Appendix E 

Energy and Minerals 

This appendix provides detailed background on mineral and energy developments. 

In this appendix: 

Reasonably Foreseeable Mineral and Energy Developments

 in the Salem and Coos Bay Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E-3 

Restrictions and Requirements on Mineral 

and Energy Exploration and Development Activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E-36 

E – 1
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

E – 2
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Reasonably Foreseeable Mineral and 

Developments Summary 

Table E-1. Fluid Mineral Development Potential 

Energy 

Salem Eugene Roseburg Coos Bay Medford Klamath 

Falls 

Conventional 

Oil/Gas 

68 wells associated 

with the Mist Gas Field N/A Zero to 114 wells 3 exploration wells N/A N/A 

Seismic notices 

of intent 

Expected to be

confined to existing 

road systems;

negligible effects. 

Expected to be

confined to existing 

road systems;

negligible effects. 

Expected to be confined 

to existing road systems;

negligible effects. 

Road 

construction 

0.25 mile per well @

40 feet = 82 acres 

disturbance. 

7 miles new road = 

39 acres. 

0.25 mile per well @

40 feet = 4 acres 

disturbance 

Well pad 2 acres per well.= 136 

acres 

Nested wells and 

services = 114 

acres. 

2 acres per well = 6 

acres 

Collection pipe: 

Assume 25% well 

success; 2 miles per

well; 30 feet wide =

124 acres. 

Collection piping

will utilize road 

prism. 

No discoveries; no

pipe; no disturbance. 

Plug &

abandon wells No additional effect. No additional effect. No additional effect. 

Coal bed 

natural gas Exploration only N/A N/A 37 to 77 wells N/A N/A 

Seismic notices 

of intent 

Expected to be

confined to existing 

road systems;

negligible effects 

Expected to be confined 

to existing road systems;

negligible effects 

Road 

construction 

1⁄4 mile per well @

40 feet = 45 to 90 acres 

disturbance 

Well pad 

Assume 4 wells per pad;

2 acres per pad =19 to 38

acres disturbance 

Collection pipe: 

Assume 50% well 

success; Assume most 

collection pipe along

existing transportation 

system; new

disturbance = 5 to 10 

linear miles at 30 feet wide 

= 18 to 36 acres. 

Plug &

abandon wells No additional effect 

Geothermal N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A See below. 

For Klamath Falls Resource Area: 

Geophysical Exploration (includes seismic reflection and gravity/magnetic field surveys): 

- Notices of Intent: 2; Very small acres disturbed 

- Exploratory Wells: 1-2: 0.1 acre per site; .25 acre per well for roads. 0.35-0.7 acres total disturbance 

Geothermal Operations: 

-Notices of Intent: 

Surface Geophysical Surveys: 6: very limited surface disturbance 

Temperature Gradient Holes: 5: 0.1 acre per site; .25 acre per well for roads. 2.25 acres total disturbance 

Exploration wells: 5 wells; One acre per well pad; 40 ft. wide ROW @ 0.5 mile per well = 17 acres total disturbance 

Geothermal Power Plant Development: 

1 possible in the life of the plan; if proposed, evaluate separately in cooperation with the State. 

Direct Use of Geothermal Energy for space heat: 

2 possible; evaluate separately if proposed 

E – 3
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Table E-2. Salable Mineral Development Scenario Summary For 2008-2018 

Klamath 

Roseburg Salem Eugene Coos Bay Medford Falls 

New quarries 1 5 2 5 3 1 to 2 

Acres disturbed 2 acres per quarry, plus 1⁄2 acre for access. 

2 to 3 acres 

per quarry, plus 1⁄2 

acre for access. 

Existing quarries 60 38 71 32 188 18 quarry & 

cinder sites used 

Intermittently. 

6 quarries 

expanded @ 2 

acres per quarry 

8 quarries 

expanded. 

Less than 2 

acres per 

quarry. 

4 quarries 

expanded at 

approximately 1 

acre each. 

6 quarries 

expanded. Less 

than 2 acres 

each quarry. 

10% of quarries 

expanded at less 

than1 acre per 

quarry, plus 1/10 

acre per quarry for 

new access. 

Depletions 10 quarries 2 quarries 2 quarries 1 quarry 5 quarries Up to 4 quarries 

Decorative stone 3 to 6 sales 

per year 

1 to 2 sales 

per year 

750 sales over the 

10-year period 1 to 2 sales per year 

E – 4
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Table E-3. Locatable Mineral Development Scenario 

Klamath 

Roseburg Salem Eugenea Coos Bay Medford Falls 

Bench Placer 

notices 2 10 6 6 80 0 

Of 80 estimated, 0.3 acres 0.3 acres Roads 0.3 acres per 0.3 acres per 10 would have roads at 0 

per per 1⁄2 acre per notice.

1 acre Test pits, support 1 acre per 1 acre per 1 acre per 1 acre per notice on per facility notice notice notice average. notice 

Notice to plan 1 1 0 1 0 0 

100 notices; surface 

Vein notices 2 4 4 one disturbance 1 to 5 acres 4 

per notice. 

Mostly existing roads; Mostly 3 per 3 per notice minimal temporary roads; existing 3 per notice 3 per notice notice 40x200= estimate 0.50-acre for half roads; Roads 40x200 = 1⁄2 40X200=1/2 40x200= 1⁄2 acre per of the notices; and zero minimal acre per notice acre per notice 1⁄2 acre per notice acres for the other half of temporary notice the notices. roads. 

1 acre for half of 1 acre Support 1 acre per 1 acre per 1 acre per the notices (many current per facilities notice notice notice notices take ore off-site notice for processing). 

Ten holes per notice; 0.1 Ten holes per 1⁄2 acre 0.50-acre 0.50-acre 0.50-acre acre per hole; estimate notice; Sample sites per per notice per notice per notice 1/5 of the notices will drill 0.1 acre per notice a hole. hole. 

Plans of 

Operation 1 1 1 1 15 (lode & placer) 0 

Ten; 0.1 acre per hole; 

5; 0.1 acre Ten; 0.1 Ten; 0.1 roads Ten; 0.1 acre per per hole; acre per acre per 40x300= 0.75 Exploratory hole; roads roads hole; roads hole; roads acre. Estimate holes 40x300= 0.75 40x300= 0.75 40x300= 40x300= 1⁄2 of the plans will acre 

acre 0.75 acre 0.75 acre be lodes and have 

exploratory holes. 

Support facility 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre 1 acre per plan 

Second Phase Exploration 

Roads 

5 (standard as 

above)= 2.5 

acres 

10 (standard 

as above)= 2.5 

acres 

10 (standard 

as above)= 

2.5 acres 

10 

(standard 

as 

above)= 

2.5 acres 

Mostly existing roads; 

minimal temporary roads; 

estimate 1⁄2 acre for 1⁄2 of 

the plans;zero acres for 

the other half of the plans. 

Drill pads 5 holes, 0.1 

acre per hole 

10 holes, 0.1 

acre per hole 

10 holes, 

0.1 acre per 

hole 

10 holes, 

0.1 acre 

per hole 

10 holes, 0.1 

acre per hole; on 

1⁄4 of the plans. 

Mine Development 

Bench placer One; 1 acre One, 7.5 acres one; 7.5 acres 

Eight of the plans are 

estimated to be bench 

placers at five acres 

per plan. 

E – 5
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Roseburg Salem Eugenea Coos Bay Medford 

Klamath 

Falls 

Lode One one None 

Seven of the plans are 

estimated to be lodes 

with 

one requiring a 

25 acre heap leach. 

Surface 

excavation 1 acre 10 acres 5 acres per plan. 

Stockpile topsoil 1 acre 2acres 1 acre per plan. 

Support facility 1 acre 2acres 1 acre per plan. 

Roads 1 acre 2 acres Less than 1 

acre per plan. 

Mineral Done One acre for half of the 

Processing offsite Done offsite plans. 

Silica sand 

deposit One a

 See Footnote one 0 

Mine site 21 acres 20 acres 

Stockpile heavy 

minerals One acre 2 acres 

vegetation 

stockpile One acre 1⁄2 acre 

Office & 

magnetic 

separation 

One acre One acre 

Laterite 

placer plan of 

operation One plan 0 

Exploratory 

Holes drilled 

10 @ 0.1 

acre per 

hole 

New temporary 

Roads 

0.75 acres 

total 

Support facility One acre 

Second Phase Expansion 

Temporary 

roads 

2.5 acres 

total 

Ten additional One acre 

drill holes total 

Recreational 

mining 

5 notices; 2 

Acres total 

30 notices; 

7.5 acres total 

30 notices; 

7.5 acres 

total 

30 notices; 

7.5 acres 

total 

800 

Estimate 300 acres, this is 

disturbance only under the 

water level. 

See suction 

dredging 

above. 

a

 Eugene footnote: Locatable minerals with silica sand potential withdrawn from mineral entry in the Florence area. However, sand is excavated and removed from BLM property near Florence, 

Oregon, on an easement granted to the adjacent landowner. 

E – 6
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Ten-Year Reasonably Foreseeable Development 

Of Oil And Gas Resources Scenario For The Salem 

And Coos Bay Districts 

Summary
 

Salem District
 

The Salem District is located in northwest Oregon, bound by the Pacific Ocean to the west, the Columbia 

River to the north, the crest of the Cascade Mountain Range to the east, and the Salem District/Eugene 

District boundary to the south. It encompasses lands in 13 different counties (Clatsop, Columbia, 

Multnomah, Tillamook, Washington, Clackamas, Yamhill, Marion, Polk, Lincoln, Benton, Linn and Lane). 

Most Public Domain and O&C railroad lands within the district will be available for oil and gas leasing, 

subject to guiding stipulations. 

Estimating how much oil and gas exploration and development will occur on Federal lands managed by the 

Salem District during the next 10 years is based on an existing gas field designation and historical oil and gas 

investigations. The first exploration well was drilled near Newberg, Oregon in 1902. Conventional petroleum 

resources in the district have been the focus of numerous studies. Two periods of intense search occurred 

from 1920 to 1940, and again from 1940 to 1960. These investigations resulted in development of the Mist 

Gas Field, with a discovery well in 1979. Small amounts of gas, however, have been found throughout the 

district within projected sedimentary basins. 

Review of Oil and Gas Occurrence Potential, Oil and Gas System and Play Analysis, Oil and Gas Production 

Activities, Potential for Resource Occurrence and Development, and Leasing are needed to understand the 

District’s oil and gas potential. This information was used to project activity through 2018. Given the current 

incipient nature of petroleum development in Oregon (i.e., current Coalbed Natural Gas development, new 

exploration of the Mist Gas Field), completely new assumptions and information that impact Reasonably 

Foreseeable Development (RFD) scenarios may be applicable during the next 10 years and beyond. 

Identified potential petroleum source sedimentary basins within the district include: 

• Astoria Basin 

• Nehalem Basin (or Arch) 

• Tualatin Basin 

• Willamette Valley 

• Yaquina Basin 

• Tillamook Basin 

Both the Yaquina Basin and the Tillamook Basin are part of the off-shore Newport Basin. The BLM 

manages approximately 19,400 acres of surface estate within these basins. The amount of subsurface estate is 

unknown. These basins exist within the Western Tertiary Basins Geologic Province. The Mist Gas Field lies 

within the Nehalem Basin/Arch. 

As of 1985, the estimated in-place gas reserves for the Mist Gas Field were 28.4 billion cubic feet (bcf), with 

total production through 1984 of 19.2 bcf. The total estimated resource in 1985 was 47.6 bcf. As of 2007, the 

State of Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) reported that approximately 65 

bcf of gas had been produced from the Mist Gas Field, with 2.7 bcf produced between 2002 and 2006. This 

exceeds the 1985 estimate by 17.4 bcf, indicating continued discoveries of resource. 

E – 7
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Current non-federal lease holdings within the Salem District are focused within the Mist Gas Field. There 

are currently no BLM-administered surface holdings within the Mist Gas Field. However, there appears to 

be one BLM-administered subsurface estate within the field. The BLM-administered surface estate is located 

to the southeast of the current field description. Previous Mist Gas Field boundaries include approximately 

980 acres of BLM-administered surface estate. Similar geology and structure exists under at least 9,000 acres 

of BLM-administered surface estate southeast of the Mist Gas Field, indicating that foreseeable development 

of the high potential area could result in approximately 10,800 acres of BLM lease offerings. 

The spacing plan for the Mist Gas Field is 160 acres. The size of the pools ranges from 40 acres to 160 

acres. Extension of the Mist Field onto the adjacent Federal land, as defined by wells and mapped geology 

could result in approximately 68 wells on BLM-administered estate. Additional conventional and nonconventional development may occur in other sedimentary basins within the district. Coal bed natural gas 

development is occurring within Coos County. Exploration companies are mapping coal seams throughout 

Oregon for other potential resource areas. Coal has been historically mapped and mined throughout the 

Salem District. Coal bed natural gas development, however, is not expected above exploration within the 

next 10 years. 

Coos Bay District 

The Coos Bay District is located on the western edge of Southwest Oregon and encompasses lands in 

Douglas, Coos, Curry, Lane, and Josephine Counties. Conventional petroleum in the district has been the 

focus of numerous studies (Diller 1901 as found in Newton 1980, Niem and Niem 1990, and Ryu et al. 1996) 

with the projection of numerous plays and petroleum structures. The district has also been the focus of 

numerous industry explorations and investigations. Two speculative conventional petroleum systems have 

been identified within the district (Ryu et al. 1996). One coal bed natural gas play has also been identified 

within the district, and is currently being developed on private and Coos County lands. It is expected that 

most of the public domain and O&C and Coos Wagon Road lands will be available for leasing, subject to 

guiding stipulations. 

Estimating how much oil and gas exploration and development will occur on Federal lands managed by the 

Coos Bay District during the next 10 years is difficult. Review of Oil and Gas Occurrence Potential, Oil and 

Gas System and Play Analysis, Leasing, and Oil and Gas Production Activities are needed to understand the 

oil and gas potential. This information was used to project activity through 2018. Where appropriate, the 

coal bed natural gas resource is discussed separately from conventional oil and gas. 

The speculative conventional petroleum systems include the Umpqua-Dothan-White Tail Ridge hybrid 

petroleum system and the Umpqua-lower Tyee Mountain petroleum system. Both areas are contained in the 

southern Tyee sedimentary basin (Ryu et al. 1996) (see Figure E-1). The Umpqua-Dothan-White Tail Ridge 

hybrid petroleum system is located in the mid-central portion of the district and encompasses an estimated 

350 square miles; approximately 26% of which is managed by the district. The northern portion of the 

district contains approximately 200 square miles of the Umpqua-lower Tyee Mountain petroleum system. 

The BLM-administered lands comprise about 20% of the area. The coal bed natural gas play is focused 

mainly on the Coaledo Formations of the onshore portion of the Coos Basin (see Figure E-2), which is an 

area of approximately 250 square miles located on the western edge of the district. 

Although oil and gas exploration has been historically associated with these systems (Ryu et al. 1996, 

Newton 1980) and conventional oil and gas potential exists as identified speculative petroleum systems 

(Ryu et al. 1990), there is currently no known interest in exploration or development of these systems. It 

is anticipated, however, that the Coos Bay District could issue competitive and over-the-counter leases 

and authorize geophysical surveys. It is also estimated that up to three exploratory wells for conventional 

petroleum may be drilled during the life of this plan. Conventional exploration, coupled with coal bed 

natural gas exploration within coal seams beyond the Coos Basin, could increase the number of wells 

actually drilled. 

E – 8
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Figure E-1. Southern Tyee Sedimentary Basin 

Source: Ryu et al. 1996 

E – 9
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Figure E-2. Coaledo Formations Of The Onshore Portion 

Of The Coos Basin 

Source: Torrent Energy Inc. 2005

E – 10
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Current non-Federal lease holdings within the district are focused within the Coos Basin area, with the 

intention of coal bed natural gas development. Approximately 115,000 acres of the 160,000 acres within the 

Coos Basin are privately held. Federally-managed mineral estate represents approximately 12.3 percent of 

the Basin, with BLM-administered portion of roughly 7.6 percent. 

Industry has estimated an in-place gas reserve for their lease holdings at 1,166 billion cubic feet (bcf) 

(1.2 trillion cubic feet (tcf)) for the privately held 115,000 acres (Sproule 2006). To develop this resource, 

industry estimates a total build-out of between 300 and 719 wells, with 300 being most likely within the 

next 10 years (Halferty 2007). Based on this estimate compared to proportional acreage, the Coos Bay 

District could see a total development on BLM-administered lands of between 37 and 77 wells. The total 

Coos Basin development could range between 436 wells and 1,001 wells. To date, industry has constructed 

approximately 18 single and multiple well pads consisting of both exploration and production wells. 

Foreseeable development of the coal bed natural gas play could result in an additional 25,000 acres of BLMadministered lease offerings. 

Reasonably Foreseeable Development 

Introduction 

Reasonably Foreseeable Development (RFD) describes scenarios for leasable oil and gas commodities. 

The purpose of these scenarios is to provide rational models that anticipate the level and type of future 

petroleum development activity in the planning area, and to serve as a basis for cumulative impacts analysis. 

The RFD describes logical historic and current development based on plausible interpretation of available 

information. Future trends and assumptions for hypothetical exploration and development operations are 

then described.
 

Scope 

The reasonably foreseeable developments are based on known and inferred mineral resource capability 

of the lands involved and apply to conditions and assumptions discussed under Historic and Current 

Development, as well as Future Trends and Assumptions. Possible changes in current geologic data, 

interpretation, and/or economic conditions would alter the reasonably foreseeable developments, resulting 

in deviation over time. 

Impacts caused by oil and gas exploration and development cannot be assessed without estimating future oil 

and gas activity. 

Estimates of future activity on the Salem District would need to take into account: 

• oil and gas occurrence potential, as documented by historic research and papers 

• oil and gas system an d play analysis, including existing sites such as the Mist Gas Field and the 

potential development of new plays such as identified sediment basins and coal bed natural gas 

• oil and gas production, including economics and technology 

• potential for resource occurrence and development 

• leasing and development, including Federal and non-Federal activities 

Estimates of future activity on the Coos Bay District would need to take into account: 

• oil and gas occurrence potential, as documented by historic research and papers 

• oil and gas system and play analysis, including looking at the potential development of new 

plays, such as the identified petroleum systems and Coos Basin coalbed natural gas or interest in 

unknown discoveries 

E – 11
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

• leasing, including Federal and non-Federal activities 

• oil and gas production, including economics and technolog y. 

These factors cannot be predicted with absolute certainty, but reasonable generalizations are possible. 

The estimates presented here are based on past and present activities and trends, as well as future price 

deviations. The estimates may be lower than what actually happens if price and play development is more 

positive than anticipated. Likewise, if exploration in existing plays, such as the Coos Basin, is not successful 

and new plays are not developed and/or commodity prices are less than anticipated, estimates presented 

here may be exaggerated. 

Potential for Resource Occurrence and Development 

Potentials for resource occurrence and resource development (Haerter 2007) have been estimated for the 

districts. Definitions for potential for resource occurrence include: 

• Low Potential - Hydrocarbon occurrence is unlikely. 

• Moderate Potential - Conditions exist for hydrocarbons to occur. 

• High Potential - Hydrocarbon shows have been documented, or production has been established. 

Definitions for Potential for Resource Development Include: 

• Low Potential - Economic or other conditions would likely preclude development. 

• Moderate Potential – It is reasonable to conclude that development could occur. 

• High Potential - Development is likely to occur within the life of the plan. 

Leasing 

After initial fi eld work, research, and subsurface mapping, which may include seismic testing and data 

collection, leasing is often the next step in oil and gas development. Leasing may be based on speculation, 

with the riskiest leases usually purchased for the lowest prices. 

Geophysical Exploration 

Geophysical exploration is conducted in an attempt to determine the subsurface structure of an area. The 

three geophysical survey techniques generally used to define subsurface characteristics are measurements of 

Gravity and magnetic fi eld surveys involve small portable measuring units which are easily transported via 

light-weight off-highway vehicles, such as four-wheel drive vehicles, or aircraft. Both off-highway and onhighway travel may be necessary in these two types of surveys. Usually a three-man crew transported by one 

or two vehicles is required. These two survey methods can make measurements along defined lines, but it is 

more common to use a grid with discrete measurement stations. 

Seismic reflection surveys, which are the most common of the geophysical methods, produce the most 

detailed subsurface information. Seismic surveys are accomplished by sending shock waves, generally by 

a small explosion or mechanically beating of the ground surface, through the earth’s surface, reflecting off 

some layers, thus depicting the underlying structure of the rock. The thumper and vibrator methods pound 

or vibrate the ground surface to create a shock wave. Usually four large trucks are used, each equipped 

with pads about four-feet square. The pads are lowered to the ground, and the vibrators are electronically 

triggered from the recording truck. After information is recorded, the trucks move forward a short distance 

and the process is repeated. Less than 50 square feet of surface area is required to operate the equipment at 

each recording site. 

the gravitational field, magnetic ,dlfi e and seismic reflections.

E – 12
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

The small explosive method requires that charges be detonated on the surface or in a drill hole. Holes for 

the charges are drilled utilizing truck-mounted portable drills to create small-diameter (two or six-inch) 

holes to depths of 100 to 200 feet. Generally 4 to 12 holes are drilled per mile of line, and a 5- to 50-pound 

charge of explosives is placed in the hole, covered, and detonated. The created shock wave is recorded by 

geophones placed in a linear fashion on the surface. In rugged terrain, a portable drill carried by helicopter 

can sometimes be used. A typical drilling seismic operation may utilize 10 to 15 men operating fi ve to 

seven trucks. Under normal conditions, three to fi ve miles of line can be surveyed daily using this method. 

A drilling program may include the use of heavy truck-mounted drill rigs, track-mounted air rigs, water 

trucks, a computer-recording truck, and several light pickups to transport people conducting the survey. 

Public and private roads and trails are used where possible. However, off-highway cross-country travel is 

also necessary in some cases. Graders and dozers may be required to provide access to remote areas. Several 

trips a day are made along a seismograph line, usually resulting in a well-defined two-track trail. Drilling 

water, when needed, is usually obtained from private landowners, but may be acquired from sources used 

for fi re suppression, such as pump chances and ponds. 

The surface charge method utilizes charges of between one and fi ve pounds attached to wooden laths 

three to eight feet above the ground. Placing the charges lower than six feet usually results in destruction 

of the vegetation; placing the charges higher, or on the surface of deep snow, results in little visible surface 

disturbance. 

Advanced Three Dimensional Survey analyzes fi ve to six miles using lines with 1,700 shot holes at 70-foot 

spacing. The lines are spaced at 400 feet apart. The lines are hand brushed for survey. The survey crews 

utilize an Inertial Survey System that allows for accurate surveying without the need to maintain a line of 

sight. This allows flexibility in brushing paths. The shot hole pad is three feet by four feet in size and cleared 

to mineral soil with hand tools. The drill rig is then placed on the pad. If existing access to the pad is limited, 

the drill rig may be placed and removed by helicopter. The holes are drilled to 15-feet depths and the charges 

exploded subsurface, leaving no surface expression. Where there is surface expression, the damage is 

mitigated with hand tools. In open valleys and areas with access, thumper rigs are used, as they disturb even 

less ground. 

Drilling and Production Phase 

Notices of Staking are anticipated during the plan period. It is anticipated that the company would then 

submit an Application for Permit to Drill after the Notice of Staking is accepted. Private surface owner 

input, if split estates are involved, would be actively solicited during this stage. After an Application for 

Permit to Drill is approved, the operator initiates construction activities in accordance with stipulations 

and Conditions of Approval. Access road lengths vary, but usually the shortest feasible route is selected to 

reduce the haul distance and construction costs. In some cases, environmental factors or landowner’s wishes 

may dictate a longer route. Drilling activity in the planning area is predicted to be done using existing roads 

and constructing short roads to access each drill site location. The district will utilize currently developed 

and utilized forest management Best Management Practices, in addition to the BLM’s “Gold Book” (USDI/ 

USDA 2006), for surface disturbance in road construction and pad development similar to landings. 

Surface Impacts of Drilling and Production 

During the fi rst drilling phase, the operator would move construction equipment over existing maintained 

roads to the point where the new access road begins. 

In the second part of the drilling phase, the operator would construct the drilling pad or platform, which is 

anticipated to involve approximately two acres per well site. Support facilities are also anticipated to disturb 

about two acres per well site. The likely duration of well development, testing, and abandonment is predicted 

to be approximately six months to one year for each drill site. 

E – 13
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Plugging and Abandonment 

Wells completed as dry holes are plugged according to a plan designed specifically for the down-hole 

conditions of each well. Plugging is accomplished by placing cement plugs at strategic locations from the 

bottom of the well to the surface. Drilling mud is used as a spacer between plugs to prevent communication 

between fluid-bearing zones. The casing is cut off at least three feet below ground level and capped by 

welding a steel plate on the casing stub. Wells will be plugged and abandoned at the end of their production 

life, with the pad, support facilities, and road reclaimed. 

Surface Impacts of Plugging and Abandonment 

After plugging, all equipment and debris would be removed and the drill site would be restored as near 

as reasonably possible to its original condition. If new roads constructed for drilling are not needed for 

future access to the area, they would be reclaimed using Best Management Practices, with the road prism 

revegetated as required by the Authorized Officer. Pipelines will be plugged and abandoned in place to 

minimize new surface disturbance. 

District Specific 

Historic and Current Development 

Oil and Gas Occurrence Potential 

Salem District 

The Salem District is part of a structural sedimentary basin system that extends onshore and offshore 

from the Klamath Terrains boundary north to the Columbia River (extending into Washington) from the 

continental shelf east to the Cascade Mountain/Willamette Valley interface. This is known as the Western 

Tertiary Basin Province (Olmstead et al. 1989). It has been of interest for petroleum exploration since the 

1880s (Newton 1969, Orr and Orr 2000) with oil and gas drilling exploration beginning in 1902 with the 

drilling of an exploration well near Newberg (Newton 1965, Olmstead et al. 1989). Two major peaks of 

petroleum exploration have occurred. The fi rst occurred between 1920 and 1940 and was very wide-spread, 

as there was little geologic information guiding the exploration. The second peak occurred between 1940 

and 1960, investigating the deeper Oligocene and Eocene marine sediments. These explorations cumulated 

in the discovery of the Mist Gas Field in 1979 (Olmstead et al. 1989, Olmstead and Alger 1985, Houston 

1997). 

Petroleum development on the Salem District has been the focus of numerous studies (Washburne 1914 

in Olmstead et al. 1989, Stewart 1954 in Newton et al. 1965, Newton 1969, Olmstead et al. 1989, Niem et 

al. 1990, Houston 1997, and Meyer 2007). The district has also been the focus of industry explorations 

and investigations by companies such as Northwest Natural (Oregon Natural Gas Development), RH 

Exploration, Diamond Shamrock Corporation, Quintana Petroleum Corporation, Standard Oil Company of 

California, American Quasar Petroleum Company, ARCO Oil and Gas Company, Exxon Corporation, and 

The Texas Company (Texaco) (Olmstead et al. 1989). 

At least 42 exploration wells, 16 water wells, and 7 seeps within the Salem District boundary and outside the 

1985 Mist Gas Field boundary (see Figure E-3 below) have had gas shows (Olmstead et al. 1989). As of 1989, 

a total of at least 108 wells drilled outside of Columbia County (which holds the Mist Gas Field) and within 

the Salem District (Olmstead et al. 1989) have defined specific sedimentary basins of the Western Tertiary 

Basin Province that exist within the district (Newton 1969, Olmstead et al. 1989). These basins have been the 

focus of historic investigation and contain potential conventional petroleum development (Newton 1969, 

Niem et al. 1985, Meyer 2007). 

E – 14
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Non-conventional systems, such as coal bed natural gas, may be a possibility and are being researched where 

coal is present (Wiley 2006, Pappajohn 2007, Meyer 2007). 

Coos Bay District 

The Coos Bay District is part of a structural sedimentary basin system that extends onshore and offshore 

from the Klamath Terrains boundary (Middle Fork of the Coquille River) north to the Columbia River 

(extending into Washington), from the continental shelf east to the Willamette Valley. These basins have 

been the focus of petroleum exploration since the 1880s (Newton 1980, Orr and Orr 2000), with oil and gas 

drilling exploration of the district beginning in 1913 (Newton 1980). Conventional petroleum in the Coos 

Bay District has been the focus of numerous studies (Diller 1901 in Newton et al.1990, Ryu et al.1996) with 

the projection of numerous plays and petroleum structures. The district has also been the focus of industry 

explorations and investigations by companies such as AMOCO Production Company, Union Oil Company, 

Phillips Petroleum Company, Northwest Natural Gas Company (Newton 1980) and Methane Energy 

Corporation (Pappajohn 2002). 

The most recent play and petroleum structure projections provide three possibilities within the District. 

These include portions of two potential conventional petroleum structures (Ryu et al. 1996) and a nonconventional coal bed natural gas play identified by Methane Energy Corporation (Pappajohn 2002). 

Oil and Gas Structures and Plays 

A speculative petroleum system presumes a direct relationship between a particular source rock and a 

resulting potential petroleum (or natural gas) accumulation (Ryu et al. 1996). An oil and/or gas play is an area, 

geologic formation, or geologic trend that has good potential for oil and/or gas development, or is generating a 

large amount of interest in leasing and drilling (USDI BLM 2001). 

Salem District 

The Western Tertiary Basin Province contained within the Salem District possesses at least six identified 

basins or sub-basins (Newton 1969, Orr and Orr 2000, Olmstead et al. 1989). These include: 

• Tualatin Basin, a sub-basin of the Willamette Valley 

• Willamette Valley 

• Newport Basin, a sub-basin of the la rger off -shore Newport Basin 

• Tillamook Basin, a sub-basin of the larger off -shore Newport Basin 

• Astoria Basin 

• Nehalem Basin or arch 

See Figures E-3 and E-4. 

The basins structures are controlled by compression force of the sub-ducting easterly movement of the Juan 

de Fuca plate in relation to the overriding westerly movement of the North American Plate. The fold axes are 

oriented north-south (Orr and Orr 2000), and are defined by the contact between the Miocene or Oligocene 

rock and Eocene rock. This is a point of erosion of the Eocene rock, which was covered by Miocene or 

Oligocene rock, defined as a nonconformity (unconformity if covered by Miocene or Oligocene sedimentary 

rock). This break in the geologic column is considered the Eocene nonconformity and a focus of petroleum 

exploration. The Eocene rocks consist of marine sediments, with later sedimentation creating coal beds in 

many areas (Newton 1969) (see Figure E-4). The Salem District manages a total of approximately 19,375 

acres of surface estate within these basins (USDI BLM 2007). 

Tualatin Sub-Basin: The BLM manages approximately 8,858 acres of surface estate in the Tualatin SubBasin (USDI BLM 2007), which is considered part of the Willamette Valley. The lower rock is Eocene shale 

E – 15
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Figure E-3. BLM Oregon Salem District, Surface 

Based on Newton (1969), Ferns and Huber (1984), Olmstead et al n (1969), F er (1984), Ol (1989), a I BLM (2007) . (1989), and USDI BLM (2007)

E – 16
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Figure E-4. BLM Salem District, Subsurface 

Based on Newton (1969), Ferns and Huber (1984), Olmstead et al. (1989), and USDI BLM (2007) 

E – 17
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

and sandstone intermixed with basalt. Miocene Columbia River Basalts rest unconformably on top of the 

sedimentary rock and are covered by gravels and silts. The Eocene rock and sands have excellent reservoir 

characteristics as the faulting and overlying basalts provides trap structures (Newton 1969). The Eocene 

Nonconformity is at a maximum mapped depth of 4,000 feet below sea level (Newton 1969) (refer to Figure 

E-2). It is thought that the Tualatin Sub-Basin is a source of petroleum for the Mist Gas Field (Olmstead and 

Alger 1985, Houston 1997). 

Willamette Valley: The BLM manages approximately 644 acres of surface estate in the Willamette Valley, 

excluding the Tualatin Sub-Basin (BLM, 2007). The lower rock, or basement rock, is the Eocene Siletz 

River Volcanics or Kings Valley Siltstone. Overlying these are sandstones and siltstones of the Eocene 

Nonconformity, then covered by volcanics, and overlain by sandstone, limestone, and coal beds. This is 

capped by the Columbia River Basalts and then covered by tuff and silt. The petroleum potential Eocene 

rock boundary is defined to the east by the change from marine sediment to volcanic sediment (facies 

change) (Newton 1969) (refer to Figure E-4). Numerous wells with gas shows have been drilled within the 

valley. The eastern valley edge provides numerous possibilities for structural traps, with the marine beds 

providing source rock. Even though numerous holes have been drilled and source and structure is present, 

true potential has not been clearly defined. The Eocene Nonconformity (marine facies) is at maximum 

mapped depth mapped of 5,000 feet below sea level (Newton 1969). 

Newport Sub-Basin: The BLM manages approximately 443 acres of surface estate in the Newport Sub-Basin 

(USDI BLM 2007), which is part of the off-shore Newport Basin (Orr and Orr 2000). As most of the basin 

lays off-shore, little was found to be published about on-shore portions of the specific Newport Sub-Basin. 

Generally, the off-shore basins consist of thicknesses up to 15,000 feet of marine sediments, predominately 

siltstones and shales, with some sand shows. Oil and gas shows occurred in at least three of the off-shore 

wells (Orr and Orr 2000). Two exploratory gas wells with shows, one seep, and one gas show in a water-well 

have been reported within the Newport Sub-Basin (Olmstead et al. 1989). There are also occurrences of coal 

(Ferns and Huber 1984) (refer to Figures E-3 and E-4). The Eocene Nonconformity is at a maximum onshore mapped depth of 2,000 feet below sea level (Newton 1969) (refer to Figure E-4). 

Tillamook Sub-Basin: The BLM manages approximately 25 acres of surface estate within the Tillamook SubBasin (USDI BLM 2007), which is also a part of the off-shore Newport Basin (Orr and Orr 2000) described 

above. Gas show has been associated with one exploratory well and two water wells in the Tillamook SubBasin (Olmstead et al. 1989). The Eocene Nonconformity is at a maximum onshore mapped depth of 2,000 

feet below sea level (Newton 1969) (refer to Figure E-4). 

Astoria Basin: The BLM manages approximately 39 acres of surface estate within the Astoria Basin (USDI 

BLM 2007). The lowest sequence of rock, considered the basement rock, is the upper Eocene Volcanics. 

There are a few thin beds of sandstone and mudstone that are inter-fingered with the Tillamook Volcanics. 

A few of these sedimentary layers have gas shows. The volcanics are overlain with the mudstone-dominated 

rock, with sandstone and conglomerate members. The mudstone is overlain by sandstone and siltstones. 

These sandstones (Cowlitz Formation) contain the Clark and Wilson Sandstone, which is the gas reservoir 

in the Mist Gas Field. Late Eocene mudstone and sandstone sequences then overlie the Clark and Wilson 

Sandstones (Niem et al. 1985, Houston 1997). A total of 49 noncommercial gas shows were recorded in eight 

wells developed within the basin. Gas shows, with the majority of hydrocarbon chains being methane, were 

recorded in all units except the Roy Creek conglomerate and sandstone, the Pittsburg Bluff Formation, and 

the Wickiup Mountain and Youngs Bay members of the Astoria Formation (Niem et al. 1985). The Eocene 

Nonconformity is at a maximum mapped depth of 5,000 feet below sea level (Newton 1969) (refer to Figure 

E-4). It is thought that the Astoria Basin is a source of petroleum for the Mist Gas Field (Olmstead and Alger 

1985). 

Nehalem Basin: The BLM manages approximately 9,366 acres of surface estate in the Nehalem Basin (USDI 

BLM 2007). It is in this basin that the Mist Gas Field exists (See Figure E-5) the only offi cial State of Oregon 

Designated Gas Field. This basin has the most potential for further gas development that may impact BLME – 18
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

administered lands (Houston 1997, Houston 2007, Meyer 2007). Although the Nehalem structure is defined 

as a Tertiary Basin by most researchers (Olmstead et al. 1989, Olmstead and Alger 1985, Newton 1969, 

Houston 1997), it has also been identified as an arch in comparison to the surrounding structures of the 

Astoria Basin to the west and the Tualatin Sub-Basin to the east (Armentrout and Suek in Niem et al. 1985, 

Orr and Orr 2000). The description of the structure as an arch provides mechanism for petroleum migration 

from the adjoining Astoria Basin and Tualatin Sub-Basin to the collection traps of the Nehalem Arch (Niem 

et al. 1985). However, the structure does have a down-warp, creating a closed structural basin (Newton 

1969). A great deal of geologic work has occurred within the Mist Gas Field and surrounding areas of the 

Nehalem Basin (Niem et al. 1985 and 1990, Olmstead et al. 1985), including Three Dimensional Survey 

(Meyer 2007). Specific geologic interpretation was conducted on the Bacona Quadrangle containing BLMadministered lands located ten miles southeast of the Mist Gas Field (Houston 1997) (refer to Figure E-4). 

The Nehalem Basin consists of deltaic to shallow-marine and deep marine depositional environments, 

depositing thousands of feet of mud and sand. There was also intermittent volcanism (Houston 1997, 

Olmstead and Alger 1985). This lithified material creates the basin’s stratigraphy. The oldest rock, considered 

the economic basement rock, is the Middle to Upper Eocene Tillamook Basalts. However, other localities show 

that deep-water depositions of the Yamhill Formation may underlie the Tillamook Basalts (Olmstead and 

Alger 1985). Houston (1997) has defined, at least in part, the Yamhill Formation as the Hamlet Formation. The 

mudstone of the Hamlet Formation is mature at depth and could be a source of petroleum within the Mist Gas 

Field. It is overlain by the Cowlitz Formation, separated by unconformity (Houston 1997, Olmstead and Alger 

1985). The lowest member of the Cowlitz Formation is the Clark and Wilson Sandstone that serves as the 

major reservoir rock for the Mist Gas Field (Olmstead and Alger 1985) and reservoir potential outside the Mist 

Gas Field (Houston 1997). Coal also occurs within the sandstone (Olmstead and Alger 1985). The sandstone 

in the Mist Gas Field has fl ow rates of 10,000 to 20,000 cubic feet per day (Niem et al. 1985 in Houston 1997). 

However, the reservoir quality deteriorates southeast of the Mist Gas Field (Houston 1997) and BTU rates may 

also decline southeast of the Mist Gas Field (Meyer 2007). 

Overlying Clark and Wilson Sandstone is a mudstone member of the Cowlitz Formation. This formation is 

a deep oceanic mudstone that acts as a seal to the Clark and Wilson Sandstone, helping form the petroleum 

trap (Houston 1997). After deposition of the Cowlitz Formation, the region was faulted, creating horst 

and graben environment, possibly forming structural traps. These fault patterns are not transferred to the 

younger overlying formations and, therefore, more recent faulting may not have compromised these traps. 

The faults truncate at the Keasey Formation-Goble Volcanics (Houston 1997 and 2007, Olmstead and Alger 

1985). 

Covering at least a portion of the Cowlitz Formation, and intermixed with the Keasey Formation, is 

the Goble Volcanics, shown as a 2,000-meter thick sequence in the exploration hole located on BLMadministered lands (see Figure E-6). The Keasey Formation unconformably overlies the Cowlitz Formation 

where the Goble Volcanics are not present, and consists of silty mudstone (Houston 1997). It is in turn 

covered by the sandstones, mudstones, siltstones, and volcanics of the Oligocene Pittsburg Bluff Formation 

(Houston 1997, Olmstead and Alger 1985). Coal seams are also found in the Pittsburg Bluff Formation 

(Houston 1997). The Scappoose Formation unconformably overlies the sandstone Pittsburg Bluff Formation 

(Houston 1997) with fl ows from the Miocene Columbia River Basalts as an unconformable cap rock. The 

Eocene Nonconformity is at a maximum mapped depth of 500 feet below sea level (Newton 1969) (refer to 

Figure E-4). 

The Mist Gas Field Designation was initiated with the discovery of natural gas in 1979. The offi cial 

boundaries as of 1985 consisted of 89,575 acres, approximately 140 square miles (State of Oregon 1985, 

Olmstead et al. 1985), including approximately 978 acres of BLM-administered surface estate. By 1999, the 

boundaries were reconfigured to a total acreage of 81,850 acres, approximately 128 square miles, with no 

BLM-administered surface estate (State of Oregon 1999, Houston 2007) (see Figure E-7). 

E – 19
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Figure E-5. Mist Gas Field, 1999 Boundary 

Source: DOGAMI 2003 

E – 20
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Figure E-6. Identified High Potential Area (This Report) And Bacona 

Geologic Quadrangle 

Source: Houston 1997 

E – 21
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Figure E-7. Mist Gas Field Boundaries (1985 and 1999) 

E – 22
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

The main target zone is the reservoir rock of the Clark and Wilson Sandstone (Olmstead and Alger 1985). 

To date, there have been more than 45 separate pools identified (Meyer 2007) with two gas storage reservoirs 

(DOGAMI 2003). Locations of additional pools are expected with the use of Three Dimensional Survey 

(Meyer 2007). Current exploration is focused to the northwest of the Mist Gas Field (Houston 2007). 

However, this is due to economics as opposed to existence of resource. Exploration to the southeast, in the 

direction of BLM-administered lands, has been restricted to lower BTUs and depth of resource, not lack of 

product. All areas north of Vernonia, Oregon could be considered a viable extension of the Mist Gas Field 

(Meyer 2007). 

Natural Gas production at the Mist Gas Field has been consistent since its discovery in 1979. As of 2006, 

two companies maintained production wells, Enerfin Resources with eight producing wells, and Northwest 

Natural with four producing wells. Other production wells of the companies were shut in for 2006. An 

annual production history of the past 10 years is as follows (DOGAMI 2003 and 2007)(see Table E-4): 

Gas production has decreased from its discovery in 1979 to the present (2006), depleting known pools. 

However, with the advancement of Three Dimensional Survey, it is probable that additional pools within and 

outside of the Gas Field Designation Boundary will be discovered and developed. 

Table E-4. Mist Gas Field 10-Year Production 

Year 

Cumulative Cubic Feet 

All Wells 

(million cubic feet) 

Cumulative Therms 

All Wells 

(therms) 

2006a 402,713 2,482,713 

2005 305,433 2,744,415 

2004 466,756 4,180,445 

2003 733,537 6,500,818 

2002 837,067 6,926,533 

2001 2,674,673 10,037,413 

2000 1,596,159 14,426,257 

1999 1.554,717 13,534,088 

1998 1,262,550 11,009,121 

1997 1,380,509 12,023,109 

10-Year Total 11,214,114 86,864,912 

a

Update on March 20,2007 of DOGAMI data base (DOGAMI 2007) 

E – 23
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Oil and Gas Production 

Salem District 

Annual production for 2005 for the Mist Gas Field was 305,000 thousand cubic feet (mcf) (305 million 

cubic feet [mmcf] with a total life production to date of 70 mmcf (DOGAMI 2007). As of 2006, the fi eld had 

produced approximately 68 bcf with a value of about $140 million (DOGAMI 2007). The State of Oregon 

applies a severance tax of 6% on the production designated to the common school fund. In total, over 500 

oil and gas wells had been permitted in the field by 2003 (DOGAMI 2003). There are currently 18 producing 

wells, one water disposal well, 21 observation wells, and 20 gas injection/withdrawal wells operating on 

the site (DOGAMI 2007). Eight new Applications for Permit to Drill are being submitted to DOGAMI for 

additional exploration and production wells (Houston 2007). 

In addition to production, the Mist Gas Field also contains two underground natural gas storage projects 

defined as the Flora/Bruer EFSC and the Calvin Creek EFSC (DOGAMI 2003). These storage facilities 

consist of six drained gas structures with a storage capacity of 12.5 bcf. As additional pools become depleted 

they may be converted to additional storage facilities. This is dependent on market supply and demand 

(DOGAMI 2006). 

Water management for the Mist Gas Field is currently by deep well injection. In Oregon, discharge of 

produced water from onshore oil and gas activities into navigable waters is addressed in the 40 CFR, 

Part 435, Subparts C and E. With exceptions, produced water can be used for agriculture and wildlife 

propagation. Produced water discharges to streams or other surface water bodies must be authorized by 

a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by the Oregon Department 

of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Consistent with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, storm water discharges 

from oil and gas-related construction activities are exempt from NPDES permit coverage, except in limited 

instances. Injection wells used for the disposal of produced water are regulated by the Oregon DEQ 

Underground Injection Control program. 

Coos Bay District 

There is currently no coal bed natural gas production in Oregon. However, the Coos Basin is being 

developed as a production resource. Sproule (2004, 2005, 2006) has estimated base, high, and low isotherm 

projections for the industry’s 115,000-acre lease holdings within the Coos Basin, with a base (average) 

isotherm projected in-place gas volume of 1,166 bcf. The low isotherm projects in-place gas volume of 725 

bcf, with a high isotherm projection of 1,617 bcf. 

The target coal groupings are split into the Lower Coaledo, Isthmus Slough, and South Slough groups. 

Sproule’s (2005, 2006) average estimates for gas in-place for the Lower Coaledo Group is 854 mmcf per 80 

acres. Estimates for the Isthmus Slough and South Slough groups are 268 mmcf per 80 acres and 186 mmcf 

per 80 acres, respectively. 

Site-specific calculations for volumetric in-place gas content calculated from average in-situ-isotherms were 

completed by Sproule (2005). Some of these estimates were conducted for sections including or adjacent to 

Federally managed mineral rights. See Tables E-5, E-6, and E-7 for estimates for the three groups: 

E – 24
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Table E-5. Isthmus Slough Group Near Federal Mineral Rights 

Total Gas Average Gas Gas Content Acres Location (millions of (scf2 Per Acre /ton) Sampled cubic feet) (mmcf/acre)3 

T. 27S, R. 13W., Sec. 11 71.4 828.521 300 2.76 

T 27S., R. 13W., Sec 14 54.1 168.327 70 2.40 

T 27S., R. 13W., Sec 15 90.4 2342.751 480 4.88 

T. 27S., R. 13W., Sec 24 80.1 3115.784 640 4.87 

Table E-6. South Slough Group Near Federal Mineral Rights 

Location Gas Content 

(scf/ton) 

Total Gas 

(millions of

 cubic feet) 

Acres 

Sampled 

Average Gas

 Per Acre 

(mmcf/acre) 

T. 26S, R. 13W., Sec. 6 148.4 665.871 308 2.16 

T 26S., R. 14W., Sec. 1 154.7 150.968 100 1.51 

T 26S., R. 14W., Sec. 3 147.6 15.254 15 1.02 

T. 26S., R. 14W., Sec. 4 68.2 0.0 0 0.00 

T. 26S., R. 14W., Sec.28 110.6 280.005 160 1.75 

Table E-7. Lower Coaledo Group Near Federal Mineral Rights a 

Location Gas Content 

(scf/ton) 

Total Gas 

(millions of

 cubic feet) 

Acres 

Sampled 

Average Gas

 Per Acre 

(mmcf/acre) 

T. 27S, R. 13W., Sec. 11 158.4 2,174.382 360.8 6.03 

T 27S., R. 13W., Sec. 12 147.6 590.400 285.9 2.07 

T 27S., R. 13W., Sec. 13 146.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

T. 27S., R. 13W., Sec. 14 149.1 2,981.251 580 5.14 

T. 27S., R. 13W., Sec. 24 158.4 1,140.074 640 1.78 

a

Most of the Lower Coaledo Isotherm Data in Sproule (2005) did not specify section location within a township. Therefore, position of Federal managed rights 

could not be determined in relation to the Methane Energy Corporation’s cited acreage. These townships were not included in this report, but it should be noted 

that Federal holdings may be located near Sproule’s (2005) projections. 

Although, based on limited analysis (Sproule 2005), Federally managed mineral rights may contain less inplace gas volume than the average of industry’s holdings, in-place gas is present in measurable volumes. 

The analysis of coal bed natural gas potential is limited to the Coos Basin coals to a depth of 4,244 feet. 

Other coal seams occur at deeper intervals, with areas in the South Slough containing coals at depths greater 

than 10,000 feet. These deeper seams have not been included in the analysis (Sproule 2005). Gas content in 

the overlying coals may also imply migration of gas from deeper thermogenic sources as well as biogenic 

development in the target seams (Sproule 2004). 

The Methane Energy Corporation is utilizing directional drilling of multiple wells from single pad 

locations. Engineering analysis (Sproule 2004) estimated a 160-acre well spacing on a 50,000-acre lease 

development. This would yield a maximum potential number of wells for 115,000 acres of development to 

approximately 719 wells. 

E – 25
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

The Methane Energy Corporation’s pilot production program includes the Radio Hill, Beaver Hill, and 

Westport sites located in the center of the Coos Basin. Collection systems are currently being engineered for 

the Westport site, which will deliver production gas from the well to the Coos County Natural Gas Pipeline. 

Initial results from the Radio Hill and Beaver Hill sites indicated that the coal bed natural gas was a dry 

gas, with little production water. This type of system is similar to Horseshoe Canyon coals of Alberta, 

the Hartshorne coals of the Arkoma basin, and the Fruitland coals of the south San Juan basin (Sproule 

2006). However, future production of coal bed natural gas could encounter a wet gas system similar to 

the Powder River basin type. This could create substantial amounts of production water that will need 

to be managed. Initial results indicate brackish salinity in the production waters. Industry is currently 

reviewing injection potentials. 

Examples of water management issues exist within current coal bed natural gas producing areas outside of 

Oregon and may be used for possible guidance of coal bed natural gas development in the District. Powder 

River Basin coal bed natural gas development has produced nearly four billion barrels (bbl) of water through 

2006, equating to two bbl of water for every 1,000 cubic feet of gas. Operators discharge 61 percent of the 

water into ephemeral and perennial surface drainages, 31 percent into off-channel pits, and 5.7 percent 

for irrigation. Of the remainder, 1.4 percent is re-injected into the wells, and 1.2 percent is treated by ionic 

exchange. Only 25 percent of the shallow injection wells have been successful (Petzet 2007). 

Potential for Resource Occurrence and Development 

Salem District 

Six distinct sedimentary basins or sub-basins have been the focus of petroleum explorations, the Eocene 

Unconformity being the primary target of exploration. In areas outside these basins, the target is above 

surface and eroded, creating the highlands. There has been little exploration of these areas, as any plays that 

might exist would be below the basement rock of Tillamook or Siletz River Basalts with low potential for 

occurrence and low potential for development. It is within these areas that the majority of the Salem District 

lands exist. It should be noted that private timber companies have been marketing the potential of all their 

lands in Oregon and Washington for the exploration and development of petroleum resources (Meyer 

2007). Exploration has demonstrated the presence of petroleum in all six basins, although commercial 

development has been limited to one. Although the potential for resource occurrence in all six basins is 

moderate to high, the potential for resource development for fi ve of the basins would be moderate, with little 

expectation for development within the 10-year life span of this scenario. The basins that would have high 

potential for resource occurrence, and moderate potential for resource development include: 

• Newport Sub-Basin 

• Tillamook Sub-Basin 

• Astoria Basin (although, given the location of the Mist Gas field, development potential should be 

considered higher) 

• Tualatin Sub-Basin (as with the Astoria Basin, development potential could be higher). However, 

a small portion of the Tualatin Sub-Basin may be included in the identified high potential area 

described below 

• Willamette Basin 

The Nehalem Basin, or Arch, has been the most extensively explored structure, resulting in the development 

potential for resource development. 

Based on geologic mapping showing similarities to the geology of the Mist Gas Field (Houston 1997), drilled 

exploration wells with petroleum shows (Olmstead et al. 1989) and discussions with DOGAMI and industry 

(Houston 2007, Meyer 2007), it is estimated that up to 50,200 acres containing both BLM-administered 

of a commercially viable gas .dlfi e The basin maintains a high potential for resource occurrence and a high 

E – 26
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

surface estate and non-federal estate could be explored and developed for petroleum in the 10-year life 

of this scenario. Of this acreage, the district maintains approximately 10,800 acres of BLM-administered 

surface estate. The remaining 39,400 acres appears to be non-federal lands. 

The lands are associated with the geologically mapped Bacona Quadrangle (Houston 1997), bound to the 

southeast by Leaseholding Syndicate’s 1925-1927 exploration hole named Dutch Canyon. The well was 

located at the NW1⁄4 of Section 17 in Township 3 North, Range 2 West. The well encountered gas at a depth 

of 1,850 feet. The pressure of the gas blew water and mud 20 feet above the casing. However, analysis of 

the gas determined that only 7.9% was methane and 91.8% was nitrogen. The identified high potential 

area is located southeast of the existing field (refer to Figure E-6). Additional petroleum development 

could likely occur to the northwest of the current Mist Gas Field, an area of current focus of exploration. 

However, there is no known BLM-administered estate in that area (USDI BLM 2007). 

It is assumed that if this area containing both federal and non-federal lands were developed, it would be 

as an extension of the current Mist Gas Field. Therefore, the current spacing plan of one well per 160 acres 

would likely apply (DOGAMI 2003, State of Oregon 1999), allowing for a total of approximately 314 wells 

within the identified high potential area, approximately 68 of which could be on BLM-administered surface 

estate. The district could foresee approximately 22 percent of the expansion development, with non-federal 

lands carrying approximately 78 percent of the expansion development (see Figure E-8). 

Figure E-8. Salem District 

Mist Gas Field Expansion 

Estimate, 160-Acre Spacing 

Salem District RFD Mist Gas Field 

Expansion Estimate, Wells. Based on 

160 Acre Spacing 

246, 78% 

68, 22% 

Non-Federal BLM 

E – 27
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Coos Bay District 

Three areas within the Coos Bay District have been identified as having petroleum potential. The two 

conventional petroleum structures described by Ryu et al. (1996) have a moderate to high potential for 

occurrence. The structures have been identified, and historic exploration has had both oil and gas shows. 

However, resource development potential is low to moderate. Although hydrocarbons may exist, it has not 

been historically economic to produce these resources. This is due to the lack of infrastructure, low price, 

and limited investigations. 

The Coos Basin has a high potential for occurrence of coal bed natural gas. The structure has been identified 

and hydrocarbon shows have been documented. Although actual economic production from this play has 

not occurred, initial steps with the placement of infrastructure and wells as well as the Gas Field Designation 

process has been implemented. The potential for resource development is also high. It is likely that 

development will occur within the life of this plan, with private development already occurring. 

Leasing 

Salem District 

Foreseeable development of the Mist Gas Field could result in potentially an additional 10,800 acres of 

BLM-administered lease offerings. If these offerings were sold for the 2006 average of $17.71 per acre, the 

net receipts would be nearly $191,268. 

Coos Bay District 

After lands are nominated and reviewed by BLM, leases on lands where the Federal government manages the 

oil and gas rights are offered via oral auction on a quarterly basis. The maximum lease size is 2,560 acres at a 

minimum bid of $2.00 per acre. An administrative fee of $75 per parcel is charged, and each successful bidder 

must meet citizenship and legal requirements. Lands not leased at auction are then available for over-thecounter leasing for a period of two years. Leases are issued for a 10-year term and charged a 12.5% royalty on 

production. In the first five years of a lease, annual rental is $1.50 per acre, and $2.00 per acre thereafter. Leases 

that become productive are “held by production” and do not terminate until all wells on the lease have ceased 

production. 

Foreseeable development of the Coos Basin coal bed natural gas play could potentially result in an 

additional 25,000 acres of BLM-administered lease offerings. If these offerings were sold for the 2006 

average price of $17.71 per acre, based on Federal proceeds from leasing in eastern Washington, the net 

receipts would approach $500,000. 

Future Trends and Assumptions 

Introduction 

Salem District 

Based on history of past exploration; historic, current, and projected development of the Mist Gas Field; 

mapped geology; and foreseeable development potential in the planning area, activity over the next 

decade may be stable to increasing. Current development within the Mist Gas Field as well as petroleum 

developments and interest in other BLM districts in Oregon, and the increasing value of petroleum 

products, indicate continued interest within the Salem District. Oil and gas activity on BLM-administered 

mineral rights within the district is expected to consist of competitive and over-the-counter leases, 

geophysical surveys, and processing of Applications for Permit to Drill for approximately 68 wells. 

E – 28
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Some exploration for coal bed natural gas in the form of coal seam investigation and mapping is predicted, 

but development of coal bed natural gas is not expected within the next 10 years. The supply of natural gas 

in the region may be augmented by one or more proposed Liquefied Natural Gas terminals. Natural gas 

prices are expected to rise 0.3% (2004 purchase power) by 2034 with a 0.7% increase in demand over the 

same period (Energy Information Administration 2007). Consequently, while the petroleum industry does 

experience economic and production cycles, demand and price are projected to continue to increase. 

Coos Bay District 

Based on history of past drilling, current development of coal bed natural gas and foreseeable development 

potential in the planning area indicate activity over the next decade may be stable to increasing. Current 

development within the Coos Basin and the increasing value of petroleum products indicate continued interest 

within the Coos Bay District. Oil and gas activity on BLM-administered mineral rights within the district 

is expected to consist of competitive and over-the-counter leases, geophysical surveys, and processing of 

Applications for Permit to Drill for 50 to 80 wells. 

Continued exploration and development for coal bed natural gas is expected. Some exploration for conventional 

natural gas is also predicted. The supply of natural gas in the region has been augmented by the Coos County 

Natural Gas Pipeline. A liquefied natural gas terminal and an associated second natural gas pipeline are being 

proposed. These systems provide export opportunities for natural gas produced in the district. Natural gas 

prices are expected to rise 0.3% (2004 purchase power) by 2034, with a 0.7% increase in demand over the same 

period (Energy Information Administration 2007). Therefore, although the petroleum industry does experience 

fluctuations in economic and production cycles, demand and price are projected to continue to increase. 

The speculative conventional petroleum systems are the Umpqua-Dothan-White Tail Ridge hybrid 

petroleum system and the Umpqua-Lower Tyee Mountain petroleum system, located in the northern 

portion of the Coos Bay District are contained in the southern Tyee sedimentary basin (Ryu et al. 1996) 

(refer to Figure E-1). 

System 1: The Umpqua-lower Tyee Mountain petroleum system is located in the center of the Smith River 

Sub-Basin. The system may include a tight-gas sandstone reservoir. According to Ryu et al. (1996), gas could 

migrate along faults, forming small accumulations in the lower Tyee Mountain sandstones. Mudstones 

within the member would serve as additional seals within the traps. An unconventional over-pressured 

tight-gas mudstone reservoir is possible in the Umpqua Group of the Smith River area. Deep wells within 

the system have encountered over-pressured zones at approximately 7,000-foot depth. Characteristics of the 

zone are sufficient to generate thermogenic wet-gas (Ryu et al. 1996). The approximate area of this system 

within the district is 200 square miles. The BLM-surface management consists of approximately 20 percent 

of that area. 

System 2: The Umpqua-Dothan-White Tail Ridge Hybrid Petroleum System is in the southern portion of 

the Tyee Basin, with a southern boundary defined by the Tyee Basin-Klamath Mountain contact. According 

to Ryu et al. (1996), the system may contain dry gas from both biogenic methane (similar to coal bed 

natural gas) and deeply buried conventional petroleum sources. It is possible the created gas migrates to 

accumulation zones which are located east of the Coos Bay District, extending into the BLM Roseburg 

District. It is also possible that the entire structure projects under the Klamath Mountains (Ryu et al. 1996). 

The approximate area of this system within the district is 350 square miles. The BLM-surface management 

consists of approximately 26% of that area. 

System 3: The third opportunity is the coal bed natural gas play within the Coos Basin. This is the play 

that is currently producing the most interest and activity. The focus of production is within the Coaledo 

Formations mapped by Newton (1980). During deposition and compaction of the organic material which 

ultimately becomes coal, large quantities of methane are generated. Methane gas produced from coal may 

have lower energy content than conventional natural gas (USDI BLM 2001). 

E – 29
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

The approximate area of the coal bed natural gas play is 250 square miles, with producing Lower Coaledo 

Formation coals currently being sought at depths up to 4,500 feet. The Coos Basin is a folded structural 

basin, one of a series of onshore and offshore basins along the northwest coast, ranging from the Klamath 

Mountains north to the Columbia River in Oregon, and from the Columbia River north to the Puget Sound 

in Washington. The basins are located from the continental shelf offshore, east to the Willamette Valley. 

Sedimentary deposits including coals, sandstones, siltstones, and shales are within these structural basins 

(Orr and Orr 2000). 

The Coos Basin structure is controlled by compression force of the subducting easterly moving Gordia 

subplate and Juan de Fuca plate in relation to the overriding westerly moving North American Plate. The 

fold axes are oriented north-south, plunging northward. The Coaledo Formation-Flournoy Formation 

contact generally defines the basin boundaries to the north, east, and south. The basin is thought to extend 

offshore to the west. The basin’s rock sequence consists of sedimentary layers of sandstone, siltstone, and 

shales, with coal seams (Newton 1980). Surface exposures of the basin’s coal seams have been economically 

mined since the 1800s (Orr and Orr 2000). 

Current development of the coal bed natural gas resource is being conducted by Methane Energy 

Corporation which has completed numerous exploratory and production wells in the Coos Basin. The 

company has projected an “Area of Mutual Interest” incorporating the Coos Basin, an area of approximately 

160,000 acres (see Figure E-9). 

The Methane Energy Corporation maintains approximately 115,000 acres of non-federal mineral lease 

rights, with an estimated in-place volume of 1.2 trillion cubic feet (Sproule 2006). Of the estimated 45,000 

Figure E-9. Coos 

asin Acreage In Area 

f Mutual Interest 

Basin Acreage In Area 

Of Mutual Interest

Coos Basin Acreage 

160,000 acres 

71% 

8% 

5% 

16% 

MEC BLM Non-BLM Fed Non-Federal 

E – 30
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

acres not yet controlled by lease agreements, the 

Federal Government manages approximately 19,694 

acres or approximately 44 percent (see Figure E-10). 

Federal mineral rights account for approximately 

19,694 acres of the basin area, and BLMadministered subsurface mineral rights (split and 

non-split estate) account for approximately 12,228 

acres of the basin area. The remaining lands consist 

of non-federal and non-leased estate in private, city, 

county, and state ownership. 

The State of Oregon Department of Geology and 

Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) initiated a public 

meeting process to establish a Gas Field Designation 

for the Coos Basin. The first public meeting was 

conducted January 29, 2007. There is only one 

other Gas Field Designation in Oregon, which is the 

Mist Gas Field in northwest Oregon. The Gas Field 

Designation is required to fulfill state requirements 

to establish well spacing designations and control 

drainage. It may also increase competition, as more 

development companies may be interested in the 

resource after such a designation. The proposed 

Gas Field Designation is likely to incorporate the 

boundaries defined in Methane Energy Corporation’s 

“Area of Mutual Interest”. The boundary of the Gas 

Figur Figure E-10. Coos Basin Unleased 

Coos Basin Unleased Acreage 

45,000 acres 

56% 44%

Non-Federal Federal

Acreage 

Field Designation is simple to alter, needing only evidence of gas potential (additional formation mapping or 

shows of gas within a well). The designation will incorporate BLM and Forest Service lands, as well as other 

federal jurisdictions (Houston 2005). 

All coal seams in western Oregon could produce coal bed methane. However, the potential is completely 

unknown, as these resources have not been investigated. Potential could exist within the coal seams of the 

Umpqua Group, as well as their correlating formations north through the coast range. If coal bed methane is 

producible in the Coos Basin, exploration could occur within these other speculative formations (May 2005). 

Geophysical Exploration 

Salem District 

Advanced Three Dimensional Survey is utilized within the Mist Gas Field. These requirements are in place 

because the Mist Gas Field is located in commercial forest land and is required by the land manager to 

minimize disturbance to near non-existent levels (Meyer 2007). 

Surface Impacts of Geophysical Explorations 

Salem District 

It is anticipated that the foreseeable geophysical activity in the identified high potential area would consist 

of the currently used the Three Dimensional Survey. The total area of the identified potential expansion 

is 81 square miles, or approximately 50,200 acres. Using the Three Dimensional Survey spacing of shots, 

it is anticipated that complete investigation of the area could utilize 22,950 shots. With pad ground 

disturbance of 12 square feet, the total disturbance area could be up to 6.3 acres. The Salem District manages 

E – 31
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

approximately 22% of the area of interest, so potential surface impacts to BLM-administered lands by 

Geophysical Explorations are expected to be approximately 1.4 acres. This disturbance is created exclusively 

with hand tools and based on experience in the Mist Gas Field, is completely reclaimed in fi ve years or less 

(Meyer 2007). Disturbance will be less where pre-existing roads and/or landings can be used. 

Coos Bay District 

Geophysical exploration techniques are not commonly utilized in coal bed natural gas production, but may 

be utilized in developing conventional petroleum plays within the Coos Bay District. It is anticipated that 

the foreseeable geophysical activity in the planning area will consist of seismic reflection surveys, utilizing 

existing roads. Surface impacts would involve temporary blockage of the roads by the large trucks used to 

gather the data, but this type of equipment is not expected to damage the roads. 

The small explosive method is also anticipated to be used on approximately 20 miles of line. Surface 

disturbance is expected to consist of drilling 4 to 12 holes per mile of line. Each drill hole would impact 

about 200 square feet, but 90 percent of these holes would be drilled on existing landings, spur roads, or 

timber haul roads. Altogether, 7,200 square feet (approximately 0.2 acre) of existing road surface would 

temporarily be impacted by drilling activities and low power blasting. 

Blasting would not be powerful enough to impact any surface resources or improvements. It is anticipated 

that four drill holes would be made on currently undeveloped areas. Drill holes would impact about 200 

square feet each, and short spur roads 100 feet by 25 feet wide constructed to each drilling location another 

2,500 square feet each. Total surface disturbance for the anticipated four drill holes would be approximately 

0.25 acre. Total surface disturbance for blasting and drilling combined is expected to total approximately 0.5 

acre. An increase in conventional petroleum development would increase these estimates. 

Drilling and Production Phase 

Salem District 

Based on past oil and gas drilling in Oregon, it is projected that three conventional petroleum 

exploratory “wildcat” wells would be drilled within the Salem District. The estimated success rate 

of finding hydrocarbons is predicted to be no greater than 10 percent, based on the average U.S. 

wildcat well success rate. Future identification of additional structures would increase this estimate. 

Development within the identified high potential area would be directed by Three Dimensional Survey 

as opposed to wildcatting (Meyer 2007). 

Coos Bay District 

The Methane Energy Corporation estimates of development for coal bed natural gas for their current 

leases range from 300 to 719 wells. Based on well spacing assumptions (Sproule 2004) of 160 acres per 

well, Coos Basin development could eventually involve 436 to 1001 wells. As previously described, 

spacing rules will be developed during the DOGAMI Gas Field Designation process. If all remaining 

Federal and non-federal leasable land was open for surface occupancy, well development on federallymanaged lands (BLM, USFS, and BIA) could range between 59 and 124 wells. Both highs and lows are 

extremes (see Figures E-11 and E-12). 

E – 32
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Figure E-11, Coos 

Basin Wells Based 

On 338-Acre Spacing On 338-Acre Spacing

Coos Basin Wells Based on 338.33 Acre 

Spacing 

300, 69% 

37, 8% 

22, 5% 

77, 18% 

MEC BLM Non-BLM, Federal Non-Federal 

Figure E-12. Coos 

Basin Wells Based 

On 160-Acre Spacing 

Coos Basin Wells Based on 160 Acre 

Spacing 

719, 71% 

77, 8% 

47, 5% 

158, 16% 

MEC BLM Non-BLM, Federal Non-Federal 

E – 33
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Surface Impacts of Drilling and Production 

Salem District 

The Mist Gas Field has maintained production since 1979. More than 500 wells have been permitted, 

although 60 wells are currently in operation. Abandoned well sites have been reclaimed and surface 

disturbance mitigated. Consequently, the current surface disturbance is limited to 60 wells. Development 

of the identified high potential area or development of an unknown fi eld could add an additional 314 wells, 

with 68 wells on BLM-administered lands. It is anticipated that all gas production would be transported 

by pipelines, most of which would be located within road rights-of-way. It is estimated that up to 20 miles 

of pipelines could be sited outside road rights-of-way. All well service requirements would be provided by 

established companies. 

Pipelines totaling 20 miles in length within a 30-foot wide right-of-way would disturb about 72.5 acres. Due 

to the checkerboard public land ownership in this area, it is estimated that only 22 percent or 16 acres would 

be on lands administered by the BLM. 

Given the existing infrastructure of the Mist Gas Field, timber management of other lands within the 

district, the amount of existing roads within the identified high potential area, use of Three Dimensional 

Survey to optimize directional drilling, the ability to place multiple wells on a single pad (Meyer 2007), and 

development scenarios of other BLM Oregon districts, it is anticipated that most well development will 

utilize existing road infrastructure to develop the resource. However, it may be necessary to construct up to 

0.25-mile of access road for each pad to remove the facilities from active roadways. Based on the ability to 

cluster wells, an assumption for calculation of four wells per pad was used. Therefore, it is estimated that no 

more than 20 miles of new road construction would be needed in full development. This would be moderate 

duty access road with a surface 18 to 20 feet wide, anticipated to be constructed on both private and BLMadministered lands. The clearing width would average 40 feet including ditches, utilities, pipelines, cuts, and 

.sll fi The total acreage impacted would total approximately 97 acres for all lands within the Salem District, 

approximately 22 acres of which would involve BLM-administered lands. Roads not retained for other 

resource management purposes would be reclaimed at the end of the project. 

Total disturbance of both BLM-administered lands and other lands for wells, support services, pipeline 

and new road construction is expected to be approximately 1,426 acres or 2.8% of the total high potential 

acreage. Surface disturbance would be restricted, as much as possible, to previously disturbed areas such 

as logging roads and landings. Industry is currently utilizing a multi-well to single pad approach which 

minimizes impact. Interim reclamation will also reduce initial disturbance. After initial construction, well 

sites pad areas will be reclaimed while the wells are in production. Disturbance will be limited to areas 

within overwork foundation structures and necessary infrastructure, such as well heads, pipelines, and 

access roads. 

Coos Bay District 

It is estimated that the productive life span of a single well within the coal bed natural gas could range to 

greater than 14 years. Total lifespan of the fi eld would be determined on the type of phased development and 

exploration of the previously untested deeper resources greater than 4,000 feet. All gas production would 

be carried by pipelines. Most, if not all, pipeline will be contained within road rights-of-way. It is estimated 

that up to 40 miles of pipeline could occur outside a road right-of-way. Additional conventional petroleum 

structures totaling 550 square miles have also been identified within the Coos Bay District. 

Based on potential for resource development (described above) and utilizing access road built for well 

accessed timber development (most likely for the BLM-administered parcels within the Coos Basin), it was 

estimated that between fi ve to no more than 10 miles of moderate duty access road with a surface 18 to 20 

E – 34
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

feet wide is anticipated to be constructed. The surface disturbance width would average 40 feet including 

ditches, utilities, pipelines, cuts, and fill s. The acreage impacted by new road building would total between 

approximately 24.25 acres and 48.5 acres for the Coos Bay District. Roads not incorporated into other 

resource management would be reclaimed at the end of the project. 

Altogether, the total disturbance for the wells, support services, and new road construction on BLMadministered mineral estate is expected to range between 194.25 acres (1.6% of BLM-administered area: 37 

wells) to 404.25 acres (3.3% of BLM-administered area: 77 wells). Surface disturbance would be restricted, 

as much as possible, to previously disturbed areas such as logging roads and landings. Industry is currently 

utilizing a multi-well to single pad approach which minimizes impact. 

A pipeline 40 miles in length with a right-of-way width of 30 feet would disturb about 145 acres. Due to 

the checkerboard public land ownership in this area, it is estimated that only 50 percent of that acreage 

would be on public lands administered by the BLM. Altogether, it is estimated that about 73 acres of BLMadministered land would be impacted from pipeline construction. The total surface disturbance of fi eld 

development and production on BLM-administered land would range between 291.5 acres and 525.75 acres. 

Total fi eld development disturbance within the district, both Federal and non-Federal, could range between 

2,289 acres (338.33-acre well spacing) and 5,255.25 acres (160-acre well spacing). Communitization and 

Unitization agreements (both State and Federal) can drastically reduce surface disturbance for both Federal 

and non-Federal lands. These cooperative agreements allow the sharing of wells, pads, and infrastructure; 

combining uses; and minimizing the need for new development. 

Limitations 

Salem District 

The acreage estimates used for BLM-administered surface estate are based on current GIS layers. 

The accuracy of this information has not been verified by Master Title Plat Maps. The GIS coverage 

for subsurface estate within the District is incomplete. Therefore, the existence and location of BLMadministered subsurface estate on the Salem District is unknown. 

A brief review of the Master Title Plat Maps was completed within and near the 1985 Mist Gas Field 

boundaries. Federal subsurface estate identified on the Master Title Plat Maps was not recorded on the GIS 

layers. Most of the Master Title Plat Maps identified federal subsurface parcels outside the Mist Gas Field 

boundaries. Due to the incompleteness of the GIS layers, especially within subsurface estate, the potential of 

BLM-administered subsurface estate was not addressed in this report. 

E – 35
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Restrictions and Requirements on Mineral and 

Energy Exploration and Development Activity 

Introduction 

This appendix discusses the leasing stipulations as they will be applied to BLM-administered lands in 

the Coos Bay District. Operating standards pertinent to the locatable and salable minerals program are 

also described. Mineral exploration and development on Federal lands must also comply with laws and 

regulations administered by several agencies of the State of Oregon; however, these requirements are not 

discussed in this document. 

Leasable Mineral Resources 

Oil and Gas Leasing 

The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (as amended) provides that all publicly owned oil and gas resources be 

open to leasing, unless a specific land order has been issued to close the area. Through the land use planning 

process, the availability of these resources for leasing is analyzed, taking into consideration development 

potential and surface resources. Constraints on oil and gas operations are identified and placed in the leases 

as notices and stipulations. Oil and gas leases are then issued from the BLM Oregon State Office in Portland. 

Specific proposed notices and stipulations are listed later in this appendix. 

The issuance of a lease conveys to the lessee an authorization to actively explore and/or develop the lease, 

in accordance with the attached stipulations and the standard terms outlined in the Federal Onshore Oil 

and Gas Leasing Reform Act (FOOGLRA). Restrictions on oil and gas activities in the planning area will 

take the form of timing limitations, controlled surface use, or no surface occupancy stipulations used at the 

discretion of the Authorized Officer to protect identified surface resources of special concern. 

The field office which reviews the lease tract will attach stipulations to each lease before it is offered for 

bid. The review will be conducted by consulting the direction given in this Resource Management Plan. 

In addition, all lands administered by BLM within the planning area will be subject to the lease notices as 

shown on the following pages. All Federal lessees or operators are required to follow procedures set forth by: 

Onshore Oil and Gas Orders, Notices to Lessee (NTL), the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act (as 

amended), the Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing Reform Act, and Title 43 Code of Federal Regulations, 

Part 3100. 

Oil and Gas Operations 

Geophysical Exploration 

Geophysical operations may be conducted regardless of whether the land is leased or not. Notices to 

conduct geophysical operations on BLM surface are received by the resource area. Administration and 

surface protection are accomplished through close cooperation of the operator and the BLM. Seasonal 

restrictions may be imposed to reduce fire hazards, conflicts with wildlife, watershed damage, etc. An 

operator is required to file a “Notice of Intent to Conduct Oil and Gas Exploration Operations” for all 

geophysical activities on public land administered by the BLM. The notice should adequately show the 

location and access routes, anticipated surface damages, and time frame. The operator is required to comply 

with written instructions and orders given by the Authorized Officer, and must be bonded. Signing of the 

E – 36
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Notice of Intent by the operator signifies agreement to comply with the terms and conditions of the notice, 

regulations, and other requirements prescribed by the Authorized Officer. A pre-work conference and/ 

or site inspection may be required. Periodic checks during and upon completion of the operations will be 

conducted to ensure compliance with the terms of Notice of Intent, including reclamation. 

Drilling Permit Process 

The federal lessee or operating company selects a drill site based on spacing requirements, subsurface 

and surface geology, geophysics, topography, and economic considerations. Well spacing is determined 

by topography, reservoir characteristics, protection of correlative rights, potential for well interference, 

interference with multiple-use of lands, and protection of the surface and subsurface environments. 

Close coordination with the State would take place. Written field spacing orders are issued for each field. 

Exceptions to spacing requirements involving Federal lands may be granted after joint State and BLM 

review. 

Notice of Staking 

After the company makes the decision to drill, it must decide whether to submit a Notice of Staking or 

apply directly for a permit to drill. The Notice of Staking is an outline of what the company intends to do, 

including a location map and sketched site plan. The Notice of Staking is used to review any conflicts with 

known critical resource values and to identify the need for associated rights-of-way and special use permits. 

The BLM utilizes information contained in the Notice of Staking and obtained from the on-site inspection 

to develop conditions of approval to be incorporated into the application for permit to drill. Upon receipt of 

the Notice of Staking, the BLM posts the document and pertinent information about the proposed well in 

the District Office for a minimum of 30 days prior to approval, for review and comment by the public. 

Application for Permit to Drill (APD) 

The operator may or may not choose to submit a Notice of Staking; in either case, an Application for Permit 

to Drill must be submitted prior to drilling. An Application for Permit to Drill consists of two main parts: 

a 12-point surface plan that describes any surface disturbances and is reviewed by resource specialists for 

adequacy with regard to lease stipulations designed to mitigate impacts to identified resource conflicts with 

the specific proposal, and an 8-point subsurface plan that details the drilling program and is reviewed by the 

staff petroleum engineer and geologist. This plan includes provisions for casing, cementing, well control, and 

other safety requirements. For the Application for Permit to Drill option, the onsite inspection is used to 

assess possible impacts and develop provisions to minimize these impacts. 

Geothermal Leasing 

The Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 (as amended) provides for the issuance of leases for the development 

and utilization of geothermal steam and associated geothermal resources. Geothermal leasing and 

operational regulations are contained in Title 43 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 3200. Through the 

land use planning process the availability of the geothermal resources for leasing is analyzed, taking into 

consideration development potential and surface and subsurface resources. Constraints on geothermal 

operations are identified and placed in the leases as stipulations. Geothermal leases are then issued by the 

BLM Oregon State Office in Portland. 

Geothermal resources are first offered by competitive sale. Prior to a competitive lease sale, or the issuance 

of a noncompetitive lease, each tract will be reviewed, and appropriate lease stipulations will be included. 

The review will be conducted by consulting the direction given in this resource management plan. The 

issuance of a lease conveys to the lessee authorization to actively explore and/ or develop the lease in 

accordance with regulations and lease terms and attached stipulations. Subsequent lease operations 

E – 37
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

must be conducted in accordance with the regulations, Geothermal Resources Operational Orders, and 

any Conditions of Approval developed as a result of site-specific NEPA analysis. In the planning area, 

restrictions in some areas will include timing limitations, controlled surface use, or no surface occupancy 

stipulations used at the discretion of the Authorized Officer to protect identified surface resources of special 

concern. 

In addition to restrictions related to the protection of surface resources, the various stipulations and 

conditions could contain requirements related to protection of subsurface resources. These may involve 

drainage protection of geothermal zones, protection of aquifers from contamination, or assumption of 

responsibility for any unplugged wells on the lease. Development of geothermal resources can be done 

only on approved leases. Orderly development of a geothermal resource, from exploration to production, 

involves several major phases that must be approved separately. Each phase must undergo the appropriate 

level of NEPA compliance before it is approved and subsequent authorizations are issued. 

Leasing Notice and Stipulation Summary 

The mineral leasing notices and stipulations below are considered to be the minimum necessary to issue 

leases in the operating area. The standard and the special status species leasing stipulations will be utilized 

on most lands. The powersite stipulation (USDI BLM Form 3730-1, Powersite Stipulation) will be utilized 

on lands within powersite reservations. 

Stipulations also include waiver, exception, and modification criteria. If the Authorized Officer 

determines that a stipulation involves an issue of major concern, waivers, exceptions, or modifications 

of the stipulation will be subject to at least a 30-day advance public review. Waiver, exception, and 

modification are defined as follows: 

• Waiver - The lifting of a stipulation from a lease that constitutes a permanent revocation of 

the stipulation from that time forward. The stipulation no longer applies anywhere within the 

leasehold. 

• Exception - This is a one time lifting of the stipulation to allow an activity for a specific proposal. 

This is a case-by-case exemption. The stipulation continues to apply to all other sites within the 

leasehold to which the restrictive criteria apply. It has no permanent effect on the lease stipulation. 

• Modification - This is a change to a stipulation that either temporarily suspends the stipulation 

requirement or permanently lifts the application of the stipulation on a given portion of the lease. 

Depending on the specific modification, the stipulation mayor may not apply to all other sites 

within the leasehold to which the restrictive criteria apply. 

Whenever a special stipulation, such as No Surface Occupancy (NSO), Timing, or Controlled Surface Use 

(CSU) is used, the need for the special stipulation is described in the “Objective” that follows the stipulation. 

By imposing these special stipulations, it has been concluded that less restrictive stipulations would not be 

adequate to meet the stated objective. 

Leasing Notices 

The following Notices are to be included in each lease for all lands administered by BLM within the 

planning area where the pertinent resource potential exists. Lease notices are attached to leases in the same 

manner as stipulations; however, there is an important distinction between lease notices and stipulations: 

lease notices do not involve new restrictions or requirements. Any requirements contained in a lease notice 

must be fully supported by either laws, regulations, policy, onshore oil and gas orders, or geothermal 

resources operational orders. 

E – 38
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Resource-Specific Leasing Notices 

Notice 

Special Status Species Stipulation 

Resources: Botany and Wildlife 

Stipulation: (All the)/(Certain) lands within this lease are within the suitable habitat of the (identify all 

Federal Threatened (FT), Endangered (FE) or Proposed Threatened (PT) and Proposed Endangered (PE) 

species, including scientific names), (an officially listed)/(a proposed for listing) Threatened or Endangered 

species. The Authorized Officer, through an environmental review process, has determined that because of 

the habitat characteristics of this species, all future post-lease operations must be analyzed and subjected to 

a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Section 7 consultation or conference to ensure the action is not likely 

to jeopardize the continued existence of the species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat. 

(All the)/(Certain) lands within this lease are known to bear the species listed (Insert list of species) which 

has (have) protected status as (State Threatened (ST); State Endangered (SE); Federal Candidate (FC); 

Bureau Sensitive (BS)); or are within the suitable habitat of (identify all State Threatened, State Endangered, 

Federal Candidate, or Bureau Sensitive species, including scientific names). These species are protected 

by BLM policy as described in Manual 6840. All future post-lease operations must be analyzed, utilizing 

recent field data collected at the proper time of year, to identify the presence of such species. If the field 

examination indicates that the proposed activity may adversely impact FC species, technical assistance will 

be obtained from FWS to ensure that actions will not contribute to the need to list a federal candidate as a 

federal threatened or endangered species. Technical assistance may be obtained from FWS to insure that 

actions will not contribute to the need to list a ST, SE, or BS species as a federal threatened or endangered 

species. Therefore, prior to any surface disturbing activities or the use of vehicles off existing roads on (this 

lease)/(the lands legally described as: . BLM approval is required. This restriction also 

applies to geophysical activities for which a permit is required. The approval is contingent upon the results 

of site specific inventories for any of the above mentioned species. The timing of these inventories is critical. 

They must be conducted at a time of year appropriate to determine the presence of the species or its habitat. 

The lessee is hereby notified that the process will take longer than the normal 30 days and that surface 

activity approval will be delayed. 

If no FT, FE, PT, or PE species, or suitable habitat, are found during the inventories, then no formal Section 

7 consultation with the USFWS will be necessary and the action will be processed using the procedures 

found in the applicable oil and gas Onshore Orders or geothermal resources operational orders. However, 

the lessee is hereby notified that, if any FT, FE, PT, PE, ST, SE, FC, or BS species are found during the 

inventories, or if the actions are proposed in designated or proposed critical habitat, then surface disturbing 

activities may be prohibited on portions of, or even all of the lease, unless an alternative is available that 

meets all of the following criteria: (a) The proposed action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence 

of a threatened or endangered species; (b) the proposed action is not likely to destroy or adversely modify 

critical habitat for a threatened or endangered species; (c) the proposed action is consistent with the 

recovery needs in approved Fish and Wildlife Service recovery plans or BLM Habitat Management Plans 

for the threatened or endangered species; and (d) the proposed action will not contribute to the need to list 

species as federal threatened or endangered. 

Objective: To protect officially listed or proposed threatened or endangered plant or wildlife species; and 

to insure that post leasing oil and gas or geothermal operations will not likely contribute to the need to list 

other special status species as threatened or endangered. 

E – 39
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Exception: An exception may be granted by the Authorized Officer, if review of the proposed plan submitted 

by the operator indicates that the proposed action will have no effect on the (common name of species). 

Modification: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified, by the Authorized Officer, if it is 

determined that portions of the area do no have any officially listed or proposed threatened or endangered 

species, federal candidate, state threatened or endangered species, or Bureau sensitive species, or their 

habitat. 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived if the (common name) is declared recovered and is no longer 

protected under the Endangered Species Act, or if other species found within the lease are no longer 

considered to be in the federal candidate, state threatened or endangered, or Bureau sensitive categories. 

Notice 

Cultural Resources: An inventory of the leased lands may be required prior to surface disturbance to 

determine if cultural resources are present and to identify needed mitigation measures. Prior to undertaking 

any surface-disturbing activities on the lands covered by this lease, the lessee or operator shall: 

1. Contact the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to determine if a cultural resource inventory is 

required. If an inventory is required, then; 

2. The BLM will complete the required inventory; or the lessee or operator, at their option, may 

engage the services of a cultural resource consultant acceptable to the BLM to conduct a cultural 

resource inventory of the area of proposed surface disturbance. The operator may elect to inventory 

an area larger than the standard 10-acre minimum to cover possible site relocation, which may 

result from environmental or other considerations. An acceptable inventory report is to be 

submitted to the BLM for review and approval no later than that time when an otherwise complete 

application for approval of drilling or subsequent surface-disturbing operation is submitted. 

3. Implement mitigation measures required by the BLM. Mitigation may include the relocation of 

proposed lease-related activities or other protective measures such as data recovery and extensive 

recordation. Where impacts to cultural resources cannot be mitigated to the satisfaction of the BLM, 

surface occupancy on that area must be prohibited. The lessee or operator shall immediately bring to 

the attention of the BLM any cultural resources discovered as a result of approved operations under 

this lease, and shall not disturb such discoveries until directed to proceed by the BLM. 

Authorities: Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act is required for all actions 

that may affect cultural properties eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. Section 6 of the Oil 

and Gas Lease Terms (DOI BLM Form 3100-11, Offer to Lease and Lease for Oil and Gas) requires that 

operations be conducted in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts to cultural and other resources. 

Special Leasing Stipulations 

The following special stipulations will be utilized on specifically designated tracts of land as described in the 

resource management plan. 

Leasing Stipulations 

No Surface Occupancy 

Resource: Land Use Authorizations 

Stipulation: Surface occupancy and use is prohibited on Recreation and Public Purposes (R&PP) and 

FLPMA leases. 

E – 40
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Objective: To protect uses on existing R&PP and FLPMA leases. 

Exception: An exception to this stipulation may be granted by the Authorized Officer, if the operator submits 

a plan demonstrating that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. 

Modification: The area affected by this stipulation may be modified by the Authorized Officer, if the land use 

authorization boundaries are modified. 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived by the Authorized Officer, if all land use authorizations within the 

leasehold have been terminated, canceled, or relinquished. 

No Surface Occupancy 

Resource: Recreation Sites
 

Stipulation: Surface occupancy and use are prohibited within developed recreation areas.
 

Objective: To protect developed recreation areas.
 

Exception: An exception to this stipulation may be granted by the Authorized Officer, if the operator submits 

a plan demonstrating that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated.
 

Modification: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified by the Authorized Officer, if the 

recreation area boundaries are changed. 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived, if the Authorized Officer determines that the entire leasehold no 

longer contains developed recreation areas. 

No Surface Occupancy 

A 30-day public notice period will be required prior to modification or waiver of this stipulation. 

Resource: Special Areas Stipulation: Surface occupancy and use are prohibited within Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern (ACEC). 

Objective: To protect important historic, cultural, scenic values, natural resources, natural systems or 

processes, threatened and endangered plant species, and/or natural hazard areas of the ACEC. 

Exception: An exception to this stipulation may be granted by the Authorized Officer, if the operator submits 

a plan demonstrating that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. 

Modification: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified by the Authorized Officer, if the ACEC 

or Environmental Education Area (EEA) boundaries are changed. 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived, if the Authorized Officer determines that the entire leasehold no 

longer contains designated ACECs or EEAs. 

No Surface Occupancy 

Resource: Progeny test sites.
 

Stipulation: Surface occupancy and use are prohibited within progeny test sites.
 

E – 41
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Objective: To protect progeny test sites.
 

Exception: None.
 

Modification: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified by the Authorized Officer, if the 

progeny test site boundaries are changed.
 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived, if the Authorized Officer determines that the entire leasehold no 

longer contains progeny test sites.
 

No Surface Occupancy 

A 30-day public notice period will be required prior to modification or waiver of this stipulation. 

Resource: Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class I 

Stipulation: Surface occupancy and use are prohibited in VRM Class I areas. 

Objective: To maintain soil productivity, provide necessary protection to prevent excessive soil erosion 

on steep slopes, and to avoid areas subject to slope failure, mass wasting, piping, or having excessive 

reclamation problems. 

Objective: To preserve the existing character of the landscape. Exception: An exception to this stipulation 

may be granted by the Authorized Officer, if the operator submits a plan demonstrating that impacts from 

the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. 

Modification: The boundaries of the stipulated area may be modified by the Authorized Officer, if the 

boundaries of the VRM Class I area are changed. 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived by the Authorized Officer, if all VRM Class I areas within the 

leasehold are reduced to a lower VRM class. Areas reduced to VRM Class II will be subject to the Controlled 

Surface Use stipulation for visual resources, and areas reduced to VRM Class III will be subject to standard 

lease stipulations. 

Controlled Surface Use 

Resource: Soils 

Stipulation: Prior to disturbance of any suspected unstable slopes or slopes over 60 percent, an engineering/ 

reclamation plan must be approved by the Authorized Officer. Such plan must demonstrate how the 

following will be accomplished: 

• Site productivity will be restored. 

• Surface runoff will be adequately controlled. 

• Off-site areas will be protected from accelerated erosion, such as rilling, gullying, piping, and mass 

wasting. 

• Water quality and quantity will be in conformance with state and federal water quality laws. 

• Surface-disturbing activities will not be conducted during extended wet periods. 

• Construction will not be allowed when soils are frozen. 

E – 42
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Exception: An exception to this stipulation may be granted by the Authorized Officer if the operator submits 

a plan, which demonstrates that the impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately 

mitigated. 

Modification: The area affected by this stipulation may be modified by the Authorized Officer, if it is 

determined that portions of the area do not include suspected unstable slopes or slopes over 60 percent. 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived by the Authorized Officer if it is determined that the entire leasehold 

does not include any suspected unstable slopes or slopes over 60 percent. 

Controlled Surface Use 

A 30-day public notice period will be required prior to modification or waiver of this stipulation.
 

Resource: Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class II.
 

Stipulation: All surface-disturbing activities, semi-permanent and permanent facilities in VRM Class II 

areas may require special design including location, painting and camouflage to blend with the natural 

surroundings and meet the visual quality objectives for the area.
 

Objective: To control the visual impacts of activities and facilities within acceptable levels.
 

Exception: None. Modification: None.
 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived, if the Authorized Officer determines that there are no longer any 

VRM Class II areas in the leasehold.
 

Controlled Surface Use 

Resource: Deferred Timber Management Areas 

Stipulation: Unless otherwise authorized, drill site construction and access through Deferred Timber 

Management Areas within this leasehold will be limited to established roadways. 

Objective: To substantially maintain the existing level of older and multi-layered conifer forest through year 2023.
 

Exception: An exception to this stipulation may be granted by the Authorized Officer if the operator submits 

a plan demonstrating that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately mitigated. 

Modification: The area affected by this stipulation may be modified by the Authorized Officer if it is 

determined that portions of the area do not include Deferred Timber Management Areas. 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived by the Authorized Officer if it is determined that the entire leasehold 

does not include Deferred Timber Management Areas. 

Controlled Surface Use 

Resource: Riparian Management Areas. 

Stipulation: Unless otherwise authorized, drill site construction and access through riparian management 

areas within this leasehold will be limited to established roadways. 

E – 43
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Objective: To protect riparian vegetation and reduce sedimentation. 

Exception: An exception to this stipulation may be granted by the Authorized Officer, if the operator submits 

a plan which demonstrates that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately 

mitigated. 

Modification: The area affected by this stipulation may be modified by the Authorized Officer, if it is 

determined that portions of the area do not include riparian areas, floodplains, or water bodies. 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived by the Authorized Officer, if it is determined that the entire 

leasehold no longer includes Riparian Management Areas. 

Controlled Surface Use 

Resource: Late-Successional Management Areas 

Stipulation: Unless otherwise authorized, drill site construction and access through Late-Successional 

Management Areas (LSMAs) within this leasehold will be limited to established roadways. 

Objective: To protect vegetation and to retain and/or restore old-growth forest characteristics. 

Exception: An exception to this stipulation may be granted by the Authorized Officer if the operator submits 

a plan which demonstrates that impacts from the proposed action are acceptable or can be adequately 

mitigated. 

Modification: The area affected by this stipulation may be modified by the Authorized Officer if it is 

determined that portions of the area do not include LSMAs. 

Waiver: This stipulation may be waived by the Authorized Officer if it is determined that the entire leasehold 

does not include LSMAs. 

Locatable Minerals Surface Management Standards for Exploration, Mining, 

and Reclamation 

The following operational standards for mining activities have been compiled to facilitate compliance with the 

43 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 3809 surface management regulations, which apply to all operations on 

mining claims located on BLM administered lands. It is the mining claimant’s and operator’s responsibility to 

avoid “unnecessary or undue degradation,” and to perform all the necessary reclamation work. 

All operators proposing occupancy, timber removal, road or trail construction, installation of structures 

of any kind, use of mechanized earth moving equipment, or suction dredges having hoses with an 

inside diameter greater than 4 inches must provide written notice to the District Office prior to the 

commencement of any mining related disturbance of the surface. If the mining or operation is in sensitive 

areas (not exploration work) a Plan of Operations will be required. Operations are not to proceed until the 

operator’s bond or financial guarantee is accepted. Surface management performance standards include 

compliance with all pertinent State laws. 

Operations ordinarily resulting in only negligible disturbance as defined in 43 CFR 3809.5(1) are considered 

to be casual use and no notification to or approval by the BLM is required. Likewise, use of a suction dredge 

in a stream having an intake nozzle of less than 4 inches in diameter, will not generally require the filing of a 

Notice or Plan of Operations. Such activity is generally considered casual use. 

E – 44
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Vegetation/Timber Removal 

An application must be submitted to the Authorized Officer pursuant to 43 CFR 3821.4 describing the 

proposed use of timber from O&C lands for mining purposes. No trees may be cut until the application is 

approved and the trees are marked. 

Firewood 

Merchantable timber may not be used for firewood. Firewood permits may be issued to the operator for 

use in conjunction with the mining operation but no wood may be used until a permit is obtained from the 

BLM. Firewood authorized for use in conjunction with a mining operation is not to be removed from the 

mining claim. 

Topsoil 

All excavations should have all the productive topsoil (usually the top 12 to 18 inches) first stripped, 

stockpiled, and protected from erosion for use in future reclamation. This also includes removal of topsoil 

before the establishment of mining waste dumps and tailings ponds, if the waste material will be left in place 

during reclamation. 

Roads 

Existing roads and trails should be used as much as possible. Temporary roads are to be constructed to a 

minimum width and with minimum cuts and fills. All roads shall be constructed so as to minimize negative 

impacts to slope stability. 

Water Quality 

All operations, including casual use, shall be conducted in a manner so as to prevent unnecessary or undue 

degradation of surface and subsurface water resources and shall comply with all pertinent Federal and State 

water quality laws. 

Claim Monuments 

State law prohibits the use of plastic pipe for claim staking in Oregon. The BLM policy requires all existing 

plastic pipe monuments to have all openings permanently closed. Upon loss or abandonment of the claim, 

all plastic pipe must be removed from the public lands. When old markers are replaced during normal claim 

maintenance, they shall be either wood posts or stone or earth mounds, constructed in accordance with the 

requirements of State law. 

Drill Sites 

Exploratory drill sites should be located next to or within existing roads when possible without blocking 

public access. When drill sites must be constructed, the size of the disturbance shall be as small as possible. 

Dust and Erosion Control 

While in operation, and during periods of shut-down, exposed ground surfaces susceptible to erosion will 

need to be protected. This can be accomplished with seeding, mulching, installation of water diversions, and 

routine watering of dust-producing surfaces. 

E – 45
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Fire Safety 

All State fire regulations must be followed, including obtaining a campfire permit or blasting permit, if 

needed. All internal gas combustion engines must be equipped with approved spark arresters. 

Safety and Public Access 

Mining claimants shall not exclude the public from mining claims with force, intimidation, or “no 

trespassing” signs. In the interest of safety, the general public may be restricted only from specific dangerous 

areas (e.g., underground mines, open pits, and heavy equipment operating and storage areas) by erecting 

fences, gates and warning signs, if they are included in the Mining Notice or Mining Plan and authorized by 

the BLM. It is the operator’s responsibility to protect the public from mining hazards. Gates, signs or road 

blocks may be installed only with BLM approval. 

Sewage 

Self-contained or chemical toilets are generally to be used at exploration or mining operations and their 

contents shall be disposed of at approved dump stations. 

Equipment 

The claimant must maintain the claim site, including structures and equipment, in a safe and orderly 

condition. Only equipment and supplies that are appropriate, reasonable, and regularly used for exploration 

or mining will be allowed on the claim. 

Tailings Ponds 

Settling ponds must be used to contain sediment, and any discharge must meet state standards. 

Solid and Hazardous Waste 

Trash, garbage, used oil, etc. must be removed from public land and disposed of properly. Trash, garbage 

or hazardous wastes must not be buried on public lands. The accumulation of trash, debris, or inoperable 

equipment on public lands is viewed as unnecessary degradation and will not be tolerated. Operators 

conducting illegal disposals shall be held financially responsible for the clean-up of such disposals. 

Cultural and Paleontological Resources 

Operators shall not knowingly alter, injure, or destroy any scientifically important paleontological (fossil) 

remains or any historical or archaeological site, structure, or object on federal lands or any identified 

traditional use areas. The operator shall immediately bring to the attention of the Authorized Officer, 

any paleontological (fossil) remains or any historical or archaeological site, identified traditional cultural 

properties, structure, or object that might be altered or destroyed by exploration or mining operations, and 

shall leave such discovery intact until told to proceed by the Authorized Officer. The Authorized Officer shall 

evaluate the discovery, take action to protect or remove the resource, and allow operations to proceed. 

Threatened and Endangered Species of Plants and Animals 

Operators shall take such action as may be needed to prevent adverse impacts to threatened or endangered 

species of plants and animals and their habitat that may be affected by operations, as stipulated in guidelines 

developed through consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

E – 46
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Occupancy at Mining Sites 

Occupancy means full or part-time residence on the public lands. It also pertains to barriers to access, 

fences, tents, trailers and the storage of equipment or materials. Living on the public land in excess of 14 

days must be reasonably incident to and required for actual continuous mining or diligent exploration 

operations, and will require concurrence by the BLM. In general, operations at the casual use level are 

not sufficient to warrant occupancy. Occupancy may be allowed for mining operations if it is deemed 

reasonably incident to conducting the operations. To be reasonably incident, activities must constitute 

substantially regular work, lead to the extraction of minerals, involve observable on-the-ground activity that 

BLM may verify, and use appropriate equipment that is presently operable. Proposed occupancy or use must 

conform to the provisions in 43 CFR 3715 and such occupancy or use cannot commence until BLM has 

completed a review of the proposal. At the conclusion of the review BLM will make a written determination 

to be sent to the claimant/operator. 

Security Guard 

In some cases, it may be reasonably incident for a security guard to live onsite to protect valuable 

property, equipment, or workings that are necessary for the mining operation, or to protect the public 

from site hazards. 

Reclamation 

As per the 43 CFR 3809 regulations all Notices and Plans of Operation will have an approved 

reclamation bond.
 

Reclamation of all disturbed areas must be performed concurrently or as soon as possible after exploration 

or mining ceases and shall conform to the guidelines described in surface management regulations found in 

43 CFR 3809. 

Reclamation shall include, but shall not be limited to: 

1) saving topsoil for final application after reshaping disturbed areas; 

2) measures to control erosion, landslides, and water runoff; 

3) measures to isolate, remove or control toxic materials; 

4) reshaping the area disturbed, applying topsoil, and revegetating disturbed areas where reasonably 

practicable; and
 

5) rehabilitation of fisheries and wildlife habitat.
 

Equipment and Debris 

All mining equipment, vehicles, and structures must be removed from the public lands during extended 

periods of non-operation and/or at the conclusion of mining, unless authorization from the BLM is given 

to the operator or claimant in writing. Accumulations of debris and trash on mining claims are considered 

unnecessary and undue degradation and must be removed immediately regardless of the status of the 

operation. Failure to do so will result in the issuance of a notice of noncompliance. 

Seeding 

The BLM approved seeding prescription must be used to provide adequate re-vegetation for erosion control, 

wildlife habitat, and productive secondary uses of public lands. 

E – 47
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Mulch 

As directed by the BLM, during review of the Notice or Plan of Operations, the disturbed area may require 

mulching during interim or final reclamation procedures. Depending on site conditions, the mulch may 

need to be punched, netted, or blown on with a tackifier to hold it in place. 

Roads 

After mining is completed, all new roads shall be reclaimed, per the claimants or operators reclamation plan. 

Tailings Ponds 

The ponds should be allowed to dry out and the sediments removed and spread with the topsoil, unless the 

sediments contain toxic materials. If the ponds contain toxic materials, a plan will be developed to identify, 

dispose, and mitigate effects of the toxic materials. If necessary, a monitoring plan will also be implemented. 

The ponds should then be backfilled and reclaimed. 

Guidelines for Development of Salable Mineral Resources 

Proposed Operations 

All salable mineral exploration and development, that involves surface disturbance, must have an operation 

and reclamation plan approved by the Authorized Officer. Extraction of mineral materials must be in 

accordance with a contract of sale or free use permit issued to qualifying organization by the Authorized 

Officer. All proposals will undergo the appropriate level of review and compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act. 

Quarry Design 

In steep terrain, quarry developments may require a series of benches to effectively maximize the amount 

of mineral materials to be removed in a safe manner. In all cases, bench height shall not exceed 40 feet. 

If the bench would be used by bulldozers to access other parts of the quarry, the width of the bench 

should be at least 25 feet. If the bench won’t be used by equipment, then this width can be reduced to 

approximately 10 feet. 

Clearing of timber and brush should be planned at least 10 feet beyond the edge of the excavation limit. 

Most often the brush would be piled and burned at the site, or scattered nearby. 

• All topsoil and overburden should be stockpiled and saved for eventual quarry site 

reclamation. These piles may need to be stabilized by mulching or seeding in order to 

minimize erosion during the winter months. 

As a standard procedure, the excavation of the quarry floor should be designed with an outslope of 

approximately two percent to provide for adequate drainage. 

E – 48
 
Appendix E - Energy and Minerals 

Operating Procedures 

Where practicable, the following requirements will be made a part of every contract or permit providing for 

the use of mineral material: 

• Oversize shall be treated according to the site specific plan. 

• The operator shall comply with local and State safety codes covering quarry operations, warning 

signs and traffic control. All necessary permits must be obtained from State and County agencies. 

• Use of the site for equipment storage and stockpiling rock material is allowed for the duration of 

the contract or permit. Use of the site beyond that time will be authorized, if warranted, under a 

temporary use permit. 

• All topsoil shall be stockpiled or windrowed as appropriate, for use in reclamation. 

• Prior to abandonment, all material sites will be graded to conform with the surrounding 

topography. Topsoil will be utilized to create a medium for re-vegetation. Reseeding and tree 

planting, if necessary, will be done as prescribed by the Authorized Officer. Access roads no longer 

needed by the BLM will be abandoned and reclaimed as directed by the Authorized Officer. 

E – 49
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

E – 50
 
Appendix F 

Lands 

This appendix provides detailed data about lands and realty in the Coos Bay BLM District. 

In this appendix: 

Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-3 

Land Withdrawals and Land Tenure Zone 3 Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-4 

Inventory of Communication Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-12 

F – 1
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

F – 2
 
Appendix F - Lands 

Land Tenure Adjustment Criteria 

In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) and other laws, 

Executive Orders, and Departmental and Bureau policy, the following factors will be considered in 

evaluating opportunities for disposal or acquisition of lands or interests in lands. This list is not considered 

all inclusive, but represents the major factors to be considered. 

General Land Tenure Adjustment Evaluation Factors 

• Improves manageability of specific areas. 

• Maintains or enhances important public values and uses. 

• Consolidates Federal mineral estate and/or reuniting split surface and mineral estates. 

• Facilitates development of energy and mineral potential. 

• Reduces difficulty or cost of public land administration. 

• Provides accessibility to land for public recreation and other uses. 

• Amount of public investments in facilities or improvements and the potential for recovering those 

investments. 

• Suitability of land for management by another Federal agency. 

• Significance of decision in stabilizing or enhancing business, social, and economic conditions, and/ 

or lifestyles. 

• Meets long-term public management goals as opposed to short term. 

• Facilitates National, State, and local BLM priorities or mission statement needs. 

• Consistency with cooperative agreements and plans or policies of other agencies. 

• Facilitates implementation of other aspects of the approved resource management plans. 

Acquisition Criteria 

• Facilitates access to public land and resources retained for long-term public use. 

• Secures Threatened or Endangered or Sensitive plant and animal species habitat. 

• Protects riparian areas and wetlands. 

• Contributes to biodiversity. 

• Protects high-quality scenery. 

• Enhances the opportunity for new or emerging public land uses or values. 

• Facilitates management practices, uses, scales of operation, or degrees of management intensity 

that are viable under economic program efficiency standards. 

• Secures lands adjacent to other existing Zone 1 lands. 

• Protects significant cultural resources and sites eligible for inclusion on the National Register of 

Historic Places 

• Whether private sites exist for the proposed use. 

F – 3
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Disposal Criteria 

The following criteria will be used to identify parcels in Land Tenure Zones 2 or 3 suitable for disposal: 

• Suitability for purposes including, but not limited to, community expansion or economic 

development such as industrial, residential, or agricultural development. 

• Lands of limited public value. 

• Lands that are difficult for the BLM to manage and unsuitable for transfer to other federal agencies 

or State and local governments. 

• Lands that would aid in aggregating or repositioning other public lands or public land resource 

values where the public values to be acquired outweigh the values to be exchanged. 

O&C Land Exchange Criteria 

An O&C land exchange is an exchange within the O&C land area as delineated in Public Law 105-321. 

Forest management and related factors to consider when evaluating the feasibility of an O&C land exchange 

include the following: 

• Land exchanges that maintain the existing balance between the various land use allocations will be 

considered favorably. 

• Offered lands that are primarily suitable for agriculture, business, or home sites, or that would 

require extensive post-acquisition management will not be favorably considered. The O&C lands 

designated for timber production will generally not be exchanged for lands that will be managed 

solely for a single use, such as species protection. 

• Generally, where cutting rights are reserved on existing and future timber stands by the proponent, 

the proposed exchange will not be considered favorably. 

• Proposals that result in a material reduction in the number of acres of O&C land or Coos Bay Wagon 

Road (CBWR) land or acres of harvestable timber should not be considered favorably. See I.M. No. 

OR-99- 081, dated August 4, 1999, for an interpretation of Section 3 of Public Law 105-321, which 

established a requirement of “No Net Loss” of O&C and CBWR lands in western Oregon. 

• The exchange of O&C and CBWR lands specifically for lands located outside of the 18 O&C 

counties is prohibited by regulations in 43 CFR 2200.0-6(e). This restriction applies to timber and 

other interests in lands as well. 

Land Withdrawals and Land Tenure Zone 3 Lands
 

Table F-1 contains detailed information about existing and proposed land withdrawals in the Coos Bay 

District. Table F-2 lists Zone 3 lands, which are lands available for disposal. 

F – 4
 
Appendix F - Lands 

Table F-1. Existing Land Withdrawals And Recommendations For Continuance In The Coos 

Bay District 

Serial Order Managing Segregation Recommendation Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Number Number Agency Effect (C/R) 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 19S 12W Sec. 1 40.43 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C - serving original 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 26S 14W Sec. 28 40 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B purpose, revoke 

patented parcel. 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 30S 15W Sec. 12 40 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 32S 15W Sec. 4 71.75 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 33S 14W Sec. 31 155.16 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 34S 14W Sec. 6 40.7 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 34S 14W Sec.33 162.05 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 34S 14W Sec. 34 40 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 34S 15W Sec. 1 7.92 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 38S 14W Sec. 4 40 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 38S 14W Sec. 5 40 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 38S 14W Sec. 34 34 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 39S 14W Sec. 23 40 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 41S 13W Sec. 6 2.56 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

OR 50856 PLO 7215 41S 13W Sec. 7 0.32 Pacific Coastline, Highway 101 BLM B C 

ORE 

016183C PLO 3869 20S 9W Sec. 31 81.29 Smith River Falls Recreation Site BLM B C - Developed Sites 

ORE 

016183C PLO 3869 20S 9W Sec. 33 3.5 Vincent Creek Recreation Site BLM B C 

ORE 

016183C PLO 3869 23S 10W Sec. 2 78.86 Loon Lake Recreation site BLM B C 

ORE 

016183C PLO 3869 27S 10W Sec. 4 60 Park Creek Recreation Site BLM B C 

ORE 

016183C PLO 3869 27S 10W Sec. 18 20 Big Tree Recreation Site BLM B C 

ORE 

016183C PLO 3869 30S 9W Sec. 9 80 Bear Creek Recreation Site BLM B C 

ORE 

016183C PLO 3869 32S 14 W Sec. 12 120 Sixes River Recreation Site BLM B C 

ORE 

016183C PLO 3869 Total acres 443.65 

OR 23558 SO 12-31­

1930 23S 10W Sec. 1 51.51 Rec Wdl. No. 43 East Shore Recreation Site BLM B C - Developed Site 

OR 19291A PLO 3530 27S 10W Secs. 17-20 590 Cherry Creek Natural Area BLM B C - Protecting site, for 

research opportunities 

OR 6398 PL 181 27S 11W Sec. 35 120 Lavern County Park BLM/ Coos 

Cnty B C - Developed County Park 

OR 6398 PL 181 27S 12W Sec. 35 160 Rock Prairie County Park BLM/ Coos 

Cnty B C - Developed County Park 

OR 6398 PL 181 28S 9W Sec. 7 87.72 Judge Hamilton County Park BLM/ Coos 

Cnty B C - Developed County Park 

OR 6398 PL 181 28S 11W Sec. 5 80 Middle Creek County Park BLM/ Coos 

Cnty B C - Potential for County 

Park Development 

OR 6398 PL 181 28S 11W Sec. 11 80 Frona County Park BLM/ Coos 

Cnty B C - Developed County 

Park 

OR 6398 PL 181 Total acres 527.72 

F – 5
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Table F-1. (Continued) 

Serial Order Managing Segregation Recommendation Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Number Number Agency Effect (C/R) 

R – Not developed. No 

planned development. 

OR 21318 SO 6-12-1907 40S 13W Secs. 11, 14 320.75 Potential National Park BLM B	 No public support for 

establishment of park or 

monument. 

OR 19231 EO 11-24­

1903 22S 13W Sec. 14 71.1 Umpqua Jetty Maintenance COE B R – COE indicated a desire to relinquish. 

OR 21901 EO 8-23-1895 22S 13W Sec. 13 130 Umpqua River Light Station USCG B R – USCG indicated a 

desire to relinquish. 

OR 4011 EO 7-14-1884 26S 14W Secs. 2,3 5.1 Bar Watch Administrative Site USCG B C – serving original 

purpose 

OR 19227 EO 7-14-1884 26S 14W Sec. 2 2.43 Military Facility US Navy B C – serving original 

purpose 

OR-22094 EO 6/14/1876 26S 14W Sec. 4 21.58 Sub Surface only / Cape Arago 

Lighthouse USCG R 

ORE 

012693 PLO 5490 All Public Domain lands 50,329 Multiple use management BLM 

Surface 

closed to Ag 

laws 

C - serving original 

purpose 

OR 54142 PLO 7436 

25S 13W Secs. 

4-8,18,19 

See 

total acres 

below. 

North Spit Rec Area and ACEC BLM Closed to the 

mining laws 

C - serving original 

purpose 

OR 54142 PLO 7436 25S 14W Secs. 

12,13,23-26 North Spit Rec Area and ACEC BLM Closed to the 

mining laws C 

OR 54142 PLO 7436 Total acres 1,779.27

OR 24294 PL 95-450 26S 14W Secs. 

5,8,17-19 15 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A C - serving purpose 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 27S 14W Sec. 19 8 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 28S 15W Secs. 

25,26,35 3.56 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 29S 15W Sec. 2 4 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 31S 16W Secs. 

24,25,34,35 30 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 32S 16W Secs. 

2,3,10,17,21, 28-31 54 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 33S 15W Secs. 

6,8,21,22,33 38 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 34S 14W Sec. 30 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 34S 15W Sec. 31 31.83 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 36S 15W Secs. 

2,11,15-17 32 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 38S 14W Secs. 30,31 12 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 38S 15W Sec. 1 16 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 39S 14W Secs. 

6,8,16,17 30 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 24294 PL 95-450 40S 14W Secs. 

4,16,22,26 38 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A 

OR 711 PLO 4395 28S 15W Sec. 25 

See 

total acres 

below. 

Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C - serving original 

purpose 

F – 6
 
Appendix F - Lands 

Table F-1. (Continued) 

Serial Order Managing Segregation Recommendation Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Number Number Agency Effect (C/R) 

31S 16W Secs. OR 711 PLO 4395 Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C 24,25,34 

OR 711 PLO 4395 31S 15W Sec. 35 Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C 

OR 711 PLO 4395 32S 16W Secs. 

17,21,28-31 Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C 

OR 711 PLO 4395 33S 15W Secs. 

21,22,33 Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C 

OR 711 PLO 4395 34S 15W Sec. 4 Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C 

OR 711 PLO 4395 36S 15W Secs. 2,11 Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C 

OR 711 PLO 4395 38S 15W Sec. 1 Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C 

OR 711 PLO 4395 38S 14W Secs. 30,31 Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C 

OR 711 PLO 4395 39S 14W Secs. 

6,8,16,17 Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C 

OR 711 PLO 4395 40S 14W Secs. 4,22 Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C 

OR 711 PLO 4395 Total acres 222.56 

OR 50874 PLO 7170 29S 15W Secs. 35, 36 70.9 Lost Lake BLM B C - serving original 

purpose 

OR 45401 PLO 6967 

30S 15W Secs. 

2,3,10,11,15, 

21,28,32,33 

963.38 New River ACEC BLM B C - serving original 

purpose 

OR 51194 PLO 7170 31S 15W Secs. 7,8 111.48 Floras Lake BLM B C - serving original 

purpose 

OR 51891 PLO 7246 32S 14W Sec. 6 44.48 Edson Creek Rec Site BLM B C - serving original 

purpose 

OR 24293 PL 91-504 40S 14W Sec. 22 21 Oregon Islands NWR USFW A C - serving original 

purpose 

OR 22376 EO 7035 40S 14W Sec. 35 21 Oregon Islands NWR USFW B C - serving original 

purpose 

OR 25306 PLO 6287 Unsurveyed Islands 

rocks reefs Oregon National Wildlife Refuge USFW B C - serving original purpose 

OR 11517 EO 5-6-1935 Unsurveyed Islands 

rocks reefs 100 Oregon Islands NWR Addition USFW B C - serving original purpose 

OR 19130 SO of 

4/30/1921 27S 11W Sec. 35 40 Water Power Potential/ PSC 1 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19130 SO of 

4/30/1921 

28S 10W Secs. 

6,8,12,14 165.26 Water Power Potential/ PSC 1 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19140 SO of 

6/1/1926 27S 10W Sec. 31 115.35 Water Power Potential/ PSC 147 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19140 SO of 

6/1/1926 27S 11W Sec. 35 236.72 Water Power Potential/ PSC 147 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19140 SO of 

6/1/1926 28S 10W Secs. 5,6 169.26 Water Power Potential/ PSC 147 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19140 SO of 

6/1/1926 28S 11W Sec. 1 320 Water Power Potential/ PSC 147 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19140 SO of 

6/1/1926 Total acres 841.33 

OR 19144 SO of 

7/19/1926 

22S 8W Secs. 4***, 

7,9,17,21 276.1 Water Power Potential/ PSC 162 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19144 SO of 

7/19/1926 22S 9W Secs. 7-9 109.44 Water Power Potential/ PSC 162 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

F – 7
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Table F-1. (Continued) 

Serial Order Managing Segregation Recommendation Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Number Number Agency Effect (C/R) 

SO of R - unless viable for OR 19144 23S 8W Sec. 13 80 Water Power Potential/ PSC 162 BLM D 7/19/1926 hydropower 

OR 19144 SO of 

7/19/1926 Total acres 465.54 

OR 19152 SO of 

2/15/1928 22S 9W Sec. 7 183.93 Water Power Potential/ PSC 198 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 20365 EO of 

5/28/1912 

20S 9W Secs. 

26,28,32,34 245.22 Water Power Potential/ PSR 273 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 20365 EO of 

5/28/1912 21S 8W Secs. 2***,4*** 320 Water Power Potential/ PSR 273 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19101 EO of 

8/7/1917 

20S 8W Secs. 

17,19,21,27, 33 186.57 Water Power Potential/ PSR 629, BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19101 EO of 

8/7/1917 

20S 9W Secs. 

21,25,27,31, 33,35 1,508.32 Water Power Potential/ PSR 629 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19101 EO of 

8/7/1917 21S 8W Secs. 1,9,11 616.26 Water Power Potential/ PSR 629 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19101 EO of 

8/7/1917 Total acres 2,311.15

OR 19011 SO of 

7/13/1917 

20S 9W Secs. 

21,25,27,31, 33,35 1,362.74 Water Power Potential/ WPD 11 BLM R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19011 SO of 

7/13/1917 

20S 8W Secs. 

17,19,21,27, 31,33 1,586.55 Water Power Potential/ WPD 11 BLM R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19011 SO of 

7/13/1917 

21S 8W Secs. 

1,3,4,9,11 1,062.95 Water Power Potential/ WPD 11 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19011 SO of 

7/13/1917 

22S 9W 

Secs.7,13,15***,17 282.52 Water Power Potential/ WPD 11 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19011 SO of 

7/13/1917 22S 8W Secs. 5,21 20.03 Water Power Potential/ WPD 11 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19011 SO of 

7/13/1917 22S 7W Sec.19 47.45 Water Power Potential/ WPD 11 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19011 SO of 

7/13/1917 

23S 10W 

Secs.1,11***,13,35 37.38 Water Power Potential/ WPD 11 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19011 SO of 

7/13/1917 

23S 9W Secs. 

7***,17***, 19*** 200.21 Water Power Potential/ WPD 11 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19011 SO of 

7/13/1917 

23S 7W Secs. 

5,7,9,15,19***, 

21,23,27,31,33 

887.79 Water Power Potential/ WPD 11 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19102 EO of 

6/29/1917 22S 8W Sec. 24 3 Protect water power and reservoir potential/ PSR 630 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower. 

OR 19105 EO of 

7/24/1917 22S 7W Sec. 19 29.93 Water Power Potential/ PSR 633 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19105 EO of 

7/24/1917 22S 8W Secs. 5, 21 20.03 Water Power Potential/ PSR 633 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19105 EO of 

7/24/1917 

22S 9W Secs. 7,13, 

15***,17 282.52 Water Power Potential/ PSR 633 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19105 EO of 

7/24/1917 

23S 7W Secs. 

5,7,9,15,19***, 

21,23,27,31,33 

887.79 Water Power Potential/ PSR 633 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19105 EO of 

7/24/1917 23S 8W Sec. 11 29.38 Water Power Potential/ PSR 633 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

F – 8
 
Appendix F - Lands 

Table F-1. (Continued) 

Serial Order Managing Segregation Recommendation Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Number Number Agency Effect (C/R) 

EO of R - unless viable for OR 19106 22S 10W Sec. 35 239.95 Water Power Potential/ PSR 634 BLM D 7/17/1917 hydropower 

OR 19106 EO of 

7/17/1917 

23S 9W Secs. 

7***,17***, 19*** 200.21 Water Power Potential/ PSR 634 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19106 EO of 

7/17/1917 23S 10W Secs. 1, 13 211.51 Water Power Potential/ PSR 634 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19106 EO of 

7/17/1917 Total acres 651.67 

OR 19109 EO of 

7/17/1917 23S 10W Sec. 35 40 Water Power Potential / PSR 645, BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19012 SO of 

7/13/1917 23S 10W Sec. 35 40 Water Power Potential/ WPD 12 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19113 EO of 

12/12/1917 

26S 9W Secs. 11,13,15, 

17***,19***,23,25,29***, 

31***,35 

Water Power Potential / PSR 659 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19113 EO of 

12/12/1917 27S 11W Sec. 15 183 Water Power Potential / PSR 659 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19113 EO of 

12/12/1917 30S 9W Secs. 9,17 120 Water Power Potential / PSR 659 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19113 EO of 

12/12/1917 30S 10W Secs. 3,13 280 Water Power Potential / PSR 659 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19014 SO of 

12/12/1917 

26S 9W Secs. 11,13,15, 

17***,19***,23,25,29***, 

31***,35 

Water Power Potential / WPD 14 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19014 SO of 

12/12/1917 27S 11W Sec. 15 183 Water Power Potential / WPD 14 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19014 SO of 

12/12/1917 30S 9W Secs. 9,17 120 Water Power Potential / WPD 14 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19014 SO of 

12/12/1917 30S 10W Sec. 3,13 280 Water Power Potential / WPD 14 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19017 SO of 

1/12/1921 

27S 11W Secs. 

5***,7 ,17, 

19,21** **,29,31,33  

2,418.76 Water Power Potential / WPD 17 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

27S 12W Secs. 

OR 19017 SO of 

1/12/1921 

11** *,13***, 23***, 

25***, 1,663.57 Water Power Potential / WPD 17 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

27***, 35*** 

OR 19017 SO of 

1/12/1921 28S 9W Sec. 7 335.2 Water Power Potential / WPD 17 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19017 SO of 

1/12/1921 

28S 10W Seca. 3, 5, 9, 

11, 15*** 1,296.28 Water Power Potential / WPD 17 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19017 SO of 

1/12/1921 

28S 11W Secs. 

1,3,5***,7 883.12 Water Power Potential / WPD 17 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19017 SO of 

1/12/1921 

28S 12W Secs. 

1 ,3** *, 

11***,13,15***21***, 

1,516 Water Power Potential / WPD 17 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

OR 19017 SO of 

1/12/1921 Total acres 8,112.93

OR 19142 SO of 

12/4/1926 

22S 10W Secs. 

15***,21***, 22***, 

26***,27***,34*** 

Water Power Potential / PSC 157 BLM D R - unless viable for 

hydropower 

F – 9
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Table F-1. (Continued) 

Serial 

Number 

Order 

Number Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Managing Segregation Recommendation Agency Effect (C/R) 

OR 19142 SO of 

12/4/1926 23S 10W Sec. 2*** 76.86 Water Power Potential / PSC 157 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19142 SO of 

12/4/1926 24S 8W Sec. 31*** Water Power Potential / PSC 157 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19116 EO of 

12/12/1917 

26S 9W 

Secs.10***,14*** 640 Water Power Potential / PSR 662 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19116 EO of 

12/12/1917 

32S 13W Secs. 17, 

PB 37 387 Water Power Potential / PSR 662 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

OR 19116 EO of 

12/12/1917 32S 14W Secs 11,12 160 Water Power Potential / PSR 662 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

EO of 

12/12/1910 25S 12W Secs. 29-33 400 Resource Protection/ Coal Lands BLM 

OR-19180 USGS Order 

of 7/15/1947 26S 8W Sec. 8 80 Water Power Potential / PSC 382 BLM D R - unless viable for hydropower 

DO: Director Order 

EO: Executive Order 

SO: Secretarial Order 

BO: Bureau Order 

DO: Director Order 

PL: Public Law 

PLO: Public Land Order 

PSR: Power Site Reserve 

PSC: Power Site Classification 

R&PP: Recreation and Public Purposes 

WPD: Water Power Designation 

FPCO: Federal Power Commission 

FO: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Order 

Segregation Effect: 

A: Withdrawn from operation of the general land laws, the Mining law, and the Mineral Leasing Act 

B: Withdrawn from operations of the General Land and Mining Laws 

C: Withdrawn from operation of the General Land Law 

D: Withdrawn from operation of the General Land Law; open to mining subject to Public Law 359 

E: Withdrawn from operation of the General Land Law; withdrawn from mining except metalliferous 

Recommendation: 

C – Continue R - Revoke 

*** Opened to entry subject to Sec. 24 of the Federal Power Act. 

**** Opened to entry in part subject to Sec. 24 of the Federal Power Act. 

Notes: Location description indicates sections within which withdrawn lands are located. Information on which portions of the cited sections are withdrawn is available at the Coos Bay BLM District 

Office. 

Table does not include lands that have been completely transferred out of Federal ownership subsequent to withdrawal or lands within National Forest boundaries. 

F – 10
 
Appendix F - Lands 

Table F-2. Land Tenure Zone 3 Lands In The Coos Bay District 

Location # on Map 

Township Range Section Subdivision Acres Status 3A/3B 

19S 12W 1 Lots 1, 2 40.48 PD 161 

20S 9W 33 Lot 7 3.98 O&C 162 

20S 

20S 

10W 

11W 

31 

36 

Portion of Lot 10 

Portion of Lot 9 

5.98 Acq. 

163 

164 

21S 11W 31 Lot 18 37.22 PD 165 

21S 11W 32 Lots 16, 23 59.01 PD 166 

22S 8W 15 Lot 9, 10 25.30 O&C 167 

22S 9W 7 Portion of Lot 6 10.64 O&C 167a 

22S 13W 14 Lots 1, 2 71.10 PD 168 

25S 11W 30 Lot 5 39.92 PD 169 

25S 13W 4 N1/2NW1/4 80.00 PD 170 

25S 13W 7 Lots 6, 8, 13, 14, 15 92.78 PD 171 

25S 13W 18 Lot 7, E1/2NW1/4 96.15 PD 172 

26S 08W 10 SE1/4NE1/4 40.00 PD 173 

26S 11W 8 NW1/4NE1/4 40.00 PD 174 

26S 12W 9 Portion of SE1/4SW1/4 4.00 Acq. 175 

26S 14W 3 Portion of Lots 1, 2 , SE1/4NW1/4 62.18 PD 176 

26S 14W 28 NW1/4NE1/4 40.00 PD 177 

28S 12W 19 SE1/4SE1/4 40.00 CBWR 178 

30S 12W 5 Lot 6 1.80 O&C 179 

30S 12W 6 Lots 3,4 1.14 PD 180 

30S 13W 21 N1/2NE1/4NW1/4 20.00 CBWR 181 

32S 14W 7 N1/2SW1/4NE1/4NW1/4 5.00 CBWR 182 

39S 12W 8 W1/2NW1/4 80.00 PD 184 

896.68 

E = East; N = North; S = South; W = West; 

UN = Unnumbered 

PD = Public Domain land; OC = Oregon and California Railroad land; Ot = Other; Acq.- Acquired; CBWR – Coos Bay Wagon Road 

Sources: Western Oregon Digital Base and District realty records 

F – 11
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Inventory of Communication Sites 

Table F-3 contains information on existing communication sites in the Coos Bay BLM District. The resource 

management plan contains management directions related to management of communication sites. 

Table F-3. Inventory Of Communication Sites For The Coos Bay District 

Location # on 

Figure 5 in the 

RMPa Site Name Serial Number T R S Quarter Section 

Latitude 

North 

Longitude 

West 

38 Roman Nose OR 8652 19 S 9 W 23 NWNE,NENW 43-54-50 122-44-00 

39 Johns's Peak OR 53660 23 S. 9 W 27 SESW 43-31-56 123-45-41 

40 Blue Ridge OR 36189 26 S 12 W 35 SESW 43-16-34.7 124-5-24.5 

41 Signal Tree OR 8651 29 S 9 W 33 NWSW 43-00-07 123-46-28 

42 Sugar Loaf None 29 S 12 W 23 NE 43-02-48 124-05-14 

43 Bennett Butte OR 30 S 13 W 20 NENW 43-57-38 124-16-27 

44 Edson Butte OR 46648 31 S 14 W 23 SWNW 43-52-20 124-20-03 

45 Grizzly Mountain 37 S 14 W 4 Lot 15 42-23-50 124-21-55 

46 Bosley Butte OR 16304 39 S 13 W 10 SWSE 42-12-33 124-13-25 

47 Palmer Butte 40 S 13 W 10 Lot 10 42-7-36 124-12-34 

48 Black Mound OR 60391 40 S 13 W 20 NWNWSW 42-5-17 124-18-52.83 

a

Map numbers start at 38 because communication sites were numbered consecutively across the planning area in the Final Environmental Impact Statement. 

F – 12
 
Appendix G 

Recreation 

Resource Management Plan. 

In this appendix: 

This appendix provides supplemental material for the recreational section of the Coos Bay BLM District 

Interim Off-Highway Vehicle Management Guidelines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .G-3 

Planning Frameworks for Special Recreation Management Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .G-6 

G – 1
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

G – 2
 
Appendix G - Recreation 

Interim Off-Highway Vehicle

Management Guidelines 

This section provides interim off-highway vehicle (OHV) management guidelines that would be 

implemented until subsequent transportation management plans are completed. These interim guidelines 

have been developed at the district level, for OHV emphasis areas. 

Maps associated with these interim OHV management guidelines are available at the Coos Bay BLM District 

Offi ce. These maps show off-highway vehicle area designations, a preliminary road and trail network, and 

BLM-administered lands that have secured legal public access. See the Resource Management Plan: Table 

20 for a listing of areas closed to off-highway vehicle use, Table 21 for off-highway vehicle area designations, 

and Table 22 for off-highway vehicle emphasis areas for the Coos Bay District. 

The BLM road maintenance levels that pertain to limitations on types of off-highway vehicle use are described 

below. 

• Level 1 – This level is assigned to roads where minimum maintenance is required to protect 

adjacent lands and resource values. Emphasis is given to maintaining drainage and runoff patterns 

as needed to protect adjacent lands. Grading, brushing, or slide removal is not performed unless 

roadbed drainage is being adversely affected, causing erosion. Closure and traffic restrictive devices 

are maintained as needed. 

• Level 2 – This level is assigned to roads that are passable by high clearance vehicles. Drainage 

structures are to be inspected within a 3-year period and maintained as needed. Grading is 

conducted as necessary to correct drainage problems. Brushing is conducted as needed to allow 

access. These are typically low standard, low volume, single lane, natural and aggregate surfaced, 

and are functionally classified as a resource road. 

• Level 3 – This level is assigned to roads where management objectives require the road to be open 

seasonally or year-round for commercial, recreational, or administrative access. Typically, these 

roads are natural or aggregate surfaced, but may include low use bituminous surfaced road. These 

roads have a defined cross section with drainage structures (e.g., rolling dips, culverts, or ditches). 

These roads may be negotiated by passenger cars traveling at prudent speeds. User comfort and 

convenience are not considered a high priority. Drainage structures are to be inspected at least 

annually and maintained as needed. Grading is conducted to provide a reasonable level of riding 

comfort at prudent speeds for the road conditions. Brushing is conducted as needed to improve 

sight distance. 

• Level 4 – This level is assigned to roads where management objectives require the road to be 

open all year (except may be closed or have limited access due to snow conditions) and which 

connect major administrative features (recreational sites, local road systems, administrative 

sites, etc.) to County, State, or Federal roads. Typically these roads are single or double lane, 

aggregate, or bituminous surface, with a higher volume of commercial and recreational traffic than 

administrative traffic. 

G – 3
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Coos Bay District 

OHV Designations: 

Limited to designated roads and trails: 318,437 acres 

Closed: 3,844 acres 

Description: 

Includes all BLM-administered lands within the Coos Bay District. See additional interim guidelines for the 

Blue Ridge OHV Emphasis Area. 

Limited Area Management Guidelines 

• Limited OHV areas are managed in accordance with all applicable federal and state off-highway 

vehicle regulations. 

• Motor vehicle use will be limited to administrative, commercial, and passenger vehicle traffic where 

not specifically signed or gated. 

• Until road and trail designations are complete, all motorized vehicles will be limited to the interim 

road and trail network as mapped unless closed or restricted under a previous planning effort or due 

to special circumstances as defined below. 

• Routes may be closed or limited under seasonal or administrative restrictions. These restrictions 

may include, but are not limited to, fi re danger, wet conditions, special requirements for wildlife 

species, to protect cultural resources, or for public safety. 

• Vehicles may pull off roads or trails to park or allow others to pass, up to 25 feet from centerline of 

roads or up to 15 feet from centerline of trails. 

• Limitations apply to all Class I (ATVs), Class II (4WDs) and Class III (motorcycles) vehicle 

use and to all activity types (recreational, commercial, etc.) unless authorized by the BLM for 

administrative purposes. 

Closed Area Management Guidelines: 

All motorized vehicles are prohibited from entering closed OHV areas unless authorized by the BLM for 

administrative purposes. 

Process for Ongoing Public Collaboration/Outreach 

• The principal venue for public collaboration is through public outreach and scoping during future 

travel management planning efforts, special projects, and local partnership. 

• Press releases will be sent out as needed informing the public of OHV opportunities and 

restrictions. Signs will be posted where appropriate. 

• After completion of the transportation management plan, maps and brochures will be available to 

the public at the Coos Bay District Offi ce illustrating designations, describing specific restrictions, 

and defining opportunities. 

Process for Selecting a Final Road and Trail Network 

Route designations have been completed for the New River ACEC and the Blue Ridge OHV Emphasis 

Area. Final route designations for the rest of the district will be accomplished in a comprehensive, 

interdisciplinary travel and transportation management plan scheduled to be complete no later than fi ve 

years after completion of the RMP revision. 

G – 4
 
Appendix G - Recreation 

The BLM’s geo-database will provide information for identifying roads and trails for both motorized and 

non-motorized activities. On-the-ground inventories will be conducted if a reasonable determination 

can not be made using remote-sensing techniques. Proposed designations will be analyzed through 

public scoping and a NEPA analysis. Amendments to the designated system will be considered during the 

transportation management planning process. 

Road and Trail Construction and Maintenance Standards 

Construction and maintenance will be done in accordance with the standards in BLM Manual H-9114-1 

and other professional sources. 

Blue Ridge OHV Emphasis Area 

Acres: 1,609 

OHV Designation: 

Limited to designated roads and trails 

Niche: Offers a multiple-use, single-track trail riding experience for hikers, equestrians, mountain bikers, 

and motorcycle riders. 

Management Guidelines 

• The single-track trail system is available to Class III (motorcycles) vehicles with Oregon ATV 

permits and all non-motorized modes of travel. 

• Motorized, mechanized, and equestrian use is prohibited between December and April to prevent 

excessive damage to the trail tread when soil moisture conditions are high. Motorized use on the 

trail system may be restricted during summer months due to fi re hazard conditions. 

Process for Ongoing Public Collaboration/Outreach 

The principal venue for public collaboration on the trail system is through local partnership relationships. 

A printed trail map is available to the public at the Coos Bay District office and on the Coos Regional Trail 

Partnership webpage. The trail system is marked on the ground with regulatory and directional signage.
 

Process for Selecting a Final Road and Trail Network 

Route designations were completed through the Blue Ridge Multiple Use Trail System environmental 

assessment (EA OR-125-98-18). Adaptive management will be used to adjust the system for commercial 

timber production demands, user needs and resource protection. These modifications will be accomplished 

in collaboration with trail partners and users, and through amendments to the Blue Ridge Trail system plan 

and an environmental assessment. 

Road and Trail Construction and Maintenance Standards 

Construction and maintenance will be done in accordance with the design features identified in the 

environmental assessment, standards in BLM Manual H-9114-1, and other professional sources. Trail 

maintenance will be a priority within this OHV emphasis area to ensure a quality riding experience for trail 

users and to conserve natural resource values. 

G – 5
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Planning Frameworks for Special Recreation 

Management Areas 

This section presents management guidelines for special recreation management areas in the Coos Bay BLM 

District. 

Coos Bay Shorelands 

Primary Market Strategy: Community 

Niche: Access for ocean, coastal, and bay-front dependent recreation activities. 

Management Objectives: 

• Promote awareness of and appreciation for the many resource values and recreational 

opportunities, and support a minimum impact land use ethic through educational programs such 

as Leave No Trace and Tread Lightly. 

• Manage the area to provide for a range of recreational opportunities that contribute to meeting 

recreation demand while protecting natural, cultural, and scenic resources. 

• Provide and maintain visitor facilities, services, signage, and programs that are appropriate for the 

area’s recreational opportunity setting that serves to protect the sensitive resources. 

Targeted Outcomes 

Activities: Access to the ocean and bay for clamming, fishing, crabbing, boating, surfing, and wind sports. 

Four-wheel drive and off-highway vehicle touring, hunting, hiking, horseback-riding, mushroom hunting, 

bird watching, dispersed camping. 

Experiences: Developing outdoor skills; experiencing a greater sense of independence, exploring, closeness 

of family, and group affiliation; easy access to natural landscapes; exercise and physical fitness; and an ability 

to utilize natural resources for personal enjoyment. 

Benefits: 

• Psychological – Better mental health; personal development and growth; supporting an outdoororiented lifestyle; and greater freedom from urban living. 

• Household and Community – Greater family bonding; more well-rounded children; enhanced 

lifestyle; and easy access to low-cost recreation opportunities. 

• Economic – Positive contributions to local economic stability; maintenance of community’s 

distinctive recreation-tourism market; and increased desirability as a place to live or retire. 

• Environmental – Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting character; greater community 

ownership of recreation and natural resources; and greater protection of wildlife and plant habitats 

from growth and development. 

Prescribed Setting Character 

Physical: Rural to front/middle country setting comprised of sand dune, wetlands, meadows, shore pine 

uplands, and bay/ocean front beaches. BLM’s developed site includes a boat ramp, a parking lot, restrooms, 

interpretive kiosk, dock, and volunteer host site. 

G – 6
 
Appendix G - Recreation 

Social: Visitor encounters can be high during peak use periods at the boat ramp. Encounters diminish along 

the sand roads and are rare along the non-motorized trail system. 

Administrative: Primarily in the form of fences, gates and posted regulatory signs. Patrolled frequently by 

BLM staff and county and BLM law enforcement officers. 

Activity Planning Framework 

Management: Provide a range of opportunities that contribute to meeting recreation demand while 

protecting resources. Provide and maintain visitor facilities, services, signage, and programs that are 

appropriate for the area’s setting and serve to protect sensitive resources.
 

Marketing: Use information and education to lessen potential conflicts between visitors and manage impacts 

to natural, cultural and scenic resources. 

Monitoring: Monitor visitor satisfaction and recreation-related resource impacts. 

Administrative: Apply administrative actions to maintain a quality recreation experience. 

Dean Creek Elk Viewing Area 

Primary Market Strategy: Community 

Niche: Unparalleled opportunities to view a Roosevelt elk herd in a day-use wildlife observation and 

interpretive site.
 

Management Objectives: 

• Provide safe opportunities for the public to view and study elk, other wildlife and their habitats at 

Dean Creek. 

• Provide high-quality forage for the elk as a means of maintaining herd health and supporting 

public viewing opportunities. 

• Provide facilities and programs that support visitor safety; wildlife viewing; and interpretive, 

educational and passive recreational uses, all of which are compatible with the elk and other 

wildlife that inhabit Dean Creek. 

• Manage visitor use to avoid unacceptable conflicts with, or damage to, wildlife and their habitats. 

Manage visitor use so elk and other wildlife retain their wild instincts and actions, by providing 

them freedom to roam the entire area without human intervention. 

Targeted Outcomes 

Activities: Wildlife viewing, photography, interpretive and educational programs. 

Experiences: Learning more about wildlife and wetlands, enjoying the experience of viewing an elk herd and 

natural landscapes; and physical rest. 

Benefits: 

• Psychological – Personal appreciation and satisfaction; closer relationship with the natural world; 

and improved opportunity to view wildlife close-up. 

• Economic – Positive contributions to regional economic stability; increased local tourism revenue; 

and maintenance of community’s distinctive recreation-tourism character. 

G – 7
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

• Environmental – Retention of rural landscape features and maintenance and enhancement of 

habitat for elk and other wildlife. 

• Prescribed Setting Character 

• Physical : Developed wildlife viewing and interpretive site with paved road and parking lots, a large 

covered interpretive wayside and restrooms. Landscape is rural pastureland and tidally affected 

wetlands and forested islands on the banks of the Umpqua River. 

• Social : Visitors are confined to specified routes and viewing areas at Dean Creek, creating a setting 

with a high density of visitors, especially during peak use periods. 

• Administrative : Most of the property is closed to all public entry, except for the designated viewing 

areas. The area is regularly patrolled by law enforcement, BLM staff and volunteers. Fences and 

gates, posted rules, and no trespassing signs are common. 

Activity Planning Framework 

Management: Continue to provide for a high-quality wildlife viewing and interpretive experience and 

maintain facilities with an emphasis on the rural recreation setting.
 

Marketing: Use information and interpretation to increase visitor awareness of wildlife habitat and wetland 

management. Work closely with the gateway community of Reedsport and other partners in the region in 

marketing and outreach. 

Monitoring: Monitor visitor satisfaction and resource conditions based on stated objectives. 

Administrative: Apply administrative actions to maintain a safe and enjoyable wildlife viewing experience 

while protecting the elk herd from harassment. 

Loon Lake/East Shore 

Primary Market Strategy: Destination 

Niche: Developed overnight camping and access to water-based day use recreation. 

Management Objective: Provide a clean, safe, enjoyable experience for visitors. 

Targeted Outcomes 

Activities: Camping, picnicking, beach activities, access to power boating and interpretive programs. 

Experiences: Family and group affiliation; physical rest; and escape from personal-social pressures. 

Benefits: 

• Personal – Better mental health and health maintenance. 

• Psycho-physiological - Restored body from fatigue. 

• Household and Community – Greater family bonding; opportunity for more well-rounded 

childhood development; learning and passing on of outdoor skills; and reduced social isolation. 

• Economic – Positive contribution to regional economic stability. 

G – 8
 
Appendix G - Recreation 

Prescribed Setting Character 

Physical: Developed recreation site with paved road and parking lot surfaces within a mature Douglas fir 

forest on the shore of a natural lake. Landscaping varies from unmodified forest to urban-like park settings. 

The overall physical setting character is rural. 

Social: High visitor density – accommodates over 850 people within the developed 35 acre campground and 

day use area when at full capacity. 

Administrative: Controlled access entrance station. Regularly patrolled by law enforcement and other 

agency staff. Resident staff during the summer recreation season. Rules are clearly posted throughout the 

park. 

Activity Planning Framework 

Management: Continue to provide for a developed camping and day use experience and associated facilities 

with an emphasis on maintaining a rural recreation setting. 

Marketing: Use visitor information and the reservation system to disperse use and reduce crowding during 

peak periods to enhance the overall visitor experience at Loon Lake. Use information and interpretation to 

lessen visitor conflicts and resource impacts in the recreation area. Inform visitors how their fees are being 

used in the operation of the recreation area and solicit feedback from them on how they would like to see 

their fees used in the future. 

Monitoring: Monitor visitor satisfaction and the natural setting values within the area. 

Administrative: Apply administrative actions as needed to maintain a safe and enjoyable recreation 

experience and to conserve and restore the natural setting at Loon Lake (i.e., permits and fees, visitor 

services, law enforcement, restoration/renovation).
 

New River 

Primary Market Strategy: Community 

Niche: Opportunities to explore undeveloped coastal uplands, river and ocean-front settings for traditional 

recreation uses, resource appreciation, and educational and interpretive programs. 

Management Objectives: 

• Accommodate low-impact recreational use at New River while providing a variety of experience 

opportunities to help meet existing and anticipated demands. 

• Promote awareness and appreciation for New River’s many resource values, especially those 

significant to its Area of Critical Environmental Concern designation. 

• Provide adequate supervision, visitor facilities, services, signage, and programs to protect resources 

and support planned visitor use activities and levels. 

• Provide reasonable access with minimal impact on resources and visitor experiences. 

Targeted Outcomes 

Activities: Access to the ocean and river for fishing, waterfowl hunting, and kayaking, hiking, bird watching, 

photography, nature study, interpretive programs and environmental education. 

Experiences: Learning about and enjoying nature; developing outdoor skills; experiencing independence; 

enjoying the closeness of family and group affiliation; exercising; escaping pressures. 

G – 9
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Benefits: 

• Psychological – Personal development and growth; support of an outdoor-oriented lifestyle; 

improved opportunity to view wildlife; and greater freedom from urban living. 

• Household and Community– Greater family bonding, more well-rounded children; enhanced 

lifestyle; and access to low cost recreation opportunities. 

• Economic – Contributions to local economic stability, maintenance of community’s distinctive 

recreation-tourism market niche; increased desirability as a place to live; and increased property 

values for adjacent landowners. 

• Environmental – Maintenance of distinctive recreation setting; greater community ownership of 

recreation and natural resources; and greater protection of habitats from development. 

Prescribed Setting Character 

Physical: Primarily a rural to front/middle country setting that includes diverse coastal habitats, sand 

dunes and ocean-front beaches. Facilities at Storm Ranch include a learning center, parking lots, restrooms, 

interpretive kiosk, picnic tables and a host site. 

Social: Visitor encounters are highest (10-20 contacts) during peak use periods at Storm Ranch and Floras 

Lake. Encounters diminish significantly on the trail network and river. 

Administrative: Primarily in the form of gates and posted regulatory signs. Area is closed to the public at 

night. Patrolled frequently by BLM staff and law enforcement. Interpretive and environmental education 

programs are used to increase awareness and to lessen impacts. 

Activity Planning Framework 

Management: Provide opportunities that contribute to meeting recreation demand while protecting 

resources. Provide and maintain visitor facilities, services, signage, and programs.
 

Marketing: Use information and education to lessen potential visitor conflicts and resource impacts. 

Exercise discretion in promoting the recreation opportunities to minimize crowding.
 

Monitoring: Monitor visitor satisfaction and recreation-related resource impacts. 

Administrative: Apply administrative actions to maintain a quality recreation experience compatible with 

the appropriate setting and to protect sensitive resources. 

Sixes River 

Primary Market Strategy: Destination 

Niche: Developed camping, water based day-use activities, and recreational gold mining. 

Management Objectives: 

• Provide the facilities, services, and administrative designations needed to manage the activities 

associated with recreational use. 

• Manage existing recreation sites consistent with Roaded Natural, to Roaded Modified management 

classes. Continue to provide for a range of recreation opportunities in the area, including individual 

to large-sized group camping and picnicking experiences within the Edson Creek Recreation Site. 

G – 10
 
Appendix G - Recreation 

Targeted Outcomes 

Activities: Camping, picnicking, fishing, social gatherings, swimming, non-motorized boating, recreational 

gold panning and sluicing. 

Experiences: Family and group affiliation; physical rest; escape from personal-social pressures; ability to 

collect and utilize natural resources for personal enjoyment (e.g., fishing and recreational mining). 

Benefits: 

• Personal - Better mental health and health maintenance, greater self reliance, stronger ties with 

family and friends. 

• Psycho-physiological - Restored body from fatigue. 

• Household and Community - Greater family bonding, opportunity for more well-rounded 

childhood development, learning and passing on of outdoor skills, reduced social isolation. 

• Economic - Positive contribution to regional economic stability. 

Prescribed Setting Character 

Physical: Developed recreation sites along the banks of the Sixes River, varying from an unmodified alder 

and Douglas fir forest to a rural park setting. 

Social: High visitor density in the developed campgrounds when operating at peak capacity. During the offseason visitor contacts can be less than 10 per day. 

Administrative: Regularly patrolled by law enforcement and other agency staff. Both campgrounds are fee 

areas and rules are clearly posted throughout the recreation area. 

Activity Planning Framework 

Management: Continue to provide for a developed camping and day use experience and associated facilities 

with an emphasis on maintaining a rural recreation setting. 

Marketing: Use information and interpretation to lessen visitor conflicts and resource impacts in the 

recreation area. Inform visitors how fees are being used in the operation of the recreation area and solicit 

feedback from them on how they would like to see their fees used in the future. 

Monitoring: Monitor visitor satisfaction and recreation-related resource impacts based on the SRMA 

objectives.
 

Administrative: Apply administrative actions to maintain a safe and enjoyable recreation experience, and 

to conserve and restore the natural setting of the Sixes River (e.g., permits and fees, visitor services, law 

enforcement, restoration/renovation). 

Tioga 

Primary Market Strategy: Undeveloped 

Niche: Undeveloped Coast Range setting for traditional forest-based recreation activities. 

Management Objectives: A Special Recreation Management Area management plan has not been developed 

to establish management objectives for this area. 

G – 11
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Targeted Outcomes 

Activities: Driving for pleasure, big game hunting, fishing, mushroom gathering, camping in developed 

campgrounds, primitive dispersed camping, hiking, mountain biking/bicycling. 

Experiences: Developing skills and abilities; experiencing a greater independence; exploring and enjoying 

nature; utilizing resources for personal enjoyment and physical fitness; escaping pressures. 

Benefits: 

• Psychological –Better mental health, personal development and growth, greater self reliance, 

improved outdoor skills and self confidence, stronger ties with family, friends, and the natural 

world, a more outdoor- oriented lifestyle, enhanced sense of personal freedom. 

• Psycho-physiological – Improved physical fitness and health, restored body from fatigue. 

• Household and Community – Greater family bonding, reduced social isolation, passing on outdoor 

skills and values, more well-rounded children, enhanced lifestyle. 

• Economic – Access to low cost outdoor recreation experiences; positive contribution to local 

economic stability; and maintenance of the region’s distinctive recreation market niche and 

character. 

Prescribed Setting Character 

Physical: Developed recreation sites include: Park Creek Campground, Burnt Mountain Recreation Site, 

and the Doerner Fir Trail. The area contains tracts of substantially unmodified forest landscapes in the 

Cherry Creek Research Natural Area and Wilderness Instant Study Area, the Tioga Creek Area of Critical 

Environmental Concern and the China Wall Area of Critical Environmental Concern. 

Social: Social encounters are very low except the Park Creek Campground during the peak of summer 

and fall hunting season. Visitors may encounter log trucks on the roadways and other activities commonly 

associated with commercial forestry practices on public and private land. 

Administrative: Very few administrative controls except for gates and some regulatory signs. Infrequent 

patrol by law enforcement and other BLM employees involved in visitor services. 

Activity Planning Framework 

Management: Provide a developed camping experience at Park Creek and associated facilities with an 

emphasis on maintaining a front country recreation setting. Maintain existing trails and evaluate the 

conversion of closed roads for additional hiking, mountain biking, equestrian, and off-highway vehicle 

opportunities. Develop new trails to connect with existing opportunities in the area. 

Marketing: Use information and interpretation to lessen visitor conflicts and resource impacts with an 

emphasis on low impact recreation practices. Provide information to visitors about forest management 

practices, stream restoration, and wildlife habitat management efforts. 

Monitoring: Monitor visitor satisfaction and recreation-related resource impacts. 

Administrative: Apply administrative actions to maintain a safe and enjoyable recreation experience within 

the Park Creek Campground and to conserve the middle country and backcountry settings of the area. Keep 

administrative controls to the minimum necessary to meet objectives in order to preserve the primitive 

setting valued by visitors. 

G – 12
 
Glossary 

Glossary – 1
 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Glossary – 2
 
Glossary

3P fall, buck, and scale sampling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A sampling method that determines the volume and value of 

merchantable timber. The method starts with visual estimation of 

a stand using the 3P sampling method (i.e., PPP, or, probability 

proportional to prediction), which operates under the assumption that 

the probability of a tree being sampled is proportional to its predicted 

occurrence in a stand. The estimation is verified by cutting down a 

sampled tree (fall), cutting it into merchantable log lengths (buck), and 

measuring the logs (scale) noting indicators for defects and log grades. 

For managed second-growth stands, 3P sampling is generally used to 

develop volume tables from which stand volumes may be extrapolated. 

For uneven-aged stands, typically containing larger and often more 

defective timber, 3P sampling is useful in determining the net volume 

(recovery). 

303(d) Water Quality Listing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impaired waters that do not meet water quality standards, identified 

by DEQ, as required by the Clean Water Act. 

acre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A measure of surface land area in U.S. customary units that is 43,560 

square feet, which is 1/640 of a square mile (or approximately 0.4 

hectares). If square, it is nearly 209 feet on each side. 

active stream channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The inundated area of bed and banks of a stream, from larger 

streamflow of one to two years. 

activity fuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Debris (wood chips, bark, branches, limbs, logs, or stumps) left on the 

ground after management actions, such as logging, pruning, thinning, 

or brush cutting, versus debris left after storms or fires. 

adaptive management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A forest management methodology that continually monitors, 

evaluates, and adjusts decisions and management actions to improve 

implementation and to ensure that the goals and objectives of resource 

management plans are being met. 

Adaptive Management Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Northwest Forest Plan term that denotes a land use allocation (or 

landscape unit) whose lands are designated for development and 

for testing technical and social approaches for achieving desired 

ecological, economic, and other social objectives. 

adverse modification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An Endangered Species Act term that is not specifically defined by the 

act but is generally accepted to denote a direct or indirect alteration of 

habitat that appreciably diminishes the value of an area with respect 

to the survival, or in some instances the recovery, of a listed species. 

In most instances, this standard is considered the same as, or is nearly 

identical, to the jeopardy standard. 

age classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A system that categorizes trees, forests, stands, or forest types by 

intervals of years. Age classifications differ around the U.S. by forest 

type (wet, dry, evergreen, deciduous, or succulent). For this analysis, 

the interval is usually 10-year increments. 

aggregated retention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . See variable-retention harvest system. 

Glossary – 3 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

allowable sale quantity/annual productive capacity . . . . . . These terms are synonymous. The timber yield that a forest can 

produce continuously under the intensity of management outlined in 

the RMP from those lands allocated for permanent forest production. 

alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One of several proposed management actions that have been studied 

and found to meet the goals and objectives of a project’s purpose and 

need and, as a result, is suitable to aid decision-making. 

anadromous fish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fish that are born and reared in freshwater, move to the ocean to grow 

and mature, and return to freshwater to reproduce. Includes species 

such as salmon and steelhead. Also see salmonid. 

analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The scientific evaluation of the environmental impacts of proposed 

planning decisions. The BLM employs many types of analysis (e.g., 

surface, linear, raster, contiguity, and topological overlay) with a 

variety of data sets (e.g., inventory and GIS) and tools (e.g., physical, 

quantitative, data, and spatial modeling). 

analytical assumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A judgmental decision that is based on the science and relationships 

of natural systems assumed to be true and from which conclusions 

can be drawn to supply the missing values, relationships, or societal 

preferences needed for proceeding with an analysis of alternatives. 

angular canopy density. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A measure of shade provided by riparian vegetation. It is the density 

of the canopy, expressed as a percent, measured along the path of 

incoming solar radiation between the sun and a stream. 

animal unit month (AUM). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The amount of forage necessary to sustain one cow (or its equivalent) 

for one month. 

annual productive capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An O&C Act term denoting the volume of timber that is determined 

will grow in one year in a given area. Also see allowable sale quantity 

(ASQ), offer, and sustained yield capacity. 

Aquatic Conservation Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Northwest Forest Plan methodology designed to restore and 

maintain the ecological health of watersheds and aquatic ecosystems, 

consisting of four components: riparian reserves, key watersheds, 

watershed analysis, and watershed restoration. 

aquatic habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Habitat for vertebrate and invertebrate wildlife species and vascular 

and non-vascular plants occurring in free water (e.g. lakes, ponds, 

streams, rivers, springs and seeps). 

area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A generic forestry term that refers to the surface land included within 

specific boundaries and usually allocated for a specific purpose, such 

as a late-successional management area, a timber management area, 

a traditional use area, a recreational use area, or a wilderness area. 

Contrast with block. 

Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) . . . . . Land where special management attention is needed to protect life, to 

provide safety from natural hazards, or to prevent irreparable damage 

to important values (historic, cultural, or scenic), resources (fish and 

wildlife), or processes (natural systems). 

Glossary – 4 
Glossary

Area of Mutual Interest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A defined mapped area, identified by industry, of potential petroleum 

development. 

assessment area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A subdivision of a sustained yield unit (BLM district) that has been 

divided by physiographic provinces. 

at-risk species. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Species that are determined by a detailed assessment to be in danger of 

becoming locally or completely extinct. 

at-risk community. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A group of homes or structures that exist within the vicinity of federal 

lands or a wildland/urban interface for which a significant threat to 

human life or property exists as a result of a wildland fire. 

authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The right and power to make decisions and give orders such as the 

United States Congress exerts when passing legislation (e.g. the O&C 

Act and the Endangered Species Act). 

awarded timber sales. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A sale where the government has accepted a bid from a qualified high 

bidder, thereby binding the government and granting specific rights to 

the purchaser. 

backcountry byways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A road segment designated as part of the National Scenic Byway 

System. 

basal area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The cross-sectional area of a single stem, of all stems of a species in a 

stand, or of all plants in a stand (including the bark) that is measured 

at breast height (about 4.5 feet up from the ground) for larger plants 

(like trees) or measured at ground level for smaller plants. 

baseline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The starting point for the analysis of environmental consequences, 

often referred to as the Affected Environment. This starting point 

may be the condition at a point in time (e.g., when inventory data 

is collected) or the average of a set of data collected over a specified 

number of years. Also see analysis, environmental consequences, and 

inventory data. 

beneficial use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In general, any reasonable use of a resource for a purpose consistent 

with the laws and best interests of the people of a state. In water use 

law, such uses include, but are not limited to: instream, out of stream, 

and ground water uses; domestic, municipal, and industrial water 

supplies; mining, irrigation, and livestock watering; fish and aquatic 

life; wildlife watering; fishing and water contact recreation; aesthetics 

and scenic attraction; hydropower; and commercial navigation. 

Best Management Practices (BMPs). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BMPs are defined as methods, measures, or practices selected on 

the basis of site-specific conditions to ensure that water quality will 

be maintained at its highest practicable level. BMPs include, but are 

not limited to, structural and nonstructural controls, operations, 

and maintenance procedures. BMPs can be applied before, during, 

and after pollution-producing activities to reduce or eliminate the 

introduction of pollutants into receiving waters (40 CFR 130.2, EPA 

Water Quality Standards Regulation). 

Glossary – 5 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

biological assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A biological assessment is a document that evaluates potential effects 

of a proposed action to listed and proposed species and designated 

and proposed critical habitat and determines whether any such species 

or habitats are likely to be adversely affected by the action. It is used 

in determining whether formal consultation or conferencing with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries Service is 

necessary (50 CFR 402.12[a] ) 

biological opinion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An opinion by the U. S, Fish and Wildlife Service or the National 

Marine Fisheries Service as to whether or not a federal action is 

likely or not to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species, or 

would result in the destruction of or adverse modification of critical 

habitat. The opinion may contain reasonable and prudent alternatives, 

a statement of anticipated take of listed animals, and conservation 

recommendations for listed plants. 

biomass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unmerchantable and waste plant materials used as a source of 

renewable combustible fuel. Also includes non-sawlog material 

ground up into fiber and used in secondary wood products. 

block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A term that denotes an area of land that has been approved for 

special management, such as a northern spotted owl reserve or a fire 

suppression area. Contrast with area. 

board foot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A unit of measure for unfinished solid wood used by the lumber 

industry that is typically expressed as bf or bd. ft. and equals the 

volume contained in a 1-inch thick, 12-inch long, and 12-inch wide 

board. 

Bureau Strategic Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A special status species category established by the Oregon/ 

Washington BLM that includes animal, plant and fungi species that 

are of concern in the two states. The special status species policy 

(BLM 6840) does not apply to these species, and no analysis of them 

is required in NEPA documents. Field units are required to collect 

occurrence field data and maintain records. Also see Bureau sensitive 

species. 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A federal agency within the U.S. Department of the Interior that is 

responsible for administering 261 million surface acres of federally 

owned lands in accordance with all applicable laws to sustain the 

health, diversity, and productivity of those lands. Most of the acreage 

is in Alaska and the western states. 

Bureau Sensitive Species. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A special status species category established by the BLM that includes 

those plant and animal species eligible for status as federally listed, 

federal candidate, state listed, or state candidate (plant) species; on 

List 1 of the Oregon Natural Heritage Database or approved for this 

category by the BLM state director; or included under agency species 

conservation policies. Also see Bureau strategic species. 

Glossary – 6 
Glossary

candidate species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Plants and animals for which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has 

sufficient information on their biological status and threats to propose 

them as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA), but for which development of a proposed listing regulation is 

precluded by other higher priority listing activities. 

canopy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The more or less continuous cover of branches and foliage formed 

collectively by adjacent trees and other woody species in a forest stand. 

Where significant height differences occur between trees within a 

stand, formation of a multiple canopy (multi-layered) condition can 

result. 

canopy closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The ground area covered by the crowns of trees or woody vegetation as 

delimited by the vertical projection of crown perimeter and commonly 

expressed as a percent of total ground area. 

catchment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An area drained by a stream. For research, a very small experimental 

watershed, often times less than 100 acres. 

channel migration zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The extent of lateral movement of a river across a floodplain toward 

the convex side of an original curve. 

checkerboard land ownership pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A land ownership pattern in which square-mile sections of federal 

lands are typically intermixed, on the basis of alternating sections, 

with adjoining private lands. The O&C lands of western Oregon 

are an example of checkerboard ownership. This ownership pattern 

resulted from the revestment back to the federal government of lands 

granted by the federal government to early railroad companies. The 

checkerboard ownership pattern of the O&C lands creates additional 

access, management, and perception issues. Also see O&C Act. 

clearcut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A timber harvesting method that removes essentially all trees in 

an area, whether merchantable or not, producing a fully exposed 

microclimate for development of a new age class. 

coarse woody debris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . That portion of trees that has naturally fallen or been cut and left in 

the woods. Usually refers to pieces at least 20 inches in diameter. Also 

see coarse woody debris classes. 

coarse woody debris classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . There are four classes used to describe coarse woody debris. The 

classes range from Class I (which has the least decay, intact bark, and a 

hard log) to Class IV (i.e., the coarse woody debris has decayed to the 

point of nearly being incorporated into the forest floor). 

commercial forest land base. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forest lands declared suitable for producing timber and having a 

minimum level of productivity of 20 cubic feet/acre/year. Contrast 

with harvest land base. 

commercial thinning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Any type of thinning producing merchantable material at least equal 

to the value of the direct cost of harvesting. See thinning. 

Congressionally Reserved Areas 

(Congressional Reserves). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Areas established by an Act of Congress or Executive Order, such 

as national parks, wild and scenic rivers, national recreation areas, 

wilderness, and national monuments. 

Glossary – 7 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

connectivity block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Northwest Forest Plan term denoting a corridor that links areas of 

northern spotted owl habitat. Contrast with connectivity/diversity 

block. 

connectivity / diversity block. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A subdivision of the matrix land use allocation in the current 

Resource Management Plans that serves as a corridor for linking 

late-successional and old-growth forests to facilitate the movement, 

feeding, and breeding of late-successional and old-growth species. 

These blocks are managed to maintain between 25 and 30 percent of 

late-successional forest within them. Contrast with connectivity block. 

conservation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conservation, when applied to special status species, is the methods 

and procedures used to improve the plant and animal species biology, 

improve their habitat condition, and reduce threats to their continued 

existence. 

conservation agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A non-binding document of agreement between agencies that outlines 

conservation goals necessary to reduce, eliminate, or mitigate specific 

threats to species at risk, and provides general guidance on species 

management. 

conservation strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A management plan for a species, group of species, or ecosystem that 

prescribes standards and guidelines that if implemented provide a 

high likelihood that the species, groups of species, or ecosystem, with 

its full complement of species and processes, will continue to exist 

well-distributed throughout a planning area. 

Consultation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A formal review between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or 

National Marine fisheries Service and another federal agency when it 

is determined that an action by the agency may affect critical habitat 

or a species that has been listed as threatened or endangered to ensure 

that the agency’s action does not jeopardize a listed species or destroy 

or adversely modify critical habitat. 

cooperators and cooperating agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Those individuals and agencies that provide qualified information 

to a federal agency, such as the BLM, to use in formulating resource 

management actions and analyzing environmental consequences. 

The Council on Environmental Quality regulations that implement 

requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act define a 

cooperating agency as any agency that has jurisdiction by law or 

special expertise for proposals that are covered by the National 

Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1501.6). BLM planning regulations 

[43 CFR 1610.3-15(b)] further provide that eligible Federal agencies, 

state and local governments, and federally recognized Indian tribes 

may also participate as cooperating agencies. 

Coos Bay Wagon Road (CBWR) lands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The public lands that were granted to the Southern Oregon Company 

for construction of a military road, but subsequently revested by the 

United States and later incorporated into the O&C Act. 

Glossary – 8 
Glossary

corridor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A strip of land that links areas in a fragmented landscape to 

facilitate the passage of animals, plants, people, energy, or materials 

between habitat or service areas. Examples are biological, recreation, 

transportation, and utility corridors. Biological corridors are reserved 

from substantial disturbance. Also see connectivity block and 

connectivity/ diversity block. 

critical habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An Endangered Species Act term denoting a specified geographic area 

occupied by a federally listed species, and on which the physical and 

biological features are found that are essential to the conservation and 

recovery of that species and that may require special management or 

protection. 

crown. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The upper part of a tree that has live branches and foliage. 

crown bulk density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A measure of the fuel in a forest’s canopy that is usually calculated by 

dividing the canopy volume by the weight of the needles, leaves, and 

smaller branches (or calculated using the height-to-crown base, tree 

height, and basal area values). Contrast with crown density. 

crown density. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A measure of the density of a tree’s crown that is calculated from the 

amount, compactness, and depth of the foliage in the tree’s crown. 

Contrast with crown bulk density. 

crown fire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fire that moves through the crowns of adjacent trees independent 

of any surface fire. Crown fires can often move faster and ahead of 

ground fires. 

culmination of mean annual increment (CMAI) . . . . . . The age in the growth cycle of a tree or stand at which the mean 

annual increment (MAI) for volume is at its maximum. At 

culmination, MAI equals the periodic annual increment (PAI). 

cumulative effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The impact on the environment that results from incremental impacts 

of an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions regardless of which agency or person 

undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from 

individually minor, but collectively significant, actions taking place 

over a period of time. 

decompaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mechanical ripping and/or tillage of roadbeds, landings and other 

compacted areas for the purposes of increasing infiltration and 

aeration. 

density management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The cutting or killing of trees to increase spacing for promoting the 

acceleration of the growth of remaining trees, improvement of stand 

vigor, or attainment of late-successional characteristics. Also see 

thinning, precommercial thinning, and commercial thinning. 

determination of NEPA adequacy (DNA) . . . . . . . . . . . . An interim step in BLM’s internal analysis process, which documents 

that a proposed action is adequately analyzed in an existing 

environmental impact statement [EIS] or environmental assessment 

[EA]. Where applicable, the determination also documents 

conformance with an approved land use plan. (BLM NEPA Handbook, 

516 DM 11). 

Glossary – 9 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

diameter at breast height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The diameter of the stem of a tree measured at 4.5 feet above the 

ground level on the uphill side of the stem. Also see quadratic mean 

diameter. 

dispersal habitat (spotted owl). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forest habitat that allows northern spotted owls to move (disperse) 

across the landscape; typically characterized by forest stands with 

average tree diameters of greater than 11 inches, and conifer overstory 

trees having closed canopies (greater than 40 percent canopy closure) 

with open space beneath the canopy to allow owls to fly. 

dispersed retention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . See variable-retention harvest system. 

disturbance (natural) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A force that causes significant change in structure and/or composition 

through natural events such as fire, flood, wind, and earthquake, or 

through mortality caused by insect or disease outbreaks. 

disturbance, stand replacement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A force that removes most or all existing trees in a forest stand 

through natural events such as fire, flood, earthquake, or mortality 

caused by insect or disease outbreaks. 

dominant use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A land use that is the primary purpose for the land use designation; 

for instance, wildlife habitat on National Wildlife Refuges or timber 

production on O&C lands. Contrast with multiple use. 

effective shade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The proportion of direct beam solar radiation reaching a stream 

surface to total daily solar radiation. 

envelope curve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A line drawn on a figure with dependent and independent variables 

for a collection of hydrologic studies, showing the best fit of the extent 

of maximum response. 

environmental consequences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The direct, indirect and cumulative effects of a proposed action or 

alternative on existing conditions in the environment in which the 

action(s) would occur. Also see baseline. 

environmental impact statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A detailed document, required under the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969, of a federal project’s environmental consequences, 

including adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided, 

alternatives to the proposed action, the relationship between local 

short-term uses and long-term productivity, and any irreversibly or 

irretrievable commitment of resource. 

equivalent clearcut area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Method of estimating changes in streamflow response from the 

amount and distribution of forest cover in a watershed. 

even-aged management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A silvicultural system that creates forest stands primarily comprised of 

a single age or having a very narrow range of ages. 

even-aged stand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A stand of trees comprised of a single age class in which the range of 

tree ages is usually ± 20% of rotation. 

Glossary – 10 
Glossary

evolutionary significant unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A population or group of populations considered “distinct,” and hence 

a “species” for purposes of the Endangered Species Act, representing 

an evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) of the biological species. A 

population must satisfy two criteria to be considered an ESU. It must 

be reproductively isolated from other conspecific population units, 

and it must represent an important component in the evolutionary 

legacy of the species. Isolation does not have to be absolute, but must 

be strong enough to permit evolutionarily important differences to 

accrue in different population units. The second criterion is met if the 

population contributes substantially to the ecological/genetic diversity 

of the species as a whole. (NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS F/ 

NWC-194). 

facies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A characteristic of a rock unit that reflects a common origin or time. 

fifth-field watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One of the classifications of watersheds used by the United States 

Geological Survey that identifies some of the smallest watersheds and 

is useful for assessing water-related issues; generally 20 to 200 square 

miles in size. For details about the classification of drainage areas, see 

http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/huc.html. Also see watershed. 

fine sediment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fine-grained soil material, less than 2mm in size, normally deposited 

by water, but in some cases by wind (aeolian) or gravity (dry ravel). 

fire control, direct . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Any treatment applied directly to burning fuel, such as wetting, 

smothering, or chemically quenching the fire or by physically 

separating the burning from unburned fuel. 

fire control, prescribed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Any fire ignited by management actions to meet specific objectives. 

A written, approved prescribed fire plan must exist, and NEPA 

requirements (where applicable) must be met prior to ignition. 

forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An ecosystem characterized by stands of trees varying in 

characteristics such as species composition, structure, age class, and 

associated processes, and commonly including meadows, streams, fish, 

and wildlife. 

flood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Streamflow overtopping streambanks, or rising water that covers land 

not normally under water. 

floodplain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Level lowland bordering a stream or river onto which the flow spreads 

at flood stage. 

forage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . All browse and herbaceous matter available to grazing animals, 

including wildlife and domestic livestock. 

Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team 

(FEMAT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The 1993 presidentially assigned team of scientists, researchers, and 

technicians from seven federal agencies that created the report that 

was used as the basis for the Northwest Forest Plan. 

forest land. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Land at least 10 percent stocked by forest trees of any size, and 

including land that formerly had such tree cover and that will be 

naturally or artificially regenerated. 

Glossary – 11 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Forest Operations Inventory (FOI). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An intensive inventory that provides managers with information 

regarding the age, species, stand location, size, silvicultural needs, 

and recommended treatment of stands based on individual stand 

conditions and productivity. 

fuel loading. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The dry weight of all accumulated live and dead woody and 

herbaceous material on the forest floor that is available for 

combustion, and which poses a fire hazard. 

genetic gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Average improvement of a specific trait in a population of progeny 

over the average of the parental population (for example, height 

growth increase). 

green tree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A live tree. 

green tree retention. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A stand management practice in which live trees are left within 

harvest units to provide a legacy of habitat components over the next 

management cycle. 

group selection harvest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . See selection cutting. 

growth and yield modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Simulated projections of forest stand growth and development, from 

which timber volume estimates and other stand attributes expected 

to be produced per unit area under a certain set of conditions are 

derived. Also see modeling. 

forest habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An area containing the forest vegetation with the age class, species 

composition, structure, sufficient area, and adequate food source to 

meet some or all of the life needs (such as foraging, roosting, nesting, 

breeding habitat for northern spotted owls) of specific species. 

habitat-capable forests (spotted owl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forested stands that are capable of developing into suitable habitat 

specifically for the northern spotted owl. 

harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The process of onsite cutting and removing of merchantable trees from 

a forested area. 

harvest land base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Those lands that are available for timber harvesting on a programmed 

sustained basis. Generally, a harvest land base does not include 

managed or other reserved lands, nonforested lands, or areas that the 

timber production capability classification inventory has determined 

are not capable of sustaining timber production. Also see timber 

production capability classification. 

hydrophilic vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vegetation having a strong affinity for water. 

hydroregion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An area of similar climate and stream runoff processes. 

incidental take . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An Endangered Species Act term denoting the taking of a species 

that is listed as threatened or endangered inadvertently, rather than 

purposely, while carrying out otherwise lawful activity. Also see take. 

Glossary – 12 
Glossary

incorporated by reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Documents referenced in the final environmental impact statement 

that are provided by the individual subject matter experts, are 

maintained as a part of the administrative record housed at a 

centralized location, and are available upon request. 

intensively managed timber stands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forest stands that are managed to obtain a high level of timber volume 

and quality per unit area by using growth-enhancing practices, such as 

precommercial thinning, commercial thinning, and fertilization. 

intrinsic potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A stream’s inherent ability to provide high-quality habitat for 

salmonids. 

inventory data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Information collected by the use of objective sampling methods 

designed to quantify the spatial distribution, composition, and rates of 

change of forest parameters within specified levels of precision. Note: 

Inventories may be made of all forest resources including trees and 

other vegetation, fish and wildlife, etc. Also see baseline. 

jeopardy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The endangerment of the continued existence of a species that is listed 

as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Also 

a finding made through consultation by a federal agency under the 

Endangered Species Act regarding an action proposed by the agency 

that may cause such endangerment. 

key watershed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Northwest Forest Plan term that denotes a watershed that contains 

habitat for potentially threatened species, stocks of anadromous 

salmonids, or other potentially threatened fish, or is an area of highquality water and fish habitat. Also see watershed. 

land use allocation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A designation for a use that is allowed, restricted, or prohibited for a 

particular area of land, such as the matrix, adaptive management, latesuccessional reserve, or critical habitat land use allocations. 

landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A broad expanse of terrain, up to the watershed scale of 10,000 to 

20,000 acres, which spans several ecosystems irrespective of ownership 

or other political boundaries. 

late-successional forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A forest that is in its mature stage and contains a diversity of structural 

characteristics, such as live trees, snags, woody debris, and a patchy, 

multi-layered canopy. 

Late-Successional Management Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A designated area outside of the harvest land base that is actively 

managed to protect or enhance conditions of late-successional forest 

base. 

Late-Successional Reserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Northwest Forest Plan term that denotes a land use allocation 

and has been reserved from programmed timber harvesting and 

designated to maintain existing or future mature old-growth, or latesuccessional habitat. 

load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The amount of material entering a system, such as point source and 

nonpoint source pollutants. Typically measured as pounds per day and 

significant in relation to the volume and circulation of the water or air 

mass in question. Also see point source and nonpoint source. 

Glossary – 13 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

long term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A period of time used as an analytical timeframe; starts more than 10 

years after implementation of a resource management plan, depending 

on the resource being analyzed. Also see short term. 

mass wasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The sudden or slow dislodgement and downslope movement of rock, 

soil, and organic materials. 

Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Northwest Forest Plan term that denotes a land use allocation for 

federal lands located outside of reserves, withdrawn areas, and latesuccessional areas. For the purpose of this final environmental impact 

statement, this term applies only to the No Action Alternative. 

mature stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Generally begins as tree growth rates stop increasing (after 

culmination of mean annual increment), and as tree mortality shifts 

from density-dependent mortality to density-independent mortality. 

mean annual increment (MAI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The total cumulative quantity produced over time of some attribute of 

a tree or stand growth (for example, wood volume divided by the total 

age of the tree or stand). 

merchantable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trees or stands having the size, quality and condition suitable for 

marketing under a given economic condition, even if not immediately 

accessible for logging 

minerals, leasable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Generally found in bedded deposits and include oil, gas, coal, 

chlorides, sulfates, carbonates, borates, silicates, and nitrates of 

potassium (potash) or sodium and related products; sulfur; phosphate 

and its associated and related minerals; asphalt; and gilsonite. 

minerals, locatable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Includes both metallic minerals (gold, silver, lead, copper, zinc, nickel, 

etc.) and nonmetallic minerals (fluorspar, mica, certain limestone and 

gypsum, tantalum, heavy minerals in placer form and gemstones) in 

land belonging to the United States that are open to citizens of the 

United States for exploration, discovery, and location which conveys 

the exclusive right to extract the locatable minerals upon receiving all 

required authorizations in accordance with regulations at 43 CFR 3802 

for lands in wilderness review and 3809 for other public lands. 

minerals, salable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Include but are not limited to: petrified wood and common varieties of 

sand, stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, cinder, clay, and rock. 

modeling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A scientific method that operates by a structured set of rules and 

procedures to simulate current conditions and predict future 

conditions. Also see analysis. 

multi-layered canopy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forest stands with two or more distinct tree layers in the canopy. 

Glossary – 14 
Glossary

multiple use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Federal Land Policy and Management Act term that denotes “... the 

management of the public lands and their various resource values so 

that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the present 

and future needs of the American people; making the most judicious 

use of the land for some or all of these resources or related services 

over areas large enough to provide sufficient latitude for periodic 

adjustments in use to conform to changing needs and conditions; the 

use of some land for less than all of the resources; a combination of 

balanced and diverse resource uses that takes into account the longterm needs of future generations for renewable and nonrenewable 

resources, including, but not limited to, recreation, range, timber, 

minerals, watershed, wildlife and fish, and natural scenic, scientific 

and historical values; and harmonious and coordinated management 

of the various resources without permanent impairment of the 

productivity of the land and the quality of the environment with 

consideration being given to the relative values of the resources and 

not necessarily to the combination of uses that will give the greatest 

economic return or the greatest unit output.” (U.S. Code, Title 43, 

Chapter 35, Subchapter I, § 1702 (c)) Contrast with dominant use. 

National Marine Fisheries Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A federal agency under the United States Department of Commerce 

that is responsible for working with others to conserve, protect, and 

enhance anadromous fish and their habitats. 

natural fire regime class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A general classification of how fire would behave over time in the 

absence of human intervention. 

noncomformity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A physical expression of a period of time of non-deposition between 

rock units, usually indicated by erosion characteristics, bed tilting, or 

missing strata of an intervening time period. 

nonpoint source pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Water or air pollutants where the source of the pollutant is not 

readily identified and is diffuse, such as the runoff from urban areas, 

agricultural lands, or forest lands. Also see point source. 

Northwest Forest Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A 1994 common management approach for the 19 national forests and 

7 BLM districts located in the Pacific Northwest ecological region and 

jointly approved by the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of 

the Interior. 

nutrient cycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Circulation of elements (such as carbon or nitrogen) between 

vegetation/organic material and soil, water and air. 

ordinary high water line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fluctuations of water in a stream or waterbody, from higher runoff of 

one or two years, that establish a line on the shore which is typically 

identified by physical characteristics. 

overstory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . That portion of trees forming the uppermost canopy layer in a forest 

stand and that consists of more than one distinct layer. 

partial harvest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . For the purpose of defining management action in Alternative 

3, partial harvest is a timber harvesting method that removes a 

substantial portion of the stand basal area (50-70%) on a harvest 

interval that mimics the historic average return interval for a moderate 

or mixed-severity fire. Glossary – 15 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

periodic annual increment (PAI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The difference in stand volume at two successive measurements, 

divided by the number of years between measurements. PAI is an 

approximation to current annual increment, which is not directly 

measurable. 

petroleum shows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A visual appearance of hydrocarbon (gas, oil, asphalt, etc.) in an 

exploration well, water well, coal prospect, natural spring, or seep. 

petroleum system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A relationship of source rock and the resulting petroleum 

accumulation. 

physiographic province . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A region of the landscape with distinctive geographical and biological 

features. When physiographic provinces subdivide sustained yield 

units (i.e., BLM districts), assessment areas are created. 

plan conformance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The determination that a management action is consistent with 

the terms, conditions, decisions, and is within the anticipated 

environmental consequences, of an approved resource management 

plan. 

plant communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A group of populations that coexist in space and time and interact 

with one another (conifer and hardwood forest lands, oak woodlands, 

juniper woodlands and rangelands, chaparral, shrub-steppe lands, 

grasslands, serpentine, riparian vegetation, cliffs, rock outcrops, talus 

and overslopes, dune systems, meadows, wetlands, springs, fens, 

ponds, and vernal pools). 

play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The existence of a trap that is detectable with geological, geophysical, 

or geochemical technology. 

point source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An origin of water or air pollutants that is readily identified, such as 

the discharge or runoff from an individual industrial plant or cattle 

feedlot. Also see nonpoint source. 

precommercial thinning (PCT). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The practice of reducing the density of trees within a stand by manual 

cutting, girdling, or herbicides to promote growth increases or 

maintain growth rates of desirable tree species. The trees killed are 

generally unmerchantable and retained on the treated area. 

preferred alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A National Environmental Policy Act term that denotes the alternative 

in a draft Environmental Impact Statement that is preferred by the 

proposing agency. 

progeny test site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A test area for evaluating parent seed trees by comparing the growth of 

their offspring seedlings. 

proper functioning condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The state of a riparian wetland area having the vegetation, landform, 

and large woody debris that are necessary for the species, habitat, and 

natural processes of an area. 

prospect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A drillable trap that is located within a play. 

public domain lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Original holdings of the United States that were never granted or 

conveyed to other jurisdictions or never reacquired by exchange for 

other public domain lands. 

Glossary – 16 
Glossary

public land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Land that is owned and controlled by some governmental entity 

(federal, state, county, or other municipality). 

quadratic mean diameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The average diameter, at breast height, of the tree that is of average 

basal area in a stand. Also see basal area and diameter breast height. 

reclamation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Land treatment to “bring back” vegetation or functions of the land 

that minimize water degradation, damage to aquatic life or wildlife, 

flooding, erosion, and other adverse effects from surface mining 

operations. The process may involve backfilling, grading, resoiling, 

revegetation, decompaction, stabilization, or other measures. 

record of decision (ROD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A document required by the National Environmental Policy Act, 

that is separate from, but associated with, an environmental impact 

statement. The ROD publicly and officially discloses the responsible 

official’s decision on which alternative assessed in the EIS will be 

implemented. 

recovery plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A plan for the conservation and survival of an endangered species 

or a threatened species listed under the Endangered Species Act for 

the purpose of improving the status of the species to the point where 

listing is no longer required. 

recruitment habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A stand that is capable of becoming habitat for a designated species 

within a designated period of time. 

regeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (n.) Tree seedlings or saplings existing in a stand. (v.) The process of 

re-establishing trees on a tract of forest land where harvest or some 

natural event has removed the existing trees. 

regeneration harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Any removal of trees intended to assist regeneration already present or 

make regeneration possible. 

relative density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A means of describing the level of competition among trees or site 

occupancy in a stand, relative to some theoretical maximum that 

is based on tree size and species composition. Relative density is 

determined mathematically by dividing the stand basal area by the 

square root of the quadratic mean diameter. Also see basal area and 

quadratic mean diameter. 

replacement habitat. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A stand of equivalent habitat value to a designated species that is 

made available as a replacement for habitat that is lost within the same 

population boundary. 

resource management plan (RMP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A BLM planning document, prepared in accordance with Section 

202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act that presents 

systematic guidelines for making resource management decisions for 

a resource area. An RMP is based on an analysis of an area’s resources, 

their existing management, and their capability for alternative uses. 

RMPs are issue oriented and developed by an interdisciplinary team 

with public participation. Also see adaptive management. 

restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Land treatments intended to bring back a former condition or function. 

Glossary – 17 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

riparian area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A geographic area containing an aquatic ecosystem and adjacent 

upland areas that directly affect it. This includes floodplains, 

woodlands, and all areas within a horizontal distance of approximately 

100 feet from the normal line of high water of a stream channel or 

from the shoreline of a standing body of water. 

road decommissioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stabilization of unneeded or low use roads. Depending on the 

restoration objective, the series of actions may involve one or several 

of the following: closure, restoring natural stream crossings and selfmaintaining road surface drainage, erosion control, and vegetative 

treatments (planting), surface decompaction, and sidecast pullback or 

road obliteration. 

road improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Activities on an existing road that improves its original design 

standard. A typical improvement would add culverts and/or crushed 

aggregate to a natural dirt surface road. 

road obliteration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Removing a roadbed back from the landscape and restoring the 

natural topography. 

road pullback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Removal of unstable fill materials placed on the outside edge of the 

road prism. 

road stormproofing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Road surface work that upgrades drainage condition on roads that 

will remain open for travel, but will receive infrequent maintenance. 

Measures intended to prevent and control erosion and sediment 

delivery into stream channels, and reduce risk of road failure. 

rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The planned number of years between establishment of a forest stand 

and its regeneration harvest. 

salmonid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fish that are born and reared in freshwater, move to the ocean to grow 

and mature, and return to freshwater to reproduce. Includes species 

such as salmon and steelhead. Also see anadromous fish. 

salvage cutting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Removal of dead trees or of trees damaged or dying because of 

injurious agents other than competition, to recover economic value 

that would otherwise be lost. 

seed orchard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A plantation of clones or seedlings from selected trees; isolated to 

reduce pollination from outside sources, weeded of undesirables, and 

cultured for early and abundant production of seed. 

sedimentary basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A geologic structural downwarp that has been filled with eroded 

rock from surrounding uplands. Both marine (filled with sediment 

deposited in oceans) and terrestrial (filled with inflowing rivers) basins 

exist. 

selection cutting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A method of uneven-aged management involving the harvesting of 

single trees from stands (single-tree selection) or in groups up to four 

(4) acres in size (group selection) without harvesting the entire stand 

at any one time. 

Glossary – 18 
Glossary

shelterwood cutting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A regeneration method under an even-aged silvicultural system. With 

this method a portion of the mature stand is retained as a source of 

seed and/or protection during the regeneration period. The retained 

trees are usually removed in one or more cuttings. 

short term. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A period of time used as an analytical timeframe and that is within the 

first 10 years of the implementation of a resource management plan. 

Also see long term. 

silvicultural prescription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A planned series of treatments designed to change current stand 

structure to one that meets management goals. 

silvicultural system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A planned series of treatments for tending, harvesting, and reestablishing a stand. The system name is based on the number of age 

classes managed within a stand (e.g., even- aged, two-aged, unevenaged). 

single-tree selection harvest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . See selection cutting. 

site class. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A classification of an area’s relative productive capacity for tree growth; 

commonly expressed in terms of the heights of the largest trees in 

a stand at a common “index” age, usually 50 or 100 years-old. Site 

classes are numbered from 1 (most productive) to 5 (least productive). 

site potential tree height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The average maximum height of the tallest dominant trees (200 years 

or older) for a given site class. Also see site class. 

snag . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Any standing (upright) dead tree. 

sold timber sale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A timber sale for which a qualified purchaser has been established, 

through auction or negotiation, but where the BLM has yet to approve 

and consummate the timber sale contract. See awarded timber sales. 

source water watershed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A watershed area providing untreated water, used for drinking water. 

special forest products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Those plant and fungi resources that are harvested, gathered, or 

collected by permit, and have social, economical, or spiritual value. 

Common examples include mushrooms, firewood, Christmas trees, 

tree burls, edibles and medicinals, mosses and lichens, floral and 

greenery, and seeds and cones, but not soil, rocks, fossils, insects, 

animal parts, or any timber products of commercial value. 

special status species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Those species that are listed under the Endangered Species Act as 

threatened or endangered (including proposed and candidate species); 

listed by a state as threatened, endangered or candidate species; and 

listed by the BLM as sensitive species. Under the BLM Special Status 

Species policy (BLM 6840), the BLM State Director has created an 

additional category called Bureau Strategic Species (see glossary 

Bureau strategic species). 

stand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An aggregation of trees occupying a specific area and sufficiently 

uniform in composition, age, arrangement, and condition so that it is 

distinguishable from the forest in adjoining areas. 

Glossary – 19 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

stand establishment stage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The developmental stage extending from stand initiation until stands 

have reached canopy closure and density-dependent tree mortality 

begins. 

standards and guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Northwest Forest Plan rules for managing the different land use 

allocations. For the purpose of the final environmental impact 

statement, this term applies only to the No Action Alternative. 

stream, intermittent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Drainage feature with a dry period, normally for three months or 

more, where the action of flowing water forms a channel with welldefined bed and banks, supporting bed-forms showing annual scour 

or deposition, within a continuous channel network. 

stream order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A classification system used to define stream size; based on the 

hierarchy of tributaries principle. Working downstream from the 

upper extent of stream channels in a watershed, two unbranched 

first-order stream channels join to from a second order, and two like 

second orders join to form a third order, and so on. 

stream, perennial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Permanent channel drainage feature with varying but continuous yearround discharge, where the base level is at or below the water table. 

structurally complex stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stage at which stands develop characteristics approximating “oldgrowth” stands described in many analyses associated with the 

Northwest Forest Plan. 

structural legacies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The large trees, down logs, snags, and other components of a forest 

stand that are left after harvesting for the purpose of maintaining site 

productivity and providing structures and ecological functions in 

subsequent stands. 

structural stage classifications of forests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . A scheme used to define the structural stages of forests. It uses 

four broad classifications (stand establishment, young, mature, and 

structurally complex) and multiple subclassifications to distinguish 

differences within classifications. 

stumpage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The price paid for timber on the stump. A timber purchaser pays 

stumpage to the BLM and then incurs the cost of logging and hauling 

the logs to the mill. 

suitable habitat. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A stand that has the structures (physical and biological features) 

necessary to meet the biological requirements of a particular species. 

sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sustainability can be defined as using, developing, and protecting 

resources in a manner that enables people to meet current needs and 

provides that future generations can also meet future needs, from 

the joint perspective of environmental, economic and community 

objectives. 

sustained yield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The volume of timber that a forest can produce continuously at a 

given intensity of management; the achievement and maintenance 

in perpetuity of a high-level annual or regular periodic output of the 

various renewable resources without impairment of the productivity of 

the land. 

Glossary – 20 
Glossary

sustained yield capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The volume of timber that can be offered for sale each year from an 

area based upon the consistent volume of timber that a forest can 

produce continuously. Also see annual productive capacity. 

sustained yield unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A BLM district. 

take . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An Endangered Species Act term that denotes the act of or the attempt 

to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or 

collect a species listed as threatened or endangered. Also see incidental 

take. 

terrain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A tract or region of the earth’s surface or grouping of rock considered 

as a separate physical feature. 

thinning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A silvicultural treatment made to reduce the density of trees primarily 

to improve tree/stand growth and vigor, and/or recover potential 

mortality of trees, generally for commodity use. Also see density 

management, precommercial thinning, and commercial thinning. 

timber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forest crops or stands, or wood that is harvested from forests and is of 

a character and quality suitable for manufacture into lumber and other 

wood products rather than for use as fuel. 

timberland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forested land capable of producing crops of industrial wood at a 

rate of at least 20 cubic feet/acre per year and is not withdrawn from 

timber production. (Some forest lands are not classified by the FIA 

[U.S. Forest Service Inventory and Analysis] as timberland because 

they are either unproductive or by law are off limits to harvesting [e.g., 

national parks and wildernesses]). 

timber production capability classification 

(TPCC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An analytical tool that inventories and identifies sites as capable of 

sustaining intensive timber management without it degrading their 

productive capacity. This tool evaluates a site’s soil depth, available 

moisture, slope, drainage, and stability to determine site capacity for 

timber management activity. Sites that prove incapable of sustaining 

intensive timber management are typically not included in the harvest 

land base. Also see harvest land base. 

trap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A geologic structure that allows petroleum to accumulate and be 

preserved. 

two-aged stand. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A stand of trees comprised of two distinct age classes separated in age 

by more than ± 20% of rotation. 

two-aged system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A silvicultural system that regenerates and maintains stands with two 

age classes. The resulting stand may be two-aged, or trend towards an 

uneven-aged condition as a consequence of both an extended period 

of regeneration establishment and the retention of reserve (green live) 

trees that may represent one or more age classes. 

understory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Portion of trees or other woody vegetation that forms the lower layer 

in a forest stand, and that consists of more than one distinct layer. 

Glossary – 21 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

uneven-aged management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A combination of actions that simultaneously maintains continuous 

tall forest cover, recurring regeneration of desirable species, and the 

orderly growth and development of trees through a range of diameter 

or age classes. 

uneven-aged stand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A stand with three or more distinct age classes, either intimately 

mixed or in small groups. 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) . . . . . A federal agency under the United States Department of the Interior 

that is responsible for working with others to conserve, protect, and 

enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats. 

United States Forest Service (USFS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A federal agency under the United States Department of Agriculture 

that is responsible for administration of the nation’s national forests. 

variable-density thinning (VDT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A thinning method where two or more densities of retained trees 

are used to promote stand heterogeneity through the development 

of multi-layered canopies. Provision of conditions conducive to the 

initiation and growth of regeneration is often an objective of VDT to 

encourage understory development. 

variable-retention harvest system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An approach to harvesting that is based on retaining structural 

elements or biological legacies (trees, snags, logs, etc.) from the 

harvested stand for integration into the new stand to achieve various 

ecological objectives. Note: The major variables in variable retention 

harvest systems are types, densities, and spatial arrangement of 

retained structures: 1) aggregated retention is retention of structures 

as (typically) small intact forest patches within the harvest unit; 2) 

dispersed retention is retention of structures or biological legacies in a 

dispersed or uniform manner. 

watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . All of the land and water within the boundaries of a drainage area 

that are separated by land ridges from other drainage areas. Larger 

watersheds can contain smaller watersheds that all ultimately flow 

their surface water to a common point. Also see fifth- field watershed 

and key watershed. 

wetland (jurisdictional) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A wetland determination, using the Army Corps of Engineers current 

interagency rules, based on presence of defined wetland vegetation, 

soils and hydrology. 

wetland (natural). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unaltered land with natural presence and duration of water, sufficient 

to support wetland vegetation 

wildfire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Any nonstructural fire, other than prescribed burns, that occurs on 

wildland. 

wildfire, uncharacteristic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A wildfire that burns with unusual intensity and size. They are a 

particular concern in drier ecosystems such as sagebrush-grasslands, 

dry Douglas-fir, dry grand fir and ponderosa pine forests in the West 

where combustible fuels have accumulated. 

wildland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lands that are not dedicated to such uses as agricultural, urban, 

mining, or parks. 

Glossary – 22 
Glossary

wildland/urban interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The area in which structures and other human development meet or 

intermingle with undeveloped wildland. 

windthrow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A tree or trees uprooted or felled by the wind. 

young stage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Characterized by the predominance of density-dependent tree 

mortality and, in high density stands, a small range of tree diameters. 

Glossary – 23 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Glossary – 24
 
Index 

Index – 1

Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

Index – 2
 
Index

Index 

A Adaptive management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20, B-4 

Air quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 

Allowable sale quantity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9, 14, 36, 37, B-9, B-16 

Annual program summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-3 

B	 Bald eagle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 

Best Management Practices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, C-1 

Biomass. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37, 42, 44, 56, B-16 

C	 Clean Water Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8, 10, 11, 22, C-3 

Communication sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47, 48, F-12 

Critical habitat. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6, 8, 14, 21, 45, 60, E-39, E-46, F-3 

D	 Deferred Timber Management Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36, 44, 56, B-9, E-43 

Deer management area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61, B-14 

E	 Elk management area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 

Endangered Species Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 13, 21, 40, 60, B-10, B-14, E-40, E-46 

F	 Fire regime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44, B-11 

Fire resiliency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 

Fire severity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 

H	 Harvest land base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7, 31 

High intrinsic potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35, B-15 

I	 Instream restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35, B-15 

L	 Land tenure zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46, F-4, F-11 

Land use allocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4, 28, A-3 

Large wood. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9, 17, 34, 35, B-15 

Late-Successional Management Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31, B-6, B-15, E-44 

Listed fish species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

M	 Marbled murrelet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9, 14, 17, 31, 32, 60, B-6 

Monitoring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20, B-1, C-4 

N	 National Landscape Conservation System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28, 30, 45, 60 

Northern spotted owl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 15, 31, 32, B-6 

O	 O&C Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 8, 10, 11, 26 

Off-highway vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 53, C-36, C-37, G-3 

Oregon Smoke Management Plan 

P	 Peak fl ow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 10, 18 

Port-Orford cedar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 

Index – 3 
Coos Bay District ROD and RMP 

R Reasonably Foreseeable Mineral Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42, E-3 

Research natural area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39, 40, 45, 46, B-10 

Rights-of-way. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 45, 46, 60, A-5, E-34, E-37 

Riparian Management Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16, 23, 34, 35, B-7, C-5, E-43, E-44 

S Salvage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 34, 35, 38, 41, B-7, B-11 

Source water watersheds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, C-32 

Special status species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7, 13, 17, 31, 34, 40, 60, E-38, E-39 

Stream temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 10, 21, C-5, C-45, C-49 

Sudden Oak death. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35, C-28 

T Temporary use permits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 

Timber Management Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 7, 14, 17, 18, 28, 36, 44, B-9, B-16, E-43 

Timber Production Capability Classification (TPCC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 

Traditional use sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 

Travel management plans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53, B-17, G-4 

U Utility corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 

V Visual resource management classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 46, 57 

W Water quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 15, 17, 21, 34, 58, B-7, C-3, E-42, E-45 

Western Snowy Plover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53, 60, D-5 

Wildland urban interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35, 43, B-11 

Wind energy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 

Index – 4 

BLM/OR/WA/PL-09/011+1792 

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300 OFFICIAL BUSINESS _____________North Bend, OR 974591300 Airport Lane Coos Bay District Office Bureau of Land ManagementUnited States Department of the Interior PRIORITY MAIL 

Bureau of Land Management

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID 

Permit No. G-76