February 19, 1997
Phase I Implementation Plan
ODF 1 - ROAD EROSION AND RISK PROJECT
BACKGROUND: Many forest roads built prior to the development of the Oregon Forest Practices Act or prior to the current BMPs pose increased sediment risk to fish habitat. Industrial forest landowners have agreed to implement a voluntary program to identify risks from roads and to address those risks.
GOAL: The goal of this project is to: 1) implement a systematic process to identify road related risks to coastal salmon recovery; 2) establish priorities for problem solution; 3) design and implement actions to reduce road related risks.
Roads assessed by this project will include all roads on non-federal forest land used as part of an industrial or state forest operation since 1972, regardless of when they were constructed. Emphasis will be given to road systems constructed prior to current forest practice standards and road systems in core areas.
OBJECTIVE: This action will make improvements to road elements such as road fills, stream crossings, and drainage and surface problems to improve fish passage and habitat.
These improvements will also reduce the risks of adverse watershed affects associated with "legacy" roads and major storm events such as the storm that occurred in February 1996.
The following priorities (highest priority listed first) will be used to implement this project:
ACTION ITEMS:
FUNDING: The funding commitment for implementation of this project by OFIC landowners over the next ten years is estimated to be approximately $130 million or $13 million per year on average. Technical support funding will be provided by ODF and DEQ.
WORK SCHEDULE: Road inventory protocol completed (Keith Mills, ODF).
Assessment plan based upon priorities will be completed March 30, 1997 (OFIC).
Road Management Guidebook will be completed June 30, 1998 (Keith Mills, ODF).
Assessment work will be completed by January 1, 2002 (OFIC landowners).
The target for completing necessary remediation actions on culvert and road problems in core areas is January 1, 2007 (OFIC landowners).
The target for completing necessary remediation actions on culvert and road problems outside of core areas is January 1, 2012 (OFIC landowners).
MONITORING: This is a voluntary effort that will be monitored by ODF in cooperation with OFIC and ODFW. A annual accomplishment report by OFIC landowners and annual meetings will be used to measure progress. At the end of ten years, landowners will be evaluated on substantive progress made. For landowners that have not made substantive progress, more aggressive application of regulatory options will be considered.
ODF 2 - STATE FOREST LANDS ROAD EROSION AND RISK PROJECT
BACKGROUND: State forest landowners have agreed to implement a voluntary program (to include 1996 storm damage) on state-owned lands to identify risks from roads and to address those risks. This proposed effort will upgrade at least 130 miles of road in each of the next three biennium. Many of the road systems were built prior to the Oregon Forest Practices Act to salvage Tillamook burn timber in the 1950's. The state forest land was in private ownership at that time.
GOAL: To restore, upgrade and in some cases close state forest roads and stream crossing structures to meet current Forest Practices Act requirements.
OBJECTIVE: The project will upgrade at least 130 miles of forest road in each of the next three biennium. This effort will reduce the risk of erosion and sedimentation that could severely impact fisheries resources.
ACTION ITEMS: Roads will be inventoried using new road inventory protocol developed by ODF and OFIC to identify high priority road repair/improvement projects. Roads will be re-constructed, improved or put to bed. All repairs and improvements will meet or exceed requirements of the revised Oregon Forest Practices Act rules.
FUNDING: Storm damage portion (FEMA and District storm-related costs): Current biennium $3 to $4 million anticipated.
For the Phase 2 portion of this measure $3 million dollars is available for the 97-99 biennium pending approval.
Road improvement program (Phase 2):
The Department is requesting authorization to spend an additional $3 million dollars and add 6.5 FTEs as part of a program option package for the 97-99 biennium to support this portion of the program. The revenue to implement this project is available awaiting authorization.
WORK SCHEDULE: July 1996 through 2002
MONITORING: Reconstruction, road closures and repair work will be monitored by ODF road engineers using GIS data collection techniques.
*******
ODF 3 - TECHNICAL AND POLICY REVIEW OF RULES AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES RELATED TO SLOPE STABILITY
BACKGROUND: To analyze the effects of the February 1996 and November 1996 storms, the Department is in the process of collecting and analyzing landslide information from study zones within the storm areas, this project is described in measure ODF 13. As a follow-up of the monitoring effort the Board of Forestry will review the existing forest practice rules and program in relation to slope stability to determine if changes in rules or administration procedures are needed. The review process will be two-fold focusing on public safety and impacts on fish habitat and water quality.
GOAL: Review forest practice rules related to slope stability.
OBJECTIVES:
ACTION ITEMS: Water Quality/Habitat Issues
Adaptive Management
Regulatory Program
Implement Voluntary Program
Public Safety/Property Issues
FUNDING: Funding of hazard mapping portion of this project will be contained within ODF's forest practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: March 1997 Board of Forestry provide direction to Department to implement review.
Spring 1997 legislative proposal.
1997 technical group review of FPA road rules and guidance.
Late summer 1997 complete storm monitoring study.
97/98 develop and implement compliance audit program (ODF 23).
1999 implement legislative changes (rule development).
MONITORING: Annual reporting.
*****
ODF 4 - STREAM HABITAT ASSESSMENTS
BACKGROUND: For the last three years, industrial forest landowners and state forest lands have contracted with ODFW to complete stream habitat surveys following modified Hankin and Reeves protocol (ODFW protocol).
Assessments to date have included approximately 3000 miles of stream. Landowners plan to continue to provide funding for or conduct additional assessments during the next several years. The focus of these assessments will be completing all coho streams.
GOAL: To assess the condition of salmonid habitat in all coastal watersheds. At a target of approximately 1000 miles per year.
OBJECTIVE: See ODFW measure I.B.2.
ACTION ITEMS: See ODFW measure I.B.2. responsibilities.
FUNDING: See ODFW measure I.B.2. funding.
WORK SCHEDULE: See ODFW measure I.B.2. work schedule.
MONITORING: Annual reporting.
*****
ODF 5 - NORTH COAST SALMONID HABITAT RESTORATION PROJECT
BACKGROUND: The North Coast Salmonid Habitat Restoration Project is an existing program that's been in place for two years. Membership is open to all landowners that share a commitment to stream habitat conservation, restoration and enhancement through cooperative means and who can contribute valuable resources (time, equipment, dollar) to support the Project's objectives.
A steering committee oversees the project. Representatives on the steering committee include a representative of each landowner, a representative from ODFW, two representatives from the Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation, a representative from Oregon Forest Industries Council, a representative from the Oregon Small Woodlands Association and a representative from the Associated Oregon Loggers.
The geographic area this project encompasses includes all river basins from Neskowin Creek near Lincoln City north to the mouth of the Columbia River. The area is divided into three regions: the Nehalem, the Tillamook and the Nestucca. Approximately 64 original potential restoration sites were located within the project area during the first two years. An additional 92 potential project sites have recently been identified on state forest land by ODFW through a three month contract funded by ODF. Work will also begin this year to identify additional habitat improvement projects on private lands.
GOAL: To conserve, restore and enhance salmonid habitat of the North Coast through voluntary participation of area landowners in cooperation with the Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
OBJECTIVE: The development and implementation of detailed habitat restoration plans for individual stream reaches identified in the Tillamook/North Coast and Lower Columbia Project Selection Guide developed by ODFW on private and state lands.
ACTION ITEMS: For the Tillamook/North coast, of the 64 total identified project areas 38 have been completed to date, 17 are scheduled to be completed in 1997 and 9 currently do not have scheduled completion dates. Contracts are currently being written to begin addressing the 92 projects on state forest land as part of this Initiative.
FUNDING: Periodically, members of the Project may contribute money or something of value to the Foundation for the purpose of habitat restoration. The Foundation seeks contributions from other interested parties including federal agencies and private foundations. This money is used in part to fund an ODFW habitat biologist, to leverage additional federal funds and provide cost share dollars to small landowners who might not otherwise be able to afford projects on their lands.
WORK SCHEDULE: Current projects funded for completion (17 projects currently in progress):
6 projects - Oregon Department of Forestry scheduled to be completed summer of 1997 (see measure ODF 24 for additional projects which may be included with this measure).
1 project - Private (Longview Fibre) scheduled to be completed summer 1997.
7 projects - SWCD and private agriculture (Tillamook County and Hawk Creek Golf Course) scheduled to be completed summer/fall 1997.
In addition Tillamook County SWCD has 5 projects which entail fencing and/or planting which need funding for completion. A proposal has been submitted to OWHF for $25 K. Also the Nestucca Watershed Group has 4 projects in need of funding for completion.
MONITORING: Completion of identified restoration projects. Monitoring of all the North Coast Initiative projects will occur using established protocol established by ODFW.
*****
ODF 6 - MID-COAST RESTORATION PROJECT
BACKGROUND: The Mid-Coast Restoration Project has been modeled after the North Coast Restoration Project. Membership is open to all landowners that share a commitment to stream habitat conservation, restoration and enhancement through cooperative means and who can contribute valuable resources (time, equipment, dollar) to support the Project's objectives.
In 1996 the Mid-Coast Habitat Restoration Project completed a total of 24 projects. The projects included placing 283 plus structures effecting approximately 20.8 miles of stream. Landowner participation included several industrial forest landowners (Boise Cascade, Georgia Pacific, Starker, Willamette, Simpson, Weyerhauser, Stimpson, Hampton and Hancock), small private landowners and Oregon Department of Forestry.
GOAL: To conserve, restore and enhance salmonid habitat (particularly Coho) of the Mid-Coast through voluntary participation of area landowners in cooperation with the Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
OBJECTIVE: The development and implementation of detailed habitat restoration plans for individual stream reaches identified by ODFW.
ACTION ITEMS: For 1997, a total of 26 potential projects have been identified within the Salmon, Siletz, Yaquina, Alsea and Siuslaw basins. These potential projects include instream work, fencing, riparian planting, fish weir repair, maintenance, dike repair, and bridge installation. The potential projects could affect approximately 24.5 miles of stream reach. Of the 26 potential projects five are continuation of 1996 projects.
FUNDING: For 96-97 and 97-98 estimated funding is $850,000. Periodically, members of the Project may contribute money or something of value to the Foundation for the purpose of habitat restoration. This money is used to fund a habitat biologist hired by ODFW to implement projects and to leverage additional federal funds. The Foundation may also receive contributions from other interested parties.
WORK SCHEDULE: February 11, 1997 steering committee meets to determine 1997 project priorities.
MONITORING: Completion of identified restoration projects.
*****
ODF 7 - FUND 7 NEW FISH BIOLOGISTS TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR SALMONID HABITAT RESTORATION
BACKGROUND: This voluntary measure by the Oregon Forest Industries Council (OFIC) landowners, will function to provide technical assistance in western Oregon to forest landowners conducting salmonid habitat restoration projects. Current in place grassroots efforts such as the north and mid coast initiatives (ODF 5 and 6) lack stable funding, this action will absorb these and create five additional areas covering all of western Oregon providing long term stable funding. This project area will include the western slopes of the Cascades to the Pacific Ocean.
GOAL: To conserve, restore and enhance salmonid habitat in western Oregon through voluntary participation of area landowners in cooperation with the Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation, Oregon Department of Forestry and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
OBJECTIVE: Provide technical support for the development and implementation of detailed habitat restoration plans and projects for individual stream reaches identified by ODFW.
ACTION ITEMS: This program is in the initial phase of development.
FUNDING: OFIC forest landowners will voluntarily contribute up to $500,000 annually to fund 7 biologists hired by ODFW. Additionally, in conjunction with the Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation additional dollars will be leveraged to fund restoration projects on non-industrial forest land. On forest industry lands restoration projects will be funded by the landowners.
WORK SCHEDULE: This program is in the initial phase of development, funding will be available spring of 1997. Restoration projects will be identified after biologists are on board and then prioritized for completion.
MONITORING: Completion of identified projects documented through annual reporting.
*****
ODF 8 - RIPARIAN HARDWOOD CONVERSIONS
BACKGROUND: Forest practice rules adopted in the fall of 1994 effecting vegetation retention requirements have been changed to allow the conversion of conifer sites currently dominated by brush and hardwoods back to conifers.
This measure can only be implemented on conifer sites and only on sites where current RMA conifer basal area is half of that required by stream size and stream Type under the general water protection rules. No more than half of the total stream length within the harvest unit can be converted and the conversion blocks cannot exceed 500 feet in width. The conversion blocks must be separated from each other by a minimum of a 200 foot retention block where the general vegetation retention prescription is applied.
This management measure includes modifications of applications within initiative identified core areas. In lieu of the standard procedures within the rules, hardwood conversions within core areas will be subject to additional review and will require a site specific plan to be submitted and reviewed.
GOAL: To restore riparian conifers on conifer sites, while assuring potentially adverse effects are fully considered.
OBJECTIVE: On sites where the native tree community would be conifer dominated, but due to historical events the stand has become dominated by hardwoods, in particular, red alder, the rules allow disturbance to produce conditions suitable for the re-establishment of conifer. In this and other situations where the existing streamside vegetation is incapable of developing characteristics of a mature streamside stand in a "timely manner," the desired action will provide functional stream shade, some woody debris, and bank stability in the short term while creating conditions in the streamside area to attain desired future conditions more quickly than would otherwise be achievable under natural succession.
ACTION ITEMS: RMA hardwood conversions have been implemented since January 1995.
Proposed conversions within "core areas" will be subject to additional review and will require a site specific plan to be submitted by the operator. Plans will be reviewed by FPFs in consultation with ODFW Biologists.
Supplement written technical and administrative guidelines for hardwood conversions proposed within "core areas" will be developed. Guidance will provide direction for review of site specific plans to make assessments of potential impacts to the affected streams (guidance is located in appendix B). Approval of site specific plans will be dependent upon how the operational elements of the plan will provide protection to the identified limitations of core area streams, particularly temperature. In the event the plan is inadequate to assure acceptable impacts it will be modified.
FUNDING: Funding is contained within ODF Forest Practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: ODF forest practices inspection program is responsible for determining compliance by operators.
Core area review will become effective April 1997.
Written technical and administrative guidelines for RMA hardwood conversions have been developed for consistent implementation and are contained in the Forest Practices Rule & Statute Guidance Manual.
Supplement written technical and administrative guidelines for hardwood conversions proposed within "core areas" will be developed by January 31, 1997 (Rod Krahmer, ODF).
MONITORING: Both validation and effectiveness monitoring have been initiated. Effectiveness monitoring will include analysis of riparian vegetation structure both pre- and post-operation and effectiveness of riparian reforestation efforts.
Implementation monitoring will analyze the frequency of hardwood conversions.
*****
ODF 9 - NORTHWEST STATE FOREST LANDS MANAGEMENT PLAN
BACKGROUND: Oregon Department of Forestry is preparing a NW Oregon State Forest management Plan. A draft plan is expected to be completed by the summer of 1997. The plan will cover over 600,000 acres of state forest land and will address the full array of statutory mandates and Board and department policies. ODF is working closely with ODFW in developing the plan, and has solicited input from stakeholders through a variety of forums.
GOAL: To produce a forest plan that: (1) meets the Department's statutory obligations on Board of Forestry land, and its contractual obligation to the State Land Board on Common School Land; (2) is a comprehensive and integrated plan, taking into account a wide range of forest values; and (3) uses the technical information that can be reasonably obtained within the constraints of timelines and budgets. The plan will be used to develop a Habitat Conservation Plan, if possible, that serves as a means of complying with the federal ESA, and also achieves the purposes of the state ESA.
OBJECTIVE: Plans are now in development and are not expected to be approved until late 1997. Riparian management practices will meet or exceed the Forest Practices Act to provide for multi-species needs. Watershed assessment will be part of implementation planning to provide for more effective placement of habitat enhancement projects. Investments in road and culvert surveys as part of watershed assessments will provide for more effective maintenance and upgrading of the road systems and will result in improved fish passage.
Focus will be on: (1) upgrading or stabilizing "legacy" roads; (2) improving fish passage, placing LWD and improving riparian conditions; and (3) reducing the risk of debris flows and sediment from roads constructed during the 1950s and early 60s.
ACTION ITEMS: The Forest Management plan is being developed through a public process and requires approval by the state Board of Forestry and the State Land Board. The Habitat Conservation Plans will also require approval by these state boards, as well as by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The high level of approval acts to assure implementation of the plans.
Some provisions under discussion and development in the planning process include: maintaining and developing mature streamside stands; employing site specific measures to maintain and improve salmon habitat, including the consideration of source/recovery areas; implementing upland management strategies so that they complement salmon habitat enhancement strategies; conducting fish population and habitat surveys and road assessments as a means of prioritizing areas for management actions; and continuing active participation in the North and Mid Coast Salmonid Restoration Initiatives, and the Tillamook Bay National Estuary Program.
FUNDING: Funding for plan development is in the ODF budget. An initial request for additional resources that will be used for plan implementation is included in a program option package as part of the proposed 1997-99 program and agency budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: Draft strategies refined (early 1997)
Public review and input (early 1997)
Development of district level plans (spring/summer 1997)
Write Draft Management Plan (spring/summer 1997)
Public Input (summer 1997)
Write final plan (fall 1997)
Review and seek approval from Board of Forestry and State Land Board
MONITORING: A monitoring plan will be developed as a component of the NW Plan and HCP. The monitoring plan will likely identify monitoring questions to explore, indicators to track, and benchmarks to measure against.
*****
ODF 10 - FOREST PRACTICES MONITORING PROGRAM
BACKGROUND: Oregon Department of Forestry has developed and implemented a program to monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the forest practice rules. The forest practices monitoring program has been substantially enhanced over the past four years. The program is guided by a strategic plan that was developed through involvement of many interests. The strategic plan identifies the monitoring questions, and priorities, and established process for developing methodologies and improving coordination. The plan is updated periodically with public involvement.
GOAL: To provide information to the Board of Forestry in a timely manner regarding Forest Practice rule effectiveness and implementation. Recommendations for rule revisions are made based on study results which indicate inadequacy of the rule. If rules are shown to be effective and properly implemented, then revision is not recommended.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the forest practices monitoring program are to:
ACTION ITEMS: Project is in place.
FUNDING: Contained within the forest practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: 1994 - Road sediment and stream temperature.
1995 - Road sediment and stream temperature.
1996 - Road sediment, stream temperature, riparian conditions and storm impacts.
1997 - Road sediment, stream temperature, riparian conditions, storm impacts and chemical application.
1998 - Road sediment, stream temperature, chemical application and fish passage implementation.
MONITORING: An annual monitoring report is required by rule to be presented to the Board of Forestry.
*****
ODF 11 - MONITORING OF RIPARIAN MANAGEMENT AREAS UNDER THE FOREST PRACTICE ACT.
BACKGROUND: In the fall of 1994 the Oregon Department of Forestry adopted new water protection rules. The rules require specific riparian management leave areas (RMAs) with some flexibility for active management under certain stand conditions. Large woody debris (LWD) recruitment is a primary focus of the new rules.
GOAL: The riparian monitoring project will look at the effectiveness of the 1994 water protection rules in maintaining and creating sources of current and potential LWD and in maintaining effective riparian stand structure in terms of stream protection and wildlife habitat.
This project will provide an on-the-ground understanding of future recruitment of LWD from riparian stands prior to harvest operations, and after harvest operations. The project will also evaluate the effectiveness of the riparian rules in maintaining shade and wildlife habitat components. Therefore, RMAs will be evaluated based on their effectiveness to supply these functions to the stream system both pre- and post-operation.
OBJECTIVE:
To accomplish these four larger objectives the department will specifically:
ACTION ITEMS: Oregon Department of Forestry forest practices monitoring program.
FUNDING: Oregon Department of Forestry budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: May 1996 - hire seasonals, develop test protocol, design datasheets, contact forest practice foresters, obtain vehicles, field test protocol.
June 1996 - begin intensive pre-harvest inventory on a few streams to determine variability and design function for extensive sampling in 1998.
September 1996 - end inventory, organize and analyze first year data, evaluate design and field protocol for 1998.
June 1997 - begin post-operation inventory.
September 1997 - end post- harvest inventory.
September - December 1997 - query FACTs database for state-wide stream and harvest information, analyze data.
June 1998 - begin extensive pre/post-harvest inventory.
September 1998 - December 1998 - finish extensive study, analyze data, publish report by spring 1999.
MONITORING: The first year, 1996, will intensively focus on a few sites set to be harvested in each georegion on both non-industrial and industrial lands and on small, medium, and large streams. Post-operation monitoring will occur during the summer of 1997. From this data set, the monitoring process will be streamlined and the department will significantly increase the number of sites in 1998, the final year of the study. The data from streams harvested under the 1994 rules will also be compared to data collected in 1990-91 during the analysis of the effectiveness of the 1987 rules. The Department plans to compare the 1987 and 1994 rules through the stand characteristics both sets of rules created and are creating.
If this monitoring effort identifies that the Water Protection Rules are not achieving the protection or LWD recruitment goals, the department will recommend rule changes.
*****
ODF 12 - MONITORING EFFECTIVENESS OF BMPs IN PROTECTING WATER QUALITY DURING AERIAL APPLICATIONS OF FOREST PESTICIDES
BACKGROUND: The Board of Forestry recently reviewed and revised the state's forestry chemical application rules. As part of the chemical rule revisions the Board adopted OAR 629-620-700 committing Oregon Department of Forestry to monitoring compliance with and the effectiveness of the chemical and other petroleum rules.
The department will implement an overall monitoring program on a representative sample of operations across the state. The program will consist of observation, vegetation surveys, water quality sampling and aquatic insect sampling.
GOAL: To monitor effectiveness and compliance of Best Management Practices in protecting water quality during aerial applications of forest pesticides on 25 operations.
OBJECTIVE: As a result of previous water quality studies indicating concentrations of chemicals greater than 1 ppb are relatively rare as a result of forest operations. Monitoring will focus on chemicals that have a more sensitive toxicity rating. The objectives of the project will be to:
ACTION ITEMS: The department is committed to implementing this project to test the effectiveness and implementation of the forest practice rules in protecting riparian function and water quality during aerial application of pesticides. The program will prioritize monitoring efforts based on past findings, toxicity criteria, chemical use, and regional distribution of chemical applications over the past two years. The program will coordinate with private landowners in situations where the landowner has existing plans to monitor.
FUNDING: Currently $90,000 has been budgeted. $50,000 from ODF's forest practices budget, $30,000 from GWEB (application in progress) and $10,000 from Oregon State University (application in progress).
WORK SCHEDULE: 1996 - develop monitoring protocol (Appendix C)
Fall 1997 - monitor 13 operations and spring 1998 monitor 12 (2.5 percent of the annual average number of operations). Monitoring will focus on herbicide and insecticide applications.
Water Samples:
Samples will be collected before the operation, and 15 minute 2 hour, 4 hour, and 24 hours after the first swath has been sprayed near the buffer strip. Runoff sampling will be conducted after the first runoff- producing rainfall event on a subset of samples.
Vegetation Surveys:
Vegetation inspection surveys will be conducted in riparian areas on high priority operations and by Forest Practice Foresters in response to complaints. In addition, the surveys will be conducted on the 25 operations selected for the department's monitoring program.
MONITORING: Annual reporting.
ODF 13 - STORMS OF 1996 MONITORING PROJECT
BACKGROUND: The storm of February 5 to 8, 1996 resulted in many landslides, channel changes, and other effects to natural resources, public, and private resources. Initial assessment indicates there are several thousand landslides in the storm area. Many locations had over twenty inches of combined rainfall-snowmelt over four days, with a few over thirty inches. This is an extreme amount of water, and without the flood control dams, it would have caused very severe damage to all towns and cities adjacent to the Willamette and Columbia Rivers, regardless of land use. Evidence of channel impacts includes hundreds of washed out stream crossing fills and hundreds of miles of scoured channels which resulted from the landslides and washed-out stream crossings.
GOAL: The goal of the project is to determine which forest practices and designs successfully minimized or contributed to impacts. The project includes intensive on-the-ground data collection regarding landslides, debris torrents, roads, channel impacts, and fish habitat.
OBJECTIVE:
ACTION ITEMS: This measure has been developed with the involvement of a coordination team, a team of four experts representing four different disciplines, Oregon Department of Forestry State Lands Program, Oregon State University Forest Engineering Department, and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
The coordination team is composed of corporate and small private landowners, USFS, BLM, ODFW and ODF
The USFS and the BLM have provided ODF with a report of the initial Phase I findings of their study. Phase I consisted of an assessment of the storm boundaries and a windshield survey of locations of landslides. They are currently embarking on Phase II. Phase II is a region-wide project and consists of a synoptic view of patterns of disturbance using GIS referenced information; detailed stream crossing survey to determine causal mechanisms of failures; watershed performance studies; and an assessment of fish structure durability under these flood conditions. Individual forests are coordinating with ODF on forest specific projects which may couple with the ODF project.
OSU, through the Forest Engineering Department, has incorporated a graduate student and research assistant into the flood project. Their portion will focus on road related landslides and washouts within the ODF study sites.
Immediately following the flood, ODF completed an aerial reconnaissance of the storm impacted areas. The storm boundaries and areas with particularly high rates of landslide and debris torrent impacts (referred to as "red zones") were delineated. Six landslide study sites were then selected. Each of the sites is ten square miles in area. Three were intentionally selected to represent the red zones and three were randomly selected. The purpose of this design is two fold. First by selecting red zone sites, documentation of forest practice effectiveness in areas known to be impacted by the storm is possible. The randomly selected sites provide a broader perspective of storm effects. Secondly, the ten square mile areas were designed to encompass multiple land ownerships (federal, state, industrial private, small private) providing a range of management history. The sites are referred to as Mapleton, Tillamook, and Vida. The three randomly selected sites are Vernonia, Dallas, and Estacada.
Land management history for all six study sites will be gathered by ODF. This will include harvest and regeneration schedules as well as road construction history and specifications.
Six protocols have been developed to address the different components of the study. These protocols address road drainage (OSU); road-related landslides (OSU); non-road related landslides (ODF); channel impacts (ODF); torrent jams (ODF); and fish habitat (ODFW). The OSU and ODFW protocols will be implemented on all six sites.
(Reference; Liz Dent, George Robison, Keith Mills, July 1996, Oregon Department of Forestry 1996 Storm Impacts Monitoring Project).
FUNDING: Funding is contained within ODF budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: Finalize protocols: June 1996
Data collection: July to September (ODF, OSU)
NCASI meeting presentation: September 1996
Water Resources Conference: October 1996
Data analysis: beginning September, 1996
Road protocol field sessions: November -December 1996
Summary report Board of Forestry: January, 1997
Draft report Board of Forestry: March 1997
Final report Board of
Forestry: Fall 1997
MONITORING: Data collection was completed during the summer of 1996 on six study sites. This project represents the most extensive ground-based study ever implemented to assess landslide frequency. In addition it is unique in that extensive channel impacts data was collected simultaneously with landslide data. Data analysis and synthesis occurred during the winter of 1996-1997. Conclusions on the effects of forest practices on storm-initiated landslide frequency and channel impacts will be available in Winter of 1997.
This project will be repeated in areas affected by the November 1996 storm in Coos and Douglas counties. The November storm project will be implemented during the summer of 1997. The combination of data from the six 1996 study sites and the two 1997 sites will broaden the department's understanding of the link between forest practices and landslide frequency, and how varying storm characteristics affect that link. Findings and rule revision recommendations, if necessary, will be presented to the Board of Forestry in 1997 and again in 1998.
*****
ODF 14 - MONITORING WATER TEMPERATURE PROTECTION BMPs
BACKGROUND: This project was initiated in 1994 and will continue for the next several years. The general approach for this project has been to record stream temperatures and physical characteristics of a variety of streams under various silvicultural activities allowed under the water protection rules.
GOAL: To collect information that supports the development of the BMP program.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of the forest practice rules in maintaining stream temperature at the site and watershed scales.
ACTION ITEMS: Annual monitoring, expansion of the data set, prepare annual reports.
FUNDING: Funding is provided partially by an EPA grant and under a cooperative contract among DEQ, OSU and ODF.
WORK SCHEDULE: Annual data collection, analysis and reporting to the Board of Forestry.
MONITORING: Annual report.
ODF 15 - EVALUATION OF ROAD AND TIMBER HARVEST BMPs TO MINIMIZE SEDIMENT IMPACTS
BACKGROUND: Roads are recognized as the largest source of sediment associated with forest management. This four year monitoring project was originally intended as an evaluation of whether Oregon's forest practices for roads were minimizing the delivery of sediment by means of surface erosion to waters of the state.
A random sample of road segments was selected from non-federal lands in western Oregon for monitoring. The sample is representative of the ODF georegions, ownership patterns (state, large industrial, and small non-industrial), and road characteristics (age, use, gradient, etc.).
The project applied the road drainage protocol that was developed, tested and refined during the first year of the project (FY94). This protocol provides information on the locations of drainage systems, road characteristics, runoff routing, and whether there is evidence of sediment delivery.
The major winter storm of February 1996 resulted in many landslides, channel changes, and other effects to natural resources and to public and private resources in northern Oregon. This was an unusual but extremely important storm event, the type which shapes the long-term water quality and watershed characteristics. The storm has provided an unique opportunity to test forest practices developed over the last couple of decades for landslide prevention (acute sedimentation). At the same time the storm reduced both the short term importance of chronic surface erosion and also the ability to accurately measure chronic surface erosion.
The Department of Forestry recommended slight modifications to the study methods, in response to storm-related changes to roads and watersheds. Roads in the survey area and in the storm area will be examined to identify and determine factors associated with new landslides, washouts, and gullies related to the drainage system. This monitoring will use the protocol used during previous data collection, with some modification for collection of landslide data.
Forest Practices staff initiated a process to scope potential approaches for monitoring forest road sediment best management practices (BMPs). Forest Practices staff worked closely with the Forest Engineering Department staff at Oregon State University to develop monitoring concepts. With input from forest landowners, agency personnel and other interested landowners, the methods were further refined. The methods were field tested on 18 miles of forest roads in northwest Oregon.
GOAL: The purpose of this project is to provide land managers and appropriate agencies with specific information on road drainage practices that minimize sediment entry into streams and how these practices are implemented in western Oregon.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this project are:
ACTION ITEMS: Planned work for completion of this project includes:
FUNDING: This project is funded primarily through DEQ and ODF. The Tillamook Bay National Estuary project and the Tillamook State Forest are cooperating to partially fund and utilize this work.
WORK SCHEDULE: See action items above.
ODF 16 - EVALUATION OF THE ADEQUACY OF FISH PASSAGE CRITERIA
BACKGROUND: Technical criteria and guidelines for fish passage have been recently established. These criteria and guidelines will be followed by all state agencies when designing or approving projects. However, the criteria and guidelines, while developed using the best available science, have not been validated by monitoring.
GOAL: To ensure that all instream structures pass both juvenile and adult fish, upstream and downstream, whenever such movement would normally take place.
OBJECTIVE: To establish that the criteria and guidelines used for the design of stream crossing structures pass fish as intended under the goal.
ACTION ITEMS: Monitor velocities and other hydraulic conditions inside culverts that are sunk into streambeds or that use various baffle designs. Evaluate sediment retention inside sunken culverts. Evaluate performance and survival of existing culverts through monitoring.
FUNDING: Funded through existing ODF Forest Practices monitoring at 0.2 FTE.
WORK SCHEDULE: Develop interim fish passage guidance (completed).
Complete Technical Note on hydraulic conditions inside fish passage culverts - summer 1997.
Prepare technical report on hydraulic conditions for various culvert designs based on theoretical calculations and monitoring results - spring 1998 (draft).
Final fish Passage Guidance spring 1998 (draft).
*****
ODF 17 - SITE-SPECIFIC PLANS FOR VEGETATION RETENTION WITHIN RMAs ON NORTHWEST OREGON STATE FOREST LANDS
BACKGROUND: As described in (ODF 9), a long range management plan (LRP) and a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) are being developed for NW Oregon state forest lands. These plans, which will meet program and agency mandates, take an integrated comprehensive approach and address a wide range of forest resources, including riparian resources. These plans are progressing well, but due to more technical work that needs to be done, and the public input process, they are likely not to be completed until late 1997. The riparian strategies now in the draft plan address links to upslope habitats, consideration of salmonid core and recovery areas, and other important riparian management considerations.
In the interim, this measure will be applied so that the desired future condition of RMAs is achieved to the maximum extent practicable, and in the most timely manner. This is similar to measure (ODF 19) described elsewhere in the plan that are being applied by other nonfederal landowners.
GOAL: The goal of this action is to achieve mature forest stands within RMAs in the most timely manner and to the maximum extent practicable.
OBJECTIVE: To maximize the potential of achieving mature streamside stands by retaining conifer trees based upon site-specific information, rather than standard targets in the Forest Practice rules.
ACTION ITEMS: For sales on NW state forest lands within the coastal zone with contracts prepared by May 1, 1997, and until the NW state forest plan is adopted, the following standard(s) will be used:
OR
OR
FUNDING: All resources necessary to implement this project are currently funded and in place.
WORK SCHEDULE: Develop internal guidance for implementation of site specific plans for RMAs on NW state forest lands (April 15, 1997).
Implement guidance for all sales with contracts prepared by May 1, 1997. (May 1, 1997)
MONITORING: Monitoring is not necessary for this specific action. Riparian monitoring will be addressed in the NW state forest plan.
ODF 18 - WILDLIFE TREE PLACEMENT ON STATE FOREST LANDS
BACKGROUND: The forest practices act requires retaining at least two trees or snags per acre on "clear-cut" harvest units. This is separate from, and in addition to, the tree retention required by the water protection rules. The forest practice rules require that these trees and snags (referred to as in-unit trees), be left on all units exceeding 25 acres in size. The purpose of leaving these trees is to contribute to the overall maintenance of wildlife, nutrient cycling, moisture retention, and other benefits associated with retained wood.
In addition to the in-unit trees required by the forest practices rules, state land managers generally leave additional wildlife trees on a site specific basis. This measure directs that trees and snags required by the forest practices rules be placed along Type N streams to assist salmon recovery. This is similar to measure (ODF 22) described elsewhere in the plan that are being applied by other nonfederal landowners.
GOAL: The goal of this measure is to use required leave trees to provide maximum benefit to salmon recovery.
OBJECTIVE: Where operationally possible, concentrate the retention of the required in-unit trees along Type N streams on all state forest lands within the coastal zone. State forest managers will consult with ODFW biologists to identify circumstances where it would not be desirable to retain in-unit trees in this manner.
ACTION ITEMS: When operationally possible, required leave trees will be concentrated along Type N streams for sales on NW state forest lands within the coastal zone with contracts prepared by May 1, 1997. This will be in effect until the NW state forests plan is adopted.
FUNDING: Funding for on the ground administration and tracking of this measure is contained within the state forest lands budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: ODF, in consultation with ODFW, will develop protocol and guidance for operational implementation of this measure (April 15, 1997).
MONITORING: This is an interim measure that will be in place until the NW plan is approved. Monitoring of riparian areas will be based on the NW plan.
ODF 19 - ADDITIONAL CONIFER RETENTION ALONG FISH-BEARING STREAMS IN CORE AREAS
BACKGROUND: Under the Forest Practices Act, meeting the "desired future condition" of mature forest conditions for riparian management areas is based upon basal area targets. The basal area targets are designed to achieve a stand with the characteristics of a mature forest within the RMA. The "standard" basal area targets were developed based upon some assumptions. To the extent that the assumptions are invalid, the target may under-represent the actual stand within the RMA and the potential for achieving the desired future condition and the corresponding LWD delivery is reduced.
GOAL: To ensure that in Core Areas the actual conifer BA retained in an RMA will to the maximum extent practicable and in the most timely manner meet the "desired future condition" established under the Water Protection Rules.
OBJECTIVE: To maximize in Core Areas the potential of meeting the desired future condition established under the Water Protection Rules by retaining additional conifer trees along fish bearing streams when the actual stocking exceeds that stocking assumed under the standard target.
ACTION ITEMS:
OFIC members:
For fish-bearing streams within Core Areas, when requested (based upon guidance developed by ODF/ODFW) OFIC members will voluntarily retain conifer BA in RMAs so that no more than 25 percent of the excess conifer basal area above the standard target is harvested.
OSWA members:
Following ODF/ODFW guidance, for Core Area streams forest practices foresters will make requests of individual members to retain conifer BA in RMAs so that no more than 25 percent of the excess conifer basal area above the standard target is harvested. The decision to meet the request is an individual decision of each OSWA member.
ODF and ODFW will develop guidance for application of this measure within core areas.
FUNDING: All resources necessary to implement this project are currently funded and in place.
WORK SCHEDULE: ODF and ODFW develop guidance - May 1997.
ODF 20 - LIMITED RMA FOR SMALL TYPE N STREAMS IN CORE AREAS
BACKGROUND: Establishes limited RMAs of 20 feet for small type N streams for the purpose of retaining snags and downed wood.
GOAL: To increase the potential availability of LWD to streams.
OBJECTIVE: To provide LWD for potential fish habitat and sediment storage.
ACTION ITEMS: OFIC member landowners will voluntarily establish 20 foot RMAs along Type N streams. Within these RMAs, in addition to the retention requirements of the Forest Practices Act rules, all snags and downed wood (with the exception merchantable blowdown) will be retained where operationally possible.
FUNDING: Funding to implement this measure is contained within existing budgets.
WORK SCHEDULE: Implementation will occur May 1997.
MONITORING: These projects will be monitored as part of the forest practices monitoring project.
*****
ODF 21 - ACTIVE PLACEMENT OF LWD DURING FOREST OPERATIONS
BACKGROUND: This action provides a more aggressive and comprehensive program for placing LWD in streams currently deficient of this material. Placement will be accomplished following ODF/ODFW placement guidelines (ODF 31) currently in place.
GOAL: To provide large woody debris to streams currently deficient of material in a more timely manner.
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this measure are to provide a system that will provide for a more comprehensive and aggressive program for the recruitment of LWD.
ACTION ITEMS: ODF and ODFW jointly develop recommended placement targets involving the number and size of pieces to be placed by stream size.
OFIC landowners complete placement targets as active operations occur along LWD limited streams.
FUNDING: Funding for development of placement targets contained within current agency budgets. Funding of LWD enhancements will be provided by landowners completing them.
WORK SCHEDULE: ODF/ODFW develop placement targets June 1997.
MONITORING: These projects will be monitored as part of the forest practices monitoring project.
*****
ODF 22 - 25 PERCENT IN-UNIT LEAVE TREE PLACEMENT AND ADDITIONAL VOLUNTARY RETENTION
BACKGROUND: The forest practices act requires retaining two trees per acre on "clear-cut" harvest types. This is a separate requirement than required by the water protection rules. These trees referred to as in unit trees must be left on all units exceeding 25 acres in size. The purpose of these trees is to contribute to the overall maintenance of wildlife, nutrient cycling, moisture retention and any other resource benefits of retained wood.
The State Forester can by statute direct that 25 percent of these in-unit trees be placed in or adjacent to riparian management areas (RMAs) or Type F and D streams. Landowners can voluntarily choose to retain additional in-unit trees along Type N, D or F streams.
GOAL: To retain up to 100 percent of the in-unit trees along Type N or F streams in "core areas" and other special areas along specific stream reaches when ODF in consultation with ODFW determine additional retention along streams is beneficial to coho salmon recovery.
OBJECTIVE: To retain additional trees in and along streams within salmon core areas. Forest Practices Foresters can consult with ODFW biologists to identify circumstances where it would be desirable to leave additional trees. These trees will be an additional source for large woody debris recruitment and shade as well as providing other wildlife attributes.
ACTION ITEMS: ODF in consultation with ODFW will develop protocol and guidance for operational implementation of this management measure. In addition ODF will provide documentation and tracking of projects completed.
ODF forest practices foresters in consultation with ODFW biologists will implement on operations starting April 1997. ODF Forest Practices inspection program will be used for administration. Technical and administrative guidelines are contained in appendix C.
OFIC industrial forest landowners have voluntarily agreed to retain in-unit trees in "core" and other special areas along specific stream reaches when requested by ODF or ODFW. In addition OFIC members will voluntarily change the ratio of 50 percent conifer and 50 percent hardwood to 75 percent conifer and 25 percent hardwood when requested on a site-specific basis.
FUNDING: Funding for on the ground administration and tracking of this measure is contained within the ODF Forest Practice budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: 25 percent in-unit leave tree placement currently in place administered by ODF forest practices inspection program.
Guidance development by Rod Krahmer (ODF) and Jeff Boechler (ODFW) will be completed by January 31, 1997.
Additional in-unit tree placement targeted to be implemented April 1997.
MONITORING: Implementation and effectiveness monitoring will be scheduled over the next five years. Monitoring will evaluate the number of request complied with and the number of in-unit trees retained in core areas.
*****
ODF 23 - BMP COMPLIANCE AUDIT PROGRAM
BACKGROUND: The Department of Forestry achieves FPA rule compliance through a balanced program of rule education, technology transfer and enforcement. However, to ensure that its compliance program is producing desired results and to identify methods to improve compliance, a statistically reliable sample of BMP compliance is needed.
Within this measure ODF will develop and implement a compliance auditing program within the next two years. The compliance auditing program will provide a statistically valid sample of the level of compliance and help establish how identified compliance problems are best resolved.
GOAL: By 1999, identify level of overall forest operations in compliance with the forest practice rules and determine if adjustments to compliance program or program administration are needed.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this program are:
ACTION ITEMS: In addition to normal inspection programs:
FUNDING: Funding for Department compliance audit program is contained within ODF's existing budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: In addition to ongoing compliance activities the Department will develop and implement a compliance audit program within the next two years.
MONITORING: An annual compliance audit report will be presented to Board of Forestry in 1999.
ODF 24 -STATE FORESTLANDS STREAM HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND INSTREAM PROJECTS
BACKGROUND: During 1994 and 1995, 305 miles of stream have been surveyed for habitat on state forest lands by ODFW biologists. Fish distribution surveys have been done on 260 streams and stored on GIS. Contracts with ODFW are planned to complete assessments for the remaining streams and adjacent riparian areas. In stream projects will be used to create or enhance stream structure and habitat. Alder dominated riparian areas will be manipulated to reestablish conifers. The department has spent over $.5 million on stream enhancement projects annually. Specific examples of this work are the Miami river in Tillamook County and the South Fork Wilson river in Washington County.
Most of these projects have been and where possible will continue to be done in conjunction with the North Coast Salmonid Restoration Project and watershed assessments as part of the NW Oregon Forest Management Plan.
GOAL: To improve Salmon habitat (in stream and riparian) on state forest lands.
OBJECTIVE: To identify habitat restoration opportunities and with the assistance of local biologists design and construct instream structures and reestablish conifer in alder dominated riparian areas.
ACTION ITEMS: Complete assessments for the remaining streams and conduct identified instream projects and riparian work. Currently an additional 92 enhancement projects have been identified on the Tillamook State forest using this assessment process. Significantly more projects will be identified when the remaining assessments are completed.
FUNDING: The Department has been spending over $.5 million on stream enhancement projects annually.
As a Phase 2 measure the Department is requesting authorization to spend an additional $1.15 million (from state lands revenues) during each of the next three biennia in support of these projects. Of this the Northwest Oregon Area has requested $.75 million part of which will provide funding for an ODFW fisheries habitat biologist to assist with the implementation of habitat improvement contracts and a wildlife biologist to assist with implementation of the forest plan.
WORK SCHEDULE: Complete assessments and projects by the close of the 2001/2003 biennia.
MONITORING: Monitoring of the projects will be conducted by ODFW to insure the effectiveness of the projects and to apply lessons learned to other projects.
ODF 25 - FISH PRESENCE/ABSENCE SURVEYS AND FISH POPULATION SURVEYS
BACKGROUND: This is a voluntary program in which industrial forest landowners and state lands conduct or have contracted with ODFW to survey for absence and presence of salmonid fish.
The fish population surveys have focused on potential coho streams. These surveys have helped to identify the upper limits of fish distribution on some of the smaller streams, as well as population densities. This data has supported the prioritization of enhancement priorities.
GOAL: To identify fish use streams and fish populations.
OBJECTIVE: To support the implementation of the Oregon Forest Practices Act. Fish presence/absence data ensures that protection measures for waters of the state derived from the forest practices rules is applied appropriately.
Also, to create a baseline to analyze how management activities or natural events (such as debris flows or droughts) affect fish distribution.
ACTION ITEMS: Continued surveys through 1997.
FUNDING: This is a voluntary program with funding generated through participants.
WORK SCHEDULE: Surveying to be conducted from 1995 through 1997.
ODF 26 - ELLIOTT STATE FOREST HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
BACKGROUND: The northern spotted owl was listed as a federal threatened species in Washington, Oregon and California in July 1990 and the Marbled Murrelet was listed September 1992. The federal ESA includes provisions for the issuance of special permits for take that is incidental to but not the purpose of otherwise lawful activities.
To qualify for an incidental take permit, the applicant must prepare a habitat conservation plan (HCP) that specifies the impact that will likely result from such taking; what steps the applicant will take to minimize and mitigate such impacts, and the funding that will be available to implement such steps; what alternative actions to such taking the applicant considered and the reasons why such alternatives are not being selected; and other such measures that may be required as necessary or appropriate for purposes of the plan.
The incidental take permit for owls and murrelets was signed in October 1995. As part of the requirement for the permit monitoring and annual reporting to the USFWS is required.
The plan is based on a strategic framework that includes management basins with varying harvest rotations from 80 to 240 years, and establishment of habitat conservancy areas, riparian reserves, and other reserve areas across the 93,000 acre forest. These riparian and other reserves as well as long rotation management of adjacent management basins, will provide protection for cutthroat trout and other fish species of concern.
The forest has been divided into 17 management basins approximately 5500 acres each in size. The basins will serve as the basis to implement and monitor the strategy of the conservation plan. Habitat Conservancy Areas (HCAs) are established in each of the management basins to protect some T&E species sites and fisheries areas. Of the 93,000 acres of the forest HCAs, riparian reserves, and other reserves (such as scenic areas) total 18,060 acres, or 19 percent of the Elliott State Forest.
The basins use a mix of 240, 200, 160, 135 and 80 year rotations, varying by basin. Over time, from 13 to 66 percent of each basin will be managed in NRF habitat for the spotted owl and protect occupied murrelet sites. Important to note is that late successional forests (stands 156 plus years old) show a dramatic increase over the next 100 years. Late successional forest will increase from the current level of less than 1 percent to 29 percent (26,678 acres) by the year 2063 and then be maintained at that level.
The riparian strategy of the habitat conservation plan will retain late successional forest between 50 and 100 feet in width along both sides of fish-bearing and perennial non-fish-bearing streams. Where fires, storms, road building, and past practices have reduced the numbers of large conifers in riparian zones, specific habitat enhancement projects maybe undertaken, in consultation with ODFW, to restore conifers. In the long term, the creation of large woody debris in the streams from fallen conifers will enhance fish habitat by creating pools, slowing the flow of the stream, trapping sediment, and increasing macroinvertebrate populations. In addition to other protective measures put in place by the plan, the plan includes Conservancy Lands. Within Conservancy Lands no timber harvest is likely to occur except in the event of emergency conditions. Conservancy Lands are divided into two categories, they include Scenic conservancy lands and Protective conservancy lands. Scenic conservancy lands include areas that hold scenic values such as park buffers, highway corridors, river corridor-lakeshore, and scenic attractions. The river corridor-lakeshore lands will be maintained as natural, untouched areas due to their scenic value. Protective conservancy lands are classified as damageable lands, special game habitat, and special fish habitat. These areas are associated with the steep, rocky slopes on either side of major rivers or streams, including the Umpqua River, Mill Creek and the West Fork Millicoma River.
GOAL: To develop a management plan to address the entire forest ecosystem in lieu of the circle management guidelines for spotted owls.
The Elliott State Forest (ESF) Habitat Conservation Plan developed for Northern Spotted Owls and Marbled Murrelets also enhances riparian areas. The forest covers approximately 93, 000 acres in the Oregon coast range.
OBJECTIVE: To protect owl and murrelet habitat while allowing harvest to meet constituent responsibilities. The plan provides security for management operations while providing increased levels of protection to all resources.
ACTION ITEMS: Implementation of the plan, the incidental take permit was signed in October 1995.
FUNDING: Contained within the state lands budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: - Annual monitoring report.
- Five year comprehensive review.
MONITORING: Each year the Department will prepare an annual monitoring report and submit it to U.S. Fish and Wildlife for review. In addition the Department has proposed that a comprehensive review of the HCP be conducted at the end of the first five years.
ODF 27 - INCREASED RIPARIAN PROTECTION
BACKGROUND: Vegetation retention requirement rules along streams have been changed to reflect stream type and size. Previous retention requirements only applied a standard of vegetation retention to streams with "significant" fish use. Rather than using a distinct "shade" standard as the past rules did, these rules are designed to achieve and maintain a desired future condition similar to mature forests with an emphasis towards conifer species along most fish-bearing streams. The new standard uses live conifer basal area instead of number of trees as the vegetation-retention measures.
Generally, no tree harvesting is allowed within 20 feet of all fish-bearing, all domestic-use and all other medium and large streams unless stand restoration is needed. In addition, all snags and downed wood must be retained in every riparian management area (with exceptions related to safety). Provisions governing vegetation retention are designed to encourage conifer restoration on riparian forest land that is not currently in the desired condition. Future supplies of conifer on these sites are necessary to support stream functions and to provide fish and wildlife habitat.
These changes have resulted in an increase in the number of conifer trees, snags and downed woody debris required to be left along fish-bearing streams and medium and large non-fish bearing streams, the changes also increase tree density and RMA width.
GOAL: The purpose of the water protection rules is to protect, maintain and, where appropriate, improve the functions and values of streams, lakes, wetlands, and riparian management areas. These functions and values include water quality, hydrologic functions, the growing and harvesting of trees, and fish and wildlife resources
OBJECTIVE: Establishing and maintaining a desired future condition similar to mature forests with an emphasis towards conifer species along most fish-bearing and many non-fish bearing streams. And to provide good instream habitat improvement over time across forested lands.
ACTION ITEMS: This management measure is currently implemented.
FUNDING: Current Oregon Department of Forestry Forest Practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: This management measure is in place. It is administered through the ODF Forest Practices inspection program. Written technical and administrative guidelines have been developed for consistent implementation (contained in Forest Practices Rule & Statute Guidance Manual, OAR 629-24-635).
MONITORING: Both validation and effectiveness monitoring began in 1996. The vegetation retention targets have been based upon a number of assumptions. Validation monitoring will test some of these assumptions.
Effectiveness monitoring will include analysis of riparian vegetation structure pre- and post-operation. Effectiveness of riparian reforestation efforts and success in hardwood conversion stands will also be analyzed.
ODF 28 - PROTECTION OF SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS, INCLUDING ESTUARIES
BACKGROUND: Significant wetlands on forestlands provide a wide range of functions and values, including those related to water quality, hydrologic function, fish and other aquatic organisms, and wildlife.
Forest practice rules requiring protection of riparian management areas around significant wetlands, including all estuaries were implemented in late 1991. While all wetlands are protected under the forest practice rules, this change requires the retention of riparian vegetation around the wetland in addition to retention of vegetation within the wetland.
Significant wetlands include all estuaries, any wetland larger than 8 acres, bogs, and important springs in eastern Oregon.
GOAL: The goals of significant wetlands protection are to maintain the functions and values of significant wetlands on forestlands over time, and to ensure that forest practices do not lead to site destruction or reduced productivity, while at the same time ensuring the continuous growth and harvest of forest tree species. In order to accomplish these goals, the rules focus on the protection of soil, hydrologic functions, and specified levels of vegetation retention.
OBJECTIVE: To provide riparian management areas 100 feet in width for any wetland larger than 8 acres, 100 to 200 feet for an estuary, and 50 to 100 feet from a bog.. The actual location and width of the selected RMA is based upon site-specific factors.
For all significant wetlands, operators shall provide the following to the wetlands and riparian management areas: 1) live tree retention (OAR 629-645-010); 2) soil and hydrologic function protection (OAR 629-645-030); 3) understory vegetation retention (OAR 629-645-040); and 4) snag and down wood retention (OAR 629-645-050).
ACTION ITEMS: This management measure is currently implemented.
FUNDING: Oregon Department of Forestry Forest Practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: This management measure is in place. It is administered through the ODF Forest Practices inspection program. Written technical and administrative guidelines have been developed for consistent implementation (contained in Forest Practices Rule & Statute Guidance Manual, OAR 629-645-000 - 050).
Compliance is assured through prior approval of written plans. Operators are required to submit written plans for Forest Practices Forester approval before the commencement of any operation within 300 feet of significant wetlands.
MONITORING: Periodic implementation and effectiveness monitoring is planned within the next five years.
ODF 29 - FOREST PRACTICE CHEMICAL PROTECTION RULES INCREASED BUFFERS
BACKGROUND: The Board of Forestry has recently reviewed and revised the state's forestry chemical application rules. The changes include providing protection to vegetation required to be protected by the water protection rules, increasing distances for the exclusion of direct aerial application of fungicides and non-biological insecticides from 60 to 300 feet from the aquatic areas of Type F and Type D streams, large lakes and any lakes with fish use, any areas of standing open water larger than one-quarter acre, and significant wetlands.
The rule revisions follow 1994 changes in the water protection rules that resulted in a 20 to 30 percent increase in the number of miles of streams receiving the highest level of protection when chemicals are applied.
GOAL: The purpose of the forest practice chemical and other petroleum product rules is to establish requirements that will ensure:
OBJECTIVE: To increase buffer strips to 300 feet in width from the aquatic areas of the water types listed above for the exclusion of direct aerial application of fungicides and non-biological insecticides. Monitoring data indicate that past BMPs may not have adequately protected water quality and fish and aquatic invertebrate populations. The larger buffer distance will provide a much higher level of protection to fish and aquatic invertebrates in regard to these chemical operations.
In addition, the potential for chemical to enter fish bearing waters during mixing and loading operations of all chemicals for forest operations is reduced.
ACTION ITEMS: The new chemical rules were adopted by the Board of Forestry September 1996. The new rules were implemented January 1997. Training and written guidance has been developed for the administration of the new rules by department forest practices foresters.
The new rules commit the department to conduct effectiveness monitoring and evaluation of the chemical and other petroleum product rules.
FUNDING: Current Oregon Department of Forestry Forest Practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: Administration will be through the ODF forest practices inspection program, written technical and administrative guidelines are in the process of being developed for consistent implementation (they will be contained in Forest Practices Rule & Statute Guidance Manual, under Division 620 Chemicals and Other Petroleum Products)
MONITORING: The Benchmark is to prevent forest chemical from entering the waters of the state levels injurious to fish, wildlife or water quality. Thresholds have been developed for each specific chemical labeled for use on forestlands. Monitoring is conducted to confirm that BMP compliance will result in these thresholds not being exceeded.
OAR 629-620-700 of the adopted rules commits the department, in cooperation with other state agencies, landowners, and other interested parties to conduct effectiveness monitoring and evaluation of the chemical and other petroleum product rules (ODF 12). The monitoring will be designed to determine the effectiveness of the rules to meet the goals of the Forest Practices Act and the purposes stated in the rules, as well as their workability and operability.
ODF 30 - LARGE WOODY DEBRIS RECRUITMENT INCENTIVES
BACKGROUND: Large woody debris placement incentives were included in the September 1994 Forest Practice Water Protection Rules. Forest Practice Rules have been developed to provide landowner incentives to work with ODF and ODFW in the voluntary placement of LWD and other material where appropriate.
Woody debris diverts water flow, creating pools and providing cover. In the past, large wood's role in forming stream habitat was not understood or was ignored. In some smaller streams, splash dams were built to drive logs down to larger bodies of water, often scouring the streams and removing all woody debris. Also, logging operations in the past typically cut right to the edge of the stream, depriving the stream of wood input from the adjacent riparian area. Over time, this lack of input can cause a depletion of wood in the stream. Streams also were cleared of large wood for navigation and to improve fish migration.
There have been many attempts to add large woody debris to streams, beginning in the 1930's with the help of Civilian Conservation Corps work crews. In the Midwest, many of these efforts have led to documented increases in fish production. However, many of the past efforts in the Pacific Northwest have not increased fish production because the structures were not designed to handle the variation in flows and the greater stream slopes that occur in this region.
GOAL: Many fish bearing streams currently need improvement of fish habitat because they lack adequate amounts of large woody debris. The goal of this action is to provide incentives to operators to conduct approved stream improvement projects.
OBJECTIVE: To provide a short term supply of large woody debris to fish bearing streams while riparian management areas mature to provide these components.
ACTION ITEMS: This management measure is currently implemented.
FUNDING: Placement projects are funded by the companies completing them. ODF inspection funding is contained within ODF's forest practice budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: This action is voluntary with regulatory guidelines. Administration of this measure is accomplished by the ODF forest practice inspection program. Once a forest operator chooses to accomplish a habitat improvement project, they must obtain prior approval from the Department through a written plan.
To support this effort, a publication (ODF 31), "Large Woody Debris Placement Guidelines" has been developed jointly by ODF and ODFW to guide landowners during woody-debris placement projects. Projects must comply with these guidelines or the operator must get site-specific approval of a detailed plan for the enhancement work. These projects are high priority inspection item for ODF Forest Practices Foresters.
MONITORING: Both validation and effectiveness monitoring began the summer of 1996. In addition, some monitoring has been conducted by ODFW to determine how some of the previous projects withstood the February 1996 storm.
ODF 31 - LARGE WOODY DEBRIS PLACEMENT GUIDELINES
BACKGROUND: ODF and ODFW have developed a guidelines publication for operators to use in the placement of large woody debris in streams. The forest practices rules adopted in the fall of 1994 provide landowner incentives to place large woody debris in streams. If a proposed woody debris placement project meets the ODF guidelines contained in the publication the process for acquiring approval is streamlined. The landowner or operator still must obtain prior approval of a written plan before proceeding with the project.
GOAL: To provide guidelines for forest operators to follow in the placement of large woody debris.
OBJECTIVE: To assure correct placement of large woody debris by operators and to reduce operator liability.
ACTION ITEMS: This management measure is currently implemented. However, debris placement monitoring is ongoing, as our knowledge of wood placement techniques improves, information in the current publication will become outdated leading to updated publications
FUNDING: Department of Forestry Forest Practice budget.
ODF 32 - FISH PRESENCE SURVEY (OAR 629-635-200(11))
BACKGROUND: This measure will fund and complete an interagency "fish" (salmonids, game fish, and T&E fish) presence survey to improve efficiency of program deliveries and to ensure that protection is delivered as was intended by the forest practice rules and other programs. This survey also identifies barriers to fish passage.
OAR 629-635-200(11) adopted in 1994, directs the Department of Forestry in cooperation with ODFW to conduct a comprehensive field survey to identify fish use on non-federal forest land in Oregon.
When direction was provided, it was understood that the survey work was unfunded. The agencies were directed to seek grants and other sources of funds to complete the work. The survey work to date has been accomplished using existing resources of the Department of Forestry and Department of Fish and Wildlife.
As funding becomes available survey priority is given to streams that operators have identified as having pending sales.
GOAL: To complete a comprehensive fish presence survey to identify fish use on non-federal forestland waters in Oregon.
OBJECTIVE: To improve efficiency of program deliveries and to ensure that protection is delivered as was intended by the forest practice rules and other programs. Also, to identify barriers to fish passage.
ACTION ITEMS: Develop contracts for supervision and survey work to carry out the project.
FUNDING: Estimated cost of completing this project work is $1.5+ million over three biennia. Currently ODF and ODFW budgets supply funding for this project as money is available. This has enabled an approximate annual accomplishment of 3 percent per year for three years.
Phase 2 of this measure included as a part of the Governor's budget includes $503,965 dollars and .5 FTE for the 1997-99 biennium.
WORK SCHEDULE: For fiscal 97 complete 600 miles of survey (statewide). Work to secure additional funding.
MONITORING: Survey results are mapped on official water classification maps.
ODF 33 - INCREASE NUMBER OF STREAMS AND STREAM MILES PROTECTED
BACKGROUND: The water protection rules implemented in the fall of 1994 effectively increased the number of streams and stream miles receiving increased protection from harvesting practices as compared to past forest practices rules.
Vegetation retention requirement rules along streams have been changed to reflect stream type and size. Past rule standards provided riparian protection standards based on a two-class system. The new system identifies seven geographic regions; distinguishes among streams, lakes, and wetlands and further distinguishes each by size; distinguishes among those streams that have fish or domestic use, or neither, and in each case describes the stream as large, medium, or small based on average annual flow.
All fish-bearing streams have a riparian management area (RMA) that includes a vegetation retention standard. Previously, a standard of vegetation retention applied only to those streams with "significant" fish use. Based on surveys completed before the rules were adopted these rules could increase by as much as 30 percent the miles of forest streams that receive protection consistent with fish use.
GOAL: The goal of this measure is to increase the number of miles of protected stream by 25 to 30 percent. The purpose of the water protection rules is to protect, maintain and where appropriate, improve the functions and values of streams, lakes, wetlands and riparian management areas. These functions and values include water quality, hydrologic functions, the growing and harvesting of trees, and fish and wildlife resources.
OBJECTIVE: Establishing and maintaining a desired future condition similar to mature forests with an emphasis towards conifer species along most fish-bearing and many non-fish bearing streams. And to provide good instream habitat improvement over time across forested lands.
ACTION ITEMS: This management measure is currently implemented. Rule (OAR 629-635-200(11) directs the Department of Forestry in cooperation with ODFW to conduct a comprehensive field survey to identify fish use on non-federal forest land (see measure ODF 32).
FUNDING: Current Oregon Department of Forestry Forest Practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: This management measure is in place. It is administered through the ODF Forest Practices inspection program. Written technical and administrative guidelines have been developed for consistent implementation (contained in Forest Practices Rule & Statute Guidance Manual, Divisions 635, 640, 645, 650 and 655)
MONITORING: Both validation and effectiveness monitoring began in 1996. The vegetation retention targets have been based upon a number of assumptions. Validation monitoring will test some of these assumptions.
ODF 34 - IMPROVE FISH PASSAGE BMPs ON STREAM CROSSING STRUCTURES
BACKGROUND: Forest practice rules adopted in the fall of 1994 require stream crossing structures to pass both adult and juvenile fish upstream and down stream. The new standard applies to all stream crossing structures installed after September 1, 1994. The February 1996 storm event has likely increased the process to replace older culverts and crossing structures with structures that meet the new standard.
GOAL: To ensure that all new stream crossing structures on forestland installed or replaced after the fall of 1994 will pass both adult and juvenile fish upstream and down stream.
OBJECTIVE: Upstream and downstream fish passage of both adult and juvenile fish.
ACTION ITEMS: The rule standards are currently applied through "interim" technical guidance. The guidance includes detailed criteria about which structures will pass fish based upon stream gradient. FPF approval of written plans is based on this written guidance and in some cases consultation with ODFW. Additional refined guidance is being developed through a region wide partnership of natural resource agencies throughout the northwest.
FUNDING: Oregon Department of Forestry Forest Practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: This management measure is currently implemented. It is administered through the ODF Forest Practices inspection program. Written technical and administrative guidelines have been developed for consistent implementation (contained in Forest Practices Rule & Statute Guidance Manual, OAR 629-24-622(5)(b)).
MONITORING: Implementation and effectiveness monitoring will be scheduled over the next five years.
ODF 35 - INCREASE DESIGN FOR LARGER FLOWS
BACKGROUND: Water protection rules adopted in the fall of 1994 increased the BMP design standard for stream crossing structures to pass a fifty year storm event. The past design standard required stream crossing structures to pass twenty five year events.
GOAL: For stream crossings (culverts, bridges and fords) to pass peak flows that at least correspond to a 50-year return interval.
OBJECTIVE: To prevent damage to aquatic habitat and water quality caused by stream crossing failures.
ACTION ITEMS: This management measure is currently implemented.
FUNDING: Current Oregon Department of Forestry Forest Practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: This management measure is in place. It is administered through the ODF Forest Practices inspection program. Written technical and administrative guidelines have been developed for consistent implementation (contained in Forest Practices Rule & Statute Guidance Manual, OAR 629-24-622(5)(a)).
MONITORING: Implementation and effectiveness monitoring will be scheduled over the next five years.
ODF 36 - UPGRADED ROAD CONSTRUCTION & FILL REQUIREMENTS
BACKGROUND: In the fall of 1994 road construction BMPs were changed to specifically require that excavation and amount of road fill be minimized at stream crossings, and that any road fill greater than 15 feet deep require prior approval. Previous road construction BMPs were not as specific nor did they require prior approval for fills greater than 15 feet deep.
GOAL: To minimize the volume of material in fills.
OBJECTIVE: Requiring fill depths and widths installed after the fall of 1994 to be minimized, in combination with the new stream crossing design criteria of the 50 year storm event should significantly reduce the likelihood of dam break floods from stream crossing failures and minimize the potential adverse effects of such events if they should occur.
ACTION ITEMS: This management measure is currently implemented.
FUNDING: Current Oregon Department of Forestry Forest Practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: This management measure is in place. It is administered through the ODF Forest Practices inspection program. Written technical and administrative guidelines have been developed for consistent implementation (contained in Forest Practices Rule & Statute Guidance Manual, OAR 629-24-622(4)).
MONITORING: Implementation and effectiveness monitoring will be scheduled over the next five years.
ODF 37 - UPGRADED SKID TRAIL CONSTRUCTION AND FILL REQUIREMENT
BACKGROUND: For ground based yarding equipment, BMPs were changed to specifically require that excavation and amount of fill for skid trails be minimized at stream crossings, and that for fills over eight feet deep prior approval is required.
GOAL: To minimize excavations and the volume of material in fills at stream crossings.
OBJECTIVE: To reduce the likelihood of dam break floods from crossing failures and to minimize potential adverse effects if they should occur.
ACTION ITEMS: This management measure is currently implemented.
FUNDING: Current Oregon Department of Forestry Forest Practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: This management measure is in place. It is administered through the ODF Forest Practices inspection program. Written technical and administrative guidelines have been developed for consistent implementation (contained in Forest Practices Rule & Statute Guidance Manual, OAR 629-660-020(4)).
MONITORING: Implementation and effectiveness monitoring will be scheduled over the next five years.
ODF 38 - CLEARCUT LIMITATIONS
BACKGROUND: ORS 527.740 restricts clearcuts to 120 acres in size. Clearcut harvesting units that total a combined acreage greater than 120 acres must be separated by 300 feet until any adjacent areas are reforested and free to grow (generally at least four years).
Within the forest practice rules clearcuts are defined as "harvest type 3" units. Harvest type 3 units are any harvest unit that requires reforestation after completion of harvest. Harvest type 3 units also require wildlife leave trees (two per acre) and downed log retention.
GOAL: To limit clearcuts exceeding 120 acres.
OBJECTIVE: In relation to impacts on riparian management areas assure that waters of the state protected under the FPA have a minimum of 300 feet of non-harvest area between large harvested acreage's.
ACTION ITEMS: Provide inspections for compliance. The Department provides ongoing random inspections of forest operations based on priority and the potential for resource damage. In the event of non-compliance with this rule operators are subject to enforcement action. When non-compliance of the rules is documented enforcement action can be taken in the form of civil penalties, criminal action and repair orders.
FUNDING: This action is funded through the Departments forest practices budget.
WORK SCHEDULE: This management measure is in place. It is administered through the ODF Forest Practices inspection program. Written technical and administrative guidelines have been developed for consistent implementation (contained in Forest Practices Rule & Statute Guidance Manual, ORS 527.740)
MONITORING: Forest Practices inspection program.
ODF 39 - LOBSTER CREEK WHOLE-BASIN COORDINATION RESTORATION PROJECT
BACKGROUND: A whole basin restoration project to restore native salmonid populations, modeled after Hancock Timber Resource Group's (HTRG) strategy used in the Knowles Creek efforts in the Siuslaw basin. Partners in this project include HTRG, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the USDA Forest Service, and the Pacific Rivers Council.
GOAL: To restore remnant native salmonid populations (fall Chinook salmon, Coho salmon, winter steelhead).
OBJECTIVE: To coordinate Hancock Timber Resource Group's approach to salmon restoration (a whole basin strategy) with a watershed analysis by the USDA Forest Service in the upper basin (scheduled to begin later this year).
ACTION ITEMS:
FUNDING: Funding is provided by HTRG, ODFW, USFS, and a grant from the World Wildlife Fund's Rogue River Walter A. Haas, Jr. Conservation Award ($25,000).
WORK SCHEDULE:
MONITORING: Action item 5 above contains a monitoring component.
ODF 40 - UPPER SIUSLAW ENHANCEMENT
BACKGROUND: This is a voluntary action coordinated through Weyerhaeuser, the Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (Mid-Coast Habitat Restoration Project).
GOAL: Fish habitat improvement on tributaries of the upper Siuslaw river.
OBJECTIVE: To install structures as designed by ODFW biologists.
ACTION ITEMS: Identification of sites through the mid-coast habitat survey work done by the Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation and ODFW. Four potential sites were identified for the 1996 season. Additional sites may be determined as the watershed analysis continues.
FUNDING: Funding for instream project work provided by Weyerhaeuser.
WORK SCHEDULE: Installation of structures on three sites completed in 1996 (34 structures), fourth site plus an additional site scheduled for 1997, and continuing analysis for future projects.
MONITORING: Pictures of completed projects are taken. Photos are taken of the same site after every spring to track how structures are physically functioning.
ODF 41 - SOUTH SILETZ MONITORING
BACKGROUND: This is a voluntary action by Boise Cascade.
GOAL: To quantify any changes in stream health after implementation of road enhancement projects.
OBJECTIVE: To monitor channel morphology, turbidity, sedimentation, pH, temperature, bed load movement, and flows (all critical factors concerning salmonid production) on the S. fork Siletz River.
ACTION ITEMS: Turbidity will be related to total suspended solids and flows will be related to turbidity, to allow monitoring of sediment movement during various flows.
Temperature will be measured above, below, and within the old Valsetz lake site to monitor whether critical temperatures are being reached.
Channel morphology is being monitored using scour chains and ODFW cross section methodology. Scour chains are also being used to monitor bed load movement around summer steelhead spawning areas.
FUNDING: This is a voluntary project by a private landowner.
WORK SCHEDULE: Monitor during 1996 through 1998.
ODF 42 - NORTH FORK COQUILLE MONITORING ASSESSMENT
BACKGROUND: Menasha is conducting several long term monitoring projects in the North Fork basin of the Coquille River. These projects include fish presence / extent surveys, aquatic habitat surveys, salmon spawning surveys and some temperature monitoring. This work was started in the summer of 1993.
GOAL: To determine and map the presence and extent of fish use within Menasha ownership.
OBJECTIVE: Using ODF&W protocol conduct aquatic habitat surveys within the north fork area.
ACTION ITEMS: Spawning Surveys:
Conduct spawning surveys on four tributaries Giles, Wapati, 15B, and Little North Fork. Two streams were first surveyed in 1994 - 95, the other two were began in 1995 - 96. In addition, spawning surveys are being conducted on the Middle Creek sub-basin of the North Fork. The surveys will continue for a minimum of two coho life cycles.
Temperature Monitoring:
Placement of three water temperature monitors and one air temperature monitor along the North Fork. These devices are deployed in June and are recovered in September. This monitoring will continue for a minimum of two more years.
FUNDING: This is a voluntary measure funded by Menasha.
WORK SCHEDULE:
MONITORING: Complete mapping of the presence and extent of fish use within Menasha ownership will be completed within the next two years. The upper north fork area within Menasha ownership is approximately 50 percent mapped.
ODF 43 - SOUTH FORK COOS RIVER MONITORING ASSESSMENT
BACKGROUND: Several fish presence/extent surveys have been completed on this river. A complete extent survey was done on both Salmon, and Burma Creeks. A partial extent survey was completed on mink Creek. Each of these creeks has a complete aquatic habitat survey completed on the mainstems.
GOAL: To identify fish presence and the extent of fish use for this basin.
OBJECTIVE: Conduct fish presence and salmon spawning surveys (spawning surveys monitored for two coho lifecycles).
ACTION ITEMS: Complete surveys.
FUNDING: Private funding.
WORK SCHEDULE: Completion scheduled for 1997.
ODF 44 - COOS RIVER MAINSTEM MONITORING ASSESSMENT
BACKGROUND: This is a voluntary action conducted by Menasha. Areas of fish presence and the extent of fish use for portions of this basin will be identified. Scheduled habitat surveys will provide information on the adequacy of habitat in these streams.
GOAL: To monitor and protect these watersheds.
OBJECTIVE: To have a positive impact on stream restoration and salmon recovery.
ACTION ITEMS: Goat Creek - Fish use has been mapped, an aquatic habitat survey is scheduled for the summer of 1996. In addition a salmon spawning survey that began in 1994 will continue for a minimum of two coho lifecycles.
Davis Slough Area - Six fish presence and extent surveys have been completed in this area, all on unnamed tributaries to the slough. Four additional creeks are scheduled to have extent surveys completed during the summer of 1996.
Coalbank Slough Area - Coalbank creek is scheduled for a fish presence and extent survey, and an aquatic habitat survey during the summer of 1996.
FUNDING: Private funding.
WORK SCHEDULE:
ODF 45 - COQUILLE, SILETZ AND SIXES WATERSHED MONITORING
BACKGROUND: This is a voluntary long-term monitoring project implemented by Georgia Pacific in the Coquille, Siletz and Sixes basins to determine current conditions and to ascertain trends over time. The project began in 1994 and will continue indefinitely.
The monitoring plans were reviewed by multiple state and federal agencies prior to implementation. In addition local watershed councils and associations were given the opportunity to review and comment on them.
GOAL: It is the design and purpose of the general monitoring plan to evaluate the current conditions of the aquatic habitat, develop baseline data, ascertain trends over time and work with state and federal agency officials to improve and enhance the fish populations and recreational opportunities in these watersheds
OBJECTIVE: Nine in-stream parameters will be measured to quantify current cold water fish habitat:
The data collected through this effort will be used to prioritize sub-basins where stream enhancement activities will be useful.
ACTION ITEMS: Stream temperature monitoring will be conducted within the watershed as well as some air temperatures. McNeil sediment samples will be utilized to indicate fine sediment levels in stream systems
FUNDING: This project is being conducted and funded by Georgia Pacific.
WORK SCHEDULE: The project began in 1994 and will continue indefinitely.
MONITORING: All data is and will be shared with ODFW.
ODF 46 - FISH PASSAGE SURVEYS (Weyerhaeuser)
BACKGROUND: The Coos Watershed Association and Weyerhaeuser have completed analysis of all "major" anadromous fish culverts in the Coos River Watershed for problems with passage
GOAL: To improve anadromous fish passage within the Coos River Watershed.
OBJECTIVE: This project has two objectives:
ACTION ITEMS: Through the combination of the two objectives culverts which have the greatest negative impact to fish passage will be prioritized for enhancement work.
FUNDING: This is a voluntary action with funding provided by private landowner.
WORK SCHEDULE: Culvert survey completed, stream conditions to be completed in 1996, begin enhancement work.
ODF 47 - COOS, MILLICOMA AND UPPER SIUSLAW RIVERS WATERSHED ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND: Weyerhaeuser is completing watershed analysis for all of its ownership in Oregon. This analysis follows modified protocol used by the State of Washington under Washington's Forest Practice Act.
GOAL: To complete watershed analysis of all Weyerhaeuser ownership.
OBJECTIVE:
ACTION ITEMS: Analysis is completed for the East Fork Millicoma River, and several basins in the McKenzie and upper Willamette systems. Analysis is underway on the William's River watershed, and the upper Siuslaw River. And analysis is planned for the remainder to the Millicoma Tree Farm over the next three years.
FUNDING: Private
WORK SCHEDULE: Complete watershed analysis by the year 2000.
MONITORING: The action plans include monitoring actions to determine both implementation and effectiveness of prescriptions.
ODF 48 - SOUTH FORK SILETZ WATERSHED ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND: This is a voluntary action by Boise Cascade Corp.
GOAL: To assess the geomorphic vulnerabilities of the system, determine stream health and assess any road concerns.
OBJECTIVE: To survey all roads within Boise ownership to identify any conditions that may adversely affect water quality.
ACTION ITEMS: For problems identified through the analysis complete sidecast removal and culvert replacement on all identified problems.
FUNDING: Funding for project provide by private landowner. ODFW provides technical assistance and some data analysis.
WORK SCHEDULE: Analysis has been completed. Side-cast removal and culvert replacement on all identified problems scheduled for 1996 to 2000.
MONITORING: See ODF 42.
ODF 49 -ECOLA CREEK WATERSHED ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND: Cavenham Forest Industries ( now Willamette Ind.) owns approximately 12,000 acres of forest land in Ecola Creek watershed, east of Cannon Beach, Oregon. Ecola Creek is a source of domestic water for Cannon Beach and provides habitat for native salmon. Until recently there had been little operational activity on these lands, but much of the timber is now approaching harvest age. Cavenham has been meeting with a citizens committee appointed by the City of Cannon Beach to facilitate on going communication regarding community concerns and company plans. In conjunction with this process Cavenham initiated a watershed analysis of Ecola Creek.
GOAL: Conduct watershed analysis of Ecola Creek.
OBJECTIVE: Identification of sensitive or high risk areas, requiring special care in management decisions and operations, and the collection of benchmark data so that impacts of future operations can be accurately determined.
ACTION ITEMS: Riparian function, i.e., the capability of riparian vegetation to provide shading and large woody debris, was examined, as were the condition of the existing road system, risk of flooding and risk of up-slope mass soil movement.
As a result of its studies and planning at Ecola Creek, Cavenham has began to implement changes on the ground. The company is pursuing the replacement of large culverts, engineering to accommodate a 100 year flood event as the standard for road and drainage construction and reconstruction projects.
In addition, in cooperation with ODFW, stream habitat enhancement work has begun at Ecola Creek, with the placement of large spruce in the main channel. The company has also begun trial planting of conifer under the canopy of hardwood dominated riparian areas to improve the long term potential for large woody debris in the stream.
FUNDING: Private.
WORK SCHEDULE:
ODF 50 - KILCHIS WATERSHED ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND: This project is currently in development, it will build upon information developed from other projects within this basin.
GOAL: To develop a template for watershed analyses in Oregon.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the assessment include the following factors: sediment input (surface erosion and slides) processing, flow and bay sedimentation.
ACTION ITEMS: Coordination and development of an action plan.
FUNDING: Funding is currently under development for this project. Funding will come from NEP and ODF.
WORK SCHEDULE: The assessment is scheduled to begin during late 1996 or 1997.
ODF 51 - PALMER CREEK ACCLIMATION PONDS
BACKGROUND: A voluntary project by Georgia Pacific at the request of ODFW
GOAL: Design, develop and construct acclimation ponds for the hatchery Siletz River winter steelhead and potential hatchery coho near Palmer Creek.
OBJECTIVE: To create a terminal hatchery fishery in the Siletz River that will give greater access to hatchery fish, while at the same time allow for wild fish to spawn in the upper drainage with less disturbance.
ACTION ITEMS: Construction began in 1995 and is scheduled to be completed in 1996.
FUNDING: Private
WORK SCHEDULE: Construction began in 1995 and is scheduled to be completed in 1996.
MONITORING: Successful acclimation of steelhead and coho smolts and a successful terminal hatchery fisher on the Siletz.
ODF 52 - SOUTH COAST TECHNICAL ADVISORY TEAM
BACKGROUND: This is a coordinating group of agencies and landowners in the south coast area which identify and prioritize habitat restorations within the area.
GOAL:
OBJECTIVE:
ACTION ITEMS:
FUNDING:
WORK SCHEDULE:
MONITORING:
ODF 53 - OREGON PROFESSIONAL LOGGER PROGRAM
BACKGROUND: The American Forests and Paper Association has adopted a national program designed to promote sound forestry practices on member company lands as well as assist in the same effort on non-industry lands. The Sustainable Forestry Initiative also contains an element dealing with logger education and training. This element of the Initiative envisions logger training and education programs within each state. In Oregon the training program is offered by the Associated Oregon Loggers, Inc. (AOL).
In January 1994 the AOL Board of Directors established a standing committee of members to formalize and expand upon past training efforts. Meetings were held with cooperators such as the Oregon Department of Forestry in developing the program. At the Spring 1995 meeting of the Board of Directors of AOL, the Professional Oregon Logger Program was approved for implementation.
Highlights of the first 15 months of the program include:
GOAL: To encourage professional growth and knowledge to advance forest stewardship in timber harvesting.
OBJECTIVE: Support practices that meet present needs without compromising healthy forests for future generations. This means reforesting, growing and harvesting trees for useful products with the conservation of soil, water, wildlife and other resources.
ACTION ITEMS: To earn Professional Logger status, a company must accumulate 32 credits within a 12 month period. Completion of seminars in any of the pre-approved subject areas by any owner, or key supervisor qualifies for program credit. Thereafter, 16 credits every 24 months maintains the company's status.
FUNDING: Privately funded.
WORK SCHEDULE: This measure is in place.
MONITORING: AOL monitors the training, issues acknowledgments, stickers, letters, and maintains training records. AOL tracks participants to award certification.
ODF 54 - FOREST RESOURCE TRUST
BACKGROUND: A loan or capitol venture investment program to convert underproducing and non-stocked non-industrial forest land into healthy forests. Provides up to 100 percent of the cost of establishing a new stand of trees. Once a landowner accepts the terms of the Forest Resource Trust 200 year contract funds are made available to start afforestation and reforestation. The trust is repaid when the landowner harvests. Landowners who choose not to harvest for 200 years are not required to pay anything back.
GOAL: The mission of the Forest Resource Trust is to expand the forest land base by helping people who own nonstocked and underproducing forest land convert those tracts into productive healthy forests.
OBJECTIVE: The program has five key objectives:
ACTION ITEMS: This program is currently in place and is administered by the Oregon Department of Forestry Assistance Program. Staff is working to develop additional funding to fund a back log of approved projects.
FUNDING: Funds come from the state legislature and private investments and donations to form a public-private partnership to address the afforestation and reforestation of underproducing small woodlands.
WORK SCHEDULE: Established in 1993, first projects approved in 1995.
MONITORING: Funded projects are inspected and monitored by the Oregon Department of Forestry Service Foresters for compliance for 200 years or the trees are harvested and replanted.
ODF 55 - STEWARDSHIP INCENTIVE PROGRAM (SIP)
BACKGROUND: Federal cost share program which reimburses Non-industrial Private Forest Landowners up to 75 percent of the cost of resource protection and enhancement projects.
GOAL: To assist individual landowners develop and implement integrated resource management strategies on their forest lands.
OBJECTIVE: Objectives of SIP are to assist non-industrial private forest landowners:
ACTION ITEMS: The program is administered on the state level by ODF and on the national level by the USDA-FS. Landowners must have an ODF approved stewardship plan in place before being approved for other SIP practices. All SIP projects must be maintained for 10 years.
FUNDING: SIP was authorized by Congress in the 1990 and 1996 Farm Bills. The amount of funding available is authorized by congress annually.
WORK SCHEDULE: Individual landowner projects are approved monthly based on program priorities and available funds. Landowner sign-up is continuous at county USDA- Farm Services Agency (FSA) offices. Stewardship plans are developed by private or public resource professionals working with landowners. Other projects are develop jointly by landowners and ODF service foresters. Projects are inspected upon completion by service foresters to assure compliance with the project specifications.
MONITORING: SIP projects are monitored by service foresters during and after completion, and a random five percent of completed projects are monitored annually for program compliance and required landowner maintenance by an ODF staff coordinator.
ODF 56 - LANDOWNER STEWARDSHIP AWARD
BACKGROUND: The Landowner Stewardship Award is a cooperative recognition by ODF and ODFW to forest landowners to recognize the values and contributions made by them to the stewardship of fish and wildlife.
GOAL: To provide recognition and incentive to landowners who voluntarily want to improve salmon habitat.
OBJECTIVE: To provide a public demonstration by ODF and ODFW that the agencies recognize and value contributions made by landowners to stewardship of fish and wildlife.
ACTION ITEMS: Program is in place.
FUNDING: ODF and ODFW department budgets.
WORK SCHEDULE: Present awards in the fall of the year.
MONITORING: Annual presentation of awards.
ODF 61 - ANALYSIS OF RACK CONCEPT FOR DEBRIS FLOWS
BACKGROUND: LWD delivered by debris flows can be important for fish habitat. However, information that clearly defines a prescription to address this issue is still lacking. The probability of any given area of steep forest land failing is extremely low, the probability of a debris torrent, flow or flood to pass through and recruit wood from riparian areas of certain small Type N streams is relatively high. The wood recruited from such areas may be significant.
Thus, by identifying certain Small Type N streams that are collectors for multiple debris slides/flows one can reasonably retain vegetation near the confluence of the Type N and Type F in anticipation of retained trees providing LWD delivery. For example, a small Type N that drains mostly steep forest land (> 70% slope) with a basin size of 100 acres or larger has a much higher likelihood of hosting the passage of an event than a stream draining a 40 acre basin.
GOAL: To study the feasibility of identifying Type N streams that are very likely to carry debris flows to Type F streams and evaluate the best prescription for retaining trees with the highest probability for delivery.
OBJECTIVE: To identify the specifications of small Type N streams that are very likely to carry debris flows to Type F streams and to determine where the best site for tree retention might be along such streams.
ACTION ITEMS: Develop a committee to review the results of the Storms of 1996 Monitoring project (ODF 13). Using this information and any other appropriate information the committee will asses the feasibility of identifying Type N streams that are likely to carry debris flows to Type F streams. And through this analysis make recommendations for developing prescriptions for retaining trees with the highest probability for delivery.
FUNDING: All resources necessary to implement this project are currently funded and in place.
WORK SCHEDULE: Implement committee review fall of 1997.
PHASE 2 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
ODF 2(B) - STATE FOREST LANDS ROAD ASSESSMENT AND EXPEDITED REMEDIATION IN THE TILLAMOOK STATE FOREST
BACKGROUND: Refer to phase 1
GOAL: Refer to phase 1
OBJECTIVE: Refer to phase 1
ACTION ITEMS: Refer to phase 1
FUNDING: Storm damage portion (FEMA and District storm-related costs):
For the Phase 2 portion of this measure $3 million dollars is available for the 97-99 biennium pending approval.
Road improvement program (Phase 2):
The Department is requesting authorization to spend an additional $3 million dollars and add 6.5 FTEs as part of a program option package for the 97-99 biennium to support this portion of the program. The revenue to implement this project is available awaiting authorization.
WORK SCHEDULE: Refer to phase 1
MONITORING: Refer to phase 1
ODF 24(B) - STATE FOREST LANDS ROAD STREAM HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND INSTREAM PROJECTS
BACKGROUND: Refer to phase 1
GOAL: Refer to phase 1
OBJECTIVE: Refer to phase 1
ACTION ITEMS: Refer to phase 1
FUNDING: The Department is requesting authorization to spend an additional $1.15 million (from state lands revenues) during each of the next three biennia in support of these projects. Of this the Northwest Oregon Area has requested $.75 million part of which will provide funding for an ODFW fisheries habitat biologist to assist with the implementation of habitat improvement contracts and a wildlife biologist to assist with implementation of the forest plan.
WORK SCHEDULE: Refer to Phase 1.
MONITORING: Refer to Phase 1.
ODF 32(B) - FISH PRESENCE SURVEY (OAR 629-635-200(11))
BACKGROUND: Refer to phase 1.
GOAL: Refer to phase 1.
OBJECTIVE: Refer to phase 1.
ACTION ITEMS: Refer to phase 1.
FUNDING: Phase 2 of this measure included as a part of the Governor's budget includes $503,965 dollars and .5 FTE for the 1997-99 biennium. The estimated cost of completing this project work is an additional $1+ million.
WORK SCHEDULE: Refer to phase 1.
MONITORING: Refer to phase 1.
ODF 57 - ENHANCEMENT OF ODF MONITORING PROGRAM
BACKGROUND: Monitoring of the current forest practices rule assumptions and on-the-ground results of the rules has been a key concern of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). This enhancement of the monitoring program will use additional resources to focus on these concerns.
GOAL: Reduce the time frame to evaluate key questions related to the water protection rules.
OBJECTIVE: Assess the effectiveness of the forest practice BMPs in relation to small stream protection, mass wasting, changes in hydrologic conditions and cumulative effects.
ACTION ITEMS: ODF currently has several monitoring programs in place this measure will evaluate where additional resources can expedite results within the appropriate current programs to achieve the goal.
FUNDING: The forest practice program has been relatively successful in attracting grant moneys for cooperative monitoring projects over the past 3 - 5 years. This proposal would increase the other funds authorization to pursue additional grants in the amount of $200,000.
WORK SCHEDULE: 1997 secure additional funding.
MONITORING: An annual monitoring report is required by rule to be presented to the Board of Forestry.
ODF 58 - LIABILITY LIMITS FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS
BACKGROUND: Two perceived concerns about legal liability have prevented willing landowners from improving fish and wildlife habitat on their property. One concern is about the potential liability for property damage (of others) that might result from habitat improvement projects. A second concern is about tort liability that may result from the use of the land by volunteers or others that may be doing habitat improvement projects. This action is to secure legislation that limits property damage liability for landowners completing habitat enhancement projects following guidelines established by ODFW, GWEB and/or ODF and that limits tort liability for landowners that allow volunteers or others to use their property for habitat improvement efforts.
GOAL: Provide incentives for landowner/operators to allow fish and wildlife enhancement projects to be developed on their lands..
OBJECTIVE: Increase the number of fish and wildlife enhancement projects.
ACTION ITEMS: Propose Senate Bill 108 to the 1997 Legislature and secure its passage.
FUNDING: No funding necessary.
WORK SCHEDULE: Introduce legislation to legislature in the 1997 session as Senate Bill 108.
Work to secure passage before end of session.
ODF 59 - INTEGRATED FOREST ASSESSMENT
BACKGROUND: To meet the objectives of the Governor's salmon recovery plan, additional information will be included in the Departments Forest Assessment Project (described below) to better understand the tradeoffs between salmon habitat and other resource uses of Oregon's forests. This work will answer questions about the implications of current and alternative policies and forest management activities for sustainability of long-term productivity of Oregon's salmon runs.
The purpose of the Forest Assessment Project will be to provide a basis for considering forest policy actions within the purview of the Board of Forestry (BOF). The Assessment will provide both factual background about conditions and trends of Oregon's forests and analytical tools with which to examine scenarios of the future development of the state's forests under alternative forestry policies. The Assessment will use the criteria and indicators from the Santiago Declaration as the basis to describe forest conditions.
The assessment report will examine a specific set of policy questions reflective of current and anticipated resource issues. It will include an explicit analysis of the implications of a continuation of current BOF policies. Alternative policy scenarios will be examined at the request of the BOF. This information will support deliberations of the Board of Forestry in developing action plans for the next Forestry Program for Oregon.
GOAL: To answer questions about the implications of current and alternative policies and forest management activities for sustainability of long-term productivity of Oregon's salmon runs.
OBJECTIVE: Tentative objectives for this portion of the Forest Assessment will be:
ACTION ITEMS: Integration of CSRI into the forest assessment project will be a collaborative effort. Staff will interact with researchers and other monitoring and research questions, and analyze collected information.
This effort will include gathering and analyzing information about riparian habitat over relatively large areas. Analysis necessary to provide information for improvement of salmon habitat and to integrate with other elements of the Forest Assessment will be undertaken.
FUNDING: Funding of $275,000 has been approved in the Governor's budget for this portion of the Forest Assessment Project. These dollars will be used to fund one FTE, hardware/software and additional data gathering for streams.
WORK SCHEDULE: Implement in 1997.
MONITORING: Completion of Forestry Program for Oregon, July, 2001.
ODF 60 - ELIMINATION OF THE 25,000 BF EXEMPTION ON HARVEST TAX
BACKGROUND: Currently timber harvest taxes are not paid on the first 25,000 bd. ft. of timber harvested on an annual basis. This proposal would eliminate this exemption and use the increased revenue to help fund the Departments Forestry Assistance program.
The Forestry Assistance program administers non industrial forest landowner incentive programs such as the Stewardship Incentive Program (SIP) and the Forest Resource Trust program (these programs are described in separate management measures). The Forestry Assistance program is administered on the ground by Department Service Foresters, and revenue generated from this proposal will be used to fund these positions.
GOAL: To provide technical assistance to non-industrial private forest landowners.
OBJECTIVE: To provide technical assistance to non-industrial private forest landowners through current cost share and Trust programs.
ACTION ITEMS: Propose legislative concept.
FUNDING: Funding of $489,242 dollars has been approved in the Governor's budget. From this four service foresters would be funded and a quarter FTE for clerical support would be provided.
WORK SCHEDULE: Implement 1997-99 biennium.
MONITORING: Annual reporting of accomplishments.
Appendix A - OCSRI Road Inventory Protocol
Final Draft (12-30-96)
Introduction
Timely inspection and subsequent maintenance or repair activity on forest roads can greatly reduce the potential for sediment to enter streams. The Department of Forestry is committed to working cooperatively with forest landowners to reduce erosion from forest roads. This will first require an assessment of forest roads for erosion and possible sediment delivery to streams. Analysis of erosion risk by landowners and setting priorities for repair are the next step, followed by maintenance or repair activity. A suggested database format for data collection is nearing completion.
This publication describes a protocol that land managers can use to provide information needed for prioritizing road management decisions, especially maintenance and repair activities. This protocol has been redesigned to be the first part of the Oregon Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative (OCSRI) Road Erosion and Risk Reduction Project. Road inventories should first be conducted in areas where roads pose higher risk to anadromous fish and their habitats. A road management guidebook that will provide cost-effective technical options for reduction of road erosion hazard should be completed in about one year. This inventory is designed as a means to identify roads of concern and to prioritize repair activity, but is not meant to collect all information necessary for those repairs.
| Three major areas of concern | Three major elements of inventory |
| |
|
Background
The Department of Forestry, with the Forest Engineering Department at Oregon State University, developed a road sediment monitoring protocol. The monitoring procedures were further refined using input from forest landowners, agency personnel, and other interested parties. Monitoring surveys of drainage systems on over 200 miles of forest roads on industrial, non-industrial, and state lands in western Oregon were completed in 1995. This monitoring found that most surface drainage systems on roads are performing well, with two areas of possible concern:
Another road hazard assessment project, conducted cooperatively by ODF and several private landowners looked at landslide and washout hazard. Road-related landslides and washouts are the focus of ongoing ODF monitoring. Past ODF monitoring has shown most road landslides related to steep sidecast, though road drainage may also be an important factor. All of this monitoring and assessment information was used in development of this protocol.
Methods
Useful information requires inspection of entire road systems on-the-ground. This protocol requires a minimum level of training. Information is collected through direct measurements, combined measurement/estimations, and direct observations. Road junctions and ownership boundaries provide the starting points for these surveys. Information is either directly entered into a computer or data logger, or recorded on forms for subsequent entry into a relational database.
Tools and Measurements
A vehicle (truck or utility rig) is preferred for road access, though a mountain bike can also be used. A single person can collect the necessary data. Distance measurements are made by traveling along the road. We recommend using a distance measuring instrument (DMI) or other device that records vehicle travel in feet (a normal vehicle odometer alone is not very inaccurate). Impassable roads are measured with a hip chain (string box). A clinometer is used to measure road gradient, culvert gradient, and other slopes. Short distance measurement require a scaled rod of staff and a measuring (loggers) tape. Much of the data collected is determined by direct observation. An ODF stream classification map (on USGS 15 minute quad maps) and/or other maps showing roads and streams is also needed.
Information Needed
Priority information needed includes:
General Road Characteristics
Each road should be identified by name or number, according to the system normally used by the landowner, generally classified as follows:
Figure 1. Typical Road Inventory Features
Road segments:
1: Drains to XRD (A)
2: Drains to XRD (B)
3: Drains to CSX (C)
4: Drains to CSX (C)
5: Drains to XRD (E)
6: Drains to XRD (E)
7: Drains off sample plot, due to change in grade
Stream Crossings
Stream crossings are an extremely important part of the road system. Improperly functioning stream crossings can result in loss of the roadway through washouts and channel diversions and can also be a barrier to fish movement. At each crossing structure, information should be collected by getting out of the vehicle and taking measurements, usually at the inlet end, and by observations from the road surface of the outlet end of the structure.
The following information should be collected at each stream crossing (figure 2):
Additional measurements are needed for Type F stream crossings, especially for crossings where fish use changes from Type F to Type N, and other structures where fish use is expected, >as follows:
Figure 2. Stream crossing culvert with key dimensions.
Surface drainage
The source area, referred to as a "segment," is the length of road draining to any one surface drainage location. The information collected along each segment is designed to identify potential for severe erosion. A "relief" is any location where a collected water leaves the roadway. Properly functioning outsloped roads have no reliefs. Of special concern are the lengths of road segments draining directly to streams.
Source Area
The following observations/measurements are made to identify symptoms of high erosion on road segments. As best, describe the condition of the entire segment:
Relief
Locations where concentrated water leaves the road surface can include cross drainage culverts; live stream crossings; waterbars; rolling dips; grade reversals (drainage divides); natural saddles and ditch-outs. The survey will collect the following information on drainage characteristics and potential sediment delivery at all structured relief (culvert) locations, and at other locations only where there are problems:
Sidecast/landslides (only for high risk segments)
High risk segments include sidecast constructed roads where sidecast related landslides are reasonably expected. Depending on georegion, geology, and soil, and drainage, the natural slopes for high risk segments be as gentle as 50 percent (in wet areas with weak sidecast and drainage problems. In areas with well drained materials with uniform slopes and no or very limited signs of old slides high risk segments exist when natural slopes exceed 65 or 70 percent. High risk segments are also those which have experienced past sidecast related landslides. For the high risk segments only, the following information should be collected:
Options
Landowners are encouraged to use this protocol for road management purposes other than erosion hazard reduction. Possible uses include routine maintenance and surfacing decisions, which require additional information on surface condition. Global positioning systems may be used to help map information from the survey, though can result in a significant reduction in productivity for steep areas with canopy cover, especially when the canopy is wet. Direct data entry into a field data-logger as it is being collected can be very efficient. The inventory person or crew can also be used to mark culverts and to flag locations needing immediate maintenance attention.
Decision Making
Immediate action should be taken on forest practices compliance related issues. These may include: failing stream crossing pipes; non-functional cross drainage; active gullies down the road; and sidecast beginning to slide downslope.
Inventory information should be entered into relational databases. An example database is attached. To help landowners make risk reduction priority decisions, a road management guidebook is being developed in cooperation with practicing road engineers and the Forest Engineering Department at Oregon State University.
Database for Road Inventory Protocol
Road:
Stream X:
For Fish Only:
Source Area:
Relief:
Sidecast (high risk segments only):
Appendix B - Guidance For OCSRI Measure ODF8
Riparian Hardwood Conversions
Within Coastal Salmon Core Areas
No single action by a government agency or individual will restore declining salmon and trout populations, but a cooperative effort, sustained over time, can succeed. Oregon's Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative (OCSRI) is an effort focused on preserving and restoring native coastal salmon populations and preventing the need for a federal threatened or endangered listing of coho salmon under the federal Endangered Species Act.
The Forest Practices water protection rules stipulate that streams that have adequate conifer stocking require that the standard target or active management target be retained within the riparian management area (RMA). However, where the existing streamside stand is too sparse or contains too few live conifers to maintain fish, wildlife, and water quality resources over time, operators conducting forest management on streamside sites that are hardwood dominated may apply alternative vegetation retention prescription #2 (OAR 629-640-300).
The standard riparian hardwood conversion guidelines as specified by OAR 629-640-300(4) are as follows:
Evaluate the stand within the RMA and, where they exist, segregate segments (200 feet or more in length) that are well-stocked with conifer, as identified from an aerial photograph, from the ground or through other appropriate means. The general vegetation retention prescription for vegetation retention shall be applied to these segments.
For the remaining portion of the RMA that generally does not have adequate conifer stocking, the RMA shall be divided into conversion blocks and retention blocks.
Within conversion blocks the operator shall retain:
Within retention blocks the operator shall retain:
Riparian hardwood conversions (alternative prescription #2) may apply to streamside stands that are capable of growing conifers but where conifer stocking is currently low and unlikely to improve because of competition from brush or hardwoods. The intent of the alternative prescription is to provide adequate stream shade, woody debris, and bank stability in the for the future while creating conditions in the streamside area that will result in quick establishment of a new and healthy stand.
Purpose
Under this measure, OFIC forest landowners have voluntarily agreed to additional review of proposed hardwood conversions through site specific plans within CSRI Salmon Core Areas. The purpose of the additional voluntary review associated with the site-specific plan process is to encourage the design and implementation of riparian hardwood conversion projects that minimize the potential short-term risks to depressed salmonid populations. This guidance provides specific details for the administration and implementation of this voluntary effort.
Administration And Implementation
Pursuant to the Forest Practices Act, a riparian hardwood conversion may be applied only if all of the following criteria are met:
The assumption for this prescription is that many streamside areas have been impacted by previous management resulting in hardwood or brush conditions, though the site would naturally have been a conifer site. For the prescription to be implemented correctly, it is important that such sites be properly identified, and evidence exists that future large woody debris supplies within the watershed are limited. Successful application of the strategy requires the landowner to accurately identify conifer sites in preparing for this prescription. Thus, in the written plan the operator must explain how the determination of a site as a conifer site was made. Such evidence can include topographic and soil features (steep bank with well drained soil); substantial evidence that conifer occupied the site based upon the presence of conifer stumps and/or snags; or other vegetation information. This prescription should not be used at sites where:
Proposed riparian hardwood conversions by OFIC forest landowners that occur within Salmon Core Areas will be subject to additional review through a site-specific plan to be submitted by the operator. Other forest landowners, such as small woodland owners, will be encouraged to voluntarily develop site-specific plans for riparian hardwood conversion projects proposed within Salmon Core Areas.
The State Forester will review plans in consultation with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), and will approve the voluntary plan if:
OR
Factors that may need to be considered in the plan include, but are not limited to:
If water quality limitations exist, the site-specific voluntary plan must describe how the prescription will prevent additional impairment to identified water quality limited parameters. The site-specific voluntary plan must contain protection measures that exceed the standards established within the alternative prescription contained within the forest practice rules (OAR 629-640-300 (4). For example, modifications to the alternative prescription contained within the forest practice rules that may be necessary to minimize potential short-term risks could include, but are not limited to:
Coordination
The ODF Forest Practices inspection program will be used for the administration and implementation of this voluntary measure. When a notification is received proposing a riparian hardwood conversion, the State Forester must determine if it is located within a Salmon Core Area. Maps (1:100,000 USGS Hydrologic Units for coastal basins) of contemporary core areas of the spawning and rearing distributions of salmon and steelhead in Oregon coastal river basins will be available for this purpose at all ODF western Oregon district offices. Salmon Core Areas are defined as reaches or watersheds within individual coastal basins that are judged to be of critical importance to the sustenance of salmon populations that inhabit those basins.
The DEQ's 1994/1996 303(d) list of Water Quality Limited Waterbodies will be available to all ODF western Oregon district offices to be used in identifying temperature limited streams within Salmon Core Areas.
Consultations with ODFW will be necessary for proposed riparian hardwood conversions within salmon core areas. Additionally, the State Forester will inspect the site with the operator, ODFW biologist, and any other individual(s) who may have information necessary or beneficial to the decision-making process. The purpose of the on-site inspection is to develop a thorough understanding of the proposed operation, discuss how wildlife and aquatic habitat and water quality parameters may be affected by the proposed operation, and to discuss protection requirements or alternate practices that could be applied at the site to best meet the intent of this action.
The State Forester will inform the operator of the factors that will need to be addressed in the written plan. In general, written plans for site-specific prescriptions should include:
Compliance
All riparian hardwood conversions shall be conducted in compliance with existing forest practice rules; nothing within this measure exempts operators from meeting the requirements of the statutes and rules stipulated within the Forest Practices Act. Compliance exists when an operator conducts an operation and follows the provisions in the approved written plan. Non-compliance exists when the operator fails to follow the written plan. Enforcement action for failure to follow the written plan will be taken under OAR 629-24-113(5). The State Forester will determine compliance with this guidance during routine inspections both, while the operation is being conducted and upon completion of the operation.
An unsatisfactory condition exists any time the provisions of a written plan are not or have not been followed. The FPF should provide a written statement if an unsatisfactory condition exists, but damage has not yet occurred and there is still an opportunity for the operator to comply with the written plan. A violation exists any time there is an unsatisfactory condition and damage has occurred or there is no longer an opportunity to comply with the provisions of the written plan.
Monitoring
Implementation and effectiveness of riparian hardwood conversions will be assessed as part of the Forest Practices Monitoring Program (management measure ODF 10), Monitoring of Riparian Management Areas (management measure ODF11), and Monitoring Water Temperature Protection BMPs (management measure ODF14). These monitoring management measures will be scheduled over the next five years.
Specifically, the department shall report on the number and type of riparian hardwood conversions, an evaluation of the success of the applied protection levels, recommended changes to protection levels, and research needed to further evaluate the protection levels.
Appendix C - Oregon Department of Forestry
Chemical Monitoring Protocol
June 1996 Draft
The attached protocol has been developed to test compliance and effectiveness of Best Management Practices (BMPs) in protecting water quality during aerial applications of forest pesticides. This document describes the Oregon Department of Forestry's (ODF) approach and provides protocols that can be utilized in other monitoring programs. ODF has coordinated with private landowners and community water managers in developing the protocol.
Effectiveness and Implementation Questions
Need: Forest pesticides are commonly used to aid in the re-establishment, growth and harvest of conifer species through out Oregon. The Oregon Department of Forestry is revising forest practice rules regarding chemical application. Effectiveness of these rules in protecting water quality and riparian vegetation needs to be tested.
Monitoring Strategy
The program is composed of effectiveness and compliance monitoring (Table 1). Effectiveness monitoring will consist of a water quality sampling program and community water manager cooperation. Compliance monitoring will consist of visual observation during the operation and a follow-up vegetation survey, investigation of public complaints, and Pesticide Analytical and Response Center (PARC) interagency investigations.
The Oregon Department of Forestry will implement an overall monitoring program on a representative sample of operations across the state after the new rules have been adopted. The program will consist of observation, vegetation surveys and water quality sampling. Use of the water quality monitoring protocol by other parties will be promoted by ODF.
Monitoring Focus
The Oregon Department of Forestry is committed to implementing a project to test the effectiveness and implementation of the forest practice rules in protecting riparian function and water quality during aerial application of pesticides. The program will prioritize monitoring efforts based on past findings, toxicity criteria, chemical use, and regional distribution of chemical applications over the past two years. The program will coordinate with private landowners in situations where the landowner has existing plans to monitor. The ODF will seek additional funding for effectiveness monitoring to augment the current monitoring budget.
Table 1. Forest Chemical Monitoring Strategy
| Why | What | Who | Where | When | How | Reports |
| BMP Effectiveness | Cooperative operator/ community water system manager monitoring | Landowner, applicator, and/or water system manager | Domestic use surface water downstream from application | Timing agreed to by operator and water system manager | Standardized water sampling protocol to be developed by ODF | Results reported to ODF |
| Same | Operator/ODF water sampling | ODF collects and analyzes unless landowner is allready sampling | Type F or D streams immediately downstream from application | When required by ODF through predetermined criteria | Standardized water sampling protocol to be developed by ODF | Annual reports by ODF |
| BMP Compliance Monitoring | inspections on high priority operations | FPFs | In or near high spray units | During application | visual observation of application and spray deposition, checking of application records and vegetation surveys | Case Brief, if violation found, summary in program final report |
| Same | Public complaint investigations | FPFs | Depends on nature of complaint | Begin investigation within 24 hours | Interviews, application records, visible vegetation effects (herbicides), possibly water or foliage samples | Complaint investigation form |
| Same | PARC interagency investigations | ODF, ODA, DEQ, OHD, OR-OSHA | Depends on nature of complaint | ODF will notify PARC within 24 hours of report and begin investigation if forest practice rules involved | Interviews, application records, visible vegetation effects (herbicides), possibly water or foliage samples | PARC annual reports |
Past Findings
Water Sampling Results: Forest chemical monitoring has taken place in Washington and Oregon over the past 16 years. Results from three different studies indicate that the majority of the 24-hour-average composite samples contained either no detectable residue or less than 1.0 parts per billion (ppb) of the applied chemical (Figure 1). From 1980 to 1987, the ODF implemented a water sampling program to assess the effectiveness of the forest practice rules in protecting the waters of the state (Oregon Department of Forestry, Forest Practices Monitoring Program, 1992). A representative subset of total chemical applications was monitored totaling 153 water samples. Of 153 samples analyzed, 86 percent (132 samples) resulted in no detectable chemical residue. A subsequent study was carried out from 1989 to 1990 by the ODF to assess herbicide applications again. Of 52 samples analyzed, 83 percent (43 samples) resulted in no detectable herbicide.
The Washington Timber Fish and Wildlife Program (TFW) intensively studied six monitoring operations during 1991 (Rashin and Graver, 1993). Of six samples analyzed, 83 percent (5 samples) contained 0.13 to 0.56 ppb of the applied herbicide. Results of these three studies indicate that under most conditions, chemical concentrations greater than 1 ppb are relatively rare as a result of forest operations.
Graphic not available.
Figure 1. Chemical monitoring results from three studies in Washington and Oregon.
Peak Concentrations Generated by Precipitation: Additional peaks in pesticide concentrations may occur after the first rainfall and subsequent runoff. If streamflow increases, such that the active channel width increases, then the water may come in contact with pesticide deposits (Ice, 1994; Norris, 1980). The potential for subsequent peaks depends on the elapsed time between the pesticide application and the first runoff event, the expansion of the channel, the decay rate of the pesticide and the antecedent storm conditions. In the TFW study, the authors determined that rainfall events which occurred within the first 72 hours of the operation were the most important. They recommended sampling within the initial 12 hours after runoff begins. Professional judgment must be used to determine when there is sufficient rainfall to produce runoff.
Table 2. Proposed best management practices target criteria for forest chemicals operations. (Provided by Dr. N. I. Kerkvliet, OSU Extension Toxicology Specialist). Target criteria expressed as an average 24-hour concentration in surface water in significant wetlands, Type F or Type D streams, large lakes, other lakes with fish use, or other areas of standing open water larger than 0.25 acre at the time of the application.
All values in parts per billion (ppb)
| CHEMICAL | HUMAN HEALTH
(10 day HAa) |
FISH
48- or 96-hr LC50 (¸100-fold safety factor) |
INVERTEBRATES
48- or 96 hr LC50 |
| MOST COMMONLY
APPLIED FOREST
HERBICIDES
2,4-D amine 2,4-D ester Atrazine Clopyralid Glyphosate (w/o surfactant) Glyphosate (w/surfactant) Hexazinone Imazapyr Metsulfuron methyl Sulfometuron methyl Triclopyr amine Triclopyr ester |
300
300 100 500aa 17500 17500 2500b 10000bb 2500c 1000e 50g 50 |
salmon 3500
bluegill 7 trout 45 trout 1030 salmon 6800 trout 13 trout 3200 trout 1100 trout 1500d trout 125f trout 1170 trout 7.4 |
daphnia 4000 daphnia 100 midge 720 daphnia 2.25 x 105 daphnia 9.3x105 daphnia 300 daphnia 52000 daphnia 3.5x105 daphnia 1.5x105d daphnia 12500f daphnia 1.2x105h no data found |
| MOST COMMONLY
APPLIED FOREST
INSECTICIDES
Bacillus thuringiensis Carbaryl Diflubenzuron |
exempt
1000
200i |
trout>12x109spores/L
brook trout 6.9 trout 1350 |
N/A
stonefly 1.7 to 29 daphnia 5.6 stonefly 2.0 daphnia 0.015 |
| MOST COMMONLY
APPLIED FOREST
FUNGICIDE
Chlorothalonil |
200 | trout 0.5 | daphnia 70 |
| FERTILIZERS
Free Ammonia Nitrate -N Ammonia-N Ammonium sulfamate |
no data
10,000j 500 30,000k |
salmon 83
no data no data carp 10,000 |
general 53 to 22,800 no data no data no data |
| DIESEL (used as a carrier) | no data | fish 1.9 | no data |
Footnotes to Table 2:
a) unless otherwise indicated
aa) based on RFD of 0.5 mg/kg/day
b) 90-day HA
bb) based on rabbit NOEL of 400 mg/kg/day and a 400-fold safety factor
c) based on RFD of 0.25 mg/kg
d) based on LC50 > 150 mg/L
e) based on RFD of 0.1 mg/kg
f) based on LC50 > 12.5 mg/L
g) based on 1-yr dog NOEL of 0.5 mg/kg/day
h) based on 21-day EC50
i) based on 1-yr dog NOEL of 2 mg/kg/day
j) MCL
k) lifetime HA
Toxicity Criteria
The forest practices staff, with input from Dr. Nancy Kerkvliet (Oregon State University) and Dr. Robert Pratt (Portland State University), developed a Best Management Practices Target Criteria for Forest Chemical Operations (Table 2). These criteria, expressed as the 24-hour average concentration were developed to evaluate pesticide water sampling results of monitoring studies. Based on previous findings and these toxicity criteria, there is sufficient rationale to focus monitoring resources on chemicals with low criteria. Therefore, the ODF will focus monitoring efforts on chemicals with a criteria less than 10 ppb, unless future information indicates a need to do otherwise.
Chemical Use
During the time of project implementation, the ODF will assess which chemicals are being used most frequently. The operation selection will be weighted towards these chemicals. If it is evident that a particular chemical is lacking in background information, but it is not commonly used, the ODF will consider sampling for that chemical. Insecticide application is highly variable from year to year and fungicide applications are rare. In Oregon during 1993 and 1994, there were one and no insecticide applications, respectively. The initial goal of the ODF is to monitor all non-biological insecticides (carbaryl) and fungicide applications.
Regional Distribution
During 1993 and 1994, respectively, there were 1,478 and 1,168 operations involving aerial application of pesticides. Numbers of operations and regional patterns were similar for both years. Herbicide applications were generally concentrated in the same 10 counties in 1994 and 1993 (Table 3 ). There were fewer fertilizer applications, and they varied geographically from year to year.
Future monitoring efforts will be weighted to the counties with historically greater numbers of operations. The ODF is not currently committed to monitoring fertilizer operations due to difficulties in establishing background variability of naturally occurring nitrogen. The ODF will continue to investigate fertilizer monitoring.
Table 3. Herbicide and fertilizer operations in 1993 and 1994.
| County Name | 1993 Number of Herbicide Operations | 1994 Number of Herbicide Operations | 1993 Count of Fertilizer Operations | 1994 Count of Fertilizer Operations |
| Baker | 0 | 1 | ||
| Benton | 30 | 59 * | 0 | 3 |
| Clackamas | 68 * | 46 | 7 * | 9 * |
| Clatsop | 35 | 39 | ||
| Columbia | 44 * | 63 * | 3 | 6 |
| Coos | 58 * | 123 * | 2 | 2 |
| Curry | 21 | 32 | 1 | 9 * |
| Douglas | 310 * | 313 * | 36 * | 35 * |
| Hood River | 12 | 8 | 18 * | 2 |
| Jackson | 7 | 8 | ||
| Klamath | 2 | 10 | ||
| Lake | 95 * | 2 | ||
| Lane | 101 * | 143 * | 3 | 12 * |
| Lincoln | 47 * | 159 * | 4 | 2 |
| Linn | 38 | 74 * | 1 | 2 |
| Marion | 4 | 43 | ||
| Multnomah | 45 * | 9 | ||
| Polk | 3 | 60 * | ||
| Tillamook | 3 | 7 | ||
| Washington | 78 * | 101 * | 6 | 17 * |
| Yamhill | 79 * | 77 * | 3 | 1 |
* = greatest number of operations
Water Quality Monitoring Protocol
The goal of the Oregon Department of Forestry is to monitor 25 operations (2.5 percent of the annual average number of operations). Potential sites will have safe access for sampling after nightfall and be near a Small, Medium or Large type F or D stream. The program will focus on herbicide and insecticide applications. Samples will be collected before the operation (control), and 15 minute 2 hour, 4 hour, 8 hour, and 24 hours after the first swath has been sprayed near the buffer strip. Actual timing of collection depends on the stream water velocity. Sampling begins 15 minutes after water which flowed through the unit, reaches the sample site. Runoff sampling will be conducted after the first runoff-producing rainfall event. Numbers of runoff samples analyzed will depend on available funding.
Sample Location
Samples will be collected approximately 200 feet downstream of the treatment unit boundary. Access to the sampling site should be done without walking or driving through the treatment unit. The site should be protected from drift, have a uniform cross-section (no backwater or eddies), and have adequate flow to facilitate sample collection.
Operator Questionnaire
The operators/landowners will fill out the operator questionnaire (Figure 2) for the monitoring sites selected as parts of the ODF's monitoring program.
Sample Timing
A control sample will be collected within 24 hours prior to application. Five more samples will be collected 15 minutes, and 2, 4, 8, and 24 hours after the first swath has been sprayed near the buffer strip. The time of collection is based on the travel time of the water moving through the treatment unit. The time of collection is calculated as follows.
[A + B / 2] / C + 15 minutes = 15 minute sample time
60 seconds
A = length of stream between top of treatment unit and sample point (ft)
B = length of stream between bottom of treatment unit and sample point (ft)
C = average velocity of stream (ft / sec)
Figure 2. Operator Questionnaire: Forest Chemicals Monitoring Project
Landowner:_____________________________________________________________
Person's (name) completing questionnaire: ___________________________________
Unit Name:______________________________________________________________
Date of Application:_______________________________________________________
Weather Conditions:
Please fill in measurements of:
Time Time Time Time Time Time Time Time
Windspeed: _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
Wind Direction _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
Relative Humidity _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
Temperature _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____
*******
Chemical Application
Start time _________
End time __________ Was chemical directly applied within 60 ft of the
stream?______
Target vegetation/pest:____________________________________________________
Active ingredient pesticide:_____________ lbs/acre
applied_________________
Additional pesticide used: ______________ lbs/acre applied_________________
Surfactant added:_____________________ amount/acre___________________
Other additives:______________________ amount/acre___________________
Application rate for final spray mixture___________amount/acre___________________
Carriers used:____________________________________________________________
EPA Registration number______________Trade Name__________________________
*******
Operation
Helicopter model:__________________________________
Flight altitude:_____________________________________
Air speed:________________________________________
Boom length:_____________________________________ Boom Pressure________________
Flight centerline offset from edge of buffer: _____________ Half Boom used ____ Yes ____ No
Nozzle type, size, angle, orientation: ___________________
Number of nozzles: _________________________________
Runoff Sampling
The goal of the ODF is to implement runoff sampling at all sites where a runoff event occurs within the first 72 hours of the chemical operation. Samples will be collected on a subset of the remaining sites within the first 12 hours after the first runoff event.
Collection Procedures
The Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) Laboratory has defined specific container and storage temperature requirements for given chemicals (Appendix A). These procedures will be followed for the ODF's sampling program. (Note: If this protocol is implemented for other programs, but samples are to be analyzed at a lab other than the ODA LAB, ask the lab for and comply with its recommended collection-to-analysis holding procedures and times.)
Monitoring personnel will access the sampling site without physical contact with vehicles or personnel from the spray operation and comply with the following procedure :
Once all 5 (15 min, 2-, 4-, 8-, and 24-hr) post- treatment samples are collected create a composite sample using equal portions of each sample. Preparations of composite samples will be done under controlled conditions to avoid contamination. Funnels and other equipment will be clean and free of chemical residues. (Exception: Carbaryl water samples will be submitted for analysis within 24 hours of collection. ) The Department of Agriculture will form the composite in the laboratory.
Figure 3. Water quality monitoring label for sample bottles.
Figure 4. Water Quality Chemical Sampling Form
Draw schematic map of unit, streams, buffers, and flight patterns.
Notification number___________________________________
Applied pesticide:____________________________
Stream name:_________________
Monitoring personnel name(s):__________________________________
Spray start time:______________________________
Average stream velocity:_____________________
Sampling start time:____________________
Date:_____________________________________
| SAMPLE DESCRIPTION | SAMPLE COLLECTION
DATE: TIME: |
SAMPLE ID NUMBER |
| Control Sample | ||
| 15 minute | ||
| 2 hour | ||
| 4 hour | ||
| 8 hour | ||
| 24 hour | ||
| Runoff Sample #1 (optional) | ||
| Runoff Sample #2 (optional) | ||
| Runoff Sample #3 (optional) |
The sample number is the operation number plus the following extensions:
xx-xxx-xxxx-A control sample
xx-xxx-xxxx-B 15 minute sample
xx-xxx-xxxx-C 2 hour sample
xx-xxx-xxxx-D 4 hour sample
xx-xxx-xxxx-E 8 hour sample
xx-xxx-xxxx-F 24 hour sample
When using a plastic container, the sample number should be written directly on the bottle as well as on the label. When using glass, the number should be written on a tape strip on the jar itself and label filled in on the lid.
Upon submission of the water samples, a Universal Sample Collection and Laboratory Report (USCLR) Form must be completed and turned in to the ODA Laboratory.
Sample Storage and Delivery to ODA Laboratory
Samples will immediately be put in water-tight cold storage and remain so until analyzed. Glyphosate samples should immediately be packed in ice. Samples will be transported to the laboratory as soon as possible. At no time will the sample be in contact with personnel directly involved with the chemical operation.
Samples will be transported in a water-tight ice chest, with a leak-proof cooling device (blue-ice, frozen water jugs, double-bagged ice cubes). Each sample will be accompanied with a USCLR. The lab should be pre-notified of delivery.
Sample Analysis
The Oregon Department of Forestry will consider two alternatives for analysis. In both options the ODF will use the 24-hour average as a water quality indicator. Samples will be delivered to the lab and analyzed as soon as possible. Control and post-treatment samples will be stored at field offices or in Salem. One alternative is to analyze the composite sample first. If chemical is detected in the composite sample at levels greater than the adopted Toxicity Criteria, then the individual samples will be submitted for analysis.
The other alternative is to analyze each of the five post spray samples individually and use a weighting formula to approximate the 24-hour average. This formula applies a time-proportionate weighting factor to each grab result:
24-hour avg. conc. = 15-min (0.02) + 2-hr (0.08) + 4-hr (0.10) + 8-hr (0.30) + 24-hr (0.50)
Operator/Community Water System Manager Coordination
The goal of the Oregon Department of Forestry will be to develop partnerships between the ODF, landowners, and community water users. The objectives of the partnership would include increasing awareness of monitoring efforts and results, information sharing, and public education.
The ODF will coordinate with existing programs between community water users and landowners/operators. When appropriate, the ODF will promote use of the preceding water quality monitoring protocol. Data collected for community water system purposes may be available as additional data for the ODF's program.
Compliance Monitoring
Public Complaints and Pesticide Analytical Response Center
Investigation of public complaints is a high priority for the ODF. Upon receipt of a complaint the ODF will assess the need for water quality sampling. The ODF will coordinate with the State of Oregon's PARC. The ODF is a participant in PARC, as are five other state agencies, as well as OSU. PARC's primary responsibilities are to:
Centralize and receive information relating to actual or alleged health and environmental incidents involving pesticides.
PARC investigations are warranted when:
The Oregon Department of Forestry will annually summarize and make public the results of forestry-related PARC investigations.
Vegetation Surveys
This portion of the monitoring program is still in the early planning phase. The following protocol is a rough idea of the direction ODF is taking.
Vegetation inspection surveys will be conducted in riparian areas on high priority operations and by Forest Practice Foresters in response to complaints. In addition, the surveys will be conducted on the 25 operations selected for ODF's monitoring program. At an appropriate time interval after application (depending on the chemical), monitoring personnel will implement the following procedure and fill out the Compliance Form (Figure 5).
Figure 5. BMP COMPLIANCE MONITORING
Stream name
Notification number
Stream type
Date of Application:
Day of Application Observation
Was chemical directly applied to streamside vegetation?
Rate difficulty in avoiding streamside vegetation (1-4).
Based on the terrain, height of vegetative buffer, layout of unit, etc. rate the difficulty as:
1 = easily avoidable
2 = avoidable
3 = difficult to avoid
4 = extremely difficult to avoid
Vegetation Inspection
Date of inventory: _________________
Streamside rules applied/prescription:
(new versus old rules, width of no-cut buffer, alternative prescriptions)
Transect information to assess drift impacts:
Predominant overstory species __________________________________________________
Predominant understory species _________________________________________________
Ground Cover species_________________________________________________________
For each transect, estimate the percent of vegetation damaged or killed by herbicide. Draw transects on map. Photograph damage for each species.
overstory understory
Transect A (10 feet from unit/buffer boundary) ________ _________
Transect B (30 feet from unit/buffer boundary) ________ _________
Transect C (5 feet from stream edge) ________ _________
TOTAL ________ _________
Summary
The combined information from the chemical application, operation and vegetation surveys will be analyzed and summarized in a final report one year after completion of the program. At that time the ODF will assess the need for future monitoring. Possibilities may include implementing the project for a second year and another 25 sites, monitoring type N streams, testing sediment samples, monitoring ground applications, or coordination with the research community to study the effects on aquatic life.
Any questions or comments regarding this document can be directed to:
Appendix D - Guidance For OCSRI Measure ODF 22
25 Percent In-Unit Leave Tree Placement
And
Additional Voluntary Retention
Introduction
No single action by a government agency or individual will restore declining salmon and trout populations, but a cooperative effort, sustained over time, can succeed. Oregon's Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative is an effort focused on preserving and restoring native coastal salmon populations and preventing the need for a federal threatened or endangered listing of coho salmon under the federal Endangered Species Act.
Due to rising concerns over the status of depressed salmonid populations, and as specified in the Oregon Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative (OCSRI) management measure ODF 22, the State Forester, will implement section 3(c) of Section 9, Chapter 9, Oregon Laws special session (Leaving Snags and Downed Logs in Harvest Type 2 or Type 3 Units; Green Trees to be Left Near Certain Streams):
"For harvest type 2 or type 3 operations adjacent to fish-bearing or domestic use streams, the State Forester may require up to 25 percent of the green trees required to be left pursuant to this section to be left in or adjacent to the riparian management area of the fish-bearing or domestic use stream if such requirement would provide increased benefits to wildlife. Such trees shall be in addition to trees otherwise required by rule to be left in riparian management areas. The operator shall have sole discretion to determine which trees to leave, either in or adjacent to a riparian management area, pursuant to this paragraph."
Also, as part of OCSRI management measure ODF 22, members of the Oregon Forest Industry Council (OFIC) will voluntarily implement placement of the remaining 75 percent of in-unit trees following these guidelines. These additional trees will be another source for large woody debris recruitment and shade. The specific details concerning where these actions will occur, and how this provision will be implemented will be established by this guidance.
Administration And Implementation
The State Forester will implement section 3(c) Section 9, Chapter 9, Oregon Laws, 1996 special session, and specify opportunities for additional voluntary tree retention within Salmon Core Areas as identified by the ODFW. Core Areas comprise the habitats necessary for the persistence of salmon populations, and are a major source for "seeding" new habitats as restoration programs are implemented. The concept of identifying, on maps, the portions of river basins particularly important to salmon will aid State and Federal agencies and private landowners in deciding where to focus limited resources on management actions that will provide the greatest benefits to conserving and improving the status of salmon. Overall, approximately 2900 miles of coastal streams have been identified as Core Areas. This comprises about 40 percent of the overall anadromous salmonid habitat and 15 percent of the overall stream mileage.
The State Forester will require that 25 percent of the green trees required to be retained within harvest type 2 or 3 units will be left within or adjacent to the RMA of all fish-bearing (Type F) streams, unless placement along other streams or in other locations will produce better protection. In addition, OFIC landowners located within Salmon Core Areas have agreed to placing remaining (additional 75 percent) in-unit trees where directed by ODF and ODFW. Other forest landowners, such as small woodland owners, will be encouraged to voluntarily leave additional in-unit leave tree requirements as recommended by ODF and ODFW. Such trees will be in addition to trees otherwise required by the water protection rules to be retained in riparian management areas.
Voluntary placement of in-unit leave trees will be directed, in order of priority, in the following areas:
While it is possible that some trees growing beyond 100 feet from a stream (e.g., unstable upslope areas) may contribute large woody debris (and other inputs) to the stream, the majority of trees that contribute large woody debris to the stream grow within 100 feet of the stream. Consequently, with the exception of potentially unstable slopes, the placement of in-unit leave tree requirements should occur within 100 feet of the active stream channel. High risk sites as determined by the State Forester will be used to identify potentially unstable slopes where slope failures could deliver large wood to Salmon Core Area streams. A high risk site may include but is not limited to: slopes greater than 65 percent, steep headwalls, highly dissected land formations, areas exhibiting frequent high intensity rainfall periods, faulting, slumps, slides, or debris avalanches.
The State Forester may also approve alternate plans to waive, in whole or in part, the requirements pursuant to this guidance for a harvest type 2 or type 3 operation if the plan provides for an equal or greater number of trees or snags to be left in another harvest type 2 or type 3 operation, which in the opinion of the State Forester, would, in the aggregate, achieve better overall benefits for wildlife, including fish. For example, a forest operation may be planned within a Salmon Core Area watershed, but may not be located near a stream or high-risk site that can affect a stream. Providing an equal or greater number of trees or snags to be left in a different harvest Type 2 or Type 3 operation near a more suitable stream pursuant to this guidance may achieve better overall benefits to fish.
This management measure is designed to achieve enhanced riparian and in-stream habitat for salmon. However, a holistic approach is desirable. Focusing on only one resource benefit associated with leave trees may have unexpected consequences to other resource benefits over time. Therefore, undesirable "trade-offs" in resource benefits associated with implementation of this action shall be minimized. The State Forester shall direct the retention of the in-unit leave tree requirements within or adjacent to the RMAs stipulated in this guidance unless the additional trees will not contribute to the desired stream functions and processes. Additionally, operators will not be directed or encouraged to fell existing snags in upland areas and to replace these with green trees along the RMA. Existing snags are very important for providing immediate habitat requirements for many wildlife species.
Similarly, management decisions must also consider operational constraints that may affect stream habitat and salmonid populations. For example, it should be recognized that only rarely can roads be built that have no negative effects on streams. The retention of green trees near streams pursuant to this statute/guidance should not result in the construction of additional road networks, especially on steep slopes and unstable soils, to accomplish timber harvesting objectives.
All leave trees must meet the minimum criteria for acceptable snags and green trees specified in Section 9, Chapter 9, Oregon Laws, special session, which is at least 30 feet in height and 11 inches diameter at breast height (DBH), and at least 50 percent must be conifers. Although operators shall have sole discretion in determining which trees beyond minimum diameter and height requirements to leave, larger diameter trees are preferred because they provide greater benefits, for longer time periods, than do smaller diameters. Conifers are also preferable to hardwoods because they generally decay slower.
Coordination
The ODF Forest Practices inspection program will be used for the administration and implementation of this statute/guidance. When a notification is received for an operation, the State Forester must determine if it is located within a Salmon Core Area. Maps (1:100,000 USGS Hydrologic Units for coastal basins) of contemporary core areas of the spawning and rearing distributions of salmon and steelhead in Oregon coastal river basins will be available for this purpose at all ODF western Oregon district offices. For all notifications of Type 2 and Type 3 harvest units, the State Forester will collaborate with operators pertaining to green trees to be left near certain streams as described in the following flowchart:
Graphic not available.
Consultations with ODFW will be necessary, but should be considered an exception rather than the rule. The intent of this management measure item is to provide specific guidance to minimize the need for such consultations to most effectively utilize field staff time. An example where consultation with ODFW would be required would be to evaluate site-specific alternatives, opportunities, and constraints not addressed herein.
Statute Compliance: [Paragraph 3(c) of section 9, chapter 9, Oregon Laws, 1996]
Paragraph 3(c) of section 9, chapter 9, Oregon Laws, 1996 special session, is subject to enforcement action in the event of noncompliance. Noncompliance occurs if operators fail to retain the additional 25 percent in-unit trees within the area or areas designated by the Forest Practices Forester.
The State Forester will determine compliance with this statute by visually inspecting (i.e., counting green trees and snags) approximately 5 percent of all operations. Failure to leave the required number and size of green trees and snags within a Type 2 or Type 3 harvest unit pursuant to Section 9, Chapter 9, Oregon Laws, 1996 special session, is a violation, unless an alternate plan has been approved.
Voluntary Compliance: Voluntary placement of in-unit trees above the 25 percent requirement.
Placement of additional in-unit trees above the 25 percent requirement within areas designated by the Forest Practices Forester is a voluntary measure and is not subject to enforcement action. However, failure to maintain the required in-unit trees within the operation area (with the exception of an alternative plan) is noncompliance and subject to enforcement action. Landowners complying with the voluntary portion of this management measure (i.e. placing all in-unit trees in recommended ODF/ODFW locations) are encouraged to document the location and maintain the information on file.
The State Forester will determine compliance with this statute by visually inspecting (i.e., counting green trees and snags) approximately 5 percent of all operations. Failure to leave the required number and size of green trees and snags within a Type 2 or Type 3 harvest unit pursuant to Section 9, Chapter 9, Oregon Laws, 1996 special session, is a violation, unless an alternate plan has been approved. If the unit does not appear to comply with the additional voluntary guidance presented herein, the State Forester will document non-compliance, and emphasize education and coordination in collaborating with the landowner to obtain the desired results.
Monitoring
Implementation and effectiveness of the 25 percent in-unit leave tree placement and additional voluntary retention will be assessed as part of the Forest Practices Monitoring Program (management measure ODF 10), Monitoring of Riparian Management Areas (management measure ODF 11), and Monitoring Water Temperature Protection BMPs (management measure ODF 14). These monitoring management measures will be scheduled over the next five years.
Specifically, ODF shall report on the number and type of operations by landowner (e.g., OFIC), the number of requests complied with, the number and type of in-unit trees retained and their placement within Salmon Core Areas, an evaluation of the success of the applied protection levels, recommended changes to protection levels, and research needed to further evaluate the protection levels.
Go to:
top of page.
State Agency Workplan - Department of Environmental Quality
State Agency Workplan - Department of Transportation
State Agency Workplan - Division of State Lands
State Agency Workplan - Department of Agriculture
State Agency Workplan - Department of Fish & Wildlife
State Agency Workplan - Parks & Recreation Department
State Agency Workplan - Water Resources Department
Table of Contents page
Home page
Created March 4, 1997
Web Page Construction: Janet Demaris (503) 378-3397 x 234