United States 

Department of

Agriculture

Forest

Service

Pacific Northwest 

Region

March 2014

RECORD OF DECISION

36 CFR 218 Objection Process Draft

Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Powers Ranger District

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Coos County, Oregon

Information Contact:

Wesley H. Crum, Forester

42861 Highway 242

Powers, OR 97466

Phone (541) 439-6200
VICINITY MAPS

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, 

age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, 

political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases 

apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, 

audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to 

USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or 

(202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

OREGON

CALIFORNIA

Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest

18

07

06

31

28

30

11

18

19

27

04

12

01

13

05

19

34

16

27

17

31

08

22

28

15

24

32

23

25

13

09

29

22

16

34

24

14

26

03

21

29

35

36

02

33 35

23

24 20

26

26

14

23

21

36

25

20

30

10

33 35

36

11

25

36 32

13

25

17

12

02

14

01

23

11 12

26

35

01

31

02

30

19

18

07

06

07

06

15

10

22

27

34

Ashland

§ ̈¦5

T.39S.

T.40S.

R.1W. R.1E.

Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest

Klamath

National

Forest

Mt. Ashland Ski Area

The U.S. Depart ment of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discimination

in all its programs and activities on the base of race, color, national

orgin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation,

or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.)

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication

of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should

contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). 

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil 

Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence 

Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964

(voice and TDD). USDA is an equal oppotunity provider and employer.

Printed on recycled paper
RECORD OF DECISION

36 CFR 218 Objection Process Draft

Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Final Environmental Impact Statement

Powers Ranger District

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Coos County, Oregon

March 2014

Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

Responsible Official: Rob MacWhorter, Forest Supervisor

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

For Further Information Jessie Berner, District Ranger or

Contact: Wesley H. Crum, Project Leader

42861 Highway 242

Powers OR 97466

Phone: (541) 439-6200

Project Website: http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/fs-usda-pop.php/?project=33418
Record of Decision

Eden Ridge Timber Sales

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ ROD – 1

Project Location ........................................................................................................................................ ROD – 1

Background ............................................................................................................................................... ROD – 1

Purpose and Need .................................................................................................................................... ROD – 1

Project Design Objectives ......................................................................................................................... ROD – 2

MY DECISION ........................................................................................................................................... ROD – 2

Description of My Decision ........................................................................................................................ ROD – 3

Summary – Modified Alternative 2 ............................................................................................................. ROD – 6

RATIONALE FOR MY DECISION ............................................................................................................ ROD – 6

Response to Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................... ROD – 7

Response to Significant Issues ................................................................................................................. ROD – 8

Other Issues............................................................................................................................................... ROD – 12

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED .............................................................................................................. ROD – 12

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................. ROD – 14

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT .......................................................................................................................... ROD – 14

FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................................. ROD – 15

Forest Plan Consistency (NFMA) .............................................................................................................. ROD – 15

Other Legal Requirements and Policies .................................................................................................... ROD – 17

IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................................................................................. ROD – 18

Process for Change during Implementation .............................................................................................. ROD – 19

PREDECISIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW (OBJECTION) .............................................................. ROD – 19

ATTACHMENTS

A Implementation Strategy

B Project Design Criteria and Required Mitigation Measures

C Monitoring Plan
Record of Decision ROD - 1 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

INTRODUCTION

This draft1 Record of Decision (ROD) documents my decision and rationale for the selection of a course of action to be 

implemented for Eden Ridge Timber Sales. The Eden Ridge Timber Sales Final Environmental Impact Statement

(FEIS) was issued in March 2014, and is incorporated by reference. The FEIS documents and analyzes a proposal to 

apply silvicultural treatments within the 6,516-acre Eden Ridge Planning Area. Treatments include variable density 

thinning and other silvicultural treatments. Treatments were designed to control stocking and improve forest health and 

resiliency, contribute towards commercial timber volume from Matrix lands, and improve riparian conditions for the 

benefit of multiple species.

In this Record of Decision (ROD) I explain my decision and the rationale for my selection for implementation of the Eden 

Ridge Timber Sales. I came to my decision after careful review of the public comments, the FEIS, specialist reports,

related scientific literature, and the 1989 Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Siskiyou 

Forest Plan), as amended.

The FEIS was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the regulations for 

implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508; 36 CFR 220), including allied Federal 

environmental laws and regulations.

Project Location

The Eden Ridge Planning Area is approximately 4 miles southeast of the city of Powers, Coos County, Oregon. The 

legal description is: Township 31 South, Range 10 West, Sections 9, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 29 and 30; and 

Township 31 South, Range 11 West, Sections 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27; Willamette Meridian. Elevations range 

from 2,080 to 3,540 feet. 

Background

The Eden Ridge Planning Area has a unique history. Originally included in the C.A. Smith Lumber and Manufacturing 

Company holdings, the area played a role in the economic development of the Coos Bay area. By the late 19th century, 

numerous small rail road lines, many with wooden rails, had been constructed to assist in transporting the timber and 

coal to the sea port at Coos Bay. Camps moved with logging operations and by 1936, a second camp at Doe Swamp 

(within the Planning Area) was in operation with a capacity of 400 men. This camp was run until 1941. As the logging 

operations drew to a close, much of the rail lines were removed and salvaged, but traces of the rail lines, camps and skid 

trails still remain.

During the Depression, many northwest timber owners would abandon cutover lands to reduce their tax burden. In 

1933, rather than abandon their lands, the Coos Bay Lumber Company proposed to convey their lands to the Forest 

Service. The Eden Ridge Planning Area lands were relinquished to the Siskiyou National Forest between 1938 and 

1941. The clear-cut stands regenerated and are currently 60 to 75 years old. Dense tree stocking and inter-tree 

competition for resources is occurring. In small portions of the Planning Area, two tree pathogens are present: PortOrford-cedar root disease (Phytophthora lateralis) and laminated root rot (Phellinus weirii).

Purpose and Need

The overall Purpose and Need of the Eden Ridge Timber Sales Project is to implement the Siskiyou Plan, as amended. 

Specifically, this project is designed to address the following: 1) improve the overall forest vigor and resiliency; 2)

contribute commercial timber to the Probable Sale Quantity (PSQ) and 3) restore aquatic conditions to trend toward and 

meet the intent of Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives in the long term. The project occurs within two land 

allocations - Matrix and Riparian Reserve.

 

1 This Record of Decision is a “draft” (a decision has not been made and this ROD has not been signed) per predecisional 

administrative review regulations at 36 CFR 218, effective March 27, 2013.
Record of Decision ROD - 2 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Matrix

The Planning Area is primarily designated Matrix which emphasizes obtaining a full yield of timber within the capability of 

the land. Most scheduled timber harvest and other silvicultural activities would be conducted in that portion of the Matrix 

with suitable forest lands (NW Forest Plan, page C-39). 

Improvement of Overall Forest Vigor and Resiliency – There is a need to reduce stand densities through 

intermediate harvest thinning treatments to sustain or increase tree growth and improve forest vigor and resiliency. 

Density management would release remaining trees from inter-tree competition for sunlight, water and soil nutrients 

when compared to untreated areas. Minor portions of the Planning Area infected with root diseases would be managed 

to harvest trees predisposed to pathogen infection and retain or plant resistant tree species to improve forest health.

Contribution of Commercial Timber to the Probable Sale Quantity – Proposed candidate stands are primarily 

allocated to Matrix and contribute to the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest Probable Sale Quantity (PSQ). PSQ is 

the estimated output of commercial timber and other commodities assigned to the Forest under the 1994 Northwest 

Forest Plan.

Riparian Reserve

There is a need to restore late-successional forest habitat near and adjacent to streams to benefit aquatic and riparian 

dependent species.

Maintain and Restore Riparian Reserves - Meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives – There is a need to

accelerate the development of late-successional stand conditions, such as older forest stand characteristics, increase 

conifer growth rates and provide for larger remnant conifers and hardwoods. There is a need to treat vegetation within 

the Riparian Reserves to meet the intent of Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives and lead to improved conditions in 

the long term. Many riparian areas are currently dominated by smaller diameter Douglas-fir and some hardwoods. Most 

are lacking adequate amounts of large wood material, downed logs, and large tree structure. Like treatment in the 

uplands, thinning treatments of these areas would reduce competition on the retained (residual) trees for light, nutrients, 

water and growing space. These residual trees would develop larger canopies, display better vigor and put on diameter 

growth faster than if left untreated.

Project Design Objectives

The project and its activities were designed to:

 Minimize soil impacts (erosion, compaction and/or displacement);

 Minimize damage to residual trees during treatment;

 Reduce the risk of effects from insect and disease infestations;

 Minimize or reduce the potential for high severity, stand replacement wildfires; 

 Maintain and restore (improve) aquatic conditions in terms of attainment of Aquatic Conservation Strategy 

Objectives;

 Minimize adverse effects, including cumulative effects, on all other resources;

 Provide wood products for local and regional markets (including firewood); and

 Be an operational and economically sustainable project for this and future entries.

MY DECISION

After careful consideration of analyses, applicable laws, and public comments, I have decided to select Alternative 2

with modification as described in the FEIS for implementing management objectives in the Eden Ridge Planning Area 

(FEIS pages II-35 through II-43, and including all Project Design Criteria (FEIS pages II-25 through II-34), Mitigation 

Measures (FEIS pages II-58 through II-69, and the Monitoring Framework described on pages II-69 through II-72). My 

decision is based on information contained in the Project Record, the Eden Ridge Timber Sales FEIS and the effects 

analysis described in chapter III, resource specialist reports and the management requirements of applicable laws and 

policies. Commercial harvest treatments will include variable density thinning techniques and other connected actions 

on approximately 3,310 acres of second growth conifer stands.
Record of Decision ROD - 3 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

I am making modifications to Alternative 2 based on public and other agencies comments, as well as Interdisciplinary 

Team recommendations regarding new classified roads located in sensitive areas, primarily associated with the Coal 

Creek subwatershed. These modifications, i.e., decreasing the miles of road construction, will change access 

opportunities, and therefore necessitates modification of certain units and the anticipated logging system. Commercial 

and other silvicultural treatments and connected actions associated with my decision are detailed in ROD 

Attachment A; Tables ROD A-1 through 3, and displayed on Map ROD A-1. 

Based on public comments and recommendations from my resource specialists, I requested Alternative 2 be modified to

reduce or eliminate hydrologic and soil impacts caused by units located in sensitive watershed areas (identified in FEIS 

Table III-7, Hydrologic Condition issue), and from roads (new Classified or temporary) that cross concern areas (identified 

in FEIS Table III-18, Soils, Geology and Site Productivity issue). A Core Interdisciplinary Team and the District Ranger 

reviewed each road segment (see analysis contained in Attachment A, Table ROD A-2) and its associated units which 

resulted in the following modifications to FEIS Alternative 2:

Modification 1: Remove – Classified road segments Q1, Q2, Q3, P4 and temporary road Q4

Modification 2: Change yarding systems for Units 302, 304, 306, and 308 to helicopter

Modification 3: Change yarding system for Units 305 and 307 to skyline (now yarded as one unit)

Modification 4: Remove small portion of Unit 301 (4 acres) below lower switchback of Road 50000290

Modification 5: Remove Classified road segment W

Modification 6: Change yarding system for Unit 327 to helicopter

Modification 7: Change portion of Unit 326, adding to portion to Unit 328 as skyline yarding system; 

Modification 8: Change the yarding system in a portion of Unit 325 associated with Classified road segment X, to a 

new Unit 325b, with a skyline yarding system (to correct an error on the map); Unit 325a now 

reduced with ground based yarding system

Modification 9: Remove Classified road segment Z

Modification 10: Change yarding system for Unit 334 from ground based to skyline (to existing road)

Specifically, these modifications to Alternative 2 will: 

 reduce the total treated acreage by 4 acres;

 eliminate 1.33 miles (in six segments) of proposed Classified system road in sensitive areas, all within the Coal 

Creek subwatershed;

 eliminate 0.25 mile of proposed temporary road in a sensitive area within Coal Creek subwatershed;

 change some areas of ground based yarding to less impact skyline or helicopter yarding systems;

 change the acres by anticipated logging system to a higher percentage of skyline systems, lower the amount of 

ground based systems, and add acres of helicopter yarding; and

 reduce the amount of road density increase within the Coal Creek subwatershed.

Description of My Decision

The original Alternative 2 (the Proposed Action) was developed by identifying treatment opportunities within the Planning 

Area using an Interdisciplinary Team process. Vegetative management needs and silvicultural opportunities were 

identified and field verified. Treatments of proposed candidate stands were analyzed for compliance with Forest Plan 

Standards and Guidelines and other laws and policies.

The Proposed Action was designed to address and maximize attainment of the Purpose and Need detailed in FEIS 

Chapter I. Alternative 2 responds to the goals and objectives outlined by the Forest Plan for the Siskiyou National 

Forest, as amended by the 1994 Northwest Forest Plan, and helps move the Planning Area toward desired conditions 

described in that plan, as well as specific desired conditions developed for this Planning Area and this project (see FEIS 

Chapter I, Section C, 3). The modifications made to Alternative 2 will reduce or eliminate impacts to areas associated 

with Significant Issues.

Under my decision overall forest health will be improved by stimulating natural processes that encourage more stable 

and resilient forest vegetative conditions, stand densities and species composition will be managed, and a sustainable 

yield of commercial timber and other commodities will be provided to the surrounding communities. 
Record of Decision ROD - 4 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Commercial treatments will involve harvest of conifers with diameters 7 inches and larger DBH which is a viable product 

size under current and anticipated market conditions. Estimated commercial volume could average 8 to 20 thousand 

board feet (MBF) per acre. Other wood product commodities are anticipated including biomass (chips) and firewood.

Treatments will occur within the South Fork Coquille River and the Middle Fork Coquille River 5th-Field watersheds, and 

the Lower Rock Creek, Myrtle Creek, Headwaters South Fork Coquille River, Coal Creek, and Mill Creek 6th field 

watersheds. As a result of my decision, commercial timber harvest could yield an estimated 50 million board feet2 and 

will be implemented utilizing multiple timber sale contracts over approximately 5 years. 

Silvicultural Treatments

Site-specific, integrated silvicultural prescriptions will be developed for the project. Silvicultural prescriptions will describe 

specifically desired conditions of treated stands and associated stand structures, tree species composition, canopy 

retention, tree spacing or basal area retention, fuels treatments, snag numbers (where present), large woody material 

and other key stand components. Final silvicultural prescriptions will be approved by Region 6 certified silviculturists 

working closely with resource specialists to ensure integrated resource objectives are met. MAP ROD A-1 (in ROD 

Attachment A) shows the general locations and descriptions of silvicultural treatments associated with my decision.

The primary silvicultural treatment is to control dense stocking conditions through variable density thinning treatments 

(VDT) to improve overall forest health, vigor and resiliency. Silvicultural treatments also include management of two 

forest pathogens, Port-Orford-cedar root disease (Phytophthora lateralis) and laminated root rot (Phellinus weirii) 

affecting forest health in small portions of the Planning Area as discussed in FEIS Chapter I, Section C, 2, c. 

Under my decision and within Matrix, thinning will include variable spacing between trees (will not have a rigid or grid-like 

appearance), no-treatment areas (skips), and small irregular shaped openings (up to 2 acres) created to treat root 

disease areas. Root disease areas will retain non-host tree species and planting of disease-resistant Port-Orford-cedar 

seedlings or Douglas-fir seedlings will occur. Tree spacing will be variable and species diversity will be maintained or 

increased and would include some hardwoods and species of limited local occurrence. No residual (old-growth) legacy 

trees will be cut, except where they pose a threat to humans (danger trees). If felled, they would not be removed.

Tree harvest within Riparian Reserve is a byproduct of vegetative treatments. Silvicultural practices will be applied to 

control stocking, reestablish and manage stands, and acquire desired vegetation characteristics needed to attain Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy Objectives. Variable density thinning treatments will only occur when vegetative conditions could 

be improved within the outer portions of Riparian Reserve of some perennial and intermittent streams, in accordance 

with specially designed Riparian Reserve Project Design Criteria (see FEIS Chapter II, Section D, 3, and ROD 

Attachment B). 

Actual conditions on the ground may differ from map-delineated stands; therefore, treatments and/or stand boundaries 

may be adjusted as needed. All Similar and/or Related Actions (ROD Attachment A) are also included in my 

decision, notably non-commercial treatment on 363 acres. 

Commercial Tree Harvest and Logging Systems

My decision includes commercial tree harvest and removal that will be accomplished by private contractors, via Forest 

Service contracts. Contracts for commercial harvest operations will require certain provisions and mitigation measures 

to be incorporated as contract requirements. Execution of commercial actions will be accomplished via several timber 

sale contracts, to be offered over several years, to various high bidders (purchasers) of sales.

Treatment methods will include use of mechanized machinery and chainsaws. Trees could be felled using mechanized 

feller-bunchers, cut-to-length harvesters, or hand (chainsaw) felling. Commercial products could be yarded to landings 

or decking areas using ground-based systems (tractor or log forwarder), skyline cable, or helicopter yarding systems. 

Logging systems anticipated to be utilized to harvest trees are also displayed in Table ROD A-1, contained in ROD 

Attachment A (Implementation Strategy).

 

2 Based on an overall average of 17.5 thousand board feet (mbf) per acre removed. This is an estimate only and is not considered 

an output threshold for the project. 
Record of Decision ROD - 5 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Road (Access) Systems

Products will be hauled using existing system (Classified) roads or newly constructed roads to manufacturing plants by 

log trucks or chip vans. Use of approximately 31 miles of existing Classified roads is proposed. Reconstruction of 

approximately 6 miles of existing roads would occur and road maintenance of approximately 6 miles of road. In addition 

to several roads already managed as cost share use roads, proposed Cost Share Supplemental Road Use Agreements 

will manage approximately an additional 7 miles.

New Classified (system) and temporary road construction is proposed to access some units under my decision. Refer to

FEIS Appendix I (Roads Analysis) for the basis of new road construction. A total of approximately 9.48 miles of new 

Classified road construction will occur in 37 segments, ranging from 0.11 miles to 1.93 miles. I am authorizing 

permanent Classified (system) roads be constructed rather than “temporary” roads because permanent roads are

designed to a higher standard. Temporary road construction is managed by the timber sale contract and to a lesser 

standard. They are typically constructed, used, and decommissioned in one year, with no need to over-winter. Multiyear temporary roads increase disturbance and the risk of sediment through the removal and re-installation of stream 

crossings for overwintering. 

Based on the recommendations of resource specialists, my desire is to be very prescriptive in the design and 

construction of these permanent roads. New road construction will be designed to minimal widths to reduce resource 

impacts, as well as to keep construction costs down. Considering the overall amount of proposed new classified road 

and the acres they will access, it is likely these roads would need to be used multiple years, and for future treatment 

access on Matrix lands. Therefore access should be designed for that level of multi-year use. This requires a level of 

engineered design above what can be expected for a temporary road under a timber sale contract. 

All new proposed Classified (system) roads will be created and managed as operational Maintenance Level 2 roads 

when in use and Maintenance Level 1 when not in use for management activities. Under Maintenance Level 1, basic 

custodial maintenance is performed to keep damage to adjacent resources to an acceptable level and to perpetuate the 

road to facilitate future management activities. While being maintained at Level 1, roads are closed to public motorized 

access and use (in concert with the Forest’s Travel Management Plan and Motorized Vehicle Use Map). 

Construction of approximately 0.03 mile in a new temporary road will occur and will then be decommissioned after 

management activities are completed. See Map ROD A-1 and Table ROD A-2 and A-3, contained in ROD 

Attachment A (Implementation Strategy) for the general locations and descriptions of road use and proposed 

road construction, reconstruction, and maintenance needs associated with my decision.

Activity Fuels Treatments

The combination of density management and activity fuels treatments are designed to leave the stands in a condition 

where a wildfire could burn through the stand, in the form of a surface fire that would not create unacceptable levels of 

mortality. As part of my decision, I am including only those activity fuel treatments predicted to be necessary to obtain 

an acceptable fuels/fire risk as discussed in FEIS Chapter II, Section D, 2, d. Several methods of activity fuels treatment 

are planned, including: yarding with tops attached, hand piling fuels concentrations: piling and burning landing slash, and 

no treatment.

Project Design Criteria and Required Mitigation Measures

“Project Design Criteria” are designed to assist in developing timber sale proposals and/or are to be employed during onthe ground project designation/implementation to address overall objectives and to manage resource objectives for 

consequences. Other elements that manage consequences during actual operations are termed “Mitigation Measures.” 

My decision will include and require Project Design Criteria (PDCs) and Mitigation Measures as discussed in FEIS 

Chapter II. Final and specific PDCs and Mitigation Measures that are a binding part of my decision are contained in 

ROD Attachment B.
Record of Decision ROD - 6 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Monitoring

Monitoring is important for tracking the implementation of a project; ensuring activities are implemented as planned to 

measure success in meeting the stated project goals and objectives and to apply any lessons learned to future planning 

efforts. Project activities will be monitored during and following implementation to ensure Project Design Criteria and 

Mitigation Measures are implemented as specified under my decision. This aspect of monitoring is referred to as 

implementation monitoring. The progress and findings of implementation monitoring will be documented as it occurs 

during project implementation. Monitoring will be required on representative units to evaluate the effectiveness of 

authorized activities, including standard practices and mitigation measures, in achieving the specifically desired project 

outcomes.

Detailed discussion on monitoring methodology under my decision is documented in ROD Attachment C, Monitoring 

Plan (Version 1.1). If ongoing monitoring indicates that laws, regulations, standards and guidelines or critical project 

objectives are not being met, the project will be modified. Knowledge and experience gained, and lessons learned from 

monitoring and evaluation will also be incorporated into future planning efforts.

Summary - Modified Alternative 2

Modified Alternative 2 will enact the following vegetation management and connected actions. Complete details of 

actions authorized with this ROD are identified in Attachment A, Implementation Strategy:

 3,310 acres of commercial variable density management thinning treatments (in several separate timber sales), 

on 76 units, producing approximately 50 million board feet of commercial timber volume.

 Ground-based yarding systems to be used on approximately 1,883 acres (57%)

 Skyline systems used on approximately 1,343 acres (40%)

 Helicopter systems used on approximately 88 acres (3%)

 Use of approximately 31 miles of existing Classified roads

 Construction of 9.48 miles of new Classified road (in 37 segments)

 Construction and decommissioning of 0.03 miles of temporary road

 Use and reconstruction of 6.1 miles of existing Classified road

 Use of and maintenance of 5.5 miles of existing Classified road

In addition, Modified Alternative 2 may enact the following Similar and/or Related actions:

 363 acres of non-commercial silvicultural treatments;

 snag/down woody material creation;

 meadow enhancement;

 stream enhancement;

 native grass/forb seeding;

 invasive plant treatments

 interpretation of historical logging; and 

 wildlife nest boxes.

RATIONALE FOR MY DECISION

In making my decision, I considered how each alternative meets the stated Purpose and Need for action and complies 

with applicable laws, regulations, and policies. I have also considered comments and concerns from interested publics 

and the analysis brought forward in the FEIS and associated specialist reports. We have considerable experience with 

this type of action on the Forest and have based many of the conclusions on credible peer-reviewed scientific research 

done in close proximity to the project Planning Area in the same vegetation types and on monitoring data collected on 

projects of a similar type across the Forest. The combination of both site-specific monitoring data and peer-reviewed 

credible science informing the analysis in the FEIS give me confidence that the conclusions reached in the FEIS are 

accurate and scientifically sound and a balance between the need for treatment, economics, and environmental effects.
Record of Decision ROD - 7 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Within Riparian Reserves, my decision will accelerate the development of late-successional stand conditions, such as 

older forest stand characteristics, increase conifer growth rates and provide for larger remnant conifers and hardwoods. 

This will allow aquatic conditions to improve and to meet intent of Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives in the long 

term.

I choose to implement this activity through commercial means to improve the forest in a manner that also allows the 

private sector to assist. I believe this approach will meet the intent of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives and 

support the needs of the local economy by providing wood products to the local mills. 

Many of the comments I received in association with the Draft EIS Comment Period focused on concerns for new 

Classified road construction, the need for soils and water quality protection, the need for treating dense stands in 

Riparian Reserves, and the effects and costs of anticipated logging systems. These comments played a key role in 

forming my decision and in particular, adding the modifications to Alternative 2. These modifications all or in part, 

addressed the concerns raised through the comment period by changing proposed logging methods, removing portions 

of units and proposed roads, and changing segments of temporary roads to Classified road segments.

A portion of the Planning Area is within a Key Watershed (South Fork Coquille River). Per the Northwest Forest Plan,

(NWFP page B-19) there is to be no net increase in the amount of roads: “The amount of existing system and nonsystem roads within Key Watersheds should be reduced through decommissioning of roads.” The basis for this 

Standard and Guidelines is “amount of existing system and non-system roads” and not road density (usually expressed 

in miles/sq. mi.). This Standard and Guideline is applicable at the fifth-field scale (the area designated as Tier 1 Key 

Watershed (and not to any of the smaller subwatersheds that comprise the larger fifth-field Key Watershed).

I received comments during the DEIS Comment Period that road decommissioning has not reduced the amount of roads 

within the Coal Creek subwatershed. There are very few existing Forest Service roads within the Coal Creek 

subwatershed; therefore, minimal opportunities exist to decommission unneeded roads. Instead, most of the road 

decommissioning has occurred within the Johnson Creek, Delta Creek, and Headwaters South Fork Coquille (aka 

Wooden Rock Creek) subwatersheds, because that is where a more extensive network of existing roads exists from the 

past.

The term “Road Bank” is used by this project to reflect the accounting of road decommissioning versus new road 

constructed, as discussed in the NWFP, page B-19. This accounting has identified that there has been more roads 

decommissioned since 1994 within the South Fork Coquille fifth-field watershed, than have been constructed or will be 

constructed within this project under my decision. Based on public comment, further clarification and evidence regarding 

this “road bank” situation and the amount and locations of decommissioned roads was provided in the FEIS (see 

Appendix I). Decommissioned roads within South Fork Coquille fifth-field watershed are identified.

Under my decision, the risk of large scale high-severity wildland fire will be reduced, the overcrowding of young trees will 

be reduced, the resulting timbered stands will not be a monoculture, and many stands of trees will exist and continue to 

grow and thrive under healthy forest conditions. 

Response to Purpose and Need

I have selected Alternative 2 with modifications over the other alternatives considered because it best meets the Purpose 

and Need for action while being responsive to public comments and the recommendations of resource specialists. The 

project can move stands in the Planning Area toward desired conditions. The overall purpose of the Proposed Action for 

this project is to implement management direction from the Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management 

Plan (SNF-LRMP) as amended by the Northwest Forest Plan. Alternative 2 with the modifications I have included in my 

decision is designed to meet this purpose and does so at a high level as compared to the other Action Alternatives. The 

No-Action Alternative does not meet the stated purpose. 

This project will provide for a sustainable supply of timber products that contribute to probable sale quantity (PSQ) of 

commercial timber (approximately 50 MMBF) and other commodity outputs (e.g., biomass material and firewood). 
Record of Decision ROD - 8 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Previous environmental analysis of similar stands on Powers and Gold Beach Ranger Districts identified a relative 

density (RD) of 50% as a threshold of undesirable competition-related tree mortality (USDA 2007). This RD threshold 

was used to determine treatment needs on Eden Ridge. Preliminary stand exam information indicates most candidate

stands exceed the 50% RD threshold. Stands exhibit significant inter-tree competition as evidenced by receding tree 

crowns, decreasing diameter increment growth and down wood created from tree mortality caused by stand self-thinning.

Accelerating the growth and sustainability of candidate stands through density management and forest health treatments 

to meet LRMP goals for lands allocated to Matrix is the primary objective for this project. The treatments within Riparian 

Reserve will improve habitat conditions for wildlife and fish. This means increased vegetative and structural diversity and 

species (over current conditions); maintenance or improvement of shading capability of streams; improvement of large 

wood retention and large wood recruitment, and providing suitable amounts of snags and/or replacement habitat for 

dependent species.

Management activities shall be planned to maintain enough large woody material (dead and down) to maintain a healthy 

forest ecosystem for multiple species. As with snags, down logs are important for wildlife and aquatic ecosystem 

function. In addition, large coarse woody material is particularly important to maintaining and holding soils in place. In 

the Eden Ridge Planning Area, large down woody material left from historical railroad logging represent a unique 

situation and every effort will be made to avoid disturbance and maintain this existing material. 

Portions of almost every candidate stand will not be thinned and harvested. Areas within the stands that will not be 

thinned and harvested will be identified on the ground during the implementation process. The majority of the areas not 

treated will be stream buffers in accordance with Riparian Reserve Project Design Criteria, areas of geologic instability, 

inaccessible stands, and those portions of stands where the current health, vigor, and variable spacing of the conifer and 

hardwood vegetation is on a suitable trajectory toward attaining overall forest vigor and resiliency without the need for 

treatment.

Post-harvest stand variability will be enhanced through the creation of snags and coarse woody material and PortOrford-cedar tree planting. Tree planting in created openings and underneath tree canopies of candidate stands will 

restore healthy, disease-resistant Port-Orford-cedar into the landscape and enhance structural and species diversity over 

the long term.

Response to Significant Issues

Issues were generated internally, by the interdisciplinary team, and externally, through public comments. Involvement of 

interested individuals, businesses, organizations, and county, state, and federal agencies, and local tribes was sought to 

provide detailed information for defining the issues, concerns, mitigations, and treatment options. Public comments were 

carefully considered during the process of developing alternatives including mitigation measures and PDCs to reduce or 

eliminate environmental impacts. My decision is responsive to these and all other public comments as it is important to 

me to show the public how I considered their comments and how those comments made a difference in my decision. 

Modifications to Alternative 2 will reduce the overall impact of Alternative 2, as proposed and analyzed in the FEIS. I 

chose to modify FEIS Alternative 2 and discuss its consequences within this ROD, rather than develop a new alternative 

within the FEIS. This is because, in every aspect, the degree of impact from my decision (Modified Alternative 2) is 

identical to or less than those analyzed within the FEIS, for Alternative 2.

Hydrologic Conditions; Soils and Geology, and Site Productivity

Commenters raised concerns related to the hydrologic function of the major watersheds associated with the Planning 

Areas. Modified Alternative 2 was developed from detailed consideration of units and new roads associated with FEIS 

Alternative 2 that are located in sensitive watershed areas (identified in FEIS Table III-7, Hydrologic Condition issue). A

Core Interdisciplinary Team and the District Ranger reviewed each road segment and its associated unit(s). This 

additional assessment as to how to reduce or eliminate hydrologic and soils risks and/or impacts was provided to me and 

is included in my decision.
Record of Decision ROD - 9 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Units (and associated roads) of concern included 214 acres within Coal Creek; specifically Units 301, 302, 303, 304, 

306, 307, 308, 309, 312, 315, 321, 338 (FEIS Table III-7). Proposed Classified road segments Q1, Q2, Q3, P4, and

temporary road Q4 represent the roads of greatest concern for the entire project (within the lower portions of the Coal 

Creek subwatershed). Under my decision, these roads are dropped, and the anticipated logging system is changed to a 

less impacting system, e.g., ground based to skyline, or skyline to helicopter. 

This will allow silvicultural treatment systems in sensitive areas without the risks of additional roads or ground based

logging. Units 312, 315, 321 and 338 were also further assessed. They were not changed because they did not involve 

new roads in sensitive areas, and PDCs will provide protection to the steep slopes in close proximity to the units.

I decided to remove a 4 acre portion of Unit 301, below the existing road, in a riparian area. Upon close review, I 

decided to remove proposed Classified Road W, accessing Units 326 and 327. This road was within a sensitive area 

largely identified as Riparian Reserve, and was in the headwaters of Coal Creek. This road would have crossed through 

Phytophthora lateralis (PL) pockets affecting Port-Orford-cedar. The location of this road also contained populations of 

the regionally Sensitive plant Bensoniella oregana, which would be better protected without this road. Since there is still 

a need for density management treatments, removal of this road changed the anticipated logging system for Unit 327 to 

helicopter, and changed a portion of Unit 326 to skyline (from ground based).

I also decided to remove Classified Road Z, lying in a sensitive area primarily within Riparian Reserve. To allow for 

density management treatments, Unit 334 can be accessed from an existing road with skyline systems. The table below 

(Table ROD-1) compares Alternative 2 and my selected Modified Alternative 2 for important hydrologic condition 

indicators.

Table ROD-1. Important Indicators for Hydrologic Conditions

Indicator Alternative 2 Modified

Alternative 2

Thinning Acres by Subwatershed and Percent of Subwatershed Affected

Coal Creek (9,952 acres) 1,760 (17.7%) 1,756 (17.6%)

Headwaters SF Coquille (40,233 acres) 585 (1.5%) No Change

Mill Creek (13,935) 33 (<1%) No Change

Myrtle Creek (20,028 acres) 172 (1%) No Change

Lower Rock Creek (25,544 acres) 765 (3%) No Change

Road Construction Miles by Subwatershed: Permanent System Classified / Temporary

Coal Creek 6.61 0.29 5.28 0.03

Headwaters SF Coquille 2.27 0.0 No Change

Mill Creek 0 0.0 No Change

Myrtle Creek 0.78 0.0 No Change

Lower Rock Creek 1.15 0.0 No Change

Road Density by Subwatershed: 

Existing / Increase:(mi/sq. mi)

Coal Creek 4.19 / 0.43 4.19 / 0.34

Headwaters SF Coquille 4.25 / 0.04 No Change

Mill Creek 3.94 / 0.00 No Change

Myrtle Creek 4.12 / 0.02 No Change

Lower Rock Creek 4.68 / 0.03 No Change

Permanent System Roads Crossing 

Riparian Reserve (Miles) 1.58 0.81

Temporary Roads Crossing Riparian 

Reserve (Miles) 0.17 None

Percent of Subwatershed Affected by Ground Based Yarding

Coal Creek 12% (1,189 ac.) 10% (953 ac.)

Headwaters SF Coquille 0.5 % No Change

Mill Creek <0.1 % No Change

Myrtle Creek 0.3 % No Change

Lower Rock Creek 2.5 % No Change
Record of Decision ROD - 10 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Modified Alternative 2 was developed from detailed consideration of roads (new Classified or temporary) that cross

concern areas (identified in FEIS Table III-18, Soils, Geology and Site Productivity issue). The table below (Table ROD2) compares Alternative 2 and my decision (Modified Alternative 2) for important soils, geology, and site productivity 

indicators.

Table ROD-2. Important Indicators for Soils, Geology and Site Productivity

Indicator Alternative 2 Modified 

Alternative 2

Risk of Slope Failure

Miles of New Classified and Temporary Road that 

Crosses Concern Areas

4.74 3.52

Soil Productivity

Acres Taken Out of Productivity (Range Based on Est. 

Road Widths) 78-104 76-101

Long-Term Opportunity For Erosion: Miles of System 

Road (New Construct/Reconstruct) 53.4 52.1

Detrimental Disturbance (Acres)

Ground-based harvest system (est. 15%) 318 282

Skyline harvest system (est. 5%) 60 67

Aerial harvest system (est. 2%) 0 3

Helicopter landings 0 4

Pile & Burn (est. 2%) 39 32

Totals 417 388

Water Quality

The background and analysis framework for water quality is contained in FEIS Chapter III, Section D, 2. The main 

factors assessed in the FEIS are water temperature increase, and sediment production/increase in turbidity. All Action 

Alternatives were assessed and found to predict negligible increase in these factors. Alternative 2 (as presented in the 

FEIS, includes the greatest risk, due to the amount of acres affected and the amount of roading activities.

For potential for water temperature increase, the FEIS determined:

 All of the road crossings are located on first and second order streams. These channels are only a few feet wide 

and have small discharges.

 Sun exposure will be 100% blocked as water flows through the culvert. Exposure upstream and downstream of the 

culvert will occur over a few linear feet and will be reduced by adjacent forest canopy; this limited exposure is not 

enough to cause a measureable change in water temperature. 

 The largest watershed area above these crossings totals approximately 60 acres. Others are 30 acres or less. This 

presents very little drainage area to collect surface water to these crossings. Stream discharge from such small 

drainage basins is low, especially during the summer when ground water levels are lowest.

 Skyline corridors will remove minor amounts of canopy in the primary shade zone where the corridor crosses 

perennial streams. However, skyline corridors that cross Riparian Reserves are required to be 12 feet or less in 

width, and no less than 150’ apart, and be utilized with full log suspension. Surrounding trees and understory will

make shade loss resulting from these gaps in the canopy negligible. 

The FEIS adopts an increased Primary Shade Zone width, based on the 2011 Updated TMDL (total maximum daily 

load) strategy. This increased widths to 50 – 85 feet for the Primary Shade Zone of typical perennial streams. 

Therefore, under my decision there is less risk of a water temperature increase due to fewer acres affected, a 

reduction in roads in sensitive areas, and incorporation of the 2011 Updated TMDL Strategy.

For potential for sediment production and increase in turbidity, the FEIS determined:

 Thinning will leave sufficient forest canopy to prevent large increases in storm runoff or snowmelt.

 Minimally disturbed soils and understory vegetation will recover and anchor surface soils.

 Thinning activities will occur in areas where streams and runoff amounts are both small. Units located along Coal 

Creek that are exceptions to these conditions have site specific mitigation measures designed to prevent or capture 

activity generated sediment.
Record of Decision ROD - 11 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

 No cut buffers in the stream bank protection zone and Primary Shade Zone will act as capture and retention areas 

between stream courses and activity-generated, localized sediment sources.

 Wet weather conditions will preclude hauling as per design criteria; road-generated sediment during wet conditions 

is the primary source of logging activity-generated sediment. 

As noted above, my decision will further reduce the potential for sediment production in units located along Coal Creek 

in addition to site specific mitigation measures designed to prevent or capture activity generated sediment. Therefore, 

under my decision there is less risk of sediment production due to fewer acres affected, reduced amount of 

roads in sensitive areas, and change in anticipated logging systems in sensitive areas of Coal Creek.

Cumulative Watershed Effects

The background and analysis framework for cumulative effects analysis is contained in FEIS Chapter III, Section D, 3. 

FEIS analysis determined that there will be no measureable increase in risk for adverse cumulative watershed effects in 

the Headwaters SF Coquille, Mill Creek, Myrtle Creek or Lower Rock Creek subwatersheds under Alternative 2. This 

was based on:

 The minor involvement of these subwatersheds in the Action Alternatives.

 The location of units/roads at or near ridges and watershed divides where effects will be minimal.

For the Coal Creek subwatershed, the risk of adverse cumulative watershed effects is currently High since the main 

channel is already in a degraded condition. For FEIS Alternative 2, the addition of the proposed harvest acreage and 

road construction within this degraded subwatershed was found to contribute to additional risk of adverse effects; 

however, limited stand management could be conducted without increasing risk because the impacts will be limited to 

the site scale (FEIS Page III-46.). The following conditions will allow containment of impacts to the local or unit level (site

scale):

 NFS lands contain hydrologically mature stands with large in-stream and upland wood present; this provides 

vegetative buffers that will counter increased runoff or sediment transport.

 NFS lands are located mainly in the uplands where streams are small and discharges are low; risk of hydrologic 

impact from this portion of watershed is low.

 The majority of the proposed units are located thousands of feet away from the main channel.

 Proposed thinning is designed to enhance the growth and vigor of the stand by removing intermediate and 

suppressed trees.

 Stream buffers and equipment limitations are designed to eliminate off-site impacts.

The FEIS identified that some proposed units (and roads) are located in areas that have a greater potential for 

hydrologic impacts (see above). Their combined acreage is relatively small; however these units were identified to 

represent more risk of measurable impact than the rest of the project (FEIS Page III-46). As discussed under Hydrologic

Conditions (above), my decision has removed these roads of concern and has changed anticipated logging systems to 

further reduce effects related to these concerns. The elimination of these roads will lower the anticipated increase in 

road density by 0.09 mi./sq. mi. (see above). Therefore, the predicted overall risk for adverse cumulative effects 

under my decision is less than that predicted for Alternative 2 (which was determined to be acceptable and limited 

to the site scale).

Economics

The background and analysis framework for economics is contained in FEIS Chapter III, Section D, 5. Generally, a

reduced benefit cost ratio (based on a decrease of non-monetary returns) is reflected with the use of a greater 

percentage of high-cost yarding, (i.e., helicopters) as opposed to conventional yarding systems. My decision has not 

substantially changed the amount of commercial volume and potential revenue. My decision however has reduced the 

amount of ground based yarding systems, slightly increased the amount of skyline yarding systems, and has added 

some acres that will potentially be yarded with helicopters (see above). This minimally affects some economic 

indicators; the table below (Table ROD-3) compares Alternative 2 and my decision (Modified Alternative 2) for these 

indicators.
Record of Decision ROD - 12 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Table ROD-3. Important Economic Indicators

Indicator Alternative 2 Modified 

Alternative 2

Volume by Logging System (MBF)

Ground Based 33,933 30,140

Skyline 19,197 21,515

Helicopter 0 1,411

Total Yarding Costs (Dollars) $11,925,200 $12,364,265

Total Roading Costs (Dollars) $4,268,291 $4,107,077

Present Net Value (Dollars) $322,501 $24,754

Benefit Cost Ratio 1.02 1.0015

Other Issues

Beyond the above listed Significant Issues, Other Issues were also taken into account in my decision. These additional 

issues are based upon public and agency comments received during the scoping and analysis process. The FEIS 

documents discussion of additional issues and effects that were identified during the process but were not found to be 

significant issues key to designing alternatives (FEIS Chapter III, Environmental Consequences). Other Issues as used 

in this environmental analysis are those that have been determined to be relevant, are used to disclose consequences, 

may affect design or prescribe mitigation measures, or whose disclosure of environmental effects are required by law or 

policy. Other Issues as used in this environmental analysis differ from Significant Issues in that they were not used to 

formulate alternatives or drive alternatives themes. In addition, these issues often describe minor and/or consistent 

consequences among alternatives considered in detail. Because of this, these issues will not be further discussed in this 

decision document. 

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

Four alternatives (including a no-action alternative) are analyzed in detail in the FEIS. Alternative 1, the No-Action 

Alternative, provides a basic description of conditions (both current and ongoing) for which the other alternatives were 

analyzed and compared. Under this scenario, Alternative 1 - No-Action would not authorize variable density 

management and other connected actions to obtain the Purpose and Need for the Eden Ridge Timber Sales Project. 

The No-Action alternative should not be confused with a baseline. Whereas a baseline is essentially a description of the 

affected environment at a fixed point in time, the No-Action alternative assumes that other things would happen to the 

affected environment, particularly in a dynamic, changing forest ecosystem over time. How this ecosystem could change 

over time without the proposed management actions is discussed more fully in those Sections of the FEIS that describe 

potential consequences of No-Action.

This alternative was not selected because it would not meet the Purpose and Need, e.g., it would not improve overall 

forest vigor and resiliency, it would not contribute commercial timber volume to the Forest’s Probable Sale Quantity (for 

Matrix lands), and it would not maintain and Riparian Reserves to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives.

In addition to No-Action, three Action Alternatives were analyzed in detail in the FEIS. The range of alternatives was

developed in accordance with Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations to provide the decision-maker and 

the public with a clear basis for choice (40 CFR 1502.14). This range includes all aspects of actions and alternatives 

considered but eliminated from detailed study, as well as those actions and alternatives considered in detail. The 

specific alternatives considered in detail have been designed to respond to the Purpose and Need for this Proposed 

Action and the identified Significant Issues. They are summarized below. For additional detail, see FEIS Chapter II.

Alternative 2, the Proposed Action was designed to address and maximize attainment of the Purpose and Need 

outlined in FEIS Chapter I. Alternative 2 also represents the maximum extent of proposed treatments and connected 

actions (e.g., harvest systems and roads).
Record of Decision ROD - 13 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

This alternative, as originally presented and analyzed in the FEIS, was not selected because it would not be 

responsive to comments and concerns received from the public and other agencies during the Draft EIS Comment 

Period. Many of the comments received focused on concerns for new Classified road construction, the need for soils 

and water quality protection, the need for treating dense stands, and the effects of logging systems, especially within the 

Coal Creek watershed. Without modification, Alternative 2 would not respond in a positive manner to these concerns.

Alternative 3 was designed to be similar to and is based on the Proposed Action, but differs from the candidate stands, 

opportunities and connected actions associated with the Proposed Action, with modifications that include only “highmoderate benefit/low risk” new roads. In relation to Alternative 2, this modification would reduce the treated area on 

some units resulting in a change in configuration, or in some cases, units would be combined or dropped. This 

alternative proposed more extensive helicopter logging systems, based on the change in access for more conventional 

systems.

Alternative 3 would include intermediate commercial harvest treatments using variable density thinning techniques and 

other connected actions on approximately 3,240 acres of second growth conifer stands. Use of approximately 31 miles 

of existing Classified roads is included. In addition, approximately 4 miles of reconstruction of existing Classified roads 

would occur, as well as approximately 6 miles of existing Classified road maintenance.

New Classified (system) and temporary road construction would access some units under this alternative, as discussed 

in FEIS Chapter II. New road construction would include approximately 4.45 miles of new Classified roads, in 27 

segments, ranging from 0.11 miles to 0.60 miles. New Classified roads would be managed as Maintenance Level 1 

(closed until further need). Approximately 0.03 miles of new temporary road was also included.

This alternative was not selected because it would treat fewer acres, thereby attaining Purpose and Need to a lesser 

degree, in terms of improvement of overall forest vigor and resiliency, contribution of commercial timber volume to the 

Forest’s Probable Sale Quantity (for Matrix lands), and would not include maximum improvement in Riparian Reserves to 

meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives.

Most of the existing Classified roads evolved from early railroad grades but do not adequately serve the Planning Area 

for today’s needs and systems. Because the area is primarily allocated to Matrix, the Forest Service conducted a Roads 

Analysis process which identified the need for additional, permanent, Classified roads (see FEIS Appendix I (Roads 

Analysis). More extensive or exclusive use of roads as “temporary” was not considered in detail because a permanent 

classified system road is managed by the Forest Service and can be designed to a higher standard for resource 

protection in the short and long term (see above). 

New Classified roads were determined to be necessary to minimize impacts on resources, especially land, hydrologic 

conditions, water quality, and aquatic species. These new Classified roads are necessary to maintain a situation that 

permits future use without need to re-accomplish or replace work that is currently in satisfactory condition. These roads 

would minimize repeated impacts and avoid unacceptable risks to resources. Roading should not result in higher future 

capital expenditures that could be required if, for example, roads had to be rebuilt or relocated for each sale or entry. 

Alternative 3 would not establish, at this time, as complete a network of Classified roads as recommended during the 

Roads Analysis process. Improved access for fire suppression and future management of Matrix lands would be 

compromised, compared to Alternative 2. This alternative would not be an operational or economically sustainable 

project for this and future entries, as compared to my decision or FEIS Alternative 2.

In addition, this alternative, while proposing construction of less new Classified road, would leave some sensitive areas 

at risk (as identified in Alternative 2). As a result, it would not be responsive to comments and concerns received from 

the public and other agencies during the Draft EIS Comment Period.

Alternative 4 is also similar to and is based on the Proposed Action, but differs from the candidate stands, opportunities 

and connected actions associated with the Proposed Action, with modifications that include only the use (with some 

reconstruction and maintenance) of existing roads for treatment access. This alternative also excludes some of the 

higher risk treatments within Riparian Reserves (primarily those associated with perennial streams). In relation to 

Alternative 2 and Alternative 3, these modifications would reduce the treated area on some units resulting in a change in 

configuration, or in some cases, units would be combined or dropped. This alternative also proposes extensive 

helicopter logging systems, based on the change in access for more conventional systems.
Record of Decision ROD - 14 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Alternative 4 includes intermediate commercial harvest treatments using variable density thinning techniques and other 

connected actions on approximately 3,058 acres of second growth conifer stands. Use of approximately 31 miles of 

existing Classified roads is included. In addition, Alternative 4 would include approximately 2 miles of reconstruction of 

existing Classified roads, as well as approximately 6 miles of existing Classified road maintenance. Under this 

alternative, no new Classified (system) or temporary road construction is included. The theme of this alternative is to 

utilize only existing Classified system roads for access. This alternative was designed in part, to evaluate the economic 

effects of more extensive helicopter yarding systems.

This alternative was not selected because it would treat the fewest acres, thereby attaining Purpose and Need to a 

lesser degree than the other two Action Alternatives, in terms of improvement of overall forest vigor and resiliency,

contribution of commercial timber volume to the Forest’s Probable Sale Quantity (for Matrix lands), and improvement of 

Riparian Reserves conditions to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives.

Alternative 4 would not establish, at this time, a Classified road network as assessed and recommended in the Roads 

Analysis process. Improved access for fire suppression and future management of Matrix lands would be compromised 

compared to Alternative 2 and 3. 

Alternative 4 has the highest percentage of helicopter logging systems. A reduced benefit to cost ratio (based on a 

decrease of non-monetary returns) is reflected with the use of a greater percentage of high cost yarding, (i.e., 

helicopters) as opposed to conventional yarding systems. Given the high cost of helicopter logging systems, this 

alternative would pose the greatest threat to a successful commercial timber sale, thereby failing to accomplish resource 

objectives.

ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

It is required by law that one or more environmentally preferable alternatives be disclosed. The environmentally 

preferred alternative is not necessarily the alternative that will be implemented and it does not have to meet the 

underlying Purpose and Need for the project. It does however, have to cause the least damage to the physical and 

biological environment and best protects, preserves and enhances historical, cultural, and natural resources (Section 

101 NEPA; 40 CFR 1505.2(b)).

I have determined that FEIS Alternative 4 has the least impact in terms of protecting, preserving, and enhancing the 

environment of the alternatives considered that propose vegetative management action. The No-Action Alternative, in 

and of itself, does not propose action, but has a consequence of inaction for maintenance of vigorous and healthy forest 

stand conditions that would result in greater impact than any of the Action Alternatives considered in the long-term. My 

decision (Modified Alternative 2) predicts more impacts than FEIS Alternative 3 and 4, but will have less environmental 

impact than FEIS Alternative 2.

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

The Scoping process for this project officially began with the issuance of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement published in the Federal Register on April 26, 2010 (FR page 21577-21579). Written 

and electronic responses to the Scoping Letter were received through June 10, 2010. Eight sources of substantial input 

were received from interested individuals, environmental interest groups, industry representatives, the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Due to the length of time that had passed since the original NOI was published, refinement of the Proposed Action, and 

a change in the Responsible Official, a second (corrected) Notice of Intent was sent to the Federal Register and was 

published on January 18, 2012 (FR Vol. 77, No. 11, page 2508-250). Notification was provided to the initial scoping 

respondents to notify them of the corrected NOI.
Record of Decision ROD - 15 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Copies of the March, 2012, Draft Eden Ridge Timber Sales Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and Appendices, 

along with an invitation to comment, were mailed to approximately 45 individuals and organizations who were involved 

with this project or who had requested a copy of the DEIS. A 45-day DEIS public Comment Period formally began on 

March 31, 2012, the first day following publication of a Notice of Availability (EIS #20120087) in the Federal Register Vol. 

77 No. 62 (FR page 19281). The 45-day comment period closed on May 14, 2012.

Four comment letters were received during the comment period. The original comment letters and copies of Forest 

Service review and coding are part of the Project Record (incorporated by reference). All comments were read and 

coded based on content and intent, by a Forest Service planning team, with District Ranger and Forest Supervisor 

oversight, review and concurrence. Pursuant to 40 CFR 1503.4 (and 36 CFR 215.6 (b), (1)), A “Response to

Comments” appendix documents the Responsible Official’s consideration and response of all substantive comments 

submitted in compliance with paragraph (a) of this section. This document is contained in FEIS Appendix A, 

incorporated by reference. Comments and responses were used to clarify and improve FEIS documentation and 

analysis, and help the Responsible Official to reach an informed, rational decision regarding Eden Ridge Timber Sales.

Additional comments directed to the DEIS were received from Richard Nawa (representing Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands 

Center, Cascadia Wildlands Project and Umpqua Watersheds) via a letter dated June 6, 2013. While this letter and 

these comments were received after the DEIS Comment Period had closed, the Forest chose to respond to substantive 

comments contained in this letter in a similar fashion as those received during the Comment Period. 

Based on all comments and input received on the draft, a Final EIS was prepared. The FEIS was designed as complete 

final documentation of the analysis of this project, in conjunction with this Record of Decision.

In addition, the following also occurred in support of the public involvement (scoping) process: an invitation to attend a 

formal field trip to review the proposed Eden Ridge Timber Sales (ER) area was provided to all those who responded to 

scoping in July 2011. A field trip was conducted on August 2nd, 2011, with the following in attendance:

 Jim Nielsen – citizen, representing Society of American Foresters 

 Brian Tenbusch – American Forest Resource Council, representing forest industry 

 Teresa Kubo – US Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Specialist

 Christopher Claire – Oregon Dept. Fish and Wildlife, Fisheries Biologist

On request, a special Eden Ridge field trip was conducted on August 1, 2011, with Joseph Patrick (Pat) Quinn of Camas 

Valley, a member of the Executive Board Coquille Watershed Assoc., and a member of the Board of Directors Umpqua 

Watersheds, Inc. An additional field trip with Rich Nawa, representing Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center was 

conducted in the Spring of 2012 (during the Comment Period). Numerous additional phone calls between interested 

parties and the Forest Service are documented in the Project Record.

The Forest Service actively sought information, comments, and assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies, 

tribes, and other groups, organizations, and individuals. The Forest Service has a government-to-government 

responsibility to all federally-recognized Tribes. The Forest has identified the Coquille Indian Tribe as having general 

concerns about the management of activities within the Planning Area. The Forest consulted with the Coquille Indian 

Tribe to solicit their concerns regarding the Planning Area (and this project) with no response received. The public was 

provided and responded to numerous opportunities to participate in the proposed project via the Environmental Impact 

Statement process. The project was developed with extensive public participation.

FINDINGS

This action has been analyzed and designed under laws, regulations and agreements applicable to the management of 

National Forest System lands and resources, including: 16 USC 1604 (g)(3), 36 CFR 219.14, 36 CFR 219.27 (b). I find 

this decision to be consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the Council on Environmental 

Quality regulations for implementing NEPA, 40 CFR 1500-1508, July 1, 1986, the Multiple-use Sustained Yield Act of 

1960, and the National Forest Management Act of 1976. I also find this decision is in compliance with the Endangered 

Species Act 1973 as amended, and the Historic Preservation Act. Further discussion follows.
Record of Decision ROD - 16 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Forest Plan Consistency (NFMA)

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1502.20, the National Forest Management Act requires a specific determination of consistency with 

the Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan and its Standards and Guidelines. Alternative 2

including modifications, has been developed to be in full compliance with NFMA. Overall, while there will be varying 

levels of impacts, with appropriate mitigation, based on the information and evidence contained in the March 2014 FEIS

and its Appendices, and as further documented within this Record of Decision, I find that my decision is consistent 

with the Siskiyou National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended by the Northwest Forest 

Plan; other amendments and other laws, regulations and agreements applicable to the management of National 

Forest System lands and resources.

Conformance with the key management direction defined in FEIS Chapter 1, Section G is analyzed below; resourcespecific management direction is addressed under individual resource topic areas.

Forest Plan Management Direction

The 1994 Northwest Forest Plan amended the Siskiyou Forest Plan and provided new goals, objectives, Standards and 

Guidelines for resource management, as well as new land allocations of Matrix and Riparian Reserve. With specially 

designed Project Design Criteria and Mitigation Measures, Modified Alternative 2 will be in conformance with all 

applicable Forest Plan management direction.

Matrix: lands allocated under the Northwest Forest Plan that include all areas not otherwise designated to a more 

protective status. The Eden Ridge Planning Area primarily includes lands allocated to Matrix, as carried forward from the 

1989 LRMP as General Forest Prescription (Management Area 14) (FEIS page I-21).

The primary activities proposed under Modified Alternative 2 (i.e., density management thinning, commercial timber 

harvest and connected actions) will occur in Matrix lands. Actions have been carefully designed to mitigate impacts to 

be within and maintain compliance with the associated Standards and Guidelines for Matrix. These impacts are 

discussed thoroughly in FEIS Chapter III. All actions associated with my decision will result in conditions that will be in 

compliance with all applicable Standards and Guidelines.

Riparian Reserves are areas where special Standards and Guidelines apply to streams and wetlands, with the objective 

of protecting aquatic and riparian species and other species that utilize riparian areas. These reserves are established 

as part of the overall Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) for maintaining and restoring ecosystem health at the project, 

watershed and landscape scales. Riparian Reserve widths as identified in the Northwest Forest Plan will be maintained 

along all stream courses under my decision. All fish bearing streams are buffered by identification of Riparian Reserves 

of 350 feet on each side of the streams. All non-fish-bearing streams have Riparian Reserves of 175 feet on each side 

of streams. 

Some density management treatments will occur within Riparian Reserve, outside of the Primary Shade Zone. These 

areas will be thinned to expedite large tree development while maintaining 50% canopy cover as silvicultural objectives 

to restore structural diversity goals stated in the ACS Objectives and expedite development of late seral conditions that 

were historically present in this area, and serve as recruitment sources for large wood. Specially designed Project 

Design Criteria and Mitigation Measures (FEIS Chapter II and ROD Attachment B), will be applied to reduce impacts to 

Riparian Reserves on a site-specific basis. The FEIS adopts an increased Primary Shade Zone width, based on the 

2011 Updated TMDL Strategy, which increases widths to 50 – 85 feet for the Primary Shade Zone of typical perennial 

streams.

The Siskiyou Forest Plan allocation of “Riparian” (Prescription MA-11) is now included within the Northwest Forest Plan 

Riparian Reserves allocation; it was generally less restrictive and included less area than does Riparian Reserve as now

designated. The Eden Ridge Timber Sales Project is contained within the “South Fork Coquille Planning Basin” (SNF 

LRMP page IV-124), and is assigned Prescription B (SNF LRMP page IV-125). My decision will only include harvest 

activities that are designed to improve conditions within areas designated as MA-11, in accordance with this Standard 

and Guideline.
Record of Decision ROD - 17 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Northwest Forest Plan – Aquatic Conservation Strategy

The ACS was developed to improve and maintain the ecological health of watersheds and aquatic ecosystems 

contained within them on public lands. The four primary components of the ACS are designed to operate together to 

maintain and restore the productivity and resiliency of riparian and aquatic ecosystems; they include: 1) Riparian 

Reserves; 2) Key Watersheds; 3) Watershed Analysis; and 4) Watershed Restoration. 

All of the lands associated with my decision have been analyzed by Watershed Analyses which were reviewed and used 

during the development and analysis of this proposal. Under Northwest Forest Plan direction, Key Watersheds are not a 

designated area or Matrix, but overlay all allocations. The South Fork Coquille Key Watershed is discussed in this ROD 

above, regarding the road decommissioning Standard and Guideline, and further discussed in the FEIS Chapter III, 

Section E, 1. Watershed Restoration is discussed in the FEIS within the Hydrologic Condition Section (FEIS Chapter III, 

Section D, 1.

The analysis of the existing conditions relative to Riparian Reserve Standards and Guidelines (1994 NWFP ROD, pages 

C-31 through C-39) and the nine ACS Objectives is presented for each alternative considered in detail in FEIS Chapter 

III, Section E, 1. My decision will have overall impacts that are similar to but less than FEIS Alternative 2. On the basis 

of the analysis referenced above, I find that none of the impacts associated with my decision (Modified Alternative 

2), either directly, indirectly, individually or cumulatively, will prevent attainment of the Aquatic Conservation 

Strategy, compliance with the Riparian Reserve Standards and Guidelines, or consistency with the nine ACS 

Objectives, at the site, watershed or landscape scales.

Other Legal Requirements and Policies

In reviewing the FEIS and actions involved in Alternative 2, including my modifications, I have concluded that my 

decision is consistent with the following laws, requirements and current or proposed policies:

The Preservation of American Antiquities Act, June 1906: All surveyed and inventoried cultural resource sites 

associated with the Eden Ridge Planning will be protected and/or excluded from any resource management activities. 

Any new sites discovered during operations will be protected by required Mitigation Measures (See ROD Attachment B).

The National Historic Preservation Act: The numerous past cultural resource surveys of the Planning Area have been 

adequate to locate the “findable,” significant cultural resources (i.e., eligible or potentially eligible to the National Register 

of Historic Places, or NRHP) that might be located in or near to project units. The Forest has consulted with the State 

Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) under the R6 PA Stipulation III (B)6: Historic Properties Adversely Affected 

which requires case-by-case review of the project under the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800.5). The 

Forest has developed measures with SHPO to mitigate the adverse effects of the project on the Smith-Powers Logging 

Railroad at Eden Ridge. These measures have been incorporated into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with SHPO 

that documents these measures. A Notification of Adverse Effect has been submitted to the Advisory Council of Historic 

Preservation (ACHP) with no response received. Any new sites discovered during operations will be protected through 

contract provisions.

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 1969: NEPA establishes the format and content requirements of 

environmental analysis and documentation, such as the Eden Ridge Timber Sales. The entire process of preparing an 

environmental impact statement was undertaken to comply with NEPA.

The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended: Biological Evaluations and Assessments have been conducted 

and the FEIS documents possible effects of activities on endangered and threatened species in the Eden Ridge

Planning Area. Appropriate coordination, conferencing, and consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service and National 

Marine Fisheries Service have been completed.
Record of Decision ROD - 18 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

The Forest consults with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (per Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act) about any 

management activities which “may affect” individuals of listed species or their habitat. To protect northern spotted owls 

and marbled murrelets from disturbance; Project Design Criteria (PDC) from the US Fish and Wildlife Service Formal 

Consultation on Timber Harvest, Meadow Restoration and Quarry Activities Proposed by the Rogue River–Siskiyou 

National Forest (TAILS #: 13420-2009-F-0146) dated August 27, 2009 (USDA/USDI, 2009) will be applied to activities 

associated with my decision.

Consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has been completed for Eden Ridge Timber Sales. 

Pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 402, the Forest 

Service prepared a Biological Assessment (disclosed as part of DEIS Appendix H). A Letter of Concurrence was 

received on February 27, 2012, in which NMFS concurred with the Forest Service’s determination that the project “May 

Affect, would Not Likely Adversely Affect (NLAA)” Oregon Coast coho salmon and their designated critical habitat (ref. 

2011/03685).

This letter also transmitted the results of analysis of the effects of Alternative 2 on Essential Fish Habitat EFH), pursuant 

to section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 600.920. NMFS concluded that the proposed actions will not adversely affect EFH designated for Pacific 

salmon and that no additional conservation measures were provided.

While alternatives were analyzed and consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service was based on the lessor 

Primary Shade Zone widths (who concurred with the Forest Service determination and effects), increasing these widths 

per the 2011 TMDLs will provide additional protection. 

Clean Air Act Amendments, 1977: My decision is designed to meet the National Ambient Air Quality standards 

through avoidance of practices that degrade air quality below health and visibility standards. The Oregon State 

Implementation Plan and the Oregon State Smoke Management Plan will be followed to maintain air quality.

The Clean Water Act, 1982: My decision will meet and conform to the Clean Water Act as amended in 1982. This act 

establishes a non-degradation policy for all federally proposed projects. My decision meets anti-degradation standards 

agreed to by the State of Oregon and the Forest Service, Region 6, in a Memorandum of Understanding (Forest Service 

Manual 1561.5). 

The analysis of effects to water quality documented in FEIS Chapter III concludes there is no risk for increase in water 

temperatures or bacteria, and the risk for increasing sedimentation is low. Any increase in sediment will likely not be 

measurable above baseline conditions.

State Forest Worker Safety Codes: The Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Code for Forest Activities (OAR 437, 

Division 6) regulations will be met when the decision is implemented. Appropriate provisions will be included in all 

contracts for addressing State Forest Worker Safety Codes. 

Roadless Conservation: There are no lands inventoried as roadless within the Eden Ridge Planning Area. Analysis 

determined that there are no Potential Wilderness Areas or other undeveloped areas that contain roadless 

characteristics similar to inventoried roadless areas (FEIS Chapter III, Section E, 14.) 

IMPLEMENTATION

The Eden Ridge Timber Sales decision is expected to be implemented beginning in 2014 and continue for 5 years or 

more through multiple contracts.

If no objection is filed (see below regarding Predecisional Administrative Review Objection Process), my decision will be 

finalized (signed) and implementation could begin on, but not before, the fifth business day following the end of the 45-

day objection-filing period. If an objection is filed, a written objection response will be completed by the Reviewing 

Officer from 45 to 75 days after the end of the 45-day objection-filing period. At that time my decision will be finalized 

(signed) and implementation could begin immediately thereafter.
Record of Decision ROD - 19 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Process for Change during Implementation

Minor changes may be needed during implementation to better meet on-site resource management and protection 

objectives. Actual conditions on the ground may differ from map-delineated stands; therefore, there will be a need to be 

flexible and adjust treatments and/or stand boundaries as needed. Minor adjustments to unit boundaries may be needed 

during final layout for resource protection, to improve operational feasibility as determined through on-the-ground 

implementation and/or contract preparation, and to better meet the intent of my decision. Many of these minor changes 

will not present sufficient potential impacts to require any additional specific documentation or action to comply with 

applicable laws. Notable changes will be documented through implementation monitoring. 

On-going monitoring conducted in association with management activities authorized by my decision provide opportunity 

for adapting management techniques as needed to better meet the intent of the selected alternative as planned and 

approved. In some cases this may involve minor modifications or corrections during implementation. Project monitoring

could result in the need to propose changes to authorized project actions. These changes will be subject to the 

requirements of the NEPA and other laws concerning such changes. In determining whether and what kind of further 

NEPA action is required, the Responsible Official will consider the criteria in 40 CFR 1502.9(c) and FSH 1909.15, sec. 

18. In particular the official will determine whether the proposed change is a substantial change to the decision as 

planned and already approved, and whether the change is relevant to environmental concerns. 

PREDECISIONAL ADMINSTRATIVE REVIEW (OBJECTION)

This draft decision is subject to administrative review (pre-decisional objection) pursuant to 36 CFR 218. An objection 

must meet all of the requirements described in 36 CFR 218.8.

Who may file an objection (36 CFR 218.5): Only individuals or organizations that submitted specific written comments 

during any designated opportunity for public participation (scoping or public comment periods) may object.

Filing an objection (36 CFR 218.8): An objection must meet all of the requirements described in 36 CFR 218.8, which 

include being in writing and being filed with the reviewing officer.

Objection issues [36 CFR 218.8(c)]:

(c) Issues raised in objections must be based on previously submitted specific written comments regarding the 

proposed project or activity and attributed to the objector, unless the issue is based on new information that arose 

after the opportunities for comment. The burden is on the objector to demonstrate compliance with this requirement 

for objection issues.

Minimum requirements [36 CFR 218.8(d)]:

(d) At a minimum, an objection must include the following:

(1) Objector’s name and address as defined in § 218.2, with a telephone number, if available;

(2) Signature or other verification of authorship upon request (a scanned signature for electronic mail may be filed 

with the objection);

(3) When multiple names are listed on an objection, identification of the lead objector as defined in § 218.2.

Verification of the identity of the lead objector must be provided upon request or the reviewing officer will designate a

lead objector as provided in § 218.5(d);

(4) The name of the proposed project, the name and title of the responsible official, and the name(s) of the national

forest(s) and/or ranger district(s) on which the proposed project will be implemented;

(5) A description of those aspects of the proposed project addressed by the objection, including specific issues

related to the proposed project; if applicable, how the objector believes the environmental analysis or draft decision 

specifically violates law, regulation, or policy; suggested remedies that would resolve the objection; supporting 

reasons for the reviewing officer to consider; and

(6) A statement that demonstrates the connection between prior specific written comments on the particular

proposed project or activity and the content of the objection, unless the objection concerns an issue that arose after 

the designated opportunity(ies) for comment (see paragraph (c) of this section).
Record of Decision ROD - 20 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Timely filing (36 CFR 218.9): Evidence of and responsibility for timely filing is described in §218.9. Objections must be 

postmarked or received by the Reviewing Officer, Regional Forester, within 45 days from the date of publication of notice 

of the objection in Medford’s Mail Tribune, the newspaper of record for the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. The 

publication date is the exclusive means for calculating the time to file an objection. Those wishing to file an objection 

should not rely upon dates or timeframe information provided by any other source.

Mail: Objections can be mailed to the Reviewing Officer at the address below. Objections delivered by mail must be 

received before the close of the fifth business day after the objection filing period. 

Regional Forester (Reviewing Officer)

Pacific Northwest Regional Office

Attn: 1570 Appeals

P.O. Box 3623

Portland, OR 97208-3623

Email: Objections can be filed electronically at: objections-pnw-regional-office@fs.fed.us. Please put OBJECTION and

the project name in the subject line. Electronic objections must be submitted as part of an actual e-mail message, or as 

an attachment in Microsoft Word (.doc), rich text format (.rtf), or portable document format (.pdf) only. For electronically 

mailed objections, the sender should receive an automated electronic acknowledgement from the agency as 

confirmation of receipt. If the sender does not receive an automated acknowledgement of receipt of the objection, it is 

the sender’s responsibility to ensure timely receipt by other means.

Hand-delivery: Objections can be hand delivered to the Pacific Northwest Regional Office, 1220 SW 3rd Avenue, 

Portland, Oregon, between 8:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday except legal holidays. Please note that this is 

a new physical address as of September, 2013.

Fax: Objections can be faxed to the Regional Forester, Attn: 1570 Objections at (503) 808-2339. Please verify receipt.

218 Draft

(Record of Decision has not been signed)

__________________________________________ __________________

Robert G. MacWhorter, Date

Forest Supervisor, Responsible Official

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest

For Further Information concerning the specific actions authorized by my decision, you may contact:

Jessie Berner, District Ranger or

Wesley Crum, Project Leader

42861 Highway 242

Powers OR 97466

Phone: (541) 439-6200
ATTACHMENT A

Implementation Strategy

ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 1 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

EDEN RIDGE TIMBER SALES 

RECORD OF DECISION

ATTACHMENT A

Implementation Strategy

Contents

I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. ROD A-2

A. Background ............................................................................................................ ROD A-2

B. Assumptions Regarding Treatment Application (Implementation) .................. ROD A-3

II. THE DECISION ............................................................................................................... ROD A-3

A. Details of Authorized Actions ............................................................................... ROD A-4

B. Similar and/or Related Actions ............................................................................. ROD A-12

C. Process for Change during Implementation ....................................................... ROD A-14

III. TREATMENT ELEMENTS ............................................................................................ ROD A-15

A. Silviculture .............................................................................................................. ROD A-15

B. Silvicultural Treatments ........................................................................................ ROD A-17

C. Snags and Down Woody Material ......................................................................... ROD A-19

D. Silvicultural Disease Treatments ......................................................................... ROD A-22

E. Activity Fuels Treatments ..................................................................................... ROD A-26

F. Harvest (Logging) Systems ................................................................................... ROD A-27

G. Existing Road (Access) Systems ......................................................................... ROD A-32

H. Proposed Road (Access) Systems ...................................................................... ROD A-33

Maps

MAP ROD A-1. Modified Alternative 2 ...............................................................................................ROD A-11

MAP ROD A-2. Non-Commercial Treatments ....................................................................................ROD A-13

MAP ROD A-3. POC Treatments ..........................................................................................................ROD A-24

MAP ROD A-4. Potential Helicopter Landing Sites ...........................................................................ROD A-31

Tables

Table ROD A-1. Modified Alternative 2 - Silvicultural Treatments ................................................ROD A-4

Table ROD A-2. New Classified (System) Road Construction (and Temporary Road Construction)

Modified Alternative 2 ..............................................................................................ROD A-7

Table ROD A-3. Classified Road Use, Maintenance, & Reconstruction

Modified Alternative 2 ..............................................................................................ROD A-9

Table ROD A-4. Eden Ridge Non-Commercial Treatment Units .....................................................ROD A-12

Table ROD A-5. Stand Competition from Calculated Relative Density (Curtis 1982) ..................ROD A-16

Table ROD A-6. Snag Data for Western Hemlock Plant Series ........................................................ROD A-21

Table ROD A-7. Down Wood Data for Western Hemlock Plant Series ..........................................ROD A-21

Table ROD A-8. POC Wide-Thin Gap Treatments (Modified Alternative 2) .................................ROD A-25

Table ROD A-9. POC Roadside Sanitation Treatments (Modified Alternative 2) .........................ROD A-26

Table ROD A-10. Road Maintenance Level Definitions ....................................................................ROD A-32

Figures

Figure ROD A-1. Examples of Stand Treatments; Eden Ridge Timber Sales ................................ROD A-19

Figure ROD A-2. Roadside Sanitation Recommendation ..................................................................ROD A-25
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 2 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

I. INTRODUCTION

This Project Implementation Strategy has been developed to provide instructions and/or guidance to carry 

out the implementation of the selected activities. This Project Implementation Strategy is to be used and 

referred to by Forest Service vegetation management personnel, resource specialists and other project 

implementation personnel in the advancement of various vegetation management projects as well as other 

activities identified and authorized in the Record of Decision (ROD) for Eden Ridge Timber Sales.

This Strategy is not a subsequent decision document that decides which stands are to be selected and/or 

combined to form a sale or sales, nor is it a schedule of when bundled units and contracts will ultimately 

be offered as commercial timber sales. These tasks are solely associated with implementation and would 

likely be documented in an internal schedule of implementation treatments.

A. Background

Through a preliminary field examination process, candidate stands were identified. The majority of 

candidate stands are currently overstocked. Vegetative competition has increased over time since stand 

initiation in the late 1930s and 1940s due to the lack of early stand management. Proposed treatments are

designed to reduce stand densities through stocking level control to allow residual trees to increase in both 

vigor and growth. Candidate stands are expected to respond well to thinning since stands are less than 80 

years old.

Within candidate stands, the more abundant species are Douglas-fir and western hemlock. Vegetative 

competition has increased over time resulting in minor populations of other tree species such as PortOrford-cedar, red alder, chinquapin, and tanoak. Other species are a mixture primarily of vine maple, 

Pacific rhododendron, tanoak, evergreen huckleberry, dwarf Oregongrape and salal in the understory.

The overall Purpose of this project is to implement direction from the 1989 Land and Resource 

Management Plan for the Siskiyou National Forest, as amended. The Eden Ridge Timber Sales Project 

will occur within two Land Allocations; Matrix and Riparian Reserve. The majority of the Eden Ridge 

Timber Sales proposal is on lands allocated to Matrix which emphasizes obtaining a full yield of timber 

within the capability of the land. Most scheduled timber harvest and other silvicultural activities will be 

conducted in that portion of the Matrix with suitable forest lands (NW Forest Plan, page C-39). 

Specifically for the Eden Ridge Timber Sales Project, Needs within Matrix include: 

Improvement of Overall Forest Vigor and Resiliency – There is a need for tree stocking level control 

that will reduce current stand densities through intermediate harvest thinning treatments to sustain or 

increase tree growth and improve forest vigor and resiliency. Density management will release remaining 

trees from inter-tree competition for sunlight, water and soil nutrients when compared to untreated areas. 

Minor portions of the Planning Area infected with root diseases will be managed to harvest trees 

predisposed to pathogen infection and retain or plant resistant tree species to improve forest health.

Older legacy (remnant) trees, minor conifer tree species (in portions of stands uninfected with root 

disease), hardwoods, existing snags and coarse woody material will be retained where feasible to maintain 

or improve forest diversity. The desired condition is a sustainable forest resilient to drought, wind, 

insects, disease, fire and other natural disturbances. 

Contribution of Commercial Timber to the Probable Sale Quantity – Candidate stands are primarily 

allocated to Matrix and contribute to the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest Probable Sale Quantity 

(PSQ). PSQ is the estimated output of commercial timber and other commodities assigned to the Forest 

under the 1994 Northwest Forest Plan.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 3 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

For the Eden Ridge Planning Area within Riparian Reserve, there is an initial need to restore (improve) 

riparian conditions for late-successional forest habitat, lost by historical clear-cut logging. Specifically 

for the Eden Ridge Timber Sales project, Needs within Riparian Reserve include: 

Maintain and Restore Riparian Reserves - Meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives – There is a 

need to accelerate the development of late-successional stand conditions, such as older forest stand 

characteristics, increase conifer growth rates and provide for larger remnant conifers and hardwoods. 

There is a need to treat vegetation within the Riparian Reserves to meet the intent of Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy Objectives and lead to improved conditions. Treatments would move the riparian 

structure to trend toward the natural range of variability in the long term.

Many riparian areas are currently dominated by smaller diameter Douglas-fir and some hardwoods. Most 

are lacking adequate amounts of large wood material, downed logs, and large tree structure. Like 

treatment in the uplands, thinning treatments of these areas will reduce competition on the retained 

(residual) trees for light, nutrients, water and growing space. These residual trees will develop larger 

canopies, display better vigor and put on diameter growth faster than if left untreated. Production of 

wood volume is a by-product of this treatment. 

The Purpose of this action is to respond to the stated Needs. In enacting treatments to meet the above 

stated needs, the overall project and/or its activities have been designed to minimize soil impacts (erosion, 

compaction and/or displacement); minimize damage to residual trees during treatment; reduce the risk of 

effects from insect and disease infestations; minimize or reduce the potential for high severity, stand 

replacement wildfires; maintain and restore (improve) aquatic conditions in terms of attainment of 

Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives; minimize adverse effects, including cumulative effects, on all 

other resources; provide wood products for local and regional markets (including firewood); and be an 

operational and economically sustainable project for this and future entries.

B. Assumptions Regarding Treatment Application (Implementation)

A key assumption associated with the Record of Decision (ROD) for Eden Ridge Timber Sales is the basis 

of implementation. The decision utilizes a concept that treatments will be located and conducted as 

specified in the design of the decision, the Project Design Criteria and/or employment of specific 

Mitigation Measures. The on-the-ground conditions that trigger these criteria are to be identified and 

validated at the time of, or concurrent with implementation (and prior to operation).

Given these assumptions, for variable density management, there is no intent to treat any candidate 

stand, unless it needs and would benefit from treatments. When current relative density is not greater 

than 50 percent (i.e., it is not overly dense) it would not be treated. 

Contracts for commercial harvest or stewardship operations will require certain provisions and mitigation 

measures to be incorporated as contract requirements. The Forest Service has long-standing experience in 

applying mitigation measures under traditional timber sale contracts; the Forest Service is responsible for

enforcing the implementation of contract provisions.

II. THE DECISION

The ROD identifies Alternative 2, with modifications, as the selected course of action. Modified 

Alternative 2 will enact the following vegetation management and connected actions: 3,310 acres of 

commercial variable density management thinning treatments (in several separate timber sales), on 

76 units, producing approximately 53 million board feet of commercial timber volume.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 4 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

In general, FEIS Alternative 2 was selected, with retention of all silvicultural elements and most of 

the connected actions. Modifications were made to Alternative 2, based on public and other 

agencies comments, as well as Interdisciplinary Team recommendations regarding roads located in 

sensitive areas, primarily associated with the Coal Creek subwatershed. These modifications, i.e., 

dropping certain roads, changed the access opportunities, and therefore necessitated modification 

of certain units and the anticipated logging systems.

Ground-based yarding systems are anticipated to be used on approximately 1,883 acres, or 57%; skyline 

systems would be used on approximately 1,343 acres, or 40% of the treated area; and helicopter systems 

would be used on approximately 88 acres, or 3% of the treated area.

Also included is the use of approximately 31 miles of existing Classified roads, construction of 9.48 miles 

of new Classified road (in 37 segments), construction and decommissioning of 0.03 miles of temporary 

road, use and reconstruction of 6.1 miles of existing Classified road, use of and maintenance of 5.5 miles

of existing Classified road; and 363 acres of non-commercial silvicultural treatments.

For Eden Ridge Timber Sales, “Project Design Criteria” are designed to assist in developing timber sale 

proposals and/or are to be employed during on-the ground project designation/implementation to address 

overall objectives (attain the Purpose and Need), and to manage resource objectives for consequences 

(obtain compliance with Standards and Guidelines). Other elements that manage consequences during 

actual operations are termed “Mitigation Measures.” The decision includes and requires Project Design 

Criteria (PDCs) and Mitigation Measures as documented in ROD Attachment B.

Monitoring is important for tracking the implementation of a project; ensuring activities are implemented 

as planned as well as to measure success in meeting the stated project goals and objectives. Project 

activities will be monitored during and following implementation to ensure design features and mitigation 

measures are implemented as specified under my decision. Detailed discussion on monitoring 

methodology is documented in ROD Attachment C.

A. Details of Authorized Actions

The following table (Table ROD A-1) lists the units of commercial and other silvicultural prescriptions 

associated with the decision, estimated total acres and acres for Matrix and Riparian Reserve treatments, 

anticipated logging systems, activity fuels treatment and reference to road access associated with this 

decision. Table ROD A-2 identifies the associated new Classified (System) road construction (and 

Temporary Road Construction) along with analysis of modifications to Alternative 2. Table ROD A-3 

identifies planned Classified road use, maintenance, and reconstruction needs.

MAP ROD A-1 shows the general locations and descriptions of silvicultural treatments, road use and 

proposed road construction, reconstruction, and maintenance needs associated with the decision.

Table ROD A-1. Modified Alternative 2 - Silvicultural Treatments

Unit 

Reference

Estimated 

Unit Acres

Matrix 

Acres 

Riparian 

Reserve 

Acres 

Within 

Unit

Silvicultural 

Prescription

Proposed 

Logging 

System

Fuels 

Treatment

Existing 

Road 

Access

New Road 

Access 

Reference

001 187 95 92 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT GB YTA CRM & CRR -

002 137 108 29 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT GB YTA CRM -

003 135 63 72 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT S YTA,P & B CRU A

004 8 8 0 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT GB YTA, P & B - A

005 126 66 60 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT GB YTA, P & B - B

006 102 87 15 VDT/LRR/POCPLT/POC-RS GB YTA, P & B CRU & CRR D

007 70 54 16 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT GB YTA, P & B CRU E1, E2

101 65 46 19 VDT/LRR/POC- GB YTA, P & B CRU F
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 5 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Unit 

Reference

Estimated 

Unit Acres

Matrix 

Acres 

Riparian 

Reserve 

Acres 

Within 

Unit

Silvicultural 

Prescription

Proposed 

Logging 

System

Fuels 

Treatment

Existing 

Road 

Access

New Road 

Access 

Reference

PLT/POC-RS

102 46 32 14 VDT/LRR/POCPLT/POC-RS S YTA, P & B CRU G

103 61 46 15 VDT/LRR/POCWTG/POC-RS S YTA CRU H

201 117 105 12 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT GB YTA, P & B CRU -

202 57 24 33 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT S YTA, P & b CRU -

203 19 15 4 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT GB YTA, P & B CRU -

204 48 40 8 VDT S YTA, P & B - E1, E3

205 14 13 1 VDT S YTA - E2

206 25 18 7 VDT GB YTA CRU & CRR I

207 17 10 7 VDT GB YTA CRR I & J

208 21 13 8 VDT S YTA CRM -

209 79 41 38 VDT S YTA, P & B CRM K & L

210 13 13 0 VDT GB YTA CRM C & M

211 23 11 12 VDT S YTA CRM C & M

212 26 18 8 VDT S YTA, P & B CRM C & M

213 22 8 14 VDT S YTA CRM N

214 36 18 18 VDT S YTA, P & B CRU

215 29 29 0 VDT S YTA, P & B - O1, O2

216 17 17 0 VDT GB YTA - O1, O3

217 6 6 0 VDT S YTA, P & B - D

218 17 14 3 VDT GB YTA, P & B CRU -

301 9 3 10 VDT/P-3 treatment S YTA, P & B CRU -

302 7 5 2 VDT/P-3 treatment H YTA, P & B CRU -

303 12 12 0 VDT GB YTA, P & B CRU P1 &P2

304 6 6 0 VDT H YTA -

305 8 7 1 VDT S YTA - P3

306 15 11 4 VDT H YTA -

307 24 15 9 VDT S YTA -

308 13 1 12 VDT H YTA -

309 14 3 11 VDT GB YTA, P & B CU R

310 49 37 12 VDT GB YTA - S1, S2

311 36 24 12 VDT GB YTA CRR S1, S2, S3, S4, 

S5, S6 & T

312 38 19 19 VDT S YTA CRR S1, S2, S3, S4, 

S5 & S6 

313 93 73 20 VDT GB YTA CRR S1, S2, S3, & T 

314 40 22 18 VDT S YTA - T

315 26 22 4 VDT S YTA CRR S1, S2, S3, S4, 

S5, S6 & S8

316 33 23 10 VDT S YTA - T

317 74 48 26 VDT GB YTA CRR S1, S2, S3, S4, 

S5, S6 & S8

318 25 20 5 VDT GB YTA CRR -

319 86 72 14 VDT/ POC-RS GB YTA CRU & CRR T

320 37 21 16 VDT/LRR/POCPLT/POC-RS S YTA CRU T

321 16 16 0 VDT S YTA CRR -

322 35 35 0 VDT GB YTA CRR V

323 31 11 20 VDT S YTA CRR V

324 95 58 36 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT GB YTA CRR U

325a 98 54 44 VDT/LRR/POCPLT/POC-RS GB YTA, P & B CRU Y

325b 36 20 16 VDT/LRR/POCPLT/POC-RS S YTA, P & B CRU X

326 127 72 55

VDT/POC-WTG/

POC-RS/ P3,P8,P9 

treatment

GB YTA CRR

327 47 23 23 VDT/LRR/POC-PLT/ 

POC-WTG/ POC-RS H YTA CRR
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 6 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Unit 

Reference

Estimated 

Unit Acres

Matrix 

Acres 

Riparian 

Reserve 

Acres 

Within 

Unit

Silvicultural 

Prescription

Proposed 

Logging 

System

Fuels 

Treatment

Existing 

Road 

Access

New Road 

Access 

Reference

328 80 40 40 VDT/ POC-RS/P3 

treatment S YTA - D

329 41 14 27

VDT/POCWTG/POC-RS/P9 

treatment

S YTA CRR -

330 18 7 11 VDT POC-RS/P9 

treatment GB YTA CRR -

331 13 7 6

VDT/POC-WTG/ 

POC-RS/P3 

treatment

S YTA, P & B CRR -

332 44 39 5

VDT/POCWTG/POC-RS GB YTA, P & B CRU -

333 86 65 21 VDT/POCWTG/POC-RS GB YTA, P & B CRU -

334 88 46 42 VDT/POCWTG/POC-RS S YTA, P & B CRU

335 38 27 11 VDT/POCWTG/POC-RS S YTA, P & B CRU -

336 49 24 25 VDT/POCWTG/POC-RS S YTA, P & B CRU -

337 19 16 3 VDT S YTA, P & B - C & M

338 24 2 22 VDT S N/A CRR S1, S2, S3, S4, 

& T

340 19 11 8 VDT/ POC-RS S YTA, P & B - Q4

341 25 12 13 VDT/ POC-RS GB YTA, P & B CRU Q4

342 16 7 9 VDT/ POC-RS S YTA CRU -

343 18 18 0 VDT/ POC-RS GB YTA - Q1, Q3

344 30 27 3 VDT/ POC-RS S YTA, P & B - Q1, Q3

345 17 17 0 VDT/ POC-RS GB YTA, P & B CRU -

401 8 8 0 VDT/P6 treatment GB YTA CRU -

402 20 14 6 VDT/P6 treatment S YTA CRU -

403 5 2 3 VDT S YTA CRU -

76 Total 

Units 3,310 2,154 1,156

There is no Unit 339

Table Notes and Legend

000s Middle Fork Coquille 5th Field, (Lower) Rock Creek 6th Field watershed

100s Middle Fork Coquille 5th Field, Myrtle Creek 6th Field watershed

200s South Fork Coquille 5th Field, Wooden Rock Creek 6th Field watershed (Headwaters SF Coquille)

300s South Fork Coquille 5th Field, Coal Creek 6th Field watershed

400s South Fork Coquille 5th Field, Mill Creek 6th Field watershed

VDT Variable Density Thinning (Commercial)

POC-PLT Port Orford Cedar; site prep and planting of resistant POC seedlings

POC-WTG Port Orford Cedar; Wide Thin Gap, eradication treatment

POC-RS Port Orford Cedar; Roadside Sanitation

LRR Laminated Root Rot; gap treatments centered around disease pockets, possible plant with POC and other species

P-# Plantation thinning (circa 1939-1963); commercial and non-commercial thinning

YTA Yarding Tops Attached

P&B Pile and Burn

GB Ground based logging systems

S Skyline logging systems

CRU Classified road use

CRM Classified road maintenance with reconstruction

CRR Classified road use with reconstruction
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 7 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Table ROD A-2. New Classified (System) Road Construction (and Temporary Road Construction) - Modified Alternative 2

Road 

Segment 

Reference

Length 

(miles) Location Notes Units AccessedReference

Area 

Accessed

(acres)

Allocation 

Accessed 

Notes

Comments

A 0.23 Ridgetop/shoulder road, skyline access, Part of 003 81 Mostly M

B 0.74 Crosses some riparian; some grade up to 10% 005 126 Mixed

C 0.03 Begins on PVT; ties to Road M for FS access - - -

Needed for Road M; Cost-Share with 

private lands 

D 0.60 Ridgetop road, skyline access 006, 217, 218, 328 128 Mostly M

E1 0.34 Ridgetop road, skyline and tractor access Part of 007, 204 18 Mostly M

E2 0.22 Ridgetop road, skyline and tractor access Part of 007, 205 Mostly M

E3 0.20 Ridgetop road, skyline access Part of 204 37 Mostly M

F 0.39 Crosses riparian, minimal grade 101 55 Mostly M

G 0.15 Ridgetop road, skyline access, no grade Part of 102 25 Mostly M

H 0.21 Ridgetop road, skyline access, no grade Part of 103 31 Mostly M

I 0.09 Ties to existing route planned for reconstruction Part of 206 - Mostly M Needed for Road 445

J 0.08 Crosses riparian; provides tractor access 207 17 Mostly M

K 0.36 Begins on PVT; for FS skyline access 1/3 of 209 22 Mostly M Cost-Share with private lands 

L 0.01 Begins on PVT; for FS skyline access 2/3 of 209 55 Mixed Cost Share with private lands

M 0.81 Ties to Road C for FS access, minimal grade 210, 211, 212, part 

of 332, 333, 337 117 Mostly M

N 0.04 Begins on PVT for FS skyline access 213 22 Mixed Cost-Share with private lands 

O1 0.28 First segment for skyline access; minimal grade Part of 344, 215 17 Mostly M

O2 0.23 Second segment for skyline access; minimal grade Part of 215, 216, 

343 33 Mostly M

O3 0.24 Third segment for skyline access; minimal grade 343, part of 344 33 Mostly M

O4 0.18 Additional segment for skyline access; minimal grade 340 17 Mixed

P1 0.06 Begins on PVT, ties to P2 for FS access. Easement 

granting access is in place. - - -

Needed for Road P2: Cost-Share with 

private lands 

P2 0.08 Ties to P1 for FS tractor access 303 12 Mostly M

P3 0.13 Short spur for skyline access 305 33 Mostly M

P4 0.11 Short Spur for skyline access 306 15 Mixed Changed yarding to helicopter and 

dropped from Alternative 2

Q1 0.11 Begins on PVT, ties to Q2 for FS access. Easement 

granting access is in place. - - -

Changed yarding and dropped from 

Alternative 2

Q2 0.05 Segment for tractor access 307 20 Mixed Changed yarding to skyline and 

dropped from Alternative 2

Q3 0.09 Segment to facilitate downhill yarding with full suspension 304 6 Mostly M Changed yarding to helicopter and 

dropped from Alternative 2
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 8 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Road 

Segment 

Reference

Length 

(miles) Location Notes Units AccessedReference

Area 

Accessed

(acres)

Allocation 

Accessed 

Notes

Comments

Q4 0.25 Temporary segment for tractor access 307, 308 19 Mostly RR Changed yarding to helicopter and 

dropped from Alternative 2

R 0.01 Temporary segment for tractor access 309 14 Mostly RR

S1 0.09 Joins existing road with existing road planned for 

reconstruction - - -

Needed for Road 299 & 298 

reconstruction

S2 0.12 Joins existing road with existing road planned for 

reconstruction, tractor access 310 49 Mostly M Needed for Road 299 reconstruction

S3 0.06 Construction of old railroad grade trestle to classified road - - - Needed for Road 299 reconstruction

S4 0.15 Segment for tractor access 311, 338 32 Mostly M

S5 0.05 Construction to bypass old railroad trestle - - - Needed for Road 299 reconstruction

S6 0.24 Additional segment for tractor & skyline access Part of 311, 312 38 Mixed

S7 0.11 Construction to bypass old railroad trestle - - - Needed for Road 299 reconstruction

S8 0.04 Construction to bypass old railroad trestle - - - Needed for Road 299 reconstruction

S9 0.06 Construction to bypass old railroad trestle - - - Needed for Road 299 reconstruction

T 1.93 Crosses some riparian; some grade up to 10% 313, 314, 316, part 

of 319, 320 237 Mostly M Mainline new road

U 0.38 Crosses some riparian; minimal grades 324 56 Mostly M

V 0.14 Ridgetop road, skyline and tractor access 322, 323 66 Mostly M

W 0.61 Toe slope crosses multiple riparian, tractor access 327, part 326 73 Mixed Changed yarding to helicopter and 

skyline, dropped from Alternative 2

X 0.22 Skyline access; minimal grade 325b 25 Mixed

Y 0.18 GB access; minimal grade 325a 74 Mixed

Z 0.35 Splits unit 334 into tractor and skyline with future access 

to non-commercial treatment area. 334 88 Mixed Changed yarding to all skyline and dropped from Alternative 2

TOTAL 9.48 Does not include dropped road segments P4, Q1, Q2, 

Q3, Q4, W or Z for Modified Alternative 2

Legend

M = Matrix

Mostly M = >70% Matrix

Mixed = Matrix and Riparian Reserve

Mostly RR = <30% Matrix
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 9 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Table ROD A-3. Classified Road Use, Maintenance, and Reconstruction – Modified Alternative 2

Classified Road Use Reference Miles

3300000 1.21

3358000 1.01

5000000 10.36

5000200 4.25

5000210 0.75

5000290 3.00

5000297 1.10

5000420 0.34

5000440 5.06

5000441 0.56

5000445 0.11

5000448 2.90

5000449 0.38

Classified Road Use Total 31.03

Classified Use & Maintenance 2000 0.76

2600100 0.26

5000444 0.42

5000445 0.89

5000446 0.35

5000450 1.01

5000670 1.75

5000671 0.06

Classified Use & Maintenance Total 5.50

Classified Use W/Reconstruction 5000291 0.10

5000298 0.18

5000299 2.02

5000299.1 0.03

5000442 1.24

5000442.1 0.18

5000443 0.72

5000446 0.31

5000447 0.19

5000448.1 0.45

5000451 0.65

Classified Use W/Reconstruct Total 6.07
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 10 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

This page is intentionally left blank
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 11 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

MAP ROD A-1. Modified Alternative 2
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 12 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

B. Similar and/or Related Actions

Similar actions, which when viewed with other reasonably foreseeable or proposed agency actions ,have 

similarities that provide a basis for

Similar actions, which when viewed with other reasonably foreseeable or proposed agency actions ,have 

similarities that provide a basis for evaluating their environmental consequences together, such as 

common timing or geography (40 CFR 1508.25(a)(3)). The Forest chose to analyze the following similar 

and/or related actions within the Eden Ridge FEIS, and they are now part of the decision.

These other miscellaneous actions are designed as resource enhancement, restoration, or improvements. 

These actions would occur in proximity to commercial and silvicultural stand treatments. They could be 

financed through collections generated via forthcoming timber sales (for example Knutson-Vandenberg 

[KV] funds), or through Forest Service appropriated resource and enhancement funding, or stewardship 

contract agreements. There may also be opportunities for public learning and interpretation of actions 

associated with this project.

Non-Commercial Treatments

Non-commercial treatments are proposed for 363 acres within the ER Planning Area (see Table ROD A-4,

and MAP ROD A-2). Options include restoration, rehabilitation, reforestation, removal or thinning of 

non-commercial sized trees. The purpose of these treatments, considered Timber Stand Improvement, is to 

comply with the National Forest Management Act of 1976 and the 1989 LRMP. 

Portions of proposed units for non-commercial treatments have high height to diameter ratios on 

overstory trees and forest health issues with laminated root rot, shallow soils and windthrow (e.g., Unit 

908). These areas may be treated by removing small diameter material for biomass and planting with 

POC and other resistant tree species. 

Some plantations within commercial unit boundaries are non-commercial due to tree size, density and 

high height to diameter ratios. These areas may also be treated (or skipped) by removing small diameter 

material for biomass and planting.

Table ROD A-4. Eden Ridge Non-Commercial Treatment Units

Unit 

Reference Acres

900 85

901 7

902 7

903 5

904 14

905 140

906 82

907 12

908 9

Total 363
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 13 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

MAP ROD A-2. Non-Commercial Treatments

Snag/Down Wood Creation

Following harvest operations, if KV, stewardship, or other funding is available, in areas where there is a 

lack of large snags needed for cavity nesting species, snags may be created from live trees left in stands. 

Creation can be through girdling, topping the trees with chain saws, blasting, inoculation with heart rot 

fungi, or deliberate injury. 

These methods would open the trunk to development of a hollow core used by woodpeckers and a variety 

of other birds, mammals, and other wildlife. Whenever possible, creation of snags over 20” dbh should 

be part of each prescription (see below for snag and large wood objectives for the western hemlock plant 

series in the coast geographic region, as applicable to the Eden Ridge Project).

Meadow Enhancement

Following harvest operations, the Eden Ridge Timber Sales Project may provide the funding mechanism 

if funding is available for non-commercial treatments to enhance meadow and other grassy area 

conditions. These treatments have already been analyzed under NEPA and a separate decision already 

made (Meadow Restoration and Enhancement Decision Memo, signed in November 2005). Treatments 

may include removal of encroaching brush and conifers, underburning and vehicle access controls. The 

site locations include Coal Meadows, Sweeney Meadows, proximity of Unit 316, and other identified 

locations within the Planning Area but outside of treatment units. Treatment of these sites will be

directed by Wildlife Biologists.

Stream Enhancement 

The Eden Ridge Project included placement of 150 large trees in stream channels and adjacent 

floodplains to increase channel stability, rearing habitat, pool formation, spawning gravel deposition, 

channel complexity, hiding cover, low velocity areas, and floodplain function. Live and dead trees may 

be removed from riparian areas to provide wood for enhancement projects, under special conditions 

described in the Project Design Criteria (see ROD Attachment B). 
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 14 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

This action could involve the use of log trucks and dump trucks for transport and excavator-type 

machinery, low ground pressure equipment, cable yarders, draft horses, or helicopters for placement. 

Plans and designs would be consistent with Forest Plan direction, funding opportunities, and watershed 

restoration plans (e.g., USDA FS 2006). 

Approximately 1 Mile of upper Coal Creek tributaries within Units 905 and 906 will have trees felled 

toward the channel and approximately 1 mile of Wooden Rock would have stream enhancement. 

Approximately 50 trees per mile will be placed within approximately 3 miles of stream (150 trees total, 

22,650 cubic feet). The proposed enhancement is located in resident fish habitat ranging from ten miles 

to twenty seven miles upstream of critical coho habitat and three to eight miles for essential fish habitat 

(see FEIS Appendix H).

Native Grass/Forb Seeding

Following harvest operations, if funding is available, seeding of disturbed sites associated with logging 

skid trails, landings, temporary roads and burned slash piles will reduce the opportunity for non-native 

plants(including noxious weeds) to invade disturbed sites and reduce erosion from exposed mineral soils. 

Seeding exposed mineral soil with native grass seed (~4-8 lbs/acre) will restore and improve forage for 

wildlife that benefit from grasses and forbs; e.g. deer, elk, mice, rabbits and their predators.

Invasive Plant Treatments

Monitor and treat invasive plants within Project Area boundaries to reduce/eliminate current populations 

and reduce the future spread of non-native vegetation. Treatment will be completed in disturbed areas 

within the watersheds by hand pulling only. Depending upon funding availability, monitor and treat 

invasive species within the Planning Area for up to 5 years after completion of the project.

Other Wildlife Opportunities

Following harvest operations, if funding is available, artificial nest/roost box creation for cavity nesting 

species may be appropriate. Locations include any created gaps/openings within all treatment units, 

meadows or grassy areas, and riparian areas within the Project Areas.

C. Process for Change during Implementation

Minor changes may be needed during implementation to better meet on-site resource management and 

protection objectives. Actual conditions on the ground may differ from map-delineated stands; therefore, 

there will be a need to be flexible and adjust treatments and/or stand boundaries as needed. Minor 

adjustments to unit boundaries may be needed during final layout for resource protection, to improve 

operational feasibility as determined through on-the-ground implementation and/or contract preparation, 

and to better meet the intent of the decision. Many of these minor changes will not present sufficient 

potential impacts to require any additional specific documentation or action to comply with applicable 

laws. Notable changes will be documented through implementation monitoring. 

On-going monitoring conducted in association with management activities authorized by the decision 

provide opportunity for adapting management techniques as needed to better meet the intent of the 

selected alternative as planned and approved. In some cases this may involve minor modifications or 

corrections during implementation. Project monitoring could result in the need to propose changes to 

authorized project actions; these changes will be subject to the requirements of the NEPA and other laws 

concerning such changes (see ROD).
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 15 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

III. TREATMENT ELEMENTS

This section provides more detail and assumptions, definitions, treatment objectives, and methodologies 

for elements of the decision and associated connected actions.

A. Silviculture

Background

The Planning Area is approximately 6,516 acres of Forest Service land within the South Fork Coquille 

River and the Middle Fork Coquille River 5th-Field watersheds, and the Headwaters of South Fork 

Coquille River (aka Wooden Rock Creek), Coal Creek, Mill Creek, Lower Rock Creek and Myrtle Creek 

6

th field watersheds. Adjacent private timber company lands owned by Plum Creek surround the Planning 

Area.

Forested stands in the Eden Ridge Planning Area were extensively railroad logged (clear-cut) in the 1920s 

and 1930s with steam donkeys as railroad lines were constructed through the area. Harvested areas were 

likely covered in slash or burned with abundant quantities of residual down wood still present today in 

many proposed units. 

Current Stand Condition

Overstory is dominantly composed of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) with subordinate amounts of 

western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) and minor amounts of Port-Orford-cedar (Chamaecyparis

lawsoniana). Hardwoods occur in the mid-story and understory and consist of chinquapin (Chrysolepis

chrysophylla), tanoak (Notholithocarpus densiflorus) and some red alder (Alnus rubra) occurring in 

riparian areas adjacent to streams. Conifer regeneration is mostly western hemlock with more localized 

profuse Port-Orford-cedar seedlings/saplings associated with drainages and areas with high water tables. 

Understory vegetation dominantly consists of salal (Gaultheria shallon), Pacific rhododendron 

(Rhododendron macrophyllum), tall in places (> 10 feet), and lower covers of dwarf Oregongrape 

(Mahonia nervosa), prince’s pine (Chimaphila Pursh), sword fern (Polystichum munitum), western 

twinflower (Linnaea borealis), woods rose (Rosa gymnocarpa), evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium

ovatum) and some grasses.

Candidate stands are mostly single-storied in stem exclusion (Oliver, 1996) with scattered openings from 

root disease infection in the northern portion of the Planning Area that have more multi-layered structure 

from natural regeneration of conifers and hardwoods. Live crowns are receding from dense stand 

conditions with crown ratio ranging 15-20% on suppressed and intermediate crown class trees to 30-40% 

for dominant and codominant trees. Hardwood thickets of chinquapin are present and interspersed within 

stands and are associated with rocky, shallow soils (Atzet, Wheeler, 1989) and rock outcrops. Candidate 

stands are generally 60-75 years old. 

Relative Density

Relative Density (RD) is a measure of a stand’s occupied density compared to a theoretical maximum 

density. RD measures the number of trees per acre independent of site qualities such as light, water, and 

nutrients and serves as a measure of competition for growing space. 

Relative Density index is used on ER for determining thinning treatment thresholds for candidate stands. 

RD is calculated using quadratic mean diameter and stand basal area (Curtis 1982) or by dividing a 

stand’s existing Stand Density Index (SDI) (Reineke 1933) by a maximum SDI characteristic of the 

stand’s species composition (Woodall 2009). The SDI maximum for Douglas-fir in Oregon (Larsen, 

2001) was used for ER. Calculated RD numbers describe stand competition as follows (Ellen 1984):
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 16 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Table ROD A-5. Stand Competition from Calculated Relative Density (Curtis 1982)

70%+ Grossly overstocked (unmanaged mature stands)

60% Approximate “normal” stocking

50-70% Stand density sufficient to cause competition-related mortality

35-50% Stand vigor and growth are maximized

<35% Individual tree growth maximized

Previous environmental analysis of similar stands on Powers and Gold Beach Ranger Districts identified 

a RD of 50% as a threshold of undesirable competition-related tree mortality (USDA 2007). This RD 

threshold is used for treatments on Eden Ridge.

Previous Timber Stand Exams

A data query of the Forest’s existing vegetation GIS layer displays 1,996 acres exceeding 50% RD in 

candidate stands for Eden Ridge Timber Sales. Queried polygons are concentrated in the eastern portion 

of the Planning Area and are associated with the more productive Preacher-Bohannon soils. These areas 

are higher priority for treatment though computer-generated existing vegetation data will need ground 

verification at the stand-level for determining data accuracy and developing site-specific silvicultural 

prescriptions. 

2012 Riparian Reserve Stand Exams

Additional stand exam plots taken within Riparian Reserves during summer 2012 showed 165 out of 199 

plots (83%) with RD greater than 50%. Species composition is 91% Douglas-fir, 3% western hemlock, 

3% Port-Orford-cedar, 2% tanoak and <1% chinkapin. Stand exams show that the majority of Riparian 

Reserves are overstocked with a high RD, and that there is a lack of species diversity.

Stand exams showed tree heights ranged 67 to 145 feet with an average height of 95 feet. Tree diameters 

ranged 12 to 27 inches with an average diameter of 17 inches. Adoption and implementation of the 2011 

Northwest Forest Plan Temperature TMDL Implementation Strategies with the FEIS will increase the 

Primary Shade Zone width based on slope and tree height. Tree heights measured in Riparian Reserves 

during the 2012 stand exams indicate the primary shade zones for Eden Ridge Timber Sales would range 

50 to 85 feet on both side of a stream course. These areas would allow for natural suppression processes 

to occur and produce snags (Lutz 2005; Pabst 2003) that would be available for future recruitment of 

down woody material into the stream channel to restore and maintain Aquatic Conservation Strategy 

objectives.

Outside of the Primary Shade Zone is where riparian thinning will occur. These areas will be thinned to 

expedite large tree development while maintaining 50% canopy cover as silvicultural objectives to restore 

structural diversity goals stated in the ACS objectives and expedite development of late seral conditions 

that were historically present in this area and serve as recruitment sources for large wood (USDA 1995). 

Field work in potential treatment units during the 2010 field season noted Riparian Reserves of 175 to 

350 feet (one site potential tree = 175 feet) overlapping into upland forest types. Silvicultural (FVS) 

modeling of upland stands (FEIS Appendix B) displayed higher tree mortality, lower tree diameters 

(QMD) and slower basal area growth for un-treated stands, compared to stands that were thinned. 

One conclusion in a recent ‘The Science of Thinning to Meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives in 

Northwest Forest Plan Riparian Reserves’ held October 30, 2012 at La Sells Stewart Center on the OSU 

campus workshop (Spies, Pollock, Reeves, Beechie) in Corvallis, Oregon noted thinning is most 

beneficial in dense young stands < 80 years old and has the greatest potential for ecological benefits to 

accelerate development of older forest structure. These larger green trees would be available to other 

processes (debris torrents, wind storms, etc.) for potential live delivery to the riparian system for future 

achievement of ACS objectives.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 17 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

B. Silvicultural Treatments

The primary silvicultural objective for Eden Ridge Timber Sales is to control existing dense stocking 

conditions and to treat subordinate amounts of root disease infection within Matrix candidate stands to 

improve forest health and to sustain or increase tree growth and vigor. Intermediate commercial harvest 

treatments using variable density thinning (VDT) techniques are proposed. Riparian Reserve treatments 

are designed to maintain or restore (improve) riparian stand conditions to meet NWFP Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy Objectives.

Variable Density Thinning

Research (Carey 2003) (Chan 2004) (Tappeiner 1997) has compared variable density thinning with 

traditional thinning and no treatment and found that introducing variability resulted in greater numbers of 

species of birds, lichens, bryophytes, fungi, and small mammals. Many species that are particularly at 

risk such as Threatened species (including spotted owls and anadromous fish), sensitive species, and 

Survey and Manage species are at risk because their required habitats have been altered by clear-cutting 

in the past (USDA USDI 1994). Variable density thinning to enhance diversity will benefit these species.

VDT uses a combination of low and crown thinning to release larger dominant and co-dominant trees. 

Spacing between trees is variable depending on tree diameter distribution on the ground and thinning 

intensity. Individual stand characteristics will be heterogeneous and post-harvest tree spacing will not 

have a rigid, grid-like appearance. 

Intensity of density management treatments ranges from Light (150-225 trees per acre [tpa]), Medium 

(90-150 tpa) or Heavy (50-90 tpa) thinning with a target relative density (RD) of approximately 35-50%. 

Tree species composition is maintained or enhanced by favoring a diverse mixture of conifers and 

hardwoods (see Figure ROD A-1). 

Stocking level control to reduce stand density to a RD of 35-50% will allow stand vigor and growth to be 

maximized (Ellen 1984) by creating more growing space for retained trees and controlling inter-tree 

competition for site resources. Retained trees will ideally have 40% live crown ratios following treatment 

to respond to increased availability of site resources. A live crown ratio of 40% represents a generally 

acceptable level of individual tree vigor (Daniel et al., 1979). 

Although maximum gross production in coastal Douglas-fir is obtained when RD exceed 40%, thinning 

to relative densities below this optimum may produce less growth per unit area but this would be offset by 

greater growth per tree (Drew and Flewelling; 1979). Reducing treated stands to this target 35-50% RD 

range will achieve desired conditions for Matrix of sustainable, cost-efficient timber production while 

treating candidate stands to improve forest health and resiliency. 

Habitat conditions for wildlife and fish will be improved from treatments within Riparian Reserves. This 

means increased vegetative and structural diversity and species (over current conditions); maintenance or 

improvement of shading capability of streams; improvement of large wood retention and large wood 

recruitment, and providing suitable amounts of snags and/or replacement habitat for dependent species.

In order to maintain northern spotted owl dispersal habitat, reducing RD to these levels would result in 

canopy cover within treated stands to be maintained at 40% or greater.

Future thinning treatments could occur when stand density grows back to 50% RD or when dominant and 

co-dominant trees have about 40% live crown ratios. For Douglas-fir, a live crown ratio of 40% appears 

to correspond with a SDI of about 50% of the maximum SDI (i.e., 50% RD) (Long 1985).
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 18 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Gaps

Gaps are small areas where most or all trees are removed in patches scattered through a thinned stand. 

Gaps can provide breaks in an otherwise uniform canopy allowing sunlight to reach the ground. Where 

gaps are created, seedlings and ground vegetation would naturally regenerate resulting in a multi-storied 

canopy with both vertical and horizontal diversity.

For Eden Ridge, VDT may include creation of irregular shaped openings (i.e., gaps) interspersed within 

some thinning units to primarily treat laminated root rot infection centers. Forest heath treatments will 

harvest all susceptible tree species (Douglas-fir, white fir, western hemlock) within and along the 

perimeter of infection pockets and 50-100’ out from the last symptomatic tree while favoring resistant or 

immune species for leave trees. Gaps may be site prepared and planted afterwards with Port-Orford-cedar 

seedlings (see planting) for improving stand health and stocking conditions to meet sustainable timber 

harvest objectives while enhancing structural and species diversity. Gap size is estimated to be 1⁄4 to 2 

acres depending on extent of infection centers and proximity to existing openings on adjacent private 

timber company lands. Larger gap sizes are estimated to occur in the northeastern corner (Units 002 and 

201; each 2 acre root disease treatment area would be < 2% of unit acres) to treat smaller connected root 

rot infection pockets (see Map B-13 in Silvicultural Diagnosis Report, FEIS Appendix B). 

Additionally, portions of dense stands where live tree crowns are <15-20% and not likely to respond to 

thinning may also receive gap treatments. 

Skips

Skips are small areas where no trees are cut in patches scattered through a thinned stand. Skips provide 

dense shade and a place to optimize snag development. In Eden Ridge, VDT may include no-thin areas 

(i.e., skips). Skips can be strategically placed to protect hardwood thickets, minor tree species, pockets of 

large down wood, other unique stand attributes (e.g., large woody material remaining from historical 

railroad logging) or inaccessible areas (see Figure ROD A-1.).

Wide-Thin Gaps

Wide-thin gaps (WTG) may occur around genetic trees selected for cone collection, Port-Orford-cedar 

root disease pockets favoring resistant trees, or dominant tree release of desirable trees from competing 

vegetation. Generally, one (1) to four (4) trees will be retained in WTG (Figure ROD A-1.). The size of 

WTG will be approximately 1⁄4 - 1⁄2 acre.

Thinning treatments are designed to enhance development of late seral conditions as recommended in the 

South Fork Coquille Watershed Analysis (1995) by moving stand structure forward by increasing tree 

growth through density management, creating structural diversity through skip and gap treatments and to 

improve forest health and resistance to forest pathogens. 

VDT treatments will harvest conifers with diameters ranging approximately 7-24 inches and larger. 

Extracted commercial timber volume is estimated to range 8-20 thousand board feet (mbf) per acre and 

could potentially yield 50 million board feet for the entire project. 

Site-specific, integrated silvicultural prescriptions will be developed; these prescriptions will describe 

desired conditions of treated stands and associated stand structures, tree species composition, canopy 

retention, tree spacing or basal area retention, fuels treatments, snag numbers (where present), large 

woody material and other key stand components. These will be specific to the allocations involved, i.e., 

Matrix or Riparian Reserve. Final silvicultural prescriptions will be approved by Region 6 certified 

silviculturists working closely with resource specialists to ensure integrated resource objectives are met. 

No old residual trees (old-growth) or remnant trees would be cut, except for potential danger trees. If 

remnant trees were felled as danger trees, they will not be removed.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 19 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Figure ROD A-1. Examples of Stand Treatments; Eden Ridge Timber Sales Figure 1. Illustration of Stand Treatments

 

 

 

C. Snags and Down Woody Material

The Siskiyou National Forest LRMP (1989) is the existing policy direction for snags and coarse down 

wood objectives. However, scientific studies on wildlife habitat (Johnson, O’Neil, 2001) have 

determined that snag retention based on biological potential is a flawed technique. This technique was 

used for determining snag requirement standards and guidelines in the LRMP.

The Southwestern Oregon Provincial Interagency Executive Committee requested a province-wide 

process be developed for determining levels of snags and down woody material in forests in the late 

1990s. As a result, landscape stratification based on Plant Association Groups (PAGs), was developed 

across the Forest. 

4. SKIP

5. WIDE -THIN GAP

(1⁄4 to 1⁄2 ACRE OPENINGS WITH A 

DOMINANT TREE RETAINED)

(1⁄4 to 2 ACRE

OPENINGS)
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 20 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Ecological processes within PAGs vary due to changes in climate, topography and soil. Each PAG has a 

mean and range for snags and down wood derived from ecological plot data. Recommended means and 

ranges (standard deviations) are broken into diameter classes: 6 to 9 inches, 10 to 19 inches and 20 inches 

and greater and into decay classes: 1 through 5 (Siskiyou NF, 2000; White et al., unpubl.). 

Because the Forest’s PAG data is at a finer scale, the Forest is currently using plant series data from new 

PAG classifications, delineated by geographical regions (Cascades, Siskiyous, Coast), for determining 

snag and down wood objectives on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. The PAG approach being 

utilized by the Forest for snag and down wood objectives meets and exceeds the Forest Plan standards.

Under the decision, snags and down wood will be retained to support ecosystem function (see FEIS 

Appendix G, Wildlife Report). Management activities shall be planned to maintain enough large woody 

material (dead and down) to maintain a healthy forest ecosystem for multiple species. Large down woody 

material left from historical railroad logging represent a unique situation and every effort to avoid 

disturbance and maintain this existing material should be made. LWM already on the ground would be 

protected from disturbance to the greatest extent possible during logging and other land management 

activities that might destroy the integrity of the substrate.

Evaluations will occur after density management treatments to assess potential needs for snag/down wood 

creation. In areas lacking adequate amounts of down woody material (include snags in calculations), 

green trees may be felled. Any leave trees damaged during harvest operations will be left standing or 

felled for safety, but left on site. The intent is to provide future snags or trees with cavities or deformities 

utilized by wildlife. 

Observations based on an informal walk through candidate stands prior to 2009 by the previous district 

silviculturists noted large woody material (LWM), 20 inch plus diameter at breast height (dbh), limited on 

the forest floor. Where observed, LWM was in the decomposition class 4 and 5 range (soft), having been 

left during the historical clear-cut railroad logging activity. Standing snags over 16 inch diameter are also 

limited with most snags being within the 8 to 11 inch diameter range. A qualitative assessment associated 

with the 2012 Riparian Reserve Stand Exams of large woody material noted 28%, 43%, 25% (of 114 

plots) were in the “Heavy, Moderate and Light” categories respectively for existing conditions of down 

wood within Riparian Reserves.

Snag Recommendations

The LRMP specifies a desired snag quantity of 185 to 235 snags per 100 acres delineated into hard and 

soft 11+, 15+, 17+ and 25+ snag diameter classes to maintain habitat capability of woodpeckers 

(indicators of cavity nesting species) at not less than 60% of potential population levels (LRMP, IV-33 to 

36). Snag quantities are dependent on woodpecker species present in the treatment area. 

As noted above, the Forest is choosing to use plant series data derived from new PAG classifications to 

determine snag and down wood objectives. Table ROD A-6 displays snag data (trees per acre) recently 

derived for the western hemlock plant series in the coast geographic region.1 This data reflects snag 

quantities present in older stands derived from numerous PAG inventory plots and represents desired 

(target level) snag quantities (trees per acre) to develop in candidate units post-treatment.

 

1 Hochhalter (et al.) Ecology Group, Southwest Oregon Province, plant series data from PAG plots.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 21 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Table ROD A-6. Snag Data for Western Hemlock Plant Series

COAST - Snags

SERIES Diameter Average TPA

Western Hemlock 0-10” 28.64

Western Hemlock 11-19” 7.93

Western Hemlock 20”+ 6.27

Large snags over 20 inch diameter are particularly essential for forest function. In addition, at least 96 

wildlife species in Oregon and Washington are associated with snags in forests, using snags for shelter, 

roosting and hunting. Most species use snags greater than 14 inch diameter (Rose et al., 2001). Ridges, 

upper thirds of slopes, and riparian areas or lower third of slopes are especially important for latesuccessional dependent species. Snags in various size classes also are important to the recruitment 

pathways of the down, coarse materials important to soils. 

In areas where past management has resulted in a lack of large snags needed for cavity nesting species, 

snags would be created from live trees left in stands. Whenever possible, creation of a minimum of 2 or 

more snags per acre over 20 inch dbh within all commercially treated units should be part of each 

silvicultural prescription. Creation can be through girdling, topping the trees with chain saws, blasting, 

inoculation with heart rot fungi, or deliberate injury. These methods would open the trunk to 

development of a hollow core used by woodpeckers and a variety of other birds, mammals, and other 

wildlife. 

Down Wood Recommendations

A key element of desired conditions for PAGs is down dead woody material. Existing large woody 

material varies depending on past logging operations and PAG in southwest Oregon. Desired levels of 

dead wood were modeled by PAG, based on Ecology Plot data, adjusted by past conditions with 

consideration of the DecAID2 advisory system. These models were intended to be used as a baseline for 

managers to develop prescriptions for landscape management. Treatment units proposed for Eden Ridge 

are within the maritime western hemlock PAG model derived from this process (Siskiyou NF, 2000).

As with snags, down logs are important for wildlife and aquatic ecosystem function. In addition, large 

coarse woody material is particularly important to maintaining and holding soils in place. Large down 

woody material left from historical railroad logging represent a unique situation and every effort to avoid 

disturbance and maintain this existing material should be made. The following table displays down wood 

data (pieces per acre, tons and size) for the western hemlock plant series in the coast geographic region 

and represents desired (target level) down wood quantity and size objectives.

Table ROD A-7. Down Wood Data for Western Hemlock Plant Series

COAST – Down Wood 

SERIES DIAMETER

Average 

PIECES 

PER ACRE

Average

TONS

Average 

LENGTH 

(feet)

Western Hemlock 0-10" 110 3 63

Western Hemlock 11-19" 52 11 64

Western Hemlock 20"+ 35 38 111

 

2 DecAID is a wood advisory tool for Washington and Oregon forests and is based on Habitat Model for Wildlife Tree Retention. 

USDA Forest Service, Region 6, Portland Oregon: Kim Mellen (editor) 2003. The title can be read as decayed wood advisor and 

management aid “decay-aid” or “decision-aid”.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 22 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

D. Silvicultural Disease Treatments

There are two forest pathogens; Port-Orford-Cedar root disease (Phytophthora lateralis) and laminated 

root rot (Phellinus weirii) affecting forest health in small portions of the Eden Ridge Planning Area 

(within Matrix and Riparian Reserves). 

Laminated Root Rot

Laminated root rot is affecting forest health on portions of Eden Ridge Planning Area, particularly in the 

northern half in forest stands adjacent to FS Roads 5000440, 5000440003, and 5000448.

This disease infection extensively decays roots of susceptible host trees and either causes windthrow or 

mortality by destroying the tree’s ability to take up water and nutrients (Hadfield et al. 1986). Windthrow 

is more common with laminated root rot than other root pathogens. Laminated root rot spreads by root 

contact between uninfected trees when living roots penetrate infected roots. In pole-sized and larger 

trees, the root disease can spread outwards an average rate of one (1) foot per year. 

This pathogen can live saprophytically in infected dead roots for fifty (50) years or more. Tree species 

present in proposed treatment units are listed as follows in decreasing order of susceptibility: 

Douglas-fir and white fir> western hemlock > Port-Orford-cedar. All hardwoods are immune

Overstory tree species composition is dominantly composed of Douglas-fir in proposed treatment units. 

Stand-level susceptibility to infection is expected to increase as root rot pockets continue to expand in 

size. Root rot pockets are currently estimated to be 1/8 to 1/4 acre for areas field visited, though larger 

infection centers are anticipated based on numerous potential root rot pockets visible on aerial photos that 

are within proximity to each other. 

Although timber volume losses caused by laminated root rot are most conspicuous as mortality or 

windthrow, tree growth may also be reduced for several years before tree death (Bloomberg and Reynolds 

1985, Thies 1983). For commercial forest land in Oregon, reduction in wood volume is estimated to be 

40-70% on areas affected (Goheen and Hansen, 1993).

Gap Development Treatment

Irregular shaped openings 1⁄4 to 2 acres for tree yield (Matrix) reasons centered on root rot pockets may be

created to treat portions of stands infected with laminated root rot. Treatments will harvest all susceptible 

tree species within and along the perimeter of infection pockets while favoring resistant or immune 

species for leave trees. Gaps may be site prepared and planted afterwards with Port-Orford-cedar 

seedlings for stand health and enhance structural and species diversity within a stand. 

Port-Orford-cedar Root Disease

On most of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, Port-Orford-cedar (POC) is concentrated in 

Riparian Reserves except on the Powers Ranger District where POC is well distributed across the 

landscape. The Powers Ranger District has the greatest concentration of Port-Orford-cedar (POC) 

occurring in the world, from the South Fork of the Coquille River to Iron Mountain. This district is also 

unique in having stands with POC stand components of up to 70 to 80 percent. 

Phytophthora lateralis (PL)

PL is a virulent, non-native pathogen that was introduced into the native range of POC in the early 1950s; 

its place of origin is unknown. PL readily kills POC of all ages that are growing on sites favorable for 

infection. Once an area becomes infested, it is difficult to eradicate PL.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 23 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

PL can cause mortality within weeks of infection in the case of small trees and in one to four years when 

large trees are infected (Roth et al., 1987). Trees usually lose all foliage two to three years after death. In 

areas where the disease has been active for several years, dead and dying trees with all degrees of foliage 

symptoms are visible (Hadfield et al., 1986). A 2008 inventory showed 47,902 acres of POC present on 

the district, of which 2,349 acres (4.9%) are infested with PL. 

PL is spread in the following ways (Hansen et al., 2000; Zobel et al. 1985):

-Human vectors over long distances via resting spore transported in infested plant material or soil;

-Locally via waterborne spores moving in ditches, streams, or overland flow; or

-Via mycelia growing across root contacts and grafts between infected and uninfected POC.

PL is favored in areas of slow-moving or standing water and on poorly drained microsites, especially 

when such sites occur below roads. Susceptible areas are segregated by the following risk categories 

(USDA Forest Service, 2004: Record of Decision and Land and Resource Management Plan Amendment 

for Management of Port-Orford-cedar in Southwest Oregon, Siskiyou National Forest). 

High-risk Sites

Low-lying wet areas (infested or not) that are located downslope from already infested areas or below likely 

sites for future introductions, especially roads, are high risk sites. They include streams, drainage ditches, 

gullies, swamps, seeps, ponds, lakes, and concave low lying areas where water collects during rainy 

weather (USDA-FS 2004). High risk sites also include places with streamside POC within 100 feet below a 

road and non-streamside POC within 50 feet below a road or 25 feet above a road (see Figure ROD A-2).

For the purposes of this analysis, probability (USDA-FS 2004, section 3&4, page 37) below 6.1% for 

spread and establishment of PL in previously uninfested areas is considered low risk. Probabilities of 

spread are based on literature and professional judgment of forest pathologists with substantial amounts of 

experience evaluating PL in the laboratory and in the field (USDA-FS 2004). Probability below 6.1% 

corresponds to Low-risk sites defined as follows:

Low-risk Sites

These are sites with characteristics unfavorable for spread and infection by PL. Low risk sites are defined 

as streamside POC greater than 100 feet from a road and non-streamside POC greater than 50 feet from a 

road. They are sites that do not meet the criteria for high-risk as defined above.

Port-Orford-cedar Risk Key 

The POC Risk Key is used to clarify the environmental conditions that require implementation of one or 

more of the disease controlling management practices listed in the 2004 Record of Decision (ROD) and 

Land and Resource Management Plan Amendment for Management of Port-Orford-cedar in Southwest 

Oregon Siskiyou National Forest. The objectives of the amended POC management Standard and 

Guidelines are to:

 Maintain POC on sites where the risk for infection is low.

 Reduce the spread and severity of root disease in high-risk areas to retain its ecological function 

to the extent practicable.

 Reestablish POC in plant communities where its numbers or ecosystem function have been 

significantly reduced.

 Reduce the likelihood of root disease becoming established in disease-free 7th field watersheds.

Program objectives are to maintain POC as an ecologically and economically significant species on 

National Forest lands. POC management will provide cost-effective mitigation for management activities 

that create appreciable additional risk to important uninfected POC though not to reduce all risk to all 

trees at all cost (USDA-FS 2004). In areas proposed for timber harvest and road building, mitigation 

would be required as described in the POC Risk Key assessment (contained in FEIS Appendix B2, POC

Report, incorporated by reference). 
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 24 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

NEPA analysis has appropriately documented the application of the risk key and the consideration of the 

available management practices, and makes the project consistent with the mid- and large-geographic and 

temporal-scale effects described by the 2004 SEIS analysis and Forest Plan Amendment, and permit the 

project analysis to tier to the discussion of those effects (USDA FS, 2004). 

POC Treatments

The POC Risk Key assessment for Eden Ridge (see FEIS Appendix B2) recommends the following active 

treatments. MAP ROD A-3 displays the treatments (except planting) from the POC Risk Key, IDT 

discussions, and the decision. Miles and acres of POC treatments in the following tables are estimated in 

GIS for roads and PL infestation polygons. Treatment extent will be field verified during site-specific 

project implementation.

MAP ROD A-3. POC Treatments

Wide-Thin Gap Treatments

Remove all live POC within PL infection sites. Leave non-susceptible tree species on site. Thin out all 

live POC within 2 to 3 crown radii from last infected POC along the perimeter of infection sites to 

separate healthy POC from potential root contact with infected POC. Pile and burn all POC slash. Sites 

can be planted with non-susceptible tree seedlings (Douglas-fir, western hemlock, hardwoods). 
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 25 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Table ROD A-8. POC Wide-Thin Gap Treatments (Modified Alternative 2)

Unit#

PL Infestation Acres -

GIS

103 0.2

320 1.1

325 0.8

326 19.3

327 1.5

329 0.4

331 1.5

332 1.5

333 0.1

334 0.7

335 0.8

336 0.1

905 2.2

906 1.2

Total Acres 31.4

Roadside Sanitation

Manage for non-susceptible tree species by removing all POC along road sides as follows:

 100-feet below roads at stream crossings, width of high water table.

 25 feet above roads and 50-feet below roads in non-streamside areas.

Figure ROD A-2. Roadside Sanitation Treatments
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 26 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Table ROD A-9. POC Roadside Sanitation Treatments (Modified Alternative 2)

Road ID

Alternative 2 

Miles - GIS

5000 0.67

5000420 0.33

5000440 1.71

5000442 0.69

5000443 0.72

5000448 2.9

5000449 0.38

Road F 0.39

Road G 0.15

Road H 0.21

Road O 0.18

Total miles 8.35

Planting

Restore POC within its natural range by planting non-PL infested areas and low risk areas with resistant 

POC. Gaps from treatment of laminated root rot pockets may be planted with resistant POC seedlings for 

stand health and to enhance structural and species diversity within the Planning Area (presence, location 

and extent of laminated root rot infection to be determined during field layout). 

Recommended planting spacing is twenty-five (25) feet apart or in approximately ten (10) tree clusters at 

100-150 foot spacing to lessen the potential for root grafting (USDA 2004, ROD, page 36). These 

spacing guidelines can be flexible to meet site-specific conditions. Avoid stagnant water, but plant POC 

in areas that maximize chances of maintaining moist surface soil year-round. 

POC’s distribution in Coos County appears primarily to reflect edaphic conditions (Zobel, 2011). During 

introduction of disease-resistant POC, the General Soil Type Digger-Preacher-Remote is an appropriate 

soil type to plant POC (based on POC’s native distribution in historical cruise data in pre-harvest forests). 

Eden Ridge is within the ‘Oregon Transitional’ Block/Zone 340 (2,501-4,000 ft. elevation) for diseaseresistant seed (Hamlin, 2005). Seed is collected from seed orchards established since 2001 at the Dorena 

Genetic Resource Center, USDA Forest Service, in Cottage Grove, Oregon. Seedlings should be grown 

primarily from this seedlot.

Plant openings created by WTG treatments in PL pockets with Douglas-fir where openings > 1⁄4 acre. 

Western hemlock is anticipated to naturally regenerate in openings and does not need be planted. Do not 

plant POC as these PL pockets are considered high risk and should be managed for non-host species to 

reduce the potential for long-term PL disease persistence on site. Post-planting tree netting of seedling 

terminal buds may be needed to reduce big game browse damage on Douglas-fir.

E. Activity Fuels Treatments

Activity fuels treatment refers to the slash and accumulated fuel resulting from the proposed variable 

density management and other silvicultural treatments. While there may be some slash from previous 

harvesting or from natural conditions, the majority of material would be generated through density 

treatment and commercial removal from these actions. Activity fuels treatments proposed for this project 

include only those that are predicted to be necessary to obtain a resultant and acceptable fuels/fire risk. 

The combination of density management and activity fuels treatments should leave the stands in a 

condition where a wildfire could burn through the stand, in the form of a surface fire that would not create 

unacceptable levels of mortality. 
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 27 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Harvest activities associated with the decision would add needles, limbwood, and tops to the existing fuel 

bed in varying degrees throughout each treatment area. Disturbed ground vegetation and larger woody 

material would contribute to the dead fuel loading. In comparison with the natural long-term 

accumulation of ground fuels, harvest would contribute fuels to the site at an accelerated rate. The fuels 

remaining after harvest would be mostly of the smaller size classes, as most of the larger fuels would be 

removed for utilization, unless contractual requirements specify that they be left on site. Below, are fuels 

treatment options to be considered for the selected units. Implementation of these fuels treatment 

methods will likely be one or a combination of several treatments.

No treatment: This method would be appropriate for sites where fuel loadings fall well below LRMP 

Standard and Guideline recommendations by photo series (S&G 12-2, page IV-59). When residual fuels 

exceed the guidelines, not treating the fuels may be appropriate in areas of low risk where risks may be 

assumed for a period, until the hazard has been reduced by natural processes.

Hand piling fuels concentrations: This method would be effective in breaking up fuel continuity 

thereby reducing fire spread rates. Hand piling, followed by burning of the piles, can remove most fuels 

from a site. Hand piling is most effective in continuous moderate fuel loadings (25 to 50 tons per acre), 

and is less effective in scattered light fuels. This method may also be employed in areas where no other 

disposal methods are prescribed, or in conjunction with non-burning types of treatments, but where the 

risks may warrant some sort of hazard reduction; such as the piling proposed along Roads 5000, 290, 440, 

and 448. On the commercially thinned units that are adjacent to the aforementioned roads, logging slash 

within 100 feet of these roads will be hand piled and burned.

Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines for detrimental soil conditions and erosion (SNF-LRMP; pages IV44-45) will be applied to this project. By minimizing the size and maximizing the spacing between piles, 

and burning in the winter and spring windows of opportunity when soil and fuel moistures are high, soil 

detrimental impacts and mineral soil exposure is minimized. This would also compliment the objectives 

of maximizing the retention of Large Woody Material (LRMP S&G 7-8). Large down woody material 

left from historical railroad logging represent a unique situation and every effort to avoid disturbance and 

maintain this existing material will be made. 

Yarding of tops: This method would be effective in removing concentrations of the 0 to 3-inch size 

class fuels. In all treatment areas using ground-based or skyline yarding, tops of commercial trees would 

be left attached to a commercial log while yarding (Yard Tops Attached – YTA). The tops will be piled 

and disposed at the landing location.

Piling and Burning Landing Slash: This method would be effective in disposing of all remaining unmerchantable vegetation on log landings (piling and burning).

Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines for fire management (SNF-LRMP; pages IV-59 through 62) would 

be applied to this project. The fire hazard presented by natural, activity or prior activity fuels should be 

reduced to appropriate levels; and proposed activities should be designed and coordinated on the ground 

to help make the fuel treatment and fire protection as practical and economical as possible.

F. Harvest (Logging) Systems

Considerations for Application of Logging Systems

All candidate stands have all been previously logged, with the majority of the Eden Ridge Planning Area 

being previously logged via historical railroad systems. A Transportation and Logging Systems Report 

(Roads Analysis) Appendix I is attached to the FEIS. This report documents the basis for application of 

potential logging systems and provides the basis for road use and proposed new road construction.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 28 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Past treatments had different (and typically less) consideration for sensitive slopes, sensitive soils and 

sensitive riparian areas. The entire area was logged with “steam donkey” cable systems. Past cable 

yarding systems, as associated with railroad transport, employed “high lead” or systems that did not 

require or utilize log suspension (as would be required today). Some terrain will require partial 

suspension (or full suspension) systems on stands that had previously been cable logged without 

suspension in the past. 

The anticipated system(s) to be used in any given stand is based on existing classified road access, new 

system or temporary road construction needs, as well as economic and technical feasibility identified for 

each treatment unit. The two primary concerns involved with use of the various logging systems is the 

potential detrimental effects to soils and the construction of new roads. New classified or temporary 

roads may be necessary due to the need for a change in the logging system design or to access areas that 

retain no access, reflecting an adherence to current standards and guidelines set forth in the Forest Plan. 

Soil concerns elevate when ground based equipment is considered for use on steeper slopes, sensitive 

riparian areas, sensitive soil types, or unstable areas.

Conversely, there is an operational concern for economics between the various systems being considered, 

i.e., ground based systems are most economic from an operational cost viewpoint, skyline systems 

increase in operational costs, and aerial (full suspension or helicopter) systems are the most costly. Road 

access and landing accessibility and construction costs are also factors to consider. Preliminary logging 

feasibility information that was collected and utilized in the NEPA analysis will be reviewed. Additional 

ground verification and analysis will be accomplished to ensure not only physical feasibility, but is also 

that the design of the sale is in a manner that will be economically efficient.

Where ground based logging is planned, a logging plan is developed that takes into account the existing 

skid trail patterns and landing locations, the amount of pre-existing adverse impacts, and sale objectives 

identified in the Record of Decision. Generally, tractor logging is economically feasible so the focus will 

normally be on physical feasibility. Development of a logging plan will help ensure that ground based 

logging systems are not prescribed on lands that are over-steepened, sensitive, unstable, and to ensure that 

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines will be met. 

In areas where skyline yarding is planned, a similar process is performed. A preliminary logging plan 

will be developed that considers the prescription, the terrain, the existing situation and then identifies a set 

of objectives and requirements that “acceptable yarding equipment” would have to meet. With that 

information in mind, potential landings are located and additional ground profiles are run and analyzed. 

Data is collected, sufficient to determine critical payloads, control points on the ground, and production 

rates. This information is synthesized in a Report of Skyline Logging Feasibility. 

Logging System Options

Within the Eden Ridge Timber Sales Project, anticipated logging system options for stands that provide 

opportunities for commercial extraction include ground-based systems, skyline cable systems, and aerial 

(helicopter) systems. This section provides background and explanation of these systems.

Ground-based Systems - Refers to a group of logging methods that are considered ground-based, and 

may also include mechanized harvesting equipment. Typically, logs are harvested using mechanized 

heavy equipment to skid the logs to a landing area, where they would be loaded onto a truck. These 

ground-based systems are usually utilized on terrain where slopes are less than 25-35 percent. The 

maximum percent slope for ground based systems, as designed for the Eden Ridge Planning Area is 

35%.

In all cases, all proposed skid trails should be pre-designated by the operator and approved by the Forest 

Service before felling and skidding. Skid trails should not be allowed to cross specified stream channels 

or only at Forest Service approved locations. 
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 29 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

In general, skid trail spacing should average 100 feet apart and located on the fall line, especially if using 

harvester-forwarder systems due to the forwarder’s high center of gravity. It is estimated that an average 

skid trail spacing of 100 feet apart would result in approximately 12% to 15% of the area being covered 

with skid trails.

Tractor - In this system, a cutter will fall to lead toward designated skid trails, then limb and buck the tree 

in the bed where it landed when it was felled. Three methods of skidding can then be utilized, loader or 

shovel yarding, grapple or choker skidding. Shovel yarding consists of a heal boom loader grabbing the 

logs and swinging them towards the landing in stages. Grapple skidding uses swing grapples attached to 

the rear of the tractor. The clamps pick up one end of the log and the operator positions the log for 

skidding. When several logs are bunched, the grapple can pick up several ends at one time and skid the 

turn to the landing. The third method involves chokers that are attached to the logs and a tractor equipped 

with a winch pulls the logs from their beds into the skid trail. When a group of logs are assembled into a 

turn, the chokers are gathered together, the leading ends of the logs are suspended above the ground 

behind the tractor by way of an integrated arch or similar apparatus, and the trailing end of the logs drag 

along the ground on the way back to the landing. At the landing, a front-end or a knuckle-boom loader is 

used to sort and load logs decked at the landing onto log trucks. 

“Winch/line” Some areas of timber harvest where slopes generally exceed 35% slope but are relatively 

small – usually less than 250 feet wide –can be reached by a winch line from a ground based machine or 

reached from a road by a winch line or loader. The tractor uses a “bull line” to pull the logs to the skid 

trail or road. These areas are usually inside larger ground based inclusions and are considered part of the 

ground based system.

Rubber-tired Skidder - This system is essentially the same as tractor logging in technique, although the 

skidding equipment has some operational and functional differences. While most tractors have steel 

tracks with cleats that run along a rigid rail and tend to churn up some soil when it turns, rubber-tired 

skidders are often articulated in their middle instead of a rigid frame, and they displace somewhat less 

topsoil than a tractor would when it turns. Both types of equipment can have advantages, depending on 

the situation. 

Typically, tractors can work on somewhat steeper slopes, while skidders are faster and average skidding 

distances can be somewhat longer. By virtue of the fact that both tractors and skidders bear the weight of 

one end of the logs being skidded, the weight of the machine skidding logs is not evenly distributed, but is 

instead concentrated near the back of the machine. This configuration can create disproportionately 

higher ground pressure on the soils being skidded upon than the machines rated or calculated pressure (in 

pounds per square inch) would indicate. 

Harvester-Forwarder - A harvester and forwarder are two separate pieces of equipment. The harvester 

(while traveling on pre-designated harvester trails) reaches its boom out to cut the tree, and lays it on its 

side approximately perpendicular to the axis of the skid trail. Rollers on the cutting head then pull the 

tree through delimbing knives which drops the limbs in the harvester trailing front of the harvester as they 

are severed. As each pre-determined length of log has been fed through the harvester head, logs are cut to 

length and allowed to fall into a stack of uniform length logs alongside the harvester trail. As the 

harvester travels through the stand, it rides on the layer of limbs that act as a cushion to help minimize 

soil compaction. 

Later, a forwarder uses the same trails to pick up the logs, load them onto its bunk, and transport the logs 

to the landing, completely free of the ground instead of dragging them behind the machine. Because the 

logs are transported free of the ground, the weight is evenly distributed over all of its wheels, so the 

resultant ground pressure is less than with other ground based systems. This method not only minimizes 

soil compaction, but it virtually eliminates any exposure of subsoil so there is rarely any detrimental 

displacement or erosion. Because of the specialized equipment, there is a slightly higher cost, compared 

to tractor or rubber-tired skidder.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 30 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Skyline - Is a system that transports logs from stumps to landings using a wire rope cable that is 

suspended between a tower and a tail tree. This cable (or skyline) functions as an overhead track for a 

load-carrying carriage. Logs are lifted by cables or other devices attached to the carriage and pulled into 

a skyline corridor. The carriage is then pulled to the landing by a mainline powered by a yarder. The 

skyline provides vertical lift so that the logs have their leading end suspended above the ground during 

inhaul. In some cases, the entire log may be suspended above the ground.

Skyline logging is generally specified where road access is suitable, on slopes greater than 35%, and/or 

where soil or water conditions are a concern. In all cases, one-end log suspension will be required in all 

skyline units. Where logs are to be yarded across specified stream channels or wet areas, full log 

suspension will be required over the designated stream channel. In order to get adequate deflection in 

some units, the skyline may have to be rigged across major streams and/or existing roads.

Guyline anchors are needed and within the Eden Ridge Planning Area, should be adequate in most areas. 

However, in some locations multiple stump anchors, machine anchors, and/or “deadman” anchors may be 

needed. Guyline anchors should generally be green Douglas-fir 15” to 26” dbh and 40+ years of age. 

Guy trees will have to be felled before using the stumps as anchors. 

Tail tree and tail tree anchors would be needed on most skyline corridors. Tree sizes should be from 15” 

to 26”+ in most locations (Douglas-fir). Tail tree rigging heights may be up to 50 feet. Tree sizes and 

rigging heights should be guided by OR-OSHA Chapter 437, Division 6.

Skyline landings would mostly be located in the road prism. Landing orientation would utilize both 

parallel and centralized (radial) configurations. In some cases, landings would need to be placed on 

narrow roads; therefore, a swing boom type yarder would be necessary. If the project specifies that tops 

be left attached to the top log in skyline units, some log processing may be needed on the landings (i.e., 

the whole tree system). This would require slightly larger landings and/or the back-haul of slash in order 

to accommodate the residual slash from the top log and residual limbs. Log processing could be 

accomplished by a relatively small and inexpensive “pull-thru” log processor or a more expensive and 

more efficient mechanical processor. 

Helicopter - This logging system utilizes medium or heavy-lift helicopters to transfer the logs from 

where they are cut to a landing where they are loaded on trucks for haul to a mill. Helicopters are divided 

into three classes, depending on their lift capabilities. Helicopters have high operating costs and are 

usually utilized where there are concerns for ground disturbance or where road building is not desired. 

Aerial systems (e.g., helicopters) would be a system used to accomplish commercial density management

where existing access systems are not available or would cause extensive resource damage if utilized. 

Helicopters can be used to move material from the treatment area sites, and move them to processing 

areas (i.e., landings). From the landings, material can then be removed from the forest by trucks, utilizing 

existing classified roads suitable for such use. The use of helicopters allows for full suspension of trees or 

material from the treatment area to the landing area and does not create excessive ground disturbance via 

skid trails or skyline corridors. 

This system (helicopter) can be utilized where there is no directly adjacent road access. There are 

limitations however on the flight distance and elevation change from the landing to the stand where 

material would be transported. Landings must be within a distance of approximately 1 mile from the 

treated stand. There are also other factors to consider regarding helicopter systems and economic 

feasibility, including turn size, maintenance and fuel storage landings, etc.

Within the Eden Ridge Planning Area, numerous potential log and service landings are available. 

Helicopter landings, in general, have an average size of about 80 feet by 200 feet and are located as close 

as possible to the harvest units they serve. However, the actual landing size and location can vary widely 

depending on terrain, slope, volume flown per acre, and flight direction. 
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 31 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

In general, landings should be cleared of trees and stumps and leveled as much as possible. In some 

cases, some surrounding green tree might have to be removed to facilitate flight direction. Some of the 

landings associated with the Eden Ridge Planning Area may be located on private land or private roads

(see MAP ROD A-4). These locations would need approval from the private land holder if used. Service 

landing(s) need to be no more than 1 mile from the harvest units (less if possible) and accessible by 

highway fuel trucks.

MAP ROD A-4. Potential Helicopter Landing Sites

Prebunching

This system can be subordinate to any of the above systems. It typically involves machine cutting, 

weighing, and bundling logs to make log transport more efficient. A tracked, self-leveling machine can 

typically work on ground up to 35% slope gradient, with minimal adverse effect to soils (minimal 

additional detrimental soil effects and within soils Standards and Guidelines). By making one pass 

through the stand and walking on slash and compacting and dispersing it, slash treatment costs can be 

bypassed and fire danger lessened. 

Use of this equipment can make all phases of the ground based, skyline, and helicopter logging 

considerably more economical and can also treat the slash at the same time. While pre-bunching could be 

used in any systems (where slopes allow), it is especially applicable to helicopter systems. The biggest 

cost factor in helicopter logging is the aircraft cost per hour; anything that can boost the volume per hour 

produced can bring down unit costs. 

1

4

2

3

9

8

7

6 5

22

21

20

19

18

16

17

15

14 13

12

11

10

0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6

Miles
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 32 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Pre-bunching timber in a thinning into flyable bundles with a “cut-to-length” processing machine has 

been proven to maximize volume flown per hour. Production can be increased as the turns fly faster, 

loading is consistent, no excess weight (slash) is flown, landing impact and size are minimized, and labor 

and loading costs are cheaper. The savings from this type of operation is estimated to be about 20-25%.

G. Existing Road (Access) Systems

A Transportation and Logging Systems Report (Roads Analysis) Appendix I, is attached to the FEIS. 

This report documents the basis for application of potential logging systems and provides the basis for 

road use and proposed new road construction. The following discussion summarizes the basis for use of 

existing roads. 

Roads are organized into four types; existing Forest Service Classified (or permanent system) roads, 

existing unclassified roads on National Forest System Lands (NFSL), existing roads currently under a 

Cost Share Agreement with adjacent private landowner interests, and roads that are private roads (not 

inventoried or managed by the Forest Service. 

Considerable effort was made during this planning effort to correctly locate and inventory existing roads 

systems discussed in Appendix I and in this section. In many cases, roads appearing on maps or in 

database inventories were determined to be incorrect based on field examination. These anomalies 

occurring in several ways, e.g., some roads being tracked and mapped as existing Classified roads were in 

fact not correct. 

In other cases, roads existed and are being used that were not being tracked as Classified roads. 

Unclassified roads likewise were found to be in error, either existing as Classified roads or not existing 

but were being tracked as unclassified roads. In order to facilitate use, existing Cost Share roads and the 

inventory of adjacent privately managed roads was updated for this project.

Classified Road Systems

The following discussion includes the basis for use of (Classified or permanent system) roads. Forest 

System Roads are under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service and are deemed necessary for protection, 

administration, and use of NFSL. These roads are inventoried, maintained, and managed by the Forest 

Service. Generally, these NFS roads are identified as Maintenance Level 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, under the 

following definitions.

Table ROD A-10. Road Maintenance Level Definitions

Level 1

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

perpetuate the road to facilitate future management activities. While being maintained at level 1, roads are closed to 

vehicular traffic.

Level 2 Assigned to roads open for use by high clearance vehicles. Traffic is normally minor, usually consisting of one or a 

combination of administrative, permitted, dispersed recreation, or other specialized uses. 

Level 3 Roads in this maintenance level are typically low speed, single lane with turnouts and spot surfacing. Some roads may 

be fully surfaced with either native or processed material. 

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

paved and/or dust abated. 

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

Most of the currently existing Classified road system within Eden Ridge is currently managed as 

Maintenance Level 1 or 2.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 33 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Unclassified Roads

The Eden Ridge Planning Area contains additional roads, trails or grades that are not inventoried, 

maintained, or currently managed by the Forest Service. As noted above, some unclassified roads were 

found to be in error, either existing as Classified roads or not existing but were being tracked as 

unclassified roads. Further use of correctly inventoried unclassified roads is discussed in the next section 

under proposals for construction, reconstruction or use as part of the Eden Ridge Proposed Action.

Cost Share Roads

The Eden Ridge Planning Area is completely surrounded by private lands owned and managed for timber 

production. There is an extensive network of existing roads to facilitate access to these lands. In the past, 

some of these roads also facilitated access to NFSL and cooperative Cost Share Agreements were put in 

place. 

These agreements require a proportionate share of use, maintenance and reconstruction of roads that serve 

mutual benefit. The intent of the Cost Share Agreement is to eliminate the need for duplicate road 

systems and share in the cost and maintenance of these facilities that benefit both parties. While some 

cost share roads currently exist, construction, reconstruction and/or use of additional cost share roads is 

discussed in the next section. Some existing roads on private lands are also being proposed to be added to 

existing Cost Share Agreements to minimize the need for construction of new roads.

Private Roads

As noted above, the Eden Ridge Planning Area is completely surrounded by private lands owned and 

managed for timber production. There is an extensive network of existing roads to facilitate access to 

these lands. While not providing direct access to NFSL, in some cases these roads provide the most 

logical product haul and may be used under agreement or permit under the Eden Ridge Timber Sales 

Project.

H. Proposed Road (Access) Systems

Product Transport or Haul

Hauling involves loading and transporting logs or other products on log trucks along roads associated 

with the harvest activity areas. These roads need to be in a safe and acceptable condition for this purpose, 

and could require Classified road reconstruction or maintenance prior to this use. Hauling occurs on all 

road surface types including asphalt, aggregate gravel, and native-surfaced. 

Classified Road Maintenance

This activity includes several related activities which maintain drainage, cuts and fills and surfacing of the 

road prism to accommodate light and commercial road traffic; while maintaining the integrity of the road 

facility and minimizing effects to natural resources adjacent to the road. Much of this work is done with a 

motor grader, dump trucks and backhoe. 

Road maintenance includes travel way surface maintenance, drainage ditch maintenance, culvert cleaning, 

surface rock replacement, shaping of the roadway and ditches by blading, removal of slough materials, 

compacting and other mechanized and hand work. Classified road maintenance involves activities of a 

lesser scale and effect than Classified road reconstruction. Note that some items associated with routine 

road maintenance are sometimes included in contracts and identified as road reconstruction.

It is estimated that road maintenance will be needed on the road system utilized for this project, over a 

number of years. This would vary according to the Actions Alternatives due to stand treatment locations, 

the proposed harvest access and logging system, and the conditions preceding the need for the road. Road 

maintenance renders the road durable and useable, and when not further needed, allows it to be in a 

storage condition that minimizes effects on soil, water and other resources. 
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 34 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Road maintenance includes use of rock quarries and water sources, roadside brushing, grading, ditching, 

rocking of perennial stream crossings on native surface roads and other activities needed to maintain the 

road facility in good condition. Maintenance work is usually performed commensurate to the use of the 

road and the condition of the road.

Classified Road Reconstruction

Reconstruction involves maintenance and improvements to existing Classified (system) roads, to make 

them suitable for logging equipment and harvest treatment access. Reconstruction involves restoring a 

Classified system road to its previous operational condition. Road repairs could have one or more of the 

following work items: removing fallen trees, cleaning out culvert inlets, removing and disposing of small 

cut slope slides, falling danger trees, replacing minor amounts of road surfacing, replacing, adding 

additonal drainage structures, etc. 

Treatments could include grading, clearing, restoring road width loss, or stabilizing a cut or fill 

(embankment) slope that was lost due to storm damage, by placing riprap materials (large boulders) 

against existing slopes, and may include widening and surface rock replacement.

Previously existing spur roads, skid roads, or old railroad grades could be reconstructed and utilized for 

development of Classified road access. This would place the impacts on areas already affected and lessen 

the environmental impact associated with new road construction in undeveloped areas. A reconstructed 

Classified road is often more environmentally sound than a temporary road because it is designed to a 

higher standard. When closed for a long period of time, a Classified road can be a more stable facility 

when left in a storage condition. 

It is estimated that road reconstruction will be needed on portions of the road system utilized for this 

project, over a number of years and projects (or sales). This would vary due to stand treatment locations, 

the anticipated harvest access and logging system, and the conditions preceding the need for the road. 

Performing road repairs could also be accomplished by future commercial timber sales or stewardship 

contracts that would include requirements to perform minor road reconstruction work and applicable road 

maintenance work. 

Culvert replacement may occur in some stream channels and drains that relieve road ditches. Many 

culverts in channels are determined to be undersized to handle the water and sediment from areas above 

the structure. Culverts have a lifespan and effectiveness that diminishes as rust and corrosion decrease 

the strength and integrity of the structure. These culverts will be replaced as necessary. This project 

provides the opportunity to upgrade culverts for additional resource protection and enhancement.

Work would entail excavating the fill covering the current culvert and removing the culvert. Fills placed 

over the new pipe would be compacted and the road prism shaped to provide good drainage in and around 

the new culvert. Project Design Criteria and preventive Mitigation Measures will be used to minimize 

stream channel disturbance at the site and reduce the amount of unconsolidated material remaining in the 

channel after installation of the new culvert is completed. 

New Classified Roads

The Eden Ridge Planning Area currently has a minimal existing road network and when the logging that 

created the candidate stands of today were created, most of the area was logged by historical railroad 

systems. Most of the existing Classified roads evolved from early railroad grades but do not adequately 

serve the Planning Area for today’s needs and systems. Because the area is primarily allocated to Matrix, 

the Forest Service conducted a Roads Analysis process which identified the need for additional, 

permanent, Classified roads (FEIS Appendix I (Roads Analysis).
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 35 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

New Classified roads were determined to be necessary to minimize temporary impacts on resources, 

especially, land, water, wildlife, and air. These new Classified roads are necessary to to maintain a 

quality that permits future use without need to re-accomplish or replace work that is currently in 

satisfactory condition. Construction should minimize repeated impacts and avoid unacceptable risks to 

resources. It should not result in higher future capital expenditures that could be required if, for example, 

roads had to be rebuilt or relocated for each sale or entry.

New Classified road construction is designed to result in the lowest total transportation cost (construction, 

hauling, and maintenance) for the intended management use, while ensuring safety and minimizing 

temporary or extended resource impacts (FSM 2432.34 and FSM 7700). Timber sale contracts may 

authorize construction of both specified Classified roads and temporary roads. 

All proposed new Classified roads will be created and managed as Operational Maintenance Level 2 

roads and Maintenance Level 1 when not in use for harvest activities. System roads are for long-term, 

multiple management needs, often with some potential for future use every five-to-ten years. At this 

time, the critical vehicle has been identified as a skyline yarder, and the design vehicle has been identified 

as a log truck. The traveled-way width would be generally 12-14 feet plus curve widening, fill widening, 

and turnouts, unless the critical vehicle dictates otherwise.

All proposed new system roads would be rocked as needed to minimize erosion and allow for extended 

use during wet conditions. All new Classified roads (including those crossing Riparian Reserve) will be 

engineered and designed to minimize environmental impacts. Designed roads constructed on NFSLwill

be accompished to standards appropriate for the intended uses; considering safety, cost of transportation, 

and impacts on lands and resources. Designed roads will be constructed as stable and durable structures 

to facilitate maintenance during and after use. 

This design will include necessary drainage facilities, adequate erosion control, closure devices, and 

resource protection devices. Closure of all new construction of system roads would typically be 

accomplished via a road entrance closure of native materials (logs, earth, boulders) after timber sale 

activites had occurred, placing them into Maintenance Level 1 Status. 

Some new Classified roads will cross Riparian Reserves, under specially designed Project Design 

Criteria. In addition, some of these proposed new Classified roads would potentially be constructed under 

terms of the existing Cost Share Agreement (subject to agreement between the Government and private 

landowners.)

Temporary Road (Access) Systems and Landings 

A temporary road is a road necessary for emergency operations or authorized by contract, permit, lease or 

other written authorization that is not a Forest road and that is not included in a Forest transportation atlas 

(36 CFR 212.1). For the Eden Ridge Timber Sales Project, some new temporary road construction may 

be needed for candidate stand access. Temporary roads include those roads needed only for the 

purchaser’s use for a given timber sale(s), such as roads used to haul timber from landings to permanent 

National Forest System roads. 

The Forest Service and the purchaser must agree upon the location, resource protection requirements for 

road construction, clearing widths, and closure or rehabilitation requirements. Temporary roads are not 

constructed to serve long-term future uses and must be closed prior to closure of the timber sale (FSM 

2432.34b). 

Temporary roads are proposed where it is likely that a one-time access is needed as part of a contract, for 

access to harvest units. They typically have a lower planning, design, and initial development cost than 

permanent system roads. Forest Service regulations (36 CFR 223.37) require temporary roads to be 

revegetated within ten years. These roads cannot be compared to engineered roads (permanent system 

roads) as they are not designed for multiple uses or long-term resource protection (e.g., all-weather 

maintenance).
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 36 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

Under this decision, a temporary road is defined as a created travel way, for the purpose of transporting 

logs that is built, utilized, and decommissioned (obliterated) over the course of the treatment/harvest 

operation. Temporary roads will not be surfaced (rocked) and will be used during dry conditions only. 

These roads will be built and removed by the operator as part of the Forest Service timber sale or 

stewardship contract. In constructing these temporary roads, no large diameter trees (e.g., late-seral or 

“old-growth” type trees would be felled for road clearing. 

In many cases, these temporary roads are essentially access to or an extension of a landing (a few hundred 

feet), or could actually be a travel way of up to 1,800 feet. Temporary roads are considered as part of the 

affected (detrimental) soil conditions under the Soil Quality Standards and Guidelines. Maximum percent 

of area for detrimental soil conditions will be 15 percent for an activity area (including roads and 

landings: SNF LRMP Standards and Guidelines for Soils; 7-2).

Temporary roads will be managed in accordance with water quality Best Management Practices3(BMPs) 

R-23. In order to prevent continued low level casual use, and to minimize resource impacts, such roads 

and landings will be obliterated at the completion of their intended use. Effective obliteration is generally 

achieved through a combination of the following measures:

-Temporary culverts are removed and natural drainage configuration is re-established;

-Road surfaces are ripped;

-Sideslopes are reshaped and stabilized; road is effectively drained; and

-Road is blocked to further use, and road is returned to vegetation production through revegetation 

(seeding, planting browse species, or hardwood/conifer trees).

Landings

Some of the areas associated with the candidate stands have an existing network of roads and landings 

from previous harvests. However, there would also be a need for some additional areas created for log 

landings. These would primarily occur in areas where no landing currently exist or where a change in 

logging systems (e.g., where skyline logging is now prescribed in areas previously railroad logged).

These additional landings are highly variable by the logging system. For example, helicopter systems 

typically require larger (1 acre) landing areas, whereas a tractor system could utilize areas barely larger 

than a road-width, although tractor and skyline systems would typically require many more landings.

Temporary road (and landing) locations and stabilization measures are typically determined by the Forest 

Service with agreement by the contractor/purchaser. The Forest Service may request the advice of a 

watershed specialist in determining the most appropriate location and stabilization measures to be applied. 

Special stabilization measures would be required if need for a temporary road would extend for more than 

one year (seasonal mitigation measures).

Log landings may be a specified road requirement when they meet all of the following conditions: 1) 

when constructing the landing and the road simultaneously would reduce cost and soil disturbance, 2) 

when logging system planning has confirmed the need to locate the landing on a specified location, 3) 

when the landing lies on or immediately adjacent to the road, and 4) when the landing area is to remain a 

permanent part of the road. The road and landing must result in a contiguous cross-section. To the extent 

possible, location of landings would coincide with turnouts, borrow areas, and turnarounds.

 

3 This refers to the General Water Quality Best Management Practices, Pacific Northwest Region, November 1988. These are 

now used in concert with the National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management (April 2012). The purpose of 

the National BMP Program is to provide a standard set of core BMPs and a consistent means to track and document the use and 

effectiveness for BMPs on NFS lands.
ROD Attachment A Page ROD A - 37 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Implementation Strategy

This page is intentionally left blank
ATTACHMENT B

Project Design Criteria and Required Mitigation Measures

ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 1 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

EDEN RIDGE TIMBER SALES 

RECORD OF DECISION

ATTACHMENT B

Project Design Criteria

and

Required Mitigation Measures

Project Design Criteria and Mitigation Measures are a required component of the Record of 

Decision and are identified and detailed within this attachment, and will be enacted for activities 

associated with Eden Ridge Timber Sales.

I. PROJECT DESIGN CRITERIA

These criteria are to be employed during on-the ground project designation/implementation and are 

designed to address overall objectives (attain the Purpose and Need) and resource objectives to manage 

consequences (obtain compliance with Standards and Guidelines). Other elements that manage 

consequences during actual operations are termed “Mitigation Measures” and are discussed in the second 

section of this attachment.

Design elements are employed concurrent with the various treatment elements described in the FEIS (and 

ROD Attachment A), as authorized by the Decision. Many specific design elements will require further 

site-specific recommendations from Forest Service resource professionals. This is an overall design 

element/mitigation measure applicable to all treatments.

A. Project Design Criteria for Riparian Reserves

This section discusses elements related to the design of treatments and actions (i.e., Project Design 

Criteria), applicable to Riparian Reserves, under the Decision. These elements were utilized to develop 

proposals and/or are to be employed during on-the ground project designation/implementation and are 

designed to address overall objectives (attain the Purpose and Need) and resource objectives to manage 

consequences (obtain compliance with Standards and Guidelines). 

Project Design Criteria are employed concurrent with the various silvicultural treatment elements 

described in ROD Attachment A. Many specific Riparian Reserve design elements would require sitespecific recommendations for application from Forest Service resource professionals during 

implementation (adaptive management). This is an overall design element/mitigation measure applicable 

to all treatments.

Density management and/or commercial extraction within Riparian Reserve shall only be considered to 

maintain, enhance or restore Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) objectives. Timber harvest in 

Riparian Reserves is prohibited unless treatments promote desired vegetation characteristics needed to 

attain ACS objectives or to mitigate damaging effects from catastrophic events such as fire, flooding, 

volcanic, wind, or insect damage (NWFP Standards and Guidelines, Timber Management, TM-1). 
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 2 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Situations in which timber harvest may be needed to maintain or restore (improve) ACS Objectives 

include thinning in forested Riparian Reserves to improve root strength, and other characteristics having 

to do with overall health and vigor of the stand. A young healthy stand has greater potential to restore the 

timing, volume, rate, and character of sediment input and storage (water quality and aquatic habitat). A 

young healthy stand also has greater potential to grow into a late seral forest, eventually providing latesuccessional habitat.

Riparian Reserve and its appurtenant Standards and Guidelines apply where these reserves overlap other 

land allocations (i.e., within Matrix). Consequently, field identification of Riparian Reserves and 

validation of fish-bearing status and stream classification will be required before implementation of 

treatments. An estimate of Riparian Reserve acreage within proposed units associated with each Action 

Alternative has been made and is described in ROD Attachment A.

Thinning within Riparian Reserves associated with perennial streams within some candidate stands will 

occur, based on field reconnaissance. Further investigation during implementation may identify Riparian 

Reserves that are currently fully functioning and not in need of thinning treatments. There are likely to be 

intermittent or perennial streams not yet identified. These areas would need to be identified through 

additional field reconnaissance and mapped in GIS. Some, all or none of these Riparian Reserves may 

need vegetative treatment to maintain or improve their function in accordance with the ACS.

Specifically for the Eden Ridge Timber Sales Project, Riparian Reserve treatments and connected actions 

are to be designed to avoid or minimize conditions that would increase hydrologic connectivity, increase 

drainage from roads into steams (especially higher order streams), increase interception and concentration 

of subsurface slope flow by road cuts, concentrate runoff into centralized drainage conduits (especially 

near higher order streams), increase runoff from impervious surfaces or concentrated areas of compaction 

(landings, skyline pads, roads), and increase activity generated sediment, especially in high risk areas.

High risk areas for increased runoff, erosion and hydrologic connectivity as classified for the Eden Ridge 

Timber Sales Project include steep slopes, high water table areas, proximity to previously disturbed areas 

(e.g., regeneration harvest along FS/private land boundaries, and proximity to high order streams (midand low- slope positions in watersheds).

1. Overall Project Design Criteria for Riparian Reserve Treatments

This sub-section discusses criteria for proposed silvicultural treatments and connected actions associated 

with timber yarding and felling within Riparian Reserves. Access and haul are discussed in the next subsection on roads.

Riparian Reserve widths are based on one site-potential tree height1 each side of stream course (assumed 

to be 175 feet for all areas within Eden Ridge Planning Area). The width for fish-bearing streams is two 

site potential tree heights on each side. All Riparian Reserves would be identified during implementation 

and prior to treatments (including currently unmapped Riparian Reserves within treatment areas).

Riparian Reserve treatments and project design elements fall into three categories; fish-bearing 

perennial streams, non-fish-bearing perennial streams, and intermittent and ephemeral streams, 

(see next sections). Further explanation of categories and terms used in these criteria are contained 

below.

 

1 A site potential tree height is the average maximum height of the tallest dominant trees (200 years or older) for a given site 

class.
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 3 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Silvicultural treatments within Riparian Reserves will include density management thinning via removal 

of intermediate and suppressed trees. Treatments will be designed to produce a variable thin and create 

an uneven canopy closure across the stand. For the Eden Ridge Timber Sales Project, Riparian Reserve 

treatments will typically occur within the outer edges of Riparian Reserves (upland, farthest from stream 

course, typically with no actual riparian vegetation).

 No density management treatment would reduce the existing overstory canopy within Riparian 

Reserve to less than 50%.

 Commercial extraction of trees would occur outside of variable, no-treatment stream course buffers, 

according to stream category and thinning intensity (see next sub-sections and Table ROD B-2).

 To reduce the risk of sediment delivery, soil compaction or the loss of soil infiltration capacity in 

the riparian area to the streams, yarding activities, within 100 feet of stream courses, pre and post 

activity will not result in a loss of more than 10% of the soil infiltration capacity which reduces 

concerns for sediment reaching the stream. This activity will include existing skid trails, which 

could be re-utilized as necessary and then be ripped (as feasible) to re-establish soil infiltration 

capacity. Use of long-lining (winch line) to remove material from treatment areas is allowed where 

it is determined to be of benefit to Riparian Reserve conditions such as reducing the amount of skid 

trails needed. 

 Yarding activities shall achieve full suspension over the active channel2. To facilitate log 

suspension with skyline operations, corridors for cable rigging would be allowed to pass through 

Riparian Reserves. A maximum clearing width of 12 ft. is required and logs may be yarded 

through this corridor if necessary. Corridors must be spaced at a minimum of 200 feet apart if they 

pass through Riparian Reserves. Corridor “rub trees” within the Riparian Reserve, even if 

damaged, will either be left standing or felled and left in place.

 Hand piles and burning should be no closer than 25 ft. from stream channel to maintain ground 

vegetation.

 No new temporary roads or landings, gap treatments, or heavy thinning is proposed nor allowed 

within Riparian Reserves without prior field examination by a Soils Scientist, Hydrologist, or 

Geologist to prescribe site specific mitigation, if needed.

2. Design Criteria for Perennial Streams

This category includes permanently flowing perennial fish-bearing and non-fish-bearing streams. The 

primary concern regarding yarding Riparian Reserves with fish bearing streams is prevention of sediment 

delivery to streams, prevention of concentrated overland flow, wood recruitment, and maintenance of 

stream temperatures. Project design features would follow direction provided in NWFP Temperature 

TMDL Implementation Strategies of 20113. This involves protection, maintenance and enhancement of 

existing stream shade, and maintenance of the existing micro-climate, ambient air temperature, and air 

movement. 

 

2 Active channel is the bank full width of flowing perennial or intermittent streams.

3 Northwest Forest Plan Temperature TMDL Implementation strategies were updated in 2011 (Evaluation of the Northwest 

Forest Plan Aquatic Conservation Strategy and Associated Tools to achieve and maintain stream temperature water quality 

standards- USFS and BLM). Recommended Primary Shade Zone widths were increased over the September 9, 2005 version. 
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 4 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

The primary difference between fish-bearing and non-fish-bearing stream is the width of the entire 

Riparian Reserve (which is differentiated by fish-bearing status) as shown below:

Fish-bearing Riparian Reserve widths are two site potential tree heights each side of stream 

course (175 ft. X 2 = 350 ft. each side; total width 700 ft).

Nonfish-bearing Riparian Reserve widths are one site potential tree height each side of stream 

course (175 ft. each side; total width 350 ft.).

The Stream Channel Protection Zone buffer is 50-85 feet from the edge of stream course based on the 

Primary Shade Zone. This zone is an area where no commercial extraction will occur (larger trees felled 

for skyline corridor clearing would be left), however some enhancement treatments could occur. Distance 

from active stream channel varies according to height of existing overstory trees and hill slope in 

immediate area. The following table establishes the width of the Primary Shade Zone.

Table ROD B-1. Primary Shade Zone Width, Based on Adjacent Hill Slope within Perennial

Streams

Hill Slope

<30%

Hill Slope

30% to 60%

Hill Slope >60%

Tree Height >60 – 100 ft. 50 ft. 55 ft. 60 ft.

Tree Height >100– 140 ft. 70 ft. 75 ft. 85 ft.

The Temperature Implementation Strategies allow the distances in the above table to be less (but not less 

than 25 ft.) if the trees are located on a south facing slope (175-185 degree azimuth) and therefore do not 

provide stream shade. Note: no large wood, or remnant trees with a potential for instream recruitment 

would be cut or removed.

The Riparian Treatment Zone is an area where density management, fuels reduction or other 

enhancement treatments could occur, outside of the Stream Channel Protection Zone, in accordance with 

design criteria. 

Figure ROD B-1. Riparian Reserve Design Elements – Perennial Fish & Non-Fish Bearing Streams

Stream Channel Protection Zone (50-85feet:

includes 25 Foot No Cut Buffer)

Riparian 

Treatment 

Zone

Two Site Potential Tree Heights

(Fish bearing) 

One Site Potential Tree Height

(Non-fish Bearing)

Riparian 

Treatment 

Zone

Total Riparian 

Reserve Width 
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 5 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

3. Design Criteria for Non Fish-bearing Intermittent and Ephemeral Streams

Seasonally flowing intermittent and ephemeral non-fish-bearing streams have buffers established for the 

prevention of sediment delivery to streams, prevention of concentrated overland flow, and maintenance of 

micro-climates, ambient air temperature and humidity. There are no fish-bearing ephemeral or 

intermittent stream channels in the Eden Ridge Planning Area.

The primary difference between perennial and intermittent/ephemeral streams is the buffers for no-cut, 

and allowable density management and commercial extraction activities. The intermittent/ephemeral 

Riparian Reserves and non-fish bearing Riparian Reserves are the same, one site potential tree heights on 

each side of stream course (175 feet on each side; total 350 feet). The Stream Channel Protection Zone 

width is based on the intensity of proposed riparian treatments, i.e., a Light Thin would be 25 ft.; a 

Medium Thin would be 35 ft.; and a Heavy Thin would be 40 ft. 

Figure ROD B-2. Riparian Reserve Design Elements – Ephemeral and Intermittent Stream Channels

The following table presents and summarizes the overall Project Design Criteria developed for Riparian 

Reserves (PDCRR), for Eden Ridge Timber Sales. 

Total Riparian 

Reserve Width 

Riparian 

Treatment 

Zone

One Site 

Potential

Tree Height

One Site 

Potential

Tree Height

Riparian 

Treatment 

Zone

Stream Channel Protection Zone

(25-40 feet; includes No-Cut Buffer 25 feet)
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 6 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Table ROD B-2. Overall Design Criteria for Timber Felling and Yarding within Riparian Reserves

Stream Channel Project Activities Buffer Riparian 

Reserve PDCRR Name

Range of Commercial 

Prescriptions Outside of 

Buffer (TPA)

Ephemeral and 

Intermittent

Non-fish

Bearing Streams

No-cut buffer except for hazard 

trees, corridor or anchor trees 

(for skyline cable yarding) may 

be felled and left at site, no 

commercial removal.

Stream side to 25 feet 

along both sides of 

channel.

One site potential 

tree height each 

side of stream 

(175 feet each 

side; total width 

350 feet)

Stream Channel 

Protection Zone

Light Thin = 150-225 

Density management and 

commercial extraction allowed.

25 feet from stream side to 

edge of Riparian Reserve, 

along both sides of 

channel, based on one site 

potential tree height.

Riparian 

Treatment Zone

Light Thin = 150-225

Ephemeral and 

Intermittent

Non-fish

Bearing Streams

No-cut buffer except for hazard 

trees, corridor or anchor trees 

(for skyline cable yarding) may 

be felled and left at site, no 

commercial removal.

Stream side to 35 feet 

along both sides of 

channel.

One site potential 

tree height each 

side of stream 

(175 feet each 

side; total width 

350 feet)

Stream Channel 

Protection Zone

Medium Thin = 90-150

Density management and 

commercial extraction allowed.

35 feet from stream side to 

edge of Riparian Reserve, 

along both sides of 

channel, based on one site 

potential tree height.

Riparian 

Treatment Zone

Medium Thin = 90-150 

Ephemeral and 

Intermittent

Non-fish

Bearing Streams

No-cut buffer except for hazard 

trees, corridor or anchor trees 

(for skyline cable yarding) may 

be felled and left at site, no 

commercial removal.

Stream side to 40 feet 

along both sides of 

channel.

One site potential 

tree height each 

side of stream 

(175 feet each 

side; total width 

350 feet)

Stream Channel 

Protection Zone

Heavy Thin = 50-90

Density management and 

commercial extraction allowed.

40 feet from stream side to 

edge of Riparian Reserve,

along both sides of 

channel, based on one site 

potential tree height.

Riparian 

Treatment Zone

Heavy Thin = 50-90

Perennial

Non-fish

Bearing Stream

No-cut buffer (same as 

Ephemeral and Intermittent

Streamside to 50-60 feet 

along both sides of 

channel

One site potential 

tree height each 

side of stream 

(175 feet each 

side; total width 

350 feet)

Primary Shade 

Zone (includes 

Stream Channel 

Protection Zone)

Light Thin = 150-225 

Medium Thin = 90-150 

Heavy Thin = 50-90

Density management and 

commercial extraction allowed 

(same as Ephemeral and 

Intermittent).

50-85 feet from stream 

side to edge of Riparian 

Reserve, along both sides 

of channel, based on one 

size potential tree height.

Riparian 

Treatment Zone

Light Thin = 150-225 

Medium Thin = 90-150

Heavy Thin = 50-90

Perennial

Fish Bearing 

Streams

No-cut buffer (same as 

Ephemeral and Intermittent

Same as Perennial 

Non-fish Bearing Stream Two site potential 

tree height each 

side of stream 

(350 feet each 

side; total width 

700 feet)

Same as Perennial 

Non-fish Bearing 

Stream

Light Thin = 150-225

Medium Thin = 90-150 

Heavy Thin = 50-90

Density management and 

commercial extraction allowed 

(same as Ephemeral and 

Intermittent).

Same as Perennial 

Non-fish Bearing Stream, 

except Riparian Treatment 

Zone extends from 50-85’ 

buffer limit to edge of two 

site-potential tree buffer

Same as Perennial 

Non-fish Bearing 

Stream

Light Thin = 150-225 

Medium Thin = 90-150 

Heavy Thin = 50-90

4. Project Design Criteria for Roads and Landings within Riparian Reserves

As noted In ROD Attachment A and as documented in the Road Analysis (Transportation and Logging 

Systems Report, FEIS Appendix I), the Eden Ridge Planning Area currently has a minimal existing road 

network and when the harvesting that created the candidate stands of today occurred, the area was logged 

by historical railroad systems. Most of the existing roads evolved from early railroad grades but do not 

adequately serve the Planning Area for today’s needs and systems. 

In order to adequately and efficiently access the Planning Area for today’s management systems, a need 

was identified for additional Classified or temporary roads. Given the current situation, these proposed 

new access roads could not be developed without the need to cross some drainages designated as Riparian 

Reserve.
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 7 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Temporary Road Construction and Decommissioning Design Criteria

Temporary road construction and decommissioning will be managed in accordance with water quality 

Best Management Practices4(BMPs) R-23. In order to prevent continued low level casual use, and to 

minimize resource impacts, such roads would be obliterated at the completion of their intended use. 

Effective obliteration is generally achieved through a combination of the following measures:

 Temporary culverts are removed and natural drainage configuration is re-established;

 Road surfaces are ripped;

 Sideslopes are reshaped and stabilized; road is effectively drained; and

 Road is blocked to further use, and road is returned to vegetation production through revegetation 

(seeding, planting browse species, or hardwood/conifer trees).

 Remove those elements of a road that reroute hillslope drainage and present slope stability 

hazards. Another term for this is “hydrologic obliteration.”

Temporary roads constructed will be closed after the season of use, and if kept open over winter, would 

be winterized. Drainage work to winterize temporary roads would include water bars at suitable intervals 

and out sloping.

New Road Construction Design Criteria

Some of the proposed new Classified roads will cross Riparian Reserves under specially designed Project 

Design Criteria for Riparian Reserves (see below).

 No new road construction is proposed nor will be allowed to cross or disturb any fish bearing

perennial stream, especially the banks of fish bearing portions/tributaries of Coal Creek and 

Wooden Rock Creek. 

 New classified road construction will only be allowed to cross non fish bearing perennial streams 

or intermittent streams and would include engineering design as Operational Maintenance Level 2 

roads during use, and Maintenance Level 1 when not in use for harvest activities. 

 Perennial channels would be dewatered or water would be rerouted during construction with 

manufactured or natural sediment filters placed within the channel to prevent sediment from 

discharging downstream. 

 New permanent stream crossings will be designed to accommodate at least the 100-year flood, 

including associated bedload and debris.

 Relief ditch spacing will be shortened on new road segments within Riparian Reserves to reduce 

concentration of road runoff into stream courses such that water does not channelize when 

leaving the relief culvert. 

 All exposed soils near streams will be mulched for erosion control.

 Roads would be designed to minimize hydrologic connectivity and sediment delivery. This 

includes roads inside and outside of Riparian Reserves. Road drainage will be routed away from 

potentially unstable channels, fills, and hillslopes.

 No side-casting (placement of unconsolidated earthen waste materials resulting from road 

construction or maintenance) is allowed in Riparian Reserves.

 Minimize or avoid disruption of natural hydrologic flow paths, including diversion of stream flow 

and interception of surface and subsurface flow when considering constructing or reconstructing 

roads or landings either inside or outside of Riparian Reserves.

 

4 General Water Quality Best Management Practices, Pacific Northwest Region, November 1988. 
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 8 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

 Where physically feasible, construction of stream crossings will avoid diversion of stream flow 

out of the channel and down the road.
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 9 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Landing Design Criteria

All landings, designated skid trails, staging or decking within Riparian Reserves will:

 Be of minimum size as possible to only allow harvest operations;

 Be located above the break in slope above the stream channel;

 Landing slopes would be armored with logs or other woody material capable of protecting the 

slope surface; 

 Landing surfaces would drain away from the stream channel during use, and, would be

revegetated/mulched after use;

 Landing site restoration would consist of :

-Loose soil material on the downslope side would be pulled back

-Placement of slash on bare soils located on the downhill slope; and

 All new landings would be at least 100 feet away from stream channels.

5. Stream Enhancement Project Design Criteria

 Place large wood (LWM) and boulders only in those areas where they would naturally occur and in 

patterns that closely mimic that which would naturally occur for that particular stream type. 

 LWM includes whole conifer and hardwood trees, logs, and root wads. LWM size (diameter and 

length) should account for bankfull width and stream discharge rates. When available, trees with 

rootwads should be a minimum of 1.5 times bankfull channel width, while logs without root wads 

should be a minimum of two times the bankfull width. Place wood in a manner that most closely 

mimics natural accumulations of LWM for that particular stream type. Structures may partially or 

completely span stream channels or be positioned along streambanks. 

 No conifers should be felled in the riparian area for in-channel large wood placement unless conifers 

are overstocked and treatments are consistent with Project Design Criteria in vegetation treatment 

categories. Felled hazard trees can be used for in-channel wood placement. 

 LWM may be buried into the streambank or channel, but shall not constitute the dominant placement 

method of LWM. 

 Tree Removal for LWM Projects: 

o Trees may be removed by cable, ground based equipment, horses or helicopters, or felled 

directly into the stream. Felled trees may be stock-piled for later instream enhancement projects. 

o Individual trees or small groups of trees (<5) should come from the periphery of permanent 

openings (roads etc.) or from the periphery of non-permanent openings (e.g., plantations, along 

recent clear-cuts, etc.). 

o Trees selected for LWM enhancement projects must be spaced at least one site potential tree 

height apart and at least one crown width from any trees with potential nesting structure for 

ESA-listed bird species. 

 Instream work would only occur during the ODFW instream work period (typically July 1 

through September 15).

B. Wildlife Project Design Criteria

This sub-section discusses elements related to the design of treatments and actions (i.e., Project Design 

Criteria), applicable to terrestrial wildlife. These elements are to be employed during on-the ground 

project designation/implementation and are designed to address overall objectives (attain the Purpose and

Need) and resource objectives to manage consequences (obtain compliance with Standards and 

Guidelines). 
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 10 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Maintain Northern Spotted Owl Dispersal Habitat

Canopy cover within proposed stands (all units) will be maintained at 40% or greater. Maintain decadent 

woody material such as large snags and downed wood providing benefits for spotted owl prey species 

(see ROD Attachment A, snag and large wood objectives for the western hemlock plant series in the coast 

geographic region, as applicable to the Eden Ridge Project) (PDF #1; Wildlife Report, FEIS Appendix 

G, Attachment A).

Protect all Known Del Norte Salamander Sites

To protect any talus habitat from ground disturbing activities that may cause compaction; designate a 

buffer of at least one site potential tree or at least 100' horizontal distance, whichever is greater for all 

known Del Norte salamander locations (see FEIS Appendix G, Wildlife Report, Table G-15, page G-48) . 

Maintain at least 40% canopy closure and avoid activities that would disturb the surface talus layer. 

Partial harvest within the buffer may be possible if 40% canopy closure can be maintained; in such cases, 

tree harvest must be conducted using helicopter or suspended cable systems to avoid compaction or other 

disturbance of talus (PDF #4; Wildlife Report, FEIS Appendix G, Attachment A).

NOTE: Known sites associated with Modified Alternative 2 include Units 006, 211, 303, 308, 322, 

323, 326, 329, 331, 332, 333, 334, 340, 341, and 342, and Non-Commercial Unit 906. Some 

Protection Buffers overlap multiple units.

Protect Northern Spotted Owl Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging Habitat

Exclude from treatment any stand or portion thereof meeting Recovery Action 32; high-quality spotted 

owl nesting, roosting, and foraging (NRF) habitat. To be determined by wildlife biologist (PDF #5; 

Wildlife Report, FEIS Appendix G, Attachment A).

Protect Potential High-Quality Spotted Owl Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging Habitat and Potential 

Marbled Murrelet Habitat

As part of implementation, an analysis exercise will be done to determine whether or not any 5-acre 

portion of a candidate stand contains 6 or more trees with potential late-successional habitat structure. If 

an area contains 6 or more remnant trees5 with potential structure, it constitutes potential suitable habitat. 

Any stand with a potential suitable habitat (remnant tree component) will be further assessed with a walkthrough of the area that would be impacted (USDI, 2006). If a late successional component is confirmed, 

that portion of the stand (or the entire stand) will be excluded from treatments (including 1⁄2 site tree unthinned buffer) (PDF #6; Wildlife Report, FEIS Appendix G, Attachment A).

Maintain Wildlife Reserve Trees, Snags, and Down Wood

Management activities shall be planned to maintain enough large woody material (dead and down) to 

maintain a healthy forest ecosystem for multiple species. Large down woody material left from historical 

railroad logging represent a unique situation and every effort to avoid disturbance and maintain this 

existing material should be made. LWM already on the ground would be protected from disturbance to the 

greatest extent possible during logging and other land management activities that might destroy the 

integrity of the substrate.

 

5 Remnant trees = Generally large old trees that were not removed during earlier regeneration harvest activities or that survived 

stand replacement fires. In some cases they are single trees, while other areas have groups of older trees up to a half acre in 

size. These trees generally range from 34” dbh to in excess of 60” dbh and are often at least twice the diameter of the average 

tree in the stand they are located in. They often have a “wolfy” structure consisting of moss covered limbs/platforms > 4-6” 

diameter, and fire scars or charred bark. Generally, bark is thicker and more furrowed and crowns tend to be more flat topped, 

less “pointed” than younger trees.
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 11 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

In conformance with the marking guidelines, within harvest units, leave up to 4 dominant / co-dominant 

trees per acre which contain nests, wildlife cavities, structural deformities, and/or damage likely to lead to 

snag formation. To provide for structural diversity for multiple species, remnant trees would be retained. 

Remnant trees felled for operational safety needs would be retained on-site (PDF #15 & #9; Wildlife 

Report, FEIS Appendix G, Attachment A).

To the extent compatible with safety provisions, retain all snags with tree diameter >=10”. Retain on site, 

all commercial size down-woody material. "Leave-trees" damaged during project operations would be 

left on site. The intent is to maintain or minimize the loss of existing snag numbers following all 

treatment activities. All snags felled for safety would remain on site (PDF #12; Wildlife Report, FEIS 

Appendix G, Attachment A).

C. Botanical Resources Project Design Criteria

This sub-section discusses elements related to the design of treatments and actions (i.e., Project Design 

Criteria), applicable to botanical resources, including invasive species. These elements are to be 

employed during on-the ground project designation/implementation and are designed to address overall 

objectives (attain the Purpose and Need) and resource objectives to manage consequences (obtain 

compliance with Standards and Guidelines). 

Sensitive Plant Bensoniella oregana

Protect existing known sites (see FEIS Appendix F for specific locations) of the sensitive plant 

Bensoniella oregana by avoiding direct trampling, maintaining coarse woody material for moisture 

retention and maintaining the current amount of shade to light ratio. Layout aggregated retention zones or 

skips in areas where Bensoniella oregana was found. A buffer of 100 foot radius from the edge of each 

population is recommended. Protect existing known sites of the sensitive plant Bensoniella oregana by 

avoiding direct trampling, maintaining coarse woody material for moisture retention and maintaining the 

current amount of shade to light ratio.

Populations of any Bensoniella oregana found within the road prisms would be flagged prior to 

implementation of the project. The proposed new road should be moved further to the north of the buffer 

area. No equipment or vehicles should be parked or driven within the flagged areas. Protect existing 

known sites of the sensitive plant Bensoniella oregana by precluding any direct trampling of individuals 

or a population.

Avoid thinning below 40% canopy cover, with 60% or above preferred for this species. Use dispersed 

retention with random aggregate retention or skips as outlined in ROD Attachment A, and the Silviculture 

Report for this project. Allow for continued and future ectomycorrhizal colonization of remaining trees 

post-thinning.

Fungi

Maintain down wood in all stages of decay across forested landscapes. Following the current forest 

standards should meet this criterion. Many fungal species are associated with larger down woody 

material in advanced stages of decay. Allow for future saprophytic fungi colonization by retaining as 

much downed large wood as possible.

Maintain all larger well decayed logs during stand treatments. In younger stands, following disturbance 

or harvest, the presence of large, well decayed down wood legacy can provide habitat for both 

ectomycorrhizal and wood-decay fungi, as well as plant seedlings. For some fungi, spore dissemination 

into disturbed areas is the primary method of re-establishment. 
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 12 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

D. Cultural (Heritage) Resources Project Design Criteria

This sub-section discusses elements related to the design of actions (i.e., Project Design Criteria), 

applicable to cultural resources. These elements are to be employed during on-the ground project 

designation/implementation and are designed to address overall objectives (attain the Purpose and Need) 

and resource objectives to manage consequences. 

During project implementation, sale design and road locations, an archaeologist should be involved in 

laying out the various sales to flag out key features/activity areas, including key examples of skid 

trails and associated features such as camps, day-use areas, trestles, anchor stumps, spar trees and 

angled logs (internal reference map available from Forest Archaeologist).

During determination of road locations, limit impacts to railroad grades; design to minimal road width 

and limit locations to one ‘lane’ where sidings exist, leaving fill and cut features intact. The siding areas 

are not to be used as turn outs. Most of the historical features also lie along the old grades. Those 

features that retain some integrity as identified in the Cultural Resource Inventory #1352 (internal use) 

will be avoided.

II. MITIGATION MEASURES

This section discusses elements that are required under the ROD to manage consequences during actual 

operations; these are termed “Mitigation Measures.” Other elements associated with the design of 

treatments and actions (i.e., Project Design Criteria), are to be employed during on-the ground project 

designation or implementation (see above). 

The Forest Service is required by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for 

implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA to identify all relevant, reasonable mitigation measures 

that could improve the project or reduce adverse environmental effects. Mitigation, as defined in the 

CEQ Regulations (40 CFR 1508.20), includes:

 Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.

 Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.

 Rectifying or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations 

during the life of the action.

 Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.

 Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating or restoring the affected environment.

Note that some measures would be enacted only if certain (future) conditions exist that would 

require it (e.g., if a nesting pair of spotted owls is discovered adjacent (within 300 meters) to a 

proposed treatment area or a previously unknown heritage site is discovered). 

Mitigation measures and standard operating procedures designed to avoid or minimize adverse effects (or 

implement positive effects) are identified by resource topic area, and in some cases, by the specific 

component or sub-component activity. These measures are specific to implementation of actions 

authorized by this ROD. Standards and Guidelines and mitigation measures identified in the Siskiyou 

National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan as amended by the Northwest Forest Plan (and 

other amendments) are also incorporated by reference as required measures. 

In addition, all contracts or other methodology for implementation of actions would comply with all 

requirements and standards for protection of Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive species, in 

compliance with the Endangered Species Act. 
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 13 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

The effectiveness and feasibility of the following mitigation measures are assessed based upon the 

following rating system. These ratings are applied to all mitigation measures. Each measure identifies 

the code for effectiveness and feasibility at the end of the statement or paragraph. Ratings were 

determined by professional resource specialists, based on current scientific research and/or 

professional experience or judgment. Mitigation Measures designed for the protection of soils, site 

productivity, and water quality are generally referred to as Best Management Practices (BMPs) for which 

there has been extensive monitoring and validation of their effectiveness.

Table ROD B-3. Effectiveness and Feasibility Rating System

EFFECTIVENESS (E)

E1 Unknown or experimental; logic or practice estimated to be less than 75% effective; little or no experience in 

applying this measure. 

E2 Practice is moderately effective (75 to 90%). Often done in this situation; usually reduces impacts; logic 

indicates practice is highly effective but there is minimal literature or research. 

E3 Practice is highly effective (greater than 90%). Almost always reduces impacts, almost always done in this 

situation; literature and research can be applied.

FEASIBILITY (F)

F1 Unknown or experimental; little or no experience in applying this measure; less than 75% certainty for 

implementation. May be technically difficult or very costly. May be legally or socially difficult.

F2 Technically probable; greater than 75% certainty for implementation as planned; costs moderate to high in 

comparison to other options. Legally or socially acceptable with reservations.

F3 Almost certain to be implemented as planned; technically easy; costs low in comparison to other options. 

Legally or socially expected.

The following discussion by specific resource areas, provide additional mitigation and further explanation 

of the methodology, effectiveness, and feasibility of the mitigation measures.

A. Geology

The Northwest Forest Plan Aquatic Conservation Strategy includes unstable and potentially unstable 

areas within Riparian Reserves. No commercial activities will occur within the Riparian Reserves of 

unstable and potentially unstable terrain. A Hydrologist or Geologist will assist in field validation and 

identification of additional unstable areas during layout of stand treatments (BMP T-6). E3/F3

B. Soils

Mitigation Measures designed for the protection of soils, site productivity, and water quality are generally 

referred to as Best Management Practices (BMPs) as described in General Water Quality Best 

Management Practices, Pacific Northwest Region, November 1988, in concert with National Core 

BMP Technical Guide (USDA FS, 2012). While the terminology in the BMPs is dated (for example 

Streamside Management Unit now falls under Riparian Reserve), they are still considered effective under 

today’s management direction. 

Prelocate skid roads in all ground based treatment units; up to 150 feet endlining required to designated 

skid roads. Skid road locations are to be approved by the Forest Service (BMP T-11). Ground-identified 

pre-designated skid trail patterns are to be authorized that will limit the area used for harvest access skid 

trails when employing ground-based harvest systems to ensure compliance with Standards and Guidelines 

to protect the soil resource and long-term site productivity. E3/F3
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 14 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

During operations, heavy machinery use within a treatment unit shall be planned and approved by the 

Forest Service to be consistent with Forest Plan Standard and Guidelines for Soils. The maximum 

percent of area for detrimental soil conditions under the LRMP is 15% for an activity area (SNF LRMP 

S&G 7-2). This standard includes roads and landings. The 10% soil infiltration capacity standard also 

applies within Riparian Reserves, as noted within Project Design Criteria for Riparian Reserves, above. 

E3/F2

The use of vehicles and equipment shall be limited to dry soil conditions to minimize compaction. 

Percent moisture levels are to be determined by a Soil Scientist, using standard soils methodology, during 

project layout and implementation. E3/F2

During implementation, management activities will be designed to retain effective ground cover to protect 

the soil resource, as specified in the SNF LRMP (1989), and to leave woody material in accordance with 

the silvicultural prescription. E3/F2

All skyline logging will be done with equipment capable of suspending one end of the log; up to 150 foot 

lateral yarding required to skyline corridors (BMP T-12). Whenever feasible, parallel yarding corridors 

are preferred over ‘fan’ settings in order to minimize soil/vegetation disturbance immediately below the 

yarder. Yarding corridors shall target a spacing of no closer than 150 feet as much as possible (BMP T12). An effective slash cover and/or water bars in skyline corridors and skid trails will be installed 

following the completion of operations for erosion control (BMP T-16). E3/F3

During implementation, complete maintenance and erosion control on landings/roads/trails prior to the 

onset of extended periods of wet weather (BMP T-13, R-18). Restrict hauling on roads during extended 

periods of wet weather (BMP R-20). E3/F3

During implementation, ground-based heavy equipment used for cutting/ skidding/forwarding will be 

restricted to Forest Service-designated or approved skid trails that are obligated for this use, or to 

locations where thick slash mats are created using mechanized limbing/topping systems, or to periods 

when the ground is frozen or snow-covered to a depth that minimizes soil compaction. E3/F3

Ground-based systems are restricted to slopes of 35% or less. Designated skid trails and skyline corridors 

are to be spaced at a distance approved by the Forest Service to keep detrimental soil conditions to within 

the maximum percent of area for detrimental soil conditions under the LRMP; 15% for an activity area 

(SNF LRMP S&G 7-2)(BMP T-5, T-9, T-11, T-13, VM-1, VM-4). E3/F2

During implementation, pre-existing (legacy) skid trails, temporary roads and landings shall be re-used to 

the extent practicable; so as to minimize additional ground impacts (detrimental soil conditions) (BMP T11). E3/F2

One or more of the following soil restoration methods shall be used (alone or in combination) to 

rehabilitate soil conditions on detrimentally disturbed ground (for example, on legacy or newlydesignated skid trails and landings) where compaction tests or other monitoring identifies a need for a 

remedial or impact containment action. (BMP T-14, T-15, T-16, R-23):

After completion of logging, deep subsoiling of heavily compacted skid trails and landings may be 

employed, where soil conditions are feasible. This operation would use a specially-designed 

subsoiler implement, mounted on a -tracked excavator, to fracture and loosen compacted soil layers 

to re-establish water infiltration and deep root penetration. Mechanized equipment used for 

subsoiling would be restricted to the ground areas already disturbed to avoid creating additional 

ground impacts. 
ROD Attachment 

B Page ROD B- 15 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 16 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

After completion of logging, scarification (ripping) of skid trails and other disturbed soil areas may 

be employed. This operation would use standard rock rippers or similar equipment, to superficially 

cultivate the surface of tractor skid trails as a way to promote natural herbaceous re-vegetation by 

providing seed catchments and shallow water infiltration. 

During subsoiling or scarification, 5 to 10 tons per acre of woody material and/or slash may be placed 

on top of disturbed ground areas, either manually or with a machine. Dispersing organic material 

evenly across tractor skid trails, landings, and other bare soil areas reduces erosion and increases 

water infiltration.

Following completion of logging operations, and in situations where rapid (within months) protection 

of bared soils is necessary, mulching, grass seeding, shrub planting or tree planting may be conducted 

using native, non-invasive (and weed-free) grass seed or local native plants (as recommended by a 

botanist). Optionally, or in combination, sediment capture devices, such as rice straw wattles or 

bales, may be used to control erosion and reduce sediment movement. 

Selection and use of the above actions would be based on the existing condition of the site following 

completion of logging operations. These actions do not result in instant restoration; rather they begin the 

process of restoration. E3/F2

All re-constructed or newly-constructed temporary roads would be reclaimed as soon as practical by the 

contractor before the storm season, unless mitigated with prescriptions provided on a case-by-case basis 

from a soils/geology/hydrology specialist. E3/F2

Reclamation of temporary roads may include one or more of the following actions: removal of 

temporarily installed culverts, excavating cross ditches (water bars) to drain water captured by the former 

running surface, placing large logs or rocks onto the running surface to deter vehicle use, or re-contouring 

the road template to near-natural ground conditions. In addition, any of the soil restoration methods 

above may be used to decommission temporary truck roads as well (BMP R-23). E3/F2

Plan pile burning operations for when litter, duff, and soil moistures are high enough to minimize 

consumption of soil organic matter and minimize soil heating. Minimize the size of slash hand piles. 

Distribute piles to reduce severe burn impacts from concentrated fuel (BMP F-2, F-3). E3/F2

C. Hydrology

Special Riparian Reserve Mitigation Measures:

In addition to Riparian Reserve PDCs (see above) the following measures will apply to hydrology:

Currently unmapped Riparian Reserves within the Project Areas or within one site-potential tree 

(assumed to be 175 feet for all areas) of the stream course will be identified prior to implementation of 

treatments by watershed specialists and/or biologists. E3/F3

Yarding activities should achieve full suspension over the active channel. To facilitate log suspension 

with skyline operations, corridors for cable rigging would be allowed to pass through Riparian Reserves. 

A maximum clearing width of 12 ft. is required and logs may be yarded through this corridor if necessary. 

Corridors must be spaced at a minimum of 200 feet apart if they pass through Riparian Reserves. 

Corridor “rub trees” within the Riparian Reserve, even if damaged, would either be left standing or felled 

and left in place. E3/F3
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 17 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

No new temporary roads or landings, gap treatments, or heavy thinning is proposed nor allowed within 

Riparian Reserves without prior field examination by a Soils Scientist, Hydrologist, or Geologist to 

prescribe site specific mitigation, if needed (including relocation of the road). E3/F3

Fire, engineering and aquatic resource personnel will work together to determine suitable pump chances 

and the measures needed for the protection of aquatic resources. Refuel 100 feet from a stream or use 

measures to assure fuel does not reach flowing water. Water withdrawal equipment must have a 3.82 

intake screen in order to avoid fish entrapment. E3/F3

Special Haul Restrictions to Prevent Fine Sediment Delivery to Streams:6

OPERATIONS WITHIN THE NORMAL OPERATING SEASON (June 1 to Oct 31st). Project design 

features would be implemented to make it unlikely that sediment would reach stream channels. E3/F3

 Road crown will be maintained.

 Operations shall cease at any time when the travel way of the road is wet and turbid water or fines 

are observed moving off the road surface to ditch lines that deliver to Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) 

or any stream type.

 If fine sediment is observed to be moving off the road surface to ditch lines or streams due to timber 

sale activities, the Forest Service is responsible to have the Timber Sale Purchaser place sediment 

filters to prevent this sediment from reaching any stream.

IF OPERATIONS OUTSIDE THE NORMAL OPERATING SEASON: November 1 through May 31st

are allowed, the following rules must be applied to timber haul on gravel roads adjacent EFH or any 

stream type stream channels: E3/F3

 Operations shall cease at any time when the travel way of the road is wet and turbid water or fines 

are observed moving off the road surface to ditch lines that deliver to EFH or any stream type. 

 If fine sediment is observed to be moving off the road surface to ditch lines or streams due to timber 

sale activities, the Forest Service is responsible to have the Timber Sale Purchaser place sediment 

filters to prevent this sediment from reaching any stream.

 Road Rutting: No hauling down the gravel road surface if rutting is occurring, indicating the 

subsurface is wet. 

 Wet weather conditions must be monitored daily by the Forest Service for the chance of 

precipitation, especially 1 inch of rain in 24 hours.

Road Activity Mitigation Measures

Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be used for all road activities such as road reconstruction and/or 

maintenance work (Land and Resource Management Plan, Siskiyou National Forest, 1989, Appendix F 

and General Water Quality Best Management Practices, PNW, November 1988) These are now used in 

concert with the National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management (April 2012). The 

purpose of the National BMP Program is to provide a standard set of core BMPs and a consistent means 

to track and document the use and effectiveness for BMPs on NFS lands. E3/F3

Follow Road River-Siskiyou National Forest Road Use Rules. E3/F3

 

6

Luce, C.H. and Black T.A. 2001. Effects of Traffic and Ditch Maintenance on Forest Road Sediment Productions, Rocky 

Mountain Research Station, Boise, Idaho. 
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 18 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Follow Road Management Objectives (RMO) Operational Restrictions for hauling under wet conditions. 

E3/F3
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 19 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

D. Recreation

Not all areas will receive treatment at the same time – efforts should be made to ensure that a range of 

recreational experiences remain available to the recreating public. Public safety should be a top priority. 

A number of mitigation measures will be implemented as necessary to reduce the effects of 

implementation on recreation users. These would include advanced notice of closures, signing at 

appropriate locations, alternate route suggestions, and notification of various user groups. E3/F3

Identify any recreation improvements (trails, trailheads, signs) on contract area maps and protect, repair 

and restore any damage caused by project operations. E3/F3

All project activities (Forest Service and contract) will comply with State and Federal Occupational 

Safety and Health (OSHA) codes. All Forest Service project operations will be guided by FS Handbook 

6709.11 (Health and Safety Code Handbook). E3/F3

As necessary, restrict or close areas to hunting where contractors or Forest Service personnel are working. 

E3/F2

No trash will be left on public lands by any contractor or contractor crew associated with this project. 

This includes commercial timber removal, non-commercial treatments, activity fuels treatment 

contractors and includes items such as aluminum cans, lunch wrappers, paint cans, and other refuse. 

E3/F3

E. Botanical and Invasive Plant Species

Invasive Species

To prevent the introduction of invasive plant seed into the Planning Area from other projects that the 

contractor has worked on in the recent past, before entering RRSNF lands, the contractor is required to 

clean the undercarriage, tires, wheels and other parts of off-road equipment to prevent the spread of seed 

from off forest areas. When leaving RRSNF to work in other areas the contractor should clean vehicles 

again before returning to work on this project. E3/F3

Contracts and permits should contain appropriate clauses concerning the prevention or spread of invasive 

plants as described in the Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program Preventing and Managing 

Invasive Plants Record of Decision (September 2005). E3/F3

Operational site should be surveyed for invasive species; if detected, appropriate action will be taken in 

accordance with RRSNF Integrated Noxious Weed Plans. E3/F3

To prevent the inadvertent establishment of non-native grass species into e project areas, use locally 

collected native grass seed for erosion control, wildlife seeding and invasive plant abatement. E3/F3

To prevent the inadvertent establishment of non-native grass species into project areas, use only certified 

weed free straw/mulch if needed for erosion control or other purposes during road construction. E3/F3

To prevent the inadvertent dispersal of invasive plant seed into project areas, all rock sources for road 

work/construction must first be inspected by a botanist to ensure they are weed free before being used. 

E3/F3
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 20 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Use prevention practices found in Pacific Northwest Invasive Plant Program ROD (2005), and the ROD 

and LRMP Amendment for Management of Port-Orford-Cedar in Southwest Oregon, Siskiyou National 

Forest (March 2004). This direction includes making sure heavy equipment brought to the forest is clean 

of noxious weeds (including seeds), any material brought to the forest (such as hay, rock, soil) is noxious 

weed free material, and conducting road maintenance activities in a way to minimize noxious weed 

introduction/spread. E3/F3

F. Port-Orford-cedar Management Practices 

The following management practices for Port-Orford-cedar are taken from the Risk Key assessment (EIS 

Appendix B2 – April 1, 2013)

Project Scheduling - schedule commercial treatments/road building west of Doe Swamp to occur during 

the dry season (or wash project equipment) Units 326, 327, 331, 333, 334 and 336. E3/F3

Utilize Uninfested Water - Use uninfested water sources for equipment washing, road watering and 

other water-distribution needs or treat water with Clorox bleach to prevent/reduce the spread of 

Phytophthora lateralis (PL) All units in Table ROD A-1 with ‘POC-WTG’ and/or ‘POC-RS’ prescribed.

E3/F3

Unit Scheduling - Conduct work in all timber sale units where PL is not present before working in units 

infested with PL All Eden Ridge Timber Sales units (i.e., most PL infestation is in Units 326, 327 and 

331 west of Doe Swamp). E3/F3

Road Management Measures - Implement proactive disease-prevention measures including not building 

roads (e.g., Road W through PL pockets in Units 326 and 327) or relocating the proposed road to avoid 

these infested areas. E3/F3

Resistant POC Planting - Silvicultural prescriptions for sites having potential for growing POC will 

provide for the establishment of the species through natural or artificial regeneration and maintenance as a 

viable stand component through the current and future rotations. E2/F3

Washing Project Equipment - Wash project equipment prior to beginning work in uninfested project 

areas, when leaving infested areas to work in uninfested areas, and when leaving project areas to 

minimize the transportation of infested soil to uninfested areas All Eden Ridge Timber Sales units.

E3/F3

Summer Rain Events - Apply contract clause to require cessation of harvest operations when indicators 

such as puddles in the roadway, water running in roadside ditches, or increases in soil moisture indicate 

an unacceptable increase in the likelihood of spreading PL. E2/F3

Site-Specific POC Management - Manage to favor POC uphill from creeks, on ridgetops and on welldrained sites to emphasize management of POC on sites where conditions make it likely that trees will 

escape infection. Emphasis may include priority retention during thinning or other silvicultural 

treatments and planting to increase the presence of POC in areas unfavorable to PL All Eden Ridge 

Timber Sales units. E2/F2

G. Terrestrial Wildlife Species and Habitat

In addition to Wildlife PDCs (see above) the following measures will apply to terrestrial wildlife species

and habitats:
ROD Attachment 

B Page ROD B- 21 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 22 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measures to protect northern spotted owls include:

If spotted owls are detected in or adjacent to treatment units, Project Design Criteria from the USDI Fish 

and Wildlife Service Formal Consultation on timber harvest, meadow restoration and quarry activities 

proposed by the Rogue River–Siskiyou National Forest (TAILS #: 13420-2009-F-0146) dated August 27, 

2009 (USDA/USDI, 2009c) will be applied to proposed activities (PDF #2 & #3, Wildlife Report 

Attachment A). E3/ F3

If a previously unknown spotted owl nest or activity center is located, delay project activities within or 

adjacent to a Project Area until September 30th, or until a Forest Service Wildlife Biologist determines 

that the site is non-reproductive. E3/ F3 

Any of the following mitigation measures may be waived in a particular year if nesting or reproductive 

success surveys conducted according to the FWS-endorsed survey guidelines reveal that spotted owls are 

non-nesting or that no young are present that year. Waivers are valid until March 1 of the year following 

the survey. Previously known sites: activity centers are assumed occupied unless protocol surveys 

indicate otherwise.

Work activities (such as tree felling, yarding. road construction, hauling on roads not generally used by 

the public, muffled blasting) that produce loud noises above ambient levels, or produce thick smoke that 

would enter the stand, will not occur within specified distances (see table below) of any nest site or 

activity center of known pairs and resident singles between 1 March and 30 June (or until two weeks 

after the fledging period) - unless protocol surveys have determined the activity center to be not occupied, 

non-nesting, or failed in their nesting attempt. E3/F3

March 1 — June 30 is considered the critical early nesting period. The agency biologist has the option to 

extend the restricted season to as late as 30 September during the year of harvest, based on site-specific 

knowledge (such as a late or recycle nesting attempt). The restricted area is calculated as a radius from 

the assumed nest site (point). See Appendix F of the Biological Opinion for a discussion of the rationale

for the 30 June restriction date. 

Broadcast burning (or smoke producing activities) will not take place within 0.25 mile of known active 

northern spotted owl nests between 1 March and 30 June (or until two weeks after the fledging period) 

unless smoke will not drift into the nest stand. E3/F3

Table ROD B-4. Northern Spotted Owl Mitigation Measures and Affected Harvest Units

Activity

Zone of 

Restricted 

Operation

Harvest Unit

Blast of 2 pounds or more of explosive 1 mile Activity not proposed

Blast of 2 pounds or less of explosive 120 yards None

Impact pile driver, jackhammer, or rock drill 120 yards None

Type III-IV Helicopter or single-engine airplane 120 yards None

Type I or II Helicopter 0.25 miles None

Quarry operations 0.5 miles None

Chainsaws, power tools (hazard trees, tree harvest, etc.) 120 yards None

Heavy equipment 120 yards Activity not proposed

Burning where smoke will drift into occupied sites or unsurveyed habitat 0.25 miles Activity not proposed
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 23 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measures to protect marbled murrelet include:

To protect marbled murrelets from disturbance; the following Project Design Criteria from the USDI Fish 

and Wildlife Service Formal Consultation on timber harvest, meadow restoration and quarry activities 

proposed by the Rogue River–Siskiyou National Forest (TAILS #: 13420-2009-F-0146) dated August 27, 

2009 (USDA/USDI, 2009) will be applied to proposed activities 

FWS Project Design Criteria apply to two different inland management zones dealing with 

removal/degradation of habitat and disturbance of nesting murrelets. 

Area A = Area west of the line between the coastal Western Hemlock/Tanoak Zone and inland Mixed 

Conifer/Mixed Evergreen Zone; this area is the known range for marbled murrelet in SW Oregon. Area 

B = Area 6.5 miles (10 km) east of Area A (although Area B is outside the known range for this species, 

potential nesting habitat will continue to be surveyed in this “buffer” area, where projects may affect this 

potential habitat). No surveys for marbled murrelets are required on land outside of (east of) Areas A and 

B. E3/F3

(I) For Survey Areas A and B, if the project removes or degrades suitable habitat, the project must 

be surveyed to protocol (current Pacific Seabird Group two year protocol – to document 

presence/absence of murrelet). If it is not feasible to complete the two-year protocol, the FWS will be 

contacted on a case-by-case basis to discuss other means of insuring that potential nest trees are not 

impacted (PDF #7, Wildlife Report Attachment A).

The action agency has the option of not surveying suitable habitat and classifying these stands as 

“Occupied.” A “new” LSR must be established for any timber stand in Areas A or B that is determined to 

be or assumed to be occupied by marbled murrelet (per NWFP ROD, page C-10).

(II) For Survey Areas A and B work activities (such as tree felling, yarding, road and other construction 

activities, hauling on roads not generally used by the public, muffled blasting) which produce noises 

above ambient levels will not occur within specified distances (see table below) of any occupied stand 

or unsurveyed suitable habitat between April 1 – August 5. For the period between August 6 –

September 15, work activities will be confined to between 2 hours after sunrise to 2 hours before 

sunset. 

(III) Clean up trash and garbage daily at all construction and logging sites. Keep food out of sight so 

as to not attract crows and ravens (predators on eggs or young murrelets) (PDF #8, Wildlife Report 

Attachment A).

(IV) Blasting (open air/unmuffled) – No blasting activities 1 April through 15 September within 1.0 

mile of occupied stands or unsurveyed suitable habitat. This distance may be shortened if significant 

topographical breaks or blast blankets (or other devices) muffle sound traveling between the blast and 

nest sites or less than 2 lbs of explosives are used. If not, then use described distance.
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 24 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Table ROD B-5. Marbled Murrelet Mitigation Measures and Affected Harvest Units 

Activity

Zone of 

Restricted 

Operation

Harvest Unit

Blast of 2 pounds or more of explosive 1 mile Activity not proposed

Blast of 2 pounds or less of explosive 120 yards Activity not proposed

Impact pile driver, jackhammer, or rock drill 120 yards Activity not proposed

Type III-IV Helicopter or single-engine airplane 120 yards Activity not proposed

Type I or II Helicopter 0.25 miles Activity not proposed

Quarry operations 0.5 miles Activity not proposed

Chainsaws, power tools (hazard trees, tree harvest, etc.) 120 yards 401 & part of 402

Heavy equipment 120 yards 401 & part of 402

Burning where smoke will drift into occupied sites or unsurveyed habitat 0.25 miles 401 & 402

Mitigation Measures to protect peregrine falcon include:

To manage habitat for Sensitive species (peregrine falcon) viability and maintenance of populations 

throughout their existing range on the Forest protect all existing and newly discovered peregrine falcon 

nest sites during the courtship period through the dispersal of young (January 1 - July 31). Implement 

Seasonal Restrictions on All Activities (January 1 to July 31) within disturbance distances (PDF #10 & 

#11, Wildlife Report Attachment A). E3/F3

NOTE: Restriction on Units 401, 402, and 403, and portions of Roads 5000200, 5000210, and 

5000290. Restrictions apply to Units 302, 304, 306, and 308 if helicopters are anticipated as the 

yarding system.

To limit harassment and disturbance to nesting Sensitive species – peregrine falcon, helicopter landing 

locations within 1 mile of the known or any newly found peregrine falcon sites will require approval of 

the district wildlife biologist prior to implementation. E3/F3

General Terrestrial Wildlife Mitigation:

Management activities shall be planned to maintain enough large woody material (dead and down) to 

maintain a healthy forest ecosystem for multiple species. Large down woody material left from historical 

railroad logging represent a unique situation and every effort to avoid disturbance and maintain this 

existing material should be made. E3/F2

Leave trees damaged during harvest operations will be left standing or felled for safety, but left on site. 

The intent is to maintain damaged trees, which may become snags or develop cavities, to contribute to the 

large woody material needs following all treatment activities (PDF #13, Wildlife Report Attachment 

A). E3/F3

To protect grassy areas which provide habitat for deer, elk, and other wildlife, do not operate equipment 

in or construct/locate corridors, skid trails, landings, slash piles, or any roads within meadows and 

identified grassy areas (PDF #14, Wildlife Report Attachment A). E3/F3

Should future surveys locate any R6-listed Sensitive species (or if new species known to occur within the 

area become listed) management within associated units will be halted pending analysis of the impacts of 

the activities. Management may continue, prescriptions or timing altered, or units may be dropped, based 

on the analysis. E3/F3
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 25 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

General Recommendation for Neo-tropical Migratory Birds:

Efforts should be made to reduce impacts to nesting birds that may be present in project areas that may be 

directly impacted by burning operations. Operations should occur outside of the spring breeding/nesting 

season as much as possible (February-May). E2/F2

H. Aquatic Species and Habitat

All project elements would be accomplished within Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines, Best 

Management Practices (BMPs) and Standard Operating Procedures. Standard Operating Procedures 

include adherence to State Water Quality standards; ODFW instream work periods; hazardous materials 

plans; EPA requirements for storage and use of petroleum products; ODFW, and NOAA Fisheries criteria 

for culvert replacements; and BMPs for rock quarry operations. 

Additional site specific BMPs and Project Design Criteria were developed to further avoid, minimize or 

reduce adverse impacts to aquatic resources, SONC coho salmon, their critical habitat and Essential Fish 

Habitats. Mitigation measures for density management, timber felling, yarding and hauling are 

primarily discussed within Project Design Elements for Riparian Reserve (above) and in Mitigation 

Measures described above for Hydrology and Water Quality. 

Refuel power equipment, or use absorbent pads for immobile equipment, and prepare concrete at least 

150 feet (or as far as possible from the water body where local site conditions do not allow a 150 foot 

setback) from water bodies to prevent direct delivery of contaminants into associated water bodies. 

Develop and implement an approved spill containment plans that includes having a spill containment kit 

on-site and at previously identified containment locations. E3/F3

Water withdrawal equipment must have a fish screen installed, operated and maintained in accordance 

with NOAA Fisheries recommendations (3/32” mesh size). E3/F3

If rock quarries on the forest are utilized to produce aggregate for rocking roads, landings, or pump 

chances, shape for drainage and apply appropriate erosion control techniques for waste disposal. Require 

quarry development plans to include BMPs and mitigation measures as part of the contract, monitoring 

plans to comply with stormwater pollution directives, and a site restoration plan to comply with Regional 

directives. E3/F3

I. Cultural (Heritage) Resources

The Forest consults with the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on the mitigation of 

adverse effects to historic properties in the state of Oregon considered eligible to the National Register of 

Historic Places (NRHP). Specific mitigation measures for adverse effects to the Smith-Powers Logging 

Railroad are documented in the Memorandum of Agreement between the Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest and the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office Regarding the Eden Ridge Timber Sales 

Project, Coos County, Oregon. This MOA includes the mitigation measures that are required for the 

predicted effects to the Smith-Powers Logging Railroad, and which are summarized here. 

A Forest Archaeologist will aid in the layout of timber sales to ensure that key features are identified on 

the ground for avoidance. E3/F3

Limit impacts to the railroad grade during road construction and logging activities. This includes 

constructing minimal road width and limiting construction activities to one ‘lane’ where sidings exist, 

leaving fill and cut features intact. The siding areas are not to be used as turn outs. Most of the 
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 26 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

historical features also lie along the old grades. Those features that retain some integrity will be 

avoided. 
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 27 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

In some cases, timber may be removed from within the feature boundary by directional felling and 

keeping equipment outside the feature. Skid trail features that still retain donkey mounds and other 

associated features will be avoided. Where necessary, designate yarding corridors crossing 

perpendicular to linear features. E3/F2

An Archaeologist will monitor during road construction to note type and quantity of artifacts/features,

to recover information from artifacts and features uncovered during project implementation and note 

unusual artifacts. Spot check monitor throughout the various sales. The Forest will provide brief 

reports documenting any materials or features recovered during monitoring activities for the Oregon 

SHPO. E3/F2

Include contract clause C6.24 which provides for the protection of cultural resources regardless of 

when they are discovered. If concentrations of artifacts/features are discovered during project 

implementation, stop and notify a Forest Archaeologist, and the concentration shall be avoided. 

Concentrations of artifacts could be similar to the day-use features avoided, could be a dump or single 

donkey sled, or could be a variety of artifacts dispersed over an area of several acres. Coordination 

with the Archaeologist and SHPO will determine final treatment of the area. E3/F2

Eden Ridge historical railroad logging provides an opportunity to bring interpretive displays to the 

public. Interpretive products are to include a Passport in Time (PIT) volunteer project, a popular 

article on the history of the Smith-Powers Logging Railroad on Eden Ridge, and a traveling exhibit. 

Results of the PIT project will be documented and submitted to the Oregon SHPO. E3/F2

The Forest will prepare a final report incorporating all information from monitoring, Passport in Time, 

implementation activities, or other sources into a single report amending the site record for the Oregon 

SHPO. E3/F2

J. Fuels and Air Quality

Using prescribed fire as a treatment for activity fuels can generate a considerable amount of smoke 

particulates. Fire managers plan the dispersal of smoke away from designated areas in accordance with 

the State of Oregon Smoke Management plan. Burn plans will be submitted and authorized prior to 

ignition. E3/F2

Efforts to reduce smoke emissions from prescribed fire are being implemented to lessen the impact on air 

quality. One effort is seasonal burning. Spring burning, for example, results in reduced fuel consumption 

and emissions due to high fuel moistures. Springtime weather conditions may also have more favorable 

atmospheric conditions that can lead to better smoke dispersion. E3/F2

Other efforts include burning concentrations of fuel (spot-burning) rather that the entire area, burning 

when the 1,000 hour fuel moistures are high, burning within 4 -8 months of slash creation when higher 

fuel moistures are present in the larger material, burning when the duff moisture is high, using rapid 

ignition to achieve a high intensity fire, prompt “mopping up” of fires after flames have diminished, and 

further utilization of material prior to burning, i.e., firewood. These methods will aid in reducing the total 

amount of pollutants produced by burning. E3/F2

Optimizing flaming combustion can be achieved by burning piled fuels, rather than broadcast burning. 

Careful machine piling reduces the amount of dirt in piles, thereby reducing the smolder phase of a fire. 

In addition, real time monitoring can be performed such that ignition can be halted if smoke impacts 

become greater than acceptable. E3/F2
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 28 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines for detrimental soil conditions and erosion (SNF-LRMP; pages IV44-45) will be applied to this project. By minimizing the size and maximizing the spacing between piles, 

and burning in the winter and spring windows of opportunity when soil and fuel moistures are high, soil 

detrimental impacts and mineral soil exposure is minimized. This would also compliment the objectives 

of maximizing the retention of Large Woody Material (LRMP S&G 7-8). Large down woody material 

left from historical railroad logging represent a unique situation and every effort to avoid disturbance and 

maintain this existing material will be made. E3/F2
ROD Attachment B Page ROD B - 29 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Project Design Criteria and 

Required Mitigation Measures

This page is intentionally left blank
ATTACHMENT C

Monitoring Plan

ROD Attachment C Page ROD C - 1 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Monitoring Plan

EDEN RIDGE TIMBER SALES 

RECORD OF DECISION

ATTACHMENT C

Monitoring Plan

Version 1.1

This Monitoring Plan discusses monitoring elements and requirements that are specifically designed for 

proposed management activities, under the actions selected under the NEPA process (Final 

Environmental Impact Statement [FEIS]) for Eden Ridge Timber Sales. Monitoring is important for 

tracking the implementation of a project; ensuring projects are implemented as planned, as well as to 

measure success in meeting the stated project goals, objectives in application of Project Design Criteria

and required Mitigation Measures. 

Project activities will be monitored during and following implementation to ensure Project Design 

Criteria and Mitigation Measures are implemented as specified under the decision. This aspect of 

monitoring is referred to as implementation monitoring. The progress and findings of implementation 

monitoring will be documented as it occurs during project implementation. Monitoring will be required 

on representative units to evaluate the effectiveness of authorized activities in achieving the specifically 

desired project outcomes. 

On-going monitoring conducted in association with management activities authorized by the Record of

Decision provide opportunity for adapting management techniques as needed to better meet the intent of 

the selected alternative as planned and approved. In some cases this may involve minor modifications or 

corrections during implementation. Project monitoring could result in the need to propose changes to 

authorized project actions; these changes will be subject to the requirements of the NEPA and other laws 

concerning such changes. In determining whether and what kind of further NEPA action is required, the 

Responsible Official will consider the criteria in 40 CFR 1502.9(c) and FSH 1909.15, sec. 18, and in 

particular, whether the proposed change is a substantial change to the decision as planned and already 

approved, and whether the change is relevant to environmental concerns. 

a. Monitoring Framework

Monitoring and evaluation are separate, sequential activities that provide information to determine 

whether programs and projects are meeting Forest Plan direction. Monitoring collects information, on a 

sample basis, from sources specified in the Forest Plan. 

When designing and conducting monitoring, a full spectrum of techniques and methods should be used to 

evaluate the results obtained from monitoring. Evaluation techniques include, but are not limited to: 

o Site-specific observations by on-site resource specialists.

o Field assistance trips by other technical specialists.

o On-going accomplishment reporting processes.

o Formal management reviews on a scheduled basis. 

o Discussions with other agencies and various public users.

o Interdisciplinary team reviews of monitoring results.

o Involvement with existing research activities. 

o Review and analysis of records documenting monitoring results. 

o Re-measuring existing permanent inventory plots.
ROD Attachment C Page ROD C - 2 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Monitoring Plan

This Monitoring Plan is developed as an iterative tool for assessing whether the projects are achieving the 

overall goals and objectives. This plan establishes monitoring objectives and protocol for 

implementation, baseline, and effectiveness monitoring.

Implementation monitoring will track the project through layout, contract preparation, during and 

immediately following project implementation, to ensure that it is implemented as planned. This asks, 

"Did we do what we said we were going to do as outlined in the Record of Decision?"

Baseline monitoring will be carried out in conjunction with effectiveness monitoring. Baseline data will 

be collected prior to project implementation to characterize the existing conditions specifically for 

comparison to post project conditions and will provide a basis for effectiveness monitoring.

Effectiveness monitoring will determine if the project activities were effective in achieving the stated 

goals and objectives based on comparison of pre (baseline) and post project conditions. Effectiveness 

monitoring asks, "Were the results of the project as we had planned?"

The lessons learned from monitoring and data collection will be useful for modifying project plans to 

better meet project goals and objectives. If monitoring indicates laws, regulations, standards or critical 

objectives are not being met, the project will be modified as necessary and appropriate. 

b. Implementation Monitoring

Implementation monitoring asks the question, did we implement the project as outlined in the Record of 

Decision, including consistency with land allocations guiding the implementation of management 

activities in the project areas? 

Implementation Monitoring Question

Were treatments implemented according to Project Design Criteria, and did actual operations employ 

appropriate Mitigation Measures and management constraints outlined in the Record of Decision? 

If implementation deviated from design criteria and mitigation measures, document how and why 

implementation deviated and whether the desired objectives as documented in the FEIS were achieved.

Approach

A table (see example next page) can be used to track project implementation including application of 

Project Design Criteria and required Mitigation Measures and management requirements. Tables can be 

used to track commercial timber harvest units. Other tables can track other activities such as road use 

and/or construction, non-commercial density management, wildlife habitat improvement activities, etc. 

Timber sale activities will also use the Timber Information Manager System (TIMS) (Forest Service 

Manual 2493 and Forest Service Handbook 2409.14) for tracking and reporting. Implementation 

monitoring is part of the regular program of work and as such, it is fully funded through the life of each of 

the projects. Vegetation management treatments are entered into the Forest Service Activities Tracking 

System (FACTS), a corporate database for recording activities accomplished on the ground.
ROD Attachment C Page ROD C - 3 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Monitoring Plan

Example Table for Variable Density Management Stand/Unit Tracking

Stand or 

Unit 

Reference

Project or 

Sale Name

Treatment 

Prescriptions 

(Land Allocations)

Acres

Date of 

Layout and 

Validation

Logging 

System 

Employed

Project Design 

Criteria 

Employed

Activity Fuels 

Treatment 

Employed

Mitigation

Measures 

Employed

Contract 

Award 

Date

Comments/Changes?
ROD Attachment C Page ROD C - 4 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Monitoring Plan

Heritage Implementation Monitoring Report

In accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with SHPO (a copy of this MOA is attached 

to FEIS Appendix J), a brief report will be prepared to documenting and confirm the application of 

heritage mitigation for the Smith-Powers Logging Railroad system. This report will include a brief 

synthesis of discoveries during project implementation, the status of timber sale road construction 

activities, and a recommendation on the need for additional analysis or documentation. Also see Heritage 

Site Management effectiveness monitoring section 8, below.

c. Effectiveness Monitoring

Effectiveness monitoring will determine if the project activities were effective in achieving the stated 

goals and objectives based on comparison of pre (baseline) and post project conditions. Effectiveness 

monitoring asks, “Were the result of the project as we had planned?” Effectiveness monitoring is closely 

tied to baseline monitoring. 

Baseline data (stand exams or other) will be collected prior to project implementation to characterize the 

existing conditions (baseline monitoring) specifically for comparison to post project conditions and will 

provide a basis for effectiveness monitoring.

1) Soil Conditions

Detrimental soil conditions can be expected to occur as a result of implementing the Eden Ridge Timber 

Sales Project. The degree, extent, and duration of resultant detrimental soil conditions within each 

activity area influence the magnitude of productivity loss associated with any alternative. Degree refers 

to the magnitude of change in soil properties such as increase in bulk density or decrease in 

macroporosity and the depth to which those changes occur. Extent refers to the area affected by such 

changes. Duration refers to the length of time such changes may persist on a site. Detrimental soil 

conditions will vary by the level of ground disturbing activities that occur in treatment units. 

The Pacific Northwest Region (R6) has developed several policy standards for permitted amounts of 

detrimental soil conditions within activity areas. The policy standards are contained in Forest Service 

Manual 2500 – R6 Supplement, 2500-98-1 and include definitions for what constitutes soil damage and 

how to assess quality conditions and trends.

Evaluation Questions

How effective was project design, including specific Project Design Criteria and specified Mitigation 

Measures, in minimizing soil impacts and meeting Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines for soil 

protection?

What is the increase in area of detrimental soil conditions within commercially harvested units and 

activity fuels treatments; over what proportion of the treatment units with ground disturbing activities

are soils detrimentally disturbed?

Is effective soil cover being maintained in treatment units?

Approach

A Soil Scientist or Hydrologist, in cooperation with other Forest Service personnel, will monitor activities 

during implementation and document observations. Specialists will coordinate monitoring of postactivity soil conditions on selected commercially harvested and activity fuels treated units. The Forest 

Soil Disturbance Monitoring Protocol, General Technical Report WO-82a and WO-82b (2009), is the 

recommended monitoring protocol to use where statistically validated monitoring data is desired.
ROD Attachment 

C Page ROD C-5 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Monitoring Plan
ROD Attachment C Page ROD C - 6 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Monitoring Plan

2) Water Quality and Hydrologic Function

The greatest concern for impacting water quality, hydrologic function, and aquatic habitat is associated 

with accelerating erosion and sedimentation to streams. Ground disturbing activities associated with 

planned activities may increase the potential for surface erosion and sediment production at the site scale 

during and for 1 to 2 years following implementation of each project. The potential for increased 

sedimentation will taper off once ground cover and vegetation is reestablished.

Project Design Criteria and Mitigation Measures are required during project implementation and 

operations to avoid impacts altogether or minimize potential impacts to water quality and hydrologic 

function. Implementation monitoring described above will track the implementation of Project Design 

Criteria and Mitigation Measures, while this section is designed for monitoring the site-specific 

effectiveness of mitigation as they are employed during operations.

Evaluation Questions 

How effective was project design, including specific Project Design Criteria and specified Mitigation 

Measures, in minimizing impacts to water quality and meeting Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines 

for water quality?

How effective was specific Project Design Criteria and specified Mitigation Measures, in minimizing 

impacts to hydrologic function?

How effective were Best Management Practices in providing protection to riparian areas and 

minimizing impacts to aquatic systems?

Approach

In conjunction with site visits by Forest Service contract administrators and resource specialists, conduct

photo monitoring to document on site application of mitigation measures. Monitoring described above 

under Soil Conditions will determine the effectiveness of the project design in maintaining protective soil 

cover. The monitoring that occurs during implementation is funded as part of the project.

Reference is now made to new National Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Water Quality 

Management (April 2012). The purpose of the National BMP Program is to provide a standard set of core 

BMPs and a consistent means to track and document the use and effectiveness for BMPs on NFS lands. 

These are now used in concert the General Water Quality Best Management Practices, Pacific Northwest 

Region, November 1988. 

3) Aquatic Species and Habitats

All project activities will be accomplished within Forest Service Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines, 

Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Standard Operating Procedures. Standard Operating Procedures 

include adherence to State Water Quality standards; ODFW instream work periods; hazardous materials 

plans; EPA requirements for storage and use of petroleum products; ODFW, and NOAA Fisheries criteria 

for culvert replacements; and other operations. 

Additional site specific BMPs and Project Design Criteria and Mitigation Measures were developed to 

further avoid, minimize or reduce adverse impacts to aquatic resources, OC & SO/NC coho salmon, their 

critical habitat and Essential Fish Habitats. Mitigation measures for density management, timber felling, 

and yarding are primarily discussed within Project Design Criteria for Riparian Reserves. Specific 

Project Design Criteria and specified Mitigation Measures were also developed for roads, road 

reconstruction, road maintenance, landings, and use of roads (commercial haul).
ROD Attachment C Page ROD C - 7 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Monitoring Plan

Evaluation Questions 

How effective was project design, including specific Project Design Criteria for Riparian Reserves in 

minimizing adverse effects to aquatic species and habitats?

How effective was project design and specified Mitigation Measures, in minimizing operational adverse 

effects to aquatic species and habitats?

Approach

Aquatic Biologists, in cooperation with implementation crews will monitor activities during

implementation and document observations. In conjunction with site visits by contract administrators and 

resource specialists, coordinate monitoring of post-activity conditions on all areas in proximity to areas of 

concern during operations.

4) Port-Orford-Cedar Management

Port-Orford-cedar (POC) is attacked by a non-native pathogen, Phytophthora lateralis (P. Lateralis), 

which causes POC root disease. The disease is almost always fatal to POC, and is carried and spread by 

harvesting equipment and other human and non-human vectors. The spread of the disease is influenced 

by human activities (especially forest roads and ground-based logging) and natural events. The natural 

events include rainfall, saturated water flow, movement of animals, and movement of soils by natural 

erosion. 

The Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management published the 2004 ROD for the Final 

Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) on Management of Port-Orford-cedar in 

Southwest Oregon. The ROD amended the land and resource management plan for the Siskiyou National 

Forest by replacing its management direction with direction in the ROD. This ROD includes a Risk Key 

clarifying the environmental conditions at the 7th field watershed level that requires the implementation of 

one or more site-specific disease-controlling management practices for Port-Orford-cedar. 

Evaluation Questions 

How effective was project design, including specific Project Design Criteria and specified Mitigation 

Measures, in Port-Orford-cedar management and mitigation of pathogen spread?

How effective were the prescribed sanitation/eradication treatments in high risk or infested areas?

Approach

A Silviculturist, in cooperation with Port-Orford-cedar Specialists, will monitor activities during 

implementation and document observations. Specialists will coordinate monitoring of post-activity in 

high risk Port-Orford-cedar areas and areas where sanitation/eradication treatments have occurred.

5) Sensitive Plant Management

Specific Project Design Criteria and specified Mitigation Measures were designed to be consistent with 

Forest Service policy to “Develop and implement management practices to ensure that species do not 

become Threatened or Endangered because of Forest Service Actions” (FSM 2670.33). Measures 

specifically designed for this project that would minimize impacts on Oregon bensonia (Bensonia 

oregana), a Sensitive vascular plant species.
ROD Attachment C Page ROD C - 8 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Monitoring Plan

Evaluation Question

How effective was project design, including specific Project Design Criteria and required Mitigation 

Measures, in avoidance of adverse effects to this Sensitive plant species and habitat?

Approach

A Botanist, in cooperation with implementation crews will monitor activities during implementation and 

document observations. Specialists will coordinate monitoring of post-activity soil conditions on all areas 

in proximity to plants or habitats of concern.

6) Noxious Weed Management

Non-native (noxious) plant species are common, increasing, and a threat to native ecosystems within the 

Eden Ridge Planning Area. They are increasing along roadsides and in meadows. Mitigation measures to 

prevent and control the spread of noxious weeds would ameliorate but not eliminate the risk of 

introducing or spreading non-native plant species and noxious weeds. 

Evaluation Question

How effective was project design, including specific Project Design Criteria and specified Mitigation 

Measures, in minimizing spread of non-native plant species?

Approach

A Botanist, in cooperation with implementation crews will monitor activities during implementation and 

document observations. In conjunction with site visits by contract administrators and resource specialists, 

coordinate monitoring of post-activity conditions on all areas in proximity to plants or habitats of 

concern.

7) Terrestrial Wildlife Species of Concern and Important Wildlife Habitats

The Record of Decision contains a number of species and habitat specific Project Design Criteria and 

specified Mitigation Measures for terrestrial wildlife. Measures to protect federally listed species were 

derived from USDI Fish and Wildlife Service Formal Consultation on timber harvest, meadow restoration 

and quarry activities proposed by the Rogue River–Siskiyou National Forest (TAILS #: 13420-2009-F0146) dated August 27, 2009 (USDA/USDI, 2009c).

Evaluation Questions 

How effective was project design, including specific Project Design Criteria and specified Mitigation 

Measures, in minimizing effects to species of concern and important wildlife habitats?

Were implementation design elements employed to determine areas of late-successional forest 

conditions and were they adequately protected?

Approach

Wildlife biologists, in cooperation with implementation crews will monitor activities during 

implementation and document observations. In conjunction with site visits by contract administrators and 

resource specialists, coordinate monitoring of post-activity conditions on all areas in proximity to habitats 

of concern, especially any areas determined to have late-successional forest characteristics.
ROD Attachment C Page ROD C - 9 Eden Ridge Timber Sales

Monitoring Plan

8) Heritage Site Management

Specific Project Design Criteria and specified Mitigation Measures were designed in consultation with the 

State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and documented in the Memorandum of Agreement between 

the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest and the Oregon State historic Preservation Office Regarding 

the Eden Ridge Timber Sales Projects, Coos County, Oregon (ER MOA) to be consistent with the 

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) which requires consideration of project effects on historic 

properties.

Evaluation Question

How effective was project design, including specific Project Design Criteria and required Mitigation 

Measures, in limiting impacts of road construction activities on specified historic railroad grades, 

avoidance of adverse effects to specified historic features, and recovery of information yielded about 

the Smith-Powers Historic Logging Railroad site features during project implementation?

Approach

An Archaeologist, in cooperation with implementation crews, will monitor activities during

implementation and document observations. Observations will include the effectiveness Project Design 

Criteria and required Mitigation Measures. As noted above under effectiveness monitoring, a report will 

be prepared submitted to the SHPO in accordance with the ER MOA.