DOCSLIB.ORG

Volume II - Assessment I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Volume II - Assessment I Volume II - Assessment i Volume II - Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 1 1.A. Program Goal and Objectives....................................................................................................... 2 1.B. Natural Resources Division Activities .......................................................................................... 3 1.C. Background..................................................................................................................................... 4 1.C.1. Douglas County............................................................................................................................... 4 1.C.2. State of Oregon ............................................................................................................................... 7 1.D. Water Quality................................................................................................................................. 8 1.D.1. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Assessments ....................................................................... 8 2. SUB-BASIN ASSESSMENTS ............................................................................... 10 2.A. Umpqua River / Coastal Lakes Sub-basins................................................................................ 10 2.A.1. Area Description........................................................................................................................... 10 2.A.2. Water Use ..................................................................................................................................... 35 2.A.3. Sub-basin Concerns ...................................................................................................................... 46 2.B. Umpqua River / North Umpqua River Sub-basins ................................................................... 48 2.B.1. Area Description ........................................................................................................................... 48 2.B.2. Water Use...................................................................................................................................... 80 2.B.3. Sub-basin Concerns..................................................................................................................... 102 2.C. Elk Creek / Calapooya Creek Sub-basins ................................................................................ 104 2.C.1. Area Description ......................................................................................................................... 104 2.C.2. Water Use.................................................................................................................................... 130 2.C.3. Sub-basin Concerns..................................................................................................................... 149 2.D. South Umpqua River / Cow Creek Sub-basins........................................................................ 151 2.D.1. Area Description......................................................................................................................... 151 2.D.2. Water Use ................................................................................................................................... 187 2.D.3. Sub-basin Concerns .................................................................................................................... 220 2.E. South Umpqua Tributaries / Loogkingglass Creek Sub-basins ............................................. 223 2.E.1. Area Description ......................................................................................................................... 223 2.E.2. Water Use.................................................................................................................................... 246 2.E.3. Sub-basin Concerns..................................................................................................................... 272 2.F. Camas Valley Sub-basin ............................................................................................................ 275 2.F.1. Area Description.......................................................................................................................... 275 2.F.2. Water Use .................................................................................................................................... 283 2.F.3. Sub-basin Concerns ..................................................................................................................... 289 3. REFERENCES...................................................................................................... 291 APPENDIX F…..Fisheries APPENDIX I.…..Irrigation APPENDIX M… Municipal, Rural Domestic, and Industrial Use Douglas County Water Resources Program 2008 Update Volume II - Assessment ii List of Tables Table 1- 1: Umpqua Basin stream miles (and number of listed segments) on the 303(d) list addressed by the 2006 TMDL..................................................................................................................2 Table 2.A-1: Monthly and annual maximum, mean, and minimum precipitation measured at Gardiner for two time periods...............................................................................................................12 Table 2.A-2: Discharge maximum, minimum, and mean levels, and runoff for the Umpqua River near Elkton and the Smith River near Gardiner.............................................................................13 Table 2.A-3: Mean monthly discharge and the percent of annual discharge from 1906 to 2005 for the Umpqua River near Elkton. ...................................................................................................14 Table 2.A-4: Flood history measured at the Umpqua River near Elkton stream gage. Gage floods at 33 feet. ...................................................................................................................................15 Table 2.A-5: Oregon Water Quality Index rating for the Umpqua River near Elkton for water years 1996-2005..............................................................................................................................16 Table 2.A-6: Percent fecal coliform reduction necessary on each stream to meet the State fecal coliform water quality standard for shellfish.........................................................................18 Table 2.A-7: Stream segments that exceed State water temperature standards (Umpqua River/Coastal Lakes sub-basins). .................................................................................................................20 Table 2.A-8: Streams with potential concern where samples failed to meet State standards but sample sizes were insufficient for listing...........................................................................................25 Table 2.A-9: Waste discharge permits in the Umpqua River/Coastal Lakes sub-basins..............................27 Table 2.A-10: Surface area and volume of larger lakes in the Umpqua River/Coastal Lakes sub-basin. ....29 Table 2.A-11: Number of wells by water yield in different areas of the Umpqua River/Coastal Lakes sub-basins. .............................................................................................................................33 Table 2.A-12: Comparison of well data before and after 1980 for three areas within the sub-basins..........33 Table 2.A-13: Number of wells exceeding water quality standards for public water supplies in the Umpqua River/Coastal Lakes sub-basins in 1984. ................................................................34 Table 2.A-14: Number of samples by range of hardness for each area in the Umpqua River/Coastal Lakes sub-basins....................................................................................................................35 Table 2.A-15: Minimum instream flows to support aquatic life in selected areas of the Umpqua River sub-basin with priority dates of right.....................................................................................39 Table 2.A-16: Public boating sites with launching facilities in the Umpqua River/Coastal Lakes sub- basins. ....................................................................................................................................43 Table 2.A-17: Numbers of fish caught during the 1997-98 season in the Umpqua River sub-basin relative to the entire Umpqua Basin. .....................................................................................43 Table 2.B-1: Monthly and annual precipitation for four locations across the Umpqua River/North Umpqua River sub-basin. ......................................................................................................51 Table 2.B-2: Maximum, minimum, and mean discharge levels, and average annual runoff at four locations in the Umpqua River/North Umpqua River sub-basins..........................................52 Table 2.B-3: Mean monthly discharge and percent of annual discharge from three stations in the Umpqua River/North Umpqua River sub-basins...................................................................52 Table 2.B-4: Water height (in feet) above flood level measured at four stream gages throughout the sub-basins. .............................................................................................................................54
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Management Implications of Co-Occurring Native and Introduced Fishes
    Management Implications of Co-occurring Native and Introduced Fishes Proceedings of the Workshop October 27-28, 1998 Portland, Oregon Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife National Marine Fisheries Service April 1999 Recommended Citation: Entire Proceedings ODFW and NMFS. 1999. Management Implications of Co-occurring Native and Introduced Fishes: Proceedings of the Workshop. October 27-28, 1998, Portland, Oregon. 243 pgs. Available from: National Marine Fisheries Service, 525 N.E. Oregon St., Suite 510, Portland, OR 97232. Specific Paper Karchesky, C.M and D. H. Bennett. 1999. Dietary overlap between introduced fishes and juvenile salmonids in Lower Granite Reservoir, Idaho-Washington. In ODFW and NMFS. 1999. Management Implications of Co-occurring Native and Introduced Fishes: Proceedings of the Workshop. October 27-28, 1998, Portland, Oregon. 243 pgs. Available from: National Marine Fisheries Service, 525 N.E. Oregon St., Suite 510, Portland, OR 97232. Management Implications of Co-occurring Native and Introduced Fishes Proceedings of the Workshop October 27-28, 1998 Portland, Oregon Hosted by: Fish Division Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife & Sustainable Fisheries Division National Marine Fisheries Service April 1999 These Proceedings contain unedited, non-peer reviewed papers (unless otherwise specified) of oral presentations given at the workshop “Management Implications of Co- occurring Native and Introduced Fishes” held in Portland, Oregon, on October 27-28, 1998. Although care was taken to present the information in an accurate, standardized manner, errors may exist. Please contact the authors before interpreting or quoting any information presented. Reference in this document to trade names does not imply endorsement by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife or the National Marine Fisheries Service.
    [Show full text]
  • A Classification of Lakes in the Coast Range Ecoregion with Respect to Nutrient Processing EPA 910-R-05-002 December 2005
    EPA 910-R-05-002 Alaska United States Region 10 Idaho Environmental Protection 1200 Sixth Avenue Oregon Agency Seattle WA 98101 Washington Office of Water & Watersheds December 2005 A Classification of Lakes in the Coast Range Ecoregion with Respect to Nutrient Processing EPA 910-R-05-002 December 2005 A CLASSIFICATION OF LAKES IN THE COAST RANGE ECOREGION WITH RESPECT TO NUTRIENT PROCESSING R.M. Vaga, US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water and Watersheds, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Ave. Seattle, WA 98101 R.R. Petersen, M.M. Sytsma and M. Rosenkrantz, Environmental Sciences and Resources, Portland State University, Portland Oregon, 97202 A.T. Herlihy, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University, 104 Nash Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331 DISCLAIMER The information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. It has been subjected to the Agency’s peer and administrative review and it has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. (Cover photo: An unnamed dune lake on the Southern Oregon coast. Photo by R.M. Vaga) ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .................................................................................................. iv 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1 2 LAKE INVENTORY ................................................................................... 2
    [Show full text]
  • Tenmile Lakes Watershed Assessment Produced by The
    Tenmile Lakes Watershed Assessment Produced by the Tenmile Lakes Basin Partnership Table of Contents Chapter 1 ........................................................................................................................1-1 Introduction................................................................................................................1-1 Chapter 2 ........................................................................................................................2-1 Fish & Fish Habitat ....................................................................................................2-1 Introduction ........................................................................................................2-1 Critical Questions ..............................................................................................2-2 Fish Presence......................................................................................................2-3 Species of Concern............................................................................................2-8 Life History ..........................................................................................................2-9 Hatcheries, Stocking Programs, Illicit Introductions..........................2-9 Conclusions........................................................................................................2-11 Channel Habitat Types............................................................................................2-12 Channel Modifications .............................................................................................2-20
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Resources of Western Douglas County, Oregon
    WATER-RESOURCES OF WESTERN DOUGLAS COUNTY, OREGON By D.A. Curtiss, C. A. Collins, and E.A. Oster U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS REPORT 83-4017 Prepared in cooperation with DOUGLAS COUNTY PORTLAND,OREGON 1984 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas Peck, Director For additional information write to: U.S. Geological Survey 847 N.E. 19th Ave., Suite 300 Portland, Oregon 97232 i i CONTENTS Page Abstract 1 Introduction 2 Previous Investigations 2 Geographic features 2 Geolog ic setti ng 8 Tertiary marine sedimentary rocks 8 Quaternary sediments 8 Coastal deposits 9 Fluvial deposits 10 Ground-water resources 10 Recharge 11 Movement 11 Di scharge 12 Water-level fluctuations 13 Potential well yields 13 Water quality 16 General characteristics 16 Area I variations 17 Surface water 20 Mean annual flow 20 Peak flows 20 Low flows 23 Water quality 25 Umpqua River near Elkton 25 Small streams 25 Extent of saltwater intrusion in the Umpqua River estuary 27 Selected lakes 30 Summary of water-resources conditions 36 SeIected references 38 Supp I ementa I data 43 ILLUSTRATIONS [Plate is in pocket] Plate 1. Map of generalized geologic map of western Douglas County, Oregon, showing wells and springs, and stiff diagrams for water sampled for chemical ana Iysi s Page Figure 1. Index map of study area 3 2. Map showing the average annual precipitation in the study area 4 3. Graph showing maximum, average, and minimum precipitation at Reedsport, 1938-79 5 4. Graph showing cumulative departure from average annual precipitation at Astoria, Gardiner, and Reedsport 6 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Tenmile Lakes Watershed Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
    Tenmile Lakes Watershed Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Prepared by: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality February 2007 Submissions by: Oregon Department of Forestry Oregon Department of Agriculture Oregon Department of Transportation Tenmile Lakes Basin Partnership TENMILE LAKES WATERSHED WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FEBRUARY 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................I FIGURES AND TABLES.................................................................................... IV ACRONYMS........................................................................................................ V CHAPTER 1 – BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION ......................................1 1.1 TMDL WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN GUIDANCE ..................................2 1.2 WQMP REQUIRED ELEMENTS - OAR 340-042-0040 (4)(I)(A-O) .....................3 CHAPTER 2 - CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND PROBLEM DESCRIPTION OAR 340-42-0040(4)(I)(A)....................................................................................5 2.1 WATER QUALITY IMPAIRMENT .........................................................................5 2.1.1 Aquatic Weeds (Macrophytes) ...................................................................................................... 5 2.1.2 Phytoplankton (floating algae) ...................................................................................................... 6 2.1.3 Chlorophyll a................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coos County Flood Insurance Study, P14216.AO, Scales 1:12,000 and 1:24,000, Portland, Oregon, September 1980
    FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY COOS COUNTY, OREGON AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER BANDON, CITY OF 410043 COOS BAY, CITY OF 410044 COOS COUNTY (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) 410042 COQUILLE, CITY OF 410045 LAKESIDE, CITY OF 410278 MYRTLE POINT, CITY OF 410047 NORTH BEND, CITY OF 410048 POWERS, CITY OF 410049 Revised: March 17, 2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 41011CV000B NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report may not contain all data available within the Community Map Repository. Please contact the Community Map Repository for any additional data. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may revise and republish part or all of this FIS report at any time. In addition, FEMA may revise part of this FIS report by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS report. Therefore, users should consult with community officials and check the Community Map Repository to obtain the most current FIS report components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: September 25, 2009 Revised Countywide FIS Date: March 17, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Purpose of Study ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Volume II Appendix F
    Volume II –Appendix F - Fisheries Appendix F – Fisheries Table of Contents 1. FISHERIES...................................................................................................... 1 2. FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE FISHERIES ................................................... 1 2.A. Water Quality..................................................................................................................................... 2 2.B. Water Quantity and Physical Habitat.............................................................................................. 2 3. ENHANCEMENT PROGRAMS....................................................................... 3 4. ASSESSMENT OF FISH RESOURCES............................................................ 4 5. BASIN OVERVIEW......................................................................................... 5 6. SUB-BASIN DISCUSSION ............................................................................... 6 6.A. Coastal / Umpqua River Sub-basins................................................................................................. 7 6.A.1. Minimum Flows ................................................................................................................................. 7 6.A.2. Distribution and Abundance............................................................................................................... 7 6.A.3. Recreation........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-118. Scientific
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-118 Scientific Conclusions of the Status Review for Oregon Coast Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) June 2012 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Fisheries Science Center NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC Series The Northwest Fisheries Science Center of the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, uses the NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC series to issue scientific and technical publications. Manuscripts have been peer reviewed and edited. Documents published in this series may be cited in the scientific and technical literature. The NMFS-NWFSC Technical Memorandum series of the Northwest Fisheries Science Center continues the NMFS- F/NWC series established in 1970 by the Northwest & Alaska Fisheries Science Center, which has since been split into the Northwest Fisheries Science Center and the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. The NMFS-AFSC Technical Memorandum series is now used by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. Reference throughout this document to trade names does not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. This document should be referenced as follows: Stout, H.A., P.W. Lawson, D.L. Bottom, T.D. Cooney, M.J. Ford, C.E. Jordan, R.G. Kope, L.M. Kruzic, G.R. Pess, G.H. Reeves, M.D. Scheuerell, T.C. Wainwright, R.S. Waples, E. Ward, L.A. Weitkamp, J.G. Williams, and T.H. Williams. 2012. Scientific conclusions of the status review for Oregon coast coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-118, 242 p. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-118 Scientific Conclusions of the Status Review for Oregon Coast Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) Heather A.
    [Show full text]
  • Tenmile Lakes Nutrient Study Phase 2 Report
    TENMILE LAKES NUTRIENT STUDY Phase II Report November, 2002 TENMILE LAKES NUTRIENT STUDY Phase II Report Submitted by Joseph Eilersa Kellie Vachéb and Jacob Kannc E&S Environmental Chemistry, Inc. Corvallis, OR to the Tenmile Lakes Basin Partnership Lakeside, OR November, 2002 Current Affiliations _______________________ a JC Headwaters, Inc., 1912 NE 3rd Street, PMB 341, Bend, OR 97701 b Oregon State University, Dept. of BioResources Engineering, Corvallis, OR 97331 c Aquatic Ecosystem Sciences, LLC, 232 Nutley Street, Ashland, OR 97520 Tenmile Lakes Nutrient Study - Phase II Report November, 2002 Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES.............................................................4 LIST OF FIGURES............................................................5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................9 A. INTRODUCTION ........................................................12 B. STUDY AREA ...........................................................14 C. METHODS ..............................................................19 1. Sampling Design......................................................19 2. Site Selection ........................................................19 3. Field Instrumentation ..................................................21 4. Field Methods ........................................................21 5. Analytical Methods ....................................................23 6. Plankton ............................................................24
    [Show full text]
  • Cascadia Subduction Zone) Tsunami Inundation Map Tsunami Inundation Maps for Gardiner, W
    STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES Tsunami Inundation Map Doug-03 www.OregonGeology.org Local Source (Cascadia Subduction Zone) Tsunami Inundation Map Tsunami Inundation Maps for Gardiner, W. Lawrence Givens, Governing Board Chair Douglas County, Oregon Vicki S. McConnell, Director and State Geologist Andree V. Pollock, Assistant Director, Geologic Survey and Services Gardiner, Oregon Plate 1 Rachel L. Smith, Project Operations Manager Ian P. Madin, Chief Scientist 2013 124°12'0"W 124°10'0"W 124°8'0"W 124°6'0"W 100 200 rm 200 100 25 A Introduction y 100 r D r I L E R he I V E M C 200 F The Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) Oregon. DOGAMI has also incorporated physical evidence that suggests rm has been identifying and mapping the tsunami inundation hazard along that portions of the coast may drop 4 to 10 feet during the earthquake; s A Bas 100 the Oregon coast since 1994. In Oregon, DOGAMI manages the National this effect is known as subsidence. Detailed information on fault 25 Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program, which has been administered by geometries, subsidence, computer models, and the methodology used to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) since create the tsunami scenarios presented on this map can be found in Tahkenitch 1995. DOGAMI’s work is designed to help cities, counties, and other sites DOGAMI Special Papers 41 (Priest and others, 2009) and 43 (Witter and Lake 200 25 25 in coastal areas reduce the potential for disastrous tsunami-related others, 2011).
    [Show full text]
  • Tenmile Lakes Watershed Assessment
    Tenmile Lakes Watershed Assessment Produced by the Tenmile Lakes Basin Partnership Table of Contents Chapter 1 ........................................................................................................................ 1-1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1-1 Chapter 2 ........................................................................................................................ 2-1 Fish & Fish Habitat .................................................................................................... 2-1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 2-1 Critical Questions .............................................................................................. 2-1 Fish Presence ...................................................................................................... 2-3 Species of Concern............................................................................................ 2-8 Life History .......................................................................................................... 2-9 Hatcheries, Stocking Programs, Illicit Introductions .......................... 2-9 Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 2-11 Channel Habitat Types ............................................................................................ 2-12 Channel
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Multi-Species Conservation and Management Plan ODFW
    Coastal Multi-Species Conservation and Management Plan OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Approved by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission: June 6, 2014 ODFW Mission To protect and enhance Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats for use and enjoyment by present and future generations Coastal Multi-Species Conservation and Management Plan June 2014 Acknowledgements Authors (alphabetical) • Jamie Anthony (ODFW) • Kevin Goodson (ODFW) • Jay Nicholas (Contractor) • Matt Falcy (ODFW) • Steve Jacobs (ODFW, retired) • Jim Owens (Cogan Owens Cogan) • Erin Gilbert (ODFW) • Dave Jepsen (ODFW) • Tom Stahl (ODFW) Contributors: Reviews, Data, and Other Assistance (alphabetical) Cogan Owens Cogan, LLC CMP STAKEHOLDER TEAMS – Alisha Morton North Coast Stratum Team – Jim Owens Mid-South Coast Stratum Team – Garry Bullard (City of Manzanita) – Bruce Bertrand (alt., South Coast Anglers) Independent Multidisciplinary – Kelly Dirksen (Conf. Tribes of Grand Ronde) – Scott Cook, Oregon Alliance for Sustainable Science Team – Ian Fergusson (ANWS) Salmon Fisheries – Robert Hughes – Melyssa Graeper (Necanicum Watershed – Nancy Molina (co-chair) – Eric Farm (alt., The Campbell Group) Council) – Carl Schreck (co-chair) – Joe Furia (The Freshwater Trust) – Mike Herbel (CCA) – J. Alan Yeakley – Tom Hoesly (The Campbell Group) – Gary Kish (NSIA) – Aaron Longton (POORT) ODFW – Mark Labhart (Tillamook County) – Lindsay Adrean – Scott McKenzie (resource producer) – Sara LaBorde (Wild Salmon Center) – Kara Anlauf-Dunn – Jim Pex (Coos County) – Ray Monroe
    [Show full text]