DOCSLIB.ORG

North Fork Soup Creek and Blue Retro Density Management Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
North Fork Soup Creek and Blue Retro Density Management Study North Soup and Blue Retro Density Management Study ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA: OR125-08-01 Umpqua Field Office Coos Bay District Bureau of Land Management Prepared this 18 day of February by: Frank Price Forest Ecologist - Team Lead Jeremy Hunt Sale Planning/Logging Systems John Chatt Wildlife Biologist Pat Olmstead Fish Biologist Tim Barnes Soil Scientist/Geologist/Energy Coordinator John Colby Hydrologist Jim Counts Civil Engineer Bill Elam Fuels Specialist Meredith Childs Forester, Silviculture/Noxious Weed Coordinator Jennifer Sperling Botanist Paul Gammon Hazardous Materials Coordinator Nancy Zepf Recreation Specialist John Guetterman GIS Specialist Stephan Samuels Cultural Specialist/Archaeologist Scott Knowles Environmental Justice Coordinator TABLE of CONTENTS CHAPTER I.: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ............................................................................. 1 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ........................................................................................................................................... 2 CONFORMANCE WITH EXISTING LAND USE PLANS ..................................................................................................................... 4 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ................................................................................................................................................................. 5 IDENTIFIED ISSUES ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6 POTENTIAL ISSUES IDENTIFIED AND ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS ............................................................................ 6 CHAPTER II.: ALTERNATIVES ...................................................................................................................... 7 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 PROPOSED ACTION ALTERNATIVE – IMPLEMENT THE PHASE TWO STUDY PLAN ....................................................................... 7 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 CHAPTER III.: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ................... 22 REASONABLY FORESEEABLE ACTIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 22 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 23 VEGETATION AND STAND STRUCTURE ....................................................................................................................................... 24 HYDROLOGY .............................................................................................................................................................................. 38 GEOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................................................... 46 SOILS .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 47 WILDLIFE INCLUDING T&E SPECIES ......................................................................................................................................... 48 AQUATIC SPECIES INCLUDING T&E SPECIES ............................................................................................................................ 53 BOTANICAL SPECIES INCLUDING SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES ...................................................................................................... 59 NOXIOUS WEEDS ........................................................................................................................................................................ 65 FUELS ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 66 RECREATION .............................................................................................................................................................................. 68 CULTURAL RESOURCES.............................................................................................................................................................. 69 SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE ................................................................................................................................................ 70 RESOURCES NOT ANALYZED IN DETAIL .................................................................................................................................... 71 UNAFFECTED RESOURCES .......................................................................................................................................................... 72 CHAPTER IV.: List of Agencies and Individuals Contacted ........................................................................... 72 LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................................................................. 73 Tables Table I-1: Proposed Project Locations ................................................................................................................................. ……….2 Table II-1: Project Acres by Land Use Allocation ............................................................................................................................ 8 Table II-2: Summary of the Proposed Action .................................................................................................................................. 8 Table II-3: Current and Target Stocking for the North Soup Site ................................................................................................... 10 Table II-4: Current and Target Stocking for the Blue Retro Site .................................................................................................... 10 Table II-5: Average Stand Diameter by Treatment and Total Number of Trees to Recruit for Snags and Down Wood ................ 11 Table II-6: North Soup Acres by Treatment and Subtreatment ....................................................................................................... 12 Table II-7: Seasonal Restrictions .................................................................................................................................................... 17 Table II-8: Miles of Renovation by Surface Type .......................................................................................................................... 18 Table III-1: Early Stand Histories for the North Soup and Blue Retro Sites ................................................................................... 24 Table III-2: Current Species Distribution of Overstory Trees on the North Soup and Blue Retro Sites ........................................ 28 Table III-3: 1st Phase Density Management Study Treatment Histories for the North Soup & Blue Retro Sites ............................ 34 Table III-4: North Soup and Blue Retro Trees per Acre and Average DBH by Treatment ............................................................ 35 Table III-5: Miles of Stream, by Stream Order ............................................................................................................................... 40 Table III-6: Forest Operations Inventory age classes, BLM-administered land .............................................................................. 42 Table III-7: Miles of Renovation by Surface Type ......................................................................................................................... 45 Table III-8: Special Status Wildlife Species on the Coos Bay District, excluding aquatic, marine, or species in the Strategic Category. ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 48 Table III-9: Blue-Retro Project Effects Determination for Aquatic Special Status Species ............................................................ 56 Table III-10: Streamside Retention Buffers Effects on Stream Habitats ......................................................................................... 58 Table III-11: North Soup Project Effects Determination for Aquatic Special Status ...................................................................... 59 Table III-12: Special Status Species Fungi Species Suspected within Project Area. ...................................................................... 60 Table III-13: Percent of sites of special status species fungi species in Coos Bay District ............................................................ 64 Cover: Trees on the Blue Retro Density Management Study
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Relations Between Geology and Mass Movement Features in a Part of the East Fork Coquille River Watershed, Southern Coast Range, Oregon
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Jeffrey W. Lane for the degree of Master of Science in Geology presented on May 19, 1987 Title: Relations Between Geology and Mass Movement Features in a Part of the East Fork Coquille River Watershed, Southern Coast Range, Oregon Signature redacted for privacy. Abstract Approved: Frederick J. Swanson ABSTRACT Various types of mass movement features are found in the drainage basin of the East Fork Coquille River in the southern Oregon Coast Range. The distribution and forms of mass movement features in the area are related to geologic factors and the resultant topography. The Jurassic Otter Point Formation, a melange of low-grade metamor- phic and marine sedimentary rocks, is present in scattered outcrops in the southwest portion of the study area but is not extensive. The Tertiary Roseburg Formation consists primarily of bedded siltstone and is compressed into a series of west to northwest-striking folds. The overlying Lookingglass, Flournoy, and Tyee Formations consist of rhyth- mically bedded sandstone and siltstone units with an east to northeast- erly dip of 5-15°decreasing upward in the stratigraphic section. The units form cuesta ridges with up to 2000 feet of relief. The distribution of mass movements is demonstrably related to the bedrock geology and the study area topography. Debris avalanches are more common on the steep slopes underlain by Flournoy Formation and Tyee Formation sandstones, on the obsequent slope of cuesta ridges, and on north-facing slopes. Soil creep occurs throughout the study area and may be the pri- mary mass movement form in siltstone terrane, though soil creep was not studied in detail.
    [Show full text]
  • DOGAMI Open-File Report O-16-02, Landslide Susceptibility Overview
    State of Oregon Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Brad Avy, State Geologist OPEN-FILE REPORT O-16-02 LANDSLIDE SUSCEPTIBILITY OVERVIEW MAP OF OREGON By William J. Burns1, Katherine A. Mickelson1, and Ian P. Madin1 G E O L O G Y F A N O D T N M I E N M E T R R A A L P I E N D D U N S O T G R E I R E S O 1937 2016 1Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, 800 NE Oregon Street, Suite 965, Portland, Oregon 97232 Landslide Susceptibility Overview Map of Oregon NOTICE This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information. This publication cannot substitute for site-specific investigations by qualified practitioners. Site-specific data may give results that differ from the results shown in the publication. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Open-File Report O-16-02 Published in conformance with ORS 516.030 For additional information: Administrative Offices 800 NE Oregon Street, Suite 965 Portland, OR 97232 Telephone (971) 673-1555 Fax (971) 673-1562 http://www.oregongeology.org http://www.oregon.gov/DOGAMI/ ii Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Open-File Report O-16-02 Landslide Susceptibility Overview Map of Oregon TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 REPORT SUMMARY ..............................................................................................1 2.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • The Coquille River Basin, Southwestern Oregon
    Preliminary Assessment of Channel Stability and Bed-Material Transport in the Coquille River Basin, Southwestern Oregon By Krista L. Jones, Jim E. O’Connor, Mackenzie K. Keith, Joseph F. Mangano, and J. Rose Wallick Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Oregon Department of State Lands Open-File Report 2012–1064 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: South Fork Coquille River in the Broadbent Reach (Photograph by Krista L. Jones, U.S. Geological Survey, July 2010.) Preliminary Assessment of Channel Stability and Bed-Material Transport in the Coquille River Basin, Southwestern Oregon By Krista L. Jones, Jim E. O’Connor, Mackenzie K. Keith, Joseph F. Mangano, and J. Rose Wallick Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Oregon Department of State Lands Open-File Report 2012–1064 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2012 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.govFor more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Suggested citation: Jones, K.L., O’Connor, J.E., Keith, M.K., Mangano, J.F., and Wallick, J.R., 2012, Preliminary assessment of channel stability and bed-material transport in the Coquille River basin, southwestern Oregon: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Coos County Flood Insurance Study, P14216.AO, Scales 1:12,000 and 1:24,000, Portland, Oregon, September 1980
    FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY COOS COUNTY, OREGON AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER BANDON, CITY OF 410043 COOS BAY, CITY OF 410044 COOS COUNTY (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) 410042 COQUILLE, CITY OF 410045 LAKESIDE, CITY OF 410278 MYRTLE POINT, CITY OF 410047 NORTH BEND, CITY OF 410048 POWERS, CITY OF 410049 Revised: March 17, 2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 41011CV000B NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report may not contain all data available within the Community Map Repository. Please contact the Community Map Repository for any additional data. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may revise and republish part or all of this FIS report at any time. In addition, FEMA may revise part of this FIS report by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS report. Therefore, users should consult with community officials and check the Community Map Repository to obtain the most current FIS report components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: September 25, 2009 Revised Countywide FIS Date: March 17, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose of Study ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • COOS and COQUILLE AREA AGRICULTURAL WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
    COOS and COQUILLE AREA AGRICULTURAL WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Developed by the Coos and Coquille Local Advisory Committee and The Oregon Department of Agriculture with Assistance from The Coos County Soil and Water Conservation District March 29, 2006 Updated June 3, 2010 Local Advisory Committee Members Eric Aasen Jolly Hibbits Joan Mahaffy Jeff Cochran Tom Johnson JoAnn Mast Jordan Utsey (deceased) Steve Cooper Bonnie Joyce Dave Messerle Heath Hampel Roland Ransdell Coos and Coquille Area Agricultural Water Quality Management Plan June 3, 2010 Page 2 Table of Contents Acronyms........................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Applicability ...................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Introduction........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 Agriculture in the Coos and Coquille Watersheds....................................................................................................... 8 Agriculture in the Tenmile Watershed ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • South Coast Basin Water Quality Status/Action Plan
    South Coast Basin Watershed Approach South Coast Basin Status Report Appendices Appendix A: Section 303D and 305B Information ............................................ 5 Appendix B: South Coast Basin Land Use Detail .............................................. 17 Appendix C: Water Availability and Water Rights .......................................... 23 Appendix D: General NPDES Permits by Sub-basin ........................................ 31 Appendix E: CEMAP Sampling Site Detail ........................................................... 36 Appendix F: Biomonitoring Sampling Site Detail and Condition ............... 40 Appendix G: Water Quality Data Graphics and Detail ................................... 47 Floras Creek Dissolved Oxygen and pH TMDL Intensive ...................................................52 Floras Creek Diel Fluctuations – July 2008 ........................................................................53 Sixes River Ambient Sampling ...........................................................................................54 Sixes River Spawning Dissolved Oxygen TMDL Intensive .................................................58 Sixes River Diel Fluctuations..............................................................................................59 Elk River Ambient Sampling ...............................................................................................60 Hunter Creek Dissolved Oxygen and pH TMDL Intensive – July 2008 ...............................64 Hunter Creek Diel Fluctuations – August
    [Show full text]
  • 1992 Annual Report
    Status of Oregon Coastal Stocks of Anadromous Salmonids Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds Monitoring Report No. OPSW-ODFW-2000-3 FEBRUARY 2, 2000 Steve Jacobs Julie Firman Gary Susac Eric Brown Brian Riggers Kris Tempel Coastal Salmonid Inventory Project Western Oregon Research and Monitoring Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 28655 Highway 34 Corvallis, OR 97333 Funds supplied in part by: Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration Program administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anadromous Fisheries Act administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service, Pacific Salmon Treaty administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service, and State of Oregon (General and Wildlife Funds) Citation: Jacobs S., J. Firman, G. Susac, E. Brown, B. Riggers and K. Tempel 2000. Status of Oregon coastal stocks of anadromous salmonids. Monitoring Program Report Number OPSW-ODFW- 2000-3, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Oregon. CONTENTS SUMMARY................................................................................................................................. 1 Fall Chinook.............................................................................................................................. 1 Coho.......................................................................................................................................... 2 Chum......................................................................................................................................... 3 Steelhead .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Bandon City Council and Planning Commission and City Council
    JOINT BANDON CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION August 15, 2016, 6:00 to 7:00 P.M. AND CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING August 15, 2016, Following Work Session. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 555 HIGHWAY 101, BANDON WORK SESSION AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 1.1 Roll Call 2. APPROVE MINUTES 2.1 Joint Work Session Minutes from June, 27, 2016 3. WORK SESSION 3.1 Review, Discussion and Direction to Staff on Title 16 - Land Division Regulations and Title 17 - Zoning 3.2 Report on South Jetty by Commissioner Bremmer 3.3 Update on Fee Schedule 3.4 Other 4. ADJOURN AMENDED CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 1.1 Roll Call 2. EXECUTIVE SESSION 192.660 (2) (a) The governing body of a public body may hold an executive session to consider the employment of a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent. 192.660 (2) (h) To consult with counsel concerning the legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. 3. RETURN TO SPECIAL MEETING 4. ACTION Possible Action and Direction to Staff 5. ADJOURN Please note the meeting is open to the public, but no public comments will be accepted. T H E S 0 U T H J E T T Y Bandon, Oregon REPORT BAJ'IDON CITY COUNCIL BANDON PLi\1-....WNG COMMISSION WORKSESSIONS 2016 AUGUST 15, 2016 Sheryl Bremmer, Planning Commisi.ionu,Augus1 15, 2016 Southjetty Report August 15, 2016 Contents I. Introduction pg. 2 II. Historical Background pg.
    [Show full text]
  • 1992 Annual Report
    THE OREGON PLAN for Salmon and Watersheds Status of Oregon Coastal Stocks of Anadromous Salmonids, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2002-3 Status of Oregon Coastal Stocks of Anadromous Salmonids, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds Monitoring Report No. OPSW-ODFW-2002-3 September, 2002 Steven Jacobs Julie Firman Gary Susac David Stewart Jared Weybright Coastal Salmonid Inventory Project Western Oregon Research and Monitoring Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 28655 Highway 34 Corvallis, OR 97333 Funds supplied in part by: Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration Program administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anadromous Fisheries Act administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service, Pacific Salmon Treaty administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service, and State of Oregon (General and Wildlife Funds). Citation: Jacobs S., J. Firman, G. Susac, D. Stewart and J. Weybright 2002. Status of Oregon coastal stocks of anadromous salmonids, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002; Monitoring Program Report Number OPSW-ODFW-2002-3, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Oregon. CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................1 Fall Chinook ............................................................................................................................1 Coho ........................................................................................................................................2 Chum .......................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Coos Coquille Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan
    Coos and Coquille Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan October 2020 Developed by the Oregon Department of Agriculture and the Coos and Coquille Local Advisory Committee with support from the Coos Soil and Water Conservation District Oregon Department of Agriculture Coos SWCD Water Quality Program 371 N. Adams St. 635 Capitol St. NE Coquille, OR 97423 Salem, OR 97301 (541) 396-6879 Phone: (503) 986-4700 Website: oda.direct/AgWQPlans Table of Contents Acronyms and Terms Used in this Document ....................................................................... i Foreword .......................................................................................................................................... iii Applicability..................................................................................................................................... iii Required Elements of Area Plans ............................................................................................ iii Plan Content ..................................................................................................................................... iv Chapter 1: Agricultural Water Quality Program ................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose of Agricultural Water Quality Program and Applicability of Area Plans 1 1.2 History of the Ag Water Quality Program ........................................................................... 1 1.3 Roles and Responsibilities .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • K'vn-Da' Xwvn-De' - Yesterday & Tomorrow - 2040 Comprehensive Plan
    K’vn-da’ Xwvn-de’ Yesterday & Tomorrow 2040 Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Coquille Indian Tribe September 2019 Acknowledgments K’vn-da’ Xwvn-de’ - Yesteday & Tomorrow - 2040 Comprehensive Plan Completed by the Coquille Indian Tribe - Operations Department under the direction of Coquille Tribal Council, ANA-SEDS Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee, Robin Harkins Director of GIS Services and Matt Jensen Tribal Land-Use Planner Funded by: This Comprehensive Plan was funded using a grant from the Administration for Native Americans - Social Economic Development Strategies (ANA-SEDS) program. Tribal Council Special thanks for allowing time on your agendas Brenda Meade (Chairperson) Tribal Youth Council Kippy Robbins (Vice-Chair) Elders Committee Donald Ivy (Chief) Health Advisory Board Linda Mecum (Secretary-Treasurer) Coquille Indian Housing Authority (CIHA) Toni Ann Brend (Representative #1) Culture Education Committee Don Garrett (Representative #2) Natural Resource Committee Eric Metcalf (Representative #3) Kilkich Residents Association ANA-SEDS Steering Committee A very special thank you: Robin Harkins (Grant Manager/Director of GIS Services) Denni Hockema (Tribal Elder and Cultural Mark Johnston (Executive Direcor & Grant Administrator) Anthropologist) Fauna Larkin* (Operations Department Director) Jaeci Hall (Language Consultant) Scott Mickelson (Tribal Attorney) Toni Ann Brend* (Tribal Council Representative) And thank you - Tribal Members who took time out of their day at: Linda Mecum* (Tribal Council Representative) 2018 Winter Gathering
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Multi-Species Conservation and Management Plan ODFW
    Coastal Multi-Species Conservation and Management Plan OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Approved by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission: June 6, 2014 ODFW Mission To protect and enhance Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats for use and enjoyment by present and future generations Coastal Multi-Species Conservation and Management Plan June 2014 Acknowledgements Authors (alphabetical) • Jamie Anthony (ODFW) • Kevin Goodson (ODFW) • Jay Nicholas (Contractor) • Matt Falcy (ODFW) • Steve Jacobs (ODFW, retired) • Jim Owens (Cogan Owens Cogan) • Erin Gilbert (ODFW) • Dave Jepsen (ODFW) • Tom Stahl (ODFW) Contributors: Reviews, Data, and Other Assistance (alphabetical) Cogan Owens Cogan, LLC CMP STAKEHOLDER TEAMS – Alisha Morton North Coast Stratum Team – Jim Owens Mid-South Coast Stratum Team – Garry Bullard (City of Manzanita) – Bruce Bertrand (alt., South Coast Anglers) Independent Multidisciplinary – Kelly Dirksen (Conf. Tribes of Grand Ronde) – Scott Cook, Oregon Alliance for Sustainable Science Team – Ian Fergusson (ANWS) Salmon Fisheries – Robert Hughes – Melyssa Graeper (Necanicum Watershed – Nancy Molina (co-chair) – Eric Farm (alt., The Campbell Group) Council) – Carl Schreck (co-chair) – Joe Furia (The Freshwater Trust) – Mike Herbel (CCA) – J. Alan Yeakley – Tom Hoesly (The Campbell Group) – Gary Kish (NSIA) – Aaron Longton (POORT) ODFW – Mark Labhart (Tillamook County) – Lindsay Adrean – Scott McKenzie (resource producer) – Sara LaBorde (Wild Salmon Center) – Kara Anlauf-Dunn – Jim Pex (Coos County) – Ray Monroe
    [Show full text]