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. ***