1

Migratory Landbird Conservation 

Migratory Bird Species Review

1

st 48 Roadside Fuelbreak Collaborative Project

Mad River Ranger District

Six Rivers National Forest 

February 22, 2018

Under the National Forest Management Act (NFMA), the Forest Service is directed to “provide 

for diversity of plant and animal communities based on the suitability and capability of the 

specific land area in order to meet overall multiple-use objectives.” (P.L. 94-588, Sec 6 (g) (3) 

(B)). The January 2000 USDA Forest Service (FS) Landbird Conservation Strategic Plan, 

followed by Executive Order 13186 in 2001, in addition to the Partners in Flight (PIF) specific 

habitat Conservation Plans for birds and the January 2004 PIF North American Landbird 

Conservation Plan all reference goals and objectives for integrating bird conservation into forest 

management and planning.

In late 2008, a Memorandum of Understanding between the USDA Forest Service and the US 

Fish and Wildlife Service to Promote the Conservation of Migratory Birds was signed. The 

intent of the MOU is to strengthen migratory bird conservation through enhanced collaboration 

and cooperation between the Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service as well as other 

federal, state, tribal and local governments. Within the National Forests, conservation of 

migratory birds focuses on providing a diversity of habitat conditions at multiple spatial scales 

and ensuring that bird conservation is addressed when planning for land management activities. 

Implementation of the project is in accordance with the objectives within Executive Order 13186 

of which outlines responsibilities of federal land management agencies to the Migratory Bird 

Treaty Act. 

The Six Rivers National Forest is proposing to manage lands within the Little Jones Creek Pilot 

Project area that are administered by the Smith River National Recreation Area, within the Smith 

River watershed, a Tier 1 key watershed. Proposed management is intended to implement 

direction contained within the Six Rivers National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan 

(LRMP).

The 1

st 48 Project is located within Trinity County, California. Table 1 lists the migratory bird 

species known to occur within the county, as well as those known or thought to occur within the 

project area. Habitat suitability evaluations were made using the California Wildlife Habitat 

Relationships System, Version 8.2 software, developed by the California Department of Fish and 

Wildlife. The list of species potentially occurring in the project area was developed using 

sighting records, breeding bird surveys and published information. 

Table 1: Migratory bird species known to occur within Trinity County. Associated habitats for each species 

are included.

Common Name

Habitat 

Association Common Name Habitat Association

Turkey Vulture O Ruby-crowned Kinglet R,F

Osprey W Blue-gray Gnatcatcher R,O
2

Northern Harrier O Western Bluebird O

Sharp-shinned Hawk F,R Mountain Bluebird O

Cooper’s Hawk F,R,O Townsend's Solitaire F

Northern Goshawk F,R,O Swainson's Thrush F

Red-shouldered Hawk R Hermit Thrush F

Red-tailed Hawk O,F,R American Robin F,O,R

American Kestrel O,R,F Northern Mockingbird O

Merlin O,R,F American Pipit O

Peregrine Falcon W,O,F Cedar Waxwing F,O

Prairie Falcon O Solitary Vireo F

Killdeer O,W Warbling Vireo R,F

Band-tailed Pigeon F,O Orange-crowned Warbler F

Mourning Dove O,F Nashville Warbler F,O

Flammulated Owl F Yellow Warbler F,R

Long-eared Owl F Yellow-rumped Warbler F,O

Common Nighthawk O,F

Black-throated Gray 

warbler F,O

Common Poorwill O,F Townsend's Warbler F

Black Swift F Hermit Warbler F

Vaux's Swift F MacGillivray's Warbler F,R,O

Anna's Hummingbird R,F,O Common Yellowthroat W

Calliope Hummingbird O,F Wilson's Warbler F,R

Rufous Hummingbird F,O Yellow-breasted Chat R

Allen's Hummingbird F,O Western Tanager F

Belted Kingfisher W Black-headed Grosbeak F,R

Lewis' Woodpecker F,O Lazuli Bunting O

Yellow-bellied Sapsucker F,O Indigo Bunting O

Red-naped Sapsucker O.F Green-tailed Towhee O

Red-breasted Sapsucker F Rufous-sided Towhee O

Williamson's Sapsucker F Chipping Sparrow F,O

Northern Flicker F,R,O Black-chinned Sparrow O

Olive-sided Flycatcher F,O Vesper Sparrow O

Western Wood-Pewee F,R Lark Sparrow O

Willow Flycatcher R,O Sage Sparrow O

Hammond's Flycatcher F Savannah Sparrow O

Dusky Flycatcher O,F Grasshopper Sparrow O

Gray Flycatcher O Fox Sparrow O,R

Pacific-Slope Flycatcher R,F Song Sparrow O,F,R
3

Say's Phoebe O Lincoln's Sparrow O,F

Ash-throated Flycatcher R,O White-throated Sparrow O

Western Kingbird O White-crowned Sparrow O,F

Horned Lark O Dark-eyed Junco O,F

Purple Martin F,O Red-winged Blackbird W

Tree Swallow R,O,W Western Meadowlark O

Violet-green swallow R,F,O Brewer's Blackbird O

N. Rough-winged Swallow W Brown-headed Cowbird O,R,F

Cliff Swallow O,R Purple Finch F,R

Barn Swallow O,R,F Cassin's Finch F

Brown Creeper F Pine Siskin F,R

Rock Wren O Lesser Goldfinch O

House Wren O,F,R Lawrence's Goldfinch O

Marsh Wren R American Goldfinch O,R

Golden-crowned Kinglet F

The project will not adversely impact migratory species or their associated habitats.

The majority of the project area is forested habitat that was intensively managed in the past. 

Seral stages range from pole to mid-mature stands with small patches of late-mature and old 

growth. 

Shaded fuelbreaks would be created where existing live-tree overstory canopy closure of roadside forest 

stands is greater than 60 percent. These forested stands are predominately Douglas-fir dominated, intermixed with incense cedar, ponderosa and sugar pine and hardwoods. These conditions are referred to as 

natural stands, although most have experienced some level of land management such as individual tree 

selection and sanitation. Treatments within shaded fuelbreaks would be implemented as follows:

Initial Entry: Thin from below (TFB), treating crown fuels and larger ladder fuels

Secondary Entry: Hazardous fuels reduction (HFR) treating smaller ladder fuels and surface fuels 

using mechanical, manual and prescribed jackpot burning (see HFR section below for the 

treatment description).

Maintenance: Hazardous fuels reduction accomplished primarily using mastication, unless slope 

or resource protection prohibits mechanical ground-disturbance, whereby manual treatments 

and jackpot burning would occur.

Thin from below (TFB) is the removal of trees when forest conditions are overly dense, with 

high crown density and ladder fuels. TFB treatments are design to retain sufficient tree canopy to 

provide shade to suppress brush response, while separating intertwined crowns that would likely 

carry flames from tree-top to tree-top. The fuels material not removed by TFB treatments would 

be treated during a second entry, through treatments of hazardous fuel reduction. 
4

The focus of this treatment is to retain the largest trees with the best crowns. These trees are 

generally at or above the average canopy and have the best opportunity to take advantage of 

additional light, water, and nutrients to maintain or increase growth. The treatments are designed 

to maintain the existing native species diversity (including hardwoods) in the unit being treated. 

No predominant trees would be cut, and the largest trees would be favored for retention. 

Prescribed logging methods based on existing road infrastructure and past logging entries (old 

logging roads and skid trails) include ground based tractor skidding and mechanized harvesters 

on gentle slopes (<35% slope) and cable yarding and tractor with 100-foot end lining capability 

on steeper ground ( >35% slope). 

In areas of extensive brush, pre-treatment (hand piling and burning) of shrubs and small diameter trees 

may be necessary prior to underburning to promote low-intensity fire behavior. In some cases, debris 

would be manually raked back from the base of predominant trees to protect surface roots and trees from 

scorching and to buffer a Forest Service Sensitive-listed lichen species to protect habitat.

The project would restore the grassy areas through pre-treatment to allow for application of prescribed 

fire to rejuvenate and reinvigorate the grass and other grassland species and to remove encroaching 

vegetation. Low intensity fire would be allowed to creep into brushy areas, killing the brush and small 

diameter trees, maintaining approximately 10 to 20 percent of the small trees in these areas. Not all areas 

of brush would be burned; some would be retained as cover areas for wildlife. Some post treatment piling 

and burning may also occur in areas where brush was killed but not completely consumed during burning 

operations. The project area may initially be burned more than once in order to achieve the desired 

results. Burning the area more than once would allow the use of low intensity fire, which would maintain 

80 to 90 percent of the overstory trees while reducing the amount of brush and small trees.

Jackpot burning would be prescribed in the oak woodland to help maintain the desired species 

composition and retard conifer encroachment in these units. Maintenance burns would be implemented 

every 5 to 15 years or as the need is identified.

Jackpot burning is expected to reduce the quantity and quality of brush and downed woody 

material to various degrees regardless of the season of burning. However, the wetter the 

conditions during the burn, the less the impact there will be to the surrounding habitat 

components. Jackpot burning is designed to produce the least damage to the boles of the trees in 

the unit and to prevent fire from getting into the crowns of the overstory. Tree mortality will be 

minimal and mainly in the smaller size classes. Jackpot burning projects will be conducted when 

weather and fuel moisture conditions are appropriate to achieve a "cool" underburn. Fuel 

moistures and humidity are monitored to assure that the prescriptions are met. Burn 

prescriptions are designed to prevent severe burn levels, maintain a cover of fine organic matter 

on at least 50% of the burn area (USFS Region 5 Soil Quality Standards and Guidelines), retain 

large down woody material, snags, and to result in light impacts to the canopy level of conifers 

and hardwoods. The objective is to keep flame lengths low, to minimize mortality of residual 

live trees.

Snags and logs would be retained as per SRNF LRMP, S&Gs Table IV-8, and Appendix L. 

Treatments within Late Successional Reserves (LSRs), riparian reserves, units within Critical 

Habitat, and suitable northern spotted owl habitat (regardless of land allocation) would maintain 

snags (20-inch dbh and greater or the largest available in younger seral stages) and downed logs 
5

(20 inches and greater and at least 10 feet long or the largest available) at the 80 to 100 percent 

level, unless they pose a safety hazard or would not meet fuel treatment objectives.

In early seral-stage stands lacking downed woody debris (shrub and pole seral stages), small 

diameter slash would be piled and left on site to provide cover for small mammals, birds, reptiles 

and amphibians. The size of the piles would vary depending on the availability of slash; 

however, the preferred size is at least 6 feet in diameter and 4- to 6-feet tall. Small diameter 

debris decomposes quickly, so large piles may have greater longevity. The number of piles per 

acre would be dependent on the location and potential fire risk. In high public-use areas, only 

one (1) or two (2) piles per acre would be left in the stand. In other areas, three (3) to four (4) 

piles per acre would be left in the stand. No piles would be left within 100 feet of roads.

All riparian reserves would be buffered on both sides of stream channels. Perennial non-fish 

bearing, intermittent, and ephemeral with scour stream buffers are 160 feet, fish-bearing stream

buffers are 320 feet, unless intersecting with road networks. The “inner” riparian reserve 

boundary generally extends from the stream channel to one-half the width of the total buffer or 

break-in-slope, with the “outer” riparian reserve boundary corresponding to the full width of the 

riparian reserve. In the case of Littlefield Creek, a fish-bearing stream, the “inner” riparian 

reserve south of the stream would extend to the edge of the road, which is less than 160 feet in 

many areas, but this buffer is still considered adequate to prevent impacts to the stream because 

the area is so flat.

There will be minor habitat degradation for understory species within the project areas through 

the removal of brush and understory trees; however, in the long run habitat conditions for many 

migratory species will be improved in the project area by accelerating the development of latesuccessional characteristics in young stands and protecting existing late-successional habitat 

from stand replacing fire. 

Krista Smith

Wildlife biologist

Mad River Ranger District