DOCSLIB.ORG

Botany and Wildlife Observations and Surveys Data Standard

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Botany and Wildlife Observations and Surveys Data Standard Oregon/Washington Bureau of Land Management Botany and Wildlife Observations and Surveys Spatial Data Standard Wildlife specialist holding Pygmy Rabbit during field exam, SE Oregon, Photo credit: Larisa Bogardus July 2016. Version 1.0 March 2021 Bureau of Land Management OR/WA State Data Standards Document Revisions Revision Date Author Description Affected Pages 1.0 3/26/2021 Dana Baker-Allum, Initial Release All Chelsea Waddell, Mark Mousseaux, Susan Carter, Bruce Hollen Navigation This document uses hyperlinks to display additional information on topics. External links are displayed with an underline. Internal links are blue text, not underlined. After clicking on an internal link, press the Alt +left arrow keys to return to the original location from the target location. March 2021 Botany and Wildlife Observations and Surveys v1 2 Bureau of Land Management OR/WA State Data Standards Contents 1 General Information ................................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 Roles and Responsibilities ............................................................................................................ 10 1.2 FOIA Category .............................................................................................................................. 11 1.3 Records Retention Schedule ......................................................................................................... 11 1.4 Security/Access/Sensitivity ........................................................................................................... 11 1.5 Keywords ....................................................................................................................................... 11 1.6 Subject Function Codes ................................................................................................................ 12 2 Dataset Overview ........................................................................................................................................ 13 2.1 Usage .............................................................................................................................................. 13 2.2 Sponsor/Affected Parties .............................................................................................................. 13 2.3 Relationship to Other Datasets, Databases, or Files .................................................................. 13 2.4 Data Category/Architecture Link ................................................................................................ 15 2.5 Relationship to DOI Enterprise Architecture Data Resource Mode ........................................ 21 3 Data Management Protocols ...................................................................................................................... 22 3.1 Accuracy Requirements ............................................................................................................... 22 3.2 Collection, Input, and Maintenance Protocols ........................................................................... 22 3.3 Update Frequency and Archival Protocols ................................................................................. 23 3.4 Statewide Monitoring ................................................................................................................... 23 4 Botany and Wildlife Observations and Surveys Schema (simplified) .................................................... 24 4.1 SURVEY_POLY Feature Class (Survey Polygons) ................................................................... 24 4.2 SURVEY_PT Feature Class (Survey Points) ............................................................................. 25 4.3 FEATURE_POLY Feature Class (Feature Polygons) ............................................................... 26 4.4 FEATURE_PT Feature Class (Feature Points).......................................................................... 27 4.5 FLORA_SITE_POLY Feature Class (Flora Site Polygons ....................................................... 28 4.6 FLORA_OBS_PT Feature Class (Flora Observation Points) ................................................... 30 4.7 FAUNA_SITE_POLY Feature Class (Fauna Site Polygons) .................................................... 32 4.8 FAUNA_OBS_PT Feature Class (Fauna Observation Points) ................................................. 33 4.9 ADD_OBS Table (Additional Observations) .............................................................................. 34 4.10 COLLECTIONS Table (Collections) .......................................................................................... 35 4.11 FAUNA_DETAIL_OBS Table (Fauna Detail Observations).................................................... 36 5 Projection and Spatial Extent .................................................................................................................... 37 6 Spatial Entity Characteristics .................................................................................................................... 37 7 Attribute Characteristics and Definition (In alphabetical order) ........................................................... 39 7.1 ABUNDANCE ............................................................................................................................... 39 7.2 ACTIVITY .................................................................................................................................... 39 7.3 ADMIN_UNIT .............................................................................................................................. 39 7.4 AGE ................................................................................................................................................ 40 March 2021 Botany and Wildlife Observations and Surveys v1 3 Bureau of Land Management OR/WA State Data Standards 7.5 AIR_TEMP.................................................................................................................................... 40 7.6 AMPH_SURV_YN ........................................................................................................................ 40 7.7 AOBS_CN ...................................................................................................................................... 41 7.8 ASPECT ......................................................................................................................................... 41 7.9 ASSOC_SPECIES ........................................................................................................................ 41 7.10 BAT_EAR_LEN ............................................................................................................................ 42 7.11 BAT_FOREARM_LEN ............................................................................................................... 42 7.12 BAT_KEY_CHAR ........................................................................................................................ 42 7.13 BAT_WEIGHT ............................................................................................................................. 43 7.14 BIRD_SURV_YN .......................................................................................................................... 43 7.15 BRYO_SURV_YN ........................................................................................................................ 43 7.16 COLL_CN ..................................................................................................................................... 44 7.17 COLL_DT ..................................................................................................................................... 44 7.18 COLL_ID ....................................................................................................................................... 45 7.19 COLL_NOTES .............................................................................................................................. 45 7.20 COLL_TYPE ................................................................................................................................ 45 7.21 COLLECTOR ............................................................................................................................... 46 7.22 COMMON_NM ............................................................................................................................ 46 7.23 CONDITION ................................................................................................................................. 46 7.24 COVER_PCT ................................................................................................................................ 47 7.25 CREATED_BY ............................................................................................................................. 47 7.26 CREATED_DT ............................................................................................................................. 47 7.27 DATA_SRC_CD ........................................................................................................................... 48 7.28 DIAMETER .................................................................................................................................. 48 7.29 DOBS_CN .....................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Bill to Designate Certain National Forest System Lands in the State of Oregon for Inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and for Other Purposes
    97 H.R.7340 Title: A bill to designate certain National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Weaver, James H. [OR-4] (introduced 12/1/1982) Cosponsors (2) Latest Major Action: 12/15/1982 Failed of passage/not agreed to in House. Status: Failed to Receive 2/3's Vote to Suspend and Pass by Yea-Nay Vote: 247 - 141 (Record Vote No: 454). SUMMARY AS OF: 12/9/1982--Reported to House amended, Part I. (There is 1 other summary) (Reported to House from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs with amendment, H.Rept. 97-951 (Part I)) Oregon Wilderness Act of 1982 - Designates as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System the following lands in the State of Oregon: (1) the Columbia Gorge Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (2) the Salmon-Huckleberry Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (3) the Badger Creek Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (4) the Hidden Wilderness in the Mount Hood and Willamette National Forests; (5) the Middle Santiam Wilderness in the Willamette National Forest; (6) the Rock Creek Wilderness in the Siuslaw National Forest; (7) the Cummins Creek Wilderness in the Siuslaw National Forest; (8) the Boulder Creek Wilderness in the Umpqua National Forest; (9) the Rogue-Umpqua Divide Wilderness in the Umpqua and Rogue River National Forests; (10) the Grassy Knob Wilderness in and adjacent to the Siskiyou National Forest; (11) the Red Buttes Wilderness in and adjacent to the Siskiyou
    [Show full text]
  • Stewardship Contracting on the Malheur National Forest
    Stewardship Contracting on the Malheur National Forest February 2018 In September 2013, a ten year stewardship contract was awarded to Iron Triangle to complete restoration work on the Malheur National Forest in eastern Oregon’s Blue Mountains. The contract was awarded largely in response to the imminent closure of a mill in the town of John Day, a local crisis that created an unlikely alliance of industry and environmentalists. Ultimately, state and federal government officials intervened to save the mill through an innovative stewardship contract. In order for the mill to remain operational, they needed assurance of a consistent and long term supply of wood. While stewardship contracts have been used by the Forest Service since 1999, this contract is significant for its ten year commitment and the benefit it brings to the local community. Implementation After sending out a request for proposals, when the mill was saved, new opportunities Malheur National Forest awarded a ten were created locally because the contract year Integrated Resource Service Contract could assure enough supply to sustain (IRSC) to Iron Triangle, a contractor based businesses Residents report an increase in out of John Day. Under the IRSC, Iron help wanted signs around the town of John Triangle implements approved thinning Day, and an estimated 101 new jobs were projects on the Malheur NF and sells the supported in the first year of the contract.2 logs to Malheur Lumber Company and other sawmills. Iron Triangle also Blue Mountain Forest Partners subcontracts part of the restoration work to local contractors such as Grayback Forestry After several years of informal conversation and Backlund Logging, who have done between environmentalists and the timber much of the pre-commercial thinning and industry, Blue Mountain Forest Partners (BMFP) was formed in 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • Restoring Historical Forest Conditions in a Diverse Inland Pacific
    Restoring historical forest conditions in a diverse inland Pacific Northwest landscape 1, 1 2 1 JAMES D. JOHNSTON, CHRISTOPHER J. DUNN, MICHAEL J. VERNON, JOHN D. BAILEY, 1 3 BRETT A. MORRISSETTE, AND KAT E. MORICI 1College of Forestry, Oregon State University, 140 Peavy Hall, 3100 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, Oregon 97333 USA 2Department of Forestry and Wildland Resources, Humboldt State University, 1 Harpst Street, Arcata, California 95521 USA 3Department of Forest and Rangeland Stewardship, Colorado Forest Restoration Institute, Colorado State University, 1472 Campus Delivery, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 USA Citation: Johnston, J. D., C. J. Dunn, M. J. Vernon, J. D. Bailey, B. A. Morrissette, and K. E. Morici. 2018. Restoring historical forest conditions in a diverse inland Pacific Northwest landscape. Ecosphere 9(8):e02400. 10.1002/ecs2.2400 Abstract. A major goal of managers in fire-prone forests is restoring historical structure and composition to promote resilience to future drought and disturbance. To accomplish this goal, managers require infor- mation about reference conditions in different forest types, as well as tools to determine which individual trees to retain or remove to approximate those reference conditions. We used dendroecological reconstruc- tions and General Land Office records to quantify historical forest structure and composition within a 13,600 ha study area in eastern Oregon where the USDA Forest Service is planning restoration treatments. Our analysis demonstrates that all forest types present in the study area, ranging from dry ponderosa pine-dominated forests to moist mixed conifer forests, are considerably denser (273–316% increase) and have much higher basal area (60–176% increase) today than at the end of the 19th century.
    [Show full text]
  • John Day - Snake River RAC October 7, 2016 Boardman, Oregon
    John Day - Snake River RAC October 7, 2016 Boardman, Oregon Meeting called to order at 8:05 a.m., October 7, 2016. Designated Federal Officials begin their respective reports: • Vale, BLM • Umatilla National Forest 1. Jim Reiss: Concerns over water rights pertaining to mining-what happens to water pools from mining activities once the operations have concluded? a. Randy Jones: It is generally left to evaporate. 2. Randy Jones: How can the John Day- Snake River RAC interact with the land management agencies in terms of providing comments and suggestions related to the Blue Mountain Forest Resiliency Plan? a. Gen Masters: The RAC can recommend increased budgetary support for the Umatilla National Forest as well as encourage public support of upcoming and ongoing projects. Also, the Umatilla National Forest will be bringing projects to the John Day- Snake RAC for review in the near future. • Prineville, BLM 1. Jim Reiss: Pertaining to potential State Park establishment, what is the anticipated use of the park? a. Carol Benkosky: Use of the roads to access the area are different than anticipated-users are preferring to access the river via Starvation Lane. 2. Jim Reiss: How are grazing permits being managed? a. Carol Benkosky: Grazing is currently being managed by Western Rivers, as a private contract. The land is being leased and if the land becomes federal land, grazing will continue per federal grazing regulations. 3. Bryan Sykes: It sounds like the goal of acquiring these lands is to maintain public access? a. Carol Benkosky: Yes. There are also maintenance concerns with the area, so a plan will be required to be developed.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Oregon Big Game Hunting Outlook Conditions for Big Game and Hunters Are Looking Much Better Than They Were a Year Ago
    2016 Oregon Big Game Hunting Outlook Conditions for big game and hunters are looking much better than they were a year ago. Back in August of last year, 100 percent of Oregon was in severe drought and 50 percent in the even worse category of “extreme drought.” While parts of NE and SE Oregon are still experiencing a severe drought, conditions have improved across the state. “We had normal winter precipitation and a wet spring,” says Autumn Larkins, ODFW Assistant District Wildlife Biologist for Harney County. “Water availability is much better this year.” It’s a similar story in northeast Oregon. “The weather is much better suited to deer and elk production as opposed to last year’s record drought,” said Mark Kirsch, ODFW District Wildlife Biologist in Umatilla County. The increased water also better distribute animals during hunting season, rather than cluster them around fewer water sources. It should help distribute early season hunters, too— especially those pronghorn and bowhunters who crowded around the few water holes to set hunting blinds in recent years. The conflict between hunters over blind placement has gotten so bad that ODFW and BLM recently put together a flyer reminding hunters of the rules and good etiquette Now wildlife biologists are crossing their fingers for rains in September. These early fall rains green up forage and help big game put on weight, so animals head into breeding season in good body condition and fit to reproduce. Despite the increased moisture, fire is still a threat throughout Oregon. Most forestlands will have restrictions (such as no campfires) during fire season, and some private lands will be closed to public access entirely.
    [Show full text]
  • Malheur National Forest 431 Patterson Bridge Rd, John Day, OR, 97845 Contact: Pattie Hammett – 541.575.3144 April 8, 2013
    Malheur National Forest 431 Patterson Bridge Rd, John Day, OR, 97845 www.fs.usda.gov/malheur Contact: Pattie Hammett – 541.575.3144 April 8, 2013 10-Year Stewardship Timber Contract Announced JOHN DAY, OR – The Malheur National Forest will offer a 10-year timber contract that will provide a predictable and sustainable volume of timber, employ local people and assist the local economy while getting crucial restoration work done on the land, Forest officials announced today. The stewardship authority the Forest will use allows the agency to fund forest restoration activities with revenue from timber sales – traditional timber sale revenue goes directly to the Treasury. By retaining these receipts, the Forest will be able to have additional restoration projects, which also means additional employment. A 10-year contract would allow the ability to treat large landscape areas providing much needed restoration. “After careful consideration, I made the decision that the volume in the contract will be 70 – 80 percent of our total volume offered each year,” said Malheur National Forest Supervisor, Teresa Raaf. “This amount will guarantee the awardee of the contract a consistent, sustainable amount of volume which will also offer benefits to local communities by providing a stable economic environment that would support local businesses in Grant and Harney counties.” The Malheur expects to offer 55 million board feet of timber this year, and increase that amount to 75 mmbf by 2015. Timber firms would have to bid on and win the contract in competition with others. Local mills play an important role in Grant and Harney counties as they have the ability to harvest material from the Forests at a reasonable cost.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Resources of the Umatilla National Forest
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Resources of the Forest Service Umatilla National Forest Pacific Northwest Research Station Glenn A. Christensen, Paul Dunham, David C. Powell, Resource Bulletin and Bruce Hiserote PNW-RB-253 May 2007 D E E R P A U RT LT MENT OF AGRICU The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the National Forests and National Grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Authors Glenn A. Christensen is an inventory analyst, and Bruce Hiserote is a forester, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 620 SW Main Street, Suite 400, Portland, OR 97205; Paul Dunham is a forest health analyst, Forest Health Protection, Pacific Northwest Region, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 07/01/2020 to 09/30/2020 Deschutes National Forest This Report Contains the Best Available Information at the Time of Publication
    Schedule of Proposed Action (SOPA) 07/01/2020 to 09/30/2020 Deschutes National Forest This report contains the best available information at the time of publication. Questions may be directed to the Project Contact. Expected Project Name Project Purpose Planning Status Decision Implementation Project Contact Projects Occurring Nationwide Locatable Mining Rule - 36 CFR - Regulations, Directives, In Progress: Expected:12/2021 12/2021 Nancy Rusho 228, subpart A. Orders DEIS NOA in Federal Register 202-731-9196 EIS 09/13/2018 [email protected] *UPDATED* Est. FEIS NOA in Federal Register 11/2021 Description: The U.S. Department of Agriculture proposes revisions to its regulations at 36 CFR 228, Subpart A governing locatable minerals operations on National Forest System lands.A draft EIS & proposed rule should be available for review/comment in late 2020 Web Link: http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=57214 Location: UNIT - All Districts-level Units. STATE - All States. COUNTY - All Counties. LEGAL - Not Applicable. These regulations apply to all NFS lands open to mineral entry under the US mining laws. More Information is available at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/science-technology/geology/minerals/locatable-minerals/current-revisions. R6 - Pacific Northwest Region, Occurring in more than one Forest (excluding Regionwide) Adapting the 21" Standard of - Wildlife, Fish, Rare plants Developing Proposal Expected:01/2021 01/2021 Emily Platt the Eastside Screens - Vegetation management Est. Scoping Start 07/2020 503-808-2970 EA (other than forest products) [email protected] *NEW LISTING* Description: The USFS will evaluate alternatives to the Wildlife Standard of the Eastside Screens that limits harvest of trees greater than 21 inches for the Umatilla, Wallowa-Whitman, Malheur, Ochoco, Deschutes, and Fremont-Winema National Forests.
    [Show full text]
  • High Desert Region Deer and Elk DEER Mid-Columbia District
    High Desert Region Deer and Elk DEER Mid-Columbia District (Hood, White River, Maupin, West Biggs) The West Biggs Unit has good numbers of deer and a strong component of mature bucks. Much of the unit is private. The Deschutes and John Day canyons are great public places to find weary bucks, especially later in the season. The Maupin Unit has great buck ratios and should provide good opportunities at older bucks for those hunters with access to private lands. There is some limited public access within the Deschutes canyon. Having a good map to ensure you know where you are is essentiall. Buck numbers in the White River are on the rebound, and good recruitment over the past couple years should continue to increase hunter success. For the best chance at harvesting a mature buck, hunters should expect to get away from roads and focus on higher elevation habitats. Hunters headed for the Hood unit should pay close attention to fire restrictions. Last year, most of the private timber companies in the valley closed their lands due to extreme fire conditions, and this summer may be even worse if fall rains are delayed. Finding open areas with good browse is key to hunter success. Deer activity is typically highest during first and last light. DEER MIGRATION STUDY: ODFW is conducting a buck deer study in the southern portion of the White River Unit to improve its knowledge of local deer herds. ODFW would appreciate if hunters could report any sightings of these deer. Radio-collared deer in this unit are legal to shoot but return collar and identify location of the kill to The Dalles District office (3701 W 13th Street, The Dalles, OR 97058, tel.
    [Show full text]
  • Or Wilderness Protection in the Blue Mountain Ecoregion Have Been Identified by the Nature Conservancy As Vital to Protect Biodiversity in the Area
    172 OREGON WILD Neither Cascades nor Rockies, but With Attributes of Both Blue Mountains Ecoregion xtending from Oregon’s East Cascades Slopes and Foothills to the from 30 to 130 days depending on elevation. The forests are home to Rocky Mountain intersection of Oregon, Idaho and Washington, the 15.3 million acres elk, mule deer, black bear, cougar, bobcat, coyote, beaver, marten, raccoon, fisher, of the Blue Mountains Ecoregion in Oregon are a conglomeration of pileated woodpecker, golden eagle, chickadee and nuthatch, as well as various species Emountain ranges, broad plateaus, sparse valleys, spectacular river canyons of hawks, woodpeckers, owls and songbirds. Wolves, long absent from Oregon, are and deep gorges. The highest point is the Matterhorn that rises to 9,832 making their return to the state in this ecoregion. Individuals from packs reintroduced feet in the Wallowa Mountains. The ecoregion extends into southeastern Washington in nearby Idaho are dispersing into Oregon. Fish species include bull and rainbow and west central Idaho. trout, along with numerous stocks of Pacific salmon species. Most of the mountain ranges in the Blue Mountains Ecoregion are volcanic. The Depending on precipitation, aspect, soil type, elevation, fire history and other Crooked River separates the Maury Mountains from the Ochoco Mountains, which are factors, one generally finds various combinations of Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, lodge- separated from the Aldrich Mountains by the South Fork John Day River. The Aldrich pole, western larch, juniper and Engelmann spruce throughout the Blue Mountains. Mountains are separated from the Strawberry Mountain Range by Canyon Creek. Beginning approximately at the Lower Deschutes River and rising eastward, the These ranges generally run east-west.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Areas Report Refresh Date: 10/17/2020 Table 6 - NFS Acreage by State, Congressional District and County
    Table 6 - NFS Acreage by State, Congressional District and County State Congressional District County Unit NFS Acreage Alabama 1st Escambia Conecuh National Forest 29,179 1st Totals 29,179 2nd Coffee Pea River Land Utilization Project 40 Covington Conecuh National Forest 54,887 2nd Totals 54,927 3rd Calhoun Rose Purchase Unit 161 Talladega National Forest 21,412 Cherokee Talladega National Forest 2,229 Clay Talladega National Forest 66,763 Cleburne Talladega National Forest 98,749 Macon Tuskegee National Forest 11,348 Talladega Talladega National Forest 46,272 3rd Totals 246,934 4th Franklin William B. Bankhead National Forest 1,277 Lawrence William B. Bankhead National Forest 90,681 Winston William B. Bankhead National Forest 90,030 4th Totals 181,987 6th Bibb Talladega National Forest 60,983 Chilton Talladega National Forest 23,821 6th Totals 84,804 2020 Land Areas Report Refresh Date: 10/17/2020 Table 6 - NFS Acreage by State, Congressional District and County State Congressional District County Unit NFS Acreage 7th Dallas Talladega National Forest 2,167 Hale Talladega National Forest 28,051 Perry Talladega National Forest 32,738 Tuscaloosa Talladega National Forest 10,998 7th Totals 73,954 Alabama Totals 671,786 Alaska At Large Anchorage Municipality Chugach National Forest 248,417 Haines Borough Tongass National Forest 767,860 Hoonah-Angoon Census Area Tongass National Forest 1,979,060 Juneau City and Borough Tongass National Forest 1,672,684 Kenai Peninsula Borough Chugach National Forest 1,261,065 Ketchikan Gateway Borough Tongass
    [Show full text]
  • News Release
    NEWS RELEASE Media Contacts: Molly Johnson, Oregon Department of Forestry (Northeast OR District), (541) 805-4774 Christie Shaw, Oregon Department of Forestry (Central OR District), (541) 263-0661 Shawna Clark, Malheur National Forest, (541) 620-3426 Darcy Weseman, Umatilla National Forest, (541) 278-3722 Peter Fargo, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, (541) 523-1231 July 1, 2021 – 11 a.m. Passing Thunderstorms Ignite Multiple Fires in Northeast Oregon and Southeast Washington JOHN DAY, PENDLETON, BAKER CITY, and LA GRANDE, Ore. - Fire crews in northeast Oregon and southeast Washington are responding to multiple reports of smoke and fire following passing thunderstorms Tuesday evening. Approximately 23 fires have been confirmed out of more than 40 incidents reported so far to the Blue Mountain Interagency Dispatch Center and John Day Interagency Dispatch Center. Local initial attack resources have been busy responding to these incidents with support from aerial resources. Additional smoke reports are likely to be detected throughout the next few days as temperatures warm and fire activity increases. Aerial reconnaissance and fire lookouts are assisting with detection efforts. Current fire danger in the Blue Mountains ranges from HIGH to EXTREME. Public Use Restrictions are in effect involving campfires, chainsaw use, off-road driving, and smoking. Regulated closures have also been implemented on State and private lands protected by Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) in northeast and central Oregon. Please call 911 to report a wildfire.
    [Show full text]