In the Pacific Southwest Region

Investigating Water Quality in the Pacific Southwest Region

Best Management Practices Evaluation Program (BMPEP) User’s Guide

June 2002

USDA Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region 1323 Club Drive Vallejo, California 94592-1110 -2-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...... 8

ADMINISTRATIVE EVALUATIONS...... 9 Purpose...... 9 Evaluators...... 9 Evaluation Selection...... 9 Evaluation Process...... 9 Criteria for Rating Implementation...... 10 Reports...... 11 IN-CHANNEL EVALUATIONS...... 12 Purpose...... 12 Evaluators...... 12 Selection of Study Sites...... 12 Monitoring Plan...... 13 Follow-Up Investigation...... 16 Reports...... 17 ON-SITE EVALUATIONS...... 18 Purpose...... 18 Evaluators...... 20 Identification of Evaluation Sites...... 20 Developing the Random Sample Pool...... 20 Evaluation Process...... 22 Implementation Evaluation...... 22 Effectiveness Evaluations...... 23 Data Storage and Retrieval...... 24 Criteria for Rating BMP Implementation...... 25 Criteria for Rating BMP Effectiveness...... 26 Reporting...... 26 Site Information Common to All or Most Forms...... 27 DETAILED PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING ON-SITE EVALUATIONS...... 29 R-5 BMPEP...... 30 ON-SITE EVALUATION T01 STREAMSIDE MANAGEMENT ZONES *...... 30 (REFERENCE BMP 1.8, 1.19 AND 1.22)...... 30 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 30 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 30 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 30 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 30 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 31 R-5 BMPEP...... 33 ON-SITE EVALUATION T02 SKID TRAILS...... 33 (REFERENCE BMP 1.10 AND 1.17)...... 33 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 33 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 33 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 33

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 2 -3-

Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 33 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 34 R-5 BMPEP...... 36 ON-SITE EVALUATION T03 SUSPENDED YARDING...... 36 (REFERENCE BMP 1.11)...... 36 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 36 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 36 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 36 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 36 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 37 R-5 BMPEP...... 39 ON-SITE EVALUATION T04 LANDINGS...... 39 (REFERENCE BMP 1.12 AND 1.16)...... 39 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 39 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 39 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 39 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 39 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 40 R-5 BMPEP...... 42 ON-SITE EVALUATION T05 TIMBER SALE ADMINISTRATION...... 42 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 42 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 42 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 42 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 42 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 43 R-5 BMPEP...... 44 ON-SITE EVALUATION T06 SPECIAL EROSION CONTROL AND REVEGETATION...... 44 (REFERENCE BMP 1.14 AND 1.15)...... 44 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 44 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 44 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 44 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 44 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 45 Making the Estimate...... 46 R-5 BMPEP...... 48 ON-SITE EVALUATION T07 MEADOW PROTECTION...... 48 (REFERENCE BMP 1.18, 1.22,5.3)...... 48 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 48 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 48 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 48 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 48 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 49 R-5 BMPEP...... 50 ON-SITE EVALUATION E08 ROAD SURFACE, DRAINAGE AND SLOPE PROTECTION...... 50 (REFERENCE BMP 2.2, 2.4, 2.5, 2.7, 2.10, 2.22, 2.23)...... 50 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 50 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 50 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 50 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 51 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 51 R-5 BMPEP...... 54 ON-SITE EVALUATION E09 STREAM CROSSINGS...... 54

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 3 -4-

(REFERENCE BMP 2.1, 2.4, 2.5, 2.7, 2.10, 2.23)...... 54 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 54 Developing The Sample Pool and Selecting The Evaluation Sites And Timing Of The Evaluation...... 54 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 54 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 54 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 55 R-5 BMPEP...... 57 ON-SITE EVALUATION E10...... 57 ROAD DECOMMISSIONING...... 57 (REFERENCE BMP 2.26) REVISED 10/2001...... 57 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 57 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 57 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 57 Conducting The Implementation Evaluation...... 57 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 58 Note on Adjustments of Excavated Stream Crossing Fills in Different Geomorphic Settings:...... 61 R-5 BMPEP...... 63 ON-SITE EVALUATION E11 CONTROL OF SIDECAST MATERIAL...... 63 (REFERENCE BMP 2.11)...... 63 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 63 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 63 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 63 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 63 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation:...... 64 R-5 BMPEP...... 65 ON-SITE EVALUATION E12 SERVICING AND REFUELING...... 65 (REFERENCE BMP 2.12)...... 65 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 65 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 65 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 65 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 65 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 66 R-5 BMPEP...... 67 ON-SITE EVALUATION E13 IN-CHANNEL CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES...... 67 (REFERENCE BMP 2.14, 2.15, 2.17)...... 67 Header Information Unique To This Form:...... 67 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 67 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 67 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 67 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 68 R-5 BMPEP...... 70 ON-SITE EVALUATION E14 TEMPORARY ROADS...... 70 (REFERENCE BMP 2.16, 2.26)...... 70 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 70 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 70 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 70 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 70 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 71 R-5 BMPEP...... 74 ON-SITE EVALUATION E15 RIP RAP COMPOSITION...... 74 (REFERENCE BMP 2.20)...... 74 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 74

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 4 -5-

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 74 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 74 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 74 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 75 R-5 BMPEP...... 76 ON-SITE EVALUATION E16 WATER SOURCE DEVELOPMENT...... 76 (REFERENCE BMP 2.21)...... 76 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 76 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 76 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 76 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 76 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 77 R-5 BMPEP...... 79 ON-SITE EVALUATION E17 SNOW REMOVAL...... 79 (REFERENCE BMP 2.25)...... 79 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 79 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 79 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 79 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 79 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 80 R-5 BMPEP...... 81 ON-SITE EVALUATION E18 PIONEER ROAD CONSTRUCTION...... 81 (REFERENCE BMP 2.3, 2.8, 2.9, 2.19)...... 81 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 81 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 81 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 81 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 81 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 82 R-5 BMPEP...... 85 ON-SITE EVALUATION E19 RESTORATION OF BORROW PITS AND QUARRIES (INCLUDING STREAMSIDE BORROW AREAS)...... 85 (REFERENCE BMP 2.18, 2.26, 2.27)...... 85 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 85 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 85 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 85 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 85 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 86 R-5 BMPEP...... 89 ON-SITE EVALUATION E20 MANAGEMENT OF ROADS DURING WET PERIODS (REFERENCE BMP 2.24, 7.7)...... 89 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 89 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 89 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 89 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 89 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 90 R-5 BMPEP...... 91 ON-SITE EVALUATION R22 DEVELOPED RECREATION SITES...... 91 (REFERENCE BMP 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.9, 4.10)...... 91 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 91 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 91 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 91 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 91 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 92

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 5 -6-

R-5 BMPEP...... 94 ON-SITE EVALUATION R23 LOCATION OF STOCK FACILITIES IN WILDERNESS...... 94 (REFERENCE BMP 4.10)...... 94 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 94 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 94 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 94 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 94 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 95 ON-SITE EVALUATION G24...... 96 RANGE MANAGEMENT...... 96 (REFERENCE BMP 8.1, 8.2, 8.3) REVISED 8/01...... 96 Header Information Unique to this Form...... 96 Developing the Sample Pool and Selecting the Evaluation Sites...... 96 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 97 Conducting the Implementation Rating...... 97 Locating Implementation Sample Points...... 98 Implementation Sampling Protocols...... 98 Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation...... 98 R-5 BMPEP...... 107 ON-SITE EVALUATION F25...... 107 PRESCRIBED FIRE...... 107 (REFERENCE BMP 6.2, 6.3)...... 107 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 107 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 107 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 107 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 107 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 108 R-5 BMPEP...... 110 ON-SITE EVALUATION M26...... 111 MINING OPERATIONS (LOCATABLE MINERALS)...... 111 (REFERENCE BMP 3.1)...... 111 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 111 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 111 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 111 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 111 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 113 R-5 BMPEP...... 117 ON-SITE EVALUATION M27...... 117 COMMON VARIETY MINERALS...... 117 (REFERENCE BMP 3.2, 2.18)...... 117 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 117 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 117 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 117 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 117 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 118 R-5 BMPEP...... 121 ON-SITE EVALUATION V28...... 121 VEGETATION MANIPULATION...... 121 (REFERENCE BMP 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.7)...... 121 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 121 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 121

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 6 -7-

Timing Of The Evaluation...... 121 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 121 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 122 R-5 BMPEP...... 124 ON-SITE EVALUATION V29...... 124 REVEGETATION OF SURFACE DISTURBED AREAS...... 124 (REFERENCE BMP 5.4)...... 124 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 124 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 124 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 124 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 124 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 125 R-5 BMPEP...... 127 ON-SITE EVALUATION R30...... 127 DISPERSED RECREATION SITES...... 127 (REFERENCE BMP 4.9)...... 127 Header Information Unique To This Form...... 127 Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites...... 127 Timing Of The Evaluation...... 127 Conducting The Implementation Rating...... 127 Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation...... 128

*SMZ also includes other naming conventions for streamside buffering areas such as Stream Protection Zones, Riparian Reserves, Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas and so forth. Relevant direction, standards and guidelines for these conventions are also part of the BMP program.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 7 -8-

Introduction This guide has been developed to facilitate evaluation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). The purpose of the BMPEP is to generate and analyze data to:  Assess the efficacy of the Region’s water quality program, and  Identify program shortcomings and initiate corrective actions. The program assesses both the implementation of BMPs and their effectiveness. Evaluating implementation and effectiveness of BMPs in attaining water quality goals and objectives is key to the continued success of the Region’s water quality management program in that it will:  Serve as an agency quality control mechanism to determine how well BMPs are being applied and how well the practices protect water quality.  Serve as the feedback loop for the Region’s water quality management program to identify: a) those BMPs that are in need of revision or improvement. b) those practices that need to be developed. c) those water quality standards, goals and objectives that need to be revised and/or developed.  Fulfill Forest Land and Resource Management Planning water quality monitoring commitments.  Develop a record of performance that demonstrates the ability to control nonpoint source pollution on NFS lands in the PSW Region. Completion of BMP implementation and effectiveness evaluations is also expected to identify validation monitoring and evaluation needs that would be accomplished through subsequent administrative studies or research.

There are three types of Best Management Practice Evaluations: ‘Administrative Evaluations,’ ‘In-Channel Evaluations,’ and ‘On-Site Evaluations.’

Individuals and/or teams of reviewers using forms to document observations of implementation and effectiveness of the BMPs conduct the evaluations.

Administrative Evaluations involve assessing all BMPs for a project, including procedural BMPs (such as the Timber Sale Planning Process). Administrative evaluations should be incorporated into all on-going project, activity and program reviews.

In-Channel Evaluations assess the effectiveness of an aggregate ‘set’ of BMPs applied to a project area in protecting beneficial uses of water. A total set of BMPs prescribed for a project is evaluated by establishing study sites to assess effects on a beneficial use(s) over time.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 8 -9-

On-Site Evaluations involve assessment of specific practices (individual or groups of similar BMPs) using forms that rate both implementation and effectiveness of the practice. The BMPs are assessed at the site of implementation and evaluated relative to attainment of each BMP’s stated objective(s).

ADMINISTRATIVE EVALUATIONS

Purpose

Administrative evaluations provide a summary review of water quality for an entire project. These evaluations look at the total project from the team work, planning and design phases to include a subjective evaluation of the quality of the resulting project on the ground in attaining desired water quality protection. They also evaluate the use and effectiveness of “intangible” BMPs that are not otherwise observable or measurable at a project site, such as ID Team process and communication during project development and execution.

Evaluators

The evaluations are normally completed by members of review teams during project, activity program reviews. For example; an on-Forest Program Review of the Timber Sale Administration program would be an opportune to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the Timber Sale Planning Process BMP 1-1, using Form AE-1.

The review team would assess the team process used on the Forest to identify and schedule harvest activities; evaluate the quality of ID Teamwork and NEPA documents; rate how well it is being used and how well it is working. These are subjective evaluations of actions taken and results attained.

Evaluation Selection

Forest should required completion of Administrative Evaluations as part of all formal and informal reviews that are conducted. The greater the number of evaluations made, the better the Forest and agency capability to identify successes and problems, and make necessary procedural changes.

Evaluation Process

A person on the review team is assigned the responsibility for recording the evaluation findings and transferring the results to the Forest Hydrologist. The review team offers insight and opinions as to how well BMPs are being employed and how well they are working. Both implementation and effectiveness are evaluated by raring elements on the Administrative Evaluation forms. A rating of “1” is the highest and ‘4” is the lowest.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 9 -10-

Criteria for rating implementation and effectiveness are discussed in the following two sections, “E” and “F” respectively. Where improvement is needed, the Forest Hydrologist, in consultation with involved staffs, is responsible for initiating corrective actions (s) on the Forest. Completed forms are retained in a dedicated water quality evaluation file on the Forest.

Criteria for Rating Implementation

These criteria are based on an assessment of the planning, design and team procedure applied in initiating and documenting a project.

1= Exceeds Requirements. Evaluation of the supporting documentation indicated that the team functioned in an interdisciplinary manner, followed established planning and document preparation procedures, and resolved/responded to all specifics of water quality issues, concerns and opportunities. Documents are complete, including cross references, tiering and appendices, and design specifications and mitigations are clearly stated and detailed.

2= Meets Requirements. All documents indicate sufficient team interaction occurred, but vague presentation of mitigation prescriptions indicates little involvement in final writing and editing. The presence of inconsistent and incompatible mitigation measures indicated that key disciplines might not have been continuously involved. There may be a risk of mis- interpretation and mis-application of protection measures presented. Water quality issues, concerns and opportunities were identified and addressed by the team and in the documents. The quality issues, concerns and opportunities were identified and addressed by the team and in the documents. The quality of design specifications is adequate but could be improved to avoid mis-interpretation and mis-application by persons no familiar with intended results.

3=Minor Department from Requirements. A “3” rating would indicate that was departure from the planning processes or that some “key” disciplines for the ID Team were not involved. Documentation is unclear, requiring interpretation as to intent and desired end results. Important resource issues or concerns were not adequately considered in analysis or mitigated, and water quality improvement opportunities were overlooked. I the planning, design and ID Team efforts have substantial room for improvement, rating of “3” would be appropriate.

4= Major Departure from Requirements. Where it is evident that planning processes and ID Team procedures have clearly not been follow and documentation and project design are substandard, a rating of “4” is warranted.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 10 -11-

Criteria for Rating Effectiveness

Criteria used to evaluate effectiveness are base on the ground project site observations of BMP application. Evaluations are made for “indicator” BMP and the general appearance of the whole project area in regard to water quality protection.

1= Improved Protection. Observations of the project area indicate no water quality problems and no potential threats to water quality appear to be immanent. Measures implemented appeared to be over and above those specified. It is evident that extra care taken to prevent water quality impacts. All indicated BMPs are obviously in place and additional measures to protect water quality have been taken.

2= Adequate Protection. Observations of the project area indicate that there are no water quality problems. There may, however, be some potential for future minor threats to water quality evident that were overlooked. It is evident that the project was carried out with the intent of water quality evident that were overlooked. It is evident that the project was carried out with the intent of water with the intent of water quality protection. The project as implemented and observed is consistent with the ID Team ‘s expectations and desired results. Judgment must be exercised here as projected with small variations from the overall water quality protection strategy could still be rated a “2” if the end result observed at the site is satisfactory and potential of realizing adverse effects to water quality are believed to be minor. All indicated BMP are in place.

3= Minor Effects. On site observations reveal obvious shortcomings or doubts regarding water quality protection, and it is likely that future impacts to water quality will occur. Observers are generally uncomfortable with end result of the project. Again, judgment is required. If observed results clearly do not match expectations or desired conditions, a rating of “3”or “4” is appropriate.

4= Major Effects. Where substantial water quality problems are observed on –site and the potential to incur prolonged or aggravated water quality impacts is evident, a rating of “4” is appropriate.

Reports

Forest will develop an annual narrative report summarizing the number of Administrative Evaluations completed, the BMPs and types of activities assessed, the successes and deficiencies identified and the actions that need to be taken to resolve problems. These reports should be completed by the end of January each year and distributed to; the Regional Office Range and Watershed Staff, Forest Management Team, and at the minimum, those Forest Staff officers involved in initiating corrective actions. Each sequential report will also include a summary of the status of actions identified in the preceding year’s report.

It should be noted that anytime a specific water quality problem is found during these evaluations that can be rectified with treatment, it should be promptly reported to the

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 11 -12-

responsible line officer. Year-end reports are not substitutes for taking timely corrective actions to stop nonpoint source pollution problems.

IN-CHANNEL EVALUATIONS

Purpose

In-Channel Evaluations are conducted to assess the effectiveness of multiple BMPs implemented for a given project in protecting beneficial uses of water. Measurement of parameters representative of the beneficial uses to be protected are the basis of the evaluation. These evaluations are objective in nature, and measure changes in physical, biological and/or chemical indicators.

Each forest in Region 5 is expected to have at least one active In-Channel Evaluation each year.

Evaluators

The Forest Hydrologist has the lead responsibility for developing the monitoring plan and establishing the In-Channel Evaluation studies on the forest. The location of the study sites, collection of the data, analysis, interpretation and reporting, however, should be an interdisciplinary endeavor. The ID Team should include disciplines that are keyed to the beneficial uses to be protected and/or have expertise in data collection and analysis. The team should also include disciplines that may need data to address resource questions or needs.

Selection of Study Sites

Sites should be representative of management activities common to the forest (e.g., timber, OHV, mineral exploration or extraction, developed recreation, range use, etc.). Sites should also be located in watersheds that are representative of the forests’ dominant landforms and geologic types. In addition, streams selected for project evaluation should have a suitable control (or comparison stream) nearby, unless desired future condition criteria have been established for the stream, and will serve as the basis of comparison. Often the easiest comparison is between stations located on the same stream above and below the project. The other common approach is to compare the “project” stream with another nearby stream that is similar in terms of size, geology and other physical factors (paired watershed approach). In most cases, an assessment of background or pre-project conditions should be made at the selected sites for the parameters to be measured. Otherwise, any “natural” differences between stations will be interpreted as treatment-caused. Therefore, careful selection of sites, relative to the parameters to be measured, is crucial.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 12 -13-

Monitoring Plan

A Monitoring Plan is developed for each In-Channel Evaluation. To preclude redundant evaluations and optimize technical applicability, plans will undergo peer review by watershed or other specialists on another forest, and by the PSW Station. To assure commitment, plans are approved by the appropriate line officer.

Each plan describes the responsibility, location, beneficial use(s) to be protected (the basis for the evaluation), evaluation objectives, data collection parameters and methods, timing/frequency and duration of collection, analytical techniques, and the decision criteria (question or desired future condition) to be used to determine if the beneficial use(s) was protected.

Responsibility The plan should identify who is responsible for assuring that the plan, once approved, is implemented and who will accomplish data collection and analysis. The Forest Hydrologist is responsible for plan development, in consultation with other forest resource specialists, and for overall administration. Implementation of various facets of the plan, however, may be a shared responsibility. The planned monitoring actions are typically carried out by specialists, technicians, or other personnel experience or trained in data collection.

Identifying Beneficial Use The applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan should be the first reference used to identify the designated beneficial uses for the selected In-Channel Evaluation site(s). When the Basin Plan identification of beneficial uses is found to be too general, or not sensitive to the selected site, field investigation may be necessary to narrow the range of applicable beneficial uses. Evaluation should identify the most sensitive of the beneficial uses on the premise that if it is protected, the other uses will also be protected.

For example: where the beneficial uses of a stream are cold water fish, hydro-electric power generation and agricultural supply; cold water fish is probably the most sensitive beneficial use to be protected. It is the beneficial use present closest to the site of activity, and most likely to be affected by nonpoint source pollution resulting from forest management activities.

Objectives The plan should have clear and concise objectives. The objective should link the forest management action to the beneficial use and to the parameter(s) being measured. To the fullest extent practical, there should be continuity with program objectives and needs of other resources. For example, an objective statement might read: “To determine if eroded soil from the Flat Bottom OHV trail affects spiny stickleback habitat in French Creek by filling summer holder pools with sediment.”

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 13 -14-

Parameters The parameter(s) that is indicative of the most sensitive beneficial use(s) is commonly selected for measurement. For example: in a watershed where a cold water fishery is the most sensitive beneficial use to be protected, and where investigation of the fishery indicates that “habitat condition” is the key limited factor of the beneficial use, parameters (indicators) to measure might include: pool volume, channel cross-sectional area, bottom strata composition, or stream bank stability. In a similar circumstance where “food supply” is determined to be the key limiting factor, parameters to measure might include macroinvertebrates.

Given the dynamic nature of stream systems, it is recommended that a single parameter not be the basis of an In-Channel Evaluation. More than one parameter should be selected.

The indicator parameters selected for evaluation should be those that are:

- subject to change as a result of the management action

- those that are indicators of beneficial use protection.

The parameter(s) selected for measurement will dictate equipment needs and methods of collection. In all cases, stand methods and/or state-of-the-art data collection procedures will be documented in the plan as those to be employed. For example: where channel cross sectional area is the indicator to be measured, the plan might state, “Permanent steel pins will be installed on each side of the channel to ensure measurement location consistency and to secure a steel engineering tape. Once the steel tape is secured, a stadia rod and transit will be used to determine depths at on foot intervals beginning at the pin on the west bank and ending at the steel pin on the east bank.”

Finally, a determination of the acceptable level of change in the measured parameter should be made. Generally, sample size needs to increase as the acceptable level of change to be detected gets smaller.

Sampling Methodology In Channel monitoring involves measurement of parameters selected as indicators (proxies) of the selected beneficial use(s) of concern. Selected parameters are generally compared using one of four strategies:

- comparison between “treated” and “control” stations (above/below project or paired watershed methods);

- comparison of parameters from stations before, during and following the project, or;

- a combination of the two above approaches:.. against an established standard or “desired future condition” parameter.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 14 -15-

Statistical Testing: Each In-Channel Monitoring Plan will be designed to test a specific question or set of questions at a pre-determined level or significance (or confidence). Putting the water quality or beneficial use objective in the proper statistical framework is an essential and sometimes difficult task.

The management concern, for instance, “Was the SMZ prescription on XYZ Timber Sale successful in maintaining water temperature of Cool Creek,” might be restated as “Is there a difference between the population of maximum daily temperature measurements at Station A (above the sale) and the corresponding population from Station B (below the sale) at the .05 level of significance.”

If a standard or desired future condition criteria is the basis of the evaluation, the question to be tested is if the standard (or criteria) falls within the range of the parameter as defined by the data and confidence level selected.

Establishing a question to be tested is important for several reasons. First, framing the question in a statistical manner forces the author to consider variation in the parameter(s) to be measured, as well as the sample size necessary to reasonably test the question. It also forces a pre-determination of the significance level desired. Finally, statistical testing brings the plan to a pre-determined end, resulting in a yes/no (accept/reject) answer.

Data is used to test if the compared stations, using the selected parameters, are not significantly different, or that the standard or desired future condition criteria has or has not been met.

Timing: Each In-Channel Monitoring Plan will specify when data collection will begin and the duration of the sampling. During plan development, consideration shall be given to the optimal timing of sampling for each parameter included in the Plan. Access during periods of wet weather should be considered during election of parameters to be measured. The In- Channel Evaluations are expected to require one to five years of data collection before a determination of beneficial use protection can be made. Duration of the sampling will vary depending on such factors as; the parameter(s) selected for measurement, the question to be tested, climactic patterns are so forth. The monitoring plan must also include time frames for “follow-up” investigations described in the “Follow Up Investigation” section below.

Frequency: The number of In-Channel Evaluations planned or ongoing at any one time is at the discretion of forest personnel. At least one In-Channel Evaluation should be ongoing each year on each forest.

The frequency and number of samples collected for each evaluation is specified in the Monitoring Plan. Determination of sampling frequency is base primarily on the:

- characteristics and variability of the parameter(s) to be measured;

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 15 -16-

- significance level selected testing the question, and;

- variability of the methods selected to sample the parameters.

Location: Each forest will determine which watersheds and projects are most suitable and desirable for In-Channel monitoring. Normally forests should concentrate In-Channel Evaluations on management activities or within watersheds that are of most concern to the forest. Selection of the activity or watershed for the In-Channel Evaluation should be the result of interaction between line officers, involved disciplines, project planners and those implementing the projects. The Activity or watershed selected should represent a key management or water resource concern(s) on the forest.

Location of the In-Channel survey site(s) and the sampling points at each site are key elements of each In-Channel Monitoring Plan. Survey sites can range from watersheds, to streams, to stream reaches, to individual pools or riffles. The selection of the appropriate survey site must be carefully considered and will be a function of; the plan objectives, natural features and characteristics of the site, access during the period of sampling, specific parameter(s), and influences from other activities within the watershed. Determination of individual sample point locations is site-specific. Sample site location determinations are made following field evaluations and review of procedures for the monitoring the parameter to be tested, and are also documented in the In-Channel Monitoring Plan. Selection of specific sample points at the sites is best done in a random fashion, in most cases.

Follow-Up Investigation

Follow-up investigation is conducted when data from an In-Channel Evaluation indicates beneficial use protection objectives were not met. Follow-up investigations to identify causes of nonpoint source degradation are conducted at two levels. The first is a general survey of the entire upstream activity for areas suspected as problem sources. Emphasis is given to surveying areas considered most sensitive, and BMPs believed to have he highest risk of failure. The second step is to conduct On-Site Evaluations, per section II, using appropriate Onsite Evaluation procedures and forms, at all problem sites identified during the activity area survey.

Sites evaluated in thee cases are identified as “selected” (non-random) On-Site Evaluations during data entry. The Monitoring Plan should identify time frames for initiating follow-up investigations following recognition that beneficial uses were not protected and identify responsibilities for this work.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 16 -17-

Reports

Each forest will report the results and status of In-Channel Evaluation efforts on a yearly basis. These reports should be completed by the end of January each year and distributed to; the Regional Office Range and Watershed Staff, Forest Management Team, and at the minimum, those Forest Staff Officers involved in the In-Channel evaluations. The report is expected to have three sections that address on-going, recently concluded, and planned evaluations and provide the following information:

On-Going Evaluations: The section of the report should identify the name and location of evaluations being conducted. For each evaluation, the text should describe its objective and beneficial use(s), the questions being tested, indicator parameters being assessed and their relevancy as an indicator of the selected beneficial use(s). The report should identify other resource disciplines involved, and the duration of the evaluation.

Describe any natural or human-caused events that might influence the final results and any modifications made to the original monitoring plan to compensate for these influences. To the extent practicable, the port should quantitatively and qualitatively describe the results/findings to date regarding protection of the beneficial use(s). Reference should also be made to any previously concluded evaluations, highlighting the relevancy of the on-going evaluation(s) and preliminary findings to the results of the concluded evaluations.

Concluded Evaluations: The section of the report should address those evaluations completed during the reporting year. This section should include a quantitative and qualitative discussion of the results obtained in regard to the objective(s), question to be tested and the protection of the beneficial use(s). It would also identify any natural non human-caused events that influenced the results, and describe what effect they had on the results. The credibility of the selected parameters monitored as proxies for the identified beneficial use(s) should also be discussed.

Planned Evaluations: This section of the report should identify monitoring plans to be developed in the following years and the schedule for development and status.

It should be noted that any time a specific water quality problem is found during these evaluations that can be rectified with treatment, it should be promptly reported to the responsible line officer. Year-end reports are not substitutes for taking timely corrective actions to stop nonpoint source pollution problems. Administrative evaluations provide a summary review of water quality for an entire project. These evaluations look at the total project from the team work, planning and design phases to include a subjective evaluation of the quality of the resulting project on the ground in attaining desired water quality protection. They also evaluate the use and effectiveness of “intangible” BMPs that are not otherwise observable or measurable at a project site, such as ID Team process and communication during project development and execution.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 17 -18-

ON-SITE EVALUATIONS

Purpose

On-Site Evaluations are the core of the Region’s BMP Evaluation Program. They evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of individual BMPs applied on project sites. The reliability and accuracy of these evaluations is expected to be high; and they are critical in the feedback loop that will enable us to refine and improve BMPs.

Evaluation forms are responsive to the implementation question: “Did we do what we said we were going to do to protect water quality?” and the effectiveness question: “How well did we protect water quality?” The evaluations contribute to a data set that allows determinations regarding the success of BMP implementation and effectiveness. The determinations are based on a regional pool of results in which criteria are weighted, analyzed through systems algorithms, and statistically tested.

There are 29 different evaluation procedures. Each is designed to assess a specific practice or set of closely related practices. For example, one procedure evaluates Streamside Management Zones; another evaluates grazing; and another recreational facilities.

Each procedure has a “form” where ratings and comments are recorded, and each form has an electronic counterpart in ORACLE on the IBM.

Evaluation procedures vary greatly, but the overall approach is consistent. A listing of the 29 procedures follows:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 18 -19-

Table 1. BMP Evaluation Procedure Names and Descriptions. Procedure # Procedure Name (BMPs Monitored) T01 Streamside Management Zones* (BMP 1.8, 1.19, 1.22) T02 Skid trails (BMP 1.10, 1.17) T03 Suspended yarding (BMP 1.11) T04 Landings (BMP 1.12, 1.16) T05 Timber sale administration (BMP 1.13, 1.20, 1.25) T06 Special erosion control and revegetation (BMP 1.14, 1.15) T07 Meadow protection (BMP 1.18, 1.22, 5.3) E08 Road surface, drainage and slope protection (BMP 2.2, 4, 5, 10, 23) E09 Stream crossings (BMP 2.1) E10 Road Decommissioning (BMP 2.26) E11 Control of side cast material (BMP 2.11) E12 Servicing and refueling (BMP 2.12) E13 In-channel construction practices (BMP 2.14, 2.15, 2.17) E14 Temporary roads (BMP 2.16, 2.26) E15 Rip rap composition (BMP 2.20) E16 Water source development (BMP 2.21) E17 Snow removal (BMP 2.25) E18 Pioneer road construction (BMP 2.3, 2.8, 2.9, 2.19) E19 Restoration of borrow pits and quarries (BMP 2.27, 2.18) E20 Management of roads during wet periods (BMP 2.24, 7.7) R22 Developed recreation sites (BMP 4.3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10) R23 Location of stock facilities in wilderness (BMP 4.11) G24 Range management (BMP 8.1, 8.2, 8.3) F25 Prescribed fire (BMP 6.3) M26 Mining operations (Locatable minerals) (BMP 3.1, 3.2) M27 Common variety minerals (BMP 3.3) V28 Vegetation manipulation (BMP 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.7) V29 Revegetation of surface disturbed areas (BMP 5.4) R30 Dispersed Recreation Sites (BMP 4.5, 4.6, 4.10)

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 19 -20-

Evaluators The On-Site Evaluations are designed for completion by those persons responsible for the execution of the practices. For example, Range Conservationists or Resource Officers would conduct the On-Site Evaluation of Grazing, while a Sale Administrator or Planner would conduct the evaluation of Streamside Management Zones. An Engineer or Contracting Officer’s Representative would conduct the evaluation of Road Drainage Control. A Hydrologist might assist in conducting the evaluations, but the primary person conducting the evaluation should, in most cases, be the person with the responsibility for implementing the practices.

Identification of Evaluation Sites To ensure generation of an analytical database from which statistically valid inferences can be made, Forests will be assigned the number and types of evaluations to be completed each year. For statistical analysis purposes, the assigned evaluations must be accomplished at randomly identified sites. Sites to be evaluated are identified in two ways: Random and Selected. Randomly identified sites are very important for drawing statistical conclusions on the implementation and effectiveness of BMPs. Random sites are picked from a pool of projects that meet specified criteria. Criteria for sample pool development for each form are described in Section II-D below. Selected sites are identified in various ways. They may be:  Identified as part of a monitoring plan prescribed in an EA, EIS or LMP.  Identified as part of a Settlement or Negotiated Agreement.  Part of a routine site visit.  Follow-up evaluations above In-Channel Evaluation Sites, to discover sources of problems.  Sites that are of particular interest to site administrators, specialists and/or management due to their sensitivity, uniqueness and so forth.  Selected for a particular reason specific to local needs. It is important to note that for statistical analysis, the sample pool cannot contain selected sites. Only randomly identified sites are used to develop statistical inferences. Selected sites must be clearly identified and kept separate from the random sites by the Forest Hydrologist during data storage and analysis.

Developing the Random Sample Pool The detailed instructions for each On-Site Evaluation provide methods for developing sample pools for randomly selected sites. Detailed instructions for timber and roads is as follows: Timber Evaluations (T01-T07) calls for development of a Timber Sale Sample pool, according to the following:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 20 -21-

The Pool from which to select timber sales for evaluation should include all sales or portions of sales that meet the following requirements: 1) An EA or EIS was prepared. 2) All contract requirements have been met. 3) At least one winter has passed since contract requirements were met, except for T05, which is an active timber sale. 4) Not more than three winters have passed since contract requirements were met. Do not include timber sale units that have been previously evaluated for a given procedure. You may use this timber sale unit for evaluation using a different procedure(s).

Once the pool of timber sales meeting these requirements has been put together, develop individual sample pools for each of the timber (T01-07) evaluations assigned to the forest. Timber sale units will be the unit of selection. For salvage sales and other smaller sales without units, subdivisions will serve as the unit of selection. For timber sales not divided into either units or subdivisions, the sale will be the unit of selection.

For instance, if a forest were assigned three T01 (SMZ) and three T07 (Meadow Protection) evaluations, all timber sales meeting the four criteria above would be reviewed. Each timber sale unit (or, in the absence of units, subdivision or small sale) containing an SMZ or meadow (as designated on the Sale Area Map) would be placed into the T01 and T07 sample pools, respectively. This process is repeated, adding units to the pool, until all the sample pool sales have been reviewed.

After each pool has been developed, randomly select a number of sites equal to the forest assignment for that evaluation. You must use a truly random method for this, such as rolling dice, pulling numbers out of a hat, or a random number table or generator.

For Engineering Evaluations (E08, E09 and E11), use roads rather than timber units or subdivisions are the unit of selection. Note that sample pools for E08, E09 and E11 contain roads treated under maintenance contracts, roads constructed under public works or other cooperative contracts as well as those constructed or reconstructed under a timber sale contract. It is very important to randomly select the sales. Random selection of sample sites across the Region is key to establishing confidence in BMPEP results. The procedure for sample pool development will, at least initially, require time and effort. The quality of results makes the effort worthwhile. Do not take shortcuts on this very important aspect of the program.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 21 -22-

Evaluation Process The process for review and evaluation consists of 9 steps: 1) Identify sample locations and timing. a) Develop the sample pool of projects that apply to the evaluation (random sites). b) Identify sample locations and schedule any specific evaluations with timing requirements for the evaluations that must be made at every site the BMP is applied (E12, E13, E14, E18). c) Identify those evaluations that must be sampled every time the activity occurs (see E17, E19, F25, M27). d) Choose any additional sites for evaluation (selection sites).

2) Pick the evaluation site(s) (random) from the sample pool. 3) Study all available project documentation to determine what BMP mitigation measures are applicable and prescribed for the project. 4) Conduct the implementation rating in the field at the project site. 5) Conduct the effectiveness rating at the project site using sample point selection and observation methods specified for each procedure. 6) Turn in the fully completed data forms (including form header information) to the Forest BMP Data Steward, who will: a) Enter the data into the computerized storage and retrieval system on the IBM (BMP-DB), and file the hard copy data in a file, in the Supervisor’s Office, dedicated as the Forest’s water quality monitoring data repository. b) Generate and disseminate reports of results, noting shortfalls in implementation and evaluation, and actions to be taken. c) Initiate corrective actions to address deficiencies identified by the evaluations.

Implementation Evaluation Implementation of BMPs is always evaluated before effectiveness to answer the question; “Did we do what we said we were going to do to protect water quality?” This is the most time- consuming part of On-Site Evaluations as it involves identifying, in detail, what practices were prescribed to protect water quality. Source documents such as the project EA, project map, contract, implementation plan, plan of operations, applicable handbooks, Special Use Permit, Allotment Management Plan and contract daily dairies must be searched. A comprehensive picture of “What did we say we would do?” must be obtained. To guide the person doing the evaluation, there are specific questions to be answered about implementation on each form. A few of these questions require “yes” or “no” answers, but the majority requires a rating between 1 and 4. A rating of 1 is the best, and 4 is the worst. Descriptive indicators of what might constitute a 1, 2, 3 and 4 rating are presented in the “Criteria for Rating BMP Implementation” section following. When implementation shortcomings are discovered, probable cause(s) of the implementation failure and recommended corrective actions to prevent recurrence should be noted on the form. Reviewer comments are extremely valuable. A series of boxes are provided to identify the

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 22 -23-

phase(s) of the project implementation where the problems occurred. A space is also provided to make notes on recommendations for corrective actions. For example, in completing form T01, Streamside Management Zones, a person performing an evaluation observed that the SMZ was not clearly identified on the project site as only four orange flags were tied to brush to mark the area. In this case, the “Layout” box might be checked and a notation similar to the following might be written in the blank space for comments: “Orange flagging not visible and not placed frequently enough along SMZ. Have bright orange 6 inch by 8 inch signs printed with the wording ‘SMZ Special Attention Area’ printed on them and install along subsequently marked SMZs at 40 foot intervals”.

Effectiveness Evaluations Effectiveness of the BMP is then evaluated to answer the question; “How well did we protect water quality?” Specific indicators of the success of the BMPs are observed or measured on-site. In most cases, three descriptive choices of the observed or measured criteria are provided on each form (a few evaluations have two choices). The person performing the evaluation checks the description on the form that most closely matches the observations and measurement results. Discussion of effectiveness criteria is presented in the “Criteria for Rating BMP Effectiveness” section below. Generally, rating of more than one criterion in the right-hand column is an indication of poor effectiveness. Each evaluation is intended to focus the observer on key areas, but the criteria are not perfect and might not fit every site. The primary benefit of conducting the evaluations is that someone, hopefully an experienced and perceptive technician or professional, is on the ground looking at results. If the observer sees something that indicates the practice resulted in poor effectiveness, he or she should take the time to comment on that observation, even if it is not reflected in the effectiveness rating. When effectiveness problems are noted, observers need to comment on the extent, duration and magnitude of effects on beneficial uses. In addition to describing the effects in the comments section, observers will use the following system to rate the effects.

Extent:  Pollutant has been mobilized off-site, but does not reach the stream channel; effects are evident near the site of the activity;  Pollutant has been mobilized off-site and reaches the stream channel; effects are evident at the stream reach scale (<20 channel widths downstream);  Pollutant has been mobilized off-site and reaches the stream channel; effects are evident at the drainage scale (>20 channel widths downstream), effects typically extending downstream and are expressed in larger order channels.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 23 -24-

Duration:  The pollutant or its effects dissipate within a very short (<5 day) period; they are typically associated with a single activity or precipitation event.  The pollutant or its effects are observable for an intermediate (< 1 season) duration; effects are typically expressed intermittently during high flow or precipitation events, dissipating to near background levels by the next wet season.  The pollutant or its effects are observable for a long (> 1 season) duration; effects are typically chronic and persist beyond the next wet season.

Magnitude:  Effects to beneficial uses insignificant with no measurable water quality impairment; pollutant may be visible, but not likely detectable by compared measurements above and below the site.  Effects to beneficial uses are minor with measurable water quality impacts the pollutant or its effects may be measurable up to the reach scale, but with no likely effect on biological or economic values.  Effects to beneficial uses are significant with measurable water quality impacts resulting in degradation to biological or economic values. For example, in completing the effectiveness portion of form E08 ‘Road Surface, Drainage and Slope Protection’, the person performing the evaluation observed scour below a culvert outlet that extended all the way to an adjacent ephemeral stream channel. In the space provided the person might note: “Design specs should have required installation of loose rock energy dissipation structure at outlet of the culvert but did not. Gullying is occurring. Extensive deposition of scour material is evident in the channel. Water quality effects are major during large storms. The effects will be prolonged as scour will persist and gullying will worsen unless a culvert outlet energy dissipater is installed.” The comments may relate back to poor implementation, as with the inadequate design described in the example above. Poor effectiveness might be a result of inadequate recognition of site sensitivity, or because severe storms exceeded the margin of safety provided by the practice, or for innumerable other equally likely and important reasons. It is important for the observer to comment on what is seen, in terms of both successes and shortcomings. NOTE: If the evaluator encounters problems with completing the form, that is, the procedure doesn’t fit the site or the practice, comments concerning these problems should be noted at the bottom of the form.

Data Storage and Retrieval Hard copy data-completed On-Site forms-are submitted to the BMP Data Steward or Forest Hydrologist in the Supervisor’s Office. Then the data will be entered into the Best Management Practice Data Base (BMP-DB), which resides on the IBM in ORACLE. This system allows for flexible storage, retrieval and reporting. Detailed user instructions for this system are given is

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 24 -25-

Section IV of this Guide. Following computer data entry, hard copy data (forms, comments, photographs, etc.) provided to the Forest Hydrologist are retained in the Forest’s dedicated water quality data file in the Supervisor’s Office. Maintenance of a dedicated hard copy data file is essential for meeting requests for data and information from sources without access to the IBM system and as a source of backup information to computer files. In order to be responsive to local needs for data, Districts are encouraged to maintain dedicated hard copy data files of District- specific data as well. In order for the Storage and Retrieval system to be most useful, the entered data must be consistent. Therefore the range of allowable evaluation form entries is necessarily constrained and must not be modified. Personal modification, additions and/or deletions will result in inconsistencies and ambiguities, and a data set that cannot be analyzed. It is very important that persons performing evaluations review the format of the data that is allowable. (Refer to the BMP-DB section of the User’s Guide) Comments on problems with evaluation criteria or format should be made on the forms to identify a need for uniform and controlled modification. Refer to the completed example forms in the “Protocols and Examples of Completed On-Site Evaluations” section following.

Criteria for Rating BMP Implementation 1 = Exceed contract/project requirements. The project as implemented and observed exceeds the water quality protection measures prescribed. Measures were implemented that were over and above those required by project documentation and standard practices. Extra care was taken to prevent water quality impacts. 2 = Meets contract/project requirements. The project as implemented and observed is consistent with all or virtually all the requirements prescribed. Where there were deviations from the requirements and expectations, they were small and are not, or not perceived to be, of consequence to water quality. Some judgment must be exercised here. Projects with small variations from the prescription could still be rated a “2” if the degree and duration of the effects, or potential effects, to water quality and the relationship of the deviation to the whole project, in the judgment of the observer, are minor. For example, if one waterbar out of several dozen prescribed for a given site being evaluated is missing or improperly constructed, a “2” rating is probably warranted. In this case, the overwhelming majority of the waterbarring is done correctly and there is little evidence of an eminent threat to water quality. A site does not have to be perfect to be rated a “2”, but the great majority of the required mitigation measures identified to protect water quality should have been fully implemented, and those that are not are of very little or no consequence. 3 = Minor departure from contract/project requirements. A “3” rating would indicate that the water quality protective measures are implemented substantially as planned yet some obvious shortcomings are observed. The observed shortcomings need not be serious or of dire consequence but should be more than minor departures from those prescribed. Judgment is called for. If observed results clearly do not match the prescriptions, directives, and usual expectations, but the deviations are not major and their consequences are not substantial, the criterion should be rated a “3”.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 25 -26-

4 = Major departure from contract/project requirements. Where implementation is clearly lacking and the deviation from the prescriptions, direction and usual expectations is substantial, or the deviation is such that it has resulted in or has high potential to result in sustained degradation of water quality, a rating of “4” is warranted.

Criteria for Rating BMP Effectiveness Criteria used to evaluate effectiveness were based on the objective statement(s) for the BMP(s) evaluated by the procedure. For example, the objective for BMP 2-7 “Control of Road Drainage”, is to minimize the erosive effects of concentrated water, disperse runoff, lessen sediment loads and minimize road prism erosion. Hence, the criteria on the evaluation form, E08, used to evaluate effectiveness of road drainage controls include observations of: rilling on the road surface, sediment delivery, scouring, and sediment delivery to channels. These are observable physical evidence that indicate if the objectives of the BMP were attained. Similarly, the objective for BMP 2.14, “Controlling In-Channel Excavation” is to minimize stream channel disturbance and related sediment production. Hence, the criteria on the evaluation form, E13, used to evaluate effectiveness of in-channel excavation controls rely on the physically observable indicators; sedimentation present in channel riffle substrate and turbidity plume presence. Effectiveness evaluation formats vary somewhat. There are three types of responses. The first and most common, is the format where the person performing the evaluation chooses from three entries for each criteria. A check in the left-most box indicates the BMP(s) being evaluated are fully effective. A check in the center box indicates there is some question that effectiveness is adequate. A check in the right-most box indicates effectiveness is lacking or in serious doubt. The second type of response on the evaluation forms for effectiveness is the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ entry. Here, the evaluator is asked to make a specific observation or measurement and as a result answer the yes or no inquiry with a check in the appropriate box. The third type of response is an ‘either/or’ response. Here the person performing the evaluation is asked to evaluate two possible choices and check the appropriate box. Instructions on how to complete the effectiveness criteria required on each form are provided in the ‘detailed procedures’ portion of the form completion instructions that follow in Section II-M.

Reporting Analysis of the data through the BMP-DB generates quantitative reports, based on standard system algorithms, indicating the success of both implementation and effectiveness. Following annual analysis of the stored data, Forest Hydrologists will prepare an interpretative narrative that describes and explains the results of analysis with regard to the success of implementation and effectiveness of BMPs evaluated. The narrative is expected to be both quantitative and qualitative. It should describe causes for failures and identify corrective actions needed to rectify deficiencies (on Forest or Regional level as appropriate). These reports should be completed by the end of January each year and be distributed to; the Regional Office Range and Watershed Staff, Forest Management Team, and at the minimum, those Forest Staff Officers involved in initiating corrective actions.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 26 -27-

Initially Forests will have a limited data set for analysis. Over time however, Forests will generate a large enough data set to conduct statistical analyses. It should be noted that any time a specific water quality problem is found during these evaluations that can be rectified with treatment, it should be promptly reported to the responsible line officer. Year-end reports are not substitutes for taking timely corrective actions to stop nonpoint source pollution problems.

Site Information Common to All or Most Forms (First section of each form)

Date: Give the date of the field review. If more than one day was involved, enter the most recent date.

District: Give the code number of the District on which the evaluation is being conducted. See page 56 of the BMP-DB section of this User’s Guide for a listing of these.

Forest: Give the code number of the Forest on which the evaluation is being conducted. See page 56 of the BMP-DB section of this User’s Guide for a listing of these. Site ID: Enter the 10-digit Site ID code, according to the following:  Digit 1-3 = The BMPEP Procedure Number (e.g., T01, R08, V29)  Digit 4-5 = Forest number (2-digit Forest Administrative Code)  Digit 6-8 = Site numbered sequentially for each form/procedure (i.e., each different procedure (each different form #), on each Forest starts with site number 001, then 002, 003, 004, and so on). The numbers start over with different procedures, but not with the same procedure on different years.  Digit 9-10 = the last two numbers of the year of the evaluation. For example, the Site ID...... T041000492...... represents: T04 = Landings Evaluation - Procedure T04 10 = Six Rivers National Forest (Forest # 10) 004 = The 4th T04 evaluation done on the Six Rivers 92 = The evaluation took place in 1992

NFS Watershed: Give the full number of the watershed that the site is in, to the smallest recognized tributary, in accordance with FSH 2509.24 - National Forest System Watershed Codes Handbook.

Project: Give the name of the project evaluated. If it has more than one common name, use the name that is most commonly used on the District.

Radio Button: Buttons with blue rectangles around them.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 27 -28-

This button MUST be selected before criteria questions are answered. The user will be alerted if an attempt is made to enter criteria questions before selecting a radio button value. Forms that have these buttons (T03, T06, E13, E18, M26) have two or more “sets” of weighting factors and scoring or BMPEP.

Reviewer(s): Give the names of the people conducting the review. Use the first initial and the last name (as in an IBM address). Only give the names of people involved in the office and field review. People that just assisted in the office implementation review should not be listed.

Road #: Give the number of the road being evaluated. If it is a temporary road, insert TEMP.

Rock Type: Give the predominant rock type in the area being evaluated. If you don’t know, ask a geologist or soil scientist what it is. See Page 18 of the BMP-DB section of this User’s Guide for the categories.

Selection Code: Give the code corresponding to the method that was used in selecting the evaluation site. The codes are: Selection Method Code Randomly identified R01 Part of NEPA document or LMP S01 Part of an agreement S02 Routine site visit S03 Suspected Problem Site S04 Follow-up to In-Channel Evaluation S05 Other reason for selection S06

Site Prep: Give the method of site prep used on the site being evaluated. If the method used differs from what was prescribed in the EA or other project documentation, give the method used and note the discrepancy in the comments on “describe deficiencies and corrective actions area” in the implementation section of the form.

Stream: Give the name of the stream nearest to the evaluated site. If the stream is not named, give the name of the nearest named stream in the same watershed as the evaluated site.

Township, Range & Section: Give the Township, Range, and Section that the evaluated site occurs in. If it occurs in more than one, give the one that is the most central to the evaluated land.

Title(s): Give the OPM job series number for each of the people listed in the “Reviewers” section. See the BMP-DB section of this User’s Guide, Page 55 for a listing of these.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 28 -29-

Unit#: Give the unit number on which the evaluation was conducted. If more than one unit was evaluated, give each one. If specific units are not relevant to the evaluation, enter NA.

UTM Coordinates: Enter the UTM coordinates of the site being evaluated, as close as can be discerned on a 7.5-minute topographic map. This information is essential for the data to be useful with Geographic Information Systems. It may be added after the evaluation is completed but prior to entering the data in the database.

Detailed Procedures for Completing On-Site Evaluations The following section includes detailed instructions for completing the 29 On-Site Evaluation procedures. Included for each procedure is information on developing the sample pool, selecting evaluation sites, timing the evaluation, filling in the header information of the form, and the method used to do the observations, measurements and recording for all the implementation and effectiveness criteria. Also in this section there are hypothetical examples of a completed form for each procedure.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 29 -30-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation T01 Streamside Management Zones * (Reference BMP 1.8, 1.19 and 1.22)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Year Logging Occurred: Give the year that the unit being evaluated was logged.

SMZ Rx: Describe the prescription for the treatment of the SMZ being evaluated. Include the width and any vegetation retention burn restrictions, and equipment exclusion prescriptions found in the EA or other document relevant to the evaluated site.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Using the Sale Area Maps from the pool of selected Timber Sales, count the number of units that include or are adjacent to (bordering) designated Streamside Management Zones. These units comprise the SMZ sample pool. *SMZ also includes other naming conventions for streamside buffering areas such as Stream Protection Zones, Riparian Reserves, Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas and so forth. From this pool, randomly select a number of sites equal to that assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation All sites used for effectiveness evaluations should have gone through at least one winter season before effectiveness is rated. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the selected unit has been logged, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation is rated for five different factors, and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Review the timber sale environmental document, timber sale contract and any other supporting documents to determine:  The manner in which the SMZ was to be designated or identified (signs, flagging, etc.)  The planned width of the Streamside Management Zone (SMZ)  The planned treatment of the SMZ. Include planned silvicultural prescription, proposed fuel treatment, planned operational restrictions, yarding requirements, etc. Field survey is then used to determine if the specific requirements were implemented. In addition, the observer is asked to identify whether:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 30 -31-

 Mechanized equipment was excluded from the SMZ except at approved crossings (for tractor units only).  If logging slash was treated by means other than mechanized equipment.

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating the Sample Site

Survey the entire length of stream within the selected unit. If more than one SMZ is located in the selected unit, randomly select one for evaluation.

Sampling Protocols Groundcover: Determine SMZ ground cover objective from Forest LMP, project plan or EA. Enter on form. Note: If the SMZ evaluated received no treatment, then the groundcover transect need not be conducted. Groundcover should be rated in the left hand column for untreated SMZs. Locating the Sample Plots: To locate sample plots for Groundcover measurements, use a map to estimate the length of each SMZ (it is preferable to underestimate this length rather than overestimate). Divide the estimated length by one hundred. The resulting value is the distance (in feet) between sample plots, for the unit. Place a transect that bisects the SMZ (halfway between the channel bank and SMZ boundary) parallel to the stream, taking measurements at intervals as determined above, until one hundred plots are taken.

Making the Estimate: Ground Cover is estimated using the toe point method.  At each plot (as determined by the end of the observer’s foot) examine the area, about one foot in diameter, directly in front of the center of the toe; determine whether the ground has adequate cover. Adequate cover is defined as: Adequate ground cover is material in contact with the soil that consists of living plants, slash, litter, duff mat and rock fragments that are of sufficient size (> ¾ inch in diameter) to break the impact of raindrops and serve as a filter media for overland flow.  Classify each plot as having ground cover, or not having ground cover.  If both sides of an SMZ have been impacted, flip a coin to randomly select one side of the stream on which to walk a transect.  The number of plots with adequate ground cover equals percent groundcover.

Canopy Cover:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 31 -32-

Determine SMZ canopy cover objective from Forest LMP, project plan or EA. Enter on form. Locating the Sample Points: Control measurements for canopy cover are located one hundred feet upstream and downstream of the unit evaluated. Canopy cover sample points within the unit are located one hundred feet upstream and downstream of the unit boundary.

Making the Estimate: Canopy Density is estimated by using a Solar Pathfinder.  At each sample location, level the instrument facing south at a height comfortable to the observer. Trace the boundary between the unobstructed sky and objects (trees, ridges, etc.) on the horizon as reflected on the instrument’s dome, as viewed no more than 15 degrees from vertical, at a distance of 12 to 18 inches. Unless another time period has been classed as critical, use the August sun path for the evaluation.  Add the shaded sections across the sun path to yield the % shading for the sample.  Average the measurements from the two control stations to determine the control value. Average the measurements from the three treatment (within unit) stations to derive the treatment value.

Disturbance to Stream Banks: While pacing the SMZ length to determine groundcover, observe the channel banks. Count the number of transect points where the channel is physically disturbed by the management activity. Disturbance could be evidenced by rutting, compaction, sloughing, removal of soil cover, or other evidence ground disturbance on the stream bank. The number of paces counted with disturbance gives the percent stream bank disturbed. Sediment to Channel: Along the transect, look for evidence of sediment passing through the SMZ to the channel. Normally, sediment will be transported in rills or gullies, or (less commonly) by sheet erosion. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter the SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. Rills and gullies should be obvious, and if located, the ground cover transect should be interrupted to follow the rill or gully and determine whether or not it continues through the SMZ to the channel. Sheet erosion will be evidenced by deposition of sediment behind down logs, stems, twigs and topographic “rises”. When such features are encountered, the ground cover transect should be interrupted to seek evidence that sediment reached the channel. There may or may not be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel; the presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 32 -33-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation T02 Skid Trails (Reference BMP 1.10 and 1.17)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Year Logging Occurred: Give the year that the unit being evaluated was logged.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Using the Sale Area Maps from the pool of selected Timber Sales count the number of units where tractor logging is the designated logging system. These units comprise the Skid Trail Sample Pool. From this pool, randomly select a number of sites equal to that assigned to the Forest for the year.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Conduct a paper review of the timber sale environmental document, timber sale contract, Timber Sale Administration Handbook (FSH 2409.15: sections 51.43, 51.64, 51.67) and any other supporting documents to determine:  Planned location of skid trails within the unit.  Planned or desired spacing of skid trails.  Planned drainage of and erosion control on skid trails.  If any special erosion control measures (C6.601 or C6.602) were planned.  Planned skid trail width.  Constraints or plans for any drainage crossings within the unit. Include number of crossings, planned skid trail location and approaches, and planned restoration measures.  If end lining or other specialized equipment or harvesting methods were used as planned.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 33 -34-

A skid trail is defined as: roads, trails or routes along which logs are dragged by a tractor, rubber tired skidder or other equipment from the stump to a landing or point where they are loaded on a truck. Areas passed by equipment with litter/duff layer left basically intact are not considered skid trails for these evaluations. Conduct a field survey to determine:  If skid trails were located as planned.  If skid trails met spacing requirements.  If drainage structures on skid trails met standard. Look to see that water bars are of the proper angle and height, and constructed of material free of organic matter.  If special erosion control measures were implemented if planned.  If skid trail width was as planned.  If any drainage crossings were properly located and constructed.  If end lining was required, whether it was properly conducted.  If skid trails meet the disturbance requirement.

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Sampling Protocols

Ground Disturbance:  The Regional Soil Quality Standards do not have a disturbance level, but most Forest Plans use 15% ground disturbance.

Erosion on Skid Trail Surface: Locating the Sample Site and Sampling Points: If there is more than a single landing, then number the landings and select one at random. Count and number the skid trails entering the landing and then randomly select one of the skid trails. If the selected skid trail forks, flip a coin to determine which trail to walk. Continue to walk and survey until you reach the end of the skid trail. As the length of skid trail is surveyed, observe conditions at each location the selected skid trail crosses a channel. This selection process is also used for the Rutting and Waterbar determinations. Making the Estimate: As the length of skid trail is surveyed, keep a tally of the length of skid trail on which rills or gullies are present. Rills and gullies are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 10 feet in length. When the entire skid trail has been surveyed, estimate the percent of the length with rilling, and select the appropriate column on form T02.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 34 -35-

Rutting: Locating the Sample Site and Sampling Points: Sample sites and points for rutting evaluations are the same as those selected for the surface erosion determination. Making the Estimate: As the length of skid trail is surveyed, keep a tally of the length of skid trail on which rutting is present. Rutting is characterized by the sunken tracks or grooves left by the passage of vehicles or machinery, usually made when the ground is wet or soft. Ruts for the purposes of this survey, are at least 2 inches in depth. When the entire skid trail has been surveyed, estimate the percent of the length with rutting, and select the appropriate column on form T02.

Waterbars: Locating the Sample Site and Sampling Points: Sample sites and points for Waterbar evaluations are the same as those selected for the surface erosion determination. Making the Estimate: While surveying the selected skid trail(s) make observations of each waterbar. Note the number of waterbars that are not effective in diverting flow off the skid trail (are breached, are of inadequate height, etc.). Also note the number of waterbars where sediment deposition and rutting are evident below the waterbar outlet. Keep track of the total number of waterbars encountered so that criteria can be rated in terms of percent.

Sediment to Channel: Locating the Sample Site for Implementation: Along the selected skid trail, and while walking all skid trails to determine ground disturbance percentage for the implementation rating, look for evidence of sediment traveling to the channel at each crossing. Making the Estimate: At each crossing, determine if rilling is present, if the rills appear to be active and enlarging, and if sediment from the rills has been deposited in the channel. The estimate for this criterion is based on observations from all crossings on the selected skid trail. If there is a range of conditions at the crossings, the rating should reflect the worst condition, not the average.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 35 -36-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation T03 Suspended Yarding (Reference BMP 1.11)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Year Logging Occurred: Give the year that the unit being evaluated was logged. Project Status: Give the status of the unit evaluated. For example, logged, logged and site prepared, logged and planted, etc. Did Harvest Of This Unit Involve Suspending Logs Over a SMZ? Indicate if suspended log yarding over an SMZ was necessary in this unit. SMZ: Identify if SMZ exists within evaluation site.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Using the Sale Area Maps from the pool of selected timber sales count the number of units that are designated as cable or helicopter yarding units. These units comprise the Suspended Yarding Sample Pool. From this pool, randomly select a number of sites equal to that assigned to the Forest for the year.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation for Suspended Yarding is rated for three different factors, and involves a review of environmental documents and contracts and a field survey. Conduct a paper review of the timber sale environmental assessment, Timber Sale Administration Handbook (FSH 2509.15, section 51.43 (2)), timber sale contract and any other supporting documents to determine:  Whether the areas identified to be harvested using suspended yarding during the Timber Sale Planning Process were designated and shown on the Sale Area Map.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 36 -37-

Conduct the field survey to determine:  Whether the units were harvested as specified in the Timber Sale Contract.  In units with Streamside Management Zones, whether logs were suspended over the SMZ as required by the Timber Sale Contract.  Whether erosion control measures were accomplished in cable corridors; e.g. was the corridor water barred; where water bars required is spacing correct.

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Site And The Sample Points

For Ground Disturbance: Locate a 2-leg, 100-point transect in the approximate center of each unit selected for measurement. Randomly determine the compass bearing of the first leg of the transect. This can be done by throwing a spinning stick in the air and using the direction it points after resting on the ground. Add 135 degrees to the bearing of the first leg of the transect to determine the direction of the second leg of the transect. The intent of type of sampling is to draw an unbiased sample, not to achieve true randomness. Determine the distance between sample points along the transect by one of the following two methods: (1) Pace off the distance from the center starting point to the edge of the treatment area for each leg of the transect and divide by 50, which determines the number of paces between sample points; or, (2) use an arbitrarily fixed distance between sample points (for example 15 feet) and develop a “rule” for what to do if the edge of the activity area is reached before all 50 points are observed (for example, turn right or left 315 degrees to extend the transect back into the treatment area). Either method may be used as long as it is used consistently.

For Streamside Management Zone Disturbance: Survey the entire length of stream within the selected unit. If more than one SMZ is located in the selected unit, conduct separate evaluations for each SMZ. If the unit does not have an SMZ, insert NA in the left hand column, and make an explanatory notation. Walk the entire length of the SMZ on a line through the middle of the SMZ (100 ft from the boundary edge and channel bank in an SMZ 200 ft wide). If the unit has an SMZ on both sides of the channel, flip a coin to randomly select one side of the channel for evaluation.

For Erosion on Cable Corridor Surface: If there is more than a single corridor, then number them and select one at random. Count and number the corridors and randomly select one. Walk and survey until you reach the end of the corridor.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 37 -38-

Sampling Protocols

Ground Disturbance: At each of the 100 transect plots, look at an area approximately 1 foot square, and determine whether or not the ground has exposed bare soil, or the soil cover has been modified such that adequate ground cover is not provided. Adequate ground cover is material in contact with the soil that consists of living plants, slash, litter, duff mat and rock fragments that are of sufficient size (> ¾ inch in diameter) to break the impact of raindrops and serve as a filter media for overland flow. Classify each point as being disturbed or undisturbed. The number of plots classified as disturbed equals percent ground disturbed.

Streamside Management Zone Disturbance: As the SMZ is paced, observe the channel banks and stream canopy. Estimate (by counting the number of paces) the length of the channel that was physically disturbed by the suspended yarding. Look for disturbance to both the ground or channel banks, as evidenced by rutting, compaction, or sloughing; and to the canopy, which would be characterized by broken treetops or limbs, or by uprooted trees. The number of paces counted with disturbance divided by the total paces of the SMZ length gives the percent SMZ disturbed. As the length of corridor is surveyed, keep a tally of the length of corridor on which rills or gullies are present. Rills and gullies are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 10 feet in length. When the entire corridor has been surveyed, estimate the percent of the length with rilling, and select the appropriate column on form T03.

Erosion on Cable Corridor Surface: As the length of corridor is surveyed, keep a tally of the length of corridor on which rills or gullies are present. Rills and gullies are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 10 feet in length. When the entire corridor has been surveyed, estimate the percent of the length with rilling, and select the appropriate column on form T03.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 38 -39-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation T04 Landings (Reference BMP 1.12 and 1.16)

Header Information Unique To This Form Year Logging Occurred: Give the year that the unit being evaluated was logged. Special Measures Required On This Landing: Indicate whether any of the following special measures were required on the landing:  Vegetative Soil Stabilization (C6.601)  Special Erosion Control (C6.602)  Soil Scarification (C6.603)

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Using the Sale Area Maps from the pool of selected Timber Sales count the number of units. These units comprise the landing Sample Pool. From this pool, randomly select a number of sites equal to that assigned to the Forest for the year.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation is rated for four different factors and involves a review of environmental documents and contracts and a field survey. Conduct a paper review of the timber sale environmental document, timber sale contract, Timber Sale Administration Handbook (FSH 2409.15, sections 51.41 and 51.63) and any other supporting documents to determine:  Planned or desired location of landings in the unit.  Planned or desired drainage treatments for the selected landing.  Planned or desired landing size.  Planned or designed landing stabilization (include both surface & slopes).

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 39 -40-

Conduct a field review to determine:  Actual location of landings in the unit. Pay particular attention to proximity of landings to drainages or other sensitive lands.

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating the Sample Site and the Sample Points If there is more than a single landing in the selected unit, number all the landings, and from this group select one at random. Sample points for the rilling evaluation are located along a single transect that bisects the landing surface into two roughly equal parts along its longest axis (see example below). Starting at the edge of the landing, pick a landmark at the far end of the approximate transect location. Walk the transect, always bearing toward the selected landmark.

Sampling Protocols

Landing Surface Erosion: While walking the transect across the landing, count the number of rills crossed. Rills and gullies are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 10 feet in length, and continue off the landing surface.

Drainage: In the blank provided, describe the type of surface drainage employed on the landing. If the landing is improperly drained, rills or gullies will be present on the landing slope where drainage leaves the landing surface. If such rills or gullies are present, determine whether or not they continue for more than 20 feet past the toe of the landing fillslope.

Fillslope Rilling: Rilling may also be present on eroding fillslopes. If rills are present that are not caused by drainage from the landing surface, determine whether they extend a distance below the toe of the slope that is greater than the length of the slope. Note that a single rill would not cause the right hand column to be checked for this criterion.

Sediment Below Fillslope: Below the toe of the fillslope, look for evidence of sediment deposition. Normally, evidence will be by deposition of sediment behind downed logs, stems, twigs and topographic “rises”. Look for such evidence, and note whether deposition extends downslope a distance greater than the length of the fillslope.

Sediment to Channel: While walking along the edge of the fillslope, follow any rill or gully, or deposition of sediment to their terminus, and observe whether these erosion features reached a stream channel. In most

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 40 -41-

cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. The presence of rills, gullies or sediment deposited at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel; more frequently, there will be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel.

Slope Failures (Cut or Fill Slopes): While surveying the fillslope, note instances of slope failure. Slope failures are evidenced by movement of soil in blocks or large clumps, rather than by rills, gullies or surface erosion. The criteria calls for you to estimate whether the failures total a cubic yard of material moved, and whether the material moved reaches a stream channel. Make the sediment to channel evaluation as described above.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 41 -42-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation T05 Timber Sale Administration (Reference BMP 1.13, 1.20, 1.21 and 1.25)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Sale: Provide the name of the timber sale. Status: Briefly indicate the approximate percentage of area (or volume) logged and accepted, and the time until the sale terminates, and if a runoff-producing precipitation event occurred during operations.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a pool of active timber sales that have tractor units. From this pool, randomly select a number of sales equal to the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year. From each selected sale, randomly select a tractor unit on which to conduct each evaluation.

Timing Of The Evaluation The sites for these objective evaluations should be an active timber sale, on a unit where the erosion control measures maybe subject to purchaser’s maintenance (within one year of construction). The effectiveness portion of the evaluation should be conducted only if a precipitation event has occurred on the unit. Complete the implementation portion of the evaluation in all cases.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation is rated for five different factors and involves both office reviews of pertinent information and a field review. Conduct an office review of the Timber Sale Contract, Timber Sale Administration file (including 181s) to determine:  If necessary erosion control work has been specified by the sale administrator, and if the purchaser has been advised of the needed work.  If modifications to the TSC that might affect water quality were reviewed and coordinated with earth science specialists. Conduct a field review to determine:  If erosion control work is adequately installed and current.  Whether purchaser maintenance of erosion control structures is adequate.  If adequate control during wet weather is evident.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 42 -43-

 If changes to environmental decision or TSC that could effect water quality were implemented.

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation (Complete only if there was a precipitation event while the unit was active)

Locating The Sample Site And Sampling Points

If there is more than a single active landing, then number the landings and select one at random. Count and number the skid trails entering the landing and then randomly select one of the skid trails. If the selected skid trail forks, flip a coin to determine which trail to walk. Continue to walk and survey until you reach the end of the skid trail.

Sampling Protocols

Evidence of Operations in Wet Conditions (Rutting): Rutting is characterized by the sunken tracks or grooves left by the passage of vehicles or machinery, usually made when the ground is wet or soft. For the purposes of this survey ruts are at least 2 inches in depth and must occur on greater than 10% of the skid trail length. Rutting is evidence that timber operations were conducted during wet conditions. You are asked to look for evidence of rutting, and if found, evaluate whether measures have been conducted, or are planned to treat the rutted areas.

Erosion Control (Waterbars): Diversion Of Runoff Potential: While surveying the selected skid trail(s) make observations of each waterbar. Note the number of waterbars that are not effective in diverting flow off the skid trail (are breached, or of inadequate height, etc.). Sediment Below Water Bar Outlet: Also note the condition of the water bar outlets, and condition of the area below the outlets. You are asked to rate whether or not there is sediment deposition and/or rilling below the outlet, and whether the deposition or rilling continues for more than 20 feet below the outlet. Rills are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 10 feet in length. Normally, you can find deposition of sediment behind downed logs, stems, twigs and topographic “rises”. Sediment to Channel: Along the selected skid trail, look for evidence of sediment traveling to the channel. Normally, sediment will be transported in rills or gullies, or, less commonly by sheet erosion. In most cases a Streamside Management Zone will be present between the harvest unit and the channel, and typically ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope. Rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. Rills and gullies should be obvious, and if located followed downslope to determine whether or not it continues through the SMZ to the channel. There may or may not be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel; the presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 43 -44-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation T06 Special Erosion Control and Revegetation (Reference BMP 1.14 and 1.15)

Header Information Unique To This Form Year Activity Occurred: Give the year that the unit being evaluated was logged. Site Evaluated: Check whether a skid trail or landing (or both) is to be evaluated. Site Treatment: Indicate whether the site evaluated was identified for Special Erosion Control (C6.602), Revegetation (C6.601) or both. Landing or Skid Trail: Identify evaluation site as landing or skid trail.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Using the Sale Area Maps from the pool of selected Timber Sales develop a subset of sales for which TSC provisions C6.601 or C6.602 are included. These provisions would be listed on the Sale Area Map legend, as well as in the contracts. Once the sales with these Special Erosion Control Measures have been identified, the sale planning documents (EA, sale inspection reports, etc) will have to be reviewed to determine which sale units were to receive the special treatments. Develop a pool from the units specified and implemented for special treatment. From this pool, randomly select a number of units equal to the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation is rated for one factor when C6.602 (Special Erosion Prevention Measures) is used, and for two factors when C6.601 (Vegetative Soil Stabilization) is used. Tracking the implementation involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Review the timber sale environmental assessment, timber sale contract, Timber Sale Administration Handbook (FSH 2409.15 section 61.42) and any other supporting documents to determine:

For units where C6.602 was required:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 44 -45-

 Whether the areas identified for special erosion control treatment were treated to the specifications outlined in the contract.

For units where C6.601 was required:  Whether the areas identified for vegetative soil stabilization were treated to the specifications outlined in the contract.  Whether the treatment was timed to give a good chance of successful establishment of the applied vegetation.

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

Sampling Protocols Number and select at random a landing from the unit (if there is more than one landing). For skid trails, use the same landing, count and number the treated skid trails entering the landing, and then randomly select one of the skid trails. If the selected skid trail forks, flip a coin to determine which treated trail to walk. Continue to walk and survey until you reach the end of the treatment.

Cover: Determine groundcover objective from Forest LMP, project plan or EA. Enter on form.

Locating the Sample Points

For Skid Trails: Sample points for the cover estimate are located along a single transect that runs along the center line of the skid trail, and begins just above the first waterbar or drainage break encountered on the selected skid trail. Make a cover determination at every other step until one hundred observations have been made.

For Landings: Sample points for the cover evaluation are located along a single transect that bisects the landing into two roughly equal parts along its longest axis (see example below). Estimate the total length of the transect (overestimate rather than underestimate) and divide this estimated length by 100 to derive the distance between sample points along the transect. Starting at the edge of the landing, pick a landmark at the far end of the approximate transect location. Walk the transect, always bearing toward the selected landmark, and stop to make an observation at the interval derived above. EXAMPLE: The estimated distance along the long axis transect is 150 ft. Divide by 100 to yield a distance between sample points of 1.5 feet. The observer could then calibrate his or her stride to locate sample points approximately 1.5 ft apart.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 45 -46-

Making the Estimate Ground Cover is estimated using the toe point method. At each plot (as determined by the end of the observer’s foot) examine the area; about 1’ in diameter, directly in front of the center of the toe, determine whether the ground has adequate cover. Adequate cover is defined as: Adequate ground cover is material in contact with the soil that consists of living plants, slash, litter, duff mat and rock fragments that are of sufficient size (> ¾ inch in diameter) to break the impact of raindrops and serve as a filter media for overland flow. Classify each plot as having ground cover, or not having ground cover. Percentages are determined by: (Total Points with Adequate Cover / Total Points) X 100 = % Ground Cover

For Skid Trails

Erosion On Skid Trail Surface: As the length of skid trail is surveyed, keep a running count of the length of skid trail on which rills and gullies are present. Rills and gullies are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 10 feet in length. When the entire skid trail has been surveyed, estimate the percent of the length with rilling, and select the appropriate column on form T06.

Sediment To Channel

Along the selected skid trail, and while walking the ground disturbance transect, look for evidence of sediment traveling to the channel from the skid trail. Normally, sediment will be transported in rills or gullies, or, less commonly by sheet erosion. In most cases a Streamside Management Zone will be present between the harvest unit and the channel, and typically ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope. Rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. Rills and gullies should be obvious, and if located followed downslope to determine whether or not it continues through the SMZ to the channel. There may or may not be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel; the presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 46 -47-

For Landings

Surface Erosion:

Surface Rilling: While walking the transect across the landing, count the number of rills crossed. Rills and gullies are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are at least 10 feet in length, that continue off the landing surface.

Fillslope Erosion:

Fillslope Rilling: Rill and gullies may also be present on eroding fillslopes. If rills or gullies are present that are not caused by drainage from the landing surface, determine whether they extend a distance below the toe of the slope that is greater than the length of the slope. Note that a single rill would not cause the right hand column to be checked for this criterion.

Sediment Below Fillslope: Below the toe of the fillslope, look for evidence of sediment deposition. Normally, evidence will be by deposition of sediment behind downed logs stems, twigs and topographic “rises”. Look for such evidence, and note whether deposition extends downslope a distance greater than the length of the fillslope.

Sediment To Channel: While walking along the edge of the fillslope, follow any rill or gullies, or deposition of sediment to their terminus, and observe whether these erosion features reached a stream channel. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. The presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel; more frequently, there will be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel.

Landing Slope Failures: Use the landing selected above as the evaluation site. Walk a transect below the landing fillslope along its entire length. While surveying the fillslope, note instances of slope failure. Slope failures are evidenced by movement of soil in blocks or large clumps, rather than by rills, gullies or surface erosion. The criteria calls for you to estimate whether the failures total a cubic yard of material moved, and whether the material moved reaches a stream channel. Make the sediment to channel evaluation as described above.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 47 -48-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation T07 Meadow Protection (Reference BMP 1.18, 1.22,5.3)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Year Activities Occurred: Give the year that unit evaluated was logged, and if site prep occurred, the year site prep was conducted.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Using the Sale Area Maps from the pool of selected Timber Sales (see Page 19) count the number of units that include or border meadows identified for protection (reference TSC Prov. B6.61 and C6.62). These units comprise the Meadow Protection Sample Pool. From this pool, randomly select units to equal the number of sites assigned to the Forest for the year. If there is more than one meadow within the selected unit, randomly select one for evaluation.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of Meadow Protection is rated for three different factors, and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Review the timber sale environmental assessment, timber sale contract, Timber Sale Administration Handbook (FSH 2409.15, section 51.61), Timber Sale Administration Reports (R5 2400-181), and any other supporting documents to determine:  Whether meadows were identified for protection during the Timber Sale Planning Process.  Whether timber was designated to be removed from the meadow.  How logging slash was removed from the meadow.  If the meadow was posted to exclude mechanized equipment except at approved location.  Whether any meadow erosion control measures were planned.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 48 -49-

Conduct a field review to determine:  If the meadows identified for protection during the Timber Sale Planning Process were marked on the ground and shown on the Sale Area Map.  If timber was removed from the meadow as specified.  If any logging slash generated by the sale was removed (without mechanized equipment) from the meadow.  If slash was treated without use of ground mechanized equipment.  If mechanized equipment was kept off the meadow except at approved locations.  If disturbed areas (authorized or unauthorized) were adequately restored.

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating the Sample Site and Sample Points

The effectiveness evaluation is based on a complete survey of the selected meadow. Depending on the size of the meadow, this might be accomplished by walking a survey line that traverses the edge of the meadow, or a traverse through the middle of the meadow.

Sampling Protocols

Damage and Disturbance: During your survey of the entire meadow, look for evidence of damage from the timber harvest activity. Such disturbance should be fairly obvious, and characterized by rutting or compaction of the meadow surface, or removal of vegetative cover (exposed soil). If such damage is present, evaluate whether measures were taken to restore the damaged areas. Restoration treatments might include mulching or seeding, smoothing or filling of ruts or furrows, or closure of vehicular approaches to the meadow. If ruts or other evidence of damage is present, estimate whether more or less than 5% of the meadow area is disturbed.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 49 -50-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E08 Road Surface, Drainage and Slope Protection (Reference BMP 2.2, 2.4, 2.5, 2.7, 2.10, 2.22, 2.23)

E08 evaluations are conducted in conjunction with E09 and E11. E08 documents road conditions excluding stream channel crossings, E09 evaluates stream crossings, and E11 documents control of side casting. The same site is used for all three evaluations.

Header Information Unique To This Form

Year Construction Completed: Give year that all construction (including final erosion control required under the contract) was completed. Last Maintenance: Give the month and year of the last maintenance done on the road being evaluated. If this is not known, find out. Project Is: Check the activity being evaluated (Construction, Reconstruction, Maintenance, or Other). If “other” is checked, briefly describe the activity).

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites

For Maintenance Evaluations  Include in the pool all Forest Service System roads with at least one stream crossing.

For Construction/ Re-Construction  Include in the pool all roads constructed or re-constructed the previous two years, including timber sale contracts, under public works or cooperative contracts, or Special Use Permit. From these pools, randomly select roads to equal the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year such that 25% are from construction/ re-construction and 75% are from maintenance.

Timing Of The Evaluation All roads used for effectiveness evaluations should have gone through at least one winter season following the activity (construction, reconstruction or maintenance). Ratings should be done before the current year’s maintenance is conducted. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the road activity has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 50 -51-

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E08 is rated for several factors, which differ depending upon the type of activity (reconstruction, maintenance, etc.) being evaluated, and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Review the timber sale environmental assessment, timber sale contract, Contract Daily Diary (FS 6300-20), Timber Sale Administration Handbook (FSH 2409.15 section 32 and 34), Timber Sale Administration Reports (R5 2400-181), Specified Road Construction Agreement and/or notice (FS7700-42), Work Order (FS 6300-12), and any other supporting documents to determine:

For Construction or Reconstruction Projects  If water quality issues were addressed by the ID team that developed the project, and whether road design objectives were developed to address those issues.  If the final design addressed those objectives.  If the contract requirements were met for: 1) surfacing (Was surfacing required? If so, what kind and to what specifications?) 2) drainage (What kind of drainage was planned (outsloping, cross drains, etc.) and what was implemented?) 3) slope stabilization (Was slope stabilization called for, if so, what was planned and what was implemented?) 4) slash disposal (How and where was road-generated slash to be treated; were treatments as planned?) 5) compaction of fills (What compaction specifications were planned?)

For Maintenance Projects If the Specifications of the Maintenance Plan or Contract were met for: 1) Surface treatment 2) Drainage 3) Slope Treatments

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Site And Sample Points Locate a 0.1 mile transect along the selected road. Walk or drive the entire road, and number all the channel crossings (those with culverts, bridges or fords). Randomly select one of the crossings to serve as the transect midpoint. For E08, begin the evaluation on both sides of the crossing at the point where drainage from the road surface, cuts and fills no longer carries to the stream crossing (conduct an E09 Stream Crossing Evaluation for the crossing). From these starting points, walk the road for .05 miles (approximately 260 ft) away from the crossing. If the

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 51 -52-

selected road is less than 0.05 mile in either direction, walk the road to its terminus (conduct a E11 Side casting Evaluation along the same road length). During the survey, observe the road surface, cut slope and fill slope for evidence of soil and water movement. At points where rills or gullies leave the road surface or cross the fill slope, it will be necessary to follow these features downslope of the road surface to their terminus, to determine length and whether material has entered stream channels.

Sampling Protocols

Fill Slopes: Rilling: Rilling may also be present as a result of eroding fillslopes. If rills are present that are not caused by drainage from the road surface, determine whether they extend a distance below the toe of the slope that is greater than the length of the slope. Sediment To Channel: While walking the road transect, follow any rill or gullies, or deposition of sediment to their terminus, and observe whether these erosion features reached a stream channel. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. The presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel, more frequently, there will be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel. Slope Failures: While surveying the fillslope, note instances of slope failure. Slope failures are evidenced by movement of soil in blocks or large clumps, rather than by rills, gullies or surface erosion. The criteria calls for you to estimate whether the failures total 5 cubic yards of material moved, and if the material moved reached a stream channel. Make the sediment to channel evaluation as described above.

Cut Slope Failure/ Inside Ditch Scour: This criterion is similar to the slope failure criteria explained above for fillslopes that is if 5 cubic yards have moved. However, here the observer must also determine if a total of one cubic yard of the slide material has been transported from slope failure to a channel. This would be most likely when material slumped into a drainage ditch, and there is evidence that more than one cubic yard was carried by the ditch to a channel. The observer should follow transport paths (ditches, cross drains, etc.) to their terminus to determine if the material reached a channel. Also observe the inside ditch, if present, for evidence of scour. Determine if scour is present, and extensive enough to contribute at least a cubic yard of material to a stream channel. This

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 52 -53-

means following ditch produced sediment to determine if it has reached a channel. If ditch scour is evident, but less than one cubic yard reaches a channel, rate this criteria in the middle column.

Cross Drains: Evaluate these criteria when dips, waterbars, culverts or other structures (not outsloping) are used to drain the surface. Scour At Outlet: Observe the outlet of the drainage structure, and observe whether scour is present, the length of this scour, and whether or not the scour and or sediment reaches a natural channel. Plugging: Observe the culvert inlet, or upslope end of the structure, and evaluate whether debris or deposited sediment is present in quantities that might cause bypass or failure.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 53 -54-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E09 Stream Crossings (Reference BMP 2.1, 2.4, 2.5, 2.7, 2.10, 2.23)

Header Information Unique To This Form Year Construction Completed: Give year that all construction (including final erosion control required under the contract) was completed. Last Maintenance: Give the month and year of the last maintenance done on the road being evaluated. If this is not known, find out. Project Is: Check the activity being evaluated (Construction, Reconstruction, Maintenance, or Other). If “other” is checked, briefly describe the activity).

Developing The Sample Pool and Selecting The Evaluation Sites And Timing Of The Evaluation E09 is conducted in conjunction with E08. Its function is to separate important observations of the channel crossing from observations made for the rest of the road. Follow the directions provided for E08 to develop sample pools, and selection of the sample site.

Timing Of The Evaluation All roads used for effectiveness evaluations should have gone through at least one winter season following the activity (construction, reconstruction or maintenance) before effectiveness is rated. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the road activity has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E09 is rated for several factors, which differ depending upon the type of activity (reconstruction, maintenance, etc.) being evaluated. The rating involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Review the timber sale environmental assessment, timber sale contract, Contract Daily Diary (FS 6300-20), Timber Sale Administers Handbook (FSH 2409.15), Timber Sale Administration Reports (R5 2400-181), and any other supporting documents to determine:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 54 -55-

 If the contract requirements were met for: 1) The disposal of slash generated during construction of the crossing and the associated roadways 2) The type size and placement of the crossing structure (culvert, bridge, etc.) 3) Road surface treatment 4) Compaction of fills 5) Slope stabilization 6) Drainage of the roadway and associated features in the vicinity of the crossing

For Maintenance Projects  Check appropriate means of maintenance accomplishment  If the Specifications of the Maintenance Plan or Contract were met for: 1) Repair, cleaning or other treatment of the drainage structure 2) Slope treatments and/or sidecast control (to include material removed from roadways, ditches, catchbasins, etc.) 3) Road surface treatment

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating the Sample Site Once the site has been located (a channel crossing), walk the road in both directions, and determine the points where drainage from the road surface, cuts and fills no longer carries to the stream crossing. The road length for the E09 evaluation lies between those two points.

Sampling Protocols

Fill Slopes:

Vegetative Cover: For this criteria assess whether the crossing fillslope has at least fifty percent of its surface covered with a protective covering in the form of vegetation, mulch, rock, or other stable material. Rilling: Rilling may also be present as a result of eroding fillslopes in addition to or in absence of rills caused by surface drainage. If rills are present that are not caused by drainage from the road surface, determine whether their frequency is greater than one per five lineal feet of road surface length. Also note whether the rills appear to be active and enlarging. Active rills would show little or no vegetation or litter in their depressions. If rills have enlarged to the point where they are greater than four inches deep and six inches wide, they are considered gullies. Note whether gullies are present on the fillslope.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 55 -56-

Cracks: As you survey the fillslopes, also note any evidence of cracks in the slope or on the road surface. Often these are present at the upper edge of the fillslope. Cracks are common as fill settles. In addition to identifying their presence, you must assess whether the cracks appear to be stabilized or widening (active). This assessment is best accomplished by looking for signs of vegetation, litter or rounded edges in older features, and for sharp edges on recent cracking. Slope Failures: While surveying the fillslope, note instances of slope failure. Slope failures are evidenced by movement of soil in blocks or large clumps, rather than by rills, gullies or surface erosion. The criterion calls for you to estimate whether the failures total a cubic yard of material moved, and whether the displaced material reached a stream channel.

Road Surface: Rilling: As the road surface at the stream crossing is surveyed, keep a cumulative count of the length of road surface on which rills are present. Rills are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 20 feet in length. When the entire road length has been surveyed, estimate the percent of the length with rilling. You must also assess whether rills present continue off the road surface (to a ditch or fillslope). Ponding: Observe the road surface for evidence of ponding of surface runoff. Normally, ponds form at the low points of the surface, where a berm or other feature prevents drainage. Minor ponding is to be expected, so the observer is asked to examine the fillslope below areas where ponding is evident, to determine if the ponding has resulted or could result in slippage of the fill. Drainage Control: Observe the condition of road drainage in the vicinity of the crossing. Look for evidence of chronic sediment movement (in the form of deposition, raw banks, downcutting, exposed roots and such). Estimate the annual sediment yield from the road drainage system, and whether or not the feature seems to be stabilizing or degrading. Rate according to the categories on the form.

Culvert/Crossing: Scour At Inlet And Outlet: Observe the stream channel at both the inlet and the outlet of the culvert or crossing. Estimate the total amount of scour that has occurred and is likely to occur in the next 2 years, and rate accordingly. Diversion Potential: Examine the grade of the roadway at the crossing. If the crossing fails (plugs up or fails to carry all of the flow), will the stream be diverted out of its channel and down the roadway for more than 20 feet, or will flow continue across the road and down the channel? Plugging: Observe the culvert inlet or upslope end of the structure and evaluate if debris or deposited sediment is present in quantities that might cause culvert bypass or culvert fill failure. Piping: Examine the crossing fill and determine if piping of water is occurring, whereby water is passing through the fill without going through the culvert.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 56 -57-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E10 Road Decommissioning (Reference BMP 2.26) revised 10/2001

Header Information Unique To This Form Project: Note if project had or did not have stream crossings. Project Status: Enter year road decommissioned. Crossing: Identify whether a stream crossing is within evaluation site.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites First, make a list of all system (classified), non-system (unclassified) and temporary roads decommissioned or obliterated on the Forest. Randomly select from the sample pool the number of decommissioned road evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation The E10 BMP Evaluation is complex and requires a high degree of coordination and two trips to the sample site. Implementation is evaluated any time after the decommissioning treatments have been completed. Effectiveness is evaluated shortly after the project has been completed and after the project has gone through at least two winter seasons.

Conducting The Implementation Evaluation

For All Decommissioning Projects Implementation of road decommissioning involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents, plans and contracts. These criteria are rated for all projects; an additional four criteria are rated for projects with stream crossings. Review the contract and/or decommissioning plan and planning documents (including NEPA, biological assessments, etc.) to determine if water quality issues identified by the ID team were incorporated into and addressed by the design and contract or plan.  Did the ID Team consider the potential and actual effects of roads on water quality? Did plans address water quality? Were pre-project surveys of springs, areas prone to landsliding, and extent of fills conducted?  Did the final design incorporate mitigations included in NEPA, Biological Opinions, Biological Assessment, or other controlling documents?

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 57 -58-

Conduct a field review by walking the entire length of the project. Compare environmental documents, contract information, and/or site designs against on the ground results to determine if the project/contract requirements were met for:  Treating the road surface?  Disposal Areas?  Reshaping or stabilization of the road prism?  Ground cover re-vegetating and/or other erosion control in areas disturbed by treatments?  Physical closure of the road to unintended vehicle use? For projects with stream crossing(s), compare the plan requirements against ground results to determine:  Was fill beneath culverts removed as per the specifications?  Does the resulting excavated channel closely match the natural channel (both upstream and downstream) in width, grade, and alignment?  If grade control or energy dissipating structures were called for, were they installed as specified?  Were the sideslopes at the crossing excavations configured as specified? If problems occurred in implementation, identify which phase or phases the problems can be attributed to; and describe the deficiencies and possible corrective actions in narrative form (this is very important, please do not skip or skimp on this part).

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

For All Decommissioning Projects Locating The Sample Site: Effectiveness is assessed by walking the entire length of the decommissioned road. Along this transect, observations are made at a minimum of 3 crossing sites at the largest channels are tallied. Evidence of mass failures is tallied per 1500 feet of road. Determine the length of transect by pacing. Also tally the length of road with rills or gullies greater than 20 feet in length and 2 inches deep. Note also the condition of areas where excavated material has been stored.

Sampling Protocols After the entire transect is observed, rate the following effectiveness criteria:

Road surface rilling: Divide the paced length of the transect with rills > 2” deep and 20’ in length by the total paced transect length. Rills/gullies running longitudinally are tallied by their full length; rills/gullies

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 58 -59-

running transverse to the road surface are tallied by the longitudinal distance of road which they occur. Compare this result with the categories on the form.

Disposal area rilling: Excavated material removed from channels or from pulled fillslopes, etc. is placed in designated disposal areas. Based on observations of these areas made while walking the transect, rate the amount of rilling and delivery to channel observed. Exclude areas where the road surface serves as the disposal site so as not to double count rilling accounted for under “road surface rilling”. “Numerous rills” are defined as greater than 1 rill per lineal 5 feet.

Road prism fillslope rilling: Based on observations made while walking the transect, rate the amount of rilling occurring on re-contoured or pulled fillslopes within the road prism. “Numerous rills” are defined as greater than 1 rill per lineal 5 feet. Note: fillslopes at excavated channel crossings are evaluated separately below.

Slope failure: Walk the road and observe all incidences of mass-wasting slope failures. Tally and make a volume estimate for those failures.

Traffic control: Whatever method of traffic exclusion or control was used, evaluate its effectiveness based on whether evidence of unintended vehicular use is present.

For roads where stream crossings are present: A minimum of three (3) excavated stream crossings encountered along the road are evaluated and tallied; the summary rating for each of the effectiveness indicators (existing channel adjustment, future channel adjustment, excavated sidslope rilling, and slope failure) is derived from the numerical average of sites evaluated. Assign a numeric score for the indicator condition described on the evalution form. For example, under existing channel adjustment indicator: 1 = “little downcutting…”, 2 = “moderate downcutting…”, and 3 = “extensive downcutting…”. For each indicator, add the combined scores and divide by the number of sites (crossings) evaluated to obtain a numeric average. Rounding to the nearest whole number should indicate the appropriate condition box to check for each parameter.

Adjustments of channel: Rate the adjustment of the channel. This criterion is based on comparison of the degree of existing and anticipated channel adjustment. Evaluation of existing channel adjustment is based upon observations of lateral scour, downcutting, channel stability from two site visits; the first shortly following project completion and second following two or more winter seasons. To facilitate assessment of post winter channel adjustment, photo points on stream crossings must be established prior to the first winter in order to facilitate a baseline for evaluating post winter channel adjustment. In addition to photo point monitoring, the extent of channel adjustment

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 59 -60-

should also be compared to an upstream area, which is presumed to represent the channel’s natural geometry, and forms a basis of what can be considered reasonable and unavoidable adjustment. Rate and tally existing adjustment of the channel at excavated stream crossings by comparing areas of the channel eroded since the excavation was completed and after two or more winters (see figure E10-1). Rate and tally future adjustment of the channel at excavated stream crossings by evaluating the stability and recovery of project associated adjustments along the excavated channel. In other words, evaluate whether or not the excavated stream channel stable or is likely to continue to adjust for the foreseeable future and deliver sediment through sideslope failures or continued downcutting and gullying. When evaluating existing and future channel adjustments, a clear understanding of the range of acceptable and unacceptable post excavation channel conditions must be defined.

An excavated stream crossing that is stable can be defined as having little post project channel adjustment and no foreseeable future channel adjustment. The stream channel is at natural grade, channel width mimics the native channel, and channel sideslopes are not oversteepened or prone to future failure as a result of project design. Stream crossings in this category would be rated as meeting project intent with minimal sediment delivery.

An excavated stream crossing that has experienced moderate downcutting and lateral adjustment can be defined as undergoing more channel adjustment than was anticipated in the project design. However, the channel is still stable and will not continue to adjust and deliver significant sediment into the foreseeable future. For example, the stream channel may have downcut more than anticipated, or a small slump occurred on a channel sideslope where insufficient channel width was left. Despite the unanticipated adjustments, no significant future sediment delivery is likely, the channel is stable, and project intent was essentially met.

An excavated stream crossing that has experienced extensive downcutting and lateral adjustment can be defined as a channel that is not stable and will continue to deliver significant sediment into the foreseeable future (e.g. next winter or moderate storm event). For example, the channel bottom will continue to downcut and widen, which will undermine sideslopes and cause slope failures. Chronic sedimentation is anticipated to continue and the project intent was largely not met.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 60 -61-

Figure E10-1. Excavated channel, after project and after channel adjustment.

Excavated sideslope rilling: Based on observations of selected stream channel crossings evaluated within the project area, tally and rate the amount of rilling occurring on newly excavated or pulled sideslopes at channel crossings.

Slope failure: Walk the road and observe all incidences of mass-wasting slope failures. Tally and make a volume estimate for those failures.

Note on Adjustments of Excavated Stream Crossing Fills in Different Geomorphic Settings: Sideslopes and newly excavated channels are expected to adjust for several years following removal of a fill because the site conditions that existed before the crossing was built cannot be duplicated. The type and amount of channel and sideslope adjustment will vary substantially for different sizes of fills and different geomorphic settings. Projects should be designed, executed and evaluated for effectiveness with this inherent landscape variation in mind. Although it cannot be easily quantified, the degree of adjustment that can be reasonably expected should vary directly with the size of the disturbed site and the steepness or relief of the surrounding topography, and inversely with the relative competence of the underlying materials; these factors are related to the geomorphic setting of a site. For example, minimal downcutting or slope instability would be expected within competent bedrock, whereas substantial downcutting and some mass movement should be expected within a large landslide deposit of fine-textured colluvium. Experienced earth scientists can make reasonably consistent estimates of expected adjustments based on observable site characteristics, and can

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 61 -62-

also help adjust the design to mitigate for most adverse characteristics (e.g., special channel armoring or slope protection).

The size and geometry of the excavated fill also affects the engineering feasibility of achieving an end product that is likely to experience minimum adjustments. Professional judgment typically will be applied during design and execution to determine a rational tradeoff between total site disturbance and residual sideslope steepness or percent of the fill that can realistically be removed. Usually, most of the fill that cannot be removed will contribute to the site adjustment.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 62 -63-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E11 Control Of Sidecast Material (Reference BMP 2.11)

Header Information Unique To This Form Year Activities Occurred: Give the year that the activity being evaluated occurred. If it occurred over more than one year, give the most recent year, or, if the great majority of activity happened in a specific year, give that one.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites E11 evaluations are conducted in conjunction with E08 (Road Surface, Drainage and Slope Protection). Follow the directions for sample pool development and site selection in E08, and conduct E11 evaluations at those sites.

Timing Of The Evaluation All roads used for effectiveness evaluations should have gone through at least one winter season following the activity (construction, reconstruction or maintenance) before effectiveness is rated. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the road activity has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E11 is rated for two factors, which require a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. These documents may include: environmental assessments, timber sale contracts, Contract Daily Diaries (FS 6300-20), Timber Sale Administration Reports (R5 2400-181), Specified Road Construction Agreements and/or notice (FS 7700-42), Work Orders (FS 6300-12), Special Use Permits, Public Works contracts and any other supporting documents to determine: If the project contract or plan set limits for sidecasting, and designated areas to be used for disposal of excavated material. Field review is conducted to determine:  If the sidecast provisions and controls specified in the project contract or plan were implemented correctly.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 63 -64-

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation:

Locating the Sample Site Locate a 0.1 mile transect along the selected road. Walk or drive the entire road, and number all the channel crossings (those with culverts, bridges or fords). Randomly select one of the crossings to serve as the transect midpoint. As for E08, begin the evaluation on both sides of the crossing at the point where drainage from the road surface, cuts and fills no longer carries to the stream crossing (conduct an E09 Stream Crossing Evaluation for the crossing). From these starting points, walk the road for 0.05 miles (approximately 260 ft) away from the crossing. If the selected road is less than 0.05 mile in either direction, walk the road to it terminus (conduct an E08 Road Drainage Control along the same road length).

Sampling Protocols

Making the Estimates: Placement of Sidecast Material: As the transect is walked, the observer must look for evidence of material sidecast by the construction, reconstruction or maintenance activity, and note whether the sidecast material was placed such that it entered a Streamside Management Zone, a stream channel, or ditches or other drainage ways that drain directly to a channel. A ditch may enter a cross drain that discharges onto protected vegetation, and therefore not drain to a channel. Flow from and sediment deposition related to ditches that receive sidecast material should be followed to determine whether material makes its way to a channel.

Sidecast Onto Stabilized Vegetation: If sidecast material is found along the transect, the observer should note whether material was sidecast onto slopes where vegetation has been established to stabilize the slope (most likely grasses).

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 64 -65-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E12 Servicing and Refueling (Reference BMP 2.12)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Project Status: Indicate if the activity evaluated is completed or active. If active, estimate when the project will be completed. Types And Amount Of Fuel Stored: List the types of fuels stored at the evaluated site, and estimate the volume of each material.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a pool that includes all active permits, leases, or contracts that include surface fuel storage and/or service sites. For marinas, use Administrative Evaluation AE-5. From this pool, randomly select sales to equal the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation The evaluation of E12 should occur during administration of an active project. If possible, schedule the evaluation as close to termination of the contract (or late in the season) as possible. Evaluation of implementation should be completed prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation is rated for three different factors and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Review the timber sale environmental assessment, timber sale contract, Timber Sale Administration Handbook (FSH 2409.15) and any other supporting documents to determine:  Whether the amount of fuel stored exceeds 660 gallons in a single container, or 1320 gallons total storage, and if so, whether a Spill Prevention and Countermeasure Plan has been prepared.  Whether the storage area is located near stream channels, drainage ditches that feed directly to channels, meadows, lakeshores, or other areas of water or conveyance to water. It is hard to define a “safe” distance, as this varies with the slope, soil type, soil condition and several other factors, including the design of the storage facility and safety berms, but 100 feet is a good general rule. Ask yourself whether the storage area is placed such that if all the material were spilled, the risk of any of it reaching a stream channel would be low.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 65 -66-

 Whether berms of adequate composition, and of adequate size to contain spills, have been constructed around the storage area.

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating the Sample Site and Sample Points The sample site is located by identifying all the fuel storage areas on the selected timber sale. If there is more than one, randomly select the fuel storage area to be evaluated. The evaluation is based on a survey of the entire fuel storage area, and by surveying the area downslope of the storage area for a distance of at least fifty feet, or greater if evidence of fuel is found.

Sampling Protocol

Evidence of Discharge: Fuel should be contained within the storage area, and the only evidence of fuel outside the area should be minor drips or leakage. There should be no evidence that enough oil or fuel has spilled to result in ponding, or as a worse case, that fuel has run along the ground and formed rills or gullies. If any evidence of more than minor leakage is found, also determine whether these are located at distances greater than fifty feet from the nearest channel or drainage ditch. If the containment area has no berm around it, rate this criterion in the middle or right column.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 66 -67-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E13 In-Channel Construction Practices (Reference BMP 2.14, 2.15, 2.17)

Header Information Unique To This Form:

Site Evaluations/Project Status: In designated spaces, provide the name of the reviewer, the reviewer’s job title, the date, and photo reference numbers for each of the two reviews (Active Project and Post Project). It is not necessary that the same individual(s) conduct all three evaluations. Project Stream Is: Indicate if the stream evaluated is a perennial stream (flows year round), an intermittent stream (flows seasonally most years) or is ephemeral (flows only in response to precipitation events).

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites ALL in-channel construction occurring in flowing or dry streams must be evaluated; up to the point where 5 evaluations have been completed. Evaluations beyond 5 are optional.

Timing Of The Evaluation The E13 BMP Evaluation is complex and requires a high degree of coordination and two trips to the sample site. The observer or observers schedule an evaluation during the project (while the In-Channel construction is taking place), and post-project phase (at least one winter season following the activity). The implementation rating is conducted during the active project phase.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E13 is rated for several factors and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Review the timber sale environmental assessment, special use permits, operating plans, timber sale contract, Transportation Engineering Handbook (FSH 7709.11), Forest Service Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges, Contract Daily Diary (FS6300-20), Specified Road Construction Agreement and/or notice (FS 7700-42), Work Order (FS 6300-12), and any other supporting documents to determine:  If there were requirements identified for diversion of stream flow around or through the construction site (conduct this evaluation during the pre-activity or active stages).

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 67 -68-

Use field review to determine:  If excavated and/or stockpiled materials generated by the in-channel construction were removed to areas above the apparent high water line (conduct this evaluation during the active project stage).  If the requirements for flow diversion identified above were implemented (conduct this evaluation during the active project stage).  If the channel areas disturbed by the construction activity were returned to the natural or designed grade, alignment and stability (conduct this evaluation during the post-activity stage).

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Site

For Sedimentation of Channel Riffle Substrate: Locate two stations, the first ten active channel-widths upstream of the channel activity, and the second ten active channel-widths downstream of the activity. Active channel width is the width of channel inundated by the annual peak flow. As channel width varies, an estimate of the width in a riffle portion is adequate. Riffles are shallow, high velocity sections of the stream, usually characterized by gravel or cobble substrate (boulders may dominate in larger streams or in rivers). As an example, if the stream where the practice was to be evaluated averaged five feet in width, then observations for sedimentation would be made at the first riffle encountered fifty feet upstream of the activity, and at the first riffle encountered fifty feet downstream of the activity.

For Turbidity: Observation of turbidity is made at a distance of twenty-channel widths downstream of the downstream edge of the construction activity. If turbidity is evident at this location, the observer should also check for turbidity in the stream above the activity, to ensure turbidity is due to the construction versus another upstream activity. Turbidity related to the in-channel construction will be very apparent, and should be easily discernible from upstream “background” conditions.

For Disturbance to Channel, Fill In-Channel and Fill on Floodplain: Observe the project area within the clearing limits to determine the amount of channel disturbed above and below the structure and removal of construction material from the channel and the floodplain.

Sampling Protocols

For Flowing Streams: These estimates are made during the active project stage of the evaluation.

For Sedimentation of Channel Riffle Substrate: This criteria asks the observer to look at the amount of fine sediment deposited on the gravel, rock or boulder substrate of the selected riffles, and determine whether or not there is more siltation in the channel below the construction than in

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 68 -69-

the channel above the construction. Sediment deposition should be evaluated by placing a shallow pie-size pan or similar catchment above and below the construction site and visually analyzing the difference in collected material. For Turbidity: This is an observation of water clarity below the activity site. If sediment is picked up by water at the construction site, it will tend to move downstream in a wave or plume, which is thickest, darkest and most highly concentrated at the point of disturbance. The plume will tend to lengthen and narrow, and become less distinct, as one moves downstream. The observer is asked to determine whether or not the plume is still distinguishable at the sample site twenty active channel-widths below the downstream edge of the activity. A sediment plume will be in the center of the channel. It is likely that turbid water will be evident in side pools and standing water at the channels edge downstream of the point where a sediment plume is evident. Document this observation with a photo as well, framed such that a channel length of approximately five active channel widths is in view.

For All Streams (Flowing or Dry): These estimates are made during the post-project stage of the evaluation. Disturbance to Channels: Within the clearing limits, determine the active channel width. Measure the length of channel disturbance from the ends of the structure to the clearing limits. Compare active channel width with length of channel disturbed. To minimize channel disturbance, clearing limits and channel disturbance should be within three active channel widths. Fill in channel: Observe the channel within the clearing limits above and below the crossing to determine the amount of material (such as excavated or construction material) left in the channel. Fill on floodplain: Observe the five-year floodplain area for material (such as excavated or construction) remaining after the stream crossing construction activity. The floodplain is the depositional area above bankfull flow or normal high water.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 69 -70-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E14 Temporary Roads (Reference BMP 2.16, 2.26)

Header Information Unique To This Form Project Status: Note if the road is open or closed, and if open, whether road has logging traffic or other traffic. Unit #: Temporary Roads are not normally given a road number. Insert the appropriate unit number instead.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Include all temporary road construction which has been exposed to 1 to 3 winters and are associated with a Timber Sale Contract, Special Use Permit, Public Works Contract or with other force account project work. These roads comprise the Temporary Road Pool. From this pool, randomly select a number of sites equal to that assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation All roads used for effectiveness evaluations should have gone through at least one winter, but not more than three winters. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the construction has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E14 is rated for several factors, which differ if the selected road has a channel crossing, and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Review the timber sale environmental document, timber sale contract, Contract Daily Diary (FS 6300-20), Timber Sale Administration Handbook (FSH 2409.15, section 51.62), Timber Sale Administration Reports (R5 2400-181), and any other supporting documents to determine:

For All Temporary Roads:  If water quality issues were addressed by the ID team that developed the project, and whether the road location and construction plans address those issues.  If the “as built” results met the plan objectives including closure provisions.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 70 -71-

 If the contract requirements were met for: 1) drainage 2) slope stabilization 3) slash disposal  If the road was closed (blocked to traffic) and treated for closure (ripped, drained, etc.) as planned.

For Temporary Roads with Channel Crossings:  If the crossings fills and culverts were removed as the plan specified.  If the channel crossing location and approach met plan specifications.  If stream bank excavation associated with the crossing was restricted to that proposed in the plan.

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Site And The Sample Points Locate a 0.1 mile transect along the selected temporary road. Walk or drive the entire road, and number all the channel crossings (those with culverts, or low water crossings). Randomly select one of the crossings to serve as the transect midpoint. For E14, begin the evaluation on both sides of the drainage at the point where drainage from the road surface, cuts and fills no longer carries to the stream crossing. From these starting points, walk the road for 0.05 miles (approximately 260 ft) away from the crossing in each direction. If the selected road is less than 0.05 mile in either direction, walk the road to its terminus. Conduct an E09 Stream Crossing Evaluation for the crossing, if these are still in place. If the temporary road has no channel crossings, estimate the approximate midpoint of the temporary road, and make that the transect midpoint. From this starting point, walk the road for 0.05 miles (approximately 260 ft) away from the midpoint in each direction. If the selected road is less than 0.05 mile in either direction, walk the road to its terminus. During the survey, observe the road surface, cut slope and fill slope for evidence of soil and water movement. At points where rills or gullies leave the road surface or cross the fill slope, it will be necessary to follow these features downslope of the road surface to their terminus, to determine length, and if material has entered stream channels.

Sampling Protocols

Channel Crossing:  If the crossing is in place, complete the effectiveness portion of the BMPEP E09 Evaluation.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 71 -72-

 If the crossing has been removed, assess whether or not the stream banks affected by the crossing are stable, and whether or not fill associated with the crossing was removed. Unstable banks will be characterized by rilling, gullying or sloughing.

Fill Slopes: Rilling: Rilling may also be present as a result of eroding fillslopes in addition to or in absence of rills caused by surface drainage. If rills are present that are not caused by drainage from the road surface, determine if they extend a distance below the toe of the slope that is greater than the length of the slope. Note that a single rill would not cause the right hand column to be checked for this criterion. Sediment To Channel: While walking the road transect, follow any rill or gullies, or deposition of sediment to their terminus, and observe if these erosion features reached a stream channel. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter the SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. The presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class these sediment as having entered the channel; more frequently, there will be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel. Slope Failures: While surveying the fillslope, note instances of slope failure. Slope failures are evidenced by movement of soil in blocks or large clumps, rather than by rills, gullies or surface erosion. The criterion calls for you to estimate if the failures total 5 cubic yards of material moved, and if the material moved reaches a stream channel. Make the sediment to channel evaluation as described above.

Cut Slopes: Slope Failures: This criterion is similar to the slope failure criteria explained above for fillslopes, that is if five cubic yards have moved. However, here the observer must also determine if a total of one cubic yard of the slide material has been transported from slope failure to a channel. This would be most likely when material slumped into a drainage ditch, and there is evidence that more than one cubic yard was carried by the ditch to a channel. The observer should follow transport paths (ditched, cross drains, etc.) to their terminus to determine if the material reached a channel. Also observe the inside ditch, if present, for evidence of scour. Determine if scour is present and extensive enough to contribute at least one cubic yard of material to a stream channel. This means following ditch-produced sediment to determine if it has reached a channel. If ditch scour is evident, but less than one cubic yard reaches a channel, rate this criteria in the middle column.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 72 -73-

Road Drainage: Evaluate these criteria when dips, waterbars, culverts or other structures (not outsloping) are used to drain the road surface. Scour At Outlet: Observe the outlet of the drainage structure, and observe if scour is present, the length of this scour, and whether or not the scour is continuous to a natural channel. Plugging: Observe the culvert inlet, or upslope end of the structure, and evaluate if debris or deposited sediment is present in quantities that might cause bypass or failure.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 73 -74-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E15 Rip Rap Composition (Reference BMP 2.20)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Year Rip Rap Placed: Give the year that the riprap placement was completed. Purpose Of Rip Rap: Give the objective of the riprap placement. For example: to protect stream banks; to protect bridge abutments; etc.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a sample pool by including all projects completed the previous calendar year that included riprap placement. This pool should include road construction or reconstruction, recreation developments, stream restoration, drainage facility outlets, and any other projects where riprap is used. If water did not reach the selected site, the site may be evaluated the following year. From this pool, randomly select a number of sites equal to the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation All projects used for evaluation should have gone through at least one winter season following the activity before effectiveness is rated. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the riprap placement has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E15 is rated for three factors, and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Conduct a paper review of the project environmental document, project plan or contract, and Contract Daily Diaries (FS 6300-20) to determine:  The planned composition and placement of riprap material. Conduct a Field Review to Determine:  If the riprap was placed as specified in the plan or design.  If the riprap is free of organic material (limbs, etc.) and small sized material that is not resistant to streamflow.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 74 -75-

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating the Sample Site The area of riprap placement is the sample site, and your evaluation is based on a survey of the site in its entirety. Walk the entire length of shore or streambank upper bank that received the riprap placement, and, if possible, along the shore or stream edge.

Sampling Protocols

Evidence of Scour: If the riprap used for the project was of sufficient size to resist stream flow, there should be little or no evidence of scour on the protected bank. Scour is the removal of material by water, and most likely will occur during high flows. Some scour is likely and to be expected, because riprap material is not always well sorted, and may contain small percentages of material that are less than the “design” size. Given that some material may be expected to move during high flows, you must evaluate if the dominant size class of rip rap material appears to be free of scour, and if the size class that appears resistant to scour is present in quantities to protect the bank.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 75 -76-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E16 Water Source Development (Reference BMP 2.21)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Year Development Completed: Give the year that the construction of the water source was completed. Year Of Last Maintenance: Give the year that the water source was last maintained. If the configuration of the water source was drastically changed, this should be considered development, not maintenance.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a pool that includes all water holes that are directly connected to stream channels used for road watering, fire protection and other administrative uses. Include wildlife and stock water developments where appropriate. From this pool, randomly select a number of water sources equal to the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation All water sources used for effectiveness evaluations should have gone through at least one winter season following their construction before effectiveness is rated. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the water source development has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E16 is rated for three factors, and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Conduct a paper review of the project environmental assessment, project plan or contract, and Contract Daily Dairies (FS 6300-20) to determine:  If water quality protection measures were included in the project plan, design or Environmental Document. These might include drainage or surfacing measures, limits on location or size, etc.  If limits or guidelines for water use or withdrawal from the source (loads or gallons per day, percentage of flow, etc.) have been established and are being followed. This criteria may not be applicable in areas were flow is plentiful.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 76 -77-

Conduct a Field Review to Determine:  If the water quality protection measures included in the plan, design or EA were implemented as planned.  If materials used to construct the water hole are sufficiently resistant to stream flow and erosion so that sediment will not be contributed to the channel from the water source. Construction might be adjacent to the channel (an out-of-channel water hole for example) in which case use of stable material at diversion and/or return points should be resistant, as well as materials used to restore altered channel banks. Water holes are also developed within the channel, in which case materials used to create the pool should be composed of materials that would not contribute sediment if washed out. Observe if consideration of high flows is evident in the water source. Assess if high flows would “safely” pass the water source. A worst-case situation would be a design that has potential to divert high flows out of the channel. Another concern is a design that would cause cutting of natural channel banks during high flows. Assess if the amount of alteration to the natural channel banks appeared to be the minimum practical amount to allow for the water source development.

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Site For Water Flow and Rilling: The evaluation is based on a complete survey of the water source. Include the approach, drainage structures, the impoundment and the channel above, at and below the water source. For Sedimentation of Channel Riffle Substrate: Locate two stations, the first ten active channel-widths upstream of the water source development and the second ten active channel- widths downstream of the development. As channel width varies, an estimate of the width in a riffle portion is adequate. Riffles are shallow, high velocity sections of the stream, usually characterized by gravel or cobble substrate (boulders may dominate in larger streams or in rivers). As an example, if the stream at the water source location averaged five feet in width, then observations for sedimentation would be made at the first riffle encountered after going fifty feet upstream of the development, and at the first riffle encountered after going fifty feet downstream of the development.

Sampling Protocols

Water Flow: Based on observations of the channel above and below the water source development, assess if there is adequate flow for maintenance of fish passage and aquatic resources. One quick technique for this determination is to pick up several (about 5) cobble sized rocks from a riffle above and a riffle below the development, and see if the number of aquatic organisms are roughly the same. If there are far fewer organisms below the development, flow is probably

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 77 -78-

inadequate. Other factors to look for are the presence of fish in pools above and below the development, and the presence of rooted aquatic vegetation above and below the development.

Rilling: During the survey of the channel banks and the water development approach, look for evidence of rills that originate on these areas and continue to the channel. Rills are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil.

Sedimentation of Channel Riffle Substrate: This criterion asks the observer to look at the amount of fine sediment deposited on the gravel, rock or boulder substrate of the selected riffles, and determine whether or not, there is more siltation at the site below the water source development than the site above the construction. The sediment should appear to be recently deposited, and its color will match that of the recently eroded material at the development. If there is doubt as to if the two sites are different, the photos taken at each site can be used to gain the opinion of other observers at a later date. Take photos of the substrate such that approximately one square foot of substrate is in frame.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 78 -79-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E17 Snow Removal (Reference BMP 2.25)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Status: Give the status of the snow removal project at the time of the evaluation (e.g., plowing completed one week previous, plowing partially completed, re-plow due to recent snow, etc.).

Timing Of The Evaluation Evaluations of snow removal activities should be conducted during the winter or spring, after snow has been removed, and while the road is receiving traffic. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the road activity has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Conduct evaluations of all snow removal projects on Forest Service System Roads, up to the point where at least 3 evaluations have been completed each year. Roads are typically plowed to allow access to recreation sites or facilities, or to allow access for site prep or reforestation activities, or for access to yearlong special use permittees in snow country. Also include roads in timber sales that will be used for winter log haul in snow country. Evaluations are based on opportunities as they occur during a given year. Forests with snow removal activity are to evaluate at least 3 sites per year. Evaluations beyond 3 are optional.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E17 is rated for two factors, and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Conduct a paper review of the project environmental assessment, forest wide direction, project plan or contract, and project implementation notes (Contract Daily Diary FS 6300-20 or Timber Sale Administration Reports R5 2400-181 for example) to determine: If standards for the snow removal had been developed and documented in one of documents listed above, or in another document. The standards could include limits on road use, written road drainage specifications for snow removal, or established end results for road condition. Conduct a Field Review to Determine:  If the standards developed were implemented on the ground.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 79 -80-

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Site Locate a 0.1 mile transect along the selected road by first walking or driving the entire road, and enumerating all the channel crossings (those with culverts, bridges or fords). Randomly select one the crossings to serve as the transect midpoint. During the survey, observe the road surface, cut slope and fill slope for evidence of soil and water movement. At points where rills or gullies leave the road surface or cross the fill slope, it will be necessary to follow these features downslope of the road surface to their terminus, to determine both length, and if material has entered stream channels.

Sampling Protocols

Road Surface: Rilling: As the length of road is surveyed, keep a running count (paces) of the length of road surface on which rills are present. Rills are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 20 feet in length and extend off the road surface. When the entire road length has been surveyed, estimate the percent of the length with rilling that meets these criteria. Concentrated Flow Along Berms Or Ditches: Following snow removal, it is common that snowmelt will concentrate on the road surface along berms left by the plowing, or in ditches that might not drain properly due to the presence of snow, ice or sediment. For this criterion, you will determine if there is evidence of scour from concentrated snowmelt, and if so, if 10 percent of the road segment surveyed is scoured. Scouring is evidenced by gullying, with channels exceeding 4” in width and 2” in depth. Scour is most likely at the outside edge of roads that are outsloped (commonly when holes are not punched through the berm frequently enough), or in ditches (or along snow berm if present) of insloped roads. Scour will appear fresh if related to snowmelt, most likely with evidence of sediment deposition associated with the scour. Fill Slope Rilling: Where surface flow is diverted off the road, rilling of the fill slope may result. As the road segment is surveyed, observe the fillslope at locations where flow is diverted though outside berms an/or at cross drain outlets. You will need to determine if rills are present, and if so, if they extend a distance below the fillslope greater than the length of the slope. Note that a single rill would not cause the right hand column to be checked for this criterion. Sediment To Channel: While walking the road transect, follow any rill or gullies, or deposition of sediment to their terminus, and observe if these erosion features reached a stream channel. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. The presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel. Road Rutting: Running vehicles on unsurfaced roads where snow has been plowed commonly results in rutting. As you survey the road segment, observe and estimate the length of the segment that has ruts greater than 2 inches in depth.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 80 -81-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E18 Pioneer Road Construction (Reference BMP 2.3, 2.8, 2.9, 2.19)

Header Information Unique To This Form Project Status: Briefly describe the stage of the road construction: (clearing, grading, etc.). Crossings: Identify whether a stream crossing exists within the evaluation site. Over Winter: Identify whether evaluation site has over wintered.

Timing Of The Evaluation The E18 evaluation must be conducted at the time of implementation, that is, while pioneer road construction is underway. Effectiveness should be evaluated only after a precipitation event of approximately 0.25” or greater has occurred. If an evaluated project is left incomplete over a winter season, it must be revisited to complete effectiveness criteria #5.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Include all roads (that include at least one channel crossing) to be constructed in the current year under Timber Sale Contract, Public Works, Cost-Share or other means in the sample pool. Do not include temporary roads in the pool. Conduct evaluations of all pioneer road construction activities up to the point where 5 evaluations have been completed. Evaluations beyond 5 are optional.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E18 is rated for seven factors and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Review the timber sale environmental document, timber sale contract, Contract Daily Diary (FS 6300-20), Timber Sale Administration Handbook (FSH 2409.15), Timber Sale Administration Reports (R5 2400-181), and any other supporting documents to determine:  If water quality issues were addressed by the ID team that developed the project and if road design objectives were developed to address those issues.  If pioneer road excavation was limited to the road corridor.  If construction-generated materials were deposited within the roadway limit.  If the contract specified the timing of construction activities and had provisions for erosion prevention and control during wet weather.  If planned erosion control measures were implemented during the time period specified.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 81 -82-

 If the contract specified where construction-generated stumps and logging slash were to be placed.  If the contract provisions for treatment or placement of slash and stumps have been implemented.

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation NOTE: Complete Criteria 1 (Debris), 2 (Road Surface Rilling) and 3 (a & b) (Sediment deposition and gullying and Sediment to Channel) for ALL evaluations. Complete an E13 evaluation when a flowing stream is crossed by the road. Complete the Stream Crossing Criteria (Rills and Slope Failures) for dry channel crossings. Complete Criteria #5 (Sediment to Channel: Stream Crossing Rilling) for projects where the road was left incomplete for a winter.

Locating The Sample Site and Sample Point

Stream Crossings Present: Locate a 0.1 mile transect along the selected road. Walk or drive the entire road, and number all the channel crossings (those with culverts, bridges or fords). Randomly select one of the crossings to serve as the transect midpoint. Begin the evaluation on both sides of the crossing at the point where drainage from the road surface, cuts and fills no longer carries to the stream crossing. Determine and find the midpoint. From this starting point, walk the road for 0.05 miles (approximately 260 ft) in both directions, away from the midpoint. If the selected road is less than 0.05 mile in either direction, walk the road to its terminus in that direction.

No Stream Crossings: Traverse the length of the road and determine the midpoint. From either starting point, walk the road for 0.05 miles (approximately 260 ft) in both directions, away from the midpoint. If the selected road is less than 0.05 mile in either direction, walk the road to its terminus. During the survey, observe the road surface, cut slope and fill slope for evidence of soil and water movement. At points where rills or gullies leave the road surface or cross the fill slope, it will be necessary to follow these features downslope of the road surface to their terminus, to determine both there length, and if material has entered stream channels.

Sampling Protocols

Debris: As the transect is walked, take note of road construction-generated slash and other debris (sidecast, rock, excavated fills, etc.). Observe if slash or debris is placed in a channel or SMZ.

Rilling:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 82 -83-

As the length of road is surveyed, keep a running count of the length of road surface on which rills are present. Rills are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 20 feet in length. When the entire road length has been surveyed, estimate the percent of the length with rilling. You must also assess if rills present continue off the road surface (to a ditch or fillslope).

Erosion Control: List the type of erosion controls present e.g. mulch, geotectile, etc. Sediment Deposition Or Gullying: Below the toe of the fillslope, look for evidence of sediment deposition. Normally, there will be deposition of sediment behind downed logs, stems, twigs and topographic “rises.” Look for such evidence, and note if deposition extends downslope a distance greater than the length of the fillslope. Also look for evidence of rilling or gullying on the road surface, or on or below the fillslope. If such rills are present, determine if they continue for more than 20 feet past the toe of the fillslope. Sediment To Channel: While walking the road transect, follow any rill or gullies, or deposition of sediment to their terminus, and observe if these erosion features reached a stream channel. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope areas, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter the SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. The presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel; more frequently, there will be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel.

Stream Crossings:

For Dry Channels (For flowing channels complete an E13 Evaluation) Rills: Examine the fillslopes for the presence of rills. If rills are present, look closely to see if they extend to the channel. Slope Failures: While surveying the fillslope, note instances of slope failure. Slope failures are evidenced by movement of soil in blocks or large clumps, rather than by rills, gullies or surface erosion. The criteria calls for you to estimate whether or not the failures total one cubic yard of material moved, and whether or not the displaced material reached the stream channel.

For Projects Left Incomplete Over Winter Keep the form for next year and enter the data after the form is complete.

Sediment To Channel: Stream Crossing Rilling: Rilling may be present as a result of eroding fillslopes in addition to or in absence of rills caused by surface drainage. If rills are present that are not caused by drainage from the road surface, determine if their frequency is greater than one per five lineal feet of road surface length. Also note if the rills appear to be active and enlarging. Active rills would show little or no vegetation or litter in their depressions. If rills have enlarged to the point

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 83 -84-

where they are four inches in depth and six inches wide, they are considered gullies. Note whether gullies are present on the fillslope.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 84 -85-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E19 Restoration of Borrow Pits and Quarries (including streamside borrow areas) (Reference BMP 2.18, 2.26, 2.27)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Quarry Name: Give the name of the quarry being evaluated. If it has no name give the road number where the quarry occurs. Status: Briefly describe the stage of quarry development (under development, active, being restored, or restored). Year Area Restored: Give the year that restoration of the quarry was completed. If no restoration work was done or it was not completed, insert NA, but explain in comments section.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites ALL borrow pits and quarries, including streamside borrow areas closed within the past year must be evaluated up to the point where 5 evaluations have been completed. Evaluations beyond 5 are optional.

Timing Of The Evaluation All borrow sites should have gone through at least one winter season following closure before effectiveness is rated. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the site closure and restoration activities have been completed and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E19 is rated for three factors, and involves a combination of field survey and review of environmental documents and contracts. Conduct a paper review of the project environmental document, project plan or site development plan, and project implementation notes (Contract Daily Diary FS 6300-20) to determine: If restoration of the site was addressed in the EA or plan. Conduct a Field Review to Determine:  If the roads within the site were closed, treated or obliterated as specified in the development plan.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 85 -86-

 If the non-roaded surface areas (excavation and work areas) within the site were treated (ripped, mulched, etc) as specified in the plan.

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Sites

For Roads: Randomly select a road from within the area covered by the site development plan. Locate a 0.1 mile transect along the selected road. Walk or drive the entire road, and number all the channel crossings (those with culverts, bridges or fords). Randomly select one of the crossings to serve as the transect midpoint. Begin the evaluation on both sides of the crossing at the point where drainage from the road surface, cuts and fills no longer carries to the stream crossing. From this starting point, walk the road for 0.05 miles (approximately 260 ft) in each direction. If the selected road is less than 0.05 mile in either direction, walk the road to its terminus. During the survey, observe the road surface, cut slope and fill slope for evidence of soil and water movement. At points where rills or gullies leave the road surface or cross the fill slope, it will be necessary to follow these features downslope of the road surface to their terminus, to determine both there length, and if material has entered stream channels.

For Excavations: This will include all areas from which rock or gravel was removed. If the operation includes more than one source area, randomly select one for evaluation. Evaluation is based on a survey of the entire selected excavation, with a transect walked at the downslope (or downstream) edge of the area disturbed by the excavation.

For Work Areas: Processing areas include all locations where rock was crushed, washed, sorted, or loaded. Evaluation is based on a survey of the entire area, with at minimum, a transect walked at the downslope (or downstream) edge of the processing area.

Locating Sample Points For Cover Estimates:

Roads: From the transect midpoint, pace in a zigzag manner across the roadbed 260 feet and take 50 equally spaced cover measurements in both one, then the other direction, to yield a 100 plot sample.

Excavations and Work Areas: Locate a 2-leg, 100-point transect in the approximate center of each site selected for measurement. Randomly determine the compass bearing of the first leg of the transect. This can

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 86 -87-

be done by throwing a spinning stick in the air and using the direction it points after resting on the ground. Add 135 degrees to the bearing of the first leg of the transect to determine the direction of the second leg of the transect. The intent of this level of sampling for a general assessment is to draw an unbiased sample, not to achieve true randomness. Determine the distance between sample points along the transect by one of the following two methods: 1) Pace off the distance from the center starting point to the edge of the treatment area for each leg of the transect and divide by 50, which determines the number of paces between sample points; or 2) Use an arbitrarily fixed distance between sample points (for example 15 feet) and develop a “rule” for what to do if the edge of the activity area is reached before all 50 points are observed (for example, turn right or left 315 degrees to extend the transect back into the treatment area). Either method may be used as long as it is used consistently.

Sampling Protocols

Cover: Making the Estimate: Ground Cover is estimated using the toe point method. At each plot (as determined by the end of the observer’s foot) examine the area, about one foot in diameter, directly in front of the center of the toe, determine If the ground has adequate cover. Adequate cover is defined as: Adequate ground cover is material in contact with the soil that consists of living plants, slash, litter, duff mat and rock fragments that are of sufficient size (> ¾ inch in diameter) to break the impact of raindrops and serve as a filter media for overland flow. Classify each plot as having ground cover, or not having ground cover. Percentages are determined by: (Total Points with Adequate Cover/Total Points) X 100 = % Ground Cover Sediment To Channel: While walking the road transect, follow any rill or gullies, or deposition of sediment to their terminus, and observe if these erosion features reached a stream channel. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. The presence of rills, gullies or

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 87 -88-

deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel, more frequently, there will be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel.

Excavations: Erosion Below Excavation: Also note the condition of the area below features that drain the excavation. These can be designed or engineered structures such as dips, drains or culverts, or could be natural features such as rills or gullies. You are asked to rate if there is rilling below the base of the area disturbed by the excavation, and if the rills continue for at least 20 ft onto undisturbed ground. Rills are depressions on the ground surface caused by the washing away of soil. Cover: Use the toe-point method described above under “roads”.

Sediment To Channel: Along the downslope border of the excavation, look for evidence of sediment traveling to the channel. Normally, sediment will be transported in rills or gullies, or, less commonly by sheet erosion. In most cases a Streamside Management Zone will be present between the excavation and the channel, and typically ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope. Rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. Rills and gullies should be obvious, and if located should be followed downslope to determine if they continue through the SMZ to the channel. There may or may not be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel; the presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel.

Work Areas: Surface Treatment: Determine if the work area has been ripped or otherwise treated to increase infiltration and reduce runoff. Erosion Below Work Area, Cover And Sediment To Nearest Channel: Repeat the procedures outlined for these criteria as explained above under Excavations. The criteria should be based on a complete survey of the Process Area, with special attention given to the downslope or downstream border of the area.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 88 -89-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation E20 Management of Roads During Wet Periods (Reference BMP 2.24, 7.7)

Header Information Unique To This Form Road Has Been Treated For Wet Season Use: Check this box if the road was intended for wet weather use, and designed and constructed to meet that objective. Road Has Been Designated For Seasonal Operation: Check this box if the road was not intended for wet weather traffic. Closed: Check this box if the road has been seasonally closed to prevent wet weather traffic.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a sample pool that includes: Any road that has been:  treated for wet season use  designed for seasonal operations  closed for wet weather damage protection From this pool, randomly select a number of roads equal to the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation Effectiveness evaluations should be timed to assess effects of wet season use. Therefore, should be conducted following the wet season before maintenance or onset of normal use. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the road has been closed (for closures) or after the road construction is complete (for seasonal use) and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of E20 is rated for two factors, and involves a combination of field review and survey of Road Management Objectives and Road Construction Contracts, Road Closure Plan, Environmental document and other documents that outline closure specifications to determine: If the road management or closure plan called for barriers, determine if they were installed as planned.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 89 -90-

If any other road closure measures (e.g., gates) or wet weather protection measures (e.g., surfacing) were required, and if so, if they were implemented. Be sure to check the appropriate box or boxes in the header to indicate the type of closure and/or protection measures taken.

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating the Sample Site Locate a 0.1 mile transect along the selected road by first walking or driving the entire road, and enumerating all the channel crossings (those with culverts, bridges or fords). Randomly select one crossings to serve as the transect midpoint. From this starting point, walk the road for 0.05 miles (approximately 260 ft) away from the crossing. If the selected road is less than 0.05 mile in either direction, walk the road to its terminus. During the survey, observe the road surface, cut slope and fill slope for evidence of soil and water movement. At points where rills or gullies leave the road surface or cross the fill slope, it will be necessary to follow these features downslope of the road surface to their terminus, to determine both their length, and if material has entered stream channels.

Sampling Protocols

Road Surface: Rilling: As the length of road is surveyed, keep a cumulative count (paces) of the length of road surface on which rills are present. Rills are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 20 feet in length. When the entire road length has been surveyed, estimate the percent of the length with rilling. You must also assess if rills present continue off the road surface (to a ditch or fillslope). Rutting: When vehicles are run on wet dirt roads, rutting may result. As you survey the road segment, observe and estimate the length of the segment that has discernable ruts deep enough to channel water.

Sediment To Channel: While walking the road transect, follow any rill or gullies, or deposition of sediment to their terminus, and observe if these erosion features reached a stream channel. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter the SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. The presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel, more frequently, there will be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 90 -91-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation R22 Developed Recreation Sites (Reference BMP 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.9, 4.10)

Header Information Unique To This Form Year Facility Constructed: Give the year construction of the site was completed or an estimate of when use started. Nearest Stream Of Lake: Give the name of the nearest lake or watercourse to the recreational facility. If it is unnamed, insert “unnamed tributary to the ______.” Facility Operated By: If facility is operated by the Forest Service, check the appropriate box; if operated by concessionaire, provide the name of the concessionaire.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a sample pool that includes all developed recreation sites on the Forest where the Forest Service provides a service as sanitation, water refuse removal, etc.. This may include sites as campgrounds, vistas, day use areas, boat ramps, and staging areas. From this pool, randomly select sites to equal the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation All sites selected should have gone through at least one winter season following construction of the site. Evaluation of implementation should always be completed prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation is rated for six factors, and involves a combination of field survey and review of Forest Service Manuals and publications, applicable Special Use Permits and contracts, and monitoring and survey records. The six factors are refuse disposal, sanitation facilities, groundcover, stream protection, washing facilities within 100 feet of stream and runoff control. Conduct a Paper Review to Determine: When the site is operated under concessionaire Special Use Permit or contract; are the provisions of the contract, Special Use Permit or Operating Plan being implemented? If site has fuel storage, complete a ‘Servicing and Refueling evaluation, E12. If the facility is operated by the Forest Service, that it conforms to standards set forth in FS Special Report 8023 1801 July 1980 (Updated March1988) “Cleaning Recreation Sites,” FSM 2330 (2332 Operation and Maintenance), “In-Depth Design and Maintenance for Vault Toilets” (Sept 1991) and the Land and Resource Management Plan.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 91 -92-

Conduct a Field Review to Determine: If sources that could degrade water quality, such as toilets, garbage containers and garbage, cleaning agents, fuel, etc. are located at least 100 feet from lakes and streams.

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Site If the site is a campground and has more than one spur or loop, randomly select a spur or loop for the survey. Otherwise, base evaluation on a survey of the entire site. This survey should be made on foot, and include visual inspection of toilet facilities, refuse disposal facilities, water faucets and hydrants, and a transect along the edge of the site that is closest to the nearest water body. If the facility is situated between more than one water body, include a survey of all boundaries of the site. Also survey along the edge of the nearest stream(s) or lake, if one (or more) is located within 250’ of the facility boundary.

Sampling Protocols

Sanitation Facilities: Visually inspect each restroom facility for evidence of contamination of water quality. For facilities with vault toilets, problems could occur from either cracked or leaky vaults, or wash water from facility cleaning. Although hard to detect, leaking vaults might be evidenced by lusher vegetation around the facility than is present elsewhere in the site. A better indicator of leaks is if the vaults will fill with water during the winter; ask the recreation managers. If excessive water is used to wash facilities, then rills or gullies may be evident around the structure. If the facility has flush toilets, sewer lines and lines to the leach field should be checked for lush vegetation that might indicate leaks. In addition, septic tank locations should be checked for evidence of overflow. NOTE: If leakage is suspected but cannot be confirmed, methods to test for leakage should be employed, such as coliform bacteria analysis or dye tracing.

Refuse: Garbage collection and storage areas should be checked for obvious evidence of water quality degradation. Rills or gullies leaving storage sites, or drainage of paved sites to ditches or channels are evidence of possible runoff problems. Worst-case situation would be location of garbage close enough to drainage systems or water bodies where direct contamination is possible.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 92 -93-

Hydrants and Faucets: Inspect each faucet or hydrant for evidence that it has been the site of washing, cleaning, fish gutting, etc. If the faucet has been designated for that purpose, evaluate with regard to proximity to surface water.

Sediment: While walking the boundary(s) between the site and the nearest water body follow any rills, gullies or sediment deposition to their terminus, and observe if these erosion features reached a stream channel. The presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel; frequently, there will be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel.

Runoff: Locate release point(s) for runoff collected on impervious surfaces e.g. roads, trails, and parking lots. Observe dispersion of collected runoff at point of release and assess trap efficiency with regard to runoff reaching surface water.

SMZ Ground Cover: Randomly establish a transect within the SMZ located halfway between the developed recreation site and the high water mark. At equal intervals take ten ground cover measurements within a one-foot diameter circle around the point. Average the ten values to derive an average ground cover for the SMZ. Evaluate this average figure against Forest wide ground cover objectives where available or the default value of 60%.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 93 -94-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation R23 Location of Stock Facilities in Wilderness (Reference BMP 4.10)

Header Information Unique To This Form Wilderness Area: Provide the name. Type Of Facility: Indicate if the facility evaluated is a corral, holding area, water/feeding area, hitchline, group camp or other high use area. Facility Operated By: If the Forest Service operates facility, write FS, if operated by concessionaire or Special Use Permitted, provide the name of the operator. Operating Season: Indicate the normal operating season of the facility (e.g. June 1 - Sept 30).

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a pool that includes all stock facilities (corrals, holding, watering feeding areas, etc.) located within or serving wilderness. From this sample pool, randomly select a number of allotments to equal the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation Evaluation of implementation must be completed at the end of the grazing season and prior to (or coincident with) the effectiveness determinations. Effectiveness measurements should therefore also be conducted at the end of the grazing season.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation is rated for two factors, and involves a combination of field survey and review of the applicable Forest Service Manual and Handbooks, Wilderness Implementation Plan and applicable Special Use Permits. Conduct a paper review to determine:  If the facility is designed and operated as per direction in the Wilderness Implementation Plan or Special Use Permit. Conduct a Field Review to Determine:  That the facility is located greater than one hundred feet from the nearest lake or stream channel.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 94 -95-

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Site Evaluation of Effectiveness is based on a survey of the land downslope of the stock facility. The observer should walk a transect along the perimeter of the facility through which water runoff would have to flow to reach nearby channels or lakes.

Sampling Protocols Along this transect, the observer should look for evidence of sediment being transported to channels or lakes. Transport would most likely by rills or gullies that originate or pass through the stock facility, and if any rills or gullies are found, they should be followed downslope to see if they reach channels or lakes. Less likely, but possible is the transport of sediment by sheet erosion. If sheet erosion is occurring, then there should be evidence of recent sediment deposition behind obstructions or in depressions. When sediment is found, the deposition should be tracked downslope to see if there is indication of delivery of sediment to channels or lakes. Along the transect, also look for evidence that any other contaminants, such as feed or animal waste, have been transported to watercourses or lakes.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 95 -96-

On-Site Evaluation G24 Range Management (Reference BMP 8.1, 8.2, 8.3) revised 8/01/2001

Header Information Unique to this Form Allotment: Give the name of the allotment being evaluated. Type of Grazing System: Give the name of the grazing system (e.g., rest rotation) that is prescribed in the Allotment Management Plan (AMP) or the Annual Operating Instructions (AOI). Database allows the following valid answers (with definition): (1) season-long: livestock anywhere, prescribed period of time [season], (2) year-long: livestock anywhere, anytime, (3) deferred rotation: livestock turned out into defined pastures as “ready” (other pastures deferred until “ready”); livestock rotated among pastures, (4) rest rotation: livestock turned out into defined pastures as “ready” (other pastures not used - “rested”); livestock rotated among pastures not being “rested,” (5) once over: livestock turned out, then removed after “once over” grazing, and (6) other: not equivalent to those above. If a different system appears to actually be in use, give the prescribed system and note the discrepancy in the “comment” section under implementation. Pasture or Management Unit: Give the name or number of the unit pasture being evaluated. Season of Use: Give the prescribed season of use from the Allotment Management Plan (AMP) or the Annual Operating Plan (AOI). Kind and Class of Livestock: Give the kind and class of livestock that are allowed to graze on the unit being evaluated as prescribed in the Allotment Management Plan (AMP) or the Annual Operating Plan (AOP). If this differs from the actual use, give the actual use and note the discrepancy in the “comment” section under implementation. Type of Channel: Response channel has a gradient less than 2%. Type of Lentic Habitat: Choose between a spring, fen (lowland with water) or natural pond.

Developing the Sample Pool and Selecting the Evaluation Sites If the Forest or District range monitoring schedule includes a random selection of key and/or critical areas, randomly select from among the allotments already selected, to equal the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year. Otherwise, using all active grazing allotments on the Forest, develop a pool of those that are in use for the season in question. From this sample pool, randomly select a number of allotments to equal the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Who Should Conduct the Evaluations Completing this evaluation properly requires knowledge of Forest Service Range Management policies and procedures, rangeland science and channel dynamics. It is strongly recommended

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 96 -97-

that the evaluation be conducted by a team that includes both range and watershed/fisheries expertise. Including range permitees and representatives of regulatory agencies in the evaluation is also encouraged.

Conducting the Implementation Rating Conduct a paper review to determine if site-specific Standards & Guidelines or objectives for the following elements have been developed for this allotment and implemented via the Annual Operating Instructions (AOI), grazing permit, or Allotment Management Plan (AMP).  herbaceous utilization or residual forage  woody utilization  streambank disturbance (streambank alteration or comparable measure) For herbaceous utilization or residual forage indicate which of the following methods was used:  Stubble Height  Visual Observation – Roble Pole  Comparative Yield  Paired Plot  Ocular Estimate  Key Species  Height-Weight  Actual Weight  Grazed-Class  Landscape Appearance

For woody utilization indicate which of the following methods was used:  Twig Length Measurement  Cole Browse  Extensive Browse

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 97 -98-

For streambank disturbance indicate which of the following methods was used:  Representative Reach  Point  Plot  Other: ______

Conduct a field review to determine the degree that Standards & Guidelines or objectives have been met for the following attributes:  Herbaceous utilization or residual forage  Woody utilization  Streambank disturbance

Locating Implementation Sample Points Measurements of implementation attributes are conducted at the locations selected for allotment compliance.

Implementation Sampling Protocols These measurements are made following the protocols provided in the R5 Rangeland Analysis and Planning Guide (section 4b – “Utilization Studies and Residual Measurements”, and section 5b – “Streambank Alteration”). Tabulate and summarize the measurements, and compare the result with the Standard & Guideline or objective for that attribute, and check the appropriate column on the evaluation form. Attach copies of the data form to this evaluation. If Standards & Guidelines or objectives have not been met, use the space provided on the form to describe what, if any, actions have been taken to obtain or improve compliance. If no actions have been taken, so state.

Conducting The Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating the Sample Areas

Utilization or Key Area Transect: Locate a 2-leg, 100 point transect in the approximate center of the vicinity of the grazing unit’s (allotment, unit, or pasture) permanent utilization monitoring transect. If there is more than one utilization-monitoring site, evenly split the 100 sample points between the sites.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 98 -99-

If no utilization monitoring transects have been established for the grazing unit, select a “key area” using the guidelines set forth in the Region 5 “Rangeland Analysis and Planning Guide (section #A, chapter II.D. Location of Study Sites (pp. 3-4)). Additional guidance is provided in the video entitled “Selecting Key Areas and Key Species” (California Rangeland Interagency Video Series). These guides are available at each Forest Supervisor’s Office and Ranger District.

Riparian and Channel: Identify all low gradient channels at least 100 meters (~328 ft) in length (see definition below) within ½ mile of the area selected for the Utilization of Key Area Transect (UKAT) and within the same watershed as the UKAT. In circumstances where the only low gradient channels are less than 100 meters in length identify the longest reaches. If there is more than one low gradient channel, randomly select one as the location for the riparian and channel effectiveness measures. If no low gradient reaches are present within the ½ mile range described above, identify all steeper gradient channels at least 100 meters in length (see definition below) within the ½ mile range. If more than one channel is present, randomly select one as the riparian-channel location. If no low gradient or steep gradient channels are located within ½ mile of the UKAT, locate the closest channel that meets either channel type definition (at least 100 meters in length) to serve as the location of the riparian-channel measures.

Channel Type Definitions:

Low gradient channels (channels less than 2% gradient), typically have channel banks comprised of fine textured material, and would be classified as “C”, “D”, “E”, “F” or “G” channels using the Rosgen Classification system and as “Response” channels using the classification system developed by Montgomery and Buffington. Steeper gradient channels (channels greater than 2% but less than 4% gradient) typically have channel banks with at least some rock and would be classified as “B” channels using the Rosgen Classification system and as “Transport” channels using the classification system developed by Montgomery and Buffington.

If available, sample stream reaches must be at least 100 meters in length, otherwise, include the entire reach of less than 100 meters length in the sample. The sample reach should include only one channel type, and should not include confluence with a channel large enough to influence the effectiveness criteria. Breaks between channel types and channel confluence should serve as breaks between stream reaches.

In the field, determine the length of the selected sample reach. If the reach is equal to or less than 1000 meters (~3,280 ft) in length, measurements will be at transects placed along the entire reach. If the reach is greater than 1000 meters, then a 1000-meter length must be chosen at random from within the entire reach. To do this, after measuring the length of the sample reach, subtract 1000 meters. The difference is the length within where the start of the survey segment is

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 99 -100-

randomly selected. For example, if the sample reach is 1,750 meters long, subtracting 1000 meters equals 750 meters. Determine a random number between 0 and 750 (a list of random numbers is included in the Stream Condition Inventory protocols). The selected number is the distance downstream from the 1000-meter survey segment, where the survey will begin. Thus, if 350 is selected as the random number, the survey begins 350 meters upstream of the beginning of the sample reach (and ends at 1350 meters along the 1750 meters sample reach). Lentic Habitats (springs, fens, natural ponds): Evaluations are made of one natural pond, spring or fen, if present. From the downstream extent of the sample stream reach, locate the nearest natural pond, spring or fen. This may be based on existing surveys, inventories and maps if available, or use of aerial photos or field survey if information on location is unavailable. Do not conduct this portion of the evaluation if no such habitats are located within 1 mile of the stream reach.

Locating Sample Points

Utilization or Key Area Transect: For Groundcover: For each site being surveyed, randomly determine the compass bearing of the first leg of the transect. This can be done by throwing a pointed stick in the air and using the direction it points after landing on the ground. Add 135 degrees to the bearing of the first leg of the transect to determine the direction of the second leg of the transect. The intent of this level of sampling for a general assessment is to draw an unbiased sample, not to achieve true randomness. Determine the distance between sample points along the transect by one of the following two methods:  Pace off the distance from the center starting point to the edge of the utilization monitoring area for each leg of the transect and divide by 50 (or ½ of the number of sample points allocated to the area), which determines the number of paces between sample points: or  Use an arbitrarily fixed distance between sample points (for example 15 feet) and develop a “rule” for what to do if the edge of the area is reached before all the sample points are observed (for example, turn right or left 315 degrees to extend the transect back into the treatment area). Either method may be used as long is it is used consistently. For Rilling: Use the same transect as for groundcover measurements.

Riparian and Channel: For Bank Stability and Floodplain Erosion: Evaluate the streambank stability and floodplain for evidence of grazing related erosion at each of 20 equally spaced transects along the sample reach. Obviously, the interval between transects will vary with the length of the sensitive reach. At each transect, locate a 30cm (~ 1 ft) wide plot to assess bank stability, and a 3 meter (~ 10 ft) wide strip, wide, oriented perpendicular to the valley axis for evaluation of floodplain erosion. Evaluate the strip out to both edges of the floodplain or a lateral distance of 10 times the average bank full width from the channel margin, whichever is less.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 100 -101-

For Herbaceous Vegetation and Riparian Vegetation: Evaluation of the entire sample reach is required. As the reach is walked, collect information on these riparian indicators.

Lentic Habitats (springs, fens, natural ponds): For Waterflow and Extent, Habitat Disturbance, Riparian Vegetation: Rating of criteria is based on an ocular survey of the lentic feature, and the vegetation and landscape surrounding the habitat that affects its surface hydrology and microclimate.

Sampling Protocols

Utilization or Key Area Transect Indicators: Groundcover: Groundcover is estimated using the toe point method. At each plot (as determined by the end of the observer’s foot) examine the area, about 1 foot diameter, directly in front of the center of the toe, determine if the ground has adequate cover. Adequate cover is defined as: Adequate ground cover is material in contact with the soil that consists of living plants, slash, litter, duff mat and rock fragments that are of sufficient size (> ¾ inch in diameter) to break the impact of raindrops and serve as a filter media for overland flow. Classify each plot as having ground cover sufficient to meet standards and guidelines, or as not having ground cover sufficient to meet standards and guidelines. Percent groundcover is determined by: Total Plots Meeting Cover S&Gs = % Groundcover Rilling: As the groundcover transect is walked, keep a running count of the number rills that are crossed. Rills are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are at least 10 feet long. Determine the number of rills per 20 feet using this formula: (Total number of rills tallied x 20) / (Total length of transect in feet).

Riparian and Channel Indicators:

Bank Stability: This criteria requires the evaluators to observe both channel banks at each of the 20 equally spaced transects, and place the stability plot into one of three stability classes by applying the following procedure:

A) Identify the base of the stream bank. It is the point of greatest slope between the streambed and streambank. B) Locate the point on the streambank where cover is first encountered above the streambed or at the bankfull level, whichever occurs first. Begin the stability plot at that point and extend it upwards as follows:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 101 -102-

Figure 1. Illustration of streambank stability locations and transect layout.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 102 -103-

1) For low gradient channels, to the crest of the first convex slope above bankfull. This is usually a terrace of an alluvial fan (figure 1.) 2) For steeper gradient channels, to the crest of the first convex slope above bankfull or twice maximum bankfull depth, whichever occurs first. Twice maximum bankfull depth is approximate level of the 50 year flood and may be encountered before a slope break occurs on confined channels.

C) Record the following streambank stability class for each plot:

1) Stable- A stable steambank plot has 75% or more cover of living plants and or other stability components, which are note easily eroded, and has no indicator of instability. 2) Vulnerable- A vulnerable steambank plot has 75% or more cover but has one or more instability indicators. 3) Unstable- An unstable streambank plot has less than 75% cover and may have instability indicators. Unstable steambanks are often bare banks composed of particle sizes too small or uncohesive to resist erosion at high flows.

Cover Components Defined:

Live Plants- (1) perennial herbaceous species such as grass-sedge-rush; (2) woody shrubs (willows, etc.); (3) broadleaf trees (cottonwood, aspen, alder, etc.); (4) conifer trees, and (5) plant roots which are on or near the surface of the streambank and provide substantial binding strength to the substrate beneath.

Rock- boulders (>256 mm), bedrock and cobble/boulder aggregates when combined as a stable mass.

Down Wood- Logs firmly embedded into banks.

Erosion Resistant Streambank Soil- In very limited cases, hardened conglomerate or cohesive clay-silt banks.

Instability Indicators Defined:

Fracturing, blocking or slumping- These features include cracks near the top of the streambank (often parallel to with flow), slumping banks without cracks, and blocks or

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 103 -104-

soil/plan material, which have fallen off or have been pushed down the bank. Usually associated with streams with gradients <2% and fine textured banks.

Mass Movement- These features include bank failure from deep-seated landslides and gravity erosion of oversteepened slopes adjacent to the channel. Usually associated with steeper gradient streams.

Use the back of the form to keep a running tally of the number of plots that fall into each of the three categories Use this tally to determine the percentage of stable banks (number of stable plots times 2.5) and determine the summary rating for entry on the front of the form.

Floodplain Erosion: At each of the 20 equally spaced transects, look for evidence of erosion that is related to grazing along each 3-meter (~10 ft) wide strip. Rate strips that have rills and isolated small scour holes as minor erosion; rate strips that have gullies, large scour holes, or numerous small scour holes as major erosion. These features may be related to grazing if they are associated with livestock trails, with inadequate cover or with poor vigor of floodplain vegetation that has been caused by livestock grazing. If erosion features are present, but are associated with upstream or upland conditions rather than with conditions induced by grazing of the floodplain, do not count as grazing related floodplain erosion (for example, if a gully traverses the floodplain, but originates from a road culvert and the floodplain vegetation is not overgrazed, this would be tallied as not showing grazing related floodplain erosion). Use the back of the form to keep a running tally of the number of sample strips that fall into each of the three categories (no erosion, minor erosion, or major erosion). Use this tally to determine the number of sample points per category, and to determine the summary rating for entry on the front of the form.

Riparian Vegetation: Evaluators base their rating on characteristics observed throughout the entire sample reach. If woody riparian vegetation is present on greater than 20% of the reach length, then its’ condition is rated based on the age class distribution present. The illustrations (figure 2) and descriptors are used to place the reach in the appropriate category. In some cases, woody vegetation will not be present, and the rating will then be based on the composition of herbaceous species and other vegetation present. For cases where woody vegetation is present, evaluators are asked to factor the loss of shade into the rating. Only shade loss attributable to livestock should be considered.

Herbaceous Vegetation: Evaluators should have a working knowledge of herbaceous vegetation evaluation techniques, including plant identification, in order to appropriately rate this indicator. Evaluators base their rating on characteristics observed throughout the entire sample reach. Herbaceous vegetation condition is rated based on the age class distribution present, as indicated by the proportion of species in one of three mid to late seral stage categories: a) > 50%,

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 104 -105-

b) 30 – 50%, and c) < 30 %. Examples of mid to late seral stage herbaceous vegetation include sod-forming perennial grasses and grass like plants such as beaked sedge, wide-fruited sedge, Kellogg sedge, Nevada rush, swordlike sedge, great basin wildrye and short-hair sedge

Lentic Aquatic Habitat Indicators: Water Flow and Extent: This criterion requires the observer to assess if the flow conditions and area extent of the habitat appear stable, or have been altered as a result of livestock use. Livestock trampling of some habitat types (e.g. springs) can enlarge the saturated area, and is considered a negative impact in this evaluation. Changes in flow may result from chiseling, sloughing or trailing diverting flow away from the habitat, or by breaking down containment features, which alter outflow. Such changes in flow might result in a reduction in the size of the habitat, or a reduction in the period of time the unit is inundated or saturated. The observer is asked to assess the near and within habitat vegetation for signs of change and to look at the habitat and the area around the habitat that might contribute surface or near surface flow, for evidence that cattle trails and hoof prints have changed the flow pattern or flow regime. Habitat Disturbance: The rating is based on the degree to which livestock have impacted the site. Impacts are in the form of hoof prints, trails, and sloughing due to livestock use. Riparian Vegetation: Observe the vegetation near and surrounding the habitat, and select the description that best fits the condition of vegetation in terms of seral stage diversity, and ability to provide shade and maintain microclimate characteristics of the site. Only shade loss attributable to livestock should be considered. The illustrations (figure 2) and descriptors are used to place the reach in the appropriate category. In some cases, woody vegetation will not be present naturally, and the rating will be based on the composition of the herbaceous species and other vegetation present.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 105 -106-

Figure 2. Woody Vegetation Age Classes

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 106 -107-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation F25 Prescribed Fire (Reference BMP 6.2, 6.3)

Header Information Unique To This Form Unit: If activity was treatment of a timber sale unit, give the unit number. If specific units are not relevant to the activity, enter NA. Date Burn Completed: Give the date that the burn was finished. Distance To Nearest Channel: Give the approximate distance, in feet, to the nearest channel (any channel that carries water at any time of the year and has some evidence of annual scour).

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites All prescribed fires for which a broadcast burn plan has been prepared are to be evaluated; up to the point where 5 evaluations have been completed. Evaluations beyond 5 are optional.

Timing Of The Evaluation Conduct the effectiveness evaluation for all criteria after the prescribed burn area has been subjected to at least one but not more than two winter seasons. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after prescribed burn has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of F25 is rated for two factors, and involves a combination of field survey and review of the EA, prescribed burn plan, burn report and field review to determine: If the burn plan prescription was developed to meet objectives for soil and water protection e.g. LRMP, R5 Soil Quality Standards, and/or EA requirements, protections might include fuel moisture limitations, specifications for timing of burn (time of year), irrigation of streamside zones, limitations on tractor fire lines, etc. If the burn as implemented met the prescription.

 NOTE: The F25 evaluation is to be conducted as part of the Post-Burn Evaluation required for all broadcast burn plans (FSM 5140)

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 107 -108-

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Points Upslope Evaluations (Groundcover, Hydrophobic Soils and Rilling):

For Groundcover: Locate a 2-leg, 100-point transect in the approximate center of each unit selected for measurement. If the burn resulted in patches of unburned vegetation, center the transect on burned ground nearest the center of the unit. Randomly determine the compass bearing of the first leg of the transect. This can be done by throwing a spinning stick in the air and using the direction it points after resting on the ground. Add 135 degrees to the bearing of the first leg of the transect to determine the direction of the second leg of the transect. The intent of this level of sampling for a general assessment is to draw an unbiased sample, not to achieve true randomness. Determine the distance between sample points along the transect by one of the following two methods: 1) Pace off the distance from the center starting point to the edge of the treatment area for each leg of the transect and divide by 50, which determines the number of paces between sample points; or 2) Use an arbitrarily fixed distance between sample points (for example 15 feet) and develop a “rule” for what to do if the edge of the activity area is reached before all 50 points are observed (for example, turn right or left 315 degrees to extend the transect back into the treatment area). Either method may be used as long as it is used consistently.

For Hydrophobic Soils: Use the same transect as for Groundcover, taking a measurement at every fifth ground cover point to yield twenty sample points.

For Rilling: Use the same transect as for groundcover measurements. SMZ Evaluations (Canopy Cover, Ground Cover and Sediment to Channel): Survey the entire length of the SMZ. If more than one SMZ is located in the selected unit. Select one at random. To locate sample points for Groundcover measurements, use a map to estimate the length of each SMZ. It is preferable to underestimate this length rather than overestimate to ensure that 100 sample points will be obtained. Divide the estimated length by one hundred. The resulting value is the distance (in feet) between sample points, for the unit. Pace a transect that bisects the SMZ (halfway between the channel bank and SMZ boundary) parallel to the stream, taking measurements at intervals as determined above, until 100 points are taken.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 108 -109-

Control measurements for canopy cover are located 100 feet upstream and downstream of the unit evaluated. Canopy cover sample points within the unit are located 100 feet upstream and downstream of the unit boundary. Sediment to Channel observations are made along the SMZ Groundcover Transect.

Sampling Protocols

Groundcover and SMZ Groundcover: Determine SMZ ground cover objective from Forest LMP project plan or EA. Enter on form. Ground Cover is estimated using the toe point method. At each plot (as determined by the end of the observer’s foot) examine the area, about 1 foot diameter, directly in front of the center of the toe, determine if the ground has adequate cover. Adequate cover is defined as: Adequate ground cover is material in contact with the soil that consists of living plants, slash, litter, duff mat and rock fragments that are of sufficient size (> ¾ inch in diameter) to break the impact of raindrops and serve as a filter media for overland flow. Classify each plot as having ground cover, or not having ground cover. For SMZ Groundcover, if both sides of an SMZ have been affected, then a transect should be run on each side of the stream. Percentages are determined by: Total Points with Adequate Cover = % Ground Cover

Hydrophobic Soils: Determine objective from Forest LMP, project plan or EA. Enter on form. Consult a soil scientist or hydrologist for answers to any questions raised by the following description of hydrophobic soils assessment. The variation of hydrophobicity will be analyzed as a discrete variable. This requires that the question being asked have two possible outcomes, only one of which can occur. In this case, field personnel will determine if the soil is hydrophobic at a depth of six inches or at the average depth that occurs in preburn conditions. Forest Service Handbook 2509.13 Burn Area Emergency Rehabilitation Handbook, Chapter 20, 30.31 Hydrophobicity, contains guidance for assessing the degree and class of hydrophobicity for a project area. Naturally hydrophobic soils are assumed to be present in some pre-burn watershed conditions. Pre-burn repellency may be confined to the soil-duff interface, although evaluation of soils in an unburned white fir stand on the Tahoe NF indicated natural repellency extending 8- to 10-inches below the surface. These natural conditions make it impossible to determine the degree or a real extent of hydrophobicity induced by wildfire or prescribed fire, unless pre-burn conditions are known. When measuring hydrophobicity in areas where hydrophobic soils occur naturally, pre- burn hydrophobicity should be determined using the procedures outlined below.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 109 -110-

To determine hydrophobicity at six inches, dig a shallow trench with one to two inch horizontal steps one inch deep to a total of six inches. Apply droplets in one inch increments to the dry soil surfaces. An alternative technique is to remove a slice of soil at least six inches deep, without mixing soils from depths greater than six inches, and apply water droplets to the dry soil. The soil will be considered hydrophobic if the water drop remains intact on the soil for greater than 5 seconds at any point within the 6-inch profile. Determining area extent of hydrophobicity: Count the number of points testing positive for hydrophobicity, divide the total number of points by 20 and then multiply the result by 100. This percentage is an estimate of the percent of area within the unit that is hydrophobic. Depending upon the precision of the hydrophobic objective for the project, statistical tests can be performed to determine the variance at given confidence intervals.

Rilling: As the groundcover transect is walked, keep a running count (paces) of the number of rills that are crossed. Rills are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 10 feet long.

Canopy Cover: Determine SMZ canopy cover objective from Forest LMP, project plan or EA. Enter on form. Canopy Density is estimated using a Solar Pathfinder. At each sample location, level the instrument facing south at a height comfortable to the observer. Trace the boundary between the unobstructed sky and objects (trees, ridges, etc.) on the horizon as reflected on the instrument’s dome, as viewed no more than 15 degrees from vertical, at a distance of 12 to 18 inches. Unless another time period is considered the most critical, use the Pathfinder’s August sunbath for the evaluation. Add the shaded sections across the sunbath to yield the % shading for the sample. Average the measurements from the two control stations to determine the control value. Average the measurements from the three treatment (within unit) stations to derive the treatment value.

Sediment To Channel: Along the transect, look for evidence of sediment passing through the SMZ to the channel. Normally, sediment will be transported in rills or gullies, or, less commonly by sheet erosion. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. Rills and gullies should be obvious, and if located, the ground cover transect should be interrupted to follow the rill or gully and determine if it continues through the SMZ to the channel. Sheet erosion will be evidenced by deposition of sediment behind downed logs, stems, twigs and topographic “rises”. When such features are encountered, the ground cover transect should be interrupted to seek evidence that sediment reached the channel. There may or may not be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel, the presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel. R-5 BMPEP

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 110 -111-

On-Site Evaluation M26 Mining Operations (Locatable Minerals) (Reference BMP 3.1)

Header Information Unique To This Form Mine Name: Give the name of the mine or claim that is being evaluated. Type Of Operation: Check the box that represents the type of mining operation being evaluated either dredging (include recreational), exploration, or other. The “other” category includes operations with extraction, processing and other mining operations. Activity Status: Check the box that represents the status of the mining operation being evaluated. Options are active, reclamation active, reclamation complete, or other. Description of Operation: Briefly describe the operation being evaluated. Include the components of the operation (access, extraction, processing, occupancy, etc.) the area involved and other pertinent information. Hazmats Stored On-Site: Indicate if there are hazardous materials stored on-site at the time of the evaluation. Type (of Hazmats Stored On-Site): List the kinds and amounts of hazardous materials stored on-site.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a sample pool of all active mining operations with operating plans as well as those that terminated the previous year. From this pool, randomly select a number of operations equal to the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation Locatable or leasable mining operations selected for evaluations should have gone through at least one winter season following commencement of activity (exploration, road construction, processing, etc.) before effectiveness is evaluated. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the activity has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Assessing implementation of this BMP involves review of Operating Plans, Environmental Documents, and any other documents (Biological Opinions, Waste Discharge Requirements, etc.) to determine what controls were planned to protect water quality, followed by a field assessment to determine if the planned controls were applied on the ground. Office and field reviews are conducted to determine:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 111 -112-

1) Is an approved (and current) Plan of Operation on file for the mining activity? 2) If water quality protection measures were included in the Plan of Operations (or other document applicable to the operation, for example Biological Opinion, Waste Discharge Requirement, etc.) (insert NA if activity not applicable to the operation) for one or more of the following:  Access  Occupancy  Storage Areas  Human Waste and Refuse Disposal  Boundaries of Operation  Erosion Control (consider disturbed areas, tailings, overburden, roads, etc.)  Hazardous Materials  Water Use  Process Water Treatment or Disposal  Site Reclamation 3) Applicable protection measures were implemented for:  Access  Occupancy  Storage Areas  Waste and Refuse Disposal  Boundaries of Operation  Erosion Control (consider disturbed areas, tailings, overburden, roads, etc.)  Hazardous Materials  Water Use  Process Water Treatment or Disposal  Site Reclamation 4) If a reclamation bond or other surety is in place. 5) If the amount of the bond is sufficient to implement reclamation as described in the Plan of Operation. 6) Were reclamation measures implemented according to schedule? 7) Were measures implemented as planned?

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 112 -113-

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation For dredging/recreational mining, address only effectiveness criteria for roads, occupancy, water consumption and hazardous materials. Do not rate excavations, disposal areas or process areas.

Locating The Sample Site And The Sample Points

For Roads: Randomly select a road from within the area covered by the operating plan, or used by the operator under a Road Use Permit. Include those roads with channel crossings. If no roads have channel crossings, include those without crossings in the selection pool. Conduct BMPEP E08 (Road Surface, Drainage and Slope Protection) and E09 (Stream Crossings) evaluations for the selected road. If the selected road does not have a channel crossing, use the midpoint of the road as the start point for the E08 evaluation. In this case, no E09 evaluation would be conducted. If the selected road is less than 0.05 mile in either direction, walk the road to its terminus. On the E08 form, note the name of the mining operation on the header under “project.” Also check the “other” project description box and describe the project as a mining operation. On the E08 and E09 forms, enter M01 as the selection code on these forms (this is a new code as of 1999 and enables linking the road and mining evaluations).

For Areas of Occupancy: This will include all areas (active or reclaimed) that are the site of improvements not directly related to mineral processing. These include storage areas, housing areas, parking areas, etc. If the operation includes more than one such area, select the largest one for evaluation. Evaluation is based on a survey of the entire area, with a transect walked at the downslope (or downstream) edge of the occupancy area. Where evidence of erosion or flow (rills, ditches, etc.) is encountered, these features are followed to evaluate the disposition of sediment. Areas of refuse and sanitary facilities for human waste disposal are also surveyed.

For Surface Water Consumption Use and Process Water: Water is often consumed in the extraction of minerals. Examples would be wash plants or leach operations. Evaluation of Surface Water Consumption is based on observations of the stream from which water is diverted above and below the diversion. Observe the water system (source, process stream and disposal) from origin to end. Where leaks, or drainage features (ditches, outlet pipes, etc.) are encountered, follow them to evaluate the disposition of the water.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 113 -114-

Locating The Sample Site

For Excavations: This will include all areas (active or reclaimed) from which material is removed for mineral processing or extraction. If the operation includes more than one source area, randomly select one for evaluation. Evaluation is based on a survey of the entire area, with a transect walked at the downslope (or downstream) edge of the area disturbed by the excavation. Where evidence of erosion or flow (rills, ditches, etc.) are encountered, these features are followed to evaluate the disposition of sediment.

For Disposal Areas: Disposal areas include all sites (active or reclaimed) where material excavated during the operation is placed after use, and can include overburden, tailings, wash residue, etc. If the operation includes more than one such area, randomly select one for evaluation. Evaluation is based on a survey of the entire area, with a transect walked at the downslope (or downstream) edge of the disposal areas. Where evidence of erosion or flow (rills, ditches, etc.) is encountered, these features are followed to evaluate the disposition of sediment.

For Processing Areas: Processing areas include all locations where extracted minerals are processed or consolidated. Examples would be wash plants, leach pads, concentration tables, etc. Evaluation is based on a survey of the entire area with a transect walked at the downslope (or downstream) edge of the processing area. Where evidence of erosion or flow (rills, ditches, etc.) are encountered, these features are followed to evaluate the disposition of sediment.

For Hazardous Materials: Hazardous materials are sometimes used to extract or process minerals, and fuel and lubricants are often stored on mining sites. Evaluation is based on observations of all areas where hazardous materials are stored. Walk the perimeter of all storage areas. Where leaks or evidence of flow are encountered, follow them to their terminus to evaluate their disposition.

Sampling Protocols

Roads: Complete the E08-Road Surface Drainage and Slope Protection and E09-Stream Crossings (if applicable) evaluations following the appropriate protocols. On the E08 and E09 forms, enter M01 as the selection code (This is a new code as of 1999). Check the box to indicate these evaluations have been conducted.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 114 -115-

Occupancy Areas: Sediment to Channel: Along the perimeter of the area of occupancy, look for evidence of sediment traveling to the channel. Normally, sediment will be transported in rills or gullies, or, less commonly by sheet erosion. In most cases a Streamside Management Zone will be present between the excavation and the channel, and typically ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope. Rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. Rills and gullies should be obvious, and when encountered, follow them to determine if they continue through the SMZ to the channel. There may or may not be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel; the presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel. Refuse and Waste Disposal: Locate areas of waste and refuse disposal and sanitation facilities. The evaluation is based on the degree to which materials are safely contained, or conversely, pose a risk to water quality. Sites are evaluated based on their location relative to channels.

Surface Water Consumption And Process Water: Assessment of surface water consumption is based on visual comparison of water quantity above and below the point of diversion. Professional judgment is used to assess if beneficial uses have been impacted. For process water, walk the water system from origin to disposal, look for evidence of leaks, or intentional discharge. The intent of this criterion is to locate incidences of contaminated (silt- laden or untreated process water) entering channels or of risk of entering channels.

Excavations: Sediment To Channel: Along the downslope border of the excavation, look for evidence of sediment traveling to the channel. Normally, sediment will be transported in rills or gullies, or less commonly, by sheet erosion. In most cases a Streamside Management Zone will be present between the excavation and the channel, and typically ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope. Rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. Rills and gullies should be obvious, and if located, follow them downslope to determine if they continue through the SMZ to the channel. There may or may not be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel; the presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel.

Disposal Areas: Sediment To Channel: Repeat the procedures outlined for this criterion as explained above under Excavations. The criteria should be based on a complete survey of the disposal areas, with special attention given to the downslope or downstream border of the area. Consider tailings, overburden and other mine waste.

Process Areas: Sediment To Channel: Repeat the procedures outlined for this criterion as explained above under Excavations. The criteria should be based on a complete survey of the Process Area, with special attention given to the downslope or downstream border of the area.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 115 -116-

Hazardous Materials: Evaluate each area where hazardous materials are stored. The intent of this criterion is to identify areas where materials have entered or pose a risk or entry into channels.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 116 -117-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation M27 Common Variety Minerals (Reference BMP 3.2, 2.18)

Header Information Unique To This Form Project And Operator: Give the name of the site, and the Operator or Permit holder. If a Forest Service development, put FS. Permit Date: List the date that the permit to extract common variety mineral was signed. Activity Status: Give the status of the material extraction at the time the evaluation is being conducted. If extraction at the site is complete, and the area is idle or being restored, so indicate. Streamside Gravel Operation: Identify if mining site is a streamside gravel operation.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a list that includes all active common variety mineral operations that result in excavation or ground disturbance using mechanized equipment (such as removal of sand, gravel, cobble boulders, aggregate, riprap, etc). If the list contains more than 5 sites, randomly select 5 for evaluation. If the list is less than 5 sites, complete evaluations on all sites. Conduct evaluations for all sites on the list.

Timing Of The Evaluation Common variety mineral operations selected for objective evaluations should have gone through at least one winter season following commencement of activity (exploration, road construction, processing, etc.) before effectiveness is rated. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after material source development is underway, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Assessing implementation of this BMP varies depending on if the operation is a Forest Service or permitted project, and if the rock source is streamside gravel. All assessments involve a combination of office and field reviews. If the operation is a Forest Service project or development, a paper review is conducted to determine:  If a site development plan was prepared for the project.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 117 -118-

A field review is conducted to determine:  If water resource protection measures of the plan were implemented. Measures could include restrictions on area to be disturbed, the type of equipment to be used, timing of the operation, or provide for construction of sediment catchments or other erosion control structures or measures. If material removal is by a party other than the Forest Service, a paper review is conducted to determine:  If a Minerals Materials Permit was approved for the project. A field review is conducted to determine:  If water resource protection measures of the permit were implemented. Measures could include restrictions on area to be disturbed, the type of equipment to be used, timing of the operation, or provide for construction of sediment catchments or other erosion control structures or measures. If the activity involves removal of streamside gravels, then:  Conduct a review of the Development Plan (Forest Service Project) or Minerals Materials permit (Private Party project) to determine if leveling, shaping and drainage of the excavation was called for.  Conduct a field review to find if sediment basins were constructed for excavations deeper than the water table (excavations with standing or running water).

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Site And The Sample Points

For Excavations: This will include all areas (active) from which material is removed for mineral processing or extraction. If the operation includes more than one source area, randomly select one for evaluation. Evaluation is based on a survey of the entire area, with at minimum, a transect walked at the downslope (or downstream) edge of the area disturbed by the excavation.

For Processing Areas: Processing areas include all locations where extracted minerals are sorted, processed, consolidated or loaded. Examples would be wash plants, sorting screens, loading areas, etc. Evaluation is based on a survey of the entire area, with a transect walked at the downslope (or downstream) edge of the processing area.

For Roads:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 118 -119-

Randomly select a road from within the area covered by the development plan, or used by the operator under Road Use or Minerals Materials Permit authorizations. Locate a 0.1 mile transect along the selected road by first walking or driving the entire road, and enumerating all the channel crossings (those with culverts, bridges or fords). Randomly select one the crossings to serve as the transect midpoint. From this starting point, walk the road for 0.05 miles (approximately 260 ft) away from the crossing. If the selected road is less than 0.05 mile in either direction, walk the road to its terminus. During the survey, observe the road surface, cut slope and fill slope for evidence of soil and water movement. At points where rills or gullies leave the road surface or cross the fill slope, it will be necessary to follow these features downslope of the road surface to their terminus, to determine both there length, and if material has entered stream channels. On the E08 and E09 forms, enter M01 as the selection code on these forms (this is a new code as of 1999 and enables linking the road and mining evaluations).

Sampling Protocols

Excavations: Erosion Below Excavation: Note the condition of the area below features that drain the excavation. These can be engineered structures such as dips, drains or culverts, or could be natural features such as rills or gullies. You are asked to rate if there is rilling below the base of the area disturbed by the excavation, and if the rills are at least 10 feet onto undisturbed ground. Rills are depressions on the ground surface caused by the washing away of soil. Sediment To Channel: Along the downslope border of the excavation, look for evidence of sediment traveling to the channel. Normally, sediment will be transported in rills or gullies, or, less commonly by sheet erosion. In most cases a Streamside Management Zone will be present between the excavation and the channel, and typically ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope. Rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. Rills and gullies should be obvious, and if located followed downslope to determine if it continues through the SMZ to the channel. There may or may not be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel; the presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel.

Process Areas: Erosion And Sediment To Nearest Channel: Repeat the procedures outlined for the work area criteria as explained above under Excavations. The criteria should be based on a complete survey of the Process Area, with special attention given to the downslope or downstream border of the area.

Roads: Rilling: As the length of road is surveyed, keep a running count (paces) of the length of road surface on which rills are present. Rills are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 20 feet long. When the

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 119 -120-

entire road length has been surveyed, estimate the percent of the length with rilling. You must also assess if rills present continue off the road surface (to a ditch or fillslope). Drainage (Sediment Deposition Or Gullying): Sediment production may also be associated with road slopes or drainage features. Assess the extent of rilling, gullying or sediment deposition in relation to the roadway clearing limits. Evidence of gullies, rills or sediment deposition greater than 20 feet downslope of the clearing limits will score in the right hand column for this criterion. Sediment To Channel: While walking the road transect, follow any rill or gullies, or deposition of sediment to their terminus, and observe if these erosion features reached a stream channel. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the SMZ than upslope, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may enter SMZ but not pass to the stream channel. The presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel; more frequently, there will be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 120 -121-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation V28 Vegetation Manipulation (Reference BMP 5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.7)

Header Information Unique To This Form Type Of Project: Check the box that most closely fits the activity being evaluated. Project Completed By: If Forest Service personnel conducted the activity check “force account”; if completed by contractor, check “contract”.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a sample pool that includes all of the following activities that occurred in the previous year: 1) Seed Drilling on the contour. 5) Herbicide Pesticide Use 2) Tractor Windrowing on the Contour 6) Mastication 3) Contour Discing 4) Tractor Piling From this pool, randomly select a number of sites equal to the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year. Random selections can be made by assigning numbers to the units and generating random numbers, by placing slips of paper naming each unit in a hat and picking, or any other random method.

Timing Of The Evaluation All projects should have gone through at least one winter season following the activity before effectiveness is rated. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the activity has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation of V28 is rated for five factors, and involves review of Environmental Assessments, project plans and contracts and a field survey. Conduct a paper review to determine:  If project treatments were described and water quality impacts evaluated in the project environmental document.  If water quality protection measures were included in the project plan or contract.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 121 -122-

Conduct a Field Review to Determine:  If protection measures outlined in the environmental document and included in the contract or plan were implemented on the ground.  If the treatment described was implemented (e.g. areas planned for tractor piling were tractor piled) and that equipment proposed for activity was used (or equipment with less ground disturbance potential).  If the activity was conducted during the time period prescribed (following seasonal or soil moisture constraints). Review of project files may be necessary for this determination.

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Points

For Groundcover: Locate a 2-leg, 100-point transect in the approximate center of each unit selected for measurement. Randomly determine the compass bearing of the first leg of the transect. This can be done by throwing a spinning stick in the air and using the direction it points after resting on the ground. Add 135 degrees to the bearing of the first leg of the transect to determine the direction of the second leg of the transect. The intent of this level of sampling for a general assessment is to draw an unbiased sample, not to achieve true randomness. Determine the distance between sample points along the transect by one of the following two methods: (1) Pace off the distance from the center starting point to the edge of the treatment area for each leg of the transect and divide by 50, which determines the number of paces between sample points; or, (2) use an arbitrarily fixed distance between sample points (for example 15 feet) and develop a “rule” for what to do if the edge of the activity area is reached before all 50 points are observed (for example, turn right or left 315 degrees to extend the transect back into the treatment area). Either method may be used as long as it is used consistently.

For Rilling and Rutting: Use the same transect as for groundcover measurements.

For Sediment to Channel: Survey the entire length of unit along its downslope edge(s). Walk a transect approximately ten to twenty feet below the edge of the activity unit.

Sampling Protocols

Rilling:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 122 -123-

As the groundcover transect is walked, keep a running count (paces) of the number of rills that are crossed. Rills are depressions in the surface caused by the washing away of soil, which for the purposes of this survey, are greater than 10 feet long.

Rutting: As the groundcover transect is surveyed, keep a running count (paces) of the number of ruts that are crossed. Rutting is evidenced by the sunken tracks or grooves left by the passage of vehicles or machinery, usually made when the ground is wet or soft. Ruts for the purposes of this survey, are at least 2 inches deep.

Sediment to Channel: Along the transect walked below the downslope edge of the treatment unit, look for evidence of sediment passing to a channel. Normally, sediment will be transported in rills or gullies, or less commonly, by sheet erosion. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the downslope of the unit than in the treatment, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may leave the unit but not pass to the stream channel. Rills and gullies should be obvious, and if located, the transect should be interrupted to follow the rill or gully and determine if it continues to a channel. Sheet erosion will be evidenced by deposition of sediment behind down logs, stems, twigs and topographic “rises”. When such features are encountered, follow them downslope to see if sediment reached the channel. There may or may not be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel. The presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel.

Groundcover: Determine ground cover objective from Forest LMP, project plan or EA. Enter on form. Ground Cover is estimated using the toe-point method. At each plot (as determined by the end of the observer’s foot) examine the area, about one foot in diameter, directly in front of the foot; determine if the ground has adequate cover. Adequate cover is defined as: Adequate ground cover is material in contact with the soil that consists of living plants, slash, litter, duff mat and rock fragments that are of sufficient size (>3/4 inch in diameter) to break the impact of raindrops and serve as a filter media for overland flow. Classify each plot as having ground cover, or not having ground cover. The number of plot with adequate groundcover equals the percent groundcover.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 123 -124-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation V29 Revegetation of Surface Disturbed Areas (Reference BMP 5.4)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Status: Describe if project is active or completed, if active describe extent (approximate percentage) completed. Describe Project And Revegetation Objectives: Briefly outline the planned activity and its objective(s). Example: Ripping, seeding and mulching of old mining drill roads to establish at least 70% groundcover to prevent erosion.

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a list of areas with revegetation of surface disturbed areas treated the previous year. This will include areas revegetated as part of grazing allotment improvements, terms of mineral or Special Use Permits, watershed restoration projects. Do not include skid trails and landings revegetated under terms of the TSC, wildfires revegetated as part of a BAER, or fillslope and cutslope stabilization required in road construction or reconstruction. From this sample pool, randomly select a number of sites equal to the number assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation All projects should have gone through at least one winter season following the vegetation treatment before effectiveness is rated. Evaluation of implementation can be completed any time after the activity has been completed, and always prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating Implementation is rated for two factors, and involves review of Environmental Assessments, project plans and contracts and a field survey. Conduct a paper review to determine:  If the project plan or contract included specifications for surface revegetation. Conduct a Field Review to Determine:  If the revegetation requirements were implemented as planned.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 124 -125-

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Points

For Rilling and Groundcover: For Groundcover: Locate a 2-leg, 100 point transect in the approximate center of each unit selected for measurement. Randomly determine the compass bearing of the first leg of the transect. This can be done by throwing a spinning stick in the air and using the direction it points after resting on the ground. Add 135 degrees to the bearing of the first leg of the transect to determine the direction of the second leg of the transect. The intent of this level of sampling for a general assessment is to draw an unbiased sample, not to achieve true randomness. Determine the distance between sample points along the transect by one of the following two methods: (1) Pace off the distance from the center starting point to the edge of the treatment area for each leg of the transect and divide by 50, which determines the number of paces between sample points; or, (2) use an arbitrarily fixed distance between sample points (for example 15 feet) and develop a “rule” for what to do if the edge of the activity area is reached before all 50 points are observed (for example, turn right or left 315 degrees to extend the transect back into the treatment area). Either method may be used as long as it is used consistently. For Rilling: Use the same transect as for groundcover measurements.

Sediment to Channel: Survey the entire length of unit along its downslope edge(s). Walk a transect approximately ten to twenty feet below the edge of the activity unit.

Sampling Protocols Soil Surface:

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 125 -126-

Adequate ground cover is material in contact with the soil that consists of living plants, slash, litter, duff mat and rock fragments that are of sufficient size (>3/4 inch in diameter) to break the impact of raindrops and serve as a filter media for overland flow. Classify each plot as having ground cover, or not having ground cover. Percent groundcover equals the number of plots with adequate cover.

Sediment to Channel: Along the transect walked below the downslope edge of the treatment unit, look for evidence of sediment passing to a channel. Normally, sediment will be transported in rills or gullies, or less commonly, by sheet erosion. In most cases, ground cover will be higher in the downslope of the unit than in the treatment, and rills, gullies or fans of sediment may leave the unit but not pass to the stream channel. Rills and gullies should be obvious, and if located, the transect should be interrupted to follow the rill or gully and determine whether or not it continues to a channel. Sheet erosion will be evidenced by deposition of sediment behind down logs, stems, twigs and topographic “rises”. When such features are encountered, follow them downslope to see if sediment reached the channel. There may or may not be evidence of sediment deposition in the channel. The presence of rills, gullies or deposited sediment at the edge of the channel is sufficient to class the sediment as having entered the channel.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 126 -127-

R-5 BMPEP On-Site Evaluation R30 Dispersed Recreation Sites (Reference BMP 4.9)

Header Information Unique To This Form

Nearest Stream Of Lake: Give the name of the nearest lake or watercourse to the recreational facility. If it is unnamed, insert “unnamed tributary to the ______.”

Developing The Sample Pool And Selecting The Evaluation Sites Develop a sample pool that includes all dispersed recreation sites on the Forest which may be identified in the INFRA database as “Concentrated Use Areas” (CUI). Fees are not collected at Dispersed Sites, and they generally do not provide potable water, sanitation facilities (toilets) or refuse containers (garbage cans). The sites receive continued and concentrated use and are maintained at least annually by the Forest Service. From this pool, randomly select sites to equal the number of evaluations assigned to the Forest for the year.

Timing Of The Evaluation Sites should be evaluated following a period of heavy use, typically after a holiday or at the end of a summer season. Evaluation of implementation should always be completed prior to the effectiveness determinations.

Conducting The Implementation Rating

Conduct a Field Review to Determine Rate the degree to which the site has been evaluated in terms of impacts to water quality or risk of impacts. A rating of “1” should be given for a documented evaluation by qualified personnel, a “4” if water quality impacts have not been considered. If the site (location) and operation of the dispersed recreation area is appropriate, in regard to:  Refuse disposal: Are trash receptacles located and configured to minimize the potential for water contamination? If no receptacles are provided, is trash causing water quality contamination or posing a risk to water quality? Refuse on the site would be considered to be illegal dumping.  Sanitation: Human and animal waste on the ground is a health hazard. Is waste threatening water quality?

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 127 -128-

 Sediment: Is the site located and used in a manner so as not to create erosion, or sedimentation of streams and riparian areas? If water quality problems (or risks) have been previously recognized, rate the degree to which management actions have been taken to address those problems. Actions could include increased visitation, maintenance, signing, law enforcement, construction of physical barriers, etc. If actions have not been successful, comment in the deficiencies and corrective actions section.

Conducting the Effectiveness Evaluation

Locating The Sample Site Base your evaluation on a survey of the entire site. This survey should be made on foot, and include visual inspection of toilet or other sanitary facilities, refuse disposal facilities, and a transect along the edge of the site that is closest to the nearest stream channel or water body. If the facility is situated between more than one water body, include a survey of all boundaries of the site. Also survey along the edge of the nearest stream(s) or lake, if a one (or more) is located within 150 feet of the facility boundary.

Sampling Protocols Walk the boundaries between the recreation site and the nearest water body. This is usually a stream within 150 feet of the edge of the site. Also observe the access route to the dispersed site. If erosion control measures, such as waterbars, dips, etc. are being made ineffective due to recreation traffic, evaluate under Sediment.

Refuse: Check the area for illegal dumping of garbage or trash. Determine if refuse is reaching a stream channel.

Human/Animal Waste: Walk around the dispersed site and look for evidence of human or animal waste. Evaluate if the waste would reach a stream channel.

Sediment: While walking the boundary of the recreation site and nearest stream, look for rills or gullies leaving the site. If rills or gullies are observed, follow them and determine if sediment has reached or threatens to reach the stream channel. Also, evaluate the route leading to the dispersed recreation site. If traffic from recreational users is nullifying the effectiveness of erosion control features, determine if the degradation is creating a source of sediment to a stream.

BMPEP User’s Guide Revised June 2002 128