Final Environmental Impact Statement Ochoco Summit Trail System Project Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences – Wildlife

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Final Environmental Impact Statement Ochoco Summit Trail System Project Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences – Wildlife Final Environmental Impact Statement Ochoco Summit Trail System Project Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences – Wildlife Wildlife _________________________________________ This section includes a summary of the Wildlife specialist’s report and Biological Evaluation; the entire report is in the Ochoco Summit Trail System project record, located at the Ochoco National Forest, Prineville, Oregon. General Effects to Wildlife With all management activities, there are negative effects to some species and benefits to others that must be considered and balanced along with the need for those human activities. Negative effects of recreational OHV use on wildlife may include wildlife mortality, direct and indirect loss of habitat, displacement, and reduced connectivity. Factors that influence the vulnerability of different wildlife species include behavior and ecology. For example, animals that tend to stay closer to shelter, such as gray squirrel and woodchuck, can tolerate closer encounters with humans because they can quickly escape (Frid and Dill 2002; Gill et al. 1996). Other species tend to forage less and spend less time in quality habitat near human activity (Gill et al. 1996). Still other species may respond positively to human development and use of OHV trails and roads; potential benefits are related to habitat, mobility, and food resources. Openings, shrubs and grasses may develop alongside roads, providing additional foraging habitats. Cleared roads and trails are utilized as travel corridors for some species. No road construction is proposed for the Ochoco Summit project; however, there are ongoing effects of existing roads, and the effects of existing roads and proposed OHV trails are similar. Road widths vary from 14 to 35 feet depending on single or double lane and maintenance of right of way. For trails, effects are less than roads regarding direct alteration of habitat as the width of the footprint for motorcycle trails would be 24 inches wide; ATV trails would be 50 inches wide; and jeep trails would be 80 inches wide. General effects to wildlife include altered reproductive success, mortality, loss of habitat or habitat quality due to: • Access for predators and people • Fragmentation of habitat patches • Behavioral changes in response to human use • Impacts due to noise • Physical alteration of habitat Access for predators and people Roads may act as barriers for some species but may aid in the dispersal of other native and non-native species. Pocket gophers have extended their ranges by traveling on roads and canals (Hey 1941 in Ouren et al. 2007). Brown-headed cowbirds are attracted to trails giving them easier access to parasitize nests near the trail or roads (Hickman 1990). Studies have found predation rates increase with decreasing distance to trails by raven, domestic dogs, mice, squirrels, skunks, and coyotes (Miller and Hubbs 2000; Miller et al. 1998). Roads and trails provide greater human access to habitats previously not accessed (Forman et al. 2003). There is increased human access to and contact with animals resulting in intentional or accidental harm or mortality. Roads and trails also increase access for falconers to remove young raptors from nests (Erdman et al. 1998 in Gaines et al. 2003). Increased contact can result in increased intentional or accidental killing of wildlife, resulting in increased vulnerability of species like mink, marten, deer and elk (Cole et al. 1997; pers. comm. ODFW; Gaines et al. 2003). Edge effect from roads and trails may also increase predation access to songbird nests. Studies found an increase in predators attracted to the corridors and the adjacent forest interior on trails and roads 7 223 Ochoco Summit Trail System Project Final Environmental Impact Statement Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences – Wildlife to 26 feet (Rich et al. 1994 in Ouren et al. 2007; Hickman 1990). In addition, open areas such as junctions, play areas, campgrounds, and staging areas have perches and a clear view of surrounding areas can be a factor in higher nest predation (Ratti & Reese 1988 in Paton 1994). Adjacent roads and trails provide travel corridors into forested habitat from nearby areas (Small and Hunter 1988; Askins 1994 in Montana TWS 1999). Predators such as great gray owls and red-tail hawks take advantage of forest edge. Roads and 4 wheel drive trails provide additional nesting habitat for these species. Indirect effects would include competition with other predators, such as Goshawk and Coopers hawk. In recent years there have been few restrictions to cross country travel across the Forest except in designated areas (e.g. wilderness, research natural areas, Travel Management Areas, Roadless Areas). Closed roads have administrative use allowed. This use is highly variable in any given year from short-term daily use for a vegetation management project to years of inactivity. Because of the variability and high degree of inactivity these roads are not included in the disturbed habitat analysis. Outside of closed areas cross country travel has been permitted on Ochoco National Forest, and many miles of user-created trails, closed roads, non-motorized trails and other unauthorized routes are receiving motorized use. Within the project area there are 659 miles of roads that are legal for mixed use by OHVs. In addition there are 140 miles of open road that are not legal for OHV use, and 669 miles of closed roads, many of which are receiving OHV use. Given the traditional pattern of “open unless designated closed” on this forest, there are currently large areas with high levels of human disturbance and predator access. The Ochoco Summit project does not propose to construct any new roads. Proposed trail construction would utilize roads, user-created trails, fire lines, snowmobile trails, and other areas disturbed from management activities wherever possible. Through the action alternatives, OHV use would only be allowed on designated trails, routes, shared use roads and/ or play areas, and would no longer be permitted on user-created trails. Within each action alternative, there is a proposal to decrease habitat disturbance by closing and rehabilitating user-created trails, physically closing roads that are not managed as open roads, and converting roads into trails. Table 89 displays the length of trail by existing disturbance type. “Miles of trail not on roads” includes new routes, as well as routes on existing disturbance that are not recognized in GIS as Forest System Roads (ie. temporary roads, skid roads, user created trails, or old roads that have been removed from the transportation database). A combination of rehabilitation of unwanted user created or unauthorized routes and reinforcement of existing road closures would be implemented, which should ameliorate effects of human access across the project area. However, closed roads, converted trails and rehabilitated routes may still provide access for predators. Given the relatively open travel conditions present across much of the project area for hunters and predators alike, it is assumed that animal mortality rates would be similar to what currently exists. Table 89. Comparison of Alternative Actions. Miles of Miles of trails Miles of trail Miles of trails Miles of mixed use on Alternative route on open on closed trails not (OHV decommissioned roads roads on roads legal) road roads Alternative 1 659 0 0 0 0 Alternative 2 659 46 44 11 69 Alternative 3 659 13 30 7 50 Alternative 4 659 53 62 14 81 224 Final Environmental Impact Statement Ochoco Summit Trail System Project Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences – Wildlife Fragmentation of habitat patches Roads contribute to forest fragmentation by dissecting large patches into smaller patches. Forest fragmentation results in decreased interior forest habitat and increased edge habitat (Askins et al. 1987; Small and Hunter 1988; Schonewald-Cox and Buechner 1992; Askins 1994 in Montana TWS 1999; Reed et al. 1996). Patch size and distribution can determine the probability that a patch may be occupied (Laan and Verboom 1990; Fahrig 1998 in Montana TWS 1999). Habitat fragmentation from roads and 4-wheel-drive trails may reduce a species capacity by disrupting continuous forest cover and reducing space needed by interior species (Hickman 1990 in Montana TWS 1999, Hutto 1996). However, some species such as flycatching birds and accipiters may respond favorably to canopy gaps and corridors, which they utilize as foraging sites or flyways. Riparian areas are usually areas of high diversity. Fragmentation of riparian habitats by roads may create greater impacts on the landscape. Patch size is reduced and roads may separate important habitat associations between the uplands and riparian areas. Songbirds, such as the brown creeper and dark-eyed junco, utilizing both the riparian and upslope forested habitat (McGarigal and McComb 1992) used habitats more effectively when they were connected (Hutto 1995). Road and trail edges may serve as ecological traps for some species (Andrews 1990 in Ouren et al. 2007; Kokko and Sutherland 2001). These areas may have the necessary resources for species to live and potentially reproduce but impose high mortality rates. For example, some bird species are attracted to roadsides due to the lush vegetation for nesting and foraging; although the road and trail sides contains suitable habitat, these individuals are at greater risk of mortality of being hit by vehicles or predation (Clark and Karr 1979 in Ouren et al. 2007, Brooks and Lair 2005; Mumme et al. 2000 in Ouren et al. 2007; Yahner et al. 1979 in Ouren et al. 2007; Kokko and Sutherland 2001). In the Ochoco Summit project area, the more likely potential effect would be increased predation, as risk of animals being hit by an OHV on trails designed for slow speed is low. Forman (2000) described a “road effect distance” of 200 meters (660 feet) for secondary roads to calculate the indirect loss of habitat and the displacement of many species. Forman also mentions the road effect zone is highly variable and is dependent on the species affected, adjacent habitat, road type, and traffic volume.
Recommended publications
  • June 2018 June 3Rd, 2018 19 Men and 6 Women NBC's Meet the Press
    June 2018 June 3rd, 2018 19 men and 6 women NBC's Meet the Press with Chuck Todd: 5 men and 1 woman Frm. Mayor Rudy Giuliani (M) PM Justin Trudeau (M) Joshua Johnson (M) Peggy Noonan (W) Rich Lowry (M) Ben Rhodes (M) CBS's Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan: 5 men and 2 women Gov. John Kasich (M) Rep. Will Hurd (M) Frm. Amb. Robert Gallucci (M) Dr. Jung Pak (W) David Nakamura (M) Susan Page (W) Michael Crowley (M) ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos: 5 men and 2 women Frm. Mayor Rudy Giuliani (M) Frm. Amb. Bill Richardson (M) Tom Bossert (M) Sue Mi Terry (W) Frm. Speaker Newt Gingrich (M) Karen Finney (W) Patrick Gaspard (M) CNN's State of the Union with Jake Tapper: *With Guest Host Dana Bash 1 man and 1 woman Rep. Kevin McCarthy (M) Minister Chrystia Freeland (W) Fox News' Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace: 3 men and 0 women Corey Lewandowski (M) Guy Benson (M) Larry Kudlow (M) June 10th, 2018 13 men and 6 women NBC's Meet the Press with Chuck Todd: No Data Available CBS's Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan: 4 men and 4 women Frm. Amb. Susan Rice (W) Dir. Larry Kudlow (M) Sen. Edward Markey (M) Evan Osnos (M) Seung Min Kim (W) Selena Zito (W) Molly Ball (W) Kenneth Starr (M) ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos: 1 man and 0 women Jonathan Cheng (M) CNN's State of the Union with Jake Tapper: 1 man and 2 women Dir.
    [Show full text]
  • Likely to Have Habitat Within Iras That ALLOW Road
    Item 3a - Sensitive Species National Master List By Region and Species Group Not likely to have habitat within IRAs Not likely to have Federal Likely to have habitat that DO NOT ALLOW habitat within IRAs Candidate within IRAs that DO Likely to have habitat road (re)construction that ALLOW road Forest Service Species Under NOT ALLOW road within IRAs that ALLOW but could be (re)construction but Species Scientific Name Common Name Species Group Region ESA (re)construction? road (re)construction? affected? could be affected? Bufo boreas boreas Boreal Western Toad Amphibian 1 No Yes Yes No No Plethodon vandykei idahoensis Coeur D'Alene Salamander Amphibian 1 No Yes Yes No No Rana pipiens Northern Leopard Frog Amphibian 1 No Yes Yes No No Accipiter gentilis Northern Goshawk Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Ammodramus bairdii Baird's Sparrow Bird 1 No No Yes No No Anthus spragueii Sprague's Pipit Bird 1 No No Yes No No Centrocercus urophasianus Sage Grouse Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Cygnus buccinator Trumpeter Swan Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Falco peregrinus anatum American Peregrine Falcon Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Gavia immer Common Loon Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Histrionicus histrionicus Harlequin Duck Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Lanius ludovicianus Loggerhead Shrike Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Oreortyx pictus Mountain Quail Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Otus flammeolus Flammulated Owl Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Picoides albolarvatus White-Headed Woodpecker Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Picoides arcticus Black-Backed Woodpecker Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Speotyto cunicularia Burrowing
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Treatments Record of Decision
    Attachment B – Conservation Measures for Special Status Species Introduction These Conservation Measures were displayed in Appendix 5 of the Final EIS. They are the product of the PEIS Biological Assessment and adopted by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service Consultation, and apply to listed and proposed species as described in those consultation documents. These do not apply where a No Effect determination can be made without them, or where site-specific consultation identifies alternative ways to achieve appropriate protection. PEIS Mitigation Measures adopted by this Record of Decision also require implementation of certain of these conservation measures “When necessary to protect Special Status plant/fish and other aquatic organisms/wildlife species….” (see Attachment A). Conservation Measures for Birds Conservation Measures for the California Brown Pelican Although treatment activities are unlikely to negatively affect the brown pelican or its habitat, extra steps could be taken by the BLM to ensure that herbicide treatments conducted in brown pelican wintering habitat did not result in negative effects to the species: • If feasible, conduct vegetation treatments in brown pelican wintering habitat outside the period when pelicans are likely to be present. • If herbicide treatments in brown pelican habitats must be conducted during the wintering period: ◦ Do not use 2,4-D in pelican wintering habitat. ◦ Prior to conducting herbicide treatments on pelican wintering habitat, survey the area for pelicans. Wait for pelicans to leave the area before spraying. ◦ Do not broadcast spray clopyralid, glyphosate, hexazinone, picloram, or triclopyr in pelican wintering habitats. ◦ If broadcast spraying imazapyr or metsulfuron methyl in pelican wintering habitats, use the typical rather than the maximum application rate.
    [Show full text]
  • Democratic Primary Preview: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina CLINTON PRESSED in IOWA, but HOLDS WIDE LEADS ELSEWHERE
    NEWS Release 1615 L Street, N.W., Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036 Tel (202) 419-4350 Fax (202) 419-4399 FOR RELEASE: MONDAY, DECEMBER 3, 2007 10:00AM Democratic Primary Preview: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina CLINTON PRESSED IN IOWA, BUT HOLDS WIDE LEADS ELSEWHERE A Survey Conducted in Association with The Associated Press Also inside… Iraq, health care top issues Clinton by far the most electable But electability matters less than in ‘04 Clinton, Obama split black vote in South Carolina FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Kohut, Director Scott Keeter, Director of Survey Research Carroll Doherty and Michael Dimock, Associate Directors Pew Research Center for the People & the Press 202/419-4350 http://www.people-press.org Democratic Primary Preview: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina CLINTON PRESSED IN IOWA, BUT HOLDS WIDE LEADS ELSEWHERE Democrats enter the presidential primary campaign upbeat about their candidates and united in their views on major issues. Sen. Hillary Clinton is the clear frontrunner in New Hampshire and South Carolina, where she holds 19-point and 14-point leads, respectively. However in Iowa she is in a statistical tie with Barack Obama. Clinton has a clear advantage on the key issue of Democratic Horse Race health care, and leads among Democratic women voters in Based on Likely Voters* all three states – where women constitute majorities of the Natl IA NH SC likely caucus and primary electorates. Her lead is also % % % % Clinton 48 31 38 45 particularly wide among older voters – voters over age 50 in Obama 22 26 19 31 all three states favor her over Obama by more than two-to- Edwards 11 19 15 10 Richardson 3 10 10 1 one.
    [Show full text]
  • WNBC/Marist Poll Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 Š Phone 845.575.5050 Š Fax 845.575.5111
    WNBC/Marist Poll Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 Phone 845.575.5050 Fax 845.575.5111 www.maristpoll.marist.edu EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE: Wednesday 6:00 p.m. February 22, 2006 All references must be sourced WNBC/Marist Poll Contact: Dr. Lee M. Miringoff Dr. Barbara L. Carvalho Marist College 845.575.5050 National Poll: Campaign 2008 Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice Are Top Contenders Among Their Party’s Faithful But Is America Ready for a Woman President? This WNBC/Marist Poll reports: • Hillary Clinton is the Democratic presidential primary frontrunner and most voters think she is going to run: Hillary Clinton is a formidable favorite among Democrats for her party’s presidential nomination. A majority of Democrats like her more than they did just two years ago. Democrats generally think she is ideologically about right, neither too liberal nor too conservative. Most of them would like to see her enter the presidential contest in 2008, and many think she will. But like the other potential Democratic and Republican presidential candidates for 2008, Senator Clinton faces a general electorate that is divided over who they would like to see in the race. She is competitive, though politically polarizing, against two of the three Republican presidential frontrunners. But most registered voters do not think she is likely to win. A majority of both Democrats and independents believe she will be treated more harshly on the campaign hustings than other potential presidential candidates. ¾ Senator Hillary Clinton outpaces the field of potential Democratic candidates nationwide for the party’s 2008 presidential nomination. Clinton receives 40% among Democrats and Democratic leaning independents.
    [Show full text]
  • The Democrats
    CBS NEWS POLL For release: Friday, June 29, 2007 6:30 P.M. EDT CAMPAIGN 2008 June 26-28, 2007 Many Americans are looking for even more choices in the race for the presidency than the 18 announced candidates they now have: Should Fred Thompson decide to officially enter the race for the Republican nomination, he is already a strong contender, tying John McCain for second place, after Rudy Giuliani. Americans would like a third political party (especially self-described Independents, and primary voters who say they are dissatisfied with their current choices) -- but Americans have historically liked the idea of more candidate choices. But as of now, most don’t know much about or have an opinion of New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who recently dropped out of the Republican Party, perhaps in anticipation of a run at the presidency in 2008 as a third-party candidate. And on the Democratic side, where most primary voters are satisfied with the choices, Hillary Clinton continues to lead Barack Obama. MIKE BLOOMBERG AND A THIRD PARTY New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's recent party registration change from Republican to “Unaffiliated” has many speculating that he is preparing an independent run for President. That speculation has sparked debate about the need for a third political party. 53% say that a third party is needed to compete with the Democratic and Republican parties. 41% disagree. These views are similar to what they were in 1996, and in 1992 voters also expressed the desire for a new party. Half of both Republicans and Democrats do not think there is a need for a third political party, but 71% of Independents say there is.
    [Show full text]
  • Face the Nation."
    © 2008, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. PLEASE CREDIT ANY QUOTES OR EXCERPTS FROM THIS CBS TELEVISION PROGRAM TO "CBS NEWS' FACE THE NATION." CBS News FACE THE NATION Sunday, March 2, 2008 GUESTS: Governor BILL RICHARDSON (D-NM) Senator CHRISTOPHER DODD (D-CT) Obama Surrogate Senator EVAN BAYH (D-IN) Clinton Surrogate MODERATOR/PANELIST: Mr. Bob Schieffer – CBS News This is a rush transcript provided for the information and convenience of the press. Accuracy is not guaranteed. In case of doubt, please check with FACE THE NATION - CBS NEWS (202)-457-4481 BOB SCHIEFFER, host: Today on FACE THE NATION, it's down to Texas and Ohio now. It'll be a showdown this Tuesday with contests there which could decide which Democrat will run against Senator John McCain, and the campaign rhetoric is red hot. Senator Hillary Clinton argues she's the one who's ready to be president. But is that fair to Senator Barack Obama? We'll talk to two senators on opposite sides: for Senator Obama, Chris Dodd, senator from Connecticut; for Senator Clinton, Evan Bayh, senator from Indiana. Then we'll talk to Governor Bill Richardson, who ran against both candidates, but who has not yet endorsed either. Will he make an endorsement? We'll find out. Then I'll have a final word on the passing of a conservative and a gentleman. But first, Texas and Ohio on FACE THE NATION. Announcer: FACE THE NATION, with CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer. And now, from CBS News in Washington, Bob Schieffer. SCHIEFFER: And good morning again.
    [Show full text]
  • New Mexico Statehood and Political Inequality • the Case of Nuevomexicanos
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by UNM Open Journals Portal (The University of New Mexico) • New Mexico Statehood and Political Inequality • The Case of Nuevomexicanos PHILLIP B. GONZALES rior to the late 1880s, the civic and political leaders of Nuevomexica- nos generally disagreed on the question of statehood for territorial New Mexico. As one faction or another put the issue on the public agenda, Pthose who favored it joined Euroamerican (the vernacular “Anglo”) settlers who believed that statehood would accelerate the modern development of the territory to everyone’s benefit and enable the people to enjoy the political sovereignty that regular membership among the states in the Union held out. Opponents generally believed that the territory was not yet ready for statehood, and especially that it would burden the mass of poor Spanish-speaking citizens with unaffordable taxes until the territory’s economy could develop sufficiently.1 But as David Holtby’s recent book on New Mexico’s achievement of statehood indicates, Nuevomexicano spokesmen at the turn of the twentieth century clearly, if not unequivocally, supported the statehood movement. The success of the statehood proposition rested on this support. Nuevomexicanos constituted the majority of New Mexico’s population and statehood required that the population ratify the 1910 constitution. A great deal thus rode on Nuevomexicano leaders Phillip B. (Felipe) Gonzales is professor of Sociology at the University of New Mexico (UNM). At UNM he was formerly associate dean of faculty, College of Arts & Sciences; chair of Sociology; and director of the Southwest Hispanic Research Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • Election Summary Report PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY
    Election Summary Report 02/05/08 PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY 22:36:27 Summary For Jurisdiction Wide, All Counters, All Races Registered Voters 75175 - Cards Cast 12839 Num. Report Precinct 132 - Num. Reporting 132 17.08% 100.00% PRESIDENT-DEMOCRATIC Vote for One DEM Total Number of Precincts 132 Precincts Reporting 132 100.0 % Times Counted 7139/31708 22.5 % Total Votes 7040 MIKE GRAVEL 27 0.38% JOHN EDWARDS 677 9.62% CHRIS DODD 5 0.07% HILLARY CLINTON 2983 42.37% JOE BIDEN 36 0.51% BARACK OBAMA 3096 43.98% BILL RICHARDSON 54 0.77% DENNIS KUCINICH 120 1.70% Write-in Votes 42 0.60% PRESIDENT-REPUBLICAN Vote for One REP Total Number of Precincts 132 Precincts Reporting 132 100.0 % Times Counted 4622/21660 21.3 % Total Votes 4532 MIKE HUCKABEE 674 14.87% DUNCAN HUNTER 11 0.24% FRED THOMPSON 184 4.06% TOM TANCREDO 7 0.15% RUDY GIULIANI 253 5.58% JOHN H. COX 6 0.13% SAM BROWNBACK 3 0.07% RON PAUL 231 5.10% JOHN MCCAIN 1847 40.75% MITT ROMNEY 1274 28.11% ALAN KEYES 18 0.40% Write-in Votes 24 0.53% PRESIDENT-AIP Vote For One AIP Total Number of Precincts 132 Precincts Reporting 132 100.0 % Times Counted 196/1837 10.7 % Total Votes 125 DIANE BEALL TEMPLIN 20 16.00% DON J. GRUNDMANN 33 26.40% MAD MAX RIEKSE 29 23.20% Write-in Votes 43 34.40% PRESIDENT-LIBERTARIAN Vote For One LIB Total Number of Precincts 132 Precincts Reporting 132 100.0 % Times Counted 69/619 11.1 % Total Votes 51 BARRY HESS 5 9.80% DAVE HOLLIST 0 0.00% ALDEN LINK 0 0.00% DANIEL IMPERATO 0 0.00% CHRISTINE SMITH 14 27.45% GEORGE PHILLIES 1 1.96% ROBERT MILNES 0 0.00% MICHAEL P.
    [Show full text]
  • River Canyon Country – Rural Tourism Studio
    RIVER CANYON COUNTRY – RURAL TOURISM STUDIO WORKSHOP #1, COMMUNITY TOURISM VISIONING EVENT November 6, 2012 Inn at the Cross Keys, Madras, Oregon PARTICIPANTS Cristie Amaral, Maupin Chamber Sarah Ashley, Imperial River Company Joe Becker, Prineville‐Crook County Chamber of Commerce Amy Belasen, Brasada Ranch Brenda Comini, Crook County Seth Crawford, Crook County Russell Deboodt, EDCO Billie Estridge, Timber Creek Farms Serenia Groth, Creative Groth Pam Hardy, 1000 Friends of Oregon Alana Hughson, Central Oregon Visitors Association Kahseuss Jackson, Confederated Tribe of Warm Springs Lonnie James, Warm Springs CAT Beth Jay, Resident Joe Krenowicz, Madras Chamber of Commerce Tory Kurtz, Forest Service Brenda Nathan, N8TV Adventures Randy Nathan, N8TV Adventures Stan Nowakowski, Bicycle Rides Northwest Dean Noyes, Crooked River Roundup Jeff Rasmussen, Jefferson County Rachael Ress, Bend Bulletin Kristi Richter, Central Oregon Visitors Association Aliza Rosenstein, The Well‐Traveled Fork Maura Schwartz, Resident Aurolyn Stwyer‐Pinkham, Red Skye, LLC Bill Vollmer, Mountain Photo and Graphics Don Wood, Resident TRAVEL OREGON STAFF: Todd Davidson, Chief Executive Officer Kristin Dahl, Senior Manager, Destination Development Harry Dalgaard III, Specialist, Destination Development David Blair, Community Projects, Destination Development Linda Andrews, Destination Development Coordinator Jamie Parra, Destination Development Coordinator River Canyon Country Rural Tourism Studio Notes, Community Tourism Planning/Visioning, Nov 6 & 7, 2012 1 Background Summary The scenarios developed during this Scenario Planning Process and outlined in these notes are important to provide a ‘vehicle’ to be used in the process of building a shared tourism vision for the future of the Canyon River Country Region. In addition, these deliberations assist in identifying key actions and approaches to how various stakeholders might best contribute to future developments; in part by identifying possibilities for collaboration.
    [Show full text]
  • Descendants of John Jacob Michael Beeler
    Descendants of John Jacob Michael Beeler Courtesy of Frazier Farmstead Museum Our goal is to research the pioneers that came into the Walla Walla Valley Area, as a starter for those doing their family genealogy; we are not related. Head Researcher: Sarah Olsen, Researcher: Linda Kracke September 18, 2006 Generation No. 1 1. JOHN JACOB MICHAEL 1 BEELER was born 21 Feb 1736/37 in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. He married MARY ANN TURNEY Abt. 1757 in Franklin, Virginia. She was born Abt. 1740 in Union, Tennessee. More About JOHN BEELER and MARY TURNEY: Marriage: Abt. 1757, Franklin, Virginia Child of JOHN BEELER and MARY TURNEY is: 2. i. PETER 2 BEELER, b. 16 Sep 1767, Millers Town, Shenandoah Co, VA; d. 17 Aug 1836, Speedwell, Claiborne County, Tennessee. Generation No. 2 2. PETER 2 BEELER (JOHN JACOB MICHAEL 1) was born 16 Sep 1767 in Millers Town, Shenandoah Co, VA, and died 17 Aug 1836 in Speedwell, Claiborne County, Tennessee. He married BARBARY ELIZABETH PETREY Mar 1794 in Speedwell, Claiborne County, Tennessee. She was born 29 Mar 1772 in West Donegal, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, and died Jun 1828 in Speedwell, Claiborne County, Tennessee. More About PETER BEELER: Burial: Beeler Cemetery, Speedwell, Tennessee1 More About BARBARY ELIZABETH PETREY: Burial: Beeler Cemetery, Clairborne County,Tennessee 2 More About PETER BEELER and BARBARY PETREY: Marriage: Mar 1794, Speedwell, Claiborne County, Tennessee Children of PETER BEELER and BARBARY PETREY are: 3. i. ESTHER JASON 3 BEELER, b. 09 Jan 1795, Sullivan County, Tennessee; d. Abt. 1853, Jackson County, Missouri. 4. ii. MARY BEELER, b. 16 Jul 1796, Sullivan County, Tennessee; d.
    [Show full text]
  • OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION Page 1 of 683 Licensed Businesses As of 8/12/2018 4:10A.M
    OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION Page 1 of 683 Licensed Businesses As of 8/12/2018 4:10A.M. License License Secondary Location Tradename Licensee Name Type Mailing Address Premises Address Premises No. License No. Expires County To License # #1 FOOD 4 MART FUN 4 U INC O PO BOX 5026 729 SW 185TH 28426 271408 03/31/2019 WASHINGTON BEAVERTON, OR 97006 ALOHA, OR 97006 Phone: 503-502-9271 00 WINES 00 OREGON LLC WY 937 NW GLISAN ST #1037 801 N SCOTT ST 58406 272542 03/31/2019 YAMHILL PORTLAND, OR 97209 CARLTON, OR 97111 Phone: 503-852-6100 1 800 WINESHOP.COM 1 800 WINESHOP.COM INC DS 525 AIRPARK RD 51973 267742 12/31/2018 OUTSIDE OR NAPA, CA 94558 Phone: 800-946-3746 1 AM MARKET 1 AM MARKET INC O PO BOX 46 320 N MAIN ST 4346 275587 06/30/2019 DOUGLAS RIDDLE, OR 97469 RIDDLE, OR 97469 Phone: 541-874-2722 1 AM MARKET 1 AM MARKET INC O PO BOX 46 1931 NE STEPHENS 4379 275588 06/30/2019 DOUGLAS RIDDLE, OR 97469 ROSEBURG, OR 97470 Phone: 541-673-0554 10 BARREL BREWING COMPANY 10 BARREL BREWING LLC WY ONE BUSCH PLACE / 202-1 1135 NW GALVESTON AVE SUITE A 46579 260298 09/30/2018 DESCHUTES 260297 ST LOUIS, MO 63118 BEND, OR 97703 Phone: 541-678-5228 10 BARREL BREWING COMPANY 10 BARREL BREWING LLC F-COM ONE BUSCH PLACE / 202-1 62950 & 62970 NE 18TH ST 49506 259722 09/30/2018 DESCHUTES ST LOUIS, MO 63118 BEND, OR 97701 Phone: 541-585-1007 10 BARREL BREWING COMPANY 10 BARREL BREWING LLC F-COM ONE BUSCH PLACE / 202-1 1135 NW GALVESTON AVE SUITE A 57088 259724 09/30/2018 DESCHUTES ST LOUIS, MO 63118 BEND, OR 97703 Phone: 541-678-5228 10 BARREL BREWING COMPANY
    [Show full text]