Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-1 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Appendix G 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Biological Assessment for Motorized Vehicle Use 

Project Name: Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF) 

Species and Habitat of Concern: Oregon Coast (OC) coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and OC Critical 

Habitat (CCH); listed as Threatened under Endangered Species Act 

(ESA) 

 Southern Oregon/Northern California Coasts (SONCC) coho salmon 

(O. kisutch) and SONCC Critical Habitat (CCH); listed as Threatened 

under ESA 

Coho and Chinook salmon Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) listed as 

Commercially Viable under Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation 

and Management Act (MSA), December 1997 and February 2008 

respectively 

Determination of Effects: ESA: SONCC and OC coho salmon and its CCH; “Beneficial, Not 

Likely to Adversely Affect” 

MSA: coho and Chinook salmon EFH: “Beneficial, Not Likely to 

Adversely Affect” 

Project Location: USDA Forest Service, Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Table 1. Fifth Watersheds within the Action Area 

Fifth Field 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fifth Field 

Althouse Creek Little Applegate River 

Bear Creek Little Butte Creek 

Big Butte Creek Lobster Creek 

Briggs Creek Lower Applegate River 

Chetco River Middle Applegate River 

Deer Creek North Fork Smith River 

East Fork Illinois River Pistol River 

Elk Creek Rogue River 

Elk River Shasta Costa Ck-Rogue River 

Euchre Creek-Frontal Pacific Silver Creek 

Headwaters Applegate Riv. Sixes River 

Headwaters Rogue River South Fork Coquille River 

Hellgate Canyon-Rogue River South Fork Rogue River 

Hunter Creek Stair Creek-Rogue River 

Indian Creek Sucker Creek 

Indigo Creek Upper Applegate River 

Josephine Ck-Illinois River West Fork Cow Creek 

Klondike Ck-Illinois River West Fork Illinois River 

Lawson Ck-Illinois River Winchuck River 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-2 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Watershed Analyses (WA): 

Table 2. Watershed Analysis Completed within the Action Area 

Watershed, Year Completed Watershed, Year Completed 

Bear Creek, 1995 Lower Illinois, 2000 

Beaver-Palmer, 1994 Lower Rogue, 1995 

Bradford Creek, 1996 Middle Applegate, 1998 

Briggs Creek, 1994 Middle Illinois, 1999 

Cheney/Slate, 1996 North Fork Smith River, 1995 

Chetco River, 1996 Pistol River, 2003 

Collier Creek, 1997 Quosatana Creek,1996 

Deer Creek, 1997 Rogue River above Galice, 1995 

East Fork Illinois River, 2000 Rogue River below Agness, 2000 

Elk Creek, 1996 Rogue River Marial/Agness, 1999 

Elk River, 1998 SF Coquille River, 1995 

Grayback/Sucker 1998 Shasta Costa Creek, 1996 

Horse Sign Creek, 1998 Silver Creek, 1995 

Hunter Creek, 1998 Sixes River, 1997 

Indigo Creek, 1998 Squaw/Elliott/Lake, 1995 

Kalmiopsis Wilderness, 1995 Upper Bear Creek, 2003 

Lawson Creek, 1997 Upper Big Butte Creek, 1995 

Little Applegate River, 1995 Upper Rogue River, 1995 

Little Butte Creek, 1997 West Fork Illinois, 1997 

Lobster Creek, 1999 Winchuck River, 1999 

Land Allocation of Project Area: Administrative Study Area (MA-15) 

 Backcountry Recreation (MA-6) 

 Botanical (MA-4) 

 Late Successional Reserve (MA-8) 

 Matrix (MA-14) 

 Riparian Reserve (MA-11) 

 Special Wildlife Site (MA-9) 

Administrative Unit: Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF): Gold Beach, 

High Cascades, Powers, Siskiyou Mountains, and Wild Rivers 

Ranger Districts 

Prepared By: Steve Brazier, Fisheries Biologist, RRSNF 

Reviewed By: Maureen Joplin, Hydrologist, RRSNF 

 Susan Maiyo, Forest Fisheries Biologist, RRSNF 

Document Date: July 19, 2011 

This consultation is undertaken pursuant with Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act and the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and is implementing Federal regulations 

50 CFR Part 600. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-3 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The following Biological Assessment analyzes the effects of the Motorized Vehicle Use Project (MVU) 

on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF). The Action Area includes Oregon Coast (OC) 

and Southern Oregon/California Coast (SONCC) coho salmon, listed as a “threatened” species under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA). The analysis contained herein has resulted in a determination of 

“Beneficial, May Affect, Not Likely To Adversely Affect” to OC and SONCC coho salmon and OC and 

SONCC coho critical habitat (CCH). Effects of the action were determined to be a “Beneficial, Would 

Not Adversely Affect” coho and Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha) Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). There is 

no anticipated incidental take associated with the proposed project actions. Any questions and/or 

comments regarding this assessment or the proposed project should be addressed to Steve Brazier, 

Fisheries Biologist, RRSNF at (541) 471-6766 or Susan Maiyo, Forest Fisheries Biologist, RSNF at (541) 

618-2052. 

II. INTRODUCTION 

The following assessment was prepared to initiate consultation pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (ESA), to evaluate and describe the potential effects of proposed actions on Oregon 

Coast and Southern Oregon/California Coast Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESU) of coho salmon. 

The overall Planning Area is located on National Forest System Lands within 5th Field watersheds listed 

in Table 1, for which Watershed Analyses have been completed. The Planning Area for the MVU is 

located on lands within the RRSNF boundaries in Oregon and California. 

III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIONS AND ACTION AREA 

Note: This Biological Assessment (BA) was being prepared as the Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS) was being prepared. Some road miles may not exactly correspond with the final EIS numbers; 

however, any discrepancies are small and have been factored into this analysis. The overall scope of the 

project has been adequately analyzed and disclosed in this BA. Consultation would be reinitiated if the 

scope of the EIS expands to include effects greater than those consulted on under this BA. 

A. Proposed Action (s) 

Summary 

The project would provide for a designated and managed travel system, enact changes to reduce existing 

resource damage from motorized use, and reduce social impacts such as user conflicts and safety 

concerns. The project actions are located on suitable forest land designated as Matrix, Riparian Reserve, 

Late Successional Reserve, Administrative Study Area, Backcountry Recreation, Botanical, and Special 

Wildlife Site land allocations under the Siskiyou National Forest Land and Rogue River National Forest 

Resource Management Plans as amended by the Northwest Forest Plan. See attached Map 1 Vicinity for 

project location. 

The actions of the project can be divided into three Project Elements and are described below: 

1) Enact Forest-wide plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel 

Management Rule and current historical motorized use 

2) Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an 

Existing Trail, Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit 

Motorized Public Use, and Construct Motorized Trail

3) Close Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-4 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

1) Enact Forest-wide plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel Management Rule 

and current historical motorized use 

FOREST-WIDE PROJECT OVERVIEW 

 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. 

DISTRICT LEVEL SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES

Gold Beach Ranger District 

 Amend the Siskiyou LRMP to make current motorized use of the Game Lake Trail (#1169), 

Lawson Creek Trail (#1173), Illinois River Trail (#1161), Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trail 

(#1166), and two unnamed connector trails consistent with the Standards and Guidelines for 

the Allocations through which they pass (Backcountry Recreation). 

Wild Rivers Ranger District 

 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). 

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District 

 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. 

2) Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an Existing Trail, 

Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit motorized Public Use, and 

Construct Motorized Trail

FOREST-WIDE PROJECT OVERVIEW 

 Convert approximately 10 miles of NFS roads 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, Oregon, located on the High Cascades 

Ranger District, above Lost Creek Lake. 

 Construct one motorized trail to provide loop route opportunities (approximately 1.5 miles) 

above Applegate Lake Reservoir. 

 Prohibit public motorized use on approximately 7 miles of road and 37 miles of trail currently 

open in order to minimize or reduce resource damage. 

 Formally designate approximately 4,505 miles of road open to public motorized use, 

including 2,999 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 nonhighway-legal motor vehicles. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-5 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

DISTRICT LEVEL SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES

Powers Ranger District 

 Prohibit motorized use on the one-mile Big Tree Trail (#1150). 

Gold Beach Ranger District

 Convert approximately 9.3 miles of roads currently designated as Maintenance Level 1 to 

motorized trails (portions of Roads 3313103, 3680190, 3680195, 3680220, 3680351, 

3680353, and 3313117). These roads are located in the following areas south of the Rogue 

River: Upper Lawson Creek, Signal Butte, and Kimball Butte. 

 Designate approximately 500 feet of paved road for motorized mixed use on a portion of 

Road 2308 (Burnt Ridge Road). 

 Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 12.5 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 1376010, 1376012, 1376013, 13760150, 1376019, 1376902, 

1376903, and 1376908. 

 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). 

 Prohibit motorized use on approximately 0.8 miles of trail (#1164) in the Woodruff Meadow 

area. 

Wild Rivers Ranger District 

 Convert approximately 0.3 miles of Road 2509640, currently designated as a Maintenance 

Level 1 road, to a motorized trail. 

 Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 10.2 miles of road where it is currently 

authorized on portions of Roads 4400445, 4400459, 4400460, 4400461, and 4400480. 

 Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 11.9 miles of road where it is currently 

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

 Prohibit public motorized use on approximately 6.4 miles of road including portions of Roads 

4300011, 4300910, 4300920, 4300925, 4201016, and 4103011. These roads would still be 

open for permitted or limited administrative use. 

 Prohibit motorized use on approximately 0.6 miles of Road 2600050. 

 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).

 Prohibit motorized use on approximately 1.9 miles of trail that currently allows motorized use 

on the Silver Lake Trail (#1184). 

 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). 

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District 

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

Applegate Lake that would allow motorized use for Class III vehicles. 

 Prohibit motorized use on approximately 3.8 miles of the Horse Camp Trail (#958) that 

currently allows motorized use. 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-6 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

High Cascades Ranger District 

 There would be no changes on the High Cascades Ranger District. 

3) Close Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel

FOREST-WIDE PROJECT OVERVIEW 

The project would close approximately 275,000 acres of the RRSNF to cross-country motorized travel. 

This action would occur on all five Ranger Districts (i.e. Powers, Gold Beach, Wild Rivers, Siskiyou 

Mountains, and High Cascades). This element is an administrative change in the type of use that certain 

areas of the Forest would receive. There is no on-the-ground construction, restoration or rehabilitation 

action included in this action. Any ground disturbing activity that may occur in the upcoming years, i.e., 

culvert replacement, would be covered under a different effects analysis and consultation process. 

B. Action Area 

The Action Area for this project is all land within the boundaries of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest. This area encompasses nearly 2 million acres, most of which is administered by the RRSNF. 

C. Consistency with Watershed Analysis 

Information in the Watershed Analyses of the affected watersheds was used to develop the proposed 

activities. None of the proposed activities are inconsistent with the findings and recommendations of the 

Watershed Analyses. The Watershed Analyses pertinent to this project are listed in Table 2. 

IV. DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT 

Oregon Coast Coho Salmon and Critical Habitat 

Oregon Coast (OC) coho ESU was listed as threatened on August 10, 1998 (63 FR 42587). This listing 

was reevaluated and NMFS determined listing OC coho was not warranted on January 17, 2006. The 

listing was once again reevaluated and NMFS determined a listing of threatened was warranted on 

February 4, 2008 (73 FR 7816). OC coho salmon critical habitat was designated as threatened also on 

February 11, 2008 (73 FR 7816). Final protective regulations for OC coho salmon were issued on 

February 11, 2008 (73 FR 7816). On April 28, 2009 NMFS announced that it was initiating a status 

review of OC coho. On May 26, 2010, NMFS affirmed the listing of the OC coho salmon as Threatened 

(75 FR 29489). 

 

Critical habitat is defined in Section 3(5)(A) of the ESA as “the specific areas within the geographical 

area occupied by the species Oregon Coast Coho on which are found those physical or biological features 

(I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management 

considerations or protection.” Section 7 of the ESA prohibits the destruction or adverse modification of 

designated critical habitat (CH). Table 3 lists streams with OC coho presence and/or CCH within the 

Action Area. The lateral extent of OC CCH is limited to the ordinary high water mark (i.e. bankfull 

elevation). 

On the RRSNF, the South Fork Coquille River, though occupied by OC coho, is exempt from critical 

habitat designation due to economic benefits of exclusion outweighing the benefits of designation. 

Further, marine habitats are not included as critical habitat due to the difficulty in identifying specific 

areas critical to the species. 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-7 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

The habitat indicators addressed in this BA that are pertinent to aquatic habitat health, also represents the 

primary constituent elements of proposed CH for OC coho salmon. Therefore, this analysis is sufficient 

for consultation of proposed CH as well. 

Table 3. Oregon Coast Coho Salmon ESU Critical Habitat within Action Area 

NMFS developed a list of Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) that are essential for the conservation of 

OC coho, and which are based on the life history of the coho salmon. These PCEs are: freshwater 

spawning sites, freshwater rearing sites, freshwater migration corridors, estuarine areas, nearshore marine 

areas, and offshore marine areas. These PCEs in concert with OC coho distribution data, were used to 

delineate the spatial extent of the critical habitat. The lateral extent of this designation is limited to the 

ordinary high water mark (i.e. bankfull elevation). For the purposes of this BA, the PCEs are cross 

referenced with the respective Habitat Indicators in Table 4 below. 

Table 4. OC Coho Critical Habitat Essential Habitat Features and Respective Habitat Indicators 

PCEs of OC 

coho Critical 

Habitat 

Habitat Indicator 

Freshwater 

Spawning Sites 

Change in Peak/Base Flows, Water Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity, Chemical 

Contamination/Nutrients, Substrate 

Freshwater 

Rearing Sites 

Change in Peak/Base Flows, Floodplain Connectivity, Water Temperature, 

Sediment/Turbidity, Chemical Contamination/Nutrients, Water Quality Indicators, Riparian 

Reserves, Substrate, Large Woody Debris, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, Width/depth Ratio, 

Off-channel Habitat, Streambank Condition 

Freshwater 

Migration 

Corridors 

Physical Barriers, Change in Peak/Base Flows, Water Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity, 

Chemical Contamination/Nutrients, Riparian Reserves, Substrate, Large Woody Debris, Pool 

Frequency, Pool Quality, Width/depth Ratio, Floodplain Connectivity, Off-channel Habitat, 

Streambank Condition 

Estuarine Areas Physical Barriers, Water Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity, Chemical 

Contamination/Nutrients, Change in Peak/Base Flows, Water Quality Indicators, Riparian 

Reserves, Substrate, Large Woody Debris, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, Width/depth Ratio, 

Floodplain Connectivity, Off-channel Habitat, Streambank Condition 

Nearshore 

Marine Areas 

N/A to RRSNF Actions 

Offshore 

Marine Areas 

N/A to RRSNF Actions 

SONCC Coho Salmon and Critical Habitat 

CCH for SONCC coho salmon was designated by NMFS on May 5, 1999 (64 FR 24049). CCH is 

defined in Section 3(5)(A) of the ESA as “the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the 

species ... on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the 

species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection.” Critical habitat 

was designated (64 FR 24049, May 5, 1999) to include all river reaches accessible to listed coho salmon 

between Cape Blanco, Oregon, and Punta Gorda, California. 

5th Field Watershed 

5th Field 

Watershed 

(acres) 

Miles of Occupied 

Coho Habitat 

(miles) 

CCH and 

EFH 

(miles) 

Sixes River 85,832 7.66 8.66 

South Fork Coquille River 108,300 15.41 20.79 

West Fork Cow Creek 55,892 0 5.0
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-8 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Critical habitat consists of the water, substrate, and adjacent riparian zones of estuarine and riverine 

reaches (including off-channel habitats). Accessible reaches are those within the historical range of the 

ESU that can still be occupied by any life stage of coho salmon. Inaccessible reaches are those above 

specific dams or above long-standing, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence 

for at least several hundred years). Table 5 lists streams with OC coho presence and/or CCH within the 

Action Area. 

Table 5. SONCC Coho Critical Habitat within Action Area 

The list of Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) essential for the conservation of the SONCC coho ESU 

include, but are not limited to, spawning sites, food resources, water quality and quantity, and riparian 

vegetation (64 FR 24050, May 5, 1999). Specifically, the adjacent riparian area is defined as the area 

adjacent to a stream that provides the following functions: shade, sediment, nutrient or chemical 

regulation, streambank stability, and input of large woody debris or organic matter. 

5th Field Watershed 

5th Field 

Watershed 

(acres) 

Miles of Occupied 

Coho Habitat 

(miles) 

CCH and 

EFH 

(miles) 

Althouse Creek 30,243 0.59 3.71 

Bear Creek 231,244 0 4.09 

Big Butte Creek 158,256 0 0 

Briggs Creek 43,758 0 0 

Chetco River 225,228 35.55 91.86 

Deer Creek 72,605 1.94 2.64 

East Fork Illinois River 57,779 7.71 12.72 

Elk Creek 85,476 4.90 12.86 

Elk River 58,398 21.55 25.91 

Euchre Creek-Frontal Pacific 56,329 0 0 

Headwaters Applegate River 142,276 0 0 

Headwaters Rogue River 248,577 0 0 

Hellgate Canyon-Rogue River 93,369 10.31 14.95 

Hunter Creek 28,458 0 0 

Indian Creek 82,267 No data No data 

Indigo Creek 48,984 0 0 

Josephine Ck-Illinois River 81,746 18.51 35.41 

Klondike Ck-Illinois River 67,123 30.87 52.57 

Lawson Ck-Illinois River 41,179 13.60 28.31 

Little Applegate River 72,295 0 15.20 

Little Butte Creek 238,882 7.12 18.80 

Lobster Creek 44,316 9.47 14.79 

Lower Applegate River 90,604 3.69 10.13 

Middle Applegate River 82,603 0 0.57 

North Fork Smith River 101,182 20.38 28.78 

Pistol River 67,285 0 21.71 

Rogue River 82,717 16.70 23.05 

Shasta Costa Ck-Rogue River 45,026 9.35 16.39 

Silver Creek 51,620 0 0 

South Fork Rogue River 160,773 0 0 

Stair Creek-Rogue River 36,544 13.41 13.41 

Sucker Creek 61,515 11.75 12.83 

Upper Applegate River 52,296 10.85 22.30 

West Fork Illinois River 76,996 5.98 29.78 

Winchuck River 45,634 22.85 38.8 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-9 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

NOAA Fisheries defines 10 essential habitat features to include substrates, water quality, water quantity, 

water temperature, water velocity, cover/shelter, food, riparian vegetation, space, and safe passage 

conditions (64 FR 24059, May 5, 1999). For the purposes of this BA, the 10 essential habitat features are 

cross referenced with the respective Habitat Indicators in Table 6 below. 

Table 6. Essential Habitat Features and Respective Habitat Indicators of SONCC CCH 

Essential 

Feature of 

CCH 

Habitat Indicator 

Substrate Sediment, Pool Quality, Landslide Rates, Large Woody Debris 

Water Quality Temperature, Sediment, Road Density & Location 

Water Quantity Peak/base flows, Drainage Network Increase, Road Density and Location 

Water 

Temperature 

Temperature, Riparian Reserves, Refugia, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank Condition, 

Peak/base flows, and Floodplain Connectivity. 

Water Velocity Peak/base flows, Drainage Network Increase, Floodplain Connectivity, Off-channel 

Habitat, Width/Depth Ratio, Road Density and Location, Streambank Condition, Large 

Woody Debris 

Cover/shelter Sediment, Pool Quality, Streambank Condition, Riparian Reserves, Refugia, Large Woody 

Debris, Off-channel Habitat, Width/Depth Ratio, Floodplain Connectivity 

Food Sediment, Riparian Reserves, Floodplain Connectivity, Large Woody Debris, Temperature 

Riparian 

Vegetation 

Riparian Reserves, Large Woody Debris, Disturbance History, Floodplain Connectivity 

Space Pool Quality, Off-channel Habitat, Floodplain Connectivity 

Safe Passage 

Conditions 

Refugia, Physical Barriers, Change in Peak/Base Flows 

Essential Fish Habitat 

Interim final rules for Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(b)) 

were published in the Federal Register/ Vol. 62, No. 244, December 19, 1997 and final rules published in 

the Federal Register/ Vol. 67, No. 12, January 17, 2002. These rules are pertinent to Chinook salmon and 

coho salmon habitat within the Southern Oregon Coastal Basin. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) has been 

defined by NMFS as “those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or 

growth to maturity.” This definition includes all waters historically used by anadromous salmonids of 

commercial value. EFH within the Action Area is the same as CCH. Table 5 displays streams with EFH 

within the Action Area by river miles. 

Overview of SONCC and OC Coho Salmon 

The Forest is located in several geologic provinces in SW Oregon: Klamath Mountains, Coastal 

Franciscan and Cascade Mountains (Western and High Cascades). Anadromous and resident fish 

populations have occupied the Forest lands for many thousands of years during periods of variable 

climate and periodic floods, large and smaller area fires, wind storms and tectonic movements that caused 

aquatic and riparian habitat changes. These fish inhabit diverse habitats on the Forest in streams, ponds, 

lakes, and reservoirs at elevations from near sea level to more than 5,000 feet elevation. Anadromous fish 

occupy at least 1,300 miles of streams and rivers on the Forest; including two races of Chinook salmon, 

coho salmon, two races of steelhead and sea-run cutthroat trout. Coho salmon and its critical habitat on 

the Forest are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act for the Southern Oregon/Northern 

California Coasts (SONCC) and Oregon Coast (OC) coho salmon Evolutionary Significant Units (ESU). 

Coho salmon and Chinook habitat on this Forest are listed as commercially viable for Essential Fish 

Habitat under the Magnuson Steven Fisheries Management Act. Resident trout and other species occupy 

approximately 2,000 miles of streams on the Forest. The preponderance of anadromous fish habitat is 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-10 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

found in the western portion of the Forest due to natural and human-made migration barriers in portions 

of the eastside of the Forest, e.g., Lost Creek Lake Dam and Applegate Dam. 

The Forest contains portions of six designated Wild and Scenic Rivers, including the: upper Rogue, lower 

Rogue, Chetco, Illinois, Elk, and North Fork Smith Rivers; five of which have fisheries Outstanding and 

Remarkable Values; excluding upper Rogue located above Lost Creek Lake reservoir, an anadromous fish 

barrier. Lake habitats are also abundant on the Forest, particularly within the Sky Lakes and Red Buttes 

Wilderness Areas, where many high elevation lakes are stocked with trout. 

V. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS 

OF THE PROPOSE ACTION

This analysis evaluates the direct and indirect potential effects of the proposed action on SONCC and OC 

coho salmon, CCH, and EFH. There is potential to affect CCH and EFH. CCH and EFH are the same in 

the Action Area, so any potential effect to one (i.e. CCH) would obviously result in an effect to the other 

(EFH). This analysis will discuss affects to CCH for feasibility and readability, recognizing that the same 

effect would apply to EFH. Different PCEs and Habitat Indicators will be lumped together when 

appropriate. 

The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest Motorized Vehicle Use project involves the designation of a 

motorized travel system for the Forest. Following completion of the plan, motorized travel on the forest 

will be restricted to designated routes and areas only. This project is merely designating permitted 

vehicle use on the existing system of routes within the Forest. Accordingly, the baseline (i.e. pre-project) 

condition includes all negative impacts to aquatic biota populations and habitat from the existing route 

network. The magnitude and extent of existing road and trail impacts to fish populations and fisheries 

habitat is highly variable depending on site specific characteristics. 

Coho distribution and CH information used in this analysis utilizes RRSNF Geographic Information 

System data, Watershed Analysis, and Aquatic Habitat Inventories data. This data is field verified data; a 

few data gaps may exist. Properly Functioning Condition ratings are based on the NOAA Table of 

Population and Habitat Indicators, as modified by the Rogue River/South Coast Level 1 Team for the 

Klamath Province/Siskiyou Mountains. 

The proposed actions of the project can be divided into three Project Elements, Table 7. 

Table 7. Proximity of Project Elements to CCH 

Project Elements (PE) Distance to CCH 

Enact Forest-wide plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel 

Management Rule and current historical motorized use 

Administrative only 

Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use 

on an Existing Trail, Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized 

Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use and Construct Motorized Trail 

Adjacent to CCH in some 

locations. 

Administrative activity only. 

Close Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel Adjacent to CCH in some 

locations. Administrative 

activity only. 

Overall Baseline Conditions (WA, Table 2, and R6 Level II Stream Surveys) 

Native fish, particularly salmonids, on the Forest require cool clean water, gravels with little fine 

sediment for spawning, shade along streams from vegetation and diverse habitats for successful growth 

during periods of their life history in fresh water. Large wood plays several important roles in fish 

habitat: for shade along streams, large mass to create habitat when wood enters the water, and in the 

formation and maintenance of stream channels. 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-11 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Large wood also has an ecological role associated with slope stability, soil retention, stream channel 

scouring, organic matter for primary aquatic production and formation of large stream features (fans, 

wood complexes and blockages, large sediment deposits) during storm episodes. Fish habitat on the 

Forest is generally lacking in diversity and complexity where past management activities, e.g., wood 

removal and road building have simplified instream diversity. Here fish habitat is lacking the quality and 

quantity of pool habitat and spawning gravels expected within the range of historical conditions. Some 

areas, particularly in the Siskiyou Mountains, naturally lack the expected numbers of large wood pieces 

per mile due to channel steepness and intensity of storms. Historically in SW Oregon, fire, wind, floods 

and landslides have routinely changed in-stream habitats, with large changes occurring during episodic 

events. 

Comparing past stochastic episodes with management of the Forest the past several decades indicates a 

change of disturbance patterns from irregular and episodic to more chronic patterns of anthropogenic 

disturbance from timber harvest, mining, road construction and maintenance, livestock grazing, and 

suppression of fire. Timber harvest and associated road development and road traffic have greatly 

decreased since the mid to late 1980’s. Within the National Forest, passive recovery of harvested stands 

and areas has placed stream networks in most watersheds on a recovery trajectory. Though, roads 

continue to have chronic sediment and drainage effects on fish populations and water quality in many 

watersheds, and placer mining is a chronic disturbance in many Klamath Mountain streams. High 

recreation use in specific local riparian areas also creates some chronic disturbance. Watershed 

restoration has occurred intensively on the Forest since the Northwest Forest Plan, 1994. Stream, 

riparian, and upland restoration is a process being implemented on high priority watersheds across the 

Forest. 

At the landscape scale, it is well documented that motorized routes modify the frequency, timing, and 

magnitude of disturbance to aquatic systems. The current motorized travel system on the Forest includes 

over 5,800 miles of motorized routes. Many of these routes are located within proximity to occupied fish 

habitat. The overriding negative effect of this motorized travel system on the fisheries resource is via 

sediment input to stream systems, Riparian Reserve fragmentation, and to a lesser degree fragmentation 

of aquatic habitats due to impassable or partially impassable road/stream crossings. These conditions 

have contributed to decreased distribution and abundance of native salmonid stocks, particularly 

anadromous salmon and steelhead. 

A. All Habitat Indicators and Watershed Conditions Indicators 

Effects 

Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an Existing Trail, 

Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use and 

Construct Motorized Trail

Proximity Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an Existing 

Trail, Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use 

and Construct Motorized Trail project element activities are located within fifteen 5th field watersheds on 

the RRSNF. These actions occur on the Powers, Gold Beach, Wild Rivers, and Siskiyou Mountains 

Ranger Districts and are in proximity to SONCC and OC CCH. No such actions are proposed for the 

High Cascades Ranger District. There is no causal mechanism from any of the indicators since they 

involve a change in the type of use (e.g. elimination of motorized use of a trail). There are no on-theground construction, restoration or rehabilitation actions included in this action. The route would remain 

on the landscape regardless of the type of public use that the road or trail segment would receive. 

Consequently, these activities would result in a neutral effect to all habitat indicators and watershed 

condition indicators. 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-12 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Element/Indicator Summaries: There is no causal mechanism for Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road 

to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an Existing Trail, Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, 

Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use, and Construct Motorized Trail to all the 

Habitat Indicators and Watershed Condition Indicators because the affected routes are currently part of 

the RRSNF travel route network, and the project only involves an administrative change to the type of use 

(e.g. mixed-use, non-motorized, etc.) that an existing route would receive. There is no ground disturbing 

action from this activity. Road maintenance currently occurs and will continue. Any ground disturbing 

activity that may occur in the upcoming years, i.e., culvert replacement, would be covered under a 

different effects analysis and consultation process. The only exception to this description involves the onthe-ground construction of the Penn Sled Trail on the Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District. However, this 

proposed trail is entirely located upstream of Applegate Dam, and thus does not occur within a watershed 

that contains coho critical habitat. 

This project would result in a neutral (0) effect from Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized 

Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an Existing Trail, Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized 

Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use, and Construct Motorized Trail to all indicators. 

B. All Habitat Indicators (except for Sediment and Pool Character and Quality) and Watershed 

Condition Indicators 

Effects 

Closing Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel 

Proximity There is no causal mechanism from Closing Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel to any 

of the indicators, except for Sediment and Pool Character and Quality from this action, since this action 

involves an administrative change in the type of use that certain areas of the Forest would receive. There 

is no on-the-ground construction, restoration or rehabilitation action included in this action. The 

Motorized Vehicle Use Project would eliminate cross country motorized travel across the Forest, with the 

exception of the existing Woodruff Play Area on the High Cascades Ranger District. This action would 

affect approximately 275,000 acres of land where cross country motorized travel is currently allowed. 

These areas are scattered across the Forest, and occur within and outside of coho salmon occupied 

watersheds. Although the majority of the acres are located on the High Cascades Ranger District, 

upstream of permanent man-made (e.g. Lost Creek Lake Dam) and natural (Butte Falls) barriers, well 

upstream of CCH. 

Element and Indicator Summary: There is no causal mechanism from Closing Areas to Cross-Country 

Motorized Travel to the Habitat Indicators (except for Sediment &Pool Character & Quality) and 

Watershed Condition Indicators, since this action involves an administrative change in the type of use that 

certain areas of the Forest would receive. There is no on-the-ground construction, restoration or 

rehabilitation action included in this action. Any ground disturbing activity that may occur in the 

upcoming years, i.e., culvert replacement, would be covered under a different effects analysis and 

consultation process. This project would result in a neutral (0) effect to all indicators, with the exception 

of sediment and Pool Character & Quality. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-13 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

SEDIMENT and POOL CHARACTER & QUALITY HABITAT INDICATORS

Effects 

Close Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel 

Proximity The project would close approximately 275,000 acres of the RRSNF to cross-country 

motorized travel. These areas are depicted in blue on the attached map. There is a causal mechanism 

from this action within multiple watersheds that do contain SONCC and OC coho CH since some crosscountry motorized areas are in proximity to SONCC and OC coho CH. 

Probability Closing Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel in watersheds that do contain SONCC and 

OC CCH provides a mechanism for potential reduction in upland erosion and sediment influx into stream 

networks. This sediment reduction could lead to improvement and/or maintenance of existing CCH, 

although the benefit would probably be discountable. 

Magnitude Sediment reduction from Closing Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel could lead to 

improvement and/or maintenance of existing CCH. Though these benefits are not expected to occur at 

magnitudes where the effects are measurable, or discernable when compared to the ongoing natural 

sediment production, and that which will continue to occur as a result of the remaining road and trail 

system. 

Element and Indicator Summary: There would be a discountable insignificant beneficial (+) effect

to the Sediment and Pool Character and Quality Habitat indicator from Closing Areas to Cross-Country 

Motorized Travel, within watersheds which contain CCH since the project element provides a mechanism 

for potential reduction in upland erosion and sediment influx into stream networks. This reduction would 

support the maintenance and improvement of OC coho PCE’s and SONCC coho Essential Features, 

particularly coho spawning and rearing habitat, both of which are closely tied to pool character and 

quality within the respective stream segment.
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National ForestTable 8. Motorized Vehicle Use Project Actions 

Activity Watershed ESU Total 

Units 

(miles/ 

acres) 

Units 

w/in 

Riparian 

Reserve 

Units 

outside 

Riparian 

Reserve 

Location 

in 

Watershed 

(lower, 

middle, 

upper)

Distance 

from 

CH/EF

H 

Effect 

Det. 

Convert mtn. Level 1 to motorized trail Rogue River SONCC 2.90 0.20 2.70 Upper/mid 2.40 NE NConvert mtn. Level 1 to motorized trail Hunter Creek SONCC 2.68 0.39 2.29 Upper 11.50 NE NConvert mtn. Level 1 to motorized trail Lawson Ck-Illinois R SONCC 3.69 0 3.69 Upper 5.10 NE Convert mtn. Level 1 to motorized trail Hellgate Canyon – 

Rogue River 

SONCC 0.29 0 0.29 Upper 1.20 NE 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail Rogue River SONCC 0.78 0 0.78 Middle 0.50 NE Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail Lawson Ck – Illinois 

R 

SONCC 14.27 2.59 11.68 Mid/Low 0 NE C

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail Briggs Creek SONCC 11.11 0.89 10.22 Upper/mid 6.70 NE Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail Silver Creek SONCC 1.85 0.71 1.14 Middle 12.50 NE Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail Sucker Creek SONCC 2.98 0.32 2.66 Upper 3.00 NE Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail Indian Creek SONCC 1.08 0 1.08 Upper 1+ miles NE Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail Headwaters 

Applegate River 

SONCC 3.84 1.22 2.62 Upper 8.20 NE U

Prohibit motorized mixed use Chetco River SONCC 12.51 0.52 11.99 Middle 0.05 NE Prohibit motorized mixed use Josephine Ck – 

Illinois R 

SONCC 11.97 3.43 8.54 Lower 0 NE C

Designate motorized mixed use Shasta Costa – Rogue 

R. 

SONCC 0.17 0.12 0.05 Lower 0.70 NE 

Prohibit motorized public use W. Fork Illinois SONCC 7.65 0.30 7.35 Middle 0.10 NE Prohibit motorized public use Josephine Ck – 

Illinois R. 

SONCC 4.82 2.56 2.26 Mid/Low 0 NE C

Prohibit motorized public use Deer Creek SONCC 1.52 1.20 0.32 Lower 0 NE CConstruct motorized trial Headwaters 

Applegate River 

SONCC 1.18 0 1.18 Middle 6.30 NE U

Close Areas to Motorized Cross-Country Travel 

Multiple Watersheds across the Forest 

SONCC, 

OC 

~275,000 

acres 

- - - - BE, 

NLAA 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-15 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

VI. ESA AND EFH DETERMINATION 

Determination on Effects on OC and SONCC Coho Salmon and OC and SONCC Coho Critical Habitat 

from implementation of the Motorized Vehicle Use Project 

The effects are determined to be neutral for all indicators except sediment and pool character & quality, which 

had a slight positive effect from project actions. Much of the discussion of possible effects to coho salmon, 

essential features of critical habitat and essential fish habitat (EFH) centers on reduction of fine sediment delivery 

to the stream system and critical habitat downstream. This improvement is exclusively linked to the elimination 

of cross-country motorized travel within the boundaries of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF), 

and the potential decrease in upland erosion and sediment influx into stream channels that could result from this 

action. As a result the Closing Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel would have a beneficial effect on 

individual OC and SONCC coho salmon, OC and SONCC coho salmon critical habitat and beneficial effect on 

essential fish habitat (EFH) for coho and Chinook salmon. All other Project Elements would have no effect

whatsoever to individual OC and SONCC coho salmon, OC and SONCC coho salmon critical habitat, or EFH for 

coho and Chinook salmon. 

Determination and Conclusions 

The Motor Vehicle Use Project would result in positive effects to OC and SONCC coho salmon and OC and 

SONCC coho salmon critical habitat on the RRSNF. Thus, a Beneficial, May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely 

Affect determination is rendered for OC coho salmon, and OC coho salmon critical habitat and a Beneficial, May 

Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect determination is rendered for SONCC coho salmon, and SONCC coho 

salmon critical habitat. This determination is exclusively linked to the elimination of cross-country motorized 

travel within the boundaries of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF), and the potential decrease in 

upland erosion and sediment influx into stream channels that could result from this action. 

Essential Fish Habitat is the same as CCH in the Action Area. Therefore, the same determination of effects 

applies to EFH. The project is Beneficial, Will Not Adversely Affect Essential Fish Habitat for coho salmon or 

Chinook salmon. 

Rationale and approval from NOAA Fisheries, 2011 for use of the Programmatic Consultation for Fish Habitat 

Restoration Activities in Oregon and Washington, CY2007-2012 (ARBO), to cover project consultation 

requirement for ESA listed fish species and critical habitat and EFH is stated below: 

On November 9, 2005, the Final Rule for Travel Management; Designated Routes and Areas for Motor Vehicle 

Use (hereafter referred to as Travel Management Rule) was published in the Federal Register; affecting 36 Code 

of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 212, 251, 261, and 295. The Rule revises several regulations to require 

designation of roads, trails, and areas for motor vehicle use on National Forests and National Grasslands. 

Highlights of the Travel Management Rule include: each National Forest or Ranger District will designate those 

roads, trails, and areas open to motor vehicles: designation will include class of vehicle and, if appropriate, season 

of use for motor vehicle. Once the designation process is complete, the rule will prohibit motor vehicle use off 

the designated system and use that is inconsistent with the designations. 

The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest began the designation process in spring 2006. The Preferred 

Alternative is being carried forward in accordance with the Travel Management Rule. 

USDA Forest Service Region 6 guidance to local Forests included: 

Designation of routes, trails and areas decided by previous administrative decisions through publication of a 

Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM), where no NEPA is required (36 CFR 212.50), does not constitute either a 

major Federal action under NEPA nor a Federal agency action under the ESA. 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-16 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Designation is considered to be purely an administrative action mapping an existing situation in which decisions 

have been implemented and the environmental consequences have already occurred. Designation, therefore, has 

no environmental consequences that can be meaningfully evaluated (40 CFR 1508.14). 

For the purposes of NEPA, the “proposed action” consists of the change(s) being proposed to current Forest 

Plan and transportation system to implement the Travel Management Rule (36 CFR 212, 251, 261, 295). For the 

purposes of ESA compliance, the NEPA “proposed action” is the same as the “Federal agency action” (ESA 

Section 7(a)(2). 

Thus, inclusion of existing routes with continuation of existing use does not constitute an “action” by the Forest, 

and thus no consultation ESA §7(a)(2) is required. 

This same approach was successfully used on the Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests (DONF) during the 

analysis of their motorized travel planning effort, and disclosure of effects to ESA listed Middle Columbia River 

Steelhead. During this analysis, the DONF determined that closure of 298,180 acres to cross-country motorized 

travel resulted in a beneficial effect to steelhead. The DONF, in concert with the NOAA Fisheries Oregon State 

Office, utilized ARBO category 9 (reduction of recreation impacts), to meet the consultation obligations of ESA 

§7(a)(2). 

Dichotomous Key for Making Section 7 Determination of Effects 

Location: Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Project Name: Motorized Vehicle Use 

Species: OC coho salmon 

Watersheds within Project Area: Watersheds within the RRSNF, Table 1

1. Are there any proposed/listed anadromous salmonids and/or proposed/designated critical habitat in 

the watershed or downstream from the watershed? 

NO.......................................................................................No Effect 

YES...........................................................................May affect, go to 2 

2. Will the proposed action(s) have any effect whatsoever* on the species and/or critical habitat? 

NO.......................................................................................No Effect 

YES......................................................................................Go to 3 

3. Does the proposed action(s) have the potential to hinder attainment of relevant properly functioning 

indicators from checklist? 

NO........................................................................................Go to 4 

YES..........................................................................Likely to adversely affect 

4. Does the proposed action(s) have the potential to result in “take”** of proposed/listed anadromous 

salmonids or destruction/adverse modification of proposed/designated critical habitat? 

NO. There is a negligible (extremely low) probability of take of proposed/listed anadromous 

salmonids or destruction/adverse modification of proposed/designated critical 

habitat...................................................Not likely to adversely affect 

YES. There is more than a negligible probability of take of proposed/listed anadromous salmonids or 

destruction/adverse modification of proposed/designated critical 

habitat..............................................................Likely to adversely affect***
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-17 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

*”Any effect whatsoever” includes small effects that are unlikely to occur, and beneficial effects, i.e. 

a “no effect” determination is only appropriate if the proposed action will literally have no effect 

whatsoever on the species and/or critical habitat, not a small effect, an effect that is unlikely to occur, 

or a beneficial effect. 

**”Take” – The ESA (Section 3) defines take as “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, 

capture, collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct”. The USFWS further defines “harm” as 

“significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by 

significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering” and “harass” as 

“actions that create the likelihood of injury to listed species to such an extent as to significantly 

disrupt normal behavior patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding or 

sheltering”. 

***Document expected incidental take on appropriate form. 

Dichotomous Key for Making Section 7 Determination of Effects 

Location: Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Project Name: Motorized Vehicle Use 

Species: SONCC coho salmon 

Watersheds within Project Area: Watersheds within the RRSNF, Table 1

5. Are there any proposed/listed anadromous salmonids and/or proposed/designated critical habitat in 

the watershed or downstream from the watershed? 

NO.......................................................................................No Effect 

YES...........................................................................May affect, go to 2 

6. Will the proposed action(s) have any effect whatsoever* on the species and/or critical habitat? 

NO.......................................................................................No Effect 

YES...................................................................................... Go to 3 

7. Does the proposed action(s) have the potential to hinder attainment of relevant properly functioning 

indicators from checklist? 

NO........................................................................................ Go to 4 

YES..........................................................................Likely to adversely affect 

Does the proposed action(s) have the potential to result in “take”** of proposed/listed anadromous 

salmonids or destruction/adverse modification of proposed/designated critical habitat? 

NO. There is a negligible (extremely low) probability of take of proposed/listed anadromous 

salmonids or destruction/adverse modification of proposed/designated critical 

habitat...................................................Not likely to adversely affect 

YES. There is more than a negligible probability of take of proposed/listed anadromous salmonids or 

destruction/adverse modification of proposed/designated critical 

habitat..............................................................Likely to adversely affect*** 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-18 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

*”Any effect whatsoever” includes small effects that are unlikely to occur, and beneficial effects, i.e. 

a “no effect” determination is only appropriate if the proposed action will literally have no effect 

whatsoever on the species and/or critical habitat, not a small effect, an effect that is unlikely to occur, 

or a beneficial effect. 

**”Take” – The ESA (Section 3) defines take as “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, 

capture, collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct”. The USFWS further defines “harm” as 

“significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by 

significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering” and “harass” as 

“actions that create the likelihood of injury to listed species to such an extent as to significantly 

disrupt normal behavior patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding or 

sheltering”. 

***Document expected incidental take on appropriate form. 

Name of Biologist: /s/ Steve Brazier Date: July 19, 2011

Literature Cited

Bennett, G. 2009. Personal communication regarding fish species observed and recorded during July 2009 Level 

II Stream Survey of Quosatana Creek. 

Joplin, M. 2011. Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, Travel Management-Hydrologic Analysis. 

NMFS 2008. Biological Opinion for Fish Habitat Restoration Activities in Oregon and Washington, CY 2007-

2012. NMFS No: 2008/03505. 150 pages. 

NMFS 2006. Biological Opinion for Fish Habitat Restoration Activities in Oregon and Washington, CY 2007-

2012. NMFS No: P/NWR/2006/06530. 145 pages. 

NMFS 1996. Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the 

Watershed Scale. Prepared by: The National Marine Fisheries Service, Environmental and Technical Services 

Division, Habitat Conservation Branch. 32 pages. 

USFWS 1997. Biological Opinion for Programmatic Aquatic Habitat Restoration Activities in Oregon and 

Washington. 8330.F0055(07). 258 pages. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-19 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Aquatic Biota 

Biological Evaluation & Specialist Report 

Motorized Vehicle Use 

on the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

3040 Biddle Road 

Medford, OR 97504 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-20 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

I. Title Page 

Project Name: Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF) 

Project Location: USDA Forest Service, Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

Table 1. Fifth Watersheds within the Action Area 

Fifth Field 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fifth Field 

Althouse Creek Little Applegate River 

Bear Creek Little Butte Creek 

Big Butte Creek Lobster Creek 

Briggs Creek Lower Applegate River 

Chetco River Middle Applegate River 

Deer Creek North Fork Smith River 

East Fork Illinois River Pistol River 

Elk Creek Rogue River 

Elk River Shasta Costa Ck-Rogue River 

Euchre Creek-Frontal Pacific Silver Creek 

Headwaters Applegate Riv. Sixes River 

Headwaters Rogue River South Fork Coquille River 

Hellgate Canyon-Rogue River South Fork Rogue River 

Hunter Creek Stair Creek-Rogue River 

Indian Creek Sucker Creek 

Indigo Creek Upper Applegate River 

Josephine Ck-Illinois River West Fork Cow Creek 

Klondike Ck-Illinois River West Fork Illinois River 

Lawson Ck-Illinois River Winchuck River 

Watershed Analyses (WA): Listed in Table 2. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-21 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Table 2. Watershed Analysis Completed within the Project Area 

Watershed, Year Completed Watershed, Year Completed 

Bear Creek, 1995 Lower Illinois, 2000 

Beaver-Palmer, 1994 Lower Rogue, 1995 

Bradford Creek, 1996 Middle Applegate, 1998 

Briggs Creek, 1994 Middle Illinois, 1999 

Cheney/Slate, 1996 North Fork Smith River, 1995 

Chetco River, 1996 Pistol River, 2003 

Collier Creek, 1997 Quosatana Creek,1996 

Deer Creek, 1997 Rogue River above Galice, 1995 

East Fork Illinois River, 2000 Rogue River below Agness, 2000 

Elk Creek, 1996 Rogue River Marial/Agness, 1999 

Elk River, 1998 SF Coquille River, 1995 

Grayback/Sucker 1998 Shasta Costa Creek, 1996 

Horse Sign Creek, 1998 Silver Creek, 1995 

Hunter Creek, 1998 Sixes River, 1997 

Indigo Creek, 1998 Squaw/Elliott/Lake, 1995 

Kalmiopsis Wilderness, 1995 Upper Bear Creek, 2003 

Lawson Creek, 1997 Upper Big Butte Creek, 1995 

Little Applegate River, 1995 Upper Rogue River, 1995 

Little Butte Creek, 1997 West Fork Illinois, 1997 

Lobster Creek, 1999 Winchuck River, 1999 

 Land Allocation of Project Area: Administrative Study Area (MA-15) 

 Backcountry Recreation (MA-6) 

 Botanical (MA-4) 

 Late Successional Reserve (MA-8) 

 Matrix (MA-14) 

 Riparian Reserve (MA-11) 

 Special Wildlife Site (MA-9) 

Administrative Unit: Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF): Gold Beach, High 

Cascades, Powers, Siskiyou Mountains, and Wild Rivers Ranger 

Districts 

Prepared By: Steve Brazier, Fisheries Biologist, RRSNF 

Reviewed By: Susan Maiyo, Forest Fisheries Biologist, RRSNF 

Document Date: July 19, 2010 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-22 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Biological Evaluation Background Information 

The Biological Evaluation process (FSM 2672.43) is intended to conduct and document activities necessary to ensure Proposed 

Actions will not likely jeopardize the continued existence or cause adverse modification of habitat for: 

A. Fish species listed or proposed to be listed as Endangered (E) or Threatened (T) or Proposed for Federal listing 

(P) by the National Marine Fisheries Service. 

B. Fish species listed as Sensitive (S) by USDA, Forest Service. 

Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive, and Proposed Fish Species (TESP) 

In compliance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Forest Service Biological Evaluation process for 

TESP fish species, the list of species potentially occurring within the project area was reviewed. Lists for the Rogue RiverSiskiyou National Forest (RRSNF) and the Pacific Northwest Region (R-6) were reviewed in regard to potential effects on 

any of these species by actions associated with the Motorized Vehicle Use Project. Pre-field and reconnaissance results are 

summarized in the table below. 

Table 3. Potentially Affected Species, Status, and Habitats Assessed (Pacific Northwest Regional 

Forester’s Sensitive Species List updated January 2008) 

Species/Habitat Pre-field Review Field Surveys 

Common name Scientific Name 

Existing Sighting or 

Potential Habitat 

(Yes*/No**) 

Habitat or Species 

Confirmed 

(Yes*/No**) 

Threatened Species 

SONCC Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch Yes Yes 

OC Coho Salmon O. kisutch Yes Yes 

Critical Habitat 

SONCC Coho salmon O. kisutch Yes Yes 

OC coho salmon O. kisutch Yes Yes 

Essential Fish Habitat 

Coho salmon O. kisutch Yes Yes 

Chinook Salmon O. tshawytscha Yes Yes 

Sensitive Species 

SONCC Chinook salmon O. tshawytscha Yes Yes 

PC chum salmon O. keta No No 

OC Steelhead O. mykiss Yes Yes 

Inland redband trout O. mykiss No No 

Pit sculpin Cottus pitensis No No 

Western ridged mussel Gonidea angulata No No 

Klamath rim pebblesnail Fluminicola sp. No No 

Highcap lanx Lanx alta No No 

Scale lanx Lanx klamathensis No No 

Robust walker Pomatiopsis binneyi No No 

Pacific walker Pomatiopsis californica No No 

Pristine springsnail Pristinicola hemphilli No No 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-23 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

*Yes – The proposed project’s potential effects on these species will be further analyzed in this document. 

**No – No further analysis is necessary, and a determination of “No Impact” is rendered. 

Summary of Findings 

Proposed activities included in all Action Alternatives (Alternatives 2, 3, 4, 5) would have a Beneficial, Not 

Likely to Adversely Affect on SONCC coho salmon, SONCC coho critical habitat, OC coho salmon, and OC 

coho salmon critical habitat. Further, these activities will have a Beneficial, Not Likely to Adversely Affect to 

Essential Fish Habitat for coho salmon and Chinook salmon. These Beneficial Effects are covered under the 

existing programmatic consultation for Fish Habitat Restoration Activities in Oregon and Washington (NMFS 

2008, NMFS 2006, USFWS 2007), under category 9 “Reduction of Recreation Impacts”. For detailed effects 

analysis related to SONCC coho salmon, SONCC coho salmon critical habitat, OC coho salmon, OC coho salmon 

critical habitat, and coho and Chinook Essential Fish Habitat, please refer to the Fisheries Biological Assessment 

for the Motorized Vehicle Use Project (Brazier 2011).

Proposed activities (excluding the Woodruff Trail Connector in Alt. 3, see below) included in all Action 

Alternatives (Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5) would have a Beneficial Impact to SONCC Chinook salmon, and OC 

steelhead. No Impact was determined for effects on PC chum salmon, inland redband trout, pit sculpin, western 

ridged mussel, Klamath rim pebblesnail, highcap lanx, scale lanx, robust walker, pacific walker, and pristine 

springsnail. 

Construction of the Woodruff Trail connector would create a new sediment source within the Quosatana Creek 

subwatershed, which is CCH and occupied by SONCC Chinook salmon. Accordingly this action May Affect, 

Not Likely to Adversely Affect SONCC coho salmon and SONCC coho CH. Further, this action May Impact 

Individuals or Habitat, But Will Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a 

Loss of Viability to the Population or Species (SONCC Chinook salmon). 

The No Action Alternative would have No Effect to SONCC coho salmon, SONCC coho critical habitat, OC 

coho salmon, and OC coho salmon critical habitat. Further, this alternative would have No Effect to Essential 

Fish Habitat for coho salmon and Chinook salmon, and No Impact on SONCC Chinook salmon, PC chum 

salmon, OC steelhead, inland redband trout, pit sculpin, western ridged mussel, Klamath rim pebblesnail, highcap 

lanx, scale lanx, robust walker, pacific walker, and pristine springsnail. 

III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES 

On November 9, 2005, the Final Rule for Travel Management; Designated Routes and Areas for Motor Vehicle 

Use (hereafter referred to as Travel Management Rule) was published in the Federal Register; affecting 36 Code 

of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 212, 251, 261, and 295. The Rule revises several regulations to require 

designation of roads, trails, and areas for motor vehicle use on National Forests and National Grasslands. 

Highlights of the Travel Management Rule include: each National Forest or Ranger District will designate those 

roads, trails, and areas open to motor vehicles: designation will include class of vehicle and, if appropriate, 

season of use for motor vehicle. Once the designation process is complete, the rule will prohibit motor vehicle 

use off the designated system and use that is inconsistent with the designations. 

 The actions of the project can be divided into three Project Elements and are described below: 

4) Enact Forest-wide plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel Management Rule 

and current historical motorized use (Alternative 2, 3, 4, and 5). 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-24 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

5) Close Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel (Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5).

6) Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an Existing Trail, 

Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use, and 

Construct Motorized Trail (Alternatives 3, 4, and 5). 

 Table. 4 Proposed Alternatives with Activities 

Alternative 

Project 

Element 

1 

(administrativ

e only)

Project 

Elemen

t 2

Project Element 3 

Enact Forest and District-wide plan amendments. Close area to Motorized Cross-country ravel (acres) Convert ML1 Road to Motorized Trail (miles) Prohibit Motorized use of an existing Trail (miles) Prohibit motorized Mixed Use (miles) Designate Motorized Mixed Use (miles) Prohibit Motorized Public Use (miles) Construct Motorized Trail (miles) Develop Motorized Play Area (acres) 

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

2 Forest-wide 275,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

3 Forest-wide 275,000 13.91 31.51 24.48 36.83 14.64 1.48 10.

0 

4 Forest-wide 275,000 0 128.71 24.92 0.14 51.45 0 0 

5 Forest-wide 275,000 9.56 36.82 24.48 0.17 14.64 1.18 0 

Alternative 1 – No Action 

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

the transportation system completed in 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. 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 cross-country travel prohibition would occur. 

Alternative 2 

Enact Forest-wide plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel Management Rule and current 

historical motorized use – similar to all action alternatives 

 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. 

District Specific Activities 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-25 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Gold Beach Ranger District 

o Amend the Siskiyou LRMP to make current motorized use of the Game Lake Trail (#1169), Lawson 

Creek Trail (#1173), Illinois River Trail (#1161), Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trail (#1166), and two 

unnamed connector trails consistent with the Standards and Guidelines for the Allocations through 

which they pass (Backcountry Recreation). 

Wild Rivers Ranger District 

o Amend the Siskiyou LRMP 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). 

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District 

o Amend the Rogue River LRMP to make motorized use of the Boundary Trail (#1207) and two 

connecting trails (#900 and #903) consistent with Standards and Guidelines for the allocations in 

which it passes through. 

Close Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel

Similar to all the action alternatives, Alternative 2 would close approximately 275,000 acres of the RRSNF to 

cross-country motorized travel. The vast majority of these acres are located on the High Cascades Ranger 

District, in watersheds that do not contain coho salmon critical habitat, due to the presence of the Lost Creek Dam 

and other permanent passage barriers (i.e. Butte Falls on Big Butte Creek). In addition, there are specific project 

activities for some of the Districts as stated below. 

Alternative 3 – Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action 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 enacting the Travel 

Management Rule. 

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. 

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 and current 

historical motorized use 

 Similar to Alternative 2. 

Close Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel

 Similar to Alternative 2. 

Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an Existing Trail, Prohibit 

Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use, and Construct Motorized 

Trail

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-26 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

 Similar to all the action alternatives, formally designate approximately 3,183 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. 

 Construct two motorized trails to provide loop route opportunities (approximately 2 miles). 

 Convert approximately 12 miles of NFS roads to motorized trails. 

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

Woodruff area near Prospect and the development of an additional area near Willow Lake. Both areas are 

located on the High Cascades Ranger District. All other cross country travel would be prohibited. 

 Prohibit public motorized use on approximately 7 miles of roads and 31 miles of trail currently open in 

order to minimize or reduce resource damage. 

There are specific project activities for the Districts as stated below. 

Powers Ranger District 

o Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping is generally allowed along all roads designated open, 

except where otherwise prohibited. No off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would be 

allowed within 1⁄4 mile of developed recreation sites. 

o Designate approximately 6.2 miles of paved road for motorized mixed use on a portion of Road 3348 

(Eden Valley Road). 

Gold Beach Ranger District 

o Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping is generally allowed along all roads designated open, 

except where otherwise prohibited. No off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would be 

allowed within 1⁄4 mile of developed recreation sites. 

o Amend the Siskiyou LRMP to make current motorized use of the Game Lake Trail (#1169), Lawson 

Creek Trail (#1173), Illinois River Trail (#1161), Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trail (#1166), and two 

unnamed connector trails consistent with the Standards and Guidelines for the Allocations through 

which they pass (Backcountry Recreation). 

o 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. 

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

(#1173) and Game Lake (#1169) trails, which currently allow motorized use. 

o Construct approximately 0.5 miles of new motorized trail that would connect to the Woodruff Trail. 

o Designate approximately 0.2 miles of paved road for motorized mixed use on a portion of Road 3313. 

o Convert 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, 

3680353, and 3680409). 

Wild Rivers Ranger District 

o No off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would be allowed. The only authorized parking 

would along-side of open roads (not to exceed 20 feet) or in previously constructed landings. 

o Amend the Siskiyou LRMP 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). 

o Convert approximately 3.0 miles of roads currently designated as Maintenance Level 1 to motorized 

trails (portions of Roads 4402494, and 2509640). 

o Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 11.8 miles of road where it is currently authorized on 

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

o Prohibit public motorized use on approximately 13.8 miles of road, including portions of Roads 

4400445, 4400459, 4400460, 4400480, 4300011, 4300910, 4300920, 4300925, 4201016, and 

4103011. 

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 0.6 miles of Road 2600050. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-27 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

o 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).

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

Silver Lake Trail (#1184). 

o 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). 

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District

o Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping is generally allowed up to 300 feet along roads 

designated as open, except for areas currently closed by a Forest Order.

o 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. 

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 4.0 miles of the Horse Camp Trail (#958) that currently 

allows motorized use. 

o Construct and relocate approximately 1.2 miles of the Penn Sled Trail (#957) east of Applegate Lake 

that would allow motorized use for Class III vehicles. 

High Cascades Ranger District

o Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping is generally allowed up to 300 feet along most roads 

designated as open, except within the Elk Creek Watershed, and areas currently closed by Forest 

Order.

o Develop a motorized play area (approximately 10 acres) near the junction of road 3050 and county 

road 821.

o Designate approximately 31.5 miles of paved road for motorized mixed use on portions of Roads 34, 

37, 3705, 3720, and within developed campgrounds adjacent to routes that allow mixed use. These 

campgrounds included Union Creek, Farewell Bend, Natural Bridge, Woodruff Bridge, Abbott Creek, 

and Whiskey Springs.

Alternative 4 

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

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

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. 

 

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: 

Enact Forest-wide plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel Management Rule and current 

historical motorized use 

 Similar to Alternatives 2 and 3. 

Close Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel

Similar to Alternatives 2 and 3. 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-28 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an Existing Trail, Prohibit 

Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use, and Construct Motorized 

Trail

 Similar to all the action alternatives, formally designate approximately 3,047 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. 

 Prohibit motorized public access on approximately 43 miles of 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. 

There are specific project activities for each of the Districts as stated below. 

Powers Ranger District 

o Off-road travel for dispersed motorized camping would not be allowed along paved roads. All other 

open roads would allow off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping. No off-road motorized 

travel would be allowed within 1⁄4 mile of developed recreation sites or where otherwise prohibited. 

o Prohibit motorized use on the one-mile Big Tree Trail (#1150). 

Gold Beach Ranger District 

o Off-road travel for dispersed motorized camping would not be allowed along paved roads. All other 

open roads would allow off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping. No off-road motorized 

travel would be allowed within 1⁄4 mile of developed recreation sites or where otherwise prohibited. 

o 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. 

o 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. 

o Prohibit motorized use on the one-mile Red Flat Trail, located in the Hunter Creek Watershed. 

o 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 (unnumbered) northeast of Buzzards Roost, 1.2 miles of 

an unnumbered trail east of the Rogue River (near Shasta Costa Creek), and 5.4 miles on the Lower 

Rogue River Trail (#1168). 

o Prohibit motorized use on the 17.2 mile Silver Peak-Hobson Horn (#1166) located on both the Gold 

Beach and Wild Rivers Ranger Districts, and the 3-mile Fish Hook Trail (#1180), also located on 

both Districts. 

Wild Rivers Ranger District 

o No off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would be allowed. The only authorized parking 

would along-side of open roads (not to exceed 20 feet) or in previously constructed landings. 

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

Silver Lake Trail (#1184). 

o Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 4.8 miles of Road 2512091. 

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 0.6 miles of Road 2600050. 

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 11.3 miles of trail that currently allow motorized use, 

including portions of 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) and Swede Creek (#1135) Trails. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-29 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 3.9 miles of road including portions of Roads 4300011, 

4300910, 4300925, 4201016, and 4103011. In Addition, prohibit motorized use on approximately 

4.4 miles of road, including portions of Roads 4103087, 4201844, 4201846, 4201847, 2524847, 

2524015, and 2524048. These roads would still be open for permitted or limited administrative use. 

o 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. 

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 7.6 miles of road including all or portions of Roads 

4400445, 4400459, 4400460, and 4400480. 

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 24.8 miles of road including all or portions of Roads 

4402019, 4402172, 4402206, 4402259, 4402450, 4402530, and 4402550. 

o 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. 

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District 

o Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would only be allowed along certain designated 

Maintenance Level 2 and 3 roads. 

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 3.8 miles of trail that includes the Sturgis Fork (#903) and 

O’Brien Creek (#900) trails. 

o 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). 

High Cascades Ranger District 

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

remain in place. Off-road motorized travel for dispersed camping would be allowed along currently 

identified “green-dot” roads only. 

Alternative 5 – Preferred Alternative 

Alternative 5 is a blend activities included in Alternatives 3 and 4, which 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 would propose a reduction in motorized use 

relative to the current condition and Alternative 3, though not to the extent of Alternative 4. 

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 and current 

historical motorized use 

 Similar to Alternatives 2 through 4. 

Close Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel

 Similar to Alternatives 2 through 4. 

Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an Existing Trail, Prohibit 

Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use, and Construct Motorized 

Trail

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-30 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

 Similar to all the action alternatives, formally designate approximately 2,999 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. 

 Construct one motorized trail to provide loop route opportunities (approximately 1.5 miles). 

 Convert approximately 10 miles of NFS roads 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 public motorized use on approximately 7 miles of roads and 37 miles of trail currently open in 

order to minimize or reduce resource damage. 

There are specific project activities for most of the Districts as stated below. 

Powers Ranger District 

o Prohibit motorized use on the one-mile Big Tree Trail (#1150). 

Gold Beach Ranger District

o Amend the Siskiyou LRMP to make current motorized use of the Game Lake Trail (#1169), Lawson 

Creek Trail (#1173), Illinois River Trail (#1161), Silver Peak Hobson Horn Trail (#1166), and two 

unnamed connector trails consistent with the Standards and Guidelines for the Allocations through 

which they pass (Backcountry Recreation). 

o Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 12.5 miles of road where it is currently authorized on 

portions of Roads 1376010, 1376012, 1376013, 13760150, 1376019, 1376902, 1376903, and 

1376908. 

o 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). 

o Convert approximately 9.3 miles of roads currently designated as Maintenance Level 1 to motorized 

trails (portions of Roads 3313103, 3680190, 3680195, 3680220, 3680351, 3680353, and 3313117). 

These roads are located in the following areas south of the Rogue River: Upper Lawson Creek, 

Signal Butte, and Kimball Butte. 

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 0.8 miles of trail (#1164) in the Woodruff Meadow area. 

o Designate approximately 500 feet of paved road for motorized mixed use on a portion of Road 2308 

(Burnt Ridge Road). 

Wild Rivers Ranger District 

o 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). 

o Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 10.2 miles of road where it is currently authorized on 

portions of Roads 4400445, 4400459, 4400460, 4400461, and 4400480. 

o Prohibit motorized mixed use on approximately 11.9 miles of road where it is currently authorized on 

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

o Prohibit public motorized use on approximately 6.4 miles of road including portions of Roads 

4300011, 4300910, 4300920, 4300925, 4201016, and 4103011. These roads would still be open for 

permitted or limited administrative use. 

o Convert approximately 0.3 miles of Road 2509640, currently designated as a Maintenance Level 1 

road, to a motorized trail. 

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 0.6 miles of Road 2600050. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-31 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

o 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).

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 1.9 miles of trail that currently allows motorized use on the 

Silver Lake Trail (#1184). 

o 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). 

Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District 

o 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. 

o Prohibit motorized use on approximately 3.8 miles of the Horse Camp Trail (#958) that currently 

allows motorized use. 

o Construct and relocate approximately 1.2 miles of the Penn Sled Trail (#957) east of Applegate Lake 

that would allow motorized use for Class III vehicles. 

IV. DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED SPECIES AND HABITAT 

Status of Listed Species and Habitat 

Oregon Coast Coho Salmon and Critical Habitat (threatened) 

Oregon Coast (OC) coho ESU was listed as threatened on August 10, 1998 (63 FR 42587). This listing was 

reevaluated and NMFS determined listing OC coho was not warranted on January 17, 2006. The listing was once 

again reevaluated and NMFS determined a listing of threatened was warranted on February 4, 2008 (73 FR 7816). 

OC coho salmon critical habitat was designated as threatened also on February 11, 2008 (73 FR 7816). Final 

protective regulations for OC coho salmon were issued on February 11, 2008 (73 FR 7816). On April 28, 2009 

NMFS announced that it was initiating a status review of OC coho. On May 26, 2010, NMFS affirmed the listing 

of the OC coho salmon as Threatened (75 FR 29489). 

 

Critical habitat is defined in Section 3(5)(A) of the ESA as “the specific areas within the geographical area 

occupied by the species Oregon Coast Coho on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential 

to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection.” 

Section 7 of the ESA prohibits the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat (CCH). Table 

5 lists streams with OC coho presence and/or CCH within the Action Area. The lateral extent of OC CCH is 

limited to the ordinary high water mark (i.e. bankfull elevation). 

Table 5. Oregon Coast Coho Salmon ESU Critical Habitat within Action Area 

5th Field Watershed 

5th Field 

Watershed 

(acres) 

Miles of Occupied 

Coho Habitat 

(miles) 

CCH and 

EFH 

(miles) 

Sixes River 85,832 7.66 8.66 

South Fork Coquille River 108,300 15.41 20.79 

West Fork Cow Creek 55,892 0 5.0
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-32 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

On the RRSNF, the South Fork Coquille River, though occupied by OC coho, is exempt from critical habitat 

designation due to economic benefits of exclusion outweighing the benefits of designation. Further, marine 

habitats are not included as critical habitat due to the difficulty in identifying specific areas critical to the species. 

The habitat indicators addressed in this BA that are pertinent to aquatic habitat health, also represents the primary 

constituent elements of proposed CH for OC coho salmon. Therefore, this analysis is sufficient for consultation 

of proposed CH as well. 

NMFS developed a list of Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) that are essential for the conservation of OC 

coho, and which are based on the life history of the coho salmon. These PCEs are: freshwater spawning sites, 

freshwater rearing sites, freshwater migration corridors, estuarine areas, nearshore marine areas, and offshore 

marine areas. These PCEs in concert with OC coho distribution data, were used to delineate the spatial extent of 

the critical habitat. The lateral extent of this designation is limited to the ordinary high water mark (i.e. bankfull 

elevation). For the purposes of this BA, the PCEs are cross referenced with the respective Habitat Indicators in 

Table 6 below. 

Table 6. OC Coho Critical Habitat Essential Habitat Features and Respective Habitat Indicators 

PCEs of OC coho 

Critical Habitat Habitat Indicator 

Freshwater Spawning 

Sites 

Change in Peak/Base Flows, Water Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity, Chemical 

Contamination/Nutrients, Substrate 

Freshwater Rearing 

Sites 

Change in Peak/Base Flows, Floodplain Connectivity, Water Temperature, 

Sediment/Turbidity, Chemical Contamination/Nutrients, Water Quality Indicators, 

Riparian Reserves, Substrate, Large Woody Debris, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, 

Width/depth Ratio, Off-channel Habitat, Streambank Condition 

Freshwater Migration 

Corridors 

Physical Barriers, Change in Peak/Base Flows, Water Temperature, 

Sediment/Turbidity, Chemical Contamination/Nutrients, Riparian Reserves, 

Substrate, Large Woody Debris, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, Width/depth Ratio, 

Floodplain Connectivity, Off-channel Habitat, Streambank Condition 

Estuarine Areas Physical Barriers, Water Temperature, Sediment/Turbidity, Chemical 

Contamination/Nutrients, Change in Peak/Base Flows, Water Quality Indicators, 

Riparian Reserves, Substrate, Large Woody Debris, Pool Frequency, Pool Quality, 

Width/depth Ratio, Floodplain Connectivity, Off-channel Habitat, Streambank 

Condition 

Nearshore Marine 

Areas 

N/A to RRSNF Actions 

Offshore Marine Areas N/A to RRSNF Actions 

SONCC Coho Salmon and Critical Habitat (Threatened) 

CCH for SONCC coho salmon was designated by NMFS on May 5, 1999 (64 FR 24049). CCH is defined in 

Section 3(5)(A) of the ESA as “the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species ... on 

which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which 

may require special management considerations or protection.” Critical habitat was designated (64 FR 24049, 

May 5, 1999) to include all river reaches accessible to listed coho salmon between Cape Blanco, Oregon, and 

Punta Gorda, California. Critical habitat consists of the water, substrate, and adjacent riparian zones of estuarine 

and riverine reaches (including off-channel habitats). Accessible reaches are those within the historical range of 

the ESU that can still be occupied by any life stage of coho salmon. Inaccessible reaches are those above specific 

dams or above long-standing, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence for at least several 

hundred years). Table 7 lists streams with SONCC coho presence and/or CCH within the Action Area.
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-33 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Table 7. SONCC Coho Critical Habitat within Action Area 

The list of Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) essential for the conservation of the SONCC coho ESU include, but are not 

limited to, spawning sites, food resources, water quality and quantity, and riparian vegetation (64 FR 24050, May 5, 1999). 

Specifically, the adjacent riparian area is defined as the area adjacent to a stream that provides the following functions: shade, 

sediment, nutrient or chemical regulation, streambank stability, and input of large woody debris or organic matter. NOAA 

Fisheries defines 10 essential habitat features to include substrates, water quality, water quantity, water temperature, water 

velocity, cover/shelter, food, riparian vegetation, space, and safe passage conditions (64 FR 24059, May 5, 1999). For the 

purposes of this BA, the 10 essential habitat features are cross referenced with the respective Habitat Indicators in Table 8 

below.

5th Field Watershed 

5th Field 

Watershed 

(acres) 

Miles of Occupied 

Coho Habitat 

(miles) 

CCH and EFH 

(miles) 

Althouse Creek 30,243 0.59 3.71 

Bear Creek 231,244 0 4.09 

Big Butte Creek 158,256 0 0 

Briggs Creek 43,758 0 0 

Chetco River 225,228 35.55 91.86 

Deer Creek 72,605 1.94 2.64 

East Fork Illinois River 57,779 7.71 12.72 

Elk Creek 85,476 4.90 12.86 

Elk River 58,398 21.55 25.91 

Euchre Creek-Frontal Pacific 56,329 0 0 

Headwaters Applegate Riv. 142,276 0 0 

Headwaters Rogue River 248,577 0 0 

Hellgate Canyon-Rogue 

River 

93,369 10.31 14.95 

Hunter Creek 28,458 0 0 

Indian Creek 82,267 No data No data 

Indigo Creek 48,984 0 0 

Josephine Ck-Illinois River 81,746 18.51 35.41 

Klondike Ck-Illinois River 67,123 30.87 52.57 

Lawson Ck-Illinois River 41,179 13.60 28.31 

Little Applegate River 72,295 0 15.20 

Little Butte Creek 238,882 7.12 18.80 

Lobster Creek 44,316 9.47 14.79 

Lower Applegate River 90,604 3.69 10.13 

Middle Applegate River 82,603 0 0.57 

North Fork Smith River 101,182 20.38 28.78 

Pistol River 67,285 0 21.71 

Rogue River 82,717 16.70 23.05 

Shasta Costa Ck-Rogue 

River 

45,026 9.35 16.39 

Silver Creek 51,620 0 0 

South Fork Rogue River 160,773 0 0 

Stair Creek-Rogue River 36,544 13.41 13.41 

Sucker Creek 61,515 11.75 12.83 

Upper Applegate River 52,296 10.85 22.30 

West Fork Illinois River 76,996 5.98 29.78 

Winchuck River 45,634 22.85 38.8 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-34 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Table 8. Essential Habitat Features and Respective Habitat Indicators of SONCC CCH 

Essential Feature of 

CCH Habitat Indicator 

Substrate Sediment, Pool Quality, Landslide Rates, Large Woody Debris 

Water Quality Temperature, Sediment, Road Density & Location 

Water Quantity Peak/base flows, Drainage Network Increase, Road Density and Location 

Water Temperature Temperature, Riparian Reserves, Refugia, Width/Depth Ratio, Streambank 

Condition, Peak/base flows, and Floodplain Connectivity. 

Water Velocity Peak/base flows, Drainage Network Increase, Floodplain Connectivity, Offchannel Habitat, Width/Depth Ratio, Road Density and Location, Streambank 

Condition, Large Woody Debris 

Cover/shelter Sediment, Pool Quality, Streambank Condition, Riparian Reserves, Refugia, Large 

Woody Debris, Off-channel Habitat, Width/Depth Ratio, Floodplain Connectivity 

Food Sediment, Riparian Reserves, Floodplain Connectivity, Large Woody Debris, 

Temperature 

Riparian Vegetation Riparian Reserves, Large Woody Debris, Disturbance History, Floodplain 

Connectivity 

Space Pool Quality, Off-channel Habitat, Floodplain Connectivity 

Safe Passage 

Conditions 

Refugia, Physical Barriers, Change in Peak/Base Flows 

Essential Fish Habitat 

Interim final rules for Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(b)) were 

published in the Federal Register/ Vol. 62, No. 244, December 19, 1997 and final rules published in the Federal 

Register/ Vol. 67, No. 12, January 17, 2002. These rules are pertinent to Chinook salmon and coho salmon 

habitat within the Southern Oregon Coastal Basin. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) has been defined by NMFS as 

“those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity.” This 

definition includes all waters historically used by anadromous salmonids of commercial value. EFH within the 

Action Area is the same as CCH. Table 5 displays streams with EFH within the Action Area by river miles. 

SONCC Chinook Salmon (sensitive) 

On the RRSNF, Southern Oregon and Northern California Coastal (SONCC) Chinook salmon occur within the 

Rogue, Pistol, Chetco, Winchuck, and Smith River basins, as well as several smaller coastal front drainages (e.g. 

Hunter Creek). The SONCC Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) was determined to be not warranted for 

listing under the Endangered Species Act, by the National Marine Fisheries Service on September 16, 1999 (64 

FR 50394). This ESU is listed as a Sensitive Species on the USFS Region 6 Special Status Species List. 

OC Steelhead (sensitive) 

On the RRSNF, Oregon Coast (OC) steelhead occurs within the South Fork Coquille, and Sixes River drainages. 

The OC steelhead trout distinct population segment (DPS) was proposed as threatened under the ESA on August 

9, 1996 (61 FR 41541), but was found not warranted for listing. OC steelhead is currently listed as a species of 

concern by NMFS, and as a Sensitive Species by the USFS Region 6. 

Other Species (sensitive) 

PC chum salmon, inland redband trout, pit sculpin, western ridged mussel, Klamath rim pebblesnail, highcap 

lanx, scale lanx, robust walker, pacific walker, and pristine springsnail, are not know to occur or have suitable 

habitat within proximity to any of the proposed changes included within any of the action alternatives. As such, a 

No Impact determination is rendered and these species will not be discussed further within this document.
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-35 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

V. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE AND POTENTIAL 

EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES 

A. Environmental Baseline – Forest-wide 

The Forest is located in several geologic provinces in SW Oregon: Klamath Mountains, Coastal Franciscan and 

Cascade Mountains (Western and High Cascades). Anadromous and resident fish populations have occupied the 

Forest lands for many thousands of years during periods of variable climate and periodic floods, large and smaller 

area fires, wind storms and tectonic movements that caused aquatic and riparian habitat changes. These fish 

inhabit diverse habitats on the Forest in streams, ponds, lakes, and reservoirs at elevations from near sea level to 

more than 5,000 feet elevation. Anadromous fish occupy at least 1,300 miles of streams and rivers on the Forest; 

including two races of Chinook salmon, coho salmon, two races of steelhead and sea-run cutthroat trout. Coho 

salmon and its critical habitat on the Forest are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act for the 

Southern Oregon/Northern California Coasts (SONCC) and Oregon Coast (OC) coho salmon Evolutionary 

Significant Units (ESU). Coho salmon and Chinook habitat on this Forest are listed as threatened for Essential 

Fish Habitat under the MSA. Resident trout and other species occupy approximately 2,000 miles of streams on 

the Forest. The preponderance of anadromous fish habitat is found in the western portion of the Forest – Siskiyou 

Mountains – due to natural and human-made migration barriers in portions of the eastside of the Forest, e.g., Lost 

Creek Dam and Applegate Dam. 

The Forest contains portions of six designated Wild and Scenic Rivers, including the: upper Rogue, lower Rogue, 

Chetco, Illinois, Elk, and North Fork Smith Rivers; five of which have fisheries Outstanding and Remarkable 

Values; excluding upper Rogue located above Lost Creek Lake reservoir, an anadromous fish barrier. Lake 

habitats are also abundant on the Forest, particularly at Fish Lake, Applegate Lake, and within the Sky Lakes and 

Red Buttes Wilderness Areas, where many high elevation lakes are stocked with trout. 

Native fish, particularly salmonids, on the Forest require cool clean water, gravels with little fine sediment for 

spawning, shade along streams from vegetation and diverse habitats for successful growth during periods of their 

life history in fresh water. Large wood plays several important roles in fish habitat: for shade along streams, large 

mass to create habitat when wood enters the water, and in the formation and maintenance of stream channels. 

Large wood also has an ecological role associated with slope stability, soil retention, stream channel scouring, 

organic matter for primary aquatic production and formation of large stream features (fans, wood complexes and 

blockages, large sediment deposits) during storm episodes. Fish habitat on the Forest is generally lacking in 

diversity and complexity where past management activities, e.g., wood removal and road building have simplified 

instream diversity. Here fish habitat is lacking the quality and quantity of pool habitat and spawning gravels 

expected within the range of historical conditions. Some areas, particularly in the Siskiyou Mountains, naturally 

lack the expected numbers of large wood pieces per mile due to channel steepness and intensity of storms. 

Historically in SW Oregon, fire, wind, floods and landslides have routinely changed in-stream habitats, with large 

changes occurring during episodic events. 

Comparing past stochastic episodes with management of the Forest the past several decades indicates a change of 

disturbance patterns from irregular and episodic to more chronic patterns of anthropogenic disturbance from 

timber harvest, mining, road construction and maintenance, livestock grazing, and suppression of fire. Timber 

harvest and associated road development and road traffic have greatly decreased since the mid to late 1980’s. 

Tree-growth and healing of eroded areas has passively recovered and placed stream networks in most watersheds 

on a recovery trajectory within the National Forest. Roads continue to have a chronic sediment and drainage 

effect on fish populations and water quality in many watersheds and mining instream is a chronic disturbance in 

many Klamath Mountain streams. High recreation use in specific local riparian areas also creates some chronic 

disturbance. Watershed restoration has occurred intensively on the Forest since the Northwest Forest Plan, 1994. 

Stream, riparian, and upland restoration is a process being implemented on high priority watersheds on the Forest. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-36 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

At the landscape scale, it is well documented that motorized routes modify the frequency, timing, and magnitude 

of disturbance to aquatic systems. The current motorized travel system on the Forest includes over 5,800 miles of 

motorized routes. Many of these routes are located within proximity to occupied fish habitat. The overriding 

negative effect of this motorized travel system on the fisheries resource is via sediment input to stream systems, 

Riparian Reserve fragmentation, and to a lesser degree fragmentation of aquatic habitats due to impassable or 

partially impassable road/stream crossings. These conditions have contributed to decreased distribution and 

abundance of native salmonid stocks, particularly anadromous salmon and steelhead. 

B. Potential Effects of the Proposed Alternatives 

The NMFS “matrix of pathways and indicators” (NMFS 1996), was used to help determine the effects of the 

Action Alternatives (Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5). This process was intended to be utilized when considering 

project level effects at the watershed scale. All Action Alternatives would result in a neutral effect to the 

following indicators: temperature, chemical contamination/nutrients, physical barriers, substrate, large woody 

debris, off-channel habitat, refugia, width/depth ratio, stream bank condition, floodplain connectivity, change in 

peak/base flows, increase in drainage network, road density, disturbance history, and Riparian Reserves. This is 

due to the project activities occurring at sites that are currently part of the RRSNF travel route network, and in 

general merely involve an administrative change in the type of use (e.g. mixed-use, non-motorized, etc.) that an 

existing route would receive. There is no ground disturbing action from these actions. Road maintenance 

currently occurs and will continue. Any ground disturbing activity that may occur in the upcoming years, i.e., 

culvert replacement, would be covered under a different effects analysis and consultation process. The only 

exception to this description involves an on-the-ground construction of the Penn Sled Trail (included in 

Alternatives 3 and 5) on the Siskiyou Mountains Ranger District, and the Woodruff trail connector (Alternative 3) 

on the Gold Beach Ranger District. Effects of project activities to the Sediment and Pool Frequency/Quality

indicator are disclosed below. 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National ForestTable 9. TMP Actions – Alternatives 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 – relative to Riparian Reserves and Coho Salmon Critical Habitat 

Activity Watershed ESU Total 

Units 

(miles/ 

acres) 

Units 

w/in 

Riparian 

Reserve 

Units 

outside 

RR 

Location 

in 

Watershed 

(lower, middle, 

upper)

Distance 

from 

Anad. 

Habitat 

Effect 

Det. 

Alte

tiv

No action Multiple Watersheds 

across the Forest 

All N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NE 1 

Close Areas to Motorized CrossCountry Travel Multiple Watersheds across the Forest SONCC, OC ~275,000 acres - - - - BE, NLAA 2, 3, Convert mtn. Level 1 to motorized trail 

Rogue River SONCC 3.77 0.75 3.02 Upper/mid 1.60 NE 3 

2.90 0.20 2.70 Upper/mid 2.40 NE 5 

Convert mtn. Level 1 to motorized trail 

Hunter Creek SONCC 2.68 0.39 2.29 Upper 11.50 NE 3, 

Convert mtn. Level 1 to motorized trail 

Lawson Ck-Illinois R SONCC 3.69 0 3.69 Upper 5.10 NE 3, 

Convert mtn. Level 1 to motorized trail 

Hellgate Canyon – Rogue River 

SONCC 0.29 0 0.29 Upper 1.20 NE 3, 

Convert mtn. Level 1 to motorized trail

Klondike Ck-Illinois R SONCC 0.76 0 0.76 Upper 1.25 NE 3 

Convert mtn. Level 1 to motorized trail

NF Smith River SONCC 2.72 0 2.72 Upper 0.70 NE 3 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

Rogue River SONCC 0.78 0 0.78 Middle 0.50 NE 5

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail Lawson Ck – Illinois R SONCC 

10.65 1.23 9.42 Mid/Low 0 NE 3 

28.02 4.76 23.26 Mid/Low 0 NE 4 14.27 2.59 11.68 Mid/Low 0 NE 5 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

Shasta Costa – Rogue R SONCC 0.73 0.08 0.65 Low 0 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

Hunter Creek SONCC 1.57 0 1.57 Upper 7.10 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

Pistol River SONCC 0.13 0 0.13 Upper 2.80 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

Chetco River SONCC 0.20 0 0.20 Upper 1.95 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

Indigo Creek SONCC 13.80 1.20 12.60 Up/Mid/Low 0 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

Briggs Creek SONCC 11.11 0.89 10.22 Upper/mid 6.70 NE 3, 

27.08 11.49 15.59 Up/Mid/Low 3.85 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail Silver Creek SONCC 

1.85 0.71 1.14 Middle 12.50 NE 3, 

11.14 1.78 9.36 Mid/Low 2.75 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

Sucker Creek SONCC 2.98 0.32 2.66 Upper 3.00 NE 3, 

6.49 1.01 5.48 Upper 3.00 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized use on an Indian Creek SONCC 1.08 0 1.08 Upper 1+ miles NE 3, 4
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Activity Watershed ESU Total 

Units 

(miles/ 

acres) 

Units 

w/in 

Riparian 

Reserve 

Units 

outside 

RR 

Location 

in 

Watershed 

(lower, middle, 

upper)

Distance 

from 

Anad. 

Habitat 

Effect 

Det. 

Alte

tiv

existing trail Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

S Fork Coquille OC 0.91 0.21 0.70 Middle 0.05* NE 4 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

Upper Applegate R SONCC 13.04 5.10 7.94 Middle 0 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized use on an existing trail 

Headwaters Applegate River 

SONCC 3.84 1.22 2.62 Upper 8.20 NE 3, 

SONCC 25.60 7.36 18.24 Upper 3.20 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized mixed use S. Fork Coquille OC 0.17 0 0.17 Middle 0.40 NE 4 Prohibit motorized mixed use Chetco River SONCC 12.51 0.52 11.99 Middle 0.05 NE 3, 4Prohibit motorized mixed use Josephine Ck – Illinois R SONCC 11.97 3.43 8.54 Lower 0 NE 3, 

7.45 1.73 5.72 Lower O NE 4 

Prohibit motorized mixed use Silver Creek SONCC 4.59 0 4.59 Upper 9.30 NE 4 Prohibit motorized mixed use Klondike Ck – Illinois R. SONCC 0.20 0 0.20 Upper 1.25 NE 4 Designate motorized mixed use Shasta Costa – Rogue R. SONCC 0.17 0.12 0.05 Lower 0.70 NE 3, Designate motorized mixed use S Fork Coquille OC 3.09 1.58 1.51 Upper 9.35 NE 3 Designate motorized mixed use W Fork Cow Creek OC 2.44 0.95 1.49 Upper 0 NE 3 Designate motorized mixed use Rogue River SONCC 0.14 0 0.14 Lower 0.10 NE 3, Designate motorized mixed use Headwaters Rogue River SONCC 5.72 3.72 2.00 Middle 20+ NE 3 Designate motorized mixed use S Fork Rogue River SONCC 16.21 2.44 13.77 Middle 20+ NE 3 Designate motorized mixed use Big Butte Creek SONCC 0.82 0.07 .75 Middle 10.8 NE 3 Designate motorized mixed use Little Butte Creek SONCC 8.24 0.80 7.44 Upper 4.40 NE 3 Prohibit motorized public use W. Fork Illinois SONCC 7.65 0.30 7.35 Middle 0.10 NE 3, 

16.69 0.30 16.39 Up/Mid/Low 0.15 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized public use Silver Creek SONCC 0.65 0.23 0.42 Middle 13.8 NE 3, 4Prohibit motorized public use Josephine Ck – Illinois R. SONCC 4.82 2.56 2.26 Mid/Low 0 NE 3, 

11.50 4.13 7.37 Mid/Low 0 NE 4 

Prohibit motorized public use Deer Creek SONCC 1.52 1.20 0.32 Lower 0 NE 3, Prohibit motorized public use Briggs Creek SONCC 0.32 0 0.32 Upper 8.10 NE 4 Prohibit motorized public use N Fork Smith River SONCC 15.89 1.17 14.72 Upper/Mid 0 NE 4 Prohibit motorized public use Chetco River SONCC 3.27 0 3.27 Upper/Mid 0.35 NE 4 Prohibit motorized public use Winchuck River SONCC 3.13 0 3.13 Middle 0.65 NE 4 Construct motorized trial Headwaters Applegate 

River 

SONCC 1.18 0 1.18 Middle 6.30 NE 3, 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Activity Watershed ESU Total 

Units 

(miles/ 

acres) 

Units 

w/in 

Riparian 

Reserve 

Units 

outside 

RR 

Location 

in 

Watershed 

(lower, middle, 

upper)

Distance 

from 

Anad. 

Habitat 

Effect 

Det. 

Alte

tiv

Construct motorized trial Rogue River SONCC 0.30 0 0.30 Middle 1.65 NE 3Develop Motorized Play Area Big Butte Creek SONCC 10 acres 0 0 Middle 11.00 NE 3 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-40 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

 The actions of the project can be divided into three Project Elements and are described 

below: 

1) Enact Forest-wide plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel 

Management Rule and current historical motorized use (Alternative 2, 3, 4, and 5). 

2) Close Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel (Alternatives 2, 3, 4, and 5).

3) Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an 

Existing Trail, Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit 

Motorized Public Use, and Construct Motorized Trail(Alternatives 3, 4, and 5). 

This analysis evaluates the potential direct and indirect effects of All Alternatives on SONCC coho, 

SONCC coho critical habitat, OC coho, OC coho critical habitat, coho and Chinook EFH, SONCC 

Chinook salmon, and OC steelhead. This analysis will discuss effects to CCH fish habitat for feasibility 

and readability, recognizing that CCH fully encompasses not only listed CCH, but also EFH and the 

distribution of SONCC Chinook salmon and OC steelhead within the project area. Project effects and 

ESA/EFH determinations for SONCC coho salmon, SONCC coho critical habitat, OC coho salmon, OC 

coho salmon critical habitat, and EFH are discussed in detail within the Fisheries Biological Assessment 

for the Motorized Vehicle Use Project (Brazier 2011). 

 

No Action Alternative 

Under the No Action Alternative, no administrative or on-the-ground changes to the existing 

transportation system would occur. Current aquatic habitat conditions and trends would continue. The 

Rogue River LRMP (1990), Siskiyou LRMP (1989), and Northwest Forest Plan (1994) would continue to 

guide land management actions across the Forest. The direction provided within these plans is adequate 

to protect and maintain aquatic biota populations and habitat throughout the Forest. Any impact to the 

aquatic biota populations and habitat from the existing route network would continue. Route proliferation 

would continue to result within areas where cross-country travel is permitted. 

Effects Common to All Action Alternatives (2, 3, 4, and 5) 

Enact Forest-wide plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel Management Rule and 

current historical motorized use 

These Forest Plan amendments are exclusively an administrative action. As such, there is no causal

mechanism from these amendments to any of the habitat indicators. There is no on-the-ground 

construction, restoration or rehabilitation action included in this action. 

Closing Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel 

There is no causal mechanism from Closing Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel to any of the 

indicators, (except for Sediment and Pool Character and Quality) from this action since this action 

involves an administrative change in the type of use that certain areas of the Forest would receive. There 

is no on-the-ground construction, restoration or rehabilitation action included in this action. The 

Motorized Vehicle Use Project would eliminate cross country motorized travel across the Forest, with the 

exception of the existing Woodruff Play Area on the High Cascades Ranger District. This action would 

affect approximately 275,000 acres of land where cross country motorized travel is currently allowed. 

These areas are scattered across the Forest, and occur within and outside of anadromous fish occupied 

watersheds. Although the majority of the acres are located on the High Cascades Ranger District, 

upstream of permanent man-made (e.g. Lost Creek Lake Dam) and natural (Butte Falls) barriers, well 

upstream of CCH. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-41 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Sediment and Pool Character and Quality 

Closing Areas to Cross-Country Motorized Travel in watersheds that do contain CCH provides a 

mechanism for potential reduction in upland erosion and sediment influx into stream networks. This 

sediment reduction could lead to improvement and/or maintenance of existing CCH, although the benefit 

would probably be discountable. Sediment reduction from Closing Areas to Cross-Country Motorized 

Travel could lead to improvement and/or maintenance of existing CCH. Though these benefits are not 

expected to occur at magnitudes where the effects are measurable, or discernable when compared to the 

ongoing natural sediment production, and that which will continue to occur as a result of the remaining 

road and trail system. 

Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an Existing Trail, 

Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use

These actions occur on all Ranger Districts and are in proximity to SONCC and OC CCH. There is no 

causal mechanism for Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on 

an Existing Trail, Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized 

Public Use to all the Habitat Indicators and Watershed Condition Indicators because the affected routes 

are currently part of the RRSNF travel route network, and the action only involves an administrative 

change to the type of use (e.g. mixed-use, non-motorized, etc.) that an existing route would receive. 

There is no ground disturbing action from this activity. Road maintenance currently occurs and will 

continue. Any ground disturbing activity that may occur in the upcoming years, i.e., culvert replacement, 

would be covered under a different effects analysis and consultation process.

Alternative 2 - Direct and Indirect Effects 

There are no direct effects to CCH from any action included in Alternative 2, because no ground 

disturbing action would occur within CCH. 

Indirect effects to CCH from Alternative 2 are fully disclosed above within the “Effects Common to All 

Action Alternatives” section. 

Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) - Direct and Indirect Effects 

There are no direct effects to CCH from any action included in Alternative 3, because no ground 

disturbing action would occur within CCH. 

Indirect effects to CCH from Enact Forest-wide plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the 

Travel Management Rule and current historical motorized use, Closing Areas to Cross-Country 

Motorized Travel, and Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on 

an Existing Trail, Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized 

Public Use, are fully disclosed above within the “Effects Common to All Action Alternatives” section. 

Construct Motorized Trail 

Woodruff Trail Connector – Rogue River Watershed

This action would occur within the Rogue River watershed, west of Quosatana Creek. This action would 

potentially create a long-term sediment source within the Quosatana Creek subwatershed, with potential to 

indirectly impact water quality within a tributary to Quosatana Creek, and to a lesser extent mainstem 

Quosatana Creek. The nearest CCH habitat is located 1.65 miles downstream of the proposed route, within 

Quosatana Creek. The influx of additional sediment into tributaries of and mainstem Quosatana Creek could 

result in a persistent negative impact; though these effects would be immeasurable and indiscernible due to the 

existing roaded nature of the subwatershed, and its existing sediment load. 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-42 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Suspended and deposited sediment and associated increased turbidity at high enough levels could impair 

essential behavior patterns (e.g. feeding) and influence egg to fry survival and smolt growth (Suttle et al. 

2004). 

Forest Trail #957 (Penn Sled) – Upper Applegate River Watershed

The trail is in a low precipitation area with no riparian crossings. The new trail segment does not cross 

Riparian Reserve, and would have no impact on water quality (Joplin 2011). 

This action would have no direct or indirect effect on CCH, as it is located upstream of the Applegate 

Dam; which is permanent barrier to anadromous fish species. Consequently, the Penn Sled Trail is 

located outside the range of CCH. 

Alternative 4 - Direct and Indirect Effects 

There are no direct effects to CCH from any action included in Alternative 4, because no ground 

disturbing action would occur within CCH. 

Indirect effects to CCH from Enact Forest-wide plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the 

Travel Management Rule and current historical motorized use, Closing Areas to Cross-Country 

Motorized Travel, and Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on 

an Existing Trail(excluding trail #920 which is discussed below), Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, 

Designate Motorized Mixed Use, Prohibit Motorized Public Use, are fully disclosed above within the 

“Effects Common to All Action Alternatives” section. 

Prohibit Motorized Use of an Existing Trail 

Forest Trail #920 (Mule Creek) – Upper Applegate River Watershed

Trail #920 follows the majority of the main channel of Mule Creek up to the headwaters. This results in 

abundant tributary crossings near their confluence with the mainstem. The trail also intercepts many first 

order tributaries on its way to join Trail #919 at the ridge. The Squaw-Elliott Watershed Analysis states 

that Mule Creek typically becomes dry by June of most years and remains so until the autumn rains. This 

would tend to reduce the level of effect of motorized impact; however, motorized use following the 

channel so closely is inconsistent with ACS objectives protecting stream bank integrity and aquatic 

vegetation. Mule Creek also provides anadromous habitat near the confluence with the Applegate River; 

trail generated sediment is likely to be readily flushed into anadromous habitat. Prohibiting motorized use 

would alleviate some stream channel degradation, even if pedestrian use continues (Joplin 2011). 

Elimination of motorized use along Trail #920 could result in an immeasurable indirect beneficial effect 

to CCH within Mule Creek, associated with reduced sediment influx. Though the continued presence of 

the trail and use by non-motorized traffic would continue create sediment, similar to the existing 

condition. 

Alternative 5 (Preferred Alternative) - Direct and Indirect Effects 

There are no direct effects to CCH from any action included in Alternative 5, because no ground 

disturbing action would occur within CCH. 

Indirect effects to CCH from Alternative 5 are fully disclosed above within the “Effects Common to All 

Action Alternatives” section. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-43 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

VI. Cumulative Effects 

Cumulative effects are those that result from the incremental accumulations of all land management 

activities across all ownerships. On the RRSNF, historic land management activities such as hydraulic 

mining, diking, channelization, riparian timber harvest, dam construction, large wood removal, flow 

alteration, floodplain development, and road construction have had an enduring and significant impact on 

salmonid production. Since adoption of the Northwest Forest Plan in 1994, many of the streams on 

public land are likely recovering from prior management activities due to current management guidelines 

and policies. For example, Gallo et al. (2005) and Reeves et al. (2006) assessed 250 sixth-field 

watersheds in the Pacific Northwest and found a general increase in stream habitat quality in the first 10 

years after the adoption of the Northwest Forest Plan, particularly in key watersheds and late-successional 

reserves (LSR). 

Several recent past and foreseeable future projects on the RRSNF have dealt with road generated 

sediment, and sediment influx into fish bearing habitats. These include the Applegate-McKee Legacy 

Roads Project (2010), Copper-Salmon Legacy Roads Project (planning in progress), Sucker Creek Legacy 

Roads Project (field reconnaissance in progress), and multiple small scale road decommission projects, as 

well as ongoing road maintenance activities. The beneficial effects of these projects on fish habitat would 

be cumulative with the expected reduction of sedimentation within stream channels and reduce upland 

erosion rates, which are associated with the elimination of cross-country travel within all action 

alternatives of the Motorized Vehicle Use Project. 

VII. Comparison of Alternatives 

Table 10. Comparison of Effects to CCH for Each Alternative by Activity Type 

Alternative 

Close 

area to 

Motorized 

Crosscountry 

Travel 

(acres) 

Convert 

ML1 

Road to 

Motorized 

Trail 

(miles) 

Prohibit 

Motorized 

use of an 

existing 

Trail 

(miles) 

Prohibit 

motorized 

Mixed 

Use 

(miles) 

Designate 

Motorized 

Mixed 

Use 

(miles) 

Prohibit 

Motorized 

Public 

Use 

(miles) 

Construct 

Motorized 

Trail 

(miles) 

Develop 

Motorized 

Play Area 

(acres) 

1 Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral 

2 Beneficial Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral 

3 Beneficial Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Negative Neutral 

4 Beneficial Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral 

5 Beneficial Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral 

 

The No Action Alternative would not alter the existing travel management system on the Forest. Thus, a 

neutral effect to TES aquatic species or habitat would occur. 

All of the Action Alternatives, 2 through 5, would have a similar neutral effect from “Enact Forest-wide 

plan amendments to make the plans consistent with the Travel Management Rule and current historical 

motorized use” and Convert Maintenance Level 1 Road to Motorized Trail, Prohibit Motorized Use on an 

Existing Trail, Prohibit Motorized Mixed Use, Designate Motorized Mixed Use, and Prohibit Motorized 

Public Use. These Forest Plan amendments are exclusively an administrative action. There is no on-theground construction, restoration or rehabilitation included in this action. The affected routes are currently 

part of the RRSNF travel route network, and the action only involves an administrative change to the type 

of use (e.g. mixed-use, non-motorized, etc.) that an existing route would receive. Road maintenance 

currently occurs and will continue. Any ground disturbing activity that may occur in the upcoming years, 

i.e., culvert replacement, would be covered under a different effects analysis and consultation process. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-44 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

All of the Action Alternatives, 2 through 5, would have similar beneficial effects to TES aquatic species 

from the “close area to motorized cross-country travel” action. The primary effect under these 

alternatives would be a decrease in upland erosion and sediment influx into stream channels, associated 

with the elimination of cross-country motorized travel across the Forest. 

Specific to Alternative 3, the construction of new motorized trail in the Quosatana Creek subwatershed 

would result in a new sediment source. Though, given the extensive roaded nature of the subwatershed, 

sediment effects from this new trail segment on TES aquatic species would be immeasurable and 

indiscernible, given the ongoing sediment load within the subwatershed. 

Specific to Alternative 4, elimination of motorized use along Trail #920 could result in an immeasurable 

beneficial effect to coho critical habitat within Mule Creek, associated with reduced sediment influx; 

though the continued presence of the trail and use by non-motorized traffic would maintain the current 

sediment regime, similar to the existing condition. 

Effects to the TES aquatic species are similar under all of the Action Alternatives, 2 through 5. This is 

due to many of the same site specific elements being included in all of these alternatives. The differences 

in activities between Action Alternatives are not large enough to create any measurable difference on TES 

aquatic species and habitat. 

VIII. Conclusions of Determinations 

Alternative 1 – No Action 

Alternative 1 would have no direct, indirect or cumulative effects to SONCC coho salmon, SONCC coho 

CH, OC coho salmon, OC coho CH, SONCC Chinook salmon, OC steelhead, PC chum salmon, inland 

redband trout, pit sculpin, western ridged mussel, Klamath rim pebblesnail, highcap lanx, scale lanx, 

robust walker, pacific walker, or the pristine springsnail. 

Alternative 2 

Based on a review of best available science and my professional judgment, I find indirect and cumulative 

effects from Alternative 2 would result in positive effects to OC and SONCC coho salmon and OC and 

SONCC coho salmon critical habitat on the RRSNF. Thus, a Beneficial, May Affect, Not Likely to 

Adversely Affect determination is rendered for OC coho salmon, and OC coho salmon critical habitat 

and a Beneficial, May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect determination is rendered for SONCC 

coho salmon, and SONCC coho salmon critical habitat. This determination is exclusively linked to the 

elimination of cross-country motorized travel within the boundaries of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest (RRSNF), and the potential decrease in upland erosion and sediment influx into stream channels 

that could result from this action. Further, Alternative 2 would create a Beneficial Impact to SONCC 

Chinook salmon, and OC steelhead. This Alternative would have No Impact to PC chum salmon, inland 

redband trout, pit sculpin, western ridged mussel, Klamath rim pebblesnail, highcap lanx, scale lanx, 

robust walker, pacific walker, or the pristine springsnail. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-45 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Alternative 3 – Proposed Action 

I also find that indirect and cumulative effects from Alternative 3 would result in positive effects to OC 

and SONCC coho salmon and OC and SONCC coho salmon critical habitat on the RRSNF. Thus, a 

Beneficial, May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect determination is rendered for OC coho salmon, 

and OC coho salmon critical habitat and a Beneficial, May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect

determination is rendered for SONCC coho salmon, and SONCC coho salmon critical habitat. This 

determination is exclusively linked to the elimination of cross-country motorized travel within the 

boundaries of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF), and the potential decrease in upland 

erosion and sediment influx into stream channels that could result from this action. Further, Alternative 3 

would create a Beneficial Impact to SONCC Chinook salmon, and OC steelhead. This Alternative 

would have No Impact to PC chum salmon, inland redband trout, pit sculpin, western ridged mussel, 

Klamath rim pebblesnail, highcap lanx, scale lanx, robust walker, pacific walker, or the pristine 

springsnail. 

Construction of the Woodruff Trail connector would create a new sediment source within the Quosatana 

Creek subwatershed, which is CCH and occupied by SONCC Chinook salmon. Accordingly this action 

May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect SONCC coho salmon and SONCC coho CH. Further, this 

action May Impact Individuals or Habitat, But Will Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards 

Federal Listing or Cause a Loss of Viability to the Population or Species (SONCC Chinook salmon). 

Alternative 4 

I also find that indirect and cumulative effects from Alternative 4 would result in positive effects to OC 

and SONCC coho salmon and OC and SONCC coho salmon critical habitat on the RRSNF. Thus, a 

Beneficial, May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect determination is rendered for OC coho salmon, 

and OC coho salmon critical habitat and a Beneficial, May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect

determination is rendered for SONCC coho salmon, and SONCC coho salmon critical habitat. This 

determination is exclusively linked to the elimination of cross-country motorized travel within the 

boundaries of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF) and prohibiting motorized use on 

Forest Trail #920 within Mule Creek, and the potential decrease in upland erosion and sediment influx 

into stream channels that could result from this action. Further, Alternative 4 would create a Beneficial 

Impact to SONCC Chinook salmon, and OC steelhead. This Alternative would have No Impact to PC 

chum salmon, inland redband trout, pit sculpin, western ridged mussel, Klamath rim pebblesnail, highcap 

lanx, scale lanx, robust walker, pacific walker, or the pristine springsnail. 

Alternative 5-Preferred Alternative 

I also find that indirect and cumulative effects from Alternative 5 would result in positive effects to OC 

and SONCC coho salmon and OC and SONCC coho salmon critical habitat on the RRSNF. Thus, a 

Beneficial, May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect determination is rendered for OC coho salmon, 

and OC coho salmon critical habitat and a Beneficial, May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect

determination is rendered for SONCC coho salmon, and SONCC coho salmon critical habitat. This 

determination is exclusively linked to the elimination of cross-country motorized travel within the 

boundaries of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest (RRSNF), and the potential decrease in upland 

erosion and sediment influx into stream channels that could result from this action. Further, Alternative 5 

would create a Beneficial Impact to SONCC Chinook salmon, and OC steelhead. This Alternative 

would have No Impact to PC chum salmon, inland redband trout, pit sculpin, western ridged mussel, 

Klamath rim pebblesnail, highcap lanx, scale lanx, robust walker, pacific walker, or the pristine 

springsnail. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-46 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Table 11. Summary of Conclusion of Effects 

Species Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4 Alt. 5 

SONCC coho NE B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA 

SONCC coho CH NE B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA 

OC coho NE B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA 

OC coho CH NE B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA 

EFH – coho NE B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA 

EFH – Chinook NE B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA B-NLAA 

SONCC Chinook NI BI MIIH BI BI 

OC steelhead NI BI BI BI BI 

PC Chum NI NI NI NI NI 

Inland redband trout NI NI NI NI NI 

Pit sculpin NI NI NI NI NI 

Western ridged mussel NI NI NI NI NI 

Klamath rim 

pebblesnail 

NI NI NI NI NI 

Highcap lanx NI NI NI NI NI 

Scale lanx NI NI NI NI NI 

Robust walker NI NI NI NI NI 

Species Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4 Alt. 5 

Pacific walker NI NI NI NI NI 

Pristine springsnail NI NI NI NI NI 

NE = No Effect 

B-NLAA = Beneficial, Not Likely to Adversely Affect 

NI = No Impact 

MIIH = May Impact Individuals or Habitat, But Will Not Likely Contribute to a Trend Towards Federal Listing or Cause a Loss 

of Viability to the Population or Species 

BI = Beneficial Impact 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-47 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

IX. Literature Cited 

Gallo, K, S. Lanigan, P. Eldred, S. N. Gordon, and C. Moyer. 2005. Northwest Forest Plan—the first 10 

years (1994–2003): preliminary assessment of the condition of watersheds. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR647. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 

133 p.

Joplin, M. 2011. Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, Travel Management-Hydrologic Analysis. 

NMFS 2008. Biological Opinion for Fish Habitat Restoration Activities in Oregon and Washington, CY 

2007-2012. NMFS No: 2008/03505. 150 pages. 

NMFS 2006. Biological Opinion for Fish Habitat Restoration Activities in Oregon and Washington, CY 

2007-2012. NMFS No: P/NWR/2006/06530. 145 pages. 

NMFS 1996. Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped 

Actions at the Watershed Scale. Prepared by: The National Marine Fisheries Service, Environmental and 

Technical Services Division, Habitat Conservation Branch. 32 pages. 

Reeves, G. H., J. E. Williams, K. M. Burnett, and K. Gallo. 2006. The aquatic conservation strategy of the 

Northwest Forest Plan. Conservation Biology 20:319-329. 

Suttle, K. B., M. E. Power, J. M. Levine, and C. McNeely. 2004. How fine sediment in riverbeds impairs 

growth and survival of juvenile salmonids. Ecological Applications 14:969–974. 

[USDA FS] United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 1994. Northwest Forest Plan 

Record of Decision, Portland, Oregon. 

USDA FS. 1990. Rogue River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Medford, OR. 

USDA FS. 1989. Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. Grants Pass, OR. 

USFWS 1997. Biological Opinion for Programmatic Aquatic Habitat Restoration Activities in Oregon 

and Washington. 8330.F0055(07). 258 pages. 

 
Draft Supplemental EIS APPENDIX G Page G-48 

Aquatics and Fisheries Species Accounts 

Motorized Vehicle Use on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

This page is intentionally left blank