Search

Search Results

• 381. [Image] Botrychium summit: 16 March 1993

  	Cover title; Includes draft: Species conservation strategy: pumice grape fern, 1992, botrychium pumicola cov. in underw, Deschutes National Forest sensitive plant program
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Botrychium summit: 16 March 1993 Author: Christine O. Hopkins Year: 1940, 2009, 2010 Cover title; Includes draft: Species conservation strategy: pumice grape fern, 1992, botrychium pumicola cov. in underw, Deschutes National Forest sensitive plant program Title: Botrychium summit: 16 March 1993 Author: Christine O. Hopkins Year: 1940, 2009, 2010 Cover title; Includes draft: Species conservation strategy: pumice grape fern, 1992, botrychium pumicola cov. in underw, Deschutes National Forest sensitive plant program Close

• 382. [Article] Canyon Grasslands of the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area : How have they changed over time and what is their future trajectory?

  The canyon grasslands of the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area (HCNRA) are a unique ecosystem within the Pacific Northwest Bunchgrass Region (PNWBR) with a long history of natural and anthropogenic ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Canyon Grasslands of the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area : How have they changed over time and what is their future trajectory? Author: Pack, Samantha J. The canyon grasslands of the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area (HCNRA) are a unique ecosystem within the Pacific Northwest Bunchgrass Region (PNWBR) with a long history of natural and anthropogenic disturbances including fire, invasive species introduction, historical livestock grazing, and cultivation. Even with this history, these canyon grasslands contain some of the last remnants of the Pacific Northwest Bunchgrass Region. For thousands of years, these grasslands were occupied by the Nez Perce Tribe and have been grazed since the 1700s. In addition to grazing, settlers cultivated many parts of the HCNRA and some of these homesteads can still be seen today. Both historical and current land uses are strongly influenced by the natural topography of these canyon grasslands, with the highest concentration of land use centered on benchlands while steep canyon slopes avoided cultivation and were used less by livestock. The different plant associations of these grasslands are also influenced by the unique topography of the HCNRA due to the relationships between soil moisture and depth and abrupt alterations in aspect, slope, and elevation. Very few studies have examined the plant associations of the canyon grasslands of the HCNRA, even fewer have asked how they have changed over time, and there are no studies looking into their future trajectory by assessing the seed bank. The first study in my thesis (Chapter 2) focused on how canyon grasslands have changed over time using a repeated survey of vegetation from four different plant associations within the Lower Imnaha Subbasin. From the original study conducted in 1981, a total of 19 different plots in four plant associations were chosen to be resampled in 2014. Since the original study was used to classify seral stages within the plant associations, these successional stages were used to determine if the plant communities had transitioned between the seral classes over the 33 year-time-period. In addition, given the importance of topography to these grasslands, elevation, slope, and aspect were evaluated for their relationship to successional changes. Both Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling (NMS) and Indicator Species Analysis were used to verify the seral stage classifications for each plot in 1981 and 2014. To evaluate how each association had changed between sampling years, Multi-response Permutation Procedures (MRPP) and NMS were used. Most of these plant associations were relatively stable and had, for the most part, remained at the same seral stage or transitioned to a later seral stage. Among the plant associations, slope was the topographical variable that appeared most related to the transitions in seral stages. Steeper slopes either remained at the same seral stage or transitioned to a later one, while gentler slopes (< 20%) tended to shift from later to earlier seral stages. A relatively new introduced annual grass to the region, Ventenata dubia (not present in the 1981 sampling), was found in three of the four plant associations and was most abundant on the benchlands. The results of this resurvey suggest that topography is related to both the distribution of plant associations and which sites will shift in seral stage over time across the canyon grasslands of the Lower Imnaha Subbasin. The second study of my thesis (Chapter 3) focused on using a seed bank study as one of the many ways to examine the future trajectory of the plant communities in the canyon grasslands of the Lower Imnaha Subbasin, with a particular focus on the benchlands. The seed bank contains the regenerative pool for plant communities and represents the potential for a community to respond to disturbances. The seed bank from benchland sites in one plant association was evaluated in relation to the standing vegetation, successional stage, and historical cultivation. To my knowledge, this was the first seed bank study for the grasslands of this region. Vegetation cover and soil samples were collected from 8 sites, including two previously cultivated and two reference noncultivated sites. NMS was used to extract the strongest community gradients, which naturally separated out the seral stage classifications of the vegetation. To evaluate differences between the vegetation and the seed bank, between successional stages, and between cultivation histories, MRPP was used. Results from the seed bank study are consistent with many other studies around the world in perennial grasslands showing that the vegetation and seed bank are often dissimilar. Similarities between the vegetation and seed bank were highest in the annual grass dominated stage compared to the early seral stage. The effects of cultivation appear to still be evident in the seed bank, where cultivated sites have significantly more introduced grasses compared to noncultivated sites (p < 0.05). There was an overall greater abundance of introduced annual forb and grass species in the seed bank on these benchland sites, suggesting that they may be native seed limited and could easily shift to invasive species dominance after further disturbance, especially on previously cultivated areas. The results of both of these studies suggest that benchlands and lower sloped sites surrounding them in the canyon grasslands of the Lower Imnaha Subbasin may less resistant and resilient to disturbance. Priorities for future research and management may also need to focus on the plant communities of benchlands in these unique grasslands. Title: Canyon Grasslands of the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area : How have they changed over time and what is their future trajectory? Author: Pack, Samantha J. The canyon grasslands of the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area (HCNRA) are a unique ecosystem within the Pacific Northwest Bunchgrass Region (PNWBR) with a long history of natural and anthropogenic disturbances including fire, invasive species introduction, historical livestock grazing, and cultivation. Even with this history, these canyon grasslands contain some of the last remnants of the Pacific Northwest Bunchgrass Region. For thousands of years, these grasslands were occupied by the Nez Perce Tribe and have been grazed since the 1700s. In addition to grazing, settlers cultivated many parts of the HCNRA and some of these homesteads can still be seen today. Both historical and current land uses are strongly influenced by the natural topography of these canyon grasslands, with the highest concentration of land use centered on benchlands while steep canyon slopes avoided cultivation and were used less by livestock. The different plant associations of these grasslands are also influenced by the unique topography of the HCNRA due to the relationships between soil moisture and depth and abrupt alterations in aspect, slope, and elevation. Very few studies have examined the plant associations of the canyon grasslands of the HCNRA, even fewer have asked how they have changed over time, and there are no studies looking into their future trajectory by assessing the seed bank. The first study in my thesis (Chapter 2) focused on how canyon grasslands have changed over time using a repeated survey of vegetation from four different plant associations within the Lower Imnaha Subbasin. From the original study conducted in 1981, a total of 19 different plots in four plant associations were chosen to be resampled in 2014. Since the original study was used to classify seral stages within the plant associations, these successional stages were used to determine if the plant communities had transitioned between the seral classes over the 33 year-time-period. In addition, given the importance of topography to these grasslands, elevation, slope, and aspect were evaluated for their relationship to successional changes. Both Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling (NMS) and Indicator Species Analysis were used to verify the seral stage classifications for each plot in 1981 and 2014. To evaluate how each association had changed between sampling years, Multi-response Permutation Procedures (MRPP) and NMS were used. Most of these plant associations were relatively stable and had, for the most part, remained at the same seral stage or transitioned to a later seral stage. Among the plant associations, slope was the topographical variable that appeared most related to the transitions in seral stages. Steeper slopes either remained at the same seral stage or transitioned to a later one, while gentler slopes (< 20%) tended to shift from later to earlier seral stages. A relatively new introduced annual grass to the region, Ventenata dubia (not present in the 1981 sampling), was found in three of the four plant associations and was most abundant on the benchlands. The results of this resurvey suggest that topography is related to both the distribution of plant associations and which sites will shift in seral stage over time across the canyon grasslands of the Lower Imnaha Subbasin. The second study of my thesis (Chapter 3) focused on using a seed bank study as one of the many ways to examine the future trajectory of the plant communities in the canyon grasslands of the Lower Imnaha Subbasin, with a particular focus on the benchlands. The seed bank contains the regenerative pool for plant communities and represents the potential for a community to respond to disturbances. The seed bank from benchland sites in one plant association was evaluated in relation to the standing vegetation, successional stage, and historical cultivation. To my knowledge, this was the first seed bank study for the grasslands of this region. Vegetation cover and soil samples were collected from 8 sites, including two previously cultivated and two reference noncultivated sites. NMS was used to extract the strongest community gradients, which naturally separated out the seral stage classifications of the vegetation. To evaluate differences between the vegetation and the seed bank, between successional stages, and between cultivation histories, MRPP was used. Results from the seed bank study are consistent with many other studies around the world in perennial grasslands showing that the vegetation and seed bank are often dissimilar. Similarities between the vegetation and seed bank were highest in the annual grass dominated stage compared to the early seral stage. The effects of cultivation appear to still be evident in the seed bank, where cultivated sites have significantly more introduced grasses compared to noncultivated sites (p < 0.05). There was an overall greater abundance of introduced annual forb and grass species in the seed bank on these benchland sites, suggesting that they may be native seed limited and could easily shift to invasive species dominance after further disturbance, especially on previously cultivated areas. The results of both of these studies suggest that benchlands and lower sloped sites surrounding them in the canyon grasslands of the Lower Imnaha Subbasin may less resistant and resilient to disturbance. Priorities for future research and management may also need to focus on the plant communities of benchlands in these unique grasslands. Close

• 383. [Article] Forestry

  Posted by permission of Cambridge Scientific Abstracts (CSA). (c) CSA 2009. All rights reserved.

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Forestry Author: Avery, Bonnie E. Posted by permission of Cambridge Scientific Abstracts (CSA). (c) CSA 2009. All rights reserved. Title: Forestry Author: Avery, Bonnie E. Posted by permission of Cambridge Scientific Abstracts (CSA). (c) CSA 2009. All rights reserved. Close

• 384. [Article] The Role of Plant-soil Feedback in the Invasion of Brachypodium sylvaticum in Douglas-fir Forests

  Invasive plants have the capacity to transform landscapes and alter ecosystem function, causing significant economic and ecological damage. These effects include displacement and reduction of native flora ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: The Role of Plant-soil Feedback in the Invasion of Brachypodium sylvaticum in Douglas-fir Forests Author: Esterson, Andrew Invasive plants have the capacity to transform landscapes and alter ecosystem function, causing significant economic and ecological damage. These effects include displacement and reduction of native flora and fauna, altered fire regimes, modification of biotic and abiotic soil properties, as well as local, regional, and global economic impacts. With such large impacts it is important that we better understand invasion dynamics to help with prevention, control and mitigation of invasive species. One process that has been associated with plant invasion is plant-soil feedback (PSF). A PSF occurs when plants alter biotic and abiotic soil properties through a variety of root exudates and litter decomposition such that subsequent plant growth is either positively or negatively affected. Positive conspecific and negative heterospecific responses have been theorized to be invasive species traits that promote invasion. Once an invasive species is removed from a system, there is a chance that PSFs generated by that species will persist in the soil, which is often referred to as 'plant legacies' or 'legacy effects' and may negatively influence restoration efforts. In the U.S. Pacific Northwest (PNW), Brachypodium sylvaticum (slender false brome), a perennial bunch grass native to Eurasia, is listed as a quarantined invasive species in California, Oregon, and Washington. Currently, B. sylvaticum is in the midst of rapid population growth and range expansion with populations in New York, Virginia, and Ontario, Canada. With a quickly expanding range research is critical for successful efforts to reduce the spread of B. sylvaticum. We developed two experiments to determine if PSF is a contributing factor to B. sylvaticum invasion in PNW forests. We hypothesized that 1) B. sylvaticum has positive conspecific and negative heterospecific PSF, 2) native species PSF has no effect on B. sylvaticum, and 3) PSF generated by B. sylvaticum will persist in the soil once removed, but over time, response of native species, soil nutrients and bacterial community composition will change from the invaded conditioned. To test our first two hypotheses, B. sylvaticum and five common native plants from the Oregon Coastal range, including the economically important tree, Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir), were grown in a greenhouse on wild forest soils that had either been sterilized or kept live to condition the soil biotic community to the invader and the native species. Brachypodium sylvaticum was then grown on soil conditioned by itself and soil conditioned by natives; each of the five native species was grown on soil conditioned by B. sylvaticum and on their own conditioned soils. Plant biomass along with species specific measurements (number of leaves, stems, tillers, stem diameter and height) were recorded and a relative response (RR) index was used to determine the direction of PSF for the invader and native species. To test our third hypothesis, in March, 2015, ten plots were established in the McDonald-Dunn Research Forest located in Corvallis, OR where B. sylvaticum had at least 75% cover. Herbicide was applied to half of each plot to make two soil treatments: soil with B. sylvaticum and soil without B. sylvaticum. Over a nine-month period three soil collections took place where soil was collected from all plots and treatments. Plant response was evaluated by growing four native species and B. sylvaticum on both soil treatments and evaluating total biomass with a RR index; plant response (via growth), soil nutrients and bacterial communities were measured for each collection period. Bacterial communities were measured with phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) analysis and high throughput 16s rRNA amplicon sequencing. Contrary to our hypotheses, the RR to PSF generated by B. sylvaticum was negative for the invader and P. menziesii and neutral for all other natives. Soils conditioned by Bromus vulgaris inhibited B. sylvaticum growth whereas soils conditioned by Prunella vulgaris and P. menziesii promoted B. sylvaticum growth. When testing for legacy effects, the RR of P. menziesii was negative when grown on soils where B. sylvaticum had been removed for six-months (six-month soils) but when grown on soils where B. sylvaticum had been removed for nine-months (nine-month soil) the RR of P. menziesii was neutral. The RR of P. vulgaris to six-month soils was positive while its RR to nine-month soils was negative. Nutrient and bacterial communities did not change in response to B. sylvaticum removal suggesting that the biotic and abiotic legacy requires longer than nine-months to be observed or B. sylvaticum does not affect the response variables measured. Overall, our data suggest that PSF generated by B. sylvaticum does not facilitate the invasion process but does differentially affect native species growth over time. PSF generated by native grasses may be a useful restoration tool to help prevent B. sylvaticum invasion and we suggest planting native species at least nine-months after B. sylvaticum removal. Title: The Role of Plant-soil Feedback in the Invasion of Brachypodium sylvaticum in Douglas-fir Forests Author: Esterson, Andrew Invasive plants have the capacity to transform landscapes and alter ecosystem function, causing significant economic and ecological damage. These effects include displacement and reduction of native flora and fauna, altered fire regimes, modification of biotic and abiotic soil properties, as well as local, regional, and global economic impacts. With such large impacts it is important that we better understand invasion dynamics to help with prevention, control and mitigation of invasive species. One process that has been associated with plant invasion is plant-soil feedback (PSF). A PSF occurs when plants alter biotic and abiotic soil properties through a variety of root exudates and litter decomposition such that subsequent plant growth is either positively or negatively affected. Positive conspecific and negative heterospecific responses have been theorized to be invasive species traits that promote invasion. Once an invasive species is removed from a system, there is a chance that PSFs generated by that species will persist in the soil, which is often referred to as 'plant legacies' or 'legacy effects' and may negatively influence restoration efforts. In the U.S. Pacific Northwest (PNW), Brachypodium sylvaticum (slender false brome), a perennial bunch grass native to Eurasia, is listed as a quarantined invasive species in California, Oregon, and Washington. Currently, B. sylvaticum is in the midst of rapid population growth and range expansion with populations in New York, Virginia, and Ontario, Canada. With a quickly expanding range research is critical for successful efforts to reduce the spread of B. sylvaticum. We developed two experiments to determine if PSF is a contributing factor to B. sylvaticum invasion in PNW forests. We hypothesized that 1) B. sylvaticum has positive conspecific and negative heterospecific PSF, 2) native species PSF has no effect on B. sylvaticum, and 3) PSF generated by B. sylvaticum will persist in the soil once removed, but over time, response of native species, soil nutrients and bacterial community composition will change from the invaded conditioned. To test our first two hypotheses, B. sylvaticum and five common native plants from the Oregon Coastal range, including the economically important tree, Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir), were grown in a greenhouse on wild forest soils that had either been sterilized or kept live to condition the soil biotic community to the invader and the native species. Brachypodium sylvaticum was then grown on soil conditioned by itself and soil conditioned by natives; each of the five native species was grown on soil conditioned by B. sylvaticum and on their own conditioned soils. Plant biomass along with species specific measurements (number of leaves, stems, tillers, stem diameter and height) were recorded and a relative response (RR) index was used to determine the direction of PSF for the invader and native species. To test our third hypothesis, in March, 2015, ten plots were established in the McDonald-Dunn Research Forest located in Corvallis, OR where B. sylvaticum had at least 75% cover. Herbicide was applied to half of each plot to make two soil treatments: soil with B. sylvaticum and soil without B. sylvaticum. Over a nine-month period three soil collections took place where soil was collected from all plots and treatments. Plant response was evaluated by growing four native species and B. sylvaticum on both soil treatments and evaluating total biomass with a RR index; plant response (via growth), soil nutrients and bacterial communities were measured for each collection period. Bacterial communities were measured with phospholipid fatty acid (PLFA) analysis and high throughput 16s rRNA amplicon sequencing. Contrary to our hypotheses, the RR to PSF generated by B. sylvaticum was negative for the invader and P. menziesii and neutral for all other natives. Soils conditioned by Bromus vulgaris inhibited B. sylvaticum growth whereas soils conditioned by Prunella vulgaris and P. menziesii promoted B. sylvaticum growth. When testing for legacy effects, the RR of P. menziesii was negative when grown on soils where B. sylvaticum had been removed for six-months (six-month soils) but when grown on soils where B. sylvaticum had been removed for nine-months (nine-month soil) the RR of P. menziesii was neutral. The RR of P. vulgaris to six-month soils was positive while its RR to nine-month soils was negative. Nutrient and bacterial communities did not change in response to B. sylvaticum removal suggesting that the biotic and abiotic legacy requires longer than nine-months to be observed or B. sylvaticum does not affect the response variables measured. Overall, our data suggest that PSF generated by B. sylvaticum does not facilitate the invasion process but does differentially affect native species growth over time. PSF generated by native grasses may be a useful restoration tool to help prevent B. sylvaticum invasion and we suggest planting native species at least nine-months after B. sylvaticum removal. Close

• 385. [Image] Klamath Falls Resource Area resource management plan and environmental impact statement : final : Volume 1

  	Proposed resource management plan/final environmental impact statement for the Klamath Falls Resource Area
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Klamath Falls Resource Area resource management plan and environmental impact statement : final : Volume 1 Author: United States. Bureau of Land Management. Klamath Falls Resource Area Office Year: 1994, 2005, 2004 Proposed resource management plan/final environmental impact statement for the Klamath Falls Resource Area Title: Klamath Falls Resource Area resource management plan and environmental impact statement : final : Volume 1 Author: United States. Bureau of Land Management. Klamath Falls Resource Area Office Year: 1994, 2005, 2004 Proposed resource management plan/final environmental impact statement for the Klamath Falls Resource Area Close

• 386. [Image] Draft upper Klamath River management plan environmental impact statement and resource management plan amendments. Volume 2 - Appendices

  	"BLM/OR/WA/PL-02/038+1792"--P. [2] of cover; Cover title; Includes bibliographical references (v. 2, p. 219-228) and index
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Draft upper Klamath River management plan environmental impact statement and resource management plan amendments. Volume 2 - Appendices Author: United States. Bureau of Land Management. Klamath Falls Resource Area Office Year: 2003, 2004 "BLM/OR/WA/PL-02/038+1792"--P. [2] of cover; Cover title; Includes bibliographical references (v. 2, p. 219-228) and index Title: Draft upper Klamath River management plan environmental impact statement and resource management plan amendments. Volume 2 - Appendices Author: United States. Bureau of Land Management. Klamath Falls Resource Area Office Year: 2003, 2004 "BLM/OR/WA/PL-02/038+1792"--P. [2] of cover; Cover title; Includes bibliographical references (v. 2, p. 219-228) and index Close

• 387. [Image] Oregon aquatic habitat restoration and enhancement guide

  	"May 1999"
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Oregon aquatic habitat restoration and enhancement guide Author: Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds Year: 1999, 2005, 2004 "May 1999" Title: Oregon aquatic habitat restoration and enhancement guide Author: Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds Year: 1999, 2005, 2004 "May 1999" Close

• 388. [Image] Annual program summary 2004

  	Annual Program Summary and Monitoring Report - FY2004 Table of Contents ANNUAL PROGRAM SUMMARY 1.0 Introduction 3 2.0 Summary of Accomplishments 3 3.0 Budget and Employment 6 4.0 Land ...
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Annual program summary 2004 Author: United States. Bureau of Land Management. Klamath Falls Resource Area Office District Year: 2005 Annual Program Summary and Monitoring Report - FY2004 Table of Contents ANNUAL PROGRAM SUMMARY 1.0 Introduction 3 2.0 Summary of Accomplishments 3 3.0 Budget and Employment 6 4.0 Land Use Allocations within the Klamath Falls Resource Area 6 Late-Successional Reserves and Assessments 8 Matrix 8 5.0 Aquatic Conservation Strategy 9 Riparian Reserves 9 Watershed Analysis and Key Watersheds 9 Watershed Restoration 10 Roads 10 Riparian Habitat Enhancement 10 Stream Restoration 11 6.0 Air Quality 11 7.0 Water and Soils 11 Water - Project Implementation 11 Soils - Project Implementation 12 Water - Inventory and Monitoring 12 Soils -Inventory and Monitoring 13 State-listed Clean Water Act 303d Streams 13 RMP Best Management Practices 13 8.0 Terrestrial Species and Habitat Management 14 Survey and Manage Species 14 Threatened/Endangered Species 14 Northern Spotted Owl 14 Bald Eagle 14 Special Status Species-Animals 15 Peregrine Falcon 15 Yellow Rails 15 Bats 15 Northern Goshawk 15 Oregon Spotted Frog 15 Sage Grouse 16 vii Klamath Falls Resource Area Mollusks 16 Great Gray Owl 16 Special Status Species - Plants 16 Other Species of Concern 17 Neotropical Migratory Landbirds 17 Terrestrial Habitat Management 17 Nest Sites, Activity Centers, and Rookeries 17 Big Game Habitat 19 9.0 Aquatic Species and Habitat Management 19 Threatened/Endangered Species 19 Lost River and Shortnose Suckers 19 Bull Trout 20 Endangered Species Act Consultation 20 Aquatic Habitat Restoration 20 Klamath River Hydroelectric Facility Relicensing 21 10.0 Pathogen, Disease, and Pest Management 21 11.0 Weed Management 22 Inventories 22 Control 22 12.0 Special Areas/Management 23 Wild and Scenic Rivers 23 Wilderness 23 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 23 Tunnel Creek Special Botanical Area 24 Klamath Canyon ACEC 24 Old Baldy Research Natural Area 24 Wood River Wetland ACEC 24 Environmental Education Areas 25 13.0 Cultural Resources 26 14.0 Visual Resources 26 15.0 Rural Interface Areas 26 16.0 Socioeconomic Conditions 27 Jobs-in-the-Woods 28 17.0 Environmental Justice 30 18.0 Recreation 30 Recreation Pipeline Restoration Funds 30 Recreation Projects 31 viii Annual Program Summary and Monitoring Report - FY2004 Recreation Fee Demonstration Project 31 Status of Recreation Plans 32 Volunteer Activities 32 Tourism 33 19.0 Forest Management and Timber Resources 33 Silvicultural Prescriptions 33 Timber Sale Planning 34 FY 2004 Timber Sale Accomplishments 34 Status of Sold & Awarded Klamath Falls RMP Timber Sales 35 Forest Development Activities 39 Stewardship Contracting 42 20.0 Special Forest Products 42 21.0 Energy and Minerals 43 22.0 Land Tenure Adjustments 44 23.0 Access and Rights-of-Way 45 24.0 Transportation and Roads 45 25.0 Hazardous Materials 46 26.0 Wildfire/Fuels Management 46 27.0 Law Enforcement 47 28.0 Rangeland Resources / Grazing Management 48 Fiscal Year 2004 Summary 49 Fiscal Years 1996-2004 Summary 50 Wild Horse Management 51 29.0 Cadastral Survey 52 30.0 Education and Outreach 52 31.0 Research 56 32.0 Coordination and Consultation 58 Federal Agencies 58 State of Oregon 58 Counties 59 Cities 59 Tribes 59 IX Klamath Falls Resource Area Watershed Councils 59 Chartered Advisory Groups 60 Other Local Coordination and Cooperation 61 33.0 National Environmental Policy Act Analysis and Documentation 63 NEPA documentation 63 Klamath Falls Resource Area Environmental Documentation 63 Protests and Appeals 63 34.0 Plan Evaluations 64 Third Year Evaluation 64 Eighth Year Evaluation 64 35.0 Plan Maintenance 65 36.0 Plan Amendments 72 Plan Revision 76 MONITORING REPORT Introduction 79 All Land Use Allocations 83 Late-Successional Reserves 86 Matrix 88 Riparian Reserves 92 Air Quality 95 Water and Soils 96 Terrestrial Species Habitat 101 Special Status and SEIS Special Attention Species Habitat 106 Aquatic Species Habitat 110 Noxious Weeds 112 Special Areas 113 Wild and Scenic Rivers 115 Cultural Resources Including American Indian Values 116 Visual Resources 118 Rural Interface Areas 119 Socioeconomic Conditions 120 Recreation 121 Forest Management and Timber Resources 121 Special Forest/Natural Products 122 Wildfire / Fuels Management 124 Rangeland Resources / Grazing Management 124 GLOSSARY/ACRONYMS 129 Annual Program Summary and Monitoring Report - FY2004 List of Tables Table 2.1 - Summary of Resource Management Actions, Directions, and Accomplishments 4 Table 2.1 - Summary of Resource Management Actions, Directions, and Accomplishments (Cont.).5 Table 3.1 - Resource Area Budget Fiscal Year 2004 6 Table 4.1 - Land Use Allocation 8 Table 5.1 - Watershed Analysis Schedule 10 Table 5.2-Watershed Analysis Status Fiscal Year 2004 10 Table 6.1 -Air Quality Management Fiscal Year 2004 11 Table 7.1 - Watershed Activity Fiscal Year 2004 12 Table 7.2 - KFRA Clean Water Act 303(d) Water Bodies 13 Table 8.1a - BLM /KFRA Special Status Species Designations Summary -Animals 18 Table 8.1b - BLM (KFRA) Special Status Species Designations Summary - Plants 18 Table 8.2 - Terrestrial Habitat Monitoring Fiscal Year 2004 18 Table 8.3 - Monitoring for Nest Sites, Activity Centers, Rookeries, Special Habitats 18 Table 9.1 -Aquatic Habitat/ Fish Passage Management Fiscal Year 2004 19 Table 11.1 - Managed Weed Species 20 Table 12.1 - Special Management Areas 25 Table 13.1 - Cultural Resources Management Fiscal Year 2004 26 Table 16.1 - Total Payments in Lieu of Taxes and Acres by County for FY 2004 28 Table 16.2 - O&C Payments To Counties FY 2004 29 Table 16.3 - Jobs in the Woods Program Fiscal Year 2004 29 Table 18.1 - Recreation Statistics Fiscal Year 2004 30 Table 18.2 - Recreation Fee Demonstration Project Fiscal Year 2004 32 Table 19.1 - Klamath Falls Timber Sale Volume (MBF) and Acres FY 2004 35 Table 19.2-Timber Volume Sold in FY 2004 36 Table 19.3 - Harvest Activity for FY 2004 36 Table 19.4 - Planned Timber Sales (FY 2005 & 2006) 36 Table 19.5 - Status of Sold and Awarded Timber Sales 37 Table 19.6 - Summary of Volume Sold 38 Table 19.7 -Volume and Acres Sold by Allocations 38 Table 19.8 - Timber Sales Sold by Harvest Types 38 Table 19.9 - Timber Sale Acres Sold by Age Class 39 Table 19.10 - Forest Development Activities 41 Table 20.1 - Special Forest Products Fiscal Year 2004 43 Table 21.1 - Energy and Minerals Management Fiscal Year 2004 44 Table 22.1 - Land Use Tenure Adjustments Fiscal Year 2004 45 Table 24.1 - Roads and Transportation Management Fiscal Year 2004 45 Table 25.1 - Hazardous Materials Management Fiscal Year 2004 46 Table 26.1 - Fire and Fuels Management Fiscal Year 2004 46 Table 27.1 - Law Enforcement Fiscal Year 2004 47 Table 28.1 - Range Resources Management Fiscal Year 2004 48 Table 29.1 -Cadastral Survey Summary Fiscal Year 2004 52 Table 30.1 - Environmental Education/Outreach Program Summary FY2004 54 Table 30.2 - Environmental Education/Outreach Special Events FY2004 55 Table 30.3 - Environmental Education/Outreach Programs & Tours FY 2004 56 Table 32.1 - Challenge Cost Share Fiscal Year 2004 62 XI Klamath Falls Resource Area Table 33.1 - NEPA Analyses and Documentation Fiscal Year 2004 64 Table 36.1 - Redefined Survey and Manage Categories 74 Table M.I - Projects Monitored FY 2004 80 Table M-2 - FY 2004 Implementation Monitoring Selection Categories 81 Table M-3 - Comparison of Projected vs. Actual Harvest Volume (MMBF)/Acres to Date 82 Table M-4 - Timber Sale Volume and Acres Offered (Entire Resource Area) 83 Table M-5 - Timber Sale Monitoring Summary 89 Table M-6 - Post Treatment Stand Characteristics for West Grenada Timber Sale - FY 2004 90 Table M-7 - Status of Watershed Analysis 98 List of Figures Figure 1 - General Location Map 2 Figure 2 - KFRA Land Allocations 7 Xll Title: Annual program summary 2004 Author: United States. Bureau of Land Management. Klamath Falls Resource Area Office District Year: 2005 Annual Program Summary and Monitoring Report - FY2004 Table of Contents ANNUAL PROGRAM SUMMARY 1.0 Introduction 3 2.0 Summary of Accomplishments 3 3.0 Budget and Employment 6 4.0 Land Use Allocations within the Klamath Falls Resource Area 6 Late-Successional Reserves and Assessments 8 Matrix 8 5.0 Aquatic Conservation Strategy 9 Riparian Reserves 9 Watershed Analysis and Key Watersheds 9 Watershed Restoration 10 Roads 10 Riparian Habitat Enhancement 10 Stream Restoration 11 6.0 Air Quality 11 7.0 Water and Soils 11 Water - Project Implementation 11 Soils - Project Implementation 12 Water - Inventory and Monitoring 12 Soils -Inventory and Monitoring 13 State-listed Clean Water Act 303d Streams 13 RMP Best Management Practices 13 8.0 Terrestrial Species and Habitat Management 14 Survey and Manage Species 14 Threatened/Endangered Species 14 Northern Spotted Owl 14 Bald Eagle 14 Special Status Species-Animals 15 Peregrine Falcon 15 Yellow Rails 15 Bats 15 Northern Goshawk 15 Oregon Spotted Frog 15 Sage Grouse 16 vii Klamath Falls Resource Area Mollusks 16 Great Gray Owl 16 Special Status Species - Plants 16 Other Species of Concern 17 Neotropical Migratory Landbirds 17 Terrestrial Habitat Management 17 Nest Sites, Activity Centers, and Rookeries 17 Big Game Habitat 19 9.0 Aquatic Species and Habitat Management 19 Threatened/Endangered Species 19 Lost River and Shortnose Suckers 19 Bull Trout 20 Endangered Species Act Consultation 20 Aquatic Habitat Restoration 20 Klamath River Hydroelectric Facility Relicensing 21 10.0 Pathogen, Disease, and Pest Management 21 11.0 Weed Management 22 Inventories 22 Control 22 12.0 Special Areas/Management 23 Wild and Scenic Rivers 23 Wilderness 23 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 23 Tunnel Creek Special Botanical Area 24 Klamath Canyon ACEC 24 Old Baldy Research Natural Area 24 Wood River Wetland ACEC 24 Environmental Education Areas 25 13.0 Cultural Resources 26 14.0 Visual Resources 26 15.0 Rural Interface Areas 26 16.0 Socioeconomic Conditions 27 Jobs-in-the-Woods 28 17.0 Environmental Justice 30 18.0 Recreation 30 Recreation Pipeline Restoration Funds 30 Recreation Projects 31 viii Annual Program Summary and Monitoring Report - FY2004 Recreation Fee Demonstration Project 31 Status of Recreation Plans 32 Volunteer Activities 32 Tourism 33 19.0 Forest Management and Timber Resources 33 Silvicultural Prescriptions 33 Timber Sale Planning 34 FY 2004 Timber Sale Accomplishments 34 Status of Sold & Awarded Klamath Falls RMP Timber Sales 35 Forest Development Activities 39 Stewardship Contracting 42 20.0 Special Forest Products 42 21.0 Energy and Minerals 43 22.0 Land Tenure Adjustments 44 23.0 Access and Rights-of-Way 45 24.0 Transportation and Roads 45 25.0 Hazardous Materials 46 26.0 Wildfire/Fuels Management 46 27.0 Law Enforcement 47 28.0 Rangeland Resources / Grazing Management 48 Fiscal Year 2004 Summary 49 Fiscal Years 1996-2004 Summary 50 Wild Horse Management 51 29.0 Cadastral Survey 52 30.0 Education and Outreach 52 31.0 Research 56 32.0 Coordination and Consultation 58 Federal Agencies 58 State of Oregon 58 Counties 59 Cities 59 Tribes 59 IX Klamath Falls Resource Area Watershed Councils 59 Chartered Advisory Groups 60 Other Local Coordination and Cooperation 61 33.0 National Environmental Policy Act Analysis and Documentation 63 NEPA documentation 63 Klamath Falls Resource Area Environmental Documentation 63 Protests and Appeals 63 34.0 Plan Evaluations 64 Third Year Evaluation 64 Eighth Year Evaluation 64 35.0 Plan Maintenance 65 36.0 Plan Amendments 72 Plan Revision 76 MONITORING REPORT Introduction 79 All Land Use Allocations 83 Late-Successional Reserves 86 Matrix 88 Riparian Reserves 92 Air Quality 95 Water and Soils 96 Terrestrial Species Habitat 101 Special Status and SEIS Special Attention Species Habitat 106 Aquatic Species Habitat 110 Noxious Weeds 112 Special Areas 113 Wild and Scenic Rivers 115 Cultural Resources Including American Indian Values 116 Visual Resources 118 Rural Interface Areas 119 Socioeconomic Conditions 120 Recreation 121 Forest Management and Timber Resources 121 Special Forest/Natural Products 122 Wildfire / Fuels Management 124 Rangeland Resources / Grazing Management 124 GLOSSARY/ACRONYMS 129 Annual Program Summary and Monitoring Report - FY2004 List of Tables Table 2.1 - Summary of Resource Management Actions, Directions, and Accomplishments 4 Table 2.1 - Summary of Resource Management Actions, Directions, and Accomplishments (Cont.).5 Table 3.1 - Resource Area Budget Fiscal Year 2004 6 Table 4.1 - Land Use Allocation 8 Table 5.1 - Watershed Analysis Schedule 10 Table 5.2-Watershed Analysis Status Fiscal Year 2004 10 Table 6.1 -Air Quality Management Fiscal Year 2004 11 Table 7.1 - Watershed Activity Fiscal Year 2004 12 Table 7.2 - KFRA Clean Water Act 303(d) Water Bodies 13 Table 8.1a - BLM /KFRA Special Status Species Designations Summary -Animals 18 Table 8.1b - BLM (KFRA) Special Status Species Designations Summary - Plants 18 Table 8.2 - Terrestrial Habitat Monitoring Fiscal Year 2004 18 Table 8.3 - Monitoring for Nest Sites, Activity Centers, Rookeries, Special Habitats 18 Table 9.1 -Aquatic Habitat/ Fish Passage Management Fiscal Year 2004 19 Table 11.1 - Managed Weed Species 20 Table 12.1 - Special Management Areas 25 Table 13.1 - Cultural Resources Management Fiscal Year 2004 26 Table 16.1 - Total Payments in Lieu of Taxes and Acres by County for FY 2004 28 Table 16.2 - O&C Payments To Counties FY 2004 29 Table 16.3 - Jobs in the Woods Program Fiscal Year 2004 29 Table 18.1 - Recreation Statistics Fiscal Year 2004 30 Table 18.2 - Recreation Fee Demonstration Project Fiscal Year 2004 32 Table 19.1 - Klamath Falls Timber Sale Volume (MBF) and Acres FY 2004 35 Table 19.2-Timber Volume Sold in FY 2004 36 Table 19.3 - Harvest Activity for FY 2004 36 Table 19.4 - Planned Timber Sales (FY 2005 & 2006) 36 Table 19.5 - Status of Sold and Awarded Timber Sales 37 Table 19.6 - Summary of Volume Sold 38 Table 19.7 -Volume and Acres Sold by Allocations 38 Table 19.8 - Timber Sales Sold by Harvest Types 38 Table 19.9 - Timber Sale Acres Sold by Age Class 39 Table 19.10 - Forest Development Activities 41 Table 20.1 - Special Forest Products Fiscal Year 2004 43 Table 21.1 - Energy and Minerals Management Fiscal Year 2004 44 Table 22.1 - Land Use Tenure Adjustments Fiscal Year 2004 45 Table 24.1 - Roads and Transportation Management Fiscal Year 2004 45 Table 25.1 - Hazardous Materials Management Fiscal Year 2004 46 Table 26.1 - Fire and Fuels Management Fiscal Year 2004 46 Table 27.1 - Law Enforcement Fiscal Year 2004 47 Table 28.1 - Range Resources Management Fiscal Year 2004 48 Table 29.1 -Cadastral Survey Summary Fiscal Year 2004 52 Table 30.1 - Environmental Education/Outreach Program Summary FY2004 54 Table 30.2 - Environmental Education/Outreach Special Events FY2004 55 Table 30.3 - Environmental Education/Outreach Programs & Tours FY 2004 56 Table 32.1 - Challenge Cost Share Fiscal Year 2004 62 XI Klamath Falls Resource Area Table 33.1 - NEPA Analyses and Documentation Fiscal Year 2004 64 Table 36.1 - Redefined Survey and Manage Categories 74 Table M.I - Projects Monitored FY 2004 80 Table M-2 - FY 2004 Implementation Monitoring Selection Categories 81 Table M-3 - Comparison of Projected vs. Actual Harvest Volume (MMBF)/Acres to Date 82 Table M-4 - Timber Sale Volume and Acres Offered (Entire Resource Area) 83 Table M-5 - Timber Sale Monitoring Summary 89 Table M-6 - Post Treatment Stand Characteristics for West Grenada Timber Sale - FY 2004 90 Table M-7 - Status of Watershed Analysis 98 List of Figures Figure 1 - General Location Map 2 Figure 2 - KFRA Land Allocations 7 Xll Close

• 389. [Image] The Water Report. Klamath Fishery Science: Controversy in the Klamath River Basin

  	Only portions of issues of The Water Report are available in the Klamath Waters Digital Library. Includes bibliographic references. See the full report at http://www.thewaterreport.com/.
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: The Water Report. Klamath Fishery Science: Controversy in the Klamath River Basin Author: Envirotech Publications Year: 2005, 2008, 2006 Only portions of issues of The Water Report are available in the Klamath Waters Digital Library. Includes bibliographic references. See the full report at http://www.thewaterreport.com/. Title: The Water Report. Klamath Fishery Science: Controversy in the Klamath River Basin Author: Envirotech Publications Year: 2005, 2008, 2006 Only portions of issues of The Water Report are available in the Klamath Waters Digital Library. Includes bibliographic references. See the full report at http://www.thewaterreport.com/. Close

• 390. [Image] The Water Report - Watershed assessments: the Upper Klamath Basin process

  	Only portions of issues of The Water Report are available in the Klamath Waters Digital Library. See the full report at http://www.thewaterreport.com/
  	Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: The Water Report - Watershed assessments: the Upper Klamath Basin process Author: Envirotech Publications Year: 2004, 2008, 2006 Only portions of issues of The Water Report are available in the Klamath Waters Digital Library. See the full report at http://www.thewaterreport.com/ Title: The Water Report - Watershed assessments: the Upper Klamath Basin process Author: Envirotech Publications Year: 2004, 2008, 2006 Only portions of issues of The Water Report are available in the Klamath Waters Digital Library. See the full report at http://www.thewaterreport.com/ Close