Bogan, Michael T., J. L. Hwan, and S. M. Carlson. 2015.
High Aquatic Biodiversity in an Intermittent Coastal Headwater Stream at Golden Gate National Recreation Area, California.
Northwest Science, 89(2):188-197.
Groom J.D., , L. Dent. L. J. Madsen, and J. Fleuret. 2011.Response of Western Oregon (USA) stream temperatures to contemporary forest management.
Forest Ecology and Management, 262: 1618-1629.
Pollock, Michael M. and Timothy J. Beechie. 2014.
Does Riparian Forest Restoration Thinning Enhance Biodiversity? The Ecological Importance of Large Wood.
Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 50(3): 543-559. DOI: 10.1111/jawr.12206.
The following journal articles address the differences between Oregon Forest Practices Act rules and those in Washington, California, and in the federal Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP), through illustrative comparisons. Oregon’s rules are less protective of streams than those of Washington and the NWFP, and, to a lesser extent, California’s forest practices rules.
Cashore, Benjamin and Graeme Auld. 2003.
British Columbia’s Environmental Forestry Policy Record in Perspective.
Journal of Forestry. December: 42-47.
Olson, D.H., P.D. Anderson, C.A. Frissell, H.H. Welsh, Jr., and D.F. Bradford. 2007.
Biodiversity management approaches for stream-riparian areas: Perspectives for Pacific Northwest headwater forests, microclimates and amphibians.
Forest Ecology and Management, 246: 81-107.
H.H. Welsh, Jr. 2011.
Frogs, Fish and Forestry: An Integrated Watershed Network Paradigm Conserves Biodiversity and Ecological Services
Diversity, 3, 503-530.