DOCSLIB.ORG

Hydropowerpotential 1.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hydropowerpotential 1.Pdf TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ……………………………………………………………………………………….….. 1 At‐A‐Glance Map ……………………………………………………………………..………….………… 3 At‐A‐Glance Data ………………................................................…………….…………….. 4 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF HYDROPOWER POTENTIAL ………………………….………..…. 5 Potential Project Scoping …………………………………………………………………………….… 5 Analysis of Irrigation Water Provider Rights ………………………………………….……….. 5 Survey of Irrigation Water Providers …………………………………………………...………. 7 Review of Survey Results …………………………………………………………………….…….….. 7 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE RESULTS OF HYDROPOWER FACILITIES ……………………….………… 9 PROJECT COSTS ………………………………………………………………………………………………………...… 11 Pipeline/Penstock ………………………………………………………..…………………….………… 11 Interconnection Cost ………………………………………………………………………………..…... 11 Powerhouse Completion, Including Equipment and Civil Construction Costs …… 12 Turbine/Generator/Controls ………………………………………………………………………….… 12 Design and Permitting, Including Land Use Siting Requirements………………………… 12 Mitigation …………………………………………………………………………………………………..… 13 ENVIRONMENTAL AND INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS …………………………………………….. 14 Protected Areas ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 14 Wild and Scenic River and Wilderness Designations ……………………………………..… 14 Endangered Species Act …………………………………………………………………………………... 15 Clean Water Act ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 15 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ………………………………………………………..… 15 State Water Right Processes Expedited Applications ……………………………………….. 16 Fish Passage Issues ………………………………………………………………………………………... 17 Interconnection …………………………………………………………………………………………….… 18 Power Sales Agreements ………………………………………………………………………..……….. 19 i ENVIRONMENTAL AND INSITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS …………………………………………………... CONT’D d Lan Use Siting …………………………………………………………………………………………..…. 19 One‐Stop Permitting ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 20 Finance ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20 Business Energy Tax Credit …………………………………………………………………………….… 20 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE RESULTS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECTS ……………………….. 21 WESTERN OREGON REGION SITE DATA RESULTS …………………………………………………………. 24 Sidney Irrigation Dist. ‐ Sidney Outfall Site …………………………………………….…….. 25 Sidney Irrigation Dist. ‐ Sidney Outfall Data ……………………………………………………. 26 Santiam Water Control Dist. ‐ Main Canal Existing Plant Site ..………………………. 27 Santiam Water Con troll Dist. ‐ Main Canal Existing Plant Data ………………………… 28 SOUTHERN OREGON REGION SITE DATA RESULTS ……………………………………………………. 29 Lakeview Water Users, inc. ‐ Drews Reservoir Site ……………………………………….. 30 Lakeview Water Users, inc ‐ Drews Reservoir Data ……………………………………….. 31 Talent Irrigation District ‐ Appendix E Reference Page …………………………………. 32 CENTRAL OREGON REGION SITE DATA RESULTS ………………………………………………………….. 33 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Ward Road Site ……………………………………………… 34 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Ward Road Data ……………………………………………… 35 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Brinson Blvd. Site ……………………………………….. 36 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Brinson Blvd. Data ……………………………………….. 37 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ 10 Barr Road Site ……………………………………….. 38 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ 10 Barr Road Data ……………………………………….. 39 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Dodds Road Site ……………………………………………… 40 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Dodds Road Data ……………………………………….. 41 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Shumway Road Site ……………………………………….. 42 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Shumway Road Data ……………………………………….. 43 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Yew Avenue Site ……………………………………….. 44 Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Yew Avenue Data ……………………………………….. 45 ii CENTRAL OREGON REGION SITE DATA RESULTS ………………………………………………………….. CONT’D Three Sisters Irrigation Dist. ‐ McKenzie Reservoir Site ………………………………….. 46 Three Sisters Irrigation Dist. ‐ McKenzie Reservoir Data ………………………………….. 47 Tumalo Irrigation Dist. ‐ Columbia So. Main Site ………………………………………………. 48 Tumalo Irrigation Dist. ‐ Columbia So. Main Data ………………………………………………. 49 Tumalo Irrigation Dist. ‐ Columbia So. Lateral Site …………………………………………. 50 Tumalo Irrigation Dist. ‐ Columbia So. Lateral Data …………………………………………. 51 NORTHEAST OREGON REGION SITE DATA RESULTS ……………………………………………………… 52 Columbia Improvement Dist. ‐ Columbia One Site …………………………………………. 53 Columbia Improvement Dist. ‐ Columbia One Data …………………………………………. 54 Columbia Improvement Dist. ‐ Columbia Two Site ……………………..……………. 55 Columbia Improvement Dist. ‐ Columbia Two Data …………………………………………. 56 Columbia Improvement Dist. ‐ Columbia Three Site ………………..…………………. 57 Columbia Improvement Dist. ‐ Columbia Three Data …………………………………………. 58 West Extension Irrigation Dist. ‐ West Extension Site …………………………………………. 59 West Extension Irrigation Dist. ‐ West Extension Data ………..…………………………. 60 Westland Irrigation Dist. ‐ Westland Site ……………………………………………………………. 61 Westland Irrigation Dist. ‐ Westland Data ……………………………………………………… 62 Hermiston Irrigation Dist. ‐ Cold Springs Outlet Site …………………………………………. 63 Hermiston Irrigation Dist. ‐ Cold Springs Outlet Data …………………………………………. 64 Hermiston Irrigation Dist. ‐ Cold Springs Inlet Site …………………………………………. 65 Hermiston Irrigation Dist. ‐ Cold Springs Inlet Data …………………………………………. 66 Westland/Stanfield Irrigation Districts ‐ McKay Reservoir Site ………………………….. 67 Westland/Stanfield Irrigation Districts ‐ McKay Reservoir Data ………………………….. 68 EASTERN OREGON REGION SITE DATA RESULTS ……………………………………………………………. 69 Burnt River Irrigation Dist. ‐ Unity Reservoir Site ……………………………………………….. 70 Burnt River Irrigation Dist. ‐ Unity Reservoir Data …………………………………………. 71 Vale Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Beulah Reservoir Site …………………………………………. 72 iii EASTERN OREGON REGION SITE DATA RESULTS ……………………………………………………………. CONT’D Vale Oregon Irrigation Dist. ‐ Beulah Reservoir Data …………………………………………. 73 APPENDIX A …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 74 Master Table of Irrigation Providers ………………………………………………………………. 75 APPENDIX B …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 77 Water Rights Information and Definitions ……………………………………………………… 78 Water Rights Records for Arnold Irrigation Dist. ……………………………………………….. 80 Water Rights Records for Baker Valley Irrigation Dist. …………………………………… 81 Water Rights Records for Burnt River Irrigation Dist. …………………………………………. 83 Water Rights Records for Central Oregon Irrigation Dist. …………………………………… 85 Water Rights Records for Columbia Improvement Dist. …………………………………… 86 Water Rights Records for Eagle Point Irrigation Dist. …………………………………………. 87 Water Rights Records for Grants Pass Irrigation Dist. …………………………………………. 88 Water Rights Records for Greenberry Irrigation Dist. …………………………………………. 89 Water Rights Records for Hermiston Irrigation Dist. …………………………………………. 91 Water Rights Records for Jordan Valley Irrigation Dist. …………………………………… 92 Water Rights Records for Lakeview Water Users, inc. …………………………………… 93 Water Rights Records for Meadows Drainage Dist. …………………………………………. 95 Water Rights Records for Medford Irrigation Dist. …………………………………………. 96 Water Rights Records for Powder Valley Water Control Dist. ………………………….. 97 Water Rights Records for Rogue River Valley Irrigation Dist. ………………………….. 99 Water Rights Records for Santiam Water Control Dist. …………………………………… 101 Water Rights Records for Sauvie Island Drainage Dist. …………………………………… 102 Water Rights Records for Sidney Irrigation Dist. ……………………………………………….. 103 Water Rights Records for Silver Lake Irrigation Dist. …………………………………………. 105 Water Rights Records for Stanfield Irrigation Dist. …………………………………………. 106 Water Rights Records for Talent Irrigation Dist. ……………………………………………….. 107 Water Rights Records for Teel Irrigation Dist. ……………………………………………………… 109 iiii APPENDIX B …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. CONT’D Water Rights Records for Three Sisters Irrigation Dist. …………………………………… 110 Water Rights Records for Tualatin Valley Irrigation Dist. …………………………………… 111 Water Rights Records for Tumalo Irrigation Dist. ……………………………………………….. 112 Water Rights Records for Vale Irrigation Dist. ……………………………………………….. 115 Water Rights Records for Wallowa Valley Improvement Dist. ………………………….. 117 Water Rights Records for Warm Springs Irrigation Dist. ……………………………………. 118 Water Rights Records for West Extension Irrigation Dist. ……………………………………. 120 Water Rights Records for Westland Irrigation Dist. ………………………………………….. 122 APPENDIX C ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 123 Survey Packet Example Black Rock Consulting Letter …………………..……………………… 124 Survey Packet Example Survey Questions ……………………………………………………… 126 Survey Packet Example Energy Trust of Oregon Flyer …………………………………………. 128 Survey Packet Example Energy Trust of Oregon Letter …………………………………… 130 Survey Packet Example Water Rights Record ……………………………………………………… 132 APPENDIX D …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 134 Survey Results Table ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 135 APPENDIX E …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 137 Talent Irrigation Dist. Report ……………………………………………………………………….. 138 iiiii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Evaluation of Energy Savings and Hydropower Potential Among Irrigation Water Providers Energy Trust of Oregon (Energy Trust) secured the services of Black Rock Consulting (Black Rock) to evaluate the state’s largest irrigation water users to provide base feasibility evaluations which could result in subsequent development of hydropower projects in Oregon. An earlier 2008 Hydropower Technology and Resource Assessment produced for Energy Trust identified irrigation water providers as one of the state’s largest resources for the development of untapped hydropower
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In Partial Fulfillment Of
    WATER UTILI AT'ION AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE 11ILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN by CAST" IR OLISZE "SKI A THESIS submitted to OREGON STATE COLLEGE in partialfulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE June 1954 School Graduate Committee Data thesis is presented_____________ Typed by Kate D. Humeston TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION Statement and History of the Problem........ 1 Historical Data............................. 3 Procedure Used to Explore the Data.......... 4 Organization of the Data.................... 8 II. THE WILLAMETTE RIVER WATERSHED Orientation................................. 10 Orography................................... 10 Geology................................. 11 Soil Types................................. 19 Climate ..................................... 20 Precipitation..*.,,,,,,,................... 21 Storms............'......................... 26 Physical Characteristics of the River....... 31 Physical Characteristics of the Major Tributaries............................ 32 Surface Water Supply ........................ 33 Run-off Characteristics..................... 38 Discharge Records........ 38 Ground Water Supply......................... 39 CHAPTER PAGE III. ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL UTILIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT.. .... .................... 44 Flood Characteristics ........................ 44 Flood History......... ....................... 45 Provisional Standard Project: Flood......... 45 Flood Plain......... ........................ 47 Flood Control................................ 48 Drainage............
    [Show full text]
  • Junction City Water Control District Long-Term Irrigation Water Service Contract
    Junction City Water Control District Long-Term Irrigation Water Service Contract Finding of No Significant Impact Environmental Assessment Willamette River Basin, Oregon Pacific Northwest Region PN EA 13-02 PN FONSI 13-02 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Columbia-Cascades Area Office Yakima, Washington June 2013 MISSION STATEMENTS U.S. Department of the Interior Protecting America’s Great Outdoors and Powering Our Future The Department of the Interior protects America’s natural resources and heritage, honors our cultures and tribal communities, and supplies the energy to power our future. Bureau of Reclamation The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Long-Term Irrigation Water Service Contract, Junction City Water Control District U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Columbia-Cascades Area Office PN FONSI13-02 Decision: It is my decision to authorize the Preferred Alternative, Alternative B - Long-term Water Service Contract, identified in EA No. PN-EA-13-02. Finding of No Significant Impact: Based on the analysis ofpotential environmental impacts presented in the attached Environmental Assessment, Reclamation has determined that the Preferred Alternative will have no significant effect on the human environment or natural and cultural resources. Reclamation, therefore, concludes that preparation of an Environmental
    [Show full text]
  • Influence of Cougar Reservoir Drawdown on Sediment and DDT Transport and Deposition in the Mckenzie River Basin, Oregon, Water Years 2002–04
    Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Influence of Cougar Reservoir Drawdown on Sediment and DDT Transport and Deposition in the McKenzie River Basin, Oregon, Water Years 2002–04 Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5164 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Front Cover: Cougar Reservoir near Terwilliger Hot Springs, Oregon. (Photograph taken by Chauncey Anderson, U.S. Geological Survey.) Back Cover: Cougar Reservoir withdrawal tower upon completion of construction in 2005. (Photograph from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.) Influence of Cougar Reservoir Drawdown on Sediment and DDT Transport and Deposition in the McKenzie River Basin, Oregon, Water Years 2002–04 By Chauncey W. Anderson Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5164 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses Spring 6-8-2017 Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed Alexander Cameron Nagel Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Geography Commons, Hydrology Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Nagel, Alexander Cameron, "Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed" (2017). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4012. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.5896 This Thesis 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]. Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed by Alexander Cameron Nagel A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geography Thesis Committee: Heejun Chang, Chair Geoffrey Duh Paul Loikith Portland State University 2017 i Abstract This study conducts a dam-scale cost versus benefit analysis in order to explore the feasibility of each the 13 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) commissioned dams in Oregon’s Willamette River network. Constructed between 1941 and 1969, these structures function in collaboration to comprise the Willamette River Basin Reservoir System (WRBRS). The motivation for this project derives from a growing awareness of the biophysical impacts that dam structures can have on riparian habitats. This project compares each of the 13 dams being assessed, to prioritize their level of utility within the system.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Screening Exemption Proposal
    BakerCounty MasonDamHydroelectricProject _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ FishScreeningExemptionProposal October2013 Introduction: Baker County is seeking an exemption from screening for the existing Mason Dam in the following proposal. On April 30, 2013 Baker County filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for a new hydroelectric license at the existing Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) Mason Dam. Because of the addition of the hydroelectric project this triggers Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 498.301 through 351 screening criteria. The following proposal provides background describing the project, a summary of the project impacts from the Entrainment and Mortality report, Baker County’s proposed mitigation and an explanation of how those measures will provide resource protection. Background: Existing Project Mason Dam is located in Baker County, Oregon approximately 11 miles southwest of Baker City on State Highway 7(Figure1). Mason Dam was built by the BOR on the Powder River for irrigation, water delivery and flood control. Mason Dam was constructed from 1965 – 1968 and has a total height of 173 feet and a maximum hydraulic height of 157 feet. Phillips Reservoir is a 2,234 acre-reservoir that was formed by the construction of Mason Dam. The reservoir has a total storage capacity of 95,500 acre-feet and an active storage capacity of 90,500 acre-feet. Existing Operation Water is generally stored between October through March with some releases above the minimum flow starting to occur in late March through April. Irrigation season starts in May and runs through September. Releases average approximately 10 cubic feet per second (cfs) between October and January, increase to an average of 20 to 50 cfs during February and March, gradually increasing to 100 cfs during April to early-May.
    [Show full text]
  • Mckenzie River Subbasin Assessment Summary Table of Contents
    McKenzie River, ca. 1944 McKenzie River Subbasin Assessment Summary Report February 2000 McKenzie River, ca. 2000 McKenzie River, ca. 2000 Prepared for the McKenzie Watershed Council Prepared By: Alsea Geospatial, Inc. Hardin-Davis, Inc. Pacific Wildlife Research, Inc. WaterWork Consulting McKenzie River Subbasin Assessment Summary Table of Contents High Priority Action Items for Conservation, Restoration, and Monitoring 1 The McKenzie River Watershed: Introduction 8 I. Watershed Overview 9 II. Aquatic Ecosystem Issues & Findings 17 Recommendations 29 III. Fish Populations Issues & Findings 31 Recommendations 37 IV. Wildlife Species and Habitats of Concern Issues & Findings 38 Recommendations 47 V. Putting the Assessment to work 50 Juvenile Chinook Habitat Modeling 51 Juvenile Chinook Salmon Habitat Results 54 VI. References 59 VII. Glossary of Terms 61 The McKenzie River Subbasin Assessment was funded by grants from the Bonneville Power Administration and the U.S. Forest Service. High Priority Action Items for Conservation, Restoration, and Monitoring Our analysis indicates that aquatic and wildlife habitat in the McKenzie River subbasin is relatively good yet habitat quality falls short of historical conditions. High quality habitat currently exists at many locations along the McKenzie River. This assessment concluded, however, that the river’s current condition, combined with existing management and regulations, does not ensure conservation or restoration of high quality habitat in the long term. Significant short-term improvements in aquatic and wildlife habitat are not likely to happen through regulatory action. Current regulations rarely address remedies for past actions. Furthermore, regulations and the necessary enforcement can fall short of attaining conservation goals. Regulations are most effective in ensuring that habitat quality trends improve over the long period.
    [Show full text]
  • Removal Action Report US Forest Service, Blue River Administration Site Blue River, Oregon
    Removal Action Report US Forest Service, Blue River Administration Site Blue River, Oregon Prepared for: US Forest Service, Willamette National Forest McKenzie River Ranger District Report Date: August 2012 PBS Project No. 76127.000, Phase 0004 Removal Action Report US Forest Service, Blue River Administration Site Blue River, Oregon TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 2.0 SITE LOCATION AND SETTING ..................................................................................... 1 2.1 Location ............................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Physiographic Setting......................................................................................... 1 3.0 PREVIOUS SITE STUDIES .............................................................................................. 2 3.1 Assessment and Evaluation of Remedial Options ........................................... 2 3.2 Waste Determination ........................................................................................... 2 4.0 REMOVAL ACTION OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH ................................................... 2 5.0 SAFETY ............................................................................................................................ 3 6.0 SUMMARY OF FIELD ACTIVITIES.................................................................................. 4 6.1 Monitoring Well Abandonment
    [Show full text]
  • Ground Water in the Eugene-Springfield Area, Southern Willamette Valley, Oregon
    Ground Water in the Eugene-Springfield Area, Southern Willamette Valley, Oregon GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 2018 Prepared in cooperation with the Oregon State Engineer Ground Water in the Eugene-Springfield Area, Southern Willamette Valley, Oregon By F. J. FRANK GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 2018 Prepared in cooperation with the Oregon State Engineer UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1973 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 72-600346 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 Price: Paper cover $2.75, domestic postpaid; $2.50, GPO Bookstore Stock Number 2401-00277 CONTENTS Page Abstract ______________________ ____________ 1 Introduction _________ ____ __ ____ 2 Geohydrologic system ___________ __ _ 4 Topography _____________ ___ ____ 5 Streams and reservoirs ______ ___ _ __ _ _ 5 Ground-water system ______ _ _____ 6 Consolidated rocks __ _ _ - - _ _ 10 Unconsolidated deposits ___ _ _ 10 Older alluvium ____ _ 10 Younger alluvium __ 11 Hydrology __________________ __ __ __ 11 Climate _______________ _ 12 Precipitation ___________ __ 12 Temperature -__________ 12 Evaporation _______ 13 Surface water __________ ___ 14 Streamflow _ ____ _ _ 14 Major streams __ 14 Other streams ________ _ _ 17 Utilization of surface water _ 18 Ground water __________ _ __ ___ 18 Upland and valley-fringe areas 19 West side _________ __ 19 East side __________ ________________________ 21 South end ______________________________ 22 Central lowland ________ __ 24 Occurrence and movement of ground water 24 Relationship of streams to alluvial aquifers __ _ 25 Transmissivity and storage coefficient ___ _ 29 Ground-water storage _ __ 30 Storage capacity _ .
    [Show full text]
  • Little Butte Creek Watershed Assessment
    Little Butte Creek Watershed Assessment Little Butte Creek Watershed Council August 2003 Abstract The Little Butte Creek Watershed Assessment has been prepared for the Little Butte Creek Watershed Council with funding from the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB). The Assessment was prepared using the guidelines set forth in the Governor’s Watershed Enhancement Board’s 1999 Oregon Watershed Assessment Manual. The purpose of this document is to assess the current conditions and trends of human caused and ecologic processes within the Little Butte Creek Watershed and compare them with historic conditions. Many important ecological processes within the watershed have been degraded over the last 150 years of human activity. This Assessment details those locations and processes that are in need of restoration as well as those that are operating as a healthy system. The Assessment was conducted primarily at the 5th field watershed level, that of the entire Little Butte Creek Watershed. List and describe field watershed levels below. Where possible, the analyses was refined to the smaller 6th field watershed level, thirteen of which exist within the Little Butte Creek Watershed. The assessment also notes gaps in data and lists recommendations for future research and data collection. It is intended that this document, and the Little Butte Creek Watershed Action Plan be used as guides for future research and watershed protection and enhancement over the next decade. The document was developed using existing data. No new data was collected for this project. Where data was lacking, it was detailed for future work and study. Acknowledgements This assessment was compiled and written by Steve Mason.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 State(S): Oregon Recovery Unit Name: Willamette River
    Chapter 5 State(s): Oregon Recovery Unit Name: Willamette River Recovery Unit Region 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed necessary to recover and protect listed species. Plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and, in this case, with the assistance of recovery unit teams, contractors, State and Tribal agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views or the official positions or indicate the approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Recovery plans represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Director or Regional Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature Cited: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Chapter 5, Willamette River Recovery Unit, Oregon. 96 p. In: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Draft Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Two working groups are active in the Willamette River Recovery Unit: the Upper Willamette (since 1989) and Clackamas Bull Trout Working Groups. In 1999, these groups were combined, and, along with representation from the Santiam subbasin, comprise the Willamette River Recovery Unit Team.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Waterway Maintenance Plans
    Open Waterway Maintenance Plans City of Eugene Public Works Department Parks and Open Space Division 1820 Roosevelt Boulevard Eugene, OR 97402‐4159 541‐682‐4800 www.eugene‐or.gov/parks Updated in 2014 Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ II BACKGROUND AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS .................................................................. 1 METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................... 8 AMAZON BASIN ..................................................................................................................... 10 AMAZON HEADWATERS ............................................................................................................................................... 20 AMAZON (MARTIN STREET TO SNELL AVENUE) ................................................................................................................. 25 AMAZON (SNELL AVENUE TO FOX HOLLOW ROAD) ........................................................................................................... 30 TH AMAZON (FOX HOLLOW ROAD TO 30 AVENUE) ............................................................................................................. 34 TH TH AMAZON (30 AVENUE TO 24 AVENUE) .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Flow of the Upper Klamath River
    Natural Flow of the Upper Klamath River U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation November 2005 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Cover photo by J. Rasmussen— McCornac Point Marsh Natural Flow of the Upper Klamath River—Phase I Natural inflow to, natural losses from, and natural outfall of Upper Klamath Lake to the Link River and the Klamath River at Keno prepared by Technical Service Center Water Resources Services Thomas Perry, Hydrologist Amy Lieb, Hydrologist Alan Harrison, Environmental Engineer Mark Spears, P.E., Hydraulic Engineer Ty Mull, Agricultural Engineer Concrete Dams and Waterways Elisabeth Cohen, P.E., Hydraulic Engineer Klamath Basin Area Office John Rasmussen, Hydrologist Jon Hicks, Water Conservation Specialist TSC Project Management Del Holz, Manager Joe Lyons, Assistant Manager prepared for U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Klamath Basin Area Office Klamath Falls, Oregon November 2005 Base map and study area. Preface This study was undertaken to estimate the effects of agricultural development on natural flows in the Upper Klamath River Basin. A large body of data was reviewed and analyzed to obtain the results included in this assessment of the natural hydrology of the Basin. Within this report, the term natural represents typical flows without agricultural development in the basin.
    [Show full text]