Appendix I-3: N. Fork John Day River Wild and Scenic River Draft Suitability Study 

Appendix I-3:

Wild and Scenic River

 Draft Suitability Study for

North Fork John Day River 

Introduction 

The process used by BLM to identify and evaluate river segments for inclusion into the National Wild and Scenic 

Rivers system is guided by the provisions of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and BLM planning guidance. 

Section 5(d)(1) of the Act directs federal agencies to consider potential wild and scenic rivers in the land and 

water planning processes. To fulfill this requirement, the BLM inventories and evaluates rivers when it develops 

comprehensive resource management plans for public lands in a specified area. 

An eligibility inventory was conducted during the data gathering stage of John Day Basin Resource Management 

Plan. Sixteen segments of the North Fork John Day River that flow through public lands were reviewed, totaling 

25.55 miles. The shortest segment is 0.13 mile and the longest segment is 7.79 miles. All 16 segments are located 

within a section of the river that is 36.24 miles long, beginning along County Road 31, roughly 3 miles northeast 

from Monument in Section 23, T. 7 S., R. 28 E., in Grant County, and ending at the confluence of Camas Creek 

in Section 26, T. 6 S., R. 31 E., in Umatilla County. The 16 review segments through public lands make up 70.5 

percent of this section of river. 

In the fall of 2006, BLM released the Analysis of the Management Situation (AMS) and Preliminary Public 

Involvement document. The AMS included the June 11, 2006 Final Report of Potential Wild & Scenic Rivers in the 

John Day Basin Resource Management Planning Area. This final report identified the North Fork John Day River 

as eligible for further study in the land use plan. 

This suitability report was written during the formulation of the Draft RMP. 

Outstandingly Remarkable Values along the North Fork

John Day River: 

The Final Eligibility Report identified the following Outstandingly Remarkable Values (ORVs) for the North Fork 

John Day River in all studied segments: 

Scenic values: The North Fork John Day River “flows through some of the finest scenery in Oregon” (BLM 2000, 

p. 110), which includes a river valley bordered by steep, rugged hillsides with rock outcroppings and a variety of 

vegetarian types, including stands of ponderosa pines and Douglas fir, grassy meadows, and scattered clumps of 

riparian vegetation. Views of adjacent mountain peaks are offered along some sections of the river. This mix of 

landform, vegetation, water, and color add to the visual values along the river. 

While such features are not unique among rivers in the Blue Mountains ecoregion of northeastern Oregon, they 

are notable and of a quality to attract visitors from outside the area. The state of Oregon valued the scenic quality 

of the North Fork enough to include the entire study section in the State Scenic Waterway System under the 

Oregon Scenic Waterways Act (ORS 390.826). Only 18 other waterways and one lake in Oregon are afforded this 

protective status. 

I-3-1 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

A BLM-maintained native surface road runs adjacent to the river from Hwy 395 to Potamus Creek, which 

occasionally can intrude on the scenic nature of the river, while, at the same time, provides easy access for visitors 

to view the scenery. The river corridor in this section is narrow and the hills rise over 2,000 feet, with dense 

strands of mixed conifer on north-facing slopes. The warmer south facing slopes are characterized by well spaced 

ponderosa pine, a few junipers, and a terraced grassy understory. A few houses and ranches are located along 

this section of the river. 

A primitive road (with no public easement through private sections) located from Potamus Creek downstream 

to the confluence with Wall Creek, is less conspicuous and the scenery more primitive. Only a few structures and 

primitive roads are seen along this segment of the river, leaving much of the area in a natural appearing state. 

Here, the river flows through a wide valley with adjacent mountain peaks rising less than 2,000 feet. The area is 

mostly rangeland, with steep hillsides dotted with strands of ponderosa pine. 

Recreation Values: The North Fork John Day offers numerous recreational opportunities, including boating, 

hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, sightseeing, watchable wildlife, recreational gold panning, nature study, 

and photography. The boating opportunities are particularly rare or unique in northeastern Oregon as visitors 

are offered opportunities for solitude and a natural environment with easily negotiated Class I & II rapids and 

multiple boat launch and take-out areas.. 

This access provides opportunities for trips that vary, from a few hours to multiple days. While the mainstem 

John Day, from Service Creek to Clarno, offers similar river rafting experiences (e.g., Class I & II rapids and 

numerous access points) the North Fork (from Dale to Monument, which encompasses the study section) is 

considered by some as having better scenery and whitewater (Cassady et al. 1994). The rafting season is generally 

limited to May and June with weather earlier and flow levels later in the season being limiting factors. 

Boater registration data (albeit incomplete) collected between 1998 and 2005 documented that nearly one third of 

trip leaders traveled from outside of Oregon to float the river, while the majority of those coming from Oregon 

(all except one) traveled over 100 miles. This data suggest that visitors are willing to travel long distances to visit 

the river for recreational purposes. 

Fish Values: All steelhead trout in the John Day River Basin are genetically grouped into the Middle Columbia 

Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU). Steelhead in this ESU were listed as threatened under the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) on March 25, 1999 ([64 FR 14517], effective May 24, 1999, with threatened status reaffirmed on 

January 5, 2006). The John Day basin is included in the ESU. 

The North Fork John Day including the 25.55 miles of river that flow through BLM land is an important 

contributor to the total population of Middle Columbia summer steelhead trout in the Middle Columbia ESU. 

In addition, the North Fork John Day population of the Middle Columbia Summer Steelhead Species 

Management Unit meets all six criteria used to determine near-term sustainability (e.g., existing populations, 

distribution, abundance, productivity, reproductive independence, and hybridization; ODFW 2005). This includes 

the study segment as well as approximately 54 miles upstream from the study managed by USDA-Forest Service 

that are already part of the national WSR system. 

The U.S. Forest Service WSR designation is partially due to possessing outstandingly remarkable fisheries values, 

including steelhead trout. The protection afforded by the upstream WSR designation adds to the integrity of the 

fisheries in the review segments and helps ensure that the biological needs (i.e., migration corridor) of the species 

are met. 

Classification

At the same time that eligibility recommendations are made, rivers that meet the eligibility criteria are given a 

tentative classification (either wild, scenic, or recreational), as required by the WSR Act. Tentative classification 

is based on the type and degree of human development associated with waterway and adjacent lands as they 

exist at the time of the review. This classification, however, is a planning recommendation and is tentative to 

Congressional legislative determination. 

I-3-2 
Appendix I-3: N. Fork John Day River Wild and Scenic River Draft Suitability Study 

The tentative classifications are further defined as follows: 

•	1 Wild River Area – Wild river areas are those where the rivers or sections of rivers that are free of 

impoundments and generally inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds or shorelines essentially 

primitive and waters unpolluted. These represent vestiges of primitive America. Wild means 

undeveloped; roads, dams, or diversion works are generally absent from a one-quarter mile corridor on 

both sides of the river. 

• Scenic River Area – Scenic river areas are those where the rivers or sections of rivers that are generally 

free of impoundments, with shorelines or watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines largely 

undeveloped, but accessible in places by roads. Scenic does not necessarily mean the river corridor has 

to have scenery as an outstandingly remarkable value; however, it means the waterway or segment may 

contain more development (except for major dams or diversion works) than a wild segment and less 

development than a recreational segment. For example, roads may cross the river in places but generally 

do not run immediately parallel to it. In certain cases, if a parallel road is unpaved and well-screened 

from the river by vegetation, a hill, etc., it could qualify for scenic river area classification. 

•	 Recreational River Area – Recreational river areas are those rivers or sections of rivers that are readily 

accessible by road or railroad, that may have some development along their shorelines, and that may have 

undergone some impoundment or diversion in the past. Parallel roads or railroads, or the existence of small 

dams or diversions can be allowed in this classification. A recreational river area classification does not 

imply that the river or section of river will be managed or have priority for recreational use or development. 

The North Fork WSR Eligibility Report recommended; 

1.	 BLM public lands from the Wrightman County Road to Wall Creek (river segments 2.02-2.10) have a 

tentative classification as Scenic and should be managed for semi-primitive non-motorized, to semiprimitive motorized settings. 

2.	 BLM public lands West of Highway 395 to the Wrightman County Road, and just upriver from 

Monument; (river segments 2.01 and 2.11 to 2.16) are recommended a tentative classification as 

Recreational and should be managed for roaded to rural settings. 

Additional information describing the inventory, evaluation process and recommended tentative classification is 

in the Final Wild & Scenic River Eligibility report on a CD in the back page of the Analysis of the Management 

Situation for the John Day Basin Resource Management Plan. 

The recommendations of this report are included in one or more RMP alternatives, to provide a range of 

management options to protect the ORVs of this river and also satisfy BLM guidance. The planning team 

considered the WSR Final Report information in developing different land management alternatives for the two 

river segments of the North Fork John Day River. 

SUITABILITY 

The final step in the river assessment process is the determination of suitability. BLM Manual 8351(BLM 1992) 

guidance identifies eight factors to answer when completing this study. Suitability determination results from a 

combined assessment of river attributes and other land uses associated with a river. Additional factors may be 

considered if applicable to a river segment. 

Congressional legislation is required to actually designate a river as a federal Wild & Scenic River. The suitability 

evaluation does not automatically result in designation. If the suitability study determines that a river segment(s) 

is suitable for WSR designation, then BLM will make that recommendation to Congress. However, if the 

suitability study determines that a river segment(s) is not suitable, BLM would not recommend this river segment 

as suitable for Congressional WSR designation. This conclusion would be stated in the RMP, releasing it from 

further W&S review. 

I-3-3 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

The following eight factors, identified in BLM Manual Section 8351, have been reviewed to determine the 

suitability for Wild and Scenic River status of the North Fork John Day River between Camas Creek and river 

mile 20.4 north of Monument. 

1. Characteristics that do or do not make the river a worthy addition to the National System 

The Eligibility Report for the North Fork John Day River determined that thus river has scenic quality, 

recreational opportunities and fisheries values that are Outstandingly Remarkable and make this river segment a 

worthy addition to the National WSR System. These values are summarized in the Eligibility Study. 

2. The status of land and mineral ownership, use in the area, and associated or 

incompatible uses; 

Rights-of-way: 1) Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission Right of Way for public access on road and river area 

from Camas Creek to private land, just upriver from the Wrightman Canyon County Road. At this time the 

current landowner does not prevent public access across on the road across private land. There is, however no 

public right of way across this land and permission to cross may be revoked at any time. 2) Power/Phone line 

Right of Way(s) to several homes downriver from Camas Creek for power and telephone service. 

Mining Claims and Mineral Leases: As of June, 2007, there are no known mineral, saleable or oil, gas or 

geothermal leases or activities on public, private or State Lands that would conflict with potential Wild & Scenic 

River designation on public lands along the North Fork John Day River, from its junction with Camas Creek at 

State Highway 395, downriver to Monument. There are several parcels adjacent to or near the river with mineral 

rights owned by private parties, Due to the relatively low mineral potential of the proposed WSR corridor the 

probability of mineral development and conflicts with WSR Outstandingly Remarkable values is low. 

Livestock Grazing Status: Isolated tracts of public lands south of the North Fork John Day River near Monument 

have been grazed under BLM permit prior to the Oregon Land Exchange Act (OLEA). Range grazing allotments 

include Slick Ear, Neal Butte, Johnny Cake, Big Bend and North Fork. BLM has temporarily suspended grazing on 

these public lands until the JDBRMP is completed. Some lands north of Monument adjacent to the river that were 

owned prior to the exchange are still grazed. 

Grazing has historically occurred on recently acquired BLM lands before BLM obtained ownership of these lands. 

After OLEA was completed, BLM decided to not authorize any grazing until the issue of authorizing grazing on 

acquired public lands is evaluated and decided in the JDBRMP. Grazing use and its potential effect on ORVs will 

be evaluated in this land use plan. 

Fire/Fuels: The North Fork has been subject to wildfires over time. In 2001, the Monument Complex wildfire 

burned approximately 21,000 acres of public lands in Wall, Little Wall, Squaw, Cabin Creeks, Graves, Mallory, and 

Potamus Creeks, extending north into the Umatilla National Forest (FEMA report via Google). These values are 

summarized in the Eligibility portion of this report. 

Other recent, but smaller fires have occurred in this area: Wall and Graves Creek, Little Wall Creek (2003), and 

Hunter Creek (2006). In 2007 a second Monument Fire Complex burned about 54,000 acres, up to the west bank of 

river between river miles 39 and 31 and both sides of the river between river miles 31 and 24. 

Other: Scattered private/public land ownership exists from the Camas Creek to Wrightman County Road 

Bridge. The private land ownership pattern increases along the North Fork John Day River downriver, from the 

Wrightman Canyon county road. The outstandingly remarkable values that qualify this river segment as eligible 

for inclusion are not affected by the Skull Canyon bridge, or the Wrightman Canyon bridge; these bridges do not 

affect the free-flowing nature of the river. 

I-3-4 
Appendix I-3: N. Fork John Day River Wild and Scenic River Draft Suitability Study 

3. Reasonably foreseeable potential uses of the land and related waters that would be 

enhanced, foreclosed, or curtailed if the area were included in the National System and 

values that would be foreclosed or diminished if the area were not designated; 

Management consistent with wild and Scenic River status would maintain existing opportunities for fishing, big 

game hunting for deer and elk, rafting/kayaking/ canoeing, camping, wildlife observation, photography, and 

driving or riding ATV’s for pleasure. Due to the restrictions associated with Wild and Scenic river status highly 

developed recreation opportunities would be precluded in the future on the North Fork of the John Day River. 

Prior to BLM obtaining private lands through the Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 (OLEA) timber harvest and 

livestock grazing occurred on lands near the North Fork John Day River. 

Existing and proposed management limits timber management to treatments to improve forest.health. Similarly 

grazing has been restricted to ensure the congressional objectives stated in the OLEA 

No additional restrictions on livestock grazing, or timber harvest would result from Wild & Scenic River 

designation. 

Existing private land uses and motorized access to private property are not expected to change if the North 

Fork were designated as a Wild & Scenic River. These uses will continue, regardless of what decision is made 

regarding WSR designation. WSR designation would have no direct impact on private lands but could impact 

future requests for either vehicle or utility access to private land in order to protect ORVs associated with Wild 

Aand Scenic River Status. 

4. Federal, state, tribal, local, public, or other interest in designating or not designating 

the river; 

The 1988 Omnibus Oregon Rivers Act designated a 54.1- mile segment of the North Fork John Day River, from its 

headwaters in the North Fork of the John Day Wilderness Area, to its confluence with Camas Creek. 

By protecting lands adjacent to 25.5 miles the North Fork below Camas Creek designation of the BLM portion 

of the North Fork as a Wild and Scenic River would also help protect the outstandingly remarkable fish values 

associated with the Wild & Scenic River designation on U.S. Forest Service managed public lands upriver from 

Camas Creek. 

BLM received several comments for and against WSR designation during the Scoping process for the John Day 

Basin Resource Management Plan. Comments for designation described this river as worthy of designation due to 

its scenic beauty, fisheries, and natural appearance. Comments against designation felt that designation restricted 

management and attracted more visitations resulting in resource degradation. Appendix 1 of this report contains 

public comment quotes during the 2006-7 BLM public scoping meetings; for and against WSR designation. 

As noted above the State of Oregon valued the scenic quality of the North Fork enough to include the entire 

study section in the State Scenic Waterway System under the Oregon Scenic Waterways Act (ORS 390.826). State 

Scenic waterway guidance and the participation of the Oregon Department of Parks and Recreation are important 

components in protecting the integrity of outstandingly remarkable values. 

Existing and future management of mining within the potential WSR corridor would rely upon restrictions of 

existing State Scenic waterway guidance, even if the state were to change guidance in the future, to protect scenic 

quality, and after the completion of the John Day RMP, visual resource management guidance and 

Several tribes have participated in the John Day Basin Resource Management Plan planning process and have 

indicated concerns about preserving the fishery in the John Day River. 

I-3-5 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

5. Estimated cost of acquiring necessary lands and interests in lands and administering the 

area, if designated; 

Federal Wild and Scenic River Designation with a Recreation or Scenic classification from Camas Creek to public 

lands downriver from Wall Creek would not result in the need to acquire any additional lands to manage the 

ORVs on existing BLM public lands adjacent to the North Fork John Day River. BLM would consider acquisition 

of private lands and leases adjacent to this river only from willing sellers, to enhance manageability of the area. 

Estimated costs would depend on location and acreage of private land. Funding for acquisition would be 

expected to come from Land & Water Conservation Act funding by Congress. No additional costs are anticipated 

from the management of the area as a Wild & Scenic River. BLM currently manages this river to protect scenic, 

fishery and recreation values. 

6. Ability of the agency to manage and protect the river area or segment as a wild and 

scenic	river	or	other	means	to	protect	the	identified	values	other	than	wild	and	scenic	

river designation; 

BLM management currently maintains or protects fishery ORVs through existing regulations to preserve and 

maintain habitat for special status fish (bull trout, and Steelhead), through the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Pac 

fish, and the proposed Aquatic Conservation Strategy in the John Day Basin Resource Management Plan. 

Water quantity is protected through a 1986 instream water right held by the Oregon Department of Fish and 

Wildlife. Water quality is protected by the State of Oregon water quality regulations. 

The Federal government can also exert federal water right laws to protect ORVs within a river; 

“The designation of a river as a wild, scenic or recreational river under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of October 

2, 1968, explicitly reserves sufficient unappropriated water to fulfill the purposes of the Act. 

The BLM will use a variety of tools, authorities and strategies to achieve in-stream flow levels that support 

Wild and Scenic River values. These tools include: leasing (in the short term) and transferring existing BLM 

consumptive use rights to in-stream uses (in the long term); entering co-operative agreements with the State of 

Oregon, other agencies, and organizations for the purchase of water rights from willing sellers for transfer to instream uses. 

If these other tools are not effective, BLM may quantify and assert the BLM’s Federal reserved water right.” 

Recreation values for water-based recreation activities also benefit from in-stream flows for rafting, canoeing, 

kayaking, and fishing. 

The amount of water reserved is the minimum amount necessary to fulfill the purposes of the Act. The amount of 

water reserved is the minimum amount necessary to protect the particular aesthetic, recreational, scientific, biotic, 

or historic features (‘values’) which led to the river’s designation. The amount of flow reserved will vary on a 

case-by-case basis. 

The John Day Basin RMP proposes a Visual Resource Management Class 2 for the North Fork John Day. Under 

this classification scenic quality ORV would receive a higher level of protection than under current management 

standards. A WSR designation would add weight and consideration to any decision regarding a proposed project 

within this river canyon which could be seen from the river or adjacent road. 

Future project proposals such as timber harvests would require review for compliance with the WSR Act if the 

Camas- Wrightman Canyon and Wrightman Canyon to Monument river segments were designated as federal 

Wild and Scenic Rivers. Overall, the BLM would be able to manage and protect the river area with minimal effort. 

7.	Historical	or	existing	rights	that	could	be	adversely	affected	with	designation;	and

The BLM has a responsibility to ensure tribal members satisfy their treaty rights and to maintain cultural practices 

on all public lands managed by BLM. Government-to-government consultation is part of the RMP process 

and on-going public land management necessary to ensure tribal rights to access and use resources and places 

I-3-6 
____________________________________

Appendix I-3: N. Fork John Day River Wild and Scenic River Draft Suitability Study 

important to Native Americans are not affected. Wild & Scenic River designation would not affect or impair 

activities traditionally pursued by tribal members as they exercise their treaty rights and cultural practices. 

Wild and Scenic river status would have no impact on historical or existing rights except as described in sections 3 

and 4 above. 

8. Other 

BLM would work with private landowners to minimize conflicts or trespass with public use of this waterway. 

No other issues or concerns regarding suitability of this segment have been identified in the land use planning 

process. 

Recommendation: 

Based on my review of both the Eligibility Study and the information provided in this Suitability Study my 

preliminary recommendation is that the North Fork John Day River between River Mile 55 (Camas Creek) and 

River Mile 20.4 (four miles up river from monument) are Suitable for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic 

Rivers System. 

Christina M. Welch, Field Manager 

Central Oregon Resource Area 

Prineville District, Bureau of Land Management 

I-3-7 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

References 

Jonas, Lil. 2006. Final Report. Prineville District Office Eligibility Inventory of potential Wild and Scenic Rivers 

in the John Day Basin Resource Management Plan Planning Area. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management 

Prineville District Office. Prineville, Oregon. 97754. 

Bureau of Land Management. 2004. “Clarification of Policy in the BLM Manual Section 8351, Wild and Scenic 

Rivers, with Respect to Eligibility Criteria and Protective Management,” Instruction Memorandum No. 2004-196, 

Washington, D.C. 

Bureau of Land Management. 1993. Manual 8351 – Wild and Scenic Rivers – Policy and Program Direction for 

Identification, Evaluation, and Management. Washington, D.C. 

I-3-8 
 

Appendix I-3: N. Fork John Day River Wild and Scenic River Draft Suitability Study 

2006-7 Public Comments Regarding Wild & Scenic River Issue 

John Day Basin Resource Management Plan 

June 20, 2007 

I. AMS Scoping Period Comments; Subject Source: SMA Special Management Areas 

For WSR Designation; 

* We support ONDA’s proposal that BLM evaluate and recommend and recommend for designation as Wild & 

Scenic the North Fork John Day from Camas Creek to Monument. (292/14) 

* Special management designations for suitable lands. Give careful consideration to management of roadless 

areas. Designate special resource management for Wild & Scenic River status to improve protective status 

retaining the natural values permanently for future generations. (18/6) 

* Nominating the North Fork for Wild and Scenic River status would be consistent with previous BLM and U.S. 

Forest Service planning decisions to seek protection for lands between Service Creek and Tumwater Falls on the 

main John Day, as well as on the upper North Fork above Camas Creek. The designation would also assist the 

BLM’s effectiveness in carrying out the provisions of the Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000 because the agency 

has acquired a nearly contiguous block of public land along the river between Dale and Monument. The North 

Fork John Day is a valuable public asset for scenery, for resource protection, and for recreation, and nominating it 

for National Wild and Scenic River status would help accomplish the central goals of the planning process. ( 29/1) 

* The new RMP should consider adding additional Wild and Scenic river designations. The existing 54 miles of 

the designated North Fork John Day River lies immediately upstream of river segment 7 ( as described in the 

John Day River RMP), which now contains significantly more public land after recent acquisitions. This 41 mile 

segment is remote, forested and includes high scenic and wildlife values. According to the current John Day 

River RMP, this segment contains important habitat for elk, Lewis’ woodpeckers and bald eagles. Steep, forested 

hillsides border the river. This section should be studied and considered for addition to the North Fork John Day 

Wild & Scenic River. (52/2) 

* Please consider assessing the suitability of streams and rivers such as the North Fork John Day from Camas 

Creek to Monument for Wild and Scenic River status. (15/4) 

* Please consider the North Fork of the John Day River from Camas Creek to Monument for Wild and Scenic 

status. (17/5); (pg. 55) 

* Assess suitability of the North Fork John Day from Camas Creek to Monument for Wild and Scenic River Status. (21/4) 

* Consider nominating streams and rivers such as North Fork John Day from Camas Creek to Monument for Wild 

and Scenic River Status. (27/6) 

* Consider nominating streams and rivers such as North Fork John Day from Camas Creek to Monument for Wild 

and Scenic River Status. (30/5) 

* The new RMP should consider adding additional Wild and Scenic river designations. The existing 54 miles of 

the designated North Fork John Day River lies immediately upstream of river segment 7 ( as described in the 

John Day River RMP), which now contains significantly more public land after recent acquisitions. This 41 mile 

segment is remote, forested and includes high scenic and wildlife values. According to the current John Day 

River RMP, this segment contains important habitat for elk, Lewis’ woodpeckers and bald eagles. Steep, forested 

hillsides border the river. This section should be studied and considered for addition to the North Fork John Day 

Wild and Scenic River. (49/2)) 

* The new RMP must address designating additional Wild and Scenic River areas. Newly acquired North Fork 

John Day lands should be inventoried for potential addition to the Wild & Scenic River System. The North Fork 

John Day River from Camas Creek to Monument, is one area that merits WSR designation. (49/6) 

* You must consider nominating streams and rivers such as North Fork John Day from Camas Creek to 

Monument for Wild and Scenic River status in order to gain the most protection for this area. (54/6) 

I-3-9 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Against WSR Designation 

* Do not add any Wild or Scenic rivers to the existing inventory and do not allow verbal cultural history as valid. (35/9) 

* Designation of more Wild and Scenic Rivers will serve no purpose and in face is counter productive to keeping 

these streams in a healthy condition. Designation of these streams eliminate the ability to manage them. If at this 

current date, they still qualify for Wild and Scenic designation, it tells me we have been doing ok without this 

designation and can continue to do so thru proper management. ( 290/2) 

* I am opposed to any additional designation of Wild & Scenic Rivers for the same reasons I am opposed to 

additional Wilderness designations...Don’t take away your [management] options by designating them.... (No 

additional wording). 

II. 2007 February and March Public Scoping Meetings* 

 (* public comments sorted by key words) 

For WSR Designation; 

* Wild and Scenic Rivers - Please consider for designation the North Fork John Day River between Wall and 

Camas Creek as well as BLM managed sections of Bridge Creek and Jackknife canyon. (pg.4) 

Special designations (WSR, Wilderness, ACEC, etc.) attracts tourism opportunities for education; also attracts 

tourists. (pg. 55) 

Against WSR Designation 

* Designation [as Wild & Scenic River] does not save it, degrades it causes overuse from recreationists. Like 

overuse in Strawberry Mtn Wilderness, then it burned. It put in on the map for more people to visit. Same with 

wild & scenic rivers- overuse causes degration. 

* Pototmus Cr. - Not qual’d for wild and scenic river spawning & rearing habitat. (pg. 11 & 55) 

* WSR. Designation does not save it, degrades it causes overuse from recreationists. Like overuse in Strawberry 

Mtn. Wilderness, then it burned. It put it on the map for more people to visit. Same with wild & scenic riversoveruse causes degration. (pg. 38 & 55) 

III. Monument Landowner meeting Tuesday June 5, 2007 

BLM held a public meeting in Monument on June 5, 2007, specifically inviting 26 private landowners along the 

North Fork from Camas Creek to Monument. Sixteen individuals attended this meeting; most were landowners 

who had the following concerns regarding Wild and Scenic River designation: 

1. Does what the public say matter, or has someone within government already made a decision? 

2. If this became a federal WSR would it change the state designation or jurisdiction? 

3. I was on two different committees, one for the WSR designation [1988] there were a lot of tough battles. We had 

Kimberly to Wall Creek taken out of the WSR provision. Is this still the case? So it (WSR designation) may come 

up again? 

4. I have a specific question. If a WSR decision is made will it be difficult to tear down our existing house and 

build something different? 

BLM is aware that landowners would like to maintain their motorized access to their private lands and do not 

want public trespass on their private lands. 

I-3-10 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Appendix J:

Grazing 

This appendix is divided into two sets of tables. The first set (Table J-1) summarizes allotments by area, status 

of Rangeland Health Standard and Guidelines, and Grazing Matrix Outcomes by alternative. The second set 

(Table J-2) summarizes allotments by the values of specific Grazing Matrix factors and ratings by alternative (see 

Chapter 2, Livestock Grazing section for an explanation of factors and ratings). 

Key (Table J-1) 

AUMs = Animal Unit Months 

S&Gs = Rangeland Health Standards and Guides 

Standard 1 = Watershed Function - Uplands 

Standard 2 = Watershed Function - Riparian/Wetland Areas 

Standard 3 = Ecological Processes 

Standard 4 = Water Quality 

Standard 5 =Native, T&E, and Locally Important Species 

Bolded allotment names are managed under the Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000. Forage for these 

allotments (AUMs appearing in parentheses) is currently unavailable for livestock. 

O = Allotment is available (“O”) for livestock grazing 

- = If permit is voluntarily relinquished (or allotment is already vacant), allotment would be unavailable 

(“Closed”) for livestock grazing 

R = If permit is voluntarily relinquished, it would be used as a Reserve Forage Allotment (RFA) 

O/R = If permit is voluntarily relinquished, allotment would be available (“Open”) for livestock grazing, or 

used as an RFA 

-/R = If permit is voluntarily relinquished, allotment would be unavailable (“Closed”) for livestock grazing, or 

used as an RFA 

CLOSE = Allotment would be unavailable for livestock grazing, regardless of permit relinquishment 

J-1 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Table J-1. Allotments in the John Day Basin planning area by area, status of Rangeland Health Standard and Guidelines, and Grazing Matrix Outcomes by alternative. Number Name Total Acres BLM Acres BLM AUMs Year S&G Completed S&Gs Met? 1 or More Failures Caused by Livestock? Standards not met Alt 1 Alts 2 and 5 Alt 3 Alt 4 2500 Frank Anderson 7,467 79 10 O -/R -/R -/R 2501 Herbert Asher 3,585 2,522 101 2005 NO NO 2 O -/R -/R - 2503 Asher Hubert 580 317 17 O O O -/R 2504 Barker 5,823 157 18 2003 YES O -/R -/R -/R 2505 Barnett 2,099 394 55 2003 YES O O O O 2506 Maxine Barnett 3,284 195 19 2004 NO YES 1,2,3,4,5 O -/R -/R -/R 2507 Brooks 7,059 121 3 O -/R -/R -/R 2508 Bear Creek 3,717 723 45 O O O O 2509 Belshe 2,688 1,596 62 2003 YES O O O R 2511 Haystack 1,895 151 11 O - - CLOSE 2512 Big Muddy 77,040 15,708 615 2002 NO NO 1,2,3,4,5 O O O R 2513 Big Sky 7,124 592 26 2002 YES O -/R -/R -/R 2514 Black Rock 15,751 3,408 224 2003 NO 1,2,3,4,5 O O O O 2515 Bantam 319 40 6 O -/R -/R -/R 2516 Gable Creek 4,979 4,979 210 2003 NO NO 2,3,4,5 O O O O 2517 Borschowa 2,170 76 4 O -/R -/R -/R 2518 Pine Creek 16,518 5,437 346 O O O R 2520 Smith Point 2,712 2,422 93 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 O O O R 

2521 Horseshoe Bend 2,326 850 43 2003 YES O O O R 2522 James Brown 4,624 2,649 68 2003 YES O R R R 2524 Buck Hollow 4,987 441 10 O -/R -/R -/R 

2525 Rock Creek 11,232 2,619 231 2004 YES O O O O 2526 Peter Campbell 15,786 771 60 2004 YES O O O O 2528 Sentinel Peak 1,477 568 44 O O O -/R 

2529 F.C. Cherry 19,498 161 88 O O O O 

2530 Cimmiyotti 6,844 669 118 O O O O 2531 Circle Bar 18,501 18,224 637 2003 NO NO 3,4,5 O -/R -/R -

J-2 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Number Name 

Total

Acres 

BLM

Acres 

BLM

AUMs 

Year S&G

Completed 

S&Gs

Met? 

1 or More

Failures Caused

by Livestock? 

Standards

not met Alt 1 

Alts 2

and 5 Alt 3 Alt 4 

2532 T. Cole 24,828 454 19 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 O -/R -/R -/R 

2533 Sutton Mountain 26,352 25,788 489 2003 NO NO 2,4,5 O - - -

2534 Richmond 5,823 239 10 O -/R -/R -/R 

2535 Hayfield 491 309 11 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 O -/R -/R -/R 

2536 Spring Basin 29,247 5,659 146 2002 YES O O O R 2537 Dead Dog Canyon 4,263 4,013 243 2003 NO NO 2,4,5 O O O R 2538 Decker 4,656 2,875 206 2003 YES O R R R 2539 Biggs Junction 1,472 114 14 O -/R -/R -/R 

2540 Persimmon Woods 2,298 82 5 2002 YES O -/R -/R -

2541 Eakin 6,248 1,758 12 O -/R -/R -/R 

2543 Ellsworth 1,696 642 32 O -/R -/R -/R 

2544 Circle S Ranch 2164 664 16 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 O -/R -/R -/R 

2545 Cherry Creek 57428 11645 438 O O O O/R 

2546 Freeway 2021 160 2 O -/R -/R -/R 

2547 Sixmile 4926 2356 245 2004 NO YES 2 O O O O 2548 Hogan Creek 2823 41 3 O -/R -/R -/R 

2549 Hardie 4576 1062 84 O O O O 2551 Clinton O. Harris 26525 862 98 O -/R -/R -

2553 Willow Spring 1648 1093 20 2003 YES O -/R -/R -/R 

2554 Charles H. Hill 3782 1584 86 O - - CLOSE 

2555 Hoag 1180 369 10 2002 YES O -/R -/R -/R 

2556 Murray Howard 8488 638 33 2004 NO NO 4 O - - CLOSE 

2557 Hulden 4590 157 17 O -/R -/R -/R 

2558 Squaw Creek 12594 4747 301 2004 NO YES O O/R O/R O/R 

2559 Fopiano 15160 163 17 O -/R -/R -/R 

2560 Baseline 1101 535 27 2002 NO NO 1,2,3,4,5 O -/R -/R -/R 

2561 Girds Creek 21243 1696 61 2003 NO NO 2,4,5 O - - CLOSE 

2562 J Bar S 4533 707 34 2004 YES O - - CLOSE 

J-3 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Number Name Total Acres BLM Acres BLM AUMs Year S&G Completed S&Gs Met? 1 or More Failures Caused by Livestock? Standards not met Alt 1 Alts 2 and 5 Alt 3 Alt 4 2563 Horseshoe Creek 28,865 1,612 100 O O O -/R 2564 Cactus Ridge 1,045 323 20 2004 NO YES 1,3 O -/R -/R - 2565 Leroy A. Britt 8,954 212 33 O -/R -/R -/R 2566 Justesen 2,545 113 3 O -/R -/R -/R 2567 Kaser Brothers 6,049 1,526 59 O O O O 2568 Keegan 7,102 610 29 O -/R -/R -/R 2569 Zack T. Keys 9,800 1,812 58 2004 NO NO 4 O O O O 2570 Zack T Keys 3,246 1,595 64 2004 NO NO 4 O O O R 2571 Horn Butte 17,819 4,521 836 2004 NO YES 2,4,5 O O/R O/R R 2572 Laffoon and Carlson 6,712 2,823 83 2003 YES O - - - 2573 L.B. Ranch 457 24 2 O -/R -/R -/R 2574 Lear 2,994 200 13 O -/R -/R -/R 2575 Andrew F. Leckie, Jr 2,187 33 1 O -/R -/R - 2576 Left Hand Canyon 4,759 117 3 2004 YES O -/R -/R -/R 2577 Byrds Point 6,469 1,690 94 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 O O O O 2578 Logan 15,713 1,428 111 O O O O 2579 Eugene Logan Jr. 1,582 831 42 2004 YES O -/R -/R - 2581 Elsie Martin 4,806 985 22 O -/R -/R -/R 2583 Mulkey 1,354 199 15 2004 YES O - - CLOSE 

2584 Catherine Maurer 45,880 14,213 789 O O O O/R 2585 Seek Peak 1,681 317 11 O -/R -/R -/R 

2586 Tom McDonald 6,947 458 27 2005 YES O -/R -/R -/R 

2587 Corral Canyon 9,023 2,361 78 2002 NO NO 1,2,3,4,5 O -/R -/R -

2588 Spud 1,319 619 40 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 O -/R -/R -/R 2589 McQuinn 392 40 1 O -/R -/R -/R 

2590 Carroll Rim 3,704 3,471 101 2003 NO NO 3,5 O - - -2591 Miller 3,815 1,822 47 2003 YES O -/R -/R -/R 

J-4 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Number Name 

Total

Acres 

BLM

Acres 

BLM

AUMs 

Year S&G

Completed 

S&Gs

Met? 

1 or More

Failures Caused

by Livestock? 

Standards

not met Alt 1 

Alts 2

and 5 Alt 3 Alt 4 

2592 Mary Misener 1,020 511 51 2003 NO NO 1,3,5 O - - CLOSE 

2593 Verne A. Mobley 6,415 1,316 133 O O O O 2594 Morehouse and

Elliot 

232 64 3 2002 YES O - - CLOSE 

2595 Windy River 1,772 721 53 2002 NO NO 1,3,4,5 O -/R -/R -/R 

2596 Howard Mortimore 8,495 40 6 O -/R -/R -/R 

2597 John T. Murtha 15,458 8,894 283 O O O R 2598 Hay Creek 4,186 1,757 126 2002 YES O O O O/R 2599 Kenneth Myers 6,363 159 10 O -/R -/R -/R 

2600 J. Willis Nartz 2,371 473 48 O O O O 2601 Victor B. Nash 2,347 152 14 O -/R -/R -/R 

2603 Lee H. Petty John 9,874 355 14 O -/R -/R -/R 

2604 Philippi 8,097 1,039 64 2004 NO NO 1,3,4,5 O O O O 

2605 E. Glenn Potter 1,268 76 3 O -/R -/R -/R 

2606 William W. Potter 884 82 4 O -/R -/R -/R 

2607 Pryor Farms 5,280 787 50 2005 NO YES 2,4,5 O O O O 

2608 Rattray 27,646 10,795 517 2004 YES O O O R 2609 Crown Rock 4,277 4,257 105 2003 NO NO 2,3,4,5 O -/R -/R -

2611 Van Rietmann 3,398 843 25 O -/R -/R -/R 

2612 Arthur N. Robinson 819 39 1 O -/R -/R -/R 

2613 Frank R. Robinson 2,851 794 2 O -/R -/R -

2614 Clarno Homestead 2,255 2,181 63 2003 YES O O O R 2616 Orville Ruggles 2,680 8 11 2003 YES O -/R -/R -/R 2617 Emigrant Canyon 5,759 609 20 2002 NO NO 1,3,4,5 O -/R -/R -/R 

2619 Sid Seale 40,052 14,705 733 2003 NO 2,4,5 O O O R 2620 Evelyn E. See 2,041 176 3 O -/R -/R -/R 

2621 Earl A. Smith 16,032 221 35 2003 YES O -/R -/R -/R 

2622 Alta M. Spalding 620 130 7 O -/R -/R -/R 

J-5 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Number Name Total Acres BLM Acres BLM AUMs Year S&G Completed S&Gs Met? 1 or More Failures Caused by Livestock? Standards not met Alt 1 Alts 2 and 5 Alt 3 Alt 4 2623 Butte Creek 62,597 4,176 230 2003 YES O O O R 2624 Burnt Ranch 1,566 293 5 2002 NO NO 1,2,3,4,5 O - - CLOSE 2625 Davd M. Stirewalt 5,100 1,216 65 O O O O 2626 Harper Mountain 10,808 718 25 O -/R -/R - 2627 Robert W. Straub 5,322 1,585 69 O - - CLOSE 2628 Fourmile Canyon 2,408 835 152 2004 NO YES 1 O -/R -/R - 2629 Tatum 6,080 2,860 113 2003 YES O O O R 2630 Tripp 71 7 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 O -/R -/R -/R 2631 Dipping Vat 2,123 1,151 25 O -/R -/R -/R 2632 Larson 474 77 5 O -/R -/R -/R 2633 Amine Peak 146,31 4,372 294 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 O -/R -/R - 2634 Corral Hollow 4,451 157 32 O -/R -/R -/R 2635 Richard Foster 708 252 20 O - - CLOSE 2636 Weedman Ranches 3,196 301 6 O -/R -/R -/R 2637 V.O. West 3,389 232 15 2002 NO NO 1,3,4,5 O - - - 2639 Tubb Creek 6,510 407 50 O O O O 2641 North Eighty 144 78 3 2004 YES O O O O 2642 Mascall-Cant 9,932 4,162 265 2004 NO YES O -/R -/R - 2644 Hi-Meadows 544 98 2003 YES O -/R -/R - 2645 Clark 15,531 4,135 158 O O O O 

2646 Lonerock 87 68 27 2003 YES O O O O 2648 Hartung 1,884 697 22 2002 YES O -/R -/R -/R 2649 W Rim 2,023 349 3 2002 NO NO 1,3 O -/R -/R -/R 

2651 Bull Canyon 1,879 278 3 O -/R -/R -/R 

2653 Brooks Lease 16,658 36 2 O -/R -/R -/R 

2655 Norton Ranch 25,499 316 21 O -/R -/R -/R 

2656 Dry Knob 1,087 334 7 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 O -/R -/R -/R 

2657 Bridge Creek 553 52 2 O -/R -/R -/R 

J-6 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Number Name 

Total

Acres 

BLM

Acres 

BLM

AUMs 

Year S&G

Completed 

S&Gs

Met? 

1 or More

Failures Caused

by Livestock? 

Standards

not met Alt 1 

Alts 2

and 5 Alt 3 Alt 4 

2659 Packsaddle

Mountain 

1,100 397 20 2003 YES O - - CLOSE 

2660 Rattlesnake Creek 4,218 283 11 O -/R -/R -

2661 Pebble Springs 5,742 158 53 O O O O 2662 Johnson Creek 21,031 7,115 436 O O O R 

2663 Smith Hollow 8,858 570 51 O O O O 

2664 Speckle Canyon 134 79 2 2004 YES O O O O 2665 Workman 2,667 40 3 O -/R -/R -/R 

2667 Gooseberry

Mountain 

3,475 1,266 43 O O O O 

2669 Kiosk 4,738 159 16 2004 NO YES 1,3,5 O - - CLOSE 

2670 Rowe Creek 1379 360 16 O -/R -/R -/R 

2671 Red Rock 2728 964 40 2002 NO NO 2,4,5 O - - -

2672 Table Mountain 10,836 123 11 O -/R -/R -/R 

4001 Johnny Creek 6788 2,114 423 2005 NO NO 2,3,5 O -/R -/R -

4003 Slickear Mtn. 41,724 2,840 537 O -/R -/R -

4007 Windy Point 5,878 2,585 407 2005 NO NO 2,3,5 O -/R -/R -

4009 Birch Creek 7,917 2,851 350 2005 NO NO 2,3,5 O - - -

4012 River 258 114 13 O -/R -/R -/R 

4013 John Day 91 40 5 O -/R -/R -/R 

4014 Middle Fork 81 81 16 O -/R -/R -/R 

4015 MUD SPRINGS 3,542 1,913 -128 - CLOSE CLOSE CLOSE 

4016 Dixie 6,599 2,215 236 O O O O 

4020 Murderer’s Creek 37,181 16,917 860 O -/R -/R -

4028 Neal Butte 3,565 684 119 O - - CLOSE 

4029 North Fork 5,666 2,279 316 O -/R -/R -

4035 Rim 724 677 41 O O O O 4036 Stonehill 2,895 511 80 O O O O 

4038 Dayville 3,945 1,667 141 O -/R -/R - J-7 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Number Name Total Acres BLM Acres BLM AUMs Year S&G Completed S&Gs Met? 1 or More Failures Caused by Livestock? Standards not met Alt 1 Alts 2 and 5 Alt 3 Alt 4 4039 Aldrich Mtn. 9,995 40 5 O -/R -/R -/R 4040 Merrell 15 5 9 O -/R -/R -/R 4041 Franks Creek 3,703 2,109 196 2005 NO YES 1,2,3,5 O - - - 4042 Johnny Cake Mtn. 2,930 290 30 O - - CLOSE 4043 Mahogany 10,514 319 64 O O O -/R 4044 Soda Creek 6,317 1,968 405 2003 NO YES 1,2,3,4,5 O - - - 4049 Battle Creek 6,713 4,781 830 2004 YES O -/R -/R - 4050 Jinks Creek 5,750 80 16 O -/R -/R -/R 4052 Big Baldy 15,139 12,036 1743 2004 YES O -/R -/R - 4056 Pointer 219 219 12 O O O O 4058 Sugarloaf 214 160 45 O O O O 4061 Scott Creek 4,420 913 119 2005 NO NO 1,3,5 O O O O 4064 Antelope 501 40 2 O -/R -/R -/R 4065 East Franks Creek 1,625 630 81 2005 NO NO 1,3,5 O O O O 4066 Kidd Creek 6,211 720 91 2005 NO NO 1,3,5 O O O O 4067 Sheep CR Butte 17,598 810 153 O O O -/R 4068 Sheep Gulch 5,804 3,561 250 2005 NO NO 3,5 O -/R -/R - 4072 Tamarack Creek 6,206 1,046 64 O O O O 4074 McCarty Creek 1,471 1,158 20 2005 NO YES 2 O - - CLOSE 4075 Echo 80 40 5 2004 NO O -/R -/R -/R 

4076 Cottonwood Creek 8,985 3,372 204 2004 NO YES O - - -4078 Gibson Hill 5,261 40 8 O -/R -/R -4080 South Stonehill 805 389 63 O O O O 4082 Jack Of Clubs 1,574 83 8 O -/R -/R -4083 19 20 981 157 26 O - - CLOSE 

4086 Rudio Mtn. 4,999 3,788 590 2005 NO NO 2,3,5 O -/R -/R -/R 

4087 Blue Basin 2,118 932 305 2005 NO NO 2,4 O -/R -/R -/R 

4093 West Bologna Creek 4,453 79 12 O -/R -/R -/R 

J-8 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Number Name 

Total

Acres 

BLM

Acres 

BLM

AUMs 

Year S&G

Completed 

S&Gs

Met? 

1 or More

Failures Caused

by Livestock? 

Standards

not met Alt 1 

Alts 2

and 5 Alt 3 Alt 4 

4095 Fields Creek 4,051 1,011 214 O O O O 4099 Indian 3,108 41 5 O -/R -/R -/R 

4103 Rockpile 9,830 4,925 928 2004 YES O -/R -/R -

4104 South Fork 4,841 240 47 O O O -/R 

4106 Izee 1,744 227 41 O - - CLOSE 

4107 Canyon Terrace 181 147 20 O O O O 4108 Little Wall Creek 678 319 53 O O O O 4109 Big Canyon Creek 146 20 O -/R -/R -/R 

4115 Canyon Mtn. 50 49 5 O O O O 4119 Black Canyon 4,684 954 188 2004 YES O -/R -/R -

4120 Ferris Creek 5,364 3,374 277 2005 NO NO 1,2,3,5 O - - -

4122 Big Bend 712 266 25 O -/R -/R -

4124 Smokey Creek 4,556 2,449 307 2002 YES O -/R -/R -

4125 UMATILLA 2,014 1,848 -123 - - - -

4127 Kimberly 273 233 40 O O O O 4131 Day Creek 2,511 1,586 160 O -/R -/R -

4135 Gibson Creek 1,363 41 7 O -/R -/R -

4139 BONE YARD 21,023 20,536 -1369 - -/R -/R -

4145 Two County 29,203 14,010 1105 2005 NO NO 4 O -/R -/R -

4151 Kinzua 39,089 8,002 539 2005 NO NO 2,3,5 O O O O 

4154 Morgan Creek 4,834 1,411 290 O -/R -/R -

4155 Blackhorse Draw 4,276 476 29 O -/R -/R -/R 

4156 Rudio Creek 8,444 2,271 369 2005 YES O -/R -/R -4159 Miller Mountain 1,683 41 5 O -/R -/R -/R 

4160 Bologna Creek 995 393 37 O -/R -/R -/R 

4163 Creek 1,105 757 51 O -/R -/R -

4164 Corral Gulch 5,606 2,953 318 O - - -

4184 Pass Creek 3,816 79 10 O -/R -/R - J-9 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Number Name Total Acres BLM Acres BLM AUMs Year S&G Completed S&Gs Met? 1 or More Failures Caused by Livestock? Standards not met Alt 1 Alts 2 and 5 Alt 3 Alt 4 4186 Big Flats 12,581 924 100 O -/R -/R - 4190 POTAMUS 4,341 4,304 -287 - - -/R - 4191 Jack Rhodden 39,983 101 26 O -/R -/R -/R 4192 WILLIAM HEALY 7,082 5,160 -344 - - -/R - 4193 DOHERTY 4,310 4,272 -285 - - -/R - 4195 JERICHO CREEK 7,400 63,03 -420 - - -/R - 4196 Big Wall Creek 1,536 40 3 O -/R -/R -/R 4197 SCAFFOLD CREEK 1,846 1,614 -108 - -/R O - 4198 WALL CREEK 485 485 -32 - CLOSE -/R CLOSE 4352 Cow Creek 1,648 149 10 O -/R -/R -/R 

J-10 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Table J-2. Allotments in the John Day Basin planning area by the values of specific Grazing Matrix factors and ratings byalternative.

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 2

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Social 

SMA

Eco Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2500 0 0 0 50 0 92 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2501 36 36 100 1 100 16 0.25 112 0 75 0 68 M 75 M 37 M 2503 30 30 0 100 0 86 1 100 0 0 0 15 L 58 M 32 M 2504 0 0 0 50 0 85 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2505 0 0 0 55 100 54 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 72 M 0 L 

2506 0 0 0 70 0 84 1 0 0 0 100 0 L 19 L 25 L 

2507 0 0 0 50 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 L 

2508 0 0 0 10 0 63 1 14 0 0 0 0 L 90 M 3 L 

2509 123 23 100 1 79 48 2 15 48 0 0 112 M 77 M 21 L 

2511 100 100 0 100 0 91 2 72 0 0 0 50 M 13 L 43 M 

2512 7 7 100 1 36 1 0.25 16 0 75 0 54 M 144 M 6 L 

2513 41 41 43 20 0 78 1.5 23 0 0 0 42 M 19 L 16 L 

2514 2 2 0 1 0 1 0.25 4 100 0 0 1 L 174 H 27 M 2515 0 0 0 70 0 95 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 25 L 

2516 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 100 0 75 0 50 M 113 M 25 L 

2517 0 0 0 50 0 97 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 M 2518 46 6 100 1 100 1 1 0 82 0 0 73 M 121 M 22 L 

2520 50 50 100 1 83 23 1 42 0 75 0 75 M 85 M 23 L 

2521 126 26 85 1 47 64 2 32 0 0 0 105 M 59 M 14 L 

2522 138 38 100 1 66 43 2 40 0 0 0 119 H 83 M 19 L 

2524 0 0 0 10 0 92 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 22 L 0 L 

2525 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.25 100 0 0 0 0 L 179 H 25 L 

2526 0 0 4 1 0 50 0.25 100 0 0 0 2 L 84 M 25 L 

2528 0 0 36 50 0 63 1 100 100 0 0 18 L 57 M 50 M 

2529 0 0 0 20 0 27 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 L 93 M 0 L 

J-11 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 2 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Social 

SMA

Eco Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2530 0 0 0 1 0 2 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 L 100 M 0 L 2531 125 66 100 1 100 1 2 100 0 75 0 112 M 83 M 42 M 

2532 1 1 0 30 0 84 1 49 0 75 0 1 L 18 L 13 L 

2533 161 77 100 1 100 1 2 100 0 75 0 131 H 75 M 44 M 

2534 0 0 0 75 0 92 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2535 108 37 31 70 100 91 2 0 0 75 0 70 M 39 L 9 L 

2536 78 3 100 1 100 1 1 0 0 0 0 89 M 133 M 1 L 

2537 10 10 100 1 100 1 0.25 72 0 75 0 55 M 116 M 21 L 

2538 136 41 100 1 100 1 2 33 0 0 0 118 H 112 M 18 L 

2539 0 0 0 60 0 88 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2540 52 52 0 100 0 96 2 79 0 0 0 26 L 14 L 33 M 2541 100 0 100 30 75 90 1.5 1 38 0 0 100 M 12 L 10 L 2543 0 0 0 1 0 73 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 23 L 0 L 2544 17 17 20 80 38 87 1 100 0 75 0 19 L 12 L 29 M 

2545 2 2 100 1 2 1 0.25 66 0 0 0 51 M 161 H 17 L 

2546 0 0 0 50 100 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 0 L 2547 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 0 0 0 20 50 M 151 H 5 L 

2548 0 0 0 90 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 2549 0 0 96 1 0 30 0.25 0 72 0 0 48 M 77 M 18 L 2551 39 39 4 95 100 18 0.25 100 0 0 0 21 L 52 L 35 M 2553 113 13 100 50 0 83 1.5 12 0 0 0 107 M 55 L 6 L 

2554 0 0 100 1 100 28 0.25 100 100 0 0 50 M 51 L 50 M 

2555 36 36 37 100 0 92 1 58 0 0 0 37 M 14 L 24 L 

2556 61 61 44 20 0 73 1.5 72 0 75 0 53 M 15 L 33 M 

2557 0 0 0 80 0 86 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2558 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 42 0 0 80 50 M 167 H 31 M 

J-12 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 2

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Social 

SMA

Eco Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2559 0 0 0 50 0 86 1 0 87 0 0 0 L 18 L 22 L 2560 44 44 54 90 100 78 1.5 42 0 75 0 49 M 9 L 22 L 2561 82 42 100 1 100 49 1 98 89 75 0 91 M 32 L 57 M 

2562 39 39 71 50 100 72 1 11 100 0 0 55 M 11 L 37 M 

2563 0 0 0 1 0 17 0.25 41 95 0 0 0 L 83 M 34 M 2564 0 0 0 70 100 83 1 100 0 0 40 0 L 14 L 35 M 2565 0 0 0 100 100 73 1 81 0 0 0 0 L 13 L 20 L 

2566 0 0 0 50 100 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 0 L 2567 0 0 100 40 0 51 1 51 0 0 0 50 M 70 M 13 L 2568 0 0 0 50 0 76 1 69 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 17 L 2569 11 11 64 20 0 52 1 89 0 75 0 37 M 64 M 25 L 2570 5 5 100 20 44 47 0.25 53 0 75 0 53 M 59 M 15 L 2571 96 96 0 1 0 1 1 84 0 0 60 48 M 160 H 60 M 

2572 145 47 100 1 78 31 2 47 9 0 0 122 H 52 L 26 M 

2573 0 0 0 85 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 2574 0 0 0 80 0 89 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 2575 0 0 3 60 100 99 1 100 100 0 0 2 L 11 L 50 M 2576 0 0 0 80 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 16 L 25 L 2577 10 10 20 1 0 22 0.25 100 0 75 0 15 L 75 M 27 M 2578 0 0 0 1 0 8 0.25 94 0 0 0 0 L 90 M 24 L 2579 100 100 83 1 0 65 1.5 100 0 0 0 91 M 92 M 50 M 

2581 65 0 58 60 100 82 1.5 0 0 0 0 61 M 13 L 0 L 

2583 100 100 20 20 0 88 1.5 100 0 0 0 60 M 16 L 50 M 

2584 14 10 100 1 2 1 0.25 7 19 0 0 57 M 166 H 9 L 

2585 0 0 0 60 0 91 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 25 L 

2586 0 0 46 70 0 78 1 75 0 0 0 23 L 16 L 19 L 

J-13 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 2 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Social 

SMA

Eco Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2587 0 0 100 1 64 35 0.25 1 101 75 0 50 M 55 M 26 M 2588 24 24 62 20 0 67 1 0 0 75 0 43 M 18 L 6 L 

2589 0 0 0 100 0 99 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 15 L 25 L 2590 187 93 100 1 100 16 2 100 0 75 0 143 H 66 M 48 M 

2591 128 32 100 1 87 61 2 39 25 0 0 114 M 49 L 24 L 

2592 200 100 51 30 100 58 2 100 0 75 0 125 H 41 L 50 M 

2593 0 0 0 50 0 1 0.25 0 100 0 0 0 L 156 H 25 L 

2594 100 100 6 1 100 98 2 95 0 0 0 53 M 14 L 49 M 2595 53 53 72 80 100 56 1.5 40 0 75 0 63 M 38 L 23 L 

2596 0 0 0 80 0 95 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2597 85 53 100 1 7 1 1 42 0 0 0 93 M 145 M 24 L 

2598 18 18 100 1 63 1 0.25 17 0 0 0 59 M 152 H 9 L 

2599 0 0 0 80 0 92 1 23 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 6 L 2600 0 0 0 30 0 60 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 88 M 0 L 

2601 0 0 0 90 0 88 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 2603 0 0 0 30 0 88 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 21 L 0 L 2604 3 3 0 1 0 47 0.25 31 0 75 0 1 L 83 M 8 L 2605 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 68 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 17 L 2606 0 0 0 50 0 97 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 2607 0 0 0 1 0 58 1 0 23 0 60 0 L 91 M 21 L 2608 100 50 100 1 73 1 1 1 8 0 0 100 M 132 M 14 L 

2609 29 0 100 1 100 13 0.25 100 20 75 0 65 M 99 M 30 M 

2611 0 0 84 50 100 79 1 0 0 0 0 42 M 15 L 0 L 

2612 0 0 0 50 0 99 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2613 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 100 100 0 0 0 L 14 L 50 M 

2614 22 22 100 1 100 48 0.25 0 45 0 0 61 M 126 M 17 L 

J-14 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 2

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Social 

SMA

Eco Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2616 0 0 0 70 0 91 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 2617 35 35 0 10 0 83 1 53 0 75 0 17 L 18 L 22 L 

2619 128 43 100 1 43 1 2 35 0 75 0 114 M 109 M 20 L 

2620 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 2621 0 0 0 20 0 71 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 25 L 2622 0 0 4 60 0 94 1 100 0 0 0 2 L 17 L 25 L 2623 38 36 100 1 96 1 0.25 0 0 0 0 69 M 143 M 9 L 

2624 61 61 12 90 100 96 2 100 0 75 0 37 M 8 L 40 M 2625 0 0 0 10 0 46 0.25 100 0 0 0 0 L 83 M 25 L 2626 0 0 0 30 0 79 1 100 100 0 0 0 L 16 L 50 M 2627 7 7 92 50 100 43 0.25 95 100 0 0 49 M 40 L 50 M 

2628 95 95 71 1 85 1 1 86 0 0 20 83 M 122 M 50 M 2629 39 15 100 1 53 6 0.25 13 64 0 0 70 M 67 M 23 L 

2630 100 100 7 100 43 94 2 0 0 75 0 54 M 11 L 25 L 

2631 79 0 100 1 92 79 1.5 0 100 0 0 90 M 47 L 25 L 

2632 0 0 0 90 0 96 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 2633 21 21 100 1 100 1 0.25 93 0 75 0 61 M 110 M 29 M 2634 0 0 0 60 100 73 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 0 L 2635 100 100 0 98 0 83 1.5 100 0 0 0 50 M 13 L 50 M 2636 4 4 12 40 0 95 1 20 0 0 0 8 L 20 L 6 L 2637 80 80 12 90 67 88 1.5 25 0 75 0 46 M 11 L 26 M 

2639 0 0 36 75 10 58 1 0 99 0 0 18 L 62 M 25 L 

2641 0 0 8 100 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 4 L 59 M 25 L 

2642 0 0 100 50 0 1 0.25 83 0 0 60 50 M 139 M 36 M 

2644 100 100 0 1 0 18 1 100 0 0 0 50 M 76 M 50 M 

2645 10 10 44 10 0 1 0.25 82 0 0 0 27 L 166 H 23 L 

J-15 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 2 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Social 

SMA

Eco Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2646 0 0 0 70 0 78 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 68 M 25 L 

2648 44 44 70 30 100 82 1.5 30 0 0 0 57 M 14 L 18 L 

2649 161 93 35 80 0 98 2 0 0 75 0 98 M 10 L 23 L 

2651 39 0 0 100 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 19 L 16 L 0 L 2653 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2655 0 0 0 70 0 83 1 20 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 5 L 

2656 121 40 28 50 0 94 2 0 0 75 0 74 M 13 L 10 L 

2657 0 0 0 50 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 L 

2659 200 100 40 60 100 83 2 100 0 0 0 120 H 7 L 50 M 

2660 0 0 16 99 0 91 1 196 0 0 0 8 L 12 L 49 M 2661 100 100 0 1 0 56 1.5 0 0 0 0 50 M 82 M 25 L 

2662 9 9 100 80 0 1 0.25 22 24 0 0 54 M 131 M 14 L 

2663 0 0 0 30 0 58 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 88 M 0 L 2664 0 0 0 90 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 62 M 25 L 

2665 0 0 0 100 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 2667 0 0 100 10 0 64 1 28 0 0 0 50 M 77 M 7 L 2669 100 100 16 1 0 87 1.5 100 0 0 60 58 M 17 L 65 M 2670 0 0 0 50 0 87 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 2671 23 23 72 50 100 67 1 100 0 75 0 48 M 10 L 31 M 2672 0 0 0 80 0 91 1 0 49 0 0 0 L 17 L 12 L 4001 19 19 100 50 0 1 0.25 163 0 75 0 60 M 101 M 46 M 

4003 22 22 100 85 9 1 0.25 135 0 0 0 61 M 107 M 39 M 

4007 0 0 100 50 0 1 0.25 160 0 75 0 50 M 106 M 40 M 

4009 31 31 100 50 0 1 0.25 193 99 75 0 65 M 68 M 81 H 

4012 0 0 11 75 100 89 1 100 0 0 0 6 L 13 L 25 L 

4013 0 0 0 100 0 96 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 15 L 25 L 

J-16 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 2

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Social 

SMA

Eco Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4014 0 0 8 95 100 87 1 100 0 0 0 4 L 49 L 25 L 4015 241 241 100 1 100 58 2 103 0 0 0 170 H 51 L 86 H 

4016 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 11 0 0 0 50 M 149 M 3 L 4020 52 11 100 1 100 1 1 236 0 0 0 76 M 92 M 62 M 

4028 85 85 20 55 42 1 1 186 0 0 0 52 M 53 L 68 M 4029 100 100 100 1 100 22 1 154 0 0 0 100 M 90 M 71 M 4035 0 0 68 1 0 66 1 100 0 0 0 34 L 150 M 25 L 

4036 0 0 0 100 0 33 0.25 31 17 0 0 0 L 72 M 12 L 4038 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 188 0 0 0 50 M 138 M 47 M 4039 0 0 4 100 0 96 1 100 0 0 0 2 L 15 L 25 L 4040 0 0 0 50 0 93 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 L 4041 3 3 100 1 100 1 0.25 169 100 0 80 51 M 93 M 88 H 4042 74 74 29 50 100 75 1.5 100 0 0 0 51 M 12 L 43 M 

4043 0 0 32 1 0 47 0.25 195 0 0 0 16 L 72 M 49 M 

4044 0 0 100 50 0 1 0.25 200 0 0 100 50 M 116 M 75 H 4049 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 224 0 0 0 50 M 107 M 56 M 4050 0 0 0 100 0 87 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 15 L 25 L 4052 31 31 100 1 100 1 0.25 197 0 0 0 65 M 105 M 57 M 4056 0 0 22 50 0 90 1 91 0 0 0 11 L 69 M 23 L 

4058 0 0 0 1 0 63 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 140 M 0 L 4061 0 0 0 70 0 1 0.25 89 0 75 0 0 L 68 M 22 L 

4064 0 0 4 100 100 98 1 0 0 0 0 2 L 14 L 0 L 

4065 0 0 63 1 0 33 0.25 100 0 75 0 32 L 70 M 25 L 

4066 0 0 36 45 0 24 0.25 51 0 75 0 18 L 70 M 13 L 

4067 39 39 12 98 0 1 0.25 164 0 0 0 25 L 116 M 51 M 

4068 1 1 100 10 0 1 0.25 174 0 75 0 50 M 119 M 44 M 

J-17 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 2 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Social 

SMA

Eco Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4072 0 0 0 40 0 47 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 L 87 M 0 L 4074 85 85 100 50 100 83 1.5 129 0 0 20 93 M 35 L 58 M 

4075 0 0 4 1 0 96 1 14 0 0 2 L 22 L 4 L 4076 8 8 100 1 0 1 0.25 230 68 0 100 54 M 111 M 102 H 

4078 0 0 0 100 0 93 1 200 0 0 0 0 L 13 L 50 M 4080 0 0 39 95 0 48 0.25 100 0 0 0 20 L 62 M 25 L 

4082 0 0 8 100 0 93 1 125 78 0 0 4 L 12 L 51 M 

4083 70 70 12 70 100 78 1.5 100 0 0 0 41 M 12 L 42 M 4086 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 111 0 75 0 50 M 111 M 28 M 4087 0 0 93 50 100 1 0.25 113 0 75 0 47 M 93 M 28 M 

4093 0 0 0 100 100 90 1 0 94 0 0 0 L 12 L 24 L 

4095 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 63 0 0 0 50 M 163 H 16 L 

4099 13 0 4 100 0 96 1 94 0 0 0 9 L 15 L 24 L 

4103 55 55 100 1 0 1 1 225 0 0 0 77 M 117 M 70 M 

4104 33 33 24 100 0 61 1 100 0 0 0 29 L 57 M 33 M 

4106 96 96 0 100 0 66 1.5 200 0 0 0 48 M 42 L 74 M 4107 0 0 0 60 0 83 1 98 0 0 0 0 L 70 M 25 L 

4108 0 0 32 50 100 56 1 0 0 0 0 16 L 69 M 0 L 

4109 0 0 14 90 0 83 1 100 0 0 0 7 L 15 L 25 L 

4115 0 0 5 90 0 96 1 72 0 0 0 3 L 65 M 18 L 4119 4 4 89 50 0 1 0.25 205 0 0 0 46 M 117 M 52 M 

4120 17 17 100 1 100 1 0.25 185 100 75 0 58 M 69 M 75 H 

4122 37 37 0 40 0 79 1 200 0 0 0 18 L 15 L 59 M 

4124 93 0 100 1 0 1 1 211 0 0 0 97 M 111 M 53 M 4125 203 203 100 1 100 63 2 100 0 0 0 151 H 73 M 76 H 

4127 0 0 23 52 0 67 1 100 0 0 0 12 L 70 M 25 L 

J-18 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 2

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Social 

SMA

Eco Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4131 0 0 100 1 26 1 0.25 174 0 0 0 50 M 134 M 44 M 4135 0 0 4 50 0 94 1 200 0 0 0 2 L 15 L 50 M 4139 93 93 100 1 100 1 1 126 0 0 97 M 103 M 56 M 

4145 16 16 100 1 7 1 0.25 134 52 75 0 58 M 113 M 50 M 

4151 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 30 0 75 0 50 M 151 H 8 L 4154 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 200 0 0 0 50 M 135 M 50 M 4155 13 13 0 1 0 76 1 100 0 0 0 6 L 20 L 28 M 

4156 25 25 100 50 0 1 0.25 143 0 0 0 62 M 121 M 42 M 

4159 0 0 0 100 0 96 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

4160 0 0 39 10 0 69 1 100 0 0 0 20 L 19 L 25 L 

4163 0 0 76 1 100 58 1 265 0 0 0 38 M 70 M 66 M 

4164 9 9 100 1 100 1 0.25 300 100 0 0 54 M 65 M 102 H 4184 0 0 0 100 0 92 1 200 0 0 0 0 L 13 L 50 M 4186 47 47 92 1 0 17 1 200 0 0 0 70 M 61 M 62 M 4190 90 90 100 1 100 1 1 200 0 0 0 95 M 80 M 83 H 

4191 1 0 0 100 0 78 1 60 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 15 L 

4192 159 159 100 20 100 1 2 125 0 0 0 130 H 81 M 71 M 

4193 202 202 100 1 100 1 2 100 0 0 0 151 H 83 M 76 H 

4195 189 189 100 1 100 1 2 70 0 0 0 144 H 92 M 65 M 

4196 0 0 0 1 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 23 L 0 L 

4197 100 100 100 1 100 23 1 1 0 0 0 100 M 127 M 25 M 

4198 101 101 48 1 100 80 1.5 200 0 0 0 75 M 40 L 82 H 

4352 0 0 15 99 0 92 1 100 0 0 0 8 L 15 L 25 L 

J-19 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 3 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2500 0 0 0 50 0 92 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2501 36 36 100 1 100 16 0.25 112 0 75 0 68 M 75 M 37 M 

2503 30 30 0 100 0 86 1 100 0 0 0 15 L 58 M 32 M 

2504 0 0 0 50 0 85 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2505 0 0 0 55 100 54 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 72 M 0 L 

2506 0 0 0 70 0 84 1 0 0 0 100 0 L 19 L 25 L 

2507 0 0 0 50 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 L 

2508 0 0 0 10 0 63 1 14 0 0 0 0 L 90 M 3 L 

2509 123 23 100 1 79 48 2 15 48 0 0 112 M 77 M 21 L 

2511 100 100 0 100 0 91 2 72 0 0 0 50 M 13 L 43 M 

2512 7 7 100 1 36 1 0.25 16 0 75 0 54 M 144 M 6 L 

2513 41 41 43 20 0 78 1.5 23 0 0 0 42 M 19 L 16 L 

2514 2 2 0 1 0 1 0.25 4 100 0 0 1 L 174 H 27 M 

2515 0 0 0 70 0 95 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 25 L 

2516 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 100 0 75 0 50 M 113 M 25 L 

2517 0 0 0 50 0 97 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 M 

2518 46 6 100 1 100 1 1 0 82 0 0 73 M 121 M 22 L 

2520 50 50 100 1 83 23 1 42 0 75 0 75 M 85 M 23 L 

2521 126 26 85 1 47 64 2 32 0 0 0 105 M 59 M 14 L 

2522 138 38 100 1 66 43 2 40 0 0 0 119 H 83 M 19 L 

2524 0 0 0 10 0 92 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 22 L 0 L 

2525 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.25 100 0 0 0 0 L 179 H 25 L 

2526 0 0 4 1 0 50 0.25 100 0 0 0 2 L 84 M 25 L 

2528 0 0 36 50 0 63 1 100 100 0 0 18 L 57 M 50 M 

2529 0 0 0 20 0 27 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 L 93 M 0 L 

J-20 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 3

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and rating 

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2530 0 0 0 1 0 2 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 L 100 M 0 L 

2531 125 66 100 1 100 1 2 100 0 75 0 112 H 83 M 42 M 2532 1 1 0 30 0 84 1 49 0 75 0 1 L 18 L 13 L 

2533 161 77 100 1 100 1 2 100 0 75 0 131 H 75 M 44 M 2534 0 0 0 75 0 92 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2535 108 37 31 70 100 91 2 0 0 75 0 70 M 39 L 9 L 

2536 78 3 100 1 100 1 1 0 0 0 0 89 M 133 M 1 L 

2537 10 10 100 1 100 1 0.25 72 0 75 0 55 M 116 M 21 L 

2538 136 41 100 1 100 1 2 33 0 0 0 118 H 112 M 18 L 

2539 0 0 0 60 0 88 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2540 52 52 0 100 0 96 2 79 0 0 0 26 L 14 L 33 M 

2541 100 0 100 30 75 90 1.5 1 38 0 0 100 M 12 L 10 L 

2543 0 0 0 1 0 73 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 23 L 0 L 

2544 17 17 20 80 38 87 1 100 0 75 0 19 L 12 L 29 M 

2545 2 2 100 1 2 1 0.25 66 0 0 0 51 M 161 H 17 L 

2546 0 0 0 50 100 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 0 L 

2547 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 0 0 0 20 50 M 151 H 5 L 

2548 0 0 0 90 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

2549 0 0 96 1 0 30 0.25 0 72 0 0 48 M 77 M 18 L 

2551 39 39 4 95 100 18 0.25 100 0 0 0 21 L 52 L 35 M 

2553 113 13 100 50 0 83 1.5 12 0 0 0 107 M 55 L 6 L 

2554 0 0 100 1 100 28 0.25 100 100 0 0 50 M 51 L 50 M 

2555 36 36 37 100 0 92 1 58 0 0 0 37 M 14 L 24 L 

2556 61 61 44 20 0 73 1.5 72 0 75 0 53 M 15 L 33 M 

2557 0 0 0 80 0 86 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

J-21 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 3 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2558 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 42 0 0 80 50 M 167 H 31 M 

2559 0 0 0 50 0 86 1 0 87 0 0 0 L 18 L 22 L 

2560 44 44 54 90 100 78 1.5 42 0 75 0 49 M 9 L 22 L 

2561 82 42 100 1 100 49 1 98 89 75 0 91 M 32 L 57 M 

2562 39 39 71 50 100 72 1 11 100 0 0 55 M 11 L 37 M 

2563 0 0 0 1 0 17 0.25 41 95 0 0 0 L 83 M 34 M 

2564 0 0 0 70 100 83 1 100 0 0 40 0 L 14 L 35 M 

2565 0 0 0 100 100 73 1 81 0 0 0 0 L 13 L 20 L 

2566 0 0 0 50 100 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 0 L 

2567 0 0 100 40 0 51 1 51 0 0 0 50 M 70 M 13 L 

2568 0 0 0 50 0 76 1 69 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 17 L 

2569 11 11 64 20 0 52 1 89 0 75 0 37 M 64 M 25 L 

2570 5 5 100 20 44 47 0.25 53 0 75 0 53 M 59 M 15 L 

2571 96 96 0 1 0 1 1 84 0 0 60 48 M 160 H 60 M 

2572 145 47 100 1 78 31 2 47 9 0 0 122 H 52 L 26 M 

2573 0 0 0 85 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

2574 0 0 0 80 0 89 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2575 0 0 3 60 100 99 1 100 100 0 0 2 L 11 L 50 M 

2576 0 0 0 80 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 16 L 25 L 

2577 10 10 20 1 0 22 0.25 100 0 75 0 15 L 75 M 27 M 

2578 0 0 0 1 0 8 0.25 94 0 0 0 0 L 90 M 24 L 

2579 100 100 83 1 0 65 1.5 100 0 0 0 91 M 92 M 50 M 

2581 65 0 58 60 100 82 1.5 0 0 0 0 61 M 13 L 0 L 

2583 100 100 20 20 0 88 1.5 100 0 0 0 60 M 16 L 50 M 

2584 14 10 100 1 2 1 0.25 7 19 0 0 57 M 166 H 9 L 

J-22 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 3

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and rating 

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2585 0 0 0 60 0 91 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 25 L 

2586 0 0 46 70 0 78 1 75 0 0 0 23 L 16 L 19 L 

2587 0 0 100 1 64 35 0.25 1 101 75 0 50 M 55 M 26 M 

2588 24 24 62 20 0 67 1 0 0 75 0 43 M 18 L 6 L 

2589 0 0 0 100 0 99 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 15 L 25 L 

2590 187 93 100 1 100 16 2 100 0 75 0 143 H 66 M 48 M 2591 128 32 100 1 87 61 2 39 25 0 0 114 H 49 L 24 L 

2592 200 100 51 30 100 58 2 100 0 75 0 125 H 41 L 50 M 

2593 0 0 0 50 0 1 0.25 0 100 0 0 0 L 156 H 25 L 

2594 100 100 6 1 100 98 2 95 0 0 0 53 M 14 L 49 M 

2595 53 53 72 80 100 56 1.5 40 0 75 0 63 M 38 L 23 L 

2596 0 0 0 80 0 95 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2597 85 53 100 1 7 1 1 42 0 0 0 93 M 145 M 24 L 

2598 18 18 100 1 63 1 0.25 17 0 0 0 59 M 152 H 9 L 

2599 0 0 0 80 0 92 1 23 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 6 L 

2600 0 0 0 30 0 60 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 88 M 0 L 

2601 0 0 0 90 0 88 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

2603 0 0 0 30 0 88 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 21 L 0 L 

2604 3 3 0 1 0 47 0.25 31 0 75 0 1 L 83 M 8 L 

2605 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 68 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 17 L 

2606 0 0 0 50 0 97 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2607 0 0 0 1 0 58 1 0 23 0 60 0 L 91 M 21 L 

2608 100 50 100 1 73 1 1 1 8 0 0 100 M 132 M 14 L 

2609 29 0 100 1 100 13 0.25 100 20 75 0 65 M 99 M 30 M 

2611 0 0 84 50 100 79 1 0 0 0 0 42 M 15 L 0 L 

2612 0 0 0 50 0 99 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

J-23 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 3 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2613 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 100 100 0 0 0 L 14 L 50 M 

2614 22 22 100 1 100 48 0.25 0 45 0 0 61 M 126 M 17 L 

2616 0 0 0 70 0 91 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2617 35 35 0 10 0 83 1 53 0 75 0 17 L 18 L 22 L 

2619 128 43 100 1 43 1 2 35 0 75 0 114 H 109 M 20 L 

2620 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2621 0 0 0 20 0 71 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 25 L 

2622 0 0 4 60 0 94 1 100 0 0 0 2 L 17 L 25 L 

2623 38 36 100 1 96 1 0.25 0 0 0 0 69 M 143 M 9 L 

2624 61 61 12 90 100 96 2 100 0 75 0 37 M 8 L 40 M 

2625 0 0 0 10 0 46 0.25 100 0 0 0 0 L 83 M 25 L 

2626 0 0 0 30 0 79 1 100 100 0 0 0 L 16 L 50 M 

2627 7 7 92 50 100 43 0.25 95 100 0 0 49 M 40 L 50 M 

2628 95 95 71 1 85 1 1 86 0 0 20 83 M 122 M 50 M 

2629 39 15 100 1 53 6 0.25 13 64 0 0 70 M 67 M 23 L 

2630 100 100 7 100 43 94 2 0 0 75 0 54 M 11 L 25 L 

2631 79 0 100 1 92 79 1.5 0 100 0 0 90 M 47 L 25 L 

2632 0 0 0 90 0 96 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

2633 21 21 100 1 100 1 0.25 93 0 75 0 61 M 110 M 29 M 

2634 0 0 0 60 100 73 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 0 L 

2635 100 100 0 98 0 83 1.5 100 0 0 0 50 M 13 L 50 M 

2636 4 4 12 40 0 95 1 20 0 0 0 8 L 20 L 6 L 

2637 80 80 12 90 67 88 1.5 25 0 75 0 46 M 11 L 26 M 

2639 0 0 36 75 10 58 1 0 99 0 0 18 L 62 M 25 L 

2641 0 0 8 100 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 4 L 59 M 25 L 

J-24 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 3

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and rating 

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2642 0 0 100 50 0 1 0.25 83 0 0 60 50 M 139 M 36 M 

2644 100 100 0 1 0 18 1 100 0 0 0 50 M 76 M 50 M 

2645 10 10 44 10 0 1 0.25 82 0 0 0 27 L 166 H 23 L 

2646 0 0 0 70 0 78 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 68 M 25 L 

2648 44 44 70 30 100 82 1.5 30 0 0 0 57 M 14 L 18 L 

2649 161 93 35 80 0 98 2 0 0 75 0 98 M 10 L 23 L 

2651 39 0 0 100 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 19 L 16 L 0 L 

2653 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2655 0 0 0 70 0 83 1 20 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 5 L 

2656 121 40 28 50 0 94 2 0 0 75 0 74 M 13 L 10 L 

2657 0 0 0 50 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 L 

2659 200 100 40 60 100 83 2 100 0 0 0 120 H 7 L 50 M 

2660 0 0 16 99 0 91 1 196 0 0 0 8 L 12 L 49 M 

2661 100 100 0 1 0 56 1.5 0 0 0 0 50 M 82 M 25 L 

2662 9 9 100 80 0 1 0.25 22 24 0 0 54 M 131 M 14 L 

2663 0 0 0 30 0 58 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 88 M 0 L 

2664 0 0 0 90 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 62 M 25 L 

2665 0 0 0 100 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

2667 0 0 100 10 0 64 1 28 0 0 0 50 M 77 M 7 L 

2669 100 100 16 1 0 87 1.5 100 0 0 60 58 M 17 L 65 H 

2670 0 0 0 50 0 87 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2671 23 23 72 50 100 67 1 100 0 75 0 48 M 10 L 31 M 

2672 0 0 0 80 0 91 1 0 49 0 0 0 L 17 L 12 L 

4001 19 19 100 50 0 1 0.25 163 0 75 0 60 M 101 M 46 M 

4003 22 22 100 85 9 1 0.25 135 0 0 0 61 M 107 M 39 M 

J-25 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 3 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4007 0 0 100 50 0 1 0.25 160 0 75 0 50 M 106 M 40 M 

4009 31 31 100 50 0 1 0.25 193 99 75 0 65 M 68 M 81 H 

4012 0 0 11 75 100 89 1 100 0 0 0 6 L 13 L 25 L 

4013 0 0 0 100 0 96 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 15 L 25 L 

4014 0 0 8 95 100 87 1 100 0 0 0 4 L 49 L 25 L 

4015 149 149 100 1 100 27 2 103 0 0 0 125 H 46 L 63 H 

4016 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 11 0 0 0 50 M 149 M 3 L 

4020 52 11 100 1 100 1 1 236 0 0 0 76 M 92 M 62 M 

4028 85 85 20 55 42 1 1 186 0 0 0 52 M 53 L 68 H 

4029 69 69 100 1 100 1 1 154 28 0 0 85 M 86 M 56 M 

4035 0 0 68 1 0 66 1 100 0 0 0 34 M 150 M 25 L 

4036 0 0 0 100 0 33 0.25 31 17 0 0 0 L 72 M 12 L 

4038 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 188 0 0 0 50 M 138 M 47 M 

4039 0 0 4 100 0 96 1 100 0 0 0 2 L 15 L 25 L 

4040 0 0 0 50 0 93 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 L 

4041 3 3 100 1 100 1 0.25 169 100 0 80 51 M 93 M 88 H 

4042 53 53 29 50 100 75 1.5 100 0 0 0 41 M 12 L 38 M 

4043 0 0 32 1 0 47 0.25 195 0 0 0 16 L 72 M 49 M 

4044 0 0 100 50 0 1 0.25 200 0 0 100 50 M 116 M 75 H 

4049 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 224 0 0 0 50 M 107 M 56 M 

4050 0 0 0 100 0 87 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 15 L 25 L 

4052 31 31 100 1 100 1 0.25 197 0 0 0 65 M 105 M 57 M 

4056 0 0 22 50 0 90 1 91 0 0 0 11 L 69 M 23 L 

4058 0 0 0 1 0 63 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 140 M 0 L 

4061 0 0 0 70 0 1 0.25 89 0 75 0 0 L 68 M 22 L 

J-26 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 3

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and rating 

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4064 0 0 4 100 100 98 1 0 0 0 0 2 L 14 L 0 L 

4065 0 0 63 1 0 33 0.25 100 0 75 0 32 L 70 M 25 L 

4066 0 0 36 45 0 24 0.25 51 0 75 0 18 L 70 M 13 L 

4067 39 39 12 98 0 1 0.25 164 0 0 0 25 L 116 M 51 M 

4068 1 1 100 10 0 1 0.25 174 0 75 0 50 M 119 M 44 M 

4072 0 0 0 40 0 47 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 L 87 M 0 L 

4074 85 85 100 50 100 83 1.5 129 0 0 20 93 M 35 L 58 M 

4075 0 0 4 1 0 96 1 14 0 0 2 L 22 L 4 L 

4076 8 8 100 1 0 1 0.25 230 68 0 100 54 M 111 M 102 H 

4078 0 0 0 100 0 93 1 200 0 0 0 0 L 13 L 50 M 

4080 0 0 39 95 0 48 0.25 100 0 0 0 20 L 62 M 25 L 

4082 0 0 8 100 0 93 1 125 78 0 0 4 L 12 L 51 M 

4083 70 70 12 70 100 78 1.5 100 0 0 0 41 M 12 L 42 M 

4086 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 111 0 75 0 50 M 111 M 28 M 

4087 0 0 93 50 100 1 0.25 113 0 75 0 47 M 93 M 28 M 

4093 0 0 0 100 100 90 1 0 94 0 0 0 L 12 L 24 L 

4095 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 63 0 0 0 50 M 163 H 16 L 

4099 13 0 4 100 0 96 1 94 0 0 0 9 L 15 L 24 L 

4103 55 55 100 1 0 1 1 225 0 0 0 77 M 117 M 70 H 

4104 33 33 24 100 0 61 1 100 0 0 0 29 L 57 M 33 M 

4106 96 96 0 100 0 66 1.5 200 0 0 0 48 M 42 L 74 H 

4107 0 0 0 60 0 83 1 98 0 0 0 0 L 70 M 25 L 

4108 0 0 32 50 100 56 1 0 0 0 0 16 L 69 M 0 L 

4109 0 0 14 90 0 83 1 100 0 0 0 7 L 15 L 25 L 

4115 0 0 5 90 0 96 1 72 0 0 0 3 L 65 M 18 L 

J-27 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 3 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4119 4 4 89 50 0 1 0.25 205 0 0 0 46 M 117 M 52 M 

4120 17 17 100 1 100 1 0.25 185 100 75 0 58 M 69 M 75 H 

4122 37 37 0 40 0 79 1 200 0 0 0 18 L 15 L 59 M 

4124 93 0 100 1 0 1 1 211 0 0 0 97 M 111 M 53 M 

4125 127 127 100 1 100 48 2 100 0 0 0 114 H 70 M 57 M 

4127 0 0 23 52 0 67 1 100 0 0 0 12 L 70 M 25 L 

4131 0 0 100 1 26 1 0.25 174 0 0 0 50 M 134 M 44 M 

4135 0 0 4 50 0 94 1 200 0 0 0 2 L 15 L 50 M 

4139 1 1 100 1 100 1 0.25 126 4 0 50 M 103 M 32 M 

4145 16 16 100 1 7 1 0.25 134 52 75 0 58 M 113 M 50 M 

4151 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 30 0 75 0 50 M 151 H 8 L 

4154 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 200 0 0 0 50 M 135 M 50 M 

4155 13 13 0 1 0 76 1 100 0 0 0 6 L 20 L 28 M 

4156 25 25 100 50 0 1 0.25 143 0 0 0 62 M 121 M 42 M 

4159 0 0 0 100 0 96 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

4160 0 0 39 10 0 69 1 100 0 0 0 20 L 19 L 25 L 

4163 0 0 76 1 100 58 1 265 0 0 0 38 M 70 M 66 H 

4164 9 9 100 1 100 1 0.25 300 100 0 0 54 M 65 M 102 H 

4184 0 0 0 100 0 92 1 200 0 0 0 0 L 13 L 50 M 

4186 47 47 92 1 0 17 1 200 0 0 0 70 M 61 M 62 M 

4190 2 2 100 1 100 1 0.25 200 42 0 0 51 M 80 M 50 M 

4191 1 0 0 100 0 78 1 60 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 15 L 

4192 79 79 100 20 100 1 1 125 0 0 0 89 M 81 M 51 M 

4193 124 124 100 1 100 1 2 100 0 0 0 112 M 83 M 56 M 

4195 102 102 100 1 100 1 1 70 0 0 0 101 M 92 M 43 M 

J-28 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 3

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and rating 

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4196 0 0 0 1 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 23 L 0 L 

4197 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 1 0 0 0 50 M 123 M 0 L 

4198 1 1 48 1 100 73 1 200 25 0 0 25 L 39 L 50 M 

4352 0 0 15 99 0 92 1 100 0 0 0 8 L 15 L 25 L 

J-29 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 4 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2500 0 0 0 50 0 92 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2501 36 36 100 1 100 16 0.25 112 0 75 0 68 H 75 M 37 H 

2503 30 30 0 100 0 86 1 100 0 0 0 15 L 58 M 32 H 2504 0 0 0 50 0 85 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2505 0 0 0 55 100 54 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 72 M 0 L 2506 0 0 0 70 0 84 1 0 0 0 100 0 L 19 L 25 L 

2507 0 0 0 50 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 L 

2508 0 0 0 10 0 63 1 14 0 0 0 0 L 90 M 3 L 

2509 123 23 100 1 79 48 2 15 48 0 0 112 H 77 M 21 L 

2511 100 100 0 100 0 91 2 72 0 0 0 50 M 13 L 43 H 

2512 7 7 100 1 36 1 0.25 16 0 75 0 54 H 144 M 6 L 

2513 41 41 43 20 0 78 1.5 23 0 0 0 42 M 19 L 16 L 

2514 2 2 0 1 0 1 0.25 4 100 0 0 1 L 174 H 27 M 

2515 0 0 0 70 0 95 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 25 L 

2516 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 100 0 75 0 50 M 113 M 25 L 

2517 0 0 0 50 0 97 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 M 2518 46 6 100 1 100 1 1 0 82 0 0 73 H 121 M 22 L 

2520 50 50 100 1 83 23 1 42 0 75 0 75 H 85 M 23 L 

2521 126 26 85 1 47 64 2 32 0 0 0 105 H 59 M 14 L 

2522 138 38 100 1 66 43 2 40 0 0 0 119 H 83 M 19 L 

2524 0 0 0 10 0 92 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 22 L 0 L 

2525 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.25 100 0 0 0 0 L 179 H 25 L 

2526 0 0 4 1 0 50 0.25 100 0 0 0 2 L 84 M 25 L 

2528 0 0 36 50 0 63 1 100 100 0 0 18 L 57 M 50 H 

2529 0 0 0 20 0 27 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 L 93 M 0 L 

J-30 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 4

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2530 0 0 0 1 0 2 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 L 100 M 0 L 

2531 125 66 100 1 100 1 2 100 0 75 0 112 H 83 M 42 H 

2532 1 1 0 30 0 84 1 49 0 75 0 1 L 18 L 13 L 

2533 161 77 100 1 100 1 2 100 0 75 0 131 H 75 M 44 H 

2534 0 0 0 75 0 92 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2535 108 37 31 70 100 91 2 0 0 75 0 70 H 39 L 9 L 

2536 78 3 100 1 100 1 1 0 0 0 0 89 H 133 M 1 L 

2537 10 10 100 1 100 1 0.25 72 0 75 0 55 H 116 M 21 L 

2538 136 41 100 1 100 1 2 33 0 0 0 118 H 112 M 18 L 

2539 0 0 0 60 0 88 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2540 52 52 0 100 0 96 2 79 0 0 0 26 L 14 L 33 H 

2541 100 0 100 30 75 90 1.5 1 38 0 0 100 H 12 L 10 L 

2543 0 0 0 1 0 73 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 23 L 0 L 

2544 17 17 20 80 38 87 1 100 0 75 0 19 L 12 L 29 M 

2545 2 2 100 1 2 1 0.25 66 0 0 0 51 H 161 H 17 L 

2546 0 0 0 50 100 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 0 L 

2547 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 0 0 0 20 50 M 151 H 5 L 

2548 0 0 0 90 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

2549 0 0 96 1 0 30 0.25 0 72 0 0 48 M 77 M 18 L 

2551 39 39 4 95 100 18 0.25 100 0 0 0 21 L 52 L 35 H 

2553 113 13 100 50 0 83 1.5 12 0 0 0 107 H 55 L 6 L 

2554 0 0 100 1 100 28 0.25 100 100 0 0 50 M 51 L 50 H 

2555 36 36 37 100 0 92 1 58 0 0 0 37 M 14 L 24 L 

2556 61 61 44 20 0 73 1.5 72 0 75 0 53 H 15 L 33 H 

2557 0 0 0 80 0 86 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

J-31 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 4 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2558 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 42 0 0 80 50 M 167 H 31 M 

2559 0 0 0 50 0 86 1 0 87 0 0 0 L 18 L 22 L 

2560 44 44 54 90 100 78 1.5 42 0 75 0 49 M 9 L 22 L 2561 82 42 100 1 100 49 1 98 89 75 0 91 H 32 L 57 H 

2562 39 39 71 50 100 72 1 11 100 0 0 55 H 11 L 37 H 

2563 0 0 0 1 0 17 0.25 41 95 0 0 0 L 83 M 34 H 2564 0 0 0 70 100 83 1 100 0 0 40 0 L 14 L 35 H 

2565 0 0 0 100 100 73 1 81 0 0 0 0 L 13 L 20 L 

2566 0 0 0 50 100 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 0 L 

2567 0 0 100 40 0 51 1 51 0 0 0 50 M 70 M 13 L 

2568 0 0 0 50 0 76 1 69 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 17 L 

2569 11 11 64 20 0 52 1 89 0 75 0 37 M 64 M 25 L 

2570 5 5 100 20 44 47 0.25 53 0 75 0 53 H 59 M 15 L 

2571 96 96 0 1 0 1 1 84 0 0 60 48 M 160 H 60 H 

2572 145 47 100 1 78 31 2 47 9 0 0 122 H 52 L 26 M 

2573 0 0 0 85 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

2574 0 0 0 80 0 89 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2575 0 0 3 60 100 99 1 100 100 0 0 2 L 11 L 50 H 

2576 0 0 0 80 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 16 L 25 L 

2577 10 10 20 1 0 22 0.25 100 0 75 0 15 L 75 M 27 M 2578 0 0 0 1 0 8 0.25 94 0 0 0 0 L 90 M 24 L 

2579 100 100 83 1 0 65 1.5 100 0 0 0 91 H 92 M 50 H 

2581 65 0 58 60 100 82 1.5 0 0 0 0 61 H 13 L 0 L 

2583 100 100 20 20 0 88 1.5 100 0 0 0 60 H 16 L 50 H 

2584 14 10 100 1 2 1 0.25 7 19 0 0 57 H 166 H 9 L 

J-32 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 4

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2585 0 0 0 60 0 91 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 25 L 

2586 0 0 46 70 0 78 1 75 0 0 0 23 L 16 L 19 L 2587 0 0 100 1 64 35 0.25 1 101 75 0 50 H 55 M 26 M 

2588 24 24 62 20 0 67 1 0 0 75 0 43 M 18 L 6 L 2589 0 0 0 100 0 99 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 15 L 25 L 

2590 187 93 100 1 100 16 2 100 0 75 0 143 H 66 M 48 H 

2591 128 32 100 1 87 61 2 39 25 0 0 114 H 49 L 24 L 

2592 200 100 51 30 100 58 2 100 0 75 0 125 H 41 L 50 H 

2593 0 0 0 50 0 1 0.25 0 100 0 0 0 L 156 H 25 L 

2594 100 100 6 1 100 98 2 95 0 0 0 53 H 14 L 49 H 

2595 53 53 72 80 100 56 1.5 40 0 75 0 63 H 38 L 23 L 

2596 0 0 0 80 0 95 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2597 85 53 100 1 7 1 1 42 0 0 0 93 H 145 M 24 L 

2598 18 18 100 1 63 1 0.25 17 0 0 0 59 H 152 H 9 L 

2599 0 0 0 80 0 92 1 23 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 6 L 

2600 0 0 0 30 0 60 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 88 M 0 L 

2601 0 0 0 90 0 88 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

2603 0 0 0 30 0 88 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 21 L 0 L 

2604 3 3 0 1 0 47 0.25 31 0 75 0 1 L 83 M 8 L 

2605 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 68 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 17 L 

2606 0 0 0 50 0 97 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2607 0 0 0 1 0 58 1 0 23 0 60 0 L 91 M 21 L 

2608 100 50 100 1 73 1 1 1 8 0 0 100 H 132 M 14 L 

2609 29 0 100 1 100 13 0.25 100 20 75 0 65 H 99 M 30 M 

2611 0 0 84 50 100 79 1 0 0 0 0 42 M 15 L 0 L 

J-33 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 4 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2612 0 0 0 50 0 99 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2613 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 100 100 0 0 0 L 14 L 50 H 2614 22 22 100 1 100 48 0.25 0 45 0 0 61 H 126 M 17 L 

2616 0 0 0 70 0 91 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2617 35 35 0 10 0 83 1 53 0 75 0 17 L 18 L 22 L 2619 128 43 100 1 43 1 2 35 0 75 0 114 H 109 M 20 L 

2620 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2621 0 0 0 20 0 71 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 25 L 

2622 0 0 4 60 0 94 1 100 0 0 0 2 L 17 L 25 L 

2623 38 36 100 1 96 1 0.25 0 0 0 0 69 H 143 M 9 L 

2624 61 61 12 90 100 96 2 100 0 75 0 37 M 8 L 40 H 

2625 0 0 0 10 0 46 0.25 100 0 0 0 0 L 83 M 25 L 

2626 0 0 0 30 0 79 1 100 100 0 0 0 L 16 L 50 H 

2627 7 7 92 50 100 43 0.25 95 100 0 0 49 M 40 L 50 H 

2628 95 95 71 1 85 1 1 86 0 0 20 83 H 122 M 50 H 

2629 39 15 100 1 53 6 0.25 13 64 0 0 70 H 67 M 23 L 

2630 100 100 7 100 43 94 2 0 0 75 0 54 H 11 L 25 L 

2631 79 0 100 1 92 79 1.5 0 100 0 0 90 H 47 L 25 L 

2632 0 0 0 90 0 96 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

2633 21 21 100 1 100 1 0.25 93 0 75 0 61 H 110 M 29 M 

2634 0 0 0 60 100 73 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 0 L 

2635 100 100 0 98 0 83 1.5 100 0 0 0 50 M 13 L 50 H 

2636 4 4 12 40 0 95 1 20 0 0 0 8 L 20 L 6 L 

2637 80 80 12 90 67 88 1.5 25 0 75 0 46 M 11 L 26 M 2639 0 0 36 75 10 58 1 0 99 0 0 18 L 62 M 25 L 

J-34 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 4

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

2641 0 0 8 100 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 4 L 59 M 25 L 

2642 0 0 100 50 0 1 0.25 83 0 0 60 50 M 139 M 36 H 2644 100 100 0 1 0 18 1 100 0 0 0 50 M 76 M 50 H 2645 10 10 44 10 0 1 0.25 82 0 0 0 27 L 166 H 23 L 

2646 0 0 0 70 0 78 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 68 M 25 L 

2648 44 44 70 30 100 82 1.5 30 0 0 0 57 H 14 L 18 L 

2649 161 93 35 80 0 98 2 0 0 75 0 98 H 10 L 23 L 

2651 39 0 0 100 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 19 L 16 L 0 L 

2653 0 0 0 70 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 0 L 

2655 0 0 0 70 0 83 1 20 0 0 0 0 L 19 L 5 L 

2656 121 40 28 50 0 94 2 0 0 75 0 74 H 13 L 10 L 

2657 0 0 0 50 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 L 

2659 200 100 40 60 100 83 2 100 0 0 0 120 H 7 L 50 H 

2660 0 0 16 99 0 91 1 196 0 0 0 8 L 12 L 49 H 

2661 100 100 0 1 0 56 1.5 0 0 0 0 50 M 82 M 25 L 

2662 9 9 100 80 0 1 0.25 22 24 0 0 54 H 131 M 14 L 

2663 0 0 0 30 0 58 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 88 M 0 L 

2664 0 0 0 90 0 98 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 62 M 25 L 

2665 0 0 0 100 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

2667 0 0 100 10 0 64 1 28 0 0 0 50 M 77 M 7 L 

2669 100 100 16 1 0 87 1.5 100 0 0 60 58 H 17 L 65 H 

2670 0 0 0 50 0 87 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 20 L 0 L 

2671 23 23 72 50 100 67 1 100 0 75 0 48 M 10 L 31 M 2672 0 0 0 80 0 91 1 0 49 0 0 0 L 17 L 12 L 

4001 19 19 100 50 0 1 0.25 163 0 75 0 60 H 101 M 46 H 

J-35 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 4 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4003 22 22 100 85 9 1 0.25 135 0 0 0 61 H 107 M 39 H 

4007 0 0 100 50 0 1 0.25 160 0 75 0 50 H 106 M 40 H 

4009 31 31 100 50 0 1 0.25 193 99 75 0 65 H 68 M 81 H 

4012 0 0 11 75 100 89 1 100 0 0 0 6 L 13 L 25 L 

4013 0 0 0 100 0 96 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 15 L 25 L 4014 0 0 8 95 100 87 1 100 0 0 0 4 L 49 L 25 L 

4015 241 241 100 1 100 27 2 103 0 0 0 170 H 51 L 86 H 

4016 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 11 0 0 0 50 M 149 M 3 L 

4020 52 11 100 1 100 1 1 236 0 0 0 76 H 92 M 62 H 

4028 85 85 20 55 42 1 1 186 0 0 0 52 H 53 L 68 H 

4029 100 100 100 1 100 1 1 154 28 0 0 100 H 90 M 71 H 

4035 0 0 68 1 0 66 1 100 0 0 0 34 L 150 M 25 L 

4036 0 0 0 100 0 33 0.25 31 17 0 0 0 L 72 M 12 L 

4038 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 188 0 0 0 50 M 138 M 47 H 

4039 0 0 4 100 0 96 1 100 0 0 0 2 L 15 L 25 L 

4040 0 0 0 50 0 93 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 25 L 

4041 3 3 100 1 100 1 0.25 169 100 0 80 51 H 93 M 88 H 

4042 74 74 29 50 100 75 1.5 100 0 0 0 51 H 12 L 43 H 

4043 0 0 32 1 0 47 0.25 195 0 0 0 16 L 72 M 49 H 

4044 0 0 100 50 0 1 0.25 200 0 0 100 50 M 116 M 75 H 

4049 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 224 0 0 0 50 M 107 M 56 H 

4050 0 0 0 100 0 87 1 100 0 0 0 0 L 15 L 25 L 

4052 31 31 100 1 100 1 0.25 197 0 0 0 65 H 105 M 57 H 

4056 0 0 22 50 0 90 1 91 0 0 0 11 L 69 M 23 L 

4058 0 0 0 1 0 63 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 140 M 0 L 

J-36 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 4

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4061 0 0 0 70 0 1 0.25 89 0 75 0 0 L 68 M 22 L 

4064 0 0 4 100 100 98 1 0 0 0 0 2 L 14 L 0 L 4065 0 0 63 1 0 33 0.25 100 0 75 0 32 L 70 M 25 L 

4066 0 0 36 45 0 24 0.25 51 0 75 0 18 L 70 M 13 L 

4067 39 39 12 98 0 1 0.25 164 0 0 0 25 L 116 M 51 H 4068 1 1 100 10 0 1 0.25 174 0 75 0 50 H 119 M 44 H 

4072 0 0 0 40 0 47 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 L 87 M 0 L 

4074 85 85 100 50 100 83 1.5 129 0 0 20 93 H 35 L 58 H 

4075 0 0 4 1 0 96 1 14 0 0 2 L 22 L 4 L 

4076 8 8 100 1 0 1 0.25 230 68 0 100 54 H 111 M 102 H 

4078 0 0 0 100 0 93 1 200 0 0 0 0 L 13 L 50 H 

4080 0 0 39 95 0 48 0.25 100 0 0 0 20 L 62 M 25 L 

4082 0 0 8 100 0 93 1 125 78 0 0 4 L 12 L 51 H 

4083 70 70 12 70 100 78 1.5 100 0 0 0 41 M 12 L 42 H 

4086 0 0 100 1 100 1 0.25 111 0 75 0 50 M 111 M 28 M 

4087 0 0 93 50 100 1 0.25 113 0 75 0 47 M 93 M 28 M 4093 0 0 0 100 100 90 1 0 94 0 0 0 L 12 L 24 L 

4095 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 63 0 0 0 50 M 163 H 16 L 

4099 13 0 4 100 0 96 1 94 0 0 0 9 L 15 L 24 L 

4103 55 55 100 1 0 1 1 225 0 0 0 77 H 117 M 70 H 

4104 33 33 24 100 0 61 1 100 0 0 0 29 L 57 M 33 H 

4106 96 96 0 100 0 66 1.5 200 0 0 0 48 M 42 L 74 H 

4107 0 0 0 60 0 83 1 98 0 0 0 0 L 70 M 25 L 

4108 0 0 32 50 100 56 1 0 0 0 0 16 L 69 M 0 L 

4109 0 0 14 90 0 83 1 100 0 0 0 7 L 15 L 25 L 

J-37 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Allotment Number ALTERNATIVE 4 Indicators (factors) Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4115 0 0 5 90 0 96 1 72 0 0 0 3 L 65 M 18 L 

4119 4 4 89 50 0 1 0.25 205 0 0 0 46 M 117 M 52 H 4120 17 17 100 1 100 1 0.25 185 100 75 0 58 H 69 M 75 H 

4122 37 37 0 40 0 79 1 200 0 0 0 18 L 15 L 59 H 4124 93 0 100 1 0 1 1 211 0 0 0 97 H 111 M 53 H 

4125 203 203 100 1 100 48 2 100 0 0 0 151 H 73 M 76 H 

4127 0 0 23 52 0 67 1 100 0 0 0 12 L 70 M 25 L 

4131 0 0 100 1 26 1 0.25 174 0 0 0 50 M 134 M 44 H 4135 0 0 4 50 0 94 1 200 0 0 0 2 L 15 L 50 H 

4139 93 93 100 1 100 1 1 126 4 0 97 H 103 M 56 H 

4145 16 16 100 1 7 1 0.25 134 52 75 0 58 H 113 M 50 H 

4151 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 30 0 75 0 50 M 151 H 8 L 

4154 0 0 100 1 0 1 0.25 200 0 0 0 50 H 135 M 50 H 

4155 13 13 0 1 0 76 1 100 0 0 0 6 L 20 L 28 M 

4156 25 25 100 50 0 1 0.25 143 0 0 0 62 H 121 M 42 H 

4159 0 0 0 100 0 96 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 18 L 0 L 

4160 0 0 39 10 0 69 1 100 0 0 0 20 L 19 L 25 L 

4163 0 0 76 1 100 58 1 265 0 0 0 38 M 70 M 66 H 

4164 9 9 100 1 100 1 0.25 300 100 0 0 54 H 65 M 102 H 

4184 0 0 0 100 0 92 1 200 0 0 0 0 L 13 L 50 H 

4186 47 47 92 1 0 17 1 200 0 0 0 70 H 61 M 62 H 

4190 90 90 100 1 100 1 1 200 42 0 0 95 H 80 M 83 H 

4191 1 0 0 100 0 78 1 60 0 0 0 0 L 17 L 15 L 

4192 159 159 100 20 100 1 2 125 0 0 0 130 H 81 M 71 H 

4193 202 202 100 1 100 1 2 100 0 0 0 151 H 83 M 76 H 

J-38 
Appendix J: Grazing 

Allotment

Number 

ALTERNATIVE 4

Indicators (factors) 

Estimated Levels

Total Score in Category,

and Rating

(Low, Moderate, High)

SMA

Soc 

SMA

E Recreation 

Waiting

List Seasonal Forage 

Admin

Efficiency Wildlife 

ESA

Fish 

S&Gs

D 

S&Gs

E Social Demand Ecological 

4195 189 189 100 1 100 1 2 70 0 0 0 144 H 92 M 65 H 

4196 0 0 0 1 0 98 1 0 0 0 0 0 L 23 L 0 L 

4197 100 100 100 1 100 1 1 1 0 0 0 100 H 127 M 25 M 

4198 101 101 48 1 100 73 1.5 200 25 0 0 75 H 40 L 82 H 

4352 0 0 15 99 0 92 1 100 0 0 0 8 L 15 L 25 L 

J-39 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

J-40 
Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

Appendix K:

Recreation Management Areas 

Overview 

Two types of Recreation Management Areas are identified in the land use plan for BLM lands: Special Recreation 

Management Areas (SRMAs) and Extensive Recreation Management Areas (ERMAs). This appendix only 

discusses SRMAs. Chapter 2 identifies management actions pertaining to ERMAs. 

Managing Recreation Resources for Beneficial Outcomes
	

This appendix briefly describes the foundation for Benefits Based Management and its application to recreation 

management. It then summarizes proposed implementation direction for Special Recreation Management Areas 

in the John Day Basin planning area. General plan direction for each SRMA is detailed in Chapter 2. 

The purpose of Benefits Based Recreation (BBR) management is to provide opportunities for visitors to participate 

in a variety of quality non-motorized and motorized recreation opportunities within specific areas of public 

lands referred to as Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMA). SRMAs are areas where BLM will focus 

management and development of facilities, if necessary for public health and safety. 

BLM guidance in the BLM planning Handbook H-1610-1 requires the application of a BBR protocol to SRMAs, 

involving the identification of the Recreation Niche Objectives, Setting, and Actions to help visitors experience 

quality recreation activities and experiences. Identifying the Appropriate Marketing Strategy is also required for 

each SRMA, ranging from “Undeveloped” (no marketing at all), or “Community” (working with local communities), 

or “Designation” (working with state or national markets to bring in visitors outside the area or region). 

Within each SRMA, one or more Recreation Management Zones (RMZs) may also be identified. RMZs are “nested” 

in SRMAs and are usually smaller areas in SRMAs where specific recreation activities occur. RMZs are identified 

when different opportunities and management exist within the same SRMA boundary. Bridge Creek, North Fork 

and South Fork of the John Day River are the only SRMAs having one or more RMZs within a SRMA boundary. 

Within each SRMA, BLM has also identified related land use allocations that interact with the recreation setting 

of an area, such as a proposed Off-Highway Vehicle designation, or Visual Resource Management Class. 

These actions, along with proposed recreation setting combine to influence the type and quality of recreation 

opportunities and experiences. 

The recreation setting can be defined along a continuum ranging from primitive to urban. The planning area 

contains settings ranging from primitive to rural. Setting character is directly influenced and determined by 

the management, marketing, and administrative actions of BLM and other recreation-tourism providers. Those 

actions and the resulting setting character also affect and actually determine the kinds of recreation opportunities 

being produced. 

There are three broad recreation settings categories. The settings include: 

• Physical – considers the resources and facilities 

• Social – looks at visitor use 

• Administrative – management controls and services 

K-1 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

The classifications further define the settings within a range of “Primitive” to “Urban”. A brief description of the 

classification is as follows: 

• Primitive (P) – The landscape is relatively undisturbed with few signs of human presence. Very few 

encounters with other visitors occur. Regulations and information will normally be posted prior to 

entering this zone and agency presence is very rare. 

• Back Country (BC) – The landscape is more natural and the limited improvements tend to blend with the 

environment. Access does not include motorized vehicles and signing and agency presence is scarce. 

• Middle Country (MC) – The landscape is natural in appearance with some modifications not highly 

noticeable. Visitors will encounter other groups utilizing the area, but agency presence is random. 

Information and signing are present. 

• Front Country (FC) – The landscape is partially modified with visitors prevalent and agency personnel 

periodically available. Rules and information are clearly posted. 

• Rural (R) – Includes a substantially modified landscape with visitors dispersed throughout and a 

prominent level of agency presence and regulation. 

• Urban – Not found within the planning area. 

Benefits based recreation management objectives focus on specific experiences and beneficial outcomes from 

recreation activities. In the following pages, these benefits-based management objectives have been written in 

a one page summary for each SRMA: the John Day River, South and North Forks of the John Day River, Bridge 

Creek, and Little Canyon Mountain Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMAs). 

Public lands along the John Day River will continue to be managed under the 2003 BLM John Day Wild & Scenic 

River Management Plan. Prescribed Setting descriptions for river segments from Tumwater Falls to Monument 

(Segments 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6), are from the John Day Wild & Scenic River Management Plan. River Segment 5 is not 

mentioned because no public lands exist along this river segment. 

Each summary identifies proposed marketing, recreation niche, outcome objectives, targeted recreation 

opportunities, character settings and land use allocations from other resource programs. SRMA specific 

implementing actions for each SRMA will be contained in the implementation plan for this RMP. 

K-2 
Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Sherman, Gilliam, Umatilla, 

Morrow, Wasco, and Wheeler counties 

Undeveloped 

John Day River Segment 1 Recreation Management Zone

(Tumwater Falls to Cottonwood Bridge) 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

In the River Zone, visitors engage in day or overnight river based recreation opportunities such as steelhead 

and bass fishing, rafting, canoeing and kayaking in a scenic river canyon environment. In the Upland Zone, 

visitors engage in day use, upland bird and deer hunting, photography and sightseeing; in the future, overnight 

camping in a developed State Park facility. 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Within the River Zone, visitors engage in water-based day use and overnight activities, year-round land-based 

day uses, boat-in camping, fishing, hiking, sightseeing, photography and wildlife observation experiences. 

Within the Upland Zone, visitors engage in diverse non-motorized activities such as hiking, upland bird and 

big game hunting experiences. Both zones provide opportunities for friends and family to participate in 

scenic water based activities as well as upland recreation experiences in a predominately undeveloped setting, 

realizing a moderate level of satisfaction for two or more recreation activities (i.e., 3.0 on a probability scale 

where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

(See final BLM John Day WSR Plan and LAC Study) 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Steelhead fishing • Fishing for pleasure Personal: Greater appreciation for family 

• Bass fishing • Being close to nature and friends and natural landscapes. Greater 

• Upland bird & big • Pursue upland birds and environmental awareness with family & friends. 

game hunting challenging big game hunting Community/Social: Increased awareness of 

• Major watercraft 

take-out for upriver 

during seasons 

• Being with family and friends in a 

need for community involvement in public land 

stewardship. 

floaters river canyon & upland landscape Environmental: Increased awareness and 

• Driving for 

pleasureSeasonal 

motorized boating 

(Oct. 1 – Apr.30) 

• Enjoying solitude and/or river 

canyon scenery while participating 

in a favorite recreation activity. 

• Enjoying physical exercise 

compliance for protection of natural landscapes. 

Economic: Increased desirability as a place 

to visit. Increased contributions to local and 

regional economy. 

K-3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Sherman, Gilliam, Umatilla, 

Morrow, Wasco, and Wheeler counties 

Undeveloped 

John Day River Segment 1 Recreation Management Zone

(Tumwater Falls to Cottonwood Bridge) 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Roaded Natural River 

Physical Social Administrative 

Remoteness: 

Moderate evidence of the sights and 

sounds of humans. Opportunities for 

challenge in a natural environment but 

less expectation of risk. 

Naturalness: 

Alterations to the landscape are 

subtle. Natural characteristics remain 

dominant. Moderate evidence of human 

development. Impoundments, diversions 

or channel modifications may be evident. 

Facilities: 

Rustic facilities developed for resource 

Social Encounters: 

Moderate use occurs – contact with 

others is expected and occasionally 

continual, with some chance for 

isolation. Some evidence of other 

users. Moderate to high contact 

with other users, particularly at 

rapids and access points. Moderate 

to high contact on access roads. 

Moderate to low contact on trails 

and at developed sites. 

Visitor Impacts: 

Natural ecosystems may be 

Visitor Management: 

A few on-site visitor 

management controls or 

regulations may be expected. 

Contact with management 

personnel is frequent. On 

guided trips, visitors perceive 

a moderate to low degree of 

challenge and risk. On-site 

regimentation and controls 

are noticeable but harmonize 

with the natural environment. 

Simple information facilities. 

protection and to accommodate visitor 

use. Rustic facilities providing some 

comfort for the user as well as site 

protection. Use native materials but with 

more refinement in design. Synthetic 

materials should not be evident. 

modified by human use. Human 

impacts obvious but subordinate. 

Sites may be subtly hardened to 

accommodate motorized use. 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation, John Day WSR Plan: 

Travel, and Provide public access to river for fishing and rafting, kayaking, boating, emphasizing 

Visual Resource river-related activities consistent with John Day River Plan. Provide seasonal motorized 

Management boating opportunities Oct. 1 – Apr. 30 annually. Seek viable partnership opportunities 

with user groups, and County and State agencies to provide stated recreation 

opportunities and help maintain existing public access along the John Day River. 

OHV: 

Alternative 1: Open. All other alternatives: Limited. 

VRM: 

Class II for all alternatives. 

K-4 
 

Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Sherman, Gilliam, Umatilla, 

Morrow, Wasco, Wheeler, and Grant counties 

Undeveloped 

John Day River Segment 2 Recreation Management Zone

(Cottonwood Bridge to Clarno) 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

In the River Zone, visitors engage in day or overnight river based recreation opportunities, primarily rafting, 

canoeing, kayaking, bass and steelhead fishing, and camping in a rugged, scenic river canyon environment. In 

the Upland Zone, visitors engage in e hiking, upland, water fowl (upriver from Thirtymile) deer and big horn 

sheep hunting, photography and sightseeing. Visitors value these primitive landscapes and enjoy challenging 

recreation activities with friends and family. 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE

 Within the River Zone, visitors engage in year round water-based day use and overnight activities, rafting, 

canoeing, kayaking, camping, fishing for smallmouth bass and steelhead, wildlife watching, photography, 

hiking, sightseeing, and swimming experiences. Within the Upland Zone, visitors engage in non-motorized 

activities such as chukar, deer and big horn sheep hunting and hiking experiences. Visitors enjoy and value 

primitive, unconfined recreation activities with family and friends in a predominately undeveloped and rugged 

setting, realizing a moderate level of satisfaction for two or more recreation activities (i.e. 3.0 on a probability 

scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

(See final BLM John Day WSR Plan and LAC Study) 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Rafting, canoeing, • River floating through a highly Personal: Improved physical fitness; stronger 

kayaking scenic and rugged primitive basalt ties with family and friends, improved mental 

• Bass fishing river canyon well-being, greater environmental awareness for 

• Steelhead fishing • Being close to nature river canyon environment. 

• Chukar, deer, and 

big horn sheep 

hunting, 

• Wildlife watching 

• Photography 

• Swimming 

• Camping 

• Challenging big game hunting 

• Bass/steelhead fishing for pleasure 

• Being with family and friends in a 

river canyon and upland landscape 

• Enjoying solitude while 

participating in a favorite recreation 

activity. 

• Enjoying physical exercise 

Community/Social: Greater family bonding, 

improved image of land management agencies, 

enlarged sense of community dependency and 

value of public lands. 

Environmental: Increased awareness and 

compliance for protection of natural landscapes. 

Economic: Increased desirability as a place 

to visit. Increased contributions to local and 

regional economy. 

K-5 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Sherman, Gilliam, Umatilla, 

Morrow, Wasco, Wheeler, and Grant counties 

Undeveloped 

John Day River Segment 2 Recreation Management Zone

(Cottonwood Bridge to Clarno) 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Semi-Primitive Non-Motorized 

Physical Social Administrative 

Remoteness: 

Few trailed access sites along the river. Fairly 

high expectation of experiencing isolation from 

the sights and sounds of humans. Fairly high 

sense of remoteness. Self-reliance through 

application of outdoor skills in an environment 

that offers a high to moderate degree of 

challenge and risk. Out of sight and sound of 

human activity. Sense of commitment to river 

trip and perception of no return. 

Naturalness: 

Largely undisturbed natural environment. 

Little evidence of development. No 

impoundments, diversions or channel 

modifications. 

Facilities: 

Minimal facility development primarily 

for resource protection. Parties on river 

responsible for human waste disposal and 

leave no trace camping practices. No facilities 

for user comfort. Rustic and rudimentary 

facilities for site protection only. Native 

material only. 

Social Encounters: 

Few contacts with other users, 

primarily at rapids and access 

points. Little, but some evidence 

of other users. Small party size. 

Very few contacts while on the 

river (no more than 5.) No more 

than one other party within sight 

or sound of a campsite. 

Visitor Impacts: 

Natural ecosystems operate 

freely. Human impacts are 

generally limited to campsites 

of small to moderate size. 

Unnoticeable impacts, no site 

hardening or modification of 

camp areas. 

Visitor Management: 

Only a few subtle onsite visitor management 

controls or regulations are 

apparent. Contact with 

management personnel 

is occasional. On guided 

trips, visitors perceive a 

high to moderate degree 

of challenge and risk. Low 

regimentation. No on-site 

controls or information 

facilities. 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation, John Day WSR Plan: 

Travel, and Provide primitive, non-motorized public access to river for fishing and rafting, 

Visual Resource kayaking, boating, camping in river area, emphasizing non-motorized river-related 

Management activities consistent with John day River Plan and LAC Study. Seek viable partnership 

opportunities with user groups, private landowners, County and State agencies to 

provide stated recreation opportunities. Monitor river and upland visitor satisfaction 

based on stated John Day Plan and LAC. Physical, social and managerial LAC Indicators 

and Standards for this river segment. 

OHV: 

Closed to OHV use under all alternatives. 

Visual Resource Management: 

WSAs are VRM Class I under all alternatives; remaining public lands vary from Class II 

to Class III. 

K-6 
Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Sherman, Gilliam, Umatilla, 

Morrow, Wasco, Wheeler, and Grant counties 

Undeveloped 

John Day River Segment 3 Recreation Management Zone

(Clarno (RM109) to Service Creek (RM157) 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

In the River Zone, visitors engage in day or overnight river based recreation opportunities such as steelhead and 

bass fishing, rafting, canoeing, kayaking, and camping in a scenic river canyon with or without an adjacent road. 

In the Upland Zone, visitors engage in hiking, upland bird, deer and elk hunting, photography, sightseeing, 

driving for pleasure and vehicle or walk-in camping in authorized dispersed areas and at the BLM Priest Hole 

Recreation Site and Service Creek. 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Within the River Zone, visitors engage in water-based day use and overnight activities, year-round landbased day and overnight uses camping, fishing, hiking, sightseeing, photography and wildlife observation 

experiences. In the Upland Zone, visitors engage in diverse recreation activities such as hiking, upland bird, 

deer and elk hunting, sightseeing, driving for pleasure and camping experiences in authorized dispersed areas 

and at the Priest Hole BLM Recreation Site and Service Creek. Both zones provide opportunities for friends and 

family to participate in scenic water based activities as well as upland recreation experiences in a predominately 

undeveloped setting, realizing a moderate level of satisfaction for two or more recreation activities (i.e. 3.0 on a 

probability scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

(Final BLM John Day WSR Plan and LAC Study) 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Bass fishing • Being close to nature Personal: Improved physical fitness, stronger ties 

• Steelhead fishing • Challenging big game with family & friends; improved mental well-

• Upland waterfowl and 

deer or elk hunting 

• Camping 

• Seasonal Motorized 

Boating (Oct. 1 – Apr. 30) 

hunting 

• Fishing for pleasure 

• Being with family and friends 

in a river canyon and upland 

landscape 

being, greater environmental awareness. 

Community/Social: Greater family bonding, 

improved image of land management agencies, 

enlarged sense of community dependency and 

value of public lands. 

Environmental: Increased awareness and 

• Enjoying solitude and/or 

river canyon scenery while 

participating in a favorite 

recreation activity 

• Enjoying physical exercise 

need to protect natural landscapes and greater 

environmental stewardship. 

Economic: Increased desirability as a place 

to visit. Increased contributions to local and 

regional economy. 

K-7 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Sherman, Gilliam, Umatilla, 

Morrow, Wasco, Wheeler, and Grant counties 

Undeveloped 

John Day River Segment 3 Recreation Management Zone

(Clarno (RM109) to Service Creek (RM157) 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Roaded Natural 

Physical Social Administrative 

Remoteness: Social Encounters: Visitor Management: 

Moderate evidence of the sights and sounds Moderate use occurs. Contact with A few on-site visitor 

of humans. Opportunity for challenge in a others is expected and occasionally management controls or 

natural setting but low expectation of risk. continual; some chance for regulations may be expected. 

Naturalness: isolation. Some evidence of other Contact with management 

Alterations to the landscape are subtle. users. Moderate to high contact personnel is frequent. 

Natural characteristics remain dominant. with other users, particularly at On guided trips, visitors 

Moderate evidence of human development. rapids and access points. Moderate perceive a moderate to low 

Impoundments, diversions or channel to high contact on access roads. degree of challenge and 

modifications may be evident. Moderate to low contact on trails risk. On-site regimentation 

Facilities: 

Rustic facilities developed for resource 

protection and to accommodate visitor use. 

Rustic facilities providing some comfort 

and at developed sites. 

Visitor Impacts: 

Natural ecosystems may be 

modified by human use.Human 

and controls are noticeable 

but harmonize with the 

natural environment. Simple 

information facilities. 

for the user as well as site protection. Use impacts obvious but subordinate. 

native materials but with more refinement Sites may be subtly hardened to 

in design. Synthetic materials should not accommodate motorized use. 

be evident. 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation, Travel, John Day WSR Plan: 

and Visual Resource Provide public access to river for fishing and rafting, kayaking, boating, 

Management emphasizing river-related activities consistent with John Day River Plan. Seek 

viable partnership opportunities with user groups, and County and State agencies 

to provide stated recreation opportunities and help maintain existing public access 

along the John Day River. Apply administrative actions to maintain Roaded Natural 

River recreation experiences in River and Uplands consistent with John Day 

River Plan and LAC Study. Administrative actions include, but are not limited to: 

identifying camping, boat launch, and boater registration areas. Partnering with the 

National Park Service to provide consistent interpretative information. Occasional 

on-site presence. 

OHV: 

Alternative 1: Open. All other alternatives: Limited. 

VRM: 

Class II for all other alternatives. 

K-8 
Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Sherman, Gilliam, Umatilla, 

Morrow, Wasco, and Wheeler counties 

Undeveloped 

John Day River Segment 4 Recreation Management Zone

(Service Creek to Dayville) 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

Visitors drive for pleasure. Dispersed camping on BLM lands, overnight camping opportunities at Mule Shoe: 

bass and steelhead fishing, boating, wildlife and scenic landscape viewing, photography, swimming, tubing, 

and picnicking at the BLM Shady Grove Picnic Area. 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Visitor drive for pleasure. Viewing and photographing scenic geologic land formations on BLM and NPS public 

lands. Some visitors engage in bird and big game hunting experiences. Within the River Zone area, visitors 

raft from Kimberly to Service Creek, fish, day-use, and some engage in overnight vehicle camping at the BLM 

Mule Shoe campground, have boat-in camping experiences, or picnics at the BLM Shady Grove Picnic Site. The 

river and upland areas provide opportunities for friends and family to participate in upland and water based 

activities in a predominately roadside setting, realizing a moderate level of satisfaction for two or more recreation 

activities (i.e. 3.0 on a probability scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

(Final BLM John Day WSR Plan and LAC Study) 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Driving for pleasure 

• Sightseeing 

• Vehicle and boat-in camping 

• Steelhead fishing 

• Bass fishing 

• Upland bird and big game 

hunting 

• Watercraft access points 

• Natural landscape views 

• Education and interpretation 

of historic, geologic, and 

paleontological resources 

• Motor boating 

• Driving and sightseeing for 

pleasure 

• Geologic study 

• Photography 

• Camping and picnics 

• Being with family and 

friends in a river canyon & 

roadside landscape 

• Enjoying river canyon 

scenery while participating 

in a favorite recreation 

activity 

• Enjoying physical exercise 

Personal: Greater appreciation for family 

and friends and natural landscapes. Greater 

environmental awareness with family and 

friends. 

Community/Social: Increased awareness of 

need for community involvement in public 

land stewardship. 

Environmental: Increased awareness 

and compliance for protection of natural 

landscapes. 

Economic: Increased desirability as a place 

to visit. Increased contributions to local and 

regional economy. 

K-9 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Sherman, Gilliam, Umatilla, 

Morrow, Wasco, and Wheeler counties 

Undeveloped 

John Day River Segment 4 Recreation Management Zone

(Service Creek to Dayville) 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Rural 

Physical Social Administrative 

Access: Social Encounters: Visitor Management: 

Some parallel roads, bridges, and power lines Contact with others expected, Visitor management 

evident. Highway vehicle and off-road vehicle including frequent interface controls are visible and 

use is consistent and may be seen from the river. between river users and shore expected. Contact with 

Limited public access due to private land. users. Frequent evidence of management personnel 

Remoteness: other users. Frequent interface is frequent. On guided 

Evidence of sights and sounds of humans between river users and shore trips visitors perceive a 

common from other river user, traffic, and users. Moderate to high contact low degree of challenge 

agricultural activity. Distant sight and/or sound with other river users. and risk. Regimentation 

of human activity. Visitor Impacts: and controls obvious 

Naturalness: 

Modified landscape having both human-made 

and natural features. Evidence of human 

development prevalent. Impoundments, 

Ecosystems are modified by 

human use. Human impacts 

obvious. Site hardening provided 

to minimize impacts and to 

and numerous, but 

harmonious. More 

complex information 

facilities. 

diversions or channel modifications may be provide for user convenience. 

evident. 

Facilities: 

Some development for resource protection, 

visitor comfort due tor number of visitors. Sites 

developed to provide health/ sanitation. Landbased recreation facility development more 

prevalent. Some synthetic materials may be used. 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation, Travel, John Day WSR Plan: 

and Visual Resource Provide public access for fishing and rafting, kayaking, boating, consistent with 

Management John day River Plan. Seek viable partnership opportunities with user groups, 

County and State agencies to provide stated recreation opportunities and help 

maintain existing public access along the John Day River. Apply administrative 

actions to maintain Rural Developed recreation experiences in River and Uplands 

consistent with John Day River Plan and LAC Study. Administrative actions 

include, but not limited to partnering with the National Park Service to provide 

consistent interpretative information. Occasional on-site presence. 

OHV: 

Alternative 1: Open. All other alternatives: Limited. 

VRM: 

Class II 

K-10 
Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Sherman, Gilliam, Umatilla, 

Morrow, Wasco, and Wheeler counties 

Undeveloped 

John Day River Segment 6 Recreation Management Zone

(Kimberly to Monument) 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

Visitors drive for pleasure. Overnight camping opportunities at Lone Pine and Big Bend BLM Campgrounds; 

bass and steelhead fishing, boating, wildlife and scenic landscape viewing, photography, swimming, tubing, 

and picnicking at the BLM Monument picnic/boat take-out/put-in area. 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Visitor drive for pleasure on State Highway 402 along the John Day River. Some visitors engage in bird and big 

game hunting experiences in the uplands where limited public land exists. Within the River Zone area, visitors 

raft from Kimberly to Monument, fish, day-use, and some engage in overnight vehicle camping at the BLM 

Lone Pine and Bid Bend campgrounds, or have boat-in camping experiences, or picnics at the BLM Monument 

Picnic Site. The river and upland areas provide opportunities for friends and family to participate in upland 

and water based activities in a predominately roadside setting, realizing a moderate level of satisfaction for two 

or more recreation activities (i.e. 3.0 on a probability scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = 

total satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

(Final BLM John Day WSR Plan) 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Driving for pleasure • Driving and sightseeing for Personal: Greater appreciation for family 

• Sightseeing pleasure and friends and natural landscapes. 

• Vehicle and boat-in camping 

• Steelhead fishing 

• Bass fishing 

• Day use 

• Upland bird and big game 

hunting 

• Watercraft access 

• Photography 

• Camping and picnics 

• Being with family and friends 

in a river canyon and roadside 

landscape 

• Enjoying river canyon scenery 

while participating in a 

favorite recreation activity 

Greater environmental awareness with 

family & friends. 

Community/Social: Enlarged sense of 

community dependency and value of 

public lands. 

Environmental: Greater retention of 

distinctive natural landscapes. 

Economic: Contribution to local economy. 

• Natural landscape view 

• Motorized boating 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Rural 

K-11 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Sherman, Gilliam, Umatilla, 

Morrow, Wasco, and Wheeler counties 

Undeveloped 

John Day River Segment 6 Recreation Management Zone

(Kimberly to Monument) 

Physical Social Administrative 

Access: 

Some parallel roads, bridges and power 

lines evident. Highway vehicle and off-road 

vehicle use is consistent and may be seen 

from the river. Limited public access due to 

private land. 

Remoteness: 

Evidence of sights and sounds of humans 

common from other river users and from 

people off the river. Distant sight and/or 

sound of human activity. 

Naturalness: 

Modified landscape having both humanmade and natural features. Evidence 

of human development prevalent. 

Impoundments, diversions or channel 

modifications may be evident. 

Facilities: 

Some facility development for resource 

protection, visitor comfort and number of 

visitors. Specific sites developed to provide 

health/sanitation. Land-based recreation 

facility development more prevalent. Some 

synthetic materials may be used. 

Social Encounters: 

Contact with others expected, 

including frequent interface 

between river users and shore 

users. Frequent evidence of other 

users. Frequent interface between 

river users and shore users. 

Moderate to high contact with 

other river users. 

Visitor Impacts: 

Ecosystems are modified by 

human use. Human impacts 

obvious. Site hardening provided 

to minimize impacts and to 

provide for user convenience. 

Visitor Management: 

Visitor management controls 

are visible and expected. 

Contact with management 

personnel is frequent. On 

guided trips, visitors perceive 

a low degree of challenge 

and risk. Regimentation 

and controls obvious and 

numerous, but harmonious. 

More complex information 

facilities. 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation, John Day WSR Plan: 

Travel, and Provide public access to river for fishing and rafting, kayaking, boating, consistent 

Visual Resource with John Day River Plan. Maintain existing public access along the John Day River. 

Management Continue to provide recreation opportunities on public lands and pull-outs along 

State Highway 402. Pursue partnerships with the local communities to identify land 

and water-based recreation opportunities on BLM public lands, emphasizing ”Leave 

No Trace” and ”Tread Lightly” principles. Look for opportunities to interpret natural 

history and past historical events in the area, such as the historic use of a route between 

Kimberly and Monument. 

OHV: 

Alternative 1: Open. All other alternatives: Limited. 

VRM: 

Class II for all alternatives. 

K-12 
 

 

Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

South Fork John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Grant and Wheeler counties Community 

River and Upland Recreation Management Zones (RMZs) 

MARKET NICHE 

In the River Zone, visitors engage in day or overnight river based recreation opportunities such as fishing, dayuse, and camping in a scenic river canyon environment. In the Upland Zone, visitors engage in day use and 

overnight camping, hunting, hiking, mountain bike, horseback riding, and seasonal Class I, II and III motorized 

use activities. Recreation activities within the Aldrich Mountain WSA are managed to protect wilderness 

character and provide primitive, unconfined recreation opportunities such as big game hunting, hiking and 

back-country exploration. 

OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Within the River Zone, visitors engage in water-based day use and overnight activities, year-round landbased day and overnight uses, camping, fishing and driving for pleasure experiences. Within the Upland 

Zone, visitors engage in diverse non-motorized experiences such as hiking, horseback trail experiences, and 

big game hunting within the Aldrich Mountain WSA. In other upland areas, visitors engage in these activities 

and seasonal motorized trail Class I, II and III trail and route riding experiences. Both Recreation Management 

Zones provide opportunities for friends and family to participate in water based activities in the River Zone, as 

well as non-motorized and motorized trail experiences in the Upland Zone, in a predominately undeveloped 

setting, realizing a moderate level of satisfaction for two or more recreation activities (i.e. 3.0 on a probability 

scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES; River/Upland Zones 

Activity Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

River RMZ: • Being in a relatively natural Personal: Greater appreciation for natural 

Day-use, fishing, hiking landscape landscapes and environmental awareness. 

camping, driving for • Viewing scenic landscapes Community/Social: Increased awareness 

pleasure, wildlife viewing 

and photography. • Pursue upland bird and big game 

during hunting seasons 

of need for community involvement 

in public land stewardship. Increased 

Upland RMZ: 

Hiking, mountain bike, and 

horseback trail riding, big 

game hunting and seasonal 

motorized trail Class I, 

• Fishing for pleasure 

• Viewing wild horses 

• Being with family and friends in a 

river canyon and upland landscape 

involvement in recreation and land use 

decisions. 

Environmental: Increased awareness of 

“Leave No Trace” and “Tread Lightly” 

practices on public lands. II and III trail and route 

riding. Primitive Recreation 

in the Aldrich Mtn. WSA. 

• Finding solitude while 

participating in a favorite 

recreation activity 

• Different types of physical exercise

Economic: Increased desirability 

as a place to visit or work. Positive 

contributions to local and regional 

economy. 

K-13 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

South Fork John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Grant and Wheeler counties Community 

River and Upland Recreation Management Zones (RMZs) 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Middle Country 

Physical Social Administrative 

River Remoteness: River Contacts: River Mechanized Use: 

On or near improved gravel roads, but 15-29 encounters/day off travel Two-wheel drive vehicles 

at least 1⁄2 mile from highways (FC). routes and 30 or more encounters/ predominant, but also four 

Upland Remoteness: day on routes (FC). wheel drives and non-motorized, 

On or near motorized routes but at Upland Contacts: mechanized use (FC). 

least 1⁄2 mile from all improved roads, 7-14 encounters/day off travel Upland Mechanized Use: 

through they may be in sight (MC). routes (e.g., Staging Areas) and Four wheel drives, allRiver Naturalness: 15-29 encounters/day on route terrain vehicles, dirt bikes, or 

Landscape partially modified by (MC). snowmobiles in addition to nonroads/trails, utility lines, etc., but none River Group Size: motorized, mechanized use (MC). 

overpower natural landscape features 13-25 per group (FC). River and Upland Visitor 

(FC). Upland Group Size: 7-12 people Services: 

Upland Naturalness: per group (MC). Basic Maps, but area personnel 

Naturally-appearing landscapes except 

for obvious motorized routes (MC). 

River Evidence of Use: 

Small areas of alteration prevalent. 

seldom available to provide onsite assistance (BC). 

River Facilities: Surface vegetation gone with River and Upland Management 

Maintained and marked trails, simple compacted soils observed. Sounds Controls: 

trailhead developments, improved of people regularly heard (FC). Occasional regulatory signing. 

signs, and very basic toilets (MC). 

Upland Facilities: 

Some primitive trails made of native 

Upland Evidence of Use: 

Small areas altered. Vegetation 

showing wear with some 

Motorized and mechanized use 

restrictions. Random enforcement 

presence (MC). 

materials such as log bridges and bare soils. Sounds of people 

carved wooden signs (BC). occasionally heard (MC). 

Related Management Prescriptions for River and Upland RMZs 

Recreation, Recreation and Travel Management: 

Travel, OHV use is limited to designated routes with seasonal restrictions in all alternatives. 

and Visual Visual Resource Management: 

Resource For all alternatives, VRM Class II along the South Fork John Day River. VRM Class IV in the 

Management Uplands away from the South fork John Day River. VRM Class I in Aldrich Mountain WSA. 

K-14 
 

 

Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

North Fork John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Grant, Umatilla, Morrow, and 

Wheeler Counties 

Community 

River and Upland Recreation Management Zones 

MARKET NICHE 

In the River Zone, visitors engage in day or overnight river based recreation opportunities such as fishing, 

rafting, canoeing, kayaking, day-use, camping and driving for pleasure in a scenic river canyon environment. 

In the Upland Zone, visitors engage in day use and overnight camping, upland and big game hunting, hiking, 

mountain bike, horseback riding, and seasonal Class I, II and III motorized use activities. 

OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Within the River Zone, visitors engage in water-based day use and overnight activities, year-round landbased day and overnight uses, river floating, camping, fishing, and driving for pleasure experiences. Within 

the Upland Zone, visitors engage in diverse non-motorized activities such as hiking, mountain bike, and 

horseback trail experiences, big game hunting and seasonal motorized trail Class I, II and III trail and route 

riding experiences. Provide opportunities for friends and family to participate in water based activities in the 

River Zone, as well as non-motorized and motorized trail experiences in the Upland Zone in a predominately 

undeveloped setting, realizing a moderate level of satisfaction for two or more recreation activities (i.e. 3.0 on a 

probability scale; 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

River RMZ: • Explore the landscape Personal: Greater awareness of natural 

Day-use, fishing, rafting, • Viewing scenic landscapes landscapes and environmental awareness. 

canoeing, kayaking, motored 

boating, camping, hiking, 

driving for pleasure. 

Upland RMZ: 

Hiking, mountain bike, and 

horseback trail experiences, 

big game hunting and 

seasonal motorized Class 

I, II and III trail and route 

riding. 

• Pursue upland bird and big game 

during hunting seasons 

• Fishing for pleasure 

• Being with family and friends 

in a river canyon and upland 

landscape 

• Finding solitude while 

participating in a favorite 

recreation activity 

• Opportunities for different types 

of physical exercise 

Community/Social: Increased awareness of 

need for community involvement in public 

land stewardship. Increased involvement in 

recreation and land use decisions. 

Environmental: Increased awareness of 

”Leave No Trace” and “Tread Lightly” 

practices on public lands 

Economic: Increased desirability as a place 

to visit, live or retire. Positive contributions 

to local and regional economy. 

K-15 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

North Fork John Day River Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Grant, Umatilla, Morrow, and 

Wheeler Counties 

Community 

River and Upland Recreation Management Zones 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Middle Country 

Physical (River/Upland) Social (River/Upland) Administrative (River/Upland) 

River Remoteness: 

On or near motorized routes but at 

least 1⁄2 mile from all improved roads, 

through they may be in sight (MC). 

Upland Remoteness: 

More than 1⁄2 mile from any kind of 

motorized route/use area, but not as 

distant as 3 miles (BC). 

River and Upland Naturalness: 

Naturally-appearing landscapes except 

for obvious motorized routes (MC). 

River Facilities: 

Maintained and marked trails, simple 

trailhead developments, improved 

signs and very basic toilets (MC). 

Upland River Facilities: 

Maintained and marked trails, simple 

trailhead developments, improved 

signs, and very basic toilets (MC). 

Upland Facilities: 

Some primitive trails made of native 

materials such as log bridges and 

carved wooden signs (BC). 

River and Upland Contacts: 

7-14 encounters/day off travel 

routes (e.g., Staging Areas) and 

15-29 encounters/day on route 

(MC). 

River and Upland Group Size: 

7 -12 people group (MC). 

River Evidence of Use: 

Small areas of alteration prevalent. 

Surface vegetation gone with 

compacted soils observed. Sounds 

of people regularly heard (FC). 

Upland Evidence of Use: 

Small areas of alteration. Surface 

vegetation showing wear with 

some bare soils. Sounds of people 

occasionally heard (BC). 

River Mechanized Use: Two-wheel 

drive vehicles predominant, but 

also four wheel drives and nonmotorized, mechanized use (FC). 

Upland Mechanized Use: Fourwheel drives, all-terrain vehicles, 

dirt bikes, or snowmobiles in 

addition to non-motorized, 

mechanized use (MC). 

River Visitor Services: 

Area brochures and maps, plus 

area personnel occasional present 

to provide on-site assistance (MC). 

Upland Visitor Services: 

Basic Maps, but area personnel 

seldom available for on-site 

assistance (BC). 

River and Upland Management 

Controls: Occasional regulatory 

signing. Motorized and 

mechanized use restrictions. 

Random enforcement presence 

(MC). 

Related Management Prescriptions for River and Upland RMZs 

Recreation, Travel, Recreation: 

and Visual Resource Two semi-primitive campgrounds proposed in Alternatives 2-5. Developed 

Management campgrounds on the North Fork will be seasonally closed from December 1 thru 

April 15. 

Travel Management: 

Varies by alternative, but all OHV use is limited to designated routes under all 

alternatives. All alternatives close OHV use seasonally to protect big game, soil and 

water. Alternatives 1, 3, and 2 have the most interim routes available for OHV use. 

Visual Resource Management: 

VRM Class III and IV in Alternative 1. VRM Class II and III in all other alternatives. 

K-16 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

Bridge Creek Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Regional visitors and local residents of Mitchell, 

Fossil, and Service Creek 

Community 

Sutton Mtn.; Pats Cabin WSAs and Wilderness Character Areas 

Recreation Management Zones 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

Visitors engage in cross-country hiking and primitive overnight camping, big game and upland hunting, 

hiking, horseback riding, back-country navigation & exploration, photography and rock and fossil study in 

steep, challenging terrain. Recreation activities within the Sutton and Pats Cabin WSAs and adjacent areas 

with wilderness characteristics are managed to protect wilderness character and provide primitive, unconfined 

recreation opportunities listed above. Visitors value these primitive landscapes and enjoy participating in these 

challenging recreation activities with friends and family 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE

 Visitors engage in cross-country hiking, horseback trail experiences, big game and upland hunting, backcountry navigation & exploration, photography and rock/fossil study within the WSAs and areas with 

wilderness characteristics. Visitors enjoy and value challenging primitive, unconfined recreation activities 

with family and friends in a predominately undeveloped and rugged setting, realizing a moderate level of 

satisfaction for two or more recreation activities (i.e. 3.0 on a scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = 

moderate; 4 = total satisfaction.. 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Hiking 

• Horseback riding 

• Big game and upland 

hunting 

• Back-country 

exploration 

• Photography of natural 

landscapes 

• Rock and fossil study 

• Enjoying physical exercise 

• Being with family and friends 

• Enjoying solitude 

• Enjoying challenging hunting 

opportunities 

• Learning more about rocks and 

fossils 

• Increasing skills in back-country 

navigation and trekking 

• Increased self-confidence 

• Escaping daily responsibilities 

Personal: Improved physical fitness; stronger 

ties with family & friends, improved mental 

well-being, greater environmental awareness. 

Community/Social: Greater family bonding, 

improved image of land management 

agencies, enlarged sense of community 

dependency and value of public lands. 

Environmental: Increased awareness and 

need to protect natural landscapes and 

greater environmental stewardship. 

Economic: Positive contribution to local 

economy. 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Backcountry 

Physical Social Administrative 

Remoteness: 

More than 1⁄2 mile from any 

kind of motorized route/use 

area, but not as distant as 3 

miles. (BC) 

Naturalness: 

Naturally-appearing 

landscape having 

modifications not readily 

noticeable. (BC) 

Facilities: None. (P) 

Contacts: 

3-6 encounters/day off travel 

routes) and 7-15 encounters/day 

on travel routes. (BC) 

Group size: 

7-12 people per group. (BC) 

Evidence of Use: 

Areas of alteration uncommon. 

Little surface vegetation wear 

observed. Sounds of people 

infrequent. (BC) 

Mechanized Use: 

Limited to approximately 4 miles of 

designated routes. 

Visitor Services: 

Basic Maps, but area personnel seldom 

available to provide on-site assistance. (BC) 

Management Controls: 

Signs at key access points on basic user 

ethics. May have back country use 

restrictions. Enforcement presence rare. (BC) 

K-17 
 

 

Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Bridge Creek Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Regional visitors and local residents of Mitchell, 

Fossil, and Service Creek 

Community 

Sutton Mtn.; Pats Cabin WSAs and Wilderness Character Areas 

Recreation Management Zones 

Related Management Prescriptions: Upland RMZs 

Recreation,

Travel, and 

Visual Resource 

Management 

Recreation and Travel Management: 

Sutton Mountain WSA: OHV use limited to designated routes in all alternatives. 

Pat’s Cabin WSA: closed to OHV use in all alternatives. 

West Pat’s Cabin and Clark Canyon: Closed to OHV use in all alternatives. 

Visual Resource Management: 

Sutton and Pat’s Cabin: VRM I for all Alternatives. 

Clark Canyon: VRM Class II for all alternatives. 

West of Pat’s Cabin: Alternative 1 is VRM III and all other Alternatives is VRM II. 

K-18 
Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

Bridge Creek Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Regional visitors and local residents of Mitchell, 

Fossil, and Service Creek 

Community 

Sutton Mountain Back Country Byway Recreation Management Zone 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

By driving or biking around Sutton Mountain on State and County roads, visitors and residents enjoy yearround scenic viewing. By visiting roadside information kiosks at selected locations, visitors learn about its 

natural history, geology and paleontological features and early settlement history of Bridge Creek. Visitors and 

local residents see and value wide open spaces and landscapes of the Sutton Mountain, Pat’s Cabin and Painted 

Hills areas. Visitors enjoy hiking on selected trail routes, and learning about local history and natural features. 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

The Sutton Mountain Byway provides visitors and residents opportunities to enjoy the scenic beauty of Sutton 

Mountain, Pat’s Cabin and Painted Hills areas, while also increasing knowledge and appreciation of their 

natural history and early settlement history. Visitors drive or bike around Sutton Mountain on State and County 

roads and view open scenic landscapes, stopping to view information at interpretative kiosks along the byway. 

Visitors enjoy hiking on selected trail routes. Visitors realize a moderate level of satisfaction for two or more 

recreation activities, i.e., 3.0 on a probability scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total 

satisfaction. 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Driving for pleasure • Opportunities for learning Personal: Increased awareness and 

• Photography early history of Bridge Creek appreciation for natural landscapes and 

• Motorcycle and bike 

touring 

and natural history 

• Enjoying open spaces and 

formation of geologic and paleontological 

features and early history of the Bridge Creek 

• Hiking selected trail 

routes 

• Natural landscape views 

• Education and 

Interpretation of Geologic, 

Paleontological resources, 

and historic values 

scenery 

• Being close to nature 

• Sharing experiences with all 

ages of family and friends 

area. 

Community/Social: Increased community 

connection to natural processes and historic 

community “roots”. 

Environmental: Increased awareness for 

protecting and interpreting of natural 

landscapes and historic locations. 

Economic: Economic development with local 

communities and other entities resulting from 

more visitors to the Byway. 

K-19 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Bridge Creek Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Regional visitors and local residents of Mitchell, 

Fossil, and Service Creek 

Community 

Sutton Mountain Back Country Byway Recreation Management Zone 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Rural 

Physical Social Administrative 

Remoteness: 

On or near paved primary highways, 

but still within a rural area. (R) 

Naturalness: 

Landscape partially modified by 

roads/trails, utility lines, etc, but none 

overpower natural landscape features. 

(FC) 

Facilities: 

Adjacent or within the vicinity of 

improved yet modest, rustic facilities 

such as primitive campsites, basic 

restrooms, trails and interpretative 

sign. (FC) 

Contacts: 

30 or more encounters/day on 

byway during summer months. 

Less encounters in off-season. (FC) 

Group Size: 

13-25 people per group in summer 

months; less people per group in offseason (FC) 

Evidence of Use: 

Small areas of alteration prevalent. 

Surface vegetation gone with 

impacted soils observed. Sounds of 

people regularly heard. (FC) 

Mechanized Use: 

Ordinary highway auto, truck, 

motorcycle and bike traffic is 

characteristic. (R) 

Visitor Services: 

Basic maps, but area personnel 

seldom available to provide onsite assistance. (BC) 

Management Controls: 

Signs at key access or pull-out 

points along byway. Would 

have motorized use restrictions 

adjacent to byway. Random law 

enforcement presence. (BC) 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation, Travel, Coordinate management with State and County road departments for sustained, 

and Visual Resource year-round use on the Byway and identify safe roadside pull-outs for education 

Management and interpretative kiosks. Manage recreation use to ensure no cross-country use 

occurs off Byway. Manage trail hiking opportunities are available on selected trail 

routes. Pursue partnerships with local, state, federal agencies and organizations, 

if consistent with RMZ outcome objectives and management for on and off site 

education and interpretation of geologic resources, paleontological resources, 

explorers and early settlers of the Bridge Creek Area. 

K-20 
 

 

Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

Bridge Creek Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Regional visitors and local residents of Mitchell, 

Fossil, and Service Creek 

Community 

Sand Mountain Recreation Management Zone 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

Visitors engage in cross-country hiking and primitive overnight camping, big game and upland bird hunting, 

hiking, horseback riding, photography and rock and fossil study in undulating terrain. Recreation activities 

within the Sand Mountain area are managed to retain the existing landscape character and provide primitive, 

unconfined recreation opportunities. Visitors value these primitive landscapes and enjoy participating in these 

recreation activities with friends and family. 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Visitors engage in cross-country hiking, horseback trail experiences, big game and upland bird hunting, and 

photography. Visitors enjoy and value primitive, unconfined recreation activities with family and friends in 

a predominately undeveloped setting, realizing a moderate level of satisfaction for two or more recreation 

activities (i.e. 3.0 on a probability scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Hiking 

• Horseback riding 

• Big game and upland 

bird hunting 

• Photography of natural 

features 

• Rock and fossil study 

• Possibly mountain 

biking 

• Enjoying physical exercise 

• Being with family & friends 

• Enjoying solitude 

• Enjoying challenging hunting 

opportunities 

• Learning more about rocks 

and fossils 

• Escaping daily responsibilities 

Personal: Improved physical fitness, stronger ties 

with family and friends, improved mental wellbeing, greater environmental awareness. 

Community/Social: Greater family bonding, 

improved image of land management agencies, 

enlarged sense of community dependency and 

value of public lands. 

Environmental: Increased awareness and 

need to protect natural landscapes and greater 

environmental stewardship. 

Economic: Positive contribution to local economy. 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Backcountry 

Physical Social Administrative 

Remoteness: 

More than 1⁄2 mile from any kind of 

motorized route/use area, but not as 

distant as 3 miles (BC). 

Naturalness: 

Naturally-appearing landscape 

except for obvious Juniper treatment 

areas on landscape (MC). 

Visitor Services: None 

Contacts with other groups: 

3-6 encounters/day off travel routes 

and 7-15 encounters/day on travel 

routes (BC). 

Group Size: 

4-6 people per group (BC). 

Evidence of Use: 

Areas of alteration uncommon. 

Little surface vegetation wear 

observed. Sounds of people 

infrequent (BC). 

Mechanized Use: 

All non-motorized use; perhaps 

mountain bike use (BC). 

Visitor Services: 

Basic maps, but area personnel 

seldom available to provide on-site 

assistance (BC). 

Management Controls: 

Signs at key access points on 

basic user ethics. May have 

back country use restrictions. 

Enforcement presence rare (BC). 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation,

Travel, and

Visual Resource 

Management 

Recreation and Travel Management: 

OHV use limited to designated routes in all alternatives. 

Visual Resource Management: 

VRM Class II in all alternatives. 

K-21 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Bridge Creek Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Regional visitors and local residents of Mitchell, 

Fossil, and Service Creek 

Community 

Golden Triangle Recreation Management Zone 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

Alternatives 1, 2, and 5: Visitors engage in casual use on local motorized trail and route opportunities in a 

juniper-forested setting. 

Alternative 3: Visitors engage in casual cross-country motorized use. 

Alternative 4: Visitors engage in non-motorized recreation activities. 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Depending on the RMP alternative, visitors engage in either motorized, or shared-use, or non-motorized 

trail and route experiences within a forested setting to realize a moderate level of satisfaction for one or more 

recreation activities (i.e. 3.0 on a probability scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total 

satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

Activity 

Opportunities* 

(*depends on RMP 

alternative) 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Class I – ATV riding 

• Class II – 4x4 

driving 

• Class III- Motorcycle 

riding 

• Mountain bike 

riding 

• Enjoy Scenery 

• Experience casual trail riding or 

route driving with family and 

friends 

• Experience challenging motorized 

or non-motorized trail riding, 

depending on the land use RMP 

alternative. 

• Opportunities for different types 

of physical exercise 

Personal: Greater environmental awareness with 

family and friends. 

Community/Social: Increased awareness of 

need for community involvement in public land 

stewardship. Increased involvement in recreation 

and land use decisions. 

Environmental: Increased awareness of ”Leave 

No Trace” and “Treading Lightly” practices on 

public lands 

Economic: Increased desirability as a place to 

visit, live or retire. Positive contributions to local 

and regional economy. 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Middle Country 

Physical Social Administrative 

Remoteness: 

On or near improved gravel roads 

but at least 1⁄2 mile from Highways 

(FC). 

Naturalness: 

Landscape partially modified by 

roads/trails, utility lines, etc; but 

none overpower natural landscape 

features (FC). 

Facilities: 

Maintained & marked trails, simple 

trailhead developments, improved 

signs and very basic toilets (MC). 

Contacts: 

7-14 encounters day off travel 

routes and 15-29 encounters/day 

on routes (MC). 

Group Size: 

7-12 people per group (MC). 

Evidence of Use: 

Small areas of alteration prevalent. 

Surface vegetation gone with 

impacted soils observed. Sounds of 

people regularly heard (FC). 

Mechanized Use: 

Four-wheel drives, all-terrain 

vehicles, dirt bikes, or snowmobiles 

in addition to non-motorized, 

mechanized use (MC). 

Visitor Services: 

Basic maps, but area personnel 

seldom available to provide on-site 

assistance (BC). 

Management Controls: Occasional 

regulatory signing. Motorized and 

mechanized use restrictions. Random 

enforcement presence (MC). 

K-22 
Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

Bridge Creek Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Regional visitors and local residents of Mitchell, 

Fossil, and Service Creek 

Community 

Golden Triangle Recreation Management Zone 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation,

Travel, and

Visual Resource 

Management 

Recreation and Travel Management: 

OHV use limited to designated routes in Alternatives 1,2 and 5. Casual cross-country 

OHV use in Alternative 3 and non-motorized use only in Alternative 4. 

Visual Resource Management: 

VRM Class IV in Alternative 1 and VRM Class III in all other alternatives 

K-23 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Bridge Creek Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Regional visitors and Local residents of Mitchell, 

Fossil and Service Creek 

Community 

Gable Creek Recreation Management Zone 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

Visitors engage in local motorized and non-motorized trail opportunities in a juniper woodland setting 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Visitors engage in trail experiences within a woodland setting, to realize a moderate level of satisfaction for two 

or more recreation activities (i.e. 3.0 on a probability scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = 

total satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Class I – ATV riding 

• Class II – 4x4 driving 

• Class III- Motorcycle 

riding 

• Horseback riding 

• Hiking 

• Mountain Biking 

• Experience challenging trail 

riding 

• Viewing Scenic landscapes 

• Pursue upland bird and 

big game during hunting 

seasons 

• Opportunities for different 

types of physical exercise 

Personal: Greater environmental awareness with 

family and friends. 

Community/Social: Increased awareness of 

need for community involvement in public land 

stewardship. Increased involvement in recreation 

and land use decisions. 

Environmental: Increased awareness of “Leave 

No Trace” and “Treading Lightly” practices on 

public lands. 

Economic: Increased desirability as a place to 

visit, live or retire. Positive contributions to local 

and regional economy. 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Middle Country 

Physical Social Administrative 

Remoteness: 

On or near improved gravel roads 

but at least 1⁄2 mile from highways 

(FC). 

Naturalness: 

Naturally-appearing landscapes 

except for obvious motorized 

routes (MC). 

Facilities: 

Some primitive trails made of 

native materials such as log bridges 

and carved wooden signs (BC). 

Contacts: 

3-6 encounters/day off travel 

routes and 7-15 encounters/ 

day on travel routes (BC). 

Group Size: 

7-12 people per group (MC). 

Evidence of Use: 

Small areas of alteration 

prevalent. Surface vegetation 

gone with impacted soils 

observed. Sounds of people 

regularly heard (FC). 

Mechanized Use: 

Four-wheel drives, all-terrain vehicles, 

dirt bikes, or snowmobiles in addition to 

non-motorized, mechanized use (MC). 

Visitor Services: 

Basic maps, but area personnel seldom 

available to provide on-site assistance 

(BC). 

Management Controls: 

Signs at key access points on basic user 

ethics. May have back country use 

restrictions. Enforcement presence rare 

(BC). 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation, Travel, 

and Visual Resource 

Management 

Recreation and Travel Management: 

OHV use limited to designated routes in all alternatives. 

Visual Resource Management: 

VRM Class III in all alternatives. 

K-24 
Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

Bridge Creek Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Regional visitors and local residents of Mitchell, 

Fossil, and Service Creek 

Community 

Logging Road South Recreation Management Zone 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

Residents and visitors engage in motorized Class I, II and III opportunities on designated trails and routes in a 

juniper woodland landscape. 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Visitors engage in Class I, II and III motorized travel on designated routes within a juniper woodland 

area. Visitors enjoy and value motorized recreation activities with family and friends in a predominately 

undeveloped setting, realizing a moderate level of satisfaction for two or more recreation activities (i.e. 3.0 on a 

probability scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Class I – ATV riding 

• Class II – 4x4 driving 

• Class III- Motorcycle 

riding 

• Enjoy Scenery 

• Experience trail riding 

or driving experiences 

• Interact with other 

community users 

• Enjoy physical exercise 

Personal: Improved physical fitness, stronger ties 

with family & friends, improved mental well-being, 

greater environmental awareness. 

Community/Social: Enlarged sense of community 

dependency and value of public lands. 

Environmental: Manage public lands for enjoyable 

recreational use in an environmentally responsible 

manner by limiting all use to designated routes and 

trails. 

Economic: Positive contributions to local/regional 

economy. 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Middle Country 

Physical Social Administrative 

Remoteness: 

On or near improved gravel roads 

but at least 1⁄2 mile from highways 

(FC). 

Naturalness: 

Naturally-appearing landscapes 

except for obvious motorized routes 

(MC). 

Facilities: 

Some primitive trails made of 

native materials such as log bridges 

and carved wooden signs (BC). 

Contacts: 

15-29 encounters/day on 

routes (MC). 

Group Size: 

7-12 people per group (MC). 

Evidence of Use: 

Small areas of alteration 

prevalent. Surface vegetation 

gone with impacted soils 

observed. Sounds of people 

regularly heard (FC). 

Mechanized Use: 

Four-wheel drives, all-terrain vehicles, dirt 

bikes, or snowmobiles in addition to nonmotorized, mechanized use (MC). 

Visitor Services: 

Basic maps, but area personnel seldom 

available to provide on-site assistance (BC). 

Management Controls: 

Regulatory signing clearly posted. 

Motorized and mechanized use restrictions. 

Random enforcement presence (MC). 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation, Travel,

and Visual Resource 

Management 

Recreation and Travel Management: 

OHV use limited to designated routes in all alternatives. 

Visual Resource Management: 

VRM Class III in all alternatives. 

K-25 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Bridge Creek Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Regional visitors and local residents of Mitchell, 

Fossil, and Service Creek 

Community 

Priest Hole Triangle Recreation Management Zone 

RMZ MARKET NICHE 

Residents and visitors engage in motorized and non-motorized opportunities near a upland river canyon area 

setting. 

RMZ OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

By the year 2016, visitors engage in upland and big game hunting, hiking, mountain biking, motorized travel 

on designated routes and photography of the adjacent John Day River canyon area. Visitors enjoy and value 

these recreation activities with family and friends in a predominately undeveloped setting, realizing a moderate 

level of satisfaction for two or more recreation activities (i.e., 3.0 on a probability scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = 

somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total satisfaction. 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Driving or riding for 

pleasure 

• Natural landscape views 

• Hiking 

• Mountain biking 

• Upland and Big game 

• hunting 

• Photography of natural 

landscapes 

• Being with family and friends 

• Enjoying hunting 

opportunities 

• Escaping daily 

responsibilities 

• Enjoying physical exercise 

Personal: Improved physical fitness; stronger 

ties with family and friends, improved mental 

well-being, greater environmental awareness. 

Community/Social: Enlarged sense of 

community dependency and value of public 

lands. 

Environmental: Greater retention of 

distinctive natural landscapes. 

Economic: Positive contribution to local 

economy. 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Middle Country 

Physical Social Administrative 

Remoteness: 

On or near improved gravel roads 

but at least 1⁄2 mile from highways. 

(FC) 

Naturalness: 

Naturally-appearing landscapes 

except for obvious motorized routes. 

(MC) 

Facilities: 

Some primitive trails made of native 

materials such as log bridges and 

carved wooden signs. (BC) 

Contacts: 

3-6 encounters/day off travel 

routes and 7-15 encounters/day on 

travel routes. (BC) 

Group Size: 

7-12 people per group. (MC) 

Evidence of Use: 

Small areas of alteration prevalent. 

Surface vegetation gone with 

impacted soils observed. Sounds 

of people regularly heard. (FC) 

Mechanized Use: 

Four-wheel drives, all-terrain 

vehicles, dirt bikes, or snowmobiles 

in addition to non-motorized, 

mechanized use (MC) 

Visitor Services: 

Basic Maps, but area personnel 

seldom available to provide on-site 

assistance (BC). 

Management Controls: 

No visitor controls apparent. No use 

limits. Enforcement presence rare. 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation, Travel, 

and Visual Resource 

Management 

Recreation and Travel Management: 

OHV use limited to designated routes in all alternatives. 

Visual Resource Management: 

Alternative 1: VRM Class II within view of the John Day River; VRM Class IV 

away from river. 

Action Alternatives: VRM Class II within view of the John Day River; VRM 

Class III away from river. 

K-26 
Appendix K: Recreation Management Areas 

Little Canyon Mountain Special Recreation Management Area
	

SRMA PRIMARY MARKET STRATEGY SRMA MARKET 

Local communities in Grant County Community 

Little Canyon Mountain Recreation Management Zone (RMZ) 

MARKET NICHE

 Visitors engage in local motorized and non-motorized trail opportunities in a forested setting 

OUTCOME OBJECTIVE 

Visitors engage in trail experiences within a forested setting, realizing a moderate level of satisfaction for two or 

more recreation activities (i.e. 3.0 on a probability scale where 1 = not at all; 2 = somewhat; 3 = moderate; 4 = total 

satisfaction.) 

TARGETED OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES 

Activity 

Opportunities 

Experience Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

Benefit Opportunities 

and Outcomes 

• Class I – ATV riding 

• Class II – 4x4 

driving 

• Class III- Motorcycle 

riding 

• Horseback riding 

• Hiking 

• Mountain Biking 

• Viewing Scenic landscapes 

• Experience challenging trail 

riding 

• Interact with other 

community users 

• Opportunities for different 

types of physical exercise 

Personal: Greater environmental awareness. 

Community/Social: Greater community involvement 

in recreation and land use decisions. Reduced social 

isolation. Improved functioning in community. 

Environmental: Manage previously disturbed or 

unclaimed mining areas for recreational use on 

public land. 

Economic: Increased desirability as a place to live 

or retire. Positive contributions to local/regional 

economy. 

PRESCRIBED SETTING CHARACTER: Front Country 

Physical Social Operational 

Remoteness: 

On or near improved gravel roads but 

at least 1⁄2 mile from Highways (FC). 

Naturalness: 

Landscape partially modified by 

roads/trails, utility lines, etc., but none 

overpower natural landscape features 

(FC). 

Facilities: 

Maintained and marked trails, simple 

trailhead developments; improved 

signs and very basic toilets (MC). 

Contacts: 

7-14 encounters off travel 

routes and 15-29 encounters/ 

day on routes (MC). 

Group Size: 

7-12 people per group (MC). 

Evidence of Use: 

Small areas of alteration 

prevalent. Surface vegetation 

gone with impacted soils 

observed. Sounds of people 

regularly heard (FC). 

Mechanized Use: 

Four-wheel drives, all-terrain vehicles, 

dirt bikes, or snowmobiles in addition 

to non-motorized, mechanized use 

(MC). 

Visitor Services: 

Area brochures and maps, plus area 

personnel occasional present to provide 

on-site assistance (MC). 

Management Controls: 

Rules clearly posted with some seasonal 

or day-of-week use restrictions. Periodic 

enforcement presence (FC). 

Related Management Prescriptions 

Recreation,

Travel, and

Visual Resource 

Management 

Recreation and Travel Management: 

Alternative 1 allows cross-country OHV use. All other alternatives limit OHV use to 

designated routes. OHV use and the type of OHVs in North and South pits vary by 

alternative. See Chapter 2 for differences between alternatives for OHV and other 

recreation use. 

Visual Resource Management: 

VRM Management Class II for all alternatives. 

K-27 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

K-28 
Appendix L: Existing Rights-of-Way 

Appendix L:

Existing Rights-of-Way 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

ME_P-21 TRLRD OR 7586 RD 

ME-P-10 PIPELINE OR 7586 RD 

ME-P-11 RD OR 7586 RD 

ME-P-16 PIPELINE OR 7586 RD 

ME-P-18 FENCE OR 7586 RD 

ME-P-20 CULTURAL OR 7586 RD 

ME-P-20 CULTURAL OR 7586 RD 

ME-P-20 RD OR 7586 RD 

ME-P-21 FENCE OR 7586 RD 

ME-P-21 FENCE OR 7586 RD 

ME-P-4 PIPELINE OR 8530 TEL 

ME-P-6 RD PIPELINE OR 8530 TEL 

ME-P-8 PIPELINE OR 8705 OR HWY 

ME-P-9 FENCE OR 9493 RD 

ME-P-9 FENCE OR 9493 RD 

OR 10164 PWR OR 9554 WELL 

OR 10164 PWR OR 9848 PWR 

OR 10164 PWR OR 9848 PWR 

OR 10407 PWR RE_P-57 TRL PIPE 

OR 10407 PWR RE_P-64 RD 

OR 10407 PWR RE_P-83 RD 

OR 10407 PWR RE_P-86 TRL 

OR 10407 PWR RE-02-10 RD 

OR 10407 PWR RE-02-10 RD 

OR 10407 RD RE-02-10 RD 

OR 10407 BPA PWR RE-02-10 RD 

OR 10407 RD RE-02-10 RD 

OR 10407 RD RE-02-10 RD 

OR 10407 BPA PWR RE-02-111 RD 

OR 10407 BPA PWR RE-02-112 L STOUT RD 

OR 10407 RD RE-02-112 L STOUT RD 

OR 10407 RD RE-02-112 RD 

OR 10407 RD RE-02-112 RD 

OR 10407 BPA PWR RE-02-112 RD 

OR 10556 GAS RE-02-112 RD 

L-1 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

OR 10556 GAS RE-02-112 RD 

OR 10556 GAS RE-02-112 RD 

OR 10556 GAS RE-02-112 RD 

OR 10556 GAS RE-02-112 RD 

OR 10556 GAS RE-02-114 RD 

OR 11269 RD RE-02-117 RD 

OR 11269 RD RE-02-117 RD 

OR 11269 RD RE-02-117 RD 

OR 11269 RD RE-02-117 RD 

OR 11269 RD RE-02-119 RD 

OR 12149 RD RE-02-128 RD 

OR 12824 OR 19 RD RE-02-128 RD 

OR 12971 HWY RE-02-128 RD 

OR 13824 GAS RE-02-128 RD 

OR 13824 GAS RE-02-129 RD 

OR 13824 GAS RE-02-130 RD 

OR 13824 GAS RE-02-132 RD 

OR 14199 RAILROAD RE-02-133 RD 

OR 15772 RD RE-02-134 RD 

OR 15821 RD RE-02-134 RD 

OR 15821 RD RE-02-136 RD 

OR 15821 RD RE-02-139 RD 

OR 15821 RD RE-02-139 RD 

OR 15910 BPA PWR RE-02-139 RD 

OR 15910 RD RE-02-140 RD 

OR 15910 BPA PWR RE-02-141 RD 

OR 15910 BPA PWR RE-02-150 RD 

OR 15910 BPA PWR RE-02-151 RD 

OR 16216 ONF 58 RD RE-02-151 RD 

OR 1668 PWR RE-02-151 RD 

OR 16817 TEL RE-02-151 RD 

OR 16847 RD RE-02-160 RD 

OR 16847 RD RE-02-163 RD 

OR 16847 RD RE-02-163 RD 

OR 168998 PWR RE-02-165 RD 

OR 168998 PWR RE-02-166 RD 

OR 17530 TEL RE-02-166 RD 

OR 17530 TEL RE-02-166 RD 

OR 18632 RD RE-02-166 RD 

OR 18632 RD RE-02-166 RD 

L-2 
Appendix L: Existing Rights-of-Way 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

OR 18632 RD RE-02-18 RD 

OR 18714 BPA RD RE-02-18 RD 

OR 18714 BPA PWR RE-02-18 RD 

OR 18714 BPA PWR RE-02-18 RD 

OR 18714 BPA RD RE-02-18 RD 

OR 18714 BPA RD RE-02-190 FENCE 

OR 18714 BPA RD RE-02-190 FENCE 

OR 18714 PWR RE-02-191 RD 

OR 18714 PWR RE-02-191 RD 

OR 18714 PWR RE-02-191 RD 

OR 1923 OR 218 RD RE-02-193 RD 

OR 1923 OR 218 RD RE-02-196 PIPELINE 

OR 1923 OR 218 RD RE-02-196 PIPELINE 

OR 20299 RD RE-02-200 RD 

OR 20299 RD RE-02-200 RD 

OR 2158 RD RE-02-210 RD 

OR 2158 RD RE-02-211 RD 

OR 2158 RD RE-02-212 RD 

OR 2158 RD RE-02-213 RD 

OR 2158 RD RE-02-213 RD 

OR 2158 RD RE-02-213 RD 

OR 2158 RD RE-02-213 RD 

OR 2158 RD RE-02-213 RD 

OR 2158 RD RE-02-214 RD 

OR 2212 RD RE-02-214 RD 

OR 24421 TEL RE-02-215 RD 

OR 24421 TEL RE-02-216 RD 

OR 24421 TEL RE-02-217 RD 

OR 2451 PWR RE-02-218 RD 

OR 2451 PWR RE-02-218 RD 

OR 2451 PWR RE-02-218 RD 

OR 2451 PWR RE-02-221 RD 

OR 2451 PWR RE-02-221 RD 

OR 2451 PWR RE-02-40 RD 

OR 2451 PWR RE-02-40 RD 

OR 2451 BPA PWR RE-02-43 RD 

OR 2451 BPA PWR RE-02-43 RD 

OR 2451 BPA PWR RE-02-43 RD 

OR 2451 BPA PWR RE-02-43 RD 

OR 25747 TEL RE-02-74 RD 

L-3 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

OR 25747 TEL RE-02-75 RD 

OR 25747 TEL RE-02-75 RD 

OR 25747 TEL RE-02-75 RD 

OR 25747 TEL RE-02-75 RD 

OR 25747 TEL RE-02-75 RD 

OR 25747 TEL RE-02-75 RD 

OR 26706 RD RE-02-75 RD 

OR 26708 WATER-PIPE RE-02-75 RD 

OR 34235 PWR RE-02-

RE-02-75 

RD 

OR 343235 PWR RE-2-214 RD 

OR 343235 PWR RE-2-214 RD 

OR 343235 PWR RE-2-214 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3471 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3514 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3514 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 3514 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 35146 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 35890 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 35890 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 35958 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 36187 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 36187 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 36220 RES RE-B-3 RD 

OR 37393 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 40270 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 40270 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 40270 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 40270 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 40270 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

L-4 
Appendix L: Existing Rights-of-Way 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

OR 40270 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 40270 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 40412 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 40412 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 41397 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 41424 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 41424 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 41424 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 41427 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4156 GC 3070 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4156 GC 3070 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4156 GC 3070 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 41799 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 42314 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44536 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44536 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44536 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44536 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44536 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44536 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44536 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44536 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44536 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44605 GC 3407 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44605 GC 3407 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44605 GC 15 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44703 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44703 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44703 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 44703 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 46103 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4704 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4704 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4704 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4704 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4704 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4704 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4704 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 4704 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 47830 CANAL RE-B-3 RD 

L-5 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

OR 51958 TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 53868 CENTURY TEL TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 54099 S LEMONS WATER-PIPE RE-B-3 RD 

OR 55097 P SARI RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 55097 P SARI RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 5534 PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56243 FS 4795 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56243 FS 4795 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56243 FS 4795 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56243 FS 4795 RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56561 L STOUT RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

L-6 
Appendix L: Existing Rights-of-Way 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56872 OREGON TRAIL EL 

CO-OP 

PWR RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56888 C WOOD WATER-PIPE RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56888 C WOOD WATER-PIPE RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56897 T MCDONALD RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 56897 T MCDONALD RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 57533 CENTURY TEL TEL RE-B-3 RD 

OR 57977 T GROO RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 58199 J KELLY RD RE-B-3 RD 

OR 58200 D SHANAFELT WATER-PIPE RE-B-4 RD 

OR 58251 TUDOR/MUELLER RD RE-P-1 RD 

OR 58251 TUDOR/MUELLER RD RE-P-1 RD 

OR 58251 TUDOR/MUELLER RD RE-P-1 RD 

OR 58291 L&P STOUT RD RE-P-1 RD 

OR 58291 L&P STOUT RD RE-P-1 RD 

OR 58947 J&L RECKLING RD RE-P-1 RD 

OR 59642 G GRIFFITH RD RE-P-1 RD 

OR 60143 TEEVIN BROS L&C RD RE-P-100 RD 

OR 60168 WATER-PIPE RE-P-100 RD 

OR 60168 WATER-PIPE RE-P-100 RD 

OR 6046 PWR RE-P-100 RD 

L-7 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

OR 6046 PWR RE-P101 RD 

OR 6046 PWR RE-P101 RD 

OR 6046 PWR RE-P-101 RD 

OR 6059 RD RE-P-101 RD 

OR 60685 SMITH PROPERTIES 

INC 

WATER-PIPE RE-P-101 RD 

OR 60685 SMITH PROPERTIES 

INC 

RD RE-P-101 RD 

OR 60879 CENTURY TEL TEL RE-P-102 RD 

OR 6211 GC 63 RD RE-P-102 RD 

OR 6211 GC 63 RD RE-P-105 RD 

OR 6211 GC 63 RD RE-P-107 RD 

OR 6211 GC 63 RD RE-P-107 RD 

OR 6211 GC 63 RD RE-P-107 RD 

OR 6211 GC 63 RD RE-P-107 RD 

OR 6305 RD RE-P-107 RD 

OR 6305 RD RE-P-109 RD 

OR 6305 RD RE-P-110 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-114 CROWN PACIFIC RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-115 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-116 CROWN PACIFIC RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-117 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-117 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-117 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-117 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-117 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-120 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-122 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-123 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-126 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-126 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-126 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-126 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-127 RD 

OR 6306 RD RE-P-127 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-128 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-128 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-132 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-133 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-16 RD 

L-8 
Appendix L: Existing Rights-of-Way 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-16 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-16 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-16 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-16 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-16 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-18 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-33 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-33 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-36 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-37 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-38 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-43 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-47 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-47 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-50 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-50 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-50 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-50 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-54 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-54 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-54 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-55 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-56 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-58 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-58 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-58 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-58 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-58 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-60 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-61 RD 

OR 6315 TEL RE-P-61 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-61 RD 

OR 6315 TEL RE-P-61 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-61 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-61 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-61 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-61 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-62 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-62 RD 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-63 RD 

L-9 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

Serial 

Number Name Type 

OR 6315 RD RE-P-69 RD 

OR 6443 US 395 RD RE-P-71 RD 

OR 6443 US 395 RD RE-P-72 RD 

OR 6443 US 395 RD RE-P-78 RD 

OR 6443 US 395 RD RE-P-78 RD 

OR 7248 BUTLER MKT RD RD RE-P-79 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-79 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-79 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-80 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-80 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-80 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-80 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-81 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-83 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-84 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-85 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-85 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-88 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-89 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-90 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-90 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-91 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-92 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-92 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-92 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-92 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-97 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-98 RD 

OR 7265 RD RE-P-99 RD 

OR 7265 RD TD 21901 RAILROAD 

OR 7265 RD TD 31609 HWY 

OR 7265 RD TD 32456 OR 402 RD 

OR 7586 RD TD 32456 OR 402 RD 

L-10 
Appendix M: Withdrawn Lands 

Appendix M:

Withdrawn Lands 

“Legal Description” indicates sections within which withdrawn lands are located. Information on which portions 

of the cited sections are withdrawn is available at the Prineville District Office. 

Within PSRs, sections noted with “*” contain land where the surface is “Open to Entry Subject Section 24 FPA.” 

Note: Table does not include other agency withdrawals within National Park boundaries, or lands within 

National Forest boundaries. 

M-1 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Serial Number Order Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Managing Agency Segregative Effect Recommendation (C/R) ORE 0 5286 PLO 3871 T.4N. R.22E. Sec. 26, 33; Protection of Navigation and

Power Development/John 

Day Lock and Dam Project 

USACE A C 

T.3N. R.17E. Sec. 1; C T.3N. R.18E. Sec. 18, 20, 22, 26, 30; 

C 

T.3N. R.19E. Sec. 34, 35; C T.3N. R.20E. Sec. 26, 28, 32; 

C 

T.3N. R.21E. Sec. 2, 10; C T.3N. R.22E. Sec. 4, 6; C T.2N. R.18E. Sec. 10, 11, 12; 

C 

T.2N. R.19E. Sec. 4, 6; C 

OR 59369 FO of

1/22/2004 

T.3N. R.17E. Sec. 28; Protection of Power 

Development/Power Project 12468 

FERC C C 

ORE 0 3141 PLO 1256 T.2N. R.16E. Sec. 7, 9, 10, 

18; 

Protection of Dam Project/The Dalles Dam Project 

COE A C 

OR 19024 EO of

10/12/1932 

T.3N. R.18E. Sec. 30*; Protect Water Power and 

Reservoir Development Potential/ PSR 24 

BLM D C 

T.1N. R.19E Sec. 4*; C T.1N. R.20E Sec. 30*, 31*; C T.1S. R.20E Sec 6, 7; C T.3S. R.18E. Sec. 2, 11, 23, 24, 27, 35; 

C 

T.4S. R.18E. Sec. 2, 3, 15, 22, 23, 25; 

C 

M-2 
Appendix M: Withdrawn Lands 

Serial

Number 

Order

Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name 

Managing

Agency 

Segregative

Effect 

Recommendation

(C/R) 

T.4S. R.19E. Sec. 29; C T.5S. R.19E. Sec. 9, 21, 29; C T.7S. R.19E. Sec. 5, 7, 8,17-20; C T.8S. R.19E. Sec. 3, 9, 21,25, 26; C T.8S. R.20E. Sec. 31; C T.9S. R.19E. Sec. 12; C T.9S. R.20E. Sec. 6, 30, 32; C T.9S. R.21E. Sec. 28*, 29,30, 31; C T.9S. R.22E. Sec.13*, 14,22, 23, 27,28, 32*; C T.9S. R.23E. Sec. 1, 8*, 9*,10*, 11, 12, 18; C T.9S. R.25E. Sec. 24, 25; 

OR 19083 EO of

11/24/1916 

T.2N. R.18E. Sec. 10*; Protect Water Power and 

Reservoir Development 

Potential/ PSR 566 

BLM D C 

T.2N. R.19E. Sec. 18, 19,28, 30, 32; 

C 

T.1N. R.19E. Sec. 2*; C T.1N. R.20E. Sec. 30; C T.1S. R.19E. Sec. 10*, 11*,12*, 15, 17, 19, 21-23, 30,31; 

C 

T.2S. R.18E. Sec 1, 11-14,23-26, 34, 35; 

C 

T.3S. R.18E. Sec 1, 13, 14,22, 23, 26, 27, 34, 35; 

C 

M-3 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Serial Number Order Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Managing Agency Segregative Effect Recommendation (C/R) T.4S. R.18E. Sec 3, 10, 13, 14, 23-25; C T.4S. R.19E. Sec 19, 29-32; C T.5S. R.18E. Sec 25; C T.5S. R.19E. Sec 5, 6, 8, 17, 20, 28-30; C T.6S. R.19E. Sec 6, 7, 30; C T.8S. R.19E. Sec 5; C T.9S. R.23E. Sec 11; C OR 44721 PL 100-557 T.2N. R.18E. Sec 11-13; Protection under Wild and Scenic Rivers Act / John Day WSR BLM Various C T.2N. R.19E. Sec 18-20, 27-30, 32,33; C T.1N. R.19E. Sec 2-4, 11, 14, 23-25, 36; C T.1N. R.20E. Sec 5-7; C T.1S. R.18E. Sec 36; C T.1S. R.19E. Sec 3; C T.2S. R.18E. Sec 1, 11-13, 23-26, 34, 35; C 

T.2S. R.19E. Sec 5-7; C T.3S. R.18E. Sec 2,3,11-15, 22-24,26,27,34,35; 

C 

T.4S. R.18E. Sec 2, 3, 10, 11, 13-15, 22-25; 

C 

T.4S. R.19E. Sec 19, 29-32; C T.5S. R.18E. Sec 25, 36; C T.5S. R.19E. Sec 5, 6, 8, 9, 16, 17, 20, 21, 29, 30; 

C 

M-4 
Appendix M: Withdrawn Lands 

Serial

Number 

Order

Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name 

Managing

Agency 

Segregative

Effect 

Recommendation

(C/R) 

T.6S. R.18E. Sec 1; C T.6S. R.19E. Sec 6-8, 17-20,29-32; 

C 

T.7S. R.19E. Sec 5-8, 17-20,29, 30, 32, 33; 

C 

T.8S. R.19E. Sec 3-5, 9, 10,15, 16, 22, 23, 25, 26, 35,36; 

C 

T.8S. R.20E. Sec 31; C T.9S. R.19E. Sec 1, 11-14,24, 25; 

C 

T.9S. R.20E. Sec 1; C T.9S. R.21E. Sec 27-36; C T.9S. R.22E. Sec 13, 14,21-24, 27-29, 31-33; 

C 

T.9S. R.23E. Sec 17-19; C T.10S. R.20E. Sec 1-4; C T.10S. R.21E. Sec 1, 2, 6; C T.10S. R.22E. Sec 5, 6; C

C 

OR 44713 PL 100-557 T.1S. R.16E. Sec 4-6, 8, 9,

16, 17, 19-21, 29-32; 

Protection under Wild and Scenic Rivers Act /

Deschutes WSR 

BLM Various C 

T.2S. R.16E. Sec 5-7, 18, 19; C 

OR 19046 EO of 7/2/1910 T.1S. R.19E. Sec 10, 31; Protect Water Power and 

Reservoir Development Potential/ PSR 145 

BLM D C 

T.1S. R.20E. Sec 6, 7; C T.3S. R.18E. Sec 11, 15, 27; C T.4S. R.18E. Sec 13; C 

M-5 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Serial Number Order Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Managing Agency Segregative Effect Recommendation (C/R) T.5S. R.19E. Sec 20, 29; C T.6 S. R.19E. Sec 7, 8, 17-20, 29; C T.7S. R.19E. Sec 8, 17, 29; C T.8S. R.19E. Sec 22; C T.9S. R.19E. Sec 12; C T.9S. R.20E. Sec 30, 32; C T.9S. R.22E. Sec 23; C T.9S. R.24E. Sec 6*; C Not Serialized 12/30/1982 T.2S. R.18E. Sec 1, 11-14, 20-29, 34, 35; Protection of Wilderness Area Potential/Lower John Day BLM C T.2S. R.19E. Sec 6, 7, 18, 19; Lower John Day C T.3S. R.18E. Sec 1-3, 9-16, 20-30, 32-35; Lower John Day C T.4S. R.18E. Sec 1-4, 10-15, 22-27; Lower John Day, Thirtymile C T.4S. R.19E. Sec 19, 29-32; Thirtymile C T.5S. R.18E. Sec 24-26; North Pole Ridge C T.5S. R.19E. Sec 7, 8, 17, 

19-21, 28-32; 

North Pole Ridge C 

T.8S. R.20E. Sec 6, 7, 18-21, 29; 

Spring Basin C 

T.13S. R.26E. Sec 25; Aldrich Mountain C 

T.13S. R.27E. Sec 19, 20, 28-32; 

Aldrich Mountain C 

T.14S. R.26E. Sec 1, 12, 13; Aldrich Mountain C 

T.14S. R.27E. Sec 5-8, 17, 19-21, 27-29, 34; 

Aldrich Mountain C 

M-6 
Appendix M: Withdrawn Lands 

Serial

Number 

Order

Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name 

Managing

Agency 

Segregative

Effect 

Recommendation

(C/R) 

T.14S. R.31E. Sec 24, 25; Sheep Gulch C T.14S. R.32E. Sec 11; Pine Creek C T.14S. R.33E. Sec 10; Indian Creek C 

OR 9041 C EO of

4/17/1926 

T.6 S. R.18E. Sec 25; Protection of Public Water 

Resource/PWR 107 

BLM E C 

T.12S. R.27E. Sec 1; C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.10S. R.20E. Sec 10,NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Lower Coyote Canyon Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.10S. R.20E. Sec 16, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of PublicWater Resource/PWR 107 Lockwood Cyn Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.10S. R.20E. Sec 21,SE1⁄4SE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Pat’s Cabin Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.10S. R.26E. Sec 30,NW1⁄4NE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 W-4 Spring # 2 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T. 10S. R.26E. Sec 30,SE1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 W-4 Spring # 3 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.10S. R.26E. Sec 31,NW1⁄4NE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 BransonCreek Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.10S. R.26E. Sec 7,SW1⁄4NE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 W-4 Spring #1 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.11S. R.21E. Sec 29,NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Willow Springs 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.11S. R.21E. Sec 29,SE1⁄4NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 SlickrockSpring 

BLM Various C 

M-7 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Serial Number Order Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Managing Agency Segregative Effect Recommendation (C/R) Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T.11S. R.21E. Sec 34, SW1⁄4SE1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Pee Wee Spring (RC) BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T.11S. R.21E. Sec 35, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Broken Hip Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T.11S. R.24E. Sec 30, SE1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Fopiano Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T.11S. R.25E. Sec 13, SE1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Elmer Asher Spring # 1 BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T11S,R26E,Sec 23 , Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Blue Basin Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T.11S. R.26E. Sec 24, SW1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Blue Basin Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T.11S. R.26E. Sec 35,. NW1⁄4SE1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Maggie Spring BLM

Various 

Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.11S. R 26E. Sec 35, SE1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Corral 

Springs 

BLMVarious 

Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.11S. R.27E. Sec 31, SE1⁄4SE1⁄4 

Protection of PublicWater Resource/PWR 107 

Whisenhunt Spring 

BLMVarious 

Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.12S. R.26E. Sec 08, SW1⁄4SE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Basin 

Spring 

BLMVarious 

Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.12S. R.26E. Sec 09, NW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Battle Ck 

Spring 

BLMVarious 

Various C 

M-8 
Appendix M: Withdrawn Lands 

Serial

Number 

Order

Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name 

Managing

Agency 

Segregative

Effect 

Recommendation

(C/R) 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.12S. R.26E. Sec 21,NW1⁄4SE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Mcnulty

Basin Spring 

BLMVarious 

Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.12S. R.26E. Sec 33,NE1⁄4SE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Nash 

Reservoir Spring 

BLMVarious 

Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T. 12S. R.26E. Sec 34,SW1⁄4SE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Bluebird

Springs 

BLMVarious 

Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.12S. R.26E. Sec 4,SE1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Cactus 

Spring 

BLMVarious 

Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.12S. R.26S. Sec 2,SW1⁄4NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Two 

Through Spring 

BLMVarious 

Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.13S. R.15E. Sec 15,NW1⁄4SW1⁄4 and T.18S. R.15E. Sec 15,NW1⁄4SW1/4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Cox Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.13S. R.26E. Sec 21,SE1⁄4NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Battle

Creek Spring #2 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.13S. R.26E. Sec 22,NE1⁄4SE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Munjar

Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.13S. R.26E. Sec 26,SW1⁄4NE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 N. Munjar 

Srping 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.13S. R 26E. Sec 8,SW1⁄4SE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Boundary

Fence Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T.13S. R.26E. Sec 9,SW1⁄4NE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 West Fork 

Spring (Battle Creek) 

BLM Various C 

M-9 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Serial Number Order Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Managing Agency Segregative Effect Recommendation (C/R) Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T.13S. R.26E. Sec 9, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Battle Creek Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T.13S. R.26E. Sec 9, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Battle Creek Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T.13S. R.27E. Sec 20, SW1⁄4NE1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Gray Gulch Spring #3 BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T.13S. R.27E. Sec 31, SW1⁄4NE1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Oliver Creek Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T14S, R26E, Sec 35, NW1⁄4SE1/4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Rockpile Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T14S, R27E, Sec 17, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Dry JackAss Butte Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T14S, R27E, Sec 20 ,NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 JackAss Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T14S, R27E, Sec 28, NW1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Big Pine Spring BLM Various C Not

Serialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T14S, R27E, Sec 30,SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Cow 

Gulch Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T14S, R27E, Sec 33,SE1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Bull 

Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T14S, R31E, Sec 22,NW1⁄4NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Miller Mt. 

Spring 

BLM Various C 

M-10 
Appendix M: Withdrawn Lands 

Serial

Number 

Order

Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name 

Managing

Agency 

Segregative

Effect 

Recommendation

(C/R) 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T15S, R26E, Sec 12,NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Doghouse

Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T15S, R26E, Sec 23,NE1⁄4NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Hairpin

Curve Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T15S, R26E, Sec 23,SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 North 

Cougar Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T15S, R26E, Sec 29,NE1⁄4NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Magic 

Latern Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T16S, R26E, Sec 16 Protection of Public Water 

Resource/PWR 107 Carcajou

Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T16S, R27E, Sec 25,SW1⁄4NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 French 

Butte Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T16S, R27E, Sec 28,NW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Little 

Frazier Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T16S, R27E, Sec 28,NW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Junction

Ck Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T16S, R27E, Sec 30,NE1⁄4SE1⁄4 andT16S, R27E, Sec 29,S1⁄2NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Ellingson

Mill Administrative Site 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T16S, R27E, Sec 30,SW1⁄4NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 No Where 

Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T17S, R27E, Sec 15,NE1⁄4NE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Phillips

Spring #1 

BLM Various C 

M-11 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Serial Number Order Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Managing Agency Segregative Effect Recommendation (C/R) Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T17S, R27E, Sec 2, NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Phillips Spring #2 BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T17S, R27E,S ec 5, NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Pine Creek Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T17S, R28E, Sec 18, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Wildcat Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T17S, R28E,S ec 18, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 St. Clair - Wildcat Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T17S, R28E, Sec 19, NE1⁄4SE1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Pasture Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T17S, R28E, Sec 19, NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 St. Clair - Reservoir Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T17S, R28E, Sec 20, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Poison Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T17S, R28E, Sec 20, SE1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 St. Clair- Tributary Spring BLM Various C Not

Serialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T18S, R27E, Sec 3,NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Sheep 

Creek Butte Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T18S, R28E, Sec 06,NW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Nothalf - 

Flat Ck Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T18S, R28E, Sec 06,SE1⁄4NE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Nothalf - 

Buck Ck Spring 

BLM Various C 

M-12 
Appendix M: Withdrawn Lands 

Serial

Number 

Order

Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name 

Managing

Agency 

Segregative

Effect 

Recommendation

(C/R) 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T18S, R28E, Sec 08,NW1⁄4NE1⁄4 

Protection of PublicWater Resource/PWR 107

Blackhorse Draw Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T18S, R28E, Sec 8,NW1⁄4NE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Notatft 

Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T1S, R19, Sec 10,NW1⁄4NW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 High 

Spring # 3 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T1S,R19, Sec 11,NW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 High 

Spring # 2 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T1S, R19, Sec 11,SW1⁄4SE1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 High 

Spring # 5 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T2S, R18E, Sec 27,SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Eakin &

Strewart Spring 3 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T2S, R18E, Sec 27,SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Eakin &

Strewart Spring 2 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T2S, R20E, Sec 11,NW1⁄4SW1⁄4 

Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Barnell

Spring 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T2S, R20E, Sec 3 Protection of Public Water 

Resource/PWR 107 Hay Ck

Spring # 1 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T2S, R20E, Sec 9 Protection of Public Water 

Resource/PWR 107 Hay Ck

Spring # 2 

BLM Various C 

NotSerialized 

EO of4/17/1926 

T2S, R20E, Sec 9 Protection of Public Water 

Resource/PWR 107 Hay Ck

Spring # 3 

BLM Various C 

M-13 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Serial Number Order Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Managing Agency Segregative Effect Recommendation (C/R) Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T2S, R21E, Sec 21, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Eakin and Strewart Spring 1 BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T3S, R15E, Sec 10, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Gert Canyon Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T8S, R19E, Sec 03, SE1⁄4NE1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Sidehill Sp and Pipeline BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T8S, R20E, Sec 24, SW1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Line Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T9S, R20E, Sec 26 , NW1⁄4NW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Tom Stephen Spring # 1 BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T9S, R20E, Sec 26, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Tom Stephen Spring # 2 BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T9S, R21E, Sec 29, SE1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 C.O. Warren Spring BLM Various C Not Serialized EO of 4/17/1926 T9S, R25E, Sec 8, NW1⁄4SW1⁄4 Protection of Public Water Resource/PWR 107 Fischer Spring BLM Various C 

OR 19027 EO of 7/2/1910 T.7S. R.28E. Sec 33-35; Protect Water Power and 

Reservoir Development 

Potential/ PSR 61 

BLM D C 

T.8S. R.28E. Sec 4, 5, 7-9, 17, 18, 19*, 20*, 30*; 

C 

T.9S. R.26E. Sec 14*, 19, 20*, 21, 30; 

C 

T.9S. R.27E. Sec 2; C 

M-14 
Appendix M: Withdrawn Lands 

Serial

Number 

Order

Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name 

Managing

Agency 

Segregative

Effect 

Recommendation

(C/R) 

OR 19026 EO of 7/2/1910 T.8S. R.29E. Sec 10*, 11*,

12*; 

Protect Water Power and Reservoir Development 

Potential/ PSR 60 

BLM D C 

T.8S. R.30E. Sec 7*, 17, 24*,25*; 

C 

T.8S. R.31E. Sec 30*, 32*; C T.9S. R.31E. Sec 4*, 5*; C 

OR 19031 EO of 7/2/1910 T.9S. R.26E. Sec 31; Protect Water Power and 

Reservoir Development Potential/ PSR 65 

BLM D C 

T.10S. R.26E. Sec 7*, 18*; C T.12S. R.26E. Sec 20*; C 

NotSerialized 2/21/1996 

T.10S. R.20E. Sec 4, 9, 10,14-17, 19-23, 28-35; 

Protection of Wilderness Area Potential/Pat’s Cabin 

Wilderness Study Area BLM C 

T.11S. R.20E. Sec 4; C 

NotSerialized 2/21/1996 

T.10S. R.20E. Sec 12, 12, 24,25; 

Protection of Wilderness Area Potential/Sutton Mountain

Wilderness Study Area BLM C 

T.10S. R.21E. Sec 2-12,14-23, 25-36; C T.10S. R.22E. Sec 30-32; C T.11S. R.21E. Sec 1-5, 9-16,21-23; C T.11S. R.22E. Sec 5-8, 18; C

C 

ORE 010418 PLO 3076 T.11S. R.25E. Sec 3 

Protection of Air NavigationSite/John Day ANS FAA B C 

M-15 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Serial Number Order Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Managing Agency Segregative Effect Recommendation (C/R) OR 46602 SO of 9/28/1928 T.12S. R.25E. Sec 1, 2; Protection of lands for State, RP&P Selection/Recreational Withdrawal #15 BLM/NPS Closed to Public Land Laws except RP&P disposal C T.11S. R.26E. Sec 5, 8, 18, 20; C OR 44748 PL 100-557 T.13S. R.26E. Sec 24-26; Protection under Wild AND Scenic Rivers Act/ S Fork John Day WSR BLM Various C T.15S. R.26E. Sec 1, 12-14, 24,25,36; C T.15S. R.27E. Sec 19, 30, 31; C T.16S. R.26E. Sec 1; C T.16S. R.27E. Sec 7, 18-20, 29, 32, 33; C T.17S. R.27E. Sec 4, 9, 10, 15, 22-25; C T.17S. R.28E. Sec 28-30, 32-34; C T.18S. R.28E. Sec 3, 4, 10, 

11, 13-15, 24; 

C 

OR 19030 EO of 7/2/1910 T.14S. R.26E. Sec 23*, 26*, 

35*; 

Protect Water Power & Reservoir Development Potential/ PSR 64 

BLM D C 

OR 44758 T.17S. R.36E. Sec 21, 22, 

27, 28, 33, 34; 

Protection under Wild & Scenic Rivers Act /N Fork Malheur Study River 

BLM C 

M-16 
Appendix M: Withdrawn Lands 

Serial

Number 

Order

Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name 

Managing

Agency 

Segregative

Effect 

Recommendation

(C/R) 

NotSerialized 

Rock Creek (RM 23)T1N, R19E, Sec 14, E1⁄2 

Recreation Sites to bewithdrawn form MineralEntry (2001 John Day Wild 

and Scenic River Plan Recordof Decision Appendix J) 

BLM C 

Cottonwood Bridge(RM40)T1S, R19E, Sec 17,SW1⁄4SW1⁄4, SW1⁄4, SE1⁄4 

C 

Butte Creek (RM97)T6S, R19E,Sec 8, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4,Sec 17 NW1⁄4NW1⁄4 

C 

Clarno (RM 106-109)T7S, R19E Sec 18 S1⁄2 SW1⁄4,SW1⁄4SE1⁄4Sec 19Sec 20 W1⁄2Sec 29 W1⁄2, SW1⁄4SE1⁄4Sec 30 E1⁄2Sec 32 N1⁄2, N1⁄2SW1⁄4 C Clarno East (RM 112)T8S, R19E Sec 3 NE1⁄4SW1⁄4 C Burn Ranch (RM132-133) T9S, R20E Sec 32SW1⁄4NW1⁄4, S1⁄2 C Priest Hole (RM 137)T9S, R20E Sec 36 S1⁄2 C Service Creek (RM 157)T9S, R23E Sec 17 NW1⁄4Sec 18 E1⁄2NE1⁄4 C Muleshoe (RM 159)T9S, R23E Sec 9 SW1⁄2NE1⁄4 C 

M-17 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement Serial Number Order Number/Date Legal Description Acres Purpose/Name Managing Agency Segregative Effect Recommendation (C/R) Wooden Bridge (RM 162) T9S, R23E Sec 12 N1⁄2NW1⁄4 C Shady Grove (RM178) T9S, R25E Sec 9 N1⁄2NE1⁄4 C Lone Pine (North Fork RM2) T9S, R26E Sec 20 W1⁄2NE1⁄4, NW1⁄4 C Lone Pine (North Fork RM 2) T9S, R26E Sec 20 W1⁄2NE1⁄4, NW1⁄4 C Big Bend (North Fork RM 3) T9S, R26E C Monument (North Fork RM 16) T9S, R27E Sec 1 SW1⁄4, NW1⁄4SE1⁄4 C Ellingson Mill (South Fork RM 32) T16S, R27E Sec 29 W1⁄2 C Acronyms: PLO: Public Land Order DO: Director Order PSR: Power Site Reserve EO: Executive Order PSC: Power Site Classification SO: Secretarial Order R&PP: Recreation and Public Purposes BO: Bureau Order WPD: Water Power Designation FO: FERC Order FPC: Federal Power Commission PL: Public Law Segregative 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:

Continue-C Revoke-R 

M-18 
Appendix N: Implementation and Monitoring 

Appendix N:

Implementation and Monitoring 

Introduction 

An implementation and monitoring schedule helps to focus priorities in order to leverage multiple resources, 

identifies key partnerships where mutual interests can be met with minimum costs, and provides specific 

interests an opportunity to focus resources on areas of specialized interest. 

Currently, without public comment on alternatives and the selection of a Proposed Action, creating an 

implementation and monitoring plan would be premature. The following is provided to identify the process, 

necessary elements, timeline, and broad scale questions that will guide the development of an implementation 

and monitoring plan. The implementation and monitoring plan will be developed with stakeholder involvement 

shortly after the Record of Decision and Final Resource Management Plan are published. 

Collaborative Approach and Regional Framework 

The Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan was developed with input from diverse public outreaches, 

cooperators, and the John Day/Snake Resource Advisory Council. That approach will also be applied to develop 

an implementation and monitoring schedule for the objectives and anticipated outcomes of the John Day Basin 

Resource Management Plan. 

Implementation and Monitoring Schedule 

Successfully implementing the long-term vision of the John Day Basin Resource Management Plan will be 

supported by a strategic implementation and monitoring framework that includes descriptions of the following: 

1.	 task & resource estimates to get to on-the ground implementation 

2.	1 priority areas for resource focus (See Objectives: S3, V4 and 5, FU2, AQ3, W4, and AC5 for resource 

specific prioritization criteria) 

a.	 integration of basin-wide interest 

i. Watershed councils 

ii. Community Wildfire Protection Plans 

iii. Malheur, Ochoco, and Umatilla National Forests 

iv. ODF&W conservation opportunity areas 

b.	 relative costs/benefits of choices 

c.	1 resource/community benefits/needs 

d.	 partnership opportunities 

e.	 funding strategies 

3.	1 partnerships 

a.	 stewardship opportunities 

b.	 opportunities for administration or cost sharing 

c.	1 volunteers 

d.	 complementary basin or regional efforts 

i. Bonneville Power Administration - John Day Sub-basin draft plan - 2005 

ii. The Nature Conservancy – Ecoregional Assessment 

4.	1 effective measures for establishing periodic “course corrections” 

a.	 adaptive management (See Objectives AC5, R8, and R9. for identified adaptive management criteria) 

b.	 plan maintenance 

N-1 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

c.	1 regional and basin-wide monitoring frameworks 

d.	 appropriate data collection and analysis - MONITORING 

RMP monitoring differs from activity or program specific monitoring in that it looks at progress on a 

landscape basis and focuses on trends as they relate to the achievement of objectives that designed to 

move conditions toward Desired Future Condition (DFC). 

i. implementation monitoring – would record what, when, where, and how the plan has been 

followed, including legal requirements and agency policies. Implementation monitoring would occur 

at one-year intervals and would provide a basis for annual budgeting. 

ii. effectiveness monitoring – were the implemented projects/plan guidance effective at moving 

conditions towards the objectives and long term vision of the RMP. 

iii. plan evaluation – has there been a significant change in the science, issues, or knowledge gained 

from effectiveness monitoring that would call for a change in RMP direction. 

Conditions that might warrant a change in the RMP include: 

•	1 New information or circumstances that provide for interpretations not known or understood when the 

RMP was completed that could significantly affect ongoing actions. 

•	1 RMP decisions that are no longer valid based on new information or changed circumstances. 

•	1 Implementation decisions that are no longer valid based on new information or changed circumstances. 

•	1 Effects of proposed or ongoing actions that are substantially different than those projected in the 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
1

•	1 Inconsistencies that arise between RMP actions and other resource-related plans. 

The understanding gained through a comprehensive review of all the monitoring data is critical to managing 

sustainable, healthy, and productive habitats. Evaluation and assessment would occur at five-year intervals. 

Conditions that indicate conditions that reflect a movement away from DFC may indicate a need to change or 

adjust management. Results from program specific monitoring could provide additional indicators for change. 

Minor changes, refinements, or clarifications in the plan are maintenance actions that incorporate data from 

monitoring. Plan maintenance actions would not expand the scope of resource uses or restrictions or change the 

terms, conditions, or decisions of the approved John Day Basin RMP/EIS. Maintenance actions do not require 

formal public involvement, Tribal consultations, or interagency coordination. Major changes to the plan, however, 

would require a plan amendment, formal public involvement, interagency coordination, and Tribal consultations, 

and NEPA analysis. 

MONITORING QUESTIONS 

To better guide development of a strategic monitoring plan the ID team has developed broad scale monitoring 

questions. Public feedback on these monitoring questions and input from stakeholders will be use to develop a 

specific monitoring plan. These questions are intended to provide a landscape scale picture of trend as it relates 

to Desired Future Conditions and the effectiveness of plan direction at addressing issues identified in the Purpose 

and Need. 

Implementation Monitoring: 

•	1 Are actions and projects being implemented in the locations, amounts, and manner specified in the RMP? 

•	1 Are BMPs being applied? 

•	1 Are projects being implemented in accord with resource specific and implementation plan priorities? 

N-2 
Appendix N: Implementation and Monitoring 

Effectiveness Monitoring: 

•	1 Are BLM actions moving at-risk riparian/aquatic areas toward PFC? 

•	1 Are BLM actions moving 5% of the areas at PFC toward desired potential conditions? 

•	1 Are BLM actions moving vegetative conditions toward ARV? 

•	1 Are BLM actions maintaining or reducing the extent of noxious weeds and invasive annuals? 

•	1 Are BLM actions developing conditions where fire can be managed in a safe and ecologically resilient 

manner? 

•	1 Are OHV and Interim/Designated route designations providing adequate access to and opportunities for 

use of public lands? 

•	1 Are OHV and Interim/Designated route designations meeting resource objectives such as wildlife 

security, limiting erosion, providing areas of non-motorized recreation, etc.?
1

•	1 Are BLM actions and designations on the North Fork acquired lands providing recreational opportunities 

while protecting unique fish and wildlife resources? 

The following resource specific monitoring will be used to help answer plan level monitoring needs: 

Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N-3 

Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N-3 

Fire and Fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N-3 

Aquatic Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N-4 

Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N-4 

Wilderness Study Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N-4 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N-4 

Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N-5 

Paleontological Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N-5 

Air Quality 

There is an air quality monitoring network developed for Oregon that will be used to determine whether the 

national ambient air quality standards are met; monitoring stations are located in La Grande, Baker City, Burns, 

and John Day. This monitoring network will continue be used to determine background pollution levels which 

can help measure emissions increases during fire events. 

Vegetation 

Treatment monitoring will be done consistent with the Central Oregon Fire Management Services Fuels 

Monitoring Strategy or its successor. 

Changes in ARV (Geographic distribution, magnitude, and cause). 

Fire and Fuels 

Fuels treatment monitoring will be done consistent with the Central Oregon Fire Management Services Fuels 

Monitoring Strategy or its successor. 

Changes in FRCC (Geographic distribution, magnitude, cause) 

Number of fires where the fire management objective was in whole or part to achieve resource benefit. 

N-3 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Aquatic Resources (ACS Monitoring and Inventory ) 

Inventory

During field assessments aquatic or other resources, update riparian photo points and PFC inventories of lentic 

areas, all fish bearing stream, and on perennial, perennial interrupted and intermittent streams greater than 1⁄4 

mile or 1⁄2 acre. Update inventory during assessments if previous inventories indicate non attainment, are older 

than 3 years, or both. 

Monitoring

•	1 Continue to participate in PACFISH INFISH Effectiveness Monitoring (PIBO), if it is continued at the 

regional scale. 

•	1 Monitor the most limiting factor on PFC assessments where streams and lentic areas are not at PFC 

(approximately 25% of streams). PFC assessments (USDI 1988 and 1999) and activity level planning 

shall guide the identification of specific riparian attributes of vegetation, hydrology/geomorphology and 

erosion/deposition to be monitored. Selection of monitoring technique will be unique to the topic, site, 

and recent science but is likely to include photo monitoring. Monitoring frequency must be accomplished 

at least every 10 years in order to be meaningful for the next land use plan. 

•	1 At the watershed scale (5th field HUC; up to 250,000 acres), evaluate the percentage of routes passing 100 

year flood with a natural geometry, slope, & bed stability and with safe passage for aquatic organisms. 

Are active and passive restoration actions allowing an upward trend toward desired conditions for 

streambank stability, water quality and width to depth ratios? 

•	1 Evaluate improvements in vegetation (streambank stability) and channel width to depth ratios on major 

river (Wild and Scenic Segments) and the acquired land on the North Fork John Day. 

•	1 Are active and passive restoration actions allowing an upward trend toward desired conditions for pools? 

•	1 Survey pools on streams with essential fish habitat for rearing where segments of BLM are longer than 1⁄4 

mile BLM ownership. Repeat every 10 years. 

•	1 Develop and continue to support BLM and joint efforts to monitor any water quality parameter of interest 

to a specific TMDL. 

Wildlife 

Monitor the number of adult long-billed curlew on the Horn Butte reproductive area yearly between March 

and April. 

Wilderness Study Areas 

Within available means, assure a level of monitoring and surveillance of each WSA adequate to prevent, detect, 

and mitigate unauthorized uses and facilities. 

•	1 Establish partnerships with user groups who are willing to assist the BLM with WSA monitoring on a 

volunteer basis. 

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

•	1 Monitor ecological conditions and uses within ACECs to ensure that management actions and resource 

uses within all existing and proposed ACECs are compatible with the values and resources for which 

they were established or proposed. 

•	1 Establish long-term ecological monitoring for Black Canyon ACEC. 

N-4 
Appendix N: Implementation and Monitoring 

Recreation 

•	1 Use Limits of Acceptable Change identify areas where dispersed recreation is contributing to nonattainment of RMP resource objectives or recreation experience, or both. Actions to protect resources, 

such as campsite hardening, rehabilitation or closure, may be taken at any time, if necessary. 

•	1 Monitor the 4,488 acre Rudio Plateau area annually to determine if ecological and social thresholds for 

Open OHV use have been exceeded. The Rudio Plateau area would remain seasonally Open unless one or 

more of the following triggers are exceeded, at which point the area would be Closed to off-route travel 

and limited to designated routes. The triggers for closure are: 

◦	1When unmitigated motorized use for > 1 year will cause sensitive species to become listed as threatened 

or endangered, currently listed threatened or endangered species to be “taken”, or streams to become 

listed as 303d listed for not providing water quality for beneficial uses, 

◦	1When BLM or its partners cannot afford to protect public safety or resource objectives, or resolve most 

conflicts with users or adjacent lands (see BMPs), 

◦	1When detrimental soil disturbance exceeds 15 percent of the Rudio OHV area, or 

◦	1If BLM or its partners are no longer monitoring motorized use, special status species, soil disturbance 

or other relevant resource values. 

•	1 Monitor visitor use on the 4,488 acre Rudio Plateau to determine if changes are needed in transportation 

or other activity planning. 

Paleontological Resources 

•	1 Periodically monitor for unauthorized disturbances to and locality condition of paleontological resources. 

•	1 Monitor sites and conduct law enforcement patrols to discourage vandalism and check site conditions. 

•	1 Conduct reactive inventory, recording and evaluation on a project-specific level. 

•	1 Periodically monitor for ARPA violations and site condition. 

•	1 Conduct intensive and complete inventory in areas of high probability and/or potential high use not 

previously inventoried and which are not necessarily associated with specific projects. 

•	1 Conduct limited site testing/salvage excavation where appropriate. 

N-5 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

N-6 
Appendix O: Priority Species Assessment 

Appendix O:

Priority Species Assessment 

ISSSSP: State Director’s Special Status Species List for the Oregon/Washington Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 

for Sensitive species lists. 

CSLB -Focal species: Partners in Flight Conservation Strategy for Landbirds Focal Species: 

The strategy for achieving functioning ecosystems for landbirds is described through the habitat requirements 

of “focal species” that are highly associated with important attributes or conditions within each habitat type. The 

rationale for using focal species is to draw immediate attention to habitat attributes most in need of conservation 

or most important in a functioning ecosystem. By managing for a group of species representative of important 

components in a functioning ecosystem, many other species and elements of biodiversity also will be conserved. 

(LI) Locally Important Species: Designated for interest shown by the state and public. 

Grassland Priority Species 

Priority Species Species Status Key Habitat Features 

Washington ground squirrel ISSSSP Areas of high grass cover, on deep soils with 

low clay content. 

Grasshopper sparrow CSLB -Focal species and ISSSSP Large patches of grass cover with few to no 

shrubs. 

Bobolink ISSSSP Tall grass areas, flooded meadows, and prairies. 

Upland sandpiper CSLB -Focal species and ISSSSP Large areas of short grass interspersed or 

adjacent to taller grasses. 

Mule deer LI Coniferous forests, desert shrub and grasslands 

with shrubs. 

Antelope LI Grasslands with mix of forbs and shrubs. 

Shrubland Priority Species
	

Priority Species Species Status Key Habitat Features 

Greater sage grouse CSLB -Focal species and ISSSSP Big sagebrush dominated habitats with diverse 

understories of grasses and forbs. 

Loggerhead shrike CSLB -Focal species Shrubs or small junipers for nesting. 

Sage sparrow CSLB -Focal species Large patches of big sagebrush. 

Pygmy rabbit ISSSSP Burrow in tall, dense, mature sagebrush plants; 

need deep, friable soils for burrows. 

Brewer’s sparrow CSLB -Focal species Areas of sagebrush in desert, and shrubland/ 

chaparral. 

Sage thrasher CSLB -Focal species Big sagebrush plains, primarily in arid or semiarid situations. 

Lark sparrow CSLB -Focal species Ecotonal edges in herbaceous, shrub, and tree 

habitats. 

Burrowing owl CSLB -Focal species Grass-(or shrub) dominated habitats; associated 

with burrowing animals 

Antelope LI Grasslands with mix of forbs and shrubs 

Mule deer LI Coniferous forests, desert shrub and grasslands 

with shrubs. 

Elk LI Alpine, Conifer, Hardwood and Mixed 

Woodlands and Forests, Grassland/herbaceous, 

Savanna and Shrublands. 

O-1 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Juniper Steppe Priority Species 

Priority Species Species Status Key Habitat Features 

Ferruginous Hawk CSLB -Focal species Scattered, mature juniper trees 

Antelope LI Grasslands with mix of forbs and shrubs 

Mule deer LI Coniferous forests, desert shrub, and grasslands 

with shrubs. 

Elk LI Alpine, Conifer, Hardwood and Mixed 

Woodlands and Forests, Grasslandherbaceous, 

Savanna and Shrublands. 

Forest Priority Species 

Priority Species Species Status Key Habitat Features 

Lewis’ woodpecker ISSSSP and CSLB -Focal species Patches of burned old trees usually in 

low elevation forests, including pine and 

cottonwood riparian. 

Chipping sparrow CSLB -Focal species Open forest with well-developed under story in 

ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and grand-fir. 

White-headed woodpecker ISSSSP & CSLB -Focal species Large pine trees in pure pine and mixed conifer 

stands (Dry Forest types) 

Flammulated owl CSLB -Focal species Large pine trees in old forest with grassy 

openings and dense thickets (Dry forest types). 

Townsend’s big-eared bat ISSSSP Uses caves and bark of large trees in forested 

regions, areas with a mosaic of woodland, 

grassland, and/or shrubland. 

Mule deer LI Coniferous forests, desert shrub and grasslands 

with shrubs. 

Elk LI Alpine, Conifer, Hardwood and Mixed 

Woodlands and Forests, Grassland/herbaceous, 

Savanna and Shrublands. 

O-2 
Appendix O: Priority Species Assessment 

Riparian Priority Species 

Priority Species Species Status Key Habitat Features 

Bald eagle 

ISSSSP 

Large diameter trees along rivers and lakes. 

Forages for fish or waterfowl on water. 

Peregrine falcon ISSSSP Riparian areas from seacoasts, to mountainous 

open forests where there are suitable nesting 

cliffs. 

Yellow-billed cuckoo CSLB -Focal species Large patches of cottonwood and willow 

riparian woodlands. 

Upland sandpiper CSLB -Focal species and 

ISSSSP 

Large areas of short grass interspersed or 

adjacent to taller grasses. 

Tricolored blackbird ISSSSP Fresh-water marshes of cattails, tules, bulrushes 

and sedges 

Bobolink ISSSSP Tall grass areas, flooded meadows, and prairies. 

Black swift ISSSSP Waterfalls and wet cliffs near forests and open 

areas. 

Lewis’ woodpecker ISSSSP and CSLB -Focal 

species 

Patches of burned old trees usually in 

low elevation forests, including pine and 

cottonwood riparian. 

Bufflehead ISSSSP Riparian vegetation along marshes, rivers, and 

lakes. 

Silver-Bordered Fritillary ISSSSP Wet areas in meadows, bogs, marshes, and 

swamps. 

Meadow Fritillary ISSSSP Wet areas in marshes, meadows, and aspen 

groves. 

Cliff and Canyon Priority Species
	

Priority Species Species Status Key Habitat Features 

Prairie falcons CSLB -Focal species Primarily open situations, especially in 

mountainous areas, steppe, plains or prairies 

adjacent to potential cliff nest sites 

Fringed myotis ISSSSP Caves, cliffs and mines in deserts, grasslands, 

woodlands and forests. 

Spotted bats ISSSSP Cliffs and caves from desert to montane 

coniferous stands. 

Pallid bat ISSSSP Arid deserts and grasslands, often near rocky 

outcrops and water 

Townsends’ big-eared bat ISSSSP Uses caves and bark of large trees in forested 

regions , areas with a mosaic of woodland, 

grassland, and/or shrubland 

Bighorn sheep LI Cliffs, rock rims, rock outcroppings, and bluffs 

with sparse cover of trees or shrubs 

O-3 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

O-4 
Appendix P: Common and Scientific Names 

Appendix P:

Common and Scientific Names 

Below is a table of the common names of plants as given by the USDA and their scientific names. Some common 

names are known by another name, as indicated in the parenthesis. 

Plants 

Common Name Scientific Name Code 

Alkali sacaton Sporobolus airoides SPAI 

American speedwell Veronica americana VEAM2 

antelope bitterbrush Purshia tridentata PUTR (2) 

arrowleaf balsamroot Balsamorhiza sagittata BASA 

arrowleaf thelypody Thelypodium eucosmum THEU 

aster Aster sp. ASTER 

Baltic rush Juncus balticus JUBAB2 

basin big sagebrush Artemisia tridentata ssp. tridentata ARTR (2) 

basin wildrye (Great Basin wild rye) Leymus cinereus LECI4 

bigseed biscuitroot Lomatium macrocarpum LOMA 

black cottonwood Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa POPUL 

black currant Ribes hudsonianum RIBES 

blue elder (blue elderberry) Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea SANIC5 

bluebells Mertensia sp. MERTE 

bluebunch wheatgrass Agropyron spicatum AGSP 

bluebunch wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicata PSSP (6, S) 

bride’s bonnet (queen’s cup beadlily) Clintonia uniflora CLUN2 

broadleaf cattail Typha latifolia TYLA 

chairmaker’s bulrush (three square bulrush) Schoenoplectus americanus SCAM6 

cheatgrass Bromus tectorum var. tectorum BRTE 

choke cherry Prunus virginiana PRVI 

clasping pepperweed Lepidium perfoliatum LEPE2 

cocklebur Xanthium sp. XANTH2 

Columbia monkshood Aconitum columbianum ACCO4 

common snowberry Symphoricarpos albus SYAL 

common spikerush Eleocharis palustris ELPA3 

cryptantha Cryptantha sp. CRYP 

Dalmatian toadflax Linaria dalmatica LIDA 

dawn redwood Metasequoia glyptostroboides MEGL8 

diffuse knapweed Centaurea diffusa CEDI3 

Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii PSME 

dwarf suncup (dwarf evening-primrose) Camissonia pygmaea CAPY5 

P-1 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Plants
	 Common Name Scientific Name Code 

elk sedge Carex garberi CAGA3 

Englemann spruce Picea engelmannii PIEN 

fiddleneck Amsinckia sp. AMSIN 

field horsetail Equisetum arvense EQAR 

fireweed Chamerion angustifolium CHAN9 

fleabane Erigeron sp. ERIGE2 

fringed willowherb (hairy willowherb) Epilobium ciliatum EPCI 

Geyer’s sedge Carex geyeri CAGE2 

grand fir Abies grandis ABGR 

gray alder (mountain alder) Alnus incana ALNUS 

gray rabbitbrush Ericameria nauseosa ERNA1 

greasewood Sarcobatus vermiculatus SAVE4 

greenleaf fescue (green fescue) Festuca viridula FEVI 

grouse whortleberry (grouse huckleberry) Vaccinium scoparium VASC 

hardheads (Russian knapweed) Acroptilon repens ACRE3 

heartleaf arnica Arnica cordifolia ARCO9 

Hood’s sedge Carex hoodii CAHO5 

Indian ricegrass Achnatherum hymenoides ACHY 

Jacob’s-ladder Polemonium pulcherrimum POPU3 

largeleaf sandwort (bigleaf sandwort) Moehringia macrophylla MOMA3 

leafy spurge Euphorbia esula EUES 

Lewis’ mockorange Philadelphus lewisii PHLE4 

little prince’s pine (prince’s pine) Chimaphila menziesii CHME 

little sagebrush (low sagebrush) Artemisia arbuscula ARAR8 

lodgepole pine Pinus contorta PICO 

lupine Lupinus sp. LUPIN 

mallow-leaf ninebark Physocarpus malvaceus PHMA5 

medusahead (medusahead rye) Taeniatherum caput-medusae TACA8 

mountain big sagebrush Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana ARTRV 

mountain snowberry Symphoricarpos oreophilus SYOR (2) 

mountain-mahogany Cercocarpus ledifolius CELE3 

naked sedge (torrent sedge) Carex nudata CANU5 

narrowleaf mock goldenweed Stenotus stenophyllus STST5 

Nebraska sedge Carex nebrascensis CANE2 

needle-and-thread Hesperostipa comata HECO26 

netleaf hackberry Celtis laevigata var. reticulata CELAR 

oceanspray Holodiscus dumosus HODI 

Pacific ninebark Physocarpus capitatus PHCA11 

P-2 
Appendix P: Common and Scientific Names 

Plants
	 Common Name Scientific Name Code 

Parry’s rush Juncus parryi JUPA 

peachleaf willow Salix amygdaloides SAAM2 

pine Pinus sp. PINUS 

pinegrass Calamagrostis rubescens CARU 

poison hemlock Conium maculatum COMA2 

ponderosa pine Pinus ponderosa PIPO 

prickly currant Ribes lacustre RILA 

prickly sandwort Arenaria aculeata ARAC2 

puncturevine Tribulus terrestris TRTE 

purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria LYSA2 

quackgrass Elymus repens ELRE4 

quaking aspen Populus tremuloides POTR (5) 

rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus sp. CHRYS 

ragwort Senecio sp. SENEC 

redosier dogwood Cornus sericea COSE16 

reed canarygrass Phalaris arundinacea PHAR3 

Rocky Mountain maple Acer glabrum ACGL 

rose spirea Spiraea douglasii SPDO 

rush skeletonweed Chondrilla juncea CHJU 

saltgrass Distichlis sp. DISTI 

sandbar or coyote willow Salix exigua SAIN3 

Sandberg bluegrass Poa secunda POSE 

scabland penstemon (hot rock penstemon) Penstemon deustus var. variabilis PEDEV2 

scabland sagebrush Artemisia rigida ARRI2 

Scotch cottonthistle (Scotch thistle) Onopordum acanthium ONAC 

Scouler’s willow Salix scouleriana SASC 

sedge Carex sp. CAREX 

sidebells Orthilia secunda ORSE 

slenderbeak sedge Carex athrostachya CAAT3 

snowberry Symphoricarpos sp. SYMPH 

snowbrush ceanothus Ceanothus velutinus CEVE 

spiny greasebush (Nevada greasebush) Glossopetalon spinescens var. aridum GLSPA 

spiny hopsage Grayia spinosa GRSP 

spotted knapweed Centaurea stoebe CEST8 

spruce Picea sp. PICEA 

squirreltail Elymus elymoides ELEL5 

St. Jacob texosporium lichen Texosporium sancti-jacobi TESA 

stinging nettle Urtica dioica URDI 

subalpine fir Abies lasiocarpa var. lasiocarpa ABLAL or ABLA 

P-3 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Plants
	 Common Name Scientific Name Code 

Common name Scientific name Code 

tall annual willowherb Epilobium paniculatum EPPA 

tamarisk Tamarix sp. TMAR2 

thinleaf huckleberry Vaccinium membranaceum VAME 

Thurber’s needlegrass Achnatherum thurberianum ACTH7 

thymeleaf buckwheat Eriogonum thymoides ERTH4 

tomcat clover (springbank clover) Trifolium willdenowii TRWI3 

transparent milkvetch Astragalus diaphanus ASDI2 

tufted hairgrass Deschampsia caespitosa DECA (1) 

twinflower Linnaea borealis LIBO3 

water birch Betula occidentalis BEOC2 

wavyleaf thistle Cirsium undulatum CIUN 

wax currant Ribes cereum RICE 

western clematis Clematis ligusticifolia CLLI2 

western juniper Juniperus occidentalis JUOC or JUNIP 

western larch Larix occidentalis LAOC 

western needlegrass Achnatherum occidentale ssp. occidentale ACOC3 or ACOCO 

white alder Alnus rhombifolia ALRH2 

white fir Abies concolor ABCO 

white top Cardaria draba CADR 

whitebark pine Pinus albicaulis PIAL 

willow Salix sp. SALIX 

willowherb Epilobium sp. EPILO 

winter wheat Triticum sp. 

Woods’ rose Rosa woodsii ROWO 

woolly sedge Carex pellita CAPE42 

Wyoming big sagebrush Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis ARTRW 

yellow rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus CHVI8 

yellow star-thistle Centaurea solstitialis CESO3 

P-4 
Appendix P: Common and Scientific Names 

Fish
 Common Name Scientific Name 

bull trout Salvelinus confluentus 

channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus 

Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha 

interior redband trout DPS Oncorhynchus mykiss 

Lahonton cutthroat Oncorhynchus clarki hendersoni 

Pacific lamprey Lampetra tridentata 

smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui 

summer steelhead DPS Oncorhynchus mykiss 

westslope cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi 

Yellowstone cutthroat Oncorhynchus clarki bouvieri 

Animals
	

Common Name Scientific Name 

antelope Antilocapra americana 

bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus 

black bear Ursus americanus 

California big horn sheep Ovis canadensis californiana 

California quail Callipepla californica 

Canadian Lynx Lynx canadensis 

chukar Alectoris chukar 

Columbia Spotted Frog Rana luteiventris pop. 3 

Columbian sharp-tailed grouse Tympanuchus phasianellus columbianus 

cougar Puma concolor 

elk Cervus elephus 

gray wolf Canis lupus 

grizzly bear Ursus arctos 

Lewis’ woodpeckers Melanerpes lewis 

long-billed curlew Numenius americanus 

mountain quail Oreortyx pictus 

mule deer Odecoileus hemionus 

peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus 

sage grouse Centrocercus urophasianus phaios 

Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsoni 

Washington ground squirrel Spermophilus washingtoni 

wild turkey Meleagris gallopavo 

yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus occidentalis 

P-5 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

P-6 
Appendix Q: Wildlife and Vegetation Species associated with Riparian Areas 

Appendix Q:

Wildlife and Vegetation Species

associated with Riparian Areas 

Some of the Species addressed by Appropriate Management of Their Habitat in 

Stream Channels and Floodplains 

Species Comment 

American Dipper Observed within planning area 

American Goldfinch Observed within planning area 

American Robin Observed within planning area 

Arrow-leaf Thelypody BLM is largest public landowner of sites and habitat and plays major 

role in management. Much of its suspected habitat has been inventoried. 

Management actions which could affect include livestock grazing, riparian 

treatment, road construction/maintenance. The plant is listed as “threatened” 

by the State of Oregon. 

Ash-throated Flycatcher Observed within planning area 

Audubon’s Warbler Observed within planning area 

Bald Eagle Threatened as described in the Endangered Species Act. 1999 USFWS proposed 

a rule to remove it from the list of Threatened and Endangered Wildlife in the 

Lower 48 states. 

Bank Swallow Observed within planning area 

Barn Swallow Observed within planning area 

Belted Kingfisher Observed within planning area 

Black-billed Magpie Observed within planning area 

Black-capped Chickadee Observed within planning area 

Black-chinned Hummingbird Observed within planning area 

Bobolink Added at the suggestion of wildlife biologist April 2007 

Brewer’s Blackbird Observed within planning area 

Brewer’s Sparrow Observed within planning area 

Bull trout Listed as Threatened under ESA 

Bullock’s Oriole Observed within planning area 

Bushtit Observed within planning area 

California bighorn sheep Stream channel and function are important habitats, but not as critical as the 

cliff and canyon land community. 

California Quail Observed within planning area 

Calliope Hummingbird Observed within planning area 

Canada Goose Observed within planning area 

Canyon Wren Observed within planning area 

Catfish Non-native species 

Cedar Waxwing Observed within planning area 

Chinook salmon Monitored by ODFW. Important native game species 

Q-1 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Some of the Species addressed by Appropriate Management of Their Habitat in 

Stream Channels and Floodplains 

Species Comment 

Chipping Sparrow Observed within planning area 

Chukar Observed within planning area Non-native 

Cliff Swallow Observed within planning area 

Columbia Cress This species is not known from lands within the planning area but is suspected 

due to its habitat (gravel along water courses and alkaline vernal ponds) and its 

disjunct occurrences in Oregon and Washington (Silver Lake, Multnomah Co., 

Hanford). It has not been purposely surveyed for and it is unlikely that BLM 

management would affect this species if it does, indeed, occur on BLM land in 

the planning area. 

Common Merganser Observed within planning area 

Common Nighthawk Observed within planning area 

Common Raven Observed within planning area 

Common Yellowthroat Observed within planning area 

Downy Woodpecker Observed within planning area 

Eastern Kingbird Observed within planning area 

Floater Mussles Found in John Day River 

Gray Flycatcher Observed within planning area 

Great Blue Heron Observed within planning area 

Green-tailed Towhee Hillary Cooke sampled on local BLM riparian 

House Finch Observed within planning area 

House Sparrow Observed within planning area 

House Wren Observed within planning area 

Interior redband trout Sensitive species 

Killdeer Observed within planning area 

Lark Sparrow Hillary Cooke sampled on local BLM riparian 

Lazuli Bunting Observed within planning area 

Least Flycatcher Observed within planning area 

Lewis’ Woodpecker Observed within planning area 

Loggerhead Shrike Observed within planning area 

Malhuer mottled sculpin 

Mallard Observed within planning area 

McGillivray’s Warbler Observed within planning area 

Middle Columbia Steelhead Monitored by ODFW. Threatened under ESA 

Mountain Chickadee Observed within planning area 

Mourning Dove Hillary Cooke sampled on local BLM riparian 

Northern Flicker Observed within planning area 

Northern Harrier Observed within planning area 

Northern Rough-winged 

Swallow 

Observed within planning area 

Olive-sided Flycatcher Observed within planning area 

Q-2 
Appendix Q: Wildlife and Vegetation Species associated with Riparian Areas 

Some of the Species addressed by Appropriate Management of Their Habitat in 

Stream Channels and Floodplains 

Species Comment 

Orange-crowned Warbler Observed within planning area 

Oregon Junco Observed within planning area 

Pacific Lamprey Sensitive species 

Parry’s Sedge This species is not known from lands within the planning area but is suspected 

due to its meadow habitat and that it is known from a site in the Burns RD in 

Grant County. It has not been purposely surveyed for. If it were to be found on 

BLM land in the planning area, livestock grazing, forest management and access 

would be the greatest concerns. 

Peck’s Mariposa Lily This species is not known from BLM lands within the planning area but is 

suspected due to its meadow and riparian habitat. A number of sites have been 

documented in Crook and Wheeler counties, especially in and around Big 

Summit Prairie. It has not been purposely surveyed for on BLM lands within 

the planning area. If it were to be found, livestock grazing, forest management, 

changes in hydrology and access would be the greatest concerns. 

Peregrine Falcon De-listed from ESA in 1999; however, the peregrine is protected by the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act. 

Red-breasted Nuthatch Observed within planning area 

Red-tailed Hawk Observed within planning area 

Red-winged Blackbird Observed within planning area 

Retrorse Sedge This species is not known from BLM lands within the planning area but is 

suspected due to its riparian habitat and widespread collections from such 

diverse areas as Echo, Sauvie Island, Eugene, and Jefferson and Wasco counties. 

It has not been purposely surveyed for. Livestock grazing, forestry practices, 

access and changes in hydrology could all affect this taxon. It is unlikely BLM 

would play a major management role if it were found on BLM land. 

Ring-necked Pheasant Observed within planning area 

Rock Dove Observed within planning area 

Rock Wren Observed within planning area 

Rufous Hummingbird Observed within planning area 

Sandhill Crane Suggested addition from Wildlife Biologist on April 13, 2007 

Say’s Phoebe Observed within planning area 

Scalloped Moonwort This species is not known from BLM lands within the planning area but 

is suspected due to its riparian habitat and current collections from moist 

meadows and intermittent springs in the Ochocos and in Grant and Wheeler 

counties. It has not been purposely surveyed for. If it were to be found on BLM 

land in the planning area, livestock grazing, forest management, changes in 

hydrology and access would be the greatest concerns 

Small Mouth Bass Non-native species 

Snails Any perennial spring might have snails that no one has seen before. There are 

5 different species found in the planning area. Two of them may already be 

extinct. 

Song Sparrow Observed within planning area 

Q-3 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Some of the Species addressed by Appropriate Management of Their Habitat in 

Stream Channels and Floodplains 

Species Comment 

Spotted Sandpiper Observed within planning area 

Spotted Towhee Observed within planning area 

Stellar’s Jay Hillary Cooke Sampled on local BLM riparian 

Tree Swallow Observed within planning area 

Triangle-lobe Moonwort This species is not known from BLM lands within the planning area but is 

marginally suspected due to its habitat (wet meadows, streams, and bogs 

in higher elevation forest) and the fact that it is known from both Grant and 

Wheeler counties. It has not been purposely surveyed for. If it were to be found 

on BLM land in the planning area, livestock grazing, forest management, 

alterations in hydrology, and access would be the greatest concerns. 

Turkey Vulture Observed within planning area 

Vaux’s Swift Observed within planning area 

Violet-green Swallow Observed within planning area 

Warbling Vireo Observed within planning area 

Western Kingbird Observed within planning area 

Western Meadowlark Observed within planning area 

Western Scrub Jay Observed within planning area 

Western Tanager Observed within planning area 

Western Wood-pewee Observed within planning area 

Westslope Cutthroat Trout Sensitive species 

White-crowned Sparrow Observed within planning area 

Wilson’s Warbler Hillary Cooke sampled on local BLM riparian 

Yellow Warbler Observed within planning area 

Yellow-billed cuckoo Federal Candidate species because of insufficient listing information. 

Q-4 
Appendix Q: Wildlife and Vegetation Species associated with Riparian Areas 

Some of the Species addressed by Appropriate Management of their Habitat in 

Playas, Ponding, and Lentic Areas 

Species Comment 

American Goldfinch The species may occur in the plan area lentic areas. 

American Robin The species may occur in the plan area lentic areas. 

Ash-throated Flycatcher The species may occur in the plan area lentic areas. 

Bastard Kentrophyta This species is not known from lands within the planning area but is suspected 

due to its habitat (ponderosa pine and big sagebrush) and its occurrence in the 

southern portion of the Blue Mountains. It has not been purposely surveyed 

for. While it is unlikely that BLM management would affect this species if it 

does, indeed, occur on BLM land in the planning area, any such sites would be 

important as range extensions. 

Black-capped Chickadee The species may occur in the plan area lentic areas. 

Bobolink Added at the suggestion of wildlife biologist April 2007 

California bighorn sheep This is a locally important species for economics and recreational hunting. 

California Quail The species may occur in the plan area lentic areas. 

Chukar This is a locally important species for economics and recreational hunting. 

Columbia Cress This species requires vernal pools - this is a more seasonal water source. 

Cusion Coryphantha This species is not known from lands within the planning area but is suspected 

due to its habitat (desert valleys and hills) and collections from Jefferson and 

Sherman counties. It has not been purposely surveyed for and it is unlikely that 

BLM management would affect this species if it does, indeed, occur on BLM land 

in the planning area. 

Dwarf Scorpion-weed This species is not known from lands within the planning area but is suspected 

due to its habitat (vernally-moist meadows and scablands) and current collections 

from NW of Prairie City and near Adrich Mtn. It has not been purposely surveyed 

for and it is unlikely that BLM management would affect this species if it does, 

indeed, occur on BLM land in the planning area. 

Floater Mussles Freshwater Mussels of the Pacific Northwest by Nedeau, and others referenced the 

presence of these mussels in the John Day River. 

Hayden’s Cymopterus This species is not known from BLM lands within the planning area but is 

suspected due to its habitat (open, rocky and gravelly slopes) and current 

collections from above Canyon City. It has not been purposely surveyed for and it 

is unlikely that BLM management would affect this species if it does, indeed, occur 

on BLM land in the planning area. 

Henderson’s Ricegrass This species is not known from BLM lands within the planning area but is 

suspected due to its habitat (rocky, bunchgrass scablands) and current collections 

from Grant, Wheeler, Jefferson, Wasco and Sherman counties. It has not been 

purposely surveyed for. If found on BLM land, concerns would center around 

livestock grazing management, although the majority of the management 

responsibility for this species likely would remain with the Forest Service since 

numerous sites are known there. 

Howell’s thelypody This species is not known from lands within the planning area but is suspected 

due to its alkaline meadow habitat and historic collection from the Big Summit 

Prairie area. It has not been purposely surveyed for. If it were to be found on BLM 

land in the planning area, livestock grazing and changes in hydrology would be 

the greatest concerns. It is currently considered as extirpated from Oregon with 

historic collections from Crook and Grant counties, and counties to the south. 

Q-5 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Some of the Species addressed by Appropriate Management of their Habitat in 

Playas, Ponding, and Lentic Areas 

Species Comment 

Narrow-leaved Sedge This species is not known from lands within the planning area but is suspected 

due to its general habitat (open, dry to moderately moist, often grassy places). It 

has not been purposely surveyed for and is considered extirpated from Oregon. 

One site is known in Washington. If it were to be found on BLM land in the 

planning area, livestock grazing, forest management and access would be the 

greatest concerns. 

Porcupine Sedge Although not extensively surveyed for, the plant is known from about a dozen 

sites in the planning area, including near McCarty and Hay Creeks, and on Sutton 

Mountain. Habitat is “wet ground” along streams and meadows. Although BLM 

has several sites, it likely occurs on private land also, as well as on National Forest 

land. Therefore, BLM does not play a major role in its management. Activities that 

could affect the taxon include livestock grazing, access and changes in hydrology. 

Raven’s Lomatium This species is not known from BLM lands within the planning area but is 

suspected due to its rocky scabland habitat and a current collection from near 

Prairie City. It has not been purposely surveyed for and it is unlikely that BLM 

management would affect this species if it does, indeed, occur in the planning area. 

Sandhill Crane Suggested addition from Wildlife Biologist April 13,2007 

Seaside Helitrope This species is not presently known from BLM lands within the planning area but 

is suspected due to its ubiquitous habitat (moist areas and roadsides) and current 

collections from counties surrounding the planning area. There is also a historic 

collection from near Moro. It has not been purposely surveyed for. If it were to be 

found on BLM land in the planning area it is unlikely BLM management would 

have an impact on the plant. 

Sesile Mouse Tail This species requires vernal pools - this is a more seasonal water source. 

Transparent Milkvetch This plant is known from BLM land in the planning area, and with 22 known sites, 

BLM plays a major role in the management of this species. Extensive inventory 

has been conducted for this taxon. Concerns exist related to OHV use, livestock 

trailing/trampling, horse use, and road improvement. The plant is listed as 

“threatened” by the State of Oregon. Note: Some authors “lump” this variety with 

Astragalus diaphanus, which is more common in Wheeler, Sherman, Morrow and 

Umatilla counties. 

Triangle-lobe Moonwort This species is not known from lands within the planning area but is marginally 

suspected due to its habitat (wet meadows, streams and bogs in higher elevation 

forest) and the fact that it is known from both Grant and Wheeler counties. It 

has not been purposely surveyed for. If it were to be found on BLM land in the 

planning area, livestock grazing, forest management, alterations in hydrology, and 

access would be the greatest concerns. 

Wallowa Rice Grass This species is not known from lands within the planning area but is suspected 

due to its habitat (rocky, bunchgrass scablands) and current collections from both 

Crook and Walowa counties. It has not been purposely surveyed for. If it were 

found on BLM land in the planning area, BLM likely would have an important role 

in the species’ conservation since sites are few and widely dispersed. Livestock 

grazing would be the greatest concern. 

Yellow-billed Cuckoo The species may occur in the plan area lentic areas. 

Q-6 
Appendix R: Social and Economic Analysis Methodology 

Appendix R:

Social and Economic Analysis

Methodology 

This appendix provides more detail about the Social and Economic analyses of environmental consequences of 

the management alternatives than is provided in the Data, Methods, and Models section of Chapter 4. 

Forest Economic Analysis Spreadsheet Tool (FEAST) 

The FEAST analysis used in Chapter 4 assesses the economic impacts of the resource outputs projected under 

each alternative. Resource outputs in this context are the amount of a resource (e.g., timber volume, AUMs, 

recreation visits etc.) that would be available for use under each alternative. Average annual resource outputs 

were projected by resource specialists for each alternative for the short term (10-year) planning period based on 

the best available information and professional judgment. Impacts to economic well-being are measured in terms 

of employment and labor income. 

Employment and Labor Income 

Employment and labor income estimates developed for this analysis include direct, indirect, and induced 

economic effects. Direct employment would, for example, be generated in the logging and sawmill sectors. 

Additional employment would be generated as the affected logging and sawmill operations purchase services 

and materials as inputs (“indirect” effects) and employees spend their earnings within the local economy 

(“induced” effects). 

Theoretically, expenditures associated with changes in final demand would be available and specific enough 

to allocate to each of the 528 sectors contained in the IMPLAN model. In the absence of primary data, national 

level production functions are used. Expenditures should be delineated between local and non-local providers, 

as purchases out of the economic study region will have no local economic impact. IMPLAN’s data contains 

information, called regional purchase coefficients, that describe the proportion of a given commodity that will be 

provided by local producers. Previous modeling experience has shown that the data contained in the IMPLAN 

modeling system for the various sectors are an accurate representation of impacts. 

Potentially affected social groups 

The social analysis assesses the potential effects of different management actions on potentially affected social 

groups. These groups were identified based on studies contracted for this RMP (Preister 2006), the results of 

public scoping and comments received after the release of the Analysis of the Management Situation. This 

analysis addresses the potential impacts of the alternatives based on the issues and concerns raised by these 

groups during the public scoping process. The analysis draws upon ongoing discussions between the BLM 

and potentially affected publics, as well as discussions with subject matter experts involved in other parts of 

the analysis. The analysis is primarily qualitative with potential impacts ranked by alternative. Quantitative 

measures, such as acres in protected areas, harvest volumes, and recreation visitation, are used, as appropriate. 

Environmental Justice 

The environmental justice analysis assesses the potential for the alternatives to have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low income populations. The fair treatment and 

meaningful involvement of people of all races, cultures, and incomes in this planning process is also considered. 

R-1 
Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

R-2 
Appendix S: Snags and Salvage 

Appendix S:

Snags and Salvage
	 Retention of Snag Pulses: 

The following methodology describes how to identify an appropriate analysis area and measure the amount of 

area within a snag pulse. A snag pulse is an area at or above the 80% tolerance interval (see glossary and table 

below) by habitat type (DecAID, 2007). 

To calculate the size of the analysis area needed for snags pulses: 

Acres of Habitat type affected by high mortality (insect epidemic, fire, etc.) divided by 0.2 gives the total acres 

of that habitat type that should be included in the analysis area. The size of the total analysis area would be the 

cumulative amount of each habitats resultant value. Minimum allowable analysis area would be 12,800 acres. 

Habitat type Acres with high mortality Divided by 0.2 

East Side Mixed Conifer 2,000 10,000 

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas Fir 1,000 5,000 

Lodgepole Pine Forest and Woodlands 500 2,500 

Total Analysis Area Needed 17,500 

Start by delineating a contiguous area which encompasses the amount of area identified in the step above for 

the habitat type that encompasses the largest amount of acreage. Make the area logical in terms of watershed or 

administrative boundaries. One option is to start with the 5th field HUC the project falls within and then add 6th 

field HUCs along the perimeter until the area requirement is met. The analysis area must contain the necessary 

acres for each habitat type. 

Once the analysis area is identified a review of each habitat type within the analysis area will be made to 

determine the number of acres meeting the 80% tolerance level for snag densities listed in the table below. > 10” 

(Total) numbers provide a sufficient review. Areas are identified through the use of recent fire information, insect 

surveys, aerial photo interpretation or other broad data sources. If more detailed snag density information exists 

the > 20” data can be used. 

Snag Densities per Acre at the 80% Tolerance Interval 

Habitat Type Structure > 10” (Total) > 20” 

East Side Mixed Conifer - Blue Mountains 

Large Tree 21.21 9.11 

Open 58.32 12.79 

Small 25.25 8.62 

Ponderosa Pine/Douglas-fir 

Large Tree 13.27 10.76 

Open 15.58 5.30 

Small 7.16 2.51 

Lodgepole Pine Forests and Woodlands 

Large Tree No Data No Data 

Open 26.59 4.25 

Small 27.64 6.64 

S-1 
 

Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement 

Multiply the total acres of each habitat type in the analysis area by 0.2 (expected pulse acres) then subtract the 

number of acres determined to be meeting the 80% tolerance level for each habitat type (existing pulse acres). 

Example: 

Total East Side Mixed Conifer – 40000 * 0.2 = Expected Pulse Acres of 8,000
1

Existing Pulse Acres 8,500
1

Acres available for Salvage 500
1

If the resultant number is positive, that is the number of acres available for salvage logging. If the number is negative, 

the manager should consider not salvaging or retaining snag levels at the 80% tolerance level on salvage acres. 

S-2 

Bureau of Land Management 

Prineville District Office 

BLM/OR/WA/PL-08/097+1792 

United States Department of the Interior PRIORITY MAIL 

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID 

Bureau of Land Management

Permit No. G-76

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300 OFFICIAL BUSINESS Prineville, OR 977543050 NE 3rd Street Prineville District Office Bureau of Land Management
Volume II: Appendices 

Draft John Day Basin Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement

October 

2008