1. GIS Study of the Kelsey-Whisky Logging Plan Jared Chapiewsky Matthew Bloch U of Wisconsin, Madison

2. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is planning to sell the rights to log 1400 acres of old growth and mature forest along a popular stretch of the Rogue River in southwestern Oregon. The plan has been criticized on the grounds that it will detract from the scenic value of the area and destroy habitat of the Northern Spotted Owl, which is protected under the Endangered Species Act. This study examines whether these two objections are supported by available data.. Introduction

3. Background Location of the Study Area

4. Background Map of the Study Area

5. Background Views of the Area

6. October 2000Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) presented for 90-day public review. February 2001Final EIS presented for 30-day review. April 2001BLM decides to go forward with the plan. August 20049 th Circuit Court rules that “critical habitat” must be protected under the Endangered Species Act. TodayBLM has still not advertised the Kelsey Whisky timber sale; environmental groups prepare to file lawsuits. Background Timeline of Events

7. Description The section of the Rogue River running through the study area is designated as a “Wild and Scenic River” and is a popular destination for rafters and kayakers. In 2003, 13,447 visitors floated through the study area, according to BLM statistics. A hiking trail parallels this section of the Rogue River to the North. A scenic byway borders the northern part of the area to be logged. … Scenic Impact

8. We tested the visibility of clearcut areas from the Rogue River, the trail and the scenic road using viewshed analysis. We used DEM data from the USGS. We also incorporated tree species data from the Oregon Natural Heritage Program. We modified the DEM by adding the average tree height of each species to the DEM. 100 meter buffers were defined around viewing locations, to adjust for a ground-based perspective. Conceptualization Scenic Impact

9. Tree data over a DEM Scenic Impact

10. Northern Spotted Owl The Northern Spotted Owl nests in stands of old growth forest in the Pacific Northwest. It is listed as a “threatened species” under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 Environmental groups have used the bird’s protected status to halt logging in the past. Owl Impact

11. Owl Habitat Data Under the Endangered Species Act, the US Fish and Wildlife Service must conduct habitat surveys of all threatened and endangered species. The Northern Spotted Owl survey was conducted in 1994 and updated infrequently. The survey defines areas of “critical habitat” and “owl activity centers.” “Owl activity centers” are defined as 100 acre buffers around observed nesting sites. The BLM designed the logging plan to minimize encroachment on owl activity centers (but not critical habitat). Owl Impact

12. Owl Activity Centers Owl Impact

13. Habitat Encroachment Map Results

14. Findings: The clear-cut areas are not in the owl activity centers Therefore, the complaint is not supported. Problems? Results

15. Problem #1: Age of Data Owl Activity Centers from 1994. Owls moved into clear-cut areas since? Very Possible: 1000 acre range but only 100 acre habitat buffer. Results

16. Problem #2: Perfect Fit? Results

17. Conclusions: BLM avoided Owl Activity Centers Proximity to close for comfort? Based on the available data and the criteria of NFP, the complaint is not supported. Data old and activity centers arbitrary How good is the Northern Forest Plan? Results

18. Conclusions: Different interpretations of the ESA - broader definitions of protected habitat Recent federal court decision – ALL critical habitat protected Timber Sale on hold Results

19. Scenic Impact: Treeless Map Results

20. Scenic Impact: Tree Map

21. Findings: Less than 1% of river could see at least 1 clear-cut area ~ 6% of the trail. ~ 49% of road! And about 25% of road can see more than one clear-cut. Which clear cuts are the most visible? Viewsheds from river, trail, and road Results

22. Most Visible Clearcuts: Road Results

23. Most Visible ClearCuts: River Results

24. Most Visible Clearcuts: Trail Results

25. Clearcuts for On-Site Investigation Results

26. Conclusions Scenic Impact Complaint Valid with byway Environmental Impact Statement does not consider byway On-Site Surveys - visibility from river and trail at very least Results

27. Potential Sources of Error Use of centroids as view points Assignment of tree heights Conditions on the Ground Results

28. Final Conclusions Habitat Encroachment Complaint subject to legal interpretation Scenic Impact Complaint: - minimal from river - high from road Many questionable aspects: - What degree of habitat encroachment is acceptable? - Should the Scenic Byway be considered? Reassessment of Timber Sale needed? Review

29. Future Tasks 3d Analysis (fly through, etc.) Improve Viewshed Accuracy - on-site verification Collection of up-to-date owl habitat data Monitoring court decisions and policy changes