DOCSLIB.ORG

Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program Reauthorization September 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program Reauthorization September 2020 FINAL Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review for Proposed Amendment 111 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Gulf of Alaska Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program Reauthorization September 2020 Responsible Official: Dr. James Balsiger, Regional Administrator Alaska Regional Office, National Marine Fisheries Service For further information contact: Stephanie Warpinski, NMFS Sustainable Fisheries P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802 (907) 586-7228 Abstract: This Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review analyzes proposed management measures that would apply to the Central Gulf of Alaska (CGOA) Rockfish Program (RP) fisheries. The measures under consideration include reauthorizing the RP by either removing the sunset date or establishing a new sunset date within a range of 10 through 20 years. The action also includes other potential measures that would alter regulations associated with the reallocation of Pacific cod and rockfish, exempt crab program sideboard limits for vessels when fishing in the RP, establish regulations that require NMFS to provide annual cost recovery reports for the RP, and other regulatory changes. List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym or Acronym or Meaning Meaning Abbreviation Abbreviation MSST minimum stock size threshold ABC acceptable biological catch mt Metric ton ADF&G Alaska Department of Fish and Game NAICS North American Industry Classification AFA American Fisheries Act System AFSC Alaska Fisheries Science Center NAO NOAA Administrative Order AKFIN Alaska Fisheries Information Network NEPA National Environmental Policy Act BSAI Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety CAS Catch Accounting System and Health CEQ Council on Environmental Quality NMFS National Marine Fishery Service CFID Commercial Fishing Incident Database NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration CFR Code of Federal Regulations NPFMC North Pacific Fishery Management CGOA Central Gulf of Alaska Council CMCP Catch Monitoring and Control Plan NPPSD North Pacific Pelagic Seabird Database COAR Commercial Operators Annual Report NRC National Research Council Council North Pacific Fishery Management Observer North Pacific Observer Program Council Program CP catcher/processor OFL Overfishing level CQ Cooperative quota OMB Office of Management and Budget CR Crab rationalization PA Preferred Alternative CV catcher vessel PBR potential biological removal DPS distinct population segment PSC prohibited species catch E.O. Executive Order POP Pacific Ocean Perch EA Environmental Assessment PPA Preliminary preferred alternative EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone PRA Paperwork Reduction Act PSEIS Programmatic Supplemental EFH essential fish habitat Environmental Impact Statement EIS Environmental Impact Statement QS Quota shares ESA Endangered Species Act RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act ESU endangered species unit RFFA reasonably foreseeable future action FE Fishing effects RIR Regulatory Impact Review FIS Fisheries Impact Statement RPA reasonable and prudent alternative FMA Fisheries Monitoring and Analysis RP Rockfish Program FMP fishery management plan RPP Rockfish Pilot Program FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact SAFE Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation FR Federal Register SAR stock assessment report FRFA Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis SBA Small Business Act Ft foot or feet Secretary Secretary of Commerce GOA Gulf of Alaska SIA Social Impact Assessment H&G Head and Gut SIR Supplemental Information report ICA Incidental catch allowance SPLASH Structure of Populations, Levels of IPHC International Pacific Halibut Commission Abundance, and Status of Humpbacks IRFA Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis SRKW Southern Resident killer whales IPA Incentive Plan Agreement SSL Steller sea lion JAM jeopardy or adverse modification TAC total allowable catch LAPP Limited access privilege program U.S. United States lb(s) pound(s) USCG United States Coast Guard LEI long-term effect index USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service LLP license limitation program YOY Year-over-year LOA length overall M meter or meters VMS vessel monitoring system Magnuson- Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation WGOA Western Gulf of Alaska Stevens Act and Management Act WYAK West Yakutat District MMPA Marine Mammal Protection Act MMSA Marine Mammal Stock Assessment MRA Maximum retainable amount CGOA Rockfish Reauthorization, September 2020 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 1 Introduction 17 1.1 Purpose and Need ......................................................................................................................................... 17 1.2 History of the Rockfish Program .................................................................................................................... 18 1.2.1 Before RPP (1996 through 2006) ........................................................................................................ 18 1.2.2 Authority for the Rockfish Program .................................................................................................... 21 1.3 Description of Management Area .................................................................................................................. 29 1.4 Proposed Action ............................................................................................................................................ 30 1.5 Description of Alternatives ............................................................................................................................. 30 1.6 Alternatives .................................................................................................................................................... 30 1.6.1 Alternative 1, No Action ..................................................................................................................... 30 1.6.2 Alternative 2, Reauthorize RP (Preferred Alternative) ....................................................................... 31 1.7 Background on Modifications to Requirements for Annual RP Cooperative Reports (Elements 6 & 7) ......... 34 1.8 Council Request for Additional Information .................................................................................................... 37 1.9 Comparison of Alternatives ............................................................................................................................ 39 1.9.1 Summary table of alternatives and findings ....................................................................................... 39 1.9.2 Rationale for the Council’s Preferred Alternative .............................................................................. 43 1.10 Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed Further ......................................................................................... 45 2 Environmental Assessment................................................................................................................................... 46 2.1 Methods ......................................................................................................................................................... 46 2.1.1 Documents Incorporated by Reference in this Analysis ..................................................................... 47 2.1.2 Resource Components Addressed in the Analysis .............................................................................. 48 2.1.3 Cumulative Effects Analysis ................................................................................................................ 49 2.2 Target Species ............................................................................................................................................... 50 2.2.1 Status of Primary RP Species .............................................................................................................. 50 2.2.2 Status of Secondary RP Species .......................................................................................................... 54 2.2.3 Effects of the Alternatives on Target Species ..................................................................................... 56 2.3 Unallocated Species and PSC Species ......................................................................................................... 58 2.3.1 Status of Unallocated Species............................................................................................................. 58 2.3.2 Status of PSC Species .......................................................................................................................... 59 2.3.3 Effects of the Alternatives on Unallocated and PSC Species .............................................................. 64 2.4 Essential Fish Habitat .................................................................................................................................... 68 2.4.1 Status .................................................................................................................................................. 68 2.4.2 Effects of the Alternatives on EFH ...................................................................................................... 70 2.5 Social and Economic Impacts .......................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Physical and Chemical Characteristics of the Yaquina Estuary, Oregon
    PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE YAQUINA ESTUARY, OREGON Richard J. Callaway MarPoiSol P.O. Box 57 Corvallis, OR 97339 David T. Specht, Project Officer Coastal Ecology Branch U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2111 S.E. Marine Science Drive Newport, Oregon 97365-5260 2 (Purchase Order #8B06~NTT A) Submitted August 9, 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 Area of Study .................................................................................................................. 1 Estuary Classification.............................................. .......................................... 1 Local Communities ............................................................................................... 7 Physical Setting .................................................................................................... 7 Climate ................................................................................................................. ? Winds ................................................................................................................... 8 Tides .................................................................................................................... 8 Currents .............................................................................................................. 9 Estuarine Dynamics and the Hansen-Rattray Classification Scheme ...............................
    [Show full text]
  • Drainage Basin Morphology in the Central Coast Range of Oregon
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF WENDY ADAMS NIEM for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in GEOGRAPHY presented on July 21, 1976 Title: DRAINAGE BASIN MORPHOLOGY IN THE CENTRAL COAST RANGE OF OREGON Abstract approved: Redacted for privacy Dr. James F. Lahey / The four major streams of the central Coast Range of Oregon are: the westward-flowing Siletz and Yaquina Rivers and the eastward-flowing Luckiamute and Marys Rivers. These fifth- and sixth-order streams conform to the laws of drain- age composition of R. E. Horton. The drainage densities and texture ratios calculated for these streams indicate coarse to medium texture compa- rable to basins in the Carboniferous sandstones of the Appalachian Plateau in Pennsylvania. Little variation in the values of these parameters occurs between basins on igneous rook and basins on sedimentary rock. The length of overland flow ranges from approximately i mile to i mile. Two thousand eight hundred twenty-five to 6,140 square feet are necessary to support one foot of channel in the central Coast Range. Maximum elevation in the area is 4,097 feet at Marys Peak which is the highest point in the Oregon Coast Range. The average elevation of summits in the thesis area is ap- proximately 1500 feet. The calculated relief ratios for the Siletz, Yaquina, Marys, and Luckiamute Rivers are compara- ble to relief ratios of streams on the Gulf and Atlantic coastal plains and on the Appalachian Piedmont. Coast Range streams respond quickly to increased rain- fall, and runoff is rapid. The Siletz has the largest an- nual discharge and the highest sustained discharge during the dry summer months.
    [Show full text]
  • NORTH AMERICAN GREEN STURGEON (Acipenser Medirostris) AS an ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES UNDER the ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
    PETITION TO LIST THE NORTH AMERICAN GREEN STURGEON (Acipenser medirostris) AS AN ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION INFORMATION CENTER CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY WATERKEEPERS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PETITIONERS JUNE 2001 NOTICE OF PETITION Environmental Protection Information Center P.O. Box 397 Garberville, CA 95542 (707) 923-2931 Contact: Cynthia Elkins Center for Biological Diversity P.O. Box 40090 Berkeley, CA 94704 (510) 841-0812 Contact: Jeff Miller WaterKeepers Northern California Presidio Building 1004 San Francisco, CA 94129 (415) 561.2299 ext. 14 Contact: Jonathan Kaplan Petitioners Environmental Protection Information Center (“EPIC”), Center for Biological Diversity (“CBD”), and WaterKeepers Northern California (“WaterKeepers”) formally request that the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) list the North American green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) as an endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544. In the alternative, petitioners formally request that NMFS list the North American green sturgeon as a threatened species under the ESA. In either case, petitioners request that green sturgeon critical habitat be designated concurrent with the listing designation. This petition is filed under §553(e) of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA” - 5 U.S.C. §§ 551-559), §1533(b)(3) of the ESA, and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(b). This petition sets in motion a specific administrative process as defined by §1533(b)(3) and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(b), placing mandatory response requirements on NMFS. Because A. medirostris is an anadromous fish, NMFS has jurisdiction over this petition. A Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between NMFS and the U.
    [Show full text]
  • PROGRESS REPORTS 2005 FISH DIVISION Oregon
    PROGRESS REPORTS 2005 FISH DIVISION Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Final Summary Report: Green Sturgeon Population Characteristics in Oregon This program receives federal financial assistance in Sport Fish and/or Wildlife Restoration and prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex or disability. If you believe that you have been discriminated against as described above in any program, activity, or facility, or if you desire further information, please contact ADA Coordinator, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 3406 Cherry Avenue NE, Salem, OR, 97303, 503-947-6000, or write Office for Human Resources, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240. This material will be furnished in alternate format for people with disabilities if needed. Please call (503) 657-2000 ext. 406 to request. FINAL PROGRESS REPORT FISH RESEARCH PROJECT OREGON PROJECT TITLE: Green Sturgeon Population Characteristics In Oregon PROJECT NUMBER: F-178-R JOB NUMBER: 1 JOB TITLE: Green Sturgeon Population Characteristics In Oregon PROJECT PERIOD: 1 October 1999 – 30 September 2004 Prepared by: Ruth A. Farr J. Chris Kern Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 17330 Southeast Evelyn Street Clackamas, OR 97015 This project was financed in part with the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (Wallop- Breaux) funds through the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. CONTENTS SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................................... i INTRODUCTION
    [Show full text]
  • The Yaquina Estuary and Its Inhabitants a Trail Guide
    The Yaquina Estuary &Its Inhabitants HATFIELD MARINE SCIENCE CENTER n the end, we will conserve “ only what we love, we will love only what we under- stand, and we will understand only what we are taught. —Baba Dioum, Senegalese philosopher” Published by Oregon Sea Grant, Oregon State University, 1600 SW Western Blvd., Suite 350, Corvallis, OR 97333. Phone: 541-737-2714. Web: seagrant.oregonstate.edu Facebook: www.facebook.com/OregonSeaGrant Twitter: twitter.com/OregonSeaGrant © 1999 by Oregon State University. Revised 2019. All rights reserved. All illustrations copyrighted 1999 by Barbara Gleason. This report was prepared by Oregon Sea Grant under award number NA18OAR4170072 (project number M/A-21) from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce, and by appropria- tions made by the Oregon State Legislature. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of these funders. ORESU-H-19-001 The Yaquina Estuary and Its Inhabitants A Trail Guide he Hatfield Marine Science Center (HMSC) invites you to take a one-mile walk along our nature trail. This Ttrail follows the bay side of the Marine Science Center along the Yaquina Estuary and ends near the Oregon Coast Aquarium. The trailhead is located in the northeast corner of the HMSC public parking lot. Marine Science Center Campus THE YAQUINA ESTUARY AND ITS INHABITANTS -~1 What is an estuary? A place where freshwater and saltwater meet Here in Yaquina Bay, high tide brings saltwater from the ocean to mix with freshwa- ter flowing down the Yaquina River.
    [Show full text]
  • State Waterway Navigability Determination
    BODY OF WATER & LOCATION NAV CG NON-NAV CG REMARKS yellow highlight = apply to USCG for permit up to RM stipulated Alsea Bay, OR X Estuary of Pacific Ocean. Alsea River, OR X Flows into Alsea Bay, Waldport, OR. Navigable to mile 13. Ash Creek, OR X Tributary of Willamette River at Independence, OR. Barrett Slough, OR X Tributary of Lewis and Clark River. Bayou St. John, OR X Court decision, 1935 AMC 594, 10 Mile Lake, Coos County, OR. Bear Creek (Coos County), OR X Tributary of Coquille River (tidal at mile 0.5) Beaver Creek, OR X Tributary of Nestucca River. Beaver Slough, OR X See Clatskanie River. Big Creek (Lane County), OR X At U.S. 101 bridge (tidal). Big Creek (Lincoln County), OR X Flows into Pacific Ocean. Big Creek Slough, OR X Upstream end at Knappa, OR (tidal). At site of Birch Creek (Sparks) Bridge on Canyon Road near Birch Creek, OR X Pendleton, OR. Side channel of Yaquina River. 3 mi. downstream from Toledo, Blind Slough, OR X OR (tidal). Tributary of Knappa Slough. 10 mi. upstream from Astoria, OR Blind Slough/ Gnat Creek, OR X (tidal at mile 2.0). Boone Slough, OR X Tributary of Yaquina River between Newport and Toledo, OR. Side channel of Willamette River. 3 miles upstream from Booneville Channel, OR X Corvallis, OR. Boulder Creek, OR X 7 miles N of Lake Quinalt. Side channel of Columbia River. 5 miles N of Clatskanie, OR Bradbury Slough, OR X (tidal). Brownlee Reservoir, ID /OR X See Snake River. Also known as South Channel.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Herring Spawn Timing
    October 31, 2019 Steven L. Pfeiffer [email protected] D. +1.503.727.2261 F. +1.503.346.2261 VIA EMAIL ONLY Mayor Joe Benetti City of Coos Bay City Council Coos Bay City Hall 500 Central Avenue Coos Bay, OR 97420 Re: City of Coos Bay Land Use Application #187-18-000153 Jordan Cove Energy Project - Navigation Reliability Improvements Applicant’s Second Open Record Period Submittal to City Council Dear Mayor Benetti and Councilors: This office represents Jordan Cove Energy Project, L.P. (“JCEP”) with regard to City of Coos Bay Land Use Application #187-18-000153 – Jordan Cove Energy Project - Navigation Reliability Improvements (hereafter “Application”). The Application seeks approval of a zone change of approximately 3.3 acres of submerged land in Coos Bay from 52-NA to DDNC-DA zoning and permits to dredge a “Navigation Reliability Improvement” intended to facilitate more efficient navigation of vessels transiting Coos Bay. JCEP timely submits this letter, and attached Exhibit CBCC-8 in further support of the Application pursuant to the City Council’s first open period which closes October 31, 2019 and which includes the following: Exhibit CBCC-8: Technical Memorandum - Response to Comments – Land Use Application #187-18-000153 – ODFW Recommendation to Restrict In-water Work Window to February 1 (October 2019) which addresses the following issues: . Responds to Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) recent communique to JCEP which proposes to truncate the in-water work window (IWWW) for the Application to February 1; Mayor Benetti October 31, 2019 Page 2 . The Technical Memorandum addresses ODFW’s error in relying on Yaquina Bay herring spawning data to apply to Coos Bay, and further cites the relevant Coos Bay herring spawning studies which support maintaining the current IWWW of October 1 through February 15; .
    [Show full text]
  • Assistant City Manager City Recorder
    The City of Newport, Oregon is currently searching for a ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER CITY RECORDER The position will be open until filled The Ideal Candidate The ideal candidate will be a leader and professional with proven experience at a municipality with a population similar to the City of Newport. The person will be a leader, inspirational to staff; someone who builds trust with other departments, the City Manager, the city advisory committees, and one who can successfully function as an agent of the City Manager when necessary. The candidate will be a strategic thinker who cultivates a culture of excellence, which encourages professional growth and creativity. The candidate will be someone who is approachable; and friendly; achievement oriented; and a consensus builder. The ideal candidate will have a good command of budget, finance, and the principles of effective staff management. They will be knowledgeable of coastal community issues, tourism, and personally invested in the Newport community. Compensation The salary range for the position is $6,432 - $8,430/month. Starting salary will be based on the knowledge, skills, experience, education, and training of the person hired. An excellent benefit package including medical, dental, vision, life insurance, short-term disability, long-term disability, city-funded health savings account, and city-funded defined contribution retirement plan. The Preliminary Recruitment Process and Schedule The position will be open until filled. The first screening of applications will begin on September 27, 2021. Phone Screens are anticipated to be conducted the week of October 4, 2021; in-person interviews/assessments conducted the week of October 18, 2021; a contingent job offer extended the week of November 1, 2021 (subject to background and reference checks); job offer anticipated to be confirmed the week of December 1, 2021; with a potential start date of December 20, 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol 1, No 1, Winter 1962
    3AiF.-,kwp&uj-.. - ~s---c(~I SAMPLE Copy 1 . American Town NO: i Winter I& COLLECTOR'S lTEM 1.o~\vill want to save your copies of "Corvallis," for in it you \rill find the most coml~leterecorti, old 2nd lie\{., of this city ilnti county. Thc anatomy of a hornrl- lo\!.i~ n.here -ou live or through which you arc passing. I'ictul-es galore. ant1 L7.e neeti more! 30 -ou hrivc ;I sio:.y to tell? !\'hat's in your attic, neighbor:' 110 you remember:' - J. K. N. Re11 "Jake" Bloomberg William Jasper Kerr "Fatty" Knox The year the R'illamette froze over. Tom Graham "Jackie" Horner And, incidet~tully,who are you? Read the "Corvallis" magazine and you will better appreciat,e this town and the republic that is America. P. 0.Box 122 CORVALLIS, OREGON .l b d i3 ;,; t. I* Forward Volume I Winter. 1962 Number 1 with TOM WILSON CORVALLIS is published quarterly by Thomas A. Wilson, P. 0. Box 122. Cor- vallis, Oregon. Business office at 225 SO. TO STUDY the entire universe scientists now look into the smallest atoms. 2nd St. Printing plant on Hwy. 20, north. Where chemistry once was the touchstone to knowledge of matter, now Published privately and independently. it is particle physics that enables us to communicate with and to ma- MEMBER Benton County Pioneer-Historical Society nipulate the secrets of nature. Oregon Historical Society Similarly to know intimately a town such as Corval!is is also to know Classified Advertising: 10 cents per word. about towns and cities everywhere.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species Act Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens
    Endangered Species Act Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Conservation Recommendations for the NOAA Marine Operations Center-Pacific Relocation Yaquina Bay (6th field HUC 171002040303) Lincoln County, Oregon Lead Action Agency: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Consultation Conducted By: National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Region Date Issued: November 9, 2010 Issued by: ___________________ William W. Stelle Jr. Regional Administrator NMFS No.: 2010/02704 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 Background and Consultation History ........................................................................................ 1 Description of the Proposed Action ............................................................................................ 2 Action Area ............................................................................................................................... 21 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT BIOLOGICAL OPINION ....................................................... 23 Status of the Species and Critical Habitat ................................................................................. 25 Environmental Baseline ............................................................................................................ 32 Species within the Action Area ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation System Plan for Lincoln County, Oregon
    Transportation System Plan for Lincoln County, Oregon Volume 1 | Plan October 2007 Volume 1 Transportation System Plan Lincoln County, Oregon Prepared for Lincoln County Planning & Development Department and Oregon Department of Transportation October 2007 Acknowledgments The following people were instrumental in the development of this Transportation System Plan: Lincoln County Matt Spangler, Director, Planning and Development Department Jim Buisman, P.E., Director, Public Works Department Cynda Bruce, Manager, Lincoln County Transit Oregon Department of Transportation John deTar, Senior Planner, Region 2 Dorothy Upton, Senior Transportation Analyst, Transportation Planning and Analysis Unit Angela Kargel, Traffic Engineer, Region 2 Adam Roberts, Environmental Coordinator, Region 2 Robert Melbo, Rail Planner, ODOT Rail Division John Lucas, Senior Designer, Region 2 Roadway CH2M HILL Larry Weymouth, Project Manager and Planner, Corvallis Office Andra Henriques, P.E., Transportation Designer and Traffic Analyst, Portland Office Tim Newkirk, Associate Transportation Engineer, Bellevue Office Darren Muldoon, AICP, Associate Planner, Portland Office Tim Burkhardt, AICP, Senior Reviewer, Portland Office Jesse Manley, GIS Specialist, Portland Office Kathryn Westcott, Graphic Designer, Portland Office Vicki Starr, Document Processor, Corvallis Office Angelo Planning Group Serah Overbeek, Planner, Portland Office Darci Rudzinski, AICP, Planner, Portland Office Port of Newport Don Mann, General Manager Port of Toledo Bud Shoemake, General Manager
    [Show full text]
  • A Historical Reconstruction and Land Use History of Six Tidal Wetlands in Oregon
    A Historical Reconstruction and Land Use History of Six Tidal Wetlands in Oregon March 2005 By Jennifer Taylor Hennessey Master's of Science Project Marine Resource Management College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences Oregon State University Corvallis, Oregon TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3 INTRODUCTION 4 METHODOLOGY 15 SIUSLAW RESULTS & DISCUSSION 25 Background:General statistics, Site locations, Site specifics Historical Reconstruction- Landscape scale 27 Native Resource Use GLO/Army Corps surveys General history of resource use Transportation Fishing Hatcheries Agriculture Timber Other: Splash Damming, Jetties etc. Historical Reconstruction- Site Level 49 Deed & Land ownership info Historical Accounts Aerial photo narrative & quantitative scaling Field Observation Summary of Siuslaw 63 ALSEA RESULTS & DISCUSSION 65 Background:General statistics, Site locations, Site specifics Historical Reconstruction- Landscape scale 67 Native Resource Use GLO/Army Corps surveys General history of resource use Transportation Fishing Hatcheries Agriculture Timber Other: Splash Damming, Jetties etc. Historical Reconstruction- Site Level 88 Deed & Land ownership info Historical Accounts 1 PAGE ALSEA RESULTS & DISCUSSION (CONTINUED) Aerial photo narrative & quantitative scaling Field Observation Other evidence of impacts Summary of Alsea 99 YAQUINA RESULTS & DISCUSSION 102 Background:General statistics, Site locations, Site specifics Historical Reconstruction- Landscape Level 104 Native Resource Use GLO/Army Corps surveys General history of resource use Transportation Fishing Hatcheries Agriculture Timber Other: Splash Damming, Jetties etc. Historical Reconstruction- Site Level 124 Deed & Land ownership info Historical Accounts Aerial photo narrative & quantitative scaling Field Observation Other evidence of impacts Summary of Yaquina 136 CONCLUSION 139 APPENDICES 157 REFERENCES 159 2 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my committee and academic advisors: Dan Bottom, Ron Doe! and Tony D'Andrea for their time, energy, and guidance in completing this project.
    [Show full text]