United States Department of Restoring Ecosystems Agriculture
Forest Service In the Blue Mountains
Pacific Northwest Region A Report to the Regional Forester and the Forest Supervisors of the Blue Mountain Forests
July 1992
RestoringEcosystems in the Blue Mountains
PanelMembers
Core Panel DavidL. Caraher PanelChair, Watershed Specialist JohnHenshaw AssistantChair, PNW, New Perspectives FredHall PlantEcologist WalterH. Knapp RegionalSilviculturist Bruce P. McCammon RegionalHydrologist JohnNesbitt FuelsManagement Specialist RichardJ. Pedersen WildlifeBiologist Iral Regenovitch GroupLeader, Entomo'logy ChuckTietz GroupLeader, Engineering
Science Coordinator Kathy Geyer PNW,Portland
Support Thom Corcoran PublicAffairs MauragraceHealy Writer-Editor Kay Pennell Wildlife andFisheries Tableof Contents
Introduction
AssessmentProcess...... AssessmentScale ...... I --: EcosystemElements ...... 2 NaturalVariability ...... 4 CurrentCondition ...... 6 Valuesat Risk ...... 8
Results ...... 8 AreasofConcem ...... 8 Long-TermObjectives .....9 TranslatingLong-Term Objectives into Activities . ... . 12
Recommendations t4
List of Appendices
AppendixA: SustainingEcological Systems AppendixB: Descriptionof Elementsand Processes AppendixC: River BasinProfiles and Assessment AppendixD: List of Stakeholders AppendixE: Summaryof StakeholderInput INTRODUCTION
Backgroundand Charter
The forestedecosystems of the Blue Mountainsin northeastemOregon are complexand highly variable.The complexitycomes from themultitude of interactionsbetween the land,the air, the water,and the vegetation.Human interactionwith the physicalsystems influences the ratesand intensityofthe interactionsas well asthe distributionof the ecosystemcomponents. Landscapeprocesses and human interaction are closely woven in theBlue Mountains.
Overthe lasttwenty years, the forestsin theBlue Mountainshave been subjected to increasing damageby fire, insects,and diseases. Approximately 3.2 million acresof NationalForests, landsmanaged by otherfederal and state agencies,and private lands have been affected. The Umatilla,Malheur, and Wallowa-WhitmanNational Forests, along with otherlandowners, agenciesand concemedcitizens, have already begun working toward the restorationof ecosystemswithin the Blue Mountains.A numberof initiativeshave already been completed or arecurrently underway.
A panelofresource specialists was formed by theRegional Forester to developa broad assessmentof forestedecosystem health within the Umatilla,Malheur, and Wallowa-Whitman NationalForests. This panel'smain taskswere to developa cleardescription of long-term ecosystemrestoration objectives and to providea morecomprehensive understanding of the need andurgency for restorationactivities.
ASSESSMENTPROCESS
This assessmentuses an ecosystemapproach that was adapted from the NorthernRegion (Rl ) of theForest Service. This approach, Sustaining Ecological Systems (SES) (Appendix A), recognizesthat ecosystems vary overtime andspace. A key conceptof SESis thatwhen systemsare "pushed" outside the bounds ofnatural variabilitythere is substantialrisk that biologicaldiversity and ecological function will not be maintained,and, therefore, ecological systemswill not be naturallysustained. This approachsuggests that an objectivefor most wildlandenvironments is to managein sucha mannerthat most of the componentsof an ecosystemare within their rangeofnatural variability.
AssessmentScale
Ecosystemsfunction at differentscales ranging from globalto specific sites. To conductthis assessment,the panel recognized the Blue Mountainsas a distinctphysiographic region with its own climateand topography. Then, within the Blue Mountains,the panelidentified three broad physiographiczones. The Marine zone,roughly the northern third of Blue Mountains,is characterizedby a relativelycool, moist climate, and wide variations in topography.
The Mixed zone,roughly the centralportion of the Blue Mountains,has a climatethat is betweenthe moist,cool influenceof thenorth, and the drier, warmerclimate from the south.
TheContinental zone, in thesouthern portion of theBlue Mountains, is thedriest of the threezones.
Thepanel then went on to identifythe river basinswithin eachof the physiographicZones (Figure1). Eachriver basinis a collectionof smallerwatersheds and covers from half a million to a million acres.This wasthe scalethat thepanel used to estimatethe currentconditions of ecosystemhealth.
EcosystemElements
Ecosystemsare made up of almostcountless elements and processes - those partsof the ecosystemthat living organismsinteract with anddepend on for theirlife cycles.From that countlessarray, the panel selected the following nine elements as indicators of foresthealth, the waya physicianmight select heart rate, blood pressure, and body temperature as indicators of humanhealth.
The first threeelements refer to thoseportions of thephysiographic zone that are part of the Douglasfir - truefir climaxforest:
l. Early seral:The percent of theclimax fir forestthat consists offorest openings and standsof youngt'ees with smalldiameters (less than two inches)and hal an open canopy(less than 60 percent closure).
2. Late seral Park-Like:The percent of theclimax fir forestthat consists mostlv of ponderosapine or westemlarch, has been maintained by frequentunderburns, and hasless than 20 percentcover ofunderstoryhees.
3. Late seralrolerant Multistory:The percent of theclimax fir forestthat consists of standswith two or morecanopy layers of Douglas-fir andtrue fir andwhich have Iessthan 20 percentoverstory cover of ponderosapine or westemlarch.
2 PHYSIOGRAPHIC ZONES OF THE BLUE MOUNTAINS WITH RIVER BASINS
CON N TA L
I-IPIGR MALHEUR
IIARNEY,MALHET'I, IIXES
n UErtilb N.tio$l FoE.t ,'r' county touaarry n W.IIow. WhitrbrD N.tioE.l FoErt /V Riv.r h..iD bourd.ry n M.lh.rr Nrtrorrl FoE.t il-' { ny.iog,.pu" zo!. boud.ry
l5 tuly 1992 l:1668t07 USDA PORESTSETVICE I.EGION 6 GEOMETTONICS GIOUP CII UNIT Thefollowing two elementsrefer to thoseparts of theecosystem that are dominated by pine species: 4. PonderosaPine - high density,low vigor: Thepercent of theponderosa pine stands,climax as well asseral, that are dominated by treeslarger than 6 inches diameterat breastheight and are susceptibleto attackby bark beetles.
5. LodgepolePine - highdensity, low vigor:The percent of thelodgepole pine stands, climaxas well asseral, that are dominated by trees'largerthan 6 inchesin diameter at breastheight and which are susceptible to attackby bark beetles.
The next two elementsare separate indicators of ecosystemhealth: 6. AvailableFuels - The percentof the totalabove-ground forest biomass that consists of standinedead and down trees.
' 7. Juniper-Grasslands- The percent of thegrassland and shrubland that hasbeen colonized by juniper.
Thelast two elementswere selected as indicators of generalwatershed health. 8. Riparianshrub cover - Thepercentage of streamlength which has -- deciduousshrub cover.
9. Streambankstebility - Thepercentage of streamlength which has stablebanks.
-- NaturalVariability
The elementsand processes within ecosystemsare naturally dynamic - rainfall variesfrom year - to year,wildlife populations increase and decline, and the stnrctures ofplant communities shift overtime - thatis, the elements and processes occur within a rangeofnatural variability.
Thepanel used professional judgement and local knowledge of theecosystems in theBlue Mountainsto estimatethe range ofnatural variability prior to fire exclusionand timber harvest. -- Theseestimates were made for eachof theelements in eachof thethree physiographic zones (Figure2). Someofthese estimated ranges were adjusted after consulting with resource specialistswho work in theBlue Mountains. The estimates represent a first approximation of therange ofconditions for thoseelements. The elements selected do not coverthe full anayof possibleconditions and, therefore, do notadd up to 100percent. Riparisn Bsnk Shrub Sabilily Cq.er Physlographlc 0 50 1@% 0 50 1@ o 50 too 0 50 1000 50 1@o 50 1000 50 lm Zone tfrTfr tffffl tfr-ffl tfr-ffr tfr-ffr tffTfl tfr-ffr iltl m F t.,l t:l Marine HtJI: HtdH E HM H
Figure 2. The ranges of natural variability (lffi) arnongselected ecosysten elements.
tlrlrllttt)lit)ttl Figure2 conveystwo main ideas.First, the ranges of naturalvariability for someof the elementsshift asone moves from theMarine physiographic zone in thenorth to the Continental zonein the south. Significantshifts occur in the elementswhich wereselected to characterize theDouglas-fir, true fir climaxt)?es; the high density,low vigor lodgepolepine stands;the amountof availablefirels; and the riparian shrubcover. Secondly,the width of the rangeof variabilityfor someof the elementschanges among the threephysiographic zones. Th-s is mostevident in the riparianshrub cover element.
Current Condition working with resourcespecialists on theUmatilla, Malheur, and wallowa-whitmannational forests,the panel estimated the currentcondition of eachof the elements.in eachriver basinin theBlue Mountains(Figure 3). More completedescriptions of the currentsituation, variabilitv. andsite specific concerns are provided in AppendixC.
A numberof generalconclusions can be drawnfrom comparingcurrent conditionswith their rangesof naturalvariability among the three physiographiczones:
' Throughoutthe Blue Mountains,the amount of climaxfir forestdominated by pine and larchis currentlyless than the estimatedranges of naturalvariability, especiaily in the ContinentalPhysiographic Zone.
' Progressingsouthward through the Blue Mountains,the amountof the climax fir forest composedof multiplelayers of Douglasfir-tnre fir increasesto levelsthat arenow hisher thanthe estimatedrange of natural variability.
' Someof the river basinsin the southernBlue Mountainshave significantly higher percentagesof high density,low vigor ponderosaand lodgepole pine thanunder "natural" conditions.
' Almostall of theriver basinscunently show higher levels of availablefuels than natural.
' Riparianshrub cover and streambank stability are below their rangesof naturalvariability in mostof the river basinsin theBlue Mountains,especially in the centraland southern portions.
Oneof themain assumptionsabout this ecosystemapproach is thatan elementor processthat is outsideits rangeof naturalvariability can not be sustainednaturally. However, this doesnot meanthat all elementsand process must be returnedto their naturalrange. Many elementsand processesare maintained outside their ranges of naturalvariability by managementactivities, suchas controlling forest fires, planting trees after timber harvest, and restocking fish in streams. Allforests Non-forest Eany Lalo Seral PordorGa todgepolo Riparian Bank S€€l Park-liko Tolerart Pine Pine Shrub Stability Multisiory high derFrty, high derFrty, Co/gr low vi]or low vigor 0 50 100* Fltrlrfl-fn tl-r-ffl tfr-r-fl tfr-frt ffr-r-ft tr-[ffr lrr-fr trr-rrr tn-ffl RIVERBASIN
n cannon lmnaha WallaWalla Ri/s Lowrr Sruk€ Rir,s Umelilla W1lowCrEk WallowaRi\or Lrpp€rGEndo Ronde
[,o*rr Grar|d€Ronde
Powdo(Rivq BroY{nh€R6artalr UpporJotur Day t{or0rFork John Oay MiddloFort JoamDay l,-owerJoln Day
o gurnt (D Upp€rMsllFur c c SiMo3 o o Harnoy.MalhourLak€8
Figure 3. Current conditions (,lt ) compared hrith their ranges of natural variability ( W ) . 7 llrll ]lllrlttlit Whenan elementor processis outsideits rangeof naturalvariability, landmanagers need to considerthe following questions:
' What arethe effectsof maintaining(or trying to maintain)the elementor processoutside its naturalrange?
. Whatare the costsof trying to maintainit outsideits naturalrange, andof trying to return it to its naturalrange? ' Whatmanagement activities will helprestore the element or processto its naturalrange?
Valuesat Risk
As a partof its process,the panel interviewed thirty-one groups and individuals who have a stakein or concernsabout forest health in theBlue Mountains.Most of thoseinterviewed had previouslyvoiced their viewsto ForestService managers, but thepanel needed to better understandhow foresthealth was affecting the human side of the equationand placing values at risk.
Fromthe interviews,the panel found that most ofthe concernsand issues fell underfour headings:
. Fuelreduction and fire management . WaterQuality, including municipal supplies . Fisheriesand riparian areas . Timbermanagement, including salvage and restoration
- The commentsfrom theseinterviews were recorded, condensed, and categorized based on major areasof interestot concern(see Appendix E). Most of theresponses were general in natureand did notpertain to specificriver basinsor areas.The panel used this information to formulateits recommendedlong-term objectives for restoration.
RESULTS
Areasof Concern
Thisassessment of ecosystem health, including the interviews with stakeholders,reveals several primaryconcems with the healthof forestedecosystems in the Blue Mountains:the needto preventcatastrophic fires, providehigh qualitywater, and maintain the structureofthe forests sothat they are able to resistinsects and diseases. Usingthe assessmentand the interviews,the panel found that the conditionswithin theriver basinscan be groupedinto threebroad categories of ecosysternhealth (Figure 4). At differcnt scaleswithin the river basins,conditions vary - someof theriver basinsin generallypoor health may have areasin goodhealth, and those generally in goodhealth may haveareas which urgentlyneed restoration.
. River basinswhich arecrurently far outsidenaturally sustainable ranges. These river basinsexhibit high fuel loadings,poor stand stnrcture,and excessive streambank instability- characteristicswhich posesubstantial risk to terrestrialand aquatic ecosystems.Restoration activities within theseriver basinsshould be basedon an ecosystemapproach, deal with landscapelevel planning, and address values at risk as well asecosvstem imbalances.
' River basinswhich are currently outside sustainable levels and are tendingtoward greater ecosystemimbalance. The flrel loadings,stand structures,and streambank stabilities are far enoughaway from naturalranges to be of concern.Restoration activities within these areasshould be directedtoward protection ofvalues at risk andtoward conection of ecosystemimbalance .
' River basinswhich arenear or within naturallysustainable ranges. Theseare areas where immediaterestoration activities, if necessary,would addresssite specific conditions relativeto the protectionofvalues at risk.
Long-TermObjectives
The overridingprinciple that guided this assessmentof foresthealth was the need to bring elementswithin their naturalrange of variability. This suggeststhat there are long-term objectivesfor restorationactivities in the Blue Mountains.With this in mind the Panellooked at the assessmentsof ecosystemelements for river basins(Figure 3), talkedwith many stakeholders,and reviewed current literature including the Blue MountainsForest Health Report. Of themany objectives for restoringforest health, the panelidentified seven which merit specialemphasis. These objectives lead to the enhancementof biodiversitythrough the emphasison developmentof healthyforested ecosystems that containall seralstages, including old growthand other limited plant communities.The objectivesare not new. They are, however,consistent with thoseraised both in the forestplans for the Blue MountainForests and in theBlue MountainsForest Health Reoort. BLUE MO{.INTAIN ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION MALHEU& UMATILLA AND WALLOWA-WHITMAN NATIONAL FORESTS WITH RIVER BASINS
TJPPBRJOTIN DAY NATIONAL FOREST BOTJNDARIES
UPPEN MAIUAUT
.MALEET.II LATAE
C{)NDITION OF ECOSYSTEM HEALT}I OTHER FEATI'RES K t n.t ouria. tlr uoll noge { nrv* tr*n t algy U z ,lura" u urlil @sc r'\,' couIy boto&ry E I x* d srhb tbe EAnnilrlrge t ctty
15 ttlv 1992 l:166850? TISDA IOIEST 5ERVICE RECION 6 CiEOMETRONICS GTOUP GIS UNTT Fire - Reducethe risk of catastrophicfire. Large,high intensityfires havea high potentialfor adverselyaffecting water quality, fish habitat, municipalwater supplies, wildlife cover,timber, riparian vegetation, as well asthreatening homes and property locatedadjacent to or nearthe National Forests.
Water - Bring all surfacewaters to conditionswhich arein accordancewith Statewater qualitystandards. High qualitywater is a naturalproduct of sustainableecosystems in the Blue Mountains,and currently there is a $eat dealofconcern about those streams whichexceed state water quality standards.Management of roadsystems is an essential aspectof improvingor maintainingwater quality.
Riparian Areas- Providehigh qualityriparian vegetation. Managementof riparian vegetationis critical for boththe restoration and the maintenanceof waterquality, channelform andfunction, and wildlife values.Manage grazing of both big gameand livestockto re-establishor maintainriparian vegetation, and to promotewater quality recovery.
Fish - Emphasizerestoration and enhancement offish habitat,especially with regardto Threatenedand Endangered species. Anadramous and resident fish populationswithin the Blue Mountainriver basinsare at risk. Primaryconcerns are stream temperature andfish habitat. Somespecies are listedas Threatened and Endangered and other non-listedspecies are recognizedto be the soleremaining wild stockswithin Oregon. Thereare severalfactors influencing these populations, one of which is habitaton NationalForests. Activities upslope from streamscan have significant effectson water qualityand habitat within fish bearingstreams.
Insects- Developconditions which reduce the risk of epidemicinsect outbreaks. Landscapesdominated by highdensity, low vigorpine stands are highly susceptible to bark beetleattack. Defoliatinginsects, such as western spruce budworm, canreach epidemiclevels in landscapesdominated by multistorystands of Douglas-firand tnre firs.
Big GameHabitat - Providebig gamecover within the frameworkof restoration activities.Elk anddeer are highly valuedin the Blue Mountains.Big gamehabitat, particularlycover, is at risk dueto cunent ecosystemconditions. Develop restoration activitiesso thatthey address and consider the needsfor habitatimprovement and protection.Management of transportationnetworks is an essentialtool for controlling harassmentof big gamepopulations.
Communities- Identifyand address community needs when designing ecosystem restoration.The communitiesof the Blue Mountainsdepend on theresources and characterof theBlue Mountains.
lt Translating Long-Term ObjectivesInto Activities
Basedon the long-termobjectives, the panelidentified potential restoration activities and priority areas.while eachactivity may havespecific benefits related to oneor morelong-term objectives,ultimately all activitieswill benefitcommunities by improvingthe overallhealth of the forestsin the Blue Mountains.within each objective,arq$ areranked based on relative priority - high, medium,or low - for initiatingactivities to attainthe objective.
. Reducefuels. Fuelsreduction lowers the risk of catastrophicfires .
HIGH: - Watershedswith Threatenedand Endangered fish species - Municipalsupply watersheds - Urbaninterface areas - Areasof criticalgame cover
MEDIUM: - Importantviewsheds - Old-growthareas - GeneralForest areas (roaded)
LOW: - GeneralForest (unroaded)
. Establishstand conditions which minimizeinsect epidemics.
HIGH: - Areasofcritical gamecover - Threatenedand Endangered species habitat, including riparian - Municipalsupply watersheds
MEDIUM: - Urbaninterface
LOW: - GeneralForest
Restoreponderosa pine on siteswhere the speciesis well adapted.
HIGH: - Areasof high fuel concentrations - Overstocked,multiple specics
MEDIUM: - Late seralwith ponderosapine overstory and grand fir or Douglas-firin understory
LOW: - Healthystands currently stocked with grandfir or Douslas-fir
t) ' Establishriparian vegetation to restoretemperature, bank stability, and sedimentloads whichmeet State water quality standards, and fishery needs.
HIGH: - Watershedswith Threatenedand Endangered species - Watershedwith streamsoutside water quality standards and wherethe change has benefits to theentire basin
- Residualwild stocks(Middle Fork JohnDay River Basin)
- Streamreaches with extensivebank instability and excessive sedimentloads.
MEDIUM: - Streamsoutside water quality standards where downstream influenceis notlikely
- Streamswith sensitivefish populations - anadromous or resident
LOW: - Streamswithin standardsbut thatcould be improved
' Managethe road system to (a) reducesediment, (b) provideaccess for management activities,and (c) controlaccess - big game,other wildlife species
HIGH: - Watershedswith Threatenedand Endangered species - Municipalsupply watersheds - Areasof criticalbig gamecover - Areaswhere critical access is restricted(e.g., fire). - Urbaninterface
. Managelivestock and big gameto improvewater quality, fish habitat,and upland watershedfunction.
HIGH - Riparianzones - Watershedswith Threatenedand Endangered fish - Streamswhich are outside State temperature standards
MEDIUM: - Areascompacted by livestock - Campgrounds - Streamswith fish populationsof specialconcern
LOW: - Uplandrange condition where needing improvement
l3 RECOMMENDATIONS
The oanelconcludes its work with two mainrecommendations:
1. Thisis a broadassessment, conducted quickly over a largearea of land. Its primary valueis that it identifiesthree broad conditions of foresthea'lth within the Blue Mountains:Use the results of this assessmentto focusefforts for restoration. Continueusing this approach to identifyareas within the river basins where restorationactivity is needed. 2. Throughoutthe Blue Mountains, there are sites, stream reaches, timber stands,and watershedsin needofrestoration, even in riverbasins where the ecosystems are generallyhealthy. Use the sections on long-termobjectives and activities to identify highpriority management activities for restoration.
Opportunitiesto Apply an EcosystemApproach
Duringthe course of theassessment, the panel identified a numberofways thatresource managersand specialists can continue working with thisecosystem approach:
l. Forestand Ranger District resource specialists can use various resource maps and inventoriesto validatethe ranges of naturalvariability and current conditionsshourn in thisreport. 2. Resourcespecialists and managers on theOchoco National Forest can apply the approachused in thisassessment to the portion ofthat forestthat is withinthe Blue Mountains. 3. Lookfor waysto applythis ecosystem concept to otherareas in Region6. 4. Work with Rl, Research,and the Region 6 EcologicalManagement Group to continuedeveloping the use of theSES approach. 5. Deve'lopand implement a prototypeplan for restorationof ariverbasinor watershed ecosystem. 6. ReviewForest Plan Standards and Guidelines, Desired Future Conditions, and MonitoringPlans to assesshow theyaddress ecosystem management. 7. Look for ecosystemrestoration funding opportunities outside of traditionalsources. Find waysto movetoward integrated funding.
t4 APPENDICES OESK FIEFERENCE
NORTHERNREGION USDAFOREST SERVICE MARCH,1992 R-1SES_92_02 March1992 Edition
OURAPPROACH TO SUSTAININGECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
INTRODUCTION
ln the springof 1991,the NorthernRegion began to lookat managingforests and grasslandsin a newway. 'SES.' Thisapproach is calledManaging for SustainingEcological Systems or SESis designedto implement the prioritythemes of the 1990Resource Planning Act (RPA).
SESpromotes efticienry by establishinga hierarchicalapproach to environmentalanalysis. Responsibilities are sharedby RangerDistricts, Supervisor's ffices, and the RegionalOffice. This approachprovides for a morethorough consideration of ecologicalsystem composition, structure, and function,that are bsst as- sessedat broadgeographic scales-such as sp€cies viability, landscape connectivity, and insectand disease - or firo regimes.
The objectiveof SESis to providea basisfor managementactivities that sustainthe ecosystemsfrom which multipleuses and valuesare derived.We must continueto providefor societalneeds within the legal mandatesimposed by suchlaws asthe NationalForestManagement Act and EndangeredSpecies Act, while emphasizingoptions for futuremanagement. - This guidancewill speciticallyaddress:
Basicconcepts
AnalysisresPonsibilities
- Analysismethods
ThisGuidance encourages all unitsto beginapplying the enclosedconcepts and procedures.Various factors will influencethe rate ol applicationon individualunits.
A-l CONCEPTS
To movsfoMard with a consistenteffort for SESws must all und€rstandsome basicconcepts:
Resourcesthat pro/ide goods,seNices, and an anay of valuesare the primarytocus ol our manage- mentefforts. SES is an ecologicalapproach to resourcemanagement. The DesiredCondition (DC) ot a landscapeat any scalemust account for the goods,sevices and amenitiesdesired by society.SES will not determineDC. This is a managementprerogativo that considerssocial and economicfactors SESwill set boundariesfor DC.
There are lbIggjeguglEqlglgs of the analysis process used for SES. 1. Environmentalanalysis proceduEs ars organizedaround the elementsof ecosystemand landscapetunction, composition, and structure.
2. The analysisis part of the assessm€ntof ecologicatcharacteristics in a hierarchyof geographicscal€s.
3. The analysisconsiders broad temporal and spatialscales.
Compositionis the kindsand amountsof elements,such arsplants, animals, and soil.
Struclureis the patternof distribuionof lhese elementsvertically and spatially.
Functionis the tlow of species,materials, and energywithin ecosystems,across landscapes,and throughtime. Functionincludes a diversityof process€s,such as succession,the bioticfood chain, fire,the hydrologicsystem, and ndrient cycling.
Hlerarchvrefers to the obseNationthat €cqrysterirsoccur In a nested arrangement,with smaller ecosrystemsfound within larger ones. The hierarctryorganizes the dominantecological factors as well as the essembledgesof plantsand animalsin an hierarchlalrelationship.
EgggygEllsoccur at all levelsin the hierarchy.Ecosystems exhibit a relativelyhomogenous nature in termsof tundion, compositionand structure.Human beings are a part ot the ecosystem.
Landscapesoccur at all levelsln the hierarchy,except for the site level.They are aggregatesof fungtionallyconnected ecosystems.
Spatialand temooralscales recognize that th€ Int€ractionb€tween cllmate, physical factors, and plant and animalassembleges, occur at a varietyof spatialscales across a landscapeand throughtime.
Biodiversivisthevariety of lifeand it's accompaningecological processes. Our approach to conserva- tion of biodiveritydepends upon managing whhin the boundsof naturalecological variability, and use of the CoarseFilter ConseNation Strategv. Naturalvariability is the variabilityin landscape/ ecosy$em composition,structure, and functionthat hasoccuned through recent adaptive evolutionary time. The CoarseFilter Strategy is basedon conservationof landscapelevel composition and structure,such as plantand animalcommunities, and emphasizesmainlenance of naturallunclional processes.
we willnot attemptto mimicnature or try to duplicatepresettlement conditions with our management,
A-2 Threatened.Endanqered, and SensitivesD€cies ar€ important. SES does not reducethe emphasison threat€ned, endangered, and sensitive OES) species. SES will not change the process for proiect evaludion ct TES sp€cios.Ths SESanavsis proc€sswill pro/ide a linkage betweenTES species and landscap€connec{ivity, on both spdial and tomporalscales, and improveour ability to estlmateviable populations.
Ecowstem health will be determinedby the state of the ec'osystemcompared to the naturalvariability inherertin that ecGystem.This appliesto forestheanh, long-term soil productivity,range condition, and compositionol plant and animalcommunities.
Foresiheahh will be consideredin a broadercor ext than insectand diseasemanagement. lt will includethe rolesand eftectsof inseclsand pathogensin ecosystemsand landscapes.
The amountand kind of Old-Gro/vth,and othsr seralstages, needed to sustainecological systems, will be oraluatedbased on the amount of natu.alvariation of successional$ages that occurred throughadaptive ecological timo.
Ecoloqicalw$em characterizationrsquires that we coordinateand share landscape/ecosystem characterizationat Regional,Forsst, and Oistrictlwels to assure consistency and efficiency.
Inventoryand data storaqewill requireuse of consistentmethods that are in placein R-1.The basic data systemtor analysis,planning and charact€rizationot landscapes/ecosystems is the North€rn RegionEoosystem, landscape, and resourceOATA system (ECODATA), which includesmap data bases,classification data bases, plot sampling data bases, the TimberStand Exam sampling system, and the TimberStand ManagementRecord System. Development of inventorytechniques and data base managementfor wildlife,fisheries, and TESwill continue.
Forest plan imolementationand monitorinqwill inco.porateand retine informationon ecological systemcomposition, structure, and function.D€sired conditions will b€ developedbased on Forest plan goals and oblectives.This providesa synthesisof social/economicneeds and values,and on managemer fo. sustainableecosystems. Desired cuditions will be developedin conten wfthunder- standingthe vaiability ol naturalocosystoms and hoJvih€y are affectedby humaninfluences.
Broadscale analyses are integralparts of the Regionaland Forestmonitorinq and evaluationeffons.
A-3 The Hlera.chy
The Regionwill use a hierarchyof geographicscales tor analysisand decisionmaking. This hierarchyis consistentwith ForestService planning levels and marrymaps and data systemspresently in use.The SES hierarclrycan bo correlatedto thoseused by th€ Stateof Montana,U.S. Fish and WildlifeService, National MarineFisheries Ssrvice, Environmental Protection Agency, Forest Servics management, other resource managementagencies, and those found in the ecologyand cons€rvationbiology literature.
Characterizationat arryhierarchial scale will be bas€d upon a re!/iewof the literature,data collectionand analysisto establishcommon patterns, and the use of shon-and long{erm models.In the tuture,the upper levelsof the hierarcfrywill be usefulto determinewhere to conductbiological evaluations for TES and in developingtechniques ancl inventory proc€dues to addressissues of populationviability, TES management, barriers/corridors,habitat capability models for fish and wildlile,and landscapeconnectivity.
GLOBAL- the global levelincludes the earthand its landscap€s/ecosystems.
This is a broad anavsis leveltypically used for internationaland nationalplanning and analysis.However, regionalanalysis may be conductedon intercontinerialrelationships, such as status ol migratorybkds betweenNorth and SouthAmerica, rate of spreadof exoticspecies from Europeand Asiato NorthAmerica, or air pollutantflow depositiontrom othercontinents to Nonh America.
Mapscommonly used to delineateglobal levelEcological Landscape Units (ELU)include Bailey's 'Ecore- gionsof the Continents(Bailey, 1989).'The scale of mappingfor this levelof analysisis 1:30,000,000.
CONTINENTAL- the continentallevelincludesthe NorthAmerican continenl and itslandscapes/ ecosystems.
Thisis a broadanalysis leveltypically used for nationaland regionalplanning. This levelof the hierarchywould involvebroad level asssssments, such as statusancl trends ol TES species,fire/fuels regimes and fire risk, hydrologicregimes and afilwaletquality, and toresthealth.
Mapscommonly used to delineatecontinental Ecological landscape Units include Bailey's'North American Ecoregions(Bailey 1981)'and Aldrich's'Life Areas ol NorthAmerica (Aldrich 1963).'The scale of mapping for this levelof analysisis 1:12,000,000.
PHYSIOGRAPHICREGION - the physiographicregion level includes parts of live regionswithin our Nonhern Regionadministrative boundary. These are the ColumbiasnaleRiver Plateau (nonh ldaho), Northern Rock- ies (nonhldaho, western Montana, and centralMor ana),Middl€ Rockies (south-central Montana & Yellow- stoneNP), Nonhern Great Plains (eastern Montana, w€stem North Dakota, northwestern South Dakota), and NorthernCentral Lowlands (eastern Nonh Dakota),In adclition,physiographic regions that are adiacentto our Regionwould be analyzedrelative to connectedecological systems or attributes.
Thislevelotthe hierarcy would involve broad future Regional levelassessments, such as air pollution,weather systems,fire/ fuel regimesand lire risk,and grazingrsgimes. This is the levelof analysisthat wouldtypically deal with ecologicalsystems and elementsthat ars conn€ctedto adiacentForest Service administrative regions.
A-4 Maps commonv us€d to delineateEcological Land Units at this le\relinclude Bailey's 'Ecoregion, Land- surtaoeForm, and HydrologicUnit Mapsof the UnitedStates (Bail€y 1982), Omernik's 'Ecoregions of the ConterminousUnit€d States (Omemik 1984, Kuchl€r's'Potential Natural Vegetation of the Conterminous UnitedStaes (Kuchler 1964),' and the SoilCons€rvaton Servic€ 'Soils Map for the Unitedgtates.' ln addition, variousmap6 cf TES and other key speciesdislribution, status, migratory routes, and corridorswill be de\relopedat th'rslevel. Base maps will also b€ dwelop€d at this levelfor species distribution (both tenestrial and aquatic),reliEf (elardion), broad climde factors,and existingvegetation from satelliteremote sensing. The scaleof mappingat this levelvaries lrom 1:1,q)0,q)Oto 1:5,000,000.The pixel (polygon)size for the satelliteremote sensing vogetation map will b€ appoximately25rO acres (1 squarekilometeo.
PHYSIOGRAPHICZONE - physiographiczonos aro subdivisions cf physiographicregions based primarily on climateand topograptry.The zonesthat will b€ analyz€dwithin the NorthernRegion adminislrative bound- arieswill be northemldaho, western Montana, central Montana, eastern Montana, western Dakotas, and easlernDakotas.
Assessmentsat this lev6lwill be Regionalvcoordinatecl with analysisteams from Forestsin each zone, Assessmentsat this levelwill emphasizocoordinatsd landscape/ ecosystem characterizations to improve efticiency,successional stage classmcation description by zone habitattype groups,landscape unit delin- eationacr6s forestand zone boundaries, literdure revi€r rsforfunction, composition, and structure,lherature reviewsrelated to eftectsanalysis, satellite remote s€nsing vegetation mapping, modeling to characterize naturalvariability, and developmentof climatomaps. This levelwill play a keyrole in the developmentof future approachesto populationviability, TES managementand wildlifehabitat capability models.
Maps commonlyused to delineateEcological Land Unitsat this scale includethe land systeminventory subsectionmaps, DEM elevation data, National Weather Service zone map, climate characlerization, satellite remotesensing vegetation map, and presettlementvegetation map. In addition,other maps showing habitat type groupd€lineations, and hydrologymaps will b€ usecl.The scaleof mappingat this levelvaries between 'l:100,000and 1:500,000.
PHYSIOGMPHICAREA - physiographicareas ar€ subdivisionsot physiographiczones based on similar land-sudacefonyvprocess and hydrologic system.Thes€ areas will be defined by the zone analysis teams who will commonlydelineate mountain ranges and associatedaiver basins. An examplelandscape delin- eationat this la/el would bo the Sapphk€Mountain Rangs and associatedBinerroot River and Rock/Flint CreekRiver Basins.
Thislevel ot assessmentrequires coordination b€tw€sn regional, zone, and Forestteams. Characterization of presettlementconditions, natural variability, landscap€ / ecosystemfunction, composition, and structure, connecteclnessto adlacentphysiographic areas, tra/el linkageassessment, and lragmentation assessement all occur at this level.
Keymaps and predictivemodels used at this lw€l c'f analysisinclude landtype associationmaps, habitattype groupmaps, reliet maps, historic and existingvegetation maps, habitat suitability maps, species distribution maps,habitat typ€ groupsuccessional stage characterization, and modelingof naturalecological variation. Map scalescommonly range from 1:10O,0O0and 1:5O0,00O.
A-5 RIVERBASIN - the fiver basin level of analysisuses suMivisionsof physiographicareas based on the standardUSGS hydrologic unit map.These river basins are identifiedin FSM2513.2 at the 4th code level.
Thisanalysis lev€l is keyto futureForest level planning. At this le\relwat€rsheds are delineated and prioritized for SESassessment (e.9., Bin€rroot River Basin). Characlerizations and analysisconducted at the physio- graphic zone and area l€vels ars us€d as basic data lor conducting coars€ filter style analysisto determine amountof departureof existingconditions trom th€ naturalrange ot ecologicalvariability at this level.
A variety of ecosystem,landscape, spscies, and human aclivity maps, and ecologicallandscape unit classificationsare used at lhis level.Most ot thesemaps ancl classifications are similarto those usedat the physiographicarea level. Map scalescommonly range b€tween 1:60,000 and 1:100,000.
WATERSHED- watersheds are subdivisionsot th€ rivsrbasin level. These delineations have been detined in FSM2513.2 at the 5th or 6th code level.An examplewaterched in the Bitterrootriver basinwould be Lower-UpperSkalkaho.
This analysislevel is keyto Forestancl District identification ot managementneeds and productionof goods and services.Management treatments will b€ dssign€d to move ths watershedtowards a sustainable ecologicallandscape whh less departurefrom naturallandscape / ecosystemfunction, composition, and structure.This is the levelat whichstands are identmedd|d selectedfor treatmentto meetecological and resourceobieclives. There are a varietyof ecosystem,landscape, spscies, and humanactivity maps, and ecological/ landscapeunit classificationsused at this level.
Mostof the mapsand classiticationsused at the physiographicarea and riverbasin are commonlyrequired for watershedlev€l proiect planning and anatysis.More refined classilication and modelingof successional stagesrelative to ecologicalcomposition, slructure, resource values, and changeover time will be developed usingsite-specific data. Map scalesat this leveltypically range b€tween 1:24,000 and 1:60,000.
STANDor REACH- the stand or reachlevel is a subdivisionof the watsrshedlevel. Stands are vegetation standsthat delineaterelatively homogeneous patchG ol existingvegetation on relativelyhomogenous site conditions.Stand delineationsinclude: 1) foresl standsol ditferentcomposition, size class,and canopy closure,2) nonforeststands of grass,forb, shrub, and various combinations of thesespecies, and 3) riparian zonesor stripsthat occursalong stream courses. The riparians{ands are very importantin theirrelationship to the hydrologicsystem and uplandsystems. These riparian stands should be delineatedas separatestands usinga polygonor lineteature. The stand is th€ keyanalysis level for designingsilvicultural, grazing, burning, or othertreatments to meetobiectives identified at th€ watersh€dlevel of analysis.
The reachis the equivalentto the standlevel for hydrologicand aquaticsystem analysis and management. Riverand streamreaches are identifiedusing a code thd is hierarchialto the watershedcode. All reaches shouldbe codedand mappedusing the slandardsystem describ€d in the NorthernRegion Riparian, Aquatic, and WetlandSampling Procedure Guide.
Mostof the maps and classilicationsused d this levelare similarto those used at the watershedlevel of analysis.However, specific habitat type maps,stand maps, adclitional she-specific data, site-specific moclel proiections,and landtypephase maps may be neededfor treatmentdesign. Map scaleswill rangefrom 1:12000to 1:24000.
A-6 SITE- the site levelis primarilyused tor prolectconstruction, sampling, and monitoring.However, site level identiticationof specialhabitats, tisheries and aquaticconditions, and humanactivities, is often necessary for standand reachtreatmer levelplanning. Sites are sp€cmc bcations identified within stands and reaches for specifcsampling, monitoring, or managementpurposes. Locations are identifiedas subcomponentsor samploswithin stands or wateGheds and / or with longitude/ latitude (or UTM) locations.
The site is typically the basic l€vel at which €ffecis on funclion, oomposition,and structure occur, but the aggregate of efiects is assessedand managed at higher levels in the hierarchy,
Point locationsof proiscts,samples, and monitoringsites and adiyiti€s are locatgd on maps at the stand and watershed lq/els of analysis.
ANALYSISFESPONSIBIUTIES
The ReaionalOtfice, in coop€rationwith the WashingtonOlfic€, othe. Regions,Pacific Northwest, Rocky Mourfiainand lr ermountainResearch Stations, and Univ€rsitieswill be responsiblefor conductingmoni- toring anclevaluation at the Globalthrough Ptrysiographic Region scal€s.
TheR€qional Oftice and Forestswill coop€rate in th€ monitoringand evaluationof PhysiograhicZones and Areasthrough the use of thg RO lDT,zon€ t€ams, detailers, and contractings.
Forestswill completethe monitoringand NFMIy'NEPAanalysis ot RiverBasins, Watersheds, Stands, and Sitesbased on priorities,guidelines, and obigctivssidentmed in higherlevels ot analysis.
A-7 ANALYSISMETHODS
Sc.le ot Analysl3
Analysiswill extend o/er differentlevels in the hierarcfrydepending on the elementsthat ars to be addressed. -
Anavsis Scales and Relationshipto EcologicalSystems and Elements
Stand Plryrlogrrphb Phy.logr.phlo Phy.logr$hio Fllv.r or Gbbd Contlncnlrl Rggbn Zonc Af.. B.rln Wat€Dhod Roach Slts Air Oualiv Wate.Ouality Woathor Hydrology Fish/Aquaric Sysl6mo Goomorphic proc6e9et
Fir€/Fu€ls Begime & Ri.k
Coftidora
Tfavsl Llnkqgea
TES Vlqblllty
Ffagmentalion
Habitat Relationehipe
Forest Insoctsand Pathogen6
NutriontClcling,/ LongtermSoil Producllon
Grszing Rogime
Succeggion- Community Struoture/ Composhlon
At the RiverBasin scale, ths analysismay bo bas€do{l extensiveir ormationand iudgment.At the Watersh€d scale, analysisshould b€ based upon the b€st arailable quar ificationol etementsand pr@€sses,The same ecosystemelements and processesare used for both naturalancl existing condition descriptionsto facilitate comparison.
A-8 Anelysb Elomenta
The followingelements and processesare suggest€dfor consideration:
FORESTEDSYSTEMS Amount,Patch Size, Patch Shape, and StandStruc{ure for Earlyseral vegetation Mid seralvegetation Leteseral park like stands Lateseral/tolerant multilayer stands Mid- and late seralforest edge OTHERTERRESTRIAL SYSTEMS Comoosition Patch size Patchshape Structure AOUATIC Composition E)der Structure PROCESSES Fireregime Hydrologicregime Inseclsand pathogensregime PROBABIUTYOF CHANGE Wildfirerisk Rateof succesion Riskof insectmortality Riskof diseaseeffects Channelstability etfects Exoticsoecies O{her- Overallrisk of change
. SOILPRODUCTIVITY DAMAGE Soil erosion Soil compaction Soil displacment - Groundcover
ROADEDGE ' Ooen roads Closedroads
Rangeof Natu.al Verlablllty
An importantconcept of SESanalysis is a comparisonot existingconditions at variousgeographic scales, withthe estimatedrange ol naturalvariabilitythat determinedthe characterof bioticcommunities and species nativeto the area.lt is this comparisonwith natural vaiability that proridesthe basisfor conservingbiodiver- sity (i.e.,Coarse Filteo, thus maintainingth€ viabilityof most sp€ciesboth knownand unknown.
The SES proiectwill developimproved methods of long-termmodeling, tree growth ring analysis,pond sedimentanalysis, and other techniquesto characterizenatural variability. However, in the interim,the processot historicalcharacterization of the periodfrom mid-l80O to mid-l900,is a soundway to improveour understandingot our ecosystemsand landscap€s.This historiccharacterization will also aid the Regional
A_9 levelanalysis and will be aggre€atedto coarserscales in the hierarchy.Natural, successional variability within ecologicallandscape units will be characterizdthrough historical mapping of vegetationtypes. This will be donetor a subsetof watershedsto developa soundunderstanding of the ctynamicsof vegetationover time. Firesuppression by modernman was implementedat low lwels in the early1900's, increased in the 1930's, and becamefairly otfective in the 1950's.Due to the largemosaic type firesthat occurredat 20-to 3o-year intervalsprior to 1920,fuels were at fairly low levelsduring the 1920'sand thirties.Consequently, most ignitionswere relativelyeasy to extinquishby earlytorest fire tightingcrews.
In general,the periodfrom the mid-'1800'sto mid-190o'scan bs acceptedas a pictureof'natural. succession- al.changeat the landscapelevel. lf the watershedyou are assessinghas been directlyaffected by historic miningor settlementactivity, b€fore or duringthat period,you shouldpick a similarwdtershed thdt has not had direct eftects,characterize the area, and extrapolatethe relationshipsfor analysisof the analysis watershed.
From1950 to present,fire suppressionbecame fairly eftec{ive, and unnaturaltueland vegetationconditions stanedto develop.Harvest, using traditional torestry techniques also became common in manywatersheds sincethe.1950's, causing unnaturalcomposition, structure, patch size, patch shape, patch juxtdposition, and roadcorridorsand edge.The intro-cluctionol nonnativespecies, such as blisterrust and sioned knapweed, alsohave.had significant etfects. Consequently, the time periodfrom 1950'sto the presentcannot be used to exemplifynatural variation, but can b€ usedto assesseffects of modernman's denlement and manage- ment.
The rangein amountsot seralstages, patch size and shape,and ratesof changecan be usedto establish a generalidea or pictureof naturalvariability in th€ss elements.Use the literaiureto verifyand refinethe spatial,structural, compostion, and temporalcharacterizations d€,t eloped forthe various typ6s of watersheds beinganalyzed.
NFMAand NEPAAnalysls
Furtherinformation on analysisprocedures will b€ foundin Chapterstitled Ecological System Description and Mapping;Characterization of Successionand Associated Information; Characterization ol NaturalEcosystem and LandscapeVariability; Assessing Change in Landscap€Patterns and Conditions;Forest Health; Frag- mentation,Corridors, and Viability;and AquaticSystems, and TES.
The generalapproach consists of four steps.They are:
Conslderlhe dlrecitlonIn the Forest Plan,NFMA, ESA, lncludlng vlablllty ot na ve and deslrable Introducedapecles, 8nd TES specle3,as well as requlrementaIn other substan ve leglsla on.
Compareexlstlng condltlonsto the range of natutal varlablllty.
Consldel plotectlon toa rare elements,e.g., rare communltlee,geologlc, ot other slgnfflcant landscapefealutes.
Basedupon the preceedlngthree stepo,ldentlty opportunltlesto malnteln,or restore ecologlcal systemsand paoducea full range of goods, servlces,and values.
The developmentof the DesiredConditions (DC) and seloctionof prolectsis a managemertprerogative and musttake into account both social/ €conomicand sustainableecosystem obiectives. The NEPAanalysis and otherdocuments needed for implementationwill bo develop€dand incorporatedby referenceto the docu- mentationdeveloped in the IRAproceslt. Broad-scale analysis that will eqsistin the developmentof DC,as well as thoseto assistin maintainingviable populations and TES,will be conductedin the next Z years,
In the lnterlm,Districts will identifypossible management ptactices based on availablelunding, to produce the goods,services, amenities, and improyedecological conditions based on the abor'efour-step approach, as detailedin the follorringstrategy. A-10 Forestmonitoring, and NFMAand NEPAanalysis, will usually start with information from the RiverBasin level. However,fac'tors like fire risk and viability,should b€ address€d d broader scales as shown in the 'SCALE OF ANALYSIS'section of this Guide.
1. SelectWatersheds within a RiverBasin for potentialproiect locations.
This is accomplish€dthrough an InterdisciplinaryT€am process. The ForestPlan may providedirec- tion to focuson paticularwatershecls. Th€ teamevaluates Watersheds in a RiverBasin by comparing generalexisting conditions to whatthey would deline as naturaltylunctioning systems. The listof items in the'ANALYSISELEMENTS'sec'tion of this guide should be usedtorthis assessment.Some general knowledgeot grounclconclitions in the Watershedsis required.At the RVerBasin scale, this analysis may bo bas€d on extensiveinlormation and ludgement. 2. Characlerizepriority Watersheds for rangeof naturalcomposition, structure, and function.
Once Watershedshave been selectodtor turtheranalysis, the naturalcomposition, structure, and functionwill be characterizedfor the clominantecosystem and landscapeelements, and for high-value minor elements.This characterizationshould us€ the same itemsas the RiverBasin analysis (see ANALYSISELEMENTS in this guide)and shouldb€ quantifiedwhere data is available.
Ecologicallandscape units (ELU) are used to identifyan aggregateot geographicallyand functionally connectedecosystems that haverepeatable patterns with predictable response to etfectsof process- es, such as fire, hydrology,weather, landscape connectivity, and mosaicsuccession. These land- scapeunits are generally delineated using similar landforms that are connectedfrom valley bottom to mountaantoPs.
At the Watershedlevel, an ELUwould usuallybe identifledby combiningadiacent landtypes from valleybonom to mountaintop that havesimilar drainage aspect and density,and historicvegetation panerns.The responseot fire behavior,trydrologic tlow, weather, and landscapeconnectivity should be predictablewithin the ELU.An ELUwill typically repeat itself within a watershedand in othersimilar watersheds.
Characterizationof ecologicallandscape units provides efficienry in inventoryand analysisbecause the informationobtained can be usedwherever the unit is repeated.
3. Describeexisting conditions in prioritywatersheds.
Existingconditions at a watershedlewl arecharactorized using existing timber stand and rangestand maps,along with watershed,fire, wildlife, and otherresource information. Insect and diseaseetfecls, lightningtire starts,and man-causedtire siartsshould b€ mappedfor the area usingwhatever data is available.The successional stages, patch siz€s, shape, and structurewill be characterizedusing the same definitionsand criteriaas tor the naturalsituation in step 2. This providesconsistency in interpretation.Landscape connectivity, location data, and habitatrelationships are alsodeveloped lor the €xistingconditions.
Evaluatetheprobability that existing conditions may change using fire riskanalysis, insect and disease risk models,windthrow risk, mass wasting risk, severedrought risk, successionalchange rates, presenceor absenceof wildlife,and hydrologictlood data.Us€ a ratingot low,moderate or high risk to reflecthow existingconditions may change in th€ near future. Indiciesmay be used. A risk assessmertperiod ot 10 yearsis suggesledbased on a G to lGyear cycle of droughtyears which is characterisliclor the Region.
Usingthe successionalstage rates of changed€veloped in step2, or specificPROGNOSIS, FORSUM, or ECOCI-ASSmodel proiections, develop a scenariofor the futuregiven no catastrophicevents or vegetationmanagement treatments. This proiection,at a minimum,should look at conditionsat 20
A-I I years in the tuture, and assessgeneral trends at 10Oyears. Consider any differencein .isk ot change at future time periods.
4, Conducta ooarsetilter evaluation.
Evaluateth€ statusand conditionsof €l€m€ntsol ecosystemand landscapecomposition, structure, and function. Emphasizemeasureable €cosystem and landscapeelements and processes.Comparg the existingsituation charactsrizedin step 3 with the natural range of conditions characterlzsdin step 2. ldentifyolements that are not withinthe range of naturalconditions of ecosystemcomposition, strucutre,and function. lclentifykey tunctionalprocess€s and e\raluatetheir exisiing conditions relative to ndurally functioning lanclscapesand ecosystems.
Assessthe connectionsot the watershedrelative to adiacentwatersheds in termsof travellinkages, fragmentation, potential fire connections, and hydrologic systenrs. Assess the connections of the watershedto coarserscale landscap€s in termsof oorridorsfor wicteranging species, tragmemation, air^,veather,and hydrologicsystems. Evaluat€ rars communities in thewatershed and determineif they are rare due to natural rarity or due to man-causedloss ot habitat or etfects of pollutants.
Answertho followingquestions to ths b€stol th€ lD Team'sability, based on the informationavailable.
1) Oo the existingconditions fit withinthe naturalvariation of ecologicalcomposition and structurethat occurredthrough adaptive time?
2) Are funtionalprocesses opsrating across the landscapeunit similarto naturalprocesses, such that the diversityof speciesare experiencingconditions with whichthey evolved?
Historicaland existingcharacterization of ecosystemand landscapeelements and processestrom steps2 and 3 can be graphicallydisplayed. For €xample,the followingdepicts the frequencyol late s€ralpark-liko stages orer time withina landscap€unit. I %30t Fl R20t trl ols ul E10 Nl c5 Y tt I rttt 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 PRESENT
Th€ g.aphical display of historicchang€ in an el€m€.t or proc€ss,as depicted abo/e, p,ovides a basis for assessnent of condfiionsot departure.In this exampl€the period from 189Oto 195O,can generally be acceptedas an indicationof changesduring a short'natural' period. Based on this example,it can be generallyconcluded that the amountof late seralpa*like stagesis in significantdepanure from the naturalsystem and conditionsthat bioticsp€cies adapted to throughe\rolutionary time.
Recognizethat significantevents may have@urred during and priorto this period relativeto:
a. livestock grazing, which reduced fine herbaceous fuels, thereby reducing probability ol ignitionand rate of spread: A-I2 b. miningand pr€senced miners,which resulted in harvestot timberfor tuelwood and mine timbers,and their presencemay haveincreased fire ignitions;
c. restrictionson NativeAmericans, which may ha\redecreased the amountof fire ignitions;
d. railroads,military movements, and earlyagricultural settlement, which may havereduced or increasedignitions, and decreasedfire spreadby providingbarriers;
€. conoentratedhunting and trapping,and the loss of large herds of ungulatesand their preddors, from the foothills and plains €fwironments;
f. a shift of foothills and plains ungulat€s,and associat€dpredators, irto thE protection of the mountainenvironments.
Rangestor key SES elementsand processesin rslationto existingconditions is shown in the following display.The ## sign indicatespresent conditions while the +++ showsthe rangeof naturalconditions.
++++++++++++ Running Crown Flro R6gimo ## +++++++++++++ Late Ssral Pa.kllko +++++++ #* Late Se.al Tolerant Muhlstory +##+++++++ ++ ++++++ + Lalo Soral Pstoh Siz€ ++++++ ## Root Oi6easo Rlsk +++++++ #* Mountein Pine B€.llo Ri.k ** +++++++ RiparlanShrub Compo.itlon ++##++++++++++++++ Ch6nnol StabiliV I 0102030 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 RANGEOF CONDITIONS
In this example,we can generallyconclude that the amountof lateseral (parklike) stands has been greatly reduceddue to suppr€ssiionof groundfires and some harvestot the largetrees. The amountot late seral standswith tolerantmultiple layered understory has increas€ddue to fire suppression.
Patchsize of the lates€ral stage is within its naturalrange, but on the low end dueto fragmentationwith small cuttingunits and roads.Root disease has increased much higher than natural due to presenceof susceptible toleranttree sp€cies.Mountain pine beetlehas increasedmuch higherthan naturaldu€ to the increasein maturelodgepole pine.
The resultof combinedeffects is a muchhigher tuel loadingand continuitythan natural,and an associated higherthan naturalrisk of runningcrown fire. ll a largerunning crown fire occurs,this willfurther reduce the amountof lateseral foresl, create large patches ot earlyseraltypes, and possiblyreduce the sizeof remaining lateseral patches to lessthan what occunednaturalv.
It is importantto evaluatetheconnectedness of scologicalelementsand processes.Eventhough all elements and process€smay b€ withintheir range of naturalvariability, we may loseelements or processesbecause they are on extremeends ot theirranges. lt is alsoimportant to identifyrelatively indep€ndent elements and processestrom dependentelements and processes.
Anotherimportant concept is that risk of eventsincreases over time, if the condhionsstay the same or continuein the s€lmedirection. Given enough time, the systemshown above will have a largerunning crown fire.The probabilityover an 8o-yearperiod esser ialtyreaches 100 percent.Conditions may be at a point wherethere is littlewe can do with our managementto changethe courseof probability,without excessive investmentof dollars.
A-r 3 Describ€rare elemer s, e.9., plant communitles,geological features, €tc. that requireconservation measures.
6. ldentifymanagement opportunities and possiblepractices.
Theidentification of managemeropportunities is guicled by legalrequirements including NFMA and ESAand the coarsetilter evaluation in step 4. Theseopponuniti€s for goods,services, and produclionof amenities should:
a. p.ovide tor maintonanceot sustainable€cosystems,
b. provide for restorationof ecological systems.
The characlerizationsof rangeof vegetationconditions lrom Step2 shouldbe the basislor the Silviculturist to developTarget Stands for diagnosisot treatmentneeds. Target stands should describs optimum condi- tionstormeeting resource needs and at th€ sametimo pro/ide those conditions of composition,structureand patch sizethat are withinthe rangeot naturalvariability. This is a rationalbasis for prescribinqsivicultural treatmentsthat mav deviatefrom lraditionalpractice.
The charact€rizationo{ ranggof vegetationconditions from step 2 shouldalso be the basistor the Range Con, Fire Manager,Biologist, and other disciplinesto de\relopdesired communities or landscapesand identifytreatment needs.
An obiectfuefor SES is to id€ntitythe conditionsof an analysisarea in comparisonto the rangesof natural variabilityto whichbiota are adapted.Managem€nt actions will differdep€nding upon howclose we wantto approachnatural conditions. In wildernesswe may wari high similarityto naturalvariability.
Wecan g€nerally assume that ifwe areoutside the.ang6 of ndural conditionswe willnot maintain biodiversity or ecologicalfunction, and thereforewill not sustainecological systems. This will eventuallyresuh in the reductionof land productivity,loss of optionsfor management,and lowersustainability for humanuses and values.Therefore, our obiectivefor mostwildland environments would be to managein such a mannerthat most of the elementsand processesboth landscapesand €cosystemsare within the range of natural systems.
SUMMARY
All ol the scalesin the hierarclryare related.Al large.scales, the abilityto sustainecosystem processes may be compromisedby an irrelrievablecommitment of the land to other uses.Even so, the ecosystemswe manageare resilientand adaptable.This has b€en d€monslratedby thousandsof years of maiorclimate shiftsand occurr€nceof catastophice\rents during recentgeologic history. Our efiort in SES is to bound managementetlorts on NationalForest lands, by lhs rangeof naturalvariability, as we understandit.
To a cenainextent this €ffonwill, over time, atfect th€ way other owners viofl managementon theirown lands.
This guidanceis a trarneworkfor thinkingabout, and actingon, a philosophyof managementthat tells us sustainingth€ ecologicalsy$ems of the NorthemRockies is of primaryimportance. As we continueto learn aboutthe applicationof this philosophywe will shareour new kno$rledgeand refinethese guidellnes.
A-14 UTERATURECITED
Aldrich,J.w. 1963.Lite areas of NorthAm€rica. J. WildlifeManagement; 27:530-531.
Bailey,R.G. 1989a Ecoregionsof the continenrs.supplement to Erwironmentalconservation;16(4). 1 map.
Bailey,R.G. 1989b. Explanatory supplemer to €corsgionsmap cf the continents.Erwironmental Conservation;16(4) :307€09.
Bailey,R.G. 1982. Ecor€ion, land-surfacetorm and hydrologicunit maps of the UnitedStates. Frsh and Wildlits Service,U.S. Departmentc'l tho lr orior. FWS/OBS€?og. 3 maps.
Bailey,R.G. 1981. Ecoregions of NorthAmerica. Fish and Wi|dlifeSsrvice and GeologicalSuNey, U.S.Department of the Interior.FWS/OBS€1/29. 1 map.
Kuchler,A"W. 1964. Poternial Natural vegetdion of the conterminousUnited Statos. Am. Geog.Soc. Spec. Publ.36. I 16 p and map.
Omernik,J,M, 1987.Ecoregions ot contsrminousUnited States. Annals of Assoc,Amer, Geog, 77i1A-125,
A-15 APPENDIXB Descriptionof EcosystemElements and Processes
Introduction
The analysistechnique of theIntermountain Region of theForest Service (Region l) called SustainableEcologica'l Systems (SES) was used by the Blue MountainsRestoration Panel for evaluatingcategories of existingconditions dealing with foresthealth. The following contains descriptionsand interpretations of theseelements.
The Blue MountainRegion encompasses four NationalForests: Umatilla, Wallowa-Whitman, Malheur,and Ochoco. The regionis dividedinto threephysiographic zones based primarily on climateas follows'
Marine PhysiographicZone: Characterizedby slightlymodified marine climate which moves up the ColumbiaRiver gorge. ContinentalPhysiographic Zone: Characterizedby continentalclimate which haspassed over the Coastand Cascade Ranges and across the inter-mountainsagebrush basin Mixed PhysiographicZone: Characterizedby intermixingof themarine and continental climates.
Elementsused for the SustainableEcological Systems (SES) approach occur in all physiographic zonesat differentranges of naturaloccurrence. They areonly a few of the manypossible. Each elementselected could have many additional sub-elements associated with it. Five kinds of conditionswere selected as listed below: 1. Climaxpotential for Douglas-fir,grand fir andsubalpine fir. Otherclimax forest sitepotentials are not included(ponderosa pine, whitebark pine, quaking aspen, black cottonwoodfor example). Threeelements are identified within this group:early seral, late seralparkJike, and late seraltolerant multistory. 2. Highdensity or low vigorstands susceptible to barkbeetle attack. Two elementsare stands dominated by ponderosapine or lodgepolepine in both climaxand seral ecological roles. 3. Fuel loadingwhere dead and down woody material is expressedas a percentageof totalbiomass on thesite (total is liveplus dead).
4. Statusof westernjuniper colonization of formerfire maintainedgrasslands. 5. Streamsideconditions. Two elementsare shrubby potential and bank stability.
B-1 Elementdescriptions, natural range of occurrenceby physiographiczone, current stand conditions,and some interpretations follow.
ElementDescrintions
Early Seral openingsin Douglas-fir,grand fir andsubalpine fir climaxpotential forests caused by natural disturbancesuch as fire, blowdown, insect kill, or a combinationof these.An openingis defined as:less than 60 percentcanopy cover of treesless than 2 inchesdiameter breast height (dbh); habitatfor wildlife that meetsthe criteriafor thosespecies inhabiting openings for reproduction, feeding,or both.
Thenaturrl occurrenceof openingswas estimated using the following factors:
Age classof westernlarch which requires openings for regeneration,usually caused by crom fire. If larchaverages 200 yearsold and30 yearselapse from fire to saplingsgreater than 60 percentcover, then openings will naturallyoccur about l5 percentof thetime.
Age classesof lodgepolepine stands which seem to havea somewhatunique natural cycle. Whenlodgepole approaches I to l0 inchesdbh, it becomessusceptible to mountainpine beetle which kill the dominanttrees or the wholestand. The dead standis thenmost prone to fire which burnseliminating all regeneration.This sequenceseems to explainhow lodgepole pine has bumed two or moretimes adjacent to 250year old grandfir. Agesof lodgepolepine stands sampled in theBlue Mountains.for ecologyplots seemed to beabout 40 yearsapart, i.e. 40, g0,and 120 yearsold suggestingbeetle attacks about every 40 years.If beetlekilled lodgepole standslast five yearsuntil burned,and then take another 25 yearsto reachsaplings greaterthan 60 percent cover, an average 100 year old lodgepoleecosystem will have openconditions about 30 percent of thetime.
Someunique plant communities have long time delays between fire andfull stocking. Douglas-fir/ninebarkis the primaryexample. After fire, shrubcompetition is so severethat openings may remainpoorly stockedfor up to 50 years,about 33 percent of the average150 year old Douglas-firstand.
Thenrtural rangeof openingsis asfollows:
Marine PhysiographicZone: 20-40percent of theDouglas-fir, grand fir and subalpinefir types. Areabased on distributionof larch,lodgepole pine, and ninebark shrubfields.
B-2 Mixed PhysiographicZone: 10-30percent of the fir typesbased on distributionof lodgepolepine, larch and some ninebark shrubfields.
ContinentalPhysiographic Zone:0-20 percentof the fir typesbased on the very high occurrenceof underburnmaintained ponderosa pine much of which is successionalto fir.
Current openings,due to fire suppression,are somewhat different. They arelargely regenerationunits, salvage units from beetle,tussoc moth andspruce budworm damage, and somewildfires.
Interpretation: Whenexisting early seral conditions are below the lower naturalrange, considerthat current stands may be extendedin their naruralrotation resulting in lower tree vigor, denserstands, higher fuel buildup,and greater susceptibility to insectsand disease. If currentconditions are above the naturalrange, current rotations may be shorterthan natural resultingin smallertree sizes and less fuel buildup. Treevigor may not be goodin densestands.
Late Seral parklike Standswhich were naturally maintained by light, periodicunderbums usually resulting in nearly pureoverstories ofponderosa pine and in somecases western larch. Oldertrees of the overstory exceed120 years in age. The treeunderstory is generallyless than 20 percentcover. Fuelstend to be low, 1-5tons per acrein ponderosapine and some what higher, l0-20 tonsper acre,in westemlarch. Theseare ponderosa and larch stands successional to Douglas-firand true firs. Their naturalsimple structure and species dominance developed as a survivalmechanism in a dry lightningstorm climate.
Park-likestands vary from ponderosapine maintenancein a Douglas-firclimax with periodic underbumingcycles at 6-12year intervals to larchstands resulting from crownfire which are underbumedat 40 to 60 yearcycles. Long underbumingcycles of larchon grandfir and subalpinefir sitesseems to be a temporarysituation where firs candominate the standswith one interruptionof theunderburning cycle. In thesecases, "open parkJike" conditionsoccur for only 20 to 30 yearsof theunderbuming cycle.
The natural occurrenceof late seralparkJike stands was estimated using the following criteria:
Typemaps ofponderosa pine as SAF types 214 and 237 where ponderosa pine must be a significantcomponent (214) to dominant(237). These have been supplemented by newermaps of ponderosapine occunence. Oldermaps of westemlarch SAF types2l'2 and213 wereused in conjunctionwith currentlarch distribution. For this assessment.larch had to be morethan 20 oercent of the overstorytree component.
Thenatural rangeof openpark-like stands is asfollows:
B-3 Marine PhysiographicZone:25-40 percent ofthe Douglas-firand true fir types.A majorityis westemlarch with 40-60year underburning cycles which means that about half of the larchstands would have been in the "openpark-like" condition if it lastsfor 20 to 30 yearsafter burning.
Mixed PhysiographicZone: 50-70 percent ofthe Douglas-firand true fir types. Ponderosapine stands have 15 to 25 yearunderburning cycles and tend to be more commonthan larch at 30-50year cvcles.
Continental PhysiographicZone: 70-90percent of theDouglas_fir and true fir types. A vastmajority of the areawas in ponderosapine at g-20year underburn cycles.
current condition of late seralparkJike tends to be very differentdue to g0 yearsof fire suppressionand 50 yearsof logging. Fire suppressionhas permitted Douglas-fir and true firs to regenerateand often become dominant in the stand.Logging has selectively harvested overstory ponderosapine andlarch. So currentconditions may vary betweenthe following:
Ponderosapine (or occasionallylarch) greater than 50 percentof its originaloverstory coverwith openfir regeneration,i.e. lessthan 30 percentcover.
Ponderosapine (and occasionally l4rch) greater than 50 percent of it original overstorycover with densefir regeneration,saplings, poles and small sawtimber.
Ponderosapine (andoften larch) less than 50 percentof its originaloverstory cover with fir regeneration,saplings, poles, and often small sawtimber at variousdensities.
Ponderosapine andlarch harvested from the siteleaving multilayered fir.
Interpretation: when existingconditions are below the lowernatural range, fuel loadingsare higherthan natural which, in associationwith abovenatural density offir, createsa crown fire environmentinstead of underbuming.conditions below natur4l also indicate multistorv stnrctureand greater tree species diversity than occuned in naturalstands, a characterisiic considereddesirable for wildlife habitat.Maintaining stands in a non-naturalcondition requires effort,money, and risk. To datethis is reflectedin fire suppressionand pre-commerical thinning costs.Risk is associatedwith promptfire suppressionto preventcrown fire. Late SeralTolerant Multistory standsdominated by Douglas-fir,grand fir or subalpinefir with 2 or moretree layers. Ponderosapine and./or larch, ifpresent, are less than 20 percentof the overstory(occasional occurrence).under naturalconditions these are stands approaching climax condition. In many casesearly seral species such as lodgepole pine, larch and ponderosa pine aredead and down. No agecriteria are required, only two or morelayers (sizes) of trees.
B-4
}- The natural occurrenceof tolerantmultistory stands was estimated using the following criteria.
Typemaps ofSAF typesfor Douglas-fir,grand fir, andsubalpine fir (210, 2ll,2l3). Thesehave been supplemented by newermaps.
The natural range of lateseral tolerant multistory stands is asfollows:
Marine PhysiographicZone: 50-80percent of the Douglas-firand true fir types. The zonewhere most of thetrue fir typesare closest to climax.
Mixed PhysiographicZone: 20-50percent of the fir types. A transitionfrom near climaxenvironment in themarine climate with long fire intervalsto shortinterval underbumingin the continentalclimate.
ContinentalPhysiographic Zone: 5-30percent of the fir types. Generallylimited to upperelevation northerly slopes. A vastmajority of fir typeswere underburn maintainedponderosa pine.
Current condition of thesestands has been influenced by loggingwhere occasional larch, ponderosapine and white pinehave been selectively harvested. There is a transitionbetween lateseral tolerant multistory and current conditions in lateseral parkJike stands where overstory removalof ponderosapine or larchcan leave a multistorysmall sawtimber fir stand.
Interpretrtion: Wherecurrent conditions are above the upper natural range, consider that fire suppressionhas extended natural rotations resulting in higherfuel loadingand o'lder, less vigorousstands. Above natural conditions may also include select harvest ofponderosa pine, westernlarch and white pinereducing tree species diversity and increasing susceptibility to insectattack.
PonderosaPine Hish Densitv.Low Visor Standsdominated by ponderosapine, climax as well asseral, ofhigh densityand/or low vigor which aresusceptible to bark beetleattack.
Thenatural occurrence tended to beold, over-mature trees at relativelyhigh densities that periodicallywere killed by beetles.Smaller trees were seldom affected because natural underburningmaintained low densities.As maturetrees fell, theywould be consumedby the underbums.Heat from burningwouldkill groundvegetation and great an ashseedbed devoid of herbaceouscompetition. This seemsto be the commonmode ofponderosa pine regeneration whenmaintained in open,park-like stands by underburning.At a 200 yearaverage life spanof dominanttrees,5 percent of theland area would be in beetlesusceptible condition.
Thenatural range ofhigh density/lowvigor ponderosa pine is asfollows: l- i
B-5 Marine PhysiographicZone: 0-10percent of the formerpine dominated stands.
Mixed PhysiographicZone: 10-20percent of the formerpine dominatedstands. Percentof areais higherdue to longerunderburn cycle which permits longer times in highdensity conditions.
ContinentalPhysiographic Zone: 0- l0 percentof thepine dominated stands.
Current conditionsare defined as follows: ponderosapine dominated stands, climax as well as seral,over 6 inchesdbh anddense enough, growing at lessthan I .2 inchesper decadein diameter,to be susceptibleto barkbeetle attack.
Interpretation: when existingconditions are below the lower normalrange, bark beetle susceptibilityis not a seriousproblem. when above,beetle wlnerability is abovenormal, thc higherthe estimatethe greaterthe vulnerability.
LodgenolePine High Density.Low vigor Standsdominated by lodgepolepine, climax as well asseral, which aredense enough or low enoughin vigor to be susceptibleto bark beetleattack.
Natural lodgepolepine srandsstrongly tend to be even-aged.As such,they also tend to developbark beetlesusceptibility at a reasonablypredictable size and stand condition -- over 6 inchesdbh of dominanttrees and diameter growth slower than 1.2inches per decade.we assumedthat, as an average,a standwould be in a vulnerablecondition for about20 vears(half of the40 year ageclass difference between sampled stands) prior to beingattacked. fni. Zti y.r. vulnerabilityperiod is 20 percentofa 100year old lodgepolepine ecosyitem. on bettersites, standswould grow fasterand tend to becomesusceptible at an earlierage and thus would havea greaterpercent ofthe naturalrotation in a vulnerablecondition; poorer sites might tendto have a lowerpercent.
The natural range ofhigh densityflowvigor lodgepolepine is asfollows:
Marine PhysiographicZone: 20-30percent using an average100 year natural rotation.
MixedPhysiographicZone:20-40percentusinganaverage80-l00yearrotation.
ContinentalPhysiographic Zone:0-20 percentusing an average100 to 120year naturalrotation.
Current conditionsare defined as follows: stands doininated by lodgepolepine, seralas well asclimax, where dominant trees are greater than 8 inchesdbh and wherediameter growth is lessthan 1.2inches per decade.
B-6 Interpretation: Whenexisting conditions are below the lower naturalrange, bark beetle susceptibilityis not a seriousproblem because of smalltree dbhs. However,this doesnot imply satisfactorystand condition. Excessiveregeneration is a majorcharacteristic oflodgepole pine, usuallyresulting in stagnatedstands. Stocking level contro'loften requires 2 or more pre-commericalthinnings to avoidstagnation. When existing conditions are above natural, beetlevulnerability is alsoabove natural.
AvailableFuels Availablefuels are standing dead and down material expressed as the percentof the total biomasson a site. Forexample, if live biomassis 100tons per acre and there are 30 tonsof deadmaterial, the total biomassis 130tons and the percent ofdead anddown is about25 percent (30/130= 0.23).Available fuel applies to all forests.
Natural fuels canbe dividedinto thosein underburned,park-like stands and those in stands proceedingtoward climax without underbuming.
Underburned,park-like firelsunder natural l0 to 20 yearunderburn cycles were very low, seldommore than a few tonsper acreand thus less than l0 percentof the total biomass,a situationtypical of park-likeponderosa pine stands. Loadings under longerunderburn cycles typical of westernlarch, (30-60 years) tended to be heavier duringthe last20 yearsof thecycle, apparently 10-20 percent of the total biomass.
Tolerant multistory fuelswere generally much higher. For example,in a grandfir standof225 sq.ft. basalarea per acre,20 percentof thetotal biomassis composedof 4 snagsand l0 downtrees per acreaveraging 24 inchesdbh.
The natural range of availablefuels as as follows:
Marine PhysiographicZone: 20-40percent based on the amountof late seral tolerantmultistory stands compared to westernlarch park-like stands.
Mixed PhysiographicZone: l0-30 percentbased on theproportions of late seral parkJikeand late seraltolerant multistory stands.
ContinentalPhysiographic Zone: 0-l5 percentbased on thepreponderance of late seralparkJike stands. Current conditionsare vastly different, primarily a resultof insectactivity andsuppression of naturalunderburning.
Fire suppressionhas permitted natural mortality to accumulateto wherethe former3-10 tons per acrehas reached 30 to 50 tons. This, coupledwith multilayeredstands largely with fir understory,has created a crown firehazzrd.
B-7 Epidemicinsect attacks have killed manytrees, particularly in multistoryfir dominatedstands. In somecases, 80 percentto 100percent ofthe treeshave been killed resultingin 80 percentto 100percent available fuels, ladder fuels starting at theground and reaching as high as 120feet in the air.
Interpretations: Availablefuels below the naturalrange indicate low fire risk. Availablefuels abovethe natural range indicate increasing fire risk with increasingdisparity between the upper naturalrange and the estimatedcurrent condition.
Junioer-srassland Westernjuniper is activelycolonizing many areas where it wasonce eliminated by recurrentlow intensityfires similarto underbumingin foreststands. This elementdescribes those sites where it is lessthan 90 yearsold, morethan l0 percentcover and is colonizingbetter grasslands or big sagebrush,bitterbrush and/or mountain mahogany types. Excludedfrom this elementare sites wherewestern juniper exhibitsold growthage and form, usuallypoor sitegrasslands and sagebrushtypes dominated by rigid andlow sagebrush.
Thenrtural rangesare as follows:
Marine PhysiographicZone: Minoroccunence
Mixed PhysiographicZone: 5-20percent of the areabased on moderatelylong fire frequencies.
ContinentalPhysiographic Zone: 0-15percent of thearea.
Current conditionsare defined as western juniper greaterthan l0 percentcover and less than 90 yearsold.
Interpretation: Whenexisting conditions exceed the naturalrange, fire suppressionhas been effectivein permittingjuniper andoften shrub colonization of grasslands.Juniper and shrubs addboth structureand species diversity to grasslands,enhancing wildlife habitat. On the other hand,high coverofjuniper canreduce shrub and herbaceous cover tending to createan ecosystemhazard and reduced diversity. Maintenanceofnon-natural conditions requires effort andmoney, currently reflected in fire suppressioncosts.
RioarianShrub Cover Watertemperature is a critical waterquality characteristic streams in the Blue Mountains.Many streamson the Umatilla,Wallowa-Whitman, and Malheur National Forests are reported to have summerpeak daily temperatureswhich exceed state water quality standards. Stream temperatureis stronglyinfluenced by adjacent,riparian plant communities during the critical summerperiod.
B-8 Natural riparian vegetationis composedof coniferousspecies, a mixtureof conifersand shrubs,or shrubcommunities. Conifers provide a majorityof theheadwaters shading of streams in theBlue Mountains.Shrub communities, such as willow andalder, occur in manyvalley and meadowareas. Shrub communities are positive indicators of hyporheiczone extent since they grow mostprominently where there is a gravelsubsoil. In additionto shade,riparian shrubs providebank stability, woody debris, and nutrients through leaf-fall.
Riparianvegetation can be affectedby naturalevents such as floods, fire, or insectsand disease. Riparianplant communities in the Blue Mountainsare also affected by beaverpopulations, miningactivities, roads, timber harvest, and grazing/browsing by livestockand big game. The endresult is a greatdeal of variabilityin not only the arealextent of riparianvegetation but also in theoverall quality relative to its ability to provideshading and site protection.
The riparianshrub cover element used by the Blue Mountainrestoration panel was chosen to provideinformation about the arealextent of theseplant communities. It wasfelt by the panel membersthat the coniferousriparian areas were represented by otherelements. The natural occurrenceofriparian shrubcover was estimated by thepanel and refined by the areaecologist for theBlue Mountains
Thenatural rangeofriparian shrub cover is asfollows:
Marine PhysiographicZone:, 40-15 percent shrub cover
Mixed PhysiographicZone: 30-60 percent shrub cover
ContinentalPhysiographic Zone: 15-60percent shrub cover
Current conditionsof theriparian shrub element was evaluated by Forestpersonnel based on their impressionof thepercentage of streamlength within a river basinwhich currentlyhas shrubbyvegetation present. There was no attemptto evaluatethe qualityof theriparian shrub communities.We recognizewhat the sizeand densityof riparianshrubs is alsoan important characteristicbut felt that arealextent was most easily visualized and provided an indexto overallriparian shrub values.
Streambank stability Streamsin the Blue Mountainsare subject to the samechannel forming processes of other streams.The channelsrespond to fluctuationsin flow amountand timing. Floodsand drought arenatural events to which streamsadjust. Overtime, streambanks illustrate a rangeof stability. Streamsrecover from theseevents at varyingrates dependant on precipitation,flow, riparian plantcommunities, soils and site characteristics. At any giventime, on any givenchannel, one canexpect to seereaches which areunstable and reaches which arestable.
B-9 The range of natural variability of streambankstability was estimated by the paneland refined by thehydrologist on the Wallowa-WhitmanNational Forest based on his extensiveexperience in the area.
The natural range for all zonesis 70-90percent.
Current conditions: In someareas, streams have been dramatically affected by mining, grazinglbrowsing,roads, and beavers. The cunentrange of bankstability conditions were evaluatedby Forestpersonnel to showtheir impressionof thepercentage of streambanksin a river basinwhich arestable now. The Forestestimates were compared to dataavailable through theregional steam inventory. The Forestestimates appear to be reasonablewhen compared to the streaminventorv data.
B- l0 APPENDIX C
RiverBasin Profiles and Assessments
c-1 TucannonRiver
PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mountains W Ra^gcatN.ntral Variability PhysiographicZone:MarineClimale H CuneflrR.nge of vfiabitity RiverBasin: Tucannon O v"di.n
Rangeof Conditions(70) m 40 60 oo 100
Earlysoral L!leSeral Park-lile LeleS€ral Tolerrol Multistory
PondorosrPino, Low vioot LodgepoloPino, Low ylgor
AvailabloFud!
Junipor/Grasshod
RiparianShrub CoYor BankStsbility
. TucaDaonRiver Basitr Irmodlla NF t lower6_Smilts(insid< NFboundery) isoD slele and private lsDd Ripsdanconditi(,n is notesSood as indicated forlhis scctionofthe river. Ripadao9h6de aDd batk strbilityarc mucblower. Stot.hou.rs t LotgitrSat lte biSherelevatioo snd on feedcrsrcams shoutd bE curtailed to pptect the l rrcrnmo Rivcr. . Thisriverbssin oeeds to be thinnedaod replsnrcd wirh othcrspecies.
c-2 ImnahaRiver
PhysiographicRegion: Blue M0untains Rangcof NaturalVariability PhysiographicZone:MarineClimate CuncntR ngcof Vfiability o Mcdian RiverBasin: lmnaha
100
EarlysorEl LalsS8ral Parl.like LatoSoral Tolorant Multiltory
PondgrotaPino, Low vigor LodgrpoloPiio, Low vigor
Availsblofuols
Juniper/GrasEland
RiparianShrub Cov€r BanfiStability
. Irnnaha River Basin
Wol,owa-W rnn NF . Juniper/grasslandbeinS l\A in lhis basitr. \vhrt about significeot portions ofthe conif€r regen on benclD/giasslatrds? Staheholdcrs . Morgan fudge area necds introsivc mttragcrncnt for fucls reduction . Tbis area is ovetslockcd.
c-3 Walla Walla River
PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mountains QM R^nE of NaluralVatiability PhysiographicZone: l\,larineClimate H CurrcnrRangc ofvariabilily O RiverBasin: WallaWalla Median RangeofConditio ns(%) 20 40 60 60 1m
Eaflysoral LatoSeral Parklike Lat€Sor8l Tolsrant Multistory
PondsrosaPino, Lov/ vigor Lodgspol€Plno, Low vlgor
AYallabloFuels
Juniper/Grassland
RiparianSirub Covor Bank Stabilily
Walla Walla tuver Basin
. Visual impact to "Ski Itlucwuxl" from dcfoliation . South Fork tjmatilla - shnrb problems: som€ streamlemperature pmblems
. Some standstreed to b€ lhinned, commcrcial lhinning could lake 4" te R", would need larg€rtrees as w€ll as small k, make a saL-
Other methods should als) be used in thinniog Replant*ith larch and lodgcpole pide Too steepand bank rs unslabld- ltLrybe some work couldbe dotrc on upperen'i. MillerCriek is also an area rhal could use sornc*ork Restt)G_the areasnbove lhe Walla Walla Watershed Restoreareas abov€ Mill Creek Walersbed.
Do oot extracl timber on lands *.hi!h drain into the Walla Walla Riv€rWateBhed. Eliminare proposedlogging on Hehry Fork.
c-4 Lower SnakeRiver
PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mountains w Rangcof Nahll'alVariability PhysiographicZone:MarineClimate CurrcntRrnge of Vaiability o Median RiverBasin: LowerSnake Rangeof Conditions (%) 40 60 B0 100
Earlysoral LaleSsral Partlikr LatoSorsl Tolorart Mullirtory
PondorosaPina, Low vigor LodgspoloPinE, Low vhor
AvrilabloFuols
Junip€r/Grassland
RiparianShfub Covsr BankStability
Lower Snake River Basitr lYallowo-Whitman NF . This riverbasio isprirnarily Hells Canyoo NRA and in wildemcss . Heavy grazing in past I.ttnatila NF
. Lo'.verAsotin Cre€k watershcdhas ahislory offloodin8. Is a narural"llash flood" riskeven without human activity oothe Forcst, . South Fork Asotin Creek - riparian cotrdition ofconcem
c-5 UmatillaRiver
PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mountains ffi R ngcof Nrturalvrriability PhysiographicZone:MarineClimate H CurretrR.nge of variabiliry O uedien RiverBasin: Umatilla Rangeof Conditions(%) N 40 60 80 100
Earlys€ral LateS€tal Parl-lilo LateS€r8l Tol.rant Multistory
PondorosePino, Lo\r vigot Lodgspol€Plno, Low vlgor
AvailEbloFu€lg
Juniper/Grassl6nd
RiparianShrub Covor BankStability
. Lhdills tuverBasin
Itnati o NF
. Wildlife (biE Snmeand olher) sccurily arcas!€ltinB smaller. Rccr€atronuse 8ro\|ing. lmpacls ofbig game lo prilate land . Lossofbig game habilal duc lo loSSingtnd deli)l'ation . high firEpotenlial in d.folated are^s(standing lr€cs) r Phillips Crcek - some ^rcas ofloss ol shmb covcr and bank slability . PearsonC(cek tnad rclocali.'n Saafteholders . The SoNthFork oflhe (Jmatilla Rivcr necds morc ripanan veSctatron. . The Nodb Foft ofthe Umatilla is in lbir-8oo.l conditioD . Work in Grand Ronrle and (rmatilla . class Hill-Mor8on t.akc aNa (La Grande).tlkish. T{)dd ('any(,n, Fly Crcck, Tollgale. t lnpsr squaw cree} . Fundirg. endangercdspectes. . Fuet loading. . wildem€ss-private land inlerfacc-Fedcralproblcms movinS onlo privale . Coorditrationofactivity on private land rnd activity on Fedcral land in th€ samedainaSe. . South Fork oftlmarilla is rn need of more riparian vegelation,less silt, tDadnexl lo riv€r. . No(b Fo* (wildern€ss)is in fair-good shape.
c-6 Willow Creek
PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mountains ww, Rangcof NanrralVariability PhysiographicZone:Marine Climate CurrentRangc of v.riabilily o Mcdian RiverBasin: Willow Rangeof Conditions (%) 40 60 80
Earlyseral LaleSoral Parl-likE LstoSsral Tolerent Multistory
Pond€rcsaPin€, Low YigoI LodgapoloPlno, Low vlgot
Availab16Fuolg
JuniDer/Gra$land
RiparianShrub Cov€r BenkSlabiliiy
r willow Rivcr Basln
Llmati a ;\T . \alional Forestlands representa vary srull portioD ofth€ walershe'l. Privale lard activities heve pFcluded severaloptioDs on liF lands . A major fire or other disturtancc on NF land could have sislrificanl effecls . Blue Mouotaitr SceDicBnvay passesthrough this area
c-7 Wallowa River
PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mountains w Rangcof Na$ral vanability PhysiographicZone:Marine Climate C\fiort Rangeof veiability o Median RiverBasin: Wallowa Rangeof Conditions (%) 40 60 B0 100
Earlys€ral LaloS€ral Parl.lile LatsSsral Tolsrant Multistof y
PondorosrPins, Lon vigor LodgepoloPlno, Low vigor
Av6ilabl€Fuels
Juniper/Grassland
RiparianShrub Covor BankStabilily
. Wallon a River Basin
Vdrlowa- WLnan NF
. Subalpinefir(€spccially al h igher clevations) in largc qurnlities . Mostly wild€mess. Smaller€as ofcommercial forest arc hcavily halcaed
Srahehol.led
. Lower Mioam areahas bu8 damagc.dryarf mistletoe.dog-hai r I hickets on the trorth slopes. . lfwe dod't do something herc *e will lose it. . Reducefuels and lhin.
c-8 UpperGrande Ronde
Physiographic Region: Blue Mountains W&t Rang.of Nar\ral Variability PhysiographicZone:MarineClimate H Currentlknge of Vriabitity o RiverBasin: UpperGrande Ronde M"di"n Rangeof Conditions(%) m40 60 Bo tm
Esrlys6ral Lal€Seral Parl.lile LNtoSoral lolorEnt Multillory
PondorosaPino, Low vigol Lodgopol€PIne, Low vlgor
AvailrblrFu!lt
Junip€r/Gra!3land
RiparianShrub Covor BankSlability
r t pper Gralde RoDdcRjver Basio
Vonowa- Whitman NF . Roads:locatioo, drainage.surfrcitrg. scdimenl yield . MonrtoriDg:all progmms rElaledlo forcsl rchabilitation: rncEasc rfl)unt and lype ofmonrtoring
. lncrcas.d bi8 game rumb€rs releredlo shrub supprcssionin riparien ares may bc releled lo slrcambrnk slabilrty . R€for€slalio0backlog: uncut delolialed ar€as:pmblem due lo increAsein pinegrass/elksed8e: building a backlog in clttovet areas
. Riparian arra rnana8emcntin bu8,dis$sr in fcsred forc$ .. howdo we rnanageriparian arcas(dead) ro meetdesired futuN ccndili,)n? . MAnagcmelt oftrusl lil'ds acr,,sst pperGratrde Rondc . Big game habilat: cover fonge impacts due k, defoliarron
. Timeline ti,r reaching lrorestPla DFCS is beirg impa(t€d by insacr,nrl di$ca-seand fire {wil(lfire) . salvage is not a diny word with rcgard k) Fo.csl Hcalth . Ilrealencd sprirg chinook salrn,n (wild slock) and relali('nshipol conscr!ali(,n slrnl€gy lo li,re$ rch.rbililalion slielegy... oecd mooumentalcdoi al rehabiliiarionrnd moniloriDg in li8hr ofdcfoliariod. ried ro ripe.isn hcalth (shdc, LWI)) and ils effccls on lieshwater lil-ehistory stafrcs- . Resoluli(,nofconfiicl berwe€nriparian ena health and cattle/she€pgrezing is fencrng . Iiss ofold growlh to d€folialion
. tnokirsClass Creck - somc tossofshrub coverand bank stability Stah.holders . Mcadow (lrc€k needs r€slorationwork. 'll€ . sinks area on the Waila walla t)islricl . l-ookio88lassRoadless Arca and LookitrB8lassCrcek should be lcR alotre-notimber hawcst or rord constructioo. . Need lo reduce fuele8e;al bar'\,eslend undeftuming-can't do businessss usual-exislitrgtimber sslesm.a*ed rigbt lo lhe drainac€ lines.
c-9 LrpperG.ande Rondc Rjvcr Dasin(continu€d)
. nris nren sho[ld bc focus.d oll . (inrd. RondcAnrl I'rnilrll^ . GlassHill-Mor8^n Lrkc arca(La (ift'nde).L,kiah Ii 'l ('anyon.Fly ('rcck. lbllgarc.r ,ppcrsqu !4.( rcck . FuDdingendanscred spccics . Fuel lo,dinc
. wildemess-privrtc inlcrfare-Federalproblcms movinB onto privalc . Coardinalionofactivify on nrivatcland atrd activ'ty on tcdcnt land-rhcsamr dninagc . I xL(\\ir ( tu(ls in I ptrrr'rrtr(L Ron'l( . Nrc,l slream(fish) habirat rchahilirari(,n and tflnccti(,n-doo r l,,g . 11c I:rvr I){'intlimbcr salerh(nrl(l nor br s('l,lcul
c-10 Lower GrandeRonde River
Physiographic Region: Blue Mountains W R2J.gcot NaturalVadabi)ity PhysiographicZone:MarineClimate + CunentRangc of variability O RiverBasin: LowerGrande Ronde vcdio Rangeof Conditions(%) m40 60 Bo 100
Esdys€ral LateS€ral Parl.like LatsSaral Tolorant Multistory
PondcrosaPin6, Low vigor lodgspoloPlne, Low vlgor
AvarlabloFuols
Junip€r/Gra3sland
RiparianShrqb Cover BankSlabilily
. Lo.r'er Crande Rond€ River tsasin
Wallowo Wirmad NF . tupadan zoDesat risk to DF bark bcclles . ()ld groMh standsat risk k, Df hark be€tlcs . Really hiSh road density
. Paslpadial cuttitrghas drrslically reduc,jdtbe mature PPA\'|. componenl in the lale seml communiriesleaving purE stands ofunmaDageableDF/GF at high nsk to Foreslpests. Foresl Plan gam€ cover aod peak flow S&C restrictssilviculiun tr.almenls in this type linali a NF . L()ssofbrg 8am€ babiLatf.om k,gging and deloliation . High polenlial fire fmm d€foliation (slanding trees)
'Ile . bi_sherelevalrons adjacenl ro lhc WeneharTucannonWildemess should trot be logged. . Cc'trcemfor overstockin g. excessivehlels f)o sorhethingnow. . Nonh halfofthe tuv€rBasin;D lhe \rort
c-l r PowderRiver
PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mountains WW.4 Ranlcof N^val Variability PhysiographicZone: MixedClimate H CurrcitRangc of Variability RiverBasin: PowderRiver o vcdian
Rangeof Conditions(70) m40 $80 100
Earlysoral Lale3ot6l P.rl-like LateSoral Tolarant Multistory
PondorosaPine, Low vigor LodgepoloPine, Low vlgor
Availabl€Fuols
JuniperiGrassland
RiparianShrub Covor BankStability
r Powder River Basin
Wcllona-Whinnon NF . t.rtuan,Torestinl(rface (mial and small communrtirs) . Scenicbyway (Elkhom Loop) Elkhom face vi€w fmm Visitor Ccnrcr . Wikllife habiratneeds (cover in panicular) . Hydro cumuhlivc€ffecls. l)oot considerpotetrlialcffectsof no-trc.tmcnt
. Rrlulivclyshort rolalions indicaled jn lorcst Plan(Nt).lo(, yrl q59/o('MAl).. nccdrlircction for krngcrrolations . fuparian no-lr€arbulTrra don r allow forpositrvc chtrntcs thK,ugh managcmcnl . Necd lo rn nagc for more old-gro'*.th nplaccmcnt strnds . Need to manageold grosth to incrcaselongcvity . Bener grazing contol (fescitrg) to incresseriparisn hrnl\oods . BakerCity watershed.. high hazard forwildfire . Fuels iocrcasing(doublc to triple) io the next 5 yeaB
. S€cotrdE:mwlh slaods have increasinSba* bec(lc acrivity . Veg compctition incrcasing ... n8en dif6culti€s
. CompactioDrcmainsan issueovermucb oflhe disliicl $her- triclors l*.crcused. Appears seriousto productiotr ofall vegetaliotr
. The noxious $eed problem is grcr*in8 (yellowslar, knap$ccds. whitetop, lhislles)...thrEatens maoy resourEevalues . Concemed about the upper parls ofthe walershed.moslly ellocalcd to backcounlry or wildemess. Highcr fuel loading, standsbreakiDg down nccdi a plao forurylanned ignitio n or p rescribedfire in mucb ofthisareawb€re fir€ hasbeen excluded and no rnanagemcnlactiviti€s are taking place. Thcse arElh€ CE. CI-, CW types nrostly atx ve 6000 fe€t . How to handle lhe resullsofthc sprucebeclle whcre lh(' npariAnvhlues are hi8h... rnillions ofboard feet ofstaoding dead in pans ofthe $,atershcd. . In gcnelll, loo mrry trccs,bo much fir in mired conifcr typcs.
c-t2 Poqd.r tuver(coDrinucd)
. Ll.arcr Sutr,in( re!k, 8aker \\' le$hcd - ltis is a highlyviriblc *rtcnhcd Nrcd n'rihe iiscussionon .rnylogsirs/tiDrber har!est . ThrUal!r(try*alcrshedmusrhcihrEhpriontyfo.actirrryroas{urcrr'shertrh . Flkhortrnn-!c rsa .oncern \ecd actronrn fronl rrog( for hi8h vrsual(oncem
c-13 BrownleeReservoir
Physiographic Region: Blue Mountains W Ra gcot Ntntralva.iebilily Physiographic Zone: MixedClimate l-{ Curcnt Ran$ of variability o M.di"n RiverBasin: BrownleeReservoir Rangeof Condilions (%) 20 40 60 g) 100
EarlyEoral Lat€Seral Par*-lik€ o LetoSersl Tolsranl Multiltory
Pond€rosEPine, Low vigor O Lodg€poloPin€, Low vigor o AvrilrbloFu!l!
Juniper/Gra!sland o
RiparianShrub Cover BankStabilily
. BrD*.nleeReservoir Riv{r Basin
Wa ows-Wldan NF . Comprcrion rcm^ins an issueovcr much ofthe district B'h€rErractors w€rE us.d. Apt,ears seriouslo productioDofall v€geral|on . fbe ooxious wced probhm is gNwing (y€llowstar. knapw€cds,*,hirctop. thistl€s)-. lhrcalcDsnraDy resourcc values . Conceoed about lhe upperparts oflbe watershed,mostly sllocrled to backcouotry or wildemess- Higher fuel loadiog, shodsbreaking do*n need: a plan forunplaoned ignirion orprescribed firc in much ofthrs areawhere fire hasbeeo excluded and no managerhetrt activities arE leking plece. Th.se are lhe CE, CL. CW tyPes rnonly sbov€ 6000 feet . Howtohandlethcresullsofth€s?rucebecrlewh€rrtheripsrianvaluesarehigh.milliotrsofboardf€etofslatrdiogdeadin parls oflhe warershed.
. In Eeneral,too many lrees,kro much firio mixed conrferlypes.
c-14 UpperJohn Day River
PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mountains i@&. Rutgcol N^tral V.riability PhysiographicZone: MixedClimat€ H CurIqrr Rmgeof vadability O RiverEasin: UpperJohn Day Median Rangeof Conditions(70) 2040 60 80 100
Earlyrsml Lrt. grralParllite LrteS.ral Tolorant Multittory
PonderolrPino, Low vigor Lodgrpol.Plno, Lor Yfuor
AvlilrbhFolb
Junip€ricrE$land
RiparianShrub Covet BankStrbility
. LroDerJobn flav River Brsin
Mdheu hT . Heavy fuels and insectdiseas€problems: . South side ofcanyor Cr. drainage . Slrawberry wildem€ss . All ofvancc ( icck drainaScs . Aldrich . Mossy Gulch . Dane Creck . StandantCreek . Dixie creck . Notlh slopcsofBeech ( reek .lmponanttoeslimatep€rcenlageofPPandLPcompa.edlomi\edconiferoroverstockeddo,:str'lmesnmuch. gaheholders
. Thcr. are a lol ofdeird lrces in walershcds91, 92,9J, & 96, . Everyrhilg possible should be donc forlhe John Day RivcF.nd lo ptr)tect,enhencc or restort thc walcrshed. . Lots ofdEAd lrces to dcal with.
c-15 North Fork John Dav River
PhysiographicRegion:BlueMounta ins W Rangcof Naurd Variability Physiogra phic Zone: MixedClimate H ( urr€fltRNflBe of Vanabiliry o RiverBasin: NorthFork John Day vedian Rangeof Conditions(%) m 40 60 80 100
Earlyscral LaloSoral Parkiik€ LatBSeral Tol€ranl Multistory
PondorogaPine, LorY Yigor LodgopoloPinc, Low vigol
AvailableFuoli
JufliperiGrassland
RiparianShrub CoYer BenkSl6bility
N,rnb Fork J"bn Dav Rivcf tsasin
Warlowa- Witman NI . Streambanksiability and ripanan shrub cov€r trcgativcly affecl.d by l5l) ycars ofmioing activity . Privatehnd adjacenl to Olivc ( rcrk . Columbia tuver Basin srlmonidsi Scenic tst'\r'ay/ visuals . NF Jobo Day wildem€ss - Irsect aod fire h^zArd . Already exc.cding ma,\ allowablc cumulativc effects for hydrology Affects ability lo utrde6um, do stockinSconlml, srtvaSe,eIc . tld'an I for€sl interface(Cranile communily) . I-adCepolemislleloe overstory in rcgenertting slands. WL overstory wilh mislletoc with I-P regen. . Veg competition increasirg in standsopining up by budworm defoliatroo . Old groe,lh losinS qualrty/tunction . Don't bave atry good models forestirMting hydrologic rccovcry in harvestedstands .. e.9.. LPP wilh 43,560 tps and 8 fr tall . High po{etrtialfor stand replacementwildfires versuslow inlensily uodetbums witb subsequcnteffccts to fishcriesand watershed. IncreasingtercEnta8e ofeady seml slands,decreasinS late serrl. (NoTE: lhis comment was hiShlighted by someoneto say that it applied lo all riverbasins) . Limited opportuoities for parklike stands
. lnsecrsand disease- Dorth slopesofDonaldson Ridgc. Black Buttc, Fox Creek. Duoniogs an{l Smith Creeks . Junipet eocroachmeDl- soulh slopesof Hamilton Ridge. foothtlls on edBesof Fox Vall€y
c-16 Nodh r('rk l,'h'r l)ay Rivcr Uasin(ronrioutd)
. ( hr ,'f ln)f,('ni()n lalc senrlrolcnrn!slrnrl\ . 1ow carlv s . $'ildlilc c(^ cr is an cxrftmc pmblcm(biF Eam(and hinh) . soil condil;r,n.- compaction is r mlJ,'rconecm 'n lhisb^\in . Th. wAll( r. warcrshslis n ,nni,,rr,'ne€m (l('s sha(le,bank srabiliry) . CamasCr.ck \+'alcfthcdis a sonccm . Fishrricsconccrns, riFarian Tonc tmshc(lr nccds ftslonrri,,o . Ripari.rnareas nccd lu bc rnanryed an{l n(,1o\'.rlo{,kcd . Soulh sirlc ofdrainage sccms lt\{ nlTcctrd- . Bouldcrs in streamhcat them up- . \" fircr unlrssrt *rr d,.ncrn V:ir(h . Conccm for ov€rslockinS.cxcess'vc fuclsio somethirg now. c-17 Middle Fork John Dav PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mou ntains @w Renlcnl li?.turalVariahility PhysiographicZone. MixedClimate l-{ CurcnrRange of varability O RiverBasin: MiddleFork John Dav vcdi- Rangeol Conditions(%) 20 40 60 Bo EErlysoral Lrl€ S€ralPark-liko Llto SorelTolrr!nl Multi3tory PondorosaPin6, Lof, vigot LodgopolsPino, Low vlgor AveilabloFu6l3 Jufliper/Grassland Rip6rianShrub Cov€r EankStsbilily . Middle Foft John Dav Rivcr Basin I Inatilta NF . Wil'llife - biC Brrnc and olhcr . Rccrenlion use rs incrcasinEB,hilc security is dccNasins . All bur CP and (|ry Cw r],Ies . All mixed conifcr siles - birt t''or$ nonh oflhc Middk Fo* for ins{cls and diseas( rnrt fircts Stahcholders . Ihe nparian arcas in I onF ( rcck arc i| maior con(lm. . Mrddle Fork John Day G'ppcr has'n) is the last cold ,,alcr sonrcc for t.owcr Rivcr ,.indangercdChinook rnd Rull Trout. . I lpland ve8€lali"n manascmenli loSging: road buildin8: rhrnningrand c-18 LowerJohn Dav River Physi0graphic Region: Blue Mountains W Ral,B.ofNa ral Variability Physiographic Zone: MixedClimate |-] CuncntRange of v adability O RiverBasin: LowerJohn Dav u"aian Rangeof Conditions(%) 20 40 m80 100 EarlyEoral LateSeral Part.lit6 LqloSoral Toleranl Multi8to.y Pond6ro3aPins, Low vigor LodgopolePIno, low Ylgor Avriltbl€Fuols Juniper/Grassland RiparianShrub Cov6r BankStabilily . Lower John Dav RiverBasit Unati o NF . Natio[alForcsl area in rhisbasin rcnrescntsa small ponron ol rhe *'atcrshed . Privareland actrvitieslimit options on NF lands . Soil compaction is a majorproblem . Mzlorbig gaDe aDimaldam.age complaints on adjacentpnvale lands . fuparien / hardwood concems . EIk popularioo is way over managemcnlobjectivc ofODFW Stakcholders . EverrlhiES possibleshould be done lorthc John Day River-and tr, pmlecl. enhance.or reslorethe Watelshed. c-r9 Burnt River PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mountains 8W, Rangcof N^n\al Variability PhysiographicZone:ContinentalClimale l--{ Curr€ntRargc of variabiliry O RiverBasin: Burnt u"di- Rangeof Conditions(%) 20 40 mq) 1m Earlysoral LEtoSeral Parl-lil(o LatoSeral Tolsrant Multittory PondorosaPin6, Lou vigor LodgrpolcPlns, Low vlgor AvaihbloFudls Junipericragslond RipsrianShrub Covor BenkStabilily r Bumi Rivcr Basio lfo oteo-Wit rtr, NF . Rords contn'bulingt0 rlcgndation ofwatcr quality (itrcrcsse'lscdimcntation) . Noxious weeds . MininS access(tied to road prohlem listed ebovc) ' Heavily affcclcd in pasl l5 ycars by wildfirc (Doolcy Mln.. steveDsCr.. Rough Ridge. Huckleberry, Monumert Rftk. SxnlIow€r). APproxiDarcly 21,000 icr€s bumcd on thity RDitr fires stown hcrc. 195,000acrEs total o! thc Disrdcl. . Presentlyexcecds rnlxlr rm allos?ble cumulative effecls for hydro and wildtife . Potential high for '.r'ildfir€ to iocrcsse eldy seral . Somlj old gro\th is iDeflcctive or losinS function Stah.hohlers . Need restorelioowork in Big ( rcck. c-20 Upper MalheurRiver PhysiographicReg ion: BlueMountains w'@ R?lt'Eeof Naursl Vadability PhysiographicZone. ContinentalClimate H CunentRangc ol-Variability O v"di- RiverBasin: UpperMalheur Rangeof Conditions (%) m 40$80 '100 Earlyie.al LatoSeral Park-like Lal€Soral Toloranl Multistory PonderosaPino, Ldw vigol LodgrpolsPins, Low vlgor Availabl6Fuels JuniperiGrassland RiparirnShrub Cover BanlStlbrlity l-rDDrrValhsur fuverBasin . Slraeberry Wildem"'ss - s.'ulh sidc . Pin€ encroachm€niinto nonforesl srtes.-s('uth end ofPrairic City RI) . Riparian utilization prohlcms; also slream band stahilizalion - south end P.aine Cily in dricr areas. . Catlle damagein riparian ar€as . Slop mining in Olwe Cre€k of(;recDhom Mounlarn. . Large old ctearcutshav€ rol rcgen€raledin Snow Crcck, T 7 S. R 16 E T6 S. R 37 E &T8 S. R 17 E c-2r SilviesRiver PhysiographicRegion: Blue Mountains w Rangcof NaturalVariability PhysiographicZone:Continental Climate CuncntRange of Variabilrty o Mcdian RiverBasin: Silvies Rangeof Condrtio ns(70) 40 60 80 100 Earlysoral LateSeral Park-like LateSaral Tol€rant Multislory PondorosaPinr, Low vigor LodgopolePlns, Low vlgor Availabl€Fuols Juniper/Grassland RiparianShtub Covet BanlSlability . Sih iesRiver Basin Malhettr NF . Llpper Bear Creek and Scolly Creek - bank inslabrliiy, lack of riparian shrubsand conifercover- . Scotty Creek - lols oftuet toading . Irte serdltolernnt mullislory - lar8e part io Mynlc-Silvic tronmolorized recroationarea . LPP - not much ac(-a8e rn lhis type Stokehouers . t lpp€rRiver Basin goo(l ninc countryhur hardk) regenerdlcifcur too hard c-22 Harnev- MalheurLakes PhysiographicRegio n: Elue Mounta ins W R^ng.6l N^turalVariability Physiographic Zone: ContinentalClimate F-{ CunentRange of varilbility O RiverBasin: Harnev-MalheurLakes M"di"n Rangeof Conditions (%) n 40 60 B0 1m Earlysoral LatoSeral Park-like LatoSoral Tolarant Multiltory Pond€rosaPino, Lor vigol LodgopolePiio. Low Ylgor Avtihbl€Furlg JuniDericrassland RipsrianShfub Covor BankStability l- . Hamev-MalheurLak€s tuver Basin . Hcavy WI mortaliryt ma(leratePl modalily in slccp caryons . Lots ofunlreated thinning slash . I-and adjacentlo nonlbrcstcd lands with hcavy saScbrush- mounlain mAhogaoystands . SiCnificantmonality in old gro$1h areas Stoheholders . (iood pinc countrybut hard to reSenemlcifcut rrxrhard c-23 APPENDIXD List of Stakeholders JohnAaron Barry Carter KinzuaCorporation Blue MountainNative Forest Alliance Rt.2. Box2100 2319Balm Heppner, Oregon97836 BakerCity, Oregon 97814 676-9183 s23-33s7 JohnE. Barry Brian Cole SienaClub, Blue Mountains Group BakerEconomic Development Department P.O.Box 566 P.O.Box 650 La Grande, Oregon97850 BakerCity, Oregon 97814 963-3562 523-6s41 RobertaBates Lany Cribbs GrandeRonde Resource Council EagleTrucking 403M Ave 10202S. Grandview La Grande, Oregon97850 La Grande,Oregon 97845 963-3720 963-8551 JuneBombaci PeteEllingson Treeof Life EllingsonLumber 67597Lostine fuver Rd. P.O.Box 866 Lostine, Oregon97857 BakerCity, Oregon 97814 s69-2388 52f-4404 CassandraBotts Bob Freimark BoiseCascade Corporation WildernessSociety P.O.Box E 610SW Alder, Room #915 Joseph, Oregon97846 Portland,Oregon 97205 432-2011 248-0452 Walt Brookshire Rick George IndustrialDevelopment Commission ConfederatedTribes of the Umatilla 1205Campbell P.O.Box 638 Baker City,Oregon 97814 Pendleton,Oregon 97801 523-6n7 276-3449 Rick Brown Betty andLee Graham NationalWildlife Federation GrandeRonde Resource Council 519Sw Third,#606 l5l l AspenDrive Portland, Oregon97204 La Grande,Oregon 97850 222-1429 D-l Dr. CharlesE. Hofmann SteveMartin BakerCity Mayor Aerial ForestManagement Foundation City of BakerOregon P.O.Box 95 P.O.Box 650 Canby,Oregon 97013 BakerCity, Oregon 97814 266-2851(home) 678-2665(work) BruceHoneyman Rt. I Box 27 A BobMessinger Halfway,Oregon 97834 BoiseCascade '142-2323 l9l7 Jackson La Grande,Oregon 97850 Arleigh Isley 962-2000 WallowaCounty Extension P.O.Box 280 PaulMorehead Enterprise,Oregon 97828 NorthwestTimber Workers Resource Council 426-3143 P.O.Box 338 Joseph,Oregon 97846 JudithJohnson 432-4312(home) NationalAudubon Society 432-201I(work) 209N. ClintonSt. WallaWalla, Washington 99362 JimNeal 509-529-8009 AerialForest Management Foundation P.O.Box 95 ChloeLarvik Canby,Oregon 97013 GrandeRonde Resource Council (W) 678-2665 61323Deal Canyon Lane (H) 548-2861 La Grande,Oregon 97850 Bill Oberteuffer Jim Lauman The Smilin 'O TreeFarm OregonDepartment of Fishand Wildlife 70417Follet Road 201- 20thStreet Elgin,Oregon 97827 La Grande,Oregon 97850 437-5252 963-2138 Ed Pearson OdusLowery Louisiana-Pacific Bureauof LandManagement P.O.Box AA P.O.Box 982 PilotRock, Oregon 97868 BakerCity, Oregon97814 529-0200 523-6391ext.324 KevinProctor WayneLudeman, District Forester P.O.Box 280 NorthwestForestry Association JohnDay, Oregon 97485 I 15NW OregonAve, Suite l0 575-281I Bend,Oregon 97701 820-3351 389-2306 D-2 t_I MaureenQuinn HowardShobel GrantCounty Conservationist OregonDepartment of Forestry P.O.Box 156 802 WestHwy 82 Prairie City, Oregon97869 Wallowa,Oregon 92885 820-4752 886-2881 Jack Shipley UmatillaForest Resource Headwaters Council ShirleyMuse, Chairperson 1340Missouri Flat Road 2l9 Newell GrantsPass, Orcgon 97527 Walla Walla,Washington 99362 Mark Simmons,President Pat Wortman LocalUnion 2910 WallowaCounty Commissioner P.O.Box 572 Rt. 1,Box 267 Elgin,Oregon 97827 Enterprise,Oregon 97828 426-3742(home') 426-4543(work) D-3 APPENDIXE Summaryof InterviewsWith Stakeholders Thepanel interviewed over thirty people who have an interest and a stakein thehealth of the BlueMountains. These people represented themselves as individuals or theorganizations to whichthey belong. The BIue Mountains Natural Resources Institute in La Grande,and people on theUmatilla, Wallowa-Whitman, and Malheur National Forests, helped identify people who shouldbe interviewed. The peoplewho wereinterviewed represented a full rangeof interestin manyissues. The following summary,grouped by areasof interest,highlight statements made during the interviews.A copyof thepanel's notes from the interviews is on file at theBlue Mountains Instituteoffice in La Grande. Interviewersasked four questions: . Do youhave any general comments conceming restoration activities in theBlue Mountains? . Are thereany specific arealactivities within any river basin that the Forest Service shouldand could be working on now? . Are thereany specific areas/activities within any river basin that need further discussionor considerationbefore activities should begin? . Are thereany specific areas/activities within any river basin that do notneed - emphasisnow? Whenpeople had comments on specificareas, the panel added those to thehealth profile for the appropriateriver basin (Appendix C), with theidea that resource specialists on theforests would beable to usethem for thenext level ofplanning for restorationactivities. The remaining commentsaddressed areas ofconcem with foresthealth, and these reflected four generalthemes. Thefirst deals with theneed for theForest Service to bedoing something more quickly to aidin Foresthealth restoration. The second reflects high concem for majorfires and the resource and economicdamage they would cause. The third expresses the need to improveand maintain waterquality. And thefourth highlights the need to considerand address the stability of communitiesin theBlue Mountains, and their dependency on a long-term,consistant supply of - timber. Thepanel used the results ofthe interviewsto helpidentify the principal values at risk with foresthealth problems, to identifylong-term objectives for restoration,and suggest priorities for restorationactivities. E-l I InterviewHighliqhts I TimberSalvage I ...Salvagedead timber as soonas possible to maintaineconomic value of wood. ...Foresthealth restoration is more thansalvage. ...Localmills needgreen timber as well as salvage. I ...Salvagesale planning process takes too long to get a saleon the market. ...Substitutesalvage for greentrees in salesunder contract. ...TheForest Service is not moving very fastto salvagedead timber. I Wildlife I ...Thereis a majorloss of wildlifecover (thermal) with all thedead trees. ...RoadManagement should reflect the higher concem for wildlifeand more roads shouldbe closed I ...Elkpopulations are aVor near the carrying capacity in Blues. ...OpenparkJike late serial stands are not good for wildlife. ...Leavean adequate number of snags. I ...Developmanagement agreement for big hornand domestic sheep. ...Harvestmanagement of big-gamesneeds to beincluded in theForest health ecosystemPlan. I Grazing I ...Cattlegrazing is inhibitingthe stream restoration efforts. ...Considerrange lands when looking at Foresthealth. ...Grazingprogram can help produce healthier trees. I ...Stopgrazing in wildernessareas. ...Keepcattle out of riparianareas. ...Needto do a betterjob of grazingadministration. I ...Openpark-like stands produce better forage for grazing. I FuelsReduction and Fire ...Needto planto protectwatersheds from fire. I ...Needto reducefuel loading in Forest,this includes material with litt'leor no value. ...Tradeoffof air qualityfor fire ecology. ...Pastfire suppressionhave contributed to theproblem. I ...Userestoration projects to breakup continuousfuels. ...Thereis a catastrophicfire conditionin theBlues. ...Highfear of a catastrophicfire. I ...Abolishslash buming, use a chipper. ...Findalternatives to fire to improveForest health. ...Encouragecooperative management of prescribedfire on privateand Federal land. I ...Weare leaving too much slash after salvage operations. ...Reintroducefire to Forestlandscapes. I E' I Old Growth andRoadless Areas ...Retainall existingold-growth stands. ...Absolutelyquit cutting old-growth pine. ...Oldgrowth is a decliningresource. ...Roadlessareas should be a low priorityfor work. ...Leaveroadless areas alone. Socialand Economic ...Needto reduceamount of redtape to getanyhing done. ...Privately,commercial timberland owners are dealing with theproblem, but the ForestService is not. ...Needbetter public relations and education on Foresthealth. ...Lossof revenuefrom timber ia a majorconcem for communities. ...Decisionsmust be localto becredible. ...Weneed to be fiscallyresponsible. ...Lossof highpaying timber jobs. ...Wehave been trying to getmore out of ourNational Forest than they can give. Fisheriesand Riparian Areas ...Thepolicy ofno loggingin riparianareas is a disasterdo to fuel loading. ...Fishhabitat need down woody material in streams. ...Anadromousfish policy will effectForest health activities. ...Fisheriesand water quality are critical to Foresthealth. ...Stayout of theriparian areas. ...Leaveshrubs along streams to actas barriers for cows. ...Morecoordination by ForestService is neededin riparianmanagement. ...Prohibitlogging in all riparianareas and wetlands. ...ForestService has not demonstratedthey can work in riparianzones without degradation. ...Obliteratingroads, PIG implementationtimeframes, model calibrating, and grazing annualmanagement plans are needed to restoreriparian areas. ...Removeriparian areas from timber base. ...Buffersdo not workon streamswith bug problem. ...ForestService needs to handleClass IV streamsand dips as riparian areas. t- E-3 WaterOuality ...Developbetter understanding of wetlandsrole in Foresthealth. ...Ahealthy Forest produces cool, clean water. ...Thereare many miles of degradedstreams in oulrr'atersheds. ...Protectand enhance water oualitv. GeneralForest Health ...Donot continue practices that results in poorForest health. ...Wehave high grade of timberin EastemOregon. ...AchievingForest health will takea verylong time. ...Encourageresearch to identifystands and procedures for monitoringForest health in theBlues. ...Naturewill beunacceptably slow in retumingthe Blues to a healthycondition. ...Adequatemeans of improvingForest health may conflict with otherprograms objectives. ...Needto addressactivities when address in Foresthealth. ...Savehealthy areas. ...Grasslands are in troubleas well asthe Forest- Insectand Disease ...Addpest management input to resourcemanagement prescriptions. ...Fundingproblems have sometimes prohibited prompt and effective response to pest outbreaks. ...Preventivespraying in someareas to preventbug movement. ...Applyinsect and disease objectives in BlueMountain Forest health report. ForestStocking Control ...Needmore precommercial thinning so problems do notcontlnue. ...Thinningneeds to discriminateagainst fir. ...Thereis severeoverstocking on bothprivate and US ForestService (USFS) lands. ...Needmanual thinning of youngstands for health. ...Thereis currentlyan excess of biomassin theForest, we needstocking level confrol. E-4 TimberManagement (Other than Salvage) ...Naturalregeneration works best if seedsource is available. ...Morewinter logging. ...Concemfor fir to pineconversion on fir sites,not all theBlues should be pines. ...Watchout for soilcompaction during salvage and thinning. ...Donot cut older pines. ...Speedup USFSsale planning process. ...Keepgreen wood program moving also. ...Wemay be beyond sustainable yield. ...Theemphasis on timber hasbeen at the expenseof otherelements of the system. ...Clearcuttingand shelterwood must be made illegal. ...Notimber sales on southslopes. ...Needlonger rotations. ...Re-establishopen pine stands. ...Whenharvesting leave good trees. Roads ...Nonew roads. ...Largeareas need to beclosed by closingroads. ...Roadclosures are an irritation. Soils ...Protectionof soilsand water resources are our highest priorities. ...Leavesome slash to detererosion. ...Lowersoil compaction while harvesting. ...Water,soil, and atmosphere form the foundation of theecosystem. EcosvstemManasement ...Needcore areas for biologicaldiversity. ...Conserveecotones. ...Thinkof landas a wholeholistic approach. ...Uselandscape approach. ...Weneed to maintainor enhanceecological diversity. ...Needto thinkabout entering wilderness areas for Foresthealth. ...Thesign of intelligenttimbering is in keepingall theprices. ...Needlong range plan to presentsame problems again. E-5 GeneralForest Health ...Needto movequicker! ...Getthough current analysis paralysis. ...Provideleadership and direction. ...Therehave been plans, but no action. Recreationand Cultural Resources ...Environmentalistsarewilling to payfor recreationon theForest. ...TheBlues have major recreation importance. ...A healthyForest provides for protectionof our culturalheritage. ...TheChiefs philosophy has recognition of spiritualvalues in it. ...Protectand enhance culturally significant plant species and communities. E-6