United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

 

Forest 

Service 

Brown, Crawford, Dubois, Jackson, Lawrence,

Martin, Monroe, Orange, and Perry Counties, 

Indiana

Hoosier National Forest 

January 15, 2004 

Responsible Official: 

Jim Denoncour, Acting Forest Supervisor 

For more information contact: 

Ron Ellis, NEPA Specialist 

Hoosier National Forest 

811 Constitution Avenue 

Bedford, IN 47421 

Office: 812-275-5987 

FAX: 812-279-3423 

TDD: 812-275-7817 

Website: www.fs.fed.us/r9/hoosier 

Land and Resource Management Plan 

Monitoring and Evaluation Report

Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003
i

Table of Contents 

Table of Contents.......................................................................................................... i

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1

PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS FY 2002 AND FY 2003 .......................................... 2

COSTS [219.12(K)(3)] .................................................................................................... 9

RESEARCH [36 CFR 219.28(A)] ................................................................................ 13

SITE-SPECIFIC PROJECT DECISIONS...................................................................... 14

ADJACENT LANDS [36 CFR 219.7(F)] ....................................................................... 15

DEMAND [36 CFR 219.10(G)]...................................................................................... 19

PROTECT AND MANAGE ECOSYSTEMS ................................................................. 20

Restocked Lands [36 CFR 219.12(k)(5)(i)]............................................................................ 20

Insects and Disease [36 CFR 219.12(k)(5)(iv)]..................................................................... 21

Soil and Water [36 CFR 219.27(a)(1)(2)(4),(b)(5),(e),(f)]....................................................... 22

2002--- ................................................................................................................................... 22

2003--- ................................................................................................................................... 24

Caves and Karst [36 CFR 219] ............................................................................................. 25

2002--- ................................................................................................................................... 25

2003--- ................................................................................................................................... 26

Vegetative Management [36 CFR 219.15 and 219.27(b)].................................................... 27

Monitor warm season grass restoration at Bird Cemetery..................................................... 27

Garlic mustard monitoring in the Charles C. Deam Wilderness............................................. 28

Research Natural Areas (RNA’s) and Special Areas (SA’s) and Potential Candidates [36 

CFR 219.25]............................................................................................................................. 28

Monitor rare and exotic plant populations.............................................................................. 28

Boone Creek Barrens monitoring transects........................................................................... 29

Featherbell monitoring in the Faucett Chapel Special Area................................................... 29

Vegetative monitoring after burning in Harding Flats and Clover Lick Barrens ..................... 30

Management Indicator Species, Federal Threatened and Endangered Species, Regional 

Forester’s Sensitive Species, and Forest Species of Concern [36 CFR 219.9]................ 30

Monitor bald eagle activities near Lake Monroe .................................................................... 31

Survey for Regional Forester sensitive species (RFSS) and Forest species of concern 

(FSOC) plants........................................................................................................................ 31

Monitor populations of butternut ............................................................................................ 32

Fish and Wildlife [36 CFR 219.19]......................................................................................... 32

Monitor fish populations in selected waters ........................................................................... 32

Monitor aquatic species populations in Lake Monroe, Lower Salt Creek, and Little Blue River 

watersheds (FY 2003)............................................................................................................ 33

Monitor frog populations throughout the Hoosier National Forest ......................................... 34

2002 breeding bird surveys.................................................................................................... 35
ii

2003 Breeding Bird Survey.................................................................................................... 39

2002 monitoring of mammals................................................................................................. 42

2003 monitoring of mammals................................................................................................. 47

PROTECT OUR CULTURAL RESOURCES................................................................ 49

Cultural and Heritage Resources [36 CFR 219.24].............................................................. 49

PROVIDE FOR A VISUALLY PLEASING LANDSCAPE............................................. 52

Visual Quality Objectives [36 CFR 219.21]........................................................................... 52

PROVIDE FOR RECREATION IN HARMONY WITH NATURAL COMMUNITIES...... 53

Wilderness Management [36 CFR 219.18] ........................................................................... 53

Recreation Facilities [36 CFR 219.21©]................................................................................ 59

Trails [36 CFR 219.21(G)........................................................................................................ 60

PROVIDE FOR A USEABLE LANDBASE................................................................... 64

Report land status changes by County, District, and Management Area......................... 64

PROVIDE FOR HUMAN AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ................................... 65

Special Uses and Outstanding Rights ................................................................................. 65

Monitoring of earth-disturbing permit activities ...................................................................... 65

Pesticide use.......................................................................................................................... 66

Monitor special uses for compliance with nondiscrimination ................................................. 66

Air Quality [36 CFR 219.27(a)(12)]........................................................................................ 66

Health and Safety ................................................................................................................... 67

CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................. 68
iii

List of Tables 

Table 1. Fiscal Year 2002 Management Attainment Report - Resource 

Accomplishments................................................................................................... 2

Table 2. Fiscal Year 2003 Management Attainment Report - Resource 

Accomplishments................................................................................................... 4

Table 3. Comparison of Key Indicators (includes both FY 2002 and FY 2003)....... 7

Table 4. Comparison of Forest Plan Costs with Fiscal Year 2002 Expenditures.. 11

Table 5. Comparison of Forest Plan Costs with Fiscal Year 2003 Expenditures.. 12

Table 6. Decisions in Fiscal Year 2002..................................................................... 14

Table 7. Decisions in Fiscal Year 2003..................................................................... 14

Table 8. Forest Plan Demand and Supply................................................................ 19

Table 9. Wild Turkey Count 2002 .............................................................................. 35

Table 10. Turkey Harvest 2001 and 2002.................................................................. 36

Table 11. Ruffed Grouse Heard 2002........................................................................ 37

Table 12. 2001 and 2002 Indiana Mourning Dove Call Count ................................. 38

Table 13. 2002 Bobwhite Quail Whistle Count......................................................... 38

Table 14. Wild Turkey Count 2003 ............................................................................ 39

Table 15. Turkey Harvest 2002 and 2002................................................................. 40

Table 16. Ruffed Grouse Heard 2003........................................................................ 41

Table 17. 2002 and 2003 Mourning Dove Call Count............................................... 42

Table 18. 2002 and 2003 Bobwhite Quail Count ...................................................... 42

Table 19. Raccoon Road-kill Indices ........................................................................ 45

Table 20. White-tailed Deer Harvest 2001 and 2002 ................................................ 45

Table 21. Wildlife Observations 1999 and 2000....................................................... 46

Table 22. Raccoon Road-kill Indices 2002 and 2003............................................... 47

Table 23. White-tailed Deer Harvest 2002 and 2003 ................................................ 47

Table 24. Wildlife Observations 2000 and 2001....................................................... 48

Table 25. Summary of Trail Field Trips FY 2002...................................................... 61

Table 26. Summary of Trail Field Trips FY 2003...................................................... 63

Table 27. Land Adjustment by Management Area for FY 2003 .............................. 64

Table 28. Land Adjustment by County and District for FY 2003 ............................ 64

Table 29. Other Land Adjustments for FY 2003....................................................... 64
1

Introduction 

The Forest Plan, as amended in 1991, provides guidance to ensure that National Forest System 

(NFS) lands in Indiana provide diverse and healthy forest ecosystems while providing high 

quality recreational opportunities. We are committed to forest activities that lie lightly on the 

landscape. Our mission is to manage forest resources and allow people to enjoy the values and 

benefits the forest provides. 

Projects included here are the on-the-ground application of management practices and guidance 

to move toward the desired future condition identified in the Forest Plan. The final budget for 

any given year determines the annual program of work. This report lists those projects, the 

budget to accomplish them, and decisions made based on site-specific environmental analysis. It 

also includes monitoring activities to help evaluate the quality of Forest Plan application. 

Project monitoring determines how well we are carrying out the Forest Plan. It provides a 

means to evaluate whether Forest Plan guidance is sufficient to achieve management goals and 

direction in the Forest Plan. The National Forest Management Act [36 CFR 219.12(k)] requires 

monitoring and evaluation on an on-going basis. Attached are, first, a narrative that describes 

monitoring results for fiscal year 2002 and, second, a narrative describing monitoring results for 

fiscal year 2003. 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on 

the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual 

orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with 

disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, 

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

complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten 

Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 

(voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 
2

PROGRAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS FY 2002 and FY 2003 Outputs [219.12(k)(1)] - Compare goods and services with those projected on pages 2-14 and 2-15 of the FEIS, Report (MAR) and Non-MAR Performance Measures. TABLE 1. FISCAL YEAR 2002 MANAGEMENT ATTAINMENT REPORT - RESOURCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS

MAR Description MAR Code 

Regional Target 

Watershed Assessment  Assessments EM-AS-WA 1 Land Management Planning  LRMP Monitoring and Evaluation Reports, Reports, FN EM-LRMP-M&E 1  Amendments (Forest Plan) EM-AMEND  FN EM-TF-LPS 200  FN EM-AQBI--R  FN EM-AQBI-L 20  FN EM-SP-COM 1  FN EM-EP-COM 1 Inventory and Monitoring  Heritage Resource Inventories, Acres, FN EM-HR-I 4,000  EM-TEUI-SBRG 82  EM-SRM-M 5  EM-WRM-M 3 Recreation, Wilderness and Heritage Resource Management  Recreation Special Uses Administered, Permits, FN RM-SU-ADMIN 17  RM-WLD-PSC 23  Annual (wilderness) Education Contacts, Contacts, FN RM-WLD-EC 1,300  Wilderness RM-WD-STD 1  RM-WLD-RP 30  Heritage RM-HR-STD 12  RM-PROD-STD 112  RM-STD-GA 383  Heritage Sites Evaluated, sites, FN RM-HERT-EVAL 
3

MAR Description MAR Code 

Regional Target 

 Heritage Sites Interpreted, sites, FN RM-HERT-INTP  RM-HERT-INV 350  Heritage Sites Preserved and Protected, sites, FN RM-HERT-P&P  Project Level Heritage Inventories, FN Grazing and Rangeland Vegetation Management Noxious Weed Treatment, acres, FN RG-NOX-WD-TR 45 Wildlife, Fisheries, TES Management  Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restored or Enhanced, acres, FN WL-THAB-RES 800  Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restored or Enhanced, acres, C WL-THAB-RES 0  Inland Fish Lakes Restored or Enhanced, acres, FN WL-IF-LAK-RE 0  Total Wildlife Structures, FN WL-STRUCTURE 0  WL-TES-HAB 20  WL-BIO-A&E 0 Soil, Water and Air Resources Management  Soil and Water Resource Improvements, acres, FN SW-RES-IMP 50 Real Estate Management, Landlines, Land Acquisition  Special Use Applications Processed, permits, FN LM-SU-APPL 36  LM-LND-CLASS 0  Special Use Permits Administered to Standard, permits, FN LM-SUP-STD 23  LM-SUP-TOT 0  Ownership Adjustment Excluding Exchanges, acres, FN LA-OWNER-ADJ 0  C LA-LL-MAINT 3  LM-LL-NEW 6  Rights-of-Way Acquired, cases, FN LA-ROW-ACQ  FN LA-LND-PURCH  LA-EXCH-FEE 0 Facility Re/Construction 

FN FC-MF 64 
4

MAR Description MAR Code 

Regional Target 

Minerals and Geology 

C MG-GEO-PER 0 FN MG-N-BNE-OP 1 FN MG-BNE-OP-AD 1 C MG-BNE-OP-AD 1 FN MG-GEO-MA-AD 

Vegetation and Watershed Management 

FN VW-EV 0 

Fire Protection  Hazardous Fuels Reduction, Appropriated, acres, FN FP-FUELS-APP 69  Firefighting Production Capability, FN FP-FFPC 22 Public Asset Management  Trails Maintained, miles, FN TR-MAINTN 95  FN TR-IMP-STD 16  Trail Construction and Reconstruction, miles FN CR-TR-CNST-R 5  Seasonal Capacity Available - Total, PAOT days, FN RM-PAOTS-TOT 1,560,000 Human Resources  Youth Conservation Corps, enrollee weeks, FN HR-YCC-PART  Senior Community Service Employees, enrollee hours, FN HR-SCSEP 

TABLE 2. FISCAL YEAR 2003 MANAGEMENT ATTAINMENT REPORT - RESOURCE ACCOMPLISHMENTS

MAR Description MAR Code 

Regional Target 

Watershed Assessment 

Broadscale Assessments EM-AS-WA 25 

Land Management Planning  Amendments EM-AMEND 1  LRMP Monitoring and Evaluation Reports, Reports, FN EM-LRMP-M&E 1  LRMP Revisions Underway EM-LRMP-CP 1 
5

MAR Description MAR Code 

Regional Target 

Inventory and Monitoring  Above-Project Integrated Inventory EM-ABV-PRJ 740  Heritage Resource Inventories, Acres, FN EM-HR-I ----  Terrestrial Fauna Inventories, Acres, FN EM-TF-LPS -- Recreation, Wilderness and Heritage Resource Management  Recreation Special Uses Administered, Permits, FN RM-SU-ADMIN 7  Recreation Wilderness Areas Managed to Standard, FN RM-WD-STD 1  Recreation Products provided to Standard, FN RM-PROD-STD 160  Recreation Days Managed to Standard, FN RM-GS-STD 891  Seasonal Capacity Administered to Standard RM-PAOTS-STD 988,149  Heritage Sites Managed to Standard, sites, FN RM-HERT-P&P 14  Project Level Heritage Inventories, FN RM-HERT-INV 0  Sites Managed to Standard RM-HR-STD 14 Grazing and Rangeland Vegetation Management Noxious Weed Treatment, acres, FN RG-NOX-WD-TR 13 Wildlife, Fisheries, TES Management  Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restored or Enhanced, acres, FN WL-THAB-RES 1,117  Wildlife Interpretation & Education Products Provided, FN C WL-PROD-PROV 25  Inland Fish Lakes Restored or Enhanced, acres, FN WL-IF-LAK-RE 20 Soil, Water and Air Resources Management  Soil and Water Resource Improvements, acres, FN SW-RES-IMP 48  Acres of Air Quality Managed, FN SW-AQ 1,190 Real Estate Management, Landlines, Land Acquisition  Land Classification Cases Resolved LM-LND-CLASS 7  Land Use Proposals and Applications Processed, FN LM-SU-APPL 15  Land Use Authorizations Administered to Standard, permits, FN LM-SUP-STD 55  Boundary Line Marked or Maintained, FN LM-BL-TOTAL 15  Acres Acquired, FN LA-LND-PURCH 674  Acres Adjusted LM-OWNER-ADJ 1  Geologic Permits and Reports, FN/C MG-GEO-PER 50  M&G Operations Processed MG-OP-PRO 1  M&G Operations Administered to Standard MG-OP-ADM 8 
6

MAR Description MAR Code 

Regional Target 

Fire Protection  WUI Fuels Treatment, FN FP-FUELS-WUI 375 Public Asset Management  Miles of Trail Maintained, to Standard, FN TR-MTC-STD 91  Miles of Trail Improved to Standard, FN TL-IMP-STD 12 Human Resources  Youth Conservation Corps, enrollee weeks, FN HR-YCC-PART  Senior Community Service Employees, enrollee hours, FN HR-SCSEP Forest Management  Establish Vegetation FM-EV-REF 120  Improve Vegetation FM-IV-TSI 355  Special Products Permits Administered FM-SPROD-NC 10  Green Timber Volume Offered FM-VOL-OFF 80 Road Construction  High Clearance Roads as OML 1 or 2 RD-HIGH 7  Passenger Car Roads as OML 3,4 & 5 RD-PASS 9 
7 

The following table includes information on outputs for both fiscal year 2002 and 2003. It includes key indicato

Environmental Impact Statement for the Forest Plan (p. 2-14 and 2-15). 

TABLE 3. COMPARISON OF KEY INDICATORS (INCLUDES BOTH FY 2002 AND FY 2003) 

The column labeled “Est. 1991-2001” presents the units as identified as potential in the Forest Plan; this column might have 

like “Anticipated Outputs for Ten Years.” 

Key Indicator 

Unit of Measure 

Est. 1991- 2001 

1992 Output 

1993 Output 

1994 Output 

1995 Output 

1996 Output 

1997 Output 

1998 Output 

1999 Output 

2000 Output 

2001 Output 

2

Recreation Visitor Days (RVD) 

MRVD 387 896 230 510 510 525 525 525 525 

Trail Construction  Hiking Miles 99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  Horse Miles 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  Bike Miles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  Multiple-use Miles 0 0 0 3 8.6 7.5 22 0 6.5 0 0  Trail Reconst. (all) 

Miles 0 0 33.4 0 0 0 51.5 28.1 28.0 9 3.3 

Vegetation maintained  Forest Openings Acres 4,000 459 350 509 322 480 650 439 290 1,373 907  Barrens Maint. Acres 1,131 40 140 40 60 0 83 0 0 20 0 
8

Key Indicator 

Unit of Measure 

Est. 

1991- 

2001 

1992 

Output 

1993 

Output 

1994 

Output 

1995 

Output 

1996 

Output 

1997 

Output 

1998 

Output 

1999 

Output 

2000 

Output 2001 Output 

Wetlands Construc  Lakes/ Ponds Acres 120 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  Marsh/ Wetlands Acres 15 0 0 0 0 0 1 20 0 50 105 Vegetation Regen.  Hardwood 0-9 Acres 4,853 0 0 57 0 0 150 44 76 0 0  Pine 0-9 Acres 94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Timber Harvested  Sawmber MMBF 26 0.042 0.019 0.395 0.159 0.114 0.67 3.839 0.903 0 0 --Roundwood MMBF 17 0.078 0.040 0.706 0.127 0.066 1.13 1.839 0.373 .0091 .0028  Total MMBF 43 0.120 0.059 1.101 0.286 0.180 1.89 5.728 1.322 .0091 .0028 Roads Const./ Reconst. 

 Miles 140 3.50 1.00 0.10 0.60 7.90 10.90 1.0 1.0 7.43 6.85 
9 

Costs [219.12(k)(3)] 

Quantitatively compares actual cost of applying management practices with Forest Plan estimates.

As shown on line 16 of each of the following tables entitled Comparison of Forest Plan Costs with 

Fiscal Year [2002 or 2003)] Expenditures, expenditures exceeded Forest Plan budget estimates. 

Our staff summarized over 70 budget line items into 15 program areas. Forest Plan cost estimates 

did not include land acquisition funds ($1,500,000 in FY 2002 and $1,563,000 in FY 2003) or the 

Senior Community Service Program ($199,560 in FY 2002 and $166,065 in 2003). 

In 1990, the estimate of funds necessary to carry out the Forest Plan was $5,385,675 (2003 dollars -- 

all figures have been adjusted for inflation based on Gross National Product Implicit Price Deflator 

index1). 

The mix of expenditures does not correspond to plan estimates. In FY 2003, the Forest spent 

$1,132,104 in forest planning, inventory, and monitoring. The interdisciplinary team did not estimate 

these expenditures in the 1991 Forest Plan cost estimates. In 1991, these expenditures were 

accounted in other program areas. Expenditures were less (in both fiscal years) in recreation, fish 

and wildlife, timber, and law enforcement than estimated in the 1991 Forest Plan. However, 

expenditures exceeded estimates in soil, water, and air; lands; minerals, engineering; and fire. 

Our expenditures for recreation in FY 2003 were about 25 percent of our Forest Plan estimate. The 

expenditures included: 

• Replacement of 14 vault toilets with accessible SST design 

• Rehabilitation of HRRA flush toilet 

• New kiosks with maps at trailheads 

• Trail reroute in Charles C. Deam Wilderness 

• Dump cleanup in Charles C. Deam Wilderness 

• Rehabilitation of Youngs Creek Trail 

• Completion of Springs Valley Trail 

Timber funding was about 20 percent of the Forest Plan estimate in FY 2003, higher than in FY 

2002. 

Congress funded the land acquisition program. In FY 2002 land acquisition fund paid dollars of 

$1,500,000 resulted in acquisition of 779 acres. Land acquisition costs in FY 2003 were $1,563,000 

to acquire 674 acres. The lands staff also completed environmental analyses, including the 

environmental assessment for the Braun Land Exchange. The Forest Plan budget did not estimate 

land acquisition funds. 

Engineering project FY 2002 expenditures included: 

• German Ridge Dam valve replacement. 

• Hardin Ridge Shelterhouse ceilings 

 

1

 The Bureau of Economic Analysis, an agency of the United States Department of Commerce, 

prepared the Gross National Product Implicit Price Deflator index. 

http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb/Index.htm. 
10

• Hardin Ridge Bath house renovations 

• Celina Lake toe drain 

• Saddle Lake beach demolition 

• Saddle Lake road removal 

• Tipsaw and Indian Lakes shoulders and paving 

• Celina and Indian Lakes storm damage 

• Tipsaw Beach steps, railing, and sidewalk repair 

• Construction of Indiana Interagency Fire Coordination Center at Tell City 

In FY 2003 engineering project expenditures included: 

• Completion of Houston and Spears Repeater Towers 

• Hardin Ridge paving 

• Hardin Ridge toilet and shower 

• Tell City dam maintenance 

• Tipsaw/Celina waterline 

• Hickory Ridge Fire Tower steps and landings 

• SST construction 

• Pioneer Mothers parking lot 
11

TABLE 4. COMPARISON OF FOREST PLAN COSTS WITH FISCAL YEAR 2002 EXPENDITURES 

(Shown in 2002 dollars) 

Line 

Number Summarized 

budget line item 

Forest Plan

Budget 

Estimate 

(2002 dollars) 

Fiscal Year 

2002 

Expenditure1

Difference 

(Expenditure - 

Estimate) 

Expenditures as 

Percent of Forest 

Plan Budget 

Estimate 

2 Recreation 1,976,593 495,763 -1,480,830 25% 

3 Wildlife and Fish 606,098 242,855 -363,243 40% 

4 Range 0 0 0 

5 

Planning and 

Inventory and 

Monitoring. 0 637,296 637,296 

6 Timber 864,225 77,522 -786,703 9% 

7 Soil, Water & Air 136,906 232,032 95,126 169% 

8 Minerals 32,801 49,494 16,693 151% 

9 

Senior Citizens 

(SCSEP) 0 199,460 199,460 

10 Lands2 221,047 1,611,701 1,390,654 729% 

11 Engineering 283,125 1,097,249 814,124 388% 

12 Fire 106,958 620,722 513,764 580% 

13 Law Enforcement 52,766 20,256 -32,910 38% 

14 General-Cost Pools 711,631 1,266,287 

Not 

Comparable 

Categories 

15 Misc. 0 0 0 

16 Total All Funds 4,992,150 6,550,637 1,558,487 131% 

 

1

 Expenditure/Revenue includes unpaid obligations. . 

2

 Lands includes land acquisition funds. 
12

TABLE 5. COMPARISON OF FOREST PLAN COSTS WITH FISCAL YEAR 2003 EXPENDITURES 

(Shown in 2003 dollars) 

Line 

Number Summarized 

budget line item 

Forest Plan

Budget 

Estimate 1

(2003 dollars) 

Fiscal Year 

2003 

Expenditure2

Difference 

(Expenditure - 

Estimate) 

Expenditures as 

Percent of Forest 

Plan Budget 

Estimate 

2 Recreation 2,132,728 875,207 -1,257,521 41% 

3 Wildlife and Fish 653,975 334,783 -319,192 51% 

4 Range 0 0 0 

5 

Planning & Inventory 

& Monitoring 0 1,132,104 1,132,104 

6 Timber 932,491 186,950 -745,541 20% 

7 Soil, Water & Air 147,721 274,818 127,097 186% 

8 Minerals 35,392 58,200 22,808 164% 

9 

Senior Citizens 

(SCSEP) 0 166,065 166,065 

10 Lands3 238,598 2,193,030 1,854,432 919% 

11 Engineering 304,675 2,312,790 2,008,115 859% 

12 Fire 115,407 605,811 490,404 525% 

13 Law Enforcement 56,934 14,326 -42,608 25% 

14 General Admin 767,844 1,255,613 

Not 

Comparable 

Categories 

16 Total All Funds 5,385,675 9,030,253 3,644,578 168% 

 

1

 Inflation factor 1.410 based on Gross National Product Implicit Price Deflator Index, see web page: 

http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb/Index.htm 2

 Expenditure includes unpaid obligations. 

3

 Lands includes $1,563,000 in land acquisition funds. 
13 

Research [36 CFR 219.28(a)]

Review and update research activities on the Forest. Find out if the needs in the 

Forest Plan (pages 3-4 to 3-7) are being addressed, and are still appropriate. 

Identify additional research needs based on monitoring and evaluation and on 

changing societal needs. 

Listed below are research needs addressed in FY 2202 and FY 2003 (Forest Plan, pp. 3-4 to 3-

7). Published research conducted in other years may be found on the Hoosier National Forest 

webpage at www.fs.fed.us/r9/hoosier. Most research needs recognized in the Forest Plan are 

being addressed, many through partnerships with other entities. Several research studies are 

still in progress and work continues. 

Need: Native Plant and Animal Community Research

Hedge, Cloyce; Homoya, Mike; and Scott, Perry. 2001. Interim Report. Endangered, threatened, 

and rare plant species on the Hoosier National Forest. 6 pages. FOUO. On file with: Forest 

Supervisor, Hoosier National Forest, 811 Constitution Avenue, Bedford, IN 47421. 

Hedge, Cloyce. 2002. Inventory and control recommendations for invasive plant species on 

selected areas of the Hoosier National Forest. 13 pages. On file with: Forest Supervisor, 

Hoosier National Forest, 811 Constitution Avenue, Bedford, IN 47421. 

Other research publications from work on the Hoosier National Forest 

Guyette, Richard P., Dey, Daniel C., and Stambaugh, Michael C. 2003. Fire and human history 

of a barren-forest mosaic in southern Indiana. American Midland Naturalist 149(1):21-34. 

Leatherberry, Earl C. 2003. The forest resources of the Hoosier National Forest, 1988. Resource 

Bull. NC-210. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North 

Central Research Station. 54 p. 

Zhalnin, Andrey, George R. Parker, Guofan Shao, and Patrick Merchant. 2002. LTA delineation 

for the Hoosier National Forest: criteria and methods. In: Smith, Marie-Louise, ed. 

Proceedings, land type associations conference: development and use in natural resources 

management, planning and research; 2001 April 24-26; Madison, WI. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

NE-294.Newton Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Northeastern Research Station: 30-38. 
14

Site-Specific Project Decisions 

TABLE 6. DECISIONS IN FISCAL YEAR 2002 

Decision Date County 

South Lawrence Utilities (water line) 11/27/01 Lawrence County 

McKain Exchange Proposal 3/12/02 Jackson County 

Orange County REMC 3/12/02 Orange County 

Otter Creek Upland Planting 3/19/02 Crawford County 

Southern IN REC (Whitcomb buried 

utility) ROW 

5/10/02 Perry County 

Stand Improvement (grapevine control) 9/13/02 Perry County 

TABLE 7. DECISIONS IN FISCAL YEAR 2003

Decision Date County 

Houston Tower Site 10/09/2002 Brown, Crawford, Jackson, Lawrence, 

Martin, Orange, and Perry Counties 

Spear Tower Site 10/10/2002 Orange 

Indian Lake Dam Road Construction 10/11/2002 Orange 

Breedlove Road Access 03/13/2003 Perry, Crawford 

Tornado Blowdown Fuel Hazard Reduction 04/18/2003 Crawford 

Plan Amendment (7) for T&E Species 07/21/2003 Perry 

Braun Land Exchange 09/29/2003 Martin 

 

Springs Valley Special Use Trail 11/14/2002 Jackson 

Paoli Exp. Forest Oak Planting/TSI 01/31/2003 Perry 

Narrows Marsh Riparian Restoration Project 02/07/2003 Crawford 

Boone Creek Special Area Prescribed Burn 02/24/2003 Monroe and Jackson 

Parking Area for Pioneer Mothers 02/26/2003 Perry 

Bonds Special Use Permit Trail 05/08/2003 Perry 

Utilities District of Western Indiana REMC 

Permit 

06/03/2003 Crawford 

Ransburgh Boy Scouts of America Special 

Use Permit 

06/18/2003 Crawford 
15

Adjacent Lands [36 CFR 219.7(f)] 

Consider effects of national forest planned management on land, resources, and communities 

adjacent or near the Hoosier National Forest and, conversely, the effects on national forest 

management from activities on nearby lands managed by other public land agencies or under 

the jurisdiction of local government. To be addressed from a perspective of current and 

emerging issues.

There are various interrelationships between national forest management on nearby privately 

owned lands, including the effects on national forest management from activities on nearby 

lands. Here in south central Indiana, where National Forest System (NFS) land is interspersed 

with private or other public lands, national forest management certainly affects private lands as 

well. 

Because of the limited amount of public land in Indiana, there are many demands for its use. 

According to the Indiana Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP), only 

three percent of the state is in public ownership and but a fraction of an acre of public land is 

available for recreation per capita. Of the public land in Indiana, 31 percent is within the 

Hoosier National Forest. The concentration of visitors on the Hoosier obviously affects 

adjacent lands, and the NFS lands also provide quality of life benefits and opportunities to our 

neighbors. In addition, the presence of private land and homes influences the way the scattered 

blocks of NFS land are managed. 

Besides use by Indiana residents, the proximity of the forest to Kentucky results in a high level 

of use by recreationists living south of the Ohio River. The Hoosier is by far the closest large 

block of public land for residents of Louisville and Owensboro, Kentucky and Cincinnati, Ohio. 

Current demands that affect national forest management on adjacent lands include: trail use, 

land prices, trespass, small forest products, other special uses, community development, debris 

burning, and flood control. 

sold 1,503 annual tags and 7,866 daily tags. The fee demonstration project netted $55,864. 

Trail use has a positive impact on the local economy and the businesses that cater to these users. 

Horse camps in the northern portion of the Forest are booked to capacity most weekends during 

the recreation season. There are several trail permits issued to link private horse camps to NFS 

trails. 

Trail use –Demand for special use trails and for permits to conduct events 

on NFS lands remains high. Most trail use requests are for horse-riding 

events, but we have also received requests for mountain bike events. A 

recreation fee demonstration program, which went into effect in 1998, 

requires a trail use permit for all horse and bike riders on forest trails. The 

permits are available as daily tags or as an annual trail use tag. In 2002, 32 

local vendors sold tags, in addition to Forest offices. In 2002, the Forest 
16

We estimate that 22,964 horseback riders and 4,052 mountain bike riders visited the forest in 

2002. We also completed construction on the Springs Valley Trail system. 

Land Prices and Real Estate –When advertising private land for sale, most 

realtors mention if the land borders NFS land. People usually consider a 

location adjacent to NFS land desirable. 

Trespass – Recreational trespass from NFS land to private land occurs both inadvertently and 

deliberately on a continual basis. Only about 25 percent of the National Forest boundaries are 

marked and identifiable. As a result, people using the forest often wander onto private lands 

without realizing that they have trespassed. Local landowners complain about an increasing 

apathy on the part of these trespassers for attention to boundaries and a wanton disrespect for 

private landowner rights. 

There is also the potential for private landowners to trespass, in person or with their land 

practices, onto NFS land. As the numbers of neighbors increase through parcel subdivision, the 

likelihood of trespass also increases. In limited instances, some cases can be resolved using the 

Small Tracts Act authority. The cases thus resolved vary from someone’s garden or yard to 

substantial improvements such as homes. Resources permitting, we address these trespasses on 

a case-by-case basis. 

Illegal off-road vehicle use continues to be a problem, as adjacent landowners illegally ride 

from their property onto NFS land. Efforts to apprehend these trespassers are rarely productive 

since the trespassers do not access the Forest by public points. Regardless of the entrance point, 

however, they can do substantial damage to forest resources. Horseback riders also often ride 

onto the forest from private lands and create their own trails, resulting in further resource 

impacts. 

Dumping of trash, old appliances, and tires is also an ongoing problem on the forest. The forest 

is actively working with community recycling and solid waste districts to promote responsible 

waste disposal. The Forest has one site under special use to the Orange County Solid Waste 

Disposal District. This site provides for recycling containers and household trash collection. 

Small forest products – Frequent requests for small forest products include plant collection, 

grapevine collection, house logs, fence posts, and other miscellaneous products. These are 

normally denied unless the request corresponds with a project which has dutifully been 

approved through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. Requests for other 

products, though rarely approved, may be allowed under certain circumstances if they fit into 

Forest Plan guidance. Resource specialists determine the best locations and impose 

restrictions. As appropriate, permittees pay a fee for the small forest products commensurate 

with their value. 

Other special uses – Occasionally private enterprises are authorized to use NFS land. One 

example is the concessionaire permit for Hardin Ridge, Indian and Celina Lakes, and Tipsaw 

Lake Recreation Areas. These permits provide jobs and income to local people as well as 

services to NFS visitors in a cost-efficient manner. 
17

Other examples are private driveways to access in-holdings or utility rights-of-way to develop 

rural areas. Permittees uphold permit requirements and pay a fee to the United States for the 

use of NFS land. They are granted non-exclusive use of the land. 

A third type of special use permit is the type that authorizes utility companies to put their lines 

across National Forest System land--with restrictions and in some cases the payment of a fee. 

Changes in the permits and locations of the lines can be beneficial to both the permittee and the 

national forest. In 2002 Orange County REMC moved one power line from Pine Valley Store 

to State Road 145. In 2003 Orange County REMC moved a line from a forested location to the 

roadside of the Hagar Tract west of Orleans. 

Community development – Community development and private land management also 

affects the national forest. Development and subdivision of private parcels increases the 

number of people adjacent to NFS land, thus increasing the potential for direct use by 

neighbors. Louisville, Kentucky and Bloomington, Indiana are two nearby large cities that 

continue to expand. Preferring to live in a more rural area and buy land at lower costs, 

commuters are creating a demand for more home construction in the area of the Forest. 

Economic development, primarily in the Tell City Ranger District, has the potential to greatly 

change the demographics of Perry and Crawford Counties. 

Ohio River Scenic Byway – This 981-mile route, of which only a portion crosses 

NFS lands in three states, was nominated as a National Scenic Byway in 1996. It 

continues to grow into an appreciable tourist attraction. Brochures are now 

available with loop tours off the byway through the Hoosier as well as rural 

communities. The route now extends through the states of Ohio and Illinois, and 

the three states are working together on marketing, interpretation, and signs. 

Indiana is working in partnership with the states of Ohio and Illinois to extend the route at each 

end through its neighboring states. Key to the route’s attraction are the rolling hills and scenic 

overlooks on the Hoosier. The Forest has assisted with some funding, designing, and 

contracting work on reconstruction portions of the route through the Hoosier National Forest. 

Branchville Prison – The Branchville Training Center is across Highway 37 from the Tipsaw 

Recreation Area. Visitors to the inmates at the center are likely to use the Tipsaw area. 

Indiana Historic Pathways – Thirty-seven counties are involved in this 

effort to designate, develop, and market three historic pathways. The 

effort pulls three routes together: US Highway 50, US 150, and the 

Buffalo Trace. The preliminary work has been done, and the route has 

been nominated and is awaiting approval. U.S. Highway 50 crosses the 

state as part of one of the earliest coast-to-coast highways. Through 

Indiana, the highway route parallels the railroad that also has historic routes in the area. The 

Buffalo Trace predates all other routes, as the route migrating buffalo used to cross from 

wintering grounds in the Kentucky Bluegrass Region to the plains of the Midwest, crossing at 

the falls of the Ohio River (now Louisville, Kentucky and Jeffersonville, Indiana). The route 

angles across the southern part of the state to Vincennes where the buffalo crossed the Wabash 

River and spread out onto the Illinois prairies. Later, stagecoaches, travelers, and even the 

military used the trace as the easiest access across southern Indiana. Part of its route was paved 

and became Highway 150. Highway 150 and the original buffalo trace both cross the national 
18

forest, and some of the last remnants of the unpaved portions of the trace remain on National 

Forest System lands. The Hoosier is an active part of the committee working toward 

recognition of these byways. 

New Ohio River Bridge – A new bridge has been completed across the Ohio 

River to Owensboro, Kentucky. This allows additional expansion of industry 

into southern Indiana and, potentially, additional visitors to the Forest. 

Holiday World and Splashing Safari – This growing amusement park is the 

oldest theme park in continuous operation in the nation. In recent years, the 

park has undergone a major renovation. With the park putting more money 

into expansion and construction, its popularity has grown. Each year a major 

new ride had opened, and the number of visitors has continued to rise. 

Hotels, restaurants, and other tourist accommodations are being built to

accommodate these visitors. Many of these tourists also camp on the Forest or visit other Forest 

areas during their trip to the amusement park. 

West Baden Hotel Renovation – The 

West Baden Springs Hotel has long been of 

interest to people from around the world. It 

was an architectural wonder when 

constructed in 1902. Cook, Inc. funded 

most of the 30 million dollar renovations 

for the hotel’s current owner, Historic 

Landmarks Foundation. Historic 

Landmarks Foundation sponsors tours of 

the site including the ongoing renovations 

and the restoration of the hotel grounds. The restoration effort of the hotel has sparked similar 

renovations throughout the town of West Baden and French Lick. Other bed and breakfasts, 

rooming houses, and restaurants have been restored. A “promenade” is being designed to link 

the two towns and showcase some of the area’s history. West Baden and French Lick were 

once popular resorts known for their hot springs and extravagant accommodations. A major fire 

and the 1930’s depression played roles in the demise of this once famous landmark. With 

current renovations and the State’s approval for gambling development in the area, the West 

Baden and French Lick area hopes to once again become a prominent destination landmark for 

tourists. 

 Rickenbaugh House – The Hoosier, 

in conjunction with local partners, 

has largely completed renovation of 

the historic Rickenbaugh House, 

shown here with its new windows, 

doors, and porch. Meetings for 

community organizations are now 

held in the house, and it is open for 

interpretive programs on weekends 

during the recreational season. 
19

Flood Control – Other than streams, creeks, and rivers, there are few natural bodies of water 

within the boundary of the Hoosier National Forest. Most of the existing lakes and ponds were 

designed primarily for flood control with recreation as a secondary use. Many of the dams are 

located above private lands. It is critical that these structures are sound and meet standards to 

ensure safety to those who live below the structures. Considerable work was done in earlier 

years to ensure that structures are safe. A new access road to Indiana Lake dam has been 

authorized and final design work is being completed prior to actual construction. 

Demand [36 CFR 219.10(g)] 

The Forest Supervisor shall review the conditions on the land covered by the plan at least 

every 5 years to determine whether conditions or demands of the public have changed 

significantly.

With the Forest Plan in 1991, many demands for the National Forest were emphasized. 

Demand for National Forest System resources was displayed and discussed in depth in the Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix B (p. 4-4 to 4-5), and in the Forest Plan (p. 3-3 to 

3-4). The interdisciplinary team (ID team) estimated demands for dispersed recreation, 

developed recreation, timber, young forest, openings and shrubland, natural-appearing forest, 

and opportunities for solitude and remote recreation. Demand was estimated to address the 

management challenges of land ownership patterns, recreation use, oil and gas exploration, and 

biological diversity. The following demand and supply table shows the Forest Plan estimates 

for 1995 (an approximate midpoint of the Plan life), and for the year 2005 to show future 

demand trends. 

TABLE 8. FOREST PLAN DEMAND AND SUPPLY

Benefit 

Projected 

Demand For 

1995 

Projected 

Demand For 

2005 

Projected 

Supply From 

Forest Plan 

Dispersed Recreation (Recreation Visitor Days – 

RVDs) 272,000 347,502 267,000

Developed Recreation (RVDs) 120,000 168,315 120,000

Timber (Million Board Feet) 19.0 22.4 4.4

Young Forest (Acres of 0-19 hardwood, 0-9 pine, or 

reverting openings) 

23,400 23,400 14,100

Openings and Shrubland (Acres of maintained 

openings, red cedar, barrens, & utility corridors) 

6,300 6,300 5,800

Natural-appearing Forest (Acres) 185,000 185,000 96,000

As reported earlier in this report, recreation visitor days exceeded our expectations in 2003. 

Demand for other benefits has not changed appreciably since the Forest Plan estimates. 

During FY 2003, public meetings were held in Jasper and near Bedford to gather input for 

alternatives in the revision of the Forest Plan. Other activities have also been ongoing for the 

Forest Plan Revision, including identification of assignments for the revision, contracts for 

development of certain needed information including vegetation, issue identification, and 
20

alternative formulation. Participation in the public meetings was active and usable. 

Representatives were present from a variety of user groups, and they displayed a cooperative 

attitude toward other such groups. 

The Forest Plan Revision is now moving forward on a revised schedule. The intent is to have a 

draft plan and Draft Environmental Impact Statement available for review by mid-summer of 

2004. 

Protect and Manage Ecosystems 

Restocked Lands [36 CFR 219.12(k)(5)(i)] 

Assure lands are adequately restocked as specified in the Forest Plan (App. B, B-11 to B13), both FY 2002 and FY 2003

Reference: Annual National Forest Management Act (NFMA) Stocking Report. 

Methodology: Newly planted stands typically receive a first and third year stocking survey to 

determine seedling survival. The survival rate is determined using two methods. The first 

method uses survival plots. When a stand is initially planted, survival plots are established 

which are scattered throughout the stand. Each survival plot consists of 10 representative trees. 

For stands or plantations of less than 10 acres, two to three survival plots are established. For 

plantations over ten acres, an additional survival plot is established for each five acres. During 

first and third year plantation survival checks, the survival plots are monitored and the quality 

and quantity of the surviving seedlings is recorded. 

The second method is the general walk-though of the plantation, which verifies the results of the 

survival plots. The general walk-thorough is used to check for blocks were survival may be low 

and to locate stands where future stand improvement treatments may be needed. 

Results: In 2002 stocking surveys were run on five plantations that include a total of 116 acres. 

One plantation adjacent to a wetland had a survival rate of only 55 percent. This same 

plantation had a survival rate of 50 percent in 2003. The lower than desired survival was 

attributed to the flooding that occurred in the plantation. The remaining seedlings were growing 

well, and many of the seedlings are over five feet in height. Even though the survival rate is 

lower than desired, the area was certified as being stocked because the distribution of seedlings 

and the diversity of species meet the objectives of enhancing the species around the wetland. 

The remaining four plantations sampled in 2002 had an acceptable average survival rate of 73.5 

percent. The four plantations are scheduled for a third year stocking survey in 2004. 

Plantations often suffer high mortality rates because of deer predation and from competition 

with herbaceous plants, fescue in particular. In an effort to offset seedling loss and still have a 

stocked stand of trees, the number of seedlings planted per acre was increased in 2001. Future 

plantings in fescue fields will be planted at rates of 800 seedlings per acre to offset seedling 

losses. 
21

In 2003, 87 acres received a first year stocking survey. Survival rates showed a 71 percent 

survival rate. These same areas are scheduled for a third year survey in 2005. 

Insects and Disease [36 CFR 219.12(k)(5)(iv)] 

2002 and 2003--- 

Methodology: Coordinate with State agencies to monitor insect and disease outbreaks. 

Results Several insect and disease surveys were accomplished in 2002 and 2003. The annual 

gypsy moth survey showed the State has been successful in slowing the spread of gypsy moth. 

No gypsy moths were found in any pheromone traps located on the Forest. 

Recommendations: Will continue to work with the State in the effort to slow the spread of 

gypsy moth. 

Introduced sawfly has been visually monitored in white pine stands throughout the Forest since 

the outbreak in 1996. Stands throughout the forest were inspected, and no recent defoliation has 

been detected. 

Recommendations: Continue to monitor white pine stands. The State representative is to keep 

the forest appraised of any outbreaks occurring in the rest of the State. 

In 2003 the Forest, in cooperation with Indiana Department of Natural Resources, established a 

Sirex plot north of Bedford, Indiana to determine if there were any Sirex beetles on the Forest. 

The Bedford plot was established because Sirex beetles were found in pallet factory in the 

Bloomington Area. As part of the study, six pine trees were weakened with the intent that if 

there were Sirex beetles in the area the beetles would attack the weakened trees. The results of 

the study have yet to be determined. 

Recommendations Continue to work with the State in identifying insect and disease outbreaks. 

Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) continues to monitor exotic beetles throughout 

the State. No exotic beetles have been identified on the Forest. 

In 2002 there was a gradual buildup of Linden looper and forest tent caterpillar on the Forest. 

In 2003 the Linden looper reached epidemic proportions, and the forest tent caterpillar declined 

in numbers. In 2003 the Linden looper defoliated scattered trees on several thousand acres in 

the southern part of the State from Interstate 64 to the Ohio River. In 2003 the Forest mapped 

the extent of the defoliation and relayed the information to State and Federal agencies. The 

State, along with State and Private Forestry (S&PF), also flew the state and mapped the extent 

of the defoliation. The insect epidemic and defoliation is expected to last for another two years 

and cause scattered mortality in hardwood stands throughout the Forest. 

Recommendations: Continue to work with the State in identifying the extent of the problem. In 

cooperation with State and S&PF, the Forest will be flown in 2004 to map the extent and 

intensity of the defoliation. 
22

Monitor Storm Damage 

In May 2003, a tornado struck Perry County, Indiana, damaging trees on approximately 80 acres 

in the Tell City Ranger District of the Hoosier National Forest. The Forest is currently in the 

process of asking the public for comments concerning the proposal. The project proposal is to 

remove weakened and severely damaged trees. The purpose of the project is to: 

• Reduce the safety hazard to German Ridge trail users, hunters, and general forest users. 

• Reduce the fire hazard to National Forest System land and adjacent private lands. 

• Improve the visual appearance along the trail system. 

• Salvage merchantable wood. 

Soil and Water [36 CFR 219.27(a)(1)(2)(4),(b)(5),(e),(f)] 

Implementation, effectiveness, and validation monitoring of the Moffatt, Roland, and 

Otter Creek wetland restoration, structure design, and water flow. 

Reference to relevant laws and handbooks:

36 CFR 219.27(a) (1) & (f); Forest Service Handbook (FHS) 2309.18 section 3.12b – Exhibit 

02; FSH 2509.18 Soil Management Handbook; R9 Supplement, FSH 2509.22, Soil and Water 

Conservation Handbook; Draft R9 Supplement, FSH 2509.18, Chapter 2, Soil Quality 

Monitoring--Logging and Forestry BMP’s For Water Quality in Indiana, Field Guide, January 

1998; Forest Plan Appendix J and K.

2002--- 

Date of observations: December 26, 2001 

Lake Celina Dam Access Road Project 

Determine effectiveness of road design in controlling soil erosion and sedimentation 

approximately one year after completion of road construction. 

Methodology: Visual observations were made to note evidence of soil erosion occurring in road 

ditches, on cut-banks, and at inlet and outlet of culverts and to see if sediment coatings occurred 

on rocks and leaves or in pools in the drainages below the culverts. Observations were also 

made as to how far the excessive sediment had traveled down the drainage. 

Criteria for being acceptable: Small channels and gullies should not occur on cut-banks, in 

ditches, or in the vicinity at the inlet of culverts. If sediment occurs at the outlet of culverts, 

there should not be large deposits within 12 feet and evidence should not be apparent beyond 25 

feet from the end of the culvert. Sediment coatings on leaves and rocks in the channel of the 

drainage should not be obvious beyond 25 feet from the end of the culvert. 

Results: There are 15 culverts placed along this road. The ditches running into most of the 

culverts had small gullies where soil had been eroded. There was little vegetative cover in the 

ditches or on the cut banks. Some of the eroded soil was deposited in a few of the culverts. The 

area just beyond the outlet of the culverts has sediment and road gravel deposited, this material 
23

having been washed through the culverts. Significant sediment coatings occurred on leaves and 

rocks in the drainage 330 feet from the outlet of the third culvert. The drainage at the end of the 

sixth culvert shoots down a 30 percent slope. Sediment coatings were noted approximately 700 

feet from the end of the sixth culvert. The cut-bank has slipped into the ditch between the fifth 

and sixth culverts. The slip begins 30 feet from the inlet of the sixth culvert and extends 

approximately 80 feet. The drainages below the twelfth and fifteenth culverts carried sediment 

into Celina Lake. 

Forest Plan met: No 

Recommendations: The following recommendations are the result of a discussion with the civil 

engineering technician in the charge of the project. Ditches and cut-banks were planted to seed 

and the seed germinated. Germination of the seed was followed by a long dry spell, and the 

planting failed. The cut-bank slump will have to be removed from the ditch. The small gullies 

in the ditches will be smoothed out and then cut banks and ditches will covered with a surfaceapplied erosion control blanket imbedded with seed. This will aid in the establishment of 

vegetation and also protect the ditches and cut banks from eroding. Once the erosion control 

blanket is placed, the sediment moving down the drainages should be alleviated. 

Date of observations: December 27, 2001 

Location:

U-38 Dam Access Road, T.2S. R.3W, section 31 and T.3S, R.3W, section 6, Tell City Ranger 

District, Hoosier National Forest. 

Determine effectiveness of road design in controlling soil erosion and sedimentation 

approximately one year after completion of road construction. 

Methodology: Visual observations were made to note evidence of soil erosion occurring in road 

ditches, on cut-banks, and at inlets and outlets of culverts and to see if sediment coatings 

occurred on rocks and leaves or in pools in the drainages below the culverts. Observations were 

also made as to how far the excessive sediment had traveled down the drainage. 

Criteria for being acceptable: Small channels and gullies should not occur on cut-banks, in 

ditches, or in the vicinity at the inlet of culverts. If sediment occurs at the outlet of culverts, 

there should not be large deposits within 12 feet and evidence should not be apparent beyond 25 

feet from the end of the culvert. Sediment coatings on leaves and rocks in the channel of the 

drainage should not be obvious beyond 25 feet from the end of the culvert. 

Results: There are 10 culverts placed along this road. The ditches running into most of the 

culverts had small gullies where soil had been eroded. There was good vegetative cover in the 

ditches and on the cut banks, which has helped to keep ditch and cut bank erosion to a 

minimum. A few of the culverts had small deposits of eroded soil and road gravel inside them. 

The soil that had eroded from the inlet side of the culverts was deposited in the area just beyond 

the outlet of the culverts. 

Culvert 1, which is closest to the gated access, had a small amount of ditch erosion at the inlet. 

Most sediment that flowed through the culvert was deposited within 15 feet of the outlet. The 

inlet of Culvert 2 is sitting on sandstone bedrock, and little ditch erosion is occurring. Sediment 
24

at the outlet consists mostly of road gravel and occurs within 21 feet from the end of the culvert. 

Culverts 3, 4 and 5 had little ditch and inlet erosion with sediment deposited within 10 feet of 

the culvert outlet. Culvert 6 had some ditch and inlet erosion with sediment having settled out 

within 20 feet of the outlet. Between culvert 6 and 7, water from overland flow was allowed to 

move across the road with no impact to the road. Culverts 7, 8, 9, and 10 had little inlet erosion 

with no noticeable sediment beyond 5 feet of their outlets. 

Forest Plan met: Yes, soil and water resources are adequately protected. 

Recommendations: The soil and water resources are adequately protected; however, there is 

some ditch erosion occurring at the culvert inlets. Protection at these sites is dependent on 

having adequate moisture for seed germination. The seedlings act as sediment traps and anchor 

the soil in place. Use of surface-applied erosion control blankets at the inlets to the culverts 

would provide immediate protection, keep the soil from being eroded, and provide protection to 

seedlings during germination and establishment. 

It is recommended that future road projects utilize surface applied erosion control blankets at 

the inlets to culverts to protect soil and water resources. 

2003--- 

Date of observations: Throughout the year. 

Determine effectiveness of site selection, restoration techniques, and levee design in 

restoring the features and functions of a bottomland hardwood forest and associated 

wetlands. 

Methodology: Site information including existence of bottomland landforms, appropriate soil 

information, site hydrology, and other information are a consideration in site selection. Levee 

design and use of grade stakes are used during implementation monitoring. Effectiveness 

monitoring occurs during the first season following construction. It includes answering 

questions such as: does levee hold water, does wetland function as wetland, does wetland store 

flood water, can the levee withstand annual flooding, does the levee attract appropriate wildlife 

species, and does the wetland hydrology encourage appropriate vegetative species? 

Criteria for being acceptable: The wetland stores water for appropriate time to encourage 

wetland vegetation and attracts wildlife. Levee is well vegetated and is able to withstand 

flooding. 

 

Results: Moffatt levee and wetland were constructed in the late summer of 1997. In the spring 

of 1998 one to two feet of water was observed flowing over the levee when the Lost River was 

flooding. Inspection of the levee later indicated that no damage had occurred to the levee. The 

shallow water wetland has been functioning as planned. In the spring the wetland is filled to 

capacity, and by late summer there are just a few pools remaining. This natural water level 

control encourages plant species that provide a food source to waterfowl during the migration 

season when water levels in the wetlands again rise. The levee at Moffatt was rebuilt during 

2002 because of muskrat damage. To discourage muskrat use, more sloping backslopes have 

been constructed on the levee. Also, mounds of soil have been constructed in the wetland area 
25

with backslopes that may attract muskrats away from the levee. This is being monitored by 

Forest Service and IDNR personnel. 

Observations and results have been similar at the Roland and Otter Creek sites. However, due 

to the large watersheds draining into these wetlands, manual draining of the wetlands during the 

summer months has been scheduled. Two of the wetland areas at Roland and one at Otter 

Creek were drawn down during the summer of 2003. Because of a scheduled dedication 

ceremony for the Roland project, a pump was borrowed and used by the IDNR to refill the two 

wetlands drained. During the course of refilling, two field drainage tiles–missed during 

construction–were located and will be plugged. This demonstrated a need to be able to refill 

wetlands manually before the adjacent rivers levels rise so that tile outlets can be located. 

Wetland site selection and restoration process, wetland levee design, and water flow regimes are 

meeting or exceeding all three levels of monitoring. 

Forest Plan met: Yes, and the process is working, as evidenced by the success of these projects. 

Recommendations: Continued monitoring of the levees for muskrat damage and scheduled 

repair of them. It is also recommended that the levees of all wetlands be placed on a schedule to 

be drained on a rotating basis to ensure the growth of vegetation that provides food for 

waterfowl. 

Caves and Karst [36 CFR 219] 

Conduct surveys for development of cave management plans 

Legal or Regulation Reference: Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988 (FCRPA), 36 

CFR 290, Forest Plan Appendix I. 

2002--- 

Methodology: A large percentage of this program depends on volunteer cavers. Members of 

the Indiana Karst Conservancy conduct the actual base level inventories and cave mapping. 

Results: The volunteers were involved in a number of activities including: 

o Writing cave management plans. Three plans have been drafted. 

o Attending HNF/IKC Karst Inventory Committee meetings. Meetings are held every 

other month to discuss items of interest on the Hoosier National Forest and to discuss 

cave and karst issues. 

o Performing Values Team activities, which include: identifying the archaeological, 

biological, cultural, educational, geological, hydrological, mineralogical, recreational, 

and scientific resources within a number of caves. 

o Evaluating caves for significance. Information on twenty-four caves has been 

submitted. 

o Biota Inventory. Dr. Julian Lewis continued conducting a biota inventory of the caves 

on the Hoosier National Forest throughout FY 2002. Several members of the HNF/IKC 

committee assisted Dr. Lewis in his work. Dr. Lewis has discovered several species that 

are new to science. 
26

o Surveying land for acquisition and other projects. 

o Providing input on HNF projects including the Forest Plan Revision, trails projects, and 

land acquisitions. 

o Surveys evaluating sinkholes prior to prescribed burns. 

o Training. Kriste Lindburg hosted a training session on Project Underground. 

o Tours. Bob Armstrong and Val Frazee led Forest employees on a tour so they could 

help teachers integrate karst education into school curriculums. 

o Take Pride in America. Ten individuals assisted with a day of walking ridges to locate 

new cave locations and pick up trash. 

o Participatied in cost share agreements to fund sinkhole cleanup on newly acquired 

properties. 

o Data Collection. Jerry Lewis and Keith Dunlap gathered information on the karst 

features and fauna in the Tincher Karst Area for inclusion in the I-69 project file. 

In addition, the Hoosier National Forest recently received a karst groundwater model to use 

in schools and environmental education opportunities. Dr. Virgil Brack from 

3D/Environmental Services surveyed eight southern caves located on the Forest. Dr. Julian 

Lewis completed draft conservation assessments (54 reports total) for all the cave species on 

the Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species list for Region 9. 

Forest Plan met: Yes. We continue to work on acquiring locations, mapping interiors, 

listing resource values, and writing individual management plans (Forest Plan Appendix I). 

Recommendations: Caves that have been recommended for significance have been 

nominated and should be approved. Future activities could be expanded to include dye 

tracing to determine water flow paths in Karst areas. 

2003--- 

Legal or Regulation Reference: Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988 (FCRPA), 36 

CFR 290, Forest Plan Appendix I. 

Methodology: A large percentage of this program depends on caver volunteers. Members of 

the Indiana Karst Conservancy conduct the actual base level inventories and map the caves. 

Results: The volunteers were involved in a number of activities including: 

o Writing cave management plans. Four plans have been drafted and one has been 

approved. 

o Attending HNF/IKC Karst Inventory Committee meetings. Meetings are held in 

alternate months to discuss items of interest on the Hoosier National Forest and to 

discuss cave and karst issues. 

o Performing Values Team activities, which include: identifying the archaeological, 

biological, cultural, educational, geological, hydrological, mineralogical, recreational, 

and scientific resources within a number of caves. 

o Evaluating caves for significance. Information on twenty-four caves has been 

submitted. 

o Biota Inventory. Dr. Julian Lewis continued conducting a biota inventory of the caves 

on the Hoosier National Forest throughout FY 2003. Several members of the HNF/IKC 
27

committee assisted Dr. Lewis in his work. These surveys have resulted in twenty-six 

cave species being added to the Regional Foresters sensitive species list for Region 9. 

o Surveys for land acquisitions and other projects were completed. 

o Providing input on Hoosier projects including the Forest Plan Revision, trails projects, 

and land acquisitions. 

o Surveys evaluating sinkholes prior to prescribed burns. 

o Take Pride in America. Ten individuals assisted with a day of walking ridges to locate 

new cave locations and pick up trash. New locations included one new cave and 

possibly a second, three additional sinkholes, and a karst spring. 

o Participating in cost-share agreements to fund sinkhole cleanup on newly acquired 

properties. 

o Presentations. Hoosier National Forest Wildlife Biologist Kelle Reynolds, Dr. Julian 

Lewis, and IKC committee member Kriste Lindberg gave presentations at the National 

Cave and Karst Management Symposium on October 14 – 17, 2003. 

In addition, Dr. John Whitaker from Indiana State University and Dr. Virgil Brack from 

3D/Environmental Services, Inc. are publishing a paper summarizing all the bat studies 

conducted on the Forest over the past years. This paper will include previous work that was 

never summarized or published. 

Forest Plan met: Yes. We continue to work on acquiring locations, mapping interiors, 

listing resource values, and writing individual management plans (Forest Plan Appendix I). 

Recommendations: Caves that have been recommended for significance have been 

nominated and should be approved. In the future, activities should be expanded to include 

dye tracing to determine water flow paths in Karst areas. 

Vegetative Management [36 CFR 219.15 and 219.27(b)] 

Monitor warm season grass restoration at Bird Cemetery 

Methodology: We conducted an ocular observation of the area to observe species composition 

and effectiveness of restoration activities to convert the opening from tall fescue to warm season 

grasses. 

Results: Forest botanist, soil scientist, wildlife biologists, and technicians reviewed the site on 

multiple dates during FY 2002 (autumn) and FY 2003 (summer). Burning of the opening last 

occurred during the spring of 2003. Consensus among participants familiar with the project was 

that the area showed an improvement towards increased amounts of warm season grasses. 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendation: Continue conducting prescribed burning in the opening and performing 

subsequent ocular monitoring for effectiveness. If feasible, establish permanent transect and 

plots for species composition. 
28

Garlic mustard monitoring in the Charles C. Deam Wilderness 

Methodology: Roads in the Deam Wilderness area were inventoried for the seventh (FY 2002) 

and eighth (FY 2003) years for populations of garlic mustard. 

Results: In FY 2002 and FY2003, the Forest botanist examined the area for garlic mustard and 

pulled approximately 50 plants each year in the vicinity of Blackwell Horse Camp. There were 

no other garlic mustard infestations observed along the Tower Ridge Road or other roads in the 

Charles C. Deam Wilderness. 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendations: Forest Service personnel will continue monitoring these sites in FY 2004 to 

determine if the plant is still present. 

Research Natural Areas (RNA’s) and Special Areas (SA’s) and Potential 

Candidates [36 CFR 219.25] 

Monitor rare and exotic plant populations

Methodology: The Forest botanist conducted surveys for rare plants within various project 

areas that included various designated special areas during FY 2002 and FY 2003. Data 

collected for all new rare plant sites followed the procedures in the Indiana Special Plant Survey 

Form and was sent to the State Natural Heritage Program. Botanists also found some new rare 

plant populations within other special areas where no active projects are proposed or occurring. 

Surveys conducted within portions of designated areas included Boone Creek, Clover Lick, 

Faucett Chapel, Harding Flats, Hemlock Cliffs, Oil Creek, Pioneer Mothers’ Memorial Forest, 

Plaster Creek, Rockhouse Hollow, and Tincher Special Areas. 

These surveys also recorded information on non-native invasive plant species infestations. 

Forest personnel will revisit these sites to record data using nation-wide invasive plant protocol 

methods and then enter this information into the TERRA database for invasive plant species. 

Results: None of the invasive plants found within special areas were new species for the Forest. 

At some locations, earlier surveys and data had documented the occurrence of the invasive 

plants, but botanists had not mapped these infestations. 

New populations of Regional Forester sensitive species found within special areas were: 

• Bryoxiphium norvegicum – one population 

• Ophioglossum engelmannii – one population 

• Panax quinquefolius – one population 

• Vittaria appalachiana – two populations 

• Woodwardia areolata – one population 

New populations of Forest species of concern found within special areas were: 
29

Prenanthes aspera – one population 

Rudbeckia fulgida var. fulgida – two populations 

Other rare plant species found within special areas were: 

Trichomanes intricatum – two populations 

Boone Creek Barrens monitoring transects 

Methodology: The Forest has established approximately 100 herbaceous vegetation monitoring 

plots in the Boone Creek Special Area (T4S, R1W, Sec. 25). Plots follow along transect lines 

with circular plots at 30 meter intervals. Data collection protocol includes recording species 

composition at each plot and other vegetation data at other intervals along the transect line. 

Monitoring also included photo plots at designated locations. 

Results: Data collection following this protocol for all of these plots was not possible due to 

time constraints and other project priorities. However, we did take photographs at one of the 

photo plot sites and conducted a cursory examination along two of the transect lines following 

this year’s prescribed burn project. Vegetation observed at various plots was robust with equal 

or increased species numbers and diversity as compared to prior data collection. This 

monitoring resulted in locating one new rare plant population near one of the transect lines 

conducted in 2003. 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendations: Continue monitoring along these established routes and record data 

according to the protocol developed by the project. These transects did not have permanently 

marked beginning and ending points. We recommend placing rebar at predetermined intervals 

along the transect line to enable us to replicate each plot in the same location each year. 

Featherbell monitoring in the Faucett Chapel Special Area 

Methodology: The Forest botanist surveyed the population area during the summer of 2002 and 

2003. An attempt to relocate a monitoring plot last done in 1994 within the featherbell 

population was unsuccessful. However, we did count the total number of plants within the 

population each year. 

Results: In FY 2002, approximately 710 plants occurred within the population area in several 

groups or subpopulations. In FY 2003, monitoring of the site resulted in observation of 

approximately 3,841 plants. After comparing earlier maps of the population, it was confirmed 

that one new subpopulation of 766 plants was found in 2003. The population appears to be 

increasing, but that remains inconclusive because of possible differences in data collection 

between the different years. 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendations: Continue monitoring and establish permanent monitoring transect with 

rebar at each endpoint. 
30

Vegetative monitoring after burning in Harding Flats and Clover Lick Barrens 

Methodology: The Forest has established permanent transects and plots in both the Harding 

Flats and Clover Lick Barrens (Mogan Ridge area). Data collection last occurred at these sites 

in 1995. 

Results: The most recent prescribed burning in these barrens communities occurred in 2001, 

but no data collection occurred because of workload associated with other Forest projects. 

Recommendations: Continue monitoring along these established routes following the next 

prescribed burning project.

Management Indicator Species, Federal Threatened and Endangered Species, 

Regional Forester’s Sensitive Species, and Forest Species of Concern [36 CFR 

219.9] 

Activities accomplished related to endangered and threatened species in general 

Personnel began the process to amend the Forest Plan to incorporate information from the 

USDI Fish and Wildlife Service’s Biological Opinion. 

Hoosier employees are members of NEBWG (Northwest Eastern Bat Working Group). 

The Forest Supervisor participated in Endangered Species Act training. 

The Forest prepared an education trunk with information concerning bats for use in school 

programs. 

T&E species viability evaluations were completed in coordination with Purdue (gray bat, bald 

eagle, Indiana bat) and SIU (fanshell); full viability evaluation continued for Indiana bat—

reviewed by biological viability experts throughout the Midwest. 

Karst Conservancy is surveying features, including the presence of bat species. 

Since 1991, 11,200 acres of land have been acquired with potential as T&E habitat. 

Continuing monitoring of caves—so far, few visits and no vandalism.

Activities related to fanshell mussel

Stream surveys were completed, but no fanshell were found (2001 and 2002). 

Activities related to gray bat 

Four cave management plans were drafted. 

Seven new caves were located, and three caves, which had poor location information, were 

relocated. 

At least 28 programs concerning bats were provided to schools and organizations in an ongoing 

program of public education. 

Bat surveys were conducted at South Gardner Kaolinite Mine entrance and two other mine 

entrances. 

Personnel surveyed 17 caves with potential for Indiana bat, but found no gray bats. 

Personnel surveyed 80 karst features inside the proclamation boundary; no gray bats were 

found. 

Monitoring of gray bats is continuing in cooperation with IDNR. 

A cave fauna inventory was completed, including presence of bats. 
31

Activities related to Indiana bat

Hoosier personnel helped edit Bat Conservation International conservation assessment (2002). 

HNF personnel are continuing to communicate with other national forests and disseminate 

Indiana bat information in order to discuss new research findings, habitat enhancements 

that work, and ways to deal with new bat issues. 

Development of ponds and wetlands and maintenance of forest openings is providing foraging 

habitat. 

John Whittaker is doing bat surveys in the barrens (2002). 

Virgil Brack and John Whittaker are putting together a paper summarizing studies of bats on the 

Hoosier National Forest. 

Monitor bald eagle activities near Lake Monroe 

Methodology: The Brownstown District initiated informal consultation with the USFWS in 

1993 to ensure protection of nesting bald eagles on NFS lands near Lake Monroe. One known 

nesting site has been located. The Forest issued a closure order to protect the area surrounding 

the nest and monitored the area to determine the effectiveness of the closure. 

Results: IDNR – Division of Fish and Wildlife coordinates monitoring of bald eagle nests. In 

2002, bald eagles were observed incubating at the nest on the Hoosier National Forest. The nest 

was checked three times during the year (March, April, and June) by helicopter to determine 

how many chicks were produced. Despite the eagle’s appearance of incubating eggs, no chicks 

were fledged. 

Programs on raptors, including eagles, was presented to local schools 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendations: Continue monitoring work through IDNR. 

Survey for Regional Forester sensitive species (RFSS) and Forest species of concern 

(FSOC) plants 

Methodology: The Forest botanist and wildlife biologists conducted site-specific rare plant 

surveys for all RFSS and FSOC species with appropriate habitat within various project areas in 

FY 2002 and FY 2003. Biologists conducted these surveys using either cursory or intuitivecontrol survey methods. The Forest botanist also conducted presence-absence monitoring of 

selected known rare plant sites where they exist within or near project areas. 

Results: Botanists found new populations of both RFSS and FSOC species scattered across the 

Forest. The following new sightings are for populations located outside of special areas. See 

above for the species and populations found within special areas. 

New populations of Regional Forester sensitive species found were: 

 Cypripedium parviflorum var. pubescens – one population 

Panax quinquefolius – one population – two populations 

Forest Plan met: Yes 
32

Recommendations: Continue to monitor selected rare plant sites in future project areas where 

project activities could potentially affect these populations. 

Monitor populations of butternut 

Methodology: All live butternut trees (Juglans cinerea), a Regional Forester’s sensitive 

species, are to be monitored using the butternut monitoring form: dbh, percent live crown, and 

fruits produced. In the future, we will GPS the location of known sites. 

A stand clearcut in 1979 was identified in 2000 as having numerous healthy butternut trees. 

Approximately 74 butternut trees were identified in the 19-acre stand. In 2003, Hardwood Tree 

Improvement and Regeneration Center at Purdue University began DNA testing to determine if 

there was any genetic difference between healthy trees and those affected by the canker. 

Results: Not yet available. 

Recommendation: Continue to work with research in identifying healthy butternut trees 

throughout the Forest. Continue to monitor the health of the remaining trees throughout the 

Forest. As seeds and seedlings become available, plant seedlings in future regeneration sites. 

Fish and Wildlife [36 CFR 219.19] 

Monitor fish populations in selected waters 

Methodology: Through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the Indiana Department of 

Natural Resources (IDNR) manages the fish populations within designated selected waters 

within the Hoosier National Forest. In FY 2002 the IDNR completed a report for Oriole Pond. 

The purpose of the survey was to determine if triploid grass carp was a viable option for aquatic 

vegetation control. Survey methods employed by the IDNR include electrofishing, gill nets, 

and trap nets. Aquatic vegetation and water chemistry parameters were measured as well (for 

detailed results see Carnahan 2002). In FY 2002 the IDNR continued stocking selected waters 

based on previous surveys that were completed. 

Relevant laws and regulations: 36 CFR 219.11 

Results: Oriole Pond is a 2.8 acre impoundment located in the Hoosier National Forest near the 

town of Oriole on State Road 66. IDNR has conducted active management on the pond since 

1986. Survey results suggested that Oriole Pond had normal water chemistry and could be 

classified as infertile. A water shield formed a 10 to 30 feet wide band around the pond, which 

restricted fishing and electrofishing equipment access. In addition, cattails were dense along the 

pond’s entire west shoreline, which further decreased bank fishing opportunities. IDNR were 

unable to sample enough fish to make valuable assessments about the fish community in Oriole 

Pond because of a water shield restricting equipment access. 

Hoosier National Forest personnel investigated reports of a fish kill at Tipsaw Lake and Indian 

Lake in July and September 2003. Personnel observed dead largemouth bass and sunfish in 

Tipsaw Lake close to the boat ramp and swimming beach. Both Tipsaw Lake and Indian Lake 
33

had supersaturated amounts of oxygen and 40-60% aquatic vegetation percent coverage. The 

target percent coverage for aquatic vegetation in a pond or lake environment is 25%. Shallow 

areas where dead fish were observed had 100% coverage of aquatic vegetation. 

Additionally, Hoosier National Forest personnel inventoried selected and non-selected ponds 

and lakes for aquatic vegetation percent coverage in FY 2003. Of the 20 selected ponds and 

lakes, 75% had 50-90% coverage of aquatic vegetation. Of the 11 non-selected waters that were 

inventoried, 73% of these ponds had 70-90% coverage of aquatic vegetation. 

Forest Plan met: Partially, but see recommendations. 

Recommendations: Continue to collaborate with and support the IDNR in the monitoring of 

fish populations. Develop plans and viable methods to contain and control nuisance aquatic 

vegetation. IDNR recommends a discontinuation of annual channel catfish stockings in Oriole 

Pond until aquatic vegetation is under control and fishing access is improved. 

Monitor fisheries in the Deer Creek and Poison Creek watersheds (FY 2002) 

Methodology: The Hoosier National Forest fisheries staff conducted intensive surveys within 

the Deer Creek and Poison Creek watersheds. The objectives of these surveys were to: (1) 

inventory and document fish, mussel, amphibian, reptile, and crayfish populations; (2) define 

and measure current physical habitat conditions; and (3) identify adjunct or unstable 

populations. 

Relevant laws and regulations: 36 CFR 219.11, 36 CFR 219.19 

Results: A total of 20 streams were surveyed within the Deer Creek watershed and 10 streams 

within the Poison Creek watershed. The fisheries staff documented 27 species of fish, 7 species 

of amphibians and reptiles, 1 species of crayfish, and 1 species of mussel in the Deer Creek 

watershed. The fisheries staff documented 23 species of fish, 4 species of amphibians and 

reptiles, and 1 species of mussel within the Poison Creek watershed. In addition to biological 

data, the fisheries staff collected water chemistry and habitat composition data to characterize 

stream segment habitat. 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendations: The effective management of watersheds depends on the amount and 

accuracy of available baseline information. This information can be used to identify potential 

stream habitat enhancement and restoration projects and to further prioritize work in 

watersheds. Continued support in monitoring and inventorying of aquatic ecosystems on the 

Hoosier National Forest is necessary to better manage its aquatic resources. 

Monitor aquatic species populations in Lake Monroe, Lower Salt Creek, and Little Blue 

River watersheds (FY 2003) 

Methodology: The Hoosier National Forest aquatic ecologist and summer crew conducted 

extensive stream surveys for each stream within the Lake Monroe and Lower Salt Creek 

watersheds. The objectives of these surveys were to: 
34

(1) Classify each stream according to Rosgen (stream profile) analysis 

(2) Collect water chemistry data, flow data, and substrate composition data for each stream 

(3) Inventory fish, aquatic insect, and crayfish populations found in each stream with 

electro-fishing gear and sampling nets 

(4) Document the presence of reptile and amphibian species 

(5) Complete aquatic habitat assessments and calculate biotic indices based on fish and 

aquatic insect community data 

(6) Compile data and summarize habitat quality information for each surveyed stream so 

that stream restoration and watershed improvement projects can be identified and 

prioritized 

Additionally, the Hoosier National Forest aquatic ecologist and summer crew collaborated with 

the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Bloomington, Indiana Field Office to survey all streams 

within the Little Blue River watershed. The objectives of these surveys were to: 

(1) Document baseline habitat conditions within all streams of the watershed 

(2) Identify streams within the watershed that will need habitat or physical improvement 

work 

(3) Inventory fish, aquatic insect, and crayfish populations found in each stream with 

electro-fishing gear and sampling nets 

Relevant laws and regulations: 36 CFR 219.11, 36 CFR 219.19 

Results: A total of 11 streams were surveyed within the Lower Salt Creek watershed and 7 

streams within the Lake Monroe watershed. Data was collected to classify each stream 

according to Rosgen analysis. A total of 43 streams were surveyed within the Little Blue River 

watershed. All chemical, physical, and biological data was collected for each stream channel to 

meet all proposed objectives. 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendations: The effective management of watersheds depends on the amount and 

accuracy of available baseline information. This information can be used to identify potential 

stream habitat enhancement and restoration projects and to further prioritize work in 

watersheds. Continued support in monitoring and inventorying of aquatic ecosystems on the 

Hoosier National Forest is necessary to better manage its aquatic resources. 

Monitor frog populations throughout the Hoosier National Forest 

Methodology: Hoosier National Forest personnel conducted frog call surveys for the purpose of 

gathering baseline data on frog populations throughout the Forest. This data can be used to 

document population trends over time and as a measure of relative abundance for the 

documented species of frogs. Call survey protocols were modeled after United States 

Geological Survey, North American Amphibian Monitoring Program protocols. 

Relevant laws and regulations: 36 CFR 219.11 

Results: Hoosier National Forest personnel conducted frog call surveys between February and 
35

August at 15 ponds or wetlands within the German Ridge Recreation Area on the Tell City 

District. No rare species or new species county records were documented. 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendation: Continue to support amphibian population monitoring throughout the Forest 

to document population trends. Further baseline data collection will be valuable to determine if 

aquatic habitats on the Forest are providing viable amphibian breeding habitat. 

2002 breeding bird surveys 

Bald Eagle nest monitoring 

This survey is conducted annually under the direction of Dr. John Castrale of the Indiana 

Division of Fish and Wildlife. The single existing eagle nest on the Hoosier National Forest is 

in the Crooked Creek watershed. This nest still exists but was not active; that is, no eggs were 

laid during 2002. 

Winter bald eagle survey 

This survey is conducted annually under the direction of Dr. John Castrale of the Indiana 

Division of Fish and Wildlife. Midwinter eagle counts are conducted in January of each year. 

Areas near the Hoosier National Forest where these counts are conducted include Lake Monroe 

and Patoka Lake. The census from wintering bald eagle (Haliaetus leucocephalus) counts for 

these lakes are: 

2002: Lake Monroe (24) 

Patoka Lake (16) 

Heron rookery survey 

This survey is conducted at approximately five year intervals under the direction of Dr. John 

Castrale of the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. Hoosier National Forest biologists 

typically participate in the effort to monitor great blue heron (Ardea herodias) rookeries within 

the Forest boundaries. This survey was not conducted in 2002; the survey will be conducted in 

2004.

Wild turkey gobbler count 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Steve Backs, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey is conducted in the spring 

of the year when male turkeys gobble in order to attract mates or retain breeding flocks and 

territories. Hoosier National Forest biologists typically participate in the effort to monitor 

numbers of eastern wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) on the Forest. 

In general, 10 routes with 15 designated stops are surveyed for the presence of gobbling turkeys. 

Of the 10 routes surveyed, 5 occur on national forest lands. 

TABLE 9. WILD TURKEY COUNT 2002 

(Wild turkeys heard per stop on roadside counts on Hoosier National Forest lands in April of 

2002, previous five year mean, and the cumulative mean calculated from counts beginning in 

1987) 
36

Area / Route 2002 5-year 

Mean 

Cumulative 

Mean 

Hickory Ridge 0.33 0.84 0.76 

Oriole – St. Croix 0.53 0.59 0.45 

Lost River – East 1.27 0.91 0.81 

Lost River – West 0.93 0.55 0.76 

Lick Creek 1.13 0.77 0.65 

Means 0.84 0.73 0.69 

Wild turkey harvest 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Steve Backs, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey is conducted in the spring 

of the year following the close of turkey hunting seasons. Harvest is derived from mandatory 

check station reporting of turkey harvest. 

TABLE 10. TURKEY HARVEST 2001 AND 2002 

(Indiana wild turkey harvest within counties containing Hoosier National Forest lands, spring 

2001 and 2002. Percent of harvest refers to percent county contribution to State-wide harvest. 

Statewide, hunters harvested 9,975 wild turkeys in 2001 and 10,575 turkeys in 2002. The nine 

counties containing National Forest System lands contributed well over 20% of the statewide 

harvest of wild turkeys in 2001 and 2002.) 

County 2001 Harvest Percent of 

Harvest 2002 Harvest Percent of Harvest 

Brown 260 2.6 218 2.1 

Crawford 353 3.5 325 3.1 

Dubois 174 1.7 191 1.8 

Jackson 191 1.9 203 1.9 

Lawrence 290 2.9 315 3.0 

Martin 239 2.4 220 2.1 

Monroe 202 2.0 204 1.9 

Orange 414 4.2 366 3.5 

Perry 379 3.8 409 3.9 

Totals 2,502 25.0 2451 23.3 

Ruffed grouse drumming counts 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Steve Backs, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey is conducted in the spring 

of the year when ruffed grouse drum in order to attract mates and establish breeding territories. 

Hoosier National Forest biologists typically participate in the effort to monitor numbers of 

ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) on the Forest. 
37

In general, 10 routes with 15 designated stops are surveyed for the presence of drumming 

grouse. Of the 10 routes surveyed, 5 occur on National Forest System lands. Four of these 

routes have been previously designated as control routes as part of a larger grouse population 

study. 

TABLE 11. RUFFED GROUSE HEARD 2002 

(Ruffed grouse heard per stop on control routes occurring on Hoosier National Forest lands. 

Surveys are conducted annually in the spring of the year. Data are presented as the mean 

number of drumming grouse heard per stop in the survey year, previous five year mean, and the 

cumulative mean calculated from year of study initiation.) 

Area / Route (Year 

Initiated) 2002 5-year Mean Cumulative Mean 

Hickory Ridge (1979) 0.07 0.15 0.47 

Perry County (1980) 0.07 0.04 0.17 

Lost River – East (1987) 0.00 0.37 0.33 

Lick Creek (1987) 0.20 0.08 0.31 

Means 0.07 0.13 0.32 

Woodcock singing ground survey 

The annual woodcock singing ground survey is a State-wide survey administered by the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service’s Office of Migratory Bird Management. Clark McCreedy, former 

research biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife, coordinated implementation of 

this survey in Indiana. 

Similar to other surveys which take advantage of unique characters of the breeding biology of 

birds, this survey takes advantage of the male woodcock’s unique breeding display and flight in 

order to evaluate annual changes in relative abundance. Because of the limited number of 

survey routes and, more importantly, because of rapidly declining numbers of woodcock across 

their range, little inference can be made concerning relative numbers of woodcock in the general 

region of the Hoosier National Forest. 

In 2002, only four male American woodcock were heard on 18 Indiana singing ground survey 

routes. 

It is the intent of Hoosier National Forest biologists to expand coverage of this survey, in 

cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, to more thoroughly evaluate the status of 

woodcock on the Hoosier National Forest, and to do so in particular with respect to 

management on the Forest. 

Mourning dove call count survey 

The annual mourning dove call count survey is a State-wide survey administered by the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service’s Office of Migratory Bird Management. Clark McCreedy, former 

research biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife, coordinated implementation of 

this survey in Indiana in 2002. 
38

Similar to other surveys which take advantage of unique characters of the breeding biology of 

birds, this survey takes advantage of the mourning dove’s distinctive ‘coo’ call in order to 

evaluate annual changes in relative abundance. The number of doves seen on these designated 

survey routes is also recorded in addition to the number heard. 

In 2002, results of those mourning dove call count surveys conducted in the region of the 

Hoosier National Forest compare reasonably well to results of the State-wide survey. 

TABLE 12. 2001 AND 2002 INDIANA MOURNING DOVE CALL COUNT

(Results of the 2001 and 2002 Indiana mourning dove call count survey for survey routes within 

counties that contain National Forest System lands) 

County of route Doves Seen 

2001 

Doves Seen 

2002 

Doves Heard 

2001 

Doves Heard 

2002 

Dubois / Martin 16 19 3 14 

Perry 17 27 22 32 

Statewide Means 19.1 18.2 20.7 21.8 

Bobwhite quail whistle count survey 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually; in 2002 this survey was directed by Clark 

McCreedy, former research biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. In general, 

beginning in mid-June and continuing through mid-July, wildlife biologists record the number 

of whistling male bobwhite quail heard per survey stop along designated survey routes. Survey 

results are standardized by males heard per survey stop and analysis is stratified by quail 

management region in the State of Indiana (North, Central, Southwest, Southcentral, and 

Southeast). The southcentral quail management region corresponds well to the general area of 

the Hoosier National Forest. This survey tracks population trends of this early successional 

ground-nesting gamebird. Results are indicative of general land use patterns and a good 

comparative measure of the availability of early successional habitats upon which numerous 

passerines (a large order of birds, including sparrows and many others) and neotropical migrant 

songbirds depend. 

TABLE 13. 2002 BOBWHITE QUAIL WHISTLE COUNT 

(Results of the 2001 and 2002 Indiana bobwhite quail whistle count survey for southern quail 

management regions in Indiana. The southcentral management region (SC) corresponds well to 

the general region of the Hoosier National Forest. Survey results are reported as the average 

number of bobwhite quail heard per stop along designated survey routes. Because of 

physiographic similarities, southwest and southeast regions are pooled. Numbers bracketed by 

parentheses indicate the number of survey routes per region.) 

2001 2002 

SC SE / SW Statewid

e 

SC SE / SW Statewide 

1.15 (10) 1.30 (15) 0.62 (71) 1.31 (10) 1.16 (15) 0.70 (72) 
39

2003 Breeding Bird Survey 

Raptor Survey 

This survey is conducted annually by the Department of Forestry and Natural Resource under 

contract with the Hoosier National Forest. Dr. Barney Dunning of the Department of Forestry 

and Natural Resource oversees the implementation and analysis of the survey. Data collection 

completed in 2003; analysis and reporting to be completed. 

Bald Eagle Nest Monitoring 

This survey is conducted annually under the direction of Dr. John Castrale of the Indiana 

Division of Fish and Wildlife. The single existing eagle nest on the Hoosier National Forest, in 

the Crooked Creek watershed, was not active; that is, no eggs were laid during 2003. 

Winter Bald Eagle Survey 

This survey is conducted annually under the direction of Dr. John Castrale of the Indiana 

Division of Fish and Wildlife. Midwinter Eagle Counts are conducted each year in January. 

Areas near the Hoosier where these counts are conducted include Lake Monroe and Patoka 

Lake. Wintering bald eagle (Haliaetus leucocephalus) counts for these lakes are as follows: 

Lake Monroe(33) 

Patoka Lake (13) 

Heron Rookery Survey 

This survey is conducted at approximately five year intervals under the direction of Dr. John 

Castrale of the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. Hoosier National Forest biologists 

typically participate in the effort to monitor great blue heron (Ardea herodias) rookeries within 

the forest boundaries. This survey was not conducted in 2002 but will be conducted in 2004. 

Wild Turkey Gobbler Counts 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Steve Backs, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey is conducted in the spring 

of the year when male turkeys gobble in order to attract mates or retain breeding flocks and 

territories. Hoosier National Forest biologists typically participate in the effort to monitor 

numbers of eastern wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) on the forest. In general, 10 routes with 

15 designated stops are surveyed for the presence of gobbling turkeys. Of the 10 routes 

surveyed, 5 occur on National Forest System lands. 

TABLE 14. WILD TURKEY COUNT 2003 

(Wild Turkeys heard per stop on roadside counts on National Forest System lands within the 

Hoosier in April of 2003, previous five year mean, and the cumulative mean calculated from 

counts beginning in 1987) 

Area / Route 2003 5-year Mean Cumulative Mean 

Hickory Ridge 0.53 0.84 0.79 

Oriole – St. Croix 0.60 0.59 0.44 
40

Lost River – East 1.07 0.91 0.77 

Lost River – West 0.67 0.55 0.78 

Lick Creek 1.00 0.77 0.61 

Mean 0.77 0.73 0.68 

Wild Turkey Harvest 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Steve Backs, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey is conducted in the spring 

of the year following the close of turkey hunt seasons. Harvest is derived from mandatory 

check station reporting of turkey harvest by turkey hunters. 

TABLE 15. TURKEY HARVEST 2002 AND 2002

(Indiana wild turkey harvest within counties containing Hoosier National Forest lands, spring 

2002 and 2003. Percent of harvest refers to percent county contribution to statewide harvest. 

State-wide, hunters harvested 10,575 wild turkeys in 2002 and 10,366 turkeys in 2003. The 

nine counties containing National Forest System lands contributed over 20% of the State-wide 

harvest of wild turkeys in 2002 and 2003.) 

County 2002 Harvest Percent of 

Harvest 2003 Harvest Percent of Harvest 

Brown 218 2.1 194 1.9 

Crawford 325 3.1 320 3.1 

Dubois 191 1.8 191 1.8 

Jackson 203 1.9 209 2.0 

Lawrence 315 3.0 284 2.7 

Martin 220 2.1 250 2.4 

Monroe 204 1.9 187 1.8 

Orange 366 3.5 322 3.1 

Perry 409 3.9 373 3.6 

Totals 2451 23.3 2330 22.4 

Ruffed Grouse Drumming Counts 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Steve Backs, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey is conducted in the spring 

of the year when ruffed grouse drum in order to attract mates and to establish breeding 

territories. Hoosier National Forest biologists typically participate in the effort to monitor 

numbers of ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) on the forest. 

In general, 10 routes with 15 designated stops are surveyed for the presence of drumming 

grouse. Of the 10 routes surveyed, 5 occur on National Forest System lands; four of these 

routes have been previously designated as control routes as part of a larger grouse population 

study. 
41

TABLE 16. RUFFED GROUSE HEARD 2003 

(Ruffed Grouse heard per stop on control routes occurring on the Hoosier National Forest. 

Surveys are conducted annually in the spring of the year. Data are presented as the mean 

number of drumming grouse heard per stop in the survey year, previous five year mean, and the 

cumulative mean calculated from year of study initiation.) 

Area / Route (Year Initiated) 2003 5-year 

Mean Cumulative Mean 

Hickory Ridge (1979) 0.00 0.12 0.45 

Perry County (1980) 0.00 0.04 0.16 

Lost River – East (1987) 0.07 0.27 0.32 

Lick Creek (1987) 0.07 0.11 0.29 

Means 0.03 0.14 0.31 

Woodcock Singing Ground Survey 

The annual Woodcock Singing Ground Survey is a statewide survey administered by the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service’s Office of Migratory Bird Management. James Pitman, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife, coordinates this survey in Indiana. 

Similar to other surveys which take advantage of unique characters of the breeding biology of 

birds, this survey takes advantage of the male woodcock’s unique breeding display and flight in 

order to evaluate annual changes in relative abundance. Because of the limited number of 

survey routes and, more importantly, because of rapidly declining numbers of woodcock across 

their range, little inference can be made with respect to relative numbers of woodcock in the 

general region of the Hoosier National Forest. 

In 2003, only two male American woodcock were heard on 16 Indiana singing ground survey 

routes. 

It is the intent of Hoosier National Forest to expand coverage of this survey, in cooperation with 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, to more thoroughly evaluate the status of woodcock on the 

Hoosier National Forest and how the bird responds to management on the Forest. 

Mourning dove call count survey 

The annual Mourning Dove Call Count Survey is a State-wide survey administered by the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service’s Office of Migratory Bird Management. James Pitman, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife, coordinated implementation of this 

survey in Indiana in 2003. 

Similar to other surveys which take advantage of unique characters of the breeding biology of 

birds, this survey takes advantage of the mourning dove’s distinctive ‘coo’ call in order to 

evaluate annual changes in relative abundance. The number of doves seen on these designated 

survey routes is also recorded in addition to the number of heard. 
42

Because of the limited number of survey routes and because of declining numbers of doves 

throughout the dove Eastern Management Unit, little inference can be made with respect to 

relative numbers of mourning doves in the general region of the Hoosier National Forest. 

In 2003, results of those mourning dove call count surveys conducted in the region of the 

Hoosier National Forest compare reasonably well to results of the State-wide survey. 

TABLE 17. 2002 AND 2003 MOURNING DOVE CALL COUNT

(Results of the 2002 and 2003 Indiana mourning dove call count survey for survey routes within counties 

that contain National Forest System lands) 

County of route Doves Seen 

2002 

Doves Seen 

2003 

Doves Heard 

2002 

Doves Heard 

2003 

Dubois / Martin 19 20 14 20 

Perry 27 14 32 29 

Statewide Means 18.2 17.7 21.8 20.9 

Bobwhite Quail Whistle Count Survey 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually; in 2003 this survey was directed by James 

Pitman, research biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. In general, beginning 

in mid-June and continuing through mid-July, wildlife biologists record the number of whistling 

male bobwhite quail heard per survey stop along designated survey routes. Survey results are 

standardized by males heard per survey stop and analysis is stratified by quail management 

region in the State of Indiana (North, Central, Southwest, Southcentral, and Southeast). The 

southcentral quail management region corresponds well to the general area of the Hoosier 

National Forest. This survey tracks population trends of this early successional ground-nesting 

gamebird. Results are indicative of general land use patterns and a good comparative measure 

of the availability of early successional habitats upon which numerous passerines and 

neotropical migrant songbirds depend. 

TABLE 18. 2002 AND 2003 BOBWHITE QUAIL COUNT

(Results of the 2002 and 2003 Indiana bobwhite quail whistle count survey for southern quail 

management regions in Indiana. The southcentral management region (SC) corresponds well to 

the general region of the Hoosier National Forest. Survey results are reported as the average 

number of bobwhite quail heard per stop along designated survey routes. Because of 

physiographic similarity, southwest and southeast regions are pooled. Numbers bracketed by 

parentheses indicate the number of survey routes per region.) 

2002 2003 

SC SE / SW Statewide SC SE / SW Statewide 

1.30 (10) 1.16 (15) 0.70 (72) 0.99 (9) 1.01 (11) 0.63 (47) 

2002 monitoring of mammals 

Bobcat survey 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Scott Johnson, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. In contrast to river otter reintroductions, 
43

bobcats in Indiana were not reintroduced, but have probably persisted in the state as remnant 

populations. 

Thirteen bobcats were captured from November 2001 until April 2002 in Lawrence, Martin, and 

Greene counties. Four individuals that had been previously outfitted with radio transmitters 

were recaptured. Nine new captures were fitted with radio transmitters. Each bobcat fitted with 

a radio transmitter was located approximately three times per week through August 2002 to 

obtain information on survival, home range, and movement patterns. 

River otter survey 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Scott Johnson, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey was initiated in the winter 

of 2002 and is conducted annually. This survey, in addition to anecdotal records of occurrence, 

was initiated in order to systematically assess the distribution of otters in Indiana.

The Indiana River Otter Restoration Program released 303 otters into six watersheds in the state 

from 1995 to 1999. To date, 52 of these animals are known to have died. Twenty-four deaths 

are a result of incidental trapping, and an additional 17 are a result of road kills. The 

standardized bridge and stream surveys were initialized during the winter of FY 2002 to collect 

unbiased data on Indiana River Otter populations throughout the state of Indiana. Although 

seventeen counties were surveyed, conclusive evidence of otters was only found in three 

counties. None of these counties (Jennings, Miami, and Wabash) fall within the proclamation 

boundaries of the Forest. 
44

Distribution of River Otters in Indiana. Post-Release Records of River Otters in Indiana. 
45

Raccoon roadside survey 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Bruce Plowman, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey is conducted each year in 

the months of March, July, and August. Observations for this survey are standardized by miles 

of roadside surveyed and stratified by furbearer management region in the State of Indiana. The 

southcentral furbearer management region corresponds well to the general area of the Hoosier 

National Forest. 

TABLE 19. RACCOON ROAD-KILL INDICES

(Comparison of statewide and regional raccoon road-kill indices between March, July, and 

August of 2001 and 2002 in southcentral Indiana) 

2001 2002 

Miles Surveyed Raccoons 

Observed 

Raccoons / 

10,000 Miles Miles Surveyed Raccoons 

Observed 

Raccoons / 

10,000 Miles 

169,593 459 27 234,138 1,032 44 

White-tailed deer harvest 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Jim Mitchell, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey is conducted in the winter 

and spring of the year following the close of white-tailed deer hunt seasons. Harvest is derived 

from mandatory check station reporting of deer harvest by deer hunters. 

TABLE 20. WHITE-TAILED DEER HARVEST 2001 AND 2002 

(Indiana white-tailed deer harvest within counties containing National Forest System lands, 

2001 and 2002. Percent of harvest refers to percent county contribution to State-wide harvest. 

State-wide, hunters harvested a reported 103,163 white-tailed deer in 2001 and 104,426 deer in 

2002. The nine counties containing National Forest System lands contributed approximately 

14% of the statewide harvest of white-tailed deer in both 2001 and 2002.) 

County 2001 Harvest Percent of 

Harvest 2002 Harvest Percent of Harvest 

Brown 918 0.89 1017 0.97 

Crawford 1474 1.43 1425 1.36 

Dubois 1486 1.44 1656 1.59 

Jackson 2164 2.10 2362 2.26 

Lawrence 1658 1.61 1302 1.25 

Martin 1037 1.01 1545 1.48 

Monroe 1514 1.47 1514 1.45 

Orange 1978 1.92 2061 1.97 

Perry 1826 1.77 1950 1.87 

Totals 14055 13.64 14832 14.20 
46

Statewide Archery Hunter’s Wildlife Index 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Bruce Plowman, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. In general, beginning October 1, for six 

weeks archery hunters record observations of wildlife on a standardized log that also requires 

the tracking of time in the field. Consequently, wildlife observations for this survey are 

standardized by hours of observation and stratified by furbearer management region in the State 

of Indiana. The southcentral furbearer management region corresponds well to the general area 

of the Hoosier National Forest. This survey tracks population trends of wildlife species. 

Results are indicative of general land use patterns and habitat type within respective regions. 

Due to limited personnel, reporting of survey results typically lags behind field collection of 

data. For example, results reported in 2002 record observations collected during the 2000 field 

season; that is, results of this survey are typically reported two years following collection of 

data. 

TABLE 21. WILDLIFE OBSERVATIONS 1999 AND 2000 

(Comparison of State-wide and southern region wildlife observations per 1000 hours of 

observation by archery hunters between October 1 and mid-November of 2000 and 2001 in 

southern Indiana. The southcentral management region corresponds well to the general area of 

the Hoosier National Forest. This survey tracks population trends of wildlife species. Results, 

by region, are indicative of general land use patterns and habitat type within the respective 

regions (SW = southwest Indiana; SC = southcentral Indiana; SE = southeast Indiana; State = 

Statewide).) 

1999 2000 

Species 

SW SC SE State SW SC SE State 

Deer 639 548 530 646 604 460 543 607 

Coyote 40 26 17 26 25 20 17 20 

Red Fox 10 6 4 7 6 2 6 5 

Gray Fox 3 5 2 3 1 1 1 2 

Bobcat 0.7 1 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.8 0.8 0.5 

Raccoon 50 36 44 52 29 25 27 36 

Opossum 14 9 12 14 15 5 6 10 

Skunk 3 5 4 4 2 5 2 4 

Quail 64 9 39 29 56 17 33 31 

Grouse 12 13 3 6 3 11 3 4 

Turkey 234 272 346 200 205 257 485 224 

Fox Squirrel 667 475 629 582 715 447 608 576 

Gray Squirrel 208 659 284 248 181 678 328 274 

Rabbit 48 33 32 44 32 33 44 43 
47

2003 monitoring of mammals 

River Otter Survey 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Scott Johnson, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey was initiated in the winter 

of 2002 and is conducted annually. This survey, in addition to anecdotal records of occurrence, 

was initiated in order to systematically assess the distribution of otters in Indiana. 

Data collection for the current year is now underway and will be reported in the next monitoring 

report. 

Bobcat Survey 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Scott Johnson, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. In contrast to river otter reintroductions, 

bobcats in Indiana were not reintroduced, but have probably persisted in the state as remnant 

populations. 

Data collection for the current year is now underway and will be reported in the following year. 

Raccoon Roadside Survey 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Bruce Plowman, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey is conducted each year in 

the months of March, July, and August. Observations for this survey are standardized by miles 

of roadside surveyed and stratified by furbearer management region in the State of Indiana. The 

southcentral furbearer management region corresponds well to the general area of the Hoosier 

National Forest. As of November 2003, data had been collected; analysis and summarization 

were in progress. 

TABLE 22. RACCOON ROAD-KILL INDICES 2002 AND 2003 

(Comparison of statewide and regional raccoon road-kill indices between March, July, and 

August of 2002 and 2003 in southcentral Indiana) 

2002 2003 

Miles Surveyed Raccoons 

Observed 

Raccoons per 

10,000 Miles Miles Surveyed Raccoons 

Observed 

Raccoons per 

10,000 Miles 

234,138 1,032 44 Data analysis underway 

White-tailed Deer Harvest 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Jim Mitchell, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. This survey is conducted in the winter 

and spring of the year following the close of white-tailed deer hunt seasons. Harvest is derived 

from mandatory check station reporting of deer harvest by deer hunters. 

TABLE 23. WHITE-TAILED DEER HARVEST 2002 AND 2003 

(Indiana white-tailed deer harvest within counties containing Hoosier National Forest lands, 

spring 2002 and 2003. Percent of harvest refers to percent county contribution to statewide 

harvest. State-wide, hunters harvested 104,428 white-tailed deer in 2002; data collection for 

2003 will commence following the close of deer hunt seasons. The nine counties containing 
48

National Forest System lands contributed over 14% of the State-wide harvest of white-tailed 

deer in 2002.) 

County 2002 Harvest Percent of 

Harvest 2003 Harvest Percent of Harvest 

Brown 1017 0.97 

Crawford 1425 1.36 

Dubois 1656 1.59 

Jackson 2362 2.26 

Lawrence 1302 1.25 

Martin 1545 1.48 

Data analysis to begin at 

close of hunt seasons on 

January 4, 2004 

Monroe 1514 1.45 

Orange 2061 1.97 

Perry 1950 1.87 

Totals 14832 14.20 

Archer Furbearer Wildlife Index 

This State-wide survey is conducted annually under the direction of Bruce Plowman, research 

biologist for the Indiana Division of Fish and Wildlife. In general, beginning October 1, for six 

weeks archery hunters record observations of wildlife on a standardized log that also requires 

the tracking of time in the field. Consequently, wildlife observations for this survey are 

standardized by hours of observation and stratified by furbearer management region in the State 

of Indiana. The southcentral furbearer management region corresponds well to the general area 

of the Hoosier National Forest. This survey tracks population trends of wildlife species. 

Results, by region, are indicative of general land use patterns and habitat type within the 

respective regions. 

Due to limited personnel, reporting of survey results typically lags behind field collection of 

data. For example, results reported in 2002 record observations collected during the 2000 field 

season, that is, results of this survey are typically reported two years following collection of 

data. 

TABLE 24. WILDLIFE OBSERVATIONS 2000 AND 2001 

(Comparison of State-wide and southern region wildlife observations per 1000 hours of 

observation by archery hunters between October 1 and mid-November of 2000 and 2001 in 

southern Indiana. The southcentral management region corresponds well to the general area of 

the Hoosier National Forest. This survey tracks population trends of wildlife species. Results, 

by region, are indicative of general land use patterns and habitat type within the respective 

regions (SW = southwest Indiana; SC = southcentral Indiana; SE = southeast Indiana; State = 

State-wide).) 

2000 2001 

Species 

SW SC SE State SW SC SE State 

Deer 604 460 543 607 756 548 623 715 
49

Coyote 25 20 17 20 34 24 16 19 

Red Fox 6 2 6 5 6 5 5 8 

Gray Fox 1 1 1 2 0 4 1 2 

Bobcat 0.0 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.6 1.1 0.8 

Raccoon 29 25 27 36 39 21 33 40 

Opossum 15 5 6 10 8 6 7 8 

Skunk 2 5 2 4 3 3 2 3 

Quail 56 17 33 31 20 6 45 16 

Grouse 3 11 3 4 0 8 2 2 

Turkey 205 257 485 224 162 344 322 196 

Fox Squirrel 715 447 608 576 765 547 588 611 

Gray Squirrel 181 678 328 274 188 806 233 279 

Rabbit 32 33 44 43 34 33 19 28 

Protect Our Cultural Resources 

Cultural and Heritage Resources [36 CFR 219.24] 

Project reviews to ensure mitigation and protection measures are correctly applied for 

ground-disturbing activities. 

Legal/Regulations Reference: Antiquities Act of 1906; National Historic Preservation Act of 

1966 as amended; Executive Order 11593; Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 as 

amended; 36 CFR 219, 296, and 800. 

Methodology: New resource damage does not occur and vandalism does not increase; that is, 

deterioration or collapse of significant buildings is avoided and rockshelters are not actively 

looted or inadvertently damaged by recreation users. Steps are taken to protect sites through 

public education, signing, and law enforcement activities. 

Acceptable Criteria: Project areas are inspected for the presence of historic and prehistoric 

properties prior to project implementation. Significant and potentially significant properties are 

protected. Discovery of unrecorded resources are brought to the attention of the forest 

archaeologist. 

Results:

Paw Paw Marsh 

On April 23, 2003 a large prehistoric site (12 Mn 0202) was disturbed as a result of clearing an 

unimproved access road prior to maintenance work on the wetland area. The purpose was to 

drain Paw Paw Marsh for restoration of the wetland. 
50

Hardin Ridge UDWI 

In July, two multi-component sites (12 Mo 1222 and 12 Mo 1223) were disturbed by the 

Utilities District of Western Indiana (UDWI) R.E.M.C. while conducting earth disturbing 

activities related to maintenance of a powerline right-of-way 

Hardin Ridge Pine Loop Vault Toilet 

An historic site (12 Mo 0958) was not protected, and a vault toilet was installed on the site.. 

Two Lakes Loop Dump Cleanup 

On Public Lands Day in September of 2003, a modern trash dump was cleaned up adjacent to 

the Two Lakes Loop Trail. Early twentieth century domestic artifacts associated with a 

previously unrecorded historic site were removed. These artifacts were later returned to the site 

but are no longer in context.. 

Forest Plan Met? No. 

Recommendations: Officials on the Forest discussed the unprecedented number of 

archaeological sites that were damaged this year and brainstormed ways to ensure it does not 

happen in the future. The Public Affairs Officer and the Forest Archeologist have developed a 

plan to address this issue. The action plan for protecting heritage resources is presented below. 

Included in the plan is an all-employee heritage resource protection workshop that will be held 

this winter. We will explore ways to more fully involve the heritage program in all aspects of 

project planning and implementation. We need to improve effective communications both 

internally and externally. 

We need to continue to carefully monitor all kinds of projects occurring on the forest to ensure 

protection measures are followed and significant sites are protected. We will continue to work 

with law enforcement, as needed. 

HERITAGE RESOURCES PROTECTION ACTION PLAN 

ACTION ITEM RESPONSIBLE 

PARTY 

DUE 

DATE 

“Stop the line” if archaeological resources or human remains are 

discovered during project implementation. Ensure work ceases 

and contact the heritage resource specialist. 

All employees On-going 

At Monday morning meetings, ensure employees coordinate 

with the heritage resource specialist on any new or maintenance 

activities that may involve archaeological sites. 

Les Wadzinski On-going 

Create a paragraph describing archaeological site protection 

laws and violation information to include in annual permitee 

letter. 

Angie Krieger and Tom 

Krueger 

11/2003 

Add a signature block to engineering designs and drawings to 

ensure project review by the heritage resource specialist. 

Angie Krieger, Brad 

Lidell, James Klug, 

Dave Kissel, Sue 

Peterson 

1/2004 

Host an all employee workshop to promote archaeological site 

protection and appreciation. Create a power point to highlight 

local resources, research conducted and information learned. 

Angie Krieger, Frank 

Lewis, Teena Ligman, 

Lafayette Chamberlain, 

2/2004 
51

Include slides specific to laws and the responsibilities of COR’s 

and inspectors. 

Donald Kidd, Jim 

Mohow (IDNR-DHPA) 

Create a CD from workshop power point for use in contract 

prework meetings. 

Angie Krieger 2/2004 

Insert archaeological site protection clause into contracts, 

permits, and agreement documents. Ensure people know that, if 

archaeological sites are discovered, work must cease and the 

heritage resource specialist be notified immediately. 

Frank Lewis, Mary St. 

Louis, Vinda Anderson, 

Tom Krueger, Project 

leaders. 

2/2004 

Discuss archaeological concerns at pre-work or tailgate meetings 

at the beginning of projects. Create an initial block to complete 

at the prework meeting after viewing the mandatory CD on 

protection of heritage resource sites. 

Project leaders, COR’s 

and Inspectors 

2/2004 

Update the one-page summary of our heritage resource 

responsibilities. Distribute to program managers. 

Angie Krieger 3/2004 

Execute MOU w/IDNR-F&W after inserting an archaeological 

site protection clause and statement of action required upon 

discovery of sites. Document annual program of work. 

Frank Lewis, Angie 

Krieger, and Gary 

Dinkel 

3/2004 

Create heritage resources education materials for youth and 

adults (i.e. coloring book and exhibits for district lobbies). 

Janet Farless, summer 

interpreters 

9/30/2004 

Provide open houses and opportunities for employees to assist 

field projects. 

Angie Krieger 9/30/2004 

Organize and implement an annual field project for a 

paraprofessional refresher. 

Angie Krieger, Pat 

Merchant, Bob Aynes, 

Ron Overshiner, Dave 

Morris, Maggie Schetter, 

Ronnie Roark, Randy 

Lutz, and Ryan Jahn 

9/30/2004 

Monitor several National Register listed sites and several potentially significant sites to 

ensure resource protection forest-wide. 

Legal/Regulations Reference: Antiquities Act of 1906; National Historic Preservation Act of 

1966 as amended; Executive Order 11593; Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 as 

amended; 36 CFR 219, 296, and 800. 

Methodology: Methods include literature reviews, field inspections, and surface and subsurface 

investigations. Original site forms and associated sketch maps are used to determine change 

and assess current site condition. All changes are noted in these permanent records. Develop, 

recommend, and implement protection or mitigation measures, if applicable. 

Acceptable Criteria: New resource damage does not occur and vandalism does not increase, i.e. 

deterioration/collapse of significant buildings is avoided and rockshelters are not actively looted 

or inadvertently damaged by recreation users. Steps are taken to protect sites through public 

education, signing and law enforcement activities. 

Results: Four incidents of damage to archeological sites occurred, which led to the development 

of the Heritage Resources Protection Action Plan above. 
52

Nine rockshelters were reinvestigated during FY03 during a survey of Peter Cave Hollow. No 

disturbance was noted. 

Cox’s Woods, Wesley Chapel Gulf, and the Rickenbaugh House were visited to acquaint the 

Hoosier’s new Public Affairs Officer with the heritage resources on the forest. No disturbance 

was noted. 

 

Forest Plan Met? No. 

Recommendations: See the recommendation section presented above and the Heritage 

Resources Protection Action Plan, also above. 

As recommended last year, both law enforcement officers stationed on the Forest attended an 

Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) training in FY 2003. This training provided 

them with a better understanding of the laws, regulations, and methods used in the protection of 

fragile archaeological resources. 

Also, as recommended last year, Forest Order No. 09-12-04 was rescinded. 

Place interpretive signs at Cox’s Woods and Wesley Chapel Gulf. 

Continue to monitor significant and potentially significant sites throughout the forest to ensure 

their protection. Continue to work with law enforcement in areas of high use or repeat 

vandalism. 

Provide for a Visually Pleasing Landscape 

Visual Quality Objectives [36 CFR 219.21] 

Monitor project design and execution to ensure visual quality objectives (VQO’s) are met 

Legal/Regulation Reference: 36 CFR 219.21 (f), Forest Plan (p.2-15 to 2-16) 

Methodology: Inspect projects that affect landform, water, vegetation, and structures; 

furthermore, compare effects to Forest Plan criteria. Projects that potentially affect the VQO’s 

include soil and water improvements, wildlife opening maintenance, prescribed burns, trail 

maintenance, trail construction, and recreation construction. 

Acceptable Criteria: Meet the VQO’s stated in the Forest Plan

Results: 

Trail Maintenance Project 

A trail maintenance project was completed in October 2003 on the Youngs Creek Trail. The 

trail was widened in sections with minimal clearing to accommodate equipment. In places 

where there was erosion, entrenchment, and wet muddy areas, the tread was treated with 

synthetic materials and gravel. Waterbars and drainage dips were constructed into the existing 
53

trail tread using native materials, and some were hardened with gravel. This project partially 

meets the assigned VQO’s. According to the Visual Quality map of the Forest, the Youngs 

Creek trail is within modification and partial retention areas. Some of the trail sections treated 

with gravel may be within a partial retention area rather than a modification area. The 

maintenance work was based on degradation of the trail. The graveled sections of the trail will 

be more noticeable initially, but should be natural appearing within two to five years. The areas 

of the trail where waterbars and drainage dips were installed correspond to partial retention. 

The waterbars and dips may be evident to forest visitors but will look more like a natural 

occurrence. 

Burn Project 

In April 2003 an 855-acre Boone Creek burn was completed in the Buzzard Roost area. 

Initially the burned area was noticeable from the road. Over the summer, vegetation has grown 

in and the burned area now blends into the natural setting. This project met the assigned VQO’s 

Forest Plan met: Partially, see above under Trail Maintenance Project 

Recommendations: Continue to follow VQO principles on all projects and coordinate with the 

Forest VQO coordinator. 

Provide for Recreation in Harmony with Natural 

Communities 

Wilderness Management [36 CFR 219.18] 

Monitor wilderness resources according to Wilderness Implementation Schedule (WIS) 

Legal or Regulation Reference: 36 CFR 219.18, Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2320, FSH 

2309.19 R9 Supplement 1, Forest Plan (pp 2-36 through 2-39). 

Methodology: Visual observation of limits of acceptable change (LAC) indicators per the WIS 

monitoring schedule. 

Acceptable Criteria: Limits of acceptable change standards as developed for the Charles C. 

Deam Wilderness. 

Results:

2002---

All areas were monitored according to monitoring plan for the Charles C. Deam Wilderness. 

The monitoring plan will be updated in the next few years to include new monitoring 

information such as use of trail counters, Cole campsite inventories, and trail condition surveys. 

Cole campsite inventories are used to determine campsite conditions within wilderness. The 

parameters used in the Charles C. Deam Wilderness are: amount to root exposure, amount of 
54

tree damage, square footage of camp area, square footage of bare ground, amount of “social \” 

trails, and vegetation loss on the site. Campsites too close to trails and water are rehabilitated. 

Campsites with a rating of 4 or 5 are restored at least to a rating of 3. The monitoring also helps 

track trends in campsite proliferation. 

1. Campsite Impact and Inventory: 

No campsites were monitored in 2002. 

2. Trail Social Encounters: 

Three infrared trail counters were used in the Charles C. Deam Wilderness during July, August, 

and September. One counter was placed on the Grubb Ridge Loop Trail, west of Blackwell 

Campground. A second counter was placed on Terrill Ridge. The third counter was placed on 

the Grubb Ridge Trail, near the Grubb Ridge Trailhead. 

 

Counter Results: 

Grubb Ridge Loop Trail (near Blackwell) – between July 1, 2002 and September 27, 2002, 

the counter collected 50 days of data. During the 50 days, 952 counts were recorded. 

Grubb Ridge Loop (near Grubb Ridge Trailhead)– between July 1, 2002 and September 27, 

2002, the counter collected 38 days of data. During the 38 days, 783 counts were recorded. 

Terrill Ridge - between July 1, 2002 and September 27, 2002, the counter collected 27 days 

of data. During the 27 days, 1,148 counts were recorded. 

Wilderness Ranger Rod Fahl, Fee Demo Ranger Danna Strout, and Wilderness Manager 

Eric Sandeno patrolled trails in the Charles C. Deam Wilderness. A total of 441 hikers and 

383 horse riders were observed. 

Based on information collected, it is difficult to determine overall use in the Charles C. 

Deam Wilderness. Trail counters will again be placed at all access points during FY2003 

and other monitoring efforts will be utilized to determine use. 

3. Trail Social Impact: 

The amount of garbage on or along the trails and in campsites was minimal. However, garbage 

at trailheads and off-trail areas has a social impact to wilderness visitors as much as garbage 

along trails. Garbage continues to be a problem at the Hickory Ridge Fire Tower. Most 

garbage is a result of Friday and Saturday night parties by local residents. Law Enforcement is 

aware of the problem and has been working with local authorities to develop a solution. 

A significant amount of garbage washes onto the shore of the Charles C. Deam Wilderness 

along Monroe Lake. Every May, the Hoosier National Forest sponsors Take Pride in America, 

a day for people to complete volunteer work projects on the forest. A popular project has been 

cleaning the shoreline in the wilderness. This annual clean up prevents large amounts of 

garbage from accumulating. 

Another concern area is the northeast side of the Charles C. Deam Wilderness adjacent to the 

Middle Fork Salt Creek. Middle Fork Salt Creek itself is managed by the Army Corps of 

Engineers, but garbage is collecting along the wilderness boundary. This is a potential location 

for work projects. 
55

4. Trail Tread Condition: 

Problem erosion units were not inventoried, as identified in the Charles. C. Deam Wilderness 

monitoring plan. Problem erosion units have not proven to be an effective measurement of trail 

conditions. Trails will continue to be monitored and muddy areas or areas draining poorly will 

be identified and corrective action taken. 

A five-person seasonal trail crew was hired for the summer to complete trail work within the 

wilderness. The crew worked for four months on construction and heavy maintenance projects. 

The Saddle Creek trail construction project was completed (1.5 miles), 36 miles of trail were 

cleared of down trees, four miles of existing trail was graveled, all water bars were cleaned, one 

mile of trail (in nine different locations) was rehabilitated, and several locations had other minor 

maintenance completed. 

 

The Hoosier Horsemen provided a total of 27 volunteers on two separate workdays. 

The workdays concentrated efforts on improving drainage on the trails and eliminating muddy 

sections. 

During the annual Take Pride in America volunteer workday, a small group concentrated on the 

Sycamore Loop Trail. A total of 47 water bars were cleaned, 26 new water bars constructed, 

four drainage dips installed, eleven check dams were replaced, and several sections had berm 

removed. 

5. Access Trail and Impact: 

Minimal trash was collected at Hayes, Blackwell, and Grubb Ridge Trailheads. As stated 

above, garbage at the Hickory Ridge Fire Tower, alcohol containers picked up on Saturday and 

Sunday mornings, continues to be a problem. 

Information and education is listed in the Wilderness Implementation Schedule as an issue and 

concern (Appendix B), but does not have a category in the Monitoring Plan. There appears to 

be a lack of awareness of why the Charles C. Deam Wilderness is unique and why management 

direction in wilderness is different. When the Charles C. Deam Wilderness monitoring plan is 

updated, information and education will be included as a monitoring category. Results of 

information and education efforts in 2002 are: 

a. Leave No Trace demonstrations were provided to individual Boy Scout Troops 

during the year. 

b. A volunteer staffed Brooks Cabin every Sunday during the summer and fall. The 

volunteer provided wilderness information to approximately 200 people. 

c. Two lectures were given discussing wilderness management on the Hoosier 

National Forest at an Indiana University SPEA class. A total of approximately 

75 people attended the two lectures. 

d. Presentations were given at Midwest Trail Rides regarding the use of forest trails 

and wilderness management. 

e. The Hoosier National Forest had a booth at the Indianapolis Horse Show. 

f. Leave No Trace programs were presented to approximately 200 Boy Scouts at 

Maumee Boy Scout Camp. 

g. The forest interpreters provided programs to schools and other forest users on 

Leave No Trace. 
56

h. The Hoosier National Forest staffed a booth at the Order of the Arrow National 

Conference (theme, Leave No Trace). 

Forest Plan Met? Yes 

Recommendations: Improve Monitoring Program for Deam Wilderness and review Wilderness 

Implementation Schedule for possible changes. 

1. Campsite inventory utilizing either Frissell or Cole method will be a priority for 2003. 

2. Continue to use trail counters to determine use on trails. 

3. Continue to hire trail crews to improve trail conditions. 

4. Continue to emphasize education and interpretation program. 

5. Eliminate problem erosion units from monitoring protocol and replace in trail inventory 

logs. 

2003---

All areas were monitored according to monitoring plan for the Charles C. Deam Wilderness. 

The monitoring plan will be updated in the next few years to include new monitoring 

information such as use of trail counters, Frissell and Cole campsite inventories, and trail 

condition surveys. 

1. Campsite Impact and Inventory: 

A three person seasonal Wilderness Crew was hired in FY 2003 to complete a variety of tasks. 

One task was to complete campsite inventories within the wilderness. A total of 103 campsites 

were surveyed utilizing the Cole method. Survey forms will be thoroughly reviewed during the 

winter of 2003/2004. Preliminary review of the information shows that site ratings did fairly 

well with an average of about 2.8 (1 being the best and 5 the worst). Of the 103 sites surveyed, 

69 were illegal (too close to water or trails). 45 of the 69 illegal campsites were rehabilitated. 

Many of the legal campsites had ash removed from the fire rings, fire rings removed, and 

“Flintstone” furniture removed. 

2003 survey information will be reviewed closely during the winter. A seasonal crew in 2004 

will continue to monitor sites and take corrective action on sites reviewed in 2003. 

2. Trail Social Encounters: 

Three infrared trail counters were used in the Charles C. Deam Wilderness during July, August, 

and September. One counter was placed on the Grubb Ridge Loop Trail, west of Blackwell 

Campground. A second counter was placed on Terrill Ridge. The third counter was placed on 

the Grubb Ridge Trail, near the Grubb Ridge Trailhead. 

 

Counter Results:

Grubb Ridge Loop Trail (near Blackwell) – between July 6, 2003 and October 10, 2003, the 

counter collected 50 days of data. During the 116 days, 2,140 counts were recorded. 

Grubb Ridge Loop (near Grubb Ridge Trailhead)– between July 6, 2003 and October 10, 

2003, the counter collected 38 days of data. During the 33 days, 1,152 counts were 

recorded. 
57

Terrill Ridge - between July 6, 2003 and October 10, 2003, the counter collected 27 days of 

data. During the 109 days, 1,799 counts were recorded.

Wilderness Ranger Rod Fahl, Fee Demo Ranger Danna Strout, and Wilderness Manager 

Eric Sandeno patrolled trails in the Charles C. Deam Wilderness. A total of 289 hikers and 

378 horse riders were observed. 

Based on information collected, it is difficult to determine overall use in the Charles C. 

Deam Wilderness. Trail counters will again be placed at all access points during FY2004. 

The national recreation use survey took place on the Hoosier National Forest in 2003. 

Results from this survey will not be available until spring 2004. Information from this 

survey may help determine use in the wilderness. 

3. Trail Social Impact: 

The amount of garbage on or along the trails and in campsites was minimal. However, garbage 

at trailheads and off-trail areas has a social impact to wilderness visitors as much as garbage 

along trails. Garbage continues to be a problem at the Hickory Ridge Fire Tower. Most 

garbage is a result of Friday and Saturday night parties by local residents. The amount of 

garbage and known incidents at the tower seemed to be reduced in 2003. 

A significant amount of garbage washes onto the shore of the Charles C. Deam Wilderness 

along Monroe Lake. Every May, the Hoosier National Forest sponsors Take Pride in America, 

a day for people to complete volunteer work projects on the forest. A popular project has been 

cleaning the shoreline in the wilderness. This annual clean up prevents large amounts of 

garbage from accumulating. 

Another concern area is the northeast side of the Charles C. Deam Wilderness adjacent to the 

Middle Fork Salt Creek. Middle Fork Salt Creek itself is managed by the Army Corps of 

Engineers, but garbage is collecting along the wilderness boundary. This is a potential location 

for work projects. 

The seasonal wilderness crew spent a great deal of the summer locating and removing garbage 

sites within the wilderness. These dumpsites were either packed out by hand or packed out 

using the mule string. A total of 21 dumpsites were found. Items in the sites consisted of old 

tires, refrigerators, glass, and assorted appliances. The crew also used a boat and cleaned the 

lakeshore as well. 

4. Trail Tread Condition: 

Trail inventories were completed by the trail crew and wilderness crew. Muddy areas or areas 

draining poorly were identified and corrective action taken. Locations that need additional 

work were noted. 

A five-person seasonal trail crew was hired for the summer to complete trail work within the 

wilderness. The crew worked for four months on construction and heavy maintenance projects. 

The Axsom Branch trail construction project was completed (1.5 miles), 36 miles of trail were 

cleared of down trees, three miles of existing trail was graveled, all water bars were cleaned, 

and several locations had other minor maintenance completed. 

 
58

The Hoosier Horsemen provided a total of 14 volunteers on one volunteer workday. 

The workday concentrated efforts on improving drainage on the trails and eliminating muddy 

sections. 

5. Access Trail and Impact: 

Minimal trash was collected at Hayes, Blackwell, and Grubb Ridge Trailheads. As stated 

above, garbage at the Hickory Ridge Fire Tower, alcohol containers picked up on Saturday and 

Sunday mornings continues to be a problem, but appears to be improving. 

Information and education is listed in the Wilderness Implementation Schedule as an issue and 

concern (Appendix B), but does not have a category in the Monitoring Plan. There appears to 

be a lack of awareness of why the Charles C. Deam Wilderness is unique and why management 

direction in wilderness is different. When the Charles C. Deam Wilderness monitoring plan is 

updated, information and education will be included as a monitoring category. Results of 

information and education efforts in 2003 are: 

a. Weekly Leave No Trace demonstrations were provided at Ransburg Boy Scout 

Camp. Approximately 700 Boy Scouts attended these programs. 

b. Leave No Trace demonstrations were provided to individual Boy Scout Troops 

during the year. 

c. A volunteer staffed Brooks Cabin every Sunday during the summer and fall. The 

volunteer provided wilderness information to approximately 200 people. 

d. Two lectures were given discussing wilderness management on the Hoosier 

National Forest at an Indiana University SPEA class. A total of approximately 

100 people attended the two lectures. 

e. Presentations were given at Midwest Trail Rides regarding the use of forest trails 

and wilderness management. 

f. The 2003 spring camporee for the Valley Trails District of the Hoosier Trails 

Council (Boy Scouts of America) was sponsored by the Hoosier National Forest. 

The theme was Leave No Trace. 200 scouts attended this two-day event. 

g. The Hoosier National Forest had a booth at the Indianapolis Horse Show. 

h. Leave No Trace programs were presented to Boy Scouts at Maumee Boy Scout 

Camp. 

i. The Forest interpreters provided programs to schools and other forest users on 

Leave No Trace. 

 

Forest Plan Met? Yes 

Recommendations: Improve Monitoring Program for Deam Wilderness and review Wilderness 

Implementation Schedule for possible changes. 

• Complete campsite inventory utilizing either the Cole method. Review work 

completed in 2003 and implement suggestions to improve campsite conditions. 

• Continue to use trail counters to determine use on trails. 

• Continue to hire trail crews to improve trail conditions. 

• Continue to emphasize education and interpretation program. 

• Rehabilitate muddy and poorly drained areas noted in 2003 trail inspections. 
59

Recreation Facilities [36 CFR 219.21©] 

Monitor public feedback to trailhead, campground, sign, and restroom designs and 

function, including accessibility.

Legal or Regulation Reference: 36 CFR 219.21©, FSM 2300, Forest Plan (pages 2-17 and 2-

18) 

Methodology: Public comment is obtained from phone-ins, letters, Congressional inquiries, the 

“Serving People” customer survey cards, concessionaire customer response forms, e-mails to 

the Forest website, responses to scoping for project proposals, and personal contacts at Forest 

offices and in the field. Comments are also occasionally found on bulletin boards, notes left on 

vehicle windshields, or in the form of graffiti. 

Acceptable Criteria: There is no standard regarding this type of public feedback. Each 

comment is evaluated, however, and action taken if warranted. 

2002---

Results: Ninety-six Forest Service Customer Comment Cards were forwarded from the 

Washington Office in 2002. Sixty five visitor comment forms were forwarded to the forest by 

the concessionaire in 2002, and nine comments were received by email or letter. Numerous 

phone calls regarding customer’s concerns were handled on the spot. In addition, in June 2002, 

the Forest was visited for a “Reality Check” by Washington Office “Mystery Shopper” Bill 

Delaney. The majority of the responses from the comment cards and the Reality Check 

provided very favorable feedback, particularly in regard to good service by the staff. This was 

the situation for both Forest Service and concessionaire personnel. Public input that came from 

letters or emails contained complements, complaints, or requests for more facilities. 

In instances where a complaint was voiced, the problem was addressed on the spot by the front 

liner if it was a routine issue. If it constituted a more significant issue, the program manager 

was notified so that it could be handled appropriately. A common example is someone 

disagreeing with a forest policy such as the ban on ATV use and refusing to accept the first 

contact’s explanation. The Program Manager would typically contact the constituent to explain 

why the policy exists and to suggest alternatives off forest. 

Suggestions and comments (internal and external) were also reviewed and action taken when 

possible and appropriate. Some comments centered on a desire for additional facilities such as 

more trails and shower buildings, and there were also general statements about having a great 

time and liking the facilities. 

Forest Plan met: Partially. As a result of scarce resources, the recreation program is not 

functioning at full level. Most notably, there is a backlog regarding replacement or 

rehabilitation of aging facilities, non-accessible facilities, recreation area roads, and degraded 

trails. 
60

Recommendations: Continue to strictly enforce concessionaire requirements, emphasize 

customer service, and continue to pursue capital investment funds and other resources to 

address the facility backlog situation. 

2003---

Results: In 2003, only two Forest Service Customer Comment Cards were forwarded from the 

Washington Office, and 135 visitor comment forms were forwarded to the Forest by the 

concessionaire. Twenty-two comments were received by email or letter, and numerous phone 

calls regarding customers’ concerns were handled on the spot. The majority of the responses 

from the comment cards provided favorable feedback, particularly in regard to good service by 

the staff. This was the situation for both Forest Service and concessionaire personnel. Public 

input that came from letters or emails contained complements, complaints, or requests for more 

facilities. 

In instances where a complaint was voiced, the problem was addressed on the spot by the front 

liner if it was a routine issue. If it constituted a more significant issue, the program manager 

was notified, and the complaint was handled accordingly. A typical example is when someone 

disagrees with a forest policy such as the ban on all-terrain vehicle (ATVs) use and refuses to 

accept the explanation of the first person they contact. The program manager typically contacts 

the constituent to explain why the policy exists and to offer alternatives off of the Forest. 

Suggestions and comments (internal and external) were also reviewed and action taken when 

possible and appropriate. For example, the proliferation of aquatic weeds was causing a 

problem at the Tipsaw beach and boat ramp, and complaints were voiced to the concessionaire. 

In response, the Forest implemented an integrated pest management plan to use herbicides to 

control the weeds; complaints have stopped. Other comments centered on a desire for 

additional facilities such as more trails and shower buildings, and there were also general 

statements about having a great time and liking the facilities. 

Forest Plan met: Partially. As a result of scarce resources, the recreation program is not 

functioning at full level. Most notably, there is a backlog regarding replacement or 

rehabilitation of aging facilities, non-accessible facilities, recreation area roads, and degraded 

trails. 

Recommendations: Continue to strictly enforce concessionaire requirements, emphasize 

customer service, and continue to pursue capital investment funds and other resources to 

address the facility backlog situation. Because the Washington Office has discontinued the use 

of the Customer Comment Cards, the Forest has developed one of its own. It is recommended 

that this opportunity continue to be made available to the public. 

Trails [36 CFR 219.21(G) 

Set up and schedule trail use monitoring on selected trails. Evaluate the type and amount 

of use. 
61

Legal or Regulation Reference: 36 CFR 219.21 

Methodology: On multiple-use trails, we are able to estimate use by comparing the number of 

trail permits sold with field observations. The methodology and results are documented in a 

memorandum to the file dated February 4, 2003 titled Methodology for estimating horse and 

bike use for CY 2002, file code 2350, authored by Les Wadzinski. 

Trail counters were installed in the Deam Wilderness and are summarized in the Wilderness 

Management monitoring report in this document. 

2002---

The Forest conducted numerous field trips with trail users, trail professionals, internal staff, and 

other interested parties for the purpose of gaining input into the trail program. Although these 

field trips did not result in data related to the amount and type of trail use, they did provide the 

forest with other valuable information about the trail program such as the general condition of 

trails and feedback from users. These trips are summarized in the following table. Each field 

trip is also documented by memo in the Hoosier National Forest files. 

TABLE 25. SUMMARY OF TRAIL FIELD TRIPS FY 2002 

Trail Date Purpose Participants 

 

Deam Wilderness: 

Hays, Grubb, and 

high water route 

(now known as 545) 

4/17/02 Annual Forest 

Monitoring Trip 

Hoosier NF Operations and 

Strategy Team, Soils Scientist 

Deam Wilderness: 

Grubb 

6/10/02 Discuss sharing 

of trails by 

hikers and 

horses 

Executive Director Hoosier Hikers 

Council, Indiana University 

Professor, Officer of Hoosier 

Horsemen, Officer of Indiana Trail 

Riders Association, Recreation 

Program Manager and Wilderness 

Manager 

Deam Wilderness: 

Hays and Grubb 

8/28/02 Trail inspection Forest Supervisor 

Deam Wilderness: 

Grubb 

6/5/02 Trail inspection Researcher from the Leopold 

Wilderness Institute, Recreation 

Program Manager, Wilderness 

Manager, Outdoor Recreation 

Planner 

Acceptable Criteria: For trails in the Charles C. Deam Wilderness, acceptable use criteria is 

based on limits of acceptable change (LAC) social indicators for trails (see Wilderness 

Management monitoring report in this document). For Forest-wide trails, we have no formal 

specific use criteria; however, we use the following general guidelines: use must be high enough 

to justify keeping the trail on the system, yet not so high that severe resource damage occurs or 
62

undue user conflict occurs. Interpretation of these guidelines should consider site-specific 

conditions such as soil types, topography, weather, season, and use type. 

Results: It is estimated that 4,052 bike riders and 22,964 horse riders used the trails in 2002. 

About three-fourths of this use likely occurred on the Pleasant Run Unit based on permit sales 

in that area. It is more difficult to draw conclusions about hikers because they are not required 

to buy a trail permit. However, hikers accounted for 34 percent of the users observed on 

multiple-use trails. There are also additional hikers using hiking-only trails, such as the Two 

Lakes Loop and Hardin Ridge trails, but exact numbers are unknown. There is evidence of 

some illegal use of trails by ATVs, most notably in the Tell City District. 

In regard to the field trips and general observations, all trails are receiving enough use to justify 

keeping them open. Impacts from high use trails have been mitigated through maintenance, and 

reports of user conflicts are infrequent. For technical information on the condition of trails, see 

the soils section of this document or the individual field trip memos referenced above. 

Forest Plan met: Yes. Forest trail use is generally within moderate levels, with sporadic high 

use periods at some locations. Trail conditions have now been upgraded in many areas where 

work was needed to sustain the levels of use and to provide environmental protection. 

Recommendations: Continue using the trail permit program to determine use. Analyze the data 

collected from trail counters and continue the use of trail counters at high use areas or high 

impact areas. Use the data from the National Visitor Use Monitoring (NVUM) and Virginia 

Tech studies to assist in the evaluation of the amount and type of use. 

2003---

The Forest had two research programs underway in 2003 related to trails. The first was the 

NVUM program. The NVUM is the Forest Service’s national program to determine use levels 

and types, including trail use. That effort ended October 31, 2003, and the results have not been 

made available as of this writing. Another program was a study by Virginia Tech to look at trail 

impacts and determine best management practices. That study is scheduled to be completed by 

summer 2004 and should also yield data about trail use and impacts. 

In addition, the Forest conducted numerous field trips with trail users, trail professionals, 

internal staff, and other interested parties for the purpose of gaining input into the trail program. 

Although these field trips did not result in data related to the amount and type of trail use, they 

did provide the Forest with other valuable information about the trail program, such as the 

general condition of trails and feedback from users. These trips are summarized in the 

following table. Each field trip is also documented by memo in the Hoosier National Forest 

files. 
63

TABLE 26. SUMMARY OF TRAIL FIELD TRIPS FY 2003 

Trail Date Purpose Participants 

 

Deam Wilderness: 

Hays, Grubb, and 

545 

11/14/02 Trail program 

review 

Regional Office Review Team, 

Recreation Program Manager, 

Wilderness Manager 

Deam Wilderness: 

Grubb, Sycamore; 

Hickory Ridge #s 1, 

13 and 14; Shirley 

Creek Trail; Springs 

Valley Trail. 

4/24/03 Provide 

overview of 

trail program 

Deputy State Director for Senator 

Richard Lugar, Forest Supervisor, 

Recreation Program Manager, 

Wilderness Manager, Wilderness 

Ranger 

Deam Wilderness: 

Axsom 

5/22/03 View trail 

reroute under 

construction 

Regional Office Trails Specialist, 

Forest Engineer, Recreation 

Program Manager, Wilderness 

Manager, Wilderness Ranger 

Birdseye Trail 7/30/03 Trail inspection Recreation program Manager, 

Outdoor Recreation Planner, 

Forestry Technician 

Youngs Creek, 

Springs Valley 

4/1/03 

8/21/03 

Review 

rehabilitation 

work with 

concerned 

landowner 

Adjacent landowner, Engineering 

Technician, Recreation Program 

Manager, two members of the horse 

community, one member from the 

mountain bike community 

Acceptable Criteria: For trails in the Charles C. Deam Wilderness, acceptable use criteria is 

based on limits of acceptable change (LAC) social indicators for trails (see Wilderness 

Management monitoring report in this document). For Forest-wide trails, we have no formal 

specific use criteria; we do, however, use the following general guidelines: use must be high 

enough to justify keeping the trail on the system yet not so high that severe resource damage 

occurs or undue user conflict occurs. These guidelines are influenced by site-specific 

conditions such as soil types, topography, weather, season, and use type. 

Results: It is difficult to draw conclusions about hikers because they are not required to buy a 

trail permit. However, hikers accounted for 34 percent of the users observed on multiple-use 

trails. There are also additional hikers using hiking-only trails such as the Two Lakes Loop and 

Hardin Ridge trails, although exact numbers are unknown. There is evidence of some illegal 

use of trails by ATVs, most notably in the Tell City Ranger District. 

The field trips and general observations indicate that all trails are receiving enough use to justify 

keeping them open. Impacts from high-use trails have been mitigated through maintenance, and 

reports of user conflicts are infrequent. For technical information on the condition of trails, see 

the soils section of this document or the individual field trip memos referenced above. 

Forest Plan met: Yes. Forest trail use is generally within moderate levels, with sporadic high 

use periods at some locations. Trail conditions have now been upgraded in many areas where 

work was needed to sustain the levels of use and to provide environmental protection. 
64

Recommendations: Continue using the trail permit program to determine use. Analyze the data 

collected from trail counters and continue the use of trail counters at high use areas or high 

impact areas. Use the data from the NVUM and Virginia Tech studies to assist in the evaluation 

of the amount and type of use. 

Provide for a Useable Landbase 

Report land status changes by County, District, and Management Area 

TABLE 27. LAND ADJUSTMENT BY MANAGEMENT AREA FOR FY 2003 

Management Area 2003 Acreage 

Adjusted 

Total NFS Land 

Acres 

2.4 183 16,867 

2.8 302 102,737 

5.1 0 12,965 

6.2 147 18,720 

6.4 42 23,698 

7.1 0 6,357 

8.1 0 72 

8.2 0 18,424 

8.3 0 616 

Total 674 200,456 

The acreage figures were calculated based on two GIS layers--ownership and management area. 

The acreage on this report, having been calculated according to GIS, does not match the acres 

acquired by deed. 

TABLE 28. LAND ADJUSTMENT BY COUNTY AND DISTRICT FOR FY 2003 

County District Acreage Value ($) Management Area 

Brown Brownstown 29 $95,000 2.8 

Brown Brownstown 3 $6,000 6.2 

Brown Brownstown 186 $377,500 6.2, 6.4 

Crawford Tell City 30 $45,720 2.8 

Crawford Tell City 8 $18,000 2.4 

Martin Brownstown 223 $557,500 2.8 

Orange Tell City 195 $220,000 2.4, 2.8 

TABLE 29. OTHER LAND ADJUSTMENTS FOR FY 2003 

County District Acreage Value ($) Management Area 

Crawford Tell City 2 Donation1 2.4 

 

1

 Donation of a flowage easement. 
65

Provide for Human and Community Development 

Special Uses and Outstanding Rights 

Methodology: The special uses team monitored rights-of-way (ROW) maintenance work on 

Hoosier Energy 100 foot-wide ROW for tower replacement. 

Results: No impacts were found on soil or water from maintenance work. The seeding and 

waterbarring worked well. 

Forest Plan Met: Yes. 

Recommendations: Work with company to plan access for future power upgrades when new 

conductor wire is installed on new and taller structures to utilize the same width ROW. 

Monitoring of earth-disturbing permit activities 

Methodology: The Special uses team monitored earth-disturbing activity associated with new 

permit rights-of-way for compliance with Forest Plan guidance in Appendix K and mitigation 

measures built into each permit. We also monitored for outstanding rights for working on 

segments of county roads. 

Results: 

1) No impacts were found on soil and water because of the replacement of 12 towers and 

conductors on Hoosier Energy 100 foot wide ROW. A road was reconstructed with waterbars 

and seeded after use. 

2) No impacts were found on soil and water resources because of the reconstruction of 

approximately 1600 feet of existing county road. New cross drainage was constructed and 

gravel surfacing was added. The road access was closed to motorized use by a berm on the 

access road to the west and by gate to the private land to the south. 

3) No impacts were found on soil and water resources as a result of the powerline trenching and 

burying process across NFS land in Monroe County to bring power to Boy Scouts of America 

land on the Ransburg Boy Scout Reservation. Utilities District of Western Indiana did the 

work. This same company also attempted to build a road to access steep side-hill terrain in the 

Hardin Ridge Recreation Area entrance. Impacts associated with unauthorized construction 

activities were mitigated and alleviated. They have restored the site for soil and water concerns. 

Forest Plan Met: Partially met. 

Recommendations: Monitor use of ATV’s and 4x4 trucks who may try to breach closures. 

Send reminder to utility and road authorities of their responsibility to notify the Forest Service 

of planned maintenance work prior to the work so we can monitor protection of soil, water, and 

heritage resources. 
66

Pesticide use 

Methodology: The Special uses team monitored pesticide use by Jackson County REMC on 

rights-of-way (ROW) where the company had outstanding rights. Jackson Co. REMC used 

broadleaf herbicides to treat regrowth of trees in the ROW by spot treatment. Very small 

amounts of chemical were needed, and about one mile of ROW was treated. The objective was 

to determine if there had been damage to non-target organisms or soil and water. 

Results: No impacts were found to soil and water or non-target organisms in the ROW on the 

Jackson County REMC powerline ROW. 

Forest Plan Met: Yes 

Recommendations: The areas of ROW under permit from the Forest Service do not presently 

permit herbicide use, but mechanical treatment is far more damaging since much of the access is 

steep. Herbicide treatment to maintain the ROW in a grass/brush mix of vegetation with no 

trees would be less damaging to the soil resource. 

Monitor special uses for compliance with nondiscrimination 

Legal or Regulation Reference: Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VI prohibits discrimination on 

the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 

Methodology: Permittees are subject to pre-award nondiscrimination reviews anytime a permit 

involves public use. The permittee is also notified of the responsibility. Assurance statements 

(Form 1700-1) are signed by all new "direct service" providers. Permittees must agree to 

comply; otherwise, we do not issue the permit. 

The Federally Assisted Program Manager visited with permittees at the start of the season to 

monitor compliance with Title VI by concessionaires who have recreation areas under contract 

and with trail permittees who have large programs. 

Results: All permittees visited were in compliance, and no complaints were received. 

Forest Plan Met: Yes 

Recommendations: Continue to monitor recreation permittees and send reminders of 

compliance requirements to other permittees according to the schedule. 

Air Quality [36 CFR 219.27(a)(12)] 

Monitor prescribed burns for adequacy of smoke management practices per burning 

plans. 

Methodology: Record any comments or calls received. 

Results: The Hoosier NF completed 11 prescribed burns for 1,167 acres in 2003. Post 

monitoring was completed on the burns to determine if objectives were met for ecological 
67

purposes. All burns were monitored for smoke management and were in compliance with no 

negative comments or calls received. 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendations: Continue to monitor future burns, and accompany each burn with an 

aggressive public outreach to assure that people are aware of the plans to burn and know where 

to call if smoke is a problem. 

Health and Safety 

Monitor the effluent discharge at the Hardin Ridge Recreation area according to the National 

Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements. 

Legal or Regulation Reference: NPDES, State of Indiana, and Monroe County 

Methodology: Licensed operator collects and tests as required by NPDES permit. 

Acceptable Criteria: Pass NPDES requirements. 

Results: All NPDES requirements were met. 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendations: During FY2004 continue working closely with concessionaire and monitor 

to meet NPDES permit requirements. 

Check bacteria levels at public swimming beaches. 

Legal or Regulation Reference: 36 CFR 219.21(c) 

Methodology: Check five times each 30-day period and once each week for two weeks before 

beach is open to public, per state standards. 

Acceptable Criteria: Meet state standards for bacteria. 

Results: State standards were met. 

Forest Plan met: Yes 

Recommendations: Continue testing to meet state standards. 
68

Conclusion 

We carried out the Monitoring and Evaluation Program for Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003 to take 

a close look at our project activities and other resource uses and determine if they are consistent 

with Forest Plan guidance. This program also provided an opportunity to evaluate if that 

guidance meets the goals and objectives established in the Forest Plan. 

Meeting Forest Plan objectives is dependent on the level of funding allocated to the Hoosier 

National Forest. It is our responsibility, within this allocation and Congressional direction, to 

emphasize a balanced mix of projects that are environmentally sound and provide benefits to 

people. We developed many projects in partnerships with individuals and organizations. 

I have reviewed this Monitoring and Evaluation Report for the Hoosier National Forest for 

Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003. Our deficiencies are noted. We will ensure that corrective action 

is taken where appropriate. I am satisfied that management activities accomplished during 

Fiscal Years 2002 and 2003 were consistent with Forest Plan guidance, except where noted, 

and that the guidance provides solid direction in meeting the goals and objectives set forth in the 

Forest Plan. 

This report documents our review of the conditions of National Forest System lands managed 

by the Hoosier National Forest. Since we replaced the plan in 1991, I have not observed any 

significant changes in conditions or demands. Therefore, I recommend that we continue the 

current course of carrying out the Forest Plan as we work toward plan revision. 

This meets the intent of both the Forest Plan (Chapter 5) and the National Forest Management 

Act planning regulations (36 CFR 219).

 

/s/Jim Denoncour 1/15/04 

JIM DENONCOUR Date 

Acting Forest Supervisor