Roads Analysis Report

Transcription

1 United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Jan Roads Analysis Report Deep Project Area Deep Creek Watershed Paulina Ranger District Ochoco National Forest Crook County, Oregon 1

2 Introduction Background On January 12, 2001, the Forest Service issued a new National Forest System Road Policy. This policy revises regulations concerning the management, use, and maintenance of the National Forest Transportation System. Consistent with changes in public demands and use of National Forest System resources and the need to better manage funds available for road construction, reconstruction, maintenance, and decommissioning, the final rule removes emphasis on transportation development and adds a requirement for science-based transportation analysis. The final rule is intended to help ensure that additions to the National Forest System road network are those deemed essential for resource management and use; that construction, reconstruction, and maintenance of roads minimize adverse environmental impacts; and that unneeded roads are decommissioned and restoration of ecological processes are initiated. In August 1999, the Washington Office of the USDA Forest Service published Miscellaneous Report FS-643 titled Roads Analysis: Informing Decisions about Managing the National Forest Transportation System. The objective of roads analysis is to provide decision makers with critical information to develop road systems that are safe and responsive to public needs and desires, are affordable and efficiently managed, have minimal negative ecological effects on the land, and are in balance with available funding for needed management actions. According to the Forest Service Road Management Policy, all NEPA decisions signed after January 12, 2002, that involve any of the items listed below, must be informed by a Roads Analysis. 1. Changes in access such as current use, traffic patterns, or road standards (FSM c). This includes closing currently open roads, opening currently closed roads, adding/changing seasonal restriction periods, changing maintenance levels, etc. 2. When adding new roads to the transportation system (FSM b). This includes both new construction and newly acquired roads. 3. Road construction, reconstruction, or decommissioning (FSM b, FSM c). In this context, the term reconstruction refers to either an improvement, where an activity results in an increase to the roads traffic service level, expands its capacity, or changes its original design function; or a realignment, which results in a new location of a portion of an existing road. As a result, most reconstruction work typically done under timber sale and public works contracts is more properly considered to be deferred maintenance work. The Paulina District Ranger has determined that a project-level roads analysis is needed for the Deep project area because it includes road management activities that fall within all three categories listed above. 2

3 Process The product of a roads analysis is a report for decision-makers and the public that documents the information and analyses used to identify opportunities and set priorities. Roads analysis is a sixstep process with the steps designed to be sequential but may require iteration among the steps over time throughout the analysis. The amount of time and effort spent on each step differs by project based on specific situations and available information. The process provides a set of possible issues and analysis questions for which the answers can help managers make informed choices about road system management. The following six steps guide the process: Step 1. Setting up the analysis Roads Analysis Plan Step 2. Describing the situation Existing Conditions Step 3. Identifying the issues Issues Step 4. Assessing benefits, problems, and risks Analysis Step 5. Describing opportunities and setting priorities Opportunities and Recommendations Step 6. Reporting Transportation Analysis Document This Report This report has been prepared according to the six-step process published in the report Roads Analysis: Informing Decisions About Managing the National Forest Transportation System (USDA Forest Service, 1999, Misc. Report FS-643). This report documents the information and analysis procedure used for the Deep Roads Analysis. It corresponds to Deep (EIS) and Deep Restoration project boundary. It was completed concurrently with the Deep EIS. It includes rating tables showing relative values of each road in the planning area for resource management and access needs, and compares the associated risks of each road on various environmental values. The report includes recommendations for future road management actions and lists opportunities for future actions that may impact the road system within the planning area. This report is a living document and reflects the conditions of the analysis area at the time of writing. The document can be updated as the need arises and conditions warrant. Step 1 Setting up the analysis Scope and Scale of Analysis Analyze the Deep Planning Area at the watershed level within the Ochoco National Forest, Prineville, Oregon, National Forest System, Region 6. Concentrate on maintenance level 1 and 2 roads, with specific maintenance analysis on maintenance level 3, 4, and 5 roads. 3

4 Objectives of the Analysis The main objectives of this analysis are to: Provide a safe and efficient transportation system that meets the needs of forest users; Facilitate implementation of the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan; Allow for economical and efficient management within likely budget levels; Meet current and future resource management objectives; Address associated ecological impacts across the planning area. Provide management recommendations for present and future motorized access within the Deep Planning Area. Identify the need for changes within the transportation system within the Deep planning area by comparing the current road system to the desired condition; Balance the need for access with the need of other resources by examining important ecological, social, and economic issues related to roads; Describe transportation management opportunities and strategies that will better address future access needs, budgets, and environmental concerns. Interdisciplinary Team Members and Participants The Interdisciplinary Team for this roads analysis consists of: Rodd Kubitza District Road Manager Carl Magill Range/Logging Systems Lori Blackburn Silviculturist Deb Mafera Botanist Carrie Gordon Geology Richard Vacirca Fisheries Biologist Rob Tanner Hydrology Kathleen Martin Cultural Resources David Palmer Range Specialist Tyler Groo Recreation Kevin Donham Fuels Specialist David Frantz Writer Editor Jim David Soils Specialist Information Needs The information needed to complete this analysis is currently available and includes numerous GIS layers, information contained in the Deep Creek Watershed Analysis, information gathered during the preparation of the 2002 Deep Environmental Assessment, and an inventory of both classified and unclassified roads in the project area. Members of the Interdisciplinary team are familiar with the project area because they have all participated in other planning efforts in the same area. The Deep Creek Watershed Analysis (1999) identified data gaps for this project area. This missing information is not critical to making recommendations for management of the transportation system in this area. Gathering additional information would add precision to the recommendations identified in Step 5. However, as road management projects are proposed and analyzed, additional sitespecific information will be gathered where it is needed to make reasoned choices before proceeding. Since the roads analysis process was designed to be an iterative process, adjustments in recommendations will be made as new or more complete information becomes available. 4

5 Analysis Plan This roads analysis was completed by following the steps in the Roads Analysis Guide. The interdisciplinary team has: 1. reviewed the example questions contained in the guide and determined which questions are pertinent to this project area, 2. developed resource related issues that have been answered during the analysis, 3. developed ranking criteria to assess the social and ecological benefits and risks associated with existing roads, 4. assessed individual road segments to identify what roads are needed and where existing roads are causing unacceptable levels of resource damage, 5. developed a recommendation list for how existing roads should be managed, and 6. completed this report to document the analysis Step 2 Describing the situation Analysis Area The Deep Creek Watershed drains approximately 55,370 acres of the south slope of the Ochoco Mountains (Map 1). The watershed is located within the larger Deschutes River Basin and the Upper Crooked River sub-basin. Wetlands and meadow systems are scattered throughout the watershed along with cold water seeps and springs. The lower third of the watershed drainages occur at the bottom of steeper canyons. Stream classes I, II, III and IV make up a total habitat area of approximately 6,330 acres. Streams that occur in the Deep Creek watershed include: Deep Creek, Little Summit Creek, Crazy Creek, Happy Camp Creek, Jackson Creek, Double Corral Creek, Derr Creek, East Fork Crazy Creek, West Fork Crazy Creek, Toggle Creek, all 303(d) listed streams within the Deep Planning Area. Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act mandates outcomes or Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for these listed water bodies (Boyd and Sturdevant 1997). Other named and unnamed tributaries are also present within the watershed. In 1988 Congress designated the North Fork Crooked River as wild and scenic (USDA Forest Service 1993). Deep Creek empties into the North Fork Crooked River at river mile 27. Elevation within the planning area ranges from approximately 4,500 feet to approximately 6,315 feet. Lands within the Deep Creek Watershed Analysis Area are distributed to the following ownerships: 54,522 acres (98%) National Forest land, 846 acres (2%) private land inholdings. Subwatersheds of the Deep Creek Watershed Analysis Area are Happy Camp Creek (5,787 acres), Jackson Creek (18,415 acres), Lower Deep (14,559 acres), and Little Summit Prairie Creek (16,607 acres). There are no known Threatened or Endangered plant species within the watershed. Several plants listed on the R6 Regional Forester s Sensitive Species List occur within the watershed. Those of primary concern occur within riparian habitats, including Peck s Mariposa Lily (Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii), and moonworts (Botrychium species). 5

6 Noxious weeds are a growing concern within the Deep Creek watershed. Roads are a primary source for the establishment and spread of noxious weeds. The Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, as amended by the Regional Forester's Forest Plans Amendment #2, June 1995 and the Inland Native Fish Strategy, August 30, 1995 (INFISH) provide guidance for the management of lands within the Deep Creek Watershed. The Ochoco National Forest divides the Forest into Management Areas, each with an accompanying Management Emphasis. Management Areas occurring within the Deep Creek Watershed Analysis Area are: Ochoco National Forest Management Areas Management Area MA-F6 Old Growth 1,267 (2%) MA-F7 Summit Trail Visual Retention Corridor 1,634 (3%) MA-F13 Developed Recreation 63 (<1%) MA-F14 Dispersed Recreation ~30 (<1%) MA-F19 Deep Creek Recreation Area 873 (2%) MA-F22 General Forest 48,666 (88%) MA-F24 N.F. Crooked River Scenic Corridor 46 (<1%) MA-F26 Visual Management Corridor 1,987 (4%) SNOTEL USGS Snow Course Monitoring Point 10 (<1%) Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas (RHCA) 6,332 (11%) Acres (% of Analysis Area) Existing Road and Access System Description FDR s (forest development roads) provide access to National Forest lands and are classified as arterial, collector, and local roads. Arterial roads serve large land areas, primarily provide the main access into the Ochoco National Forest, and usually connect to public highways, other collector, and collect traffic from forest local roads. Local roads connect terminal facilities with forest collector, arterial, or public highways, and provide minor linkage with other roads. Nearly all of the existing forest development road system has evolved from the demand for access to other resources. Maintenance and reconstruction requirements of the existing system depend mainly on the volume of timber hauled and to a much lesser extent of recreational use. Amount of future construction is anticipated to continue to be dependent primarily on the need to access timber resources. Minor new construction for other resource purposes (such as access to a new trailhead or campground) may occur. Reconstruction of existing roads may be done to correct safety deficiencies or to address adverse resource impacts from the road. Road use in the watershed is comprised of administrative, commercial, recreational, and tribal use. Forest roads are managed by a system of maintenance levels. The project area currently contains miles of road. This analysis uses the road definitions contained in 36 CFR Those in an inactivated maintenance level 1 are managed in storage or closed category, primarily for resource protection and safety reasons. Maintenance level 2 roads are kept open for high clearance vehicles (pickups, all purpose vehicles). Level 3,4 and 5 are maintained to be suitable for use by low clearance vehicles (passenger cars); those in level 4 and 5 provide a more comfortable ride. 6

7 The stated goal in the Forest Plan for the transportation systems is to support resource activities and to serve multiple resource needs rather than individual planning proposals. Traffic is managed, as needed, to control access due to structural limitations of the road, safety, or to meet resource objectives. Traffic safety will exist for all roads on the transportation system. Safety of traffic using forest development roads (system roads) is ensured through restrictions. The full range of traffic management strategies currently in use include prohibiting traffic to unrestricted use by all vehicle types. Signs are used to inform the public of the reason for restrictions. Under current management, all system roads would be maintained to at least the basic custodial care required to maintain drainage, protect road investment, and minimize damage to adjacent land and resources. Roads and trails will be at the lowest density, which meets long-term resource needs. The goal of off-highway vehicle (OHV) management is to ensure resource protection, public safety of all users, minimum conflicts between users, and diverse opportunities. Encourage off-highway vehicle (OHV) use on roads where other vehicle use has been eliminated, as appropriate with other resources. Users are encouraged to use designated routes to protect Forest resources such as soil and water quality. Maintenance levels define the level of service provided by, and maintenance required for, a specific road. Maintenance levels must be consistent with road management objectives and maintenance criteria. Maintenance Level 1: Assigned to intermittent service roads during the time they are closed to vehicular traffic. The closure period must exceed 1 year. Maintenance Level 2: Assigned to roads open for use by high clearance vehicles. Passenger car traffic is not a consideration. Maintenance Level 3: Assigned to roads open and maintained for travel by a prudent driver in a standard passenger car. User comfort and convenience are not considered priorities. Maintenance Level 4: Assigned to roads that provide a moderate degree of user comfort/convenience at moderate travel speeds. Most roads are double lane and either treated for dust control or paved. Maintenance Level 5: Assigned to roads that provide a high degree of user comfort and convenience. These roads are normally double lane, paved facilities. Roads may be currently maintained at one level (operational maintenance level) and have planned maintenance at a different level (objective maintenance level) at some future date. The operational maintenance level is the maintenance level to which the road is currently being maintained. The objective maintenance level is the desired level of maintenance with consideration for future needs, budget constraints, and environmental concerns. Roads within the Planning Area are currently open seasonally for both motorized and non-motorized use. Present uses include, but are not limited to, sightseeing, biking, cross country skiing, hunting, OHV use (ATVs, motorcycles, 4WD, snowmobiles), special use access, and Forest Service administrative use. Because roads are not maintained during the winter, winter use is primarily limited to snowmobiling and skiing 7

8 The current road status within the Deep Planning Area is displayed in Table 1. Table 1: Deep Creek Watershed Current Road Status Current Road Status Miles Total Miles Forest Wide Roads Analysis Maintenance Level Current System Roads Open Maintenance Level Total Miles Open Current System Roads Closed Maintenance Level Total System Miles Maintenance Level Primary access into and within the Planning Area is from Forest Roads which includes 45.4 miles of Arterial [12, 30 and 42) and Collector roads (1250, 2630, 4250,4254, 4256, 4258, 4270, 4272, 4274 and 4276]. These roads, and other connecting roads, have provided access to/for private land, minerals, vegetation treatments, grazing, and various recreation activities. Arterial and Collector roads are usually double to single lane. They are crushed aggregate to bituminous treated surface. All have an operational maintenance level 2 5. The use and traffic volumes are limited up to traffic with any legal size load or vehicle. All of the arterial and collector road system has already been established for the area. These roads accept or encourage passenger vehicles. FDR 2630 road is in MA-F7 Summit Historic Trail; emphasis is to protect the integrity of the Summit Trail. The majority of the Summit Trail is along developed roads. Direction is to vigorously promote the use of this resource for recreation including: mountain biking, driving for pleasure, horseback riding, crosscountry skiing and backpacking. Open maintenance level 2 roads in the planning area contains 89.2 miles native material surface and 73.5 miles improved native material (pit run, select borrow, grid rolled, crushed aggregate). These roads are single lane (14 ft wide), with a operational maintenance level of 2. They are kept open for high clearance vehicles (pickups, all purpose vehicles). Level 2 roads are long-term constant service. They are a single purpose type of road, providing high clearance vehicle access to the area for commercial hauls and dispersed recreation. Management strategy on these roads vary from accept (pick-ups), passenger cars discouraged, to discourage some or all traffic types. Design vehicle generally is a log truck. Closed or inactivated maintenance level 1 roads within the planning area include 84.4 miles native material surface and 10.7 miles improved native material (pit run, select borrow, grid rolled, crushed aggregate). They are kept in a storage or closed condition and reopened when need. Level 1 road are long-term intermittent service. They are a single purpose type of road, providing high clearance vehicle access when open. When closed they remain open to motorized off highway vehicles such as: motorcycles, snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, and four-wheel drive vehicles, and for other travel activities. Management strategy on these roads vary from eliminate vehicular traffic, to Prohibit (elimination of certain traffic, require CFR order). Decommission roads have no long-term needs, not planned to be used again and have been removed from the road system status. The planning area has 46.6 miles of existing decommission roads. They are being tracked to assure there is no long-term needs, and that no work remains for protection of other resources. Future monitoring will show if these roads should be removed from the tracking process. 8

9 Non-system or Unclassified are roads that were not constructed, maintained, or intended for longterm highway vehicle use. They are roads built for temporary access and other remnants of shortterm use roads associated with fire suppression; timber harvest; as well as travel-ways resulting from off-road vehicle use. This is inventoried miles within the project area. It is difficult to enforce and completely discourage off trail and off road travel. There are no (RARE II) roadless areas within the Deep Creek Watershed. The ability to accomplish road maintenance on the Forest road network has declined over the last decade. Road managers are unable to perform preventative maintenance on the road network and to fix eroding culverts and road drainage problems in a timely manner. Most of the road maintenance is focused on the primary system which receives maintenance regularly. A large proportion of the roads in Deep watershed have not been maintained for years. Many of the ML 2 roads, which represent 57% of the roads in the watershed, haven t been maintained for years. Timber sale purchasers also accomplished substantial amounts of road work on the existing network. Road reconstruction and maintenance was regularly incorporated into each timber sale contract. Now, with substantially reduced harvest levels, opportunities for accomplishing this have been diminished. (Appendix 2 and Map 2 show Existing System Roads) Road Definitions (36 CFR 212.1) As mentioned above, the Federal Register published the Final Rule and Administrative Policy January 12, 2001; this established new definitions for road management on the National Forests. Listed below are the new definitions for roads. Classified Road Roads wholly or partially within or adjacent to National Forest System lands that are determined to be needed for long-term motor vehicle access, including State roads, county roads, privately owned roads, National Forest System roads, and other roads authorized by the Forest Service. Temporary Roads Roads authorized by contract, permit, lease, other written authorization, or emergency operation, not intended to be a part of the forest transportation system and not necessary for long-term resource management. Unclassified Roads Roads on National Forest System lands that are not managed as part of the forest transportation system, such as unplanned roads, abandoned travelways, and off-road vehicle tracks that have not been designated and managed as a trail; and those roads that were once under permit or other authorization and were not decommissioned upon the termination of the authorization. Road Decommissioning Activities that result in the stabilization and restoration of unneeded roads to a more natural state. Road Reconstruction Activities that result in improvement or realignment of an existing classified road as defined below: a. Road Improvement Activity that results in an increase of an existing road s traffic service level, expansion of its capacity, or a change in its original design function. b. Road Realignment Activity that results in a new location of an existing road or portions of an existing road and treatment of the old roadway. 9

10 Management Areas Existing and Desired OLD GROWTH MA-F6, OG-D2-02, OG-02-06, OG & OG-D2-12: Emphasis provide habitat for wildlife species dependent on old growth stands. Avoid construction of new roads, except where analysis results in no other reasonable alternatives. Hazard tree felling is permitted for public safety. Except for constant service through routes and short, exiting, local access, use will be restricted to approved projects designed to meet management area desired conditions. No off road motorized use is allowed. MA-F6 OG-D2-02 has 0.85 miles of existing open roads, (4250 & 4254.) MA-F6 OG-D2-06 has 1.45 miles of existing open roads, ( & ). MA-F6 OG-D2-11 has.0.01miles of existing open road 12., MA-F6 OG-D2-12 has 0.10 miles of existing open roads, ( , ) SUMMIT HISTORIC TRAIL MA-F7: Emphasis is to protect the existing integrity of the Summit Trail. Enhance and interpret significant segments for public enjoyment and education. Promote driving for pleasure and mountain biking. No motorized use of trails except on designated routes. Construction and reconstruction are allowed to access forest resources, according to management area emphasis. Hazard tree felling is permitted for public safety. Blaze trees will be cut above the blazes. Generally, access routes will be open, motorized use restricted to designated routes except snowmobiles over snow. Pristine segments will be managed to protect, interpret, and preserve their historic qualities. The majority of the trail route is along developed roads and will provide pleasurable travel by highway vehicle. Road closures in visual management areas should be designed and constructed to blend with the natural characteristic of the landscape. Uniform travel management direction will be developed for road design standards, road maintenance plans, traffic control devices (to include signing), closure orders, and trail design standards. Existing condition for Arterial and Collector road miles in Summit Trail visual retention and partial retention corridors are roads 12 and 2630 are the main system miles within the Summit Trail corridor, road 4250 is intersection with road 12. Trail is FDR 2630, running 600 feet on either side. No change to these miles. DISPERSED RECRTION MA-F14: Provide safe, esthetic facilities for people to utilize while they are pursuing a variety of recreational experiences. Prohibits motorized use in developed sites and encourages use of OHV on designated trails in dispersed sites but discourages use off designated trails. Local road accesses to historical dispersed recreation sites are generally graveled to prevent investment loss and resource damage during wet periods of the year. Traffic management strategies for access to dispersed sites will be either "accept" or "encourage". There are no OHV designated trails, use is generally discouraged in the area. Motorized use in the developed sites is prohibited. 10

11 RIPARIAN The planning area has four subwatersheds: Happy Camp Creek, Jackson, Little Summit Prairie and Lower Deep. Emphasis is to manage riparian habitat to protect streamside habitat, eliminate and obliterate roads in riparian area, and restrict motorized traffic to existing roads. Roads will not be constructed through the length of a riparian area. Roads crossing a riparian area will not alter stream or groundwater flow characteristics. Road drainage will be designed and maintained to eliminate any influx of sediment road runoff directly into stream channels, to the extent possible. Ensure that appropriate traffic management is established to prevent the creation of sediment-generating conditions, such as deep wheel tracks in roads during wet weather. Stabilize and re-establish vegetation on obliterated roads. STRM CROSSINGS: Design and construct the transportation system to minimize the numbers of stream crossings. Ensure adequate sizing of culverts to accommodate anticipated high stream flows and to allow fish passage, design stream crossings to minimize stream damage. Schedule stream crossing construction during low stream flow and/or outside fish spawning periods. Maintain existing riparian communities both upstream and downstream from the crossing. INLAND NATIVE FISH STRATEGY: Minimizing road locations in Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas. Regulation of traffic during wet periods to minimize erosion and sediment delivery and accomplish other objectives. Avoid sediment delivery to streams for the road surface. Route road drainage away from potentially unstable stream channel, fills while avoiding disruption of natural hydrologic flow paths. Reconstruct road and drainage features that do not meet design criteria or operation standards, or that have been shown to be less effective than designed for controlling sediment delivery, or do not protect watershed from increased sedimentation. Closing and stabilizing or decommissioning, and stabilizing roads not needed for future management activities. Construct new, and improve existing, culverts, bridges, and other stream crossings to accommodate a 100-year flood, including associated bed load and debris, where those improvements would/do pose a substantial risk to riparian conditions. Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and potential fish-bearing streams. Prohibit storage of fuels and other toxicants within RHCA. Prohibit refueling within RHCA. Locate water drafting sites to avoid adverse effects to inland native fish and instream flows, and in a manner that does not retard or prevent attainment of Riparian Management Objectives TABLE EXISTING SYSTEM ROADS IN RCHA TOTAL TOTAL CLOSED OPEN OPEN OPEN OPEN LEV 1-5 OPEN RHCA CLASS LEV 1 LEV 2 LEV 3 LEV 4 LEV 5 MILES MILES CLASS CLASS CLASS CLASS Grand Total

12 Existing System Roads Includes Closed and Open, Level 1 to 5. The Deep Creek Watershed has total of miles of system roads Level 1 to 5 includes closed, within the watershed. There is 87.5 miles within 200 ft stream buffer, 52.9 miles within 400 ft stream buffer, and 35.8 miles within 600 ft stream buffer. Total of miles or %62 of roads within 600 ft of streams, and miles of road outside of 600 ft buffer. TABLE 3 EXISTING ROADS MILES IN STRM BUFFERS. TOTAL TOTAL STRM CLOSED OPEN OPEN OPEN OPEN LEV 1-5 OPEN SUB NAME BUFFER LEV 1 LEV 2 LEV 3 LEV 4 LEV 5 MILES LEV 2-5 Happy Camp Creek 200 FT FT FT HAPP CAMP Total JACKSON 200 FT FT FT JACKSON TOTAL LITTLE SUMMIT 200 FT FT FT LITTLE SUMMIT TOTAL LOWER DEEP 200 FT FT FT LOWER DEEP TOTAL Total MILES IN DEEP 200 FT AR BUFFERS 400 FT FT TOTAL MILES IN BUFFER TOTAL MILES OUTSIDE BUFFER NORTH FORK CROOKED RIVER SCENIC CORRIDOR MA-F24, maintain and enhance the natural appearing landscape and protect the scenic river designation. Existing condition is Arterial road 42 for 0.20 miles. VISUAL CORRIDOR MA-F26, Maintain natural appearing character along major travel routes with retention and partial retention. Promote or encourage driving for pleasure and mountain biking on major travel routes as safety allows. Motorized use is restricted to designated routes except snowmobiles over snow. Discourage OHV and other motor vehicle operations along the roadside except for snowmobile activity, which is accepted. 12

13 Road closures in visual management areas should be designed and constructed to blend with the natural characteristic of the landscape. Uniform travel management direction will be developed for road design standards, road maintenance plans, traffic control devices (to include signing), closure orders, and trail design standards. Include parking areas and view points in road plans and designs where appropriate. Locate material stock piles out of site of the main travel route. Avoid locating roads in the visual foreground other than at junctions. Design roads to fit the topography, minimizing cuts and fills. No new construction, reconstruction or temporary roads within MA-F26. Existing condition for Arterial and Collector road miles in visual partial retention corridor is as listed in the following chart. Roads 12 & 42 are the main system miles in Visual Corridors all other roads are intersections with these roads. VPR ARTERIAL COLLECTOR ARTERIAL Total COLLECTOR Total 0.95 VPR Total TES Plant Habitat Activities will avoid TES plant habitat, road construction, reconstruction, and helicopter landings would not occur in habitat. Roads passing through TES habitat would be given high priority for closure. Roads recommended for obliteration that are in sensitive plant areas will only be blocked and allow nature to take it course. No reconstruction off existing road prism on roads passing through sensitive plant areas. Noxious Weeds Road closures would be coordinated with the weed coordinator to ensure that if noxious weeds exist within the closed portion of the road, the sites are inventoried, weed management decisions are made, and provisions are made for access as needed to implement weed treatments. Road management objectives would consider allowing or encouraging desirable herbaceous vegetative growth on shoulders, cuts and fills. Road maintenance planning would address practices to prevent the spread of noxious weeds. Disturbed land would be re-vegetated as soon as possible after project activities cease. Regeneration or other resource needs in planning for species to be seeded, timing, rates, etc. would be considered. PROTECTION: Ceded lands & Cultural Resources: Roads will be managed for protection cultural resources and access for ceded lands. All road management activities will be coordinated with these resources. Should cultural sites be discovered during project activities, project activities will stop until cultural resource management objectives are met. Coordination between project leaders and cultural resource specialists will facilitate resource management treatment recommendations or changes that should occur. Fuels: Access for fire protection is limited within this area due to limited open road density. 13

14

15 GENERAL FOREST MA-F22 The least restrictive management area for travel access management activities. Following use for timber haul, local access routes with planned future use will generally be open to high clearance vehicles unless there are significant reasons to do otherwise. OHV users are encouraged to use designated routes to protect Forest resources such as soil and water quality. When more routes are developed for OHV opportunities providing quality experiences for a range of user types, OHV use forest wide will be restricted to those designated routes only. Manage open road density to average 3 miles/sq mile on a management area-wide basis. This number can be adjusted up or down to meet Habitat Effectiveness Index (HEI) goals and objectives. The area will have dispersed sites scattered throughout which will be maintained in as natural a condition as possible. The Forest plan provides desired road density direction for the various Management Areas. Densities are to be used as thresholds for evaluation and not as the basis for assessing Forest Plan conformance. Within the Deep Planning Area, only management area General Forest has a open road density direction. The Deep Planning Area consists of approximately 86.5 square miles, accessed by approximately miles of roads. The current open road density, when averaged across the Planning Area, is 2.19 miles per square mile. Open road miles by maintenance level, miles level 2, 19.5 miles level 3, 5.6 miles level 4, and 1.8 miles level 5. The Planning area has 1.97 miles/sq mile average open road density for General Forest. Open road miles by maintenance level, miles level 2, 26.9 miles level 3. At present, OHV use that is off road or trail is discouraged but allowed and no designated routes exist. DEEP EXISTING CONDITION AR DENSITY TABLE 4 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL MILES SYSTEM MILES MILES SYSTEM DENSITY OPEN OPEN Road MGT AR CLOSED OPEN2 OPEN3 OPEN 4 OPEN 5 LEV 1-5 LEV 1-5 LEV 2-5 DENSITY DC MA-F DEVRA MA-F GF MA-F OG-D2-02 MA-F OG-D2-06 MA-F OG-D2-11 MA-F OG-D2-12 MA-F SCEN-R MA-F ST-VPR MA-F ST-VR MA-F VPR MA-F Grand Total

16 DEEP EXISTING CONDITION SUB WATERSHED DENSITY TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TABLE 5 MILES SYSTEM MILES MILES 16 SYSTEM DENSITY OPEN OPEN SUB NAME MGT AR CLOSED OPEN2 OPEN3 OPEN 4 OPEN 5 LEV 1-5 LEV 1-5 LEV 2-5 DENSITY Happy Camp Creek GF OG-D ST-VPR ST-VR Happy Camp Creek Total Jackson Creek DEVRA GF OG-D OG-D ST-VPR ST-VR VPR Jackson Creek Total Little Summit Prairie DEVRA GF OG-D OG-D VPR Little Summit Prairie Creek Total Lower Deep DC DEVRA GF OG-D OG-D SCEN-R VPR Lower Deep Total Grand Total

17 Step 3 Identifying issues Issue Summary Natural disturbance processes such as floods, drought, wildfire, insects, disease, landslides, and erosion affect change in stream channel morphology, water quality, aquatic habitat, vegetation patterns, and species distribution. Understanding these natural disturbance processes allows us to determine the relative effect and importance of human disturbance patterns on ecosystem conditions. Human disturbances within the Deep Creek Watershed Analysis Area such as timber harvest, road development, fire exclusion, and grazing have affected the natural rates of change and function of certain ecosystem elements. Areas of concern within the Watershed Analysis focused on: Soil erosion and subsequent sediment production to streams; Natural hydrologic flow regime and stream channel morphology; State water quality limited streams; Aquatic species distribution; Riparian vegetation contribution to stream shading; Abundance and distribution of noxious weeds; Recreation multiple use and access needs for camping, hunting, fishing and tribal use; Management implications associated with species of concern known, or expected to occupy the Watershed Analysis Area. The forest road system provides access for public, private, and administrative uses. The road system has evolved over time. The vast majority of roads were constructed between 1940 and Safe and efficient access for today s users cannot be provided without some form of change to the road system. Historical patterns and reasons for use have and are continuing to change and the annual road maintenance budget is currently insufficient to meet maintenance needs. 1. Funds to maintain roads have substantially declined over the last decade and are expected to continue declining. It is not possible to maintain the existing road system at levels expected by the public or to meet current Forest Plan requirements. The use of the road system has changed dramatically over the years from being predominantly used for support of timber management objectives to present day conditions where over 90 percent of use is estimated to be related to some form of recreation activity such as hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, skiing, driving for pleasure, etc. Along with the changing use patterns on the road system, especially the increase in recreation traffic, the Forest Service road budget is not able to keep up with road maintenance needs. It is estimated that, nation-wide, the Forest Service has a growing $8.4 billion dollar maintenance and reconstruction backlog and receives only 20 percent of the annual maintenance funding needed to maintain the road system to environmental and safety standards. Current and projected road budgets are not likely to cover many road activities such as new road construction, road reconstruction, road maintenance, and system and non-system road closure. 2. Several recreation uses occur throughout the project area. These uses have occurred for many years and users expect to be able to continue using the project area. Closing roads could reduce access to traditional use areas for a variety of dispersed activities. User conflicts could also be reduced, particularly between motorized and non-motorized use. 17

18 3. Most of the roads were located along rivers and streams for ease of construction, and consequently, many of the main roads today are located in riparian zones. Potential impacts to water quality from roads occur from stream crossings, surface erosion. Road construction and use may impact water quality by increasing sediment, reducing infiltration, and increasing runoff rates. The existing road network has created barriers to fish movement. The location of many roads is in close proximity to streams and contributes to sediment delivery. In addition, roads affect the amount of riparian vegetation that provides shade to streams. 4. Roads facilitate the control of forest insects and disease by allowing efficient access for crews and equipment to infested sites for treatment and monitoring purposes. Roads, including use and maintenance, increase the potential for introduction and spread of noxious weed species. There are several species of noxious weeds present in the area. The majority of weed populations within the project area are associated with roads. 5. Maintaining road densities at the current level would provide continued fragmentation of these habitats and potential adverse impacts to wildlife from disturbance and harassment by humans. Closing roads may increase response time for wildfire suppression crews. Analytical Questions to Evaluate Issues The interdisciplinary team reviewed the questions in the Roads Analysis Guide (FS-643, August 1999) made a list of these questions (Appendix 1) to evaluate road-related issues. Some of the questions were not applicable to the Deep Planning Area. These questions are not intended to be prescriptive. Rather they are intended to assist in discerning and quantifying important interactions. Some of these questions will help in NEPA effects analysis at a later time. Status of Current Data Currently, the Paulina Ranger District has a wide variety of data sources. The road layer contained in the Ochoco NF GIS system was updated as a result of the road inventory for this project. The road layer is accurate and up-to-date as a result of project planning and this roads analysis. The stream layer contained in GIS is accurate and up-to-date. Developed recreation sites, trails, and some dispersed recreation sites are in the GIS system. Resource specialists at both the Forest and District levels shared their knowledge of existing uses and locations throughout the project area. The GIS layer for noxious weeds is evolving and is not yet complete. Information for noxious weeds was obtained from past survey and sighting information, along with pre-project weed surveys. The level and accuracy of other data sources are as variable as those described above. Existing Road System in Deep Creek Road Analysis Area (see Appendix 2 and Map 2) 18

19 19

20

21 Step 4 Assessing benefits, problems, and risks Assessing Benefits, Problems, and Risks Analysis of Current Road System The analysis process considered all level 1 and 2 roads within the planning area. Level 3, 4, and 5 roads were analyzed during the forest level roads analysis. Road maintenance activities were reviewed during this analysis. A two-step process systematically addressed all roads while considering issues, data, and specialists information. This process attempted to synthesize benefits, problems, and risks and to assess the ability of the road system to meet objectives. Benefits are the potential uses and socioeconomic gains provided by roads and related access. Problems are conditions for certain environmental, social, and economic attributes that managers deem to be unacceptable. Risks are likely future losses in environmental, social, and economic attributes if the road system remains unchanged. The information that has been generated will be used as a baseline against which the existing and future road systems can be compared. The interdisciplinary team reviewed the questions in the Roads Analysis Guide (FS-643, August 1999), and developed ranking factors to assess the benefits, problems, and risks associated with the current and future road system for the project area. Ranking factors were developed for four broad topic areas: Human Use, Aquatics, Botany, and Wildlife. The team relied in large part on efforts completed as part of the Forest-Wide roads analysis. Ranking factors from the Forest-wide Roads Analysis were reviewed and used where applicable to this project-level analysis. In addition, some site-specific ranking factors were developed and used. Items factored into the risk rating for each resource specialty were: 1) Issues; 2) Road location; 3) Resource values; and 4) Resource risk. Risk or value ratings were used for an initial determination for the need of each road segment. Ratings from 0-9 were assigned each segment by each resource, 0 being the lowest risk or value and 9 being the highest risk or value. The total rating for each road segment was averaged for both value and risk and given an initial recommendation for future status. Recommendations were to retain in the present condition, close, or decommission. Human Use The Human Use ranking factors considered both administrative uses and public uses. Human Uses of the road system within the project area are the benefits associated with roads. Public uses of roads include access to both developed and dispersed recreation sites, access to private lands, and as travelways through the project area to other lands. Administrative uses included all facets of managing the land including access for managing timber stands and livestock grazing, and access to assist in suppressing wildfires. These uses and others were considered during the ranking process. Existing decommissioned and unclassified roads were also ranked by the same factors. Even though these roads are not part of the transportation system database, they were analyzed by whether they might be in a location suitable for current or future administrative needs and whether they needed additional work to prohibit use or rehabilitate them. Table 1 summarizes the ranking of roads from a human use perspective. 21

22 Table 1. Human Use Rankings Ranking Number of Road Segments Total Miles High elements Medium elements Low elements Sixty-five (30) percent of the miles of roads received a high human use ranking factors, 45 percent received a moderate ranking, and 24 percent received a low ranking. These rankings indicate that most roads in the project area are important to either public users or land managers. Public Access:1) The roads in the analysis area are maintained and signed in accordance with their maintenance and traffic service levels (Map 2) and are considered safe for normal traffic levels or use under normal operating conditions. Most Forest roads managed in maintenance level 1 or 2 and unclassified roads experience only minor vehicular traffic during periods of noncommercial use. During periods of commercial use, these roads experience much higher traffic volumes. Additional road maintenance may be required to safely accommodate increased volumes of large commercial vehicles and is the responsibility of the commercial user. Seasonal restrictions may be necessary to prevent undue wear and tear on roads by large commercial vehicles. Any management activity that increases use or considerably alters normal traffic patterns should be mitigated with appropriate warning and precautionary signing. Additional road maintenance or reconstruction may be required to safely accommodate heavier volumes. Recreation Road Use: The recreating public takes advantage of the existing roads in the analysis area for activities such as driving and sightseeing, camping, fishing, hunting, wildflower viewing, bird watching, horseback riding, off highway vehicle use, mountain biking, cross country skiing, and other activities. There is 1 campground (Big Springs Campground) in the analysis area. There are no trails within the watershed. No inventoried Roadless areas are within the analysis area. Much of the recreation use within the watershed occurs during the hunting seasons beginning in late August through the end of November. During this time period for two months, most roads are closed by an area road closure. This is a cooperative effort with ODFW, USFS and Oregon State Police to provide a hunting experience in which motorized travel is limited. This helps ensures better escapement of bucks and bulls. The Paulina District area road closure is an integral part of ODFWs management plan for the Ochoco Wildlife Management Unit. Dispersed camping generally occur along roads, throughout the watershed. Frequently used areas are Little Summit Creek, Dowell Spring, Happy Camp Spring, Younger Spring, Blevins Spring, Crazy Spring, Goofy Spring, Happy Jack Camp, Aspen Grove Spring, Chamberlin Spring, Lonesome Spring, Fir Tree Spring, Toggle Meadows, Sam Davis Spring, Dicer Meadow, Wilson Spring, Timothy Spring, Dublin Spring, Round Meadow, Shown Troughs. Dispersed camping also occurs in many other places throughout the watershed in areas that are riparian in nature but do not necessarily have a proper name and in many of the mineral material source sites. Recreation use has increased due to improved accessibility, increased hunting tags, increased amount of leisure time, and above all, an increasing population. It is expected that these trends will continue. As the population of Central Oregon increases and tourism grows, recreational use will increase on the Ochoco National Forest. The concern regarding access and travel management was to provide adequate open roads for recreational use throughout the year. 22

23 Developed Sites: High Road leads to one or more high use developed sites (moderate to high {>25%} week-day use, more than 50% of capacity on weekends). Medium Road leads to one or more trail-heads that access high use wilderness/unroaded area. (>20 people per day) 4200 rated as high, roads 1200, 4258 and rated medium. Dispersed Sites: High-Road provides access to high number of dispersed sites with high use (some week-day use, occupied > 50% of summer weekends). 25 miles rank high and 54.4 miles ranked medium. RANKING ROAD MILE RANKING ROAD MILE High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High Total Dispersed Use: High Road provides access to high level of use and types of dispersed opportunities. Primary use is summer-fall. Roads that may only have a moderate amount of use but also provide access to winter recreation use are included here miles ranked high and 37.4 miles ranked medium for dispersed use. RANKING ROAD MILE RANKING ROAD MILE High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High Total Private Access: Private Ownership: The only parcel of non-federally owned property within the analysis area is located at Little Summit Prairie. These roads provide primary access. RANKING ROAD MILE High High High High High High Total

24 Special-Use Permits / Special Forest Products: Other than firewood permits, there are no special use permits currently being issued for special forest products. The current road system offers good access for protection of cultural resources and access for ceded lands. Tribal use has significantly declined over the years, however areas of cultural use still exist in the form of root gathering sites. Road system changes (closures and decommissioning) could make access more difficult. RANKING ROAD MILES High High H Total 4.6 Forest Management and Products: Roads that provide access to plantations, commercial and pre-commercial managed stands were ranked the highest in this analysis. Roads that provide important access for silviculture and other forest management considerations such as logging systems and log haul. Once silvicultural treatments are carried out, some of these access roads will not be needed again for many years. Well planned ridge top roads lend themselves better to vegetation/timber stand management than do lower roads in riparian areas. Timber (T) Medium= Road segment probably not needed for the next 10 years, but provides primary access for harvest or haul to an area, or segment possibly needed in next 10 years but provides duplicate access or could be moved to a more efficient location. High= Road segment needed in next 10 years for harvest/haul and is in a primary location. 140 miles of the roads ranked high within the analysis area. Silviculture: Medium = Road segment provides access to older established plantations which continue to be monitored, or provides access to stands planned for timber stand improvement in the next 10 years. High = Road segment provides access to active reforestation units or units planned for reforestation in the next 10 years. RANKING ROAD MILES RANKING ROAD MILES High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High High H Total

25 Range: The current road system provides adequate access for the existing range allotments within the analysis area. Range (R) Medium = Road segment provides secondary access for water developments or developments which need maintenance only every few years. Provides access to traditional salt grounds, or secondary access to pastures. High = Road segment provides primary access to pastures or traditional gathering places; or used for cattle haul/loading/unloading or access to water sources that need annual maintenance. RANKING ROAD MILES RANKING ROAD MILES HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH H Total Fire: The current road system provides adequate access for ground-based fire suppression forces to manage wildland fires. There may be some instances where existing roads would be beneficial as fire breaks. Harvest methods would contribute to fuels management. Other fuels management activities would include prescribed burning and mechanical treatments of logging slash. Roads within the analysis area would be used to access fuel treatment sites and for fire lines. The mix of activities (fire suppression, prescribed burning, and visitor access) increases risks to both fire fighters and the public. The potential risks would be from smoke, vehicle accidents, falling snags, entrapment, etc. Another result of adequate road access may be an increase in human caused fires due to use of the area by arsonists, contractors and the public. Fire (F) rating system (high): Does the road segment provide primary (main route) or secondary (more than one access route) for fire management (suppression, fuel treatment). Medium- Road segment provides secondary access for fire management and provides access to one, water source, fire camp location or other improvements. High Road segment provides primary access for fire management and provides access to one or more water sources, fire camp location or other improvements. 185 miles ranked high for fire in the analysis area, all other roads ranked low. Lands/Minerals -What is the likely transportation system needed for future needs (geothermal, mining claims, mineral material sources, etc)? How does the road system affect access to rock-hounding areas? Primary access is the main route and secondary access has more than one route into the area. High Road segment provides primary access to one or more areas. (geothermal, mining claims, mineral material sources, etc). 24 miles rated high, roads (12, , , ,300930,42 and 4260). 25

26

27 Aquatics - Aquatic factors were developed to capture key processes associated with roads as they link to aquatic environments. The list of factors includes: geologic hazard; road related sediment; floodplain off-channel habitat; riparian habitat function; flow effects; at risk fish populations; and wetlands. Geologic hazard relates to both active and dormant landslide terrain and its potential for mass wasting, and also to soil types and the potential for erosion (sediment movement). The term at risk fish refers to fish listed as Threatened, Endangered or Sensitive. Road development has been the greatest human impact to the watershed analysis area in terms of increasing sediment delivered to streams and the negative affects to aquatic habitats. Roads intercept and collect surface and subsurface water affecting the natural distribution and timing of stream flows (Flow Regime). Roads can intercept streams which concentrates the water into culverts, increasing water velocity. Where roads cross streams, it is estimated that 70% of the culverts on Class 1 & 2 streams and 60% on Class 3 streams are undersized. The concern with these undersized culverts, is the increase in water velocity that occurs on the downstream side. This fast water scours deep pools, erodes channels by lateral scouring and headcutting and creates fish passage barriers. Many of the Deep Creek Watershed Analysis area roads have not been constructed with adequate drainage structures. Most of the roads are unsurfaced and lack armoring on fill slopes, and do not have water-bars, or drain dips to protect against erosion and failures. During storm events, high energy runoff is often concentrated into rills which transports sediment into streams, especially at stream crossings and where roads parallel streams. The Forest-wide Roads Analysis identified roads (only levels 4 and 5) that were of concern. For this analysis, the road had the most risk to aquatic resources in the watershed by far. This road parallels Deep Creek and crosses numerous tributaries. A combination of factors and road position (stream bottom) lead to the increased concerns. The road had a high rating for fish species and moderate concerns for flow and fish passage. The road crosses Jackson, Toggle, Happy Camp and Deep Creeks. There are undersized culverts impeding flow. The segment of Road which passes through Deep Creek has undersized culverts at Little Summit and Derr Creeks, with some fish passage concerns. Road crosses Happy Camp and Double Cabin creeks. The culverts are undersized and fish barriers. The smaller stream crossings should be checked for culvert sizes. Road crosses Little Summit Creek at the head end of Little Summit Prairie. The culvert should be checked for size. Surface/rill erosion from roads increases when log hauling, maintenance and reconstruction activities take place. Roads produce and deliver sediment to streams. There are 65.4 miles of road within RHCAs. Within the watershed there are 12 Class 1 stream crossings, 44 Class 2 stream crossings, and 147 Class 3 stream crossings and Class 4 stream crossings on National Forest Lands. The Deep Creek Roads Analysis process identified system and existing decommissioned roads (levels 1 through 3) that were of concern. Of the 423 system roads analyzed in this analysis, 138 system roads (33%, miles) had high concern (ranked out high ) for aquatic risk. Of the 126 existing decommissioned roads, 25 roads (20%, 17.3 miles) ranked out high risk for aquatic factors (Tables 1 and 2). 27

28 Table 1. Composite of Ranking for System Roads in Deep Creek Watershed Ranking % of roads (by number) from roads analysis list* High (score of ) 33% (138 of 423) Medium (score of ) 36% (153 of 423) Low (score of ) 31% (132 of 423) *numbers developed from Deep Creek Watershed system roads Excel spreadsheet Table 2. Composite of Ranking for Existing Decommissioned Roads. Ranking % of roads (by number) from roads analysis list* High (score of ) 20% (25 of 126) Medium (score of ) 31% (39 of 126) Low (score of ) 49% (62 of 126) *numbers developed from Deep Creek Watershed decommissioned roads Excel spreadsheet More detail on rankings and road segments are in the analysis file under Aquatics. Botany - Botany ranking factors were developed to address three main issues; special plant habitats, TES plant species, and noxious weeds and non-native invasive plant species. Special habitats considered in this analysis are wetlands and riparian plant communities; wet, moist and dry meadows; aspen stands; cottonwood bottomlands; and scablands. Road proximity to plant populations and/or habitat (within 200 feet), current use, and other factors were used to develop the overall rankings. The botany assessment of the transportation system included three factors that addressed key issues. These included 1) effects to special plant habitats, 2) effects on Region 6 sensitive plant species (TES), and 3) noxious weeds. The roads were ranked for each of these factors, and the rankings for special habitats and TES species were analyzed together. Noxious weeds are ranked separately. Three separate transportation categories were used, system roads, decommissioned roads, and new system/non-system/temporary roads. Special plant habitats that can be affected by the transportation system include: dry, moist and wet meadows, aspen, willow and cottonwood communities, scablands, rock outcrops and wetlands. See the Botany Risk Factors for the Ochoco National Forest Roads Analysis for an explanation of the rating system. The road system within the Deep analysis area is one of the significant vectors for exotic plant species introduction. Exotic species are considered to be any non-native plant species, and are generally lumped in two categories, invasive species and noxious weeds. Seeding roads with exotic species is not a widely accepted practice at the present time and is therefore considered low risk for the analysis area. There are no Threatened or Endangered plant species within the watershed. Several plants that are on the R6 Regional Forester s Sensitive Species List occur within Deep Creek watershed. Those of primary concern occur within riparian habitats, including Peck s Mariposa Lily (Calochortus longebarbatus var. peckii), and moonworts (Botrychium species). Most special habitats and riparian sensitive species are dependant on the health and function of the streams, and therefore the aquatic risk rankings are also used in the botany risk ratings. New road construction and reconstruction activities have the potential to affect these sensitive species and change the natural processes of habitat. Generally speaking, road closure and decommissioning is beneficial to the plants and their habitat if the work is done carefully. 28

29 There are many plant habitats that are considered unique within the analysis area, including scablands, wet meadows, and hardwood riparian communities. There is one of two known rummond s willow communities on the Forest at the junction of the 4250, roads. This is a rare willow for the Ochoco Mountains. Sixty-seven percent of all wet meadows on the Paulina Ranger District occur within the Deep analysis area. These meadows are somewhat common in number, however many are small and fragmented. Nine roads go through wet meadows, and 20 roads directly parallel wet meadows. The system off Forest Road 30 in particular is extensively parallel to wet meadows, including the , , and the Roads degrade the quality and size of wet meadows through sediment delivery, reducing floodplain access by streams and springs, etc. There are also alder wetlands within the analysis area, in which the surface soil remains moist all year. Six roads bisect or run adjacent to alder wetlands. This situation prevents expansion of the alder community downstream. Noxious weeds are a growing concern within the Deep Creek watershed. Roads are a primary vector in establishing and spreading noxious weeds. Therefore there is not a no-risk category for weeds; the lowest ranking a road can receive is low risk. Most known locations of noxious weeds are along the existing road system and associated areas of soil disturbance. and logging equipment are the main vectors for spreading noxious weeds within the analysis area. Table 1. Ranking for System Roads in Deep Creek Watershed for Special Habitats and TES Species Risk Ranking Factors Percent (and number) of road segments High Medium Low No Risk 15% (60 of 423) 18% (78 of 423) 9% (39 of 423) 58% (246 of 423) Although the above table shows only 14% of the road segments are high risk to special habitats, this is by the number of segments. Total miles of system road in the watershed equals miles, 80 miles of which received a high rating, which means 28% of the roads within the watershed pose a high risk to meadows, wetlands and scablands. Table 2. Ranking for Decommissioned Roads in Deep Creek Watershed for Special Habitats and TES Species Risk Ranking Factors Percent (and number) of road segments High Medium Low No Risk 12% (15 of 128) 9% (12 of 128) 2% (2 of 128) 77% (99 of 128) The high risk rating for decommissioned roads is 6.4 miles of 52.5 total miles within the watershed, which is 12%. Roads that are decommissioned are of particular concern because they are often still drivable and in use. 29

30 Table 3. Ranking for System Roads in Deep Creek Watershed for Noxious Weeds Risk Ranking Factors Percent (and number) of road segments High Medium Low No Risk 9% (40 of 423) 8% (33 of 423) 83% (350 of 423) N/A Although the above table indicates that the majority of the roads within the watershed are low risk for weeds, mileagewise, this equates to 83 miles of road, or 29%, that pose an elevated risk of weed introduction and spread. Roads with either a high or moderate risk rating are considered a high priority for noxious weeds. Table 4. Ranking for Decommissioned Roads in Deep Creek Watershed for Noxious Weeds Risk Ranking Factors Percent (and number) of road segments High 13% (17 of 128) Medium 6% (7 of 128) Low 81% (104 of 128) No Risk N/A There are 14 miles, or 27%, of decommissioned roads that pose high risk for weeds. Table 5. Ranking for New System, Temporary and Non-System Roads in Deep Creek Watershed for Special Habitats and TES Species Risk Ranking Factors Percent (and number) of road segments High Medium Low No Risk 4% (5 of 128) 5% (7 of 128) 9% (11 of 128) 82% (105 of 128) Only 5% of new and temporary miles of road (1.8 of 38 miles) pose a high risk to special habitats and sensitive plant species. Roads with a high risk rating for sensitive habitats and TES species include: Table 6. Ranking for New System, Temporary and Non-System Roads in Deep Creek Watershed for Noxious Weeds Risk Ranking Factors Percent (and number) of road segments High Medium Low No Risk 2% (2 of 128) 31% (40 of 128) 67% (86 of 128) N/A Seventeen miles, or 45%, of the total miles of new and temporary roads pose a high risk for the spread and introduction of noxious weeds. 30

31 Wildlife - Wildlife ranking factors were developed to address five main issues: wildlife movement (dispersal and migration), human disturbance during critical periods (reproduction, rearing, wintering), habitat fragmentation, decline in habitats for threatened, endangered, and sensitive species, and reduction of key habitat elements (i.e. snags and down logs). Twenty-five (25) percent of the road miles medium wildlife ranking factors (Table 4). Table 4. Wildlife Ranking - System Roads Ranking Number of Road Segments Total Miles High elements 1 (RD ) 0.4 Medium elements Low elements Rocky Mountain Elk (Cervus elaphus) and Mule Deer (Odocoileus hemionus) are abundant within the watershed. Elk herds within the watershed typically stay within their home range year round. Except during only the most severe winters, in which they move south to lower elevations. The deer herds generally move south each year to lower elevations, as they are not as adept at travel in deeper snow as elk. Fawning and calving areas are present within the watershed. Habitat character and distribution has been modified within the watershed for these species, by lack of fire, timber harvesting and road building. High road densities (>2 mi/sq. mi.) reduce habitat effectiveness, fragment habitat and can result in poor distribution. Open roads can have a negative effect on elk when they experience stress associated with disturbance at a time when animals are loosing weight and cows are pregnant. The Forest policy on road management has influence on deer wildlife management. Road density allows easier entrance for hunters whether walking or by vehicle if the road is opened. Open road density within the watershed is currently 2.19 miles per square mile. Additionally 48,666 acres (88%) of the area is in MA-F22 General Forest Management Area. Current open road density with MA-F22 is 1.97 miles per square mile which is below 3.0 miles per square mile recommended in the Ochoco National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (LMRP, 1989). One of the effects of open roads on big game is a direct loss of wildlife habitat that can range from 2.5 acres per mile of road to three or four times that amount depending on the road clearing width. Indirect effects on big game use of roaded habitats can include displacement away from roaded areas. Recent research in northeast Oregon (Rowland 2000) show that cow elk consistently select areas away from open roads during the spring and summer months. They also found that the spatial distribution of roads could affect elk habitat use. Regularly spaced roads had the greatest negative impact on elk and a more randomly spaced pattern less impact. The primary impacts were forcing elk into habitats that may be less suitable to support daily activities including finding quality forage, adequate water intake for lactating cows, and possible decreased survival rate for elk calves. Another indirect effect of open roads is greater and easier access to animals during hunting seasons and/or those taken illegally. Open roads have the capability to negatively impact wildlife species as a result of human caused disturbance. Elevated noise levels from vehicular traffic and human access into nesting or denning sites have the potential to cause nest or den abandonment if conducted during sensitive times of the year. Most raptor species are very sensitive to human intrusion during the nesting season. Open roads increase the risk sensitive sites may be impacted. 31

32 Risks and Benefits of Entering Unroaded Areas There are no risks to entering unroaded areas because there are none in the analysis area. The interdisciplinary team used the definition of unroaded areas from the Forest Service Manual (FSM) 7710, Transportation Atlas, Records, and Analysis (published in the Federal Register on January 12, 2001). The manual identifies Contiguous unroaded areas of more than 1,000 acres that are contiguous to Congressionally designated wilderness areas These areas of 1,000 acres or more must have a common boundary of considerable length, be at least one-quarter mile in width, and provide important corridors for wildlife movement or extend a unique ecological value of the established inventoried area. Ability of the Road System to meet Objectives The objective for the transportation system is to support resource activities and to serve multiple resource needs. Traffic is managed, as needed, to control access due to structural limitations of the road, safety, or to meet resource objectives, such as off-road vehicle travel management needs. Traffic safety will exist for all roads on the transportation system. Safety of traffic using forest development roads is ensured through restrictions. The road system meets the objective of supporting resource activities. Minor amounts of new roads and some reconstruction will be needed to access and support resource activities (such as commercial timber harvest and wildfire suppression). Reconstruction will generally occur when a poorly located road needs to be replaced. Ongoing road maintenance activities will be needed to control traffic and ensure safety. Current budget levels do not contain sufficient funding to complete desired and deferred maintenance on all roads. The miles of closed road are likely to increase to reduce maintenance costs; however, additional funding levels would be needed to effectively close roads. This roads analysis report contains recommendations to change road management objectives and associated maintenance costs. Appendix 3 contains a list of road recommendations where the management objective (i.e. maintenance level) is recommended to change. Step 5 Describing opportunities and setting priorities Problems and Risks Posed by the Current Road System The current risks associated with the road system primarily relate to water quality and fish habitat. Many roads were constructed in close proximity to streams or cross streams and contribute to sediment movement. Several of these roads also prevent or retard the growth of riparian and other vegetation that could provide stream shade. Many culverts throughout the project area are too small (undersized) and are barriers to fish passage. The current road system has increased the hydrologic network which causes water to more quickly flow from the project area. 32

33 In several areas, roads reduce the effectiveness of wildlife habitat. Roads that pass through key wildlife areas (winter range, goshawk post-fledging, pileated woodpecker feeding, allocated oldgrowth) can lead to disturbance/harassment during critical periods. For example, roads that pass in or near goshawk nest stands can reduce survival of young birds. Roads also contribute to the introduction and spread of noxious weed species. Most of the weed populations in the project area are located along road corridors. More than 15 species of noxious weeds are known to exist in or near the project area. Opportunities for Addressing Important Problems and Risks It is desired to provide a road system that is safe, affordable, has minimal ecological impacts, and meets immediate and projected long-term public and resource management needs. Resource management needs are largely based on LRMP direction. Each individual road segment was assessed by the IDT using the two (2) steps under benefits, problems, and risks to confirm or alter the initial recommendation. The IDT analyzed the miles of maintenance level 1 and 2 roads to provide management recommendations for various road access and resource objectives (Definitions of road maintenance levels are found on page 8). Roads that were analyzed in the Forest Wide Roads Analysis, 26.9 miles of primarily 3-5 maintenance level roads, were also reviewed for long-term safety and maintenance needs within the scope of this analysis. The Forest Wide Roads Analysis also analyzed level 2 roads if they were determined to be arterial or collector roads. Roads that were analyzed within the Forest Wide Roads Analysis were not recommended for closure or decommissioning. There are opportunities to reduce the risks associated with the existing road system. Decommissioning, closing (inactivating), or relocating roads in proximity to streams can reduce sediment movement. Reconstructing roads to install drainage structures and filter strips can also reduce sediment movement. Where roads are decommissioned or relocated, vegetation can be restored and help contribute to stream shade. Replacing undersize culverts would ensure that culverts are not plugged or topped during high-flow (flood) events which can also reduce sediment movement. Replacing undersize culverts will also remove barriers to fish passage. Insuring adequate drainage on roads can reduce their effect on the hydrologic network. Decommissioning or closing roads in or near key wildlife areas can reduce disturbance. Decommissioning roads in allocated old-growth areas would assist in managing for species associated with old growth and would reduce disturbance. Key habitat components associated with old-growth areas include snags and down logs. Limiting road access can reduce the potential for firewood cutters to remove these habitat components. Seasonal and year-round closures can reduce disturbance during reproductive seasons and during the winter months. Decommissioning roads can limit access and reduce the risk of introducing or spreading noxious weeds. Weed control treatments can also reduce the size and density of weed populations. Road maintenance equipment can be cleaned of all soil and plant material before and after completing maintenance work to reduce the risk of spreading weeds. Forest users can be encouraged to use weed-free hay for livestock (i.e. horses) during special activities such as endurance rides. Map 3 identifies opportunities for addressing important problems and risks. Map 4 identifies management recommendations. 33

34 Management Recommendations Management Recommendation within the Deep Planning Area is displayed in Table 1. Table 1: Deep Creek Watershed Current Road Status Current Road Status Miles Total Miles Forest Wide Roads Analysis Maintenance Level System Roads Open Maintenance Level Total Miles Open System Roads Closed Maintenance Level Total System Miles Maintenance Level Recommendation to Decommission 46.5 Based on the ecological, social, and economic considerations, existing and desired conditions, and key issues, the IDT recommends the following list of road management actions. Table 1 identifies and provides management recommendations for roads. Table 1 Management Recommendations Maintenance Level 1 and 2 Roads Management Recommendations Miles Current System Roads Open Maintain at Current Level Open Upgrade Maintenance Level From Closed to Open 2.9 Decrease Maintenance Level Implement Seasonal Closure Travel Restriction 11.1 Close 31.4 Decommission/Convert to Other Uses 48.2 Total Miles Roads would be closed or decommissioned after further environmental analysis such as the Deep Environmental Analysis. Closed roads would be available for administrative needs including, but not limited to, forest inventory, thinning, and monitoring. Refer to Appendix 3 for the list of road segments recommended for closure and associated mileage. Existing and Recommended Road Densities An adequate transportation system is necessary for Administrative as well as public use. The desire is to provide a road system that is safe, maintainable, reduces ecological risks, and meets current and long-term public and resource management needs. The Forest Plan provides desired road density direction for the various Management Areas. Densities are to be used as thresholds for evaluation and not to serve as the basis for assessing Forest Plan conformance. Table 1 provides a comparison between present and recommended road density. The recommended road densities result from the Roads Analysis if all recommendations where implemented. Road density includes maintenance level roads 2-5, and State and County roads. Table 1: Present And Recommended Road Densities Management Area Present Open Road Density (Miles/Square Mile)* Desired Open Road Density (Miles/Square Mile)* Recommended Open Road Density (Miles/Square Mile)* Density (Miles/Square Mile)* * Desired road density is derived from the Forest Plan. Open road density describes density of open, system roads. 34

35 Road Maintenance Needs - During the course of completing maintenance surveys of the Forest Service roads within this analysis area, a large amount of data was gathered on work that needed to be completed on the FS road system. More roads are reconstructed than constructed because the primary transportation system is in place. Miles of road needing construction or reconstruction varies with the timber sale program each year. This road work falls under either a timber sale or a public works road contract. NEPA analysis needs Appendix 3 contains a list, by road number, of recommended activities to reduce the risks associated with roads while preserving the benefits. Appendix 4 also contains a map 3 showing what the road system would look like if all of the recommendations were implemented. All of the recommended activities included on this list would require some form of environmental analysis before they could be implemented. Routine maintenance such as blading or spot rocking does not require environmental analysis. Changing the maintenance level from open to closed or closed to open would require an environmental analysis. Because this roads analysis is being completed concurrently with the Deep Creek EIS, many opportunities identified can be incorporated into the EIS process. Several of the activities included in Appendix 3 were proposed as part of the Deep Creek project and have been included in the Deep Creek EIS. These road management activities have been noted. If there are some opportunities identified that will not be incorporated into the EIS, they will require a site-specific NEPA analysis in the future when the decision is made to implement them (activities other than maintenance and administrative decisions).other activities on this list are not scheduled or proposed to be implemented at this time. Step 6 Reporting Step 6 of the roads analysis process is reporting. This entire document addresses how the roads analysis process was completed, describes the key findings (Step 4), and describes opportunities for altering the existing road system (Step 5). This analysis was developed to capture key processes associated with roads as they link to aquatic environments, and to identify those roads that may be of concern to aquatic resources. The process allowed interdisciplinary team members to make recommendations based on resource discussions and rankings. This is not a decision document, however it provides a list of roads recommended for action. By closing/decommissioning these roads, over time, it is expected that resources damage would be minimized and eventually eliminated in identified problem areas. Report - The roads analysis resulted in the Road Analysis Report and accompanying maps that document the information and analysis methods used to identify social and environmental opportunities, problems, risks, and priorities for future road management. The Road Analysis Report documents the key findings of the analysis and contains graphical, tabular, and geospatial displays of the transportation system options, including a minimum road system. It is important that the roads analysis identify access needs and opportunities that are based on current budget levels and realistic projections of future funding. Analysts located, interpreted, and used relevant scientific literature in the analysis and disclosed assumptions on which the analysis is based. 35

36 Road Atlas - The initial transportation atlas consists of those maps incorporated into the Forest GIS transportation coverages associated information available. The Forest will maintain a current record of forest transportation facilities in the atlas. INFRA will be used for the storage and analysis of information in the transportation atlas. Unit transportation managers shall document changes in road management status, including changes such as accomplishment of decommissioning objectives or the addition of an unclassified road to the forest road system. Temporary roads are not intended to be included as part of the forest road atlas, as they are managed by the projects or activities under which they are authorized and decommissioned at the conclusion of the authorized activity. 36

37 Analytical Questions to Evaluate Issues Appendix A Ecosystem Functions and Processes EF(1): What ecological attributes, particularly those unique to the region, would be affected by roading of current unroaded areas? EF(2): To what degree do the presence, type, and location of roads increase the introduction and spread of exotic plant and animal species, insects, diseases, and parasites? What are the potential effects of such introductions to plant and animal species and ecosystem function in the area? EF(3): To what degree do the presence, type, and location of roads contribute to the control of insects and diseases? EF(4): How does the road system affect ecological disturbance regimes in the area? EF(5): What are the adverse effects of noise caused by developing, using, and maintaining roads? Aquatic, Riparian Zone, and Water Quality AQ(1): How and where does the road system modify the surface and subsurface hydrology of the area? AQ(2): How and where does the road system generate surface erosion? AQ(3): How and where does the road system affect mass wasting? AQ(4): How and where do road-stream crossing influence local stream channels and water quality? AQ(5): How and where does the road system create potential for pollutants, such as chemical spills, oils, de-icing salts, or herbicides, to enter surface waters? AQ(6): How and where is the road system hydrologically connected to the stream system? How do the connections affect water quality and quantity (such as, the delivery of sediments and chemicals, thermal increases, elevated peak flows)? AQ(7): What downstream beneficial uses of water exist in the area? What changes in uses and demand are expected over time? How are they affected or put at risk by road derived pollutants? AQ(8): How and where does the road system affect wetlands? AQ(9): How does the road system alter physical channel dynamics, including isolation of floodplains; constraints on channel migration; and the movement of large wood, fine organic matter, and sediment? AQ(10): How and where does the road system restrict the migration of and movement of aquatic organisms? What aquatic species are affected and to what extent? AQ(11): How does the road system affect shading, litterfall, and riparian plant communities? AQ(12): How and where does the road system contribute to fishing, poaching, or direct habitat loss for at-risk aquatic species? AQ(13): How and where does the road system facilitate the introduction of non-native aquatic species? AQ(14): To what extent does the road system overlap with areas of exceptionally high aquatic diversity or productivity, or areas containing rare or unique aquatic species or species of interest? 37

38 Terrestrial Wildlife TW(1): What are the direct affects of the road system on terrestrial species habitat? TW(2): How does the road system facilitate human activities that affect habitat? TW(3): How does the road system affect legal and illegal human activities (including trapping, hunting, poaching, harassment, road kill, or illegal kill levels)? What are the affects on wildlife species? TW(4): How does the road system directly affect unique communities or special features in the area? Economics EC(1): How does the road system affect the agency s direct costs and revenues? What, if any, changes in the road system will increase net revenue to the agency by reducing cost, increasing revenue, or both? EC(2): How does the road system affect the priced and non-priced consequences included in economic efficiency analysis used to assess net benefits to society? EC(3): How does the road system affect the distribution of benefits and costs among affected people? (benefits of nonpriced activities, i.e. wildlife viewing, etc)? Commodity Production/Timber Management TM(1): How does road spacing and location affect logging system feasibility? TM(2): How does the road system affect managing the suitable timber base and other lands? TM(3): How does the road system affect access to timber stands needing silviculture treatment? Minerals Management MM(1): How does the road system affect access to locatable, leasable, and salable minerals? Range Management RM(1): How does the road system affect access to range allotments? Water Production WP(1): How does the road system affect access, constructing, maintaining, monitoring, and operating water diversions, impoundments, and distribution canals or pipes? WP(2): How does road development and use affect water quality in municipal watersheds? WP(3): How does the road system affect access to hydroelectric power generation? Special Forest Products SP(1): How does the road system affect access for collecting special forest products? Special-Use Permits SU(1): How does the road system affect managing special-use permit sites (concessionaires, communication sites, utility corridors, and so on)? General Public Transportation 38

39 GT(1): How does the road system connect to public roads and provide primary access to communities? GT(2): How does the road system connect large blocks of land in other ownership to public roads (ad hoc communities, subdivisions, in-holdings, and so on)? GT(3): How does the road system affect managing roads with shared ownership or with limited jurisdiction (RS 2477, cost share, prescriptive rights, FLPMA easements, FRTA easements, DOT easements)? GT(4): How does the road system address the safety of road users? Administrative Use AU(1): How does the road system affect access needed for research, inventory, and monitoring? AU(2): How does the road system affect investigative or enforcement activities? Protection PT(1): How does the road system affect fuels management? PT(2): How does the road system affect risk to firefighters and public safety? PT(3): How does the road system affect the capacity of the Forest Service and cooperators to suppress wildfires? PT(4): How does the road system contribute to airborne dust emissions resulting in reduced visibility and human health concerns? Unroaded Recreation UR (1): Is there now or will there be in the future excess supply or excess demand for unroaded recreation opportunities? UR (2): Is developing new roads into unroaded areas, decommissioning of existing roads or changing the maintenance of existing roads causing substantial changes in the quantity, quality, or type of unroaded recreation opportunities. UR (3): What are the adverse effects of noise and other disturbances caused by developing, using and maintaining roads, on the quantity, quality, and type of unroaded recreation opportunities? UR (4): Who participates in unroaded recreation in the areas affected by constructing, maintaining, and decommissioning roads? UR (5): What are these participants attachments to the area, how strong are their feelings, and are alternative opportunities and locations available? UR (6): How are developing new roads into unroaded areas affecting the Scenic Integrity Objective, SIO(s)? Road-Related Recreation RR(1): Is there now or will there be in the future excess supply or excess demand for roaded recreation opportunities? RR(2): Is developing new roads into unroaded areas, decommissioning of existing roads, or changing maintenance of existing roads causing substantial changes in the quantity, quality, or type of roaded recreation opportunities? RR(3): What are the adverse effects of noise and other disturbances caused by constructing, using and maintaining roads on the quantity, quality, or type of roaded recreation opportunities? 39

40 RR(4): Who participates in roaded recreation in the areas affected by road constructing, changes in road maintenance, or road decommissioning? RR(5): What are these participants attachments to the area, how strong are their feelings, and are alternative opportunities available? RR(6): How does the road system affect the Scenic Integrity Objective, (SIO)? Passive-Use Value PV(1): Do areas planned for road constructing, closure, or decommissioning have unique physical or biological characteristics, such as unique features and threatened or endangered species? PV(2): Do areas planned for road construction, closure, or decommissioning have unique cultural, traditional, symbolic, sacred, spiritual, or religious significance? PV(3): What, if any, groups of people (ethnic, subcultures, and so on) hold cultural, symbolic, spiritual, sacred, traditional, or religious values for area planned for road entry or road closure? PV(4): Will constructing, closing, or decommissioning roads substantially affect passive-use values? Social Issues SI(1,2): What are people s perceived needs and values for roads and access? How does road management affect people s dependence on, need for and desire for roads and access? SI(3): How does the road system affect access to paleontological, archaeological, and historical sites? SI(4): How does the road system affect cultural and traditional uses (such as plant gathering, and access to traditional and cultural sites) and American Indian treaty rights? SI(5): How are roads that constitute historic sites affected by road management? SI(6): How is community social and economic health affected by road management (for example, lifestyles, businesses, tourism industry, infrastructure maintenance)? SI(7): What is the perceived social and economic dependency of a community on an unroaded area versus the value of that unroaded area for its intrinsic existence and symbolic values? SI(8): How does road management affect wilderness attributes, including natural integrity, natural appearance, opportunities for solitude, and opportunities for primitive recreation? SI(9): What are traditional issues of animal and plant species in the area of analysis? SI(10): How does road management affect people s sense of place? 40

41 APPENDIX 2 EXISTING ROADS Existing System Roads in the Deep Creek Watershed Roads Analysis Area Road No. BMP EMP Length (miles) Jurisdiction Surface Type Current Condition FS Aggregate 3 Passenger FS Aggregate 3 Passenger FS Bituminous 4 Passenger FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Improved FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native 41

42 FS Improved Existing System Roads in the Deep Creek Watershed Roads Analysis Area Road No. BMP EMP Length (miles) Jurisdiction Surface Type Current Condition FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Improved FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Aggregate FS Aggregate FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Improved FS Bituminous FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED 42

43 FS Native 1 CLOSED Existing System Roads in the Deep Creek Watershed Roads Analysis Area Road No. BMP EMP Length (miles) Jurisdiction Surface Type Current Condition FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Aggregate 3 Passenger FS Aggregate 3 Passenger FS Aggregate 3 Passenger FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Aggregate FS Aggregate FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Aggregate FS Aggregate FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Aggregate 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Improved 1 CLOSED 43

44 FS Native 1 CLOSED Existing System Roads in the Deep Creek Watershed Roads Analysis Area Road No. BMP EMP Length (miles) Jurisdiction Surface Type Current Condition FS Native FS Improved FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Improved FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS AC - Asphalt 5 Passenger FS Bituminous 4 Passenger FS Aggregate 3 Passenger FS Aggregate 3 Passenger FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Improved FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Improved 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED 44

45 FS Native 1 CLOSED Existing System Roads in the Deep Creek Watershed Roads Analysis Area Road No. BMP EMP Length (miles) Jurisdiction Surface Type Current Condition FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Improved FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Aggregate FS Aggregate FS Aggregate FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Aggregate 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Improved FS Native 45

46 FS Native 1 CLOSED Existing System Roads in the Deep Creek Watershed Roads Analysis Area Road No. BMP EMP Length (miles) Jurisdiction Surface Type Current Condition FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Improved FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Aggregate FS Aggregate FS Aggregate FS Aggregate 1 CLOSED FS Aggregate 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Aggregate 1 CLOSED FS Aggregate 1 CLOSED FS Aggregate 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Aggregate 1 CLOSED FS Aggregate 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Improved FS Native FS Improved FS Aggregate FS Improved FS Improved FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED 46

47 FS Native Existing System Roads in the Deep Creek Watershed Roads Analysis Area Road No. BMP EMP Length (miles) Jurisdiction Surface Type Current Condition FS Native FS Improved FS Improved FS Improved FS Aggregate FS P - PAVED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Aggregate FS Aggregate FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Improved FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 47

48 FS Native 1 CLOSED Existing System Roads in the Deep Creek Watershed Roads Analysis Area Road No. BMP EMP Length (miles) Jurisdiction Surface Type Current Condition FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Aggregate FS Aggregate FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Improved 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Aggregate FS Aggregate FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Aggregate FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native FS Native FS Native 1 CLOSED 48

49 FS Native 1 CLOSED FS Native 49

50 ROAD NO. APPENDIX 3 RECOMMENDATIONS DEEP CREEK WATERSHED ROAD ANALYSIS Recommended changes in maintenance levels and Recommended Activities LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL FS A Aggregate 3 Passenger 3 Passenger FS A Bituminous 4 Passenger 4 Passenger FS E Native FS E Native FS E Native FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS Replace undersize culverts. Undersized Little Summit and Derr Cr. Segments causing fine sediment and adjustments to channel morphology, some fish passage problems associated Replace undersize culverts. Undersized Little Summit and Derr Cr. Segments causing fine sediment and adjustments to channel morphology, some fish passage problems associated PROJECT DOCUMENT 1 CLOSED Recommend closure, check x-drainage DEEP EIS 1 CLOSED Recommend closure, check x-drainage DEEP EIS 1 CLOSED Recommend closure, check x-drainage DEEP EIS Check 2 crossings, dispersed site at junction, protect dead line and drift fence DEEP EIS FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Recommend closure, check x-drainage DEEP EIS FS E Native 1 CLOSED FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS E Native FS E Native 1 CLOSED Recommend closure, check x-drainage and pipes, wet spot in road, high use woodcutting Check crossdrains; in Class IV & Class III, spot rock Class II,close&cmps Check x-drainage and pipes, 2 class 4 streams, first.2 miles presently open and next 0.6 mile presently closed, remain in current status DEEP EIS DEEP EIS NEED 1 CLOSED Check x-drainage and culvert on class 4, recommend closure DEEP EIS FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Check x-drainage and culvert on class 4, DEEP EIS FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Needs Heavy Reconstruction. Crosses 7 class 4, check pipes, reconstruct pipes Check x-drainage and culvert on class 4, pull pipes, remain in current status Needs reclosed FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Remain level 1, parallels up a class 1V stream FS E Native 1 CLOSED first.2 miles open, last 1 mi closed, check x-drainage, light reconstruction, haul road, only fire access, close first.2 miles with entrance management for fire - only road access for fire in area DEEP EIS DEEP EIS only reconstruction FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED first.2 miles open, last 1 mi closed, check x-drainage, light reconstruction, haul road, only fire access, close first.2 miles with entrance management for fire - only road access for fire in area FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Check x-drainage, remain in current status FS A Native Armor potential class 4 DEEP EIS only reconstruction 50

51 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type FS E Native CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native FS A Native FS A Native FS A Native FS E Native FS A Improved FS A Native FS A Native FS A Native 51 PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS 1 CLOSED On ridge, parallels meadow, recommend closure Current level 2, check x-drainage, armor fords, remain level 2 PROJECT DOCUMENT 1 CLOSED Recommend close, low use DEEP EIS Check crossdrains. Crosses Scab Crosses Scab Dispersed rec site, first.9 open,.7 closed, haul and close last, check x- drainage FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Crosses scabs, check crossdrains, crosses small draws FS B Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED in Class IV, check crossdrainage, Recommend leave open. NEED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED on ridge, rutting, scab FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED on ridge, rutting, scab FS A Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Remain level FS E Native FS A Native FS E Native Heavy reconstruction, present level 2, remain level 2, check x-drainage and upgrade Remain closed, check closures on, 2 crossings 1 class 3, 1 may be 2, check x-drainage, high for fire. DEEP EIS only reconstruction 1 CLOSED Check x-drainage, close last third NEED 1 CLOSED FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED side hill current level 1, recommend decommission, contour ripping, revegetation plan parallels stream high side; Class II; decommission, check cross drainage DEEP EIS

52 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL FS B Native 1 CLOSED FS A Native FS A Native FS A Native FS A Improved FS A Native FS B Native 1 CLOSED RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL 52 PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS PROJECT DOCUMENT Increase mtce. Level to Open High Clearance. NEED FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS B Native 1 CLOSED Check x-drainage, leave open Derr material source, current level 2, leave open, watering site for permitted Drother material source,, ridge top check crossdrains, side hill on ridge Stock driveway off N. end, current level 1, Leave OPEN. current level 1, recommend remain level 1 with entrance management for fire, check x-drainage and pipes Open to high Clearance DEEP EIS FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Ineffective close, needs work. DEEP EIS FS A Improved FS F Native FS E Native FS A Native Decommissioned Decommission last part of road. 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native FS E Native current level 2, access to snow station, remain level 2 current level 2, prop haul, remain level 2 1 CLOSED current level 2, recommend closure, check x-drainage FS A Native check x-drainage, current level 1, proposed haul, crosses 1 class 4, and 1 class 2 (double corral creek), dispersed site on other side of creek, recommend FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned decommission FS A Native check x-drainage, native surface FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, remain closed FS E Native 1 CLOSED Check x-drainage, runs up draw, recommend closure

53 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS PROJECT DOCUMENT FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, // road, class 2 stream, recommend decommission FS F Native Decommissioned current level 2, proposed decommission following all post sale activities, up draw, old head cuts, old crossing, new crossing started, head cutting partially from culverts, check x-crossings, fire no problem when fuels txs completed, DEEP EIS FS A Native Needs Light Reconstruction. Check x-drainage, possible spot rock, maintain level 2, reconstruction DEEP EIS only reconstruction FS A Native ridge,check crossdrains FS A Aggregate Check x-drainage FS E Native 1 CLOSED Ridge top,check crossdrains FS A Native Ridge top,check crossdrains FS A Native Check sizing on pipes, head cuts, check double corral, fish barriers and undersized, w fork, e fork, happy camp, see forest roads analysis FS A Improved Top of ridge, crosses Happy Camp, Double Corral (both fish barriers and undersized), GIS layer does not show all stream crossings. Check Cmp sizing, and Happy Camp Crk Headcuting FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned Class III crossing? decommission, shotgun CMP in FS E Native 1 CLOSED rutted in places, check cross drainage, on ridge FS A Native FS E Native 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Class IV, rutted road, check cross drainage, disp camps at entrance FS E Native 1 CLOSED check crossdrains, on ridge FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS F Native 1 CLOSED current level 2, propose decommission after dispersed rec site, dispersed rec site at entrance, wet and dry meadow system, prohibited haul, class 4 ends at class 1 stream, road in stream bed DEEP EIS 53

54 ROAD NO. APPENDIX 3 RECOMMENDATIONS DEEP CREEK WATERSHED ROAD ANALYSIS Recommended changes in maintenance levels and Recommended Activities CURRENT RECOMMENDED LENGTH MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type LEVEL LEVEL PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS FS A Native Crosses class 4, landslide terrain, // wet meadow part way FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Crosses class 4, landslide terrain, // wet meadow part way FS E Native FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native FS A Native FS A Native in grass scab, check x-drainage, midslope Check x-drainage, accesses dispersed camps, only fire access in area current level 2, check x-drainage, maintain current level PROJECT DOCUMENT FS B Native 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED check x-drainage, FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED check x-drainage, FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED check x-drainage, FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED check x-drainage, FS F Native FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Aggregate 3 Passenger 3 Passenger FS A Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1, check x-drainage, dispersed camps are accessible, forested, hits edge of scab, presently hauling, recommend leave open current level 2, prohibit haul, recommend decommission, dispersed rec site at entrance, wet meadow system, essentially vegetation closing road, may have minimal work to decommission current level 2, needs Heavy reconstruction, open until post sale, recommend closure with access management for fire, check x-drainage Monitor road for water quality/aquatic concerns. Crosses west fork and east fork of Crazy Creek, Happy Camp, Double Corral, and five intermittent, midslope, fish presence in five perennial streams, more stream crossings than GIS shows. Spotted knapweed, treated yearly & declining FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned dispersed recreation, in Class IV, decommission NEED DEEP EIS DEEP EIS 54

55 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type FS A Native FS A Aggregate CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS dispersed recreation, check crossdrains, resurface Proposed for Heavy reconstruction, w fork crazy creek crossing, check x-drainage, Heavy Reconstruction FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Cross class 4, check pipes and x-drainage FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, slated and recommended for decommissioning, prohibit use, check x-drainage, 2 crossings/pipes, current level 1, in class 4 and crosses class 4, recommend decommission current level 1, check x-drainage, proposed and recommended for decommissioning, mid-slope, scab, reseeding FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Check x-drainage, mid-slope road FS E Native 1 CLOSED Recommend closure, fire management access FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED no change PROJECT DOCUMENT DEEP EIS only reconstruction DEEP EIS DEEP EIS FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Heavy Reconstruction, check crossdrains. DEEP EIS FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS E current level 1, recommend decommissioning, check x-drainage and culverts (also first segment) DEEP EIS 1 CLOSED current level 2, light reconstruct first.2 miles - drainage - then to level 1 DEEP EIS FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, goes up draw, recommend decommission FS F Native FS A Aggregate FS F Aggregate FS F Native FS F Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Decommissioned current level 2, dispersed camp first part, access to creek, proposed for decommissioning, water conservation plan to leave pump chances open, leave first 200' to leave open check x-drainage/pipe, turning area into heli-logging, resurface, retain level 2 first I/2 crosses Class III; size CMP; 11 Class II, III & IV; resurface, check crossdrains, decommission current level 2, proposed closure, check x-drainage, pull pipe, opportunity for reveg., decommission DEEP EIS DEEP EIS DEEP EIS Decommissioned current level 1, recommend decommission DEEP EIS FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, recommend decommission NEED Light Reconstruction. current level 1, accessible, used in past for stock movement, crosses class 1 crazy creek, // class 4, check x-drainage, recommend decommission last.3 miles and maintain first 1 mile at DEEP EIS only FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level reconstruction FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED prohibit haul, check x-drainage, pull culverts under restoration, 55

56 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS A Native FS A Native FS A Native FS A Native FS F Native FS A Native PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS current level 1, check x-drainage, recommend x-drainage, decp,,ossopm 2 class 4 cross, 1 class 3 cross, check pipes and x-drainage, Check x-drainage, Check x-drainage, Decommissioned current level 2, check x-drainage, recommend decommission FS A Aggregate 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED check on closure FS A Native Wildlife, dispersed rec site at entrance. Aspen material source road, aggregate surface, FS B Improved 1 CLOSED current level 2, landslide terrain, check x-drainage, seasonal gate both ends til June 1, maintain current level current level 1, landslide terrain, //class 2, check x-drainage, closed last.5 mile, recommend decommission last.5 mile, maintain first.5 mile at FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level FS F Native FS A Improved FS D Native Decommissioned 1 CLOSED current level 2, dispersed site in riparian class 2 at culvert, going to relocate road to bench, pump chance, recommend decommission current level 2, check x-drainage, // class 2, check pipe sizes, high dispersed rec, spot rock, maintain current level current level 2, crosses top of dam, concern of stability, columbia spotted frog habitat, access to draw water, recommend closure at dam, maintain current level and for drafting PROJECT DOCUMENT NEED FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1, ineffective closure, pull 1-2 culverts, re-close DEEP EIS FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1, ineffective closure, check x-drainage DEEP EIS FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, check x-drainage, recommend decommission FS B Native 1 CLOSED current level 1, accessible, check x-drainage, recommend open NEED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED On ridge, hook road, check and maintain at current level FS A Native Check x-drainage, across scab, FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned check crossdrains - crosses numerous draws, ends at Class III; pull CMPS; revegitate,check fills & draws - when pull CMPS,decomm. (inters. To west) recommend decommission 56

57 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type FS A Native FS E Native FS E Native FS E Native CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS Crosses numerous draws, check x-drainage, check for pipes in closed section, check fills, maintain current levels for first 2 sections 1 CLOSED current level 2, crosses class 4, recommend closure, check pipe and class 4 stream, check x-drainage 1 CLOSED current level 2, recommend closure 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Check x-drainage current level 2, has decommissioned section off end, recommend closure FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, recommend decommission, check x-drainage FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED data base problem, under 854 road, CHECK DATABASE FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED ridgetop, FS F Native Decommissioned FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED check x-drainage, FS A Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED PROJECT DOCUMENT current level 2, 1.2 miles proposed for decommissioning by creek, road // to meadow, check x-drainage and culverts DEEP EIS check x-drainage, current level 1, // class 4, Heavy reconstruction, check x-drainage, maintain current level FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1, maintain current level, check x-drainage DEEP EIS only reconstruction FS A Improved current level 2, recommend closure of native surface portion - segment 2, maintain current level for segment 1, entrance management for fire and other administrative, check x-drainage, 2 class 4 crossings, FS E Native 1 CLOSED current level 2, recommend closure of native surface portion - segment 2, maintain current level for segment 1, entrance management for fire and other administrative, check x-drainage, 2 class 4 crossings, FS E Native 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 2, proposed for closure, first 3 miles open, last.8 mile closed, check x-drainage, multiple class 4 crossings, fire access management Heavy reconstruction, current level 1, crosses 6 class 4 draws, check x- drainage, midslope, // creek, unable to drive southern portion, maintain first mile to maintain current level and recommend southern section (1.5 mi.) decommission FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1, maintain current level DEEP EIS DEEP EIS only reconstruction 57

58 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS PROJECT DOCUMENT FS A AC - Asphalt 5 Passenger - HIGH DEGREE OF USER COMFORT 5 Passenger - HIGH DEGREE OF USER COMFORT FS A Bituminous 4 Passenger 4 Passenger Monitor for water quality/aquatic concerns. Check pipes. Either paved or graveled, Paved parallels Deep Creek, then parallels Buck Hollow Creek (one fish barrier and sediment delivery from cut slope), then ridge top, in and out of watershed FS A Aggregate 3 Passenger 3 Passenger FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED in Deep Creek, Class II FS F Native Decommissioned Monitor for water quality/aquatic concerns. Check pipes. Either paved or graveled, Paved parallels Deep Creek, then parallels Buck Hollow Creek (one fish barrier and sediment delivery from cut slope), then ridge top, in and out of watershed. in Deep Creek; decommission, effects N Fork Crooked Class I Deep Creek FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned in Deep Creek Class II, decommission FS A Native FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS A Improved Dispersed site - Class I; improve or discourage current level 1, scab, swales, recommend decommission last.5 mile, prescribed fire prior to closing FS A Improved 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Crosses 3 class 4, check x-drainage, check pipe sizing FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1, check x-drainage, check on pipes to see if pulled, on ridge, prescribed fire prior to closing O FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, used for haul, winter logged, check x-drainage, crosses w fork buck hollow, recommend look at for decommission, FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned Recommend Decommission NEED FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned Recommend Decommission NEED FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned Recommend Decommission NEED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED sound trough material source - active, FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Check x-drainage, FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED 58 Scab, rare plant association, check post-burn for potential sediment problems.

59 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Crosses 2 class 3 draws, check x-drainage FS A Improved FS A Native FS A Native FS A Native To Stump Spring, midslope, current level 2, check x-drainage, maintain current level, access to Paulina Butte current level 2, crosses 1 class 4, check 3 culverts, check x-drainage, maintain current level PROJECT DOCUMENT FS A Aggregate FS D Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED (Seasonal) FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS F Aggregate 1 CLOSED Decommissioned Many undersized pipes, check x-drainage, possible resurfacing, potholes, possible dispersed site closure, landslide terrain in 1 segment sections 34/35 from seg Needs heavy reconstruction. Gate frequently open on both ends, maintain gates, crosses 2 class 4, undersized pipe, high dispersed use, knapweed being treated, recommend maintain current level with seasonal travel restrictions current level 1, prohibit haul, proposed decommission, check for recontouring, current level 1, prohibit haul, recommend decommission, check x- drainage DEEP EIS DEEP EIS FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned NEED FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS A Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS E Native FS E Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1, prohibit haul, proposed decommission check x-drainage, pull pipe 1 class 4 crossing, check x-drainage, check pipe sizing, heritage, maintain current level with fire access 1 class 4 crossing, check x-drainage, check pipe sizing, heritage, maintain current level with fire access 59

60 APPENDIX 3 RECOMMENDATIONS DEEP CREEK WATERSHED ROAD ANALYSIS Recommended changes in maintenance levels and Recommended Activities ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS PROJECT DOCUMENT FS A Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS F Native Light Reconstruction. Check x-drainage, may need pipe, DEEP EIS Decommissioned FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 2, 2 class 4 crossings, check x-drainage, proposed for haul, recommend pull pipe and decommission current level 2, 2 class 4 crossings, check x-drainage, proposed for haul, recommend pull pipe and decommission FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned NEED FS E Native FS A Improved FS E Native 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native Crosses multi channels, check pipe sizing, //to 2,3,4, 1 CLOSED current level 2, recommend closure at 605, fire management access FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Improved FS F Native FS A Native FS A Native Decommissioned current level 2, crosses class 3, check x-drainage, toggle meadows, recommend decommission FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED closed system remove Class IV (2) Class II (1); in draw; remove CMP's FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED closed system remove Class IV (2) Class II (1); in draw; remove CMP's FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Beetle MS crosses Class IV draw, check cross drains 60

61 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL FS A Aggregate 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1 - gate, FS A Aggregate FS A Native FS A Native FS E Native FS E Native FS E Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS Timothy material source, crosses class 4, check x-drainage, size pipes. current level 2, check cross drains and pipe sizing PROJECT DOCUMENT FS A Aggregate 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1 by gate, maintain current level, check x-drainage FS A Aggregate 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1 by gate, check x-drainage, maintain current level FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1 by gate, check x-drainage, maintain current level FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED same as FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1 by gate, check x-drainage, maintain current level FS D Native FS A Native FS A Native FS A Native FS F Improved FS A Native FS A Improved FS A Aggregate 1 CLOSED (Seasonal) Decommissioned FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 2, crosses class 4, check x-streams and pipe sizes, recommend closure and maintain fire access Check x-drainage, pipe on class 4 - check size, plugged pipe, sizing pipe and surface. midslope to Wilson Spring; check cross drains, wetlands class II current level 2, // class 2,4, head cuts, repair head cut and pipe at 4254, check x-drainage, recommend decommissioning current level 2, crosses 7 class 3 draws and 5 class 4, check x- drainage, resize pipe, crosses 6 class 4, check x-drainage, resurface current level 1, proposed and recommended for decommissioning, end haul toggle creek and class 4 crossing DEEP EIS 61

62 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS PROJECT DOCUMENT FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS A Native FS E Native FS F Native FS F Native current level 1, proposed and recommended for decommission, rehabilitate landing at 010 junction, check x-drainage for at least one class 4 drain Needs Heavy Reconstruction. proposed remain open DEEP EIS DEEP EIS only reconstruction 1 CLOSED Heavy Reconstruction. proposed closure DEEP EIS Decommissioned FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS A Native FS E Native FS E Native FS A Native FS F Improved FS A Improved FS F Improved FS A Aggregate current level 2, both ends into 58 road proposed for decommissioning, this.4 proposed for decommissioning, DEEP EIS Decommissioned proposed decommissioning DEEP EIS 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 2, proposed for decommissioning, DEEP EIS current level 2, this section remain open, dispersed rec site at junc with 108 Decommissioned proposed for decommissioning DEEP EIS FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Aggregate FS A Native change pipe sec 20, 12 crossings class 2,3,4, check pipe sizes, check thornton creek culvert 62

63 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL FS B Native 1 CLOSED RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS PROJECT DOCUMENT Increase mtce. Level to Open High Clearance. NEED FS E Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS E Native FS E Native 1 CLOSED current level 2, proposed for closure, check x-drainage, recommend leave open to 250 jct, noxious weeds at jct, pull pipe past 250 and check x-drainage current level 1, prohibit haul, bisects wet meadow?, retain current status, check x-drainage, Prohibit Use, will require reconstruction. current level 2, proposed and recommend for closure, check x- drainage, check pipe 1 CLOSED current level 2, recommend closure DEEP EIS DEEP EIS FS F Native Decommissioned current level 2, proposed and recommended for decommissioning, check x-drainage and pipe (at least 2 need pulling) FS F Native Decommissioned current level 2, road is creek bottom, drainage structures needed, any cross drain pipes need to be pulled, discontinuous contours proposed, head cut due to proximity of road, recommend decommission DEEP EIS only reconstruction FS A Native, branches off 410, class 4 along road, head cut present, need to look at for haul FS E Native 1 CLOSED FS E Native 1 CLOSED FS A Native Landslide terrain, check pipes and x-drainages FS F Native Decommissioned current level 2, at least 2 class 4 crossings need to be checked, probably head cuts, recommend decommission FS A Improved Landslide terrain, crosses at least 6 class 4 streams, check 6 pipes, check initial x-drainage, resurface low sites, high dispersed rec, possibly construct French drains, larger pipes?, recommend maintain at current DEEP EIS only level with reconstruction. reconstruction 63

64 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS current level 2, landslide terrain, x's 1 class 4, check x-drainage, waterbars present, recommend decommission from 500 jct to where FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned road turns to go west, FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED decommission, off FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned decommission, lanslide terrain, check x-drainage, off FS A Native FS A Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS E Native 1 CLOSED crosses scab PROJECT DOCUMENT FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned FS A Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS D Native 1 CLOSED (Seasonal) FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS F Native FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS E Native 64 current level 2, proposed haul, sec 24 crosses swales, at least class 4 crossings, // class 3, check pipe sizing, recommend decommission on segment 2 and maintain seg 1 current level 2, class 4 draw, check for closure Decommissioned current level 2, // class 2, rutted road, recommend decommission NEED 1 CLOSED FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, recommend decommission post sale FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Aggregate Heavy Reconstruction parallels and crosses class 4; check cmp and cross drainage Heavy Reconstruction parallels and crosses class 4; check cmp and cross drainage

65 ROAD NO. LENGTH (MILES) JURISDICTION Strategy Surface Type FS E Native CURRENT MAINTENANCE LEVEL RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE LEVEL 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 1, proposed haul FS D Native FS D Native 1 CLOSED (Seasonal) 1 CLOSED (Seasonal) FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS A Native PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS current level 2, check x-drainage, recommend closure with access management, // class 3 and FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED parallels class 3 part way, close, check cross drainage FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED ridge top FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED ridge top FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED ridge top FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED ridge FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED ridge FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED ridge FS A Native FS A Aggregate midslope; parallels draw, check cross drainage 4 class 4 crossings, resize pipes, spot rock FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, // class 4, crosses drainage, recommend decommission PROJECT DOCUMENT NEED FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, proposed and recommended for decommission DEEP EIS FS F Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 1, proposed and recommended for decommission FS F Native FS E Native FS F Native FS A Native Decommissioned crosses Thornton creek, decommission 1 CLOSED parallels class 4; CLOSE FS B Native 1 CLOSED Decommissioned current level 2, drops to class 3, recommend decommission TO Round Meadow Cottonwood Dispersed Rec (Thornton MS), pond planted with fish by ODFW. Cottonwood Dispersed Rec (Thornton MS), pond planted with fish by ODFW. Recommend leave open. NEED 65

66 FS A Aggregate FS B Native 1 CLOSED FS E Native crosses 1 class 2, resize pipe resurface Increase mtce. Level to Open High Clearance. NEED 1 CLOSED FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED current level 2, weeds, recommend close or decommission FS F Native Decommissioned FS A Native 1 CLOSED 1 CLOSED FS F Native Decommissioned current level 2, weeds, recommend close or decommission, check x- drainage current level 1, check x-drainage, meets class 4 if not crosses, maintain current level goes into Little Summit Campground; resurface;geotextile and surfacing to dispersed rec. site, decommission for meadow restoration. Appendix 3 Recommendations Decommissioned Roads Deep Creek Watershed Road Analysis Recommended Changes to Existing Decommissioned Roads ROAD Length Current Maintenance Recommended Maintenance NO. (Miles) Strategy Surf Level Level Project Recommendations Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned 1 crossing, class IV Native Decommissioned Decommissioned B System Native Decommissioned Convert ot Open System Road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned draw; check crossing; close Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Class IV; close, check cross drainage Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned up a draw up a Class IV; pull CMP; decommission, Native Decommissioned Needs Work Decommission Parallels Callop near road 12 Might have been decommissioned to Rock Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Creek, Adjacent to dry meadow Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Convert ot Open System Road, Open road 'Barn Units, check cross drainage and spot B System Native Decommissioned rock Native Decommissioned Decommissioned 66 PROJECT DOCUMENT

67 Appendix 3 Recommendations Decommissioned Roads Deep Creek Watershed Road Analysis Recommended Changes to Existing Decommissioned Roads ROAD NO. Length (Miles) Strategy Surf Current Maintenance Level Recommended Maintenance Level Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Project Recommendations cross Class IV, parellels a Class II - Pere Creek B System Native Decommissioned Convert ot Open System Road, Open Green Dot Happy Camp, Crosses Class II/IV < Heavy dispersed rec, weeds present Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses a draw (Class II now) Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses a draw (Class IV now) Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 2 Class IV's; some midslope Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 1 Class IV; ridge top Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope & goes into draw Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridgetop Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope Native Decommissioned Decommissioned rosses 1 draw; check CMP Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridgetop Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope Native Decommissioned Decommissioned cuts & crosses a Class IV Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses a Class IV Native Decommissioned Decommissioned cuts a draw & turns mid-slope Native Decommissioned Decommissioned cuts a draw & turns mid-slope Native Decommissioned Decommissioned parallels steep draw and wet meadow, Parallels Callop Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridgetop PROJECT DOCUMENT 67

68 ROAD NO. Length (Miles) Strategy Surf Current Maintenance Level Recommended Maintenance Level Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned_OPEN Needs Work Decommission Project Recommendations crosses 4 Class IV; mid-slope, Callop on other side of road 42, weeds. Needs additional work to place in decommission. May cross 1 drainage. PROJECT DOCUMENT Native Decommissioned_OPEN Needs Work Decommission Needs additional work to place in decommission Native Decommissioned_OPEN Needs Work Decommission Needs additional work to place in decommission Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope; but goes into a draw Native Decommissioned Decommissioned cuts a Class IV Native Decommissioned Decommissioned draw Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridge road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridge road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridge top Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridge top Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned parellels Deep, etc Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned parellels Class III Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 1 draw Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridge top road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Goes through and parallel to small moist meadow. Goes through Callop where it comes of road

69 Appendix 3 Recommendations Decommissioned Roads Deep Creek Watershed Road Analysis Recommended Changes to Existing Decommissioned Roads ROAD NO. Length (Miles) Strategy Surf Current Maintenance Level Recommended Maintenance Level Project Recommendations Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 1 draw & parallels another Murderers Creek. Goes through and parallel to small moist meadow Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 1 Class IV Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 1 draw (Class IV now) Native Decommissioned Decommissioned cuts a Class IV Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Crosses stream near aspen. Hydro process disrupted. Extensive through SD9221, Crosses Callop in two places and runs paralle Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 1 Class IV - goes up a draw. In Callop for length Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Parallel and within select pop for 1/4 length Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Callop in wet meadow - aquatics rank? Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Callop in wet meadow - aquatics rank? Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Callop in wet meadow - aquatics rank? Native Decommissioned Decommissioned cuts Class IV the whole way. SK and DK Large population. Has been treated for years Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 1 draw; mostly ridge top Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridge top Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridge top Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridge top Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Parallels callop Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridge top Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope roads Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope roads Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses Class IV B System Native Decommissioned 1 Closed cuts a Class IV PROJECT DOCUMENT 69

70

71 ROAD NO. Length (Miles) Strategy Surf Current Maintenance Level Recommended Maintenance Level 71 Project Recommendations Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Adj. to select population B System Native Decommissioned Convert ot Open System Road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned parallels a draw Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses a draw Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Bisects select population Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 1 Class IV; parellels a draw. Bisects select pop of Callop Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Bisects and parallels select Callop Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses & parellels Class IV B System Native Decommissioned 1 Closed Convert ot Closed System Road B System Native Decommissioned 1 Closed Convert to Closed System Road. Parallel to select pop. entire length. Road ends in wet meadow and Callop, Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Botrychium. Weeds Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Road ends in Callop Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned parellels Class III (W. Fork Thorton) Native Decommissioned Decommissioned cuts a draw Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope & duts a draw Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned parallels Class III & crosses Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 1 Class IV (W. Fork Thornton) Native Decommissioned Decommissioned ridge top road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned cuts a draw (Class IV now) Native Decommissioned Decommissioned cuts a class IV Native Decommissioned Decommissioned mid-slope road Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses Class IV Native Decommissioned Decommissioned crosses 2 Class IV's & cuts 1 Class IV Native Decommissioned Decommissioned B System Native Decommissioned Convert ot Open System Road, crossses Class III stream. Private land access. PROJECT DOCUMENT

72 Definitions: Management Strategies: A. Maintain As Is: (Existing maintenance efforts are generally in balance with access needs, no resource impacts are identified that would warrant a change in maintenance levels.) B. Increase Maintenance Level: (Access needs identified exceed existing maintenance efforts and/or resource impacts have been identified that indicate a need to perform maintenance at a higher level.) C. Decrease Maintenance Level: (Access needs identified do not support maintaining road at current level. Resource impacts are low and do not require maintenance to continue at present level.) D. Implement Seasonal Travel Restrictions: (Access is generally needed during the snow free season, but resource concerns indicate a need for travel restrictions to be implemented to mitigate negative impacts.) E. Close Year Around: (Access needs are low and only necessary for administrative or project use. Road can be closed between projects. Resource concerns or maintenance budget limitations indicate a need to close road between project activities.) F. Decommission or Convert to Other Uses: (Full-sized vehicle access is no longer needed, road can be removed from the transportation inventory. Road can either be stabilized and returned to resource production or converted to other uses such as a motorized or non-motorized trail.) Current and Recommended Condition Open - These roads are maintained to be suitable for use by passenger cars. Generally, these roads are identified as maintenance level 3, 4, or 5. High Clearance - These roads are kept open for high clearance vehicles such as pickups or all purpose vehicles). These roads are identified as maintenance level 2. Closed - These roads are kept in a storage or closed condition. These roads are needed for long-term, intermittent access and are occasionally reopened. These roads are identified as maintenance level 1. Decommissioned - These roads have been closed, stabilized, and are allowed to revert to a more natural state. These roads are not needed. These roads are not categorized by maintenance level. System - A new road that is needed for long-term motor vehicle access. Surface Type Asphalt-These are paved or concrete roads. Bituminous - These roads have a gavel/oil surface that closely resembles paved roads. Aggregate- These are gravel roads. Improved These roads have a rock surface. Native-These are dirt roads. 72

73 73

74 74

75 75