DOCSLIB.ORG

R-• . Study of Wild Spring Chinook Salmon in the John Day River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
R-• . Study of Wild Spring Chinook Salmon in the John Day River Study of Wild Spring Chinook Salmon in the John Day River System 1985 Final Report .r-• by l R.B. Lindsay W.J. Knox M.W. Flesher B.J. Smith E.A. Olsen L.S. Lutz Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 506 S.W. Mill Street, P.O. Box 59 Portland, Oregon 97207 Funded by Larry Everson, Project Manager U.S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration . Division of Fish and Wildlife Contract No. DE-Al79-83BP39796 Project No. 79-4 February 1986 CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION........................................................ 1 STUDY AREA.......................................................... 2 METHODS ............................................................ 8 Catch in Ocean and Columbia River.............................. 8 Smolt Migration................................................ 10 Abundance and Survival......................................... 12 Freshwater LifeHistory........................................ Adult Holding Areas........................................ Spawning................................................... Emergence Timing........................................... Distribution of Fingerlings................................ Size and Growth of Juveniles............................... Abundance of Fingerlings................................... Scales..................................................... Stock-Recruitment.............................................. 20 Hatchery Supplementation....................................... 22 RESULTS............................................................. 23 Catch in Ocean and Columbia River.............................. 23 Smolt Migration Timing.................t. ........................ 24 Abundance and Survival......................................... 30 Freshwater Life History........................................ Adult Holding Areas........................................ ;; Spawning................................................... 32 Emergence Timing........................................... 37 Distribution of Fingerlings................................ Size and Growth of Juveniles ............................... ii Abundance of Fingerlings................................... 45 Scales..................................................... 48 Stock-Recruitment.............................................. 50 CONTENTS (Continued) Page DISCUSSION.......................................................... 67 Catch in Ocean and Columbia River.............................. 67 Smolt Migration................................................ 68 Abundance...................................................... 69 Survival....................................................... 70 Freshwater Life History........................................ 70 Adult Holding Areas......................................... 70 Spawning................................................... 71 Emergence.................................................. 72 Distribution of Fingerlings................................ 72 Stock Recruitment.............................................. 73 Hatchery Supplementation....................................... 84 Hatchery Location and Alternatives......................... 85 Brood Stock............................................... 86 Rearing and Release........................................ 87 Evaluation................................................. 89 RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................... 91 FOOTNOTES........................................................... 94 REFERENCES.......................................................... 95 APPENDIXES.......................................................... 101 FIGURES NUMBER 1 Page 1. Map of John Day basin .i. .: . 3 2. Map of upper Mainstem John Day River......................... 4 3. Map of the Norh Fork John Day River ..*.......,*..*......,... 5 4. Map of the Middle Fork John Day River........................ 6 5. Trap sites and seining areas where smolts were captured in the John Day River. 9 6. Timing of migration of spring chinook salmon smelts past Spray (km 286) in the John Day River, 1979-84................ 27 7. Migration rates for weekly mark: groups from the North Fork scoop trap to the Spray seining area, 1984. ....... 29 8. Average redd densities in index areas (all streams combined) in the John Day River system, 1959-85................. 33 9. Cumulative thermal units from week of peak spawning to week of end of emergence in the John Day River spawnig areas, 1980-81............................................ 39 10. Cumulative thermal units from week of peak spawning to end of emergence, 1982-83........................ 40 11. Relation between juvenile distribution in the Middle Fork and water temperature the week. prior to sampling, 15 June to 15 September 1980-82 and 84. Water tempera- 41 ture was measured at km 51..................... 12. Relation between juvenile distribution in the North Fork and water temperature the week prior to sampling, 15 June to 15 September,1980-84. Water temperature was measured at km 71. ............................................................... 41 13. Mean weekly water temperature in Clear Creek (km 107) and the Middle Fork (km 103), 1983. ...................... 44 e 14. Mean weekly water temperature in Camp Creek (km 76) and the Middle Fork (km 76), 1981. ......................... 44 15. Mean lengths of juvenile chinook salmon in the Mainstem, Middle Fork, North Fork, and Granite Creek, 1979-84........ 46 FIGURES (continued) NUMBER Page 16. Estimated returns per spawner in the North Fork Johri Day River, 1964-80 broods. 52 17. Estimated returns per spawner in the Granite Creek system (includes Clear and Bull Run creeks; Bull RunCreek was inaccessible to spawning until 1962), 1959-80 broods....... 53 18. Estimated returns per spawner in the Middle Fork John Day River, 1960-80 brood. ...................... 54 19. Estimated returns per spawner in the Mainstem John Day River, 1959-80,broods. .................... 55 20. Estimated returns per spawner in the John Day River system (all streams combined), 1964-80 broods..................... 56 21. Relationship between spawning stock density and returns/ spawner for 1969-79 broods in the Mainstem John Day River.. '57 22. Relationship between spawning stock density and returns/ spawner for 1960179 broods in the Middle Fork, John Day River. ..................... 58 23. Relationship between spawning stock density and returns/ spawner for 1964-79 broods in the North Fork John Day River.,......,.....,,..........,........................... 59 24. Relationship between spawning stock density and returns/ spawner for 1959-79 broods in the Granite Creek system (includes Clear and Bull Run creeks)....................... 60 25. Beverton-Holt stock recruitment curve for 1959-69 broods in the Mainstem John Day River. Data for 1970-79 broods are included for comparison..*,,.,,,,.......,.....~........ 62 26. Beverton-Holt stock-recruitment curve for 1960-69 broods in the Middle Fork John Day River. Data for 1970-79 broods are included for comparison,............................... 63 27. Beverton-Holt stock recruitment curve for 1964-69 broods in the North Fork John Day River. Data for 1970-79 broods are included for comparison .,........i..................... 64 TABLES Number Page 1. Description of extensive and index spawning survey sections in the John Day River.. ......................... ' 15 2. Description of, supplemental spawning survey sections in the John Day River. 16 3. Catch and escapement of upriver spring chinook salmon that entered, the Columbia River,, 1957-84................. 21 4. Estimated number and percentage of spring chinook salmon smolts coded-wire tagged in the John Day River, 1978-80 brood.s . ....................................... 23 5. Columbia River recoveries of adult spring chinook salmon marked Ad-CWT as juveniles in the John Day River, 1981-84 ................................................... 24 6. Percent length class composition of spring chinook salmon from John Day' River spawning surveys and from Columbia River fisheries, 1982 ..................................... 25 7. Estimated relative contribution of John Day River spring' chinook salmon, to Columbia River fisheries, 1981-84...... 25. 8. Catch of spri'ng chinook salmonsmolts at trapping and seining sites, 1980-84 ...........................................,....,..... 26 I 9. Dates that smolts marked'in the ‘John Day River were recaptured in the Columbia River, 1979-84;;...........,. 28 I,’ 10. Migration rates of spring chinook salmon smolts through' the John Day 'and Columbia rivers, 1982-84................ 30 11. Estimated abundance (thousands) of spring chinook salmon in the John Day River at several life history stages, 1978-85 brood. .s . ......................... 31 . 12. Estimated percent survival of spring chinook salmon in the John Day River at several life history stages, 1978-82 broods. 31 13. Salmon redds counted during extensive (Ext) and index surveys and estimated spawning escapements (at 3 fish/ redd) in the John Day River, 1978-85..................... 32 14. Redd density in index areas of the John Day River system in redds/mile (r/m) and redds/kilometer (r/k), 1959-85... 34 TABLES Number Page 15. Dates index spawning ground surveys in the John Day River should be conducted to maximize redd counts.................. 36 16. Coded-wire tag recoveries from spawning ground surveys in the John Day River, 1981-85 . 36 17. Comparisons of emergence timing based on field
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Field Geology and Petrologic Investigation of the Strawberry Volcanics, Northeast Oregon
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses Winter 2-24-2016 Field Geology and Petrologic Investigation of the Strawberry Volcanics, Northeast Oregon Arron Richard Steiner Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Geology Commons, and the Volcanology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Steiner, Arron Richard, "Field Geology and Petrologic Investigation of the Strawberry Volcanics, Northeast Oregon" (2016). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 2712. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.2708 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Field Geology and Petrologic Investigation of the Strawberry Volcanics, Northeast Oregon by Arron Richard Steiner A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Sciences and Resources: Geology Dissertation Committee: Martin J. Streck, Chair Michael L. Cummings Jonathan Fink John A.Wolff Dirk Iwata-Reuyl Portland State University 2016 © 2015 Arron Richard Steiner i ABSTRACT The Strawberry Volcanics of Northeast Oregon are a group of geochemically related lavas with a diverse chemical range (basalt to rhyolite) that erupted between 16.2 and 12.5 Ma and co-erupted with the large, (~200,000 km3) Middle Miocene tholeiitic lavas of the Columbia River Basalt Group (CRBG), which erupted near and geographically surround the Strawberry Volcanics. The rhyolitic lavas of the Strawberry Volcanics produced the oldest 40Ar/39Ar ages measured in this study with ages ranging from 16.2 Ma to 14.6 Ma, and have an estimated total erupted volume of 100 km3.
    [Show full text]
  • Murderer's Creek Wildlife Area
    10 Year PHILLIP W. SCHNEIDER WILDLIFE AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN July 2017 Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive SE Salem Oregon, 97302 Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Mission and Authority………………………...2 Purpose and Need of the Phillip W. Schneider Wildlife Area……………………………2 Phillip W. Schneider Wildlife Area Vision Statement..……………………………………2 Wildlife Area Goals and Objectives .............................................................................. 2 Wildlife Area Establishment ......................................................................................... 3 Description and Environment ...................................................................................... 4 Physical Resources ..................................................................................................... 4 Location ................................................................................................................... 4 Climate ..................................................................................................................... 4 Topography and Soils .............................................................................................. 4 Habitat Types ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Timing of In-Water Work to Protect Fish and Wildlife Resources
    OREGON GUIDELINES FOR TIMING OF IN-WATER WORK TO PROTECT FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES June, 2008 Purpose of Guidelines - The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, (ODFW), “The guidelines are to assist under its authority to manage Oregon’s fish and wildlife resources has updated the following guidelines for timing of in-water work. The guidelines are to assist the the public in minimizing public in minimizing potential impacts to important fish, wildlife and habitat potential impacts...”. resources. Developing the Guidelines - The guidelines are based on ODFW district fish “The guidelines are based biologists’ recommendations. Primary considerations were given to important fish species including anadromous and other game fish and threatened, endangered, or on ODFW district fish sensitive species (coded list of species included in the guidelines). Time periods were biologists’ established to avoid the vulnerable life stages of these fish including migration, recommendations”. spawning and rearing. The preferred work period applies to the listed streams, unlisted upstream tributaries, and associated reservoirs and lakes. Using the Guidelines - These guidelines provide the public a way of planning in-water “These guidelines provide work during periods of time that would have the least impact on important fish, wildlife, and habitat resources. ODFW will use the guidelines as a basis for the public a way of planning commenting on planning and regulatory processes. There are some circumstances where in-water work during it may be appropriate to perform in-water work outside of the preferred work period periods of time that would indicated in the guidelines. ODFW, on a project by project basis, may consider variations in climate, location, and category of work that would allow more specific have the least impact on in-water work timing recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Irrigation and Streamflow Depletion in Columbia River Basin Above the Dalles, Oregon
    Irrigation and Streamflow Depletion in Columbia River Basin above The Dalles, Oregon Bv W. D. SIMONS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1220 An evaluation of the consumptive use of water based on the amount of irrigation UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1953 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Douglas McKay, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 50 cents (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Abstract................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction........................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose and scope....................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgments......................................................................................................... 3 Irrigation in the basin......................................................................................................... 3 Historical summary...................................................................................................... 3 Legislation................................................................................................................... 6 Records and sources for data..................................................................................... 8 Stream
    [Show full text]
  • 4. Lower Oregon Columbia Gorge Tributaries Watershed Assessment
    4. Lower Oregon Columbia Gorge Tributaries Watershed Assessment 4.1 Subbasin Overview General Description Location and Size The Lower Oregon Columbia Gorge Tributaries Watershed consists of the 19 small Columbia River tributaries located between Bonneville Dam and the Hood River. Its major streams are Herman and Eagle creeks. The watershed is located in Hood River County, except for a small part of the Eagle Creek drainage, and includes the City of Cascade Locks and part of the City of Hood River. The watershed covers a drainage area of 63,714 acres or 99.6 square miles. Geology Volcanic lava flows, glaciers, and flooding were the key forces forming the Columbia Gorge landscape of basalt cliffs, waterfalls, talus slopes and ridges. Land elevations rise rapidly from 72 feet above sea level to approximately 5,000 feet. Mt. Defiance is the highest peak at 4,960 feet. Landslides are the dominant erosional process in recent history (USFS, 1998). Debris torrents and ice and snow avalanches are not uncommon in the winter months. Alluvial fan deposits at the mouths of the steeper, more constricted creeks suggest the frequent routing of debris torrents down these channels. The lower mile or so of creeks have gradients of about 5 percent, rising steeply at middle elevations, with lower gradient channels in glaciated headwater valleys. Climate and Weather The watershed lies in the transition zone between the wet marine climate to the west and the dry continental climate to the east. Precipitation amounts vary dramatically from east to west and with elevation, ranging from 40 to 125 to inches annually.
    [Show full text]
  • John Day River Proposed Management Plan, Two Rivers and John Day Resource Management Plan Amendments and Final Environmental Impact Statement
    As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing tor the enjoyment of lite through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their development is in the best interest ot all our people. The Department also has a major responsibility tor American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in Island Territories under U.S. administration. B LM/O RJWAlPT-00/048+1792 JOHN DAY RIVER PROPOSED MANAGEMENT PLAN, TWO RIVERS AND JOHN DAY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS AND FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ON THE DRAFT JOHN DAY RIVER PLAN AND EIS Comment Period Ending 3/03/00 Table of Contents Contents INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................1 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC MEETINGS .......................................................................................................................1 Redmond, Oregon.....................................................................................................................................1 Public Questions and Comments ...............................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Westslope Cutthroat Trout
    Oregon Native Fish Status Report – Volume II Westslope Cutthroat Trout Existing Populations Oregon populations of westslope cutthroat trout are disjunct from their greater contiguous distribution in the Upper Missouri and Columbia basins of Montana and Idaho (Behnke 1992). The Westslope Cutthroat Trout SMU is comprised of 17 populations in the upper mainstem John Day River basin (Table 1). Populations were identified according to those defined in the interagency westslope cutthroat trout range-wide assessment (Shepard et al. 2003). The interagency assessment identified westslope cutthroat trout in Laycock Creek and the Upper John Day Complex as a single population. This review considers trout in Laycock Creek as a separate population from the Upper John Day Complex due to the significant distance between the two creeks. Most populations express a resident life history strategy, although, migratory forms exist in the Upper John Day Complex and possibly in the Canyon Complex (Hemmingsen 1999a, Shepard et al. 2003). Table 1. Populations, existence status, and life history of the John Day Westslope Cutthroat Trout SMU. Exist Population Description Life History Yes Upper John Day Includes upper mainstem river and tributaries. Resident / Migratory Complex Yes Strawberry Strawberry, Slide, and Squaw Creeks. Resident Yes Dixie Dixie and Standard Creeks. Resident Yes Indian Indian, Little Indian, and Overholt Creeks. Resident Yes Bear Bear Creek. Resident Yes Pine Pine Creek. Resident Yes Dog Dog Creek. Resident Yes Little Pine Little Pine Creek. Resident Yes Canyon Complex Includes Berry, Crazy, and Canyon creeks and Resident / migratory tributaries. Yes Laycock Laycock Creek. Yes Ingle Ingle Creek. Resident Yes Beech Upper Beech, Bear, Cottonwood, and Lake creeks.
    [Show full text]
  • This File Was Created by Scanning the Printed Publication
    This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Text errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain. Editors SHARON E. CLARKE is a geographer and GIS analyst, Department of Forest Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331; and SANDRA A. BRYCE is a biogeographer, Dynamac Corporation, Environmental Protection Agency, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Western Ecology Division, Corvallis, OR 97333. This document is a product of cooperative research between the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service; the Forest Science De- partment, Oregon State University; and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Cover Artwork Cover artwork was designed and produced by John Ivie. Abstract Clarke, Sharon E.; Bryce, Sandra A., eds. 1997. Hierarchical subdivisions of the Columbia Plateau and Blue Mountains ecoregions, Oregon and Washington. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-395. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 114 p. This document presents two spatial scales of a hierarchical, ecoregional framework and provides a connection to both larger and smaller scale ecological classifications. The two spatial scales are subregions (1:250,000) and landscape-level ecoregions (1:100,000), or Level IV and Level V ecoregions. Level IV ecoregions were developed by the Environmental Protection Agency because the resolution of national-scale ecoregions provided insufficient detail to meet the needs of state agencies for estab- lishing biocriteria, reference sites, and attainability goals for water-quality regulation. For this project, two ecoregions—the Columbia Plateau and the Blue Mountains— were subdivided into more detailed Level IV ecoregions.
    [Show full text]
  • John Day River RMP Final
    JOHN DAY RIVER PROPOSED MANAGEMENT PLAN, TWO RIVERS AND JOHN DAY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS AND FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ON THE DRAFT JOHN DAY RIVER PLAN AND EIS Comment Period Ending 3/03/00 Table of Contents Contents INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................1 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC MEETINGS .......................................................................................................................1 Redmond, Oregon.....................................................................................................................................1 Public Questions and Comments ...............................................................................................1 Salem, Oregon2 Public Questions and Comments ...............................................................................................2 Clackamas, Oregon ..................................................................................................................................4 Public Questions and Comments ...............................................................................................4 Fossil, Oregon6 Public Questions and Comments ...............................................................................................6 John Day, Oregon ......................................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Or Wilderness Protection in the Blue Mountain Ecoregion Have Been Identified by the Nature Conservancy As Vital to Protect Biodiversity in the Area
    172 OREGON WILD Neither Cascades nor Rockies, but With Attributes of Both Blue Mountains Ecoregion xtending from Oregon’s East Cascades Slopes and Foothills to the from 30 to 130 days depending on elevation. The forests are home to Rocky Mountain intersection of Oregon, Idaho and Washington, the 15.3 million acres elk, mule deer, black bear, cougar, bobcat, coyote, beaver, marten, raccoon, fisher, of the Blue Mountains Ecoregion in Oregon are a conglomeration of pileated woodpecker, golden eagle, chickadee and nuthatch, as well as various species Emountain ranges, broad plateaus, sparse valleys, spectacular river canyons of hawks, woodpeckers, owls and songbirds. Wolves, long absent from Oregon, are and deep gorges. The highest point is the Matterhorn that rises to 9,832 making their return to the state in this ecoregion. Individuals from packs reintroduced feet in the Wallowa Mountains. The ecoregion extends into southeastern Washington in nearby Idaho are dispersing into Oregon. Fish species include bull and rainbow and west central Idaho. trout, along with numerous stocks of Pacific salmon species. Most of the mountain ranges in the Blue Mountains Ecoregion are volcanic. The Depending on precipitation, aspect, soil type, elevation, fire history and other Crooked River separates the Maury Mountains from the Ochoco Mountains, which are factors, one generally finds various combinations of Douglas-fir, ponderosa pine, lodge- separated from the Aldrich Mountains by the South Fork John Day River. The Aldrich pole, western larch, juniper and Engelmann spruce throughout the Blue Mountains. Mountains are separated from the Strawberry Mountain Range by Canyon Creek. Beginning approximately at the Lower Deschutes River and rising eastward, the These ranges generally run east-west.
    [Show full text]
  • Ouzel Outfitters Trip Planner
    John Day River 4-Day Rafting Trip (Service Creek to Clarno –45 Miles) Trip Planner Thank you for choosing Ouzel Outfitters. This trip planner contains detailed information designed to help you prepare for your trip. COVID-19 Operating Plan & Guidelines By making a reservation you agreed to abide by our COVID-19 operating guidelines and requirements. We will combine groups according to vaccination status as allowed by CDC and OHA guidelines and with the express consent of participants. You will be asked on the registration form for your vaccination status and your preference with regard to mixing with other groups. In some cases, it may be difficult to accommodate small non-vaccinated groups (less than 4) on certain trips. If this is the case with your group, we will contact you as soon as this becomes evident. The day before your trip, you’ll receive an email with a link to a COVID-19 screening survey. If you will not have internet access the day before your trip, please call us to make other arrangements for completing the survey. Face coverings are required at the meeting location, during the safety briefing, at stops along the river, in camp and at the take-out if during those times we are not able to effectively distance from other groups. Face coverings are not required in the rafts or while dining. Reservation Account You can login to your reservation account by clicking the link provided in your confirmation email or CLICKING HERE . If you haven’t already done so, please login and fill out a registration form for each person included in your reservation.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon's John Day River
    Water Resources Department NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT [ GOVERNOR 1 3850 PORTLAND ROAD NE, SALEM, OREGON 97310 MEMORANDUM TO: Water Resources Commission FROM: Director SUBJECT: ~~enda+It$h H, December 7,1990 Water R ources Commission meeting Request for approval of John Dav River Scenic Waterway flows for Diack findinys Backaound A first draft of the John Day River Scenic Waterway Flow Assessment was presented to the Commission at its August 3, 1990 meeting. The Commission reviewed the report and directed staff to hold workshops in the John Day basin to gather public input on the report.. Two workshops were held in October. At the October 26, 1990 meeting staff provided the Commission with a brief report on the workshops and indicated more detailed information would be presented at this Commission meeting. An analysis of comment and copies of hw written comments may be found in Attachment 1. In addition, at the October 26 meeting staff requested and received approval to incorporate public workshops into the flow assessment workplan for all Scenic Waterways and revise the schedule accordingly. Staff evaluated public comment and has revised portions of the assessment (Attachment 1) to reflect public concerns. Discussion In accordance with the Diack decision, before issuing new water rights, the Commission must find that recreation, fish and wildlife uses in the scenic waterway will not be impaired. The John Day Scenic Waterway Flow Assessment documents flow ranges needed to support recreation, fish, and wildlife. The Commission could use this documentation to make findings on pending and future water rights in or upstream from scenic waterway reaches.
    [Show full text]