DOCSLIB.ORG

Interim Corridor Strategy Staff Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Interim Corridor Strategy Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Staff Report An Element of the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US Highway 26) Corridor Plan Oregon Department of Transportation Prepared by: ODOT Regions I & 2 Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. Paula Calvin Associntes Cogan Owens Cogan October 1997 Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Proposed Action Endorsement of the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US 26) Interim Corridor Strategy. Background and Analysis The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has been working with 18 local and regional governments, interest groups, statewide agencies and stakeholder committees, and the general public to develop a long-term plan for the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US Highway 26) Corridor. The first phase of that process has resulted in the attached Interim Corridor Strategy. The Interim Corridor Strategy is a critical element of the Portland-Cannon-Beach Junction Corridor Plan. Corridor planning is a new approach to transportation planning statewide. ODOT and the communities bordering major transportation corridors have worked together to build a plan that not only addresses the specific needs of each corridor, but also identifies each corridor's current and future uses and unique character. --""-' Astoria /L I Corridor Map. file: us26/phusel /chprev stafSre2.doc Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan The Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor serves both urban and rural transportation needs. Though multi-modal, the corridor is dominated by auto use on US Highway 26 (US 26), which is part of the National Highway System. US 26 is one of two major tourist routes to the north coast and also provides the primary access from the Portland area to the Tillamook area through its connection to Wilson River Highway (OR 6). In the urban or eastern portion (within the regional urban growth boundary) of the corridor, use of all transportation modes is increasing and expected to continue to increase over the life (20 years) of the Corridor Plan. In this portion, the Corridor has the following primary functions: Both an inter-city and intra-city commuter route; Major regional transit corridor, which will be focused on the Westside light rail system when completed; Access to major employment centers in Portland and Washington County, most notably a growing high-tech industry; Major freight movement within the urban growth boundary (UGB); and Connections to 1-5 (via 1-405 and Highway 21 7) and 1-84 (via 1-405). Within its rural or western portion (outside the regional UGB), the Corridor is noted for the following: Linkage to north Oregon coast; Tourism and access to recreation opportunities; Rural scenic qualities, e.g. it is designated by Washington County as a Scenic Route; Natural resource amenities, particularly agricultural and forest lands and scenic rivers; Connection to other highways that serve rural communities and outlying cities such as Banks, North Plains, and Vemonia; and Freight movement for agricultural specialty crops, aggregate and forest products. Assumptions In developing the Interim Corridor Strategy, a number of assumptions were made related to other planning efforts, capital improvements, and other aspects of the transportation system. These assumptions, are not repeated as issues or objectives. ODOT Corridor Staff and the ODOT Planning Staff are coordinating with Metro and local juridications to define and address growth management strategies in the Urban Growth Functional Plan for the urban or eastern portion of the corridor. Regional (as opposed to corridor-specific) transportation system issues and needs within the metropolitan urban growth boundary(UGB) are being addressed in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), which is a part of the Urban Growth Functional Plan. Assumptions, based upon Metro's Region 2040 Growth Concept include significant population and employment growth focused on "Regional Centers" and "Town Centers"; limited UGB expansion; expanded transit services; and significant growth in local intra-city trips. Another file: us26/phasel lchprev stafJre2. doc Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan element of the Metro planning effort is the development of a "Green Corridor" from the Metro UGB to North Plains (approximately 3 miles outside the UGB). The North Plains "Neighbor City" study is examining the potential impacts of regional growth management strategies on North Plains, including the need for urban growth boundary amendments. The rural portions of the Corridor (west of the Metro UGB) are assumed to continue in resource uses, e.g . agriculture and forestry, with growth generally confined to acknowledged exception areas and existing rural community centers. The Inter& Corridor Strategy assumes the issues related to US 101 and its junction with US 26 have previously been addressed in the Coastal Highway Corridor Plan and will be further refined in the Highway 101 Scenic Byway study. Corridor plans for other state highways intersecting with US 26, e.g. Highway 47, will be prepared at a future time, although the functioning of these intersections is being addressed in this corridor plan. The Interim Corridor Strategy assumes that all highway uses of US 26 will increase during the 20- year planning period. The use of US 26 as a primary route to the Tillarnook area via OR 6 will continually grow. The availability of "Tillarnook Bum" timber stands for harvesting will increase use of the US 26 corridor for logging operations and transport. Highway capital improvement projects identified for construction in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) relating to US 26 are assumed as part of the Strategy. Projects previously identified by ODOT and local jurisdictions but not included in the STIP are not assumed. Current funding constraints are not assumed. The purpose of the Corridor Plan is to establish objectives and priorities for the long-term management of and improvements to transportation facilities within the corridor, regardless of current funding limitations. The corridor objectives and priorities are balanced with a reasonable possibility of funding from a variety of sources over the 20 year planning period. The ability to implement these objectives and priorities will, of course, be dependent upon future available funding. One of the tasks in the next phase will be to determine the priorities of the improvements within three different financial scenarios. Key Findings The Interim Corridor Strategy for Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor consists of a series of objectives to enhance the corridor's ability to serve commute, recreational, and freight travel between Portland and the Cannon Beach Junction. Consistent with Oregon Transportation Plan objectives to promote a balanced multi-modal transportation system, the Interim Strategy promotes transportation demand management (TDM) and system management (TSM) strategies as the first course in addressing future needs in the corridor. These TDM and TSM strategies include the development of support facilities for transit and other non-motorized modes, as well as retaining railroad and air services as an effective means of transport. file: ur26/phasel/chprev stafJre2.doc Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan A wide variety of objectives have been developed to address the various elements of the corridor's transportation system. The following are the key issues reflected in the Interim Corridor Strategy objectives. Demand For Increased Capacity The Interim Strategy recommends limited expansion in highway capacity within the Metro Urban Growth Boundary. The question of how far out to expand US 26 over the next 20 years is yet to be resolved. The Strategy recommends an investigation of highway widening to the UGB line. The investigation should determine if there is a need for additional highway capacity over the long term given the projections for population and employment growth and requirements to reduce reliance on the automobile. The question of highway widening will be resolved during the Metro RTP and the Urban Growth Functional Plan process. The Strategy calls for increased reliance on transit and local street networks for intracity trips on US 26 to reduce the demand for increased capacity. The degree to which local jurisdictions will be willing to accommodate a shift of traffic from US 26 to local streets remains to be determined. The Interim Strategy recommends no expansion in highway capacity outside the Metro UGB, except for climbinglpassing lanes and turning lanes. One of the most controversial issues is interchange improvements in areas outside of the Metro UGB. There has been strong public demand for action on the Jackson School Road intersection, improvements to the Glencoe Road interchange, adding ramps to the Gordon Road overpass and improving the Staleys Junction (OR47) intersection. Staff position at this time is as follows: Interchange Im~rovements Jackson School Road Yes ENFonsi recommend interchange Glencoe Road Yes Local studies support interchange improvements Gordon Road No Does not meet OBQT standards At-grade Intersechon Improvements Mountaindale Analyze in this fiscal year Staley's Junction Analyze in this fiscal year These issues are to be resolved jointly by ODOT and the regional, county and cities TSFs within the context of the CSC next phase over the coming fiscal year. Alternative Modes
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Long Trails Project USP 549: REGIONAL PLANNING and METROPOLITAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT
    The Long Trails Project USP 549: REGIONAL PLANNING and METROPOLITAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning College of Urban and Public Affairs Portland State University Fall, 2012 Table of Contents I. Introduction and Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ 2 II. History of Long Trails and Regional Trail Networks ..................................................................................................... 6 III. Long Trails in Northwestern Oregon...............................................................................................................................20 IV. The Demand for Long Trails-based Recreation ...........................................................................................................36 V. Long Trails and Community Economic Development .............................................................................................52 VI. Long Trails Implementation ...............................................................................................................................................76 I. Introduction and Acknowledgements The Oregon Department of Forestry and the Oregon Parks Team 3: The Demand for trails-base recreation; analysis and Department are currently engaged in a joint assessment of a new critique of SCORP and similar surveys; trails in the context of trail extending from Garibaldi, on the Oregon coast, to the crest other recreational opportunities;
    [Show full text]
  • 2021-22 Budget in Brief
    2022 1 Letter from the Budget Officer To the great citizens of Clatsop County, Welcome to the County’s 2021-22 Budget in Brief. Each year Clatsop County produces a budget document to fulfill the community’s vision for where our resources should be directed. We strive for excellence in providing sound, Contents reasonable, honest, and transparent management of these resources. Letter from the Budget Officer……...2 This year’s budget is approximately 550 pages. While the entire budget document is available to view, county Our Community………………………….…3 management is hoping that by providing this Budget in Brief which summarizes the most essential elements of the County’s budget, we can provide an abbreviated document The Budget Process……………………...8 for convenience. We hope you find it useful. Our budget reflects the County Commissioners goals, Citizen Budget Committee….………..9 maintains the long-term financial health and stability of our General Fund and reserves, and continues the delivery of Organization Chart………………..…..10 high-quality services for our community. The 2021-22 budget allocates approximately $110 million, including approximately $24 million for capital projects such as the Tax Payment Breakdown……………11 construction of a new county jail facility. For a more detailed look at the County’s 2021-22 adopted Where the Money Comes From….12 budget, please visit the County’s website at http://www.co.clatsop.or.us/finance/page/clatsop-county- Where the Money Goes………………13 budget. Through sound fiscal management, we are able to continue The County’s General Fund…………14 delivering the high quality services our citizens expect and deserve.
    [Show full text]
  • 2005–2006 Assessment of Fish and Macroinvertebrate Communities of the Tualatin River Basin, Oregon
    FINAL REPORT 2005–2006 ASSESSMENT OF FISH AND MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITIES OF THE TUALATIN RIVER BASIN, OREGON MICHAEL B. COLE JENA L. LEMKE CHRISTOPHER R. CURRENS PREPARED FOR CLEAN WATER SERVICES HILLSBORO, OREGON PREPARED BY ABR, INC.–ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH & SERVICES FOREST GROVE, OREGON 2005-2006 ASSESSMENT OF FISH AND MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITIES OF THE TUALATIN RIVER BASIN, OREGON FINAL REPORT Prepared for Clean Water Services 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway Hillsboro, OR 97123-9379 By Michael B. Cole, Jena L. Lemke, and Christopher Currens ABR, Inc.--Environmental Research and Services P.O. Box 249 Forest Grove, OR 97116 August 2006 Printed on recycled paper. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RIVPACS O/E scores from high-gradient reaches ranged from 0.24 to 1.05 and averaged • Biological monitoring with fish and 0.72, while multimetric scores ranged from 11 macroinvertebrate communities is widely used to 46 and averaged 27.9. The two approaches to determine the ecological integrity of surface produced similar impairment-class groupings, waters. Such surveys directly assess the status as almost half of the high-gradient-reach of surface waters relative to the primary goal macroinvertebrate communities that scored as of the Clean Water Act and provide unimpaired according to O/E scores also information valuable to water quality planning received unimpaired multimetric scores. and management. As such, fish and Upper Gales Creek received both the highest macroinvertebrate communities are O/E and multimetric scores of 1.05 and 46, periodically assessed by Clean Water Services respectively. Three sites received “fair” O/E to assist with water quality management in the scores ranging from 0.779 to 0.877.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Environmental Law: Year in Review
    2020 Environmental Law: Year in Review Cosponsored by the Environmental & Natural Resources Section Thursday, October 8, 2020 8:30 a.m.–4:40 p.m. 6 General CLE credits and 1 Ethics (Oregon specific) credit 2020 ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: YEAR IN REVIEW SECTION PLANNERS Maura Fahey, CLE Chair, Crag Law Center, Portland Alia Miles, Oregon Department of Justice, Portland Kate Moore, Dunn Carney LLP, Portland Ilene Munk, Foley & Mansfield PLLP, Portland Stephanie Regenold, Perkins Coie LLP, Portland Ryan Shannon, Center for Biological Diversity, Portland Avalyn Taylor, Attorney at Law, Portland OREGON STATE BAR ENVIRONMENTAL & NATURAL RESOURCES SECTION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Sarah R. Liljefelt, Chair Maura C. Fahey, Chair-Elect Kate LaRiche Moore, Past Chair Caylin Joy Barter, Treasurer Ashley M. Carter, Secretary Dominic M. Carollo Michael C. Freese Sara Ghafouri Kirk B. Maag John R. Mellgren Alia S. Miles Ilene M. Munk Stephanie M. Regenold Ryan Adair Shannon Mark P. Strandberg Avalyn Taylor Christopher B. Thomas The materials and forms in this manual are published by the Oregon State Bar exclusively for the use of attorneys. Neither the Oregon State Bar nor the contributors make either express or implied warranties in regard to the use of the materials and/or forms. Each attorney must depend on his or her own knowledge of the law and expertise in the use or modification of these materials. Copyright © 2020 OREGON STATE BAR 16037 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road P.O. Box 231935 Tigard, OR 97281-1935 2020 Environmental Law: Year in Review ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Schedule. v Faculty. .vii 1. Crystal Balls and Tea Leaves: NEPA Implementation in a Changing Landscape .
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Health Highlights in Oregon 2017
    Forest Health Highlights in Oregon 2017 DRAFT Oregon Department of Pacific Northwest Region Forestry Forest Health Protection Forest Health Program for the greatest good AGENDA ITEM 4 Attachment 2 Page 1 of 36 Forest Health Highlights in Oregon 2017 Joint publication contributors: Christine Buhl¹ Zack Heath² Sarah Navarro¹ Karen Ripley² Danny Norlander¹ Robert Schroeter² Wyatt Williams¹ Ben Smith² ¹Oregon Department of Forestry ²U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender Cooperative Aerial Survey: 2017 Flight lines DRAFT The aerial survey program is changing! Give us input to better serve your needs. Front cover image: Orange hawkweed (Hieracium aurantiacum), a European exotic, was first identified in Oregon in 2017 in Clatsop County (Photo by Peter Dziuk). AGENDA ITEM 4 Attachment 2 Page 2 of 36 Table of Contents SUMMARY .........................................................................................................................................1 AERIAL AND GROUND SURVEYS .........................................................................................................2 ABIOTIC STRESSORS ...........................................................................................................................4 Climate and Weather ...................................................................................................................4 Drought .......................................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • The City of Banks Oregon the City of Banks
    PREPARED FOR: THE CITY OF BANKS, OREGON PREPARED BY: WITH SUPPORT FROM: OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON OCTOBER 2010 CONTENTS Section Page 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 2 Planning Process ...................................................................................................................... 2 Public Involvement .................................................................................................................. 2 Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................. 2 Existing Operations and Traffic Analysis ........................................................................... 14 Regulatory Envirnoment ....................................................................................................... 20 Future Traffic Analysis .......................................................................................................... 21 3 Alternatives Evaluation and Recommendations .............................................................. 34 Concepts to Address Needs Identified in TSP Analysis.................................................... 35 Concepts to Service Expanded UGB Areas ......................................................................... 46 Future Functional Classification of Roadways ................................................................... 59
    [Show full text]
  • Milebymile.Com Personal Road Trip Guide Oregon State Highway #47
    MileByMile.com Personal Road Trip Guide Oregon State Highway #47 Miles ITEM SUMMARY 0.0 Junction: Clatskanie, Junction United States Highway #30, Clatskanie, Oregon, a city in Oregon Columbia County, Oregon, located on the banks of the Clatskanie River, a tributary of the Columbia River, The Clatskanie River empties into the Columbia River within the city limits. This is where Oregon Route #47 ends (at its northern terminus). Altitude: 20 feet 1.4 Palm Hill Road/Gas Palm Hill Road/Gas Pipeline Road, Entrance to, Clatskanie Guard Pipeline Road Station, of the Oregon State Department of Forestry, Altitude: 230 feet 11.8 Junction Junction Oregon Route #202/Nehalem Highway, Mist, Oregon, a community in Columbia County, Oregon, Mist contains one of the very few, and therefore very valuable, natural gas storage areas in the Pacific Northwest. Altitude: 531 feet 15.5 OBlack Lane OBlack Lane, Burns Road, Community of Natal, Oregon, Altitude: 528 feet 18.9 Apiary Market Road Apiary Market Road, winds through the Forest Grove District State Forest, meets Camp Wilkerson Road, Enterprise Road, Camp Wilkerson, offers camping sites, facilities, Cabins in the thickly wooded areas of Forest Grove District State Forest, Altitude: 558 feet 19.9 Big Eddy Park Big Eddy Park, located between Nehalem River and Oregon Route #47, Altitude: 571 feet 22.7 Scappoose-Vernonia Scappoose-Vernonia Highway, columbia Forest Road, Scaponia Highway: Recreation Site Columbia County Park, Scaponia Recreation Site, The Portland and Southwestern Railroad Tunnel near Scappoose, Oregon, a registered National Historic Place, Altitude: 584 feet 23.1 Crooked Creek Mountain Crooked Creek Mountain Lane, Pittsburg, Oregon, a community in Lane Columbia County, Oregon, located on the Nehalem River, Altitude: 587 feet 27.3 Vernonia, Oregon Vernonia, Oregon, a city in Columbia County, Oregon, located on the Nehalem River, on Oregon Route #47, in a valley on the western side of the Northern Oregon Coast Range.
    [Show full text]
  • 1999 OREGON HIGHWAY PLAN Including Amendments November 1999 Through May 2015
    1999 OREGON HIGHWAY PLAN Including amendments November 1999 through May 2015 An Element of the Oregon Transportation Plan THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Copyright © 1999 by the Oregon Department of Transportation Permission is given to quote and reproduce parts of this document if credit is given to the source. A copy of this plan and amendments as the Oregon Transportation Commission adopted them are on file at the Oregon Department of Transportation and online at: https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Planning/Pages/Plans.aspx#OHP. Editorial changes for consistency have been made in this document. Amendments Incorporated into May 2015 version of 1999 OHP 99-01: Highway Reclassification (9 November 1999) 00-02: Expressway Classification (11 May 2000) 00-03: Expressway Classifications and Technical Corrections (7 June 2000) 00-04: Alternate Mobility Standards; RVMPO and Metro (13 December 2000) 01-05: Expressway Classifications (11 April 2001) 01-06: Conditional Designation of STAs and Designation of UBAs (9 August 2001) 02-07: Jurisdictional Transfers (November 2002) 03-08: Bypass Policy (16 April 2003) 03-09: Amendment of Appendix E: NHS Intermodal Connectors (18 June 2003) 04-10: Amended Policy 1B (14 January 2004) 04-11: Highway Segment Designations (14 January 2004) 04-11: Highway Segment Designation Maps (14 January 2004) 04-12: Technical Corrections to the Oregon Highway Plan (2 July 2004) 04-13: Technical Corrections to the Oregon Highway Plan (20 December 2004) 05-14: Designation of Special Transportation Areas (10 January 2005)
    [Show full text]
  • Ecoregions-I
    Oregon Conservation Strategy 2016: Ecoregions-i Table of Contents – Chapter 3: Ecoregions ECOREGIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 BLUE MOUNTAINS ................................................................................................................................................ 3 COAST RANGE ..................................................................................................................................................... 12 COLUMBIA PLATEAU .......................................................................................................................................... 21 EAST CASCADES .................................................................................................................................................. 27 KLAMATH MOUNTAINS ..................................................................................................................................... 36 NORTHERN BASIN AND RANGE ......................................................................................................................... 47 WEST CASCADES ................................................................................................................................................. 58 WILLAMETTE VALLEY ......................................................................................................................................... 67 NEARSHORE .......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • OB 21.2 1995 Summer
    $4.95 The quarterly journal of Oregon field ornithology Volume 21, Number 2, Summer 1995 Whooper Swan at Summer Lake Wildlife Area, Oregon, and California Wintering Areas 35 Martin J. St. Louis 1994 Oregon Listing Results 37 Jim Johnson Hotlines and Birding Talk by Computer 42 Jane Lufkin Davis The importance of collecting birds and preserving museum specimens 45 M. Ralph Browning Recording Natural Sounds 49 Eleanor A. Pugh More on the Oregon Atlas and Gazetteer 50 Matthew G. Hunter Same Lame Game 50 David R. Copeland Oregon Breeding Bird Atlas Project 51 PaulAdamus NEWS AND NOTES OB 21(1) 52 FIELDNOTES, Fall 1994 56 Eastern Oregon, Fall 1994 57 Paul T. Sullivan Western Oregon, Fall 1994 64 Jim Johnson COVER PHOTO Boreal Owl, TumaloMt, Deschutes Co., 14 September 1994. Photo/Tom Crabtree. CENTER OPO annual meeting and convention, La Grande • OFOfall birding weekend, Malheur • OPO membership form • OPO Bookcase • Checklist of Oregon birds • Oregon Rare Bird Phone Network Oregon Birds is looking for Oregon Birds material in these categories: News Briefs on things of temporal Tlie quarterlyjournal of'Oregonfield ornithology importance, such as meetings, birding trips, announcements, news items, etc. Articles are longer contributions dealing OREGON BIRDS is a quarterly publication of Oregon Field with identification, distribution, ecology, 2~ :-z :g,sts. an Oregon not-for-profit corporation. Membership in management, conservation, taxonomy, : - eld Ornithologists includes a subscription to Oregon Birds. behavior, biology, and historical aspects of SSN 0890-2313 ornithology and burjmg in Oregon. Articles cite references (i any); Editor Owen Schmidt Assistant Editor Sharon K. Blair appear at I Associate Editor Jim Johnson Short OREGON FIELD ORNITHOLOGISTS President George A.
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Anchor Habitat Strategy Invited Expert Responses
    Salmon Anchor Habitat Strategy Invited Expert Responses Prepared for The Salmon Anchor Habitat Work Group/ Salmon Anchor Habitat Conference Tillamook, Oregon June 24-25, 2004 Institute for Natural Resources and Oregon Department of Forestry Introduction (Abstract) This document compiles written responses by experts in their respective fields to questions from the Salmon Anchor Habitat Work Group about the Salmon Anchor Habitat Strategy component of Oregon Department of Forestry Northwestern Oregon State Forest Management Plan. The Salmon Anchor Habitat Strategy and Work Group The 2003 Oregon Legislature directed the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) to convene a citizen work group to examine the Salmon Anchor Habitat Strategy. Introduced by ODF in the 2001 Northwestern Oregon State Forest Management Plan and described more specifically in the 2003 Implementation Plan, the Salmon Anchor Habitat (SAH) Strategy was designed to provide additional protection for 10 years to a series of drainages with intact salmon populations and habitat as active, structure-based forest management strategies are implemented across the Tillamook and Clatsop State Forests. The 6-person Salmon Anchor Habitat Work Group consisted of representatives from Clatsop County, Tillamook County, Oregon Trout, Wild Salmon Center, the Council of Forest Trust Land Counties and the Oregon Forest Industries Council. The Institute for Natural Resources (INR) organized and moderated a series of meetings where SAH Work Group members identified issues and questions about the SAH Strategy and the effects of implementing it. Staff from ODF and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) explained agency policies and how they were developed. Salmon Anchor Habitat Work Group Invited Experts The SAH Work Group members defined a set of key issues and questions they wanted addressed so they could make recommendations about the SAH Strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Youngs Bay Conservation Plan
    YOUNGS BAY CONSERVATION & RESTORATION PLAN May 2008 Esther Lev, The Wetlands Conservancy Dick Vander Schaaf, The Nature Conservancy John Anderson, The Wetlands Conservancy John Christy, The Wetlands Conservancy Paul Adamus Ken Popper, The Nature Conservancy Brent Davis, Ecotrust, Charlie Dewberry, Ecotrust, Matt Fehrenbacher, The Pacific Forest Trust Funded by National Fish & Wildlife Foundation US Fish & Wildlife Service Acknowledgements Thanks to the following people for their assistance and review of this project. Dave Ambrose, Clatsop Soil and Water Conservation District Ian Sinks, Columbia Land Trust Alan Whiting, Columbia River Estuary Study Task Force Scott Stonum, Lewis and Clark National Historical Park Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership Neal Maine, North Coast Land Conservancy North Coast Watershed Association Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Doug Ray & Todd Jones, CEDC Fisheries Project Oregon Department of Forestry Mike Mertens, Ecotrust YOUNGS BAY WATERSHED CONSERVATION AND RESTORATION PLAN I. Project Description The goal of this project is to prioritize the conservation needs and opportunities for the Youngs Bay watershed from an ecological perspective and promote the selection of acquisition and restoration projects that address critical watershed restoration issues. The ten-year goal is conservation and restoration of over 1,000 acres of Sitka spruce swamp, estuarine marsh and freshwater riparian habitats and 4000 acres of upland forest in the watershed through actions targeted in this plan. Since 1994, the Youngs Bay watershed has been identified as an important conservation area in the Lower Columbia River in a variety of biodiversity, wetland, wildlife and salmon conservation plans. The Wetlands Conservancy, The Nature Conservancy, Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center, North Coast Land Conservancy, Columbia Land Trust, Ecotrust, Pacific Coast Joint Venture and National Park Service have been actively working to overlay their plans and develop mutual strategies and partnerships for conservation in the region.
    [Show full text]