Draft Supplemental EIS II - 1 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

CHAPTER II - ALTERNATIVES 

This Chapter of the DSEIS describes and compares the alternatives considered in detail for this 

project. It identifies function and includes a detailed description of each alternative considered 

as well as alternatives considered, but eliminated from detailed study.

B. INTRODUCTION 

Identification of motorized vehicle use over an entire National Forest is a large and complex 

undertaking. The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is approximately 1.8 million acres in 

size, with approximately 4,512 miles of road currently open to the public, and over 246 miles of 

trail that allow motorized use. Combine this with possible seasonal restrictions on use and other 

components of a designation process, and the result is an infinite number of permutations and 

combinations that could be developed as alternatives. Therefore, the Forest developed a strategy 

to limit the number of alternatives to study in detail while providing a clear basis of choice 

among options. 

1. Strategy for Developing the Proposed Action and Alternatives 

 Under NEPA, a reasonable alternative is one that fulfills the Purpose and Need for action 

and responds to one or more significant issues [FSH 1909.15 (14.2)]. Analysis of the 

initially Proposed Action and the current situation relative to the Significant Issues 

showed, in general, that impacts vary with the level of human use, particularly motorized 

use. A criterion for the alternatives was to provide a range that would also vary in terms 

of amount of motorized opportunities to be provided. The alternatives should also be 

responsive to public comments received on the Proposed Action. 

 

A.CHANGES BETWEEN FINAL EIS AND DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL EIS 

ADDED: Edits were completed throughout this chapter to provide clarification of information 

previously presented. All edits were based on issues identified internally and externally 

through the appeals process. All modifications, clarifications, deletions or additions for each 

section will be framed within a box. Other minor corrections, explanations and edits have 

also been made. 

Changes within this chapter include: 

 Added corrections to baseline road and trail mileages (II-11,12) 

 Changes to roads or portions of roads allowing mixed use within Alternative 5 

(II-12,13) 

 Clarified dispersed camping (II-17,18,41) 

 General closure of cross-country travel incorporated into Alternative 2 (II-20,22) 

 Added mitigation measures for Public Safety (II-47) 

 Updated mitigation measures for Invasive Plants (II-50,51) 

 Updated mitigation measures for Special Plant Species (II-52) 

 Added mitigation measures for Soils – Site Productivity (II-52) 

 Added mitigation measures for Naturally Occurring Asbestos (II-53) 

 Designated and Eligible Wild and Scenic Rivers Alternative Comparison (II-68) 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 2 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

 Each alternative should provide for sufficient opportunities of public motorized 

recreation on the Forest while implementing the Travel Management Rule, which 

requires the authorized official to consider minimizing impacts to natural and cultural 

resources, public safety concerns, and conflicts among users. In short, the alternatives 

should strive to achieve or attain the stated Purpose and Need for this process. 

 In response to the Travel Management Rule, the planning process under NEPA began 

when the Forest Service determined that there was a need to change how public 

motorized travel was being managed on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (see 

Chapter I). As associated with the Final EIS, an initial proposal was developed based on 

results from analysis of the Forest’s transportation system. Forest and Ranger District 

staff identified changes they believed should be made based on information available 

regarding the potential effects of travel, as well as higher-level direction, public reports of 

problems, and knowledge of the Forest road and trail system. This led to the 

development of Alternative 3-Proposed Action, which the Forest Service used to initiate 

the NEPA process, facilitate meaningful public comment, and serve as a basis for 

identification of the issues. 

 Motorized use planning is designed to assess human access and travel within the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest. Given this, the possible options would range from 

unregulated or unmanaged motorized use across the Forest to prohibiting all motorized 

use and travel. Although there were a few comments advocating such management, 

neither of these extremes was considered reasonable. They clearly would not meet the 

Purpose and Need for this process. 

 Alternative 2, which represents the situation associated with motorized use as it was in 

2008, was determined to be sufficient in representing the most motorized-use end of the 

range of alternatives. The Forest Service did not identify a reason to consider alternatives 

that would further relax control of motorized use in general. It should be noted that 

limiting the more motorized end of the range of alternatives to Alternative 2 did not mean 

that new motorized routes could not be considered within the range. The Proposed 

Action in particular, includes some motorized routes or areas that are not available today. 

 Alternative 4, in general, is more restrictive on motorized use in exchange for putting 

more management emphasis on other resource values. Based on individual values, a case 

can be made for alternatives that would get more and more restrictive on human use 

(including non-motorized uses). For example, environmental analysis could demonstrate 

that there would be other resource benefits if all Forest roads were closed and reclaimed; 

if motorized, mountain bike and stock use were prohibited; and if trails were not cleared, 

making hiking more difficult. Most people would consider these options, as well as the 

option of prohibiting all human use, to be unreasonable. They would also not meet the 

stated Purpose and Need. The challenge was developing alternatives with increasing 

restrictions on motorized use while still remaining within a reasonable range. The Forest 

determined this end of the spectrum to be represented by Alternative 4. 

 Alternative 5 was developed to reflect a combination of Alternatives 3 and 4. The 

development of this alternative was primarily based on public comments received during 

the formal DEIS comment period. 

The existing level of use of NFS roads and trails is part of the current condition. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 3 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

2. Identification of the Preferred Alternative 

NEPA required that the Final EIS identify the agency’s Preferred Alternative or alternatives, if 

one or more than one exists. As noted above, the Forest Service has developed and analyzed an 

additional action alternative, Alternative 5. The Forest Supervisor of the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest has identified this alternative as the Preferred Alternative which is described in 

Section G, this Chapter. 

C. ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 

1. National Forest System Roads and Trails 

National Forest System (NFS) roads and trails are Forest roads and trails other than those 

authorized by a legally documented right-of-way held by a state, county, or other public road 

authority. Only NFS roads and NFS trails can be designated for motor vehicle use. State, 

county, and other public roads (including Forest highways) are administered by the applicable 

public road authority. 

Roads are motor vehicle routes 50 inches or greater in width, unless defined and managed as a 

trail. Roads are managed by Forest Service Engineering groups. Trails are less than 50 inches 

in width, or when greater than 50 inches in width, defined and managed as a trail. Trails are 

managed by Forest Service Recreation managers. An old railroad grade converted to a trail 

would be an example of a trail wider than 50 inches. 

Temporary roads and trails are necessary for emergency use or authorized by contract or permit. 

Temporary roads and trails and unauthorized roads and trails are not included on the Forest 

transportation atlas and are not part of this analysis. 

Some NFS roads and NFS trails are not designated for motor vehicle use. These include nonmotorized trails and single-purpose roads or trails (examples: Wilderness trails, intermittent 

service Maintenance Level 1 roads providing access for future land management activities, or 

roads constructed for access to power lines, ski areas, or other special use permits). The Motor 

Vehicle Use Map would identify only the NFS roads, NFS trails, and areas on NFS lands 

designated for motorized public vehicle use. 

NFS roads are designed for use by full-sized highway-legal vehicles, but many NFS roads also 

provide recreational access for OHVs and other non-highway-legal vehicles. NFS trails may be 

connected to each other by segments of road. 

Existing Designations 

Many National Forests are able to begin the designation process with the presumption that NFS 

roads and trails are in effect already designated for the motor vehicle uses for which they are 

currently managed. All National Forests, for example, include NFS roads managed as open to 

highway-legal vehicles. Generally, these NFS roads are identified as Maintenance Level 2, 3, 4, 

or 5. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 4 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Table II-1. Road Maintenance Level Definitions 

Level 1 

Basic custodial maintenance is performed to keep damage to adjacent resources to an acceptable 

level and to perpetuate the road to facilitate future management activities. While being maintained 

at level 1, roads are administratively1 closed to vehicular traffic. 

Level 2 

Assigned to roads open for use by high clearance vehicles. Traffic is normally minor, usually 

consisting of one or a combination of administrative, permitted, dispersed recreation, or other 

specialized uses. 

Level 3 Roads in this Maintenance Level are typically low speed, single lane with turnouts and spot 

surfacing. Some roads may be fully surfaced with either native or processed material. 

Level 4 Most roads are double lane and aggregate surfaced. However, some roads may be single lane. 

Some roads may be paved and/or dust abated. 

Level 5 These roads are normally double lane, paved facilities. Some may be aggregate surfaced and 

dust abated. 

Maintenance Level 2, 3, 4, or 5 roads are already designated for use by highway-legal vehicles. 

Nothing in the Travel Management Rule requires reconsideration of such past management 

decisions. 

Travel management decisions are generally focused on user-created routes, cross-country motor 

vehicle use, and use of off-highway vehicles (OHVs) other than over-snow vehicles. An OHV is 

any motor vehicle designed for, or capable of, cross-country travel on or immediately over land, 

water, sand, snow, ice, marsh, swampland, or other natural terrain. Synonymous and less used 

terms for this type of vehicle are “off-road vehicle (ORV)” or “all-terrain vehicle (ATV)”. 

An over-snow vehicle is a motor vehicle that is designed for use over snow and that runs on a 

track or tracks and/or a ski or skis, while in use over snow. The Travel Management Rule 

exempts over snow vehicles from the designation process. Over-snow vehicle use may still be 

subject to restrictions and prohibitions under 36 CFR part 212, subpart C.

The purpose of the Travel Management Rule is to designate a system of roads, trails, and areas 

for motor vehicle use (other than over-snow vehicle use) and end unmanaged cross-country 

motor vehicle use. The rule is not intended to require re-evaluation of the entire Forest 

transportation system. 

Jurisdiction 

One part of compiling existing travel management direction is to identify jurisdiction for roads 

and trails on or serving NFS lands. Only NFS roads and trails can be designated for motor 

vehicle use. NFS lands also include state, county, and municipal roads authorized by legally 

documented rights-of-way. While the Forest Service may have some authority to take law 

enforcement actions or to regulate certain uses of such roads to protect NFS lands, they are not 

NFS roads and are not subject to designation under 36 CFR 212.51. Determining jurisdiction 

was important to identifying transportation systems in which Federal, State, and local 

designations and policies are reasonably consistent. 

 

1 Administratively closed is defined as being restricted for access by features (e.g. berm, gate, or barricade) that prevent 

passenger vehicle access but is not closed by forest order. All maintenance level 1 roads are available for motorized use where 

vehicles are operated in a manner that do not cause damage to land, wildlife, or vegetation as defined in the Code of Federal 

Regulations (36 CFR 261.13(h)). 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 5 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Sometimes jurisdiction over a given road or trail is uncertain or disputed (e.g., disputed RS 2477 

claims2). Generally, roads and trails on NFS lands are considered in the designation process 

unless authorized by a legally documented right-of-way. Coordination with Federal, State, 

county, and local public road authorities and law enforcement agencies was necessary for this 

analysis in evaluating roads or trails when jurisdiction is uncertain. Legal research and title 

searches are sometimes necessary to establish jurisdiction. 

The Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) and California State Vehicle Code (CVC) are the major 

sources of State law pertaining to traffic engineering and are referred to in both the FSM and 

FSH. Relevant sections of the ORS and CVC are covered below. The vast majority of the 

Forest is located in Oregon and the Forest Service Pacific Northwest guidance is written in 

consideration of the ORS. The following information summarizes current Oregon and California 

State Laws and applies to all alternatives. 

Oregon State Laws Regarding OHV Use 

OHV riders must display an OHV permit “decal” when operating on public land (and the land 

must be specifically designated for OHV use). The permit decal must be permanently affixed to 

the vehicle and be clearly visible. There are three classes of OHV permits: 

Class I Permit

Definition:

 For vehicles 50" wide or less, and ...

 Dry weight of 800 pounds or less. 

 Have saddle or seat. 

 Travels on three or four tires. 

 Meet the safety equipment standards for off-road vehicles. (see Oregon Administrative Rules 

735-116-0000) 

Operating requirements: 

 Have a valid driver’s license, or ... 

 Youth under age 16 must be supervised by an adult over age 18 who is able to provide immediate 

assistance and direction to the children, and

 Youth and any passengers under age 18 must wear a helmet with the chin strap fastened. 

 Operators with a suspended or revoked driver’s license may not operate any Class I, II, or III 

OHV. 

 Permit fee. $10.00 

Class II Permit

Defined: 

 For vehicles more than 50” wide, or ... 

 Dry weight of more than 800 pounds. 

 Meet the safety equipment standards for off-road vehicles. (see Oregon Administrative Rules 

735-116-0000) 

 

2 RS 2477 stands for Revised Statute 2477 from the Mining Act of 1866, which states: "The right-of-way for the construction of 

highways over public lands, not reserved for public uses, is hereby granted." The act granted a public right-of-way across 

unreserved federal land to guarantee access as land transferred to state or private ownership. Rights-of-way were created and 

granted under RS 2477 until its repeal in 1976. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 6 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Operating requirements: 

 A valid driver’s license. 

 Check with law enforcement officials in the area you wish to ride for any special requirements. 

 Uninsured Class II off-road vehicles should contact Department of Motor Vehicles for more 

information. 

 Permit fee. $10.00 

Class III Permit

Defined:

 For vehicles riding on two tires, and

 Dry weight of less than 600 pounds. 

 Meet the safety equipment standards for off-road vehicles. (see Oregon Administrative Rules 

735-116-0000) 

Operating requirements: 

 Must be at least 7 years of age 

 Youth under age 16 must be supervised by an adult over age 18 who is able to provide immediate 

assistance and direction to the children, and

 Youth and any passengers under age 18 must wear a helmet with the chin strap fastened. 

The following state rule changes under the Rider Fit Program took effect on January 01, 2009:

 A Class I OHV operator under the age of 16, must meet all the following minimum physical size 

requirements in relationship to the vehicle; 

 Brake Reach: With hands placed in the normal operating position and fingers straight out, the 

first joint (from the tip) of the middle finger will extend beyond the brake lever and clutch, and; 

 Leg Length: While sitting and with their feet on the pegs, the knee must be bent at least 45 

degrees, and; 

 Grip Reach: While sitting upright on the OHV with hands on the handlebars and not leaning 

forward, there must be a distinct angle between the upper arm and the forearm, and; 

 The rider must be able to turn the handle bars from lock to lock3 while maintaining a grip on the 

handle bars and maintaining throttle and brake control. 

 Disabled riders are allowed to use prosthetic devices or modified or adaptive equipment to 

achieve rider fit. 

 All OHV operators under the age of 16 and their adult supervisors are required to complete a state 

sponsored Safety Education Course. (This program will be phased in for all ages by 2014.) In 

addition, all youth under the age of 16 will be required to have hands on training starting 2012.

Individuals are required to display a permit decal when operating an OHV on public land. A 

helmet is required only if all the following conditions are true: (1) under 18 years old, (2) 

operating a Class I or Class III OHV, and (3) riding on public land. 

All off-road vehicles must be equipped with a properly installed Forest Service approved spark 

arrestor which has not been modified from its original manufacturer’s specifications. The spark 

arrester must meet either the US Department of Agriculture—Forest Service Standard 5100-1a, 

or the 80 percent efficiency level standard when determined by the appropriate Society of 

Automotive Engineers (SAE) Recommended Practices J335 or J350. 

 

 

3 “Lock to lock” is the terminology used by the State to describe the point where the handlebars of a quad stop turning. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 7 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

These standards include, among others, the requirements that: (1) The spark arrester shall have 

an efficiency to retain or destroy at least 80 percent of carbon particles for all flow rates, and (2) 

the spark arrester has been warranted by its manufacturer as meeting this efficiency requirement 

for at least 1,000 hours subject to normal use, with maintenance and mounting in accordance 

with the manufacturer's recommendation. A spark arrester is not required when an off-road 

vehicle is being operated in an area that has 3 or more inches of snow on the ground. 

All vehicles must be equipped with a muffler that conforms to the current noise level and defect 

standards of the Department of Environmental Quality for vehicles operated off-road. Allowable 

ambient noise levels vary by year of manufacture, type of OHV, and proximity to “Noise 

Sensitive Property.”4 Required safety equipment and noise level standards for OHVs is listed in 

Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs) at 735-116-0000 and 340-035-0005-0030. 

Table II-2. Motorized Trail Classification and Specifications 

Class I 

Trail specifications for Class I trail types are designed to accommodate 3 to 4 wheel machines that are 50 

inches wide or less (typically referred to as “quads”). Tread width varies from about 48 to 60 inches, with 

clearing widths up to 72 inches wide. 

Class II

Trail specifications for Class II trail types are designed to accommodate vehicles that are greater than 50 

inches wide – generally these are 4-wheel drive sport utility vehicles, side-by-side utility vehicles, and 

pickup trucks requiring a wider tread and clearing width than class 1 vehicles. 

Class III Trail specifications for Class III trails are designed to accommodate vehicles on two wheels 

(motorcycles). The tread width varies from 12 to 30 inches with a clearing width of up to 60 inches wide. 

Figure II-1. Examples of OHV Classes 

 Class I Class II Class III

 

 

 

4 “Noise Sensitive Property” means real property normally used for sleeping, or normally used as schools, churches, hospitals or

public libraries. Property used in industrial or agricultural activities is not Noise Sensitive Property unless it meets the above 

criteria in more than an incidental manner. OAR Division 35 340-035-0015 (38). 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 8 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

California State Laws Regarding OHV Use 

The following excerpts are taken directly from the CVC. 

Division 16.5 Off-Highway Vehicles

Vehicle License

CVC 38012. (a) As used in this division, “off-highway motor vehicle subject to identification” 

means a motor vehicle subject to the provisions of subdivision (a)of Section 38010. 

(b) As used in this division, “off-highway motor vehicle” includes, but is not limited to, the 

following: 

(1) Any motorcycle or motor-driver cycle, except for any motorcycle which is eligible for a 

special transportation identification device issued pursuant to Section 38088. (Motorcycle 

used in racing events). 

(2) Any snowmobile or other vehicle designed to travel over snow or ice, as defined in 

Section 557. 

(3) Any motor vehicle commonly referred to as a sand buggy, dune buggy, or all-terrain 

vehicle. 

(4) Any motor vehicle commonly referred to as a jeep (that is not highway legal). 

Identification refers to registration with DMV and evidenced by a green or red sticker–date 

sensitive. 

Vehicle Equipment

CVC 38335 & 38345 – Headlights and taillights when operating from one-half hour after sunset 

to one-half hour before sunrise. 

CVC 38355 – Serviceable brakes. 

CVC 38366 – Spark Arrester 

CVC 38370 – Noise Limits 

Division 16.5 Chapter 7 OHV Safety, education and certificates

CVC 38007. The Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division of the Department of Parks 

and Recreation shall adopt courses of instruction in off-highway motor vehicle safety, operation, 

and principles of environmental preservation by January 1, 2005. For this purpose the division 

shall consult with the Department of the California Highway Patrol and other public and private 

agencies or organizations. The division shall make this course of instruction available directly, 

through contractual agreement, or through volunteers authorized by the division to conduct a 

course of instruction. 

CVC 38501. (a) An all-terrain vehicle safety training organization, commencing on January 1, 

1989, shall issue an all-terrain vehicle safety certificate furnished by the department to any 

individual who successfully completes a course of instruction in all terrain vehicle operation and 

safety as approved and certified by the Off-highway Vehicle Safety Education Committee.
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 9 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

CVC 38502. The department, on and after July 1, 1988, may monitor any all-terrain vehicle 

safety training organization or any all-terrain vehicle safety instructor without advance notice. 

The monitoring may include, but is not limited to, the instruction provided, business practices, 

and records required by Section 11108. 

CVC 38503. No person under the age of 18 years, on and after January 1, 1990, shall operate an 

all-terrain vehicle on public lands of this state unless the person satisfies one of the following 

conditions: 

(a) The person is taking a prescribed safety training course under the direct supervision of a 

certified all-terrain vehicle safety instructor. 

(b) The person is under the direct supervision of an adult who has in their possession an 

appropriate safety certificate issued by this state, or issued under the authority of another 

state. 

(c) The person has in possession an appropriate safety certificate issued by this 

state or issued under the authority of another state. 

CVC 38504. No person under 14 years of age, on and after January 1, 1990, shall operate an allterrain vehicle on public lands of this state unless the person satisfies one of the conditions set 

forth in Section 38503 and, in addition, is accompanied by and under the direct supervision of a 

parent or guardian or is accompanied by and under the direct supervision of an adult who is 

authorized by the parent or guardian. 

CVC 38504.1 (a). Neither a parent or guardian of a child who is under 14 years of age, nor an 

adult who is authorized by the parent or guardian to supervise that child shall grant permission 

to, or knowingly allow, that child to operate an all-terrain vehicle in a manner that violates 

Section 38504. 

CVC 38504.2. If a person under 14 years of age was not properly supervised or accompanied in 

accordance with Section 38504, and the parent or guardian of that child or the adult who was 

authorized by the parent or guardian to supervise or accompany that child is in violation of 

Section 38504.1, upon conviction pursuant to Section 38504, the court may order that child to 

attend and complete the all-terrain vehicle safety training course accompanied by the person who 

violated Section 38504.1. If so ordered, the child under 14 years of age shall provide the court a 

copy of the all-terrain vehicles safety certificate issued as a result of that completion. 

CVC 38505. No person, on and after January 1, 1989, shall operate, ride, or be otherwise 

propelled on an all-terrain vehicle on public lands unless the person wears a safety helmet 

meeting requirements established for motorcycles and motorized bicycles, pursuant to Section 

27802. 

CVC 38305. 38314, 38316a, 38317. Operators may not drive a motor vehicle in a manner that 

endangers the safety of other persons or their property. 

CVC 38319. No person shall operate, nor shall an owner permit the operation of, an off-highway 

motor vehicle in a manner likely to cause malicious or unnecessary damage to the land, wildlife, 

and wildlife habitat or vegetation resources. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 10 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Motorized Mixed Use

Motorized mixed use is defined as use of a NFS road for use by both highway-legal and nonhighway-legal vehicles at the same time. The RRSNF proposes to continue managing most open 

NFS roads for motorized mixed use. Determinations to manage for motorized mixed use involve 

safety, legal, and engineering considerations. Motorized mixed use (open to all vehicles) would 

be allowed on those roads where a qualified road engineer has assessed the current road 

condition and determined that mixed use of the road would have low to moderate safety risks. 

Under Oregon State Law, paved roads and two-lane gravel roads are generally closed to nonstreet legal ATVs unless designated open. Gravel roads, one and one-half lanes or less, are 

generally open to ATVs. On Federal lands, all roads are closed unless designated open (as 

shown on the specific Motorized Vehicle Use Map (MVUM)). 

Portions of roads on the Siskiyou Mountains and Wild Rivers Ranger Districts are located in 

California. According to the California Highway Patrol (Farrow 2007), mixed use is allowed on 

unpaved Maintenance Level 3 roads "that have been operating as mixed use roadways for years" 

under Section 38001 of the California Vehicle Code. The code also allows for mixed use on 

certain paved roads up to three miles in length if one of the following conditions is met: 

 The road is part of an off-highway motor vehicle trail segment; or 

 An off-highway motor vehicle recreational use area and necessary service facilities; or 

 Lodging facilities and an off-highway motor vehicle recreational facility. 

The RRSNF would allow mixed use on some non-paved roads in California. Mixed use on 

paved roads would not be allowed in California. 

2. Alternative Development on the RRSNF 

The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest undertook an extensive effort to validate the location 

of all NFS roads and trails along with unauthorized routes that showed current or past motor 

vehicle use, and could be interpreted as travel ways for motor vehicles. Data collection for this 

effort began in 2006. The Forest held public open house meetings and met with individuals to 

gather information for the current travel inventory. The baseline inventory information provided 

by groups and individuals was used to update the Forest roads and trails database. 

The No Action Alternative is developed based on this inventory, although, as stated previously, 

roads or trails that have been closed to motor vehicle use or for which there is a pre-existing 

decision to close or restrict use were excluded from this alternative. Also, routes that have revegetated from non-use were excluded as well. 

For the RRSNF, proposals are composed of basically two actions: prohibition of cross-country 

wheeled motorized vehicle travel by the public, and changes to the system of motorized NFS 

roads, trails and areas open to the public (i.e., changing allowed/prohibited vehicle classes on the 

existing system, changing season of use for vehicles on the existing system, and adding new 

roads, trails or areas to the system). 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 11 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Before the Action Alternatives were developed, all existing routes identified during the analysis 

of the transportation system were checked for compliance with the Forest Plan Standards and 

Guidelines. Each Standard and Guideline related to motorized use was identified, and criteria for 

interpreting each Standard and Guideline were developed. 

Alternatives were then developed in response to the Significant Issues identified from scoping of 

the Proposed Action, initiated on August 26, 2008. In addition, specific route segments 

considered important (based on current and historical use) to the development of an Action 

Alternative not found to be compliant with Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines were identified 

and recommended for Forest Plan Amendments. These are identified in the description of the 

alternatives in the next section. 

Development of the Action Alternatives also included the review and evaluation of the current 

assignment of Maintenance Levels of NFS roads. Changes were proposed if it was appropriate 

for the development of an alternative, based on its function. 

D. CORRECTIONS TO BASELINE MAPPING

During the comment period on the Draft EIS, a number of corrections were identified to the base 

map that reflects the current condition and Alternatives 1 and 2. Some of these corrections were 

simply changes to the road surface type (paved versus un-paved), some involved a change in the 

road Maintenance Level, some roads were corrected to show whether they are currently open or 

closed, and some were closed as a result of recent legislation. These changes were incorporated 

into the Final EIS. 

Additional corrections were identified between the Final EIS and this Draft Supplemental EIS. 

Those changes are a result of internal review that incorporated into this document changes due to 

project implementation since the publishing the Final EIS, mapping and database errors. 

The changes in miles of roads and trails reflected in each of the alternatives are displayed in the 

summary tables and alternative descriptions. 

The following is a discussion of the primary changes to the baseline mapping (minor edits or 

changes to the maps are not discussed here): 

 

Changes Between Final EIS and Draft Supplemental EIS: 

Tables have been corrected throughout this document to reflect the following changes. 

In addition, an errata sheet (see appendix H) is being included with this DSEIS to assist 

the reader in identifying where changes to the road and trail system occurred. These 

changes reflected on the errata sheet have also been incorporated into the alternative 

maps. 

The total mileage of NFS Roads has decreased by 24.02 due to implementation of the 

Applegate McKee Legacy Roads Decision Notice (watershed restoration) and 

subsequent decommissioning of 25 roads. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 12 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

As discussed in the Draft EIS, the use of Forest roads by both highway legal and non-highway 

legal vehicles is informed by a “mixed use” analysis that is completed by a qualified engineer. 

During the publication of the DEIS, the analysis was on-going. For the DEIS, it was assumed 

that mixed use would be allowed on all Maintenance Level 2 and 3 roads and some Maintenance 

Level 4 roads, consistent with State law for both Oregon and California. Results of the mixed 

use analysis identified 93 miles of roads or portions of roads (that would otherwise allow mixed 

use) where risks are too high to allow for mixed use. This change has been incorporated into the 

map displaying current condition and is the same for all alternatives. This elimination of mixed 

use on these roads would occur regardless of this NEPA effort in order to mitigate unsafe 

conditions. 

 

ADDED: 

Additional mixed use analysis completed after publishing the FEIS identified 25.8 miles 

of roads or road segments where mixed use risks are high. These roads were not 

incorporated during the Final EIS because the information was not available at that time. 

These additional roads or road segments have been removed due to high risk concerns 

and are now reflected as part of the baseline mapping displaying the current condition 

and is the same for all alternatives. 

Changes Between Final EIS and Draft Supplemental EIS (continued)

Mapping (GIS) and database errors added 17.29 miles of roads open to the motorized 

use, while 5.87 additional miles were closed for resource protection resulting from 

implementation of the Applegate McKee Legacy Roads Decision Notice, and 11.28 

miles were removed from all alternative maps due to recognition that the Forest Service 

did not have easements across private lands. 

Errors were discovered on four trails; 

 An unnamed old road used as a “trail” (1.70 miles) just south of Applegate Lake 

on the Siskiyou District paralleling County Road 859 was removed from the 

system prior to 2000. 

 FDT 1101, the Johnson Creek Trail (2.70 miles) was mis-labeled in the GIS 

coverage as a motorized trail, but is not accessible for motorized use. 

 FDT 1168, the Lower Rogue River Trail (6.70 miles), on the Gold Beach District, 

from Agness West is under County jurisdiction and is non-motorized. 

 FDT 1279 (1.86 miles) on the Gold Beach District was incorrectly left off the map 

due to a GIS coverage error. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 13 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

E. ALTERNATIVE 1-No Action

NEPA regulations at 40 CFR 1502.14 state that “agencies shall: (d) include the alternative of no 

action.” CEQ guidance clarifies that the No Action Alternative be based on no change from 

current management. In this case, current management is considered to be implementation of 

previous decisions affecting motorized use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. The 

No Action Alternative is used as a baseline against which to compare other alternatives. The 

baseline conditions are described in the FEIS, Chapter III, Affected Environment and 

Environmental Consequences. 

 

ADDED: 

Below is a description of where these additional segments are located on the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

Gold Beach Ranger District 

Mixed use of the Hunter Creek Road 3680 would not be allowed from Milepost 6.19 to 

Milepost 9.20. This is a change from the current condition and is the result of a mixed 

use analysis report that determined that high safety risks cannot be sufficiently lowered 

even with mitigation measures. There may be some individuals that access National 

Forest lands with OHVs over that portion (MP 0.0 to MP6.19) of the Hunter Creek road 

on private lands, also a high safety risk. These individuals will now have to transport 

their OHVs to MP 9.20. 

Wild Rivers Ranger District 

Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 22 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized. The change would affect portions of the following roads: Shan Creek 

(#2706), Onion Mountain (#2509), and Crazy Peak (#4906). Closing the Shan Creek 

road to mixed use will shut down a portion of loop opportunities that includes both trails 

and roads. There are still many miles of opportunities for loop travel in the same area. 

Closing the Onion Mountain road to mixed use would prevent OHV users traveling up to 

the Onion Mountain lookout. Closing the Crazy Peak road will block direct access from 

an extensive OHV system of roads to approximately 5 miles of roads currently 

accessing the Black Creek drainage and the Siskiyou Wilderness. 

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District 

Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 0.7 mile of road # 1000 where it is 

currently authorized. This road extends non-mixed use 0.7 mile from the end of 

pavement to a safer starting point for OHV traffic and has little affect on the OHV system 

of roads and trails on the Siskiyou District. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 14 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

1. Function of the No Action Alternative 

Under this alternative the agency would take no affirmative action (no change from current 

management or direction). This means continued cross-country travel, continued use of 

unauthorized routes, and no change to the current Forest system of roads, trails and areas. The 

No Action Alternative is not a proposal to add all of the unauthorized routes to the current Forest 

system of roads, trails and areas. It is a proposal to ‘do nothing’ and maintain the ‘status quo’. 

The ‘status quo’ would be the combination of all previous decisions by the Forest (allowing 

cross country travel, the creation of temporary roads associated with permits or other 

authorizations; and any previous decisions associated with the system of roads, trails and areas). 

It is important to approach the No Action Alternative in this manner because it establishes an 

important benchmark for the assessment of impacts resulting from the existing condition, and 

largely forms the justification for the need for action since current unacceptable environmental 

impacts are likely to continue or get worse. This benchmark (the No Action Alternative) will 

show impact trends based on findings in the recent motorized route inventory, national trends, 

trends in Oregon and IDT analysis. The No Action Alternative provides a benchmark for 

contrasting resource impacts and use conflicts with the Action Alternatives. 

2. Description of the No Action Alternative 

Under the No Action Alternative, the existing condition, as reflected in the Forest route inventory 

and analysis of the transportation system completed August 2008, would continue. These 

existing routes on the Forest would primarily be used for public wheeled motor vehicle use. 

Cross-country travel and route proliferation would still occur in isolated areas on the Forest since 

it is not currently prohibited. Areas for dispersed activities would continue to be used by public 

wheeled motor vehicles primarily for the purpose of dispersed camping and parking. No 

changes would be made to the current National Forest transportation system and no crosscountry travel prohibition would be put into place. 

The following table provides a Forest-wide summary of current conditions for roads, trails and 

areas: 

Table II-3. Alternative 1 (No Action - Current Condition) Summary 

Roads and Trails Current Condition 

Total NFS Roads 5,286 miles 

NFS Roads “open” to the public 4,512 miles 

Open roads that allow mixed use 3,183 miles 

Open roads that prohibit mixed use 1,329 miles 

Total NFS Trails 1,199 miles 

NFS Trails that allow motorized use 246 miles 

Total area open to cross country travel 274,670 acres 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 15 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Under this alternative, no MVUM would be produced and the Travel Management Rule would 

not be implemented. The No Action Alternative is not designed to meet the Purpose and Need 

for action. Wheeled motor vehicle travel by the public would not be limited to designated routes. 

Unauthorized routes would continue to have no status or authorization as NFS roads or trails. 

Existing closures and orders would continue. 

No NEPA decision would be necessary to continue use of the current Forest system of roads, 

trails and areas (i.e., OHV and transportation). These decisions were made previously. User 

created roads, trails and areas are not NFS facilities and they are unauthorized. The agency did 

not create, manage, or construct them for public use; the public, as a result of cross-country 

travel, created them. 

Temporary roads, trails and areas built to support emergency operations or temporarily 

authorized in association with contracts, permits or leases are not intended for public use. They 

are not NFS facilities (e.g., they are unauthorized for public use). Any proposal to add these 

temporary roads to the NFS would require a NEPA decision. No Forest-wide or route-specific 

Forest Plan Amendments are included as part of this alternative since no action is being taken. 

Included with this document is a map packet containing several large oversized maps that 

represent each of the alternatives. Map 1 displays the current conditions for roads and trails 

that allow some form of motorized vehicle use for the five Ranger Districts on the Rogue RiverSiskiyou National Forest (Powers, Gold Beach, Wild Rivers, Siskiyou Mountains, and High 

Cascades). 

Chapter III of the DSEIS includes a disclosure of the direct, indirect and cumulative 

environmental consequences resulting from the agency taking no action to change from current 

management direction (i.e., continued cross-country travel and use of unauthorized routes by the 

public). Providing this disclosure allows the existing condition (open) to be compared to the 

proposed condition (closed) in each Action Alternative as well as the incremental effects of any 

changes to the existing Forest system of roads, trails and areas (including proposals to add 

unauthorized routes to the system). 

F. ASSUMPTIONS AND ELEMENTS COMMON TO ACTION ALTERNATIVES 

This section presents assumptions and elements that are common to Alternatives 2, 3, 4 and 5. 

These are referred to as the Action Alternatives. These alternatives focus on the allowable uses 

for wheeled motorized vehicle routes and areas. Action Alternatives are being carried forward in 

accordance with the Travel Management Rule (36 CFR Part 212). A MVUM would designate 

where motorized vehicle routes are located as well as which class of vehicle may use the route 

and the season of use base on the alternative selected. 

1. Authorizations 

Any activities associated with contract, permit, lease or other written authorization is exempt 

from designation under the Travel Management Rule (36 CFR 212.51 (a) (8) and are not part of 

this proposal (i.e., fuelwood permits, motorized Special Use Permits, etc.). 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 16 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Access for permitted activities (such as livestock operations, maintenance of water 

developments, utility maintenance, timber management or harvest activities, ski area 

management, outfitter-and-guide operations, forest product gathering, and special events) on 

National Forest System land is independent of general public access. Individuals or groups with 

special permits are allowed to conduct their business according to conditions outlined in their 

permits. If a permit does not stipulate exemptions to the Forest’s travel regulations, the general 

travel regulations will apply. 

Except in Wilderness and other congressionally designated special areas, the following are 

exempt from prohibitions associated with each alternative when granted by the District Ranger 

or Forest Supervisor: 

 Limited administrative use by the Forest Service. 

 Use of any fire, military, or law enforcement vehicle for emergency purposes. 

 Authorized use of any combat or combat support vehicle for national defense purposes. 

 Law enforcement response to violations of law, including pursuit (Note: emergency 

access and law enforcement pursuit does not necessarily require permission from the 

Forest Supervisor). 

 Use and occupancy of National Forest System lands and resources pursuant to a written 

authorization issued under Federal law or regulations. 

The Agency will continue to make changes to NFS roads and trails on an ‘as-needed-basis’. It 

will also continue to make decisions about temporary roads or trails on an ‘as-needed-basis’ 

associated with contract, permit, lease or other written authorization. 

2. Parking 

Parking a motor vehicle on the side of the road, when it is safe to do so without causing damage 

to NFS resources or facilities, is allowed under all of the Action Alternatives, unless prohibited 

by State law, a traffic sign, or an order (36 CFR 261.54). NFS roads include all trailheads, 

parking lots, terminal facilities5, and turnouts associated with NFS roads. 

The “side of the road” is defined as that area within one vehicle length, not to exceed 20 feet, 

from the edge of the road surface. Parking on the side of the road may not damage the land, 

vegetation, or streams and no vegetation (live or dead) may be cut. 

 

 

5

 Terminal facilities are defined as a transfer point between the Forest transportation system and forest resources served by the

system, or between different transportation modes, including parking facilities, boat ramps, trailheads, log landings, and airfields. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 17 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

CHANGED: 

3. Dispersed Motorized Camping 

It is well recognized that National Forests have historically provided camping 

opportunities outside of developed campgrounds. This type of dispersed motorized use 

has historically occurred adjacent to open roads, adjacent to bodies of water, and at the 

termini of roads and trails. Under all of the Action Alternatives, motor vehicle travel 

would not be allowed off of any designated motor vehicle route, except to access an 

existing6 dispersed campsite not to exceed 300 feet7 from centerline either side of the 

designated route. 

Use of established motorized routes to existing dispersed campsites would be required. 

Additional site-specific closures and seasonal restrictions (such as emergency fire 

closures or where unexpected resource damage is occurring) may be implemented on a 

case-by-case basis for management, wildlife, and resource protection through 

authorized forest orders. 

Each alternative provides identification of roads that would allow motorized access off of 

the road surface for the purpose of dispersed camping. 

The following aspects are common to all Action Alternatives. 

Activities Generally Prohibited: 

 Dispersed motorized camping within Botanical Areas, Research Natural Areas, 

and all Municipal Watersheds. 

 Areas currently closed by a Forest Order (for example, Big Butte Springs 

Watershed, Ashland Watershed, etc.). 

 Dispersed camping or parking within 1⁄4 mile (1,320 feet) of any potable water 

source or developed campgrounds. 

 The use of a motorized vehicle which damages or unreasonably causes resource 

damage while accessing a dispersed campsite. 

 Establishment of new motorized routes to access dispersed campsites. 

 Crossing of any streams, wetlands, or water bodies unless on a designated 

route. 

 Off-road motorized travel for game retrieval. 

 

 

6 An “existing dispersed campsite” is an area obviously used by campers that usually contains a primitive fire ring and minimal 

ground vegetation as the result of motor or foot traffic. 

7 Region 6 Guidelines to implement the Travel Management Rule (36 CFR 212 subpart B (2005)) limited dispersed camping sites 

to not more than 300 feet either side of a designated route. (September 6, 2006; Revised April 20, 2009) 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 18 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

4. Land Management Plan Amendments 

Designations and restrictions on motor vehicle use are fundamentally site-specific decisions, and 

are not normally made in land management plans (Forest Plans). However, each site-specific 

motorized use decision must be evaluated to ensure it is consistent with overall management 

direction and Standards and Guidelines in the applicable Forest Plan. If proposed changes to the 

Forest transportation system (including the prohibition on cross-country motor vehicle use) 

would be inconsistent with the applicable land management plan, proposed amendments to the 

plans must be included with the alternatives so that the final decision would be consistent with 

the land management plan(s). 

For the RRSNF, there are two types of changes proposed as Forest Plan Amendments, overall 

Forest-wide amendments to the Forest Plans to implement the Travel Management Rule, and 

route -specific amendments in the form of changes to specific management direction and/or to 

Standards and Guidelines. Both types of amendments are needed under the various Actions 

Alternatives and are proposed to allow a decision under these alternatives to be consistent with 

land management plan direction. This process is being enacted to provide improved motorized 

use direction, in compliance with current Forest Service policy. This process and its analysis 

have considered all applicable wheeled motorized use management direction and constraints. 

Current Land and Resource Management Plans provide direction for portions of the Forest that 

are open to cross-country motor vehicle use. Implementation of the Travel Management Rule 

requires a forest-wide amendment to the applicable Forest Plans to provide direction as 

associated with the 2005 Travel Management Rule.

Under the Travel Management Rule, all roads, trails, and cross-country motorized use would be 

closed unless designated open to specific uses. For the Action Alternatives, new additional text, 

specific to each respective Forest Plan for the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, would 

amend current management direction for motorized vehicle use. 

 

CHANGED: 

3. Dispersed Motorized Camping (continued) 

Activities Generally Allowed: 

 Access to designated gravel bars located along the lower Rogue, lower Illinois, 

Chetco, and Elk Rivers. 

o The Rogue River gravel bars include: Smith Orchard, Foster, 

Miller/Dunkelberger, Quosatana, Lobster Creek, and Hawkins located on 

the Gold Beach Ranger District. 

o The one Illinois River gravel bar is located in the vicinity of Oak Flat 

Campground located on the Gold Beach Ranger District. 

o The Chetco River gravel bars include: Miller, Nook, Redwoods, and South 

Fork (upper and lower). All of these gravel bars are located on the Gold 

Beach Ranger District. 

o The Elk River gravel bars are unnamed and include five bars located 

between the river and Road 5325 on the Powers Ranger District. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 19 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Since motorized use includes OHV use, all Action Alternatives propose the deletion of the 

1989 and 1990 Off-road Vehicle Management Plans, contained as appendices to the 

respective Forest Plans, to be replaced with the Motorized Vehicle Use Map. 

The following table portrays the elements of proposed Forest Plan Amendments by alternative. 

The No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) does not include Forest Plan Amendments and is 

included in the table for reference. Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5 (the Action Alternatives) include 

Forest Plan Amendments according to the function and description of the alternatives, as 

described in this Chapter. For specific detail regarding the content of proposed Forest Plan 

Amendments, see DSEIS Appendix B (incorporated by reference). 

Table II-4. Forest Plan Amendment Proposals by Alternative 

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Rogue River National Forest LRMP 

Forest-wide amendment to 

implement Travel Rule NO YES YES YES YES 

Forest-wide to delete ORV Plan - 

Appendix C NO YES YES YES YES 

Specific amendments to make 

motorized use on the Boundary 

Trail consistent with Forest Plan 

direction and Standards and 

Guidelines 

NO YES YES NO YES 

Siskiyou National Forest LRMP 

Forest-wide amendment to 

implement Travel Rule NO YES YES YES YES 

Forest-wide to delete ORV Plan - 

Appendix E NO YES YES YES YES 

Specific amendments to make 

motorized use on portions of the 

Boundary, Lawson, Game Lake, 

Lower Illinois, and Silver Peak 

Hobson Horn Trails consistent 

with Forest Plan Standards and 

Guidelines 

NO YES YES NO YES 

The EIS evaluates the effects of the proposed amendments as related to the objectives, guidelines 

and other contents of the Forest Plans of the Rogue River and Siskiyou National Forests as 

required by 36 CFR 219.10 (f). The level of analysis should be sufficient to evaluate effects 

associated with the site-specific changes associated with a motorized use system. Based on this 

evaluation the Forest Supervisor will determine whether the proposed amendments significantly 

change the delivery of goods and services as described in the respective Forest Plans8.

 

8 FSM 1926.51
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 20 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

5. Motorized Vehicle Use Map (MVUM) 

In accordance with the Travel Management Rule and following a decision, the Forest would 

publish a MVUM identifying all Forest roads, trails and areas that are designated open for motor 

vehicle use by the public. The MVUM would specify the classes of vehicles and, if appropriate, 

the times of year for which use is authorized. The MVUM would be updated and published 

annually and/or when changes to the Forest’s transportation system are made. Future decisions 

associated with changes to the MVUM may trigger the need for documentation of additional 

environmental analysis. 

G. ALTERNATIVE 2

1. Function of Alternative 2 

This alternative would implement actions consistent with the Travel Management Rule with no 

change to the current system of NFS roads, trails and designated play area. This alternative is similar 

to the No Action alternative since it represents no change with respect to the existing NFS facilities 

or “baseline” transportation system. This alternative is designed to assess the consequences of 

implementing the Travel Management Rule with no changes to the current system of roads, trails, 

and play area. 

Under Alternative 2, there would be no change from current management or direction, except crosscountry travel would not continue, use of unauthorized routes would not be allowed, and there would 

be no changes to the current NFS of roads, trails and designated play area. Alternative 2 would 

maintain the ‘status quo’ and would be the combination of all previous decisions by the Forest (i.e. 

previous decisions associated with the NFS of roads, trails and designated play area). This 

alternative is also designed to be responsive to Scoping comments received in the fall of 2008. Many 

people expressed concern about the possible loss of motorized opportunities. 

2. Description of Alternative 2 

Under Alternative 2, the existing condition, as reflected in the Forest route inventory and analysis of 

the transportation system completed in August 2008 (and updated between the Final EIS and this 

Draft SEIS) would continue. 

These existing routes on the Forest would primarily be used for public wheeled motor vehicle use. 

Areas for dispersed activities would continue to be used by public wheeled motor vehicles primarily 

for the purpose of dispersed camping and parking. No changes would be made to the current 

National Forest Transportation System, except general cross-country travel would be prohibited. 

Table II-5 summarizes Alternative 2. 

CHANGED: 

Alternative 2 would designate the current condition, excluding cross-country travel, with Plan 

Amendments that would close all roads, trails and cross-country travel unless designated open 

to be consistent with the Travel Management Rule, and enact site-specific route Plan 

Amendments to make current use consistent with the Forest Plans. 

Changes in this section between FEIS and DSEIS: 

 General Closure of Cross-Country Travel Incorporated Into Alternative 2
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 21 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Table II-5. Alternative 2 (Current Condition) Summary

Roads and Trails Current Condition Alternative 2 

Total NFS Roads 5,286 miles 5,286 miles 

NFS Roads “open” to the public 4,512 miles 4,512 miles 

Open roads that allow mixed use 3,183 miles 3,183 miles 

Open roads that prohibit mixed use 1,329 miles 1,329 miles 

Total NFS Trails 1,199 miles 1,199 miles 

NFS Trails that allow motorized use 246 miles 246 miles 

Total area open to cross country travel 274,670 acres 15 acres 

* The only paved roads on the Forest that currently allow mixed use are those that are part of the Prospect OHV System. 

Compared to the Proposed Action (Alternative 3), this alternative would not propose conversion 

of ML 1 roads to motorized trails. There would be no new road or trail closures over the current 

condition. There would be no new play area and no mixed use on paved roads except for 

existing use on Prospect OHV system. 

Alternative Design Strategy 

Based on analysis of the transportation system, the following assumptions were used to design 

this alternative: 

 NFS level 2, 3, 4 and 5 roads or trails currently being used that have no order closing or 

prohibiting use were included as part of the current condition. Current use may or may 

not be consistent with Forest Plan direction. 

 A NFS road or trail that is currently being used where the use is illegal or not consistent 

with State law was not included as part of this alternative. 

3. Forest-wide Elements of Alternative 2 

Under Alternative 2, NFS level 2, 3, 4 and 5 roads, trails and areas that are currently part of the 

Forest transportation system and are open to wheeled motorized vehicle travel would remain 

designated for such use. Alternative 2 was designed to take into account past patterns of OHV 

use on the Forest as well as other public motor vehicle use. 

These routes provide all-purpose access for destination travel, driving for pleasure, hunting, 

fishing, and other recreational activities, such as, travel to dispersed camping locations, specific 

features or destinations, or unique motorized recreation experiences, while directing OHV use 

onto routes where there is available mileage and connections to other routes open to OHVs. 

At no time may any motorized use take place that would cause unacceptable resource damage. 

Additional site-specific closures and seasonal restrictions (such as emergency fire closures or 

where unexpected resource damage is occurring) may be implemented on a case-by-case basis 

for fire management, wildlife, and resource protection through authorized travel orders. Nothing 

in this alternative precludes future project-specific environmental analysis from proposing the 

construction of new system roads and trails or the decommissioning or closing of roads or trails. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 22 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Current Land and Resource Management Plans provide direction for portions of the Forest that 

are open to cross-country motor vehicle use. Under this alternative, amendments to the Rogue 

River and Siskiyou Land and Resource Management Plans are proposed to provide consistency 

with the 2005 Travel Management Rule. 

The map associated with Alternative 1 (No Action) is also applicable to Alternative 2

(available in the map packet).

Under this alternative, off-road travel for dispersed motorized camping would be allowed within 

300 feet from centerline of roads designated as open to motorized use. Also see elements 

common to all alternatives (section F, 3) this Chapter. 

4. District Specific Elements of Alternative 2 

a. Powers Ranger District Elements 

There would be no changes on the Powers District. 

b. Gold Beach Ranger District Elements 

An amendment to the Siskiyou Land and Resource Management Plan to make motorized 

use on portions of the Game Lake Trail (# 1169), the Lawson Creek Trail (#1173), the 

Illinois River Trail (#1161), the Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trail (#1166), and two unnamed 

connector trails consistent with Standards and Guidelines for the allocations through 

which it passes (Backcountry Recreation). See Appendix B for actual changes to the 

wording of the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

Reason for Change: The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is guided by two separate 

Forest Plans. These trails are located on the Gold Beach Ranger District. Historical and 

current motorized use of these trails is not consistent with Standards and Guidelines. 

c. Wild Rivers Ranger District Elements 

Under Alternative 2, the Boundary Trail and all current connections remain motorized. 

An amendment to the Siskiyou Land and Resource Management Plan is proposed to make 

motorized use of the Boundary Trail (#1207) consistent with Standards and Guidelines for 

the allocations in which it passes through (Research Natural Area). See Appendix B for 

actual changes to the wording of the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

Reason for Change: The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is guided by two separate 

Forest Plans. The Boundary Trail is located on the boundary of the Rogue River and Siskiyou 

National Forests. The Forest Plans are inconsistent and provide conflicting guidance at this 

location as associated with the Boundary Trail (Research Natural Area). 

 

CHANGED: 

All roads and trails would be closed to motorized use unless designated. Specific Forest Plan 

Amendments would close cross-country use, consistent with the Travel Management Rule, on 

approximately 275,000 acres. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 23 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

d. Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District Elements 

An amendment to the Rogue River Land and Resource Management Plan to make 

motorized use of the Boundary Trail (#1207) and some connecting trails (#900 and #903) 

consistent with Standards and Guidelines for the allocations through which it passes. See 

Appendix B for actual changes to the wording of the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

Reason for Change: The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is guided by two separate 

Forest Plans. The Boundary Trail is located on the former boundary of the Rogue River and 

Siskiyou National Forests. The Forest Plans are inconsistent and provide conflicting guidance 

at this location as associated with the Boundary Trail (Research Natural Area, Backcountry 

Recreation, And Botanical Area). 

e. High Cascades Ranger District Elements 

There would be no changes on the High Cascades District. The Prospect OHV system would 

remain in place and current management practices would continue. 

H. ALTERNATIVE 3-Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action (Alternative 3) is based on the Forest’s analysis of the transportation 

system process and focuses on the change from the current condition. It aims to strike a balance 

for various forms of motorized use by identification of sustainable motorized use opportunities 

with minimal adverse resource impacts, and implementing the Travel Management Rule.

1. Function of Alternative 3 

The Proposed Action would provide for a designated and managed system, enact changes to 

reduce existing resource damage from motorized use, and reduce social impacts, user conflicts 

and safety concerns. Other functions of the Proposed Action are to establish a framework that 

the Forest used to initiate the NEPA process, facilitate meaningful public comment, and serve as 

a basis for identification of the issues.

2. Description of Alternative 3 

Based on the stated Purpose and Need for action and as a result of the recent analysis of the 

transportation system process, under the Proposed Action (Alternative 3), the Forest proposes to: 

 Enact Forest-wide Plan Amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel 

Management Rule. Two separate Forest Plans guide the Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest. 

 Enact site-specific level Forest Plan Amendments to make the plans consistent with 

current and historical motorized use on the portions of the Boundary Trail and portions of 

the Game Lake, Lawson Creek, Lower Illinois, and Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trails. 

 Formally designate approximately 4,505 miles of roads where passenger vehicles would 

be allowed to travel. 

 Formally designate approximately 3,197 miles of road where mixed use would be 

allowed. Mixed use is defined as designation of a National Forest System (NFS) road for 

use by both highway-legal and non-highway-legal motor vehicles. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 24 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

 Authorize designation of two new motorized trail segments (Penn Sled & Woodruff 

connector) to provide loop route opportunities (approximately 2 miles). 

 Authorize conversion of approximately 12 miles of NFS level 1 roads to motorized trails 

to maintain a portion of the currently used travel routes for motorized opportunities. 

 Designate two areas where off-road motorized use would be allowed. This includes 

continued use of the existing Woodruff area near Prospect and the development of an 

additional area near Willow Lake. Both areas are located on the High Cascades Ranger 

District and total approximately 25 acres where motorized cross-country travel would be 

allowed. 

 Prohibit all other cross country motorized travel outside of the play areas identified above 

(i.e. closure of 274,670 acres). 

 Prohibit motorized use on 774 miles of NFS level 1 roads. 

 Prohibit public motorized use on approximately 7 miles of NFS level 2 roads and 31 

miles of trail currently open in order to minimize or reduce resource damage. 

Under the Proposed Action, most NFS Level 2, 3, 4, and 5 roads, trails and areas that are 

currently part of the Forest Transportation System and are open to wheeled motorized vehicle 

travel would remain designated for such use. The Proposed Action was designed to take into 

account past patterns of OHV use on the Forest as well as other public motor vehicle use. 

Where possible, routes creating connections between popular use areas were included to provide 

all-purpose access for destination travel, driving for pleasure, hunting, fishing, and other 

recreational activities, such as, travel to dispersed camping locations, specific features or 

destinations, or unique motorized recreation experiences, while directing OHV use onto routes 

where there is available mileage and connections to other routes open to OHVs. 

3. Forest-wide Elements of Alternative 3 

Under the Proposed Action, amendments to the Rogue River and Siskiyou Land and Resource 

Management Plans would provide consistency with the 2005 Travel Management Rule. All 

roads and trails and areas would be closed to motorized use unless designated as open. 

Alternative Design Strategy 

Based on analysis of the transportation system, the following assumptions were used to design 

this alternative: 

 All Maintenance Level 2, 3, 4, and 5 NFS roads would remain open to motorized use, 

except where: the road is known to be naturally closed or impassable, the road is causing 

unacceptable resource damage either directly or by allowing access to a sensitive area, or 

closed by Forest Order. 

 All trails closed to motorized use by a Forest Order would continue to be closed to 

motorized use. 

 No motorized use would be allowed on Maintenance Level 1 NFS roads unless the road 

is changed to Maintenance Level 2 (none are proposed) or converted to a trail that allows 

motorized use. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 25 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

 For Maintenance Level 1 roads converted to motorized trails, maintenance would 

include: 

o “Log out” trees from the trail9. 

o Maintaining drainage structures (culverts, drain dips, water bars, etc.). 

o Maintaining a clearing width of 6-8 feet and clearing height of 8-10 feet. This consists of 

brush and small tree removal. Low growing ground vegetation (grasses, herbs, forbs) would 

not be removed from cut banks, fill slopes, or from the former road bed. 

 For motorized trail construction/reconstruction, the following would apply: 

o For Class III motorcycle trails, a solid sustainable tread 18-24 inches wide with a clearing 

width of approximately 6 feet and a clearing height of 8-10 feet would be created10.

o Utilize rolling drain dips, natural features, and a slightly out-sloped tread to divert water off 

the trail. 

o Locate trail to avoid cutting any trees greater than 8 inches in diameter. Maintain canopy 

closure. 

o For Class I quad trails, create a tread width that would be approximately 50 inches wide with 

a clearing width of 6-8 feet. 

Under the Proposed Action, approximately 4,505 miles of road and 229 miles of trail would be 

open to motorized use. Table II-6 below summarizes the Proposed Action. 

Off-road travel for dispersed motorized camping is discussed under the District-specific elements 

for Alternative 3. The following elements of Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) are identified by 

each of the Ranger Districts on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

Access to certain gravel bars along the Elk River, Rogue River, Illinois River, and Chetco River 

sites (see discussion, Section F, 3, this Chapter) is currently not part of the Forest road system. 

Under all alternatives, these gravel bars would be identified as areas where motorized vehicle 

off-road travel is allowed. 

Table II-6. Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) Summary 

Roads and Trails Current Condition Proposed Action Change 

Total NFS Roads 5,286 miles 

NFS Roads “open” to the public 4,512miles 4,505 miles -7 miles 

Open roads that allow mixed use 3,183 miles 3,197miles +14 miles 

Open roads that prohibit mixed use 1,329 miles 1,309 miles -14 miles 

Total NFS Trails 1,199 miles 1,213 miles +14 miles 

NFS Trails that allow motorized use 246 miles 229 miles -17 miles 

New trails authorized 2 miles 

Authorize conversion ML1 

road to trail 12 miles 

Total area open to cross country travel 274,670 acres 25 acres (not including gravel bars) 

 

 

9 Log out is a common trail maintenance term. It means cutting away trees that have fallen across the trail. 

10 Tread is the actual travel surface of the trail. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 26 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

In the following discussion, the text references the large map associated with Alternative 3 

(available in map packet) to provide reference and context. 

4. District Specific Elements of Alternative 3

a. Powers Ranger District Elements 

Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping is generally allowed up to 300 feet from 

centerline along all roads designated as open except where otherwise prohibited (see Section F, 

3, this Chapter). No off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would be allowed within 1⁄4 

mile of developed recreation sites. 

Designate approximately 6.2 miles of paved road for motorized mixed use on a portion of 

Road 3348 (Eden Valley Road). 

Reason for Change: Allowing mixed use on a portion of the Eden Valley Road (3348) would 

provide access to more primitive roads located to the north and south in this popular hunting 

area (Map 2 Box A). 

b. Gold Beach Ranger District Elements 

Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would generally be allowed up to 300 feet from 

centerline along all roads designated as open, except where otherwise prohibited (see common to 

all discussion, Section F, 3, this Chapter). No off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping 

would be allowed within 1⁄4 mile of developed recreation sites.

An amendment to the Siskiyou Land and Resource Management Plan to make motorized 

use on portions of the Game Lake Trail (# 1169), the Lawson Creek Trail (#1173), the 

Illinois River Trail (#1161), the Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trail (#1166), and two unnamed 

connector trails consistent with Standards and Guidelines for the allocations through 

which it passes (Backcountry Recreation). See Appendix B for actual changes to the 

wording of the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

Reason for Change: The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is guided by two separate 

Forest Plans. Historical and current motorized use of these trails is not consistent with 

Standards and Guidelines. 

Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 12.6 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 1376010, 1376012, 1376013, 1376015, 1376019, 1376902, 

1376903, and 1376908. 

Reason for Change: A large portion of the 1376 road system is located on private land and 

does not provide loop opportunities except on roads over which the Forest Service has no 

jurisdiction. (Map 2 Box F). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 10.1 miles in the lower portions of the Lawson 

(#1173 – 4.0 miles) and Game Lake (#1169 – 6.1 miles) trails that currently allow motorized 

use. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 27 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Reason for Change: Both of these trails are currently impassable for motorized users. The 

Lawson Creek Trail is extremely steep on both sides of the Lawson Creek crossing and is subject 

to erosion. The lower half the Game Lake Trail is overgrown and in many cases cannot be 

followed by experienced hikers. This trail also requires a crossing of the Illinois River at its 

lower end (Map 2 Box B). 

Designate approximately 0.5 miles of new motorized trail that would connect to the 

Woodruff Trail (T.36S., R.13W., section 9). 

Reason for Change: Provide a designated loop opportunity for Class I and Class III motorized 

vehicles (Map 2 Box C). 

Designate approximately 0.2 miles of paved road for motorized mixed use on a portion of 

Road 3313. 

Reason for Change: The first 0.2 miles of this road is paved and then turns to a non-paved road 

that allows mixed use. There is a lack of parking where the road changes from paved to nonpaved. This would allow a safer terminus to the mixed use portion of Road 3313 (Map 2 Box C). 

Authorize conversion of approximately 9.3 miles of roads currently designated as Maintenance 

Level 1 to motorized trails (portions of Roads 3313103, 3313110, 3313117, 3680190, 3680195, 

3680220, 3680351, 3680409, and 3680353). These roads are located in the following areas south of 

the Rogue River: Lawson Creek, Quosatana Creek, Game Lake, and Signal Butte. An estimated 

4.7 miles would be for all three vehicle classes while 15.2 miles would allow for Class I and Class III 

vehicles. 

Reason for Change: Provide opportunities for Class I, Class II, and Class III motorized 

vehicles and provide for loop opportunities (Map 2 Box C). 

c. Wild Rivers Ranger District Elements 

Under Alternative 3, no off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would be allowed on 

the Wild Rivers Ranger District. The only authorized parking would be along-side of open roads 

(not to exceed 20 feet) or in previously constructed (existing) landings (see Section F, 2, this 

Chapter). 

Route-specific Forest Plan Amendments: An amendment to the Siskiyou Land and 

Resource Management Plan is proposed to make motorized use on the Boundary Trail 

(#1207) consistent with Standards and Guidelines for the allocations through which it 

passes (Research Natural Area11). See Appendix B for actual changes to the wording of the 

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

Reason for Change: The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is guided by two separate 

Forest Plans. The Boundary Trail is located on the former boundary of the Rogue River and 

Siskiyou National Forests. The Forest Plans are inconsistent and provide conflicting guidance 

at this location as associated with the Boundary Trail. 

 

11 The area that is the subject of this plan amendment is a recommended Research Natural Area (RNA). Formal designation as 

an RNA must be approved by the Chief of the Forest Service following preparation of an Establishment Record. (Siskiyou 

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, page IV-81) 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 28 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Authorize conversion of approximately 2.7 miles of roads currently designated as 

Maintenance Level 1 to motorized trails (portion of Road 4402494). 

Reason for Change: Conversion of Road 4402494 to a trail would offer a side trip for OHV 

users from the McGrew Trail to Biscuit Hill (Map 2 Box H).

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 7.6 miles of road where it is currently authorized 

on portions of Roads 4400445, 4400459, 4400460, and 4400480. 

Reason for Change: The 4400 road system is a jeep route that is partially located within and 

near LRMP designated Botanical Areas. Road closures would help prevent motorized users 

from leaving the road system and entering these sensitive areas (Map 2 Box H).

Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 10.8 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 4201029, 4201881, 4300011, 4300910 and 4300920. 

Reason for Change: These roads are also located in the Canyon Creek and Josephine Creek 

areas. The 4201881 road is partially located within a LRMP designated Botanical Area. No 

mixed use is proposed in order to prevent OHV use in sensitive wetlands, bogs, and fens as well 

as impacts to plants within the Botanical Area (Map 2 Box G). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 6.2 miles of road to public use including portions 

of Roads 4300011, 4300910, 4300920, 4300925, 4201016, and 4103011. These roads would 

still be open for permitted or limited administrative use. 

The 4300 system is also primarily a jeep route located in the Canyon Creek and Josephine Creek 

areas. A portion of this system is being proposed for non-motorized use primarily due to water 

quality concerns associated with numerous creek crossings (Map 2 Box G). 

The 4201016 and 4103011 are located entirely within the Eight Dollar Mountain Botanical 

Area. These roads along the Illinois River are proposed for non-motorized use in order to 

prevent off-road damage to sensitive plants, wetlands, fens, and bogs (Map 2 Box G). 

Authorize conversion of approximately 0.3 miles of Road 2509640, currently designated as 

a Maintenance Level 1 road, to a motorized trail. 

Reason for the change: Conversion of Road 2509640 would provide a ridge top connection to 

the existing Shan Creek Trail on the northeast portion of the District (Map 2 Box E). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 0.6 miles of Road 2600050. 

Reason for the change: A portion of this road is proposed for closure due to jurisdiction issues 

with private land (Map 2 Box E). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 11.3 miles of trail that currently allows motorized 

use on portions (or entirely) of the following trails: Taylor Creek (#1142), Big Pine Spur 

(1142A), Onion Way (#1181), Secret Way (#1182), Secret Way Spur (1182A), and Swede 

Creek (#1135). 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 29 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Reason for Change: Taylor Creek, Onion Way, Big Pine Spur, Secret Way Spur, and Secret 

Way trails are all located in the Briggs Valley area. These are proposed for closure due to 

issues associated with spotted owl sites and to be consistent with year-round closures on selected 

adjacent roads. The Swede Creek Trail south of Briggs Valley is proposed for non-motorized 

use for the same reason as Briggs Valley (Map 2 Box E). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 1.8 miles of trail that currently allows motorized 

use on the Silver Lake Trail (#1184). 

Reason for Change: The Little Silver Lake Trail is proposed for non-motorized use due to very 

steep slopes and erosive soils (Map 2 Box D). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 4.1 miles of trail that currently allows motorized 

use on portions (or entirely) of the following trails: Mt. Elijah (#1206), Bigelow Lake 

(#1214), Bolan Lake (#1245), and Kings Saddle (#1245A). 

Reason for Change: The Mt. Elijah, Bigelow Lake, Bolan Lake, and Kings Saddle trails are all 

located within or adjacent to Botanical Areas. Prohibiting motorized use would help protect 

unusual and sensitive plants indigenous to southwestern Oregon (Map 2 Box I). 

d. Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District Elements 

Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would generally be allowed up to 300 feet from 

centerline along all roads designated as open, except where otherwise prohibited (see common to 

all discussion, Section F, 3, this Chapter). 

An amendment to the Rogue River Land and Resource Management Plan to make 

motorized use of the Boundary Trail (#1207) and some connecting trails (#900 and #903) 

consistent with Standards and Guidelines for the allocations through which it passes. See 

Appendix B for actual changes. 

Reason for Change: The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is guided by two separate 

Forest Plans. The Boundary Trail is located on the boundary between the Rogue River and 

Siskiyou National Forests. The Forest Plans are inconsistent and provide conflicting guidance 

at this location as associated with the Boundary Trail. 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 4 miles of the Horse Camp Trail (#958) that 

currently allows motorized use. 

Reason for Change: This trail, adjacent to Red Buttes Wilderness, climbs steeply through a 

Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) to the Siskiyou Crest and the Pacific Crest National Scenic 

Trail (PCNST). It is proposed for closure in order to minimize impact to soils and wildlife. In 

addition, the proposal for non-motorized use on this trail would discourage motorized use on the 

PCNST. Note: motorized use is prohibited along the entire length of the 2,600-mile PCNST 

(Map 2 Box J). 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 30 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Designate and relocate approximately 1.2 miles of the Penn Sled Trail (#957) east of 

Applegate Lake to allow motorized use for Class III vehicles. 

Reason for Change: The old Penn Sled Trail has not been maintained for a number of years. 

Construction of this trail would connect two existing motorized trail systems (Mule Mountain 

and Elliot Ridge) and would avoid private land issues associated with the old trail location (Map 

2 Box J). 

e. High Cascades Ranger District Elements 

Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would generally be allowed up to 300 feet from 

centerline along all roads designated as open, except where otherwise prohibited (see common to 

all discussion, Section F, 3, this Chapter). 

Develop an additional motorized use play area (approximately 10 acres) near the junction 

of Road 3050 and County Road 821. 

Reason for Change: This proposed play area would provide increased recreation opportunities 

for motorized users, particularly for less experienced riders (Figure II-2).

Figure II-2. High Cascades RD, Alternative 3, Proposed Play Area 

Designate approximately 31.5 miles of paved road for motorized mixed use on portions of 

Roads 34, 37, 3705, and 3720 (24.4 miles) and within developed campgrounds (OHV use 

within campgrounds will be addressed in the Operations, Maintenance, and Safety plans 

for sites allowing OHV use to access mixed use routes and trails) adjacent to routes that 

allow mixed use (7.1 miles). These campgrounds include Union Creek, Farewell Bend, 

Natural Bridge, Woodruff Bridge, Abbott Creek, and Whiskey Springs (not shown on 

maps). 

Reason for Change: Mixed use on these roads would provide access to more primitive roads 

located to the north and south for hunting and other recreation activities (Map 2 Boxes K and L). 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 31 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

I. ALTERNATIVE 4 

Alternative 4 addresses the significant resource issues identified through scoping process and 

proposes a reduction in motorized use relative to the current condition and to Alternative 3. 

1. Function of Alternative 4 

This alternative would provide for a designated and managed system of roads and trails, enact 

changes to reduce existing resource damage from motorized use, and reduce social impacts such 

as user conflicts and safety concerns. This alternative is also designed to be responsive to 

Scoping comments received in fall of 2008. Many people were concerned about possible effects 

to roadless character within Inventoried Roadless Areas, Botanical Areas, serpentine areas (and 

associated meadows, fens, and bogs), and water quality. 

2. Description of Alternative 4 

Based on the stated Purpose and Need for action and as a result of the recent analysis of the 

transportation system, Alternative 4 proposes to: 

 Formally designate approximately 4,469 miles of roads where passenger vehicles would be 

allowed to travel. 

 Formally designate approximately 3,155 miles of road where mixed use would be allowed. 

Mixed use is defined as designation of a National Forest System (NFS) road for use by both 

highway-legal and non-highway-legal motor vehicles. 

 Designate one area where off-road motorized use would be allowed. This would include 

continued use of the Woodruff area near Prospect on the High Cascades Ranger District. 

 Prohibit motorized public access on approximately 43 miles of ML 2 roads currently open in 

order to minimize or reduce resource damage. 

 Prohibit motorized use on approximately 114 miles of trails currently open in order to 

minimize or reduce resource damage and user conflicts. 

 Prohibit motorized use on 774 miles of NFS level 1 roads. 

 Prohibit all other cross country motorized travel outside of the Woodruff OHV play area (i.e. 

closure of 274,670 acres). 

3. Forest-wide Elements of Alternative 4 

Under Alternative 4, amendments to the Rogue River and Siskiyou Land and Resource 

Management Plans would provide consistency with the 2005 Travel Management Rule. All 

roads and trails and areas would be closed to motorized use unless designated as open. 

Alternative Design Strategy 

Based on analysis of the transportation system, the following assumptions were used to design 

this alternative: 

 Motorized use within Inventoried Roadless Areas, Botanical Areas and serpentine soils 

(as currently mapped12) would be prohibited. 

 

12 A map of serpentine soil areas has been prepared and is used as the basis for this assumption (see Chapter III). 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 32 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

 An exception would be on existing Maintenance Level 2 and higher (“open”) roads 

within Botanical Areas and serpentine areas outside of Inventoried Roadless Areas. 

 All Maintenance Level 2, 3, 4, and 5 NFS roads outside of the areas identified above 

would remain open to motorized use, except where: the road is known to be naturally 

closed or impassable, the road is causing unacceptable resource damage either directly or 

by allowing access to a sensitive area, or closed by Forest Order. 

 All trails closed to motorized use by a Forest Order would continue to be closed to 

motorized use. 

 No motorized use would be allowed on Maintenance Level 1 NFS roads unless the road 

is changed to Maintenance Level 2 (none are proposed) or converted to a trail that allows 

motorized use. 

 For Maintenance Level 1 roads converted to motorized trails, maintenance would 

include: 

o “Log out” trees from the trail. 

o Maintaining drainage structures (culverts, drain dips, water bars, etc.). 

o Maintaining a clearing width of 6-8 feet and clearing height of 8-10 feet. This 

consists of brush and small tree removal. Low growing ground vegetation 

(grasses, herbs, forbs) would not be removed from cut banks, fill slopes, or from 

the former road bed. 

Under Alternative 4, approximately 4,469 miles of road and 132 miles of trail would be open to 

motorized use. Table II-7 below summarizes Alternative 4. 

Table II-7. Alternative 4 Summary 

Roads and Trails Current Condition Alternative 4 Change 

Total NFS Roads 5,286 miles 

NFS Roads “open” to the public 4,512miles 4,469 miles -43 miles 

Open roads that allow mixed use 3,183 miles 3,155 miles -28 miles 

Open roads that prohibit mixed use 1,329 miles 1,357 miles +28 miles 

Total NFS Trails 1,199 miles 1,199 miles 0 miles 

NFS Trails that allow motorized use 246 miles 132 miles -114 miles 

New trails authorized 0 miles 

Authorize conversion of 

ML1 road to trail 0 miles 

Total area open to cross country travel 274,670 acres 15 acres (not including gravel bars) 

The following elements of Alternative 4 are described by each of the Ranger Districts on the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. Dispersed camping is discussed under the Districtspecific elements for Alternative 4. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 33 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

In the following discussion, the text references the large map associated with Alternative 4 

(available in map packet) to provide reference and context.

4. District Specific Elements of Alternative 4 

a. Powers Ranger District Elements 

Off-road travel for dispersed motorized camping would not be allowed along paved roads. All 

other open roads would allow off-road travel up to 300 feet from centerline for dispersed 

motorized camping (see common to all discussion, Section F, 3, this Chapter). 

Prohibit motorized use on the 1-mile Big Tree Trail (#1150) south of Powers near the South 

Fork Coquille River. 

Reason for Change: Big Tree Trail is located within the Big Tree Botanical Area (Map 3 Box 

A). 

b. Gold Beach Ranger District Elements 

Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would not be allowed along paved roads. All 

other open roads would allow off-road motorized travel up to 300 feet from centerline for 

dispersed camping (see common to all discussion, Section F, 3, this Chapter). 

Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 12.6 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 1376010, 1376012, 1376013, 13760150, 1376019, 1376902, 

1376903, and 1376908. 

Reason for Change: A large portion of the 1376 road system is located on private land and 

does not provide loop opportunities except on roads for which the Forest Service has no 

jurisdiction (Map 3 Box F). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 6.0 miles of road where it is currently authorized 

on portions of Roads 1107350, 1107357, 1107950, 1205245, 1205246, 1205248, 1205249, and 

1205321. 

Reason for Change: These roads are within the South Kalmiopsis Inventoried Roadless Area 

(Map 3 Box F). 

Prohibit motorized use on the one-mile Red Flat Trail (unnumbered) located in the Hunter 

Creek Watershed. 

Reason for Change: The Red Flat trail is partially located within the Red Flat Botanical Areas. 

Prohibiting motorized use would help protect unusual and sensitive plants indigenous to 

southwestern Oregon (Map 3 Box C). 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 34 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 33.2 miles of trail that include 16.9 miles on the 

Game Lake (# 1169) and Lawson Creek (#1173) trail system, 9.7 miles on the lower portion 

of the Illinois River Trail (#1161) and the “Nancy Creek” Trail northeast of Buzzards 

Roost (un-numbered), 1.2 miles of an un-numbered trail east of the Rogue River (near 

Shasta Costa Creek), and 5.4 miles on the Lower Rogue River Trail (#1168) 13.

Reason for Change: These trails are proposed for closure in order to minimize or reduce 

impacts related to soils, water quality, and user conflict. The Lower Rogue River Trail (#1168) 

is partially located within the Potato Mountain Inventoried Roadless Area. Game Lake, Lawson 

Creek, Illinois River, and the unnamed trail are located within the North Kalmiopsis Inventoried 

Roadless Area. A portion of Game Lake is also located within the Sourgame Botanical Area 

(Map 3 Box B). 

Prohibit motorized use on the 17.2-mile Silver Peak-Hobson Horn Trail (#1166) located on 

both the Gold Beach (8.8 miles) and Wild Rivers (8.4 miles) Ranger Districts and the and 

the 3-mile Fish Hook Trail (#1180), also located on both Ranger Districts. 

Reason for Change: Portions of the Silver Peak-Hobson Horn and Fish Hook trails are located 

within the North Kalmiopsis IRA (Map 3 Box D). 

c. Wild Rivers Ranger District Elements 

Under Alternative 4, no off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would be allowed on 

the Wild Rivers RD. Only authorized parking would be allowed adjacent to open roads (not to 

exceed 20 feet) or in previously constructed (existing) landings (see Section F, 2, this Chapter). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 1.8 miles of the Little Silver Lake (#1184) Trail. 

Reason for Change: The Little Silver Lake Trail is proposed for non-motorized use due to very 

steep slopes and erosive soils (Map 3 Box D). 

Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 4.8 miles of Road 2512091 (Bald Mountain 

Road). 

Reason for Change: This road borders the Kalmiopsis Wilderness and the Illinois River Trail. 

Prohibiting mixed use would lessen the likelihood of motorized users entering the Wilderness 

and gaining access to the trail (Map 3 Box D). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 0.6 miles of Road 2600050.

Reason for Change: A portion of this road is proposed for closure due to jurisdiction issues 

associated with private land (Map 3 Box E). 

 

13 There are three “Rogue River” trails on the Forest: the 48-miles Upper Rogue River Trail #1034 on the High Cascades RD; 

the 42-mile Upper Rogue River Trail # 1160 on the Gold Beach RD and Medford BLM; and the 13-mile Lower Rogue River Trail 

#1168 on the Gold Beach RD below Agnes. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 35 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 11.3 miles of trail that currently allows motorized 

use on portions (or entirely) of the following trails: Taylor Creek (#1142), Big Pine Spur 

(1142A), Onion Way (#1181), Secret Way (#1182), Secret Way Spur (1182A), Briggs Creek 

(#1132), Red Dog (#1143), Phone (#1153), Dutchy Creek (#1146) Swede Creek (#1135). 

Reason for Change: Taylor Creek, Onion Way, Big Pine Spur, Secret Way Spur, Secret Way, 

Briggs Creek, Red Dog, Phone, and Dutchy Creek trails are all located in the general vicinity of 

Briggs Valley. Taylor Creek, Onion Way, Big Pine Spur, Secret Creek, and Swede Creek are 

proposed for closure due to issues associated with spotted owl sites, to be consistent with yearround closures on selected adjacent roads, and to reduce or minimize impacts in serpentine 

terrain. Briggs Creek, Red Dog, and Phone are located within the Briggs IRA. Dutchy Creek is 

located in serpentine soils and a portion of the trail is located in the North Kalmiopsis 

Inventoried Roadless Area (Map 3 Box E). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 3.9 miles of road including portions of Roads 

4300011, 4300910, 4300920, 4300925, 4201016, and 4103011. In addition, prohibit 

motorized use on approximately 4.4 miles of road including portions of Roads 4103087, 

4201844, 4201846, 4201847, 2524015, and 2524048. These roads would still be open for 

permitted or limited administrative use. 

Reason for Change: The 4300 system is also primarily a jeep route located in the Canyon 

Creek and Josephine Creek areas. Limiting motorized use on a portion of this system is 

primarily due to water quality concerns associated with numerous creek crossings (Map 3 Box 

G).

Roads 4201016 and 4103011 are located entirely within the Eight Dollar Mountain Botanical 

Area. These roads along the Illinois River are proposed for non-motorized use in order to 

prevent off-road damage to sensitive plants, wetlands, fens, and bog (Map 3 Box G). 

Roads 4103087, 4201844, 4201846, 4201847, 2524015, and 2524048 are all located within 

either the South Kalmiopsis or Squaw Mountain Inventoried Roadless Areas (Map 3 Box G). 

Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 10.8 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 4201029, 4201881, 4300011, 4300910 and 4300920. 

Reason for Change: These roads are also located in the Canyon Creek and Josephine Creek 

areas. The 4201881 road is partially located within Days Gulch Botanical Area. No mixed use 

is proposed in order to prevent OHV use in sensitive wetlands, bogs, and fens as well as impacts 

to plants within the Botanical Area (Map 3 Box G). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 7.6 miles of road including all or portions of 

Roads 4400445, 4400459, 4400460, and 4400480.

Reason for Change: The 4400 road system is a jeep route that is partially located within and 

near Rough and Ready Flat and Oregon Mountain Botanical Areas. Road closures would help 

prevent motorized users from leaving the road system and entering these sensitive areas. In 

addition, these roads are located within the South Kalmiopsis Inventoried Roadless Area (Map 3 

Box H). 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 36 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 24.8 miles of road including all or portions of 

Roads 4402019, 4402112, 4402172, 4402206, 4402259, 4402450, 4402497, 4402530, and 

4402550. These roads include the McGrew Trail and associated spurs. 

Reason for Change: The majority of the 4402 road system is located within the South 

Kalmiopsis IRA. Approximately 1⁄2 mile of the 4402019 is located within the Oregon Mountain 

Botanical Area (Map 3 Box H). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 15.2 miles of trail that currently allows motorized 

use on the following trails: Boundary Trail (#1207, Elk Creek (#1230), Mt. Elijah(#1206), 

Bigelow Lake (#1214), Bolan Lake (#1245), and Kings Saddle. 

Reason for Change: The Boundary, Mt. Elijah, and Bigelow Lake trails are located within the 

Kangaroo Inventoried Roadless Area. Portions of the Boundary and Bigelow Lake Trails are 

located within two Botanical Areas (Bigelow Lakes and Grayback Mountain). Bolan Lake and 

Kings Saddle trails are located within or adjacent to the Bolan Lake Botanical Area. 

Prohibiting motorized use would help protect unusual and sensitive plants indigenous to 

Southwestern Oregon (Map 3 Box I). 

d. Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District Elements 

Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would only be allowed up to 300 feet from 

centerline along certain designated Maintenance Level 2 and 3 roads (Map II-1). Also see 

common to all discussion, Section F, 3, this Chapter. 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 3.8 miles of trail that includes the Sturgis Fork 

(#903) and O’Brien Creek (#900) Trails. 

Reason for Change: These trails are located within the Kangaroo Inventoried Roadless Area 

and are part of the Boundary complex of trails that include Elk Creek (#1230) and Bigelow Lake 

(#1214) on the Wild Rivers Ranger District. A portion of the O’Brien Creek trail is located 

within the Grayback Botanical Areas. Motorized closures would potentially reduce user conflict 

on these trails (Map 3 Box I). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 29.1 miles of trail that includes the Horse Camp Trail 

(#958, Cook and Green Trail (#959), and the Mule Mountain complex of trails: Mule Mountain 

(#919), Mule Creek (#920), Charley Buck/Baldy Peak (#918), and Little Grayback (#921). 

Reason for Change: The Horse Camp Trail, adjacent to Red Buttes Wilderness, climbs steeply 

through a Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) to the Siskiyou Crest and the Pacific Crest National 

Scenic Trail (PCNST). It is proposed for closure in order to minimize impact to soils and 

wildlife. In addition, the proposal for non-motorized use on this trail would discourage 

motorized use on the PCNST (Map 3 Box J). 

Cook and Green Trail is located within the Cook and Green Botanical Area. Prohibiting 

motorized use would help protect unusual and sensitive plants indigenous to southwestern 

Oregon. Horse Camp and Cook and Green trails are also located within the Kangaroo 

Inventoried Roadless Area while the Mule mountain complex is located within the Little 

Grayback Inventoried Roadless Area (Map 3 Box J). 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 37 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

5§ ̈¦

238

¬«

99

¬«

66

¬«

238

¬«

777

") 859

")

722

")

557

") 682

")

1151

")

788

")

734

")

4003

")

4003

")

4003

")

4003

")

0 2.5 5 1.25

Miles

E

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District

Parking for Dispersed Camping

Alternative 4

National Forest BoundaryRanger District Boundary

County Road

State HighwayNFS Road

NFS roads where parking for dispersed camping allowed

Map II-1. Siskiyou Mountains RD, Parking for Dispersed Camping, Alternative 4 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 38 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

e.. High Cascades Ranger District Elements 

There would be no changes on the High Cascades District. The Prospect OHV system would 

remain in place and current management practices would continue. 

Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would be allowed up to 300 feet from centerline 

along currently identified “green dot” roads only (Map II- 2). Also see common to all 

discussion, Section F, 3, this Chapter. 

Map II-2. High Cascades RD, Parking for Dispersed Camping, Alternative 4 

¬«140

¬«99

¬«62

¬«238

¬«230

¬«227

¬«140

")821

")722

")533

")941

")992 ")998

")797

")965

")557

")998

")992

0 5 10 2.5 Miles E

High Cascades Ranger District

Parking for Dispersed Camping

Alternative 4

County Road

State Highway

NFS roads where parking for 

dispersed camping allowed

National Forest Boundary

Ranger District Boundary
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 39 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

J. ALTERNATIVE 5-Preferred Alternative 

Alternative 5 is based on the Forest’s analysis of the transportation system process and aims to 

strike a balance for various forms of motorized use by identification of sustainable motorized use 

opportunities with minimal adverse resource impacts, and implements the Travel Management 

Rule.

1. Function of Alternative 5 

Alternative 5 would provide for a designated and managed system, enact changes to reduce 

existing resource damage from motorized use, and reduce social impacts such as user conflicts 

and safety concerns. Alternative 5 was developed as a combination of the Proposed Action 

(Alternative 3) and Alternative 4, including elements of both alternatives.

2. Description of Alternative 5 

Based on the stated Purpose and Need for action and as a result of the recent analysis of the 

transportation system process, under Alternative 5, the Forest proposes to: 

 Enact Forest-wide Plan Amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel 

Management Rule. Two separate Forest Plans guide the Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest. 

 Enact project-level Forest Plan Amendments to make the plans consistent with current 

and historical motorized use. 

 Formally designate approximately 4,505 miles of roads where passenger vehicles would 

be allowed to travel. 

 Formally designate approximately 3,160 miles of road where mixed use would be 

allowed. Mixed use is defined as designation of a National Forest System (NFS) road for 

use by both highway-legal and non-highway-legal motor vehicles. 

 Authorize designation of one new motorized trail (Penn Sled) to provide loop route 

opportunities (approximately 1.5 miles). 

 Authorize conversion of approximately 10 miles of NFS ML 1roads to motorized trails. 

 Designate one area where off-road motorized use would be allowed. This would include 

continued use of the Woodruff area near Prospect. This area is located on the High 

Cascades Ranger District. 

 Prohibit motorized use on 774 miles of NFS level 1 roads. 

 Prohibit public motorized use on approximately 7 miles of ML 2 roads and 37 miles of 

trail currently open in order to minimize or reduce resource damage. 

 Prohibit all other cross country motorized travel outside of the play area identified above 

(i.e. closure of 274,670 acres). 

Under Alternative 5, many of roads, trails and areas that are currently part of the Forest 

Transportation System and are open to wheeled motorized vehicle travel would remain 

designated for such use. This alternative was designed to take into account past patterns of OHV 

use on the Forest as well as other public motor vehicle use. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 40 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Where possible, routes creating connections between popular use areas were included to provide 

all-purpose access for destination travel, driving for pleasure, hunting, fishing, and other 

recreational activities, such as, travel to dispersed camping locations, specific features or 

destinations, or unique motorized recreation experiences, while directing OHV use onto routes 

where there is available mileage and connections to other routes open to OHVs. 

3. Forest-wide Elements of Alternative 5 

Under Alternative 5, amendments to the Rogue River and Siskiyou Land and Resource 

Management Plans would provide consistency with the 2005 Travel Management Rule. All 

roads and trails and areas would be closed to motorized use unless designated as open. 

Alternative Design Strategy 

Based on analysis of the transportation system, the following assumptions were used to design 

this alternative: 

 All Maintenance Level 2, 3, 4, and 5 NFS roads would remain open to motorized use, 

except where: the road is known to be naturally closed or impassable, the road is causing 

unacceptable resource damage either directly or by allowing access to a sensitive area, or 

closed by Forest Order. 

 All trails closed to motorized use by a Forest Order would continue to be closed to 

motorized use. 

 No motorized use would be allowed on Maintenance Level 1 NFS roads unless the road 

is changed to Maintenance Level 2 (none are proposed) or converted to a trail that allows 

motorized use. 

 For Maintenance Level 1 roads converted to motorized trails, maintenance would 

include: 

o “Log out” trees from the trail14. 

o Maintaining drainage structures (culverts, drain dips, water bars, etc.). 

o Maintaining a clearing width of 6-8 feet and clearing height of 8-10 feet. This consists of 

brush and small tree removal. Low growing ground vegetation (grasses, herbs, forbs) would 

not be removed from cut banks, fill slopes, or from the former road bed. 

 For motorized trail construction/reconstruction, the following would apply: 

o For Class III motorcycle trails, a solid sustainable tread 18-24 inches wide with a clearing 

width of approximately 6 feet and a clearing height of 8-10 feet would be created15.

o Utilize rolling drain dips, natural features, and a slightly out-sloped tread to divert water off 

the trail. 

o Locate trail to avoid cutting any trees greater than 8 inches in diameter. Maintain canopy 

closure. 

o For Class I quad trails, create a tread width that would be approximately 50 inches wide with 

a clearing width of 6-8 feet. 

 

14 Log out is a common trail maintenance term. It means cutting away trees that have fallen across the trail. 

15 Tread is the actual travel surface of the trail. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 41 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Under this alternative, approximately 4,505 miles of road and 221 miles of trail would be open to 

motorized use. Table II-8 below summarizes Alternative 5. 

Table II-8. Alternative 5 Summary 

Roads and Trails Current Condition Alternative 5 Change 

Total NFS Roads 5,286 miles 

NFS Roads “open” to the public 4,512miles 4,505 miles -7 miles 

Open roads that allow mixed use 3,183 miles 3,160 miles -12 miles 

Open roads that prohibit mixed use 1,329 miles 1,341 miles +12 miles 

Total NFS Trails 1,199 miles 1,211 miles +12 miles 

NFS Trails that allow motorized use 246 miles 221 miles -25 miles 

New trails authorized 1.5 miles 

Authorized conversion of 

ML1 road to trail 10 miles 

Total area open to cross country travel 274,670 acres 15 acres 

Access to certain gravel bars along the Elk River, Rogue River, Illinois River, and Chetco River 

sites (see discussion, Section F, 3, this Chapter) is currently not part of the Forest road system. 

Under this alternative, these gravel bars would be identified as areas where motorized vehicle 

off-road travel is allowed. 

The following elements of Alternative 5 are identified by each of the Ranger Districts on the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

In the following discussion, the text references the large map associated with Alternative 5 

(available in map packet) to provide reference and context.

4. District Specific Elements of Alternative 5

a. Powers Ranger District Elements 

Prohibit motorized use on the 1-mile Big Tree Trail (#1150) south of Powers near the South 

Fork Coquille River. 

Reason for Change: Big Tree Trail is located within the Big Tree Botanical Area (Map 4 Box A). 

 

CHANGED: 

For all Districts, off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would generally be 

allowed up to 300 feet from centerline along all roads designated as open, except where 

otherwise prohibited (see common to all discussion, Section F, 3, this Chapter).
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 42 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

b. Gold Beach Ranger District Elements 

An amendment to the Siskiyou Land and Resource Management Plan to make motorized 

use of portions of the Game Lake Trail (# 1169), the Lawson Creek Trail (#1173), the 

Illinois River Trail (#1161), the Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trail (#1166), and two unnamed 

connector trails consistent with Standards and Guidelines for the allocations through 

which it passes (Backcountry Recreation). See Appendix B for actual changes to the 

wording of the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

Reason for Change: The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is guided by two separate 

Forest Plans. These trails are located on the former Siskiyou National Forests. Historical and 

current motorized use of these trails is not consistent with Standards and Guidelines. 

Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 12.6 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 1376010, 1376011, 1376012, 1376013, 1376014, 1376015, 

1376019, 1376902, 1376906, and 1376908.

Reason for Change: A large portion of the 1376 road system is located on private land and 

does not provide loop opportunities except on roads over which the Forest Service has no 

jurisdiction (Map 4 Box F). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 14.2 miles of trail that include 6.9 miles on the 

Game Lake Trail (# 1169), 4.1 miles on the Lawson Creek Trail (#1173), and 3.2 miles on a 

portion of the Illinois River Trail (#1161). 

Reason for Change: These trails are proposed for non-motorized use in order to minimize or 

reduce impacts related to soils, water quality, and user conflict. Game Lake, Lawson Creek, and 

the Illinois River Trails are located within the North Kalmiopsis Inventoried Roadless Area. A 

portion of the Game Lake Trail is also located within the Sourgame Botanical Area. The 

Lawson Creek Trail is extremely steep on both sides of the Lawson Creek crossing and is subject 

to erosion. The lower half the Game Lake Trail is overgrown and in many cases cannot be 

followed by experienced hikers. This trail also requires a crossing of the Illinois River at its 

lower end (Map 4 Box B). 

Authorize conversion of approximately 9.3 miles of roads currently designated as 

Maintenance Level 1 to motorized trails. These roads are located in the upper Lawson 

Creek drainage near Fairview Mountain (3.7 miles on portions of Roads 3680351, and 

3680353), near Signal Butte in the Hunter Creek drainage (3.9 miles on portions of Roads 

3313103, 3680190, 3680195, and 3680220) and the Kimball Hill area in the Quosatana 

Creek drainage (1.7 miles on Road 3313117). 

Reason for Change: Provide opportunities for Class I, Class II, and Class III motorized 

vehicles and provide for loop opportunities (Map 4 Box C). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 0.8 miles of trail (#1164) in the Woodruff 

Meadow area.

Reason for Change: This trail travels through a meadow system that include wet areas. 

Elimination of motorized use would reduce resource impacts (Map 4 Box C). 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 43 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Designate approximately 0.2 miles of paved road for motorized mixed use on a portion of 

Road 3313. 

Reason for Change: The first 0.2 miles of this road is paved and then turns to a non-paved road 

that allows mixed use. There is a lack of parking where the road changes from paved to nonpaved. This would allow a safer terminus to the mixed use portion of Road 3313 (Map 2 Box C). 

Designate approximately 500 feet of paved road for motorized mixed use on a portion of 

Road 2308 (Burnt Ridge Road). 

Reason for Change: Allowing mixed use on a portion of the this road would provide a 

connection between a motorized trail and a road system that allows motorized mixed use (Map 4 

Box B). 

c. Wild Rivers Ranger District Elements 

Route-specific Forest Plan Amendments: An amendment to the Siskiyou Land and 

Resource Management Plan is proposed to make motorized use of the Boundary Trail 

(#1207) consistent with Standards and Guidelines for the allocations through which it 

passes (Research Natural Area). See Appendix B for actual changes to the wording of the 

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

Reason for Change: The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is guided by two separate 

Forest Plans. The Boundary Trail is located on the former boundary of the Rogue River and 

Siskiyou National Forests. The Forest Plans are inconsistent and provide conflicting guidance 

at this location as associated with the Boundary Trail. 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 7.6 miles of road where it is currently authorized 

on portions of Roads 4400445, 4400459, 4400460, and 4400480. 

Reason for Change: The 4400 road system is a jeep route that is partially located within and 

near LRMP designated Botanical Areas. Road closures would help prevent motorized users 

from leaving the road system and entering these sensitive areas (Map 4 Box H).

Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 10.8 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 4201029, 4201881, 4300011, 4300910 and 4300920. 

Reason for Change: These roads are also located in the Canyon Creek and Josephine Creek 

areas. The 4201881 road is partially located within a LRMP designated Botanical Area. No 

mixed use is proposed in order to prevent OHV use in sensitive wetlands, bogs, and fens as well 

as impacts to plants within the Botanical Area (Map 4 Box G). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 6.4 miles of road to public use including portions 

of Roads 4300011, 4300910, 4300920, 4300925, 4201016, and 4103011. 

The 4300 system is also primarily a jeep route located in the Canyon Creek and Josephine Creek 

areas. A portion of this system is being proposed for non-motorized use primarily due to water 

quality concerns associated with numerous creek crossings (Map 4 Box G). 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 44 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

The 4201016 and 4103011 are located entirely within the Eight Dollar Mountain Botanical 

Area. These roads along the Illinois River are proposed for non-motorized use in order to 

prevent off-road damage to sensitive plants, wetlands, fens, and bogs (Map 4 Box G). 

Authorize conversion of approximately 0.3 miles of Road 2509640, currently designated as 

a Maintenance Level 1 road, to a motorized trail. 

Reason for the change: Conversion of Road 2509640 would provide a ridge top connection to 

the existing Shan Creek Trail on the northeast portion of the District (Map 4 Box E). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 0.6 miles of Road 2600050. 

Reason for the change: A portion of this road is proposed for closure due to jurisdiction issues 

with private land (Map 4 Box E). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 1.9 miles of trail that currently allows motorized 

use on the Silver Lake Trail (#1184). 

Reason for Change: The Little Silver Lake Trail is proposed for non-motorized use due to very 

steep slopes and erosive soils. This trail is also within a Forest Plan allocation that prohibits 

motorized use (Backcountry Non-motorized) (Map 4 Box D). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 11.1 miles of trail that currently allows motorized 

use on portions (or entirely) of the following trails: Taylor Creek (#1142), Big Pine Spur 

(1142A), Onion Way (#1181), Secret Way (#1182), Secret Way Spur (1182A), and Swede 

Creek (#1135). 

Reason for Change: Taylor Creek, Onion Way, Big Pine Spur, Secret Way Spur, and Secret 

Way trails are all located in the Briggs Valley area. These are proposed for closure due to 

issues associated with spotted owl sites and to be consistent with year-round closures on selected 

adjacent roads. The Swede Creek Trail south of Briggs Valley is proposed for non-motorized 

use for the same reason as Briggs Valley (Map 4 Box E). 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 4.1 miles of trail that currently allows motorized 

use on portions (or entirely) of the following trails: Mt. Elijah(#1206), Bigelow Lake 

(#1214), Bolan Lake (#1245), and Kings Saddle (#1245A). 

Reason for Change: The Mt. Elijah, Bigelow Lake, Bolan Lake, and Kings Saddle trails are all 

located within or adjacent to Botanical Areas. Prohibiting motorized use would help protect 

unusual and sensitive plants indigenous to southwestern Oregon (Map 4 Box I). 

d. Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District Elements 

An amendment to the Rogue River Land and Resource Management Plan to make 

motorized use of the Boundary Trail (#1207) and some connecting trails (#900 and #903) 

consistent with Standards and Guidelines for the allocations through which it passes. See 

Appendix B for actual changes to the wording of the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 45 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Reason for Change: The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is guided by two separate 

Forest Plans. The Forest Plans are inconsistent and provide conflicting guidance at this 

location as associated with the Boundary Trail. 

Prohibit motorized use on approximately 3.8 miles of the Horse Camp Trail (#958) that 

currently allows motorized use. 

Reason for Change: This trail, adjacent to Red Buttes Wilderness, climbs steeply through a 

Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) to the Siskiyou Crest and the Pacific Crest National Scenic 

Trail (PCNST). It is proposed for closure in order to minimize impact to soils and wildlife. In 

addition, the proposal for non-motorized use on this trail would discourage motorized use on the 

PCNST. Note: motorized use is prohibited along the entire length of the 2,600-mile PCNST 

(Map 4 Box J).

Designate and relocate approximately 1.2 miles of the Penn Sled Trail (#957) east of 

Applegate Lake to allow motorized use for Class III vehicles. 

Reason for Change: The old Penn Sled Trail has not been maintained for a number of years. 

Construction of this trail would connect two existing motorized trail systems (Mule Mountain 

and Elliot Ridge) and would avoid private land issues associated with the old trail location (Map 

4 Box J). 

e. High Cascades Ranger District Elements 

There would be no changes on the High Cascades Ranger District under this alternative. 

K. MITIGATION MEASURES COMMON TO ALL ACTION ALTERNATIVES 

This section discusses mitigation measures to insure that applicable management objectives are 

met for each of the Action Alternatives. Upon a final decision as documented in a Record of 

Decision, selected measures would become a requirement. 

The Forest Service is required by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for 

implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA to identify all relevant, reasonable mitigation 

measures that could improve the project. Mitigation, as defined in the CEQ Regulations (40 

CFR 1508.20) includes: 

 

Changes in this section between FEIS and DSEIS: 

 Additional mitigation measures for Public Safety 

 Updated mitigation measures for Invasive Plants 

 Updated mitigation measures for Special Plant Species 

 Added mitigation measures for Soils –Site Productivity 

 Added mitigation measures for Naturally Occurring Asbestos 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 46 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

 Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. 

 Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its 

implementation. 

 Rectifying or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations 

during the life of the action. 

 Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. 

 Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating or restoring the affected environment. 

Proposed mitigation measures and standard operating procedures designed to avoid or minimize 

adverse effects (or implement positive impacts) for the Action Alternatives are identified by 

resource topic area. While some recommendations are specific, many are stated as general 

concepts. Therefore, site-specific information would be incorporated into the project design and 

implementation as mitigation measures. 

Mitigation measures identified herein are specific to the implementation of actions considered 

within this DSEIS. Standards and Guidelines and mitigation measures identified in the Land and 

Resource Management Plans as amended by the Northwest Forest Plan are also incorporated by 

reference as required measures. 

The effectiveness and feasibility of the mitigation measures are assessed based upon the 

following rating systems identified in Table II-9. These ratings are applied to all mitigation 

measures, except the Standard Operating Procedures identified in the next section. Each 

measure identifies the code for effectiveness and feasibility at the end of the statement or 

paragraph. Ratings were determined by professional resource specialists based on current 

scientific research and/or professional experience or judgment. 

Table II-9. Effectiveness and Feasibility of Mitigation Measures 

EFFECTIVENESS (E) 

E1 Unknown or experimental; logic or practice estimated to be less than 75%; little or no experience in applying this 

measure. 

E2 Practice is moderately effective (75 to 90%). Often done in this situation; usually reduces impacts; logic indicates 

practice is highly effective but there is minimal literature or research. 

E3 Practice is highly effective (greater than 90%). Almost always reduces impacts, almost always done in this situation; 

literature and research can be applied. 

FEASIBILITY (F) 

F1 Unknown or experimental; little or no experience in applying this measure; less than 75% certainty for implementation. 

May be technically difficult or very costly. May be legally or socially difficult. 

F2 Technically probable; greater than 75% certainty for implementation as planned; costs moderate to high in comparison 

to other options. Legally or socially acceptable with reservations. 

F3 Almost certain to be implemented as planned; technically easy; costs low in comparison to other options. Legally or 

socially expected. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 47 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

1. Public Safety 

o Roads and trails must meet minimum road or trail standards as defined by the Forest Service 

Handbook FSH section 7700 for roads, or the Forest Service Standard Specifications for 

Constructions of Trails (EM-7720-102). (E3, F3)

o A sign plan will be implemented to adequately sign trail and road intersections and mixed 

use roads. (E3, F3)

o Installation of signing to warn highway traffic about the presence of non-highway-legal 

vehicles, using a standard warning sign, (in a diamond shape, with reflective yellow 

background and black graphics and letters) with an all-terrain vehicle graphic (RL-170) 

and a yellow supplemental placard with the wording “SHARE THE ROAD” (W16-1) 

may be used. An additional placard with the wording “NEXT XX MILES” (W16-3a) or 

“BEYOND THIS POINT” (W16-3) may also be added. A rectangular yellow sign with 

black graphics and lettering showing a passenger car graphic and an appropriate nonhighway-legal vehicle graphic and the wording “SHARE THE ROAD” (FW8-7) may 

also be used. See EM-7100-15. (E3, F3)

2. Hydrology and Riparian Reserves 

o Incorporate all applicable Best Management Practices (BMPs, USDA Forest Service, 1988) 

as identified in Appendix D to ensure water quality protection from routine activities related 

to National Forest System Roads and Trails. (E3,F3)

o Design new trails to avoid springs, seeps, and wetlands. (E3, F3) 

o Design new trails to avoid stream channel crossings where possible. If stream channel 

crossings are necessary to maintain the connectivity of the trail network, design trails to cross 

the stream channels perpendicular to the drainage to minimize the potential for sediment 

delivery. (E3, F2) 

ADDED: 

o For all roads where a mixed-use analysis determines that safety risks are high, 

mitigation measures that will reduce these risks to moderate or lower will be 

implemented before the road is open for mixed-use traffic. Some of the mitigation 

measures for a particular road recommended in the “Mixed Use Analysis Reports” 

may include: 

o Closing the road to mixed-use during commercial haul, road maintenance, and 

other activities that will significantly increase traffic volumes or involve heavy 

construction equipment. (E3, F3)

o On the High Cascades District signing on roads that are part of the Prospect OHV 

trail system would include notification of this activity and would include a 

recommended 20 mph speed limit sign. (E3, F3)

o Installation of “Open Range” signage. (E3, F3)
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 48 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

3. Erosion and Sedimentation 

o Stream crossing construction or reconstruction will not occur during the wet season (October 

15 to June 15) when the potential for soil erosion and water quality degradation exists. This 

restriction could be waived by the Responsible Official under dry conditions and with a 

specific erosion control plan (e.g., rocking, waterbarring, seeding, mulching, barricading). 

(E3, F3) 

o Minimize vegetation clearing to the maximum extent possible to maintain stream bank 

stability, while maintaining the safety of riders. (E3, F3)

4. Fish and Aquatic Species

 

o For any trail construction/reconstruction all State and Federal requirements for maintaining 

water quality will be met. Work requirements include the following: (E3, F3)

 Mechanized equipment will be inspected and cleaned before moving onto the project site 

in order to remove oil and grease, noxious weeds and excessive soil. 

 Hydraulic fluid and fuel lines on heavy mechanized equipment must be in proper 

working condition in order to avoid leakage into streams. 

 Waste diesel, oil, hydraulic fluid and other hazardous materials and contaminated soil 

will be removed from the site and disposed of in accordance with DEQ regulations. 

Areas that have been saturated with toxic materials will be excavated to a depth of 12 

inches beyond the contaminated material or as required by DEQ. 

 Equipment refueling will be conducted within a confined area outside Riparian Reserves. 

 Use spill containment booms or other equipment as required by DEQ. 

 Equipment containing toxic fluids will not be stored in or near (within 300') of a stream 

channel. 

5. Terrestrial Wildlife 

Spotted Owl Restrictions 

o Work activities that produce loud noises above ambient levels will not occur within specified 

distances of any documented or generated owl site (Table II-10) during the critical early 

nesting period, March 1 and June 30, or until two weeks after the fledging period. This 

seasonal restriction may be waived if protocol surveys have determined the activity center is 

not occupied, owls are non-nesting, or owls failed in their nesting attempt. (E3, F3)

o The distances listed below may be shortened (with USFWS Level 1 Team concurrence) if 

substantial topographical breaks or blast blankets (or other devices) would muffle sound 

between the work location and nest sites. (E3, F3) 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 49 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

o The District Ranger or Forest Biologist has the option to extend the restricted season until 

September 30 during activities, based on site-specific knowledge (such as a late or 2nd 

nesting attempt). Design measures can be waived if site-specific biological evaluation by the 

biologist indicates seasonal protection is unwarranted. (E3, F3) 

o Delay any project activities located within the nest patch until September 30 unless the 

biologist determines young are not present, or until two weeks after the fledging period. (E3, 

F3)

Table II-10. Spotted Owl Restriction Distances 

Activity Zone of Restricted Activity 

Heavy Equipment (including non-blasting quarry operations) 105 feet (35 yards) 

Chain saws 195 feet (60 yards) 

Motorized vehicle use 195 feet (60 yards) 

Impact pile driver, jackhammer, rock drill 195 feet (60 yards) 

Small helicopter or plane 360 feet (120 yards) 

Type 1 or Type 2 helicopter 0.25 miles*

Blasting; 2 pounds of explosive or less 360 feet (120 yards) 

Blasting; more than 2 pounds of explosives 1 mile 

 * If less than 1,500 feet above ground level.

Above-ambient noises further than these Table II-10 distances from spotted owls are expected to 

have either negligible effects or no effect to spotted owls. The types of reactions spotted owls 

could have to noise that are considered to have a negligible impact includes flapping of wings, 

turning the head towards the noise, hiding, assuming a defensive stance, etc. (USFWS 2003). 

Marbled Murrelet Restrictions 

Table II-11. Murrelet Restriction Distances 

Activity Zone of Restricted Activity 

Heavy Equipment (including non-blasting quarry operations) 300 feet (100 yards) 

Chain saws 300 feet (100 yards) 

Motorized vehicle use 300 feet (100 yards) 

Impact pile driver, jackhammer, rock drill 300 feet (100 yards) 

Small helicopter or plane 360 feet (120 yards) 

Type 1 or Type 2 helicopter 0.25 miles*

Blasting; 2 pounds of explosive or less 360 feet (120 yards) 

Blasting; more than 2 pounds of explosives 1 mile 

 * If less than 1,500 feet above ground level. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 50 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Table II-12. Disturbance Criteria for the Protection of Marbled Murrelet 

Disturbance 

For Survey Areas A and B work activities (such as tree felling, yarding, road and other construction 

activities, hauling on roads not generally used by the public, muffled blasting) which produce noises above 

ambient levels will not occur within specified distances (see Table II-11) of any occupied stand or 

unsurveyed suitable habitat between April 1 – August 5. For the period between August 6 – September 

15, work activities will be confined to between 2 hours after sunrise to 2 hours before sunset. 

Disturbance 

Blasting (open air/unmuffled) – No blasting activities 1 April through 15 September within 1.0 mile of 

occupied stands or unsurveyed suitable habitat. This distance may be shortened if significant 

topographical breaks or blast blankets (or other devices) muffle sound traveling between the blast and nest 

sites or less than 2 lbs of explosives are used If so, then use described distance. 

Disturbance Recommended Delay project implementation until after September 15 where possible. 

Disturbance 

Recommended Between 1 April and 15 September, concentrate disturbance activities spatially and 

temporally as much as possible (e.g., get in and get out, in as small an area as possible; avoid spreading the 

impacts over time and space). 

6. Invasive Non-native Species 

 

Changed: 

Invasive Plants 

o In managing its transportation system, the Forest will adhere to Standards 1 through 23 

incorporated into our Forest's Land and Resource Management Plans by the October 2005 

Regional Forester's Record of Decision for Preventing and Managing Invasive Plants. (E3, 

F3) 

o The Forest will follow the "required" practices outlined in Best Management Practices For 

Noxious Weed Prevention and Management, Port-Orford-cedar Root Disease Prevention 

and Management, Sudden Oak Death Prevention and Management--Interim Direction for the 

ROR/SIS National Forests--February 15, 2002. (E3, F3)

o Include approved FS noxious weed clauses in any contracts and/or special use permits 

issued by the Forest that implement provisions of its Travel Management Plan. (E3, F2)

o Develop site-specific prevention measures if noxious weed occurrences are discovered prior 

to, or during implementation of the Travel Management Plan, and project activities have 

potential to increase the abundance or extent of noxious weed occurrences, or increase the 

risk of off-site transport of propagules. (E3, F3)

o Mitigation specific to the proposed new OHV play area near Willow Lake is: 

a. Conduct a more extensive noxious weed inventory in and around the proposed play 

area; 

b. Attempt to eradicate the sulphur cinquefoil and perhaps other noxious weeds for a 

minimum of two years before ground-disturbing activities at the proposed new play area. 

c. Since there will presumably be a soil seedbank, design the play area’s amenities to avoid 

as much as possible the exact places where noxious weeds were previously located. 

d. Restrict use of the play area to the dry season May-October. 

e. Conduct annual monitoring, and weed treatments if noxious weeds are found within the 

play area. (E3, F3)
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 51 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Invasive Pathogens 

o Comply with Federal and State regulations regarding P. ramorum. Soil from infested sites shall 

not be transported outside the currently designated quarantine area unless subjected to approved 

and officially verified sterilization treatment. Movement of restricted or regulated plant materials 

to locations outside the quarantine area shall comply with current regulations. (E3, F2)

o Public Information: Increase public awareness of Port-Orford-cedar root disease and the need to 

control it by using informational signs on or at trailheads, gates, and other closures, and holding 

coordination meetings with adjacent industrial and small woodland landowners. (E3, F2)

o Road Management Measures: Implement proactive disease-prevention measures: road design 

features include pavement over other surfacing, surfacing over no surfacing, removal of low 

water crossings, drainage structures to divert water to areas unfavorable to the pathogen, and 

waste disposal. (E3, F2)

 

ADDED: 

Note: Roadside sanitation is not included as a mitigation measure in this document because 

vegetation altering practices may require reinitiation of formal consultation with the Fish and Wildlife 

Service pursuant to the programmatic consultation completed on February 17, 2004, to implement 

the Record of Decision for Management of Port-Orford-cedar in Southwest Oregon, Siskiyou National 

Forest 2004. The management practices listed above are within the reasonable range of costeffective mitigation measures available to reduce PL spread.

o Wash boots, tools, vehicles, and equipment prior to entering in uninfested project areas, 

when leaving infested areas to enter in uninfested areas, and when leaving the project areas 

to minimize the transportation of infested soil to uninfested areas. (E3, F2)

o Project areas should be compartmentalized by road system in areas with mixed ownership 

(Federal and private). A road system with infested areas and noninfested areas will be 

considered infested. Washing areas should be placed at optimum locations for minimizing 

spread, such as at entry/exit points of the road system with Federal control. Washing should 

take place as close as possible to infested sites. Wash water will be from uninfested water 

sources or treated with Clorox bleach. Wash water should not drain into watercourses or 

into areas with uninfected POC. (E3, F3)

o If conversion of ML1 Roads (e.g. Rd 4402494 Cedar Springs to Biscuit Hill) requires actual 

construction or ground disturbance beyond the first 100 meters, conduct a noxious weed 

survey concurrent with the botanical field reconnaissance already specified in a botanical 

mitigation measure. If noxious weeds are present, re-route or re-design trail, and/or treat 

weeds before ground-disturbing activities occur and develop site-specific mitigation to 

minimize or avoid spreading noxious weed seeds beyond their current extent in the soil 

seedbank. (E3, F2)

o New trail routes proposed (i.e. the 0.5 mile of new motorized connector trail to Woodruff 

meadow on Gold Beach Ranger District, located in T36S, R13W, sec 9 and approximately 

1.2 miles of the Penn Sled Trail on Siskiyou Mountains RD): Conduct a noxious weed 

survey concurrent with the botanical field reconnaissance already specified for this location 

in a botanical mitigation measure. If noxious weeds are present, re-route or re-design trail, 

and/or treat weeds before ground-disturbing activities occur and develop site-specific 

mitigation to minimize or avoid spreading noxious weed seeds beyond their current extent in 

the soil seedbank. (E3, F2)
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 52 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

7. Protection of Special Status Plant Species 

ADDED: 

8. Soils - Site Productivity 

New trail routes will require a field soil review during layout and design to verify soils 

and to re-route or re-design trail to avoid excessive soil impacts if needed. (E3, F3)

Seasonal closures of motorized trails and roads will be enacted where driving during 

wet weather would cause or is causing excessive damage and erosion of road surfaces. 

(E3, F3)

Changed: 

o If conversion of ML1 Road 4402494 (Cedar Springs to Biscuit Hill) requires construction 

or ground disturbance beyond the first 100 meters, conduct botanical field 

reconnaissance in the spring or early summer for Arabis macdonaldiana, FS Sensitive 

plants, and Survey and Manage (S&M) Category A and C species along the proposed 

route before project is implemented. If Arabis macdonaldiana is found, re-route or redesign to avoid individuals. If FS Sensitive plants or S&M species are found, re-route or 

re-design if needed to maintain viability of local population, but no need to avoid every 

individual. (E3,F3) 

o New trail routes proposed (i.e. the 0.5 mile of new motorized connector trail to Woodruff 

meadow on Gold Beach Ranger District, located in T36S, R13W, sec 9 and 

approximately 1.2 miles of the Penn Sled Trail on Siskiyou Mountains RD): Conduct 

botanical field reconnaissance during appropriate season to determine if the FS vascular 

plant Trillium angustifolium, other FS sensitive species, or Survey and Manage Category 

A and C species are in this immediate vicinity. Complete the survey before construction 

begins, with re-routing or re-design if needed to maintain the viability of local population 

of the Trillium, other FS sensitive species, or S&M species found. (E3,F3)
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 53 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

 

ADDED: 

9. Naturally Occurring Asbestos 

Measures can be taken to reduce exposure to Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA). 

In general, the longer a person is exposed to asbestos and the greater the intensity of 

the exposure, the greater the chances for a health problem. 

In particular, measures to reduce exposure require user education and users 

practicing these measures. However, the Forest Service cannot regulate but only 

recommend use of these strategies. As part of the overall educational effort, the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou N.F. will provide an NOA informational web page and NOA 

visitor pamphlet/brochure available at ranger stations. Specifically, National Forest 

visitors wishing to reduce their potential exposure to NOA should consult the NOA 

map provided on the web page or at ranger stations identifying known areas of 

ultramafic and serpentine rock more likely to contain NOA. 

The Forest will use this web page to provide general public information concerning 

NOA, associated health risks, additional web links for related information, and 

strategies to reduce exposure. Any new information on risks to human health will be 

incorporated into the educational materials. This web site will be managed in 

coordination with the U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5) 

website on NOA, located at: www.fs.fed.us/r5/noa. 

Current strategies located on the Region 5 web site to reduce risk of exposure include 

the following: (E3,F3)

 Be aware of windy conditions and avoid dusty conditions to reduce exposure. 

 Limit dust generating activities, such as riding off road vehicles, riding bicycles, 

running or hiking, riding horses or moving livestock, etc. 

 Avoid handling or disturbing loose asbestos-containing rock types. 

 Drive slowly over unpaved roads, with windows and vents closed, to minimize 

dust generation (California Air Resources Board recommends that vehicle 

speeds not exceed 15 miles per hour on unpaved roads where asbestos is 

present). 

 Avoid or minimize the tracking of dust into vehicles. 

 Do not use compressed air for cleaning your vehicles after your visit. Use a 

wet rag to clean the interior. 

 If there are proposed changes to routes that would increase disturbance, such 

as creation of new trails or changing administratively closed roads to motorized 

trails, then site-specific analysis which would include testing the ground 

surface material will be done to determine if the ground surface poses a health 

risk due to presence of asbestiform fibers. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 54 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

L. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 

The Forest Service developed the following strategies to be used as part of all of the Action 

Alternatives to improve implementation of the designated route system for motorized use: 

 Produce a primary Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM) following National Forest Service 

standards that indicates which routes are designated open to the public by type of vehicle 

per route and season open for use. This map would also identify areas where crosscountry travel for dispersed camping would be allowed. This MVUM would be made 

available to the public free-of charge. There may be some changes as implementation 

occurs on the ground. Authorized use, use restrictions, and operating conditions would 

be revised in future decisions as needed to meet changing conditions or management 

strategies (adaptive management). 

 Provide clear, consistent, and adequate signage that identifies routes designated open by 

type of vehicle per route and season open for use corresponding to the public MVUM and 

local travel map. Insure road and trail number identifiers are maintained as designated in 

the MVUM. Only as necessary, signing of dead-end routes leading to/stopping at rivers, 

streams, meadows, and other sensitive resources will be a priority to help protect 

resources from public wheeled motor vehicle damage. 

 Development of a public education strategy that may include public meetings, 

workshops, and other forums to educate forest users about the designated route system, to 

assist the public with reading the public MVUM, to educate Forest users about the 

potentially adverse effects of their activities, and to discuss how the public can help with 

implementation of the designated system by volunteering for maintenance activities, 

enforcement of the rules, and education of other forest users. 

 Development of a public volunteer strategy that may include identifying opportunities for 

the public to help implement, enforce, maintain, and fund the designated route system is 

desirable. 

MVUM Publication 

A key consideration in route and area use designation for the Motor Vehicle Use Map is 

geographic scale. Early in the process, the RRSNF decided to conduct analysis with one process 

and one interdisciplinary team planning effort for the entire Forest. Specific analysis has focused 

on the areas represented by the four Motorized Vehicle Use Maps reflecting designated routes 

and areas that would be published at the district scale. These four areas are shown on Map II-3 

below. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 55 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Map II-3. MVUM Publication Areas and Scale 

M. MONITORING COMMON TO ACTION ALTERNATIVES 

Monitoring is important for tracking the implementation of a project; ensuring projects are 

implemented as planned, as well as to measure success in meeting the stated project goals, 

objectives, and required mitigation. 

This Section of the DSEIS discusses monitoring elements and requirements for proposed 

management activities, under the recommended strategy for action, or any other action selected 

under the NEPA process. 

Monitoring includes a full spectrum of techniques and methods should be used to evaluate the 

results obtained from monitoring. Evaluation techniques include, but are not limited to: 

o Site-specific observations by on-site resource specialists. 

o Field assistance trips by other technical specialists. 

o On-going accomplishment reporting processes. 

o Formal management reviews on a scheduled basis. 

o Discussions with other agencies and various public users. 

o Interdisciplinary team reviews of monitoring results. 

o Involvement with existing research activities. 

o Review and analysis of records documenting monitoring results. 

o Re-measuring existing permanent inventory plots.

o Review of current applicable research. 

High Cascades

Siskiyou Mountains

Wild Rivers

Gold Beach

Powers

Wild 

Rivers OREGON 

CALIFORNIA

Pacific

Ocean

I

Medford

Grants Pass

§ ̈¦5

Rogue River-Siskiyou NF

Proposed MVUM Maps

Estimated scale of finished

maps is 1” = 1 mile

1

2 3

4
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 56 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Recommended Monitoring Elements 

Authorized use of designated roads and trails will continue to be monitored. Current monitoring 

includes surveys of road and trail conditions by road engineers and recreation specialists on a 

regular basis. Monitoring includes an evaluation of consistency with the Rogue River and 

Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management Plans and compliance with these 

travel management decisions, and would required mitigation measures. 

Monitoring would be used to identify potential effects on the following, with the objective of 

minimizing: (1) damage to soil, watershed, vegetation, and other forest resources; (2) harassment 

of wildlife and significant disruption of wildlife habitats; (3) conflicts between motor vehicle use 

and existing or proposed recreational uses of National Forest System lands or neighboring 

Federal lands; and (4) conflicts among different classes of motor vehicle uses of National Forest 

System lands or neighboring Federal lands (36 CFR 212.55). 

Designations may be revised as needed to meet changing conditions (36 CFR 212.54). Revisions 

to designations, including revisions to vehicle class and time of year, will be made in accordance 

with FSM 7712, 7715, and 7716. When a designated route is temporarily closed for more than 1 

year, the MVUM would be updated to reflect the closure. When the route is reopened, the 

MVUM would be updated to reflect the reopening. No additional travel or environmental 

analysis would be required to support these temporary changes, which do not affect the 

underlying designation. 

N. ALTERNATIVES AND ELEMENTS CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED 

FROM DETAILED STUDY 

Federal agencies are required by NEPA to rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all 

reasonable alternatives and to briefly discuss the reasons for eliminating any alternatives that 

were not developed in detail (40 CFR 1502.14). Public comments received in response to the 

Proposed Action provided suggestions for alternative methods for achieving the Purpose and 

Need. Some of these alternatives may have been outside the scope of the Purpose and Need, 

duplicative of the alternatives considered in detail, or determined to be components that would 

cause unnecessary environmental harm. Therefore, a number of alternatives or alternative 

elements were considered, but dismissed from detailed consideration for reasons summarized 

below. 

Many comments and suggestions were received during the Scoping process, throughout the 

analysis of the transportation system, and during the Comment Period on the DEIS. All 

suggestions and ideas were considered and discussed during the development of alternatives to 

the agency’s Proposed Action. 

1. Alternatives Related to Route Designation 

Alternatives, elements and ideas that are related to route or area designation that were considered 

but not analyzed in detail include: 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 57 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Prohibit OHV use on the Forest. Only public highway-licensed wheeled motor vehicles 

would be permitted on existing NFS roads. The public proposed this alternative during 

Scoping to eliminate the environmental and social impacts from off highway vehicles. The 

stated Purpose and Need is: “The purpose for action is to enact the Travel Management Rule. 

Motorized use is a popular use and is an important form of recreation for many individuals, 

families, and groups. A designated and managed system is needed to provide this use. Increased 

demand for motorized use, lack of designated areas/routes, and the inconsistent direction 

contained in the Forest Plans, has led to resource damage and social impacts, user conflicts, and 

safety concerns.” Prohibiting OHV use on the Forest fails to meet the Purpose and Need for this 

project and was therefore eliminated from detailed study. 

Limit OHV, truck, and automobile use to NFS roads. Do not allow these vehicles on trails 

or going cross-country. The public proposed this alternative during Scoping and the DEIS 

Comment Period to restrict where larger motor vehicles travel. Some individuals felt that these 

larger vehicles widen the trails designed and managed for motorcycles, thereby degrading the 

recreation experience. Others felt that these larger vehicles cause damage to trails and should be 

restricted to roads that are able to sustain the impacts from their use. As noted above, part of the 

Purpose and Need is: “Motorized use is a popular use and is an important form of recreation for 

many individuals, families, and groups. A designated and managed system is needed to provide 

this use.” Motorized trails provide a diversity of opportunities for different types of wheeled 

motor vehicles. Some trails are single-track only, and it is appropriate to designate such routes 

for motorcycle use only. However, other trails have been designed for, or have been historically 

used by, various other wheeled motor vehicles such as 4WDs and OHVs. Limiting wheeled 

motor vehicles other than motorcycles to NFS roads only, would fail to provide a diversity of 

road/trail opportunities, or a balance of experiences for the various wheeled motor vehicle 

classes, as well as inconsistencies with current trail designs and historical uses. Limiting OHV, 

truck, and automobile use to NFS roads would fail to meet the Purpose and Need for this project 

and was therefore considered but eliminated from detailed study. 

Designate all NFS and unauthorized routes that are determined to be compliant with 

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines. Alternative 2 allows use on all existing motorized NFS 

routes and would prohibit use of the unauthorized routes on the RRSNF. Developing another 

alternative that includes all NFS and unauthorized routes that are determined to be compliant 

with LRMP standards and guidelines was considered. After reviewing the public input from the 

public meetings, interested groups, and interested individuals, an assessment of unauthorized 

roads or trail was conducted by each Ranger District to determine which routes would be carried 

forward to the Proposed Action. 

Individual routes were evaluated against screening criteria designed to highlight whether a 

proposed route was a desired recreation opportunity, would result in unmanageable impacts to 

resources, had impacts to private land or access, or was consistent with existing plans. 

Designating all unauthorized routes determined to be consistent with Standards and Guidelines 

would fail to address these concerns, as well as fail to meet the Purpose and Need for this project 

to better manage public wheeled motor vehicle travel and address the National Travel 

Management Rule of 2005 and its associated criteria (see Purpose and Need statement above). 

Therefore, this alternative was considered but eliminated from detailed study. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 58 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Consider Actions to Construct, Reconstruct and Conduct Maintenance on Roads and 

Trails. Comments were received that raised issues and concerns relevant to conditions on 

specific roads and trails (i.e., facility issues). For example a concern about erosion and 

sedimentation of streams is primarily a facility issue, not a “use” issue. Actions that would 

repair current conditions are not necessarily part of the proposals under this DSEIS to designate 

where motorized use would be permitted. There may be more impacts from construction, 

reconstruction and maintenance of roads and trails, than by use, which is mostly already 

occurring. The Forest Service intends to address actions to construct, reconstruct and conduct 

maintenance on roads and trails through future site-specific analysis, consistent with applicable 

NEPA procedures, once a decision is made through this designation process on the types of uses 

that are to be managed for on each specific route. 

This decision is needed first so that the agency knows the use or uses to be designed for in future 

proposals for road and trail construction, reconstruction, or maintenance. The scope of this 

analysis was limited to those actions described in Chapter I and proposed in Chapter II. 

Therefore, these actions were considered but eliminated from detailed study. 

There is a need for a safe place for OHV use in Brookings area; how about a play area? 

A motorized play area in the Brookings area was considered by the planning team but no suitable 

location was identified by the public or the team. Therefore, this alternative was considered but 

was eliminated from detailed study. 

Consider a comprehensive authorized trail use plan for all types of trail uses e.g., mountain 

bike, equestrian, hiking. A comprehensive trail use plan for all types of uses is not within the 

scope of the project; this project is for motorized uses for roads, trails and areas as directed by 

the 2005 Travel Management Rule. There is no policy or direction or Federal funding to conduct 

this type of analysis. Therefore, this idea was eliminated from detailed study. 

Designate all single-track trails for motorcycle use 

This idea was considered but some existing single-track trails are not designed or conducive to 

motorized use. This would also affect (change) diversity for all types of uses, in favor of 

motorized use exclusively. This would not address the stated Purpose and Need. Therefore, this 

alternative was eliminated from detailed study. 

Provide winter OHV opportunities in lower elevation areas not critical to big game winter 

range. This idea for an alternative was considered, however no low elevation routes outside of 

winter range were identified on the RRSNF to provide this opportunity. 

Put gate on Road 5502-020; motorized trail use may conflict with private landowner goals. 

The 5520-020 Road remains open in all alternatives except at the crossing of Bald Mountain 

Creek where a bridge was removed in 2008 for safety reasons. There are no plans to replace this 

bridge in the near future due to lack of funds. However, private property owners can still access 

the 5502-020 road by alternate routes from the east and west. Therefore, this suggestion was 

considered but eliminated from detailed study. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 59 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Need a one mile buffer for noise adjacent to Wilderness, Wild and Scenic Rivers, etc. 

While some public may consider sounds from motorized vehicles offensive, there is no 

requirement for a buffer to these land designations/allocations. To do so would also conflict with 

Land Management Plan direction and national Forest Service policy. Therefore, this idea was 

considered but eliminated from detailed study. 

Consider a “citizens alternative” or a pro-motorized use alternative. 

Several types of alternative packages were received during scoping that identified with these and 

similar themes. The RRSNF has chosen not to represent these alternatives as received because 

there would simply be too much change, confusion, debate and duplication with numerous 

alternatives and themes. For the Final EIS, the RRSNF has chosen to focus on a limited number 

of alternatives, representing an adequate range for consideration. 

Consider expansion of the Green Dot system. 

This suggestion was received based on the success of this system for managing access within big 

game winter range during hunting season. It was considered, but found to be duplicative of the 

Travel Management Rule. It only varies in the way that roads are designated as open. The 

MVUM as associated with the Travel Rule will effectively replace the green dot system and is 

similar in many ways. The Forest Service is obligated to enact the Travel Rule. Therefore, this 

idea was considered but eliminated from detailed study. 

Under the current condition, routes lacking documentation (before NEPA) should be 

analyzed as new unauthorized roads. The assumptions regarding the current condition are 

stated in Chapter II. Under the Travel Rule, there is no requirement to analyze existing routes 

and uses as new routes, with consideration as new NEPA. It would further not be practical and 

was considered but eliminated from detailed study. 

Do not close potential access on specific roads for South Coast Lumber. 

Specific routes (Road 1376, 1503050, and 3300090), were identified as concerns for closing or 

precluding future use under this process (and should remain open). A road not showing on map 

and potentially not appearing on the MVUM does not mean they are being closed or 

decommissioned at this time. Under the Action Alternatives, opportunities for future use as a 

road are not being precluded. The conversion of an existing road as a motorized trail does not 

preclude its future use as a road. This concern was therefore considered but eliminated from 

detailed study. 

Consider an alternative with specific routes associated with Boundary Trail. 

As noted above, specific alternative packages were considered. Specific connector routes 

associated with Boundary Trail have been considered; the specific package as presented was 

considered but eliminated from detailed study. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 60 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Consider trail connecting Roads 3680 and 1703. 

Comments to the DEIS suggested consideration of a loop trail connecting Roads 3680 and 1703 

(T37, R13, S 8 & 17). It was suggested that this would provide a logical loop, fire access and 

would help to avoid conflicts with cars and trucks. This connection would only lessen conflicts 

with cars and trucks on approximately 2 miles of road. Furthermore, it would not connect with 

any other trails in the area. It was therefore eliminated from detailed study with this process 

because it would not sufficiently reduce mixed use conflicts or maintain existing motorized use 

opportunities. 

Consider replacing Frog Lake Bridge (3313100) with OHV/foot traffic bridge. 

Comments to the DEIS suggested consideration of replacement of the Frog Lake Bridge with an 

OHV/foot traffic bridge, missing since the Biscuit Fire. This opportunity was not identified or 

considered during Travel Analysis process because the purpose of the Travel Management Plan 

is designating routes for motorized travel and not intended to propose construction of new 

facilities for public use. Here, the focus is on designating routes where use will be authorized. If 

funds are available in the future, subsequent NEPA will be conducted to authorize 

facilities/improvements for public use. It was therefore eliminated from detailed study with this 

process. 

Moving Kalmiopsis Wilderness boundary would open more use from Agness to Selma. 

Currently the northern edge of the Illinois River Trail defines the northern boundary of the 

Kalmiopsis Wilderness. Comments to the DEIS suggested that if that boundary were moved 

about three feet to the southern edge of the trail, then the trail could be left open all the way 

through from Agness to Selma – for motorcycles (Sept 15th through May 15th). Wilderness 

boundaries are established by Congress. Increases or decreases in Wilderness acreage (or 

moving boundaries), is not within the jurisdiction of the Forest Service, is outside the scope of 

this analysis and was therefore eliminated from detailed study with this process. 

Mt. Elijah Trail: connect to Sucker Creek drainage via Road 098 or 092. 

Comments to the DEIS suggested that it is important and common sense to have connectors to 

prevent dead ends and mandatory uphill climbs to get back to the point of trail entry. 

Commentors suggested consideration of the Mt. Elijah Trail with a connection to Sucker Creek 

drainage via Road 098 or 092. This opportunity was not identified or considered during Travel 

Analysis process because it would not maintain existing uses consistent with the Travel 

Management Plan’s purpose and need. It was therefore eliminated from detailed study with this 

process. This connection remains as a future opportunity for consideration, outside of this 

process. 

Opportunity to connect Road 610 to the Bear Camp Road. 

Comments to the DEIS suggested consideration of an opportunity to connect Road 610 to Bear 

Camp Road. The 610 Road (Maintenance Level 1) branches off the 650 Road and extends to 

about the center of section 18. Construction of a new motorized trail in this vicinity would not 

appreciably improve motorized opportunities in this area as the connection only leads to dead 

end roads in the immediate vicinity that connect to Bear Camp Road. It was therefore eliminated 

from detailed study with this process. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 61 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Road 4402112 should terminate at junction with 019; possible parking and trailhead 

location. Comments to the DEIS suggested Road 4402112 should only be open to motorized use 

form its beginning at 4402 to the “fire safe zone” at the junction with 4402019. The “fire safe 

zone” would be a good parking area and trailhead for campers, hunters, hikers and horseback 

riders. Forest Service analysis between the Draft and Final EIS identified that there is already a 

well established trailhead beyond the junction of the 4402112 and the 019 Roads. There would 

be no reason to incur the costs associated with moving this trailhead to the junction suggested. It 

was therefore eliminated from detailed study with this process. 

Consider connecting Road 310 with Road 3318 to create a loop access. 

Comments to the DEIS suggested that the Lawson Creek Road 310 remain open to ATV Class I 

and Motorcycle Class III use. In addition, a connection of Road 310 with Road 3318 (Wildhorse 

Road) was suggested, thereby creating a loop access. This opportunity was not identified or 

considered during Travel Analysis process because it would not maintain existing uses consistent 

with the Travel Management Plan’s purpose and need. It was therefore eliminated from detailed 

study with this process. This connection remains as a future opportunity for consideration, 

outside of this process. 

Consider permanent closure of Road 990 (T35S, R11W, section 5) to motorized use. 

Comments to the DEIS suggested that of Road 990 be permanently closed (now gated at the top) 

with no motorized use allowed. While a closure would provide a fine recreational hiking 

experience to Shasta Costa Creek, it would exclude motorized users without justification 

pursuant to implementation of the Travel Rule. It was therefore eliminated from detailed study 

with this process because this proposal does not meet the purpose and need for action identified 

within the Travel Management Plan. This proposed closure remains as a future opportunity for 

consideration, if there is a need to exclude motorized use due to user conflicts or environmental 

damage. 

2. Ideas Related to Management of Motorized Use 

The following are suggested ways that the current system may be managed and as such were not 

considered as alternatives. In other word, these suggestions are not related to the question of 

whether a NFS road, trail, or area is designated open. Many decisions currently in place provide 

for the application of seasonal closures as needed for resource protection. 

Establish Noise Restrictions on Motorized Vehicles. 

Comments were received recommending that the Forest Service establish noise restrictions on 

motorized vehicles. The Forest Service did not study this idea in detail because noise is 

regulated by State of Oregon Standards (see Noise issue in DSEIS Chapter III) on public lands. 

While the Forest Service has the authority to enforce noise standards set by other Federal 

(typically EPA or OSHA) agencies and by the state under 36 CFR 261.13, accurate field-testing 

of noise from OHVs has been problematic for many enforcement entities. The agency also has 

the authority to set specific limitations through special order 36 CFR 261.55 (j). While fieldtesting equipment is available, ambient noise can create erroneous readings, as can other 

environmental factors. Field tests have been successfully challenged in court, limiting the 

effectiveness of this enforcement tool. Therefore, this idea was considered but eliminated from 

detailed study. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 62 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Consider a permit system, with combination to a locked gate for authorized users. 

At the scale of the National Forest, this consideration was not found to be practical nor 

manageable, and would not be in the public interest. It could well create additional problems 

with administration of a system like this. Therefore, this alternative control method was 

considered but eliminated from detailed study. This method is used and would continue to be 

used for specially authorized access, typically under special permit. 

Consider creation of trails which require a permit; this would control type of vehicles, 

numbers of vehicles and time of year that access would be available for some of the more 

sensitive areas. This idea has merit and a permit system could be implemented in the future as 

appropriate on both existing trails and any new trails that may be created in the future. No route 

specific permitting proposals were identified by either the public or the planning team with the 

exception of the Boundary Trail. Motorized use on this trail is relatively infrequent and resource 

damage from that use is minimal, it was decided to not implement a permit system on that trail at 

this time. 

Consider a contribution to noxious weed abatement with vehicle registration. 

While this may be possible or actually implemented in some states, vehicle registration or fee 

collection is not the responsibility of the Forest Service. Therefore this motorized use 

management idea is not within the decision space for this project and its analysis. It was 

therefore eliminated from detailed study. 

The Prospect OHV system should be open earlier in the year and/or have a longer season. 

This is based on conflicts associated the ability to use the existing trails during times that conflict 

with big game winter range and calving concerns. This suggestion for management of the 

existing OHV system is not being considered with this process. It would not be in alignment 

with the purpose and need to enact the Travel Rule. This idea will be forwarded to the District 

Ranger of the High Cascades district for consideration under a future and separate analysis. 

Separate Motorized and Non-Motorized Uses in Time (e.g., alternating days or weeks). 

A number of public comments were received suggesting that the Forest Service consider the 

concept of alternating use periods to address social problems (i.e. “user conflict) between 

motorized and non-motorized users on popular trails rather than prohibiting motorized use 

altogether. For example, a trail could be managed as open to motorcycles on alternating days, 

alternating weeks, or even by the time of day. These suggestions are not related to the question 

of whether a NFS road, trail, or area is designated open were not considered with this analysis. 

At the scale of the National Forest, this consideration was not found to be practical nor 

manageable, and could well create additional problems with administration. Therefore, this 

alternative control method was considered but eliminated from detailed study. 

Consider a seasonal closure to OHVs (for example in winter: Jan 1 to May 1). 

This suggestion was offered as a way to prevent resource damage associated with wet conditions. 

Where potential resource issues exist, appropriate management measures are already in place. 

This consideration exclusive to OHV use was not found to be practical nor manageable, and 

could well create additional problems with administration. Many decisions currently in place 

provide for the application of seasonal closures as needed for resource protection. It was 

therefore eliminated from detailed study. 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 63 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Provide reward for photographic documentation of off-road violations. 

Comments on the DEIS suggested that this plan should also include reward for photographic 

documentation of off-road violation, so that citations may remain a substantial deterrent. This 

Forest is bound (as are all forests) by national policy and direction for implementation of the 

Travel Management Rule and implementation of the MVUM. There is no provision for reward 

of photographic documentation of off-road violations. Therefore this idea is not within the 

decision space for this project and its analysis. It was therefore eliminated from detailed study. 

Consider FS law enforcement patrols at parking areas and staff Guard Stations. 

Comments to the DEIS suggested Forest Service law enforcement officers should frequently 

patrol roads and should designate parking areas to guard against vehicle vandalism. Further, it 

would be good to establish and staff guard stations to provide information, safety, and law 

enforcement. Trends in violations related to the Travel Management Rule can be analyzed and 

appropriate action(s) taken, if needed. Appropriate action(s) may involve one or more 

techniques or adaptive strategies. It is probably impractical and too costly to establish guard 

stations specifically to enforce travel management. This suggestion was therefore eliminated 

from detailed study with this process. 

Consider “zone” routes and ORV staging areas away from campgrounds. 

Comments during Scoping and to the DEIS suggested consideration of a strategy to reduce use 

conflicts to “zone” routes and to site ORV staging areas away from campgrounds. There are a 

number of motorized trails that start at campgrounds on the Prospect OHV system. The scoping 

comment focused on the Oak Flat Campground which is located on the lower portion of the 

Illinois River, and suggested that use would increase here with publication of the MVUM. The 

Forest considered formal creation of staging areas early in this process; however felt that there 

were already a large number of informal staging areas associated with large turnouts, landings, 

and rock pits. Specific to Oak Flat, an increase in use associated with the MVUM and the 

potential of increased noise and exhaust cannot be predicted. This idea was therefore eliminated 

from detailed study with this process. 

Consider limiting motorcycle size; smaller ones don’t cause damage. 

Comments to the DEIS suggested consideration of limiting the size of motorcycles. An 

assumption is that smaller bikes are capable of providing the riding experience yet they don’t 

have enough power to tear up a lot of ground. The Forest has not considered limiting the size of 

motorcycles. In general, motorcycles used on single track trails are far lighter and smaller than 

those used on roads. In addition, riding style and rider skill and ability is a more substantial 

factor in “tearing up the ground” than the size of the motorcycle. This motorized use 

management idea is not within the decision space for this project and its analysis and was 

therefore eliminated from detailed study. 

Consider seasonal use restriction in Mule Mountain Area (Big Game Winter Range). 

Comments to the DEIS from Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife recommended that trail 

systems within designated Big Game Winter range have seasonal restrictions from Nov 1 - May 

1. Specifically, the Mule Mountain area is identified as very important deer winter range and has 

been the focus of large prescribed burn habitat improvement projects. Enacting seasonal 

restrictions for motorized use (vehicle access) within Big Game Winter Range (Rogue River 

Land Management allocation MA-14) is already an option, as stated in Forest Plan Standards and 

Guidelines for recreation at LRMP page 4-165: 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS II - 64 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

6. Control vehicle access in big game winter range as needed between November 1 and April 30 to 

prevent biological stress. 

This use restriction can be implemented by the responsible official (District Ranger) at any time, 

regardless of the motorized vehicle use process. It was therefore eliminated from detailed study 

with this process. This restriction remains as a future opportunity for consideration. If this 

restriction is enacted, it would be shown on the MVUM. 

O. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES 

This Section compares the alternatives considered in detail, based on information presented in 

this Chapter, as well as environmental consequences presented in Chapter III. Table II-13 

summarizes the alternatives; Table II-14 contains a comparison of some of the indicators 

relevant to the Significant Issues for the environmental consequences, and Table II-15 contains a 

comparison of the alternatives for the environmental consequences on Other Issues. 

1. Description of the Alternatives Considered in Detail 

The following table summarizes the alternatives. 

Table II-13. Alternative Comparison 

Roads and Trails 

Current Condition 

(Alternative 1) Alternative 2 

Proposed Action 

(Alternative 3) Alternative 4 Alternative 5 

Total NFS Roads 5,286 miles 5,286 miles 5,286 miles 5,286 miles 5,286 miles 

NFS Roads “open” to 

the public 4,512 miles 4,512 miles 4,505 miles 4,469 miles 4,505 miles 

Open roads that 

allow mixed use 3,183 miles 3,183 miles 3,189 miles 3,108 miles 2,999 miles 

Open roads that 

prohibit mixed use 1,329 miles 1,329 miles 1,323 miles 1,361 miles 1,506 miles 

Total NFS Trails 1,199 miles 1,199 miles 1,213 miles 1,199 miles 1,211 miles 

NFS Trails that allow

motorized use 246 miles 246 miles 229 miles 132 miles 221 miles 

Total area open to 

motorized cross 

country travel 

274,670 

acres 

15 acres and 

designated 

gravel bars 

25 acres and 

designated 

gravel bars 

15 acres and 

designated gravel 

bars 

15 acres and 

designated 

gravel bars 

Off-road motorized 

travel for dispersed 

camping 

Off-road travel for 

dispersed 

camping would be 

allowed within 

300 feet of all 

“open” roads, 

except where 

otherwise 

prohibited 

Off-road travel 

for dispersed 

camping would 

be allowed 

within 300 feet 

of all “open” 

roads, except 

where otherwise 

prohibited

Powers and 

Gold Beach

RDs – same as 

Alternative 2. 

Wild Rivers RD

– no off road 

travel from 

existing open 

roads. 

Siskiyou 

Mountains and 

High Cascades 

RDs – only 

where 

designated 

Powers and Gold

Beach RDs – no 

off-road travel 

from paved roads. 

Wild Rivers RD – 

no off-road travel 

from existing 

open roads. 

Siskiyou 

Mountains and 

High Cascades 

RDs – only where 

designated 

Off-road travel 

for dispersed 

camping would 

be allowed up 

to 300 feet from 

designated 

roads where it 

is currently 

allowed 
Draft Supplemental EIS 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 2. Comparison of Alternatives Considered in Detail in Terms of Significant and Ot

Table II-14. Comparison of Alternatives - Significant Issues Significant Issues Indicator Alternative 1 (No Action) Alternative 2 Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) Alternative 4 

Water Quality and 

Erosion 

Miles of open roads closed to public use No change No change 7 miles 43 miles 

Miles of motorized trails closed to motorized use No change No change 31 miles 114 miles 

Botanical Areas and 

Special Plant 

Habitats 

Acres of cross-country travel allowed 274,670 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 

Miles of motorized trails closed to motorized use within Botanical Areas 

No change No change 4 miles 11 miles 

Public Safety 

Change in traffic density on open roads and trails No change No change Slight increase Slight increase 

Miles of road where mixed use is allowed 3,183 miles 3,183 miles 3,197 miles 3,185 miles 

Motorized 

Opportunities 

Change in miles of roads and trails open to the public No change No change -24 miles -157 miles 

Miles of open roads 4,512 miles 4,512 miles 4,505 miles 4,469 miles Miles of motorized trails 246 miles 246 miles 229 miles 132 miles 

Roadless Character 

within Inventoried 

Roadless Areas 

Miles of motorized trails within IRAs 94 miles 94 miles 72 miles 0 miles 

Acres of cross-country travel allowed within IRAs 30,170 acres 30,170 acres 0 acres 0 acres 
Draft Supplemental EIS 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF Table II-15. Comparison of Alternatives - Other Issues 

Other Issues Indicator Alternative 1 (No Action) Alternative 2 Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) Alternative 4 

Soils – Site 

Productivity 

Areas where crosscountry travel would be allowed 

No change to the 

current condition. 

Cross-country 

travel would be 

allowed on 274,670 

acres 

Would prohibit cross-country travel 

Aquatic 

Conservation 

Strategy 

Consistency with ACS Objectives N/A All of the Action Alternatives would be consistent with the 9 Aquatic Conserv

the site scale and all watershed scales 

Air Quality – 

Vehicle 

Emissions 

Change in the current level of vehicle emissions 

No change Alternatives 2, 3, 4, or 5 would result in an insignificant change in 

Air Quality – 

Dust and 

Asbestos 

Change in the current level of dust and asbestos 

No change Alternatives 2, 3, 4, or 5 decrease disturbance due to closure of cross-cou

selected travel routes per alternative 

Fire Risk Change in the risk of human-caused fires No change Slightly reduces risk by eliminating cross-country tra

Listed Plants Effect to listed plant species No change 

Effects would be 

reduced by closure 

of cross-country 

travel. 

Though actions may impact individuals, actions are n

species or critical habitat. Elimination of cross countr

Alternative 2 

Invasive Nonnative Plants Potential change in spread of invasive non-native plants No change 

Closure of crosscountry travel 

would have a 

potential to reduce 

spread 

Would reduce the 

potential for spread by 

limiting motorized use 

on some trails and roads 

Would reduce the 

potential more than 

Alternative 3 for 

spread by limiting 

motorized use on 

more trails and roads 

W

u

Invasive 

Pathogens 

Compliance with current direction 

Alternative 1: Current high risk sites would remain due to cross-country travel; Alternatives 2, 3, 4, a

reduction in high risk due to elimination of cross country travel. All alternatives would comply with Sta

regarding Phytophera ramorum

Terrestrial 

Wildlife Listed 

Species 

Determination for listed species N/A Effects to the northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet due to disturbance 

alternatives and would result in a “may effect, not likely to adversely effe
Draft Supplemental EIS 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Other Issues Indicator Alternative 1 (No Action) Alternative 2 Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) Alternative 4 

Management 

Indicator Species 

Harassment to big game (deer and elk) within winter range areas 

No change 

Potential decrease 

due to elimination 

of cross-country 

travel 

Harassment potential would be decreased due to the 

and human activities through the elimination of cro

reduction in the amount of roads open 

Effects to other MIS No change None of the action alternatives would result in substantial direct or indirec

Management Indicator Species 

Other Rare or 

Uncommon 

Species 

Effects to other rare or uncommon species 

No change 

Reduced potential 

due to closure of 

cross-country 

travel 

Due to the potential disturbance from noise associated 

OHV traffic, alternatives may impact but not advers

Fisheries and 

Aquatic Species 

Determination for listed species N/A None of the action alternatives would result in measurable direct or indirect ef

the watershed or subwatershed scale 

Visuals Attainment of visual quality objectives No change 

No change is 

expected from 

cross-country 

travel closure 

The reduction of roads and trails would not substantia

visual quality objectives 

Sound Level 

Change in use conflicts related to sound 

No change 

Potential decrease 

due to closure of 

cross-country 

travel 

Slight decrease in 

potential use conflicts 

related to sound 

Moderate decrease in 

potential use conflicts 

related to sound 

u

Mining Access 

Affect to access for prospecting, locating, or developing mineral resources. 

Selection of any alternative would not affect access that is reasonably incident to mining. However, a

restrictive on vehicle travel would result in a higher degree of administration to determine if access is 

necessary for the stage of mineral activity 

Enforcement 

Change in ability to enforce compliance with Federal law 

No change Amendments to the Forest Plans and publication of the Motor Vehicle Use M

to cite those who cause resource damage 
Draft Supplemental EIS 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou NF 

Significant Issues Indicator Alternative 1 (No Action) Alternative 2 Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) Alternative 4 

Cultural 

Resources 

Increase in risk to heritage sites No change The reduction of cross-country travel would further limit access to existing 

Climate Change 

All alternatives considered with this proposal were identified to have minor cause-effect relationships to greenhouse gas em

and were determined to be of such a minor scale at the global or even regional scale, that the direct effects would be mean

among alternatives 

Designated and 

Eligible Wild and 

Scenic Rivers 

(Added between 

FEIS and DSEIS)

Protect or enhance 

outstandingly 

remarkable values 

(ORVs) 

No Change 

Potential for 

enhancement of 

ORVs due to 

closure of crosscountry travel 

Alternatives 3, 4, and 5 would have a slight poten

eliminating cross-country tra

Slightest potential for 

enhancement to ORVs 

from reduction in 

motorized roads and 

trails 

Most potential for 

enhancement to 

ORVs from reduction 

in motorized roads 

and trails 

P