GIS Study of the Kelsey-Whisky Logging Plan

1
GIS Study of the Kelsey-Whisky Logging Plan

• Jared Chapiewsky
• Matthew Bloch
• U of Wisconsin, Madison

2
Introduction

• 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..

3
Background
Location of the Study Area
4
Background
Map of the Study Area
5
Background
Views of the Area
6
Background
Timeline of Events

• October 2000 Draft Environmental Impact Statement
  (EIS)
• presented for 90-day public review.
• February 2001 Final EIS presented for 30-day
  review.
• April 2001 BLM decides to go forward with the
  plan.
• August 2004 9th Circuit Court rules that
  critical habitat must be protected under the
  Endangered Species Act.
• Today BLM has still not advertised the Kelsey
  Whisky timber sale environmental groups prepare
  to file lawsuits.

7
Scenic Impact
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.

8
Scenic Impact
Conceptualization

• 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.

9
Scenic Impact
Tree data over a DEM
10
Owl Impact
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 birds
  protected status to halt logging in the past.

11
Owl Impact
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).

12
Owl Impact
Owl Activity Centers
13
Habitat Encroachment Map
Results
14
Findings
Results

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

15
Problem 1 Age of Data
Results

• Owl Activity Centers from 1994.
• Owls moved into clear-cut areas since?
• Very Possible 1000 acre range but only 100 acre
  habitat buffer.

16
Problem 2 Perfect Fit?
Results
17
Conclusions
Results

• 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?

18
Conclusions
Results

• Different interpretations of the ESA
• - broader definitions of protected habitat
• Recent federal court decision ALL critical
  habitat protected
• Timber Sale on hold

19
Scenic Impact Treeless Map
Results
20
Scenic Impact Tree Map
21
Findings
Results

• 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

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
Results

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

27
Potential Sources of Error
Results

• Use of centroids as view points
• Assignment of tree heights
• Conditions on the Ground

28
Final Conclusions
Review

• 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?

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