State Agency Measures

Physical Habitat: Key Parameter for Restoring Salmon Populations

Issue Background:

Key physical habitat components important for fish production in freshwater and estuaries have been altered by human activity. Much of this alteration has occurred within the last 150 years due to European settlement (Meehan, 1991). However, fish habitat in pre-settlement coastal Oregon was subject to substatial disturbance from fires that were set by native Americans (Hemstrom and Franklin, 1982). Other disturbances had significant effects as well including floods, volcanism, and climate change that triggered erosion events (Orr et al., 1992 and Personius et al., 1993).

"Channel improvement" has greatly reduced the complexity and sinuosity of stream channels (Sedell and Duvall, 1985). Active removal of large woody debris and harvest of forests has greatly reduced the supply of large woody debris in many channels (Chamberlin et al., 1991 and Bisson et al, 1987). Land use activites have caused increases to normal sediment regimes resulting in changes to channel morphology and substrate composition (Everest et al., 1987). In addition, riparian area function has been hampered by past riparian tree harvest and land use changes. Riparian areas, as a whole, do not produce shade, litter, or large wood as they did in the past. Wetland and estuarine habitat has been altered and reduced in size.

Data are available that help quantify the physical condition of Oregon's streams and riparian areas. Cooperative stream habitat surveys were begun by the Oregon Forest Industries Council (OFIC) and member companies, and the Umpqua Basin Fisheries Restoration Initiative in cooperation with ODFW in 1993. The Department of Forestry joined these survey efforts in 1994, and the study efforts continue. Over 2,000 stream miles have been surveyed in the Coastal Basin mostly on forest land. In addittion, there have been stream surveys done on federal lands by the BLM and Forest Services that encompass hundreds of stream miles. Both survey methods are based on a modified Hankin and Reeves survey method.

Private land Coastal Basin survey results were summarized from information provided by ODFW (C. Rassmusen, personal communication 1996). The results come from 2,026 miles of forest land stream surveys in the following subbasins:

The survey results contain information from a portion of agricultural and small private woodland owner lands as well. Whenever possible, surveys were begun in such downstream reaches so as to completely survey a stream from its confluence to its headwater area.

Table 1 summarizes the coastal basin results expressed in terms of ODFW habitat category quality benchmarks. This is analogous to expressing how the actual survey results compare to ODFW's desired future conditions, in terms of good, adequate (fair), and poor. The benchmarks are described in attachment 1.

This is a good sample size (2,027 miles; 1,795 individual reaches) and probably is a very reasonable approximation of the habitat condition of streams and riparian area on industrial forests in the Coastal Basin.

Although information is not provided in Table 1, the basic data from these stream surveys indicate that riparian areas are often dominated by alder trees. These hardwood riparian areas are providing good shade, bank stability, floodplain roughness, and allochthonous food input functions based on analysis results in Table 1. Alder cannot; however, provide the inputs of larger LWD which can only be supplied by large conifer trees. Alder stands may succeed to brush stands with reduction in shade and other functions over time.

Oregon has in place a number of regulatory and voluntary programs directed at maintaining and improving physical habitat for salmonids. These programs include the Forest Practices Act, the Fill and Removal program, the Statewide land use program, the CAFO program, and the state water qulaity laws. A number of new programs, such as SB 1010 (the Agricultural Water Quality Water Management Act) are now being implemented. Many additional voluntary programs have been developed and will be implemented under this plan.

Background about Factors for Decline

The physical habitat factors for decline have been identified based upon review of key literature such as the Botkin and NRC Reports, the professional judgement of state agency staffs, and the advice of NMFS staff. Not all identified factors are of equal weight in contributing to the decline of coastal salmonids. There are significantly different views about the extent of habitat modifications and data are limited with regard to the degree to which changes have occurred and are currently limiting salmonid production.

In the subsequent sections of this Chapter, a detailed description is provided of the various physcial habitat factors of decline for coho salmon and biological objectives for management and recovery of these factors. Included is analysis of the various base programs and measures offered by various state agencies that are aimed at improving degraded physical habitat conditions that may have led to the decline of coho salmon. In discusing overall program and measure adequacy, the measures effectiveness at meeting biological objectives is examined. The factors are generally discussed in their relative order of perceived importance.

Key attributes evaluated include measure extent, effectivness, certaintly of implementation, and tracking mechanisms that will be used to adjust the measure to make it more effective over time.

In discussing the various factors of decline, it becomes obvious that they are inter-related. For instance, large roughness effects channel morphology and channel complexity and yet large

roughness and channel mopholoigical complexity are treated seperately.

TABLE 1

Oregon Forest Industries Council, Coastal Basin Stream Habitat Survey Results expressed as ODFW quality benchmarks in terms of percent total stream length surveyed (2,2027 miles). Results were determined for individual subbasins by ODFW and the weighted averages for the Coastal Basin as a whole were determined by V. Kaczynski.

ODFW benchmarks assume sedimentary parent rock and are generally more conservative than benchmarks for volcanic parent rock as an example. Quality benchmarks were derived and supplied by K. Moore of ODFW. Individual subbasin results were supplied by C. Rassmusen of ODFW.

Background about Habitat Objectives

Objectives have been identified for each of the identified factors for decline. The objectives are established to support the recovery of desired habitat conditions that will ultimately maintain healthy populations. The objectives identified for each factor fall into the following categories:

Objectives to assess status of physical habitat conditions.
Objectives to establish more quatitative targets.
Objectives to prevent degradation of existing conditions.
Objectives to restore degraded physical conditions.

While the objectives often have quantitative targets to help measure progress, the State is especially concerned that establishing measurable targets for channel conditions would be a difficult undertaking with limited potential value. Physical habitat objectives related to channel condition would need to reflect a range of factors, including the natural temporal and spatial distribution of both desireable and undesirable conditions that would be expected to occur.

The recent increase in activity and funding to Watershed Councils and other grassroots efforts shows promise as a new mechanism to manage and restore salmonid habitat at the watershed scale. Watershed councils will help establish more local objectives over time that will also be used to define progress toward "success."

Implementation Monitoring

1. Channel morphology:

a. Factor for decline:

In many coastal streams, human activities have simplified or otherwise modified channel complexity, braidedness and interconnection with the floodplain to the detriment of salmonids.

b. Discussion of Factor:

Many researchers have regarded channel complexity (especially the creation of slow water and back water habitat during winter months) the major limiting factor regarding freshwater habitat for coho salmon (Bustard and Narver, 1975, McMahon and Hartman, 1989, and Dolloff, 1986). Juvenile coho salmon are genetically adapted to slow water having a body shape that does not work well in fast water (Bisson et al., 1988). Fish population surveys during winter months typically find the highest densities of coho in slow water areas off channel, in beaver dams or in channel spanning pools. Likewise coho are most often found in pool habitat during summer months.

Channels that are "complex," allowed to meander, and have large wood and beaver activity have higher proportions of slow water habitat (Dolloff, 1986, Bisson, 1987, and Meehan, 1991). Streams that are channelized lose most if not all of this type of habitat (Leopold et al., 1964 and Sullivan et.al., 1987). Since many channels have been depeleted of wood due to stream cleaning, splash damming, riparian harvest, or to improve channel conveyance or navigation much of this habitat has been depleted (See large wood factor of decline for more information). At this time, the only comphrensive survey of stream habitat outside of federal lands are the ODFW stream habitat surveys primarily done on state and private forest lands (see overall background for physical habitat above). While these surveys indicate that the amount of pool habitat is relatively good, pool habitat complexity has been reduced due to large woody debris depletion. For other landuses, these numbers are reasonably expected to show even more depletion as there have been less restrictions on wood removal and channelization in the past.

c. Habitat Objectives;

i.) Inventory existing channel morphology elements in at least 40% of fish bearing coastal streams by 2001.

ii.) Identify by reach or stream type, the type and diversity of channel morphology elements necessary to support healthy salmonid stocks in all coastal streams by 2001.

iii.) In coastal streams, ensure that existing programs do not allow human activities that would modify channel morphology, or the upstream and upland processes that generate various morphological features and morphological diversity, to the detriment of salmonids beyond present (1997) conditions.

iv.) Where channel morphology in coastal streams has been altered by human activities to the detriment of salmonids, actively restore those channel morphology elements necessary to support healthy salmonid populations, and/or the upstream and upland conditions that will restore those elements naturally, in 5% of altered stream miles per biennium.

d. Adequacy of actions/measures to meet Objectives:

The inventory target described in objective (i) should be acheived by 2001. Watershed analyses that include channel condition information have been completed or in process and should be soon completed for most federal forest lands. ODFW habitat surveys (ODFWIB2 and ODF4, 24) are beginning to give a comprehensive snapshot on a growing percentage of streams in the Oregon Coast Range. This is most evident on state and private forestland. At the current time there are habitat surveys on about 2000 miles of surveys on west slope coast range plus Umpqua and Rogue basin streams. Rough quantative estimates of the channel network length on state and private forest land range from 10,000 - 15,000 miles for the Oregon Coast Range at ground level scale for all perenial and ephemeral channels. This means that between 12-20 percent of the channel network already has had a survey conducted on it. For streams that contain fish and moreover contain coho salmon, the percentage is higher. In addition, forest landowners are conducting independent watershed anaylsis efforts that will increase the extent of stream reaches invenoried (ODF 41-45). The stream habitat inventories described in ODF4 and 24 will continue at the current rate of effort (1000 miles per year).

On non-forest land increased Watershed Council efforts will add milage to the surveys. DEQ habitat monitoring (Regional Monitoring and Assessment Program, REMAP) will add more detailed information on habitat (and corresponding fish and aquatic insect community numbers) but for a much lower sample size (currenlty about 60 short reaches in the Oregon Coast Range area).

From the current iniatives and momentum regarding surveys in the Oregon Coast Range a large percentage of streams (at least 40% of streams on state and private ownership) should have surveys done for them after the next four years. The information should be useful for watershed assessments and for prioritizing locations for ehancement projects. Fish presence surveys (ODF 25 and ODFWIB2) and subsequent GIS development of fish classification maps (ODF 59) will give the overall stream mileage that is fish-bearing to determine what percentage of fish-bearing streams have been surveyed.

From the information currently being collected, as explained for the first objective, much of the information needed to assess functional channel morphology (Objective 2) is already being collected. At this time, preliminary benchmarks have already been established for several channel morphological elements (see Attachment 1). As more research and monitoring is conducted, the benchmarks can be adjusted refined, and localized. As watershed assessments are done at the local scale, there will be more site specific benchmarks determined. By 2001, most if not all watersheds will have had some initial watershed assessments and the benchmarks at the regional and statewide scale will have been refined several times over to give fairly robust estimates of needed habitat elements.

From a watershed perspective approxiametly 90% of the overall landbase is deemed forest land. Of that landbase approximately 75% is under state and private ownership. For the federal portion of foreslands watershed function that may influence channel morpology is regulated under FEMAT. Under these provisions approximetly 85% of the landbase has been taken out of active timber production. In addition, riparian protection is extremely high with buffers 300 feet wide for fish bearing streams.

For state and private forest lands, several programs administered by ODF are aimed at protecting channel morphology from further degradation (ODF 1,2,3,9,26,27,33,35,36,37, and 38). Stream morphology can be degraded by excess sedimentation. These effects include channel widening (Lyons and Beschta, 1983) and the loss of pool habitat (Lisle and Hilton, 1992). The primary souce of accellerated sedimentation has been found to be roads (Megahan et al., 1992). The forest practices program has existing rules that deal with existing roads (ODF 1,2, 35,36, and 37). ODF 1 is a new volunatary program to deal with inactive roads and will decrease the risk of excess sedimentation over current baseline conditions significantly. In addition, a road assessment protocol and monitoring program will track implementation over time. ODF 1 (see also ODF 2 for state lands) calls for a program to assess road drainage, sidecast fill slopes, proper design and sizing of culverts. The program will seek out problem areas and then mitigate problems by either upgrading the road or properly putting the road to bed.

In addition, to these programs, ODF 3 calls for a technical and policy review of rules and administrative processes related to slope stability. The end result of this process will be rules that minimize the risk of excess sedimentation (over current conditions) due to landsliding from both roads and harvest units. For additional information about the programs related to landslide issues see the issue paper titled "What are the risks to salmonids from debris flows, and are additional practices needed to further reduce these risks?" in the appendices. The issue paper does not include consideration of measure ODF 3.

Alteration of hydrology can also alter channel morphology as well (Schumn, 1977). However, for forested lands, studies showing altered channels due to altered hydrology associated with managment of forest land are clearly lacking (Botkin 1994 p. 86). The measures regarding sediment reduction from roads will also mitigate some potential hydrological effects of roads by dissconnecting them where possible from the stream channel network. In addition, the bedding of many poorly functioning roads (in ODF 1 and 2) will also mitigate hydrological alterations. Measure ODF 38 also limits clearcut size and extent and would tend to dampen potential hydrological effects of widespread focused clearcutting. WRD and ODFW, through measure "peak flow protection" shall jointly develop a policy to assure that peak flows are available below water storage projects to maintain the channel morpholoigcal benefits provided by periodic peak flows.

From a near stream riparian perspective the role of landuses other than forestry in meeting Objective 3 under this factor of decline is greatly increased (See table in riparian factor of decline section following). Land management activities in the riparian area can greatly influence channel morphology. However, several state agencies have various programs to minimize potential impacts to channel morphology. Many of these programs are new and while it is difficult to dicern how effective they will be, it is certain that these measures will protect stream morphology to a greater degree than regulations and other programs of the past.

One of the key salmon protection measures is the in-water working guidelines by ODFW. ODFWIVA1 will better disperse these guidelines among other state agencies and effected users. ODFWIVA4 and 6 will also improve protection by providing better technical assitance and by closing fill and removal areas that pose a risk to salmonid habitat. Better coordination with other state agencies is also a goal that will increase protection (for example see SMB 5-6)

For state and private forest land, there are several measures aimed at protecting the instream and nearstream area including ODF 9, 22,26,27 28, and 29). The removal of large wood and channel modification is prohibited except for stream crossings or in emergency situations where life or structures are threatened. The Water Protection rules (ODF27) (see riparian factor of decline for more detail) along with voluntary measures ODF 17, 18, 19, 20 and 22 will provide high levels of riparian wood retention and supply to the stream than occured from past practices. Riparian no touch zones for fish bearing streams and vegetative retention for non-fish bearing streams will also help ensure that channel banks are maintained and root strength near channel banks are maintained. The current regulations will decrease the risk of channel instability over the previous regulations. The end result of these measures will be a continuing improvement of stream channel condition and wood recruiment over time on private forest lands. These programs are regualtory with a strong field presence of regulators, widespread in extent, and have an active monitoring program (ODF 10-14) to evaluate implementation and effectiveness over time. The ODF program is also well established and is generally well accpeted so implementation is expected to be high. However, even the implemetation rate will be monitored (ODF 23). There are also statutes and rules within the ODF program that allow monitoring results to be used to change rules if needed.

For agricultural lands, ODA1's program for the development and implementation of water quality management plans will also lead to improved riparian conditions over the current baseline for the vast majority of non-forested lands. Specific to ODA 1, there is the mandate to create propher functioning riparian communities to address beneficial use impairment as well as a prohibition of agricultural activities that prevent riparian function and restoration. Unlike ODF rules, ODA 1 has no specific requirments regarding buffer width or designated practices. The measure will allow farmers and ranchers flexibility in how to manage for riparian function to achieve water quality and protect beneficial uses.

Because this is a new program and is charting into unknown territory the degree of implementation is unknown. The degree of effectiveness monitoring that will lead to more effective plans is also unknown at this time. However, it is certain that if this plan is implemented there will be increased protection over the current conditions. It should also be noted that there are also several efforts comming from watershed councils to replant fence and improve riparian areas and channels that will complement this program.

For state owned road projects, there are several measures aimed at mitigating impacts from roads and highways (ODOT 6 and other baseline rules and regulations). These rules mandate that ODOT will modify road and bridge designs in future projects to protect even enhance exisiting channel morphology. Beyond this the NPDES program requires effective erosion and sediment control plans to minimize risk of material entering waters of the state. These programs are all within the scope of ODOT so the implementation rate is extemely high.

In urban areas Goal 5 landuse planning standards require buffers and put restrictions on construction in floodplains and riparian areas (see riparian section for more detail).

The Division of State Lands (DSL) actively manages fill and removal activities for all waters of the state and have recently ammended several programs to make them more "fish friendly." For instance, DSL imposes condtions on fill and removal activities to prevent or minimize channel alterations or alter those processes that lead to shaping channel morphology. DSL is currently trying to develop Best Management Practices (DSL 2) for all types of fill and removal activities. These rules along with better interagency coordination (DSL 3) will allow for more careful conditioning of fill and removal permits to protect stream morphology in the future. In addition gravel mining will be limited to annual gravel recruitment (DSL 22). The combined effect of these measures will be increased protection over the regulatory baseline of the past. Finally, measure [ODFWIVA4] will result in WRD, DSL and ODFW working jointly to implement closure of fill and removal areas through the authority of the Water Resources Commission. This approach will be taken only on specific critically important salmon habitat areas, and only after other management approaches prove insufficient.

Objective (iv), of all objectives regarding channel morphology, perhaps will be the hardest to quantify as determining the number of miles that are "altered" will be difficult. Another difficulty is to quantify the degree of actual "restoration" that occurs for given enhancement actions. For this reason, the percent stream network enhanced per beinium, while quantified, should be considered to be a "soft" number. As time passes and monitoring results and analysis is done (see ODFWIB3) better quantification will occur. However, programs surronding Oregon state government are begining to address degraded streams conditions for hundreds of stream reaches throughout the state. The following discussion will outline the extent and content of these various activities.

On forest land there are several iniatives and incentives to "enhance" stream habitat (ODF 5-8, 30, 31, 39-40, 51, and 58). The Northcoast and Midcoast iniatives (ODF 5 and 6) are large well funded efforts done in cooperation with ODF, ODFW and forest private industry. Reconaisance and analysis of prefered enhancement sites is the first step in the process. ODF 7 will allow the existing initiatives and similiar iniatives and efforts to become much larger and ambitious in scope. Generally speaking, under the existing iniatitives ehancement activites are targeted to areas that, based on stream surveys, are lower gradient and have low wood loadings and low pools (i.e., targeting coho salmon habitat and coho salmon habitat factor of dimished slow water habitat). Based on past performance and recent trends, stream enhancement will occur at about 100 sites per bienium in conjunction with this program. This means that at least 50 miles of targeted streams will have enhancement activity in a given bienium in the range of coastal coho. "Enhancement" activities include adding wood and boulders to the streams as well as creating alcoves and side channels. This rate of enhancement and restoration should be substantially increased as ODF 7 and other efforts are implemented.

Oregon Parks is conducting several stream enhancement projects targeting coho and other salmon habitat that will improve channel morphology (OPRD 1-8). These projects, though small in extent, are typically near the coast and on lower gradient reaches that are prefered coho habitat. These projects will also have high educational value to encourage other enhancement efforts.

ODFW, OPRD, OEDD, and DSL are enacting several measures that will facilitate stream enhancment activity (see listing below). In most cases these measures streamline technical support, remove barriers in getting permits, provide additional material for enhancement activity, and streamline grant applications. These measures are not actual enhancement activities but will lead to more miles being done are important and significant. When considered in the context of facilitating greater watershed council activity these measures will add greatly to the number of miles enhanced. ODF 59 should reduce barriers that prevent landowners from implementing restoration efforts.

ODFW is also involved with better targeting enhancment activities both by location and type and in monitoring enhancement implementation and effectiveness for all landuses. These activities will be crucial in guiding activity in the future.

In summary, activity on forest and park land activities along with state regulation streamlining and increased Watershed Council activity should lead to 100 miles or more of targeted stream channel habitat enhancement per bienium. These activities will oftentimes occur in targeted places where the most effectiveness for salmon production will be gained. However, not all activities will be absolutely targeted as the availability of willing landowners as well as access and other factors will limit where enhancement activities can occur. Monitoring (implementation and effectiveness, ODFWIB3) is planned to track the progress of enhancement activities.

e. Description of Applicable Agency Actions/Measures:

ODA actions/measures:

ODA1 - SB 1010 Program To Develop Overall Water Quality Management Plans: Program to develop overall water quality management plans for listed watersheds through a cooperative effort with watershed farmers and ranchers.

OEDD Actions/Measures:

OEDD2 - Effective Administration of U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service Funds For Watershed

Restoration Work On Public And Private Lands.

DEQ actions/measures:

DEQ6 - Tillamook Bay National Estuary Program: Continue to support and provide technical assistance for the development of a coordinated conservation management plan inthe Tillamook Bay watershed that addresses salmon concerns.

ODFW actions/measures:

ODFWIVA1 - Provide Technical Assistance for Habitat Protection: Promote increased habitat protection by cooperating with and assisting federal agencies, other state agencies, and local governments that have regulatory authority over activities that occur in salmon habitat.

ODFWIB2 - Inventory and Monitoring of Salmon Habitat and Distribution: Provide information base for restoration of salmon spawning and rearing habitat through inventory of habitat quality and distribution and salmon population distribution, and through determination of salmon production capacity.

ODFWIB3 - Habitat Restoration Evaluation: Evaluate representative restoration projects to quantify the effectiveness and implementation of techniques used and to determine appropriate restoration strategies for use in specific situations.

ODFWIVA4 - Administratively Close Fill and Removal Areas: As a response to a threat to specific critically important salmon habitat areas (and only if other management approaches prove insufficient), protect important salmon spawning and rearing areas by consulting with DSL and WRD on the possibility of administratively closing them to fill and removal activities.

ODFWIVA6 - Promote and Assist Habitat Protection Actions: Provide technical assistance to private landowners, watershed councils, and other cooperators to promote and guide protection of high priority salmonid habitat areas on forest, agriculture and other lands.

ODF actions/measures:

The Forest Practice rules provide protection to riparian vegetation, banks, channels that minimize changes to channel morphology. Best Management Practices minimize increaes in sedimnet that may adversely affect channel morphology.

ODF1 - Road Erosion and Risk Project: Many forest roads built prior to the development of the Oregon Forest Practices Act or prior to the current BMPs pose increased sediment risk to fish habitat. Industrial forest landowners have agreed to implement a voluntary program to identify risks from roads and to address those risks.

ODF2 - State Forest Lands Road Erosion and Risk Project: State forest landowners have agreed to implement a voluntary program on state-owned lands to identify risks from roads and to address those risks. This effort will upgrade at least 130 miles of road in each of the next three biennium. Many of the road systems were built prior to the Oregon Forest Practices Act to salvage Tillamook burn timber in the 1950's. The state forest land was in private ownership at that time.

ODF3 - Technical and Policy Review of Rules and Administrative Processes related to Slope Stability: To analyze the effects of the February 1996 and November 1996 storms, the Department is in the process of collecting and analyzing landslide information from study zones within the storm areas, this project is described in measure ODF 10. As a follow-up of the monitoring effort the Board of Forestry will review the existing Forest practice rules and program in relation to slope stability to determine if changes in rules or administration procedures are needed.

ODF4 - Stream Habitat Assessments: For the last three years, industrial forest landowners and state forest lands have contracted with ODFW to complete stream habitat surveys following modified Hankin and Reeves protocol (ODFW protocol). Assessments to date have included approximately 5000 miles of stream statewide.

ODF5 - North Coast Salmonid Habitat Restoration Project: The North Coast Salmonid Habitat Restoration Project is an existing program that's been in place for two years and has provided resources to conduct enhanceement actitities at dozens of locations in the north coast areas.

ODF6 - Mid-Coast Restoration Project: The Mid-Coast Restoration Project has been modeled after the North Coast Restoration Project. Several dozen projects are targeted for the next biennium.

ODF7 - Fund 7 New Fish Biologists to provide Technical Assistance for Salmonid Habitat Restoration: This voluntary measure by the Oregon Forest Industries Council (OFIC) landowners, will function to provide technical assistance in western Oregon to forest landowners conducting salmonid habitat restoration projects. Current in place grassroots efforts such as the north and mid coast initiatives (ODF 5 and 6) lack stable funding, this action will absorb these and create five additional areas covering all of western Oregon providing long term stable funding. This project area will include the western slopes of the Cascades to the Pacific Ocean. This project has the potential to greatly accelerate enhancement activity on private forest land thorughout western Oregon.

ODF8 - Riparian Hardwood Conversions: FP rules have been developed to allow and provide incentives for the conversion of hardwood dominated RMAs (on conifer sites) to establish conifers. This process will be modified to require an additional review process before implementation for hardwood conversions within core areas.

ODF9 - Northwest State Forest Lands Management Plan: Oregon Department of Forestry is preparing a NW Oregon State Forest management Plan. A draft plan is expected to be completed by the summer of 1997. The plan will cover over 600,000 acres of state forest land.

ODF10 - Forest Practices Monitoring Program: The FP monitoring program evaluates: the implementation of forest practices BMPs, determines if BMPs are meeting their intended purposes, and validates assumptions upon which rules may have been developed.

ODF11 - Monitoring of Riparian Management Areas under the Forest Practice Act: The riparian monitoring project will look at the effectiveness of the 1994 water protection rules in maintaining and creating sources of current and potential LWD and in maintaining effective riparian stand structure in terms of stream protection and wildlife habitat.

ODF13 - Storms of 1996 Monitoring Project: The storm of February 5 to 8, 1996 resulted in many landslides, channel changes, and other effects to natural resources, public, and private resources. The goal of the project is to determine which forest practices and designs successfully minimized or contributed to impacts.

ODF 15 - Evaluation of Road and Timber Harvest BMPs to Minimize Sediment Impacts: The purpose of this project is to provide land managers and appropriate agencies with specific information on road drainage practices that minimize sediment entry into streams and how these practices are implemented in western Oregon.

ODF22 - 25 Percent In-Unit Leave Tree Placement and Additional Voluntary Retention: This is a voluntary measure to retain up to 100 percent of the in-unit trees along Type N or F streams in "core areas" and other special areas along specific stream reaches when ODF in consultation with ODFW determine additional retention along streams is beneficial to coho salmon recovery.

ODF23 - BMP Compliance Audit Program: Within this measure ODF will conduct compliance auditing. Compliance auditing will be planned and implemented within the next two years by the Department.

ODF24 - State Forest Lands Stream Habitat Assessment and Instream Projects: During 1994 and 1995, 305 miles of stream have been surveyed for habitat on state forest lands by ODFW biologists. Fish distribution surveys have been done on 260 streams and stored on GIS. Contracts with ODFW are planned to complete assessments for the remaining streams and adjacent riparian areas.

ODF26 - Elliot State Forest Habitat Conservation Plan: The Elliott State Forest (ESF) Habitat Conservation Plan developed for Northern Spotted Owls and Marbled Murrelets also enhances riparian areas. The forest covers approximately 93, 000 acres in the Oregon coast range.

ODF27 - Increased Riparian Protection: 1994 Forest Practices rule changes have increased vegetation retention requirements in RMA's to increase protection and the potential delivery to near optimal for LWD.

ODF28 - Protection of Significant Wetlands, including Estuaries: Forest practice rules requiring protection of riparian management areas around significant wetlands, including all estuaries were implemented in late 1991. While all wetlands are protected under the forest practice rules, this change requires the retention of riparian vegetation around the wetland in addition to retention of vegetation within the wetland.

ODF30 - Large Woody Debris Recruitment Incentives: Large woody debris placement incentives were included in the September 1994 Forest Practice Water Protection Rules.

ODF31 - Large Woody Debris Placement Guidelines: ODF and ODFW have developed a guidelines publication for operators to use in the placement of large woody debris in streams. If a proposed woody debris placement project meets the ODF guidelines contained in the publication the process for acquiring approval is streamlined.

ODF33 - Increase Number of Streams and Stream Miles Protected: Through Forest Practice Rule changes protected stream miles have increased approximately 25 - 50 percent.

ODF 35 - Increase Design for Larger Flows: Modification of BMPs for stream crossing structures from 25 to 50 year storm events.

ODF 36 - Upgraded Road Construction & Fill Requirements: Road construction BMPs have been changed to require excavation and fills to be minimized at stream crossings, and that any road fill greater than 15 feet deep must obtain prior approval.

ODF 37 - Upgraded Skid Trail Construction and Fill Requirement: Skid trail construction BMPs have been changed to require excavation and fills to be minimized at stream crossings, and that any skid trail fill greater than 8 feet deep must obtain prior approval.

ODF 38 - Clearcut Limitations: ORS 527.740 restricts clearcuts to 120 acres in size. Combined acreage clearcuts that exceed 120 acres, must be separated by 300 feet until any adjacent areas are reforested and have reached free to grow (generally at least four years).

ODF 39 - Lobster Creek Whole-Basin Coordination Restoration Project: A cooperative voluntary whole basin restoration project to restore native salmonid populations, modeled after Hancock Timber Resource Group's (HTRG) strategy used in the Knowles Creek efforts in the Siuslaw basin.

ODF 40 - Upper Siuslaw Enhancement: This is a voluntary action coordinated through Weyerhaeuser, the Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (Mid-Coast Habitat Restoration Project) for fish habitat improvement on tributaries of the upper Siuslaw river.

ODF 41 - South Siletz Monitoring: This is a voluntary action by Boise Cascade to quantify any changes in stream health after implementation of road enhancement projects on the South Fork Siletz river.

ODF 42 - North Fork Coquille Monitoring Assessment: Menasha is conducting several long term monitoring projects in the North Fork basin of the Coquille River. These projects include fish presence / extent surveys, aquatic habitat surveys, salmon spawning surveys and some temperature monitoring.

ODF 43 - South Fork Coos River Monitoring Assessment: Menasha is conducting salmon spawning surveys on tributaries of the S. Fork Coos River.

ODF 44 - Coos River Mainstem Monitoring Assessment: Menasha is conducting salmon spawning surveys (minimum of two coho life cycles) on Goat Creek a tributary of the Coos River, survey began in 1994 - 1995.

ODF 45 - Coquille, Siletz and Sixes Watershed Monitoring: A long-term monitoring project has been implemented on Georgia Pacific lands in the three above basins. The project began in 1994 and will continue indefinitely.

ODF 47 - Coos, Milliacoma and Upper Siuslaw Rivers Watershed Analysis: Weyerhaeuser is completing watershed analysis for all of their ownership in Oregon. This analysis follows modified protocol used by the State of Washington under their FPA.

ODF 48 - South Fork Siletz Watershed Analysis: This is a voluntary action by Boise Cascade Corp. to assess the geomorphic vulnerabilities of the system, determine stream health and assess any road concerns.

ODF 49 - Ecola Creek Watershed Analysis: Analysis of Ecola Creek watershed (Cannon Beach) Willamette Industries (formally Cavenham) to identify sensitive or high risk areas, requiring special care in management decisions and operations.

ODF 50 - Kilchis Watershed Analysis: Proposed assessment project to asses possible cumulative effects of changes in hydrology, sediment routing and other factors due to land use practices through out the Kilchis watershed channel network (Tillamook Bay NEP Monitoring Program).

ODF 52 - South Coast Technical Advisory Team: This is a coordinating group of agencies and landowners in the south coast area which identify and prioritize habitat restorations within the area.

ODF 58 - Liability Limits for Fish Enhancement Projects: Legislation has been proposed that would limit liability for landowners completing habitat enhancement projects following guidelines established by ODFW and ODF (May 1995 publication ).

ODF 59 - Integrated Forest Assessment: Develop a Geographic Information System (GIS) hydrological layer for the range of the coastal coho. This would make information available to support regulatory and voluntary program implementation.

SMB Actions/Measures:

SMB5 - Acquire Early Review And Coordination On Construction Projects: Establish agency policy and procedure to secure early involvement by appropriate fish biologists in location, design, and timing decisions for projects involving construction in bays and coastal rivers.

SMB6 - Involve ODFW Biologists In Process of Permitting Marine Events: Establish an agency policy and procedure to secure review by appropriate fish biologists of applications for marine events.

OPRD Actions/Measures:

OPRD1 - Disposition of Hazard And Blowdown Trees On OPRD Property: Take fish habitat needs into consideration when deciding the disposition of blowdown and hazard trees. Places high priority on offering trees to ODFW or other agencies or groups to be used as fish habitat.

OPRD2 - Improve Fish Habitat And Riparian Zones Within OPRD Lands: Over the next two years the OPRD (with assistance from ODFW) will identify fish habitat needs, including riparian zone restoration needs on coastal streams within OPRD properties. Interpretive and educational programs will be developed at the high visibility project sites.

OPRD3 - Clear Creek Spawning Habitat: OPRD, in cooperation with ODFW and Dunes NRA, is re-establishing spawning habitat in Clear Creek at Tugman State Park. This project has high visibility and would lend itself to interpretation.

OPRD4 - Sixes River Restoration: With technical assistance from ODFW, the OPRD will place large woody debris in the Salmon and Little Rivers within OPRD properties in the VanDuzer Corridor.

OPRD6 - Spencer Creek Restoration: In cooperation with Boise Cascade and ODFW, the OPRD is proposing to place large woody debris for the purpose of creating off-channel rearing areas in Spencer Creek. In conjunction with this project, an interpretive trail with signs is planned.

OPRD7 - Jackson Creek Restoration: OPRD and ODFW has completed 0.25 mile of stream improvement on Jackson Creek at Cape Lookout State Park.

OPRD8 - North Wolf Creek Restoration: OPRD, in a cooperative effort with ODFW and ODF, will be providing large woody debris for placement in the North Ford of Wolf Creek along approximately one mile of stream to enhance spawning and rearing habitat.

DSL actions/measures:

DSL-2 - DSL will work with other state and federal agencies to develop Best Management Practices (BMPs) for all types of removal-fill activities. TIMELINE: BMPs for all types of permits by 6/98.

DSL-3 - DSL will strengthen interagency coordination on removal-fill permits through Memoranda of Understanding and other institutional mechanisms. TIMELINE: by 9/97.

DSL-7 - DSL has modified its General Authorization for fish habitat enhancement projects to broaden its applicability to channel morphology restoration projects, removing an institutional obstacle to these projects.

DSL-12 - DSL is analyzing the imposition of a surcharge on gravel removal to be devoted to habitat restoration projects. TIMELINE: Coordinated with DSL-2 on BMPs for gravel removal.

DSL-15 - In coastal basins, DSL is targeting compensatory wetlands mitigation projects to fish habitat restoration. TIMELINE: Ongoing.

DSL-22 - DSL will limit all gravel bar removal to annual recruitment, enforce the requirement for surveys and cross-sections, and require annual reporting of the amount actually removed. TIMELINE: In conjunction with DSL-2 on BMPs, by x/97.

ODOT actions/measures:

ODOT - Endangered Species Act Program: Environmental staff within ODOT review construction projects to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act. Ifstream morphology is altered, the rebuild channel will be constructed to provide equivalent or, if possible, better habitat.

ODOT - 6: Environmentally Sensitive Design: ODOT will evaluate and modify road and bridge designs in future projects to ensure the existing channel morphology is maintained, where feasible, or improved

ODOT - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program: Effective erosion and sediment control plans will be prepared and implemented (exceeding DEQ's requirements) for construction projects and some maintenance activities to avoid excess sedimentation causing channel morphology changes.

ODOT -15: Habitat for Fish in Wetland Mitigation: In the future, wetland mitigation efforts will incorporate more measures with benefits for fish including the creation of in-channel or off-channel wetlands.

2. Substrate changes in streams:

a. Factor for decline:

In many coastal streams, human activities have resulted in the loss, redistribution, simplification, burial or other modification of stream bed particle size and distribution to the detriment of salmonids.

b. Discussion of Factor:

Changes in sediment supply and routing dynamics can potentially have several detrimental effects. Excess sediment supply to the extent it overwhelms the sediment transport capacity of a given stream reach can lead to channel aggradation leading to channel instability and widening (Leopold et al., 1964 and Lyons and Beschta, 1984). Excess sediment over transport capcacity can also in some cases fill in pools to some degree (Megahan et al., 1992 and Lisle and Hilton, 1992). Excess fine sediment supply (material the size of small sand and smaller) can lead to the intrusion of fines into coarser particle beds decreasing aquatic insect production and possibly decreasing egg to fry survival of salmonids (Everest et al., 1987).

In constrast, splash damming, snagging, and stream cleaning for fish passage in some coastal streams has often led to the loss of large roughness (chaning sediment routing and storage, Sullivan et al., 1987) as well as substrate leaving behind channels with little or no substrate over bedrock (Sedell and Duvall, 1985 and Bisson et al., 1987). Many of the splash dammed streams have been delineated (Sedell and Duvall, 1985); however, much of the snagging and other stream cleaning activity is less well documented.

In the past, forest harvesting practices, road buiding, agriculture, and urbanization have all led to increased sediment supply (over background natural conditions) to the stream channel network. However, it should be noted that natural processes like large intense fires can trigger increases sediment inputs to the channel network even beyond human induced increases (Reeves et al., 1995).

The primary mechanisms by which sediment is supplied to the channel network is by landsliding on steep forest land and by surface erosion from roads, agricultural and urban areas that have surface runoff. Roads are particulariy important as they often input fine sediment into the channel network during periods when streamflow is considerably below peakflows allowing fines to intrude coarser sediment beds (Everest et al., 1987).

While it is certain that increased sedimentation can have negative effects on salmon habitat, it is not so certain that this is a major limiting factor for coho salmon in the Oregon Coast Range. For instance, for the intrusion of fine sediment into spawning gravels factor, the independent Botkin Report (Botkin et al., 1994; p. 88-89) concluded that this effect is "subtle" and Everest et al.(1987), documented that the cleaning action of salmon redd creation mitigates much of the fine sediment buildup in gravels. In addition, a review of salmon habitat in the Oregon Coast Range found that fishery experts gave sediment related problems a low to moderate importance ratings for coho salmon productivity (State of Oregon, 1990). In contrast, factors like temperature, channel complexity and large wood recruitment recieved high importance.

Likewise, the negative effects of excess sedimentation on channel widening and pool filling is also elusive. Stream habitat survey information (see section in Background for physical habitat) shows a high degree of shading (which would indicate that overall widening is not significant) as well as adequate pools for many stream reaches in spite of low levels of channel roughness.

The loss of substrate along with large roughness due to stream cleaning and other factors can be a factor limiting production of coho salmon at least locally. In many cases, scoured channels are incised and lack slow water habitat as well as substrates to support a rich mix of aquatic insects or to support spawning. Streams that have these types of problems can be identified and roughness can be added to them to correct many of these problems. In fact, many of the measures outlined in the stream morphology factor of decline seciton are targeting such wood and boulder limited reaches.

Another potentially significant factor is the loss of spawning gravel due to instream gravel mining. While this might be a significant factor for other salmonids, coho salmon typically spawn upstream from where this activity typically occurs (OWRI, 1994). However, the loss of substrate that can hold and produce aquatic insects for a food source can be a factor of concern for rearing juveniles. In addition, this type of instream activity can create instream disturbance that may harm fish. However, that factor is handled in the direct take due to instream activities section.

Habitat Objectives:

i.) Inventory existing substrate conditions in a representative sample of coastal streams by 2001. Also identify and prioritize reaches that have poor substrate conditions by 2001.

ii.) Identify, by reach or stream type, the substrate elements needed to support healthy salmonid stocks in all coastal streams by 2001.

iii.) Ensure that existing programs do not allow human activities that would modify substrate composition in coastal streams, or the upstream and upland processes that generate instream substrate diversity, to the detriment of salmonids beyond present (1997) conditions.

iv.) Restore substrate abundance and distribution elements necessary for healthy salmonid stocks, and/or the upstream and upland processes that would replenish them naturally, in stream reaches identified as limited due to human induced excessive sedimentation or substrate loss by 2003. This may include up to 100 miles of targeted stream reaches.

d. Adequacy of actions/measures to meet Objectives:

Regarding objective i, ODFW habitat surveys (ODFWIB2 and ODF4 and 24) are beginning to give a comprehensive stream physical habitat snapshot on a growing percentage of streams in the Oregon coast range. However, sediment information taken in these surveys is very coarse and proably not usable to quantatively characterize sediment conditions. However, DEQ's regional environmental monitoring and assessment program (REMAP) will include detailed sediment information and monitoring by DEQ regarding dissolved oxygen will also yield information. Effort by DEQ to find and document benificial use impairment due to sediment conditions for water quality limited status listings under the clean water act will also help document stream reaches that have poor substrate conditions. In addition, there are several other independent monitoring efforts that will increase the extent of stream reaches evaluated (ODF 41-45).

It is apparent that for substrate alone there will not be the sample size that was documented for basic stream habitat detailed in the channel morphology factor of decline. However, the REMAP as well as other iniatives should give a representative sampling of sites adequate to determine some basic sediment parameters for a cross-section of Oregon Coast Range streams. From these efforts, greater quantative information will be detailed as to what is desirable substrate conditions for salmonid survival (objective ii).

From a watershed sediment supply perspective approxiametly 90% of the overall landbase is deemed forest land. Of that landbase approximately 75% is under state and private ownership. For the federal portion of foreslands watershed function that may influence channel morpology is regulated under FEMAT. Under these provisions approximetly 85% of the landbase has been taken out of active timber production. In addition, riparian protection is extremely high with buffers 300 feet wide for fish bearing streams.

For state and private forest lands, several programs administered by ODF are aimed at reducing excess sediment supply (ODF 1,2,3,9,26,27,33,35,36,37, and 38). Stream morphology can be degraded by excess sedimentation. These effects include channel widening (Lyons and Beschta, 1983) and the loss of pool habitat (Lisle and Hilton, 1992). The primary souce of accellerated sedimentation has been found to be roads (Megahan et al., 1992). The forest practices program has existing rules that deal with existing roads (ODF 1,2, 35,36, and 37). ODF 1 is a new volunatary program to deal with inactive roads and will decrease the risk of excess sedimentation over current baseline conditions significantly. In addition, a road assessment protocol and monitoring program will track implementation over time. ODF 1 (see also ODF 2 for state lands) calls for a program to assess road drainage, sidecast fill slopes, proper design and sizing of culverts. For many non active roads lack of maintience has made these roads like "loaded cannons" waiting to go off. The program will seek out these problem areas and then mitigate problems by either upgrading the road or properly putting the road to bed. In addition, to these programs, ODF 3 calls for a technical and policy review of rules and administrative processes related to slope stability. The end result of this process will be rules that minimize the risk of excess sedimentation (over current conditions) due to landsliding for both roads and harvest units.

Riparian areas because of their close proximity to channels can be a sigificant source of sediment that can directly enter the channel. Channel instability can also change sediment transport dynamics. One of the key salmon protection measures is the in-water working guidelines by ODFW. ODFWIVA1 will better disperse these guidelines among other state agencies and effected users. ODFWIVA4 and 6 will also improve protection by providing better technical assitance and by closing fill and removal areas that pose a risk to salmonid habitat. Better coordination with other state agencies is also a goal that will increase protection (for example see SMB 5-6)

For state and private forest land, there are several measures aimed at protecting the instream and nearstream area including ODF 9, 22,26,27 28, and 29. The removal of large wood and channel modification is prohibited except for stream crossing maintience near the stream crossing or in emergency situations where life or structures are threatened. Riparian protection rules (see riparian factor of decline for more detail) along with inunit tree retention in the riparian area (ODF 22 and 27) will help ensure more riparian wood retention and supply to the stream than occured from past practices. More wood in the stream will help store more wood in the stream channel network in higher gradient streams. Stream storage of sediment behind instream obstruction is significant as one study found that 15 times the annual sediment export for a given watershed was stored behind obstructions (Megahan, 1982).

Riparian no touch zones for fish bearing streams and vegetative retention for non-fish bearing streams will also help ensure that channel banks are maintained and root strength near channel banks are maintained. Both of these regulations will decrease the risk of channel instability over old regulations. These programs are regualtory with a strong field presence of regulators, widespread in extent, and have an active monitoring program (ODF 10-14) to evaluate implementation and effectiveness over time. The ODF program is also well established and is generally well accpeted so implementation is expected to be high. However, even the implemetation rate is monitored (ODF 23). There are also statutes and rules within the ODF program that allow monitoring results to be used to change rules if needed.

For agricultural lands, ODA1's program for the development and implementation of water quality management plans will also lead to less sediment input into the channel network primarily by providing for better riparian protection. Specific to ODA 1, there is the mandate to create propher functioning riparian communities to address beneficial use impairment as well as a prohibition of agricultural activities that prevent riparian function and restoration. Unlike ODF rules, ODA 1 has no specific requirments regarding buffer width or designated practices. The measure will allow farmers and ranchers flexibility in how to manage for riparian function to achieve water quality and protect beneficial uses.

Because this is a new program and is charting into unknown territory the degree of implementation is unknown. The degree of effectiveness monitoring that will lead to more effective plans is also unknown at this time. However, it is certain that if this plan is implemented there will be increased protection over the current conditions. It should also be noted that there are also several efforts comming from watershed councils to replant fence and improve riparian areas and channels that will complement this program.

For state owned road projects, there are several measures aimed at mitigating impacts from roads and highways (ODOT 6 and other baseline rules and regulations). For instance, the NPDES program requires effective erosion and sediment control plans to minimize risk of material entering waters of the state. These programs are all within the scope of ODOT so the implementation rate is extemely high.

In urban areas Goal Five landuse planning statues require buffers and put restrictions on construction in floodplains and riparian areas (see riparian section for more detail). A reduction in activity in riparian areas should lead to less excess sediment being delivered to streams.

The Division of State Lands (DSL) actively manages fill and removal activities for all waters of the state and have recently ammended several programs to make them more "fish friendly." For instance, DSL imposes condtions on fill and removal activities to prevent or minimize channel alterations that may change sediment transport dynamics. DSL is currently trying to develop Best Management Practices (DSL 2) for all types of fill and removal activities. These rules along with better interagency coordination (DSL 3) will allow for more careful conditioning of fill and removal permits to reduce sedimentation and preserve current sediment transport dynamics. In addition gravel mining will be limited to annual gravel recruitment (DSL 22). The combined effect of these measures will be increased protection over the regulatory baseline of the past.

Objective iv will be achieved by first locating streams that have had radical departures from sediment transport dynamics. Sedell and Duvall (1985) is a key publication in delinating reaches that were splash dammed and snaged. Forest Service and other agency records will be useful to find reaches that were stream cleaned. In summary, activity on forest and park land activities along with state regulation streamlining and increased Watershed Council activity should lead to 100 miles or more of targeted stream channel habitat enhancement per bienium (see stream morphology factor of decline section for detail). On forest land there are several iniatives and incentives to "enhance" stream habitat (ODF 5-8, 30, 31, 39-40, 51, and 58). Some of these projects will target poor substrate conditions. It will take monitoring to quantify what proportion of projects that deal with lack of or too much substrate mitigation. Monitoring is planned for stream enhancement activities as detailed in the stream morphology factor of decline section.

In addition to instream activities that will improve sediment conditions in targeted reaches, there are several programs that will reduce potential excess sediment supply from roads (ODF 1 and 2). ODF though voluntary is anticipated to be large and well funded as the Forest Industry has other reason besides salmon protection to upgrade the forest road system to reduce sediment inputs.

e. Description of Applicable Agency Actions/Measures:

ODA actions/measures:

ODA1 - SB 1010 Program To Develop Overall Water Quality Management Plans - Program to develop overall water quality management plans for listed watersheds through a cooperative effort with watershed farmers and ranchers. Plan will identify problems and outline ways to correct those problems.

ODA2 - CAFO (Confined Animal feeding Operations) Program - Insures compliance with existing clean water laws of non-point pollution sources related to animal feeding operations. Regulatory program under ORS 468B.200.230.

OEDD Actions/Measures:

OEDD2 - Effective Administration of U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service Funds For Watershed

Restoration Work On Public And Private Lands.

ODFW Actions/Measures:

ODFWIVA1 - Provide Technical Assistance for Habitat Protection: Promote increased habitat protection by cooperating with and assisting federal agencies, other state agencies, and local governments that have regulatory authority over activities that occur in salmon habitat.

ODFWIVA6 - Promote and Assist Habitat Protection Actions: Provide technical assistance to private landowners, watershed councils, and other cooperators to promote and guide protection of high priority salmonid habitat areas on forest, agriculture and other lands.

ODFWIVA4 - Administratively Close Fill and Removal Areas: As a response to a threat to specific critically important salmon habitat areas (and only if other management approaches prove insufficient), protect important salmon spawning and rearing areas by consulting with DSL and WRD on the possibility of administratively closing them to fill and removal activities.

ODFWIVB1 - Direct Habitat Restoration to Where It Will Do the Most Good: Guide or direct habitat restoration efforts toward areas where the investment will provide the greatest increase in productivity for wild coho. Prioritize restoration projects for maximal effectiveness based on assessment of specific limiting factors, potential for success, source or recovery status, projects based on proven approaches and techniques, and magnitude of gains expected.

ODFWIB2 - Inventory and Monitoring of Salmon Habitat and Distribution: Provide information base for restoration of salmon spawning and rearing habitat through inventory of habitat quality and distribution and salmon population distribution, and through determination of salmon production capacity.

ODFWIB3 - Habitat Restoration Evaluation: Evaluate representative restoration projects to quantify the effectiveness of techniques used and to determine appropriate restoration strategies for use in specific situations. This will provide meaningful feedback to assist in design and technical selection for subsequent CSRI projects.

ODFWIVB6 - Fish Habitat Improvement Tax Credit Program: Provide effective incentive for developers, cities, and private landowners to protect and restore salmon habitat by re-authorizing and improving ODFW's Fish Habitat Improvement Tax Credit Program, which offers incentives for actions by private landowners who improve habitat for fish.

ODF actions/measures:

ODF 1 - Road Erosion and Risk Project: Many forest roads built prior to the development of the Oregon Forest Practices Act or prior to the current BMPs pose increased sediment risk to fish habitat. Industrial forest landowners have agreed to implement a voluntary program to identify risks from roads and to address those risks.

ODF 2 - State Forest Lands Road Assessment and Expedited Remediation in The Tillamook STATE Forest: Effects of the February 1996 storm resulted in damage to many roads and stream crossing structures on state lands within the Tillamook Bay Watershed. This proposed effort will upgrade approximately 130 miles of road in each of the next three biennium.

ODF 3 - Technical and Policy Review of Rules and Administrative Processes Related to Slope Stability: To analyze the effects of the February 1996 and November 1996 storms, the Department is in the process of collecting and analyzing landslide information from study zones within the storm areas, this project is described in measure ODF 10. As a follow-up of the monitoring effort the Board of Forestry will review the existing Forest practice rules and program in relation to slope stability to determine if changes in rules or administration procedures are needed.

ODF 4 - Stream Habitat Assessments: For the last three years, industrial forest landowners and state forest lands have contracted with ODFW to complete stream habitat surveys following modified Hankin and Reeves protocol (ODFW protocol). Assessments to date have included approximately 5000 miles of stream statewide.

ODF 5 - North Coast Salmonid Habitat Restoration Project: The North Coast Salmonid Habitat Restoration Project is an existing program that's been in place for two years and has provided resources to conduct enhanceement actitities at dozens of locations in the north coast areas.

ODF 6 - Mid Coast Restoration Project: The Mid-Coast Restoration Project has been modeled after the North Coast Restoration Project. Several dozen projects are targeted for the next biennium.

ODF 7 - Fund 7 New Fish Biologists to Provide Technical Assistance for Salmonid Habitat Restoration: This voluntary measure by the Oregon Forest Industries Council (OFIC) landowners, will function to provide technical assistance in western Oregon to forest landowners conducting salmonid habitat restoration projects. Current in place grassroots efforts such as the north and mid coast initiatives (ODF 5 and 6) lack stable funding, this action will absorb these and create five additional areas covering all of western Oregon providing long term stable funding. This project area will include the western slopes of the Cascades to the Pacific Ocean. This project has the potential to greatly accelerate enhancement activity on private forest land thorughout western Oregon.

ODF 8 - Riparian Hardwood Conversions: FP rules have been developed to allow and provide incentives for the conversion of hardwood dominated RMAs (on conifer sites) to establish conifers. This process will be modified to require an additional review process before implementation for hardwood conversions within core areas.

ODF 9 - Northwest State Forest Lands Management Plan: Oregon Department of Forestry is preparing a NW Oregon State Forest management Plan. A draft plan is expected to be completed by the summer of 1997. The plan will cover over 600,000 acres of state forest land.

ODF 10 - Forest Practices Monitoring Program: The FP monitoring program evaluates: the implementation of forest practices BMPs, determines if BMPs are meeting their intended purposes, and validates assumptions upon which rules may have been developed.

ODF 11 - Monitoring of Riparian Management Areas Under The Forest Practice Act: The riparian monitoring project will look at the effectiveness of the 1994 water protection rules in maintaining and creating sources of current and potential LWD and in maintaining effective riparian stand structure in terms of stream protection and wildlife habitat.

ODF 12 - Monitoring Effectiveness of BMPs in Protecting Water Quality During Aerial Applications of Forest Pesticides: As part of the chemical rule revisions the Board adopted OAR 629-620-700 committing Oregon Department of Forestry to monitoring compliance with and the effectiveness of the chemical and other petroleum rules.

ODF 13 - Storms of 1996 Monitoring Project: The storm of February 5 to 8, 1996 resulted in many landslides, channel changes, and other effects to natural resources, public, and private resources. The goal of the project is to determine which forest practices and designs successfully minimized or contributed to impacts.

ODF 15 - Evaluation of Road and Timber Harvest BMPs to Minimize Sediment Impacts: The purpose of this project is to provide land managers and appropriate agencies with specific information on road drainage practices that minimize sediment entry into streams and how these practices are implemented in western Oregon.

ODF 22 - 25 Percent In-Unit Leave Tree Placement and Additional Voluntary Retention: This is a voluntary measure to retain up to 100 percent of the in-unit trees along Type N or F streams in "core areas" and other special areas along specific stream reaches when ODF in consultation with ODFW determine additional retention along streams is beneficial to coho salmon recovery.

ODF 23 - BMP Compliance Audit Program: Within this measure ODF is proposing to conduct compliance auditing. Compliance auditing will be planned and implemented within the next two years by the Department.

ODF 24 - State Forest Lands Stream Habitat Assessment and Instream Projects: During 1994 and 1995, 305 miles of stream have been surveyed for habitat on state forest lands by ODFW biologists. Fish distribution surveys have been done on 260 streams and stored on GIS. Contracts with ODFW are planned to complete assessments for the remaining streams and adjacent riparian areas.

ODF 25 - Fish Presence/Absence Surveys and Fish Population Surveys: This is a voluntary program in which industrial forest landowners and state lands conduct or have contracted with ODFW to survey for absence and presence of salmonid fish.

ODF 26 - Elliott State Forest Habitat Conservation Plan: The Elliott State Forest (ESF) Habitat Conservation Plan developed for Northern Spotted Owls and Marbled Murrelets also enhances riparian areas. The forest covers approximately 93, 000 acres in the Oregon coast range.

ODF 27 - Increased Riparian Protection: 1994 Forest Practices rule changes have increased vegetation retention requirements in RMA's to increase protection and the potential delivery to near optimal for LWD.

ODF 28 - Protection of Significant Wetlands, Including Estuaries: Forest practice rules requiring protection of riparian management areas around significant wetlands, including all estuaries were implemented in late 1991. While all wetlands are protected under the forest practice rules, this change requires the retention of riparian vegetation around the wetland in addition to retention of vegetation within the wetland.

ODF 29 - Forest Practice Chemical Protection Rules Increased Buffers: The Board of Forestry has recently reviewed and revised the state's forestry chemical application rules. The changes include providing protection to vegetation required to be protected by the water protection rules.

ODF 30 - Large Woody Debris Recruitment Incentives: Large woody debris placement incentives were included in the September 1994 Forest Practice Water Protection Rules.

ODF 31 - Large Woody Debris Placement Guidelines: ODF and ODFW have developed a guidelines publication for operators to use in the placement of large woody debris in streams. If a proposed woody debris placement project meets the ODF guidelines contained in the publication the process for acquiring approval is streamlined.

ODF 32 - Fish Presence Survey (OAR 629-635-200(11)): This measure will fund and complete an interagency "fish" (salmonids, game fish, and T&E fish) presence survey to improve efficiency of program deliveries and to ensure that protection is delivered as was intended by the forest practice rules and other programs. This survey also identifies barriers to fish passage.

ODF 33 - Increase Number of Streams and Stream Miles Projected: Through Forest Practice Rule changes protected stream miles have increased approximately 25 - 50 percent.

ODF 35 - Increase Design for Larger Flows: Modification of BMPs for stream crossing structures from 25 to 50 year storm events.

ODF 36 - Upgraded Road Construction & Fill Requirements: Road construction BMPs have been changed to require excavation and fills to be minimized at stream crossings, and that any road fill greater than 15 feet deep must obtain prior approval.

ODF 37 - Upgraded Skid Trail Construction and Fill Requirement: Skid trail construction BMPs have been changed to require excavation and fills to be minimized at stream crossings, and that any skid trail fill greater than 8 feet deep must obtain prior approval.

ODF 39 - Lobster Creek Whole-Basin Coordination Restoration Project: A cooperative voluntary whole basin restoration project to restore native salmonid populations, modeled after Hancock Timber Resource Group's (HTRG) strategy used in the Knowles Creek efforts in the Siuslaw basin.

ODF 40 - Upper Siuslaw Enhancement: This is a voluntary action coordinated through Weyerhaeuser, the Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (Mid-Coast Habitat Restoration Project) for fish habitat improvement on tributaries of the upper Siuslaw river.

ODF 41 - South Siletz Monitoring: This is a voluntary action by Boise Cascade to quantify any changes in stream health after implementation of road enhancement projects on the South Fork Siletz river.

ODF 42 - North Fork Coquille Monitoring Assessment: Menasha is conducting several long term monitoring projects in the North Fork basin of the Coquille River. These projects include fish presence / extent surveys, aquatic habitat surveys, salmon spawning surveys and some temperature monitoring.

ODF 43 - South Fork Coos River Monitoring Assessment: Menasha is conducting salmon spawning surveys on tributaries of the S. Fork Coos River.

ODF 44 - Coos River Mainstem Monitoring Assessment: Menasha is conducting salmon spawning surveys (minimum of two coho life cycles) on Goat Creek a tributary of the Coos River, survey began in 1994 - 1995.

ODF 45 - Coquille, Siletz and Sixes Watershed Monitoring: A long-term monitoring project has been implemented on Georgia Pacific lands in the three above basins. The project began in 1994 and will continue indefinitely.

ODF 46 - Fish Passage Surveys (Weyerhaeuser): The Coos Watershed Association and Weyerhaeuser have completed analysis of all "major" anadromous fish culverts in the Coos River Watershed. Weyerhaeuser will contract with ODFW to evaluate stream conditions above culverts that are fish passage limiting to establish priority for enhancement.

ODF 47 - Coos, Milliacoma and Upper Siuslaw Rivers Watershed Analysis: Weyerhaeuser is completing watershed analysis for all of their ownership in Oregon. This analysis follows modified protocol used by the State of Washington under their FPA.

ODF 48 - South Fork Siletz Watershed Analysis: This is a voluntary action by Boise Cascade Corp. to assess the geomorphic vulnerabilities of the system, determine stream health and assess any road concerns.

ODF 49 - Ecola Creek Watershed Analysis: Analysis of Ecola Creek watershed (Cannon Beach) Willamette Industries (formally Cavenham) to identify sensitive or high risk areas, requiring special care in management decisions and operations.

ODF 50 - Kilchis Watershed Analysis: Proposed assessment project to asses possible cumulative effects of changes in hydrology, sediment routing and other factors due to land use practices through out the Kilchis watershed channel network (Tillamook Bay NEP Monitoring Program).

ODF 51: Palmer Creek Acclimation Ponds: Georgia Pacific construction of an acclimation pond for the hatchery Siletz River winter steelhead (may be used for hatchery coho).

ODF 52 - South Coast Technical Advisory Team: This is a coordinating group of agencies and landowners in the south coast area which identify and prioritize habitat restorations within the area.

ODF 57 - Enhancement of ODF Monitoring Program: Enhancement of elements of ODF monitoring program to focus on key National Marine Fisheries Service issues.

ODF 58 - Liability Limits for Fish Enhancement Projects: The concept of this action is to propose legislative action which would limit liability for landowners completing habitat enhancement projects following guidelines established by ODFW and ODF (May 1995 publication ).

ODF 59 - Integrated Forest Assessment: Develop a Geographic Information System (GIS) hydrological layer for the range of the coastal coho. This would make information available to support regulatory and voluntary program implementation.

DLCD actions/measures:

DLCD 2, DLCD 3 and DLCD 4 will all contribute to the restoration of riparian areas and a reduction of the amount of suspended solids that reach surface waters in the long term. Thus these measures will contribute indirectly to improving substrate quality for salmonids.

DLCD2: Riparian Area Technical Assistance - Develop model ordinances and other interpretive materials, as necessary and appropriate, for use by local government in amending local land use-regulations to implement the riparian area protection and restoration provisions in the newly-amended administrative rules for Statewide Planning Goal 5, Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources.

DLCD3: (Phase 2) Implement New Goal 5 Rules for Riparian and Wetland Protection - Statewide Planning Goal 5 rules were amended in June 1996, and include improved protection for riparian areas. DLCD's task is to ensure that coastal local governments integrate the new requirements into their comprehensive plans and ordinances as soon as possible. Requires developing partnerships and workplans with coastal local governments.

DLCD4: Implement Urban Management Measures under the CNPCP - Several of the Urban Management Measures in the CNPCP are designed to be implemented: through local planning and development review processes; by local public works officials in their management of road systems. DLCD will facilitate implementation of these measures by developing rules, technical assistance, or administering grants to local governments as necessary to implement specific CNPCP requirements. Requires developing partnerships and workplans with coastal local governments.

OPRD Actions/Measures:

OPRD1 - Disposition of Hazard And Blowdown Trees On OPRD Property

Take fish habitat needs into consideration when deciding the disposition of blowdown and hazard trees. Places high priority on offering trees to ODFW or other agencies or groups to be used as fish habitat.

OPRD2 - Improve Fish Habitat And Riparian Zones Within OPRD Lands

Over the next two years the OPRD (with assistance from ODFW) will identify fish habitat needs, including riparian zone restoration needs on coastal streams within OPRD properties. Interpretive and educational programs will be developed at the high visibility project sites.

OPRD3 - Clear Creek Spawning Habitat

OPRD, in cooperation with ODFW and Dunes NRA, is re-establishing spawning habitat in Clear Creek at Tugman State Park. This project has high visibility and would lend itself to interpretation.

OPRD4 - Sixes River Restoration

With technical assistance from ODFW, the OPRD will place large woody debris in the Salmon and Little Rivers within OPRD properties in the VanDuzer Corridor.

OPRD6 - Spencer Creek Restoration

In cooperation with Boise Cascade and ODFW, the OPRD is proposing to place large woody debris for the purpose of creating off-channel rearing areas in Spencer Creek. In conjunction with this project, an interpretive trail with signs is planned.

OPRD7 - Jackson Creek Restoration

OPRD and ODFW has completed 0.25 mile of stream improvement on Jackson Creek at Cape Lookout State Park.

OPRD8 - North Wolf Creek Restoration

OPRD, in a cooperative effort with ODFW and ODF, will be providing large woody debris for placement in the North Ford of Wolf Creek along approximately one mile of stream to enhance spawning and rearing habitat.

DSL actions/measures:

DSL imposes conditions on removal-fill permits intended to prevent or minimize substrate changes. DSL has reduced the amount of gravel removed per site, and the number of sites, and will continue to limit removal to annual recruitment (see 1(c)).

DSL-2 - Develop BMPs/standard permit conditions for all types of removal-fill activities (see 1(c)).

DSL 5-9 - DSL has modified its General Authorizations for road construction, erosion control, fish habitat enhancement, and wetland restoration and enhancement to add a preference for bioengineered methods of streambank stabilization. We also have trained all field staff in these methods, and are implementing them in individual permits whenever possible.

DSL-10 - DSL is developing administrative rules on small-scale placer mining operations in state scenic waterways and areas designated as essential indigenous anadromous salmonid habitat. Operations affecting more than 25 cubic yards annually in those areas require individual permits. TIMELINE: 2/97. Operations in other streams are not currently subject to state regulation unless they affect more than 50 cubic yards annually.

DSL also has increased its public education efforts among placer miners and its field

monitoring and enforcement of this activity in essential indigenous anadromous salmonid habitat/core areas.

DSL-1 - DSL is continuing to work toward assumption of the federal 404 dredge/fill permitting program, which would eliminate the 50 cubic yard threshold for state regulation. TIMELINE: If we proceed with assumption, it would be in 1998 or 1999.

DSL-23 and DSL-25 (both Phase II), which would increase field presence in essential habitat/core areas, also will assist in oversight of placer mining activities. TIMELINE: If approved, 7/97.

ODOT actions/measures:

ODOT's Erosion Control Program's goal is to eliminate the discharge of settleable solids and minimize all sediment discharge from our construction sites. This is done by implementing the following measures:

(1) NPDES program: This program is implemented through the conditions of the NPDES 1200-ca permit for all of ODOT's ground-disturbing projects, whether they are technically covered (i.e. > 5 acres) or not.

(2) ODOT specifications and special provisions: Plans for construction projects include measures to minimize and avoid sediment input into streams. Projects require detailed erosion control plans.

(3) ODOT Action Item #8 Statewide Erosion Control Handbook: In 1996, ODOT produced a draft erosion control handbook. This erosion control handbook will provide the necessary information so, with training, ODOT field personnel can design, implement and monitor erosion control efforts. The draft document is currently being used and reviewed by each ODOT region. At the end of 1997, the handbook will be finalized, and distributed to ODOT staff. Erosion and sediment control training will occur after 1997.

• ODOT Action Item #3 Responding to Sources of Sediment: This action item ensures that response to landslides is conducted in a way that keeps sediment out of streams whenever possible.

• ODOT Action Item #10 Aggregate Permit Review: Instream or near-stream aggregate material sources will be evaluated for potential shut-down due to their disturbance to salmonid habitat. The need for possible mitigation at shut-down will also be evaluated.

3. Loss of instream roughness:

a. Factor for decline:

In many coastal streams, human activities have resulted in the loss of instream roughness elements, including boulders and large woody debris, negatively affecting both the quality and quantity of anadromous fish habitat.

b. Discussion of Factor:

Large woodyl debris (LWD) and other channel roughness elements are key factors in the development of channel form; including off-channel rearing backwaters, side channels, pools and riffles, that are important for salmon. LWD also provides cover and "territories" for juvenile salmonids. The National Research Council Report concludes that "[p]erhaps no other structural component of the environment is as important to salmon habitat as large woody debris, particularly in coastal watersheds." NRC p. 194

Woody debris in channels can effect the rate of coarse sediment migration downstream (Duncan et al. 1987, Pearce and Watson 1983). Large woody debris (LWD) loading of a water has been correlated to winter survival of juvenile salmonids (Bisson et al 1987, Murphy et al. 1986). Winter survival has often been considered to be a limiting factor, but improved winter survival has not always increased smolt production and/or return of adult salmon. The Carnation Creek study indicated that compensatory mechanisms exist (at least in the short-term) to offset loss of LWD.

The amount of potential function provided by riparian vegetation for LWD input can be described as a function of distance from the stream. The bulk of potential function comes from vegetation in close proximity to the channel, with diminishing amounts coming from distances farther from the stream out to a maximum distance of the potential maximum height of a tree for the site. For example, McDade (1987) found that the origin of 90% of the woody debirs found in small streams in western Oregon bordered by stands 80 to 200 years old came from vegetation within 66 feet of the streams. This relationship did not vary between streams with steep slopes and streams with gentler slopes.

While reductions in woody debris will often result in habitat simplification, this has not always resulted in a decline in total fish productivity. Certain species and age classes may increase in numbers to occupy space vacated by other species or age classes that found the habitat simplification undesirable (Schwartz 1990). However, suitable on-site or downstream habitat must be available for later life stages of these fish for there to be an overall increase in productivity for the basin. In some cases habitat simplification favored no species or age classes and all groups experience a decline in productivity (House and Boehne 1987).

As described by Bisson et al. (1987), research has not yet determined how much LWD is too little, optimal or too much:

"Both forest and fishery managers are concerned with the questions of how much debris in streams is too little, how much is "optimum," and how much is too much. There are no simple answers to these questions, for the habitat requirements of various salmonid species, as well as juvenile and adult stages often differ..." pp. 178

Similarly, the size of woody debris that is optimal for habitat and channel function for a given stream reach has not been fully established. Nonetheless, Bisson et al. (1987) describes the current knowledge as:

"Because debris stability is strongly influenced by channel width as well as the size of the piece, we should be able to predict what size log will function effectively in maintaining good fish habitat if we know something about stream size, gradient, and valley form. It seems possible, for example, that relatively small deciduous trees could perform all the necessary roles required of debris in small channels, while longer trees will be necessary for wider channels. Large conifers are usually necessary for stability and to anchor accumulations of smaller debris in streams with channels greater than 15 to 25 meters wide (Lienkamper and Swanson 1987, in press) while smaller deciduous species of the proper length can be stable in narrower channels (Bilby, unpublished data)." pp. 175

Recent stream surveys conducted by ODFW generally find that LWD loading is "less than optimal." Existing loadings are due to a number of historical factors including use of splash dams used for log transportation, removal of wood for commerce or fish passage, harvest of streamside trees, and removal for flood mitigation (particularly after the 1964 flood) (Bisson et al., 1987).

However, as noted by Botkin, both federal and non-federal protection measures will reverse the trend of habitat degradation from loss of LWD. Both the Botkin and FEMAT reports indicate that this recovery will require many years to occur by natural processes. Thus, the Botkin Report notes that: "[t]here is a major challenge to be faced to accelerate restoration of salmon habitat, particularly in the lower reaches of rivers flowing through private land." (Botkin p. 64) The Botkin report concludes that:

"...the amount of large woody debris in western Oregon streams continues to be far below the amount that most fish biologists consider optimal for spawning and rearing of salmon. Furthermore, natural processes of regrowth and mortality of riparian conifers leading to inputs of large woody debris is so slow that natural processes alone, even under the new forest practice regulations requiring that some large trees be left in logged riparian zones, will not repair the shortage of large woody debris for at least a hundred years, and in fact may never replace the original steady-state volume of woody debris. A management strategy will be needed to recreate an adequate loading of LWD on a time scale of interest for salmon conservation." Botkin p. 64-65

In support of their conclusions, the Botkin Report offers several other recommendations with regard to LWD:

"Develop a management strategy for an adequate loading of LWD such as bringing logs to areas that lack sufficient large streamside trees. Measurement must be part of this strategy, including before and after monitoring, to determine the ecological effectiveness and cost effectiveness of different methods." Botkin p. 158

"Continue to regulate forest operations to protect riparian habitat." Botkin p. 158

"Continue to create incentives for habitat restoration in conjunction with forest operations" Botkin p. 158

c. Habitat Objectives:

i) Identify, by reach or stream type, levels of instream roughness necessary to support healthy salmonid stocks in all coastal streams by .

ii) Ensure that existing programs do not allow present (1997) instream roughness elements important to salmonids to be modified or removed by human activities.

iii) Ensure that instream roughness elements important to salmonids created during floods and other natural events remain in place to the extent consistent with public health and safety.

iv) In coastal streams deficient in instream roughness elements important to salmonids, actively restore those elements and/or the upstream and upland processes that will restore them naturally, in 10% of deficient stream miles per biennium.

d. Adequacy of Actions/Measures to Meet Objectives:

Objective (i) has a hgih likelihood of being accomplished. Watershed analyses that include instream roughness information have been completed or in process and should be soon completed for most federal forest lands. ODFW habitat surveys (ODFWIB2 and ODF4, 24) are beginning to give a comprehensive inventory of LWD on a growing percentage of streams in the Oregon Coast Range. This is most evident on state and private forestland. In addition, forest landowners are conducting independent watershed anaylsis efforts that will increase the extent of stream reaches invenoried (ODF 41-45). The stream habitat inventories described in ODF4 and 24 will continue at the current rate of effort (1000 miles per year).

On non-forest land, increased Watershed Council efforts will add milage to the surveys. DEQ habitat monitoring (Regional Monitoring and Assessment Program, REMAP) will add more detailed information on habitat (and corresponding fish and aquatic insect community numbers) but for a much lower sample size (currenlty about 60 short reaches in the Oregon Coast Range area).

Objectives (ii) and (iii) will be achieved on most streams. On forest land streams, LWD and other roughness elements are required to be retained under the applicable regulations that apply to federal and non-federal forest lands. Forest practice rules do not allow the removal of LWD or disturbance of channels except for purposes of public safety or for the construction of stream crossings.

Regulations are not yet adequately in place to address this issue on other land uses. However, improved interagency coordination and a legal basis to solve this issue will be developed under DSL's authority (DSL14).

Objective (iv) also has a relatively high probability for success.

For federal forest lands, riparian protection requirements that will provide for LWD are established by the President's Forest Plan (Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl) and the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT) Report. RMA widths for fish bearing streams are either 300 feet or a width equal to two site potential tree heights, whichever is greatest. RMA widths for non-fish-bearing perennial streams are 150 feet or one site potential tree height, whichever is larger. Intermittent non-fish-bearing streams have RMAs 100 feet or one site potential tree height, whichever is larger. Harvest is very limited within any of the RMAs. In addition to the specific RMA requirements, additional protection is established under the various federal Plans for a range of land allocation and protection reasons. The requirements established for federal forest lands should provide levels of protection that are near maximum for LWD potential.

For non-federal forest lands, the primary mechanism for riparian area protection and management is the state Forest Practices Act (FPA) administered by the Department of Forestry. Under the FPA, riparian management area widths and tree retention requirements are variable based upon stream size and beneficial uses. Under these rules, there are also incentives to encourage riparian stand restoration and large wood placement. Monitoring is currently being conducted to evaluate how well the various RMAs maintain riparian functions, focusing particularly on temperature and large woody debris (ODF 11 and 14).

Large woody debris placement incentives were included in the Sept. 1994 Water Protection Rules for forest lands (described in measure ODF30). Forest Practice Rules have been developed to provide landowner incentives to work with ODF and ODFW in the voluntary placement of LWD and other material where appropriate. The rules provide incentives during the time when an active operation is occurring. It is at this time, when personnel and equipment are at a site, that LWD placement is most feasible. To provide an incentive some reduction in retained vegetation as required under the Water Protection Rules is allowed in return for the active placement. Guidelines have been developed to direct LWD placement under the forest practice rules (ODF31).

The new ODF Water Protection Rules (ODF27) will significantly improve protection and restoration of salmon habitat. When considered in combination with federal lands, habitat over most forest land will be improving to near maximum potential within the next 100 years. Incentives under the Forest Practices rules to place large woody debris and other voluntary actions will serve to reduce the timelag in getting LWD into the system by natural process alone. These incentives have very positive aspects relative to recovery that the federal measures do not.

There are several approaches to analyzing the potential of the vegetation retention requirements of the forest practice rules to provide LWD and other functions. This are described in the issue paper titled "Will the various riparian protection strategies applied across the variuos ownerships and landuses provide adequate recruitment of wood into streams" contained in the Appendices.

As part of the CSRI plan, a number of voluntary programs increase riparian protection and/or enhancement of LWD loading beyond the regulatory standards.

Measure ODF26 "Elliott State Forest (ESF) Habitat Conservation Plan" developed for Northern Spotted Owls and Marbled Murrelets enhances riparian protection. The forest covers approximately 93,000 acres in the southern Oregon coast range. The riparian strategy of the habitat conservation plan will retain late successional forest between 50 and 100 feet in width along both sides of fish-bearing and perennial non-fish-bearing streams. Where fires, storms, road building, and past practices have reduced the numbers of large conifers in riparian zones, specific habitat enhancement projects may be undertaken, in consultation with ODFW, to restore conifers. In the long-term, the creation of large woody debris in the streams from fallen conifers will enhance fish habitat by creating pools, slowing the flow of the stream, trapping sediment, and increasing macroinvertebrate populations.

Through measure DSL22, DSL will work with ODF to identify fish habitat enhancement that could improve habitat conditions on the Elliott State Forest (90% owned by the State Land Board) and that are consistent with the Elliott Habitat Conservation Plan.

While not yet completed, measure ODF9 "Northwest state forest lands management plan/HCP will likely enhance protection above the standards of the Forest Practices Act. ODF is currently preparing a NW Oregon State Forest Management Plan. A draft plan is expected to be completed by the summer of 1997. The plan will cover over 600,000 acres of state forest land in the north Coast ESU and will address the full array of statutory mandates and Board and department policies. ODF is working closely with ODFW in developing the plan, and has solicited input from stakeholders through a variety of forums. Some provisions under discussion and development in the planning process include: using the Forest Practice rules as a foundation for riparian management; employing site specific measures to maintain and improve salmon habitat, including the consideration of source/recovery areas; implementing upland management strategies so that they complement salmon habitat enhancement strategies. As a means of complying with the federal ESA in the most effective manner, ODF is also developing a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the NW (and possibly SW) lands. During the interim between now and plan completion, ODF17 and 18 will direct riparian management on state lands, These two measures will maximize the potential for recovery of LWD delivery from the RMAs on State Lands.

Measure ODF8 "Riparian hardwood conversion" provides increased oversight of riparian hardwood conversion actions in "core areas." The Forest Practices Water Protection Rules provide incentives for riparian hardwood conversions on appropriate sites. The rules since Sept. 1994, allow and provide incentives for the conversion of hardwood dominated RMAs (on conifer sites) to establish conifers. Data from stream habitat surveys conducted by ODFW/OFIC indicate that the coastal zone riparian zones are frequently dominated by alder. Over the long-term, many of these alder riparian zones will not provide for the establishment, growth and input of large conifer woody debris. In many cases, without disturbance the alder stands will succeed to salmonberry dominant stands. While alder stands generally provide high levels of shade, bank stability, etc., their succession to salmonberry greatly diminishes these riparian functions. This process enables sites capable of growing conifers to contribute conifer LWD in a more timely manner. The natural succession of hardwood stands to conifer is problematic and when it occurs may take many decades.

In lieu of the standard procedures within the rules, hardwood conversions within core areas will be subject to additional review and will require a site specific plan to be submitted and reviewed. Under this measure industrial OFIC landowners will implement the site specific approach and involve additional consultation with ODF and ODFW before implementing conversions in core areas.

Through measures ODF4 "Stream habitat assessments" and ODF24 "State lands stream habitat assessment and instream projects," habitat assessments are being funded and/or conducted by many large forest landowners and by several initiatives/councils. Approximately 3,000 miles of streams have been surveyed using ODFW protocol. Many of these streams have been surveyed by ODFW crews under contract with landowners. The data is being analyzed by ODFW to identify opportunities for restoration. These surveys are used to direct restoration under ODF 5, 6, 7, 21, 24, 39, and 40. These measures will result in many streams receiving LWD placement.

As part of measure ODF22, members of the Oregon Forest Industries Council will voluntarily place "in-unit" trees along streams within core areas as directed by ODF and ODFW. These trees are in addition to the riparian management area requirements of the water protection rules. The State Forester can direct that 25 percent of these in-unit trees be placed in or adjacent to RMAs of Type F and D streams. Landowners will voluntarily retain additional in-unit trees along other streams. Emphasis for retention will be along small high gradient Type N streams.

Measures ODF5 and 6 are existing initiatives of forest landowners to voluntarily conserve, restore and enhance salmonid habitat. These initiatives will continue to take priority stream enhancement opportunities as identified with ODFW through the stream habitat surveys, design and implement projects such as placement of LWD and creation of alcoves. In the North Coast Initiative approximately 300 potential restoration projects were identified, of which the 62 highest priority projects were to be completed during the first two years. Most of these projects have been completed. The remaining projects were scheduled to be completed in 1996. New projects are being identified and designed for 1997 and beyond. Measures 7 and 21 will substantially increase the rate of LWD placement.

For non-forest lands, the plan includes a number of regulatory and voluntary programs directed at maintaining riparian habitat and increasing LWD delivery. These programs include the Fill and Removal program, and the Statewide land use program and SB 1010 (now being implemented).

For agricultural lands, ODA1's program for the development and implementation of water quality management plans will lead to better riparian protection. Specific to ODA 1, there is the mandate to create propher functioning riparian communities to address beneficial use impairment as well as a prohibition of agricultural activities that prevent riparian function and restoration. Unlike ODF rules, ODA 1 has no specific requirments regarding buffer width or designated practices. The measure will allow farmers and ranchers flexibility in how to manage for riparian function to achieve water quality and protect beneficial uses.

The statewide land use program related to riparian vegetation is described under measure DLCD2 "Implement the new goal 5 rules for riparian protection." The new Statewide Planning Goal 5 rules will, among other things, establish a basic riparian protection standard that must be implemented through local comprehensive plans. The new riparian provisions require local governments to protect riparian corridors, including water and riparian areas and fish habitat. Under Goal 5, jurisdictions are to inventory and determine the significance of several resources, including riparian areas. Based on this inventory and determination, local governments must then adopt a list of significant resource sites as part of its comprehensive plan. Finally, Goal 5 requires that local governments adopt programs to protect significant resource sites -- in this case, significant riparian areas -- based on an analytical process laid out in the rule (OAR 660-23-040). The new Goal 5 rules for the first time establish a riparian protection standard for local land use plans. In addition, the new rules contain a provision which encourages riparian area restoration.

If a local government chooses, it can adopt safe-harbor provisions which are contained in administrative rules that provide protection for significant riparian areas. The safe harbor provisions meet the requirements of Goal 5. They provide for a local government to adopt a standard setback from fish-bearing lakes and streams that are shown on common inventory materials such as state and federal agency resource maps. The standard setback is 75 feet from each bank for streams with an average annual flow of 1000 cfs, and 50 feet from lakes and smaller streams. Within these areas, vegetation removal is restricted; impervious surfaces are restricted, and no permanent structures may be sited. (Some necessary structures such as roads and utilities are permitted.) The setback may be reduced in return for riparian area restoration.

Through measure ODOT19 "Burning in riparian areas, " ODOT will avoid burning in riparian areas. This is a new action to remove the option of burning from current specifications, although very little burning has been practiced recently in riparian areas. This action was completed in March 1996. Implementation of this action was voluntary by ODOT. This action is implemented by removing the option of burning in riparian areas in project specifications. This was a statewide action which will continue to have a long-term impact on the quality of water and fisheries habitat through the minimization of vegetation and soil nutrient loss. The overall impact will be minimal because burning in riparian areas has been rare in recent years. This action was not dependent on any other effort or action.The ODOT project specifications are available for review by NMFS.

Measure ODOT12 will have ODOT develop a storage and disposal plan for woody debris materials collected following storm events and during project construction. This action will be undertaken by ODOT in conjunction with ODFW, ODF, counties, municipalities, and OCZMA (ODOT 1996). This is a new action although some jurisdictions may have informal arrangements. Identification of temporary storage and disposal sites will begin immediately, after which the program will be ongoing. Constitutional restrictions prohibit ODOT from hauling materials if the relocation results in increased costs. A challenge of the action will be to implement within this restriction. This is a statewide action which will have a long-term impact on fish habitat. A qualitative assessment predicts that this action will have ongoing impact by increased stream habitat structure and complexity. Increased structure provides protection from predators, habitat for macroinvertebrates, and shade to decrease water temperatures.

With measure DSL7, DSL has revised the General Authorization for removal-fill activities associated with fish habitat enhancement to be more fish-friendly and to apply to more projects by: a) eliminating the applicability to gabions, b) including full-spanning boulder weirs, c) including hydrologically connected off-channel ponds, d) increasing the allowed yardage for pools and ponds from 50 cubic yards to 350 cubic yards, e) increasing the allowed yardage for back/side channels from 100 cubic yards to 350 cubic yards, f) including culvert replacement to allow fish passage, g) requiring culverts to meet ODFW fish passage criteria, h) streamlining the approval process, and i) adding a preference for bioengineered methods of streambank stabilization over structural methods. Effective July 1996. All projects require prior ODFW approval. Since 7/96, all General Authorizations promote the re-use of large woody debris that was removed during project construction - either on site or given to ODFW.

In measure OPRD1 "Improve fish habitat and riparian zones within OPRD lands," Oregon Parksand RecreationDepartment (OPRD) with help from ODFW, will identify including riparian zone restoration needs on coastal streams within OPRD properties over the next two years.

Barriers exist that discourage the placement of woody debris in streams. One barrier is concern about liability from movement of placed materials. A second barrier is concern about tort liability. Another barrier is the percieved "red tape." Concern exists about effective design and project implementation. However, much has been done to alleviate these problems and other actions provide new incentives for placement of large woody debris. For example, all General Authorizations allowing fill and removal promote the re-use of large woody debris that was removed during during project construction - either on site or given to ODFW.

Watershed councils will also be effective in working with a broad range of landowners, across all the landuses in promoting riparina protection and LWD restoration.

e. Description of Applicable Agency Actions/Measures:

Note: Described briefly below are the existing or planned agency actions and measures related to this factor that were discussed above. A more detailed description of each measure is included in each agencies "implementation plan." Numbers associated with the described measure, such as "DSL5" correspond to the same measure within the implementation plan.

ODOT actions/measures:

Endangered Species Act program: During ESA review of projects, ODOT environmental staff ensure protection of stream bed and bankcharacteristics, to the maximum extent practicable. Any alteration (increase or decrease) of instream roughness is done in conjunction with an ODFW, U.S. Forest Service or Watershed Council biologist.

ODOT6: Environmentally Sensitive Design : During construction project design, fish needs will be evaluated and incorporated into design, where feasible.

ODOT7: Storage and Disposal Plan for Woody Debris: Temporary storage sites for woody debris will be developed within each ODOT district within the CSRI area. The woody debris from these sites will be made available for placement in or adjacent to streams/wetlands by ODFW biologists or Watershed Council representatives.

ODOT15: Habitat for Fish in Wetland and Fishery Impact Mitigation: Wetland and fishery impact mitigation efforts will incorporate more measures with benefits for fish such as inclusion of large woody debris and boulders. This work will be done in conjunction with ODFW, U.S. Forest Service or Watershed Council biologists.

ODA actions/measures:

ODA1: SB 1010 Program To Develop Overall Water Quality Management Plans - Program to develop overall water quality management plans for listed watersheds through a cooperative effort with watershed farmers and ranchers. Plan will identify problems and outline ways to correct those problems.

DSL action/measures:

DSL imposes conditions on all removal-fill permits that prohibit or minimize disturbance of instream roughness elements.

DSL5 through DSL8: DSL revised its General Authorizations for road construction, erosion control, fish habitat enhancement, and wetland restoration and enhancement to require that any trees or other large woody material unavoidably removed during project construction either be placed instream or donated for use in habitat restoration projects.

DSL21: DSL will work with other agencies to clarify jurisdiction over removal of large woody debris and fill legal/jurisdictional gaps. TIMELINE: By 6/97.

DLCD action/measures:

DLCD3: Implement New Goal 5 Rules for Riparian and Wetland Protection - This measure will contribute to the restoration of riparian areas and therefore, in the long term, will increase the availability of components such as large woody debris that are important elements of in-stream roughness. Thus DLCD 3 will contribute indirectly to improving instream roughness for salmonids.

ODF action/measures:

ODF4: STREAM HABITAT ASSESSMENTS: For the last three years, industrial forest landowners and state forest lands have contracted with ODFW to complete stream habitat surveys following modified Hankin and Reeves protocol (ODFW protocol). Assessments to date have included approximately 3000 miles of stream. Assessments will continue at the current rate.

ODF5: NORTH COAST SALMONID HABITAT RESTORATION PROJECT: The North Coast Salmonid Habitat Restoration Project is an existing program that's been in place for two years. Membership is open to all landowners that share a commitment to stream habitat conservation, restoration and enhancement through cooperative means and who can contribute valuable resources (time, equipment, dollar) to support the Project's objectives.

ODF6: MID-COAST RESTORATION PROJECT: The Mid-Coast Restoration Project has been modeled after the North Coast Restoration Project. Membership is open to all landowners that share a commitment to stream habitat conservation, restoration and enhancement through cooperative means and who can contribute valuable resources (time, equipment, dollar) to support the Project's objectives.

ODF7: FUND 7 NEW FISH BIOLOGISTS TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR SALMONID HABITAT RESTORATION: This voluntary measure by the Oregon Forest Industries Council (OFIC) landowners, will function to provide technical assistance in western Oregon to forest landowners conducting salmonid habitat restoration projects. Current in place grassroots efforts such as the north and mid coast initiatives (ODF 5 and 6) lack stable funding, this action will absorb these and create five additional areas covering all of western Oregon providing long term stable funding. This project area will include the western slopes of the Cascades to the Pacific Ocean.

ODF8: RIPARIAN HARDWOOD CONVERSIONS: FP rules have been developed to allow and provide incentives for the conversion of hardwood dominated RMAs (on conifer sites) to establish conifers. This process enables sites capable of growing conifers to contribute conifer LWD in a more timely manner. This process will be modified to require an additional review process before implementation for hardwood conversions within core areas.

ODF9: NORTHWEST STATE FOREST LANDS MANAGEMENT PLAN: Oregon Department of Forestry is preparing a NW Oregon State Forest management Plan. A draft plan is expected to be completed by the summer of 1997. The plan will cover over 600,000 acres of state forest land and will address the full array of statutory mandates and Board and department policies. ODF is working closely with ODFW in developing the plan, and has solicited input from stakeholders through a variety of forums.

ODF11: MONITORING OF RIPARIAN MANAGEMENT AREAS UNDER THE FOREST PRACTICE ACT: The riparian monitoring project will look at the effectiveness of the 1994 water protection rules in maintaining and creating sources of current and potential LWD and in maintaining effective riparian stand structure in terms of stream protection and wildlife habitat.

ODF 17: SITE-SPECIFIC PLANS FOR VEGETATION RETENTION WITHIN RMAs ON NORTHWEST OREGON STATE FOREST LANDS

Until the Northwest Forest Plan is completed, this measure will be used to ensure that the desired future condition for RMAs established under the Forest Practices Act is achieved to the maximum extent practicable on State Forest Lands. Actual site-specific stocking will be used to calculate BA targets following the procedures used in developing the standard targets.

ODF 18: WILDLIFE TREE PLACEMENT ON STATE FOREST LANDS

Wildlife trees required to be retained in harvest units will be retained along Type N streams on all state lands within the coastal zone unless otherwise directed by ODFW.

ODF 19: ADDITIONAL CONIFER RETENTION ALONG FISH-BEARING STREAMS IN CORE AREAS

Within Core Areas, OFIC members have voluntarily agreed to harvest no more than 25 percent of the conifer that are in excess of the standard basal area target in those situations when the actual stocking in the RMA exceeds the standard target.

ODF 20: LIMITED RMA FOR SMALL TYPE N STREAMS

Establishes limted RMAs of 20 feet for small type N streams for the purpose or retaining snags and downed wood.

ODF 21: ACTIVE PLACEMENT OF LWD DURING FOREST OPERATIONS

Following ODF/ODFW placement guidelines, implement an aggressive and comprehensive effort to place more LWD in streams during forest operations on OFIC member lands. Recommended placement targets will be developed jointly by ODF/ODFW.

ODF 22: 25 PERCENT IN-UNIT LEAVE TREE PLACEMENT AND ADDITIONAL VOLUNTARY RETENTION

This is a voluntary measure to retain up to 100 percent of the in-unit trees along Type N or F streams in "core areas" and other special areas along specific stream reaches when ODF in consultation with ODFW determine additional retention along streams is beneficial to coho salmon recovery. OFIC members will voluntarily change the ratio of 50% conifer and 50% hardwood to 75% conifer and 25% hardwood when requested on a site-specific basis.

ODF 24: STATE FOREST LANDS STREAM HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND INSTREAM PROJECTS

During 1994 and 1995, 305 miles of stream have been surveyed for habitat on state forest lands by ODFW biologists. Fish distribution surveys have been done on 260 streams and stored on GIS. Contracts with ODFW are planned to complete assessments for the remaining streams and adjacent riparian areas.

ODF 26: ELLIOT STATE FOREST HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN

The Elliott State Forest (ESF) Habitat Conservation Plan developed for Northern Spotted Owls and Marbled Murrelets also enhances riparian areas. The forest covers approximately 93, 000 acres in the Oregon coast range.

ODF 27: INCREASED RIPARIAN PROTECTION

1994 Forest Practices rule changes have increased vegetation retention requirements in RMA's to increase protection and the potential delivery to near optimal for LWD.

ODF 30: LARGE WOODY DEBRIS RECRUITMENT INCENTIVES

Large woody debris placement incentives were included in the September 1994 Forest Practice Water Protection Rules. Forest Practice Rules have been developed to provide landowner incentives to work with ODF and ODFW in the voluntary placement of LWD and other material where appropriate.

ODF 31: LARGE WOODY DEBRIS PLACEMENT GUIDELINES

ODF and ODFW have developed a guidelines publication for operators to use in the placement of large woody debris in streams. If a proposed woody debris placement project meets the ODF guidelines contained in the publication the process for acquiring approval is streamlined. The landowner or operator still must obtain prior approval of a written plan before proceeding with the project.

ODF 33: INCREASE NUMBER OF STREAMS AND STREAM MILES PROTECTED

Through Forest Practice Rule changes protected stream miles have increased approximately 30 percent.

ODF 39: LOBSTER CREEK WHOLE-BASIN COORDINATION RESTORATION PROJECT

A whole basin restoration project to restore native salmonid populations, modeled after Hancock Timber Resource Group's (HTRG) strategy used in the Knowles Creek efforts in the Siuslaw basin. Partners in this project include HTRG, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the USDA Forest Service, and the Pacific Rivers Council.

ODF 40: UPPER SIUSLAW ENHANCEMENT

This is a voluntary action coordinated through Weyerhaeuser, the Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (Mid-Coast Habitat Restoration Project) for fish habitat improvement on tributaries of the upper Siuslaw river.

Analysis of the adequacy of riparian protection strategies must consider the potential effects of measures applied to the various land uses, including federal forest lands. GIS data developed by BPA showing land ownership class based upon 600 foot wide riparian acreage correlated to coho streams found the following proportions for the various land ownership classes in each Gene Conservation Group.

4. Loss of estuarine rearing habitat:

a. Factor for decline:

Diking, draining and filling of estuaries has reduced the amount of estuarine habitat useable to meet salmonids life-history needs and may have changed how salmon interact with marine mammal and avian predators.

b. Discussion of Factor:

Estuaries provide important habitat for salmonids. For coho, estuaries provide the location for smolts to acclimatize and sometimes overwinter, but are otherwise migration corridors for both upstream and downstream migration. Estuaries play an important role as rearing areas for some salmonids, but generally not for coho in Oregon.

Diking, draining and filling are the most common activities that have changed the abundance and quality of estuaries. Diking was often used to reduce the tidal influence on lands through the installation of a tidal gate. Gates allow water to drain away from an area behind a dike at low tide, but do not allow water to flow back in at high tide. Often diked areas retain some wetland charcteristics, but hydrologic connectivity is reduced and fish access is eliminated. Filling is the placement of materials in a estuary to elimnate wetland characteristics in the filled area.

The NRC Report states that:

"[l]oss of estuarine and riverine wetland habitat can potentially affect all salmon. Those most likely to be affected are coho, which can use riverine wetlands and estuaries for over-wintering (Tschaplinski and Hartman 1983), and chum, chinook, and sea-run cutthroat, which rear in estuaries for extended periods (Simenstad et. al. 1982, Trotter 1989, Healey 1991, Salo 1991).

The Botkin Report states that:

"... we learned there have been few studies that estimate the amount of estuaries lost due to land use changes or other reasons. Thomas (1983) documented that since the time of settlement of the Columbia River Valley, more than 43% of the tidal marshes and 76% of the tidal swamps in that area have been lost, primarily due to diking. Throughtout the Pacific Northwest as a whole, by the late 1970's, wetland areas in most estuaries had been reduced by 50% to 95% from the combination of conversion of these areas to agriculture and urban zones (Boule and Bierly, 1987). It has been estimated that estuaries in Oregon contain 8027 acres of tidal marshes, 9931 acres of diked marshes, and 1915 acres of filled lands. Total estuary loss along the Oregon coast has been documented in two areas: Coos Bay and The Coquille River. According to Dan Bottom, the area of the Coos Bay estuary has been reduced by 90 percent and the area of the