HYDROLOGIC REPORT FOR THE BUTCHERKNIFE/SLATE CREEK 

PROJECT, WILD RIVERS RANGER DISTRICT 

Maureen Joplin, Hydrologist September, 2008 

/s/ Maureen Joplin

Introduction and Proposed Action 

This report discusses hydrologic issues associated with the Butcherknife/Slate Creek (BKS) 

thinning project. The project would be located mainly in the Slate Creek 6th field subwatershed of 

the Lower Applegate River Watershed. A small portion of the project is located in the Lower Deer 

Creek 6th field subwatershed within the Illinois River Subbasin. The proposed action is to thin 

managed stands and underburn overstocked and fireprone stands. Objectives are to reduce fuel 

loads in an area of wildland/urban interface and facilitate the growth of fewer, but larger trees in 

forested areas. The proposed action would include ground and cable based harvest systems to 

accomplish the following activities (refer to environmental assessment for detailed description): 

• 2,093 acres of commercial thinning accompanied by vegetation treatment, precommercial 

thinning, fuels treatment and underburning 

• 1,812 acres of underburning 

• 619 acres of precommercial thinning accompanied by vegetation/fuels treatment, and 

underburning 

• 122 acres of meadow treatment and underburning 

• 2 miles of thinning/slash treatment within riparian reserves 

• 2 miles of instream structure placement 

• 3 miles of temporary (stubbie) road construction 

• 6 miles of non-system road reconstruction 

• 29 miles of reconstruction or maintenance on existing system roads 

The Proposed Action would utilize the Forest’s Riparian Reserve Project Design Criteria for 

Density Management and Prescribed Burning (Appendix). 

 

Watershed Issues 

Issue 1: Density management may reduce stream shading that could contribute to an increase in 

water temperature.

Issue 2: Surface disturbance and canopy removal resulting from fuel and density treatments may 

cause erosion and generate sediment that reduces water quality and affects stream flow. 

Increased sediment generated in disturbed areas or from water concentrated by roads and 

yarding disturbance may reach streams, degrading water quality/fish habitat.

Information Sources and Field Techniques 

Watershed analysis as directed by the Northwest Forest Plan, covering the project area was 

completed by the Medford District Office of the Bureau of Land Management in 1996. The 

1
Cheney/Slate Watershed Analysis (BLM, 1996) describes the subject area, human and natural 

disturbances, and current condition. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has 

prepared a Water Quality Management Plan/Total Maximum Daily Load (WQMP/TMDL) for the 

Applegate Subbasin (DEQ, 2003). DEQ is in the process of preparing plans for the Illinois 

Subbasin. 

Map information for this report was generated through the Siskiyou National Forest’s Geographic 

Information System (GIS) database on ArcMap software (ESRI). The following data layers were 

queried for the project: 

 Streams/wetlands 

 Hydrologic Units 

 Roads 

 Topographic contours (generated from digital elevation models) 

 Harvest Units (managed stands) 

 Land status/management allocation 

 Late Successional Reserve boundary 

 Timber Marginal Lands – landslide inventory 

 

GIS map information developed specifically for this project includes: 

Proposed Units and temporary roads 

Proposed Logging System 

 Stream Shade map 

A model for conducting rapid assessment of stream condition and restoration need has been 

utilized by the Rogue-Siskiyou National Forest since 2006. This model maps stream reaches with 

critical shade deficiencies based on the SHADOW model (Park, 1993). RAPID was utilized to 

describe existing condition and identify areas needing restoration of stream shading. Stream 

channels were assumed to be perennial if they had at least 50 acres of contributing area. 

Unmapped ephemeral streams are expected to be discovered and incorporated into riparian 

reserves during unit marking and layout. 

Regional Setting 

The 493,000-acre (770-square-mile) Applegate Subbasin is located on the northeastern flank of 

the Siskiyou Mountains in southwestern Oregon. It is steep and rugged, ranging in elevation from 

850 feet to 7,418 feet above sea level. Numerous small tributaries flow into the Applegate River 

which joins the Rogue River near the City of Grants Pass in Josephine County. The Slate Creek 

drainage is the last major tributary to the Applegate River above its confluence with the Rogue. 

The Illinois Subbasin is a major contributor to the Rogue River. The project area occurs on and 

just north of a watershed divide between the Applegate and Illinois Rivers. All but a small portion 

of the project is within the Slate Creek subwatershed, draining to the Applegate River. The 

remainder of the project is within Lower Deer Creek subwatershed, draining to the Illinois River. 

Full descriptions of the watershed and its characteristics are provided in the Cheney/Slate 

Watershed Analysis (USDI, 1996). 

2
Precipitation and Channel Morphology 

Project subwatersheds drain mountainous terrain that is moderately steep. The mean watershed 

slope ranges from 19 to 25 degrees and the watershed relief is fairly low at about 11%. Annual 

precipitation is about 40” falling as rain in most years. First and second order stream channels are 

typically steep, V-shaped and ephemeral. Floodplains in the project area are mainly associated 

with Slate Creek. Summer flows are typically very low or absent in most project area streams. 

Channel substrate is typically bedrock, cobble or gravel with low channel sinuousity. Large woody 

material is lacking throughout the watersheds and in the project area. Wood structures have been 

placed in Slate Creek. These structures are in good condition and have retained some of the 

gravel substrate. 

Sediment Delivery Process 

Stream sediment originates by erosion on steep colluvial slopes. Bedrock materials are mainly 

serpentine and metasedimentary or metavolcanic rock. These materials are well fractured and 

faulted, allowing erosive rains and stormwater flows to move loose and weathered material easily 

down steep slopes or as stream bedload. A mass of serpentinized rock dominates the northwest 

portion of the project area and supports sparse to brushy vegetation. Upland vegetation and 

surface litter play a major role in attenuating rates of erosion and protecting shallow soils. Large 

woody material in streams and on slopes would also play a large role in capturing and metering 

out eroded material. 

Roads in the project area are largely unsurfaced, many need travelway repair. Some of the 

system roads need repair at stream crossings and drainage improvement. Notable examples are 

the Ramsey Creek/744 crossing and the 020 road that parallels upper Slate Creek. Roads 

capture and concentrate storm runoff that might otherwise flow in a more dispersed pattern over 

slopes or within the subsurface. System road densities in the project area are not abnormally high 

at 2.7 miles/sq.mile. The area also contains overgrown roads and skid trails that may be affecting 

water flow but are recovering passively. Road densities in the 5th field watershed are high, 

corresponding to private land development and extensive historic harvest levels. Managed 

stands on NFS lands in the Slate Creek subwatershed account for 8% (2,393 acres) of the 

watershed acres; 5% (1138 acres) in Lower Deer subwatershed. Managed stands that are less 

than 30 years old and were originally regeneration harvested are most likely to have residual 

watershed effects (USDA Forest Service, 1993). On National Forest, these stands account for 

2.5% (640 acres) of Slate Creek subwatershed, and 1% (177 acres) of the Lower Deer Creek 

subwatershed. 

 

Shallow slope failures associated with steep slopes are the main natural source of sediment in the 

project area. An inventoried slide zone occurs on the west side of the project area associated with 

the steep canyon walls of Ramsey Creek and with the contact between serpentinized rock and 

metamorphic formations. This is a likely zone of weakness in which steep slopes combine with 

erodible formations and sparse vegetation to generate naturally high rates of erosion. 

3
Water Yield 

Water yields from the project area were estimated using peak discharge for two year return 

interval estimates for Ramsey Creek, Slate Creek above its confluence with Ramsey Creek, and 

Butcherknife Creek (Oregon Dept. of Water Resources Peak Discharge Estimate, 2008; Cooper, 

2005). 

Drainage Drainage 

Area (sq. 

miles) 

Estimated Bankfull 

Peak Flow cfs (2 

year return internval) 

Bankfull 

discharge 

cfs/square mile 

Ramsey Creek 5.2 487 94 

Slate Creek 

above Ramsey 9.2 761 83 

Butcherknife 

Creek 2.3 182 79 

 

Water Quality and Beneficial Use 

The Oregon Environmental Quality Commission (OEQC) has adopted numeric and narrative 

water quality standards to protect designated beneficial uses. In practice, water quality standards 

have been set at a level to protect the most sensitive beneficial uses and seasonal standards may 

be applied for uses that do not occur year-round. Cold-water aquatic life such as salmon and trout 

are the most sensitive beneficial uses occurring in the Applegate Subbasin (DEQ, 2003). Of the 

streams within and downstream of the project area, both the Applegate River and its tributary 

Slate Creek, are designated as water quality limited for temperature. Total maximum daily loads 

for the Applegate Subbasin were approved by EPA in 2004. DEQ has allocated all temperature 

nonpoint source loading to natural sources. Any human activity that will result in increasing the 

amount of heat energy reaching any stream in the Applegate Subbasin is deemed unacceptable. 

Temperature simulations indicate that temperatures in most river reaches will still be above the 

water quality criteria when all human caused increases in heat are removed and shade reaches its 

maximum. 

Clear Creek and Anderson Creek drainages are tributary to Deer Creek and drain the southern 

portion of the project area. Neither stream is listed; however they are tributary to Deer Creek 

which is listed as impaired due to water temperatures exceeding state standards. 

Beneficial uses in the Applegate Subbasin include the following; those occurring in the Slate 

Creek watershed are underlined: 

 

Public Domestic Water Supply

Anadromous Fish Passage

Private Domestic Water Supply

Salmonid Fish Spawning 

Industrial Water Supply 

Salmonid Fish Rearing

Irrigation

4
Resident Fish and Aquatic Life 

Livestock Watering

Wildlife and Hunting

Boating 

Fishing 

Aesthetic Quality 

Water Contact Recreation 

Commercial Navigation & Transportation 

Hydro Power 

Riparian Reserve Widths 

Riparian reserve buffer widths (slope distance from stream channel to edge of buffer) consistent 

with the Northwest Forest Plan would be as follows: 

• ephemeral/intermittent streams: the greater of 100’ or one site potential tree 

• perennial non-fish bearing streams: the greater of 150’ or one site potential tree 

• fish-bearing streams: the greater of 300’ or two site potential trees 

A site potential tree for the project area is about 140’; therefore the riparian reserve widths for this 

project would be as follows: 

• ephemeral/intermittent streams: 140’ 

• perennial non-fish bearing streams: 150’ 

• fish-bearing streams: 300’ 

Density, vegetation, and fuels management activities would occur within the riparian reserve 

treatment zone as specified by project design criteria provided in Appendix. Thinning needs in 

riparian reserves are shown on the RAPID Stream Assessment Map. 

5
6
Mitigating Measures 

Mitigation Measures designed for the protection of soils, site productivity, and water quality are 

generally referred to as Best Management Practices (BMPs) as described in General Water 

Quality Best Management Practices, Pacific Northwest Region, November 1988. BMP’s provide a 

useful checklist for incorporating resource protection measures into projects. They are written to 

cover a wide variety of projects, but are most effective when tailored to specific project needs. 

The table below lists the BMP’s recommended for this project, their incorporation into the project 

design, and the mitigation measures proposed for achieving their objectives. 

Best Management Practices for the East Illinois Valley Vegetation Project 

BMP Objective Consideration in project Mitigation measures recommended 

for implementation 

TIMBER MANAGEMENT (T) 

T-3 Use of 

Erosion Potential 

Assessment for 

Timber Harvest 

Unit Design 

To prevent 

downstream water 

quality degradation by 

the timely identification 

of areas with high 

erosion potential and 

adjustment of harvest 

unit design.

During project design, planning, 

and environmental analysis units 

were reviewed by soil/hydrology 

specialists and modified or 

dropped according to resource 

needs. Skyline logging systems 

are prescribed for units with 

steep slopes. 

Mitigation measures specific to 

riparian reserves were developed 

for thinning projects on the 

Rogue-Siskiyou National Forest. 

Refer to Appendix: Project 

Design Elements for Riparian 

Reserves. 

Continue review of unstable areas by 

physical scientists working with layout 

personnel. Exclude unstable areas 

from harvest or surface disturbance 

not associated with stabilization 

measures. 

Refer to Appendix: Project Design 

Elements for Riparian Reserves 

T-4 Use of Sale 

Area Maps for 

Designating 

Water Quality 

Protection Needs 

To delineate the 

location of protection 

areas and available 

water sources as a 

guide for both the 

Purchaser and the 

Sale Administrator, 

and to ensure their 

recognition and proper 

consideration and 

protection on the 

ground.

The treatment contract will 

contain the following minimum 

information as per the BMP: 

a.Location of stream courses to 

be protected 

b.Wetlands (meadows, lakes, 

bogs, etc.), if any, to be protected 

c. Boundaries of harvest units 

d. Specified roads 

e. Roads where log hauling is 

prohibited or restricted 

f. Structural improvements 

g. Areas for different skidding, 

felling, and yarding methods 

h. Sources of rock for road work, 

riprapping, etc. 

i. Water sources available for 

Purchaser's use 

j. Other features required by 

Division "C" contract provisions 

On the ground marking will include 

riparian reserve boundaries, primary 

shade zone boundaries and 

unstable/wetland area boundaries. 

“No cut” areas will be clearly 

identified. 

7
 

T-5 Limiting the 

Operating Period 

of Timber Sale 

Activities 

To ensure that the 

Purchaser conducts 

operations in a timely 

manner, within the 

time period specified in 

the Timber Sale 

Contract (TSC).

The treatment contract specifies 

a Normal Operating Season, 

during which, operations may 

generally proceed without 

resource damage. Operations 

are permitted outside the Normal 

Operating Season only when 

they can be conducted without 

damage to soil, water, and other 

resources.

Normal operating season for this 

project is summer and fall. Roads 

exhibiting rutting/travelway 

displacement may be removed from 

use at any time to prevent moisture 

related road bed damage. 

T-6. Protection of 

Unstable Lands 

To provide for 

identification and 

appropriate 

management 

prescriptions for 

unstable lands.

 Refer to BMP T-3. 

T-7 Streamside 

Management Unit 

Designation 

T-8 Streamcourse 

Protection 

To designate a riparian 

area or zone along 

streams and wetlands 

where prescriptions 

are made that will 

minimize potential 

adverse effects of 

nearby logging and 

related land 

disturbance activities 

on water quality and 

beneficial uses.

Mitigation measures specific to 

riparian reserves were developed 

for thinning projects on the 

Rogue-Siskiyou National Forest. 

Refer to Appendix: Project 

Design Elements for Riparian 

Reserves.

Temporary roads will be allowed to 

enter or cross riparian reserves only 

after review and mitigation by a 

physical scientist. 

Complete mapping of unidentified 

riparian reserves and establish 

appropriate widths for 

protection/shade zones. Mapping 

should extend 150 feet outside of the 

project area boundary. 

Ensure that temporary roads/landings 

within 100’ of a stream course will not 

result in a loss of more than 10% of 

the soil infiltration capacity (including 

existing skid trails). Designate 

roads/landings to be ripped/subsoiled 

to re-establish infiltration capacity. 

T-10 Log 

Landing Location 

To locate landings in 

such a way as to 

minimize creation of 

hazardous watershed 

conditions. 

Project re-utilizes existing 

landings associated with 

managed stands where 

available; landings are limited to 

1⁄2 acre. 

New landings are sited outside of 

riparian reserves/unstable areas.

T-11 Tractor 

Skid Trail 

Location and 

Design 

To minimize the area 

compacted, erosion, 

and runoff water. 

Mitigation measures specific to 

riparian reserves were developed 

for thinning projects on the 

Rogue-Siskiyou National Forest. 

Refer to Appendix: Project 

Design Elements for Riparian 

Reserves. 

Soil resource protection includes 

restoration of reutilized and new skid 

trails within units via 

ripping/subsoiling and placement of 

slash to attain effective soil cover. 

Skid trails shall be re-used to the 

extent practical and such that soil 

disturbance is less than 10-15% of an 

activity area. 

T-12 Suspended 

Log Yarding in 

Timber 

Harvesting 

To protect soils from 

excessive disturbance. 

Refer to Appendix: Project 

Design Elements for Riparian 

Reserves. 

Yarding through riparian areas 

requires full suspension, retaining 

trees cut for corridors or for safety 

within riparian reserves. Minimum 

corridor spacing is 200’. Corridor “rub 

trees” would be left, even if damaged 

and/or felled. 

8
T-13 

Erosion 

Prevention and 

Control Measures 

During Timber 

Sale Operations 

To ensure that the 

Purchaser's operations 

shall be conducted to 

minimize soil erosion. 

Treatment contract specifications 

address erosion control. 

Erosion control measures 

specific to riparian reserves have 

been included in Appendix: 

Project Design Elements for 

Riparian Reserves. 

Heavy machinery use within a 

treatment unit shall be planned and 

approved by a FS Rep. to ensure 

detrimental soil disturbance is less 

than 10-15% of an activity area . FS 

shall designate skid trails spaced to 

prevent compaction greater than 15% 

threshold; or designate slash mat 

locations for using mechanized 

harvester-forwarder systems. 

T-14 

Revegetation of 

Areas Disturbed 

by Harvest 

Activities 

T-15 Log Landing 

Erosion 

Prevention and 

Control 

T-16 Erosion 

Control on Skid 

Trails 

To establish a 

vegetative cover on 

disturbed sites to 

prevent erosion and 

sedimentation. 

To reduce the impacts 

of erosion and 

subsequent 

sedimentation on log 

landings by use of 

mitigating measures. 

To protect water 

quality by minimizing 

erosion and 

sedimentation derived 

from skid trails. 

Surface disturbance is minimized 

through project design. Use of 

non-ground based equipment on 

steep slopes, avoiding 

permanent road construction, 

avoiding temporary roads in 

riparian reserves are examples. 

Landings and skid trails are to be left 

in a condition that prevents 

channeling of surface flows and 

allows infiltration suitable for 

revegetation. Natural revegetation 

through a slash layer (skid trails) or 

native seeding (landings) will be 

utilized. 

Any non-system (Unclassified) roads 

or legacy skid trails or landings that 

are used will be deep ripped to reestablish soil infiltration capacity. 

Skidding would be restricted to 

conditions when soil moisture levels 

are low (hand squeeze method) or 

when the ground is frozen or snow 

covered to sufficient depth to prevent 

soil disturbance. 

T-17 Meadow 

Protection During 

Timber 

Harvesting 

To avoid locating 

roads, landings, and 

skid trails in meadows. 

Meadows are usually included in 

riparian reserves wetlands, or 

unstable areas. As such they 

would be avoided by treatment 

activities unless tree removal to 

restore meadow characteristics is 

part of the silvicultural 

prescription. 

Mitigating measure: Relocate new 

and existing temporary roads, 

landings, or skid trails to avoid 

meadows. 

T-18 Erosion 

Control Structure 

Maintenance. 

T-19 Acceptance 

of Timber Sale 

Erosion Control 

Measures Before 

Sale Closure 

To ensure that 

constructed erosion 

control structures are 

stabilized and working. 

To assure the 

adequacy of required 

erosion control work. 

Treatment contract should 

contain measures for ensuring 

erosion control structures such 

as rolling dips, water bars, rock 

drains, etc. are functional when 

activities are complete or prior to 

winter shut-down. 

Mitigating measure: sale 

administrators/physical scientists will 

evaluate project erosion control 

structures in riparian reserves prior to 

completion of activities or season 

shut-down. 

T-21 Servicing 

and Refueling 

Equipment 

To prevent pollutants 

such as fuels, 

lubricants, bitumens, 

raw sewage, wash 

water and other 

harmful materials from 

being discharged into 

Treatment contract contains spill 

prevention plan that addresses 

potential contaminant, allowable 

storage and transfer locations, 

site requirements, and seasonal 

restrictions. 

9
or near rivers, streams 

and impoundments or 

into natural or manmade channels 

leading thereto. 

ROAD SYSTEMS (R) 

R-2 Erosion 

Control Plan 

To limit and mitigate 

erosion and 

sedimentation through 

effective planning prior 

to initiation of road 

construction activities 

and through effective 

contract administration 

during construction. 

Project design avoids new 

permanent roads. Temporary 

roads are avoided in sensitive 

areas (riparian reserves, 

unstable areas) except where 

relocation or avoidance would 

create more disturbance than the 

original alignment. 

Reutilized roads in riparian reserves 

will be field reviewed by a physical 

scientist and site-specific mitigating 

measures applied to prevent erosion 

and hydraulic connectivity between 

the road and the stream channel and 

to prescribe restoration. 

R-3 Timing of 

Construction 

Activities 

To minimize erosion 

by conducting road 

construction 

operations during 

minimal runoff periods. 

Project design avoids permanent 

road construction. Temporary 

road construction and road 

maintenance activities are 

confined by the operating period 

of the project and by condition 

limitations on native surface 

roads. 

R-6 Dispersion of 

Subsurface 

Drainage 

Associated with 

Roads 

R-7 Control of 

Surface Road 

Drainage 

Associated with 

Roads 

To minimize the 

possibilities of roadbed 

and cut or fill slope 

failure and the 

subsequent production 

of sediment. 

To minimize the 

erosive effects of 

water concentrated by 

road drainage 

features; to disperse 

runoff from or through 

the road; and to 

minimize the sediment 

generated from the 

road. 

Project may utilize existing roads 

that need maintenance and have 

developed failures or drainage 

problems. 

Existing roads utilized by the project 

will be evaluated for needed repairs 

or maintenance. Sites with potential 

to generate sediment that will reach 

stream courses will be prioritized and 

repaired as part of the contract or as 

KV funds allow. 

 

R-9 Timely Erosion 

Control Measures 

on Incomplete 

Roads and Stream 

Crossing Projects 

To minimize erosion of 

and sedimentation 

from disturbed ground 

on incomplete 

projects. 

Project generally avoids 

temporary road construction in 

riparian reserves; however, 

situations may arise in which the 

least resource damage is 

achieved through a stream 

crossing. 

Stream crossings will not be initiated 

unless they can be completed within 

the working period. Temporary roads 

may be allowed to overwinter for use 

the following season if they receive 

winterization treatment, and approval 

by a physical scientist.Temporary 

roads to be winterized will be closed 

to vehicle access, and provided with 

drainage sufficient to disperse 

expected winter runoff. 

R-17 Water 

Source 

Development 

To supply water for 

roads and fire 

protection while 

Water sources will be located on 

the treatment area map. 

Sites will be prepared to ensure that 

use does not impact aquatic 

resources and that undesirable 

10
Consistent with 

Water Quality 

Protection 

maintaining existing 

water quality. 

material is not introduced into surface 

waters. 

R-18 

Maintenance of 

Roads 

To maintain roads in a 

manner which 

provides for water 

quality protection by 

controlling the 

placement of waste 

material, keeping 

drainage facilities 

open, and by repairing 

ruts and failures to 

reduce sedimentation 

and erosion. 

See R-6/R-7. The Forest Service shall clearly 

identify and mark all culvert locations 

on system haul roads, prior to winter 

snow conditions, so they can be 

located and kept clear of debris as 

needed to keep them fully functioning.

During routine road maintenance 

operations, the contractor shall not 

use a motorized grader or other 

heavy equipment to remove (clean) 

vegetation or debris from a roadside 

ditch in any circumstance where that 

ditch directly drains into a perenniallyflowing stream. This prohibition is 

intended to avoid creation of 

loosened, exposed earth in the ditch 

that could be carried into a stream by 

water flows in the ditch. 

R-19 Road 

Surface Treatment 

to Prevent Loss of 

Materials 

To minimize the 

erosion of road surface 

materials and 

consequently reduce 

the likelihood of 

sediment production 

from those areas. 

See R-6/R-7. Unconsolidated 

road surfaces likely to produce 

sediment that could enter a 

streamcourse will be identified 

and treated prior/during use. 

Treatment may include grading, 

watering or seasonal sealing. 

Permanent roads may require 

spot-rocking, sealing or paving. 

R-20 Traffic 

Control During Wet 

Periods 

To reduce road 

surface damage and 

rutting of roads, and to 

lessen sediment 

washing from 

damaged road 

surfaces. 

Operations and associated road 

use are limited to the dry-season 

operating period in order to avoid 

sediment and road damage 

associated with wet-season road 

use. 

Special Haul Restrictions to Prevent 

Fine Sediment Delivery to Streams:1

Haul or maintenance is permitted on 

un-surfaced and surface roads under 

the following conditions: 

• During timber haul, weather 

conditions are monitored daily for the 

chance of precipitation by the Timber 

Sale Administrator, Hydrologist or 

Fish Biologist. 

• During haul, no rutting of the road 

surface is occurring, indicating the 

subsurface is wet. 

• During frozen ground conditions. 

• Ditches will not be bladed past 

the last cross-drain before a stream 

crossing. 

 

1 Luce, C.H. and Black T.A. 2001. Effects of Traffic and Ditch Maintenance on Forest Road Sediment Productions, Rocky Mountain Research 

Station, Boise, Idaho. 

11
Haul will cease at any time when the 

travelway of the road is wet and turbid 

water or fines are observed moving 

off the road surface to ditchlines that 

deliver to stream channels, 

regardless of time of year. 

Roads Exempt from Haul Restrictions 

include: 

-Paved roads 

-Surfaced Ridge top roads 

-Surfaced out sloped roads with 

no ditch or stream crossings 

R-23 Obliteration 

of Temporary 

Roads and 

Landings 

To reduce sediment 

and restore 

productivity of the land 

at the completion of 

intended use. 

Project re-utilizes existing roads 

and disturbed areas where 

possible. 

Obliteration of temporary roads, skid 

trails and landings will include 

removal of drainage structures and 

re-establishment of natural drainage 

routes; surface ripping/subsoiling, 

stabilization and reshaping of cut and 

toe slopes; closure to vehicle entry; 

and establishment of effective soil 

cover/revegetation. 

All or a portion of the following actions 

would be used to restore soil 

conditions on detrimentally disturbed 

ground (for example, on legacy or 

newly-designated skid trails, 

temporary truck roads and landings) 

where compaction tests or other 

monitoring identifies a need for a 

remedial or impact containment 

action. 

1.After completion of logging, deep 

subsoiling of heavily compacted skid 

trails, roads, and landings may be 

employed. This operation would use 

a specially-designed subsoiler 

implement, mounted on a dozer or 

tracked excavator, to fracture and 

loosen compacted soil layers. 

Mechanized equipment used for 

subsoiling would be restricted to the 

ground areas already disturbed to 

avoid creating additional ground 

impacts. 

2.After completion of logging, 

scarification of skid trails and other 

disturbed soil areas may be 

employed. This operation would use 

12
13

standard rock rippers or similar 

equipment, to superficially cultivate 

the surface of tractor skid roads as a 

way to promote natural re-vegetation 

by providing seed catchments and 

water infiltration. 

3.Following subsoiling or scarification, 

5 to 10 tons per acre of woody 

material, mulch, and/or slash may be 

placed on top of disturbed ground 

areas, either manually or with a 

machine. Dispersing organic 

material evenly across tractor skid 

roads and other bare soil areas 

assists in reducing rain drop impact to 

soils. 

4.Following completion of logging 

operations, and in situations where 

rapid (within months) protection of 

bared soils is necessary, (for 

example, to control surface soil 

movement on highly erosive granitic 

soils during the next winter), artificial 

grass seeding or shrub planting may 

be conducted using native, noninvasive (and weed-free) grass seed 

or local native plants (as 

recommended by a botanist). 

Optionally, or in combination, 

sediment capture devices, such as 

rice straw wattles or bales, may be 

used to control erosion and reduce 

sediment movement. 

Selection and use of these actions 

would be based on the existing 

condition of the site following 

completion of logging operations. 

These actions do not result in instant 

restoration; rather they begin the 

process of restoration. 

WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 

W-1 Watershed 

Restoration 

To repair degraded 

watershed conditions 

and improve water 

quality and soil 

stability. 

Project protects water temperature 

by avoiding shade modification 

within the primary shade zone. 

Secondary shade zones require a 

silvicultural prescription adapted to 

aquatic resource needs rather than 

to harvest. This may include 

leaving or relocating cut trees 

where large wood supplies are 

poor. 

Ensure that temporary roads/landings 

within 100’ of a stream course will not 

result in a loss of more than 10% of 

the soil infiltration capacity (including 

existing skid trails). Designate 

roads/landings to be ripped to reestablish infiltration capacity. 

Develop silvicultural prescription for 

riparian reserve area in each 

treatment unit specific to the needs of 
the riparian area. Ensure 

existing/prescribed canopy density is 

at least 50%. Prescription should 

include favored species, appropriate 

horizontal and vertical spacing goals, 

pruning/fuels management goals, and 

special areas (such as south facing 

slopes) where commercial extraction 

will occur within the primary shade 

zone. 

Trees being extracted as a 

commercial product will be felled 

away from the primary shade zone. If 

trees are being felled for safety 

reasons and/or trees to be left on site, 

they can be felled toward the stream. 

14
Effects of the Proposed Action and No Action Alternatives 

Proposed Action Direct Effects

Direct effects resulting in higher peak flows/increased erosion could be caused through the 

following mechanisms: 

• reduction in forest canopy that intercepts rain resulting in increased moisture at the ground 

level 

• increase in road density resulting in increased collection, concentration, and flow speed of 

storm water 

• reduction in understory cover and ground litter that assist in moisture retention and flow 

reduction 

Direct effects would be greatest immediately after treatment activities, but would be expected to 

disappear rapidly as vegetative recovery proceeds. The proposed action design would prevent 

detectable changes to peak flow and limit effects to the short term primarily through limiting annual 

project implementation and avoiding the wet season. The proposed action spreads management 

activity over a 15 year time span. All treatment combined amounts to less than 4% of the Lower 

Deer Creek subwatershed. At this level changes in peak flow at the sixth field watershed level 

would be undetectable even if completed in a single year (Grant et. al., 2008). The bulk of the 

proposed treatment occurs in the Slate Creek subwatershed. Combined treatments (prescribed 

burning, thinning, and harvest) amount to 14% of the subwatershed area. Grant et. al. (2008) 

have estimated that rain dominated watersheds can tolerate harvest activities that affect up to 

15% of the watershed before peak flow changes are detectable. The proposed action proposes 

commercial harvest amounting to less than 6% of the Slate Creek subwatershed. Thresholds 

provided by Grant et.al. (2008) indicate that peak flow increases resulting from the project would 

not be detectable. Treatment activities such as understory thinning, and fuels management would 

have minor short term effects (localized surface erosion) lasting less than a year since understory 

vegetation and litter would recover and grow vigorously during the following spring. Thinning 

from below is a treatment that causes little soil disturbance and is designed to retain protective 

forest canopy. Prescribed burning is implemented to achieve a “cool” burn with mosaic pattern 

that mimimizes soil disturbance. These activities would not cause sufficient surface or vegetative 

disturbance to cause detectable or durable watershed effects. Long term effects would be caused 

by activities that eliminate surface vegetation such as road construction, road reconstruction, and 

landing development. Road and landing erosion control practices and restoration would remove 

all or most of this impact since it would be implemented prior to the following winter. Erosion 

control mitigation and avoidance of riparian reserves would prevent new/reconstructed road work 

from contributing to the drainage network. Existing roads and trails that occur within the riparian 

reserve may be reutilized for the project; however, their long term drainage and infiltration 

characteristics would be improved through subsequent restoration. In summary, treatments 

included in the proposed action may contribute to peak flow increases in the short term, but not at 

detectable levels. Implementation of the proposed action over 15 years is unlikely to affect peak 

flow levels to even a minor degree. No long term or cumulative effects to peak flow are indicated. 

Erosion that could produce sediment reaching project streams would be minor and short-lived. A 

15
potential long term beneficial effect would be the improvement of road drainage and surface 

condition that would reduce road-generated runoff and sediment from existing levels. 

Proposed Action Indirect Effects

Water yields in the project area are relatively low, averaging 85 cfs/square mile at the two year 

peak flow recurrence interval. Although peak flow increases are not anticipated, it is possible that 

seasonal flow variations may occur due to the effects that thinning may have on 

evapotranspiration and soil moisture levels (Jones, 2004). Thinning may reduce 

evapotranspiration by reducing the number of small trees and brush that utilize soil moisture, and, 

may increase soil moisture by allowing rain to reach the ground rather than evaporating from leaf 

surfaces. The resulting increases in soil moisture may prolong streamflow into the dry season. 

Research on flow variations has been limited to regeneration harvests; therefore quantification of 

this effect for thinning projects at the watershed scale is uncertain. The proposed action affects a 

small per centage of the subwatershed that extends over a 15 year period, so it likely that the 

seasonal effect on water yield would not be detectable at the 6th field scale. 

 

The proposed action would reduce fuel loads and thin overstocked stands in both upland and 

riparian reserve areas. Indirect effects are primarily beneficial because the project area is located 

in watersheds that experience hot, dry summers and retain water poorly. Fuel reduction would 

reduce the risk of wildfire that is severe enough to remove all surface vegetation (USDA Forest 

Service, 2004). Hot wildfires open streams to solar warming, especially where forest cover is 

eliminated. Reduction or elimination of forest and understory cover generally results in a 

substantial increase in surface erosion over the following winter. Understory vegetation typically 

recovers rapidly; however an intense wildfire would likely result in a flush of sediment into the 

stream network during the first winter. Prevention of severe fire behavior and its effects is a 

major beneficial effect of the proposed action. Thinning of dense stands generates a longer term, 

but no less beneficial effect, in that it promotes the growth of large trees that will provide stream 

shade and large wood that traps sediment and moisture in streams and on slopes. The long term 

cumulative effect would be greater watershed stability, resilience to disturbance, and water 

retention resulting from less flammable forest and greater sediment trapping ability. The 

cumulative effect of this management strategy is expected to be gradual reversal of the effects on 

water flow and retention resulting from historic regeneration harvest practices. 

No Action Direct Effects

There are no direct effects since management activities would not occur. The existing condition of 

the watersheds would be left to passive recovery that could be set back by natural disturbance 

events, primarily wildfire. Project subwatersheds are currently in a condition that would promote 

stand-replacing wildfire. 

16
No Action Indirect Effects

Beneficial effects described under the Proposed Action would be at high risk under the no action 

alternative. Passive watershed recovery would be likely to occur more slowly than under the 

proposed action since overstocked stands would gradually thin themselves through competition 

and mortality. Fine fuels would be naturally generated and would often occur as ladder fuel. 

Under these conditions, wildfire is likely to be severe enough to set vegetative recovery back 

through removal of vegetation and through soil damage due to erosion and hydrophobicity (USDA, 

2004). 

Compliance with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives provided by the Northwest 

Forest Plan

Objective #1 

Maintain and restore the distribution, diversity, and complexity of watershed and landscape-scale 

features to ensure protection of the aquatic systems to which species, populations and 

communities are uniquely adapted. 

The project would restore vegetative distribution and diversity through thinning and prescribed 

burning. Wildfire protection would be improved through management of fuel levels and 

distribution, reducing the severity of effects on watershed vegetation and soils. 

Objective#2 

Maintain and restore spatial and temporal connectivity within and between watersheds. Lateral, 

longitudinal, and drainage network connections include floodplains, wetlands, upslope areas, 

headwater tributaries, and intact refugia. These network connections must provide chemically and 

physically unobstructed routes to areas critical for fulfilling life history requirements of aquatic and 

riparian-dependent species. 

Project contributes to the maintenance of temporal connectivity of the watershed drainage by 

improving poor drainage conditions on Forest System Roads and restoring reutilized non-system 

roads. 

Objective #3 

Maintain and restore the physical integrity of the aquatic system, including shorelines, banks, and 

bottom configurations. 

Project maintains existing physical integrity of the aquatic system with restoration at specific 

locations (i.e. failed road/stream crossings; road decommissioning).

Objective #4 

Maintain and restore water quality necessary to support healthy riparian, aquatic, and wetland 

ecosystems. Water quality must remain within the range that maintains the biological, physical, 

17
18

and chemical integrity of the system and benefits survival, growth, reproduction, and migration of 

individuals composing aquatic and riparian communities. 

Project would maintain existing stream temperatures in the short term and may contribute to 

stream cooling through enhancement of riparian shade. Project avoids contributing to stream 

sediment through mitigating measures and use of riparian PDC’s. 

 

Objective #5. Maintain and restore the sediment regime under which aquatic ecosystems 

evolved. Elements of the sediment regime include the timing, volume, rate, and character of 

sediment input, storage, and transport. 

Project avoids direct contributions to stream sediment; contributes to long term soil protection by 

reducing severity of future wildfire behavior. 

 

Objective #6. Maintain and restore in-stream flows sufficient to create and sustain riparian, 

aquatic, and wetland habitats and to retain patterns of sediment, nutrient, and wood routing. The 

timing, magnitude, duration, and spatial distribution of peak, high, and low flows must be 

protected. 

Project’s effect on stream flow would be negligible; would not prevent attainment of this objective. 

Objective #7. Maintain and restore the timing, variability, and duration of floodplain inundation and 

water table elevation in meadows and wetlands. 

Project’s effect on floodplain inundation and water tables would be negligible; would not prevent 

attainment of this objective. 

Objective #8. Maintain and restore the species composition and structural diversity of plant 

communities in riparian areas and wetlands to provide adequate summer and winter thermal 

regulation, nutrient filtering, appropriate rates of surface erosion, bank erosion, and channel 

migration and to supply amounts and distributions of coarse woody debris sufficient to sustain 

physical complexity and stability. 

Project contributes to restoration of mature riparian forest through thinning and fuels management. 

Woody debris may be utilized to improve stream habitat if thinned material is suitable. Riparian 

reserve buffers protect stream channels and vegetation to ensure project does not prevent 

attainment of this objective. 

Objective #9. Maintain and restore habitat to support well-distributed populations of native plant, 

invertebrate, and vertebrate riparian-dependent species. 

Refer to wildlife and botony reports. 
References 

Cooper, R.M. 2005. Estimation of peak discharges for rural, unregulated 

streams in western Oregon: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 5116. 

Gordon E. Grant, Sarah L. Lewis, Frederick J. Swanson, John H. Cissel, and 

Jeffrey J. McDonnell. 2008. Effects of forest practices on peak flows and 

consequent channel response in western Oregon: a state-of-science report. 

Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report. 

Jones, Julia A. and D.A. Post, 2004. Seasonal and successional streamflow 

response to forest cuttingand regrowth in the northwest and eastern United 

States. WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, VOL. 40. 

Oregon Dept. of Environmental Quality (DEQ), 2003. APPLEGATE SUBBASIN 

TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL) 

HUC # 17100309 

 

Oregon Dept. of Environmental Quality, Water Quality Assessment Database 

(2004/2006) website: http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/assessment/ 

Oregon Dept. of Water Resources, 2008. Peak Flow Estimation Model. 

Website: http://www.oregon.gov/OWRD/SW/peak_flow.shtml

Park, C.S. 1993. SHADOW stream temperature management program, USDA, 

USFS, Pacific Northwest Region. 

U.S.D.A. Forest Service, 1993. Determining the Risk of Cumulative Watershed 

Effects Resulting from Multiple Activities. 

U.S.D.I. Bureau of Land Management, 1996. Cheney/Slate Watershed Analysis 

USDA Forest Service – USDI, Bureau of Land Management, Record of Decision 

for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning 

Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl. April 1994. 

USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 1988. “General Water Quality 

Best Management Practices”. 

USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 2004. Basis for 

Changing Forest Structure to Modify Wildfire Behavior and Severity. 

Rocky Mountain Research Station, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-120. 

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1998. Annual Precipitation Map 

for Oregon. 

19
APPENDIX 

DENSITY MANAGEMENT AND PRESCRIBED BURN 

PROJECT DESIGN ELEMENTS 

20
21

Density Management Project Design Elements for Riparian Reserves 

Density management thinning treatments and/or commercial extraction should only be 

considered if needed to allow attainment of or restore Aquatic Conservation Strategy 

(ACS) objectives. Timber harvest is prohibited in Riparian Reserves, unless it is to 

acquire desired vegetation characteristics needed to attain ACS objectives or to mitigate 

damaging effects to Riparian Reserves from catastrophic events such as fire, flooding, 

volcanic, wind, or insect damage (NWFP Standards and Guidelines, Timber 

Management, TM-1). “Apply silvicultural practices for Riparian Reserves to control 

stocking, reestablish and manage stands, and acquire desired vegetation 

characteristics needed to attain Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives” (NWFP 

Standards and Guidelines, Timber Management, TM-1 c). 

Situations in which timber harvest may be needed to attain ACS objectives include 

thinning in forested Riparian Reserves in order to improve shade and root strength, and 

other characteristics having to do with overall health and vigor of the stand. A young 

healthy stand has greater potential to provide shade within riparian areas and restore 

the timing, volume, rate, and character of sediment input and storage (water quality and 

aquatic habitat). A young healthy stand also has greater potential to grow into a late 

seral forest, providing late-successional habitat. 

Overall Design Elements for Riparian Reserve Treatments 

• Currently unmapped Riparian Reserves within the project area or within one sitepotential tree (assumed to be 140 feet for all areas) of the project area boundary 

would be identified and included in riparian reserves during marking and unit 

layout and prior to implementation of treatments. 

• No new temporary roads or landings, gap treatments, or heavy thinning (see 

Figure II-1) is proposed nor allowed within Riparian Reserves without prior 

examination by a soils scientist or hydrologist to prescribe site specific mitigation, if 

needed (including relocation of the road). 

• No density management treatment would reduce the existing overstory canopy 

within Riparian Reserve to less than 50%. 

• No density management would occur within 25 ft. of the stream channel. 
22

Soil compaction or the loss of soil infiltration capacity in the riparian area from such 

things as skid roads could establish a mechanism for sediment delivery from 

concentrated overland flow. As a special design element for this project, within 100 

feet of a stream course, pre and post activity would not result in a loss of more 

than 10% of the soil infiltration capacity. This element would include existing skid 

trails, which could be re-utilized as necessary and then be deep ripped (as feasible) to 

re-establish soil infiltration capacity. This figure does not include new haul roads or 

landings because they would be prohibited within Riparian Reserves. 

To facilitate log suspension with skyline operations, corridors for cable rigging would be 

allowed to pass through Riparian Reserves. A maximum width of 12 ft. is required and 

logs may be yarded through this corridor if necessary. Corridors must be spaced at a 

minimum of 200 feet apart if they pass through Riparian Reserves. Corridor “rub trees” 

would be left, even if damaged and/or felled. 

Riparian Reserve treatments and project design elements fall into three categories; fishbearing perennial streams, non-fish-bearing perennial streams, and intermittent 

streams, wetlands and unstable areas. 

Category 1: Fish-bearing Perennial Streams 

This category includes permanently flowing fish-bearing streams, typically Class I and II. 

The primary concern regarding treatments within this category is maintenance of stream 

temperature. Project design would follow direction provided in NWFP Temperature 

TMDL Implementation Strategies 20052. This involves protection and maintenance of 

existing stream shade, and maintenance of the existing micro-climate, ambient air 

temperature, and air movement. For this Category, Riparian Reserve widths are two 

site potential tree heights each side of stream course (150 ft. X 2 = 300 ft. each side; 

total width 600 ft). 

The Stream Channel Protection Zone is from the edge of stream course up to 25 feet. 

No vegetation management (including commercial extraction) would occur within 25 

ft. of the active stream channel. No hand piles would be located or burned within the 

channel. Prescribed fire would not be ignited within this zone but fire may be allowed to 

“back down” to stream channel. 

The Primary Shade Zone is an area where no commercial extraction would occur

(larger trees felled for skyline corridor clearing would be left), however some density 

management, fuels reduction or other restoration treatments could occur. Distance 

from active stream channel varies according to height of existing overstory trees and hill 

slope in immediate area. For managed stands trees that provide shade are 

assumed to be 60 ft. tall and greater. The following table establishes the width of the 

Primary Shade Zone. 

Table 7. Primary Shade Zone Width, Based on Adjacent Hill Slope 

 

2 Northwest Forest Plan Temperature TMDL Implementation strategies - Evaluation of the Northwest Forest Plan Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy and Associated Tools to achieve and maintain stream temperature water quality standards. USFS and 

BLM; latest version September 9, 2005. 
Hill Slope <30% Hill Slope 30% to 60% Hill Slope >30% 

Primary Shade 

Zone Width (slope 

distance

50 ft. 55 ft. 60 ft. 

The Temperature Implementation Strategies allow the distances in above table to be 

less (but not less than 25 ft.) if any of the following conditions applies: 

-The trees are located on a south facing slope (175-185 degree azimuth) and 

therefore do not provide stream shade; 

-An appropriate level of analysis is completed and documented, such as shade 

modeling, using site-specific characteristics to determine the primary shade tree 

width; and or 

-Field monitoring or measurements are completed to determine the width where 

optimum Angular Canopy Density (65% or greater) is achieved (see TMDL 

Implementation Strategies). 

The Riparian Treatment Zone (Secondary Shade Zone) includes area from the edge 

of the Primary Shade Zone to the outer edge of the Riparian Reserve. Density 

management treatments and commercial extraction would be allowed, following 

guidelines and overall design elements for Riparian Reserve. 

Within the Riparian Treatment Zone, the primary concern is prevention of sediment 

delivery to streams, prevention of concentrated overland flow, and maintenance of 

infiltration rates. The maximum percent of area for detrimental soil conditions 

under the LRMP is 15% for an activity area (SNF LRMP S&G 7-2). This standard 

includes roads and landings. The 10 % soil infiltration capacity standard also 

applies, as noted above. 

Figure 2. Riparian Reserve Design Elements - Category 1 

Total Riparian 

Reserve Width 

(600 ft.) 

Two Site-Potential 

Tree Heights (300 ft.) 

Riparian 

Treatment 

Zone 

Primary 

Shade Zone Stream Channel 

Protection Zone 

(25 ft.) Perennial 

Fish-bearing 

Stream Course 

Class I and II 

23
24

Category 2: Non Fish-bearing Perennial Streams 

This category includes permanently flowing non fish-bearing streams, defined as Class 

III. The primary concern regarding treatments within this category also is maintenance 

of stream temperature. Project design would also follow direction provided in NWFP 

Temperature TMDL Implementation Strategies 2005. This involves protection and 

maintenance of existing stream shade, and maintenance of the existing micro-climate, 

ambient air temperature, and air movement. 

For this Category, Riparian Reserve widths are one site potential tree height each side 

of stream course (150 ft. each side; total width 300 ft.). 

The Stream Channel Protection Zone is from the edge of stream course up to 25 feet. 

No vegetation management (including commercial extraction) would occur within 25 

ft. of the active stream channel. No hand piles would be located or burned within the 

channel. Prescribed fire would not be ignited within this zone but fire may be allowed to 

“back down” to stream channel. 

Under Category 2, the Primary Shade Zone is also an area where no commercial 

extraction would occur (larger trees felled for skyline corridor clearing would be left), 

however some density management or other restoration treatments could occur. 

Distance from active stream channel varies according to height of existing overstory 

trees and hill slope in immediate area. Table 7 (above) establishes the width of the 

Primary Shade Zone. The Temperature Implementation Strategies (discussed above) 

also allow the distances in above table to be less (but not less than 25 ft.) under the 

same conditions as under Category 1. 

The Riparian Treatment Zone (Secondary Shade Zone) includes area from the edge 

of the Primary Shade Zone to the outer edge of the Riparian Reserve. Density 

management treatments and commercial extraction would be allowed, following 

guidelines and overall design elements for Riparian Reserve. The primary difference 

between Category 1 and 2 is the width of the entire Riparian Reserve (which is 

differentiated by fish-bearing status). 
Figure 3. Riparian Reserve Design Elements - Category 2 

Total Riparian 

Reserve Width 

(300 ft.) 

One Site-Potential Tree 

Height (150 ft.) 

Riparian 

Treatment 

Zone 

Primary 

Shade Zone Stream Channel 

Protection Zone 

(25 ft.) Perennial Non 

Fish-bearing 

Stream Course 

Class III 

Category 3: Non Fish-bearing Intermittent Streams and Wetlands 

This category includes intermittent non-fish-bearing streams, typically Class IV, 

wetlands greater than one acre and unstable areas not associated with Class I, II and III 

streams. The primary concern is prevention of sediment delivery to streams, prevention 

of concentrated overland flow, and maintenance of micro-climates, ambient air 

temperature and humidity. 

The Stream Channel Protection Zone is from the edge of stream course up to 25 feet. 

No vegetation management (including commercial extraction) would occur within 25 

ft. of the active stream channel. No hand piles would be located or burned within the 

channel. Prescribed fire would not be ignited within this zone but fire may be allowed to 

“back down” to stream channel. 

The Riparian Treatment Zone includes area from the edge of the Stream Channel 

Protection Zone, to the outer edge of the Riparian Reserve (one site potential tree 

height). Density management treatments and commercial extraction would be allowed, 

following guidelines and design elements for Riparian Reserve. 

25
Figure 4. Riparian Reserve Design Elements - Category 3 

Total Riparian 

Reserve 

Width (280 ft.) 

One Site Potential 

Tree Height (140 ft.) 

Riparian 

Treatment 

Zone 

Stream Channel 

Protection Zone 

(25 ft.) Intermittent Stream Course, 

Wetlands, Unstable Areas 

Class IV 

26
27

Corbett, E.S. and J.A. Lynch. 1985. Management of Streamside Zones on Municipal 

Watersheds. Pp. 187-190. First North American Riparian Conference, April 16-18. 1985, 

Tucson, Arizona. 

Emmingham et al. 2002. PNW Commercial Thinning for Diversity Study: Cataract Site, Oregon 

State University. 

EPA 1980. An Approach to Water Resources Evaluation of Non-Point Silviculture Sources: 

EPA 600/8/80/012. 

Kormeier, E. 1995. Summary of Fish Habitat/Water Quality Since the Silver Fire of 1987. 

Siskiyou National Forest, Grants Pass, Oregon 

Lynch, J.A., E.S. Corbett, and K. Mussallem. 1985. Best Management Practices for Controlling 

Non-point-Source Pollution on Forested Watersheds. J. Soil and Water Conservation 40:164-

167. 

Mchugh, M. 2005. Soil Erosion after the Biscuit Fire. Rogue Siskiyou National Forest 

Moring, J.R. 1982. Decrease in Stream Gravel Permeability After Clear-cut Logging: An 

Indication of Intergravel conditions for Developing Salmonid Eggs and Alevins. Hydrobiologia 

88:295-298. 

Park, C, Jubas, H. 2005. Channel and shade monitoring for the 1996 Waters Thin Fuels 

Reduction Project, Rogue Siskiyou National Forest. 

USFS, DEQ, and BLM, 2005. Northwest Forest Plan Temperature TMDL Implementation 

Strategies, Pacific Northwest. 
Stream

Edge of channel 25’

100’

Back burn down

Ignition

The Burn Boss can adjust the 

100’ ignition distance as needed 

to meet burn objectives and 

protect the ground vegetation 

within the 25’ zone

Infiltrated water from 

precipitation

Reason for protection of the 25’ zone: 

Increased water pressure from groundwater 

and the rise and fall of the stream’s water 

can make this area more sensitive to slope 

failure

Maintain most of the ground

vegetation

Riparian Reserve Width

Maintain overstory trees

Prescribed Burn in Riparian Reserves

 Project Design Criteria 

Reducing high fuel Loading 

Pump chances

- 

 -

Use mechanical treatment and pile burning as 

needed prior to under burning to protect the overstory trees. Pile and burning should 

be no closer to the stream than 25’ to maintain ground vegetation. 

 Fire, engineering and aquatic resource personnel will work together 

to determine suitable pump chances and the measures needed for the protection of 

aquatic resources. Refuel 100’ feet from a stream or use measures to assure fuel 

does not reach flowing water. Water withdrawal equipment must have a 3/32 intake 

screen in order to avoid fish entrapment.

Roque River Siskiyou N.F

 August 2008

28