Monitoring the Effectiveness of Culverts Replaced Or Retrofitted for Fish Passage in the Upper West Fork of Smith River, Oregon

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Monitoring the Effectiveness of Culverts Replaced Or Retrofitted for Fish Passage in the Upper West Fork of Smith River, Oregon Monitoring the Effectiveness of Culverts Replaced or Retrofitted for Fish Passage in the Upper West Fork of Smith River, Oregon Bruce P. Hansen Gordon H. Reeves Aquatic and Land Interactions Program, PNW Research Station Corvallis, OR SUMMARY history stage. Motivation for movement includes response to changing environmental conditions either seasonally All of the culverts in this study passed juvenile coho or from the alteration of existing conditions, and meeting salmon and cutthroat at a wide range of flows, suggesting reproductive needs and age or life-history stage specific that the current design criteria for these culverts were habitat requirements (Kahler and Quinn 1998; Hoffman adequate to ensure juvenile fish passage. There appear and Dunham 2007). Preserving connectivity among to be patterns in the timing, frequency, and magnitude habitats within a watershed is crucial to the persistence of of upstream and downstream pre-smolt movement. The species dependent on periodic movements (Young 1994; upstream movement of both juvenile coho salmon and Fausch et al. 2002). cutthroat trout in the West Fork of Smith River was triggered Barriers, anthropogenic or natural, can have important by the first fall freshets and tapered off through the rest of ecological effects on fish movement. They may limit access the year. Downstream movement was spread throughout to food resources, reproductive sites, and seasonal refugia the year. Virtually all of the upstream movement occured (Hilderbrand and Kershner 2000). They can also restrict during flows at or below the 2% exceedance level (i.e., 2% interactions among populations of a given species, which of the flows at the site are greater than this flow), with the may reduce the likelihood of persistence of some populations vast majority happening at or below the 10% exceedance. (Lacey 1987; Rieman and Dunham 2000; Wofford et Determining the timing and magnitude of flows when fish al. 2005). How the influence of individual natural and move could help to refine the design criteria for crossings. anthropogenic barriers differs is not immediately clear. While these findings might be used to justify crossings that However, the large number of human-related obstacles do not match the stream channel dimensions, slope and (relative to natural barriers) suggests that they may have substrate (stream simulation), many other factors need to major impacts on fish populations in basins in the Pacific be considered as crossings are sized and designed. Stream Northwest and elsewhere. simulation crossings provide for many more benefits and Culvert passage issues are gaining national and functions than just fish passage. Maintenance of stream international focus because they are implicated in the channel processes and ecological functions are of equal or decline of many fish populations. Agencies responsible for greater importance and should be considered in stream managing fish or their habitat are increasingly concerned crossing design. about the potential impact of culverts on fish movement, particularly for those fish listed under the Endangered INTRODUCTION Species Act. Culverts can impede movement of fish and other aquatic organisms either at all times or under certain Movement within the stream network is an integral flow conditions. They may pose a barrier to upstream part of the life-history of many stream fishes (Fausch et movement of organisms by disrupting stream flow in one al. 2002; Schrank and Rahel 2004). The length, timing, or more of the following ways, by creating: (1) a jump and duration of movement vary with species and life- that is impossible to negotiate, or (2) a velocity barrier. A single impassable culvert can have effects that extended far METHODS beyond the stream on which it is located (Porto et al. 1999). Network fragmentation resulting from barrier culverts can Study Area affect the dispersal of individuals, the genetic integrity of local populations, and community and ecosystem dynamics The West Fork Smith River (WFSR) is a perennial 2 throughout the entire watershed (Wofford et al. 2005). stream draining a 69 km watershed in the Umpqua River Millions of dollars are being spent in the Pacific Northwest basin of the Oregon Coast Range (Figure 1). The WFSR by the USDI Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and was chosen for this study for multiple reasons; the Coos USDA Forest Service to remedy fish passage problems Bay District, BLM had a mix of existing and soon to be created by culverts. The agencies have identified a multiple replaced culverts along the valley floor road. The U.S. hundred million-dollar backlog of fish passage projects in Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was conducting Oregon and Washington (US General Accounting Office a study investigating relationships between landscape 2001). Current designs for fish passage culverts consider attributes and coho salmon productivity. Additionally, all life-history stages of selected salmon and trout. Until the WFSR is a life cycle monitoring basin of the Oregon recently, however, the primary emphasis was on adult fish. Department of Fish and Wildlife [ODFW] (Solazzi et al. Now there is increased concern about the movement, 2003). particularly upstream, of juveniles. Obviously, conditions The watershed is covered with a multi-aged forest, for the movement of juveniles will be quite different from dominated by Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga( menziesii), with those of adults. The Government Accounting Office mixed broadleaf and conifer species in the riparian areas, (GAO) review also found that there was a lack of systematic including red alder (Alnus rubra) and bigleaf maple (Acer monitoring to determine whether replacement culverts are macrophyllum). The WFSR has an elevation range from effective in fish passage. 60 to 850 m, with an average gradient of 2.5% (ODFW Land management agencies increasingly recognize and 1997). The underlying geology is Tyee sandstone. acknowledge the ecological importance of small streams, The watershed was splash dammed during a period of including those that may only flow during wetter times intensive forest management in the late 1800s and early of the year. Juveniles of many species move from larger 1900s (S. Klein, EPA, pers com). As a result, in-stream streams to smaller tributary streams seasonally (Kahler and habitat conditions in the lower portions of the West Fork Quinn 1998; Ebersole et al. 2006). They generally move Smith River have been relatively simplified through loss of into tributaries on increasing flows in the fall and early large wood structure that historically would have provided winter, and leave on falling flows in the spring. These points of accumulation of streambed sediments, and streams are often a major part of the stream network, and associated hydraulic and morphometric complexity (Reeves they often have culverts in them, particularly in more et al. 2002). There is, however, substantial variation in in- heavily managed watersheds. stream physical habitat conditions associated with more A literature review by Kahler and Quinn (1998) recent accumulations of large wood pieces and sediment in identified a number of studies that have shown upstream the channel. In the mainstem reaches, the amount of large movements of juvenile anadromous fish throughout the woody debris (LWD) greater than 0.1 m in diameter and 3 2 year. Juvenile steelhead (Onchorhyncus mykiss), cutthroat 1.5 m in length ranged from 0.0004 to 0.263 m /m . In trout (O. clarkii) and coho salmon (O. kisutch), species the tributaries studied, the amount of LWD ranged from 3 2 of interest in this study, have a generalized upstream 0.015 to 0.052 m /m (J. Ebersole, EPA, unpublished migration pattern into small tributaries from larger rivers data). in the late fall and early winter (Kahler and Quinn 1998). Fish species present in the West Fork Smith River Small streams generally served as crucial productive habitat include coho salmon, a small introduced run of fall for juvenile salmonids (Ebersole et al. 2006). chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha), winter steelhead, both The specific objectives of this study were to: (1) determine sea-run and resident cutthroat trout, sculpin (Cottus if recently replaced culverts on selected tributaries of the spp.), speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus), Umpqua dace West Fork Smith River, Oregon, allow upstream movement (R. evermanni), redside shiner (Richardsonius balteatus), of juvenile anadromous salmonids; and (2) identify water largescale sucker (Catostomus macrocheilus), northern conditions under which juvenile anadromous salmonids pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis), western brook move through culverts on selected tributaries of the West lamprey (Lampetra richardsoni), and Pacific lamprey (L. Fork Smith River basin. tridentata). 2 Figure 1. Location of West Fork Smith River stationary receivers. allow fish passage (Pat Olmstead, Coos Bay BLM, pers. Study Culverts comm.). Green crossings are judged most likely to pass Road crossings at Crane Creek, Moore Creek, Beaver fish at a wide range of flows and all life stages (Clarkin Creek, and Gold Creek were originally selected for the et al. 2005). Grey crossings are judged to have conditions study (Figure 1). The Crane Creek culvert was dropped that may not be adequate for all species and life stages of from the analysis due to excessive antenna down time and fish to pass the crossing. Red crossings are judged to have a short period of record. Each was recently replaced, and conditions that are assumed not adequate for fish passage. had been designed to allow passage of fish over a range The Upper West Fork Smith River bridge crossing, where of flows (Table 1, Figures 2-4). They were classified as road 20-9-27 crosses the WFSR (Figure 5), was added to Green or Grey using the “Coarse Screen Filter”, a rapid the study to monitor fish movement in a reach of stream assessment tool to identify the potential of a culvert to not affected by a culvert. Table 1.West Fork Smith River culvert specifications. Length Width Height Year (ft) (ft) (ft) Gradient % Stream Coarse Crossing Type Installed [m] [m] [m] (%) Simulation2 Filter3 Crane Cr.
Recommended publications
  • Agenda Item L
    Kate Brown, Governor 775 Summer Street NE, Suite 360 Salem OR 97301-1290 www.oregon.gov/oweb (503) 986-0178 Agenda Item L supports OWEB’s Strategic Plan priority # 6: Coordinated Monitoring and Shared Learning. MEMORANDUM TO: Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board FROM: Audrey Hatch, Conservation Outcomes Coordinator Renee Davis, Deputy Director SUBJECT: Agenda Item L – Telling the Restoration Story January 22-23, 2020 Board Meeting I. Introduction “Telling the Restoration Story” is a targeted grant offering that helps OWEB and grantees better communicate the ecological outcomes of restoration funded by OWEB. These grants support compilation, analysis, and/or interpretation of existing data from a watershed restoration project, and production of outreach materials that describe outcomes. Outreach products will reach a broad audience, including board members and legislators. Grantees also have identified specific audiences, so their messages about factors that lead to quantifiable restoration success will have high impact by speaking to landowners, restoration practitioners, and natural resource managers working to restore similar landscapes in Oregon. II. Progress to Date Seven projects were funded by OWEB in 2019: 1. Smith River Watershed Council: video, two-page fact sheet and technical report about how stream restoration treatments have increased salmon populations in the West Fork Smith River; 2. Lake County Umbrella Watershed Council: video, four-page fact sheet and technical report that highlights how fish passage projects benefit sensitive species in the Warner Lakes Basin; 3. Rogue Basin Partnership: online story map, fact sheet and compilation of fish passage restoration projects in the Rogue Basin; 4. Coos Watershed Association: video, fact sheet, and update to previously developed Willanch Creek report that details how riparian restoration improved habitat and helped keep water temperatures cool; 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Umpqua Bibliography by Groups I. Possible
    Umpqua Bibliography by Groups Introduction This bibliography is about the Umpqua River Basin, particularly its hydrology and its fisheries. Some films, photographs and archival materials are included along with books, articles, maps and web pages. The bibliography was built using local, regional and national library catalogs, major online databases, theses and dissertations, watershed assessments and Federal endangered species reports. Its historical coverage begins with Joel Palmer’s 1847 Journal of Travels over the Rocky Mountains and ends in early 2008. I have attempted to cover major physical features of the Umpqua Basin, as well as important aquatic species and critical issues facing the area. Trying to build a comprehensive collection of references on any subject in the age of information is, to use an image Joel Palmer would understand, like trying to catch a greased pig. It is ever squirming out of your grasp. This collection of references is necessarily incomplete, but I’d be grateful to learn of any major omissions. --Susan Gilmont Updated September, 2008 I. Possible Candidates for Digitization: Grey Literature, Important Or Uncataloged Reports on the Umpqua River (Sorted by Date) Roth, A. R. A survey of the waters of the South Umpqua Ranger District : Umpqua National Forest . Portland, Or.: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region; 1937. Call Number: OSU Libraries: Valley SH35.O7 U65 Notes: Baseline temperature data for the Umpqua Oregon State Game Commission. Lower Umpqua River Study : Summary : Annual Report. 1949. Call Number: Available from NMFS Environmental and Technical Svcs. Division, 525 NE Oregon St. Portland, OR 97232 (? dated reference). State Library or StreamNet should have this.
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE University of Idaho
    CURRICULUM VITAE University of Idaho NAME: Madison S. Powell DATE: January 5, 2018 RANK OR TITLE: Associate Professor, Department of Animal and Veterinary Science Associate Director, Aquaculture Research Institute, Hagerman Fish Culture Experiment Station DEPARTMENT: Animal and Veterinary Science OFFICE LOCATION AND CAMPUS ZIP: OFFICE PHONE: 208-837-9096 FAX: 208-837-6047 Hagerman Fish Culture Experiment Station EMAIL: [email protected] 3059F National Fish Hatchery Road Hagerman, ID 83332 DATE OF FIRST EMPLOYMENT AT UI: June 1995 DATE OF TENURE: Tenured July 2008 DATE OF PRESENT RANK OR TITLE: July 2008 EDUCATION BEYOND HIGH SCHOOL: Degrees: Ph.D., Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, Zoology, 1995 M.S., University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, Zoology, 1990 B.S., University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, Zoology and Biology, 1985 EXPERIENCE: Teaching, Extension and Research Appointments: Associate Professor / Graduate Faculty, Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Faculty, Department of Animal and Veterinary Science, Aquaculture Research Institute, Hagerman Fish Culture Experiment Station, University of Idaho, Hagerman, Idaho, 2008 – present Assistant Professor / Graduate Faculty, Department of Animal and Veterinary Science, Aquaculture Research Institute, Hagerman Fish Culture Experiment Station, University of Idaho, Hagerman, Idaho, 2002 – 2008 Research Assistant Professor, Department of Animal and Veterinary Science / Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, Aquaculture Research Institute, Hagerman Fish Culture Experiment Station, University
    [Show full text]
  • 1992 Annual Report
    THE OREGON PLAN for Salmon and Watersheds Status of Oregon Coastal Stocks of Anadromous Salmonids, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 Report Number: OPSW-ODFW-2002-3 Status of Oregon Coastal Stocks of Anadromous Salmonids, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds Monitoring Report No. OPSW-ODFW-2002-3 September, 2002 Steven Jacobs Julie Firman Gary Susac David Stewart Jared Weybright Coastal Salmonid Inventory Project Western Oregon Research and Monitoring Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 28655 Highway 34 Corvallis, OR 97333 Funds supplied in part by: Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration Program administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anadromous Fisheries Act administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service, Pacific Salmon Treaty administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service, and State of Oregon (General and Wildlife Funds). Citation: Jacobs S., J. Firman, G. Susac, D. Stewart and J. Weybright 2002. Status of Oregon coastal stocks of anadromous salmonids, 2000-2001 and 2001-2002; Monitoring Program Report Number OPSW-ODFW-2002-3, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Oregon. CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................1 Fall Chinook ............................................................................................................................1 Coho ........................................................................................................................................2 Chum .......................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 75, No. 101/Wednesday, May 26, 2010
    Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 26, 2010 / Proposed Rules 29489 Since nothing in the rule requires regulations under the ESA and status can be found in our February 11, those persons who submit reports designating critical habitat for this ESU 2008, final rule (73 FR 7816), classifying pursuant to this rule to keep copies of will remain in effect. this ESU as a threatened species. any records or reports submitted to us, DATES: Information and comments on To summarize that history, on July 25, recordkeeping costs imposed would be this proposal must be received by July 1995 we first proposed to list the ESU zero hours and zero costs. 26, 2010. A public hearing will be held as threatened (60 FR 38011). We withdrew that proposal in response to Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506; delegation of promptly if any person so requests by authority at 49 CFR 1.50. July 12, 2010. Notice of the location and the State of Oregon’s proposed conservation measures as described in Issued on: May 21, 2010. time of any such hearing will be published in the Federal Register not the Oregon Plan for Salmon and O. Kevin Vincent, less than 15 days before the hearing is Watersheds (62 FR 24588; May 6, 1997). Chief Counsel. held. On June 1, 1998, the U.S. District Court [FR Doc. 2010–12664 Filed 5–25–10; 8:45 am] for the District of Oregon found that our ADDRESSES: You may submit comments BILLING CODE 4910–59–P determination to not list the OC coho identified by 0648–XO28 by any of the salmon ESU was arbitrary and following methods: • Electronic Submissions: Federal e- capricious (Oregon Natural Resources DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Rulemaking Portal: http:// Council v.
    [Show full text]
  • West Fork Smith River Environmental Assessment
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management DOI-BLM-ORWA-C030-2017-0001-EA West Fork Smith River Environmental Assessment February 15, 2019 OR/WA Bureau of Land Management Coos Bay District, Umpqua Field Office 1300 Airport Lane North Bend, OR 97459 (541) 756-0100 [email protected] i | West Fork Smith River Environmental Assessment | DOI-BLM-ORWA-C030-2017-0001-EA | February 15, 2019 CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE AND NEED ................................................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT AREA LOCATION ......................................................................................................................................... 1 ACRES CONSIDERED AND ELIMINATED FROM PROPOSED PROJECT ............................................................................ 1 NEED .......................................................................................................................................................................... 4 PURPOSE (OBJECTIVES) .............................................................................................................................................. 5 DECISIONS TO BE MADE ............................................................................................................................................. 5 CONFORMANCE WITH LAND USE PLAN .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX a to the PACIFIC COAST SALMON FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN As Modified by Amendment 18 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan
    APPENDIX A TO THE PACIFIC COAST SALMON FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN As Modified by Amendment 18 to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION OF ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT, ADVERSE IMPACTS, AND RECOMMENDED CONSERVATION MEASURES FOR SALMON Pacific Fishery Management Council 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101 Portland, OR 97221-1384 (503) 820-2280 http://www.pcouncil.org September 2014 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The primary drafting of this document was accomplished by Dr. John Stadler, Kerry Griffin, and Eric Chavez. GIS mapping was contributed by Barbara Seekins and Charleen Gavette. Additional contributions were provided by (in alphabetical order) Scott Anderson, F. Dale Bambrick, Alice Berg, Stephanie Burchfield, Sean Callahan, Scott Carlon, Renee Coxen, Rebecca Dittmann, Brian Ellrott, Dr. Jeffrey Fisher, William Foster, Michael Grady, Mark Hampton, Dr. Peter Kiffney, Keith Kirkendall, Gayle Kreitman, Steven Landino, William Lind, Michael Lisitza, Jeffrey Lockwood, Matthew Longenbaugh, David Mabe, Robert Markel, Michael McDonald, Michelle McMullen, Ben Meyer, Kenneth Phippen, Dr. Phil Roni, Bonnie Shorin, Dr. Thomas Sibley, Jim Simondet, Dr. Brian Spence, Kenneth Troyer, Randy Tweten, Julie Weeder, and David White. Final compilation and editing were done by Kim Ambert and Chuck Tracy. Partial funding for this effort was secured by Michael Tehan, Assistant Regional Administrator for Habitat Conservation Division, Northwest Region, National Marine Fisheries Service. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS, AND INITIALISMS ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coho Salmon Life History Patterns in the Pacific Northwest and California
    Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) Life History Patterns in the Pacific Northwest and California Final Report March 2007 Prepared for U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Klamath Area Office Prepared by Lawrence C. Lestelle 17791 Fjord Drive NE Suite AA Poulsbo, WA 98370 360-697-6702 ACKNOWLDGEMENTS This project was funded by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). Ron Costello, Richard Piaskowski, and Cindy Williams of the Klamath Area Office were particularly helpful in securing funding and coordinating field visits to Klamath area streams. Steve Cramer, Nick Ackerman, and Tom Nickelson of Cramer Fish Sciences provided insightful reviews of early drafts and shared information sources. Josh Strange with the Yurok Fisheries Program of the Yurok Tribe provided helpful comments on the review draft, as did Jim Simondet of the Arcata Area Office of NOAA Fisheries. Special thanks are due to the five scientists who kindly responded to an invitation from USBR to give technical peer review of the report. Each of these individuals are experts on coho life history and have first-hand experience in researching this species in different geographic areas. These are Walt Duffy, Humboldt State University, James Hall, Oregon State University (retired), Gordon Hartman, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (retired), Peter Moyle, University of California at Davis, and Tom Quinn, University of Washington. Tom Nickelson, previously mentioned for his review, deserves to be ranked with this distinguished group for his expertise on coho life history. Coho Salmon
    [Show full text]
  • An Abstract of the Thesis Of
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Nancy Raskauskas for the degree of Honors Bachelors of Science in Fisheries Science presented on December 9, 2005 Title: Cool Hideaways: Use of Summer Temperature Refuges by Juvenile Coho Salmon in the West Fork Smith River Abstract approved: ________________________________________________________ Judith L. Li The West Fork Smith River, a 69 km2 watershed in the Coast Range of Oregon, is prone to short periods of very high water temperature in mid-summer due to a combination of human and natural influences. In the summers of 2003 and 2004 more than 400 juvenile coho salmon regularly packed themselves into a 4m2 area of cooler water near Crane Creek. In the same watershed, other groups of coho salmon and trout were monitored in three other cold refuges where they avoided main channel water temperatures that reached as high as 25oC. In 2003 we mapped cold refuges and performed snorkel surveys and fish counts at several sites. In 2004 we chose four main refuges as study sites. We installed temperature loggers in each refuge and nearby main channel. We measured (length, weight) and PIT- tagged juvenile coho salmon at each site in early July and recaptured and measured fish in September. We tracked fish movement throughout the summer using a portable PIT- tag reader and snorkel surveyed to count fish numbers in the refuges and nearby pools at various water temperatures and to observe fish behavior. However, of the 178 coho salmon tagged only 50 were recaptured. 1 Local fidelity to refuge sites, in association with peak temperatures in mid summer best describes juvenile coho use of coldwater refuges at West Fork Smith River.
    [Show full text]
  • Umpqua Basin Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL
    CHAPTER 7 UMPQUA BASIN WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP) Prepared by: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Submissions by: Oregon Department of Agriculture Oregon Department of Forest Oregon Department of Transportation USDA Forest Service and USDI BLM Partnership for the Umpqua Rivers Umpqua Basin TMDL: Water Quality Management Plan October 2006 Table of Contents PART I. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................. 1 Douglas County........................................................................................................................................................2 Oregon Department of Agriculture........................................................................................................................2 Oregon Department of Forestry.............................................................................................................................2 USDI-Bureau of Land Management, USDA-Forest Service................................................................................2 Oregon Department of Transportation .................................................................................................................2 DEQ - NPDES Permitted Operations ....................................................................................................................3 The incorporated cities in Douglas County ...........................................................................................................3 B.
    [Show full text]
  • Umpqua Basin TMDL and WQMP Response to Public Comments
    Umpqua Basin Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) & Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Response to Public Comments Prepared by: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality October 2006 Umpqua Basin TMDL: Response to Comments October 2006 Introduction This Response to Public Comments document addresses comments received regarding the Draft Umpqua Basin Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) dated February 2006. Grammatical, editorial, and formatting errors noted by reviewers are not addressed here but corrections have been made in the document where necessary. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) appreciates the time and effort that all the commenters put into reviewing the document. All comments have been considered by ODEQ and, where appropriate, have been addressed in the final document that has been submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). EPA will then either approve or disapprove the TMDL. Background The public comment period on the proposed TMDL and WQMP opened February 21, 2006. Written and oral comments were received during the public comment period that extended through April 24, 2006. Four information sessions were provided around the basin prior to the formal public hearings in Reedsport (City Hall) March 30, 2006 and Roseburg (Courthouse Church Annex Building) April 6, 2006. One commenter provided ORAL comments at the public hearing in Reedsport. Remaining comments received by ODEQ were submitted in written (paper and electronic) form. The TMDL and WQMP were available for downloading from ODEQ’s website throughout the comment period. Hard copies and CDs of the document were also available for viewing at ODEQ’s offices in Roseburg and Portland.
    [Show full text]
  • LCM Annual Report 1998-1999
    for Salmon and Watersheds Salmonid Life-Cycle Monitoring Project, 1998 and 1999 REPORT NUMBER: OPSW-ODFW-2000-2 SALMONID LIFE-CYCLE MONITORING PROJECT 1998 AND 1999 Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds Monitoring Report No. OPSW-ODFW-2000-2 March 2, 2000 Mario F. Solazzi Steven L. Johnson Bruce Miller Tim Dalton Coastal Salmonid Inventory Project Western Oregon Research and Monitoring Program Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 28655 Highway 34 Corvallis, OR 97333 Funds provided in part by: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration Program administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bureau of Land Management Salem and Coos Bay Districts Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds Tillamook Bay National Estuary Program Oregon Department of Forestry Citation: Solazzi, M.F., S.L. Johnson, B. Miller, T. Dalton 2000. Salmonid Life-Cycle Monitoring Project 1998 and 1999. Monitoring Program Report Number OPSW-ODFW-2000-2, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Oregon. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I. SMOLT AND ADULT MONITORING………………………………………………………..1 Introduction............................................................................................................................. 1 Description of Sub-basins ....................................................................................................... 1 North Fork Scappoose Creek (Lower Willamette)................................................................ 1 North Fork Nehalem River..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]