Common use of Baseline Clause in Contracts

Baseline. This Safe Harbor Agreement defines the baseline condition, prior to any barred owl removal actions, as habitat that currently supports resident spotted owls. Conversely, the term “non-baseline” is used in the Agreement to describe areas that have not been occupied for at least three years. The USFWS has determined the baseline spotted owl territories for this Agreement based on annual spotted owl survey data and forest stand/habitat information according to the process in the discussion that follows. Thanks to continued monitoring of spotted owls on Weyerhaeuser lands as part of the ongoing spotted owl surveys conducted under the Northwest Forest Plan Monitoring program, we have strong annual survey data for most of the area that would be included in the Agreement, and can establish a baseline based on the estimated current occupancy status of each spotted owl site. Multiple years of data are preferred as the spotted owl’s response to the presence of barred owls may have further reduced their propensity to respond to call surveys. Therefore, for the purposes of this Agreement, spotted owl sites on which annual surveys detected the presence of at least one resident spotted owl over the last three year period from 2013 through 2015 will be considered to support current spotted owls in the Study Area and are considered as baseline sites. USFWS biologists delineated both currently occupied and historic spotted owl using ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons. USFWS used these territories to define spotted owl sites within the treatment area (Map 3). To delineate the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons, USFWS biologists located annual site centers (i.e. the most biologically important location from each year based on the following hierarchical ranking: 1) active nest, 2) fledged young, 3) primary roost location, 4) diurnal location, and 5) nocturnal detection) for each spotted owl site. They then used the Euclidean Allocation Distance tool in ArcGIS (ESRI 2011) to delineate a ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon around all annual center locations for each spotted owl territory. Thus, the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon represents the estimated cumulative area of use by a single or pair of spotted owls during the survey period (March to August). The ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon encompasses all the annual territory center locations, and extends outward to a maximum of one half the median nearest neighbor distance, or midway between the annual territory center locations of spotted owls occupying adjacent territories, whichever distance is shorter. For Weyerhaeuser lands that lie outside of any ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon, the USFWS examined habitat maps and forest inventory information, as well as general survey information, and has determined these lands are not likely to support undetected resident spotted owls. 0765 Cleveland Indian ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 4474 Upper ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 4491 Chicken Creek 2010 0087 Deadwood Trib 2010 2543 Druggs Creek 2008 0183 East Fork Lobster 2012 0524 Elk Mountain 2011 2549 January Creek 2012 2552 Little Lake Creek 2007 2313 Lower ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2010 4492 Lower ▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2011 4651 Major Tieko 2008 4088 ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2012 3554 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2003 0814 Old Man Rock Canyon 2009 0188 Prairie Creek 2002 0086 Upper Elk 2010 2722 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2011 Township Range Sections 15S 7W 30 15S 8W 8 16S 7W 6,7 16S 8W 2 17S 7W 10,14

Baseline. This For the Safe Harbor Agreement defines Agreement, the baseline condition, condition is defined as habitat that is supporting current resident spotted owls (as defined below) prior to any barred owl removal actions, as habitat that currently supports resident spotted owls. Conversely, the term “non-baseline” is used in the Agreement to describe areas that have not been occupied for at least three years. The USFWS has determined the baseline spotted owl territories for this Agreement actions based on annual spotted owl survey data surveys and forest stand/habitat information according to the process in the discussion that followsfollowing process. Thanks to continued monitoring of spotted owls on Weyerhaeuser ODF lands as part of the ongoing spotted owl surveys conducted under the Northwest Forest Plan Monitoring programprogram as well as surveys conducted directly by ODF, we have strong annual survey data for most of the area that would may be included in the Safe Harbor Agreement, and can establish a baseline based on the estimated current occupancy status of each spotted owl site. Multiple years of data are preferred as the spotted owl’s response to the presence of barred owls may have further reduced their propensity to respond to call surveys. Therefore, for the purposes of this Safe Harbor Agreement, spotted owl sites on which annual surveys detected the presence of at least one resident spotted owl over the last three year period from 2013 through 2015 will be considered to support current spotted owls in the Oregon Coast Range Study Area and are considered identified as baseline sites. USFWS biologists delineated both currently Spotted owl sites on which annual surveys detected the presence of at least one resident spotted owl in 2011 or 2012 but did not have a response in 2013 through 2015 are considered to be recently-occupied sites that have high value for species’ recovery and are identified as elevated baseline sites. This elevated baseline is a commitment to spotted owl conservation by ODF and is intended to be a valuable component of the net conservation benefit provided under Safe Harbor Agreement by conserving sites that would not otherwise be included in the baseline. Both baseline and elevated baseline sites are considered to be baseline sites under this agreement. Currently occupied, recently occupied, and historic spotted owl using territories are delineated by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygonspolygons (Map 3). USFWS We used these territories to define spotted owl sites within the treatment area (Map 3)area. To delineate the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons, USFWS biologists located defined annual site centers (i.e. the most biologically important location from each year based on the following hierarchical ranking: 1) active nest, 2) fledged young, 3) primary roost location, 4) diurnal location, and 5) nocturnal detection) for each spotted owl site. They then used the Euclidean Allocation Distance tool in ArcGIS (ESRI 2011) to delineate a ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon around all the annual center locations for each spotted owl territory. Thus, the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon represents the estimated cumulative area of use by a single or pair of spotted owls during the survey period (March to August). The ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon encompasses all the annual territory center locations, and extends outward to a maximum of one half the median nearest neighbor distance, or midway between the annual territory center locations of spotted owls occupying adjacent territories, whichever distance is shorter. For Weyerhaeuser ODF lands that lie outside of any ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon, the USFWS we examined habitat maps and forest inventory information, as well as general survey information, and has determined these lands are not likely to support determine if the area might be capable of supporting an undetected resident spotted owlsowl. 0765 Cleveland Indian ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 4474 Upper ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ West 2137 Bear Creek 4491 Chicken Creek 2010 0087 Deadwood Trib 2010 2543 Druggs Creek 2008 0183 East Fork Lobster West 2012 0773 Cape Horn 2012 0524 Elk Mountain 2011 2549 January Creek 2012 2552 Little Lake 2546 ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2007 2011 2313 Lower ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2010 4492 Lower ▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2011 4651 Major Tieko 2008 4088 ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2012 ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ 2722 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2011 Spotted owl sites on Table 4 have been well surveyed, and have not had any resident spotted owls found between 2011 and 2015. These sites would not be in the baseline for this safe harbor agreement. 0779 Brush Creek 2008 2545 Chickahominy Creek 2010 4491 Chicken Creek 2010 2543 Druggs Creek 2009 ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ 2006 4688 Iron Mountain 2007 ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ 3126 Lower Deadwood 2009 ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2011 2489 Misery Creek 2009 3554 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2003 0814 Old Man Rock Canyon 2009 0188 Prairie 3362 Pat Creek 2002 2007 0086 Upper Elk 2010 2722 ▇4686 Upper Hula 2006 4600 Upper San ▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2008 0764 Velvet Creek 2011 Township Range Sections 15S 7W 30 15S 8W 8 16S 7W 6,7 2008 16S 8W 2 10, 12, 14, and 24 16S 9W 16, 25, and 36 17S 7W 10,144, 6, 8, 10, 18, and 32 17S 8W 1, 6 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19,26, 28, 29, 30, 31, and 32 17S 9W 13, 14, 16, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 32, and 33 18S 7W 5 18S 8W 5, 6, and 11 18S 9W 4, 5, 9, and 10

Baseline. This For the purposes of this Safe Harbor Agreement defines Agreement, the baseline condition, condition is defined as spotted owl sites delineated using ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons supporting current resident spotted owls prior to any barred owl removal actions, as habitat that currently supports resident spotted owls. Conversely, the term “non-baseline” is used in the Agreement to describe areas that have not been occupied for at least three years. The USFWS has determined the baseline spotted owl territories for this Agreement This determination was based on annual spotted owl survey surveys. For unsurveyed areas outside of the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons, we used habitat data and forest stand/habitat information from the Northwest Forest Plan monitoring according to the process in the discussion that followsfollowing process. Thanks to Because of continued monitoring of spotted owls on Weyerhaeuser lands as part of the ongoing spotted owl surveys conducted under the Northwest Forest Plan Monitoring programprogram and by Roseburg BLM in cooperation with RRC, we have strong annual survey data for most of the area that would may be included in the Safe Harbor Agreement, and can establish a baseline based on the estimated current occupancy status of each spotted owl site. Multiple years of data are preferred as the spotted owl’s response to the presence of barred owls may have further reduced their propensity to respond to call surveys. Therefore, for For the purposes of this Safe Harbor Agreement, spotted owl sites on which annual surveys detected the presence of at least one resident spotted owl over the last three year period from 2013 2014 through 2015 the survey season in 2016 will be considered to support current spotted owls in the Study Area Area. This represents the minimum baseline sites for the Safe Harbor Agreement. Spotted owl sites listed in Table 3 did not have resident spotted owl responses during the 2014 and are considered 2015survey seasons. If no resident spotted owls respond during the 2016 survey season, these sites will not be included in the baseline. Any of these sites with a resident spotted owl response in 2016 will be added to Table 2 or 3 as baseline spotted owl sites. USFWS biologists delineated both Both currently occupied and historic spotted owl using territories are delineated by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons. USFWS We used these territories polygons to define spotted owl sites within the treatment area (Map 3)and adjacencies to other well surveyed sites. To delineate the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons, USFWS biologists located defined annual site centers (i.e. the most biologically important location from each year based on the following hierarchical ranking: 1) active nest, 2) fledged young, 3) primary roost location, 4) diurnal location, and 5) nocturnal detection) for each spotted owl site. They then used the Euclidean Allocation Distance tool in ArcGIS (ESRI 2011) to delineate a ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon around all the annual center locations for each spotted owl territory. Thus, the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon does not incorporate or calculate total habitat within the territory, it only represents the estimated hypothetical cumulative area of use by a single or pair of spotted owls during the survey period (March to August). The ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon encompasses all the annual territory center locations, and extends outward to a maximum of one half the median nearest neighbor distance, or midway between the annual territory center locations of spotted owls occupying adjacent territories, whichever distance is shortershorter and regardless of ownership. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons are solely based on the spatial orientation of locations, and do not incorporate any habitat information. The location of any particular land in a ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon does not indicate that the land is suitable habitat for spotted owls. For Weyerhaeuser RRC lands that lie outside of any ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon, the USFWS we examined habitat maps and forest inventory information, as well as general survey information, and has determined these lands are not likely to support determine if the area might be capable of supporting an undetected resident spotted owlsowl. 0765 Cleveland Indian ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ We examined the condition of the forest lands, the amount and location of any potential habitat, the size of the area not already included in a ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 4474 Upper ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 4491 Chicken Creek 2010 0087 Deadwood Trib 2010 2543 Druggs Creek 2008 0183 East Fork Lobster 2012 0524 Elk Mountain 2011 2549 January Creek 2012 2552 Little Lake Creek 2007 2313 Lower ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2010 4492 Lower ▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2011 4651 Major Tieko 2008 4088 ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2012 3554 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2003 0814 Old Man Rock Canyon 2009 0188 Prairie Creek 2002 0086 Upper Elk 2010 2722 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2011 Township Range Sections 15S 7W 30 15S 8W 8 16S 7W 6,7 16S 8W 2 17S 7W 10,14polygon, and the proximity to existing known spotted owl sites. Many of these areas were deemed too small to support resident spotted owls, and most contained no, or very little, spotted owl habitat.

Baseline. This For the Safe Harbor Agreement defines Agreement, the baseline condition, condition is defined as habitat that is supporting current resident spotted owls prior to any barred owl removal actions, as habitat that currently supports resident spotted owls. Conversely, the term “non-baseline” is used in the Agreement to describe areas that have not been occupied for at least three years. The USFWS has determined the baseline spotted owl territories for this Agreement actions based on annual spotted owl survey data surveys and forest stand/habitat information according to the process in the discussion that followsfollowing process. Thanks to continued monitoring of spotted owls on Weyerhaeuser RRC and Oxbow lands as part of the ongoing spotted owl surveys conducted under the Northwest Forest Plan Monitoring program, we have strong annual survey data for most of the area that would may be included in the Safe Harbor Agreement, and can establish a baseline based on the estimated current occupancy status of each spotted owl site. Multiple years of data are preferred as the spotted owl’s response to the presence of barred owls may have further reduced their propensity to respond to call surveys. Therefore, for the purposes of this Safe Harbor Agreement, spotted owl sites on which annual surveys detected the presence of at least one resident spotted owl over the last three year period from 2013 through 2015 will be considered to support current spotted owls in the Coast Range Study Area and are considered as baseline sitesArea. USFWS biologists delineated both Both currently occupied and historic spotted owl using territories are delineated by ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons. USFWS We used these territories to define spotted owl sites within the treatment area (Map 3)sites. To delineate the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons, USFWS biologists located defined annual site centers (i.e. the most biologically important location from each year based on the following hierarchical ranking: 1) active nest, 2) fledged young, 3) primary roost location, 4) diurnal location, and 5) nocturnal detection) for each spotted owl site. They then used the Euclidean Allocation Distance tool in ArcGIS (ESRI 2011) to delineate a ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon around all the annual center locations for each spotted owl territory. Thus, the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon represents the estimated cumulative area of use by a single or pair of spotted owls during the survey period (March to August). The ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon encompasses all the annual territory center locations, and extends outward to a maximum of one half the median nearest neighbor distance, or midway between the annual territory center locations of spotted owls occupying adjacent territories, whichever distance is shorter. For Weyerhaeuser RRC and Oxbow lands that lie outside of any ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygon, the USFWS we examined habitat maps and forest inventory information, as well as general survey information, and has determined these lands are not likely to support determine if the area might be capable of supporting an undetected resident spotted owlsowl. 0765 Cleveland Indian 0812 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ 0160 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 3553 Raleigh Creek ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ 0159 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek West 4559 West Fork Deadwood Spotted owl sites on Tables 3 and 4 have been well surveyed, and have not had any resident spotted owls found between 2013 and 2015. These sites would not be in the baseline for this safe harbor agreement. 0526 ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2012 0779 Brush Creek 2008 2545 Chickahominy Creek 2010 4491 Chicken Creek 2010 0524 Elk Mountain 2011 2549 January Creek 2012 2546 ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2008 4088 ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2012 ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ 2003 4600 North San ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇2008 3362 ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇Creek 2007 2722 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 4474 Upper ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 4491 Chicken 2011 2637 Buck Creek 2008 3251 Lake Creek 2010 0087 3126 Lower Deadwood Trib 2010 2543 Druggs Creek 2008 0183 East Fork Lobster 2012 0524 Elk Mountain 2011 2549 January Creek 2012 2552 Little Lake Creek 2007 2009 2313 Lower ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2010 4492 Lower 4686 Upper Hula 2006 0764 Velvet Creek 2008 We analyzed data for RRC and Oxbow lands outside of any ▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2011 4651 Major Tieko 2008 4088 ▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2012 3554 ▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2003 0814 Old Man Rock Canyon 2009 0188 Prairie Creek 2002 0086 Upper Elk 2010 2722 ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Creek 2011 polygon on the treatment portion of the Oregon Coast Ranges Study Area. All of the RRC and Oxbow lands outside of the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ polygons on the Study Area are not likely to support undetected resident spotted owls and are not part of the baseline (Table 5). Township Range Sections 15S 7W 30 15S 8W 8 16S 7W 6,7 16S 8W 2 36 17S 7W 10,1419, 20, 22, 28, 30 17S 8W 14, 28, 29, 32, 34, 36 17S 9W 2, 9, 10 18S 7W 6 18S 8W 1,2,7,8,10, 16, 17 18S 9W