APPENDIX F 

AQUATIC ESA 

COMPLIANCE INFORMATION 

 
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-1 

Salmonid Project Design Criteria Compliance Worksheet 

BLUE MOUNTAIN PROVINCIAL EXPEDITED PROCESS 

Project Name: South George Vegetation and Fuels Management

Administrative Unit: Pomeroy Ranger DistrictAgency Contact: Del Groat (Fish Biologist), Tara Hanger (Fuels Planner), Su Meredith (Silviculturist) Report Date: September 8, 2009 Level I team: Tracii Hickman, Rebecca Dittmann, Marisa Meyer (Umatilla Level 1) Species and/or designated critical habitat covered: Snake River steelhead and Snake River critical habitat Watershed(s) affected by the project: (include HUC#) 170601030203 (South Fork Asotin Creek HUC 6), 170601030206 (Upper Ge

watersheds of the Asotin Creek watershed HUC 5 1706010302) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: (FOCUS ON THE PROJECT COMPONENTS THAT MAY AFFECT LISTED SALMONID SPECIES OR THEIR DESIHABITATS) The South George Vegetation and Fuels Management project has been designed using the Blue Mountain PDC for the following projec

Mechanized (use of heavy equipment) Vegetation Management (outside of RHCAs) • Thin dry and moist upland forests to a species composition and structure compatible with the historical range of variability. Thinn

reduce forest density, modify species composition, and reduce insect and disease susceptibility by improving tree and stand vigor. are used to improve upland forest sites where early-seral species are no longer present in ecologically viable amounts. 

Road Maintenance • Conduct road maintenance on 79 miles of system roads used by timber sales. This would include spot rocking, blading 

cleanout as needed to prevent, reduce or minimize sedimentation from timber haul. One undersized culvert on an intermitt

4300130) would be replaced with a rock ford that protects the channel, and eliminates the current condition of the culvert plugging 

flowing over the road and creating sedimentation). 

Non-mechanized Vegetation Management – Prescribed Burning (no ignition in RHCAs) • Reduce fuel loading (surface, ladder and canopy fuels) to a level that facilitates future reintroduction of low-intensity surface fire, r

fuels in natural fuel areas to lower the risk of fire spread into the upper canopy, and reduce fuels that would contribute to uncharactand resource damage. 
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-2 

Summary of Project Activities: 

Acres in South Fork Asotin Creek and Upper George Creek 20,653 Timber HarvestSummary of South George Project Silvicultural Activities outside RHCA’s 

Approximate Acres 

Improvement cutting/free thinning 3,020 Low thinning 80 Clear cutting with reserves 250 Seed-tree cutting with reserves 550  (regeneration and seed-tree cutting areas will be planted with trees to meet desired ecological conditions) 

Total (approximately) 3,900 

FuelsSummary of South George Project Activity and Natural Fuel Treatments outside RHCA’s 

Approximate Acres 

Mechanical Grapple Piling (on same acres as timber harvest) 870 Prescribed burning of activity fuels (on same acres as timber harvest) 

2,030 

Non-commercial mechanical thinning and ladder fuel reduction 800 Non-commercial hand thinning and ladder fuel reduction 350 Landscape prescribed fire 3,000 

Total (approximately) 7,075 

Road Maintenance Approximate Miles 79 miles of system roads used by timber sales 79 
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-3 

PROJECT 

MAPS:
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-4 
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-5 
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-6 

RATIO NALE FO R CO NSI S TENCY WITH PROJ ECT DESIGN CRITE RIA 

Habitat Parameter PDC Component Rationale Water Quality 

Water Temperature Is there any risk of effecting water temperature? No 

Proposed harvest activities will nPACFISH RHCAs. Fire will oninto riparian areas. The burn witimplemented to maintain shade tor increase in stream temperature

Sediment and Substrate Will the project contribute to the introduction of 

sediments into streamcourses? No 

Burning in riparian areas would 

conditions, following project desallowed to back into RHCAs. Vstreams is unlikely. No mechaniwould occur in RHCAs. Burn inexpected to be low and localized

vegetation could occur within tw(Agee 1993). Based on slope dissediment to reach channels is ver

Road maintenance would occur oroads used by timber sales and wditch relief culvert cleanout, and 

on portions. Culvert cleanout ancleanout would lead to immediatthe road system. Effects from dilocalized and be short term, less culvert on an intermittent channeduring the dry season. Due to distreams, topography and in-chanthe probability any sediment from activities would be transported to and would not be detectable. 

Chemical Containments/nutrients 

Will the project increase nutrients or introduce chemical contaminants to streamcourses? No 

No activities will occur that will contaminants to any stream cour

occur in RHCAs. 

Barriers Will the project result in any impediment to 

movement of any life stage of fish? No 

This project will not create nor r

listed fish and their critical habit
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-7 

Habitat Elements 

Large Wood Will the project reduce the amount of large wood 

within stream courses? No 

Proposed harvest activities will nPACFISH RHCAs. No large woany stream or removed from the 

project. 

Pools Will the project adversely affect pool frequency in 

any stream course? No 

No effects to pool frequency are this project. No in-stream work 

Channel Conditions and Dynamics 

Wetted Width/Depth Ratio 

Will the project affect the wetted width/depth ratio? No 

No effects to width/depth ratios a

of this project. No changes in stra result of this project. 

Streambank Condition Will the project result in decreasing steambank 

stability or artificially raising or lowering natural water levels? No 

Stream banks will not be disturbEffects of proposed harvest and lbelow levels to affect or change 

release of water. 

Flow /Hydrology 

Changes in Peak/Base Flow 

Will the project result in detectable changes in peak 

or base flows? No 

Peterson (July 2009) modeled pochanges as Equivalent Treatmenproposed projects in the South Gmodel included both effects of pharvest. Peterson found that preharvest together would not produ

flows. (ETA’s total <15% for all of proposed harvest and landscap

levels to affect or change capturewater. 

Drainage Network Increase 

Will the project increase the drainage network? No One undersized culvert on an int

removed, the channel recontoure

rocked ford. No other changes to will occur as part of the timber aproject components. Three mile

located upslope of stream channe

with no hydrologic connection, wpart of the timber sale portion of decommissioned when the projec
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-8 

Watershed Condition 

Cumulative Effects to Watershed Condition 

Are there any baseline indicators for this watershed that, are rated Functioning at Unacceptable Risk, and will this project affect those indicators? Yes. As described in Watershed Analysis and other basin analysis (on file at Pomeroy Ranger District)areas within the National Forest boundary are in good condition and rated as Properly Functioning. Downstream, off-Forest, there are numerous problems. There are no adverse effects, either shortterm or long-term predicted on National Forest lands. 

Off Forest habitat has been identunacceptable risk” For example: Embeddedness, Pool Frequency, Riparian Conservation Areas in dsubwatersheds are/were functionoutside National Forest lands. Ralleviating some of these problemNo activities will occur with this these indicators and proper functForest will remain at “Functioninterm effects of the project at the boundary downstream are neglig

Disturbance History 

Does the project occur within a subwatershed that has baseline indicator for Disturbance History rated Functioning Appropriately? No... If so, will the project change the indicator? N/A... Does it requirean ACOE 404 permit (no), result in take (no), or are short-term effects negligible? Yes. 

This project will not change the 

indicator and it will “not” require and will not result in take. 

Direct Effects to Individuals Does the project contain the risk of a “take”? No There are no ESA species in the 

physical habitat effects downstrenegligible. 
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-9 

DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT: Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs): Steelhead Critical Habitat 

PCE PCE Habitat Feature Matrix Pathway Matrix Indicator Ratio

(1) Freshwater spawning sites 

with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning, incubation and larval development; 

Water Quantity Flow/Hydrology 

Changes in 

Peak/Base Flows 

The intent of the underburdowned fuels not live treedetectable changes in peak of this project. There will RHCAs. Peterson (2009) flow from proposed actividetectable change in flow

Increase in Drainage 

Network 

Three miles of temporary as a part of this project. Tflat ground, with no hydrostream channels, and there the drainage network. 

Water Quality Flow/Hydrology 

Temperature 

Fire will only be allowed areas. The burn within ripin a way to maintain shadshade or increase in stream expected. 

Sediment/Turbidity 

Burning in riparian areas wcontrolled conditions and into RHCAs so vegetation unlikely. Burn intensities low and localized, and re-could occur within two we(Agee 1993). Project desiestablished to control sedidistances the potential for channels is very low, near 

Chemical 

Contamination/ 

Nutrients 

No activities will occur thcontaminants entering streoccur in RHCAs. 
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-10 

PCE PCE Habitat Feature Matrix Pathway Matrix Indicator Ratio

Suitable 

Substrate Habitat Elements Substrate Embeddedness 

Project design criteria werany fire creep into RHCAexposure. As a result thermeasurable increase in sedbe no change to substrate 

(2) Freshwater rearing sites with: 

(i) Water quantity and 

floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; 

(ii) Water quality and forage 

supporting juvenile development; and 

(iii) Natural cover such as 

shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks 

Water Quantity Flow/Hydrology 

Changes in 

Peak/Base Flows 

The intent of the underburdowned fuels not live treeharvest and landscape buraffect or change capture, swater. There should be no peak or base flows as a re

Increase in Drainage 

Network 

Three miles of temporary as a part of this project. Trelatively flat ground, with connection to stream chanincrease in the drainage ne

Water Quality Water Quality 

Temperature 

Fire will only be allowed areas. The burn within ripin a way to maintain shadshade or increase in stream expected. 

Sediment/Turbidity 

Burning in riparian areas wcontrolled conditions and into RHCAs so vegetation unlikely. Burn intensities low and localized, and re-could occur within two we(Agee 1993). Project desiestablished to control sedidistances the potential for channels is very low, near 

Chemical 

Contamination/ 

Nutrients 

No activities will occur thcontaminants entering the occur in RHCAs. 
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-11 

PCE PCE Habitat Feature Matrix Pathway Matrix Indicator Ratio

Floodplain 

Connectivity 

Channel Condition 

and Dynamics 

Floodplain 

Connectivity 

There is no causal mechanconnectivity with this projstream banks will occur. 

Forage 

Habitat Elements 

Substrate 

Embeddedness 

Project design criteria werany fire creep into RHCAexposure. As a result thermeasurable increase in sedbe no change to substrate 

Large Woody Debris 

Proposed harvest activitieinterim PACFISH RHCAremoved from any stream RHCA as a result of this p

Pool Frequency 

No effects to pool frequenresult of this project. No occur. 

Pool Quality 

No effects to pool quality of this project. No in-streThere is a very low probabentering streams, and any streams would no affect p

Off-Channel Habitat No effects to off-channel 

result of this project. 

Refugia No effects to refugia are e

this project. 

Watershed 

Condition 

Riparian Reserves 

Burning in riparian areas wcontrolled conditions and into RHCAs so vegetation near streams is unlikely. T

change to the riparian rese

Natural Cover Habitat Elements 

Substrate 

No in-stream work will ocproject so there will be no substrate. 

Large Woody Debris No large wood will be rem

as a result of this project. 

Pool Frequency No effects to pool frequen

result of this project.
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-12 

PCE PCE Habitat Feature Matrix Pathway Matrix Indicator Ratio

Pool Quality 

No effects to pool quality of this project. See above sediment/turbidity.

Off-Channel Habitat No effects to off-channel 

result of this project.

Refugia No effects to refugia are e

this project.

Watershed 

Condition 

Riparian Reserves 

Burning in riparian areas wcontrolled conditions and into RHCAs so vegetation near streams is unlikely. T

change to the riparian rese

(3) Freshwater migration 

corridors free of obstruction and excessive predation with water quantity and quality conditions and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival;. 

Migration 

Corridors Free 

of Obstruction 

Habitat Access Physical Barriers 

No migration barriers will as part of this project. 

Agee, J. K. 1993. Fire Ecology of Pacific Northwest Forests. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.Peterson, S. 2009. South George Hydrologist Report. On file at Pomeroy Ranger District, Pomeroy, Washington 
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-13 

Project Title: Asotin Creek Riparian Vegetation Treatment (controlled 

burning) – ARBO category 13 

Project Leader: Del Groat (Fish Biologist), assisted by Tara Hanger (Fuels Planner), Su Meredith (Silviculturist) 

 

Phone: 509-843-4639 

dgroat@fs.fed.us 

Location of Project Area: 

The project area is 24 acres in an unnamed tributary in Upper George Creek of Asotin Creek (HUC 170601030206), 

located at the Umatilla National Forest boundary 

Proposed Date for Implementation: Spring 2012 

Project Description: The objective of the proposed project is to reduce crown fire initiation, disrupt crown fire 

continuity, and use prescribed fire to reduce existing and created ground material. As described during monitoring 

of the nearby School Fire of 2005, dry forest RHCA’s provided corridors for wildfire to spread across the landscape 

(Tara Hanger, personal communication 2005). The goal of this project is to reduce probability of crown fire 

initiation by treating ladder fuels, and to reduce crown fire spread by using treatments to disrupt canopy continuity 

in dry forest RHCAs. 

Historical fire suppression created an absence of fire in dry forest, and allowed shade tolerant understory trees to 

establish. The result is a change in forest plant composition in the Asotin watershed. In addition, fire return 

intervals and severity has changed from frequent low intensity fires to infrequent, high intensity wildfires. 

Benefits include maintenance of large wood to streams and reduced potential of catastrophic fire. The treatment 

should maintain the function of the riparian area. Objectives include restoration of desired levels of stream shade, 

bank stability, soil erosion and stream turbidity, stream nutrients, and large wood inputs. 

The project is designed to comply with the Endangered Species Act-Section 7 Programmatic Consultation Biological and 

Conference Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat

Consultation: Fish Habitat Restoration Activities in Oregon and Washington, CY2007-CY2012, by National Marine 

Fisheries Service, Northwest Region, re-issued June 27, 2008 (FS 2008/03505). 

Extent: Approximately 24 acres of RHCA would be treated and restored.

Species Affected: Snake River steelhead and their critical habitat 
South George Vegetation and Fuels Management Project 

F-14 

Aquatic Restoration BO Project Notification 

Project Title: Asotin Creek Road Decommissioning Treatments (Category 17) 

Project Leader: Stacia Peterson 

Phone: 509-522-6285 

speterson@fs.fed.us 

Location of Project Area: 

The project is located in the headwaters of Asotin Creek (HUC 170601030206) 

Timing/Proposed Date for Implementation: Summer 2010 – 2012 (if project extends beyond 2012 then project 

would be reevaluated and resubmitted for consultation as needed) 

Activity Type: #18. Removal of Legacy Structures 

Project Description: The objective of this project is to decommission roads in the headwaters of Asotin Creek to 

restore watershed function. Thirty-one (31) miles of system road decommissioning is proposed, and an additional 

15.5 miles of unauthorized non-system roads and ATV trails (pioneered by Forest users) would also be 

decommissioned. Culverts would be pulled, channels recontoured, ditches blocked, and any other work necessary 

to disconnect the roads from the hydrologic system would be performed. Roads would be subsoiled and revegetated 

with native grasses. 

The road decommissioning and watershed restoration project will implement the design criteria described in the 

Aquatic Restoration Biological Opinion (Fish Habitat Restoration Activities in Oregon and Washington, CY2007-

CY2012, by National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Region, June 27, 2008), category 17. 

Extent: Approximately 131 acres of system road beds would be rehabilitated.

Species Affected: Snake River steelhead and their critical habitat