4 \ \ i Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands

Art L. Oakley David A. Heller Jim A. Collins Jack C. Howerton Larry B. Everson Robert E. Vincent

Table of Contents

Introduction ...... 58 Riparian Zones ...... 58 Freshwater Wetlands ...... 62 Importance of Riparian Zones and Wetlands ... 63 Major Elements of Riparian Zones and Wetlands. 65 Topography ...... 65 Vegetation ...... 65 Surface Water ...... 66 Soils ...... 66 Local Climate ...... 66 Wildlife Use of Riparian Zones and Wetlands ... 67 Habitat Functions ...... 67 Management Considerations ...... 69 Natural Events ...... 69 Timber Management ..... , ...... 70 Livestock Grazing ...... 73 Mining Operations ...... 74 Recreation Management ...... 75 Energy Development ...... 75 Wood Fuels ...... 75 Rehabilitation and Enhancement ...... 75 Summary ...... 76 References Cited ...... 76

Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 57 Introduction I Riparian zones and freshwater wetlands 1970. Results of ongoing research are occur along rivers, streams, lakes, reser­ are among the most heavily used wildlife expected to further substantiate and voirs, ponds, f>prings, and sometimes habitats occurring in forest lands of expand our knowledge of wildlife use in tidewater (fig. 1). They have high water western Oregon and Washington. these habitats. tables because of their close proximity to Biologists have recognized this for years, aquatic ecosystems, certain soil charac­ but only recently has the significance of teristics, and some vegetation that re­ riparian and wetland productivity been Riparian Zones quires free (unbound) water or conditions well quantified by research studies. Of that are more moist than normal. These the references cited in this chapter, the Webster's New World Dictionary, 2d. zones are transitional between aquatic majority have been published since college edition defines riparian as: "of, and upland zones. As such they contain adjacent to, or living on the bank of a river elements of both aquatic and terrestrial or, sometimes, of a lake, pond, etc." The ecosystems (fig. 2). riparian zones discussed in this chapter

RIVERS STREAMS TIDEWATER

LAKES RESERVOIRS PONDS, SPRINGS Figure 1.-Aquatic habitats common to western Oregon and Washington that have associated riparian vegetation influenced by the type of water.

58 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands Deciduous Trees

Shrubs

--\­Water

....>--__ AQUATIC ____j.------RIPARIAN------_~------UPLAND------<..~ ZONE ZONE ZONE

Figure 2.-Riparian zones have vegetation that requires large amounts of free or unbound water and are transitional between aquatic and upland zones.

Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 59 In the Pacific Northwest, most riparian zones occur along streams and rivers. Such habitats can extend through entire drainage systems from the smallest intermittent headwater streams to the largest rivers (fig. 3). The terms "riparian zones" and "riparian areas"are used interchangeably in this chapter, but by strict ecological definition, they may not be the same in all instances. Vegetation found in riparian zones usu­ ally includes hydrophytes (skunk cab­ bage, coltsfoot, lady-fern, sedges, devil's club, water-parsley, stink currant, willows, etc.) and species which also occur in drier sites (red alder, salmon­ berry, vine maple, bigleaf maple, black cottonwood, Sitka spruce, western redcedar, California-laurel, Douglas-fir, etc.) (Brown et al. 1980, Campbell and Franklin 1979, Franklin and Dyrness 1973, Maser et al. 1981, Minore and Smith 1971, Proctor et al. 1980, Walters et al. 1980). Riparian vegetation west of the Cascade Range in Oregon and Washington usually consists of herbace­ ous ground cover, understory shrubs and overstory trees (Swanson et at. 1981). The edge between riparian and upland zones is usually identified by a change in plant composition, relative plant abundance, and the end of high soil moisture. Any of the plant communities described in chapter 2 can occur in riparian zones. There is great variability in both the size and vegetative complexity of riparian zones because of the many combina­ tions possible between physical and biological characteristics. These charac­ teristics include stream gradient, eleva­ tion, soil, aspect, topography, water quantity and quality, type of stream bottom, and plant community (Campbell and Franklin 1979, Odum 1971 , Swanson et al. 1981, Walters et al. 1980). Numer­ ous habitats and niches usually occur within any riparian zone because of these varying conditions.

Figure 3.-Riparian habitat conditions vary with the location and size of the stream. There also is considerable difference in their importance to wildlife. Larger, more productive riparian zones are usually found along medium-sized or larger streams.

60 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands The natural succession of vegetative types following major disturbances such as floods, fires or logging, determines the kinds of vegetation occurring in a riparian zone at any given time. Pioneer species include willows on gravel bars and red alder on mineral soil (Campbell and Franklin 1979). Stream deposition and erosion influence the topographical features of floodplains and have pro­ nounced effects on the vegetative com­ position and habitat conditions of riparian zones (Brinson et al. 1981). Riparian zones of western Oregon and Washington possess the same charac­ teristics as those listed by Thomas et al. (1979§). They occupy only a small part of the overall area but are a critical source of diversity within the forest ecosystem. They create distinct habitat zones within the drier surrounding areas. In addition, riparian zones are elongated in shape with very high edge-to-area ratios (Odum 1979). They therefore possess a high degree of connection with other habitat types and function as effective transport systems for water, soil, plant seeds, and nutrients to downstream areas (Ewel 1979) (fig. 4). They also serve as impor­ tant travel routes for the movement or dispersal of many wildlife species. D Deciduous Hardwood I..: ::·1 Riparian Zone § High Temperate Conifer ITID Temperate Conifer Eflil Grass Forb Hillside b\'

Figure 4.-Riparian zones along streams and rivers function as connectors between habitat types. They are important migration routes for some wildlife species and serve as travel routes for numerous species because of the presence of water, food, and cover.

I" J Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 61 Lfi... __ _ deeper than 6.6 feet in the deepest part of the basin at low water. These two types of water bodies are considered deep­ water haoitats, as recently classified by the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin et al. 1979). In summary, wetland and riparian habitats are characterized by high diver­ sity (numbers of species), density, and productivity of both plant and animal species. There are continuous interac­ tions among the aquatic, riparian and adjacent upland zones through ex­ changes of energy, nutrients, and species (Cummins 1980, Franklin et al. 1981, Meehan et al. 1977, Odum 1979, Swanson et al. 1981). The direct role of riparian areas in affecting the productivity of aquatic habitats for salmonid fishes is discussed in detail in chapter 10.

Freshwater Wetlands

Wetlands are areas that are permanently or intermittently flooded. The water table is normally at or near the surface, or the land is covered by shallow water not exceeding 6.6 feet in depth at low water. Hydric soils occur and vegetation is composed of floating or submergent aquatics and emergent hydrophytes which require saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Examples of wetland plants include yellow water-lily, cat-tail, rushes, skunk cabbage, sedges, cotton­ grass, willow, alder, black cottonwood, and western redcedar (Cowardin et al. 1979, Franklin and Oyrness 1973, Proctor et al. 1980). In certain areas, however, vegetation may be completely lacking as on flats where drastic fluctuations in water levels or wave action prevent growth of hydrophytes.

Wetland habitats include freshwater marshes, swamps, bogs, seeps, wet meadows, and shallow ponds (fig. 5). Not included are lakes and reservoirs over 20 acres in surface area with less than 30 percent areal vegetative cover or

Figure 5.-Small ponds, marshes, wet meadows, and bogs are types of freshwater wetlands that add diversity to the forest lands of western Oregon and Washington and provide crucial habitats for aquatic and semi-aquatic species.

62 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands Importance of Riparian Zones and Wetlands I Riparian zones and wetlands provide some of the most important wildlife habitat in forestlands of western Oregon and Washington. Wildlife use is generally greater than in other habitats because the major life requirements for many species are present. Aquatic and am­ phibious species are normally found only in these habitats (fig. 6). Water is the habitat for aquatic life forms, including many species of invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mam­ mals. Vertebrates that either feed or reproduce in water are directly depen­ dent on wetlands or riparian areas and adjacent aquatic areas. Many other species, although not completely depen­ dent on riparian or wetland habitats, tend to use them to a greater degree than upland areas. Riparian zones are important for many other types of land use. Highly productive timber sites frequently occur along streams and around wetlands or lakes. Livestock utilize vegetation in riparian zones more heavily than in other areas because they concentrate here for water, shade, and succulent forage. Riparian zones are used for road locations, par­ ticularly in mountainous, rugged terrain. Rock and gravel for building roads have been taken from streambeds and their banks as well as from floodplains. Mining has direct and indirect impacts on ripa­ rian areas. Recreationists concentrate their use in wetland and riparian areas where scenic values are high. Riparian zones are preferred for recreational developments such as campgrounds and summer home sites. Because of these conflicting uses, riparian zones are recognized as critical areas in multiple use planning.

Figure 6.-Many wildlife species require riparian or freshwater wetland habitat to survive. Many others show a preference for these habitats even though their survival may not be dependent on riparian or freshwater wetland habitat.

Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 63 gg - &M

Riparian zones are more numerous than 4. Riparian zones have different of new territories. Strips of old-qrowth wetlands in forested areas west of the microclimates from surrounding forest left along streams also serve summit of the Cascade Range and are of coniferous forests due to increased as "connectors" for wildlife to move much greater signjficance to forest humidity, a higher rate of transpira­ between otherwise isolated stands management. Riparian zones are of tion, and greater air movement. of old growth (Franklin et al. 1981) paramount concern as wildlife habitat for These conditions are preferred by (fig. 4). the following reasons: some species during hot weather. 6. Productive fish habitats and good 1. Most riparian zones contain water, 5. Riparian zones are natural migration water quality depend on well­ cover, and food-the three critical routes and serve as travel corridors developed vegetative communities habitat components. for many wildlife species such as in riparian zones. Self-sustaining ruffed grouse, bats, deer, beaver, 2. Riparian zones have a greater diver­ riparian forests stabilize stream­ mink, and raccoons, to name just a sity of plant composition and struc­ banks and adjacent slopes and few. Cover, water, and sometimes ture than uplands. There are more provide food and recruitment of food are available for birds and internal edges and strata in a short large woody debris to streams (see animals when they are dispersing distance due to understory shrubs, chapter 10). from their original habitats in search deciduous trees, and coniferous trees than in adjacent upslope forest stands (fig. 7). Where riparian zones are dominated by deciduous vegeta­ tion, they provide one type of habitat in late fall and winter after leaf fall, and a different type of habitat during late spring and summer when in full leaf. 3. The elongated shape of most riparian 4 zones maximizes edge effect with the surrounding forest as well as with water. This produces high edge-to­ area ratios, and creates productive habitats for many species (see chapter 6).

VEGETATIVE STRATA

2 3 4 EDGES Figure 7.-Riparian zones often have a high number of strata and edges in a relatively small area. This produces habitat for a greater number of species because of the diversity of plants which create numerous "habitat niches:

64 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands Major Elements of Riparian Zones and Wetlands I There are many types of riparian zones based heavily on topographic features Vegetation and wetlands in the Northwest. It is including entrenchment floodplain important to be able to identify physical width, and stream gradient. Vegetation has numerous functions in and biological differences in order to riparian zones and wetlands. It defines properly understand and manage them. Topography often determines the space the number and type of wildlife habitats It is also necessary to understand the available for the development of riparian present. Vegetation stabilizes soil and natural processes which cause changes or wetland plant communities. It is a stream banks and provides nutrients to in these habitats. A brief discussion of primary indicator of the type, frequency, the soil. On small to moderate-sized the major elements of riparian zones and and magnitude of erosion/deposition streams, leaves and debris (litter) pro­ wetlands should facilitate such an under­ processes occurring in an area. It may vide the primary source of energy for the standing. By observing each element, it have a major influence on local climate, aquatic system (Franklin et al. 1981). is possible to draw general conclusions particularly sunlight, temperature, and Large dead and down trees store nu­ regarding the nature of an area and its wind. Topography may strongly influence trients, provide seed beds for various management needs. In all cases, field the occurrence and relative effect of tree species, provide habitat for various reconnaissance,operational experience, various upslope disturbances (wind­ wildlife and, when incorporated into and professional judgment are funda­ thrown trees, landsliding, etc.) on riparian streams, control channel structure and mental to evaluating and managing zones or wetlands. It determines the stability (Franklin et al. 1981, Swanson et riparian zones and wetlands. capability of the riparian zone for many al. 1976). Both the physical and biologi­ types of uses. cal structure of riparian vegetation also A wide variety of factors are frequently A comparison of selected characteristics has a strong influence on the growth, mentioned to define the character and density and biomass of salmonids in function of riparian zones and wetlands of two riparian zones having substantially adjacent streams (Martin et al. 1981) (Brown et al. 1979; Campbell and different surrounding topography is (chapter 10). Franklin 1979; Collotzi 1978; Cowardin et shown in table 1. al. 1979; Odum 1971). The following five important elements are discussed: Table 1-Riparian area conditions with different local topography 1. Topography 2. Vegetation 3. Surface water (including flowing water) 4. Soil 5. Local climate Th6se elements should provide a basic framework for analyzing and understand­ ing the management needs of riparian zones and wetlands. Additional elements can be added to this list depending on individual needs and the type of planned management activity. Each element is discussed as it relates to defining the quantity, quality, and function of riparian A. Broad, Open Area B. Narrow, Entrenched Area zones and wetlands. • Local Slopes: 30% • Local Slopes: 60%, often 80% • Location: Well developed flood­ • Location: Poorly developed flood­ Topography plains. Also includes lakes, plains. Also includes small wetlands (marshes, bogs, glacial or landslide lakes, Topography as used here refers to the ponds, wet meadows). small wetlands around springs "lay of the land" within and adjacent to or seeps. • Dominant process: Deposition. riparian zones and wetlands. It affects a • Dominant process: Active erosion number of physical (e.g., erosion, depo­ • Soils: Deep and often fine textured. and transport. sition, hydroperiod, soil formation) and • Sunlight: Year-round. biological (e.g., plant and animal com­ • Soils: Often shallow and coarse munities, animal use) characteristics. • Winds: Relatively open to textured. The topography of the surrounding disturbance. • Sunlight: Often partially blocked landscape can be used to stratify riparian • Vegetation and structure: Localized during winter months or long zones and wetlands having similar variations in soil type, mois­ periods of the day. structural and functional characteristics ture, and disturbance often (Brown et al. 1979). Collotzi (1978) and create high diversity. • Winds: Relatively sheltered. Heller and Maxwell (1980) classified • Vegetation and structure: Often potential riparian resource production limited.

Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 65 , ,

I···r..•....$. i ~ , ffi.'.

The composition of vegetation refers to and, hence, the number and type of Important parameters in the classification both the number and abundance of niches provided for various wildlife of wetland soils include soil organic various plant species. Composition is species. Activities of man, like road content, drainage, texture, and nutrient controlled by many factors, including construction or logging operations, can content (Brown et al. 1979). Frequently, topography, substrate, and stream cause small to large-scale alterations in wetland soils have high percentages gradient (Campbell and Franklin 1979, vegetative communities of riparian zones (20 + percent) of incompletely decom­ Walters, et al. 1980). Composition also and wetlands. posed vegetation and are referred to as may be influenced by adjacent stands of organic soils (Buckman and Brady timber, particularly old growth, through 1972). These organic materials are shading and competition (Campbell and Surface Water largely provided by overlying or adjacent Franklin 1979, Franklin et al. 1981). wetland vegetation. The presence of surface water during all The structure of vegetation relates to how or part of the year is a common charac­ Texture influences permeability or drain­ available space is occupied by different teristic of riparian zones and wetlands. age of soils and their relative susceptibil­ species and sizes of plants. Habitat The character of the surface water­ ity to erosion. Fine-textured soils found diversity is controlled by the stratification whether standing (lakes, ponds, on broad floodplains or wetlands gener­ or structure of vegetation, both vertically marshes, etc.) or running (streams and ally are highly productive with good and horizontally (Kelly et al. 1975) (fig. 7). rivers), and whether perennial or moisture-holding capacities. They are In general, it appears that the greatest intermittent-plays an important role in susceptible, however, to compaction as structural diversity in riparian areas is the function of these areas. The character well as surface and/or stream erosion provided by old-growth stands of timber of surface water directly controls the type unless stream banks are well vegetated. (Campbell and Franklin 1979, Franklin et of aquatic habitat, the composition and Coarse-textured soils, often found on al. 1981). diversity of vegetation, and its potential narrow floodplains and glacial scour use by wildlife, livestock, and man. In lakes, are characterized by relatively An important aspect of vegetative com­ wetlands the duration of surface water lower productivity and poor moisture­ position and structure is the potential for and its chemistry influence the decom­ holding capacity. They are less suscepti­ both short-term (seasonal) and long-term position process in organic soils ble to erosion and compaction than (successional) change. Seasonal (Cowardin et al. 1979). fine-textured soils. changes, due to the emergence and die-off of annual plants, may cause small Hydroperiod (the frequency of flooding Combinations of these two divergent scale changes in composition and struc­ in a riparian zone or wetland), is de­ types of soil textures may be found in any ture. On a larger scale, the leafing out scribed as the key external factor control­ given riparian zone or wetland. This and subsequent fall of leaves from de­ ling vegetative composition and produc­ variability in soil character results in a ciduous vegetation cause major sea­ tivity (Odum 1979). Hydroperiod may variety of plant habitats (Odum 1979). sonal variations in the habitat conditions determine the relative resistance of an of a wetland or riparian zone. Seasonal area to change; a shorter hydroperiod changes can produce considerable usually means a higher likelihood of Local Climate differences in the amount of food and change (Ewel 1979). In maintaining or cover available for wildlife use. improving riparian zones and wetlands, Weather exerts a decided influence on maintenance of natural flow regimes are most physical and biological processes Natural succession changes the struc­ important. Extremes (stagnant water, of riparian zones and wetlands. It controls ture and composition of vegetation over abrasive flooding) or major changes the frequency and magnitude of major longer periods of time (Meehan et al. (damming, diversion, fire, logging, etc.) disturbances such as floods, fires, and 1977). Succession is frequently the result are likely to lower the productivity of an wind storms. Climate directly influences of disturbance such as floods and fires area (Ewe11979, Odum 1979). the character of soils by controlling which may involve large areas but occur physical and chemical reactions and infrequently. Stream bank erosion, chan­ various biological processes (Buol et al. nel deposition, and blowdown or mortal­ 1973). Regional climatic factors interact ity of individual trees are small scale Soils with local conditions (topography, eleva­ disturbances which occur frequently. tion, aspect, soil factors, and characteris­ The patterns of vegetative succession Soils provide the substrate which sup­ tics of surface water) to determine the primarily depend on the frequency of ports much of the biological activity of a riparian zone or wetland. They are an types of vegetation in a given wetland or disturbance and the substrate of a given riparian area (Walters et al. 1980). area (Campbell and Franklin 1979). expression of the previously mentioned These patterns playa dominant role in components acting over time. Parent controlling the diversity of vegetation material for riparian soils is usually water­ carried sediments whose characteristics depend on the geology and hydrelogy of the drainage basin. Wetlands, which typically have no flowing water to trans­ port sediments, usually have parent material characteristic of the local geol­ ogy at a site (Brown et al. 1979).

66 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands Wildlife Use of Riparian Zones and Wetlands I Major components of climate are mois­ Habitat Functions (Odum 1979). Many species not directly ture and temperature. These factors dependent on these areas for their basic interact to determine potential plant and Wildlife use riparian zones and wetlands life functions, utilize them as preferred animal popwlations. Temperature is more disproportionately more than other habitat during certain seasons of the limiting where moisture conditions are areas. Odum (1979) stated that the year or as travel corridors in moving from extreme, while moisture plays a more density and diversity of wildlife are one location to another (Taber 1976, dominant role where there are extremes greater in riparian zones and wetlands Tabor 1976). in temperature (Odum 1979). Because of than in other habitats. Stevens et al. abundant water and vegetation, ex­ (1977) showed that the effect of riparian Of the 414 western Oregon and tremes in temperature and/or moisture zones is not limited to wildlife directly Washington wildlife species covered in are ameliorated to a greater degree in dependent on these zones but that appendix 8,359 use riparian zones or riparian zones and wetlands than in populations in adjacent areas are wetlands during some season(s) or nearby upland areas. strongly influenced by the presence and part(s) of their life cycles (table 2). Of quality of the riparian community. Ac­ these, 318 species use one or more of In the mountains of the Pacific Northwest, tivities that alter or destroy riparian or the three plant communitites directly climate is strongly affected by elevation. wetland habitats will have serious im­ associated with riparian zones and Although riparian and wetland plant pacts on wildlife because of the large wetlands. Another 41 species use ripa­ communities show change with eleva­ variety of species that use these habitats rian zones or wetlands as special or tion, these changes are less pronounced (Carothers 1977). unique habitats but do not use any of than in drier regions (Walters et al. 1980). their associated plant communities. Latitude also has an influence on climate Wildlife require food, water, cover, and These include species such as the between southwestern Oregon and space which includes areas to feed, shorebirds, gulls, some waterfowl, and northwestern Washington. breed, rear young, hide, and rest as well harbor seals that use the waters or as habitats that provide protection from shorelines of riparian and wetland areas extremes of heat and cold (thermal for feeding or resting but do not venture cover). The density, diversity, and struc­ far from the water's edge. ture of vegetation, combined with the landforms found in riparian zones and Some species such as the spotted frog, wetlands, tends to provide these require­ beaver, muskrat, and many waterfowl ments for a great many wildlife species. species are totally dependent upon More habitat niches are provided in riparian or wetland areas. Species such riparian zones and wetlands than in any as the roughskin newt, ruffed grouse, other type of habitat. Use of these areas willow flycatcher, striped skunk, and is a classic example of the "edge effect" dusky-footed woodrat may live in other habitats but reach maximum population densities in riparian or wetland areas. Still other species occupy a broad array Table 2-Number of wildlife species using riparian zone or freshwater wetland habitats'i of habitats including riparian zones and wetlands but at sometime during their life cycle spend a significant amount of time in these areas. Examples of such species Numberof species are Pacific tree frog, western toad, using riparian Cooper's hawk, yellow warbler, bobcat, Numberof zones or wetlands and Roosevelt elk. Many species with Numberof species using as a specialized Total number of significant economic importance, such westside riparian or habitat but not species using as most of the furbearers, are products of wildlife wetland plant using plant riparian zones riparian zones and wetlands. Class species communities communities or wetlands Habitat functions that attract wildlife to Amphibians 44 35 2 37 riparian zones and wetlands are dis­ & Reptiles cussed in the following sections.

Birds 267 192 38 230 Foraging and Watering Riparian zones and wetlands provide an abundance and variety of quality food for Mammals 103 91 92 wildlife. Because of the diversity in veg­ etation and landforms, many vertical levels (strata) are available for foraging. Total 414 318 41 359 Seed-eating birds and mammals feed in canopies of tree and shrub layers as well as on seed-producing groundcover. The 1) Data from appendix 8. black-capped chickadee, song sparrow,

Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 67 and western harvest mouse are exam­ riparian zones. Wood ducks that require Beaver and muskrat rest and take refuge ples of seed-eating species found in cavities for nesting will use dead or dying from enemies in dens with underwater riparian zones. trees found in riparian zones and wet­ entrances. Rabbits and hares hide and lands. Red-winged blackbirds and rest in burrows, rocks, litter or dense Insect eaters such as shrews, bats, marsh wrens are examples of species underbrush. Large mammals often hide flycatchers, swallows, woodpeckers, that use marsh vegetation for nesting. in thickets of riparian shrubs and trees. warblers, salamanders, turtles and Waterfowl nest in a variety of habitats, Many small mammals burrow or create snakes find food sources at different some on floating nests in the water, some "runs" under or through this dense vege­ levels in riparian communities. Wildlife in riparian vegetation, and still others in tation which allows protection from that feed primarily on vegetation also find upland vegetation adjacent to riparian predators. Frogs and turtles rest on an abundant source of quality food in zones and wetlands. All waterfowl emergent vegetation, logs, or floating riparian and wetland habitats, e.g. deer, species, however, use riparian zones material in the water and also hide in elk, grouse, rabbits, and voles. Beaver and wetlands for brooding. water and emergent vegetation. and muskrat are species that are totally dependent on food from riparian and Most bald eagles nest in trees or snags Waterfowl, such as mallard ducks and wetland vegetation for survival. Other along shores of large lakes and streams, Canada geese, use sheltered areas species like the raccoon can survive perch in snags and trees, and feed on along streams for loafing and protection outside riparian zones and wetlands but fish, waterfowl, and shorebirds. Ospreys during severe weather. Riparian and reach their maximum densities in this also nest atop trees or snags along wetland vegetation also provides type of habitat. waterways and lakes, and feed on fish. perches for species such as bald eagle, The peregrine falcon, a cliff nester, feeds osprey, belted kingfisher, and willow There are also those wildlife that feed on almost exclusively on birds, many of flycatcher. Since riparian zones and fish, crayfish and other aquatic or am­ which are associated with riparian zones wetlands normally support denser vegeta­ phibious organisms. Belted kingfisher, and wetlands. tion than adjacent L'pland areas, they American dipper, great blue heron, river provide hiding and resting cover for otter, mink, Pacific giant salamander, Banks, ground cover, hollow logs and many wildlife species that are not other­ western aquatic garter snake and Pacific trees in the riparian zone provide denning wise dependent on this type of habitat. water shrew are examples of wildlife that habitat for many small to medium-sized may not survive without food provided by mammals. Beaver, muskrat, raccoon, Large mammals, furbearers, and pre­ these habitats. and Pacific water shrew are examples of dators use riparian zones as travel cor­ mammals that use these habitats in ridors to and from summer and winter Predators such as hawks, owls, eagles riparian zones or wetlands. Although ranges and between feeding, resting, and coyotes are attracted to riparian and roughskin newts and western toads hiding, breeding, brooding, and rearing wetland habitats by the abundance of frequent forest habitats, they must have habitats. Riparian zones and wetlands prey species. Bald eagles and ospreys ponds, lakes or slow-moving streams for are also used as stop-over areas by are particularly dependent upon riparian breeding. migrating songbirds. and wetland habitats. Rearing habitat is extremely critical for Free water is also an extremely important Thermal Cover habitat component of riparian zones and most species. Rearing areas must be near nesting, fawning, and other areas The local climate of riparian zones and wetlands, particularly in summer. Band­ wetlands is strongly influenced by loca­ tailed pigeons use mineral springs for where young are produced. Species that nest, den or otherwise produce young in tion, topography, presence of water, and their water, and young upland game the amount and diversity of vegetation. birds need water daily. riparian zones and wetlands also rear their young there. There must be an Extremes in climate are moderated by abundant supply of food and hiding these factors. Vegetation that amelior­ ates temperature extremes is referred to Breeding and Rearing cover for young, as well as for adults. Feeding areas and hiding cover must be as "thermal cover". These areas are often Diverse riparian and wetland areas cooler in summer and warmer in winter. provide a wide variety of habitats where close together to allow ready access between them. In many areas during winter, particularly wildlife can breed and rear young. Fawn­ in severe winters, riparian zones and ing and calving areas are usually near wetlands may be the only areas where water where good quality food and cover Hiding and Resting . snow does not render the habitat unsuita­ are available. Trees, shrubs, and ground ble to large and medium-sized mammals cover are used by a great variety of Hiding and resting cover is an essential habitat element for wildlife. Dense vege­ and to some forest birds. In summer, songbirds, shorebirds, wading birds, when humidity is low and temperature raptors, and waterfowl for nesting and tation, complex landforms, and abundant water found in riparian zones and wet­ very high, these areas provide a cooler, rearing young. Dippers, for instance, moister climate for wildlife than surround­ nest on cliffs or banks in moss watered lands provide this important requirement. Burrows, dens, hollow logs and trees, ing upland habitats. Large mammals by spray from waterfalls and riffles. Great such as Roosevelt elk and blacktailed blue herons nest in large trees of the cavities in logs and trees, and dense foliage are essential for many species of deer use riparian zones to migrate sea­ mammals, birds, and other wildlife. sonally between summer and winter habitats.

68 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands Management Considerations I The high value of riparian zones and Natural Events Floods accelerate erosion and deposi­ wetlands must be considered whc·n tion, inundate streamside vegetation, and making management decisions that Riparian zones are geologically unstable deform, kill, scar, or uproot riparian affect these habitats. The density and environments, characterized by erosion vegetation. Often, mass soil movements, diversity of vegetation, combined with a and deposition (Leopold et a!. 1964). debris torrents, and organic debris dams variety of landforms, create edges and Swanson (1980) reviewed the relation­ are associated with floods (Ketcheson microclimates that provide an almost ships among the ecological time scale, and Froehlich 1978, Swanson and Lien­ infinite number of habitat niches for biota, and geomorphic processes. He kaemper 1978, Swanson et al. 1976, wildlife. Heavy use of these habitats by found that vertical channel erosion Swanston 1978 and 1980). These events wildlife illustrates their importance. lowers the water table, accelerates slope destroy existing riparian vegetation, but erosion, and may cause adjustment in can also form new riparian zones or Riparian zones and wetlands are by the profile of the entire drainage network. wetlands as stream profiles are changed. nature especially susceptible to natural Horizontal channel erosion (meanders), Large organic debris, which develops and man-caused disturbances. Riparian common on floodplains, undercuts naturally under old-growth forest condi­ communities in particular, being long riparian vegetation and erodes soil only tions, is a major factor in controlling the and narrow and having extensive inter­ to deposit it downstream. Deposition biological and physical features of smal­ face with both aquatic and terrestrial forms meadows, wetlands, and channel ler forest streams (Bilby and Likens 1980, systems, are highly vulnerable to impact bars where plant succession com­ Bryant 1980, Heede 1972), and in provid­ from major upslope events. The cumula­ mences again (Morisawa 1968). Smaller ing an important habitat component in tive effects of activities in tributary water­ wetlands are often ephemeral habitats riparian areas (Franklin et a!. 1981). sheds on riparian zones and wetlands where a slight amount of either deposition located at lower elevations is an impor­ or erosion may change their character. Other catastrophic events such as tant management consideration. Natural disturbance can be reduced and wildfire (Lyon et al. 1978) (fig. 8), windstorms (Ruth and Yoder 1953), or Human activities are often concentrated recovery hastened through careful management (Cairns 1980). Some volcanic eruptions may damage the in riparian zones and wetlands. Water biota severely (Swanston 1980). The total bodies provide life necessities: hydro­ natural disturbance is desirable, how­ power, minerals, diverse and abundant ever, and helps to create diversity and biota, and productive floodplains for may aid in achieving management forestry and agriculture. In addition, objectives. larger rivers are transportation routes where recreation and lifestyle are en­ hanced by the plant diversity and proxim­ ity to water. People are attracted to riparian zones and wetlands for many of the same reasons as are wildlife. Com­ petition between man and wildlife is intense for this limited area. Forest managers and planners should recognize that riparian zones and wet­ lands are (1) vulnerable to severe alter­ ations because of their relatively small size and location, and (2) sensitive due to their distinct vegetative communities and microclimates. Because of the interface between aquatic and terrestrial com­ munities, managers should consider the impacts of activities that occur in riparian zones and wetlands to both on-site and downstream communities. For these reasons, riparian zones and wetlands along with their associated water bodies should be managed as one unit within a watershed. Fishery and wildlife biologists, hydrologists, and soil scien­ tists should be consulted when manage­ ment activities are planned that could affect these important habitats. Figure B.-Many riparian areas have been severely impacted by fires and subsequent salvage logging operations as shown by this 1967 photo.

Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 69 destruction of riparian habitat by massive mud flows resulting from the eruption of Mount St. Helens in May, 1980, is illus­ trated by figure 9. These large scale natural catastrophies occur infrequently. Over time, affected areas recover as communities become re-established, but time becomes more important as competitive uses intensify the frequency or magnitude of disturbance. Wildlife populations, if unregulated, can create significant impacts on localized areas of riparian and wetland habitat. High beaver populations increase the frequency of bank burrowing and dams, attendant sediment deposition, and consumption or destruction of riparian vegetation. Raising of the water table and flooding change habitats from lotic to lentic conditions (Gard 1961, Hair et al. 1979). Many of these newly formed len tic habitats are small wetlands. Downslope soil movement along heavily used game trails and overbrowsing by large wild ungulates can have effects in localized areas. Burrowing animals, such as mountain beaver, can alter natural soil­ water movement patterns (Swanson 1980). Colony nesting birds sometimes cause excessive damage to vegetation (Carey and Sanderson 1981, Jackman 1974).

Timber Management

Complete removal of riparian vegetation (clearcutting to the water's edge) se­ Figure 9.-Aerial view of the South Fork of the Toutle River, June 4, 1980, showing verely impacts not only the habitat of the complete inundation of the floodplain and riparian zone following the eruption many riparian wildlife species but water of Mount st. Helens. quality and fish habitat as well (fig. 10). Oregon and Washington have adopted resources during logging operations how leave strips eliminate or minimize forest practice rules and regulatiuns (Erman et al. 1977, Federal Water Pollu­ three of the four major stream-habitat concerning the removal of streamside tion Control Administration 1970, Franklin changes associated with logging, i.e., vegetation (State of Oregon 1980§" State eta1.1981, Moring 1975, U.S. Environ­ water temperature, sediments, and of Washington 1982). Federal agencies mental Protection Agency 1973 and dissolved oxygen in surface and sub­ with forest management responsibilities 1976) (fig. 11). These buffer zones are gravel waters. A leave strip not only also have policies and guidelines gov­ not a panacea in all instances (Streetby reduces impact on streams from upslope erning timber harvest in riparian zones 1971), and windthrow can be a problem land use activities, but also maintains the and wetlands (see chapter 10). Com­ (Franklin et al. 1981, Steinblums 1977). diversity of the long, narrow riparian zone pliance with these regulations and Well designed leave strips, however, relatively intact. guidelines, if properly applied, should have generally been successful in provide Significant protection for wildlife achieving management objectives for If harvest of forest products in a riparian habitats in riparian zones and wetlands. water quality and fish habitat and should zone is planned, careful evaluation must be equally effective in wildlife habitat be given to impacts on fish and wildlife Maintaining vegetative buffers or leave management. Effective leavestrip width habitat. Selective or shelterwood cutting strips is an important stream riparian and composition will vary with stream will have less impact than clearcutting on management practice designed to order, topography, vegetation, manage­ canopy density and solar radiation, protect water quality and fish and wildlife ment objectives, and land use (Lantz which in turn affects stream-water tem- 1971 b, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1976). Lantz (1971 ~ discussed

70 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands perature and microhabitat (Brown 1970, and 1974, Thomas etal. 1979~ (fig. 10). After on-site inspection and consultation· with wildlife and fishery biologists and the establishment of management objec­ tives, it may be possible to selectively Single tree selection Moderate impact harvest some trees from the riparian zone without creating undesirable changes in habitat conditions. Important factors to consider in this decision are that the narrower the riparian zone or the greater the number of trees harvested, the more susceptible the area becomes to loss of habitat function and productiv­ ity. Detailed recommendations, pictures, and guidelines for logging practices that limit direct and indirect impacts on riparian zones are included in several publications (Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, 1970, Lantz Shelterwood Heavy impact 1971 g, Moring 1975). Research concerning the effects of logging on stream flows has de­ monstrated that changes in annual stream flows are minimal in larger water­ sheds where timber harvesting is done in small, well-spaced clearcuts. In small headwater watersheds, however, studies have shown that road building, clearcut­ ting, and other activities associated with timber harvesting may result in (1) signifi­ cant increases in annual water yield and summer low flows, (2) increases in fall peak flows and small winter peak flows, Clearcut Severe impact and (3) increases in large, major winter peak flows if more than five percent of the watershed has been compacted (Harr 1976, Harr and Krygier 1972, Harr and Figure 10.-Environmental impacts should be carefully evaluated when timber is McCorison 1979, Harr et al. 1979, Harris cut in riparian zones.

1973, Rothacher 1970 and 1973). Vari­ ations do occur and much depends on the amount of watershed disturbed, the harvest system used and the time since the activities were conducted (Dyrness 1967, Harr 1980).

Figure 11.-Habitat diversity in riparian zones is maintained by leaving conifers as well as hardwoods in vegetative buffers adjacent to streams. These trees, when they die, may become snags providing habitat for cavity users (see chapter 7) or when they fall to the ground they provide habitat for many other species (see chapter 8) as well as providing structure in stream channels (see chapter 10).

Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 71 Onsite damage to stream channels and adjacent riparian habitats in small water­ sheds can occur due to increases in peak winter flows after logging. Down­ stream impacts in 'streams of larger basins may be lessened by vegetative conditions in uncut areas. Except on highly disturbed and compacted areas, infiltration capacity and erodibility can return to prelogged conditions within three to six years (Johnson and Beschta 1980).

If wildlife habitat is to be protected, timber harvest should be carried out in a manner that will maintain normal water movement and minimize adverse im­ pacts from floods on stream channels and riparian zones. Because clearcuts and road construction can greatly accel­ erate the natural rate of debris av­ alanches and debris torrents (Swanson and Lienkaemper 1978, Swanston 1980), practices to minimize these events should be encouraged in order to reduce Figure 12.-Debris torrents in stream channels carry tons of soil, rocks, boulders, undesirable alterations of established and vegetative material downstream causing long lasting adverse impacts on the riparian communities (fig. 12). productivity of riparian and aquatic habitats.

To maintain desirable habitat conditions, both favorable and unfavorable influ­ reduce the risk of subsequent large natural, stable organic material in the ences on animal populations (Dimock debris dams, debris avalanches or form of large debris in stream channels 1974). If natural logs are scarce, some debris torrents. Large conifers retained and large down logs in riparian areas large and small down material resulting in riparian zones would ensure a source should be left undisturbed during logging from logging operations should be left in of dead and down woody material for operations (Franklin et al. 1981, Swanson the riparian zones. Because logging may future habitat needs. et al. 1976) (fig. 13). It should be recog­ add significantly to the total amount of nized, however, that forest residues debris (Froehlich 1971), the amount and The type of yarding system chosen by remaining after timber harvest can exert location of logging debris left in riparian forest managers can do much to areas should be carefully determined to minimize the impact of tree harvest on

Figure 13.-Trees that fall across streams are used as bridges by many wildlife species until they decay and fall into the stream wnere they add structure to the stream channel.

72 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 1---­

riparian zones. Use of full cable su~pen­ sion, ballooon, or helicopter transport I /' removes trees with almost no distur- ­ 1 bance of soil or vegetation (U.S. Environ­ Habitat 1 mental Protection Agency 1973 and I 1976). Uphill felling reduces breakage I and keeps felled trees out of the riparian 1 .~. area (Burwell 1971). Parallel felling can also be effective in preventing damage to riparian vegetation where steep side slopes occur. Natural amounts of small Q organic debris are essential to the aqua­ tic food chain (Cummins 1974 and 1980) and large organic debris helps small U stream channels dissipate energy and store sediments (Swanson and Uen­ kaemper 1978, Swanson et al. 1976). Excessive accumulations of small debris Fi.gu~e 14.-:-Road construction in riparian zones reduces their productivity as in streams, however, may deplete oxy­ ~i1dhfe ~abl~at. Roads ~Iter vegetative structure, change microclimate, reduce the gen levels (Moring 1975). size of npl3:na~ zones, Impact water quality in the aquatic zone, eliminate habitat and result In disturbance of wildlife. Forest roads, if constructed near streams or across wetlands, reduce the produc­ Common silvicultural applications of livestock grazing are therefore in the tivity of riparian and wetland habitats for fertilizers and pesticides (herbicides, interior parts of southwestern Oregon, many wildlife species (fig. 14). Recom­ insecticides, and rodenticides) usually high mountain meadows of the Cascade mendations for the proper location of will not seriously impact riparian zones Range, and along valley bottom corridors roads and landings, drainage structures, and wetlands if these areas are not of coastal streams. road surfaces, and road construction treated, and accepted precautions are followed to prevent excessive drift into If grazing by livestock on riparian zones and maintenance are discussed by and wetlands is heavy and continuous, Greene (1950), Lantz (1971!:D, Larse downslope areas (Miller and Fight 1979, USDA Forest Service 1974, U.S. Environ­ the vegetation which provides essential (1971), U.S. Environmental Protection habitat for wildlife can be reduced, Agency (1975), and Yee and Roelofs mental Protection Agency 1973 and 1977). These precautions include no­ changed, or eliminated (Kennedy 1977, (1980). In contrast to past practices, Platts 1981, Storch 1979, Thomas et al. many new forest roads are being located treatment areas or buffers of sufficient width based on site-specific conditions, 1979b, U.S. Environmental Protection away from riparian zones and along Agency 1979). Uncontrolled grazing of benches or ridgelines. In order to reduce and restrictions on aerial applications to times when winds are less than five mph, palatable plants often prevents repro­ soil movement on steep hillsides, instead duction of desired species and can of side-casting, excavated material is etc. Healthy riparian communities help prevent adverse impacts on water quality eventually bring about a complete con­ end-hauled by truck to stable waste version of vegetative type. Existence of areas. by natural filtering of sediments contain­ ing pesticides before they reach the older shrubs and trees that provide Many streams are currently paralleled by s~ream. Where steep slop~s are highly required habitat structure for many species of wildlife may be eventually roads. Managers should take this into d~s~ected by stream channels, it may be consideration if a new streamside road is difficult to keep aerial applications of precluded by consumption and by proposed. The amount of riparian habitat herbicides out of riparian zones and trampling of seedlings (Dahlem 1979, already seriously impacted should be streams. In such cases, the "no spray" Kennedy 1977). determined and this information carefully alternative should be given 'serious In addition, heavy livestock use in ripa­ weighed in making a final decision on the consideration. rian zones and wet meadows can result road location. More than any other man­ in undesirable changes in stream chan­ agement activity, road construction has nel morphology, lowered water tables the most critical and lasting impact on Livestock Grazing and eventual conversion to dry-site plant riparian zones (Thomas et al. 1979§). species and different types of habitat Although livestock grazing in riparian (Bowers et al. 1979, Platts 1981). Improperly located, constructed, or zones and wetlands is not as widespread maintained roads may initiate or acceler­ west of the Cascade Range as it is in the Generally, protection of riparian zones ate. slope failur~ (Yee and Roelofs 1980) more arid eastside areas, effects can be and wetlands can be enhanced by which In turn triggers debris torrents. Significant in certain locations. Most recognition of three basic realities: Stream crossings should be at right livestock grazing on forested lands angles to disturb the minimum amount of occurs in southwestern Oregon where 1. The heavier the grazing use and riparian vegetation. Bridges and culvert weather is relatively hot and water is longer the grazing period, the more installations should be of the proper size often in short supply during the summer severe the impacts will be on these and design to limit channel erosion and months. The greatest likelihood for habitats; debris accumulations and provide unre­ adverse impacts on riparian zones from stricted passage for migrating fish (see 2. Physiological needs of shrubs and chapter 10). trees have not been a priority of past Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 73 r grazing systems which considered Protection Agency 1979). It may be a Mining Operations primarily the production and mainte­ permanent requirement to controllive­ nance of grasses and forbs to the stock use in the most important wildlife Mining activities have frequently occur­ exclusion of woody vegetation in habitats. However, permanent elimina­ red in riparian and wetland habitats, riparian areas; and tion of livestock grazing in most other resulting in substantial surface distur­ areas may be neither feasible nor desira­ bance. Whenever a valuable mineral 3. Because of habitat requirements for ble, but grazing should be closely con­ deposit is located, mining can preempt dependent resources, multiple trolled to improve habitats in poor condi­ any other land use because of the Mining resource considerations, and high tion and to maintain healthy riparian Law of 1872 - unless the land has been values, different grazing strategies habitats in productive conditions. specifically withdrawn from mineral should be applied to riparian zones development. Because of this, other and wetlands than to upland areas. • To prevent undesirable alterations of resource uses can be precluded by the water source and to maintain wildlife Because of the high degree of variability mining. habitats, exclude livestock from parts of within riparian zones and wetlands, wet meadows, springs, and seeps by Gravel and sand mining from floodplains managers can make better decisions by fencing. Necessary water for livestock and stream channels has been common using recommendations of an interdis­ should then be piped outside the exclo­ throughout forest lands of western Ore­ ciplinary team which has analyzed sure into a trough(s) (fig. 15). gon and Washington because it is a site-specific conditions. convenient and relatively inexpensive • Artificial revegetation of riparian source of construction material. Riparian To insure that riparian zones and wet­ zones and wetlands may result in more lands remain in satisfactory condition for zones adjacent to numerous streams rapid response than natural recovery, wildlife use, managers responsible for have been greatly altered, first by re­ particularly with native shrubs and trees. developing livestock grazing programs moval of vegetation and then by taking Plantings must be protected from heavy should take into consideration the follow­ gravel for construction of logging roads. grazing to achieve desired results. ing management principles (Bowers et This practice of mining sand and gravel al. 1979, Platts 1981, Storch 1979, • In the planning process, part of the from streambeds and stream banks has Thomas et al. 1979b, U.S. Environmental vegetation in riparian zones and wet­ been greatly reduced in recent years by Protection Agency 1979): lands should be allocated to wildlife use laws and regulations to protect water at the same time forage is allocated for quality and aquatic habitats. Most rock • If significant livestock use is con­ livestock use. for logging roads is now mined from templated, present and potential habitat quarries or open pit mines thus reducing conditions should be key considerations adverse impacts to riparian zones. in determining the grazing management prescribed for specific areas. Where habitat is in unsatisfactory condition, grazing practices and systems that will achieve the desired habitat objectives should be implemented: defer grazing in riparian zones until late fall months; fence and apply rest rotation grazing systems; improve off-stream distribution of livestock by providing alter­ nate sources of water to attract animals away from riparian zones and wetlands; provide salting away from ripa­ rian zones and wetlands; utilize periodic herding; and - improve rangeland condition by revegetation, prescribed burn­ ing, etc. • To obtain management objectives for important riparian zones and wetlands that have been severely impacted from past use, it may be necessary to allow complete rest from livestock grazing for several years by fencing, which appears Figure 1S.-lmportant wildlife habitat around springs can be maintained and/or to be the only present management enhanced by fencing small areas to exclude livestock. Water for livestock can be technique capable of producing the piped outside the exclosure into troughs. Additional wet meadow habitat can be created and maintained by piping overflow water into small fenced areas. desired results (U.S. Environmental

74 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands Gold mining by hydraulic (placer) Energy Development diversity characteristics of old-growth methods has been common in parts of forest (Franklin et al. 1981). Optimur,. southwestern Oregon. Hydraulic mining The construction of dams to generate wildlife habitat conditions cannot be for gold in str~ams and riparian areas electricity results in the elimination of achieved in riparian zones if many snags can be particularly destructive Inasmuch existing riparian and wetland habitats and down dead trees are removed for as this activity completely removes located in floodplains inundated by the firewood or as marketed forest residue vegetation and subsequently cr~ates backwaters of the dam. For many wildlife jsal'{~Jle m_aLeriaj)fQr.!l.J~IJ..o,wJ)sM.L{(.e unsfcu5(e pIres OlTarger roCKS and runnre. species, natural migration routes may be heat, steam or other products. Basic productivity of the site for vegeta­ disrupted by these backwaters. Vegeta­ tion and habitat quality is drastically tion in downstream riparian zones and reduced. the natural erosion/deposition process Rehabilitation and can also be altered if natural stream Enhancement Protective stipulations and rehabilitation discharge patterns are changed signific­ measures should be included in mining antly by the operation of hydroelectric When riparian zones and wetlands are in plans to minimize impacts on riparian facilities. Some tree species are more zones and wetlands and to assist in satisfactory condition for wildlife, the tolerant to flooding and saturated soil best management generally is to allow recovery of satisfactory habitat condi­ conditions, while other species are more tions. Access roads should be located the natural ecosystems to function with resistant to drought (Minore and Smith minimal disruption. This approach is outside riparian zones and wetlands. 1971, Walters et al. 1980). Vegetation removal and surface distur­ usually the least costly and most effective bances should be minimized. Vegetation The impact of each dam depends on the way to manage for all native wildlife. should be re-established in disturbed amount of habitat lost in relation to the populations. Simply stated, it means areas as soon as mining operations are total available local habitat. Compensa­ protection from major disturbances terminated. tion by development of like habitat in caused by man. another location is often not feasible. Rehabilitation of altered habitats can be Other factors being equal, low-head hastened by various techniques which Recreation Management hydrologic projects should be located promote natural recovery to desired where they will result in the smallest loss conditions and prevent further deteriora­ Construction of recreational facilities in of riparian and wetland vegetation. If tion. Some of these methods are listed in riparian zones increases recreational more than one such project is located or habitat improvement handbooks (Nelson use which increases the potential for proposed for an area, the cumulative et al. 1978, USDA Forest Service 1969). conflicts with wildlife (Thomas et al. effects of all the projects should be Recommended grasses, shrubs and 1979~. The impact on wildlife and ripa­ assessed. trees to use for revegetating riparian rian zones and wetlands depends on the Other large energy developments like zones and wetlands in western Oregon season, type, duration, and magnitude of are listed in an interagency seeding use. Habitats can be adversely affected geothermal and fossil fuel (coal) plants, guide (State of Oregon 1980~. by destructive acts, and human distur­ or oil and gas production fields have not bance in areas around recreational been major energy producers in past Enhancement of habitat can often be developments is a major consideration. years. Impacts of any such future large­ accomplished by creating more diver­ Campgrounds, picnic tables, and trails scale, developments on riparian zones sity, but a thorough field evaluation should be located outside riparian zones and wetlands would have to be analyzed should precede any plans to enhance whenever possible. on a site-by-site basis. Impacts and riparian and wetland habitats. Projects mitigation, however, would be similar to should be designed to achieve specific Recreational facilities should not be some of the management activities habitat objectives developed for that located in areas such as heron rookeries, previously discussed in this section. area. Examples of enhancement projects bald eagle nest sites, or important winter­ in riparian zones and wetlands are (1) ing areas for big game. Detailed vegetative plantings of native or prefer­ guidelines for protecting bald eagles are Wood Fuels red wildlife food species, (2) construction given in chapter 13. Off-road vehicle use of nesting islands or installation of nest in riparian zones and wetlands should be Standing dead trees (snags) and down boxes, and (3) vegetation manipulation. prohibited or closely controlled to pre­ (windthrown) trees in riparian zones vent undesirable damage to these sensi­ provide important habitats for many tive habitats. wildlife species (see chapters 7 and 8). Large old-growth boles create the habitat

Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 75 Summary References Cited I I Riparian and wetland habitats are among Bilby, R. E.; Likens, G. E. Importance of Buckman, H. 0.; Brady, N, C. The nature the most important for wildlife in man­ organic debris dams in the structure and properties of soil. 7th ed. Lon­ aged forests, with the riparian zones and function of stream ecosystems. don: Macmillan and Company; particularly significant for forest wildlife. Ecology 61(5): 1107-1113; 1980. 1972.653 p. Forest managers'are only just beginning to recognize the importance of these Bowers, W, L.; Hosford, W. E,; Oakley, A Buol, S, W.; Hole, F. D,; McCracken, R, J. habitats in providing a variety of wildlife L,; Bond, C, E. Native trout. In: Soil genesis and classification. populations for people to enjoy. Riparian Thomas, J. W,; Maser, C.; tech. eds, Ames, IA: Iowa State University zones and wetlands, however, have high Wildlife habitats in managed range­ Press; 1973.404 p. potential for resource management lands - the Great Basin of south­ conflicts among commodity producers. eastern Oregon, Gen, Tech. Rep. Burwell, D, Prevention of debris accumu­ Managers, with the advice of resource PNW-84. Portland, OR: U.S, Depart­ lation in streams by uphill felling, In: specialists,should seek creative ways to ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Proceedings of asymposium: Forest manage these habitats or maintain and Pacific Northwest Forest and Range land uses and stream environment. improve their productivity, This will be an Experiment Station; 1979, 16 p. 1970 October 19-21; Corvallis, OR: interesting and important challenge. It is Oregon State University; 1971 : one which will require considerable effort Brinson, M. M.; Swift, B. L.; Plantico, R. 118-120. if satisfactory management plans are to C.; Barclay, J. S. Riparian ecosys­ be developed and implemented tems: their ecology and status. Cairns, J., Jr. The recovery process in successfully, FWS/OBS-81 117. Kearneysville, damaged ecosystems. Ann Arbor, WV: U.S. Department of the Interior, MI: Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Inc.; 1980. 167 p. Services Program; 1981. 155 p. Campbell, A G.; Fro.nklin, J. F, Riparian Brown, G. W. Predicting the effect of vegetation in Oregon's western clearcutting on stream temperature. Cascade Mountains: composition, J, Soil and Water Cons. 25: 11-13; biomass, and autumn phenology, 1970. Bull. No, 14, Coniferous Forest Biome, Ecosystem Analysis Studies, Brown, G, W. Forestry and water quality. Seattle, WA: University of Corvallis, OR: Oregon State Univer­ Washington; 1979. 90 p. sity Book Store, Inc,; 1974, 74 p, Carey, A. B.; Sanderson, H. R. Routing to Brown, B.; Henderson, J.; McShane, T.; accelerate tree-cavity formation. [and others], Riparian vegetationl Wildl. Soc. Bull. 9(1): 14-21; 1981. stream bank stability inventory. Olympia, WA: U.S. Department of Carothers, S. W. Importance, preserva­ Agriculture, Forest Service, Olympic tion, and management of riparian National Forest, Mimeo. Rep.; 1980. habitats; an overview. In: Johnson, 24p. R. R.; Jones, D. A,tech. coord. Importance, preservation and man­ Brown, S,; Brinson, M, M,; Lugo, A E, agement of riparian habitat: a sym­ Structure and function of riparian posium; 1977 July 9; Tucson, AZ; wetlands. In: Johnson, R, R.; McCor­ Gen, Tech. Rep. RM-43, Ft. Collins, mick, J. F., tech. coord. Strategies CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, for protection and management of Forest Service, Rocky Mountain floodplain wetlands and other ripa­ Forest and Range Experiment rian ecosystems, Proceedings of the Station; 1977: 2-4, symposium; 1978 December 11-13; Calloway Gardens, GA Gen, Tech. Collotzi, A. W. A systematic approach to Rep. WO-12. Washington, D.C.: the stratification of the valley bottom U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the relationship to land use Forest Service; 1979: 17-31. planning. Ogden, UT: U.S. Depart­ ment of Agriculture, Forest Service; Bryant, M, D. Evolution of large organic 1978. debris after timber harvest: Maybeso Creek, 1949 to 1978. Gen. Tech. Cowardin, L, M.; Carter, V.; Golet, F. C.; Rep, PNW-101, Portland, OR: U.S, LaRoe, E. T, Classification of wet­ Department of Agriculture, Forest lands and deepwater habitats of the Service, Pacific Northwest Forest United States, FWS/OBS-79/31. and Range Experiment Station; Washington, DC: U.S. Fish and 1980.30 p. Wildlife Service; 1979. 103 p.

76 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands

-----.~------Cummins, K. W. Structure and function of Federal Water Pollution Control Adminis­ Harr, R. D. Streamflow after patch log­ stream ecosystems. Biosci. 24: tration. Industrial waste guide on ging in small drainages within the 631-641; 1974. logging practices. Portland, OR: Bull Run Municipal Watershed, U.S. Department of the Interior, Oregon. Res. Pap. PNW-268. Port­ Cummins, K. W. The multiple linkages of Federal Water Pollution Control land, OR: U.S. Department of Ag­ forests and streams. In: Waring, R. Administration, Northwest Region; riculture, Forest Service, Pacific H., ed. Forests: Fresh perspectives 1970.50 p. Northwest Forest and Range Experi­ from ecosystem analysis. Corvallis, ment Station; 1980. 16 p. OR: Proc. 40th Annual BioI. Colloq; Franklin, J. F.; Dyrness, C. 1. Natural Oregon State University Press; ve.getation of Oregon and Harr, R. D.; Krygier, J. T. Clearcut logging 1980: 191-198. Washington. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW­ and low flows in Oregon coastal 8. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of watersheds. Res. Note No. 54. Dahlem, E. A. The Mahogony Creek Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Corvallis, OR: Forest Research watershed-with and without graz­ Northwest Forest and Range Experi­ Laboratory, School of Forestry, ing.ln: Cope, O. B., ed. Proceedings ment Station; 1973.417 p. Oregon State University; 1972.3 p. of the forum-grazing and riparian stream ecosystems; 1978 Franklin, J. F.; Cromack, K. Jr.; Denison, Harr, R. D.; McCorison, F. M. Initial effect November 3-4; Denver, CO: Trout W; [and others]. Ecological charac­ of clearcut logging on size and Unlimited: 1979: 31-34. teristics of old-growth Douglas-fir timing of peak flows in a small forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-118. watershed in western Oregon. Dimock, E. J., II. Animal'populations and Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Water Resour. Res. 15(1): 90-94; damage. In: Environmental effects Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 1979. of forest residues management in Northwest Forest and Range Experi­ the Pacific Northwest: A state-of­ ment Staion; 1981. 48 p. Harr, D. R.; Fredriksen, R. L.; Rothacher, knowledge compendium. Gen. J. Changes in streamflow following Tech. Rep. PNW-24. Portland, OR: Froehlich, H. A. Logging debris-manag­ timber harvest in southwestern U.S. Department of Agriculture, ing a problem. In: Proceedings of a Oregon. Res. Paper PNW-249. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest symposium: Forest land uses and Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Forest and Range Experiment stream environment. 1970 October Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Station; 1974: 01-028. 19-21; Corvallis, OR: Oregon State Northwest Forest and Range Experi­ University; 1971: 112-117. ment Station; 1979. 22 p. Dyrness, C. T. Soil surface conditions following skyline logging. Res. Note Gard, R. Effects of beaver on trout in Harris, D. D. Hydrologic changes after PNW-55. Portland, OR: U.S. Depart­ Sagehen Creek, California. J. WildI. clearcut logging in a small Oregon ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Manage. 25(3): 221-241; 1961. coastal watershed. J. Res. U.S. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Geol. Surv. 1 (4): 487-491; 1973. Experiment Station; 1967.8 p. Greene, G. E. Land use and trout streams. J. Soil and Water Cons. Heede, B. H. Influences of a forest on the Erman, D. C; Newbold, J. D.; Roby, K. B. 5(3): 125-126; 1950. hydraulic geometry of two mountain Evaluation of streamside buffer streams. Water Resour. Bull. 8(3): strips for protecting aquatic or­ Hair, J. D.; Hepp, G. 1.; Luckett, L. M.; 523-530; 1972. ganisms. Cont. No. 165. Davis, CA: [and others]. Beaver pond ecosys­ Calif. Water Resour. Center, Univer­ tems and their relationships to Heller, D. A.; Maxwell, J. M. Development sityof California; 1977.48 p. multi-use natural resource manage­ of a riparian area classification and ment. In: Johnson, R. R.; McCor­ management system on the Siuslaw Ewel, K. C. Riparian ecosystems: conser­ mick, J. F., tech. coord. Strategies National Forest, Oregon. Unpub­ vation of their unique characteristics. for protection and management of lished paper. Corvallis, OR: U.S. In: Johnson, R. R.; McCormick, J. F. floodplain wetlands and other ripar­ Department of Agriculture, Forest tech. coord. Strategies for protection ian ecosystems: Proceedings of the Service, Siuslaw National Forest; and management of floodplain symposium: 1978 December 11-13; 1980. wetlands and other riparian ecosys­ Calloway Gardens, GA. Gen. Tech. tems. Proceedings of the sym­ Rep. WO-12. Washington, DC: U.S. Jackman, S. M. Woodpeckers of the posium; 1978 December 11-13; Department of Agriculture, Forest Pacific Northwest: their characteris­ Calloway Gardens, GA. Gen. Tech. Service; 1979: 80-92. tics and their role in the forests. Rep. WO-12. Washington, DC: U.S. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State Univer­ Department of Agriculture, Forest Harr, R. D. Forest practices and sity; 1974. 147 p. Thesis. Service; 1979: 56-61. streamflow in western Oregon. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-49. Portland, OR: Johnson, M. G.; Beschta, R. L. Logging, U.S. Department of Agriculture, infiltration capacity, and surface Forest Service, Pacific Northwest erodibility in western Oregon. J. For. Forest and Range Experiment 78(6): 334-337; 1980. Station; 1976. 18 p.

Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 77 Kelly, W.; Hubbell, R.; Lee, S.; Shikany, L. Maser, C.; Mate, B. R.; Franklin, J. F.; Nelson, R. W.; Horak, G. C.; Olson, E. Management of r IjJarian habitats. Dyrness, C. T. Natural history of Western reservoir and stream Coordination guidelines for wildlife Oregon coast mammals. Gen. Tech. habitat improvements handbook. habitats, No., 9; San Francisco, CA: Rep. PNW-133. Portland, OR: U.S. FWS/OBS-78/56, Ft. Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture, Forest U.S. Department ofthe Interior, Fish Forest Service, California Region; Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Wildlife Service, Office of 1975. and Range Experiment Station; Biological Services; 1978. 1981.496 p. Kennedy, C. E. Wildlife conflicts in ripa­ Odum, E. P. Fundamentals of ecology. rian management: water. In: Martin, D. J.; Salo, E. 0.; White, S. T.; 3d ed. W. B. Saunders, Co., Philadel­ Johnson, R. R.; Jones, D. A; tech. [and others]. The impact of man­ phia, PA; 1971.574 p. coord. Importance, preservation aged streamside timber removal on and management of riparian habitat; cutthroat trout and the stream Odum, E. P. Ecological importance of the a symposium; 1977 July 9; Tucson, ecosystem. FRI-UW 8107, Final riparian zone. In: Johnson, R. R.; AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-43. Ft. Report; Seattle, WA: University of McCormick, J. F. Tech. Coord. Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Washington, College of Fisheries. Strategies for protection and man­ Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky 1981.65p. ~ agement of floodplain wetlands and Mountain Forest and Range Experi­ other riparian ecosystems. Proceed­ ment Station; 1977: 52-58. Meehan, W. R.; Swanson, F. J.; Sedell, ings of the symposium; 1978 De­ J. R. Influences of riparian vegeta­ cember 11-13; Calloway Gardens, Ketcheson, G.; Froehlich, H. A Hydro­ tion on aquatic ecosystems with GA Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-12. logic factors and environmental particular reference to salmonid Washington, DC: U.S. Department impacts of mass soil movements in fishes and their food supply. In: of Agriculture, Forest Service; 1979: the Oregon Coast Range. WRRI56. Johnson, R. R.; Jones, D. A; tech. 2-4. Corvallis, OR: Water Resources coord. Importance, preserv;3.tion Research Institute, Oregon State and management of riparian habitat; Platts, W. S. Effectsof livestock grazing. University; 1978. 94 p. a symposium; 1977 July 9; Tucson, In: Influence of forest and rangeland AZ: Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-43. Ft. management on anadromous fish Lantz, R. L. Fish population impacts. In: Collins, CO: U.S. Department of habitat in western North America. Proceedings of a symposium: Forest Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-124, Portland, land uses and stream environments. Mountain Forest and Range Experi­ OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1970 October 19-21; Corvallis, OR: mentStation; 1977: 137-148. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Oregon State University; 1971 ~ Forest and Range ExperimentStation; 246-268. Miller, R. E.; Fight, R. D. Fertilizing Doug­ 1981.25 p. las-fir forests. Gen.Tech. Rep. PNW­ Lantz, R. L. Guidelines for stream protec­ 83. Portland, OR: U.S. Department Proctor, C. M.; GarCia, J. C.; Galvin, D. V.; tion in logging operations. Res. Div. of Agriculture, Forest Service, [and others]. An ecological charac­ Rep.; Portland, OR: Oregon State Pacific Northwest Forest and Range terization of the Pacific Northwest Game Commission; 1971 Q: 29 p. Experiment Station; 1979.29 p. coastal region. FWS/OBS-79/11 through 79/15; 5 vols. Portland, OR: Larse, R. W. Prevention and control of Minore, D.; Smith, C. E. Occurrence and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, erosion and stream sedimentation growth of four northwestern tree Biological Services Program. 1980. from forest roads. In: Proceedings of species over shallow water tables. a symposium: Forest land uses and Res. Note PNW-160, Portland, OR: Rothacher, J. Increases in water yield stream environments. 1970 October U.S. Department of Agriculture, following clearcut logging in the 19-21; Corvallis, OR: Oregon State Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Pacific Northwest. Water Resour. University; 1971: 76-83. Forest and Range Experiment Res. 6(2): 653-658; 1970. Station 1971. 9 p. Leopold, L. B.; Wolman, M. G.; Miller, Rothacher, J. Does harvest in west slope J. P. Fluvial processes in geomor­ Moring, J. R. The Alsea watershed study: Douglas-fir increase peak flow in phology. San Francisco, CA: W. H. effects of logging on the aquatic small forest streams? Res. Pap. Freeman and Co; 1964. 522 p. resources of three headwater PNW-163. Portland, OR: U.S. De­ streams of the Alsea River, Oregon. partment of Agriculture, Forest Lyon, L. J.; Crawford, H. S.; Czuhai, E.; Part III-Discussion and recommen­ Service, Pacific Northwest Forest [and others]. Effects of fire on dations. Fishery Res. Rep. NO.9. and Range Experiment Station; fauna-a state-of-knowledge re­ Corvallis, OR: Oregon Department 1973.13 p. view. National Fire Effects Work­ of Fish and Wildlife; 1975.24 p. shop; 1978 April 10-14; Denver CO; Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-6. Washington, Morisawa, M. E. Streams: their dynamics DC.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, and morphology. New York: Forest Service; 1978.22 p. McGraw-Hili; 1968. 175 p.

78 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands Ruth, R. H.; Yoder, R. A. Reducing wind Storch, R. L. Livestock/streamside Swanston, D. N impact of natural events. damage in the forests of the Oregon management programs in eastern In: Meehan, W. R. tech, ed.lnfluence Coast Range. Res. Pap. PNW-7. Oregon. In: Cope, O. B., ed. Pro­ of forest and rangeland manage­ Portland, OR: U.S. Department of ceedings of the forum - g razing and ment on anandromous fish habitat in Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific riparian/stream ecosystems; 1978 western North America. Gen.Tech. Northwest Forest and Range Experi­ November 3-4; Denver, CO: Trout Rep. PNW-104. Portland, OR: U.S. ment Station; 1953.29 p. Unlimited; 1979: 56-59. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest State of Oregon, Department of Forestry. Streetby, L. R. Buffer strips- considera­ and Range Experiment Station; Oregon forest practice rules. Salem, tions in the decision to leave. In: 1980.27 p. OR: Oregon Administrative Rules, Proceedings of a symposium: Forest Chapter 629, Sections 24-101 land uses and stream environments. Taber, R. D. Seasonal landscape use by through 24-648, 7th Revision, effec­ 1970 October 19-21; Corvallis, OR: elk in the managed forests of the tive 1/10/80. Established under ORS Oregon State University; 1971: Cedar Creek drainage, western 527.610 to 527.730 and subsection 194-198. Washington. Final Report to U.S. (1) of 527.990; 1980~. Department of Agriculture, Forest Swanson, F. J. Geomorphology and Service for June 1, 1974-June 30, State of Oregon. The Oregon interagency ecosystems. In: Waring, R. H., ed. 1976, FS-PNW-Grant No. 14 Seattle, guide for conservation and forage Forests: fresh perspectives from WA: University of Washington; 1976. plantings-seeding guide. Joint ecosystem analysis. Proc. 40th 146 p. publication of the state of Oregon Annu. BioI. Colloq. Corvallis, OR: (Oregon State University and Ore­ Oregon State University Press; Tabor, J. E. Inventnry of riparian habitats gon Department of Fish and 1980: 159-170. and associated wildlife along the Wildlife), Portland, OR: U.S. Depart­ Columbia River. Vol. IIA: Corvallis, ment of Agriculture (Forest Service Swanson, F. J.; Gregory, S. V.; Sedell, OR: Report to U.S. Department of and Soil Conservation Service) and J. R.; Campbell, A. S. Land-water the Army, Corps of Engineers, North U.S. Department of Interior (Bon­ interaction: the riparian zone. In: Pacific Division; Oregon Coopera­ neville Power Administration and Edmunds, R. L., ed. The natural tive Wildlife Research Unit; 1976. Bureau of Land Management); behavior and response to stress of 861 p. 1980Q.. 84 p. western coniferous forests. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchin­ Thomas, J. W.; Maser, C.; Rodiek, J. E. State of Washington, Forest Practices son and Ross, Inc.; 1981. Riparian zones. In: Thomas, J. W.; Board. Washington forest practices: tech. ed. Wildlife habitats in man­ rules and regulations. Adopted Swanson, F. J.; Lienkaemper, G. W. aged forests- the Blue Mountains of pursuant to chapter 76.09 RCW, Physical consequences of large Oregon and Washington. Agric. Olympia, WA; Washington State organiC debris in Pacific Northwest Handbook 553. Washington, DC: Forest Practices Board, Department streams. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-69. U.S. Department of Agriculture, of Natural Resources; 1982.76 p. & Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Forest Service; 1979~ 40-47. appendices. Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experi­ Thomas, J. W.; Maser, C.; Rodiek, J. E. Steinblums, J.1. Streamside buffer strips: ment Station; 1978. 12 p. Riparian zones. In: Thomas, J. W.; survival, effectiveness and design. Maser, C.; tech. eds. Wildlife Corvallis, OR: Oregon State Univer­ Swanson, F. J.; Lienkaemper, G. W.; habitats in managed rangelands­ sity; 1977. 181 p. Thesis. Sedell, J. R. History, physical effects the Great Basin of southeastern and management implications of Oregon. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-80. Stevens, L. E.; Brown, B. T.; Simpson, large organic debris in western Portland, OR: U.S. Department of J. M.; Johnson, R. R. The importance Oregon streams. Gen. Tech. Rep. Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific of riparian habitat to migrating birds. PNW-56. Portland, OR: U.S. Depart­ Northwest Forest and Range Experi­ In: Johnson, R. R.; Jones, D. A.; ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, ment Station; 1979Q.. 18 p. tech. coord. Importance, preserva­ Pacific Northwest Forest and Range tion and management of riparian Experiment Station; 1976. 15 p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest habitat; a symposium; 1977 July 9; Service. Wildlife habitat improve­ Tucson, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-43. ment handbook. Forest Service Ft. Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Swanston, D. N. Effect of geology on soil Handbook, FSH2609.11 . Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky mass movement activity in the Washington, DC: U.S. Department Mountain Forest and Range Experi­ Pacific Northwest. In: Youngberg, C. of Agriculture, Forest Service; 1969. ment Staion; 1977: 156-164. T., ed. Forest soils and land use. Ft. Collins, CO: Proc. Fifth North Amer. For. Soils Conf., Colorado State University; 1978: 89-115.

Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands 79 I ! I

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Service. Vegetation management Livestock grazing management and with herbicides, environmental water quality protection (state-of­ statement-Siskiyou, Siuslaw and the-art reference document). EPA Umpqua forests. Portland, OR: U.S. 910/9-79-67. Seattle, WA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Environmental Protection Agency Service, Pacific Northwest Region; and USDI Bureau of Land Manage­ 1974.115 p. & appendices. ment; 1979. 147 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Walters, H. M.;Teskey, R. D.; Hinckley, T. Processes, procedures, and M. Impact of water level changes on methods to control pollution result­ woody riparian and wetland com­ ing from silvicultural activities. EPA munities. Vol VIII: Pacific Northwest 430/9-73-010. Washington, DC: and Rocky Mountain regions. FWS/ U.S. Environmental Protection OBS-78/94; Kearneysville, WV: U.S. Agency, Office of Air and Water Department of the Interior, Fish and Programs; 1973. 91 p. Wildlife Service, Biological Services Program, 1980.47 p. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Logging roads and protection of Yee, C. S.; Roelofs, T. D. Planning forest water quality. EPA 91 0/9-75-007. roads to protect salmonid habitat. Seattle, WA: U.S. Environmental In: Meehan, W.R., tech. ed. Influence Protection Agency, Region X, Water of forest and rangeland manage­ Division; 1975.312 p. ment of anadromous fish habitat in western North America. Gen. Tech. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Rep. PNW-109. Portland, OR: U.S. Forest harvest, residue treatment, Department of Agriculture, Forest reforestation and protection of water Service, Pacific Northwest Forest quality. EPA 910/9-76-020. Seattle, and Range Experiment Station; WA: U.S. Environmental Protection 1980.26 p. Agency, Region X, 1976. 271 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Silviculture chemicals and pro­ tection of water quality. EPA 910/9-77-036. Seattle, WA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region X; 1977,224 p.

80 Riparian Zones and Freshwater Wetlands