DISTRIBUTION OF THE MARBLED MURRELET IN WESTERN OREGON
Final Report to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (Contract 89-9-02)
Submitted May 1990
DISTRIBUTION OF THE MARBLED MURRELET IN WESTERN OREGON
CONTRACTOR
Oregon Nongame Wildlife Research Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife SW First Street Portland, OR 97207
INVESTIGATOR
S. Kim Nelson Oregon Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Oregon State University Corvallis, Oregon 97331-3803
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was funded by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Non- game Wildlife Research Program (Contract 89-9-02), in cooperation with the
U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Council of the Paper
Industry for Air and Stream Improvement and the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation. The research was conducted under the auspices of the Oregon
Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit at Oregon State University. I owe a special thanks to Bill Haight, Bill Neitro, Wayne Logan, Holt Holthausen, and
Charles Meslow for their support and guidance.
This study could not have been a success without the tremendous efforts of my 10 research assistants and volunteers. I extend a sincere thanks to
Jody Carter, April Claggett, Sally Claggett, Tim Dwyer, Janet Hardin, Barbara
Maier, Jim McGinn, Michael Pope, John Sterling, and Will Wright. In addition,
I am grateful to the following U. S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land
Management, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife,
Oregon Department of Forestry, and Oregon State Parks biologists and resource specialists for providing maps, materials and logistical assistance: Carol
Bickford, Robin Brown, Connie Frisch, Sarah Greene, Scott Hayes, Sallie
Jacobsen, Joe Lint, Wayne Logan, Roy Lowe, Steve Lucas, Larry Mangen, Kim
Mellen, Randy Miller, Clint Smith, Janet Stein, Charlie Thomas, Norma
Vangrunsven, Heide Vogt, Lou Wallenmeyer, Lee Webb, Margie Willis and Joe
Witt. I also thank Richard Gustafson of Cavenham Forest Industries and Kent
Boring of Stimson Lumber Company for allowing us access to their lands on the north coast for conducting surveys.
DISTRIBUTION OF THE MARBLED MURRELET IN WESTERN OREGON
INTRODUCTION
The Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) is a small, robin-sized seabird that inhabits near-shore coastal waters and inland older-aged (>80 yrs) coniferous forests of the Pacific Northwest. Before 1989, this alcid was located up to 47 km from the ocean at 46 inland sites in western Oregon (40 in the central Coast Range and 6 in the southern Coast Range) (Nelson 1989,
Nelson et al. in review). In addition, four historic records of adults and juveniles discovered at inland sites in the central Coast Range were known
(Marshall 1988, Nelson et al. in review).. Despite these inland sightings, little was known about the overall distribution and specific habitat preferences of the Marbled Murrelet in Oregon. Knowledge of the current distribution of this species is important for assessing impacts of land management on their future abundance and distribution in Oregon, and related cumulative impacts on northern California and Washington populations.
In 1988, research on Marbled Murrelets included creating and testing inventory techniques (Paton and Ralph 1988, Nelson 1989). Effective road transect methodologies were developed for determining the presence and absence of this alcid in inland coniferous forests. Using these methodologies, a project was undertaken in spring and summer of 1989 to meet the following objectives: (1) determine the presence and absence of Marbled Murrelets in 2 selected study sites in the Oregon Coast Ranges, (2) describe large scale habitat and geographic associations in areas where murrelets are detected, (3) describe habitat associations in potential nest areas, and (4) collect information on murrelet behavior. 3
STUDY AREA AND METHODS
The study area was located in the Oregon Coast Ranges between the
Columbia River and the California border. Lands within this area are administered by the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Oregon
Department of Forestry, Oregon State Parks, County Parks, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, private timber companies, and individuals.
The Oregon Coast Ranges were divided into 9 equal-sized blocks (165 by 20 km): 3 north to south based on latitude, and 3 east to west based on distance from the coast (maximum distance 60 km) (Figure 1). A total of 137 road transects were established within the study area (Figure 2, Appendix 1).
Eight to ten (primarily nine) sampling stations, spaced at a minimum of 0.5 km intervals, were located along each transect (Figure 3). Location of transects, distance between stations, and transect length varied with the distribution and abundance of appropriate habitat. For the purpose of this study, appropriate Marbled Murrelet habitat was defined as trees > 25 cm in diameter (DBH). Sampling stations were therefore established in coniferous forest stands (>2 ha in size) of 3 tree size classes: 25-45 cm, 46-81 cm, and
>82 cm (Hall et al. 1985). Open pole-sapling stands and clearcuts were not surveyed. I assumed that murrelets would not nest in these habitat types based on previous research on this species (Marshall 1988).
Within each block, I attempted to establish an equal number of transects and stations in the 3 tree size class. However, a long history of natural
(fire) and man-made disturbances (logging) in the Oregon Coast Ranges limited 4 the abundance of stands with trees >82 cm DBH. The distribution of stations by tree size class generally reflected availability in the Coast Ranges; most transects were located adjacent to mature stands (Appendix 2). In addition, more transects were located along the central coast and in close proximity to the coast, where appropriate murrelet habitat was relatively common
(Appendices 3 and 4).
A method for surveying Marbled Murrelets from road transects was developed by Paton et al. (1989). Similar survey techniques were implemented to facilitate comparisons with other studies. However, each transect was visited 4 times between 15 May and 15 August, instead of 3, to improve conclusions regarding presence and absence. On alternate surveys, observers ran transects in reverse order (visit 1: stations 1-10, visit 2: stations 10-
1, repeat) to avoid any time of day biases. Surveys began 45 minutes before, and continue until 75 minutes after, official sunrise (determined from tables constructed by the Oregon State University Climatic Research Institute). Each station was surveyed for 10 minutes. Information collected at sampling stations where murrelets were detected included: time of observation, number of birds detected, type of detection (audio, visual, both), number of vocalizations, direction and distance to the observation, length of observation, and murrelet behavior (flight patterns, height of bird, direction of flight).
Definitions
Detection: the visual or auditory observation of 1 or more murrelets acting in a similar manner at a given point in time. 5
Presence: hearing or seeing murrelets on at least one visit from at least
one station.
Percent Occurrence: the percent of transects or stations at which murrelets were detected at least once.
Flight Corridor: a river basin or drainage used by murrelets on flights
between inland forests and the ocean.
Potential Nest Area: a forest stand where murrelets were observed flying
into or out of the canopy, landing in trees, nesting or calling from
stationary locations.
Data Analysis
The percent occurrence of murrelets was calculated within each tree size
class, and in relation to latitude and distance to the coast. Differences in
percent occurrence and number of detections within each category were compared
using Chi-square analysis and Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA (analysis of variance),
respectively (SAS Institute, Inc. 1987). The percent of habitat in each tree
size class along each transect was correlated with the presence of murrelets
using Mann-Whitney U-tests (SAS Institute, Inc. 1987).
I used contingency table analysis (SYSTAT, Inc. 1984) to determine which
geographic or habitat variable (latitude, distance from the coast, tree size
class) or combination of variables had the most effect on murrelet presence.
The procedure involved a hierarchical partitioning of a four factor log-linear
model into individual and interactive terms. The most important variable
affecting murrelet presence was chosen based on the significance of the G2
statistic, while controlling for all other possible interactions (see Fienberg
1980 for further details). 6
Vegetation and topographic features of potential nest sites were compared to an equal number of random sites to determine habitat selection. The random sites were selected with a random number generator from the pool of stations along road transects where murrelets were not detected. Habitat characteristics of these stands were summarized through analytical stereo plotter aerial photo (1986, black and white, 1:31,000) interpretation.
Variables collected in each area included stand age (yrs), stand size (ha), tree species composition, tree height (m), tree diameter (cm, DBH), canopy cover (%), aspect(°), slope (%), elevation (ridge and drainage; m), and distance from the coast (km). Tree height and diameter were also determined for remnant trees (old-growth trees that survived previous disturbances) when present. Mann Whitney U-tests were used to compare mean habitat characteristics of nest and random stands (SAS Institute, Inc. 1987).
Habitat fragmentation in a 2.4-km-radius circle around potential nest and random sites was determined using a linear fragmentation index (Ripple and
Johnson 1990). A circular grid (Figure 5) was centered at the nest stand or selected random transect station, and distance (m) from each grid point (N =
21) to the nearest inappropriate habitat (clear-cut, pole stands) was measured. The mean distance to inappropriate habitat was then calculated for each study plot. Mean values less than 500 meters indicated high habitat fragmentation (Ripple and Johnson 1990). Mann-Whitney U-tests were used to evaluate the effects of fragmentation at potential nest and random habitat locations. In addition, correlation analysis was used to relate numbers of detections to fragmentation and habitat characteristics at potential nesting sites (SAS Institute, Inc. 1987). 7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Presence and Absence of Murrelets
Marbled Murrelets were discovered along 88 of 137 (64.2%) transects
(Table 1). These areas were located in a variety of forest types including
Douglas-Fir, Sitka Spruce, and Coastal Redwood forests. They ranged from sites less than 1 km from the ocean to an area on the edge of the Willamette
Valley, 55 km inland. They also were located in a variety of stand sizes ranging from 6 to more than 200 ha.
A total of 1300 detections were recorded at 344 of 1240 stations, with an average of 3.8 detections per station (SE = 0.2) and 14.8 detections per transect (SE = 1.9). Murrelets were detected on 46.6%, 20.5%, 27.3% and 5.7% of the transects during the first through the fourth visits, respectively.
Birds were heard or seen on all visits to 20.5% of the transects (Table 1).
However, the largest number of detections occurred during the month of July, in most cases the third visit to each transect. The increase in detections on these surveys coincided with documented peak murrelet activity levels (Nelson
1989).
Murrelets were detected along most (>64.7%) transects on lands owned by the Siuslaw (N = 51) and Siskiyou (N = 24) National Forests, Coos Bay BLM (N =
11), and Oregon State Parks (N = 9) (Table 1, Appendix 1). The Siuslaw
National Forests had the largest percentage (84.3%) of transects with murrelet detections. The central Coast Range is suspected to be the most important breeding area for this alcid in Oregon (Nelson et al., in review). In contrast, murrelets were absent from all Roseburg BLM lands (N = 8), and 8
Oregon State Forest (north of township 3N) (N = 4) and Oregon State Park
(north of township 5N) (N = 3) lands in Clatsop Co. (Table 1). The distribution of murrelets appeared to be related to the distribution of preferred habitat and proximity of these habitats to the ocean.
Distribution Patterns
The variable with the most significant affect on the presence of murrelets was distance from the coast (G 2 = 137.9, P < 0.001). The proportion of transects with detections was significantly greater along the coast compared to the mid and valley sections (X 2 = 16.6, df = 1, P < 0.001) (Figure
6). In addition, most detections (58.9%) were recorded within 20 km of the ocean. Marbled Murrelets were more active and common in close proximity to the ocean, and may prefer this area for nesting.
The availability of forest stands with large trees also had an effect on the distribution of the murrelets in the Oregon Coast Ranges. Contingency
table analysis revealed that tree size class was the second most important
variable affecting murrelet distribution (G 2 = 18.2, P < 0.05). There was a
significant difference in the presence of these birds based on tree size class
(X2 = 15.6, df = 1, P < 0.001); these alcids were detected more frequently in
stands with trees >82 cm DBH (Figure 7). The presence of these birds was also
correlated with a high percentage of older forests (46-81 cm DBH) along road
transects (Mann-Whitney U-Statistic = 3.2, df = 135, P = 0.002), while
murrelets were absent along road transects with high percentages of young
habitat (Mann-Whitney U-Statistic = 3.1, df = 135, P = 0.003). In addition, a
significantly larger number of detections were recorded in older stands (>82
cm DBH) than younger (<81 cm DBH) stands (F = 4.6, P = 0.01, Kruskal-Wallis 9
ANOVA) (Figure 8). These results coincide with those in northern California;
Paton and Ralph (1988) have demonstrated that the large scale distribution of murrelets in northern California is related to the distribution of old-growth habitat.
The proximity of these older-aged forests to the coast had an affect on murrelet distribution. Contingency table analysis revealed that distance from the coast and availability of trees >82 cm DBH have an interactive effect on the presence of this species. In contrast, the proportion of detections along transects with respect to latitude were not significantly different from north to south along the coast (G 2 = 0.1, df = 1, P > 0.05). Forest type (Douglas-
fir versus mixed conifer) may not have an affect on this species. Murrelets
did occurred slightly more often along transects in the central portion of the
coast (where older Douglas-fir forests are more common) than other areas
(Figure 9).
Potential Nest Sites
Eighteen potential nest sites were identified in western Oregon through
observations of murrelets flying into or out of the canopy, or landing in
trees. These 18 areas were significantly different (Mann-Whitney U-Statistic
= 2.5, df = 1, P < 0.02) from the 18 random sites based on stand age, stand
area, tree diameter and height, ridge elevation, and distance from the coast
(Table 2). Potential nest sites were lager in size, older in age, and
contained larger and taller trees than random sites. In addition, nest sites
were at lower elevations and closer to the coast than random areas. In
relation to ridge elevation, the number of detections at nest sites was
significantly greater in areas with gentle slopes than steep slopes (r = 0.51, 1 0
P = 0.03). The characteristics of these potential nest sites were similar to potential nest stands monitored by Nelson (1989) in 1988.
Habitat fragmentation index values did not differ between potential nest sites and random sites. I believe this was the case because the entire Oregon
Coast Ranges are highly fragmented (Harris 1984). Mean distances to inappropriate habitat at all nest (except 1) and random sites were less than
500 m (Table 2). Any areas with linear fragmentation indices <500 m are considered highly fragmented by Ripple and Johnson (1990). In addition, most forest stands are <50 ha in size and remnant old-growth stands average 28 ha in size (Harris 1984). The effects of this high degree of fragmentation on the murrelet is not completely known, however it may be influencing murrelet abundance. Assuming that the number of detections is indicative of murrelet numbers, there was a significant difference (Mann-Whitney U-Statistic = 45.5, df = 1, P < 0.001) between the number of detections in the highly fragmented areas of the Oregon Coast Ranges (N = 88) compared to the relatively unfragmented habitat in northern California (N = 66). The mean number of detections per transect over the survey season in Oregon was 14.8 or an average of 3.6 detections per visit. These numbers are very low compared to detection rates documented by Paton and Ralph (1988) which included a mean
30.7 detections per transect or 12.5 detections per visit.
New Information
New information on the behavior of this alcid has been collected during the 1989 field season. A new distance inland record was established for
Oregon; murrelets were detected along Pedee Creek (Polk Co., Salem BLM), which is approximately 55 km from the ocean. The previous inland record included 11 detections on Marys Peak (Benton Co., City of Corvallis), 47 km from the ocean
(Nelson 1989). In addition, murrelets were detected as late as 11:24 hrs
(PDT) at Cape Meares State Park (Tillamook Co.). Previously, murrelets had been observed to be active only as late as 09:30 hrs (PDT). The late activity periods at Cape Meares were recorded on cloudy or rainy days; weather conditions have been shown to affect murrelet activity patterns (Nelson 1989).
A "roost" site was located on Cascade Head Experimental Forest (Tillamook
Co., Siuslaw National Forest) where 3-5 murrelets per day during 4 July surveys were seen landing momentarily on branches of mature Douglas-fir trees, circling, and landing again. Birds were observed landing in the same area but not the same trees during each survey. I believe this area may be a roost location for non-breeding murrelets. Behaviors of Marbled Murrelets may be similar to those of Ancient Murrelets (Synthliboramphus antiquus). Non- breeding Ancient Murrelets are known to enter the forests during late June and
July to establish pair bonds and select nesting sites (Jones et al. 1990,
Gaston, in review).
A dead murrelet chick was found in a small pool along Red Cedar Creek on
1 August. This site was located in Curry County (T33S R14W S13) on the
Siskiyou National Forest, 12 km from the ocean. This marked the first documented evidence of nesting along the southern Oregon Coast.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The timing of transects, as well as the number of visits, was important for determining murrelet presence, and documenting stand use. Some flight corridors may not have been located without the third and fourth visit in July and August, respectively. Differentiation of potential nest sites from flight 12 corridors appears to be related to the consistency of stand use and dates of murrelet presence. The 18 identified potential nest sites were used more consistently and birds were present in earlier months (May and June) than flight corridor and roost areas (Table 1). Stands occupied only during July and August may be roost areas for non-breeders. I recommend that a minimum of
4 surveys be conducted for documenting murrelet presence, determining consistency of site use, and identifying roosting and potential nesting areas.
The overall presence and absence of Marbled Murrelets is related to the distribution of older-aged forests on a landscape scale. Murrelets were absent from areas without large trees (>82 cm DBH), such as in Clatsop Co. and on Eugene BLM lands where disturbances (logging and fires) have been recent and extensive. Old-growth forests may be the preferred nesting habitat for this species. Large horizontal moss covered branches are needed for nesting platforms. These characteristics do not occur in trees <175 years of age
(Marshall 1988). The degree of large scale habitat fragmentation may also be affecting the distribution and abundance of this species. In addition, these alcids may prefer to nest in sites close to the ocean rather than fly long distances to find nesting habitat. Maintenance of suitable habitat (older- aged forests in close proximity to the ocean) on the Siuslaw and Siskiyou
National Forests, and Salem and Coos Bay BLM lands may be critical to their survival. Further studies are needed to evaluate in more detail the effects of habitat fragmentation and habitat loss on this unique species. 13
LITERATURE CITED
Fienberg, S.E. 1980. The analysis of cross-classified categorical data.
Second ed. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. 198pp.
Hall, F.C., L.W. Brewer, J.F. Franklin, and R.L. Werner. 1985. Plant
communities and stand conditions. Pages 17-31 IN E.R. Brown, ed.
Management of wildlife and fish habitats in forests of western Oregon and
Washington. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Publ. No. R6-F WL-192-1985.
Harris, L.D. 1984. The fragmented forest - island biogeography theory and
the preservation of biotic diversity. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago,
IL. 211pp.
Gaston, A.J. In Review. Population parameters of the Ancient Murrelet
Synthliboramphus antiquus. Condor.
Jones, I.L., A.J. Gaston, and J.B. Falls. 1990. Factors affecting colony
attendance by Ancient Murrelets. Can. J. Zool. 68:433-441.
Marshall, D.B. 1988. Status of the Marbled Murrelet in North America: with
special emphasis on populations in Washington, Oregon and California.
U.S. Dep. Interior, Fish and Wildl. Serv. Bio. Rep. 88(30). 19pp.
Nelson, S. K. 1989. Development of inventory techniques for surveying
Marbled Murrelets (Brachvramphus marmoratus) in the central Oregon Coast
Range. Final report to the Oregon Dept. Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR.
104pp.
Nelson, S.K., M.L.C. McAllister, M.A. Stern, and D.H. Varoujean. In Review.
The Marbled Murrelet in Oregon, 1899-1987. IN H.R. Carter, ed. Status, 14
distribution, and management of the Marbled Murrelet. Proc. W. Found.
Vert. Zoology.
Paton, P.W.C., C.J. Ralph, H.R. Carter, and S.K. Nelson. 1989. The Pacific
Seabird Group s 1989 handbook for Marbled Murrelet surveys at inland
sites. U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-??, Pacific
Southwest For. and Range Exp. Stn., Arcata, CA.
Paton, P.W.C., and C.J. Ralph. 1988. Geographic distribution of the Marbled
Murrelet in California at inland sites during the 1988 breeding season.
Final report to the California Dept. Fish and Game, Nongame Bird and
Mammal Section, Sacramento, CA. 35pp.
Ripple, W.J., and D.H. Johnson. 1990. A simple method for measuring forest
fragmentation: the linear fragmentation index. Unpubl. Rep., Oregon
State University, Environmental Remote Sensing Applications Laboratory,
Corvallis, OR. 3pp.
SAS Institute, Inc. 1987. SAS/STAT guide for personal computers. Version 6
ed. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC. 1028pp.
SYSTAT, Inc. 1984. The system for statistics. SYSTAT, Inc., Evanston, IL.
383pp. 15
Table 1. Location and number of Marbled Murrelet detections and number visits (1-4) birds were detected along road transects, Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989.
Total #
Visits Name Legal Description Detections Detected
Ft. Stevens Greasy Spoon Road Simmons Ridge 0 0 Crawford Road 0 0 SaraJarvie Ridge 0 0 Saddle Mountain 0 0 Ecola 0 0 Sunset Highway T5N R8W S25,26 2 1 Gods Valley T3N R9W S9 30 4 >rOswald West T3N RlOW S6,7 33 4 Kilchis River T1N R9W S21 31 2 Hembre Ridge 0 0 Beaver Creek Road 0 0 Cape Meares T1S R11W S13 24 3 >c Moon Creek T3S R8W S3,4,9,10,16 16 2 East Beaver Creek T3S R9W S1,11,12 8 1 West Creek T3S R9,10W S19,23,24 7 4 Cape Lookout T3S R11W S1,2 2 1 Reneke Creek T3S RlOW S32,33 4 1 Niagara Point 0 0 Niagara Creek 0 0 Gauldy Ridge T4,5S RlOW S36,1 2 2 Wind River 0 0 Van Duzer Corridor T6S R9W S16,20 75 4 Dolph Junction T5,6S R9W S32,33,5 14 3 Cascade Head (Stillwell Cr.) T6S RlOW S15,16 41 4 Hart s Cove T6S R11W S2,11 47 4 Gold Creek T7S R7W S7 1 1 Warnick Creek T7S R8W S17,20,29 88 4 Valley of Giants T7S R8W S30,31 66 4 Elk Wallow T7S R9W S17,20 2 1 Willis Ridge T7S RlOW S4 18 2 -.7 Wildcat Creek T8S RlOW S10,13,14,15 41 4 Pedee Creek T9S R6,7W S11,12 1 1 Mary s Peak Watershed 0 0 Mary s Peak Road 0 0 Elk Creek 0 0 Lake Creek 0 0 Nettle Creek 0 0 Flynn Creek T12S R9,10W S7,1 9 2 16
Table 1. Continued
Total #
Visits Name Legal Description Detections Detected
Creek T12S R1OW S7,8 4 2 Elkhorn Creek T12S RlOW S29 1 1 -Parker Creek T13S R7,8W S7,12 28 3 Beatty Creek T13S R8W S25,36 18 1 Scott Creek T13S R9W S20,29,30 47 3 West Ridge T13S SlOW S3 2 1 :Boulder Creek T13S R1OW S15,16,22 27 3 \3.-Darkey. Creek T13S R11W S25,26,35,36 23 4 Maltby Creek T13,14S R8W S33,5 10 2 Trenhoim Saddle Road 0 0 Trout Creek 0 0 Tobe Creek 0 0 Fall Creek 0 0 Denzer Ridge T14S R9W S30,31,32 21 4 Skinner Creek T14S R10,11W S8,18,13 10 1 Cannibal Mountain T14S RlOW S9,10,15,16 36 3 South Fork Alsea 0 0 Horton (Congdon Creek) 0 0 East Lobster Creek 0 0 -›/Preacher Creek T15S R9W S15,23,26 8 2 Crab Creek T15S R9W S8,17,18 7 1 Bear Creek 2 T15S R1OW S4,5 3 2 Klickitat Mtn. T15S R1OW S29,30 9 1 Tenmile Ridge T15S R11W S22,28,29 9 2 )Cooks Ridge Trail T15S R12W S2,3 24 4 Cummins Ridge T15S R12W S13,14 14 2 Windy Peak 0 0 -A Cremo Creek T16S R9W S30 2 2 Ocean Beach (Mill Creek) T15,16S R12W S35,1,2 10 4 Indian Creek T16S R1OW S10,15 3 1 Three Buttes T16S R11W S23,24,26 12 4 Wapiti Creek 0 0 Walton (Shady Creek) 0 0 Cataract Creek T17S R1OW S4 1 1 Cleveland Creek T17S R9W S18 1 1 McCleod Creek T17S R1OW S19,20,21 12 2 Condon Creek T17S R11W S10,11,14 11 3 Morris Creek T17,18S R11W S20,6 2 2 Austa (Meadow Creek) 0 0 > Cedar Creek T18S R1OW S29,30 6 3
17
Table 1. Continued
Total #
Visits Name Legal Description Detections Detected
Linslaw Tie (Knowles Creek) 0 0 Roman Nose 0 0 Siuslaw River T19S R8W S1 3 1 Baldy Mountain T19S R9W S20,29 2 1 Peach Creek T19S R1OW S25,26,27 38 2 Alder Creek T19S R11W S28,33 4 3 S. Sister Creek 0 0 Helipond (Johnson Creek) T2OS R9W S20,21 2 2 Tahkenitch/Ada (Five Mile Cr.)T2OS R11W S7,8 4 2 Noel Creek T2OS R11W S21,27 3 2 Smith/Noel Creeks T20S,21S R11W S32,33,3,4 7 2 Lookout Mountain 0 0 Halfway Creek 0 0 Buck Creek Ridge Road T21S R9W S4,9 4 3 Dear Head Point T21,22S R1OW S33,5 9 4 Wells Creek 0 0 Umpqua Elliot (Johnson Cr.) T22S R11W S13,14 3 2 Camp Creek T23S R8,9W S19,13,24 5 2 Loon Lake T23S R1OW S1 10 3 Elliott 49(W.Frk.Millicoma R.)T23S R11W S15,22 3 1 Old Blue (Wolf Creek) 0 0 Larson Creek T24S R12W S13,22,23 3 3 Case Knife Ridge 0 0 Cougar Creek 0 0 Tioga/Burnt Mountain T26S R9W S32 1 1 Coal Creek T26S R1OW S5 4 2 Cherry Creek Myrtle T27S R1OW S17,18 12 1 Camas (Long Creek) 0 0 Lausch Creek 0 0 Sugar Pine (Boulder Creek) 0 0 Raiser Creek 0 0 Foggy Creek 0 0 South Fork Coquille T32S R11W S8 10 3 --- Sixes River T32S R13W S5,6,7,8 40 3 Grassy Knob Wilderness T32S R14W S28,29,30,32,33 65 4 Hanging Rock 0 0 Nickel Creek 0 0 Upper Elk River T33S R13W S15 4 3 Lower Elk River T33S R14W S13,23 14 4 Bald Mountain T33S R14W S33 2 2 18
Table 1. Continued
Total #
Visits Name Legal Description Detections Detected
Humbug Mountain T33S R15W S26 1 1 Panther Ridge 0 0 North Fork Lobster Creek T34S R13W S13,14,23 5 2 Raspberry Mountain 0 0 Upper Rogue River T35S R12W S15 6 3 Wakeup Rilea Creek T35S R12W S32 1 1 Rogue River T35S R13W S33,34,35 21 3 Kimball Hill T35,36S R13W S34,35,5,6,7 24 3 Wildhorse Prairie 0 0 High Prairie 0 0 Upper Chetco River T38S R12W S28,33 10 2 Stack Yards T38S R13W S2,11 2 1 South Fork Chetco River 0 0 7/Lower Chetco River T39S R12W S20,29,30,31 42 4 Wheeler Creek T4OS R12W S15 2 2 North Fork Chetco River T4OS R13W S4,5,8,9 9 2 Moser Creek T41S R12W S17,18 2 2
TOTAL 1,300
# Transects = 137 # Transects with detections = 88
Potential Nest Site
Table 2. Mean habitat characteristics of eighteen potential nest areas and eighteen random sites, Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989.
Habitat Characteristics
Dominant Remnant Overstory Tree specie Tree Distance Composition Canopy Tree Tree Tree diameter Elevation (m) from Age Area cover height (DBH, height (DBH, Slope Aspect coast Study Sites (yrs) (ha) FIa Dominant Remnant (%)c (m) cm) (m) (cm) (%) (.) Ridge Drainage (km)
Potential Nest Areas
Gods Valley 100 52.7 84.4 DF,SS DF,SS 65.0 27.4 45.7 39.6 86.4 21.0 198 268.2 91.4 3.7
Kilchis 150 35.6 138.4 DF(SS,WH) N/Ad 65.0 54.9 86.4 N/A N/A 57.5 278 314.9 111.6 1.1
Cape Meares 200 87.9 53.9 DF,SS N/A 35.0 57.0 94.0 N/A N/A 27.5 226 202.7 27.4 <1.0
Van Duzer 125 17.8 27.4 DF(SS) N/A 45.0 56.4 111.8 N/A N/A 20.0 197 320.0 152.4 5.6
Cascade Head 145 64.8 149.0 DF(SS,WH) N/A 70.0 45.7 81.3 N/A N/A 11.0 310 339.9 210.6 2.9
Hart s Cove 220 90.7 243.5 DF,SS DF,SS 100.0 18.3 35.6 48.8 91.4 33.0 249 368.2 0 0
Warnick Creek 350 51.8 75.3 DF N/A 45.0 51.8 101.6 N/A N/A 41.0 330 470.9 349.3 9.2
Valley of Giants 350 149.4 59.3 DF,WH N/A 40.0 55.6 92.7 N/A N/A 14.0 108 483.3 483.3 9.2
Willis Ridge 125 129.6 70.7 DF N/A 62.5 47.2 74.9 N/A N/A 42.0 321 216.0 73.5 1.9
Denzer Ridge 125 20.7 93.5 DF N/A 57.5 51.8 78.7 N/A N/A 56.0 57 360.0 93.9 9.2
Cannibal Mtn. 180 88.7 111.8 DF,WH N/A 60.0 45.7 94.0 N/A N/A 41.0 261 400.8 165.8 7.2
Klickitat Mtn. 250 28.4 262.3 DF,WH N/A 55.0 54.9 94.0 N/A N/A 37.5 333 566.9 527.3 5.8
Peach Creek 125 48.6 216.7 DF(WH) N/A 45.0 49.5 72.4 N/A N/A 42.5 99 196.9 74.7 8.0
Cherry Creek Myrtle 350 45.0 114.0 DF N/A 65.0 55.6 99.1 N/A N/A 62.5 266 590.3 335.3 15.4
Lower Elk River 150 19.4 590.8 OF N/A 45.0 36.6 76.2 N/A N/A 90.0 265 787.9 297.5 4.2
Kimball Hill 350 33.5 164.2 DF,WH N/A 45.0 49.5 101.6 N/A N/A 35.0 315 365.8 336.5 4.5
Upper Chetco 150 184.7 54.7 DF,SS N/A 45.0 42.7 88.9 N/A N/A 50.0 155 470.0 64.6 7.7
Moser Creek 350 53.9 137.0 DF(WH,CR) N/A 55.0 57.9 121.9 N/A N/A 41.0 302 416.4 121.0 2.5
Overall 211 66.8 147.1 OF DF,SS 55.6 47.7 86.2 44.2 88.9 40.1 237 395.5 195.3 5.5
(SE) e (22.6) (11.1) (30.5) (3.5) (2.5) (5.0) (4.6) (2.5) (4.5) (20.0) (35.1) (36.9) (0.9) Table 2. Continued
Habitat Characteristics
Dominant Remnant Overstory Tree specieR Tree Distance Composition Canopy Tree Tree Tree diameter Elevation (m) from Age Area cover height (DBH, height (DBH, Slope Aspect coast Study Sites (yrs) (ha) Fie Dominant Remnant (m) cm) (m) (cm) (%) ( ) Ridge Drainage (km)
Random Sites
Fort Stevens 63 7.3 32.9 DF(SP) N/Ad 40.0 33.5 53.3 N/A N/A 0 276 45.7 0 <1.0
Greasy Spoon 125 18.2 246.3 OF DF 70.0 18.3 30.5 41.2 78.7 14.0 53 381.0 213.4 16.2
Ecola 75 7.3 47.9 DF,SS DF,SS 50.0 24.4 43.2 36.6 71.1 25.0 12 335.3 0 <1.0
Saddle Mtn. 63 16.2 79.8 RA OF 90.0 15.2 25.0 21.3 44.5 7.0 197 640.1 274.3 8.2
Beaver Creek 45 24.3 98.1 DF,RA N/A 100.0 17.5 25.4 N/A N/A 43.0 175 202.7 12.2 4.7
Niagara Creek 125 38.9 440.2 DF,RA DF,WH 67.5 30.8 55.9 51.8 86.4 24.0 199 520.9 437.7 8.5
Nettle Creek 125 95.2 61.6 DF N/A 75.0 39.6 69.9 N/A N/A 52.5 182 553.2 232.0 8.7
Tobe Creek 125 14.2 221.3 DF DF 55.0 21.3 38.1 44.2 83.8 25.0 247 463.3 143.3 16.2
Walton 63 17.0 39.9 DF,RA DF 95.0 18.3 35.6 57.9 108.0 53.0 325 659.6 444.4 15.7
Wapiti Creek 100 17.8 166.7 DF N/A 60.0 38.9 78.7 N/A N/A 52.5 321 567.2 368.2 4.0
Austa 63 41.7 177.9 DF,RA N/A 67.5 19.1 38.1 N/A N/A 36.0 266 492.9 327.7 15.9
Wells Creek 88 23.5 146.0 DF N/A 65.0 30.5 45.7 N/A N/A 35.0 264 487.7 213.4 13.1
Old Blue 275 24.7 237.2 DF N/A 42.5 47.2 94.0 N/A N/A 53.0 70 412.1 291.7 18.4
Cougar Creek 100 7.3 136.8 DF N/A 55.0 39.6 78.7 N/A N/A 20.0 295 579.1 243.8 22.4
Lausch Creek 180 55.1 58.5 DF N/A 70.0 56.4 102.9 N/A N/A 16.0 233 677.3 600.8 18.1
Foggy Creek 150 18.2 82.1 DF N/A 55.0 35.6 69.0 N/A N/A 49.0 135 731.5 640.1 16.7
Nickel Creek 125 42.9 86.7 DF DF(SS) 40.0 21.3 48.3 41.1 97.8 30.0 61 775.6 677.6 11.4
Wildhorse Prairie 63 62.0 125.5 DF N/A 55.0 21.3 43.2 N/A N/A 15.0 203 1080.8 975.4 8.9
Overall 109 29.5 138.1 DF DF 64.0 29.4 54.2 42.0 81.3 30.6 195 533.7 338.7 11.6 (SE) e (13.0) (5.4) (23.9) (4.2) (2.8) (5.5) (4.4) (7.7) (4.0) (22.5) (53.7) (60.9) (1.5) a FI = Fragment Index b DF = Douglas-fir, WH = Western hemlock, SS = Sitka spruce, CR = Coastal Redwood, RA = red alder, SP = Shorepine. S Remnant and Dominant overstory combined. N/A = not applicable e SE = standard error. Indicates a significant difference between potential nest and random sites (P < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U-Test). 21
Figure 1. Division of study area into equal-sized blocks for transect distribution, Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989. 22 A
165
KM
20 20 20 • • as KM KM - KM
165
K M 23
Figure 2. Study area including location of 137 road transects, Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989. 24
- COUIVRIA
ASTORIA
(!) ® ® Ct A T SOP 0)
OREGON
lrn
TRANSECTS WITH MURRELET3 ® TRANSECTS WITHOUT MUFIRELETS ORHAN
T IL L A MOOK 1.11n
Y A MHILL
O w
SALEM i. 0 POLK
NEWPOCIT
Sow CORVALL19 ® O iLUTPosIt
L-t BENT ON LINN
O■___.
ag..411t< LA NE EUGENE
_.r "Ak_ kr, L. • 1_ A.trUn
DOUGLAS
ROSEBURG
JACKSON 1( /\ 1( 3 4 5 6 7 8 I 9 ^ 0.5 KM
Figure 3. Example of a road transect with 9 sampling stations spaced at a minimum of 0.5 km intervals, Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989.
26
Figure 4. Distribution of transects by latitude and distance from the coast. Numbers in each block indicate sample size, Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989. 27
OREGON
28
Figure 5. A study plot with 21 sample points used to measure habitat fragmentation at potential nest and random sites, Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989 (2.4-km-radius plot; scale 1:31,000) (adapted from Ripple and Johnson 1990). Figure 6. Percent of transects with murrelets based on distance from the coast (coast, mid, valley), Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989. 100
% 80 - T R 60 - A N S 40 - E C T S 20 -
0 COAST MID VALLEY DISTANCE FROM COAST Figure 7. Percent of stations with murrelets based on tree size class (25-45 cm DBH, 46-81 cm DBH, >82 cm DBH), Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989. 50 1240
40 % S T 30 A T I 20 0 N S 10
0 25-45 46-81 ^ 82 TREE SIZE CLASS Figure 8. Mean number of murrelet detections in relation to tree size class, Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989. 34
CD 0 < ___1 0 LU N (/) LU LU CC F-
I 1 IC) `zt C ) CM 1- 0 21.1.1 70 66.2 64.7 60 T R 50 A N 40 S E 30 C T 20 S 10 NORTH MID SOUTH LATITUDE 37 Appendix 1. Marbled Murrelet road survey transects, Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989. Name Legal Description Ownership Ft. Stevens T8N R11W S7,17,18 Oregon State Parks Greasy Spoon Road T7,6N R6W S34,2,3 Oregon State Forest Simmons Ridge T7N R8W S23,24,25,36 Oregon State Forest Crawford Road T6N R6W S19,29,30,32 Oregon State Forest SaraJarvie Ridge T6N R7W S22,23,27,28,33 Oregon State Forest Saddle Mountain T6,5N R8W S31,32,6,7 Oregon State Parks/Private Ecola T6,5N R11W S29,31,6 Oregon State Parks Sunset Highway T5N R8W S21,22,23,26 Oregon State Parks/Private Gods Valley T3N R9W S7,8,9,10 Oregon State Forest/Private Oswald West T3N RlOW S,6,7,12 Oregon State Parks Kilchis River TIN R9W S16,21,28 Tillamook County Park Hembre Ridge T1S R7,8W S18,13,23,24 Oregon State Forest Beaver Creek Road T1S R9W S15,16,17 Oregon State Forest/ Salem BLM Cape Meares T1S R11W S13 Oregon State Parks/ US Fish Wild. Serv. Moon Creek T3S R8W S3,9,16 Salem BLM East Beaver Creek T3S R9W S1,11,12,15 Siuslaw Natl. Forest West Creek T3S R9,10W S19,23,24 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Cape Lookout T3S R11W S1,2 Oregon State Parks Reneke Creek T3,4S RlOW S32,5,8 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Niagara Point T4S R7,8W S19,13,24 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Niagara Creek T4S R8W S21,27,28 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Gauldy Ridge T4,5S RlOW S25,36,1 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Wind River T5S R8W S11,14 Salem BLM Van Duzer Corridor T6S R9W S14,15,16,20,29 Oregon State Parks Dolph Junction T5,6S R9W S31,32,33,5 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Cascade Head (Stillwell Cr.) T6S RlOW S8,15,16,17 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Hart s Cove T6S R11W S2,11 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Gold Creek T7S R7W S5,7,8 Salem BLM Warnick Creek T7S R8W S17,20,29 Salem BLM Valley of Giants T7S R8W S30,31 Salem BLM Elk Wallow T7S R9W S16,17,18 Salem BLM Willis Ridge T7S RlOW S3,4,5 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Wildcat Creek T8S RlOW S10,13,14 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Pedee Creek T9S R6,7W S7,1,11,12 Salem BLM Mary s Peak Watershed T12S R7W S14,15 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Mary s Peak Road T12S R7W S25,34,35 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Elk Creek T12S R8W S22,27 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Lake Creek T12S R8W S20,28,33 Salem BLM Nettle Creek T12S R9W S15,22,27 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Flynn Creek T12S R9,10W S7,18,1 Siuslaw Natl. Forest 38 Appendix 1. Continued Name Legal Description Ownership Mill Creek T12S kluW S7,8,9,18 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Elkhorn Creek T12S RlOW S19,20,21 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Parker Creek T13S R7,8W S7,11,12 Salem BLM Beatty Creek T13S R7,8W S31,25,36 Salem BLM Scott Creek T13S R9W S20,29,30 Siuslaw Natl. Forest West Ridge T13S SlOW S3,11,12 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Boulder Creek T13S RlOW S15,16,21,22 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Darkey Creek T13S R11W S25,26,35,36 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Maltby Creek T13,14S R8W S33,5 Salem BLM Trenholm Saddle Road T13S,14S R9W S34,3 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Trout Creek T14S R7W S9,16,17 Salem BLM Tobe Creek T14S R7W S19,30 Salem BLM Fall Creek T14S R7W S26,27,34 Salem BLM Denzer Ridge T14S R9W S30,31,32 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Skinner Creek T14S R10,11W S8,17,13 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Cannibal Mountain T14S RlOW S10,11,15 Siuslaw Natl. Forest South Fork Alsea T14,15S R6W S31,5,6 Salem BLM Horton (Congdon Creek) T15S R7W S16,21 Eugene BLM East Lobster Creek T15S R7,8W S19,15,22,23,24 Salem BLM Preacher Creek T15S R9W S15,22,26 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Crab Creek T15S R9W S17,18,23,24, Siuslaw Natl. Forest Bear Creek 2 T15S R1OW S3,4 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Klickitat Mtn. T15S RlOW 521,29,30,32 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Tenmile Ridge T15S R11W 522,27,28,29 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Cooks Ridge Trail T15S R12W S2,3 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Cummins Ridge T15S R12W S13,14 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Windy Peak T16S R8W S28,33,34 Eugene BLM Cremo Creek T16S R9W S29,30,31 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Ocean Beach (Mill Creek) T15,16S R12W S35,1,2 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Indian Creek T16S RlOW S9,10,14,15 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Three Buttes T16S R11W S13,23,24,26 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Wapiti Creek T16,17S R11W S31,5,6 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Walton (Shady Creek) T17,18S R7,8W S31,25,1 Eugene BLM Cataract Creek T17,S R1OW S4,8,17 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Cleveland Creek T17S R9,10W S18,13,14 Siuslaw Natl. Forest McCleod Creek T17S RlOW S19,20,28 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Condon Creek T17S R11W S10,11,14 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Morris Creek T17,18S R11W S20,29,31,32,6 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Austa (Meadow Creek) T18S R8W S3,9,10 Eugene BLM Cedar Creek T18S R10,11W S29,30,25,26 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Linslaw Tie (Knowles Creek) T18,19S R9W S25,36,2 Eugene BLM Roman Nose T18,19S R8W S33,5,7 Eugene BLM Siuslaw River T19S R8W S1,11,12,14,15 Eugene BLM Baldy Mountain T19S R9W S17,20,29 Siuslaw Natl. Forest 39 Appendix 1. Continued Name Legal Description Ownership Peach Creek T19S R1OW S25,26,27 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Alder Creek T19S R11W S21,22,28,33 Siuslaw Natl. Forest S. Sister Creek T19,20S R7,8W S5,6,35,1 Eugene BLM Helipond (Johnson Creek) T2OS R9W S17,20,21,28 Coos Bay BLM Tahkenitch/Ada (Five Mile Cr.) T2OS R11W S5,7,8 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Noel Creek T2OS R11W S21,22,27,28 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Smith/Noel Creeks T20S,21S R11W S32,3,4 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Lookout Mountain T21S R6W S17,21,22,23 Roseburg BLM Halfway Creek T21S R7,8W S18,19,20,29,13 Roseburg BLM Buck Creek Ridge Road T21S R9W S4,9,10 Coos Bay BLM Dear Head Point T21S R1OW S28,32,33 Siuslaw Natl. Forest Wells Creek T21,22S R9W S31,32,5 Coos Bay BLM Umpqua Elliot (Johnson Cr.) T22S R11W S13,14 Oregon State Forest Camp Creek T23S R8,9W S19,13,24 Coos Bay BLM Loon Lake T23S R9,10W S7,1,2 Coos Bay BLM Elliott 49(W.Frk.Millicoma R.) T23S R11W S10,15,22 Oregon State Forest Old Blue (Wolf Creek) T24S R8W S14,15,16,23 Roseburg BLM Larson Creek T24S R12W S13,22,23 Oregon State Forest Case Knife Ridge T24,25S R8W S34,35,1,2 Roseburg BLM Cougar Creek T25S R7W S17,18,19 Roseburg BLM Tioga/Burnt Mountain T26S R9W S31,32,33 Coos Bay BLM Coal Creek T26S R1OW S4,5,9 Coos Bay BLM Cherry Creek Myrtle T27S R1OW S17,18,20,21 Coos Bay BLM Camas (Long Creek) T28,29S R8,9W S31,25,1 Roseburg BLM Lausch Creek T28S R9S S13,23 Coos Bay BLM Sugar Pine (Boulder Creek) T3OS R8W S17,19,21 Roseburg BLM Raiser Creek T3OS R11W S24,25 Coos Bay BLM Foggy Creek T32S R1OW S10,15,16,17,21 Siskiyou Natl. Forest South Fork Coquille T32S R11W S5,8,17 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Sixes River T32S R13W S6,7,8 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Grassy Knob Wilderness T32S R14W S29,30,32,33 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Hanging Rock T32,33S R11W S36,12,13,14 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Nickel Creek T33S R12W S11,12,13 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Upper Elk River T33S R13W S15,16,22,23 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Lower Elk River T33S R14W S13,22,23,24 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Bald Mountain T33S R14W S32,33 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Humbug Mountain T33S R15W S26,35 Oregon State Parks Panther Ridge T33,34S R11W S32,4,5 Siskiyou Natl. Forest North Fork Lobster Creek T34S R13W S13,14,15,22,23 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Raspberry Mountain T35S R11W S11,15 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Upper Rogue River T35S R12W S11,14,15,21 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Wakeup Rilea Creek T35S R12W S28,31,32 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Rogue River T35S R13W S33,34,35 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Kimball Hill T35,36S R13W S35,6,7 Siskiyou Natl. Forest 40 Appendix 1. Continued Name Legal Description Ownership Wildhorse Prairie T36S R1zt4 S18,19,25 Siskiyou Natl. Forest High Prairie T38S R12W S2,3,11 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Upper Chetco River T38S R12W S21,28,32,33 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Stack Yards T38S R13W S2,11,12,14 Siskiyou Natl. Forest South Fork Chetco River T39S R11,12W S19,30,14,23,24 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Lower Chetco River T39S R12W S20,29,30,31 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Wheeler Creek T4OS R12W S14,15,21 Siskiyou Natl. Forest North Fork Chetco River T4OS R13W S5,8,9 Coos Bay BLM Moser Creek T41S R12W S17,18 Siskiyou Natl. Forest Appendix 2. Number of stations established adjacent to forest stands of 3 tree size classes (25-45 cm DBH, 46-81 cm DBH, >82 cm DBH), Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989. 700 651 N = 1240 600 500 - N U 400 - M 316 B 273 E 300 - R 200 - 100 - 25-45 46-81 ^ 82 TREE SIZE CLASS Appendix 3. Number of transects established in 167 km long blocks from the Columbia River to the California Border (north to south), Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989. 80 70 - 60 - N 50 - U M 40 - B E 30 - R 20 - 10- 0 NORTH MID SOUTH LATITUDE Appendix 4. Number of transects established in 20 km wide blocks from the coast to the Willamette Valley (west to east), Oregon Coast Ranges, 1989. COAST MID VALLEY DISTANCE FROM COAST