hydrology resource specialist reporta123.g.akamai.net/7/123/11558/abc123/forestservic... · systems...

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service July 23, 2013

Prepared by: Kate Day Hydrologist

/s/ ____Kate Day____ Date _7/23/2013____

Hydrology Resource Specialist Report

Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage Environmental Assessment

Sisters Ranger District Deschutes National Forest

1

Scale of Analysis and Watershed Hierarchy

Project treatments are located within the Deep Canyon and Whychus watersheds in portions of five subwatersheds (SWS). The watershed hierarchy of the project area and acres of treatment proposed in each SWS are shown in Table 1.

The Hydrologic Analysis Area for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage includes the SWSs where treatments are proposed including Three Creek, Headwaters Whychus Creek, Upper Whychus Creek, Upper Trout Creek, and Lower Trout Creek. SWSs downstream of the project area were not included in project analysis. The potential effects of the project are no longer relevant or quantitatively or qualitatively meaningful at a scale larger than the SWSs where treatments are located because there are no treatments proposed near streams or within Riparian Reserves, and additional BMPs and project design criteria would avoid treatments in other hydrologically connected and sensitive areas. The temporal bound for analysis is 23 years into the future, the estimated recovery time for heavy salvage in moist forest types in the equivalent clear-cut area (ECA) model. Nearly 90% of proposed salvage activities are in the wet mixed-conifer or other wet conifer plant associations, with less than 10% of treatments in dry forest types. The ECA is a model often used to estimate potential cumulative effects of timber harvest activities on water yield and is discussed in greater detail in the Water Yield and Peak Flow Cumulative Effects section of this report. Project SWSs (Hydrologic Analysis Area), streams, Riparian Reserves, Key Watersheds, the planned Wild and Scenic boundary, spatial extent of 303(d) listing in Whychus Creek, and Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage treatment units are shown in Figure 1.

Table 1. Watershed hierarchy, and project and treatment acres for the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage. Watershed SWS name SWS number SWS

acres Treatment acres (proposed action)

% SWS treated

Deep Canyon

Three Creek 170703010601 18,790 55 0.3

Whychus Creek

Headwaters Whychus Creek

170703010701 22,764 152 0.7

Upper Whychus Creek

170703010702 18,305 720 4.0

Upper Trout Creek

170703010703 12,100 21 0.2

Lower Trout Creek

170703010706 20,056 32 0.2

Watersheds are located within the Upper Deschutes Subbasin 17070301, Deschutes Basin 170703, Columbia Basin 1707, Pacific Northwest Region 17.

2

Figure 1: Map of project SWSs (Hydrologic Analysis Area), streams, Riparian Reserves, Key Watersheds, Wild and Scenic boundary, and Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage treatment units.

3

There are four streams adjacent to treatment areas or haul routes in the Hydrologic Analysis area including Pole Creek, North Fork Pole Creek, Snow Creek, and Whychus Creek. These streams and their flow regimes are shown in Table 2. There are also several unnamed perennial and intermittent streams, wet meadows, and swamps in the project area that contribute to streamflow. Wet meadow and swamp systems are important for late-season water storage and sediment storage capacity. Although these areas have not been assessed to determine if they are jurisdictional wetlands (based on vegetation, soil, and hydrology), compaction in these areas, or diversion of flows can negatively impact water storage and sediment storage capacity. These areas are protected under the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) as a wetland and will receive a 150ft buffer from project activities.

Table 2: Flow regime of streams within the Hydrologic Analysis Area. SWS Stream Flow Regime

Upper Whychus Creek Pole Creek Spring-fed

North Fork Pole Creek Spring-fed

Whychus Creek Snowmelt


Snow Creek Spring-fed/snowmelt

Management Direction

All federal land management activities must follow standards and guidelines (S&Gs) listed in the Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) (USDA Forest Service 1990), as amended by the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP) (USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management 1994), and any applicable Wild and Scenic River Plans. Project treatments must comply with all applicable best management practices (BMPs) (USDA Forest Service 1998a, USDA Forest Service 2012) and the Clean Water Act. All National Forest lands in the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage Project are under NWFP direction and are located within the matrix land allocation.

Deschutes National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan The following standards and guidelines from the Deschutes LRMP are applicable to this project (USDA Forest Service 1990): RP-3: Give preference to riparian area dependent resources RP-8: Evaluate the cumulative effects of proposed projects on water quality, runoff, stream channel conditions fish habitat and adopt measures to avoid adverse effects to these resources. RP-10: Manage woody debris and vegetation to: 1) maintain or enhance stream channel and bank structure. RP-39: Large organic material which is beneficial to fish, wildlife or water quality will be preserved in riparian areas, stream or river channels and lakes adjacent to summer homes. Streambank erosion or esthetic enhancements are not adequate reasons for its removal. The material may be altered if it creates a safety hazard, however its contribution to riparian resources will be preserved.

4

Northwest Forest Plan The Deschutes National Forest LRMP was amended in 1994 by the Record of Decision for Amendments to the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl (Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP)) (USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management 1994). The Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) is an essential part of the NWFP that “was developed to restore and maintain the ecological health of watersheds and aquatic ecosystems contained within them on public lands” (USFS 1994, B9). The NWFP provides standards and guidelines for Key Watersheds and Riparian Reserves that prohibit or regulate activities that “Prevent further degradation of aquatic ecosystems and to restore and maintain habitat and ecological processes responsible for creating habitat over broad landscapes of public lands” (Reeves et al. 2006). Within the project area, the Headwaters Whychus Creek SWS and portions of the Upper Whychus Creek SWS (excluding the Pole Creek catchment), and a portion of the Three Creek SWS are Tier 2 Key watersheds under the NWFP (Figure 1). Tier 2 Key watersheds may not contain at risk fish stocks, but provide sources of high quality water. There are no Tier 1 Key watersheds in the project area. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act In 1988, Whychus Creek was designated as a Wild and Scenic River by Congress. The 2007 Whychus Resource Assessment identified river-related ORVs to help guide the Whychus Creek Wild and Scenic River Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 2010). The Whychus Creek Wild and Scenic River Management Plan was completed in 2010 and outlines the outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs) that guided W& S designation and future management (USDA Forest Service 2010). Hydrology ORVs include glacial erosion and water carved features including waterfalls, caves, and potholes, regionally unique wetlands and springs, and the long-term stream flow record (USDA Forest Service 2007). The Whychus Creek Wild and Scenic River corridor is within both the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage project boundary and the Hydrologic Analysis Area; however there are no treatments proposed within the Wild and Scenic corridor (Figure 1). Units 35, 37, and 38 are located adjacent to the Wild and Scenic Corridor of Snow Creek, however treatments are well outside the Wild and Scenic corridor, and BMPs and project design criteria will ensure that hydrology ORVs would be preserved in the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage project. The Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage project complies with applicable consistent uses to protect the hydrology ORVs and does not involve any conflicting uses outlined in the Whychus Creek Wild and Scenic River Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 2010). The Waterbody Condition section of this report contains an additional discussion of Wild and Scenic ORVs.

Riparian Reserve and Ephemeral Draw Buffer Widths The Whychus Watershed Analysis refined Riparian Reserves as defined by the NWFP based on average maximum tree height, the 100-year floodplain, extent of riparian vegetation, and unstable and potentially unstable lands (USDA Forest Service 1998b). Site specific assessment of ephemeral draws was used to prescribe additional buffers (which are not considered Riparian Reserves) where needed to reduce potential erosion and ground disturbance in the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage. Riparian Reserve and ephemeral draw buffer widths for the project are shown in Table 3. Ephemeral buffer widths were prescribed primarily as a means to preserve draw stability and keep potentially damaging activities away from the channel. Forested ephemeral channels act as sediment sinks during the dry season, and are potential sources of sediment during storm events (Daniels and Gilliam 1996). Ephemeral draw buffers

5

are not designated as Riparian Reserves and are specific to the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage project only. Table 3: Riparian Reserve and ephemeral draw buffer widths for the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage Category Stream

Class Description Riparian Reserve

width (slope distance (ft) from edge of channel)

Buffer Width (slope distance (ft) from edge of draw)

1 1 & 2 Fish-bearing streams 300 ft See Riparian Reserve width column

2 3 Permanently flowing non-fish bearing streams

150 ft See Riparian Reserve width column

3 n/a Ponds, lakes reservoirs, and wetlands > 1 acre


4 4 Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams, wetlands < 1 acre, unstable or potentially unstable areas


n/a n/a Hydrologically connected ephemeral draw features

n/a 30 ft

Clean Water Act The Clean Water Act (CWA) is a federal law in the United States governing point and non-point source water pollution. In Oregon, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated authority for compliance with the CWA to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). The CWA requires the development of water quality standards to protect beneficial uses of waters of the United States. Beneficial uses for the Deschutes River Basin include public, private, and industrial water supply, irrigation, livestock watering, anadromous fish spawning, salmon spawning, resident fish and aquatic life, wildlife and hunting, fishing, boating, water contact recreation, and aesthetic quality. The Forest Service’s responsibilities under the CWA are defined in a 2002 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Oregon DEQ. The MOU designates the Forest Service as the responsible agency for meeting the Clean Water Act on National Forest System (NFS) lands and recognizes best management practices (BMPs) as the primary mechanism for control of non-point source pollutants on NFS lands. It recognizes that BMPs are developed by the Forest Service as part of the planning process and includes a commitment by the Forest Service to meet or exceed standards (USDA Forest Service, 2002). BMPs that apply to the project are identified in Chapter 2 of the Pole Creek Timber Salvage EA and are discussed throughout this report. To meet Clean Water Act responsibilities, the Forest Service developed a draft Water Quality Restoration Plan (USDA Forest Service 2004). Oregon DEQ and the Forest Service are in the process of updating the MOU for compliance with the Clean Water Act with

6

completion expected late 2013. The Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage complies with both the draft Water Quality Restoration Plan and the forthcoming Draft 2013 MOU. 303(d) Listed Streams The State of Oregon is required under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act to identify waters that do not meet water quality standards. Whychus Creek, the upper portion of which is in the Hydrologic Analysis Area, is listed on the 2010 303(d) list for temperatures exceeding the 7-day average maximum water temperature standard of 18⁰C for salmon and trout rearing and migration (ODEQ 2013). Whychus Creek is listed as impaired for its entire length (including the wilderness) (Figure 1) because listing criteria are based on beneficial uses; however, temperatures in the upstream reaches within the Hydrologic Analysis Area, are well below the state water temperature standard. Temperatures within Whychus Creek are consistently above the state standard below the 16 road and progressively get warmer downstream. Insufficient in-stream flows are the primary cause of high water temperatures. Recent flow, channel, and floodplain restoration in the lower reaches of Whychus Creek have resulted in a recent cooling trend in Whychus Creek. Stream temperature is discussed further in the Existing Condition section of this report. Steelhead trout were reintroduced in Whychus Creek in 2007; however, a state temperature standard for steelhead spawning in Whychus Creek has not yet been set. A potential state standard was evaluated by the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council based on the state standard set for the Lower Deschutes River of 13⁰C from January 1 through May 15 for salmon and steelhead spawning (Hill et al. 2008).

The Whychus Watershed Analysis (USDA Forest Service 1998b) and the 2009 Whychus Watershed Analysis Update Hydrologist Report (Press) describe how state beneficial uses of the Deschutes Basin apply to waterbodies in the Whychus analysis area. Oregon DEQ has performed temperature modeling to guide development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and subsequent Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). Once complete, these documents will specify the total load of pollutant (in this case temperature) a waterbody can carry and still meet beneficial uses. The TMDL and WQMP also outline the process through which beneficial uses can be met through the identification of sources of pollutants, and actions that lead to improved water quality. To assist and provide local expertise to TMDL development, DEQ convened the Upper Deschutes and Little Deschutes Technical Advisory Committee in early 2012, a group composed of state and federal agencies, the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation, city and county government, irrigation districts, the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council, Deschutes River Conservancy and agricultural and fisheries organizations. TMDL development is currently on hold pending final court judgment on a lawsuit challenging EPA’s approval of Oregon’s temperature standard (ODEQ 2012). Watershed Condition Framework The Watershed Condition Framework was developed as a nationally consistent, science-based approach to classify the condition of all National Forest System (NFS) SWSs (Potyondy and Geier, 2010) as a means to consistently prioritize watersheds for improvement and track condition change over time. The WCF is a 6-step process, step 1 of which includes the classification of watershed condition using 24 watershed condition "attributes" to rate 12 watershed "indicators" and produce an overall Watershed

7

Condition Class Rating. Within this context, the three watershed condition classes are directly related to the degree or level of watershed functionality and are classified as follows: Class 1 = Functioning Properly; Class 2 = Functioning at Risk; and Class 3 = Impaired Function. Watersheds are classified using attributes that quantify aquatic physical, aquatic biological, terrestrial physical, and terrestrial biological condition. Steps 2 and 3 of the WCF process include prioritization of watersheds for restoration and the development of watershed action plans outlining essential projects to improve watershed condition. Steps 4-6 include implementation of essential projects within priority watersheds, monitoring of watershed restoration efforts, and aggregation of program performance data for national reporting. All SWSs that intersect the Deschutes National Forest were analyzed during the National Watershed Condition Framework process and ranked in 2011. Through this process, the Upper Whychus Creek SWS was identified as a priority for restoration. The 2011 Upper Whychus Creek Action Plan outlines essential projects to improve watershed condition from functioning at risk to functioning properly within the next 5 years. As part of the 2013 Whychus Watershed Analysis update, subwatersheds included in the analysis area were re-evaluated using the WCF process to include changes from the Pole Creek Fire, and other watershed changes that could affect condition. Watershed condition ratings from the 2011 and 2013 analyses for the subwatersheds in the Whychus Watershed Analysis area are shown in Table 4. The Pole Creek Fire Timber salvage would not result in a change in watershed condition for any SWS within the Hydrologic Analysis Area; as discussed in the Effects Analysis of this report there would be no significant effect to hydrologic parameters from the project.

Table 4: SWS rating using the Watershed Condition Framework. Subwatershed 2011 WCF rating 2013 WCF rating Comments


Functioning properly Functioning at risk Change in rating from Pole Creek fire effects

Lower Trout Creek Functioning at risk Functioning at risk

Three Creek Functioning at risk Functioning at risk

Upper Trout Creek Functioning properly Functioning properly

Upper Whychus Creek

Functioning at risk Functioning at risk National Priority Subwatershed

Analysis Methods

Activities in areas that contribute water, shade, or sediment to streams or wetlands can affect water quality or quantity; therefore activities within Riparian Reserves and potentially hydrologically connected areas (roads and hydrologically connected ephemeral draws) are the focus of this analysis. Treatment

8

alternatives will be analyzed based on their potential effects to water quality, water yield, peak flow, and hydrologic function and condition. Specifically, sedimentation, stream temperature, water yield, peak flow, and waterbody condition will be analyzed through the measures outlined in Table 5. Effects to the Hydrology Outstandingly Remarkable Value (ORV) for Whychus Creek Wild and Scenic River, and 303d listing status of Whychus Creek are also analyzed in the Waterbody Condition and Temperature section of this report respectively.

Table 5: Hydrology issues and measures for the Pole Creek Salvage project. Issue Measures

Erosion and Sedimentation • Acres of soil detrimentally impacted in Riparian Reserves. • Acres of soil detrimentally impacted in potentially

hydrologically connected areas (ephemeral draws). • Acres harvested within 30ft of hydrologically connected

ephemeral draws. • Miles of road reconstructed, closed, or decommissioned • Miles of temporary road constructed or used.

Stream Temperature/303d listed streams

• Acres harvested in riparian reserves.

Water Yield and Peak Flow • Acres of soil detrimentally impacted in riparian reserves. • Acres of soil detrimentally impacted in potentially

hydrologically connected areas. • Acres treated within the rain on snow zone in potentially

hydrologically connected areas. • Number of live trees removed.

Waterbody Condition/Wild and Scenic River Outstandingly Remarkable Values

• Alteration of stream/lake bank and bed stability measured by changes in sedimentation, and water yield using measures described above.

• Acres harvested along stream or lake banks. • Acres harvested in potential large wood recruitment areas in

riparian reserves.

The Hydrologic Analysis Area for analysis of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage includes the SWSs where treatments are proposed. The temporal bound for analysis is 23 years into the future, the estimated recovery time for heavy salvage in moist forest types in the equivalent clear-cut area (ECA) model. A discussion of the rationale for setting the temporal and spatial scale of analysis is included in the Scale of Analysis and Watershed Hierarchy section of this report.

Acres of treatment for the Action Alternatives within each SWS within the Hydrologic Analysis Area are shown in Table 6. For each hydrology measure, effects for Alternatives 2 and 3 are analyzed together because effects are not expected to differ between the two Alternatives. The effects of not removing trees >21” in diameter do not change the effects to any hydrology measure; the same areas would be treated,

9

and the same infrastructure including haul roads, skid trails, and landings would be needed for each Action Alternative.

Table 6: Acres of treatment in each project SWS. SWS SWS area

(acres) Alternatives 2 and 3 (acres treated)

Road Closures (mi)

Road Decommissioning (mi)


18,790 152 1.7 1.7

Upper Whychus Creek

22,764 720 3.8 0

Upper Trout Creek

18,305 21 0 0

Lower Trout Creek

12,100 32 0 0

Three Creek 20,056 55 0 0.4 Total n/a 980 5.5 2.1

Past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects within the Hydrologic Analysis Area were evaluated to determine potential cumulative effects from the project. These activities are shown in Chapter 2 of this EA.

The Pole Creek Fire is the most recent, largest-scale disturbance in the Hydrologic Analysis Area, and effects from the fire are discussed throughout the existing condition, ecological trends, and cumulative effects sections of this report. This report uses both burn severity and burn intensity to describe potential watershed changes from the Pole Creek Fire, and potential interactions with treatments in the Pole Creek Fire Salvage. Burn severity describes the effects of the fire on soil structure, infiltration capacity, and biotic components. It is used to indicate runoff and soil erosion potential from the fire. Burn severity maps were produced and field-verified as part of the Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) assessment for the Pole Creek Fire. Burn severity is defined through differences in surface organics, duff cover, and characteristics of mineral soils (Debano et al, 1998):

• Low severity – low soil heating, litter scorch or consumption with duff largely intact, mineral soil is not changed.

• Moderate severity – litter consumption with moderately charred or consumed duff, no visible alteration of mineral soil surface.

• High severity – complete consumption of duff and mineral soil surface visibly reddish or orange color.

Acres burned in each SWS by severity are shown in Table 7.

10

Burn intensity describes fire effects to vegetative characteristics including tree mortality and consumption of understory vegetation and down wood.

• Underburn— <25% tree mortality, live green tree crowns predominate. • Mixed mortality— 25-75% tree mortality, tree crowns are generally not consumed. • Stand replacement— >75% tree mortality, tree crowns are generally consumed.

Acres burned in each SWS by intensity are shown in Table 8. Treatments in the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage are located only in areas that experienced stand replacement conditions in the Fire. In this report, burn severity is used to understand and predict effects from potential erosion increases. Burn intensity is used to understand and predict changes in water yield, peak flows and canopy cover.

Table 7: SWS acres burned by severity in the Pole Creek Fire.

Subwatershed High severity (acres)

Moderate severity (acres)

Low severity (acres)

Underburned or unburned (acres)

Total burned high and moderate severity (acres)

% SWS burned by high and moderate severity fire

Headwaters Whychus Creek 265 4062 2924 2299 4327 10

Lower Trout Creek

3 220 161 66 223 1

Three Creek 41 1415 1547 1042 1456 8 Upper Trout Creek

0 184 1220 920 184 2

Upper Whychus Creek 98 4016 3521 2179 4114 22

11

Table 8: SWS acres burned by intensity in the Pole Creek Fire. Subwatershed Stand

replacement Mixed mortality (acres)

Underburn (acres)

%SWS burned by stand replacement fire


4327 2924 2299 10

Lower Trout Creek

223 161 66 1

Three Creek 1456 1547 1042 8 Upper Trout Creek

184 1220 920 2

Upper Whychus Creek

4114 3521 2179 22

Based on acres proposed for treatment (direct and indirect effects) and the number of acres affected by the Pole Creek Fire (cumulative effects), the Headwaters Whychus Creek and Upper Whychus Creek SWSs have the highest potential for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects; however, as discussed in the Effects Analysis there are no significant or long-term direct, indirect, or cumulative effects expected from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage. The treatment stands in the Three Creek and Upper and Lower Trout Creek SWSs are not hydrologically connected to any perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral streams or draws, and have low proposed treatment acres (Table 6). These SWS also had less acreage burned by the Pole Creek Fire.

Best Management Practices and Project Design Criteria

A complete list and discussion of best management practices (BMPs) and project design criteria (PDC) are included in Chapter 2 of this EA. BMPs and PDC were developed for the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage using the National Core BMP Technical Guide (USDA Forest Service 2012) based on recommendations in the 2013 Whychus Watershed Analysis Update (Day 2013), field verification, and the best available science. BMPs and PDC were also discussed with operations personnel to ensure feasibility for implementation effectiveness. BMPs and PDC are discussed throughout the effects analysis of this report and are the primary mechanism to mitigate potential hydrologic effects from the project.

BMP implementation and effectiveness has been systematically monitored across National Forest Lands in California since 1992. From 2008-2010, randomized monitoring showed 91% of BMPs were implemented, and 80% of implemented BMPs were rated effective. BMPs for timber harvests, fuels treatments, and vegetation management were consistently highly effective, while BMPs for other activities, including roads, range management, recreation, and mining, were less effective (USDA Forest Service 2013). At sites where BMPs were not implemented or effective the monitoring program includes a strong feedback loop to take corrective action on non-compliance scenarios.

12

At the national scale, a consistent program to monitor BMP implementation and effectiveness has been in development for several years. Monitoring of BMP implementation and effectiveness using the national BMP protocols has taken place on the Deschutes National Forest since 2011. Monitoring results from vegetation management projects indicate that BMPs intended to minimize effects to water, aquatic and riparian resources were successfully implemented, and BMPs intended to minimize effects from landings and ground-based mechanical harvest were successfully implemented, including landing location, spacing of skid trails, and retention of cover (USDA Forest Service 2011, and 2012(a)). Additional project-level BMP monitoring has occurred as part of project implementation on the Deschutes National Forest. Monitoring results are cited throughout this report where they are applicable.

BMPs project design considerations, and project design criteria (PDC) for the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage are also supported by recommendations in scientific literature on postfire logging to reduce potential physical and ecological effects from salvage logging (Beschta et al. 1995; Beschta et al. 2004; Karr et al. 2004; Reeves et al. 2006). Select BMPs, PDC, and project design elements are shown in Table 9.

Table 9: Select project design considerations, BMPs, and PDC for the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage. Practice Initial Project

Design Element

BMP/PDC

No RR harvest X X No harvest in Wild and Scenic Corridor X No harvest in units proposed for aerial mulching through the BAER process

X

No temporary or new road construction X X 30 ft buffer and limited designated crossings on hydrologically connected ephemeral draws

X

30 ft no equipment limitation zone and limited designated crossings on non-hydrologically connected ephemeral draws

X

No winter haul on unstable hydrologically connected roads or roads within riparian reserves

X

Drainage improvement on unstable hydrologically connected roads before haul can occur

X

Closure of 5.5 miles of road upon salvage completion X Decommission of 2.1 miles of road upon salvage completion X Subsoiling of select skid trails where necessary on slopes 15-30% and piling of slash on skid trails where available

X

Installation of waterbars on skid trails X Construction of new landings and skid trails would be minimized

X

No ground-based salvage on slopes over 30% X

13

Initial project design elements were included in the development of the Proposed Action, BMPs were developed using recommendations in the National Core BMP Technical Guide (USDA Forest Service 2012), and site-specific analysis of the project area.

Existing Condition and Effects Analysis

Erosion and Sedimentation

Existing Condition

Existing condition and potential effects to erosion and sedimentation for the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage are addressed in this report through three key parameters; stream channel sedimentation, hillslope erosion, and roads. Erosion refers to soil movement, transportation and deposition by water to another location, and sedimentation refers to the amount of fine sediment in streams.

Stream Channel Sedimentation

Sediment yield studies following wildland fire found that 25% of sediment comes from hillslopes, and 75% of sediment yield comes from stream channels (Moody and Martin, 2009). The amount of sediment transported to or eroded within a stream channel can affect the beneficial uses of water and is frequently used as a measure of overall water quality. Oregon administration rule (OAR 340-041-0036) states “No more than 10 percent cumulative increases in natural stream turbidities shall be allowed, as measured relative to a control point immediately upstream of the turbidity-causing activity” (ODEQ 2011, and USDA Forest Service 2004). Stream channel sedimentation can be affected by changes in overland sediment input to streams and instream channel erosion. Stream channel size and shape both evolve to carry historic sediment loads. Fine sediment may impact aquatic habitat quality when increases in sediment yielded to a stream exceed the ability of a stream to transport excess sediment (Dunne and Leopold 1978). Sediment deposition may occur in the stream channels with low-gradient alluvial sections of stream being inherently susceptible to point and mid-channel bar development, and storage of additional fine sediment in interstitial space between larger stream substrate. Bank erosion may also increase through this process, which contributes additional fine sediment to the system. Excess stream sediment can also fill in pools, reducing capacity and habitat quality.

The Sisters Ranger District has monitoring data on several parameters that are influenced by fine sediment including, turbidity, fine sediment percentage in spawning gravels, cobble embeddedness, and bank stability. Streams adjacent to and downstream of project treatment areas include Whychus Creek, Snow Creek, Pole Creek, and North Fork Pole Creek. Existing condition of parameters affected by in-stream sediment in the most recent stream survey are discussed below. The 2013 Whychus Watershed Analysis Update provides a more detailed description of sediment parameters in Whychus, Pole and Snow Creeks. There has not been an official stream survey of any streams in the Hydrologic Analysis area since the Pole Creek Fire.

Whychus Creek A 1990 stream survey indicated that sand was the dominant substrate in 7 out of 8 survey reaches of Whychus Creek. Embeddedness was found to be high only in the furthest upstream reach in the Three Sisters Wilderness, which is outside of the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage analysis area. Bank instability ranged from 1.6 % to 13% in a 1997 survey. Portions of Whychus Creek may have

14

naturally elevated amounts of bank instability due to the flashy flow regime and past moraine lake failures in headwater lakes. Generally, the lower reaches of Whychus Creek, which are downstream of the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage Hydrologic Analysis Area have higher fine sediment than the upper reaches (Dachtler 2013).

Although there have been no formal stream surveys on Whychus Creek since the Pole Creek fire, field observations in the winter of 2013, following the fire indicate higher levels of stored sediment within the channel and floodplain than observed before the fire (Riehle, personal communication, 2/12/2013). A fall 2012 monitoring report for the TSID channel restoration project notes that flows from post-fire October storms deposited several inches of ash laden silt and fines on flood channels in the project area. These nutrient-rich fines covered up planted grasses and forbs, but provide soil for recruitment of riparian vegetation (Jensen, 2012).

Snow Creek Fine sediment production in Snow Creek is generally low due to the stable flow regime, well-vegetated banks, and good floodplain connectivity. Although the stable flow regime generally results in less erosion from in-channel processes, fine sediment is not flushed from channel substrate as frequently as in flashier systems. A 1992 embeddedness survey found that stream substrate was not embedded with fine sediment. Pebble counts and visual estimation of substrate from a 2007 stream survey found higher amounts of fine sediment (<2mm) in the downstream reaches with sand/silt substrate decreasing upstream. Percentage of unstable banks ranges from 0.1% to 0.5% in the lower reaches, and increases to 1.8% in the upper reach. This increase is attributed primarily to the Cross District Snowmobile Trail crossing and Forest Service trail #99, which parallels Snow Creek in some areas (Dachtler 2013). The 1514780 Road parallels the eastern bank of Snow Creek, and will be used as a haul route and closed following the project. Although the road is near Snow Creek, and within its Riparian Reserve along some of its length, is does not significantly interact with the stream; the road is mostly stable and it is estimated that 40% of road length is not hydrologically connected to the stream system. There is one perennial tributary crossing on the 1514780, however this crossing is stable and the stream upstream and downstream of the crossing is well-vegetated. Observations of Snow Creek since the Pole Creek fire indicate that although a significant length of the Creek was burned, bank instability and sedimentation have not markedly increased. North Fork Pole Creek Pebble count data from a 2007 inventory of North Fork Pole Creek indicate 90% fine sediment (<2mm) in the lower portion of the stream and 30% in the upper portion of the stream. High fine sediment percentage in the lower reaches of Pole Creek is attributed primarily to low gradient wetland systems adjacent to the Creek and the braided nature of the channel near the confluence with Pole Creek. Additionally, North Fork Pole Creek has a stable, spring-fed flow regime that rarely experiences high flows to flush fine sediment. Streambanks are generally in good condition with 0.1% unstable banks found during the 2007 stream inventory (Dachtler, 2013).

Pole Creek A 1990 survey indicated that substrate in Pole Creek was not embedded. Fine sediment percentage (<2mm) from pebble counts ranged from 6% to 39% with the highest percentages found in the middle reaches. Streambanks were typically in good condition except in areas where clear cuts had

15

occurred near the stream and the trees left in buffer zones have blown over causing streambank instability in some locations. Overall, streambanks were found to be less than 0.1 % unstable in all reaches (Dachtler, 2013).

Ephemeral Draws Two storms moved over the Pole Creek Fire area closely following the burn. The first produced approximately 1 inch of rain over several hours, with flows peaking at an estimated 600cfs in Sisters on 10/16/2012 (estimated based on gage interpretation and field observations). A second storm on 10/28/2012 peaked at around 300 cfs at the Sisters gage. Runoff from these storms damaged a number of road and stream crossings (Table 12). Field observations following these storms indicate that ephemeral draws with no evidence of previous scour across the burned area conveyed water and moved sediment (Riehle, personal communication, 1/29/2013). These effects were greatest in the Pole Creek drainage, where certain stream reaches have increased bank erosion and stored sediment.

Ephemeral draws were mapped using LIDAR data and were field verified to determine condition and protections needed to preserve water quality. The majority of ephemerals mapped through this exercise did not exist on the ground; however several hydrologically connected draws were identified and excluded from ground-based treatments with a 30ft no-cut/no equipment buffer on both sides of the feature. There were also several ephemeral draws identified within units that are not hydrologically connected to the stream system but are potentially unstable; equipment would be limited in these draws, but reach-in harvest would be allowed. Units with protected ephemeral draws are listed in Chapter 2 of this document. Protection of hydrologically connected ephemeral draws with a 30ft no-cut buffer, and limiting equipment on ephemeral draws that are not hydrologically connected are prescribed to preserve draw stability and keep potentially damaging activities away from ephemeral draw features. The 30ft buffer width has been used successfully in the past on the Deschutes National Forest to preserve draw stability and limit activities in areas receiving ephemeral flow but have no associated riparian vegetation. In a 1999 literature review of buffer widths, 30 feet is cited as a minimum buffer width to preserve channel stability (Wenger 1999).

Forested ephemeral channels act as sediment sinks during the dry season, and are potential sources of sediment during storm events (Daniels and Gilliam 1996). Ephemeral draws identified within the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage sale area had not recently conveyed water before the fire, and are low spots in the landscape rather than actual channels. Ephemeral draws did not have a riparian vegetation component before the Pole Creek Fire because they rarely conveyed water, and did not have the moisture component to support obligate riparian vegetion. Vegetation and soils conditions from the Pole Creek Fire, and two large precipitation events closely following the fire created conditions that caused flow, erosion, and sedimentation in these channels. These conditions are not expected to occur again as upland vegetation recovers within and along draws. Additional protection measures for ephemeral draws will ensure that vegetation recovery would not be hampered by salvage activities and that draw stability would not be affected by the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage.

Hillslope Erosion

The location where erosion and overland flow occurs is the most important factor in determining potential sediment contribution to streams. Areas adjacent to streams are the most likely to contribute to stream sedimentation; however, upland areas may be connected to the stream network via the road network, or through intermittent channels or ephemeral draws. Overland sediment input to streams can be altered by

16

management activities or events occurring in areas that contribute to streams and that disturb the soil and cause soil compaction. Activities or events that disturb the soil are usually a result of a loss of ground vegetation that helps to stabilize the soil. These effects are usually short-term and return to pre-disturbance levels once ground vegetation reestablishes.

Burned areas are vulnerable to accelerated soil erosion which can increase post-fire sediment yield (Neary, et al., 2005). Increases in surface erosion following wildfire have been well documented (Helvey, 1980; Robichaud and Hungerford 2000; Wondzell et al. 2003; and Neary et al. 2005); however effects are spatially variable based on soil condition, burn severity, and timing and magnitude of precipitation (Robichaud and Hungerford, 2000). Post-fire observations in the Pole Creek fire area indicate that soil infiltration rates are expected to decrease by 5% from absence of ground cover and duff. Although soil infiltration rate change is minor, and soil condition is not uniform across the burned area, this is enough of an increase in overland flow to elevate erosion and sediment yield for several seasons (Reinwald, 2012).

Modeling using Disturbed WEPP is one way to conceptualize potential hillslope erosion. Disturbed WEPP was used to estimate potential erosion and sedimentation yield to compare between different management scenarios, burn severities, ground cover, and slope in the Pole Creek burned area. WEPP is a physically-based soil erosion model that provides estimates of soil erosion and sediment yield considering specific soil, climate, ground cover, and topographic conditions. It was developed by an interagency group of scientists including the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Forest Service, and Natural Resources Conservation Service; and the U.S. Department of Interior's Bureau of Land Management and Geological Survey (Elliot et al., 2010).

Accurately predicting erosion is difficult and subject to large errors from various sources because of highly complex processes including spatial variation in slope, soil, and vegetative conditions, and uncertainty in precipitation (Walling, 1988). Therefore, applying hillslope estimates across landscapes and watersheds generalizes actual rates of erosion that may occur. Modeled erosion and sedimentation rates are recognized as highly variable. Neary et al. (2005) suggest “A rule of thumb in interpreting erosion observations or predictions is that the true ‘average’ value is likely to be plus or minus 50% of the observed value”. WEPP-modeled sediment yield scenarios for the first year following the Pole Creek Fire are shown in the soils section of this EA. Model results indicate that erosion rates return to pre-fire levels once vegetation reestablishes, which should begin taking place 1-2 years post-fire (Craigg 2006).

Roads

Roads in the project area are a primary source for concentration of overland flow and potential erosion and sedimentation. Roads increase the volume of flow during large storm events through overland flow generated by the interception of precipitation on compacted road surfaces with low infiltration capacity. Roads can also intercept subsurface flow and convert it to rapid surface runoff, extending channel networks and increasing watershed efficiency (Wemple, 1996). Roads reduce vegetative cover in streamside areas and accelerate erosion and sedimentation into streams (Megahan, 1983). Slope position of roads is a critical factor in the interaction between roads and streams. Ridge-top roads can influence watershed hydrology by channeling flow into small headwater swales, accelerating channel development. Mid-slope roads can intercept subsurface flow, extend channel networks, and accelerate erosion (Gucinski et al., 2001). Roads adjacent to and crossing streams, or hydrologically connected to streams have the

17

greatest influence on streamflow, streamside shade, accelerated sediment delivery to the stream system. Hydrologically connected roads increase flow routing efficiency and can increase peak flows and sedimentation and are of greatest concern from effects of fire and other management activities (Wemple, 1996).

Road density, riparian road mileage and density, and number of road crossings by SWS are shown in Table 10 . The Document “Determining Risk of Cumulative Watershed Effects Resulting from Multiple Activities (USDA Forest Service, 1993) considers road density above 4.6 in relatively low-relief to be high risk. Road density in Lower Trout Creek, Three Creek, and Upper Whychus Creek SWSs are considered to be high. Riparian road density, which is a better metric to predict potential effects to the hydrologic system from roads, are highest in the Lower Trout Creek SWS; however none of these roads are adjacent to treatment stands, and would not be used for haul in the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage. Lower Trout Creek, Three Creek, and Upper Whychus Creek also have a high number of road stream crossings. A significant portion of the Headwaters of the Headwaters Whychus Creek is within the Three Sisters Wilderness making both road density and riparian road density relatively low compared with other SWSs within the Hydrologic Analysis Area. Table 10: Total road density, riparian road density, and # of crossings in the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage hydrology analysis area. SWS Total

road length (mi)

SWS area (mi2)

Road density (mi/mi2)

Riparian road length (mi)

Riparian area (mi2)

Riparian road density (mi/mi2)

# of road crossings


34.0 35.6 1.0 10.1 8.5 1.2 9

Lower Trout Creek 205.0 31.3 6.5 6.4 0.8 8.2 57

Three Creek 143.0 29.4 4.9 5.2 1.5 3.5 32 Upper Trout Creek 30.8 18.9 1.6 3.2 1.1 2.8 7

Upper Whychus Creek

134.5 28.6 4.7 11.9 3.0 4.0 28

All road calculations include Forest Service and non-Forest Service open, closed, and known unclassified roads (from field verification). Roads throughout the Hydrologic Analysis area were damaged by increased runoff in two October storms following the Pole Creek Fire. Many of these roads were treated before winter 2012, and additional roads would be improved, closed, or decommissioned as part of the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage, and the Pole Creek Fire BAER process (Table 11). Work not completed in 2012 is planned to be completed in summer 2013. Roads within the project area were analyzed in the Sky, Popper, and Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage Roads Analyses (Walker 2009, 2012, and 2013), and proposed road closures and decommissioning activities were based on findings from these analyses.

18

Table 11: Roads and crossings at risk or affected by the Pole Creek Fire. Road or Crossing

Damage from post-fire storms

Maintenance following October 2012 storms

Work planned for completion in 2013

1018 crossing at Trout Creek

None None None

1018000 None None None 1024000 Erosion on upgrade

portion of road None None

1500000 Debris in road, clogged ditch relief culverts

Constructed armored drain dips and partially cleaned ditch.

Ditch improvement, reinforcement of 2 drain dips, installation of culvert at 1 drain dip

1500200 crossing at Pole Creek

Washed out None Install rock dip

1500600 Areas of erosion Constructed water bars None 1500700 Washout of parking

lot at Pole Creek Trailhead

None Installation of 2 armored drain dips

1514000 at Snow Creek

None Installed natural dip, armored road shoulder

None


Plugged and overtopped

Culverts cleared None

1514000 Multiple plugged culverts and area of erosion

Road bladed, sediment and debris from Pole Creek crossing

Installation of gates to close road due to hazard trees

1514600 Plugged culverts Clean culverts and ditches. Shaped road to drain. Relocated trailhead to intersection of 1514640.

None

1514610 Areas of erosion Construction of armored drain dip

None

1514640 Areas of erosion Construction of armored drain dip

None

1514680 Gullying delivered sediment onto 1514600 road

None None

1514880 Areas of erosion Reconstruct drain dips and lead-out ditches. Road bladed.

None

1516000 Areas of erosion Clean culverts Improve ditch capacity 1516500 Areas of erosion Remove sediment and debris

from culvert, spot-cleaned ditch line. Constructed 1 drain dip

Improve ditch capacity

19

1526000 Areas of gullying Cleaned culverts and ditch. Constructed vented ford at the Pole Creek crossing.

Improve road drainage capacity, replace 15” culvert with 22” culvert


Pugged and overtopped

Culvert cleared None

1500200 Culverts washed out at Pole Creek Trailhead

None Construct armor ford crossing at Pole Creek Trailhead

1600000 Sediment deposited onto paved road

Cleaned culverts and ditch. Removed debris from paved road.

Installation of new culvert to supplement ditch drainage

1600700 Road washed out onto the 1600000

Road reconstruction Remove sediment and debris from culverts. Install drain dips

Ecological Trends—Alterative 1 (No Action)

Measures used to assess the potential effects and compare alternatives of the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage to erosion and sedimentation are shown in Table 12.

Table 12: Measures to assess effects to sediment Issue Measures Alterative 1 Alternative

2 Alternative 3

Erosion and Sedimentation

Acres of soil detrimentally impacted in Riparian Reserves.

0 0 0

Acres of soil detrimentally impacted in potentially hydrologically connected areas (ephemeral draws).

0 0 0

Acres harvested within 30ft of hydrologically connected ephemeral draws.

0 0 0

Miles of road reconstructed, closed, or decommissioned

0 9.8 9.8

Miles of temporary road constructed or used.

0 0 0

Under the No Action Alternative, no project activities would occur; there would be no soil detrimentally impacted within Riparian Reserves or ephemeral draws and no log haul. Hillslope erosion may increase from a reduction in live canopy and consumption of organic material on the forest floor from the Pole Creek Fire, especially in stands that burned at high intensity.

20

The hydrologic effects of roads and the interaction between road and fire effects would continue. Roads in unstable condition would continue to deteriorate, and sediment delivery would continue to occur, especially on hydrologically connected roads that were impacted from increased runoff following the Pole Creek Fire. There would be no improvement of road conditions on hydrologically connected roads, or haul routes in riparian reserves, except those occurring through BAER rehabilitation efforts.

There would be no reforestation activities under the No Action Alternative; however recovery of soil stability would occur once shrubs, grasses, and tree seedlings reestablish. Hillslope erosion may continue longer on uncompacted soils in Alternative 1 than on uncompacted soils in the Action Alternatives because tree regrowth and evapotranspiration, precipitation, and interception would occur at natural rates which are estimated to be slightly lower than in areas where conifers are planted. Re-growth and needle-fall established since the fire would not be disturbed by mechanical treatments. In the short term, establishment of fine woody material may be lower than within treatment areas because harvesting activities would break branches of harvested dead trees. Down wood from falling dead trees would increase over the next 5-10 years and provide surface roughness to trap and store sediment.

Direct and Indirect Effects—Alternatives 2 and 3

Soil-disturbing activities were evaluated for the potential to increase hillslope erosion and potential sedimentation in streams. Ground disturbing activities within the Action Alternatives that could potentially increase short-term hillslope erosion and stream sedimentation include: Salvage of dead trees, log haul in Riparian Reserves or on hydrologically connected roads, felling and removal of danger trees, and road decommissioning, closure, reconstruction, and maintenance. Ground-based salvage of dead trees could increase the risk of erosion through the disturbance of ground vegetation and compaction of soil, which concentrates runoff and may slow vegetation re-establishment. Based on findings in McIver 2006, approximately 85% of total treated area is estimated to have minimal ground disturbance with approximately 15% of stands with soil disturbance from landings and skid trails following salvage. Soil disturbance does not necessarily meet the definition of detrimental soil disturbance (see soils report in EA). Removal of danger trees along haul routes in the Action Alternatives would not displace or compact as much ground as in salvage units because less overall volume would be harvested, and most trees could be harvested from the road.

Stream Channel Sediment

There would be no measurable stream channel sediment generated from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage in Pole Creek, North Fork Pole Creek, Snow Creek, and Whychus Creek because project activities would not occur in Riparian Reserves or other hydrologically connected areas with the potential to deliver sediment to stream channels, including hydrologically connected ephemeral draws. As previously discussed in the Existing Condition section of this report, observations following two storm events after the Pole Creek Fire indicate that ephemeral drainages across the burned area with no evidence of previous recent scour conveyed water and moved sediment. Ephemeral draws would be protected through a 30ft buffer on both sides of the feature for hydrologically connected draws and a 30ft

21

equipment limitation zone on either side of the feature for draws that are not hydrologically connected. Limited designated crossings would be allowed on ephemeral draws. These crossing would be designated by a hydrologist or fisheries biologist and would be located in stable areas with low slopes. The potential of additional erosion and sedimentation from crossing ephemeral draws would be mitigated through appropriate crossing placement.

Log haul on select roads that are hydrologically connected or located within Riparian Reserves would be restricted to the dry season only (from April through October). These roads are shown in Table 11. In addition, there would be pre-haul maintenance and routine road maintenance on up to 67 miles of haul roads as an action associated with the timber sale. Restriction of log haul and road maintenance would reduce the potential for delivery of sediment from the road system to the stream system. Danger trees on roads within Riparian Reserves would be hand felled and left in place; and effects to stream channel sediment from this activity would be minimal.

Units 17, 18, 19, 20, 35, 37, and 38 are located adjacent to, but outside of Riparian Reserves. A compilation of studies on effectiveness of riparian buffers (Belt et al. 1992) concluded that non-channelized sediment rarely travels more than 300ft and that 200-300 foot riparian “filter strips” are generally effective at protecting streams from sediment and non-channelized flow (USDA and USDI 1995). Since the filtration capacity of buffers within the fire area may be reduced until ground vegetation recovers, units adjacent to Riparian Reserves were evaluated to determine if standard buffers are adequate to minimize sediment delivery to Pole and Snow Creeks. Units 17, 18, 19, and 20 are adjacent to the Pole Creek Riparian Reserve. Riparian Reserves adjacent to these stands have a mix of stand replacement and mixed-mortality conditions and slopes are primarily < 15%. The 1526100 road runs between the stands and the Pole Creek Riparian Reserve. Haul on the 1526100 would be restricted to the dry season. Additionally, wood mulch was applied during BAER treatment between Unit 18 and Pole Creek. This treatment will further mitigate erosion potential in this area. Units 35, 37, and 38 are adjacent to the upper Snow Creek Riparian Reserve. Riparian Reserves adjacent to these stands are primarily in stand replacement burn conditions and on slopes < 15%. The 1514780 road runs between the stands and the Snow Creek Riparian Reserve. Haul on the 1514780 would be restricted to the dry season and the road would be closed following timber harvest.

Based on field evaluation of slope and hydrologic connectivity, stands adjacent to Riparian Reserves are not at increased risk of hillslope erosion and sediment delivery to the stream system. In addition, BMPs and PDC, including seasonal haul restrictions on roads in Riparian Reserves, road drainage improvements, and location of landings well outside of Riparian Reserves. Standard Riparian Reserve buffer widths and buffer widths for ephemeral draws Table 3 are considered adequate to protect water quality. An additional discussion of effects to in-stream sediment is included in the Waterbody Condition section of this report.

There would be no measurable sedimentation from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage in streams in the project area because there are no treatments proposed within Riparian Reserves or potentially hydrologically connected areas, including ephemeral draws, and there would be no detrimental soil conditions created from the project in Riparian Reserves or hydrologically connected ephemeral draws.

22

Hillslope Erosion

Removal of burned trees through salvage activities was evaluated for the potential to affect hillslope erosion and stream channel sedimentation. Studies on erosion and sedimentation from fire salvage logging are variable and report both slight increases and no change in erosion rates. Slope, logging system, amount of organic litter on site following logging, and variability in weather events in the first years following salvage account for the greatest differences between study results (McIver and Starr 2000). Tree felling is not usually considered a major cause of increased sediment; however methods for removing harvested timber such as tractor and cable yarding can increase hillslope erosion. A 2006 study of post-fire logging effects on the Malheur National Forest in the Blue Mountains of eastern Oregon found that there was a correlation between the number of stems removed and the total amount of mechanical soil disturbance with 15.2% disturbed soil and 3.8% compaction area in commercial harvest units (McIver). However, the study found no correlation between disturbance within units and hill slope sediment collected in silt fences downslope of units (McIver 2006). Evaluation of sediment in silt fence indicated that levels of sediment transport were low and that the existing road system caused most hillslope sediment transport (McIver 2006).

While logging practices are not expected to increase sedimentation, the increase in openings and decrease in ground cover could result in a slight reduction in interception and evapotranspiration, and created openings may trap more snow. These processes could result in a slight increase in overland flow and hillslope erosion. However stream channel sedimentation from this process is not expected because BMPs and PDC would ensure sediment would not enter the stream system.

WEPP modeling for the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage shows a potential for a slight increase in sediment yield originating on skid trails within the project (Table 13). Sediment yield is highest in moderate to high severity burned areas during storms with a ≥ 5 year return period on slopes ≥30%. Estimating that up to 15% of treated stands may have disturbed soils (McIver 2006), acres within the project area with the potential for increased sediment yield were calculated in Table 13. Delivery of sediment to the stream systems from potential increases in hillslope erosion would be mitigated through PDC and BMPs (Chapter 2), including exclusion of treatment in Riparian Reserves and hydrologically connected ephemeral draws and potential subsoiling of select high-risk skid trails following treatment.

23

Table 13: Sediment yields for skid trails in the Pole Creek Fire Salvage. Estimated acres assume that 15% of treated acres are in disturbed condition (skid trail or landing). Disturbance Type

Storm Return Period (years) Estimated acres within the Pole Creek Fire Salvage Project

1 2 5 10 Skid trail above Low Severity Fire

Hill Slope Erosion (tons/acre)

Slope 10% 0 0.07 0.20 0.24 n/a Slope 30% 0 0.43 1.10 1.13 n/a Skid trail above Mod/High Severity Fire

Hill Slope Erosion (tons/acre)

Slope 10% 0 0.07 0.36 0.42 *83 Slope 30% 0 0.58 1.58 1.75 ^0 (Craigg 2013(b)) *Estimated as 15% of total treatment on slopes 10%-30%. ^Although there are 36 acres of treatment proposed on slopes 30-60%, there would be no ground-based treatment on these slopes, and therefore no skid trials or log landings. Hillslope erosion potential increases as slope increases. Skid trails on slopes greater than 30% are at increased risk for concentrating overland flow and increasing erosion potential. Treatment acres by slope class within project watersheds are shown in Table 14. No ground-based harvest would occur on slopes greater than 30%. Within treatment stands, and estimated 36 acres of salvage is proposed within the 30-60% slope class; these areas would either be excluded from treatment during project implementation, or trees would be felled downhill and grabbed; there would be no ground-based treatment on these slopes.

Table 14: Acres of treatment by slope class. SWS 0-5% 5-15% 15-30% 30-60% >60% Total Headwaters Whychus Creek

3.5 50.6 79.3 18.5 0 152

Lower Trout Creek

15.2 16.7 0.6 0 0 32.5

Three Creek 2.3 9.1 32.5 10.5 0 54.8 Upper Trout Creek

6.7 11 3.5 0 0 21.3

Upper Whychus Creek

124.6 413.5 173.6 7.2 0 718.9

Total 153 500.9 289.5 36.2 0 980

24

Hillslope and upland erosion caused by project activities would be minimal because no treatment would occur in areas most likely to deliver sediment to streams, including Riparian Reserves and hydrologically connected ephemeral draws. Additionally, there would be no ground-based harvest on slopes > 30% and these areas are not located adjacent to Riparian Reserves. Project design criteria and BMPs exclude activities in all areas with the potential to deliver sediment from hillslope erosion.

Vegetation recovery is also an important driver of hydrologic processes in a burned landscape. The hypothesis that removal of fire killed trees causes increases in surface temperatures due to loss of shade and increased solar radiation, influencing soil moisture, vegetation establishment, and stand development was tested in a study in the Siskiyou Mountains of Oregon. The study found that post-fire logging did not lead to increased maximum daily surface air temperature, but that dead tree removal was associated with lower night-time minimum temperatures, and earlier daytime heating (Fontaine et al. 2010). These results suggest that snags do not intercept enough shortwave radiation to significantly influence temperature, and that post-fire logging may not be of a large enough magnitude to affect soil moisture and vegetation reestablishment; however more study on microsite conditions is needed (Fontaine et al. 2010).

Re-growth and needle-fall established since the fire would be disturbed by mechanical treatments, however short-term establishment of fine woody material would increase because harvest activities would break branches of harvested dead trees. Reforestation of 980 acres would have a long-term beneficial effect to recovery of conifer cover and re-establishment of organic material, and result in faster recovery of conifers than in unplanted stands. Establishment of shrubs and grasses may be slower than in Alternative 1 especially in areas that have been compacted or disturbed. Shrub recovery in the hydrologic analysis area typically occurs 2 years post-fire. A 2006 soil photo point monitoring report on Lower Jack Unit 85, a salvage unit in the B&B Complex fire on the Sisters RD indicates that vegetation recovery was visually substantial with ceanothus present on approximately 75% of the unit area providing up to 80% aerial cover two years post disturbance (Craigg, 2006). Vegetative recovery on previously compacted or disturbed ground (skid trail) was more variable; germinants were smaller than those observed on undisturbed areas. Monitoring results indicate that vegetative recovery of shrubs and other early seral species post-fire on areas with no compaction will occur 2 years post-fire (Craigg, 2006).

Hillslope erosion from the Action Alternatives would have measurable effect to stream channel sedimentation because activities would not occur in hydrologically connected areas including Riparian Reserves and ephemeral draws, and additional BMPs and PDC would mitigate erosion on compacted surfaces within treatment stands.

Roads

In managed forest areas, the main source of direct sediment is from road construction associated with timber harvest and other activities (Helvey and Fowler 1979). Log haul has been demonstrated to increase sedimentation from from hydrologically connected roads during precipitation events (Reid and Dunne1984). Hauling on roads, especially those that are hydrologically connected to streams has the potential to increase sedimentation in channels. Driving on muddy, wet roads with puddling or dry, dusty roads can transport sediment to streams. Potential erosion and sedimentation on haul routes would be

25

reduced through pre-haul maintenance or routine road maintenance on up to 70 miles of haul roads. Maintenance activities are discussed in the Roads section of this EA. Haul would be restricted to the dry season (usually April-October) on most hydrologically connected haul routes, and haul routes within Riparian Reserves.

All haul routes within the project area were assessed to determine potential erosion and sedimentation concern. There are 3.6 miles of haul routes within Riparian Reserves for the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage and 11.9 miles of hydrologically connected road (Table 15). Road maintenance, reconstruction, closure, and decommissioning could result in a short-term increase in erosion from these features, however in the long-term, these improvements would decrease erosion and sedimentation as disturbed soils stabilize, and vegetation is established (on closed and decommissioned roads). BMPs for road maintenance and reconstruction activities would minimize the risk of sedimentation from these activities.

Table 15: Haul routes treatments and restrictions. Haul road Haul route in

riparian reserves

Estimated hydrologic haul route connectivity

BMPs and PDC Additional Actions

1500500 0.6 0.8 Seasonal haul restriction

1500530 0 0 none Closure 1500620 0 0.5* none Closure 1500650 0 1.0* none 1500680 0 0.8 Seasonal haul

restriction

1500685 0 0.3 Seasonal haul restriction


1514050 0.1 1.4* Seasonal haul restriction

1514150 0.1 1.4* 0.2

Seasonal haul restriction



Closure

1516000 0.2 0.2 none

1516200 0.1 0.1 none

1516220 0.1 0.1 none Decommission

1526000 0.1 0.1 none

1526150 0 0 none Closure

26



Closure

1526200 0.3 0.3 Seasonal haul restriction, south end

1526240 0 0 none Closure 1018777 0 0.3 none 1600625 0 0 none Decommission Totals 3.6 11.9

The existing road system would continue to be a source of sedimentation, however drainage would be improved on haul routes, and the closure and decommissioning after harvest of 5.5 and 2.1 miles of road respectively and reconstruction of 2.2 miles before haul would reduce erosion and sedimentation on these roads.

Cumulative Effects—Alternatives 2 and 3

The erosion and sedimentation effect of the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage would not incrementally add to cumulative effects because no effects to any hydrology parameters are predicted from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage . Potential increases in erosion and sedimentation within the Hydrologic Analysis Area could be attributed to fires, or other past, present, or future management activities. Less than 1% of total SWS area would be treated in all SWSs, except Upper Whychus Creek, which would have 4% of total area treated. Salvage would occur on approximately 4% of the total area burned by the Pole Creek Fire. Additionally, areas that are more susceptible to erosion, including Riparian Reserves, slopes over 30% and areas that received mulch treatment following the fire would not be treated. Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects within the hydrologic analysis area are shown in Chapter 2 of this EA.

Past projects and disturbances that affect erosion and sedimentation include timber sales and thinning projects beginning in the 1900s, the Black Crater Fire Salvage project, prescribed fire, the Black Crater Fire, the Rooster Rock Fire, Pole Creek Fire, fire suppression activities (average 15 starts/year in the project area), with more intensive suppression activities for larger fires, the Whychus (Squaw) Creek Cattle and Horse Allotment (closed in the mid 1980s). Roads (Table 10), trails (16 miles in project area), dispersed recreations sites (25 inventoried), and stand mortality from mountain pine beetle (MPB) outbreaks, are semi-permanent features within the Hydrologic Analysis Area that affect erosion and sedimentation. Ongoing and upcoming projects include several timber sales (SAFR, Glaze, Popper, Ursus) and forest restoration, the Pole Creek Fire Danger Tree Abatement, and fuel reduction projects, firewood cutting, invasive weed control, and road maintenance. The hydrologic analysis for the Pole Creek Fire Danger Tree Abatement project indicated that the project would not affect channel sedimentation (Press 2012(b)). Recent and future restoration projects in the Hydrologic Analysis Area include BAER treatments, and fire suppression rehabilitation for the Pole Creek, Black Crater, and Rooster Rock Fires, and culvert replacement projects on Snow and Pole Creeks.

27

Although there are numerous projects, disturbances, and semi-permanent features within the Hydrologic Analysis Area, the Pole Creek Fire and stand mortality from MPB outbreaks are the largest factors that could affect erosion and sedimentation within the Hydrologic Analysis Area. The Black Crater Fire burned primarily in the Upper and Lower Trout Creek SWSs, and the Rooster Rock Fire burned primarily in the Three Creek SWS. Since these fires burned in SWSs with low treatments acreages in the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage (Table 6), the effects of these fires are not analyzed in greater detail. Cumulative effects of MPB stand mortality are discussed in greater detail in the Water Yield and Peak Flows Cumulative Effects section of this report.

The sediment-filtration capacity of near channel vegetation in Riparian Reserves was reduced by the Pole Creek Fire which could increase erosion and sedimentation risk (Table 16) within the Hydrologic Analysis Area. The Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage would not add to this effect because no Riparian Reserves would be treated and stands adjacent to Riparian Reserves are not expected to increase sedimentation. Increased risk of erosion and sedimentation from tree mortality in Riparian Reserves would be of relatively short duration with early seral vegetation providing soil protection within 2-3 years. Eighteen percent and 14% of total Riparian Reserve acreage experienced stand replacement conditions in the Headwaters and Upper Whychus Creek SWSs respectively. Effects of the Pole Creek Fire are expected to be greater in Snow Creek and Pole Creek where a high percentage of Riparian Reserves and stream length experienced stand replacement conditions (Table 21), however the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage is not expected to increase sedimentation. Loss of Riparian Reserve filtration capacity is also mitigated by mulching (completed July 2013) between the 1526100 Road and Pole Creek through the BAER implementation process.

Table 16: Acres of riparian reserves (including streams, wetlands and lakes) burned by intensity in the Pole Creek Fire. SWS Stand

replacement (acres)

Mixed mortality (acres)

Burned or underburned (acres)

Total acres of riparian reserves (acres)

Total riparian reserve with stand replacement conditions (acres)

% riparian reserves with stand replacement conditions (acres)


997 770 672 5,438 997 18%

Lower Trout Creek

2 3 2 511 2 0.4%

Three Creek 1 30 29 959 1 0.1% Upper Trout Creek

3 81 108 703 3 0.4%

Upper Whychus Creek

274 327 337 1,919 274 14%

28

Long-term sedimentation from roads would be reduced because 5.5 miles of road would be closed, 2.1 miles of road would be decommissioned, 2.2 miles of road would be reconstructed, and up to 67 miles of roads would receive pre-haul maintenance or routine road maintenance as an action associated with the timber sale. Restriction of haul to the dry season on hydrologically connected haul routes and haul routes within Riparian Reserves would minimize erosion risk. Future culvert replacement projects on Snow Creek and Pole Creek should reduce risk of culvert failure at these crossings. Road improvements through the BAER process, as well as general road maintenance activities would also reduce erosion and sedimentation from the road system within the project area. The Cross District Snowmobile Trail parallels sections of Snow Creek and contributes to increased erosion in these areas.

Fireline (14 miles of handline and 24 miles of dozer line) construction from suppression efforts for the Pole Creek Fire could increase erosion and sedimentation risk, especially in areas where concentrated flow from these features could enter the stream system, however no erosion from firelines was observed after fall 2012 storms. These features were rehabilitated as part of suppression rehab from the Pole Creek Fire, and condition on firelines should improve as vegetation recovers. Firelines do not overlap with salvage units.

The burned area emergency response (BAER) team identified approximately 200 acres along Whychus, Snow and Pole Creeks for aerial application of mulch. Sites were chosen based on adjacency to streams and potential hydrologic connectivity, burn severity, and slopes (>15%). Mulch was applied to these units in July 2013. These treatments will help reduce sediment transported to Whychus Creek (Tanner and Gritzner, 2012). Robichaud and others (2012) showed that erosion reduction from wood shred mulch treatments ranged from 50-96% with greater effectiveness correlated with wood shred cover of 50-60%.

Conclusion—Summary of Effects to Erosion and Sedimentation

There are no measurable direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to erosion or sedimentation expected from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage because there are no effects to the measures used to predict potential effects. There would be 0 acres of soil detrimentally impacted in Riparian Reserves or potentially hydrologically connected areas (ephemeral draws), 0 acres harvested within 30ft of hydrologically connected ephemeral draws, and no temporary roads constructed for the project. In addition, drainage would be improved on haul routes through pre-haul maintenance, and the closure and decommissioning of 5.5 and 2.1 miles of road respectively and reconstruction of 2.2 miles (Table 12).

Water Yield and Peak Flows

Existing Condition

Precipitation

The Hydrologic Analysis Area has one of the steepest precipitation gradients in the Cascades with precipitation ranging from 120 inches a year in the high Cascades to 14 inches per year in Sisters, OR. Elevations in the project area range from 4,160ft to 5,600ft with approximately 38% of the project area and 47% of project treatments within the 3,500-5,000ft rain on snow (ROS) zone. Approximately two-thirds of precipitation occurs between October and March and falls mostly as low intensity rain or snow. Large runoff events created from rain on snow precipitation occur once a year, on average and result in

29

high, but short spikes in peak flows during these periods. A secondary peak of precipitation occurs in the summer and falls as high-intensity thunder showers. Although portions of the project area experience a significant amount of precipitation and high intensity storms, drainage densities in the project area are low and several streams have only ephemeral or intermittent connections to downstream waterbodies.


Water yield and surface drainage in the hydrologic analysis area are low because the predominately volcanic soils are highly permeable. It is estimated that only 11% of precipitation falling in the Whychus watershed flows as surface water into Whychus Creek. The remaining precipitation is evaporated or infiltrated into highly porous lava flows and volcanic ash and enters the Deschutes River as springs (USDA Forest Service 2007). Overland flow rarely occurs in soils within the hydrologic project area because infiltration rates generally exceeded typical rainstorm rates by an order of magnitude (Litton 2006). The mechanisms with the potential to increase overland flow include reduction in canopy cover and attendant reduction in evapotranspiration and canopy interception of rain and snowfall. These mechanisms can increase the amount of precipitation available for runoff as streamflow. Within the Hydrologic Analysis Area, overland flow does not generally occur from a reduction in evapotranspiration when trees are harvested or killed by fire or insects and disease because infiltration and permeability rates often still exceed precipitation rates (Craigg 2009). However, overland flow can occur in areas where infiltration rates are reduced, such as rain-on-snow zones and road surfaces.

Snow Creek and its Tributaries and Waterbodies

Snow Creek originates in the Three Sisters Wilderness and is an important cold water tributary to Whychus Creek in the Headwaters Whychus Creek SWS. Snow Creek is located in the Whychus Creek Wild and Scenic River boundary. Snow Creek has a perennial stable, spring-fed flow regime with wetlands and springs through its length. The Snow Creek gage (#14074900), operated by Oregon Department of Water Resources is located adjacent to the wilderness boundary and has been in operation since 1970. This gage was burned in the Pole Creek Fire and replaced on March 14, 2013. The drainage area at the gage is 2 mi2. Average peak flows are approximately 30 cfs and baseflows are approximately 4 cfs. The Snow Creek Ditch, located 200ft downstream from the gage once carried water from Snow Creek to Three Creek, however this ditch has not run water since 1976 and has been decommissioned (Press 2012(a)). Pole Creek and its Tributaries and Waterbodies

Pole Creek is a predominately spring-fed system with a fairly constant flow regime. Pole Creek is a tributary to Whychus Creek in the Upper Whychus SWS and is currently diverted into the Pole Creek ditch prior to reaching Whychus Creek to serve as irrigation for agriculture and the Sisters public water supply. The city does not currently use water from Pole Creek, but reserves the right to use the water when necessary (Tanner and Gritzner, 2012). An intermittent flow connection between Pole Creek and Whychus Creek has recently been restored. Pole Creek Swamp currently drains into Pole Creek and flows into Whychus Creek with a six to eight foot waterfall with boulder cascade present at the confluence (Dachtler 2013).

30

North Fork Pole Creek

The North Fork of Pole Creek is a spring-fed system that originates in Twin Meadows with several unnamed meadow and swamp features in its headwater reaches. NF Pole Creek flows intermittently and is only ephemerally connected to Pole Creek—the channel is braided and poorly defined at the lower end of the system near the Pole Creek confluence.

Whychus Creek

The hydrology of the Whychus system is flashy (short lag time between precipitation and high flows) in response to summer convective storms and rain on snow events in winter and spring. The typical hydrograph for Whychus Creek is bi-modal with lower-magnitude consistent spring snowmelt flows, and higher, flashier rain on snow events in the winter months. The Whychus Creek flow regime is altered by several diversions near the town of Sisters. The primary diversion is located 3 miles upstream from Sisters and is used for irrigation by the Three Sisters Irrigation District (TSID). This diversion diverts up to 150 cfs or 90% of flows from April to Oct and has significantly affected the natural hydrograph in lower Whychus Creek (Press 2012(a)). As recently as 1998, all summer flows of Whychus Creek were diverted for irrigation. Since then, water conservation efforts have been implemented including improvement of diversion efficiency, and transfer and leasing of water rights. Median low flow of Whychus Creek from 2009-2012 averaged 27 cfs in Sisters. Base summer flows below the TSID diversion are warm and shallow because width to depth ratios are high and no low-flow channel has developed given the armored bed (UDWC and USFS, 2013).

Peak Flows

Climate is the primary determinant of flow regime and magnitude of large flood events (Dunne and Leopold, 1978); however, land use practices and fire can also increase peak flows through increases in overland flow and subsequent delivery of increased runoff (Helvey, 1980, Kunze and Stednick, 2006). Peak flows are important for sediment transport, substrate redistribution, and channel formation, and can cause significant changes in the hydrologic function of the stream system (Rosgen, 1996, Neary et al., 2005). Watersheds exhibit great natural variability in flow and can accommodate some increases in peak flows without damage to stream channels and aquatic organisms; however increases in peak flow are of concern due to their potential to erode and destabilize channels, affecting aquatic habitat quality. Increases in peak flows may have a positive ecological outcome because floods can restructure and rejuvenate riparian communities (Swanson et al. 2010), especially in depositional reaches with well-connected floodplains such as those found in the lower reaches of Whychus Creek.

Figure 2 shows yearly instantaneous peak discharge of Whychus Creek in Sisters, Oregon for 96-years of flow data. The trendline through these data points indicates that peak flows have increased in Whychus Creek over the period of record. Bankfull flows, which are considered to be channel maintenance flows and are associated with the spring-melt season peak, appear to be occurring with greater frequency. Bankfull flow in Whychus Creek in Sisters was estimated to be approximately 300 cfs at a 1.5 year recurrence interval using the entire period of record (Flynn et al. 2006). In the last 20 years, flows around 300 cfs are occurring almost yearly and are now associated with a 1.15 recurrence interval, while flows associated with the 1.5 recurrence interval have increased to approximately 500 cfs. It appears that rain-on-snow events, resulting in high streamflows, are becoming more frequent in the Whychus Creek

31

watershed. This corresponds to the period when a large swath of lodgepole pine in the watershed was killed by mountain pine beetle which could have reduced interception and increased snow pack. Streams in the Hydrologic Analysis area are generally resilient to watershed changes that influence flow regime based on high soil permeability, and the stable spring-fed flow regime of most streams.

Figure 2: Yearly instantaneous peak discharge for Whychus Creek in Sisters, Oregon. Data points denoted with an X are estimates (Day 2013).

Stand Replacement Conditions

A significant portion of the Hydrologic Analysis Area experienced stand replacement conditions from mountain pine beetle (MPB) outbreaks before the Pole Creek Fire. Although a proportion of acres affected by mountain pine beetle have begun to recover with brush and young trees, these areas remain more open than before the beetle outbreak. The creation of open areas through removal (or death) of vegetation has the potential to change flow characteristics, and can increase peak flows and water yield, and change the timing of discharge. The changes are in proportion to basal area or leaf area removed from a site. Acres of stand replacement conditions from MPB and stand replacement fire within SWSs within the hydrologic analysis area are shown in Table 17. Based on percentage of SWS with open stand conditions, the Headwaters Whychus Creek SWS is likely to experience the greatest increases in water yield and peak flows.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

Disc

harg

e (c

fs)

Water Year

Yearly Instantaneous Peak Discharge Whychus Creek, Sisters Oregon

Water Years 1907-2012

32

Table 17: Acres of SWSs within the Hydrologic Analysis Area with stand replacement conditions. SWS SWS

acres MPB stand replacement conditions (acres)

% SWS with stand replacing conditions from MPB

Acres burned by a stand replacing fire in the Pole Creek Fire

SWS acres with stand replacement conditions from MPB that are not within the Pole Creek stand replacement burn area

Acres burned by stand replacing fire in the Pole Creek Fire or with stand replacement conditions from MPB

% SWS burned by a stand replacing fire and/or with stand replacing conditions from MPB


18,790 13,185 70% 4327 9,625 13,952 74%

Lower Trout Creek

22,764 1,658 7% 223 1,649 1,872 8%

Three Creek 18,305 9,582 52% 1456 8,126 9,582 52%

Upper Trout Creek

12,100 6,792 56% 184 6,608 6,792 56%

Upper Whychus Creek

20,056 8,029 40% 4114 3,915 8,029 40%

As discussed previously, open stand conditions within the ROS zone can contribute to increases in peak flows, especially during ROS precipitation events. For each SWS, acres with stand replacing conditions from the Pole Creek Fire and MPB stand mortality are shown in Table 18. Ninety-seven percent of the ROS zone in the Headwaters Whychus Creek SWS experienced stand replacement conditions, putting this SWS at increased risk of rapid storm runoff during ROS events. The Upper Trout Creek and Upper Whychus Creek SWSs also have >50% of ROS zone area with stand replacement conditions. Potential effects to water yield and peak flows from open stand conditions is expected to improve as vegetation recovers. Additionally, the highly permeable soils in the Hydrologic Analysis Area make it more resistant to changes in peak flows and water yield resulting from changes in vegetation.

33

Table 18: Acres of SWSs within the Hydrologic Analysis Area in the ROS zone with stand replacement conditions. SWS SWS

acres SWS acres in ROS zone (3,500-5,000ft)

Acres of ROS zone with stand replacement conditions from MPB that are not within the stand replacement burn area

Acres of ROS zone burned by a stand replacing fire in the Pole Creek Fire

Acres of ROS zone burned by stand replacing fire in the Pole Creek Fire or with stand replacement conditions from MPB

% of ROS zone burned by a stand replacing fire and/or with stand replacement conditions from MPB


18,790 2,305 1,070 1,178 2,248 97%

Lower Trout Creek

22,764 10,621 492 223 715 7%

Three Creek 18,305 9,923 1,974 167 2,141 21% Upper Trout Creek

12,100 2,911 1,807 82 1,889 65%

Upper Whychus Creek

20,056 9,607 2,177 3,927 6,104 63%

Ecological Trends—Alterative 1 (No Action) The No Action Alternative would have no effect on water yield and peak flows because no trees would be removed, and no additional compaction would occur in potentially hydrologically connected areas. Roads in poor condition would continue to intercept flow and could contribute to slight increases in peak flows. Effects of both the Pole Creek Fire and tree mortality from insects and disease could increase water yield and peak flows. Although soil infiltration is naturally high in the Hydrologic Analysis Area, with overland flow rarely occurring, decreases in evapotranspiration from the Pole Creek Fire and MPB stand mortality could affect water yield and peak flows. These effects are discussed in detail in greater detail in the Cumulative Effects on Water Yield and Peak Flow section of this report. Issues and measures to assess effects to water yield and peak flows are shown in Table 19.

34

Table 19: Issues and measures to assess effects to water yield and peak flows. Issue Measures No Action Alternative

1 Alternative 2


Acres of soil detrimentally impacted in riparian reserves.

0 0 0

Acres of soil detrimentally impacted in potentially hydrologically connected areas.

0 0 0

Acres treated within the rain on snow zone in potentially hydrologically connected areas.

0 0 0

Number of live trees removed. 0 0 0


Activities within the Action Alternatives with the potential to affect water yield and peak flows, include tree removal and soil disturbance within potentially hydrologically connected areas. Since no live trees would be removed in the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage, soil disturbance would be the primary mechanism for increases in water yield and peak flows; ground-based salvage of dead trees could increase the risk of erosion through disturbance of ground vegetation and compaction of soil, which concentrates runoff and may slow vegetation re-establishment and cause detrimental soil conditions. Potential effects of vegetation removal on water yield and peak flows are greatest in the ROS zone (ROS) (3,500-5,000ft), where created openings intercept more snow. Studies have shown that snow water equivalent and snow melt rates are higher in open areas than in forested areas (McCaughey and Farnes, 2001, Skidmore et al. 1994). The seasonally impermeable areas created by a snow or ice layer could accumulate more snow as a result of decreased interception from trees and associated evaporation, leading to more overland flow and potential increases in peak flows during ROS events.

Increases in water yield following fires and timber harvest are widely documented (Helvey 1980, and Stednick 1995). Removal of live forest overstory increases water yield at a detectable level when 20-40% of basal area is removed or killed (Peterson et al, 2009). Since salvage logging does not involve removal of live trees, literature on post-fire logging has rarely reported an effect on water yield or peakflows (Helvey 1980 and 1974; McIver and Starr 2000; Neary et al 2005). Water yield typically increases in the first year following fire or logging, but slowly decreases to pre-disturbance levels as vegetation reestablishes (Peterson et al. 2009). Soil water storage, interception, and evapotranspiration are reduced when vegetation is removed or killed by fire and when organic matter on the soil surface is consumed by fire (DeBano et al. 1998; Neary et al 2005).

The Action Alternatives would have no measurable effect on water yield and peak flows because no live trees would be removed, and there would be no additional soil disturbance or detrimental soil conditions in Riparian Reserves, hydrologically connected areas, or hydrologically connected areas within the ROS zone from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage. Although dead trees do intercept some precipitation that is evaporated back into the atmosphere, the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage would not measurably reduce evaporation or transpiration. Planting 2-year old seedlings in harvested units would result in slightly faster conifer recovery than in the No Action alternative, and faster recovery of interception and

35

evapotranspiration processes. Infiltration rates in the project area are naturally high and overland flow occurs infrequently. A greater likelihood of overland flow from proposed activities is most likely to occur on compacted surfaces including skid trails, roads, and landings. Soil compaction can increase water yield and peak flows through overland routing of flow on compacted surfaces. Skid trails, roads, and landings can also concentrate flow and result in faster runoff. Salvage activities would disturb newly established vegetation and could increase compaction on approximately 150 acres (assuming 15% of treated stands are made up of skid trails and landings and that stands had no previous detrimental soil conditions); however there would be no increase in compaction in Riparian Reserves or hydrologically connected areas because there would be no treatments within these areas. Therefore, delivery of overland flow from treatment areas to streams would not occur. Subsoiling and piling of slash on skid trails where needed on steeper slopes in upland areas would reduce concentration of flow on these features, and reduce the potential for increased runoff. The soils report in this EA includes a detailed discussion of soil disturbance (from past activities) and potential soil disturbance following salvage for each salvage unit.

Within treated stands, the amount of dead wood available for downfall and subsequent slowing of overland flow would be reduced; however at the scale of the Pole Creek Fire there would be more dead wood than in pre-fire condition. In treated stands, slash from harvest activities would help slow overland flow.

There are 441 acres of treatment proposed in the ROS zone. The majority of these units are not hydrologically connected to the stream system, and are at low risk from increased runoff during ROS precipitation events. Units 17, 35, 37, and 3 acres of unit 18 are within the ROS adjacent to Riparian Reserves. Slopes within these units range from 15-30%. There are no ephemeral draws in unit 35, or in the section of unit 18 within the ROS zone. There is an ephemeral draw and evidence of rilling in unit 17 and one stable ephemeral draw in unit 37. Within unit 17 ephemeral draws would be protected with a 30ft no cut buffer with limited designated crossings of this feature. Within stands adjacent to Riparian Reserves, BMPs and PDC would minimize the risk of increased runoff during ROS events.

Cumulative Effects

The effect to water yield and peak flow from the Pole Creek Fire Salvage would not incrementally add to cumulative effects because no effects to evapotranspiration or compaction in Riparian Reserves or hydrologically connected areas are predicted. As discussed in the Erosion and Sedimentation Cumulative Effects section of this report, The Pole Creek Fire and MPB stand mortality would continue to have the greatest influence on water yield and peak flows in the Hydrologic Analysis Area. Potential effects of the Pole Creek fire on water yield are dependent on fire severity and vegetative condition before the fire, with areas that with the highest percentage of live trees killed by fire and insects and disease exhibiting the greatest potential for increased water yield.

The equivalent clearcut area (ECA) model is often used by the Forest Service to quantify cumulative watershed effects (CWE). The model provides a quantitative approximation of the potential hydrologic response from project activities when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions and is useful for comparing potential differences between alternatives. The physical model driving ECA analysis is that vegetation removal changes potential flow characteristics, including peak flow, timing of discharge, and water yield in proportion to basal area or leaf area removed from a site (Ager and Clifton 2005). The ECA model is a determination of percentage of open canopy or

36

“percentage of area in equivalent clear cut condition” (Ager and Clifton 2005). The ECA model was not used for this analysis because the Action Alternatives would not contribute to the ECA. Fire and mountain pine beetle mortality have already created open stand conditions, therefore salvage activities would not result in additional removal of leaf area or increases in “clear cut conditions”. Stands proposed for salvage are dead, and trees are no longer transpiring. The interception capacity of dead trees in negligible.

The high percentage of SWS in the Hydrologic Analysis Area in stand replacement condition may result in increases water yield and peak flows from the Pole Creek Fire, but the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage would not affect this increase. No live vegetation would be removed and potential increases in disturbed soil from skid trails and landings would be outside of Riparian Reserves and hydrologically connected ephemeral draws. The magnitude of increases on water yield is dependent on precipitation patterns over the next few years as vegetation recovers. The duration of water yield and peakflow increases is dependent on timing and intensity of precipitation and snowmelt rates (MacDonald 2000), and rate of vegetation recovery.

Conclusion—Summary of Effects to Water Yield and Peak Flows

There are no measurable direct, indirect or cumulative effects to water yield or peak flows expected from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage because there are no effects to the measures used to predict potential effects to water yield and peak flows. There would be 0 acres of soil detrimentally impacted in Riparian Reserves or hydrologically connected ephemeral draws, no acres treated within the rain on snow zone in potentially hydrologically connected areas (Riparian Reserves, hydrologically connected ephemeral draws), and no live trees removed from salvage units (Table 19).

Stream Temperature

Existing Condition

Temperature data for streams in the Hydrologic Analysis Area is shown in Table 20. All of the streams in the Hydrologic Analysis Area were within the Pole Creek Fire, with some sections of stream experiencing stand replacement conditions in Riparian Reserves (Table 17). Length of stream by burn severity is shown in Table 21, and acres of Riparian Reserves burned by severity are in Table 17.

37

Tree removal and other disturbance in Riparian Reserves can reduce stream shade and increase channel exposure to solar radiation. Decreases in riparian vegetation can also exacerbate channel erosion and widening, leading to warmer stream temperatures from increased surface area. Pole Creek is a spring-fed system with water temperatures well below the Oregon state temperature standard for salmonids spawning and rearing of 18⁰C. A 2001 survey (Dachtler) of temperature at headwater springs found temperatures of 3 °C. Continuous summer water temperature data was collected at the 1514 road crossing using electronic thermographs in 1995 and 1997 where daily maximums were in the range of 12 °C (Dachtler 2013). With 3.2 miles of Pole Creek flowing through stand replacing fire, temperatures in Pole Creek could increase, however, temperature increase may be buffered by cold-water springs that feed the channel. There is very little existing temperature data for North Fork Pole Creek, however temperatures in the spring-fed system are likely well below the State temperature standard. North Fork Pole Creek has <0.1 miles of total length affected by the Pole Creek Fire. Snow Creek has a fairly stable spring-fed flow regime. Water temperatures in Snow Creek during a 2007 stream inventory ranged from 5 to 13oC using a hand held thermometer. Continuous summer water temperature data was collected at the 1514 road crossing using electronic thermographs from May to September of 1997. Temperatures at the 1514 crossing reached a maximum temperature of 12.3 °C in August and a maximum of 10 °C in September (Dachtler 2013). Snow Creek also has wetlands and springs along its length, making the system less susceptible to large temperature fluctuation. Temperatures in Snow Creek could increase given nearly 4 miles of Snow Creek and adjacent wetlands were burned by stand replacing fire in the Pole Creek Fire. As discussed previously in this report, the entire length of Whychus Creek (including in the Wilderness) is on the state 303(d) list for temperature, however temperatures in upper Whychus Creek within the Hydrologic Analysis Area are well below the state water temperature standard of 18⁰C. Temperatures within Whychus Creek are consistently above the state standard below the 16 road and progressively get warmer as water moves downstream. Insufficient in-stream flows are the primary cause of high water temperatures in Whychus Creek. Recent flow, channel, and floodplain restoration in the lower reaches of Whychus Creek have resulted in a recent cooling trend. Whychus Creek temperatures were lower on the hottest water day in 2011 than in 2010, and lower in 2010 than in 2009 (Mork, 2011).

38

Table 20: Water temperature monitoring in the Whychus Watershed Analysis Area (sites on the same stream listed from upstream to downstream). Stream Period of

record Max 7-day average maximum temperature

2003 Water Temperature standard

Pole Creek @ 1514 rd 1989-1991, 1995, 1997

12º C** 18º C

*Snow Ck @ 1514 rd 1997 11.4º C 18º C *Whychus Ck @ 1514 rd 1997-1999,

2002, 2006 14.4º C 18º C

Whychus Ck @ gaging station

1991, 1994-2000, 2002-2006

16.3º C 18º C

Whychus Ck @ 4606 rd foot bridge

1999 - 2005 20.4º C 18º C

Whychus Ck @ City Park 1997-2006 24.4º C 18º C *Located within the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage Analysis Area **7-day average calculated by Forest Service hydrologist from raw temperature data

Table 21: Length of streams (mi) in the analysis area burned in the Pole Creek Fire by severity. Stream Stand

replacement (mi)

Mixed-mortality (mi)

Underburn (mi)

Pole Creek 3.2 2.1 1.9 North Fork Pole Creek

0 0.8 0.4

Snow Creek 3.9 1.2 1.3 Whychus Creek

2.4 2.3 4.7

Ecological Trends—No Action

The No Action Alternative would not affect stream temperature because no stream shade would be removed. Longer-term increases in shade-producing vegetation from closure and decommissioning of roads in Riparian Reserves would not occur. Stream temperatures could increase through a reduction in shade from burned Riparian Reserves in the Pole Creek Fire. Increases in channel large woody debris could mitigate these effects. Measures for analysis of temperature effects of the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage are shown in Table 22. Table 22: Issues and measures for temperature Issue Measures No Action Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Stream Temperature/303(d) listings

Acres harvested in riparian reserves.

0 0 0

39


The Action Alternatives would not affect water temperature because salvage activities would take place outside of Riparian Reserves and effective shade components would not be removed on any stream channel or Riparian Reserve. There would be no effect on the 303(d) listing status of Whychus Creek because treatments are well outside the Riparian Reserve of Whychus Creek. No changes in channel condition are predicted from project activities; therefore, morphological channel changes that could affect stream temperature, including widening would not result from project activities.

Cumulative Effects—Alternatives 2 and 3

The effect to stream temperature from the Pole Creek Fire Salvage would not incrementally add to cumulative effects because no effects to temperature are predicted. There would be no removal of trees within Riparian Reserves. No effective shade components along stream channels would be removed, and morphological channel changes affecting stream temperature would not result from project activities. Potential effects to temperature from other disturbance in the Hydrologic Analysis Area would continue. The Pole Creek Fire has the largest potential to affect stream temperature in the Hydrologic Analysis Area because it removed significant shade components within Riparian Reserves. Acres of riparian reserve burned by intensity within the Pole Creek burned area are shown in Table 17.

The ongoing Pole Creek Fire Danger Tree Abatement project includes felling of danger trees in Riparian Reserves; however, no trees would be removed within Riparian Reserves. Danger trees would be felled into the stream to provide cover; therefore, stream shade would not be reduced as a result of harvest activity (Press 2012(b)). Since lack of in-stream flow is the primary driver of increased temperatures in Lower Whychus Creek, increases in water yield from vegetation mortality from the insects and disease, and the Pole Creek fire could increase flows and lower temperatures in Whychus Creek. Watershed restoration activities in Whychus Creek that work to restore in-stream flows and improve hydrologic function are on-going and expected to improve temperature.

Potential impacts to temperature from the Pole Creek Fire are expected to be greatest in Pole Creek, Snow Creek, and the main stem of Whychus Creek because these streams experienced the highest fire impacts in Riparian Reserves and stand replacement fire conditions through their lengths. However, the spring-fed flow regime of Pole and Snow Creeks and continued flow and stream channel restoration in Whychus Creek will likely buffer these effects. Long-term effects to temperature from the Pole Creek Fire are expected to diminish as riparian vegetation re-establishes.

In the long-term, improvements to roads, trails, and dispersed recreation sites within Riparian Reserves would increase shade and could decrease stream temperature.

Conclusion—Summary of Effects to Stream Temperature

There are no direct, indirect or cumulative effects to temperature or 303(d) listed streams expected from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage because there are no effects to the measures used to predict potential temperature effects. There would be no acres harvested in Riparian Reserves and temperature and the

40

303(d) listing status of Whychus Creek would not be affected by the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage (Table 22).

Waterbody Condition

Existing Condition

Channel conditions are dependent upon the processes that affect channel morphology including hillslope erosional processes, sediment load input, water yield and peak flows, upland and riparian vegetation condition, and road/stream interactions (Knighton 1998). Stream channel variables used to understand waterbody condition and potential effects from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage include; large woody debris, percent unstable banks, embeddedness, and fine sediment (<2mm) percentage. Average measurements from the most recent stream surveys are shown in Table 23. Variables differ between each reach, and a more detailed discussion of variables by reach is included in the fisheries report for the 2013 Whychus Watershed Analysis Update (Dachtler 2013). Formal stream surveys have not been completed since the Pole Creek Fire. Table 23: Channel variables used to asses waterbody condition in this analysis. Stream Survey

date Average medium and large pieces of wood/mile

% unstable banks

*Embedded Fine sediment <2mm %

Whychus Creek

1997 32 1.6-13% No 22%

Pole Creek 2001 88 0.1% No 6-39%

Snow Creek 2007 36 0.1-1.8% No 20-55%


2007 33 0.1% Yes, in lower reach

30%-upper reaches; 90% lower reaches

*Although not formally measured during stream survey, embeddedness is estimated as a “yes” or “no” if more than 35 % of the cobble or gravel substrate in a habitat unit was embedded with fine sediments (Dachtler 2013). Bank stability is important in determining the relative health of a channel because bank condition is indicative of processes at work throughout the watershed, including flow regime and sediment inputs (Montgomery and MacDonald, 2002). Pole Creek, North Fork Pole Creek, and Snow Creek are predominately spring-fed with stable flow regimes, and a low percentage of unstable banks. Snow Creek has a slightly higher percentage of unstable banks in the furthest upstream reach, which is primarily attributed to the Cross District Snowmobile Trail crossing and the Forest Service trail # 99 which parallels this reach in some locations. The flashier Whychus Creek is more dynamic and glacial and volcanic deposits in the stream valley results in some inherent bank instability. Much of Whychus Creek

41

has been channelized which increases shear stress and often results in higher bank erosion than in natural conditions. However, the reaches with these conditions are primarily outside of the Hydrologic Analysis Area. Bank instability in Whychus Creek is highest in the reach near the town of Sisters which is well outside of the Hydrologic Analysis Area. Areas of instability in Whychus Creek are being addressed through past and planned restoration efforts. Channel morphology and flow dynamics are influenced by the presence of large woody debris in the stream channel, floodplain, and riparian area. Large wood stabilizes small streams through energy dissipation, streambank armoring, and creation of a mosaic of erosional areas and slow-water depositional areas (Rose et al. 2001). Large woody debris is high in Pole Creek, and moderate in Snow, Pole, and North Fork Pole Creeks. Large wood is low in Whychus Creek primarily because the channel was historically straightened and cleared of wood. Large woody debris recruitment will increase in the next 2-10 years, but there will likely be a future gap in future wood recruitment as vegetation within Riparian Reserves recovers from the Pole Creek Fire. Embeddedness and fine sediment % <2mm are both measures of stored sediment. An increase in fine sediment in a system can alter channel width to depth ratios, roughness, scour depth, and can impact aquatic habitat (Montgomery and Buffington, 1997). Fine sediment distribution is variable in streams within the project area as a result of variable flow regime and gradient, with watershed disturbance as a secondary driver of stream channel sedimentation. Existing sediment conditions are within the range of expected values for streams in the

Riparian Vegetation Condition

Riparian vegetation along streams within the Hydrologic Analysis Area varies in width from a few feet on smaller forested streams to several hundred feet in wetlands and areas of larger streams with broad floodplains. Often true riparian vegetation exists for only a small portion of the riparian reserve usually directly adjacent to a stream or lake. The remaining Riparian Reserve area consists of tree and plant communities more similar to those found in the surrounding uplands (Dachtler 2013). Riparian vegetation conditions discussed below existed before the Pole Creek Fire and have not been formally assessed since the fire. Acres of Riparian Reserve burned in the Pole Creek Fire are shown in Table 17. Functional Riparian Reserves act as buffers between hillslope erosion and stream channel sedimentation. Riparian Reserve sediment filtration capacity has been reduced in areas burned at high severity, however filtration capacity will increase as vegetation re-establishes.


North Fork Pole Creek originates from several springs in Twin Meadows. Several of these springs are fen peat meadow areas, but there is a mix of wet and dry meadow types found throughout the meadow complex. Young lodgepole pines are encroaching around the perimeter of the upper meadow.

The riparian area along North Fork Pole Creek consists of a thin strip of mountain alder with a thick stand of mostly Engelmann spruce along the valley bottom. Twin Meadows and riparian areas in North Fork Pole Creek were largely unaffected by the Pole Creek Fire.

Pole Creek

42

A thin strip of mountain alders exists in the riparian area through most of the length of Pole Creek. Engelmann spruce is common in the lower half of Pole Creek mixed with white fir, Douglas fir, lodgepole pine and ponderosa pine. Lodgepole pine is the dominant conifer species along the upper half of Pole Creek. Several old clear cuts were located along the stream and now have young pine plantations. Thin buffer strips were left in several location and these trees have blown down in several locations adding wood to the stream but also causing bank instability and decreasing streamside shade. Firewood cutting of dead lodgepole pine and white fir has caused a reduction in future wood recruitment to upper Pole Creek where a large die off of lodgepole pine has occurred. The riparian area adjacent to the perennial portion of Pole Creek above the 1514 road was affected by the Pole Creek Fire with 3.2 miles (64%) of stream length burned at high and moderate severity. (Dachtler 2013)

Snow Creek

A thin zone of mountain alder runs along the edge of the creek with other riparian shrubs. Thick Engelmann spruce stands dominate the lower reaches of Snow Creek with white fir and mountain hemlock at higher elevations. Lodgepole and ponderosa pine are scattered in pockets along the stream, with high densities of white fir in some locations. A few small spring fed wetlands and streams exist along the Snow Creek. Some small aspen clumps are present along the creek and on the surrounding hillslopes. (Dachtler 2013) Nearly 4 miles of Snow Creek (68% of total length) was burned at high to moderate severity in the Pole Creek Fire.

Whychus Creek

Within the project area the riparian species along the stream include, mountain alder, Engelmann spruce, willows, aspen and cottonwood. Although there is riparian vegetation along portions of Whychus Creek, it is often confined in the channel margins, young, and lacking in species diversity. There are several fen peat meadow features in headwater tributary areas of Whychus Creek. Approximately 2.4 miles of Whychus Creek was burned at high to moderate severity in the Pole Creek Fire.

Ecological Trends—No Action

The No Action Alternative would have no effect on waterbody condition because no project activities would occur. Between < 1% and 18% of Riparian Reserves within SWSs in the hydrologic analysis area experienced stand replacement conditions in the Pole Creek Fire. In-stream wood is expected to increase significantly as standing dead trees in riparian areas fall; however, long-term large wood recruitment would be reduced as riparian vegetation recovers. In-stream wood would help mitigate potential increases in sedimentation from the Pole Creek Fire by creating new pools and trapping sediment.

Issues and measures for assessment of effects to waterbody condition are shown in Table 24.

43

Table 24: Issues and measures for waterbody condition. Issue Measures No Action Alternative

1 Alternative 2

Waterbody Condition

Alteration of stream/lake bank and bed stability measured by changes in sedimentation, and water yield using measures shown in Tables 12 and 19.

0 0 0

Acres harvested along stream or lake banks. 0 0 0 Acres harvested in potential large wood recruitment areas in riparian reserves.

0 0 0

Wild and Scenic hydrology outstandingly remarkable values

No effect No effect No effect


The Action Alternatives would not measurably affect waterbody condition because no measurable undesirable effects to water yield, peak flows, sedimentation, riparian vegetation, and large woody debris recruitment would occur from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage. Channel and wetland stability would not be compromised by the proposed activities in either Action Alternative because no trees would be removed in Riparian Reserves, or within 30 ft of hydrologically connected ephemeral draws. Riparian vegetation would not be affected because no treatments would occur where riparian vegetation is present. Large woody debris recruitment would not be affected by project treatments because no trees would be removed from Riparian Reserves.

Haul on system roads in Riparian Reserves would not affect streamflow, sedimentation, riparian vegetation or large woody debris recruitment. Haul would occur on existing roads, and would be restricted during the wet season on roads that are hydrologically connected or located within Riparian Reserves. There would be no temporary road construction for the project. Danger trees along roads within Riparian Reserves would be hand felled and left in place, and would not affect waterbody condition. Closure and decommissioning of 5.5 and 2.1 miles of road respectively and reconstruction of 2.2 miles would improve channel stability and near channel waterbody vegetation, and future large woody debris recruitment potential on roads that are within Riparian Reserves. Drainage improvements on haul routes, seasonal haul restrictions on hydrologically connected roads and roads within Riparian Reserves, and road closures and decommissioning projects would minimize the effects of the existing road system to waterbody condition. Effects of the existing road system are discussed in the erosion and sedimentation section of this report.

The Action Alternatives would not affect hydrology outstandingly remarkable values (ORVs) for the Whychus Wild and Scenic River, which include complex channel geomorphology and water-carved features, wetlands, and high-elevation moraine dam lakes. No treatments except hazard tree felling would occur within the Wild and Scenic Corridor, and BMPs and PDC would ensure that there would be no effect to ORVs. The Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage follows all consistent uses from the hydrology ORV and does not involve any conflicting uses outlined within the Whychus Creek Wild and Scenic River Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 2010).

44

Cumulative Effects

The cumulative effects to waterbody condition from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage would not incrementally add to cumulative effects because no effects measurable effecs to sedimentation, water yield, riparian vegetation, or in-stream wood in Riparian Reserves or hydrologically connected areas are predicted. Salvage activities would not affect waterbody condition. The Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage would treat 1% of the hydrologic analysis area, and none of these treatments would occur within Riparian Reserves or other potentially hydrologically connected areas, including ephemeral draws. There would be no cumulative effects to water yield and peak flows because no live trees would be harvested, and detrimental soil conditions from ground-based harvesting methods would be minimized through BMPs and PDC. There would be no cumulative effects to instream woody debris because no trees would be removed from Riparian Reserves. The erosion and sedimentation cumulative effects section of this report discusses past, present, and ongoing projects within the Hydrologic Analysis Area

The Pole Creek Fire and stand replacement conditions from MPB would continue to have the greatest potential effect on waterbody condition. Potential effects of the Pole Creek Fire on waterbody condition are analyzed in the Fisheries and Hydrology Reports for the 2013 Whychus Watershed Analysis Update (Dachtler 2013; Day 2013). Approximately 44% of the Hydrologic Analysis Area is currently within stand replacement condition from these disturbances. These effects are highest in the Headwaters Whychus Creek SWS. The Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage would not contribute to increases in open stand conditions and would not affect peak flow or water yield.

There would be no cumulative effects to hydrology ORVs from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage because no treatments would occur within the Wild and Scenic Corridor. Danger trees may be removed in the Wild and Scenic Corridor and used for stream restoration projects in Whychus Creek (downstream of the Hydrologic Analysis Area) as part of the ongoing Pole Creek Fire Danger Tree Abatement Project. Trees that could potentially be removed for stream restoration would be outside of Riparian Reserves and over 300 ft from Whychus Creek, and would not affect large wood recruitment. Proposed activities in these areas comply with the Standards and Guidelines in the Whychus Wild and Scenic Management Plan (USDA Forest Service 2010).

Potential increases in water yield and peak flows as a result of the Pole Creek Fire may contribute to bank instability. A stream survey in Street Creek following the Eyerly Fire (in the nearby Metolius watershed) found that unstable stream banks increased from 11.9% to 22.4% (Dachtler 2004). Sedimentation could also potentially increase in streams within the Hydrologic Analysis area from increases in bank instability, peak flows, and increases in overland flow and erosion from the Pole Creek Fire. However, the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage would not affect these parameters because there would be no erosion or sedimentation to streams and water yield and peak flows are not expected to increase from the project. There would be no salvage in Riparian Reserves, or hydrologically connected ephemeral draws, and haul would be seasonally restricted on roads within Riparian Reserves.

Large woody debris loading within streams and Riparian Reserves is expected to increase in the next 1-10 years as dead trees begin to fall. Down wood adjacent to streams would contribute to in-stream and floodplain large woody debris recruitment, store sediment, and increase channel complexity. A 2010 study found that in unimpacted wilderness areas, riparian areas burned at different severities

45

(mosaic) may drive a “fire pulse” that increases aquatic and riparian area productivity (Malison and Baxter). Increases in large woody debris loading could also increase channel instability in some locations. Over the long-term, large wood recruitment to streams would be reduced as new trees are established. The Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage would not affect large woody debris recruitment because no trees would be removed from Riparian Reserves.

Ongoing and future restoration within the Hydrologic Analysis Area, including road closures and decommissioning, culvert replacement, and road and upland treatments through the BAER process would continue to improve waterbody conditions. Stream channel and riparian restoration downstream of the Hydrologic Analysis Area will improve the resilience of Whychus Creek to the effects of the Pole Creek Fire.

Conclusion—Summary of Effects to Waterbody Condition

There are no direct, indirect or cumulative effects to waterbody condition expected from the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage because there are no effects to the measures used to predict potential effects to waterbody condition. There would be no alteration of stream or lake bank or bed stability through changes in sedimentation or water yield, no acres harvested along stream or lake banks or within potential large wood recruitment areas. In addition, the hydrology outstandingly remarkable values for the Whychus Wild and Scenic River would not be affected by the Pole Creek Fire Timber Salvage (Table 24).

References

Ager, A. A. and C. Clifton. 2005. Software for calculating vegetation disturbance and recovery by using the equivalent clearcut area model. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-637. Portland, OR: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 10p.

Belt, G. H., J. O’Laughlin, and T. Merrill. 1992. Design of forest riparian buffer strips for the protection of water quality: Analysis of scientific literature. Idaho Forest, Wildlife and Range Policy Analysis Group, Report No. 8. Beschta, R. L., C. A. Frissell, R. Gresswell, R. Hauer, J. R. Karr, G. W. Minshall, D. A. Perry, J. J. Rhodes. Wildfire and salvage logging: Recommendations for ecologically sound post-fire salvage management and other post-fire treatments on federal lands in the West. http://www.saveamericasforests.org/congress/Fire/Beschta-report.htm Beschta, R. L., J. J. Rhodes, B. Kauffman, R. E. Gresswell, G. W. Minshall, J. R. Karr, D. A. Perry, F. R. Hauer, and C. A. Frissell. 2004. Postfire management on forested public lands of the western United States. Conservation Biology, 18(4): 957-967. Craigg, T. 2006 Lower jack unit 85 soil monitoring update. U.S. Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Sisters, OR. Craigg, T. 2009. Water utilization and site productivity of east side forests. Unpublished report. Oregon State University term paper.

46

Craig, T. 2013. Soils report, Whychus watershed analysis 2013 update. U.S. Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Sisters, OR. Dachtler, N. 2001. Pole creek temperature survey. U.S. Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Sisters, OR. Dachtler, N. 2004. Street Creek 2004 post eyerly fire pebble count monitoring update. Draft Report. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District, Sisters, Oregon.

Dachtler, N. 2013. Fisheries report, Whychus watershed analysis 2013 update. U.S. Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Sisters, OR. Daniels, R. B. and J. W. Gilliam. 1996. Sediment and chemical load reduction by grass and riparian filters. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 60:246-251. Day, K. 2013. Hydrology report, Whychus watershed analysis 2013 update. U. S. Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Sisters, OR. DeBano, L.F., D. G. Neary, and P. F. Folliatt. 1998. Fire’s effects on ecosystems. John Wiley and Sons: USA. Dunne T, and L. B. Leopold. 1978. Water in environmental planning. W. H. Freeman, 818pp. Elliot, W. J., and D.E. Hall. 2010. Disturbed WEPP model 2.0. ver. 2011.11.22. Moscow, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: <http://forest.moscowfsl.wsu.edu/fswepp>. Flynn, K.M., Kirby, W.H., and Hummel, P.R. 2006. User’s manual for program PeakFQ annual flood-frequency analysis using bulletin 17B guidelines: U.S. Geological Survey, techniques and methods book 4, chapter B4; 42 pgs. Fontaine, J. B., D. C. Donato, J. L. Campbell, J. G. Martin, and B. E. Law. 2010. Effects of post-fire logging on forest surface air temperatures in the Siskiyou Mountains, Oregon, USA. Forestry, 83(5): 477-482.

Gucinski, H., M. J. Furniss, R. R. Ziemer, and M. H. Brookes. 2001. Forest roads: a synthesis of scientific information. Gen Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-509. Portland, OR: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 103p. Helvey, J. D. 1974. Watershed behavior after forest fire in Washington. In Proceedings of the Irrigation and Drainage Division, American Society of Civil Engineering. Fort Collins, Colorado: 403-422. Helvey, J. D. 1980. Effects of a north-central Washington wildfire on runoff and sediment production. Water Resources Bulletin, 16: 627-634. Helvey, J. D., W. B. Fowler. 1979. Grass seeding and soil erosion in a steep, logged area in northeastern Oregon. United States Department of Agriculuture, Forest Service Reserve Note. PNW-343. Hill, C., M. Logan, and L. Jones. 2008. Whychus Creek temperature summary: 2005-2008. Upper Deschutes Watershed Council Technical Report. Bend, OR.

47

Jensen, C. 2012. Re-vegetation monitoring report, Three Sisters Irrigation District channel restoration project, year 2 establishment summary. U.S. Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Sisters, OR.

Karr, J. R., J. J. Rhodes, G. W. Minshall, F. R. Hauer, R. L. Beschta, C. A. Frissell, and D. A. Perry. 2004. The effects of postfire salvage logging on aquatic ecosystems in the American West. BioScience, 54(11): 1029-1033.

Knighton, D. 1998. Fluvial forms and processes. Oxford University Press, New York. 383p.

Kunze, M. D., and J. D. Stednick. 2006. Streamflow and suspended sediment yield following the 2000 Bobcat fire, Colorado. Hydrological Processes, 20: 1661-1681. Leopold, L. B., M. G. Wolman, and J. P. Miller. 1964. Fluvial processes in geomorphology. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company. 531p. Litton, S. 2006. Physical characteristics of forest soils after timber harvest and tillage in Central Oregon: A case study. Masters of Forestry Thesis Report, Department of Forest Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis Oregon 64p. MacDonald, L. H. 2000. Evaluating and managing cumulative effects: Process and constraint. Environmental Management, 26(3): 299-315. Malison, R.L., and C.V. Baxter. 2010. The fire pulse: wildfire stimulates flux of aquatic prey to terrestrial habitats driving increases in riparian consumers. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 67: 570-579. McCaughey, W. and P. Farnes. 2001. Snowpack comparison between an opening and a lodgepole stand. 69th Annual Meeting of the Western Snow Conference. Sun Valley, Idaho. McCown, C. 2005. Hydrology specialist report, B & B fire recovery project EIS. Deschutes National Forest, Sisters Ranger District. Sisters, Oregon. McIver, J. D. 2006. Soil disturbance and hill-slope sediment transport after logging of a severely burned site in northeastern Oregon. Western Journal of Applied Forestry 21(3): 123-133. McIver, J. D. and L. Starr. 2000. Environmental effects of post-fire logging: Literature review and annotated bibliography. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-486. Portland, OR: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 78p. Megahan, W. F., and J. L. Clayton. 1983. Tracing subsurface flow on roadcuts on steep, forested slopes, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 47: 1063– 1067. Montgomery, D. R., and Buffington, J. M. 1997. Channel reach morphology in mountain drainage basins. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 190(5): 596-611. Montgomery, D. R., and L. H. MacDonald. 2002. Diagnostic approach to stream channel assessment and monitoring. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 38(1): 1-15.

Moody, J.A. and D. A. Martin, 2009. Synthesis of sediment yields after wildland fire in different rainfall regimes in the western United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire 18: 96-115.

48

Mork, L. 2011. Whychus Creek water quality status, temperature trends, and stream flow restoration targets. Upper Deschutes Watershed Council, Bend, OR. Neary, D. G., Ryan, K. C., DeBano, L. F., eds. 2005. (revised 2008). Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on soils and water. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol.4. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 250 p. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ), 2003. Designated beneficial use for the Deschutes Basin. http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/rules/div041/dbutables/table130a.pdf. ODEQ. 2010. Water Quality Assessment - Oregon's 2010 Integrated Report Assessment Database and 303(d) List: http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/assessment/rpt2010/search.asp ODEQ. 2012. Water Quality TMDL Program, Upper Deschutes Basin: http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/tmdls/deschutesupper.htm.

ODEQ. 2013. Oregon administrative rules, water pollution, division 41, water quality standards: Beneficial uses, policies, and criteria for Oregon: http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/pages/rules/oars_300/oar_340/340_041.html

Peterson, D. L., J. K. Agee, G. H. Aplet, D. P. Dykstra, R. T. Graham, J. F. Lehmkuhl, D. S. Pilliod, D. F. Potts, R. F. Powers, and J. D. Stuart. 2009. Effects of timber harvest following wildfire in western North America. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-776. Portland, OR: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 51p.

Potyondy, J.P. and T.W. Geier. 2010. Forest Service watershed condition classification technical guide. Watershed, Fish, Wildlife, Air, and Rare Plants, Washington D.C.

Press, C. 2009. Whychus watershed analysis update hydrology report. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District. Sisters, Oregon.

Press, C. 2012(a). Hydrology resource specialist report, popper vegetation management project EIS. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District. Sisters, Oregon.

Press, C. 2012(b). Pole Creek fire danger tree abatement categorical exclusion hydrologic report. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District. Sisters, Oregon.

Reeves, G. H., P. A. Bisson, B. E. Rieman, and L. E. Benda. 2006. Postfire logging in riparian areas. Conservation Biology, 20(4): 994-1004.

Reeves, G. H., J. E. Williams, K. M. Burnett, and K. Gallo. 2006. The aquatic conservation strategy of the Northwest Forest Plan. Conservation Biology, 20(2): 319-329.

Reid, L. M., and T. Dunne. 1984. Sediment production from forest road surfaces. Water Resources Research, 20(11): 1753-1761.

Reinwald, T. 2012. Pole Creek Fire BAER soil resources report. U. S. Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Sisters, OR.

http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/rules/div041/dbutables/table130a.pdf

http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/assessment/rpt2010/search.asp

http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/tmdls/deschutesupper.htm

49

Robichaud P. R., and R. E. Brown. 1999. What happened after the smoke cleared: Onsite erosion rates after wildfire in eastern Oregon. In: Proceedings of the annual summer specialty conference. Track 2: Wildland hydrology. American Water Resources Association, Henderson, VA, pp, 419-426. Robichaud P. R., and R. D. Hungerford. 2000. Water repellency by laboratory burning of four northern Rocky Mountain forest soils. Journal of Hydrology, 231-232: 207-219. Robichaud P. R., R. B. Foltz, C. G. Showers, J. S. Groenier, R. Sternke, L. E. Ashmun, R. E. Brown, and P. Jordan. 2012. Evaluating the effectiveness of wood shreds on post-fire erosion. Joint fire science final report 07-1-1-01. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Rose, C. L., B. G. Marcot, T. K. Mellen, J. L. Ohmann, K. L. Waddell, D. L. Lindley, and B. Schreiber. 2001. Decaying wood in Pacific Northwest forests: concepts and tools for habitat management. Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, 580-623. Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied river morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO. 380p. Skidmore, P., Hansen, K., and W Quimby. 1994. Snow accumulation and ablation under fire-altered lodgepole pine forest canopies. Annual Meeting of the Western Snow Conference. Stednick J. D. 1996. Monitoring the effects of timber harvest on annual water yield. Journal of Hydrology, 176(1-4): 79-95. Suna, H. 2004. Eyerly BAER monitoring report – Seeding for erosion control: Year 3 monitoring for seeding persistence and effectiveness. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District. Sisters, OR. Swanson, M. E., Sedell, J. R., and A. G. Campbell. 1982. Landwater interactions: The riparian zone. Pages 267-291. In R. L. Edmonds, ed. Analysis of coniferous forest ecosystems in the western United States. US/ISB Synthesis Series, Hutchison Ross: Stroudsburg, PA. Swanson, M. E., J. F. Franklin, R. L. Beschta, C. M. Crisafulli, D. A. DellaSala, R. L. Hutto, D. B. Lindenmayer, and F. J. Swanson. 2010. The forgotten stage of forest succession: early-successional ecosystems on forest sites. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment doi: 10.1890/090157 Tanner, R., and J. Gritzner. 2012. Pole Creek Fire BAER hydrology report. U.S. Forest Service, Deschutes National Forest, Sisters, OR. Upper Deschutes Watershed Council (UDWC) and USDA Forest Service. 2013. Whychus Canyon Restoration Plan Design Report (DRAFT). Bend, OR. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1990. Deschutes National Forest land and resource management plan. Deschutes National Forest, Supervisor’s Office. Bend, Oregon. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 1993. Determining the risk of cumulative watershed effects resulting from multiple activities: Endangered species act. 36pp. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service; U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (USDA and USDI). 1994. Record of decision for amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management planning documents in the range of northern spotted owl and standards and guidelines for management of habitat for late-successional and oldgrowth forest related species in the range of the northern spotted owl. Place of publication unknown. 74p.

50

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1995. Decision notice and finding of no significant impact for the Inland native fish strategy—interim strategies for managing fish-producing watersheds in eastern Oregon and Washington, Idaho, western Montana, and portions of Nevada. Intermountain, Northern, and Pacific Northwest Regions. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1998a. General water quality best management practices. Unpublished USFS Report. Pacific Northwest Regional Office. Portland, Oregon. 104p. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1998b. Whychus watershed analysis. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District. Sisters, Oregon U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, 2002. Memorandum of understanding between the USDA Forest Service and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality to meet state and federal water quality rules and regulations. NFS 02-MOU11060000-141. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2004. Draft Upper Deschutes and Little Deschutes subbasins water quality restoration plan. Deschutes National Forest. Bend, OR. U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 2007. Whychus Creek wild and scenic river resource assessment. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District. Sisters, OR. U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 2010. Whychus Creek wild and scenic river management plan. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District. Sisters, OR. U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 2011. Deschutes national forest 2011BMP summary report. Deschutes National Forest. Bend, OR. U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 2012(a). BMP monitoring of ground-based harvest in glaze unit 5. Deschutes National Forest. Bend, OR. U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 2012(b). National best management practices for water quality management on national forest system lands, volume 1: National core BMP technical guide. 164p. U. S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 2013. Water quality protection on national forests in the pacific southwest region: Best management practices evaluation program, 2008-2010. 42p. Walker, D. 2009. Sky roads analysis report. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District, Sisters, Oregon. Walker, D. 2012. Popper vegetation management project roads analysis report. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District, Sisters, Oregon. Walker, D. 2013. Pole Creek fire timber salvage roads analysis report. Deschutes National Forest. Sisters Ranger District, Sisters, Oregon. Walling, D. E. 1988. Erosion and sediment yield research—some recent perspectives. Journal of Hydrology 100(1-3): 113-141.

51

Wenger, S. 1999. A review of the scientific literature on riparian buffer width, extent, and vegetation. Office of Public Service and Outreach, Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia. Athens, GA. 59p. Wemple, B. C., J. A. Jones, and G. E. Grant. 1996. Channel network extension by logging roads in two basins, western Cascades, Oregon. Water Resources Bulletin 32(6): 1195-1207. Wondzell, S.M., and J. G. King. 2003. Post-fire erosional processes: Comparing the Pacific Northwest region to the interior northwest and northern Rocky Mountain Region. Forest Ecology and Management 178: 75-87.