2018 Southwestern R.J\;f P and Nortlnrestern & Coastal RMP Evaluation - Oregon/ Washington BLM

2018 Evaluation of the Southwestern Resource Management Plan and the Northwestern & Coastal Resource Management Plan

I. Introduction and Background

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Oregon/Washington (OR/WA) conducted this Resource Management Plan (RMP) evaluation to consider new information associated with the Western Oregon Tribal Fairness Act of 2018 (WOTFA) (Public Law 115-103). The act directed the BLM to convey 32,539 acres that were previously administered by the Bureau's Northwest Oregon 1, Coos Bay, and Roseburg Districts to the Confederated Tribe of the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians and the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians ( collectively, the Tribes). Land use planning direction for these conveyed lands was estab lished in the 20 16 Northwestern and Coastal Oregon Record of Decision (ROD) and RMP ( orthwestem and Coastal Oregon RMP) and the 2016 Southwestern Oregon Record of Decision and RMP (Southwestern Oregon RMP). Collectively, these wi ll be referred to as the RMPs.

The BLM developed and analyzed the 2016 RMPs under the assumption that the BLM would continue managing these 32,539 acres in confonnance with the Oregon and California Revested Lands Sustained Yield Management Act of 1937 and the Coos Bay Wagon Road Act of 1939 (O&C Act)(43 U.S.C. §§ 260 1 et seq., fonnerly43 U.SC. §§ 1181a etseq.). TheO&CAct directs that the O&C lands be managed "for pennanent forest production, and the timber thereon shall be sold, cut, and removed in conformity with the principal of sustained yield for the purpose of providing a permanent source of timber supply, protecting watersheds, regulating stream flow, and contributing to the economic stability oflocal communities and industries, and providing recreational facilities." The O&C Act goes on to state that "[t]he annual productive capacity for such lands shall be determined and declared ... (p]rovided. [t]hat timber from said lands ... not less than the annual sustained yield capacity ... shall be sold annually, or so much thereof as can be sold at reasonable prices on a normal market."

This is an unscheduled RMP evaluation that was completed in conformance with 43 CFR 1610.4-9 and the RMPs. The BLM planning regulations at 43 CFR 16 10.4-9 state: "The Field Manager shall be responsible for monitoring and evaluating the plan in accordance with the established intervals and standards and at other times as appropriate to determine whether there is sufficient cause to warrant amendment or revision of the plan." The RMPs established that the BLM would conduct plan evaluations at 5-year intervals, but acknowledged that the BLM could conduct unscheduled plan evaluations to address certain unanticipated events or new information that would call into question the underlying analysis and decisions of the plan (Northwestern and Coastal Oregon RMP, p. l 12; Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 134).

In order to determine whether an RMP amendment and/or revision would be necessary as a result of implementing WOTF A, this plan evaluation considered whether the conveyances would substantially alter the scope of resource uses previously approved in the RM Ps and/or the scope of effects that were previously analyzed in the 2016 Proposed No11hwestem and Coastal and

1 The Eugene and Salem Districts merged into the Northwest Oregon District after the 20 I 6 RMPs were approved.

2018 Southwestern RMP and Northwestern & Coastal RMP Evaluation - Oregon/ Washington BLM

Southwestern RMPs/Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). This plan evaluation summarizes the findings of an interdisciplinary analysis completed by a team of BLM subject matter experts after the passage of WOTF A, which is described in more detail in the appendix.

II. Questions and Findings Related to the BLM's Ability to Implement the RMPs

The RMPs allocated the 32,539 acres of conveyed lands into a variety of different classifications for timber management that would have guided how the BLM implemented the O&C Act on these lands {Appendix, Section II.A). The RMP evaluation considered whether the conveyances would substantially alter the BLM's ability to implement the management direction in the RMPs to such an extent that an RMP amendment or revision would be appropriate. The plan evaluation identified three key issues to consider as to whether the BLM's ability to implement the RMPs' resource use decisions was substantiall y al tered. The BLM detennined that no other RMP­approved resource use decisions would be affected, either because of the relatively small acreage of the conveyances or because other major resource uses were not occurring on the specific lands that were conveyed.

A. Do the Allowable Sale Quantities for the Coos Bay, Eugene, or Roseburg Sustained­Yield Units Need to be Recalculated?

The allowable sale quantity (ASQ), or the annual productive capacity, for each sustained-yield unit of the O&C lands is influenced, in part, by the total Harvest Land Base {HLB) acreage (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, p. 342). In order to detennine whether the RMPs ' ASQs need to be recalculated, the BLM analyzed the harvest modeling data used in the calculation of the ASQ for the RMPs to estimate the potential reduction in ASQ from the reduction in HLB acreage (Appendix, Section 11.B; Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 1206-1208; 1215-1216). This 2018 effort projected low- and high-range decadal effects of the new acreages at Oto 2 percent (Appendix, Section 11.8). The RMPs disclosed that the Coos Bay and orthwest Oregon Districts' ASQs may vary as much as 40 percent on an annual basis and as much as 20 percent on a decadal basis and that the Roseburg Disttict's ASQs may vary as much as 30 percent on a decadal basis (Northwestern and Coastal RMP, p. 6; Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 6). Given that the RMPs have already provided for far greater variabilities in each District's ASQs for their sustained-yield units than what the 2018 plan evaluation has projected, the conveyances are unlikely to have any meaningful immediate or overall effect on the BLM's ability to implement this aspect of the RMPs. Therefore, WOTFA conveyances do not require recalculation of the ASQ for the Roseburg, Coos Bay, or Northwest Oregon sustained-yield units at this time.

B. Has the Roseburg District 's Ability to lmpleme11t Selectio11 Harvest or Commercial Thimiing Treatments on Late-Successional Reserve - Dry Lands in the South River Field Office been Substantially Altered?

The RMP directs the BLM to "apply selection harvest or commercial thinning treatments to at least 4,500 acres per decade in the South River Field Office of Roseburg District" on lands that were allocated as Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) -

2

2018 Southwestern RMP and Northv.·estern & Coastal RMP Evaluation - Oregon/ Washington BLM

Dry (Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 74). The conveyances reduced the South Ri ver Field Office's 97,544 acres of LSR - Dry lands by 8,240 acres and, thereby, could potentially reduce the BLM's ability to implement this component of the RMP. However, the Proposed RMP/Final EIS estimated that an average of 16,132 acres of lands allocated as LSR - Dry could be sustainably treated per decade (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 1206-1208; 1215-1216). This plan evaluation used the same methodologies as the RMPs to determine whether the reduction in the LSR - Dry acreage from the conveyances would affect the BLM's ability to implement the RMP. This effort projected that the acreage reduction would result in an average potential reduction of 1,238 acres treated per decade, which means the South River Field Office would still be able to sustainably treat up to 14,894 acres of LSR - Dry per decade (Appendix, Section 11.C). This is still substantially more than the 4,500 acres of treatments per decade directed by the RMP. Therefore, the conveyances do not substantially a lter the abi lity of the South River Field Office to implement the RM P's direction for selection harvest or commercial thinning treatments on lands allocated as the LSR - Dry.

C. ls Special Management Still Suitable at tl,e Tater Hill Area of Critical Environmental Concern?

The conveyances transferred 43 acres of the Roseburg District South River Field Office's 304-acre Tater Hill Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC)/Research Natural Area. The BLM designated the Tater Hill ACEC based on the relevance and importance of natural hazards associated with an active landslide (Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 256). The active landslide currently covers approximately 100 acres of the 304-acre ACEC, and approximately 20 acres of the 43 conveyed acres are within the active landslide (personal communication, Aaron Roe, BLM, South River Field Office ACEC lead, 2018). The remaining 261 acres of the ACEC, including approximately 80 acres of active landslide, continue to meet the BLM's criteria for ACEC designation. Therefore, no change to the ACEC is necessary as a result of the conveyances other than to update the acreage and boundary of the ACEC through plan maintenance.

Ill. Questions and Findings Related to the RMPs' Effects Analyses

The RMP evaluation considered whether the conveyances substantially altered the validity of the BLM's previous effects analyses disclosed in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS to such an extent that an RMP amendment or revision would be appropriate. This plan evaluation determined that the Proposed RMP/Final EIS' effects analyses for the following resources and programs remain valid because: (I) the conveyance acreage was relatively too small to alter the effects analyses at the scale and scope of the RMPs; (2) the analyses did not depend on any of the specific lands that were conveyed; and/or (3) the analyses did not depend on a total acreage of SLM-administered lands within the planning area: air quality; cultural resources; fire, fuels, and wildfire response; invasive species; lands, realty, and roads; paleontological resources; rare plants and fungi; visual resource management; wildlife habitat (other than northern spotted owl and marbled rnurrelet); minerals; soil resources; and sustainable energy. None of the conveyed lands were previously

3

2018 Sowhwestern RMP and Northwestern & Coastal RMP Evaluation - Oregon/ Washington BLM

managed for livestock grazing under the RMPs. The plan evaluation identified the following six key issues to consider as to whether the RMPs' previous effects analyses remain va lid under the new conditions.

A. Has the Total Amount of Non-A SQ Timber Volume that will be Produced from the Coos Bay, Eugene, or Roseburg Sustained-Yield Units been Substantially Altered?

The conveyances reduced the acreages of land the RMPs allocated as LSR and Riparian Reserve in the Coos Bay, Eugene, and Roseburg sustained-yield units (Table 5) and, thereby, could potentially reduce the BLM 's ability to provide non-ASQ timber volume. The RMPs did not identify a targeted annual or decadal amount of non-A SQ timber volume or otherwise commit to producing a specific amount of non-ASQ volume (Northwestern and Coastal Oregon RMP, p. 7, Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 6). The Proposed RMP/Final EIS projected that non-ASQ timber volume would be produced each decade as a by-product of implementing silvicultural treatments to improve habitat conditions in the LSR and the Riparian Reserve (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 350-355). Thus, the provision of non-ASQ timber volume is not an RMP decision but rather an outcome that the Proposed RMP/Final EIS anticipated in the effects analyses. Updated timber harvest estimates completed fo r this plan evaluation projected that there could be a nrnximum 4 to 6 percent decadal decrease in the non­ASQ timber volume harvested in the Coos Bay, Eugene, and Roseburg Districts' sustained-yield units (Appendix, Section Il l.A). The maximum potential decadal reduction in non-A SQ timber volume represents a small percentage of the total amount of non-ASQ timber volume estimated in the Proposed RMP/Final E IS; therefore, the conveyances have not substantially altered the Proposed RMP/Final EIS' effects analyses.

B. Have Estimates of Timber Sale Payment to the O&C Counties been Substantially Altered?

The Proposed RMP/Final EIS estimated the payments the counties would receive as a percentage of the receipts from BLM timber sold and harvested based on the distribution formula in the O&C Act (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 687-697). However, the O&C counties are currently receiving extended payments under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act rather than from timber receipts under the O&C Act. It is still uncertain whether the O&C counties will continue to receive such extended payments or if they will receive payments based on timber receipts in the future (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, p. 689). Using the same analytical assumptions and information in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS (p. 695; Table 3-188), the BLM completed an analysis for this plan evaluation that projected up to a I percent total reduction in county payments per year duting the first decade and a 0.4 percent reduction in county payments per year during the second decade (Appendix, Section III.B). However, WOTFA also directed the BLM to reclassify public domain lands that are approximately equal in acreage and condition to the conveyed O&C lands

4

2018 Southwestern RMP and Northwestern & Coastal RMP Evaluation - Oregon/ Washington BLM

for management under the O&C Act. Following this reclassification, timber receipts from the reclassified lands would result in payments to counties that would be approximately equal in amount to those projected in the RMPs.

C. Do the RMPs' Hydrological and Fishe,y Resource Analyses remain Valid?

The Proposed RMP/ Final E IS comprehensively analyzed the effects that implementing all components of the plans would have on hydrological and fishery resources. This plan evaluation identified the following two aspects of the Proposed RMP/Final EJS' hydrology analyses that could potentially be altered by the conveyances (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 384-394; 401-408):

J. How would timber harvest and road construction under the alternatives affect peak stream flows within the rai11-011-s11ow dominated hydro-region?

The analysis of peak stream flows could potentially be altered by the conveyances if the management of the conveyed lands differed substantially from the anticipated management by the BLM under the RMPs. However, the hydrologic condition of the conveyed lands are not directly changed by the conveyance, and it is not possible to identify any reasonably foreseeable change in management of these lands that would result from conveyance to the Tribes. At this time, it would be speculative for the BLM to predict the Tribes' future management of the conveyed lands. Therefore, the conveyances do not alter the analysis of effects on peak stream flows in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS based on the information available to the BLM at this time.

2. How would new BLM road construction and road decommissioning under the altematives affect disturbance and sources of fine sediment that may be delivered to stream channels?

The analysis of sediment delivery from road construction could potentially be altered by the conveyances if the conveyances resulted in different amounts of anticipated road construction over time. The conveyance will slightly decrease the amount of BLM road construction because of the decrease in acres managed by the BLM. However, it is likely that there would be an associated increase in the amount of Tribal road construction resulting in the same cumulative effect on sediment delivery from road construction as analyzed in the Proposed RMP/Final EJS. Therefore, the conveyances do not alter the analysis of effects on sediment delivery from road construction in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS based on the information available to the BLM at this time.

D. Do the RMPs' Outdoor Recreation Analyses remain Valid?

The conveyed lands will not be open to recreational public access; conveyances could potentially reduce the types and levels of previously provided recreation opportunities. However, none of the conveyed lands were located within any of the RMPs' Special

5

2018 Southwestern RMP and Northwestern & Coastal RMP Eva!uarion - Oregon/ Washington BL/vi

Recreation Management Areas, which allocate which BLM lands will receive the highest levels of recreation management. The conveyances did include a portion of one of the Northwest Oregon District Siuslaw Field Office's Extensive Recreation Management Areas, which are allocated in the RMPs to indicate a less intensive approach to recreation management. However, the Confederated Tribe of the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians has agreed to a llow public vehicular transit across the conveyed lands that were previously a part of the BLM's Hult Reservoir Non­Motorized Trail Extensive Recreation Management Area. o RMP amendments or revisions are necessary for this resource use because there wi ll be no reduction to the level of public recreational access within the area compared to what was previously analyzed in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS.

E. Do the RMPs' Northern Spotted Owl am/ Marbled Murrelet Habitat Analyses remain Valid?

The Proposed RMP/Final EIS comprehensively analyzed the effects that implementing a ll components of the plans would have on northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet habitat. This plan evaluation identified the following three aspects of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS ' northern spotted owl habitat analyses (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 932-973) and the following two aspects of the marbled murrelet habitat analyses (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 899-91 8) that could potentially be altered by the conveyances:

1. Would the alternatives contribute to a landscap e in the planning area that creates large blocks of uesting, roosting, and foraging habitat that are capable of supporting clusters of reproducing owls, distributed across a variety of ecological conditions and spaced to facilitate owl movemellf between the blocks?

2. Would the altematives contribute to a landscape i11 the planning area that facilitates northern spotted owl movement between and tl,rougl, large blocks of nesting, roosting, and forag ing habitat and ensures tl,e survival of dispersing owls?

3. Would the alternatives, in areas of significant population decline, sustain the full range of survival and recove,y options for tl,e northem spotted owl in ligl,t of significant uncertainty?

4. What levels of nesting habitat for the marbled murrelet would be available under each altemative?

5. How would the altematives affect known and future occupied marbled murrelet sites?

The conveyances did not directly or indirectly change the on-the-ground forest conditions on any of these lands. The Proposed RMP/Final EIS evaluated scenarios in which land use allocations and management standards would change by alternative on BLM-administered lands, but adjacent land management would continue under the existing management regime (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 1766-1771 ). The conveyances themselves would not change the current distribution of forest stands, and it would be speculative at this time for the BLM to predict the

6

- - - --- - --- -

2018 Southwestern RMP and Northwestern & Coastal RMP Evaluation - Oregon/ Washington BLJv/

Tribes' future management of the conveyed lands. Therefore, the Proposed RMP/Final EIS ' effects analyses on no11hem spotted owl and marbled murrelet habitats remain valid under the new conditions, and an RMP amendment or revision for these resources is not necessary.

IV. Findings Regarding the Need for Plan Amendments and/or Revisions

This plan evaluation comprehensively considered the full scope of RMP decisions and effects analyses that could have been affected by the passage of WOTF A, and no new information has been identified that would warrant any RMP amendments or revisions at this time. Therefore, the BLM will conduct its next regularly scheduled, 5-year plan evaluations for the Southwestern RMP and the Northwestern and Coastal RMP in 2021.

The BLM OR/WA will promptly make all necessary updates to its geospatial and administrative data for the affected land use allocations and designations identified in this evaluation in accordance with all applicable statewide and national standards through regular plan maintenance procedures.

V. State Director Approval

Acting State Director, Oregon/ Washington

Date: Christopher J. McAlear

7

2018 Southwestern and Northwestern & Coastal RMPs Evaluation Appendix: lnterdisciplina,y Team Report Oregon/Washington BLM

2018 Southwestern and Northwestern and Coastal RMP Evaluation Appendix: Interdisciplinary Team Report

I. Introduction

This appendix includes the detailed analyses completed by an interdisciplinary team of subject matter experts to determine whether any amendments or revisions to the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) 2016 Southwestern and Northwestern & Coastal Resource Management Plans (RMP) were warranted after the passage of the Western Oregon Tribal Fairness Act of 2018.

A. Preparers

The following BLM staff prepared this interdisciplinary report:

• Craig Ducey, BLM Oregon/Washington State Office, GIS Specialist • Richard Hardt, BLM Oregon/Washington State Office, Planning and Environmental Coordinator • Bruce Hollen, BLM Oregon/Washington State Office, Wildlife Biologist • Carolina Hooper, BLM Oregon/Washington State Office, Forest Analyst • Alexandra James, Office of the Regional Solicitor, Pacific Northwest Region, Attorney-Advisor

II. Questions and Findings Related to the BLM's Ability to Implement the RMPs

A. 2016 RMP Resource Use Allocations of Conveyed Lands

Table A.1: Acreages of Conveyed Lands by 2016 RMP Land Use Allocation.

RMP land use allocation

District

Total (acres)

Coos Bay

(acres)

Northwest Oregon (acres)

Roseburg (acres)

District-Designated Reserve 99 98 196 District-Designated Reserve -Area of Critical Environmental Concern

43 43

District-Designated Reserve - Timber Production Capability Classification

2 92 94

Late-Successional Reserve 5,590 3,915 4,270 13,814 Late-Successional Reserve - Dry 8,240 8,240 Riparian Reserve - Moist 4,025 1,041 1,576 6,604 Riparian Reserve - Dry 2,274 2,274 Harvest Land Base - Uneven-Aged Timber Area 477 477 Harvest Land Base - Low Intensity Timber Area 635 635 Harvest Land Base - Moderate Intensity Timber Area 35 118 154 Total 9,751 4,956 17,825 32,532

2018 Southwestern and Northwestern & Coastal RMPs Evaluation Appendix: Interdisciplinary Team Report Oregon/ Washington BLM

B. Do the Allowable Sale Quantities for the Roseburg, Coos Bay, or Northwest Oregon Districts' Sustained-Yield Units Need to be Recalculated?

The BLM determines the allowable sale quantity (ASQ), or the annual productive capacity, of timber that can be harvested from each sustained-yield unit of the O&C Lands by accounting for the requirements to comply with other applicable laws and by considering the applicable RMP's objectives, land use allocations, and management direction. The ASQ volume represents the sustained-yield volume of timber that the BLM can offer for sale from each sustained-yield unit. As such, the BLM offers this sustained-yield volume of timber only from the Harvest Land Base (HLB), which has specific objectives for sustained-yield timber production (Northwestern and Coastal Oregon RMP, p. 59; Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 62). The ASQ for each sustained­yield unit of the O&C Lands is influenced, in part, by the total harvest land base (HLB) acreage (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, p. 342). Almost all of the HLB acreage included in the WOTFA conveyances is in the Roseburg District 's sustained-yield unit, with a very small acreage in the Coos Bay District's sustained-yield unit, and none in the Northwest Oregon District's sustained­yield unit. Table A. I shows the decreases in the HLB acreages by sustained-yield unit due to the conveyances.

Table A.2: Change in Harvest Land Base (HLB) Acreage by Sustained-Yield Unit from the Conveyances.

HLB after

Sustained-yield unit Northwest Oregon Coos Bay Roseburg

Total HLB prior to conveyances(acres)

64,632 34,930 73,476

HLB in conveyances (acres) 0 (0%)

35(0.1%) 1,230 (1. 7%)

conveyances (acres) 64,632 34,895 72,246

Total 173,038 1,265 (0.7%) 171,773

For this plan evaluation, the BLM re-estimated the ASQ for each sustained-yield unit based on the reduced HLB acreages with the same timber harvest model that was used to develop the RMPs (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 1206-1208; 1215-1216). The range of potential decadal reductions in ASQ harvest based on this 2018 modeling effort are identified in Table A.2.

Table A.3: Potential Change in Decadal ASQ Harvest in Million Board Feet (MMbf) Resulting from the Conveyances by Sustained-Yield Unit.

Sustained-yield unit Northwest Ore on Coos Ba Rosebur

Average High range Low Range potential potential potential

reduction in ASQ reduction in ASQ reduction in ASQ Declared ASQ harvest harvest harvest ( decadal,

decadal MMb decadal MMb decadal, MMb MMb 520 120 2.5 320 6.5 1.5

2

2018 Southwestern and Northwestern & Coastal RMPs Evaluation Appendix: Interdisciplinmy Team Report Oregon/Washington BLM

The RMPs disclosed that the Coos Bay and Northwest Oregon Districts' ASQs may vary as much as 40 percent on an annual basis and as much as 20 percent on a decadal basis; and that t~e Roseburg District's ASQs may vary as much as 30 percent on a decadal basis (Northwestern and Coastal RMP, p. 6; Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 6). The RMPs anticipated such fluctuations of HLB acreages and associated ASQs from several sources, including:

• Changes to the location oflands allocated as Riparian Reserve based on future field identification of water features;

• The identification of marbled murrelet occupied stands and red tree vole "habitat areas" through surveys;

• Changes to District-Designated Reserves Timber Production Capability Classifications based on field examination; and

• The construction of roads and other facilities and infrastructure allocated to District­Designated Reserves (Northwestern Oregon and Coastal RMP, pp. 56, 113; Southwestern Oregon RMP, pp. 55, 135).

Given that the RMPs have already provided for far greater variabilities in each District's ASQs for their sustained-yield units than what the 2018 modeling effort has projected, the conveyances are unlikely to have any meaningful immediate effect on the BLM's ability to implement the RMPs. Therefore, the WOTFA conveyances do not require recalculation of the ASQ for the Roseburg, Coos Bay, or Northwest Oregon sustained-yield units at this time. During the next plan evaluation, the BLM will again assess whether the net effect of any additional changes to the HLB acreages, together with the changes from the 2018 conveyances, will require the recalculation of the ASQs for the sustained-yield units.

C. Has the Roseburg District's Ability to Implement Selection Harvest or Commercial Thinning Treatments on Late-Successional Reserve - Dry Lands in the South River Field Office been Substantially Altered?

The RMP directs the BLM to "apply selection harvest or commercial thinning treatments to at least 4,500 acres per decade in the South River Field Office of Roseburg District" on lands that were allocated as Late-Successional Reserve (LSR)- Dry (Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 74). The conveyances reduced the South River Field Office's 97,544 acres of LSR - Dry lands by 8,240 acres, and thereby could potentially reduce the BLM's ability to implement this component of the RMP (see Table A. l). However, the Proposed RMP/Final EIS estimated that an average of 16,132 acres of lands allocated as LSR - Dry could be sustainably treated per decade (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 1206-1208; 1215-1216).

This plan evaluation used the same methodologies as the Proposed RMP/Final EIS to determine whether the reduction in the LSR - Dry acreage from the conveyances would affect the BLM's ability to implement the RMP. This effort projected that the acreage reduction would result in an average potential reduction of 1,238 acres treated per decade (Table A.4), which means the South River Field Office would still be able to sustainably treat up to 14,894 acres of LSR - Dry per decade. This is still substantially more than the 4,500 acres of treatments per decade directed by the RMP. Therefore, the conveyances do not substantially alter the ability of the South River

3

2018 Southwestern and Northwestern & Coastal RMPs Evaluation Appendix: Interdisciplinary Team Report Oregon/Washington BLM

Field Office to implement the RMP's direction for selection harvest or commercial thinning treatments on lands allocated as the LSR - Dry.

Table A.4: Projected Reductions in Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) - Dry Acres Treated in the South River Field O ice.

Average LSR - Dry Average reduction in High range reduction Low range reduction modeled for harvest LSR - Dry harvested in LSR-Dry harvested in LSR-Dry harvested

acres er decade1 acres er decade acres/decade acres/decade I 6,132 1,238 1,463 593

III.Questions and Findings Related to the RMPs' Effects Analyses

A. Has the Total Amount of Non-ASQ Timber Volume that will be Produced from the Northwest Oregon, Coos Bay, and Roseburg Districts' Sustained-Yield Units been Substantially Altered?

The conveyances reduced the acreages of land the RMPs allocated as LSR and Riparian Reserve in the Northwest Oregon, Coos Bay, and Roseburg Districts' sustained-yield units (Table A.5), and thereby could potentially reduce the BLM's ability to provide non-ASQ timber volume. The RMPs did not identify a targeted annual or decadal amount of non-ASQ timber volume, or otherwise commit to producing a specific amount of non-ASQ volume (Northwestern and Coastal Oregon RMP, p. 7, Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 6). The Proposed RMPs/Final EISs projected that non-ASQ timber volume would be produced each decade as a by-product of implementing silvicultural treatments to improve habitat conditions in the LSR and the Riparian Reserve (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 350-355). Thus, the provision of non-ASQ timber volume is not an RMP decision, but rather, an outcome the Proposed RMPs/Final EISs anticipated in their effects analyses.

Table A.5: Change in Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) and Riparian Reserve (RR) Acreage from the Conveyances by Sustained-Yield Unit

Sustained-yield unit

Total LSR and RR prior to conveyances

(acres) Conveyance in LSR

and RR (acres) LSR and RR after

Conveyances (acres) Euj:!;ene 221,136 4,956 216,180 Coos Bay 182,004 9,615 172,389 Roseburg 328,480 16,360 312,120 Total 731,620 30,931 700,689

Although the conveyances reduced the acreage available to produce non-ASQ timber volume, the RMPs assumed that only a portion of the eligible acres would be treated for habitat improvement purposes and provide non-ASQ timber volume as a byproduct of these efforts. The RMPs' modeling of non-ASQ timber harvests produced results that varied decade by decade depending on the modeling direction (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 1206-1208; 1215-1216). Thus, it is very likely that the BLM will still be able to meet the anticipated non-ASQ harvest on

1 Includes selection harvest and commercial thinning acres in the Late-Successional Rese,w - D,y in the South River Field Office averaged over the first five decades using land use allocation boundaries calculated on 7/24/2018.

4

2018 Southwestern and Northwestern & Coastal RMPs Evaluation Appendix: Interdisciplinary Team Report Oregon/ Washington BLM

other acres that are suitable for habitat improvement during the first five decades of implementing the RMPs. However, if the BLM is not able to successfully identify other suitable acres for the anticipated non-ASQ harvests, 2018 modeling efforts completed for this plan evaluation have projected that there would be a maximum 4 to 6 percent decrease in the non­ASQ timber volume harvested in the Northwest Oregon, Coos Bay, and Roseburg Districts' sustained-yield units (Table A.6). The maximum potential reduction in non-ASQ timber volume represents a small percentage of the total amount of non-ASQ timber volume estimated in the Proposed RMPs/Final EISs, and therefore would constitute little change to the Proposed RMPs/Final EISs' effects analyses.

Table A.6: Potential Change in the Decadal non-ASQ Harvest from the Conveyances by Sustained­Yield Unit.

Sustained-yield unit

Non-ASQ harvest

(decadal, MMbf)

Average potential

reduction in non-ASQ harvest

( decadal, MM bf) Range high

( decadal. MMbf) Range low

( decadal, MMbf) Northwest Oregon 149 6.0 (4%) 18.0 (12%) <0.1 (<1%) Coos Bay 150 9.2 (6%) 13.8 (9%) 4.7 (3%) Roseburg 74 3.0 (4%) 4.3 (6%) 1.7 (2%)

B. Have Estimates of Timber Sale Payments to the O&C Counties been Substantially Altered?

The Proposed RMPs/Final EISs estimated the payments the counties would receive as a percentage of the receipts from BLM timber sold and harvested based on the distribution formula in the O&C Act (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 687-697). However, the O&C counties are currently receiving extended payments under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self­Determination Act, rather than from timber receipts under the O&C Act. It is still uncertain whether the O&C counties will continue to receive such extended payments or will receive payments based on timber receipts in the future (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, p. 689).

If the potential reduction in both ASQ and non-ASQ timber volumes estimated above does occur, and if the counties will be receiving payments based on timber receipts, there would be a reduction in receipts to the O&C counties as a result of the conveyances. Using the same analytical assumptions and information in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS (p. 695; Table 3-188), the 2018 modeling effort completed for this plan evaluation has projected that the conveyances could result in up to a 1 percent total reduction in county payments per year during the first decade and a 0.4 percent reduction in county payments per year during the second decade (Table A.4).

However, WOTFA also mandated that the BLM reclassify public domain lands to O&C lands that is approximately equal in acreage and condition to the conveyed O&C lands. Following this reclassification, timber receipts from the reclassified lands will result in payments to counties according to the distribution formula in the O&C Act. This reclassification will potentially replace any reduction in payments to counties as a result of the conveyances.

5

2018 Southwestern and Northwestern & Coastal RMPs Evaluation App endix: Interdisciplinary Team Report Oregon/Washington BLM

Table A. 7: Total Estimated Payments to O&C Counties in 2018 and 2028 and Estimated Reductions in Payments from the Conveyances.

Commercial harvest volume (1000 bf, short

102)**

2018 208,136 Conveyance non- 3,120 ASQ Conveyance ASQ 405 Total conveyance reduction 2028 202,995 Conveyance non- 796 ASQ Conveyance ASQ 405 Total conveyance reduction

Stumpage value (harvest volume x

Stumpage price stumpage price per 1000 bf (2012 dollars)

$245.94 $51,187,903 $245.94 $575,518

$245.94 $74,741

$273.68 $55,556,162 $245.94 $146,789

$245.94 $74,760

Area-wide payments to

O&C counties (2012 dollars)

$25,593,952 $287,759

$37,371 $325,130

$27,778,081 $73,395

$37,380 $110,774

Numbers in blue come direct~y from the Proposed RMP/Final EIS Table 3-188.

6

Errata In the 2018 Evaluation of the Southwestern Resource Management Plan and the Northwestern & Coastal Resource Management Plan, the discussion of the effect of the conveyances on the ability of the South River Field Office to implement the management direction for the Late-Successional Reserve – Dry land use allocation contained errors. These errors overstated the acreage modeled for harvest in the LSR – Dry (the 2018 Evaluation stated this as 14,894 acres; the corrected area is 4,765 acres) and overstated the potential reduction in acres treated as a result of the conveyances (the 2018 Evaluation stated this as 1,238 acres; the corrected area is 392 acres). The corrected data only strengthen the conclusion that the conveyances do not substantially alter the ability of the South River Field Office to implement the RMP's direction for selection harvest or commercial thinning treatments on lands allocated as the LSR -Dry. This errata wholly replaces the referenced sections of the Plan Evaluation with the sections below.

II. A. 2. Do the Conveyances Substantially Alter the Ability of the South River Field Office of the Roseburg District to Implement Selection Harvest or Commercial Thinning Treatments in the Late-Successional Reserve – Dry?

The RMP directs the BLM to "apply selection harvest or commercial thinning treatments to at least 4,500 acres per decade in the South River Field Office of Roseburg District" on lands that were allocated as Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) - Dry (Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 74). The conveyances reduced the South River Field Office's 97,544 acres of LSR -Dry lands by 8,240 acres and, thereby, could potentially reduce the BLM's ability to implement this component of the RMP. However, the Proposed RMP/Final EIS estimated that an average of 4,765 acres of lands allocated as LSR - Dry would be treated per decade (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 1206-1208; 12I5-1216). This plan evaluation used the same methodologies as the RMPs to determine whether the reduction in the LSR - Dry acreage from the conveyances would affect the BLM's ability to implement the RMP. This effort projected that the acreage reduction would result in an average potential reduction of 392 acres treated per decade. Using the same broad assumptions about treatments in the Late-Successional Reserve – Dry as used in the analysis in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS, the reduction in the Late-Successional Reserve – Dry acreage from the conveyances would result in an average potential reduction in the acreage treated of 392 acres per decade (Table 4). This acreage may potentially be replaced from among the 89,304 acres allocated as LSR - Dry in the South River Field Office. Therefore, the conveyances do not substantially alter the ability of the South River Field Office to implement the RMP's direction for selection harvest or commercial thinning treatments on lands allocated as the LSR - Dry.

Appendix II. C. Do the Conveyances Substantially Alter the Ability of the South River Field Office of the Roseburg District to Implement Selection Harvest or Commercial Thinning Treatments in the Late-Successional Reserve – Dry?

Management direction for the Late-Successional Reserve – Dry requires, “Apply selection harvest or commercial thinning treatments to at least 4,500 acres per decade in the South River Field Office of Roseburg District” (Southwestern Oregon RMP, p. 74). The conveyances reduced the acreage of Late-Successional Reserve – Dry in the South River Field Office and thereby could potentially reduce the ability to implement this management direction. The conveyances removed 8,240 acres of the approximately 97,544 1 of the LSR - Dry in the South River Field Office.

At the time of the modeling, the LSR - Dry was broken down into the component pieces that represented District Defined Older Forest, Northern Spotted Owl Large Block and occupied Marbled Murrelet Sites. There were approximately 24,000 acres that were considered for harvest, of which 80 percent or 19,000 acres actually had some harvest modeled on them, all of which came from the Northern Spotted Owl Large Block component.

Of the 8,240 acres that were removed in the conveyance approximately 1,600 acres were in the Northern Spotted Owl Large Block. This represents approximately 7 percent of the total acres that were considered for harvest modeling. During the first 4 decades between 187 and 593 acres from the conveyance land were modeled for harvest.

The modeling of timber harvest produced results that varied decade by decade depending on the modeling direction (Proposed RMP/Final EIS, pp. 1206-1208; 1215-1216). As a result, the conveyances could have effects on the potential harvest in the LSR - Dry that would vary decade by decade, as shown in Table 4 for the decades with the highest and lowest impact.

Table 1. Estimated Potential Reduction in Late-Successional Reserve (LSR) - Dry Acres Treated in the South River Field Office.

Average LSR - Dry modeled for harvest

(acres per decade1)

Average reduction in LSR - Dry harvested

(acres per decade) Range high

(acres/decade) Range low

(acres/decade) 4,765 392 593 187

Using the same broad assumptions about treatments in the Late-Successional Reserve – Dry as used in the analysis in the Proposed RMP/Final EIS, the reduction in the LSR – Dry acreage from the conveyances would result in an average potential reduction in the acreage treated of 392 acres per decade (Table 4). This acreage may potentially be replaced by other acres in the South River Field Office. Therefore, the conveyances do not substantially alter the ability of the South River Field Office to implement selection harvest or commercial thinning treatments in the LSR – Dry.

1 From WOTFA_RWO_LUA_RMPID_Roseburg. Includes selection harvest in the Late-Successional Reserve – Dry in the South River Field Office averaged over the first four decades using land use allocation boundaries calculated on 7/24/2018.