found; big game cover 

patches to provide 

potential habitat; 

discovered nests to 

provide 10 acres each 

for protection. 

Meets 

S&Gs applicable if 

found; big game cover 

patches to provide 

potential habitat; 

discovered nests to 

provide 10 acres each 

for protection. 

Woodpeckers (Cavity Nesters): WL 

37 and 38 (MPP levels by 

management areas amended; 

compliance based upon the harvest 

unit area rather than individual acre 

evaluation) 

Not Applicable Meets with mitigation. 

Amended by the 

Eastside Screens for 

timber sales 

Meets with mitigation. 

Amended by the 

Eastside Screens for 

timber sales 

Eastside Screens for Snags: Timber 

Harvest, Interim Wildlife Standards, 

Scenario A, S&G 4) a), (1) (guidance 

on snag sizes with >21” dbh emphasis 

or average dbh for overstory, 100% 

MPP, MPP determined by best 

Not Applicable Meets with mitigation. 

Does Not Meet: Snag 

estimates indicate that 

current levels do not 

meet 100% MPP per 

DecAID 

Meets with mitigation. 

Does Not Meet (snag 

estimates indicate that 

current levels do not 

meet 100% MPP 

DecAID 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

321

WILDLIFE 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

available science) recommendations for 

ponderosa pine or 

lodgepole pine habitats 

(50% TL); mitigation 

measures to protect and 

create snags 

recommendations for 

ponderosa pine or 

lodgepole pine habitats 

(50% TL); mitigation 

measures to protect and 

create snags) 

Mule Deer Outside of Deer 

Management Area 7 (Summer 

Range): WL-52 (guidance on 

providing a mosaic of forested 

conditions for security and thermal 

cover, travel corridors, visual screens, 

and harassment protection; deer herd 

management objectives by unit) 

Currently does 

not meet hiding 

cover standards 

or provide travel 

corridors. 

Forest Plan 

Amendment to reduce 

density for protection 

from wildfire and insect 

loss. 10% retention 

patches in black-bark 

stands. 

Forest Plan 

Amendment to reduce 

density for protection 

from wildfire and insect 

loss. 10% retention 

patches in black-bark 

stands. 

WL-53 (guidance on “target open road 

densities” of 2.5 mi/sq. mi. in summer 

range, based on implementation units, 

must use procedures detailed in the 

Transportation standards for 

determination). Reference TS-11 thru 

TS-14. 

Does Not Meet Proposed road closures 

and decommissioning 

post-sale will reduce 

road density; existing 

Green Dot system also 

mitigates 

Proposed road closures 

and decommissioning 

post-sale will reduce 

road density; existing 

Green Dot system also 

mitigates. 

WL-54 (guidance on hiding cover 

areas, 30% minimum of each 

implementation unit, 70% of each 

implementation unit in hiding cover or 

within 600’ of cover, black bark 

exception with separate S&Gs, 

generally 6 ac.+ un-thinned patches to 

be retained, 1⁄2 ac. unthinned clumps 

minimum size, residual dead and 

down direction, locate clumps away 

from roads) 

Does Not Meet Cover retention 

patches within nonblack bark harvest units 

@ 10-20%; higher 

retention in specified 

stands identified to 

meet deer movement as 

well as to meet 

Cooper’s and sharpshinned hawks 

direction; 70% direction 

unknown. 

Cover retention patches 

within non-black bark 

harvest units @ 10-

20%; higher retention 

in specified stands 

identified to meet deer 

movement as well as to 

meet Cooper’s and 

sharp-shinned hawks 

direction; 70% direction 

unknown. 

WL-56 (guidance on travel corridors 

to link stands meeting clump/unit 

conditions in WL-54 as needed) 

Not Applicable Inadequate hiding 

cover 

 Wildlife corridors per 

Eastside Screens and 

20% retention patches 

in OGMA and 10% 

retention patches in 

black-bark. 

 Inadequate hiding 

cover 

Wildlife corridors per 

Eastside Screens and 

20% retention patches 

in OGMA and 10% 

retention patches in 

black-bark. 

WL-57 (assumption that hiding cover 

will meet deer thermal cover 

requirements) 

Does Not Meet Forest Plan 

Amendment for hiding 

cover / stand density 

reduction to reduce risk 

from wildfire and pests. 

Summer range thermal 

cover needs is 

debatable; no transition 

range present in project 

area. 

Forest Plan 

Amendment for hiding 

cover / stand density 

reduction to reduce risk 

from wildfire and pests. 

Summer range thermal 

cover needs is 

debatable; no transition 

range present in project 

area. 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

322

WILDLIFE 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

WL-58: Retain narrow strip of trees 

along roads to reduce sight distance if 

possible 

Not Applicable Unkown: Limited 

opportunities - No 

specified areas for 

retention identified; 

potential conflicts with 

fuels objectives. 

Unknown: Limited 

opportunities - No 

specified areas for 

retention identified; ; 

potential conflicts with 

fuels objectives. 

Black Bark Pine Management: WL59: Retain 10% of treated stands in 

clumps of visual screening, details on 

sizes and distribution 

Not Applicable Meets Meets 

WL-60: Guidance on identification of 

site specific needs at project level by 

IDT 

Not Applicable None specified None specified 

Pine Marten: WL-61 thru WL-63: 

Forest types with preference for lpp, 

mc and mountain hemlock, emphasis 

management areas, big game cover 

areas may be used in MAs like 

General Forest, preference for 

concentrations of CWM to be left at 

one/acre after any timber harvest 

Meets Meets (reference CWM 

S&Gs and amended 

Eastside Screens; no 

salvage of down trees) 

Meets (reference CWM 

S&Gs and amended 

Eastside Screens; no 

salvage of down trees) 

Townsend’s Big-eared Bat: WL-64 

thru WL-71: Caves management as 

preferred habitat) 

Not Applicable 

No known caves 

S&Gs applicable if 

caves discovered. 

Literature documents 

use of tree hollows and 

lava outcrops (day 

roosts). 

S&Gs applicable if 

caves discovered. 

Literature documents 

use of tree hollows and 

lava outcrops (day 

roosts). 

Species Associated with Logs and 

Down Woody Debris: WL-72: 

Retention levels for down logs after 

timber harvest, minimum sizes, 

charring should be minimized) 

Not Applicable Amended by Eastside 

Screens 

Amended by Eastside 

Screens 

WL-73: Retention of slash piles @ 

1/acre if minimum logs are not 

available; also reference Eastside 

Screens S&Gs described below on 

logging debris retention) 

Not Applicable Meets - Address via 

implementation 

coordination; potential 

conflict with prescribed 

fire and/or piling postlogging 

Meets - Address via 

implementation 

coordination; potential 

conflict with prescribed 

fire and/or piling postlogging 

Eastside Screens for CWM (Logs):

Timber Harvest, Interim Wildlife 

Standards, Scenario A, S&G 4) a), (2) 

(guidance on retention of pre-activity 

down logs, if levels below minimums 

retain logging debris, GTRs for logs 

not required, falling trees for logs not 

required, snag retention/GTRs will 

meet future logs, exception on 

amounts of logs for protection of 

life/property from fires, prescribed 

burning allowed, prescribed burns 

prescriptions to ensure maximum 

consumption restrictions are met, 

leave logs in current lengths with no 

Not Applicable 

Current 

conditions for 

ponderosa pine 

and mixed 

conifer habitats 

meet minimums 

Lodgepole pine 

habitat for 

current down 

logs do not meet 

minimums; 

Meets with mitigation: 

(Current conditions for 

ponderosa pine and 

mixed conifer habitats 

do not meet minimums; 

Losses are expected, 

reducing levels below 

minimums due to 

prescribed burning 

and/or piling postharvest particularly in 

ponderosa pine; 

reference PDCs and 

applicable S&Gs, e.g. 

logging debris piles, for 

Meets with mitigation: 

(Current conditions for 

ponderosa pine and 

mixed conifer habitats 

do not meet minimums; 

Losses are expected, 

reducing levels below 

minimums due to 

prescribed burning 

and/or piling postharvest particularly in 

ponderosa pine; 

reference PDCs and 

applicable S&Gs, e.g. 

logging debris piles, for 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

323

WILDLIFE 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

cutting, arrangement as is without 

scattering, pieces per acre by habitat 

type prescribed, minimum sizes 

specified) 

mitigations. 

Meets with mitigation 

(lodgepole pine habitat 

for current down logs 

do not meet minimums; 

project will apply cited 

mitigation measures 

and related PDCs) 

mitigations. 

Meets with mitigation 

(lodgepole pine habitat 

for current down logs 

do not meet minimums; 

project will apply cited 

mitigation measures 

and related PDCs) 

Species Associated with Various 

Plant Communities and Successional 

Stages: WL-74 (guidance to provide 

diversity of various successional 

stages through time; large 

homogeneous areas of the same 

species or successional stages will be 

avoided) 

Meets Meets (treatments will 

not alter current ratios 

of structural stages; 

promotion of SS7 in the 

long-term; black bark 

stands problematic but 

S&G lacks 

quantification criteria). 

Note: reference TM-55. 

57, 61, 62, 63. 

Meets (treatments will 

not alter current ratios 

of structural stages; 

promotion of SS7 in the 

long-term; black bark 

stands problematic but 

S&G lacks 

quantification criteria). 

Note: reference TM-55. 

57, 61, 62, 63. 

Species Associated with Special or 

Unique Habitats: WL-75 (guidance 

for spp. associated with seeps, cliffs 

and talus slopes during project 

development) 

Not Applicable Meets (reference 

location information in 

Wildlife Report) 

Note: literature supports 

inclusion of several 

other important habitat 

types (e.g. aspen, 

mountain mahogany, 

meadows, etc. 

Reference PDCs.) 

Meets (reference 

location information in 

Wildlife Report) 

Note: literature supports 

inclusion of several 

other important habitat 

types (e.g. aspen, mt. 

mahogany, meadows, 

etc. Reference PDCs.) 

Management Area 7 Deer Habitat 

General Theme and Objectives: 

(overall direction to optimize habitat 

conditions on deer winter and 

transition ranges; details on 

cover/forage ratios (40:60 with 10% 

hiding and 30% thermal) and forage 

enhancement) 

Currently does Not 

Meet: 

Not applicable (cover 

deficit; shrub 

treatments will leave 

a mosaic of seral 

stages with 40-50% 

untreated) 

Not applicable (cover 

deficit; shrub 

treatments will leave 

a mosaic of seral 

stages with 40-50% 

untreated) 

Ponderosa Pine- Suitable Timber 

Lands: M7-5 (guidance on percentage 

of crown cover being 40% with trees 

30’ high for thermal cover. Exception 

noted for low site productivity, but 

concludes with a minimum of 40% 

and greater crown cover preferred) 

Currently does Not 

Meet: 

Not applicable 

(current conditions 

are not providing this 

level of crown cover 

in sufficiently large 

areas to qualify as 

thermal cover; no 

timber harvest 

prescribed in MA7 

units) 

Not applicable 

(current conditions 

are not providing this 

level of crown cover 

in sufficiently large 

areas to qualify as 

thermal cover; no 

timber harvest 

prescribed in MA7 

units) 

Wildlife: M7-10 (guidance on 

providing a mosaic of forested 

conditions to include escape and 

hiding cover, thermal cover, travel 

corridors, visual screens, and 

Currently does Not 

Meet: 

Not applicable (the 

MA7 acreage, 586 

acres, is too small to 

provide all of these 

attributes; no timber 

Not applicable (the 

MA7 acreage, 586 

acres, is too small to 

provide all of these 

attributes; no timber 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

324

WILDLIFE 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

harassment reduction) harvest prescribed in 

MA7 units) 

harvest prescribed in 

MA7 units) 

M7-11 (guidance on size of analysis 

area to be greater than 3,000 acres) 

Not Applicable Not applicable (only 

586 ac. or 3.8% of 

Wigtop WRHU 

within the project 

boundary) 

Not applicable (only 

586 ac. or 3.8% of 

Wigtop WRHU 

within the project 

boundary) 

Cover: M7-13 (guidance on crown 

cover to be greater than 40% with 

trees 30’ tall) 

Currently Does Not 

Meet 

Not applicable 

(current conditions 

are not providing this 

level of crown cover 

in sufficiently large 

areas to qualify as 

thermal cover; no 

timber harvest 

prescribed in MA7 

units) 

Not applicable 

(current conditions 

are not providing this 

level of crown cover 

in sufficiently large 

areas to qualify as 

thermal cover; no 

timber harvest 

prescribed in MA7 

units) 

Forage: M7-14 (guidance on 

maintenance and improvement of 

forage conditions; variety of plants 

with mix of age classes of shrubs; 

improve forage in areas with poor 

vigor shrubs) 

Meets Meets (increase in 

early seral age class 

from prescribed 

burns; mosaic to be 

created by dripline 

burn prescription; 

identify MA7 units in 

EIS) 

Meets (increase in 

early seral age class 

from prescribed 

burns; mosaic to be 

created by dripline 

burn prescription; 

identify MA7 units in 

EIS) 

M7-15 (guidance on forage 

improvement activities not directly 

associated with tree stands; size of 

units 300-500 acres; treatments spaced 

600-1,200’ apart in a single year) 

Not Applicable Meets 

(implementation 

coordination required 

on fuels units) 

Meets 

(implementation 

coordination required 

on fuels units) 

Arrangement: M7-16 (guidance on 

forage created via timber harvesting; 

maintain thermal cover adjacent to 

forage; provide irregular mosaic of 

trees and openings in the long-term) 

Not Applicable Not Applicable 

Fuels treatments only 

in MA7, no timber 

management; 

Treatments will 

create a mosaic of 

forage.) 

Not Applicable 

Fuels treatments only 

in MA7, no timber 

management; 

treatments will create 

a mosaic of forage. 

Transportation: M7-22 (guidance on 

road density to average 1.0-2.5 mi./sq. 

mi.; threshold for evaluation and not 

absolute standard; reference 

Transportation S&Gs if exceeded). 

Unknown Unknown (road 

density for MA7 

portion not calculated 

due to its small size; 

no new roads 

proposed; reference 

project-wide road 

density analysis) 

Unknown (road 

density for MA7 

portion not calculated 

due to its small size; 

no new roads 

proposed; reference 

project-wide road 

density analysis) 

M7-23 (guidance on minimizing 

disturbance for both winter period and 

hunting season via optional 

administrative closures) 

Meets (existing 

Green Dot road 

closure system; no 

winter period 

restrictions) 

Meets (existing 

Green Dot road 

closure system; no 

winter period 

restrictions) 

Meets (existing 

Green Dot road 

closure system; no 

winter period 

restrictions) 

Prescribed Burning: M7-27

(guidance on use of prescribed fire to 

Not Applicable Meets 

(implementation 

Meets 

(implementation 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

325

WILDLIFE 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

maintain plant diversity; provide 

reestablishment of bitterbrush within 

20 years; limits annual treatments to 

2.0-2.5% annually in MA7). Note: 

Forest direction to apply by herd unit. 

coordination on fuels 

treatments; dripline 

burn prescriptions to 

provide diversity) 

coordination on fuels 

treatments; dripline 

burn prescriptions to 

provide diversity) 

Management Area 8 General Forest

Wildlife: M8-15 (guidance on 

application of minimum standards for 

wildlife using the Forest-wide S&Gs; 

higher levels for habitat if no conflict 

with timber management objectives). 

Not Applicable Meets (as amended 

by screens; also 

reference preceding 

Forest-wide S&Gs) 

Meets (as amended 

by screens; also 

reference preceding 

Forest-wide S&Gs) 

Fuel Loadings: M8-27 (guidance on 

slash treatments; retention of slash and 

larger dead material at sufficient levels 

to provide soil protection, 

microclimates for tree establishment, 

and small mammal habitat) 

Not Applicable Meets (as amended 

by screens; also 

reference preceding 

Forest-wide S&Gs) 

Meets (as amended 

by screens; also 

reference preceding 

Forest-wide S&Gs) 

Management Area 9 Scenic Views

Vegetative Management: M9-13

(guidance on retention of adequate 

snags for wildlife provided no 

conflicts with visual quality in 

ponderosa pine) 

Not Applicable Unknown (snag 

levels not surveyed in 

this MA; also 

reference preceding 

Forest-wide S&Gs) 

Unknown (snag 

levels not surveyed in 

this MA; also 

reference preceding 

Forest-wide S&Gs) 

M9-63 (guidance on retention of cull 

logs, snags and replacement to meet 

wildlife requirements provided no 

conflicts with visual quality in 

lodgepole pine) 

Not Applicable Meets (as amended 

by screens; also 

reference preceding 

Forest-wide S&Gs) 

Meets (as amended 

by screens; also 

reference preceding 

Forest-wide S&Gs) 

Wildlife: M9-79 thru M9-82

(guidance on snags, snag replacement 

trees, habitat improvement, deer 

migration crossings on roads) 

Not Applicable Meets (as amended 

by screens,; also 

reference preceding 

Forest-wide S&Gs) 

Meets (as amended 

by screens; also 

reference preceding 

Forest-wide S&Gs) 

Management Area 15 Old Growth

General Theme and Objectives:

(guidance on management of OGMAs 

for large trees, abundant standing and 

down trees, and vertical structure 

w/exception for lodgepole pine; 

designation of the goshawk as the 

management indicator species for 

ponderosa pine) 

Meets Meets (reference 

preceding S&Gs for 

snags, down logs and 

vertical structure) 

Meets (reference 

preceding S&Gs for 

snags, down logs and 

vertical structure) 

Timber: M15-4 thru M15-6

(guidance on vegetative manipulation 

only allowed to perpetuate or enhance 

old growth characteristics; substitution 

of areas after catastrophic events; 

firewood cutting prohibited) 

Not Applicable Meets (reference 

harvest prescriptions 

for units within the 

OGMA and the 

silviculture report) 

Meets (reference 

harvest prescriptions 

for units within the 

OGMA and the 

silviculture report) 

Wildlife: M15-9 (guidance on snags 

and live trees for future snags to be 

maintained at the 100% MMP level of 

primary excavators; dead, down trees 

will be managed to maximize 

biological diversity) 

Currently does not 

meet 

Meets with 

mitigation (snag 

estimates indicate 

that current levels do 

not meet 100% MPP 

per DecAID 

Meets with 

mitigation (snag 

estimates indicate 

that current levels do 

not meet 100% MPP 

per DecAID 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

326

WILDLIFE 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

recommendations; 

Snag losses to safety 

and prescribed fire 

will reduce levels; 

Mitigation measures 

to protect and create 

snags. 

recommendations; 

Snag losses to safety 

and prescribed fire 

will further reduce 

levels; mitigation 

measures to protect 

and create snags 

Transportation: M15-14 (guidance on 

limiting road or trail access to the 

minimum; roads no longer needed will 

be closed and allowed to revegetate 

naturally; helispots and transmission 

corridors not allowed) 

Meets Meets (reference 

transportation and 

soils analysis for 

proposed road 

closures; check 

details on closures vs. 

decommissioning, i.e. 

natural or not) 

Meets (reference 

transportation and 

soils analysis for 

proposed road 

closures; check 

details on closures vs. 

decommissioning, i.e. 

natural or not) 

Fire Management--Prescribed Fire:

M15-19: (guidance on using 

prescribed fire in achieving old growth 

characteristics; use to reduce 

unacceptable fuel loadings; do not use 

in lodgepole pine) 

Not Applicable Meets (reference 

fuels and silviculture 

prescriptions) 

Meets (reference 

fuels and silviculture 

prescriptions) 

Fuel Treatment Other Than 

Prescribed Fire: M15-20: (guidance 

on using prescribed fire as the 

preferred treatment method but other 

methods allowable to reduce 

unacceptable fuel loadings) 

Not Applicable Meets (reference 

silviculture/fuels 

prescriptions) 

Meets (reference 

silviculture/fuels 

prescriptions) 

Forest Health: M15-23, 24 (guidance 

on monitoring pests to prevent 

unacceptable damage to adjacent 

areas; use Forest-wide S&Gs for 

Forest Health; only practices 

compatible with old growth objectives 

allowed to treat insects and diseases) 

Not Applicable Meets (reference 

silviculture/fuels 

prescriptions) 

Meets (reference 

silviculture/fuels 

prescriptions) 

Eastside Screens for Late and Old 

Structure (LOS): Timber Harvest, 

Interim Wildlife Standards, Scenario 

A, S&G 1) (allows some timber sale 

activities with LOS stages that are 

within or above HRV which maintain 

or enhance LOS; allowable to 

manipulate one type of LOS to move 

stands into the LOS stage that is 

deficit if it meets historical conditions) 

Not Applicable Meets (reference 

silviculture report 

and prescriptions) 

Meets (reference 

silviculture report 

and prescriptions) 

2) (outside of LOS other types of 

timber sale activities are allowed 

provided they maintain and/or enhance 

LOS component within the treated 

stands; standards a) thru c) provide 

specific direction for prescriptions) 

Not Applicable Meets (reference 

silviculture report 

and prescriptions) 

Meets (reference 

silviculture report 

and prescriptions) 

3) (maintain connectivity and reduce 

fragmentation of LOS, standards 

include: a) provide connectivity 

Not applicable Meets (reference 

Wildlife Report and 

file map on 

Meets (reference 

Wildlife Report and 

file map on 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

327

WILDLIFE 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

between all LRMP designated “old 

growth/MR” habitats, (1) network 

pattern of connectivity with at least 2 

different directions; (2) specifics on 

stand characteristics including having 

medium or large diameter trees, 

canopy closures within top 1/3rd. of 

site potential, minimum width of 400’ 

with specified exception rule; use best 

stands available; (3) keep length of 

corridors as short as possible; (4)

harvest within corridors permitted if 

(2) criteria are met plus leaving 

available understory in patches or 

scattered to assist supporting stand 

density and cover, some understory 

removal allowable depending upon 

site; b) do not apply even-aged 

regeneration or group selection 

treatments in non-LOS stands that are 

located within or surrounded by LOS, 

use non-regeneration or single-tree 

selection prescriptions to move these 

stands to LOS conditions) 

LOS/OGMA 

corridors; check 

silviculture 

units/prescriptions 

overlapping 

designated corridors) 

LOS/OGMA 

corridors; check 

silviculture 

units/prescriptions 

overlapping 

designated corridors) 

PATHOLOGY 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

M15 Old Growth Area 

M15-23 Monitor pests to prevent 

damage to adjacent areas. 

Pests moving from 

Deadlog to adjacent 

areas not present. 

Bark beetle and 

mistletoe spread will 

be reduced. 

Bark beetle and 

mistletoe spread will 

be reduced. 

M15-24 Practices compatible with Old 

Growth objectives... 

Old Growth 

objectives may not be 

met if mortality of 

large old trees 

accelerates 

Old Growth 

objectives of 

maintaining large old 

tree and structure 

maintained. 

Old Growth 

objectives of 

maintaining large old 

tree and structure 

maintained more than 

Alt 2 

Forest Health 

FH-1 It is the responsibility of the 

resource manager to consider, 

document and mitigate, if possible, the 

potential impact of forest pests, both 

on short and long-term land 

management objectives 

FVS mistletoe impact 

analysis included no 

action alternative for 

current condition, 20, 

40, and 100 years 

from present. 

FVS mistletoe impact 

analysis included 

action alternative for 

current condition, 20, 

40, and 100 years 

from present. 

FVS mistletoe impact 

analysis included 

action alternative for 

current condition, 20, 

40, and 100 years 

from present. 

FH-3 Management strategies should 

emphasize prevention of pest 

problems rather than suppression 

activities. 

Adoption of 

alternative will not 

emphasize prevention 

of pest problems. 

Adoption of 

alternative will 

emphasize prevention 

of pest problems 

through selective 

thinning practices. 

Adoption of 

alternative will 

emphasize prevention 

of pest problems 

through selective 

thinning practices. 

FH-4 Treatment of pest problems 

should be a result of integrated area 

All dwarf mistletoe 

infected stands with 

All dwarf mistletoe 

infected stands with 

All dwarf mistletoe 

infected stands with 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

328

PATHOLOGY 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

analysis to achieve quantifiable land 

management objectives. Treatment on 

an isolated stand by stand basis is not 

recommended. 

stand exam data were 

analyzed with LOS 

component and 

blackbark conditions. 

stand exam data were 

analyzed with LOS 

component and 

blackbark conditions. 

stand exam data were 

analyzed with LOS 

component and 

blackbark conditions. 

FH-5 It may not be possible, or 

desirable, to treat all affected stand in 

an analysis area in one entry. Priority 

systems for treatment will need to be 

established by the interdisciplinary 

team. These systems could be based 

on a number of factors including: loss 

of future management option if 

treatment is delayed, diversity, site 

productivity, visual and/or wildlife 

considerations. 

Could lose significant 

portions of old tree 

component if left 

untreated. 

Will promote the 

retention of the old 

tree component and 

development of 

current blackbark 

stands into LOS. 

Will promote the 

retention of the old 

tree component and 

development of 

current blackbark 

stands into LOS. 

TM-10 The silvicultural prescription 

will consider integrated pest 

management. Pests include insects, 

diseases, animals, and vegetation. 

Where conditions are such that 

unacceptable damage or reductions in 

tree growth can be predicted, 

protection measures may be warranted 

prior to the actual damage occurring. 

Will not consider 

preemptive treatment 

of stands currently at 

risk from bark beetle, 

wildfire, and dwarf 

mistletoe. 

Will be preemptive in 

treatment of stands 

currently at risk from 

bark beetle, wildfire, 

and dwarf mistletoe. 

Will be preemptive in 

treatment of stands 

currently at risk from 

bark beetle, wildfire, 

and dwarf mistletoe. 

TM-32 Uneven-aged management is 

most applicable in stands free of dwarf 

mistletoe. Uneven-aged management 

should be restricted to stands where 

dwarf mistletoe can be stabilized 

indefinitely at a low infection level in 

the trees comprising the regulated 

stand. This will insure that no more 

than a 10% loss in productivity will 

occur. Maintaining mistletoe at low 

levels will be easiest where mistletoe 

occurs on species which are minor 

components of the stand. In single 

species stands, or stands where 

mistletoe infects the dominant species, 

stabilization will be more difficult 

both to accomplish and to predict. 

Productivity losses 

due to dwarf 

mistletoe will be 

more severe without 

treatment compared 

to treated stands and 

are projected to 

exceed 10% at the 

stand level within 40 

years. 

Productivity losses 

due to dwarf 

mistletoe will be less 

in dwarf mistletoe 

infected treated 

stands than in 

untreated stands for 

up to 40 years 

following treatment 

at which point they 

are projected to 

exceed 10%. 

Productivity losses 

due to dwarf 

mistletoe will be less 

in dwarf mistletoe 

infected treated 

stands than in 

untreated stands for 

up to 40 years 

following treatment 

at which point they 

are projected to 

exceed 10%. 

TM-33 Consultation with the Zone 

Pathologist and careful record keeping 

is critical in these higher risk 

situations. In lightly infected stands 

where the mistletoe infected trees 

occur in patches, group selection may 

be an appropriate management 

technique; especially with good 

boundary design and follow up 

treatments of trees surrounding the cut 

area. Conifer species to plant include 

Ponderosa pine, western larch and 

western white pine which are tolerant 

Will not address 

mistletoe in affected 

stands. 

Will adequately 

address management 

of mistletoe in stand 

by selectively 

removing most 

severely infected 

trees, increasing 

spacing around 

infected residual 

trees, and introducing 

prescribed fire into 

stands. 

Will adequately 

address management 

of mistletoe in stand 

by selectively 

removing most 

severely infected 

trees, increasing 

spacing around 

infected residual 

trees, and introducing 

prescribed fire into 

stands. 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

329

PATHOLOGY 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

or moderately tolerant to root rots. 

TM-43 “Management of Advanced 

Regeneration” Trees of acceptable 

condition will generally have the 

following characteristics: 

* Trees are free of dwarf mistletoe 

bole infections and predicted to 

maintain a minimum of 10 inches of 

leader growth annually within a 20 

year period. 

Will not address trees 

infected with 

mistletoe. 

Will selectively 

remove the 

regenerating trees 

most severely 

infected with 

mistletoe and leave 

lightly and uninfected 

trees which are likely 

to maintain 10 inches 

of leader growth. 

Will selectively 

remove the 

regenerating trees 

most severely 

infected with 

mistletoe and leave 

lightly and uninfected 

trees which are likely 

to maintain 10 inches 

of leader growth. 

TM-48 “Natural Regeneration” 

Appropriate stand and site conditions 

for natural regeneration include: 

* Seed trees can be dwarf mistletoe 

infected but in that case must be 

removed or girdled before 

regeneration reaches a height of 3 feet. 

If dwarf mistletoe infected trees are 

retained to meet wildlife habitat needs, 

they should be killed in place to avoid 

infecting regeneration. 

Will not address 

infected regeneration. 

Has a provision to 

girdle live infected 

trees greater than or 

equal to 21 inches 

DBH three years 

following 

introduction of fire 

and to remove 

infected regeneration 

at that time. 

Has a provision to 

girdle live infected 

trees greater than or 

equal to 21 inches 

DBH three years 

following 

introduction of fire 

and to remove 

infected regeneration 

at that time. 

M9-37 “Vegetative Management” 

Even-aged management may be 

practiced where appropriate for insect 

and disease control. 

Will not address 

insect and disease 

management in evenaged blackbark 

stands. 

Appropriate evenaged insect and 

disease management 

of blackbark stands 

affected by mistletoe 

will be practiced 

through selectively 

removing most 

severely infected 

trees, reducing stand 

basal areas, and 

introducing 

prescribed fire into 

affected stands. 

Appropriate evenaged insect and 

disease management 

of blackbark stands 

affected by mistletoe 

will be practiced 

through selectively 

removing most 

severely infected 

trees, reducing stand 

basal areas, and 

introducing 

prescribed fire into 

affected stands. 

M9-96 Monitoring and vegetative 

management will emphasize the 

control or prevention of major insect 

and disease problems Minor insect 

infestations or root rot centers may not 

require immediate treatment, as long 

as they are consistent with the desired 

visual condition for the species in 

which they occur Insect and disease 

problems in the Scenic Views 

Management Area will be monitored 

to determine their rate of spread and 

degree of risk to the visual resource. 

Will not address the 

control or prevention 

of insect and disease 

problems in the 

project area. 

Will emphasize the 

control of mistletoe 

infection and the 

prevention of bark 

beetle attack within 

the project area. 

Will emphasize the 

control of mistletoe 

infection and the 

prevention of bark 

beetle attack within 

the project area. 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

330

RANGE 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

M8 General Forest 

M8-9 Timber harvesting and postharvesting activities . . . should be 

scheduled to accommodate grazing 

systems. 

No change in grazing 

operations 

Develop an 

Implementation Plan 

for planned activities 

that addresses range 

operations including 

allotment use and 

pasture rotations. 

Develop an 

Implementation Plan 

for planned activities 

that addresses range 

operations including 

allotment use and 

pasture rotations. 

BOTANY 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

TES Plant Species 

TE-1 During environmental analysis 

of each project activity, available 

habitat, location records, and other 

information will be reviewed 

determine whether known or 

suspected locations of Sensitive plant 

species or their habitat occur. 

Meets 

No known Sensitive 

plant species are 

documented within or 

closely adjacent to 

the project area. 

Meets 

No Sensitive plant 

species are 

documented within or 

closely adjacent to 

the project area. 

Meets 

No Sensitive plant 

species are 

documented within or 

closely adjacent to 

the project area. 

TE-3 When suitable habitats or 

reported locations are suspected to 

occur in the area of influence of the 

project, a field reconnaissance will be 

performed to more precisely verify the 

presence, abundance and distribution 

of the Sensitive species. If the search 

is conducted during a season of the 

year when positive identification is 

probable and no listed species are 

found, this fact will be documented 

and no further investigation is needed. 

Meets 

The presence of 

potential habitat for 

Sensitive plant 

species Botrychium 

pumicola and 

Castilleja chlorotica. 

Surveys conducted in 

1990, 1998 and 2005, 

targeted highprobability habitat 

resulted in no 

detections. 

Meets 

The presence of 

potential habitat for 

Sensitive plant 

species Botrychium 

pumicola and 

Castilleja chlorotica. 

Surveys conducted in 

1990, 1998 and 2005, 

targeted highprobability resulted 

in no detections. 

Meets 

The presence of 

potential habitat for 

Sensitive plant 

species Botrychium 

pumicola and 

Castilleja chlorotica. 

Surveys conducted in 

1990, 1998 and 2005, 

targeted highprobability habitat 

resulted in no 

detections. 

SCENIC 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

M8 General Forest 

M8-19: To the extent possible, the 

highest visual quality level will be 

provided. 

Meets Scenery 

Management System 

Guidelines 

Meets: Reduces 

foreground stand 

density. Opens views 

into the forest, with 

residual larger trees 

remaining. 

Meets: Reduces 

foreground stand 

density. Opens views 

into the forest, with 

residual larger trees 

remaining. 

M9 Scenic Views 

M9-4 Ponderosa pine in Foreground 

Scenic Views MA areas 

Meets Scenery 

Management System 

Guidelines 

Meets: Reduces 

foreground stand 

density. Opens views 

into the forest, with 

residual larger trees 

remaining. 

Meets: Reduces 

foreground stand 

density. Opens views 

into the forest, with 

residual larger trees 

remaining. 

M9-5 Existing mosaic of tree sizes and 

size class diversity perpetuated by 

Meets Scenery 

Management System 

Meets: Reduces 

foreground stand 

Meets: Reduces 

foreground stand 
Appendix D – Forest Plan Consistency 

331

SCENIC 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

managing some of the trees within 

each size class. 

Guidelines density. Opens views 

into the forest, with 

residual larger trees 

remaining and, where 

possible, size class 

diversity. 

density. Opens views 

into the forest, with 

residual larger trees 

remaining and, where 

possible, size class 

diversity. 

Forest Roads 

Standards and Guidelines Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 

M8 General Forest 

TS-11: Density guidelines are not 

intended to be objectives in 

themselves, but are a means to 

accomplish wildlife resource 

objectives. 

Does not meet road 

density guidelines for 

wildlife. 

Reduces road density 

from 4.7 to 3.1 miles 

per square mile. 

Meets Scenery 

Management 

Guidelines 

TS-12: Guideline densities will be 

used as thresholds for a further 

evaluation and will not serve as the 

basis for assessing conformance with 

the Forest Plan. 

Does not meet road 

density guideline 

thresholds. 

Reduces road density 

from 4.7 to 3.1 miles 

per square mile. 

Does not meet the 

threshold of 2.5 miles 

per square miles in 

General Forest 

Reduces road density 

from 4.7 to 3.1 miles 

per square mile. 

Does not meet the 

threshold of 2.5 miles 

per square miles in 

General Forest 

TS-13: If a preferred project 

alternative would exceed these 

guidelines, a detailed further 

evaluation by a wildlife biologist 

would be required. ... If the 

evaluation concludes that the net effect 

of the project is compatible with the 

Forest Plan wildlife objectives as 

proposed or with mitigation measures, 

or significantly enhances the 

conformance of the Implementation 

Unit with wildlife objectives, the 

project will be considered compatible 

with Forest Plan direction. 

Does not meet road 

density guidelines for 

wildlife. 

Reduces road density 

from 4.7 to 3.1 miles 

per square mile. 

Does not meet the 

threshold of 2.5 miles 

per square miles in 

General Forest. 

Considered 

compatible with 

Forest Plan direction. 

Reduces road density 

from 4.7 to 3.1 miles 

per square mile. 

Does not meet the 

threshold of 2.5 miles 

per square miles in 

General Forest. 

Considered 

compatible with 

Forest Plan direction. 

TS-14: The biologist’s evaluation 

would be used by the project ID Team 

and line officer in deciding on a plan 

with best satisfies multiresource needs, 

and in preparing the NEPA document 

and Decision Notice. ... Selection of 

project alternatives, which further 

evaluation finds are not compatible 

with Forest Plan wildlife objectives or 

will not significantly enhance 

conformance of the Implementation 

Unit with wildlife objectives, will 

require an amendment of the Plan. 

Does not meet road 

density guidelines for 

wildlife. 

Reduces road density 

from 4.7 to 3.1 miles 

per square mile. 

Does not meet the 

threshold of 2.5 miles 

per square miles in 

General Forest. 

Considered 

compatible with 

Forest Plan direction. 

Green dot closures 

during hunting 

season. 

Reduces road density 

from 4.7 to 3.1 miles 

per square mile. 

Does not meet the 

threshold of 2.5 miles 

per square miles in 

General Forest. 

Considered 

compatible with 

Forest Plan direction. 

Green dot closure 

during hunting 

season