APPENDIX H 

Vegetation and Wildlife 

H-1. Rationale for Routing Alignment within Marbled Murrelet Occupied 

Stands Cross by the Proposed Project 

H-2. Effects to MAMU Nesting Habitat within Occupied or Presumed 

Occupied Stand in the Proposed Terrestrial Analysis Area Affected from 

Construction of the Project Within MAMU Habitat Zones 1 and 2 

H-3. Effects to Northern Spotted Owl Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging Habitat 

by Land Use Allocation and Land Ownership from Construction of the 

Proposed Action within the Range of the NSO 

H-4. Summary of Suitable NSO Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging Habitat 

Condition Pre- and Post-Action for Known and Predicted Owls within 

the Project Analysis Area 

H-5. Rationale for Routing Alignment within Northern Spotted Owl Nest 

Patches Crossed by the Proposed Project 

H-6. Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that 

May Occur Near the Project 

H-7. Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that May Occur 

Near the Project 

H-8. Special Status Plants (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that May 

Occur Near the Project 

H-9. New BLM and USFS Sensitive and Strategic Species on the 2008 State 

Director’s and Regional Forester’s Lists that Were not on the 2004 Lists 

H-10. Focal Landbird Species Analysis for U.S. Forest Service and BLM Lands 

H-11. Biological Evaluation 

H-12. Applicant Responses to U.S. Forest Service Comment Regarding Snag 

Densities 

H-13. Pacific Connector Pipeline, Management Indicator Species Evaluation 
 

TABLE H-1

Rationale for Routing Alignment within Marbled 

Murrelet Occupied Stands Crossed by the Proposed Project 

MSNO or 

Site ID 1 Project 

Component2 Jurisdiction

Forest 

Stand 

Age3

Rationale for Proposed 

Alignment Potential for Avoidance 

Known Occupied Stands

C3098 

(B04) 

ROW, EAR 

MP 32.10 & 

32.55 

Coos Bay 

BLM 120 

Original route was moved 

to minimize crossing deep 

seated landslide and avoid 

the OSU red alder test 

plots as requested by 

BLM. Current alignment 

follows existing road and 

is perpendicular to 

contours for stability. 

No - Current route was approved on 

the ground with BLM representative 

and cannot be moved due to terrain 

(Elk Creek Headwall). 

Surveys conducted in 2007 did not 

detect presence in stand; 2008 

surveys documented occupied 

behavior. 

C3075 

ROW, EAR 

MP 33.74 - 

33.80 & 

34.02 

Coos Bay 

BLM 120 

C3042 

ROW, EAR 

MP 34.02 & 

34.31 

Coos Bay 

BLM 120 

Alignment follows ridgeline 

and contours to ensure 

stable route and avoids 

drainages. Alignment is in 

road in Occupied Stand 

C3075 

No - Any re-alignment will result in 

crossing the stand at other locations. 

Note: original prefiling route was 

realigned to avoid multiple deep 

seated landslides and the proposed 

alignment significantly minimized the 

crossing of occupied stand C3042 

as well as the number of stream 

crossings. A field visit will occur 

prior to construction to evaluate the 

right-of-way and work spaces within 

these stand locations. 

C3093 

(B06) 

ROW, AA--

EAR MP 

35.33 & 

35.34 - 35.8 

Coos Bay 

BLM 120 

Alignment follows existing 

road between the two 

stands that make up B06. 

No - The amount of timber that 

would need to be removed from the 

stands is small because of the inroad alignment. Numerous micro 

adjustments have been made to the 

prefiling alignment to minimize stand 

impacts. 

Surveys in 2007 detected presence 

in both the north and south stands 

that make up B06. Surveys in 2008 

detected occupied behavior. 

C3073 

ROW, EAR 

MP 36.13, 

36.64 - 37.15 

Coos Bay 

BLM 

120/ 

150 

C3090 

(B08) 

ROW, EAR 

MP 36.64 - 

37.15 

Coos Bay 

BLM 

70/80/

150 

C3094 

(GS07) 

N of MP 

38.20; EAR 

MP 38.34-

38.87 

Coos Bay 

BLM 150 

Geologic hazards dictated 

alignment along the 

contours and within the 

existing road alignment 

(BLM 28-10-29.0). This 

alignment ensures safety, 

see Follow Up Response 

to Dec. 14, 2007 FERC 

Data Request. 

No – Follow-up response to Dec. 14, 

2007 FERC Data Request 

concluded that the BLM suggested 

alternatives were not constructible 

and the existing route could not be 

moved. 

2007 MAMU surveys identified 

occupied behavior in C3090 and 

surveys in 2008 documented 

occupied behavior in C3094. 

H-1
 

C3070 

ROW, EAR 

MP 41.37 & 

41.75 

Coos Bay 

BLM 

350/ 

600 

The pipeline alignment 

follows a stable ridgeline 

almost entirely through 

regenerating forest stands 

that are 30-40 years in 

age. Co-locating the 

alignment adjacent to the 

existing road (Weaver Rd., 

BLM 28-8-18) would 

require side hill 

construction, additional 

work area requirements 

and potential unstable 

conditions for long-term 

pipeline integrity. To 

minimize construction 

disturbance, the ridgeline 

alignment minimizes 

additional TEWAs. The 

work areas were limited to 

those needed to safely 

construct the pipeline and 

were located outside of 

mature forests. 

No - C3070 is a large dual-lobed 

polygon that cannot be entirely 

avoided. The current alignment 

utilizes much of the "gap" between 

the lobes; a potential move toward 

the road contains many large & tall 

trees. Co-locating the alignment 

adjacent to the existing road 

(Weaver Rd) would require side hill 

construction, additional work area 

requirements and potential unstable 

conditions for long-term pipeline 

integrity and would still not entirely 

avoid C3070. A small minor TEWA 

adjustment was made to minimize 

impacts. 

C3092 

(B10) 

ROW, AA--

EAR MP 

44.87 & 

45.23 

Coos Bay 

BLM 250 

Current route at this 

location avoids side slope 

construction by traversing 

slope contours at a 

perpendicular angle. 

No - The only potential route to the 

north would have to follow Upper 

Signal Tree Road and would require 

additional distance and multiple 

added TEWAs to accommodate the 

tight bends and turns of construction 

and cross three headwaters to 

waterbodies. Rapidly moving 

landslide areas would also be 

traversed. The current route only 

intersects the northern most "lobe" 

of the designated stand, removing 1 

acre of suitable habitat out of the 

181-acre stand (0.5%). A minor 

alignment adjustment (based on civil 

survey data) was incorporated into 

the DEIS-revised route to minimize 

impacts to the stand. 

R3026 

(B11) 

ROW, EAR 

MP 47.07 - 

47.66 & 

48.07 - 48.42 

Roseburg 

BLM 

250/ 

120 

The pipeline alignment 

follows a stable ridgeline 

off of Weaver Ridge which 

minimized the length of 

steep slopes (greater than 

50 percent) that are 

descended. The alignment 

also minimizes impact to 

Riparian Reserves. Within 

this LSMA, the alignment 

traverses two regenerating 

forested areas. The 

youngest forest stand is 

less than 10 years old and 

is crossed for about 800 

feet. The other is about 50 

years old and is crossed 

for approximately 2,200 

feet with more than 1,200 

feet of this alignment coNo - The BLM-identified potential reroutes of this alignment were 

reviewed by R. Peacock for the 

Habitat Quality Subgroup on April 

10th and were provided as a followup response to the Dec. 14, 2007 

FERC Data Request. The descent of 

Weaver Ridge along the BLM's 

Proposed Alternative was 

determined to be an unsuitable 

location to construct and operate a 

high-pressure, large-diameter, 

natural gas transmission pipeline 

and inadequate for pipeline integrity. 

The alternative bisects the headwall 

and near the bottom of the steep 

slope, the alternate route would 

pass within 100 feet of a small, 

active waterfall that originates from 

the headwall. The proposed 

H-2
 

located within an existing 

forest road (BLM Deep 

Creek Road, Rd., BLM 29-

9-12.2). To further 

minimize impacts, TEWAs 

were reduced to those 

needed for safe pipeline 

construction. Further, 

UCSAs were located 

within the LSMA to 

temporarily store stumps, 

slash and potential spoil 

generated during 

construction which will be 

redistributed on the rightof-way during restoration. 

alternative then traverses a steep 

slide slope for 0.6 mile and closely 

parallels a waterbody headwater 

(Deep Creek) rather than crossing it. 

GeoEngineers’ assessment of the 

BLM Proposed Alternative indicated 

that from a geotechnical 

perspective, the alternative is not a 

reasonable alternative because 

there is a high risk of landslide 

occurrence and surface erosion 

where the alignment descends the 

eastern flank of Weaver Ridge 

through convergent slopes above a 

first order stream. 

1 MSNO provided by BLM. Unit ID (i.e., B03) provided by R&A and SBS. 

 Unit IDs: Habitat areas numbered B01, B02 are BLM; Habitat areas numbered P01, P02 are Private; 

Potential/Gray Habitat numbered G01, G02 are Private. 2

 Project Location: 

 Range of MPs provided = the PCGP Construction Right-of-Way occurs within the MAMU stand or identified 

 potential stand/trees. 

 Direction from a milepost (MP) is provided = the MAMU stand does not occur within the PCGP Construction Right- 

 of-Way but is some distance from the proposed project. 

 EAR is an existing access road that has been identified, by MP to be used to access the construction 

 right-of-way. If only an “EAR” is identified, the proposed project is more than 0.25 mile from the MAMU 

 stand but within 0.25 mile of an EAR. 

3

 Age of forested stand was obtained from BLM Forest Operations Inventory GIS coverage. If not located within BLMmanaged land, age of stand is provided a general description: Regenerating = 5 – 40 years, Mid-Seral = 40 – 80 

years, and Late Successional = 80 – 175 years. 

H-3
TABLE H-2

Effects (acres) to Marbled Murrelet (MAMU) Nesting Habitat Within Occupied or Presumed O

In the Proposed Terrestrial Analysis Area Affected From Construction of the PCGP Project within MAM

Suitable Habitat8 Non-Suitab

MSNO or 

Site ID1 Project Location2

Distance 

from 

Centerline 

or EAR to 

Stand/Trees 

(feet)4 

Land owner Land Allocation5 Forest Stand Age6

Habitat 

Removed 

or 

Modified 

(Y/N) 

Overall 

Acres in 

the 

Stand7 Removed10 Modified11 Removed10 

Occupied StandsMarbled Murrelet Zone 1 

C1032 

E of MP 9.25; 

EAR MP 8.77 - 

9.37D 1,192 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, TMA 120 N 49.0 N/A N/A N/A 

C3045 EAR MP 28.53P 0 Coos Bay BLM 

LSMA, AW, 

DFMA, 

RMA, TMA 

190 N 40.2 N/A N/A N/A 

C3051 EAR MP 28.53P 0 Coos Bay BLM 

LSMA, AW, 

DFMA, 

RMA, TMA 

190 N 24.4 N/A N/A N/A 

C3046 EAR MP 28.53P 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 190 N 19.9 N/A N/A N/A C3098 

(B04P) 

MP 31.97-32.33; 

EAR MP 32.10 & 

32.55G,D 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA 120 Y 129.5 5.0 0.0 0.00 

C3074 EAR MP 32.55G,D 110-414 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 100/120 N 18.5 N/A N/A N/A C3039 SW of MP 31.82; EAR MP 34.02P 990 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, DTMA, RMA, TMA 150/160 N 104.1 N/A N/A N/A C3038 EAR MP 34.02P 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 150 N 134.1 N/A N/A N/A C3043 EAR MP 34.02P 900 Coos Bay BLM 

LSMA, AW, 

DTMA, 

RMA, TMA 

160 N 208.3 N/A N/A N/A 

C3061 EAR MP 34.02P 1,092 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 40 N 43.5 N/A N/A N/A C3042 

MP 33.84-33.90; 

EAR MP 34.02 & 

34.31P 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 120 Y 250.5 0.9 0.0 0.0 

C3075 

MP 33.77-33.84; 

EAR MP 33.74 - 

33.80 & 34.02P 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 120 Y 45.2 1.3 0.0 0.3 

C3054 EAR MP 34.02P 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 120 N 145.8 N/A N/A N/A C3041 EAR MP 34.02P 972 Coos Bay BLM 

LSMA, AW, 

DTMA, 

RMA, TMA 

120 N 214.0 N/A N/A N/A 

C3020 EAR MP 35.33 & 35.34 - 35.80P 99 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, RMA, TMA 120 N 34.6 N/A N/A N/A C3021 

EAR MP 35.33, 

35.34 - 35.80 & 

38.87P 0 Coos Bay BLM 

LSMA, AW, 

DTMA, 

RMA, TMA 

80/120 N 195.2 N/A N/A N/A 

H-4
TABLE H-2

Effects (acres) to Marbled Murrelet (MAMU) Nesting Habitat Within Occupied or Presumed O

In the Proposed Terrestrial Analysis Area Affected From Construction of the PCGP Project within MAM

Suitable Habitat8 Non-Suitab

MSNO or 

Site ID1 Project Location2

Distance 

from 

Centerline 

or EAR to 

Stand/Trees 

(feet)4 

Land owner Land Allocation5 Forest Stand Age6

Habitat 

Removed 

or 

Modified 

(Y/N) 

Overall 

Acres in 

the 

Stand7 Removed10 Modified11 Removed10 

C3060 EAR MP 35.33 & 35.34 - 35.80P 1,166 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 160/120 N 60.7 N/A N/A N/A C3022 EAR MP 35.33 & 35.34 - 35.80P 514 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, DTMA, RMA, TMA 140 N 329.7 N/A N/A N/A C3086 EAR MP 35.33 & 35.34 - 35.80P 842 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 60/110 N 84.2 N/A N/A N/A C3093 

(B06P) 

MP 35.13-35.82; 

EAR MP 35.33 & 

35.34 - 35.8P 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA 120 Y 330.1 0.3 1.2 4.0 

C3073 

MP 36.49-37.14; 

EAR MP 36.13, 

36.64 - 37.15G 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 120/150 Y 176.3 1.6 0.0 2.8 

C3090 

(B08P) MP 37.31-38.06 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA 70/80/150 Y 321.2 7.9 4.0 2.2 

C3094 

(GS07P) 

N of MP 38.20; 

EAR MP 38.34-

38.87 

0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA 150 Y 76.5 0.0 0.0 0.6 

C3095 

(GS04P) 

SW/NE of MP 

38.85; EAR MP 

38.34 - 38.87, 

38.87P 

0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA 70 Y 22.1 0.0 0.0 0.8 

C3096 

(GS08P) 

S of MP 39.94; EAR MP 38.87 2,690 Coos Bay BLM LSMA 150/160 N 192.4 N/A N/A N/A 

C3070 

MP 41.89-41.97; 

EAR MP 41.37 & 

41.75P 0 Coos Bay BLM 

CHU/LSMA, 

AW, DTMA, 

RMA, TMA 

350/600 Y 123.7 0.9 0.0 0.0 

C3091 

(B09) 

N of MP 42.37; 

EAR MP 42.03 - 

42.5P 400 Coos Bay BLM LSMA 350 N 101.3 N/A N/A N/A 

C3069 EAR MP 42.74 - 42.86P 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, DTMA, RMA, TMA 450/170 N 212.5 N/A N/A N/A C3082 EAR MP 42.74 - 42.86P 525 Coos Bay BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 450 N 36.9 N/A N/A N/A C3068 EAR MP 42.74 - 42.86P 0 Coos Bay BLM CHU/LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 350 N 165.0 N/A N/A N/A C3067 EAR MP 42.74 - 42.86P 453 Coos Bay BLM CHU/LSMA, AW, RMA 350 N 231.0 N/A N/A N/A 

H-5
TABLE H-2

Effects (acres) to Marbled Murrelet (MAMU) Nesting Habitat Within Occupied or Presumed O

In the Proposed Terrestrial Analysis Area Affected From Construction of the PCGP Project within MAM

Suitable Habitat8 Non-Suitab

MSNO or 

Site ID1 Project Location2

Distance 

from 

Centerline 

or EAR to 

Stand/Trees 

(feet)4 

Land owner Land Allocation5 Forest Stand Age6

Habitat 

Removed 

or 

Modified 

(Y/N) 

Overall 

Acres in 

the 

Stand7 Removed10 Modified11 Removed10 

C3092 

(B10) 

MP 45.39-45.47; 

MP 44.87 & 

45.23G 0 Coos Bay BLM LSMA 250 Y 173.0 0.9 0.5 0.0 

R3020 EAR 46.51 195 Roseburg BLM LSMA, AW, RMA, TMA 170/70/ 250/30 N 464.7 N/A N/A N/A R3026 

(B11P) 

MP 46.87-47.31; 

EAR MP 47.07 - 

47.66 & 48.07 - 

48.42G 

0 Roseburg BLM CHU/LSMA 250/120 Y 358.4 4.6 8.5 0.1 

R3027 

(B12) 

MP 51.45-51.65; 

EAR MP 51.38 & 

51.46D,P 1420 Roseburg BLM LSMA 250/110/ 120/60 N 141.0 N/A N/A N/A 

Marbled Murrelet Zone 2 

R3024 EAR 55.81 0 Roseburg BLM 

LSMA, AW, 

DTMA, 

RMA, TMA 

250/140 N 248.6 N/A N/A N/A 

R3021 S of MP 60.32 735 Roseburg BLM LSMA, AW, TMA 150 N 47.5 N/A N/A N/A 

Occupied Total Acres 5735.6 23.4 14.2 10.8 

Presumed Occupied Stands Marbled Murrelet Zone 1 

WC1A-A NE of MP 5.60; EAR 327 Private None Mid-seral N 0.1 N/A N/A N/A WC1A-B MP 6.41-6.46; EAR 0 Private None Mid-seral Y 4.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 

WC1A-C SW of MP 8.30; EAR 90 Private None Mid-seral N 0.9 N/A N/A N/A WC1A-D E of MP 8.40; EAR 85-295 Private None Mid-seral N 0.8 N/A N/A N/A 

WC1A-E MP 8.49-8.52; EAR 0 Private None Mid-seral Y 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 

WC1A-F MP 8.58-8.70; EAR 0 Private None Mid-seral Y 8.1 1.6 0.0 0.2 

H-6
TABLE H-2

Effects (acres) to Marbled Murrelet (MAMU) Nesting Habitat Within Occupied or Presumed O

In the Proposed Terrestrial Analysis Area Affected From Construction of the PCGP Project within MAM

Suitable Habitat8 Non-Suitab

MSNO or 

Site ID1 Project Location2

Distance 

from 

Centerline 

or EAR to 

Stand/Trees 

(feet)4 

Land owner Land Allocation5 Forest Stand Age6

Habitat 

Removed 

or 

Modified 

(Y/N) 

Overall 

Acres in 

the 

Stand7 Removed10 Modified11 Removed10 

WC1A-G MP 8.79-8.85; EAR 0 Private None Mid-seral Y 3.0 0.6 0.0 0.1 

WC1A-H E of MP 8.80; EAR 268-314 Private None Mid-seral N 0.5 N/A N/A N/A 

WC1A-I MP 8.93-9.00; EAR 0 Private None Regenerating Y 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.4 

WC1A-J E of MP 9.05; EAR 231 Private None Regenerating N 0.0 N/A N/A N/A 

WC1A-K MP 9.04-9.13; EAR 0 Private None Regenerating Y 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 

WC1A-L E of MP 9.70; EAR 133 Private None Mid-seral N 0.9 N/A N/A N/A 

WC1A-M E of MP 9.95; EAR 320 Private None Mid-seral N 0.3 N/A N/A N/A 

WC1A-N E of MP 10.10; EAR 222 Private None Mid-seral N 2.5 N/A N/A N/A 

WC1A-O W of MP 10.25; EAR 275 Private None Mid-seral N 0.2 N/A N/A N/A 

WC1A-P SE of MP 10.75; EAR 140 Private None Mid-seral N 0.2 N/A N/A N/A 

G05* E of MP 10.01; EAR MP 10.12P 70 Private None Mid-seral N 0.6 N/A N/A N/A G06* 

SW of MP 10.26; 

EAR MP 

10.39P,G 

228 Private None Mid-seral N 0.2 N/A N/A N/A 

G07* SE of MP 10.56; EAR MP 10.59P 160 Private None Mid-seral N 1.1 N/A N/A N/A G10* NW of MP 11.93; EAR MP 11.96P 290 Private None Late Successional N 1.8 N/A N/A N/A G11* SE of MP 11.93; EAR MP 11.96P 85 Private None Late Successional N 0.2 N/A N/A N/A 

H-7
TABLE H-2

Effects (acres) to Marbled Murrelet (MAMU) Nesting Habitat Within Occupied or Presumed O

In the Proposed Terrestrial Analysis Area Affected From Construction of the PCGP Project within MAM

Suitable Habitat8 Non-Suitab

MSNO or 

Site ID1 Project Location2

Distance 

from 

Centerline 

or EAR to 

Stand/Trees 

(feet)4 

Land owner Land Allocation5 Forest Stand Age6

Habitat 

Removed 

or 

Modified 

(Y/N) 

Overall 

Acres in 

the 

Stand7 Removed10 Modified11 Removed10 

G16* 

MP 12.27-12.30; MP 12.46-12.47; 

EAR MP 12.79 - 

12.94P,G,D 

0 Private None Mid-seral/Late Successional Y 5.4 0.3 0.0 0.1 

G24* W of MP 16.10; EAR MP 16.25G 200 Private None Regenerating N 0.2 N/A N/A N/A G31* 

MP 18.87-18.93; 

NE of MP 19.05; 

EAR MP 18.61G 

12-330 Private None Regenerating/ Mid-seral Y 1.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 

G33* 

MP 20.64-20.92; 

scattered N and 

S ; EAR MP 

20.73, EAR MP 

19.83 - 21.6 & 

22.19G 

0-510 Private None Mid-seral Y 72.3 0.0 0.0 2.3 

G32* 

N of MP 21.24; 

EAR MP 19.83 - 

21.6G 

1,130 Private None Mid-seral N 1.7 N/A N/A N/A 

G34* 

MP 21.82-21.99; 

scattered N and 

S; EAR MP 

19.83 - 21.60 & 

22.19G,D 

0-595 Private None Mid-seral Y 16.3 1.7 0.0 0.0 

G35* 

MP 22.17-22.35; 

EAR MP 22.19 & 

22.39G,D,P 

0-560 Private None Mid-seral Y 19.0 1.2 0.0 0.1 

G37* 

NE of MP 23.00; 

EAR MP 

23.09G,P 

790 Private None Mid-seral N 0.6 N/A N/A N/A 

G38* MP 23.08-23.18; EAR MP 23.09GP 0 Private None Mid-seral Y 3.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 G41* 

NE of MP 27.51; 

EAR MP 26.95 & 

27.08G,D 

628-1015 Private None Late Successional N 5.9 N/A N/A N/A 

G42* NE of MP 28.47; EAR MP 28.53G 250 Private None Regenerating N 0.7 N/A N/A N/A G44* 

MP 29.17-29.19; MP 29.48-19.51; 

scattered S; 

EAR MP 29.20 & 

29.47 & 29.27 - 

29.46G,P 

0-590 Private None Mid-seral/Late Successional Y 2.4 0.1 0.0 0.3 

G46* 

NE of MP 29.54; 

S of MP 29.89; 

EAR MP 

173-566 Private None Mid-seral/Late Successional N 1.3 N/A N/A N/A 

H-8
TABLE H-2

Effects (acres) to Marbled Murrelet (MAMU) Nesting Habitat Within Occupied or Presumed O

In the Proposed Terrestrial Analysis Area Affected From Construction of the PCGP Project within MAM

Suitable Habitat8 Non-Suitab

MSNO or 

Site ID1 Project Location2

Distance 

from 

Centerline 

or EAR to 

Stand/Trees 

(feet)4 

Land owner Land Allocation5 Forest Stand Age6

Habitat 

Removed 

or 

Modified 

(Y/N) 

Overall 

Acres in 

the 

Stand7 Removed10 Modified11 Removed10 

29.59G,P 

G47* MP 29.89-29.92 416 Private None Mid-seral N 0.2 N/A N/A N/A G48* SW of MP 30.03 275 Private None Mid-seral N 0.7 N/A N/A N/A 

G50 

MP 30.48-31.09; 

scattered; EAR 

MP 30.48 - 

31.15G,D 

0-940 Private None Late Successional Y 72.3 3.2 0.1 0.1 

P06A* N of MP 30.28 600 Private None Late Successional N 12.4 N/A N/A N/A 

G49 W of MP 30.48 1,045 Private None Late Successional N 0.9 N/A N/A N/A 

P06B* E of MP 30.48 570 Native American None Late Successional N 4.0 N/A N/A N/A 

G51 

E of MP 30.35; 

EAR MP 30.48 - 

31.15G,D 

93-970 Native American None Late Successional N 46.9 N/A N/A N/A 

P07* 

W of MP 33.74; 

EAR MP 33.74 - 

33.80 & 34.02P 

390 Native American None Late Successional/120 N 24.4 N/A N/A N/A 

G53 

SW of MP 34.62; 

EAR MP 

34.69D,G 

130 Native American None Late Successional/120 N 3.3 N/A N/A N/A 

G59* S of MP 36.73; EAR MP 38.87 4,425 Coquille Forest None Late Successional N 9.3 N/A N/A N/A G61* S of MP 37.46; EAR MP 38.87 4,100 Coquille Forest None Late Successional N 17.6 N/A N/A N/A G55* 

N/S of MP 40.36; 

EAR MP 40.17 - 

41.28P 

53 Private None Mid-seral Y 5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 

G56* S of MP 40.83; EAR MP 40.68P 100 Private None Mid-seral N 4.1 N/A N/A N/A 

GS05 

(1yr Survey) 

E of MP 43.05; 

EAR MP 43.29 - 

43.35P 135 Coos Bay BLM AW, TMA 350 N 2.7 N/A N/A N/A 

H-9
TABLE H-2

Effects (acres) to Marbled Murrelet (MAMU) Nesting Habitat Within Occupied or Presumed O

In the Proposed Terrestrial Analysis Area Affected From Construction of the PCGP Project within MAM

Suitable Habitat8 Non-Suitab

MSNO or 

Site ID1 Project Location2

Distance 

from 

Centerline 

or EAR to 

Stand/Trees 

(feet)4 

Land owner Land Allocation5 Forest Stand Age6

Habitat 

Removed 

or 

Modified 

(Y/N) 

Overall 

Acres in 

the 

Stand7 Removed10 Modified11 Removed10 

ALTR-A 

MP 50.81-51.26; 

EAR 50.69; EAR 

50.75; EAR 50.83; EAR 

51.73 

0 Private/Roseburg BLM None/RMA, TMA Late Successional/120 Y 36.2 5.10 0.0 0.46 

ALTR-B 

N of MP 52.15; 

EAR 51.73; EAR 

52.04; EAR 

52.16 

125 Private None Mid-seral Y 1.3 0.13 0.0 0.0 

ALTR-C MP 52.15-52.41; EAR 52.16 0 Private None Mid-seral Y 20.8 3.0 0.0 0.0 ALTR-D 

SE of MP 52.80; 

EAR 52.62; EAR 

52.91 

100 Roseburg BLM CHU/DTMA, TMA 250 N 2.6 N/A N/A N/A 

Presumed Occupied Total Acres 427.1 18.93 0.1 4.66 

Unlikely to be Occupied – 2 Year SurveyMarbled Murrelet Zone 1 

GS01 

NE of MP 7.82; 

EAR MP 7.62 & 

7.90D,G 

113 Private None Mid-seral N 1.6 N/A N/A N/A 

GS02* 

E of MP 16.95; 

EAR MP 16.78 – 

17.12, 17.12 – 

17.40G,D

210 Coos Bay BLM AW, TMA 50 N 0.6 N/A N/A N/A 

GS03* 

MP 26.97-27.02; 

EAR MP 

26.95G,D 0-300 Coos Bay BLM AW, RMA, TMA 40 Y 4.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 

B02P

MP 27.12-27.48; 

EAR MP 27.52 – 

28.15G,D 0 Coos Bay BLM AW, DTMA, RMA 250 Y 59.7 4.0 0.0 0.1 

B03P

EAR MP 32.10, 

NE of MP 31.55; 

EAR MP 31.46 – 

31.69G 

0 Coos Bay BLM AW, RMA, TMA 120 N 27.2 N/A N/A N/A 

B07 

MP 35.90-36.17; 

EAR MP 35.81 & 

35.81 – 36.13P,G 0 Coos Bay BLM AW, RMA, TMA 120 Y 14.3 0.0 0.0 1.9 

B12 EAR MP 51.73D,G 1455 Roseburg BLM AW, DTMA, RMA, TMA 120/250 N 43.3 N/A N/A N/A 

Marbled Murrelet Zone 2 

H-10
TABLE H-2

Effects (acres) to Marbled Murrelet (MAMU) Nesting Habitat Within Occupied or Presumed O

In the Proposed Terrestrial Analysis Area Affected From Construction of the PCGP Project within MAM

Suitable Habitat8 Non-Suitab

MSNO or 

Site ID1 Project Location2

Distance 

from 

Centerline 

or EAR to 

Stand/Trees 

(feet)4 

Land owner Land Allocation5 Forest Stand Age6

Habitat 

Removed 

or 

Modified 

(Y/N) 

Overall 

Acres in 

the 

Stand7 Removed10 Modified11 Removed10 

B13 

MP 53.13-54.44; 

EAR MP 53.21 – 

53.59 & 54.2G 0 Roseburg BLM AW, RMA, TMA 140 Y 122.5 2.0 1.5 0.7 

B14 

MP 60.86-61.67; 

EAR MP 60.58, 

61.89 – 62.08D,G 0 Roseburg BLM AW, DTMA, RMA, TMA 120 Y 205.0 13.0 4.4 0.0 

Unlikely to be Occupied Total Acres 478.4 19.5 5.9 2.7 

Overall Total Acres 6641.1 61.8 20.2 18.2 

1 MSNO provided by BLM. Unit ID (i.e., B03) provided by R&A and SBS. 

 Unit IDs: Habitat areas numbered B01, B02 are BLM; Habitat areas numbered P01, P02 are Private; Potential/Gray Habitat numbered G01, G02 are Private. 

 Unit IDs are provided in parenthesis beneath Occupied Stand MSNOs provided by Coos Bay or Roseburg BLM Districts to track the survey units identified by R&A during s

 A superscript “P” indicates which survey areas documented marbled murrelet presence during 2007 and/or 2008 surveys.  An Asterisk (*) next to a “Presumed Occupied” site indicates the Stands and/or Trees that Pacific Connector is assuming will be determined to have no potential nesting str

2 Project Location: 

 Range of MPs provided = the PCGP Construction Right-of-Way occurs within the MAMU stand or identified potential stand/trees. 

 Direction from a MP is provided = the MAMU stand does not occur within the PCGP Construction Right-of-Way but is some distance from the proposed project. 

 EAR is an existing access road that has been identified, by MP to be used to access the construction right-of-way. If only an “EAR” is identified, the proposed project is mo

4 Distance from the Project is measured from the edge of the occupied, presumed occupied, or unlikely to be occupied stand to the PCGP centerline or EAR (existing access roa

occupied stand. If a range is provided, that indicates that the potential suitable habitat area identified consists of more than one polygon area or trees. 5 Land Allocation: CHU = Marbled Murrelet Critical Habitat Unit OR-06-d; WOPR Land Allocations - LSMA = Late-Successional Management Area; AW = Administratively With

Area; TMA = Timber Management Area. 6 Age of forested stand was obtained from BLM Forest Operations Inventory GIS coverage. If not located within BLM-managed land, age of stand is provided a general descript

= 80 – 175 years. 7 Includes acres in and outside of the identified Terrestrial Action Area. 8 Suitable Habitat includes the following: 1) forest stands that were determined suitable MAMU habitat from LiDAR coverage, 2005 summer aerial photography, and ground reco

determined by LiDAR and aerial photography) but were denied survey access and not ground-truthed, 3) delineated MAMU occupied stands, and 4) potential habitat modeled 

analysis (Raphael et al., 2006). 9 Non-Suitable Habitat: areas including clearcut forest, lakes, rivers, rock outcroppings, roads, residences, industry that is not be capable of becoming suitable habitat within 25 

10 Project components considered in calculation of habitat “Removed”: PCGP construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, aboveground facilities, permanent and tem11 Project components considered in calculation of habitat “Modified”: PCGP uncleared storage areas (UCSAs) described in Section 3.3.3.2 of the Project Description and will n

slash, stumps and dead and downed log materials that will be removed and scattered across the right-of-way after construction during restoration and are considered as tempo

12 Percent of suitable habitat removed from stand is calculated from acres of suitable habitat removed from the total stand value (Occupied Stands or Presumed Occupied Stand13 Project Disturbance Timing is general – more specific information provided in Table 1 of Appendix Q. A “B” or “H” superscript indicates where trench blasting and helicopter u

indicates that if additional surveys of habitat indicate that a potential nest tree is within the right-of-way (or occupied behavior is identified in presumed occupied stands within DSeptember 15). In this situation where construction is scheduled for Year One, construction of the pipeline would occur after timber clearing and continue through Year Two w

September 15). 

H-11
TABLE H-3

Effects (acres) to Northern Spotted Owl (NSO) Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging (NRF) Habitat by 

 and Land Ownership from Construction of the Proposed Action within the Range of 

Suitable Habitat3 Dispersal Only Habitat4 Total Dispersal Habitat5 Capable Habitat6 

Physiographic Province Land Owner1 Land Allocation2 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modifi

CHU & LSMA 

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU only 

(none) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSMA only 17.08 5.13 4.17 1.17 21.25 6.30 2.38 0.30 

BLM - 

Coos Bay 

Other 

Allocations 15.14 0.51 73.13 7.20 88.27 7.71 28.57 1.71 

Coos Bay Subtotal 32.22 5.64 77.30 8.37 109.52 14.01 30.95 2.01 

CHU & LSMA

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU only 

(none) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSMA only 3.80 7.91 0.72 0.61 4.52 8.52 0.55 0.06 

BLM - 

Roseburg 

Other 

Allocations 3.22 0.44 19.81 6.27 23.03 6.71 4.86 1.79 

Roseburg Subtotal 7.02 8.35 20.53 6.88 27.55 15.23 5.41 1.85 

Other/NonFederal None/Non- Federal 40.52 4.22 168.90 12.12 209.42 16.34 290.86 28.7

Coast Range 

Other Subtotal 40.52 4.22 168.90 12.12 209.42 16.34 290.86 28.7

CHU & LSMA

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU only 

(none) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSMA only 20.88 13.04 4.89 1.78 25.77 14.82 2.93 0.36 

Other 

Allocations 18.36 9.95 92.94 13.47 111.30 14.42 33.43 3.50 

None/NonFederal 40.52 4.22 168.90 12.12 209.42 16.34 290.86 28.7

Coast Range Total 

Overall 79.76 18.21 266.73 27.37 346.49 45.88 327.22 32.5

CHU & LSMA

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU only 

(none) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSMA only 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

BLM - 

Roseburg 

Other 

Allocations 101.08 94.26 41.90 21.81 142.98 116.07 36.36 16.84 

Roseburg Subtotal 101.08 94.26 41.90 21.81 142.98 116.07 36.36 16.8

CHU & LSMA

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU only 

(none) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSMA only 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

BLM - 

Medford 

Other 

Allocations 29.69 12.53 20.42 5.67 50.11 18.20 4.09 1.04 

Medford Subtotal 29.69 12.53 20.42 5.67 50.11 18.20 4.09 1.04 

CHU & LSR 

Klamath 

Mountains 

Umpqua 

NF (overlap) 46.82 18.28 17.65 0.84 64.47 19.12 0.70 0.39 

H-12
TABLE H-3

Effects (acres) to Northern Spotted Owl (NSO) Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging (NRF) Habitat by 

 and Land Ownership from Construction of the Proposed Action within the Range of 

Suitable Habitat3 Dispersal Only Habitat4 Total Dispersal Habitat5 Capable Habitat6 

Physiographic Province Land Owner1 Land Allocation2 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modifi

CHU only 

(OR-14) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSR only 

(RO 223) 0.58 2.33 0.00 0.00 0.58 2.33 0.0 0.00 

Other 

Allocations 56.51 21.32 23.74 2.44 80.25 23.76 4.26 0.11 

Umpqua N.F. Subtotal 103.91 41.93 41.39 3.28 145.30 45.21 4.96 0.50 

Other/NonFederal None/Non- Federal 180.03 161.03 120.38 86.42 300.21 247.45 207.15 76.34 

Other Subtotal 180.03 161.03 120.38 86.42 300.21 247.45 207.15 76.3

CHU & LSMA 

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU & LSR 

(overlap) 46.82 18.28 17.65 0.84 64.47 19.12 0.70 0.39 

CHU only 

(OR-14) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSMA only 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSR only 

(RO 223) 0.58 2.33 0.00 0.00 0.58 2.33 0.00 0.00 

Other 

Allocations 187.28 128.11 86.06 29.92 273.34 158.03 44.71 17.9

None/NonFederal 180.03 161.03 120.38 86.42 300.41 247.45 207.15 76.3

Klamath Mountains Total 

Overall 414.71 309.75 224.09 117.18 638.80 426.93 252.56 94.7

CHU & LSMA

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU only 

(none) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSMA only 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

BLM - 

Medford 

Other 

Allocations 61.31 14.61 35.08 2.32 96.39 16.93 40.14 1.95 

Medford Subtotal 61.31 14.61 35.08 2.32 96.39 16.93 40.14 1.95 

CHU & LSR 

(overlap) 68.29 35.04 62.63 24.99 130.92 60.03 36.75 9.06 

CHU only 

(OR-17) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSR only 

(RO 227) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Rogue River - 

Siskiyou 

NF 

Other 

Allocations 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.28 0.00 

Rogue River Subtotal 68.29 35.04 62.66 24.99 130.95 60.03 37.03 9.06 

Other/NonFederal None/Non- Federal 38.23 10.39 58.81 7.27 96.96 17.65 91.59 6.49 

West 

Cascades 

Other Subtotal 38.23 10.39 58.81 7.27 96.96 17.65 91.59 6.49 

CHU & LSMA 

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU & LSR 

(overlap) 68.29 35.04 62.63 24.99 130.92 60.03 36.75 9.06 

CHU only 

(OR-17) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

West Cascades Total 

LSMA only 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

H-13
TABLE H-3

Effects (acres) to Northern Spotted Owl (NSO) Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging (NRF) Habitat by 

 and Land Ownership from Construction of the Proposed Action within the Range of 

Suitable Habitat3 Dispersal Only Habitat4 Total Dispersal Habitat5 Capable Habitat6 

Physiographic Province Land Owner1 Land Allocation2 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modifi

LSR only 

(RO 227) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other 

Allocations 61.31 14.61 35.18 2.31 96.42 16.93 40.42 1.95 

None/NonFederal 38.23 10.39 58.81 7.27 96.96 17.65 91.59 6.54 

Overall 167.83 60.04 156.55 34.58 324.30 94.61 168.76 17.5

CHU & LSMA 

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU only 

(none) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSMA only 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

BLM - 

Lakeview 

Other 

Allocations 12.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Lakeview Subtotal 12.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU & LSR 

(overlap) 2.18 0.90 0.98 0.28 3.16 1.18 0.00 0.00 

CHU only 

(OR-17) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSR only 

(RO 227) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Rogue 

River – 

Siskiyou 

NF 

Other 

Allocations 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Rogue River Subtotal 2.18 0.90 0.98 0.28 3.16 1.18 0.00 0.00 

CHU & LSR 

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU only 

(none) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSR only 

(none) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

FremontWinema 

NF 

Other 

Allocations 38.52 7.42 20.03 3.73 58.55 11.15 16.85 0.84 

Winema Subtotal 38.52 7.42 20.03 3.73 58.55 11.15 16.85 0.84 

Other/NonFederal None/Non- Federal 15.50 0.02 25.62 1.05 41.12 1.07 116.58 1.48 

East 

Cascades 

Other Subtotal 15.50 0.02 25.62 1.05 41.12 1.07 116.58 1.48 

CHU & LSMA 

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU & LSR 

(overlap) 2.18 0.90 0.98 0.28 3.16 1.18 0.00 0.00 

CHU only 

(OR-17) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSMA only 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSR only 

(RO 227) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other 

Allocations 51.25 7.42 20.03 3.73 71.28 11.15 16.85 0.84 

None/NonFederal 15.50 0.02 25.62 1.05 41.12 1.07 116.58 1.48 

East Cascades Total 

Overall 68.93 8.34 46.63 5.06 115.56 13.40 133.43 2.32 

H-14
TABLE H-3

Effects (acres) to Northern Spotted Owl (NSO) Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging (NRF) Habitat by 

 and Land Ownership from Construction of the Proposed Action within the Range of 

Suitable Habitat3 Dispersal Only Habitat4 Total Dispersal Habitat5 Capable Habitat6 

Physiographic Province Land Owner1 Land Allocation2 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modified9 Removed8 Modifi

CHU & LSMA 

(overlap) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHU & LSR 

(overlap) 117.29 54.22 81.26 26.11 198.55 80.33 37.45 9.45 

CHU only 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

LSMA only 20.88 13.04 4.89 1.78 25.77 14.82 2.93 0.36 

LSR only 0.58 2.33 0.00 0.00 0.58 2.33 0.00 0.00 

Other 

Allocations 318.20 151.09 234.14 49.44 552.34 200.53 135.41 24.2

None/NonFederal 274.28 175.66 373.71 106.86 647.71 282.51 706.18 113.0

OVERALL TOTAL 

OVERALL 731.23 396.34 694.00 184.19 1424.95 580.52 881.97 147.1

1 Land Owner: Coast Range Other = Bureau of Indian Affairs, State, Private; Klamath Mountains Province Other = State, Private; West Cascades Other = State, Stat2 Land Allocation: CHU = federally designated critical habitat; LSR = NWFP late successional reserves; CHU & LSR (overlap) = area that both land allocations occur; 

only LSR occurs; LSMA = WOPR late successional management areas; CHU & LSMA (overlap) = area that both land allocations occur; LSMA Only = area that only L(i.e., NWFP/USFS = Matrix, Connectivity, etc.; WOPR/BLM = Administratively Withdrawn, Deferred Timber Management, etc.); within other, Non-Federal landowners, 

3 Suitable Habitat: Forest stands used by NSO for nesting, roosting, and foraging (conifer dominated, 80+ years, multi-storied, sufficient snags and LWD, canopy clos

described in Section 4.2.5.2 (Habitat subsection) that included mid-seral, late successional, and old-growth coniferous forest PLUS coniferous forest habitat determine

model (all late successional and old-growth within the range of the spotted owl). 4 Dispersal Only Habitat (only includes dispersal habitat not located in suitable habitat): support owl movement across landscape but lack structural characteristics to 

canopy cover ≥ 40%, average dbh ≥ 11 inches). This was determined using the GNN model described in Section 4.2.5.2, Habitat subsection where all forested habita

occurs within the project area but did not include recent clearcut areas. 

5 Total Dispersal Habitat (includes dispersal habitat that coincides with suitable habitat): support owl movement across landscape but lack structural characteristics to 

canopy cover ≥ 40%, average dbh ≥ 11 inches). The acres within this column are not included in the Total Acres since they are included in Suitable and Dispersal On

6 Capable Habitat: not currently spotted owl habitat (see # 3 and #4) but have the potential to become habitat in the future and includes recent clearcuts, as well as ot

stages of deciduous forest) not included within the suitable habitat or dispersal habitat models. 

7 Noncapable Habitat: areas such as lakes, rivers, rock outcroppings, roads 8 Project components considered in calculation of habitat “Removed”: PCGP construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, aboveground facilities, permanen9 Project components considered in calculation of habitat “Modified”: PCGP uncleared storage areas (UCSAs) described in Section 3.3.3.2 of the Project Description 

areas will be used to store forest slash, stumps and dead and downed log materials that will be removed and scattered across the right-of-way after construction durin

habitat modifications. 

10 Total Acres includes only the removed and modified columns within Suitable NRF, Dispersal Only, Capable, and Non-Capable Habitat.

H-15
TABLE H-4

Summary of Suitable NSO Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging (NRF)1 Habitat Condition Pre- and Post-Action for Known and P

Nest Patch 

(<90%NRF=27.9ac)5

Core Area 

(<50% NRF = below threshold)6 

Project 

Location2

MSNO 

or Site 

ID 

Site Name11

Owl 

Statu

s3

Date 

Highest 

Status 

(PR, RS, 

M/F) 

NSO 

Activity 

Center 

within 

CHU, 

LSR, 

and/or 

MOCA 

Distance 

from 

Centerline, 

EAR, or 

Rock 

Source 

(feet)4

PreAction Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Pre- Action Pre- Action (%) Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Post- Action (%) 

A

COAST RANGE PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCENSO Group CR-A

19.26-22.22 P815G Predicted P-S N/A None 3,238 0.3 N/A 0.3 223.3 44.5 N/A 223.3 44.5 20.33-23.57 P816G PredictedB P-S N/A None 1,598 0.5 N/A 0.5 137.0 27.3 0.08 136.92 27.3 

N/A 

(nest patch in 

Analysis 

Area) 

P812G Predicted P N/A None 7,866 30.4 N/A 30.4 396.3 78.9 N/A 396.3 78.9 

22.26-25.81 P813G PredictedB P-S N/A None 2,127 27.9 N/A 27.9 265.3 52.8 N/A 265.3 52.8 23.35-25.78 P802G PredictedB P N/A None 2,738 30.8 N/A 30.8 414.4 82.5 N/A 414.4 82.5 

NSO Group CR-B

32.33-35.82 2182O Elk LoopB K- PR,F 1989 None 2,080 30.4 N/A 30.4 400.7 79.8 6.07 394.63 78.6 

EAR 

35.33&35.34-

35.80P; EAR 

38.87P 

2180B Bear Pen K-PR 1994 None 518 24.9 N/A 24.9 289.6 57.7 N/A 289.6 57.7 

37.47-39.49 

PCGP 

037.8 

(P804

G) 

Big CreekB 

’08-

RS 

(PR w/ 

STVA) 

2008 None 425 29.9 N/A 29.9 352.5 70.2 6.03 346.47 69.0 

38.91-42.03 2189O Upper Sandy CreekB K- PR,F 1994 None 3,153 26.6 N/A 26.6 249.7 49.7 N/A 249.7 49.7 40.85-42.95 PCGP 041.6 Sandy CreekB ‘08- PR 2008 LSR 4,610 18.5 N/A 18.5 203.8 40.6 N/A 203.8 40.6 42.22-45.88 2188A Upper Rock CreekB K- PR,F 2000 LSR 3,339 30.9 N/A 30.9 249.7 49.7 N/A 249.7 49.7 

EAR 42.74-

42.86P 2181O Cawrses Road K-PR 1998 LSR 1,235 30.4 N/A 30.4 225.3 44.9 N/A 225.3 44.9 

EAR 42.74-

42.86P 2183O Lower Camas Creek K-M/F 2002 None 960 26.4 N/A 26.4 223.9 44.9 N/A 223.9 44.6 

45.22-48.27 P037G Predicted P - S N/A LSR 3,070 31.0 N/A 31.0 251.0 50.0 0.01 250.99 50.0 45.45-48.41 2099A Deep CreekB K- PR,F 2004 LSR 2,710 26.4 N/A 26.4 211.1 42.1 N/A 211.1 42.1 

Signal Tree 

Road Quarry ; 

EAR 45.85-

45.92P

4639O Wildcat Creek K-M/F 2006 LSR 2,790 26.9 N/A 26.9 194.3 38.7 0.0 194.3 38.7 

Weaver Road 

Quarry 2190A Weaver Ridge K- PR,F 1997 LSR 2,435 31.0 N/A 31.0 330.8 65.9 0.0 330.8 65.9 

Signal Tree 

Road Quarry P073G PredictedB P N/A None 6,260 31.0 N/A 31.0 326.4 65.0 N/A 326.4 65.0 

NSO Group CR-C

EAR 46.51P 2186O Signal Tree K-PR 2006 None 935 22.9 N/A 22.9 162.7 32.4 N/A 162.7 32.4 

KLAMATH MOUNTAINS PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCENSO Group KM-D

52.48-53.83 2748O Lower Berry CreekB K 2002 None 5,560 26.1 N/A 26.1 359.8 71.7 N/A 359.8 71.7 53.98-55.21 2199B JWT K-PR 2006 OR-14 MOCA 27 5,135 27.7 N/A 27.7 235.6 46.9 N/A 235.6 46.9 

H-16
TABLE H-4

Summary of Suitable NSO Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging (NRF)1 Habitat Condition Pre- and Post-Action for Known and P

Nest Patch 

(<90%NRF=27.9ac)5

Core Area 

(<50% NRF = below threshold)6 

Project 

Location2

MSNO 

or Site 

ID 

Site Name11

Owl 

Statu

s3

Date 

Highest 

Status 

(PR, RS, 

M/F) 

NSO 

Activity 

Center 

within 

CHU, 

LSR, 

and/or 

MOCA 

Distance 

from 

Centerline, 

EAR, or 

Rock 

Source 

(feet)4

PreAction Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Pre- Action Pre- Action (%) Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Post- Action (%) 

A

NSO Group KM-E

59.08-59.54 PCGP 059.2 Olalla/McNabb ‘08- PR 2008 None 5,895 29.5 N/A 29.5 215.2 42.9 N/A 215.2 42.9 61.93-64.35 PCGP 062.7 Hoover Hill/ Squaw Creek ‘08- RS 2008 None 2,960 26.1 N/A 26.1 222.6 44.3 N/A 222.6 44.3 62.72-65.67 PCGP 064.2 Kent Creek ’07- PR 2007 None 70 15.5 N/A 15.5 135.9 27.1 3.02 132.88 26.5 

NSO Group KM-F

79.68-79.96 P032G Predicted P-S N/A None 5,700 24.7 N/A 24.7 318.5 63.4 N/A 318.5 63.4 80.21-81.65 2036O Birkenstock K-M/F 2008 None 5,260 23.5 N/A 23.5 286.9 57.2 N/A 286.9 57.2 

EAR 81.15 P030G Predicted P N/A None 950 28.5 N/A 28.5 224.5 44.7 N/A 224.5 44.7 

Days Creek 

Pipeyard 2210O Packard Gulch K 2002 None 6,795 30.4 N/A 30.4 234.2 46.7 N/A 234.2 46.7 

80.38-83.53 

0361A 

(PCGP 

82.0) 

Wood Creek K-P,N 2008 None 775 29.8 N/A 29.8 271.9 54.2 13.74 258.16 51.4 

81.82-84.35 2091B Stinger Gulch K-PR 2007 None 2,735 30.1 N/A 30.1 390.2 77.7 N/A 390.2 77.7 82.92-86.31 

1984O 

(PCGP 

84.1) 

Wood CreekB K-PR 2007 None 1,380 19.7 N/A 19.7 340.2 67.8 10.7 329.5 65.6 

83.66-87.39 PCGP 084.6 Wood CreekB ’08- PR 2008 None 3,750 22.9 N/A 22.9 314.5 62.6 N/A 314.5 62.6 85.88-88.36 2093A Fate Creek K-PR 2008 None 1,560 24.3 N/A 24.3 240.4 47.9 1.96 238.44 47.5 87.89-90.39 4614O Bland Bailey K-PR 2007 None 4,115 31.0 N/A 31.0 340.3 67.8 N/A 340.3 67.8 88.83-91.62 PCGP 090.2 Bland Mountain ’08- PR 2008 None 0 10.7 2.11 8.59 222.0 44.2 5.22 216.78 43.2 90.05-92.70 4538O Ash CreekB K-PR 2008 None 1,513 28.8 N/A 28.8 294.6 58.7 6.44 288.16 57.4 92.11-94.35 PCGP 091.0 St. John's CreekB ’07- PR 2007 None 1,735 2.7 N/A 2.7 167.0 33.3 2.97 164.03 32.7 92.05-95.48 

1998O 

(PCGP 

093.2) 

Lower St. 

John’s Creek K-PR 2008 None 2,045 26.1 N/A 26.1 300.9 59.9 4.86 296.04 59.0 

93.82-97.04 PCGP 095.3 Milo South K-PR 2008 LSR 0 23.4 0.83 22.57 289.7 57.7 5.69 284.01 56.6 94.40-96.64 4052A Three Stouts K-PR 2008 LSR 3,340 22.6 N/A 22.6 241.5 48.1 N/A 241.5 48.1 95.30-96.89 3909O No Doubt Stout K- PR,F 2008 LSR 3,740 16.7 N/A 16.7 274.0 54.6 N/A 274.0 54.6 96.80-98.39 

PCGP 

097.6 

(P035

G) 

Hatchet Creek/ 

N&S CallahanB 

’08-

U/M 2008 LSR 3,880 15.7 N/A 15.7 315.8 62.9 N/A 315.8 62.9 

96.55-99.88 4519O Ebony StoutB K-PR,I 2005 LSR 4,250 22.6 N/A 22.6 298.9 59.5 N/A 298.9 59.5 97.87-99.57 UMP 0405 Hatchet CreekB K-PR 1992 OR-14 MOCA 29 LSR 4,510 29.7 N/A 29.7 462.0 92.0 N/A 462.0 92.0 

99.56-102.19 

4008A 

(UMP 0420) 

Hatchet Creek 

SouthB 

KPR,F 2002 OR-14 MOCA 29 LSR 2,345 21.9 N/A 21.9 427.2 85.1 N/A 427.2 85.1 

EAR 102.3; P481G Predicted P N/A OR-14 0 23.7 N/A 23.7 299.5 59.7 N/A 299.5 59.7 

H-17
TABLE H-4

Summary of Suitable NSO Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging (NRF)1 Habitat Condition Pre- and Post-Action for Known and P

Nest Patch 

(<90%NRF=27.9ac)5

Core Area 

(<50% NRF = below threshold)6 

Project 

Location2

MSNO 

or Site 

ID 

Site Name11

Owl 

Statu

s3

Date 

Highest 

Status 

(PR, RS, 

M/F) 

NSO 

Activity 

Center 

within 

CHU, 

LSR, 

and/or 

MOCA 

Distance 

from 

Centerline, 

EAR, or 

Rock 

Source 

(feet)4

PreAction Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Pre- Action Pre- Action (%) Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Post- Action (%) 

A

EAR 104.24G MOCA 29 

LSR 

EAR 102.3; 

EAR 104.24G P466G PredictedB P N/A 

OR-14 

MOCA 29 

LSR

0 22.9 N/A 22.9 241.6 48.1 N/A 241.6 48.1 

EAR 104.24G P480G PredictedB P N/A 

OR-14 

MOCA 29 

LSR

860 24.8 N/A 24.8 374.7 74.6 N/A 374.7 74.6 

101.49-

105.11 

UMP 0459 

(PCGP 

103.4) 

Callahan 

CreekB 

K,’08-

PR 2008 

OR-14 

MOCA 29 

LSR

3,975 29.2 N/A 29.2 271.2 54.0 N/A 271.2 54.0 

EAR 102.3 G P052G Predicted P N/A None 260 25.6 N/A 25.6 347.9 69.3 N/A 347.9 69.3 

102.07-

103.95 

UMP 

ID 

(PCGP 

102.8) 

Devil Creek K,’08- PR 2008 MOCA 29 3,065 18.4 N/A 18.4 315.4 62.83 N/A 315.4 62.8 

102.67-

104.56 

UMP 0418 Devil's Flat 2B K-RS 1989 None 2,740 26.9 N/A 26.9 341.7 68.1 N/A 341.7 68.1 

103.30-

106.27 

UMP 0408 Beaver CreekB K-M/F 2008 None 2,070 27.3 N/A 27.3 357.6 71.2 13.88 343.72 68.5 

104.40-

106.05 

UMP 

ID 

(PCGP 

105.3) 

Upper GraniteB K,’08- PR 2008 OR-14 MOCA 29 LSR 3,785 25.3 N/A 25.3 323.3 64.4 N/A 323.3 64.4 

104.58-

107.32 P484G PredictedB P-S N/A 

OR-14 

MOCA 29 

LSR 

1,145 29.1 N/A 29.1 414.0 82.5 6.33 407.67 81.2 

105.75-

107.78 

UMP 0407 

East Fork Cow 

CreekB K-PR 1993 

OR-14 

MOCA 29 

LSR 

4,410 23.3 N/A 23.3 384.0 76.5 N/A 384.0 76.5 

106.06-

108.30 

UMP 0401 Drew CreekB K-PR 1993 

OR-14 

MOCA 29 

LSR 

4,180 27.4 N/A 27.4 395.3 78.7 N/A 395.3 78.7 

106.82-

109.51 

UMP 0499 

(PCGP 

108.3) 

Upper East 

Cow CreekB 

K,’07-

PR,F 2008 OR-14 MOCA 29 1,925 27.4 N/A 27.4 401.9 80.1 8.11 393.79 78.4 

108.82-

109.35 P462G PredictedB P N/A None 5,515 29.4 N/A 29.4 362.2 72.2 N/A 362.2 72.2 

108.98-

111.62 

UMP 

ID 

(PCGP 

109.7) 

PeavineB K-PR 2007 None 2,020 28.0 N/A 28.0 367.5 73.2 2.07 365.43 72.8 

EAR 111.66-

111.79D,G P460G Predicted P N/A None 8 29.6 N/A 29.6 403.5 80.4 N/A 403.5 80.4 

111.10-

113.81 

UMP 0409 

(PCGP 

112.2) 

Long Prairie K-PR 2008 None 1,780 26.5 N/A 26.5 276.9 55.2 10.68 266.22 53.0 

111.11-

113.35 

UMP 0403 

Snowshoe 

Springs K-PR 1992 None 3,400 26.1 N/A 26.1 346.9 69.1 N/A 346.9 69.1 

H-18
TABLE H-4

Summary of Suitable NSO Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging (NRF)1 Habitat Condition Pre- and Post-Action for Known and P

Nest Patch 

(<90%NRF=27.9ac)5

Core Area 

(<50% NRF = below threshold)6 

Project 

Location2

MSNO 

or Site 

ID 

Site Name11

Owl 

Statu

s3

Date 

Highest 

Status 

(PR, RS, 

M/F) 

NSO 

Activity 

Center 

within 

CHU, 

LSR, 

and/or 

MOCA 

Distance 

from 

Centerline, 

EAR, or 

Rock 

Source 

(feet)4

PreAction Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Pre- Action Pre- Action (%) Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Post- Action (%) 

A

111.99-

113.66 

UMP 0410 

West Fork Trail 

Cr. K-PR 1990 None 4,430 23.8 N/A 23.8 287.1 57.2 N/A 287.1 57.2 

113.41-

116.21 P022G Predicted P-S N/A None 1,820 27.8 N/A 27.8 312.6 62.3 3.02 309.58 61.7 

115.82-

118.06 P023G PredictedB P-S N/A None 3,500 23.6 N/A 23.6 294.8 58.7 N/A 294.8 58.7 

NSO Group KM-G

Rock Source 

MP 119.51 4027A Paradise Creek K-PR 2004 None 5,600 20.1 N/A 20.1 419.2 83.5 N/A 419.2 83.5 

119.23-

121.37 4381O Canyon Creek K no data None 5,080 27.7 N/A 27.7 342.3 68.2 N/A 342.3 68.2 

WEST CASCADES PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCENSO Group CASC-H

125.09-

127.25 

4074O 

(PCGP 

127.4) 

Dry IndianB K-PR 2008 None 1,500 31.0 N/A 31.0 250.6 49.9 0.0 250.6 49.9 

NSO Group CASC-I

EAR MP 

133.59D P165G Predicted P N/A None 5,378 22.0 N/A 22.0 253.1 50.4 N/A 253.1 50.4 

132.83-

135.34 3381A Round About K-PR 1994 None 3,290 30.9 N/A 30.9 451.6 90.0 N/A 451.6 90.0 

133.71-

135.61 

2627C 

(PCGP 

134.7) 

Obenmac K- PR,F 2008 None 3,300 13.0 N/A 13.0 117.2 23.3 N/A 117.2 23.3 

135.49-

138.05 P163G Predicted P-S,U 2007 None 435 16.9 N/A 16.9 225.7 45.0 8.15 217.55 43.3 

NSO Group CASC-J

150.48-

152.79 

PCGP 

151.9 

Heppsie 

Mountain 

’08-

RS 2008 None 3,360 21.6 N/A 21.6 194.0 38.6 N/A 194.0 38.6 

151.78-

153.91 

3932A 

(PCGP 

152.8) 

Heppsie 

Mountain K-PR 2008 None 2,980 29.2 N/A 29.2 306.9 61.1 N/A 306.9 61.1 

153.68-

156.24 

0990 

(RRS 

2026) 

HeppsieB K-PR 2007 

OR-17 

MOCA17 

LSR 

3,900 24.0 N/A 24.0 250.7 49.9 N/A 250.7 49.9 

154.29-

157.01 

PCGP 

155.2 Grizzly CreekB ’07- PR 2007 OR-17 MOCA17 LSR 860 30.7 N/A 30.7 313.3 62.4 3.94 309.36 61.6 

155.01-

155.72 

RRS 

2057 none K-PR 1991 

OR-17 

MOCA17 

LSR 

6,140 12.2 N/A 12.2 130.0 25.9 N/A 130.0 25.9 

154.84-

156.76 

0314O 

(RRS 

2028) 

GrizzlyB K-PR 2008 

OR-17 

MOCA17 

LSR 

3,250 15.6 N/A 15.6 275.1 54.8 N/A 275.1 54.8 

155.30-

157.78 

PCGP 

156.3 

Robinson 

PrairieB 

’08-

RS 2008 

OR-17 

MOCA17 

LSR 

795 25.5 N/A 25.5 298.7 59.5 6.03 292.67 58.3 

156.50-

158.45 

PCGP 

157.8 

Robinson 

Prairie 

’08-

RS 2008 

OR-17 

MOCA17 

LSR 

3,745 25.0 N/A 25.0 295.5 58.9 N/A 295.5 58.9 

157.06-

158.95 4334 Robinson ButteB K- PR,F 2007 OR-17 MOCA17 4,010 27.7 0.0 27.7 360.8 71.9 N/A 360.8 71.9 

H-19
TABLE H-4

Summary of Suitable NSO Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging (NRF)1 Habitat Condition Pre- and Post-Action for Known and P

Nest Patch 

(<90%NRF=27.9ac)5

Core Area 

(<50% NRF = below threshold)6 

Project 

Location2

MSNO 

or Site 

ID 

Site Name11

Owl 

Statu

s3

Date 

Highest 

Status 

(PR, RS, 

M/F) 

NSO 

Activity 

Center 

within 

CHU, 

LSR, 

and/or 

MOCA 

Distance 

from 

Centerline, 

EAR, or 

Rock 

Source 

(feet)4

PreAction Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Pre- Action Pre- Action (%) Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Post- Action (%) 

A

LSR 

157.99-

160.72 

0624 

(RRS 

9030) 

Robinson 

PrairieB 

KPR,F 2006 OR-17 MOCA17 LSR 2,150 19.9 N/A 19.9 282.5 56.3 1.42 281.08 56.0 

158.16-

161.02 

RRS 

0624 

Robinson 

PrairieB 

KPR,F 2006 OR-17 MOCA17 LSR 1,370 12.9 N/A 12.9 171.5 34.2 6.78 164.72 32.8 

159.93-

160.26 

3645 

(RRS 

2045) 

Short Creek 

Prairie K-PR 1998 

OR-17 

MOCA17 

LSR 

5,870 26.4 N/A 26.4 292.4 58.2 N/A 292.4 58.2 

160.04-

162.72 

PCGP 

160.7 Big Elk ’07- PR 2007 OR-17 MOCA17 LSR 280 23.1 N/A 23.1 227.3 45.3 4.68 222.62 44.3 

162.02-

163.81 3644 Beaver Dam K- PR,F 2008 OR-17 MOCA17 LSR 3,890 21.9 N/A 21.9 252.1 50.2 N/A 252.1 50.2 

161.80-

164.48 

0994 

(RRS 

2040) 

Cox Creek K- PR,F 2006 OR-17 MOCA17 LSR 875 28.0 N/A 28.0 321.0 63.9 3.96 317.04 63.2 

162.87-

165.17 

4277 

(RRS 

2067) 

Cox ButteB K-PR 2002 

OR-17 

MOCA17 

LSR 

1,050 17.8 N/A 17.8 343.8 68.5 6.90 336.90 67.1 

EAR 164.29-

165.93G 

RRS 

2039 none K no data 

OR-17 

MOCA17 

LSR 

853 30.87 N/A 30.87 431.73 86.0 N/A 431.73 86.0 

164.66-

166.58 

PCGP 

165.8 Cox ButteB U 2008 OR-17 MOCA 17 3,595 22.7 N/A 22.7 229.8 45.8 N/A 229.8 45.8 

165.59-

167.74 

PCGP 

166.3 PCT ’08- PR 2008 OR-17 MOCA-17 2,740 9.3 N/A 9.3 101.8 20.3 N/A 101.8 20.3 

EAST CASCADES PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCENSO Group CASC-J

167.58-

169.48 2263 Ichabod Quarry SouthB K-PR 1996 None 3,082 20.8 N/A 20.8 340.8 67.9 N/A 340.8 67.9 

168.94-

170.70 1785 Burton ButteB K-PR 2002 None 3,715 29.6 N/A 29.6 344.3 68.6 N/A 344.3 68.6 

NSO Group CASC-K

172.73-

174.91 

0023 

(P917

G) 

Buck LakeB K 2008 None 1,845 15.9 N/A 15.9 244.1 48.6 0.0 244.1 48.6 

174.33-

176.03 2390O Spencer CreekB K-PR 1991 None 4,270 31.0 N/A 31.0 419.8 83.6 N/A 419.8 83.6 

1 Total available suitable NRF habitat was calculated and considered on both federal and non-federal lands. 2 Range of MPs represents the extent of each owl’s home range that is crossed by the PCGP; if an owl site occurs only within the action area of an identified existing access road (EAR), M

G=Gravel, D=Dirt. 

3 Owl type: K = known (provided by BLM Districts or U.S. Forests within the project area), P = predicted (provided by the FWS and reviewed by BLM and Forest Service biologists), P - S = 

2007 and/or 2008 NSO surveys for the PCGP Project – PR=Pair, RS=Resident Single, and R-2=2 fledglings, N=Nest. 4 Distance is measured from 1) the known nest location (K) to the centerline, 2) the known nest location (K) to the access road if only the home range intersects an existing access road – “

centerline (exception nest located – N), or 4) from the edge of a nest patch (’07, ’08, and P) to the access road if only the home range intersects an existing access road. An asterisk after 

located during NSO surveys in 2007 or 2008 (’07, ’08). 5 Nest patch: generally 31 acres occur within a nest patch. Acres provided (pre-action, acres removed, and post-action) are suitable NRF NSO habitat as determined through BioMapper r

component; however, in some cases no NRF removed. 6 Core area: generally 502 acres occur within a core area. Acres provided (pre-action, acres removed, and post-action) are suitable NRF NSO habitat as determined through BioMapper r

H-20
TABLE H-4

Summary of Suitable NSO Nesting, Roosting, and Foraging (NRF)1 Habitat Condition Pre- and Post-Action for Known and P

Nest Patch 

(<90%NRF=27.9ac)5

Core Area 

(<50% NRF = below threshold)6 

Project 

Location2

MSNO 

or Site 

ID 

Site Name11

Owl 

Statu

s3

Date 

Highest 

Status 

(PR, RS, 

M/F) 

NSO 

Activity 

Center 

within 

CHU, 

LSR, 

and/or 

MOCA 

Distance 

from 

Centerline, 

EAR, or 

Rock 

Source 

(feet)4

PreAction Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Pre- Action Pre- Action (%) Acres Removed 10 Post- Action Post- Action (%) 

A

component; however, in some cases no NRF removed. 7 Home range: generally 4,525 acres, 3,398 acres, and 2,895 acres occur within the Oregon Coast Range, Klamath Mountains, and Cascades NSO home ranges, consecutively. Acres pr

(NRF) NSO habitat as determined through BioMapper raw data analyses. At least one component of the project (i.e., construction right-of-way, rock source/ disposal site, or existing acce

8 Habitat Condition (both pre- and post-action): 1 = Home Range >40% NRF and Core Area >50% NRF; 2 = Home Range > 40% NRF and Core Area < 50% NRF; 3 = Home Range <40% 9 Project Disturbance Timing is general (from Figure 3.1-2) – more specific information provided in Table 3 of Appendix Q. A “B” or “H” superscript indicates where trench blasting and/or h10 Acres removed refers to suitable nesting, roosting, and foraging habitat. Suitable habitat was determined using the BioMapper model described in Section 4.2.5.2 (Habitat subsection) th

forest habitat determined to be 80 years within the project area but not included in the model (all late successional and old-growth within the range of the spotted owl). 11 Superscript B indicates that a barred owl was documented within the home range of the known or predicted owl during NSO surveys conducted by Pacific Connector in 2007 and/or 2008

H-21
TABLE H-5

 Rationale for Routing Alignment within Northern Spotted Owl Nest Patches 

Crossed by the Proposed Project 

Project Location 

(nest patch) 1 MSNO or 

Site ID Site Name Rationale for Proposed Alignment Potential for Avoidance 

Klamath Mountains Physiographic Province 

90.07-90.33 PCGP 

090.2 

Bland 

Mountain 

This best location nest patch is located in 

marginal habitat on a ridge. Not possible to 

realign route to avoid nest patch because 

of steep dissected topography and 

proposed alignment follows stable ridge. 

Alignment also follows existing road 

approximately half the length of the 

alignment within the nest patch. 

This pair was documented during the 2nd

(best location) and 3rd (0.25 mile E of best 

location) night visits to this survey area in 

2008, but not located during follow-up 

surveys. BLM Roseburg thought this pair 

could possibly be the Ash Creek pair 

located late in the season, but not enough 

information available to determine this (see 

rationale discussion in Table S-1 in 

Appendix S). Pacific Connector is 

considering this “best location” site for 

worst case scenario analysis. 

To minimize impacts to 

habitat within nest patch 

and core area TEWA 

89.89-W was converted to 

1/2 UCSA and 1/2 TEWA 

to minimize clearing 

impacts 

by 1.17 acres. 

95.18-95.41 PCGP 

095.3 Milo South 

Not possible to realign route to completely 

avoid nest patch because of steep 

dissected topography, and proposed 

alignment follows stable ridge. 

This pair was documented during one visit 

in 2008. An unknown adult was 

documented outside of this core area in 

2007. Not a lot of habitat is available within 

this area for numerous spotted owl pairs 

and so potentially this pair is associated 

with another known and monitored site; 

male had white with red polka dot band on 

right leg (see rationale discussion in Table 

S-1 in Appendix S). Pacific Connector is 

considering this “best location” site for 

worst case scenario analysis. 

A minor realignment was 

implemented to minimize 

side hill construction and 

1.52 acres of impacts to 

old growth/LSR forested 

habitat areas within nest 

patch. 

1

 Range of MPs represents the extent of each owl’s nest patch that is crossed by the PCGP. 

H-22
Appendix H – V

H-35

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

MammalsPacific shrew Sorex pacificus cascadensis 

 S 

Humid forests, marshes, and thickets. Often near riparian vegetation. In early successional and mature coniferous forests. Requires downed logs, brushy thickets, or ground debris for cover and feeding. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

RRS-D 

UMP-D 

No docum

within proj

known to oc

Cascade m

Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus SOC SV BA S 

Arid regions, open forest types, desert vegetation types. Uses cliff faces, caves, mines, or buildings for roosts. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-S 

LV-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

RRS 

F-W-D 

PV (T28S,R1993): 1.6 mof MP 55.92(T28S,R6W1994): 2.8 mMP 64.75; P(T28S,R6W1983): 1.3 mMP 64.75; P(T29S,R6W1994): 0.5 mof MP 68.15(T29S,R6W1994): 0.1 mMP68.99. Wboundary to Detected at Guard StatioR04E Sec 1

Townsend’s bigeared bat Corynorhinus townsendii 

 SC BS 

Forested regions of the Cascade Mountains. Roosts in buildings, caves, mines, and bridges. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D 

LV-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

RRS-D 

Ben Irving Reservoir/R(T29S,R7W19, 20; 1993miles S of MPV (T29S,R1983): hibe/ Tenmile MCave appro

H-23
Appendix H – V

H-36

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

0.9 miles NW 58.13; PV (T29S,R6W1994): 0.1 mMP68.99; M(T34S,R2E,historic breein large bas2.5 miles NE 126.3; MD (T34S,R2E,1994): bree2.2 miles E 133.05. 

Fringed myotis Myotis thysanodes SOC SV BA 

Wide range of habitats, prefers forested or riparian areas. Within flying distance of forested areas. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D 

LV-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

CB (T28,R12004): 1.7 mof MP 33.77(T28S,R10W2003): 0.3 mof MP 38.54(T37S,R5E,2002): 1.6 mof MP 170.0Captured at R04E Sec 2

Spotted bat Euderma maculatum

BA S 

Wide variety of habitat types ranging from ponderosa pine forests to desert water holes. Nest in cliff crevices. 

Klamath LV-D 

Pygmy rabbit Brachylagus idahoensis 

SOC SV BA S 

Tall dense clumps of sagebrush, also in greasewood. Deep, friable soils for burrows. 

Klamath 

historic 

only 

LV-S 

H-24
Appendix H – V

H-37

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

Gold Beach pocket gopher Thomomys mazama helleri3

 BA 

Open grassy meadows, wet pastures in mountain forests. 

Coos CB-S 

Pistol River pocket gopher Thomomys bottae detumidus

 BA 

Moist meadows, pastures, grasslands, riparian areas. Requires deep soils. 

Coos CB-S 

Red tree vole Arborimus longicaudus 

SOC BT SM 

Dense, moist, coniferous forests with Douglas-fir component. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

CB (T28S,R1996): 105f37.06; RO (T29S,R4WRTV site (10nest tree) wand NE of M83.02; UMP (T32S,R2Wwithin ROW 107.59; UM(T32S,R2W348ft. SW o107.68; UM(T32S,R2W474ft. SW o108.51; UM(T32S,R2W88ft. W of Min TEWA; B(T33S,R1W186ft. W of Not found ovicinity of pr

Pacific fisher Martes pennanti pacifica 

C 

SOCKlamath SC S 

Mature-closed canopy coniferous forests with some deciduous component. Frequently along riparian corridors. Sometimes in 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-S 

LV-S 

MD-D 

RRS-D 

UMP-D 

F-W-D 

CB (t26S,R1991): 1.4m10.37; Buck (T38S,R5E,1978): 0.4mMP 172.58 

H-25
Appendix H – V

H-38

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

clearcuts. 

Columbian whitetailed deer Odocoileus virginianus leucurus 

 SV BS 

Restricted to a few islands in the Columbia River, white-oak woodlands near Roseburg. 

Douglas RO-D 

Olalla Creek Hoover Hill, of the Clarks area 

BirdsRed-necked grebe Podiceps grisegena

 SC S 

Breeds in lakes and pond, mostly in forested areas. In waters grown to hardstem bulrush intermixed with open water over 5 feet. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

 F-W-D 

Horned grebe Podiceps auritus SP S 

Open water surrounded with emergent vegetation. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

F-W-D 

RRS-D 

Not near pipRRS 

Fork-tailed storm petrel Oceanodroma furcata

SV BA 

Nests on offshore islands with developed soils. Forages over open ocean. Burrows located in grassy areas without trees or shrubs. 

Coos CB-S 

American white pelican Pelecanus erythrorhynchos

SV BA 

Inland lakes and marshes during breeding season. Nest on predator free islands. May occur on most bodies of water during nonbreeding. 

Jackson Klamath LV-D UMP-D RRS-D Fish Lake T

Sec 2 and 3 

Western least bittern Ixobrychus exilis hesperis

SOC SP S 

Breeds in freshwater cattail and bulrush marshes east of the Cascades. 

Klamath F-W-D 

H-26
Appendix H – V

H-39

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

Snowy egret Egretta thula SV 

Marshy areas, especially in Coos Bay in the winter. Cattail and bulrush marshes in breeding seasons. 

Klamath Documente

near Coos B

Trumpeter swan Cygnus buccinator BA 

Nests on the shores of large inland lakes and marshes. 

Klamath CB-S LV-D 

Aleutian Canada Goose Branta canadadnsis leucopareia

 SE BS 

Migrates along the entire Oregon coast to California wintering grounds, also winters in Oregon. Forage on pastures. During migration, may be seen in the Willamette Valley or Goat Rock (Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge). Some winter exclusively in the Semidi Islands, near Pacific City. In the spring, several thousand congregate in the Langlois area of southern coastal Oregon. 

Coos CB-D 

Dusky Canada goose Branta canadensis occidentalis

 BS 

Breeds in freshwater marsh with tall shrub cover. Terrestrial habitats include cropland, hedgerow and grasslands. 

Coos 

Douglas CB-S 

Tule goose Anser albifrons elgasi

 BS 

Winters in California, migrates from Alaska through Oregon utilizing marshes and wetland habitats 

Klamath CB-S LV-S 

H-27
Appendix H – V

H-40

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

Harlequin duck Histrionicus histrionicus

SOC SU BA S 

Breeds along lowgradient slowerflowing reaches of mountain streams in forested areas. Uses swift waters and rapids during other seasons. 

Coos 

Douglas Klamath 

RO-D UMP-D F-W-D 

Bufflehead Bucephala albeola SU BA S 

Near mountain lakes surrounded by open woodlands containing snags. Nests in aspen, ponderosa pine, or Douglas-fir. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

LV-D 

F-W-D 

RRS-D 

UMP-D 

Fish Lake TSec 2 and 3 

Yellow rail Coturnicops noveboracensis

SOC SC BS S 

Freshwater and coastal estuary marshes. Requires areas with shallow water and vegetative cover. 

Klamath LV-D F-W-D UMP-S 

Upland sandpiper Bartramia longicauda

 SC BS S 

Nests in partially flooded meadows and grasslands, often with a fringe of trees in the middle of sagebrush communities. 

Klamath CB-D 

Rhinoceros auklet Cerorhinca monocerata

 BA 

Offshore islands, coast headlands with well developed soils. Forages oceanwide. 

Coos 

Douglas CB-S 

Cassin's auklet Ptychoramphus aleuticus

 BA 

Breeds on offshore islands. Forages in the marine environment. 

Coos CB-S 

H-28
Appendix H – V

H-41

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

Tufted puffin Fratercula cirrhata BA 

Burrows on slopes or turf-covered headlands of offshore islands and coastal bluffs. May nest in rock crevices. Forage in the marine environment. 

Coos CB-S 

White-tailed kite Elanus leucurus BA 

Lower-elevation grasslands, agricultural areas, meadows, oak and riparian woodlands, marshes, and wetlands. Requires trees or tall shrubs for nesting. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

 

Northern goshawk Accipiter gentilis SOC SC BS 

Coniferous forests, sometimes in quaking aspen groves on desert mountain ranges. Prefer large patches of latesuccessional forests with large trees and canopy closure. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D 

LV-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

F-W-D 

CB (1998)

NE of MP 2

(T32S,R1

2001): 2.3 

MP 114.

(T35S,R1E,

1.1 miles 

134.1

(T35S,R1

1997): 0.7 

of MP 136

(T35S,R2

1995): 0.3 

of MP 138

(T35S,R2

1997): 1.4 

of MP 13

(T36S,R2

1999): 2.3 

MP 143.

(T36S,R2

1998): 2.3 

of MP 145

(T36S,R2

H-29
Appendix H – V

H-42

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

1996): 2.8

NE of MP 1

(T36S,R2

1998): 1.3 

of MP 148

(T38S,R5E

1996): 0.5

SW of MP 1

(T38S,R5

1996): 0.5 

of MP 170

(T37S,R5

1995): 0.2 

of MP 168

(T37S,R5

1995): 0.6 

of MP 168

(T37S,R5

1994): 0.9 

of MP 168

(T38S,R5E,

1.6 miles S

168.88

(T38S,R5E

2006): 1.1

SW of MP 1

(T38S,R5

1998): 2.3 

of MP 169

(T38S,R5

1998): 2.9 

of MP 169

(T38S,R5

1996): 2.7 

of MP 171

(T37S,R5

1992-199

miles NE 

171.44

(T38S,R5E,

1.6-1.9 mi

H-30
Appendix H – V

H-43

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

MP 171.4(T38S,R5

1995,1998)

0.3 miles N

171.93

Lake

(T38S,R5

1995): 0.4 

of MP 172

Lake

(T38S,R5

1999): 0.9 

of MP 173

(T38S,R5

1998): 1.5 

of MP 174

(T38S,R5

1993): 2.3 

of MP 174

(T38S,R5

1998): 0.4

SW of MP 1

(T38S,R6

2005): 0.4

NE of MP 1

(T38S,R5

1994): 1.4 

of MP 176

(T38S,R6

1996-2003

records 0.

1.3 miles N

178.12

(T39S,R6E,

0.7 miles S

177.39

(T38S,R6

1996): 0.9 

of MP 178

(T39S,R6E,

0.6 miles N

H-31
Appendix H – V

H-44

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

179.06

(T39S,R61994,199

miles and 

SW of MP 1

(T40S,R1

1994): 2.8 

MP 21

Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis SOC SC BS 

Forages over open country (grasslands, desert steppe, juniper woodlands). Requires ledges on cliffs, juniper woodlands or riparian woodlands for nesting.. 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-D 

MD-D 

Merlin Falco columbarius BA 

Nest in open coniferous woodlands, forests, and savannahs. Forage over a variety of habitats such as marshes, prairies, and woodland openings. Usually close to water. 

Coos 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-S UMP-D RRS-D 

Documented near Coos B- Documentsightings in vicinity of thbut no nest on file 

American peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus anatum 

 BS S 

Nests usually in cliffs overlooking fairly open areas with an ample food supply, such as along coasts, lakes, and marshes. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D 

LV-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

RRS-D 

UMP-D 

Nest sites: (T28S,R10W2003): 0.8 mof MP 33.88(T32S,R2W2003): 0.2 mof MP 112.6(T33S,R2W2003): 2.2 mof MP 119.5(T36S,R3E,2003): 1.8 mMP 152.15. documentatwithin Coos 

H-32
Appendix H – V

H-45

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

– foraging, froosting. 

Arctic peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus tundrius 

 BS 

Migratory habitat on coast – cliffs or bluffs near large bodies of water or open fields for hunting. 

Coos 

Douglas 

CB-D 

MD-S 

Greater Sage Grouse Centrocercus urophasianus 

SOC SV BS S 

Big sagebrush, preferring areas where big sagebrush covers 15-50%. Leks in open areas. 

Klamath LV-S 

Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus occidentalis 

C SC 

60+ acres of thick closed-canopy riparian forests with an understory of dense brush usually composed of various species of willows and cottonwoods. 

Klamath 

Great gray owl Strix nebulosa SV BT/S M SM 

Forage over open areas. Found in mixed coniferous, ponderosa pine, and lodgepole pine forests. Often in oldgrowth forests on north-facing slopes. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-S 

LV-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

F-W-D 

RO (T29S,R2003): 1.7, NE of MP 8(T29S,R3W1999, 2003)miles NE of 86.53; UMP (T31S,R2W1992): 0.7 mof MP 104.5(T31S,R2W1983) 0.6 m105.24; UM(T32S,R2W1997, 1998, 0.8 miles N 111.25; MD (T33S,R2W1999-2005)miles SW of 116.29; MD 

H-33
Appendix H – V

H-46

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

(T33S,R1W2002): 0.1 mMP 116.65; (T33S,R2W1998, 2003, 2005): 1.9, miles SW of 116.34; MD (T33S,R1W2002): 0.21 of MP 117.0(T33S,R2W2002): 2.8 mMP 119.02; (T33S,R2W2004): 2.5 mof MP 119.5(T34S,R1W1995): 1.9 mof MP 121.2(T34S,R2W1995): 2.8 mof MP 121.2(T35S,R1E,0.3, 0.5, 1.0 MP 133.66; (T35S,R1E,2001, 2003, 2005): 0.65 of MP 134; (T35S,R1E,2004): 0.8, miles E of MMD (T35S,R2000): 1.2 mof MP 134.4(T35S,R1E,1998): 0.1 mMP 137.17; (T35S,R1E,1999, 2000)

H-34
Appendix H – V

H-47

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

miles SW of 137.41; PV (T35S,R1E,1999, 2000)miles SW of 137.41; MD (T35S,R1E,1996-2005)0.9 miles NE 136.58; MD (T35S,R1E,1997, 1998, 2003, 2004)miles NE of 136.83; PV (T35S,R1E,1998): 0.6 mof MP 136.8(T35S,R2E,2001, 2003)miles NE of 136.83; MD(T35S,R1E,1997): 0.2 mof MP 136.9(T35S,R2E,2000,2001)and 1.5 mileMP 138.44; (T35S,R2E,2005): 1.0 mof MP 138.4(T35S,R2E,2001): 1.5 mof MP 138.4(T35S,R2E,1999): 0.8 mof MP 138.4(T35S,R2E,1997): 1.6 mof MP 139.7

H-35
Appendix H – V

H-48

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

(T35S,R2E,1995): 2.8 mof MP 140.4(T35S,R2E,1998): 1.6 mof MP 140.4(T36S,R2E,1996-2005)miles NE of 146.51; PV (T36S,R2E,1999): 2.3 mMP 147.46; (T37S,R2E,0.3 miles S 150.07; MD (T37S,R2E,1997): 2.9 mof MP 150.9(T37S,R3E,1997): 1.9 mMP 152.41; (T36S,R3E,2004-2006)miles N of MMD (T37S,R1998): 0.7 mMP 153.35; (T37S,R3E,1998): 1.6-S of MP 153(T37S,R3E,1998): 2.7-S of MP 153(T37S,R3E,1997): 2.0 mof MP 159.9(T37S,R3E,1998): 2.3 mof MP 154.7(T36S,R4E,

H-36
Appendix H – V

H-49

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

1998): 2.8 mMP 158.76; (T38S,R5E,1.9, 2.1 mileMP 168.78; (T38S,R6E,1998): 0.6 mof MP 174.1(T38S,R5E,1997): 2.2 mof MP 174.6(T38S,R5E,2004): 0.8 mof MP 174.6(T38S,R6E,2005): 0.6 mof MP 175.5(T39S,R6E,1997): 2.0, SW of MP 1

Flammulated owl Otus flammeolus SC BS S 

Open forests with ponderosa pine. Roosts in large trees adjacent to grasslands. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

LV-D 

MD-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

MD (T33S,R2002): 1.9 mMP 121.25; (T34S,R1W2003): 0.7 mof MP 124.3(T35S,R2E,1996): 1.7 mof MP 140.4(T36S,R2E,2.6 miles E 141.89; MD (T37S,R3E,0.3 miles S 153.35. 

Northern pygmy owl Glaucidium gnoma

 BT S 

Occupies dense, moist forests (Douglas-fir, western hemlock, western red cedar) riparian woodlands, and drier 

Douglas Jackson MD-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

F-W-D 

PV (1997): NE of MP 2(1996): 2.5 of MP 28.86(1993): 1.6 of MP 33.77

H-37
Appendix H – V

H-50

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

woodlands (ponderosa pines). In chaparral in southwestern Oregon. Hunts within open areas in the forest.1

(T29,R10,S2.3 miles SW CB (T29,R11998, 2000)miles SW of (T29S,R9W1994): 0.85 of MP 43.49(T32S,R1W2000): 2.8 mof MP 111.8(T32S,R1W2000): 1.2 mof MP 114.1(T33S,R2W2000): 0.5 mMP 114.71; (T33S,R1W1998): 0.6 mMP 120.83; (T35S,R2E,1995): 0.5 mof MP 139.4(T35S,R2E,1996): 1.5 mof MP 140.4(T36S,R2E,1998): 2.5 mof MP 146.5(T37S,R3E,1998): 2.9 mMP 152.41; (T36S,R3E,1997): 0.7 mMP 153.55; (T37S,R3E,0.3 miles S 153.35; LV (T39S,R5E,1.8 miles SW 176.50; LV 

H-38
Appendix H – V

H-51

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

(T38S,R6E,1998): 2.0 mof MP 176.6

Western burrowing owl Athene cunicularia hypugea

SOC SC BS 

Open deserts, grasslands, fields, pastures, and sagebrush steppe. 

Klamath CB-D 

Common nighthawk Chordeile minor 

 SC BS 

Forage over a variety of habitats. Nest in open areas. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D 

LV-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

F-W-D 

CB (T27S,R1998): 2.0, 2.5 miles NE 28.86. 

White-headed woodpecker Picoides albolarvatus

SOC SC BS 

Ponderosa pine or pine-mixed conifer forests. Requires large trees for foraging and snags for nesting. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

LV-D 

MD-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

F-W-D 

LV (T38S,R1999): 2.1 mof MP 174.6T38S R04E Suitable habpipeline in TSec 25 and 30 and 31. 

Lewis' woodpecker Melanerpes lewis

SOC SC BS 

Open forests, lower elevations. Nests in white oak woodlands, ponderosa pine woodlands, mixed oak-pine woodlands, and cotton woodland riparian woodlands in eastern Oregon. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D 

LV-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

PV (T36S,R1995): 1.1 mof MP 142.5

Black-backed woodpecker Picoides arcticus

SC BS 

Lodgepole pine or ponderosa pine forests mixed with other species. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

LV-D 

MD-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

LV (T38S,R2000): 0.9 mof MP 174.1Breeding reR04E Sec 5

H-39
Appendix H – V

H-52

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

Gray flycatcher Empidonax wrightii S 

Open ponderosa pine forests, pinion pine and juniper, sagebrush. 

Jackson 

UMP-D 

F-W-D 

RRS-D 

 

Streaked horned lark Eremophila alpestris strigata

C SC BS 

Expanses of thinly vegetated land, including fields, prairies, dunes, upper beaches, airports, and similar areas with low/sparse grassy vegetation. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-D 

MD-N 

Purple martin Progne subis SOC SC BS 

Nest trees with holes in trees and nest boxes with open areas for foraging. May use open forests of woodlands. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D 

MD-S RO-D 

Haynes InleCoos Bay (aApril); CatchSlough (nes1985). 

Oregon vesper sparrow Pooecetes gramineus affinis3

SOC SC BS 

Grassy foothills west of Cascades in the Umpqua and Rogue valleys. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-D 

RO-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

RRS – Founmeadows aclearcuts alopipeline rourecords mai

Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor 

SOC SP BA S 

Breeds in freshwater marshes with emergent vegetation or thickets of shrubs. May breed in Himalayan blackberry near wetlands. 

Jackson Klamath LV-D F-W-S RRS-S 

ST (T39S,R1980): 1.0 mof MP 196.1(T41S,R12E2000): 1.8 mMP 229.39. 

Reptiles Northwestern pond turtle Actinemys marmorata marmorata (formerly Emys 

SOC SC BS S 

Rivers, creeks, small lakes, ponds, marshes, irrigation ditches, and reservoirs. Nests on sandy banks near 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D 

LV-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

F-W-D 

RRS-D 

UMP-D 

Ross Sloug(T26S,R12W1993): 1.2 mMP 9.25; JeCreek/CB (T27S,R11W

H-40
Appendix H – V

H-53

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

marmorata marmorata)

water. 1993): 0.8 m

MP 26.64; Fork Coquil(T29S,R8W18; 1994): 0NW and 0.4 of MP 49.97(T28S,R7W1993): 1.4 mof MP 55.92Creek (T29S,R7W1995): 0.2 mof MP 59.5; Irving Reser(T29S,R7W19, 20; 1993miles S of MSouth Umpq(T28S,R6W33; 1995); ECreek (T29SR6W,: 1.2 miles 67.47; SoutRiver (T29Sand T29S,R1998): 0.2 mMP 68.99 amiles SE of 70.43; SoutRiver (T30S,R3W33; 1997): W and 0.9 mof MP 94.55(T31S,R2W1993): 1.8 mof MP 105.2(T32S,R2W1989): 1.5 m

H-41
Appendix H – V

H-54

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

of MP 109.6River/PV (T34S,R1W122.67; BLM (T37S,R2E,2.7 miles SW 148.2; Klam(T39S,R8E,1991): 0.9 mof MP 191.3Klamath Riv(T39S,R8E,1991): 0.8 mof MP 195.0ST/Klamath (T39S,R9E,1991): 0.3 mand at MP 1

Common kingsnake Lampropeltis getula 

SOC SV BT S 

Thick vegetation along waterbodies, but ranges into farmland, chaparral, and deciduous and mixed coniferous woodlands in the Rogue and Umpqua river valleys. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-S 

LV-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

RRS-S 

UMP-S 

MD (T35S,R1991): 0.5 mMP 141.58. 

AmphibiansOregon slender salamander Batrachoseps wrighti3

SOC SU S 

Under bark or moss in mature and secondgrowth Douglas-fir forests. Also under rocks or logs in stands of moist hardwood forests within coniferous forests.

Douglas Outside o

rang

H-42
Appendix H – V

H-55

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

Del Norte salamander Plethodon elongatus 

SOC SV BT S 

Moist, rocky areas within forests. Occasionally in decaying logs and under forest floor litter.

Coos 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

RRS-D Outside o

rang

Siskiyou Mountains salamander Plethodon stormi 

SOC SV BS/S M S/SM 

Loose rock rubble or talus on north-facing slopes or in dense wooded areas. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D Outside o

rang

Southern torrent salamander Rhyacotriton variegatus 

SOC SV S 

Shallow, cold waters of perennial, highgradient streams within humid coniferous forests. Adults occupy splash zones or areas with overflowing water. Larvae found in cobble or gravel beds flushed with water.

Coos 

Douglas UMP-D 

PV (T26S,R1995): 1.5 mMP 13.48; C(T28S,R12W1992): 2.7 mof MP 28.05(T28S,R11W1998): 0.8 mMP 30.17; C(T28S,R10W1998): 0.53 of MP 39.65

Black salamander Aneides flavipunctatus

 SP BA S 

Near streams, in talus slopes or under rocks and logs. Inhabits open woodlands, and mixed coniferous and mixed-coniferousdeciduous forests.

Jackson MD-D RRS-D Outside of k

range 

California slender salamander Batrachoseps attenuatus 

SP BA S 

Lower-elevation forests along the southern coast, including hardwood, redwood, and other coniferous forests. Also in open areas with scattered trees. Under rocks, logs, or other objects on the ground.

Coos 

Jackson CB-D RRS-D Outside of k

range 

H-43
Appendix H – V

H-56

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

Foothill yellowlegged frog Rana boylii

SOC SV BA S 

Permanent slowflowing streams in a variety of habitat types such as grassland, chaparral, coniferous or deciduous forests, and woodlands. Missing from much of their historic habitat. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

RRS-D 

UMP-D 

CB (T29S,R1995): 1.8 mof MP 40.33Creek/PV (T30S,R2W1998): 1.9 mof MP 94.78Creek/PV (T33S,R1W1998): 1.1 mMP 117.24)Creek/MD (T34S,R1Wmiles SW of 127.31. 

Northern leopard frog Rana pipeins

 SC S 

Marshes, wet meadows, vegetated irrigation canals, ponds, and reservoirs. Prefers quiet or slow flowing waters. 

Jackson Klamath 

Outside of krange 

Oregon spotted frog Rana pretiosa 

C SC BS S 

Margins of lakes, marshes, and pools in streams with aquatic vegetation. Higher elevations from the crest and east slope of Cascade Mountains. 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-D 

MD-D 

F-W-D RRS-D UMP-S 

F-W/PV/WeBuck Lake (and S of MP LV (T38S,R1997): 0.6-1of MP 173.4

Invertebrates d/Evening fieldslug Deroceras hesperium

BS/S

M SM 

Associated with wet meadows in forested habitats in a varetiy of low vegetation, litter, debris; rocks. 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-D 

MD-D 

F-W-D 

RRS-D 

Great Basin ramshorn Helisoma newberryi newberryi

 BS 

Larger lakes, slow rivers, larger spring sources, spring-fed creeks; burrow in soft mud. 

Klamath LV-D Not located 

surveys 

H-44
Appendix H – V

H-57

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

Oregon shoulderband Helminthoglypta hertleini

BS 

Rocky areas, including talus deposits and outcrops generally within 98 feet of herbaceous vegetation and deciduous leaf litter; woody debris used as refugia. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S 

MD-D 

RO-D 

RRS-D 

UMP-D 

RO (T29S,R1999): 0.9 mof MP 58.53(T29S,R7W2006): 0.4 m0.6 miles SE 59.70; RO (T29S,R7W1999-2006)locations > 0SE of MP 60several documentat>500ft. 

Tillamook westernslug Hesperarion mariae

 BS 

Moist, mature forested habitats or coastal “fog” zone near the ocean; decaying wood. 

Douglas CB-S Not located 

surveys 

Chace’s sideband Monadenia chaceana

BS/S

M SM 

Late-successional forest and open talus or rocky areas; associated with large woody debris in mesic, forested habitats; otherwise, moist, shaded rock surfaces. 

Douglas Jackson 

LV-S 

MD-D 

RO-D 

F-W-S 

RRS-D 

UMP-D 

RO (T29S,R2006): 2.8 mof MP 81.31(T37S,R4E,1999): 0.6 mMP 161.45; ~0.3 miles S166.89 (T37S,R5E,documentatft from PCGand NFS lan

Green sideband Monadenia fidelis beryllica

 BS 

Generally inhabit deciduous stands (including alder) and brush in wet, relatively undisturbed forest; low elevation; low coastal scrub. 

Coos CB-S RO-D Not located 

surveys 

H-45
Appendix H – V

H-58

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

Traveling sideband Monadenia fidelis celeuthia

 BS 

Dry basal talus and rock outcrops; oak/maple overstory; along spring run in rock and moist vegetation and moss; mixed coniferhardwood forest. 

Jackson MD-D 

Found sevePipeline SA779, SA-705

Modoc sideband Monadenia fidelis ssp. Nov.

 BS 

Talus and wetted rocky areas on lakeshore; mixed pine-Douglas fir forest or open grasslands; associated with seeps and springs in talus deposits. 

Klamath LV-D Not located 

surveys 

Crater Lake tightcoil Pristiloma arcticum crateris

BS/S

M SM 

Mature conifer forests; 

perennially wet areas among rushes, mosses, and other surface vegetation or under rocks and woody debris within 30 feet of open water in wetlands, springs, sepps, and riparian areas. 

Douglas Jackson 

LV-S 

MD-N 

RO-D 

F-W-D 

RRS-D 

UMP-D 

Not located surveys 

Klamath taildropper Prophysaon sp. Nov.

 BS 

Moist open areas (floodplains and spring margins) in ponderosa pine forest; elevation varies. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-S 

RO-S 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

Not located surveys 

Spotted taildropper Prophysaon vanattae pardalis

 BS 

Moist, mature forested habitats; coastal “fog” zone near ocean; significant deciduous tree or shrub component present. 

Coos CB-D RO-S Not located 

surveys 

H-46
Appendix H – V

H-59

TABLE H-6 

Special Status Marine Mammal and Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Projec

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrenc

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vi

Project 

Siskiyou hesperian Vespericola sierranas

 BS Terrestrial Jackson MD-D 

Found sevePipeline SA1146, M7, SSA-1134 

Siskiyou shorthorned grasshopper Chloealtis aspasma 

SOC BS 

Grassland/herbaceous habitats; associated with elderberry 

Jackson MD-D ROR 

MD (T37S,R1973): 0.1 mMP 153.49. 

Johnson’s hairstreak Callophrys johnsoni (Mitoura johnsoni) 

 BS 

Old-growth coniferous forests with red firs, western hemlocks or grey pines on which its parasitic host grows. 

Coos 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

MD-D RRS-D 

Insular blue butterfly Plebejus saepiolus littoralis 

 BS 

Bogs, roadsides, stream edges, open fields, meadows, open forests; hosts are clovers. 

Coos CB-D 

Mardon skipper butterfly Polites mardon 

C BS 

Small (0.5-10 acres) high-elevation (4,500-5,100 feet) grassy meadows within mixed conifer forests. 

Jackson Klamath 

CB-S 

MD-D 

UMP-D 

RRS-D 

RRS (T37S2005): 0.6mMP 159.95; (T37s,R4E,S2005): 0.8mMP 159.95. 

a/ Status Key: 

Federal Status: C = Federal Candidate, SOC = Species of Concern, MMPA = Marine Mammal Protection Act State Status: SC = State Critical, SV = State Vulnerable, SP = State Peripheral or Naturally Rare, SU = Undetermined Status BLM Status: BS = BLM Sensitive, BA = BLM Assessment, BT = BLM Tracking, SM = Survey and Manage USFS Status: S = Sensitive, SM = Survey and Manage b/ Occurrence Key: 

BLM Districts and USFS Forests provided lists of species documented or suspected within the management area and are noted. 

BLM District: CB = Coos Bay District, RO = Roseburg District, MD = Medford District, K F= Klamath District 

USFS Forest: F-W = Fremont-Winema National Forest, RRS = Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, UMP = Umpqua National Forest 

 D = Documented within BLM or USFS Management Area  S = Suspected within BLM or USFS Management Area c/ Pacific Connector Project: mollusks and red tree vole documented within 500 feet of the proposed pipeline; all other species are documented within 3 m

d/ Invertebrates associated with water are included in Appendix 4.6-C. 

References: Species Status and Range: FWS 2006a; BLM 2006; ORNHIC 2007a, b; ORNHIC 2006a and 2006d; Janes et al. 2005. Expected Habitat: Csuti et al. 2001; NatureServe 2006; ORNHIC 2006d; Gilligan et al. 1994; Kozloff 1976; USFS and BLM 2006. 

H-47
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-7 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodie

crossed by Pr

Documentat

within Vicinit

Project Area 

Non-anadromous FishPit-Klamath Brook lamprey Lampetra lethophaga

 BT S 

In Oregon, this species is confined to the Klamath River system.Inhabits cool, clear streams or springs with sandy-muddy bottoms or edges, low to moderate gradient. Spawning in spring-summer. 

Jackson Klamath LV-S F-W-D Klamath River; s

in Spencer Cree

Klamath River lamprey Lampetra similis

 S 

Klamath River drainage of Oregon and California, restricted to fresh water. 

Klamath F-W-D 

Klamath River drainage; spawn Spencer Creek. 

Jenny Creek redband trout Oncorhynchus mykiss

 SV BS S Adfluvial, located within Jenny Creek Jackson Klamath LV-D MD-D F-W-D RRS-D Jenny Creek no

crossed by PCG

Klamath redband trout Oncorhynchus mykiss newberryi

SOC SV BT S 

Occupies remnant streams in seven Pleistocene lake beds in Oregon. Highly fragmented and isolated populations. 

Klamath KF F-W-D RRS-D 

Spawning occurSpencer Creek mouth to RM 12spawning occurbetween Roads and 110. 

Umpqua Oregon chub Oregonichthys kalawatseti

SOC SV BS S 

 Endemic to the mainstream and south Umpqua River, resident species. Occupies habitats with higher current velocities. 

Douglas RO-D UMP-D 

Tenmile Creek (1971); endemic Umpqua and SoUmpqua rivers. 

Blue chub Gila coerulea S 

Rocky pools of creeks and rivers, rocky shores of reservoirs and lakes. Known to spawn in spring-summer at the shoreline over substrate of rocks, large gravel, or 

Klamath F-W-D RRS-S Klamath and Lo

River basins 

H-48
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-7 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodie

crossed by Pr

Documentat

within Vicinit

Project Area 

volcanic rubble.Abundant in Upper Klamath Lake and other reservoirs. 

Millicoma dace Rhinichthys catarctae ssp.

SOC SP BS 

Endemic to Coos Basin, resident species. Prefers swift current associated with cobble and boulders and probably high velocity waters. 

Coos 

Douglas CB-D South Fork Coo

River 

Jenny Creek sucker Catostomus rimiculus ssp. 

SOC SP BS Adfluvial, located within Jenny Creek. Jackson LV-D MD-D Not crossed by 

Klamath largescale sucker Catostomus snyderi 

SOC BT S 

Limited to Upper Klamath Basin and its tributaries. In rocky pools, runs of creeks and small rivers (with moderate gradient), lakes and reservoirs Spawning usually occurs from late March to midApril, and sometimes earlier in small tributary streams. 

Klamath LV F-W-D RRS-S Upper Klamath 

and tributaries 

Slender sculpin Cottus tenuis SOC BT S 

 Inhabits both still and slower waters on variety of substrates of the Upper Klamath and Agency lakes and their tributaries. 

Klamath LV-D F-W-D 

H-49
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-7 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodie

crossed by Pr

Documentat

within Vicinit

Project Area 

Anadromous FishChinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytschaOregon Coast ESU BA S 

Anadromous species that rears in the Pacific Ocean, for most of its life, and spawns in freshwater streams. Most enter Oregon’s coastal rivers AprilDecember, but some start in February. Spawning generally occurs from August to early November for spring chinook and from October to early March for fall chinook. Preferred spawning and rearing areas have a low gradient (<3%), adults often ascend to higher gradient reaches to find spawning areas. Spawn and rear in a range of sizes of streams and rivers, and often use estuaries for rearing. Adults require deep pools within proximity to spawning areas where they hold and mature between migration and spawning 

Coos 

Douglas 

CB 

RO UMP-D 

Coos Bay, CoosCoquille, South Umpqua, and Umpqua HUs 

H-50
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-7 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodie

crossed by Pr

Documentat

within Vicinit

Project Area 

Southern Oregon Coast/California Coast ESU Fall-run 

 SC BS S 

Anadromous species that rears in the Pacific Ocean, for most of its life, and spawns in freshwater streams. Most enter Oregon’s coastal rivers AprilDecember, but some start in February. Spawning generally occurs from October to early March. Preferred spawning and rearing areas have a low gradient (<3%), adults often ascend to higher gradient reaches to find spawning areas. Spawn and rear in a range of sizes of streams and rivers, and often use estuaries for rearing. Adults require deep pools within proximity to spawning areas where they hold and mature between migration and spawning 

Jackson CB-D MD-D RRS-D Rogue River & Tributaries (spa

and rearing) 

Chum salmon (Pacific Coast ESU) Onocorhynchus keta

 SC BS S 

Anadromous species that rears in the Pacific Ocean, for most of its life, and spawns in freshwater streams in the fall. Utilizes low gradient, gravel-rich, barrier-free freshwater habitats and productive 

Coos 

Douglas 

CB-D 

RO-D 

UMP-I 

RRS-I Unknown 

H-51
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-7 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodie

crossed by Pr

Documentat

within Vicinit

Project Area 

estuaries. Juveniles migrate to estuarine environments after emergence. 

Steelhead Oncorynchus mykissKlamath Mountains Province ESU Summer/winter run 

 SV BA 

Anadromous species, juveniles rear in freshwater streams 1-4 years. Adults live in marine environment prior to spawning in winter or spring. May spawn more than once.

Jackson CB-D MD-D Upper Rogue 

Oregon Coast ESU SOC SV S 

Anadromous species, juveniles rear in freshwater streams 1-4 years. Adults live in marine environment prior to spawning mostly in winter or spring. May spawn more than once. 

Coos 

Douglas 

CB-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

UMP-D 

Coos, Coquille, Umpqua, and Umpqua HUs 

Coastal Cutthroat Oncorhynchus clarki clarkiOregon Coast ESU SOC SV BT S 

Spawn in first and second order tributaries from late winter through spring, may spawn more than once. Young fry move into channel margin and backwater habitats during the first several weeks. During the winter, juvenile cutthroat trout use low 

Coos 

Douglas 

CB 

RO UMP-D 

Coos Bay, CoosCoquille, South Umpqua, and Umpqua HUs 

H-52
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-7 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodie

crossed by Pr

Documentat

within Vicinit

Project Area 

velocity pools and side channels with complex habitat created by large wood. 

Southern Oregon/California Coast ESU 

SOC SV BT S 

Spawn in first and second order tributaries from late winter through spring, may spawn more than once. Young fry move into channel margin and backwater habitats during the first several weeks. During the winter, juvenile cutthroat trout use low velocity pools and side channels with complex habitat created by large wood. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB 

MD RRS-D Rogue River an

Tributaries. 

Aquatic InvertebratesPea clam Pisidium ultramontanum

SOC BS Freshwater, seasonal wetlands. Klamath CB-S MD-S 

PV (T40S,R11Eno date): approximately 0S of MP 221.83

Black Abalone Haliotis cracherodii 

C 

Feed mostly on kelp and drift algae; spawn primarily during the summer months. 

Coos? Rare in Coos Ba

Newcomb's littorine snail Algamorda newcombiana 

SOC BS 

Inhabits salt marshes at the edge of bays and estuaries on glasswort/pickleweed; tolerant of fresh and saltwater. 

Coos CB-D 

H-53
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-7 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodie

crossed by Pr

Documentat

within Vicinit

Project Area 

Diminutive pebblesnail Fuminicola sp. Nov.

 BS 

Very large, cold springs and their outflow, with very cold, clear water; gravel/boulder substrate. 

Jackson LV-D 

Fall Creek pebblesnail Fluminicola sp. Nov.

 BS 

Large cold springs and outflows including medium-sized creeks; gravel/cobble substrate. 

Jackson Klamath MD-D 

Keene Creek pebblesnail Fluminicola sp. Nov.

BS/

SM SM 

Small to medium sized springs and springinfluenced creeks. Jackson Klamath MD-D 

Toothed pebblesnail Fluminicola sp. Nov.

BS/

SM SM 

Very large cold springs and their outflow, with exceptionally good water quality; gravel/boulder substrate. 

Jackson MD-D 

Klamath pebblesnail Fluminicola sp. Nov.

 BS 

Gravel-boulder substrates with flowing water (cold, oligotrohpic water with high dissolved oxygen) rarely found in springs; avoids dense macrophyte beds. 

Klamath LV-D MD-S RRS-S 

Nerite pebblesnail Fumunicola sp. Nov.

BS/

SM SM 

Large cold springs and their outflows with exceptionally good water quality; gravel/boulder substrate 

Jackson LV-S MD-D 

Scale lanx Lanx klmathensis BS 

Spring-influenced portions of large lakes and streams or limnocrene springs; boulder/cobble substrates; welloxygenated, cold water. 

Klamath LV-D MD-S RRS-S 

H-54
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-7 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodie

crossed by Pr

Documentat

within Vicinit

Project Area 

Rotund lanx Lanx subrotunda BS 

Found in unpolluted rivers and large streams at low to moderate elevations, in highly oxygenated, swiftflowing, cold water on stable cobble, boulder, or bedrock substrates. 

Douglas CB-S RO-D UMP-D 

Typically found Umpqua River bthe confluence wLittle River, Little River, portions oSouth Umpqua major tributaries above RoseburgCow Creek. 

Pacific walker Pomatiopsis californica

 BS 

Semi-aquatic; inhabit wet leaf litter and vegetation adjacent to flowing or standing water in shade; high humidity. 

Coos CB-S 

a/ Status Key: Federal Status: SOC = Species of Concern State Status: SC = State Critical, SV = State Vulnerable, SP = State Peripheral or Naturally Rare BLM Status: BS = BLM Sensitive, BA = BLM Assessment, BT = BLM Tracking, SM = Survey and Manage USFS Status: S = Sensitive, SM = Survey and Manage b/ Occurrence Key: 

BLM Districts and USFS Forests provided lists of species documented or suspected within the management area and are noted. BLM District: CB = Coos Bay District, RO = Roseburg District, MD = Medford District, LV = Lakeview District USFS Forest: F-W = Fremont-Winema National Forest, RRS = Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, UMP = Umpqua National Forest  D = Documented within the BLM or USFS management area  S = Suspected within the BLM or USFS management area  I = FS Actions Influence Downstream c/ Documentation within Project Area: Aquatic invertebrates documented within 500 feet of the proposed PCGP alignment. 

References: Status and Range References: FWS 2006a and b; ORNHIC 2007b Life Histories and Expected Habitat References: Kostow 1995; NatureServe 2006; ODFW 2005a; CDFG 1986; NMFS 2006b. Waterbodies Crossed: ORNHIC 2006a; Kostow 1995. 

H-55
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

BryophytesBryum calobryoides BA Rock outcrops and shallow soil Jackson MD-D Calypogeia sphagnicola BA Sphagnum containing wetlands. Coos Douglas CB-D Chiloscyphus gemmiparus BS On rocks in cold water streams. Klamath LV-S RO-S Codriophorus depressus (formerly Racomitrium depressum)

 BA On rocks in montane streams. Jackson MD-D 

Crumia latifolia BA 

Wet rocks and cliff faces, usually calcareous, along seasonal creeks 

Douglas Jackson 

MD-D RO-D 

Diplophyllum plicatum

BA/SM SM 

Moist cool forests on bark, rotting wood, humus and soil. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO-S 

Encalypta brevicollis  var. crumiana 

 BS Deep, rocky ravine. Coos MD-S 

Eucladium verticillatum BA 

Year-round seepage; wet rocks; perennially wet microhabitats; calcareous substrates along edges of waterfalls, and on rocks with seeps and creek splash. 

Jackson MD-D 

Funaria muhlenbergii BA Dry exposed soil on rock outcrops and cliff ledges. Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-D RO-D Helodium blandowii BA 

Montane fens, usually with calcareous ground water. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

LV-S 

Kurzia makinoana

BA/SM SM Shady moist sites on orangic substrates. Coos CB-D 

H-56
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Limbella fryei SOC C BS 

 On wet rotting wood, leaf litter and lower trunks of tall shrubs in coastal shrub swamps. 

Coos Douglas CB-S 

Meesia uliginosa BA Wet places, marshes and fens. Jackson LV-S MD-D Pseudocalliergon trifarium (formerly Calliergon trifarium)

 BA Calcareous fens. Klamath LV-S 

Pseudoleskeella serpentinensis BA On ultramafic rock, usually with some shade. Douglas CB-D MD-D RO-D Rhizomnium nudum SM S/SM 

On moist organic soil, or among rocks or on rotten logs in mid to high elevations. 

Douglas 

RRS-S UMP-D F-W-S 

 

Schistostega pennata 

BA/SM S/SM 

On damp rock, soil and decaying wood in dark places, caves or mineshafts and rootwads. 

Douglas Klamath 

CB-S RO-S 

RRS-S UMP-D F-W-S 

Scouleria marginata BT S 

On rocks in streams, often submerged part of the year. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-S 

UMP-D 

Splachnum ampullaceum BA On old dung of herbivores. Klamath LV-S Tayloria serrata BA On old dung of herbivores Douglas Jackson MD-D RO-D Tripterocladium leucocladulum BA 

Shaded to exposed rocks, cliffs and bark of hardwoods. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S LV-S MD-D RO-S 

 

Tritomaria exsectiformis

BA/SM SM 

On peaty or humic soil, or rotted wood. Often along creeks. 

Douglas Klamath LV-S 

H-57
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

FungiAlbatrellus avellaneus 

BS/SM SM 

Presumed mycorrhizal with pine trees, known from Shore Acres in Coos County, in T26S, R14W, Sec. 17 SWNE along Cape Arago area.

Coos CB-S 

Albatrellus caeruleoporus 

BT/SM SM 

Old growth forest, ranging from near sea level to montane. 

Coos CB-D 

Albatrellus ellisii BT/S M SM 

Above Olalla Creek, near junction with Thompson Creek in Douglas County; solitary, scattered, gregarious, or in fused clusters on ground in forest. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-S RO-D MD-D LV-D 

 

Alpova olivaceotinctus

BT/SM SM 

Associated with true fir, Douglas-fir, madrone, ponderosa pine and black oak 

Jackson MD-D 

Arcangeliella camphorata 

BS/SM SM 

Forms sporocarps beneath soil surface associated with various Pinaceae spp., particularly Pseudotsuga menziesii and Tsuga heterophylla from 600 feet to 2,800 feet elevation. 

Coos CB-D 

H-58
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Arcangeliella crassa 

BT/SM SM 

Associated with pines, especially Douglas-fir and western hemlock, two known sites from So. Fork Camas area and Wasson Lake road area; CR & WC Ecoregions. 

Coos Douglas CB-D 

Balsamia nigrescens 

BT/SM SM Associated with pines and Douglas-fir Jackson CB-S MD-D 

Boletus pulcherrimus

BS/SM S/SM 

West side Cascades, sporocarps usually solitary in association with mixed conifer (grand fir, Douglas-fir) and hardwoods (tanoak) in coastal forests.

Jackson 

CB-S LV-D MD-D 

RRS-D UMP-D F-W-D 

 

Catathelasma ventricosum 

BT/SM SM 

Solitary, scattered, rooting in deep humus under conifers (primarily fir and spruce), known from South Slough Estuarine Reserve; located within Coos Bay 

Coos CB-S 

H-59
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Choiromyces alveolatus 

BT/SM SM 

Forms sporocarps beneath the soil surface associated with various Pinaceae spp., particularly Abies spp., shorepine, Douglas-fir, western hemlock, and mountain hemlock above 1,300 meters.

Douglas Jackson RO-S 

Clavariadelphus sachalinensis 

BT/SM SM Mixed conifer forests, mesic sites Jackson Klamath MD-D RO-S LV-D 

MD (T34S,R1; 2000): feet E of 133.29. 

Clavariadelphus subfastigiatus 

BT/SM SM On soil or duff, under mixed conifers. Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-D RO-D 

Cortinarius barlowensis 

BT/SM S/SM 

Coastal to montane conifer forests up to at least 1,200m elevation; late successional oldgrowth association; fruits in autumn. 

Douglas CB-S UMP-D 

Cortinarius valgus 

BT/SM SM 

Associated with Abies, 

Picea, Pseudotsuga, Tsuga; fruits in autumn. 

Douglas CB-S 

Cortinarius verrucisporus 

BT/SM SM Associated with Abies magnifica Klamath LV-S 

Cudonia monticola 

BT/SM S/SM 

Grows on spruce needles and coniferous debris, several district sites in the Burnt Ridge area, fruits in late summer and autumn.

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO-D UMP-D 

H-60
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Dermocybe humboldtensis

BS/SM SM 

Stabilized dunes on roots of pine and huckleberry species and conglomerate rock and gravelly loam soil with Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine

Douglas 

CB-S MD-S RO-D 

 

Endogone oregonensis 

BT/SM SM 

Roots of Sitka spruce, Douglas-fir, and western hemlock, below 350 m elevation, known from Cascade Head, Lincoln County and on Roseburg BLM.

Douglas CB-S RO-D 

Gastroboletus vividus

BS/SM SM 

Associated with Abies 

magnifica and Tsuga 

mertensiana

Jackson Klamath MD-S 

Gelatinodiscus flavidus 

BT/SM SM 

Fruits from cones, twigs, and down foliage ofChamaecyparis nootkatensis. It typically 

occurs near or under melting snow-banks. 

Douglas Jackson MD-D 

Gomphus bonarii (synonym of common species Gomphus floccosus) 

BT/SM S/SM Under montane conifers. Douglas Klamath MD-S RO-D UMP-D F-W-D 

Gomphus kauffmanii 

BT/SM S/SM 

Deep humus under pine and spruce species, closely gregarious

Coos Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-D LV-S 

RRS-D UMP-D F-W-D 

 

H-61
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Helvella elastica BT/S M SM 

Duff in coniferous forests; CR & WC Ecoregions. Gregarious on soil under conifers in damp areas, fruits from May through December.

Douglas 

CB-S MD-D RO-D LV-S 

 

Leucogaster citrinus 

BT/SM S/SM 

Roots of white fir, subalpine fir, shore pine, western white pine, Douglas-fir, and western hemlock, Fruits from August through November.

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-D 

RRS-S UMP-D 

Metzgeria violacea BS 

Trunks of woody plants, rarely on rotting wood or igneous rocks. In coastal rainforests in cool, moist riparian areas or shaded talus slopes, sea level to 1000 ft. 

Coos CB-D 

Mycena monticola S 

Roots of Sitka spruce and western hemlock below 200 m, known from several coastal sites in Curry, Lane, and Lincoln Counties, fruits in January, July through November.

No Data 

RRS-D UMP-D F-W-D 

 

H-62
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Mycena tenax BT/S M SM 

Densely gregarious in duff under fir, Douglas-fir, spruce, and redwood trees, known from several coastal sites in Douglas, Lane, and Lincoln Counties; fruits in spring and autumn.

Douglas CB-S 

Phaeocollybia attenuata 

BT/SM SM 

Groups under Sitka spruce and redwoods. From Sept. to Nov. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO-D 

Phaeocollybia californica

BS/SM S/SM 

Roots of Sitka spruce, Pacific silver fir and western hemlock 

Douglas 

CB-D MD-S RO-D 

RRS-D 

Phaeocollybia olivacea

BS/SM S/SM Under conifers in fall and F-Wter. Coos Douglas CB-D MD-D RO-D RRS-D 

Phaeocollybia piceae 

BT/SM SM 

Roots of Pacific silver fir, Douglas-fir and western hemlock in October and November. 

Coos 

CB-D MD-D RO-S 

 

Phaeocollybia pseudofestiva 

BT/SM SM 

Associated with Pinaceae, mixed conifers, and hardwoods; fruits in October - January and April – July. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D MD-D RO-S 

 

Phaeocollybia scatesiae 

BT/SM SM 

Roots of Abies, Sitka 

spruce and huckleberry in coast range and west Cascades in spring and fall. 

Coos CB-D RO-S 

Phaeocollybia spadicea 

BT/SM SM 

In humus under mixed conifer forests or forests associated with Abies, Picea, Pseudotsuga, 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO-D 

H-63
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Tsuga; fruits September – December. 

Pseudorhizina californica (formerly Gyromitra californica) 

BT/SM S/SM Forest edges, disturbed sites. Douglas Jackson Klamath MD-S RO-S LVD RRS-D UMP-D F-W-D 

Ramaria abietina BT/S M SM 

In duff under conifers, especially Monterey cypress and Coast Redwood; from late fall to late winter. 

Douglas MD-D RO-D 

Ramaria amyloidea 

BT/SM S/SM 

In humus or soil under Abies ssp Douglas-fir and western hemlock from September to October. 

Douglas RO-S UMP-D 

Ramaria aurantiisiccescens 

BT/SM S/SM 

In humus or soil under Abies ssp Douglas-fir and western hemlock in October. 

Coos 

CB-D MD-D RO-S 

UMP-D F-W-D 

Ramaria botrytis var. aurantiramosa 

BT/SM SM 

Form coralloid sporocarps in humus or soil that mature above the surface of the ground. 

Douglas Klamath RO-S 

Ramaria concolor f. Tsugina 

BT/SM SM 

In humus or soil under Abies ssp Douglas-fir and western hemlock in October. 

Coos RO-S 

Ramaria conjunctipes var. Sparsiramosa 

BT/SM SM On ground in moist conifer forests in fall. Coos CB-D RO-S 

Ramaria coulterae 

BT/SM SM Unknown; fruits spring- early summer. Jackson Klamath MD-D RO-S 

H-64
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Ramaria largentii BT/S M S/SM 

In humus or soil under Abies ssp Douglas-fir, western white pine and western hemlock in October. 

Jackson 

CB-D MD-D RO-D 

RRS-S UMP-D 

Ramaria rainierensis 

BT/SM SM 

In humus or soil under Abies ssp Douglas-fir and western hemlock in December and March. 

Coos CB-D 

Ramaria rubribrunnescens 

BT/SM SM 

Terrestrial under Pinaceae ssp. in October and November. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D MD-D RO-S 

 

Ramaria spinulosa var. diminutiva 

BS/SM SM 

Terrestrial under Pinaceae ssp. in October and November. 

Douglas 

CB-S MD-S RO-D 

 

Ramaria suecica BT/S M SM On litter; fruits in autumn. Douglas RO-D Ramaria thiersii BT/S M SM Terrestrial under Pinaceae ssp. in June. Douglas Jackson Klamath MD-D RO-S F-W-D 

F-W (T38S,R5; 2001): feet W of 171.93. 

Rhizopogon brunneiniger 

BT/SM SM 

Associated with roots of various Pinaceae ssp. in low to high elevation conifer forests in September and October. 

Douglas 

CB-S MD-S RO-S 

 

Rhizopogon ellipsosporus

BS/SM SM 

Associated with roots of Douglas-fir and sugarpine in October. 

Jackson LV-S MD-D 

Rhizopogon flavofibrillosus 

BT/SM SM 

Associated with roots of various Pinaceae ssp. in mid to high elevation conifer forests from July through November. 

Douglas 

CB-S MD-S RO-D 

 

H-65
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Rhizopogon truncatus 

BT/SM SM 

Associated with Pinaceae; fruits AprilNovember. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-S MD-D RO-D LV-S 

 

Rickenella swartzii 

BT/SM SM 

Moist, shaded locations, typically in moss beds; known from coastal forests in the fall; locally abundant in small troops on or among mosses under hardwoods.

Coos Douglas CB-D 

Sarcodon fuscoindicus 

BT/SM SM Found on soil; fruits in autumn and winter. Douglas CB-S MD-S RO-D 

Sowerbyella rhenana 

BT/SM SM 

In duff of moist older conifer forests from October through December. 

Jackson Klamath 

CB-D MD-D RO-D LV-S 

 

Stropharia albovelata (formerly Pholiota albivelata) 

BT/SM SM 

Scattered under conifers on conifer litter from late April through early January. 

Coos CB-S 

LichensBryoria pseudocapillaris

BS/SM SM Coastal trees and shrubs. Coos Douglas CB-D RO 

Bryoria spiralifera BS/S M SM 

Grows on exposed or moderately exposed coastal trees, shrubs, and (once) on rock, primarily in late seral and old-growth shorepine scrub forests of dunes, marine terraces, and in Sitka spruce forests along the edges of coastal lagoons, 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO 

H-66
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

estuaries, and headlands at or near sea level (0 - 75 m elevation; 0-250 feet). Occurring in sites with moderated temperature and high humidity provided by frequent fog. 

Bryoria subcana BA/S M SM 

Grows on conifer bark in forests of coastal bays, streams, dune forests, and high precipitation ridges within 30 mi (50 km) of the ocean. Inhabits areas of high humidity, mostly in lateseral to old-growth stands. 

Coos CB-D RO-S 

Buellia oidalea BT/S M SM 

Bark of various shrubs, hardwoods, and conifers, maritime (< 1 km from coastline), known from Oregon Dunes NRA

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-S 

 

Calicium adspersum

BA/SM SM 

Highly textured bark on the boles of old growth conifer trees. 

No Data CB-S RO-S 

Cetrelia cetrarioides 

BT/SM SM 

Moist riparian and valley bottom forests, especially older red alder stands over swampy ground. 

Coos CB-D RO-S 

Chaenotheca ferruginea

BT/SM SM 

Open, gappy, well-lit sites in conifer stands, oak balks with occasional remnant conifer snags, conifers snags around rocky 

Douglas Jackson 

MD-D RO-D 

H-67
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

outcrops, and the edges of beaver ponds and bogs; on the boles of lare, old oaks; on large, old conifers with highly textured bark on the side of the tree that lacks mosses and macrolichens, usually the side that does not intercept rain, 62 known sites in Oregon. 

Chaenotheca subroscida 

BT/SM S/SM 

Restricted to bark of old trees with most known occurrences on conifers > 200 years old, occasionally found on younger trees southward in Klamath region, 7 sites found in Oregon 

Douglas Jackson MD-D RRS-S UMP-D 

Chaenothecopsis pusilla

BT/SM SM 

Restricted to bark and wood of old trees in Pacific Northwest with most known occurrences on old-growth conifers in association with algae, occasionally found on younger trees, 11 sites in Oregon. 

Douglas RO-D 

Dermatocarpon luridum

BT/SM S/SM 

On moist to wet rocks along streams or lakesides. 

Douglas Jackson 

MD-D RO-D 

RRS-S UMP-D F-W-S 

 

Erioderma sorediatum BA Humid sites on trees and shrubs near the coast Coos CB-D Heterodermia leucomela BA 

On mossy hardwoods or rock faces with some light. 

Coos Douglas CB-D 

H-68
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Hypotrachyna revoluta 

BA/SM SM 

On rocks, trunks of alders growing on streambanks and lakesides. 

Coos CB-S 

Leioderma sorediatum BA 

On shrubs (huckleberry and manzanita) and mossy conifer branches in humid coastal forests 

Coos Douglas CB-S 

Leptogium brebissonii BA 

Mossy trees and shrubs in low elevation coastal forests. 

No Data CB-S 

Leptogium cyanescens

BT/SM S/SM 

On bark or wood of hardwoods and conifers near coast. Sometines on rock. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-D 

RRS-S UMP-S F-W-S 

 

Leptogium hirsutum (L. burnetiae var. h.)

 BT S 

Usually on hardwood trunks and branches but also on decaying logs and rocks. In mesic open forests. 

Jackson CB-S MD-D UMP 

Leptogium rivale BT/S M SM Submerged rocks in small to medium sized mountain streams. Coos Douglas Jackson Klamath MD-D RO-D Leptogium teretiusculum 

BT/SM SM 

Usually on oaks in dry to mesic open mixed conifer forests. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-D 

MD (T33S,R22; 2001) feet SW 115.32. 

Lobaria linita BA/S M SM On trees, shrubs, mossy rocks or alpine sod. Montane to alpine. Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-S RO-S Nephroma occultum 

BT/SM S/SM 

Bark and wood of conifers in old growth moist forests on the west slope of the cascades. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-S RO-D 

RRS-D UMP-D 

H-69
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Niebla cephalota BA/S M SM On trees, shrubs and rock on the immediate coast. Coos CB-D RO Pannaria rubiginosa BA 

Low elevation coastal shrub thickets on wet deflation plains, mature Douglas-fir/western hemlock forest, and old growth conifer forest dominated by Douglasfir, Sitka spruce, and western red cedar. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-S RO-S RRS-S 

Peltigera pacifica SM S/SM 

Terrestrial in moist conifer forests at low elevations. 

Jackson RRS-S UMP-D 

Platismatia lacunosa 

BT/SM SM 

On bark and wood, mainly hardwoods and rarely on mossy rocks in moist riparian forests in the coast range and cascades. 

Coos Douglas Jackson 

CB-D MD-D RO-D 

 

Pseudocyphellaria mallota BA 

Old conifers or understory hardwoods and shrubs in late successional forests. 

Douglas CB-S 

Pseudocyphellaria perpetua 

BT/SM SM 

Conifer branches in riparian old growth forests on the immediate coast and on shaded branches of manzanita on stabilized sand dune. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO-S 

Pseudocyphellaria rainierensis 

BT/SM S/SM 

Bark or wood of conifers in moist old growth forests at low to mid elevations. 

Douglas CB-D RO-S UMP-D 

Ramalina pollinaria BA S Bark and wood, usually in low elevation swamps. Coos Jackson? CB-D UMP-S 

H-70
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Stereocaulon spathuliferum BA On rock. 

Not within the counties affected 

RO-S 

Sulcaria badia BA 

On branches of hardwoods and shrubs, usually in oak woodlands 

Coos Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-D 

 

Teloschistes flavicans

BA/SM SM 

On bark and wood, usually Sitka spruce in coastal headland forests. 

Coos CB-D RO 

Usnea hesperina BT/S M SM On branches of exposed hardwoods and conifers usually near the coast. Coos Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-S RO-S Usnea longissima 

BT/SM S/SM On trees in shaded, humid forests. Coos Douglas CB-D MD-D RO-D UMP-D 

Vascular PlantsCalifornia maiden-hair Adiantum jordanii

 BA Rocky areas in moist woods Coos Douglas CB-D MD-D RO-D 

Henderson's bentgrass Agrostis hendersonii 

SOC BS Vernal pools, Agate Desert Jackson MD-S Extirpate

Oregon (recovery 

Peninsular onion Allium peninsulare 

 BA S 

Dry open or wooded slopes and flats to 3000 ft; valley grassland, foothill woodlands; March through June. 

Jackson MD-S RRS-S 

Long-stemmed androsace Androsace elongata ssp. acuta 

 BA S 

Found on slopes between 0 - 4000 feet within chapparral, foothill woodland, northern coastal scrub, coastal sage scrub. 

Jackson MD-S RRS-S 

H-71
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Koehler's rockcress Arabis koehleri var. koehleri 

SOC C BS Rocky cliff sites. Douglas CB-S RO-D 

Rogue Canyon rockcress Arabis modesta 

SOC BA S 

Known only from the Rogue River canyon near Galice, Josephine County. 

Jackson MD-D 

Crater Lake rock cress Arabis suffrutescens var. horizontalis 

SOC C S 

High elevation open sites with pumice. Known sites in Crater Lake NP. 

Jackson Klamath 

F-W-D RRS-S UMP-D 

 

Hairy manzanita Arctostaphylos hispidula 

SOC BA S 

 Rocky serpentine soils or sandstone, open forests 

Douglas CB-D MD-D 

Shasta arnica Arnica viscosa BA S 

High elevation, open rocky sites; known in Deschutes, Klamath, Douglas Co, OR; FWema, found at a few sites in wilderness along the Cascade Crest and on Pelican Butte. 

Douglas Klamath MD-S 

F-W-D RRS-S UMP-D 

 

Coastal sagewort Artemisia pycnocephala 

 BA Rocky or sandy soils, coastal strand Coos CB-D 

Green-flowered wild-ginger Asarum wagneri 

 C BS 

Grows in humus soils within red and/or white fir trees at low elevations up to open boulder fields at timberline; occurs above 5,000 feet in Klamath County. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

MD-D LV-D 

Grass-fern Asplenium septentrionale 

 BA S 

Grows on shady, moist, north faces of large rocks; only known in North Umpqua 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

MD-S RO-S 

UMP-D F-W-D RRS-D 

 

H-72
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

California milkvetch Astragalus californicus 

 BA Dry open areas in shrubland. Jackson MD-D 

Wooly balsamroot Balsamorhiza hookeri var. lanata 

 BS Open woods, grassy slopes. Jackson MD-D 

Bensonia Bensoniella oregana 

SOC C BS S 

Wet meadows and moist streamside sites in preCretaceous metasedimentary rock at elevations above 4,000 feet. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D MD-D RO-D 

 

Crenulate grapefern Botrychium crenulatum 

SOC C S Marshes, meadows above 4000 feet Douglas Jackson RRS-S 

Mingan moonwort Botrychium minganense 

BT/SM S/SM Coniferous forests along streams. Douglas RO-S UMP-S 

Dwarf brodiaea Brodiaea terrestris 

 BA Grassland, open woodlands. Coos CB-D 

Greene's mariposa-lily Calochortus greenei 

SOC C BS 

Grows on dry, bushy hillsides in southern Jackson County. 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-S MD-D 

One-leaved mariposa-lily Calochortus monophyllus

 BA S Wooded slopes, clay loam soils. Jackson Klamath MD-D RRS-S 

Broad-fruit mariposa-lily Calochortus nitidus 

SOC BA S Open rocky areas or dry meadows Jackson MD-D 

H-73
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Siskiyou mariposa lily Calochortus persistens 

C B? Open rocky areas Jackson MD-D 

Howell’s camassia Camassia howellii 

SOC C BS S 

Grassy wet meadows, swampy ground, and transitional areas between wet meadows and coniferous woodlands. 

Jackson MD-D 

Primrose Camissonia graciliflora 

 S 

Open rocky grassy and shrublands, usually clay soils. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Abrupt-beaked sedge Carex abrupta 

 BA Moist meadows, open forests. Klamath LV-S 

Short-stemmed sedge Carex brevicaulis 

 BA Rocky or sandy soils. Coos Douglas CB-D RO-S 

Capitate sedge Carex capitata BA Wet places. Jackson Klamath LV-S Bristly sedge Carex comosa BA Wet places. Klamath 

LV-D MD-D RO-S 

 

Crawford’s sedge Carex crawfordii BA S Moist or wet places. Jackson CB-D RRS-S UMP-S Carex gigas S Wet meadows at high elevations Jackson RRS-D Hairy sedge Carex gynodynama 

 BA Moist meadows, open forests. Coos Douglas CB-D MD-D RO-D 

Inland sedge Carex interior BT S Wet meadows, swamps Jackson MD-S LV-D Slender sedge Carex lasiocarpa var. americana 

 BA Bogs, shallow water. Klamath LV-D 

Sierra sedge Carex nervina S Moist to wet places. Jackson RRS-D 

H-74
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Siskiyou sedge Carex scabriuscula 

 BA Same plant as Cares gigas Jackson CB-S MD-D 

Saw-tooth sedge Carex serratodens 

 BA S Moist places. Douglas Jackson MD-D RO-D RRS-D UMP-S 

Involute-leaved sedge Carex stenophylla (C. 

eleocharis) 

 S Wet meadows Klamath F-W-S 

Green-tinged paintbrush Castilleja chlorotica 

 BS S 

Grows on dry gravelly or sandy slopes; Elevation 6000 - 8000 feet; late June through midAugust. Found in shrub openings on slopes and ridges; On F-Wema, found at one site near northeast corner of the Forest. 

Klamath LV-S F-W-D 

Split-hair paintbrush Castilleja schizotricha 

 S 

Decomposed granite or marble at high elevations. 

Jackson RRS-D 

Coville’s lip-fern Cheilanthes covillei 

 BA Rock outcrops, cliffs. Jackson MD-D 

Coastal lip-fern Cheilanthes intertexta 

 BA S Rock outcrops, cliffs. Douglas Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

MD (T37SS,R; 2000): feet SW o149.9. 

Narrow-leaved amole Chlorogalum angustifolium 

 BA S Clay soils in dry grassland. Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

H-75
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Timwort Cicendia quadrangularis 

 BA Openings. Coos Douglas CB-D RO-D 

Bulb-bearing water-hemlock Cicuta bulbifera 

 BA S Wetlands and lake and stream margins. Klamath LV-S F-W-S 

Tall bugbane Cimicifuga elata var. elata 

 C BS S Moist open forests and along small drainages. Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-D RO-D RRS-D UMP-D 

Ashland thistle Cirsium ciliolatum 

 BS Grasslands and shrublands in clay soils. Jackson MD-D 

Small-fruit clarkia Clarkia heterandra 

 BA S Open forests and oak woodlands. Douglas Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Spoonwort Cochlearia officinalis 

 BA Sea bird nesting areas on offshore rocks Coos CB-S 

Mt. Mazama collomia Collomia mazama 

 BS S 

Dry woods at high elevations; July and August; True fir/lodgepole pine forest, meadows, and meadow edges; On F-Wema, found in Lost Creek, Horse Creek, Rock Creek and Cherry Creek drainages, Klamath RD. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

LV-S 

UMP-D RRS-D F-W-D 

 

Milo Baker’s cryptantha Cryptantha milobakeri 

 BA S 

Rocky or gravelly soils in conifer openings, chaparral or oak woodlands. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Baker's cypress Cupressus bakeri SOC BA S 

Scattered on dry wooded slopes, usually in serpentine soil. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

H-76
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Short-pointed cyperus Cyperus acuminatus 

 BA 

Wet, low places in valley and lowlands, edges of tempory pools, ponds, streams, ditches 

Jackson MD-S 

Shining flatsedge Cyperus bipartitus 

 BT S Sand bars, pond shores, ditches. Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-D 

Clustered lady'sslipper Cypripedium fasciculatum 

SOC C BS/S M S/SM Open woods of coniferous forests; can occur up to 6,400 feet. Douglas Jackson CB-S LV-S MD-D RRS-D UMP-D 

PV: (T31S,R2; 1994) 3N of MP in construROW. 

Mountain lady'sslipper Cypripedium montanum 

BT/SM 

Moist areas, dry slopes, mixed evergreen or conifer forests. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

MD-D RO-D LV-D 

 UMP RRS-D F-W 

 

Red larkspur Delphinium nudicaule 

 BA S Rocky openings, often in talus on moist slopes. Douglas Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Siskiyou false rue-anemone Enemion stipitatum 

 BT S Oak woodlands, forest edges. Douglas Jackson Klamath CB-S MD-D RO-D UMP 

Oregon willow herb Epilobium oreganum

SOC C BS S 

Grows in bogs at low elevations. Known only from Josephine County. 

Douglas MD-D 

Siskiyou willow herb Epilobium siskiyouense 

SOC C S Scree and talus on Serpentine ridges. Jackson RRS-D 

Siskiyou daisy Erigeron cervinus SOC BA S Rocky streamsides. Jackson CB-S MD-S RRS-S Rock daisy Erigeron petrophilus 

 S Rocky foothills to montane forest. Jackson RRS-D 

H-77
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Prostrate buckwheat Eriogonum prociduum 

SOC C S 

Areas of barren rocky or gravelly volcanic soils within juniper or sagebrush habitat. 

Klamath F-W-D 

Russet cottongrass Eriophorum chamissonis 

 BA S Bogs along the coast Coos CB-D 

Large-leaved filaree Erodium macrophyllum 

 BA Open sites grassland and shrubland. Jackson MD-S 

Inland coyotethistle Eryngium alismifolium 

 BA Vernal pools, flooded meadows. Klamath LV-D 

Howell’s adder’s tongue Erythronium howellii 

 BS S 

Found in open woods primarily in the upper Illinois River basin, mostly in serpentine soil; April and May 

Jackson MD-D 

Gold poppy Eschscholzia caespitosa 

 BA S 

Grows on dry, brushy slopes and flat areas, mostly along roadsides; known in southern Douglas County; March through early June 

Douglas MD-D RO-S 

Brewer’s aster Eucephalus breweri (Aster breweri) 

 BA Subalpine meadows, open woods Jackson MD-D 

Western wahoo Euonymus occidentalis 

 BT S Shaded Streambanks, 

canyouns 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D MD-D RO-D 

 

Elmer’s fescue Festuca elmeri BA 

Rocky openings in oak woodlands and chaparral. 

Jackson Douglas 

MD-D RO-S RRS-D 

H-78
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Umpqua swertia Frasera umpquaensis 

 C BS S 

Elevations 4500 - 6500 feet in conifer forests, in damp, shaded or sometimes open environments; June through August 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-S 

RRS-D UMP-D 

Siskiyou fritillaria Fritillaria glauca BA S 

found on dry, rocky serpentine slopes in Douglas County; April through June

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D 

RRS-D UMP-D 

Newberry's gentian Gentiana newberryi var. newberryi 

 BA S 

High alpine meadows of the Cascade Mountains ; wet meadows and meadow edges, generally 5,000' and above ; August and September, On F-Wema found on Klamath RD. 

Klamath LV-S 

RRS-S UMP-S F-W-D 

 

Seaside gilia Gilia millefoliata SOC BS Stabiilized Coastal Dunes Coos Douglas CB-D Beautiful stickseed Hackelia bella 

 BA Forest openings, roadsides. Jackson Klamath MD-D 

Large-flowered rush-lily Hastingsia bracteosa var. bracteosa 

 BS S 

Found only in Siskiyou Mountains of southern Jackson County; late May through June. 

Jackson MD-D 

Whitney's bristleweed Hazardia whitneyi var. discoidea

 BT S 

Rocky, open forested slopes at high elevation, Oregon Cascades. On Fremont-Wema few sites found along Cascade Crest in wilderness 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-S RO-S 

RRS-D UMP-D F-W-D 

 

Salt heliotrope Heliotropium curassavicum 

 BA Moist to dry saline soils. Klamath LV-D 

H-79
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Shaggy horkelia Horkelia congesta ssp. congesta 

SOC C BS Open dry ground and rocky flats Douglas Jackson RO-D 

Henderson's horkelia Horkelia hendersonii 

SOC S 

Endemic to summits of a few granite peaks in southern Jackson County. 

Jackson RRS-D 

Three-toothed horkelia Horkelia tridentata ssp. tridentata 

 BA S Granitic soils. Jackson MD-S RO-S RRS-D 

Whorled marshpennywort Hydrocotyle verticillata 

 BA S Swampy ground, lake margins. Coos Douglas CB-S 

Baker’s globemallow Iliamna bakeri 

 BS S 

Open mixed conifer or ponderosa pine stands, and juniper shrublands. Generally occurs after a fire, but may persist in openings. On F-Wema, few sites in southeast Chiloquin RD. 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-D MD-D F-W-D 

California globemallow Iliamna latibracteata 

 BA S 

Grows in coastal ranges in Coos and Douglas counties; June and July

Coos Douglas Jackson 

CB-D MD-D RO-S 

RRS-D UMP-D F-W-D 

 

Siskiyou rueanemone Isopyrum stipitatum 

 S 

1968-4593 feet; chaparral, foothill woodland Same plant as Enemion stipitatum 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

RRS-D UMP-S 

North Umpqua kalmiopsis Kalmiopsis fragrans 

SOC BS S 

Cliffs and rock outcrops, known only from North Umpqua River 

Douglas RO-S UMP-D 

H-80
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Bush beardtongue Keckiella lemmonii

 BA S Rocky slopes, chaparral Jackson MD-S RRS-D 

Thin -leaved peavine Lathyrus holochlorus 

SOC BS 

Thickets and open woods, low elevations, fence rows 

Douglas RO-S 

Columbia lewisia Lewisia columbiana var. columbiana 

 BA S 

Reported on three mountains in the southeastern portion of Douglas County; May through July

Douglas UMP-D 

Lee's lewisia Lewisia leana BA S 

Grows on high elevation serpentine ridges; late May through August

Douglas Jackson MD-D RRS-D UMP-S 

Kellogg's lily Lilium kelloggii BA S 

Grows on sandstone/sedimentary type of soil in dry wooded areas; June

Klamath? CB-S 

Bellinger's meadowfoam Limnanthes floccosa ssp. bellingeriana 

SOC C BS S 

Seasonally wet depressions above 2500 ft; seasonally wet meadows in Klamath County. 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-D MD-D RRS-S 

Slender meadow-foam Limnanthes gracilis ssp. gracilis 

 C BS S 

Found in Douglas, Jackson, and Josephine counties in very wet areas (early spring) and often in serpentine soil; March through May. Vernal pools. 

Douglas Jackson 

MD-D RO-D 

RO (T29S,R81989): 2N of MP 

Western marshrosemary Limonium californicum 

 BA S Coastal strands, salt marshes Coos CB-D 

H-81
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Tracy’s desertparsley Lomatium tracyi 

 S Open pine forest, serpentine. Douglas Jackson RRS-S 

Stipuled trefoil Lotus stipularis BA S Open forests, chaparral, disturbed sites. Jackson MD-D RRS-S Brewer’s Lupine Lupinus breweri var. breweri 

 BA Montane coniferous forest, 4,000-11,000 feet Jackson MD-S 

Ashland lupine Lupinus lepidus var. ashlandensis 

SOC C S Sandy or gravelly soils at low to alpine elevations. Jackson RRS-D 

Tracy’s lupine Lupinus tracyi BA S Dry open montane forest. Douglas Jackson Klamath MD-S Bog club-moss Lycopodiella inundata 

 BA S 

Bogs, muddy depressions, and pond margins. On F-Wema one site in Yoss Creek drainage on Chiloquin RD. 

Coos Douglas Klamath 

CB-D F-W-D 

White meconella Meconella oregana 

SOC C BS S 

Grows in open areas that are wet in the spring at low elevations. Known from sites in the Willamette Valley and the Columbia Gorge. 

Douglas Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

Nodding melic Melica stricta BA 

Open sites, coniferous forests, rocky areas in alpine. 

Klamath LV-S 

Coast microseris Microseris bigelovii 

 BA 

Open sandy soil or sandy pockets on rocky headlands. 

Coos CB-S 

Douglas’ microseris Microseris douglasii ssp. douglasii 

 BA S 

Grassy flats and hillsides in heavy hard packed soil. 

Jackson MD-S RRS-S 

H-82
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Detling's microseris Microseris laciniata spp. detlingii 

SOC BS S 

In moist rocky meadows, open grasslands, and in clay soils. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

MD (T35S,R22000): 3E of MP 

Bolander’s monkeyflower Mimulus bolanderi 

 BA S 

Openings in chaparral, burns and disturbed areas. Applegate Valley 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Congdon’s monkeyflower Mimulus congdonii 

 BA 

Openings in oak woodland and chaparral. Applegate Valley 

Jackson MD-D 

Disappearing monkeyflower Mimulus evanescens 

 C BS S 

Vernally moist sites along perennial and intermittent streams; receding margins of lakes, ponds, and reservoirs within juniper/sagebrush habitats. 

Klamath LV-D F-W-S 

Tri-colored monkeyflower Mimulus tricolor 

 BA S 

Grows at low elevations in clay soil, preferring vernal pools; scattered in Klamath County; late May through June

Klamath LV-S F-W-D 

Howell’s montia Montia howellii C BT S 

Vernally wet sites, usually on compacted soils. 

Douglas MD-D RO-D UMP-S 

Tehama naverretia Navarretia heterandra 

 BA Openings in chaparral, old roads and trails. Jackson MD-S 

MD (T34S,R12003): 1feet W of 126.44 in TEWA; M(T34S,R12005): 6E of MP MD 

H-83
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

(T34S,R12005): 3NE of MP 127.57; M(T35S,R22005): 4NE of MP 138.97. 

Marigold navarretia Navarretia tagetina

 BT S Open rocky grassy flats, vernal pools. Douglas Jackson MD-D RO-S 

Slender nemacladus Nemacladus capillaris 

 BA S Dry slopes, burned 

areas. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

Adder’s-tongue Ophioglossum pusilum 

 BA S 

Open fens, wet meadows, grassy slopes, roadside ditches. 

Coos Douglas CB-S UMP-D 

Coffee fern Pellaea andromedifolia 

 BA S Rock outcrops, cliffs. 

Coos Douglas Jackson 

CB-D MD-D RO-D 

RRS-S UMP-S 

Bird’s-foot fern Pellaea mucronata ssp mucronata 

 BA S Rocky dry openings. Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

Blue-leaved penstemon Penstemon glaucinus 

BS S 

Openings in mid to high elevation pine, fir, and mounatin hemlock communities. Welldrained volcanic soils along rocky points and ridges. 

Klamath LV-D F-W-D 

Red-root yampah Perideridia erythrorhiza 

SOC C BS S Moist meadows, forest edges below 4500'. Douglas Jackson Klamath MD-D RO-D LV-S RRS-S UMP-S F-W-D 

H-84
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

American pillwort Pilularia americana 

 BA S Vernal pools, mud flats, lake margins. Jackson Klamath MD-S LV-S RRS-S 

Austin’s plagiobothrys Plagiobothrys austiniae 

 BA 

Vernally wet areas, along road and trail edges. 

Jackson MD-D 

Coral seeded allocarya Plagiobothrys figuratus var. corallicarpus 

SOC C BS S 

Low elevation meadows and moist clearings and fields. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

Sculptured popcornflower Plagiobothrys glyptocarpus 

 BA S Vernal pools, seasonal stream edges. Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

Greene’s popcorn flower Plagiobothrys greenei 

 BA Vernal pools (Recovery plan) Jackson MD-D 

Loose-flowered bluegrass Poa laxiflora 

 BT S Wet cliffs in the coast mountains. Coos CB-D 

Timber bluegrass Poa rhizomata BA 

Dry Douglasfir/ponderosa pine forests. 

Jackson MD-D 

Profuse-flowered mesa mint Pogogyne floribunda 

BS Vernal pools, seasonal lakes. Klamath LV-D 

California swordfern Polystichum californicum 

 BA S 

Creek banks and canyons in redwoods and mixed evergreen forests. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO-D UMP-D 

Rafinesque’s pondweed Potamogeton diversifolius 

 BA Shallow water, ditches, ponds, lakes. Klamath LV-S 

H-85
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Fibrous pondweed Potamogeton foliosus var. fibrillosus 

 BA Shallow water, ditches, ponds, lakes, streams. Klamath LV-S 

Southern Oregon buttercup Ranunculus austrooreganus 

 C BS 

Oak woodlands, chaparral and dry grasslands. 

Jackson MD-D 

Redberry Rhamnus ilicifolia BA S Chaparral in Applegate Valley Jackson MD-S RRS-D Thompson’s mistmaiden Romanzoffia thompsonii 

 BS S Sunny, vernally wet mossy rocks. Douglas Jackson CB-D MD-S RO-D RRS-D UMP-D 

Columbia cress Rorippa columbiae 

 C BS S 

Along intermittent and perennial streams and lakeshores: banks, sandbars, vernal pools, lakebeds, and ditches. 

Klamath LV-D RRS-S F-W-D 

Joint-leaved saxifrage Saxifragopsis fragarioides 

 BA S Grows on dry cliffs in the high Siskiyou Mountains. Jackson MD-S RRS-S 

American Scheuchzeria Scheuchzeria palustris ssp. Americana 

 BA S 

Grows in ponds and along streams in Oregon Cascades. 

Douglas Klamath LV-S UMP-D F-W-D 

Water clubrush Schoenoplectus subterminalis (formerly Scirpus subterminalis) 

 BA S Lakes, ponds, marshes. 

Coos Douglas Klamath 

CB-D RO-S LV-S 

RRS-S UMP-D 

Drooping bulrush Scirpus pendulus BA S Marshes, wet meadows, ditches. Jackson CB-S MD-D RRS-D 

H-86
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Scribner's grass Scribneria bolanderi 

 BT S Shallow soil on open rocky scabland. Jackson MD-D 

Heckner's stonecrop Sedum laxum ssp. heckneri 

 BT S 

Grows in dry areas in peridotite and gabbro rock outcrops; Elevation 4500 - 5300 feet. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-S 

RRS-D 

Applegate stonecrop Sedum oblanceolatum 

 C BS S Rock outcrops in the Applegate Valley. Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Henderson sidalcea Sidalcea hendersonii 

SOC BS 

Wet meadows, tidal marshes and flats at low elevations. 

Douglas CB-S 

Hickman’s checkerbloom Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. nov. 

 BS 

Shallow soil in open rocky areas. Known from one site in Sams Valley. 

Jackson MD-D 

Coast checker bloom Sidalcea malvaeflora ssp. patula 

SOC C BS S Open Coastal Forest Coos CB-D 

Hitchcock's blueeyed grass Sisyrinchium hitchcockii 

SOC BS 

Known in the Umpqua and southern Willamette valleys. 

Douglas RO-D 

Parhish’s horsenettle Solanum parishii 

 BA Chaparral, dry conifer openings, recent burns. Jackson MD-D 

Howell's tauschia Tauschia howellii SOC C S Granitic gravel ridgetops above 6000 feet Jackson RRS-D Short-podded thelypody Thelypodium brachycarpum 

 BA S 

Alkaline flats, lake margins in shrub steppe and near edges of pine forests. 

Klamath LV-S F-W-D 

H-87
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

Leach's brodiaea Triteleia hendersonii var. leachiae 

SOC C BS S 

Open and wooded slopes in the Siskiyou Mountains of Josephine, Curry, and Douglas counties. 

Coos CB-D MD-S 

Sierra brodiaea Triteleia ixioides ssp. anilina 

 BA S Coniferous forest edge, often in sand or gravel Jackson MD-S RRS-S 

Humped bladderwort Utricularia gibba 

 BA S Shallow water, mud. Coos CB-D RO-S 

Lesser bladderwort Utricularia minor 

 BA Shallow water. 

Coos Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D RO-S MD-S LV-S 

 

Western bog violet Viola primulifolia ssp. occidentalis 

 BS S Serpentine bogs. Douglas CB-S MD-D 

Columbia watermeal Wolffia columbiana 

 BA S Free floating in quiet water. Douglas Jackson MD-S RO-S RRS-S UMP-S 

Small-flowered death camas Zigadenus fontanus 

SOC BA 

 Rocky openings in chaparral in Applegate Valley 

Jackson MD-D 

a/ Status Key: Federal Status: E = Endangered, T = Threatened, C = Federal Candidate, SOC = Species of Concern, 

State Status: SE = State endangered, ST = State threatened, C = State Candidate BLM Status: BS = BLM Sensitive, BA = BLM Assessment, BT = BLM Tracking USFS: S = Sensitive BLM and USFS: SM = Survey and Manage species b/ Occurrence Key: 

BLM Districts and USFS Forests noted if the species has been documented or suspected within the management area. c/ ORNHIC (2007a, b) dropped from rare species list in March 2007 because too common. 

BLM Districts: CB = Coos Bay District, RO = Roseburg District, MD = Medford District, LV = Lakeview District USFS Forests: F-W = Fremont-Fremont-Winema National Forest, RRS = Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, UMP = Umpqua Nationa

H-88
Appendix H – V

TABLE H-8 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence 

Districts/Forests 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal State BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicini

Pipe

(≤ 500 

 D = Documented within BLM or USFS management area.  S = Suspected within BLM or USFS management area. Pacific Connector Project Area: Botanical species documented within 500 feet of proposed project area. References Status: USFS 2006a; ORNHIC 2004a and b ; ORNHIC 2006e; ODA 2006a, USFS 2006a. Expected Habitat: ORNHIC 2006e; Eastman 1990; ORNHIC 2006a; Pojar and MacKinnon 1994; BLM 2004; Hickman 1993; Hitchcock et Arora 1986; Christy and Wagner 1996; Lawton 1971; Norris and Shevok 2004a and b; McCune and Geiser 1997; Brodo et al. 2001. Documented Occurrences: BLM 2006; ORNHIC 2004b, 2006a; USFS 2006b; NRCS 2007. 

H-89
Appendix H – Vegetation and Wildlife Tables 

TABLE H-9 

New BLM and USFS Sensitive and Strategic Species on the 2008 State Director’s and 

Regional Forester’s Lists That Were Not on the 2004 Lists

Status National Forest c/ BLM District d/ 

Scientific Name Federal a/ BLM/USFS b/ FWI RRS UMP CB KF LV MD RO 

Fungi 

Bridgeoporus nobilissimus * SEN S 

Chamonixia caespitosa OR-SEN S S 

Chroogomphus loculatus * OR-SEN S 

Destuntzia rubra * OR-SEN S S 

Gastroboletus imbellus * OR-SEN S 

Gymnomyces fragrans OR-SEN D S S 

Helvella crassitunicata OR-SEN S S 

Hygrophorus caeruleus OR-SEN D 

Otidea smithii * SEN D S S S D 

Phaeocollybia dissiliens * OR-SEN D S 

Phaeocollybia gregaria OR-SEN S S 

Phaeocollybia olivacea * OR-SEN D D D D 

Phaeocollybia oregonensis * SEN D S S 

Phaeocollybia rufotubulina OR-STR S D 

Phaeocollybia sipei * OR-SEN D S 

Ramaria gelatiniaurantia * SEN S D S 

Rhizopogon chamaleontinus OR-SEN D S S 

Rhizopogon exiguus OR-SEN D S S S S 

Rhizopogon inquinatus OR-SEN S 

Stagnicola perplexa OR-SEN D S 

Thaxterogaster pavelekii OR-SEN S 

Non-vascular Plants 

Andreaea schofieldiana OR-SEN D 

Anoectangium aestivum OR-STR D 

Campylopodiella flagellacea OR-STR D 

Campylopus schmidii OR-SEN S 

Campylopus subulatus OR-STR D 

Encalypta brevipes OR-SEN D S S 

Entosthodon fascicularis OR-SEN S S S D S 

Hygrohypnum alpinum OR-STR D S 

Orthodontium gracile OR-SEN D 

Orthodontium pellucens OR-SEN D S 

Orthotrichum bolanderi OR-STR D 

Orthotrichum euryphullum OR-STR S S 

Orthotrichum hallii OR-STR D 

Pohlia obtusifolia OR-STR S 

Polytrichum sphaerothecium OR-SEN S S 

Ptychostomum cyclophyllum OR-STR D D 

Rhytidium rugosum OR-SEN D 

Schistidium tenerum OR-STR D 

Tetraphis geniculata * SEN S S S 

Tetraplodon mnioides OR-SEN S S 

Tomentypnum nitens OR-SEN D D D S S 

Trematodon asanoi OR-SEN S S S 

Barbilophozia lycopodioides OR-SEN S S 

Cryptomitrium tenerum OR-SEN D S 

Gymnomitrion concinnatum OR-SEN S 

Jamesoniella autumnalis var. 

heterostipa OR-SEN S 

Jungermannia polaris OR-SEN 

Leptogium platynum OR-STR D 

Leptogium plicatile OR-STR D 

Lophozia laxa OR-SEN S 

Marsupella emarginata var. 

aquatica OR-SEN S 

Metzgeria temperata OR-STR S 

Metzgeria violacea OR-SEN D 

Porella bolanderi OR-SEN S S S D 

Dermatocarpon meiophyllizum * SEN S S D S D D 

H-90
Appendix H – Vegetation and Wildlife Tables

TABLE H-9 

New BLM and USFS Sensitive and Strategic Species on the 2008 State Director’s and 

Regional Forester’s Lists That Were Not on the 2004 Lists

Status National Forest c/ BLM District d/ 

Scientific Name Federal a/ BLM/USFS b/ FWI RRS UMP CB KF LV MD RO 

Hypogymnia duplicata * OR-SEN S S 

Hypotrachyna revoluta * SEN S 

Pilophorus nigricaulis OR-SEN S 

Texosporium sancti-jacobi FSC SEN S S S 

Umbilicaria hirsuta OR-STR D 

Vascular Plants 

Desert Needlegrass 

Achnatherum speciosum OR-SEN 

Cusick’s Giant-Hyssop 

Agastache cusickii OR-SEN D 

Geyer’s Milk-Vetch 

Astragalus geyeri var. geyeri OR-SEN S 

Bastard Kentrophyta 

Astragalus tegetarioides FSC OR-SEN D 

Crenulate Moonwort 

Botrychium crenulatum FSC SEN D 

Gray Moonwort 

Botrychium minganense * OR-SEN S S 

Brewer’s Reedgrass 

Calamagrostis breweri OR-SEN S 

Crinite Mariposa-Lily 

Calochortus coxii FSC OR-SEN S D 

Howell’s Mariposa-Lily 

Calochortus howellii FSC OR-SEN D D 

Sexton Mt. Mariposa-Lily 

Calochortus indecorus OR-SEN S 

Shasta Star-tulip 

Calochortus nudus OR-STR S S 

Constances’s Sedge 

Carex constanceana OR-SEN S D 

Lesser Panicled Sedge 

Carex diandra OR-SEN D S S D 

Carex klamathensis ssp. nov. OR-SEN D D 

Slender Sedge 

Carex lasiocarpa var. americana OR-SEN D S D D 

Spikenard Sedge 

Carex nardina OR-SEN D 

Dark Alpine Sedge 

Carex subnigricans OR-SEN S 

Native Sedge 

Carex vernacula OR-SEN D S S 

Mendocino Coast Indian 

Paintbrush 

Castilleja mendocinensis

FSC OR-SEN S 

Desert Chaenactis 

Chaenactis xantiana OR-SEN D 

Fee’s Lip-Fern 

Cheilanthes feei SEN S S 

Mountain Tall Bugbane 

Cimicifuga elata var. alpestris OR-STR D 

Point Reyes Bird’s Beak 

Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. 

palustris

FSC OR-SEN D 

Seaside Cryptantha 

Cryptantha leiocarpa OR-SEN D 

Snowline Spring-Parsley 

Cymopterus nivalis OR-SEN D 

Few-Flowered Bleedingheart 

Dicentra pauciflora FSC OR-SEN D D 

Howell’s Whitlow-Grass 

Draba howellii OR-SEN D S 

H-91
Appendix H – Vegetation and Wildlife Tables 

TABLE H-9 

New BLM and USFS Sensitive and Strategic Species on the 2008 State Director’s and 

Regional Forester’s Lists That Were Not on the 2004 Lists

Status National Forest c/ BLM District d/ 

Scientific Name Federal a/ BLM/USFS b/ FWI RRS UMP CB KF LV MD RO 

Short Seeded Waterwort 

Elatine brachysperma OR-SEN S S D 

Bolander’s Spikerush 

Eleocharis bolanderi OR-SEN D 

Golden Fleece 

Ericameria arborescens OR-SEN D D S 

Crosby’s Buckwheat 

Eriogonum crosbyae FSC OR-SEN D 

Cusick’s Buckwheat 

Eriogonum cusickii FSC OR-SEN D 

Lobb’s Buckwheat 

Eriogonum lobbii OR-SEN D S 

Green Buckwheat 

Eriogonum umbellatum var. 

glaberrimum

FSC OR-SEN D S D 

Butte County Fritillaria 

Fritillaria eastwoodiae OR-STR S 

Warner Mt. Bedstraw 

Galium serpenticum ssp. 

warnerense

FSC OR-SEN D D 

Elegant Gentian 

Gentiana plurisetosa FSC OR-SEN D S 

Waldo Gentian 

Gentiana setigera FSC OR-SEN D D D 

Boggs Lake Hedge-Hyssop 

Gratiola heterosepala FSC OR-SEN S D 

Pink Stickseed 

Hackelia mundula OR-STR S 

Purple-Flowered Rush-Lily 

Hastingsia bracteosa var. 

atropurpurea

FSC OR-SEN D D 

Cooper’s Goldflower 

Hymenoxys lemmonii FSC OR-SEN D 

Grimy Ivesia 

Ivesia rhypara var. rhypara FSC OR-SEN D 

Shelly’s Ivesia 

Ivesia rhypara var. shellyi FSC OR-SEN D 

Shockley’s Ivesia 

Ivesia shockleyi OR-SEN D S 

Large-Flowered Goldfields 

Lasthenia ornduffii FSC OR-SEN D 

Kellogg’s Lily 

Lilium kelloggii OR-STR S S S 

Aristulate Lipocarpha 

Lipocarpha aristulata SEN S S 

Englemann’s Desert-Parsley 

Lomatium engelmannii OR-SEN D S 

Packard’s Lomatium 

Lomatium packardiae OR-STR S 

Nevada Lupine 

Lupinus nevadensis OR-SEN D 

Lyrate Malacothrix 

Malacothrix sonchoides OR-SEN D 

Howell’s Microseris 

Microseris howellii OR-SEN D 

Broad-Toothed Monkeyflower 

Mimulus latidens OR-SEN D 

Annual Dropseed 

Muhlenbergia minutissima OR-SEN S 

Siskiyou Phacelia 

Phacelia leonis FSC OR-SEN D S 

Gray Pine 

Pinus sabiniana OR-STR D D 

H-92
Appendix H – Vegetation and Wildlife Tables

TABLE H-9 

New BLM and USFS Sensitive and Strategic Species on the 2008 State Director’s and 

Regional Forester’s Lists That Were Not on the 2004 Lists

Status National Forest c/ BLM District d/ 

Scientific Name Federal a/ BLM/USFS b/ FWI RRS UMP CB KF LV MD RO 

White Piperia 

Piperia candida OR-STR S 

Dense-flower Rein Orchid Piperia 

elongata OR-STR S 

Shiny-Fruited Popcorn Flower 

Plagiobothrys lamprocarpus OR-SEN S 

Desert Allocarya 

Plagiobothrys salsus FSC OR-SEN D 

Oregon Semaphoregrass 

Pleuropogon oregonus FSC OR-SEN S S 

San Francisco Bluegrass 

Poa unilateralis FSC SEN S 

Silvies Valley Desert Combleaf 

Polyctenium fremontii var. 

bisulcatum 

 OR-STR S 

Brownish Beakrush 

Rhynchospora capitellata OR-STR S S 

Straggly Gooseberry 

Ribes divaricatum var. pubiflorum OR-SEN S D 

Lowland Toothcup 

Rotala ramosior SEN S S S 

Wolf’s Willow 

Salix wolfii OR-SEN S 

Slender Bulrush 

Scirpus heterochaetus OR-STR S S 

Rogue River Stonecrop 

Sedum moranii OR-SEN D D 

Big Groundsel 

Senecio triangularis var. 

angustifolius 

 OR-STR D 

Verrucose Sea-Purslane 

Sesuvium verrucosum OR-SEN S D 

Henderson’s Sidalcea 

Sidalcea hendersonii OR-STR S 

Bolander’s Catchfly 

Silene hookeri ssp. bolanderi OR-SEN D D 

Serpentine Catchfly 

Silene serpentinicola OR-STR S S 

Western Sophora 

Sophora leachiana FSC OR-SEN D D 

Common Jewel Flower 

Streptanthus glandulosus OR-SEN S D 

Howell’s streptanthus 

Streptanthus howellii OR-SEN D S D 

Long-Flowered Snowberry 

Symphoricarpos longiflorus OR-SEN D 

Siskiyou Trillium 

Trillium kurabayashii OR-SEN D D 

Lesser Bladderwort 

Utricularia minor OR-SEN D D D D S D S 

Northern Bladderwort 

Utricularia ochroleuca OR-SEN S S 

Dotted Water-Meal 

Wolffia borealis OR-SEN S D D 

Columbia Water-Meal 

Wolffia columbiana OR-SEN S S S S 

Fish 

Pit Sculpin 

Cottus pitensis, all ESUs OR-SEN D S S 

Sheldon Tui Chub 

Gila bicolor eurysoma, all ESUs FSC OR-SEN D 

H-93
Appendix H – Vegetation and Wildlife Tables 

TABLE H-9 

New BLM and USFS Sensitive and Strategic Species on the 2008 State Director’s and 

Regional Forester’s Lists That Were Not on the 2004 Lists

Status National Forest c/ BLM District d/ 

Scientific Name Federal a/ BLM/USFS b/ FWI RRS UMP CB KF LV MD RO 

Oregon Lakes Tui Chub 

Gila bicolor oregonensis 

all ESUs 

FSC OR-SEN S D 

Summer Basin Tui Chub 

Gila bicolor ssp., all ESUs FSC OR-SEN D 

Warner Basin Tui Chub Gila 

bicolor ssp., all ESUs OR-SEN D 

Goose Lake Tui Chub 

Gila bicolor thalassina 

all ESUs 

 OR-SEN D S 

Miller Lake Lamprey 

Lampetra minima, all ESUs FSC OR-SEN D D 

Goose Lake Lamprey 

Lampetra tridentata ssp. 

all ESUs 

FSC OR-SEN D D 

Pit Roach 

Lavinia symmetricus mitrulus 

all ESUs 

FSC OR-SEN D S 

Slugs and Snails 

Turban Pebblesnail 

Fluminicola turbiniformis OR-SEN D 

Salamander Slug 

Gliabates oregonius OR-SEN S S 

Highcap Lanx 

Lanx alta OR-SEN D S 

Robust Walker 

Pomatiopsis binneyi OR-SEN D S 

Archimedes Springsnail 

Pyrgulopsis archimedis OR-SEN D 

Lined Ramshorn 

Vorticifex effusus diagonalis OR-SEN D 

Insects 

Hoary Elfin 

Callophrys polios maritima SEN S S 

Yuma Skipper 

Ochlodes yuma SEN S D 

Scott’s Apatanian Caddisfly 

Allomyia scotti FSC OR-SEN S 

Caddisfly 

Rhyacophila chandleri FSC OR-SEN S 

Amphibians 

Inland Tailed Frog 

Ascaphus montanus FSC OR-SEN S 

Birds 

Tule Goose 

Anser albifrons elgasi STR S S S 

Black Swift 

Cypseloides niger OR-SEN D S 

Bobolink 

Dolichonyx oryzivorus SEN D 

Franklin’s Gull 

Larus pipixcan OR-SEN D D D 

Northern Waterthrush 

Seiurus noveboracensis OR-SEN D 

a/ FSC = Federal Species of Concern 

b/ SEN = Sensitive; OR-SEN = Classified Sensitive in Oregon only; STR = Strategic; OR-STR = Classified Strategic in Oregon only. 

c/ FWI = Fremont-Winema National Forest; RRS = Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest; UMP = Umpqua National Forest; D = 

Documented to occur; S = Suspected to occur. 

d/ CB = Coos Bay BLM District; KF = Klamath Falls Wildlife; LV = Lakeview BLM District; MD = Medford BLM District; RO = Roseburg 

BLM District; D = Documented to occur; S = Suspected to occur. 

* Former Survey and Manage species that will remain Sensitive even though the revised criteria would place them in the Strategic 

category or off the list. 

H-94
Appendix H-10 

Focal Landbird Species Analysis for U.S. Forest Service and 

BLM Lands

H-95
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline, LP 

Focal Landbird Species Analysis for U.S. Forest Service and 

Bureau of Land Management Lands

Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project 

March 2009 

H-96
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 1

1.0 FOCAL LANDBIRD SPECIES 

1.1 Introduction 

The purpose of this analysis is to provide the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and USDAU.S. Forest Service (Forest Service) with estimates of project effects to focal landbird species 

and habitats that are important to their conservation where their lands and jurisdictions are 

affected by construction and operation of the Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline (PCGP) Project. 

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended, implements treaties for the protection of 

migratory birds. The Act prohibits hunting, taking, capturing, killing, possessing, selling, 

purchasing, shipping, transporting, or exporting migratory birds, parts, nets and eggs, covered 

by the Act. Section 3 requires agencies to develop an Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) 

with the FWS to promote migratory bird population conservation, which includes an analysis of 

the effects of actions on migratory birds, emphasizing species of concern. Non-native birds are 

not covered by the Act. 

Executive Order 13186 issued in 2001 directs actions that would further implement the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act. This includes requiring federal agencies to develop Memoranda of 

Understanding (MOU) with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through which each agency would 

promote the conservation of migratory bird species. The Forest Service finalized a MOU in 

2008. The Forest Service specified that they would evaluate the effects of agency actions on 

migratory birds during the NEPA process, focusing first on species of management concern 

along with their priority habitats and key risk factors. The Forest Service also committed to 

participate in planning efforts within Bird Conservation Regions (U.S. NABCI Committee, 2000) 

that would lead to conservation actions that benefit migratory bird species. 

As of late 2007, the BLM had not established a national MOU with USFWS but had developed 

guidelines to consistently address migratory bird populations and habitats until a MOU is in 

place (BLM, 2007). Similar to the Forest Service, BLM requires analysis of project effects to 

migratory birds in every NEPA analysis. Focus should be on effects to migratory bird species of 

concern that are within local Bird Conservation Areas (U.S. NABCI Committee, 2000). BLM 

guidance includes consideration of goals and objectives set out in various existing bird 

conservation strategies, including those provided by Partners In Flight (PIF) Bird Conservation 

Plans, which address habitat and population objectives, identifying best management practices, 

and monitoring. In Executive Order 13186, agencies are instructed to identify when 

unintentional take may have a negative effect on migratory bird populations in order to develop 

methods that may lessen take, focusing on species of concern, priority habitats, and key risk 

factors. 

1.2 Partners In Flight Conservation Strategies 

The PCGP Project crosses 3 geographic areas for which the Oregon-Washing Chapter PIF has 

developed Conservation Strategies for conserving populations of landbirds. The areas include 

Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000a), Coniferous Forests 

of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 1999), and East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains 

of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000b). The first two geographic areas lie within 

the Northern Pacific Rainforest Bird Conservation Region while the East-Slope of the Cascade 

Mountains area is within the Great Basin Bird Conservation Region (U.S. NABCI Committee, 

2000). 

H-97
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 2

1.3 Geographic Ranges for the Conservation Strategies 

As described in Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in Lowlands and Valleys of Western 

Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000a), the Westside Lowlands and Valleys are distinct and 

somewhat separated areas of low elevation habitat within coniferous forests in western Oregon 

and Washington. Within Oregon, these areas include the Rogue, Umpqua, and Willamette 

Valleys, and the Coastal lowlands and valleys. In the PCGP Project area, the Rogue and 

Umpqua Valleys are the interior valleys and rolling foothills between the mesic lowlands of the 

Willamette Valley and northern California and will be crossed by the project. They are 

completely embedded within several mountain ranges, which include the Cascades, Klamath 

and Siskiyou. The Coastal Lowlands and Valleys include Coos Bay (Altman, 2000a). 

The geographic range included in Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and Washington 

(Altman, 1999) is all coniferous forests in Washington and Oregon west of the crest of the 

Cascade Mountains. The area was selected for development of conservation strategies 

because it is a relatively distinct range boundary for many landbird species. Coniferous forest is 

defined as all forest lands outside urban areas with less than a 30% deciduous canopy 

component. 

The third region, East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington (Altman, 

2000b), includes mostly mid to high elevation forest cover types along the east-slope of the 

Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington. This includes several ecoregions, such as the 

North Cascades and Southern Washington Cascades in Washington, and the High Cascades in 

Oregon. Again, the boundaries are not rigorously defined but more dependent upon the 

presence of priority habitats (Altman, 2000b). The subprovinces are the North Cascades, 

Yakima Plateau, Columbia Foothills, Central Oregon, and Klamath Basin; only the Klamath 

Basin coincides with the PCGP Project area. 

1.4 Focal Landbird Species and Associated Habitats 

The Oregon-Washington PIF conservation strategies develop a conceptual approach to 

conservation that involves a hybrid strategy, emphasizing ecosystem management, but 

including components of single-species and guild or indicator species management. The typical 

PIF approach designates priority species with a scoring system. This approach is 

supplemented with a greater emphasis on ecosystems. The most important habitat conditions 

and features used by landbirds were identified, initial PIF priority species were determined along 

with habitat associations and conditions, and additional species were selected based on the 

degree of association with remaining habitat conditions and features, resulting in a list of both 

common and uncommon species. 

Wildlife habitats affected by construction and operation of the PCGP Project were classified by 

habitat types addressed within Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in Oregon and Washington 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). With habitats defined, wildlife occurring in the vicinity of the PCGP 

Project, including focal landbird species, have varying levels of association with different habitat 

types as specified by Johnson and O’Neil (2001). Wildlife associations with habitats, listed 

below, are in decreasing order of specificity: 

H-98
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 3

1. Close association: a species is known to depend on a specific habitat for part or all of 

its life history requirements (feeding and reproduction) implying that the species has 

an essential need for a particular habitat for its maintenance and viability; 

2. General association: a highly adaptable species that is supported by a number of 

habitats that provide for its maintenance and viability; and 

3. Present: a species that occasionally uses a habitat that provides marginal support for 

its maintenance and viability. 

In the following sections, assumptions specify which habitats described by Johnson and O’Neil 

(2001) are most likely to correspond to the habitats and habitat attributes that have been 

designated within each Conservation Strategy. Focal landbird species’ associations with 

habitats occurring near and affected by the PCGP Project are one important component of 

impact evaluation based on the assumption that a species with a close association with an 

impacted habitat will be more affected by the Proposed Action than a species with a general 

association or one that may only be present. 

Focal landbird species having no association with a specific habitat type, even though the 

habitat may provide structural and/or growth conditions suitable for a particular species, are 

assumed to not be affected by removal of that habitat during construction of the Proposed 

Action. 

Priority Habitats, Westside Lowlands and Valleys. Four habitats are considered priority 

habitats in the Westside Lowlands and Valleys, including grassland-savanna, oak woodland, 

riparian, and chaparral. Of those, chaparral does not occur within the PCGP Project area. 

Elevation and geographical boundaries are dependent on the presence of priority habitats. 

Priority habitats were based on their status in an Oregon-Washington PIF prioritization scheme 

(Andelman and Stock, 1994 cited in Altman, 2000a); the loss, alteration and current condition of 

the habitat in contrast to historic conditions; current threats to the habitat; and importance of the 

habitat to one or more high priority species 

Grassland-Savannah: Grassland habitats were highly associated with 44 breeding species. 

This habitat includes dry prairie, savanna, and wet prairie. Wet prairie is characterized by 

species associated with a mix of grasses and forbs in mesic sites. Upland areas dominated by 

extensive grass cover characterizes dry prairie. Within this, if a scattered shrub component 

occurs, species diversity and/or abundance may increase. Singular or small groves of scattered 

oaks or occasionally ponderosa pine or Douglas-fir results in an entirely new group of highly 

associated species. Grasslands are defined as any habitat dominated by grasses and/or forbs 

including both native and agricultural grasslands. 

For simple grassland and savanna communities, the western meadowlark was used as an 

umbrella species to explain conservation objectives. This species has relatively large area 

requirements. Conservation in these areas emphasizes healthy ecosystems through 

representative focal species for several attributes in each habitat type. Only focal landbird 

species and habitat attributes that are specified to occur in the Rogue Valley/Umpqua Valley 

(Table 1) are included in later analyses. 

The General Biological Objectives for Grassland-Savanna Habitats from the Conservation 

Strategy (Altman, 2000a) are provided in Appendix A. The Strategy Conservation Focus for 

H-99
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 4

each focal species, including species-specific Biological Objectives (populations and habitats), 

is included in Appendix A. 

The Westside Grasslands habitat (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) is assumed to be closely related 

to the Grassland habitat and habitat attributes in Table 1. Similarly, Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forests and Woodlands habitat (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) may correspond to 

Savanna conditions with either large open-form oaks or large conifer savanna trees. In either 

case, only conditions associated with mature or late successional-old growth Westside Oak and 

Dry Douglas-fir Forests and Woodlands habitats are assumed to provide the Savanna habitat 

attribute conditions in Table 1. 

Table 1 

Conservation Focus on Specific Habitat Attributes within Grassland-Savanna Habitats of Westside 

Lowlands and Valleys and Associated Focal Landbird Species 

(Altman, 2000a) 

Associated Focal Landbird Species 

Habitat 

Conservation Focus 

on Habitat Attributes 

Willamette Valley/ 

Puget Lowlands

Rogue Valley/ 

Umpqua Valley

large patches of habitat N/A Western Meadowlark 

short grass with areas of 

bare ground Streaked Horned Lark* Common Nighthawk 

moderate-tall grass, 

minimal bare ground or 

shrubs 

Grasshopper Sparrow Grasshopper Sparrow 

scattered shrubs and/or 

bunchgrass Oregon Vesper Sparrow Oregon Vesper Sparrow 

Lark Sparrow 

burrows N/A Burrowing Owl 

Grassland 

wet prairie/grassland Northern Harrier Northern Harrier 

cavities in large savanna 

open-form oaks American Kestrel* Western Screech Owl 

Savanna large conifer savanna 

trees Lewis’ Woodpecker Lewis’ Woodpecker 

* Indicates focal species or habitats are not present in the Project Area. 

Oak Woodland: Oak woodlands are highly associated with 47 breeding species. The most 

highly associated species utilize a variety of habitat factors such as acorn production, large oak 

trees with natural or woodpecker excavated cavities, young regenerating oaks in the 

subcanopy, an open, herbaceous dominated understory, or canopy openings that increase edge 

habitat. The amount of shrubby understory often determines species composition. 

The conservation plan for oak woodland habitat emphasizes healthy ecosystems through focal 

species for several habitat attributes, including large patches with some large trees, the 

presence of canopies in oak trees, canopy edges and openings, young (subcanopy) 

regenerating oaks, herbaceous cover in the understory, and a native shrub understory. Only 

focal landbird species and habitat attributes that are specified to occur in the Rogue 

Valley/Umpqua Valley (Table 2) are included in later analyses. 

The General Biological Objectives for Oak Woodland Habitats from the Conservation Strategy 

(Altman, 2000a) are provided in Appendix A. The Strategy Conservation Focus for each focal 

species, including species-specific Biological Objectives (populations and habitats), is included 

in Appendix A. 

Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forests and Woodlands habitat (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) 

corresponds to Oak Woodland conditions in Table 2. Mature or late successional-old growth 

H-100
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 5

Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forests and Woodlands habitats are assumed to provide 

large patches with large oaks and large oaks with cavities (Table 2). Those seral stages, in 

addition to mid-seral Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forests and Woodlands habitats, are 

assumed to provide canopy edge, sub-canopy oaks and herbaceous understories in oak 

woodlands (Table 2). 

Riparian: Riparian forest and shrub habitats are highly associated with 49 breeding species. 

This includes many species that are generalists and that also occur as breeders in other habitat 

types. Most are primarily insectivores and, in general, the greater the structural layering and 

complexity of the habitat, the greater the insect productivity, and thus the greater the bird 

species diversity. Other species are connected with unique features, such as nesting areas 

provided by snags, nectar of flowering plants in the understory, fruit from berry producing plants 

in the understory and subcanopy, or a dense, diverse shrub layer. 

Table 2 

Conservation Focus on Specific Habitat Attributes within Oak Woodland Habitats of Westside 

Lowlands and Valleys and Associated Focal Landbird Species 

(Altman, 2000a) 

Associated Focal Landbird Species 

Habitat 

Conservation Focus 

on Habitat Attributes 

Willamette Valley/ 

Puget Lowlands

Rogue Valley/ 

Umpqua Valley

large patches with large 

oaks White-breasted Nuthatch White-breasted Nuthatch 

large oaks with cavities Acorn Woodpecker* 

Downy Woodpecker* Ash-throated Flycatcher 

canopy edge and 

openings Western Wood-pewee Western Wood-pewee 

young (subcanopy) oaks Bushtit Bushtit 

Oak 

Woodland 

herbaceous understory 

cover Chipping Sparrow Chipping Sparrow 

* Indicates focal species or habitats are not present in the Project Area. 

Conservation focuses on healthy ecosystems for Open Water (presence of snags), Floodplain 

Shrub (either early successional or permanent condition depending on hydrology, a dense 

shrub layer), and Deciduous Woodland (presence and volume of foliage such as large canopy 

trees, well-developed canopy, dense understory shrub layer, and availability of large, 

structurally diverse patches of riparian deciduous woodland habitat). Only focal landbird 

species and habitat attributes that are specified to occur in the Rogue Valley/Umpqua Valley 

(Table 3) are included in later analyses. 

The General Biological Objectives for Riparian Habitats from the Conservation Strategy 

(Altman, 2000a) are provided in Appendix A. The Strategy Conservation Focus for each focal 

species, including species-specific Biological Objectives (populations and habitats), is included 

in Appendix A. 

Riparian forests (within Riparian Reserves on all Federal lands) with late successional-old 

growth conifers and mid-seral conifers in Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest habitats 

and Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forests and Woodlands habitat (Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001) are assumed to provide the structural characteristics associated with habitat attributes for 

Riparian-Open Water, Riparian Shrub, and Riparian Woodland habitats in Table 3. 

Additionally, Herbaceous Wetlands and Westside Riparian Wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001) are assumed to provide structural characteristics associated with riparian understories as 

well as forested conditions in some circumstances. 

H-101
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 6

 

Priority Habitats, Coniferous Forests. Successional stage is used to organize the 

Conservation Strategy developed for Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and Washington 

because it “provides the most distinct separation of bird-habitat relationships in coniferous 

forests of western Oregon and Washington” (Meslow and Wight, 1975 cited in Altman, 1999). 

However, it is only used to organize forest condition and bird-habitat relationships. 

Table 3 

Conservation Focus on Specific Habitat Attributes within Riparian Habitats of Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys and Associated Focal Landbird Species 

(Altman, 2000a)

Associated Focal Landbird Species

Habitat

Conservation Focus 

on Habitat Attributes

Willamette Valley/ 

Puget Lowlands

Rogue Valley/ 

Umpqua Valley

Open Water snags - cavities Purple Martin Tree Swallow 

Purple Martin 

Floodplain Shrub dense shrub layer Willow Flycatcher* Yellow-breasted Chat 

large canopy trees Red-eyed Vireo* Bullock’s Oriole 

subcanopy, tall shrub 

foliage Yellow Warbler Yellow Warbler 

dense understory shrub 

layer Swainson’s Thrush* Wrentit 

snags Downy Woodpecker Downy Woodpecker 

Deciduous 

Woodland 

large, structurally 

diverse patches Yellow-billed Cuckoo* Red-shouldered Hawk Cooper’s Hawk 

* Indicates focal species or habitats are not present in the Project Area. 

Coniferous forests in this plan include 5 forest types: coastal Sitka spruce zone, the widespread 

low-elevation western hemlock/western redcedar zone, the mid-elevation Pacific silver fir zone 

which occurs primarily in the Cascade and Olympic Mountains, the subalpine mountain hemlock 

zone of the Cascade, Olympic, and Klamath Mountains, and the mixed-conifer zone of the 

Klamath/Siskiyou Mountains. 

The highest priority types are low -elevation western hemlock/western redcedar and mixedconifer in southwestern Oregon, and physiographic regions are the Klamath Mountains and 

Oregon Coast Range, as well as on the Olympic Peninsula of Washington. Focal landbird 

species and habitat attributes that are specified to occur in the Coniferous Forests are included 

in Table 4. 

The General Biological Objectives for successional stages in Coniferous Forest Habitats from 

the Conservation Strategy (Altman, 1999) are provided in Appendix B. The Strategy 

Conservation Focus for each focal species, including species-specific Biological Objectives 

(populations and habitats), is included in Appendix A. 

Table 4 

Conservation Focus on Specific Habitat Attributes within Forest Succession Stages of Coniferous 

Forests of Western Oregon and Washington and Associated Focal Landbird Species 

(Altman, 1999) 

Habitat 

(Successional Stage)

Conservation Focus 

on Habitat Attributes

Associated Focal Landbird 

Species

Large snags Vaux's Swift 

Old-Growth Forest Large trees Brown Creeper 

Conifer cones Red Crossbill 

Mature Forest: Multi- Layered Large snags Pileated Woodpecker 

H-102
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 7

Habitat 

(Successional Stage)

Conservation Focus 

on Habitat Attributes

Associated Focal Landbird 

Species

Large trees Brown Creeper 

Conifer cones Red Crossbill 

Closed canopy Hermit Warbler 

Deciduous canopy trees Pacific-slope Flycatcher 

Mid-story tree layers Varied Thrush 

Open mid-story Hammond's Flycatcher 

Deciduous understory Wilson's Warbler 

Forest floor complexity Winter Wren 

Closed canopy Hermit Warbler 

Deciduous canopy trees Pacific-slope Flycatcher 

Open mid-story Hammond's Flycatcher 

Deciduous canopy trees Black-throated Gray Warbler 

Deciduous understory Wilson's Warbler 

Young Forest: Understory 

Reinitiating 

Forest floor complexity Winter Wren 

Pole Forest: Stem Deciduous canopy trees Black-throated Gray Warbler 

Exclusion Deciduous subcanopy/understory Hutton's Vireo 

Residual canopy trees Olive-Sided Flycatcher 

Snags Western Bluebird 

Deciduous vegetation Orange-crowned Warbler 

Early-Seral Forest: Stand 

Initiation 

Nectar-producing plants Rufous Hummingbird 

Mineral springs Band-tailed Pigeon* 

Alpine American Pipit* 

Waterfalls Black Swift* 

Forest Inclusions/ 

Unique Habitats 

High elevation wet meadows Lincoln's Sparrow* 

* Indicates focal species or habitats are not present in the Project Area. 

Priority Habitats, East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains. Eight forested or woodland 

habitats are considered as priorities within the area defined as the East-slope of the Oregon and 

Washington Cascades. Multiple habitat attributes specified for conservation focus have been 

identified for ponderosa pine forest, mixed conifer forest (late-successional), and oak-pine 

woodlands. Single habitat attributes were identified for lodgepole pine, whitebark pine, montane 

meadows, aspen, and subalpine fir forests/woodlands. 

Ponderosa Pine was chosen as a priority habitat because of the extensive loss and degradation 

of forests characteristic of this type, and several highly associated bird species have declining 

populations and are species of concern (Altman, 2000b, see page 27). Mixed conifer (late 

successional) forest occurs at mid-high elevations and includes coniferous forest composed 

primarily of cool moist Douglas-fir/Grand fir, cool dry Douglas-fir, western larch, hemlock, and 

occasional ponderosa pine. There is a substantial loss of late-successional stage of this habitat 

type (Altman, 2000b). Oak-Pine woodland habitats occur mostly in Klickitat (Washington) and 

Wasco (Oregon) counties in the Columbia Foothills and Yakima Plateau subprovinces, as well 

as a small part of the Klamath Basin, especially in the Klamath River Canyon (Altman, 2000b). 

Within lodgepole and white-bark pine, the conservation emphasis is the presence of old growth 

trees. In aspen, the emphasis is large trees with regeneration. In subalpine fir, the emphasis is 

a patchy presence. Both wet and dry meadows also are emphasized. 

Only the ponderosa pine and mixed conifer habitat components of the East-Slope Cascades are 

crossed by the PCGP Project. Only focal landbird species and habitat attributes that are 

specified to occur within those two habitat types (Table 5) are included in later analyses. 

H-103
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 8

Table 5 

Conservation Focus on Specific Habitat Attributes within East-slope Cascades of Western Oregon 

and Washington and Associated Focal Landbird Species 

(Altman, 2000b) 

Habitat

Conservation Focus 

on Habitat Attributes

Associated Focal Landbird 

Species

old forest-large patches White-headed Woodpecker

large trees Pygmy Nuthatch

open understory - regeneration Chipping Sparrow Ponderosa Pine

burned old forest Lewis' Woodpecker*

large trees Brown Creeper*

large snags Williamson's Sapsucker

grassy openings, dense thickets Flammulated Owl

multi-layered, structural diverse Hermit Thrush

Mixed Conifer

fire edges and openings Olive-sided Flycatcher*

early seral, dense understory Nashville Warbler*

Oak-Pine Woodland large oaks with cavities Ash-throated Flycatcher*

large pine trees/snags Lewis' Woodpecker*

Lodgepole Pine mature/old-growth Black-backed Woodpecker*

Whitebark Pine mature/old growth Clark's Nutcracker*

Montane Meadows wet and dry Sandhill Crane*

Aspen large trees/snags, regeneration Red-naped Sapsucker*

Subalpine Fir patchy presence Blue Grouse*

* Indicates focal species or habitats are not present in the Project Area. 

1.5 Focal Landbird Species’ Population Trends 

When Oregon-Washington PIF developed their Conservation Strategies for each of the three 

geographic ranges described above, they reviewed available information on population trends 

for each of the focal landbird species considered in each Conservation Strategy. OregonWashington PIF utilized data compiled by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Patuxent Wildlife 

Research Center. Species’ trends, based on annual breeding bird survey (BBS) counts, were 

analyzed within several Physiographic Regions, one or more of which coincide with OregonWashington PIF Conservation Strategy areas. When each Conservation Strategy was 

developed, Oregon-Washington PIF utilized regional trend analyses provided by USGS-BBS 

data to determine if focal landbird species’ populations were decreasing. 

There is one USGS-BBS Physiographic Region, the Southern Pacific Rainforest, within the 

geographic boundaries coinciding with the Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and 

Washington Conservation Strategy. Fifty bird species were reported as having either long-term 

or short-term significantly declining trends. Of these, 22 were considered exclusively or 

primarily breeding within Westside Lowlands and Valleys. An additional 19 use both low 

elevation valley habitats and higher elevation coniferous forest habitat similarly, and the 

remaining 9 are predominantly coniferous forest species. In addition, there have been 

extirpations of breeding populations for species such as the burrowing owl, yellow-billed cuckoo, 

Lewis’ woodpecker, common nighthawk, Say’s phoebe, and black-billed magpies (Altman, 

2000a). Twelve of the 33 focal species in the Lowlands and Valleys Conservation Strategy had 

declining regional population trends prior to 2000 (Table 6). 

Two USGS-BBS Physiographic Regions coincide with the boundaries of the Coniferous Forests 

of Western Oregon and Washington Conservation Strategy. They are the Cascade Mountains 

and Southern Pacific Rainforests regions. There are 25 species that had significantly declining 

long-term or recent trends in the Southern Pacific Rainforests prior to 1999, but only 8 species 

in the Cascade Mountains Physiographic Region had declining trends (Altman, 1999). Of the 

H-104
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 9

20 focal landbird species in the Coniferous Forest Conservation Strategy, 10 species had 

declining regional population trends prior to 1999 (Table 6). 

More than 100 native landbird species were considered to be highly associated breeding 

species in all or parts of the East-Slope Cascades. In Ponderosa Pine and Mixed Conifer (latesuccessional) habitats, there are 85 species each, and there are 100 species that are regularly 

associated breeding species in oak-pine woodland habitats. The Cascade Mountains 

Physiographic Region is the only USGS-BBS regional analysis coinciding with geographic 

boundaries of the East-Slope Cascades conservation strategy. Sixteen native landbird species 

were considered to have significantly declining trends prior to 2000 though only 3 of 17 the focal 

species in Table 6 were declining (Altman, 2000b). 

There were 12 species within the Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington 

that had declining population trends within the Southern Pacific Rainforest Physiographic 

Region prior to 2000. When species’ regional populations were evaluated for trends through 

2007, five species’ regional populations (lark sparrow, acorn woodpecker, western wood-pewee, 

house wren, and wrentit) were not declining although they were reported to be in decline prior to 

2000 (Altman, 2000a). Based on the most recent USGS-BBS species regional population 

trends (Sauer et al., 2008), four species (common nighthawk, chipping sparrow, purple martin, 

and red-shouldered hawk) that did not have declining populations prior to 2000 had declining 

trends through 2007 (Table 6). 

Similarly, six species (Vaux’s swift, brown creeper, varied thrush, winter wren, western bluebird, 

and band-tailed pigeon) within the Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and Washington that 

had declining population trends within the Southern Pacific Rainforest and Cascade Mountains 

physiographic regions prior to 1999 (Altman, 1999) did not have declining trends through 2007 

(Table 6). Two species (Hammond’s flycatcher and Wilson’s warbler) had declining trends 

evaluated through 2007 (Sauer et al., 2008) although their regional population was not declining 

prior to 1999 (Altman, 1999). Only one species (blue grouse) in the East-Slope of the Cascade 

Mountains in Oregon and Washington that was declining prior to 2000 (Altman, 2000b) did not 

have a significant declining regional population trend in 2007 (Table 6). 

Table 6 

Population Trend Estimates Provided by Oregon-Washington Partners In Flight for Focal Land 

Bird Species Associated with Specific Habitat Attributes that May Coincide with the PCGP Project. 

Population Trends through 2007 are Included for Comparison to the Earlier Trends 

Habitat Habitat Attribute 

Focal Landbird 

Species 

Population 

Trends Reported 

by PIF 1 

Population 

Trends from 

1966 to 2007 4 

Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000a)

Large patches Western Meadowlark Declining 2 Declining 2 

Streaked Horned Lark* Short grass-bare ground Common Nighthawk Declining 2

Moderate-tall grass Grasshopper Sparrow 

Burrows Burrowing Owl* 

Oregon vesper Sparrow Scattered shrubs Lark Sparrow Declining 2

 

Grassland 

Wet prairie/grassland Northern Harrier 

American Kestrel* Declining 2 Declining 2

Large oaks-cavities Savanna Western Screech Owl 

Large conifer trees Lewis’s Woodpecker 

Oak Woodland Large patches, large oaks White-breasted 

Nuthatch 

H-105
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 10

Habitat Habitat Attribute 

Focal Landbird 

Species 

Population 

Trends Reported 

by PIF 1 

Population 

Trends from 

1966 to 2007 4 

Acorn Woodpecker* Declining 2 

Large oaks-cavities Downy Woodpecker* 

Ash-throated Flycatcher Declining 2

 Declining 2

Canopy edges and 

openings Western Wood-pewee Declining 2

 

Young (subcanopy) oaks Bushtit Declining 2 Declining 2

Herbaceous cover Chipping Sparrow Declining 2

Bewick’s Wren Native shrub understory House Wren Declining 2

 

Purple Martin Declining 2

Riparian-Open Water Snags Tree Swallow 

Willow Flycatcher* Declining 2 Declining 2

Riparian shrub Dense shrub layer Yellow-breasted Chat 

Red-eyed Vireo* Large canopy trees Bullock’s Oriole Declining 2

 Declining 2

Subcanopy, tall shrub 

foliage Yellow Warbler 

Swainson’s Thrush* Declining 2 Declining 2

Dense shrub understory Wrentit Declining 2

 

Snags Downy Woodpecker 

Yellow-billed Cuckoo* 

Red-shouldered Hawk Declining 2

Riparian woodland 

Large, structurally diverse 

patches Cooper’s Hawk 

Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 1999)

Old-Growth Forest Large snags Vaux’s Swift Declining 3 

Large trees Brown Creeper Declining 4 Old-Growth/Mature 

Forest Conifer trees Red Crossbill 

Large snags Pileated Woodpecker Mature Forest Mid-story tree layers Varied Thrush Declining 3

 

Closed canopy Hermit Warbler 

Deciduous canopy trees Pacific-slope Flycatcher Declining 4 Declining 3

Open mid-story Hammond’s Flycatcher Declining 4

Deciduous understory Wilson’s Warbler Declining 4

Mature/Young Forest 

Forest floor complexity Winter Wren Declining 4

 

Young/Pole Forest Deciduous canopy trees Black-throated Gray 

Warbler 

Pole Forest Deciduous subcanopy/ 

understory Hutton’s Vireo 

Residual canopy trees Olive-sided Flycatcher Declining 3 Declining 3

Snags Western Bluebird Declining 4 

Deciduous vegetation Orange-crowned 

Warbler Declining 4

 Declining Early-Seral Forest 4

Nectar producing plants Rufous Hummingbird Declining 3

 Declining 3

Mineral springs Band-tailed Pigeon* Declining 4 

Alpine American Pipit* 

Waterfalls Black Swift* Unique Conditions 

Montane wet meadows Lincoln’s Sparrow* 

East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000b)

Old forest-large patches White-headed 

Woodpecker 

Large trees Pygmy Nuthatch 

Open understoryregeneration Chipping Sparrow 

Ponderosa Pine 

Burned old forest Lewis’ Woodpecker* 

Large trees Brown Creeper Declining 5 Declining 5 Mixed Conifer 

Large snags Williamson’s Sapsucker 

H-106
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 11

Habitat Habitat Attribute 

Focal Landbird 

Species 

Population 

Trends Reported 

by PIF 1 

Population 

Trends from 

1966 to 2007 4 

Grassy openings, dense 

thickets Flammulated Owl 

Multi-layered, structural 

diverse Hermit Thrush 

Fire edges and openings Olive-sided Flycatcher* Declining 5 Declining 5

Early seral, dense 

understory Nashville Warbler* 

Large oaks with cavities Ash-throated 

Flycatcher* Oak-Pine Woodland 

Large pine trees/snags Lewis’s Woodpecker* 

Lodgepole pine Mature/old-growth Black-backed 

Woodpecker* 

Whitebark pine Mature/old-growth Clark’s Nutcracker* 

Montane Meadows Wet and dry Sandhill Crane* 

Aspen Large trees/snags, 

regeneration Red-naped Sapsucker* 

Subalpine fir Patchy presence Blue Grouse* Declining 5 

* Indicates focal species or habitats are not present in the Project Area. 

1

 References (Altman, 1999; Altman, 2000a and 2000b) available online at: http://www.orwapif.org/consplan.html 2 Significantly declining population trend in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Physiographic Region. 3

 Significantly declining population trends in the Southern Pacific Rainforest and Cascade Mountains physiographic areas. 4

 Significantly declining population trends in Southern Pacific Rainforest or Cascade Mountains physiographic areas. 5

 Significantly declining population trends in the Cascade Mountains BBS physiographic areas. 5

 Declining population trends significant at P ≤ 0.10 from BBS regional data (Sauer et al., 2008) summarized for the same 

physiographic areas as in the PIF Conservation Strategies (Altman, 1999; Altman, 2000a and 2000b), from 1966 through 

2007. 

2.0 PROJECT EFFECTS TO FOCAL LANDBIRD SPECIES 

Effects due to construction and operation of the PCGP Project have been evaluated for each of 

the focal landbird species that are likely to have habitats and/or habitat attributes impacted. 

Detailed knowledge about the occurrence of specific habitat attributes (see for example Table 6) 

appropriate to each focal landbird species is not available. As discussed in previous sections, 

assumptions have been made about the correspondence of habitat types described by Johnson 

and O’Neil (2001), including seral stages of those habitats, with the habitats and habitat 

attributes that have been designated within each Conservation Strategy. 

Where BLM and Forest Service lands would be affected by construction and operation of the 

PCGP Project, only affected habitats that are assumed to provide focal landbird species 

habitats and habitat attributes important to the species’ conservation are included in effects 

analyses. In addition, the analyses include focal landbird species’ associations with affected 

habitats. The degree of a species’ association with an affected habitat is germane to evaluating 

potential impact since a species with a close association with an impacted habitat is assumed to 

be more affected by the Proposed Action than a species with a general association or one that 

may only be present. A species with no association with an impacted habitat would not be 

affected by the project. 

2.1 Bureau of Land Management – Coos Bay District 

There are five habitat types–Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest, Westside Oak and 

Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands, Westside Grasslands, Herbaceous Wetlands and 

H-107
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 12

Westside Riparian-Wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001)–within the Coos Bay District that will 

be affected by the Proposed Action. Those five habitat types described by Johnson and O’Neil 

(2001) are assumed to provide habitats and habitat attributes that are important for conserving 

focal landbirds designated in the Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington 

Conservation Strategy (Altman, 2000a) and Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and 

Washington Conservation Strategy (Altman, 1999). 

Twenty-two focal landbird species in lowlands and valleys are likely to be affected by habitat 

removal during construction of the PCGP Project; one other species will not be affected since it 

is not associated with any of the affected habitats (Table 7). Eight of the species likely to be 

affected by habitat removal are known to have significant (P<0.10) declining regional population 

trends according to recent estimates (Sauer et al., 2008). Sixteen other species may be 

similarly affected by habitat removal in various successional stages of coniferous forests within 

the Coos Bay District; six of the species have significant declining regional population trends 

(Table 7). 

Of the 23 species with habitats and habitat attributes designated in the Lowland and Valleys 

Conservation Strategy, habitat attributes for the focal species yellow-breasted chat will be most 

affected with the loss of 12.47 acres of clearcut or regenerating forest within Riparian Reserves 

which is assumed to correspond to loss of Riparian Shrub-dense shrub layer. Similarly, the 

wrentit is a focal species for Riparian Woodland-dense shrub understory and removal of 11.03 

acres in late successional-old growth and mid-seral forests (Westside Lowland ConiferHardwood Forest, Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands) within Riparian 

Reserves is assumed to affect habitat attributes for the wrentit (see Table 7). However, both the 

yellow-breasted chat and wrentit have general associations with the habitats affected by 

construction and neither species’ regional population is declining. 

For the focal landbirds within the Coniferous Forest Conservation Strategy, five bird species 

(hermit warbler, Pacific-slope flycatcher, Hammond’s flycatcher, Wilson’s warbler, and winter 

wren) with habitats and habitat attributes within the Mature/Young Forest successional stages 

will be most affected by construction with loss of 31.39 acres of mid-seral and 82.02 acres of 

clearcut-regenerating Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest and 0.59 acres of mid-seral 

Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands. Species with close associations to 

those affected habitats are assumed to be more affected than species with general associations 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). In addition, regional populations of Pacific-slope flycatcher, 

Hammond’s flycatcher and Wilson’s warbler are declining the removal of 114.00 total acres of 

habitat is likely to have greater impact to those species locally than to species with stable or 

increasing regional populations. 

One approach for evaluating potential project effects to focal landbird species involves 

comparing the area of habitat affected relative to a species’ home range. Home range areas of 

most landbird species in Table 7 have been reported by Johnson and O’Neil (2001). Most 

passerine birds have home ranges of about 10 hectares (25 acres) although some species’ 

home ranges are less than 1 ha (<2.5 acres). Home ranges of raptors vary from 50 ha (124 

acres for American kestrel) to over 10,000 ha (>24,710 acres for northern harriers). If the 

project affects less area than one home range, effects are assumed to be insignificant for that 

species. If more area than that required for one home range will be impacted by the project, 

then the project may effect biological objectives in the Conservation Strategy (see Appendix A 

or Appendix B) for that species. Species for which home range sizes are unknown (Johnson 

and O’Neil, 2001) are assumed to have home ranges similar in size to those of related species. 

H-108
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 13

Species with declining regional population trends are likely to be more affected than species 

with stable or increasing populations but that assumption is not further evaluated here. 

One overall Biological Objective for each of the habitats covered under any of the OregonWashington PIF Conservation Strategies is no net loss of the given habitat type. To partially 

achieve that objective, Pacific Connector will be restoring some portions of impacted habitats by 

revegetating with native species of grasses and shrubs, and replanting conifers within affected 

forested areas. Restoration of grasslands, shrublands, and early successional forest stages will 

occur within shorter time spans than restoration of mid-seral forests. In some cases, Pacific 

Connector will enhance or create habitat features through, for example, girdling trees to create 

snags and will be supporting agencies’ treatments of forested stands through pre-commercial 

thinning projects that may enhance forest understories and accelerate development of late 

successional growth characteristics in treated conifer stands. 

Pacific Connector must retain a maintenance corridor that is 30 feet wide centered on the 

pipeline. That corridor will be maintained in an herbaceous state during the life of the project. 

Within the Coos Bay District, 14.54 acres of mid-seral Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest and Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands will be permanently 

affected as will 30.73 acres of clearcut-regenerating forest, 0.20 acre of Westside Grasslands, 

0.01 acre of Herbaceous Wetlands, and 0.22 acre of Westside Riparian Wetlands. On the other 

hand, Pacific Connector will restore 17.44 acres of mid-seral forest and woodlands, 51.29 acres 

of clearcut-regenerating forest, 0.76 acre of Westside Grasslands and 0.23 acre of Westside 

Riparian Wetlands within the Coos Bay District. Although restoration will occur within a portion 

of the affected areas, there will be a net loss of these habitats. However, the Compensatory 

Mitigation Plan (CMP) will compensate for habitat lost through various USFS and BLM projects. 

Direct restoration of late successional-old growth forests >80 years old cannot occur during the 

life of the project, assumed to be 50 years. The CMP will describe mitigation for losses of late 

successional-old growth forests. Based on an evaluation of effects to habitats for species listed 

under the Endangered Species Act and land allocations (Late Successional Reserves and 

Riparian Reserves) defined under the Northwest Forest Plan, Pacific Connector will remove 

26.66 acres of Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest that is classified as late 

successional-old growth forest and 0.01 acre late seral stage Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir 

Forest and Woodlands within the BLM Coos Bay District. Those areas will be compensated for 

as described in the PCGP Project Compensatory Mitigation Plan. Although specific amounts 

(acres), forest class characteristics and location(s) of compensatory locations have been 

established, the specific habitat descriptions are not yet available. 

H-109
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

Table 7 

Areas of Habitats Affected by Construction of the PCGP Project within the BLM Coos Bay District that Are Assum

Habitats and Habitat Attributes Defined for Focal Landbird Species 

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affecte

Proposed Action 7 

Habitat Habitat Attribute 

Focal Landbird 

Species 

Population

Trend 

1966-2007 

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest 4, 5, 6

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest and 

Woodlands4, 5, 6

Westside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands 

Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000a)

Large patches Western Meadowlark Decreasing 1 N/A N/A 0.96 N/A N/A Short grass-bare ground Common Nighthawk Decreasing 1 N/A N/A 0.96 N/A N/A Moderate-tall grass Grasshopper Sparrow N/A N/A 0.96 N/A N/A Burrows Burrowing Owl N/A N/A 0.96 N/A N/A 

Oregon Vesper Sparrow N/A N/A 0.96 N/A N/A 

Scattered shrubs 

Lark Sparrow N/A N/A 0.96 N/A N/A 

Grassland 

Wet prairie/grassland Northern Harrier N/A N/A 0.96 N/A N/A 

Large oaks-cavities Western Screech Owl N/A 0.016 0.96 N/A N/A 

Savanna

Large conifer trees Lewis’s Woodpecker N/A 0.016 0.96 N/A N/A Large patches, large oaks 

White-breasted 

Nuthatch N/A 0.016 N/A N/A N/A 

Large oaks-cavities Ash-throated Flycatcher Decreasing 1 N/A 0.016 N/A N/A N/A Canopy edges and openings Western Wood-pewee N/A 0.595 0.016 N/A N/A N/A Young (subcanopy) oaks Bushtit Decreasing 1 N/A 0.595 0.016 N/A N/A N/A 

Oak Woodland 

Herbaceous cover Chipping Sparrow Decreasing 1 N/A 0.595 0.016 N/A N/A N/A 

Riparian-Open 

Water Snags Purple Martin Decreasing 1 3.116 0.016 N/A 0.01 0.45 

H-110
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affecte

Proposed Action 7 

Habitat Habitat Attribute 

Focal Landbird 

Species 

Population

Trend 

1966-2007 

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest 4, 5, 6

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest and 

Woodlands4, 5, 6

Westside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands 

Riparian-Open 

Water Snags Tree Swallow 3.116 0.016 N/A 0.01 0.45 

Riparian Shrub Dense shrub layer Yellow-breasted Chat 12.024 N/A N/A N/A 0.45 

Large canopy trees Bullock’s Oriole Decreasing 1 3.116 0.016 N/A N/A 0.45 Subcanopy, tall shrub foliage Yellow Warbler 6.975 3.116 0.945 0.016 N/A N/A 0.45 Dense shrub understory Wrentit 6.975 3.116 0.945 0.016 N/A N/A 0.45 Snags Downy Woodpecker 3.116 0.016 N/A N/A 0.45 

Red-shouldered Hawk Decreasing 1 3.116 0.016 N/A N/A 0.45 

Riparian 

Woodland 

Large, structurally diverse patches Cooper’s Hawk 3.116 0.016 N/A N/A 0.45 

Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 1999)

Old-Growth 

Forest Large snags Vaux’s Swift 26.666 0.016 N/A N/A N/A 

Large trees Brown Creeper 31.395 26.666 0.595 0.016 N/A N/A N/A 

Old- Growth/Mature 

Forest Conifer trees Red Crossbill 31.395 26.666 0.595 0.016 N/A N/A N/A 

Large snags Pileated Woodpecker 31.395 26.666 0.595 0.016 N/A N/A N/A 

Mature Forest 

Mid-story tree layers Varied Thrush 31.395 0.595 N/A N/A N/A 

Closed canopy Hermit Warbler 82.024 31.395 0.595 N/A N/A N/A Deciduous canopy trees Pacific-slope Flycatcher Decreasing 2 82.024 31.395 0.595 N/A N/A N/A Open mid-story Hammond’s Flycatcher Decreasing 3 82.024 31.395 0.595 N/A N/A N/A 

Mature/Young 

Forest 

Deciduous understory Wilson’s Warbler Decreasing 3 82.024 31.395 0.595 N/A N/A N/A 

H-111
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affecte

Proposed Action 7 

Habitat Habitat Attribute 

Focal Landbird 

Species 

Population

Trend 

1966-2007 

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest 4, 5, 6

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest and 

Woodlands4, 5, 6

Westside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands 

Mature/Young 

Forest Forest floor complexity Winter Wren 82.024 31.395 0.595 N/A N/A N/A 

Young/Pole 

Forest 

Deciduous canopy trees 

Black-throated Gray 

Warbler 82.025 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Pole Forest Deciduous subcanopy/ understory Hutton’s Vireo 82.025 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Residual canopy trees Olive-sided Flycatcher Decreasing 2 82.025 N/A N/A N/A N/A Snags Western Bluebird 82.025 N/A N/A N/A N/A Deciduous vegetation Orange-crowned Warbler Decreasing 3 82.025 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Early-Seral 

Forest 

Nectar producing plants Rufous Hummingbird Decreasing 2 82.025 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

1 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Southern Pacific Rainforest Physiographic Region. 2 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Southern Pacific Rainforest and Cascade Mountain3 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in Southern Pacific Rainforest or Cascade Mountains Phy4 Clearcut and/or Regenerating Forests ≤40 years old. 5 Mid-Seral Forests ≥40 but ≤80 years old. 6 Late Successional and/or Old Growth Forests ≥80 years old. 7 N/A indicates that the Habitat and Habitat Attribute for a specific Focal Landbird Species has no equivalence to Unaltered Habitats Affect

Shading of Areas (acres) indicate the following: 

• No shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a Close Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Light gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a General Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Dark gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is only Present within that Unaltered Habitat • Black shading indicates the indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is Not Associated with that Unaltered Habitat although habitat 

be present. Those affected areas are not included in the Total Potential Habitat Affected. 8 Potential Effect on Species’ Biological Objectives based on whether the Total Potential Habitat Affected is less than one home range (Ins

one home range (May Affect) for each of the focal landbird species (home range areas provided in Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Biologica

Strategies for “No Net Loss” are achieved through mitigation: restoring the affected habitat (Restored), enhancing specific habitat featur(Enhanced), or compensating for loss of habitat (Compensated), particularly late successional-old growth forests >80 years old which is Connector’s Compensatory Mitigation Plan. 

H-112
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 17

2.2 Bureau of Land Management – Roseburg District 

There are six habitat types–Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest, Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands, 

Shrub Steppe, Westside Grasslands, and Westside Riparian-Wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001)–within the Roseburg District that will be affected by the Proposed Action. Those six 

habitat types described by Johnson and O’Neil (2001) are assumed to provide habitats and 

habitat attributes that are important for conserving focal landbirds designated in the Lowlands 

and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington Conservation Strategy (Altman, 2000a) and 

Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and Washington Conservation Strategy (Altman, 1999). 

Twenty-one focal landbird species in lowlands and valleys are likely to be affected by habitat 

removal during construction of the PCGP Project, and two additional species will have no 

habitat removed (Table 8). Seven of the species likely to be affected by habitat removal are 

known to have significant (P<0.10) declining regional population trends according to recent 

estimates (Sauer et al., 2008). Sixteen other species may be similarly affected by habitat 

removal in various successional stages of coniferous forests within the Roseburg District. Of 

those, six have significant declining regional population trends (Table 8). 

Of the 23 species with habitats and habitat attributes designated in the Lowland and Valleys 

Conservation Strategy, habitat attributes for the focal species wrentit will be most affected, with 

the loss of 8.68 acres of Riparian Woodland-dense shrub understory (Table 8). For focal 

landbirds within the Coniferous Forest Conservation Strategy, three bird species (brown 

creeper, red crossbill and pileated woodpecker) with habitats and habitat attributes within the 

Old Growth/Mature Forest successional stages will be most affected by construction, with a loss 

of 1.38 acres of mid-seral Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest, 27.36 acres of mid-seral 

and 106.70 acres of late successional-old growth Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest, and 0.38 acre of Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest (Table 8). None of those 

three species is closely associated with any of the affect habitat types, however. Species with 

close associations to those affected habitats are assumed to be more affected than species with 

general associations (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). In addition, none of the three species has 

declining regional populations. It is assumed that loss of habitat for species with declining 

populations is likely to have greater impact locally than effects due to similar loss of habitat for 

species with stable or increasing regional populations. 

One approach for evaluating potential project effects to focal landbird species involves 

comparing the area of habitat affected relative to a species’ home range. Home range areas of 

most landbird species in Table 8 have been reported by Johnson and O’Neil (2001). Most 

passerine birds have home ranges of about 10 hectares (25 acres) although some species’ 

home ranges are less than 1 ha (<2.5 acres). Home ranges of raptors vary from 50 ha (124 

acres for American kestrel) to over 10,000 ha (>24,710 acres for northern harriers). If the 

project affects less area than one home range, effects are assumed to be insignificant for that 

species. If more area than that required for one home range will be impacted by the project, 

then the project may effect biological objectives in the Conservation Strategy (see Appendix A 

or Appendix B) for that species. Species for which home range sizes are unknown (Johnson 

and O’Neil, 2001) are assumed to have home ranges similar in size to those of related species. 

Species with declining regional population trends are likely to be more affected than species 

with stable or increasing populations but that assumption is not further evaluated here. 

H-113
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 18

One overall Biological Objective for each of the habitats covered under any of the OregonWashington PIF Conservation Strategies is no net loss of the given habitat type. To partially 

achieve that objective, Pacific Connector will be restoring some portions of impacted habitats by 

revegetating with native species of grasses and shrubs, and replanting conifers within affected 

forested areas. Restoration of grasslands, shrublands, and early successional forest stages will 

occur within shorter time spans than restoration of mid-seral forests. In some cases, Pacific 

Connector will enhance or create habitat features, such as girdling trees to create snags, and 

will be supporting agencies’ treatments of forested stands through pre-commercial thinning 

projects that may enhance forest understories and accelerate development of late successional 

growth characteristics in treated conifer stands. 

Pacific Connector must retain a maintenance corridor that is 30 feet wide centered on the 

pipeline. That corridor will be maintained in an herbaceous state during the life of the project. 

Within the Roseburg District, 6.20 acres of mid-seral Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest, Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir 

Forest and Woodlands will be permanently affected, as will 21.73 acres of clearcut-regenerating 

forest, 0.22 acre of Shrub Steppe, 1.17 acres of Westside Grasslands, and 0.17 acre of 

Westside Riparian Wetlands. On the other hand, Pacific Connector will restore 18.31 acres of 

mid-seral forest and woodlands, 55.89 acres of clearcut-regenerating forest, 0.98 acre of Shrub 

Steppe, 3.00 acres of Westside Grasslands and 0.12 acre of Westside Riparian Wetlands within 

the Roseburg District. Although restoration will occur within a portion of the affected areas, 

there will be a net loss of these habitats. 

Direct restoration of late successional-old growth forests >80 years old cannot occur during the 

life of the project, assumed to be 50 years. The CMP will describe mitigation for losses of late 

successional-old growth forests. Based on an evaluation of effects to habitats for species listed 

under the Endangered Species Act and land allocations (Late Successional Reserves and 

Riparian Reserves) defined under the Northwest Forest Plan, Pacific Connector will remove 

106.70 acres of Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest that is classified as late 

successional-old growth forest within the BLM Roseburg District. Those areas will be 

compensated for as described in the PCGP Project Compensatory Mitigation Plan. Although 

specific amounts (acres), forest class characteristics and location(s) of compensatory locations 

have been established, the specific habitat descriptions are not yet available. 

H-114
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

19

Table 8 

Areas of Habitats Affected by Construction of the PCGP Project within the BLM Roseburg District that Are Assum

Habitats and Habitat Attributes Defined for Focal Landbird Species 

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affecte

Proposed Action 7

Habitat Habitat Attribute

Focal Landbird 

Species

Population 

Trend 

1966-2007 

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest 4,, 5, 6

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4,, 5, 6

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest and 

Woodlands 4,, 5, 6

Shrub-steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Westside RiparianWetlands 

Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000a)

Large patches Western Meadowlark Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A 0.46 3.36 0.2Short grass-bare ground Common Nighthawk Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A 0.46 3.36 0.2Moderate-tall grass Grasshopper Sparrow N/A N/A N/A 0.46 3.36 0.2Burrows Burrowing Owl N/A N/A N/A 0.46 3.36 0.2

Oregon Vesper Sparrow N/A N/A N/A 0.46 3.36 0.2

Scattered shrubs 

Lark Sparrow N/A N/A N/A 0.46 3.36 0.2

Grassland 

Wet prairie/grassland Northern Harrier N/A N/A N/A 0.46 3.36 0.2

Large oaks-cavities Western Screech Owl N/A N/A N/A 0.46 3.36 0.2

Savanna

Large conifer trees Lewis’s Woodpecker N/A N/A N/A 0.46 3.36 0.2Large patches, large oaks 

White-breasted 

Nuthatch N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Large oaks-cavities Ash-throated Flycatcher Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Canopy edges and openings Western Wood-pewee N/A N/A 0.385 N/A N/A N/A Young (subcanopy) oaks Bushtit Decreasing 1 N/A N/A 0.385 N/A N/A N/A 

Oak Woodland 

Herbaceous cover Chipping Sparrow Decreasing 1 N/A N/A 0.385 N/A N/A N/A 

Riparian-Open 

Water Snags Purple Martin Decreasing 1 N/A 1.976 N/A N/A N/A 0.2

H-115
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

20

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affecte

Proposed Action 7

Habitat Habitat Attribute

Focal Landbird 

Species

Population 

Trend 

1966-2007 

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest 4,, 5, 6

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4,, 5, 6

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest and 

Woodlands 4,, 5, 6

Shrub-steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Westside RiparianWetlands 

Riparian-Open 

Water Snags Tree Swallow N/A 1.976 N/A N/A N/A 0.2

Riparian shrub Dense shrub layer Yellow-breasted Chat N/A 3.064 N/A N/A N/A 0.2

Large canopy trees Bullock’s Oriole Decreasing 1 N/A 1.976 N/A N/A N/A 0.2Subcanopy, tall shrub foliage Yellow Warbler N/A 6.425 1.976 N/A N/A N/A 0.2Dense shrub understory Wrentit N/A 6.425 1.976 N/A N/A N/A 0.2Snags Downy Woodpecker N/A 1.976 N/A N/A N/A 0.2

Red-shouldered Hawk Decreasing 1 N/A 1.976 N/A N/A N/A 0.2

Riparian 

woodland 

Large, structurally diverse patches Cooper’s Hawk N/A 1.976 N/A N/A N/A 0.2

Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 1999)

Old-Growth 

Forest Large snags Vaux’s Swift N/A 106.706 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Large trees Brown Creeper 1.385 27.365 106.706 0.385 N/A N/A N/A 

Old- Growth/Mature 

Forest Conifer trees Red Crossbill 1.385 27.365 106.706 0.385 N/A N/A N/A 

Large snags Pileated Woodpecker 1.385 27.365 106.706 0.385 N/A N/A N/A 

Mature Forest 

Mid-story tree layers Varied Thrush 1.385 27.365 0.385 N/A N/A N/A 

Closed canopy Hermit Warbler 1.654 1.385 75.974 27.365 0.385 N/A N/A N/A Deciduous canopy trees Pacific-slope Flycatcher Decreasing 2 1.654 1.385 75.974 27.365 0.385 N/A N/A N/A Open mid-story Hammond’s Flycatcher Decreasing 3 1.654 1.385 75.974 27.365 0.385 N/A N/A N/A 

Mature/Young 

Forest 

Deciduous understory Wilson’s Warbler Decreasing 3 1.654 1.385 75.974 27.365 0.385 N/A N/A N/A 

H-116
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

21

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affecte

Proposed Action 7

Habitat Habitat Attribute

Focal Landbird 

Species

Population 

Trend 

1966-2007 

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest 4,, 5, 6

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4,, 5, 6

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest and 

Woodlands 4,, 5, 6

Shrub-steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Westside RiparianWetlands 

Mature/Young 

Forest Forest floor complexity Winter Wren 1.654 1.385 75.974 27.365 0.385 N/A N/A N/A 

Young/Pole 

Forest Deciduous canopy trees Black-throated Gray Warbler 1.654 75.974 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Pole Forest Deciduous subcanopy/ understory Hutton’s Vireo 1.654 75.974 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Residual canopy trees Olive-sided Flycatcher Decreasing 2 1.654 75.974 N/A N/A N/A N/A Snags Western Bluebird 1.654 75.974 N/A N/A N/A N/A Deciduous vegetation Orange-crowned Warbler Decreasing 3 1.654 75.974 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Early-Seral 

Forest 

Nectar producing plants Rufous Hummingbird Decreasing 2 1.654 75.974 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

1 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Southern Pacific Rainforest Physiographic Region. 2 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Southern Pacific Rainforest and Cascade Mountains P3 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in Southern Pacific Rainforest or Cascade Mountains Physio4 Clearcut and/or Regenerating Forests ≤40 years old. 5 Mid-Seral Forests ≥40 but ≤80 years old. 6 Late Successional and/or Old Growth Forests ≥80 years old. 7 N/A indicates that the Habitat and Habitat Attribute for a specific Focal Landbird Species has no equivalence to Unaltered Habitats Affected 

Shading of Areas (acres) indicate the following: 

• No shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a Close Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Light gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a General Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Dark gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is only Present within that Unaltered Habitat • Black shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is Not Associated with that Unaltered Habitat although habitat attributes are p

included in the Total Potential Habitat Affected. 

8 Potential Effect on Species’ Biological Objectives based on whether the Total Potential Habitat Affected is less than one home range (Insign

home range (May Affect) for each of the focal landbird species (home range areas provided in Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Biological objectfor “No Net Loss” are achieved through mitigation: restoring the affected habitat (Restored), enhancing specific habitat features such as sna

compensating for loss of habitat (Compensated), particularly late successional-old growth forests >80 years old which is addressed in Pacif

Mitigation Plan. 

H-117
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 22 

2.3 Bureau of Land Management – Medford District 

There are eight habitat types–Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest, Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, Westside Oak and 

Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands, Shrub Steppe, Westside Grasslands, Herbaceous 

Wetlands and Westside Riparian-Wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001)–within the Medford 

District that will be affected by the Proposed Action. Those eight habitat types described by 

Johnson and O’Neil (2001) are assumed to provide habitats and habitat attributes that are 

important for conserving focal landbirds designated in the Lowlands and Valleys of Western 

Oregon and Washington Conservation Strategy (Altman, 2000a) and Coniferous Forests of 

Western Oregon and Washington Conservation Strategy (Altman, 1999). 

Twenty-three focal landbird species in lowlands and valleys are likely to be affected by habitat 

removal during construction of the PCGP Project (Table 9). Eight of those species are known to 

have significant (P<0.10) declining regional population trends according to recent estimates 

(Sauer et al., 2008). Sixteen other species may be similarly affected by habitat removal in 

various successional stages of coniferous forests within the Medford District. Of those, six have 

significant declining regional population trends (Table 9). 

Of the 23 species with habitats and habitat attributes designated in the Lowland and Valleys 

Conservation Strategy, habitat attributes for the Lewis’s woodpecker will be most affected, with 

the loss of 31.35 acres of late successional-old growth Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands and 26.05 acres of Westside Grasslands (Table 9) that are assumed to 

correspond to Savanna–large oaks-cavities habitats. 

For focal landbirds species within the Coniferous Forest Conservation Strategy, three species 

(brown creeper, red crossbill and pileated woodpecker) with habitats and habitat attributes 

within the Old Growth/Mature Forest successional stages will be most affected by construction, 

with loss of 7.74 acres of mid-seral and 4.52 acres of late successional-old growth Westside 

Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest, 20.85 acres of mid-seral and 50.36 acres of late 

successional-old growth Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, 8.32 acres of midseral and 25.75 acres of late successional-old growth Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, 

and 0.83 acre of mid-seral and 31.36 acres of late successional-old growth Westside Lowland 

Conifer-Hardwood Forest (Table 9). None of those three species is closely associated with any 

of the affect habitat types, however. Species with close associations to those affected habitats 

are assumed to be more affected than species with general associations (Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001). In addition, none of the three species has declining regional populations. It is assumed 

that loss of habitat for species with declining populations is likely to have greater impact locally 

than effect due to similar loss of habitat for species with stable or increasing regional 

populations. 

One approach for evaluating potential project effects to focal landbird species involves 

comparing the area of habitat affected relative to a species’ home range. Home range areas of 

most landbird species in Table 9 have been reported by Johnson and O’Neil (2001). Most 

passerine birds have home ranges of about 10 hectares (25 acres), although some species’ 

home ranges are less than 1 ha (<2.5 acres). Home ranges of raptors vary from 50 ha (124 

acres for American kestrel) to over 10,000 ha (>24,710 acres for northern harriers). If the 

project affects less area than one home range, effects are assumed to be insignificant for that 

species. If more area than that required for one home range will be impacted by the project, 

then the project may effect biological objectives in the Conservation Strategy (see Appendix A 

H-118
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 23 

or Appendix B) for that species. Species for which home range sizes are unknown (Johnson 

and O’Neil, 2001) are assumed to have home ranges similar in size to those of related species. 

Species with declining regional population trends are likely to be more affected than species 

with stable or increasing populations but that assumption is not further evaluated here. 

One overall Biological Objective for each of the habitats covered under any of the OregonWashington PIF Conservation Strategies is no net loss of the given habitat type. To partially 

achieve that objective, Pacific Connector will be restoring some portions of impacted habitats by 

revegetating with native species of grasses and shrubs, and replanting conifers within affected 

forested areas. Restoration of grasslands, shrublands, and early successional forest stages will 

occur within shorter time spans than restoration of mid-seral forests. In some cases, Pacific 

Connector will enhance or create habitat features, such as girdling trees to create snags, and 

will be supporting agencies’ treatments of forested stands through pre-commercial thinning 

projects that may enhance forest understories and accelerate development of late successional 

growth characteristics in treated conifer stands. 

Pacific Connector must retain a maintenance corridor, 30 feet wide centered on the pipeline. 

That corridor will be maintained in an herbaceous state during the life of the project. Within the 

Medford District, 14.82 acres of mid-seral forests (Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest, 

Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, 

Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands) will be permanently affected as will 

14.54 acres of clearcut-regenerating forest, 5.66 acre of Shrub Steppe, 8.84 acres of Westside 

Grasslands, and 0.03 acre of Westside Riparian Wetlands. On the other hand, Pacific 

Connector will restore 23.12 acres of mid-seral forest and woodlands, 25.15 acres of clearcutregenerating forest, 14.74 acres of Shrub Steppe, 0.18 acre of Herbaceous Wetland and 0.03 

acre of Westside Riparian Wetlands within the Medford District. Although restoration will occur 

within a portion of the affected areas, there will be a net loss of these habitats. 

Direct restoration of late successional-old growth forests >80 years old cannot occur during the 

life of the project, assumed to be 50 years. The CMP will describe mitigation for losses of late 

successional-old growth forests. Based on an evaluation of effects to habitats for species listed 

under the Endangered Species Act and land allocations (Late Successional Reserves and 

Riparian Reserves) defined under the Northwest Forest Plan, Pacific Connector will remove 

4.52 acres of Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest, 50.36 acres of Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, 25.75 acres of Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, and 

31.36 acres of Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands that are classified as 

late successional-old growth forest within the BLM Medford District. That area will be 

compensated for, although specific amounts, characteristics, and location(s) of compensatory 

habitat have not yet been established. 

H-119
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

24

Table 9 

Areas of Habitats Affected by Construction of the PCGP Project within the BLM Medford District that Are Assum

Habitats and Habitat Attributes Defined for Focal Landbird Species 

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affected by The Propose

Habitat Habitat Attribute

Focal 

Landbird 

Species

Population

Trend 

1966-2007

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest 4, 5, 6

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4, 5, 6

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 4, 5, 6

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 4, 5, 6

Shrub-steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000a

Large patches Western Meadowlark Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.92 26.05 0.18 Short grass-bare ground 

Common 

Nighthawk Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.92 26.05 0.18 

Moderate-tall grass 

Grasshopper 

Sparrow N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.92 26.05 0.18 

Burrows Burrowing Owl N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.92 26.05 0.18 

Oregon Vesper 

Sparrow N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.92 26.05 0.18 

Scattered shrubs 

Lark Sparrow N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.92 26.05 0.18 

Grassland 

Wet prairie/grassland 

Northern 

Harrier N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.92 26.05 0.18 

Large oakscavities Western Screech Owl N/A N/A N/A 31.356 18.92 26.05 0.18 

Savanna

Large conifer trees Lewis’s Woodpecker N/A N/A N/A 31.356 18.92 26.05 0.18 Large patches, large oaks 

White-breasted 

Nuthatch N/A N/A N/A 31.356 N/A N/A N/A 

Large oakscavities Ash-throated Flycatcher Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A 31.356 N/A N/A N/A Canopy edges and openings 

Western Woodpewee N/A N/A N/A 0.835 31.356 N/A N/A N/A 

Young (subcanopy) oaks Bushtit Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A 0.835 31.356 N/A N/A N/A 

Oak Woodland 

Herbaceous cover Chipping Sparrow Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A 0.835 31.356 N/A N/A N/A 

Purple Martin Decreasing 1 2.986 6.036 0.186 0.766 N/A N/A 0.18 

Riparian-Open 

Water Snags Tree Swallow 2.986 6.036 0.186 0.766 N/A N/A 0.18 

H-120
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

25

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affected by The Propose

Habitat Habitat Attribute

Focal 

Landbird 

Species

Population

Trend 

1966-2007

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest 4, 5, 6

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4, 5, 6

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 4, 5, 6

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 4, 5, 6

Shrub-steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Riparian shrub Dense shrub layer Yellow- breasted Chat N/A 3.194 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Large canopy trees Bullock’s Oriole Decreasing 1 2.986 6.036 0.186 0.766 N/A N/A N/A Subcanopy, tall shrub foliage Yellow Warbler 0.345 2.986 0.175 6.036 1.586 0.186 0.766 N/A N/A N/A Dense shrub understory Wrentit 0.345 2.986 0.175 6.036 1.586 0.186 0.766 N/A N/A N/A Snags Downy Woodpecker 2.986 6.036 0.186 0.766 N/A N/A N/A 

Red-shouldered 

Hawk Decreasing 1 2.986 6.036 0.186 0.766 N/A N/A N/A 

Riparian 

woodland 

Large, structurally diverse patches Cooper’s Hawk 2.986 6.036 0.186 0.766 N/A N/A N/A 

Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 1999)

Old-Growth 

Forest Large snags Vaux’s Swift 4.527 50.367 25.757 31.367 N/A N/A N/A 

Large trees Brown Creeper 7.946 4.527 20.856 50.367 8.326 25.757 0.836 31.367 N/A N/A N/A 

Old- Growth/Mature 

Forest Conifer trees Red Crossbill 7.946 4.527 20.856 50.367 8.326 25.757 0.836 31.367 N/A N/A N/A 

Large snags Pileated Woodpecker 7.946 4.527 20.856 50.367 8.326 25.757 0.836 31.367 N/A N/A N/A 

Mature Forest Mid-story tree 

layers Varied Thrush 7.946 20.856 8.326 0.836 N/A N/A N/A 

Closed canopy Hermit Warbler 7.946 36.095 20.856 3.605 8.326 0.836 N/A N/A N/A 

Deciduous canopy 

trees 

Pacific-slope 

Flycatcher Decreasing 2 7.946 36.095 20.856 3.605 8.326 0.836 N/A N/A N/A 

Open mid-story Hammond’s Flycatcher Decreasing 3 7.946 36.095 20.856 3.605 8.326 0.836 N/A N/A N/A 

Deciduous understory 

Wilson’s 

Warbler Decreasing 3 7.946 36.095 20.856 3.605 8.326 0.836 N/A N/A N/A 

Mature/Young 

Forest 

Forest floor complexity Winter wren 7.946 36.095 20.856 3.65 8.326 0.836 N/A N/A N/A 

Young/Pole 

Forest 

Deciduous canopy trees 

Black-throated 

Gray Warbler N/A 36.095 3.605 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

H-121
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

26

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affected by The Propose

Habitat Habitat Attribute

Focal 

Landbird 

Species

Population

Trend 

1966-2007

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest 4, 5, 6

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4, 5, 6

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 4, 5, 6

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 4, 5, 6

Shrub-steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Pole Forest 

Deciduous subcanopy/ understory 

Hutton’s Vireo N/A 36.095 3.605 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Residual canopy trees 

Olive-sided 

Flycatcher Decreasing 2 N/A 36.095 3.605 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Snags Western Bluebird N/A 36.095 3.605 N/A N/A N/A N/A Deciduous vegetation 

Orangecrowned 

Warbler 

Decreasing 3 N/A 36.095 3.605 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Early-Seral 

Forest 

Nectar producing plants 

Rufous 

Hummingbird Decreasing 2 N/A 36.095 3.605 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

1 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Southern Pacific Rainforest Physiographic Region. 2 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Southern Pacific Rainforest and Cascade Mountains Phys3 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in Southern Pacific Rainforest or Cascade Mountains Physiograp4 Clearcut and/or Regenerating Forests ≤40 years old. 5 Mid-Seral Forests ≥40 but ≤80 years old. 6 Late Successional and/or Old Growth Forests ≥80 years old. 7 N/A indicates that the Habitat and Habitat Attribute for a specific Focal Landbird Species has no equivalence to Unaltered Habitats Affected by th

Areas (acres) indicate the following: 

• No shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a Close Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Light gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a General Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Dark gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is only Present within that Unaltered Habitat • Black shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is Not Associated with that Unaltered Habitat although habitat attributes are prese

the Total Potential Habitat Affected. 

8 Potential Effect on Species’ Biological Objectives based on whether the Total Potential Habitat Affected is less than one home range (Insignifica

(May Affect) for each of the focal landbird species (home range areas provided in Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Biological objectives in Conserva

are achieved through mitigation: restoring the affected habitat (Restored), enhancing specific habitat features such as snag creation (Enhancedhabitat (Compensated), particularly late successional-old growth forests >80 years old which is addressed in Pacific Connector’s Compensatory 

H-122
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 27 

2.4 Bureau of Land Management – Lakeview District 

There are three habitat types–Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany Woodlands and Eastside Grasslands (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001)–within 

the Lakeview District that will be affected by the Proposed Action. Those three habitat types 

described by Johnson and O’Neil (2001) are assumed to provide habitats and habitat attributes 

important for conserving focal landbirds designated in the East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains 

in Oregon and Washington Conservation Strategy (Altman, 2000b). 

Six focal landbird species in east-slope Cascades are likely to be affected by habitat removal 

during construction of the PCGP Project (Table 10). One additional species (brown creeper) is 

known to have a significant (P<0.10) declining regional population trend according to recent 

estimates (Sauer et al., 2008). Although late successional-old growth Ponderosa Pine Forest 

and Woodlands is assumed to provide large trees in a mixed conifer habitat (Table 10), brown 

creepers have no association with that habitat type (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Consequently, 

they would not be affected by the Proposed Action. 

One approach for evaluating potential project effects to focal landbird species involves 

comparing the area of habitat affected relative to a species’ home range. Home range areas of 

most landbird species in Table 10 have been reported by Johnson and O’Neil (2001). Most 

passerine birds have home ranges of about 10 hectares (25 acres) although some species’ 

home ranges are less than 1 ha (<2.5 acres). Home ranges of raptors and woodpeckers are 

larger; flammulated owls home range is 50 ha (124 acres), while the home range of whiteheaded woodpeckers is 500 ha (1,235 acres). If the project affects less area than one home 

range, effects are assumed to be insignificant for that species. If more area than that required 

for one home range will be impacted by the project, then the project may effect biological 

objectives in the Conservation Strategy (see Appendix C) for that species. Species for which 

home range sizes are unknown (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) are assumed to have home ranges 

similar in size to those of related species. Species with declining regional population trends are 

likely to be more affected than species with stable or increasing populations but that assumption 

is not further evaluated here. 

One overall Biological Objective for each of the habitats covered under any of the OregonWashington PIF Conservation Strategies is no net loss of the given habitat type. To partially 

achieve that objective, Pacific Connector will be restoring some portions of impacted habitats by 

revegetating with native species of grasses and shrubs, and replanting conifers within affected 

forested areas. Restoration of grasslands, shrublands, and early successional forest stages will 

occur within shorter time spans than restoration of mid-seral forests. In some cases, Pacific 

Connector will enhance or create habitat features, such as girdling trees to create snags, and 

will be supporting agencies’ treatments of forested stands through pre-commercial thinning 

projects that may enhance forest understories and accelerate development of late successional 

growth characteristics in treated conifer stands. 

Pacific Connector must retain a maintenance corridor that is 30 feet wide centered on the 

pipeline. That corridor will be maintained in an herbaceous state during the life of the project. 

Within the Lakeview District, 6.05 acres of mid-seral Western Juniper and Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands will be permanently affected as will 0.16 acres of Eastside Grasslands. On the 

other hand, Pacific Connector will restore 1.84 acres of mid-seral forest and woodlands and 

0.24 acre of Eastside Grasslands within the Lakeview District. Although restoration will occur 

within a portion of the affected areas, there will be a net loss of these habitats. 

H-123
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 28 

Direct restoration of late successional-old growth forests >80 years old cannot occur during the 

life of the project, assumed to be 50 years. The CMP will describe mitigation for losses of late 

successional-old growth forests. Based on an evaluation of effects to habitats for species listed 

under the Endangered Species Act and land allocations (Late Successional Reserves and 

Riparian Reserves) defined under the Northwest Forest Plan, Pacific Connector will remove 

12.82 acres of Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands that are classified as 

late successional-old growth forest within the BLM Lakeview District. Those areas will be 

compensated for as described in the PCGP Project Compensatory Mitigation Plan. Although 

specific amounts (acres), forest class characteristics and location(s) of compensatory locations 

have been established, the specific habitat descriptions are not yet available. 

H-124
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

29

Table 10 

Areas of Habitats Affected by Construction of the PCGP Project within the BLM Lakeview District that Are Assum

Habitats and Habitat Attributes Defined for Focal Landbird Species 

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Af

The Proposed Action 5

Habitat Habitat Attribute Focal Landbird Species

Population

Trend 

1966-2007

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 2, 3, 4,

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 2, 3, 4,

Eastside Grasslands 

P

A

East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000b)

Old forest-large patches White-headed Woodpecker 12.824 N/A N/A Large trees Pygmy Nuthatch 12.824 N/A N/A 

Ponderosa Pine 

Open understoryregeneration Chipping Sparrow 12.824 N/A N/A Large trees Brown Creeper Decreasing 1 12.824 N/A N/A Large snags Williamson’s Sapsucker 12.824 N/A N/A Grassy openings, dense thickets Flammulated Owl 12.824 2.843 0.40 

Mixed Conifer 

Multi-layered, structural diverse Hermit Thrush 12.824 2.843 N/A 

1 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Cascade Mountains Physiographic Region. 2 Clearcut and/or Regenerating Forests ≤40 years old. 3 Mid-Seral Forests ≥40 but ≤80 years old. 4 Late Successional and/or Old Growth Forests ≥80 years old. 5 N/A indicates that the Habitat and Habitat Attribute for a specific Focal Landbird Species has no equivalence to Unaltered Habitats Affect

Shading of Areas (acres) indicate the following: 

• No shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a Close Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Light gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a General Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Dark gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is only Present within that Unaltered Habitat • Black shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is Not Associated with that Unaltered Habitat although habitat attributes are 

Those areas are not included in the Total Potential Habitat Affected. 

8 Potential Effect on Species’ Biological Objectives based on whether the Total Potential Habitat Affected is less than one home range (Ins

one home range (May Affect) for each of the focal landbird species (home range areas provided in Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Biologica

Strategies for “No Net Loss” are achieved through mitigation: restoring the affected habitat (Restored), enhancing specific habitat featur(Enhanced), or compensating for loss of habitat (Compensated), particularly late successional-old growth forests >80 years old which is Connector’s Compensatory Mitigation Plan. 

H-125
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 30 

2.5 USDA-Forest Service Umpqua National Forest 

There are two habitat types–Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest and Westside 

Riparian-Wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001)–within the Umpqua National Forest that will be 

affected by the Proposed Action. Those two habitat types described by Johnson and O’Neil 

(2001) are assumed to provide habitats and habitat attributes that are important for conserving 

focal landbirds designated in the Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington 

Conservation Strategy (Altman, 2000a) and Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and 

Washington Conservation Strategy (Altman, 1999). 

Fourteen focal landbird species in lowlands and valleys are likely to be affected by habitat 

removal during construction of the PCGP Project; ten additional species will have no habitat 

removed (Table 11). Four of the species likely to be affected by habitat removal are known to 

have significant (P<0.10) declining regional population trends, according to recent estimates 

(Sauer et al., 2008). Sixteen other species may be similarly affected by habitat removal in 

various successional stages of coniferous forests within the Umpqua National Forest. Of those, 

six have significant declining regional population trends (Table 11). 

Of the 23 species with habitats and habitat attributes designated in the Lowland and Valleys 

Conservation Strategy, habitat attributes for the focal species wrentit will be most affected, with 

the loss of 8.17 acres of Riparian Woodland-dense shrub understory (Table 11). For focal 

landbirds within the Coniferous Forest Conservation Strategy, three bird species (brown 

creeper, red crossbill and pileated woodpecker) with habitats and habitat attributes within the 

Old Growth/Mature Forest successional stages will be most affected by construction, with loss 

of 34.44 acres of mid-seral and 85.61 acres of late successional-old growth Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest (Table 11). None of those three species is closely associated 

with any of the affect habitat types, however. Species with close associations to those affected 

habitats are assumed to be more affected than species with general associations (Johnson and 

O’Neil, 2001). In addition, none of the three species has declining regional populations. It is 

assumed that loss of habitat for species with declining populations is likely to have greater 

impact locally than effect due to similar loss of habitat for species with stable or increasing 

regional populations. 

One approach for evaluating potential project effects to focal landbird species involves 

comparing the area of habitat affected relative to a species’ home range. Home range areas of 

most landbird species in Table 11 have been reported by Johnson and O’Neil (2001). Most 

passerine birds have home ranges of about 10 hectares (25 acres) although some species’ 

home ranges are less than 1 ha (<2.5 acres). Home ranges of raptors vary from 50 ha (124 

acres for American kestrel) to over 10,000 ha (>24,710 acres for northern harriers). If the 

project affects less area than one home range, effects are assumed to be insignificant for that 

species. If more area than that required for one home range will be impacted by the project, 

then the project may effect biological objectives in the Conservation Strategy (see Appendix A 

or Appendix B) for that species. Species for which home range sizes are unknown (Johnson 

and O’Neil, 2001) are assumed to have home ranges similar in size to those of related species. 

Species with declining regional population trends are likely to be more affected than species 

with stable or increasing populations but that assumption is not further evaluated here. 

One overall Biological Objective for each of the habitats covered under any of the OregonWashington PIF Conservation Strategies is no net loss of the given habitat type. To partially 

achieve that objective, Pacific Connector will be restoring some portions of impacted habitats by 

H-126
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 31 

revegetating with native species of grasses and shrubs, and replanting conifers within affected 

forested areas. Restoration of grasslands, shrublands, and early successional forest stages will 

occur within shorter time spans than restoration of mid-seral forests. In some cases, Pacific 

Connector will enhance or create habitat features, such as girdling trees to create snags, and 

will be supporting agencies’ treatments of forested stands through pre-commercial thinning 

projects that may enhance forest understories and accelerate development of late successional 

growth characteristics in treated conifer stands. 

Pacific Connector must retain a maintenance corridor that is 30 feet wide centered on the 

pipeline. That corridor will be maintained in an herbaceous state during the life of the project. 

Within the Umpqua National Forest, 12.32 acres of mid-seral Southwest Oregon Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest will be permanently affected, as will 12.77 acres of clearcut-regenerating 

forest and 0.01 acre of Westside Riparian Wetlands. On the other hand, Pacific Connector will 

restore 22.12 acres of mid-seral forest and woodlands, 17.35 acres of clearcut-regenerating 

forest and 0.08 acre of Westside Riparian Wetlands within the Umpqua National Forest. 

Although restoration will occur within a portion of the affected areas, there will be a net loss of 

these habitats. 

Direct restoration of late successional-old growth forests >80 years old cannot occur during the 

life of the project, assumed to be 50 years. The CMP will describe mitigation for losses of late 

successional-old growth forests. Based on an evaluation of effects to habitats for species listed 

under the Endangered Species Act and land allocations (Late Successional Reserves and 

Riparian Reserves) defined under the Northwest Forest Plan, Pacific Connector will remove 

85.61 acres of Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest that is classified as late 

successional-old growth forest within the Umpqua National Forest. Those areas will be 

compensated for as described in the PCGP Project Compensatory Mitigation Plan. Although 

specific amounts (acres), forest class characteristics and location(s) of compensatory locations 

have been established, the specific habitat descriptions are not yet available. 

H-127
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

32

Table 11 

Areas of Habitats Affected by Construction of the PCGP Project within the USDA-Forest Service Umpqua Natio

Assumed to Correspond to Habitats and Habitat Attributes Defined for Focal Landbird Specie

Areas (acres) of Unaltered 

Affected by The Proposed 

Habitat Habitat Attribute Focal Landbird Species 

Population 

Trend 

1966-2007 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4, 5, 6

Westside RiparianWetlands 

P

A

Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000a)

Large patches Western Meadowlark Decreasing 1 N/A N/A Short grass-bare ground Common Nighthawk Decreasing 1 N/A 0.09 Moderate-tall grass Grasshopper Sparrow N/A N/A Burrows Burrowing Owl N/A N/A 

Oregon vesper Sparrow N/A N/A 

Scattered shrubs Lark Sparrow N/A N/A 

Grassland 

Wet prairie/grassland Northern Harrier N/A 0.09 

Large oaks-cavities Western Screech Owl 3.486 0.09 

Savanna 

Large conifer trees Lewis’s Woodpecker 3.486 0.09 Large patches, large oaks White-breasted Nuthatch N/A N/A Large oaks-cavities Ash-throated Flycatcher Decreasing 1 N/A N/A Canopy edges and openings Western Wood-pewee N/A N/A Young (subcanopy) oaks Bushtit Decreasing 1 N/A N/A 

Oak Woodland 

Herbaceous cover Chipping Sparrow Decreasing 1 N/A N/A 

Purple Martin Decreasing 1 3.486 0.09 

Riparian-Open Water Snags 

Tree Swallow 3.486 0.09 

Riparian shrub Dense shrub layer Yellow-breasted Chat 3.434 0.09 

Large canopy trees Bullock’s Oriole 1 Decreasing 1 3.486 0.09 Subcanopy, tall shrub foliage Yellow Warbler 4.695 3.486 0.09 

Riparian woodland 

Dense shrub understory Wrentit 4.695 3.486 0.09 

H-128
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

33

Areas (acres) of Unaltered 

Affected by The Proposed 

Habitat Habitat Attribute Focal Landbird Species 

Population 

Trend 

1966-2007 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4, 5, 6

Westside RiparianWetlands 

P

A

Snags Downy Woodpecker 3.486 0.09 

Red-shouldered Hawk Decreasing 1 3.486 0.09 

Riparian woodland Large, structurally diverse 

patches Cooper’s Hawk 3.486 0.09 

Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 1999)

Old-Growth Forest Large snags Vaux’s Swift 85.61 6 N/A 

Large trees Brown Creeper 34.445 85.616 N/A 

Old-Growth/Mature 

Forest Conifer trees Red Crossbill 34.445 85.616 N/A 

Large snags Pileated Woodpecker 34.445 85.616 N/A 

Mature Forest 

Mid-story tree layers Varied Thrush 34.445 N/A Closed canopy Hermit Warbler 30.124 34.445 N/A Deciduous canopy trees Pacific-slope Flycatcher Decreasing 2 30.124 34.445 N/A Open mid-story Hammond’s Flycatcher Decreasing 3 30.124 34.445 N/A Deciduous understory Wilson’s Warbler Decreasing 3 30.124 34.445 N/A 

Mature/Young Forest 

Forest floor complexity Winter Wren 30.124 34.445 N/A 

Young/Pole Forest Deciduous canopy trees Black-throated Gray Warbler 30.124 N/A 

Pole Forest Deciduous subcanopy/ understory Hutton’s Vireo 30.124 N/A 

Residual canopy trees Olive-sided Flycatcher Decreasing 2 30.124 N/A 

Early-Seral Forest 

Snags Western Bluebird 30.124 N/A 

H-129
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

34

Areas (acres) of Unaltered 

Affected by The Proposed 

Habitat Habitat Attribute Focal Landbird Species 

Population 

Trend 

1966-2007 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4, 5, 6

Westside RiparianWetlands 

P

A

Deciduous vegetation Orange-crowned Warbler Decreasing 3 30.124 N/A 

Early-Seral Forest 

Nectar producing plants Rufous Hummingbird Decreasing 2 30.124 N/A 

1 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Southern Pacific Rainforest Physiographic Region. 2 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Southern Pacific Rainforest and Cascade Mountain3 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in Southern Pacific Rainforest or Cascade Mountains Phy4 Clearcut and/or Regenerating Forests ≤40 years old. 5 Mid-Seral Forests ≥40 but ≤80 years old. 6 Late Successional and/or Old Growth Forests ≥80 years old. 7 N/A indicates that the Habitat and Habitat Attribute for a specific Focal Landbird Species has no equivalence to Unaltered Habitats Affect

Shading of Areas (acres) indicate the following: 

• No shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a Close Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Light gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a General Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Dark gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is only Present within that Unaltered Habitat • Black shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is Not Associated with that Unaltered Habitat although habitat attributes are 

not included in the Total Potential Habitat Affected. 

8 Potential Effect on Species’ Biological Objectives based on whether the Total Potential Habitat Affected is less than one home range (Ins

one home range (May Affect) for each of the focal landbird species (home range areas provided in Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Biologica

Strategies for “No Net Loss” are achieved through mitigation: restoring the affected habitat (Restored), enhancing specific habitat featur(Enhanced), or compensating for loss of habitat (Compensated), particularly late successional-old growth forests >80 years old which is Connector’s Compensatory Mitigation Plan. 

H-130
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 35 

2.6 USDA-Forest Service Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

There are five habitat types–Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, Southwest Oregon Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest, Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, Shrub Steppe, and Westside / 

Eastside Grasslands (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001)–within the Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest that will be affected by the Proposed Action. Those five habitat types described by 

Johnson and O’Neil (2001) are assumed to provide habitats and habitat attributes that are 

important for conserving focal landbirds designated in the Lowlands and Valleys of Western 

Oregon and Washington Conservation Strategy (Altman, 2000a) and Coniferous Forests of 

Western Oregon and Washington Conservation Strategy (Altman, 1999). 

Ten focal landbird species in lowlands and valleys are likely to be affected by habitat removal 

during construction of the PCGP Project, thirteen additional species will have no habitat 

removed (Table 12). Two of the species with habitat likely to be removed are known to have 

significant (P<0.10) declining regional population trends according to recent estimates (Sauer et 

al., 2008). Sixteen other species may be similarly affected by habitat removal in various 

successional stages of coniferous forests within the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. Of 

those, six have significant declining regional population trends (Table 12). 

Of the 23 species with habitats and habitat attributes designated in the Lowland and Valleys 

Conservation Strategy, habitat attributes for seven grassland species (western meadowlark, 

common nighthawk, grasshopper sparrow, burrowing owl, Oregon vesper sparrow, lark 

sparrow, and northern harrier) will be most affected, with the loss of 2.86 acres of shrub steppe 

and 11.41 acres of Westside/Eastside Grasslands that are assumed to correspond to Grassland 

habitat attributes in Table 12. 

Within the Coniferous Forest Conservation Strategy, three species (brown creeper, red crossbill 

and pileated woodpecker) with habitats and habitat attributes within the Old Growth/Mature 

Forest successional stages will be adversely affected by construction, with loss of 9.04 acres of 

mid-seral and 38.67 acres of late successional-old growth Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, 1.38 

acres of mid-seral and 27.74 acres of late successional-old growth Southwest Oregon Mixed 

Conifer-Hardwood Forest, and 2.18 acres of late successional-old growth Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and Woodlands (Table 12). None of those three species is closely associated with any 

of the affect habitat types, however. Species with close associations to those affected habitats 

are assumed to be more affected than species with general associations (Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001). In addition, none of the three species has declining regional populations. It is assumed 

that loss of habitat for species with declining populations is likely to have greater impact locally 

than effect due to similar loss of habitat for species with stable or increasing regional 

populations. 

One approach for evaluating potential project effects to focal landbird species involves 

comparing the area of habitat affected relative to a species’ home range. Home range areas of 

most landbird species in Table 9 have been reported by Johnson and O’Neil (2001). Most 

passerine birds have home ranges of about 10 hectares (25 acres), although some species’ 

home ranges are less than 1 ha (<2.5 acres). Home ranges of raptors vary from 50 ha (124 

acres for American kestrel) to over 10,000 ha (>24,710 acres for northern harriers). If the 

project affects less area than one home range, effects are assumed to be insignificant for that 

species. If more area than that required for one home range will be impacted by the project, 

then the project may effect biological objectives in the Conservation Strategy (see Appendix A 

or Appendix B) for that species. Species with declining regional population trends are likely to 

H-131
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 36 

be more affected than species with stable or increasing populations but that assumption is not 

further evaluated here. 

Focal landbird species dependent on various characteristics associated with Mature/Young 

Forests (varied thrush, hermit warbler, Pacific-slope flycatcher, Hammond’s flycatcher, Wilson’s 

warbler, and winter wren) may be affected by removal of clearcut-regenerating forest and midseral forests in three forest habitat types: Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, and Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands. For each of the 

six species, the areas affected (Table 12) are greater than their respective home range sizes. 

Likewise, focal species dependent on characteristics associated with Early-Seral Forest (olivesided flycatcher, western bluebird, orange-crowned warbler, and rufous hummingbird) may be 

affected by the project since total areas removed in clearcut-regenerating forest exceed the 

species’ home range size. In addition, three species in the Mature/Young Forests group and 

three in the Early-Seral Forest group have significant (P<0.10) declining regional population 

trends. Those species (Pacific-slope flycatcher, Hammond’s flycatcher, Wilson’s warbler, olivesided flycatcher, orange-crowned warbler, and rufous hummingbird) are expected to be most 

affected on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest by the Proposed Action. 

One overall Biological Objective for each of the habitats covered under any of the OregonWashington PIF Conservation Strategies is no net loss of the given habitat type. To partially 

achieve that objective, Pacific Connector will be restoring some portions of impacted habitats by 

revegetating with native species of grasses and shrubs, and replanting conifers within affected 

forested areas. Restoration of grasslands, shrublands, and early successional forest stages will 

occur within shorter time spans than restoration of mid-seral forests. In some cases, Pacific 

Connector will enhance or create habitat features, such as girdling trees to create snags, and 

will be supporting agencies’ treatments of forested stands through pre-commercial thinning 

projects that may enhance forest understories and accelerate development of late successional 

growth characteristics in treated conifer stands. 

Pacific Connector must retain a maintenance corridor that is 30 feet wide centered on the 

pipeline. That corridor will be maintained in an herbaceous state during the life of the project. 

Within the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 5.93 acres of mid-seral forests (Montane 

Mixed Conifer Forest, Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and Woodlands) will be permanently affected, as will 22.58 acres of clearcutregenerating forest, 0.86 acre of Shrub Steppe, and 1.09 acres of Westside/Eastside 

Grasslands. Pacific Connector will restore 4.49 acres of mid-seral forest and woodlands, 54.61 

acres of clearcut-regenerating forest, 2.00 acres of Shrub Steppe, and 10.22 acres of Westside 

/ Eastside Grasslands within the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. Although restoration 

will occur within a portion of the affected areas, there will be a net loss of these habitats. 

Direct restoration of late successional-old growth forests >80 years old cannot occur during the 

life of the project, assumed to be 50 years. The CMP will describe mitigation for losses of late 

successional-old growth forests. Based on an evaluation of effects to habitats for species listed 

under the Endangered Species Act and land allocations (Late Successional Reserves and 

Riparian Reserves) defined under the Northwest Forest Plan, Pacific Connector will remove 

38.67 acres of Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, 27.74 acres of Southwest Oregon Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest, and 2.18 acres of Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands that are classified 

as late successional-old growth forest within the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. Those 

areas will be compensated for as described in the PCGP Project Compensatory Mitigation Plan. 

Although specific amounts (acres), forest class characteristics and location(s) of compensatory 

locations have been established, the specific habitat descriptions are not yet available. 

H-132
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

37

Table 12 

Areas of Habitats Affected by Construction of the PCGP Project within the USDA-Forest Rogue River-Siskiyou Na

Assumed to Correspond to Habitats and Habitat Attributes Defined for Focal Landbird Specie

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affecte

Proposed Action 7 

Habitat Habitat Attribute 

Focal Landbird 

Species 

Population

Trend 

1966-2007 

Montane Mixed Conifer 

Forest 4, 5, 6

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4, 5, 6

Ponderosa Pine Forest 

and Woodlands 4, 5, 6

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside/Eastside 

Grasslands 

Lowlands and Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000a)

Large patches Western Meadowlark Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A 2.86 11.41 Short grass-bare ground Common Nighthawk Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A 2.86 11.41 Moderate-tall grass Grasshopper Sparrow N/A N/A N/A 2.86 11.41 Burrows Burrowing Owl N/A N/A N/A 2.86 11.41 

Oregon Vesper Sparrow N/A N/A N/A 2.86 11.41 

Scattered shrubs 

Lark Sparrow N/A N/A N/A 2.86 11.41 

Grassland 

Wet prairie/grassland Northern Harrier N/A N/A N/A 2.86 11.41 

Large oaks-cavities Western Screech Owl N/A N/A N/A 2.86 11.41 

Savanna

Large conifer trees Lewis’s Woodpecker N/A N/A N/A 2.86 11.41 Large patches, large oaks 

White-breasted 

Nuthatch N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Large oaks-cavities Ash-throated Flycatcher Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Canopy edges and openings Western Wood-pewee N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Young (subcanopy) oaks Bushtit Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Oak Woodland 

Herbaceous cover Chipping Sparrow Decreasing 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Riparian-Open 

Water Snags Purple Martin Decreasing 1 1.186 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

H-133
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

38

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affecte

Proposed Action 7 

Habitat Habitat Attribute 

Focal Landbird 

Species 

Population

Trend 

1966-2007 

Montane Mixed Conifer 

Forest 4, 5, 6

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4, 5, 6

Ponderosa Pine Forest 

and Woodlands 4, 5, 6

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside/Eastside 

Grasslands 

Riparian-Open 

Water Snags Tree Swallow 1.186 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Riparian Shrub Dense shrub layer Yellow-breasted Chat 2.294 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Large canopy trees Bullock’s Oriole Decreasing 1 1.186 N/A N/A N/A N/A Subcanopy, tall shrub foliage Yellow Warbler 1.186 N/A N/A N/A N/A Dense shrub understory Wrentit 1.186 N/A N/A N/A N/A Snags Downy Woodpecker 1.186 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Red-shouldered Hawk Decreasing 1 1.186 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Riparian 

Woodland 

Large, structurally diverse patches Cooper’s Hawk 1.186 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon and Washington (Altman, 1999)

Old-Growth 

Forest Large snags Vaux’s Swift 38.676 27.746 2.186 N/A N/A 

Large trees Brown Creeper 9.045 38.676 1.385 27.746 2.186 N/A N/A 

Old- Growth/Mature 

Forest Conifer trees Red Crossbill 9.045 38.676 1.385 27.746 2.186 N/A N/A 

Large snags Pileated Woodpecker 9.045 38.676 1.385 27.746 2.186 N/A N/A 

Mature Forest 

Mid-story tree layers Varied Thrush 9.045 1.385 N/A N/A N/A 

Closed canopy Hermit Warbler 73.064 9.045 13.474 1.385 5.614 N/A N/A Deciduous canopy trees Pacific-slope Flycatcher Decreasing 2 73.064 9.045 13.474 1.385 5.614 N/A N/A Open mid-story Hammond’s Flycatcher Decreasing 3 73.064 9.045 13.474 1.385 5.614 N/A N/A 

Mature/Young 

Forest 

Deciduous understory Wilson’s Warbler Decreasing 3 73.064 9.045 13.474 1.385 5.614 N/A N/A 

H-134
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

39

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affecte

Proposed Action 7 

Habitat Habitat Attribute 

Focal Landbird 

Species 

Population

Trend 

1966-2007 

Montane Mixed Conifer 

Forest 4, 5, 6

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 4, 5, 6

Ponderosa Pine Forest 

and Woodlands 4, 5, 6

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside/Eastside 

Grasslands 

Mature/Young 

Forest Forest floor complexity Winter Wren 73.064 9.045 13.474 1.385 5.614 N/A N/A 

Young/Pole 

Forest 

Deciduous canopy trees 

Black-throated Gray 

Warbler 73.064 13.474 5.614 N/A N/A 

Pole Forest Deciduous subcanopy/ understory Hutton’s Vireo 73.064 13.474 5.614 N/A N/A 

Residual canopy trees Olive-sided Flycatcher Decreasing 2 73.064 13.474 5.614 N/A N/A Snags Western Bluebird 73.064 13.474 5.614 N/A N/A Deciduous vegetation Orange-crowned Warbler Decreasing 3 73.064 13.474 5.614 N/A N/A 

Early-Seral 

Forest 

Nectar producing plants Rufous Hummingbird Decreasing 2 73.064 13.474 5.614 N/A N/A 

1 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Southern Pacific Rainforest Physiographic Region. 2 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Southern Pacific Rainforest and Cascade Mountain3 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in Southern Pacific Rainforest or Cascade Mountains Phy4 Clearcut and/or Regenerating Forests ≤40 years old. 5 Mid-Seral Forests ≥40 but ≤80 years old. 6 Late Successional and/or Old Growth Forests ≥80 years old. 7 N/A indicates that the Habitat and Habitat Attribute for a specific Focal Landbird Species have no equivalence to Unaltered Habitats Affe

Action. Shading of Areas (acres) indicate the following: 

• No shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a Close Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Light gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a General Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Dark gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is only Present within that Unaltered Habitat • Black shading indicates the indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is Not Associated with that Unaltered Habitat although habitat 

be present. Those affected areas are not included in the Total Potential Habitat Affected. 8 Potential Effect on Species’ Biological Objectives based on whether the Total Potential Habitat Affected is less than one home range (Ins

one home range (May Affect) for each of the focal landbird species (home range areas provided in Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Biologica

Strategies for “No Net Loss” are achieved through mitigation: restoring the affected habitat (Restored), enhancing specific habitat featur(Enhanced), or compensating for loss of habitat (Compensated), particularly late successional-old growth forests >80 years old which is Connector’s Compensatory Mitigation Plan. 

H-135
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 40 

2.7 USDA-Forest Service Fremont-Winema National Forest 

There are five habitat types–Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, Ponderosa 

Pine Forest and Woodlands, Westside/Eastside Grasslands, Herbaceous Wetlands, and 

Westside Riparian-Wetlands / Eastside Riparian-Wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001)–within 

the Fremont-Winema National Forest that will be affected by the Proposed Action. Those five 

habitat types described by Johnson and O’Neil (2001) are assumed to provide habitats and 

habitat attributes important for conserving focal landbirds designated in the East-Slope of the 

Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington Conservation Strategy (Altman, 2000b). 

Six focal landbird species in east-slope Cascades are likely to be affected by habitat removal 

during construction of the PCGP Project; one additional species (Williamson’s sapsucker) will 

have no habitat removed (Table 13). One of the species, brown creeper, with habitat likely to 

be removed is known to have significant (P<0.10) declining regional population trends according 

to recent estimates (Sauer et al., 2008). Late successional-old growth Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest is assumed to provide large trees in a mixed conifer habitat 

(Table 13) suitable for use by brown creepers which are generally associated with that habitat 

type (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). The project will remove 15.86 acres of late successional-old 

growth Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest. 

One approach for evaluating potential project effects to focal landbird species involves 

comparing the area of habitat affected relative to a species’ home range. Home range areas of 

most landbird species in Table 13 have been reported by Johnson and O’Neil (2001). Most 

passerine birds have home ranges of about 10 hectares (25 acres) although some species’ 

home ranges are less than 1 ha (<2.5 acres). Home ranges of raptors and woodpeckers are 

larger; flammulated owls home range is 50 ha (124 acres), while the home range of whiteheaded woodpeckers is 500 ha (1,235 acres). If the project affects less area than one home 

range, effects are assumed to be insignificant for that species. If more area than that required 

for one home range will be impacted by the project, then the project may affect biological 

objectives in the Conservation Strategy (see Appendix C) for that species. For example in 

Table 13, loss of 21.36 acres of late successional-old growth Ponderosa Pine Forest and 

Woodlands and corresponding open understory-regeneration attributes is likely to affect the 

chipping sparrow since their home range is less than 2.5 acres. 

One overall Biological Objective for each of the habitats covered under any of the OregonWashington PIF Conservation Strategies is no net loss of the given habitat type. To partially 

achieve that objective, Pacific Connector will be restoring some portions of impacted habitats by 

revegetating with native species of grasses and shrubs, and replanting conifers within affected 

forested areas. Restoration of grasslands, shrublands, and early successional forest stages will 

occur within shorter time spans that restoration of mid-seral forests. In some cases, Pacific 

Connector will enhance or create habitat features, such as girdling trees to create snags, and 

will be supporting agencies’ treatments of forested stands through pre-commercial thinning 

projects that may enhance forest understories and accelerate development of late successional 

growth characteristics in treated conifer stands. 

Pacific Connector must retain a maintenance corridor that is 30 feet wide centered on the 

pipeline. That corridor will be maintained in an herbaceous state during the life of the project. 

Within the Fremont-Winema National Forest, 0.78 acres of mid-seral Southwest Oregon Mixed 

Conifer-Hardwood Forest and 3.37 acres of mid-seral Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands 

will be permanently affected as will 13.49 acres of clearcut-regenerating forest, 0.19 acres of 

H-136
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 41 

Westside/Eastside Grasslands, 0.20 acres of Herbaceous Wetlands, and 0.18 acres of 

Westside Riparian-Wetlands / Eastside Riparian-Wetlands. Pacific Connector will restore 5.05 

acres of mid-seral forest and woodlands, 15.14 acres of clearcut-regenerating forest, 0.20 acres 

of Westside/Eastside Grasslands, 0.18 acre of Herbaceous Wetlands, and 0.09 acre of 

Westside Riparian-Wetlands / Eastside Riparian-Wetlands. Although restoration will occur 

within a portion of the affected areas, there will be a net loss of these habitats. 

Direct restoration of late successional-old growth forests >80 years old cannot occur during the 

life of the project, assumed to be 50 years. The CMP will describe mitigation for losses of late 

successional-old growth forests. Based on an evaluation of effects to habitats for species listed 

under the Endangered Species Act and land allocations (Late Successional Reserves and 

Riparian Reserves) defined under the Northwest Forest Plan, Pacific Connector will remove 

15.86 acres of Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest and 21.36 acres of 

Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands that are classified as late successional-old growth forest 

within the Fremont-Winema National Forest. Those areas will be compensated for as described 

in the PCGP Project Compensatory Mitigation Plan. Although specific amounts (acres), forest 

class characteristics and location(s) of compensatory locations have been established, the 

specific habitat descriptions are not yet available. 

H-137
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal L

42

Table 13 

Areas of Habitats Affected by Construction of the PCGP Project within the USDA-Forest Fremont-Winema Natio

Assumed to Correspond to Habitats and Habitat Attributes Defined for Focal Landbird Specie

Areas (acres) of Unaltered Habitats Affe

Proposed Action 5

Habitat Habitat Attribute Focal Landbird Species 

Population

Trend 

1966-2007 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 2, 3, 4 

Ponderosa Pine Forest 

and Woodlands 2, 3, 4

Westside/Eastside 

Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

East-Slope of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington (Altman, 2000b)

Old forest-large patches White-headed Woodpecker N/A 21.364 N/A N/A N/A Large trees Pygmy Nuthatch N/A 21.364 N/A N/A N/A 

Ponderosa Pine 

Open understoryregeneration Chipping Sparrow N/A 21.364 N/A N/A N/A 

Large trees Brown Creeper Decreasing 1 15.864 N/A N/A N/A N/A Large snags Williamson’s Sapsucker 15.864 N/A N/A N/A N/A Grassy openings, dense thickets Flammulated Owl 0.822 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

Mixed Conifer 

Multi-layered, structural diverse Hermit Thrush 15.864 N/A N/A N/A N/A 

1 Significantly declining population trends (P ≤ 0.10) from BBS data summarized in the Cascade Mountains Physiographic Region. 2 Clearcut and/or Regenerating Forests ≤40 years old. 3 Mid-Seral Forests ≥40 but ≤80 years old. 4 Late Successional and/or Old Growth Forests ≥80 years old. 5 N/A indicates that the Habitat and Habitat Attribute for a specific Focal Landbird Species has no equivalence to Unaltered Habitats Affected by 

Areas (acres) indicate the following: 

• No shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a Close Association with that Unaltered Habitat. • Light gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species has a General Association with that Unaltered Habitat. 

• Dark gray shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is only Present within that Unaltered Habitat. • Black shading indicates that the Focal Landbird Species is Not Associated with that Unaltered Habitat although habitat attributes are ass

are not included in the Total Potential Habitat Affected. 

8 Potential Effect on Species’ Biological Objectives based on whether the Total Potential Habitat Affected is less than one home range (Insignifi

range (May Affect) for each of the focal landbird species (home range areas provided in Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Biological objectives in C

Net Loss” are achieved through mitigation: restoring the affected habitat (Restored), enhancing specific habitat features such as snag creatiofor loss of habitat (Compensated), particularly late successional-old growth forests >80 years old which is addressed in Pacific Connector’s Co

H-138
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 43 

3.0 REFERENCES 

Altman, B. 1999. Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon 

and Washington. Version 1.0. Oregon-Washington Partners in Flight, American Bird 

Conservancy, Portland, OR. 

Altman, B. 2000a. Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in Lowlands and Valleys of Western 

Oregon and Washington. Version 1.0. Oregon-Washington Partners in Flight, American 

Bird Conservancy, Portland, OR. 

Altman, B. 2000b. Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East-Slope of the Cascade 

Mountains of Western Oregon and Washington. Version 1.0. Oregon-Washington 

Partners in Flight, American Bird Conservancy, Portland, OR.Andelman, S. J. and A. 

Stock. 1994. Preliminary Assessment of Management, Research, and Monitoring 

Priorities for the Conservation of Neotropical Migratory Birds that Breed in Washington 

State (one report) and Oregon (one report). Oregon/Washington chapter Partners in 

Flight working document. (cited by Altman, 2000a).Andelman and Stock, 1994. add 

reference 

Johnson, D.H., and T.A. O’Neil (managing directors). 2001. Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in 

Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 

Meslow, E.C. and H.M. Wight. 1975. Avifauna and Succession in Douglas-fir forests of the 

Pacific Northwest. Pp. 266271 in D.R. Smith (tech. coord.) Proceedings of the 

Symposium on Management of Forest and Rangeland Habitats for Nongame Birds. 

USDA Forest Service General Technical Report WO1. (cited by Altman, 1999). 

Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon. 2008. The North American Breeding Bird Survey, 

Results and Analysis 1966 - 2007. Version 5.15.2008. U.S. Geological Survey, Patuxent 

Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD 

USDA-Forest Service. 2008. Memorandum of Understanding Between the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to Promote the 

Conservation of Migratory Birds. FS Agreement # 08-MU-1113-2400-264. 

USDI-Bureau of Land Management. 2007. Migratory Bird Treaty Act – Interim Management 

Guidance. Instruction Memorandum No. 2008-050. 

U.S. North American Bird Conservation Initiative Committee. 2000. Bird Conservation Region 

Descriptions. A Supplement to the North American Bird Conservation Initiative Bird 

Conservation Regions Map. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arlington VA. 

H-139
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 44 

APPENDICES 

H-140
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 45 

APPENDIX A 

Biological Objectives - Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in Lowlands and Valleys of 

Western Oregon and Washington. All of the information in this appendix is from Altman, 

2000a. 

Grassland-Savanna. As outlined in the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in Lowlands and 

Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington, the general biological objectives for grasslandsavanna include: 

Institutionalize a “no net loss” habitat policy; maintain existing moderate to high quality native 

grassland and savanna, and manage it for sustainability; improve degraded native grassland 

and savanna; retain all oak trees >56 cm dbh, especially wide-spreading canopy “open-form” 

oaks; enhance size and connectivity of existing patches; maintain sites dominated by native 

vegetation and prevent infestations of exotic vegetation; manage non-native grasslands where 

biologically appropriate; maintain or provide native and/or agricultural grasslands in tracts >80 

ha in a mosaic of habitat conditions; and maintain <10% of landscape in “hostile” habitat where 

grassland-savanna is being managed for landbird conservation. 

The following are focal habitat and species within grassland-savanna: 

Large Patches of Grassland-Savanna Habitat. Western Meadowlark: The western meadowlark 

was chosen because it occurred historically throughout this planning unit; has significant longterm and short-term declining population trends; is an Oregon State Sensitive species; 

encompasses a range of habitat conditions within native and non-native grasslands; overlaps 

with most other priority grassland species in habitat use; and has relatively large-area 

requirements. The current population in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is highly 

significant (p<.01) over the long-term (1968-1998), with a declining trend of 6.8%/year, and 

significant (p<.02) over short-term (1980-1998) with a declining trend of 5.0%/year. 

The specific biological objectives for this species and habitat include: initiate actions in native 

prairies, pastures, and fallow fields to maintain or provide shrub-tree cover <10% and variable 

grass heights <76 cm tall, in areas >80 ha.; provide suitable habitat in tracts >10 ha with >50% 

of the area as optimal habitat; in areas <80 ha, manage native and agricultural grasslands to 

provide a mosaic of habitat conditions; minimum contiguous tract size should be 80 ha; at least 

one contiguous tract of >200 ha of suitable habitat should be part of the landscape; and no 

more than 10% of the landscape should be “hostile.” The population objective is to reverse 

declining BBS trends to achieve stable or increasing trends by 2010. 

Short, herbaceous Vegetation with areas of Bare Ground. Common nighthawk (Rogue, 

Umpqua Valleys): The common nighthawk is not known to breed in the Rogue and Umpqua 

Valleys. The current population in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is highly 

significant (p<.01) for the long-term (1980-1998), with a declining trend of 9.3%/year, and nonsignificant for the short-term (1980-1998), with an increasing trend of 1.5%/year. 

The specific biological objectives for this species and habitat include: maintain or provide 

patches <0.04 ha of suitable habitat with 20-50% bare or sparsely vegetated ground; 

herbaceous vegetation <30cm tall; and located where there is minimal disturbance. The 

population objective is to establish the common nighthawk as a regular breeding species in 

grassland habitats in each subprovince by 2010. 

H-141
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 46 

Burrows. Burrowing Owls: The current population is of an insufficient sample size for analysis 

of trends in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowland 

Valleys: maintain or provide mean open ground cover >40% and mean grass cover <40%. The 

population objective in the Rogue Valley is to reestablish burrowing owls as a breeding species 

with >5 nesting pairs by 2010. 

Scattered shrubs and/or bunchgrass in grassland-savanna. Lark sparrow (Rogue Valley): The 

current population in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region for the vesper sparrow shows 

an insufficient sample size for trend analysis, and for the lark sparrow a significant trend (p<.10) 

over the long-term (1968-1998). 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowland 

Valleys: maintain or provide scattered shrub cover 5-15%; variable grass heights <46cm tall 

with some areas of bare or sparsely vegetated ground; and patches of suitable habitat >8 ha. 

The population objective in the Umpqua Valley for the Vesper Sparrow is to maintain or 

establish >10 breeding populations in grassland habitats in each subprovince by 2010, and in 

the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region for the Lark sparrow is to reverse declining trends 

to achieve stable populations (non-significant trends of <2%/year) or increasing trends by 2010. 

Moderate-Tall Grass, Little or no Bare Ground and Shrubs. Grasshopper sparrow: It is 

unknown if more than a few pairs occur in the Rogue and Umpqua Valleys. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowland 

Valleys: maintain or provide variable grass heights 15-61 cm, >70% (Rogue and Umpqua); <5% 

shrub cover; and patches of suitable habitat >20 ha. 

The population objective in the Rogue and Umpqua Valleys is to maintain or establish >5 sites 

with multiple breeding pairs and at least one site with >10 pairs by 2010. 

Wet Prairie/Grassland. Northern harrier: The current population is of an insufficient sample size 

for BBS analysis in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowland 

Valleys: maintain or provide a no activity buffer of >122 m radius around nests and, in one area, 

maintain contiguous suitable habitat out to a change in habitat type. At the landscape level, 

provide a mosaic of other suitable grassland habitat in blocks >160 ha and >1/4 mile from 

development or activities. 

The population objective in the Rogue and Umpqua Valleys is to maintain or establish a 

population of >20 pairs in each subprovince by 2020. 

Large Open-form Oaks with Cavities on Savanna Habitat. Western screech owl (Rogue and 

Umpqua): The current population has insufficient data for BBS trend analysis in all regions. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowland 

Valleys: maintain or provide oaks >61 cm dbh with cavities, tree canopy cover 10-30%, and 

shrub cover <30%. 

Large Conifer Trees in Savanna. Lewis’s woodpecker: The current population is too rare for 

BBS analysis. 

H-142
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 47 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowland 

Valleys: maintain or provide trees >61 cm dbh; 2.5 snags/ha >30 cm dbh; and tree canopy 

cover 10-40%. 

The population objective in the Rogue and Umpqua Valleys is to maintain or establish breeding 

populations >5 pairs/population in at least 2 areas in each province by 2010. 

Oak Woodland. As outlined in the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in Lowlands and 

Valleys of Western Oregon and Washington, the general biological objectives for oak woodland 

include: “No net loss” of oak woodland habitat policy; maintain existing moderate to high quality 

oak woodland stands, and promote their sustainability; emphasize the conservation of large 

patches of oak woodland with large-diameter and open-form oaks; regardless of landscape, 

retain all oak trees >56 cm dbh; ensure <10% canopy cover of non-oaks in oak woodland and 

stands; provide young, subcanopy oaks and native shrubs and herbaceous vegetation in the 

understory; improve degraded oak woodland habitat; enhance size and connectivity of existing 

oak woodland patches; conserve spatially distributed oak woodlands across the planning unit; 

and maintain or provide high quality oak woodlands in tracts >40 ha in a mosaic of habitat 

conditions to support viable populations of oak woodland focal bird species at the landscape 

level. 

The following are focal habitat and species within oak woodland: 

Large patches of Oak Woodlands with Large Oak Trees. White-breasted nuthatch: The current 

population in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is non-significant for the long-term 

(1968-1998), with a declining trend of 0.2%/year, and non-significant for the short-term (1980-

1998), with a declining trend of 0.9%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowland 

Valleys: maintain or provide contiguous patches of oak woodlands in stands >40 ha; mean 

stand-level of dbh of oaks >55 cm with >20% of oaks with >70 cm dbh; mean stand-level 

canopy closure 40-80% range; and mean stand-level non-oak cover in canopy and subcanopy 

<10%. At the landscape level, manage to provide a mosaic of habitat conditions, with minimum 

contiguous tract size 40 ha, and at least one contiguous tract of >120 ha, with no more than 

10% of “hostile” landscape. 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is to maintain or 

increase population trends by 2010. 

Large Oak with Cavities in Oak Woodlands. Ash-throated Flycatcher (Rogue and Umpqua): 

The current population for the Ash-throated flycatcher in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS 

Region is non-significant for the long-term (1968-1998), with an increasing trend of 0.6%/year, 

and is significant (p<.05) for the short-term (1980-1998), with a declining trend of 2.6%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: maintain or provide mean stand dbh >38 cm with >20% of the trees >55 cm dbh; 

<5% Douglas-fir canopy cover; <50% cover in the subcanopy; and <75% cover in the canopy. 

At the landscape level, the objective is to prioritize conservation where European starlings are 

absent or have minimal presence. 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is to increase 

population trends by 2010. 

H-143
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 48 

Canopy Edge and Openings in Oak Woodlands. Western Wood-pewee: The current population 

in the Southern Pacific Rainforests BBS Region is highly significant (p<.01), over the long-term 

(1968-1998), with a declining trend of 3.0%/year, and non-significant in the short-term (1980-

1998), with a declining trend of 0.9%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: maintain or provide, within stand canopy closure 40-85% of which >80% is oak 

cover and <5% Douglas-fir cover, native understory of shrubs such as snowberry and 

serviceberry interspersed with native herbaceous grasses and forbs where neither is >80% of 

understory; and high edge to openings ratios. 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is to reverse declining 

BBS trends to achieve stable populations (non-significant trends of <2%/year) or increasing 

trends by 2020. 

 

Young (subcanopy)Recruitment Oaks in Oak Woodlands. Bushtit: The current population in the 

Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is highly significant (p<.01) over the long-term (1968- 

1998), with a declining trend of 12.0%/year, and highly significant (p<.01) on the short-term 

(1980-1998), with a declining trend of 9.8%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: maintain or provide interspersion of woodland patches dominated by canopy oaks 

and subcanopy oaks with >90% composition of oak, 30-70% cover in the canopy and >30% 

cover in the subcanopy; dense shrub understory (30-70% cover) of native species such as 

snowberry, California hazel, and poison oak; and <10% blackberry cover in the shrub layer. 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is to reverse declining 

trends to achieve stable populations (non-significant trends of <2%/year) or increasing trends by 

2020. 

Herbaceous Understory Cover in Oak Woodlands. Chipping Sparrow: The current population in 

the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is highly significant (p<.01) in the long-term (1968-

1998), with a declining trend of 8.2%/year, and is highly significant (p<.01) in the short-term 

(1980-1998), with a declining trend of 4.4%/year. These data include early successional 

coniferous forest habitats. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: maintain or provide interspersion of multiple patches of native shrub cover 

(snowberry, poison oak) and herbaceous openings so shrub cover occurs in 10-40% range and 

herbaceous cover in the 30-70% range, and <10% blackberry cover in the shrub layer. 

The population objectives in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region are to reverse 

declining trends to achieve stable populations (non-significant trends of <2%/year) or increasing 

trends by 2020, and to maintain cowbird parasitism rates below 5% in specific sites. 

 

Native Understory Shrub Cover in Oak Woodlands. Nashville Warbler (Rogue and Umpqua): 

The current population of the Nashville warbler in Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is 

non-significant for the long-term (1968-1998), with an increasing trend of 0.2%/year, and nonsignificant in the short-term (1980-1998), with a declining trend of 0.7%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: maintain or provide shrub understory cover >40% with >50% of that cover in native 

species such as snowberry, poison oak; <10% blackberry cover in the shrub layer; and 

herbaceous openings in shrub layer, accounting for <15% of the understory. 

H-144
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 49 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is to maintain trends by 

2010. 

Riparian. As outlined in the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in Lowlands and Valleys of 

Western Oregon and Washington, the general biological objectives for riparian include: “No net 

loss” of riparian habitat; maintain existing high quality riparian habitat; improve degraded 

riparian habitat; enhance size and connectivity of existing riparian patches; maintain contiguous 

cottonwood or floodplain woodlands or tall shrublands >20 ha tracts, regardless of understory 

composition; retain all cottonwood trees >56 cm dbh, regardless of landscape context; at the 

landscape level, maintain or restore >30% of historical extent of riparian habitat in lowlands and 

valleys of each major watershed to conditions that support source populations of appropriate 

focal species. 

The following are focal habitat and species within riparian: 

Snags with Cavities in or Adjacent to Open Water. Purple Martin (Umpqua) and Tree swallow 

(Rogue): The current population of the Purple martin is of insufficient sample size for trend 

analysis in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region or the state of Oregon. For the Tree 

swallow in the Southern Pacific Rainforests BBS Region, the current population is nonsignificant in the long-term (1968-1998), with a declining trend of 2.0%/year, and is nonsignificant in the short-term (1980-1998), with a declining trend of 0.3%/year. 

The specific biological objective for these species and this habitat include, in the Westside 

Lowlands and Valleys: where European starling and house sparrows are minimal, and adjacent 

to open water, maintain or provide retain old pilings for potential use as nest sites; retain or 

create >1.2snags/ha >30 cm dbh and >6 m above water; and use nest boxes as short-term 

management until natural cavities are available, and there is open air space and easy access to 

cavities. 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region for the Tree swallow is 

to maintain stable or increasing population trends by 2010. In Western Oregon, the objective for 

purple martins is to increase the population to >1,000 pairs (which includes non-water nesting 

birds) by 2010. 

 

Shrub Density in Floodplain Shrub Habitat. Yellow-breasted chat (Rogue and Umpqua): The 

current population of the Yellow-breasted chat in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is 

non-significant for the long-term (1968-1998), with a declining trend of 0.7%/year, and is 

significant (p<.20), with an increasing trend of 2.2%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: in the floodplain riparian shrub, maintain or provide patchy shrub layer with 30-80% 

cover and several scattered herbaceous openings, and canopy tree cover <20%. At the 

landscape level, the previously mentioned objectives should be applied to sites >1 km from 

urban/residential areas and >5 km from high-use cowbird areas. 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is to maintain stable or 

increasing population trends by 2010, and in the Westside Lowlands and Valleys, to maintain 

cowbird parasitism rates below 10% within specific areas. 

Large Canopy Trees in Riparian Deciduous Woodland. Bullock’s oriole (Rogue and Umpqua): 

The current population of the Bullock’s oriole in the Southern Pacific Rainforests BBS Region is 

H-145
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 50 

significant (p<.05) in the long-term (1968-1998), with a declining trend of 3.1%/year, and nonsignificant in the short-term (1980-1998), with a declining trend of 2.9%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: maintain or provide mean canopy tree height >15 m; mean canopy closure 30-

60%; and young (recruitment) sapling trees >10% cover in the understory. 

Subcanopy,Tall Shrub Foliage in Riparian Woodland. Yellow warbler: The current population in 

the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is non-significant for the long-term (1968-1998), 

with a declining trend of 5.0%/year, and non-significant in the short-term (1980-1998), with a 

declining trend of 2.4%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: maintain or provide >70% cover in shrub layer and subcanopy layer (>3 m and 

below the canopy foliage) with subcanopy layer contributing >40% of the total; shrub layer 

cover 30-60% (includes shrubs and small saplings); and shrub layer height >2m. At the 

landscape level, provide the aforementioned habitat conditions at sites that contain a high 

degree of deciduous riparian heterogeneity within or among wetland, shrub, and woodland 

patches, and low percent agricultural land use. 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is to maintain stable or 

increasing population trends by 2010 and, in the Westside Lowlands and Valleys, is to maintain 

cowbird parasitism rates below 5% within specific areas. 

Dense Understory Shrub Layer in Deciduous Woodland. Wrentit (Rogue, Umpqua Valleys):

The current population in the Southern Pacific Rainforests BBS Region is non-significant in the 

long-term (1968-1998), with a declining trend of 0.8%/year, and is significant (p<.10) for the 

short-term (1980-1998), with a declining trend of 1.4%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: maintain or provide shrub layer cover >50% with >60% of that native shrubs, and 

canopy closure >50%. 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is to maintain stable or 

increasing population trends by 2010. 

 

Snags in Riparian Deciduous Woodland. Downy Woodpecker: The current population in the 

Southern Pacific Rainforests BBS Region is non-significant in the long-term (1968-1998), with a 

declining trend of 0.2%/year, and is non-significant for the short-term (1980-1998), with an 

increasing trend of 1.8%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: maintain or provide >12 snags/ha >15 cm dbh and >1.8 m tall; of these >5/ha 

should be >25 cm dbh. 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest BBS Region is to maintain stable or 

increasing population trends by 2010. 

 

Large Structurally Diverse Patches, Deciduous Woodland. Yellow-Billed Cuckoo, Redshouldered Hawk (Rogue), and Cooper’s Hawk (Umpqua): The current populations of Yellowbilled cuckoo and red-shouldered hawk are too rare and for Cooper’s hawk is an insufficient 

sample size for Breeding Bird Survey trend estimates. 

H-146
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 51 

The specific biological objective for these species and habitat include, in the Westside Lowlands 

and Valleys: maintain or provide structurally diverse patches of habitat that include at least 3 

distinct layers (e.g., canopy, subcanopy, understory) with >25% cover in each layer or 

juxtaposition of early successional (e.g., willow) with older forest (e.g., cottonwood); mature 

canopy layer dominated by cottonwood with >50% canopy closure and >6 ha; patches of habitat 

(includes cottonwood canopy and adjacent riparian shrub if appropriate) >40 ha in size or >0.8 

km in length; and width of riparian woodland and shrub vegetation zone >100 m. 

The population objective in the Westside Lowlands and Valleys for the Yellow-billed cuckoo is to 

establish a breeding population (>10 pairs) along the Lower Columbia River by 2025. 

H-147
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 52 

APPENDIX B 

Biological Objectives - Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in Coniferous Forests of 

Western Oregon and Washington. All of the information in this appendix is from Altman, 

1999. 

As outlined in the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds in Coniferous Forests of Western Oregon 

and Washington, the forest conditions for this strategy are: Old-Growth Forest; Mature Forest: 

Multi-layered; Young Forest: Understory Re-initiating; Pole Forest: Stem Exclusion; and Earlyseral Forest: Stand Initiation Stage. Each condition and its focal attribute and species are 

explained below. 

Old-Growth Forest: The general biological objectives include: maintain existing old-growth 

forest, and where it is <15% of the landscape within a subprovince, initiate actions to develop 

old-growth forest to provide >15% old growth forest in each subprovince. 

The following are focal habitat and species within old-growth forest: 

Large snags. Vaux’s Swift: The current population in the Cascade Mountains is non-significant, 

and declining (-1.7% per year) for a long-term trend, but the recent trend is a significant (p<.10) 

decline of -7.0% per year. In the Southern Pacific Rainforests, there is a significant (p<.05) and 

long-term declining trend (-5.7% per year) with a non-significant recent increasing trend of 

20.9% per year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level, the 

following: nest structures should be >68 cm dbh and >25 m tall, accessible for flying swifts, 

either above the canopy or in canopy gaps, in different stages of decay (including some hollow 

snags), and in stands with 60% canopy closure (not necessarily at the snag). A 2 ha no-harvest 

buffer should be maintained around known nest or roost sites. At the landscape level, an 

average of 5 potential nest/roost structure (as described above) per square mile should be 

provided within landscape management units (e.g., watersheds, townships, sections) at any 

point in time, under the following conditions: 30% must have broken tops (created or natural), up 

to 20% can be snags, and 70% can be live trees with obvious signs of defects (broken tops, 

large cavity excavations). The objective at the provinces level in the Klamath Mountains is to 

provide habitat conditions as described above in general proximity to riparian habitats. 

The population objective in Western Oregon is to reverse declining BBS population trends to 

achieve stable (non-significant trend of <2% per year) or increasing trends by 2010. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Many primary and secondary cavity nesters, 

particularly pileated woodpecker, hairy woodpecker, brown creeper, red-breasted nuthatch, 

chestnut-backed chickadee, red-breasted sapsucker, and northern pygmy owl. 

Large Trees. Brown Creeper: The current population in the Cascade Mountains is significant 

(p<.05) and declining (-6.6% per year) for the long-term trend, although the recent trend is a 

non-significant increase of 2.1% per year (Sauer et al. 1997). There are relatively stable long 

term recent trends in the Southern Pacific Rainforests with a non-significant increase (2% per 

year) during the long-term, and a non-significant decrease (-1.1% per year) in the recent period. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat in the Cascade Mountains includes, 

at the stand-level: Provide late-successional forest in blocks >30 ha; in managed forests, retain 

the largest live trees, preferably Douglas-fir, including m18 green trees/ha >46 cm dbh with at 

H-148
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 53 

least 2 trees >60 cm dbh; retain trees through rotations for foraging trees and recruitment snags 

for potential nest sites, if nesting is documented in younger managed stands. At the landscapelevel: Provide an average of 2 contiguous blocks of late-successional forest >30 ha or one block 

>60 ha per square mile within landscape management units (e.g., watersheds, townships, 

sections). 

The population objective is to reverse declining BBS population trends to achieve stable (nonsignificant trend of <2% per year) or increasing trends by 2020. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily species associated with latesuccessional forests that use large trees for foraging or nesting such as red-breasted nuthatch, 

golden-crowned kinglet, chestnut-backed chickadee, hermit warbler, pine siskin, and red 

crossbill. When large trees become snags, several primary and secondary cavity-nesters that 

nest in late-successional forest will benefit, such as pileated woodpecker, hairy woodpecker, 

red-breasted sapsucker, and Vaux's swift. 

Conifer Cones. Red Crossbill: The current population in the Cascade Mountains is relatively 

stable over the long-term and recent trends (non-significant -0.9 and 5.5% per year, 

respectively). In the Southern Pacific Rainforests, long-term and recent trends are substantially 

increasing, but are non-significant (12.5 and 25.3% per year, respectively). 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat in the Cascade Mountains includes, 

at the stand-level: in managed forests, retain the largest live trees, particularly western hemlock 

and Douglas-fir, including m18 green-trees/ha >46 cm dbh with 2 trees >60 cm dbh. At the 

landscape-level, provide habitat patches with diverse species composition, particularly western 

hemlock and Douglas-fir, among as many elevation and climatological regions as possible to 

avoid synchronous cone failures among all areas. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily species associated with latesuccessional forests that use large trees for foraging or nesting such as brown creeper, redbreasted nuthatch, golden-crowned kinglet, and hermit warbler, and conifer seed-eating 

specialists such as pine siskin, evening grosbeak, and purple finch. 

Mature Forest: Multi-Layered: The general biological objectives include: maintain existing 

mature forest, and where it is <15% of the landscape within a subprovince, initiate actions to 

develop mature forest to provide >15% mature forest in each subprovince. 

Large Snags. Pileated Woodpecker: The current population trends for both the Cascade 

Mountains and Southern Pacific Rainforests are similar; both have non significant declining 

long-term trends (-2.8 and -4.5% per year, respectively), and non-significant increasing recent 

trends (4.0 and 2.7% per year, respectively) (Sauer et al. 1997). Recently improving 

populations are indicated a significantly (p<.10) declining trend (-7.5% per year) during the early 

period (1966-1980) in the Cascade Mountains. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: in 

managed stands >60 years old, provide >70% canopy closure and >70% conifer species 

canopy trees; an average of 5 nest snags/10 ha >76 cm dbh; and retained snags should be well 

distributed and mostly hard snags, with some defective live trees. In managed stands >60 

years old, an average of 30 foraging snags/ha (mix of hard and soft snags) in the following size 

classes should be provided: 10-20 in dbh = 18/ha; 20-30 in dbh = 8/ha; >30 in dbh = 5/ha (may 

include the nest snags). A 2 ha no-harvest buffer should be maintained around known nest or 

H-149
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 54 

roost sites. At the landscape level: provide an average of 60% of a landscape management unit 

(e.g., watersheds, townships, sections) as suitable habitat (early successional with adequate 

snags, young forest [40-80 years] with adequate snags, and late-successional forest), and 

>40% of suitable habitat should be late-successional forest. 

The population objective is to provide a density of breeding pairs averaging at least one pair per 

600 ha within the percent of the landscape that is suitable habitat. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Most primary cavity nesters associated with 

late-successional forests such as hairy woodpecker and red-breasted sapsucker, and 

secondary cavity nesters such as northern pygmy owl, Vaux's swift, red-breasted nuthatch, 

brown creeper, chestnut-backed chickadee, and northern saw whet owl. 

Mid-story tree layers. Varied thrush: The current populations are relatively stable for long-term 

trends in both the Cascade Mountains and Southern Pacific Rainforests (non-significant 0.3 and 

-0.5% per year, respectively) (Sauer et al. 1997). There are highly significant (p<.01) recent 

declining trends in both the Cascade Mountains and Southern Pacific Rainforests (-3.7 and -

4.7% per year, respectively). 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: provide 

late-successional forest in blocks >30 ha, in managed stands, with multiple tree layers in a 

mixed species composition, high canopy closure (>70%), and 30% deciduous vegetative cover 

in the subcanopy and understory for a dense leaf litter layer. Riparian buffer zones within 

harvest units should be >70 meters wide, with habitat conditions described above to provide 

potential nesting habitat, if successful nesting is documented in these stands. At the landscape 

level: provide an average of 2 contiguous blocks of late-successional forest >30 ha or one block 

>60ha per square mile within landscape management units (e.g., watersheds, townships, 

sections). 

The current population objective in Western Oregon is to reverse declining BBS population 

trends to achieve stable (non-significant trend of <2% per year) or increasing trends by 2020. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily species associated with mid-story tree 

layers, particularly with a deciduous component, such as warbling vireo and to a lesser extent 

Wilson's warbler. Extensive forest floor debris may benefit hermit thrush and Swainson's 

thrush. 

Closed Canopy. Hermit Warbler: The current population in the Cascade Mountains is 

significantly (p<.10) increasing for long-term and recent trends (2.4 and 3.5% per year, 

respectively) (Sauer et al. 1997). There are relatively stable long-term and recent trends (nonsignificant 0.3 and 1.2% per year, respectively) in the Southern Pacific Rainforests. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: in 

managed stands > 30 years old, provide an average tree dbh >30 cm, >90% canopy closure, 

and a dominance of Douglas-fir trees. In harvest units, retain residual clumps of closed-canopy 

forest (retention aggregates) in patches >2 ha to provide potential nesting habitat, if successful 

nesting is documented in these stands. Riparian buffer zones within harvest units should be 

>70 meters wide to provide potential nesting habitat, if successful nesting is documented in 

these stands. 

 

H-150
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 55 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily species associated with high canopy 

closure or foliage volume such as golden-crowned kinglet and chestnut-backed chickadee, or 

species associated with Douglas-fir trees such as brown creeper and red-breasted nuthatch. 

Deciduous Canopy/Subcanopy Trees. Pacific slope flycatcher: The current population in the 

Southern Pacific Rainforests is significantly (p<.05) declining in the long-term trend (-1.6% per 

year), and there is also a significantly (p<.10) declining recent trend (-1.7% per year) (Sauer et 

el. 1997). There are relatively stable long-term and recent trends (non-significant -0.4 and -

0.7% per year, respectively) in the Cascade Mountains. 

 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: provide 

late-successional forest with 20% deciduous canopy cover, particularly where it’s associated 

with riparian zone or wet site deciduous trees such as red alder and bigleaf maple. In harvest 

units with hardwood site potential, retain deciduous canopy trees and/or western hemlock and 

western red cedar trees in small residual clumps (retention aggregates) near or adjacent to the 

riparian zone to provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat. Riparian buffer zones within 

harvest units should be >40 meters wide, and meet stand-level habitat conditions described 

above. 

The current population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest is to reverse declining BBS 

population trends to achieve stable (non-significant trend of <2% per year) or increasing trends 

by 2010.

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily species associated with deciduous 

trees in the canopy of conifer dominated forests such as warbling vireo, black-headed grosbeak, 

and black-throated gray warbler. 

Open Mid-story. Hammond’s Flycatcher: The current population has relatively stable long-term 

and recent trends in the Southern Pacific Rainforests (nonsignificant 2.2 and -2.3% per year, 

respectively), but significant (p<.05) increasing long-term and recent trends in the Cascade 

Mountains (6.0 and 7.0% per year, respectively). 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: provide 

late successional forest in stands >20 ha; in managed stands >40 years old, maintain a relative 

stem density (the ration of actual stem density to the maximum density available) of 0.2 to 0.3. 

Riparian buffer zones within harvest units should be >70 meters wide, and meet stand-level 

habitat conditions described above to provide potential nesting habitat, if successful nesting is 

documented in these stands. At the landscape level, provide an average of 3 blocks of latesuccessional forest >20 ha or one block >60 ha per square mile within landscape management 

units (e.g., watershed, township, section). 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: If snags are present, reduced stem density may 

benefit hairy woodpeckers. Thinning from below to maintain a relatively closed canopy would 

benefit foliage gleaners such as hermit warbler, golden-crowned kinglet, and chestnut-backed 

chickadee. 

Deciduous Understory. Wilson’s Warbler: The current population in the Cascade Mountains has 

relatively stable long-term and recent trends (non-significant -1.0 and -1.1% per year, 

respectively) (Sauer et al. 1997). There is a stable long-term trend (0.0% per year) in the 

Southern Pacific Rainforests despite highly significant (p<.01) recent declining trend (-2.1% per 

year). 

H-151
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 56 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: 

in late-successional forest, provide an understory of shrubs and small trees (<15 ft) that 

provides >40% cover. In harvest units, retain residual clumps (retention aggregates) of closedcanopy forest in patches >2 ha to provide potential nesting habitat, if successful nesting is 

documented in these stands. Riparian buffer zones within harvest units should be >30 meters 

wide, and meet stand-level habitat conditions described above. 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest is to reverse declining BBS 

population trends to achieve stable (non-significant trend of <2% per year) or increasing trends 

by 2010. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Thinning to enhance growth of understory 

vegetation will benefit species such as winter wren, orange-crowned warbler, Swainson's 

thrush, and warbling vireo. 

Forest Floor Complexity. Winter Wren: The current population in the Cascade Mountains is 

significantly (p<.10) increasing (1.4% per year) with a long-term trend and with a relatively 

stable, non-significant (-0.8% per year) recent trend. There was a significantly (p<.10) 

increasing trend of 7.7% per year during the early BBS period (1966-1979). In the Southern 

Pacific Rainforests, there is a relatively stable non-significant long-term trend (-0.1 % per year), 

but a significantly (p<.10) declining recent trend (-1.7% per year). 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: provide 

late-successional forest in blocks >30 ha, in managed forests with a rotation age >60 years; 

provide an average of 10 down logs/ha with a dbh >61 cm and >15.2 m long; shrub cover 

(woody or ferns) >60% within 3 meters of the ground; and tree trunk surface area for foraging 

with a mean dbh >40 cm. Riparian buffer zones within harvest units should be >40 meters 

wide, and meet stand-level habitat conditions described above. At the landscape level, provide 

an average of 2 contiguous blocks of late-successional forest >30 ha or one block >60 ha per 

square mile within landscape management units (e.g., watershed, township, section). 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest is to reverse declining BBS 

population trends to achieve stable (non-significant trend of <2% per year) or increasing trends 

by 2010. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily species that use a well-developed 

understory in late-successional forest such as Wilson's warbler, orange-crowned warbler, and 

rufous hummingbird. 

Young Forest: Understory Re-initiating: Maintain 10-30% of each subprovince in young 

forest, and 20-40% of the subprovince in some combination of young and pole forest. All focal 

species and habitat attributes occur in the multi-layered/mature forest. 

Pole Forest: Stem Exclusion: Maintain 10-30% of each subprovince in pole forest, and 20-

40% of the subprovince in some combination of young and pole forest. 

Deciduous Canopy Trees. Black-throated Gray Warbler: The current population in the Cascade 

Mountains is relatively stable for long-term and recent trends in both (non-significant 0.0 and 

3.9% per year, respectively), and in Southern Pacific Rainforests (non-significant 1.6 and 0.2% 

per year, respectively). 

H-152
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 57 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: in 

young, closed-canopy managed stands, provide an average of >20% canopy cover of 

deciduous trees. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily black-headed grosbeak, Pacific-slope 

flycatcher, and warbling vireo because of their association with deciduous canopy trees in 

conifer dominated forests. 

Deciduous Subcanopy/Understory. Hutton’s Vireo: The current population for the Cascade 

Mountains has no trend data, due to inadequate sample size. In the Southern Pacific 

Rainforests, there are relatively stable long-term and recent trends (nonsignificant 1.2 and -

0.5% per year, respectively). 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: in 

young, pole-aged managed stands, provide an average of >20% deciduous/broadleaf cover in 

the subcanopy and understory. 

 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily species associated with a deciduous 

subcanopy and understory in young closed-canopy forests such as Swainson's thrush, 

MacGillivray's warbler, winter wren, warbling vireo, and Wilson's warbler. 

Early-seral Forest: Stand Initiation Stage: Maintain 20-40% of each subprovince in earlyseral forest. 

Residual Canopy Trees. Olive-Sided Flycatcher: The current population in both the Cascade 

Mountains and Southern Pacific Rainforests is highly significant (p<.01), with long-term declines 

(-2.9 and -5.1% per year, respectively) (Sauer et al. 1997). There are highly significant (p<.01) 

recent declining trends in the Southern Pacific Rainforests (-4.6% per year), and significant 

(p<.10) recent declining trends in the Cascade Mountains. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: within 

harvest units >20 ha, retain >3 1ha areas (aggregate clumps) with 10-30 trees/ha >12 m high, 

and within the harvest unit, not adjacent to the forest edge. The remainder of the harvest unit 

should average 35 trees/ha >12 m high, dispersed relatively equally throughout the harvest unit. 

Retained trees should be >50% hemlocks or true firs to provide preferred nest trees, and have 

at least 25% foliage volume (canopy lift) for nesting substrate. Suppressed or plantation trees 

should also be retained throughout the harvest unit (>13 ha) 3-12 m high. 

The population objective for Western Oregon is to reverse declining BBS population trends to 

achieve stable (non-significant trend of <2% per year) or increasing trends by 2020, and the 

density of breeding pairs should be an average of one pair/20 ha within the percent of the 

landscape that is suitable habitat (early successional with conditions described below or oldgrowth with large canopy gaps). 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily western tanager, Steller's jay, purple 

finch, evening grosbeak, red crossbill, and western wood-pewee. Depending upon the degree of 

tree retention, other species that use semi-open canopies such as chestnut-backed chickadee, 

golden-crowned kinglet, and semi-open warbler may occur in low abundance as foraging 

species. Some cavity nesting species such as brown creeper, red-breasted nuthatch, hairy 

woodpecker, red-breasted sapsucker, and pileated woodpecker may benefit in the short-term by 

H-153
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 58 

using residual trees as foraging sites, and in the long-term as the stand develops into a closedcanopy forest and the retained trees become snags suitable for nesting. 

Snags. Western bluebird: The current population in the Southern Pacific Rainforests is highly 

significant for long-term (p<.01) and recent (p<.05) declining trends (-4.0 and -7.2% per year, 

respectively). 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: within 

harvest units <10 years old, provide an average of 8 snags/ha >38 cm dbh with at least 3/ha 

>71 cm dbh; snags should >30 feet tall, well distributed, and of varying decay classes with a 

relative equal amount of hard and soft snags; and harvest units should be at least 15 ha to meet 

the needs of multiple pairs. 

The population objective for the Southern Pacific Rainforest is to reverse declining BBS 

population trends to achieve stable (non-significant trend of <2% per year) or increasing trends 

by 2010, in conjunction with conservation efforts described in the Lowland Valleys of Western 

Oregon and Washington Conservation Plan. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Other primary and secondary cavity nesters that 

will nest in harvest units such as northern flicker and to a lesser extent red-breasted sapsucker 

(soft snags), house wren (particularly in southern Oregon where oaks occur in the forest), violetgreen swallow, and tree swallow. Other non-cavity nesters that regularly use snags retained in 

harvest units for foraging or singing perches include olive-sided flycatcher, western tanager, 

western wood-pewee, red crossbill, Steller's jay, evening grosbeak, and red-tailed hawk. 

Deciduous Vegetation. Orange-Crowned Warbler: The current population in the Cascade 

Mountains has variable non-significant long-term and recent trends (-6.1 and 

2.5% per year, respectively). There are highly significant (p<.01) long-term and recent declining 

trends in the Southern Pacific Rainforests (-2.4 and -3.3% per year, respectively). 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: in earlysuccessional harvest units, provide an average of 30% cover of deciduous shrubs and small 

trees (<15 ft tall). 

The population objective in the Southern Pacific Rainforest is to reverse declining BBS 

population trends to achieve stable (non-significant trend of <2% per year) or increasing trends 

by 2010. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily Rufous hummingbird, Wilson's 

warbler, MacGillivray's warbler, willow flycatcher, and wrentit, but also Bewick's wren, song 

sparrow, and spotted towhee. If deciduous vegetation is maintained in patches into later stages 

of early-successional habitats, the primary species to benefit include Swainson's thrush and 

warbling vireo. 

Nectar-producing Plants. Rufous Hummingbird: The current population in the Cascade 

Mountains has significant (p<.05) long-term declines and highly significant (p<.01) recent 

declines (-2.7 and -5.4% per year, respectively). There are highly significant (p<.01) long-term 

and significant (p<.05) recent declining trends in the Southern Pacific Rainforests (-3.9 and - 

3.9% per year, respectively). 

H-154
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 59 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, at the stand-level: in earlysuccessional harvest units, provide diverse vegetative structure and composition including a 

well developed deciduous component of shrubs and trees, particularly nectar-producing plants. 

The population objective in Western Oregon is to reverse declining BBS population trends to 

achieve stable (non-significant trend of <2% per year) or increasing trends by 2010. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: Primarily orange-crowned warbler, Wilson's 

warbler, MacGillivray's warbler, willow flycatcher, and wrentit (coastal Oregon only), but also 

Bewick's wren, song sparrow, and spotted towhee. 

H-155
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 60 

APPENDIX C 

Biological Objectives - Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East-Slope of the 

Cascade Mountains of Western Oregon and Washington. All of the information in this 

appendix is from Altman, 2000b. 

As outlined in the Conservation Strategy for Landbirds of the East-Slope of the Cascade 

Mountains of Western Oregon and Washington, the forest conditions for this strategy are: 

Ponderosa Pine, Mixed Conifer, and Oak-pine Woodland. Each condition and its focal attribute 

and species are explained below. 

Ponderosa Pine. The general biological objectives for ponderosa pine include: “no net loss” of 

habitat; retain all large diameter >53cm Ponderosa Pine and snags; maintain existing moderate 

to high quality Ponderosa Pine; enhance size and connectivity of existing patches; avoid or 

minimize further degradation; improve degraded habitat; by 2025, restore/maintain at least 30% 

(greater if other directives exceed 30%) of the potential vegetation of late-successional (mature 

and old-growth) Ponderosa Pine forest within landscape management units; and by 2025, 

establish/maintain 3 areas of forest >5,000 acres in Oregon that are moving towards a 

dominance of late-successional Ponderosa Pine forest conditions. 

Large Patches of Old Forest with Large Snags. White-headed woodpecker: The current 

population has an insufficient sample size for population trend analyses in the Cascade 

Mountains BBS Physiographic Region. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, in the East-Slope 

Cascades: provide the following late-seral conditions: mean of >25 trees/ha >53 cm dbh, and at 

least 2 of the trees >79 cm dbh (foraging trees and replacement snags; mean >3.6 snags/ha 

>20 cm dbh with >50% >64 cm dbh in a moderate to advanced state of decay; and mean 

canopy closure 10-40%. Also, where ecologically appropriate, provide conditions described 

above in the following minimum areas (patch size) relative to amount of oldgrowth or late-seral 

forest present: in predominantly old-growth, provide >140 contiguous hectares, and in 26-75% 

old-growth provide >280 contiguous hectares. 

The population objective for the East-Slope Cascades is to maintain known breeding sites and 

provide habitat as described above to establish breeding populations (>10 pairs/area) in at least 

10 new locations (5 in the Oregon Cascades) by 2025. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: The species most likely to benefit from the 

presence of large patches of old ponderosa pine forest with large trees and snags include 

flammulated owl, Lewis' woodpecker, white-breasted nuthatch, pgymy nuthatch, Williamson's 

sapsucker, northern goshawk, Hammond's flycatcher, hairy woodpecker, and brown creeper. 

Large Trees. Pygmy Nuthatch: The current population has insufficient sample size for 

population trend analyses in the Cascade Mountains BBS Physiographic Region. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, in the East-Slope 

Cascades: where ecologically appropriate, initiate actions in Ponderosa Pine forest to maintain 

or provide the following conditions: mean of >25 trees/ha >53 cm dbh, and at least 2 of the trees 

>79 cm dbh (foraging trees and replacement snags); mean >3.6 snags/ha >20 cm dbh with 

>50% >64 cm dbh in a moderate to advanced state of decay. 

H-156
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 61 

The population objective for the East-Slope Cascades is to maintain current populations, and 

where appropriate initiate actions to expand density of breeding populations at these sites. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: The primary species to benefit from large trees 

in Ponderosa Pine forest include white-headed woodpecker, white-breasted nuthatch, pine 

siskin, northern goshawk, and flammulated owl. 

Open Understory with Regenerating Pines. Chipping sparrow: The current population in the 

Cascade Mountains BBS Physiographic Region shows a significant (p<.05) long-term (1966-

1998) declining trend of 4.3%/year, and a non-significant short-term (1980-1998) declining trend 

of 1.2%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, in the East-Slope 

Cascades: where ecologically appropriate, initiate actions in Ponderosa Pine forest to maintain 

or provide the following conditions: interspersion of herbaceous ground cover with shrub and 

regenerating pine patches; 20-60% cover in the shrub layer (includes shrubs and small trees); 

and >20% of the shrub layer in regenerating sapling conifers, especially pines, and mean 

canopy cover 10-30%. At the landscape level, ensure a mix of understory conditions such that 

10-30% of the landscape meets site-level conditions as described above. 

The population objective in the East-Slope Cascades is to reverse long-term declining 

population trends to achieve stable populations (non-significant trends of <2%/year) or 

increasing population trends by 2010, and to maintain cowbird parasitism rates below 10% 

within specific-study areas. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: The primary species to benefit from 

herbaceous-shrub openings with regenerating pines in ponderosa pine forest include dark-eyed 

junco, Townsend's solitaire, American robin, common poorwill, dusky flycatcher, and gray 

flycatcher. 

Patches of burned old Forest. Lewis’s woodpecker: The current population in the Cascade 

Mountains has an insufficient sample size for trend analyses. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat includes, in the East-Slope 

Cascades: where ecologically and socially appropriate, through natural events (i.e., wildfire) or 

management (i.e., prescribed burning), maintain >1% of the landscape (i.e., large areas such as 

ecoregions, forests) as post-fire old ponderosa pine forest habitat, with >50% of the post-fire 

landscape as unsalvaged. Where salvage logging is occurring in post-fire old ponderosa pine 

forest, maintain or provide in burns >40 ha; salvage <50% of the standing and downdead; in all 

burns, retain all trees/snags >51 cm dbh and >50% of those 30-51 cm dbh; and retained snags 

should be clumped rather than evenly spaced, with both hard and soft decay classes to 

lengthen the period that stands are suitable nesting habitat. Also, maintain approximately 59 

snags/ha >23 cm, and of these approximately 15/ha should be > 53 cm; provide recruitment 

snags (e.g., fungal inoculation, topping, girdling), particularly in areas with high risk of standreplacement fires; and provide shrub understory with >13% cover. 

The population objective in the East-Slope Cascades is to provide post-fire habitat as described 

above to maintain breeding populations (>10 pairs/area) in 5 locations in the Oregon Cascades. 

 

H-157
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 62 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: The species most likely to benefit from stand 

replacement fires in Ponderosa Pine forest are olive-sided flycatcher, American kestrel, blackbacked woodpecker, three-toed woodpecker, mountain bluebird, and northern flicker. 

Mixed Conifer. The general biological objectives for mixed conifer include: “no net loss” of 

habitat; retain large diameter >53 cm trees and snags; maintain moderate to high quality Late 

Successional Mixed Conifer forest habitat; enhance size and connectivity of patches; avoid or 

minimize further degradation; improve quality of degraded habitat; by 2025, establish/maintain 5 

blocks of forest >5,000 acres in the Oregon Cascades that are moving toward dominance by 

Mixed Conifer (Late-Successional) forest conditions; and by 2025, establish/maintain >25% of 

landscape units (e.g., watersheds, management units, etc.) where Mixed Conifer is appropriate 

as moving towards late-succcessional conditions. 

Large Trees. Brown Creeper: The current population in the Cascade Mountains BBS 

Physiographic Region is significant (p<.05) over the long-term (1966-1998), with a declining 

trend of 5.6%/year, and is non-significant in the short-term (1980-1998), with an increasing trend 

of 3.1%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat in the East-Slope Cascades 

includes: where ecologically appropriate, initiate actions in mixed conifer forest to maintain or 

provide the following conditions: blocks of late-successional habitat >30 ha, >10 trees/ha >46 

cm dbh with at least 2 trees >60 cm dbh. 

The population objective in the East-Slope Cascades is to reverse long-term declining 

population trends to achieve stable populations (non-significant trends of <2%/year) or 

increasing population trends by 2010. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: The primary species to benefit from large trees 

in late-successional mixed conifer forest include Townsend's warbler, red-breasted nuthatch, 

evening grosbeak, goldencrowned kinglet, pine siskin, and red crossbill. 

Large Snags. Williamson’s Sapsucker: The current population in the Cascade Mountains BBS 

Physiographic Region is an insufficient sample size for population trend analyses. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat in the East-Slope Cascades 

includes: where ecologically appropriate, initiate actions in Mixed Conifer (Late-Successional) 

forest to maintain or provide >2.5 snags/ha >30.5 cm dbh except ponderosa pine should be >46 

cm dbh mean canopy cover 25-70%. 

The population objective in the East-Slope Cascades is to maintain current populations, and 

where appropriate initiate actions to expand density of breeding populations at these sites. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: The primary species to benefit from snags in 

late-successional mixed conifer forest include pileated woodpecker, hairy woodpecker, 

flammulated owl, northern pygmy owl, red-naped sapsucker, brown creeper, Vaux's swift, 

chestnut-backed chickadee, great-gray owl, red-breasted nuthatch, and winter wren. 

Interspersion Grassy Openings and Dense Thickets. Flammulated Owl: The current population 

in the Cascade Mountains BBS Physiographic Region is an insufficient sample size for 

population trend analyses. 

H-158
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 63 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat in the East-Slope Cascades 

includes: where ecologically appropriate, initiate actions to maintain or provide late-successional 

Mixed Conifer forest habitat with the following conditions: >10 snags/40 ha >30 cm dbh and > 

1.8 m tall; >20 trees/ha >21 in dbh to function as recruitment snags; at least one large or two 

smaller dense, brushy thickets of sapling/pole trees for roosting habitat; and at least one large 

or two smaller grassy openings within the territory. At the landscape level, provide conditions 

described above in patches of suitable habitat >140 ha to provide for a potential nesting 

population of at least 10 pairs. 

The population objective in the East-Slope Cascades is to maintain current populations, and 

where appropriate initiate actions to expand density of breeding populations at these sites. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: The primary species to benefit from grassy 

edges and openings in Ponderosa Pine forest would be great-gray owl. Additionally, the 

presence of old, Ponderosa Pine forest would benefit numerous species associated with large 

trees and/or open understory such as white-breasted nuthatch, white-headed woodpecker, 

pygmy nuthatch, hairy woodpecker, brown creeper, chipping sparrow, Townsend's solitaire, 

Hammond's flycatcher, Cassin's finch, western bluebird, and western tanager. 

Multi-layered/Dense Canopy/Vertical Cover. Hermit Thrush: The current population in the 

Cascade Mountains BBS Physiographic Region is non-significant in the long-term (1968-1998) 

with a declining trend of 0.8%/year, and shows a non-significant short-term (1980-1998) 

increasing trend of 2.6%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat in the East-Slope Cascades 

includes: where ecologically appropriate, initiate actions in Mixed Conifer (Late-Successional) 

forest to maintain or provide patches of forest with multi-layered structure and a dense 

understory shrub layer. 

The population objective in the East-Slope Cascades is to maintain stable or increasing 

population trends over by 2010. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: The primary species to benefit from a multilayered, dense canopy and vertical cover in late-successional mixed conifer forest include 

varied thrush, chestnut-backed chickadee, blue grouse, winter wren, and Townsend's warbler. 

Edges and Openings Created by Wildfire. Olive-sided flycatcher: The current population in the 

Cascade Mountains Physiographic Region is highly significant (p<.01) for the long-term (1966-

1998), with a declining trend of 3.0%/year, and is significant (p<.01) over a short-term (1980-

1998), with declining trend of 2.9%/year. 

The specific biological objective for this species and habitat in the East-Slope Cascades 

includes: where ecologically and socially appropriate in Mixed Conifer forest, through natural 

events (i.e., wildfire) or management (i.e., prescribed burning) maintain: >2% of the landscape 

(i.e., large areas such as ecoregions, forests) as post-fire habitat, and >40% of the post-fire 

landscape as unsalvaged. Where salvage logging is occurring in post-fire old ponderosa 

pine forest, maintain or provide the following conditions: in burns >40 ha, salvage <50% of the 

standing and down dead; in all burns, retain all trees/snags >51 cm dbh and >50% of those 30-

51 cm dbh; and retain patches with mix of live and dead trees/snags to provide potential nest 

trees (live) within the context of potential foraging and singing perches (dead). 

H-159
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Focal Landbird Species Analysis 

 64 

The population objective in the East-Slope Cascades is to reverse declining BBS trends to 

achieve stable populations (non-significant trends of <2%/year) or increasing populations in the 

next by 2010 In conjunction with efforts in the Idaho Bird Conservation Plan and the Montana 

Bird Conservation Plan. 

Other Species to Benefit from these objectives: The primary species to benefit from fire created 

edges and openings in Mixed Conifer forest would be western tanager, Cassin's finch, western 

wood-pewee, mountain bluebird, northern flicker, American kestrel, and American robin. 

H-160
Appendix H-11 

Biological Evaluation 

Jordan Cove/Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline 

Project 

April 2009 

H-161
Table of Contents 

INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................4

PRE-FIELD REVIEW ..................................................................................................................4

RESULTS OF THE FIELD RECONNAISSANCE....................................................................6

SPECIES DETERMINATION OF EFFECT SUMMARY .......................................................7

EFFECTS OF ACTION ALTERNATIVE ON SPECIES CONSIDERED IN MORE 

DETAIL ........................................................................................................................................20

Global Discussion ......................................................................................................... 20 

Analysis Areas and Current Environment ................................................................ 20 

Impacts...................................................................................................................... 33

Conservation Measures and Mitigation .................................................................... 62 

Species Accounts and Analysis of Impacts .................................................................. 63 

MAMMALS ............................................................................................................. 63 

BIRDS....................................................................................................................... 74 

REPTILES .............................................................................................................. 131 

AMPHIBIANS........................................................................................................ 135 

TERRESTRIAL INVERTEBRATES .................................................................... 140 

FISH........................................................................................................................ 155

AQUATIC INVERTEBRATES ............................................................................. 170 

PLANTS ................................................................................................................. 172 

OTHER RARE AND UNCOMMON SPECIES .................................................... 191 

SIGNATURE..............................................................................................................................211

H-162
List of Tables 

Table 1 Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Table 2 Available Habitat within 700 Feet of the Proposed Action Corresponding to 

Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil 2001) and Land Owner 

Table 3 Available Habitat within 3200 Feet of the Proposed Action Corresponding to 

Habitat Category (Johnson and O'Neil 2001) and Land Owner 

Table 4 Available Habitat within 5 Miles of the Proposed Action Corresponding to 

Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil 2001) and Land Owner 

Table 5 Effects to acres by Johnson and O’Neil Habitat Type by BLM District or USFS 

National Forest 

Table 6 Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves Affected by Construction of the PCGP 

Project 

Table 7 Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves Affected by Operations of the PCGP 

Project 

Table 8 Snag Density Estimates on USFS Lands 

Table 9 Estimated Noise Associated with Equipment and Noise Attenuation at Specified 

Distances During a Typical Pipeline Construction Sequence. 

Table 10 Planned USFS and BLM Projects in the Vicinity of the Proposed Pipeline 

Route 

Table 11 Grouped Fungi Species that could Potentially Occur Along the Proposed 

Pipeline Route 

List of Appendices 

Appendix A Special Status Species that are not Expected to be Impacted by the Project 

Appendix B Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance to Each 

USFS National Forest and BLM District 

Appendix C Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project

H-163
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 4

Reply to: 2670 (FSM file code for biological evaluations) 

Subject: Biological Evaluation for Sensitive Species on the Jordan Cove/Pacific 

Connector Gas Pipeline Project 

To: Robert D. Cox, District Ranger 

Introduction 

This Biological Evaluation evaluates potential impacts to Threatened, Endangered, or 

Sensitive (TES) mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, invertebrates, fish, vascular plants, 

lichens, fungi, and bryophytes from the Jordan Cove/Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline 

(PCGP) Project. It is Forest Service policy to “ensure that Forest Service actions do not 

contribute to loss of viability of any native or desired plant or contribute to trends 

towards Federal listing of any species” (FSM 2672.41). This document will analyze 

effects to federal candidates for listing, USFS sensitive and uncommon and rare species, 

and BLM sensitive, assessment, and uncommon and rare species. The Regional 

Forester’s Sensitive Species list, which includes federally listed, federally proposed, and 

sensitive species, was updated on January 31, 2008; however, because this Project was 

initiated before the update, the analysis of special status species for this Project is based 

on the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species list from 2004. 

The Jordan Cove/Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project crosses Coos, Douglas, Jackson, 

and Klamath Counties. Within that area, the Fremont-Winema, Rogue River-Siskiyou, 

and Umpqua National Forests are crossed. Additionally, BLM Coos Bay, Roseburg, 

Medford, and Lakeview Districts are crossed. There are currently 11 mammals, 37 birds, 

2 reptiles, 9 amphibians, 28 invertebrates, 17 fish, 22 bryophytes, 55 fungi, 33 lichen, and 

154 vascular plants with special designations that have the potential to occur within the 

Project area (table 1). There are also 17 species that are listed as federally threatened or 

endangered under the Endangered Species Act that could occur in the National Forests or 

BLM Districts crossed. These species are discussed in the BA. 

The proposed Jordan Cove/Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project would consist of a 

liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility in Coos Bay, Oregon and a 230-mile 36-inch natural 

gas pipeline from the LNG facility to Malin, Oregon (Figure 1). The pipeline right-ofway would generally consist of a 95-foot wide construction corridor, of which 65-feet 

would be allowed to revegetate after completion of construction. A more detailed 

description of the Project, including Purpose and Need, can be found in the Final EIS. 

Pre-field Review 

The information on special status species occurrence is based on several data sources 

including the BLM GeoBOB database (BLM 2006), ORNHIC species request (ORNHIC 

2006), Forest Service database (USFS 2006), aerial photographs, and other Geographical 

Information System (GIS) databases. Results of this review including expected habitats, 

H-164
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 5

and documented or suspected occurrences on USFS or BLM lands can be found in Tables 

H-6, H-7, and H-8 of the FEIS. 

Asldjals;dfj 

H-165
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 6

Results of the Field Reconnaissance 

Biological surveys were conducted in the Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project area by 

Siskiyou BioSurvey LLC, and its subcontractors beginning in the spring of 2007 and 

continuing through 2008. Surveys were conducted for Federal and State-listed threatened 

and endangered species, and special-status species, including: vascular and non-vascular 

plants, Northern spotted owl, great gray owl, marbled murrelet, Region 6 former Survey 

and Manage and BLM Sensitive and Assessment species mollusks, and the red tree vole. 

Further detail on surveys can be found in the 2008 Biological Survey Report. Special 

status species detected in those surveys include: 

Mammals 

• Red tree vole Arborimus longicaudus

Birds 

• Great gray owl Strix nebulosa

Special status mollusks 

• Evening fieldslug Deroceras hesperium

• Oregon shoulderband Helminthoglypta hertleini

• Chace’s sideband Monadenia chaceana

• Traveling sideband Monadenia fidelis celeuthia

• Klamath taildropper Prophysaon sp. Nov.

• Siskiyou Hesperian Vespericola sierranas 

Fungi, Lichens, and Bryophytes 

• Clavariadelphus sachalinensis

• Ramaria thiersii 

• Beard lichen Usnea longissima

• Needle lichen Chaenotheca ferruginea

• Pin lichen (yellow-rim needle lichen) Chaenotheca subroscida

• Terete skin lichen Leptogium teretiusculum

Vascular plants 

• Coastal lip-fern Cheilanthes intertexta

• Clustered lady’s slipper Cypripedium fasciculatum

• Siskiyou false rue-anemone Enemion stipitatum

• Slender meadow-foam Limnanthes gracilis ssp. gracilis

• Detling’s microseris Microseris laciniata ssp. detlingii

• Tehama navarretia Navarretia heterandra

• Sculptured popcorn-flower Plagiobothrys glyptocarpus

• Green-flowered wild ginger Asarum wagneri

• Inland sedge Carex interior

• Marigold pincushion plant Navarettia tagetina

• Scribner’s grass Scribneria bolanderi

H-166
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 7

Species Determination of Effect Summary 

If suitable habitat is present for a species in the Project area and surveys were not conducted for that species, 

then presence is assumed and potential effects of the Project are analyzed below. Species that were dropped 

from further consideration due to a lack of habitat or being surveyed for but not detected are described in 

Appendix A. 

The no action alternative is assumed to have no impact on all species listed below. 

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Sensitive Species 

Mammals 

Pacific shrew 

Sorex pacificus cascadensis S Y N U MIIH 

Pallid bat 

Antrozous pallidus S BA Y N U MIIH 

Townsend’s big-eared bat 

Corynorhinus townsendii BS Y N U MIIH 

Fringed myotis 

Myotis thysanodes BA Y N U MIIH 

Spotted bat 

Euderma maculatum S BA N N U NI 

Pygmy rabbit 

Brachylagus idahoensis S BA N N N NI 

Gold Beach pocket gopher 

Thomomys mazama helleri BA N N N NI 

Pistol River pocket gopher 

Thomomys bottae detumidus BA N N N NI 

Red tree vole 

Arborimus longicaudus UR Y Y Y MIIH 

**Pacific fisher 

Martes pennanti pacifica S Y N U MIIH 

Columbian white-tailed deer 

Odocoileus virginianus leucurus BS N N N NI 

Birds 

Red-necked grebe 

Podiceps grisegena S Y N U MIIH 

Horned grebe 

Podiceps auritus S Y N U MIIH 

Fork-tailed storm petrel 

Oceanodroma furcata BA N N U NI 

American white pelican 

Pelecanus erythrorhynchos BA Y N U MIIH 

Western least bittern 

Ixobrychus exilis hesperis S Y N U MIIH 

Trumpeter swan 

Cygnus buccinator BA Y N U MIIH 

Aleutian Canada Goose 

Branta canadadnsis leucopareia BS Y N U MIIH 

Dusky Canada goose Branta canadensis 

occidentalis BS Y N U MIIH 

H-167
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 8

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Tule goose 

Anser albifrons elgasi BS Y N U MIIH 

Harlequin duck 

Histrionicus histrionicus S BA Y N U MIIH 

Bufflehead 

Bucephala albeola S BA Y N U MIIH 

Yellow rail 

Coturnicops noveboracensis S BS N N U NI 

Upland sandpiper 

Bartramia longicauda S BS Y N U MIIH 

Rhinoceros auklet 

Cerorhinca monocerata BA N N U NI 

Cassin's auklet Ptychoramphus aleuticus BA N N U NI 

Tufted puffin 

Fratercula cirrhata BA N N U NI 

White-tailed kite 

Elanus leucurus BA Y N U MIIH 

Northern goshawk 

Accipiter gentilis BS Y N U MIIH 

Ferruginous hawk 

Buteo regalis BS Y N U MIIH 

Merlin 

Falco columbarius BA Y N U MIIH 

American peregrine falcon 

Falco peregrinus anatum S BS Y N U MIIH 

Arctic peregrine falcon 

Falco peregrinus tundrius BS Y N U MIIH 

Greater Sage Grouse 

Centrocercus urophasianus S BS Y N U MIIH 

**Yellow-billed cuckoo 

Coccyzus americanus occidentalis N N U NI 

Great gray owl 

Strix nebulosa UR Y Y U MIIH 

Flammulated owl 

Otus flammeolus S BS Y N U MIIH 

Northern pygmy owl 

Glaucidium gnoma S Y N U MIIH 

Western burrowing owl 

Athene cunicularia hypugea BS Y N U MIIH 

Common nighthawk 

Chordeile minor BS Y N U MIIH 

White-headed woodpecker 

Picoides albolarvatus BS Y N U MIIH 

Lewis's woodpecker 

Melanerpes lewis BS Y N U MIIH 

Black-backed woodpecker 

Picoides arcticus BS Y N U MIIH 

Gray flycatcher 

Empidonax wrightii S Y N U MIIH 

**Streaked horned lark 

Eremophila alpestris strigata BS Y N U MIIH 

Purple martin 

Progne subis BS Y N U MIIH 

H-168
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 9

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Oregon vesper sparrow 

Pooecetes gramineus affinis3 BS Y N U MIIH 

Tricolored blackbird 

Agelaius tricolor S BA Y N U MIIH 

Reptiles 

Northwestern pond turtle 

Actinemys marmorata marmorata 

(formerly Emys marmorata marmorata)

S BS Y N U MIIH 

Common kingsnake 

Lampropeltis getula S Y N U MIIH 

Amphibians 

Oregon slender salamander 

Batrachoseps wrighti3 S N N N NI 

Del Norte salamander 

Plethodon elongatus S N N N NI 

Siskiyou Mountains salamander 

Plethodon stormi S BS N N N NI 

Southern torrent salamander 

Rhyacotriton variegatus S Y N U MIIH 

Black salamander 

Aneides flavipunctatus S BA N N N NI 

California slender salamander 

Batrachoseps attenuatus S BA N N N NI 

Foothill yellow-legged frog 

Rana boylii S BA Y N U MIIH 

Northern leopard frog 

Rana pipeins S N N N NI 

**Oregon spotted frog 

Rana pretiosa S BS Y N U NI 

Terrestrial Invertebrates 

Evening fieldslug 

Deroceras hesperium UR BS Y Y Y MIIH 

Great Basin ramshorn 

Helisoma newberryi newberryi BS Y Y N NI 

Oregon shoulderband 

Helminthoglypta hertleini BS Y Y Y MIIH 

Tillamook westernslug 

Hesperarion mariae BS Y N U MIIH 

Chace’s sideband 

Monadenia chaceana UR BS Y Y Y MIIH 

Green sideband 

Monadenia fidelis beryllica BS Y Y N NI 

Traveling sideband 

Monadenia fidelis celeuthia BS Y Y Y MIIH 

Modoc sideband 

Monadenia fidelis ssp. Nov. BS Y Y N NI 

Crater Lake tightcoil 

Pristiloma arcticum crateris UR BS Y Y N NI 

Klamath taildropper 

Prophysaon sp. Nov. BS Y Y Y MIIH 

Spotted tail-dropper 

Prophysaon vanattae pardalis BS Y Y N NI 

Siskiyou hesperian 

Vespericola sierranas BS Y Y Y MIIH 

H-169
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 10

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Siskiyou short-horned grasshopper 

Chloealtis aspasma BS Y N Y MIIH 

Johnson’s hairstreak 

Callophrys johnsoni 

(Mitoura johnsoni) 

 BS Y N Y MIIH 

Insular blue butterfly 

Plebejus saepiolus littoralis BS Y N Y MIIH 

**Mardon skipper butterfly 

Polites mardon BS Y N Y MIIH 

Non-anadromous fish 

Pit-Klamath Brook lamprey 

Lampetra lethophaga S Y N U MIIH 

Klamath River lamprey Lampetra similis S Y N U MIIH 

Jenny Creek redband trout 

Oncorhynchus mykiss S BS N N N NI 

Klamath redband trout 

Oncorhynchus mykiss newberryi S Y N U MIIH 

Umpqua Oregon chub 

Oregonichthys kalawatseti S BS Y N U MIIH 

Blue chub 

Gila coerulea S Y N U MIIH 

Millicoma dace 

Rhinichthys catarctae ssp. BS Y N U MIIH 

Jenny Creek sucker 

Catostomus rimiculus ssp. BS N N N NI 

Klamath largescale sucker 

Catostomus snyderi S Y N U MIIH 

Slender sculpin 

Cottus tenuis S N N U NI 

Anadromous fish 

Chinook Salmon 

Oncorhynchus tshawytscha 

Oregon Coast ESU S BA Y N U MIIH 

Southern Oregon Coast/California Coast 

ESU 

Fall-run 

S BS Y N U MIIH 

Chum salmon 

(Pacific Coast ESU) 

Onocorhynchus keta

S BS N N N NI 

Steelhead 

Oncorynchus mykiss 

Klamath Mountains Province ESU 

Summer/winter run BA Y N U MIIH 

Oregon Coast ESU S Y N U MIIH 

Coastal Cutthroat 

Oncorhynchus clarki clarki 

Oregon Coast ESU S Y N U MIIH 

Southern Oregon/California Coast ESU S Y N U MIIH 

Aquatic Invertebrates 

Pea clam 

Pisidium ultramontanum BS Y N U MIIH 

**Black Abalone 

Haliotis cracherodii N Y N U NI 

H-170
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 11

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Newcomb's littorine snail 

Algamorda newcombiana BS N N U NI 

Diminutive pebblesnail 

Fluminicola sp. Nov. BS Y Y N NI 

Fall Creek pebblesnail 

Fluminicola sp. Nov. BS Y Y N NI 

Keene Creek pebblesnail 

Fluminicola sp. Nov. UR BS Y Y N NI 

Toothed pebblesnail 

Fluminicola sp. Nov. UR BS Y Y N NI 

Klamath pebblesnail 

Fluminicola sp. Nov. BS Y Y N NI 

Nerite pebblesnail 

Fumunicola sp. Nov. UR BS Y Y N NI 

Scale lanx 

Lanx klmathensis BS Y Y N NI 

Rotund lanx 

Lanx subrotunda BS Y Y N NI 

Pacific walker 

Pomatiopsis californica BS Y N U MIIH 

Bryophytes 

Bryum calobryoides BA Y Y N NI

Calypogeia sphagnicola BA N N N NI

Chiloscyphus gemmiparus BS Y Y N NI

Codriophorus depressus (formerly 

Racomitrium depressum) BA Y Y N NI

Crumia latifolia BA Y Y N NI

Diplophyllum plicatum UR BA Y Y N NI

Encalypta brevicollis 

 var. crumiana BS Y Y N NI

Eucladium verticillatum BA Y Y N NI

Funaria muhlenbergii BA Y Y N NI

Helodium blandowii BA Y Y N NI

Kurzia makinoana UR BA Y Y N NI

Limbella fryei BS Y Y N NI

Meesia uliginosa BA Y Y N NI

Pseudocalliergon trifarium (formerly 

Calliergon trifarium) BA N N N NI

Pseudoleskeella serpentinensis BA Y Y N NI

Rhizomnium nudum S Y Y N NI

Schistostega pennata S BA Y Y N NI

Scouleria marginata S Y Y N NI

Splachnum ampullaceum BA Y Y N NI

Tayloria serrata BA Y Y N NI

Tripterocladium leucocladulum BA Y Y N NI

Tritomaria exsectiformis UR BA Y Y N NI

H-171
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 12

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Fungi 

Albatrellus avellaneus UR Y N N MIIH

Albatrellus caeruleoporus UR Y N N MIIH

Albatrellus ellisii UR Y N N MIIH

Alpova olivaceotinctus UR Y N N MIIH

Arcangeliella camphorata UR Y N N MIIH

Arcangeliella crassa UR Y N N MIIH

Balsamia nigrescens UR Y N N MIIH

Boletus pulcherrimus S Y N N MIIH

Catathelasma ventricosum UR Y N N MIIH

Choiromyces alveolatus UR Y N N MIIH

Clavariadelphus sachalinensis UR Y N Y MIIH

Clavariadelphus subfastigiatus UR Y N N MIIH

Cortinarius barlowensis S Y N N MIIH

Cortinarius valgus UR Y N N MIIH

Cortinarius verrucisporus UR Y N N MIIH

Cudonia monticola S Y N N MIIH

Dermocybe humboldtensis UR Y N N MIIH

Endogone oregonensis UR Y N N MIIH

Gastroboletus vividus UR Y N N MIIH

Gelatinodiscus flavidus UR Y N N MIIH

Gomphus bonarii (synonym of common 

species Gomphus floccosus) S Y N N MIIH

Gomphus kauffmanii S Y N N MIIH

Helvella elastica UR Y N N MIIH

Leucogaster citrinus S Y N N MIIH

Mycena monticola S Y N N MIIH

Mycena tenax UR Y N N MIIH

Phaeocollybia attenuata UR Y N N MIIH

Phaeocollybia californica S Y N N MIIH

Phaeocollybia olivacea S Y N N MIIH

Phaeocollybia piceae UR Y N N MIIH

Phaeocollybia pseudofestiva UR Y N N MIIH

Phaeocollybia scatesiae UR Y N N MIIH

Phaeocollybia spadicea UR Y N N MIIH

Pseudorhizina californica (formerly 

Gyromitra californica) S Y N N MIIH

Ramaria abietina UR Y N N MIIH

Ramaria amyloidea S Y N N MIIH

Ramaria aurantiisiccescens S Y N N MIIH

Ramaria botrytis var. aurantiramosa UR Y N N MIIH

Ramaria concolor f. tsugina UR Y N N MIIH

Ramaria conjunctipes var. sparsiramosa UR Y N N MIIH

H-172
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 13

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Ramaria coulterae UR Y N N MIIH

Ramaria largentii S Y N N MIIH

Ramaria rainierensis UR Y N N MIIH

Ramaria rubribrunnescens UR Y N N MIIH

Ramaria spinulosa var. diminutiva UR Y N N MIIH

Ramaria suecica UR Y N N MIIH

Ramaria thiersii UR Y N Y MIIH

Rhizopogon brunneiniger UR Y N N MIIH

Rhizopogon ellipsosporus UR Y N N MIIH

Rhizopogon flavofibrillosus UR Y N N MIIH

Rhizopogon truncatus UR Y N N MIIH

Rickenella swartzii UR Y N N MIIH

Sarcodon fuscoindicus UR Y N N MIIH

Sowerbyella rhenana UR Y N N MIIH

Stropharia albovelata (formerly Pholiota 

albivelata) UR Y N N MIIH

Lichens 

Bryoria pseudocapillaris UR BS N N N NI 

Bryoria spiralifera UR BS N N N NI 

Bryoria subcana UR BA Y Y N NI 

Buellia oidalea UR Y Y N NI 

Calicium adspersum UR BA Y Y N NI 

Cetrelia cetrarioides UR Y Y N NI 

Chaenotheca ferruginea UR Y Y Y MIIH 

Chaenotheca subroscida S Y Y Y MIIH 

Chaenothecopsis pusilla UR Y Y N NI 

Dermatocarpon luridum S Y Y N NI 

Erioderma sorediatum BA Y Y N NI 

Heterodermia leucomela BA Y Y N NI 

Hypotrachyna revoluta UR BA Y Y N NI 

Leioderma sorediatum BA Y Y N NI 

Leptogium brebissonii BA Y Y N NI 

Leptogium cyanescens S Y Y N NI 

Leptogium hirsutum (L. burnetiae var. h.) S Y Y N NI 

Leptogium rivale UR Y Y N NI 

Leptogium teretiusculum UR Y Y Y MIIH 

Lobaria linita UR Y Y N NI 

Nephroma occultum S Y Y N NI 

Niebla cephalota UR BA Y Y N NI 

Pannaria rubiginosa BA Y Y N NI 

Peltigera pacifica S Y Y N NI 

Platismatia lacunosa UR Y Y N NI 

H-173
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 14

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Pseudocyphellaria mallota BA Y Y N NI 

Pseudocyphellaria perpetua UR Y Y N NI 

Pseudocyphellaria rainierensis S Y Y N NI 

Ramalina pollinaria S BA Y Y N NI 

Stereocaulon spathuliferum BA N N N NI 

Sulcaria badia BA Y Y N NI 

Teloschistes flavicans UR BA N N N NI 

Usnea hesperina UR Y Y N NI 

Usnea longissima S Y Y Y MIIH 

Vascular plants 

California maiden-hair Adiantum jordanii BA Y Y N NI 

Henderson's bentgrass 

Agrostis hendersonii BS Y Y N NI 

Peninsular onion 

Allium peninsulare S BA Y Y N NI 

Long-stemmed androsace 

Androsace elongata ssp. acuta S BA Y Y N NI 

Koehler's rockcress 

Arabis koehleri var. koehleri BS Y Y N NI 

Rogue Canyon rockcress 

Arabis modesta S BA N N N NI 

Crater Lake rock cress 

Arabis suffrutescens var. horizontalis S Y Y N NI 

Hairy manzanita Arctostaphylos hispidula S BA N N N NI 

Shasta arnica Arnica viscosa S BA Y Y N NI 

Coastal sagewort 

Artemisia pycnocephala BA N N N NI 

Green-flowered wild-ginger Asarum 

wagneri BS Y Y Y MIIH 

Grass-fern Asplenium septentrionale S BA Y Y N NI 

California milk-vetch 

Astragalus californicus BA Y Y N NI 

Wooly balsamroot Balsamorhiza hookeri 

var. lanata BS Y Y N NI 

Bensonia Bensoniella oregana S BS Y Y N NI 

Crenulate grape-fern 

Botrychium crenulatum S Y Y N NI 

Mingan moonwort Botrychium minganense S Y Y N NI 

Dwarf brodiaea Brodiaea terrestris BA Y Y N NI 

Greene's mariposa-lily Calochortus greenei BS Y Y N NI 

One-leaved mariposa-lily 

Calochortus monophyllus S BA Y Y N NI 

Broad-fruit mariposa-lily 

Calochortus nitidus S BA Y Y N NI 

Siskiyou mariposa lily** 

Calochortus persistens B? Y Y N NI 

Howell’s camassia 

Camassia howellii S BS N N N NI 

Primrose S Y Y N NI 

H-174
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 15

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Camissonia graciliflora 

Abrupt-beaked sedge 

Carex abrupta BA Y Y N NI 

Short-stemmed sedge 

Carex brevicaulis BA Y Y N NI 

Capitate sedge 

Carex capitata BA Y Y N NI 

Bristly sedge 

Carex comosa BA Y Y N NI 

Crawford’s sedge 

Carex crawfordii S BA Y Y N NI 

Carex gigas S Y Y N NI 

Hairy sedge 

Carex gynodynama BA Y Y N NI 

Inland sedge 

Carex interior S Y Y Y MIIH 

Slender sedge 

Carex lasiocarpa var. americana BA Y Y N NI 

Sierra sedge 

Carex nervina S Y Y N NI 

Siskiyou sedge 

Carex scabriuscula BA N N N NI 

Saw-tooth sedge 

Carex serratodens S BA Y Y N NI 

Involute-leaved sedge 

Carex stenophylla (C. eleocharis) S Y Y N NI 

Green-tinged paintbrush 

Castilleja chlorotica S BS N N N NI 

Split-hair paintbrush 

Castilleja schizotricha S N N N NI 

Coville’s lip-fern 

Cheilanthes covillei BA Y Y N NI 

Coastal lip-fern 

Cheilanthes intertexta S BA Y Y Y MIIH 

Narrow-leaved amole 

Chlorogalum angustifolium S BA Y Y N NI 

Timwort 

Cicendia quadrangularis BA Y Y N NI 

Bulb-bearing water-hemlock 

Cicuta bulbifera S BA Y Y N NI 

Tall bugbane 

Cimicifuga elata var. elata S BS Y Y N NI 

Ashland thistle 

Cirsium ciliolatum BS Y Y N NI 

Small-fruit clarkia 

Clarkia heterandra S BA Y Y N NI 

Spoonwort 

Cochlearia officinalis BA N N N NI 

Mt. Mazama collomia 

Collomia mazama S BS Y Y N NI 

Milo Baker’s cryptantha 

Cryptantha milobakeri S BA Y Y N NI 

Baker's cypress 

Cupressus bakeri S BA Y Y N NI 

H-175
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 16

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Short-pointed cyperus 

Cyperus acuminatus BA Y Y N NI 

Shining flatsedge 

Cyperus bipartitus S Y Y N NI 

Clustered lady's- slipper 

Cypripedium fasciculatum S BS Y Y Y MIIH 

Red larkspur 

Delphinium nudicaule S BA Y Y N NI 

Siskiyou false rue-anemone 

Enemion stipitatum S Y Y Y MIIH 

Oregon willow herb 

Epilobium oreganum S BS N N N NI 

Siskiyou willow herb 

Epilobium siskiyouense S N N N NI 

Siskiyou daisy 

Erigeron cervinus S BA Y Y N NI 

Rock daisy 

Erigeron petrophilus S Y Y N NI 

Prostrate buckwheat 

Eriogonum prociduum S Y Y N NI 

Russet cotton-grass 

Eriophorum chamissonis S BA N N N NI 

Large-leaved filaree 

Erodium macrophyllum BA Y Y N NI 

Inland coyote-thistle 

Eryngium alismifolium BA Y Y N NI 

Howell’s adder’s tongue 

Erythronium howellii S BS N N N NI 

Gold poppy 

Eschscholzia caespitosa S BA Y Y N NI 

Brewer’s aster 

Eucephalus breweri 

(Aster breweri) 

 BA Y Y N NI 

Western wahoo 

Euonymus occidentalis S Y Y N NI 

Elmer’s fescue 

Festuca elmeri BA Y Y N NI 

Umpqua swertia 

Frasera umpquaensis S BS Y Y N NI 

Siskiyou fritillaria 

Fritillaria glauca S BA Y Y N NI 

Newberry's gentian 

Gentiana newberryi var. newberryi S BA Y Y N NI 

Seaside gilia 

Gilia millefoliata BS N N N NI 

Beautiful stickseed 

Hackelia bella BA Y Y N NI 

Large-flowered rush-lily 

Hastingsia bracteosa var. bracteosa S BS N N N NI 

Whitney's bristleweed 

Hazardia whitneyi var. discoidea S Y Y N NI 

Salt heliotrope 

Heliotropium curassavicum BA N N N NI 

Shaggy horkelia 

Horkelia congesta ssp. congesta BS Y Y N NI 

H-176
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 17

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Henderson's horkelia 

Horkelia hendersonii S N N N NI 

Three-toothed horkelia 

Horkelia tridentata ssp. tridentata S BA N N N NI 

Whorled marsh-pennywort 

Hydrocotyle verticillata S BA Y Y N NI 

Baker’s globe-mallow 

Iliamna bakeri S BS Y Y N NI 

California globe-mallow 

Iliamna latibracteata S BA Y Y N NI 

North Umpqua kalmiopsis 

Kalmiopsis fragrans S BS Y Y N NI 

Bush beardtongue 

Keckiella lemmonii S BA Y Y N NI 

Thin -leaved peavine 

Lathyrus holochlorus BS Y Y N NI 

Columbia lewisia 

Lewisia columbiana var. columbiana S BA Y Y N NI 

Lee's lewisia 

Lewisia leana S BA Y Y N NI 

Kellogg's lily 

Lilium kelloggii S BA Y Y N NI 

Bellinger's meadowfoam 

Limnanthes floccosa ssp. bellingeriana S BS Y Y N NI 

Slender meadow-foam 

Limnanthes gracilis ssp. gracilis S BS Y Y Y MIIH 

Western marsh-rosemary 

Limonium californicum S BA N N N NI 

Tracy’s desertparsley 

Lomatium tracyi S Y Y N NI 

Stipuled trefoil 

Lotus stipularis S BA Y Y N NI 

Brewer’s Lupine 

Lupinus breweri var. breweri BA Y Y N NI 

Ashland lupine 

Lupinus lepidus var. ashlandensis S N N N NI 

Tracy’s lupine 

Lupinus tracyi S BA Y Y N NI 

Bog club-moss 

Lycopodiella inundata S BA Y Y N NI 

White meconella 

Meconella oregana S BS Y Y N NI 

Nodding melic 

Melica stricta BA Y Y N NI 

Coast microseris 

Microseris bigelovii BA N N N NI 

Douglas’ microseris 

Microseris douglasii ssp. douglasii S BA Y Y N NI 

Detling's microseris 

Microseris laciniata spp. detlingii S BS Y Y Y MIIH 

Bolander’s monkeyflower 

Mimulus bolanderi S BA Y Y N NI 

Congdon’s monkeyflower 

Mimulus congdonii BA Y Y N NI 

Disappearing monkeyflower S BS N N N NI 

H-177
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 18

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Mimulus evanescens 

Tri-colored monkeyflower 

Mimulus tricolor S BA Y Y N NI 

Howell’s montia 

Montia howellii S Y Y N NI 

Tehama navarretia 

Navarretia heterandra BA Y Y Y MIIH 

Marigold navarretia 

Navarretia tagetina S Y Y Y MIIH 

Slender nemacladus 

Nemacladus capillaris S BA Y Y N NI 

Adder’s-tongue 

Ophioglossum pusilum S BA Y Y N NI 

Coffee fern 

Pellaea andromedifolia S BA Y Y N NI 

Bird’s-foot fern 

Pellaea mucronata ssp mucronata S BA Y Y N NI 

Blue-leaved penstemon 

Penstemon glaucinus S BS Y Y N NI 

Red-root yampah 

Perideridia erythrorhiza S BS Y Y N NI 

American pillwort 

Pilularia americana S BA Y Y N NI 

Austin’s plagiobothrys 

Plagiobothrys austiniae BA Y Y N NI 

Coral seeded allocarya 

Plagiobothrys figuratus var. corallicarpus S BS Y Y N NI 

Sculptured popcornflower 

Plagiobothrys glyptocarpus S BA Y Y Y MIIH 

Greene’s popcorn flower 

Plagiobothrys greenei BA Y Y N NI 

Loose-flowered bluegrass 

Poa laxiflora S N N N NI 

Timber bluegrass 

Poa rhizomata BA Y Y N NI 

Profuse-flowered mesa mint 

Pogogyne floribunda BS Y Y N NI 

California sword-fern 

Polystichum californicum S BA Y Y N NI 

Rafinesque’s pondweed 

Potamogeton diversifolius BA Y Y N NI 

Fibrous pondweed 

Potamogeton foliosus var. fibrillosus BA Y Y N NI 

Southern Oregon buttercup 

Ranunculus austrooreganus BS Y Y N NI 

Redberry 

Rhamnus ilicifolia S BA Y Y N NI 

Thompson’s mistmaiden 

Romanzoffia thompsonii S BS Y Y N NI 

Columbia cress 

Rorippa columbiae S BS Y Y N NI 

Joint-leaved saxifrage 

Saxifragopsis fragarioides S BA Y Y N NI 

American Scheuchzeria 

Scheuchzeria palustris ssp. Americana S BA Y Y N NI 

H-178
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 19

TABLE 1 

Sensitive Species that Potentially Occur in the Project Area 

Common and/or Scientific Name 

USFS 

status a/

BLM 

status b/

Potential 

Habitat 

c/

Surveys 

Performed

Species 

Present 

Action 

Alternative

Water clubrush 

Schoenoplectus subterminalis 

(formerly Scirpus subterminalis) 

S BA Y Y N NI 

Drooping bulrush 

Scirpus pendulus S BA Y Y N NI 

Scribner's grass 

Scribneria bolanderi S Y Y Y MIIH 

Heckner's stonecrop 

Sedum laxum ssp. heckneri S N N N NI 

Applegate stonecrop 

Sedum oblanceolatum S BS N N N NI 

Henderson sidalcea 

Sidalcea hendersonii BS Y Y N NI 

Hickman’s checkerbloom 

Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. nov. BS Y Y N NI 

Coast checker bloom 

Sidalcea malvaeflora ssp. patula S BS Y Y N NI 

Hitchcock's blue-eyed grass 

Sisyrinchium hitchcockii BS Y Y N NI 

Parhish’s horse-nettle 

Solanum parishii BA Y Y N NI 

Howell's tauschia 

Tauschia howellii S N N N NI 

Short-podded thelypody 

Thelypodium brachycarpum S BA N N N NI 

Leach's brodiaea 

Triteleia hendersonii var. leachiae S BS Y Y N NI 

Sierra brodiaea 

Triteleia ixioides ssp. anilina S BA Y Y N NI 

Humped bladderwort 

Utricularia gibba S BA Y Y N NI 

Lesser bladderwort 

Utricularia minor BA Y Y N NI 

Western bog violet 

Viola primulifolia ssp. occidentalis S BS N N N NI 

Columbia water-meal 

Wolffia columbiana S BA Y Y N NI 

Small-flowered death camas 

Zigadenus fontanus BA Y Y N NI 

H-179
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 20

Effects of Action Alternative on Species Considered in More 

Detail 

Global Discussion 

Analysis Areas and Current Environment 

In order to characterize the current environment of each analysis area, buffers of 700 feet, 

3200 feet, and 5 miles were applied to the proposed pipeline right-of-way and acreages of 

each habitat type were calculated. To characterize past actions in forested environments, 

seral stage (0-40 years, 40-80 years, and >80 years) was assigned to all forested types 

within the buffer area. In non-forested habitat types, acreages are given for existing 

habitats within the buffered area. These buffers were analyzed using a combination of 

Johnson and O’Neil (2001) habitat types, GAP data, aerial photographs, and other 

available data including FOI and LSOG coverages. 

The 700-foot buffer was used as the analysis area for species that could potentially be 

impacted by edge effect, but would not likely be impacted by noise or other long-ranging 

effects (table 2). Fundamental changes in the microclimate of a stand, humidity and 

strong winds in particular, have been recorded at distances greater than 700 feet from the 

forest edge in old-growth Douglas fir forests (Chen et al. 1995). Approximately 41 

percent of forested federal lands within the 700 foot buffer have been harvested within 

the last 80 years (27 percent 0-40 years, 14 percent 40-80 years), leaving approximately 

58 percent late-succesional forest (table 2). 

The 3,200-foot buffer was used as the analysis area for species that could potentially be 

impacted by noise from construction of the proposed pipeline in addition to edge effect 

(table 3). Noise impacts are discussed below, and the 3,200-foot buffer was applied as 

the distance at which noise produced from construction of the proposed pipeline would 

likely attenuate to background levels (see cumulative effects discussion). Approximately 

41 percent of forested federal lands within the 3,200-foot buffer have been harvested 

within the last 80 years (23 percent 0-40 years, 19 percent 40-80 years), leaving 

approximately 59 percent late-succesional forest (table 3). 

The 5-mile buffer was used as the analysis area for the fisher, which has a large home 

range and could potentially have movement patterns disrupted by construction of the 

proposed pipeline (table 4). Approximately 40 percent of forested federal lands within 

the 5-mile buffer have been harvested within the last 80 years (22 percent 0-40 years, 19 

percent 40-80 years), leaving approximately 60 percent late-succesional forest (table 4). 

H-180
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 21

Wetlands

Wetlands covered as much as 2.3 million acres (about 3.6 percent) of what is now 

Oregon as of the late 1700's (Dahl 1990). Since that time, wetland acreage has decreased 

by more than one-third, mostly owing to conversion of wetlands to agricultural uses by 

diking, draining, or both. Other causes of wetland loss or degradation have been 

urbanization, industrial development, flood-control projects, surface-water diversion and 

ground-water pumping for irrigation, stream snagging, land clearing, grazing, and beaver 

trapping. The greatest losses were of estuarine marshes, eastern Oregon riparian 

wetlands, Willamette River Valley wet prairies and riparian wetlands, and Klamath Basin 

marshes (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation 

Division 1989). 

In addition to general area of wetlands lost, the quality of remaining wetlands has also 

decreased, primarily due to human activities, with complex wetlands such as riverine 

wetlands losing connectivity with their water sources due to roads and similar 

construction. A third feature, wetland plants, also indicates that wetlands are declining. 

The Oregon Natural Heritage Program (ONHP) reports that 29% of Oregon’s wetland 

plants are imperiled. (Oregon Progress Board (OPB), 2000) 

Current regulatory programs exist to slow wetland loss, as well as creating incentives to 

increase wetland health and acreage have the potential to stop and possibly reverse 

current trends. 

Riparian Areas

There are about 114,500 miles of river and stream in Oregon, and the surrounding 

riparian areas make up almost 15% of the state (Oregon Water Resources Department as 

cited in OPB 2000). Like wetlands, the hydrologic function of streams and rivers has 

been altered, reducing the connection between the river and the riparian zones. 

Agricultural and grazing practices on private lands have reduced vegetation along 

streams to a large extent, and increased flow rates while reducing water quality and 

habitat for threatened fishes (Matthews and Barnhard 1996). Human settlement and land 

development have drastically reduced the ecological functions of these habitats (OPB 

2000). Additionally, non-native vegetation has been invading these corridors, with up to 

50% non-native species in the Willamette riparian forests (Tabacchi et al. 1996). 

Intensive human activity along the most impacted riparian corridors makes the restoration 

of these areas particularly difficult. Slightly more success is possible in more rural areas 

where conservation easements and evolving agricultural and grazing practices can be 

more easily altered. 

Ecoregions

The Oregon Progress Board produced a State of the Environment Report in 2000 (OPB 

2000) that discussed the current environment in each ecoregion that occurs within 

Oregon. The proposed Project would cross the Coast Range, Klamath Mountains, 

H-181
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 22

Cascade Mountains, and East Cascades Slope and Foothills ecoregions. In an attempt to 

further portray the current environment as a result of past actions, each ecoregion is 

discussed briefly below, as described in more depth in OPB 2000. 

The Coast Range ecoregion extends the length of Oregon, and from the edge of the 

Pacific Ocean to the Willamette Valley and Klamath Mountains. This area has 

experienced high levels of timber harvest, which results in forests in this area now 

including extensive stands of early successional stage forests that are often very dense 

and lacking in structural complexity to provide wildlife habitat. Riparian areas have been 

impacted by the removal of large conifers, and in many cases the downstream 

conveyance and clearing out of large wood through the use of splash dams. Though 

much of this area is affected primarily by logging, lowland rivers and wetlands have been 

altered by agriculture and development more than the forested portions of the ecoregion. 

The Klamath Mountains ecoregion ranges from just east of the coast through Jackson 

county. Fire suppression has altered the ecology of forests, savannas, and shrublands in 

this region. Fire suppression and widespread timber harvest have changed the structure 

of many Klamath Mountains forests. Gold mining during the mid 1800s caused extreme 

changes to streams and riparian areas in the Rogue valley, and settlement and agriculture 

in the Rogue valley decreased water availability in tributary streams. The steep terrain of 

this area makes the Klamath Mountains particularly susceptible to landslides and debris 

flows, especially in heavily logged areas. Removal of large trees has made the natural 

effects of fire and flood in riparian areas more extreme, and has limited the amount of 

large woood falling into streams resulting in decreased channel complexity and increased 

erosion. 

The Cascade Mountains ecoregion includes the length of the Cascade Mountain range 

through Oregon. The forests of this region have experienced intensive timber harvest 

which has left much of the Douglas-fir zone, especially on private lands, in early 

successional stages. Fire suppression has also contributed to changes in forest 

composition, although less-pronounced than other areas of Oregon. Timber harvest in 

riparian areas resulted in a 50 percent or more loss of large conifers in many drainages in 

this ecoregion, although the introduction of riparian rules into the Forest Practices Act 

regulations for private land over the last 30 years has reduced impacts on riparian areas. 

Currently, more than two-thirds of the federal forest land in this ecoregion is managed for 

biological diversity in late successional reserves, riparian reserves, and extensive 

wilderness areas. 

The East Cascades Slope and Foothills ecoregion stretches from Columbia River gorge 

south to the Klamath Basin. The Klamath Basin area was drained of large acreages of 

wetlands in the 1900s. As a result, the lake and marsh systems of the upper Klamath 

Basin have been reduced by an estimated 75 percent. Much of the historic wetland and 

riparian areas have been converted to agricultural uses. However, this area still has large 

marshes which support large numbers of migrating waterfowl and other waterbirds. 

H-182
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 23

TABLE 2

Available Habitat within 700 Feet of the Proposed Action 

 Corresponding to Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) and Land Owner

BLM Districts National Forest Service Habitat Category 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2000) 

ForestWoodland Age Category1

Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua 

Rogue River - Siskiyou 

Fremont - Winema 

Other Federal4

Forest - Woodland 

L-O 753.97 61.05 M-S 923.70 127.18 C-R 460.79 35.39 

Westside Lowland ConiferHardwood-Forest Total 2138.46 223.62 

L-O 824.93 20.65 M-S 12.86 0.25 C-R 817.49 39.16 

Montane Mixed Conifer Forest 

Total 1655.28 60.06 

L-O 0.35 1844.00 1008.59 1316.21 458.09 M-S 19.23 259.79 36.06 432.58 0.92 C-R 0.0 643.54 260.62 346.44 213.48 

Southwest Oregon Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Total 19.58 2747.33 1305.27 2095.23 672.49 

L-O 650.35 173.61 14.33 322.71 M-S 18.98 14.21 0.0 1.54 C-R 34.85 0.44 60.33 347.54 

Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands Total 704.18 188.25 74.66 671.79 

L-O 256.67 M-S 46.53 C-R 158.13 

Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest and Woodlands Total 461.33 

L-O 55.49 M-S 0.0 C-R 0.0 

Western Juniper and Mountain Mahogany Woodlands Total 55.49 

L-O 24.79 102.47 M-S 0.0 1.37 C-R 0.45 15.82 

Eastside (Interior) Mixed Conifer Forest Total 25.24 119.66 

H-183
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 24

TABLE 2

Available Habitat within 700 Feet of the Proposed Action 

 Corresponding to Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) and Land Owner

BLM Districts National Forest Service Habitat Category 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2000) 

ForestWoodland Age Category1

Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua 

Rogue River - Siskiyou 

Fremont - Winema 

Other Federal4

L-O 2.89 42.50 M-S 0.0 4.67 C-R 202.67 79.50 

Lodgepole Pine Forest and Woodlands Total 205.56 126.67 

L-O 0.05 57.23 178.56 6.39 33.61 11.97 M-S 6.51 13.63 46.73 0.0 0.0 0.0 C-R 9.74 44.82 7.61 0.0 17.72 4.62 

ForestedWoodland (no forested category)2 Total 16.30 115.68 232.90 6.39 51.33 16.59 

L-O 754.37 1962.28 2094.17 235.49 1316.21 1325.03 521.94 11.97 M-S 949.44 400.60 148.30 14.21 432.58 13.78 7.83 0 C-R 470.53 723.75 461.21 0.44 346.44 1294.42 499.74 4.62 

Forest-Woodland Sub-Total 

Total 2174.34 3086.63 2703.68 250.14 2095.23 2633.23 1029.51 16.59 

Non-Forested Habitat Shrub-Steppe 3.31 Herbaceous Wetlands 6.79 3.09 6.79 Westside Riparian-Wetlands / Eastside Riparian-Wetlands 

 

Agriculture, pastures, and Mixed Environs 

 0.0 2.62 19.52 0.0 49.59 

Developed--Urban and Mixed Environs 

 

Coastal Dunes and Beaches 5.75 8.57 Open WaterLakes, Rivers, and Streams 

 8.27 3.86 9.55 0.45 4.41 3.37 67.36 3.88 

H-184
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 25

TABLE 2

Available Habitat within 700 Feet of the Proposed Action 

 Corresponding to Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) and Land Owner

BLM Districts National Forest Service Habitat Category 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2000) 

ForestWoodland Age Category1

Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua 

Rogue River - Siskiyou 

Fremont - Winema 

Other Federal4

Bays and Estuaries Non-Forest (J&O forest category)3

 1.55 0.14 138.45 4.88 13.52 31.55 12.16 9.61 

Non-Forest Subtotal 15.57 6.62 167.52 15.43 17.93 34.92 82.61 78.44 

L-O 754.37 1962.28 2094.17 235.49 1316.21 1325.03 521.94 11.97 M-S 949.44 400.60 148.30 14.21 432.58 13.78 7.83 0 C-R 470.53 723.75 461.21 0.44 346.44 1294.42 499.74 4.62 Non 15.57 6.62 167.52 15.43 17.93 34.92 82.61 78.44 

Total Overall Habitat 

Total 2189.91 3093.25 2871.20 265.57 2113.16 2668.15 1112.12 95.03 

1 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed 

old; C-R, Clearcut-Regenerating Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old; NO AGE, no GIS database available outside the range of the nort

determine seral age class, but Johnson & O’Neil, 2001 GIS database identified as forested. 2 Other Forest-Woodland Habitat: delineation and available GIS data sources indicate that the area is forested but Johnson & O’Neil, 2

identified the area as non-forested. 

3 Other Non-Forest Habitat: delineation and available GIS data sources indicate that the area is not forested but Johnson & O’Neil, 200

the area as forested. 

4 Other Federal Lands include Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lands, and other National Forest Service Lands n

proposed Project.

H-185
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 26

TABLE 3 

Available Habitat within 3200 Feet of the Proposed Action 

 Corresponding to Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) and Land Owner 

BLM Districts National Forest Service 

Habitat Category 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) 

ForestWoodland 

Age 

Category1 Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua Rogue River - Siskiyou Fremont - Winema O

Fed

Forest - Woodland 

L-O 3543.38 320.49 2

M-S 4603.85 502.75 

C-R 2356.43 280.17 7

Westside Lowland ConiferHardwood-Forest 

TOTAL 10503.66 1103.41 3

L-O 2403.99 20.65 

M-S 412.71 0.25 

C-R 2158.38 121.47 

Montane Mixed Conifer Forest 

TOTAL 4975.08 142.37 

L-O 55.28 5952.69 5491.21 5146.93 1607.08 

M-S 29.74 994.39 311.12 1572.38 498.19 

C-R 30.82 2341.28 614.22 2417.56 1026.12 

Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest 

TOTAL 115.84 9288.36 6416.55 9136.87 3131.39 

L-O 2687.92 1081.38 14.33 322.72 

M-S 64.03 56.90 1.54 

C-R 93.22 8.86 193.82 858.83 

NO AGE 

Ponderosa Pine Forest and 

Woodlands 

TOTAL 2845.17 1147.13 208.15 1183.09 

L-O 852.15 

M-S 149.48 

C-R 0.96 182.16 

Westside Oak and Dry Douglasfir Forest and Woodlands 

TOTAL 0.96 3324.78 958.88 133.49 511.30 

L-O 197.07 

M-S 27.62 

Western Juniper and Mountain 

Mahogany Woodlands 

C-R 

H-186
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 27

TABLE 3 

Available Habitat within 3200 Feet of the Proposed Action 

 Corresponding to Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) and Land Owner 

BLM Districts National Forest Service 

Habitat Category 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) 

ForestWoodland 

Age 

Category1 Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua Rogue River - Siskiyou Fremont - Winema O

Fed

NO AGE 0

TOTAL 224.69 0

L-O 24.79 102.47 

M-S 1.37 

C-R 0.45 145.12 

NO AGE 

Eastside (Interior) Mixed Conifer 

Forest 

TOTAL 25.24 248.96 

L-O 2.89 42.50 

M-S 4.67 

C-R 312.53 150.07 

Lodgepole Pine Forest and 

Woodlands 

TOTAL 315.42 197.24 

L-O 2857.67 4589.01 7719.69 1105.59 3.47 33.61 4

M-S 3712.57 1148.20 527.83 98.99 2.59 

C-R 1936.20 2159.59 441.43 8.42 19.98 31.01 11

 Other Forested-Woodland 

Habitat 2

TOTAL 8506.44 7896.80 8688.95 1213.00 26.04 64.62 15

L-O 6456.33 10862.19 16750.97 2384.04 5146.93 4056.55 521.95 7

M-S 8346.16 2645.34 1052.46 183.51 1572.38 913.49 7.83 0

C-R 4323.45 4782.00 1331.03 17.28 2417.56 3711.28 1306.50 12

NO AGE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Forest-Woodland Sub-Total 

TOTAL 19125.94 18289.53 19134.46 2584.83 9136.87 8681.32 1836.28 19

Non-Forested Habitat 

Shrub-Steppe 56.70 

Herbaceous Wetlands 0.25 7.09 5.68 156.32 6

Westside Riparian-Wetlands / 

Eastside Riparian-Wetlands 0.02 0.60 4

Agriculture, pastures, and Mixed 2.07 82.47 267.80 10.52 4

H-187
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 28

TABLE 3 

Available Habitat within 3200 Feet of the Proposed Action 

 Corresponding to Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) and Land Owner 

BLM Districts National Forest Service 

Habitat Category 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) 

ForestWoodland 

Age 

Category1 Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua Rogue River - Siskiyou Fremont - Winema O

Fed

Environs 

Developed--Urban and Mixed 

Environs 

Coastal Dunes and Beaches 60.09 19

Open Water-Lakes, Rivers, and 

Streams 16.16 3.86 42.95 13.04 21.74 4.85 162.28 1

Bays and Estuaries 0.62 

 Other Non-Forest Habitat 3 43.38 249.02 964.87 55.05 194.16 1364.90 1755.74 79

Non-Forest Subtotal 122.59 335.95 1275.62 142.40 215.90 1375.43 2074.34 10

L-O 6456.33 10862.19 16750.97 2384.04 5146.93 4056.55 521.95 7

M-S 8346.16 2645.34 1052.46 183.51 1572.38 913.49 7.83 0

C-R 4323.45 4782.00 1331.03 17.28 2417.56 3711.28 1306.50 12

NO AGE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Non-Forest 122.59 335.95 1275.62 142.40 215.90 1375.43 2074.34 10

Total Overall Habitat 

TOTAL 19248.53 18625.48 20410.08 2727.23 9352.77 10056.75 3910.62 12

1 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be 

Clearcut-Regenerating Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old; NO AGE, no GIS database available outside the range of the northern spotted ow

but Johnson & O’Neil, 2001 GIS database identified as forested. 

2 Other Forest-Woodland Habitat: delineation and available GIS data sources indicate that the area is forested but Johnson & O’Neil, 2001 GI

non-forested. 

3 Other Non-Forest Habitat: delineation and available GIS data sources indicate that the area is not forested but Johnson & O’Neil, 2001 GIS 

forested. 

4 Other Federal Lands include Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lands, and other National Forest Service Lands not cros

H-188
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 29

TABLE 4

Available Habitat within 5 Miles of the Proposed Action 

 Corresponding to Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) and Land Owner 

BLM Districts National Forest Service 

Habitat Category 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001) 

ForestWoodland 

Age 

Category1 Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua 

Rogue 

River - 

Siskiyou 

Fremont - 

Winema 

Forest - Woodland 

L-O 29256.42 5875.72 0.34 

M-S 30559.26 3651.77 0.05 

C-R 22459.81 2866.28 19.72 

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

TOTAL 82275.49 12393.77 20.11 

L-O 679.81 1269.43 7878.94 22.81 

M-S 71.19 94.11 2136.93 0.25 

C-R 368.93 122.06 9558.53 988.51 

Montane Mixed Conifer 

Forest 

TOTAL 1119.93 1485.60 19574.40 1011.57 

L-O 344.21 50648.30 69055.59 24834.70 10189.43 

M-S 273.79 15351.83 6671.63 8510.96 3547.50 

C-R 564.33 22158.17 8543.06 18266.54 8562.24 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

TOTAL 1182.33 88158.30 84270.28 51612.20 22299.17 

L-O 16203.93 14689.08 18.48 323.95 

M-S 191.97 3705.66 0.98 1.54 

C-R 240.51 1969.50 1120.13 1892.53 

NO AGE 

Ponderosa Pine Forest 

and Woodlands 

TOTAL 16636.41 20364.23 1139.59 2218.02 

L-O 137.60 8155.53 

M-S 33.71 270.60 

C-R 57.13 254.32 0.11 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest and 

Woodlands 

TOTAL 228.44 8680.45 0.11 

H-189
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 30

TABLE 4

Available Habitat within 5 Miles of the Proposed Action 

 Corresponding to Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) and Land Owner 

BLM Districts National Forest Service 

Habitat Category 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001) 

ForestWoodland 

Age 

Category1 Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua 

Rogue 

River - 

Siskiyou 

Fremont - 

Winema 

L-O 2678.86 

M-S 2257.81 

C-R 20.62 

NO AGE 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

TOTAL 4957.29 

L-O 1.19 3490.83 24.79 102.87 

M-S 0.82 523.96 1.37 

C-R 141.60 0.45 165.99 

NO AGE 

Eastside (Interior) Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

TOTAL 2.01 4156.39 25.24 270.23 

L-O 361.14 2.89 42.50 

M-S 65.57 4.67 

C-R 42.37 434.86 309.79 

Lodgepole Pine Forest 

and Woodlands 

TOTAL 469.08 437.75 356.96 

L-O 21.94 0.66 

M-S 87.76 4.55 

C-R 6.70 38.37 154.58 

NO AGE 

Subalpine Parklands 

TOTAL 116.40 43.58 154.58 

L-O 28909.37 57913.08 96118.88 24043.78 26.48 33.61 

M-S 29928.11 19169.02 7253.18 7370.93 16.58 

C-R 22581.46 26379.76 8924.04 2423.54 60.45 31.27 

Other ForestedWoodland Habitat 2

TOTAL 81418.94 103461.86 112296.10 33838.25 103.51 64.88 

H-190
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 31

TABLE 4

Available Habitat within 5 Miles of the Proposed Action 

 Corresponding to Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) and Land Owner 

BLM Districts National Forest Service 

Habitat Category 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001) 

ForestWoodland 

Age 

Category1 Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua 

Rogue 

River - 

Siskiyou 

Fremont - 

Winema 

L-O 58510.00 114574.70 190214.93 46555.06 24835.04 18141.67 525.74 

M-S 60761.16 38206.33 14459.39 14105.80 8511.01 5706.54 7.83 

C-R 45605.60 51461.34 18330.86 4726.39 18286.37 19775.03 3542.67 

NO AGE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Forest-Woodland SubTotal 

TOTAL 164876.76 204242.37 223005.18 65387.25 51632.42 43623.24 4076.24 

Non-Forested Habitat 

Shrub-Steppe 4220.92 256.10 

Herbaceous Wetlands 388.79 0.05 17.98 10.59 238.31 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

 261.43 1.70 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 4.78 2010.26 1699.94 240.84 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 0.81 0.65 20.69 8.32 

Coastal Dunes and 

Beaches 1286.03 

Open Water-Lakes, 

Rivers, and Streams 152.16 81.57 193.32 528.47 56.14 132.75 320.46 

Bays and Estuaries 35.78 

Other Non-Forest 

Habitat 3 667.82 4180.75 6009.08 9862.84 1490.15 15288.64 18874.66 

Non-Forest Subtotal 2797.60 6274.93 7923.08 14871.05 1546.29 15440.30 19689.53 

L-O 58510.00 114574.70 190214.93 46555.06 24835.04 18141.67 525.74 

M-S 60761.16 38206.33 14459.39 14105.80 8511.01 5706.54 7.83 

C-R 45605.60 51461.34 18330.86 4726.39 18286.37 19775.03 3542.67 

Total Overall Habitat 

NO AGE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

H-191
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 32

TABLE 4

Available Habitat within 5 Miles of the Proposed Action 

 Corresponding to Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) and Land Owner 

BLM Districts National Forest Service 

Habitat Category 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001) 

ForestWoodland 

Age 

Category1 Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua 

Rogue 

River - 

Siskiyou 

Fremont - 

Winema 

Non-Forest 2797.60 6274.93 7923.08 14871.05 1546.29 15440.30 19689.53 

TOTAL 167674.36 210517.30 230928.26 80258.30 53178.71 59063.54 23765.77 

1 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be ≥

Regenerating Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old; NO AGE, no GIS database available outside the range of the northern spotted owl to determ

O’Neil, 2001 GIS database identified as forested. 

2 Other Forest-Woodland Habitat: delineation and available GIS data sources indicate that the area is forested but Johnson & O’Neil, 2001 GI

forested. 

3 Other Non-Forest Habitat: delineation and available GIS data sources indicate that the area is not forested but Johnson & O’Neil, 2001 GIS d4 Other Federal Lands include Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Lands, and other National Forest Service Lands not cros

H-192
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 33

Impacts 

Duration of impact 

Actual construction activities for the proposed pipeline would be initiated by Pacific 

Connector about one year after work begins on the LNG terminal within five 

constructions spreads across the proposed 230-mile pipeline. Pacific Connector 

anticipates that timber clearing would generally occur from May through November and 

the pipeline construction would occur from early May concurrent with timber clearing 

and continue through the next year through November. Exceptions to this timeline would 

occur where adherence to seasonal restrictions for federally endangered or threatened 

species is expected and in Spread 5 (mileposts 188 – 231) where winter construction is 

scheduled in part to comply with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife instream 

construction windows. Work would be conducted during daylight hours only. While all 

areas within the Project area could be affected during these periods, the average time a 

given point along the pipeline is estimated to be disturbed by construction would be 

approximately 8 weeks. This would vary, as the speed at which crews would be able to 

work would be affected by terrain, construction methods and activities, weather, and 

environmental construction windows. 

Additionally, during operation of the proposed pipeline, Pacific Connector would 

maintain a 30-foot wide corridor, centered over the pipe, for the length of the pipeline. 

Right-of-way maintenance activities (i.e., mowing, cutting) would occur every 3 to 5 

years and would have the potential to impact species associated with those habitats. To 

avoid destruction of bird eggs and nests, all vegetation maintenance would be conducted 

in late summer or early autumn, after nesting has generally been completed. 

Habitat Effects 

Impact to habitats can result in direct effects to organisms (increased mortality, 

displacement, increased energy expense, decreased reproduction) if they are inhabiting 

the affected areas while construction or other human-related disturbances are occurring. 

Indirect impacts are related to but removed from the action by an intermediate step or 

process. For wildlife, indirect impacts are often associated with alteration, elimination, or 

degradation of habitats. As habitat becomes less suitable and less available, wildlife 

populations that may have been in equilibrium with the amount of formerly suitable 

habitat must adjust, through density-dependent mechanisms, to reach new equilibria with 

habitats (often called carrying capacity). Impact to wildlife, whether direct or indirect, 

affects demographic parameters by decreasing survival and/or decreasing reproduction. 

Such impact can lead to decreasing population growth rates and smaller populations. 

Discussion of general direct and indirect impacts to wildlife can be found in Section 

4.5.1.3 of the Final EIS. 

Indirect effects may result from induced changes to wildlife habitats, potentially by 

conversion of one vegetation cover type to another, by fragmentating existing wildlife 

habitats and inducing various “edge effects” to interior habitats, and in general by 

H-193
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 34

affecting a variety of inter and intra-specific interactions including competition and 

predation. Such indirect impact to habitats decreases their functional capacity to support 

wildlife populations at non-impacted levels. Indirect effects and/or secondary effects of 

the Project on wildlife may also occur with increased human population base and 

increased access, whether as a result of the requirements of the action itself (the 

workforce needed to construct or operate the Project) or as a consequence of the action 

such as increasing a need for ancillary goods, services, or opportunities resulting from the 

Project (Comer, 1982). 

Sixteen broad wildlife habitat classifications (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) coincide with 

the PCGP Project area. Affected wildlife habitats classified by Johnson and O’Neil 

(2001) include: 1) Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood-Forest, 2) Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest, 3) Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, 4) Ponderosa 

Pine Forest and Woodlands, 5) Westside Oak and Dry Douglas-fir Forest and 

Woodlands, 6) Western Juniper/Mountain Mahogany Woodlands 7) Sagebrush Steppe, 

8) Westside Grasslands, 9) Eastside Grasslands, 10) Herbaceous Wetlands, 11) Westside 

Riparian-Wetlands combined with Eastside Riparian-Wetlands, 12) Agriculture, Pastures, 

and Mixed Environs, 13) Developed-Urban and Mixed Environs, 14) Coastal Dunes and 

Beaches, 15) Open Water-Lakes, River, and Streams, and 16) Bays and Estuaries (see 

table 5). 

Roads, as barren ground, have been added to the habitats in table 5. In addition, relative 

seral development, described as Late Successional-Old Growth (LO), Mid-Seral (MS), 

and Clearcut-Regenerating (CR) forested types have been identified for the several forest 

and woodland types in the table. Specialized habitat features also occur within the 

vicinity of the PCGP Project area. Such features include cliffs that provide nesting for 

peregrine falcons and possibly other raptors. Snags provide roosting locations for several 

bat species and nesting locations for several raptor species including cavity-nesting birds. 

Large down woody debris is present with which herpetofauna are often associated, and 

caves that are used as hibernacula by some bat species. 

For other species, use of a specific habitat type included in table 5 depends on its 

proximity to water (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Presence of those habitats and 

dependent species’ potential occurrence has been assumed if habitats occur within 

Riparian Reserves associated with waterbodies that would be crossed by or are adjacent 

to the Proposed Action (table 6). 

The area (acres) for each habitat type that would be either removed by construction or 

modified by use as Uncleared Storage Areas (UCSAs) within Federal agencies’ (BLM 

Districts or National Forests) jurisdictions provide the basis for evaluating effects to the 

sensitive species included in this Biological Evaluation. Detailed effects to habitats by 

various Project construction components are provided in Appendix B for each agency’s 

administrative jurisdiction. 

H-194
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 35 

TABLE 5 

Effects to acres by Johnson and O’Neil Habitat Type by BLM District or USFS National F

BLM Districts 

Coos Bay Roseburg Medford Lakeview Umpqua 

General 

Habitat Type 

Johnson and O’Neil 

(2001) Habitat Types 

Seral 

Stage1

Acres 

Removed2

Acres 

Modified3

Acres 

Removed2

Acres 

Modified3

Acres 

Removed2

Acres 

Modified3

Acres 

Removed2

Acres 

Modified3

Acres 

Removed2

Ac

Mod

LO 26.66 5.64 4.52 0.34 

MS 31.39 0.81 1.38 0.65 7.94 0.71 

CR 82.02 9.60 1.65 0.25 

Westside-Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest Total 140.07 16.05 3.03 0.90 12.46 1.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

LO 

MS 

CR 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

LO 106.70 102.35 50.36 19.58 85.61 35

MS 27.36 5.22 20.85 4.65 34.44 8

CR 75.97 41.82 36.09 2.93 30.12 1

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest Total 0.00 0.00 210.32 149.39 107.30 27.16 0.00 0.00 150.17 45

LO 25.75 4.16 12.82 

MS 8.32 1.22 

CR 3.60 0.41 

Ponderosa Pine Forest 

and Woodlands 

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.67 5.79 12.82 0.00 0.00 0

LO 0.01 31.36 3.83 

MS 0.59 0.38 0.33 0.83 0.36 

CR 0.00 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest and 

Woodlands Total 0.60 0.00 0.38 0.33 32.19 4.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

LO 

MS 2.84 

CR 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.84 0.00 0.00 0

LO 26.67 5.64 106.70 102.35 111.99 27.91 12.82 85.61 25

MS 31.98 0.81 29.12 6.20 37.94 6.94 2.84 34.44 8

CR 82.02 9.60 77.62 42.07 39.69 3.34 0.00 30.12 1

ForestWoodland 

Forest-Woodland SubTotal 

Total 140.67 16.05 213.73 150.62 189.62 38.19 15.66 0.00 150.17 45

Shrub-Steppe N/A 0.46 0.74 18.92 0.74 

Westside Grasslands N/A 0.96 3.36 0.81 26.05 0.02 

Grasslands- Shrublands Eastside Grasslands N/A 0.40 

Herbaceous Wetlands N/A 0.01 0.18 

Riparian Westside Riparian Wetlands/Eastside 

Riparian Wetlands 

N/A 0.45 0.29 0.06 0.09 

Agriculture, Pastures, 

and Mixed Environs N/A 0.23 

Developed Developed-Urban and 

Mixed Environs N/A 0.65 0.77 0.58 0.04 9.62 

Coastal Dunes and 

Beaches N/A 

Barren 

Roads N/A 15.67 0.09 23.00 4.01 5.26 0.19 1.13 12.42 0

Open Water Open Water-Lakes, Rivers, and Streams N/A 0.25 0.18 0.49 0.01 0.01 0.21 

Open Water 

(cont’d) Bays and Estuaries N/A 

Total Total 158.89 16.14 241.83 156.18 241.16 39.19 17.20 0.00 172.51 46

1 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be ≥40 but ≤80 years old; C-R, Clearcut-Regenerating Fore2 Project components considered in calculation of habitat “Removed”: PCGP construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, aboveground facilities, permanent and temporary access roads (3 Project components considered in calculation of habitat “Modified”: PCGP uncleared storage areas (UCSAs) that will not be cleared of trees during construction. These areas will be used to store 

across the right-of-way after construction during restoration and are considered as temporary insignificant habitat modifications. 

H-195
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 36

TABLE 6 

Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves on Federal Land Affected by Construction of the PCGP Proje

Terrestrial Habitat (acres) Affected by 

Riparian Reserv

Waterbody 

Crossed 

Approximate 

Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody 

Type 

Federal 

Jurisdiction 

Fish 

Bearing

Stream1

Site 

Potential

Tree 

Height 2

Late Successional-Old 

Growth 

5

Mid-Seral Forest 

5

Regenerating Forest 

5

Clearcut Forest 

5

Forested Wetland

Non-Forested Wetland

North Fork Coquille River (HUC 1710030504) WatershedTrib. to Steele Creek 20.34 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 224 1.28 Trib. to Steele Creek 20.59 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 224 0.63 Trib. to Steele Creek 21.36 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 224 0.40 Trib. to Steele Creek 21.55 4 unknown BLM Coos Bay District unknown 224 Trib to Middle Creek 27.02 unknown BLM Coos Bay District unknown 224 0.79 0.10 0.01 Middle Creek 27.04 Perennial BLM Coos Bay District Yes 224 0.01 0.72 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.01 3.42 0.50 0 0 0.01 

East Fork Coquille River (HUC 1710030503) WatershedTrib. To E. Fork Coquille 28.89 Perennial BLM Coos Bay District Yes 204 0.04 Trib. To E. Fork Coquille 31.64 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District No 204 0.50 Trib. To E. Fork Coquille 31.76 4 unknown BLM Coos Bay District unknown 204 Trib. To S. Fork Elk Creek 35.51 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 204 0.34 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0 0 0.88 0 0 0 

Middle Fork Coquille River (HUC 1710030501) WatershedTrib. To Big Creek 36.18 unknown BLM Coos Bay District unknown 189 0.55 Trib. To Big Creek 36.54 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 189 0.43 

H-196
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 37

TABLE 6 

Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves on Federal Land Affected by Construction of the PCGP Proje

Terrestrial Habitat (acres) Affected by 

Riparian Reserv

Waterbody 

Crossed 

Approximate 

Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody 

Type 

Federal 

Jurisdiction 

Fish 

Bearing

Stream1

Site 

Potential

Tree 

Height 2

Late Successional-Old 

Growth 

5

Mid-Seral Forest 

5

Regenerating Forest 

5

Clearcut Forest 

5

Forested Wetland

Non-Forested Wetland

Trib. To Big Creek 36.92 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 189 0.27 Trib. To Big Creek 37.33 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District Yes 189 0.16 0.03 0.24 Trib. To Big Creek 37.35 Perennial BLM Coos Bay District Yes 189 1.14 0.03 0.17 Deep Creek 47.73 4 Intermittent BLM Roseburg District Yes 189 0.45 0.01 Deep Creek 48.27 Perennial BLM Roseburg District Yes 189 0.04 2.66 0.08 Tributary 51.02 unknown BLM Roseburg District unknown 189 0.67 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 2.44 3.17 0.77 0.55 0 0 

South Umpqua River (HUC 1710030205) WatershedTrib. to South Umpqua 98.46 Intermittent BLM Roseburg District unknown 164 0.31 0.02 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.31 0 0.02 0 0 0 

Upper Cow Creek (HUC 1710030206) WatershedTrib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.15 unknown USDA-FS Umpqua NF unknown 187 0.58 0.17 0.27 Trib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.17 unknown USDA-FS Umpqua NF unknown 187 0.78 0.09 Trib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.33 unknown USDA-FS Umpqua NF unknown 187 0.93 0.10 East Fork Cow Creek 109.47 Perennial USDA-FS Umpqua NF Yes 187 2.32 Trib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.69 Perennial USDA-FS Umpqua NF Yes 187 1.12 0.31 Trib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.71 unknown USDA-FS Umpqua NF unknown 187 0.59 Trib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.76 Perennial USDA-FS Umpqua NF Yes 187 1.19 0.43 

H-197
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 38

TABLE 6 

Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves on Federal Land Affected by Construction of the PCGP Proje

Terrestrial Habitat (acres) Affected by 

Riparian Reserv

Waterbody 

Crossed 

Approximate 

Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody 

Type 

Federal 

Jurisdiction 

Fish 

Bearing

Stream1

Site 

Potential

Tree 

Height 2

Late Successional-Old 

Growth 

5

Mid-Seral Forest 

5

Regenerating Forest 

5

Clearcut Forest 

5

Forested Wetland

Non-Forested Wetland

East Fork Cow Creek 111.01 Perennial USDA-FS Umpqua NF Yes 187 1.08 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 3.48 2.96 3.43 0 0.09 0 

Trail Creek (HUC 1710030706) WatershedTrib. to W. Fork Trail Creek 110.76 4 unknown USDA-FS Umpqua NF unknown 159 1.73 Canyon Creek 120.45 Perennial BLM Medford District Yes 159 0.41 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.41 1.73 0 0 0 0 

Rogue River-Shady Cove (HUC 1710030707) WatershedTrib. to Indian Creek 126.50 Intermittent BLM Medford District No 157 0.20 Trib. to Indian Creek 126.52 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 157 0.01 0.01 Trib. to Indian Creek 126.59 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 157 Trib. to Indian Creek 126.65 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 157 Unnamed Tributary 127.61 unknown BLM Medford District unknown 157 0.40 Trib. To Indian Creek 128.89 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 157 0.54 0.05 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.94 0.21 0.01 0 0.05 0 

Big Butte Creek (HUC 1710030704) WatershedTrib. to Neil Creek 131.55 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 187 2.53 0.33 Trib. to Quartz Creek 133.13 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 187 0.01 Trib. to Quartz Creek 133.35 Perennial BLM Medford District Yes 187 1.86 0.17 0.01 Medford Aqueduct Ditch 3 133.38 Perennial BLM Medford District Yes 187 0.84 

H-198
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 39

TABLE 6 

Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves on Federal Land Affected by Construction of the PCGP Proje

Terrestrial Habitat (acres) Affected by 

Riparian Reserv

Waterbody 

Crossed 

Approximate 

Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody 

Type 

Federal 

Jurisdiction 

Fish 

Bearing

Stream1

Site 

Potential

Tree 

Height 2

Late Successional-Old 

Growth 

5

Mid-Seral Forest 

5

Regenerating Forest 

5

Clearcut Forest 

5

Forested Wetland

Non-Forested Wetland

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 5.24 0.50 0 0.01 0 0 

Little Butte Creek (HUC 1710030708) WatershedLick Creek 140.26 Intermittent BLM Medford District Yes 158 0.86 Trib. to Salt Creek 141.17 unknown BLM Medford District unknown 158 Trib. to Salt Creek 141.44 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 158 0.03 Trib. to Salt Creek 141.49 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 158 0.09 Trib. to Salt Creek 141.95 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 158 Trib. to Salt Creek 152.19 4 unknown BLM Medford District unknown 158 0.01 Stock Pond 152.33 4 Stock Pond BLM Medford District No 158 0.18 Trib. To Stock Pond 152.39 4 unknown BLM Medford District unknown 158 1.74 S. Fork Little Butte Creek 162.45 Perennial USDA-FS Rogue River NF Yes 160 1.18 1.36 Daley Creek 166.21 Intermittent USDA-FS Rogue River NF No 160 0.92 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 2.04 0.12 4.02 0 0.01 0.18 

Spencer Creek (HUC 1801020601) Watershed Trib. to Spencer Creek 168.31 4 Intermittent 

USDA-FS 

Winema-Fremont 

NF 

unknown 159 0.15 0.45 0.20 

Spencer Creek 171.06 Intermittent 

USDA-FS 

Winema-Fremont 

NF 

Yes 159 1.00 1.05 0.27 

Trib. to Spencer Creek 171.57 unknown USDA-FS Winema-Fremont unknown 159 0.33 

H-199
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 40

TABLE 6 

Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves on Federal Land Affected by Construction of the PCGP Proje

Terrestrial Habitat (acres) Affected by 

Riparian Reserv

Waterbody 

Crossed 

Approximate 

Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody 

Type 

Federal 

Jurisdiction 

Fish 

Bearing

Stream1

Site 

Potential

Tree 

Height 2

Late Successional-Old 

Growth 

5

Mid-Seral Forest 

5

Regenerating Forest 

5

Clearcut Forest 

5

Forested Wetland

Non-Forested Wetland

NF 

Trib. to Spencer Creek 172.45 Intermittent 

USDA-FS 

Winema-Fremont 

NF 

unknown 159 1.21 0.10 

Trib. to Spencer Creek 173.91 Intermittent 

USDA-FS 

Winema-Fremont 

NF 

Yes 159 2.42 

Trib. to Spencer Creek 176.44 Intermittent BLM Lakeview District unknown 159 0.66 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 3.02 1.50 2.95 0 0.27 0.10 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected By PCGP Project 17.89 13.61 12.58 0.56 0.42 0.29 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in BLM Coos Bay District 1.74 3.48 2.06 0.55 0 0.01 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in BLM Roseburg District 1.02 3.11 0.11 0 0 0 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in BLM Medford District 7.45 0.83 1.75 0.01 0.06 0.18 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in BLM Lakeview District 0.66 0 0 0 0 0 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in USDA-FS Umpqua NF 3.48 4.69 3.43 0 0.09 0 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in USDA-FS Rogue River NF 1.18 0 2.28 0 0 0 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in USDA-FS Winema-Fremont NF 2.36 1.50 2.95 0 0.27 0.10 1 Streams were assumed to be fish-bearing if they were identified as perennial and connected with no known barriers to known fish-bearing streams. 2 Riparian Reserve Widths based on horizontal measurements (not upslope) from streambanks on USDA-FS lands, Two Site Potential Tree Height from Fish-Bearing 

from Permanently Flowing and Intermittent Non-Fish Bearing Streams (Northwest Forest Plan, Standards and Guidelines, Section C), WOPR dimensions on BLM l

Fish-Bearing Streams, Half of One Site-Potential Tree Height from Intermittent Non-Fish Bearing Streams, One Site-Potential Tree Height form Natural Lakes, Pond

3 Habitats within Riparian Reserve widths generally categorized as: Late Successional (Mature) or Old Growth Forest (coniferous, deciduous, mixed ≥80 years old); M

mixed ≥40 but ≤80 years old); Regenerating Forest (coniferous, deciduous, mixed ≥5 but ≤40 years old); Clearcut Forests; Wetland Forested or Non-Forested clas

(grasslands, sagebrush, shrublands), Agriculture (croplands, pastures, orchards), and Altered Habitats (urban, industrial, residential, roads, utility corridors). 4 Streams not crossed but with Riparian Reserves potentially affected the PCGP Project. 5 Areas in forested habitats identified with a “D” are deciduous, Oregon white oak woodlands. All others are coniferous and/or mixed coniferous-deciduous forests. 

H-200
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 41

TABLE 7 

Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves on Federal Land Affected by Operations of the PCGP Projec

Terrestrial Habitat (acres) Affected 

Riparian Rese

Waterbody 

Crossed 

Approximate 

Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody 

Type 

Federal 

Jurisdiction 

Fish 

Bearing

Stream1

Site 

Potential 

Tree 

Height 2 Late Successional-Old 

Growth 

5

Mid-Seral Forest 

5

Regenerating Forest 

5

Clearcut Forest 

5

Forested Wetland

Non-Forested Wetland

North Fork Coquille River (HUC 1710030504) WatershedTrib. to Steele Creek 20.34 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 224 0.43 Trib. to Steele Creek 20.59 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 224 Trib. to Steele Creek 21.36 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 224 0.12 Trib. to Steele Creek 21.55 4 unknown BLM Coos Bay District unknown 224 Trib to Middle Creek 27.02 unknown BLM Coos Bay District unknown 224 Middle Creek 27.04 Perennial BLM Coos Bay District Yes 224 0.07 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0 0.50 0.12 0 0 0 

East Fork Coquille River (HUC 1710030503) WatershedTrib. To E. Fork Coquille 28.89 Perennial BLM Coos Bay District Yes 204 Trib. To E. Fork Coquille 31.64 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District No 204 0.16 Trib. To E. Fork Coquille 31.76 4 unknown BLM Coos Bay District unknown 204 Trib. To S. Fork Elk Creek 35.51 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 204 0.14 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0 0 0.30 0 0 0 

Middle Fork Coquille River (HUC 1710030501) WatershedTrib. To Big Creek 36.18 unknown BLM Coos Bay District unknown 189 Trib. To Big Creek 36.54 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 189 0.14 Trib. To Big Creek 36.92 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District unknown 189 0.08 

H-201
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 42

TABLE 7 

Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves on Federal Land Affected by Operations of the PCGP Projec

Terrestrial Habitat (acres) Affected 

Riparian Rese

Waterbody 

Crossed 

Approximate 

Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody 

Type 

Federal 

Jurisdiction 

Fish 

Bearing

Stream1

Site 

Potential 

Tree 

Height 2 Late Successional-Old 

Growth 

5

Mid-Seral Forest 

5

Regenerating Forest 

5

Clearcut Forest 

5

Forested Wetland

Non-Forested Wetland

Trib. To Big Creek 37.33 Intermittent BLM Coos Bay District Yes 189 0.08 0.03 0.13 Trib. To Big Creek 37.35 Perennial BLM Coos Bay District Yes 189 0.29 0.01 Deep Creek 47.73 4 Intermittent BLM Roseburg District Yes 189 Deep Creek 48.27 Perennial BLM Roseburg District Yes 189 0.51 Tributary 51.02 unknown BLM Roseburg District unknown 189 0.18 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.69 0.62 0.14 0 0 0 

South Umpqua River (HUC 1710030205) WatershedTrib. to South Umpqua 98.46 Intermittent BLM Roseburg District unknown 164 0.09 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.09 0 0 0 0 0 

Upper Cow Creek (HUC 1710030206) WatershedTrib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.15 unknown USDA-FS Umpqua NF unknown 187 0.13 0.04 0.09 Trib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.17 unknown USDA-FS Umpqua NF unknown 187 0.19 0.01 Trib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.33 unknown USDA-FS Umpqua NF unknown 187 0.30 East Fork Cow Creek

109.47 Perennial USDA-FS Umpqua NF Yes 187 0.72 

Trib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.69 Perennial USDA-FS Umpqua NF Yes 187 0.35 0.06 Trib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.71 unknown USDA-FS Umpqua NF unknown 187 0.14 Trib. to East Fork Cow Creek 109.76 Perennial USDA-FS Umpqua NF Yes 187 0.36 0.09 East Fork Cow Creek 111.01 Perennial USDA-FS Umpqua NF Yes 187 0.27 

H-202
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 43

TABLE 7 

Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves on Federal Land Affected by Operations of the PCGP Projec

Terrestrial Habitat (acres) Affected 

Riparian Rese

Waterbody 

Crossed 

Approximate 

Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody 

Type 

Federal 

Jurisdiction 

Fish 

Bearing

Stream1

Site 

Potential 

Tree 

Height 2 Late Successional-Old 

Growth 

5

Mid-Seral Forest 

5

Regenerating Forest 

5

Clearcut Forest 

5

Forested Wetland

Non-Forested Wetland

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.98 0.8 0.96 0 0.01 0 

Trail Creek (HUC 1710030706) WatershedTrib. to W. Fork Trail Creek 110.76 4 unknown USDA-FS Umpqua NF unknown 159 Canyon Creek 120.45 Perennial BLM Medford District Yes 159 0.12 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 

Rogue River-Shady Cove (HUC 1710030707) WatershedTrib. to Indian Creek 126.50 Intermittent BLM Medford District No 157 0.05 Trib. to Indian Creek 126.52 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 157 Trib. to Indian Creek 126.59 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 157 Trib. to Indian Creek 126.65 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 157 Unnamed Tributary 127.61 unknown BLM Medford District unknown 157 0.11 Trib. To Indian Creek 128.89 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 157 0.11 0.01 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.22 0.05 0 0 0.01 0 

Big Butte Creek (HUC 1710030704) WatershedTrib. to Neil Creek 131.55 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 187 0.56 0.20 Trib. to Quartz Creek 133.13 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 187 Trib. to Quartz Creek 133.35 Perennial BLM Medford District Yes 187 0.36 0.02 Medford Aqueduct Ditch 3 133.38 Perennial BLM Medford District Yes 187 0.17 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 1.09 0.22 0 0 0 0 

Little Butte Creek (HUC 1710030708) Watershed

H-203
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 44

TABLE 7 

Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves on Federal Land Affected by Operations of the PCGP Projec

Terrestrial Habitat (acres) Affected 

Riparian Rese

Waterbody 

Crossed 

Approximate 

Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody 

Type 

Federal 

Jurisdiction 

Fish 

Bearing

Stream1

Site 

Potential 

Tree 

Height 2 Late Successional-Old 

Growth 

5

Mid-Seral Forest 

5

Regenerating Forest 

5

Clearcut Forest 

5

Forested Wetland

Non-Forested Wetland

Lick Creek 140.26 Intermittent BLM Medford District Yes 158 0.20 Trib. to Salt Creek 141.17 unknown BLM Medford District unknown 158 Trib. to Salt Creek 141.44 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 158 Trib. to Salt Creek 141.49 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 158 0.01 Trib. to Salt Creek 141.95 Intermittent BLM Medford District unknown 158 Trib. to Salt Creek 152.19 4 unknown BLM Medford District unknown 158 Stock Pond 152.33 4 Stock Pond BLM Medford District No 158 Trib. To Stock Pond 152.39 4 unknown BLM Medford District unknown 158 0.29 S. Fork Little Butte Creek 162.45 Perennial USDA-FS Rogue River NF Yes 160 0.20 0.33 Daley Creek 166.21 Intermittent USDA-FS Rogue River NF No 160 0.31 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.40 0.01 0.93 0 0 0 

Spencer Creek (HUC 1801020601) Watershed Trib. to Spencer Creek 168.31 4 Intermittent USDA-FS Winema- Fremont NF unknown 159 0.06 0.18 Spencer Creek 171.06 Intermittent USDA-FS Winema- Fremont NF Yes 159 0.24 0.20 0.11 Trib. to Spencer Creek 171.57 unknown USDA-FS Winema- Fremont NF unknown 159 0.03 Trib. to Spencer Creek 172.45 Intermittent USDA-FS Winema- Fremont NF unknown 159 0.29 0.04 Trib. to Spencer Creek 173.91 Intermittent USDA-FS Winema- Fremont NF Yes 159 0.73 

H-204
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 45

TABLE 7 

Terrestrial Habitats in Riparian Reserves on Federal Land Affected by Operations of the PCGP Projec

Terrestrial Habitat (acres) Affected 

Riparian Rese

Waterbody 

Crossed 

Approximate 

Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody 

Type 

Federal 

Jurisdiction 

Fish 

Bearing

Stream1

Site 

Potential 

Tree 

Height 2 Late Successional-Old 

Growth 

5

Mid-Seral Forest 

5

Regenerating Forest 

5

Clearcut Forest 

5

Forested Wetland

Non-Forested Wetland

Trib. to Spencer Creek 176.44 Intermittent BLM Lakeview District unknown 159 0.20 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in Watershed 0.79 0.38 0.76 0 0.11 0.04 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected By PCGP Project 4.38 2.58 3.21 0 0.13 0.04 

Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in BLM Coos Bay District 0.51 0.61 0.56 0 0 0 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in BLM Roseburg District 0.27 0.51 0 0 0 0 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in BLM Medford District 1.63 0.28 0.29 0 0.01 0 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in BLM Lakeview District 0.20 0 0 0 0 0 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in USDA-FS Umpqua NF 0.98 0.80 0.96 0 0.01 0 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in USDA-FS Rogue River NF 0.20 0 0.64 0 0 0 Total Area (acres) of Riparian Reserve Affected in USDA-FS Winema-Fremont NF 0.59 0.38 0.76 0 0.11 0.04 1 Streams were assumed to be fish-bearing if they were identified as perennial and connected with no known barriers to known fish-bearing streams. 2 Riparian Reserve Widths based on horizontal measurements (not upslope) from streambanks on USDA-FS lands, Two Site Potential Tree Height from Fish-Bearing 

from Permanently Flowing and Intermittent Non-Fish Bearing Streams (Northwest Forest Plan, Standards and Guidelines, Section C), WOPR dimensions on BLM la

Fish-Bearing Streams, Half of One Site-Potential Tree Height from Intermittent Non-Fish Bearing Streams, One Site-Potential Tree Height form Natural Lakes, Pond

3 Habitats within Riparian Reserve widths generally categorized as: Late Successional (Mature) or Old Growth Forest (coniferous, deciduous, mixed ≥80 years old); Mi

mixed ≥40 but ≤80 years old); Regenerating Forest (coniferous, deciduous, mixed ≥5 but ≤40 years old); Clearcut Forests; Wetland Forested or Non-Forested classe(grasslands, sagebrush, shrublands), Agriculture (croplands, pastures, orchards), and Altered Habitats (urban, industrial, residential, roads, utility corridors). 4 Streams not crossed but with Riparian Reserves potentially affected the PCGP Project. 

5 Areas in forested habitats identified with a “D” are deciduous, Oregon white oak woodlands. All others are coniferous and/or mixed coniferous-deciduous forests. 

H-205
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 46

Pacific Connector prepared estimates of snag density (numbers per acre) that would be affected 

within the construction right-of-way and TEWAs on each of the three National Forests during 

timber reconnaissance conducted in 2007. Snag density by size class (inches, dbh) and decay 

class (hard or soft), from a site-specific inventory within the proposed construction right-of-way 

and work space that was completed at the request of the USFS in 2007, are provided in table 8. 

Most of the smaller snags (<13 inches, dbh) were observed as hard wood, rather than softened 

due to decay. Loss of snags regardless of decay class is expected to be a long-term impact 

because recruitment of new snags within the affected areas would take much longer than 3 years. 

TABLE 8 

Snag Density Estimates on USFS Lands

Estimates of Snag Density (Number per Acre) by Size 

Category (inches, DBH) 

National Forest Tree Type Decay Class <13 13-24 25-36 >36 

Hard 5.0 0.6 0.8 0.0 Umpqua conifer Soft 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.4 

Hard 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.01 conifer Soft 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 

Hard 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rogue River-Siskiyou 

hardwood Soft 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 

Hard 3.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 Fremont-Winema conifer Soft 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 

Invasive Species 

Invasive species are of concern for all terrestrial and aquatic species. More detailed discussion 

of effects of both noxious weeds and other invasive species can be found in Sections 4.5.1.3 and 

4.5.2.3 (terrestrial and aquatic species). 

Noise disturbance 

Noise could potentially impact wildlife during clearing and grading of the construction right-ofway, during pipeline construction including proposed HDD and conventional boring operations, 

and during right-of-way clean up, restoration, maintenance, and travel to and from the site. In 

some remote and steep areas crossed by the proposed pipeline, helicopters may be used during 

right-of-way timber-clearing and during pipe delivery and pipeline surveys. Minimal increase in 

ambient noise levels would also occur during periodic right-of-way vegetation maintenance 

activities (i.e., mowing, chainsaws) during operation. Noise would most likely displace wildlife 

some distance away from noise sources especially if wildlife species are nearby. However, any 

short-term effects to wildlife by noise would occur simultaneously with human presence and the 

presence of heavy machinery normally required for pipeline construction. Most likely, any 

impacts to wildlife due to noise could not be separated from those due to all other constructionrelated activities occurring concurrently. Noise and human presence would move along the 

construction right-of-way, albeit at a rather slow pace. Therefore, impacts to wildlife because of 

noise would be of short duration and spatially localized. 

Research has demonstrated varying short-term reactions of wildlife to noise. Most research has 

focused on wildlife reaction to more constant noise generated by roads and high-volume traffic 

(e.g., Forman and Alexander 1998). However, some research has recorded wildlife reaction to 

airplanes, sonic booms, helicopters, artillery, and blasting that could produce similar reactions 

H-206
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 47

from noises associated with construction activities for the proposed PCGP Project. For an 

analysis of these impacts to wildlife species, see Section 4.5.1.3 of the Final EIS. 

Ambient sound levels in much of the proposed Pacific Connector pipeline area probably would 

be similar to the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office’s projections (FWS 2006). Ambient sound is 

defined as the sound qualities as they might exist currently and might include human-generated 

sources over the long term. The typical ambient sound level for forest habitats ranges from 25 

dB to 44 dB. 

Pacific Connector proposes to cross the Coos, Rogue, and Klamath Rivers using HDD 

technology. Noise levels associated with the drilling equipment at each site are not expected to 

exceed the Oregon State noise regulations of 55 dBA during the day and 50 dBA at night within 

25 feet of a residence. Mitigation would be applied to the drilling equipment, such as vinyl 

fabric acoustic tents to ensure that noise levels do not exceed this regulation. Noise studies 

conducted for the HDD of each proposed crossing determined that with the use of mitigation 

measures, daytime noise levels at the three crossings would not exceed 3.9 dBA above ambient 

for Coos River HDD, 13.0 dBA above ambient for Rogue River HDD, and 0.01 dBA for the 

Klamath River HDD. In 2005, a study was conducted during a 4,000-foot HDD crossing of the 

Nooksack River crossing in Whatcom County, Washington to determine if drilling noise 

associated with the HDD (noise levels between 47 and 52 dBA at the study area) had a negative 

impact on wintering bald eagles. Eagles were observed from November 1, 2005 through April 7, 

2006 and results indicated that bald eagles were not negatively affected by HDD rig activity 

(Edge Environmental Inc. 2006). 

Blasting may be required for pipeline trench construction in areas where hard, non-rippable 

bedrock occurs within the trench profile; however, alternate mechanical methods would first be 

employed in order to attain the desired trench depth, such as ripping, hydraulic hammers or rock 

saws. The bedrock units that may require blasting are expected to consist primarily of volcanic 

and metavolcanic rocks in the Klamath Mountains, and volcanic rocks in the Cascade Range and 

along the ridges in the Basin and Range physiographic province. In addition, local areas of welllithified sedimentary rock may require blasting in the Coast Range. Approximately 99.5 miles of 

the proposed pipeline alignment is considered to have moderate to high blasting potential, 

although not all substrate within those areas identified may require blasting to achieve the 

required trench depth. Blasting activities may involve a single blast or a repetitive blasting 

sequence. As reported by the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (FWS 2006), noise associated 

with blasting activities may be in the range of 112dB within 50 feet of the trench and may cause 

alarm in wildlife such as mule deer responses to seismic blasts, described earlier. Blasting 

during pipeline construction, however, is expected to generate lower dB levels since all blast 

charges would be underground and muffled with blasting mats (see Blasting and Helicopter 

Noise Analysis and Mitigation Plan). 

Double rotor helicopters may be used along a portion (22.3 miles) of the proposed Pacific 

Connector pipeline during timber clearing and pipeline construction in areas that would be less 

accessible to pipeline construction contractors and logging trucks. Noise associated with this 

size of helicopter (generally >92 dBA) could have negative impacts to species, especially bird 

species during the breeding season. However, this level of noise attenuates to 92 dBA at 

distances of 650-700 feet from the aircraft (see Blasting and Helicopter Noise Analysis and 

Mitigation Plan in Appendix P of this FEIS). 

H-207
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 48

table 9 estimates cumulative noise (dBA) at 50 feet associated with each activity in the proposed 

Project (Figure 2). table 9 also estimates noise levels at 200 feet and 1,320 feet with or without a 

buffer of trees between the noise and the target point. Additionally, the distance at which the 

noise would attenuate to background (assuming an ambient noise level of 40 dBA) is estimated. 

Average noise levels over the entire construction sequence would be 84.68 dBA if ditching rockfree areas, or 85.37 dBA if ditching rocky areas that may include drills and blasting. If blasting 

and drilling were needed, the maximum attenuation distance to background (40 dBA) would be 

approximately 2.21 miles if terrain was flat and no trees were present. However, if 100 feet of 

trees were present, the distance would decrease to 1.39 miles. 

Distances at which noise would attenuate to ambient levels would depend on local conditions 

such as tree cover and density, topography, weather (humidity), and wind, all of which can alter 

background noise conditions. Consequently, short-term impact to wildlife by noise would vary 

along the length of the proposed pipeline. 

H-208
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 49

TABLE 9

Estimated Noise Associated with Equipment and Noise Attenuation at Specified Distances During a Typical Pipeline Con

Estimated Noise 

(dBA) at 200 feet 4

Estimated N

(dBA) at 0.25 

Drawing 

Number 1 

Pipeline 

Construction Sequence 1 Equipment Expected 2

Estimated 

Cumulative

Noise (dBA)

At 50 feet 3 No Trees 

With 

Trees 

(100 ft) 5 No Trees 

W

T

(10

1 Right-of-Way Acquisition and Survey Pickup Truck Chain Saw 88 73 68 53 2 Clearing and Grading 

Pickup Truck 

Chain Saw 

Excavator 

Dozer 

Flatbed Truck 

Loader 

Shovel 

Logger-Cutter 

Skidder 

Crawler-Chipper 

93 78 73 58 

3 Fencing Pickup Truck Auger Drill Rig 86 71 66 51 4 Centerline Survey of Ditch Pickup Truck 80 63 58 45 5 Ditching (Rock-Free) 

Pickup Truck 

Backhoe 

Excavator 

Dozer 

Flatbed Truck 

Dump Truck 

Tracked Ditcher 

86 71 66 51 

 OR 

6 Ditching (Rock) 

Pickup Truck 

Backhoe 

Excavator 

Dozer 

Flatbed Truck 

Auger Drill Rig 

Mounted Impact Hammer 

Rock Drill 

Blasting (Mitigated rock fracturing) 

Dump Truck 

99 84 79 64 

H-209
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 50

TABLE 9

Estimated Noise Associated with Equipment and Noise Attenuation at Specified Distances During a Typical Pipeline Con

Estimated Noise 

(dBA) at 200 feet 4

Estimated N

(dBA) at 0.25 

Drawing 

Number 1 

Pipeline 

Construction Sequence 1 Equipment Expected 2

Estimated 

Cumulative

Noise (dBA)

At 50 feet 3 No Trees 

With 

Trees 

(100 ft) 5 No Trees 

W

T

(10

7 Padding Ditch Bottom 

Pickup Truck 

Backhoe 

Excavator 

Dump Truck 

86 71 66 51 

8 Stringing 

Pickup Truck 

Excavator 

Flatbed Truck 

Crane 

86 71 66 51 

9 Bending 

Pickup Truck 

Excavator 

Dozer 

87 72 67 52 

10 Line Up, Stringer Bead and Hot Pass 

Pickup Truck 

Excavator 

Dozer 

Side-Boom 

Welder/Torch 

86 71 66 51 

11 Fill and Cap Weld Pickup Truck Welder/Torch 81 66 61 46 12 As-Built Footage Pickup Truck Welder/Torch 82 67 62 47 13 X-Ray and Weld Repair Pickup Truck Welder/Torch 82 67 62 47 14 Coating Field and Factory Welds Pickup Truck Welder/Torch 82 67 62 47 15 Inspection (Jeeping) and Repair of Coating Pickup Truck 80 65 60 45 16 Lowering In and Tie-Ins 

Pickup Truck 

Backhoe 

Excavator 

Dozer 

87 72 67 52 

17 As-Built Survey Pickup Truck 80 65 60 45 18 Pad and Backfill Pickup Truck 87 72 67 52 

H-210
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 51

TABLE 9

Estimated Noise Associated with Equipment and Noise Attenuation at Specified Distances During a Typical Pipeline Con

Estimated Noise 

(dBA) at 200 feet 4

Estimated N

(dBA) at 0.25 

Drawing 

Number 1 

Pipeline 

Construction Sequence 1 Equipment Expected 2

Estimated 

Cumulative

Noise (dBA)

At 50 feet 3 No Trees 

With 

Trees 

(100 ft) 5 No Trees 

W

T

(10

Backhoe 

Excavator 

Dozer 

Dump Truck 

19 Test and Final Tie-In 

Pickup Truck 

Backhoe 

Pumps 

86 71 66 51 

20 Replace Topsoil and Cleanup 

Pickup Truck 

Backhoe 

Excavator 

Dozer 

Tractor 

88 73 68 53 

1 Drawing Number and Pipeline Construction Sequence are shown in Figure 2. 2 Equipment expected, based on “typical” pipeline construction requirements at a given location. 3 Estimated Cumulative Noise at 50 feet is based on equipment-specific noise values (WSDOT 2008; de Hoop and Lalonde 1998) and rules for decibel addi4 Noise attenuation assumes “soft site” (absorptive ground) conditions and point-source noise reduction of 7.5 dB for every doubling of distance (WSDOT 25 In these estimates, a buffer of 100 feet of dense vegetation is present in line of sight between noise source and receptor. If 200 feet of dense vegetation is p

an additional 5 dB. 

6 Background noise assumed to be 40 dB during daylight hours, when construction would occur. 

H-211
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 52

H-212
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 53

Cumulative Impacts 

In order to understand the contribution of past actions to the cumulative effects of the 

proposed action and alternatives, this analysis relies on current environmental conditions 

as a proxy for the impacts of past actions. This is because existing conditions reflect the 

aggregate impact of all prior human actions and natural events that have affected the 

environment and might contribute to cumulative effects. 

This cumulative effects analysis does not attempt to quantify the effects of past human 

actions by adding up all prior actions on an action-by-action basis. There are several 

reasons for not taking this approach. First, a catalog and analysis of all past actions 

would be impractical to compile and unduly costly to obtain. Current conditions have 

been impacted by innumerable actions over the last century (and beyond), and trying to 

isolate the individual actions that continue to have residual impacts would be nearly 

impossible. Second, providing the details of past actions on an individual basis would 

not be useful to predict the cumulative effects of the proposed action or alternatives. In 

fact, focusing on individual actions would be less accurate than looking at existing 

conditions, because there is limited information on the environmental impacts of 

individual past actions, and one can not reasonably identify each and every action over 

the last century that has contributed to current conditions. Additionally, focusing on the 

impacts of past human actions risks ignoring the important residual effects of past natural 

events, which may contribute to cumulative effects just as much as human actions have. 

By looking at current conditions, we are sure to capture all the residual effects of past 

human actions and natural events, regardless of which particular action or event 

contributed those effects. Third, public scoping for this Project did not identify any 

public interest or need for detailed information on individual past actions. Finally, the 

Council on Environmental Quality issued an interpretive memorandum on June 24, 2005 

regarding analysis of past actions, which states, “agencies can conduct an adequate 

cumulative effects analysis by focusing on the current aggregate effects of past actions 

without delving into the historical details of individual past actions (Jamie Rosen, 

OGC)”. 

The cumulative effects analysis in this BE is also consistent with Forest Service National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Regulations (36 CFR 220.4(f)) (July 24, 2008), which 

state, in part: 

“CEQ regulations do not require the consideration of the individual effects of all 

past actions to determine the present effects of past actions. Once the agency has 

identified those present effects of past actions that warrant consideration, the 

agency assesses the extent that the effects of the proposal for agency action or its 

alternatives will add to, modify, or mitigate those effects. The final analysis 

documents an agency assessment of the cumulative effects of the actions considered 

(including past, present, and reasonable foreseeable future actions) on the affected 

environment. With respect to past actions, during the scoping process and 

subsequent preparation of the analysis, the agency must determine what information 

regarding past actions is useful and relevant to the required analysis of cumulative 

effects. Cataloging past actions and specific information about the direct and 

H-213
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 54

indirect effects of their design and implementation could in some contexts be useful 

to predict the cumulative effects of the proposal. The CEQ regulations, however, do 

not require agencies to catalogue or exhaustively list and analyze all individual past 

actions. Simply because information about past actions may be available or 

obtained with reasonable effort does not mean that it is relevant and necessary to 

inform decisionmaking. (40 CFR 1508.7)” 

For these reasons, the analysis of past actions in this section is included within 

descriptions of current environmental conditions. 

BLM and USFS have a number of projects that have completed the public scoping 

process and are thus, reasonably foreseeable. Projects planned to occur within the 3200 

feet of the proposed pipeline route were included in the analysis of cumulative effects, as 

these lands could be subject to some level of disturbance by the proposed Project. The 

cumulative impact analysis area is based on the distance at which noise from the Project 

during construction is likely to attenuate to just above assumed ambient levels. The 

estimate is based on the following assumptions: 

• Maximum noise anticipated during construction is likely to be 99 dB at 50 

feet during ditching through rock and includes mitigated blasting (see table 9, 

above). 

• Ambient noise within the cumulative impact analysis area is 40 dB, as 

assumed in the Olympic National Forest (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

2003). 

• Detectability threshold for sensitive species (northern spotted owl or marbled 

murrelet) is 4 dB above baseline noise level (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

2003). 

• Noise attenuates by 7.5 dB per doubling of distance from sources based on 

soft site reduction assumptions (Washington State Department of 

Transportation, 2008) 

• More than likely there are 200 feet of dense vegetation (timber) between the 

noise source and noise-sensitive target (distance at which noise attenuates to 

44 dB). Maximum influence of vegetation is a 10-dB reduction between 

source and receptor (Washington State Department of Transportation, 2008). 

With these assumptions, a noise of 99 dB at 50 feet would attenuate to 44 dB at 3,200 

feet from the edge of the construction right-of-way. Therefore, 3,200 feet on each side of 

the Project footprint has been used to define a zone of Project effects for cumulative 

effects analysis. The estimated cumulative effect, based on harvest of mature forests 80 

years old or older within the cumulative impact analysis area a for matrix allocations in 

each federa agency’s administrative jurisdiction are included in table 10. 

Projects on USFS and BLM lands that have completed the public scoping process include 

projects 1 through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, planned 

projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 ac) and various thinning projects 

(1,608.6 ac). On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, there is one planned project that 

H-214
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 55

involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle. Planned projects on the Umpqua National 

Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 ac) and 

thinnings (236.1 ac), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). Planned projects in 

the Coos Bay BLM district include several commercial thinning projects (atleast 2136.4 

ac), various clearcuts (atleast 331.8ac), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a 

land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District include 

four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.02 ac), 

and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include 

several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, planned 

projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 ac), 

several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 ac), and a parking lot (0.06 ac). 

H-215
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 56 

TABLE 10 

Planned USFS and BLM projects in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline route 

Federal Jurisdiction Planned Project - Brief Description Date Implemented TRS Relation to Proposed Project Umpqua National Forest 

Diamond Rock Range Allotment (23,569.6 acres) 4/17/2008 (review) T32S, R2W project bisects allotment from MP 105.39-1

Umpqua National Forest 

Peavine Rock Source (7.75 ac) - new rock source in 60yr forest T32S, R2W, S22 175 feet SW of MP 110.5 

Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 307 (27.6 ac) - clearcut T31S, R2W, S31 crossed by Project; MP 104.08-104.13 Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 122 (8.9 ac) - thinned T31S, R2W, S31 crossed by Project; MP 104.25-104.32 Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 31 (102.0 ac) - none 

T31S, R2W, S31; T32S, R2W, S6 crossed by Project; MP 104.32-105.16 

Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 308 (55.7 ac) - none T31S, R2W, S31 crossed by Project; MP 104.47-104.52 Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 32 (140.7 ac) - thinned 

T31S, R2W, S31; T32S, R2W, S6 crossed by Project; MP 105.4-105.53 

Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 141 (24.2 ac) - thinned T32S, R2W, S6, 5 crossed by Project; MP 105.53-105.62 Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 302 (17.3 ac) - clearcut T32S, R2W, S6, 5 crossed by Project; MP 105.62-105.66, MP Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 11 (64.6 ac) - clearcut T32S, R2W, S5 and 8 crossed by Project; MP 106.79-106.86, MP Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 18 (14.2 ac) - thinned T32S, R2W, S8 crossed by Project; MP 107.28-107.63 Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 190 (29.8 ac) - none T32S, R2W, S8, 17 crossed by Project; MP 107.63-108.07 Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 116 (106.8 ac) - none 

T32S, R2W, S8, 17, and 16 crossed by Project; MP 108.09-108.21 

Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 99 (35.4 ac) - thinned T32S, R2W, S17 and 16 crossed by Project; MP 108.25-108.36 Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 189 (12.7 ac) - thinned T32S, R2W, S16 crossed by Project; MP 108.49-108.66 Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 185 (42.5 ac) - clearcut 

T32S, R2W, S16, 15, and 21 crossed by Project; MP 109.16-109.36 

H-216
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 57 

TABLE 10 

Planned USFS and BLM projects in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline route 

Federal Jurisdiction Planned Project - Brief Description Date Implemented TRS Relation to Proposed Project Umpqua National Forest Cow Creek Unit 127 (134.2 ac) - clearcut T32S, R2W, S21 and 22 crossed by Project; MP 110.0-110.94 Umpqua National Forest 

Cow Creek Unit - 41 other units within 3200 feet of Project 

T31S, R3W and R2W; T32S, R2W 0 to 0.6 miles from Project. 

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest Big Elk Unit 12 (18.1 ac) - unknown T37S, R4E, S16 crossed by Project; MP 161.50 - 161.64 Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Big Elk Unit 1 (22.65 ac) - thin, prune, burn ponderosa pine T37S, R4E, S16 crossed by Project; MP 161.92-162.04 

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Big Elk Unit 2 (21.27 ac) - thin, prune, brush ponderosa pine; protect fir understory T37S, R4E, S15 0.3 mi NE of MP 162.2 

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest Big Elk Unit 13 (24.16 ac) - unknown T37S, R4E, S15 crossed by Project; MP 162.26-162.46 Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Big Elk Unit 3 (40.9 ac) - thin, prune, burn ponderosa pine T37S, R4E, S15 and 14 0.5 mi NE of MP 162.7 

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Big Elk Unit 10 (67.6 ac) - PCT or thin, prune ponderosa pine T37S, R4E, S27 0.3 mi SW of MP 164.0 

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest Big Elk Unit 20 (18.95 ac) - unknown T37S, R4E, S27 0.6 mi SW of MP 164.0 Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Big Elk Unit 9 (15.18 ac) - PCT or thin, prune ponderosa pine T37S, R4E, S27 crossed by Project; MP 164.10-164.20 

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Big Elk Unit 8 (37.13 ac) - PCT or thin, prune, brush ponderosa pine T37S, R4E, S26 crossed by Project; MP 164.71-164.97 

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Big Elk Unit 7 (17.36 ac) - thin, prune, burn ponderosa pine T37S, R4E, S26 crossed by Project; MP 165.12-165.32 

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Big Elk Unit 6 (1,368 ac) - PCT or Christmas tree sale mixed conifer 

T37S, R4E, S25, 26, 35, 36; T37S, R5E, S29, 30, 31, 32; T38S, R5E, S6 crossed by Project; MP 165.32-167.54 

H-217
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 58 

TABLE 10 

Planned USFS and BLM projects in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline route 

Federal Jurisdiction Planned Project - Brief Description Date Implemented TRS Relation to Proposed Project Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Big Elk Unit 5 (18.5 ac) - thin, prune, burn ponderosa pine T37S, R4E, S25 crossed by Project; MP 165.75-165.93 

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Big Elk Unit 15 (700.46 ac) - unknown (not suitable), mixed conifer 

T37S, R4E, S35, 36; T37S, R5E, S31, 32; T38S, R5E, S6 0.2 mi SW of MP 167.7 

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

South Butte Grazing Allotment - 255,592.5 acres T37S, R3E, 4E, and 5E Project bissects the allotment from MP 153

Rogue River - Siskiyou National Forest 

Deadwood Grazing Allotment - 21,336.7 acres 

T37S, R3E and 4E; T38S, R3E, 4E, and 5E 0 to 2.4 miles south of the proposed Project

Fremont-Winema National Forest 

Buck Lake Fence Project - fence waterbody/spring feeding Buck Lake with SOC Oregon Spotted Frog - exclude cattle. T38S, R5E, S11 

South of Clover Creek Road ~ 370 feet from located N and adjacent of Clover Creek Ro

Coos Bay BLM District 

Fairview Commercial Thinning (FCT) commercial thinning - 49 years; 454.5 acres. Believe this is an area with POC 2011 T27S,R12W,S13 0.6 mi NE of MP 22.1; around riparian rese

Coos Bay BLM District FCT regeneration - 0 years; 266.4 acres. 2012 T27S,R12W, S17 0.01mi SW of MP 18.8; around riparian resCoos Bay BLM District FCT commercial thinning - 54 years 2012 T27S,R11W,S19 0.4mi NE of MP 24.3; around riparian reserCoos Bay BLM District FCT regeneration - 81 years; 40.9 acres 2012 T27S,R12W,S25 

adjacent (W/NW) to proposed route betwee23.9 

Coos Bay BLM District 

FCT commercial thinning - 43 yrs; 30.6 

acres 2012 T27S,R12W,S25 

in and adjacent to (N) of the proposed route MP 23.4 

Coos Bay BLM District 

FCT commercial thinning - 52 yrs; 83.6 

acres. Believe this is an area with POC. 2012 T27S,R12W,S25 

in and adjacent to (S) of the proposed route MP 23.9 

Coos Bay BLM District 

FCT commercial thinning - 52 years; 203.9 

acres. Belive this is an area with POC. 2012 T27S,R12W,S25 0.2 mi S of MP 23.4 

Coos Bay BLM District 

FCT commercial thinning - 0 years; 291.3 

acres 2012 T27S,R11W, S19 

in and adajacent to (N) of the proposed rou24.35. 

H-218
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 59 

TABLE 10 

Planned USFS and BLM projects in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline route 

Federal Jurisdiction Planned Project - Brief Description Date Implemented TRS Relation to Proposed Project Coos Bay BLM District 

FCT commercial thinning - 44 yrs; 65.2 

acres 2014 T27S,R12W,S23 0.4 mi SW of MP 21.8. 

Coos Bay BLM District 

FCT commercial thinning - 44 yrs; 222.4 

acres 2014 T27S,R12W,S23 

in and adjacent to (N/S) of the proposed rouand 21.8 

Coos Bay BLM District 

FCT commercial thinning - 0 yrs; 220.8 acres 2014 T27S,R12W,S9 0.2mi NE o MP 19.1 

Coos Bay BLM District FCT regeneration -0 yrs; 24.5 acres 2014 T27S,R12W,S9 .1mi N of MP 19.0 Coos Bay BLM District 

FCT commercial thinning - 43 yrs; 174.7 

acres 2015 T27S,R12W,S15 

in and adjacent to (SW/NE) of the proposed 20.1 and MP 20.55 

Coos Bay BLM District 

FCT commercial thinning - 43 yrs; 389.4 

acres 2015 T27S,R12W,S15 0.1mi NE of MP 20.6 

Coos Bay BLM District North Spit Land Disposal #2 T25S,R13W,S4 adjacent (NW) of the proposed route at MP Coos Bay BLM District East Fork Coquille Regen Harvest T28S,R10W,S23 0.5 mi N of MP 38.4 Coos Bay BLM District East Fork Coquille Regen Harvest T28S,R10W,S23 0.3 mi NE of MP 38.5 Coos Bay BLM District Slater Rocks Commercial Thinning T29S,R9W,S9 

in and adjacent to (N/S) of the proposed rouand 45.7 

Coos Bay BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Elk Creek CT - approvied (1 sites) T28S,R11W,S23 2,840ft SW of MP 31.8. 

Coos Bay BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Elk Creek CT - approvied (1 sites) T28S,R10W,S25 1,590ft NE of MP 40.5 

Roseburg BLM District Fate Creek fish habitat restoration 

T29S,R23W,S31; T30S,R3W,S2 

Fate Creek crosses proposed Project near MProject goes N from that MP crossing appro

Roseburg BLM District Days Creek fish habitat restoration T30S,R3W,S4 & 5 

Days Creek Crosses Project at MP 88.6; resNE from that MP crossing approximately 1

Roseburg BLM District Saint John Creek fish habitat restoration T30S,R3W,S15 

1,600 ft N of MP 92.4; restoration Project imiles 

Roseburg BLM District Saint John Creek fish habitat restoration T30S,R3W,S27 

1,440 feet W of MP 93.7; restoration Projecmiles. 

Roseburg BLM District 

Treetop Flyer CT sale, Unit 30-3-21A (10.9 ac) 2009 T30S,R3W,S21 adjacent and SW of pipeline from MP 91.4

Roseburg BLM District 

Treetop Flyer CT sale, Unit 30-3-21C (23.6 ac) 2009 T30S,R3W,S21 1,300 ft SW of MP 91.7. 

H-219
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 60 

TABLE 10 

Planned USFS and BLM projects in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline route 

Federal Jurisdiction Planned Project - Brief Description Date Implemented TRS Relation to Proposed Project Roseburg BLM District 

Treetop Flyer CT sale, Unit 30-3-21B (6.22 ac) 2009 T30S,R3W,S21 

within TEWA and S of MP 91.7 along acce

Spur, BLM 30-3-28; EAR 91.19-91.74). 

Roseburg BLM District 

Treetop Flyer CT sale, Unit 30-3-15A (114.0 ac) 2009 T30S,R3W,S15 1,440 ft N of MP 92.5 

Roseburg BLM District 

Treetop Flyer CT sale, Unit 30-3-15B (13.4 ac) 2009 T30S,R3W,S15 3,100 ft NE of MP 92.7 

Roseburg BLM District 

Treetop Flyer CT sale, Unit 30-3-23A (10.9 ac) 2009 T30S,R3W,S23 

adjacent to and E of proposed Project from also either side of proposed access road (M3-23.5; EAR 93.58-93.62) 

Roseburg BLM District 

Timber Sale Inventories - Deep Six DM - approved (2 sites) T29S,R9W,S11 

one site is within and SW of the proposed P47.3 and 47.75; other site is located 1,580 f

Roseburg BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Top Cat CT - approved (3 sites) T29S,R9W,S13 adjacent to and 400-730ft S of MP 48.7 and 

Roseburg BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Suicide Squeeze DM - approved (1 sites) T29S,R8W,S15 within and N/S of proposed Project between 

Medford BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Shady Elk - planned (1 sites) 2010 T34S,R1W,S2 adjacent/N of proposed Project between MP 

Medford BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Shady Elk - planned (1 sites) 2010 T34S,R1W,S2 adjacent/NE of proposed Project between M

Medford BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Shady Elk - planned (1 sites) 2010 T34S,R1W,S11 adjacent/E of proposed Project between MP 

Medford BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Shady Elk - planned (4 sites) 2010 T34S,R1W,S12 

1) adjacent to previous sale - 1,090ft E of Mwithin/adjacent/NE between MP 125.15 anadjacent/NE of MP 125.5; 4) 2,340ft NE of 

Medford BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Shady Elk - planned (1 site) 2010 T34S,R1E,S7 1,790ft NE of MP 126.3 

Medford BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Lower Down - cruised (1 site) T35S,R1E,S11 1,350ft NE of MP 135.9 

Medford BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Windy Salt - cruised (1 site) T35S,R2E,S29 1,420ft NE of MP 140.4 

Medford BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Windy Salt - cruised (1 site) T35S,R2E,S33 3,075ft E of MP 140.7 

Lakeview BLM District 

Timber Sales Inventories - Buck 13 - planned (1 site) 2009 T38S,R5E,S13 1,400ft SW of MP 173.6 

H-220
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 61 

TABLE 10 

Planned USFS and BLM projects in the vicinity of the proposed pipeline route 

Federal Jurisdiction Planned Project - Brief Description Date Implemented TRS Relation to Proposed Project Lakeview BLM District 

Upper Spencer Creek SB/Rx Fuels Treatment (404.6 ac) 2010/2011 T38S,R6E,S19 and 20 ~2,180ft SW of MP 175.2 

Lakeview BLM District Pre-Commercial Thinning (120.3 ac) T38S,R6E,S21 N/S of proposed Project between MP 176.1Lakeview BLM District Plant (132.7 ac) T38S,R6E,S21 N/S of proposed Project between MP 176.1Lakeview BLM District Pre-Commercial Thinning (19.8 ac) T38S,R6E,S22 2,215 ft N of MP 177.5 Lakeview BLM District 

Lower Spencer Creek DD Fuels Treatment (97.0 ac) 2011 T38S,R6E,S27 and 34 2,400ft SW of MP 178.4 

Lakeview BLM District 

Pre-Commercial Thinning (248.7 ac; 4 sites) T38S,R6E,S35 450-1220ft SW of MPs 179.2 and 180.0 

Lakeview BLM District Parking Lot (0.06ac) T39S,R9E,S15 610ft S of K-Falls - Amuchastegui Pipe Ya

H-221
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 62

Conservation Measures and Mitigation 

The applicants have developed a program of conservation measures for the Project that 

they believe would mitigate adverse impacts to proposed or listed species and their 

habitats, including proposed or designated critical habitats, and in turn would benefit 

USFS and BLM sensitive species. Each of the applicants’ proposed conservation 

measures has been categorized into one of five “mitigation” applications, described by 

the CEQ (43 FR 55990 §1508.20, 1978): 

1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; 

2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its 

implementation; 

3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected 

environment; 

4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance 

operations during the life of the action; or 

5. Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or 

environments. 

A description of conservation measures can be found in Section 3.3 of the BA, and 

detailed measures can be found in Appendix N of the BA. Mitigation measures have not 

been proposed to offset impacts to specific species discussed below; however, in 

consultation with federal and state agencies, the Project proponent has avoided some 

impact by re-routing the Project and minimized the impact by restricting widths of the 

pipeline corridor in environmentally sensitive areas (i.e., riparian areas), utilizing UCSAs 

within forested areas, and maintaining large snags and trees with cavities on the edge of 

the construction right-of-way or temporary work areas, if feasible. The proponent has 

proposed measures to restore affected habitats to the maximum extent practicable 

including habitat diversity features such as cavities and snags, large woody debris, and 

rock and brush piles, and reduce impact over time by minimizing future disturbances 

(i.e., routine vegetation maintenance every 3 to 5 years after August 1). Pacific Connector 

would also minimize or avoid impact to species through construction mitigation measures 

provided in FERC’s Wetland and Waterbody Procedures and Upland Plan, and Pacific 

Connector’s Spill Prevention, Containment, and Countermeasures Plan and Erosion 

Control and Revegetation Plan. 

For instances where mitigation for impacts to habitat cannot be performed on-site, the 

applicant has proposed to use a Compensatory Mitigation Program (CMP). The goal of 

the CMP is to compensate for unavoidable impacts to administrative land allocations, 

listed species and their habitats, aquatic/riparian habitat effects, and state-specicific 

protected species or habitats through either the acquisition and long-term protection of 

substitute habitat and/or the management of existing or substitute habitat to restore and/or 

enhance suitable habitats (see Appendix O of the BA). The Compensatory Mitigation 

Program provides an at least neutral net impact of the Project, and implementation of the 

CMP benefits a number of species. 

H-222
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 63

Species Accounts and Analysis of Impacts 

MAMMALS 

Surveys were not conducted specifically for special status mammals except for the red 

tree vole; however, special status species were documented if observed during other 

survey activities. The information on special status species habitat occurrence is based 

on several GIS data sources including the BLM GeoBOB database (BLM 2006), 

ORNHIC species request (ORNHIC 2006), and Forest Service database (USFS 2006). 

Pacific shrew (Sorex pacificus)

USFS Sensitive 

The Pacific shrew is found in humid forests, marshes, and thickets, often near riparian 

vegetation (Csuti et al. 2001). It has been found in early successional stages of forests, 

but less often in mature coniferous forests, and requires downed logs, brushy thickets, or 

ground debris for cover and feeding (Csuti et al. 2001). The Pacific shrew feeds on 

snails, slugs, centipedes, insect larvae, earthworms, and some vegetable matter. Pacific 

shrews are thought to have reduced activity levels during daylight hours. Home range 

sizes are unknown for this species, but other shrew species have relatively small ranges; 

between 338 and 5,621 m2

 for three other species (Buckner 1969, Hawes 1997, Ingles 

1961 as cited in NatureServe 2008). 

The global status of this species is Vulnerable, but it is designated by the IUCN as a 

species of Least Concern. It is restricted to a part of western Oregon, but there are 

estimated to be at least 10,000 individuals and its numbers appear to be stable 

(NatureServe 2008). Populations of Pacific shrew are thought to be stable, and no threats 

have been identified although they do have a restricted range (NatureServe 2008). This 

species has a close association with Westside Lowland Conifer-Hardwood Forest, 

Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, and Westside Riparian-Wetlands 

and Eastside Riparian-Wetlands, especially where large woody debris is present (Johnson 

and O’Neil 2001). This species has been documented on both the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

and Umpqua National Forests, and is not documented or suspected to occur on any BLM 

lands crossed by the proposed Project. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable Pacific shrew habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline, in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On USFS lands, 

Pacific shrews have a close association with 192.85 acres to be removed and 66.4 acres to 

be modified (table 5). Pacific shrews are not highly mobile, nor do they migrate. Project 

activities could impact Pacific shrews by disturbing individuals. Shrews could also be 

directly killed by construction activities in the affected area if they are not able to get out 

of the way of machinery. Due to their relatively small home range size and restricted 

mobility, habitat destruction, especially the removal of large woody debris, could 

negatively impact this species. Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize 

impacts to this species include replacement of large woody debris after construction (see 

Appendix N of the BA). 

H-223
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 64

Cumulative Effects 

The Pacific shrew has a restricted range in Western Oregon, and although little is known 

about its population status, it is not thought to be declining. Within the analysis area, past 

logging has contributed to a decrease in late-succesional forests, and thus provides more 

early-successional habitat (table 3). Westside Riparian-Wetlands and Eastside RiparianWetlands in western Oregon have also declined over the past 100 years (Kauffman et al. 

2001). The Pacific shrew is often found in early-successional forests and may therefore 

have adapted to stand disturbance that occurred from past timber harvest and removal of 

downed wood in the Project analysis area. This species is associated with stream habitat 

and under the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP), riparian reserves in the analysis area are 

likely to improve habitat over time. Other USFS projects that are planned within the 

vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 through 33 (table 10). Planned projects on 

the Umpqua National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of 

clearcuts (286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown 

acreage). Planned projects on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest include two 

large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). 

These projects would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings 

would most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Although 

threats to this species are not known, actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because mitigation efforts will replace large down wood, and although 

habitat and potentially individuals would be impacted by the Project, the species is stable 

in the region. 

Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Assessment

The pallid bat ranges from central Mexico northward through western Texas, New 

Mexico, Arizona, southern and western Colorado, south-central Utah, western Nevada, 

California, Oregon, eastern Washington, western Idaho, and north to the southern 

Okanagan Valley of British Columbia (Orr 1954, Hermanson and O’Shea 1983, Verts 

and Carraway 1998). In Oregon, pallid bats have been documented in the western 

interior valleys and east of the Cascades excluding the Blue Mountains (McLaren 2001). 

The pallid bat inhabits low elevations (< 1,830 meters) in a variety of ecotypes, including 

rocky, arid deserts and canyonlands, shrub-steppe grasslands, karst formations, and 

higher elevation coniferous forests (Orr 1954, Nagorsen and Bingham 1993, Sherwin 

1998). 

H-224
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 65

Pallid bats roost alone, in small groups (2 to 20 bats), or gregariously (100s of 

individuals). Pallid bats roost in caves, mines (van Zyll de Jong 1985), open man-made 

structures such as porches and garages (van Zyll de Jong 1985, Lewis 1996), cliff 

overhangs (Hermanson and O’Shea 1983, Lewis 1996), rock crevices, trees and tree 

cavities (Nagorsen and Bingham 1993), and under abandoned bridges (van Zyll de Jong 

1985). While night roosts can include buildings, rock overhangs, bridges, caves and 

mines, Lewis (1996) found a high proportion of his study individuals in Oregon under 

bridges. Pallid bat maternity roosts have been found in ponderosa pine snags (Rabe et al. 

1998), in rock crevices, within spaces behind exfoliating rock, and “potholes” in rockoverhangs (Lewis 1996). Pallid bats’ tendency to roost communally appears to make 

them particularly sensitive to human disturbance (Lewis 1996). Fidelity of pallid bats 

toward roost sites, particularly night roosts, makes them further vulnerable to disturbance 

(Lewis 1994). Young are born in May and June, fly at 6 weeks, and are weaned in 6 to 8 

weeks. This species is thought to hibernate in the winter (NatureServe 2008). 

 

The global status of the pallid bat is Secure, and its IUCN category is Least Concern, due 

to large numbers of individuals (10,000– over 1,000,000) (NatureServe 2008). Habitat 

loss from urbanization, conversion of sagebrush-steppe, and agricultural expansion is 

likely a limiting factor on pallid bats, particularly due to reduction of foraging habitats 

(Chapman et al. 1994). In addition to direct habitat loss, the indirect effects from fire 

suppression modify the forest-valley transition area. 

The pallid bat has a close association with shrub-steppe, herbaceous wetlands, eastside 

riparian wetlands, and open water, especially at edges where snags, cliffs, caves, and tree 

cavities are present. It has a general association with southwest Oregon mixed coniferhardwood forests, ponderosa pine forests and woodlands, western juniper/mountain 

mahogany woodlands, eastside grasslands, westside riparian wetlands, and agriculture 

and pastureland. It has an occasional association with westside grasslands and urban 

areas (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). The pallid bat has been documented on the Lakeview, 

Medford, and Roseburg BLM Districts, and is suspected in the Coos Bay District. It has 

also been documented in the Fremont-Winema National Forest. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable pallid bat habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline, within the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, 

pallid bats have a close association with 21.3 acres to be removed and 1.49 acres to be 

modified, and a general association with 437.12 acres to be removed and 187.73 acres to 

be modified. On USFS lands, pallid bats have a close association with 0.68 acres to be 

removed and 0.08 acres to be modified, and a general association with 75.88 acres to be 

removed and 11.99 acres to be modified (table 5). Pallid bats could be disturbed by 

pipeline construction if habitat modification occurs, especially removal of snags. Snag 

abundance data is available for the Fremont-Winema National Forest, and it is estimated 

that approximately 138 snags would be cleared in the analysis area (tables 5 and 8; acres 

of late-successional forested habitat impacted multiplied by snags/acre), operating under 

the assumption that the bulk of snags would occur in late-successional forests (>80 years 

old). Habitat could also be temporarily rendered unsuitable due to noise disturbance; 

H-225
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 66

however, due to this species’ mobility and wide habitat preferences, it should be able to 

temporarily relocate to other areas during construction without population-scale impacts. 

Right-of-way clearing and pipeline construction also has the potential to kill or injure 

individuals, if day-roosting structures are demolished and adults or young are unable to 

escape, especially if a maternity colony or hibernaculum is impacted. This bat is a social 

species (Nagorsen and Brigham 1993), possibly magnifying these effects if a colony is 

encountered. Pallid bats could benefit from right-of-way clearing by being provided with 

more open areas for foraging. An indirect effect of the proposed Projectcould be 

disturbance to winter hibernacula, causing bats to use up energy reserves necessary to 

survive through the winter. Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize 

impacts to this species include snag creation (see Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects 

Historically, the pallid bat primarily roosted in old-growth trees or snags with cavities 

and ranged across multiple habitats. Past harvest techniques in the analysis area have 

removed large trees that served as pallid bats roosts, maternity colonies and winter 

hibernacula. Suitable foraging habitat may also have decreased in the analysis area due to 

past clearcut forest management (table 3). Threats to this species include loss of roost 

habitat due to human disturbance and snag removal. 

One USFS project (project 34, table 10) is planned within the vicinity of the analysis 

area, in the Fremont-Winema National Forest. This project involves fencing a waterbody 

to exclude cattle from Oregon spotted frog habitat, and would most likely not effect the 

pallid bat. BLM projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include 

projects 55 through 83 (table 10). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District include 

four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 acres), 

and three timber sales (6 sites, unknown acreage). Planned projects in the Medford BLM 

District include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM 

District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels 

treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 acres), a planting 

(132.7 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). The large number of thinnings would most 

likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Although 138 snags 

would potentially be cleared from the analysis area, these snags represent a small portion 

of the species’ overall available roost sites and would be replaced through mitigation 

efforts. Under the Northwest Forest Plan, Late Successional Reserves (LSR) and Riparian 

Reserves (RR) in the area are likely to improve habitat for this species over time. 

Construction noise disturbance to communal roost sites and colonies in the analysis area, 

though of short duration, could impact individuals locally. The proposed Project’s habitat 

removal and potential for roost disturbance combined with past, present and foreseeable 

future activities could potentially result in cumulative impacts to the pallid bat. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of mitigation efforts to create snags, its Secure and Least Concern 

H-226
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 67

global statuses, the large number of individuals that exist throughout its range, the 

mobility of the species, and its wide habitat preferences. 

Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii)

BLM Sensitive

The Townsend’s big-eared bat occurs throughout western North America from southern 

British Columbia, south along the Pacific coast to central Mexico and east to the Great 

Plains with isolated populations occurring in the central and eastern United States 

(Woodruff and Ferguson 2005). Townsend’s big-eared bats are a common species in 

Oregon and can be found wherever suitable habitat exists, excluding the Blue 

Mountainsand West Basin Range (McLaren 2001). 

Recent studies have indicated that the use of roost sites by Townsend’s big-eared bats is 

variable within seasons and among years (Piaggio 1998). Townsend’s big-eared bats 

roost primarily in caves, cracks or crevices in rocks, abandoned mines, abandoned 

buildings and open attics (Barbour and Davis 1969, Nagorsen and Brigham 1993, Pierson 

et al. 1996). Although caves and mines are considered to be preferred day roosts (Pierson 

et al. 2001), Keely and Tuttle (1999) reported high use of bridges as day and night roosts 

by Townsend’s big-eared bats in southwestern Oregon. Townsend’s big-eared bats show 

little fidelity to interim roosts, but the species is highly loyal to maternity roosts (Fellers 

and Pierson 2002). In Washington and Oregon, this species is known to utilize individual 

caves for both maternity roosts and winter hibernation (Woodruff and Ferguson 2005). 

Young are born from mid-April through late July, fly within a month, and are weaned 

within two months. This species hibernates from early fall through early spring 

(NatureServe 2008). 

The global status of the Townsend’s big-eared bat is Apparently Secure. It appears to be 

doing well in the western U.S. and Mexico but is quite rare in other parts of its range; two 

eastern subspecies are federally listed as Endangered (NatureServe 2008). Its IUCN Red 

List category is Vulnerable, largely due to eastern populations. Its global population 

estimate is between 2,500 and 10,000 individuals (NatureServe 2008). 

The primary threat to the Townsend’s big-eared bat is disturbance and destruction of 

roost sites through recreational caving, mine exploration, mine reclamation and renewed 

mining in historic districts. Recent studies in Oregon and California indicate that current 

and historic colonies exhibited moderate to sizable decreases in numbers following 

human visitation and renewed mining (Piaggio 1998). Additionally, the loss of old 

buildings, barns, warehouse, silos and other buildings and the physical closure or 

reactivation of mines reduces available roost sites (Woodruff and Ferguson 2005). 

Townsend’s big-eared bats have a close association with open water, especially at 

ecotones where cliffs and caves are present. They have a general association with 

westside lowland conifer-hardwood forests, montane mixed conifer forests, southwest 

Oregon mixed conifer/hardwood forests, ponderosa pine forests and woodlands, westside 

oak-dry Douglas-fir forests and woodlands, western juniper/mountain mahogany 

H-227
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 68

woodlands, shrub-steppe, west- and eastside grasslands, herbaceous wetlands, west- and 

eastside riparian wetlands, and agriculture and pastureland. They have an occasional 

association with urban areas, coastal dunes and beaches, and bays and estuaries (Johnson 

and O’Neil 2001). They have been documented on the Coos Bay, Lakeview, Medford, 

and Roseburg BLM Districts and the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable Townsend’s big-eared bat habitats within 3,200 

feet of the proposed pipeline, in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM 

lands, Townsend’s big-eared bats have a close association with 0.93 acres to be removed 

and 0.01 acres to be modified, and a general association with 613.05 acres to be removed 

and 207.24 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, Townsend’s big-eared bats have a close 

association with 0.14 acres to be removed and 0.09 acres to be modified, and a general 

association with 196.69 acres to be removed and 70.75 acres to be modified (table 5). 

The Project could affect this species by disturbing roosting bats. Particularly sensitive to 

disturbance, females have been known to permanently abandon summer roosts when 

disturbed. Nursery colonies, located in caves, mines, or buildings, can contain up to 

several hundred bats, and thus a large number of individuals could potentially be affected 

if noise disturbance causes a group to abandon its roost, particularly the young which 

may not yet be able to live independently of their mothers (Nagorsen and Brigham 1993). 

Noise disturbance would only be temporary, however, and habitat would become suitable 

once the noise ceased. Due to this species’ mobility and wide habitat preferences, it 

should be able to temporarily relocate to other areas during construction fairly easily and 

without population-scale impacts. A direct effect of pipeline construction could be if 

hibernating bats are disturbed and if aroused from torpor, possibly lowering their fitness 

during winter which could increase potential mortality, and decrese fecundity. 

Cumulative Effects 

Threats to this species result from cave disturbance by recreation, mining and mine 

closures as well as loss of foraging habitat. Suitable habitat for this species, including 

forested and wetland habitats within the area of analysis, have decreased in complexity 

from historical conditions due to widespread logging and settlement patterns (table 3). 

Cave roost sites are sparsely located across the Project area and are not likely to be 

encountered during construction activities. Construction noise disturbance to communal 

roost sites and colonies in the Projectarea, therefore, are not expected to affect local 

populations. 

USFS projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 19 

through 33 in the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, shown in table 10. These 

projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning 

projects (1,608.6 acres). BLM projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis 

area include projects 35 through 83, shown in table 10. Planned projects in the Coos Bay 

BLM District include several commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), 

various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a 

land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District 

include four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 

H-228
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 69

acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District 

include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, 

planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels treatments 

(501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 

acres; table 10). The large number of thinnings, combined with the planned fish 

restoration projects, would most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest 

ecosystems. The proposed Project, combined with past, present and foreseeable future 

activities could potentially result in cumulative impacts to the Towsend’s big eared bat. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of its Apparently Secure global status, particularly in the west 

where the Project is located, the mobility of the species, and its wide habitat preferences.. 

Fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes)

BLM Assessment

The fringed myotis ranges throughout much of western North America from southern 

British Columbia to Mexico, and from California, east to South Dakota (Bradley and 

Ports 1998, Rabe et al. 1998, Cryan et al. 2000). In Oregon, fringed myotis can be found 

in the Coast Range and in the northeastern corner of the state (McLaren 2001). Although 

widely distributed throughout western North America, the fringed myotis is considered 

rare in the northern portion of its range (Barbour and Davis 1969, United States 

Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of the Interior 1993, McLaren 2001). 

Fringed myotis roost in crevices in buildings, underground mines, rocks, cliffs faces, and 

bridges (Bradley and Ports 1998, Cryan et al. 2001). Roosting in decadent trees and 

snags, particularly large ones, is common throughout its western range. In the Pacific 

Northwest, the fringed myotis is not considered a tree-roosting bat (Nagorsen and 

Brigham 1993). Fringed myotis in the Pacific Northwest generally roost in more 

abundant albeit less permanent abandoned buildings and caves (Lewis 1995), although 

Weller and Zabel (2001) found fringed myotis roosted primarily in snags in northern 

California. Fringed myotis move within roost sites, maximizing their thermoregulation 

and reproductive behavior (O’Farrell and Studier 1980). Young are born in late June to 

mid-July and young can fly at 16-17 days. Colonies begin to disperse by October, and 

bats are likely hibernating after September (NatureServe 2008). 

The global status of the fringed myotis is Apparently Secure, and its IUCN status is Least 

Concern. It is widespread in western North America but abundance appears to be low, 

and population trend is stable (NatureServe 2008). Threats to the fringed myotis focus on 

loss or modification of roosting habitat, and include closure or renewed activity at 

abandoned mines, recreational caving and mine exploration, loss of large, decadent trees 

and replacement of buildings and bridges with non-bat-friendly structures (Bradley and 

H-229
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 70

Ports 1998). Removal of large blocks of forest habitat also threatens the fringed myotis 

by removing foraging habitat (Bradley and Ports 1998). 

Fringed myotis have a general association with westside lowland conifer-hardwood 

forests, southwest Oregon mixed conifer-hardwood forests, ponderosa pine forests and 

woodlands, westside oak/dry Douglas-fir forests and woodlands, shrub-steppe, eastside 

grasslands, herbaceous wetlands, west- and eastside riparian wetlands, and open water, 

especially at edges and where snags, cliffs, caves, and tree cavities are present. They 

have an occasional association with montane mixed conifer forests, urban areas, and 

agriculture and pastureland (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). They have been documented on 

the Coos Bay, Lakeview, Medford, and Roseburg BLM Districts and the Rogue RiverSiskiyou and Umpqua National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable fringed myotis habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline, in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, 

fringed myotis have a general association with 580.77 acres to be removed and 206.45 

acres to be modified. On USFS lands, fringed myotis have a general association with 

350.94 acres to be removed and 116.47 acres to be modified (table 5). As this species 

can sometimes be found roosting in snags, and snag abundance data is available for the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou and Umpqua National Forests, it is estimated that approximately 

890 snags would be cleared in the analysis area (tables 5 and 8; acres of late-successional 

forested habitat to be removed multiplied by snags/acre), operating under the assumption 

that the bulk of snags would occur in late-successional forests (>80 years old). The 

Project could affect this species by disturbing bats. Fringed myotis are very sensitive to 

disturbance, particularly at maternity colonies. They roost colonially, in groups up to 

2,000 individuals, so disturbance could potentially impact large numbers of bats, 

particularly the young which may not yet be able to live independently of their mothers. 

Noise disturbance would only be temporary, however, and habitat would become suitable 

once the noise ceased. Due to this species’ mobility and wide habitat preferences, it 

should be able to temporarily relocate to other areas during construction fairly easily and 

without population-scale impacts. Pipeline construction could also negatively impact the 

fringed myotis by modifying habitat, particularly by removing snags if they are located in 

the right-of-way. Individuals could also be killed or injured if snags are removed or 

destroyed while occupied by roosting bats. Another effect of pipeline construction could 

be if hibernating bats are disturbed, possibly lowering their fitness during winter when 

they must use their body reserves to survive. Specific mitigation measures that would 

help minimize impacts to this species include creation of snags (see Appendix N of the 

BA). 

Cumulative Effects 

This species is widespread in western North America but abundance appears to be low 

and population trend is stable (NatureServe 2008). Threats to the fringed myotis include 

loss of large, decadent roost trees. Suitable habitat for this species including forested and 

wetland habitats within the analysis area have decreased from historical conditions due to 

widespread logging and settlement patterns in the region (table 3). 

H-230
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 71

USFS projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33, shown in table 10. In the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, planned 

projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning 

projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest include a range 

allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 

acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). These projects would be 

consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings would most likely 

contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. BLM projects that are 

planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 through 83, shown in 

table 10. Planned projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include several commercial 

thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two 

timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned 

projects in the Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat restoration projects, 

several commercial thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). 

Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, 

unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale 

(1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial 

thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres; table 10). The large number of 

thinnings combined with the fish habitat restoration projects would most likely contribute 

to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. However, the proposed Projectwould 

remove and modify fringed bat habitat, and therefore, when combined with past, present 

and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative impacts to the 

fringed myotis bat and/or their habitat. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of mitigation efforts to create snags, its Apparently Secure and 

Least Concern global status, the mobility of the species, and its wide habitat preferences. 

 

Pacific fisher (Martes pennanti pacifica)

USFS Sensitive, Candidate for federal listing

In April 2004, the US Fish and Wildlife Service stated that the West Coast distinct 

population segment of the fisher was found to be warranted for listing, but precluded by 

higher priority actions to amend the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and 

Plants (FWS 2004). Fishers are a member of the weasel family that primarily use forest 

with high canopy cover. They mostly avoid areas with little forest cover or significant 

human disturbance and instead prefer large areas of contiguous interior forest (FWS 

2004). Fishers have a very limited range in Oregon, and are thought to be restricted to 

two disjunct and genetically isolated populations in the northern Siskiyou Mountains and 

southern Cascade Mountains (FWS 2004). The home range size of fishers varies by sex 

and individual, but has been recorded as large as 128 km2

 (31,629 acres; Beyer and 

Golightly 1996) and is typically larger in poorer quality habitat (FWS 2004). Fishers are 

H-231
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 72

opportunistic carnivores, with a diet including birds, porcupines, snowshoe hares, 

squirrels, mice, voles, shrews, insects, big game carrion, vegetation, and fruit (Powell 

1993). They use cavities, brush piles, and hollow logs as resting and denning sites (Csuti 

et al. 2001). 

The global status of the Pacific fisher is Secure, and its IUCN status is Least Concern. 

Despite extirpation due to habitat loss in the southern portion of its range, it has a large 

range in northern North America and has experienced recent range expansions in the 

eastern U.S. Its total population size is probably at least in the low hundreds of thousands 

(NatureServe 2008). 

This species has declined due to unregulated trapping for furs, predator bounties, and 

extensive, lethal predator control programs that impacted fishers for nearly two centuries. 

These losses were exacerbated by habitat loss and fragmentation from urban growth and 

development, forest management activities, and road construction (NatureServe 2008). 

Pacific fisher habitat in the Pacific Coast range is expected to continue to decline (Alig et 

al. 2003), and FWS (2004) expects that current regulations are not sufficient to reduce the 

level of threat. Fishers have been documented within 0.4 miles of the pipeline right-ofway. 

Pacific fishers have a close association with westside lowland conifer-hardwood forests, 

montane mixed conifer forests, and westside riparian wetlands, especially where large 

woody debris and snags are present. They have a general association with southwest 

Oregon mixed conifer-hardwood forests and eastside riparian wetlands, and an occasional 

association with ponderosa pine forests and woodlands (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). They 

have been documented in the Medford BLM District and are suspected to occur on the 

Coos Bay and Lakeview districts. They have also been documented in the Rogue RiverSiskiyou, Umpqua, and Fremont-Winema National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The affected area for this analysis includes all suitable Pacific fisher habitats within 5 

miles of the proposed pipeline, in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On 

BLM lands, Pacific fishers have a close association with 153.05 acres to be removed and 

17.1 acres to be modified, and a general association with 157.79 acres to be removed and 

33.0 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, Pacific fishers have a close association with 

121.13 acres to be removed and 47.1 acres to be modified, and a general association with 

275.60 acres to be removed and 82.91 acres to be modified (table 5). The Project could 

affect this species by disturbing animals. Fishers are sensitive to disturbance and will 

avoid areas used by humans (CBD 2008). Noise disturbance would only be temporary; 

however, and habitat would become suitable once the noise ceased. Due to this species’ 

mobility, it should be able to temporarily relocate to other areas during construction. The 

average home range sizes for Pacific fishers are 30 km2

 and 5 km2 for males and females, 

respectively. Pipeline construction could also negatively impact the Pacific fisher by 

modifying habitat, particularly by removing snags and large woody debris during rightof-way clearing. The cleared right-of-way could also fragment habitat, which is 

detrimental to fishers because they prefer large areas of contiguous, unfragmented forest 

H-232
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 73

(CBD 2008). Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize impacts to this 

species include replacement of large woody debris after construction and creation of 

snags (see Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects 

Historically, the Pacific fisher was common throughout the Oregon Coast Range and 

Klamath Region of Oregon in low elevation closed canopy forests with large trees for 

denning. The Pacific fisher’s range has been reduced due to prior trapping, settlement, 

and the removal of large areas of contiguous late-successional forests (table 4). Current 

threats to the Pacific fisher include habitat loss and fragmentation. 

USFS projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 34, described in table 10. In the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, proposed 

Projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning 

projects (1,608.6 acres). There is one proposed Project in the Fremont-Winema National 

Forest that involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle from Oregon spotted frog 

habitat. Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest include a range allotment, a 

new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and 

several fuel reductions (unknown acreage; table 10). These projects would be consistent 

with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings would most likely contribute to the 

long term health of the forest ecosystems. 

BLM projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 54, and 68 through 83, shown in table 10. Planned projects in the Coos Bay 

BLM District include several commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), 

various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a 

land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include 

several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, planned 

projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 

acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). The 

large number of thinnings would most likely contribute to the long term health of the 

forest ecosystems. However, due to the restricted range of this species, its overlap with 

the current analysis area, and the presence of fishers within 0.4 miles of the proposed 

right of way, it is likely that expected modification of habitat and disturbance in the 

analysis area would contribute to cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of its Secure and Least Concern global statuses, and since impacts 

of the proposed Projectwould be largely temporary and would affect a small portion of an 

individual’s home range. 

H-233
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 74

BIRDS 

Surveys were not conducted specifically for special status birds except for the great gray 

owl; however, special status species were documented if observed during other survey 

activities. The information on special status species occurrence is based on several data 

sources including the BLM GeoBOB database (BLM 2006), ORNHIC species request 

(ORNHIC 2006), Forest Service database (USFS 2006), aerial photos, and Geographical 

Information System (GIS). 

Red-necked grebe (Podiceps grisegena)

USFS Sensitive

This waterbird breeds throughout southern and central Alaska and much of Canada, and 

south to the northern US. Their winter range is along the Pacific coast from the Aleutian 

Islands to Los Angeles, California, the Atlantic coast from Newfoundland to North 

Carolina, and the shores of Lake Ontario. The only consistent breeding in Oregon is by a 

group of five to 20 birds in Upper Klamath Lake NWR. During the winter, red-necked 

grebes can be found in larger numbers along the coast (Spencer 2003a). 

Breeding habitat is clear, deep marshy lakes and ponds in timbered regions. At Upper 

Klamath Lake, emergent vegetation is dominant, and pondweed and waterweed are 

common (Spencer 2003a). Winter habitat consists of estuaries and protected waters 

along the coast (Spencer 2003a). Fish make up 50 to 75 percent of adults’ diets. Other 

important foods are insects, crustaceans, and occasionally vegetation (Spencer 2003a). 

Red-necked grebes are designated by ODFW as Sensitive – Critical in Oregon, meaning 

in danger of being listed as threatened or endangered, but their global status is Secure, 

meaning common, widespread, and abundant (ORNHIC 2007, NatureServe 2008). As 

predators, red-necked grebes are susceptible to bioaccumulation of pollutants such as 

organochlorides and heavy metals, and they are also vulnerable to oil spills. A 

potentially important source of mortality to this diving bird is bycatch in commercial 

fishing nets. Other threats to red-necked grebes are degradation of habitat and 

disturbance. Farming, road-building, and development have destroyed breeding habitat, 

while pollution is a problem at some wintering areas. Disturbance has also been blamed 

for reduced productivity at some sites (Stout and Neuchterlein 1999). 

According to Johnson and O’Neil (2001) habitat associations, the red-necked grebe has a 

close association with herbaceous wetlands, westside and eastside riparian-wetlands, and 

lakes, rivers, streams, bays, and estuaries. This bird has been documented on the 

Fremont-Winema National Forest. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes estuaries and protected waters along the coast on federal lands, 

within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline, where red-necked grebes spend time in the 

winter. Upper Klamath Lake NWR is outside of the analysis area, so breeding habitats 

are not included in the analysis area. In the Fremont-Winema National Forest, the rednecked grebe has a close association with 0.7 acres to be removed and 0.1 acres to be 

H-234
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 75

modified (table 5). Red-necked grebes could be disturbed by pipeline construction if 

activities take place near coastal wintering grounds, rendering these habitats temporarily 

unsuitable. However, since grebes are a mobile species, they should be able to move 

away from project construction activities and not be directly affected. Turbidity could 

increase near Projectconstruction thereby decreasing prey availability in the immediate 

area during construction activities. Red-necked grebes are susceptible to 

bioaccumulation of contaminants, although Pacific Connector’s Spill Prevention, 

Containment, and Countermeasures Plan should avoid this potential impact. An indirect 

effect would be decreased fitness caused by disturbance during winter which could 

accelerate the expending of bodily energy reserves at a time when they are vulnerable due 

to colder temperatures. 

Cumulative Effects

Historical information on this species is limited; breeding populations in Oregon were 

first documented in 1945 (Marshall et al. 2003). Bioaccumulation of contaminants is 

thought to occur at wintering grounds, rather than breeding sites (NatureServe 2009). 

Current threats to red-necked grebes include degradation of habitat and disturbance. 

Development has concentrated around bodies of water, increasing disturbance, 

eliminating habitat, and encouraging the spread of mesopredators. Though one-third of 

Oregon wetlands are estimated to have been lost since the late 1700s, wetlands are now 

protected under federal law, and loss of estuarine wetlands has slowed substantially since 

the mid-1900s (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation 

Division 1989, Dahl 1990). The Northwest Forest Plan also protects wetlands on 

National Forests (USFS and BLM 1994). A total of 318.6 acres of suitable red-necked 

grebe habitat would be within 3,200 feet of the proposed action (table 3). Other projects 

that are planned in the vicinity of the analysis area include a single project on the 

Fremont-Winema National Forest that includes fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle 

(table 10). Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities would not likely result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species”, because of the low probability of encountering breeding birds and the 

species’ global Secure status. 

Horned grebe (Podiceps auritus)

USFS Sensitive

This small grebe breeds in Alaska and parts of western Canada. During winter, in the 

west, it can be found along the Pacific coast from the Aleutians to Mexico, inland in 

northern California, along the Columbia and Willamette Rivers in Oregon and 

Washington, on the Colorado River between California and Arizona, and at scattered 

locations in New Mexico and Colorado. In Oregon, horned grebes have been 

documented in Harney, Lake, and Klamath Counties (Spencer 2003b). Near the 

H-235
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 76

proposed pipeline route, horned grebes can be found in the winter along the coast and 

possibly at Upper Klamath Lake, Klamath County (Stedman 2000). 

Breeding habitat in Oregon consists of small (< 25 acres), semi-permanent, shallow 

freshwater ponds and marshes with emergent vegetation, especially sedges, rushes, and 

cattails, and areas of open water (Stedman 2000, Spencer 2003b). Slightly brackish areas 

can also be used. During winter, they are usually found on saltwater, often inshore, 

though also on fresh water (Stedman 2000). In the summer, horned grebes eat aquatic 

arthropods, and in the winter they eat fish and crustaceans. 

The global status of horned grebes is Secure (common, widespread, and abundant), and 

its IUCN listing status is Least Concern (NatureServe 2008). The ODFW lists them as 

Peripheral or Naturally Rare, though this designation applies only to the breeding 

population (ORNHIC 2007). The most serious threats to winter range suitability are oil 

spills and pesticide accumulation. Losses of breeding habitat are also serious in some 

areas due to mowing of aquatic vegetation and eutrophication due to fertilizer runoff 

(Stedman 2000). Horned grebes will also abandon lakes with heavy human recreation. 

Substantial losses are reported due to incidental take in fishing nets, and some losses have 

been reported due to toxins including pesticides, and oil spills (Stedman 2000). 

The horned grebe has a close association with herbaceous wetlands and open water, 

including lakes, rivers, streams, bays, and estuaries (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). This 

species has been documented on the Fremont-Winema and Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forests and is not documented or suspected to occur on any BLM lands in the 

analysis area. 

 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable horned grebe habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline, in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On USFS lands, 

horned grebes have a close association with 0.6 acres to be removed and 0.2 acres to be 

modified (table 5). The nearest breeding to the analysis area is possibly Upper Klamath 

Lake, Klamath County, which is outside the analysis area. Threats to horned grebe 

include loss of breeding habitat and human disturbance. Because grebes are mobile 

species, they should be able to move away from project construction activities and would 

not be directly or permanently affected. Eggs or newly-hatched young in summer could 

be directly affected if disturbance causes adults to abandon them, leaving them 

vulnerable to predation or the elements. Turbidity could temporarily increase near 

project construction thereby decreasing prey availability in the immediate area during 

construction activities. Horned grebes are also susceptible to contaminants and toxins 

that could be leaked into the environment by construction equipment. There are many 

recorded instances of horned grebe deaths due to oiling, although their high population 

numbers and extensive winter range probably protects the species from population-level 

effects from isolated spills (Stedman 2000). However, Pacific Connector’s Spill 

Prevention, Containment, and Countermeasures Plan should avoid this potential impact. 

Indirect effects to this species in the analysis area could be loss of fitness due to 

displacement from preferred habitat and increased utilization of bodily energy reserves 

H-236
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 77

because of disturbance during winter. Dredging activities could also affect these birds if 

it disrupts their prey base. Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize 

impacts to this species include the use of sediment barriers (see Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects

Management activities on federal lands could affect this species by disturbing birds at 

breeding or wintering grounds. Breeding habitat in Oregon may be decreased from 

historic levels due to filling of wetlands and development. Though one-third of Oregon 

wetlands are estimated to have been lost since the late 1700s, wetlands are now protected 

under federal law, and loss of estuarine wetlands has slowed substantially since the mid1900s (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division 

1989, Dahl 1990). The Northwest Forest Plan also protects wetlands on National Forests 

(USFS and BLM 1994). A total of 329.1 acres of suitable horned grebe habitat would be 

within 3,200 feet of the proposed action (table 3). Other projects that are planned within 

the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 19 through 34 (table 10) on the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou and Fremont-Winema National Forests. On the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest, planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) 

and various thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). There is one planned project on the 

Fremont-Winema National Forest that includes fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle 

(table 10). These projects would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of 

thinnings would most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. 

Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future 

activities would not likely result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of the Secure and Least Concern global statuses of the species and 

the mobility of the species. 

American white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos)

BLM Assessment

The breeding range of the American white pelican is at scattered locations in the Great 

Plains region of Canada and the U.S.. During winter, they are found in California south 

of the San Francisco Bay, and the Pacific and Gulf of Mexico regions along the coast 

south to the Yucatan peninsula. There are a few locations in Texas and Mexico where 

they can be found year-round (Knopf and Evans 2004). Along the potential pipeline 

corridor, they can be found at breeding colonies in the Upper Klamath Lake area in 

Klamath County, and they have been documented in Jackson County as well. 

During breeding, typical habitat is isolated islands or floating reed mats in freshwater 

lakes. Nesting at Malheur NWR has been recorded on islands vegetated with 

greasewood, saltgrass, and Great Basin wild rye (Paullin et al. 1988). The diet of the 

American white pelican is largely made up of fish. Foraging habitat is shallow marshes, 

H-237
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 78

lakes, rivers, and canals, especially near dams, gates, and pipes, where fish congregate 

(Knopf and Evans 2004). 

This species is ranked as Vulnerable both globally and in Oregon, meaning it is at 

moderate risk of extinction due to a restricted range, relatively few populations, recent 

and widespread declines, or other factors (ORNHIC 2007, NatureServe 2008). There are 

many threats to this species; some deaths at Malheur NWR were the results of botulism, 

powerline strikes, and possibly starvation (Herziger and Ivey 2003). Fluctuating water 

levels have caused chick stranding and nest flooding; fluctuating water levels can also 

contribute to erosion of nesting islands (Herziger and Ivey 2003). Pelicans are also 

highly sensitive to disturbance; over 800 nests were abandoned at Malheur Lake in 1988 

after trespassers visited a colony by canoe (Herziger and Ivey 2003). 

Near the analysis area, they were observed at Fish Lake (T37S R4E, Sections 2 and 3). 

The American white pelican has a close association with open water (lakes, rivers, and 

streams) and a general association with herbaceous wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil 2001); 

it has been documented in BLM’s Lakeview District and the Umpqua and Rogue RiverSiskiyou National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable American white pelican habitats within 3,200 feet 

of the proposed pipeline, in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM 

lands, American white pelicans have a close association with less than 0.1 acre to be 

removed. On USFS lands, American white pelicans have a close association with 0.4 

acres to be removed and 0.1 acres to be modified (table 5). Pipeline construction could 

affect American white pelicans by disturbing individuals during the breeding season, 

possibly resulting in nest or chick abandonment, although the proposed pipeline route 

does not go through any known breeding colonies. Construction activities could also 

create turbidity, decreasing prey availability in the immediate area and time of 

construction activities. While disturbance could possibly cause chick abandonment if it 

occurs during the nesting and incubation period, the adults are mobile and would be 

likely able to escape disturbance and this should not have population-level effects. This 

is also unlikely because the pipeline route does not go through any known breeding 

colonies. American white pelicans are common to abundant locally in Klamath County 

March through October, so any impacts on birds would be unlikely to cause local or 

global population declines. 

Cumulative Effects

Though one-third of Oregon wetlands are estimated to have been lost since the late 

1700s, loss of estuarine wetlands has slowed substantially since the mid-1900s with 

increased protection (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and 

Recreation Division 1989, Dahl 1990). Areas near lakes, rivers, and streams have 

historically been among the most intensively developed, for easy access to water. 

Coastal rivers and estuaries have been highly altered by humans, being drained, having 

natural hydrologic processes such as tides and floods altered, and generally being reduced 

in complexity. Streams and rivers have also been degraded by logging practices (OPB 

H-238
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 79

2000). Federal laws, and the Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Service land; USFS and 

BLM 1994) and the 2008 Resource Management Plans (BLM land) protect streams, 

rivers, and wetlands, and land use designations and associated management practices on 

federal land will likely increase the amount and integrity of these habitats used by 

American white pelicans. In addition to the habitat that would be removed or modified 

within the analysis area, there are 52.4 acres of habitat on federal land within 3,200 feet 

of the pipeline that could be impacted by noise disturbance during construction (table 3). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33 in the Umpqua and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests, and Projects 76 

through 83 in the Lakeview BLM District (table 10). Planned projects on the Umpqua 

National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts 

(286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). 

Planned projects on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest include two large grazing 

allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). In the 

Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown 

acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 

acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Due to the sensitivity of the American white pelican 

to disturbance, actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Assessment 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of the local abundance of American white pelicans in south-central 

Oregon and the location of known breeding colonies lying outside the analysis area of the 

Project. 

Western least bittern (Ixobrychus exilis hesperis)

USFS Sensitive 

The western least bittern occurs from extreme southeast Canada through the eastern half 

of the U.S. except for northern New England and the Appalachians. In the west, it can be 

found in parts of California, Arizona, New Mexico, southcentral Oregon, Nevada, and 

Utah. In Oregon, least bitterns are rare but can be found in southern Klamath County in 

the spring and summer, during the breeding season (Spencer 2003c). 

The only recent evidence of breeding in Oregon has been a pair seen in 1975 and an adult 

with two juveniles in 1981, both at Malheur Lake (Spencer 2003c). Least bitterns occur 

on islands or edges of dense vegetation of hardstem bulrush and cattail in freshwater and 

brackish marshes interspersed with woody vegetation and open water (Gibbs et al. 1992, 

Spencer 2003c). Birds forage during the day from tall, dense stands of emergent plants 

along deep, open waters. They eat a wide variety of prey, including small fish, snakes, 

frogs, tadpoles, salamanders, leeches, slugs, crayfish, insects, and even shrews and mice 

(Spencer 2003c). 

H-239
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 80

The western least grebe has a global status of Vulnerable, meaning it is at moderate risk 

of extinction due to a restricted range, relatively few populations, recent and widespread 

declines, or other factors (NatureServe 2008). The entire species I. exilis has a global 

status of Secure and an IUCN status of Least Concern (NatureServe 2008). ODFW has 

designated this species Peripheral or Naturally Rare (ORNHIC 2007). 

The most serious threat to the least bittern is likely destruction of wetland habitats. Other 

threats include pollution, including acid rain, insecticides and herbicides from agricultural 

areas, and increased siltation. Competition for food with carp, which were introduced to 

Malheur Lake in the 1930s, could affect these birds (Spencer 2003c). Least bitterns have 

a close association with herbaceous wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil 2001), and they have 

been documented in the Fremont-Winema National Forest. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes herbaceous wetlands within 3,200 feet of the proposed 

pipeline in the Fremont-Winema National Forest. In these areas, western least bitterns 

have a close association with 0.4 acres to be removed and 0.1 acres to be modified (table 

5). Pipeline construction could affect this species by disturbing individuals if 

construction occurs near occupied habitat during spring or summer. Adults would be 

able to temporarily relocate to other areas away from construction disturbance, but 

incubating adults could be driven away from nests, abandoning eggs and newly-hatched 

young to predation and the elements, possibly causing death. Construction could also 

cause temporary turbidity which could decrease prey availability, or introduce pollution 

into aquatic habitats via leaking mechanical fluids. 

Cumulative Effects

The greatest threat to the least bittern is loss of wetland habitat. Though one-third of 

Oregon wetlands are estimated to have been lost since the late 1700s due to development 

and draining for agricultural use, wetlands are now protected by federal laws (Oregon 

Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division 1989, Dahl 

1990). The Northwest Forest Plan also protects wetlands on National Forests, and land 

use designations and associated management practices are expected to increase the 

quantity and quality of wetland habitat in the future (USFS and BLM 1994). These laws 

and practices will likely minimize further least bittern habitat loss. Within 3,200 feet of 

the proposed pipeline route, there are 156.3 acres of herbaceous wetlands which could be 

impacted by noise disturbance and/or edge effect (table 3). Other projects that are 

planned in the vicinity of the analysis area include a single project on the FremontWinema National Forest that includes fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle (table 10). 

Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future 

activities would not likely result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

H-240
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 81

the species” because of the location of known breeding grounds away from the analysis 

area, and thus the low probability of encountering breeding birds. 

Trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator)

BLM Assessment 

The trumpeter swan breeds throughout central Alaska and at scattered locations from 

Yukon south to Nevada and east to the Great Lakes. These birds winter along the Pacific 

coast from southern Alaska to Oregon, and at scattered locations inland to the Great 

Lakes (Mitchell 1994). In Oregon, they are known locally and uncommonly east of the 

Cascades, especially at Malheur NWR, where they breed and most stay through the 

winter. West of the Cascades, most breeding is known from the northwest part of the 

state (Ivey and Herziger 2003). 

Nesting takes place on a wide variety of fresh water bodies, especially marshes, lakes, 

ponds, and estuarine areas, with sufficient room for takeoff (> 330 feet) and diverse 

emergent vegetation for foraging (Ivey and Herziger 2003). In southern Oregon, ponds 

used for nesting are usually greater than 20 acres and have bulrush and sometimes cattail 

or burreed (Ivey and Herziger 2003). During the winter, swans use estuarine and ice-free 

fresh water for roosting, and forage in agricultural fields and estuaries (Mitchell 1994). 

Their diet is mostly herbivorous: aquatic vegetation, pasture grasses, small grains, and 

tuberous crops. They will occasionally eat fish and fish eggs, and cygnets eat aquatic 

invertebrates (Mitchell 1994). 

The global status of trumpeter swans is Apparently Secure, which means that the species 

is uncommon but not rare, and there is some cause for long-term concern due to declines 

or other factors. However, the Pacific Coast population is increasing, and they are 

unlisted by the ODFW (ORNHIC 2007). Threats to this species include disturbance at 

nest sites, including by birdwatchers and photographers, which can cause cygnet loss 

(Mitchell 1994). Disturbance can also be important during winter if it disrupts foraging 

and causes excessive energy loss. Shooting remains a problem, as well as lead poisoning 

from shot and fishing sinkers; trumpeter swans may be unusually sensitive to lead 

poisoning (Mitchell 1994). Trumpeter swans have a close association with herbaceous 

wetlands, open water, and agriculture and pastureland, and a general association with 

bays and estuaries (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Trumpeter swans have been documented 

in the Lakeview BLM District and are suspected in the Coos Bay District. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable trumpeter swan habitat in the BLM Districts 

discussed above within 3,200 feet of the pipeline route. In these areas, the trumpeter 

swan has a close association with 0.5 acres that would be removed (table 5). These 

swans are uncommon breeders at Malheur NWR, which is not in the analysis area. 

Trumpeter swans are sensitive to disturbance, and pipeline construction could possibly 

lead to nest failures or cygnet loss. Adult swans, however, are mobile and would be able 

to leave the disturbed area. Habitat could also be polluted by leaking construction 

H-241
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 82

equipment, but this is a minor threat due to the small amount of fluid in question and 

since spill avoidance and containment plans would be in place. 

Cumulative Effects

Trumpeter swan habitat in the analysis area for this project has been degraded by 

development and alteration since European settlement. Development has concentrated 

around lakes, rivers, streams, and coasts, and an estimated one-third of historic wetlands 

in Oregon has been lost, largely due to draining for agricultural use (Oregon Division of 

State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division 1989, Dahl 1990). Streams 

and rivers have been degraded by logging practices, hydrologic processes such as tides 

and floods have been altered, and the complexity of aquatic habitats in Oregon has 

generally been reduced (OPB 2000). Within the last few decades, federal laws have been 

enacted that protect waters and wetlands. Furthermore, the 2008 BLM Resource 

Management Plans protect and enhance streams, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. These 

protections and management practices should enhance the quantity and quality of habitat 

available to trumpeter swans in the analysis area in the future. Within the analysis area, 

there are 49.8 acres of suitable trumpeter swan habitat within 3,200 feet of the proposed 

pipeline route that could be impacted by noise disturbance during construction (table 3). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 54 and 76 through 83 (table 10) in the BLM Coos Bay and Lakeview districts. 

Planned projects in the Coos Bay BLM district include several commercial thinning 

projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales 

(2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). In the Lakeview 

BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels 

treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking 

lot (0.1 acres; table 10). The large number of thinnings would most likely contribute to 

the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities would not likely result in 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of the trumpeter swan’s secure global status and the location of 

their breeding area outside the analysis area. 

Aleutian Canada goose (Branta canadensis leucopareia) & dusky Canada goose (B. 

c. occidentalis)

BLM Sensitive

Canada geese as a whole live throughout North America, breeding in the northern half of 

the continental U.S. and all of Canada and Alaska and wintering throughout the 

continental U.S. Aleutian Canada geese breed on the outer Aleutian Islands and winter in 

the San Joaquin Valley of California and near Pacific City, Oregon (FWS 1999). They 

H-242
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 83

can be seen migrating along the coast of Oregon, and transients are sporadically seen in 

fall and winter at Sauvie Island, elsewhere in the Willamette Valley, and near Langlois 

and Bandon on the southern coast during fall and spring migration (Jarvis 2003). Dusky 

Canada geese breed on the Copper River Delta in southern Alaska, and winter almost 

exclusively in the Willamette Valley, but also on the lower Columbia River and at 

scattered locations along the Oregon Coast (Bromley and Rothe 2003). 

For breeding, Canada geese need small islands or elevated structures surrounded by open 

water, to allow escape from predators. For brood rearing, succulent green vegetation is 

also required (Jarvis 2003). Nesting begins in March in Oregon, and broods are present 

April through August. The earliest migrating dusky Canada geese arrive in Oregon in 

late September. In winter, both of these subspecies use nutrient-rich agricultural 

croplands and roost at night on inland lakes and coastal islands (FWS 1999, Bromley and 

Rothe 2003). These geese are almost exclusively herbivorous; grasses, sedges, berries, 

and seeds make up the bulk of their diets (Mowbray et al. 2002). 

The global status for the dusky Canada goose is Vulnerable. Breeding pairs at the 

Copper River Delta have apparently declined slightly between 1986 and 1997, and the 

main concerns regarding this subspecies is the very restricted range for breeding, 

migration stopovers, and wintering, and changes in vegetation which promote predation. 

Population estimates in the 1990s ranged from 12,000 to 14,000 individuals (NatureServe 

2008). The global status of the Aleutian Canada goose is Apparently Secure 

(NatureServe 2008). Formerly numbering in the thousands, this subspecies declined to 

about 800 individuals in the 1960s but it has since rebounded, with a census estimate of 

7,000 in 1991, and this subspecies continues to increase today (NatureServe 2008). 

Neither subspecies has a listing status with the ODFW (ORNHIC 2007). 

Canada geese have a close association with herbaceous wetlands, open water, and 

agriculture and pastureland. They have a general association with shrub-steppe, eastside 

grasslands, and bays and estuaries, and an occasional association with west- and east-side 

riparian wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). The Aleutian Canada goose has been 

documented in the BLM Coos Bay District, and the dusky Canada goose is suspected 

there. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all appropriate habitat for these two subspecies in the BLM 

Coos Bay District within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline route. These subspecies 

have a close association with 0.5 acres to be removed, and a general association with 0.5 

acres to be removed (table 5). Pipeline construction could have an indirect effect on 

wintering or migrating birds by disturbing them, possibly lowering their fitness during a 

time of year when they are more dependent on stored bodily energy reserves due to lower 

temperatures, decreased availability of forage, or the increased energy demands of 

migration. Habitat could also be polluted by leaking construction equipment, but this is a 

minor threat due to the small amount of fluid in question and to spill avoidance and 

containment plans that would be in place. 

H-243
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 84

Cumulative Effects

A potential threat to dusky Canada geese is loss of habitat on wintering grounds and 

migratory routes. Aleutian Canada geese may be threatened by loss of habitat due to 

changing land-uses, and may also be susceptible to human disturbance. Aquatic habitats 

in Oregon have experienced a large amount of degradation since European settlement. 

Development has concentrated around lakes, rivers, streams, and coasts, and an estimated 

one-third of historic wetlands in Oregon have been lost, largely due to draining for 

agricultural use (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation 

Division 1989, Dahl 1990). Streams and rivers have been degraded by logging practices, 

hydrologic processes such as tides and floods have been altered, and the complexity of 

aquatic habitats in Oregon has generally been reduced (OPB 2000). Within the last few 

decades, federal laws have been enacted that protect waters and wetlands. Furthermore, 

the 2008 BLM Resource Management Plans protect and enhance streams, lakes, ponds, 

and wetlands. These protections and management practices will likely enhance the 

quantity and quality of habitat available to Canada geese in the analysis area in the future. 

Within the analysis area, there are 19.1 acres of suitable habitat for Aleutian or dusky 

Canada geese that could be impacted by construction and/or edge effect until the 

removed vegetation regenerates, which in the case of habitat types used by Canada geese, 

would be one year, except in riparian areas where trees would be removed (table 3). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 54 (table 10) in the BLM Coos Bay District. These projects include several 

commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 

acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown 

acreage; table 10). Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal cumulative impacts to 

these subspecies. 

Determination of Impact 

For the Aleutian Canada goose, considering the information above concerning potential 

direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may

impact individuals or habitat, but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward 

federal listing or loss of viability of the species” because of its Apparently Secure 

global status and increasing population trend. For the dusky Canada goose, considering 

the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of the low likelihood of encountering migrating individuals and the 

small fraction of this subspecies’ migration habitat that would be impacted. 

Greater white-fronted “Tule” goose (Anser albifrons elgasi)

BLM Sensitive 

Greater white-fronted geese breed throughout the northwestern two-thirds of Alaska and 

northern Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut. During winter they can be found 

throughout the Central Valley of California, the southeastern third of Texas, Louisiana, 

H-244
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 85

and central Mexico. They winter at lower densities in western Washington and Oregon. 

The Tule goose, a subspecies of the greater white-fronted goose, breeds around the Cook 

Inlet of Alaska and winters in the Sacramento Valley of California, migrating through 

Oregon (Ely and Dzubin 1994). 

Breeding habitat is characterized by permanent or discontinuous permafrost (Ely and 

Dzubin 1994). Winter habitat consists of open water and unvegetated shores for loafing 

and agricultural fields for grazing, although the Tule goose uses marshes for foraging 

more than open fields (Budeau 2003). In the Sacramento Valley, rice fields are the most 

often used (Ely and Dzubin 1994). 

The global status of the greater white-fronted goose is Secure, meaning common, 

widespread, and abundant, and is increasing at a rate of over 10% (NatureServe 2008). 

The species has no listing status in Oregon (ORNHIC 2007). 

One threat to greater white-fronted geese is hunting; they are heavily hunted throughout 

their range, which controls populations to a large extent. Habitat loss is another limiting 

factor. Energy development near the MacKenzie River Delta and North Slope causes 

avoidance of some habitats due to noise disturbance (Ely and Dzubin 1994). Another 

possible threat is habitat destruction through filling and cultivation of wetlands, and 

development (Ely and Dzubin 1994). Tule geese have a close association with 

herbaceous wetlands, open water, and agriculture and pastureland, and a general 

association with bays and estuaries (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Tule geese are suspected 

to occur in the Coos Bay and Lakeview BLM Districts. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable habitat for this subspecies in those two BLM 

jurisdictions that would be impacted by construction. This subspecies has a close 

association with 0.5 acres to be removed (table 5). This subspecies migrates through 

Oregon in the spring and fall, stopping over at Malheur NWR. Tule geese are considered 

vulnerable because of their small population size (5,000–7,000 individuals) and restricted 

range (ADFG 2007). Pipeline construction could affect Tule geese by disturbing birds at 

migration stopovers, possibly lowering their fitness by causing them to use more body 

reserves that they need for their journey to wintering or breeding grounds. Habitat could 

also be polluted by leaking construction equipment, but this is a minor threat due to the 

small amount of fluid in question and to spill avoidance and containment plans. 

Cumulative Effects

Threats to Tule geese include habitat loss due to wetland destruction and development, 

and noise disturbance that results in habitat avoidance. Timber production could disturb 

Tule geese at their migration stopovers in southern Oregon, possibly resulting in loss of 

fitness by increasing use of energy reserves needed to complete their journeys to 

wintering or breeding grounds. Tule goose habitat in the analysis area for this project has 

been degraded by development and alteration since the time of European settlement. 

Development has concentrated around lakes, rivers, streams, and coasts, and an estimated 

one-third of historic wetlands in Oregon have been lost, largely due to draining for 

H-245
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 86

agricultural use (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation 

Division 1989, Dahl 1990). Streams and rivers have been degraded by logging practices, 

hydrologic processes such as tides and floods have been altered, and the complexity of 

aquatic habitats in Oregon has generally been reduced (OPB 2000). Within the last few 

decades, federal laws have been enacted that protect waters and wetlands. Furthermore, 

the 2008 BLM Resource Management Plans protect and enhance streams, lakes, ponds, 

and wetlands. These protections and management practices should enhance the quantity 

and quality of habitat available to Tule geese in the analysis area in the future. Within the 

analysis area, there are 49.8 acres of suitable Tule goose habitat within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline that could be impacted by construction and/or edge effect until the 

vegetation removed regenerates, which in the case of habitat used by Tule geese would 

be about one year (table 3). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 54, and 76 through 83 (table 10) in the BLM Coose Bay and Lakeview Districts. 

Planned projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include several commercial thinning 

projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales 

(2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). In the Lakeview 

BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels 

treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking 

lot (0.1 acres). The large number of thinnings would most likely contribute to the long 

term health of the forest ecosystems. Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of the location of their main migration stopover outside of the 

analysis area. 

Harlequin duck (Histrionicus histrionicus)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Assessment

In the west, harlequin duck breeding occurs in Alaska, Yukon, western Northwest 

Territories, British Columbia, western Washington, Idaho, western Montana, and 

northwestern Wyoming. Wintering areas are from the Aleutians along the coast down to 

northern California (Robertson and Goudie 1999). In Oregon, they are found in the 

Willamette River basin and along the coast during winter. 

Habitat for the harlequin duck is unique among ducks. They can be found along 

turbulent, fast-flowing rivers and streams during the breeding season, and shallow 

intertidal zones of rocky coastlines during winter (Robertson and Goudie 1999). In the 

west Cascades, they are most often associated with fast-moving, unbraided, low to 

moderate (1–7%) gradient, third- to fifth-order streams in western hemlock forests 

H-246
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 87

(Dowlan 2003). Rocky streams are preferred, as in-stream rocks can be used as resting 

sites. Eggs are laid in scrapes on the ground under stumps, logs, or cliff ledges, lined 

with needles, mosses, and down. Nests are built from mid-April to early June, and eggs 

hatch from late May to late June (Dowlan 2003). Winter habitat is along rocky 

headlands, offshore rocks, jetties, and occasionally sandy beaches on the coast. Their 

diet is varied, and consists of amphipods, snails, small crabs, barnacles, and fish eggs 

(Robertson and Goudie 1999). 

The global status of the harlequin duck is Apparently Secure, which means that the 

species is uncommon but not rare, and there is some cause for long-term concern due to 

declines or other factors, and its IUCN status is Least Concern (NatureServe 2008). 

Although it has a wide global distribution, this species has experienced declines over 

most of its range, including substantial declines in the Pacific population. Harlequin 

ducks may be vulnerable to local extirpations due to high breeding and wintering site 

fidelity and small local breeding populations (NatureServe 2008). Its status under the 

ODFW is Undetermined, which means that the population may be susceptible to declines, 

but more research is needed (ORNHIC 2007). 

Hunting has historically been a factor decreasing populations, though harvest rates are 

low currently. Several environmental toxins affect this species, including creosote 

leaking from piers, diesel soot, oil spills, and bioaccumulating heavy metals (Robertson 

and Goudie 1999). Logging activities degrades harlequin duck habitat by altering 

suitable riparian habitat, disrupting stream flow, and increasing silt loads (Robertson and 

Goudie 1999). Harlequin ducks have a close association with open water and west- and 

east-side riparian wetlands, specifically at ecotones and in habitats with large woody 

debris. They have a general association with bays and estuaries (Johnson and O’Neil 

2001). Harlequin ducks have been documented in the Roseburg BLM District and the 

Umpqua and Fremont-Winema National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable harlequin duck habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, 

harlequin ducks have a close association with 0.5 acres to be removed. On USFS lands, 

harlequin ducks have a close association with 0.6 acres to be removed (table 5). Pipeline 

construction could negatively impact harlequin ducks by creating a disturbance to 

breeding or wintering birds. Disturbance during the winter along the coast could lower 

individuals’ fitness by causing stress and depleting reserves during low temperatures. 

Disturbance to breeding birds could cause adults to abandon eggs or ducklings. Project 

activities could also modify habitat, specifically by removing trees and large woody 

debris, important components for harlequin ducks. Habitat could also be polluted by 

leaking construction equipment, but this is a minor threat due to the small amount of fluid 

in question and to spill avoidance and containment plans. Specific mitigation measures 

that would help minimize impacts to this species include replacement of large woody 

debris after construction (see Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects

H-247
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 88

Management activities on federal lands in the analysis area could impact harlequin ducks 

by disturbing breeding or wintering birds. This could decrease fitness in wintering birds 

by accelerating their use of bodily energy reserves during cold weather. Harlequin duck 

habitat in the analysis area has been degraded by development and alteration since the 

time of European settlement. Development has concentrated around lakes, rivers, 

streams, and coasts, and an estimated one-third of historic wetlands in Oregon has been 

lost, largely due to draining for agricultural use (Oregon Division of State Lands and 

Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division 1989, Dahl 1990). Harlequin duck habitat is 

currently threatened by logging activities which modify stream flow and riparian habitat 

and increase sediment. Within the last few decades, federal laws have been enacted that 

protect waters and wetlands. Furthermore, the Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) 

and the 2008 BLM Resource Management Plans (BLM land) protect and enhance 

streams, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. These protections and management practices will 

likely enhance the quantity and quality of habitat available to harlequin ducks in the 

analysis area in the future. Currently, there are 188.5 acres of suitable harlequin duck 

habitat within 3,200 feet of the analysis area that could be impacted by noise disturbance 

during construction (table 3). 

USFS projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 18 and project 34, shown in table 10. Planned projects on the Umpqua National 

Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) 

and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). There is a 

single planned project on the Fremont-Winema National Forest that includes fencing a 

waterbody to exclude cattle. BLM projects that are planned within the vicinity of the 

analysis area include projects and 55 through 67 (table 10) in the Roseberg BLM District. 

These planned projects include four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial 

thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Actions associated with 

this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially 

result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Apparently Secure and Least Concern global statuses, their 

very low use of the analysis area, and the relatively small area of their breeding and 

wintering grounds that would be affected. 

Bufflehead (Bucephala albeola)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Assessment

The breeding range for buffleheads is interior Alaska, southern Northwest Territories, 

northeast and southern British Columbia, northern Alberta and Saskatchewan, and at 

scattered, isolated locations in Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho, Montana, and 

Wyoming. The highest breeding densities recorded are in central British Columbia 

(Gauthier 1993). During the nonbreeding season, buffleheads range from southern 

H-248
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 89

Alaska, down the Pacific coast, and throughout most of the continental U.S. In Oregon, 

they are found at scattered locations throughout the state, and they could potentially be 

found along most of the proposed pipeline route (Scheuering 2003). Breeding is recorded 

in the central and south Cascades, including in Klamath County (Scheuering 2003). In 

the vicinity of the analysis area, it has been recorded at Fish Lake (T37S R04E, Sections 

2 and 3). 

Breeding is done at high-elevation forested lakes, with nests built in cavities or artificial 

nests boxes in trees next to water (Scheuering 2003). During migration and winter, 

buffleheads use small freshwater lakes and ponds with little or no vegetation, sewage 

treatment ponds, slow-moving rivers, estuaries, bays, backwaters, and tidal mudflats. 

Food habits consist of diving for aquatic invertebrates such as insects, crustaceans, and 

mollusks, and some seeds (Gauthier 1993). 

The global status of buffleheads is Secure and its IUCN status is Least Concern, with 

populations numbering over one million and remaining relatively stable or increasing 

(NatureServe 2008). The ODFW lists the bufflehead as Status Undetermined, which 

means that the population may be susceptible to declines but more research is needed 

(ORNHIC 2007). 

Numbers of buffleheads had decreased by 1930 due to overshooting. Once protected 

under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, numbers began to increase, but human disturbance 

from recreation and a decrease in suitable nesting cavities due to forestry practices may 

be currently impacting numbers (Scheuering 2003). Buffleheads have a close association 

with herbaceous wetlands and open water including lakes, rivers, streams, bays, and 

estuaries. Specific habitat features used by this species are edges, snags, and tree 

cavities. Buffleheads have been documented in the BLM Lakeview District, and the 

Fremont-Winema, Rogue River-Siskiyou, and Umpqua National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable bufflehead habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, 

buffleheads have a close association with less than 0.1 acre to be removed. On USFS 

lands, buffleheads have a close association with 0.8 acres to be removed and 0.2 acres to 

be modified, and a general association with 0.4 acres to be removed (table 5). Though 

not known to breed along the pipeline route, buffleheads could be negatively impacted by 

pipeline construction by disturbance created by construction activities. Disturbance 

during the winter along the coast could lower individuals’ fitness by causing stress and 

depleting reserves during low temperatures. Habitat could also be polluted by leaking 

construction equipment, but this would likely be a minor threat due to the small amount 

of fluid in question and to spill avoidance and containment plans. 

Cumulative Effects

Management activities on federal lands could negatively affect buffleheads by disturbing 

them, especially during winter when this could lead to premature depletion of body 

reserves which are needed to survive during cold weather. Another threat to this duck is 

H-249
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 90

that bufflehead habitat in the analysis area has been degraded by development and 

alteration since European settlement. Human development concentrates around lakes, 

rivers, streams, and coasts, and an estimated one-third of historic wetlands in Oregon has 

been lost, largely due to draining for agricultural use (Oregon Division of State Lands 

and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division 1989, Dahl 1990). Streams and rivers 

have been degraded by logging practices, hydrologic processes such as tides and floods 

have been altered, and the complexity of aquatic habitats in Oregon has generally been 

reduced (OPB 2000). Within the last few decades, federal laws have been enacted that 

protect waters and wetlands. Furthermore, the Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) 

and the 2008 BLM Resource Management Plans (BLM land) specifically protect and 

enhance streams, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. These protections and management 

practices should enhance the quantity and quality of habitat available to buffleheads in 

the analysis area in the future. Within the analysis area, there are 371.0 acres of suitable 

bufflehead habitat within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline route that could be impacted 

by construction and/or edge effect until removed vegetation regenerates, which in the 

case of vegetation that grows in habitats used by buffleheads, would generally be within 

one year (table 3). 

Other planned projects within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 through 

34 and 76 through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, planned 

projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning 

projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest include a range 

allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 

acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). There is a single planned project 

on the Fremont-Winema National Forest that includes fencing a waterbody to exclude 

cattle. In the Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, 

unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings 

(388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Secure and Least Concern global statuses, their large and 

stable-to-increasing global population, the mobility of the species, and the relatively 

small area of their wintering grounds that would be affected. 

Upland sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Sensitive 

Breeding in this species takes place over a contiguous area in the Great Plains and Great 

Lakes regions of the U.S. and Canada. Breeding also takes place at some locations in 

Alaska, Yukon, and central Oregon. They have been documented in Klamath County. 

Upland sandpipers winter in South America (Houston and Bowen 2001). 

H-250
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 91

The upland sandpiper is an obligate grassland species and in the western Dakotas is 

considered an indicator for native prairie. They are found in dry montane meadows 

between 1,000 and 30,000 acres from 3,400 to 5,060 feet in elevation. The meadows can 

contain a variety of native and nonnative species, but the presence of cinquefoil may be 

critical for nesting habitat (Stern 2003). Moderate grass cover, low forb and woody 

cover, moderate to high litter cover, and little bare ground are preferred (Houston and 

Bowen 2001). These meadows are usually surrounded by lodgepole pine forests, and 

sometimes by ponderosa pine. Upland sandpipers mostly eat small invertebrates, 

especially insects, but a small percentage of their diet consists of weed seeds (Houston 

and Bowen 2001, Stern 2003). Foraging habitat consists of vegetation shorter than 2.5 

inches (Stern 2003). Nesting takes place in 6 to 12-inch tall vegetation that provides 

concealment cover (Kirsch and Higgins 1976). In Oregon, birds appear on breeding 

grounds during the first week of May, egg-laying occurs from mid-May until mid-June, 

and fledging takes place from mid-July until mid-August. 

The global status of the upland sandpiper is Secure, meaning widespread, abundant, and 

secure throughout its range, and its IUCN status is Least Concern (NatureServe 2008). 

They are, however, a federal Species of Concern and designated Sensitive – Critical by 

the ODFW (ORNHIC 2007). 

Initial declines in upland sandpiper populations were caused by hunting in the late 1800s, 

and further declines were caused by conversion of prairie habitat to agriculture and 

rangeland which still continues today (Stern 2003). Further reasons for declines could be 

encroachment of pine onto meadows and the use of herbicides which reduces forb cover 

in nesting habitats (Stern 2003). Its continued existence in Oregon is currently 

precarious. The upland sandpiper has a close association with eastside grasslands, a 

general association with herbaceous wetlands, and an occasional association with 

agriculture and pastureland (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). They have been documented in 

the Coos Bay BLM District. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes suitable habitat in the Coos Bay BLM District within 3,200 

feet of the proposed pipeline route that would be impacted by the Project. The upland 

sandpiper has a general association with 0.2 acres to be removed (table 5). The main 

threat to the upland sandpipers is loss, degradation, and fragmentation of grassland 

habitat due to development, and forest encroachment on meadows due to fire 

suppression. Construction of the pipeline could negatively impact this species by altering 

habitat, potentially making it unsuitable. The analysis area is outside of this species 

breeding range, but it could cause to disturbance to individuals. 

 

Cumulative Effects

Native grasslands are one of the most imperiled habitats in the western U.S., including 

Oregon, due to conversion to agriculture, development, invasion by non-native plant 

species, and fire suppression. In the Coast Range and West Cascades of Oregon, 

grassland loss since historical times is estimated at 99 percent (ODFW 2006). 

H-251
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 92

Sustainable grazing practices help maintain existing grasslands. On BLM land, the 2008 

Resource Management Plan calls for removal of conifers that are encroaching on 

grasslands, and revegetating degraded areas with native grasses. These habitat 

management practices should increase the quantity and quality of upland sandpiper 

habitat in the future. In addition to grassland loss, an estimated one-third of historic 

wetlands in Oregon have been lost, largely due to draining for agricultural use (Dahl 

1990). Wetlands now are protected by federal laws, and the Resource Management Plan 

protects wetlands from degradation and loss with specific land use designations and 

associated management strategies. In the future, these protections should lead to 

enhanced wetland habitat in the analysis area, which would benefit upland sandpipers. 

Within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline, there is a total of 2.3 acres of suitable upland 

sandpiper habitat (table 3). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 54 (table 10) in the Coos Bay BLM District. These projects consist of several 

commercial thinning projects (at least 2,136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 

acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown 

acreage; table 10). Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal cumulative impacts to this 

species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of its Secure and Least Concern global statuses and because of the 

low likelihood of encountering this species based on the extremely small number of 

records in the analysis area. 

White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus)

BLM Assessment

In the 1930s, the white-tailed kite range was reduced to areas in California and was in 

danger of becoming extinct (Combs 2003). Recovery of this species and subsequent 

range expansion brought white-tailed kites into Oregon beginning in the 1970s, and they 

have been seen in the state every year since 1972. They are now found year-round along 

the west coast from southwest Washington into Baja, Mexico, in the central valley of 

California, large areas of Mexico, southwest Texas, and at scattered locations in Florida 

(Dunk 1995). White-tailed kites in Oregon breed rarely, in the Willamette, Umpqua, 

Rogue, Illinois, and Applegate Valleys, and along the coast. Along the counties crossed 

by the pipeline route, they are confirmed in Douglas, north of the proposed right-of-way, 

in Jackson along the right-of-way, and they are probable in Coos County along the coast 

(Combs 2003). Likely causes for their decline were egg-collecting and shooting in the 

early 20th century and loss of nesting habitat due to development (Dunk 1995). Causes 

for their rebound are protection from shooting, and possibly agricultural development 

which may have increased rodent-hunting opportunities. 

H-252
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 93

Nesting occurs in trees near fields and agricultural areas. During the nonbreeding season, 

kites typically occupy uncultivated open lowlands, prairie, and coastal estuaries and 

dunes (Combs 2003). Reported winter roost sites include dense second-growth sprucehemlock stands, the ecotone between wetlands and uplands, abandoned orchards, and 

marshes (Combs 2003). Preferred foraging habitat is ungrazed grasslands, grassy 

wetlands, and fencerows (Dunk 1995). Over 95% of the white-tailed kite diet is made up 

of mice, voles, and other small mammals, and birds snakes, lizards, frogs, and insects are 

also taken (Combs 2003). 

The global status of the white-tailed kite is Secure, and its IUCN status is Least Concern 

(NatureServe 2008). They are unlisted by the ODFW (ORNHIC 2007). Habitat 

degradation is a significant threat to white-tailed kite populations, especially loss of 

nesting trees and suitable foraging habitat (Dunk 1995). The extent of their sensitivity to 

disturbance is unknown. The white-tailed kite has a close association with agriculture 

and pastureland, especially at ecotones. It has a general association with westside 

grasslands and coastal dunes and beaches, and an occasional association with westside 

lowland conifer and hardwood forests and west- and eastside riparian wetlands (Johnson 

and O’Neil 2001). This raptor has been documented in three BLM Districts in the 

vicinity of the analysis area: Coos Bay, Medford, and Roseburg. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes suitable white-tailed kite habitat within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in these three jurisdictional areas. White-tailed kites have a close 

association with 0.2 acres to be removed and a general association with 186.7 acres to be 

removed and 18.8 acres to be modified (table 5). Pipeline construction could negatively 

impact white-tailed kites by disturbing nesting, incubating, roosting, or wintering birds. 

Western Oregon is at the northern periphery of this species’ range, and these birds are 

rare to very rare breeders in Oregon, but the highest concentration of known nest 

locations in the state is near Medford in Jackson County. During winter they are 

uncommon to locally common. Disturbance at nest sites could cause adults to abandon 

eggs or chicks. Disturbance during winter could lead to increased utilization of bodily 

energy reserves, which are necessary to survive during cold weather and when prey is 

scarce. Right-of-way-clearing could also alter habitat by removing roost trees. 

Cumulative Effects

Management activities on federal lands could affect white-tailed kites by disturbing 

nesting, incubating, roosting, or wintering birds, and by altering habitat by removing 

roost trees. Within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline, there are 12,020.1 acres of 

suitable white-tailed kite habitat on Forest Service and BLM land (table 3). The primary 

habitat type used by this species is agriculture and pastureland, which is not currently in 

danger of decreasing. The removal of habitat characteristics such as roost trees, however, 

could be detrimental. The proposed Project could remove roost trees if they occur within 

the construction area; however, due to the wide habitat preferences of these raptors and 

the large amount of suitable habitat in the vicinity, this is not expected to have a 

significant effect on population-level viability. Grassland habitats have experienced 

H-253
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 94

drastic declines in western Oregon (losses estimated to be 99 percent in the Coast Range 

and West Cascades), but more modern management practices, including sustainable 

grazing models, removal of encroaching trees, and replanting with native grassland 

species, are attempting to arrest this reduction (ODFW 2006). Coastal dunes have also 

undergone alterations from their original state. Ever-moving, flowing systems under 

natural conditions, the introduction of European beachgrass has artificially stabilized 

dunes. This prevents new sand from moving inland, allowing plant succession to 

proceed, resulting in the encroachment of woody shrubs and trees on this habitat type in 

Oregon. Dune stabilization has also opened up this habitat for development and 

recreation, further eliminating and degrading it and disturbing the animals that depend on 

it (ODFW 2006). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 75, shown in table 10. Planned projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include 

several commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 

331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown 

acreage). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat 

restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber 

sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber 

sales (11 sites, unknown acreage; table 10). Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Secure and Least Concern global statuses, the mobility of 

the species in question, and the location of the Project at the periphery of its range. 

Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis)

BLM Sensitive 

In North America, northern goshawks are found year-round from Alaska throughout 

Canada and New England, most of the western U.S., and along the Sierra Madre 

Mountains in Mexico. In Oregon, they are found in scattered local areas throughout most 

of the state between 1,900 and 6,100 feet (Marshall 2003a). The highest densities of 

northern goshawks in the state are found east of the Cascades, in the Blue, Wallowa, and 

Strawberry Mountains (Marshall 2003a). Along the potential pipeline route, they have 

been documented in Coos, Douglas, Jackson, and Klamath Counties. There are many 

records of northern goshawks along the proposed right-of-way, including a record 0.1 

mile away. 

Breeding habitat for the northern goshawk must contain nesting structures, post-fledging 

family area, and foraging area (Marshall 2003a). Nesting habitat is a large tree within a 

20–40 acre dense patch of large old trees with high (60–90%) canopy closure, open 

H-254
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 95

understory, and moderate slopes (Squires and Ruggiero 1996, Marshall 2003a). A wide 

variety of tree species is used, including Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), true firs 

(Abies spp.), lodgepole (Pinus contorta) and ponderosa pines (P. Ponderosa), western 

larch (Larix occidentalis), and quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) (Squires and 

Reynolds 1997). Post-fledging family areas surround nest sites and are characterized by 

mosaics of large mid-age trees and snags with large down logs, small openings, and an 

herbaceous understory (Marshall 2003a). Foraging area consists of a forest mosaic of at 

least 5,000 acres containing large trees, snags, large woody debris, and openings that are 

inhabited by sufficient prey animals. The northern goshawk diet consists of a wide 

variety of small to medium-sized birds and mammals (Marshall 2003a). Winter habitat 

requirements are poorly understood (Squires and Reynolds 1997). 

The global status of northern goshawks is Secure, and their IUCN status is Least 

Concern. They are relatively abundant and widespread, but trends are difficult to 

determine (NatureServe 2008). In Oregon, they are designated by the ODFW as 

Sensitive – Critical, likely due to the habitat threats from management activities on 

federal lands and fire suppression (ORNHIC 2007). However, their hypothesized decline 

in the western U.S. due to these factors has not been shown conclusively. Northern 

goshawks are uncommon to fairly common in suitable habitat statewide (Marshall 

2003a). 

Northern goshawks’ preference for older-growth timber stands makes them vulnerable to 

the effects of timber activities. Logging operations destroy nests and reduce canopy 

cover, though northern goshawks may still be able to nest in disturbed areas with lowered 

success rates (Squires and Reynolds 1997). Logging activities near nests can also create 

sufficient disturbance to cause failure, especially during incubation (Squires and 

Reynolds 1997). This species has a large home range (can be 9,500 acres in some areas; 

Squires and Reynolds 1997), so they should be able to easily shift their activity away 

from disturbances that take up only a small spatial area. Northern goshawks have a close 

association with ponderosa pine forests and woodlands. They have a general association 

with westside lowland conifer and hardwood forests, montane mixed conifer forests, 

southwest Oregon mixed conifer and hardwood forests, herbaceous wetlands, and westand eastside riparian wetlands. They have an occasional association with westside oak, 

dry douglas-fir forests and woodlands, western juniper and mountain mahogany 

woodlands, and shrub-steppe. Specific habitat features used by this species are edges, 

snags, and downed wood. (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Northern goshawks have been 

documented in all four BLM Districts and all three National Forests crossed by the 

pipeline route. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable northern goshawk habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, 

northern goshawks have a close association with 50.5 acres to be removed and 5.8 acres 

to be modified, and a general association with 529.6 acres to be removed and 200.6 acres 

to be modified. On USFS lands, northern goshawks have a close association with 64.7 

acres to be removed and 11.2 acres to be modified, and a general association with 335.3 

H-255
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 96

acres to be removed and 117.3 acres to be modified (table 5). Northern goshawks along 

the proposed pipeline route could be negatively impacted by construction from 

disturbance, possibly causing nest and chick abandonment, temporary displacement from 

a local habitat area, or increased utilization of energy reserves during winter, possibly 

leading to lowered fitness. Vegetation clearing could also destroy habitat including roost 

and nest trees, or even fell trees containing active nests with eggs or chicks. Specific 

mitigation measures that would help minimize impacts to this species include replanting 

of trees after construction (see Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects

An important current threat to northern goshawks is habitat loss, primarily from logging. 

Within 3,200 feet of the proposed Project, there are 55,577.8 acres of suitable goshawk 

habitat on BLM and Forest Service land; these could be impacted by disturbance during 

construction and/or edge effects until plant regeneration occurred (table 3). Though 

northern goshawks have broad habitat preferences, many of the habitat types used by this 

species have been severely impacted and are currently altered from their natural states. 

Compared to the 1850s, only an estimated 25 percent of late-successional forest remains 

in the Klamath Mountains, 23 percent in the West Cascades, and 8 percent along the 

Coast Range (ODFW 2006). Approximately 57.1 percent of acres of forest types used by 

the northern goshawk within the analysis area are considered late successional or oldgrowth (i.e., older than 80 years; table 3). The Northwest Forest Plan and 2008 Resource 

Management Plans have regulations to protect mature forests, including managing for 

habitat features vital to northern goshawks such as snags and down wood. This will 

likely improve forested northern goshawk habitat in the future. Wetlands have also been 

degraded; an estimated one-third of wetlands present in historical times in Oregon remain 

(Dahl 1990). Wetlands now are protected by federal laws, and the Northwest Forest Plan 

and the 2008 Resource Management Plans for BLM lands protect wetlands from 

degradation and loss by designating specific land use designations and associated 

management strategies. In the future, these protections will likely lead to enhanced 

wetland habitat in the analysis area, which would benefit northern goshawks. Shrubsteppe habitat in Oregon is prevalent in the state, but has also suffered widespread losses 

due to conversion to agriculture and development, unmanaged grazing, invasive species, 

and altered fire regimes (ODFW 2006). Due to the catholic habitat preferences of the 

northern goshawk, the large amount of available suitable habitat in the analysis area, and 

the already-disturbed state of much of the habitat that would be impacted by the project, 

viability of this species is not likely to be affected. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, planned projects 

include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning projects 

(1,608.6 acres). On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, there is one planned project 

that involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle. Planned projects on the Umpqua 

National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts 

(286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). 

These projects would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings 

would most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Planned 

H-256
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 97

projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include several commercial thinning projects (at 

least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, 

unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the 

Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial 

thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the 

Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the 

Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown 

acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 

acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities could result in cumulative impacts to this 

species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Secure and Least Concern global statuses, the mobility of 

the species in question, and their large range and population size and large home range 

size. 

Ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis)

BLM Sensitive 

Ferruginous hawks are found in the western one-half of the continental U.S., southern 

Alberta and Manitoba, and north-central Mexico. They shift to the northern part of this 

area in the breeding season and to the southern part during the winter. In Oregon they are 

found in the eastern half of the state in open landscapes, most commonly in north 

Malheur County and the foothills of the Blue Mountains. They are rare in the Klamath 

Basin, but have been documented in Jackson and Klamath Counties. 

Common habitat in Oregon is high desert sagebrush plains and the bunchgrass prairies 

along the northern foothills of the Blue Mountains where there is abundant prey (Janes 

2003). Primary prey species are rabbits, hares, ground squirrels, and prairie dogs, and 

population fluctuations of these prey animals can be mirrored among ferruginous hawk 

abundance (Bechard and Schmutz 1995, Janes 2003). Their home range may include 

only one tree, often a juniper (Juniperus spp.) or cottonwood (Populus spp.) on a small 

rise, which contains the nest (Janes 2003), but they will nest on the ground when elevated 

nest sites are absent (Bechard and Schmutz 1995). Egg-laying typically occurs around 

April, with chicks hatching just over a month later (Bechard and Schmutz 1995). 

The global status of the ferruginous hawk is Apparently Secure, and its IUCN status is 

Near Threatened. It is widespread and relatively common in appropriate habitat, but 

there are reports of local declines, continued loss of habitat, and sensitivity to 

disturbance. Exact estimates vary, but there are likely at least 20,000 birds worldwide 

(NatureServe 2008). The ODFW has designated it Sensitive – Critical (ORNHIC 2007). 

H-257
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 98

Habitat loss is the major threat to ferruginous hawks. Much if their range is being lost to 

development and conversion to agriculture and rangeland, which decrease abundance of 

prey and nest trees. Ferruginous hawks are also very sensitive to human disturbance, and 

disturbance can result in nest abandonment or reduced fledging success (White and 

Thurow 1985). Ferruginous hawks have a close association with eastside grasslands and 

shrub-steppe, and a general association with eastside canyon shrublands, dwarf shrubsteppe, desert playa and salt scrub shrublands, and agriculture, pastures, and mixed 

environs. Ferruginous hawks have an occasional association with western juniper and 

mountain mahogany woodlands (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). This species has been 

documented in the Lakeview and Medford BLM Districts. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable ferruginous hawk habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the Lakeview and Medford BLM Districts. On these lands, 

ferruginous hawks have a close association with 19.3 acres to be removed and 0.7 acres 

to be modified, and a general association with 2.8 acres to be removed (table 5). These 

raptors are uncommon to rare during the breeding season in eastern Oregon, and only a 

few individuals remain over the winter. These birds could be negatively impacted by the 

Project by disturbance of nesting or wintering birds. Adults would be able to temporarily 

relocate away from Project-related disturbance, but eggs or chicks could be abandoned, 

temporarily or permanently, and left exposed to predators and the elements. Disturbance 

of wintering birds could result in decreased fitness due to an escalation of body reserve 

utilization during cold weather and decreased prey availability. Project activities could 

also alter habitat, for example by removing nesting or roosting trees. 

Cumulative Effects 

There are 559.7 acres of suitable ferruginous hawk habitat within 3,200 feet of the 

pipeline route that would be affected by noise disturbance and/or edge effect until cleared 

vegetation regenerated (table 3). Native grasslands are one of the most imperiled habitats 

in the western U.S., including Oregon, due to conversion to agriculture, development, 

invasion by non-native plant species, and fire suppression. In the Coast Range and West 

Cascades of Oregon, grassland loss since historical times is estimated at 99 percent 

(ODFW 2006). Sustainable grazing practices help maintain existing grasslands. On 

BLM land, the 2008 Resource Management Plan calls for removal of conifers that are 

encroaching on grasslands, and revegetating degraded areas with native grasses. These 

habitat management practices should increase the quantity and quality of upland 

sandpiper habitat in the future. Shrub-steppe habitat in Oregon is prevalent in the state, 

but has also suffered widespread losses due to conversion to agriculture and 

development, unmanaged grazing, invasive species, and altered fire regimes (ODFW 

2006). 

Other projects that are planned in the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 68 

through 83 (table 10), in the Medford and Lakeview BLM Districts. Planned projects in 

the Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In 

the Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown 

acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 

H-258
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 99

acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities would not likely result in cumulative 

impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Apparently Secure global status, the mobility of the species 

in question, the location of the Project on the periphery of its range, and the relatively 

small area of its range that would be impacted. 

Merlin (Falco columbarius)

BLM Assessment 

This small falcon breeds throughout Alaska and Canada and winters along the Pacific 

coast, throughout the western half of the U.S., central America, the Gulf coast, and the 

Atlantic coast north to Long Island. In Oregon, they breed rarely and migrate and winter 

uncommonly. They are especially rare west of the Cascades. There are no confirmed 

recent breeding records; although there were regular summer sightings of merlins from 

the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, the last confirmed merlin nest in Oregon was in the late 

1800s (Bettinger 2003). Along the potential pipeline route, they are documented in Coos, 

Jackson, and Klamath Counties. 

Winter habitat throughout Oregon is open and semi-open forests and grasslands, most 

commonly near estuaries, lakes, reservoirs, and sometimes cities (Bettinger 2003, 

Warkentin et al. 2005). Nesting usually occurs near forest openings near water in old 

crow, raven, hawk, or magpie nests, tree cavities, or cliff ledges. Hunting grounds with 

sufficient prey are an important habitat component. Merlin diets consist of a variety of 

small to medium-sized birds, though large flying insects are sometimes consumed 

(Bettinger 2003). Egg-laying can occur mid-April through July, and chicks hatch a 

month later (Warkentin et al. 2005). 

The merlin’s global status is Secure and its IUCN status is Least Concern. They are 

increasing in many areas formerly negatively impacted by pesticide pollution 

(NatureServe 2008). The merlin has no listing status in Oregon (ORNHIC 2007). 

In the past, merlins experienced the detrimental effects of DDT exposure, and although 

merlin populations are now reproducing well, pesticide levels likely to affect 

reproductive success persist in some areas (Warkentin et al. 2005). The most influential 

negative impact to merlin populations, however, is loss of habitat to agriculture 

(Warkentin et al. 2005). Merlins use a wide variety of habitats types for feeding. For 

breeding activities, merlins have a general association with westside lowland conifer and 

hardwood forests, and westside riparian wetlands, and an occasional association with 

montane mixed conifer forest, eastside mixed conifer forest, and lodgepole pine forest 

and woodlands. Merlins historically have an occasional association with westside oak 

H-259
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 100

and dry douglas-fir forest and woodlands for breeding (Johnson and O'Neil 2001). 

Merlins have been documented in the Umpqua and Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forests, and are suspected to occur in the Lakeview BLM District. Merlins are rare in 

Oregon all year round. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable merlin habitats within 3,200 feet of the proposed 

pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On USFS lands, merlins 

have a general association with 120.9 acres of breeding habitat to be removed and 47.1 

acres of breeding habitat to be modified (table 5). Merlins could be negatively impacted 

by the Project by experiencing disturbance. While adults would be able to escape, 

disturbance during breeding could cause nest desertion. Nest desertion has resulted from 

humans climbing nest trees during early incubation, which could result in the death of 

chicks, although merlins have also been known to habituate to non-threatening human 

activity. An indirect effect of disturbance could be lowering of fitness and depletion of 

energy reserves resulting in disturbance during winter, when temperatures are low and 

food is more scarce. Right-of-way and pipeline construction could also result in loss of 

suitable habitat, for example due to nest tree removal. Specific mitigation measures that 

would help minimize impacts to this species include replanting of trees, although this 

may not benefit merlins for a few decades until trees reach maturity. 

 

Cumulative Effects

Management activities on federal lands during winter could negatively impact merlins 

through disturbance by increasing energetic demands while temperatures are low and 

prey is more scarce. Habitat loss, for example from logging, is a current threat to 

merlins. Altered fire regimes also can affect merlin habitat. These raptors prefer more 

open woodlands where they have high visibility for hunting. When fires are suppressed, 

fuels build up on the forest floor, crowding in woodlands and impairing visibility. In the 

analysis area, this has lead to dense forests that were historically open woodlands, and 

encroachment of shrubs and trees on grasslands. Within 3,200 feet of the pipeline, there 

are currently 5,315.7 acres of suitable merlin habitat; these lands would be impacted by 

disturbance during construction and/or edge effects until removed vegetation regenerates 

(table 3). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33 in the Umpqua and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, and projects 76 

through 83 in the Lakeview BLM District (table 10). In the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest, planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) 

and various thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National 

Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) 

and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). In the 

Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown 

acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 

acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities would not likely result in cumulative 

impacts to this species. 

H-260
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 101

 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of its Secure and Least Concern global statuses, the mobility of the 

species in question, the relatively small area of its total range that would be affected by 

the Project, and the low probability of encountering the species due to its very low 

numbers in the area. 

American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) and Arctic peregrine falcon 

(F. P. tundrius)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Sensitive

Global use of pesticides, especially DDT, from the late 1940s to early 1970s reduced 

eggshell thickness among peregrine falcons, which are top predators, causing massive 

population declines, including in Oregon. With the ban of DDT in 1972 and federal 

protection of remnant populations, wild peregrines began increasing in the late 1970s. 

The Arctic peregrine falcon was down-listed to threatened in 1984 and delisted from the 

ESA in 1994, and the American peregrine falcon was de-listed in 1999 (64 FR 46541). 

Currently, peregrine falcons breed on every continent except Antarctica (Henny and 

Pagel 2003). Distribution is still increasing rapidly, and in North America the American 

peregrine falcon is found locally across most of the continent (White et al. 2002). In 

Oregon, they are confirmed in the southern Cascade Mountains, the Coast Range in 

southwest Oregon, and in the Wallowa Mountains in the northeast corner of the state 

(Henny and Pagel 2003). Along the proposed pipeline route, American peregrine falcons 

have been documented in Coos, Douglas, Jackson, and Klamath Counties, with some nest 

sites within a mile of the right-of-way. Arctic peregrine falcons breed from northwestern 

Alaska to Greenland south to the treeline of Alaska and British Columbia. During their 

migration to South America in the spring and fall, they can be spotted along the Pacific 

coast. They have been documented in the BLM Coos Bay District and are suspected in 

the Medford District. 

Habitat preferences for this species are very diverse. They use or pass through all 

terrestrial ecosystems and nearby waters, making generalizations about habitat use almost 

impossible (Henny and Pagel 2003). They have also in many cases adapted well to urban 

environments, using buildings and bridges as nest structures and preying on feral pigeons. 

A common feature of nesting habitat is cliffs, although peregrines also nest in stick nests 

constructed by other raptor species (Henny and Pagel 2003). Prey taken are also 

extremely diverse, including birds, mammals, reptiles, insects, and fish, and ranging in 

size from mayflies and hummingbirds to Canada geese and mountain beavers (Henny and 

Pagel 2003). 

The global status of the American peregrine falcon is Apparently Secure, and the global 

status of the Arctic peregrine falcon is Imperiled, but their global population has been 

H-261
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 102

increasing in the short-term (NatureServe 2008). The total population size for Arctic 

peregrines is unknown but is between 2,500 and 10,000 individuals. In 1998, there were 

at least 3,400 breeding American peregrine falcon individuals rangewide, and their shortterm trend indicates that the global population as stable to increasing (NatureServe 2008). 

American peregrine falcons are listed as Endangered in Oregon by the ODFW, and the 

Arctic peregrine falcon has no listing status (ORNHIC 2007). 

Primary threats to American and Arctic peregrine falcons are habitat loss, human 

disturbance, illegal take, and environmental contaminants (NatureServe 2009). Although 

DDT, the pesticides responsible for the initial decline in American and Arctic peregrine 

falcon populations in the 1940s, has been outlawed in the US since 1972, eggshell 

thickness of this species is still affected by environmental contaminants (Court 1993, 

Steidl et al. 1991); this could be due to the pesticide’s continued use in Latin America 

where the birds winter. The drastic increase in the population size of this species since 

the 1970s that occurred despite overall habitat loss indicates that habitat modification is 

not currently a serious threat to the continued existence of the species (NatureServe 

2009). 

Four nest sites were located within the survey area, the closest of which was 0.2 miles 

from the pipeline right-of-way. Peregrine falcons use a very wide range of habitat types, 

and they have been found in Oregon to have a general association with all types of forests 

and woodlands, shrub and grasslands, wetlands, coastal, aquatic, and altered 

environments (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). American peregrine falcons have been 

documented in all BLM Districts crossed by the potential pipeline route and in the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou and Umpqua National Forests. The Arctic peregrine falcon has been 

documented in the Coos Bay BLM District and is suspected in the Medford District. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable American and Arctic peregrine falcon habitats 

within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed 

above. On BLM lands, American and Arctic peregrine falcons have a general association 

with 614.0 acres to be removed and 207.2 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, 

American and Arctic peregrine falcons have a general association with 356.9 acres to be 

removed and 116.6 acres to be modified (table 5). Peregrine falcons along the right-ofway may be disturbed by the noise and disturbance of vegetation concomitant with rightof-way-clearing, especially if this takes place close to an active nest. Disturbance of the 

adult could lead to egg or chick abandonment, leaving them vulnerable to predators and 

the elements. In extreme cases of disturbance, for example the sudden appearance of a 

human or machinery very close to a nest, the adult may leave so quickly as to knock eggs 

or chicks out of the nest (White et al. 2002). 

Cumulative Effects

Threats to American and Arctic peregrine falcons include habitat loss and human 

disturbance. Management activities on federal lands could negatively impact peregrine 

falcons by disturbing migrating birds, which could result in the increased expenditure of 

stored energy which is necessary for the long migratory journey. Virtually all of the land 

H-262
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 103

within 3,200 feet of the pipeline, which would be impacted by construction-related 

disturbance and/or edge effect until removed revegetation regrew, is suitable peregrine 

falcon habitat. The total amount on BLM land and in National Forests where this species 

has been recorded is 80,420.8 acres (table 3). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33 and 35 through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest 

include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and 

thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). These projects 

would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings would most likely 

contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Planned projects in the Coos 

Bay BLM District include several commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), 

various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a 

land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District 

include four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 

acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District 

include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, 

planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels treatments 

(501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 

acres). Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable 

future activities could result in minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts to American and Arctic peregrine falcons, it is determined for both subspecies 

that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, but is not likely to 

contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the species.” For 

American peregrine falcons, the reasoning for the MIIH call is their Apparently Secure 

global status, and the mobile nature and broad habitat preferences of the species. For 

Arctic peregrine falcons, the rationale for the MIIH call is the low likelihood of 

encountering migrating birds, and their mobility which should allow them to escape 

disturbance. 

Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Sensitive 

The greater sage-grouse range is the northern Rockies, Pacific Northwest, and Great 

Basin areas of the U.S., including the southeast quarter of Oregon (Schroeder et al. 1999). 

Sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) provides greater sage-grouse with food and shelter throughout 

the year. From late fall through spring, sagebrush is the only food eaten. Nests are 

located under sagebrush bushes and lined with grass or sagebrush leaves. Leks are 

located in openings in the sagebrush. Successful nests have greater cover of grass over 7 

inches tall and shrubs 16 to 31 inches tall immediately surrounding the nest than 

unsuccessful nests (DeLong et al. 1995). Males begin attending leks in late February, 

H-263
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 104

and average copulation date for Oregon is in late March (Schroeder et al. 1999, Barnett 

2003). 

The global status of greater sage-grouse is Apparently Secure, as they are widely 

distributed and still relatively common in the core of their range, even though it has 

contracted significantly (NatureServe 2008). Its IUCN status is Near Threatened. There 

are approximately 142,000 greater sage-grouse range-wide. The global long-term trend 

for this species is moderately declining to relatively stable, but the short-term trend is 

severely to rapidly declining (NatureServe 2008). This species is a federal Species of 

Concern and is designated Sensitive – Vulnerable in Oregon (ORNHIC 2007). 

Throughout their range, greater sage-grouse have experienced major population declines 

(> 60%) from historical levels due primarily to habitat alteration (Barnett 2003). These 

birds are sagebrush obligates, and much of their native high desert sagebrush shrubsteppe habitat has been altered by agriculture, development, intense grazing pressure, and 

human-aided invasion of exotic plants (Schroeder et al. 1999). Greater sage-grouse have 

a close association with shrub-steppe and eastside grassland, and a general association 

with agriculture, pasture, and mixed environs (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). This species is 

suspected to occur in the Lakeview BLM District. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable greater sage-grouse habitats within 3,200 feet of 

the proposed pipeline in the Lakeview BLM District. On these lands, greater sage-grouse 

have a close association with 0.4 acres to be removed, and a general association with 2.8 

acres to be removed (table 5). Greater sage-grouse are negatively impacted by anything 

that disturbs native sagebrush habitats and their healthy, native understory (Barnett 

2003), which could occur during right-of-way clearing. They could also be affected by 

Project-related disturbance, particularly during lek attendance, which could negatively 

impact the breeding ability of this species. Specific mitigation measures that would help 

minimize impacts to this species include noxious weed control (see Appendix N of the 

BA). 

Cumulative Effects

Within 3,200 feet of the pipeline, there are 67.2 acres of suitable greater sage-grouse 

habitat that would be impacted by construction-related disturbance and/or edge effects, 

until removed vegetation regrew. In the case of shrub-steppe habitat, the time that edge 

effects would persist would be only a few years while sagebrush and other shrubs 

recovered (only one year for grasses and forbs). The primary threat to greater sagegrouse is habitat alteration, particularily disturbance of native sagebrush habitat. 

Sagebrush steppe and shrublands cover extensive acreage in eastern Oregon, but they 

have been severely impacted by conversion to agriculture and development, unmanaged 

grazing, invasive species, and altered fire regimes (ODFW 2006). It is estimated that 

with European settlement, approximately 21 percent of greater sage-grouse habitat in 

Oregon was lost (17 percent within the Lakeview BLM district; ODFW 2005). Habitat 

that remains is largely fragmented. With fire suppression, shrub-steppe habitats have 

moved from being mosaics of shrubs, grasses, and forbs, to being dominated by shrubs. 

H-264
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 105

This decreases forage for sagebrush-specialty species such as the greater sage-grouse and 

generally decreases the quality of the habitat (ODFW 2006). Nearly all land in the 

Lakeview BLM district is protected under surface use stipulations, which are designed to 

protect greater sage-grouse and their habitat (ODFW 2005). This will likely lead to the 

development of increased quality and connectivity of sagebrush habitat in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 76 

through 83 in the Lakeview BLM District. The projects include a timber sale (1 site, 

unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings 

(388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities would not likely result in 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Apparently Secure global status, the location of the 

proposed Project on the periphery of this species’ range in Oregon, and the relatively fast 

recovery time (compared to forested habitats) for habitat types used by greater sagegrouse following project-related ground clearing, combined with federal protection of 

this habitat. 

Flammulated owl (Otus flammeolus)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Sensitive 

These small owls are common during the breeding season in scattered areas of suitable 

habitat in the western half of the continental U.S. And in Mexico. They winter in central 

America. In Oregon, they are found east of the Cascades crest in the Cascade, Blue, and 

Wallowa Mountains. Along the pipeline route, they have been documented in Douglas, 

Jackson, and Klamath Counties. 

Habitat for the flammulated owl is open ponderosa pine or other cool, dry montane 

conifer or aspen forests with limited understory (Reynolds and Linkhart 1992, McCallum 

1994). In southwest Oregon, flammulated owls have been found in forest stands 

including Shasta red fir, mountain hemlock, and lodgepole pine (Buchanan 2003). 

Suitable forests have some large old trees with scattered thickets of saplings and/or 

shrubs, and some clearings (Reynolds and Linkhart 1992). In Oregon, nests have ranged 

from 3,880 to 4,600 feet and are usually located on upper portions of gently sloping 

south- and east-facing slopes (Buchanan 2003). Flammulated owls nest in cavities, often 

excavated by pileated woodpeckers or northern flickers, in ponderosa pine or western 

larch snags about 20 to 30 inches dbh. Hunting is accomplished at night, and moths, 

beetles, crickets, and grasshoppers are the most often taken (McCallum 1994). 

The global status of the flammulated owl is Apparently Secure and its IUCN status is 

Least Concern, with a widespread distribution in western North America (NatureServe 

H-265
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 106

2008). In Oregon, the ODFW has designated this species Sensitive – Critical (ORNHIC 

2007), as loss and fragmentation of mature forests suggests likely population declines. 

Management activities such as timber harvest, firewood cutting, and fire suppression 

pose serious threats to flammulated owls due to ther reliance on snags for nesting, and 

their preference for old-growth forests (NatureServe 2009, Buchanan 2003). Disturbance 

from logging may have a detrimental effect on flammulated owls, especially during the 

breeding season in June and July (USDA Forest Service 1994). This species is slow to 

recover from environmental disturbances such as habitat loss and fragmentation due to its 

slow reproductive rate and high level of habitat specialization (McCallum 1994). 

Application of insecticides may decimate populations of critical prey species (McCallum 

1994). 

Five records were made of this species between 0.3 and 2.6 miles of the pipeline. 

Flammulated owls have a close association with southwest Oregon mixed coniferhardwood forests and ponderosa pine forests and woodlands, especially where snags and 

tree cavities are present. They have a general association with riparian wetlands, and an 

occasional association with montane mixed conifer forests (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). 

These owls have been documented in the Lakeview and Medford BLM Districts and the 

Umpqua and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable flammulated owl habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, 

flammulated owls have a close association with 157.8 acres to be removed and 33.0 acres 

to be modified, and a general association with 0.1 acres to be removed. On USFS lands, 

flammulated owls have a close association with 200.6 acres to be removed and 68.9 acres 

to be modified, and a general association with 120.9 acres to be removed and 47.1 acres 

to be modified (table 5). Flammulated owls could be negatively impacted by the 

construction of this Project by disturbance. While adults would be able to escape 

temporary disturbances, breeding birds could be led to abandon nests, leaving eggs and 

chicks vulnerable to predation and the elements. Clearing of the right-of-way would 

modify habitat, changing the seral stage and tree species makeup of occupied forests. 

Owls could be injured or killed if equipment removes a snag containing an active nest. 

Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize impacts to this species include 

planting of trees after construction and snag creation (Appendix B). 

Cumulative Effects

An important threat to flammulated owls is habitat loss. Within 3,200 feet of the 

pipeline, there are 27,860.3 acres of suitable flammulated owl habitat on BLM and 

National Forest lands that would be impacted by construction-related disturbance and/or 

edge effects, until such time as removed vegetation could regrow (table 3). Flammulated 

owl habitat has decreased dramatically in Oregon. While ponderosa pines are still 

common, the key characteristics of historic open ponderosa pine woodlands have 

changed dramatically, mostly due to logging and fire suppression (ODFW 2006). 

Frequent, low-intensity fires formerly kept ponderosa pine woodlands free of understory 

H-266
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 107

vegetation and mature trees spaced widely from each other no longer occur at their 

historic intervals. This causes buildup of fuels on the forest floor which impedes 

visibility for hunting. It also results in larger, hotter fires, when they do occur, which 

mature ponderosa pines can not always survive; thus mature trees are lost. Only an 

estimated seven percent of historically-structured ponderosa pine forests remain in the 

Klamath Mountains province, most of which are greatly reduced in patch size and 

connectivity (ODFW 2006). Within the analysis area, most (90 percent) of ponderosa 

pine forests and woodlands are late successional or old growth (i.e., older than 80 years; 

table 3). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33 and 68 through 83 (table 10). Planned projects on the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest 

include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and 

thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). Planned 

projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown 

acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, 

unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings 

(388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Apparently Secure global status, the mobility of the owls, 

and the relatively small area of their range that would be impacted. 

Northern pygmy-owl (Glaucidium gnoma)

USFS Sensitive 

Northern pygmy-owls are found year-round in southwestern Canada and most of the 

western U.S. In Oregon, northern pygmy-owls are confirmed or probable throughout 

most of the state except for the southeast quarter (Holt and Petersen 2000). Along the 

potential pipeline route, they have been documented in Douglas and Jackson Counties. 

Habitat for northern pygmy-owls is a variety of usually unfragmented forest types, from 

deciduous bottomlands to high-elevation mature coniferous forests, with large-diameter 

dominant overstory trees (Sater et al. 2003). Riparian areas, small woodlots, early seral 

forests, and juniper woodlands are infrequently used (Sater et al. 2003). Nesting occurs 

in woodpecker-excavated cavities, and nests are usually lined only with feather and leaf 

debris accumulating naturally during use (Holt and Petersen 2000). Nest-building 

probably begins in February, with the first brood hatching probably from April to early 

June and nestlings staying in the nest about 23 days (Holt and Petersen 2000). These 

H-267
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 108

small owls hunt by day and early evening and take small birds, mammals, and insects 

(Holt and Petersen 2000). 

The global status of the northern pygmy-owl is Secure and its IUCN status is Least 

Concern, being widespread in appropriate habitat with no declines detected (NatureServe 

2008). This species has no listing status in Oregon (ORNHIC 2007). 

Populations have apparently changed little since this species was first described, though 

there are few data on population trends (Sater et al. 2003). Threats to the northern 

pygmy-owl may include habitat alteration, particularly the destruction of snags or trees 

containing nesting cavities, and habitat alterations that affect the woodpecker species that 

excavate those cavities (Holt and Petersen 2000, Sater et al. 2003). 

Many detections of this species have been made in the vicinity of the analysis area, 

including a record 0.3 mile from the proposed right-of-way. Northern pygmy-owls have 

a close association with westside lowland and southwest Oregon mixed conifer-hardwood 

forests, especially where snags and tree cavities are present. They have a general 

association with ponderosa pine forests and woodlands, western juniper/mountain 

mahogany woodlands, and riparian wetlands, and an occasional association with montane 

mixed conifer forest, urban areas, and agriculture and pastureland (Johnson and O’Neil 

2001). These owls have been documented in all three National Forests crossed by the 

pipeline route, and in the Medford BLM District. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable northern pygmy-owl habitat within 3,200 feet of 

the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM 

lands, northern pygmy-owls have a close association with 119.8 acres to be removed and 

28.2 acres to be modified, and a general association with 70.5 acres to be removed and 

10.0 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, northern pygmy-owls have a close 

association with 210.9 acres to be removed and 69.7 acres to be modified, and a general 

association with 206.7 acres to be removed and 58.2 acres to be modified (table 5). 

Northern pygmy-owls could be negatively impacted by the construction of this Project by 

disturbance. While adults would be able to escape temporary disturbances, breeding 

birds could be led to abandon nests, leaving eggs and chicks vulnerable to predation and 

the elements. In addition, there could be indirect effects to wintering birds, causing them 

to increase utilization of energy reserves which are necessary during cold weather and 

decreased prey availability. Clearing of the right-of-way could modify habitat, changing 

the seral stage and tree species makeup of occupied forests and fragmenting habitat. 

Owls could also be injured or killed if equipment removes a snag containing an active 

nest. Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize impacts to this species 

include planting of trees after construction and snag creation (see Appendix N of the 

BA). 

Cumulative Effects

Within 3,200 feet of the pipeline, there are 28,306.5 acres of suitable northern pygmyowl habitat that would be impacted by construction-related disturbance and/or edge 

H-268
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 109

effect, until such time that vegetation removed could regrow (table 3). Human actions 

have cause degradation of northern pygmy-owl habitat by fragmenting forests and 

converting them to earlier seral stages through frequent harvest. Since the 1850s, only 

approximately 25 percent of late-successional Douglas-fir mixed conifer forest remains in 

the Klamath Mountains province (ODFW 2006). Of suitable forested habitat currently 

found in the analysis area, 63 percent is considered late seral/old-growth (i.e., older than 

80 years; table 3). The Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Service land) and 2008 Resource 

Management Plans (BLM land) specifically protect late seral forests through land use 

designations and management strategies; this should lead to increased quantity and 

quality of late seral forests for northern pygmy-owls in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 34, and 68 through 75 (table 10). Planned projects on the Umpqua National 

Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) 

and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). Planned 

projects on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest include two large grazing 

allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). There is a 

single project on the Fremont-Winema National Forest that involves fencing a waterbody 

to exclude cattle. Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber 

sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities would not likely result in cumulative 

impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Secure and Least Concern global statuses, the mobility of 

the owls, and the relatively small area of their range that would be impacted. 

Western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia hypugea)

BLM Sensitive 

Western burrowing owls are found in the western U.S. north to south-central Canada and 

east to the eastern edge of the Great Plains, and in Central America. In Oregon, they are 

found east of the Cascades, especially in the southeast quarter of the state, and in northern 

Morrow and Umatilla Counties along the Columbia River. Along the potential pipeline 

route, they can be found in southern Klamath County. 

Breeding range for burrowing owls is unique in that nests are in earthen burrows that are 

excavated by burrowing mammals (Rich 1986, Green 2003). They prefer dry, open, 

shortgrass (< 6 inches tall), treeless plains with a high proportion (40–70%) of bare 

ground (Rich 1986, Green 2003). They prefer burrows where vegetation immediately 

surrounding (< 15 feet) the burrow opening is lower than in the surrounding area 

(MacCracken et al. 1985). They are often seen in conjunction with human development 

such as golf courses, cemeteries, airports, vacant lots, and fairgrounds (Haug et al. 1993, 

H-269
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 110

Millsap and Bear 2000). Burrowing owls are opportunistic feeders, taking arthropods, 

small mammals, and birds. Although largely regarded as diurnal, burrowing owls change 

their activity schedule throughout the year to correspond with prey movements, for 

example foraging more at night during times of year when small mammals are more 

abundant than insects (Haug and Oliphant 1990). 

The global status of the western burrowing owl is Apparently Secure, and its IUCN status 

is Least Concern (NatureServe 2008). They have a widespread distribution in North 

America and are relatively common in appropriate habitat, although there are some local 

population declines caused by habitat alteration. They are a federal Species of Concern 

and are designated Sensitive – Critical in Oregon by ODFW (ORNHIC 2007). 

Habitat alteration has had a dramatic effect on burrowing owls. Cultivation of native 

grasslands and prairies and control of prairie dog towns has caused burrowing owl 

declines due to habitat loss. Mowing and wetland drainage, however, have created 

burrowing owl habitat and in Florida have increased the range of this species (Haug et al. 

1993). Although human developments can cause an increase in prey, disturbance by 

humans causes nest failures and decreased fledging success (Millsap and Bear 2000). 

People and dogs also destroy many burrows (Haug et al. 1993). Another threat to 

burrowing owls is insecticide and rodenticide application, which both harms owls directly 

and decreases their prey base. Burrowing owls have a close association with shrubsteppe and eastside grasslands, especially where snags are present. They have a general 

association with westside grasslands, herbaceous wetlands, urban areas, and agriculture 

and pastureland, and an occasional association with coastal dunes and beaches (Johnson 

and O’Neil 2001). Burrowing owls have been documented in the Coos Bay BLM 

District. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area is suitable burrowing owl habitat within 3,200 feet of the proposed 

pipeline route in the Coos Bay BLM District; the burrowing owl has a general association 

wtih 1.9 acres to be removed (table 5). The Project could negatively impact western 

burrowing owls by disturbing birds during construction, although birds would be able to 

flee disturbance by temporarily relocating. This bird is not expected to breed in the 

vicinity of the analysis area. Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize 

impacts to this species include snag creation (see Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects

Within 3,200 feet of the pipeline, there are 2.3 acres of habitat on BLM land with which 

burrowing owls are closely or generally associated, and an additional 60.1 acres with 

which they are occasionally associated (table 3). These areas would be impacted by 

construction-related noise and disturbance, and/or by edge effects until such time the 

cleared vegetation was able to regrow. In the case of habitats used by burrowing owls, 

this would usually take only one year. Shrub-steppe habitat in Oregon is prevalent in the 

state, but has also suffered widespread losses due to conversion to agriculture and 

development, unmanaged grazing, invasive species, and altered fire regimes (ODFW 

2006). Native grasslands are one of the most imperiled habitats in the western U.S., 

H-270
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 111

including Oregon, due to conversion to agriculture, development, invasion by non-native 

plant species, and fire suppression. In the Coast Range and West Cascades of Oregon, 

grassland loss since historical times is estimated at 99 percent (ODFW 2006). 

Sustainable grazing practices help maintain existing grasslands. On BLM land, the 2008 

Resource Management Plan calls for removal of conifers that are encroaching on 

grasslands, and revegetating degraded areas with native grasses. These habitat 

management practices should increase the quantity and quality of burrowing owl habitat 

in the future. Coastal dunes have also undergone alterations from their original state. 

Ever-moving, flowing systems under natural conditions, the introduction of European 

beachgrass has artificially stabilized dunes. This prevents new sand from moving inland 

and allows plant succession to proceed, resulting in the encroachment of woody shrubs 

and trees on this habitat type in Oregon. Dune stabilization has also opened up this 

habitat for development and recreation, further eliminating and degrading it and 

disturbing the animals that depend on it (ODFW 2006). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 54 in the Coos Bay BLM District, shown in table 10. These projects include 

several commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 

331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown 

acreage). Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities would not likely result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Apparently Secure and Least Concern global statuses, the 

mobility of the owls, the temporary nature of the disturbance, and the relatively small 

area of their range that would be impacted. 

Common nighthawk (Chordeiles minor)

BLM Sensitive 

Common nighthawks are found during the breeding season throughout North America. 

In Oregon, they are found throughout the state, at all elevations (Altman 2003a), 

including along most of the pipeline route. 

Nesting occurs directly on the ground in open landscapes with little ground cover, 

especially in sagebrush and rocky scablands, dry creek beds, burned areas, coastal dunes, 

forest clearings, and unused gravel roads and yards (Altman 2003a). In Arizona, they 

have been found in untreated, lightly cut, and heavily cut ponderosa pine forests (Szaro 

and Balda 1986). Only the camouflage of the incubating female hides the nest and 

chicks, once hatched, from view. The diet of the common nighthawk consists of flying 

insects, which are taken on the wing around dawn and dusk. Foraging takes place in any 

open, unobstructed space such as farmland, forest burns, and large bodies of water 

(Altman 2003a). Nighthawks typically arrive in western Oregon in the first week of 

H-271
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 112

June, and the peak of fall migration at Malheur NWR is in the second half of August 

(Altman 2003a). 

The global status of the common nighthawk is Secure and its IUCN status is Least 

Concern, although there are several areas where they are declining (NatureServe 2008). 

In Oregon, they are designated Sensitive – Critical (ORNHIC 2007). 

Possible threats to this species include loss of nesting habitat in urban areas and the 

increase of American crow, a nest predator, in urban areas. Insecticide spraying in urban 

areas and managed forests, to reduce mosquitoes, also decreases the prey base of the 

common nighthawk. Areas with high levels of insects are important to this species, and 

insect habitat loss, for example loss of wetlands and riparian areas, could be affecting 

common nighthawk populations (Altman 2003a). 

Four nest sites were located within the survey area, the closest of which was 0.2 miles 

from the pipeline right-of-way. Common nighthawks are habitat generalists, and they 

have been found in Oregon to have a general association with all types of forests and 

woodlands, shrub and grasslands, wetlands, and coastal, aquatic, and altered 

environments (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Nighthawks been documented in all three 

National Forests and all four BLM Districts crossed by the pipeline route. In Oregon, 

they are fairly common to locally common east of the Cascades and rare to locally 

uncommon west of the Cascades (Altman 2003a). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable common nighthawk habitats within 3,200 feet of 

the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM 

lands, common nighthawks have a general association with 614.0 acres to be removed 

and 207.2 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, common nighthawks have a general 

association with 433.1 acres to be removed and 128.6 acres to be modified (table 5). 

Breeding common nighthawks could be negatively impacted by pipeline and right-of-way 

construction by experiencing excessive disturbance from construction and clearing 

activities, possibly leading to abandonment of eggs or chicks. Incubating individuals, 

eggs, or chicks could also be injured or killed by equipment. Right-of-way clearing could 

also modify habitat, altering the abundance and/or makeup of the prey base. There are 

several records documented between 2.0 and 2.5 miles from the proposed pipeline route. 

Cumulative Effects

Threats to the common nighthawk include the loss of breeding habitat, and a decrease in 

prey population (insects) due to the loss of wetlands. Within 3,200 feet of the proposed 

Project, there are 55,577.8 acres of suitable common nighthawk habitat on BLM and 

Forest Service land; these could be impacted by disturbance during construction and/or 

edge effects until plant regeneration occurred (table 3). Though common nighthawks 

have broad habitat preferences, many of the habitat types used by this species have been 

severely impacted and are currently altered from their natural states. Wetlands have been 

degraded; an estimated one-third of wetlands present in historical times in Oregon remain 

(Dahl 1990). Wetlands now are protected by federal laws, and the Northwest Forest Plan 

H-272
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 113

and the 2008 Resource Management Plans for BLM lands protect wetlands from 

degradation and loss by designating specific land use designations and associated 

management strategies. In the future, these protections will likely lead to enhanced 

wetland habitat in the analysis area, which would benefit common nighthawks. Shrubsteppe habitat in Oregon is prevalent in the state, but has also suffered widespread losses 

due to conversion to agriculture and development, unmanaged grazing, invasive species, 

and altered fire regimes (ODFW 2006). Due to the catholic habitat preferences of the 

common nighthawk, the large amount of available suitable habitat in the analysis area, 

and the already-disturbed state of much of the habitat that would be impacted by the 

project, viability of this species is not likely to be affected. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 83 (table 10ul). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, planned projects 

include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning projects 

(1,608.6 acres). On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, there is one planned project 

that involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle. Planned projects on the Umpqua 

National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts 

(286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). 

These projects would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings 

would most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Planned 

projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include several commercial thinning projects (at 

least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, 

unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the 

Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial 

thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the 

Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the 

Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown 

acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 

acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Secure and Least Concern global statuses, the mobility of 

the species, their ability to use a wide range of habitat types, and the very small area of 

their range that would be impacted compared to their distribution in North America. 

White-headed woodpecker (Picoides albolarvatus)

BLM Sensitive 

White-headed woodpeckers are found year-round in scattered areas of suitable 

mountainous coniferous forest from south-central British Columbia through the Cascades 

of Washington and Oregon, the Ochoco, Blue, and Wallowa Mountains of northeastern 

H-273
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 114

Oregon, the Sierra Nevadas and Lake Tahoe area, and scattered small locations in 

southern California, corresponding with the highest mountain ranges in the area. In 

Oregon, they are most commonly found east of the Cascades. Along the potential 

pipeline route, they have been documented in Douglas, Jackson, and Klamath Counties. 

Open ponderosa pine or mixed-conifer forests dominated by ponderosa pine are the main 

habitats used by white-headed woodpeckers (Bull et al. 1986). They forage among the 

cones and bark of live ponderosa pines, looking for insects and seeds, with trees > 10 

inches dbh preferred (Bull et al. 1986, Marshall 2003b). Other trees used include sugar 

pine (Pinus lambertiana), lodgepole pine, white fir (Abies concolor), incense-cedar 

(Libocedrus decurrens), and Douglas-fir (Garrett et al. 1996). Main foods taken are 

invertebrates, especially ants and beetles, and conifer seeds; the relative importance of 

these two diet components varies seasonally (Garrett et al. 1996). Nesting is in cavities 

excavated in snags, down trees, or logs at an average height of 8 feet (Garrett et al. 1996). 

Cavities excavated by other species are sometimes used (Marshall 2003b). Nest 

excavation takes place in May, with eggs laid late May into the first half of June. 

Incubation is 14 days. 

The global status of the white-headed woodpecker is Apparently Secure and its IUCN 

status is Least Concern, with limited research indicating a possible stable to upward trend 

throughout its range (NatureServe 2008). White-headed woodpeckers are a federal 

Species of Concern, which means that additional information is needed to support a 

proposal to list it under the ESA, and the ODFW has designated this species as Sensitive 

– Critical, meaning in danger of being listed as threatened or endangered (ORNHIC 

2007). 

The major threat to this species is loss of habitat. Less than 10% of old-growth 

ponderosa pine in Oregon and Washington remains from the time of pre-Euro-American 

settlement, and much of what is left is too fragmented to be suitable for white-headed 

woodpeckers (Marshall 2003b). Fire suppression has precluded natural forest thinning, 

including grass reduction by grazing which inhibits a fire’s ability to spread; this leads 

eventually to the replacement of pines with firs. The resultant increase in shrubby 

understory resulting from fire suppression may also increase mammalian nest predation 

on white-headed woodpeckers (Marshall 2003b). Timber harvest on federal lands, which 

targets large-diameter trees, also has contributed to white-headed woodpecker habitat 

degradation. 

There is a record of a white-headed woodpecker 2.1 miles from the right-of-way, and 

suitable habitat was also found along the pipeline route. White-headed woodpeckers 

have a close association with ponderosa pine forests and woodlands, especially those 

containing snags. They have a general association with riparian wetlands, and an 

occasional association with montane mixed conifer forests, southwest Oregon mixed 

conifer-hardwood forests, and urban areas (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). These 

woodpeckers have been documented in all three National Forests crossed by the pipeline 

route, and in the Lakeview and Medford BLM Districts. White-headed woodpeckers are 

uncommon east of the Cascades. 

H-274
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 115

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable white-headed woodpecker habitats within 3,200 

feet of the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On 

BLM lands, white-headed woodpeckers have a close association with 50.49 acres to be 

removed and 5.79 acres to be modified, and a general association with 107.94 acres to be 

removed and 27.2 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, white-headed woodpeckers have 

a close association with 64.68 acres to be removed and 11.18 acres to be modified, and a 

general association with 352.94 acres to be removed and 116.78 acres to be modified 

(table 5). Pipeline construction and right-of-way clearing could negatively impact whiteheaded woodpeckers during the breeding season by disturbing individuals. Adults would 

be able to escape this temporary disturbance, but incubating adults could be induced to 

abandon the nest, leaving eggs or chicks behind. Eggs and chicks could also be harmed if 

active nest trees are felled during right-of-way clearing. Disturbance during winter could 

indirectly affect individuals by increasing energy demands during colder weather, 

lowering fitness. Construction could also modify habitat, possibly changing tree species 

composition, understory, or forest seral stage. Suitable nesting trees or snags marked for 

clearing should be searched for nests before removal during the nesting season. If a nest 

is found, the nest should be avoided until the young are fledged. Suitable habitat located 

along the right-of-way is located in T37S R4E Section 25 and R5E Sections 30 and 31. 

Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize impacts to this species include 

planting of trees and creation of snags, although replacement of forest trees would likely 

not benefit white-headed woodpeckers for several decades until the trees matured. (see 

Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects

Threats to the white-headed woodpecker include habitat loss and fragmentation. 

Management activities on federal lands could affect this species by disturbing wintering 

birds, possibly resulting in decreased fitness. Within 3,200 feet of the pipeline, there are 

29,185.8 acres of suitable white-headed woodpecker habitat that would be impacted by 

construction-related disturbance and/or edge effects, until such time that vegetation 

removed during construction could recover. While ponderosa pines are still common, the 

key characteristics of historic open ponderosa pine woodlands have changed 

dramatically, mostly due to logging and fire suppression (ODFW 2006). Only an 

estimated seven percent of historically-structured ponderosa pine forests remain in the 

Klamath Mountains province, most of which are greatly reduced in patch size and 

connectivity (ODFW 2006). Within the analysis area, most (76 percent) of ponderosa 

pine forests and woodlands are late successional or old growth (i.e., older than 80 years; 

table 3). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 34 and 68 through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, there is one 

planned project that involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle. Planned projects on 

the Umpqua National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of 

H-275
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 116

clearcuts (286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown 

acreage). These projects would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of 

thinnings would most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. 

Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, 

unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale 

(1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial 

thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Apparently Secure and Least Concern global statuses, the 

wide variety of habitats used by these birds, and the mobility of the species to escape 

disturbance. 

Lewis’s woodpecker (Melanerpes lewis)

BLM Sensitive 

The Lewis’s woodpecker is found in mountainous areas of the western U.S.. During 

winter, they shift to the southern portion of their range. In Oregon, they are found in 

most parts of the state, especially the Cascade, Wallowa, and Blue Mountains. Along the 

potential pipeline route, they have been documented in Coos, Douglas, Jackson, and 

Klamath Counties. 

Breeding habitat is predominantly open ponderosa pine forest, open riparian woodland 

dominated by cottonwood, and logged or burned pine forest. Important characteristics 

are an open canopy, a brushy understory, dead and large woody debris material, perches, 

and abundant insects (Tobalske 1997). Nests are in tree cavities, and soft dead or dying 

trees are required (Vierling 1997). Species used vary and in Oregon include Oregon 

white oak (Quercus garryana), ponderosa pine, cottonwoods, and juniper (Thomas et al. 

1979, Galen 2003). Eggs are laid in May and June, and incubation lasts 12 to 16 days 

(Tobalske 1997). Lewis’s woodpeckers are opportunistic feeders, consuming largely 

insects during the spring and summer, and acorns and ripe fruits during fall and winter 

(Galen 2003). Typical winter habitat is oak woodlands and commercial orchards, and 

birds depend on acorn crops during this time of year (Vierling 1997). 

The global status of the Lewis’s woodpecker is Apparently Secure and its IUCN status is 

Least Concern. This species has a large range but spotty distribution, and some apparent 

declines have been noted (NatureServe 2008). It is designated Sensitive – Critical by the 

ODFW, having formerly been “abundant” in the state (Galen 2003, ORNHIC 2007). 

Lewis’s woodpeckers are declining throughout their range, probably due to loss of 

suitable lowland oak habitat and loss of snags for nesting; only 2 to 8% of open 

H-276
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 117

ponderosa pine stands remain in eastern Oregon compared to presettlement conditions 

(Tobalske 1997). Another factor contributing to habitat degradation is logging practices 

and fire suppression which result in denser forest types (Tobalske 1997). Other factors 

are competition for nest holes with European starlings (Sterna vulgaris) and pesticide 

application. 

There is one record of a Lewis’s woodpecker documented 1.1 mile from the right-of-way. 

Lewis’s woodpeckers have a close association with edges of westside oak and dry 

Douglas-fir forests and woodlands, especially those with snags and tree cavities. They 

have a general association with southwest Oregon mixed conifer-hardwood forests, 

ponderosa pine forests and woodlands, westside grasslands, riparian wetlands, and 

agriculture and pastureland. They have an occasional association with montane mixed 

conifer forests, western juniper/mountain mahogany woodlands, eastside grasslands, and 

urban areas (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Lewis’s woodpeckers have been documented in 

all four of the BLM Districts crossed by the pipeline route and in the Umpqua and Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable Lewis’s woodpecker habitats within 3,200 feet of 

the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM 

lands, Lewis’s woodpeckers have a close association with 33.2 acres to be removed and 

4.5 acres to be modified, and a general association with 404.8 acres to be removed and 

183.2 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, Lewis’s woodpeckers have a general 

association with 353.7 acres to be removed and 116.1 acres to be modified (table 5). A 

potential negative impact to the Lewis’s woodpecker from the Project is disturbance to 

breeding birds. Adults would be able to temporarily relocate in order to avoid 

disturbance, but incubating adults could be induced to abandon an active nest, leaving 

eggs or chicks vulnerable to predation and the elements. Chicks could also be killed 

directly if the tree or snag containing their nest is felled while occupied. An indirect 

effect of Project activities could be disturbance to wintering birds, possibly lowering their 

fitness at a colder time of year. Right-of-way clearing and pipeline construction could 

also modify habitat, for example by removing snags, altering tree species makeup in 

forests, and changing the seral stage of the habitat. Specific mitigation measures that 

would help minimize impacts to this species include planting of trees and creation of 

snags, although replacement of forest trees would likely not benefit Lewis’s woodpeckers 

for several decades until the trees matured (see Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects 

Management activities on federal lands could negatively impact Lewis’s woodpeckers by 

disturbing wintering birds, lowering their fitness (Tobalske 1997). Within 3,200 feet of 

the pipeline, there are 42,270.8 acres of suitable Lewis’s woodpecker habitat that would 

be impacted by construction-related disturbance and/or edge effects until such a time that 

vegetation removed could regrow (table 3). Oak woodlands in Oregon have declined 

precipitously due to conversion to other land uses, invasive species, and fire suppression; 

this has been especially severe in the Coast Range province, where only an estimated four 

percent of historical oak woodlands remain. The 2008 Resource Management Plans 

H-277
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 118

(BLM land) identifies oak restoration as a goal; this will likely result in improved 

quantity and quality of Lewis’s woodpecker habitat in the analysis area in the future. 

Wetlands have also been degraded; an estimated one-third of wetlands present in 

historical times in Oregon remain today (Dahl 1990). Wetlands now are protected by 

federal laws, and the Northwest Forest Plan and the 2008 Resource Management Plans 

for BLM lands protect wetlands from degradation and loss by designating specific land 

use designations and associated management strategies. These protections will likely 

lead to enhanced wetland habitat in the analysis area, which would benefit Lewis’s 

woodpeckers. Native grasslands are one of the most imperiled habitats in the western 

U.S., including Oregon, due to conversion to agriculture, development, invasion by nonnative plant species, and fire suppression. In the Coast Range and West Cascades of 

Oregon, grassland loss since historical times is estimated at 99 percent (ODFW 2006). 

Sustainable grazing practices help maintain existing grasslands. On BLM land, the 2008 

Resource Management Plan calls for removal of conifers that are encroaching on 

grasslands, and revegetating degraded areas with native grasses. These habitat 

management practices should increase the quantity and quality of Lewis’s woodpecker 

habitat in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33 and 34 through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest 

include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and 

thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). These projects 

would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings would most likely 

contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Planned projects in the Coos 

Bay BLM District include several commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), 

various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a 

land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District 

include four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 

acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District 

include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, 

planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels treatments 

(501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 

acres). Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable 

future activities could result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Apparently Secure and Least Concern global statuses, and 

the mobility of the species allowing it to escape disturbance. 

H-278
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 119

Black-backed woodpecker (Picoides arcticus)

BLM Sensitive 

These elusive woodpeckers are found year-round from the Alaska Range through most of 

Canada and the Pacific Northwest. Along the pipeline route, they have been documented 

in Douglas, Jackson, and Klamath Counties. 

Black-backed woodpeckers breed in boreal and montane coniferous forests, usually 

recently burned and containing many dead trees (Powell 2003). Many tree species are 

used, including in northeastern Oregon ponderosa pine, lodgepole pine, Douglas-fir, true 

fir, and mountain hemlock. Elevational range in Oregon is approximately 4,000 to 7,800 

feet (Powell 2003). Nest holes are excavated in trees with heartrot at an average of 16 

feet from the ground (Dixon and Saab 2000). Common tree species used by blackbacked woodpeckers for nesting include small diameter (< 20 inches dbh), tall (> 50 feet) 

ponderosa and lodgepole pine and western larch dead less than 5 years (Bull et al. 1986). 

Sites used had a mean canopy closure of 46% and more than 20 dead trees per acre (Bull 

et al. 1986). Nesting begins in mid-May, and young are in the nest until mid-July 

(Powell 2003). The black-backed woodpecker diet consists largely of wood-boring 

beetle larvae and bark beetles (Bull et al. 1986, Powell 2003). 

The global status of the black-backed woodpecker is Secure and its IUCN status is Least 

Concern, though it has probably undergone declines in the last century due to fire 

suppression and logging practices (NatureServe 2008). In Oregon, they are designated 

Sensitive – Critical (ORNHIC 2007). 

Fire suppression is a major cause of habitat degradation for black-backed woodpeckers. 

This species is closely associated with stand-replacement fires, which throughout its 

range is the dominant fire type, and which is also largely suppressed by land managers. 

There is less area of intensely-burned forest at any given time than was present 

historically. Practices meant to simulate the effects of fire, such as forest thinning and 

controlled burning, will not increase habitat for black-backed woodpeckers because they 

will not replicate the large areas of burned, mature trees that a stand-replacement fire 

creates (Powell 2003). 

Two records of this species near the right-of-way have been documented: one of an 

individual 0.9 miles from the pipeline route, and a breeding record from T38S R4E 

Section 5. Black-backed woodpeckers are generally associated with montane mixed 

conifer forests, southwest Oregon mixed conifer-hardwood forests, and ponderosa pine 

forests and woodlands, especially those containing snags. They have an occasional 

association with riparian wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Black-backed 

woodpeckers have been documented in the Lakeview and Medford BLM Districts and 

the Umpqua and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable black-backed woodpecker habitats within 3,200 

feet of the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On 

BLM lands, black-backed woodpeckers have a general association with 157.9 acres to be 

H-279
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 120

removed and 33.0 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, black-backed woodpeckers 

have a close association with 120.8 acres to be removed and 47.1 acres to be modified, 

and a general association with 200.6 acres to be removed and 68.9 acres to be modified 

(table 5). On the west slopes of the Cascades, they are rare to locally common, and are 

more widespread on the east slopes (Powell 2003). A potential negative impact to the 

black-backed woodpecker from the Project is disturbance to breeding birds. Adults 

would be able to temporarily relocate in order to avoid disturbance, but incubating adults 

could be induced to abandon an active nest, leaving eggs or chicks vulnerable to 

predation and the elements. Chicks could also be killed directly if the tree or snag 

containing their nest is felled while occupied. An indirect effect of Project activities 

could be disturbance to wintering birds, possibly lowering their fitness at a colder time of 

year. Right-of-way clearing and pipeline construction could also modify habitat, for 

example by removing snags and dead trees, maintaining younger, live stands of trees, and 

possibly by fire prevention practices. Specific mitigation measures that would help 

minimize impacts to this species include snag creation (see Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects

Black-backed woodpeckers are currently threatened by habitat degradation and loss, 

particularily the loss of mature snags as a result of fire suppression and logging activities. 

Within 3,200 feet of the pipeline, there are 27,860.3 acres of suitable black-backed 

woodpecker habitat that would be impacted by construction-related disturbance and/or 

edge effects until removed vegetation could regrow (table 3). In the case of habitat used 

by the black-backed woodpecker, this would likely take several decades. Both the 

Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) and the 2008 Resource Management Plans 

(BLM land) call for management for snag retention and discuss integrating fire 

appropriately back into ecosystems. If these habitat elements are once again managed 

for, black-backed woodpecker habitat would likely increase in quality in the analysis 

area. As the proposed Project would replace any snags removed, clearing of the right-ofway is unlikely to affect black-backed woodpecker viability. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33 and 68 through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest 

include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and 

thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). These projects 

would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings would most likely 

contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Planned projects in the 

Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the 

Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown 

acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 

acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities could result in cumulative impacts to this 

species. 

Determination of Impact 

H-280
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 121

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Secure and Least Concern global statuses, the mobility of 

the species, and the relatively small amount of their range that would be affected by the 

Project. 

Gray flycatcher (Empidonax wrightii)

USFS Sensitive 

The breeding range for this inconspicuous bird extends from the south Okanagan Valley 

of British Columbia through the Cascade Mountains and encompasses the Great Basin 

high desert region. They winter in southeastern Arizona, Big Bend National Park, and 

most of Mexico. In Oregon, they occur throughout most of the state east of the Cascades, 

though are not as common in northeastern Oregon (Miller 2003). Along the potential 

pipeline route, they have been documented in Jackson County. 

A denizen of dry landscapes, this bird breeds in arid woodlands and shrublands with 

exposed ground with dry washes and gullies (Miller 2003). Common shrub species 

found in gray flycatcher habitat are sagebrush, bitterbrush, antelope brush, and 

rabbitbrush, and common woodland species are mountain mahogany, pinyon pine, 

juniper, and ponderosa pine (Sterling 1999, Miller 2003). During migration, gray 

flycatchers use riparian willow thickets, brush fields, and open areas near water (Sterling 

1999). The principal food taken is insects, which are gleaned from the ground, plants, or 

from the air. The flycatcher perches on the lowest branches of large conifers or on top of 

large shrubs and waits for prey (Sterling 1999). Gray flycatchers build nests mid-May 

through June in crotches of Jeffrey and ponderosa pines, juniper, bitterbrush, and 

sagebrush. 

The global status of the gray flycatcher is Secure and its IUCN status is Least Concern, 

with a range-wide increasing trend of approximately 10 percent, and they have no listing 

status in Oregon (ORNHIC 2007, NatureServe 2008). 

Though increasing in Oregon (Sauer et al. 2008), gray flycatchers are threatened by 

habitat alteration. Chaining of juniper and sagebrush for cattle pasture destroys essential 

habitat (O’Meara et al. 1981), although clear-cutting coniferous forests has been credited 

with causing increases in gray flycatcher populations in certain areas (Miller 2003). Gray 

flycatchers are also vulnerable to human activities such as agriculture and cattle grazing 

that increase brown-headed cowbird populations, which decrease gray flycatcher nesting 

success (Sterling 1999). The gray flycatcher has a close association with western 

juniper/mountain mahogany woodlands and a general association with ponderosa pine 

forests and woodlands and shrub-steppe habitats (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Gray 

flycatchers have been documented in all three National Forests traversed by the pipeline 

route but not on any BLM land. In Oregon they are uncommon to locally fairly common. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

H-281
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 122

The analysis area is all suitable gray flycatcher habitat on National Forest land within 

3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline route. On this land, gray flycatchers have a general 

association with 67.5 acres to be removed and 11.6 acres to be modified (table 5). The 

proposed pipeline project could negatively impact gray flycatchers by disturbing breeding 

birds. Adults would likely be able to temporarily relocate to avoid the disturbance, but 

incubating females could be induced to abandon active nests, leaving eggs and chicks 

vulnerable to predation and exposure. Chicks could also be killed directly if a tree 

containing their nest is felled during right-of-way clearing. The Project could also 

modify habitat by removing preferred vegetation species, possibly causing it to become 

unsuitable. 

Cumulative Effects

Current threats to gray flycatchers include habitat alteration and disturbances that 

increase brown-headed cowbird populations. Management activities on federal lands 

could make habitat unsuitable; in pinyon-juniper woodlands, no breeders were detected 

following chaining of trees, even after 15 years of revegetation (O’Meara et al. 1981). 

Within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline, there are 2,036.0 acres of suitable gray 

flycatcher habitat on National Forest lands that would be impacted by constructionrelated disturbance and/or edge effects until such time that vegetation cleared during 

construction could regrow (table 3). Shrub-steppe habitat in Oregon is prevalent in the 

state, but has suffered widespread losses due to conversion to agriculture and 

development, unmanaged grazing, invasive species, and altered fire regimes (ODFW 

2006). Ponderosa pine woodlands have also decreased in Oregon. While ponderosa 

pines are still common, the key characteristics of historic open ponderosa pine woodlands 

have changed dramatically, mostly due to logging and fire suppression (ODFW 2006). 

Frequent, low-intensity fires formerly kept ponderosa pine woodlands free of understory 

vegetation and mature trees spaced widely from each other no longer occur at their 

historic intervals. This causes buildup of fuels on the forest floor which when fires do 

occur, makes them larger and hotter. Mature ponderosa pines can not always survive 

these more intense fires, and mature trees are lost. Denser stands are also more 

vulnerable to insect and disease outbreaks (ODFW 2006). Only an estimated seven 

percent of historically-structured ponderosa pine forests remain in the Klamath 

Mountains province, most of which are greatly reduced in patch size and connectivity 

(ODFW 2006). Within the analysis area, most (90 percent) of ponderosa pine forests and 

woodlands are late successional or old growth (i.e., older than 80 years; table 3). The 

Northwest Forest Plan includes management practices meant to minimize further forest 

fragmentation (although this is mainly aimed at old-growth forests), which is likely to 

increase the quality of gray flycatcher habitat and minimize invasion by cowbirds. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 34 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, planned projects 

include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning projects 

(1,608.6 acres). On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, there is one planned project 

that involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle. Planned projects on the Umpqua 

National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts 

(286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). 

H-282
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 123

These projects would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings 

would most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Actions 

associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities 

could result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Secure and Least Concern global statuses, the mobility of 

the species, and its apparent ability to adapt to human activity without specific 

management efforts (Sterling 1999). 

Streaked horned lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata)

BLM Sensitive, Federal candidate for listing

Historically, the streaked horned lark bred from the southwestern corner of British 

Columbia through the Puget trough and Willamette Valley, and into the Rouge River 

Valley (Pearson and Altman 2005). This range has constricted severely, however, and in 

Oregon, this subspecies breeds in small, divided populations throughout the Willamette 

Valley and other scattered locations in the north-central part of the state (Altman 2003). 

The streaked horned lark will over-winter in Washington and Oregon, within the 

Willamette and Columbia River valleys and the Port of Portland. Historically, the 

streaked horned lark could be found along the potential pipeline corridor in Douglas and 

Jackson Counties. 

Breeding habitat within Oregon consists of large expanses of herbaceous dominated 

habitat, such as cultivated fields, pastures, roadside shoulders, and wetland mudflats. 

Areas selected for breeding territories generally have at least 17 percent bare ground 

cover, while nesting sites have around 30 percent bare ground (Altman 1999). The 

streaked horned lark begins to actively establish territories in March, and their breeding 

season runs from late March to early August. Wintering habitat typically consists of 

open areas with approximately 85 percent bare ground cover, and little to no rye grass 

(Pearson and Altman 2005). 

Though the global status of E. alpestris as a species is Secure, the status of E. a. strigata

is Imperiled due to restricted range, small population size (500–1,000 individuals), and 

ongoing habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation. They have declined by over 90% 

from historical numbers and continue to decline, though not as precipitously, today 

(NatureServe 2008). They are designated as Sensitive – Critical by the ODFW 

(ORNHIC 2007). 

There are many threats to this species. As these birds are ground nesters, human 

activities which result in ground disturbances have impacted this species. This impact 

has been exacerbated as the streaked horned lark has a tendency to build their nests 

adjacent to dirt roads, making their nests vulnerable to vehicular traffic. In addition, this 

H-283
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 124

lark has been found to abandon nests when disturbed. Flushing distances depend on the 

breeding stage and type of disturbance; however, human activities within 30 m of a nest 

are likely to result in flushing (Pearson and Altman 2005). Habitat loss and exposure to 

agricultural herbicides and pesticides have also impacted this species. Streaked horned 

larks have a close association with west- and eastside grasslands, and a general 

association with shrub-steppe, coastal dunes and beaches, urban areas, and agriculture 

and pastureland (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Streaked horned larks have been 

documented in the Coos Bay BLM District. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes suitable streaked horned lark habitat within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the Coos Bay BLM District. Within this area, streaked horned 

larks have a close association with 1.0 acres to be removed, and a general association 

with 0.9 acres to be removed (table 5). Pipeline construction could affect the streaked 

horned lark by disturbing breeding birds. The adults would likely be able to temporarily 

relocate to avoid the disturbance, but incubating females could be induced to abandon an 

active nest, leaving eggs or chicks vulnerable to predators and exposure. Right-of-way 

clearing and pipeline construction could also modify habitat, although right-of-way 

clearing could initially be beneficial to the streaked horned lark, due to its preference for 

open, herbaceous habitat containing bare ground. 

Cumulative Effects 

Within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline, there are 62.2 acres of suitable streaked 

horned lark habitat in the Coos Bay BLM district; these lands would be impacted by 

construction-related disturbance and/or edge effects which would last until removed 

vegetation could regenerate. In the case of habitats used by the streaked horned lark, this 

would likely take only one year. Native grasslands are one of the most imperiled habitats 

in the western U.S., including Oregon, due to conversion to agriculture, development, 

invasion by non-native plant species, and fire suppression. In the Coast Range and West 

Cascades of Oregon, grassland loss since historical times is estimated at 99 percent 

(ODFW 2006). Sustainable grazing practices help maintain existing grasslands. On 

BLM land, the 2008 Resource Management Plan calls for removal of conifers that are 

encroaching on grasslands, and revegetating degraded areas with native grasses. These 

habitat management practices should increase the quantity and quality of streaked horned 

lark habitat in the future. Coastal dunes have also undergone alterations from their 

original state. Ever-moving, flowing systems under natural conditions, the introduction 

of European beachgrass has artificially stabilized dunes. This prevents new sand from 

moving inland and allows plant succession to proceed, resulting in the encroachment of 

woody shrubs and trees on this habitat type in Oregon. Dune stabilization has also 

opened up this habitat for development and recreation, further eliminating and degrading 

it and disturbing the animals that depend on it (ODFW 2006). The BLM has restored and 

maintained 76 acres of dune habitat on the Coos Bay North Spit. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 54 in the Coos Bay BLM District. These projects include several commercial 

thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two 

H-284
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 125

timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). Actions 

associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities 

could potentially result in minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of their scarcity in the vicinity of the Project. This subspecies is most 

commonly found west of the Cascades, south to the southern Willamette Valley and north 

to the southern Puget Sound area; they are not regularly seen near the proposed pipeline 

route (Altman 2003, Robinson and Moore 2004) and are thus unlikely to be impacted. 

Purple martin (Progne subis)

BLM Sensitive

The breeding range of the purple martin extends east of the Rocky Mountains to the 

coast, and also along the Pacific Northwest coast and in parts of the southwestern U.S.. 

They winter in South America. Within Oregon, the purple martin inhabits the Coast 

Range, Willamette Valley, and numerous colonies along the Columbia River (Marshall et 

al. 2003). 

The timing of spring migration for western populations is uncertain; however, they likely 

begin arriving in Oregon around March and April and continue to arrive until sometime 

in June (Rosenberg et al. 1991, Gilligan et al. 1994, Marshall et al. 2003). Breeding 

groups within Oregon vary from solitary nesting pairs to colonial nesting pairs inhabiting 

a single snag or martin box. They have been found to nest in snags, old pilings, nestboxes, gourds set on poles within fields, and crevices in man-made structures (Marshall 

et al. 2003). Historically, martins nested primarily within snags, but only 5 percent of 

martins in Oregon currently nest in non-man-made structures (Horvath 1999). 

Approximately 70 percent of nesting colonies are found over water; however, adjacent 

water is not a requirement for nesting habitat (Marshall et al. 2003). Nest building occurs 

from May through July, and fledging occurs in July or August. Fall migration typically 

occurs after fledging, with the last martin leaving Oregon about mid September (Marshall 

et al. 2003). 

The global status of the purple martin is Secure and their IUCN status is Least Concern, 

with significant population increases indicated in central and western North America, 

although competition for nest sites with European starlings and house sparrows may be a 

problem in some areas, especially in the west (NatureServe 2008). Purple martins are a 

federal Species of Concern and are designated Sensitive – Critical in Oregon by the 

ODFW due to concern about breeding bird populations (ORNHIC 2007). 

Current population sizes within Oregon are unknown; however, a study conducted by the 

ODFW in 1998 found 784 purple martin pairs distributed within known colony locations 

(Horvath 1999). This species was found in Haynes Inlet, Coos Bay, and Catching 

Slough. Purple martins have a close association with edge habitats near open water, 

H-285
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 126

including lakes, rivers, streams, bays, and estuaries, especially where snags and tree 

cavities are present. They have a general association with westside lowland coniferhardwood forests, westside oak/dry Douglas-fir forests and woodlands, herbaceous and 

riparian wetlands, coastal dunes and beaches, and urban areas, and an occasional 

association with westside grasslands and agriculture and pastureland (Johnson and O’Neil 

2001). Purple martins have been documented in the Coos Bay and Roseburg BLM 

Districts and are suspected to occur in the Medford District. Purple martins are 

uncommon locally during the summer in Oregon. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes suitable purple martin habitat within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. Within those 

boundaries, purple martins have a close association with 0.9 acres to be removed and less 

than 0.1 acres to be modified, and a general association with 222.2 acres to be removed 

and 23.4 acres to be modified (table 5). Pipeline construction could negatively impact 

this species by reducing the availability of nesting habitat by removing snags, a vital 

habitat component, in the right-of-way. Eggs or chicks could also be harmed if snags 

containing active nests are felled. Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize 

impacts to this species include snag creation and installation of artificial nest structures 

(see Appendix N of the BA). The Project could also cause disturbance that could impact 

this species. 

Cumulative Effects 

Current threats to the purple martin include activities that increase starling and house 

sparrow populations, as these species compete with purple martins for nest cavities. 

Within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline, there are 15,409.7 acres of suitable purple 

martin habitat on BLM land; these acres would be impacted by construction-related 

disturbance and/or edge effects, until such time that removed vegetation could regrow 

(table 3). Purple martins are able to use a wide variety of habitats, especially if manmade nest structures that exclude invasive species are provided. Due to their wide habitat 

preferences, these birds would presumably be able to move to and utilize new areas if a 

certain location were temporarily made unsuitable. At the same time, most of the habitats 

used by purple martins have been impacted severely in the past 200 years. Development 

has concentrated around waterways, increasing disturbance and eliminating habitat. 

Wetlands have been drained and converted to agriculture, huge amounts of grassland 

habitat has been lost, and coastal dune habitat has likewise been degraded. The 2008 

Resource Management Plans for BLM land address many of these issues, and 

management activities taking place within the analysis area should increase the quality of 

purple martin habitat in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 75 (table 10). Planned projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include several 

commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 

acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown 

acreage). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat 

restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber 

H-286
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 127

sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber 

sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of its Secure and Least Concern global statuses, its ability to utilize a 

variety of habitat types, and the temporary nature of the project-related disturbance. 

Oregon vesper sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus affinis)

BLM Sensitive

This subspecies of vesper sparrow forms a distinct population, which is separated from 

the core population of vesper sparrows by the densely forested Cascade Mountains 

(COSEWIC 2006). The Oregon vesper sparrow breeds along the Pacific Northwest coast 

and on islands (Rogers 2000; Marshall et al. 2003; COSEWIC 2006). Along the potential 

pipeline corridor, they can be found in Coos, Douglas, and Jackson Counties. 

Preferred habitat for the Oregon vesper sparrow consists of dry, sparsely vegetated, 

grassland habitats with bare ground and a few scattered trees or shrubs which this 

sparrow will utilize as perching structures (Rodgers 2000). The Oregon vesper sparrow 

avoids grasslands adjacent to urban areas, grazed pastures, and hayfields (Campbell et al. 

2001; Jones and Bock 2002). It has been suggested that patch size is also important in 

determining the suitability of grassland habitat for the Oregon vesper sparrow (Rogers 

2000); however, this species has been found in patches less than 10 acres within Oregon 

(Jones and Cornely 2002). 

The Oregon vesper sparrow is a ground nester whose breeding season runs from 

approximately late April to mid-July (COSEWIC 2006). Nests are typically built on 

level ground or within a slight depression and are hidden within tufts of vegetation. 

Because this species nests on the ground, disturbance such as mowing, grazing, or other 

ground disturbing activities have had impacts (COSEWIC 2006). 

While the global status of vesper sparrows is Secure, the global status for P. g. affinis is 

Vulnerable, and anecdotal information indicates substantial population declines in the last 

40 to 50 years (Altman 2003b, NatureServe 2008). This subspecies is also designated as 

Sensitive – Critical in Oregon (ORNHIC 2007). Current populations are small, with an 

estimated 5 to 10 breeding pairs in Canada and 125 singing males in Washington 

(COSEWIC 2006). Population estimates in Oregon are highly uncertain. Likely causes 

of decline are loss of native grassland and shrub-steppe habitat to agriculture and urban 

and suburban development, chick mortality due to livestock trampling, and increased nest 

predation by mammals associated with suburban areas such as skunks, raccoons, and 

housecats (Altman 2003b). 

H-287
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 128

During surveys, this species was found within meadows and young clearcuts along the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, but no records of the exact locations were 

maintained. Vesper sparrows have a close association with shrub-steppe, west- and 

eastside grasslands, and agriculture and pastureland. They have a general association 

with southwest Oregon mixed conifer and hardwood forests, and western 

juniper/mountain mahogany woodlands (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Oregon vesper 

sparrows have been documented in the Coos Bay and Roseburg BLM Districts and the 

Umpqua and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable Oregon vesper sparrow habitats within 3,200 feet 

of the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM 

lands, Oregon vesper sparrows have a close association with 5.0 acres to be removed and 

1.6 acres to be modified, and a general association with 210.3 acres to be removed and 

149.4 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, Oregon vesper sparrows have a close 

association with 14.0 acres to be removed and 0.5 acres to be modified, and a general 

association with 192.8 acres to be removed and 66.4 acres to be modified (table 5). 

Pipeline construction could affect the Oregon vesper sparrow by disturbing breeding 

birds. Adults would likely be able to escape disturbance by temporarily relocating, but 

incubating adults could be induced to abandon active nests, leaving eggs or chicks 

vulnerable to predation or exposure. Active ground nests could also be crushed by 

equipment, directly killing eggs or chicks. An indirect effect that could result from 

disturbance is during winter, when it could cause accelerated use of bodily energy 

reserves and lowered fitness by individuals during the colder time of year. 

Cumulative Effects 

Within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline, there are 21,757.0 acres of suitable Oregon 

vesper sparrow habitat on BLM and National Forest lands (table 3). These acres of 

habitat would be impacted by construction-related disturbance and/or edge effects until 

vegetation that would be removed can regenerate. In the case of habitat used by Oregon 

vesper sparrows, this would take only one (for grass and forbs) to several years (for 

shrubs). Shrub-steppe habitat in Oregon is prevalent in the state, but has also suffered 

widespread losses due to conversion to agriculture and development, unmanaged grazing, 

invasive species, and altered fire regimes (ODFW 2006). Grassland habitats have also 

experienced drastic declines along the Oregon coast (estimated to be 99 percent in the 

Coast Range and West Cascades), but more modern management practices, including 

sustainable grazing models, removal of encroaching trees, and replanting with native 

grassland species, are attempting to arrest this reduction (ODFW 2006). 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33 and 35 through 67 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest 

include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and 

thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). These projects 

would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings would most likely 

H-288
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 129

contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Planned projects in the Coos 

Bay BLM District include several commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), 

various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a 

land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District 

include four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 

acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Actions associated with this project combined 

with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of the fact that the analysis area is a very small portion of this species’ 

suitable range. 

Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Assessment 

More than 99 percent of the restricted range of this blackbird is in California. In Oregon 

there are scattered, intermittent breeding colonies, most consistently in Klamath and 

Jackson Counties, but also in Lake, Crook, and Umatilla Counties (Spencer 2003d). 

Nesting colonies are established in freshwater marshes dominated by cattails or hardstem 

bulrush; nettles, thistles, willows, Himalayan blackberries, and other substrates are also 

used (Beedy and Hamilton 1999, Spencer 2003d). Colonies can be huge and include up 

to 100,000 nests, with nests only a foot apart from each other (Beedy and Hamilton 1999, 

Spencer 2003d). Males arrive and begin defending territories in late February. Eggs are 

laid mid-March through early April, hatching occurs in June and July, and breeding 

colonies are usually abandoned by mid-August (Beedy and Hamilton 1999). 

Tricolored blackbirds will follow and consume any locally abundant insect resource 

including grasshoppers, and also take grains, snails, and small clams (Beedy and 

Hamilton 1999). Important foraging habitats are dairies, feedlots, irrigated pastures, 

lightly grazed rangelands, dry seasonal pools, and mowed alfalfa fields (Beedy and 

Hamilton 1997). 

The global status of the tricolored blackbird is Imperiled, and its IUCN status is Least 

Concern. Although it is still relatively abundant, major declines have occurred over the 

last decade. Adults in California numbered at least 162,000 in 2000, and there are 3,000 

to 4,000 estimated in Oregon (NatureServe 2008). They are designated as Sensitive – 

Peripheral or Naturally Rare in Oregon by the ODFW (ORNHIC 2007). 

Populations of tricolored blackbirds in Oregon are in decline (Sauer et al. 2008) due to 

elimination of habitat by burning and plowing, loss of food resources, and pesticide 

application (Spencer 2003d). Large areas of historical nesting colonies in the Central 

H-289
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 130

Valley of California have been converted to agriculture and urban areas (Beedy and 

Hamilton 1997). Mowing during the spring can also destroy nests that have already been 

built (Beedy and Hamilton 1999). Eggs contaminated with agricultural pollutants and 

pesticides can fail to hatch, sometimes resulting in losses of entire colonies (Beedy and 

Hamilton 1999). 

Two records of this species near the proposed right-of-way are known, one 1.0 mile from 

the pipeline and one 1.8 miles away. Tricolored blackbirds have a close association with 

herbaceous wetlands and an occasional association with agriculture and pasturelands 

(Johnson and O’Neil 2001). This species is scattered and intermittent in Oregon. They 

have been documented in the Lakeview BLM District and are suspected in the FremontWinema and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable tricolored blackbird habitats within 3,200 feet of 

the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On USFS 

lands, tricolored blackbirds have a close association with 0.4 acres to be removed and 0.1 

acres to be modified (table 5). Pipeline construction could affect tricolored blackbirds by 

disturbing breeding birds. Adults would likely be able to escape disturbance by 

temporarily relocating, but incubating females could be induced to abandon active nests, 

leaving eggs or chicks vulnerable to predation or exposure. Excessive disturbance by 

humans at colonies can cause abandonment of active nests (Beedy and Hamilton 1999). 

An indirect effect that could result from disturbance is during winter, when it could cause 

accelerated use of bodily energy reserves and lowered fitness by individuals during the 

colder time of year. 

Cumulative Effects

There is a total of 179.6 acres of suitable tricolored blackbird habitat within 3,200 feet of 

the proposed pipeline. These would be impacted by construction-related disturbance 

and/or edge effect until such time that cleared vegetation could regenerate. In the case of 

habitat types frequented by tricolored blackbirds, this would likely take no more than a 

few years. Though one-third of Oregon wetlands, the main type of habitat used by 

tricolored blackbirds, are estimated to have been lost since the late 1700s, wetlands are 

now protected under federal law, and loss of estuarine wetlands has slowed substantially 

since the mid-1900s (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and 

Recreation Division 1989, Dahl 1990). The Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) and 

the 2008 Resource Management Plans (BLM land) also protect wetlands through land use 

allocations and directed management techniques; this should improve the quantity and 

quality of tricolored blackbird habitat in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 19 

through 34, and 76 through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, there is one 

planned project that involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle. These projects would 

be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings would most likely 

H-290
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 131

contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. In the Lakeview BLM 

District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels 

treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking 

lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities would not likely result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of their Least Concern global status, the very small fraction of their 

total population that occurs in Oregon, the location of the Project on the periphery of their 

range, and federal protection of their habitat type on lands in the analysis area. 

REPTILES 

Surveys were not conducted specifically for special status reptiles; however, special 

status species were documented if observed during other survey activities. The 

information on special status species occurrence is based on several data sources 

including the BLM GeoBOB database (BLM 2006), ORNHIC species request (ORNHIC 

2006), Forest Service database (USFS 2006), aerial photos, and Geographical 

Information System (GIS). 

Northwestern pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata marmorata)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Sensitive 

The northwestern pond turtle is found in the Puget Sound region, the Willamette Valley 

of Oregon, southwest Oregon, and the western half of California including the Central 

Valley. In Oregon, they have been found up to elevations of 3,000 feet (Storm and 

Leonard 1995). Northwestern pond turtles are most common in large river basins in 

southern Oregon (Storm and Leonard 1995). Along the potential pipeline route, they 

have been found at many locations near the right-of-way, including several locations 

within a half-mile. Northwestern pond turtles live in permanent or intermittent mudbottomed lakes, marshes, sloughs, and slow-moving rivers that have basking sites such as 

logs or rocks, which are important for thermoregulation (Storm and Leonard 1995, St. 

John 2002). Nests can be several hundred meters from water in a variety of vegetation 

types, and adults sometimes hibernate as far as 1,600 feet from water (Csuti et al. 2001). 

Their diet includes crayfish, insects, amphibian eggs and larvae, and aquatic plants (St. 

John 2002). 

Numbers of northwestern pond turtles are apparently declining, especially in the northern 

part of their range. They are no longer present throughout most of the historic range. 

Many turtle populations were depleted in the early 1900s when they were harvested for 

food. 

H-291
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 132

Threats include habitat alteration and fragmentation, and disease (Storm and Leonard 

1995). Eggs and young are also vulnerable to increasing predation by introduced 

bullfrogs, fish species, and raccoons, which are drawn to some areas where pond turtles 

live by human activity at campsites, resorts, and other developments. (St. John 2002). 

According to Johnson and O’Neil (2001), western pond turtles have close associations 

with westside oak and dry douglas-fir forest and woodlands, herbaceous wetlands, 

westside and eastside riparian wetlands, and open water. They have a general association 

with southwest Oregon mixed conifer and hardwood forests, ponderosa pine forest and 

woodlands, and westside grassland; thay have an occasional association with westside 

lowland confier and hardwood forests, shrub-steppe, developed urban and mixed 

environs, and agriculture and pastures. Northwestern pond turtles have been 

documented on the Coos, Lakeview, Medford, and Roseburg BLM Districts, and the 

Fremont-Winema, Rogue River, and Umpqua National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable northwestern pond turtle habitats within 3,200 feet 

of the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM 

lands, northwestern pond turtles have a close association with 35.1 acres to be removed 

and 4.5 acres to be modified, and a general association with 575.7 acres to be removed 

and 202.7 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, northwestern pond turtles have a close 

association with 1.1 acres to be removed and 0.2 acres to be modified, and a general 

association with 305.6 acres to be removed and 81.4 acres to be modified (table 5). The 

pipeline project could affect these turtles by direct mortality if individuals were not able 

to get out of the way of construction, or if emerging juveniles, nests, or eggs were in the 

proposed right-of-way. Indirect mortality could result form the alteration of composition 

and structure of vegetation resulting in changes in microclimate and prey base. 

Additionally, the right-of-way could act as a corridor that could facilitate the spread of 

nonnative predators such as bullfrogs and raccoons. 

Cumulative Effects

There are 50,674.6 acres of suitable northwestern pond turtle habitat on BLM and Forest 

Service land within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline (table 3). They would be 

impacted during construction by disturbance, and afterward by edge effects until 

vegetation grew back. Due to their wide habitat preferences, northwestern pond turtles 

would presumably be able utilize different areas if a certain location were temporarily 

made unsuitable. At the same time, most of the habitats used by these turtles have been 

impacted severely in the past 200 years, and these animals are not especially mobile. 

Development has concentrated around bodies of water, increasing disturbance, 

eliminating habitat, and encouraging the spread of mesopredators. Wetlands have been 

drained and converted to agriculture, huge amounts of grassland habitat has been lost, 

and coastal dune habitat has likewise been degraded. The Northwest Forest Plan 

(National Forests) and the 2008 Resource Management Plans (BLM land) address many 

of these issues, and management activities taking place within the analysis area should 

increase the quality of northwest pond turtle habitat in the future. 

H-292
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 133

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, planned projects 

include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning projects 

(1,608.6 acres). On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, there is one planned project 

that involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle. Planned projects on the Umpqua 

National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts 

(286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). 

Planned projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include several commercial thinning 

projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales 

(2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in 

the Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat restoration projects, several 

commercial thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned 

projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown 

acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, 

unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings 

(388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). The large number of thinnings combined with 

the fish habitat restoration would most likely contribute to the long term health of the 

ecosystem. However, the timber sales, grazing allotments, and clearcuts could contribute 

to habitat alteration and disturbance within the vicinity of the proposed Project. Actions 

associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities 

could potentially result in minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of the fact that the analysis area is a very small portion of this 

species’ suitable range and due to the wide range of habitats used by these turtles. 

Common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getula)

USFS Sensitive 

The common kingsnake can be found from coast to coast, as far north as New Jersey on 

the east coast and Oregon on the west coast, and in north and central Mexico (Bartlet and 

Tennant 2000). The kingsnake inhabits a wide variety of habitats including conifer 

forests, woodlands, wetlands, riparian areas, coastal marshes, river bottoms, farmlands, 

prairie/grasslands, chaparral, and deserts (Stebbins 1985). Within southwestern Oregon, 

it is typically found at low elevations within moist riparian habitats. Along the pipeline 

corridor, they are known to occur within Douglas, Jackson, and Klamath Counties. Near 

the analysis area, they have been documented within the BLM’s Medford District, 

approximately 0.5 mile east of MP 141.58. 

 

Kingsnakes are most active in April to October. Mating occurs during this time, with 

females laying between 2 and 24 eggs in May and August and incubation taking 

approximately 47 to 81 days (Stebbins 1985, Bartlet and Tennant 2000). Kingsnakes 

H-293
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 134

have a broad diet base, and will consume other snakes, lizards, small turtles, frogs, eggs, 

birds, and small mammals (Stebbins 1985). 

This species is considered common within most of North America; however, it is rare 

within the analysis area, as southwestern Oregon is on the very northern edge of its range. 

Generally, this species is described as stable to relatively stable (NatureServe 2008). No 

major threats to this species have been identified, but local declines have occurred in 

areas of human development (NatureServe 2008). The common kingsnake has a general 

association with westside lowland conifer-hardwood-forest, southwest Oregon mixed 

conifer-hardwood forst, westside oak/dry Douglas-fir forests and woodlands, westside 

grasslands, and agriculture and pastureland. It has an occasional association with westand eastside riparian wetlands and developed urban and mixed environs. This species is 

suspected to occur in the Coos Bay BLM District, and on Rogue River and Umpqua 

National Forests; it has been documented in Lakeview, Medford, and Roseburg BLM 

Districts. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable common kingsnake habitats within 3,200 feet of 

the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM 

lands, common kingsnakes have a general association with 539.8 acres to be removed 

and 199.9 acres to be modified. On USFS lands, common kingsnakes have a general 

association with 219.7 acres to be removed and 66.5 acres to be modified (table 5). The 

proposed Project could result in direct mortality to individuals, especially newly-hatched 

juveniles, if they were not able to get out of the way of construction. Habitat could be 

modified by the construction of the project, thereby decreasing the amount of suitable 

habitat available to this species. Lastly, disturbance to this species could cause a decrease 

in fitness. Disturbance could occur during clearing, which would take place from April 

to November, and construction, from April to November the following year. Each area 

along the pipeline would likely be exposed to disturbance for approximately eight weeks. 

Cumulative Effects 

Within 3,200 feet of the pipeline, there are 44,477.7 acres of suitable common kingsnake 

habitat on BLM and Forest Service lands (table 3). These areas would be impacted by 

construction-related disturbance and/or edge effect, until vegetation removed could 

regrow. Because this species uses a wide variety of habitats, it is expected that it would 

be able to switch its use over to an alternate area if a particular location temporarily 

became unsuitable. Riparian areas and wetlands, which are used by common kingsnakes, 

have been damaged and removed by logging practices, draining, and conversion to other 

uses. However, the Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Service land) and the 2008 Resource 

Management Plans (BLM land) have special land use allocations around wetlands and 

riparian areas that protect these areas. This will likely lead to improved quantity and 

quality of suitable common kingsnake habitat on federal lands within the analysis area. 

Other planned management activities on federal lands could contribute to the further loss 

or degradation of the common kingsnake’s habitat. Other projects that are planned within 

the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 through 33 and 35 through 83 (table 

H-294
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 135

10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, planned projects include two large 

grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). 

Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock 

source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel 

reductions (unknown acreage). These projects would be consistent with the NWFP and 

the large number of thinnings would most likely contribute to the long term health of the 

forest ecosystems. Planned projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include several 

commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 

acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown 

acreage). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat 

restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber 

sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber 

sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, planned projects 

include a timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), 

several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions 

associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities 

could potentially result in minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because the population is widespread, the species uses a wide range of habitats, 

and the analysis area represents a very small portion of its suitable habitat within the 

occupied range. 

AMPHIBIANS 

Surveys were not conducted specifically for special status amphibians; however, special 

status species were documented if observed during other survey activities. The 

information on special status species occurrence is based on several data sources 

including the BLM GeoBOB database (BLM 2006), ORNHIC species request (ORNHIC 

2006), Forest Service database (USFS 2006), aerial photos, and Geographical 

Information System (GIS). 

Southern torrent salamander (Rhyacotriton variegatus)

USFS Sensitive 

This salamander is found in the Coast Range from the Little Nestucca River in Oregon 

south to Mendocino County, California, including all of Coos County (Welsh and 

Karraker 2005). Adult southern torrent salamanders are found in cold, clear springs and 

streams, seeps, and waterfalls, especially in shallow, rocky areas with faster-moving 

water, for example a running seep in a talus field (Corkran and Thoms 2006). They are 

strongly associated with non-fish-bearing waters high in the stream network (Jackson et 

al. 2003). Adults may also be found under debris on streambanks or in streamside forests 

H-295
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 136

during rainy periods (Corkran and Thoms 2006). They typically occur in older forest 

sites with large conifers, abundant moss, and > 80% canopy closure; required 

microclimatic and microhabitat conditions generally exist only in older forests, although 

young, managed forests may be occupied as long as the required microhabitats are 

present (NatureServe 2009). Larvae are usually found in deeper water than adults 

(Leonard et al. 1993). Its diet consists primarily of springtails and small insects (Leonard 

et al. 1993). Density is generally not more than about 5-6 per square meter, but 

sometimes up to about 30-40 per square meter (Johnson and O’Neil 2001, NatureServe 

2009). Known separation barriers are more than 50 m of upland habitat; a warm or slow 

low-gradient stream; and impoundment or lake (NatureServe 2009). Perhaps because 

they are very sensitive to drying out (Ray 1958), torrent salamanders are relatively 

sedentary, remaining near water and seldom moving more than 6 feet from one location 

(Nussbaum and Tait 1977). Individuals have been found more than 150 feet from 

permanent water, but such movements are thought to be rare (Good and Wake 1992). 

This species is described as having a long term moderate decline (NatureServe 2008). 

The populations that could be affected by the proposed action include those in Coos Bay 

and an isolated population occurring in Douglas County in the eastern portion of the 

species’ range. 

This species is sensitive to increased temperature and sedimentation such as may result 

from logging or road construction (Welsh and Ollivier 1998). However, FWS (2000) 

concluded that current regulatory practices do not constitute a threat. FWS (2000) 

determined that the species currently is not threatened by logging or other habitat 

alterations but noted that the most vulnerable populations are those at the southern and 

eastern edges of the range. Several studies have documented greater abundance of torrent 

salamanders in old-growth forests compared to younger stands (Ashton 2002; Corn and 

Bury 1989; Corn and Bury 1991; Vesely and McComb 2002; Welsh and Lind 1991). 

Reasons for reduced population density in logged areas may include loss of optimal 

microclimate conditions due to canopy removal, and reduced habitat quality due to 

sedimentation (Nordstrom 1997). Timber harvest and associated road construction 

activities may increase the risk of debris torrents, causing scouring and increase the 

presence of fine sediments in headwaters and high-gradient streams (Swanston and 

Swanson 1976). Jackson et al. (2003) documented dramatic increases in the proportion 

of fine sediments in stream channels following clearcut harvest of adjacent timber stands, 

but found no significant differences among treatments in response by torrent 

salamanders. 

In managed landscapes, torrent salamander abundance appears to be closely tied to 

landform characteristics and parent geology. In managed forests of northern California, 

Diller and Wallace (1996) found that geology, and specifically the presence of 

consolidated lithologies, was the only landscape variable that predicted presence of 

torrent salamanders. Vesely and McComb (2002) concluded that riparian buffers 

decrease salamander declines following logging, but that current buffer requirements in 

many areas may be inadequate to prevent local declines in amphibian diversity. 

H-296
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 137

The southern torrent salamander uses different habitats where water is present. It has a 

close association with westside and eastside riparian wetlands, a general association with 

westside lowland conifer-hardwood forest and montane mixed conifer forest, and an 

occasional association with southwest Oregon mixed conifer-hardwood forest and 

westside oak/dry Douglas-fir forest and woodlands (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). This 

species has been documented on the Umpqua National Forest, within 0.53-miles of the 

analysis area. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes aquatic areas within the habitats described above that occur on 

the Umpqua National Forest within 700 feet of the proposed pipeline route. Within the 

Umpqua National Forest, southern torrent salamanders are associated with 13.9 acres of 

riparian habitat potentially affected by construction (table 6), and 0.2 acres of open water 

(rivers and streams; table 5). The riparian areas are associated with 9 perennial or 

unknown flow streams, 8 of which encompass a site potential tree height of 187 feet, and 

1 of 159 feet (Table 6). During construction, adults and juveniles could suffer direct 

mortality from trampling during waterbody crossings, and this species could also 

experience habitat loss due to construction. Indirect effects could result from the 

alteration of composition and structure of vegetation resulting in changes in microclimate 

and prey base, and increased sedimentation. Since these salamanders can move up to 50 

m, the construction corridor should not constitute a movement barrier. Best Management 

Practices in stream crossing and restoration including replanting riparian vegetation and 

reshaping channel contours should result in relatively short-term habitat effects. 

Cumulative Effects

Although this species is sensitive to habitat disturbance, including sedimentation and 

changes in water temperature, it currently is not experiencing any known population 

declines due to logging or other habitat alterations. There are 4.41 acres of suitable 

southern torrent salamander habitat in the Umpqua National Forest within 700 feet of the 

pipeline route (table 2). These would be impacted by construction-related disturbance 

and/or edge effects until removed vegetation could regenerate. A smaller number of 

acres would be affected by edge along the maintained pipeline corridor for the life of the 

project. Southern torrent salamander habitat has been negatively impacted by human 

activities over the last 200 years. Development has tended to concentrate around bodies 

of water, increasing disturbance, eliminating habitat, and encouraging the spread of 

mesopredators where these salamanders live. Wetlands have also been lost due to 

draining and conversion to other land uses. Though one-third of Oregon wetlands are 

estimated to have been lost since the late 1700s, wetlands are now protected under federal 

law, and loss of estuarine wetlands has slowed substantially since the mid-1900s (Oregon 

Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division 1989, Dahl 

1990). Riparian areas have also decreased dramatically, their acreage and connectivity 

lost to development, logging, and grazing. The Northwest Forest Plan protects riparian 

areas and wetlands and buffers around them, which could benefit the southern torrent 

salamander (ODFW 2006). Federal protection of waterbodies, wetlands, and riparian 

H-297
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 138

areas will likely increase the quantity and quality of southern torrent salamander habitat 

in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 18 on the Umpqua National Forest. These projects include a range allotment, a 

new rock source, and a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres). As 

these actions could potentially degrade stream habitat, actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impacts Determination

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species”. This effects determination is made because we can assume that some 

individuals would likely be impacted, but considering the small amount of overall habitat 

within the range of the species that would be impacted by the proposed Project and Best 

Management Practices being used for waterbody crossings, it is unlikely to cause 

significant long-term effects to the population. 

Foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Assessment

The range of the foothill yellow-legged frog extends from the Willamette Valley to 

southwestern Oregon to northwestern California and down the coastal ranges and Sierra 

Nevada Mountains to the Los Angeles area (Fellers 2005). These frogs could be 

encountered along the pipeline route in Coos, Douglas, and Jackson Counties (Leonard et 

al. 1993). This species stays very close to permanent streams with rocky, gravelly, or 

sandy bottoms (Leonard et al. 1993), though cobble-sized rocks are necessary for egglaying (Fellers 2005). They breed from early April to early June (Leonard et al. 1993, 

Fellers 2005). Diets include flies, moths, hornets, ants, beetles, grasshoppers, water 

striders, and snails (Fellers 2005). The closest location at which this species has been 

documented to the analysis area is 1.1 miles away. 

This species is described as declining (NatureServe 2008). In Oregon, it appears to be 

extirpated from 55% of its historical range (Csuti et al. 2001). Threats include habitat 

alteration, stream scouring, introduced species (including bullfrogs), riverine and riparian 

impacts of non-selective logging practices, changes in flow regimes, and airborne 

chemicals (NatureServe 2008). 

 

Johnson and O’Neil (2001) describe this species as requiring water and having general 

associations with westside lowland conifer-hardwood forests, southwest Oregon mixed 

conifer-hardwood forests, westside and eastside riparian wetlands and occasional 

associations with ponderosa pine forest and woodlands, westside oak/dry Douglas-fir 

forest and woodlands, westside grasslands, developed urban and mixed environs, and 

agriculture, pastures, and mixed environs. This species has been documented on BLM 

H-298
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 139

Coos Bay, Medford, and Roseburg districts, and Rogue River and Umpqua National 

Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes aquatic areas within the above listed habitat types, 3,200 feet 

of the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM 

lands, foothill yellow-legged frogs have an association with 0.9 acres open water to be 

removed, and less than 0.1 acres open water to be modified (table 5); they are associated 

with 72.6 acres riparian habitat potentially affected by construction (table 6). On USFS 

lands, foothill yellow-legged frogs have an association with 0.4 acres of open water to be 

removed, and 0.1 acres of open water to be modified (table 5); they are associated with 

17.3 acres riparian habitat potentially affected by construction (table 6). During 

construction, adults and juveniles could suffer direct mortality from trampling during 

water body crossings, and this species could also experience habitat loss due to 

construction. Indirect mortality could result from the alteration of composition and 

structure of vegetation resulting in changes in microclimate and prey base. Additionally, 

the right-of-way corridor could serve as an opening to increase the spread of bullfrogs. 

 

Cumulative Effects 

There are 46,291.6 acres of suitable foothill yellow-legged frog habitat on Forest Service 

and BLM lands within 3,200 feet of the pipeline route (table 3). These would be 

impacted by construction-related disturbance and/or edge effects until removed 

vegetation could regenerate. A smaller number of acres would be affected by edge along 

the maintained pipeline corridor for the life of the project. Foothill yellow-legged frog 

habitat has been negatively impacted by human activities over the last 200 years. 

Development has tended to concentrated around bodies of water, increasing disturbance, 

eliminating habitat, and encouraging the spread of mesopredators where these frogs live. 

Wetlands have also been lost due to draining and conversion to other land uses. Though 

one-third of Oregon wetlands are estimated to have been lost since the late 1700s, 

wetlands are now protected under federal law, and loss of estuarine wetlands has slowed 

substantially since the mid-1900s (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State 

Parks and Recreation Division 1989, Dahl 1990). The Northwest Forest Plan (National 

Forests) and the 2008 Resource Management Plans (BLM land) also protect wetlands 

(USFS and BLM 1994). Riparian areas have also decreased dramatically, their acreage 

and connectivity lost to development, logging, and grazing. The Northwest Forest Plan 

and Resource Management Plans protect riparian areas by designating protected areas 

with specific management objectives around streams, ponds, and lakes. Federal 

protection of water bodies, wetlands, and riparian areas will likely increase the quantity 

and quality of foothill yellow-legged frog habitat in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33 and 35 through 75 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest 

include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and 

thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). Planned 

H-299
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 140

projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include several commercial thinning projects (at 

least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, 

unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the 

Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial 

thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the 

Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). The 

large number of thinnings and the fish habitat restorations would most likely contribute to 

the long term health of the ecosystems; however, the clearcuts, timber sales, and grazing 

allotments could contribute to the further loss or degradation of the foothill yellow-legged 

frog’s habitat. Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal cumulative impacts to this 

species. 

Impacts Determination

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable 

habitat for this species, and within that area only a narrow swath through the larger area 

of suitable habitat. 

TERRESTRIAL INVERTEBRATES 

Surveys were conducted for special status mollusks in accordance with the “Survey 

Protocol for Survey and Manage Terrestrial Mollusk Species from the Northwest Forest 

Plan, Version 3.0” (USDA 2003). Surveys were conducted between March 17 and May 

23, 2007 and October 13 and November 16, 2007. The area considered for potential 

habitat in the analysis area included all federal lands in Douglas and Jackson counties and 

the region in Klamath county capable of supporting special-status terrestrial mollusk 

species. For further detail on survey methodology and results please see the 2008 

Biological Survey Report. 

Evening fieldslug (Deroceras hesperium)

BLM Sensitive 

This terrestrial slug has been documented in several provinces in Oregon, but the 

majority of currently documented sites occur on the eastern slopes of the Oregon 

Cascades. The range of this species extends into western Washington and north to 

Vancouver Island, B.C. Diet for other Deroceras species is thought to consist of 

microorganisms and plant matter scraped from the surfaces of rocks, decaying wood, leaf 

litter, and green vegetation. 

This species has a global status of Imperiled (NatureServe 2008). It is rare throughout its 

range, not being found as expected in many areas of apparently suitable habitat (Burke 

1998). Human-caused threats to this species include habitat loss from fire and from 

H-300
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 141

draining and conversion of wet meadows. The evening fieldslug is associated with 

perennially wet meadows in forested habitats, specifically in a variety of low vegetation, 

litter, and debris. It appears that the species is almost always found in or near herbaceous 

vegetation at the interface between soil and water, and is restricted to within 98 feet of 

perennial wetlands, springs, seeps, and riparian areas (Burke 1998). This species was 

documented during surveys for this project on the Umpqua National Forest. This species 

has also been documented on the BLM Lakeview and Medford districts, and the 

Umpqua, Fremont-Winema, and Rogue River National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

Since the evening fieldslug is restricted to aquatic areas and immediately adjacent 

habitats, the analysis area includes wetlands and riparian areas and the adjacent 98 feet 

within 700 feet of the pipeline in the districts discussed above. There are 34.1 acres of 

wetland and riparian habitat potentially affected by the project on BLM lands, and 25.0 

acres of wetland and riparian habitat potentially affected by the project on USFS lands 

(table 5). Direct mortality could occur to this species if they are located within the rightof-way during project clearing or construction, as they would be largely unable to escape 

due to lack of mobility. Indirect mortality could result from the alteration of composition 

and structure of vegetation resulting in changes in microclimate. 

Cumulative Effects 

Suitable habitat for the evening fieldslug has been negatively impacted by human actions 

in the past 200 years. Forested areas have been extensively logged in many areas of 

Oregon, and wetlands and wet meadows have been drained, converted to other uses, and 

trampled by livestock. Down wood has also decreased in many areas due to certain 

logging practices and slash burning. On BLM and Forest Service land within the analysis 

area, wetlands and riparian areas are protected under the 2008 Resource Management 

Plans and Northwest Forest Plan, respectively. These land use plans and associated 

management activities should improve and increase evening fieldslug habitat in the 

analysis area. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 34 and 68 through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, there is one 

planned project that involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle. Planned projects on 

the Umpqua National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of 

clearcuts (286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown 

acreage). These projects would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of 

thinnings would most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. 

Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, 

unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale 

(1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial 

thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

H-301
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 142

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the location of the proposed Project is on the periphery of its known range; 

these snails have historically been reported only from northwestern Oregon, western 

Washington, and Vancouver Island (Burke 1998). Although this species has only been 

recently discovered in southern Oregon, based on where it has been documented in the 

past, it is likely that any individuals affected by project construction would constitute 

only a small and marginal fraction of the species’ entire distribution. 

Oregon shoulderband (Helminthoglypta hertleini)

BLM Sensitive 

This land snail is endemic to northern California and Jackson, Josephine, and Douglas 

Counties in Oregon (Duncan 2004). It is found in habitat characterized by rocky areas 

with woody debris in forest habitats, often adjacent to grassy or seasonally herbaceous 

areas (Duncan 2004). They are often associated with dry conifer and mixed coniferhardwood forest communities with at least a fair amount of canopy cover, as well as oak 

communities (Duncan 2004). Daily refugia are often in woody debris or deciduous leaf 

litter, while seasonal refugia are in talus deposits with stable interstitial spaces where 

these snails are protected from fire and predation during inactive times of the year 

(Duncan 2004). Their diet consists of vegetation, leaf and needle litter, and fungi 

(Duncan 2004). 

This species has a global status of critically imperiled (NatureServe 2008). Threats 

include habitat alteration and fragmentation (Duncan 2004). Oregon shoulderbands have 

a restricted range and cannot tolerate xeric conditions, and may be especially impacted by 

unavailability of suitable refugia (Duncan 2004). Another threat is high-intensity fires, 

which can fatally impact all Oregon shoulderbands in the burn area (Duncan 2004). This 

species is most often associated with dry conifer and mixed conifer-hardwood forests and 

oak woodlands. This species was detected three times during surveys for this proposed 

Project in the Roseburg BLM District. The Oregon shoulderband has been documented 

on Coos Bay, Medford, and Roseburg BLM Districts, and Rogue River and Umpqua 

National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable Oregon shoulderband habitats within 700 feet of 

the proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM 

lands, there are 350.8 acres of these habitats to be removed and 181.1 acres of these 

habitats to be modified within the analysis area. On USFS lands, there are 192.8 acres of 

these habitats to be removed and 66.4 acres of these habitats to be modified within the 

analysis area (table 5). Direct mortality could occur to this species if they are located 

within the right-of-way during project clearing or construction because they would 

largely be unable to escape. Indirect mortality could result from the alteration of 

composition and structure of vegetation resulting in changes in microclimate. 

H-302
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 143

Cumulative Effects 

Suitable habitat for the Oregon shoulderband has been negatively impacted by human 

actions in the past 200 years. Forested areas have been extensively logged in many areas 

of Oregon (ODFW 2006). Down wood is also decreased in many areas due to certain 

logging practices and slash burning. The character of many dry forests and woodlands 

has been drastically changed due to altered fire regimes. Fire suppression leads to the 

buildup of ground fuels, which contributes to less frequent, more disastrous wildfires. 

This results in a change of forest structure from open stands with little understory and 

widely spaced mature trees to crowded, brushy stands which are more susceptible to 

insect and disease outbreaks and fire. Oak woodlands in Oregon have declined 

precipitously due to conversion to other land uses, invasive species, and fire suppression; 

this has been especially severe in the Coast Range province, where only an estimated four 

percent of historical oak woodlands remain. The 2008 Resource Management Plans 

(BLM land) identifies oak restoration as a goal; this could result in improved quantity and 

quality of Oregon shoulderband habitat in the analysis area in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33 and 35 through 75 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National Forest 

include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) and 

thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). These projects 

would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings would most likely 

contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Planned projects in the Coos 

Bay BLM District include several commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), 

various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a 

land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District 

include four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 

acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District 

include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). Although the thinnings and 

habitat restoration projets may improve some Oregon shoulderband habitat in the long 

term, the disturbance and habitat loss associated with the planned clearcuts, timber sales, 

and other activities could contribute to the further loss or degradation of Oregon 

shoulderband habitat. Actions associated with this project combined with past, present 

and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative impacts to this 

species. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable 

habitat for this species, and within that area only a narrow swath through the larger area 

of suitable habitat. 

H-303
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 144

Tillamook westernslug (Hesperarion mariae)

BLM Sensitive

This terrestrial slug is found in Douglas, Lane, and Tillamook Counties, Oregon, in the 

Coast Range region (ORNHIC 2007, NatureServe 2008). This species’ population 

abundance within Oregon is currently unknown. The global status of the Tillamook 

westernslug is Imperiled, and the ORNHIC lists this species as “threatened or endangered 

throughout range” (ORNHIC 2007). Tillamook westernslugs live among decaying large 

woody debris in moist, mature forests in the coastal fog zone. Threats to this species are 

not known; however, its preference for late successional coastal forests, which are 

declining in Oregon, raise the possibility that they are threatened by habitat loss. 

Tillamook westernslugs are suspected to occur in the Coos Bay BLM District, although 

these lands were not surveyed for the Tillamook westernslug. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable Tillamook westernslug habitat within 700 feet of 

the proposed pipeline route in the Coos Bay BLM District; there are 26.7 acres suitable 

habitat to be removed and 5.6 acres suitable habitat to be modified within the analysis 

area (table 5). The Project could impact this species by altering habitat, especially 

through tree removal during right-of-way clearing. Individuals could also be injured or 

killed by equipment or personnel, since this is not a mobile species. 

Cumulative Effects

Due to logging, only an estimated eight percent of historical late successional and oldgrowth conifer forests remain along the Coast Range of Oregon (ODFW 2006). This has 

lead to sharp declines in species that depend on this habitat type, possibly including the 

Tillamook westernslug. There are 754.0 acres of late successional or old-growth conifer 

forest within 700 feet of the pipeline route in the Coos Bay BLM district (table 2). The 

BLM, per the 2008 Resource Management Plans, protects late successional and oldgrowth forests by designating specific land use allocations and implementing associated 

management actions, including managing for down wood. This could lead to increased 

habitat for the Tillamook westernslug in the anaylsis area in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 54 in the Coos Bay BLM District. These projects include several commercial 

thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two 

timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). Actions 

associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities 

could potentially result in minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable habitat for 

this species, and within that area only a narrow swath through the larger area of suitable 

habitat. 

H-304
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 145

Chace’s sideband (Monadenia chaceana)

BLM Sensitive 

This land snail is endemic to northern Siskiyou County, California, and southern and 

eastern Jackson and Douglas Counties north to the Umpqua River basin (Duncan 2005). 

There is a record for 1 site in southwestern Klamath County (Duncan 2005). Habitat for 

Chace’s sideband is typified by open talus within dry conifer and mixed coniferhardwood forest or oak communities. These snails use the talus as a refuge, and forage 

and disperse through the surrounding forest during moist conditions (Duncan 2005). 

Interstitial spaces within the talus protect them from fire, predation, and unfavorable 

conditions. Chace’s sideband is found in areas with more frequent fire intervals than 

other species of Monadenia (Duncan 2005). Its diet consists of leaf litter and fungi. 

This species has a global status of Imperiled (NatureServe 2008). Threats to this species 

include habitat alteration and fragmentation, as this snail is slow to disperse (Duncan 

2005). High-intensity fires can result in population loss in the area of the burn. This 

species is most often associated with dry conifer and mixed conifer-hardwood forests and 

oak woodlands. This species was detected during surveys for this project at three sites on 

Medford BLM lands, eight sites on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, and one 

site on the Fremont-Winema National Forest. The Chace’s sideband is suspected to 

occur in the Lakeview BLM District, and has been documented on Medford and 

Roseburg BLM Districts, and Fremont-Winema, Rogue River, and Umpqua National 

Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable Chace’s sideband habitat within 700 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, 

there are 350.2 acres of these habitats to be removed and 181.1 acres of these habitats to 

be modified within the analysis area. On USFS lands, there are 210.9 acres of these 

habitats to be removed and 69.7 acres of these habitats to be modified within the analysis 

area (table 5). Direct mortality could occur to this species if they are located within the 

right-of-way during project clearing or construction. Indirect mortality could result from 

the alteration of composition and structure of vegetation resulting in changes in 

microclimate. 

Cumulative Effects 

Suitable habitat for the Chace’s sideband has been negatively impacted by human actions 

in the past 200 years. The character of many dry forests and woodlands has been 

drastically changed due to altered fire regimes. Fire suppression leads to the buildup of 

ground fuels, which contributes to less frequent, more disastrous wildfires. This results 

in a change of forest structure from open stands with little understory and widely spaced 

mature trees to crowded, brushy stands which are more susceptible to insect and disease 

outbreaks and fire. Oak woodlands in Oregon have declined precipitously due to 

conversion to other land uses, invasive species, and fire suppression. The 2008 Resource 

Management Plans (BLM land) identifies oak restoration as a goal; this could result in 

H-305
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 146

improved quantity and quality of Chace’s sideband habitat in the analysis area in the 

future. Management activities on federal lands such as logging could result in canopy 

closure dropping below 40%, which is detrimental to this snail species; however, most 

sites known to support Chace’s sideband are managed for timber production (Duncan 

2005). Hence, the only projects that would be likely to contribute to detrimental effects 

to this species would be those dropping canopy closure below 40%. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 34 and 55 through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, there is one 

planned project that involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle. Planned projects on 

the Umpqua National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of 

clearcuts (286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown 

acreage). These projects would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of 

thinnings would most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. 

Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat restoration 

projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber sales (6 

sites). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 

sites, unknown acreage). In the Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a 

timber sale (1 site, unknown acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several precommercial thinnings (388.8 acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated 

with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could 

potentially result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable 

habitat for this species, and within that area only a narrow swath through the larger area 

of suitable habitat. 

Traveling sideband (Monadenia fidelis celeuthia)

BLM Sensitive 

This snail is found in Jackson County, Oregon and is associated with dry basal talus and 

rock outcrops. It can be found in areas with oak/maple overstory, along springs in rock 

and moist vegetation and moss. 

This species has a global status of Critically Imperiled (NatureServe 2008). Threats to 

the traveling sideband can be assumed to be similar to the Oregon shoulderband, 

including habitat alteration and fragmentation and high intensity fire. This species has a 

general association with mixed conifer-hardwood forest. Traveling sidebands were 

detected during surveys for this project at four sites in the Medford BLM District and five 

H-306
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 147

sites on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. This snail has been documented 

during past survey efforts in the Medford BLM District. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable traveling sideband habitat within 700 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, 

107.3 acres of these habitats would be removed and 27.2 acres modified within the 

analysis area. On USFS lands, there are 42.6 acres of these habitats to be removed and 

20.7 acres of these habitats to be modified (table 5). Direct mortality could occur to this 

species if they are located within the right-of-way during project clearing or construction 

due to their low mobility. Clearing of the right-of-way could also impact habitat by 

removing forest overstory, potentially making the area unsuitable for this species until 

trees could regrow. Indirect mortality could result from the alteration of composition and 

structure of vegetation resulting in changes in microclimate. 

Cumulative Effects 

Current threats to the traveling sideband include habitat alteration and fragmentation. 

Damage to water resources such as springs may have impacted populations of this snail. 

Development tends to concentrate around a water source, which can increase disturbance, 

eliminate habitat, and encourage the spread of mesopredators. Losses of oak woodlands 

over the past 200 years may have also impacted the traveling sideband. Oak woodlands 

in Oregon have declined precipitously due to conversion to other land uses, invasive 

species, and fire suppression. The 2008 Resource Management Plans identify oak 

restoration as a goal on BLM land; this could result in improved quantity and quality of 

traveling sideband habitat in the analysis area in the future. Other projects that are 

planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 19 through 33 and 68 

through 75 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, planned projects 

include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning projects 

(1,608.6 acres). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include several timber 

sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable 

habitat for this species, and within that area only a narrow swath through the larger area 

of suitable habitat. 

Klamath taildropper (Prophysaon coeruleum)

BLM Sensitive 

The Klamath taildropper is currently an undescribed species and may be part of a 

complex including the more globally stable Prophysaon coeruleum, or blue-gray 

H-307
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 148

taildropper. The blue-gray taildropper occurs in late-successional conifer forests where it 

is associated with conifer logs, ground litter, fungi and mosses (Burke et al. no date). The 

Klamath taildropper occurs in drier habitats, extending down the east slopes of the 

Southern Oregon Cascades in Jackson and Klamath Counties. The blue-gray taildropper 

has a global status of vulnerable; the Klamath taildropper can be assumed to be more rare 

than this species (NatureServe 2008). Primary threats to this species include isolation or 

loss of additional populations, further loss of habitat to support the species across the 

landscape, predation, competition from exotic mollusks, and high intensity fire. This 

species is generally associated with late-successional conifer forests. This species was 

detected during surveys for this project at one site in the Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest. This species has been documented in the Coos Bay and Roseburg BLM Districts, 

and on the Umpqua and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable Klamath taildropper habitat within 700 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On USFS 

lands, there are 40.9 acres habitat to be removed, and 19.3 acres habitat to be modified 

within the analysis area (table 5). Direct mortality could occur to this species if 

individuals are located within the right-of-way during project clearing or construction. 

They could also suffer from habitat loss if mature trees and/or down wood are removed 

during construction. Indirect mortality could result from the alteration of composition 

and structure of vegetation resulting in changes in microclimate. 

Cumulative Effects 

Late successional and old-growth forests have declined sharply in Oregon over the last 

200 years due to logging. Only eight percent of this type of habitat remains from 

historical times in the Coast Range of Oregon, 23 percent in the West Cascades, and 25 

percent in the Klamath Mountains province (ODFW 2006). The Northwest Forest Plan 

(Forest Service land) and 2008 Resource Management Plans (BLM land) designate late 

successional and old-growth forests as protected areas and manage them for optimal 

habitat characteristics such as down wood. This would increase the quality and quantity 

of Klamath taildropper habitat in the analysis area in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33 and 35 through 67 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include 

several commercial thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 

331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown 

acreage). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat 

restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber 

sales (6 sites). Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal cumulative impacts to this 

species. 

Determination of Impact 

H-308
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 149

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable 

habitat for this species, and within that area only a narrow swath through the larger area 

of suitable habitat. 

Siskiyou hesperian (Vespericola sierranus)

BLM Sensitive 

In Oregon, this land snail is found in Jackson and Josephine Counties. This species has a 

global status of Imperiled (NatureServe 2008). Threats include diversion or modification 

of springs, removal of forest overstory, and competition with exotic mollusk species 

(USFS 2008). The Siskiyou hesperian is associated with riparian areas and other 

perennially moist habitats and may occur along running water or around permanent ponds 

and springs. This species was detected during surveys for this project at one site on 

Roseburg BLM lands, one site on Medford BLM lands, and one site on the Rogue RiverSiskiyou National Forest. This species has been documented in the Medford BLM 

District, and with the recent surveys for this project, also on the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest and in the Roseburg BLM District.

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable Siskiyou hesperian habitat within 700 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. There are 47.7 

acres of riparian habitat potentially affected by the project on BLM lands, and 3.5 acres 

of riparian habitat potentially affected by the project on USFS lands (table 5). Direct 

mortality could occur to this species if they are located within the right-of-way during 

project clearing or construction. Another potential direct effect is destruction or 

alteration of hydrology of riparian, wetland, or aquatic habitats used by this species 

Indirect mortality could result from the alteration of composition and structure of 

vegetation resulting in changes in microclimate. 

Cumulative Effects 

Habitat types preferred by the Siskiyou hesperian have been negatively impacted over the 

past 200 years. Development has concentrated around bodies of water, increasing 

disturbance, eliminating habitat, and encouraging the spread of mesopredators. Riparian 

areas have been damaged and removed by logging practices and conversion to other uses. 

Wetlands and wet meadows have been drained and trampled by grazing livestock. 

However, the Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Service land) and the 2008 Resource 

Management Plans (BLM land) have special land use allocations around riparian areas, 

streams, lakes, ponds, and wetlands that protect these resources. This will likely lead to 

improved quantity and quality of suitable Siskiyou hesperian habitat on federal lands 

within the analysis area. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 19 

through 33 and 55 through 75 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

H-309
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 150

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects in the Roseburg BLM District include 

four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial thinning projects (179.0 acres), 

and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include 

several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable 

habitat for this species, and waterbody and wetland crossing methods would be applied 

during construction. 

Siskiyou short-horned grasshopper (Chloealtis aspasma)

BLM Sensitive 

Siskiyou short-horned grasshoppers are distributed in two general areas: the Siskiyou and 

Cascade mountain ranges in Jackson County in southwestern Oregon and Benton County 

in west-central Oregon. This grasshopper lives in grasslands, is dependant upon 

elderberry for egg-laying, and is active July through September. This species has also 

been observed in clearings created by old clearcuts and vegetated with grasses, forbs, and 

elderberry, and on the brushy edges of clearcuts (Foster 1974). It is known to occur in 

Jackson County, Oregon at elevations between 5,000 and 5,800 feet. The closely related 

species C. conspersa feeds primarily on grasses and to a lesser extent on forbs (Gangwere 

1961); Siskiyou short-horned grasshoppers may exhibit similar feeding behavior. 

This species has a global status of imperiled (NatureServe 2008). Threats to this species 

include the loss of open meadows at higher elevations which can lead to the elimination 

of habitat for the host plant. This species is associated with grassland and herbaceous 

habitats; it has been documented on the Medford BLM District and Rogue River National 

Forest. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes grasslands within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline route in 

the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. Although this species has primarily been 

recorded at elevations above 5,000, for the purpose of this analysis, grassland habitat at 

all elevations are considered suitable habitat, as elevation data for grassland habitat 

within the proposed Project boundary is not available. On BLM lands, there are 26.1 

acres of suitable habitat that would be removed, and less than 0.1 acres of suitable habitat 

that would be modified within the analysis area. On USFS lands, there are 11.4 acres of 

suitable habitat that would be removed and 0.1 acres of suitable habitat that would be 

modified within the analysis area (table 5). Direct mortality could occur during clearing 

and construction if individuals are not able to get out of the way, although grasshoppers 

H-310
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 151

are relatively mobile; plants containing eggs could also be destroyed. Additionally, 

impacts could occur due to the loss of elderberry plants or other negative impacts to 

suitable habitat. Beneficial impacts could occur in the long-term by creating open spaces 

at high elevations that could serve as additional suitable habitat for this species. 

Cumulative Effects 

A major threat to this species is loss of grasslands. Native grasslands are one of the most 

imperiled habitats in the western U.S., including Oregon, due to conversion to 

agriculture, development, invasion by non-native plant species, and fire suppression. In 

the Coast Range and West Cascades of Oregon, grassland loss since historical times is 

estimated at 99 percent (ODFW 2006). Sustainable grazing practices help maintain 

existing grasslands. On BLM land, the 2008 Resource Management Plan calls for 

removal of conifers that are encroaching on grasslands, and revegetating degraded areas 

with native grasses. These habitat management practices should increase the quantity 

and quality of Siskiyou short-horned grasshopper habitat in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 19 

through 33 and 68 through 75 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include 

several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable 

habitat for this species, and within that area only a narrow swath through the larger area 

of suitable habitat. Additionally, the proposed Project could create additional suitable 

habitat for this species by clearing woody vegetation, replanting with native grass and 

forb species, and controlling potential invasion by noxious weeds post-construction. 

Johnson’s hairstreak (Callophrys johnsoni)

BLM Sensitive 

The range of Johnson’s hairstreak is Pacific Slope mountains from British Columbia 

south to central California. There is a small disjunct population in northeastern Oregon 

(Opler et al. 2006). Habitat for this species is coniferous forests, especially old-growth, 

and adults feed on flower nectar. Eggs are laid on pine dwarf mistletoe, and the 

caterpillars feed on the host plant once they hatch (Opler et al. 2006). 

This species has a global status of Vulnerable and is described as stable (NatureServe 

2008). Logging is the primary threat to this species, especially when it involves the 

H-311
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 152

removal of host trees (NatureServe2009). The Johnson’s hairstreak is documented as 

occurring on the Medford BLM District and the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes coniferous forests within 3,200 feet of the proposed pipeline 

route in the juristictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, there are 37.7 

acres of suitable habitat to be removed, and 5.8 acres of suitable habitat to be modified 

within the analysis area. On USFS lands, there are 128.6 acres of suitable habitat to be 

removed, and 49.6 acres of suitable habitat to be modified within the analysis area (table 

5). This species could be negatively impacted by the project by the clearing of mistletoe 

host trees containing eggs or larvae and by alteration of habitat. Indirect mortality could 

result form the alteration of composition and structure of vegetation resulting in changes 

in microclimate. 

Cumulative Effects 

The primary threat to Johnson’s hairstreak is logging. Over the past 200 years, logging 

has dramatically decreased late successional and old-growth forest habitats in Oregon 

upon which the Johnson’s hairstreak depends. Only eight percent of this type of habitat 

remains from historical times in the Coast Range of Oregon, 23 percent in the West 

Cascades, and 25 percent in the Klamath Mountains province (ODFW 2006). The 

Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Service land) and 2008 Resource Management Plans 

(BLM land) designate late successional and old-growth forests as protected areas and 

manage them for optimal habitat characteristics such as down wood. This would increase 

the quality and quantity of Johnson’s hairstreak habitat in the analysis area in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 19 

through 33 and 68 through 75 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 

planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various 

thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects in the Medford BLM District include 

several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable 

habitat for this species, and within that area only a narrow swath through the larger area 

of suitable habitat, and based on federal protection of Johnson’s hairstreak habitat. 

Insular blue butterfly (Plebejus saepiolus littoralis)

BLM Sensitive 

This subspecies can be found in Curry, Coos, and Lane Counties in Oregon, and Del 

Norte County, California (ISSSSP 2008). This butterfly lives along stream edges, bogs, 

H-312
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 153

and wet meadows, but also in drier sites containing blooming clover, such as road sides 

(ISSSSP 2008). Adults eat flower nectar, especially from clover (Opler et al. 2006). 

Eggs are laid in clover flower buds, and the caterpillars eat the developing flowers from 

late April through mid-August (ISSSSP 2008). Adults fly in June (ISSSSP 2008). This 

species has a global status of Imperiled (NatureServe 2008). A major threat to this 

subspecies is habitat destruction, especially drainage of wet meadows (Opler et al. 2006). 

This species is associated with riparian areas and wet meadows, and has been 

documented in Coos Bay BLM District. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable insular blue butterfly habitat within 3,200 feet of 

the proposed pipeline route in Coos Bay BLM District., of which there are 24.9 acres 

potentially affected by the project (table 5). The insular blue butterfly could be harmed 

by the proposed Project by habitat degradation and trampling of eggs and larvae. 

Another potential direct effect is destruction of habitat. Indirect mortality could result 

from the alteration of composition and structure of vegetation resulting in changes in 

microclimate. 

Cumulative Effects 

Habitat types preferred by the insular blue butterfly have been negatively impacted over 

the past 200 years. Wetlands have been highly degraded; an estimated one-third of 

wetlands present in historical times in Oregon remain (Dahl 1990). Waterbodies have 

also been negatively impacted by development. Wetlands and waterbodies now are 

protected by federal laws, and the 2008 Resource Management Plans for BLM lands 

protect wetlands, streams, lakes, and ponds from degradation and loss by designating 

specific land use designations and associated management strategies. In the future, these 

protections will likely lead to enhanced wetland and aquatic habitat in the analysis area, 

which would benefit insular blue butterflies. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 35 

through 54 in the Coos Bay BLM District. These projects include several commercial 

thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two 

timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). Actions 

associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities 

would not likely result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable 

habitat for this species, and within that area only a narrow swath through the larger area 

of suitable habitat, and due to waterbody and wetland crossing methods that would be 

employed during construction and federal protection of these habitat features in the 

analysis area. 

H-313
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 154

Mardon skipper (Polites mardon)

BLM Sensitive, Federal candidate for listing 

The Mardon skipper is a small (3⁄4–1 inch long) butterfly which inhabits grassland and 

meadow habitats which are dominated by fescue grasses (Festuca spp.). They complete 

one life cycle annually, with adults emerging from their chrysalis in late spring or early 

summer. Following mating, females deposit their eggs onto the stalks of fescue. The 

eggs hatch after 6 to 7 days, after which the larva feeds on fescue grasses for about 3 

months before hibernating through the winter and spring as a pupa (Black and Vaughan 

2005). Adults feed on the nectar of a variety of plants including blue violet (Viola 

adunca), lupine (Lupinus spp.), Idaho blue-eyed grass (Sisyrinchium idahoense), 

penstemon (Penstemon spp.), western wallflower (Erysimum capitatum), and clover 

(Trifolium spp.); Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) is strongly avoided. Very little 

movement between populations or suitable habitat is believed to occur, due to the 

Mardon skipper’s inability to traverse through unsuitable habitat such as closed 

woodlands and shrub thickets (Black and Vaughan 2005). 

This species’ distribution is limited to sites located in the southern Puget Sound of 

Washington, the Mt. Adams area in southern Washington, the north coast of California 

(Del Norte County), and the Cascade Range in southern Oregon. Many seemingly 

suitable habitats within the Cascade Range are currently unoccupied (NatureServe 2008). 

Most sites support less than fifty butterflies, while none support more than a few hundred 

(Black and Vaughan 2005). Along the pipeline corridor, the Mardon skipper can be 

found in Jackson and Klamath Counties. 

This species is described as Imperiled and declining (NatureServe 2008). There are many 

threats to this species, the most significant of which is likely invasion by exotic plants 

such as Scotch broom, which can exclude plant species that the Mardon skipper depends 

upon (FWS 1998). Other threats include fire suppression, loss of prairie habitat, and 

grazing by livestock (FWS 1998). This species is associated with grassland and meadow 

habitats; it has been documented on Coos Bay and Medford BLM Districts, and Umpqua 

and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable mardon skipper habitat within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline route in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, 

there are 27.0 acres of these habitats to be removed and less than 0.1 acres to be modified 

within the analysis area. On USFS lands, there are 11.4 acres of these habitats to be 

removed and 0.1 acres of these habitats to be modified within the analysis area (table 5). 

Pipeline construction could affect the Mardon skipper by increasing invasion by exotic 

plant species, impacting grassland habitat, or by direct mortality or disturbance occurring 

during construction activities. Eggs or pupae could also be destroyed during vegetation 

removal. Indirect mortality could result from the alteration of composition and structure 

of vegetation resulting in changes in microclimate. 

Cumulative Effects 

H-314
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 155

Native grasslands are one of the most imperiled habitats in the western U.S., including 

Oregon, due to conversion to agriculture, development, invasion by non-native plant 

species, and fire suppression. In the Coast Range and West Cascades of Oregon, 

grassland loss since historical times is estimated at 99 percent (ODFW 2006). 

Sustainable grazing practices help maintain existing grasslands. On BLM land, the 2008 

Resource Management Plans call for removal of conifers that are encroaching on 

grasslands, and revegetating degraded areas with native grasses. These habitat 

management practices should increase the quantity and quality of Mardon skipper habitat 

in the future. Invasion of Scotch broom is a serious problem in Oregon, as it outcompetes 

and displaces many native plant species. The Resource Management Plans contain goals 

for Scotch broom control and removal from BLM lands. These federal management 

activities will likely improve habitat for the Mardon skipper in the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 33, 35 through 54, and 68 through75 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest, planned projects include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) 

and various thinning projects (1,608.6 acres). Planned projects on the Umpqua National 

Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts (286.2 acres) 

and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). These 

projects would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings would 

most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Planned projects 

in the Coos Bay BLM District include several commercial thinning projects (at least 

2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, unknown 

acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the Medford BLM 

District include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). Actions associated 

with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could 

potentially result in minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” since the proposed Project would be affecting a small amount of the suitable 

habitat for this species, and within that area only a narrow swath through the larger area 

of suitable habitat. Restoration activities could enhance Mardon skipper habitat by 

following measures meant to prevent the invasion of noxious weeds, including Scotch 

broom. 

FISH 

Surveys were not conducted specifically for special status fish. The information on 

special status species occurrence is based on several data sources including the BLM 

GeoBOB database (BLM 2006), ORNHIC species request (ORNHIC 2006), Forest 

Service database (USFS 2006), StreamNet, aerial photos, and Geographical Information 

System (GIS). 

H-315
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 156

Non-anadromous fish

Pit-Klamath Brook lamprey (Lampetra lethophaga), Klamath River lamprey (L.

similis), and Klamath redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss newberryi)

USFS Sensitive 

The pit-Klamath brook lamprey is a non-parasitic lamprey which inhabits cool, clear 

streams or springs with sandy-muddy bottoms with a low to moderate gradient (Moyle 

1976). Spawning begins in spring and continues into summer. The ammocoete stage 

lasts at least 4 years, with metamorphosis occurring in September or October. The 

ammocoetes are filter feeders which eat microscopic plants, animals, detritus and algae; 

adults do not eat. The pit-Klamath brook lamprey can be found in California and 

Oregon; within Oregon this species is confined to the Klamath River system. Near the 

analysis area, this species is found in Jackson and Klamath Counties. The pit-Klamath 

brook lamprey has been documented in the Fremont-Winema National Forest and is also 

recorded in the Klamath Falls BLM district. It has been documented in the Klamath 

River basin and spawns in the Spencer Creek watershed, which feeds into the Klamath 

River; both systems are crossed by the Project. The global status of the pit-Klamath 

brook lamprey is Vulnerable, and there have been widespread sharp declines in Oregon 

(NatureServe 2008), though it has no listing status with ODFW (ONHIC 2007). Threats 

to this species include its limited range which has been modified by dams, habitat 

degradation, and pollution (NatureServe 2008). 

The Klamath River lamprey is a parasitic lamprey which inhabits areas similar to those 

described above for the pit-Klamath brook lamprey. The life history of the Klamath 

River lamprey differs from the pit-Klamath brook lamprey in that adult Klamath brook 

lampreys are parasitic and attach themselves to other fish in order to feed on their bodily 

fluids. The Klamath brook lamprey can be found in California and Oregon. Within 

Oregon this species is confined to the Klamath River system; it spawns in the Spencer 

Creek watershed. The Klamath River, Spencer Creek, and their tributaries would be 

crossed by the Project. The global status of the Klamath River lamprey is Vulnerable; 

threats to this species include its limited range that has been modified by dams and 

pollution (NatureServe 2008). This species has no listing status with ODFW. It has been 

documented in the Fremont-Winema National Forest. 

The Klamath redband trout is found within mid-size or small streams located in highly 

erosive landscapes with high gradients, steep slopes, high solar radiation, and mean 

annual air temperatures less than 48oF (Thurow et al. 2007). Their diet consists primarily 

of smaller fish. Their distribution is limited to various streams within the Upper Klamath 

Lake basin (ODFW 2008). Spawning occurs in Spencer Creek from the mouth to River 

Mile 12; most spawning occurs between Forest Service roads 100 and 110. The Klamath 

River, Spencer Creek, and their tributaries would be crossed by the project. The global 

status of Klamath redband trout is Vulnerable, but it has no listing status with ODFW. 

Threats to this species include habitat alteration resulting in low flows and high 

temperatures and stream blockage such as dams (NatureServe 2008). It has been 

documented in the Fremont-Winema and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests and is 

also recorded in the Klamath BLM district. 

H-316
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 157

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area for these species includes waterbodies within the Klamath River 

system, where these species occur. A total of ten stream crossings would be carried out 

in the analysis area. The Klamath River would be crossed using HDD, thereby limiting 

any effects due to sedimentation or vegetation removal. However, in the case of a fracout, bentonite clay could be released into the waterbody causing increased sedimentation. 

Spencer Creek is classified by the Northwest Forest Plan as an intermittent waterbody, is 

less than 10 feet wide, and would be crossed using a dry open cut during the in-water 

work window recommended by ODFW. An additional 8 waterbodies that are known or 

assumed to be fish-bearing would be crossed using a dry open cut method between July 1 

and January 31. The dry open cut method used would either be flume or dam and pump, 

both of which maintain downstream flows and isolate the construction area from the 

streamflow. Construction across small or intermediate waterbodies generally takes seven 

days using these methods. Some mortality could occur to adults, juveniles, and/or eggs if 

individuals were not able to be salvaged during this process. Turbidity increases are 

generally low using this crossing method but could increase temporarily. Indirect effects 

could occur through the harvest of riparian vegetation on either side of the stream for the 

width of the right-of-way, potentially increasing sedimentation. Spencer Creek and other 

perennial waterbodies would be backfilled with material removed from the trench with 

the upper 1-foot of the trench backfilled with clear gravel or native cobbles of a size 

appropriate for resident fish. The bottom and banks would be returned to preconstruction 

contours, banks would be stabilized, and temporary sediment barriers would be installed 

before returning flow to the waterbody channel. A further description of effects to 

aquatic species from waterbody crossings can be found in Section 4.5 of this EIS. 

Cumulative Effects 

Of the waterbodies that would be crossed by this project in the analysis area, Spencer 

Creek, Clover Creek, and the Klamath River have 303d water quality listings (Appendix 

C). Other projects by BLM or USFS that are planned within watersheds in this analysis 

area and that could contribute to impacts to these species include Projects numbered 34 

and 76 through 83 (table 10). These projects include the Buck Lake Fence Project, which 

would exclude cattle from the waterbody, one planting, 5 fuels treatment or precommercial thinnings (1,023.1 acres total), one parking lot (0.1 acres), and one timber 

sale (acreage not provided). These projects would not likely have direct impacts to 

waterbodies in the analysis area but may have some indirect effects. As the bulk of these 

projects are pre-commercial thinnings or fuels treatments, these effects would likely be 

largely beneficial to the overall health of the watershed ecosystems. Since the major 

threats to these species are habitat modification and degradation, the proposed Project 

would not likely contribute to cumulative effects, as the impacts of the project on water 

quality would be temporary. Actions associated with this project combined with past, 

present and foreseeable future activities would likely result in negligible cumulative 

impacts to these species. 

Determination of Impact 

H-317
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 158

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because the waterbody crossings that could affect these species would be 

conducted with minimal damage to the species, in accordance with the Procedures, and 

any impacts that resulted would be temporary. 

Umpqua Oregon chub (Oregonichthys kalawatseti)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Sensitive 

The Umpqua Oregon chub inhabits areas which contain eroded or depositional substrates 

with moderate to low flowing waters. They gather near the banks in shallow waters, and 

prefer habitats with riparian cover and abundant aquatic vegetation. Spawning occurs 

primarily in rocky areas. The Umpqua Oregon chub’s diet consists of bottom-dwelling 

chironomids and other organisms (Markle et al. 1991). They can be found throughout 

most of the Umpqua River in Douglas County; from the mouth of the Smith River in the 

north to Cow Creek and the South Umpqua River, near the boundary of the Umpqua 

National Forest, in the south (Markle et al. 1991). This species has been documented in 

the Roseburg BLM district and the Umpqua National Forest. The global status of the 

Umpqua Oregon chub is Imperiled, although populations appear to be stable 

(NatureServe 2008), and it is designated Sensitive – Vulnerable by ODFW (ONHIC 

2007). The main threat to this species is the increasing population of invasive 

smallmouth bass (NatureServe 2008).

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes waterbodies crossed within the Umpqua River system, where 

this species is found. The South Umpqua River would be crossed twice using a diverted 

open-cut method. Some mortality could occur to eggs with this process, but adults and 

juveniles would likely stay with the streamflow and avoid negative effects. Turbidity 

would likely increase while the work is being performed, but this would be a temporary 

impact. Other than these two crossings, 41 other affected waterbodies would be crossed 

using a dry open cut during the in-water work window recommended by ODFW. The 

dry open cut method used would either be flume or dam and pump, both of which 

maintain downstream flows and isolate the construction area from the streamflow. 

Construction across small or intermediate waterbodies generally takes seven days using 

these methods. Some mortality could occur to adults, juveniles, and/or eggs if 

individuals were not able to be salvaged during this process. Turbidity increases are 

generally low using this crossing method but could increase temporarily. Indirect effects 

could occur through the harvest of riparian vegetation on either side of the stream for the 

width of the right-of-way, potentially increasing sedimentation. Myrtle Creek and other 

perennial waterbodies would be backfilled with material removed from the trench with 

the upper 1-foot of the trench backfilled with clear gravel or native cobbles of a size 

appropriate for resident fish. The bottom and banks would be returned to preconstruction 

contours, banks would be stabilized, and temporary sediment barriers would be installed 

before returning flow to the waterbody channel. 

Cumulative Effects 

H-318
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 159

Of the waterbodies that would be crossed by this project in the analysis area, Olalla 

Creek, Myrtle Creek, and the South and Middle South Umpqua River are known to have 

303d water quality listings (Appendix C). Other projects by BLM or USFS that are 

planned to occur within watersheds in this analysis area and that could contribute to 

impacts to these species include projects numbered 1 through 18, and 55 through 64 

(table 10). These projects include 1 grazing allotment (23,569.6 acres), 1 rock source 

project (7.8 acres), 5 clear cuts (286.2 acres), 12 fuels treatments or pre-commercial 

thinnings (415.1 acres), and 4 fish habitat restoration projects. Actions associated with 

this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially 

result in minimal cumulative effects on this species. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because the waterbody crossinga would be conducted with minimal damage to 

the species, and the major threat to this species is the spread of smallmouth bass; the 

project would be unlikely to contribute to this problem. 

Blue chub (Gila coerulea) and Klamath largescale sucker (Catostomus snyderi)

USFS Sensitive 

The blue chub primarily inhabits rock pools found in creeks and rivers, or the rocky 

shores of reservoirs and lakes (Page and Burr 1991); however, they may move into the 

deeper, open waters in winter. They spawn in spring and summer, along shorelines 

which contain rocks, large gravel, or volcanic rubble substrates. Their diet consists of 

aquatic insect larvae, cladocerans, and filamentous algae (Lee et al. 1980). They are 

found in California and Oregon; in Oregon, their range includes the Klamath and Lost 

River basins. Threats to this species include a combination of drought, water diversions, 

pollution, and introduced species (NatureServe 2008). The global status of the blue chub 

is Vulnerable, and it has no listing with ODFW (ORNHIC 2007, NatureServe 2009). It 

has been documented in the Fremont-Winema National Forest and is suspected in the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

The Klamath largescale sucker inhabits rocky pools and runs within creeks, rivers, and 

lakes (Page and Burr 1991). Spawning typically occurs in spring (from late March to 

mid-April). Their diet consists of benthic organisms and aquatic plants. The Klamath 

largescale sucker’s distribution is limited to Oregon and California; however, the main 

population is within Oregon. In Oregon, it occurs within the Klamath River both below 

and above Klamath Falls (Moyle et al. 1989), as well as Upper Klamath Lake, the Clear 

Lake-Lost River system, the entire Sprague River, the lower 20 km of the Sycan River, 

lower Williamson River, and the Williamson River above Klamath Marsh (Andreasen 

1975). Threats to this species include habitat modification by dams, diversions, 

pollution, and predation by introduced fish. The global status of the Klamath largescale 

sucker is Vulnerable, and it has no listing with ODFW (ORNHIC 2007, NatureServe 

2009). It has been documented in the Fremont-Winema National Forest, is suspected in 

H-319
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 160

the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, and is also recorded for the Klamath Falls 

BLM district. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes waterbodies crossed in the Umpqua and South Umpqua 

watersheds in the Roseburg BLM district, the Upper Klamath Lake and tributaries, the 

Lost River system on the Lakeview BLM district, and the Umpqua, Fremont-Winema 

and Rogue River National Forests. The Klamath River would be crossed using HDD, 

thereby limiting any effects due to sedimentation or vegetation removal. However, in the 

case of a frac-out, bentonite clay could be released into the waterbody causing increased 

sedimentation. The Lost River (118 feet wide) and 15 other waterbodies (none wider 

than 30 feet) would be crossed using a dry open cut during the in-water work window 

recommended by ODFW. The dry open cut method used would either be flume or dam 

and pump, both of which maintain downstream flows and isolate the construction area 

from the streamflow. Construction across small or intermediate waterbodies generally 

takes seven days using these methods. Some mortality could occur to adults, juveniles, 

and/or eggs if individuals were not able to be salvaged during this process. Turbidity 

increases are generally low using this crossing method but could increase temporarily. 

Indirect effects could occur through the harvest of riparian vegetation on either side of the 

stream for the width of the right-of-way, potentially increasing sedimentation. Spencer 

Creek and other perennial waterbodies would be backfilled with material removed from 

the trench with the upper 1-foot of the trench backfilled with clear gravel or native 

cobbles of a size appropriate for resident fish. The bottom and banks would be returned 

to preconstruction contours, banks would be stabilized, and temporary sediment barriers 

would be installed before returning flow to the waterbody channel. 

Cumulative Effects 

Of the waterbodies that would be crossed by this project in the analysis area, Spencer 

Creek, Clover Creek, and the Klamath and Lost Rivers are known to have 303d water 

quality listings (Appendix C). Other projects by BLM or USFS that are planned to occur 

within watersheds in this analysis area and that could contribute to impacts to these 

species include Projects numbered 34, and 76 through 83 (table 10). These projects 

include the Buck Lake Fence Project, which would exclude cattle from the waterbody, 

one planting, 5 fuels treatment or pre-commercial thinnings (1,023.1 acres total), one 

parking lot (0.1 acres), and one timber sale (acreage not provided). These projects would 

not likely have direct impacts to waterbodies in the analysis area but may have some 

indirect effects. However, as the bulk of these projects are pre-commercial thinnings or 

fuels treatments, these effects would likely be largely beneficial to the overall health of 

the watershed ecosystems. Since the major threats to these species are habitat 

modification and degradation, the proposed Project would not likely contribute to 

cumulative effects as the effects of the project on water quality would be temporary. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

H-320
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 161

species” because the construction right-of-way is a very small portion of this species 

range, and the crossing would be conducted with minimal damage to the species. 

Millicoma dace (Rhinichthys cataractae)

BLM Sensitive 

Millicoma dace is endemic to the Coos Basin and inhabits creek riffles with fast flowing 

waters, which contain rubble and gravel substrates. They can also be found along the 

rocky shores of lakes and rivers (Page and Burr 1991). Spawning occurs in spring and 

summer on gravel substrates when water temperatures reach 11°C (Wydoski and 

Whitney 2003). Their young are pelagic and form schools (Scott and Crossman 1973). 

The millicoma dace diet consists primarily of mayflies, blackflies, and midges. Near the 

analysis area, they are found within Coos and Douglas Counties, Oregon, and have been 

documented within the South Fork Coos River. Information is limited on this specific 

subspecies of longnose dace; however, threats seem to be pollution and fragmentation of 

populations. Their global status is Imperiled, and they are listed by ODFW as Sensitive – 

Peripheral or Naturally Rare (ONHIC 2007, NatureServe 2009). The Millicoma dace has 

been documented in the Coos Bay BLM district.

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The scope of analysis includes waterbody crossings in the Coos basin in the Coos Bay 

BLM district. The Coos Bay would be crossed using a wet open cut, the only feasible 

method for crossing such a large waterbody (Coos Bay BLM lands would not be 

affected). Conventional boring would be used to cross the Kentuck, Willanch, and 

Catching sloughs, and would not be expected to impact these waterbodies. The Coos 

River would be crossed using HDD, thereby limiting any effects due to sedimentation or 

vegetation removal. However, in the case of a frac-out, bentonite clay could be released 

into the waterbody causing increased sedimentation. Besides these crossings, 47 other 

waterbodies in the area would be crossed using a dry open cut during the in-water work 

window recommended by ODFW. The dry open cut method used would either be flume 

or dam and pump, both of which maintain downstream flows and isolate the construction 

area from the streamflow. Construction across small or intermediate waterbodies 

generally takes seven days using these methods. Some mortality could occur to adults, 

juveniles, and/or eggs if individuals were not able to be salvaged during this process. 

Turbidity increases are generally low using this crossing method but could increase 

temporarily. Indirect effects could occur through the harvest of riparian vegetation on 

either side of the stream for the width of the right-of-way, potentially increasing 

sedimentation. Spencer Creek and other perennial waterbodies would be backfilled with 

material removed from the trench with the upper 1-foot of the trench backfilled with clear 

gravel or native cobbles of a size appropriate for resident fish. The bottom and banks 

would be returned to preconstruction contours, banks would be stabilized, and temporary 

sediment barriers would be installed before returning flow to the waterbody channel. 

Cumulative Effects 

Of the waterbodies that would be crossed by this project in the analysis area, Coos Bay, 

the Coos River, and the Catching, Kentuck, Stock and Willanch Sloughs are known to 

have 303d water quality listings (Appendix C). There are currently no other BLM or 

H-321
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 162

USFS projects planned to occur within the Coos River watershed in this analysis area, 

therefore no cumulative effects are expected to occur. 

Determination of Impact 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because the construction right-of-way is a very small portion of this species 

range, and the crossing would be conducted with minimal damage to the species. 

Anadromous fish

Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)

Chinook are the largest of the salmons; adults commonly exceed 40 pounds. Chinook 

migration seasons vary and include spring, summer, fall, or winter runs even within a 

single river system. The species spends most of its life in the Pacific Ocean or ocean 

estuaries. Freshwater entry and spawning timing are believed to be related to local 

temperature and water flow regimes (NOAA 2008). Most Chinook enter Oregon’s 

coastal rivers between April and December, with some starting as late as February. 

Spring Chinook generally spawn from August to early November, and fall Chinook 

generally spawn from October to early March or as late as mid-April in smaller streams. 

This species uses a wide variety of small to large low gradient streams. Threats to 

Chinook are many, including a loss of genetic variation due to hatchery interbreeding 

(Arkush et al 2002). 

 

Chinook Salmon, Oregon Coast ESU 

USFS Sensitive, BLM Assessment 

Recent decline in O. tshawytscha Oregon Coast ESU is attributed to modifications of 

original range by dams and pollution including urban runoff and sedimentation of streams 

due to logging and development (Fishbase 2008). While Chinook could historically 

withstand impacts from natural phenomena (predators, droughts, floods, and fluctuating 

oceanic conditions), population numbers have been so reduced by human pressures that 

such natural phenomena now contribute to the decline of salmonids (Buck 2008). In 

addition, recent declines in Oregon Coast ESU Chinook are attributed to modifications of 

their original range by dams and pollution including urban runoff and sedimentation of 

streams due to logging and development. The global status of Oregon Coast Chinook is 

Apparently Secure, and they have no listing status with ODFW (ONHIC 2007, 

NatureServe 2009). Surveys were not conducted specifically for O. tshawytscha Oregon 

Coast ESU, but presence in the Coquille River mainstem, North, Middle and East Forks, 

as well as the Umpqua and South Umpqua and their tributaries are assumed based on 

Streamnet mapping as having rearing and migration activities in those locations 

(StreamNet 2008). They have been documented in the Umpqua National Forest and are 

also recorded in the Coos Bay and Roseburg BLM districts. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

H-322
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 163

The analysis area includes each of the rivers and streams intersecting project facilities 

with documented or expected presence of Oregon Coast ESU Chinook. Direct effects of 

the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary disturbance and 

permanent loss or alteration of habitat for Oregon Coast Chinook. Coos Bay would be 

crossed using a wet open cut, the only feasible method for crossing such a large 

waterbody (Coos Bay BLM lands would not be affected). Conventional boring would be 

used to cross the Kentuck, Willanch, and Catching sloughs, and would not be expected to 

impact these waterbodies. The Coos River would be crossed using HDD, thereby 

limiting any effects due to sedimentation or vegetation removal. However, in the case of 

a frac-out, bentonite clay could be released into the waterbody causing increased 

sedimentation. The mainstem, North Fork, Middle Fork, and East Fork of the Coquille 

River, and the Umpqua and South Umpqua Rivers would be crossed using open trench 

method during the in-water work window recommended by ODFW. During project 

construction, 44 waterbodies in the Coos sub-basin, 29 waterbodies in the Coquille subbasin, and 40 water bodies in the South Umpqua sub-basin that may be fish bearing 

would be crossed using dry-open cuts. This method would minimize direct impacts to 

fish; however, some mortality is expected and turbidity would be at least temporarily 

increased downstream of the crossing. The greatest indirect effect from ground 

disturbing activities is stream sedimentation from tree removal leading to streambank 

instability. However, to the extent possible, soil disruption would be minimized by 

cutting trees within 25 feet of stream banks at ground level and leaving roots intact. 

Other indirect effects could include a temporary increase turbidity due to increased runoff 

in areas where vegetation has been removed and soil has been compacted from 

construction activities. 

Cumulative Effects 

The recent decline in Oregon Coast Chinook is attributed to modifications of its original 

range by dams, pollution including urban runoff, and sedimentation of streams due to 

logging and development. Further planned development near streams as well as 

management activities on federal lands and associated road building within the range of 

this ESU could contribute to further regional loss or degradation of its habitat. Of the 

waterbodies that would be crossed by this project in the analysis area, 8 waterbodies in 

the Coos river sub-basin, 7 waterbodies in the Coquille sub-basin and 12 waterbodies in 

the South Umpqua sub-basin are known to have 303d water quality listings (Appendix 

C). BLM or USFS projects that are planned in the vicinity of the Project area that could 

contribute to the direct and indirect effects to this species include projects 1 and 18, a 

grazing allotment and a fuels reduction, as well as 35 through 64, comprised of 

commercial timber activities (over 4000 acres), and 4 fish habitat restoration projects 

(table 10). Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative effects to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species”. This conclusion is reached because while it is expected that the project would 

H-323
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 164

temporarily increase stream sedimentation, best management practices would be 

employed in crossing all streams with Oregon Coast Chinook habitat. For rivers that 

would be crossed using HDD, frac-out plans would be in place, and impacts due to fracouts would be mitigated. Fish salvage plans would be in place for streams crossed by 

trenching. 

Chinook Salmon, Southern Oregon Coast/California Coast ESU Fall-run 

USFS Sensitive, BLM Sensitive 

Southern Oregon Coast/California Coast ESU fall-run (SOCCC) Chinook have a global 

status of Vulnerable, and are listed as Sensitive – Critical by ODFW (ONHIC 2007, 

NatureServe 2009). Recent declines in SOCCC Chinook are attributed to modifications 

of their original range by dams and pollution including urban runoff and sedimentation of 

streams due to logging and development (Fishbase 2008). Surveys were not conducted 

specifically for O. tshawytscha Southern Oregon Coast/California Coast ESU, but 

presence was assumed in the Rogue and Upper Rogue rivers including the Shady Cove, 

Big Butte, Little Butte watersheds based on StreamNet mapping (2008). SOCCC 

Chinook have been documented in the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest and the 

Coos Bay and Medford BLM districts. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis includes each of the rivers and streams intersecting project facilities with 

documented presence or expected presence of SOCCC Chinook. Direct effects of the 

proposed action would in general consist of both temporary disturbance and permanent 

loss or alteration of habitat for SOCCC Chinook. The mainstem of the Rogue River 

would be crossed using HDD, thereby limiting effects due to sedimentation or vegetation 

removal. In the case of a frac-out, bentonite clay could be released into the waterbody 

causing increased sedimentation and potential fish mortality. A total of 39 other 

potentially fish-bearing tributary creeks in the Upper Rogue sub-basin would be crossed 

using a dry open-cut during the in-water work window recommended by ODFW. A 

Work Area Isolation Plan would be in place for each stream crossed, and fish salvage 

would be conducted where appropriate and necessary. This method would minimize 

direct impacts to fish; however, some mortality is expected and turbidity would be at 

least temporarily increased downstream of the crossing. The greatest indirect effect is 

stream sedimentation from tree removal leading to streambank instability. To the extent 

possible, soil disruption would be minimized by cutting trees within 25 feet of stream 

banks at ground level and leaving roots intact. Other indirect effects could include 

increased turbidity due to increased runoff in areas where vegetation has been removed 

and soil has been compacted from construction activities. 

Cumulative Effects 

As noted above, recent declines in Chinook are attributed to modifications of original 

range by dams, pollution including urban runoff, and sedimentation of streams due to 

logging and development. While it is expected that the project would temporarily 

increase stream sedimentation, best management practices would be employed in 

crossing all streams with SOCCC Chinook habitat. Of the waterbodies that would be 

H-324
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 165

crossed by this project in the analysis area, 5 waterbodies are known to be 303d water 

quality limited (Appendix C). Further planned development near streams as well as 

management activities on federal lands and associated road building within the range of 

SOCCC Chinook could contribute to the further regional loss or degradation of this 

species’ habitat. Currently planned BLM or USFS projects in the vicinity of the Project 

area include project numbers 18 through 33 and 68 through 75, including 2 large grazing 

allotments (276,929.2 acres) and many timber sale units (table 10). The specific thinning 

treatments on these timber sales are unknown, but may have an impact on stream 

conditions. Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative effects to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species”. This conclusion is reached because while it is expected that the project would 

temporarily increase stream sedimentation, best management practices will be employed 

in crossing all streams with O. tshawytscha Southern Oregon Coast/California Coast ESU 

habitat. For rivers that would be crossed using HDD, a frac-out plan would be in place, 

and impacts due to frac-outs would be mitigated with habitat enhancement, replacement 

and conservation. Fish salvage plans would be in place for streams crossed by trenching. 

Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss)

Steelhead spawn from February to June in freshwater streams. Threats to this species 

include hybridization. Steelhead freely interbreed with cutthroat trout (O. clarki) and Gila 

trout (O. gilae), producing fertile offspring (Natureserve 2008). The introduction of 

rainbow trout into areas outside of their native range has contributed to problems with 

genetic integrity. Johnson & Abrahams (1991) concluded from an experiment involving 

wild and domesticated strains of O. mykiss foraging in areas containing a predator, that 

the hybrid trout were significantly more willing to take risks than the wild steelhead. 

Other threats to this species include development, impeded passage, inadequate flows 

caused by hydropower, agriculture, logging, road building, and overfishing. Specifically, 

declining winter catches on the Illinois River (tributary to the Rogue River) since the 

mid-1970s have been attributed to water withdrawal for irrigation (Nehlsen et al. 1991). 

Steelhead, Klamath Mountains Province ESU Summer/winter run

BLM Assessment 

Klamath Mountains Province ESU Steelhead have a global status of Vulnerable, and they 

are listed by ODFW as Sensitive – Vulnerable (ONHIC 2007, NatureServe 2009). This 

species has been documented in the Upper Rogue River in Jackson County and has also 

been documented in the Coos Bay and Medford BLM districts. Surveys were not 

conducted specifically for this species, but presence was assumed based on StreamNet 

data which show fish migration within the mainstem and Lower, Middle and Upper 

Rogue River forks. Spawning and rearing are mapped for Klamath Mountains Province 

Steelhead in the Shady Cove, Big Butte and Little Butte watersheds and their tributaries. 

H-325
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 166

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area for this species is all streams within BLM and Forest Service land in 

the Upper Rogue River basin, where these fish have been documented or are suspected to 

occur. There would be 49 stream crossings in the analysis area. Direct effects of the 

proposed action would in general consist of both temporary disturbance and permanent 

loss or alteration of habitat for Klamath Mountains Province Summer/winter run 

steelhead. The Rogue River would be crossed using HDD, thereby limiting effects due to 

sedimentation or vegetation removal. In the case of a frac-out, bentonite clay could be 

released into the waterbody causing increased sedimentation. Tributary creeks (47 

streams) would be crossed using a dry open-cut during the in-water work window 

recommended by ODFW. One additional crossing, an aqueduct ditch, would be crossed 

by conventional bore. Effects would be the same as though discussed above for Chinook 

salmon. 

Cumulative Effects 

Of the potentially fish bearing streams crossed by this project in the analysis area, 5 are 

known to be 303d water quality limited (Appendix C). As noted above, recent declines 

in Klamath Mountains Province ESU summer/winter run Steelhead are attributed to 

various factors. Further planned development near streams as well as management 

activities on federal lands and road building within the range of this ESU could contribute 

to the further regional loss or degradation of its habitat. Currently planned BLM or USFS 

projects in the vicinity of the Project area include project numbers 18 through 33 and 68 

through 75, including 2 large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and many timber sale 

units (table 10). The specific thinning treatments on these timber sales are unknown, but 

may have an impact on stream conditions. Actions associated with this project combined 

with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative 

effects on this species. 

 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” due to best management practices that would be in place for stream crossings, 

and the small fraction of the range of this species that would be impacted. 

Steelhead, Oregon Coast ESU

USFS Sensitive 

Oregon Coast ESU Steelhead have a global status of Imperiled and are listed by ODFW 

as Sensitive – Vulnerable (ONHIC 2007, NatureServe 2009). This species has been 

documented in the Coos, Coquille, South Umpqua, and Umpqua River HUs in Coos and 

Douglas County. On federal lands, this species has been documented in the Coos Bay, 

Medford, and Roseburg BLM districts and the Umpqua National Forest. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

H-326
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 167

The analysis area for this species is the waterbodies that would be impacted by the 

project, where it is known or suspected to occur on federal lands. Within the analysis 

area, 109 waterbodies would be crossed by the project. Direct effects of the proposed 

action would in general consist of both temporary disturbance and permanent loss or 

alteration of habitat for Oregon Coast Steelhead. Coos Bay and Cooston Channel would 

be crossed using a wet open cut, the only feasible method for crossing such a large 

waterbody. Conventional boring would be used to cross the Kentuck, Willanch, and 

Catching sloughs, and would not be expected to impact these waterbodies. Coos River 

would be crossed using HDD, thereby limiting effects due to sedimentation or vegetation 

removal. In the case of a frac-out, bentonite clay could be released into the waterbody 

causing increased sedimentation. The mainstem, North Fork, Middle Fork, and East Fork 

of the Coquille River, and the Umpqua and South Umpqua Rivers would be crossed 

using a dry open-cut method during the in-water work window recommended by ODFW. 

Of the remaining waterbodies, 44 in the Coos sub-basin, 29 in the Coquille sub-basin, 

and 40 in the South Umpqua sub-basin that may be fish bearing would be crossed using 

dry-open cuts during the in-water work window recommended by ODFW. If fish are 

present in the stream when it is crossed fish salvage would be conducted. This method 

would reduce direct impacts to fish; however, turbidity could be increased downstream of 

the crossing. Effects would be the same as though discussed above for Chinook salmon. 

Cumulative Effects 

Of the waterbodies that would be crossed by this project in the analysis area, 8 

waterbodies in the Coos river sub-basin, 7 waterbodies in the Coquille sub-basin and 12 

waterbodies in the South Umpqua sub-basin are known to have 303d water quality 

listings (Appendix C). As noted above, recent declines in Oregon Coast Steelhead are 

attributed to various factors. BLM or USFS projects that are planned in the vicinity of 

the Project area that could contribute to the direct and indirect effects to this species 

include projects 1 and 18, a grazing allotment and a fuels reduction, as well as 35 through 

64, comprised of commercial timber activities (over 4000 acres), and 4 fish habitat 

restoration projects (table 10). Actions associated with this project combined with past, 

present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal cumulative 

effects on this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but are not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” (MIIH), due to best management practices and waterbody crossing methods that 

would be in place and the small fraction of this species’ habitat that would be impacted. 

Coastal Cutthroat (Oncorhynchus clarki clarki)

Cutthroat are native to Canada, Alaska, and the Pacific Northwest region of the United 

States. Cutthroat spawn in first- and second-order tributaries with gravel bottoms and 

gentle gradients. Spawning adults migrate from saltwater to freshwater streams from late 

winter through spring and may spawn more than once. Young fry move into the channel 

H-327
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 168

margin and backwater habitats during the first several weeks and inhabit the freshwater 

stream for a year or two (up to 8 years in some populations) before entering the sea 

(Fishbase 2008). During the winter, juvenile cutthroat trout use low velocity pools and 

side channels with complex habitat created by large woody debris. This species feeds on 

small fishes, crustaceans and insects. 

The decline of this species is attributed to fishing pressure and habitat disturbance and 

alteration. In a study by Romero, Gresswell and Li (2001), most sources of prey ingested 

by cutthroat trout were greater where shrub cover was more abundant. Systematic 

removal of deciduous riparian vegetation and an increase in conifers may have negatively 

imapcted food resources used by cutthroat (Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic 

Sciences 2005). 

Coastal Cutthroat, Oregon Coast ESU

USFS Sensitive 

The global status of O. clarki as a whole is Apparently Secure. but the subspecies O. c. 

clarki is a federal Species of Concern and is listed as Sensitive – Vulnerable by ODFW 

(ONHIC 2007, NatureServe 2009). It has been documented in the Umpqua National 

Forest and is also documented or suspected in the Coos Bay and Roseburg BLM districts. 

The Coos Bay, Coos, Coquille, South Umpqua, and Umpqua Hills habitat units are 

within the vicinity of the analysis area. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area for this species is streams on federal land that would be impacted by the 

project where these trout are documented or suspected to occur. Within the analysis area, 

109 waterbodies would be crossed by the project. Coos Bay and Cooston Channel would 

be crossed using a wet open cut, the only feasible method for crossing such a large 

waterbody. Conventional boring would be used to cross the Kentuck, Willanch, and 

Catching sloughs, and would not be expected to impact these waterbodies. The Coos 

River would be crossed using HDD, thereby limiting effects due to sedimentation or 

vegetation removal. In the case of a frac-out, bentonite clay could be released into the 

waterbody causing increased sedimentation. The mainstem, North Fork, Middle Fork, 

and East Fork of the Coquille River, and the Umpqua and South Umpqua Rivers would 

be crossed using open trench method during the in-water work window recommended by 

ODFW. Of the remaining crossings, 42 waterbodies in the Coos sub-basin, 33 

waterbodies in the Coquille sub-basin, and 39 waterbodies in the South Umpqua subbasin that may be fish bearing would be crossed using dry open cuts during the in-water 

work window recommended by ODFW. Effects would be the same as those discussed 

above for Chinook salmon. 

Cumulative Effects 

Of the waterbodies that would be crossed by this project in the analysis area, 8 

waterbodies in the Coos river sub-basin, 7 waterbodies in the Coquille sub-basin and 12 

waterbodies in the South Umpqua sub-basin are known to have 303d water quality 

listings (Appendix C). As noted above, recent declines of Oregon Coast cutthroat trout 

H-328
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 169

are attributed to various factors. BLM or USFS projects that are planned in the vicinity 

of the Project area that could contribute to the direct and indirect effects to this species 

include projects 1 and 18, a grazing allotment and a fuels reduction, as well as 35 through 

64, comprised of commercial timber activities (over 4000 acres), and 4 fish habitat 

restoration projects (table 10). Actions associated with this project combined with past, 

present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal cumulative 

effects on this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” due to the best management practices and waterbody crossing methods that 

would be in place. 

Coastal Cutthroat, Southern Oregon/California Coast ESU

USFS Sensitive 

O. clarki as a whole have a global status of Apparently Secure, but the Southern 

Oregon/California Coast ESU of coastal cutthroat trout is a federal Species of Concern 

and is listed by ODFW as Sensitive – Vulnerable (ONHIC 2007, NatureServe 2009). 

This species is documented in Rogue River and its tributaries in the Rogue RiverSiskiyou National Forest, and it is documented or suspected in the Coos Bay and 

Medford BLM districts. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area for Southern Oregon/California Coast cutthroat is the rivers and 

streams that would be impacted by the project with documented or expected presence of 

this species. The range of this species in the analysis area is assumed to be the Rogue 

River basin. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both 

temporary disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for Southern 

Oregon/California Coast cutthroat. The Rogue River would be crossed using HDD, 

thereby limiting effects due to sedimentation or vegetation removal. In the case of a fracout, bentonite clay could be released into the waterbody causing increased sedimentation. 

A total of 48 potentially fish-bearing tributary creeks in the Upper Rogue sub-basin 

would be crossed using a dry open-cut during the in-water work window recommended 

by ODFW. One additional crossing, an aqueduct ditch, would be crossed by 

conventional bore. Effects would be the same as those above described for Chinook 

salmon. 

Cumulative Effects 

Of the waterbodies that would be crossed by this project in the analysis area, five are 

known to be 303d water quality limited (Appendix C). As noted above, recent declines 

of Southern Oregon/California Coast cutthroat are attributed to various factors. Currently 

planned BLM or USFS projects in the vicinity of the Project area include project numbers 

18 through 33 and 68 through 75, including 2 large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) 

H-329
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 170

and many timber sale units (table 10). The specific thinning treatments on these timber 

sales are unknown, but may have an impact on stream conditions. Actions associated 

with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could 

potentially result in cumulative effects on this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” due to the best management practices and waterbody crossing techniques that 

would be implemented during project construction and the small fraction of this species’ 

total range that would be affected. 

AQUATIC INVERTEBRATES 

Surveys were not conducted specifically for special status aquatic invertebrates. The 

information on special status species occurrence is based on several data sources 

including the BLM GeoBOB database (BLM 2006), ORNHIC species request (ORNHIC 

2006), Forest Service database (USFS 2006), StreamNet, aerial photos, and Geographical 

Information System (GIS). 

Pea clam (Pisidium ultramontanum)

BLM Sensitive 

The pea clam is a small freshwater clam from the family Sphaeriidae. These clams prefer 

sand and gravel flats and are found in estuarine herbaceous wetlands and spring-fed 

streams, lakes, and ponds (NatureServe 2009). The pea clam often occurs on the roots of 

Salicornia species (NatureServe 2008). The greatest threat to this species is habitat 

destruction and alteration, especially considering its limited range. Currently, this 

species’ distribution is limited to California and south-central Oregon. The abundance of 

pea clams in Oregon is currently unknown. The global status of this species is Critically 

Imperiled. The pea clam has been documented in Upper Klamath Lake but was not 

found in its associated tributaries (Frest & Johannes 1998). Near the proposed right-ofway, the pea clam is suspected to occur within the BLM’s Coos Bay and Medford 

Districts, and one population was documented approximately 0.2 mile south of MP 

221.83. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area for impacts to the pea clam is all suitable waterbody habitat within the 

portions of the Coos Bay and Medford BLM districts and the Klamath River and its 

tributaries crossed by the project. Coos Bay would be crossed using a wet open cut, the 

only feasible method for crossing such a large waterbody (Coos Bay BLM lands would 

not be affected). Conventional boring would be used to cross the Kentuck and Catching 

sloughs and the Medford Aqueduct and would not be expected to impact these 

waterbodies. The Coos, Rogue and Klamath Rivers would be crossed using HDD, 

H-330
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 171

thereby limiting any effects due to sedimentation or vegetation removal. However, in the 

case of a frac-out, bentonite clay could be released into the waterbody causing increased 

sedimentation. An additional 53 perennial and 24 intermittent waterbodies in the BLM’s 

Coos Bay District, 15 perennial and 46 intermittent waterbodies in the BLM’s Medford 

District, and 3 perennial and 19 intermittent water bodies Klamath County that may 

contain pea clams would be crossed using dry-open cuts during the in-water work 

window recommended by ODFW. 

Impacts to the pea clam could include direct mortality resulting from trenching activities 

within waterbodies, as well as loss of habitat. Due to the limited range and restricted 

mobility of this species, habitat loss could negatively impact this species. Other effects 

could include increased turbidity caused by soil disturbances during trenching and 

waterbody crossing. Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize impacts to 

this species include the use of sediment barriers to prevent/minimize turbidity (see 

Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects 

This species is threatened by habitat destruction and water quality degradation. Though 

one-third of Oregon wetlands are estimated to have been lost since the late 1700s, 

wetlands are now protected under federal law, and loss of estuarine wetlands has slowed 

substantially since the mid-1900s (Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State 

Parks and Recreation Division 1989, Dahl 1990). Of the waterbodies that would be 

crossed by this project in the analysis area, 14 waterbodies in the BLM’s Coos District, 5 

waterbodies in the BLM’s Medford District and 4 waterbodies in the Klamath Sub-basin 

are known to be 303d water quality limited (Appendix C). BLM projects that are planned 

in the vicinity of the Project area that could contribute to the direct and indirect effects to 

this species include: 35 – 54 and 69-75 (table 10). These projects consist of commercial 

timber sales and related activities on over 4000 acres. Actions associated with this 

project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially 

result in cumulative effects on this species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of the limited amount of disturbances which would occur to its 

habitat within the BLM’s Coos Bay and Medford Districts due to best management 

practices and waterbody crossing methods that would be implemented. 

Pacific walker (Pomatiopsis californica)

BLM Sensitive 

The Pacific walker is a semi-aquatic snail that inhabits wet leaf litter and moist vegetation 

within riparian zones in Oregon and California. There are two documented occurrences 

of the Pacific walker in Oregon: 1) one site in the Lower Millicoma River sub-basin in 

northern Coos County, six miles from BLM’s Coos Bay District; and 2) near the Pacific 

H-331
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 172

Coast in Lane County, on the Waldport Ranger District of the Siuslaw National Forest 

(Treneman 2008). As this species has been documented within six miles of the BLM’s 

Coos Bay district and there is suitable habitat there, it is suspected to occur within that 

jurisdictional boundary. The global status of this snail is Critically Imperiled. Threats 

include habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area for impacts to this species is all suitable riparian habitats within the 

portions of the BLM’s Coos Bay district that would be impacted by construction, which 

encompass approximately 22.9 acres (table 5). Impacts to the Pacific walker from the 

proposed Project could include direct mortality resulting from construction activities 

(e.g., crushed by construction equipment during trenching or stringing/lowering in of the 

pipe). Another impact could be loss of suitable moist, shaded riparian habitat. As this 

species has difficulty traversing through unsuitable habitat, the clearing of riparian zones 

would create habitat fragmentation and could potentially isolate sub-populations. 

Fragmentation may also create edge effects, thereby reducing the quality of the remaining 

habitat. Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize impacts to this species 

include replanting of riparian vegetation and the establishment of riparian buffers (see 

Appendix N of the BA). 

Cumulative Effects 

Riparian areas in Oregon have decreased dramatically over the past 200 years, their 

acreage and connectivity lost to development, logging, and grazing. This has likely 

negatively impacted the Pacific walker. The 2008 Resource Management Plans protect 

riparian areas by designating protected zones with specific management objectives 

around streams, ponds, and lakes. Federal protection of water bodies, wetlands, and 

riparian areas will likely increase the quantity and quality of Pacific walker habitat in the 

future. Planned projects in the Coos Bay BLM District include several commercial 

thinning projects (at least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two 

timber sales (2 sites, unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage; table 10). 

Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future 

activities could potentially result in cumulative effects on this species. 

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of the limited amount of disturbances to riparian zones which 

would occur within the BLM’s Coos District. 

PLANTS 

Surveys were conducted for all vascular and non-vascular species on federal lands. 

Botanists worked in pairs or singly and walked the survey area on foot. Full coverage 

complete surveys were conducted along the centerline and in the construction ROW. 

H-332
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 173

Along the corridor margins, surveys were conducted in an intuitive-controlled meander, 

where botanists stratified their survey effort, focusing on habitat(s) with potential for 

special status species. Botanists carried aerial photo and topographic maps of the survey 

area, and GPS unit with 30-foot accuracy, compass, and altimeter to assist in orientation. 

Botanists recorded all common species encountered in field notebooks. Species that 

could not be easily identified in the field were collected and identified later in the lab. 

Botanists maintained field notes of habitat encountered, and recorded mileposts (or acres) 

considered to be suitable habitat for federal or state listed species. 

When a special status vascular or non-vascular plant species was encountered, botanists 

recorded the GPS location, determined the area and population (i.e., number of plants) of 

the plant site location, recorded habitat data and associated species, and mapped the site 

on 1:200 scale maps. Plant sites located on federal lands were flagged for future location 

and identification. Plant site locations were later digitized into GIS shape files and site 

maps were created. 

Botany surveys were conducted between April 13 and August 20, 2007, and April 28 and 

August 6, 2008. More specific dates are shown in the table below: 

Project Eco-Regions Milepost Vascular Surveys Non-Vascular Surveys 

Coast and Coastal Forest 0-12 July 12-13 and August 12, 

2007 

Coast Range Moist Forest 16-48 August 10-12, 2007 May 2-11, 2007 

Umpqua Foothills and Valley 48-89 May 17-June 15, 2007; 

July 7-28, 2007; August 

18, 2007; June 20 and 

August 6, 2008 

June 1-July 28, 2007 

South Umpqua Moist Forest 89-113 June 7-August 2, 2007 

June 20 and August 6, 

2008 

April 13-30, 2007; April 

28-May 23, 2008 

Rogue Foothills Dry Conifer 

Forest and Valley Edges 

113-150 

June 14-29, 2007 

Cascade Moist Forest 150-179 July 7-July 28, 2007; July 14 and August 3, 2008 

East Cascade Dry Forest and July 2-13, 2007 

Klamath Basin 

179-217 

June 30-July 3, 2008 

Since surveys were conducted specifically for these species and hence confirm 

presence/absence, it is assumed that the analysis area includes only areas where species 

were found during botanical surveys. 

LICHENS

Pin lichen (yellow-rim needle lichen) (Chaenotheca subroscida)

USFS Sensitive 

In the Pacific Northwest of North America, most known occurrences of Chaenotheca 

subroscida are on the bark of conifers greater than 200 years old, with occasional 

H-333
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 174

occurrences on younger trees (e.g., 150 years old) in the southern part of its range, 

including the Klamath region (Peterson unpublished data in NatureServe 2008). The 

removal of old forests in North America by logging and through the rest of the species’ 

distribution has had severe impacts on the number of populations, population sizes, and 

average dispersal distance necessary for colonization of new substrates since preindustrial times. Although little is known about the reproductive and dispersal biology of 

C. subroscida, it is thought that the species can overcome some habitat fragmentation 

(OSU 2008). The global status of C. subroscida is Vulnerable. Since this species is quite 

rare in the Pacific Northwest and in other parts its distribution (California, Canada, and 

northern Europe), the species is at some risk of extirpation or extinction due to logging of 

old growth forests (OSU 2008). 

Six pin lichen sites were located in the Project area. Each was on the bark of the base of 

mature Douglas-fir or white fir trees in shady to partially shady conifer forest habitat. 

Four of the sites are located on the BLM Roseburg District in Douglas county, and two 

sites are located on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, one each in Jackson and 

Klamath counties. The six pin lichen sites were located at the following locations: 

• One site at MP 75.36, located in the construction right-of-way and TEWA; 

• One site at MP 78.20, located in the construction right-of-way near the centerline; 

• One site at MP 80.30, located in the construction right-of-way, 10 feet from the 

centerline; 

• One site at MP 80.46, located outside the construction right-of-way, 80 feet from the 

centerline; 

• One site at MP 154.20, located in the construction right-of-way, 15 feet from the 

centerline; and 

• One site at MP 173.20 – 173.55, scattered in the construction footprint and action area 

east and west of the right-of-way. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for C. subroscida. Construction 

activities could adversely affect this species by directly removing/damaging the 

individuals and/or disturbing the bark on which this species grows. Creating a treeless 

corridor along the right-of-way through some forests could also fragment C. subroscida 

populations if this species is unable to reproduce across a distance of 90 feet (over the 

short term – construction) or 30 feet (over the long term – operation). Clearing of forest 

habitat during pipeline construction would have indirect effects due to the alteration of 

the microhabitats where C. subroscida is currently found as well as to habitats this 

species has the potential to colonize. Changes to the temperature, light and moisture 

regimes due to both forest loss and forest fragmentation could result in habitat becoming 

unsuitable for this species. 

Cumulative Effects 

The primary threat to this species is the destruction of old growth forests; habitat 

fragmentation is also a concern, although little is known about the dispersal capabilities 

H-334
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 175

of this species. Over the past 200 years, logging has dramatically decreased late 

successional and old-growth forest habitats in Oregon upon which C. subroscida

depends. Only eight percent of this type of habitat remains from historical times in the 

Coast Range of Oregon, 23 percent in the West Cascades, and 25 percent in the Klamath 

Mountains province (ODFW 2006). The Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Service land) and 

2008 Resource Management Plans (BLM land) designate late successional and oldgrowth forests as protected areas and manage them for optimal habitat characteristics 

such as down wood. This would increase the quality and quantity of habitat for C. 

subroscida in the analysis area in the future. There is one federal project planned within 

the vicinity of where this plant was found during botanical surveys (project 32, table 10); 

it is a grazing allotment (255,592.5 acres) in the Rogue-River-Siskiyou National Forest 

that overlaps with the site at MP 154.20. Actions associated with this project combined 

with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative 

effects on this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because while the species has very specific habitat requirements, is sensitive to 

habitat alteration, and is slow to recolonize after disturbance, the reproductive capabilities 

are poorly studied, and it may be able to survive and reproduce adjacent to the right-ofway. 

Beard lichen (Usnea longissima)

USFS Sensitive 

The global status of U. longissima is Apparently Secure. U. longissima primarily 

reproduces asexually by fragmentation (Keon 2002). The propagules disperse only short 

distances (typically less than 15 feet; Esseen 1985; Keon & Muir 2002). Distribution 

data are incomplete; however, U. longissima has been documented in British Columbia, 

Quebec, Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, and Sweden (NatureServe 2008). In 

Oregon, it has been documented in Coos and Douglas Counties. One specimen was 

observed on BLM land at MP 16.90 outside of the right-of-way, and unknown numbers 

were observed at MP 27.30 outside of the right-of-way and at MP 27.40 on the pipeline 

centerline. Logging of mature forest, air pollution, and over-collecting for floral 

arrangements are threats to this lichen (Carlberg and Peterson 2005). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys.. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both 

temporary disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for U. longissima. 

Construction activities could adversely affect this species by directly removing or 

damaging individuals or harvesting trees to which they are affixed. Clearing of forest 

habitat during management activities on federal lands and pipeline construction would 

have indirect effects due to the alteration of the microhabitats U. longissima currently 

H-335
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 176

inhabits. Changes to the temperature and moisture regimes due to both forest loss and 

forest fragmentation could result in degradation of the habitat this species currently 

inhabits as well as any habitat that the species has potential to inhabit (undisturbed 

forest). Studies in Sweden demonstrated that variations in microclimate specifically 

(rather than the forest structure) determine the distribution of the lichen within a forest 

stand. While U. longissima occurs in high numbers in forest stands that had undergone 

relatively large changes, the highest abundance of the lichen was found in less disturbed 

forest patches (Wanglund 2008). 

Cumulative Effects 

The greatest threat to U. longissima is habitat destruction, which also destroys individuals 

living on trees in the area removed. Over the past 200 years, logging has dramatically 

decreased late successional and old-growth forest habitats in Oregon upon which U. 

longissima depends. Only eight percent of this type of habitat remains from historical 

times in the Coast Range of Oregon, and 23 percent in the West Cascades (ODFW 2006). 

The Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Service land) and 2008 Resource Management Plans 

(BLM land) designate late successional and old-growth forests as protected areas and 

manage them for optimal habitat characteristics. This would increase the quality and 

quantity of U. longissima habitat in the analysis area in the future. There are currently no 

planned federal projects near the locations where this lichen was observed during the 

biological surveys. Thus, actions associated with this project combined with past, present 

and foreseeable future activities would not result in cumulative effects on this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of its Apparently Secure global status, the small fraction of the habitat 

in its range that would be impacted by the project, best management practices and habitat 

restoration and mitigation that would be carried out in association with project 

construction, and the protected status of late successional and old-growth forests in the 

analysis area. 

VASCULAR PLANTS

Green flowered wild ginger (Asarum wagneri)

BLM Sensitive 

The global status of green-flowered wild ginger is Vulnerable, and it is an Oregon 

Department of Agriculture candidate for listing (ONHIC 2007, NatureServe 2009). 

Distribution of this species is limited to the Cascade Range in Douglas, Jackson and 

Klamath Counties in Oregon (FNA 2008a). It grows in the understory of fir (Abies spp.) 

dominated forests and open boulder fields in hemlock (Tsuga spp.) forests from 

approximately 4,900 to 10,500 feet and flowers May through July (FNA 2008c). The 

decline of this species is generally attributed habitat loss and disturbance due to logging. 

H-336
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 177

The following green-flowered wild ginger plants were located during surveys within the 

project vicinity (4,780+ total): 

• 75 plants at MP 168.90 scattered over 5 acres from centerline to 200 feet east and 

west of centerline, 

• 5 at MP 170.20 near the centerline, 

• an unknown number at MP 170.60 scattered from centerline to 200 feet east and 

west of centerline, 

• 500 at the Clover Creek reroute (no mileposts but between MP 170 and 173) in 

many small scattered patches, and 

• 4,000 at MP 173.2 to 174.6 in many small scattered patches. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat by directly removing or damaging 

plants during construction. Construction activities could also create opportunities for 

invasive species that could outcompete and/or exclude green-flowered wild ginger from 

areas previously inhabited or from expanding its range; however, Pacific Connector 

would monitor and treat noxious weeds throughout the life of the project. 

Cumulative Effects 

The Northwest Forest Plan and 2008 Resource Management Plans contain management 

methods and goals dealing with logging practices on federal lands in the analysis area. 

More sustainable logging practices will likely maintain and enhance forests used by 

green-flowered wild ginger. 

Projects 32, 33, 76, and 77 (table 10) are planned in the vicinity of where this species was 

observed during the biological surveys: these projects consist of two grazing allotments 

(276,929.2 acres) near the siting at MP 168.9, a timber sale (1 site) near the siting at 

Clover Creek reroute and the sitings between MP 173.2 to 174.6, and a fuels treatment 

(404.6 acres) near the siting at MP 174.6. Actions associated with this project combined 

with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative 

impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because many (over 4,780) plants were found in the vicinity of the project and 

because the locations of these plans are now known, they can be marked, fenced off, and 

avoided during construction if feasible. Also, reproduction of a flowering plant is 

unlikely to be precluded by a 30-foot gap in forested vegetation, so without more detailed 

information on the reproductive capacities of this particular species, it can be assumed 

that plants not directly taken would still be largely able to reproduce and populations 

would not be fragmented. 

H-337
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 178

Inland sedge (Carex interior)

USFS Sensitive 

The inland sedge inhabits wet meadows, wet prairies, calcareous fens, coniferous and 

deciduous swamps, river banks, lakeshores, seeps, and wetland and riparian areas of 

yellow pine forest at elevations from 3500 to 5000 feet (Calflora 2008b). It thrives in full 

sun but will grow in partial shade. This species blooms in mid spring, fruiting in late 

spring to early summer. Inland sedge presumably hybridizes with C. sterilis, C. echinata, 

and (rarely) C. atlantica. Inland sedge is widely distributed across the U.S. and Canada 

with thousands of occurrences known(FNA 2008d, NatureServe 2009), and its global 

status is Secure. Its bioregional distribution includes the Klamath and High Cascade 

Ranges at elevations from 3600 to 7000 feet (Jepson Flora Project 2008). Two patches of 

inland sedge were recorded 30 feet from centerline in a wetland at MP 133.30. 

The decline of inland sedge is attributed to loss of wet meadows and fens due to 

conversion to other uses, fire suppression and invasion by trees, introduction of invasive 

emergent species, beaver activity that alters the water chemistry of calcareous fen 

communities, and potentially acid rain (USFS 2008c). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat by directly removing or damaging 

plants, altering the hydrology of saturated soils, compacting soils, or disturbing the soil 

layers for inland sedge. Construction activities within emergent wetlands could adversely 

affect this species. Indirect effects could include removal of currently unoccupied but 

suitable habitat such as wet meadows, wet prairies, calcareous fens, coniferous and 

deciduous swamps, river banks, lakeshores, seeps, and wetland and riparian areas of 

yellow pine forests.Construction activities could create opportunities for invasive species 

that could outcompete and/or exclude C. interior from areas previously inhabited; 

however, Pacific Connector would monitor and treat noxious weeds for the life of the 

project. 

Cumulative Effects 

A major threat to inland sedge is loss of habitat. Wetlands in the Project area have been 

lost due to draining and conversion to other land uses. Continued canopy closure of wet 

meadows resulting from years of fire suppression may continue to shrink existing 

populations of interior sedge. In addition, grazing of wet meadows and development of 

cattle troughs and irrigation ditches that dry down wetlands may also contribute to the 

decline of this species. Though one-third of Oregon wetlands are estimated to have been 

lost since the late 1700s, wetlands are now protected under federal law (Dahl 1990). The 

Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) and the 2008 Resource Management Plans 

(BLM land) also protect wetlands (USFS and BLM 1994). Riparian areas have also 

decreased dramatically, their acreage and connectivity lost to development, logging, and 

grazing. The Northwest Forest Plan and Resource Management Plans protect riparian 

areas by designating protected areas with specific management objectives around 

streams, ponds, and lakes. Federal protection of water bodies, wetlands, and riparian 

H-338
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 179

areas will likely increase the quantity and quality of interior sedge habitat in the future. 

There are currently no other projects planned within the vicinity of where this species 

was observed during the biological surveys. Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities would not likely result in 

cumulative impacts to this species.

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because while this plant may be declining, the 2 individual patches within the 

project corridor could be avoided by the use of flagging and exclusion fencing where 

feasible, and vegetation mats used to protect wetlands during wetland crossings and 

where this species is present. 

Coastal lip-fern (Cheilanthes intertexta)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Assessment 

This small, rhizomatous fern generally inhabits rock crevices, outcrops, or cliff faces and 

tolerates a wide range of canopy closures. This species hybridizes with C. covillei and C. 

gracillima. Typical vegetative communities that this species inhabits include mixed 

evergreen, yellow pine, red fir, lodgepole, and Douglas-fir forests at elevations between 

sea level and 6500 feet (Calflora 2004a). The global status of the coastal lip-fern is 

Secure; however, southern Oregon is the northern extent of its range and its state-level 

status is Critically Imperiled (NatureServe 2009). The only known occurrences of C. 

intertexta within Oregon are in Douglas and Jackson Counties (Jepson 1993). There has 

been at least one documented occurrence of .C. intertexta within the proposed pipeline 

right-of-way, approximately 413 feet southwest of MP 149.9. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for this species. Construction 

activities could adversely affect this species if rock and cliff faces are damaged during 

management activities on federal lands or pipeline construction, although rock outcrops 

and cliffs could likely be avoided as such terrain is marginally suitable for operating 

logging equipment. A potential indirect effect is the alteration of forest microclimates 

which could affect the suitability of potential habitat for coastal lip-fern, thereby reducing 

its potential survival and reproductive success in the areas it currently inhabits as well as 

currently unoccupied but suitable habitats. Forest fragmentation and edge effects could 

also create opportunities for invasive species that could outcompete or exclude this 

species; however, Pacific Connector would monitor and treat noxious weeds for the life 

of the project. 

Cumulative Effects 

H-339
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 180

The Northwest Forest Plan and 2008 Resource Management Plans contain management 

methods and goals dealing with logging practices on federal lands in the analysis area. 

More sustainable logging practices will likely maintain and enhance forests used by the 

coastal lip-fern. There are currently no planned projects within the vicinity of the single 

documented occurrence within the analysis area. Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities would not likely result in 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species”. This conclusion is reached because of its Secure global status, best 

management practices which call for marking, fencing off, and avoiding direct impacts to 

known populations within the right-of-way if feasible, and the unsuitability of its main 

habitat (i.e., rock crevices and cliffs) for pipeline construction, making it likely that areas 

where this species potentially occurs would be avoided. 

Clustered lady's-slipper (Cypripedium fasciculatum) 

USFS Sensitive, BLM Sensitive 

The global status of the clustered lady’s-slipper is Apparently Secure, and in Oregon it is 

considered Vulnerable, with an estimated state-wide population of 4,500 individuals 

(NatureServe 2009). This plant flowers from April to August, and is pollinated by a tiny 

wasp (USFS 2008b). Clustered lady’s-slipper is found in California, Colorado, Montana, 

Oregon, Washington, Wyoming, and Utah in a variety of community types, including 

mixed conifer, pine, and black oak forest (Calflora 2008). Within Oregon, it is typically 

found in Douglas-fire forests in the western interior valleys and the Klamath Mountains 

at elevations from 1300 to 5300 feet. Clustered lady’s-slipper is usually associated with 

rocky to loamy substrates at elevations ranging from 1,083 to 5,725 feet, usually on 

northern aspects (Seevers and Lang 1998). The primary components of suitable habitat 

are proper temperature and moisture regimes and 60 to 100 percent canopy cover 

(Seevers and Lang 1998). Within the Project area, this species is known to occur within 

Douglas and Jackson Counties. At least one population has been found within the 

construction right-of-way, approximately 30 feet north of MP 104.10. 

In the Survey and Manage Plan for the Klamath Mountain Province, the BLM listed 

physical disturbance and microclimate changes as the main threats to clustered lady’sslipper (BLM 2008). In addition, the BLM notes that fire suppression may be an 

important factor in the decline of this species and points to research by Harrod and 

Knecht (1996) providing evidence that clustered lady’s-slipper is fire-intolerant. Other 

risk factors are the small size and isolated nature of most populations, and destruction of 

habitat through conversion to other uses (NatureServe 2009). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

H-340
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 181

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for clustered lady’s-slipper. 

Direct effects to this species would include mortality resulting from complete removal of 

plants or the exposure of rhizomes during timber removal. Studies have shown that 

exposure of rhizomes will cause mortality (Knecht 1996). Although spring growth arises 

from below-ground overwintering buds, clustered lady’s-slipper is sensitive to the 

removal of aboveground biomass, and its removal will result in a loss of that year’s 

vegetation or complete mortality of the plant (Sheviak 1990). Disturbances to soils can 

adversely affect the mycorrhizal fungi on which clustered lady’s-slipper depends for seed 

germination and early survival (Seevers and Lang 1998). The clearing of forest habitat 

could cause changes to the temperature and moisture regimes due to both forest loss and 

forest fragmentation could result in habitat becoming unsuitable for this species or create 

opportunities for invasive species. 

Cumulative Effects 

Threats to this species include disturbance and disruption of microclimate requirements. 

Late successional forests have declined sharply in Oregon over the last 200 years due to 

logging. Only 25 percent of this type of habitat remains from historical times in the 

Klamath Mountains province in Oregon (ODFW 2006). The Northwest Forest Plan 

(Forest Service land) and 2008 Resource Management Plans (BLM land) designate late 

successional and old-growth forests as protected areas and manage them for optimal 

habitat characteristics, including down wood. This would increase the quality and 

quantity of clustered lady’s-slipper habitat in the analysis area in the future. Other 

projects that are planned near the location where this species has been documented 

include projects 3 and 4 (table 10); these projects involve a clearcut (27.6 acres) and 

thinning (8.9 acres) near the siting at MP 104.10. Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impacts Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of this species’ Apparently Secure global status, its widespread 

distribution, the very small fraction of this species’ entire range in the western U.S. that 

would be impacted, and the known location of one population within the right-of-way 

which could be protected from direct effects by exclusion fencing if feasible. 

Siskiyou false rue anemone (Enemion stipitatum)

USFS Sensitive 

Enemion stipitatum (previously Isopyrum stipitatum) flowers in late winter to early 

spring. It is native to northern California and Douglas, Jackson, Josephine, Lane, Polk, 

and Yamhill Counties in Oregon (NatureServe 2008). Its global status is Apparently 

Secure, and its status in Oregon is Vulnerable. It grows at elevations between about 

H-341
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 182

2,000 and 4,600 feet. Siskiyou false rue anomone inhabits mountain shrub, woodland, 

chaparral, moist deciduous or mixed evergreen forests, and occasionally open pasture 

habitats (FNA 2008b). The decline of this species is attributed to competition from 

invasive species. 

The following occurrences of Siskiyou false rue anomone (a total of 20,740 plants) were 

discovered during surveys within the project vicinity: 

• 500 plants at MP 119 from 40 to 200 feet of old centerline, 

• 200 plants at MP 123.30, 

• 20,000 plants over 4 acres at MP 123.45 (a few on pipeline centerline), and 

• 40 plants at MP 124.18 100 feet northeast of the centerline. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat by directly removing or damaging 

plants and disturbing or compacting the soils. In addition, construction activities could 

create opportunities for invasive species that could outcompete and/or exclude Siskiyou 

false rue anemone from areas previously inhabited. Indirect effects could also include 

disturbance or removal of currently unoccupied but suitable habitat. 

Cumulative Effects 

Development, overgrazing, and logging could contribute to the further loss of Siskiyou 

false rue anomone habitat and increased mortality of this species. Shrub-steppe habitat in 

Oregon is prevalent in the state, but has also suffered widespread losses due to 

conversion to agriculture and development, unmanaged grazing, invasive species, and 

altered fire regimes (ODFW 2006). On BLM land, the 2008 Resource Management Plan 

calls for removal of conifers that are encroaching on grass- and shrublands, and 

revegetating degraded areas with native species. These habitat management practices 

should increase the quantity and quality of Siskiyou false rue anomone habitat in the 

future. Projects that are planned in the vicinity of where this species was observed during 

the biological surveys include projects 68 through 71 (table 10). These projects are all 

timber sales (5 sites) in the Medford BLM District. Actions associated with this project 

combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in 

minimal cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of its Apparently Secure global status, the large number of plants (over 

20,000) found in the vicinity of the proposed Project, and best management practices 

which call for avoiding direct impacts to sensitive plant species during construction if 

feasible. 

H-342
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 183

Slender meadow-foam (Limnanthes gracilis ssp. gracilis)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Sensitive 

Slender meadow-foam is a small annual herb and is designated as an obligate wetland 

species (USDA 2008). This species occurs in open habitats, including serpentine valley 

bottomlands, meadows, intermittent creeks, depressions, swales, and ditches. Its narrow 

distribution is limited to California and the southwestern corner of Oregon. Within the 

analysis area, slender meadow-foam is known to occur within Douglas and Jackson 

Counties and there is one documented occurrence within the project right-of-way 215 feet 

north of MP 51.64. 

The global status and Oregon-specific status of slender meadow-foam is Imperiled 

(NatureServe 2009). It is declining due to its rarity, limited habitat, development, 

logging activities, cattle grazing, and a high occurrence of this species on private land 

impacted by residential and commercial development (NatureServe 2009). Impacts from 

off-road vehicles and road construction and maintenance also affect both public and 

privately owned land where this species is found. Other potential threats include 

agriculture conversion, ditch construction and maintenance, and competition from exotic 

weeds (NatureServe 2008). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for slender meadow-foam. 

Construction activities within wetland systems could adversely affect this species by 

removal or damage to plants, although wetland crossing practices would be followed to 

avoid impacts to wetlands, for example by placement of vegetation mats. Construction 

activities could indirectly affect slender meadow-foam by altering the hydrology of 

wetlands, compacting soils, disturbing the soil layers, or by introducing invasive species 

into wetland systems, all potentially reducing successful reproduction of the species in 

the effected area. 

Cumulative Effects 

Meadow habitat has been lost and degraded over the past 200 years, largely due to 

unsustainable grazing and fire suppression. Removing fire from a system allows 

succession to proceed, leading to the encroachment of woody shrubs and eventually trees, 

on open areas. Riparian areas and wetlands where slender meadow-foam can be found 

have been damaged and removed by logging practices, draining, and conversion to other 

uses. However, the Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Service land) and the 2008 Resource 

Management Plans (BLM land) have special land use allocations around wetlands and 

riparian areas that protect these areas. This will likely lead to improved quantity and 

quality of suitable slender meadow-foam habitat within the analysis area. Other projects 

that are planned in the vicinity of where L. gracilis gracilis was observed within the 

analysis area include projects 66 and 67 (table 10). These projects are both timber sales 

H-343
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 184

(4 sites). Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable 

future activities could potentially result in minimal cumulative impacts to this species.

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because known locations discovered within the right-of-way would be marked, 

fenced off, and not subjected to direct impacts during construction if feasible, best 

management practices and wetland crossing procedures which would be applied, and 

federal protection of wetland habitats on BLM and Forest Service land. 

Detling's microseris (Microseris laciniata spp. detlingii)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Sensitive 

Detlings’s microseris is a perennial dicot in the aster (Asteraceae) family that typically 

occurs in open woodlands, grasslands, and shrublands with herbaceous understories on 

moist heavy clay soils (FNA 2008a). Clonal reproduction occurs by buds arising on 

lateral roots. Distribution of the detlingii subspecies is limited to Oregon and parts of 

California at elevations from 2,000 to 5,000 feet, in particular in the Siskiyou Pass region 

and adjacent foothills of southern Jackson County, Oregon, and Siskiyou County, 

California (FNA 2008a). Within the analysis area, a total of approximately 615 

individuals of Detling’s microseris were recorded: 

• Two populations adjacent to the pipeline’s right-of-way: 15 individuals near MP 

141.20 and 300 individuals near road 34-IE-30.1, and 

• Two populations within the right-of-way: 100 individuals at MP 131.40 and over 

200 individuals at MP 141.53-141.88. 

The global and Oregon-specific status of Detling’s microseris is Vulnerable, with 56 

occurrences known in the state (NatureServe 2009). The Draft Klamath/Central Pacific 

Coast Restoration Strategy (FWS 1997) listed Detling’s microseris as “at risk within the 

Klamath Ecoregion”. The decline of this species is primarily attributed to development 

of its open woodland habitat (NatureServe 2008). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for Detling’s microseris. 

Construction activities could directly impact this species by removing or damaging 

plants. As this species requires dense heavy clay soils, indirect impact would occur if 

soil layers are disturbed. Soil compaction or disturbance to soil layers could potentially 

reduce successful reproduction of the species and disturb potential habitat for this species 

in the analysis area. In addition, construction activities could create opportunities for 

H-344
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 185

invasive species that could outcompete and/or exclude Detling’s microseris from areas 

previously inhabited.

Cumulative Effects 

The primary threat to this species is habitat loss. Under the Northwest Forest Plan and 

the 2008 Resource Management Plans, there would be minimal development in open 

woodland habitats on federal land. This protection will likely lead to the development of 

increased amounts of suitable Detling’s microseris habitat. Another factor that has 

decreased open woodlands in the analysis area is fire suppression, which leads to more 

dense brushy understories and denser stands of trees. Other projects that are planned in 

the vicinity where this subspecies has been documented within the analysis area are 

projects 74 and 75 (table 10); both of these projects are timber sales in the Medford BLM 

District. Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable 

future activities would not likely result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of the fencing off and avoidance of known populations within the right 

of way if feasible and noxious weed control and restoration of altered habitat in the rightof-way that would be implemented. 

Tehama navarretia (Navarretia heterandra)

BLM Assessment 

Tehama navarretia is found in open wet grassy meadows and vernal pools within 

California and Oregon at elevations between 98 to 312 feet. This species blooms from 

April through June. It is classified as an obligate wetland species within California; 

however, insufficient information is available to determine its habitat status in Oregon 

(USDA 2008). Tehama navarretia is known to occur within Jackson County, Oregon and 

has been documented at multiple locations within and adjacent to the pipeline right-ofway within the vicinity of MPs 125 through 131 and MPs 140 through 142. Together the 

populations observed within the right-of-way number just over 20,090 individuals. The 

global status of Tehama navarretia is Vulnerable due to a low number of total 

occurrences and conversion of habitat to development and agriculture, especially in 

Oregon. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat by directly removing or damaging 

plants, altering the hydrology of wetlands, compacting soils, or disturbing soil layers. 

Construction activities within vernal pools and other emergent wetlands could adversely 

affect this species. These could include disturbance or removal of currently unoccupied 

but suitable habitat for this species (i.e., wet meadows and vernal pools). In addition, 

H-345
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 186

construction activities could create opportunities for invasive species that could 

outcompete and/or exclude Tehama navarretia from areas previously inhabited. 

Degradation of wetlands and introduction of invasive species would be minimized by 

implementing best management practices and following wetland crossing and noxious 

weed control procedures during construction. 

Cumulative Effects 

The primary threat to this species is habitat loss. Wetlands have been negatively 

impacted by human activity over the past 200 years;only an estimated one-third of 

wetlands present in historical times in Oregon are extant (Dahl 1990). Wetlands now are 

protected by federal laws, and the Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) and the 2008 

Resource Management Plans (BLM lands) protect wetlands from degradation and loss by 

designating specific land use designations and associated management strategies. In the 

future, these protections will likely lead to enhanced wetland habitat in the analysis area, 

which would benefit the Tehama navarretia. Projects that are planned in the vicinity of 

where this species has been documented in the analysis area include projects 69 through 

72, 74, and 75 (table 10). These projects include six timber sales (9 sites) in the Medford 

BLM District. Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because the individuals found within the pipeline right-of-way and vicinity 

would be protected from direct effects by flagging and exclusion where feasible and 

impacts to wetlands and the spread of noxious weeds would be minimized by following 

wetland crossing and weed control procedures. 

Marigold pincushion plant (Navarettia tagetina)

USFS Sensitive 

The marigold pincushion blooms May through June. The distribution of this species is 

Klickitat County, Washington south to California in dry, open areas at low elevations 

(Burke Museum 2006). In Oregon, the marigold pincushion plant has been observed in 

Josephine, Douglas, Jackson, Wasco, and Union counties, though it may be extirpated 

from Douglas and Josephine counties (NatureServe 2009). 

 

The following occurrences of marigold pincushion plants (a total of 2,380 individuals) 

were documented in the analysis area during botanical surveys: 

• 40 plants on trees and shrubs on centerline to 200 feet east and 125 feet west of 

centerline at MP 119.70 to 119.75, 

• 20 plants scattered through construction corridor at MP 121.30, 

• 400 plants in small patches over 0.4 acres in openings near right-of-way MP 

126.90, 

• 60 plants in 2 chaparral openings within right-of-way at MP127.50, 

H-346
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 187

• 300 plants in 2 isolated populations outside of right-of-way on access roads at MP 

128.00, 

• 40 plants over 0.1 acre within and east of right-of-way and along access roads at 

MP 128.40, 

• 500 hundred plants over 1.5 acres along centerline to 200 feet southwest of 

centerline at MP 140.18, 

• 1,000 plants scattered over 4 acres at MP 140.45, and 

• 20 plants on centerline at MP 140.90.

The global status of the marigold pincushion plant is Secure, and its status in Oregon is 

Apparently Secure. Little is known about the decline of this species; however, the 

decline of the genus Navarettia is attributed to livestock grazing. This species was 

dropped from the 2007 version of the Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species of 

Oregon list produced by the Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center for being too 

common (ONHIC 2007). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat by directly removing or damaging 

plants during construction. Indirect effects could include disturbance or removal of 

currently unoccupied but suitable habitat (i.e., dry, open areas at low elevations). 

Construction activities could create opportunities for invasive species that could 

outcompete and/or exclude the marigold pincushion plant from areas previously inhabited 

or prevent it from colonizing new areas. Introduction of invasive species would be 

minimized by implementing noxious weed control procedures during construction, and 

Pacific Connector plans to monitor and treat noxious weeds for the life of the project. 

Cumulative Effects 

Under the Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) and 2008 Resource Management 

Plans (BLM land), the goal on federal land is sustainable grazing practices and the 

prevention of shrub and tree encroachment onto grasslands. These management 

protocols should protect habitat for marigold pincushion plant. Other projects that are 

planned in the vicinity of where this species was documented within the analysis area 

include projects 72, 74, and 74 (table 10); these three projects are timber sales (3 sites) in 

the Medford BLM District. Actions associated with this project combined with past, 

present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in minimal cumulative 

impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of this species’ Secure global status, and because of the very small 

fraction of its total range that would be impacted. 

H-347
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 188

Sculptured popcorn-flower (Plagiobothrys glyptocarpus)

USFS Sensitive, BLM Assessment 

Sculptured popcorn-flower is a small annual associated with moist places, grasslands, and 

vernal pools. It occurs in Jackson County, Oregon and the Coast Range Mountains of 

California. The population in Oregon is estimated to be 14,000 plants. However, this 

can be misleading because this species is an annual that can have large fluctuations in 

numbers. Populations are assumed to be stable and no specific threats are known. The 

global status and Oregon-specific status of sculptured popcorn-flower is Vulnerable. 

This species is assumed to be fairly resistant to non-destructive intrusion (NatureServe 

2008). 

One population of sculptured popcorn flower was located in the BLM Medford District, 

150 feet north of the project construction right-of-way near milepost 130.30. The site 

includes 23 plants in a 50 square foot area in vernally moist soils within grasslandchaparral habitat. Avoidance of the site is feasible given the location outside of the 

construction right-of-way and the lack of TEWAs and UCSAs in the vicinity of the site. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat by directly removing or damaging 

plants, altering the hydrology of saturated soils, compacting soils, or disturbing soil 

layers. Construction activities within vernal pools and other emergent wetlands could 

adversely affect this species. Indirect effects could include disturbance or removal of 

currently unoccupied but suitable habitat for this species (i.e., wet meadows and vernal 

pools). In addition, construction activities could create opportunities for invasive species 

that could outcompete and/or exclude sculptured popcorn-flower from areas previously 

inhabited; however, Pacific Connector plans to monitor and treat noxious weeds for the 

life of the project. 

Cumulative Effects 

The habitat types preferred by the sculptured popcorn-flower have been negatively 

impacted by human activities over the past 200 years. Wetlands have been degraded; an 

estimated one-third of wetlands present in historical times in Oregon remain (Dahl 1990). 

Wetlands now are protected by federal laws, and the Northwest Forest Plan and the 2008 

Resource Management Plans for BLM lands protect wetlands from degradation and loss 

by designating specific land use designations and associated management strategies. 

Native grasslands have also decreased and are one of the most imperiled habitats in the 

western U.S., including Oregon, due to conversion to agriculture, development, invasion 

by non-native plant species, and fire suppression. In the Coast Range and West Cascades 

of Oregon, for example, grassland loss since historical times is estimated at 99 percent 

(ODFW 2006). On BLM land, the 2008 Resource Management Plan calls for removal of 

conifers that are encroaching on grasslands, and revegetating degraded areas with native 

grasses. Both the Northwest Forest Plan and the 2008 Resource Management Plans call 

H-348
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 189

for sustainable grazing practices on federal land. These habitat management practices 

and the protection of wetlands and grasslands, vital habitat components for the sculptured 

popcorn flower, are likely to increase the quantity and quality of habitat for this species 

on federal land in the future. There are currently no other projects planned within the 

vicinity of the analysis area where this species has been documented. Actions associated 

with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities would not 

likely result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because plants found in the analysis area would be flagged where feasible and 

because of wetland crossing procedures that would be implemented, protecting habitat. 

Scribner’s grass (Scribneria bolanderi)

USFS Sensitive 

Scribner’s grass inhabits yellow pine, red fir lodgepole pine, and subalpine forest, foothill 

woodland, chaparral, and valley grassland habitats. It grows in dry, sandy to rocky soils 

including roadsides at elevations from sea level to 9000 feet (in California). It blooms 

from April through May (Hitchcock et al 1969). 

The distribution of this species includes Klickitat and Skamania Counties (two 

occurrences) in Washington and Douglas, Josephine, Jackson, Hood River, and Wasco 

Counties in Oregon, and it is widespread in California (NatureServe 2008). Scribner’s 

grass was observed (total of 11,760+ plants) at the following project milepost locations: 

• 1,000 plants within 0.1 acre outside of 95-foot wide construction corridor at 

119.70 MP, 

• 140 plants scattered over 0.15 acre within construction corridor at MP 121.30, 

• 200 plants over 5000 square foot area at edge of the TEWA at MP 123.30, 

• 50+ plants within 0.3 acre just west of centerline at MP 124.63, 

• 80 plants over o.3 acre outside of construction zone at MP 124.68, 

• Unknown number of plants over 0.25 acre about 30 feet east of centerline at MP 

124.83, 

• Unknown number of plants over 0.5 acre in road at MP 124.97, 

• 40 plants over 0.1 acre within chaparral within right-of-way and along access 

roads at MP 128.00, 

• 2,500 plants over 2.5 acre in UCSA at MP 128.80, 

• 200 plants over 0.7 acre including some within the right-of-way at MP 129.00, 

• 1,000 plants over 1 acre in roadway at MP 129.30, 

• 200 plants over 5,000 square feet at approximately 150 feet from centerline at MP 

130.20, 

• 5,000 over 1 acre at centerline and up to 200 feet out from centerline at MP 

131.40, 

H-349
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 190

• 100 plants over 600 square feet in the road and to 5 feet from the edge of the road 

at Road 34-1E-35, 

• 75 plants over 0.5 acre just west of the centerline at MP140.88, 

• 75 plants over 0.5 acre along an old road on the centerline at MP 141.35, 

• 400 plants over 1 acre from 75 to 200 feet west of the centerline at MP 149.80, 

• 500 plants over 0.5 acre from 75 to 200 feet west of the centerline at MP 150.2, 

and 

• 200 plants over 100 square feet in a large TEWA at MP 154.80. 

The status of Scribner’s grass is Apparently Secure both globally and in Oregon. 

Potential threats to Scribner’s grass are largely unknown but likely include the increase 

and spread of weedy species with grazing (Hitchcock et al 1969), roadside maintenance, 

and trampling by recreationalists. This species was dropped from the 2007 version of the 

Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species of Oregon list produced by the Oregon 

Natural Heritage Information Center for being too common (ONHIC 2007). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of temporary 

disturbance, removal or damage of plants, and permanent loss or alteration of habitat. 

Indirect effects would include disturbance or removal of currently unoccupied but 

suitable habitat for this species. Construction activities could also create opportunities 

for invasive species that could outcompete and/or exclude Scribner’s grass from areas 

previously inhabited however, Pacific Connector plans to monitor and treat noxious 

weeds for the life of the project. 

Cumulative Effects 

Under the Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) and 2008 Resource Management 

Plans (BLM land), the goal on federal land is sustainable grazing practices. Halting the 

spread of invasive weeds on federal lands is also a management priority. These 

management protocols should protect habitat for Scribner’s grass. Projects that are 

planned in the vicinity of where this species has been documented within the analysis 

area include projects 68 through 71, 74, 75, and 32. These projects include several 

timber sales (9 sites) in the Medford BLM District, and a large grazing allotment 

(255,592.5 acres) in the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. Given that grazing and 

logging are both detrimental to this speices, actions associated with this project combined 

with past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative 

impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” due to the Apparently Secure global status and common occurrences of this 

species, and the small fraction of the species’ total range that would be affected. 

H-350
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 191

OTHER RARE AND UNCOMMON SPECIES 

Red tree vole (Arborimus longicaudus)

The red tree vole is an arboreal, mostly nocturnal species that inhabits mixed evergreen 

forests and is endemic to western Oregon. Optimum habitat for this species consists of 

dense, moist coniferous forests that contain sufficient numbers of large Douglas-fir trees 

(Csuti et al. 2001). Red tree voles feed almost exclusively on Douglas fir needles, 

although they will eat grand or lowland white fir, Sitka spruce, and western hemlock 

needles as well, and sometimes the tender bark or center of twigs. 

Red tree voles build nests in large trees, usually Douglas-fir. They build nests of 

Douglas-fir needles between 6 and 215 feet above the ground in variable locations within 

the tree, sometimes in large branches or whorls of branches, or in cavities or hollows. In 

northern California, Meiselman and Doyle (1996) found that tree vole nests were most 

abundant in old-growth forests and were associated with large-diameter Douglas-fir with 

high canopy cover (NatureServe 2008). Red tree voles breed throughout the year, with 

most litters born between February and September. Litters usually consist of 2 to 3 

young that are altricial and able to leave the nest within about 1 month. Red tree voles 

are a major food item for the threatened northern spotted owl (Csuti et al. 2001). 

The global status of the red tree vole is Vulnerable and declining (NatureServe 2008). It 

is designated Sensitive – Undetermined in Oregon, meaning that its population faces a 

threat but its status is unclear (ORNHIC 2007). Threats facing this species are loss of 

preferred old-growth forest habitat and forest fragmentation (NatureServe 2008). 

Additionally, since this species has limited dispersal capabilities, early seral stage forests 

may be a barrier to dispersal (NatureServe 2008). 

Surveys were conducted in accordance with the “Survey Protocol of the Red Tree Vole 

Arborimus longicaudus. Record of Decision, Northwest Forest Plan. Version 2.2” 

(USDA 2003). Ground surveys were conducted between July 3 and September 20, 2007. 

Tree climbing surveys were conducted between late July and September 21, 2007. The 

area considered for potential habitat in the Analysis area included federal lands of the 

proposed route that traverse the “Xeric Biological Zone” west of the Rogue River. This 

area is located between milepost 109.9 and 121.6, and totals 8.5 miles. For further detail 

on survey methodology and results please see the 2008 Biological Survey Report. 

Red tree voles have a close association with westside lowland conifer-hardwood forest, 

southwest Oregon mixed conifer-hardwood forest, and westside oak/dry Douglas-fir 

forest and woodlands, and an occasional association with westside and eastside riparian 

wetlands (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). Red tree voles have been documented in the Coos 

Bay, Medford, and Roseburg BLM Districts and the Umpqua and Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes all suitable red tree vole habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

pipeline in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, red tree voles 

H-351
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 192

have a close association with 506.4 acres to be removed and 199.1 acres to be modified, 

and a general association with 0.8 acres to be removed. On USFS lands, red tree voles 

have a close association with 192.8 acres to be removed and 66.4 acres to be modified, 

and a general association with 0.1 acres to be removed (table 3). During surveys for red 

tree voles for this project, 16 active nests were identified in the right-of-way, 2 in 

temporary extra work areas, and 2 in uncleared storage areas, and 17 outside the analysis 

area but within 150 feet. An additional 31 nests were identified as inactive. Inactive 

nests indicate vole presence in the area at some time in the past, although they could be 

used again in the future. Old unoccupied nests are believed to sometimes remain in the 

canopy for as long as 5 years or more (BLM 2000). Young red tree voles and potentially 

adults could be killed if nest trees are cleared for the project. If project activities killed or 

removed the 20 active nests in the Project area, this would conservatively represent 0.2% 

of the red tree vole population. Red tree voles that are not within the analysis area could 

experience disturbance from equipment or edge effects to their habitat. During 

construction (two years), a 90 foot-wide gap would be present along the right-of-way; 

this gap would be narrowed to 30 feet for the life of the project. Red tree voles tracked 

using telemetry have crossed small dirt forest roads, small first-order streams, and canopy 

gaps of 33 to 66 feet while traveling between nest trees (BLM 2000). However, this 

species is characterized by very small home ranges, low dispersal capability, extremely 

low reproductive potential, and a sensitivity to stand level disturbances. 

Cumulative Effects 

There are 43,155.9 acres of suitable red tree vole habitat within 3,200 feet of the 

proposed pipeline, 22,969.2 of which are late successional or old growth forest (i.e., older 

than 80 years; table 3). These would be impacted by construction-related disturbance and 

by edge effect until such time that removed vegetation could regenerate. A smaller 

number of acres would be impacted by edge effect along the maintained right-of-way for 

the life of the project. Due to logging, only an estimated eight percent of historical late 

successional and old-growth conifer forests remain along the Coast Range of Oregon, 23 

percent in the West Cascades, and 25 percent in the Klamath Mountains province 

(ODFW 2006). This has lead to sharp declines in species that depend on this habitat 

type. The Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) and the 2008 Resource Management 

Plans (BLM lands), protect late successional and old-growth forests by designating 

specific land use allocations and implementing associated management actions, including 

managing for down wood. This could lead to increased habitat for the red tree vole in the 

analysis area in the future. 

Other projects planned in the vicinity of suitable red tree vole habitat (the “Xeric 

Biological Zone” between milepost 109.9 and 121.6), include projects 1, 2, and 16 

through 18 (table 10) in the Umpqua National Forest. These projects consist a range 

allotment (23,569.6 acres), a new rock source (7.75 acres), clearcuts (176.6 acres) and 

various fuel reductions within 3,200 feet of the proposed Project (unknown acreage). 

The proposed Project is likely to impact local red tree vole populations. Actions 

associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities 

could potentially result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

H-352
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 193

Determination of Impact 

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of the large number of individuals existing throughout Oregon (at 

least 10,000; NatureServe 2009), and the low percentage of the population the project 

would likely affect as the analysis area is a relatively small portion of suitable habitat for 

this species. 

Great gray owl (Strix nebulosa)

This large owl occurs in boreal forests throughout the northern hemisphere. In North 

America, it breeds from Alaska and central Canada south into the Rocky Mountains, and 

in the Pacific states south to Yosemite National Park. They are variably and unevenly 

distributed throughout their range (Bull and Duncan 1993). In Oregon, great gray owls 

have been confirmed in the southern Cascades and in the northeastern part of the state 

(Janes 2003). Along the potential pipeline route, they have been documented in Douglas, 

Jackson, and Klamath Counties, with many records within 3 miles of the right-of-way. 

Habitat for great gray owls is deciduous or coniferous forests up to 9,000 feet elevation 

interspersed with bogs, muskegs, or montane meadows that support rodent populations. 

In the central and south Cascades, they are most often found breeding in lodgepole pine 

forests, sometimes mixed with ponderosa pine (Janes 2003). Drier pine stands and large 

open areas are avoided (Bull and Duncan 1993). During winter they sometimes move to 

lower elevations with lighter snow cover (Bull and Duncan 1993). As they do not build 

their own nests, they are dependent for breeding on the presence of suitable nesting 

structures such as abandoned raptor nests or artificial platforms (Bull and Henjum 1990). 

An increase in nesting platforms can make unsuitable habitat usable and increase nesting 

density (Bull and Duncan 1993, Janes 2003). Their diet consists mainly of small 

mammals, especially voles, while birds, fish, and insects are also taken (Bull and Henjum 

1990). 

The global status of the great gray owl is Secure, its IUCN status is Least Concern, and 

they are designated Sensitive – Vulnerable by the ODFW in Oregon (ORNHIC 2007, 

NatureServe 2008). As great gray owls tend to be elusive and erratic and widely 

scattered within their range, they are difficult to observe or study, and little is known 

about population sizes or trends. They may be threatened by management activities on 

federal lands and loss of old-growth forests which provide nesting and roosting habitat, 

although smaller clearcuts are sometimes use for foraging (Janes 2003). Some of these 

effects can be alleviated by placing artificial nest structures, which are readily used by 

great gray owls to successfully raise young, or natural nest sites such as large-diameter 

dead trees with broken tops (Bull and Henjum 1990). Cover for flightless juveniles is 

also essential. Great gray owls have a close association with ponderosa pine forest and 

woodland edges, especially where snags are present, a general association with southwest 

Oregon mixed conifer-hardwood forests and herbaceous wetlands, and an occasional 

H-353
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 194

association with westside lowland conifer-hardwood forests and montane mixed conifer 

forests (Johnson and O’Neil 2001). 

Surveys were conducted on federal lands in accordance with the “Survey Protocol for the 

Great Gray Owl Within the Range of the Northwest Forest Plan, Version 3.0”, that states 

that six survey visits per year must be conducted for two consecutive years, between 

March 15 and July 15. Surveys were conducted between March 24 and July 15, 2007 and 

March 21 and July 9, 2008. For further detail on survey methodology and results please 

see the 2008 Biological Survey Report. This species has been documented in all three 

National Forests crossed by the pipeline route. It has also been documented in the 

Lakeview, Medford, and Roseburg BLM Districts, and is suspected in the Coos Bay 

District. 

Direct and Indirect Effects

The analysis area includes all suitable great gray owl habitats within 3,200 feet of the 

pipeline in the jurisdictional boundaries discussed above. On BLM lands, great gray 

owls have a close association with 50.5 acres to be removed and 5.8 acres to be modified, 

and a general association with 473.4 acres to be removed and 194.6 acres to be modified. 

On USFS lands, great gray owls have a close association with 64.7 acres to be removed 

and 11.2 acres to be modified, and a general association with 332.1 acres to be removed 

and 116.9 acres to be modified (table 5). Great gray owls could be negatively impacted 

by construction of the pipeline right-of-way by disturbance of individuals. While adults 

would be able to flee temporary disturbance, breeding birds could be induced to abandon 

nests, eggs, and chicks. Disturbance could have an indirect effect on wintering birds, 

causing them to use more stored energy, which is necessary to survive during colder 

temperatures and when prey is more scarce, possibly leading to lower fitness. The 

Project could also modify great gray owl habitat by removing trees which are necessary 

for roosting and nesting. Specific mitigation measures that would help minimize impacts 

to this species include replanting of trees after construction (see Appendix N of the BA). 

However, the replanting of forest trees would be unlikely to benefit great gray owls for 

several decades, or even a century or more for nest trees, while trees reach maturity. 

Cumulative Effects

Within 3,200 feet of the analysis area, there are 5,383.5 acres of suitable habitat with 

which the great gray owl has a close association and an additional 44,712.9 acres with 

which it has a general or occasional association on BLM and Forest Service land (table 

3). These would be impacted by construction-related disturbance and by edge effect until 

such time that removed vegetation could regenerate. A smaller number of acres would be 

impacted by edge effect along the maintained right-of-way for the life of the project. Due 

to logging, only an estimated eight percent of historical late successional and old-growth 

conifer forests remain along the Coast Range of Oregon, 23 percent in the West 

Cascades, and 25 percent in the Klamath Mountains province (ODFW 2006). This has 

lead to sharp declines in species that depend on this habitat type. The Northwest Forest 

Plan (National Forests) and the 2008 Resource Management Plans (BLM lands), protect 

late successional and old-growth forests by designating specific land use allocations and 

implementing associated management actions, including managing for snags and down 

H-354
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 195

wood. This could lead to increased habitat for the great gray owl in the analysis area in 

the future. 

Other projects that are planned within the vicinity of the analysis area include projects 1 

through 83 (table 10). On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, planned projects 

include two large grazing allotments (276,929.2 acres) and various thinning projects 

(1,608.6 acres). On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, there is one planned project 

that involves fencing a waterbody to exclude cattle. Planned projects on the Umpqua 

National Forest include a range allotment, a new rock source, a number of clearcuts 

(286.2 acres) and thinnings (236.1 acres), and several fuel reductions (unknown acreage). 

These projects would be consistent with the NWFP and the large number of thinnings 

would most likely contribute to the long term health of the forest ecosystems. Planned 

projects in the Coos Bay BLM district include several commercial thinning projects (at 

least 2136.4 acres), various clearcuts (at least 331.8 acres), two timber sales (2 sites, 

unknown acreage), and a land disposal (unknown acreage). Planned projects in the 

Roseburg BLM District include four fish habitat restoration projects, several commercial 

thinning projects (179.0 acres), and three timber sales (6 sites). Planned projects in the 

Medford BLM District include several timber sales (11 sites, unknown acreage). In the 

Lakeview BLM District, planned projects include a timber sale (1 site, unknown 

acreage), two fuels treatments (501.6 acres), several pre-commercial thinnings (388.8 

acres), and a parking lot (0.1 acres). Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative 

impacts to this species. 

Determination of Impact

Considering the information above concerning potential direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts, it is determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat, 

but is not likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of 

the species” because of their Secure and Least Concern global statuses, the location of 

the proposed Project on the periphery of this species’ range, the mobility of the owls, and 

the relatively small area of their range that would be impacted. 

Needle lichen (Chaenotheca ferruginea)

Chaenotheca ferruginea is a needle lichen that grows on aged bark or wood of mostly 

oaks and conifers in moist sheltered locations, at elevations from sea level to 9,314 feet 

(OSU 2008c). It occurs in small patchy colonies on a single tree trunk, each only a few 

square inches in size and up to several hundred yards away from each other (OSU 

2008c). C. ferruginea is a widespread species of cool to temperate areas worldwide, 

although it has been declining since pre-industrial times. In Oregon, it is found in Coos, 

Douglas, and Jackson Counties. 

The decline of C. ferruginea is attributed to the removal of mature conifer forest, 

although its rate of loss has slowed in the Pacific Northwest. It is thought that it can 

overcome some habitat fragmentation; however, its vulnerability rank is high (3) because 

it is a specialist requiring specific scarce substrates and it is believed to require more than 

H-355
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 196

100 years to return after stand disturbance (OSU 2008). The global status of this lichen is 

Apparently Secure, with at least 14 occurrences known in Oregon (NatureServe 2009). 

This species was dropped from the 2007 version of the Rare, Threatened, and 

Endangered Species of Oregon list produced by the Oregon Natural Heritage Information 

Center for being too common (ONHIC 2007). 

The following C. ferruginea were found within the project vicinity: 10 scattered over 2 

acres in the right-of-way at MP 75.10, an undetermined number scattered on 4 trees 

within the right-of-way over 4 acres at MP 78.20, an undetermined number over 0.3 acre 

60 feet from the centerline at MP 79.80, and on 1 tree 80 feet from centerline at MP 

80.40. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes areas in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for C. ferruginea. Construction 

activities could adversely affect this species by directly removing or damaging 

individuals or disturbing the substrate (bark and tree trunks) on which this species grows. 

Clearing of forest habitat during clearing and pipeline construction would have indirect 

effects by altering microhabitats C. furfuracea currently inhabits as well as to suitable but 

currently unoccupied habitats. Changes to temperature, light and moisture regimes from 

forest loss and forest fragmentation could result in habitat becoming unsuitable for this 

species. 

Cumulative Effects 

The primary threat to this species is habitat loss, particularly the removal of mature 

conifer forests. Due to logging, only an estimated eight percent of historical late 

successional and old-growth conifer forests remain along the Coast Range of Oregon, 23 

percent in the West Cascades, and 25 percent in the Klamath Mountains province 

(ODFW 2006). This has lead to sharp declines in species that depend on this habitat 

type. The Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) and the 2008 Resource Management 

Plans (BLM lands), protect late successional and old-growth forests by designating 

specific land use allocations and implementing associated management actions, including 

managing for snags and down wood. This could lead to increased habitat for C. 

ferruginea in the analysis area in the future. 

Other planned timber harvesting resulting in the removal or disturbance of forest on 

federal and other lands, logging of mature forest, fire, and air pollution could contribute 

to the further degradation or loss of suitable habitat for this species. Currently, there are 

no planned projects in the vicinity of where C. ferruginea was documented within the 

analysis area. Actions associated with this project combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities would not result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

H-356
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 197

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because where this species is found, it would be marked and excluded from 

direct impacts from construction where feasible, because of its Apparently Secure global 

status, and its common status throughout much of its range. 

Terete skin lichen (Leptogium teretiusculum)

Leptogium teretiusculum is associated with mixed conifer and hardwood forests with a 51 

to 70 percent hardwood basal area (Martin et al 2002). L. teretiusculum has a worldwide 

distribution and in Oregon is found in Douglas and Jackson counties; however, the exact 

distribution of L. teretiusculum is uncertain, as this species is hard to collect. Its 

abundance is also difficult to estimate, partly because it is often unclear what an 

“individual” is (NatureServe 2009). Its decline is generally attributed to disturbance of 

large, old deciduous trees, possibly to air pollution in Denmark where it is extinct, dam 

building and subsequent loss of floodplain, and conversion of mature forest to plantations 

in Sweden (OSU 2008d). Although a mature forest specialist, L. teretiusculum is 

fortunately generally able to recover from decreases in abundance over a period of about 

5 to20 years (2 to 5 generations). 

Within Oregon, in has been found growing on oak species such as Quercus garryana and 

Quercus kelloggii, as well as on Arbutus menziesii and the moss species Eurhynchium 

oreganum (Martin et al 2002). Near the analysis area, it is suspected to occur within 

Douglas and Jackson Counties. There has been at least one documented occurrence of L. 

teretiusculum within the vicinity of the pipeline, approximately 445 feet southwest of MP 

115.32. The global status of this lichen is Apparently Secure, being widespread and 

experiencing only insignificant threats (NatureServe 2009). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis includes areas in which this species was found during botanical surveys. 

Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for L. teretiusculum. This species 

would be directly impacted if any deciduous trees serving as its host are cleared or 

damaged during clearing or pipeline construction. Alteration of the micro-climate due to 

vegetation clearing surrounding the pipeline right-of-way could alter L. teretiusculum

growth rate or reproductive success as well as suitable habitat for this species. 

Cumulative Effects 

The primary threat to this species is habitat loss, particularly the removal of mature 

conifer forests. Due to logging, only an estimated eight percent of historical late 

successional and old-growth conifer forests remain along the Coast Range of Oregon, 23 

percent in the West Cascades, and 25 percent in the Klamath Mountains province 

(ODFW 2006). This has lead to sharp declines in species that depend on this habitat 

type. The Northwest Forest Plan (National Forests) and the 2008 Resource Management 

Plans (BLM lands), protect late successional and old-growth forests by designating 

specific land use allocations and implementing associated management actions, including 

managing for snags and down wood. Oak woodlands in Oregon have also declined 

H-357
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 198

precipitously due to conversion to other land uses, invasive species, and fire suppression; 

this has been especially severe in the Coast Range province, where only an estimated four 

percent of historical oak woodlands remain (ODFW 2006). The 2008 Resource 

Management Plans (BLM land) identifies oak restoration as a goal. These management 

actions on federal land could lead to increased quality and quantity of habitat for L. 

teretiusculum in the analysis area in the future. 

Currently, there are no planned projects in the vicinity of where L. teretiusculum was 

documented within the analysis area. Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities would not result in cumulative impacts to 

this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species” because of its Apparently Secure global status, widespread distribution, and lack 

of significant threats. 

FUNGI

The range for each sensitive fungi species is summarized in table 11. With few 

exceptions, surveys for fungi have not been conducted over the proposed Project site due 

to the complexity of their life histories and difficulty in identification. For example, a 

given species might have below-ground fruiting bodies that only fruit once within a 

several-year time period at variable times of year. Even when identifiable fruiting bodies 

are visible, their correlation with the below ground mycelium (masses of thread-like 

filaments called hyphae) is impossible to determine (Cushman and Huff 2007). For this 

reason, it can be assumed that adequate surveys would need to take a multi-year, multiseason, and multi-visit per season approach, and thus would be highly impractical. 

Instead, it is assumed for the purposes of this analysis that there is at least some potential 

habitat for each of the 55 Special Status fungus species within the project construction 

corridor and that the project would impact each of these species. Due to the difficulty in 

surveying fungi species, information on population trends is limited or unknown. 

Two types of fungus comprise the sensitive fungi species list. The majority (51) are 

mycchorizal, a type of fungus that forms symbiotic associations with fine root systems of 

live plants, and 4 are saprobic, which derive their nutrition from nonliving organic 

material such as wood or plant litter. Micorrhizal fungi may be limited where severe soil 

disturbance have resulted in loss of host plants and their live roots (Brundrett 1991) and 

adverse soil factors such as salinity, aridity, waterlogging, or temperature extremes. 

Mycorrhizal fungi propagules can be introduced to new sites by wind or water erosion 

and animal activity; however, little is known about the time required for recolonization to 

occur (Gardner & Malajzuk 1988, Brundrett et al 1995). 

H-358
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 199

Although fungi overall are incredibly diverse and inhabit almost every type of 

environment, the list of sensitive fungi species for the proposed Project are associated 

with forests, especially late-successional conifer forests and with forest floor litter, down 

woody material, the roots of host tree or shrub species, or some combination thereof. Of 

the 16 broad habitat classification types across the project site discussed above and 

shown in table 5, the 55 Special Status fungus species inhabit only 7 of these habitat 

types: 1) westside lowland conifer-hardwood-forest, 2) montane mixed conifer forest, 3) 

southwest Oregon mixed conifer-hardwood forest, 4) ponderosa pine forest and 

woodlands, 5) westside oak and dry Douglas-fir forest and woodlands, 6) western 

juniper/mountain mahogany woodlands, and 7) coastal dunes and beaches (Johnson and 

O’Neil 2001). 

Threats 

Activities within forests may pose direct or indirect threats to the fungus fruiting body or 

mycelial mats by altering the habitat beyond the threshold of tolerance for the individual 

species. These activities could include significant removal of the fungal components or 

the woody substrate, forest floor litter, or tree or shrub hosts with which the species is 

associated, removal of the host tree, or significant modification to the site microclimate 

(for example, by creating openings that are no longer cool and shaded). Activities with 

the potential to impact fungal species include logging, road construction, urban 

development, burning, piling, chopping, chipping, and mushroom harvesting (Cushman 

and Huff 2007). 

Of the 55 sensitive fungus species listed in the counties in which the project is proposed, 

only two were specifically surveyed for along the project corridor: Clavariadelphus 

sachalinensis and Ramaria thiersii. These are discussed below. For the purposes of this 

analysis, these species plus the remaining 53 sensitive species have been provided in 

table 11 with brief descriptions of current distribution and threats. 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The proposed Project would remove 595.5 acres of late-successional or mid-seral forest 

in the habitats described above that could directly affect fungi species. Direct effects of 

the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary disturbance and 

permanent loss or alteration of late successional forest habitat for the sensitive fungal 

species. Direct impacts would occur with harvest of host tree species and the removal 

and disturbance of root tips, forest litter, humus, and down wood and woody debris. In 

addition, surface soil and mycelial networks would be disrupted and compacted 

(Kranabetter and Wylie 1998, Amaranthus and Perry 1994). These may be more 

important factors for fungi dependent on litter and woody debris, whereas habitat for 

root-dependent fungal species may be available via trees outside of the cleared pipeline 

route, which could have roots extending into the analysis area. . 

Indirect impacts to the fungal species could occur if late successional forests are 

fragmented by logging, road building, and development, resulting in edge effects that 

H-359
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 200

alter the microclimate of areas that were once forest interiors. This could reduce the 

reproductive success of fungi within the project vicinity.

Although it would be in a linear pattern, the removal of forest structure can be thought of 

as a patch in the context of the forest stand and may respond in ways that a thinned stand 

would respond. Live trees and thereby the live roots that are host to many mycorrhizal 

species would be removed but live roots from adjacent stands may increase after clearing 

of the corridor from the release of water and nutrients. Microclimatic changes (moisture 

loss and soil temperature increase from the forest opening) could be expected to diminish 

as shrub revegetation proceeds, the cleared construction corridor recruits downed woody 

debris, and adjacent timber stands and understories provide increased shade. The extent 

to which removal of canopy cover results in decreased ground moisture and increased 

temperature would be a function of the height, density and seral stage of the adjacent 

stands. Species dependent upon wood or litter would likely be affected as the recruitment 

of these would be diminished in the short run as well as in the long run as the pipeline 

community changes from forest to grass and shrub. As discussed above under 

Conservation Measures and Mitigation, Pacific Connector would replace downed wood 

in the construction corridor, create snags, and provide Compensatory Mitigation projects 

that would benefit fungi species, especially in late-successional forests. 

Cumulative Effects 

In the absences of trend analysis of the 55 sensitive fungal species, a broad assumption is 

that these species have declined with late-successional and old-growth forest and their 

host components such as live conifer roots and coarse woody debris. Many small local 

impacts combined across a regional landscape could alter the distribution of populations 

and limit the ability of some of these species to disperse. The proposed Project would 

remove and modify habitat, and therefore when combined with past, present and 

foreseeable future activities that would also remove habitat, would likely result in 

additional cumulative effects. Little is known about the regional effects from global 

warming and air pollution on mycorrizal and saprobic fungi, and thus these impacts can 

not be addressed here. 

Currently, there are limited timber harvests planned for late successional forests on 

federal lands, and regulations under the NWFP trend toward protection of latesuccessional forest (table 10). However, if rates of harvest increase in federal and other 

late successional forests and are coupled with catastrophic fire, further loss or 

degradation of the sensitive fungal species could occur. Coupled with past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable projects, the proposed Project could contribute to cumulative 

effects for all fungi species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species”. This conclusion is reached because, while the project includes disruption to 

above ground habitat for 4 saprobic species and removal of some habitat (live tee troots) 

H-360
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 201

for the remainder of the fungal species, the pipeline clearing would not affect many acres 

relative to the landscape, would not remove all habitat components (deeper roots would 

remain from late-successional trees adjacent to the clearing), and removal of some habitat 

components would be temporary (e.g., shrub growth would be restored and tree roots can 

be expected to extend into the clearing over time). 

H-361
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 202

TABLE 11 

Grouped fungi species that could potentially occur along the proposed pipeline route

Species Habitat – plant 

association 

Threats Morphology Relative 

Abundance 

Mycorrhizal Albatrellus avellaneus Late-successional 

conifer forest; sea level to montane 

Removal of the hosts, Picea spp., and Tsuga spp. by logging, fire, road construction, recreational use, road, trail, and campground construction. 

Polypore; grows out into the soil matrix from fine root systems. 

Less than 10 known sites. 

Albatrellus caeruleoporous Late-successional 

conifer forest; sea level to montane; shrub areas 

Removal of the hosts, Picea spp., and Tsuga spp., by logging, fire, road construction, recreational use, road, trail, and campground construction. 

Terrestrial polyspore; Balsamia nigrescens 

10 to 50 known sites mainly in CA 

Albatrellus ellisii Conifer forest, 

especially Abies spp. 

Logging, fire, development. Polyspore; solitary or 

scattered, gregarious, or in fused cluster on ground, litter 

10 to 50 known sites in Pacific Northwest. 

Alpova olivaceotinctus Abies spp.; P. 

menziesii; A. menziesii; P. ponderosa; Quercusspp. 

Ecological community occurrences are directly impacted over a moderate area, either causing irreversible damage or requiring a long-term recovery. 

Sequestrate; sporocarps beneath surface; grows out into the soil matrix from fine root systems. 

7 known sites. 

Arcangeliella camphorata Late- successional P. 

menziesii, heterophylla; 200-950 m 

Moderate decline in OR apparently due to fire and extensive clearcutting of latesuccessional forest (Luoma 2001); however species persists at thinned sites. 

Sporocarps under soil surface 

10- 50 known sites. 

Arcangeliella crassa P. meziesii, T. 

heterophyllaconifers; 600 – 2800 

Assumed to be declining due to removal of late seral forest but expected to increase in 

Sporocarps beneath soil Less than 10 

known sites. 

H-362
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 203

TABLE 11 

Grouped fungi species that could potentially occur along the proposed pipeline route

Species Habitat – plant 

association 

Threats Morphology Relative 

Abundance 

ft matrix forest scheme. 

Balsamia nigrescens (nigrens) Likely associated 

with mature stands; Pinus spp.; P. 

menziesii; P. jeffreyii

Logging and forest activities especially in late successional forest. 

Sequestrate; truffle Less than 10 

known sites 

Boletus pulcherrimus Mixed conifers 

especially A. 

grandis, P menziesii; Lithocarpus densifloris, Acerspp.; 62–5735 feet 

Logging of late-successional forest (BLM undated) 

Bolete; sporocarps usually solitary in humus on roots 

10-5 0 known sites 

Catathelasma ventricosum Conifers (Abies & 

Picea spp.) 

 Solitary, scattered; 

rooting in deep humus 

 

Choiromyces alveolatus Abies spp., P. 

contorta var. contorta; monticola, P. menziesii, T. heterophylla; Above 1300 ft 

 Sporocarps; sequestrate 

Clavariadelphus sachalinensis Mixed conifer; 

Quercus spp.; 

mesic; 152-5352 ft 

Soil and litter disturbing activities – logging, roads, development. 

In moss and duff in troops. 

10-50 known sites 

Clavariadelphus subfastigiatus Mixed conifer; on 

soil or duff 

 

Cortinarius barlowensis Late successional - 

old growth conifer esp. Abies spp.; Up to 4000 m; Coastal 

Habitat loss due to removal of late –successional - old growth forest. 

Solitary to gregarious; terrestrial mushroom.. 

10- 50 known sites 

H-363
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 204

TABLE 11 

Grouped fungi species that could potentially occur along the proposed pipeline route

Species Habitat – plant 

association 

Threats Morphology Relative 

Abundance 

to montane 

Cortinarius valgus Abies, Picea, P. 

menziessii, Tsuga spp. 

Large habitat disturbances such as logging practices. Low severity of threats to only a small portion of the population area. tend to recover through natural processes given reasonable time (10-100 years) (ONHP 2002). 

Gilled 

Cortinarius verrucisporus Abies magnifica 

from sea level to 5000 feet) 

 Sequestrate; sporocarps 

beneath surface 

 

Dermocybe humboltensis Stabilized dunes; 

roots of Pinus & 

Vaccinium spp.; 

P.menziesii & P. ponderosa forest 

 Stabilized dunes; rocky 

gravely loam 

Less than 10 known sites. 

Endogone oregonensis P. sitchensis, P. 

menziesii, T. heterophylla; Below 350 m 

 Sequestrate 

Gastroboletus vividus Abies magnifica, T. 

mertensiana; 1600-2300 m in southern Oregon 

 

Gelatinodiscus flavidus Chamaecyparis 

nootkatensis (Alaska cedar) 

 Fruits in cones, twigs 

and downed foliage. Typically occurs near or under melting snow banks. 

Relatively commons. 

Gomphus bonarii (G. floccosus) (Turbinellus 

Conifers; Montane Under conifers 

H-364
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 205

TABLE 11 

Grouped fungi species that could potentially occur along the proposed pipeline route

Species Habitat – plant 

association 

Threats Morphology Relative 

Abundance 

floccosus) Gomphus kauffmanii Under Pinus and 

Picea spp., shrubs; 202 – 6824 ft. 

 Deep humus; closely 

gregarious 

 

Helvella elastica Conifer forest; CR & 

WC ecoregions 

 Conifer duff; gregarious 

on soil nder conifers in damp areas; 

 

Leucogaster citrinus Abies concolor & 

lasiocarpa; P. monticola; shrubs; 288-4893 ft. 

 On roots 10- 50 known 

sites 

Phaeocollybia attenuata Picea sitchensis, 

Sequoia spp.; shrubs; 0 – 5215 ft 

 Scattered in litter, 

humus, soil 

150-200 known sites 

Phaeocollybia californica Roots of Picea 

sitchensis, Abies amabilis, T. heterphylla

 Litter, humus, soil 10-50 known 

sites 

Phaeocollybia olivacea Under conifers; 

shrubs; 20-3157 ft 

 Scattered; often in arc 

pattern in thick humus, litter, soil 

101-150 known sites 

Phaeocollybia piceae Roots of Picea 

sitchensis, Abies amabilis, T. heterphylla; shrubs; 0-3288 ft. 

 Humus, litter, soil. 51-100 known 

sites. 

Phaeocollybia pseudofestiva Conifers; mixed 

conifers & hardwoods; shrubs; 35-3682 ft. 

 Scattered in humus or 

soil. 

10-50 known sites. 

H-365
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 206

TABLE 11 

Grouped fungi species that could potentially occur along the proposed pipeline route

Species Habitat – plant 

association 

Threats Morphology Relative 

Abundance 

Phaeocollybia scatesiae Roots of Abies; 

Picea sitchensis, Vaccinium spp.; 626-4529 ft. 

 Forest litter 10-50 known 

sites. 

Phaeocollybia spadicea Mixed conifer; 10-

3157 ft.; Abies, Picea, P. menziesii, Tsuga, 

 In humus under conifers 51-100 known 

sites. 

Pseudorhizina californica (formerly Gyromitra californica) 

Forest edges; disturbed sites 

 

Ramaria abietina Cupressus 

macrocarpa & Sequoia sempervirens 

 In duff under conifers 

Ramaria amyloidea Abies spp., T. 

menziesii, T. heterophylla; shrubs; 1799-5527 ft 

 Humus, litter soil. 10-50 known 

sites. 

Ramaria aurantiisiccescens Abies spp., T. 

menziesii, T. heterophylla; shrubs; 561-6934 ft. 

 In humus, litter or soil 10-50 known 

sites. 

Ramaria botrytis var. aurantiramosa 

 Coralloid sporocarps in 

humus or soil that mature above the ground surface 

 

Ramaria concolor var tsugina Abies spp., T. 

menziesii, T. heterophylla

 In humus or soil 

Ramaria conjunctipes var. sparsiramosa 

On ground in moist conifer forests in fall 

 On ground in moist 

conifer forests in fall 

 

H-366
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 207

TABLE 11 

Grouped fungi species that could potentially occur along the proposed pipeline route

Species Habitat – plant 

association 

Threats Morphology Relative 

Abundance 

Ramaria coulterae unknown Ramaria largentii Abies spp., T. 

menziesii, Pinus monticola

 In humus or soil 10-50 known 

sites 

Ramaria rainierensis Abies spp., T. 

menziesii, T. heterophylla

 In humus or soil 

Ramaria rubribrunnescens Under conifers Terrestrial; Ramaria spinulosa var. diminutiva 

Under conifers; 1470 ft 

 Terrestrial Less than 10 

known sites. 

Ramaria suecica On litter Ramaria thiersii Under conifers Terrestrial; Rhizopogon brunneiniger Conifer forests; low 

to high elevations 

 

Rhizopogon ellipsosporus P. menziessii, P. 

lambertiana; t. heterophylla; Acerspp.; 1082-4039 ft 

 In soils on roots of 

conifers 

Less than 10 known sites. 

Rhizopogon flavofibrillosus Conifers; mid-high 

elevations. 

 Roots of conifers 

Rhizopogon truncatus conifers Rickenella swartzii Coastal forest Moist, shaded; in moss 

beds; locally abundant in small troops 

 

Sarcodon fuscoindicus Conifers esp. T. 

heterophylla A. amabilis; shrubs; 34-6516 ft. 

 Scattered to gregarious 

on soil; litter, humus. 

10-50 known sites. 

Stropharia albovelata Conifers Scattered in litter under 

H-367
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 208

TABLE 11 

Grouped fungi species that could potentially occur along the proposed pipeline route

Species Habitat – plant 

association 

Threats Morphology Relative 

Abundance 

(formerly Pholiota albivelata) conifers Saprobic Cudonia monticola Abies spp. Saprobe on litter Mycena monticola Late successional 

forest, and riparian 

. Saprobe on litter Known on 100 

sites; found in interior and open logged forest, roadsides. 

Mycena tenax No information 

found. 

 No information found. 

Sowerbyella rhenana Late successional 

conifer forest and Lithocarpus spp. (Morovec 1986) 

Logging of overstory; disturbance of soil, litter, and duff; fire. 

Saprobe on wood and litter; ascomycete scattered to gregarious 

Known from 10 sites 

Blank boxes indicate no information found. Sources: BLM undated, Castellano et al. 1999, Moravec 1986, Luoma 2001, ORNHIC 2002, Cushman and Huff 2007, USFS 2008d, ORNHIC 2009 

H-368
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 209

The proposed pipeline construction corridor was surveyed for the following fungal 

species, and thus their life histories with individual impact analysis are provided.

Clavariadelphus sachalinensis

Clavariadelphus sachalinensis grows as either scattered individual structures or as a 

small clumped cluster of several hundred fruiting bodies (Smith and Weber 1980). C. 

sachalinensis can be found across the northern portion of North America on well drained 

substrates (soil or duff) within mesic mixed conifer forests. Within Oregon, C. 

sachalinensis is suspected to occur within Jackson and Klamath Counties and was 

formerly listed as a Survey and Manage species by the BLM and USFS. Logging of 

conifer stands have led to the decline of ectomycorrhizal fungi in the region (Durall et al 

2006). The decline in ectomycorrhizal fungi can also be attributed to high intensity 

wildland and prescribed fires (Dahlberg 2002). At least one occurrence of C. 

sachalinensis has been documented for the pipeline vicinity (within approximately 260 

feet east of MP 133.29). The global status of this fungus is Secure, being common with a 

broad worldwide range. At least 13 known occurrences of this species are in the Pacific 

Northwest, and threats to this species are considered substantial, but non-imminent 

(NatureServe 2009). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes the area in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for C. sachalinensis. The primary 

direct effect that project activities would have on the areas where C. sachalinensis occurs 

is direct loss of individuals from trampling and destruction due to clearing and pipeline 

construction. The primary indirect effect of clearing and pipeline construction would be 

the degradation of suitable habitat (mesic mixed conifer forest). Timber harvesting 

creates new forest edges that alter the moisture, temperature, and light regimes of forest 

interiors. This could result in unsuitable conditions for C. sachalinensis. A change in the 

stand species composition due to logging or fire may result in a shift in the fungal 

community composition. In addition, construction activities could compact soils, 

resulting in substrates that do not support growth and reproduction of the species. 

Cumulative Effects 

As noted above, timber harvest of conifer stands have led to the decline of 

ectomycorrhizal fungi like C. sachalinensis in Oregon and the Pacific Northwest. In 

addition, increased nitrogen due to atmospheric pollution reduces ectomycorrhizal 

fruiting bodies (Lilleskov et al. 2001) which may have long term effects on species 

abundance. Over the past 200 years, logging has dramatically decreased late successional 

and old-growth forest habitats in Oregon upon which C. sachalinensis depends. Only 

eight percent of this type of habitat remains from historical times in the Coast Range of 

Oregon, 23 percent in the West Cascades, and 25 percent in the Klamath Mountains 

province (ODFW 2006). The Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Service land) and 2008 

Resource Management Plans (BLM land) designate late successional and old-growth 

forests as protected areas and manage them for optimal habitat characteristics such as 

down wood. This would increase the quality and quantity of habitat for C. sachalinensis

H-369
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 210

in the analysis area in the future. There are currently no other planned projects in a mile 

of the single occurrence of C. sachalinensis within the analysis area. There are, however, 

several timber sales planned for 10 miles on either side of the documented site (projects 

68 through 75 in table 10, 11 sites). Actions associated with this project combined with 

past, present and foreseeable future activities could potentially result in cumulative 

impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species”. This conclusion was reached because of the Secure global status of this 

species, its common and widespread distribution, and best management practices that 

would avoid direct impacts to individuals during construction if feasible. 

Ramaria thiersii

Ramaria thiersii is a mycorrhizal fungus species that grows on trees located within late 

successional conifer forests. This species was formerly listed as a Survey and Manage 

species by the BLM and USFS and is found within Idaho, Oregon and California. It 

fruits in June (Peterson 1988). Within Oregon, it is suspected to occur in Douglas, 

Jackson, and Klamath Counties. The decline of this species in the region is attributed to 

the decline in late successional forests combined with the intrinsic high vulnerability for 

this species. It is vulnerable because it has very specific environmental requirements, is 

slow to mature, reproduces infrequently, and has low fecundity resulting in slow recovery 

for populations that have decreased in abundance (OSU 2008a). One occurrence of R. 

thiersii has been documented within the construction right-of-way, approximately 172 

feet west of MP 171.93. The global status of this species is Vulnerable, and threats to it 

are substantial but non-imminent (NatureServe 2009). 

Direct and Indirect Effects 

The analysis area includes the area in which this species was found during botanical 

surveys. Direct effects of the proposed action would in general consist of both temporary 

disturbance and permanent loss or alteration of habitat for R. thiersii. Management 

activities on federal lands and pipeline construction activities within late successional 

forests could impact R. thiersii habitat. Direct impacts would occur if trees containing R. 

thiersii bodies are harvested or disturbed. Clearing could result in edge effects, which 

alter the microclimate of areas that were once forest interiors, and in degradation of 

suitable habitat for the species. This could reduce the growth rate and reproductive 

success of R. thiersii in the project vicinity.

Cumulative Effects 

The primary threat to this species is habitat loss, particularly the loss of late successional 

conifer forests. Over the past 200 years, logging has dramatically decreased late 

successional and old-growth forest habitats in Oregon upon which R. thiersii depends. 

Only eight percent of this type of habitat remains from historical times in the Coast 

Range of Oregon, 23 percent in the West Cascades, and 25 percent in the Klamath 

H-370
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 211

Mountains province (ODFW 2006). The Northwest Forest Plan (Forest Service land) and 

2008 Resource Management Plans (BLM land) designate late successional and oldgrowth forests as protected areas and manage them for optimal habitat characteristics 

such as down wood. This would increase the quality and quantity of habitat for R. 

thiersii in the analysis area in the future. There are currently no other projects planned in 

the vicinity of the single sighing of R. thiersii within the analysis area. Actions 

associated with this project combined with past, present and foreseeable future activities 

would not likely result in cumulative impacts to this species. 

Impact Determination 

In considering the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the proposed actions, it is 

determined that the action alternative “may impact individuals or habitat but is not 

likely to contribute to a trend toward federal listing or loss of viability of the 

species”. This conclusion is reached because of best management practices which would 

avoid direct impacts to known individuals during construction if feasible, the small 

fraction of this species’ range that would be impacted, and the spread of tree roots into 

the right-of-way from trees outside of the construction footprint that could be utilized by 

this fungus. 

Signature 

Must be signed by Journey-level botanist (> GS-11) or designated authority by Forest 

Supervisor. Must be completed prior to signing of Decision Memo. 

 

______ _______ ________________ 

 Robert D. Cox, District Biologist Date 

H-371
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 212

References Utilized

ADFG (Alaska Department of Fish and Game). 2007. Satellite tracking of Tule whitefronted geese to delineate and detect shifts in seasonal ranges. Federal Aid Final 

Performance Report. Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund. 

Division of Wildlife Conservation, Juneau, Alaska, USA. 

Alig, R. J., A. J. Plantinga, S. Ahn, and J. D. Kline. 2003. Land use changes involving 

forestry in the United States: 1952 to 1997, with projections to 2050 [Gen. Tech. 

Rep. PNW-GTR-587]. Portland (OR): USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Research Station. 92 pp. 

Altman, B. 2003a. Common nighthawk Chordeiles minor. Pages 330–333 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Altman, B. 2003b. Vesper sparrow Pooecetes gramineus. Pages 542–545 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Altman, B. 2003. Horned lark Eremophila alpestris. Pages 425–428 in D. B. Marshall, 

M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contrerras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Amaranthus, M.P. and D.A. Perry. 1994. The functioning of ectomycorrhizal fungi in the 

field: linkages in space and time. Plant and Soil 159:133-140. 

Andreasen, J. K. 1975. Systematics and status of the family Catostomidae in southern 

Oregon. Ph.D. diss., Oregon State Univ. 76 pp. 

Arkush, K.D., Giese, A.R., Mendonca, H.L., McBride, A.M., Marty, G.D., Hedrick, P.W. 

2002. Abstact: Resistance to three pathogens in the endangered winter-run 

chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha): effects of inbreeding and major 

histocompatibility complex genotypes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic 

Science. 59(6): 966–975. 

Ashton, D.T. 2002. A Comparison of abundance and assemblage of lotic amphibians in 

late-seral and second-growth redwood forests in Humboldt County, California. A 

Master’s Thesis presented to Humboldt State University. Arcata, CA. 

Barbour, R. W., and W. H. Davis. 1969. Bats of America. University Press of Kentucky, 

Lexington, Kentucky, USA. 

Barnett, J. 2003. Greater sage-grouse Centrocercus urophasianus. Pages 177–180 in D. 

B. Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a 

general reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

H-372
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 213

Bartlet, R., and A. Tennant. 2000. Snakes of North America. Houston, TX: Gulf 

Publishing Company. 

Bechard, M. J. and J. K. Schmutz. 1995. Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis), The Birds of 

North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; 

Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/172

Beedy, E. C., and W. J. Hamilton, III. 1997. Tricolored blackbird status update and 

management guidelines. Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc.Sacramento, 

California, USA, and Division of Environmental Studies, University of 

California, Davis, California, USA. 

Beedy, E. C., and W. J. Hamilton, III. 1999. Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor). 

The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New 

York, USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/423. 

Bettinger, K. A. 2003. Merlin Falco columbarius. Pages 164–166 in D. B. Marshall, M. 

G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Beyer, K. M. and R. T. Golightly, 1995. Distribution of Pacific fisher and other forest 

carnivores in coastal Northwestern California. CDFG contract # FG-3156-WM 

28pp. 

Black, S. H., and D. M. Vaughan. 2005. Species Profile: Polites mardon. In Shepherd, 

M. D., D. M. Vaughan, and S. H. Black (Eds). Red List of Pollinator Insects of 

North America. CD-ROM Version 1 (May 2005). Portland, OR: The Xerces 

Society for Invertebrate Conservation. 

BLM (Bureau of Land Management). Undated. Management Recommendations Group 1. 

Rare Boletes. Available online at: 

http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/surveyandmanage/MR/Fungi/GRP01.htm 

BLM. 2000. Management Recommendations for the Oregon red tree vole (Arborimus 

longicaudus) in the Record of Decision for the Northwest Forest Plan. Version 

2.0. 

BLM. 2006. GIS Database provided to Edge Environmental , Inc. July. 

BLM. 2008. Cypripedium fasciculatum Kellogg ex. S. Watson (clustered lady’s 

slipper). Vascular Plants, Survey and Manage Program, Northwest Forest Plan. 

http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/surveyandmanage/SP/VascularPlants/cypripediumfa

sciculatum.htm 

Boersma, P. D., and M. C. Silva. 2001. Fork-tailed storm-petrel (Oceanodroma furcata). 

The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New 

York, USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/569. 

H-373
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 214

Bradley, P., and M. Ports. 1998. Myotis thysanodes: fringed myotis species account. 

Updated by T. J. Weller in 2005. Western Bat Working Group. Prepared for the 

1998 Reno Biennial Meeting, and updated at the 2005 Portland Meeting. 

Brodo, I. M., S. D. Sharnoff, and S. Sharnoff. 2001. Lichens of North America. Yale 

University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, USA. 795 pp. 

Bromley, R. G., and T. C. Rothe. 2003. Conservation assessment for the dusky Canada 

goose (Branta canadensis occidentalis Baird). General Technical Report PNWGTR-591. Pacific Northwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Portland, Oregon, USA. 79 pp. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr591.pdf 

Brundrett, M. 1991. Mycorrhizas in Natural Ecosystems. Advances in Ecological 

Research. Vol 21: 

Brundrett, M.C. and L.K. Abbott. 1995. Mycorrhizal Fungus Propagules in the Jarrah 

Forest. II. Spatial Variability in Inoculum Levels. New Phytologist, Vol. 131, No. 

4. 

Buchanan, J. B. 2003. Flammulated owl Otus flammeolus. Pages 309–310 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Buck, E. H. 2008. Pacific Salmon and Steelhead Trout: Managing Under the Endangered 

Species Act. CRS Report for Congress. Order Code 98-666 Updated May 12, 

2008.Availble online at:http://ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/08Jun/98-666.pdf 

Budeau, D. A. 2003. Greater white-fronted goose Anser albifrons. Pages 76–78 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Bull, E. L., and J. R. Duncan. 1993. Great gray owl (Strix nebulosa). The birds of North 

America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/041. 

Bull, E. L., and M. G. Henjum. 1990. Ecology of the great gray owl. General Technical 

Report PNW-GTR-265. Pacific Northwest Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr265.pdf 

Bull, E. L., S. R. Peterson, and J. W. Thomas. 1986. Resource partitioning among 

woodpeckers in northeastern Oregon. Research Note PNW-444. Pacific 

Northwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_rn444.pdf 

Burke Museum (Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture). 2006. Vascular plants 

descriptions: Navarretia tagetina. University of Washington. Seattle, Washington, 

USA. 

H-374
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 215

http://biology.burke.washington.edu/herbarium/imagecollection/taxon.php?ID=10

785 

Burke, T. E. 1998. Conservation assessment for Deroceras hesperium evening fieldslug. 

Revised September 2005 by Nancy Duncan. USDA Forest Service Region 6 and 

USDI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and Washington. 

Calflora. 2004a. Taxon Report 1573. Carex interior. http://www.calflora.org/cgibin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=1573 

Calflora. 2004b. Taxon Report 1957: Cheilanthes intertexta Maxon. 

http://www.calflora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=1957 

Calflora. 2008. Taxon Report 2595. Cypripedium fasciculatum. 

http://www.calflora.org/cgi-bin/species_query.cgi?where-calrecnum=2595 

Campbell, R. W., N. K. Dawe, I. McTaggart-Cowan, J.M. Cooper, G. W. Kaiser, A. C. 

Stewart, and M.C. E. McNall. 2001. The Birds of British Columbia. Volume 4: 

Passerines. Wood Warblers through Old World Sparrows. Royal British 

Columbia Museum, Victoria, and Canadian Wildlife Service, Delta, BC. 

Carlberg, T., and E. Peterson. 2005. Results from the CALS Conservation Committee 

meeting, October 2005. Bulletin of the California Lichen Society. Vol 12, No. 2, 

Winter 2005. 

Castellano, M. A., Jane E. Smith, Thom O'Dell, Efren Cazares and Susan Nugent. 1999. 

Handbook to Strategy 1 Fungal Species in the Northwest Forest Plan. PNW-GTR476. October. 

CBD (Center for Biological Diversity). 2008. A petition to list the Pacific fisher (Martes 

pennanti) as an endangered or threatened species under the California Endangered 

Species Act. http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/species/mammals/index.html. 

Chapman, K., K. McGuiness, and R. M. Bingham. 1994. Status of the pallid bat in 

British Columbia. Wildlife Working Report Number WR – 61. Prepared for the 

British Columbia Ministry of the Environment, Wildlife Branch, Victoria, British 

Columbia, Canada. 

Chen, J., J.F. Franklin, and T.A. Spies. 1995. Growing-Season Microclimatic Gradients 

from Clearcut Edges into Old-growth Douglas-fir Forests. Ecological 

Applications. 5: 74-86. 

Combs, B. 2003. White-tailed kite Elanus leucurus. Pages 138–140 in D. B. Marshall, 

M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Comer, R.D. 1982. Understanding secondary effects of development on wildlife 

resources in mitigation planning. Pages 16-31 in Issues and Technology in the 

H-375
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 216

Management of Impacted Western Wildlife. Thorne Ecological Institute 

Technical Publication No. 14. Boulder, CO 

Corkran, C.C. and C. Thoms. 2006. Amphibians of Oregon, Washington, and British 

Columbia: a field guide. Lone Pine Publishing, Edmonton, Alberta. 

Corn, P.S. and R.B. Bury. 1989. Logging in Western Oregon: responses of headwater 

habitats and stream amphibians. Forest ecology and management: Vol 29,n 1-2. 

Corn, P.S. and R.B. Bury. 1991. Terrestrial amphibian communities in the Oregon Coast 

Range. USDA Forest Service general technical report PNW-GTR - Pacific 

Northwest Research Station (USA). 

COSEWIC. 2006. Assessment and status report on the vesper sparrow affinis subspecies 

Pooecetes gramineus affinis. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in 

Canada. Ottawa, Canada. 

Court, G.S. 1993. A toxicological assessment of the American peregrine falcon (Falco 

peregrinus anatum) breeding in Alberta, Canada - 1968 to 1992. Occasional 

Paper Number 10, Department of Environmental Protection, Wildlife 

Management Division, Fish and Wildlife Services, Government of Alberta. 28 pp. 

Cryan, P. M., M. A. Bogan, and J. S. Altenbach. 2000. Effect of elevation on 

distribution of female bats in the Black Hills, South Dakota. Journal of 

Mammalogy 81:719–725. 

Csuti, B., T.A. O’Neil, M.M. Shaughnessy, E.P. Gaines, and J.C. Hak. 2001. Atlas of 

Oregon Wildlife: Distribution, Habitat, and Natural History – Second Edition. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon. 

Cushman, K. and Rob Huff. 2007. Conservation Assessment for Fungi Included in Forest 

Service Regions 5 and 6 Sensitive and BLM California, Oregon and Washington 

Special Status Species Programs. July 2007.Available online: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/documents/planning-docs/ca-fu-text-2007-

07-10-doc.doc 

Dahl, T.E., 1990, Wetlands--Losses in the United States, 1780's to 1980's: Washington, 

D.C., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Report to Congress, 13 p. 

Dahlberg, A. 2002. Effects of fire on ectomycorrhizal fungi in Fennoscandian boreal 

forests. Silva Fennica 36:69–80. 

http://www.metla.fi/silvafennica/abs/sa36/sa361069.htm 

de Hoop, C.F., and N.J. Lalonde. 2003. Some Measured Levels of Noise Produced by 

Logging Equipment in 1998. Working Paper #58, Louisiana Forest Products 

Development Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA. 

H-376
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 217

DeLong, A.K, J.A. Crawford and D.C. DeLong, Jr. 1995. Relationships between 

Vegetational Structure and Predation of Artificial Sage Grouse Nests. The Journal 

of Wildlife Management, Vol. 59, No. 1. 

Diller, L. V. and R. L. Wallace. 1996. Distribution and habitat of Rhyacotriton variegatus 

on managed, young growth forests in north coastal California. Journal of 

Herpetology 30(1):84-191. 

Dixon, R. D., and V. A. Saab. 2000. Black-backed woodpecker (Picoides arcticus). The 

birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, 

USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/509. 

Dowlan, S. G. 2003. Harlequin duck Histrionicus histrionicus. Pages 115–118 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Duncan, N. 2004. Conservation assessment for Helminthoglypta hertlieni, Oregon 

shoulderband. USDA Forest Service Region 6 and USDI Bureau of Land 

Management, Oregon and Washington. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/documents/planning-docs/20050713-molloregon-shoulderband.doc 

Dunk, J. R. 1995. White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus). The birds of North America 

online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/178. 

Edge Environmental, Inc. 2006. Northwest Pipeline Corporation Capacity Replacement 

Project: Winter Bald Eagle Occurrence on the North Fork Nooksack River. 

Unpublished report to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Field 

Office, Lacey, Washington. 

Ely, C. R., and A. X. Dzubin. 1994. Greater white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons). The 

birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, 

USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/131. 

Esseen, P.-A. 1985. Litter fall of epiphytic macrolichens in two old Picea abies forests 

in Sweden. Canadian Journal of Botany 63:980–987. 

Fellers, G. M. 2005. Rana boylii foothill yellow legged frog. Modified from Lannoo, 

M. 2005. Amphibian declines: the conservation status of United States species. 

University of California Press, Berkeley, California, USA. 

http://amphibiaweb.org/lists/index.shtml 

Fellers, G. M., and E. D. Pierson. 2002. Habitat use and foraging behavior of 

Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in coastal California. 

Journal of Mammalogy. 83: 167 – 177. 

FishBase. 2008. Available online at: http://www.fishbase. Accessed December, 2008. 

H-377
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 218

FNA. 2008a. Flora of North America: Flora Taxon Vol. 19, 20 and 21 Page 341, 342. 

Microseris laciniata. 

http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=250068596 

FNA. 2008b. Flora of North America: Flora Taxon Vol. 3. Asarum wagneri. 

http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=233500173 

FNA. 2008c. Flora of North America: Flora Taxon Vol. 3. Enemion stipitatum. 

http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=233500599 

FNA. 2008d. Flora of North America: Flora Taxon Vol. 23 Page 326, 327, 328. Carex 

interior. 

http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=242357259 

Forman R.T., and L.E. Alexander. 1998. Roads and Their Major Ecological Effects. 

Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 29:207-231. 

Foster, D.E 1974. Ovipositional behavior of Chloealtis aspasma (Orthoptera: Acrididae). 

Pan Pacific Entomologist 50(2):207-208. 

Frest, T. J., and E. J. Johannes. 1998. Freshwater mollusks of the Upper Klamath 

drainage, Oregon. Deixis Consultants, Seattle, Washington. Oregon Natural 

Heritage Program, Portland, Oregon. 

FWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service). 1996. Draft Klamath/Central Pacific 

Coast Ecoregion Restoration Strategy. Volume II – Description of the Ecological 

Issues. Klamath Basin Ecosystem Restoration Office. Klamath Falls, Oregon. 

FWS. 1999. Aleutian Canada goose (Branta canadensis leucopareia). Threatened and 

Endangered Species. Washington, D.C. http://alaska.fws.gov/media/acg/fact.pdf. 

FWS. 2000. 12-month finding for a petition to list the southern torrent salamander in 

California as endangered or threatened. Federal Register 65:35951–35956. 

FWS. 2003. Biological Opinion and Letter of Concurrence of Effects on Bald Eagles, 

Marbled Murrelets, Northern Spotted Owls, Bull Trout, and Designated Critical 

Habitat for Marbled Murrelets and Northern Spotted Owls from Olympic National 

Forest Program Activities for August 5, 2003 to December 31, 2008. Reference 

number 1-3-03-F-0833. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Olympia, WA. 

FWS. 2004. 12-month finding for a petition to list the west coast distinct population 

segment of the fisher (Martes pennanti); proposed rule. Federal Register 

69:18769–18792. 

FWS. 2006. Estimating the Effects of Auditory and Visual Disturbance to Northern 

Spotted Owls and Marbled Murrelets in Northwestern California. U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, California. July. 

H-378
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 219

Galen, C. 2003. Lewis’s woodpecker Melanerpes lewis. Pages 350–352 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Gangwere, S.K. 1961. A monograph on food selection in Orthoptera. Transactions of the 

American Entomological Society 57:67-230. 

Gardner, J.H. and N. Malajczuk. 1988. Recolonisation of rehabilitated bauxite mine sites 

in Western Australia by mycorrhizal fungi. Forest Ecology and Management Vol. 

24, no. 1. 

Garrett, K. L., M. G. Raphael, and R. D. Dixon. 1996. White-headed woodpecker 

(Picoides albolarvatus). The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of 

Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/252. 

Gauthier, G. 1993. Bufflehead (Bucephala albeola). The birds of North America 

online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/067. 

Gibbs, J. P., F. A. Reid, and S. M. Melvin. 1992. Least bittern (Ixobrychus exilis). The 

birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, 

USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/017. 

Gilligan, J., M. Smith, D. Rogers and A. Contreras. 1994. Birds of Oregon: status and 

distribution. Cinclus, McMinnville, OR. 

Good, D. A., and D. B. Wake. 1992. Geographic variation and speciation in the torrent 

salamanders of the genus RHYACOTRITON (Caudata: Rhyacotritonidae). Univ. 

California Publication Zoology 126:i-xii, 1-91. 

Green, G. A. 2003. Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia. Pages 316–319 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Harrod, R. J.; Knecht, D. 1994. Preliminary observations of the reproductive ecology of 

Cypripedium fasciculatum. [Abstract]. Northwest Science Association Meeting, 

23-26 March 1994. Northwest Science. 68: 129. 

Haug, E. A., and L. W. Oliphant. 1990. Movements, activity patterns, and habitat use of 

burrowing owls in Saskatchewan. Journal of Wildlife Management 54:27–35. 

Haug, E. A., B. A. Millsap, and M. S. Martell. 1993. Burrowing owl (Athene 

cunicularia). The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 

Ithaca, New York, USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/061. 

H-379
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 220

Henny, C. J., and J. E. Pagel. 2003. Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus. Pages 166–170 

in D. B. Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a 

general reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Hermanson, J. W., and T. J. O’Shea. 1983. Antrozous pallidus. Mammalian Species 

213:1–8. 

Herziger, C., and G. L. Ivey. 2003. American white pelican Pelecanus erythrorhynchos. 

Pages 51–53 in D. B. Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds 

of Oregon: a general reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, 

USA. 

Hitchcock, C. L., A. Cronquist, M. Ownbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1969. Vascular plants 

of the Pacific Northwest, Part 1: vascular cryptogams, gymnosperms, and 

monocotyledons. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, USA. 

914 pp. 

Holt, D. W., and J. L. Petersen. 2000. Northern pygmy-owl (Glaucidium gnoma). The 

birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, 

USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/494. 

Horvath, E. G. 1999. Distibution, abundance, and nest site characteristics of Purple 

Martins in Oregon. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Technical Report 

99-1-01. 

Houston, C. S., and D. E. Bowen, Jr. 2001. Upland sandpiper (Bartramia longicauda). 

The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New 

York, USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/580. 

ISSSSP (Interagency Special Status/Sensitive Species Program). 2008. Species fact 

sheets. http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/species-index/faunainvertebrates.shtml 

Ivey, G. L., and C. Herziger. 2003. Trumpeter swan Cygnus buccinator. Pages 89–90 in

D. B. Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a 

general reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Janes, S. W. 2003a. Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis. Pages 158–159 in D. B. Marshall, 

M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Janes, S. W. 2003b. Great gray owl Strix nebulosa. Pages 322–324 in D. B. Marshall, 

M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Jarvis, R. L. 2003. Canada goose Branta canadensis. Pages 82–86 in D. B. Marshall, 

M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

H-380
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 221

Jepson, W.L. 1993. Jepson Online Interchange for California Floristics. The University 

and Jepson Herbaria, University of California, Berkeley. 

http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/get_JM_treatment 

Jepson, W. L. 2008. Jepson online interchange for California floristics. 

http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/get_JM_treatment 

Johnson, D., and T. O’Neil (managing directors). 2001. Wildlife-Habitat Relationships 

in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon. 

Johnsson, J.I. and Abrahams, M.V. 1991. Interbreeding with domestic strain increases 

foraging under threat of predation in juvenile steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus 

mykiss ): An experimental study. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic 

Sciences [CAN. J. FISH. AQUAT. SCI.]. Vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 243-247. 

Jones, S. L., and J. E. Cornely. 2002. Vesper Sparrow (Pooecetes gramineus). In The 

Birds of North America, No. 624 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The Birds of North 

America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 

Jones, Z. F., and C. E. Bock. 2002. Conservation of grassland birds in an urbanizing 

landscape: a historical perspective. Condor 104:643–651. 

Kauffman, J. B., M. Mahrt, L. A. Mahrt, d D. Edge. 2001. Wildlife of riparian habitats. 

Pages 361–388 in D. H. Johnson and T. A. O’Neill. Wildlife-habitat relationships 

in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, 

USA. 

Keely, B. W., and M. D. Tuttle. 1999. Bats in America’s bridges. Resource publication 

No. 4. Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas, USA. 

Keon, D. B., and P. S. Muir. 2002. Growth of Usnea longissima across a variety of 

habitats in the Oregon Coast Range. The Bryologist 105:233–242. 

Kirsch, L. M., and K. F. Higgins. 1976. Upland sandpiper nesting and management in 

North Dakota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 4:16–20. 

Knopf, F. L., and R. M. Evans. 2004. American white pelican (Pelicanus 

erythrorhynchos). The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of 

Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/057. 

Kranabetter, J.M. and T. Wylie. 1998. Ectomycorrhizal community structure across forest 

openings on naturally regenerated western hemlock seedlings. Canadian Journal 

of Botany 78: 189-196. 

Leonard, W. P., H. A. Brown, L. L. C. Jones, K. R. McAllister, and R. M. Storm. 1993. 

Amphibians of Washington and Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, 

Washington, USA. 

H-381
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 222

Lewis, S. E. 1994. Night roosting ecology of pallid bats (Antrozous pallidus) in Oregon. 

American Midland Naturalist. 132: 219 – 226. 

Lewis 1995 from page 70 

Lewis, S. E. 1996. Roost fidelity in bats: a review. Journal of Mammalogy 76:481–496. 

Lilleskov, E. A., T. J. Fahey, G. M. Lovett. 2001. Ectomycorrhizal fungal aboveground 

community change over an atmospheric nitrogen deposition gradient. Ecological 

Applications 11:397–410. 

Luoma, D. 2001. Monitoring of Fungal Diversity at the Siskiyou Integrated Research Site 

with Special Reference to the Survey and Manage Species Arcangeliella 

camphorata (Singer & Smith) Pegler & Young. Special Report on file with the 

Chetco Ranger District, Siskiyou National Forest, Brookings, Oregon. 

MacCracken, J. G., D. W. Uresk, and R. M. Hansen. 1985. Vegetation and soils of 

burrowing owl nest sites in Conata Basin, South Dakota. Condor 87:152–154. 

Markle, D. F., T. N. Pearsons, and D. T. Bills. 1991. Natural history of 

OREGONICHTHYES (Pisces: Cyprinidae), with a description of a new species 

from the Umpqua River of Oregon. Copeia 1991:277-93. 

Marshall, D. B., Hunter, M. G., and A. L. Contreas. 2003. Birds of Oregon: A General 

Reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 

Marshall, D. B. 2003a. Northern goshawk Accipiter gentilis. Pages 151–153 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Marshall, D. B. 2003b. White-headed woodpecker Picoides albolarvatus. Pages 364–

367 in D. B. Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of 

Oregon: a general reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, 

USA. 

Martin, E., McCune, B., and J. Hutchinson. 2002. Distribution and morphological 

variation of Leptogium cellulosum and L. teretiusculum in the Pacific Northwest. 

Bryologist 105:358–362. 

Matthews, W.V.G., and K. Barnhard. 1996. Conceptual riverine and riparian restoration 

plan for the Lower Williamson River Restoration Project. The Nature 

Conservancy, Portland, OR. 

McCallum, D. A. 1994. Flammulated owl (Otus flammeolus). The birds of North 

America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/093. 

H-382
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 223

McLaren, S. 2001. Mammals of Oregon. American Society of Mammalogists. 

Accessed online at http://www.mammalsociety.org/statelists/ormammals.html in 

November 2008. 

Meiselman and Doyle 1996 from page 195 

Miller, C. R. 2003. Gray flycatcher Empidonax wrightii. Pages 383–384 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Millsap, B. A., and C. Bear. 2000. Density and reproduction of burrowing owls along an 

urban development gradient. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:33–41. 

Mitchell, C. D. 1994. Trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator). The birds of North 

America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/105. 

Moravec, J. 1986. A new species and two new combinations in the genus Sowerbyella. 

Mycol. Helv. 2: 93-102. 

Morrell, T. W., M. R. Rabe, J. C. Devos, Jr., H. Green, and C. R. Miller. 1999. Bats 

captured in two ponderosa pine habitats in north-central Arizona. Southwestern 

Naturalist 44:501–506. 

Mowbray, T. B., C. R. Ely, J. S. Sedinger, and R. E. Trost. 2002. Canada goose (Branta 

canadensis). The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 

Ithaca, New York, USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/682. 

Moyle, P. B. 1976. Inland fishes of California. University of California Press. 405 p. 

Nagorsen, D. W., and R. M. Brigham. 1993. The bats of British Columbia. University 

of British Columbia Press, Vancouver, Canada. 

NatureServe. 2008. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web 

application]. Version 7.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. 

http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ 

NatureServe. 2009. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web 

application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. 

http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/

Nehlsen, W., Williams, J.E., Lichatowich, J.A. 1991. Pacific Salmon at the Crossroads: 

Stocks at Risk from California, Oregon, Idaho, Washington. Scanned for krisweb; 

available at: 

http://www.krisweb.com/krisrussian/krisdb/html/krisweb/biblio/gen_afs_nehlsene

tal_1991.pdf 

H-383
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 224

NOAA (Natural Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) Fisheries Office of Protected 

Resources.2008. Endangered Species Act (ESA). Available online at: 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/fish/chumsalmon.htm 

Nordstrom, N. 1997. Cascade Torrent Salamander and Columbia Torrent Salamander. 

In Larsen, E. M. (Technical editor) Management recommendations for 

Washington’s priority species. Volume III: amphibians and reptiles. Washington 

Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia. 

O’Farrell, M. J., and E. H. Studier. 1980. Myotis thysanodes. American Society of 

Mammalogists, Mammalian Species 137:1–5. 

O’Meara, T. E., J. B. Haufler, L. H. Stelter, and J. G. Nagy. 1981. Nongame wildlife 

responses to chaining of pinyon-juniper woodlands. Journal of Wildlife 

Management 45:381–389. 

Opler, P. A., H. Pavulaan, R. E. Stanford, and M. Pogue. 2006. Butterflies and moths of 

North America. NBII Mountain Prairie Information Node, Bozeman, Montana, 

USA. http://www.butterfliesandmoths.org/ 

ODFW. 2005. Greater sage-grouse conservation assessment and strategy for Oregon: a 

plan to maintain and enhance populations and habitat. Salem, Oregon, USA. 147 

pp. 

ODFW. 2006. Oregon Conservation Strategy. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 

Salem, Oregon, USA. 

Oregon Division of State Lands and Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division. 1989. 

Oregon wetlands priority plan: Salem, Oregon Division of State Lands and 

Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division, 75 p. 

ORNHIC 2002. Oregon Natural Heritage Program. 2002. Oregon Status Factor. 

Available online: 

http://oregonstate.edu/ornhic/documents/survey/cortinarius_valgus_or.pdf 

ORNHIC. 2006. Personal Sensitive Species Data Request to Edge Environmental, Inc. 

May 30, 2006. 

ORNHIC. 2007. Rare, threatened, and endangered species of Oregon. Oregon State 

University, Portland, Oregon, USA. 100 pp. 

http://oregonstate.edu/ornhic/documents/2007_t&e_book.pdf 

ORNHIC. 2009. Oregon Heritage Rank Status Factors. 2009. Available online: 

http://oregonstate.edu/ornhic/documents/survey

Oregon Progress Board. 2000. State of the Environment Report. 214 pages. Accessed 2-

30-2009 at http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/OPB/soer2000index.shtml 

H-384
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 225

Orr, R.T. 1954. Natural history of the pallid bat, Antrozous pallidus (Le Conte). 

Proceedings of the California Academy of Science. 18: 165 – 246. 

OSU (Oregon State University). 2008a. Oregon Status Factors. Chaenotheca subroscidia. 

http://oregonstate.edu/ornhic/documents/survey/chaenotheca_subroscidia_or.pdf 

OSU (Oregon State University). 2008b. California Status Factors. Chaenotheca 

ferruginea. 

http://oregonstate.edu/ornhic/documents/survey/chaenotheca_ferruginea_ca.pdf 

OSU (Oregon State University). 2008c. Heritage Rank Status Factors. Leptogium 

teretiusculum. 

http://oregonstate.edu/ornhic/documents/survey/leptogium_teretiusculum_global.

pdf 

OSU (Oregon State University). 2008d. Oregon Status Factors. Ramaria thiersii. 

http://oregonstate.edu/ornhic/documents/survey/ramaria_thiersii_or.pdf 

PacifiCorp. 2003. Klamath Hydroelectric Project Study Plans (FERC Project No. 

2082). 1.19 Investigation of Klamath River Freshwater Bivalves in the J.C. Boyle 

Peaking Reach and Downstream of Iron Gate Dam. April 2003. 

Page, L. M. and B. M. Burr. 1991. A Field Guide to Freshwater Fishes: North America 

North of Mexico. R. T. Peterson, Ed. Houghton-Mifflin. 

Paullin, D. G., G. L. Ivey, and C. D. Littlefield. 1988. The re-establishment of American 

white pelican nesting in the Malheur-Harney Lakes basin, Oregon. Murrelet 

69:61–64. 

Pearson, S.F., and B. Altman. 2005. Range-wide Streaked Horned Lark (Eremophila 

alpestris strigata) Assessment and Preliminary Conservation Strategy. Washington 

Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. 25pp. 

Peterson, R.H. 1988. Contributions torward a monograph of Ramaria VII: New taxa and 

miscellany. Mycologia 80:223–234. 

Piaggio, A. 1998. Updated by R. Sherwin in 2005. Corynorhinus townsendii: 

Townsend’s big-eared bat species account. Western Bat Working Group. 

Prepared for the 1998 Reno Biennial Meeting, and updated at the 2005 Portland 

Biennial Meeting. 

Pierson, E. D., W. E. Rainey, and C. J. Corben. 2001. Seasonal patterns of bat 

distribution along an altitudinal gradient in the Sierra Nevada. Report prepared 

for the California Department of Transportation, California State University at 

Sacramento Foundation, Yosemite Association, and Yosemite Fund. 

Pierson, E. D., W. E. Rainey, and D. M. Koontz. 1996. Bats and mines: experimental 

mitigation for Townsend’s big-eared bat at the McLaughlin Mine in California. 

H-385
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 226

Pages 31–42 in Issues and technology in the management of impacted wildlife. 

Thorne Ecological Institute, Snowmass, California, USA. 

Powell, H. D. 2003. Black-backed woodpecker Picoides arcticus. Pages 368–370 in D. 

B. Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a 

general reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Powell, R. A. 1993. The fisher: life history, ecology, and behavior. University of 

Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. 

Rabe, M. J., T. E. Morrell, H. Green, J. C. deVos Jr., and C. R. Miller. 1998. 

Characteristics of ponderosa ping snags used by reproductive bats in northern 

Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Management 62:612–621. 

Reynolds, R. T., and B. D. Linkhart. 1992. Flammulated owls in ponderosa pine: 

evidence of preference for old growth. Pages 166–169 in M. R. Kaufmann, W. H. 

Moir, and R. L. Basset, technical coordinators. Old-growth forests in the 

southwest and Rocky Mountain regions: Proceedings of a workshop. U.S. Forest 

Service General Technical Report RM-213. 

http://www.rmrs.nau.edu/publications/reynolds_1992/reynolds_1992.pdf 

Rich, T. 1986. Habitat and nest-site selection by burrowing owls in the sagebrush steppe 

of Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management 50:548–555. 

Robertson, G. J., and R. I. Goudie. 1999. Harlequin duck (Histrionicus histrionicus). 

The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New 

York, USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/466. 

Robinson, W. D., and R. P. Moore. 2004. Range, abundance, and habitat associations of 

streaked horned lark (Eremophila alpestris strigata) during winter. Department 

of Fisheries and Wildlife and Oak Creek Lab of Biology, Oregon State 

University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

http://southsoundprairies.org/documents/RobinsonandMoore2005.pdf 

Rogers, Jr., R. E. 2000. The status and microhabitat selection of streaked horned lark, 

western bluebird, Oregon vesper sparrow, and western meadowlark in western 

Washington. Thesis, Evergreen State College, Olympia, Washington, USA. 

Romero, N., R. E. Gresswell, J. L. Li. 2005. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic 

Sciences. 2005. 62(8): 1797–1807 (2005), NRC Research Press. Canada. 

Rosenberg, K. V., R. D. Ohmart, W. C. Hunter, and B. W. Anderson. 1991. Birds of the 

lower Colorado River valley. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona, 

USA. 

Sater, D. M., A. R. Giese, and E. D. Forsman. 2003. Northern pygmy-owl Glaucidium 

gnoma. Pages 314–316 in D. B. Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, 

H-386
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 227

editors. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. Oregon State University Press, 

Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon. 2008. The North American breeding bird survey, 

results and analysis 1966–2007. Version 5.15.2008. USGS Patuxent Wildlife 

Research Center, Laurel, Maryland, USA. http://www.mbrpwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/bbs.html 

Scheuering, R. W. 2003. Bufflehead Bucephala albeola. Pages 124–126 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Schroeder, M. A., J. R. Young, and C. E. Braun. 1999. Greater sage-grouse 

(Centrocercus urophasianus). The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of 

Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/425. 

Scott, W. B. and E. J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Fish Research 

Board of Canada Bulletin. 966pp. 

Seevers, J., and F. Lang. 1998. Management recommendations for clustered lady slipper 

orchid (Cypripedium fasciculatum Kellogg ex S. Watson), Vol. 2.0. 

http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/surveyandmanage/MR/VascularPlants/section9.htm 

Sherwin, R. 1998. Updated by D. A. Rambaldini in 2005. Antrozous pallidus: pallid bat 

species account. Western Bat Working Group. Developed for the 1998 Reno 

Biennial Meeting, and updated at the 2005 Portland Biennial Meeting. 

Sheviak C. J. 1990. Biological considerations in the management of temperate terrestrial 

orchid habitats. New York State Museum Bulletin 471:194–196. 

Smith, A. H., and N. S. Weber. 1980. The Mushroom Hunter's Field Guide: All Color 

and Enlarged. Published by University of Michigan Press. 316 pages 

Spencer, K. 2003a. Red-necked grebe Podiceps grisegena. Pages 31–32 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Spencer, K. 2003b. Horned grebe Podiceps auritus. Pages 30–31 in D. B. Marshall, M. 

G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Spencer, K. 2003c. Least bittern Ixobrychus exilis. Pages 61–62 in D. B. Marshall, M. 

G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. 

Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

H-387
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 228

Spencer, K. 2003d. Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor. Pages 578–580 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Squires, J. R., and L. F. Ruggiero. 1996. Nest-site preference of northern goshawks in 

southcentral Wyoming. Journal of Wildlife Management 60:170–177. 

Squires, J. R., and R. T. Reynolds. 1997. Northern goshawk (Accipiter gentilis). The 

birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, 

USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/298. 

St. John, A. 2002. Reptiles of the northwest: California to Alaska, Rockies to the coast. 

Lone Pine Publishing, Renton, Washington, USA. 

Stebbins, R. C. 1985. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Houghton 

Mifflin Co., Boston. 

Stedman, S. J. 2000. Horned grebe (Podiceps auritus). The birds of North America 

online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/505. 

Steidl, R. J., C. R. Griffin, and L.J. Niles. 1991. Contaminant levels of osprey eggs and 

prey reflect regional differences in reproductive success. Journal of Wildlife 

Management 55(4):601-608. 

Sterling, J. C. 1999. Gray flycatcher (Empidonax wrightii). The birds of North America 

online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/458. 

Stern, M. A. 2003. Upland sandpiper Bartramia longicauda. Pages 222–223 in D. B. 

Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general 

reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 

Storm, R. M., and W. P. Leonard, editors. 1995. Reptiles of Washington and Oregon. 

Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, Washington, USA. 

Stout, B. E., and G. L. Neuchterlein. 1999. Red-necked grebe (Podicepts grisegena). 

The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New 

York, USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/465. 

StreamNet. 2008. StreamNet GIS database. http://www.streamnet.org/online-data.html. 

Swanston, D.N.; Swanson, F.J. 1976. Timber harvesting, mass erosion, and steepland 

forest geomorphology in the Pacific Northwest. In: Coates, D.R., ed. 

Geomorphology and engineering. Strousbury, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson and 

Ross; 221. 

H-388
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 229

Szaro, R. C., and R. P. Balda. 1986. Relationships among weather, habitat structure, and 

ponderosa pine forest birds. Journal of Wildlife Management 50:253–260. 

Tabacchi, A-M, E. Tabacchi, R. J. Naiman, et al. 1996. Invasibility of species-rich 

communities in riparian zones. Biological Conservation. 

Thomas, J. W., R. G. Anderson, C. Maser, and E. L. Bull. 1979. Snags. Pages 60-77 in J. 

W. Thomas (editor). Wildlife Habitats in Managed Forests: the Blue Mountains of 

Oregon and Washington. U.S.D.A. Handbook 553. 

Thurow, R. F., Rieman, B. E., Lee, D. C., Howell, P. J., and R. D. Perkinson. 2007. 

Distribution and status of redband trout in the interior Columbia river basin and 

portions of the Klamath river and great basins Redband Trout: Resilience and 

Challenge in a Changing Landscape. Oregon Chapter, American Fisheries 

Society. 19 pp. 

Tobalske, B. W. 1997. Lewis’s woodpecker (Melanerpes lewis). The birds of North 

America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/284. 

Treneman R. 2008. Pyramid Thin Project; Biological Evaluation – Wildlife; Gold Beach 

Ranger District Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests. February 2008 

United States Department of Agriculture and United States Department of the Interior. 

1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic and social 

assessment. Report prepared for the United States Forest Service, Portland, 

Oregon, USA. 

USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). 2008. Natural Resource Conservation 

Status: Wetland Indicator Status. 

http://plants.usda.gov/java/wetland?txtparm=Navarretia%20heterandra&category

=Scientific%20Name&sort=region1 

USDA, NRCS. 2006. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant 

Data Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA. 

USFS (United States Forest Service, Region 6). 2008a. Species Fact Sheet. Available 

online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/documents/planning-docs/sfs-liusnea-longissima.doc 

USFS. 2008b. Meet the ladies: the slipper orchids – Cypripedium fasciculatum. 

Celebrating wildflowers. Botany Program, Rangeland Management. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/wildflowers/beauty/cypripedium/cypripedium_fasciculatum.

shtml. 

USFS. 2008c. Environmental assessment Dads Creek. Wildland Urban Interface 

Project; Botany section. August 29, 2008. 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/malheur/projects/dadscrk/chap-3-botany.pdf 

H-389
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 230

USFS. 2008d. Effects Analysis Guidelines for Sensitive Fungi Species Updated. U.S. 

Forest Service Region 6. Available online: 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/documents/planning-tools/cpt-fu-effectsanalysis-guidelines-2008-10.doc 

USFS. 2006. GIS Database provided to Edge Environmental, Inc. August 2006. 

USFS (United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service) and BLM (United States 

Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management). 1994. Record of Decision 

for amendments to USFS and Bureau of Land Management planning documents 

within the range of the northern spotted owl. 

Van Zyll De Jong, C. G. 1985. Handbook of Canadian mammals, volume 2: Bats. 

National Museum of Natural Sciences, National Museums of Canada, Ottawa, 

Ontario, Canada. 

Verts, B. J., and L. N. Carraway. 1998. Land mammals of Oregon. University of 

California Press, Berkley, California, USA. 

Vesely, D.G. and W.C. McComb. 2002. Salamander abundance and amphibian species 

richness in riparian buffer strips in the Oregon Coast Range. Forest Science: Vol 48, n 

2. 

Vierling, K. T. 1997. Habitat selection of Lewis’ woodpeckers in southeastern 

Colorado. Wilson Bulletin 109:121–130. 

Wanglund, Y. L. 2008. How is the distribution of the epiphytic lichen Usnea longissima

affected by forest structure and logging history within stands? University essay 

from SLU/Dept. of Forest Ecology and Management. 

Warkentin, I. G., N. S. Sodhi, R. H. M. Espie, A. F. Poole, L. W. Oliphant, and P. C. 

James. 2005. Merlin (Falco columbarius). The birds of North America online. 

Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USA. 

http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/044. 

Washington State Department of Transportation. 2008. Chapter 7.0-Noise Impact 

Assessment. Pages 7.1 - 7.54 in BA Preparation for Transportation Projects, 

Advanced Training Manual Version 10-08. Environmental Affairs Office, 

Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA. 

Weller, T. J., and C. J. Zabel. 2001. Characteristics of fringed myotis day roosts in 

northern California. Journal of Wildlife Management. 66: 489 – 497. 

Welsh, H.H. Jr, and A.J. Lind. 1991. The Structure of the Herpetofaunal Assemblage in 

the Douglas-Fir/Hardwood Forests of Northwestern California and Southwestern 

Oregon. US Forest Service General Technical Report PNW. 

H-390
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 231

Welsh, H. H., Jr., and L. M. Ollivier. 1998. Stream amphibians as indicators of 

ecosystem stress: a case study from California's redwoods. Ecological 

Applications 8:1118–1132. 

Welsh, Jr., H. H., and N. E. Karraker. 2005. Rhyacotriton variegatus southern torrent 

salamander. Modified from Lannoo, M. 2005. Amphibian declines: the 

conservation status of United States species. University of California Press, 

Berkeley, California, USA. http://amphibiaweb.org/lists/index.shtml 

White, C. M., N. J. Clum, T. J. Cade, and W. G. Hunt. 2002. Peregrine falcon (Falco 

peregrinus). The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 

Ithaca, New York, USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/660. 

Woodruff, K., and H. Ferguson. 2005. Management recommendations for Washington’s 

priority species, volume 5. Mammals: Townsend’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus 

townsendii. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 

http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phs/vol5/mammalrecs.htm in November 2008. 

H-391
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation 232

Appendix A 

Special Status Species that are not Expected to be Impacted by 

the Project

H-392
233 Appen

TABLE A-1 

Special Status Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Impacted by 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vicinity of 

Project Area c/

MammalsSpotted bat Euderma maculate BA S 

Wide variety of habitat types ranging from ponderosa pine to desert water holes. Roost in cliff crevices. 

Klamath LV-D 

Pygmy rabbit Brachylagus idahoensis 

SOC BA S 

Tall dense clumps of sagebrush, also in greasewood. Deep, friable soils for burrows. 

Klamath 

historic 

only 

LV-S 

Gold Beach pocket gopher Thomomys mazama helleri3

 BA 

Open grassy meadows, wet pastures in mountain forests. 

Coos CB-S 

Pistol River pocket gopher Thomomys bottae detumidus

 BA 

Moist meadows, pastures, grasslands, riparian areas. Requires deep soils. 

Coos CB-S 

Columbian whitetailed deer Odocoileus virginianus leucurus 

 BS 

Restricted to a few islands in the Columbia River, white-oak woodlands near Roseburg. 

Douglas RO-D 

BirdsFork-tailed storm petrel Oceanodroma furcata 

 BA 

Nests on offshore islands with developed soils. Forages over open ocean. Burrows located in grassy areas without trees or shrubs 

Coos CB-S 

Rhinoceros aukletCerorhinca niger BA 

Offshore islands, coast headlands with well developed soils. Forages oceanwide. 

Coos 

Douglas CB-S 

Cassin’s auklet Ptychoramphus aleuticus 

 BA 

Breeds on offshore islands. Forages in the marine environment. 

Coos CB-S 

Tufted puffin Fratercula cirrhata BA 

Burrows on slopes or turfcovered headlands of offshore islands and coastal bluffs. May nest in rock crevices. Forage 

Coos CB-S 

H-393
234 Appen

TABLE A-1 

Special Status Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Impacted by 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vicinity of 

Project Area c/

in the marine environment. 

Yellow rail Coturnicops noveboracensis

SOC BS S 

Freshwater and coastal estuary marshes. Requires areas with shallow water and vegetative cover. 

Klamath LV-D F-W-D UMP-S 

Yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus occidentalis 

C 

60+ acres of thick closedcanopy riparian forests with an understory of dense brush usually composed of various species of willows and cottonwoods. 

Klamath 

AmphibiansOregon slender salamander Batrachoseps wrighti3

SOC S 

Under bark or moss in mature and secondgrowth Douglas-fir forests. Also under rocks or logs in stands of moist hardwood forests within coniferous forests.

Douglas 

Del Norte salamander Plethodon elongatus 

SOC BT S 

Moist, rocky areas within forests. Occasionally in decaying logs and under forest floor litter.

Coos 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-D 

MD-D 

RO-D 

RRS-D 

Siskiyou Mountains salamander Plethodon stormi 

SOC BS/S M S/SM 

Loose rock rubble or talus on north-facing slopes or in dense wooded areas. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Black salamander Aneides flavipunctatus

 BA S 

Near streams, in talus slopes or under rocks and logs. Inhabits open woodlands, and mixed coniferous and mixedconiferous-deciduous forests.

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

California slender salamander Batrachoseps attenuatus 

BA S 

Lower-elevation forests along the southern coast, including hardwood, redwood, and other coniferous forests. Also in open areas with scattered trees. Under rocks, logs, or other objects on the ground.

Coos 

Jackson CB-D RRS-D 

H-394
235 Appen

TABLE A-1 

Special Status Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Impacted by 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vicinity of 

Project Area c/

Northern leopard frog Rana pipeins

 S 

Marshes, wet meadows, vegetated irrigation canals, ponds, and reservoirs. Prefers quiet or slow flowing waters. 

Jackson Klamath 

Oregon spotted frog Rana pretiosa 

C BS S 

Margins of lakes, marshes, and pools in streams with aquatic vegetation. Higher elevations from the crest and east slope of Cascade Mountains. 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-D 

MD-D 

F-W-D RRS-D UMP-S 

F-W/PV/West side of Buck Lake (1997): N and S of MP 172.1; LV (T38S,R5E,S23; 1997): 0.6-1.2 mi SW of MP 173.45. 

Terrestrial InvertebratesGreat Basin ramshorn Helisoma newberryi newberryi

 BS 

Larger lakes, slow rivers, larger spring sources, spring-fed creeks; burrow in soft mud. 

Klamath LV-D 

Green sideband Monadenia fidelis beryllica

 BS 

Generally inhabit deciduous stands (including alder) and brush in wet, relatively undisturbed forest; low elevation; low coastal scrub. 

Coos CB-S RO-D 

Modoc sideband Monadenia fidelis ssp. Nov.

 BS 

Talus and wetted rocky areas on lakeshore; mixed pine-Douglas fir forest or open grasslands; associated with seeps and springs in talus deposits. 

Klamath LV-D 

Crater Lake tightcoil Pristiloma arcticum crateris

BS/S

M SM 

Mature conifer forests; perennially wet areas among rushes, mosses, and other surface vegetation or under rocks and woody debris within 30 feet of open water in wetlands, springs, seeps, and riparian areas. 

Douglas Jackson 

LV-S 

MD-N 

RO-D 

F-W-D 

RRS-D 

UMP-D 

 

Spotted taildropper Prophysaon vanattae pardalis

 BS 

Moist, mature forested habitats; coastal “fog” zone near ocean; significant deciduous tree or shrub component 

Coos CB-D RO-S 

H-395
236 Appen

TABLE A-1 

Special Status Terrestrial Wildlife Species that May Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Impacted by 

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

District/Forest 

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Within Vicinity of 

Project Area c/

present. 

a/ Status Key: 

Federal Status: C = Federal Candidate, SOC = Species of Concern, MMPA = Marine Mammal Protection Act 

State Status: SC = State Critical, SV = State Vulnerable, SP = State Peripheral or Naturally Rare, SU = Undetermined Status 

BLM Status: BS = BLM Sensitive, BA = BLM Assessment, BT = BLM Tracking, SM = former Survey and Manage, no longer have any specUSFS Status: S = Sensitive, SM = former Survey and Manage, now recognized as Uncommon and Rare although they hold no legal status b/ Occurrence Key: 

BLM Districts and USFS Forests provided lists of species documented or suspected within the management area and are noted. 

BLM District: CB = Coos Bay District, RO = Roseburg District, MD = Medford District, K F= Klamath District USFS Forest: F-W = Fremont-Winema National Forest, RRS = Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, UMP = Umpqua National Forest  D = Documented within BLM or USFS Management Area  S = Suspected within BLM or USFS Management Area c/ Pacific Connector Project: mollusks and red tree vole documented within 500 feet of the proposed pipeline; all other species are documen

proposed pipeline. d/ Invertebrates associated with water are included in Appendix 4.6-C. 

References: Species Status and Range: FWS 2006a; BLM 2006; ORNHIC 2007a, b; ORNHIC 2006a and 2006d; Janes et al. 2005. Expected Habitat: Csuti et al. 2001; NatureServe 2006; ORNHIC 2006d; Gilligan et al. 1994; Kozloff 1976; USFS and BLM 2006. 

H-396
237 Appen

TABLE A-2 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Impacted b

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodies 

crossed by Project/ 

Documentation 

within Vicinity of 

Project Area c/

Eff

o

Imp

Non-anadromous fish Jenny Creek redband trout Oncorhynchus mykiss

 BS S Adfluvial, located within Jenny Creek Jackson Klamath LV-D MD-D F-W-D RRS-D N

Jenny Creek sucker Catostomus rimiculus ssp. 

SOC BS Adfluvial, located within Jenny Creek. Jackson LV-D MD-D N

Slender sculpin Cottus tenuis SOC S 

Inhabits both still and slower waters on variety of substrates of the Upper Klamath and Agency lakes and their tributaries. 

Klamath LV-D F-W-D N

Anadromous fish Chum salmon (Pacific Coast ESU) Onocorhynchus keta 

SC BS S 

Rears in the Pacific Ocean for most of its life and spawns in freshwater streams in the fall. Utilizes low gradient, gravel-rich, barrier-free habitats and productive estuaries. Juveniles migrate to estuarine environments after emergence. 

Coos 

Douglas 

CB-D 

RO-D 

UMP-I 

RRS-I Unknown N

Aquatic Invertebrates Newcomb’s littorine snail Algamorda newcombiana 

SOC BS 

Inhabits salt marshes at the edge of bays and esturaries on glasswort/pickleweed; tolerant of fresh and saltwater. 

Coos CB-D N

Black Abalone Haliotis cracherodii 

C 

Feed mostly on kelp and drift algae; spawn primarily during the summer months. 

Coos? Rare in Coos Bay. N

Diminutive BS Very large, cold springs Jackson LV-D N

H-397
238 Appen

TABLE A-2 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Impacted b

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodies 

crossed by Project/ 

Documentation 

within Vicinity of 

Project Area c/

Eff

o

Imp

pebblesnail Fuminicola sp. Nov.

and their outflow, with very cold, clear water; gravel/boulder substrate. 

Fall Creek pebblesnail Fluminicola sp. Nov.

 BS 

Large cold springs and outflows including medium-sized creeks; gravel/cobble substrate. 

Jackson Klamath MD-D N

Keene Creek pebblesnail Fluminicola sp. Nov.

BS/

SM SM 

Small to medium sized springs and springinfluenced creeks. Jackson Klamath MD-D N

Toothed pebblesnail Fluminicola sp. Nov.

BS/

SM SM 

Very large cold springs and their outflow, with exceptionally good water quality; gravel/boulder substrate. 

Jackson MD-D N

Klamath pebblesnail Fluminicola sp. Nov.

 BS 

Gravel-boulder substrates with flowing water (cold, oligotrohpic water with high dissolved oxygen) rarely found in springs; avoids dense macrophyte beds. 

Klamath LV-D MD-S RRS-S N

Nerite pebblesnail Fumunicola sp. Nov.

BS/

SM SM 

Large cold springs and their outflows with exceptionally good water quality; gravel/boulder substrate 

Jackson LV-S MD-D N

Scale lanx Lanx klmathensis BS 

Spring-influenced portions of large lakes and streams or limnocrene springs; boulder/cobble substrates; welloxygenated, cold water. 

Klamath LV-D MD-S RRS-S N

Rotund lanx Lanx subrotunda 

Need to 

address BS 

Found in unpolluted rivers and large streams at low to moderate elevations, in highly oxygenated, swiftflowing, cold water on 

Douglas CB-S RO-D UMP-D 

Typically found on Umpqua River below the confluence with Little River, Little River, portions of the South Umpqua and 

N

H-398
239 Appen

TABLE A-2 

Special Status Fish Species and Aquatic Invertebrates that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Impacted b

Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS 

Life History and 

Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Waterbodies 

crossed by Project/ 

Documentation 

within Vicinity of 

Project Area c/

Eff

o

Imp

stable cobble, boulder, or bedrock substrates. 

major tributaries above Roseburg, and Cow Creek. 

a/ Status Key: Federal Status: SOC = Species of Concern State Status: SC = State Critical, SV = State Vulnerable, SP = State Peripheral or Naturally Rare 

BLM Status: BS = BLM Sensitive, BA = BLM Assessment, BT = BLM Tracking, SM = former Survey and Manage, no longer have any specUSFS Status: S = Sensitive, SM = former Survey and Manage, now recognized as Uncommon and Rare although they hold no legal status b/ Occurrence Key: 

BLM Districts and USFS Forests provided lists of species documented or suspected within the management area and are noted. BLM District: CB = Coos Bay District, RO = Roseburg District, MD = Medford District, LV = Lakeview District USFS Forest: F-W = Fremont-Winema National Forest, RRS = Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, UMP = Umpqua National Forest  D = Documented within the BLM or USFS management area  S = Suspected within the BLM or USFS management area  I = FS Actions Influence Downstream c/ Documentation within Project Area: Aquatic invertebrates documented within 500 feet of the proposed PCGP alignment. 

References: Status and Range References: FWS 2006a and b; ORNHIC 2007b Life Histories and Expected Habitat References: Kostow 1995; NatureServe 2006; ODFW 2005a; CDFG 1986; NMFS 2006b. Waterbodies Crossed: ORNHIC 2006a; Kostow 1995. 

H-399
240 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

BryophytesBryum calobryoides BA Rock outcrops and shallow soil Jackson MD-D Calypogeia sphagnicola BA Sphagnum containing wetlands. Coos Douglas CB-D Chiloscyphus gemmiparus BS On rocks in cold water streams. Klamath LV-S RO-S Codriophorus depressus (formerly Racomitrium depressum)

 BA On rocks in montane streams. Jackson MD-D 

Crumia latifolia BA 

Wet rocks and cliff faces, usually calcareous, along seasonal creeks 

Douglas Jackson 

MD-D RO-D 

Diplophyllum plicatum

BA/SM SM 

Moist cool forests on bark, rotting wood, humus and soil. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO-S 

Encalypta brevicollis  var. crumiana 

 BS Deep, rocky ravine. Coos MD-S 

Eucladium verticillatum BA 

Year-round seepage; wet rocks; perennially wet microhabitats; calcareous substrates along edges of waterfalls, and on rocks with seeps and creek splash. 

Jackson MD-D 

Funaria muhlenbergii BA Dry exposed soil on rock outcrops and cliff ledges. Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-D RO-D Helodium blandowii BA 

Montane fens, usually with calcareous ground water. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

LV-S 

Kurzia makinoana BA/S M SM Shady moist sites on orangic substrates. Coos CB-D Limbella fryei SOC BS 

 On wet rotting wood, leaf litter and lower trunks of tall shrubs in coastal shrub swamps. 

Coos Douglas CB-S 

Meesia uliginosa BA Wet places, marshes and fens. Jackson LV-S MD-D 

H-400
241 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

Pseudocalliergon trifarium (formerly Calliergon trifarium)

 BA Calcareous fens. Klamath LV-S 

Pseudoleskeella serpentinensis BA On ultramafic rock, usually with some shade. Douglas CB-D MD-D RO-D Rhizomnium nudum SM S/SM 

On moist organic soil, or among rocks or on rotten logs in mid to high elevations. 

Douglas 

RRS-S UMP-D F-W-S 

 

Schistostega pennata 

BA/SM S/SM 

On damp rock, soil and decaying wood in dark places, caves or mineshafts and rootwads. 

Douglas Klamath 

CB-S RO-S 

RRS-S UMP-D F-W-S 

Scouleria marginata BT S 

On rocks in streams, often submerged part of the year. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-S 

UMP-D 

Splachnum ampullaceum BA On old dung of herbivores. Klamath LV-S Tayloria serrata BA On old dung of herbivores Douglas Jackson MD-D RO-D Tripterocladium leucocladulum BA 

Shaded to exposed rocks, cliffs and bark of hardwoods. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S LV-S MD-D RO-S 

 

Tritomaria exsectiformis

BA/SM SM 

On peaty or humic soil, or rotted wood. Often along creeks. 

Douglas Klamath LV-S 

LichenBryoria pseudocapillaris

BS/SM SM Coastal trees and shrubs. Coos Douglas CB-D RO 

Bryoria spiralifera BS/S M SM 

Grows on exposed or moderately exposed coastal trees, shrubs, and (once) on rock, primarily in late seral and old-growth shorepine scrub forests of dunes, marine terraces, and in Sitka spruce forests along the edges of 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO 

H-401
242 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

coastal lagoons, estuaries, and headlands at or near sea level (0 - 75 m elevation; 0-250 feet). Occurring in sites with moderated temperature and high humidity provided by frequent fog. 

Bryoria subcana BA/S M SM 

Grows on conifer bark in forests of coastal bays, streams, dune forests, and high precipitation ridges within 30 mi (50 km) of the ocean. Inhabits areas of high humidity, mostly in lateseral to old-growth stands. 

Coos CB-D RO-S 

Buellia oidalea BT/S M SM 

Bark of various shrubs, hardwoods, and conifers, maritime (< 1 km from coastline), known from Oregon Dunes NRA

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-S 

 

Calicium adspersum

BA/SM SM 

Highly textured bark on the boles of old growth conifer trees. 

No Data CB-S RO-S 

Cetrelia cetrarioides 

BT/SM SM 

Moist riparian and valley bottom forests, especially older red alder stands over swampy ground. 

Coos CB-D RO-S 

Chaenothecopsis pusilla

BT/SM SM 

Restricted to bark and wood of old trees in Pacific Northwest with most known occurrences on old-growth conifers in association with algae, occasionally found on younger trees, 11 sites in Oregon. 

Douglas RO-D 

Dermatocarpon luridum

BT/SM S/SM On moist to wet rocks along streams or Douglas Jackson MD-D RO-D RRS-S UMP-D 

H-402
243 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

lakesides. F-W-S 

Erioderma sorediatum BA Humid sites on trees and shrubs near the coast Coos CB-D Heterodermia leucomela BA 

On mossy hardwoods or rock faces with some light. 

Coos Douglas CB-D 

Hypotrachyna revoluta 

BA/SM SM 

On rocks, trunks of alders growing on streambanks and lakesides. 

Coos CB-S 

Leioderma sorediatum BA 

On shrubs (huckleberry and manzanita) and mossy conifer branches in humid coastal forests 

Coos Douglas CB-S 

Leptogium brebissonii BA 

Mossy trees and shrubs in low elevation coastal forests. 

No Data CB-S 

Leptogium cyanescens

BT/SM S/SM 

On bark or wood of hardwoods and conifers near coast. Sometines on rock. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-D 

RRS-S UMP-S F-W-S 

 

Leptogium hirsutum (L. burnetiae var. h.)

BT S 

Usually on hardwood trunks and branches but also on decaying logs and rocks. In mesic open forests. 

Jackson CB-S MD-D UMP 

Leptogium rivale BT/S M SM Submerged rocks in small to medium sized mountain streams. Coos Douglas Jackson Klamath MD-D RO-D Lobaria linita BA/S M SM On trees, shrubs, mossy rocks or alpine sod. Montane to alpine. Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-S RO-S Nephroma occultum 

BT/SM S/SM 

Bark and wood of conifers in old growth moist forests on the west slope of the cascades. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-S RO-D 

RRS-D UMP-D 

Niebla cephalota BA/S M SM On trees, shrubs and rock on the immediate coast. Coos CB-D RO Pannaria rubiginosa BA 

Low elevation coastal shrub thickets on wet deflation plains, mature Douglas-fir/western hemlock forest, and old 

Coos Douglas 

CB-S RO-S RRS-S 

H-403
244 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

growth conifer forest dominated by Douglasfir, Sitka spruce, and western red cedar. 

Peltigera pacifica SM S/SM 

Terrestrial in moist conifer forests at low elevations. 

Jackson RRS-S UMP-D 

Platismatia lacunosa 

BT/SM SM 

On bark and wood, mainly hardwoods and rarely on mossy rocks in moist riparian forests in the coast range and cascades. 

Coos Douglas Jackson 

CB-D MD-D RO-D 

 

Pseudocyphellaria mallota BA 

Old conifers or understory hardwoods and shrubs in late successional forests. 

Douglas CB-S 

Pseudocyphellaria perpetua 

BT/SM SM 

Conifer branches in riparian old growth forests on the immediate coast and on shaded branches of manzanita on stabilized sand dune. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO-S 

Pseudocyphellaria rainierensis 

BT/SM S/SM 

Bark or wood of conifers in moist old growth forests at low to mid elevations. 

Douglas CB-D RO-S UMP-D 

Ramalina pollinaria BA S Bark and wood, usually in low elevation swamps. Coos Jackson? CB-D UMP-S Stereocaulon spathuliferum BA On rock. 

Not within the counties affected 

RO-S 

Sulcaria badia BA 

On branches of hardwoods and shrubs, usually in oak woodlands 

Coos Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-D 

 

Teloschistes flavicans

BA/SM SM 

On bark and wood, usually Sitka spruce in coastal headland forests. 

Coos CB-D RO 

Usnea hesperina BT/S M SM On branches of exposed hardwoods and conifers usually near the coast. Coos Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-S RO-S Vascular plantsCalifornia maidenhair Adiantum BA Rocky areas in moist woods Coos Douglas CB-D MD-D 

H-404
245 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

jordanii RO-D Henderson's bentgrass Agrostis hendersonii 

SOC BS Vernal pools, Agate Desert Jackson MD-S Extirpated in Oregon (recovery plan) 

Peninsular onion Allium peninsulare BA S 

Dry open or wooded slopes and flats to 3000 ft; valley grassland, foothill woodlands; March through June. 

Jackson MD-S RRS-S 

Long-stemmed androsace Androsace elongata ssp. acuta 

 BA S 

Found on slopes between 0 - 4000 feet within chapparral, foothill woodland, northern coastal scrub, coastal sage scrub. 

Jackson MD-S RRS-S 

Koehler's rockcress Arabis koehleri var. koehleri 

SOC BS Rocky cliff sites. Douglas CB-S RO-D 

Rogue Canyon rockcress Arabis modesta 

SOC BA S 

Known only from the Rogue River canyon near Galice, Josephine County. 

Jackson MD-D 

Crater Lake rock cress Arabis suffrutescens var. horizontalis 

SOC S 

High elevation open sites with pumice. Known sites in Crater Lake NP. 

Jackson Klamath 

F-W-D RRS-S UMP-D 

 

Hairy manzanita Arctostaphylos hispidula 

SOC BA S 

 Rocky serpentine soils or sandstone, open forests 

Douglas CB-D MD-D 

Shasta arnica Arnica viscosa BA S 

High elevation, open rocky sites; known in Deschutes, Klamath, Douglas Co, OR; FWema, found at a few sites in wilderness along the Cascade Crest and on Pelican Butte. 

Douglas Klamath MD-S 

F-W-D RRS-S UMP-D 

 

Coastal sagewort Artemisia pycnocephala 

 BA Rocky or sandy soils, coastal strand Coos CB-D 

Grass-fern Asplenium BA S Grows on shady, moist, north faces of large Douglas Jackson MD-S RO-S UMP-D F-W-D 

H-405
246 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

septentrionale rocks; only known in 

North Umpqua 

Klamath RRS-D 

California milkvetch Astragalus californicus 

 BA Dry open areas in shrubland. Jackson MD-D 

Wooly balsamroot Balsamorhiza hookeri var. lanata 

 BS Open woods, grassy slopes. Jackson MD-D 

Bensonia Bensoniella oregana 

SOC BS S 

Wet meadows and moist streamside sites in preCretaceous metasedimentary rock at elevations above 4,000 feet. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D MD-D RO-D 

 

Crenulate grapefern Botrychium crenulatum 

SOC S Marshes, meadows above 4000 feet Douglas Jackson RRS-S 

Mingan moonwort Botrychium minganense 

BT/SM S/SM Coniferous forests along streams. Douglas RO-S UMP-S 

Dwarf brodiaea Brodiaea terrestris BA Grassland, open woodlands. Coos CB-D Greene's mariposa-lily Calochortus greenei 

SOC BS 

Grows on dry, bushy hillsides in southern Jackson County. 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-S MD-D 

One-leaved mariposa-lily Calochortus monophyllus

 BA S Wooded slopes, clay loam soils. Jackson Klamath MD-D RRS-S 

Broad-fruit mariposa-lily Calochortus nitidus 

SOC BA S Open rocky areas or dry meadows Jackson MD-D 

Siskiyou mariposa lily Calochortus persistens 

C B? Open rocky areas Jackson MD-D 

H-406
247 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

Howell’s camassia Camassia howellii SOC BS S 

Grassy wet meadows, swampy ground, and transitional areas between wet meadows and coniferous woodlands. 

Jackson MD-D 

Primrose Camissonia graciliflora 

 S 

Open rocky grassy and shrublands, usually clay soils. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Abrupt-beaked sedge Carex abrupta 

 BA Moist meadows, open forests. Klamath LV-S 

Short-stemmed sedge Carex brevicaulis 

 BA Rocky or sandy soils. Coos Douglas CB-D RO-S 

Capitate sedge Carex capitata BA Wet places. Jackson Klamath LV-S Bristly sedge Carex comosa BA Wet places. Klamath 

LV-D MD-D RO-S 

 

Crawford’s sedge Carex crawfordii BA S Moist or wet places. Jackson CB-D RRS-S UMP-S Carex gigas S Wet meadows at high elevations Jackson RRS-D Hairy sedge Carex gynodynama 

 BA Moist meadows, open forests. Coos Douglas CB-D MD-D RO-D 

Slender sedge Carex lasiocarpa var. americana 

 BA Bogs, shallow water. Klamath LV-D 

Sierra sedge Carex nervina S Moist to wet places. Jackson RRS-D Siskiyou sedge Carex scabriuscula 

 BA Same plant as Carex gigas Jackson CB-S MD-D 

Saw-tooth sedge Carex serratodens BA S Moist places. Douglas Jackson MD-D RO-D RRS-D UMP-S Involute-leaved sedge Carex stenophylla(C. eleocharis) 

 S Wet meadows Klamath F-W-S 

H-407
248 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

Green-tinged paintbrush Castilleja chlorotica 

 BS S 

Grows on dry gravelly or sandy slopes; Elevation 6000 - 8000 feet; late June through midAugust. Found in shrub openings on slopes and ridges; On F-Wema, found at one site near northeast corner of the Forest. 

Klamath LV-S F-W-D 

Split-hair paintbrush Castilleja schizotricha 

 S 

Decomposed granite or marble at high elevations. 

Jackson RRS-D 

Coville’s lip-fern Cheilanthes covillei 

 BA Rock outcrops, cliffs. Jackson MD-D 

Narrow-leaved amole Chlorogalum angustifolium 

 BA S Clay soils in dry grassland. Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

Timwort Cicendia quadrangularis 

 BA Openings. Coos Douglas CB-D RO-D 

Bulb-bearing water-hemlock Cicuta bulbifera 

 BA S Wetlands and lake and stream margins. Klamath LV-S F-W-S 

Tall bugbane Cimicifuga elata var. elata 

 BS S Moist open forests and along small drainages. Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-D RO-D RRS-D UMP-D 

Ashland thistle Cirsium ciliolatum BS Grasslands and shrublands in clay soils. Jackson MD-D Small-fruit clarkia Clarkia heterandra BA S Open forests and oak woodlands. Douglas Jackson MD-D RRS-D Spoonwort Cochlearia officinalis 

 BA Sea bird nesting areas on offshore rocks Coos CB-S 

H-408
249 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

Mt. Mazama collomia Collomia mazama 

 BS S 

Dry woods at high elevations; July and August; True fir/lodgepole pine forest, meadows, and meadow edges; On F-Wema, found in Lost Creek, Horse Creek, Rock Creek and Cherry Creek drainages, Klamath RD. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

LV-S 

UMP-D RRS-D F-W-D 

 

Milo Baker’s cryptantha Cryptantha milobakeri 

 BA S 

Rocky or gravelly soils in conifer openings, chaparral or oak woodlands. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Baker's cypress Cupressus bakeri SOC BA S 

Scattered on dry wooded slopes, usually in serpentine soil. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Short-pointed cyperus Cyperus acuminatus 

 BA 

Wet, low places in valley and lowlands, edges of tempory pools, ponds, streams, ditches 

Jackson MD-S 

Shining flatsedge Cyperus bipartitus BT S Sand bars, pond shores, ditches. Douglas Jackson CB-S MD-D Mountain lady'sslipper Cypripedium montanum

BT/SM 

Moist areas, dry slopes, mixed evergreen or conifer forests. 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

MD-D RO-D LV-D 

 UMP RRS-D F-W 

 

Red larkspur Delphinium nudicaule 

 BA S Rocky openings, often in talus on moist slopes. Douglas Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Oregon willow herb Epilobium oreganum

SOC BS S 

Grows in bogs at low elevations. Known only from Josephine County. 

Douglas MD-D 

Siskiyou willow herb Epilobium siskiyouense 

SOC S Scree and talus on Serpentine ridges. Jackson RRS-D 

Siskiyou daisy Erigeron cervinus SOC BA S Rocky streamsides. Jackson CB-S MD-S RRS-S Rock daisy Erigeron petrophilus 

 S Rocky foothills to montane forest. Jackson RRS-D 

Prostrate buckwheat SOC S Areas of barren rocky or gravelly volcanic soils Klamath F-W-D 

H-409
250 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

Eriogonum prociduum 

within juniper or sagebrush habitat. 

Russet cottongrass Eriophorum chamissonis 

 BA S Bogs along the coast Coos CB-D 

Large-leaved filaree Erodium macrophyllum 

 BA Open sites grassland and shrubland. Jackson MD-S 

Inland coyotethistle Eryngium alismifolium 

 BA Vernal pools, flooded meadows. Klamath LV-D 

Howell’s adder’s tongue Erythronium howellii 

 BS S 

Found in open woods primarily in the upper Illinois River basin, mostly in serpentine soil; April and May 

Jackson MD-D 

Gold poppy Eschscholzia caespitosa 

 BA S 

Grows on dry, brushy slopes and flat areas, mostly along roadsides; known in southern Douglas County; March through early June 

Douglas MD-D RO-S 

Brewer’s aster Eucephalus breweri (Aster breweri) 

BA Subalpine meadows, open woods Jackson MD-D 

Western wahoo Euonymus occidentalis 

 BT S Shaded Streambanks, 

canyouns 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D MD-D RO-D 

 

Elmer’s fescue Festuca elmeri BA 

Rocky openings in oak woodlands and chaparral. 

Jackson Douglas 

MD-D RO-S RRS-D 

Umpqua swertia Frasera umpquaensis 

 BS S 

Elevations 4500 - 6500 feet in conifer forests, in damp, shaded or sometimes open environments; June through August 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-S 

RRS-D UMP-D 

Siskiyou fritillaria Fritillaria glauca BA S 

found on dry, rocky serpentine slopes in Douglas County; April through June

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D 

RRS-D UMP-D 

H-410
251 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

Newberry's gentian Gentiana newberryi var. newberryi 

 BA S 

High alpine meadows of the Cascade Mountains ; wet meadows and meadow edges, generally 5,000' and above ; August and September, On F-Wema found on Klamath RD. 

Klamath LV-S 

RRS-S UMP-S F-W-D 

 

Seaside gilia Gilia millefoliata SOC BS Stabiilized Coastal Dunes Coos Douglas CB-D Beautiful stickseed Hackelia bella 

 BA Forest openings, roadsides. Jackson Klamath MD-D 

Large-flowered rush-lily Hastingsia bracteosa var. bracteosa 

 BS S 

Found only in Siskiyou Mountains of southern Jackson County; late May through June. 

Jackson MD-D 

Whitney's bristleweed Hazardia whitneyi var. discoidea

 BT S 

Rocky, open forested slopes at high elevation, Oregon Cascades. On Fremont-Wema few sites found along Cascade Crest in wilderness 

Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-S RO-S 

RRS-D UMP-D F-W-D 

 

Salt heliotrope Heliotropium curassavicum 

 BA Moist to dry saline soils. Klamath LV-D 

Shaggy horkelia Horkelia congesta ssp. congesta 

SOC BS Open dry ground and rocky flats Douglas Jackson RO-D 

Henderson's horkelia Horkelia hendersonii 

SOC S 

Endemic to summits of a few granite peaks in southern Jackson County. 

Jackson RRS-D 

Three-toothed horkelia Horkelia tridentata ssp. tridentata 

 BA S Granitic soils. Jackson MD-S RO-S RRS-D 

Whorled marshpennywort Hydrocotyle verticillata 

 BA S Swampy ground, lake margins. Coos Douglas CB-S 

Baker’s globemallow Iliamna bakeri 

 BS S 

Open mixed conifer or ponderosa pine stands, and juniper shrublands. 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-D MD-D F-W-D 

H-411
252 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

Generally occurs after a fire, but may persist in openings. On F-Wema, few sites in southeast Chiloquin RD. 

California globemallow Iliamna latibracteata 

 BA S 

Grows in coastal ranges in Coos and Douglas counties; June and July

Coos Douglas Jackson 

CB-D MD-D RO-S 

RRS-D UMP-D F-W-D 

 

North Umpqua kalmiopsis Kalmiopsis fragrans 

SOC BS S 

Cliffs and rock outcrops, known only from North Umpqua River 

Douglas RO-S UMP-D 

Bush beardtongue Keckiella lemmonii BA S Rocky slopes, chaparral Jackson MD-S RRS-D Thin -leaved peavine Lathyrus holochlorus 

SOC BS 

Thickets and open woods, low elevations, fence rows 

Douglas RO-S 

Columbia lewisia Lewisia columbiana var. columbiana 

 BA S 

Reported on three mountains in the southeastern portion of Douglas County; May through July

Douglas UMP-D 

Lee's lewisia Lewisia leana BA S 

Grows on high elevation serpentine ridges; late May through August

Douglas Jackson MD-D RRS-D UMP-S 

Kellogg's lily Lilium kelloggii BA S 

Grows on sandstone/sedimentary type of soil in dry wooded areas; June

Klamath? CB-S 

Bellinger's meadowfoam Limnanthes floccosa ssp. bellingeriana 

SOC BS S 

Seasonally wet depressions above 2500 ft; seasonally wet meadows in Klamath County. 

Jackson Klamath 

LV-D MD-D RRS-S 

Western marshrosemary Limonium californicum 

BA S Coastal strands, salt marshes Coos CB-D 

Tracy’s desertparsley Lomatium tracyi 

 S Open pine forest, serpentine. Douglas Jackson RRS-S 

Stipuled trefoil Lotus stipularis BA S Open forests, chaparral, disturbed sites. Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

H-412
253 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

Brewer’s Lupine Lupinus breweri var. breweri 

 BA Montane coniferous forest, 4,000-11,000 feet Jackson MD-S 

Ashland lupine Lupinus lepidus var. ashlandensis 

SOC S Sandy or gravelly soils at low to alpine elevations. Jackson RRS-D 

Tracy’s lupine Lupinus tracyi BA S Dry open montane forest. Douglas Jackson Klamath MD-S Bog club-moss Lycopodiella inundata 

 BA S 

Bogs, muddy depressions, and pond margins. On F-Wema one site in Yoss Creek drainage on Chiloquin RD. 

Coos Douglas Klamath 

CB-D F-W-D 

White meconella Meconella oregana 

SOC BS S 

Grows in open areas that are wet in the spring at low elevations. Known from sites in the Willamette Valley and the Columbia Gorge. 

Douglas Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

Nodding melic Melica stricta BA 

Open sites, coniferous forests, rocky areas in alpine. 

Klamath LV-S 

Coast microseris Microseris bigelovii 

 BA 

Open sandy soil or sandy pockets on rocky headlands. 

Coos CB-S 

Douglas’ microseris Microseris douglasii ssp. douglasii 

 BA S 

Grassy flats and hillsides in heavy hard packed soil. 

Jackson MD-S RRS-S 

Bolander’s monkeyflower Mimulus bolanderi 

 BA S 

Openings in chaparral, burns and disturbed areas. Applegate Valley 

Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Congdon’s monkeyflower Mimulus congdonii 

 BA 

Openings in oak woodland and chaparral. Applegate Valley 

Jackson MD-D 

Disappearing monkeyflower Mimulus evanescens 

 BS S 

Vernally moist sites along perennial and intermittent streams; receding margins of lakes, ponds, and reservoirs within juniper/sagebrush 

Klamath LV-D F-W-S 

H-413
254 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

habitats. 

Tri-colored monkeyflower Mimulus tricolor 

 BA S 

Grows at low elevations in clay soil, preferring vernal pools; scattered in Klamath County; late May through June

Klamath LV-S F-W-D 

Howell’s montia Montia howellii BT S 

Vernally wet sites, usually on compacted soils. 

Douglas MD-D RO-D UMP-S 

Slender nemacladus Nemacladus capillaris 

 BA S Dry slopes, burned 

areas. 

Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

Adder’s-tongue Ophioglossum pusilum 

 BA S 

Open fens, wet meadows, grassy slopes, roadside ditches. 

Coos Douglas CB-S UMP-D 

Coffee fern Pellaea andromedifolia 

 BA S Rock outcrops, cliffs. 

Coos Douglas Jackson 

CB-D MD-D RO-D 

RRS-S UMP-S 

Bird’s-foot fern Pellaea mucronata ssp mucronata 

 BA S Rocky dry openings. Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

Blue-leaved penstemon Penstemon glaucinus 

 BS S 

Openings in mid to high elevation pine, fir, and mounatin hemlock communities. Welldrained volcanic soils along rocky points and ridges. 

Klamath LV-D F-W-D 

Red-root yampah Perideridia erythrorhiza 

SOC BS S Moist meadows, forest edges below 4500'. Douglas Jackson Klamath MD-D RO-D LV-S RRS-S UMP-S F-W-D 

Playa phacelia Phacelia inundata SOC 

Alkaline flats, dry lake margins. Elevation 4800 - 6400 feet. 

Klamath 

American pillwort Pilularia americana 

 BA S Vernal pools, mud flats, lake margins. Jackson Klamath MD-S LV-S RRS-S 

Austin’s plagiobothrys Plagiobothrys austiniae 

 BA 

Vernally wet areas, along road and trail edges. 

Jackson MD-D 

Coral seeded allocarya SOC BS S Low elevation meadows and moist clearings and Jackson MD-D RRS-S 

H-414
255 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

Plagiobothrys figuratus var. corallicarpus 

fields. 

Greene’s popcorn flower Plagiobothrys greenei 

 BA Vernal pools (Recovery plan) Jackson MD-D 

Loose-flowered bluegrass Poa laxiflora 

 BT S Wet cliffs in the coast mountains. Coos CB-D 

Timber bluegrass Poa rhizomata BA 

Dry Douglasfir/ponderosa pine forests. 

Jackson MD-D 

Profuse-flowered mesa mint Pogogyne floribunda 

 BS Vernal pools, seasonal lakes. Klamath LV-D 

California swordfern Polystichum californicum 

 BA S 

Creek banks and canyons in redwoods and mixed evergreen forests. 

Coos Douglas 

CB-D RO-D UMP-D 

Rafinesque’s pondweed Potamogeton diversifolius 

 BA Shallow water, ditches, ponds, lakes. Klamath LV-S 

Fibrous pondweed Potamogeton foliosus var. fibrillosus 

 BA Shallow water, ditches, ponds, lakes, streams. Klamath LV-S 

Southern Oregon buttercup Ranunculus austrooreganus 

 BS 

Oak woodlands, chaparral and dry grasslands. 

Jackson MD-D 

Redberry Rhamnus ilicifolia BA S Chaparral in Applegate Valley Jackson MD-S RRS-D Thompson’s mistmaiden Romanzoffia thompsonii 

 BS S Sunny, vernally wet mossy rocks. Douglas Jackson CB-D MD-S RO-D RRS-D UMP-D 

Columbia cress Rorippa columbiae 

 BS S 

Along intermittent and perennial streams and lakeshores: banks, sandbars, vernal pools, lakebeds, and ditches. 

Klamath LV-D RRS-S F-W-D 

Joint-leaved BA S Grows on dry cliffs in the Jackson MD-S RRS-S 

H-415
256 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

saxifrage Saxifragopsis fragarioides 

 high Siskiyou Mountains. 

American Scheuchzeria Scheuchzeria palustris ssp. Americana 

 BA S 

Grows in ponds and along streams in Oregon Cascades. 

Douglas Klamath LV-S UMP-D F-W-D 

Water clubrush Schoenoplectus subterminalis (formerly Scirpus subterminalis) 

 BA S Lakes, ponds, marshes. 

Coos Douglas Klamath 

CB-D RO-S LV-S 

RRS-S UMP-D 

Drooping bulrush Scirpus pendulus BA S Marshes, wet meadows, ditches. Jackson CB-S MD-D RRS-D Heckner's stonecrop Sedum laxum ssp. heckneri 

 BT S 

Grows in dry areas in peridotite and gabbro rock outcrops; Elevation 4500 - 5300 feet. 

Douglas Jackson 

CB-S MD-D RO-S 

RRS-D 

Applegate stonecrop Sedum oblanceolatum 

 BS S Rock outcrops in the Applegate Valley. Jackson MD-D RRS-D 

Henderson sidalcea Sidalcea hendersonii 

SOC BS 

Wet meadows, tidal marshes and flats at low elevations. 

Douglas CB-S 

Hickman’s checkerbloom Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. nov. 

 BS 

Shallow soil in open rocky areas. Known from one site in Sams Valley. 

Jackson MD-D 

Coast checker bloom Sidalcea malvaeflora ssp. patula 

SOC BS S Open Coastal Forest Coos CB-D 

Hitchcock's blueeyed grass Sisyrinchium hitchcockii 

SOC BS 

Known in the Umpqua and southern Willamette valleys. 

Douglas RO-D 

Parhish’s horsenettle Solanum parishii 

 BA Chaparral, dry conifer openings, recent burns. Jackson MD-D 

Howell's tauschia Tauschia howellii SOC S Granitic gravel ridgetops above 6000 feet Jackson RRS-D 

H-416
257 Appen

TABLE A-3 

Special Status Plant (Vascular and Non-Vascular) Species that may Occur Near the Project but are not Expected to be Im

 Status a/ Documented or Suspected Occurrence b/

Common Name Districts/Forests 

and/or Scientific 

Name Federal BLM USFS Expected Habitat County BLM USFS 

Vicinity of Pipeline 

(≤ 500 feet) 

Short-podded thelypody Thelypodium brachycarpum 

 BA S 

Alkaline flats, lake margins in shrub steppe and near edges of pine forests. 

Klamath LV-S F-W-D 

Leach's brodiaea Triteleia hendersonii var. leachiae 

SOC BS S 

Open and wooded slopes in the Siskiyou Mountains of Josephine, Curry, and Douglas counties. 

Coos CB-D MD-S 

Sierra brodiaea Triteleia ixioides ssp. anilina 

 BA S Coniferous forest edge, often in sand or gravel Jackson MD-S RRS-S 

Humped bladderwort Utricularia gibba 

 BA S Shallow water, mud. Coos CB-D RO-S 

Lesser bladderwort Utricularia minor 

 BA Shallow water. 

Coos Douglas Jackson Klamath 

CB-D RO-S MD-S LV-S 

Western bog violet Viola primulifolia ssp. occidentalis 

BS S Serpentine bogs. Douglas CB-S MD-D 

Columbia watermeal Wolffia columbiana 

 BA S Free floating in quiet water. Douglas Jackson MD-S RO-S RRS-S UMP-S 

Small-flowered death camas Zigadenus fontanus 

SOC BA 

 Rocky openings in chaparral in Applegate Valley 

Jackson MD-D 

a/ Status Key: Federal Status: E = Endangered, T = Threatened, C = Federal Candidate, SOC = Species of Concern, 

State Status: SE = State endangered, ST = State threatened, C = State Candidate BLM Status: BS = BLM Sensitive, BA = BLM Assessment, BT = BLM Tracking USFS: S = Sensitive BLM and USFS: SM = former Survey and Manage species, now considered Uncommon and Rare for the USFS, no designation for BLM b/ Occurrence Key: 

BLM Districts and USFS Forests noted if the species has been documented or suspected within the management area. c/ ORNHIC (2007a, b) dropped from rare species list in March 2007 because too common. 

BLM Districts: CB = Coos Bay District, RO = Roseburg District, MD = Medford District, LV = Lakeview District USFS Forests: F-W = Fremont-Fremont-Winema National Forest, RRS = Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, UMP = Umpqua National Fo

 D = Documented within BLM or USFS management area. 

H-417
258 Appen

 S = Suspected within BLM or USFS management area. Pacific Connector Project Area: Botanical species documented within 500 feet of proposed Project area. References Status: USFS 2006a; ORNHIC 2004a and b ; ORNHIC 2006e; ODA 2006a, USFS 2006a. Expected Habitat: ORNHIC 2006e; Eastman 1990; ORNHIC 2006a; Pojar and MacKinnon 1994; BLM 2004; Hickman 1993; Hitchcock et al. 1986; Christy and Wagner 1996; Lawton 1971; Norris and Shevok 2004a and b; McCune and Geiser 1997; Brodo et al. 2001. 

Documented Occurrences: BLM 2006; ORNHIC 2004b, 2006a; USFS 2006b; NRCS 2007. 

H-418
259 Biological Evaluation 

Appendix B 

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance to Each USFS 

National Forest and BLM District 

H-419
260 Appen

TABLE B-1

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Coos Bay BLM District 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

CONSTRUCTION DISTURBANCE Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 24.26 24.26 

M-S 26.90 0.37 27.27 

C-R 56.43 56.43 

Construction Right-of-Way 

Tot 107.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.00 107.96 

 0.40 0.01 0.45 

L-O 0.06 0.06 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.16 0.16 

Hydrostatic Discharge Sites 3

Tot 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 

 

L-O 2.34 0.01 2.35 

M-S 4.49 0.22 4.71 

C-R 21.08 21.08 

Temporary Extra Work Areas 

Tot 27.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 28.14 

 0.56 0.23 0.65 

L-O 5.64 5.64 

M-S 0.81 0.81 

C-R 9.60 9.60 

Uncleared Storage Areas 

Tot 16.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.05 

 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 4.33 4.33 

Rock Source/ Disposal 

Tot 4.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.33 

 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.02 0.02 

Access Roads (TARs/PARs/ Improvements) 4 Tot 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 

 

L-O 32.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 32.31 

M-S 32.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.00 32.79 

C-R 91.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 91.62 

Total Construction Disturbance Tot 156.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 156.72 

0.00 0.96 0.00 0.01 0.45 0.23 0.65 

OPERATION DISTURBANCE Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 12.66 12.66 

M-S 14.35 0.19 14.54 

C-R 30.59 30.59 

Permanent Easement 5

Tot 57.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 57.79 

 0.20 0.01 0.22 

Permanent L-O 0.00 Access Roads M-S 0.00 

 

H-420
261 Appen

TABLE B-1

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Coos Bay BLM District 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

C-R 0.02 0.02 

Tot 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 

L-O 12.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.66 

M-S 14.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 14.54 

C-R 30.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.61 

Total Pipeline Facilities

Tot 57.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 57.81 

0.00 0.20 0.00 0.01 0.22 0.00 0.00 

L-O 7.59 7.59 

M-S 8.64 0.12 8.76 

C-R 18.08 18.08 

30-foot Maintenance Corridor 

Tot 34.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 34.43 

 0.12 0.13 

Aboveground Facilities

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.06 0.06 BVA #3 

Tot 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 

 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.06 0.06 BVA #4 

Tot 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 

 

L-O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C-R 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 

Total Aboveground Facilities

Tot 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

L-O 12.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.66 

M-S 14.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 14.54 

C-R 30.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.73 

Total Operation Disturbance 

Tot 57.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 57.93 77.48 

0.00 0.20 0.00 0.01 0.22 0.00 0.00 

1 Acres disturbed were evaluated using GIS; footprints for each component (temporary construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, temporary acc

pipe storage yards, aboveground facilities, permanent easement, and 30-foot maintenance corridor) were overlaid on the digitized vegetation coverage. 2 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be ≥40 but ≤80 ye

Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old. 3 Small brush or trees may be cleared by a rubber-tired rotary or flail motor (brush hog) or by hand with machetes/chainsaws. No soil disturbance will occur. 

utilized to lay the discharge line and to remove the saturated haybales or filter bags upon completion of hydrostatic discharge. 4 Portions of some of the PARs are located within the construction right-of-way and, therefore, there is some duplication in the acreage calculations. 5 The permanent easement is located within the disturbed acreage of the construction right-of-way. It is not an addition to the construction impacts. 6 CT = Communications tower 

H-421
262 Appen

TABLE B-2

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Roseburg BLM District 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

CONSTRUCTION DISTURBANCE Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 83.82 83.82 

M-S 0.36 19.63 0.36 20.35 

C-R 0.08 42.09 42.17 

Construction Right-of-Way 

Tot 0.44 0.00 145.54 0.00 0.36 0.00 146.34 

0.46 2.18 0.29 0.36 

L-O 0.19 0.19 

M-S 0.07 0.07 

C-R 0.22 0.22 

Hydrostatic Discharge Sites 3

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 

 

L-O 22.69 22.69 

M-S 0.04 7.73 0.02 7.79 

C-R 33.64 33.64 

Temporary Extra Work Areas 

Tot 0.04 0.00 64.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 64.12 

 1.18 0.41 

L-O 102.35 102.35 

M-S 0.65 5.22 0.33 6.20 

C-R 0.25 41.82 42.07 

Uncleared Storage Areas 

Tot 0.90 0.00 149.39 0.00 0.33 0.00 150.62 

0.74 0.81 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.98 0.98 

C-R 1.39 1.39 

Rock Source/ Disposal 

Tot 2.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.37 

 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.18 0.24 0.42 

Access Roads (TARs/PARs/ Improvements) 4 Tot 0.18 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 

 

L-O 0.00 0.00 209.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 209.05 

M-S 2.03 0.00 32.58 0.00 0.71 0.00 35.32 

C-R 1.90 0.00 117.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 119.69 

Total Construction Disturbance Tot 3.93 0.00 359.71 0.00 0.71 0.00 364.35 

1.20 4.17 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.77 

OPERATION DISTURBANCE Pipeline Facilities Permanent L-O 42.04 42.04 0.22 1.17 0.17 0.13 

H-422
263 Appen

TABLE B-2

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Roseburg BLM District 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

M-S 0.15 10.40 0.26 10.81 

C-R 0.04 21.69 21.79 

Easement 5

Tot 0.19 0.00 74.13 0.00 0.26 0.00 74.64 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Permanent Access Roads 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 0.00 42.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.04 

M-S 0.15 0.00 10.40 0.00 0.26 0.00 10.81 

C-R 0.04 0.00 21.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.73 

Total Pipeline Facilities

Tot 0.19 0.00 74.13 0.00 0.26 0.00 74.58 

0.22 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.13 

L-O 25.10 25.10 

M-S 0.13 6.21 0.15 6.48 

C-R 0.01 12.59 12.60 

30-foot Maintenance Corridor Tot 0.14 0.00 43.90 0.00 0.15 0.00 44.18 

0.13 0.59 0.10 0.08 

Aboveground Facilities

L-O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Total Aboveground Facilities Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

L-O 0.00 0.00 42.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.04 

M-S 0.15 0.00 10.40 0.00 0.26 0.00 10.81 

C-R 0.04 0.00 21.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.73 

Total Operation Disturbance

Tot 0.19 0.00 74.13 0.00 0.26 0.00 74.58 

0.22 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.13 

1 Acres disturbed were evaluated using GIS; footprints for each component (temporary construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, temporary acc

pipe storage yards, aboveground facilities, permanent easement, and 30-foot maintenance corridor) were overlaid on the digitized vegetation coverage. 2 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be ≥40 but ≤80 ye

Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old. 3 Small brush or trees may be cleared by a rubber-tired rotary or flail motor (brush hog) or by hand with machetes/chainsaws. No soil disturbance will occur. 

utilized to lay the discharge line and to remove the saturated haybales or filter bags upon completion of hydrostatic discharge. 4 Portions of some of the PARs are located within the construction right-of-way and, therefore, there is some duplication in the acreage calculations. 5 The permanent easement is located within the disturbed acreage of the construction right-of-way. It is not an addition to the construction impacts. 6 CT = Communications tower 

H-423
264 Appen

TABLE B-3

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Medford BLM District 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

CONSTRUCTION DISTURBANCE Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 4.27 39.32 18.32 22.89 84.40 

M-S 6.12 14.70 7.60 0.73 29.15 

C-R 23.82 3.10 26.92 

Construction Right-of-Way 

Tot 10.39 0.00 77.84 29.02 23.62 0.00 141.07 

10.82 16.76 0.06 0.25 

L-O 0.06 0.06 0.12 

M-S 0.13 0.13 

C-R 0.05 0.05 

Hydrostatic Discharge Sites 3

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.30 

0.06 0.11 

L-O 0.25 10.98 7.43 8.41 27.07 

M-S 1.82 6.15 0.59 0.10 8.66 

C-R 12.22 0.50 12.72 

Temporary Extra Work Areas 

Tot 2.07 0.00 29.35 8.52 8.51 0.00 48.45 

8.04 9.18 0.18 0.23 

L-O 0.34 19.58 4.16 3.83 27.91 

M-S 0.71 4.65 1.22 0.36 6.94 

C-R 2.93 0.41 3.34 

Uncleared Storage Areas 

Tot 1.05 0.00 27.16 5.79 4.19 0.00 38.19 

0.74 0.02 0.04 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Rock Source/ Disposal 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 0.10 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Access Roads (TARs/PARs/ Improvements) 4 Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 4.86 0.00 69.94 29.91 35.19 0.00 139.90 

M-S 8.65 0.00 25.50 9.54 1.19 0.00 44.88 

C-R 0.00 0.00 39.02 4.01 0.00 0.00 43.03 

Total Construction Disturbance Tot 13.51 0.00 134.46 43.46 36.38 0.00 227.81 

19.66 26.07 0.00 0.18 0.06 0.00 0.62 

OPERATION DISTURBANCEPipeline Facilities 

H-424
265 Appen

TABLE B-3

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Medford BLM District 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

L-O 1.92 21.14 9.82 11.84 44.72 

M-S 3.43 7.16 3.87 0.36 14.82 

C-R 12.61 1.93 14.54 

Permanent Easement 5

Tot 5.35 0.00 40.91 15.62 12.20 0.00 74.08 

5.66 8.84 0.03 0.19 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Permanent Access Roads 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 1.92 0.00 21.14 9.82 11.84 0.00 44.72 

M-S 3.43 0.00 7.16 3.87 0.36 0.00 14.82 

C-R 0.00 0.00 12.61 1.93 0.00 0.00 14.54 

Total Pipeline Facilities

Tot 5.35 0.00 40.91 15.62 12.20 0.00 74.08 

5.66 8.84 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.19 

L-O 1.12 12.76 5.91 7.10 26.89 

M-S 2.08 4.29 2.34 0.22 8.93 

C-R 7.50 1.19 8.69 

30-foot Maintenance Corridor Tot 3.20 0.00 24.55 9.44 7.32 0.00 44.51 

3.36 5.28 0.02 

Aboveground Facilities

L-O 0.05 0.05 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 BVA #9 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Total Aboveground Facilities Tot 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

L-O 1.97 0.00 21.14 9.82 10.18 0.00 43.11 

M-S 3.43 0.00 7.16 3.87 0.36 0.00 14.82 

C-R 0.00 0.00 12.61 1.93 0.00 0.00 14.54 

Total Operation Disturbance

Tot 5.40 0.00 40.91 15.62 10.54 0.00 72.47 

5.66 8.84 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.19 

1 Acres disturbed were evaluated using GIS; footprints for each component (temporary construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, temporary acce

pipe storage yards, aboveground facilities, permanent easement, and 30-foot maintenance corridor) were overlaid on the digitized vegetation coverage. 2 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be ≥40 but ≤80 yea

Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old. 3 Small brush or trees may be cleared by a rubber-tired rotary or flail motor (brush hog) or by hand with machetes/chainsaws. No soil disturbance will occur. 

utilized to lay the discharge line and to remove the saturated haybales or filter bags upon completion of hydrostatic discharge. 4 Portions of some of the PARs are located within the construction right-of-way and, therefore, there is some duplication in the acreage calculations. 5 The permanent easement is located within the disturbed acreage of the construction right-of-way. It is not an addition to the construction impacts. 6 CT = Communications tower 

H-425
266 Appen

TABLE B-4

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Lakeview BLM district 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

CONSTRUCTION DISTURBANCE Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 11.33 11.33 

M-S 2.26 2.26 

C-R 0.00 

Construction Right-of-Way 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.33 0.00 2.26 13.59 

 0.28 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Hydrostatic Discharge Sites 3

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 1.52 1.52 

M-S 0.58 0.58 

C-R 0.00 

Temporary Extra Work Areas 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.52 0.00 0.58 2.10 

 0.12 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Uncleared Storage Areas 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Rock Source/ Disposal 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Access Roads (TARs/PARs/ Improvements) 4 Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.82 0.00 0.00 12.82 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.84 2.84 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Total Construction Disturbance Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.82 0.00 2.84 15.66 

0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

H-426
267 Appen

TABLE B-4

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Lakeview BLM district 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

OPERATION DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities

L-O 6.05 6.05 

M-S 1.00 1.00 

C-R 0.00 

Permanent Easement 5

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.05 0.00 1.00 7.05 

 0.16 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Permanent Access Roads 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.05 0.00 0.00 6.05 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Total Pipeline Facilities

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.05 0.00 1.00 7.05 

0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

L-O 3.64 3.64 

M-S 0.65 0.65 

C-R 0.00 

30-foot Maintenance Corridor Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.64 0.00 0.65 4.29 

 0.09 

Aboveground Facilities 

L-O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Total Aboveground Facilities Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

L-O 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.05 0.00 0.00 6.05 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Total Operation Disturbance

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.05 0.00 1.00 7.05 

0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

1 Acres disturbed were evaluated using GIS; footprints for each component (temporary construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, temporary acc

pipe storage yards, aboveground facilities, permanent easement, and 30-foot maintenance corridor) were overlaid on the digitized vegetation coverage. 2 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be ≥40 but ≤80 ye

Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old. 3 Small brush or trees may be cleared by a rubber-tired rotary or flail motor (brush hog) or by hand with machetes/chainsaws. No soil disturbance will occur. 

utilized to lay the discharge line and to remove the saturated haybales or filter bags upon completion of hydrostatic discharge. 4 Portions of some of the PARs are located within the construction right-of-way and, therefore, there is some duplication in the acreage calculations. 5 The permanent easement is located within the disturbed acreage of the construction right-of-way. It is not an addition to the construction impacts. 6 C

H-427
268 Appen

TABLE B-5

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Umpqua National Forest 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

CONSTRUCTION DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities

L-O 72.18 72.18 

M-S 22.52 22.52 

C-R 24.50 24.50 

Construction Right-of-Way 

Tot 0.00 0.00 119.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 119.20 

 0.04 

L-O 0.06 0.06 

M-S 0.11 0.11 

C-R 0.05 0.05 

Hydrostatic Discharge Sites 3

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 

 

L-O 13.37 13.37 

M-S 11.81 11.81 

C-R 5.57 5.57 

Temporary Extra Work Areas 

Tot 0.00 0.00 30.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.75 

 0.05 7.30 

L-O 35.76 35.76 

M-S 8.69 8.69 

C-R 1.26 1.26 

Uncleared Storage Areas 

Tot 0.00 0.00 45.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.71 

 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Rock Source/ Disposal 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 2.32 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Access Roads (TARs/PARs/ Improvements) 4 Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 0.00 121.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 121.37 

M-S 0.00 0.00 43.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.13 

C-R 0.00 0.00 31.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.38 

Total Construction Disturbance Tot 0.00 0.00 195.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 195.88 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 9.62 

OPERATION DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities

H-428
269 Appen

TABLE B-5

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Umpqua National Forest 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

L-O 37.31 37.31 

M-S 12.32 12.32 

C-R 12.77 12.77 

Permanent Easement 5

Tot 0.00 0.00 62.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 62.40 

 0.01 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Permanent Access Roads 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 0.00 37.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.31 

M-S 0.00 0.00 12.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.32 

C-R 0.00 0.00 12.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.77 

Total Pipeline Facilities

Tot 0.00 0.00 62.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 62.40 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 

L-O 22.31 22.31 

M-S 7.40 7.40 

C-R 7.71 7.71 

30-foot Maintenance Corridor Tot 0.00 0.00 37.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.42 

 0.01 

Aboveground Facilities 

L-O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Total Aboveground Facilities Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

L-O 0.00 0.00 37.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.31 

M-S 0.00 0.00 12.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.32 

C-R 0.00 0.00 12.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.77 

Total Operation Disturbance

Tot 0.00 0.00 62.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 62.40 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 

1 Acres disturbed were evaluated using GIS; footprints for each component (temporary construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, temporary acc

pipe storage yards, aboveground facilities, permanent easement, and 30-foot maintenance corridor) were overlaid on the digitized vegetation coverage. 2 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be ≥40 but ≤80 ye

Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old. 3 Small brush or trees may be cleared by a rubber-tired rotary or flail motor (brush hog) or by hand with machetes/chainsaws. No soil disturbance will occur. 

utilized to lay the discharge line and to remove the saturated haybales or filter bags upon completion of hydrostatic discharge. 4 Portions of some of the PARs are located within the construction right-of-way and, therefore, there is some duplication in the acreage calculations. 5 The permanent easement is located within the disturbed acreage of the construction right-of-way. It is not an addition to the construction impacts. 6 CT = Communications tower 

H-429
270 Appen

TABLE B-6

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Ri

parian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

CONSTRUCTION DISTURBANCE Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 37.03 26.64 2.18 65.85 

M-S 8.85 0.95 9.80 

C-R 53.21 10.36 5.38 68.95 

Construction Right-of-Way 

Tot 0.00 99.09 37.95 7.56 0.00 0.00 144.60 

1.48 0.92 1.42 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Hydrostatic Discharge Sites 3

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 1.64 1.10 2.74 

M-S 0.19 0.43 0.62 

C-R 19.85 3.11 0.23 23.19 

Temporary Extra Work Areas 

Tot 0.00 21.68 4.64 0.23 0.00 0.00 26.55 

1.38 5.06 4.01 11.27 

L-O 18.27 16.20 0.90 35.37 

M-S 4.07 0.45 4.52 

C-R 24.71 4.04 1.62 30.37 

Uncleared Storage Areas 

Tot 0.00 47.05 20.69 2.52 0.00 0.00 70.26 

0.41 0.08 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Rock Source/ Disposal 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Access Roads (TARs/PARs/ Improvements) 4 Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 56.94 43.94 3.08 0.00 0.00 103.96 

M-S 0.00 13.11 1.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.94 

C-R 0.00 97.77 17.51 7.23 0.00 0.00 122.51 

Total Construction Disturbance Tot 0.00 167.82 63.28 10.31 0.00 0.00 241.41 

3.27 6.06 5.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.27 

H-430
271 Appen

TABLE B-6

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Ri

parian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

OPERATION DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities

L-O 19.55 14.21 1.22 34.98 

M-S 5.36 0.57 5.93 

C-R 29.35 5.32 2.86 37.53 

Permanent Easement 5

Tot 0.00 54.26 20.10 4.08 0.00 0.00 78.44 

0.86 0.50 0.69 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Permanent Access Roads 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 19.55 14.21 1.22 0.00 0.00 34.98 

M-S 0.00 5.36 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.93 

C-R 0.00 29.35 5.32 2.86 0.00 0.00 37.53 

Total Pipeline Facilities

Tot 0.00 54.26 20.10 4.08 0.00 0.00 78.44 

0.86 0.50 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

L-O 11.71 8.52 0.75 20.98 

M-S 3.27 0.35 3.62 

C-R 17.69 3.17 1.72 22.58 

30-foot Maintenance Corridor Tot 0.00 32.67 12.04 2.47 0.00 0.00 47.18 

0.54 0.31 0.46 

Aboveground Facilities 

L-O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Total Aboveground Facilities Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

L-O 0.00 19.55 14.21 1.22 0.00 0.00 34.98 

M-S 0.00 5.36 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.93 

C-R 0.00 29.35 5.32 2.86 0.00 0.00 37.53 

Total Operation Disturbance

Tot 0.00 54.26 20.10 4.08 0.00 0.00 78.44 

0.86 0.50 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

1 Acres disturbed were evaluated using GIS; footprints for each component (temporary construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, temporary acc

pipe storage yards, aboveground facilities, permanent easement, and 30-foot maintenance corridor) were overlaid on the digitized vegetation coverage. 2 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be ≥40 but ≤80 ye

Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old. 3 Small brush or trees may be cleared by a rubber-tired rotary or flail motor (brush hog) or by hand with machetes/chainsaws. No soil disturbance will occur. 

utilized to lay the discharge line and to remove the saturated haybales or filter bags upon completion of hydrostatic discharge. 4 Portions of some of the PARs are located within the construction right-of-way and, therefore, there is some duplication in the acreage calculations. 5 The permanent easement is located within the disturbed acreage of the construction right-of-way. It is not an addition to the construction impacts. 6 CT = 

H-431
272 Appen

TABLE B-7

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Fremont-Winema National Fo

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest ( 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

CONSTRUCTION DISTURBANCE Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 14.18 19.82 34.00 

M-S 1.46 6.21 7.67 

C-R 0.82 24.76 25.58 

Construction Right-of-Way 

Tot 0.00 0.00 16.46 50.79 0.00 0.00 67.25 

 0.11 0.17 0.37 0.27 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.08 0.08 

Hydrostatic Discharge Sites 3

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.08 

 

L-O 1.68 1.54 3.22 

M-S 0.02 1.51 1.53 

C-R 3.05 3.05 

Temporary Extra Work Areas 

Tot 0.00 0.00 1.70 6.10 0.00 0.00 7.80 

 0.11 0.01 

L-O 2.83 4.46 7.29 

M-S 0.43 0.89 1.32 

C-R 0.07 3.31 3.38 

Uncleared Storage Areas 

Tot 0.00 0.00 3.33 8.66 0.00 0.00 11.99 

 0.08 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Rock Source/ Disposal 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Access Roads (TARs/PARs/ Improvements) 4 Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 0.00 18.69 25.82 0.00 0.00 44.51 

M-S 0.00 0.00 1.91 8.61 0.00 0.00 10.52 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.89 31.12 0.00 0.00 32.01 

Total Construction Disturbance Tot 0.00 0.00 21.49 65.55 0.00 0.00 87.04 

0.00 0.22 0.17 0.46 0.27 0.00 0.00 

H-432
273 Appen

TABLE B-7

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to 

 Corresponding Habitat Category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Fremont-Winema National Fo

Forest-Woodland Grasslands- Shrublands Riparian 

Facility

Forest –Woodland Age 

Categoy 

2

Westside Lowland 

Conifer-HardwoodForest 

Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest ( 

Southwest Oregon 

Mixed ConiferHardwood Forest 

Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and 

Woodlands 

Westside Oak and Dry 

Douglas-fir Forest 

and Woodlands 

Western Juniper and 

Mountain Mahogany 

Woodlands 

Forest-Woodland 

Sub-Total 

Shrub-Steppe 

Westside Grasslands 

Eastside Grasslands 

Herbaceous Wetlands 

Westside RiparianWetlands / Eastside 

Riparian-Wetlands 

Agriculture, pastures, 

and Mixed Environs 

Developed--Urban and 

Mixed Environs 

OPERATION DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities

L-O 7.46 10.55 18.01 

M-S 0.78 3.37 4.15 

C-R 0.32 13.17 13.49 

Permanent Easement 5

Tot 0.00 0.00 8.56 27.09 0.00 0.00 35.65 

 0.04 0.15 0.20 0.18 

L-O 0.00 

M-S 0.00 

C-R 0.00 

Permanent Access Roads 

Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

 

L-O 0.00 0.00 7.46 10.55 0.00 0.00 18.01 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.78 3.37 0.00 0.00 4.15 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.32 13.17 0.00 0.00 13.49 

Total Pipeline Facilities

Tot 0.00 0.00 8.56 27.09 0.00 0.00 35.65 

0.00 0.04 0.15 0.20 0.18 0.00 0.00 

L-O 4.48 6.33 10.81 

M-S 0.47 2.02 2.49 

C-R 0.19 7.91 8.10 

30-foot Maintenance Corridor Tot 0.00 0.00 5.14 16.26 0.00 0.00 21.40 

 0.02 0.10 0.13 0.11 

Aboveground Facilities 

L-O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Total Aboveground Facilities Tot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

L-O 0.00 0.00 7.46 10.55 0.00 0.00 18.01 

M-S 0.00 0.00 0.78 3.37 0.00 0.00 4.15 

C-R 0.00 0.00 0.32 13.17 0.00 0.00 13.49 

Total Operation Disturbance

Tot 0.00 0.00 8.56 27.09 0.00 0.00 35.65 

0.00 0.04 0.15 0.20 0.18 0.00 0.00 

1 Acres disturbed were evaluated using GIS; footprints for each component (temporary construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, temporary acc

pipe storage yards, aboveground facilities, permanent easement, and 30-foot maintenance corridor) were overlaid on the digitized vegetation coverage. 2 Forest-Woodland Age Categories Acres are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be ≥40 but ≤80 ye

Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old. 3 Small brush or trees may be cleared by a rubber-tired rotary or flail motor (brush hog) or by hand with machetes/chainsaws. No soil disturbance will occur. 

utilized to lay the discharge line and to remove the saturated haybales or filter bags upon completion of hydrostatic discharge. 4 Portions of some of the PARs are located within the construction right-of-way and, therefore, there is some duplication in the acreage calculations. 5 The permanent easement is located within the disturbed acreage of the construction right-of-way. It is not an addition to the construction impacts. 6 CT = 

H-433
274 Biological Evaluation 

Appendix C 

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project

H-434
275 

APPENDIX C

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project 

Waterbody 1 Approximate Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody ID 4 

Pacific Northwest 

Hydrography 

Waterbody 

Identification Number 5 

Width of 

Crossing 

(feet) 

Excavated 

Volume at 

Crossing 

(yds3) 

Crossing 

Method 

FERC 

Classification 6 

Cowa

Classsif

Coast Range Ecoregion, Coos Sub-basin (HUC 17100304), Coos Bay Frontal (HUC 1710030403) Fifth fieldl Watershed 2, Coos County, Oregon

Trib To Coos Bay 1.21 BSP 246 115.59 Dry Open-Cut Major 

Coos Bay 2.92 NE026 1243397433543 12845.19 29496.36 Wet Open-Cut Major E2EMP/N, 

E2USN, E

Trib to Coos Bay 4.89 GSI026 1242017434500 6.15 14.12 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4 

Trib to Kentuck Slough 6.23 EE004/GW27 1241795434269 12.93 20.11 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate PE

Kentuck Slough 6.28 EE005/GSP-28 1242068434143 61.74 141.77 Conventional Bore Intermediate R2 

Trib to Coos Bay 6.35 NW-117/EE06 1241902434209 544.60 847.15 Dry Open-Cut Major PE

Willanch Slough 8.34 EE007 1242083434031 14.07 32.31 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R2 

Trib to Willanch Slough 8.43 GDX029/EE008 1241601434068 - - Not Crossed by Centerline Adjacent to centerline within ROW R4 Trip to Willanch Slough 8.48 GDX030 12.84 29.48 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4 Trib to Willanch Slough 8.49 GDX031 49.89 114.56 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4 

Trib to Coos Bay 10.99 BW242 1241663433710 1510.89 2350.27 Dry Open-Cut Major PETrib to Coos Bay 11.12 GW033/EE010 1241722433697 123.56 192.21 Dry Open-Cut Major PE

Trib. to Coos River 7.77 ESP013 1241551433636 12.49 31.23 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R2UBTrib. to Coos River 7.89 ESP012 1241551433636 10.62 26.55 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R2UBTrib. to Coos River 7.90 ESP111 1241551433636 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Intermediate R2UB

Coos River 8.18 BSP119 1241999433842 687.09 1717.78 HDD Major R2OW

Trib. to Coos River 8.37 BSP112 1241545433620 26.18 65.45 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R2UB

Trib. to Catching Slough 9.02 BSP104 1241704433522 2.33 5.83 Dry Open-Cut Minor R2UBTrib. to Catching Slough 9.19 BSP105 1241675433517 2.83 7.08 Dry Open-Cut Minor R2UBTrib. to Catching Slough 9.33 DSI003 1241489433510 11.72 29.30 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4UBTrib. to Catching Slough 9.51 DSP002 1241530433517 4.20 10.50 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed - 

bedrock 

Minor R3SB

Trib. to Stock Slough 

(Monkey Ranch Gulch) 10.13 BSP090 7.59 18.98 Dry Open-Cut Minor R2UB

Stock Slough 10.14, 10.16, 10.21 BSP088 1241571433361 58.08 145.23 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R2UB

Pasture Pond 10.40 BL084 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

NA PUB

Catching Slough 11.11 BSP079 1241572433284 256.83 642.07 Conventional Bore Major R2OW

Trib. to Catching Slough 11.47 BSP114 2.02 5.05 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. to Catching Slough 11.78 BSP103 1241608433185 3.07 7.67 Dry Open-Cut Minor R2UBTrib. to Catching Slough 11.84 BSP101 1241655433196 1.22 3.05 Dry Open-Cut Minor R2UBTrib. to Catching Slough 11.87 BSP100 1241655433196 4.76 11.90 Dry Open-Cut Minor R2UBTrib. to Catching Slough 12.05 NSI041 1241649433195 1.64 4.10 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4STrib. to Catching Slough 12.27 NSI092 4.99 12.48 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4S

Trib. to Catching Slough 12.31 NSI093 4.00 10.00 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4STrib. to Catching Slough 12.39 NSI094 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4S

Trib. to Catching Slough 12.39 NSI095 1241711433132 6.76 16.90 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4S

H-435
276 

APPENDIX C

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project 

Waterbody 1 Approximate Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody ID 4 

Pacific Northwest 

Hydrography 

Waterbody 

Identification Number 5 

Width of 

Crossing 

(feet) 

Excavated 

Volume at 

Crossing 

(yds3) 

Crossing 

Method 

FERC 

Classification 6 

Cowa

Classsif

Trib. to Catching Slough 12.45 NSI097 5.54 13.85 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4STrib. to Catching Slough 12.52 NSI098 1241709433122 6.14 15.35 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4S

Trib. to Ross Slough 12.66 BSP120 1241852433075 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R2SB

Trib. to Ross Slough 12.68 BSP121 1241852433075 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R2SB

Trib. to Ross Slough 12.83 BSP122 1241842433046 1.23 3.08 Dry Open-Cut Minor/Intermediate R2SBTrib. to Ross Slough 12.90 BSP125 5.82 14.55 Dry Open-Cut Minor/Intermediate R2SBTrib. to Ross Slough 12.97 CSP031 4.21 10.53 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. to Ross Slough 13.01 CSP030 1241793433038 3.01 7.52 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. to Ross Slough 13.11 CSP029 1241778433044 4.19 10.48 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UB

Ross Slough 13.55 CSP028 1241687433509 3.83 9.57 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UB

Trib. to Ross Slough 13.61 CSP027 1241761432974 2.18 5.45 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. to Ross Slough 13.70 CSP026 1241733432965 4.31 10.77 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UB

Boone Creek 15.71 EDX078 1241532432789 4.99 12.48 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3S

Trib. to Boone Creek 16.36 CSI037 1241561432755 1.14 2.85 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SBTrib. to Boone Creek 16.36 CSP036 1241561432755 4.23 10.58 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. to Boone Creek 16.39 CSI035 1241598432687 1.02 2.55 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Trib. To Catching Creek 16.56 CSP024 1241612432631 1.5 3.83 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. To Catching Creek 16.62 CSP023 1241604432619 3.08 7.70 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. To Catching Creek 16.71 CSP022 1241594432613 2.34 5.85 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. To Catching Creek 16.73 CSP021 1241596432612 5.01 12.53 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. To Catching Creek 16.78 CSP020 1241603432608 5.81 14.52 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. To Catching Creek 16.82 CSP019 1241561432616 3.00 7.50 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. To Catching Creek 16.85 CSP018 1241606432606 8.46 21.15 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UB

Catching Creek 17.47 CSP033 1241452433077 4.25 10.63 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UB

Coast Range Ecoregion, Coquille Sub-basin (HUC 17100305), Lower Coquille River (HUC 1710030505) Fifth field Watershed 2, Coos County, Oregon

Trib. To Cunningham Creek 18.20 BSP092 1241387432420 2.32 5.80 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib. To Cunningham Creek 18.28 BSP093 1241469432436 1.34 3.35 Dry Open-Cut Minor R2UBTrib. To Cunningham Creek 18.33 BSP095 1241458432440 1.38 3.45 Dry Open-Cut Minor R2UBTrib. To Cunningham Creek 18.48 BSI096 1241461432438 1.08 2.70 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Cunningham Creek 18.93 NSP042 1242026431787 37.68 94.20 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3SB

Trib. To Cunningham Creek 19.06 NSP043 1241375432355 24.58 61.45 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3SB

Coast Range Ecoregion, Coquille Sub-basin (HUC 17100305), North Fork Coquille River (HUC 1710030504) Fifth field Watershed 2, Coos County, Oregon

Trib. to Steele Creek 20.34, 20.59 ESI028 1241154432240 9.71 24.28 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R3SB

Steele Creek 21.10 NSP015 1240848432002 12.10 30.25 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3SB

Trib. to Steele Creek 21.36 ESI029 1241003432184 - - 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R3SB

North Fork Coquille River 23.06 BSP207 1241417430804 20.66 51.65 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R2U

Trib. to Middle Creek 27.01 BSI137 1240268431779 12.69 31.72 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4SB

H-436
277 

APPENDIX C

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project 

Waterbody 1 Approximate Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody ID 4 

Pacific Northwest 

Hydrography 

Waterbody 

Identification Number 5 

Width of 

Crossing 

(feet) 

Excavated 

Volume at 

Crossing 

(yds3) 

Crossing 

Method 

FERC 

Classification 6 

Cowa

Classsif

Trib. to Middle Creek 27.02 BSI136 1240268431779 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4SB

Trib. to Middle Creek 27.04 BSI135 1240268431779 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4SB

Middle Creek 27.04 BSP133 1240712431628 65.03 162.57 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R2SB

Coast Range Ecoregion, Coquille Sub-basin (HUC 17100305), East Fork Coquille River (HUC 1710030503) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, Coos County, Oregon

Trib. To E. Fork Coquille 28.89 BSP077 1240014431632 12.48 31.20 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R3SB

Trib. To E. Fork Coquille 29.18 NSI099 1239937431584 6.23 15.58 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4U

Trib. to E. Fork Coquille 29.49 BSI073 1241551433636 10.26 25.65 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3SB

Trib. To E. Fork Coquille 29.53 BSI076 1239946431580 5.48 13.70 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R4SB

East Fork Coquille River 29.88 BSP071 1240773431063 143.17 357.92 Dry Open-Cut Major R3OW

Trib. To E. Fork Coquille 31.64 BSI070 1239583431522 1.17 2.92 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UB

Elk Creek 32.40 BSP057 1240218431116 7.64 19.10 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3RB

Trib. To Elk Creek 32.44 BSP055 1239513431370 3.55 8.88 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R3SB

Trib. To Elk Creek 32.99 BSP049 1239524431250 9.77 24.43 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3SBTrib. To Elk Creek 33.02 BSP050 1239482431284 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R3SB

South Fork Elk Creek 34.46 CSP005 1239778431167 49.40 123.50 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R3SB

Trib. To S. Fork Elk Creek 35.51 BSI251 1239155431070 4.13 10.32 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UB

Coast Range Ecoregion, Coquille Sub-basin (HUC 17100305), Middle Fork Coquille River (HUC 1710030501) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, Coos County, Oregon

Trib. To Big Creek 36.48 GSI025/BSI253 1238985431032 4.60 11.50 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UBTrib. To Big Creek 36.92 BSI252 1238901431044 3.06 7.65 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UB

Trib. to Big Creek 37.33 ESI019 1238846431056 2.75 6.88 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UB

Trib. To Big Creek 37.35 ESP020 1238856431054 14.93 37.32 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3UB

Upper Rock Creek 44.21 BSP041 1238692429883 16.04 40.10 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3UB

Klamath Mountains Ecoregion, Coquille Sub-basin (HUC 17100305), Middle Fork Coquille River (HUC 1710030501) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, Douglas County, Oregon

Deep Creek 47.73 BSI255 1237088430546 4.03 10.08 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UBDeep Creek 48.27 BSP257 1237088430546 80.89 202.22 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3UB

Middle Fork Coquille River 50.28 BSP030 1241173430339 56.98 142.45 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R2OW

Trib to Middle Fork Coquille 50.45 BSI066 1236800430537 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4UB

H-437
278 

APPENDIX C

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project 

Waterbody 1 Approximate Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody ID 4 

Pacific Northwest 

Hydrography 

Waterbody 

Identification Number 5 

Width of 

Crossing 

(feet) 

Excavated 

Volume at 

Crossing 

(yds3) 

Crossing 

Method 

FERC 

Classification 6 

Cowa

Classsif

Trib to Middle Fork Coquille 50.74 BSP061/GSI037 1236823430366 6.23 15.58 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UBTrib to Middle Fork Coquille 

(PNW Hydrography) 51.02 GSI038 1236690430555 19.07 43.79 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4 

Klamath Mountains Ecoregion, South Umpqua Sub-basin (HUC 17100302), Olalla Creek-Lookingglass Cr (HUC 1710030212) Fifth field Watershed 2, Douglas County, Oreg

Trib. to Shields Creek 55.90 BSI202 1235858430773 55.38 138.45 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4SBTrib. to Shields Creek 55.94 BSI203 1235796430789 8.03 20.07 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Trib. to Olalla Creek 57.11, 57.14 BSI140 1235535430633 6.53 11.30 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R4SB

Trib. to Olalla Creek 57.31 BSI138 1235535430633 5.03 12.58 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SBTrib. to Olalla Creek 57.80 BSI147/EE012 1235479430651 4.20 10.50 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Trib to Olalla Creek 57.84 BSI147/EE012 1235479430651 4.26 10.50 Dry Open-Cut 

Trib. to Olalla Creek 58.20 BSI151 1235422430690 3.06 7.65 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SBTrib. to Olalla Creek 58.55 BSP159 1235362430712 10.60 26.50 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R2SB

Olalla Creek 58.77 BSP155 1234905431631 77.90 194.75 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R2SB

Trib. to Olalla Creek 59.29 BSI132 1235250430793 8.65 21.63 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SBTrib. to Olalla Creek 59.65 BSI129 1235231430834 18.72 46.80 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4SB

Trib. to McNabb Creek 60.13 NSP014 1235104430875 6.01 15.03 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R3SB

McNabb Creek 60.49 NSP013 1235187430921 16.06 40.15 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R3SB

Klamath Mountains Ecoregion, South Umpqua Sub-basin (HUC 17100302), Middle South Umpqua River (HUC 1710030210) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, Douglas County, Oreg

Kent Creek 63.95 BSP240 1234390431042 46.98 117.45 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R2UB

Trib. to Kent Creek 63.95 BSI241 1234490430771 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4UB

Rice Creek 65.76 BSP227 1234142430839 132.94 332.35 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Major R3SB

Trib. to Willis Creek 66.87 BSI230 1233983430694 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R4SB

Willis Creek 66.95 BSP168 1233989430788 46.79 94.15 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R3SB

Trib. to Willis Creek 67.00 BSI169 1233982430692 22.31 55.77 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R4SB

Trib. to South Umpqua 

River 68.89 BSI017 1233723430689 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

(Streambed – 

Minor R4SB

H-438
279 

APPENDIX C

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project 

Waterbody 1 Approximate Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody ID 4 

Pacific Northwest 

Hydrography 

Waterbody 

Identification Number 5 

Width of 

Crossing 

(feet) 

Excavated 

Volume at 

Crossing 

(yds3) 

Crossing 

Method 

FERC 

Classification 6 

Cowa

Classsif

bedrock) 

South Umpqua River 69.02 BSP026 1234460432680 618.55 1546.38 Diverted Open-Cut Major R3OW

Trib. to South Umpqua 

River 70.17, 70.40 BSP231 1233512430731 2.48 2.98 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R3SB

Trib. to Richardson Creek 72.55 BSI171 1233103430824 5.04 12.60 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Richardson Creek 73.20 BSP178 1233414430789 4.05 10.13 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Trib. to Richardson Creek 73.22 BSI177 1232971430801 2.86 7.15 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Klamath Mountains Ecoregion, South Umpqua Sub-basin (HUC 17100302), Myrtle Creek (HUC 1710030211) Fifth field Watershed 2, Douglas County, Oregon

Bilger Creek 76.38 BSP001 1232578430422 6.30 15.75 Dry Open-Cut Minor PFO

Little Lick 77.71 BSP006 1232235430457 7.20 18.00 Dry Open-Cut Minor PSS

Trib. to Little Lick Creek 77.93 BSI008 1232244430631 12.59 31.48 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3SBTrib. to Little Lick Creek 78.02 BSI010 1232239430620 2.01 5.02 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

North Myrtle Creek 79.12 NSP037 1232963430229 47.99 119.98 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R3SB

Trib. to North Myrtle Creek 79.15 NSP038 1232040430551 8.00 20.00 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R3SB

South Myrtle Creek 81.19 BSP172 1232847430231 68.27 170.67 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3OW

Trib. to S. Myrtle Creek 81.40 BSP259 1231856430317 2.41 6.03 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3SB

Klamath Mountains Ecoregion, South Umpqua Sub-basin (HUC 17100302), South Umpqua River (HUC 1710030205) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, 3, Douglas County, Oregon

Wood Creek 84.18 BSP226 1231503429810 8.22 20.55 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3S

Trib. to Fate Creek 88.20 BSI236 1231019429928 6.07 15.18 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R4SB

Fate Creek 88.48 BSP232 1231028429873 12.11 30.27 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R3SB

Days Creek 88.60 BSP233 1231699429713 58.99 147.48 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R3SB

Cascades Ecoregion, South Umpqua Sub-basin (HUC 17100302), South Umpqua River (HUC 1710030205) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, 3, Douglas County, Oregon

Saint John Creek 92.62 ASP303 1230596429295 40.02 100.05 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3RB

South Umpqua River 94.73 ASP196 1234460432680 204.92 512.30 Diverted Major R2OW

H-439
280 

APPENDIX C

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project 

Waterbody 1 Approximate Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody ID 4 

Pacific Northwest 

Hydrography 

Waterbody 

Identification Number 5 

Width of 

Crossing 

(feet) 

Excavated 

Volume at 

Crossing 

(yds3) 

Crossing 

Method 

FERC 

Classification 6 

Cowa

Classsif

Open-Cut 

Trib. to South Umpqua 

River 94.85/95.03 ASI193 1230382429323 25.62 38.20 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Trib. to South Umpqua 

River 98.46 ASI190 1230197429036 8.52 21.30 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R4S

Cascades Ecoregion, South Umpqua Sub-basin (HUC 17100302), Upper Cow Creek (HUC 1710030206) Fifth field Watershed 2, Douglas County, Oregon

Trib to East Fork Cow 

Creek 109.17 GW014/FS-HF-C 1229383427835 12.02 18.70 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate PS

Trib to East Fork Cow 

Creek 109.33 GSI016/FS-HF-F 1229369427819 7.54 17.31 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4 

East Fork Cow Creek 109.47, 109.69 

GSP019, 

GSP022/FS-HFG, ASP297 1229918428021 30.08 75.20 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3UB

Trib. to East Fork Cow 

Creek 109.69 FS-HF-J/AW298 1229332427779 <10 66.01 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UB

Trib. to East Fork Cow 

Creek 109.78 FS-HF-K/AW299 1229332427781 <10 94.86 Dry Open-Cut Minor R3UB

Cascades Ecoregion, Upper Rogue Sub-basin (HUC 17100307), Trail Creek (HUC 1710030706) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, Jackson County, Oregon

Trib. to W. Fork Trail Creek 110.76 ESI068 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within TEWA 

Minor R4SB

West Fork Trail Creek 118.89 ASP202 1228425426750 24.77 61.92 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R2SB

Trib. to Trail Creek 119.83 RS019 1228364426705 1.50 42.94 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Canyon Creek 120.45 NSP011 1228328426655 6.61 16.53 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R4SB

Trib. to Trail Creek 120.92 ASI205 1228233426599 6.39 15.98 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UTrib. to Trail Creek 121.58 ASI206 1228173426535 14.34 35.85 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4U

Cascades Ecoregion, Upper Rogue Sub-basin (HUC 17100307), Rogue River-Shady Cove (HUC 1710030707) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, Jackson County, Oregon

Trib. to Cricket Creek 121.87 ESI071 1228054426435 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4SB

Trib. to Cricket Creek 121.89 ESI070 1228054426435 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4SB

Trib. to Cricket Creek 121.93 ESI072 1228054426435 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4SB

Trib. to Cricket Creek 121.94 ESI073 1228054426435 - - Adjacent to Minor R4SB

H-440
281 

APPENDIX C

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project 

Waterbody 1 Approximate Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody ID 4 

Pacific Northwest 

Hydrography 

Waterbody 

Identification Number 5 

Width of 

Crossing 

(feet) 

Excavated 

Volume at 

Crossing 

(yds3) 

Crossing 

Method 

FERC 

Classification 6 

Cowa

Classsif

centerline 

within ROW 

Trib. to Cricket Creek 122.09 ESI074 1228054426435 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4SB

Rogue River 122.65 ASP235 1244292424210 244.59 611.48 HDD Major R3U

Trib. to Indian Creek 125.91 ASI223 1227634426166 4.87 12.18 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UBTrib. to Indian Creek 125.98 ASI222 1227628426207 5.43 13.57 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UBTrib. to Indian Creek 126.50 RS004 1227548426186 1.18 1.99 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UBTrib. to Indian Creek 126.52 ASI220 1227541426191 4.08 10.20 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UBTrib. to Indian Creek 126.59 ASI221 1227834426001 5.65 14.13 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UBTrib. to Indian Creek 126.65 ASI311 1227537426184 3.28 8.20 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UB

Deer Creek 128.08 ASP282 1227387426031 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4UB

Deer Creek 128.49 ASP307 1227449425936 51.04 127.60 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R3SB

Indian Creek 128.63 AW278 1227370425935 <10 614.92 Dry Open-Cut Minor PEMC/R

Trib. to Indian Creek 128.70 ASP310 1227366425936 5.34 13.35 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R3SB

Trib. to Indian Creek 128.89 AW309 <10 36.45 Dry Open-Cut Minor PFOTrib. to Indian Creek 129.48 ASI277 1227196425923 3.51 8.77 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UB

Cascades Ecoregion, Upper Rogue Sub-basin (HUC 17100307), Big Butte Creek (HUC 1710030704) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, Jackson County, Oregon

Trib. to Neil Creek 130.84 AW245 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor PSSC/R4

Trib. to Neil Creek 130.85 AW244 <10 224.21 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor PSSC/R4

Trib. to Neil Creek 130.89 ASI246 1226986425909 2.02 5.05 Dry Open-Cut Minor PEMTrib. to Neil Creek 131.55 ASI250 1226855425888 4.79 11.98 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UBTrib. to Neil Creek 131.55 ASI251 1226826425841 3.95 9.88 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UB

Neil Creek 132.00 ASP252 1226711425881 39.41 98.52 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R4SB

Quartz Creek 132.75 ASI265 1226814425828 2.36 5.90 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R4SB

Trib. to Quartz Creek 132.77 AW264 <10 68.15 

Dry Open-Cut 

(streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor PFO/R4

Trib. to Quartz Creek 133.35 ASP241 1226739425651 44.80 112.00 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3UB

Medford Aqueduct (Ditch 3) 133.38 ASP240 1228043424382 29.36 73.40 Conventional Bore Intermediate R3UB

Cascades Ecoregion, Upper Rogue Sub-basin (HUC 17100307), Little Butte Creek (HUC 1710030708) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, Jackson County, Oregon

Whiskey Creek 137.48 ASI207 1226599424838 10.37 25.92 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4UB

Trib. to Lick Creek 138.26 ASI208 1226422425032 10.37 25.92 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4UBTrib. to Lick Creek 138.45 ASI210 1226367425084 1.72 4.30 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UBTrib. to Lick Creek 138.71 ASI211 1226343425011 7.22 18.08 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UBTrib. to Lick Creek 139.15 ASI214 1226268425015 6.99 17.47 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UB

H-441
282 

APPENDIX C

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project 

Waterbody 1 Approximate Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody ID 4 

Pacific Northwest 

Hydrography 

Waterbody 

Identification Number 5 

Width of 

Crossing 

(feet) 

Excavated 

Volume at 

Crossing 

(yds3) 

Crossing 

Method 

FERC 

Classification 6 

Cowa

Classsif

Stock Pond 139.17 AL215 54.30 91.51 Dry Open-Cut NA PUB

Trib. to Lick Creek 139.19, 139.21 ASI216 1226260425019 23.35 25.78 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4SBTrib. to Lick Creek 139.39 ASI217 1226395424936 15.84 39.60 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4SBTrib. to Lick Creek 139.59 ASI226 1226220424994 6.59 16.47 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R4SB

Trib. to Lick Creek 139.63 ASI227 1226220424994 10.91 27.27 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R4SB

Trib. to Lick Creek 139.68 ASI228 1226220424994 31.75 79.38 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4EMTrib. to Lick Creek 139.72 ASI229 1226220424994 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4EM

Trib. to Lick Creek 139.83 ASI232 1226295424937 1.20 3.00 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Lick Creek 140.26 ASI233 1226975424638 12.33 30.82 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4SB

Trib. to Lick Creek 140.58 ASI189 1226125424921 2.62 6.55 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R4S

Trib. to Salt Creek 141.17 ASI187 1226075424805 2.51 6.27 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Minor R4S

Trib. to Salt Creek 141.44 ASI188 1226059424757 43.20 59.90 

Dry Open-Cut 

(Streambed – 

bedrock) 

Intermediate R4S

Trib. to Salt Creek 141.49 RS017 1226059424757 4.45 7.50 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SBTrib. to Salt Creek 141.95 ESI030 1226069424718 6.17 7.92 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SBTrib. to Salt Creek 142.36 ESI031 1226114424647 18.10 12.32 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4SB

Salt Creek 142.57 ESP034 1226522424385 41.18 102.95 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3SB

Trib. to Salt Creek 143.10 ESI037 1226145424620 4.82 12.05 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Trib. to Long Branch Creek 143.47, 143.73, 144.07 ESI038 1225948424477 5.56 13.91 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SBTrib. to Long Branch Creek 143.71 ESI039 1225959424522 3.40 8.50 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Stock Pond 143.73 EL041 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

NA PEM

Trib. to Long Branch Creek 143.74 ESI040 1225957424527 3.32 8.30 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Trib. to S. Fork Long 

Branch 144.70 GSP005/ESP048 1225946424357 11.19 27.97 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3SB

South Fork Long Branch Cr. 145.27 GPS006/ESP059 1226063424364 6.18 8.73 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4S

Trib. to S. Fork Long 

Branch 145.54 ESI061 1225996424261 13.64 34.10 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4S

North Fork Little Butte 

Creek 145.68 ESP066 1226154424196 45.87 114.68 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3SB

Trib. to N. Fork Little Butte 146.05 ESI056 1225859424250 9.37 23.42 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4STrib. to N. Fork Little Butte 146.38 ESI055 1225855424210 3.23 8.08 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4STrib. to N. Fork Little Butte 146.75 ESI052 1225847424179 11.52 28.80 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4S

Stock Pond 152.33 AL169 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

NA PUB

Eastern Slopes Ecoregion, Upper Rogue Sub-basin (HUC 17100307), Little Butte Creek (HUC 1710030708) Fifth field Watershed 2, 3, Jackson County, Oregon

H-442
283 

APPENDIX C

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project 

Waterbody 1 Approximate Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody ID 4 

Pacific Northwest 

Hydrography 

Waterbody 

Identification Number 5 

Width of 

Crossing 

(feet) 

Excavated 

Volume at 

Crossing 

(yds3) 

Crossing 

Method 

FERC 

Classification 6 

Cowa

Classsif

South Fork Little Butte 

Creek 162.45 ASP165 1226154424195 19.62 49.05 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R3SB

Daley Creek 166.21 ESI076 1223666423096 26.15 65.38 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4U

Eastern Slopes Ecoregion, Upper Klamath R. Sub-basin (HUC 18010206), Spencer Creek (HUC 1801020601) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, 3, Klamath County, Oregon

Trib. to Spencer Creek 168.31 ASI162 1222523423081 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4UB

Spencer Creek 171.06 EW085 1220277421487 <10 260.55 Dry Open-Cut Minor PEM

Trib to Spencer Creek 171.57 GSP007 1221988422850 4.05 9.30 Dry Open-Cut Minor R2 

Trib. to Spencer Creek 172.48 EW107 1221837422760 <10 175.28 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4STrib. to Spencer Creek 173.74 ESI106 5.03 12.58 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4STrib. to Spencer Creek 176.44 ESI069/GSI010 2.37 5.92 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4S

Clover Creek 177.76 EW103/GSI011 1220820421968 <10 427.77 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB2/PEM

Eastern Slopes Ecoregion, Upper Klamath R. Sub-basin (HUC 18010206), Klamath R-John C Boyle Res (HUC 1801020602) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, Klamath County, Oreg

Trib. to Klamath River 186.61 ESI097 1220000421555 3.13 7.83 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SBTrib. to Klamath River 186.65 ESI099 1220000421555 2.04 5.10 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SBTrib. to Klamath River 186.74, 186.76 ESI100 1220000421555 - - Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SB

Eastern Slopes Ecoregion, Lost River Sub-basin (HUC 18010204), Lake Ewauna-Upper Klamath R (HUC 1801020412) Fifth field Watershed 2, Klamath County, Oregon

Trib. To Klamath River 189.96 ASI013 1219145421230 4.05 10.13 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4E

Weyerhaeuser Pond 196.77 AL034 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

NA PUB

Klamath River 199.38 ASP151 1221913420005 989.26 2464.40 HDD Major L1UB

Eastern Slopes Ecoregion, Lost River Sub-basin (HUC 18010204), Lower Lost River (HUC 1801020409) ) Fifth field Watershed 2, Klamath County, Oregon

Lost River 212.05 NSP001 1212146420011 117.75 294.38 Dry Open-Cut Major R3U

Unnamed Creek 216.10 ASI051 1215715420597 12.80 32.00 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate PEMUnnamed Creek 216.11 ASI052 1215715420597 3.01 7.52 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SUnnamed Creek 216.30 ASI050 1215715420596 25.23 63.08 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4SUnnamed Creek 216.43 ASI049 1215677420606 6.95 17.38 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4S

Trib. to D Canal 218.09 ASI136 1215371420655 23.48 58.70 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4SBTrib. to D Canal 218.46 ASI137 1215384420611 3.06 7.65 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4SBTrib. to D Canal 219.69 ASI291 1214908420305 1.28 3.20 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4UB

H-443
284 

APPENDIX C

Waterbodies Crossed by the PCGP Project 

Waterbody 1 Approximate Pipeline 

Milepost 

Waterbody ID 4 

Pacific Northwest 

Hydrography 

Waterbody 

Identification Number 5 

Width of 

Crossing 

(feet) 

Excavated 

Volume at 

Crossing 

(yds3) 

Crossing 

Method 

FERC 

Classification 6 

Cowa

Classsif

Excavated Pond 219.70 NL116 - - 

Off ROW – 

Temp Extra 

Workspace 

NA PAG

Unnamed Creek 221.77 ASI138 1214569420610 5.02 12.55 Dry Open-Cut Minor R4U

Pond 222.84 EL077 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

NA PAG

Trib. to V Canal 224.95 ESI050 1214001420661 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4S

Trib. to V Canal 224.95 ESI051 1214053420564 - - 

Adjacent to 

centerline 

within ROW 

Minor R4S

Trib. to V Canal 225.07 ASI140 1214053420564 28.34 70.85 Dry Open-Cut Intermediate R4S

1 Pacific Northwest Hydrography Database and Jones and Stokes Field Survey 2 USGS Hydrologic Unit Codes. 3 Key Watershed 4 Jones and Stokes Wetland Survey Waterbody Identification Number 5 Pacific Northwest Hydrography Framework Clearinghouse Waterbody longitude/latitude unique identifier number. 6 Minor waterbody includes all waterbodies less than or equal to 10 feet wide at the water's edge at the time of construction; intermediate waterbody includes all waterbodies greater t

construction; and major waterbody includes all waterbodies greater than 100 feet wide at the water's edge at the time of construction. 7 Oregon Department of Forestry Classifications: F – Fish, D- Domestic, N- none, * Domestic use yet to be determined. 8 Northwest Forest Plan Classifications: fish bearing streams (F), permanently flowing non-fish bearing streams (N), seasonally flowing or Intermittent streams (I), lakes and natural po

9 Source: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2004/2006 303d GIS coverage. Cat: 4A – water quality Limited, TMDL approved, Cat: 4B – water quality limited, other contr

303(d) list, TMDL needed. 10 Water quality limited within one mile of crossing, not at point of crossing. 

H-444
1 Appendix H – Vegetation and Wildlife 

Appendix H-12 

Applicant response to U.S. Forest Service comment regarding snag densities. 

Snag Density Response:

Within USFS Comment WL-21, snag comments are underlined and numbered for order of 

response. 

USFS Comment #1:

“(Pacific Connector prepared estimates of snag density (numbers per acre) that would be 

affected within the construction right-of-way and TEWAs on each of the three National Forests 

during timber reconnaissance conducted in 2007 (Chapman 2007). Chapman 2007). is not 

listed in references. More importantly, I believe the reconnaissance from 2007 is from a 

different part of the Forest (Diamond Lake lodgepole/mixed conifer types). It would be 

inappropriate to use that information broadly along the pipeline route.” 

Snag Response #1:

The Pacific Connector estimates of snag density (numbers per acre) that would be affected 

within the construction right-of-way and TEWAs on each of the three National Forests (NF) 

[Umpqua, Rogue, Winema] during timber clearing operations is extracted from within the 

boundaries of the proposed alignment for the TEWAs and construction right-of-way beginning 

from the northwestern most NF property boundary, east to the southeastern most NF property 

boundary. Whichever forest types are intersected by the construction right-of-way and TEWAs, 

plots were specifically established for that particular forest area. 

Data within a specified NF is extrapolated specific to the construction footprint area only. The 

lodgepole/mixed conifer type of the alignment [+/- Buck Lake alternative] referenced by the 

USFS is at the extreme eastern property boundary within the Fremont-Winema NF which does 

contain a matrix populated with lodgepole. This forest type is a very small part of the overall 

route reconnaissance. Data is considered only in context to the specific NF and intersection of 

the construction right-of-way and TEWAs and is not inappropriately extrapolated broadly beyond 

the construction footprint boundaries. 

USFS Comment #2:

“The snag densities listed in TABLE 4.5.1.4-2 appear too low from USFS experience from 

several snag inventories on the Umpqua NF. We strongly recommend not using this 

information and either replace it with information from DecAID or conduct site specific snag 

inventories along systematically selected portions of the pipeline route.” 

Snag Response #2:

Snag density estimate information as exhibited in TABLE 4.5.1.4-2 was extrapolated from an 

inventory that is site-specific to the area within the project’s construction footprint boundary. This 

was completed in compliance with a request by the USFS in 2007. The data is valid for the 

space and time it was gathered. The documentation for DecAID [cited at end of this response] 

H-445
2 Appendix H – Vegetation and Wildlife 

states a similar observation for data used to generate DecAID estimations, and most likely 

applies to the “several other inventories on the Umpqua NF” and a database subset to DecAID. 

The inventory estimate is valid because it: (1) complies with answering a request for 

information, and (2) generated a basis for comment and potential solution regarding the FS 

comparison of stating the estimate “appear[s] too low from several snag inventories on the 

Umpqua NF,” and “either replace it with information from DecAID or conduct site specific snag 

inventories along systematically selected portions of the pipeline route.” 

The pipeline is not planned or designed as a project specific to FS forest management planning 

strategies, albeit the correlation is implicit. The design is linear with the landscape foot print 

result being a very narrow path. Post operations, most of the alignment foot print is required to 

be regenerated and reconstituted with an assortment of wildlife and erosion control mitigation 

enhancements combined with those existing prior to operations that were designed as required 

retention components where applicable. [“Where applicable” questions the request for 

establishing a matrix of snags in areas such as plantations, rock pits, etc. that do not now, and 

will not have a population of trees for quite some period of time if at all in regard to snag 

recruitment.] The pipeline is dissimilar to similar paths created by cross-country high voltage 

transmission power lines which cross a myriad of federal, state, and private ownerships above 

ground, and for the most part required via regulations to be kept clear of vegetation and snags 

within the right-of-way. In geometric size comparison to any specie of past NF even-age timber 

sale project, inclusive of private industrially managed timberland in-holdings and those adjacent 

to the National Forests, evidence indicates past timber sale project areas exist across a 

significant quantity of larger size units and overall timber sale size, including a greater number 

of watersheds and forest stand types, many of which are devoid of snags. 

Contrary to the density and size of existing past even-age harvest units, the linear pipe design 

comes equipped with a generic engineering compliment which functions as a type of size impact 

mitigation regarding avoidance strategies that pertain to issues such as: geology, archaeology, 

many others, and inclusive of wildlife habitat structure disturbance [snags, lwd]. The proposed 

pipeline routing criteria and objectives indicate a concerted routing effort to utilize existing ridge 

or near ridge top areas, existing roads, existing plantation areas, areas of young trees in general 

[generally, areas offset from stands of medium to large size trees as much as possible], rock 

pits, log landings, electrical transmission line rights-of-way, brushfields, areas of non-vegetation, 

etc. to name a few. 

As exhibited across other ownerships and as exhibited in the requested FS snag estimate, 

obvious denser than average snag populations [pockets and concentrations, plus eco-tones at 

edges of large tree stands] are avoided, and without doubt to the betterment of wildlife 

management regimes [large scale DecAid, and small scale site specific project]. The opine that 

the snag density estimate provided by Pacific Connector is too low, could be considered a 

positive project phenomenon. Unfortunately, there appears to be a downside in regard to the 

engineering standard of avoidance to a myriad of issues, of which include the inventoried snags. 

Pacific Connector is requested carte blanche for all NF acres to abide by regionalized snag 

density standards which include vast acreages of unharvested forest landscapes. In contrast, 

the project routing has positioned the pipeline alignment in areas [as much as possible, 

avoidance strategy for LSR and other such forest types] associated with historical elements of 

timber harvesting and other forest management projects which contain acres of recent 

plantations to large sapling / pole and small sawlog size forest types. These forest types within 

the exterior project boundaries do not contain much, if any or even quantifiable, of the snag 

components Pacific Connector is being asked to produce post operations for these areas. This 

H-446
3 Appendix H – Vegetation and Wildlife 

is evidenced in the Pacific Connector snag density table [See revised Table 2 below comparing 

Pacific Connector data to DecAID % tolerance levels 80/50/30]. 

Regarding the narrow project design and footprint - DecAID reference example: “Background 

Information Page, a critical consideration in use of DecAID is that of scale – of both space and 

time. DecAID (and the background component information available here [DecAID] is best 

applied at scales of subwatersheds, watersheds, subbasins, physiographic provinces, or large 

administrative units such as Ranger Districts, National Forests, or BLM Districts. “Best Applied” 

refers to its predictive capacity. DecAID is not intended to predict occurrence of wildlife species 

at the scale of individual forest stands or specific locations – there are far too many other factors 

influencing the presence or absence of organisms at the scale than what could be reasonably 

modeled for the PCGP Project. Nor is DecAID intended to predict the specific species 

composition – the species list in a given geographic area. Instead, it is intended to be used to 

help advise on broad patterns of species occurrence and distributions in generally-described 

wildlife habitat types and structural conditions. Validation of wildlife-habitat relationships models 

suggests that any model of this type would likely err on the side of commission (including 

species that may not really occur) the smaller the geographic area is considered, such as an 

individual forest stand. DecAID is intended to be a broader planning aid than a species- or 

stand-specific prediction tool. 

DecAID, “Cautions and Caveats” section provides general information: “What snag use data 

represent. Most of the data on snag density from the wildlife literature were recorded at nest, 

roost, or den sites. The size of vegetation sample plots varied among studies, though plots were 

usually <0.1 ha (1/4 acre)” [PCGP plots were prismatic, quarter acre, and inclusive of a set of 

concentric fixed radius plots to collect as much plot data as possible in regard to volume, snag, 

and lwd information]. Snag densities in these “used” plots were often higher than snag densities 

in random plots in the surrounding stand. This may indicate that wildlife are using or perhaps 

selecting for clumps of snags, however, in most vegetation conditions this assumption is not 

necessarily supported by inventory data from unharvested plots. In wildlife studies, if the 

vegetation sample plots were placed among snags occurring in locally dense clumps <1 ha 

[2.45 acres] in size, then extrapolating the snag densities from such sample plots to a per-ha 

[per acre] basis may yield very high snag densities that may not be appropriately interpreted as 

stand-wide averages or management objectives. The user of DecAid will have to decide if the 

data suggest stand averages or local clump snag densities. 

Table 1 below provides information for comparing the site-specific PCGP snag data, and what 

DecAID exhibits for the same data. DecAID produced three extremely vast geographic areas 

labeled as: “Locations of forest inventory plots used in dead wood summaries for the Southwest 

Oregon Mixed Conifer – Hardwood Forest [SWOMC] wildlife habitat type; the Westside Lowland 

Conifer – Hardwood Forest wildlife habitat type in the Oregon western Cascades subregion; and 

the Montane Mixed Conifer Forest wildlife habitat type.” These maps [not attached] indicate at a 

very large scale, the locations of forest inventory plots used in dead wood summaries across 

vast acres [all 3 National Forests, 5 million acres, at a minimum a million (or so) acres for the 

DecAID plot coverage [?], and 345 for the project]. In relation to the pipeline alignment locale, 

the most relevant DecAID type [by far] is the Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest. The other two DecAID types are considered, yet their types extend primarily from the 

east side of Roseburg southeast toward the general Crater Lake area [Winema NF], a bit west 

toward Butte Falls, then primarily north toward the Columbia River and beyond. The Southwest 

Oregon Mixed Conifer – Hardwood Forest [SWOMC] is used for comparison notes since it 

appears to be the most relative to the project. 

Each of the above types were queried for snag density information at the Open, Small to 

H-447
4 Appendix H – Vegetation and Wildlife 

Medium, and Large tree categories. DecAID categorizes the data as follows: “How Can DecAID 

Be Used? DecAID presents information on wildlife use of snag diameter, snag density, down 

wood diameter, and down wood percent cover, and on the range of natural (unharvested) and 

current (all) conditions of snag density and down wood percent cover by diameter classes. The 

information is presented at three statistical tolerance levels which may be interpreted as three 

levels of “assurance:” low (30% tolerance level), moderate (50% tolerance level), and high (80% 

tolerance level). Minimum and maximum values are also presented.” 

PCGP data to DecAID parameters and recommendations: 

PCGP data across the spectrum of plotted alignment stand types exist primarily within stands 

that have had harvest activity. There is acreage of unharvested types; however, the ratio is 

greater to harvested versus non. Therefore, it could be assumed that the PCGP snag data for 

Open and Small to Medium tree size types would be less than that found in DecAID inventory 

plots which as stated in the DecAID query as “unharvested” or “natural” condition. As stated 

earlier from DecAID literature, plot information used from wildlife studies done specifically in 

dense snag clumps and extrapolated for interpretation as stand averages flaws the process. 

Landscape visitation knowledge of lands interior, and exterior, to the project area indicates this 

in the affirmative. Second, DecAID uses only snag information at a 10” diameter at breast height 

size class and greater in two categories of 10 to 19.7” dbh, and 20” dbh and larger. PCGP data 

uses smaller size classes of snag data due to identified wildlife usage in less than 10” dbh dead 

trees [small bird nests, wood rats, vole vertical ladder to green tree tops, squirrel nests, etc.]. As 

such, this less than 10” dbh data appears valid and relative to wildlife species [i.e. prey base for 

owls, hawks, martens, myotis, and others which could be linked from literature]. 

H-448
Appendix H-13 

Management Indicator Species 

Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline

H-449
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline, LP 

Management Indicator Species

Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project 

April 2009 

H-450
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

 H13-i 

Table of Contents 

1.0 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1 

2.0 Umpqua National Forest..................................................................................................... 3 

2.1 Pileated Woodpecker ...................................................................................................... 5 

2.2 Primary Cavity Excavators (nesters) ............................................................................ 10 

2.3 Pine Marten................................................................................................................... 15 

2.4 Roosevelt Elk................................................................................................................ 17 

2.5 Columbian Black-tail Deer ........................................................................................... 23 

2.6 Peregrine Falcon ........................................................................................................... 28 

2.7 Bald Eagle..................................................................................................................... 30 

2.8 Water Quality Indicator Species ................................................................................... 33 

3.0 Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest ............................................................................. 40 

3.1 Columbian Black-tailed Deer ....................................................................................... 42 

3.2 Roosevelt Elk................................................................................................................ 48 

3.3 Pine Marten................................................................................................................... 54 

3.4 Pileated Woodpecker .................................................................................................... 57 

3.5 Primary Cavity Excavators (nesters) ............................................................................ 60 

4.0 Fremont-Winema National Forest .................................................................................... 65 

4.1 Pileated Woodpecker .................................................................................................... 67 

4.2 Northern Goshawk........................................................................................................ 67 

4.3 Three-Toed Woodpecker .............................................................................................. 67 

4.4 Pine Marten................................................................................................................... 68 

4.5 Bald Eagle..................................................................................................................... 71 

4.6 Mule Deer ..................................................................................................................... 73 

4.7 Resident Trout............................................................................................................... 77 

5.0 References......................................................................................................................... 80 

List of Tables 

Table 2-1 Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1) to Corresponding 

Wildlife Habitat Categories (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in the Umpqua National Forest ..4 

Table 2-2 Data Compiled for 20-years and Trends of Population Indices (Numbers 

Counted per BBS Route per Year) of Primary Cavity Excavator MIS in the Vicinity 

of the PCGP Project..........................................................................................................12

Table 2-3 Harvest Statistics for Roosevelt Elk within the Evans Creek Wildlife Management 

Unit 29, 2003-2007............................................................................................................19 

Table 2-4 Population Trends and Annual Productivity for Roosevelt Elk within the Evans Creek 

Wildlife Management Unit 29, 2000-2008.........................................................................19 

Table 2-5 Harvest Statistics for Black-Tailed Deer within the Evans Creek Wildlife Management 

Unit 29, 2003-2007............................................................................................................24 

Table 2-6 Population Trends, Annual Productivity, and Estimated Overwinter Survival for Juvenile 

Black-tailed Deer within the Evans Creek Wildlife Management Unit 29, 2000-2008......25 

Table 2-5 Summary of Habitats Removed by the Proposed Action from Riparian Zones 

Extending One-Site Potential Tree Height From Stream Banks and Riparian Reserves, 

Extending up to Two Site-Potential Tree Heights From Stream Banks on The Umpqua 

National Forest..................................................................................................................37 

H-451
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

 H13-ii 

Table 3-1 Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres1) to 

Corresponding Wildlife Habitat Categories (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in The Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest..........................................................................................41 

Table 3-2 Harvest Statistics for Black-Tailed Deer within the Rogue Wildlife Management 

Unit 30, 2003-2007............................................................................................................44 

Table 3-3 Population Trends, Annual Productivity, and Estimated Overwinter Survival for Juvenile 

Black-tailed Deer within the Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30, 2000-2008 ................45 

Table 3-4 Harvest Statistics for Roosevelt Elk within the Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30, 

2003-2007.........................................................................................................................49 

Table 3-5 Population Trends and Annual Productivity for Roosevelt Elk within the Rogue 

Wildlife Management Unit 30, 1998-2006.........................................................................49 

Table 3-6 Data Compiled for 20-years and Trends of Population Indices (Numbers Counted 

per BBS Route per Year) of Primary Cavity Excavator MIS in the Vicinity of the 

PCGP Project....................................................................................................................62 

Table 4-1 Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1

) to 

Corresponding Wildlife Habitat Categories (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in the 

Fremont-Winema National Forest.....................................................................................66 

Table 4-2 Harvest Statistics for Mule Deer within the Keno Wildlife Management Unit 31, 

2003-2007.........................................................................................................................74 

Table 4-3 Population Trends, Annual Productivity, and Estimated Overwinter Survival for 

Juvenile Mule Deer within the Keno Wildlife Management Unit 31, 2000-2008...............75 

Table 4-4 Summary of Habitats Removed by the Proposed Action from Riparian Zones 

Extending One-Site Potential Tree Height From Stream Banks and Riparian 

Reserves, Extending up to Two Site-Potential Tree Heights From Stream Banks 

on The Fremont-Winema National Forest ........................................................................78 

List of Figures 

Figure 2-1 20-year Trend in Pileated Woodpeckers Counted per BBS Route in the Vicinity of the 

PCGP Project......................................................................................................................8 

Figure 2-2 Trend in Productivity (Calf per Adult Cow) of Roosevelt Elk in the Evans Creek Wildlife 

Management Unit 29 Which Coincides with the PCGP Project on the Umpqua National 

Forest. ...............................................................................................................................20 

Figure 2-3 Total Bald Eagles Counted During Midwinter Surveys, 1988-2005, on the Rogue River in 

the Vicinity of Medford and Gold Hill, Oregon...................................................................31 

Figure 3-1 Trend in ODFW’s Population Index (see footnote to Table 3-5) for Roosevelt Elk in the 

Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30 Which Coincides with the PCGP Project on the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest..............................................................................50 

Figure 3-2 20-year Trend in Common (Northern) Flickers Counted per BBS Route in the Vicinity of 

the PCGP Project..............................................................................................................63 

Figure 4-1 Mean Bald Eagles per Count Route Counted During Midwinter Surveys on 9 Count 

Routes, 1988-2005, in the Vicinity of the Klamath River and Upper Klamath Lake, 

Oregon. .............................................................................................................................72 

Figure 4-2 Trend in Days per Mule Deer Harvested within Keno Wildlife Management Unit 31, 2003-

2007. .................................................................................................................................74 

H-452
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-1 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) requires each National Forest to identify 

Management Indicator Species (MIS) in the planning process and for fish and wildlife habitats to 

be managed to maintain and improve habitat of selected MIS. MIS are “plant and animal 

species, communities, or special habitats selected for emphasis in planning, and which are 

monitored during forest plan implementation in order to assess the effects of management 

activities on their populations and the populations of other species with similar habitat needs 

which they may represent” (Forest Service Manual 2620.5). The role of MIS and the criteria to 

select MIS are described in 36 CFR 219.19 (a)(1) and Forest Service Manual 2600 (1982 Rule): 

“In order to estimate the effects of each [Forest Plan] alternative on fish and wildlife 

populations, certain vertebrate and/or invertebrate species present in the area shall be 

identified and selected as management indicator species and the reasons for their selection 

will be stated. These species shall be selected because their population changes are 

believed to indicate the effects of management activities. In the selection of management 

indicator species, the following categories shall be represented where appropriate: 

Endangered and threatened plant and animal species identified on State and Federal lists 

for the planning area; species with special habitat needs that may be influenced significantly 

by planned management programs; species commonly hunted, fished or trapped; non-game 

species of special interest; and additional plant or animal species selected because their 

population changes are believed to indicate the effects of management activities on other 

species of selected major biological communities or on water quality.” 

Important characteristics of MIS include their capability of being effectively monitored and that 

relationships between species and their habitats and response to the effects of management 

activities of interest are well understood. MIS and their habitats have been used as part of a 

strategy to monitor implementation of Forest Plans and the effects to wildlife and plants. By 

monitoring the habitat changes of these particular indicator species, the effects of management 

activities on the associated animal communities can theoretically be determined. Since the 

habitats of MIS cover the majority of the vegetative seral stages on a specific National Forest, it 

is assumed that meeting the requirements of those species will assure that the needs of 

associated species will be met (USFS, 1990). 

This assessment examines potential effects to MIS and to concomitant wildlife resources which 

may result from implementation of activities associated with the Jordan Cove Energy and Pacific 

Connector Pipeline Project. The many components of this Proposed Action have been 

described by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in their Draft Environmental 

Impact Statement (DEIS) released in August 2008. Portions of the Proposed Action will cross 

the Umpqua, Rogue River-Siskiyou, and Fremont-Winema National Forests. 

This analysis identifies MIS on each National Forest that will be potentially affected by the 

Proposed Action, the management indicators that each MIS represents, management goals, 

standards, guidelines, and prescriptions for the management indicators, the status of MIS 

habitats and populations on National Forests or vicinities if known, the habitats that will be 

affected by the Proposed Action, and the effects of the Proposed Action in relation to achieving 

Forest Plan standards. Wherever possible, the analysis in this document includes available 

information on recent population trends, though in most instances population indices in one form 

or another have been developed from limited data or used directly if available from other 

sources. 

Proposed Action. The Proposed Action crosses Coos, Douglas, Jackson, and Klamath 

Counties in Southwest Oregon. The Umpqua, Rogue River-Siskiyou, and Fremont-Winema 

H-453
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-2 

National Forests will be crossed by the Proposed Action which includes a liquefied natural gas 

facility in Jordan Cove (Coos Bay) and a 234-mile natural gas pipeline from Jordan Cove to 

Malin, Oregon. 

To construct the pipeline, Pacific Connector must remove vegetation, including trees, from 

within the construction right-of-way, temporary extra work areas, and other limited locations 

(rock disposal sites, hydrostatic test sites, and temporary access roads). In addition, Pacific 

Connector will also utilize uncleared storage areas (UCSAs) at various locations along the route 

to store forest slash, stumps, and dead and downed log materials that will eventually be 

scattered across the right-of-way after construction. UCSAs will mostly be located in dense, 

mature forested areas, in areas of steep slopes, and in areas where the route follows steep, 

narrow ridgelines. However, to minimize overall project disturbance, UCSAs will not be cleared 

of trees during construction. 

Pacific Connector will be restoring some portions of impacted habitats by revegetating them with 

native species of grasses and shrubs, and replanting conifers within affected forested areas. 

Restoration of grasslands, shrublands, and early successional forest stages will occur within 

shorter time spans than restoration of mid-seral forests. In some cases, Pacific Connector will 

enhance or create habitat features through, for example, girdling trees to create snags, and will 

be supporting agencies’ treatments of forested stands through pre-commercial thinning projects 

that may enhance forest understories and accelerate development of late successional growth 

characteristics in treated conifer stands. 

Pacific Connector must retain a maintenance corridor that is 30 feet wide centered on the 

pipeline. That corridor will be maintained in an herbaceous and/or shrub state during the life of 

the project. Direct restoration of late successional-old growth forests >80 years old cannot 

occur during the life of the project, assumed to be 50 years. To mitigate for losses of late 

successional-old growth forests, Pacific Connector has developed a Compensatory Mitigation 

Plan (CMP). The CMP includes funding for implementation of projects proposed by the Forest 

Service on each National Forest crossed. Pacific Connector is confident that funding such 

projects will offset impacts within LSRs, Riparian Reserves, and to species dependent on 

affected habitats within those land allocations on each forest to at least a neutral level. That is, 

implementation of agency projects will mitigate effects by the PCGP Project so that levels of 

ecological services provided after the impact are the same as those provided before the impact. 

A more detailed description of the project, including Purpose and Need, can be found in the 

Final Environmental Impact Statement. 

H-454
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-3 

2.0 UMPQUA NATIONAL FOREST 

Species. MIS for the Umpqua National Forest include northern spotted owl, pileated 

woodpecker, pine marten, bald eagle, peregrine falcon, Roosevelt elk, Columbian black-tail 

deer, and primary cavity nesters. Indicator species for water quality on the Forest include 

summer and winter steelhead runs and resident trout. The northern spotted owl, pine marten, 

and pileated woodpecker represent various mature and old growth conifer habitats. Primary 

cavity excavators represent dead and defective tree habitats. Big game winter range is 

represented by Roosevelt elk and black-tail deer. 

The bald eagle and peregrine falcon were listed as threatened or endangered species requiring 

special management at the time of the Forest Plan’s release, but have since been delisted. 

However, they are included in this discussion because they still remain indicator species under 

the current Forest Plan. The northern spotted owl is now listed under the Endangered Species 

Act and its status is covered extensively under separate cover in the Biological Assessment and 

is not addressed here. 

Habitats. MIS on the Umpqua National Forest are associated with a variety of habitats found 

throughout the forest. However, the PCGP Project will affect only those habitats included in 

Table 2-1, below. In Table 2-1, the areas (acres) of existing forested habitats (Southwest 

Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest is the only one) within one or more seral stages 

(including clearcut-regenerating forest, mid-seral forest, late successional-old growth forest) that 

will be removed during construction and affected during operation are provided in addition to all 

other affected habitat categories. Effects by the project have been summarized by project 

component (facility) during construction and during operation of the pipeline. Generally, most 

long-term disturbance by the project is due to a 30-foot wide maintenance corridor, centered on 

the pipeline, that is maintained in an herbaceous and/or shrub state for the life of the project. 

Table 2-1 is referenced in discussions for each MIS in the sections, below. 

The forest habitat affected – Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest (Johnson and 

O’Neil, 2001) – corresponds to two vegetation categories described by the Oregon Gap 

Analysis Project (Oregon Gap; Kagan et al., 1999) and mapped in the project area. Those 

vegetation categories include 1) Douglas-fir-White Fir/Tanoak-Madrone Mixed Forest, and 2) 

Douglas-fir Dominant-Mixed Conifer Forest (Kagan et al., 1999). 

Douglas-fir-White Fir/Tanoak-Madrone Mixed Forest: Multi-layered forest of mixed conifer and 

mixed deciduous forest makes up this vegetation type. It always contains Douglas-fir, with other 

co-dominants (i.e., white fir, incense cedar, sugar pine and rarely western white pine). The 

subcanopy layers contain shade-tolerant trees, including tanoak, madrone, chinquapin, Pacific 

dogwood, and California laurel. Shrub and herb layers are generally well represented, and this 

forest type is found in low to mid elevations (Kagan et al., 1999). 

Douglas-fir Dominant-Mixed Conifer Forest: Single-layer forest canopy is typical, although 

stand structure can be diverse in undisturbed late seral stands. There is a wide range of 

canopy closure based on management practice, disturbance history, and microsite. Douglas-fir 

is dominant, with a variety of coniferous trees including white fir, incense cedar, western white 

pine, ponderosa pine, and sugar pine. Understory vegetation is usually diverse and rich in 

species, and this forest type is found at mid elevations (Kagan et al., 1999). 

Other habitat types affected by the Proposed Action within the Umpqua National Forest (Table 

2-1) include: 

H-455
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-4 

Forested Wetlands or Palustrine Forest: This type is typically multi-storied canopy (trees >18 

feet tall). Deciduous trees generally dominate in eastern Oregon, including black cottonwood, 

white alder, quaking aspen, and peachleaf willow. In western Oregon, conifer trees such as 

western redcedar, western hemlock, Douglas-fir, and grand fir tend to dominate the canopy. 

This forest type is located in narrow riparian zones along flowing waterbodies (Kagan et al., 

1999). 

Non-Forested Wetland: This type is a composite of Palustrine Shrubland vegetation and 

Palustrine Emergent vegetation types. Palustrine Shrubland is dominated by dense, tall shrubs, 

typically willow species. Other shrubs found could include chokecherry, bog birch, bog 

blueberry, snowberry, wax currant, and hardhack. It is most prominent along low gradient 

streams in broad valleys and pluvial basins of eastern Oregon (Kagan et al., 1999). Palustrine 

Emergent vegetation is made up of freshwater herbaceous wetlands that contain medium tall (2-

4 feet) to tall (>4 feet) grass or grass-like plants. Common herbaceous plants include cattails, 

bulrush species, and burreed. Grasses associated with this category are blue wildrye, tufted 

hair grass, bluejoint weedgrass, reed canarygrass, American sloughgrass, and northern 

mannagrass (Kagan et al., 1999). 

Developed-Urban and Mixed Environs: This type can include urban areas located in cities and 

municipalities (Kagan et al., 1999), areas associated with the sale of products and commercial 

services (Anderson et al., 1976) and industrial sites, typified by light to heavy manufacturing 

and buildings associated with mining, including rock quarries (Anderson et al., 1976).

Roads: This type is made up of non-vegetated, manmade highways and roads, either paved or 

un-paved. It is often included in the urban category (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001; Kagan et al., 

1999; Anderson et al., 1976). 

Open Water includes rivers, creeks, and other linear waterbodies. It may also include nonvegetated, smooth and sloping accumulations of sand and gravel along shorelines (Anderson et 

al., 1976) as well as ditches and canals since they contain excavated drainages or conveyance 

features that drain agricultural or upland areas. 

Table 2-1 

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1

) to Corresponding Wildlife 

Habitat Categories (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in the Umpqua National Forest 

Riparian Developed 

Facility 

Forest –Woodland Seral Stage 2

Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest

Forested Wetland Non-Forested Wetland Developed-Urban and Mixed Environs Roads Open WaterTotal

CONSTRUCTION 

DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities

L-O 72.18 

M-S 22.52 

C-R 24.50 

Construction 

Right-of-Way

Tot 119.20 

0.04 5.48 0.10 124.82 

H-456
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-5 

Riparian Developed 

Facility 

Forest –Woodland Seral Stage 2

Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood ForestForested Wetland Non-Forested Wetland Developed-Urban and Mixed Environs Roads Open WaterTotal

L-O 0.06 

M-S 0.11 

C-R 0.05 

Hydrostatic Discharge 

Sites 3

Tot 0.22 

 0.01 0.23 

L-O 

M-S 

C-R Rock Source/Disposal 

Tot 

 2.32 0.01 2.33 

L-O 13.37 

M-S 11.81 

C-R 5.57 

Temporary Extra Work 

Areas

Tot 30.75 

0.05 7.30 6.92 0.11 45.13 

L-O 35.76 

M-S 8.69 

C-R 1.26 Uncleared Storage Areas 4

Tot 45.71 

 0.44 46.15 

L-O 121.37 

M-S 43.13 

C-R 31.38 

Total Construction 

Disturbance

Tot 195.88 

0.09 0 9.62 12.86 0.21 218.66 

OPERATION 

DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 22.31 

M-S 7.40 

C-R 7.71 

30-foot Maintenance 

Corridor

Tot 37.42 

0.01 2.03 0.03 39.49 

L-O 22.31 

M-S 7.40 

C-R 7.71 

Total Operation 

Disturbance 

Tot 37.42 

0.01 0 0 2.03 0.03 39.49 

1

 Acres disturbed were evaluated using GIS; footprints for each component (temporary construction right-of-way, 

temporary extra work areas, temporary access roads, uncleared storage areas, pipe storage yards, aboveground 

facilities, permanent easement, and 30-foot maintenance corridor) were overlaid on the digitized vegetation 

coverage. 2

 Forest-Woodland Seral Stages are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, MidSeral assumed to be ≥40 but ≤80 years old; C-R, Clearcut-Regenerating Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old. 3

 Small brush or trees may be cleared by a rubber-tired rotary or flail motor (brush hog) or by hand with 

machetes/chainsaws. No soil disturbance will occur. A rubber-tired or track hoe will be utilized to lay the 

discharge line and to remove the saturated haybales or filter bags upon completion of hydrostatic discharge. 4

 PCGP uncleared storage areas (UCSAs) will not be cleared of trees during construction. These areas will be used 

to store forest slash, stumps and dead and downed log materials that will be removed and scattered across the 

right-of-way after construction during restoration and are considered as temporary insignificant habitat 

modifications. 

2.1 Pileated Woodpecker 

This large woodpecker was identified as an indicator species because of the number and size of 

snags it requires and its need for mature stands of timber for nesting habitat. The species may 

provide information for other cavity excavating species and animal communities associated with 

late successional forest. The pileated woodpecker requires the largest snags of any of the 

primary cavity nesters on the Umpqua National Forest (USFS, 1990a) 

H-457
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-6 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for pileated woodpeckers and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. 

• Provide one habitat area for every 12,000 to 13,000 acres of suitable habitat. Habitats 

will be distributed in such a way that any given habitat unit will be connected to two or 

more other suitable habitats. 

• When possible, wildlife trees (snags and green culls) will be left standing in areas of 

timber harvest. This habitat will be in addition to that provided by implementing the snag 

habitat prescriptions. 

Management Prescriptions. 

Prescription C5-VII, Wildlife – Pileated Woodpecker, Dedicated applies to 600-acre areas with 

the purpose of providing suitable reproduction habitat for pileated woodpeckers. 

• Wildlife and Fish: Vegetation manipulation or structural improvement designed to 

enhance wildlife permitted. Activities designed to produce the desired number of snags 

and dead and down material per acre on a continuing basis will be featured and receive 

high priority. Areas for nonstructural improvement are the priority for this prescription. 

• Timber: No timber harvest or salvage in the 300-acre reproduction area. An adjacent 

300 acres will be managed to provide snags at the minimum rate of two snags per acre 

>12 inches dbh. Six green trees per acre will be left to provide for future snags. A 

minimum of one snag >20 inches dbh per 6 acres will be provided. Commercial and 

personal-use firewood cutting shall be an incidental secondary product of timber harvest. 

Firewood cutting and gathering shall be limited to that needed for onsite recreational 

use. 

• Facilities: Generally no construction of new roads or corridors in a 300-acre 

reproduction area, except where vital to serve adjacent areas. Exceptions will be on a 

case-by-case basis. Acreage lost to roads or corridors will be compensated by additions 

to the reproduction areas. Normal maintenance of existing roads is permitted. Corridors 

may be allowed within the 300-acre area adjacent to the reproduction area, as 

determined by the NEPA process. Full road activities to meet timber objectives will 

occur in the 300-acre area adjacent to the reproduction area. 

• Protection: No snag removal for pre-suppression purposes. No insect or disease 

control unless it is catastrophic in nature (threatening 50 percent or more of the stand). 

Prescription C5-VIII, Wildlife – Pileated Woodpecker, Managed directs that an area of 2,011 

acres be managed with a 130-year rotation. The prescription will be applied to timber stands to 

proved suitable habitat characteristics for the pileated woodpecker on at least 600 acres 

properly located at any point in time. 

• Wildlife and Fish: Vegetation manipulation or structural improvement designed to 

enhance wildlife permitted. Activities designed to produce the desired number of snags 

and dead and down material per acre on a continuing basis will be featured and receive 

high priority. Areas for nonstructural improvement are priority for this prescription. 

• Timber: Timber stands will be managed to maintain at least 300 acres >20 inches dbh 

at all times. Salvage is not permitted around the 600-acre designated core area. 

Firewood cutting shall be an incidental secondary product of timber harvest. Firewood 

cutting and gathering shall be limited to that needed for onsite recreational use. 

• Facilities: Replacement areas have no special restrictions for the first 90 years of the 

rotation period. During the last 40 years of the rotation, only arterial roads will be 

H-458
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-7 

maintained. All other roads will be obliterated or maintained only to protect soil and 

water values. For the periphery portion of replacement area, full road management is 

permitted even during last 40 years of rotation period. Utility/transportation corridors 

may be allowed pending determination by the NEPA (EA) process. 

• Protection: No snag removal for pre-suppression purposes. No insect or disease 

control unless it is catastrophic in nature (threatening 50 percent or more of the stand). 

Also see Prescription C5-VI, Wildlife – Snag Management Areas below for Primary Cavity 

Excavators. 

Management Areas.

Two Management Areas, MA 10 and MA 11, in which the above prescriptions are directed 

toward managing habitats utilized by pileated woodpeckers, will be affected by the Proposed 

Action: 

Management Area 10 Direction. Pileated woodpecker prescriptions (C5-Vll and VlIl, discussed 

above) are assigned to locations that meet the distribution requirements set out in the 

Forestwide wildlife standards and guidelines. Where these locations overlap other prescription 

assignments that harvest timber, the managed prescription (C5-VIII) is assigned. Where these 

locations overlap other prescription assignments that do not harvest timber, the dedicated 

prescription (C5-VII) is assigned (USFS, 1990b). 

Management Area 11 Direction. Same as for MA 10. 

Species’ Status in the Project Area. Based on the reductions in suitable habitat on the Umpqua 

National Forest due to logging and associated activities during the last several decades, it could 

be expected that populations have been reduced by approximately 25 to 30 percent (USFS, 

1990a). Even with the current snag management policy, future logging will continue to reduce 

this species' population. Also, the use of timber rotations of less than 100 years may not 

produce trees of suitable size to meet the nesting requirements of this species (USFS, 1990a). 

Data have been collected on 18 National Biological Survey Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) routes 

(Sauer et al., 2008) that are within the region of the PCGP Project, with 3 in northern California 

and 15 in southwest Oregon. Numbers of each species that were reported on each route were 

compiled and averaged (numbers per route) for each year, 1988 through 2007, to develop 

indices of populations in the region of southwest Oregon/northern California. During the 20-year 

period, an average of 1.21 pileated woodpeckers were observed per BBS route (average of 

10.25 routes reporting per year) each year. Over the past 20 years, pileated woodpeckers 

appear to be significantly increasing (P=0.012) on BBS routes within the PCGP Project vicinity 

(Figure 2-1). 

Habitat. Pileated woodpeckers are found primarily in dense mixed confer forests in late seral 

stages, or in bottom land deciduous stands (Marshall et al., 2006). The birds require snags 50 

feet or greater in height and 20 inches in diameter at a 50-foot height, down logs, diseased 

trees, and a fairly high density of snags of all sizes (USFS, 1990a). This late seral association 

indicates the need to utilize large trees for nesting, foraging, roost sites, and cover from 

predators (Marshall et al., 2006). On the Umpqua National Forest, mature to old growth stands 

that have not been salvage-logged are generally considered prime habitat for pileated 

woodpeckers. The hemlock/white fir, silver fir/Shasta red fir, Douglas-fir/ponderosa pine 

ecoclasses are considered capable habitats for the species (USFS, 1990a) 

H-459
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-8 

Figure 2-1 

20-year Trend in Pileated Woodpeckers Counted per BBS Route 

in the Vicinity of the PCGP Project. 

Pileated woodpeckers are generally associated with Southwest Oregon Mixed ConiferHardwood Forests and Westside Riparian Wetlands – both are habitat type associations 

described by Johnson and O’Neil (2001) – that coincide with the PCGP Project (Table 2-1). 

Since they are dependent on downed wood and snags, pileated woodpeckers would be most 

likely to inhabit the old growth or late successional stands (≥80 years old) of Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest that are included in Table 2-1. They are, however, closely 

associated with small, medium, large, and giant tree forested stands that provide structural 

conditions with decadent wood and snags (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). A general association of 

a species with a given habitat applies to an adaptable species that is supported by a number of 

habitats that provide for its maintenance and viability, while a close association is indication of a 

species’ dependency on a specific habitat for part or all of its life history requirements (feeding 

and reproduction) implying that the species has an essential need for a particular habitat for its 

maintenance and viability (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). 

Forest Management Activities. Logging, fire control, and road building activities that reduce the 

number of snags or potential snags, or convert mature stands to early successional timber 

stages have the greatest detriment on pileated woodpeckers. Past fire management practices 

have had a significant impact on their habitat. In the past, all snags within a 200-foot distance 

around the outside perimeter of harvest units were felled for fire protection purposes. This 

practice is no longer in use, although snags continue to be felled on a case-by-case basis where 

fire and safety concerns are high (USFS, 1990a). 

Current management for the pileated woodpecker is incorporated in Forest and Regional snag 

management policies. This management is designed to maintain a well-distributed population 

of all cavity nesting species by providing habitat for 40 percent of potential population capability. 

The results of applying snag management practices to timber sale operations have been 

variable (USFS, 1990a) 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Pileated woodpeckers could be negatively impacted during 

construction of the PCGP Project. Direct mortality of young could occur if nest trees are cleared 

H-460
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-9 

prior to young fledging. Since nest excavation lasts from late March through early May, eggs 

are present in May and early June, and nestlings are present from late May through early July 

(Marshall et al., 2006), tree felling during those periods could directly impact young birds. While 

adults would be able to escape temporary disturbances, adult birds could abandon nests, 

leaving eggs and chicks vulnerable to predation and the elements. However, tree felling within 

the Umpqua National Forest will occur after the breeding period for northern spotted owls, from 

October 1 to the end of February, and will likewise avoid impacting nesting pileated 

woodpeckers. 

Clearing the right-of-way will modify habitat, changing the seral stage and tree species makeup 

of occupied forests. Construction will remove 121.37 acres of late successional-old growth 

Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest and 0.09 acres of Westside Riparian Forest 

in Umpqua National Forest (Table 2-1). Additional potential long-term effects to pileated 

woodpeckers will be removal of 43.13 acres of mid-seral conifer-hardwood forest (≥40 years but 

≤80 years old), thereby setting back seral development that would be expected to eventually 

provide suitable habitat elements for pileated woodpeckers, including downed wood and snags. 

The amount of late successional-old growth habitat that would be removed by the project is not 

expected to have an impact on the local or regional population of pileated woodpeckers which 

have home ranges of up to 1000 hectares or 2,500 acres (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). If all of 

the impacted late successional-old growth Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest 

(121.37 acres) occurred within a bird’s or pair’s one home range, less than 5 percent of one 

home range would be affected. More likely, the Proposed Action would span several home 

ranges and the overall effect to any single one would be less than 5 percent removal. 

If pileated woodpecker home ranges are assumed to be circular, the diameter of a 2,500-acre 

home range would be 11,700 feet. Blasting at one edge of that home range would attenuate to 

30 dBA at the far edge of the home range and would attenuate to ambient noise (assumed to be 

40 dBA) 4,630 feet away or a distance equal to 40 percent the diameter of a home range. 

Noise due to construction would be a short term effect (restricted to the period of constriction) to 

pileated woodpeckers and expected to affect them within only a portion of their home ranges. 

Mitigation. Mitigation measures that would minimize impacts to pileated woodpeckers include 

planting trees within the right-of-way after construction. Conifers would be planted to within 15 

feet of each side of the pipeline centerline. After tree planting, there will be 37.42 acres of 

former forest (22.31 acres of late successional-old growth, 7.40 acres of mid-seral forest, and 

7.71 acres of clear cut-regenerating forest that will remain in an herbaceous and/or shrub state 

within the 30-foot maintenance corridor during the life of the project (Table 2-1). 

Noise from blasting, if it is required during construction, will be minimized through application of 

various measures. Mitigation measures commonly applied to blasting of this type include 

drilling small (2.5-inch) charge holes, stemming the blast holes with sand and placing inert 

material on top of the blast area (Michael Minor & Associates, 2008). 

In Umpqua National Forest, trees will be felled along approximately 17 miles of the proposed 

construction right-of-way in Year 1 beginning October 1 and continuing through February 28 of 

Year 2 where known or predicted spotted owl nest patches are within 0.25 mile of the proposed 

project. Felling trees during this time period will avoid directly impacting young birds during the 

nesting season. 

H-461
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-10 

To mitigate for loss of cavities and snags within the construction right-of-way, Pacific Connector 

will create snags in large trees strategically left on the edge of the construction right-of-way by 

topping and or girdling trees. In addition, the Forest Service has proposed creating snags and 

placing large wood in habitats adjacent to the proposed pipeline to meet the management 

objectives of snag densities and enhance areas deficient in coarse woody material. The 

proposal would treat 700 acres and would accelerate the development of late successional 

habitat characteristics of structure and diversity (snags/large wood) including suitable nesting 

structures for pileated woodpeckers (see the CMP). The project would also reduce localized 

fuel loads while improving habitat in deficient stands (large wood) and provide long-term 

structure in the event of fire since larger logs maintain moisture longer and are less likely to be 

fully consumed by fire. 

In addition, Pacific Connector will fund other projects proposed by the Forest Service on the 

Umpqua National Forest that include decommissioning or closing 13 miles of roads, commercial 

and/or pre-commercial thinning 2,800 acres to accelerate development of late successional and 

old growth habitat characteristic among other objectives, and reallocate 585 acres from matrix 

to LSR designation so that forested habitat within former Matrix lands will be managed to obtain 

late successional forest characteristics. Those additional projects would provide benefits to 

pileated woodpeckers within the Umpqua National Forest. 

During construction, potential impact to nesting pileated woodpeckers and other species by 

predatory corvids will be addressed by assuring that all contractors practice appropriate and 

responsible trash disposal. 

Forest Plan Consistency. The Proposed Action will affect 207.89 acres in Management Area 10 

and 10.28 acres in Management Area 11. In Management Area 11, 6.98 acres of late 

successional-old growth forest will be cleared while 114.39 acres in those late seral stages will 

be removed from MA 10. The location of the Proposed Action relative to designated 300-acre 

reproduction areas and 300-acre adjacent areas – managed to provide snags – within each 

Management Area will determine whether or not the Proposed Action is consistent with 

Management Prescriptions. 

If the Proposed Action crosses a dedicated 300-acre reproduction area, the project would be 

inconsistent with Prescription C5-VII since no timber harvest or salvage in the 300-acre 

reproduction area is allowed. However, new corridors within the reproduction area may be 

allowed on a case-by–case basis, since Prescription C5-VII indicates that new corridors may be 

allowed within the 300-acre area adjacent to a reproductive area. Acreage lost to corridors will 

be compensated by additions to the affected reproductive area and would be analyzed through 

the NEPA process. Removal of snags within either Management Area by the Proposed Action 

is possible but inconsistent with Prescriptions C5-VII and C5-VIII, above. 

2.2 Primary Cavity Excavators (nesters) 

Primary cavity excavators have been identified as indicator species to represent the dead and 

defective tree (snag) component of conifer forest habitat. Primary cavity excavators that are 

identified in the Forest Plan as MIS are the pileated woodpecker (discussed above), acorn 

woodpecker, Lewis’s woodpecker, yellow-bellied sapsucker, Williamson’s sapsucker, hairy 

woodpecker, and downy woodpecker (USFS, 1990a). The yellow-bellied sapsucker is rare to 

Oregon, with only 19 site records in the state (Marshall et al., 2006). This sapsucker is common 

east of the Rocky Mountains, but is closely related to the red-breasted sapsucker, which is the 

only sapsucker commonly found in western Oregon (Marshall et al., 2006). 

H-462
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-11 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for primary cavity excavators and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines: 

• When possible, wildlife trees (snags and green culls) will be left standing in areas of 

timber harvest. This habitat will be in addition to that provided by implementing the 

snag habitat prescriptions. 

Management Prescription. 

Prescription C5-VI, Wildlife – Snag Management Areas – applies to any area scheduled for 

timber harvest where there is a need to provide snags for cavity-nesting birds. This prescription 

use at a rate of one acre per 100 acres of standard forest management prescription provides 10 

percent potential population capability for the 100 acres. 

• Wildlife and Fish: Snag densities needed to meet management requirement direction 

for cavity excavating birds must be provided within land areas that are generally no 

larger than normal harvest unit size (maximum 60 acres). These densities will be 

maintained through the full harvest rotation period. Snags provided above the 

management requirement (MR) level but that are needed to meet plan objectives will 

be distributed in order to: 

a. reduce likelihood of inter-specific crowding, 

b. increase likelihood of use by pairs, 

c. provide adequate numbers and types of snags throughout the rotation, and 

d. vegetation manipulation or structural improvement designed to enhance 

wildlife permitted. Activities designed to produce the desired number of snags 

and dead and down material per acre on a continuing basis will be featured and 

receive high priority. Areas for nonstructural improvement are priority for this 

prescription. 

• Timber: All snags and dead and down material will be left. Thirty-three percent of 

the existing volume in green trees will be left standing. Green trees left standing 

shall represent mix of size classes in the unharvested stand. No salvage permitted. 

No commercial or personal-use firewood cutting. Gathering of firewood is allowed 

only for on-site recreational use, but cutting for this use is not allowed. 

• Facilities: Utility/Transportation corridors may be allowed pending determination by 

the NEPA (EA) process. 

• Protection: No special restrictions on insect and disease control. 

Management Area 10 Direction. Adequate snag habitat must be provided in this management 

area to meet the 60 percent potential population capability (PPC) for cavity nesters. Other 

prescription assignments within the management area and immediately adjacent to the MA may 

contribute to meeting this objective. Once all contributions to snag habitat have been identified, 

prescription C5-VI (see below) is assigned and distributed on land suitable for timber production 

to meet the 60 percent PPC objective. 

Management Area 11 Direction. Same as in MA 10. 

Species Status in the Project Area. Based on reductions in suitable habitat due to logging and 

associated activities during the last several decades, it could be expected that populations have 

been reduced by 20 to 30 percent (USFS, 1990a). Minimum viable population levels for this 

H-463
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-12 

group of species are met by providing dead and defective trees at the 20 percent potential 

population capability as described in Wildlife Habitats in Managed Forests of the Blue 

Mountains of Oregon and Washington and Management of Wildlife and Fish Habitats in Forests 

in Western Oregon and Washington (Thomas, 1979). 

Data have been collected on 18 BBS routes (Sauer et al., 2008) that are within the region of the 

PCGP Project. Numbers of acorn woodpecker, Lewis’s woodpecker, Williamson’s sapsucker, 

hairy woodpecker, and downy woodpecker that were reported on each route were compiled and 

averaged (numbers per route) for each year, 1988 through 2007 (Table 2-2) to develop a 

population index. Only red-breasted sapsuckers were reported; no yellow-bellied sapsuckers 

were included in any of the BBS observations on the compiled routes in southwestern Oregon 

and northern California. 

During the 20-year period, an average of 7.43 acorn woodpeckers was observed per BBS route 

(average of 5.60 routes reporting per year) each year. Over the past 20 years, acorn 

woodpeckers appear to be significantly increasing (P=0.005) on BBS routes within the PCGP 

Project vicinity (Table 2-2). In addition to pileated woodpeckers discussed above, acorn 

woodpeckers are the only other species of cavity nesters included as a MIS with sufficient data 

to estimate 20-year population trends, indexed as annual counts per route. Regional 

populations of both species appear to be increasing. 

Table 2-2 

Data Compiled for 20-years and Trends of Population Indices (Numbers Counted per BBS Route 

per Year) of Primary Cavity Excavator MIS in the Vicinity of the PCGP Project 

Data Compiled for 20 Years, 1988-2007 

Cavity Nesting 

Species 

Average Number 

of Routes per 

Year with Species 

Average Annual 

Count of Species 

per Route Population Index Trend Comments 

Acorn Woodpecker 5.60 7.430 Significantly Increasing 

(P=0.005) none 

Lewis’s Woodpecker 3.95 1.138 Insufficient data Too few BBS routes 

Williamson’s Sapsucker 1.40 0.050 Insufficient data Too few BBS routes, too 

few observations 

Hairy Woodpecker 11.00 0.991 Insufficient data Too few observations per 

year 

Downy Woodpecker 8.95 0.710 Insufficient data Too few observations per 

year 

Habitat. Primary cavity excavators' habitat requirements are dead and defective trees of the 

appropriate diameter, height, and decay stage to meet the specific requirements of the various 

species. Found in both conifer and mixed conifer-deciduous, tree diameters required vary from 

6 inches to 20 inches or greater DBH. Dead tree heights vary from 6 feet to 50 feet or more 

(USFS, 1990a and Marshall et al., 2006). 

Except for Williamson’s sapsucker, the other four Primary Cavity Excavator MIS included in 

Table 2-2 are associated with Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forests. The acorn 

woodpecker has a close association with that habitat, but only when oak trees are present; the 

others are generally associated with Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forests. A 

close association of a species with a given habitat indicates that it is known to depend on a 

specific habitat for part or all of its life history requirements (feeding and reproduction) implying 

that the species has an essential need for a particular habitat for its maintenance and viability 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). A general association of a species with a given habitat applies to 

H-464
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-13 

an adaptable species that is supported by a number of habitats that provide for its maintenance 

and viability (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). 

Since they are dependent on snags, Primary Cavity Excavator MIS would be most likely to 

inhabit the old growth or late successional stands (≥80 years old) of Southwest Oregon Mixed 

Conifer-Hardwood Forest that are included in Table 2-1. Hairy woodpeckers, Williamson’s 

sapsucker, and Lewis’s woodpeckers have general associations with Westside Riparian 

Wetlands and downy woodpeckers are closely associated with that habitat, while acorn 

woodpeckers have no association with that habitat type. 

Forest Management Activities. Past fire management practices have reduced the amount of 

snag habitat. Because snags are more susceptible to fire than green trees and present control 

problems when accidentally ignited, they were systematically removed in timber sale and in 

heavy recreation use areas. In addition, snags are regularly removed from clearcut logging 

areas because they present a safety hazard to aerial fertilizers, herbicide applicators, and tree 

planters. 

Current management for primary cavity excavators is designed to provide habitat on a 

continuing basis at the 40 percent potential population capability level or higher. This is 

accomplished by identifying small, suitable snag management areas throughout commercial 

forest land at the time of individual timber sale planning. These areas, plus others, are 

managed to provide suitable snags on a continuing basis (USFS, 1990a). 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Primary Cavity Excavators could be negatively impacted during 

construction of the PCGP Project. Direct mortality of young could occur if nest trees are cleared 

prior to young fledging. Young of acorn woodpeckers remain in nest cavities through early 

September, young Williamson’s sapsuckers fledge by late July, downy woodpeckers remain in 

nest cavities through late July, and fledgling hairy woodpeckers have been observed in late 

July. Fledged Lewis’s woodpeckers leave the nest area by early August (Marshall et al., 2006). 

Tree felling during those periods could directly impact young birds. While adults would be able 

to escape temporary disturbances, adult birds could abandon nests, leaving eggs and chicks 

vulnerable to predation and the elements. Tree felling within the Umpqua National Forest will 

occur after the breeding period for northern spotted owls, from October 1 to the end of February, 

and would avoid impacting nesting primary cavity excavators. 

Clearing the right-of-way will modify habitat, changing the seral stage and tree species makeup 

of occupied forests. Construction will remove 121.37 acres of late successional-old growth 

Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest and 0.09 acres of Westside Riparian Forest 

(Table 2-1). Additional potential long-term effects to Primary Cavity Excavators will be removal 

of 43.13 acres of mid-seral conifer-hardwood forest (≥40 years but ≤80 years old), thereby 

setting back seral development that would be expected to eventually provide suitable habitat 

elements including snags. 

Unlike the large home ranges of pileated woodpeckers, those of the other Primary Cavity 

Excavator MIS are relatively small, ranging from 10 ha (25 acres) for Lewis’s woodpecker, 

downy woodpecker, and hairy woodpecker to 50 ha (124 acres) for Williamson’s sapsucker 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). While the amount of late successional-old growth habitat that 

would be removed by the project is not expected to impact local or regional populations of 

Primary Cavity Excavators, home ranges of several individuals or pairs could be affected. Since 

acorn woodpeckers are colonial breeders, multiple individuals could be affected if the Proposed 

Action removes occupied nesting habitats. 

H-465
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-14 

If Primary Cavity Excavator MIS’ home ranges are assumed to be circular, the diameter of a 25-

acre home range would be 1,170 feet and that of a 124-acre home range would be 2,600 feet. 

Blasting at one edge of a home range would attenuate to 55 dBA (at 1,170 feet) or 46 dBA (at 

2,600 feet) at the far edges of the home range, depending on home range size. Noise due to 

construction would be a short term effect to Primary Cavity Excavators and expected to affect 

them through home ranges since noise levels would be above ambient levels (assumed to be 

40 dBA) throughout species’ home ranges that are adjacent to the construction right-of-way. 

Mitigation. Mitigation measures that would minimize impacts to pileated woodpeckers include 

planting trees within the right-of-way after construction. Conifers would be planted to within 15 

feet of each side of the pipeline centerline. After tree planting, there will be 37.42 acres of 

former forest (22.31 acres of late successional-old growth, 7.40 acres of mid-seral forest, and 

7.71 acres of clear cut-regenerating forest) that will remain in an herbaceous and/or shrub state 

within the 30-foot maintenance corridor during the life of the project (Table 2-1). 

Noise from blasting, if it is required during construction, will be minimized through application of 

various measures. Mitigation measures commonly applied to blasting of this type include 

drilling small (2.5-inch) charge holes, stemming the blast holes with sand and placing inert 

material on top of the blast area (Michael Minor & Associates, 2008). 

In Umpqua National Forest, trees will be felled along approximately 17 miles of the proposed 

construction right-of-way in Year 1 beginning October 1 and continuing through February 28 of 

Year 2 where known or predicted spotted owl nest patches are within 0.25 mile of the proposed 

project. Felling trees during this time period will avoid directly impacting young birds during the 

nesting season. 

To mitigate for loss of cavities and snags within the construction right-of-way, Pacific Connector 

will create snags in large trees strategically left on the edge of the construction right-of-way by 

topping and or girdling trees. In addition, the Forest Service has proposed creating snags and 

placing large wood in habitats adjacent to the proposed pipeline to meet the management 

objectives of snag densities and enhance areas deficient in coarse woody material. The 

proposal would treat 700 acres and has been incorporated into the CMP and would accelerate 

the development of late successional habitat characteristics of structure and diversity 

(snags/large wood) including suitable nesting structures for pileated woodpeckers. The project 

would also reduce localized fuel loads while improving habitat in deficient stands (large wood) 

and provide long-term structure in the event of fire since larger logs maintain moisture longer 

and are less likely to be fully consumed by fire. In addition, Pacific Connector will fund other 

projects proposed by the Forest Service on the Umpqua National Forest that include 

decommissioning or closing 13 miles of roads, commercial and/or pre-commercial thinning of 

2,800 acres to accelerate development of late successional and old growth habitat characteristic 

among other objectives, and reallocating 585 acres from matrix to LSR designation so that 

forested habitat within former matrix lands will be managed to obtain late successional forest 

characteristics. Those additional projects would provide benefits to other primary cavity 

excavators within the Umpqua National Forest. 

Forest Plan Consistency. The Proposed Action will affect 207.89 acres in Management Area 10 

and 10.28 acres in Management Area 11. In Management Area 11, 6.98 acres of late 

successional-old growth forest will be cleared while 114.39 acres in those late seral stages will 

be removed from MA 10. The Proposed Action will have to clear snags and downed wood 

within the construction right-of-way. Removal of snags within either Management Area by the 

Proposed Action is possible but may be inconsistent with Prescription C5-VI, above. 

H-466
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-15 

The Proposed Action is not expected to affect adequate snag habitat within Management Area 

10 or 11 and would not limit attaining the 60 percent potential population capability (PPC) for 

cavity nesters. Prescription C5-VI indicates that new utility corridors may be allowed pending 

determination by the NEPA (EA) process. Removal of snags within either Management Area by 

the Proposed Action is possible but inconsistent with Prescriptions C5-VII and C5-VIII, above. 

2.3 Pine Marten 

The pine marten has been identified as a MIS associated with mature or old growth areas in the 

high elevation lodgepole pine and mountain hemlock forest ecoclasses. 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for pine martens and their habitat: 

Forest Plan Applicable Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. Broad wildlife coordination 

guidelines which address leaving snags, down material, unit size, shape, and spatial distribution 

apply to timber sales and result in the maintenance of habitat (USFS, 1990a). Additionally, the 

direction provides for one habitat area for every 4,000 to 5,000 acres of suitable habitat. Habitat 

will be distributed in such a way that any given habitat unit will be connected to two or more 

other suitable habitats. 

Management Prescriptions. Prescription C5-IX, Wildlife – Pine Marten, Dedicated applies to 

designated 160-acre areas in the lodgepole pine and mountain hemlock ecoclasses. Its 

purpose is to preserve suitable habitat for pine marten. 

• Wildlife and Fish: Vegetation manipulation or structural improvement designed to 

enhance wildlife is permitted. Activities designed to produce the desired number of 

snags and dead and down material per acre on a continuing basis will be featured and 

receive high priority. Areas for nonstructural improvement are the priority for this 

prescription. 

• Timber: No timber harvest or salvage is permitted in the designated 160-acre area. No 

firewood cutting or gathering is allowed. 

• Facilities: Minimal roading to remove trees surplus to those needed to meet habitat 

requirements is permitted. Roads will be physically closed, scarified, and seeded 

following use. 

• The location of utillty/transportation corridors will not be permitted. 

• Protection: No snag removal for pre-suppression purposes. No insect or disease 

control unless it is catastrophic in nature (threatening 50 percent or more of the stand). 

Prescription C5-X, Wildlife – Pine Marten, Managed applies to the same area as C5-X except 

that for each site identify a 748-acre peripheral area managed on a 175-year rotation. This 

prescription is applied to timber stands that provide suitable habitat characteristics for the pine 

martin. 

• Wildlife and Fish: Vegetation manipulation or structural improvement designed to 

enhance wildlife is permitted. Activities designed to produce the desired number of 

snags and dead and down material per acre on a continuing basis will be featured and 

receive high priority. Areas for nonstructural improvement are priority for this 

prescription. 

H-467
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-16 

• Timber: Timber stands may be fully managed as long as at least 160 acres at any point 

in time meets the following criteria: (1) enough mature and old-growth trees will be left to 

provide >50 percent crown closure, (2) provide two snags, plus six replacement trees, 

per acre, and (3) maintain an average of six down logs (12' dbh x 20') per acre. Logging 

and subsequent debris disposal shall not damage more than 30 percent of the minor 

vegetation, on an area basis. 

• Commercial and personal use firewood cutting and gathering are permissible when 

wildlife management objectives can be met. 

• Facilities: Conditions described in C5-IX above apply to selected (160 acres) areas. 

Replacement areas have no special restrictions during initial 90 years of rotation (50 

years for lodgepole). During the remaining rotation period only arterial road will be 

maintained. Other roads will be obliterated or maintained only to protect soil and water 

values. No administrative facilities are permitted. 

• Utility/transportation corridors may be allowed pending determination by the EA process. 

• Protection: No snag removal for pre-suppression purposes. No insect or disease 

control unless it is catastrophic in nature (threatening 50 percent or more of the stand). 

Management Area 10 Direction. Pine marten prescriptions (C5-lX and X) are assigned to 

locations which meet the distribution requirements set out in the Forestwide wildlife standards 

and guidelines. Where these locations overlap other prescription assignments which harvest 

timber, the managed prescription (C5-X) is assigned. Where these locations overlap other 

prescription assignments which do not harvest timber, the dedicated prescription (C5-IX) is 

assigned. 

Management Area 11 Direction. Not applicable. 

Species Status in the Project Area. No systematically collected population data are available for 

this species (USFS, 1990a). However, because little logging activity or other disturbance 

occurs in its habitat and because annual trapping efforts are moderate to light, it was expected 

that populations were stable and near habitat capacity (USFS, 1990a). 

Habitat. The habitat requirement on the Forest is considered to be the mountain hemlock and 

lodgepole pine types generally above 4,500 feet elevation where ground cover and overhead 

cover with adequate down trees are available. Large openings (over 100 yards) and areas 

devoid of overhead cover are not considered suitable habitat (USFS, 1990a). 

Pine martens have no association with Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest 

habitats although they may be present in Westside Riparian Wetlands at high elevations 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). The presence of pine martens would depend on appropriate 

structural conditions including snags, down logs, and rock outcrops. A species noted as present 

in a habitat type indicates that it occasionally uses a habitat that provides only marginal support 

for its maintenance and viability (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). 

Forest Management Activities. Fire can negatively affect marten habitat by destroying ground 

and overhead cover and consuming dead and down material. 

Recreation activity was not considered to be heavy enough to influence this species now or in 

the foreseeable future, at the time of the Forest Plan completion. Trapping of these fur bearing 

animals over the last 20 years has been light and localized to small areas. 

H-468
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-17 

Broad wildlife coordination guidelines which address leaving snags, down material, unit size, 

shape, and spatial distribution apply to timber sales and result in the maintenance of habitat. 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Based on habitats that will be affected by the Proposed Action 

(Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest) and habitats utilized by pine martens on 

the Umpqua National Forest (mountain hemlock and lodgepole pine above 4,500 feet 

elevation), the Proposed Action will not affect this species on the Umpqua National Forest. 

2.4 Roosevelt Elk 

Roosevelt elk has been identified as an indicator species to evaluate the effects of managed 

forest conditions and may provide some information for animal communities associated with 

early successional vegetative stages. Elk also require specific habitat conditions during the 

winter period (USFS, 1990a). 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for Roosevelt elk and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. 

• Established big game travel lanes will not have their character altered through 

precommercial thinning. 

• When planning timber sales in important big game areas, a habitat effectiveness model 

(“A Model to Evaluate Elk Habitat in Western Oregon" or similar model) will be used to 

compare the impact of various alternatives on big game habitat. 

Management Prescriptions.

Prescription C4-I, for Winter Range—Normal, applies to south-facing areas in the Umpqua 

National Forest. It includes these areas below 3,500 feet elevation with less than 70 percent 

slope, as well as other mapped areas. 

• Wildlife and Fish: Consider projects designed to enhance forage production such as 

seeding, planting, and fertilizing. Projects to improve habitat for other wildlife and fish 

are permitted. The use of K-V funding for this type of work is encouraged. 

• Timber: Timber harvest within each subunit of the winter range will be scheduled to best 

provide a stable, even production of forage and cover. Normally, no less than 8 percent 

or more of lands suitable for timber production will be cut each decade. Vegetation 

management activities will consider winter range browse and forage objectives. In 

winter range areas consider minimal acceptable tree stocking levels. In winter range 

areas, use spot treatment for release. 

• Unit size will average 20 acres or less and units will be shaped to optimize edge. 

Created openings will be separated by areas not classified as created openings. An 

area will no longer be considered a created opening when tree height averages 15 feet, 

except in areas of foreground and middleground where tree height averages 20 feet. 

Salvage is permitted. Clearcut is the preferred regeneration technique. Felling, yarding, 

hauling, and road construction may be restricted between December 1 and April 30 if 

unacceptable impacts to big game animals are expected to occur. Precommercial 

thinning treatments should insure animal access to at least 50 percent of the area 

treated. 

• Facilities: Dead end local roads and roads not needed to access other areas will be 

closed during the period Dec. 1 - April 30. Closures may be physical or administrative. 

H-469
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-18 

Through roads may be closed from December 1 - April 30 if needed. Limited 

administrative use may be allowed. Utility/transportation corridors may be allowed. 

• Protection: Where possible, broadcast burning is the preferred slash disposal technique. 

Standard insect and disease control is allowed. 

The Four-Part Winter Range—Optimum, Prescription C4-II, also applies to south-facing areas 

below 3,500 feet with less than 70 percent slope and other mapped areas. This prescription 

provides for an optimum mix of forage and cover through the application of a combination of 

rotation lengths to specified percentages of each winter range. 

• Wildlife and Fish: Encourage projects designed to enhance forage production such as 

seeding, planting and fertilizing. Projects to improve habitat for other wildlife and fish are 

permitted. The use of K-V funding for this type of work is encouraged. 

• Timber: The area will be managed as four separate parts. Ten percent will be managed 

for permanent openings (natural or created). These areas will be seeded to a grass 

and/or shrub mix. Conifers will be removed to maintain value of the permanent opening. 

(a.) Fifty percent of the area will be managed on a short rotation (60 years). 

Clearcutting is the preferred regeneration technique. Average unit size will be 20 

acres. Vegetation management activities will consider winter range forage and 

browse objectives. Spot treatments are preferred. May delay release up to five 

years to maintain productive forage. Maintain minimum acceptable stocking 

through precommercial and commercial thinning. (b.) Twenty percent of the area 

will be managed as hiding cover and visual protection from roads with an 

unmanaged 100-year rotation. No release, precommercial, or commercial 

thinning unless needed to improve cover values. Clearcutting is the preferred 

harvest technique. Unit size 20-acre average. (c.) Twenty percent of the area 

will be managed to produce optimum thermal cover (200 year rotation). Release 

of stand shall be done in a manner that protects hardwoods and provides multilevel stands. Precommercial thinning of stand is encouraged, but commercial 

thinning is not permitted. Spatial orientation of these different components is an 

important element of this prescription. Felling, yarding, hauling, and road 

construction may be restricted between Dec. 1 and April 30 If unacceptable 

impacts to big game are expected to occur. (d.) In winter range areas consider 

minimal acceptable tree stocking levels and use spot treatment for release. 

• Facilities: Dead end local roads and roads not needed to access other areas will be 

closed during the period December 1 through April 30. Closures may be physical or 

administrative. Through roads may be closed from December 1 through April 30 if 

needed. 

• New utility and transportation corridors will be discouraged, but where no reasonable 

alternatives exist, corridors will be located to impose the least impact. 

• Protection: Where possible, broadcast burning is the preferred slash disposal technique. 

Appropriate suppression responses will be utilized for all wildfires. Precommercial 

thinning slash treatment should insure animal access to at least 50 percent of the area 

treated. Standard insect and disease control is allowed. These are high priority areas 

for law enforcement. 

The Prescription C4-III, Winter Range – Meadow, applies to the Thorn Prairie/Mountain 

Meadows area of the Diamond Lake Ranger District and is not applicable to the Proposed 

Action. 

H-470
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-19 

Management Areas 10 Direction. Not applicable. 

Management Areas 11 Direction. This Management Area includes forest and meadow lands 

inventoried as suitable winter range. Big game habitat objectives are best met through the 

management of Prescription C4-II, which is located in the better winter range areas with at least 

25 percent of the of the inventoried winter range in each resource scheduling area (RSA) 

assigned to it. Prescription C4-I is assigned to lands suitable for timber production which are 

not needed for other wildlife habitat objectives. At least 20 percent of the land in this 

prescription assignment needs to be in Stage 5 or Stage 6 vegetation. 

Species Status in the Project Area. Big game inventories on the Umpqua National Forest are 

conducted by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). Inventory methods include 

spotlight sampling, aerial counts of wintering elk, analysis of harvest data, and population 

modeling. Forest population (as determined by the ODFW at the time of the Forest Plan 

release) varies annually, but the numbers center around 2,000 Roosevelt elk. 

ODFW’s Evans Creek Wildlife Management Unit 29 coincides with the portion of the Umpqua 

National Forest within which the Proposed Action is located. ODFW (2008a) has compiled 

harvest data on Roosevelt elk within Wildlife Management Unit 29 for the 2007 season and prior 

harvest seasons through 2003 (ODFW, 2008b). From 2003 though 2006 days per harvest of 

elk and percent hunter success were relatively consistent. In the 2007 harvest, elk hunters 

spent nearly twice as much time per elk harvested with only half the success rate as previous 

years in Management Unit 29 (Table 2-3). 

Table 2-3 

Harvest Statistics for Roosevelt Elk within the Evans Creek 

Wildlife Management Unit 29, 2003-2007 

Harvest 

Year 

Total 

Hunters 

Total 

Hunter 

Days 

Total 

Males 

(antlered)

Total NonMales 

(non-antlered) Total

Days 

per 

Harvest 

Percent

Hunter 

Success

2007 579 3162 26 5 31 102 5 

2006 267 1723 26 4 30 57 11 

2005 304 1500 43 1 44 34 14 

2004 428 2276 36 16 52 44 12 

2003 426 3049 21 27 48 64 11 

Although population data for Roosevelt elk in Wildlife Management Unit 29 are limited, the 

number of calves per adult cow (young per adult female) appear to have declined since 2000 

(Table 2-4). The apparent declining trend is significant (Figure 2-2). 

Table 2-4 

Population Trends and Annual Productivity for Roosevelt Elk within 

the Evans Creek Wildlife Management Unit 29, 2000-2008 

Year 

Population 

Index 1 

Young per 

Adult Female 2

2008 - 0.24 

2007 - 0.46 

2006 1.7 0.32 

2005 1.4 0.27 

2004 3.4 0.29 

H-471
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-20 

2003 - 0.37 

2002 2 0.34 

2001 2.2 0.52 

2000 1.7 0.50 

1 Population Index is ODFW’s Trend Count for the Hunt Area which is conducted along 

a fixed route each year, usually at the end of winter (ODFW, 2008a). 2 Productivity data is young per female from ODFW’s Composition Count data 

reported as Young per 100 Females counted in December (ODFW, 2008a). 

Decreasing productivity (Table 2-4) and the increased hunter effort per animal harvested (days 

per harvest) in Table 2-3 appear to be consistent with an overall declining population of 

Roosevelt elk in Evans Creek Wildlife Management Unit 29 and the project area. In the past, 

ODFW has conducted population trend counts of elk along a fixed route near the end of winter 

(Table 2-4) but no count data are available since 2004. 

Figure 2-2 

Trend in Productivity (Calf per Adult Cow) of Roosevelt Elk in the Evans Creek Wildlife 

Management Unit 29 Which Coincides with the PCGP Project on the Umpqua National Forest.

Habitat. Elk depend on a mosaic of early forage-producing and later cover-forming stages of 

forest in close proximity. Clearcuts can be primary foraging areas, with peak production and 

use about five to eight years after logging (Verts and Carraway, 1998). Approximately 90 

percent of use of foraging areas by elk occurs within about 400 feet of cover sufficient to hide 90 

percent of a standing elk at 200 feet. This cover may be provided by later stages of shrub and 

open sapling stand stages, and later stages of forest. For thermal cover, forested areas with 

trees about 40 feet or taller with about 70 percent canopy closure are preferred in both summer 

and winter. Nearly all thermal cover habitat is within about 1200 feet of foraging areas (Verts 

and Carraway, 1998). 

Roosevelt elk have general associations with Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood 

Forest and Westside Riparian Wetlands habitats (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001), both of which are 

present within the project area. Summer elk forage consists of a combination of lush forbs, 

grasses, and shrubs, which is usually attained at higher elevations within wet meadows, 

springs, and riparian areas in close proximity to forested stands. Forage becomes less 

H-472
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-21 

abundant and accessible in winter and the nutritional quality declines. Winter range is usually 

within forested sites which provide protection against weather, as well as lichens and other 

plants used as forage (ODFW, 2003a). The Proposed Action will cross 0.73 mile of big game 

winter range on the Umpqua National Forest. The big game winter range, classified by the 

Forest Service, is within sensitive big game range as delineated by ODFW. The Proposed 

Action will cross 10.7 miles of ODFW sensitive big game range on the Umpqua National Forest. 

Nearly the entire Umpqua National Forest has the potential to be suitable elk habitat, either as 

summer range or winter range. Summering occurs on most areas of the Forest, although 

habitat quality and animal distribution vary considerably. The highest use occurs in areas where 

forage-producing openings are in proximity with suitable cover. Summer range forage is not 

limiting current or future population growth. Adequate usable winter forage is considered to be 

the limiting factor to deer and elk populations (USFS, 1990a). 

Forest Management Activities. Historically, elk populations and their distribution were 

dependent on naturally occurring fires, wind storms, or insect infestations that created openings 

in the more or less uniform timber stands. Early fire protection efforts, until the early 1950s, 

appear to have resulted in depressed elk numbers. Available evidence indicates that low 

numbers of elk did occur on the Forest, mostly at high elevations on the Diamond Lake District 

and in the Rogue-Umpqua Divide area. With the advent of logging and the resulting created 

openings, fire suppression efforts are no longer a significant factor in suppressing elk numbers 

and may be beneficial from the standpoint of protecting and maintaining cover areas. 

Herbicides can affect big game animals in several ways; if extensive, continuous areas are 

treated at one time, a shortage of forage can occur. However, if herbicide use is timed to occur 

when target brush species have grown out of reach of the animals, the resprouting that results 

can be beneficial. 

Other human influences can be considered in three broad areas: (1) mortality, (2) harassment, 

and (3) habitat impacts. Mortality occurs during the hunting season, through poaching, and by 

accidents with vehicles. Harassment is a significant factor during winter months when animal 

energy reserves are low. In areas where activities such as recreation or logging take place, 

unintentional harassment may occur. 

The objective is to provide maximum forage utility while maintaining suitable cover in close 

proximity to foraging areas. In addition, winter range management involves scheduling timber 

harvest activities to insure adequate forage and cover through time, controlling disturbance and 

harassment during critical periods, and identifying enhancement opportunities. 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Direct mortality of Roosevelt elk due to the Proposed Action is 

possible if vehicles collide with animals traveling to and from construction sites. Numerous 

studies have shown that both Rocky Mountain elk and Roosevelt elk are sensitive to human 

disturbances such as motorized travel on and off roads (Rowland et al., 2000). Roads are 

generally avoided by elk when they are open, but are heavily utilized by elk as travel corridors 

when closed. Several herds of elk are known to winter on the western slopes of the Cascades 

(ODFW, 2003a). In general, deer and elk return to habitats from which they have vacated within 

some relatively short period of time which would likely depend on the time of year, available 

hiding cover, and duration of local disturbances. 

Construction of the PCGP Project will remove 196 acres of forested habitat (Table 2-1) including 

121 acres of late successional-old growth, 43 acres of mid-seral forest, and 31 acres of 

H-473
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-22 

clearcut-regenerating forest within the Umpqua National Forest. Roosevelt elk are likely to be 

generally associated with the Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest type affected 

and all structural conditions of affected forest (shrub-seedling, small tree, medium tree, large 

tree, giant tree; single and multi-story forests; open, moderate, and closed canopy forests). The 

project will also remove 0.09 acre of Forested Wetland and 10 acres of developed urban 

environs. Roosevelt elk are generally associated with a variety of Westside Riparian Wetland 

structural conditions and low density urban conditions (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Given that 

Roosevelt elk are such generalists, effects to any one type of structural habitat condition with 

replacement by another structural stage (e.g. shrub-seedling, grass-forb) will not adversely 

affect the species. 

A study conducted in Alberta (Brusnyk and Westworth, 1985) focused on forage and browse 

production on a 17-year old pipeline right-of-way and on a 2-year old pipeline right-of-way. 

They compared big game use (moose, deer, and elk) of forage on the two rights-of-way to use 

in adjacent undisturbed forest ecotones and undisturbed forest. Browse production was most 

extensive on the 17-year old corridor which was utilized most by moose (though they are not 

present in the PCGP Project area). 

Elk utilized forage on the 2-year old right-of-way primarily where portions were adjacent to 

forested habitats. The principal conclusion of this study was that pipeline corridors increased 

local habitat diversity and that diversity – juxtapositions of browse or forage to undisturbed 

forested habitat – influenced use of the corridors by ungulates, not necessarily due to increased 

vegetative production, per se, within pipeline rights-of-way (Brusnyk and Westworth, 1985). 

Following reclamation of the pipeline corridor, Roosevelt elk may utilize the corridor for travel 

and for foraging, depending on vegetation species planted and rapidity of successful 

revegetation. 

After construction of the PCGP Project, there will possibly be a secondary impact (Comer, 1982) 

on harvest rates with upgraded access to previously inaccessible areas; hunters are expected 

to achieve greater success, at least temporarily, with increased access. Big game species 

utilizing a cleared right-of-way, vegetated with herbaceous species, are more likely to be 

harvested than animals in forested habitat. Increased public recreation along the right-of-way in 

the fall hunting season, especially along access points, has been documented elsewhere 

(Crabtree, 1984). 

Access could increase poaching of game animals and nongame wildlife on a local level. 

Enforcement of wildlife regulations is the responsibility of the Oregon State Police, Fish and 

Wildlife Division. Individual incidences of illegal harvest are reported in the Fish and Wildlife 

Division Newsletter. From those records it appears that poaching is somewhat commonplace in 

southwest Oregon. In the April 2007 edition, a deer poaching investigation in the vicinity of the 

proposed route (Eagle Point, Jackson County) led to 130 charges, including 23 felonies, against 

8 suspects. Those particular crimes involved several black-tailed deer (Freeman, 2006) but, 

according to the April 2007 Fish and Wildlife Division Newsletter, other species that have been 

poached include elk, turkeys, and even livestock. There is no information to relate poaching 

effects to wildlife population status. 

Mitigation. During construction in Year 2, impact to wintering Roosevelt elk will be avoided 

during the winter period from December 1 - April 30 by initiating construction on winter range in 

May and ending prior to onset of winter (November). Although timber removal within the 

construction right-of-way is scheduled to occur in Year 1 beginning October 1 and continuing 

through February 28, timber removal within designated big game winter range will be completed 

H-474
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-23 

by November 15. As required by FERC’s Upland Plan, Pacific Connector consulted with the 

NRCS, the BLM, and the Forest Service regarding specific seeding dates and recommended 

seed mixtures for the project area. The recommendations have been incorporated into the 

project-specific ECRP (see Biological Assessment, Appendix F). The ECRP describes the 

procedures that will be implemented to minimize erosion and enhance revegetation success for 

the entire project, the procedures that will be utilized to minimize the spread of noxious weeds 

as a result of project construction and the silvicultural prescriptions that will be implemented in 

areas that are outside the permanent easement. Seeding mixtures and inhibition of noxious 

weeds will enhance forage production. 

To minimize potential entrapment of deer and elk within the open trenches during pipeline 

construction within delineated big-game winter and summer range, Pacific Connector will leave 

trench segments (>5 feet wide) of the proposed pipeline alignment untrenched and 

herbaceously vegetated (every 0.5 mile and at visible wildlife game trails) to serve as a route 

(i.e., green bridge or landscape connector) for big game across the construction right-of-way 

until pipe is ready to be installed (Forman et al., 2003). Alternatively, Pacific Connector will 

install soft plugs (backfilled trench materials) in the trench after excavation at these distances to 

provide wildlife passage. Additionally, 20-foot gaps will be left in spoil and topsoil stockpiles at 

all hard or soft plug locations and a corresponding gap in the welded pipe string will be left in 

these locations. Suitable ramps will be installed from the bottom of the trench to the top to 

prevent potential wildlife entrapment within the trench. 

Vegetation management over the long-term will benefit winter range browse and forage for 

Roosevelt elk. Vegetation within the permanent easement will be periodically maintained by 

mowing, cutting, and trimming (either by mechanical or hand methods). In upland areas, the 

permanent easement will be maintained in a condition where trees or shrubs greater than 6 feet 

tall will be controlled (cut or trimmed) within 15 feet on either side of the centerline (for a total of 

30 cleared feet). Maintenance activities are expected to occur approximately every 3-5 years 

depending on the growth rate of vegetation. During maintenance, vegetation will be cut/trimmed 

in 4 to 6-foot lengths and scattered across the permanent easement to naturally decompose 

and to discourage OHV traffic, as well as benefit wildlife habitat. Vegetation management over 

the long-term will benefit winter range forage for Roosevelt elk. 

Forest Plan Consistency. Big game travel lanes will not be blocked by construction or operation 

of the Proposed Action. Roosevelt elk are expected to utilize the project right-of-way for travel 

and foraging. Prescription C4-II allows for the possibility of new utility and transportation 

corridors, although discouraged, if no reasonable alternatives exist. The Proposed Action would 

be consistent with the Forest Plan. 

2.5 Columbian Black-tail Deer 

The Columbian black-tail deer has been identified as an indicator species because of the high 

level of public interest associated with hunting this species and because it requires specific 

habitat conditions during the winter period. 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for Columbian black-tail deer and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. 

• Established big game travel lanes will not have their character altered through 

precommercial thinning. 

H-475
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-24 

• When planning timber sales in important big game areas, a habitat effectiveness model 

(“A Model to Evaluate Elk Habitat in Western Oregon” or similar model) will be used to 

compare the impact of various alternatives on big game habitat. 

Management Prescriptions. Management prescriptions for big game described above for 

Roosevelt elk also apply to Columbian black-tail deer. 

Management Areas Direction. Management area direction for big game described above for 

Roosevelt elk also apply to Columbian black-tail deer. 

Species Status in the Project Area. Long-term, systematically collected data are available for 

this species, collected annually by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Data are 

collected on population trends, sex ratios, winter mortality, and harvest. Forestwide populations 

are estimated by the ODFW to be between 8,000 and 14,000 animals. 

ODFW’s Evans Creek Wildlife Management Unit 29 coincides with the portion of the Umpqua 

National Forest within which the Proposed Action is located. ODFW (2008a) has compiled 

harvest data on black-tailed deer within Wildlife Management Unit 29 for the 2007 season and 

prior harvest seasons starting in 2003 (ODFW, 2008b). From 2003 through 2007, days per 

harvest of deer and percent hunter success have been relatively consistent (Table 2-5). 

Table 2-5 

Harvest Statistics for Black-Tailed Deer within the Evans Creek 

Wildlife Management Unit 29, 2003-2007 

Harvest 

Year 

Total 

Hunters 

Total 

Hunter 

Days 

Total 

Males 

(antlered)

Total NonMales 

(non-antlered) Total

Days 

per 

Harvest 

Percent

Hunter 

Success

2007 2916 18488 842 41 883 21 30 

2006 2709 16827 735 29 764 22 28 

2005 2234 14801 791 25 816 18 37 

2004 2429 14980 674 31 705 21 29 

2003 2673 18006 749 28 777 23 29 

Unlike Roosevelt elk in Wildlife Management Unit 29, the black-tailed deer population does not 

appear to be decreasing during the period from 2000 to 2008, but neither does it appear to be 

increasing. There is no significant trend in fawns per doe (young per adult female) nor is there 

any significant trend in ODFW’s Trend Count for deer in the Hunt Area which is conducted along 

a fixed route each year, usually at the end of winter (Table 2-6). In addition to fall composition 

count surveys, ODFW (2008a and 2008b) has also conducted annual spring composition counts 

that provided ratios of young per adult deer (adult bucks and does). The two ratios of young per 

adult (fall Ratio A and spring Ratio B in Table 2-6) allow estimation of young overwinter survival 

relative to adult overwinter survival. Those estimates are included in Table 2-6 and indicate that 

juvenile black-tailed deer in the Evans Creek Wildlife Management Unit 29 have had very high 

overwinter survival rates relative to adult deer - estimates near or greater than 1 - since 2000. 

H-476
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-25 

Table 2-6 

Population Trends, Annual Productivity, and Estimated Overwinter Survival for Juvenile Blacktailed Deer within the Evans Creek Wildlife Management Unit 29, 2000-2008 

Year 

Population 

Index 1 

Young per 

Adult Female 2

Young per 

Adult – Fall 

(Ratio A) 3

Young per 

Adult – Spring 

(Ratio B) 4

Maximum 

Overwinter 

Juvenile 

Survival Rate 5

2008 5.1 0.58 0.46 0.63 1.32 

2007 - 0.61 0.48 - - 

2006 5.0 0.68 0.54 0.59 1.21 

2005 5.1 0.60 0.49 0.71 1.81 

2004 - 0.52 0.39 0.30 0.92 

2003 6.3 0.41 0.33 0.48 0.96 

2002 0.0 0.62 0.50 0.67 1.27 

2001 3.0 0.60 0.53 0.37 0.97 

2000 3.6 0.48 0.38 0.53 0.94 

1 Population Index is ODFW’s Trend Count for the Hunt Area which is conducted along a fixed route 

each year, usually at the end of winter (ODFW, 2008b). 2 Productivity data is young per female from ODFW’s Composition Count data reported as Young per 

100 Females counted in December (ODFW, 2008b). 3 Ratio A (White et al., 1996) is the ratio of Young per Adult, derived from Composition Count data 

(Males per 100 Females and Young per 100 Females) counted in December (ODFW, 2008b). 4 Ratio B (White et al., 1996) is the ratio of Young per Adult (Young per 100 Adults) counted in March 

(ODFW, 2008b). 5 Maximum Overwinter Juvenile Survival is related to ratios A and B and to the following relationship 

of adult over-winter survival rate (Ŝa) and juvenile over-winter survival rate (Ŝj

) by the formula (see 

equation 9 in Paulik and Robson, 1969): Ŝj ⁄ Ŝa = B ⁄ A or Ŝj

 = Ŝa (B ⁄ A). Since many of the estimates 

of maximum juvenile survival rates are greater than 1, they indicate survival of adults was less than 

juveniles over winter which is highly unlikely. 

Habitat. Black-tail deer prefer early successional stages created by clearcuts or burns, 

providing grasses, forbs, and shrubs (ODFW, 2003b; Csuti et al, 2001). Most black-tails 

summering in the high Cascades winter at lower elevations on the west slope, although some 

wintering may occur east of the Cascade crest (ODFW, 2003b). 

Black-tailed deer have general associations with all habitats that are present in the project area 

including Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest and Westside Riparian Wetlands 

habitats (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Most black-tails that summer in the high Cascades winter 

at lower elevations on the west slope, although some wintering may occur east of the Cascade 

crest (ODFW, 2003b). Winter loss of black-tailed deer is generally far less than for mule deer, 

because the snow does not remain on the valley floors for extended periods and a crust does 

not form on the surface as it does on the east side of the Cascades (ODFW, 2003b). The 

Proposed Action will cross 0.73 mile of big game winter range on the Umpqua National Forest. 

The big game winter range, classified by the Forest Service, is within sensitive big game range 

as delineated by ODFW. The Proposed Action will cross 10.7 miles of ODFW sensitive big 

game range on the Umpqua National Forest. 

Forest Management Activities. Historically, black-tail deer follow patterns similar to those of the 

Roosevelt elk. Historic populations were highest in areas of naturally occurring fires, 

windstorms, and insect infestations that created openings in fairly uniform timber stands. In 

addition, low numbers of deer could be found in old growth forests. The affects of controlling 

naturally occurring wildfire can be considered as limiting the amount of optimal habitat available 

H-477
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-26 

for black-tail, although under the current management, this shortfall in habitat has been 

compensated for by openings created through logging. The burning of debris following logging 

is considered positive black-tail management. 

The influence of humans on black-tail deer are similar to those discussed for Roosevelt elk and 

involve (1) direct mortality, (2) harassment, and (3) habitat modification. Mortality occurs 

through legal and illegal hunting and by accidents with motor vehicles. Harassment of deer 

during the winter months when energy reserves are low is not as much of a concern as with elk 

because they do not tend to herd and are generally less visible. 

Winter weather and habitat conditions appear to be the main factor controlling overall population 

numbers. Extreme winter weather can significantly reduce populations. 

Timber harvesting in low elevation areas (below 3,500 feet) creates considerable acreage of 

suitable forage. After timber harvest there is an initial surge of productive forage followed by 

declines in forage production once stands have reached pole-sapling size. 

Current deer management is keyed to the harvest and management of timber stands and 

emphasizes the production of suitable forage and cover on a sustained basis. Most of the 

Forest’s winter range areas have been identified and general management guidelines are 

applied to them. The objective is to provide available forage and suitable cover in close 

proximity. In addition, the management of winter ranges involves scheduling timber harvest 

activities to insure adequate forage and cover through time, controlling disturbance and 

harassment during critical periods, and identifying habitat enhancement opportunities. 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Direct mortality of black-tailed deer due to the Proposed Action 

is possible if vehicles collide with animals traveling to and from construction sites. Similar to 

mule deer, vehicle collisions with black-tailed deer may increase with traffic volume, particularly 

during winter (Arnold, 1978; Reed, 1981; Romin and Bissonette, 1996). Black-tailed deer are 

likely to avoid access roads and construction areas similar to mule deer which generally avoid 

roads (Rost and Baily, 1979). In general, deer and elk return to habitats from which they have 

vacated within some relatively short period of time which would likely depend on the time of 

year, available hiding cover, and duration of local disturbances. 

Potential impact to black-tailed deer from noises generated from construction activities may be 

similar to mule deer and can be evaluated to an extent, such as noise from vehicles and/or 

increased road traffic, blasting, and aerial fly-overs. For example, effects of short-duration 

seismic exploration (blasting) have been documented. Mule deer respond with alert postures, 

occasionally running for short distances, but did not shift home ranges or otherwise avoid 

seismic blast 2 miles away (Ihsle, 1982). Mule deer did avoid areas of seismic exploration that 

were closer (0.6 mile away) but whether avoidance was due to human presence, noise, or a 

combination was not distinguishable (Horejsi, 1979). 

Construction of the PCGP Project will remove 196 acres of forested habitat (Table 2-1) including 

121 acres of late successional-old growth, 43 acres of mid-seral forest, and 31 acres of 

clearcut-regenerating forest. Black-tailed deer are likely to be generally associated with the 

Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest type affected and all structural conditions of 

affected forest (shrub-seedling, small tree, medium tree, large tree, giant tree, single and multistory forests, open, moderate, and closed canopy forests). The project will also remove 0.09 

acre of Forested Wetland and 10 acres of developed urban environs. Black-tailed deer are 

generally associated with a variety of Westside Riparian Wetland structural conditions and low 

H-478
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-27 

density urban conditions (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Given that black-tailed deer are such 

generalists, effects to any one type of structural habitat condition with replacement by another 

structural stage (e.g. shrub-seedling, grass-forb) will not adversely affect the species. 

A study conducted in Alberta (Brusnyk and Westworth, 1985) focused on forage and browse 

production on a 17-year old pipeline right-of-way and on a 2-year old pipeline right-of-way. 

They compared big game use (moose, deer and elk) of forage on the two rights-of-way to use in 

adjacent undisturbed forest ecotones and undisturbed forest. Browse production was most 

extensive on the 17-year old corridor which was utilized most by moose (though they are not 

present in the PCGP Project area). 

Deer appeared to utilize browse in the 17-year old corridor but returned to adjacent undisturbed 

forest, probably utilizing available hiding or thermal cover. Deer utilized the corridors for travel 

in early winter prior to limiting snow depths. The principal conclusion of this study was that 

pipeline corridors increased local habitat diversity and that diversity – juxtapositions of browse 

or forage to undisturbed forested habitat – influenced use of the corridors by ungulates, not 

necessarily due to increased vegetative production, per se, within pipeline rights-of-way 

(Brusnyk and Westworth, 1985). Following reclamation of the pipeline corridor, black-tailed 

deer may utilize the corridor for travel and for foraging, depending on vegetation species planted 

and rapidity of successful revegetation. 

After construction of the PCGP Project, there will possibly be a secondary impact (Comer, 1982) 

on harvest rates with upgraded access to previously inaccessible areas; hunters are expected 

to achieve greater success, at least temporarily, with increased access. Big game species 

utilizing a cleared right-of-way, vegetated with herbaceous species, are more likely to be 

harvested than animals in forested habitat. Increased public recreation along the right-of-way in 

the fall hunting season, especially along access points, has been documented elsewhere 

(Crabtree, 1984). 

Access could increase poaching of game animals and nongame wildlife on a local level. 

Enforcement of wildlife regulations is the responsibility of the Oregon State Police, Fish and 

Wildlife Division. Individual incidences of illegal harvest are reported in the Fish and Wildlife 

Division Newsletter. From those records it appears that poaching is somewhat commonplace in 

southwest Oregon. In the April 2007 edition, a deer poaching investigation in the vicinity of the 

proposed route (Eagle Point, Jackson County) led to 130 charges, including 23 felonies, against 

8 suspects. Those particular crimes involved several black-tailed deer (Freeman, 2006) but, 

according to the April 2007 Fish and Wildlife Division Newsletter, other species that have been 

poached include elk, turkeys, and even livestock. There is no information to relate poaching 

effects to wildlife population status. 

Mitigation. Mitigation for impact to Roosevelt elk would also apply to black-tailed deer. 

Forest Plan Consistency. Similar to management of Roosevelt elk, the Proposed Action would 

be consistent with the Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines, Management Prescriptions, and 

Management Area Directions related to black-tailed deer. 

Since there is no significant trend in fawns per doe (young per adult female) nor is the any 

significant trend in ODFW’s Trend Count for deer in the Evans Wildlife Management Unit 29

(Table 2-6), there is no reason to expect that deer winter range carrying capacity on the Forest 

would be limited by the Proposed Action. Indeed, estimated young overwinter survival relative 

to adult overwinter survival indicates that juvenile black-tailed deer in the Evans Wildlife 

H-479
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-28 

Management Unit 29 have had very high overwinter survival rates relative to adults (Table 2-6), 

which may indicate carrying capacity objectives of the Forest are being achieved. The 

Proposed Action would be consistent with the Forest Plan. 

2.6 Peregrine Falcon 

The peregrine falcon was identified as an indicator species because it was classified as an 

endangered species under the Threatened and Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) when 

the Forest Plan was developed. With the banning of DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons 

and successful captive breeding, rearing, and release of over thousands of peregrines annually, 

FWS (1999) determined that the species had recovered and removed peregrine falcons from 

the list of Threatened and Endangered Species in 1999. Inclusion of the peregrine falcon as a 

MIS was for compliance with requirements of the Endangered Species Act prior to 1999. 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for peregrine falcons and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. 

• All proposed activities within areas designated for management under the bald eagle or 

peregrine falcon prescription will first be coordinated with the USFWS as required by 

consultation procedures. 

Management Prescriptions. Forest Plan Prescription C3-1, Peregrine Falcon, applies to known 

and selected potential peregrine falcon nest sites and the area within a three-mile radius of nest 

site. It is intended to meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973. However, 

since the species has been delisted, consultation with the FWS may no longer be required for 

projects which could have an impact on it. 

• Wildlife and Fish: These sites are high priority for annual monitoring. Any proposed 

enhancement project or management technique must be reviewed and coordinated with 

the FWS. 

• Timber: No programmed harvest within the immediate vicinity of the nest site. Restrict 

timber harvest activity between January 1 and July 31 as needed to reduce disturbance 

during nesting season. Within a 1.5-mile radius of nest site, if determined necessary, 

restrict timber sale activity during January 1 - July 31. Review all timber sales in the 1.5-

mile zone with FWS. Within a 3-mile radius of a nest, manage harvest schedule to 

provide a diversity of age classes. Maintain 50 percent of the stands in pole size or 

larger. Where possible, leave five or more hardwoods per acre in regeneration units. 

Modify herbicide application to provide at least 25 percent of the original hardwood 

component. Manage snags at 40 percent or more of potential population capacity. 

• Facilities: Roads within 1.5 miles may be blocked permanently or closed to use January 

1 - July 31, if needed to reduce disturbance during nesting season. Road construction 

or reconstruction within 1.5 miles will not normally take place during January 1 - July 31. 

New utility and transportation corridors will be discouraged. Where no reasonable 

alternatives exist, corridors will be located to impose the least impact as determined in 

the EA process. 

• Protection: No use of chemicals to control insect and disease outbreaks within the 1.5-

mile radius except under recommendation from FWS. 

Management Area 10 Direction. Inventoried sites for peregrine falcons on MA 10 are assigned 

to Prescription C3-I. 

H-480
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-29 

Management Area 11 Direction. Not applicable. 

Species Status in the Project Area. A peregrine falcon eyrie on the Umpqua National Forest 

has been active for several years. The eyrie is approximately 0.2 mile southwest of PCGP 

Milepost (MP) 112.32 (T32S, R2W, Section 35). 

Habitat. Throughout its vast range, the peregrine falcon has adapted to a wide array of nesting 

and prey habitats. In Oregon, the bird is found to nest on cliffs ranging in height from 75 to 1500 

feet, as well as man-made structures such as bridges (Marshall et al., 2006). The average 

occupied cliff size in the Cascade Mountain Range is 229 feet. Cliff nests are on ledges or 

potholes with and without protective overhangs (Marshall et al., 2006). Nests previously built 

and occupied by ravens, golden eagles, and red-tailed hawks have also been located as nesting 

spots for falcons in Oregon (Marshall et al., 2006). 

Peregrine falcons are associated with Westside Riparian-Wetlands and Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest habitats, both of which occur on the Umpqua National Forest 

and are crossed by the Proposed Action. 

Forest Management Activities. The influence of fire and timber harvest can be considered in 

two ways: (1) as they affect the nest site and (2) as they affect the food base. Fire or harvest in 

the immediate vicinity of the nest site can be detrimental, if the site is severely modified so that it 

may no longer be suitable. To some extent, how much disturbance would be tolerated depends 

on the quality of the site and the characteristics of the individual birds. Because peregrines are 

long-ranging birds, fire or logging will not significantly affect the food base and may actually 

increase the food base if it results in an increase in the passerine (songbird) bird population. 

Unusual or prolonged disturbance of nesting birds can lead to reproductive failure. The species' 

intense defensive behavior plus the high public interest in this species warrant limiting 

disturbance during the courtship and nesting period. Any changes in the characteristics of the 

nest site, through logging or road construction, would also be detrimental to the birds. 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Since the Forest Plan was issued and peregrine falcons were 

delisted, USDA-Forest Service has adopted new temporal and spatial buffers to protect 

peregrine falcon eyries. No disturbances are allowed within 1.5 miles of active nest sites from 

February 1 through August 31. The spatial buffer would apply to 3.3 miles of the PCGP 

construction right-of-way on the Umpqua National Forest, from MP 110.52 to MP 113.82. 

Construction is planned to occur within the temporal limit, prior to August 31. Since the eyrie is 

at a higher elevation than the construction right-of-way and there is likely no intervening tree 

cover, noise generated by construction at the eyrie is predicted to range from 45 dBA (centerline 

surveying of the ditch) to 66 dBA (ditching with mitigated rock blasting) at closest distance of 0.2 

mile. That noise level is likely to be below levels (85 dB) that normally scare birds (Golden et 

al., 1980). 

Disturbance of the adults could lead to egg or chick abandonment, leaving them vulnerable to 

predators and the elements. In extreme cases of disturbance, for example the sudden 

appearance of a human or machinery very close to a nest, the adult may leave so quickly as to 

knock eggs or chicks out of the nest (White et al., 2002). 

Mitigation. Timber clearing will begin in Year 1 after September 30 and continue through 

February 28 of Year 2 to reduce impacts to potentially nesting northern spotted owls in the 

H-481
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-30 

vicinity of the proposed project and this eyrie, which will minimize impacts associated with 

timber clearing activities at this eyrie site. Construction is planned to occur within the spatial 

and temporal limits, within 1.5 miles from the eyrie, prior to August 31 in Year 2. No additional 

mitigation has been proposed. 

Forest Plan Consistency. Since Peregrine Falcons are no longer listed under the ESA, Forest 

Plan Prescription C3-I, Peregrine Falcon, intended to meet the requirements of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, is no longer applicable. Nevertheless, the Proposed Action will be 

consistent with current temporal and spatial buffers to protect peregrine falcon eyries on the 

Umpqua National Forest. 

2.7 Bald Eagle 

The bald eagle was chosen as a management indicator species for the Forest because it was 

classified as a threatened species under the ESA (USFS, 1990a). However, the species is no 

longer listed under the Act. The FWS proposed to remove the bald eagle from the list of 

endangered and threatened wildlife in 1999 because the bald eagle’s population growth had 

exceeded most goals established in various recovery plans (FWS, 1999a). The FWS opened a 

public comment period on the proposal to delist bald eagles on February 16, 2006 (FWS, 2006) 

and on August 8, 2007, the bald eagle was removed from the list of threatened and endangered 

species (FWS, 2007). Although no longer listed as threatened under the ESA, bald eagles 

remain protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) (16 U.S.C. 668-

668d) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 703-712). 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for bald eagles and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. 

• Active raptor nest sites identified in project planning or during project work should be 

protected from human disturbance until fledging or nesting is complete. 

• All proposed activities within areas designated for management under the bald eagle 

prescription will first be coordinated with the FWS as required by consultation 

procedures. 

Management Prescriptions. Prescription C3-II, Bald Eagle, Maintained, applies to areas within 

a 20-chain radius of known and selected potential bald eagle nest sites. Under the Forest Plan 

this prescription was intended to meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 

and requires preparation of a site-specific management Plan within three years of Forest Plan 

approval. 

• Wildlife and Fish: These sites are high priority for annual monitoring. Any proposed 

enhancement project or management technique must be reviewed and coordinated with 

the FWS. 

• Timber: The following direction applies within a five-chain radius of active or alternate 

nest sites: No programmed harvest; no salvage. No silviculture-related activities 

January 1 through August 31. 

• The following direction applies between five and ten chains from the nest: 

Three or more overmature trees shall be left. No more than 10 percent of the area may 

be impacted per decade. Use of toxic chemicals is prohibited. No salvage permitted. 

All activities prohibited January 1 through August 31. Commercial and personal-use 

H-482
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-31 

firewood cutting shall be an incidental secondary product of timber harvest. Firewood 

cutting and gathering for on-site use is permitted. 

• Facilities: No corridors, roads or trails will be constructed within 400 feet of nest trees. 

Within 650 feet, no construction or reconstruction between February 15 and August 15. 

New utility and transportation corridors will be discouraged. Where no reasonable 

alternatives exist, corridors will be located to impose the least impact. Existing facilities 

are allowed. 

• Protection: No use of chemicals to control insect and disease problems within the 1.5-

mile radius except under recommendation from FWS. 

Management Areas 10 and 11 Direction. Not applicable. 

Species Status in the Project Area. No bald eagles nest within the vicinity of the Proposed 

Action on the Umpqua National Forest. However, bald eagles may winter on the Forest in the 

project vicinity. There are no Midwinter Bald Eagle Survey locations near the Forest (Steenhof 

et al., 2008) but there are three count routes along the Rogue River near Medford and Gold Hill 

within 20 miles of the pipeline route and within 30 miles of the southern boundary of Umpqua 

National Forest. Results of midwinter bald eagle counts from the three routes indicate that 

wintering bald eagles have been increasing along the Rogue River between 1988 and 2005 

(Figure 2-3) and have likewise been significantly increasing along the Pacific Coast (including 

the Northern Pacific Rainforest and Coastal California ecoregions, see Steenhof et al., 2008). 

Figure 2-3 

Total Bald Eagles Counted During Midwinter Surveys, 1988-2005, on the Rogue River in the 

Vicinity of Medford and Gold Hill, Oregon.

Habitat. Habitat requirements for this species are considered to be suitable nest sites and large 

lakes and rivers which serve as a food source. Suitable nest sites are generally within view of 

their feeding grounds near water (USFS, 1990a). Bald eagles are common in the vicinity of 

freshwater lakes and rivers and saltwater (Smith et al., 1997). Nests are built on large, 

prominent trees and snags, usually within a mile of water, and are almost always reused (Isaacs 

and Anthony, 2004). Bald eagle nesting, feeding, and wintering areas are known or potentially 

occur on or near the project area. 

H-483
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-32 

Bald eagles are associated with most habitat types that occur within the Umpqua National 

Forest in proximity to waterbodies, including Westside Riparian-Wetlands and Southwest 

Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest. 

In the Pacific Northwest, bald eagles may begin nest repairs in December but courtship and pair 

bonding generally occur during January and February (Stinson et al., 2001). Adults begin 

incubating eggs by mid to late March, and this lasts for 35 days or so and young hatch near the 

end of April (Stinson et al., 2001). Juveniles typically fledge during July, 11 to 13 weeks after 

hatching (Stinson et al., 2001) but may remain in the nest vicinity for a month, usually through 

August (Isaacs et al., 1983). Immediately before and during egg laying and early incubation are 

considered the most critical, during which even temporary abandonment by adults can leave 

eggs or young susceptible to chilling and inclement weather, excessive solar heating, and 

predation (Romin and Muck, 1999). 

Forest Management Activities. Habitat destruction through logging, road construction, and 

recreational development has in the past had the most affect on this species throughout its 

range. Recent public awareness and concerns have reduced this kind of detriment, at least on 

public lands. 

Unintentional harassment or malicious destruction of nests and shooting eagles does occur, 

although it has not been a problem on this Forest. Public awareness has benefited this species. 

The current management for this species requires, as a minimum, preparing a site-specific 

management plan for each bald eagle site. Plans will be coordinated and reviewed with the 

USFWS (USFS, 1990a). 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Bald eagles are sensitive to human disturbances during nesting 

periods (Fraser et al., 1985; Johnson, 1990; Grubb et al., 1992) and at other times of the year 

(Stalmaster and Newman, 1978; Knight and Knight, 1984; McGarigal et al., 1991). Stinson et 

al. (2001) reviewed bald eagle responses to various human activities at different times in the 

annual cycle (nesting, roosting, foraging) and summarized various distances at which bald 

eagles might be expected to be adversely affected (displacement, nest abandonment) by such 

actions as residential developments, logging, road building, boating, recreational use, and 

presence of pedestrian traffic at several locales across North America. While noting that there 

was a high degree of variability in bald eagle response, Stinson et al. (2001) recommended 

spatial buffers of 1,640 feet (0.31 mile) to reduce bald eagle avoidance of shorelines with 

pedestrian or boat traffic and 1,690 feet (0.32 mile), a threshold within which breeding bald 

eagles exhibit alert responses. No bald eagles nest on the Umpqua National Forest within the 

vicinity of the Proposed Action (within 1 mile or closer); therefore, no effects to nesting bald 

eagles are expected. 

Mitigation. No mitigation specifically targeting impact to bald eagles is proposed within Umpqua 

National Forest. 

Forest Plan Consistency. Since Bald Eagles are no longer listed under the ESA, Forest Plan 

Prescription C3-II, Bald Eagle, intended to meet the requirements of the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, is no longer applicable. The Proposed Action will not be inconsistent with the 

Forest Plan related to management of Bald Eagles. 

H-484
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-33 

2.8 Water Quality Indicator Species 

Steelhead and resident trout have been selected as indicator species because they occupy a 

variety of habitat across the Umpqua National Forest. Streams on the forest are classified 

based on the present and foreseeable uses made of the water, and the potential effects of onsite changes on downstream uses. Class I streams are direct sources of water used as a public 

water supply (more than 10 percent of the public water supply's watershed) or provide habitat 

usable by anadromous salmonids. Class II streams provide habitat usable by resident 

salmonids. Class III streams are perennial streams which are not Class I or II. Class IV 

streams are intermittent or seasonal streams which are not Class I or II. These stream classes 

are referenced extensively in the fish habitat management prescriptions detailed below. 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for Water Quality Indicator Species and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. Fisheries standards and 

guidelines in the Forest Plan, and listed below, are not specific to Forest fish indicator species 

but are primarily designed for the goal of maintaining, enhancing, and protecting habitat for 

populations of resident and anadromous fish both on and off the Forest. These resident and 

anadromous fish include the steelhead and trout indicator species. 

• Maintain all effective shading vegetation on perennial streams. Utilize silvicultural 

practices to establish shade on perennial streams where they are currently lacking. 

• Maintain or improve soil stability adjacent to all streams. When slope stability risks are 

high or very high, use stability buffer specifications found in Forest Plan Soil Productivity 

standards and guidelines. 

• Retain all existing instream large woody material, streamside snags, and streamside 

downed material within riparian areas of perennial streams (Class I, II, and III streams) 

that will not create a blockage to fish passage. Retain standing trees which are likely to 

fall into the stream in the future. 

• Protect riparian areas from prescribed fire and equipment when treating slash in 

adjacent harvest unit, where practical. 

• Fall timber directionally away from riparian areas to protect full width of residual 

vegetation, where practical. 

• Do not apply pesticides within the riparian areas. 

• Keep total fine sediment (<1.0 millimeter) to less than 20 percent by weight in spawning 

gravels. 

• Design new stream crossings to provide for unimpeded fish passage and correct existing 

passage problems on a prioritized schedule. 

• Locate new roads outside riparian areas, preferably on ridgetops, except where a stream 

crossing is necessary. Road reconstruction should not further degrade riparian areas. 

Management Prescriptions. Similar to the Forestwide Standards and Guidelines, management 

prescriptions for fish are not always specific to the forest indicator species for fish, but provide 

for maintaining and improving fish habitat in general. There are several management 

prescriptions for fish and fish habitat that apply only to specific areas or stream sections on the 

Forest. In some cases, these areas are not crossed by the PCGP Project and so the 

management prescriptions are not included here. 

Riparian objectives are to maintain or improve effective shade, existing sediment delivery, 

existing woody material for fish habitat, aquatic food source, and free salmonid fish passage. 

H-485
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-34 

Temperature increases on Class I and II streams and lakes and ponds will be limited to the 

quantitative criteria in Oregon State basin standards (OAR Chapter 340). Existing stream 

temperatures exceed those limits in the Umpqua and Willamette basin standards, so 

temperature will not be increased. 

Prescription C2-I, Riparian Area Class I and II Streams, Lakes, and Ponds, applies to streams 

and adjacent riparian areas that provide habitat for either anadromous or resident salmonids, 

and wildlife. It includes lakes and ponds greater than one acre, along with their riparian areas, 

and streams which supply water to public water systems. The riparian unit extends from 50 to 

250 feet (average 100 feet), measured horizontally from each streambank at the bankfull flow 

mark. The prescription concentrates on maintaining existing wildlife and fish habitat, as well as 

existing water quality and quantity. Environmental alteration is permitted in order to meet 

riparian objectives. Minor changes caused by other resource activities must be mitigated to 

meet water quality, fish, and wildlife needs. 

Prescription C2-II, Riparian Area Class III Stream, applies to perennial streams, lakes, ponds 

and adjacent riparian areas which do not provide salmonid fish habitat. The riparian unit 

extends 30 to 150 feet (average 50 feet) from each streambank at bankfull flow mark. The 

prescription concentrates on maintaining existing water quality and quantity. Moderate 

environmental alteration consistent with riparian objectives is permitted. 

Riparian objectives are to provide large woody material and maintain or improve effective 

shade, existing sediment delivery, and aquatic food sources on Class III streams unless a sitespecific assessment shows that shade removal will not result in temperature increases or 

degradation of aquatic habitat on downstream Class I or II waters. 

Prescription C2-III, Riparian Area Class IV Stream, applies to streams with defined streambanks 

and seasonal surface streamflow, usually described as first- and often second-order channels. 

The riparian unit extends 30 to 150 feet (average 50 feet), measured horizontally from each 

streambank at bankfull flow mark. This prescription maintains existing water quality and 

quantity by maintaining existing channel, bank, and sideslope stability. Extensive environmental 

alteration consistent with riparian objectives is permitted. 

Riparian objectives are to minimize sediment delivery to Class IV streams, and to maintain the 

existing channel profile with a vegetation rootmat in the streambank and stable woody material 

in the channel. 

Prescription C2-IV, Fish Habitat Class I and II Streams, Lakes, and Ponds, applies to streams 

and adjacent riparian areas that provide habitat for either anadromous or resident salmonids, 

and lakes and ponds greater than one acre and their adjacent riparian area. The riparian unit 

extends from 100 to 200 feet (150-foot average), measured horizontally from the streambank at 

bankfull flow mark. This prescription protects and maintains the quality of anadromous and 

resident salmonid fish and wildlife habitat via structural and nonstructural means, as well as 

aquatic organism food sources and water quality and quantity. Environmental alteration is 

permitted in order to meet riparian objectives. Minor changes caused by other resource 

activities must be mitigated to meet water quality, fish, and wildlife needs. 

Riparian objectives are to maintain or improve effective shade and existing sediment delivery on 

Class I and II streams, lakes, and ponds, and to maintain existing and future woody material, 

aquatic food sources and free fish passage. Temperature increases on Class I and II streams 

and lakes and ponds will be limited to the quantitative criteria in Oregon State basin standards 

H-486
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-35 

(OAR Chapter 340). Existing stream temperatures are above those limits in the Umpqua and 

Willamette basin standards, so temperatures will not be increased. 

Prescription C2-V, Fish Habitat Class III Streams applies to perennial streams, lakes, ponds, 

and adjacent riparian areas which do not provide salmonid fish habitat. The riparian area 

extends 30-150 feet (average 50 feet), measured horizontally from each streambank at the 

bankfull flow mark. The prescription protects and maintains aquatic food sources, water quality 

and quantity, and wildlife habitat. Moderate environmental alteration is permitted consistent with 

riparian objectives. 

Riparian objectives are to provide large woody material, and maintain or improve effective 

shade, existing sediment delivery and aquatic food sources on Class III streams unless a sitespecific assessment shows that shade removal will not result in temperature increases or 

degradation of aquatic habitat on downstream Class I or II waters. 

Prescription C2-VI, Fish Habitat Class IV Streams applies to streams with defined streambanks 

and seasonal surface streamflow, usually described as first- and often second-order streams. 

The riparian unit extends 30 to 150 feet (average 50 feet), measured horizontally from each 

streambank at bankfull flow mark. This prescription protects and maintains wildlife habitat and 

downstream fish habitat as well as water quality and quantity by protecting groundcover 

vegetation in the riparian area. Moderate environmental alteration consistent with riparian 

objectives is permitted. Riparian objectives are to minimize sediment delivery to Class IV 

streams, and to maintain the existing channel profile with a vegetation root mat in the 

streambanks and stable woody material in the channel. 

Management Areas. The PCGP Project will cross portions of Forest Plan Management Areas 

10 and 11. These MAs also contain river and stream drainages that are represented as 

resource scheduling areas (RSA) in the Forest Plan. The South Umpqua River in the vicinity of 

the project area is divided into five RSAs: Cow Creek, Elk Creek, Jackson Creek, the Upper 

South Umpqua, and the Lower South Umpqua. The PCGP Project courses along the boundary 

shared by the Cow Creek (02) and Elk Creek (04) RSAs and intersects both of them. The RSAs 

in MAs 10 and 11 are assigned management prescriptions (described above) relative to fish 

habitat and presence. 

Management Area 10 Direction. Riparian and fish habitat prescriptions are assigned for Class I, 

II, III and IV streams in this MA in order to meet management requirements or protect habitat for 

anadromous fish. In areas without anadromous fish (Resource Scheduling Areas (RSA): 2, 11-

16 and 20-22), prescriptions are assigned as follows: prescription C2-I to Class I and II streams 

and lakes and ponds, prescription C2-ll to Class III streams, and C2-Ill to Class IV streams. In 

RSAs 4 through 10, fish habitat prescriptions are assigned as follows: prescription C2-IV to 

Class I and II streams and lakes and ponds, prescription C2-V to Class III streams, and 

prescription C2-VI to Class IV streams. 

Prescription C2-Vlll is assigned on Class I streams with demonstrated unique anadromous fish 

populations. Prescription C2-Vll is assigned on all anadromous fish pools signed by the Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife. These two prescriptions do not apply to areas crossed by the 

PCGP project area. 

Management Area 11 Direction. Riparian and fish habitat prescriptions are assigned to each 

RSA in order to meet management requirements or protect habitat for anadromous fish. These 

prescriptions are assigned to inventoried Class I and II streams. Class III and IV streams that 

H-487
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-36 

are regularly inventoried as a part of watershed management are also assigned special riparian 

prescriptions. In all RSAs without anadromous fish (RSAs: 02, 11-15, 20-22), MR riparian 

prescriptions are assigned as follows: prescription C2-I to Class I and II streams and lakes and 

ponds; prescription C2-ll to Class III streams, and C2-Ill to Class IV streams. In RSAs 04 

through 10, fish habitat prescriptions are assigned as follows: prescription C2-IV to Class I and 

II streams and lakes and ponds; prescription C2-V to Class III streams, and prescription C2-VI 

to Class IV streams. In RSAs 17 and 18 within the boundaries of MA 11, special fish habitat 

prescriptions are assigned as follows: prescription C2-IV to Class I and II streams and lakes and 

ponds, prescription C2-IV to Class III streams, and prescription C2-VI to the remaining Class IV 

streams. These prescriptions identify the maximum amount of vegetative disturbance 

permissible in a riparian area, other assigned prescriptions may indicate less disturbance. 

Prescription C2-Vlll is assigned on Class I streams with demonstrated unique anadromous fish 

populations. Prescription C2-Vll is assigned on all anadromous fish pools signed by the Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife. These two prescriptions do not apply to areas crossed by the 

PCGP Project. 

Species Status in the Project Area. Both winter steelhead and resident trout may be located in 

tributaries of the South Umpqua River, including the Upper Cow Creek watershed where the 

PCGP Project crosses the Forest. Winter steelhead is the largest run of steelhead on the 

Forest and populations in the ODFW South Umpqua Species Management Unit (SMU) are not 

considered to be at risk (ODFW, 2005). Summer steelhead are not known to be present in the 

project area within the Forest (ODFW, 2009 and USFS, 1990a). 

In Tributaries to the Umpqua River, winter steelhead migrate upstream and spawn from January 

through May, egg incubation and fry emergence last from January through June, and 

downstream juvenile migration begins in February and ends in mid-July (ODFW, 2008). In 

tributaries to the Rogue River between Marial and Lost Creek, winter steelhead may migrate 

upstream from September through mid-May but spawning is from mid-February though midMay, egg incubation and fry emergence is from mid-February through June, and downstream 

juvenile migration is from mid-February through June. Juvenile rearing in both drainages is 

likely to be throughout the year (ODFW, 2008c). 

At the time of the Forest Plan, resident trout were thought to occupy nearly 800 miles of streams 

on the Forest (USFS, 1990aFEIS). Trout species include cutthroat, rainbow, brown and brook 

trout. Native cutthroat are distributed primarily in high-gradient (greater than 5 percent) 

headwater streams. Rainbow trout are widely distributed in larger streams and rivers 

throughout the Forest. Brook trout are found in some streams at higher elevations. 

Winter steelhead are not likely to occur in the stream reaches affected by the Proposed Action 

within the Umpqua National Forest. The pipeline will cross two perennial and one intermittent 

tributaries to the East Fork of Cow Creek and the East Fork of Cow Creek between MP 109.33 

and MP 109.78, but the ODFW winter steelhead distribution in those waterbodies does not 

extend to the reaches crossed by the pipeline (ODFW, 2009). The pipeline will be within the 

riparian zone of a Tributary to West Fork Trail Creek but will not cross the waterbody within the 

Umpqua National Forest. Winter steelhead do occur within the West Fork Trail Creek but not in 

the tributary near MP 110.76 (ODFW, 2009). It is assumed that resident trout occupy East Fork 

Cow Creek and some of its tributaries, possibly in the headwater streams where the PCGP 

Project crosses the Forest. 

H-488
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-37 

Habitat. Within the Umpqua National Forest, the pipeline route crosses four perennial streams 

(three of them assumed to be fish-bearing, the other is unknown) and one intermittent stream 

(fish presence is unknown) within the South Umpqua–Upper Cow Creek Fifth Field Watershed. 

The pipeline also will pass through the riparian zone of one intermittent stream (fish presence is 

unknown) that is adjacent to the pipeline but within the Upper Rogue River–Trail Creek Fifth 

Field Watershed. 

Riparian zones associated with East Fork of Cow Creek and the tributaries that will be crossed 

are forested with late successional-old growth forest and/or mid-seral forest (Table 2-5). 

Likewise, the riparian zone associated with the Tributary to West Fork Trail Creek is forested by 

mid-seral forest but a developed road and rock quarry (altered habitat) are also within the 

riparian zone that will be crossed by the pipeline. 

Table 2-5 

Summary of Habitats Removed by the Proposed Action from Riparian Zones Extending One-Site 

Potential Tree Height From Stream Banks and Riparian Reserves, Extending up to Two SitePotential Tree Heights From Stream Banks on The Umpqua National Forest 

Forested Habitat 1 Other Habitat 1

Fifth Field 

Watershed 

(Hydrologic Unit 

Code) 

and 

Riparian Zone 

Late SuccessionalOld Growth Mid-Seral Forest Regenerating ForestClearcut Forest 

Total 

Forested WetlandNon-Forested WetlandUnaltered NonForested HabitatAgricultureAltered Habitat

Total

Total Riparian Zone Impact(acres) 

Upper Cow Creek 

(HU 1710030206) 

One Site Potential 

Tree Height (187 feet) 2.78 2.96 1.43 0 7.17 0.09 0 0 0 0.09 0.18 7.35 

Riparian Reserve 3.48 2.96 3.43 0 9.87 0.09 0 0 0 0 0.09 9.96

Trail Creek 

(HUC 1710030706) 

One Site Potential 

Tree Height (159 feet) 0 1.73 0 0 1.73 0 0 0 0 2.19 2.19 3.92 

Riparian Reserve 0 1.73 0 0 1.73 0 0 0 0 2.19 2.19 3.92

Both Watersheds 

Total 

One Site Potential 

Tree Height 2.78 4.69 1.43 0 8.9 0.09 0 0 0 2.28 2.37 11.27

Riparian Reserve 3.48 4.69 3.43 0 11.6 0.09 0 0 0 2.19 2.28 13.88

 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Construction of the Proposed Action will remove a total of 8.90 

acres of forested vegetation within one site-potential tree height of all riparian zones crossed on 

the Umpqua National Forest and at total of 11.60 acres of forested vegetation within Riparian 

Reserves crossed (Table 2-5). Effects to salmonids (Oregon Coast coho and Southern 

Oregon/Northern California Coast coho), to instream habitats, and to riparian zones during 

pipeline construction and operation were analyzed and discussed in detail in the Draft Biological 

Assessment. Those affects are summarized below: 

H-489
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-38 

• Removal of trees will decrease shade and cause an increase in stream water 

temperatures that are expected to be immeasurable. 

• Construction during summer and early fall is likely to affect invertebrates that are prey to 

juvenile coho but will also coincide with periods of lowest fish use and lowest instream 

flow rates. Effects to prey are expected to be temporary and localized. 

• Some herbicides may have toxic effects on aquatic organisms and may bioaccumulate 

while others do neither. Herbicides will not be used within 100 feet of a waterbody’s 

mean high water mark. 

• The contribution by the Proposed Action to cumulative effects by harvested timber within 

riparian zones on non-federal lands within the Action Area is expected to be a very small 

portion of overall cumulative effects within the reasonably foreseeable future. 

• Turbidity ≥17 mg/L adversely affects juvenile coho. Turbidity levels ≥17 mg/L produced 

by dry open-cut construction methods to cross streams are estimated to temporarily 

affect the water columns downstream from all instream construction sites. 

• Construction requiring blasting to cross 13 streams could cause mortality to fish, eggs, 

and larvae by rupturing swim bladders and addling egg sacs. Adult and juvenile coho 

will be removed and/or prevented from being within 50 feet of blasting sites to the 

maximum extent possible. 

• Fish salvage will occur within isolated construction sites, possibly when adult and 

juvenile coho are present. 

• Lack of LWD is a limiting factor in most streams. Removal of Mid-Seral riparian forest 

(40-80 years old) will have long-term effects to recruitment of LWD and removal of Late 

Successional or Old Growth forest (≥80 years old) will have permanent effects to 

recruitment of LWD because planted conifers will not attain those age classes within the 

50-year life of the project. 

Mitigation. Conservation measures to mitigate effects to salmonids within streams impacted by 

construction of the pipeline have been provided and discussed in the Draft Biological 

Assessment for the Proposed Action. Those measures are summarized below: 

• Construction across and proximate to all perennial and intermittent streams within the 

Riverine analysis area will be during the dates recommended by ODFW to conduct inwater construction. Construction will not coincide with steelhead upstream migration, 

spawning, egg incubation or fry emergence. 

• All waterbodies supporting fisheries will be backfilled with material (gravel, cobble or 

other rock substrates) removed from the trench with the upper 1-foot of the trench 

backfilled with clean gravel which will provide substrate for benthos and potential 

spawning sites for coho. 

• Pacific Connector proposes to place 19 pieces of LWD at streams crossed or adjacent to 

the pipeline centerline in the to compensate for loss of riparian forests during 

construction within the Umpqua National Forest. 

• Riparian forests will be replanted to within 15 feet of the pipeline centerline which will 

mature during the 50-year life of the project to provide shade and LWD to many 

waterbodies. 

In addition to these measures, Pacific Connector has developed a Compensatory Mitigation 

Plan (CMP) to mitigate for unavoidable and/or unmitigated effects of the project. On the 

Umpqua National Forest, Pacific Connector will provide funding to the Forest Service to 

decommission 54.5 miles of roads and repair stream crossings at 23 locations which will provide 

benefits to steelhead and resident trout and aquatic habitats in the Forest. Additionally, Pacific 

H-490
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-39 

Connector will fund commercial and pre-commercial thinning on 1,640 acres that will also 

include fuel treatments to reduce risk of stand-replacing fire events. Downed wood and snag 

creation within 1,200 acres will also be funded and may occur within riparian zones and 

eventually contribute to large woody debris.. 

Forest Plan Consistency. Overall the Proposed Action will be consistent with fisheries 

standards and guidelines in the Forest Plan, included at the beginning of this section. As listed 

above, the implementation of mitigation measures and CMP will maintain, enhance and protect 

habitats of resident and anadromous fish on and off the Forest through placing large woody 

debris at affected streams, reducing fire risks, avoiding use of pesticides, improving stream 

crossings that will reduce blockage and sediment delivery. 

H-491
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-40 

3.0 ROGUE RIVER-SISKIYOU NATIONAL FOREST 

Species. The Management Indicator Species for the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest are 

Columbian black-tail deer, Roosevelt elk, pine marten, northern spotted owl, pileated 

woodpecker, and all woodpeckers (primary cavity nesters). Species are designated as MIS for 

the following reasons: 1) they are dependent on specialized habitat conditions; 2) they require 

early, mature, or old-growth forest conditions for optimum habitat; 3) traditional game species; 

and 4) threatened, endangered, or sensitive species (USFS, 1990c). 

Wildlife habitat management to rehabilitate, maintain, or improve habitats will emphasize 

(USFS, 1990c) indicator species’ habitats, as well as others; examples include signing or 

creation of wildlife trees, manipulating stand or vegetation structure to optimize habitat 

components desired, improving nesting and roosting sites, restricting access during key time 

frames, improving forage, and providing adequate distribution of water sources (USFS, 

1990c).Black-tailed deer and Roosevelt elk habitat will be managed to provide adequate forage, 

hiding cover, and thermal cover conditions throughout the summer and winter range. The pine 

marten, pileated woodpecker, and spotted owl represent mature and old-growth forest habitat 

conditions. 

The northern spotted owl is now listed under the Endangered Species Act and its status is 

covered extensively under separate cover in the Draft Biological Assessment and is not 

discussed here. 

Management Strategies 26, Restricted Riparian, and 28 are the only management strategies 

affected by the project. Management Strategy 26 encompasses 19,512 acres (USFS, 1990c). 

Habitats. MIS on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest are associated with a variety of 

habitats found throughout the forest. However, the PCGP Project will affect only those habitats 

included in Table 3-1, below. In Table 3-1, the areas (acres) of existing forested habitats 

(Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, and 

Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands) within one or more seral stages (clearcut-regenerating 

forest, mid-seral forest, late successional-old growth forest) that will be removed during 

construction and affected during operation are provided in addition to all other affected habitat 

type categories. Effects by the project have been summarized by project component (facility) 

during construction and during operation of the pipeline. Generally, most long-term disturbance 

by the project is due to a 30-foot wide maintenance corridor, centered on the pipeline, that is 

maintained in a herbaceous and/or shrub state for the life of the project. Table 3-1 is referenced 

in discussions for each MIS in the sections, below. 

The forested habitat (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) corresponds to vegetation categories 

described by the Oregon Gap Analysis Project (Oregon Gap; Kagan et al., 1999) and mapped in 

the project area. For Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, the corresponding 

vegetation categories include 1) Douglas-fir-White Fir/Tanoak-Madrone Mixed Forest, and 2) 

Douglas-fir Dominant-Mixed Conifer Forest (Kagan et al., 1999) and were discussed above for 

the Umpqua National Forest. 

Montane Mixed Conifer Forest habitat (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Table 3-1 corresponds to 

the True Fir-Hemlock Montane Forest vegetation type (Kagan et al., 1999) which is described 

as multi-story closed canopy forests. It also has canopy co-dominance of Pacific silver fir and/or 

noble fir along with both western and mountain hemlock. Other tree species present may 

H-492
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-41 

include Douglas-fir, western white pine, subalpine fir, Alaska yellow cedar, and grand fir. Shrub 

layer is dense and diverse with a number of deciduous and evergreen shrubs. It is found in 

middle to higher elevations (Kagan et al., 1999). 

Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands habitat (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Table 3-1 

corresponds to the Ponderosa Pine/White Oak Forest and Woodland vegetation type (Kagan et 

al., 1999) in which ponderosa pine is exclusively the overstory tree at low elevations. White fir, 

grand fir, western larch, incense cedar, Douglas-fir, subalpine fir, and Engelmann spruce are 

dominant at higher elevations. Understory and regeneration layers reflect similar composition 

as overstory. Lower elevations have fewer shrubs, increasing in diversity and abundance with 

elevation and improved soil moisture conditions. It is found at low to mid elevations (Kagan et 

al., 1999). 

Other habitat types affected by the Proposed Action within the Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest (Table 3-1) include: 

Shrub-Steppe is a mosaic of grasses (mostly introduced) and shrubs that include big sagebrush 

subspecies, such as Wyoming, basin, and mountain. Other shrubs found within this cover type 

include low, silver, and three-tip sagebrush, and rabbitbrush. A variety of bunchgrasses are 

scattered with the shrubs, although overgrazing has limited their presence (Kagan et al., 1999). 

Grasslands. West of Cascades, Oregon Gap aggregated this category with agriculture. This 

habitat contains less than 30 percent tree or shrub cover and is generally used for livestock 

grazing. Bunchgrasses dominate native-dominated sites, with mosses, lichens, and native forbs 

occurring throughout. Found at lower elevations (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Within the PCGP 

Project area, this vegetation type is found within Coos, Douglas, and Jackson counties. 

Other types, Developed-Urban and Mixed Environs, Roads, and Open Water, have similar 

characteristics to those described above for the Umpqua National Forest. 

Table 3-1 

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres1

) to Corresponding Wildlife 

Habitat Categories (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in The Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

Forest-Woodland GrasslandShrubland Developed 

Facility 

Forest –Woodland Seral Stage 2

Montane Mixed Conifer ForestSouthwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest Ponderosa Pine Forest and WoodlandsForest-Woodland Sub-Total Shrub-Steppe Grasslands Developed-Urban and Mixed Environs

RoadsOpen WaterTotal

CONSTRUCTION 

DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 37.03 26.64 2.18 65.85 

M-S 8.85 0.95 9.80 

C-R 53.21 10.36 5.38 68.95 

Construction 

Right-of-Way

Tot 99.09 37.95 7.56 144.60 

1.48 2.34 8.39 0.14 156.95 

H-493
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-42 

Forest-Woodland GrasslandShrubland Developed 

Facility 

Forest –Woodland Seral Stage 2

Montane Mixed Conifer ForestSouthwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest Ponderosa Pine Forest and WoodlandsForest-Woodland Sub-Total Shrub-Steppe Grasslands Developed-Urban and Mixed Environs

RoadsOpen WaterTotal

L-O 

M-S 

C-R 

Hydrostatic Discharge 

Sites 3

Tot 

 0.06 0.06 

L-O 

M-S 

C-R Rock Source/Disposal 

Tot 

 0 

L-O 1.64 1.10 2.74 

M-S 0.19 0.43 0.62 

C-R 19.83 3.11 0.23 23.17 

Temporary Extra Work 

Areas

Tot 21.66 4.64 0.23 26.53 

1.38 9.07 11.27 1.89 50.16 

L-O 18.27 16.20 0.90 35.37 

M-S 4.07 0.45 4.52 

C-R 24.71 4.04 1.62 30.37 

Uncleared Storage 

Areas 4

Tot 47.05 20.69 2.52 70.26 

0.41 0.08 2.62 0.09 73.46 

L-O 56.94 43.94 3.08 103.96 

M-S 13.11 1.83 14.94 

C-R 97.77 17.51 7.23 122.51 

Total Construction 

Disturbance

Tot 167.82 63.28 10.31 241.41 

3.27 11.49 11.27 12.96 0.23 280.63 

OPERATION 

DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 11.71 8.52 0.75 20.98 

M-S 3.27 0.35 3.62 

C-R 17.69 3.17 1.72 22.58 

30-foot Maintenance 

Corridor 

Tot 32.67 12.04 2.47 47.18 

0.54 0.77 1.14 0.04 49.67 

L-O 11.71 8.52 0.75 20.98 

M-S 3.27 0.35 3.62 

C-R 17.69 3.17 1.72 22.58 

Total Operation 

Disturbance 

Tot 32.67 12.04 2.47 47.18 

0.54 0.77 1.14 0.04 49.67 

1

 Acres disturbed were evaluated using GIS; footprints for each component (temporary construction right-of-way, temporary extra work 

areas, temporary access roads, uncleared storage areas, pipe storage yards, aboveground facilities, permanent easement, and 30-

foot maintenance corridor) were overlaid on the digitized vegetation coverage. 2

 Forest-Woodland Seral Stages are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be 

≥40 but ≤80 years old; C-R, Clearcut-Regenerating Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old. 3

 Small brush or trees may be cleared by a rubber-tired rotary or flail motor (brush hog) or by hand with machetes/chainsaws. No soil 

disturbance will occur. A rubber-tired or track hoe will be utilized to lay the discharge line and to remove the saturated haybales or 

filter bags upon completion of hydrostatic discharge. 4

 PCGP uncleared storage areas (UCSAs) will not be cleared of trees during construction. These areas will be used to store forest 

slash, stumps and dead and downed log materials that will be removed and scattered across the right-of-way after construction during 

restoration and are considered as temporary insignificant habitat modifications. 

3.1 Columbian Black-tailed Deer 

The black tailed deer is listed as an indicator species because of its economic importance in 

Region 6 (USFS, 1990). The entire Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest is summer and/or 

H-494
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-43 

winter range (USFS, 1990) for Columbian black-tailed deer. Summer and winter range habitat 

are both important to the black-tailed deer since their survival depends on the condition and 

presence of winter range, and on early successional vegetation stages or non-forest habitat for 

forage in summer range (USFS, 1990). Deer summer range capability indices are useful 

indicators for species needing non-forested habitat for survival (USFS, 1990). 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for Columbian black-tailed deer and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. 

• Manage habitat to provide adequate forage, hiding cover, and thermal cover conditions 

throughout summer and winter range. 

• Habitat capability levels are to be consistent with those needed to meet and sustain 

state big game population benchmark levels, which are the number of deer that must be 

produced on an ODFW Management Unit before restrictions or regulations designed to 

limit excessive harvest can begin to be relaxed (USFS, 1990c). Benchmarks must be 

reached prior to initiation of antlerless hunts. (USFS, 1990c) 

• The Forest Plan allocates 67,700 acres to winter range management. Since 1990, the 

Forest Plan anticipated that deer winter range carrying capacity would improve as 

management objectives for deer winter range needs were implemented; these 

improvements were expected to result in a capability to support up to 16,700 deer, which 

is 10 percent above the ODFW benchmark level of 15,200 deer (USFS, 1990c) on the 

Forest. Big game winter range timing limitations are December 1-April 30. Construction 

constraints deem that there shall be no disturbance within designated habitat during that 

period (App. 3D, 54). 

Management Prescriptions. Management Strategy (MS) 26, Restricted Riparian, and MS 28, 

Late Successional Reserves. 

Management Strategy 26 goals are to protect the riparian habitats associated with perennial 

streams for wildlife, fishery, and other beneficial uses, and to protect perennial streams from 

harmful water temperature variations, blockages, and sediment deposits. 

• Deer: Maintain summer range to provide forage, hiding, and thermal cover. Restricted 

operating period Apr 1-June 30 may be imposed in identified fawning or calving areas. 

• Recreation-Roaded Natural: Manage for Retention Visual Quality Objective, by blending 

and shaping regeneration openings with natural terrain, and assessing visual resource 

impacts in all project analyses. 

• Wildlife, Fish, and Plants: Maintain existing fish habitat capability. If sensitive species 

are found, avoidance or other mitigation shall be used for species whose viability has 

been identified as a concern. Specific practices are outlined for the following species: 

Northern Spotted Owl, osprey, goshawk, woodpeckers, elk, bald eagle, and peregrine 

falcon. 

• Timber: Harvest is not programmed and normally would not occur. 

• Water: Evaluate effects on stream courses. 

Species Status in the Project Area. In 1990, the black-tailed deer population was expected to 

increase by 15 percent per decade for the first two decades, then return to then-current growth 

levels and stabilize by the end of the sixth decade (USFS, 1990c). Based on ODFW 

estimations of the total deer population and the percentages of suitable habitat within the three 

Oregon Wildlife Management Units (WMU) on the forest (WMU-22 - Dixon, WMU-28 - 

Applegate, and WMU-30 - Rogue), the population was estimated at approximately 12,000, at 

H-495
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-44 

the time of the Plan (USFS, 1990). Trend data from ODFW indicate that the population had 

declined by approximately 24 percent since peak years in the early 1960s (USFS, 1990). With 

the exception of fluctuations generated by extreme weather conditions, the 1990 deer 

population was described as healthy, and its numbers adequate to provide success to one out 

of every 4 to 5 hunters (USFS, 1990). 

ODFW’s Rogue WMU 30 coincides with the portion of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

within which the Proposed Action is located. ODFW (2008a) has compiled harvest data on 

black-tailed deer within Wildlife Management Unit 30 for the 2007 season and prior harvest 

seasons beginning with 2003 (ODFW, 2008b). From 2003 through 2007, days per harvest of 

deer and percent hunter success have been relatively consistent, showing no significant trends 

(Table 3-2). 

Table 3-2 

Harvest Statistics for Black-Tailed Deer within the 

 Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30, 2003-2007 

Harvest 

Year 

Total 

Hunters 

Total 

Hunter 

Days 

Total 

Males 

(antlered)

Total NonMales 

(non-antlered) Total

Days 

per 

Harvest 

Percent

Hunter 

Success

2007 10326 64071 2002 31 2033 32 20 

2006 9158 56285 1574 12 1586 35 17 

2005 7279 44293 1326 33 1359 33 19 

2004 8682 56245 1794 18 1812 31 21 

2003 9478 64424 1307 134 1441 45 15 

Thermal cover had become limiting on many areas of the forest by 1990 and for the next 20 to 

30 years it was expected that forage could become limiting. As a result, the deer population 

was expected to remain constant for a time then drop somewhat from 2010-2030. Since deer 

are not as sensitive to these habitat factors as elk, actual population variations were thought to 

be less drastic than indicated by the habitat conditions. In 1990, USFS believed that increased 

demand for deer hunting might not be met in the future (USFS, 1990); however, that possibility 

does not appear supported by harvest data in Table 3-2. 

Annual reports for each WMU provided by ODFW include 1) a population index - ODFW’s Trend 

Count for animals in the WMU, conducted along a fixed route each year, usually at the end of 

winter, 2) productivity (young per female from ODFW’s Composition Count data reported in 

December), and 3) an estimate of the maximum overwinter juvenile survival rate (derived from 

composition count data in December and composition count data the following March). There is 

no significant trend in fawns per doe (young per adult female) nor is there any significant trend 

in ODFW’s Trend Count in Table 3-3. Estimated young overwinter survival relative to adult 

overwinter survival indicates that juvenile black-tailed deer in the Rogue Wildlife Management 

Unit 30 have had very high overwinter survival rates relative to adult deer - estimates near or 

greater than 1 - since 2000 (Table 3-3). 

Habitat. Black-tailed deer use of habitats on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest are 

assumed to be similar to those described above, for black-tailed deer on the Umpqua National 

Forest. Black-tailed deer have general associations with all terrestrial habitats that are present 

in the project area including forested-woodland types, grassland-shrubland types, and 

developed (urban and mixed environs) types (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Most black-tailed 

deer that summer in the high Cascades winter at lower elevations on the west slope, although 

H-496
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-45 

some wintering deer may occur east of the Cascade crest (ODFW, 2003b). Winter loss of 

black-tailed deer is generally far less than for mule deer, because the snow does not remain on 

the valley floors for extended periods and a crust does not form on the surface as it does on the 

east side of the Cascades (ODFW, 2003b). The Proposed Action will cross 2.0 miles of Lake 

Creek deer winter range on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest which includes ODFW 

very sensitive wildlife areas. 

Table 3-3 

Population Trends, Annual Productivity, and Estimated Overwinter Survival for Juvenile Blacktailed Deer within the Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30, 2000-2008 

Year 

Population 

Index 1 

Young per 

Adult Female 2

Young per 

Adult – Fall 

(Ratio A) 3

Young per 

Adult – Spring 

(Ratio B) 4

Maximum 

Overwinter 

Juvenile 

Survival Rate 5

2008 8.1 0.43 0.38 - - 

2007 5.5 0.69 0.50 0.61 1.22 

2006 - 0.44 0.35 0.63 1.80 

2005 6.5 0.29 0.23 0.45 1.96 

2004 0.0 0.41 0.34 0.38 1.10 

2003 6.0 0.45 0.35 0.43 1.24 

2002 7.3 0.43 0.34 0.57 1.67 

2001 7.1 0.53 0.45 0.40 0.89 

2000 6.7 0.42 0.35 0.57 1.63 

1 Population Index is ODFW’s Trend Count for the Hunt Area which is conducted along a fixed route 

each year, usually at the end of winter (ODFW, 2008b). 2 Productivity data is young per female from ODFW’s Composition Count data reported as Young per 

100 Females counted in December (ODFW, 2008b). 3 Ratio A (White et al., 1996) is the ratio of Young per Adult, derived from Composition Count data 

(Males per 100 Females and Young per 100 Females) counted in December (ODFW, 2008b). 4 Ratio B (White et al., 1996) is the ratio of Young per Adult (Young per 100 Adults) counted in March 

(ODFW, 2008b). 5 Maximum Overwinter Juvenile Survival is related to ratios A and B and to the following relationship 

of adult over-winter survival rate (Ŝa) and juvenile over-winter survival rate (Ŝj

) by the formula (see 

equation 9 in Paulik and Robson, 1969): Ŝj ⁄ Ŝa = B ⁄ A or Ŝj

 = Ŝa (B ⁄ A). Since many of the estimates 

of maximum juvenile survival rates are greater than 1, they indicate survival of adults was less than 

juveniles over winter which is highly unlikely. 

Forest Management Activities. Timber harvest activities have created the most impacts on deer 

populations. Browse created by conversion of old-growth timber to young, thrifty stands has 

caused a large expansion in the number of animals. However, in many cases, the amount and 

arrangement of thermal/hiding cover has not allowed for full utilization of the forage. 

Development of the road system has also had a detrimental effect due to increased harassment 

and hunter access (USFS, 1990). 

Any pest control that removes palatable grasses, forbs, and brush directly affects the suitability 

of the habitat; wildfire produces the same effects. However, these activities can also be 

beneficial if they return the vegetation to more forage-producing seral stages (USFS, 1990). 

Effects of Proposed Action: Direct mortality of black-tailed deer due to the Proposed Action is 

possible if vehicles collide with animals traveling to and from construction sites (see discussion 

under Umpqua National Forest, Section 1.5, above). Black-tailed deer would be expected to 

avoid noise from vehicles and/or increased road traffic, blasting, and aerial fly-overs. Following 

H-497
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-46 

reclamation of the pipeline corridor, black-tailed deer may utilize the corridor for travel and for 

foraging, depending on vegetation species planted and rapidity of successful revegetation. 

After construction of the PCGP Project, there will possibly be a secondary impact (Comer, 1982) 

on harvest rates with upgraded access to previously inaccessible areas; hunters are expected 

to achieve greater success, at least temporarily, with increased access. In addition, increased 

access could increase poaching of game animals and nongame wildlife on a local level (see 

discussions under Umpqua National Forest, Section 1.5, above). 

No information has been found that identifies specific deer fawning areas or fawning habitats 

within the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. Construction may coincide with fawning 

generally in late spring (May-early June). Fawning areas may be proximate to winter ranges or 

may be at higher elevations than winter range. If construction is in progress, parturient females 

will most likely avoid construction areas though the extent (distance) of avoidance cannot be 

estimated. Avoidance of construction areas by big game during winter and during parturition is 

also expected and may adversely affect animals in one or more ways, including increased 

energy expense if they escape from disturbances or are displaced to areas of deeper snow 

accumulation, use of suboptimal habitats that do not provide adequate functions (food, shelter, 

escape cover), and use of habitats that increase the risk of predation. The expected 

consequences of these responses would be decreased over-winter survival and decreased 

natality potentially related to embryo resorption, abortion, and/or predation of neonates (for 

example, see Bradshaw et al., 1998). 

Construction of the PCGP Project will remove 241 acres of forested habitat (Table 3-1) including 

104 acres of late successional-old growth, 15 acres of mid-seral forest, and 123 acres of 

clearcut-regenerating forest within Rogue River – Siskiyou National Forest. Black-tailed deer 

are likely to be generally associated with the forest types affected and all structural conditions of 

affected forest (shrub-seedling, small tree, medium tree, large tree, giant tree, single and multistory forests, open, moderate, and closed canopy forests). The project will remove 3 acres of 

shrub, 11 acres of grassland, and 11 acres of developed urban environs. Black-tailed deer are 

generally associated with a variety of shrub/grassland structural conditions, grass-forb habitats, 

and low density urban conditions (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Given that black-tailed deer are 

such generalists, effects to any one type of structural habitat condition with replacement by 

another structural stage (eg. shrub-seedling, grass-forb) will not adversely affect the species. 

Mitigation. Seasonal road closures on public lands have been applied to big-game winter range 

within National Forest lands to minimize the effect of winter stress on deer and elk. Timber 

removal is scheduled to begin from May 1 in Year 1 and continue through February 28 of Year 2 

with two exceptions: 1) timber will be completed by November 15 within designated big game 

winter range, and 2) timber removal will begin after September 30 in Year 1 if the project is 

located within 0.25 mile of known or predicted spotted owl sites. Therefore impact to wintering 

Columbian black-tailed deer will be avoided during timber removal activities. Impact to wintering 

Columbian black-tailed deer will also be avoided during the winter period from December 1 - 

April 30 by initiating construction on winter range in May in Year 2 and ending prior to onset of 

winter (November 15). 

After pipeline construction, deer use open areas for foraging (Jageman, 1994). The PCGP 

Project right-of-way provides an opportunity for developing high quality feeding areas (Lees, 

1989) for deer species, especially if noxious weeds are controlled and high quality native forage 

is seeded. As required by FERC’s Upland Plan, Pacific Connector consulted with the NRCS, 

the BLM, and the Forest Service regarding specific seeding dates and recommended seed 

mixtures for the project area, including an important winter forage species, wedgeleaf 

H-498
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-47 

ceanothus, in riparian areas and areas outside of the 30-foot maintenance corridor on National 

Forest lands. The recommendations have been incorporated into the project-specific ECRP 

(see Biological Assessment, Appendix F). The ECRP describes the procedures that will be 

implemented to minimize erosion and enhance revegetation success for the entire project. The 

ECRP describes the procedures that will be utilized to minimize the spread of noxious weeds as 

a result of project construction. The ECRP describes the silvicultural prescriptions that will be 

implemented in areas that are outside the permanent easement. Seeding mixtures and 

inhibition of noxious weeds will enhance forage production. 

Vegetation management over the long-term will benefit winter range browse and forage for 

Columbian black-tailed deer. Vegetation within the permanent easement will be periodically 

maintained by mowing, cutting, and trimming (either by mechanical or hand methods). In 

upland areas, the permanent easement will be maintained in a condition where trees or shrubs 

greater than 6 feet tall will be controlled (cut or trimmed) within 15 feet either side of the 

centerline (for a total of 30 cleared feet). Maintenance activities are expected to occur 

approximately every 3 to 5 years depending on the growth rate of vegetation. During 

maintenance, vegetation will be cut/trimmed in 4 to 6-foot lengths and scattered across the 

permanent easement to naturally decompose and to discourage OHV traffic, benefit wildlife 

habitat, and to decompose naturally. 

Open trenches during PCGP Project construction have the potential to entrap deer. Within 

delineated big-game winter and summer range, Pacific Connector will leave trench segments 

(>5 feet wide) of the proposed pipeline alignment untrenched and herbaceously vegetated 

(every 0.5 mile and at visible wildlife game trails) to serve as a route (i.e., green bridge or 

landscape connector) for big game across the construction right-of-way until pipe is ready to be 

installed (Forman et al., 2003). Alternatively, Pacific Connector will install soft plugs (backfilled 

trench materials) in the trench after excavation at these distances to provide wildlife passage. 

Additionally, 20-foot gaps will be left in spoil and topsoil stockpiles at all hard or soft plug 

locations and a corresponding gap in the welded pipe string will be left in these locations. 

Suitable ramps will be installed from the bottom of the trench to the top to prevent potential 

wildlife entrapment within the trench. 

Forest Plan Consistency. On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, big game winter range 

timing limitations are December 1 to April 30. Construction constraints deem that there shall be 

no disturbance within designated habitat during that period. Construction of the PCGP Project 

will not occur during that period. Big game travel lanes will not be blocked by construction or 

operation of the Proposed Action. Columbian black-tailed deer are expected to utilize the 

project right-of-way for travel and foraging and was discussed, above. 

Since there is no significant trend in fawns per doe (young per adult female) nor is the any 

significant trend in ODFW’s Trend Count for deer in the Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30

(Table 3-3). There is no reason to expect that deer winter range carrying capacity on the Rouge 

River – Siskiyou National Forest would be limited by the Proposed Action. Indeed, estimated 

young overwinter survival relative to adult overwinter survival indicates that juvenile black-tailed 

deer in the Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30 have had very high overwinter survival rates 

relative to adults (Table 3-3) which may indicate carrying capacity objectives of the Forest are 

being achieved. The Proposed Action would be consistent with the Forest Plan. 

H-499
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-48 

3.2 Roosevelt Elk 

Economic importance and high demand for elk hunting makes the Roosevelt elk an indicator 

species (USFS, 1990). The Roosevelt elk is dependent on winter range for survival (USFS, 

1990). The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified 

in the Forest Plan to conserve and manage for Roosevelt elk and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. 

The management of Roosevelt elk winter range is critical for the maintenance of existing herds, 

and even more so in order to increase the population. Winter range generally lies below 4,000 

feet, but can be quite variable. It can be divided into three separate areas based on amount 

and type of use, which include core, critical, and peripheral areas. Core winter range is utilized 

by 90 percent of the animals during 90 percent of the winters. Peripheral winter range is an 

area used by a few animals in most winters or by large numbers during mild winters; it does little 

in maintaining the big game population since either few animals use it or conditions are mild so 

that little stress is placed on the animals. Critical winter range is the area the animals 

concentrate in during extremely severe winters. It is usually a small segment of the core winter 

range that is located at the lowest elevations or otherwise provides a special set of properties 

which allow survival under extreme conditions. Critical winter range is most useful in preventing 

total loss of a population during extremely severe winters. Under these conditions, a large 

proportion of the wintering animals are either trapped on less favorable areas or are otherwise 

unable to move to critical winter range. Sufficient numbers are able to survive on these critical 

winter range areas to repopulate the summer range, should large numbers of animals die on the 

other winter range areas (USFS, 1990). 

Management Prescription. MS 26, Restricted Riparian 

• Elk: Maintain summer range to provide forage, hiding and thermal cover. Restricted 

operating period April 1 to June 30 may be imposed in identified fawning or calving 

areas. 

• See description for Black-tailed deer, Section 2.1, above. 

Species Status in the Project Area. The historic elk population in the vicinity of the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest was affected by the loss of cover on much of the lands beyond 

the forest boundaries, which resulted in the loss of much winter range capability off the Forest. 

This relative lack of cover appears to inhibit migration to the even lower elevation areas that 

might be capable of supporting the animals; therefore, elk are wintering at higher elevations 

than they historically may have, resulting in winter range being a limiting factor to further growth 

of the present elk herds. The opportunity for further recolonization of the remaining habitat on 

the Dead Indian Plateau as well as within the Siskiyou Mountains portion of the Forest still 

remains (USFS, 1990). 

In the early 1980s, lower cow/calf ratios and reduced calf-survival rates due to late calf crops 

occurred. Because of the decline, restrictions were placed on the hunting season and a 

cooperative road closure program was instituted. The result was an improved bull/cow ratio (11 

to 12 bulls/100 cows) for the years following the changes (USFS, 1990). As a result of 

continued herd expansion into previously unoccupied habitat, the elk population was expected 

to increase at about 5 percent per year, with occupancy of all available range in next 20 to 30 

years, from 2010 through 2030. However, it was not expected that the increases will meet 

hunter demands because increased restrictions and regulations have been placed upon the 

hunting public to reduce the pressure on the existing herd. These restrictions have been 

resulted in reduced recruitment of younger hunters. Increasing restrictions is likely to further 

H-500
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-49 

reduce the percentage of the people who remain interested in hunting. Conversely, increasing 

supply will reduce restrictions and increase the percentage of the public interested in hunting 

(USFS, 1990). 

ODFW’s Rogue WMU 30 coincides with the portion of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 

within which the Proposed Action is located. ODFW (2008a) has compiled harvest data on 

Roosevelt elk within WMU 30 for the 2007 season and prior harvest seasons beginning with 

2003 (ODFW, 2008b). ODFW harvest data from 2003 through 2007 indicate that days per 

harvest of Roosevelt elk and percent hunter success have been relatively consistent, showing 

no significant trends (Table 3-4). 

Table 3-4 

Harvest Statistics for Roosevelt Elk within the Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30, 2003-2007 

Harvest 

Year 

Total 

Hunters 

Total 

Hunter 

Days 

Total 

Males 

(antlered)

Total NonMales 

(non-antlered) Total

Days 

per 

Harvest 

Percent

Hunter 

Success

2007 3645 18790 144 106 250 75 7 

2006 3280 17125 167 76 243 70 7 

2005 3289 16703 156 50 206 81 6 

2004 3651 21971 142 64 206 107 6 

2003 4248 24286 198 125 323 75 8 

As of 1990, the population had been increasing 5 to 8 percent per year, with an estimated 

existing population of 900 animals. Expansion depends on the condition and availability of 

winter range, both on and off the Forest, and the quality of habitat available on summer range. 

A predictive model, assuming adequate core winter range and based upon serial stages and 

road use factors, indicates a capability to support about 1,800 elk on the Prospect and Butte 

Falls Districts. If elk occupied all available habitat on Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, a 

capability to support over 3,000 elk was predicted (USFS, 1990). 

Table 3-5 

Population Trends and Annual Productivity for Roosevelt Elk 

within the Rogue Wildlife Management Unit 30, 1998-2006 

Year 

Population 

Index 1 

Young per 

Adult Female 2

2008 - 0.40 

2007 - 0.28 

2006 2.1 0.37 

2005 - 0.40 

2004 3.0 0.34 

2003 2.8 0.34 

2002 3.3 0.31 

2001 3.9 0.41 

2000 0.41 1 Population Index is ODFW’s Trend Count for the Hunt Area which is 

conducted along a fixed route each year, usually at the end of winter 

(ODFW, 2008a). 2 Productivity data is young per female from ODFW’s Composition Count 

data reported as Young per 100 Females counted in December (ODFW, 

2008a).

H-501
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-50 

Although population data for Roosevelt elk in Wildlife Management Unit 30 are limited, the 

number of calves per adult cow (young per adult female) appear to have been relatively 

constant since 2000 (Table 3-5). However, the limited population index for Roosevelt elk in the 

Rogue WMU shows a significant decreasing trend (P<0.05) from 2001 through 2006 (Figure 3-

1). No population indices are available for 2007 or 2008. 

Based on management of winter range under guidelines in the Forest Plan, improved winter 

range conditions and a better balance in winter and summer range could result in a capability to 

support up to 2,700 elk (higher than the ODFW benchmark level of 1,750 animals) within 5 or 6 

decades past 1990 (USFS, 1990c). However, the population index trend revealed in Figure 3-1 

does not indicate that positive population growth has occurred. 

Figure 3-1 

Trend in ODFW’s Population Index (see footnote to Table 3-5) for Roosevelt Elk in the Rogue 

Wildlife Management Unit 30 Which Coincides with the PCGP Project on the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest. 

Habitat. The Roosevelt elk is a grazing and browsing animal (USFS, 1990). It forages on 

ground/shrub or understory vegetation (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). It is dependent on winter 

range for survival, and benefits from early successional stages for forage throughout its range 

(USFS, 1990). Thermal cover is important (USFS, 1990). During winters of heavy snowfall, elk 

in the Cascades move to lower elevations in November and December, and move back up in 

March and April for spring green-up. Altitudinal movements occur in the Cascade Range, but 

rarely is snow depth sufficient to cause movements in the Oregon Coast Range (Johnson and 

O’Neil, 2001). 

Winter range is usually within forested sites which provide protection against weather, as well 

rich with lichens and other plants used as forage (ODFW, 2003b); however, in Jackson County, 

winter range also consists of other habitat types such as grassy meadows, recent clearcuts, 

industrial forest lands, agricultural fields, orchards, and urban edges. Most elk range is on BLM 

and National Forest Service lands (ODFW, 2003b); however, within the PCGP Project area, 

most winter range occurs on private lands (USFS, 1990c). There is insufficient critical elk winter 

range on the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest to carry the ODFW benchmark level of 

2,000 animals during severe winters, resulting in increased dependence on private land 

H-502
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-51 

pastures as elk winter range with resulting conflicts from loss of needed livestock forage and/or 

damage to property or tree seedlings (USFS, 1990). 

The Forest supports about 204,800 acres of elk winter range mostly located on the Butte Falls 

and Prospect Ranger Districts. Of this, approximately 67,700 acres has been identified as core 

winter range. In good condition, core winter range can relieve some of the burden from the 

critical winter range areas, since fewer animals will die even in the extreme winters. All critical 

winter range on the Forest is located within the core winter range (USFS, 1990). The Proposed 

Action will affect deer winter range but not affect core winter range within the Forest. 

Roosevelt elk have general associations with Montane Mixed Conifer and Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood forested types, Westside Grasslands, and may be present in Urban 

and Mixed Environs (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). They have no apparent association with 

Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands or with Shrub-Steppe habitats (Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001) that will be affected by the Proposed Action within the Rogue River-Siskiyou National 

Forest. 

Forest Management Activities. Current timber harvesting has created a large amount of 

available forage but has also decreased available thermal and hiding cover. Total cover has 

remained at or above adequate levels, although the distribution is not great, with large distances 

between cover patches in some areas, and thermal cover shortages in other areas. This may 

be limiting some sub-populations to 20 percent of their potential. During warm summers, heat 

build-up on an exposed animal creates a heavy thermal load which takes energy to eliminate. 

This energy could have been stored as fat for winter (USFS, 1990). 

Much of the land adjacent to the forest is capable of being winter range. Due to harvest 

practices on these adjacent lands, much of the winter range carrying capacity has been lost. 

Much of the forest’s summertime elk population historically wintered on these adjacent lands. 

As the population increases, it is expected that there will be increased conflicts with private 

landowners, resulting in increased pressure on the remaining forest winter range (USFS, 1990). 

Due to past timber harvest, an imbalance in forage and cover is likely to occur from 2010 to 

2030. At that time, existing harvest areas will likely have reached the pole seral stage and will 

be shading out most forage production, and there will not be sufficient remaining older stands to 

be harvested to provide adequate replacement forage areas (USFS, 1990). Forage needed to 

meet deer and elk needs on winter range portion of range allotments is reserved for wildlife, 

which could result in restrictions in grazing allotments if forage production is inadequate. In 

1990, there were problems in some riparian zones and meadows, and it was felt that the 

conflicts would increase in subsequent years (USFS, 1990). 

Any pest management activities that remove grass or browse species in summer or winter 

range can affect the elk. Wildfire creates habitat if sufficient thermal and hiding cover remain; 

fire suppression has decreased elk habitat to some extent over the last 50 years since it has 

allowed the early seral stages to mature, thereby reducing forage supply. However, controlled 

fire activities after timber harvest have created favorable seral stages for expansion of the 

population. The most critical habitat problems for summer range are: road development, loss 

of forage areas, and difficulties in managing the road system to lessen impacts on elk (USFS, 

1990). 

Numerous studies have shown that Roosevelt elk are sensitive to human disturbances such as 

motorized travel on and off roads (Rowland et al., 2000). Roads are generally avoided by elk 

H-503
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-52 

when they are open, but are heavily utilized by elk as travel corridors when closed (ODFW, 

2003b). 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Direct mortality of Roosevelt elk due to the Proposed Action is 

possible if vehicles collide with animals traveling to and from construction sites (see discussion 

under Umpqua National Forest, Section 1.4, above). Elk would be expected to avoid noise from 

vehicles and/or increased road traffic, blasting, and aerial fly-overs. Following reclamation of 

the pipeline corridor, Roosevelt elk may utilize the corridor for travel and for foraging (Brusnyk 

and Westworth, 1985), depending on vegetation species planted and rapidity of successful 

revegetation. After construction of the PCGP Project, there will possibly be a secondary impact 

(Comer, 1982) on harvest rates with upgraded access to previously inaccessible areas; hunters 

are expected to achieve greater success, at least temporarily, with increased access. In 

addition, increased access could increase poaching of game animals and nongame wildlife on a 

local level (see discussions under Umpqua National Forest, Section 1.4, above). 

Unlike big game winter ranges, no information has been provided that identifies specific elk 

calving areas or habitats. Even so, with elk habitats distributed throughout the project area, 

construction may coincide with calving times, generally in late spring (May to early June). 

Calving areas may be proximate to winter ranges or may be at higher elevations than winter 

range. If construction is in progress, parturient females will most likely avoid construction areas 

though the extent (distance) of avoidance cannot be estimated. Avoidance of construction 

areas by big game during winter and during parturition is also expected and may adversely 

affect animals in one or more ways, including increased energy expense if they escape from 

disturbances or are displaced to areas of deeper snow accumulation, use of suboptimal habitats 

that do not provide adequate functions (food, shelter, escape cover), and use of habitats that 

increase the risk of predation. The expected consequences of these responses would be 

decreased over-winter survival and decreased natality potentially related to embryo resorption, 

abortion, and/or predation of neonates (for example, see Bradshaw et al., 1998). 

Construction of the PCGP Project will remove 168 acres of Montane Mixed Conifer Forest and 

63 acres of Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest within Rogue River – Siskiyou 

National Forest (Table 3-1), both of which have general associations with Roosevelt elk. Effects 

to those two forest types include removing 101 acres of late successional-old growth, 15 acres 

of mid-seral forest, and 115 acres of clearcut-regenerating forest. Roosevelt elk are likely to be 

generally associated with the forest types affected and all structural conditions of affected forest 

(shrub-seedling, small tree, medium tree, large tree, giant tree, single and multi-story 

forest,,open, moderate, and closed canopy forests). The project will remove 3 acres of shrub, 

11 acres of grassland, and 11 acres of developed urban environs. Roosevelt elk are generally 

associated with a variety of shrub/grassland structural conditions, grass-forb habitats, and low 

density urban conditions (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Given that Roosevelt elk are such 

generalists, effects to any one type of structural habitat condition with replacement by another 

structural stage (e.g. shrub-seedling, grass-forb) will not adversely affect the species. 

Mitigation. Seasonal road closures on public lands have been applied to big-game winter range 

within National Forest lands to minimize the effect of winter stress on deer and elk. Timber 

removal is scheduled to begin from May 1 in Year 1 and continue through February 28 of Year 2 

with two exceptions: 1) timber will be completed by November 15 within designated big game 

winter range, and 2) timber removal will begin after September 30 in Year 1 if the project is 

located within 0.25 mile of known or predicted spotted owl sites. Therefore impact to wintering 

Roosevelt elk will be avoided during timber removal activities. Impact to wintering Roosevelt elk 

H-504
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-53 

will also be avoided during the winter period from December 1 to April 30 by initiating 

construction on winter range in May of Year 2 and ending prior to onset of winter (November). 

Open trenches during PCGP Project construction have the potential to entrap elk. Within 

delineated big-game winter and summer range, Pacific Connector will leave trench segments 

(>5 feet wide) of the proposed pipeline alignment untrenched and herbaceously vegetated 

(every 0.5 mile and at visible wildlife game trails) to serve as a route (i.e., green bridge or 

landscape connector) for big game across the construction right-of-way until pipe is ready to be 

installed (Forman et al., 2003). Alternatively, Pacific Connector will install soft plugs (backfilled 

trench materials) in the trench after excavation at these distances to provide wildlife passage. 

Additionally, 20-foot gaps will be left in spoil and topsoil stockpiles at all hard or soft plug 

locations and a corresponding gap in the welded pipe string will be left in these locations. 

Suitable ramps will be installed from the bottom of the trench to the top to prevent potential 

wildlife entrapment within the trench. 

After pipeline construction, elk tend to use pipeline rights-of-way for feeding areas, especially 

when hunting is not occurring (Lees, 1989). The PCGP Project right-of-way provides an 

opportunity for developing high quality feeding areas (Lees, 1989) for elk species, especially if 

noxious weeds are controlled and high quality native forage is seeded. Big-game winter range 

disturbed by the PCGP Project during construction will be revegetated with preferred elk forage 

species as recommended by ODFW, BLM, and Forest Service (see ECRP in Appendix 1B to 

Resource Report 1), including an important winter forage species, wedgeleaf ceanothus, in 

riparian areas and areas outside of the 30-foot maintenance corridor on National Forest lands. 

The recommendations have been incorporated into the project-specific ECRP (see Biological 

Assessment, Appendix F). The ECRP describes the procedures that will be implemented to 

minimize erosion and enhance revegetation success for the entire project, describes the 

procedures that will be utilized to minimize the spread of noxious weeds as a result of project 

construction,and describes the silvicultural prescriptions that will be implemented in areas that 

are outside the permanent easement. Seeding mixtures and inhibition of noxious weeds will 

enhance forage production. 

Vegetation within the 30-foot wide maintenance corridor will be periodically maintained by 

mowing, cutting, and trimming (either by mechanical or hand methods). In upland areas, the 

permanent easement will be maintained in a condition where trees or shrubs greater than 6 feet 

tall will be controlled (cut or trimmed) within 15 feet either side of the centerline (for a total of 30 

cleared feet). Maintenance activities are expected to occur approximately every 3-5 years 

depending on the growth rate of vegetation. During maintenance, vegetation will be cut/trimmed 

in 4 to 6-foot lengths and scattered across the permanent easement to naturally decompose 

and to discourage OHV traffic, benefit wildlife habitat, and to decompose naturally. Vegetation 

management over the long-term will benefit winter range forage for Roosevelt elk. 

Forest Plan Consistency. Since elk are not found in significant numbers in the Siskiyou 

Mountains portion of forest and because elk responsiveness to changes in forage levels is not 

as sensitive as the deer population, elk are not used as indicators for other species in this area. 

Deer needs are also met when management favors elk. Big game winter range timing 

limitations specified by Forest Service, December 1 to April 30, will be adhered to within 

designated big game winter range. 

Based on management of winter range under guidelines in the Forest Plan, improved winter 

range conditions and a better balance in winter and summer range could result in a capability to 

H-505
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-54 

support up to 2,700 elk (higher than the ODFW benchmark level of 1,750 animals) within 5 or 6 

decades past 1990 (USFS, 1990c). However, the population index trend revealed in Figure 3-1 

does not indicate that positive population growth has occurred. Big game travel lanes will not 

be blocked by construction or operation of the Proposed Action. Roosevelt elk are expected to 

utilize the project right-of-way for travel and foraging. The Proposed Action would be consistent 

with the Forest Plan. 

3.3 Pine Marten 

The Pine marten is an indicator species for all species dependent upon mature and old-growth 

habitat (USFS, 1990). Pine martens represent those species utilizing mature conifer forests 

which need mature habitat areas spaced closer than 5 to 6 miles apart. They are not generally 

found at elevations below 4,000 feet on the Forest and do not appear to have an upper 

elevation restriction, which makes it an especially important indicator for those species capable 

of utilizing high elevation habitat or that are less mobile than either the northern spotted owl or 

pileated woodpecker (USFS, 1990). 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for pine martens and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. None specified for MS 26, but 

these are the general guides for the Forest: 

• Habitat capability objectives have been set in each Management Area, ranging from 40 

percent of potential population capability in Areas programmed for intensive timber 

harvest, to 100 percent of potential capability in Areas with less intensive or no 

scheduled timber production (USFS, 1990c). 

• The pine marten uses seral stages III-IV, closed sapling pole, large mature, and old 

growth, with seral stages V and VI its principal habitat. In 1986, the maximum dispersal 

distance between habitat areas was recommended to be one habitat for every 4,000-

5,000 acres. Juvenile marten dispersal up to 25 miles has been observed (USFS, 

1990). 

• Home ranges are from 160 acres for females with the males ranging up to 15 miles in 

their activities. A contiguous area of 160 acres (composed of multi-layered stands with a 

crown closure equal to or greater than 50 percent in mature or old-growth) is considered 

the minimum necessary (USFS, 1990). 

Management Prescriptions. Based on distributional requirements, management requirements 

are met with the establishment of 29 pine marten areas above 4,000 feet. The combined 

habitat networks for the spotted owl, pileated woodpecker, and pine marten, along with 

intertwined riparian, minimum management and reserved areas, serve as interlocking habitat 

system for all species utilizing older forest and mature habitat (USFS, 1990). 

Species Status in the Project Area. Population capabilities were estimated at 250 pairs in 1990 

(USFS, 1990c). Populations and the mature habitat dependent species they represent are 

expected to drop 10 to 20 percent in the first 3 to 5 decades, before returning to 1990 or slightly 

greater levels in later decades (USFS, 1990c). In 1990, there were no comprehensive 

population surveys. Sightings by the Forest Service have been mapped (with one exception, all 

sightings were at 4,200 to 6,500 feet elevation) (USFS, 1990c). 

H-506
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-55 

A historic trend is not available, but species decline is estimated in proportion to declines in 

mature and old-growth forest; however, the pine marten has exhibited tolerance to harvest 

activities if adequate crown cover and stand structure is maintained, along with sufficient 

numbers of down logs and snags. A predictive model based on habitat seral stages indicates a 

forest-wide capability of supporting over 250 pine martens (USFS, 1990). 

Habitat. Pine martens prey on squirrels and other small mammals, but they also eat insects, 

birds, fruits, and nuts (USFS, 1990). Denning takes place in coarse, woody debris, slash, 

snags, and live trees. Parturition takes place in March and April, and mating occurs in June 

through early August. They were extirpated and re-introduced to Oregon. Populations in highelevation habitats are probably stable, but loss of habitat due to human encroachment in low 

and mid-elevation areas has resulted in population declines and local extirpations (Johnson, 

2001). 

A breeding female pine marten can be supported on 160 acres of quality habitat. Female home 

range is estimated at 160 acres, although research varies on the necessary size of the area. 

Pine martens require dead and down material for foraging, cover, and denning, and six down 

logs/acre is the minimum down material requirement (USFS, 1990). They are found in mature 

forest (USFS, 1990). 

The marten has a home range of approximately 450 acres. A minimum contiguous area of 160 

acres with a crown closure equal to or greater than 50 percent in seral stages V and VI is 

considered necessary. A maximum spacing of habitat areas (to allow interaction with adjacent 

animals) is considered to be three miles. Based on distributional requirements, the 

management requirements of managing habitat to maintain viable populations of wildlife is met 

with the establishment of 93 pine marten areas above 4,000 feet in elevation (USFS, 1990c) 

Pine martens are associated with the following habitat types that occur within the Rogue RiverSiskiyou forest and which will be affected by construction of the PCGP Project: they are closely 

associated with Montane Mixed Confer Forest, may be present in Ponderosa Pine Forest and 

Woodlands, and occurrence is uncertain in Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). 

Forest Management Activities. Pest management should not bother pine martens since they 

usually occur in recently cut-over areas which they use infrequently. Wildfire would have a 

serious effect (USFS, 1990) on pine martens by destroying ground and overhead cover and 

consuming dead and down material. 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Within Montane Mixed Confer Forest, pine martens may feed 

and breed within various forest structural conditions including small tree, medium tree, large 

tree, and giant tree conditions, single and multi-story, and open moderate and closed canopies, 

but only if snags, down logs, and/or rock outcrops are present for denning (Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001). Loss of 168 acres of Montane Mixed Confer Forest over approximately 14.5 miles (57 

acres of late successional-old growth forest, 13 acres of mid-seral forest, and 98 acres of 

clearcut-regenerating forest) would affect the equivalent of one female home range (160 acres). 

If pine marten home ranges are assumed to be circular, the diameter of a 160-acre home range 

would be 3,000 feet. Blasting at one edge of that home range (assuming 200 feet of intervening 

tree cover) would attenuate to 32 dBA at the far edge of the home range and would attenuate to 

ambient noise (assumed to be 40 dBA) 1,390 feet away. Noise due to construction would be a 

H-507
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-56 

short term effect (restricted to the period of constriction) to pine martens and expected to affect 

them only if their home ranges were on or very close to the construction right-of-way.. 

Mitigation. Mitigation measures that would minimize impacts to pine martens include planting 

trees within the right-of-way after construction. Conifers would be planted to within 15 feet of 

each side of the pipeline centerline. After tree planting, there will be 32.67 acres of former 

Montane Mixed Confer Forest (11.71 acres of late successional-old growth, 3.27 acres of midseral forest, and 17.69 acres of clear cut-regenerating forest) that will remain in an herbaceous 

and/or shrub state within the 30-foot maintenance corridor during the life of the project (Table 3-

1). 

In Rogue River – Siskiyou National Forest, trees will be felled along approximately 30 miles of 

the proposed construction right-of-way in Year 1 beginning October 1 and continuing through 

February 28 of Year 2 where known or predicted spotted owl nest patches are within 0.25 mile 

of the proposed project. Felling trees during this time period will avoid directly impacting 

parturition in March and April and mating from June through early August. 

Noise from blasting, if it is required during construction, will be minimized through application of 

various measures. Mitigation measures commonly applied to blasting of this type include 

drilling small (2.5-inch) charge holes, stemming the blast holes with sand and placing inert 

material on top of the blast area (Michael Minor & Associates, 2008). 

To mitigate for loss of downed wood and snags within the construction right-of-way, Pacific 

Connector will create snags in large trees strategically left on the edge of the construction rightof-way by topping and or girdling trees. Those trees will eventually contribute to downed wood 

along the right-of-way. In addition, the Forest Service has proposed creating snags and placing 

large wood in habitats adjacent to the proposed pipeline to meet the management objectives of 

snag densities and enhance areas deficient in coarse woody material. The proposal would treat 

1,200 acres and has been incorporated into the CMP and would accelerate the development of 

late successional habitat characteristics of structure and diversity (snags/large wood) and would 

create structure by placing large wood across the corridor for use by pine martens and other 

small wildlife species (large wood). The project would also reduce localized fuel loads while 

improving habitat in deficient stands (large wood) and provide long-term structure in the event of 

fire since larger logs maintain moisture longer and are less likely to be fully consumed by fire. 

In addition, Pacific Connector will fund other projects proposed by the Forest Service on the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest that include decommissioning 54.5 miles of roads, 

commercial and/or pre-commercial thinning of 1,640 acres to accelerate development of late 

successional and old growth habitat characteristics, among other objectives, and reallocating 

593 acres from matrix to LSR designation so that forested habitat within former matrix lands will 

be managed to obtain late successional forest characteristics. Those additional projects would 

provide benefits to pine martens within the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. 

Forest Plan Consistency. Implementation of the mitigation measures is expected to increase 

potential population capabilities for pine martens in areas that would otherwise be subject to 

intensive timber harvest and would provide for additional interlocking habitats for species 

utilizing older forest and mature habitat. In these respects, the Proposed Action would be 

consistent with the Forest Plan. 

H-508
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-57 

3.4 Pileated Woodpecker 

The pileated woodpecker is an indicator species for all species dependent upon mature habitat 

(USFS, 1990). Pileated woodpeckers represent primary cavity-creating and cavity-dwelling 

species that use large, standing dead trees and mature/old-growth timber when nesting, 

roosting, and foraging (USFS, 1990). The pileated woodpecker represents over 160 wildlife 

species utilizing mature forest habitat (USFS, 1990). 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for pileated woodpeckers and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. Nothing is specified in MS 26 for 

the pileated woodpecker, although there are specifications for woodpeckers generally, as 

described in the following section. These are general for the Forest: 

• Habitat areas should be 300 acres in size, distributed at least every five and one-half 

miles, with no programmed timber harvest (USFS, 1990c). 

• Older forest habitat of 300 acres (trees having diameters of 25 inches dbh or greater) 

are considered necessary for each pair. Areas should be within 5 miles of each other, 

center to center, and evenly spaced to allow interaction of birds between suitable 

territories (USFS, 1990).

Management Prescriptions. Specifications for the pileated woodpecker (from “A Report on 

Minimum Management Requirements for Forest Planning on the National Forests of the Pacific 

Northwest Region, USDA Forest Service,” June 1986) include a five-mile maximum dispersal 

distance to one habitat area for every 12,000 to 13,000 acres. The size of areas used by pairs 

during nesting season has ranged from 320 acres in eastern Oregon to 1,357 acres in western 

Oregon, and the management requirement calls for 300 acres of old growth or mature timber 

containing at least 45 snags greater than 20 inches, plus 300 acres of feeding area (USFS, 

1990). 

Downed logs serve as important sources of food and 300 acres of mature and old-growth timber 

(trees having diameters of 21-inches DBH or greater) are considered necessary for each pair. 

Areas should be within 5 miles of each other, center-to-center, and evenly spaced over the 

Forest to allow interaction of the birds between suitable territories. Based on distributional 

requirements, the MR of managing habitat to maintain viable populations of wildlife is met with 

the establishment of 57 pileated woodpecker areas (USFS, 1990). 

When possible, 300 contiguous acres of conifers in seral stage V or VI should be maintained. If 

not possible, habitat may be arranged in blocks of no less than 50 acres and no more than one 

quarter mile apart (USFS, 1990c) 

There are timing limitations from March 1 to July 31, as well as construction constraints, calling 

for no disturbance within 1,320 feet of active pileated woodpecker nests (USFS, 1990c). 

Species Status in the Project Area. The Forest Service has no historical trend data for the 

pileated woodpecker; however, the trend of mature and old-growth habitat has been downward, 

with an estimated 74 percent loss since mid-1800s. Until the early 1970s, few snags, large 

down woody material or green replacement trees were left in treated stands, and snags were 

actively cut to avoid fire hazard. As a result, habitat capability is probably less than the trend in 

mature and old-growth habitat would indicate. However, as long as sufficient large diameter 

dead trees and downed material are present, pileated woodpeckers appear to be less sensitive 

H-509
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-58 

to modifications of mature habitat than some other mature habitat dependent species (USFS, 

1990). 

As of 1990, there were no population surveys. Some non-mature seral stages can provide part 

of a woodpecker’s needs, and a predictive model recognizing varying population densities by 

seral stage was developed. This model indicates that a population of approximately 900 birds 

may be supportable. Based on distributional requirements, the Management Requirements for 

the Forest are met with nine pileated woodpecker areas (USFS, 1990). 

The population capability in 1990 was estimated at 930 pileated woodpecker pairs (USFS, 

1990c). Populations and the mature habitat dependent species they represent were expected 

to drop 10 to 20 percent in the first 3 to 5 decades after the Plan, before returning to 1990 or 

slightly greater levels in later decades (USFS, 1990c). In June 1998, a pileated woodpecker 

was recorded just west of the Forest Service Boundary, approximately 1.7 miles from the 

proposed project (BLM, 2006). 

The same data that were collected on 18 National Biological Survey Breeding Bird Survey 

(BBS) routes (Sauer et al., 2008) that are within the region of the PCGP Project and used to 

evaluate the regional population trend are discussed in Section 1.1. During the period from 

1988 through 2007, pileated woodpeckers appear to have been significantly increasing 

(P=0.012) on BBS routes within the PCGP Project vicinity including the Rogue River-Siskiyou 

National Forest (Figure 2-1). 

Habitat. On the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, pileated woodpeckers forage exclusively 

on carpenter ants and wood-boring beetle larvae, mostly in decayed wood (USFS, 1990). They 

are found primarily in dense mixed-conifer forests in late seral stages or in deciduous tree 

stands in valley bottoms. A new nest cavity is excavated each spring, usually in a dead tree, by 

each pair. Nest cavities are quite large (mean diameter of 8 inches and depth of 22 inches) and 

are excavated at an average height of 50 feet above the ground. A pair shares and defends the 

territory all year, and home ranges are large (Marshall et al., 2006). 

Older forest habitat meets foraging needs, and other areas next to and including clearcuts with 

snags and large down woody material are also used (USFS, 1990c). Downed logs are 

important substrates from which food is obtained. For foraging, the most important things are 

the presence of the correct sizes and numbers of snags and down logs. The pileated 

woodpecker, as the largest cavity excavator, is important to cavity users that are incapable of 

creating their own cavities (USFS, 1990). 

Pileated woodpeckers are generally associated with Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, Southwest 

Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forests and Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands (Johnson 

and O’Neil, 2001) that coincide with the PCGP Project (Table 3-1). Since they are dependent 

on downed wood and snags, pileated woodpeckers would be most likely to inhabit the old 

growth or late successional stands (≥80 years old) of those forests included in Table 3-1. 

Forest Management Activities. Pest management that includes spray would have a detrimental 

effect. Wildfire would destroy nesting and foraging habitat, but also creates new snag habitats 

and attracts insect infestations (USFS, 1990). 

Timber harvest has the most significant effect on habitat for this woodpecker. Forest 

fragmentation reduces population density and makes birds more vulnerable to predation. 

H-510
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-59 

Harvesting and prescribed burning that eliminates or reduces the number of snags, logs, and 

cover are detrimental (Marshall et al., 2006). 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Pileated woodpeckers could be negatively impacted during 

construction of the PCGP Project through the same direct and indirect effects that were 

discussed in Section 1.1 above, for the Umpqua National Forest. Clearing the right-of-way will 

modify habitat, changing the seral stage and tree species makeup of occupied forests. 

Construction will remove 56.94 acres of late successional-old growth Montane Mixed Conifer 

Forest, 43.94 acres of late successional-old growth Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood 

Forests and 3.08 acres of late successional-old growth Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands 

(Table 3-1). Additional potential long-term effects to pileated woodpeckers will be removal of 

14.94 acres of mid-seral conifer-hardwood forest (≥40 years but ≤80 years old), thereby setting 

back seral development that would be expected to eventually provide suitable habitat elements 

for pileated woodpeckers, including downed wood and snags. 

The amount of late successional-old growth habitat that would be removed by the project is not 

expected to have an impact on the local or regional population of pileated woodpeckers which 

have home ranges of up to 1000 hectares or 2,500 acres (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). If all of 

the impacted late successional-old growth (103.96 acres) occurred within a bird’s or pair’s home 

range, less than 5 percent of one home range would be affected. More likely, the Proposed 

Action would span several home ranges and the overall effect to any single bird or pair would be 

less than 5 percent removal. 

If pileated woodpecker home ranges are assumed to be circular, the diameter of a 2,500-acre 

home range would be 11,700 feet. Blasting at one edge of that home range would attenuate to 

30 dBA at the far edge of the home range and would attenuate to ambient noise (assumed to be 

40 dBA) 4,630 feet away or a distance equal to 40 percent the diameter of a home range. 

Noise due to construction would be a short term effect to pileated woodpeckers and would be 

expected to affect them within only a portion of their home ranges. 

Mitigation. Mitigation measures that would minimize impacts to pileated woodpeckers include 

planting trees within the right-of-way after construction. Conifers would be planted to within 15 

feet of each side of the pipeline centerline. After tree planting, there will be 47.18 acres of 

former forest (20.98 acres of late successional-old growth, 3.62 acres of mid-seral forest, and 

22.58 acres of clear cut-regenerating forest) that will remain in an herbaceous and/or shrub 

state within the 30-foot maintenance corridor during the life of the project (Table 3-1). 

Noise from blasting, if it is required during construction, will be minimized through application of 

various measures. Mitigation measures commonly applied to blasting of this type include 

drilling small (2.5-inch) charge holes, stemming the blast holes with sand and placing inert 

material on top of the blast area (Michael Minor & Associates, 2008). 

In Rogue River – Siskiyou National Forest, trees will be felled along approximately 30 miles of 

the proposed construction right-of-way in Year 1 beginning October 1 and continuing through 

February 28 of Year 2 where known or predicted spotted owl nest patches are within 0.25 mile 

of the proposed project. Felling trees during this time period will avoid directly impacting young 

birds during the nesting season. 

To mitigate for loss of cavities and snags within the construction right-of-way, Pacific Connector 

will create snags in large trees strategically left on the edge of the construction right-of-way by 

topping and or girdling trees. In addition, the Forest Service has proposed creating snags and 

H-511
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-60 

placing large wood in habitats adjacent to the proposed pipeline to meet the management 

objectives of snag densities and enhance areas deficient in coarse woody material. The 

proposal would treat 1,200 acres and has been incorporated into the CMP and would accelerate 

the development of late successional habitat characteristics of structure and diversity 

(snags/large wood) including suitable nesting structures for pileated woodpeckers. The project 

would also reduce localized fuel loads while improving habitat in deficient stands (large wood) 

and provide long-term structure in the event of fire since larger logs maintain moisture longer 

and are less likely to be fully consumed by fire. 

In addition, Pacific Connector will fund other projects proposed by the Forest Service on the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest that include decommissioning 54.5 miles of roads, 

commercial and/or pre-commercial thinning of 1,640 acres to accelerate development of late 

successional and old growth habitat characteristic among other objectives, and reallocating 593 

acres from matrix to LSR designation so that forested habitat within former matrix lands will be 

managed to obtain late successional forest characteristics. Those additional projects would 

provide benefits to pileated within the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. During 

construction, potential impact to nesting pileated woodpeckers and other species by predatory 

corvids will be addressed by assuring that all contractors practice appropriate trash containment 

and removal. 

Forest Plan Consistency. Implementation of the mitigation measures is expected to increase 

potential population capabilities for pileated woodpeckers in areas that would otherwise be 

subject to intensive timber harvest and would provide for additional habitats for species utilizing 

older forest and mature habitat. In these respects, the Proposed Action would be consistent 

with the Forest Plan. Although the majority of timber clearing in Year 1 would occur after 

September 30 outside of the pileated woodpecker nesting season, construction would occur 

begin May 1 in Year 2, potentially within 1,320 feet of an active pileated woodpecker nest 

(nesting season: March 1 – July 31). If that occurred, the action would not be consistent with 

the Forest Plan. 

3.5 Primary Cavity Excavators (nesters) 

Primary cavity excavators represent those animals which require dead and defective woody 

material for nesting, roosting, and foraging. They are the common flicker, hairy woodpecker, 

and downy woodpecker. This also includes the pileated woodpecker, which is discussed 

separately (USFS, 1990). Snags and down logs, fairly uniformly distributed, provide critical 

habitat (USFS, 1990). 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for primary cavity excavators and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. 

• To satisfy cavity nester habitat requirements at 60 percent of their potential maximum 

population, about 200 snags (ranging from 11 inch diameter to over 25 inch diameter) 

are needed per 100 acres. Snags must be provided continuously through time, and 

usable snag life is considered to be 20 to 30 years depending on the tree species 

(USFS, 1990). 

Woodpeckers Management Prescriptions. MS 26, Restricted Riparian 

• For other details on MS 26, see Deer. 

H-512
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-61 

• Leave sufficient wildlife trees in coniferous forests to provide for 100 percent of the 

potential population levels for cavity nesting species. The distribution of numbers and 

size class necessary to meet 100 percent per 100 acres as follows: 

Species distribution should be representative of the site’s original stand. Trees selected for 

retention should maximize use of the stand’s cull component; if this does not exist, the proper 

number will be selected from the next lower class. Material that satisfies the need for down 

woody material recruitment will come from existing down material that is a result of a silvicultural 

treatment and from trees that are designated to meet standing wildlife tree requirements. The 

long-term LWM goal is 10 to 20 pieces of class I and II logs per acre, and all existing class III, 

IV, and V, except for incidental amounts. 

Additional green merchantable trees will not be designated unless none of the other categories 

exist. The expected life span of snags or dead trees in mixed conifer working groups is 30 

years, and in true fir is 20 years. The silvicultural prescription will describe the total number, 

size, and species of wildlife trees that will be required through the next full rotation of stand 

being treated. 

Down woody material will be included as part of the silvicultural prescription for each stand, with 

information for the prescription provided by a wildlife biologist site by site. A certified 

silviculturist will validate the data and include it in the preparation of the final prescription. The 

logging system required, reforestation needs, slash disposal requirements, and site preparation 

needs should be compatible with tree distribution needs. 

Primary cavity excavator habitat will be met on areas no larger than 60 acres, including adjacent 

harvest units, in order to provide well distributed habitat and allow adjacent stands to provide 

the needed wildlife trees for past harvest units where the adjacent stands plus harvest do not 

exceed 60 acres. Where past harvest units were very large, adjacent stands within 900 feet 

would be managed at higher wildlife tree levels to bring the overall area to the 40 percent level. 

When past harvest units were so large that these methods cannot bring the area to the 40 

percent level, the remaining shortage will not be provided for, but will be recorded and tracked. 

Selection of wildlife trees to make up for past deficits will meet the same selection criteria as in 

newly treated stands. Green merchantable trees will not be girdled to create wildlife snags, until 

5 to 7 years after project completion, in order to capture any mortality that may occur during that 

time (USFS, 1990c). 

Species Status in the Project Area. In 1990, it was thought that there was a population 

capability of 49,000 cavity excavator pairs (woodpeckers other than pileated woodpeckers) in 

the Forest (USFS, 1990c). There was no comprehensive inventory, although they are assumed 

to be highly correlated to snag levels (USFS, 1990). Based on the 1990 assessment, 

woodpecker populations (as based on mixes of forest habitat types) would remain relatively 

constant through the fourth decade and then would increase to 100 percent of populations 

existing previous to the Plan in the fifth decade (USFS, 1990c). It was also expected that 

habitat capability would remain relatively stable or slightly rise through the fifth decade because 

more snags would be designated to remain than in the past (USFS, 1990c). 

The historic trend estimates show that woodpeckers seem to be decreasing due to loss of snag 

habitat through timber harvest and firewood cutting activities. The viable population that would 

preserve the gene pool is undetermined. The habitat needed to maintain primary cavity 

excavators at 20 percent of their potential population (minimum viable level) is considered to be 

45 snags per 100 acres. The habitat to maintain viable population levels where the species 

H-513
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-62 

have an opportunity to interact within their environment is 135 snags per 100 acres, ranging in 

sizes from 11-inch dbh to 25-inch or greater dbh, which equates to 40 percent of their potential 

population level. Based on these parameters, a population model predicts an existing 

population of over 60,000 other woodpeckers (USFS, 1990). In 1994 and 1998, a hairy 

woodpecker was documented just outside Rogue River – Siskiyou Forest Service boundaries, 

approximately 2.6 to 2.8 miles from the proposed project (BLM, 2006). In unmanaged forested 

areas, the total cavity excavator population is limited by territorial needs, not by the availability 

of wildlife trees (snags). When the FEIS was written, there was a wide range of cavity 

excavator population capability, from 100 percent in areas not under managed rotation to zero 

in some areas harvested before the 1980s (USFS, 1990). 

The same data that were collected on 18 National Biological Survey Breeding Bird Survey 

(BBS) routes (Sauer et al., 2008) that are within the region of the PCGP Project and used to 

evaluate the regional population trends are discussed in Section 1.1. Numbers of acorn 

northern (common) flicker, hairy woodpecker, and downy woodpecker that were reported on 

each route were compiled and averaged (numbers per route) for each year, 1988 through 2007 

(Table 3-6) to develop a population index. 

Table 3-6 

Data Compiled for 20-years and Trends of Population Indices (Numbers Counted per BBS Route 

per Year) of Primary Cavity Excavator MIS in the Vicinity of the PCGP Project 

Data Compiled for 20 Years, 1988-2007 

Cavity Nesting 

Species 

Average Number 

of Routes per 

Year 

Average 

Annual Count 

per Route 

Population Index 

Trend Comments 

Common (Northern) 

Flicker 11.50 5.90 Significantly Increasing 

(P=0.015) none 

Hairy Woodpecker 11.00 0.991 Insufficient data Too few observations 

per year 

Downy Woodpecker 8.95 0.710 Insufficient data Too few observations 

per year 

During the 20-year period, an average of 5.90 northern flickers was observed per BBS route 

(average of 11.50 routes reporting per year) each year. Over the past 20 years, common 

flickers appear to be significantly increasing (P=0.015) on BBS routes within the PCGP Project 

vicinity (Table 3-6 and Figure 3-2). In addition to pileated woodpeckers discussed above, 

common flickers are the only other species of cavity nesters included as a MIS with sufficient 

data to estimate 20-year population trends, indexed as annual counts per route. Regional 

populations of both species appear to be increasing. 

Hairy Woodpecker Habitat. The hairy woodpecker may be found in virtually any forested area in 

Oregon, with the exception of juniper forests. They are common throughout most of their range, 

although most common in burns or in areas with trees that are dead from or infested with 

mountain pine beetles, and uncommon to fairly common along the coast and in western interior 

valleys. They are found primarily in mixed-conifer and ponderosa pine forests, as well as 

adjacent deciduous stands, especially during breeding season. They prefer to nest in dead 

trees with light to moderate decay, and few consistent seasonal movements are known 

(Marshall et al., 2006). 

Hairy woodpeckers are generally associated with the following habitat types that will be affected 

within the Rogue River-Siskiyou forest: Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forests, Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, and Urban and 

H-514
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-63 

Mixed Environs. They are present in Westside Grasslands but are expected to feed and breed 

within the habitats with which they are generally associated (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). 

Figure 3-2 

20-year Trend in Common (Northern) Flickers Counted per BBS Route 

in the Vicinity of the PCGP Project. 

Downy Woodpecker Habitat. The downy woodpecker is found at low to moderate elevations in 

deciduous and mixed deciduous-coniferous forests, and is most abundant in riparian areas and 

red alder. They show a preference for decayed wood for nesting. Some local movements 

occur in fall/winter as some individuals move to lower elevations (Marshall et al., 2006). 

Downy woodpeckers are generally associated with the following habitat types that will be 

affected within the Rogue River-Siskiyou forest: Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood 

Forests, and Urban and Mixed Environs. They are present in Westside Grasslands and 

Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands (only with an oak component) but are expected to feed 

and breed within the habitats with which they are generally associated (Johnson and O’Neil, 

2001). 

Northern Flicker Habitat. The flicker is the most ubiquitous woodpecker in Oregon, and is most 

abundant in open forests and forest edges adjacent to open country. They typically avoid dense 

forest, and prefer to nest in trees with some decay. Some flickers move to higher elevations in 

spring (Marshall et al., 2006). 

Northern flickers are generally associated with the following habitat types that will be affected 

within the Rogue River-Siskiyou forest: Montane Mixed Conifer Forest, Southwest Oregon 

Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forests and Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, Westside 

Grasslands, and Urban and Mixed Environs. They are present in Shrub-steppe but are 

expected to feed and breed within the habitats with which they are generally associated 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). 

Forest Management Activities. Depending on the target species, pest management would 

serve to remove a part of the species’ food choice. Wildfire destroys nesting and foraging 

habitat, but also creates new snag habitat and weakens other trees to the point where they 

H-515
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-64 

become infected with disease and insects, increasing the food supply. Timber harvesting and 

firewood cutting are the major activities that affect woodpeckers. The removal of snags and 

down/dead material would continue the downward trend in population levels (USFS, 1990). 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Primary Cavity Excavators could be negatively impacted during 

construction of the PCGP Project through the same direct and indirect impacts that were 

discussed above, for the Umpqua National Forest. 

Clearing the right-of-way will modify habitat, changing the seral stage and tree species makeup 

of occupied forests. Similar to effects to pileated woodpeckers discussed above in Section 2.4, 

construction will remove a total of 103.96 acres of late successional-old growth Montane Mixed 

Conifer Forest, Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forests and Ponderosa Pine 

Forest and Woodlands in Rogue River – Siskiyou National Forest (Table 3-1). Additional 

potential long-term effects to Primary Cavity Excavators will be removal of 14.94 acres of midseral conifer-hardwood forest (≥40 years but ≤80 years old), thereby setting back seral 

development that would be expected to eventually provide suitable habitat elements including 

snags. 

Unlike the large home ranges of pileated woodpeckers, those of the other Primary Cavity 

Excavator MIS are relatively small at 10 ha (25 acres) for the downy and hairy woodpeckers and 

50 ha (124 acres) for the northern flicker (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). While the amount of late 

successional-old growth habitat that would be removed by the project is not expected to impact 

local or regional populations of Primary Cavity Excavators, home ranges of several individuals 

or pairs could be affected. 

If Primary Cavity Excavator MIS’ home ranges are assumed to be circular, the diameter of a 25-

acre home range would be 1,170 feet and that of a 124-acre home range would be 2,600 feet. 

Blasting at one edge of a home range would attenuate to 55 dBA (at 1,170 feet) or 46 dBA (at 

2,600 feet) at the far edges of the home range, depending on home range size. Noise due to 

construction would be a short term effect to Primary Cavity Excavators and expected to affect 

them through home ranges since noise levels would be above ambient levels (assumed to be 

40 dBA) throughout species’ home ranges that are adjacent to the construction right-of-way. 

Mitigation. The same mitigation measures that were discussed in Section 2.4 for pileated 

woodpeckers would also apply to and benefit primary cavity excavators. 

Forest Plan Consistency. Implementation of the mitigation measures is expected to increase 

potential population capabilities for primary cavity excavators in areas that would otherwise be 

subject to intensive timber harvest and would provide for additional habitats for species utilizing 

older forest and mature habitat. In these respects, the Proposed Action would be consistent 

with the Forest Plan. 

H-516
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-65 

4.0 FREMONT-WINEMA NATIONAL FOREST 

Species. The MIS for the Fremont-Winema National Forest include the three-toed woodpecker, 

pine marten, northern spotted owl, pileated woodpecker, resident trout, mule deer, bald eagle 

and northern goshawk (USFS, 1990e). The bald eagle was listed as threatened or endangered 

species requiring special management at the time of the Forest Plan’s release, but has since 

been delisted. However, it is included in this discussion because it still remains an indicator 

species under the current Forest Plan. Old growth communities are used by the northern 

spotted owl, pileated woodpecker, northern goshawk, three-toed woodpecker, and pine marten. 

(USFS, 1990e). However, the northern spotted owl is now listed under the Endangered Species 

Act and its status is covered extensively under separate cover in the Draft Biological 

Assessment and is not discussed here. 

Management areas 3A, Scenic Management-Foreground Retention, 3B, Scenic ManagementForeground Partial Retention, 3C, Scenic Management-Middleground Partial Retention, and 18 

will be affected by the project. 

Habitats. The anticipated Future Condition which was expected in 1990 to have been met by 

2000 is that mature and old-growth habitat would decrease but be maintained at or above levels 

determined to be needed for viable wildlife populations by the Region 6 guide. The condition of 

the riparian area and the habitat effectiveness for historic big game winter range was expected 

to have improved. Summer range habitat effectiveness for deer was expected to be at 1990 

levels or higher. It was not anticipated that mule deer populations would increase above 1990 

levels when based on the assumption of a direct relationship between deer production and 

habitat. A mule deer study to determine causes of decline would have been completed. The 

Forest would have provided habitat to meet bald eagle recovery objectives. (USFS, 1990e). 

It was predicated that fifty years past the time of the 1990 report, riparian areas and streams 

would have been improved to provide for increased fish production by the third decade, and the 

fish program would consist primarily of reconstruction and maintenance of improvements. Deer 

production and populations would remain low. Plans would have been implemented for the 

recovery of threatened and endangered species and for the management of sensitive species. 

(USFS, 1990e). 

MIS on the Fremont-Winema National Forest are associated with a variety of habitats found 

throughout the forest. However, the PCGP Project will affect only those habitats included in 

Table 4-1, below. In Table 4-1, the areas (acres) of existing forested habitats (Southwest 

Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest and Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands) within 

one or more seral stages (clearcut-regenerating forest, mid-seral forest, late successional-old 

growth forest) that will be removed during construction and affected during operation are 

provided in addition to all other affected habitat type categories. Effects by the project have 

been summarized by project component (facility) during construction and during operation of the 

pipeline. Generally, most long-term disturbance by the project is due to a 30-foot wide corridor, 

centered on the pipeline, that is maintained in a herbaceous and/or shrub stated for the life of 

the project. Table 4-1 is referenced in discussions for each MIS in the sections, below. 

The forested habitats (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) corresponds to vegetation categories 

described by the Oregon Gap Analysis Project (Oregon Gap; Kagan et al., 1999) and mapped in 

the project area. For Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, the corresponding 

vegetation categories include 1) Douglas-fir-White Fir/Tanoak-Madrone Mixed Forest, and 2) 

H-517
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-66 

Douglas-fir Dominant-Mixed Conifer Forest (Kagan et al., 1999) and were discussed above for 

the Umpqua National Forest. Likewise, Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands habitat 

(Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in Table 4-1 corresponds to the Ponderosa Pine/White Oak Forest 

and Woodland vegetation type (Kagan et al., 1999) and was discussed above for the Rogue 

River-Siskiyou National Forest. Descriptions of Forested and Non-Forested Wetlands were 

provided in those sections under the Umpqua National Forest and a description of Westside 

Grasslands was provided for the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest. However, Eastside 

Grasslands also occur within the Fremont-Winema National Forest: 

Grasslands (east of Cascades)/Forest-Grassland Mosaic: This type is a mosaic of bunchgrass 

grasses and conifer forest in the east Cascades. Ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, white fir, and 

incense cedar are common conifers, with Idaho fescue generally the dominant grass. Other 

grasses that can form co-dominances are bluebunch wheatgrass, junegrass, Sandberg 

bluegrass, and western needlegrass. In stands heavily grazed, cheatgrass and bottlebrush 

squirreltail can be dominant. Found at mid to low elevations (Kagan et al., 1999). Within the 

project area, this vegetation type is found within Klamath County and the Fremont-Winema 

National Forest. 

Table 4-1 

Summary of Construction and Operation-Related Disturbance (acres 1

) to Corresponding Wildlife 

Habitat Categories (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001) in the Fremont-Winema National Forest 

Forest-Woodland Riparian 

Facility 

Forest –Woodland Seral Stage 2Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands Forest-Woodland Sub-Total Forested Wetland Non-Forested Wetland GrasslandsRoadsOpen WaterTotal

CONSTRUCTION 

DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 14.18 19.82 34.00 

M-S 1.46 6.21 7.67 

C-R 0.82 24.76 25.58 

Construction 

Right-of-Way

Tot 16.46 50.79 67.25 

0.27 0.37 0.28 1.45 0.03 69.65 

L-O 

M-S 

C-R 0.08 0.08 Hydrostatic Discharge Sites

Tot 0.08 0.08 

 0.08 

L-O 

M-S 

C-R Rock Source/Disposal 

Tot 

 0 

L-O 1.68 1.54 3.22 

M-S 0.02 1.51 1.53 

C-R 3.05 3.05 Temporary Extra Work Areas

Tot 1.70 6.10 7.80 

 0.01 0.11 0.48 8.40 

L-O 2.83 4.46 7.29 

M-S 0.43 0.89 1.32 

Uncleared Storage Areas 3

C-R 0.07 3.31 3.38 

 0.08 0.05 12.12 

H-518
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-67 

Forest-Woodland Riparian 

Facility 

Forest –Woodland Seral Stage 2Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands Forest-Woodland Sub-Total Forested Wetland Non-Forested Wetland GrasslandsRoadsOpen WaterTotal

Tot 3.33 8.66 11.99 

L-O 18.69 25.82 44.51 

M-S 1.91 8.61 10.52 

C-R 0.89 31.12 32.01 

Total Construction 

Disturbance

Tot 21.49 65.55 87.04 

0.27 0.46 0.39 1.98 0.03 90.25 

OPERATION DISTURBANCE 

Pipeline Facilities 

L-O 4.48 6.33 10.81 

M-S 0.47 2.02 2.49 

C-R 0.19 7.91 8.19 30-foot Maintenance Corridor

Tot 5.14 16.26 21.41 

0.11 0.13 0.12 0.27 0.01 22.04 

L-O 4.48 6.33 10.81 

M-S 0.47 2.02 2.49 

C-R 0.19 7.91 8.11 Total Operation Disturbance 

Tot 5.14 16.26 21.41 

0.11 0.13 0.12 0.27 0.01 22.04 

1

 Acres disturbed were evaluated using GIS; footprints for each component (temporary construction right-of-way, temporary extra 

work areas, temporary access roads, uncleared storage areas, pipe storage yards, aboveground facilities, permanent easement, and 

30-foot maintenance corridor) were overlaid on the digitized vegetation coverage. 2

 Forest-Woodland Seral Stages are L-O, Late Succession/Old Growth assumed to be ≥80 years old; M-S, Mid-Seral assumed to be 

≥40 but ≤80 years old; C-R, Clearcut-Regenerating Forest assumed to be ≤40 years old. 3

 Small brush or trees may be cleared by a rubber-tired rotary or flail motor (brush hog) or by hand with machetes/chainsaws. No soil 

disturbance will occur. A rubber-tired or track hoe will be utilized to lay the discharge line and to remove the saturated haybales or 

filter bags upon completion of hydrostatic discharge. 

4.1 Pileated Woodpecker 

The pileated woodpecker is an indicator species for the Winema National Forest; however, the 

Proposed Action will not affect any of its management areas designated for the species. No 

further analyses or discussion is warranted (USFS, 1990e). 

4.2 Northern Goshawk 

The goshawk is an indicator species for the Winema National Forest. It has been documented 

fifteen times 1.0 mile to 3.2 miles from the proposed project south of the Fremont-Winema 

National Forest boundary (BLM, 2006). A breeding site was also documented north of the 

proposed project in Fremont-Winema National Forest approximately 1.5 miles away (ORNHIC, 

2006). However, the pipeline does not go through any of its management areas, and warrants 

no further discussion (USFS, 1990e). 

4.3 Three-Toed Woodpecker 

The three-toed woodpecker is an indicator species for the Winema National Forest; however, 

the Proposed Action will not affect any of its management areas designated for the species. No 

H-519
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-68 

further analyses or discussion is warranted (USFS, 1990e). This species has not been 

documented within or within the vicinity of Fremont-Winema National Forest per queries from 

existing, available GIS databases. 

4.4 Pine Marten 

The pine marten is an indicator species for all species dependent upon mature and old-growth 

habitat (USFS, 1990d). Pine martens represent those species utilizing mature conifer forests 

which need mature habitat areas spaced closer than 5 to 6 miles apart. They are not generally 

found below 4,000 feet on the forest and do not appear to have an upper elevation restriction, 

which makes it an especially important indicator for those species capable of utilizing high 

elevation habitat or that are less mobile than either the spotted owl or pileated woodpecker 

(USFS, 1990d). 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for pine martens and their habitat 

Management Prescriptions. The monitoring objective for the pine marten is to assure that 

habitat that will meet or exceed the Forest share of that needed to meet viable populations of 

pine marten is provided and maintained. This applies to all management areas through which 

the project will pass, which includes 3A, 3B, and 3C (USFS, 1990e). 

MA3A emphasizes the retention of natural-appearing foreground areas. 

• Lands: For lands visible for up to 0.25 miles from selected travelways, waterbodies, or 

public use areas, only forms, lines, colors, and textures found in the characteristic 

landscape will be allowed. Natural appearing forms, colors, and textures dominate. 

• Vegetation may be manipulated through enhancing large diameter trees, scattering large 

trees among other size classes, or creating small openings with natural appearing 

edges. Trees with distinctive bark and tree form characteristics, including occasional 

snags, are very evident. Large tree character should be maintained in the foreground 

retention area in all species except lodgepole pines, and should be distributed in 

groupings. 

• Project evidence such as slash should not be noticeable one year after work completion. 

• Fire suppression methods in the immediate foreground should use low-impact methods 

(USFS, 1990e). 

MA3B emphasizes attractive scenery slightly altered from a natural condition as viewed in the 

foreground. 

• Activities may repeat or introduce form, line, color, or texture common or not to the 

characteristics landscape, but changes in size, amount, intensity, direction, and pattern 

must remain visually subordinate. 

• Lands: For lands visible for up to 0.25 miles from selected travelways, waterbodies, or 

public use areas, only forms, lines, colors, and textures found in the characteristic 

landscape will be allowed. Details such as individual tree shape, color, size, species 

mix, and related vegetation are the focus. 

• The desired future condition emphasizes and maintains perpetually large tree 

character, except lodgepole pine, through large-diameter trees in groupings or 

scattering individually large trees among other tree size classes. Small openings with 

natural-appearing edges may be created. Trees with distinctive bark and tree form 

characteristics, with occasional snags, are very evident. Management activities may be 

noticeable. 

H-520
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-69 

• Project evidence such as slash should not be noticeable two to three years after work 

completion, and large tree character should be retained in the foreground area. Hand 

tools are preferred for fire suppression in the immediate foreground (USFS, 1990e). 

MA3C emphasizes attractive scenery slightly altered from a natural condition as viewed in the 

middleground. 

• Activities may repeat or introduce form, line, color, or texture common or not to the 

characteristics landscape, but changes in size, amount, intensity, direction, and pattern 

must remain visually subordinate. 

• Lands: For lands visible for 0.25 to 5 miles from selected travelways, waterbodies, or 

public use areas, textures or forms are the focus, with groups or stands of trees similar 

as a unit compared to others that differ in size, texture, or pattern. Continuous canopy is 

typical, with variety provided by natural openings, rimrock, or rock outcrops. 

• The desired future condition calls for masses or vegetation as evident, with a mosaic 

created by varying canopy levels with natural-appearing edges and forested ridgelines. 

• Activities may introduce changes in form, line, color, or texture that are found 

infrequently or not at all in the characteristic landscape, but must remain subordinate to 

the visual strength of the characteristic landscape (USFS, 1990e). 

The monitoring questions and thresholds of concern are as follows: 

• is habitat in reserved sites meeting the needs of the pine marten in regard to structure, 

function, and size as per assumptions; the threshold of concern for this question occurs 

when more than 10 percent of marten habitat sites have less than 95 percent suitable 

habitat. 

• is the distribution of pine marten habitat meeting species needs, and are areas occupied 

by pine martens being isolated from genetic interchange by management activities. 

• the threshold of concern for all three monitoring questions occurs when more than a 10 

percent reduction in the distributional area of pine martens after five years of baseline 

information is developed (USFS, 1990e). 

Species Status in the Project Area. Due to the loss of mature forest habitat, pine marten 

populations may be declining in Oregon. (Csuti et al., 2001). Pine marten populations in highelevation habitats are probably stable, but loss of habitat due to human encroachment in low 

and mid-elevation areas has resulted in population declines and local extirpations. (Johnson 

and O’Neil, 2001). 

Habitat. The pine marten is associated with forested habitats at any elevation, but will wander 

through openings and even up into alpine areas. Their preference is for mature forests with 

closed canopies, but they will use openings in forests if there are sufficient downed logs to 

provide cover. The type of forest is less important to martens than the forest structure, although 

they are not found in dry woodlands (Csuti et al., 2001). Pine martens prefer mature or older 

forests (including lodgepole pine), with large numbers of snags and coarse woody debris. Large 

slash piles and trees with branches that reach to the ground to provide access through the snow 

during the winter are important. (USFS, 1990e). 

Pine martens are primarily carnivorous (Csuti et al., 2001) and diet on a variety of mammalian 

species. They feed on rodents and opportunistically on other small mammals and birds. Winter 

food sources are critical to marten survival as they carry very little fat reserves on their bodies. 

(USFS, 1990e. Martens will forage underground, on the ground, and on shrub or understory 

vegetation (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). 

H-521
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-70 

The dens of pine martens are located in trees or underground. They often have multiple dens 

which they move between during the rearing season (USFS, 1990e). Denning takes place in 

coarse woody debris, slash, snags, and live trees. Parturition takes place in March and April, 

and mating occurs in June through early August. They were extirpated and re-introduced to 

Oregon (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). 

Pine martens are associated with the following habitat types that occur within the FremontWinema National Forest and which will be affected by construction of the PCGP Project: .they 

maybe present in Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, and occurrence is uncertain in 

Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). They may be 

present in Eastside Riparian Wetlands at high elevations (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Presence 

of pine martens would depend on appropriate structural conditions including snags, down logs, 

and rock outcrops (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). 

Forest Management Activities. Fire can negatively affect marten habitat by destroying ground 

and overhead cover and consuming dead and down material. Recreation activity within the 

Fremont-Winema National Forest was not considered to be heavy enough to influence this 

species now or in the foreseeable future, at the time of the Forest Plan completion. Trapping of 

these fur bearing animals over the last 20 years has been light and localized to small areas. 

Broad wildlife coordination guidelines which address leaving snags, down material, unit size, 

shape, and spatial distribution, apply to timber sales and result in the maintenance of habitat. 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Within Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands and Southwest 

Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest, pine martens may be present within suitable structural 

conditions including small tree, medium tree, large tree, and giant tree conditions, singly and 

multi-story and open moderate and closed canopies, but only if snags, down logs, and/or rock 

outcrops are present for denning (Johnson and O’Neil, 2001). Loss of 65.5 acres of Ponderosa 

Pine Forest and Woodlands (44.5 acres of late successional-old growth forest, 10.5 acres of 

mid-seral forest, and 32 acres of clearcut-regenerating forest) and 21.5 acres of Southwest 

Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest (19 acres of late successional-old growth forest, 2 

acres of mid-seral forest, and 1 acre of clearcut-regenerating forest) would affect less habitat 

tan the equivalent of one female home range (160 acres – see discussion above under the 

Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest). However, given the lack of association between pine 

martens and the forested types affected on the Fremont-Winema National Forest, effects to the 

species could occur but are not likely. 

Mitigation. Mitigation measures that would minimize impacts to pine martens include planting 

trees within the right-of-way after construction. Conifers would be planted to within 15 feet of 

each side of the pipeline centerline. After tree planting, there will be 5.14 acres of former 

Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands and 15.26 acres of former Southwest Oregon Mixed 

Conifer-Hardwood Forest that will remain in an herbaceous state – the maintenance corridor - 

during the life of the project (Table 4-1). 

To mitigate for loss of downed wood and snags within the construction right-of-way, Pacific 

Connector fund the Forest Service to treat 500 acres by thinning forest and creating small 

openings adjacent to pipeline corridor along Clover Creek corridor and Dead Indian Road 

crossing. The projects would include fuel treatments and have been incorporated into the CMP. 

The treatments would accelerate the development of late successional habitat characteristics of 

structure. Those projects would provide benefits to pine martens within the Fremont-Winema 

National Forest if they occur. 

H-522
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-71 

Forest Plan Consistency. Implementation of the mitigation measures is expected to provide 

forest structure and function for pine martens in areas that would otherwise be subject to 

intensive timber harvest. In these respects, the Proposed Action would be consistent with the 

Forest Plan. 

4.5 Bald Eagle 

The bald eagle was chosen as a management indicator species for the Forest because it was 

classified as a threatened species under the ESA (USFS, 1990d). However, the species is no 

longer listed under the Act. (see discussion under Section 2.7, above, Umpqua National Forest).

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for bald eagles and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. The monitoring objective for the 

bald eagle is to assure that recovery plan objectives are being met (USFS, 1990e). The 

following are monitoring questions and thresholds of concern for the bald eagle: 

• is the bald eagle population approaching recovery objectives? The threshold of concern 

for this question occurring when more than a 10 percent decline of the bald eagle 

population in the Klamath Basin. 

• are all known and identified potential nest sites protected in accordance with the 

Recovery Plan and has a site plan for each next been written? The threshold of concern 

for this question occurs when any site is not protected, and/or when there are more than 

10 percent of sites with unfinished site plans two years after implementation. 

• For both of these first two questions, concern would occur when an active nest site is 

unoccupied two years in succession; if this happens, the causes must be determined 

and the situation corrected, if possible. 

• Other monitoring questions include: are nest sites producing young; is the winter roost 

receiving use, with concern if the decrease of winter roost use is greater than 20 percent 

over the previous two years average; is management of bald eagle replacement habitat 

producing stand conditions that meet objectives for large trees, with concern if 

silviculturally treated replacement areas are not releasing or achieving growth rates as 

anticipated five years after implementation; and is replacement area habitat receiving 

use by the bald eagle, with concern if there is no use of the replacement area within ten 

years of implementation (USFS, 1990e). 

Management Prescriptions. All management areas through which the project will pass are to be 

monitored for the bald eagle, which includes 3A, 3B, and 3C. See description for Pine Marten, 

above. The nesting and roosting season is January 1 through August 31, and the required 

protection zone is 440 yards (USFS, 1990e). 

Species Status in the Project Area. There are two bald eagle nests within the Fremont-Winema 

National Forest (Fish Lake 543 and Fish Lake 1227) in the vicinity of the pipeline but each is 

farther than one mile away. One nest was recently used in 2006 and the other, an alternate 

nest site, was used in 2003. There are no Midwinter Bald Eagle Survey locations near the 

Forest (Steenhof et al., 2008) but there are nine count routes in the vicinity of the Klamath River 

and Upper Klamath Lake that are from 7 to 11 miles of the pipeline route through the FremontWinema National Forest. Results of midwinter bald eagle counts from the nine routes indicate 

that wintering bald eagles have been significantly increasing (P<0.10) in the region during the 

10 years from 1996 to 2005 (Figure 4-1). Wintering bald eagles have likewise been significantly 

increasing along the Pacific and within the Great Basin (see Steenhof et al., 2008). 

H-523
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-72 

Figure 4-1 

Mean Bald Eagles per Count Route Counted During Midwinter Surveys on 9 Count Routes, 1988-

2005, in the Vicinity of the Klamath River and Upper Klamath Lake, Oregon.

Habitat. The bald eagle is a year-round resident when food is available. When they are not 

breeding, they may congregate where food is abundant, even away from water. Fairly common 

breeder at Upper Klamath Lake. They can be found throughout the state during non-breeding 

season, although they nest primarily in forested areas near the ocean, along rivers, and at 

estuaries, lakes, and reservoirs. All nests observed in Oregon have been in trees, primarily 

Sitka spruce and Douglas fir west of the Cascades, and ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, and sugar 

pine in eastern Oregon. Nests are usually built in live trees, but they will reuse the nest after the 

tree dies. (Marshall, et al., 2006). 

Bald eagles are associated most habitats within the Fremont-Winema National Forest in 

proximity to waterbodies, including Southwest Oregon Mixed Conifer-Hardwood Forest; 

Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands. 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Potential effects to bald eagles by the Proposed Action within 

the Fremont-Winema National Forest are expected to be the same as described above for 

effects on the Umpqua National Forest. Habitat destruction through logging, road construction, 

and recreational development has in the past had the most affect on this species throughout its 

range. Recent public awareness and concerns have reduced this kind of detriment, at least on 

public lands. Unintentional harassment or malicious destruction of nests and shooting eagles 

does occur, although it has not been a problem on this Forest. Public awareness has benefited 

this species. The current management for this species requires, as a minimum, preparing a 

site-specific management plan for each bald eagle site. Plans will be coordinated and reviewed 

with the USFWS (USFS, 1990a). One bald eagle nests on the Fremont-Winema National 

Forest just beyond one mile from the proposed project. However, because the nesting pair is 

beyond 0.32 mile of the proposed project, no effects to the nesting bald eagle pair is expected. 

Mitigation. No mitigation specifically targeting impact to bald eagles is proposed on the 

Fremont-Winema National Forest. 

H-524
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-73 

Forest Plan Consistency. The Proposed Action will be consistent with Forest Plan Standards 

and Guidelines to meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, related to 

management of bald eagles. 

4.6 Mule Deer 

The mule deer is listed as an indicator species because of its economic importance (USFS, 

1990c). Summer and winter range habitat are both important to the mule deer since their 

survival depends on the condition and presence of winter range, and on early successional 

vegetation stages or non-forest habitat for forage in summer range (USFS, 1990). Deer 

summer range capability indices are useful indicators for species needing non-forested habitat 

for survival (USFS, 1990). 

The following Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the 

Forest Plan to conserve and manage for mule deer and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. Mule deer habitat is supposed to 

be managed, taking into account all factors such as roads, cover, forage, water distribution, and 

livestock competition, so that habitat capability to support deer is maintained or improved. On 

limited site-specific instances, short-term decreases (less than 10 years) are acceptable to 

achieve long-term benefits. Effects will usually be calculated for projects on areas ranging from 

8,000 to 60,000 acres. Habitat suitability models, such as the Interagency Technical Advisory 

Committee Mule Deer Model, 1985 as amended, may be used in some projects; for example, 

with timber sales, grazing plans, road construction and water development (USFS, 1990e) 

The Forest is supposed to provide a minimum of 30 percent of its area as cover for deer; 

generally, 15 percent of the area will be hiding cover, 10 percent will be thermal cover, and 5 

percent will be cover for fawning. All cover also will be hiding cover, whenever possible. A 

short-term reduction of cover to 15 percent of an area may be justified on a project-specific 

basis if reduction below 30 percent cover will provide long-term (greater than 10 years) benefits 

for deer. To provide adequate diversity of forage structure for deer, activities shall be planned 

to achieve multiple age classes in the brush vegetative component. Wildlife forage will be 

allocated to meet the needs of big game first, and then to meet the needs of other animals. 

(USFS, 1990e) 

The monitoring objectives for the mule deer are to assure that habitat objectives are met, and to 

validate habitat assumptions. The monitoring questions and thresholds of concern are: 

• what is the relationship between habitat and population, and what is the habitat variable 

that most limits the population of mule deer, with a decline exceeding 10 percent of 1990 

populations of mule deer on any management unit influenced by the Forest being of 

concern, as well as a cumulative decrease of habitat suitability greater than 5 percent 

over five years and/or a cumulative decrease of habitat suitability index factors greater 

than 5 percent over five years being of concern. 

• what are the cumulative effects of open roads, alterations in cover, alterations of forage, 

livestock competition, water developments, and cover/forage distribution on deer habitat 

suitability, and what is the primary cause of the decline of herds in the area, with the 

thresholds of concern the same as mentioned previously. 

• what is the longevity of mule deer habitat structural and nonstructural improvements, 

with concern shown when the functional or structural failure rate of structural or 

nonstructural habitat improvements exceeding 10 percent over five years and/or failure 

H-525
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-74 

to maintain 95 percent of structural improvements over five years, with minor 

maintenance expected and not considered a failure (USFS, 1990e). 

Management Prescriptions. This affects all management areas through which the project will 

pass, which includes 3A, 3B, and 3C (USFS, 1990e). See management descriptions for Pine 

Marten, above. 

Species Status in the Project Area. Long-term, systematically collected data are available for 

this species, collected annually by the ODFW. Data are collected on population trends, sex 

ratios, winter mortality, and harvest. ODFW’s Keno Hunt Management Unit 31 coincides with 

the portion of the Fremont-Winema National Forest within which the Proposed Action is located. 

ODFW (2008a) has compiled harvest data on mule deer within Wildlife Management Unit 31 for 

the 2007 season and prior harvest seasons beginning in 2003 (ODFW, 2008b). Total mule 

deer harvest has increase within the WMU since 2003. During the same period of time, percent 

hunter success has increased (Table 4-2) and there has been a significant decrease (P <0.01) 

in the number of days per mule deer harvested (Figure 4-2). 

Table 4-2 

Harvest Statistics for Mule Deer within the Keno Wildlife Management Unit 31, 2003-2007. 

Harvest 

Year 

Total 

Hunters 

Total 

Hunter 

Days 

Total 

Males 

(antlered)

Total NonMales 

(non-antlered) Total

Days 

per 

Harvest 

Percent

Hunter 

Success

2007 1241 7951 472 0 472 17 38 

2006 1146 6216 373 0 373 17 33 

2005 1208 7528 366 0 366 21 30 

2004 1101 7432 292 0 292 25 27 

2003 1185 6343 223 0 223 28 19 

Figure 4-2 

Trend in Days per Mule Deer Harvested within Keno Wildlife Management Unit 31, 2003-2007. 

H-526
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-75 

Harvest data for Keno WMU 31 suggests that the mule deer population has been increasing, 

facilitating hunter success with decreased levels of effort. Annual reports for each WMU 

provided by ODFW include 1) a population index - ODFW’s Trend Count for animals in the 

WMU, conducted along a fixed route each year, usually at the end of winter, 2) productivity 

(young per female from ODFW’s Composition Count data reported in December), and 3) an 

estimate of the maximum overwinter juvenile survival rate (derived from composition count data 

in December and composition count data the following March). There is no significant trend in 

fawns per doe (young per adult female) nor is the any significant trend in ODFW’s Trend Count 

in Table 4-3. Estimated young overwinter survival relative to adult overwinter survival indicates 

that juvenile mule deer in the Keno Wildlife Management Unit 30 have had moderate to high 

overwinter survival rates relative to adult deer since estimates ranged from 0.52 to 0.98 (Table 

4-3). 

Table 4-3 

Population Trends, Annual Productivity, and Estimated Overwinter Survival for Juvenile Mule Deer 

within the Keno Wildlife Management Unit 31, 2000-2008 

Year 

Population 

Index 1 

Young per 

Adult Female 2

Young per 

Adult – Fall 

(Ratio A) 3

Young per 

Adult – Spring 

(Ratio B) 4

Maximum 

Overwinter 

Juvenile 

Survival Rate 5

2008 0.42 0.37 

2007 6.0 0.63 0.53 0.38 0.80 

2006 0.58 0.48 0.30 0.54 

2005 2 0.64 0.55 0.50 0.98 

2004 5 0.60 0.51 0.33 0.92 

2003 5.5 0.48 0.36 0.32 0.52 

2002 5.6 0.75 0.61 0.35 

2001 5.6 0.33 0.76 

2000 4.9 0.53 0.44 0.33 0.63 

1 Population Index is ODFW’s Trend Count for the Hunt Area which is conducted along a fixed route 

each year, usually at the end of winter (ODFW, 2008b). 2 Productivity data is young per female from ODFW’s Composition Count data reported as Young per 

100 Females counted in December (ODFW, 2008b). 3 Ratio A (White et al., 1996) is the ratio of Young per Adult, derived from Composition Count data 

(Males per 100 Females and Young per 100 Females) counted in December (ODFW, 2008b). 4 Ratio B (White et al., 1996) is the ratio of Young per Adult (Young per 100 Adults) counted in March 

(ODFW, 2008b). 5 Maximum Overwinter Juvenile Survival is related to ratios A and B and to the following relationship 

of adult over-winter survival rate (Ŝa) and juvenile over-winter survival rate (Ŝj

) by the formula (see 

equation 9 in Paulik and Robson, 1969): Ŝj ⁄ Ŝa = B ⁄ A or Ŝj

 = Ŝa (B ⁄ A). Since many of the estimates 

of maximum juvenile survival rates are greater than 1, they indicate survival of adults was less than 

juveniles over winter which is highly unlikely. 

Habitat. Mule deer are browsers and grazers. They are found throughout Oregon, east of 

Cascades and ranges into Cascades in summer. They spend summer at higher elevations and 

move back to lower elevations during winter though not all populations exhibit marked 

movements (Johnson, and O’Neil, 2001). Currently, they are confined mainly to open woods or 

isolated mountain ranges. (Csuti, et al., 2001) 

Mule deer are generally associated with most of the habitats crossed by the Proposed Action 

within Fremont-Winema National Forest including Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, 

H-527
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-76 

Eastside (Interior) Riparian-Wetlands where structural conditions provide for cover, and 

Eastside (Interior) Grasslands generally used for feeding (Johnson, and O’Neil, 2001). No mule 

deer wintering ranges would be crossed within the Forest. 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Project effects to mule deer on the Fremont-Winema National 

Forest are expected to be similar to effects to Columbian black-tailed deer described above for 

the Umpqua National Forest. Direct mortality of mule deer due to the Proposed Action is 

possible if vehicles collide with animals traveling to and from construction sites (see discussion 

under Umpqua National Forest, Section 1.5, above). Mule deer would be expected to avoid 

noise from vehicles and/or increased road traffic, blasting, and aerial fly-overs. Following 

reclamation of the pipeline corridor, mule deer may utilize the corridor for travel and for foraging, 

depending on vegetation species planted and rapidity of successful revegetation. After 

construction of the PCGP Project, there will possibly be a secondary impact (Comer, 1982) on 

harvest rates with upgraded access to previously inaccessible areas; hunters are expected to 

achieve greater success, at least temporarily, with increased access. In addition, increased 

access could increase poaching of game animals and nongame wildlife on a local level (see 

discussions under Umpqua National Forest, Section 1.5, above). The Proposed Action will 

remove 65.55 acres of Ponderosa Pine Forest and Woodlands, 0.27 acres of Forested 

Wetlands, 0.46 acre of Non-Forested Wetland, and 0.39 acre of Eastside Grasslands (Table 4-

1). 

Mitigation. The PCGP Project right-of-way provides an opportunity for developing high quality 

feeding areas (Lees, 1989) for deer species, especially if noxious weeds are controlled and high 

quality native forage is seeded. As required by FERC’s Upland Plan, Pacific Connector 

consulted with the NRCS, the BLM, and the Forest Service regarding specific seeding dates 

and recommended seed mixtures for the project area, including an important winter forage 

species, wedgeleaf ceanothus, in riparian areas and areas outside of the 30-foot maintenance 

corridor on National Forest lands. The ECRP describes the procedures that will be 

implemented to minimize erosion and enhance revegetation success for the entire project. The 

ECRP describes the procedures that will be utilized to minimize the spread of noxious weeds as 

a result of project construction. The ECRP describes the silvicultural prescriptions that will be 

implemented in areas that are outside the permanent easement. Seeding mixtures and 

inhibition of noxious weeds will enhance forage production. 

Vegetation management over the long-term will benefit winter range browse and forage for mule 

deer. Vegetation within the permanent easement will be periodically maintained by mowing, 

cutting, and trimming (either by mechanical or hand methods). In upland areas, the permanent 

easement will be maintained in a condition where trees or shrubs greater than 6 feet tall will be 

controlled (cut or trimmed) within 15 feet either side of the centerline (for a total of 30 cleared 

feet). Maintenance activities are expected to occur approximately every 3-5 years depending 

on the growth rate of vegetation. During maintenance, vegetation will be cut/trimmed in 4 to 6-

foot lengths and scattered across the permanent easement to naturally decompose and to 

discourage OHV traffic, benefit wildlife habitat, and to decompose naturally. 

Open trenches during PCGP Project construction have the potential to entrap deer. Within 

delineated big-game winter and summer range, Pacific Connector will leave trench segments 

(>5 feet wide) of the proposed pipeline alignment untrenched and herbaceously vegetated 

(every 0.5 mile and at visible wildlife game trails) to serve as a route (i.e., green bridge or 

landscape connector) for big game across the construction right-of-way until pipe is ready to be 

installed (Forman et al., 2003). Alternatively, Pacific Connector will install soft plugs (backfilled 

trench materials) in the trench after excavation at these distances to provide wildlife passage. 

H-528
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-77 

Additionally, 20-foot gaps will be left in spoil and topsoil stockpiles at all hard or soft plug 

locations and a corresponding gap in the welded pipe string will be left in these locations. 

Suitable ramps will be installed from the bottom of the trench to the top to prevent potential 

wildlife entrapment within the trench. 

In addition, Pacific Connector proposes to erect 6 miles of let-down fence along Clover Creek 

Road and install 3 cattle guards within the Forest which is included in the CMP. Fencing will 

protect wetland and riparian areas from livestock within the Spencer Creek Watershed. Pacific 

Connector will also fund the Forest Service to treat 500 acres by thinning forest and creating 

small openings adjacent to pipeline corridor along Clover Creek corridor and Dead Indian Road 

crossing. The projects would include fuel treatments and have been incorporated into the CMP. 

The treatments would accelerate the development of late successional habitat characteristics of 

structure while reducing risks of stand-replacing wildfires. 

Forest Plan Consistency. The Proposed Action will result in forest removal but revegetation 

within the right-of-way following construction will create early seral forest that will eventually 

provide forage, thermal and hiding cover and the 30-wide maintenance corridor will provide for 

travel and forage for the life of the project. The Proposed Action and Compensatory Mitigation 

Projects proposed within the Fremont-Winema National Forest will be consistent with the Forest 

Plan. 

4.7 Resident Trout 

Resident trout are indicator species for riparian and aquatic ecosystems. The following 

Standards and Guidelines and Management Prescriptions were identified in the Forest Plan to 

conserve and manage for resident trout and their habitat: 

Applicable Forest Plan Forestwide Standards and Guidelines. The monitoring element is for 

fish habitat generally, and is not specified for resident trout. Monitoring questions and 

thresholds of concern include: 

• is fish habitat capability increasing to the 80 percent level, and is the fish population 

changing in terms of numbers, species composition, or age structure, with the threshold 

of concern being any decline over three years or more of fish numbers or numbers of 

fish species. 

• what are the effects of fish habitat improvement structures on stream channel 

configuration, large woody material, and fish populations, with concern with any decline 

in pool volume, area, or average maximum depth of Class I or Class II streams. 

• what is the longevity of stream habitat structures, with concern when functional or 

structural failure rate of habitat improvement structures exceeding 20 percent over five 

years, with minor maintenance expected and not considered failure. 

• what are the cumulative effects of activities on fish habitat capability and the aquatic 

ecosystem, with concern when a one scale-class reduction in the community tolerance 

quotient for macroinvertebrates as measured at established critical reach stations by 

basin. 

Management Prescriptions. MA 18-Fish and Aquatic Habitat and all Management Areas 

through which the project will pass, which includes 3A, 3B, and 3C. See Pine Marten. 

Streams shall be managed to maintain or to improve the present level of native fish habitat 

capability (USFS, 1990e). 

H-529
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-78 

Habitat. Within the Fremont-Winema National Forest, the pipeline route crosses one perennial 

stream (Spenser Creek supports resident trout) and four intermittent tributary streams (fish 

presence is unknown for three and assumed for the fourth) within the Spenser Creek Fifth Field 

Watershed. Riparian zones associated with Spenser Creek and the tributaries that will be 

crossed are forested with late successional-old growth forest, mid-seral forest, and regenerating 

forest (Table 4-4). . 

Table 4-4 

Summary of Habitats Removed by the Proposed Action from Riparian Zones Extending One-Site 

Potential Tree Height From Stream Banks and Riparian Reserves, Extending up to Two SitePotential Tree Heights From Stream Banks on The Fremont-Winema National Forest 

Forested Habitat 1 Other Habitat 1

Fifth Field 

Watershed 

(Hydrologic Unit 

Code) 

and 

Riparian Zone 

Late SuccessionalOld Growth Mid-Seral Forest Regenerating ForestClearcut Forest 

Total 

Forested WetlandNon-Forested WetlandUnaltered NonForested HabitatAgricultureAltered Habitat

Total

Total Riparian Zone Impact(acres) 

Spencer Creek 

(HU 1710030206) 

One Site Potential 

Tree Height (187 feet) 1.44 0.84 1.68 0 3.96 0.27 0.10 0.11 0 0.15 0.63 4.59 

Riparian Reserve 2.36 1.50 2.95 0 6.81 0.27 0.10 0.22 0 0.29 0.88 7.69 

Effects of the Proposed Action. Construction of the Proposed Action will remove a total of 3.96 

acres of forested vegetation within one site-potential tree height of all riparian zones crossed on 

the Fremont-Winema National Forest and at total of 6.81 acres of forested vegetation within 

Riparian Reserves crossed (Table 4-4). Effects to salmonids, to instream habitats, and to 

riparian zones during pipeline construction and operation were analyzed and discussed in detail 

in the Draft Biological Assessment and summarized above in Section 2.8 for the Umpqua 

National Forest. The same effects are expected for stream crossed within the Fremont-Winema 

National Forest 

Mitigation. Conservation measures to mitigate effects to salmonids within streams impacted by 

construction of the pipeline have been provided and discussed in the Draft Biological 

Assessment for the Proposed Action and summarized in Section 2.8 for the Umpqua National 

Forest. The mitigation measure would be implemented within the Fremont-Winema National 

Forest. 

In addition to these measures, Pacific Connector has developed a CMP to mitigate for 

unavoidable and/or unmitigated effects of the project. On the Fremont-Winema National Forest, 

Pacific Connector proposes to erect 6 miles of let-down fence along Clover Creek Road and 

install 3 cattle guards within the Forest which is included in the CMP. Fencing will protect 

wetland and riparian areas from livestock within the Spencer Creek Watershed. Pacific 

Connector will also fund the Forest Service to treat 500 acres by thinning forest and creating 

small openings adjacent to pipeline corridor along Clover Creek corridor and Dead Indian Road 

crossing. The projects would include fuel treatments and have been incorporated into the CMP 

Funding will also be used to restore stream contours, improve riparian vegetation, and replace 

culvert, if needed, at one site. The projects would include fuel treatments and have been 

H-530
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-79 

incorporated into the CMP. The treatments would accelerate the development of late 

successional habitat characteristics of structure while reducing risks of stand-replacing wildfires. 

Forest Plan Consistency. The Proposed Action and measures included in the CMP will 

maintain or to improve the present level of native fish habitat capability and be consistent with 

the Forest Plan. 

H-531
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-80 

5.0 REFERENCES 

Anderson, J.R., E.E. Hardy, J.T. Roach, and R.E. Witmer. 1976. A Land Use and Land Cover 

Classification System for Use with Remote Sensor Data. Geological Survey 

Professional Paper 964. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 

Arnold, D.A. 1978. Characteristics and Cost of Highway Deer Kills.Parges 92-101 in The 1978 

John S. Wright Forestry Conference, C.M. Kirkpatrick (editor). Purdue University, 

Department of Forestry and Natural Resources and Indiana Cooperative Extension 

Service. Lafayette, IA. 

Bradshaw, C.J.A., S. Boutin and D.M. Hebert. 1998. Energetic implications of disturbance 

caused by petroleum exploration to woodland caribou. Canadian Journal of Zoology 

76:1319-1324. 

Brusnyk, L.M., and D.A. Westworth. 1985. An Assessment of Post-construction Use of a 

Pipeline Corridor by Ungulates. Unpublished report for NOVA, An Alberta Corporation, 

Calgary, AB. 

Comer, R.D. 1982. Understanding secondary effects of development on wildlife resources in 

mitigation planning. Pages 16-31 in Issues and Technology in the Management of 

Impacted Western Wildlife. Thorne Ecological Institute Technical Publication No. 14. 

Boulder, CO. 

Crabtree, A.F. 1984. Resolving Conflicts between two Natural Resource User Groups: Pipeline 

Rights-of-Way and Off-Road Vehicles. Page 472 to 487 in A.F. Crabtree (editor). 

Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Environmental Concerns in 

Rights-of-way Management. Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS. 

Csuti, B., T.A. O’Neil, M.M Shaughnessy, E. P. Gaines, and J. C. Hak. 2001. Atlas of Oregon 

Wildlife: Distribution, Habitat, and Natural History – Second Edition. Oregon State 

University Press, Corvallis, OR. 

Forman, R.T.T., S. Sperling, J.A. Bissonette, A.P. Clevenger, C.D. Cutshall, V.G. Dale, L. 

Fahrig, R.France, C.R. Goldman, K. Heanue, J.A. Jones, F. J. Swanson, T. Turrentine, 

and T.C. Winter. 2003. Road Ecology: Science and Solutions. Island Press, 

Washington, D.C. 

Fraser, J.D., L.D. Fenzel, and J.E. Mathisen. 1985. The Impact of Human Activities on 

Breeding Bald Eagles in North-Central Minnesota. Journal of Wildlife Management 

49:585-592. 

Freeman, M. 2006. Police Break Up Deer-Poaching Ring. Mail Tribune, March 18, 2006. 

Online at: http://archive.mailtribune.com/archive/2006/0318/local/ 

stories/01local.htm. 

Golden, J., R.P. Ouellette, S. Saari, and P.N. Cheremisinoff. 1980. Environmental Impact Data 

Book. Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, MI. 

Grubb, T.L., W.W. Bowerman, J.P. Giesy, and G.A. Dawson. 1992. Responses of Breeding 

Bald Eagles, Haliaeetus leucocephalus, to Human Activities in Northcentral Michigan. 

The Canadian Field-Naturalist 106:443-453. 

H-532
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-81 

Horejsi, B.L. 1979. Seismic Operations and the Impact on Large Mammals: Results of a 

Monitoring Program. Unpublished report Prepared for Mobil Oil Canada, Lt., Weseter 

Wildlife Environments, Calgary, AB. 

Ihsle, H.B. 1982. Population Ecology of Mule Deer with Emphasis on Potential Impacts of Gas 

and Oil Development along the East Front of the Rocky Mountains, Northcentral 

Montana. M.S. Thesis, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. 

Isaacs, F.B. and R.G. Anthony. 2004. Bald eagle nest locations and history of use in Oregon 

and the Washington portion of the Columbia River Recovery Zone, 1971 through 2004. 

Oregon Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Oregon State University, Corvallis, 

OR. 

Isaacs, F.B., R.G. Anthony, and R.J. Anderson. 1983. Distribution and productivity of nesting 

bald eagles in Oregon, 1978-1982. The Murrelet. 64: 33-38. 

Hageman, H. 1994. White-tailed Deer Habitat Management Guidelines. Forest, Wildlife and 

Range Experiment Station. University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho. 

Johnson, D.H., and T.A. O’Neil (managing directors). 2001. Wildlife-Habitat Relationships in 

Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 

Johnson, N.P. 1990. Nesting Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in Urban Areas of 

Southeast Alaska: Assessing Highway Construction and Disturbance Impacts. 

Transportation Research Record 1279:60-68. 

Kagan, J.S, J.C. Hak, B. Csuti, C.W. Kiilsgaard, and E.P. Gaines. 1999. Oregon Gap Analysis 

Project Final Report: A geographic approach to planning for biological diversity. Oregon 

Natural Heritage Program, Portland, OR. 

Knight, R.L., and S.K. Knight. 1984. Response of Wintering Bald Eagles to Boating Activity. 

Journal of Wildlife Management 48:999-1004. 

Lees, A.T. 1989. The Effect of Recreational Activity on Elk Use and Distribution Along a 

Pipeline Right-of-Way in Issues and Technology in the Management of Impacted 

Wildlife. Proceedings of a National Symposium. Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Edited 

by: P.R. Davis, J.E. Emerick, D.M. Finch, J.W. Monarch, S. Rush, O. Thorne, and J. 

Todd. 

Marshall, D.B., M.G. Hunter, and A.L. Contreras, Eds. 2006. Birds of Oregon: A General 

Reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR. 

McGarigal, K., R.G. Anthony, and F.B. Isaacs. 1991. Interactions of Humans and Bald Eagles 

on the Columbia River Estuary. Wildlife Monographs 115:1-47. 

Michael Minor & Associates. 2008. Blasting and Helicopter Noise Analysis & Mitigation Plan. 

Prepared for Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline, L.P. Portland, OR. 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2003a. Oregon’s Elk Management Plan. Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR. 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2003b. Oregon’s Mule Deer Management Plan. 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR. 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2005. Oregon Native Fish Status Report. Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish Division. Online at: 

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/ONFSR/index.asp 

H-533
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-82 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008a. Big Game Statistics. Available online at: 

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/resources/hunting/big_game/controlled_hunts/ 

reports/hunting_statistics_08/Stats_Book_2008_final.pdf 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008b. Preference Point and Controlled Hunt 

Summary Reports Archives. Available online: http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ 

resources/hunting/big_game/controlled_hunts/reports/hunt_statistics_archive.asp 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008c. Natural Resources Information Management 

Program. Online at: http://nripm.dfw.state.or.us/nrimp/default.aspx. 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2009. Oregon Fish Habitat Distribution, Digital Data. 

Online at: <http://nrimp.dfw.state.or.us/nrimp/default.aspx?pn=fishdistdata> 

Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center. 2006a. Personal Sensitive Species Data Request 

(05/03/06). 

Paulik, G.J., and D.S. Robson. 1969. Statistical Calculations for Change-in-Ratio Estimators of 

Population Parameters. Journal of Wildlife Management 33: 1-27. 

Reed, D.F. 1981. Conflicts with Civilization. Pages 509-535 in O.C. Wallmo (editor). Mule and 

Black-tailed Deer of North America. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE. 

Romin, L.A., and J.A. Bissonette. 1996. Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Highway Mortality 

of Mule Deer on Newly Constructed Roads at Jordanelle Reservoir, Utah. Great Basin 

Naturalist 56:1-11 

Romin, L.A., and J.A. Muck. 1999. Utah Field Office Guidelines for Raptor Protection from 

Human and Land Use Disturbances. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Utah Field Office, 

Salt Lake City, UT. 

Rost, G.R., and J.A. Bailey. 1979. Distribution of Mule Deer and Elk in Relation to Roads. 

Journal of Wildlife Management 43:634-741. 

Rowland, M.M., M.J. Wisdom, B.K. Johnson, and J.G. Kie. 2000. Elk distribution and modeling 

in relation to roads. Journal of Wildlife Management. 64: 672-684. 

Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon. 2008. The North American Breeding Bird Survey, 

Results and Analysis 1966 - 2007. Version 5.15.2008. U.S. Geological Survey, 

Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD. 

Smith, M.R., P.W. Mattocks, Jr., and K.M. Cassidy. 1997. Breeding Birds of Washington State. 

Seattle Audubon Society Publications in Zoology Number 1. Seattle, WA. 

Stalmaster, M.V., and J.R. Newman. 1978. Behavioral Responses of Wintering Bald Eagles to 

Human Activity. Journal of Wildlife Management 42:506-513. 

Steenhof, K., L. Bond, and L. L. Dunn. 2008. The midwinter bald eagle survey results and 

analysis 1986-2005. U.S.Geological Survey, National Biological Information 

Infrastructure, and Northwest Alliance for Computational Science and Engineering. 

Available on-line at http://www.nacse.org/nbii/eagles. 

Stinson, D.W. J.W. Watson, and K.R. McAllister. 2001. Draft Washington State Status Report 

for the Bald Eagle. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, WA. 

Thomas, J.W. (technical editor). 1979. Wildlife Habitats in Managed Forests – the Blue 

Mountains of Oregon and Washington. USDA-Forest Service Agriculture Handbook No. 

553. 

H-534
Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Management Indicator Species 

H13-83 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1990. Final Environmental Impact Statement 

for the Land and Resource Management Plan. Rogue River National Forest. Medford, 

OR. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1990a. Final Environmental Impact Statement 

for the Land and Resource Management Plan. Umpqua National Forest. Roseburg, 

OR. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1990b. Land and Resource Management Plan, 

Umpqua National Forest. Roseburg, OR. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1990c. Land and Resource Management Plan, 

Rogue River National Forest. Medford, OR. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1990d. Final Environmental Impact Statement, 

Fremont-Winema National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1990e. Land and Resource Management Plan, 

Winema National Forest. Klamath Falls, OR. 

U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 2006. BLM GeoBOB GIS Database 

provided to Edge Environmental, Inc.. July. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final 

Rule To Remove the American Peregrine Falcon From the Federal List of Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife, and To Remove the Similarity of Appearance Provision for 

Free-Flying Peregrines in the Conterminous United States; Final Rule. Federal Register 

64(164): 46542-46558. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999a. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 

Proposed Rule to Remove the Bald Eagle in the Lower 48 States from the List of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. Federal Register 64(128):36453-36464. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines, Public 

Review Draft. February. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 

Removing the Bald Eagle in the Lower 48 States from the List of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife. Federal Register. 72(130): 37346 – 37372. 

Verts, B.J., and L.N. Carraway. 1998. Land Mammals of Oregon. University of California 

Press, Berkeley, CA. 

White, G.C., A.F. Reeve, F.G. Lindzey, and K.P. Burnham. 1996. Estimation of Mule Deer 

Winter Mortality from Age Ratios. Journal of Wildlife Management. 60:37-44. 

White, C. M., N. J. Clum, T. J. Cade, and W. G. Hunt. 2002. Peregrine falcon (Falco 

peregrinus). The birds of North America online. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New 

York, USA. http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/660. 

H-535