    Oregon Watersheds: Many Activities Contribute to Increased Turbidity
    During Large Storms (Chapter Report, 07/29/98, GAO/RCED-98-220).

    Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on five
    municipal watersheds in Oregon and the activities that contribute to
    increased turbidity during large storms, focusing on the: (1) human
    activities that may have contributed to the high turbidity levels in
    western Oregon's municipal watersheds in February 1996; and (2) efforts
    under way by federal, state, local, and private land managers and
    owners, as well as the affected cities, to ensure safe drinking water
    during future storms.

    GAO noted that: (1) human activities--timber harvests and related roads
    as well as agricultural, industrial, urban, and residential
    development--can contribute to elevated sediment levels during large
    storms; (2) these activities result in soil that is compacted, paved,
    covered, or cleared of most vegetation; (3) rain falling on compacted or
    cleared soil can run off into streams, carrying with it eroded topsoil;
    (4) in addition, rain falling on roofs, paved roads and parking lots,
    and other covered surfaces does not penetrate into the ground, thereby
    increasing the runoff that moves across barren or disturbed soil and
    eroding topsoil; (5) this sediment can then be transported into streams;
    (6) the sediment from human activities in a municipal watershed,
    combined with the accelerated erosion that naturally occurs during
    storms, can shut down a municipality's water treatment system, as
    occurred in Salem in February 1996; (7) ongoing federal and nonfederal
    efforts have made significant progress in: (a) mitigating the impact of
    human activities on water quality and ensuring safe drinking water to
    cities in the Willamette and Lower Columbia river basins; and (b)
    involving more key landowners and other stakeholders in discussing,
    understanding, and addressing watershed issues and concerns and in
    implementing restoration plans; and (8) nevertheless, some key
    landowners have not been included in coordination efforts, and many
    efforts could benefit from a better understanding of, and data on, the
    condition of the watersheds.

    --------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

     REPORTNUM:  RCED-98-220
         TITLE:  Oregon Watersheds: Many Activities Contribute to Increased
                 Turbidity During Large Storms
          DATE:  07/29/98
       SUBJECT:  Potable water
                 Water pollution control
                 Water quality
                 Environmental monitoring
                 Soil conservation
                 Forest management
                 Interagency relations
                 Environmental policies
                 Storms
    IDENTIFIER:  Oregon
                 Dept. of the Interior Automated Land Management System
                 Salem (OR)
                 Portland (OR)
                 Eugene (OR)
                 Cottage Grove (OR)
                 Sandy (OR)
                 Pacific Northwest Forest Plan

    ******************************************************************
    ** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
    ** GAO report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
    ** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major          **
    ** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters,    **
    ** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and       **
    ** single lines.  The numbers on the right end of these lines   **
    ** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the      **
    ** document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the  **
    ** page numbers of the printed product.                         **
    **                                                              **
    ** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
    ** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
    ** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
    **                                                              **
    ** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
    ** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
    ** document's contents.                                         **
    **                                                              **
    ** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
    ** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
    ** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
    **                                                              **
    **                                            **
    **                                                              **
    ** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
    ******************************************************************

    Cover
    ================================================================ COVER

    Report to Congressional Requesters

    July 1998

    OREGON WATERSHEDS - MANY
    ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTE TO INCREASED
    TURBIDITY DURING LARGE STORMS

    GAO/RCED-98-220

    Reasons for Increased Turbidity During Large Storms

    (141096)

    Abbreviations
    =============================================================== ABBREV

      BLM - Bureau of Land Management
      EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
      GAO - General Accounting Office

    Letter
    =============================================================== LETTER

    B-280174

    July 29, 1998

    The Honorable Dale Bumpers
    Ranking Minority Member, Committee
     on Energy and Natural Resources
    United States Senate

    The Honorable Ron Wyden
    United States Senate

    In response to your requests and as agreed with your offices, this
    report describes (1) the human activities that may have contributed
    to the high turbidity levels in western Oregon's municipal watersheds
    in February 1996 and (2) the efforts under way by federal, state,
    local, and private land managers and owners, as well as the affected
    cities, to ensure safe drinking water during future storms.  We
    limited our review to five municipal watersheds--those serving the
    cities of Cottage Grove, Eugene, Portland, Salem, and Sandy.  The
    report contains recommendations to the Secretaries of Agriculture and
    of the Interior designed to increase the efficiency and effectiveness
    of efforts to improve water quality and ensure safe drinking water
    for cities in western Oregon.

    We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional
    committees, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of the
    Interior, the Chief of the Forest Service, and the Director of the
    Bureau of Land Management.  We will also make copies available to
    others upon request.

    Please call me at (202) 512-8021 if you or your staff have any
    questions about this report.  Major contributors to this report are
    listed in appendix III.

    Barry T.  Hill
    Associate Director, Energy, Resources,
     and Science Issues

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
    ============================================================ Chapter 0

       PURPOSE
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:1

    Cities in western Oregon have a history of providing safe drinking
    water to their residents.  However, in February 1996, during the
    region's worst storm since December 1964, the water quality in rivers
    and streams was severely degraded as the amount of fine sediment
    suspended in the water--or turbidity--increased dramatically.
    Because of the increased turbidity caused by the storm, the municipal
    water treatment system serving Salem, Oregon, was shut down for over
    a week, threatening the city's ability to provide its residents with
    safe drinking water.  Other cities in western Oregon's Willamette and
    Lower Columbia river basins also reported high turbidity levels in
    the water flowing into their municipal water treatment systems.
    After the storm, Salem and certain environmental groups raised
    concerns about the extent to which the timber harvests and forest
    roads on lands managed by the U.S.  Department of Agriculture's
    Forest Service and the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land
    Management (BLM) contributed to the increased turbidity.

    In response to congressional requests, this report describes (1) the
    human activities that may have contributed to the high turbidity
    levels during and following the February 1996 storm and (2) the
    efforts under way by federal, state, local, and private land managers
    and owners, as well as the affected cities, to ensure safe drinking
    water during future storms.  As agreed with the requesters' offices,
    GAO limited its review to five municipal watersheds in western
    Oregon--those serving the cities of Cottage Grove, Eugene, Portland,
    Salem, and Sandy.  (See fig.  1.)

       Figure 1:  Location of the Five
       Cities Included in GAO's Review

       (See figure in printed
       edition.)

       RESULTS IN BRIEF
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:2

    GAO's review of scientific studies and other documents showed that
    human activities--timber harvests and related roads as well as
    agricultural, industrial, urban, and residential development--can
    contribute to elevated sediment levels during large storms.  These
    activities result in soil that is compacted, paved, covered, or
    cleared of most vegetation.  Rain falling on compacted or cleared
    soil can run off into streams, carrying with it eroded topsoil.  In
    addition, rain falling on roofs, paved roads and parking lots, and
    other covered surfaces does not penetrate into the ground, thereby
    increasing the runoff that moves across barren or disturbed soil and
    eroding topsoil.  This sediment can then be transported into streams.
    The sediment from human activities in a municipal watershed, combined
    with the accelerated erosion that naturally occurs during storms, can
    shut down a municipality's water treatment system, as occurred in
    Salem in February 1996.

    Ongoing federal and nonfederal efforts have made significant progress
    in (1) mitigating the impact of human activities on water quality and
    ensuring safe drinking water to cities in the Willamette and Lower
    Columbia river basins and (2) involving more key landowners and other
    stakeholders in discussing, understanding, and addressing watershed
    issues and concerns and in implementing restoration plans.
    Nevertheless, some key landowners have not been included in
    coordination efforts, and many efforts could benefit from a better
    understanding of, and data on, the condition of the watersheds.

       PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3

          HUMAN ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTE
          TO INCREASED TURBIDITY
          DURING LARGE STORMS
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3.1

    All five of the cities included in GAO's review have experienced
    timber harvesting and related road construction in their municipal
    watersheds.  GAO's review of scientific studies and other documents
    showed that these activities can contribute to elevated sediment
    levels in rivers and streams during large storms.  Past
    timber-harvesting practices, including removing all of the trees from
    a streamside timber-harvesting site at one time and using heavy
    equipment such as tractors to haul logs along trails, were often not
    designed to protect water quality.  These practices resulted in
    cleared and compacted areas that exposed soil to the erosive impact
    of rain and contributed sediment to streams, especially during large
    storms.  In addition, forest roads constructed prior to the early
    1970s along streams and on hillsides used designs that were subject
    to erosion and failure.  These roads have been found to be a major
    contributor of sediment to streams.

    Two of the municipal watersheds--those serving Eugene and Salem--also
    have agricultural, industrial, urban, and residential development
    that can contribute sediment to streams during large storms.
    Agricultural operations can compact soil and frequently clear the
    land of most vegetation.  A 1997 study commissioned by the governor
    of Oregon found that agriculture in the Willamette River basin
    contributes more sediment to the river than any other activity.

    The 1997 study also found that urban sites in the Willamette River
    basin contribute the greatest amount of suspended sediment to the
    river on a per acre basis.  Residential and industrial development
    have increased the percentage of the basin covered by roofs, paved
    roads and parking lots, and other surfaces that prevent rain from
    penetrating into the soil and can increase runoff and erosion during
    storms.  In addition, streambank stabilization projects, which were
    constructed to protect property from flooding (1) prevent
    floodplains, wetlands, and riparian areas from filtering suspended
    sediment from surface runoff before it reaches streams and (2)
    increase a river's velocity and erosive power.

    The accelerated erosion that naturally occurs during large storms,
    combined with the sediment from human activities in a municipal
    watershed, can shut down a city's water treatment system, as occurred
    in Salem in February 1996.  (See fig.  2.)

       Figure 2:  Impacts on Water
       Quality During a Large Winter
       Storm

       (See figure in printed
       edition.)

    Salem's watershed has experienced timber harvesting and related road
    construction as well as agricultural, industrial, urban, and
    residential development, including a highway that parallels the
    city's sole source of drinking water--the North Santiam River.  All
    these activities can contribute to increased turbidity during storms.
    The watershed also includes the Detroit Dam, and soils containing
    high levels of microscopic clay particles that remain suspended in
    the water behind the dam and may be released downstream to the city's
    water treatment system for days or weeks following a large storm.
    Because the city's water treatment system could not remove the
    sediment and the city lacks an adequate secondary source of water,
    the elevated sediment levels during and following the February 1996
    storm resulted in Salem's having to (1) shut down its water treatment
    system for 8 days and (2) obtain an exemption from the state in order
    to deliver to its customers drinking water that had turbidity levels
    exceeding drinking water standards through July 16, 1996.

    Other western Oregon cities, including the other four GAO reviewed,
    also experienced elevated sediment levels during and following the
    storm but were better prepared than Salem to continue to deliver safe
    drinking water to their customers.  For example, although Eugene
    experienced sediment levels more than 20 times higher than those
    reported by Salem, Eugene shut down its water treatment system for
    about 12 hours and relied on reserve water supplies until its water
    treatment system could be adjusted to handle the rapidly changing
    turbid water.

    Moreover, although Salem and certain environmental groups expressed
    concerns about the extent to which the timber harvests and forest
    roads on federal lands contributed to increased turbidity, a study by
    the Forest Service and others showed that (1) naturally occurring
    erosion and erosion from human activities on primarily nonfederal
    lands in the lower portions of the watershed below the Detroit Dam
    shut down the city's water treatment system and (2) most of the
    microscopic clay particles that caused the persistent turbidity in
    the water behind the Detroit Dam and caused the city's need to obtain
    an exemption to safe drinking water standards probably did not result
    from past timber-harvesting practices or the failure of
    timber-related roads on federal lands above the dam but rather from
    naturally occurring erosion.

          PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE TO
          ENSURE SAFE DRINKING WATER
          DURING FUTURE STORMS
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3.2

    Federal land management agencies, the state of Oregon, the
    municipalities, and private landowners have made significant progress
    in mitigating the impact of human activities on water quality and in
    ensuring safe drinking water to cities in the Willamette and Lower
    Columbia river basins.  Both the Forest Service and BLM have acted
    within their multiple-use mandates--which include providing timber as
    well as protecting watersheds--to mitigate the impact of past and
    planned timber harvests and roads on their lands.  They have also
    shown a willingness to involve cities and other stakeholders more in
    their decision-making and to come together with these parties to
    discuss, understand, and address watershed problems and issues and to
    implement restoration plans.

    Similarly, Oregon regulates timber harvesting on nonfederal lands to
    help protect water quality.  Its requirements for harvesting timber
    on state and private lands, although found by the Environmental
    Protection Agency (EPA) to be less stringent than those for federal
    lands, have also been recognized by EPA as best management practices.
    The state is also working with private landowners and farmers on a
    voluntary basis to reduce agriculture's contribution to water quality
    problems and has enacted legislation and appropriated funds to
    promote voluntary local watershed councils to implement plans for
    watershed restoration.

    As part of an effort initiated by the governor to protect both water
    quality and salmon, the landowners of industrial forests have not
    only agreed to implement a voluntary program to identify and address
    risks to water quality caused by forest roads but have also promised
    about $130 million over the next 10 years to manage and upgrade older
    forest roads on these lands.

    Finally, the Congress has acted to ensure safe drinking water for
    Portland by (1) enacting legislation to protect the city's watershed
    from settlement, development, and timber harvesting that could
    adversely affect water quality and (2) appropriating most of the
    funds to protect and restore the watershed.

    Although the Forest Service, BLM, the state of Oregon, the
    municipalities, and private landowners have made significant progress
    in working together to mitigate the impact of human activities on
    water quality and to ensure safe drinking water to cities in the
    Willamette and Lower Columbia river basins, opportunities exist to
    improve the efficiency and effectiveness of these efforts.  GAO found
    that as more landowners within a watershed collaborate, more
    activities are likely to be coordinated and managed across the
    watershed, thereby better ensuring the quality of the water.
    However, memorandums of understanding between federal land management
    agencies and the cities to address watershed issues and concerns in
    the Willamette and Lower Columbia river basins have not included key
    landowners, who are critical to understanding and addressing the
    condition of the watershed.

    For instance, the formal memorandum of understanding among the Forest
    Service, BLM, and Sandy on activities within the city's municipal
    watershed does not include a large industrial forest landowner whose
    holdings include a significant portion of the watershed directly
    above the location where water flows into the city's treatment
    system.  Likewise, the memorandum of understanding between Salem and
    the Forest Service excludes both BLM and nonfederal landowners in the
    city's watershed.

    Moreover, human activities vary by watershed, and the condition of a
    watershed can change over time as a result of these activities as
    well as of storms and other natural disturbances.  Therefore, an
    analysis of the overall condition of a municipal watershed is
    essential to (1) guide project planning and decision-making and
    identify the restoration activities with the greatest likelihood of
    success; (2) make sound management decisions concerning the type,
    location, and sequence of appropriate management activities within
    the watershed; and (3) dissociate public concern about water quality
    from dissatisfaction over other land management issues, such as
    timber harvesting and road construction.  However, (1) few of the
    watershed analyses GAO reviewed corresponded directly to the
    boundaries of a municipal watershed and (2) the data gathered by
    different federal agencies and nonfederal parties within a municipal
    watershed may not be comparable.

       RECOMMENDATIONS
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:4

    To increase the efficiency and effectiveness of efforts to improve
    water quality and ensure safe drinking water to cities in western
    Oregon, GAO recommends that the Secretary of Agriculture direct the
    Chief of the Forest Service and that the Secretary of the Interior
    direct the Director of BLM to include key landowners--who are
    critical to understanding and addressing the condition of a
    watershed--in memorandums of understanding with cities and in other
    agreements to address watershed issues and concerns.  GAO also
    recommends that the Secretary of Agriculture direct the Chief of the
    Forest Service and that the Secretary of the Interior direct the
    Director of BLM to take the following actions when conducting
    watershed analyses:  (1) at a minimum, gather data on municipal water
    quality that are comparable with the data gathered by other federally
    funded analyses; (2) when feasible, include water quality as a
    primary focus and/or conduct the analyses along the boundaries of the
    municipal watersheds; (3) to the extent possible, collaborate with
    nonfederal land managers and owners to gather data that are
    comparable and useful to municipal watershed decisionmakers; and (4)
    when practical, develop data on the impact of new timber-harvesting
    methods and road construction practices on water quality.

       AGENCY COMMENTS
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:5

    GAO provided copies of a draft of this report to the Forest Service
    and BLM for their review and comment.  The agencies (1) stated that
    the report provides a comprehensive and objective view of the
    complexities and factors involved in watershed management in the
    Pacific Northwest; (2) agreed with, and promised to pursue
    implementation of, the report's recommendations; and (3) noted that
    they have made progress in developing data on the impact of new
    timber-harvesting methods and road construction practices on water
    quality.  The agencies' comments appear in appendixes I and II.

    INTRODUCTION
    ============================================================ Chapter 1

    The quality of water is described by a number of different
    measurements, such as its temperature, the amount of dissolved oxygen
    it contains, and its mineral content.  One measurement for drinking
    water quality is its turbidity, which is the amount of suspended
    sediment in the water.  Suspended sediment levels fluctuate with time
    and can change dramatically during a single day and within a short
    distance.

    In February 1996, western Oregon experienced its worst storm since
    December 1964.  Prior to the storm, large amounts of precipitation
    during the fall and early winter months of 1995 and 1996 had
    saturated the soil in the Cascade and Coast mountain ranges and in
    the valley areas.  During January 1996, heavy snow had accumulated in
    the mountains, followed by freezing temperatures.  The storm arrived
    with warmer temperatures and heavy rainfall--8 to nearly 15 inches in
    4 days in many locations.  The warm rain on top of the snow
    (rain-on-snow), saturated soil, and frozen ground produced rapid
    snowmelt and runoff, resulting in severe flooding and erosion.  Water
    quality during the storm was severely degraded as the turbidity
    increased dramatically.

    Because of the increased turbidity, the municipal water treatment
    system serving Salem, Oregon, was shut down for 8 days, threatening
    the city's ability to provide its residents with safe drinking water.
    Other cities in western Oregon's Willamette and Lower Columbia river
    basins--including Cottage Grove, Eugene, Portland, and Sandy--also
    reported high turbidity levels at the locations (intakes) where water
    flows into their water treatment systems.  After the storm, Salem and
    certain environmental groups raised concerns about the extent to
    which the timber harvests and related roads on the lands managed by
    the U.S.  Department of Agriculture's Forest Service and the
    Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
    contributed to the increased turbidity.

       THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS A
       MAJOR LANDOWNER IN WESTERN
       OREGON
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:1

    The federal government owns nearly 40 percent of the more than 15
    million acres of land in western Oregon, most of which are managed by
    the Forest Service and BLM.  Less than 100,000 acres are managed by
    other federal agencies, including Interior's National Park Service.
    The remaining lands are under various ownerships, including state and
    local governments and industrial and private landowners.

    In the Cascade mountain range, Forest Service lands are located
    primarily in the higher elevations, while BLM lands are located
    primarily in the lower elevations.  Both agencies manage lands
    interspersed throughout the Coast mountain range.

    Several cities--both large and small--in western Oregon's Willamette
    and Lower Columbia river basins obtain their drinking water from the
    streams that drain watersheds in the nearby Cascade and Coast
    mountain ranges.\1 The Forest Service and BLM manage lands within
    many of these municipal watersheds, and the condition of their lands
    affects the quality of the water that flows from them.

    --------------------
    \1 A watershed is an area of land in which all surface water drains
    to a common point.  A watershed can range from less than 100 acres
    that drain to a stream to many thousands of acres that drain through
    hundreds of smaller streams to a large, single stream or river.  A
    watershed from which a city obtains its drinking water is called a
    "municipal watershed."

       BOTH THE FOREST SERVICE AND BLM
       MANAGE THEIR LANDS UNDER THE
       PRINCIPLES OF MULTIPLE USE AND
       SUSTAINED YIELD
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:2

    The Forest Service manages about 4.3 million acres of land in western
    Oregon.  The laws guiding the management of the National Forest
    System require the agency to manage its lands under the principles of
    multiple use and sustained yield to meet the diverse needs of the
    American people.  Under the Organic Administration Act of 1897, the
    national forests are to be established to improve and protect the
    forests within their boundaries or to secure favorable water flow
    conditions and provide a continuous supply of timber to citizens.
    The Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 added the uses of
    outdoor recreation, range, watershed, and fish and wildlife.  This
    act also requires the agency to manage its lands to provide high
    levels of all of these uses to current users while sustaining
    undiminished the lands' ability to produce these uses for future
    generations (the sustained-yield principle).  Under the National
    Forest Management Act of 1976 and its implementing regulations, the
    Forest Service is to (1) recognize wilderness as a use of the forests
    and (2) maintain the diversity of plant and animal communities
    (biological diversity).

    Similarly, the Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 requires
    BLM to manage its lands for multiple uses and sustained yield.  The
    act defines multiple uses to include recreation; range; timber;
    minerals; watershed; fish and wildlife; and natural scenic,
    scientific, and historic values.

    About 2.6 million acres of Oregon and California Railroad and Coos
    Bay Wagon Road grant lands in western Oregon are managed primarily by
    BLM under the Oregon and California Grant Lands Act of 1937.  Under
    the act, timber on these lands managed by BLM is to be sold, cut, and
    removed in conformity with the principle of sustained yield for the
    purpose of providing a permanent source of timber supply, protecting
    watersheds, regulating stream flow, contributing to the economic
    stability of local communities and industries, and providing
    recreational facilities.  The Oregon and California Railroad grant
    lands managed by the Forest Service are subject to the same statutory
    and regulatory requirements as other lands within the National Forest
    System.

       EROSION IS A NATURAL PROCESS
       THAT INCREASES DURING LARGE
       STORMS
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:3

    Erosion is a natural process that has shaped the valleys and
    mountains of the Pacific Northwest (western Oregon, western
    Washington State, and northern California) for millions of years.
    Rare large rain-on-snow storms that occur at intervals of several
    decades or centuries are responsible in part for creating the many
    streams in this region, and the accompanying flooding and increased
    turbidity are recognized as natural aspects of healthy river and
    stream systems.

    The geologic origins and conditions of the Cascade and Coast mountain
    ranges have a significant impact on natural erosion and
    sedimentation, which affect water quality.  Because of wet weather
    conditions and other factors, many of the rocks and soils within
    these mountain ranges have undergone physical changes that leave them
    unstable and subject to erosion.  In addition, prior natural
    disturbances, such as windstorms and fires, leave the soil in the
    forests subject to erosion by destroying the trees and vegetation
    that holds soil on hillsides.\2

    Although the baseline rates at which erosion should naturally occur
    in large watersheds have not been identified for periods of
    accelerated sediment production during large storms, studies have
    shown that erosion increases in the presence of large, infrequent
    storms, and, from evidence in the forests, it appears that this
    process has occurred for centuries.  In normal years, the first one
    or two large storms of the winter season transport much of the
    sediment that flows from a watershed during the entire year.
    However, when the rainy season is punctuated by a rare, large-scale
    storm, such as the ones in December 1964 and February 1996, a large
    amount of precipitation is delivered in a short period of time.  The
    precipitation can cause considerable erosion and flooding and
    transport several decades of accumulated sediment through the
    region's river systems.

    --------------------
    \2 Historically, fire has been a natural ecological component in the
    Pacific Northwest that has disturbed large and small areas of the
    Cascade and Coast mountains, thereby contributing to increased
    turbidity during storms.  However, according to Forest Service
    officials, fire probably did not contribute significantly to
    increased turbidity during the February 1996 storm because a
    long-standing policy of suppressing fires on federal lands has
    limited the number of acres disturbed by fire.

       OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND
       METHODOLOGY
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:4

    Senators Dale Bumpers and Ron Wyden asked us to examine the extent to
    which human activities may have contributed to the high turbidity
    levels in western Oregon's municipal watersheds during a large storm
    in February 1996.  As agreed with their offices, this report
    describes (1) the human activities that may have contributed to the
    high turbidity levels in five western Oregon municipal watersheds
    during and following the storm and (2) the efforts under way by
    federal, state, local, and private land managers and owners, as well
    as the affected cities, to ensure safe drinking water during future
    storms.  The five watersheds serve the cities of Cottage Grove,
    Eugene, Portland, Salem, and Sandy.  (See table 1.1.)

                                   Table 1.1

                       Watersheds Serving Five Cities in
                                 Western Oregon

                                                          Approximate area
    City                            Watershed                   in acres\a
    ------------------------------  ------------------  ------------------
    Cottage Grove                   Layng Creek                     42,000
    Eugene                          McKenzie River                 740,000
    Portland                        Bull Run                      65,000\b
    Salem                           North Santiam                  432,000
                                     River
    Sandy                           Alder Creek                      4,600

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    \a Represents the area of the watershed upstream from the location
    where water flows into each city's water treatment system.

    \b Public Law 95-200, enacted on November 23, 1977, created the
    95,382-acre Bull Run Watershed Management Unit, which includes the
    physical drainage area as well as a buffer area.

    We also obtained information on the Cedar River watershed, which
    serves Seattle, Washington, and compared and contrasted its
    management to the management of Portland's Bull Run watershed.
    Seattle, like Portland, is one of the few large cities in the United
    States that relies primarily on unfiltered water.\3 (Portland treats
    the water from the Bull Run watershed with chlorine.) In addition,
    both watersheds have long histories of timber harvesting, road
    construction, and water quality protection.

    We met with, and reviewed documents provided by, managers and staff
    in the Forest Service's Pacific Northwest (Region 6) office and in
    the offices for three national forests--Willamette, Umpqua, and Mt.
    Hood.  We also met with, and reviewed documents provided by, managers
    and staff in BLM's Oregon State Office and in two districts--Salem
    and Eugene.  In addition, we spoke with officials from the (1) U.S.
    Army Corps of Engineers concerning issues pertaining to dams in the
    Willamette River valley and (2) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
    concerning issues pertaining to protecting water quality.  We also
    spoke with and obtained information from officials and individuals
    from (1) the six cities included in our review, (2) the McKenzie
    Watershed Council,\4 (3) environmental groups, (4) scientific and
    academic communities, (5) private industry and its representative
    organizations, and (6) the state of Oregon.

    We also collected and reviewed published scientific studies of
    forestry practices and reports on water quality issues in Oregon and
    Washington as well as other documents provided by federal, state, and
    local officials; environmental and industry groups; and concerned
    individuals.  (See the bibliography for the scientific studies that
    we reviewed.) We attended several conferences that addressed issues
    relating to the February 1996 storm and visited several of the
    municipal watersheds.

    We performed our work from July 1997 through June 1998 in accordance
    with generally accepted government auditing standards.  We provided
    pertinent information from a draft of this report to officials in
    each of the cities included in our review and made changes in
    response to their comments.  We also obtained comments on a draft of
    the report from the Forest Service and BLM.  These agencies' comments
    are presented in appendixes I and II, respectively.

    --------------------
    \3 Other large cities that rely on unfiltered water are Tacoma,
    Washington; New York, New York; Boston, Massachusetts; and San
    Francisco, California.

    \4 The 20-member McKenzie Watershed Council was formed in 1993 to
    address water quality and other issues within the McKenzie River
    watershed.  Council members include representatives from the Forest
    Service, BLM, the U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers, large private
    industrial landowners, state and local officials, and environmental
    and other concerned citizen groups.

    HUMAN ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTE TO
    INCREASED TURBIDITY DURING LARGE
    STORMS
    ============================================================ Chapter 2

    Our review of scientific studies and other documents showed that
    human activities--timber harvests and related roads as well as
    agricultural, industrial, urban, and residential development--can
    contribute to elevated sediment levels during large storms.  These
    activities result in soil that is compacted, paved, covered, or
    cleared of most vegetation.  Rain falling on such soil and surfaces
    can run off into streams, carrying with it eroded topsoil.  This
    sediment from human activities in a municipal watershed, combined
    with the accelerated erosion that naturally occurs during storms, can
    shut down a municipality's water treatment system, as occurred in
    Salem in February 1996.  (See fig.  2.1.)

       Figure 2.1:  Activities Within
       a Watershed That Can Increase
       Turbidity

       (See figure in printed
       edition.)

    Source:  Lane Council of Governments, McKenzie Watershed Council.

       PAST TIMBER HARVESTS AND
       RELATED ROADS CAN INCREASE
       SEDIMENT
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:1

    All five of the cities included in our review have experienced timber
    harvesting and related road construction in their municipal
    watersheds.  These activities can contribute to erosion.  Our review
    of scientific studies and other documents showed that past
    timber-harvesting practices were often not designed to protect water
    quality and resulted in cleared and compacted areas that exposed soil
    to the erosive impact of rain and contributed sediment to streams,
    especially during large storms.  In addition, older forest roads
    along streams and on hillsides were designed in ways that made them
    subject to erosion and failure.  These roads have been found to be a
    major contributor of sediment to streams.

          TIMBER HARVESTING
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:1.1

    The municipal watersheds for Cottage Grove, Eugene, Portland, Salem,
    and Sandy have all experienced varying levels of timber harvesting.
    For example, since 1960, approximately 28 percent of the national
    forest lands in Cottage Grove's Layng Creek watershed have been
    harvested.  Approximately 21 percent of the Forest Service lands in
    Salem's North Santiam River watershed upstream from the Detroit Dam
    have been cut, and about 20 percent of Portland's Bull Run Watershed
    Management Unit have been harvested.

    The fertile soil of the Cascade and Coast mountain ranges provides
    some of the best conditions in the United States for growing wood
    fiber, and federal Oregon and California grant lands are recognized
    as one of the nation's most productive and valuable commercial forest
    properties.  Timber has been an important component of the region's
    economy, and timber harvesting on federal and nonfederal lands has
    generated considerable sums of money for counties in western Oregon.
    However, past timber-harvesting practices did not always protect
    water quality.

             TIMBER HARVESTING HAS
             BEEN VIEWED AS A
             DESIRABLE ACTIVITY
    ------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 2:1.1.1

    Local governments and industries have often viewed timber harvesting
    as a desirable activity.  By federal law, counties are entitled to up
    to 50 percent of the receipts from timber sales on federal lands
    located within their boundaries.  In addition, Oregon, together with
    Washington and California, receives a specially legislated payment to
    compensate them for federal timber receipts lost as a result of the
    listing of the northern spotted owl as a threatened species under the
    Endangered Species Act.  The funds can be used to benefit roads and
    schools in the counties where the receipts were earned.\1

    In addition, Oregon's legislation emphasizes timber production on the
    about 875,000 acres of timberland\2 administered by the Oregon
    Department of Forestry to maximize revenue over the long term for
    schools and counties.\3 Another 8.6 million acres of timberland are
    owned by the private sector.

    The timber industry has historically provided many jobs in western
    Oregon that have contributed to the counties through taxes and
    discretionary spending.  Furthermore, removing trees may increase the
    quantity of water delivered to streams, and ultimately to municipal
    and industrial users, by increasing runoff.

    --------------------
    \1 Forest Service:  Distribution of Timber Sales Receipts, Fiscal
    Years 1992-94 (GAO/RCED-95-237FS, Sept.  8, 1995).

    \2 Timberlands are lands that are producing, or are capable of
    producing, crops of industrial wood (i.e., more than 20 cubic feet
    per acre per year); are not withdrawn from timber utilization by law
    or regulation; and represent the lands potentially available for
    harvesting timber resources.

    \3 Public Timber:  Federal and State Programs Differ Significantly in
    Pacific Northwest (GAO/RCED-96-108, May 23, 1996).

             PAST TIMBER-HARVESTING
             PRACTICES DID NOT ALWAYS
             PROTECT WATER QUALITY
    ------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 2:1.1.2

    Although removing trees along streams can increase the quantity of
    water available for municipal and industrial uses, it can also
    increase erosion and sedimentation, thus degrading water quality.
    For instance, until 1992, clear-cutting was commonly used to harvest
    timber from the national forests.  Scientific studies have shown that
    this harvesting method, which removes all of the trees from a
    timber-harvesting site at one time, can contribute sediment to
    streams, especially during large storms.  (See the bibliography for
    the scientific studies we reviewed on the impact of past
    timber-harvesting practices on water quality.)

    These studies have also shown that other past timber-harvesting
    practices can contribute to sedimentation during large storms.  For
    example, ground-based logging practices, including the use of heavy
    equipment such as tractors to haul logs along trails to landings
    where they are loaded onto trucks, compact the soil and create ruts.
    Rain falling on these areas tends to run off the surface, following
    the ruts, allowing sediment to flow more easily into streams.
    Similarly, using fire to clear harvested areas of all vegetation
    before reforestation (broadcast burning) can destroy protective
    layers of organic debris and expose soil to the erosive impact of
    rain.  Finally, vegetation along streams and large, woody debris in
    streams--both of which can trap and filter sediment--were often
    removed during timber harvesting.  Without the vegetation and debris,
    water velocity increases, allowing streams to (1) carry more sediment
    and (2) cut more into stream banks, eroding them and transporting the
    sediment downstream.

          TIMBER-RELATED ROAD
          CONSTRUCTION
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:1.2

    Harvesting timber has often required the construction of numerous
    miles of roads to move heavy equipment into the harvest areas and up
    and down hillsides.  When sections of these roads fail, which occurs
    most often during large winter storms, erosion can result.  Erosion
    from roads has been found to be a major contributor of sediment to
    riparian areas and streams.

    Initially, the easiest timber to reach was along streams, so
    streamside roads were constructed in these areas, primarily on
    private industrial lands.  However, the increased demand for timber
    from federal lands to meet post-World War II housing construction
    needs and to replace the supply of timber from depleted industrial
    lands, resulted in roads being constructed on steep slopes on federal
    lands.

    Road construction on federal lands continued rapidly between 1950 and
    1970.  These roads were constructed using a "sidecast construction"
    design in which excavated soil was used to build much of the roadbed
    along a hillside.  Roadside ditches were constructed to move water
    quickly from roadbeds into nearby streams, thereby reducing the
    damaging effects of the water to the roadbeds.  Stream crossings
    consisted of culverts to pass water beneath the road.

    By the time of the December 1964 storm, which was similar in
    magnitude to the one that occurred in February 1996, road location,
    sidecast road construction, and culverts had been recognized as major
    contributors to sediment delivery to streams during large storms for
    a number of reasons.  First, sidecast construction on hillsides had
    resulted in unstable roadbeds that were unconsolidated, not part of
    the natural slope of the hill, and subject to erosion and failure.
    Second, roadside ditches transported eroded topsoil from the roadbeds
    and hillsides and delivered it quickly into streams and rivers.  And,
    finally, culverts became blocked, resulting in water flowing across
    the roadbeds and contributing to their erosion and failure.

    A Forest Service report prepared after the December 1964 storm
    concluded,\4 among other things, that (1) road damage could have been
    avoided entirely or greatly reduced by better road location or design
    to cope with site conditions; (2) in some cases, the primary
    criterion for road location was apparently the "shortest distance
    from clearcut to clearcut;" (3) some of the most impressive storm
    damage was caused by sidecast road construction on steep slopes; and
    (4) the failure or impairment of drainage structures (i.e., ditches
    and culverts) was involved in almost all road-related storm damage.

    More recently, BLM has identified roads as a contributor to increased
    streamflows and sedimentation in some watersheds.  For instance, in
    an analysis of the lower McKenzie River watershed\5 --an area of
    mostly nonfederal ownership and mixed uses--BLM found that (1) some
    of the primary causes of increased peak and total water flows were an
    increase in compacted areas from roads, forest and agricultural
    activities, man-made structures, and other human development and an
    extension of the stream network resulting from the direct routing of
    water from roads to streams and (2) elevated sediment levels in a
    portion of the watershed were in part explained by the large number
    of hillside roads, many of which lacked proper drainage and roadside
    vegetation.  BLM estimated that streamside roads contribute more than
    twice as much sediment per mile than other forest roads.  (See the
    bibliography for the scientific studies we reviewed on the impact of
    forest roads on water quality.)

    During the 1970s and 1980s, the Forest Service and BLM made concerted
    efforts to reduce road failures through improved location, design,
    and maintenance.  However, by then, the main road networks had been
    nearly completed, and only small secondary roads were required to
    obtain access to new timber harvest areas.  Thus, the national
    forests and BLM lands contain a mixture of roads--of different ages
    and construction designs--that vary in their potential to deliver
    eroded soil to streams during large storms.

    --------------------
    \4 A Report of the Region 6 Storm Damage Evaluation Committee.  Part
    II:  Storms of December 1964 and January 1965, U.S.  Department of
    Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region (Dec.  1966).

    \5 Vida/McKenzie Watershed Analysis, BLM (Apr.  1996).

       AGRICULTURAL, INDUSTRIAL,
       URBAN, AND RESIDENTIAL
       DEVELOPMENT CAN INCREASE
       TURBIDITY
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:2

    Two of the watersheds--those serving Eugene and Salem--have
    agricultural, industrial, urban, and residential development.  All of
    these activities have been shown to contribute to increased turbidity
    during large storms.

          AGRICULTURE CAN CONTRIBUTE
          SEDIMENT
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:2.1

    In addition to being ideal for growing wood fiber, the fertile soil
    of the Willamette River basin provide some of the best conditions in
    the United States for growing agricultural products, including fruits
    and berries, vegetables, and ornamental plants.  As a result,
    agriculture is a major economic activity in the basin.  However,
    agricultural development in the Pacific Northwest has altered or
    removed natural plant communities and replaced them with pastures and
    industrial farming operations.  Soil is compacted and land frequently
    may be cleared of most vegetation.  Rain falling on this land can run
    off into streams, carrying with it eroded topsoil.

    A June 1993 report for Oregon's Department of Environmental Quality\6
    stated that nonpoint source pollution was a major contributor to
    water quality degradation in the Willamette River and its
    tributaries.\7 Statewide, agriculture accounted for 39 percent--or
    more than double forestry's 17 percent--of all nonpoint water
    pollution.  Boating contributed another 14 percent, while urban
    runoff contributed an additional 12 percent.  (See table 2.1.)

                                   Table 2.1

                    Percentage of Statewide Nonpoint Source
                       Pollution by Category of Land Use

                                                   Percentage of statewide
    Land use                                            nonpoint pollution
    ----------------------------------------  ----------------------------
    Agriculture                                                         39
    Forestry                                                            17
    Boating                                                             14
    Urban                                                               12
    Natural                                                             10
    Mining                                                               5
    Construction                                                         3
    ======================================================================
    Total                                                              100
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Source:  Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Guidebook for Local
    Government, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and Oregon
    Department of Land Conservation and Development (June 1994).

    A 1997 study commissioned by the governor of Oregon found that
    agriculture in the Willamette River basin contributes the greatest
    amount of suspended sediment to the river.\8

    The study also reported that an estimated 1.8 million tons of soil is
    lost each year from erosion on agricultural lands in the basin.

    --------------------
    \6 Willamette River Basin Water Quality Study:  Summary Report,
    Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (June 30, 1993).

    \7 Nonpoint source pollution is water pollution that does not result
    from a discharge at a specific, single location or point source (such
    as a single pipe) but generally results from runoff, precipitation,
    atmospheric deposition, or percolation and normally is associated
    with land management, construction, and urban runoff.

    \8 J.D.  Miller et al., Willamette River Basin Task Force:
    Recommendations to Governor John Kitzhaber (Dec.  1997).

          INDUSTRIAL, URBAN, AND
          RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAN
          CONTRIBUTE TO INCREASED
          SEDIMENT
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:2.2

    The 1997 study also found that urban sites in the Willamette River
    basin contribute the greatest amount of suspended sediment to the
    river on a per acre basis.  The basin's population had increased from
    approximately 1.5 million in 1970 to about 2.2 million in 1995, or by
    47 percent, and growth projections for the basin anticipate that this
    number will nearly double over the next 25 to 30 years.  This growth
    in population has resulted in soil that is compacted, paved, covered,
    or cleared of most vegetation.

    For example, since the 1940s, residential development and related
    roads have nearly doubled in some watersheds.  Development has
    increased the percentage of the basin covered by roofs, roads,
    parking lots, compacted areas, and other surfaces that prevent rain
    from penetrating into the soil.  During storms, this increased runoff
    moves across barren or disturbed soil, eroding the soil, which can
    then be transported into streams.  In addition, construction
    activities can contribute sediment to streams.  For instance, without
    proper controls at construction sites, sediment loads can reach 35 to
    45 tons per acre per year.

    Interstate highways, state and county roads, and other types of roads
    also contribute sediment to streams during large storms.  According
    to information provided by two groups sponsored by the state of
    Oregon--the Willamette River Basin Task Force and the Willamette
    Valley Livability Forum--the basin's roads (paved and unpaved, urban
    and rural) total over 46,500 miles--about enough to circle the earth
    twice.  Both the North Santiam River watershed serving Salem and the
    McKenzie River watershed serving Eugene have highways that parallel
    the rivers upstream from the locations where water flows into the
    cities' water treatment systems.  Like those constructed to harvest
    timber, these streamside roads increase the likelihood that sediment
    will be delivered directly into streams during large storms.

    Increased populations in the Willamette and Lower Columbia river
    basins have also resulted in the construction of a large number of
    streambank stabilization projects to protect property from flooding.
    Nearly half of the original primary and secondary river channels in
    the Willamette River basin have been eliminated by channel
    straightening and other activities, and one-quarter of the remaining
    channel banks have been stripped of riparian vegetation and
    stabilized with rocks.  As a result, floodplains, wetlands, and
    riparian areas are no longer able to function as intended--that is,
    to absorb excess water and dissipate its energy during storms and to
    provide buffers to filter suspended sediment from surface runoff
    before it reaches streams.  Streambank stabilization projects also
    increase water velocity and the erosive power of the river on
    downstream reaches.

    For example, the settlement and development of the floodplain, as
    well as the lands around the mouths of many of the tributaries,
    within Eugene's McKenzie River watershed have accelerated since World
    War II.  As a result, essentially the entire lower portion of the
    river's corridor has experienced landscaping, road construction,
    channel simplification, agricultural cropping and pasture, and
    residential development.

    According to a 1997 report by the Oregon Department of Environmental
    Quality on water quality in Eugene's McKenzie River watershed,\9
    sites in the upper subbasin--primarily federally owned lands--were
    relatively free of point and nonpoint source pollution.  Conversely,
    in the lower subbasin--on predominantly nonfederal
    lands--agricultural and urban runoff was loading the river with soil,
    organic materials, and other wastes and pollutants.

    Preliminary results from a pilot project to monitor storms, recently
    completed by the McKenzie Watershed Council, reached a similar
    conclusion.\10 Although the Council cautions that information derived
    from repeated monitoring over a number of storms will be required
    before general conclusions can be reached on the patterns of water
    quality in the watershed, data from one storm indicated that the
    highest recorded turbidity levels came from a growing residential
    area east of Eugene and that turbidity levels measured from this area
    during the storm were about double those from agricultural lands and
    considerably higher than those from federal forest lands.  In
    addition, a recent study for the Eugene Water & Electric Board
    identified runoff from road surfaces and agricultural and urbanized
    areas, along with fuel and chemical spills, roadside vegetation
    management, recreation, and forest practices, as the greatest risks
    to the city's water supply.\11

    --------------------
    \9 The McKenzie Basin Water Quality Report, Oregon Department of
    Environmental Quality, Laboratory Division (Portland, Ore.:  Feb.
    1997).

    \10 Monitoring Program:  Storm Event Monitoring Pilot, McKenzie
    Watershed Council (Feb.  21, 1998).

    \11 Final Report For the Eugene Water & Electric Board:
    Environmental Risk Assessment of EWEB's Drinking Water Supply, GEM
    Consulting, Inc.  (Eugene, Ore.:  Feb.  1995).

       INCREASED TURBIDITY DURING AND
       FOLLOWING LARGE STORMS CAN
       RENDER A WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
       INOPERABLE
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2:3

    Despite the timber harvests and forest roads and agricultural,
    industrial, urban, and residential development in the Willamette and
    Lower Columbia river basins, the cities included in our review as
    well as others in western Oregon have a history of providing safe
    drinking water to their residents.  However, during and following
    large storms, such as those that occurred in December 1964 and
    February 1996, cities in the Pacific Northwest, including those we
    reviewed, experienced elevated sediment levels at the locations where
    water flows into their water treatment systems.

    The accelerated erosion that naturally occurs during large storms,
    combined with the sediment from human activities in a municipal
    watershed, can shut down a city's water treatment system.  For
    instance, the increase in naturally occurring erosion and erosion
    resulting from human activities during the February 1996 storm
    resulted in Salem's shutting down its water treatment system for 8
    days.

    Salem uses a process known as "slow sand filtration," which is unique
    to the Pacific Northwest, to filter its drinking water.  Unlike the
    "rapid sand filtration" process used by Cottage Grove, Eugene, and
    Sandy--which pretreats the water with chemicals to cause sediment to
    settle out of the water prior to filtering it through sand
    beds--Salem's process removes impurities and sediment as the water
    filters through large beds composed of sand and the biological mat
    that forms on the beds' surface.  This system, though inexpensive and
    not uncommon for small communities, is not used by any other city in
    the Pacific Northwest with a population of more than 100,000 people,
    according to a report prepared for Salem.\12

    According to documents that we reviewed, as it did during the 1964
    storm, the Detroit Dam and Reservoir, located at the boundary of
    Forest Service lands and about 30 miles upstream from the location
    where water flows into Salem's water treatment system, provided flood
    control during the 1996 storm by retaining the turbid water from the
    Willamette National Forest as well as from lands owned by the state
    of Oregon and private landowners.\13 The dam, like other dams and
    flood retention structures, also acted like a giant sediment-settling
    pond.  When flowing water entered the reservoir behind the dam, much
    of the sediment in the water fell out of suspension and settled to
    the bottom.

    However, according to a 1998 study of the 1996 storm in the North
    Santiam watershed--conducted by Salem, the Willamette National
    Forest, the Forest Service's Pacific Northwest Research Station, and
    the Willamette Geological Services--sediment from natural erosion and
    human activities on primarily nonfederal lands in the lower portions
    of the watershed below the dam was transported down the city's sole
    source of drinking water--the North Santiam River.\14 This sediment
    shut down the city's treatment system and rendered it inoperable on
    February 6, 1996.

    In addition, not all of the sediment in the water behind the Detroit
    Dam settled to the bottom of the reservoir.  The North Santiam River
    watershed contains soils with high levels of microscopic clay
    particles.  Although the larger clay particles carried by the storm
    water settled to the bottom of the Detroit Reservoir behind the
    Detroit Dam, the finer sediment remained suspended in the water
    retained by the dam.  This material was delivered downstream when the
    U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers began releasing flood waters from the
    reservoir on February 9, 1996.

    Without a secondary source of water, Salem nearly exhausted its
    reserve water supplies and had to take emergency measures, according
    to city officials.  These measures included (1) drilling emergency
    wells, (2) purchasing water from neighboring communities, (3)
    constructing an emergency system to pretreat the water, (4) asking
    customers to curtail their use of water, and (5) banning all
    nonessential outdoor uses.

    Salem restarted its water treatment system on February 14, 1996.
    However, according to city officials, water use had to be curtailed
    for more than a month after the storm to reduce the demand on Salem's
    crippled water treatment system.  The system was also not able to
    adequately filter the turbid water being released from the Detroit
    Reservoir.  Since the microscopic clay particles were able to pass
    through the water treatment system's filter beds, the city had to
    obtain an exemption from the state in order to deliver to its
    customers drinking water that had a turbidity level exceeding
    drinking water standards through July 16, 1996.  In addition, one of
    the system's filters was damaged by the microscopic clay particles
    and has continued to create operational problems, according to city
    officials.

    Other western Oregon cities experienced elevated sediment levels
    during and following the February 1996 storm (see fig.  2.2) but were
    better prepared to continue to deliver safe drinking water to their
    customers.

       Figure 2.2:  Turbidity Levels
       at Cottage Grove, Eugene, and
       Salem During and Following the
       February 1996 Storm

       (See figure in printed
       edition.)

    Notes:  Turbidity level is in nephelometric turbidity units, which
    indicate the amount of suspended sediment in the water.  The standard
    for safe drinking water is no more than one nephelometric turbidity
    unit.

    The cities of Portland and Sandy are not included on this figure,
    because (1) Portland's maximum turbidity level of less than 11 was
    too small to display on this graph and (2) Sandy was unable to
    provide us with data on turbidity levels during and following the
    February 1996 storm.

    The break in Eugene's turbidity data represents a short period of
    time when this information was not collected.

    Source:  GAO's presentation of data provided by each of the cities.

    Specifically, Cottage Grove did not experience severe flooding, and
    although turbidity levels were slightly higher than those reported by
    Salem, the city was able to filter and deliver safe drinking water to
    its residents.  In Eugene, turbidity levels were more than 20 times
    greater than those reported by Salem.  Eugene shut down its water
    treatment system for about 12 hours and relied on its reserve water
    supplies until its water treatment system could be adjusted to handle
    the rapidly changing turbid water.  Portland experienced considerably
    lower turbidity levels than Cottage Grove, Eugene, and Salem and
    relied on its backup water system--a well field along the Columbia
    River--for 5 days to provide safe drinking water during and following
    the storm, when water from its watershed was too turbid to meet safe
    drinking water standards.

    According to Sandy's public works director, the city is usually
    prepared to continue to deliver safe drinking water to its customers
    during large storms.  Sandy never shuts down its water treatment
    system but relies on a secondary source of water and reserve water
    supplies, rather than Alder Creek, to meet demand.  However, the
    city's secondary source of water had been severely damaged during a
    windstorm in late 1995 when large trees adjacent to a timber harvest
    clearcut on private land fell onto the source's pipes and storage
    tanks.  In addition, a malfunctioning sensing device in the city's
    main storage reservoir led the city to believe that this reservoir
    was full, when in fact it was nearly empty.  As a result, the city
    had to stop the delivery of water to its customers and rely instead
    on emergency water supplies, including bottled water and tank trucks,
    until its treatment system could again filter water from Alder Creek.

    After the storm, Salem and certain environmental groups expressed
    concerns about the extent to which the timber harvests and forest
    roads on federal lands contributed to increased turbidity.  However,
    the 1998 study of the 1996 storm in the North Santiam watershed
    builds on the findings in previous studies on persistent
    turbidity.\15 The 1998 study reaffirms earlier findings that the
    persistent turbidity in the Detroit Reservoir came from the
    microscopic clay particles that remained suspended in the water
    retained by the Detroit Dam.  The main sources of these particles are
    (1) natural, large, deep-seated, slow-moving masses of earth (called
    earthflows) and (2) naturally occurring erosion from streambanks,
    which brings to the surface deep-seated clay deposits.  The study
    notes that other types of erosion--including erosion from the failure
    of forest roads on federal lands and from past timber harvests--are
    minor sources of these clays.

    This persistent turbidity had also been observed in some Oregon
    reservoirs following the December 1964 storm.\16 According to Salem's
    water source supervisor at the time of the 1964 storm, turbidity
    persisted in the Detroit Reservoir for several months following the
    storm; however, drinking water standards did not exist at that time
    and Salem was able to deliver the turbid water to its customers.  A
    1994 report on a water system master plan for Salem recognized that
    the city's reliance on the North Santiam River as its sole source of
    water left it vulnerable to emergency situations that could result in
    multiple-day closures of its treatment system and in a total loss of
    its water supply capability.\17 At the time of the February 1996
    storm, however, the city had done little to develop additional
    reserve water supplies or to expand its water treatment system, as
    recommended in the report.

    Since the February 1996 storm, the city has (1) constructed a
    permanent pretreatment basin to remove sediment from turbid storm
    water before delivering the water to the slow-sand filter beds and
    (2) continued to develop additional reserve water supplies.  However,
    according to Salem officials, the type of fine sediments after the
    February 1996 flood would still result in a "treatment challenge" and
    "may result in finished water exceeding drinking water standards for
    turbidity."

    --------------------
    \12 City of Salem:  The Water System Master Plan, CH2M Hill
    (Corvallis, Ore.:  June 7, 1994).

    \13 The state of Oregon and private landowners own more than 9
    percent of the North Santiam River watershed upstream of the Detroit
    Dam.

    \14 D.  Bates et al., "North Santiam River Turbidity Study,
    1996-1997," Willamette National Forest (Eugene, Ore.:  Feb.  1998).

    \15 D.  Bates et al., "North Santiam River Turbidity Study,
    1996-1997," Willamette National Forest (Eugene, Ore.:  Feb.  1998).

    \16 Hills Creek Reservoir Turbidity Study, Water Resources Research
    Institute, Oregon State University (Corvallis, Ore.:  Dec.  1971).

    \17 City of Salem:  The Water System Master Plan, CH2M Hill
    (Corvallis, Ore.:  June 7, 1994).

    PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE TO ENSURE
    SAFE DRINKING WATER DURING FUTURE
    STORMS
    ============================================================ Chapter 3

    Ongoing federal and nonfederal efforts have made significant progress
    in (1) mitigating the impact of human activities on water quality and
    in ensuring safe drinking water for cities in the Willamette and
    Lower Columbia river basins and (2) involving more key landowners and
    other stakeholders in discussing, understanding, and addressing
    watershed issues and concerns and in implementing restoration plans.
    Nevertheless, some key landowners have not been included in
    coordination efforts, and many efforts could benefit from a better
    understanding of, and data on, the condition of the watersheds.

       PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE IN
       MITIGATING THE IMPACT OF HUMAN
       ACTIVITIES ON WATER QUALITY
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1

    Federal land management agencies, the state of Oregon, the
    municipalities, and private landowners have made significant progress
    in mitigating the impact of human activities on water quality.
    Efforts to date have tended to focus primarily on timber and related
    roads; however, other efforts are now under way at the federal,
    state, and local levels in western Oregon to address other human
    activities that can contribute to increased turbidity during large
    storms.

          FEDERAL EFFORTS TO MITIGATE
          THE IMPACT OF TIMBER
          HARVESTS AND ROADS
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1.1

    Federal efforts--including a new plan, requirements, and
    legislation--are intended to mitigate the impact of timber harvests
    and roads on water quality.  An April 1994 plan--known as the
    Northwest Forest Plan--provides management direction for the 22.1
    million acres of land managed by the Forest Service and BLM in the
    Pacific Northwest, including those in the Willamette and Lower
    Columbia river basins.\1 The plan also begins to address the legacy
    of water quality degradation associated with past timber-harvesting
    and road construction practices.  In addition, as discussed below,
    the Congress has enacted legislation to protect Portland's watershed
    and its unfiltered water supply.

    --------------------
    \1 Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of
    Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern
    Spotted Owl and Standards and Guidelines for Management of Habitat
    for Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest Related Species Within
    the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl, Forest Service and BLM (Apr.
    1994).

             THE NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN
             IS INTENDED TO PROTECT
             WATER QUALITY
    ------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:1.1.1

    In the late 1980s and early 1990s, timber sales on the lands managed
    by the Forest Service and BLM in the Pacific Northwest were brought
    to a virtual halt by federal injunctions.  In various rulings, the
    federal courts enjoined the agencies from selling timber until they
    addressed issues related to the northern spotted owl and its
    habitat.\2 The President directed his administration to develop a
    plan that would (1) satisfy the courts so they would lift the
    injunctions, (2) protect the environment, and (3) stabilize the
    regional economy.  The result was the Northwest Forest Plan.

    In order to resurrect their timber programs under the Northwest
    Forest Plan, the Forest Service and BLM have (1) significantly
    reduced the volume of timber harvested; (2) deemphasized the use of
    clearcutting as the preferred method to harvest timber; (3) created
    requirements (standards and guidelines) to mitigate the impact of
    timber harvests and forest roads on water quality; (4) continued to
    implement practices or combinations of practices determined to be the
    most effective, practicable means of preventing or reducing
    sedimentation (best management practices); and (5) started to address
    the conditions created by past timber-harvesting and road
    construction practices.  EPA has stated that the full implementation
    of the Northwest Forest Plan is a cornerstone of the recovery of
    water quality on federal lands within western Oregon's watersheds.

    The volume of timber harvested from federal lands in the Pacific
    Northwest declined from 5.2 billion board feet in fiscal year 1989 to
    slightly more than .6 billion board feet in fiscal year 1997, a
    decrease of about 88 percent.  In addition, between fiscal year
    1992--when the Forest Service announced plans to reduce the volume of
    timber harvested by clearcutting--and fiscal year 1997, the
    percentage of all timber harvested by this method fell from 22 to 10
    percent.

    The Northwest Forest Plan also refines requirements and best
    management practices for harvesting timber and constructing roads.
    These practices have evolved over the past several decades in
    response to new federal requirements and growing public concern about
    the impacts of these activities on the environment.  (See the
    bibliography for the scientific studies we reviewed on the impact of
    newer timber-harvesting and road construction practices on water
    quality.) For example, riparian areas vital to protecting and
    enhancing aquatic and terrestrial resources are now preserved.  In
    its 1996 report,\3 the Oregon Natural Resources Council notes that
    maintaining riparian buffers protects streams from the effects of
    logging.

    Current timber-harvesting and road construction practices on federal
    lands are designed to mitigate these activities' adverse effects on
    water quality.  Specifically, timber harvesters have developed
    methods to remove timber from hillsides that are less damaging to the
    soil than older practices.  These newer practices leave trees and
    large, woody debris in riparian buffers to trap and filter sediment
    before it reaches streams.  Additionally, new forest roads are
    designed to be more stable and to reduce the potential for failure.
    Finally, road drainage systems have been improved to reduce the
    amount of water and sediment delivered to streams.

    --------------------
    \2 See, for example, Seattle Audubon Society v.  Evans, 771 F.  Supp.
    1081 (W.D.  Wash.), aff'd, 952 F.2d 297 (9th Cir.  1991) and Seattle
    Audubon Society v.  Moseley, 798 F.  Supp.  1484 (W.D.  Wash.  1992),
    aff'd sub nom., Seattle Audubon Society v.  Espy, 998 F.2d 699 (9th
    Cir.  1993).

    \3 "Economic Considerations of Municipal Watershed Use:  To Grow
    Timber or Water," Oregon Natural Resources Council (Apr.  1996).

             THE NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN
             ADDRESSES LEGACY
             CONDITIONS ON FEDERAL
             LANDS
    ------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:1.1.2

    Older forest roads constructed and timber-harvest areas cleared using
    past practices that were not designed to protect water quality can
    continue to contribute to increased turbidity during storms and
    affect other watershed values.  EPA has noted that it will likely
    take watersheds decades to recover from the impacts of these
    practices.  Under the Northwest Forest Plan, both the Forest Service
    and BLM are addressing these conditions, together with other issues,
    through watershed restoration efforts.

    Restoration efforts include controlling and preventing road-related
    runoff and sediment production by closing and stabilizing
    (decommissioning) some roads and upgrading others by removing soil
    from locations where there is a high potential for erosion, modifying
    road drainage systems to reduce the extent to which the road
    functions as an extension of the stream network, and reconstructing
    stream crossings.  These efforts also include restoring riparian
    vegetation and, to prevent instream erosion, adding back large, woody
    debris into the streams from which it was removed.

             THE CONGRESS HAS ENACTED
             LEGISLATION TO PROTECT
             PORTLAND'S WATERSHED
    ------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 3:1.1.3

    Over the past 100 years, the Congress has acted to protect Portland's
    unfiltered drinking water.  Almost all of Portland's nearly
    65,000-acre Bull Run watershed is owned by the federal government and
    managed by the Forest Service.  Legislative and administrative
    decisions in the late 1890s and early 1900s protected the watershed
    from settlement and development.\4 Public Law 95-200, enacted in
    1977, established the Bull Run Watershed Management Unit as a special
    resources management unit to be administered as a watershed by the
    Secretary of Agriculture.  In addition, title VI of the Oregon
    Resource Conservation Act of 1996,\5 which amended Public Law 95-200,
    protects the watershed from timber harvesting that could adversely
    affect water quality but permits timber to be harvested to protect or
    enhance water quality or quantity.

    Forest Service officials estimate that they spend nearly $1 million a
    year managing federal lands in Portland's watershed.  Conversely,
    Seattle, Washington--which, like Portland, relies primarily on
    unfiltered water--has purchased or otherwise acquired all of the
    lands within its more than 90,000-acre Cedar River watershed from
    private timber companies (after the timber was harvested) and from
    the Forest Service.  According to a city official, Seattle has
    harvested second-growth timber from its watershed since about 1940
    and uses the revenue generated each year from timber sales to acquire
    habitat.  Thus, while Seattle has incurred the costs to acquire, and
    generates revenue from, its watershed, the costs to protect and
    restore Portland's watershed are paid primarily by federal taxpayers.

    --------------------
    \4 A proclamation signed by the President on June 17, 1892, declared
    the Bull Run area a national forest reserve.  The law of April 28,
    1904, ch.  1774, 33 Stat.  526, protects "the Bull Run Forest Reserve
    and the sources of the water supply of the City of Portland, State of
    Oregon."

    \5 Pub.  L.  104-208, Division B, tit.  VI, 110 Stat.  3009-541.

          STATE EFFORTS TO MITIGATE
          THE IMPACT OF TIMBER
          HARVESTS AND ROADS
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1.2

    The state of Oregon has implemented rules and regulations for timber
    harvesting on state and private lands.  Although found by EPA to be
    less stringent than the requirements on federal lands, the state's
    requirements also protect water quality.

    According to the Oregon Department of Forestry,\6 Oregon was the
    first state in the nation to regulate timber harvesting on nonfederal
    lands to protect water quality.  Oregon began legislating
    timber-harvesting activities with the passage of the Oregon Forest
    Conservation Act of 1941, which addressed reforestation and fire
    protection.  According to a state official, this act was repealed in
    1971 when the Oregon Forest Practices Act\7 was enacted.  Rules were
    first promulgated under the 1971 act in 1972.  In 1979, the rules
    were certified by EPA as best management practices for controlling
    nonpoint source pollution from forestry in the state.  Major
    amendments to the rules in 1987, 1991, and 1996 further increased
    protection for stream and water quality.

    The rules specify practices required to protect water quality,
    including (1) stabilizing soil and keeping it out of streams, (2)
    retaining ground cover to filter surface water flows, (3) protecting
    vegetation around stream channels, (4) limiting soil disturbance, and
    (5) maintaining stable roadbeds.  The majority of the forest industry
    in the state has supported compliance with the act and its rules and
    has led efforts to update and refine them.  The state monitors
    compliance with the rules during commercial timber harvesting on all
    nonfederal lands.

    In addition, motivated by concerns over the possibility that
    additional coastal salmon species would be listed as endangered or
    threatened under the Endangered Species Act, the governor of Oregon
    initiated an effort--the Coastal Salmon Restoration Initiative--in
    1997 not only to prevent such a listing and improve fish habitat but
    also to protect water quality to support people, industry, fish, and
    wildlife.  As part of this effort, landowners of industrial forests
    have agreed to implement a voluntary program to identify and address
    risks to water quality caused by forest roads.  They have also
    promised about $130 million over the next 10 years to manage and
    upgrade older forest roads on these lands.  The Oregon Department of
    Forestry and other state and private agencies will monitor the
    implementation of the initiative.

    Although they have been certified as best management practices by
    EPA, Oregon's requirements to help protect water quality have been
    found by EPA to be less stringent than the requirements on federal
    lands.  For example, according to EPA, the state's Forest Practices
    Act, as amended, still affords substantially less protection to
    riparian areas, across all stream categories, than federal
    requirements.

    --------------------
    \6 The Oregon Forest Practices Act Water Protection Rules:
    Scientific and Policy Considerations, Oregon Department of Forestry
    (Dec.  1994).

    \7 Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 527.610 to 527.770, 527.990(1), and
    527.992 are known as the Oregon Forest Practices Act.

          STATE AND LOCAL EFFORTS ARE
          UNDER WAY TO ADDRESS OTHER
          ACTIVITIES CONTRIBUTING TO
          INCREASED TURBIDITY
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:1.3

    Although lagging behind the efforts to mitigate the effects of timber
    harvests and roads, efforts are under way at the state and local
    levels in Oregon to address other human activities that are known to
    contribute to increased turbidity during large storms.  For example,
    a gubernatorial task force that assessed the current status of waters
    in the Willamette River basin reported in December 1997 that
    significant resources had been expended over the prior 8 years to
    study the impact of agricultural practices on groundwater and to
    develop techniques to reduce this impact.\8 The report also noted
    that Oregon's Department of Agriculture had recently stepped up
    efforts to develop water quality management area plans for
    agriculture in Willamette River subbasins that do not meet water
    quality standards under the Clean Water Act.\9

    Unlike its regulatory approach to timber harvesting and road
    construction under the Forest Practices Act, the state's approach to
    agriculture depends on the voluntary cooperation and initiative of
    private landowners and farmers to reduce their contribution to water
    quality problems.  Key building blocks of the state's plan include
    water quality assessments, monitoring programs, education and
    outreach strategies, and technical assistance.  However, the plan's
    success depends on (1) the ability of the state to deliver technical
    and educational assistance to private landowners and (2) the
    willingness of the landowners to use this information to protect
    water quality.  State agencies have started working with landowners
    to develop management plans to control erosion and reduce the
    contaminants entering streams.  However, since compliance is
    voluntary, there is no assurance that landowners will participate.

    The gubernatorial task force also found that some cities in the
    Willamette River basin had significantly reduced the discharge of
    pollutants, including sediment, into the Willamette River and its
    tributaries.  Approaches taken included (1) removing suspended
    sediment from stormwater, (2) educating the public on water quality,
    and (3) managing wetlands.

    --------------------
    \8 J.D.  Miller et al., Willamette River Basin Task Force:
    Recommendations to Governor John Kitzhaber (Dec.  1997).

    \9 The purpose of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, as
    amended, (commonly called the Clean Water Act) is to "restore and
    maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the
    Nation's waters."

       COOPERATION AND COLLABORATION
       AMONG STAKEHOLDERS HAS IMPROVED
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:2

    In a June 1995 report on selected watershed projects,\10 we noted
    that the major lesson to be learned from our review of two projects
    in western Oregon was that involving local stakeholders in planning
    and implementing a project can help overcome a community's suspicion
    of government-sponsored initiatives and result in a cooperative
    partnership of community interests and government agencies.  Our
    review indicated that collaboration between federal and nonfederal
    parties in the Willamette and Lower Columbia river basins is
    improving.  In addition, local, voluntary watershed councils have
    been established to bring stakeholders together to discuss,
    understand, and address watershed problems and issues and to
    implement watershed restoration plans.

    --------------------
    \10 Agriculture and the Environment:  Information on and
    Characteristics of Selected Watershed Projects (GAO/RCED-95-218, June
    29, 1995).

          PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN
          FEDERAL AGENCIES'
          DECISION-MAKING HAS
          INCREASED
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:2.1

    The public has expressed its desire to become more involved in the
    decision-making processes of federal land management agencies and has
    demonstrated its preference for presenting its concerns, positions,
    and supporting documentation during, rather than after, an agency's
    development of proposed plans and projects.  The public has also
    signaled its intention to challenge decisions that it has not been
    involved in reaching.\11

    In western Oregon's municipal watersheds, the Forest Service and BLM
    have involved the public in their decision-making by (1) working more
    closely with some municipal officials, local citizen groups, and
    other stakeholders in developing proposed plans and in designing
    projects, such as timber sales, and (2) entering into some formal
    agreements--called memorandums of understanding--with municipalities
    and the state of Oregon to address watershed issues.

    Specifically, the Forest Service and Portland have collaborated in
    the management of the city's Bull Run watershed for decades.  Cottage
    Grove has worked closely with the Forest Service since the 1970s to
    improve and protect water quality.  Both the Forest Service and the
    city have worked to monitor water quality, and the agency has
    identified and mitigated sources of turbidity.  The Forest Service
    has also acted to improve water quality by (1) reducing the volume of
    timber harvested in the city's Layng Creek watershed, (2) maintaining
    roads and seeding roadside areas to prevent erosion, and (3)
    directing Layng Creek away from an earthflow and building a rock wall
    to stop the earthflow's movement.  According to monitoring data
    gathered by the Forest Service and Cottage Grove, these efforts have
    reduced turbidity and improved water quality.

    In 1997, Sandy entered into a formal memorandum of understanding with
    the Forest Service and BLM on activities within the Alder Creek
    watershed and on ways to gain a better understanding of how the
    watershed functions.  That same year, Salem entered into a similar
    agreement with the Forest Service for the North Santiam River
    watershed.

    While the benefits of working together cooperatively often outweigh
    the costs of early and continuous public involvement, our prior work
    has shown that decision-making on managing federal lands is
    inherently contentious and that public involvement in the process
    should not be viewed as a panacea to legal challenges.\12
    Dissatisfaction with an agency's process for public involvement often
    cannot be dissociated from dissatisfaction with the outcome of the
    process, and parties opposed to a particular activity, such as timber
    harvesting, can cause a federal agency to delay, alter, or withdraw
    projects by availing themselves of the opportunities for
    administrative appeal and judicial review that are provided by
    statute or regulation.

    --------------------
    \11 Forest Service Decision-Making:  A Framework for Improving
    Performance (GAO/RCED-97-71, Apr.  29, 1997).

    \12 Forest Service Decision-Making:  A Framework for Improving
    Performance (GAO/RCED-97-71, Apr.  29, 1997) and Restoring the
    Everglades:  Public Participation in Federal Efforts (GAO/RCED-96-5,
    Oct.  24, 1995).

          WATERSHED COUNCILS HAVE BEEN
          ESTABLISHED TO ADDRESS WATER
          QUALITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:2.2

    The state of Oregon has recognized the important role of
    collaboration among watershed stakeholders and enacted legislation in
    1995 to promote local, voluntary watershed councils to implement
    plans for watershed restoration.  The state provides both funding for
    the councils and guidelines for their membership.\13 In 1997, the
    state placed $20 million in a watershed enhancement fund and directed
    that the funds be used to support watershed councils as well as soil
    and water conservation districts, monitoring, and watershed
    improvements.

    One of the earliest and more advanced watershed councils in the
    Willamette River basin is the McKenzie Watershed Council.  The
    Council has developed plans and objectives for improving water
    quality within the watershed and has begun to monitor ongoing efforts
    to better understand the impact of different activities on water
    quality.  It has also provided public education and developed
    informational brochures and literature addressing different water
    quality issues.

    --------------------
    \13 1995 Or.  Laws Ch.  187 (providing, in part, for amendment to ORS
    541.350 to 541.395).

       EFFORTS COULD BENEFIT FROM MORE
       PARTICIPATION AND BETTER
       INFORMATION
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3

    Although ongoing efforts within the Willamette and Lower Columbia
    river basins have made significant progress in addressing many of the
    activities that can contribute to turbidity and in increasing
    collaboration between federal and nonfederal parties, there are
    opportunities to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of these
    efforts.  Specifically, some of the efforts could benefit from
    involving more key landowners in their decision-making, and many
    could benefit from a better understanding of, and data on, the
    condition of the watersheds.

          COORDINATION EFFORTS
          SOMETIMES EXCLUDE KEY
          LANDOWNERS
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3.1

    Our prior work has shown that, to be more effective, a watershed
    approach to protecting water quality and ensuring safe drinking water
    should include all the key landowners and other stakeholders.  As
    more landowners and others within a watershed collaborate, more
    activities are likely to be coordinated and managed across the
    watershed.\14 In our June 1995 report on selected watershed
    projects,\15 we noted that participants in two projects in western
    Oregon emphasized that the projects--which addressed drinking water
    quality and other watershed issues--could not progress until the
    stakeholders had moved beyond blaming each other and begun
    concentrating on solutions.  These participants also said that the
    stakeholders needed to be involved to ensure that all economic
    interests were represented and considered when defining the problem
    and developing a solution.

    However, memorandums of understanding between federal land management
    agencies and cities to address watershed issues and concerns in the
    Willamette and Lower Columbia river basins did not include key
    landowners, who are critical to understanding and addressing the
    condition of the watershed.  For instance, the formal memorandum of
    understanding among the Forest Service, BLM, and Sandy on activities
    within the city's municipal watershed does not include a large
    industrial forest landowner whose holdings include a significant
    portion of the watershed directly above the location where water
    flows into the city's treatment system.

    Likewise, many human activities on lands owned by the state of
    Oregon, landowners of industrial forests, local communities, and
    private individuals both above and below the Detroit Dam probably
    contributed to the elevated sediment levels that initially shut down
    Salem's water treatment system during the February 1996 storm.
    However, the memorandum of understanding between Salem and the Forest
    Service excludes both BLM and nonfederal landowners in the city's
    watershed.

    --------------------
    \14 Ecosystem Management:  Additional Actions Needed to Adequately
    Test a Promising Approach (GAO/RCED-94-111, Aug.  16, 1994).

    \15 Agriculture and the Environment:  Information on and
    Characteristics of Selected Watershed Projects (GAO/RCED-95-218, June
    29, 1995).

          THE CURRENT CONDITION OF
          MANY MUNICIPAL WATERSHEDS IS
          NOT KNOWN
    -------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:3.2

    Our review has shown that the extent to which human activities
    increased turbidity in the Willamette and Lower Columbia river basins
    during the February 1996 storm varied by watershed.  Moreover, the
    condition of a municipal watershed can change over time as a result
    of storms and other natural disturbances and human activities.
    Therefore, in planning to protect water quality, a one-size-fits-all
    approach will not work.  Rather, efforts to ensure safe drinking
    water must be tailored to address the activities occurring in a
    particular municipal watershed and should be based on an analysis of
    the overall condition of the watershed, including its land-use
    history and the impact of previous storms and human activities.
    However, (1) few of the watershed analyses we reviewed corresponded
    directly to the boundaries of a municipal watershed and (2) the data
    gathered by different federal agencies and nonfederal parties within
    a municipal watershed may not be comparable.  As a result, the
    information obtained from the analyses may be of limited value in
    describing the condition of some municipal watersheds in the
    Willamette and Lower Columbia river basins and may not be useful to
    those responsible for municipal watersheds.

    As discussed in chapter 2, human activities vary by watershed.  For
    example, all five of the cities included in our review have
    experienced timber harvesting and related road construction in their
    watersheds, but only two watersheds--those serving Eugene and
    Salem--also have agricultural, industrial, urban, and residential
    development.

    In addition, while some past and ongoing human activities may be
    contributing to increased sediment, others may not.  For instance, a
    number of comprehensive, long-term scientific studies have shown that
    the effects on water quality of timber harvesting along streams
    decrease several years after the activity occurred.  Similarly,
    studies of timber roads constructed between 1950 and the early 1970s
    have shown that (1) the highest levels of sediment delivered to
    streams occurred during storms shortly after the roads were built and
    (2) these levels generally declined as roadside vegetation increased
    and other natural stabilization occurred.  Moreover, although few
    long-term studies have been conducted to support the water quality
    benefits of improved road location, design, and maintenance,
    timber-related roads constructed during the late 1970s and 1980s are
    likely to be less prone to failure than those built between 1950 and
    the early 1970s.  Furthermore, several studies have noted that, since
    only a small portion of a large watershed may be logged at one time,
    timber harvests probably do not have a noticeable impact on
    downstream users in these watersheds.  As a result, several studies
    have found that, despite decades of timber harvesting, water quality
    in Portland's 65,000-acre Bull Run watershed remains excellent, with
    no detectable decline.\16

    Because human activities vary by watershed and the condition of a
    watershed changes over time, an analysis of the overall condition of
    a municipal watershed is considered essential to guide project
    planning and decision-making and identify the restoration activities
    with the greatest likelihood of success.  A watershed analysis
    characterizes the human, aquatic, riparian, and terrestrial features,
    conditions, processes, and interactions within a watershed by
    collecting and compiling the analytical information essential for
    making sound management decisions concerning the type, location, and
    sequence of appropriate management activities within the watershed.
    However, few of the watershed analyses we reviewed corresponded
    directly to the boundaries of a municipal watershed, and the data
    gathered by different federal agencies and nonfederal parties within
    a municipal watershed may not be comparable.

    For example, Eugene's McKenzie River watershed encompasses
    approximately 740,000 acres.  Within its boundaries, the Forest
    Service has completed five analyses, and BLM and a large industrial
    forest landowner--Weyerhaeuser--have each completed two analyses.
    However, other areas of the watershed have not yet been analyzed, and
    the overall condition of Eugene's municipal watershed is not known.
    Figure 3.2 shows the areas of the McKenzie River municipal watershed
    included in the nine different watershed analyses.

       Figure 3.2:  The McKenzie River
       Municipal Watershed With
       Watershed Analysis Areas
       Completed by the Forest
       Service, BLM, and Weyerhaeuser

       (See figure in printed
       edition.)

    Source:  Adapted from a map by the McKenzie Watershed Council.

    The McKenzie Watershed Council has recently applied for a grant to
    fund an effort to synthesize the data from the various watershed
    analyses into a useful description of basinwide issues.  However, our
    prior work and federal guidelines for watershed analyses have shown
    that the data gathered in the different analyses may not be
    comparable and may not be easily combined to assess the direct,
    indirect, and cumulative effects of human activities throughout the
    watershed.\17

    Sandy's municipal watershed is much smaller than Eugene's watershed.
    The Alder Creek watershed encompasses only about 4,600 acres, or less
    than 1 percent of the acreage in Eugene's McKenzie River watershed.
    The Alder Creek watershed was included in a watershed analysis
    conducted by the Forest Service that covered almost 68,000 acres
    owned by over 900 different landowners.  The analysis addressed the
    condition of Sandy's municipal watershed as well as other issues and
    concerns.  However, as the size of a watershed analysis increases, it
    becomes more difficult to provide meaningful information for planning
    and decision-making at the local level.

    --------------------
    \16 N.G.  Aumen, T.J.  Grizzard, and R.H.  Hawkins, Water Quality
    Monitoring in the Bull Run Watershed, Oregon, available from the City
    of Portland, Oregon, Bureau of Water Works (1989); City of Portland,
    Bureau of Water Works, Water Quality and Environmental Policy
    Division, Water Quality in the Bull Run Watershed:  A Comparison of
    Past and Present Conditions (1988); N.G.  Aumen, J.R.  Boydston, T.J.
    Grizzard, and R.H.  Hawkins, Progress Toward Implementation of Wyden
    Task Force Recommendations, prepared for the Bureau of Water Works,
    City of Portland, Oregon, and Columbia Gorge Ranger District, U.S.
    Forest Service (1990).

    \17 Forest Service Decision-Making:  A Framework for Improving
    Performance (GAO/RCED-97-71, Apr.  29, 1997); Ecosystem Management:
    Additional Actions Needed to Adequately Test a Promising Approach
    (GAO/RCED-94-111, Aug.  16, 1994); and Ecosystem Analysis at the
    Watershed Scale:  Federal Guide for Watershed Analysis, the Regional
    Interagency Executive Committee and the Intergovernmental Advisory
    Committee, Portland, Ore.  (Aug.  1995).

       CONCLUSIONS
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:4

    Federal land management agencies, the state of Oregon, the
    municipalities, and private landowners have made significant progress
    in working together to mitigate the impact of human activities on
    water quality and to ensure safe drinking water to cities in the
    Willamette and Lower Columbia river basins.  Nonetheless, there are
    opportunities to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of these
    efforts by involving more key landowners in the decision-making
    process and by developing a better understanding of, and data on, the
    condition of the watersheds.

    As more landowners within a watershed collaborate, more activities
    are likely to be coordinated and managed across the watershed.
    However, memorandums of understanding between federal land management
    agencies and cities to address watershed issues and concerns in the
    Willamette and Lower Columbia river basins have not included the key
    landowners who are critical to understanding and addressing the
    condition of the watershed.

    Moreover, because human activities vary by watershed and the
    condition of a watershed can change over time, an analysis of the
    overall condition of a municipal watershed is essential to (1) guide
    project planning and decision-making and identify the restoration
    activities with the greatest likelihood of success; (2) make sound
    management decisions concerning the type, location, and sequence of
    appropriate management activities within the watershed; and (3)
    dissociate concern about water quality from dissatisfaction over
    other land management issues, such as timber harvesting and road
    construction.  However, many of the watershed analyses we reviewed
    may not be useful for municipal watershed planning because the
    analyses did not corresponded directly to the boundaries of a
    municipal watershed and/or the data gathered may not be comparable
    with data gathered by other federal agencies and nonfederal parties
    within a municipal watershed.

       RECOMMENDATIONS
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:5

    To increase the efficiency and effectiveness of efforts to improve
    water quality and ensure safe drinking water to cities in western
    Oregon, we recommend that the Secretary of Agriculture direct the
    Chief of the Forest Service and that the Secretary of the Interior
    direct the Director of BLM to include key landowners--who are
    critical to understanding and addressing the condition of a
    watershed--in memorandums of understanding with cities and in other
    agreements to address watershed issues and concerns.  We also
    recommend that the Secretary of Agriculture direct the Chief of the
    Forest Service and that the Secretary of the Interior direct the
    Director of BLM to take the following actions when conducting
    watershed analyses:  (1) at a minimum, gather data on municipal water
    quality that are comparable with the data gathered by other federally
    funded analyses; (2) when feasible, include water quality as a
    primary focus and/or conduct the analyses along the boundaries of the
    municipal watersheds; (3) to the extent possible, collaborate with
    nonfederal land managers and owners to gather data that are
    comparable and useful to municipal watershed decisionmakers; and (4)
    when practical, develop data on the impact of new timber-harvesting
    methods and road construction practices on water quality.

       AGENCY COMMENTS
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3:6

    We provided copies of a draft of this report to the Forest Service
    and BLM for their review and comment.  The agencies' comments appear
    in appendixes I and II, respectively.  The agencies (1) stated that
    the report provides a comprehensive and objective view of the
    complexities and factors involved in watershed management in the
    Pacific Northwest; (2) agreed with, and promised to pursue the
    implementation of, the report's recommendations; and (3) noted that
    they have made progress in developing data on the impact of new
    timber- harvesting methods and road construction practices on water
    quality.  The agencies also provided comments on the factual content
    of the report, and changes were made as appropriate.

    (See figure in printed edition.)Appendix I
    COMMENTS FROM THE U.S.  DEPARTMENT
    OF AGRICULTURE
    ============================================================ Chapter 3

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)Appendix II
    COMMENTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
    THE INTERIOR
    ============================================================ Chapter 3

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    (See figure in printed edition.)

    MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
    ========================================================= Appendix III

    Charles S.  Cotton
    Alan J.  Dominicci
    Doreen Stolzenberg Feldman
    Cheryl L.  Pilatzke

    BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE SCIENTIFIC
    STUDIES REVIEWED BY GAO
    ============================================================ Chapter 1

    This bibliography lists the scientific studies we reviewed on the
    impacts of past and newer timber-harvesting and road construction
    practices on water quality.

       SCIENTIFIC STUDIES ON THE
       IMPACTS OF PAST
       TIMBER-HARVESTING PRACTICES ON
       WATER QUALITY
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:1

    Adams, P.W.  and W.R.  Stack.  Streamwater Quality After Logging in
    Southwest Oregon, Project Completion Report (Supplement No.  PNW
    87-400).  USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station:
    1989.

    Beschta, R.L.  "Long-Term Patterns of Sediment Production Following
    Road Construction and Logging in the Oregon Coast Range." Water
    Resources Research, Vol.  14, No.  6 (1978), pp.  1011-1016.

    _____________.  "Debris Removal and Its Effects on Sedimentation in
    an Oregon Coast Range Stream." Northwest Science, Vol.  53, No.  1
    (1979), pp.  71-77.

    Brown, G.W.  Logging and Water Quality in the Pacific Northwest,
    Paper 834.  Forest Research Laboratory, National Symposium on
    Watersheds in Transition, American Water Resources Association and
    Colorado State University (1972).

    ___________.  "The Alsea Watershed Study," Pacific Logging Congress
    1972 Loggers Handbook, Vol.  XXXII (1972).

    ___________ and J.T.  Krygier.  "Clear-Cut Logging and Sediment
    Production in the Oregon Coast Range." Water Resources Research, Vol.
    7, No.  5 (1971), pp.  1189-1198.

    Cromack, K.  Jr., F.J.  Swanson, and C.C.  Grier.  "A Comparison of
    Harvesting Methods and Their Impact on Soils and Environment in the
    Pacific Northwest." Forest Soils and Land Use:  Proceedings of the
    Fifth North American Forest Soils Conference, Colorado State
    University (Fort Collins, Colo.:  1979), pp.  449-476.

    Fredriksen, R.L.  Erosion and Sedimentation Following Road
    Construction and Timber Harvest on Unstable Soils in Three Small
    Western Oregon Watersheds.  USDA Forest Service Research Paper
    PNW-104.  Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station
    (Portland, Ore.:  1970).

    Swanson, F.J.  and C.T.  Dyrness.  "Impact of clear-cutting and road
    construction on soil erosion by landslides in the western Cascade
    Range, Oregon." Geology (July 1975), pp.  393-396.

    Swanston, D.N.  and C.T.  Dyrness.  "Stability of Steep Land."
    Journal of Forestry, Vol.  71, No.  5 (1973).

       SCIENTIFIC STUDIES ON THE
       IMPACTS OF FOREST ROADS ON
       WATER QUALITY
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:2

    Adams, P.W.  and W.R.  Stack.  Streamwater Quality After Logging in
    Southwest Oregon, Project Completion Report (Supplement No.  PNW
    87-400).  USDA Forest Service.  Pacific Northwest Research Station
    (1989).

    Beschta, R.L.  "Long-Term Patterns of Sediment Production Following
    Road Construction and Logging in the Oregon Coast Range." Water
    Resources Research, Vol.  14, No.  6 (1978), pp.  1011-1016.

    Bilby, R.E.  "Contributions of Road Surface Sediment to a Western
    Washington Stream." Forest Science, Vol.  31, No.  4 (1985), pp.
    827-838.

    ___________, K.  Sullivan, and S.H.  Duncan.  "The Generation and
    Fate of Road-Surface Sediment in Forested Watersheds in Southwestern
    Washington." Forest Science, Vol.  35, No.  2 (1989), pp.  453-468.

    Binkley, D.  and T.C.  Brown.  "Forest Practices as Nonpoint Sources
    of Pollution in North America." Water Resources Bulletin, American
    Water Resources Association (Oct.  1993), pp.  729-740.

    Brown, G.W.  "The Alsea Watershed Study," Pacific Logging Congress
    1972 Loggers Handbook, Vol.  XXXII (1972).

    ___________ and J.T.  Krygier.  "Clear-Cut Logging and Sediment
    Production in the Oregon Coast Range." Water Resources Research, Vol.
    7, No.  5 (1971), pp.  1189-1198.

    Burroughs, E.R., Jr.  and J.G.  King.  Reduction of Soil Erosion on
    Forest Roads.  USDA Forest Service General Technical Report INT-264.
    Intermountain Research Station (Ogden, Utah:  1989).

    Fowler, W.B., T.D.  Anderson, and J.D.  Helvey.  Changes in Water
    Quality and Climate After Forest Harvest in Central Washington State,
    Research Paper PNW-RP-388, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
    Research Station (Portland, Ore.:  1988).

    Fredriksen, R.L.  "Erosion and Sedimentation Following Road
    Construction and Timber Harvest on Unstable Soils in Three Small
    Western Oregon Watersheds." USDA Forest Service Research Paper
    PNW-104.  Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station
    (Portland, Ore.:  1970).

    Reid, L.M., and T.  Dunne.  "Sediment Production From Forest Road
    Surfaces." Water Resources Research, Vol.  20, No.  11 (1984), pp.
    1753-1761.

    Schroeder, W.L.  and G.W.  Brown.  "Debris Torrents, Precipitation
    and Roads in Two Coastal Oregon Watersheds," Presented at the
    Symposium on the Effects of Forest Land Use on Erosion and Slope
    Stability (Honolulu, Hawaii:  May 7-11, 1984), pp.  117-122.

    Sessions, J., J.C.  Balcom, and K.  Boston.  "Road Location and
    Construction Practices:  Effects on Landslide Frequency and Size in
    the Oregon Coast Range." Western Journal of Applied Forestry, Vol.
    2, No.  4 (1987), pp.  119-124.

    Swanson, F.J.  and C.T.  Dyrness.  "Impact of clear-cutting and road
    construction on soil erosion by landslides in the western Cascade
    Range, Oregon." Geology (July 1975), pp.  393-396.

    Swanston, D.N.  and C.T.  Dyrness.  "Stability of Steep Land."
    Journal of Forestry, Vol.  71, No.  5 (May 1973).

       SCIENTIFIC STUDIES ON THE
       IMPACTS OF NEWER
       TIMBER-HARVESTING AND ROAD
       CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES ON WATER
       QUALITY
    ---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1:3

    Binkley, D.  and T.C.  Brown.  "Forest Practices as Nonpoint Sources
    of Pollution in North America." Water Resources Bulletin, American
    Water Resources Association (Oct.  1993), pp.  729-740.

    Cromack, K.  Jr., F.J.  Swanson, and C.C.  Grier.  "A Comparison of
    Harvesting Methods and Their Impact on Soils and Environment in the
    Pacific Northwest." Forest Soils and Land Use:  Proceedings of the
    Fifth North American Forest Soils Conference, Colorado State
    University (Fort Collins, Colo.:  1979), pp.  449-476.

    Sessions, J., J.C.  Balcom, and K.  Boston.  "Road Location and
    Construction Practices:  Effects on Landslide Frequency and Size in
    the Oregon Coast Range." Western Journal of Applied Forestry, Vol.
    2, No.  4 (1987), pp.  119-124.

    *** End of document. ***