DOCSLIB.ORG

Grande Ronde River Subbasin Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Grande Ronde River Subbasin Plan Grande Ronde Subbasin Plan May 28, 2004 Prepared for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council Lead Writer M. Cathy Nowak, Cat Tracks Wildlife Consulting Subbasin Team Leader Lyle Kuchenbecker, Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program Grande Ronde Subbasin Plan Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary...............................................................................................................12 2. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 12 2.1 Description of Planning Entity ...................................................................................... 12 2.2. List of Participants......................................................................................................... 13 2.3. Stakeholder Involvement Process.................................................................................. 14 2.4. Overall Approach to the Planning Activity ................................................................... 14 2.5. Process and Schedule for Revising/Updating the Plan.................................................. 15 3. Subbasin Assessment ............................................................................................................ 15 3.1. Subbasin Overview........................................................................................................ 15 3.1.1. General Description............................................................................................... 15 3.1.2. Subbasin Water Resources .................................................................................... 23 3.1.3. Hydrologic and Ecologic Trends in the Subbasin ................................................. 32 3.1.4. Regional Context................................................................................................... 34 3.2. Focal Species Characterization and Status .................................................................... 36 3.2.1 Native/non-native Wildlife, Plant and Resident/anadromous Fish of Ecological Importance............................................................................................................................. 36 3.2.2 Focal Species Selection ......................................................................................... 47 3.2.3. Aquatic Focal Species Population Delineation and Characterization ................... 48 3.2.4. Terrestrial Focal Species Population Delineation and Characterization ............... 97 3.2.5 Plant Focal Species..................................................................................................... 126 3.3. Out-of Subbasin Effects .............................................................................................. 128 3.3.1. Aquatic ................................................................................................................ 128 3.3.2. Terrestrial ............................................................................................................ 131 3.4 Environment/Population Relationships ....................................................................... 133 3.4.1 Aquatic ................................................................................................................ 133 3.4.2 Terrestrial ............................................................................................................ 133 3.4.3 Interspecies Relationships ................................................................................... 190 3.5. Identification and Analysis of Limiting Factors/Conditions ....................................... 191 3.5.1. Description of Historic Factors Leading to Decline of Focal Species/Ecological Function-Process – Aquatic................................................................................................. 191 3.5.2. Description of Historic Factors Leading to Decline of Focal Species/Ecological Function-Process – Terrestrial............................................................................................. 203 3.6. Synthesis/Interpretation............................................................................................... 204 3.6.1. Subbasin-wide Working Hypothesis – Aquatic................................................... 204 3.6.2. Terrestrial Assessment Synthesis ........................................................................ 206 3.6.3. Desired Future Conditions – Aquatic .................................................................. 222 3.6.4. Desired Future Conditions – Terrestrial .............................................................. 222 3.6.5. Opportunities ....................................................................................................... 222 4. Inventory of Existing Activities (Private, Local, State, Federal) ........................................ 222 4.1. Existing Legal Protection ............................................................................................ 223 4.2. Existing Plans .............................................................................................................. 226 4.3. Existing Management Programs.................................................................................. 230 4.4. Existing Restoration and Conservation Projects ......................................................... 231 5/26/04 9:17 AM 2 4.5. Gap Assessment of Existing Protections, Plans, Programs and Projects..................... 255 5. Management Plan ................................................................................................................ 257 5.1. Vision for the Subbasin ............................................................................................... 258 5.2 Aquatic Species and Habitats ...................................................................................... 258 5.2.1 Habitats................................................................................................................ 258 5.2.2 Fish Production/Population Strategies................................................................ 264 5.3. Terrestrial Species and Habitats .................................................................................. 267 5.4 Consistency with ESA/CWA Requirements ............................................................... 269 5.5 Research, Monitoring and Evaluation ......................................................................... 269 5.5.1 Aquatic Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation.......................................................... 269 5.5.2 Terrestrial Research Monitoring and Evaluation................................................. 290 6. Appendices .......................................................................................................................... 290 6.1 Appendix 1: References .............................................................................................. 290 6.2 Appendix 2: Species Tables ........................................................................................ 317 6.3 Appendix 3: Comprehensive Focal Species Accounts ................................................ 351 6.3.1 Columbia Spotted Frog........................................................................................ 351 6.3.2 Great Blue Heron................................................................................................. 366 6.3.3 Bald Eagle ........................................................................................................... 376 6.3.4 White-headed Woodpecker ................................................................................. 386 6.3.5 American Marten................................................................................................. 393 6.3.6 Olive-sided Flycatcher......................................................................................... 396 6.3.7 Mountain Goat..................................................................................................... 401 6.3.8 Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep ......................................................................... 411 6.3.9 Western Meadowlark........................................................................................... 422 6.3.10 Sage Sparrow....................................................................................................... 429 6.3.11 Rocky Mountain Elk............................................................................................ 440 6.3.12 Yellow Warbler ................................................................................................... 444 6.3.13 American Beaver................................................................................................. 449 6.4 Appendix 4: Data Sources ........................................................................................... 452 6.5 Appendix 5: Mangement Plans and Programs Relevant to Activities in the Grande Ronde Subbasin....................................................................................................................... 454 6.6 Appendix 6: Complete Grande Ronde Subbasin Project Inventory by Salmonid Population Units...................................................................................................................... 462 6.7 Appendix 7: Species of Interest to the Tribes of the Grande Ronde Subbasin............ 463 6.7.1 Species Recognized by Tribes – Submitted by the Nez Perce Tribe................... 463
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Synthesis Document
    1114 J Ave. October 1, 2018 La Grande, Oregon 97850 (541) 663-0570 Independent Scientific Review Panel Fax: (541) 962-1585 Northwest Power and Conservation Council http://www.grmw.org 851 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Portland, Oregon 97204 Board of Directors Chair: Dear Panel Members, Susan Roberts Vice-Chair: Donna Beverage We are pleased to submit the 25-year synthesis of the Grande Ronde Model Watershed (GRMW) and hope you find it satisfactory. Although this assignment Allen Childs Norm Cimon might have been accepted begrudgingly, we have found value in taking the time Larry Cribbs to look at the road behind us, if for no other reason than to see if the dust has Jed Hassinger Joe McCormack settled. Nick Myatt Larry Nall Jim Webster It is the nature of organizations like ours to engage in an endless cycle of plan, Dave Yost prioritize, plan, prioritize, and plan some more, often failing to review past actions with a critical eye. This shortcoming might not be as commonplace as I suspect, but having been engaged in the politics and science of this relatively Staff: Mary Estes new ‘industry’ for more than 20 years, I sense that it is not unique to GRMW. I Coby Menton am reminded that this synthesis encapsulates all my career with GRMW and so Kayla Morinaga Jeff Oveson it is a personal reminder of some, but surely not all, of my own shortcomings. Jesse Steele Connar Stone Alexandra Towne If I may be presumptuous, I anticipate that other Umbrella organizations in the Columbia Basin will be tasked with a similar undertaking, and while I hope that our synthesis is not only what the Panel expected, but also can serve as a guide to those who will be preparing their own.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Historic Trails Report Book (1998)
    i ,' o () (\ ô OnBcox HrsroRrc Tnans Rpponr ô o o o. o o o o (--) -,J arJ-- ö o {" , ã. |¡ t I o t o I I r- L L L L L (- Presented by the Oregon Trails Coordinating Council L , May,I998 U (- Compiled by Karen Bassett, Jim Renner, and Joyce White. Copyright @ 1998 Oregon Trails Coordinating Council Salem, Oregon All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in the United States of America. Oregon Historic Trails Report Table of Contents Executive summary 1 Project history 3 Introduction to Oregon's Historic Trails 7 Oregon's National Historic Trails 11 Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail I3 Oregon National Historic Trail. 27 Applegate National Historic Trail .41 Nez Perce National Historic Trail .63 Oregon's Historic Trails 75 Klamath Trail, 19th Century 17 Jedediah Smith Route, 1828 81 Nathaniel Wyeth Route, t83211834 99 Benjamin Bonneville Route, 1 833/1 834 .. 115 Ewing Young Route, 1834/1837 .. t29 V/hitman Mission Route, 184l-1847 . .. t4t Upper Columbia River Route, 1841-1851 .. 167 John Fremont Route, 1843 .. 183 Meek Cutoff, 1845 .. 199 Cutoff to the Barlow Road, 1848-1884 217 Free Emigrant Road, 1853 225 Santiam Wagon Road, 1865-1939 233 General recommendations . 241 Product development guidelines 243 Acknowledgements 241 Lewis & Clark OREGON National Historic Trail, 1804-1806 I I t . .....¡.. ,r la RivaÌ ï L (t ¡ ...--."f Pðiräldton r,i " 'f Route description I (_-- tt |".
    [Show full text]
  • An Independent Newspaper for the Pacific Northwest AUGUST 1997 VOL
    An Independent Newspaper for the Pacific Northwest AUGUST 1997 VOL. 3 No. 3 Dear Reader early all the problems we face in Cascadia boil down to population. NAs Alan Durning and Christopher Crowther point out in their new book, Misplaced Blame: The Real Roots of Population Growth, the Pacific Northwest is growing nearly twice the North American rate and almost 50 percent faster than the global population. The Northwest population reached 15 million EDITORIAL in mid-1997 and is swelling by another 1 million every 40 months. Starting this month, with our cover story on growth pressures in the scenic Columbia River Gorge, Cascadia Times Boom Times The UnbearableRightness ot Breen will publish an occasional series on, Can the Columbia River Gorge survive the Life on the fault line of environmentally growth, growth management strategies demand for development? and what it all means. As senior editor correct energy Kathie Durbin reports from the Columbia by Kathie Durbin Page 9 Gorge, local politics threaten this national by Kevin Bell Page 7 treasure. This is true everywhere, because growth and land-use decisions are in varyingdegrees made at the local THE USUAL STUFF level. We aren't saying that local commu• FIELD NOTES: Green groups clash over Sierra REALITY CHECK: 16 nities cannot do a good job protecting places such as the Gorge, Snoqualmie logging. EPA fines big Alaska mine. toxic waste POINT OF VIEW: The ASARCO juggernaut and Pass, Whidbey Island, Lake Tahoe or the on crops. Oregon slams nuclear weapons plan 3 Muir Woods, to name just a few places of its proposed Rock Creek Mine.
    [Show full text]
  • Botany, Invasive Plants, Native Plants, Genetics
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest FY-16 Region Program Accomplishments Calochortus umpquaensis, Umpqua mariposa lily, is found only in the Umpqua River watershed of Botany southwestern OR. A big "anthophorid" bee is tucked into the flower. Invasive Plants Native Plants Genetics U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
    [Show full text]
  • Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny
    Outline of angiosperm phylogeny: orders, families, and representative genera with emphasis on Oregon native plants Priscilla Spears December 2013 The following listing gives an introduction to the phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants that has emerged in recent decades, and which is based on nucleic acid sequences as well as morphological and developmental data. This listing emphasizes temperate families of the Northern Hemisphere and is meant as an overview with examples of Oregon native plants. It includes many exotic genera that are grown in Oregon as ornamentals plus other plants of interest worldwide. The genera that are Oregon natives are printed in a blue font. Genera that are exotics are shown in black, however genera in blue may also contain non-native species. Names separated by a slash are alternatives or else the nomenclature is in flux. When several genera have the same common name, the names are separated by commas. The order of the family names is from the linear listing of families in the APG III report. For further information, see the references on the last page. Basal Angiosperms (ANITA grade) Amborellales Amborellaceae, sole family, the earliest branch of flowering plants, a shrub native to New Caledonia – Amborella Nymphaeales Hydatellaceae – aquatics from Australasia, previously classified as a grass Cabombaceae (water shield – Brasenia, fanwort – Cabomba) Nymphaeaceae (water lilies – Nymphaea; pond lilies – Nuphar) Austrobaileyales Schisandraceae (wild sarsaparilla, star vine – Schisandra; Japanese
    [Show full text]
  • Snake River Hatcheries Draft Environmental Assessment
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE West Coast Region 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard, Suite 1100 PORTLAND, OREGON 97232 May 21, 2019 Dear Recipient: In accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), we announce the availability for review of the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for Snake River Basin Hatcheries. The proposed action is to make Endangered Species Act (ESA) section 4(d) determinations for the 15 hatchery programs for spring and summer Chinook salmon, summer steelhead, and coho salmon to operate in the Snake River Basin. These programs are operated by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, the Nez Perce Tribe, and the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes and are funded by the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan, the Idaho Power Company, and the Bonneville Power Administration. The document is accessible electronically through the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) West Coast Region website at: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/hatcheries/SRHatcheries/snake16_hatch_rvw.html. Hard copies or CD copies of the document may be obtained from the NMFS Comment Coordinator for this action, Emi Kondo, at the contact information provided below. Written comments may be submitted to NMFS via electronic mail, physical mail, or fax to the Comment Coordinator during the public comment period (the closing date for the public comment period is noted at the above website). When submitting comments, please include the identifier “Snake River Hatcheries DEA comments” in the subject line or fax cover page. Comment Coordinator: Emi Kondo, Fish Biologist National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd., Suite 1100 Portland, OR 97232 Phone: 503-736-4739 Fax: 503-872-2737 [email protected] Thank you in advance for your input and assistance in finalizing the Environmental Assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • Joseph Canyon Potential Wilderness
    Joseph Canyon Potential Wilderness Wallowa County 40,221 acres Wallowa-Whitman National Forest Description: oseph Canyon exemplifies the J rugged topography of northeast Oregon characterized by canyons Swamp Creek Canyon from Starvation Ridge: photo by Dan Kelly. with very steep, grass- Hikers climb Starvation Ridge: inset photo by David Mildrexler. covered side slopes interspersed with numerous exposed basalt layers. The area is well-known, largely because of the Joseph Canyon Viewpoint, a highway pullout 30 miles north of Enterprise that overlooks the 2,000-foot depths of Joseph Canyon and is one of 38 sites that form the Nez Perce National Historical Park (http://www.nps.gov/nepe/index.htm). The Joseph Canyon Roadless Area is comprised of three main drainages: Swamp, Davis and Joseph Creeks. Joseph and Swamp Creeks are designated wild and scenic rivers within the roadless area and the Joseph Canyon Creek system is home to a large population of native Snake River steelhead, listed as threatened under ESA in August 1998. The area is renowned for wildlife and harbors old growth Ponderosa Pine woodlands. Joseph Canyon includes the historic Chico Trail and has significant historical value that embraces all of the major peoples that have shaped the region; the Nez Perce Indians; pioneers and settlers, the Forest Service, and backcountry hunters and hikers. The trails have been used since time immemorial. The proposed Joseph Canyon Wilderness area adjoins the Nez Perce Precious Lands Wildlife Area to the north (http://www.nezperce.org/Wolf/Exec_Summary.pdf). The Precious Lands are 15,000 acres of contiguous “roadless” lands including portions of Joseph Canyon and also adjoin to BLM and State lands to the north.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Grande Ronde Lignite Field, Asotin County
    BRIAN J. BOYLE COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC LANDS STATE OF WASHINGTON ART STEARNS, Supervisor RAYMOND LASMANIS, State Geologist DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES GEOLOGY OF THE GRANDE RONDE LIGNITE FIELD, ASOTIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON By Keith L. Stoffel Report of Investigations 27 1984 BRIAN J. BOYLE COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC LANDS STATE OF WASHINGTON ART STEARNS, Supervisor RAYMOND LASMANIS, State Geologist DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES GEOLOGY OF THE GRANDE RONDE LIGNITE FIELD, ASOTIN COUNTY, WASHINGTON By Keith L. Stoff el Report of Investigations 27 Printed in the United States of America 1984 For sale by the Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, Washington Price $4.00 CONTENTS Page Abstract t • t t Ott t t t t t I It t t t t t too It Ott It t It t It t t t Ott t t t t t t t I t t I It t It t t It 1 Introduction . 2 Location and geographic setting . 2 Purpose and scope of study . 3 Methods of study . 3 Acknowledgments . 4 Geology of the Columbia Plateau . 6 General geologic setting . 6 Stratigraphic nomenclature . 7 Columbia River Basalt Group . 7 Ellensburg and Latah Formations . 8 Stratigraphy . 8 Regional stratigraphy . 8 Imnaha and Picture Gorge Basalts . 8 Yakima Basalt Subgroup . 9 Grande Ronde Basalt . 9 Wanapum Basalt . 9 Saddle Mountains Basalt ... .............. .. ........ .... 10 Stratigraphy of the Grande Ronde lignite field . 11 Structure ................................. ...................... .. 13 Evolution of the Blue Mountains province . 13 Structural geology of the Grande Ronde River-Blue Mountains region .......... 15 Folds . ............. .................... .............. 15 Faults .
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief History of the Umatilla National Forest
    A BRIEFHISTORYOFTHE UMATILLA NATIONAL FOREST1 Compiled By David C. Powell June 2008 1804-1806 The Lewis and Clark Expedition ventured close to the north and west sides of the Umatilla National Forest as they traveled along the Snake and Columbia rivers. As the Lewis & Clark party drew closer to the Walla Walla River on their return trip in 1806, their journal entries note the absence of firewood, Indian use of shrubs for fuel, abundant roots for human consumption, and good availability of grass for horses. Writing some dis- tance up the Walla Walla River, William Clark noted that “great portions of these bottoms has been latterly burnt which has entirely destroyed the timbered growth” (Robbins 1997). 1810-1840 This 3-decade period was a period of exploration and use by trappers, missionaries, natu- ralists, and government scientists or explorers. William Price Hunt (fur trader), John Kirk Townsend (naturalist), Peter Skene Ogden (trap- per and guide), Thomas Nuttall (botanist), Reverend Samuel Parker (missionary), Marcus and Narcissa Whitman (missionaries), Henry and Eliza Spaulding (missionaries), Captain Benjamin Bonneville (military explorer), Captain John Charles Fremont (military scientist), Nathaniel J. Wyeth (fur trader), and Jason Lee (missionary) are just a few of the people who visited and described the Blue Mountains during this era. 1840-1859 During the 1840s and 1850s – the Oregon Trail era – much overland migration occurred as settlers passed through the Blue Mountains on their way to the Willamette Valley (the Oregon Trail continued to receive fairly heavy use until well into the late 1870s). The Ore- gon Trail traversed the Umatilla National Forest.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Chloroplast Genomes Shed Light on Phylogenetic
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Complete chloroplast genomes shed light on phylogenetic relationships, divergence time, and biogeography of Allioideae (Amaryllidaceae) Ju Namgung1,4, Hoang Dang Khoa Do1,2,4, Changkyun Kim1, Hyeok Jae Choi3 & Joo‑Hwan Kim1* Allioideae includes economically important bulb crops such as garlic, onion, leeks, and some ornamental plants in Amaryllidaceae. Here, we reported the complete chloroplast genome (cpDNA) sequences of 17 species of Allioideae, fve of Amaryllidoideae, and one of Agapanthoideae. These cpDNA sequences represent 80 protein‑coding, 30 tRNA, and four rRNA genes, and range from 151,808 to 159,998 bp in length. Loss and pseudogenization of multiple genes (i.e., rps2, infA, and rpl22) appear to have occurred multiple times during the evolution of Alloideae. Additionally, eight mutation hotspots, including rps15-ycf1, rps16-trnQ-UUG, petG-trnW-CCA , psbA upstream, rpl32- trnL-UAG , ycf1, rpl22, matK, and ndhF, were identifed in the studied Allium species. Additionally, we present the frst phylogenomic analysis among the four tribes of Allioideae based on 74 cpDNA coding regions of 21 species of Allioideae, fve species of Amaryllidoideae, one species of Agapanthoideae, and fve species representing selected members of Asparagales. Our molecular phylogenomic results strongly support the monophyly of Allioideae, which is sister to Amaryllioideae. Within Allioideae, Tulbaghieae was sister to Gilliesieae‑Leucocoryneae whereas Allieae was sister to the clade of Tulbaghieae‑ Gilliesieae‑Leucocoryneae. Molecular dating analyses revealed the crown age of Allioideae in the Eocene (40.1 mya) followed by diferentiation of Allieae in the early Miocene (21.3 mya). The split of Gilliesieae from Leucocoryneae was estimated at 16.5 mya.
    [Show full text]
  • Wallowa County, Oregon and Environs
    Moving On By Winona Johnson Holloway J; ~tnn,I ~M ;r= ·~ - ;}/-~ _?~ lq?7 Moving On by WinonaJohnson Holloway ©1989 Shadow Butte Press Live Oak, California All rights reserved included the right to reproduce this book or parts thereof in any form Cover picture courtesy of Alice Mccully Printed by "The Printer" in Davis, California, U.S.A. I I dedicate this book to Merritt Louis Holloway, whose genes have mixed with mine to produce our own line of descendants, now in its fourth generation. Thank you Merritt for having such interesting ancestors. Thank you for our adventurous life together. II Our past is not a dead past. It is still alive in little pockets and trickles to surprise us in places still to be found. How lucky are those who have perceived it- a spark that shines within us dimly-to tell us who we are and why and how. We know better where we are going, if we know from whence we came. WJH III Grover and Zora Johnson and family, 1926 Front: Zora, Grace, Joe, Tom, Maybeth, Grover Rear: Winona, Dorofy, Ellen, Mildred IV Moving On Contents Chapter 1 Others came before me ............................................................................ 1 Chapter 2 The world is full of a number of things ................................................. 15 Chapter 3 That was the time that was, a time that will not come again ............... 39 Chapter 4 Of fun and foibles ................................................................................ 71 Chapter 5 As the twig is bent, the tree's inclined ................................................... 87 Chapter 6 Making do ............................................................................................ 103 Chapter 7 On my own .......................................................................................... 125 Chapter 8 In which we try it out there in the big world ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Washington Game Status and Trend Report
    S T A T E O F W A S H I N G T O N 20092009 GameGame StatusStatus andand TrendTrend ReportReport AN OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON 2009 GAME STATUS AND TREND REPORT July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 STATE OF WASHINGTON Chris Gregoire Governor WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Phil Anderson Interim Director WILDLIFE PROGRAM Dave Brittell Assistant Director GAME DIVISION Dave Ware Game Division Manager This Program Receives Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration, Project W-96-R, Statewide Wildlife Management. This report should be cited as: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2009. 2009 Game status and trend report. Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington, USA. TABLE OF CONTENTS Deer .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Statewide Summary .................................................................................................................. 3 Region 1, PMUs 11, 13, GMUs 101-124 ................................................................................. 6 Region 1, PMUs 14, 15, GMUs 127-142 ............................................................................... 11 Region 1, PMUs 16, 17, GMUs 145-186 ............................................................................... 15 Region 2, PMUs 21, 22, GMUs 203-243 ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]