Characterize the Watershed Core Topics and Questions Soil Resources

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Characterize the Watershed Core Topics and Questions Soil Resources Step 1: Characterize the Watershed Purpose To identify the dominant physical, biological, and human processes and features of the watershed that affect ecosystem function or condition. To relate these features and processes with those occurring in the river basin or province. To provide the watershed context for identifying elements that need to be addressed in the analysis. To identify, map, and describe the most important land allocations, plan objectives, and regulatory constraints that influence resource management in the watershed. Core Topics and Questions Soil Resources ¾ What is the hierarchy of ecological units in the watershed, and what is the spatial relationship of these units? What are the inherent stability and erosion processes? The Blue Creek watershed is located within the Dry Domain of the Temperate Steppe Regime Mountains Division of the Southern Rocky Mountain Steppe-Open Woodland-Coniferous Forest Province of the Overthrust Mountains Section of the Centennial Mountains and Island Park Subsection, outlined in the National Hierarchical Framework for Ecological Units (USDA Forest Service 1994). Descriptions of these different levels of ecological units are found in “Targhee National Forest Subsections and Landtype Associations” (USDA-FS 1998). There are three landtype associations nested within the Centennial Mountains and Island Park Subsections. These are identified as Beaverhead and Centennial Mountains- Conifer Forest, Island Park Plains and Falls River Tablelands-Conifer Forest, and Figure 1 Blue Creek Watershed vicinity map. Island Park Tablelands-Conifer Forest. Figure 1 shows the watershed boundary overlain by the Subsections. Blue Creek Watershed Analysis 4 Physiography The landforms within the watershed consist mainly of caldera floor and scarp, dissected tablelands, foothills, and mountain slopes. Elevation ranges from 9,800 feet at the summit of Sawtell Mountain to 6,200 feet at the mouth of Henrys Fork. Slopes range from nearly level in riparian areas to over seventy percent on mountain sideslopes. Drainage patterns are dendritic with slight to moderate dissections. Some drainages are structurally controlled by bedrock. Aspects are generally southeast and southwest because of the trending slopes of the Island Park Caldera toward the Henrys Fork and the large mountains in the northwest corner of the watershed that form the Centennial Range (Hamilton 1965). Geology Geological information for the watershed was collected from several publications and maps (Mitchel et al. 1979; Hamilton 1965; and Ross et al. 1967). The Island Park Caldera is an elliptical collapsed structure in the center of a rhyolite shield. Surficial geology in the watershed consists mainly of volcanic rocks of welded rhyolite tuff, basalt flows, and flows from the Madison and Pitchstone Plateaus of the Yellowstone Plateau. The rim of the caldera is the remnant of a broad shield of rhyolite in which ash flows predominate over ash falls and lava flows. Primary geologic formations, identified by the Idaho Department of Lands, Bureau of Mines and Geology, which formed the caldera and rim are post-caldera rhyolite ash flows and olivine basalt. The age of these geologic materials are Quaternary and Tertiary. Many ridges and mountain sideslopes in this watershed have exposed volcanic bedrock. Approximately 11,000 acres (20%) in the watershed have the potential for mass instability; however, no landslides have been mapped. Ecological Units and Soils This watershed has few areas that have unstable landforms that show active landslides (USDA-FS 1997a). For the purposes of this characterization, three major landform groupings 1.) mountains and foothills, 2.) caldera floors and dissected tablelands/basalt plains, and 3.) terraces, outwash plains and floodplains are discussed. This is followed by a more detailed description of the 6 main ecological landtypes (of the 23 mapped in the area). Soils that formed from the geologic parent materials listed above have base saturation that provides relatively high natural fertility. Because many of the soils in this watershed formed from geology containing rhyolite and basalt, they have a dominance of sand and gravel in the profile. Clayey soils are usually associated with alluvial landforms. These kinds of soils have high erosion potential and may produce high levels of sediment when erosive conditions occur. Following in Figure 2 is an Ecological Unit map of the watershed including a table containing acres of each ecological unit on National Forest System lands. No information is shown for private land. Blue Creek Watershed Analysis 5 Figure 2 Ecological Unit map of the Blue Creek Watershed. Ecological Units on Mountains and Foothills On the National Forestland in the watershed, mountain and foothill landforms make up approximately 27,500 acres (47%). Soils that formed on the mountains and ridges are moderately deep to very deep (20”->60”) with some rock outcrop located on the steeper mountain sides. They are mainly Rhylow, Fitzwill, Edgway, Cryumbrepts, Yodal and Koffgo soils. Although these soils formed on steeper landforms, they have moderate to low erosion potential and have soil loss tolerance levels ranging from 2 to 5 tons per acre per year. They have higher potential to erode when they lose their protective ground cover. The potential is highest for mass movement on these landforms when soils become saturated with water. Ecological Units on Caldera floors and Dissected Tablelands/Basalt Plains Soils that formed on the caldera floor and dissected tablelands/basalt plains are generally moderately deep to very deep (20 to >60”) and are well drained. They are dominantly vegetated with conifers, big sagebrush, aspen and mountain shrubs. These soils have less potential to erode than those formed on the mountains and ridges because they formed on slopes less than 40 percent. Maintenance of ground cover on these soils is important to maintain stable conditions. They have high range productivity potential and support a variety of uses including grazing, recreation and wildlife habitat. Compaction of these Blue Creek Watershed Analysis 6 soils occurs when areas are used heavily from dispersed recreation, grazing and off-road vehicle use. Erosion from roads in this area is notable because ruts are often formed from vehicles when they are wet and channel sediment into the streams. Road maintenance is often required to reduce these impacts. Ecological Units on Terraces, Outwash Plains and Floodplains Soils that formed on terraces, outwash plains and floodplains are the most productive in the watershed. They are almost always very deep (>60”) and are influenced by wetness during some period of the year. Riparian vegetation such as willows and sedges grow in most of the riparian soils. Soils on terraces may be affected by grazing livestock and wildlife, recreation, roads and influences from upland conditions. Some areas are susceptible to down-cutting which often lowers the water table. When this occurs, riparian vegetation is gradually replaced by upland species such as sagebrush. Most riparian soils appear to be in a productive condition in the watershed but some gully erosion and trampling in riparian areas has been observed. Hydrology ¾ What are the dominant hydrologic characteristics and other notable hydrologic features and processes in the watershed? ¾ What are the basic morphological characteristics of stream valleys and segments and the general sediment transport and deposition processes in the watershed? The Blue Creek Watershed is a 58,492 acre watershed, located within the Henrys Fork basin, between Henrys Lake and Island Park Reservoir. Henrys Fork basin extends from the Idaho border to the Henrys Fork confluence with the South Fork Snake River, north of Idaho Falls, encompassing about 3220 square miles. Average river outflow is about 2,100 cubic feet per second, or about 1,407,000 acre feet per year (Idaho Water Resource Board 1992). Landscape Characteristics: Ecological Landtype Units The physical features of each sub-watershed have been described by the Targhee National Forest Ecological Unit Inventory (USFS 1999) (see Soils section). Each Ecological Unit (EU) is described by drainage patterns, physiography, soils and climate. Within the assessment area, there are six Ecological Units. These Ecological Units are: 1316 – This EU is delineated from Sawtell peak north and west. It is the extremely steep topography on and directly adjacent to the peak. The EU consists of glacial troughs, cirques and on the north side of topographically dominating peaks and ridges. Very steep slopes support open canopy mixed conifer forests that are frequently dissected by avalanche chutes, rock outcrops and rubble land. The soils erode and compact easily when disturbed, which could result in moderate to high rates of erosion and sediment delivered to stream channels from disturbed areas. The soils are within hydrologic groups B and C, which means they have a moderate to slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet and have a moderate to slow rate of water transmission through the soil Blue Creek Watershed Analysis 7 profile. This would result in moderate amounts of runoff from snowmelt and precipitation events. Annual precipitation averages 32 inches. 1270 – This EU is delineated from Sawtell Peak south and east. Within this unit are the Yale headwaters, East Fork Hotel headwaters, Arrange Creek headwaters, West Fork Hotel Creek headwaters, and east slope Blue Creek headwaters. The EU is a transitional area
Recommended publications
  • Water Storage Projects Committee Meeting Materials | August 8, 2013
    Henrys Fork Basin Study Update Idaho Water Resource Board Water Storage Projects Committee \ uA H o ~ ~ " Cynthia Bridge Clark ; "~ O:Jo August 8, 2013 "' <l'tsou1<C Background • State Authorization: • House Joint Memorial No 8 • Senate Bill 1511 approved by 2008 Idaho Legislature • Comprehensive State Water Plan • Federal Authority: • Department of Interior’s WaterSmart Program – Basin Study Program • Undertake comprehensive studies in cooperation with local partners • Basin Study MOA executed in March 2011 (IWRB and USBOR) • Study objectives: Identify additional water supplies and improvements in water management through surface storage, managed recharge, water marketing, and conservation, while sustaining environmental quality. Study Area • Henrys Fork Watershed (3,300 sq mi) – Parts of Fremont, Madison and Teton counties. • Four major subbasins – Upper Henrys Fork, Lower Henrys Fork, Teton River, and Fall River • Land use – forestland, rangeland, irrigated cropland, dryland agriculture and other urban developments • Fish & Wildlife – populations of native Yellowstone cutthroat trout, nonnative rainbow trout, and brown trout Variety of large and small mammals and birds Water Supply • Surface water supply Henrys Fork River largest tributary of the Snake The total Henrys Fork watershed discharge is 2.5 million af/yr under natural, unregulated conditions - Falls River contributes 700,000af/yr - Teton River contributes over 600,000 af/yr 1.6 million af/yr is discharged after the Henrys Fork basin diversions, seepage and evapotranspiration
    [Show full text]
  • Custer County,Idaho
    114o1230 44o5200 114o4830 44o4830 Custer County, er iv R n Tcv o Idaho Tgs m l Qa a Kgd Tgs S Tcv k Ys r Ys o Qa F Tgdd le The map on this page has been reduced by 40% from dd Ys Mi Tcv Ys the map on the big page. So it is not to 1:500,000 scale. The scale bar was reduced with it though and should be Tgs Tcv Tcv Tcv close to correct. Kgd Qa Os Qm Kgd Qa Salmon Qa Ds Kgdh R. Mtns. Kgd Kgd Tcv Qs OCZ P A Qm H Kgd Challis Tcv S Pzl Kgdh Kgd OCZ IM E Os Qa Qa Qs RO PPPs Tcv Tgdd Tcv Ds Qs I Kgdh Cs V Pzl Tgs A L Kgd Qm Tcv DSs L OCs DSs E OCs Y Cs Ss Qa Tcv Kgdh Ss Tcv Ds Ybe Kis Sunbeam OCs Tcv o Tgs Qa Cs 44 2130 Kis Kgd OCs Ss Ds 115o1730 Kgdh Kgd PPPs Kgd Qs Kis Ms OCs Os Ts Qm 21 Ybe OCs PPPs Os 75 Os PzZm Kgdh OCs Ds Qs Ybe Qa River Kgd OCs DSs Kis Kis on Ms OCs Tcv Qs m Os OCs Ss Ts Os Qs Qg al Qa Sawtooth Rge. S 25 DSOs Ms Ss Tgs OCs Ss Ms Tcv Qs Stanley o Qg Tcv Ds 44 1400 Kgd Ps PPPs Os Kgdh Tcv Tcv 93 Ms Qs Tcv Ms PzZm Qm Ts Redfish SOs Borah PK. Tcv Kgd Lk. Qa (12,662 ft) Ds Ts DSOs Qs Qm Ds Qm Qm Qa SOs Leatherman Kgd Pk Tgs Chilly Lost River Rge.
    [Show full text]
  • Trumpeter Swan Survey of the Rocky Mountain Population Winter 2012
    Trumpeter Swan Survey of the Rocky Mountain Population Winter 2012 Acknowledgements Personnel who conducted the survey are listed in Appendix C. The survey is a collaborative effort among Red Rock Lakes NWR, Migratory Birds and State Programs -- Mountain-Prairie Region of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Idaho National Wildlife Refuge Complex, National Elk Refuge, Harriman State Park, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Grand Teton National Park, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Ruby Lake NWR, Malheur NWR, and the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Additionally, R. Cavallaro, M. Wackenhut, D. Christopherson, K. Cameron, and R. Lonsinger, assisted with counts in Idaho. S. Patla, N. Cadwell, D. Smith, M. St. Louis, and K. Cutting provided information and narratives used to develop this document; conclusions are attributable only to the author. TRUMPETER SWAN SURVEY of the ROCKY MOUNTAIN POPULATION WINTER 2012 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Migratory Birds and State Programs Mountain-Prairie Region Lakewood, Colorado May 1, 2012 4 Abstract.B Observers counted 6,331 swans (white birds and cygnets) in the Rocky Mountain Population of trumpeter swans during late January and early February 2012, which was an 11% increase from the 5,712 counted during winter 2011. The number of white birds (4,783) increased by 9% from the 2011 counts while the number of cygnets (1,028) experienced a 22% decrease. In the tri-state area, the number of total swans increased for Idaho (59%) and decreased for Montana (- 33%) and Wyoming (-19%) from counts in 2011. The number of birds wintering in areas near restoration flocks increased by 18% from 2011 and was the highest count since 1996.
    [Show full text]
  • Off-Road Guide
    EASTERN IDAHO OFF-ROAD GUIDE • ATV & GEAR RENTALS • TRAIL TIPS & TRICKS • LOCAL RESTAURANTSWWW.YELLOWSTONETETON.ORG & MORE! | 1 19-VI-01 5M 2 | EASTERN IDAHO OFF-ROAD GUIDE Eastern Idaho’s off-road areas are world-famous and for good reason. With hundreds upon hundreds of miles of maintained trails at your disposal, there is something for every skill level, family and horsepower junkie. WWW.YELLOWSTONETETON.ORG | 3 CUSTOM PUBLISHING Harris Publishing 360 B St., Idaho Falls, ID 83402 208-542-2289 www.harrispublishing.com EDITORIAL Steve Smede Steve Janes DESIGN Dallas McCary PHOTOGRAPHY Dirt Toys Magazine Steve Smede 4 | EASTERN IDAHO OFF-ROAD GUIDE PLAYING IN THE DIRT As the sun rises over the majestic Teton Mountains bringing first light to Eastern Idaho and casting its rays across the Snake River Valley, one can’t help but feel blessed to live in such a beautiful area. It’s also no wonder why so many eastern Idaho residents enjoy getting out in nature and Aexperiencing God’s country. Although there are numerous ways to recreate, one of the more popular summer activities is off-road travel on ATVs and side-by-sides. Eastern Idaho epitomizes the flavor of its western heritage. Pioneers, miners and loggers blazed their trails across our landscape. Many of the more rugged and out-of-the-way trails are still accessible on Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands. Partnerships between state and federal governments and motorized recreation groups have created an extensive trail system that opens the backcountry and offers exciting off-road riding for both residents and visitors to eastern Idaho.
    [Show full text]
  • National Forest Imagery Catalog Collection at the USDA
    National Forest Imagery Catalog collection at the USDA - Farm Service Agency Aerial Photography Field Office (APFO) 2222 West 2300 South Salt Lake City, UT 84119-2020 (801) 844-2922 - Customer Service Section (801) 956-3653 - Fax (801) 956-3654 - TDD [email protected] http://www.apfo.usda.gov This catalog listing shows the various photographic coverages used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and archived at the Aerial Photography Field Office. This catalog references U.S. Forest Service (FS) and other agencies imagery. For imagery prior to 1955, please contact the National Archives & Records Administration: Cartographic & Architectural Reference (NWCS-Cartographic) Aerial Photographs Team http://www.archives.gov/research/order/maps.html#contact Coverage of U.S. Forest Service photography is listed alphabetically for each forest within a region. Numeric and alpha codes used to identify FS projects are determined by the Forest Service. The original film type for most of this imagery is a natural color negative. Line indexes are available for most projects. The number of index sheets required to cover a project area is shown on the listing. Please reference the remarks column, which may identify a larger or smaller project area than the National Forest area defined in the header. Offered in the catalog listing at each National Forest heading is a link to locate the Regional and National Forest office address and phone number at: http://www.fs.fed.us/intro/directory You may wish to visit the National Forest office to view the current imagery and have them assist you in identifying aerial imagery from the APFO.
    [Show full text]
  • Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge Centennial Valley Conservation Easement Program
    U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge Centennial Valley Conservation Easement Program Environmental Assessment and Land Protection Plan Environmental AssessmentAssessment Centennial Valley Conservation Easement Program Prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge 27820 Southside Centennial Road Lima, Montana 59739 and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service RW-RE Branch of Planning P.O. Box 25486 - DFC Denver, Colorado 80225 March 2001 TTTable of ContentsContents Chapter 1. Purpose of and Need for Action Introduction and Background .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Proposed Action ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Project Area ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Purpose of and Need for Proposed Action......................................................................................................................... 4 Decisions to be Made ........................................................................................................................................................... 14 Issues Identified and Selected for Analysis ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Yellowstone National Park, Submerged Resources Survey
    te t/:p--J038 .. } ,' ,, .. ' . ·� . I ; ,· . ' . '/ YEL.LOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK " � ! I '!'' • SUBMERGED RESOURCES SURVEY I ·' I i I \. ,· i .\ I: ··r· 'I I CC®ll®IT' §��IID� YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK a product of the NATIONAL PARK SERVICE SYSTEMWIDE ARCHEOLOGICALINVENTORY PROGRAM YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK Submerged Resources Survey James E. Bradford Archeologist Matthew A. Russell Archeologist Larry E. Murphy Archeologist Timothy G. Smith Geodesist Submerged Resources Center Intermountain Region National Park Service Santa Fe, New Mexico 1999 11 Submerged Resources Center Cultural Resources Management Intermountain Region National Park Service US Department of the Interior 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... vii FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................. X ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... xi PART 1: REMOTE SENSING SURVEY ..................................... ............................................ 1 Matthew A. Russell, Larry E. Murphy and Timothy G. Smith INTRODUCTION .... ............................ ................ ........................................... ............. 2 PROBLEM STATEMENT................... ........................................................................ 3 SURVEY DESIGN AND RATIONALE ..............
    [Show full text]
  • IDAHO ACTION PLAN (V3.0) for Implementing the Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3362
    IDAHO ACTION PLAN (V3.0) For Implementing the Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3362: “Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors” 10 September 2020 PREFACE Secretarial Order No. 3362 (SO3362) (09 February 2018; Appendix B) directs the Department of Interior (DOI) to assist western tribes, private landowners, state fish and wildlife agencies, and state transportation departments with conserving and managing priority big game winter ranges and migration corridors. Per SO3362, the DOI invited state wildlife agencies in 2018 to develop action plans identifying big game priority areas and corresponding management efforts across jurisdictional boundaries. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) and DOI jointly developed Idaho’s first version (V1.0) of the SO3362 Action Plan in 2018, which identified 5 Priority Areas for managing pronghorn, mule deer, and elk winter range and migration habitat (Appendix A and D). V2.0 was prepared in 2019 with support from the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). This V3.0 was also prepared in coordination with ITD in response to DOI’s 14 April 2020 letter to IDFG (Appendix E) requesting updated Priority Area information. Correspondingly, IDFG views this Action Plan as a living document to be reviewed and updated as needed, for example when new priorities emerge, revised information becomes available, and management efforts are completed. Each version of Idaho’s Action Plan applies best available information to identify current and future needs for managing big game winter range and migration habitat, highlight ongoing and new priority management needs, leverage collaborative resources, and narrow focus to 5 Priority Areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilderness Study Areas
    I ___- .-ll..l .“..l..““l.--..- I. _.^.___” _^.__.._._ - ._____.-.-.. ------ FEDERAL LAND M.ANAGEMENT Status and Uses of Wilderness Study Areas I 150156 RESTRICTED--Not to be released outside the General Accounting Wice unless specifically approved by the Office of Congressional Relations. ssBO4’8 RELEASED ---- ---. - (;Ao/li:( ‘I:I)-!L~-l~~lL - United States General Accounting OfTice GAO Washington, D.C. 20548 Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division B-262989 September 23,1993 The Honorable Bruce F. Vento Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Committee on Natural Resources House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairman: Concerned about alleged degradation of areas being considered for possible inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System (wilderness study areas), you requested that we provide you with information on the types and effects of activities in these study areas. As agreed with your office, we gathered information on areas managed by two agencies: the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLN) and the Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service. Specifically, this report provides information on (1) legislative guidance and the agency policies governing wilderness study area management, (2) the various activities and uses occurring in the agencies’ study areas, (3) the ways these activities and uses affect the areas, and (4) agency actions to monitor and restrict these uses and to repair damage resulting from them. Appendixes I and II provide data on the number, acreage, and locations of wilderness study areas managed by BLM and the Forest Service, as well as data on the types of uses occurring in the areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Empey-Johnson Conservation Easements Acquisition LOCATION/LEGAL DESCRIPTION: the Property Is Located on the Western Side of Henrys Lake in Fremont County, Idaho
    Worksheet Determination of NEPA Adequacy (DNA) U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management OFFICE: Upper Snake Field Office, Idaho Falls District Office TRACKING NUMBER: DOI-BLM-ID-I010-2015-0005-DNA CASEFILE/PROJECT NUMBER: IDI-037506 PROPOSED ACTION TITLE/TYPE: Empey-Johnson Conservation Easements Acquisition LOCATION/LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The property is located on the western side of Henrys Lake in Fremont County, Idaho. The legal description for the property is Township 15 North, Range 42 East, sections 1, 12 and 13, Boise Meridian (Maps 1-3). APPLICANT (if any): Bureau of Land Management A. Description of the Proposed Action and any applicable mitigation measures The proposed action is to acquire two conservation easements on approximately 565 acres located on the western side of Henrys Lake in Fremont County, Idaho (Figures 1 and 2). The conservation easements would be acquired using Land and Water Conservation Funds (LWCF) appropriations for the Henrys Lake Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) project. The property is a private inholding within the Henrys Lake ACEC designation, an area containing one of the most unique and biologically diverse ecosystems in Idaho, and an active water-based recreation program. The property is bordered to the north and west by Forest Service lands and is adjacent to BLM land on the northern portion of its eastern boundary. The remainder of the eastern boundary is adjacent to private land which is conserved by the Wetland Reserves Program. The two conservation easements are held by The Nature Conservancy (TNC). The first conservation easement, Empey-Johnson 1 (Duck Creek), was purchased by TNC in 2008 to protect 50 acres of the ranch.
    [Show full text]
  • Snake River Flow Augmentation Impact Analysis Appendix
    SNAKE RIVER FLOW AUGMENTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS APPENDIX Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla District’s Lower Snake River Juvenile Salmon Migration Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Pacific Northwest Region Boise, Idaho February 1999 Acronyms and Abbreviations (Includes some common acronyms and abbreviations that may not appear in this document) 1427i A scenario in this analysis that provides up to 1,427,000 acre-feet of flow augmentation with large drawdown of Reclamation reservoirs. 1427r A scenario in this analysis that provides up to 1,427,000 acre-feet of flow augmentation with reservoir elevations maintained near current levels. BA Biological assessment BEA Bureau of Economic Analysis (U.S. Department of Commerce) BETTER Box Exchange Transport Temperature Ecology Reservoir (a water quality model) BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs BID Burley Irrigation District BIOP Biological opinion BLM Bureau of Land Management B.P. Before present BPA Bonneville Power Administration CES Conservation Extension Service cfs Cubic feet per second Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CRFMP Columbia River Fish Mitigation Program CRP Conservation Reserve Program CVPIA Central Valley Project Improvement Act CWA Clean Water Act DO Dissolved Oxygen Acronyms and Abbreviations (Includes some common acronyms and abbreviations that may not appear in this document) DREW Drawdown Regional Economic Workgroup DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane EIS Environmental Impact Statement EP Effective Precipitation EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act ETAW Evapotranspiration of Applied Water FCRPS Federal Columbia River Power System FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FIRE Finance, investment, and real estate HCNRA Hells Canyon National Recreation Area HUC Hydrologic unit code I.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Resource Study
    Historic Resource Study Minidoka Internment National Monument _____________________________________________________ Prepared for the National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Seattle, Washington Minidoka Internment National Monument Historic Resource Study Amy Lowe Meger History Department Colorado State University National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Seattle, Washington 2005 Table of Contents Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………… i Note on Terminology………………………………………….…………………..…. ii List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………. iii Part One - Before World War II Chapter One - Introduction - Minidoka Internment National Monument …………... 1 Chapter Two - Life on the Margins - History of Early Idaho………………………… 5 Chapter Three - Gardening in a Desert - Settlement and Development……………… 21 Chapter Four - Legalized Discrimination - Nikkei Before World War II……………. 37 Part Two - World War II Chapter Five- Outcry for Relocation - World War II in America ………….…..…… 65 Chapter Six - A Dust Covered Pseudo City - Camp Construction……………………. 87 Chapter Seven - Camp Minidoka - Evacuation, Relocation, and Incarceration ………105 Part Three - After World War II Chapter Eight - Farm in a Day- Settlement and Development Resume……………… 153 Chapter Nine - Conclusion- Commemoration and Memory………………………….. 163 Appendixes ………………………………………………………………………… 173 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………. 181 Cover: Nikkei working on canal drop at Minidoka, date and photographer unknown, circa 1943. (Minidoka Manuscript Collection, Hagerman Fossil
    [Show full text]