Section 5: Appendices

Appendix 1: Comparison of forest-management strategies for the clatsop and tillamook state forests

	ODF Forest Management Plan NW State Forests	Ecotrust, Oregon Trout, Wild Salmon Center - Anchor Habitats Proposal	NMFS (1998) Proposal for the Oregon Plan
Size of Riparian Buffers	Fish bearing stream: 0–25, 25–100, 100–170 ft Non-fish perennial stream: same Non-fish seasonal streams: same	Outside of Anchor Habitats: valley floor + 100 feet up slope Anchor Habitats: Same an NMFS riparian buffers	Fish bearing stream: 150–200 feet Non-fish perennial stream: 100–135 feet Non-fish seasonal streams: 50–100 feet
Management of Riparian Buffers	Fish bearing stream: No harvest within inner zone (first 25 feet). Remainder of 3 buffer zones managed to grow mature forest conditions Timber harvest allowed every 15 years, with conifer tpa of 50/SDI of 25%. Retain 10–45 conifer per acre. Non-fish perennial stream: No harvest within inner zone (first 0–25 feet). Retain 15–25 conifer tpa in middle zone, 10 tpa in outer zone. Retain 80% shade within 500ft of F type streams. Non-fish seasonal streams: Generally similar to perennial applied to 75% of reaches, 10–25 tpa retention.	Outside of Anchor Habitats: No harvest within inner zone (first 100 feet). Thinning and replanting allowed to meet objectives (see below). In outer zone, only thinning of alder and Douglas fir allowed until there are 8 trees per acre greater than 40 inches dbh. Then, harvest is allowed if 8 trees per acre greater than 40 inches dbh are maintained, of which one is a Doug-fir; and 2) two cedars greater than 40 inches dbh are maintained (they must include the largest cedars). No harvest on debris torrent fans. Objectives: grow large trees (especially cedar), recruit LWD and large diameter snags, establish a multiple layer canopy, and maintain wind firmness	Fish bearing and non-fish perennial streams: Generally no harvest within inner zone (first 30 feet). Limited thinning allowed. Remainder of buffer managed to grow mature forest conditions typical of a 80–200 year stand at that site. Only two entries for timber management allowed in buffer during 50-year period. No salvage logging within buffer. Fullest and largest diameter trees in buffer should be maintained. Once mature forest conditions are attained in buffer, no further management activities are needed and stand should be allowed to grow. Non-fish seasonal stream: Limited silvicultural treatments allowed if aimed at growing and retaining mature trees.
Management of Anchor Habitats	Not yet addressed	Riparian Buffers within Anchor Habitats: No harvest within inner zone (first 100 feet). Thinning and replanting allowed to meet objectives. In outer zone, only thinning of alder and Douglas fir allowed until there are 8 trees per acre greater than 40 inches dbh. Then, harvest is allowed if 8 trees per acre greater than 40 inches dbh are maintained, of which one is a Doug-fir; and 2) two cedars greater than 40 inches dbh are maintained (they must include the largest cedars). No harvest on debris torrent fans.	Not yet addressed
Management of Unstable Slopes	No provision for prohibiting logging activities on unstable slopes.	No harvest. Light thinning (up to 5 ?10 mbf per feet/acre) allowed only for purpose of growing large trees.	No harvest within 30 feet of stream in areas of unstable slopes.
Management of Upland Stable Slopes	Structure-based approach using a "blended" method of 5 different structure types with various harvest volumes.	General upland stable slope silviculture not addressed yet.	No special forest management treatments
Source: National Marine Fisheries Service, ODF (2000) and Charley Dewberry, Ecotrust.

Appendix 2. Definitions of forest successional stages (USDA 1998)

Pioneer: 0–10 years after major disturbance
establishment of stand dominated by herbs, shrubs, and grasses

Very-early seral stage: (11–24 years)
stand establishment to crown closure conifer and hardwoods dominate
stand size typically 5–10" dbh

Early seral: (25–49 years)
crown closure to self pruning
maintains full closure - live canopy moves upward
5–18" dbh
many dead limbs
understory sparse

Mid-seral: (50–79 years)
self-pruning to maturation
full crown closure — high single layer
size 10–18"
little understory
tree mortality begins

Late-seral: begins at 80 years
Mature (80–149 years)
tree height and crown expansion expands slowly
trees begin to form heavy limbs
increased mortality creates openings
shade tolerant seedlings established in understory
snags and downed wood increases
size 19–32" dbh

Old-Growth Characteristics: generally 150 years or older
moderate to high canopy closure
layered canopy dominated by large overstory trees
high incidence of trees with broken tops and deformities
increased accumulation of large wood including logs on the ground

Appendix 3. A description of the salmon population recovery model in anchor habitats

In general, there are not good models of the relationship between management activities and the response of fish at the landscape level. There are a number of reasons for this. One, the method of estimating the juvenile fish populations at the watershed level did not develop until the late 1980s. Second, the landscape scale has only recently emerged as a critical scale of concern. Third, a critical time-scale for the relationship between fisheries response and management activities is at the level of decades to a century. We simply have not had the time to investigate the relationships in detail. Fourth, the fish are affected by a number of factors outside the watershed that complicates the matter.

This is an attempt to begin to build such a model based on current landscape level processes such as Benda et al 1998 (much of Lee Benda's work has been at Knowles Creek) and our 10+ years of work at Knowles Creek. The focal point of the model is carrying capacity of the watershed. The central watershed level process that controls this is the dynamics of sediment and organic matter through the watershed. This approach is consistent with the recommendations of the IMST (Independent Multidisciplinary Science Team).

The specific question we address here is, "What effect does timber harvest have on the movement of sediment and organic matter in the watershed?" This will affect the carrying capacity for salmon in the watershed. For this analysis we focus on two elements: a) the dynamics of landslides and debris flows and b) the recruitment function of large woody debris. These mass erosion features are a critical component of the natural landscape in the Coast Range and they are a major factor providing physical habitat and food resources for the fish. Large woody debris here refers to large tree trunks or whole trees with root wads attached.

First, how does timber harvest affect the triggering of these events? Our work on Knowles Creek indicates that for debris flows that enter stream reaches inhabited by anadromous fish there is an increase in magnitude and frequency for the first 20 years after timber harvest. This is consistent with the findings in the IMST Technical Report. Furthermore, slope-stability models for the Knowles Creek watershed by Benda et al (1998) and Dietrich and Montgomery (1994) suggest that all slopes are not equal in their risk of failure. Timber harvest on steep-unstable slopes grater increases the risk of landslides and debris torrents. Again these results are consistent with the recommendations found in the IMST Technical Report.