The Lower ColumbiaLower River Columbia Estuary River Partnership Estuary Partnership Newsletter 2005 Report on the Estuary

Assessing Trends in the Lower Columbia River

The view from the river more and more includes osprey nests, on navigation markers, trees, pilings, and power poles. Osprey eat fish almost exclusively and prefer to feed near their nest sites, which they use year after year. Although toxic contaminants remain a concern, Osprey numbers in the lower Columbia and Willamette Rivers continue to climb. Photo by Judy Vander Maten.

rom time to time, it is impor- strategy and have been successful The Estuary tant to reflect on where one in securing initial funds to institute Partnership Goals has been to determine where aspects of the strategy. F The ecosystem and species are next to go. The Lower Columbia River This first report becomes our base- Estuary Partnership completed our protected by increasing wetlands and line for future assessment. As we Comprehensive Conservation and habitat by 16,000 acres by 2010 and expand our water quality and ecosys- Management Plan in 1999. Since then, promoting improvements to storm- tem monitoring programs, future we have been working with many water management. reports will provide more detail with partners to implement this regional Toxic and conventional pollution is more data from which we can draw set of actions aimed at improving reduced by eliminating persistent more refined conclusions about the conditions in the 146 miles of lower bioaccumulative toxics, establishing conditions of the river. Columbia River and estuary, from maximum daily loads for streams that Bonneville Dam to the Pacific Ocean. We also include a bit of assessment do not meet water quality standards, about some of the progress the Our Report on the Estuary is an at- reducing hydrocarbon and heavy Estuary Partnership has made involv- tempt to provide a look at the river at metal discharges, and reducing ing students and citizens. This is an this point in time. One of the most bacterial contamination. important aspect of what we do. We important things the Estuary Part- Information about Columbia River believe that “experiential” learning nership can add to existing efforts is ecosystems, economics, history, and by all ages helps us understand the sustained science-based informa- culture is available to a range of river—in all of its ways—better. Full tion that can tell us if conditions are audiences by compiling and evaluat- understanding gives us all better tools improving or worsening. There have ing data about the river, providing with which to make decisions about been many studies, but little long education programs for a range of its uses and its protection. term monitoring of environmental audiences—focusing on children—and conditions. A primary focus of the It is a mighty river—it weaves through improving coordination among public Estuary Partnership is water quality all of us here in the Northwest. We are and private partners. and ecosystem monitoring. With a incredibly fortunate that we have the wide array of partners, we developed means to give it to our children even a long term monitoring plan and better than we found it.

1 www.lcrep.org Are threatened and endangered species in the lower Columbia River recovering?

The answer is mixed depending on the species. Populations of some species, such as the bald eagle have improved, while others such as the Columbian white-tailed deer and salmon species continue to face an uncertain future.

hen looking at the health tributaries at different times. For the listed Lower Columbia River chinook of native species, the fish and fishermen, times were good. salmon as threatened. The downturn Estuary Partnership can be attributed to many factors— W Times have changed. Since the 1980s focused on three species: Lower hydropower operations, hatcheries, annual Lower Columbia River chi- Columbia River chinook salmon, bald harvest, habitat loss, and ocean condi- nook returns have averaged less than eagles, and the Columbian white- tions among other reasons. However, 100,000 fish—half of them hatchery tailed deer. Each is officially listed as scientists have singled out habitat loss fish. In 1999, just prior to a fish return threatened or endangered. Each is a and degradation due to hydropower of less than 25,000 fish, and with only characteristic species that serves as projects, urbanization, logging, and a few naturally self sustaining an indicator of the general health of agriculture as leading to a significant populations of native chinook salmon the lower Columbia River. reduction in spawning and rearing left in the lower Columbia River, the habitat. National Marine Fisheries Service Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon Occupied Bald Eagle Nest Sites Lower Columbia River chinook Along the Columbia River salmon is one of twelve species of 120 salmon and steelhead listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act that depends 100 on the lower Columbia River and estuary. Also listed are Lower 80 Columbia River chum, Lower Colum- Washington bia River steelhead, and Lower Oregon Columbia River coho, as well as some 60 Willamette River, upper Columbia, and Snake River salmon. Source: Oregon 40 Cooperative One hundred years ago, between Fish and Wildlife Research Unit 450,000 and 550,000 wild Lower Columbia River chinook returned to 20 dozens of lower Columbia River tributaries. A variety of unique 0 populations—spring, early fall, and 1991 1978 1981 1979 2001 1997 1987 1993 1992 1989 1982 1983 1984 1986 1980 1998 1999 1988 1994 1996 1995 1985 1990 2003 2002 2004 late fall—returned to different 2000

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 2 In the past five years, salmon returns nest sites have been steadily growing Columbia white-tailed Deer Counts have improved some. Federal, state along the Columbia River for over 25 in the Lower Columbia River and tribal fisheries experts believe years. While a few pairs nest above

improved ocean conditions are the Bonneville Dam, most nest sites are in 450 main reason for the recent up-swing. the lower Columbia River. These Colder ocean temperatures brought eagles are year-round residents who 400 more nutrients to the surface for generally use the same breeding salmon to feed on and their ocean location year after year. A typical nest 350 productivity and survival increased. site is near water and an adequate fish 300 supply, away from human activity, and However, climatic signs are beginning surrounded by at least four large trees. to show that the Pacific’s temperature 250 may be warming again. Coupled with Unfortunately, problems remain. 200 the sixth consecutive below-average Extensive monitoring of bald eagle

water year in the northwest, the status nests—all lower Columbia River nest 150 of Columbia Basin salmon are still sites have been monitored for produc- significantly at risk. tivity since the late 1970s—shows that 100 the productivity of pairs nesting below Bald Eagles river mile 60 remain low, especially 50 for those nesting between river miles Bald eagles were listed under the 0 13 and 31. The problem is blamed on 1991 2001 1997 1987 1993 1992 1989 1986 1998 1999 1988 1994 1996 1995 1985 1990 2002 Endangered Species Preservation Act 2000 significant concentrations of DDE, PCB, in 1966. Their declining numbers, Source: Lower Columbia River Fish Recovery Board and dioxins in bald eagle egg shells. both around the country and in the lower Columbia River, were primarily Various studies have been unable to attributed to pesticides. Particularly establish why higher levels of these endangered in 1968. They once According to refuge managers, a to blame was the pesticide DDT toxic bioaccumulative chemicals are ranged throughout river valleys from variety of factors are hindering (Dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroeth- congregating in this stretch of the the Umpqua River in Southern recovery, including: river. Possibly, fine sediments and Oregon to Puget Sound, but by the ane), which was used for nearly three • Degradation of riparian habitats their associated toxins are being late sixties only the lower Columbia decades to control insect pests on through logging and brush removal. crop and forest lands, around homes continually suspended in this mixing River population and a Roseburg, and gardens, and for industrial and zone where the river’s flow and the Oregon population remained. Habitat • Historic riparian zone commercial purposes. The chemical, ocean’s tides come together. More destruction and over hunting, development for beef production, which stays in the environment for research is needed to truly under- primarily in the early 1900s, are most cottonwood plantations, alder years, was eventually banned in 1972 stand the sources and causes for low often cited for the decline. harvests, and marinas. bald eagle productivity in this reach. by the US Environmental Protection After the refuge was established, • Deer and automobile collisions. Agency because of increased insect Columbian white-tailed deer num- • Poaching. resistance, development of more Columbian white-tailed Deer bers in the lower Columbia River effective alternative pesticides, and • Entanglement in barbed wire fences. The Columbian white-tailed deer is began to rebound, to the point that in growing public and user concern over one of the largest land mammals 1995, officials considered changing • Competition with livestock for adverse environmental side effects. living within the lower Columbia the deer’s official status from endan- habitat and food. One of those side effects was bald River, and the only one with its own gered to threatened. But severe • The introduction of wild pigs on eagle productivity. DDT and other US Wildlife Refuge—the Julia Butler flooding in February 1996 killed Wallace Island in 1980. chemicals like it accumulate up the Hansen Refuge for the Columbian more than half the population. • Habitat destruction resulting from food chain. As a top-of-the-food- white-tailed Deer. The refuge, which Refuge lands on the mainland and the 1996 flood. chain animal, eagles absorbed a lot of contains over 5,600 acres of islands, Tenasillahe Island flooded and many DDT. As they nested each year and pastures, forested tidal swamps, deer perished in the high water. • Disease (foot rot) and parasites gave birth, the result of the pesticide brush woodlots, marshes and sloughs Since then, wildlife refuge managers (stomach worms). accumulation was thin egg shells— along the lower Columbia River, was and state wildlife agencies attempt- • Black tailed deer, which may and a very poor chick survival ratio. established in 1972 specifically to ing to re-invigorate the population compete with the Columbian white- protect and manage the endangered In the years since DDT was banned, have achieved only limited success. tailed deer for food and resources Columbian white-tailed deer. bald eagles have made a slow but Deer numbers remain less than half and dilute the white-tailed steady recovery. Occupied bald eagle White-tailed deer were listed as of their 1995 population. population through in-breeding.

Trending Unknown With few exceptions, threatened and endangered species in the lower Columbia River are not making significant recoveries. Approximately 24 species that live in or use the lower Columbia River for a portion of their life are listed as threatened or endangered, including plants, fish, animals, and birds. Some species, such as the bald eagle, and to a certain extent the Aleution canada goose, are slowly recovering. Many others, like the Colum- bian white-tailed deer, the spotted owl, the Oregon silverspot butterfly and most fish species are not. The fact that significant energy and resources are still being expended to recover endangered species illustrates the depth of the lower Columbia River’s problems. The health of an ecosystem can be gauged in large part on the health of its native species. Over thousands of years, these species have evolved and adapted to the specific peculiarities of an ecosystem, or even a watershed. When the ecosystem gets out of balance, degraded, or otherwise A Columbian white tailed deer moves through a lower Columbia River meadow. A number modified, native species no longer thrive. Additional habitat restoration and of large protection and restoration projects have been implemented in the last few years toxic and conventional pollutant reductions are key to achieving a more to provide additional refuge for the deer, including a 400 acre project on Crims Island that will benefit both the deer and threatened and endangered Columbia River salmon. natural balance. Photo courtesy of US Fish and Wildlife Service.

3 www.lcrep.org Are invasive species increasing or decreasing?

Since 1850 the number of invasive species discovered in the lower Columbia River has accelerated. Invasive species are one of the factors that have degraded the health of the lower Columbia River ecosystem.

lower Columbia River. Researchers bia River. Improved monitoring and sampled at 134 stations from Bonne- management strategies are needed to ville Dam to the Pacific Ocean, in detect invasive species, limit their brackish and freshwater marshes, growth, and most importantly, urban sloughs, rocky shorelines and prevent their introduction in the first other habitats. place. While historically many invasive species were purposefully The field survey team identified 269 released into the river for sport or distinct aquatic species—54 invasive food, today’s introductions are almost species (21%), 92 native species always unintentional, the result of (34%), and 123 species of unknown ballast water discharges from inter- origin (45%). When the field sam- national cargo ships. Hitchhikers on pling was combined with a literature recreational boats and escaped or review, the team reported that 81 released pets can also add to invasive organisms, including fish, aquatic species problems. plants, crustaceans and worms have been introduced into the lower Better management, monitoring, Purple loosestrife near Wallace Island. Purple loosestrife is a non-native, invasive aquatic plant that is Columbia River since the mid 1880s. education, and vigilance are required crowding out native wetland vegetation and impacting fish and wildlife. Photo by Ed Deery. to keep invasive species out of the Also of note was the discovery rate. lower Columbia River. Maintaining a Between 1880 and 1970, a new inva- nvasive species can wreak Today, nearly 4 million shad return to healthy ecosystem will also help. sive species was discovered every five significant economic and the Columbia River each year. Shad Invasive species often thrive in years. Over the last 10 however, a new environmental damage. Studies compete with juvenile salmon for degraded and disturbed ecosystems. I invasive species was discovered about estimate they cost the United States habitat and food and also crowd fish An environment where native plants every five months, in part due to more more than $100 billion each year and ladders during salmon migration and animals are thriving will natu- frequent sampling. impact nearly half of the species season. Although their full impact is rally prevent most invasive species listed on the federal Endangered not known, it’s likely their growing The PSU study provides an important from gaining a foothold. Species Act. Once established, they presence has altered the estuarine baseline, but too little is known about are extremely difficult to eliminate. food web. invasive species in the lower Colum- They thrive in altered Invasive plants are habitats and perma- another problem. nently alter the What are invasive species? Purple loosestrife has Trending Negative natural ecosystem. invaded many Invasive species are defined as Invasive species appear to be on the rise in the lower Columbia River. New Invasive species can wetland areas non-native to the ecosystem under invasive species are discovered regularly, and many existing invasive dramatically alter throughout the river. consideration whose introduction species, both plant and animal appear to be thriving. While control and food web dynamics, causes or is likely to cause harm to One plant can pro- eradication efforts against certain species are increasing, education, transmit diseases and the economy, environment or duce up to 2.7 million monitoring, and management strategies to prevent, identify, and control parasites, and out- human health. Invasive species can seeds each year. be plants, animals, and other new invasions are lacking. compete native Eurasion water milfoil organisms. Human actions are the In addition, officials are on the watch against a handful of potentially very species for habitat primary means of invasive species is an aquatic plant destructive invasive species that threaten the lower Columbia River. The and food. introduction. that shades out native perennial marsh grass Spartina alterniflora is present in Willapa Bay and vegetation, decreases Invasive species are a Puget Sound, and has established at a number of sites in Oregon. The problem all over the oxygen levels, and Chinese Mitten Crab, European Green Crab, and Zebra Mussel are all country and the lower Columbia River increases phosphorous, nitrogen significant threats. Mitten crabs can prey on salmon and sturgeon eggs, is not an exception. In our own loadings, pH, and water temperature. damage banks, levees, and pumps, and are a human health concern. Green backyards we see weedy species like Brazilian elodea is another invasive crabs could negatively impact native Dungeness crab as well as clam and Himalayan blackberry and scots plant found in the lower Columbia oyster fisheries. Zebra mussel can adhere to any hard surface, endangering broom. In and along the river, River. Its dense stands restrict water native shellfish, as well as potentially damaging water pipes, boats, buoys, numerous non native fish, wildlife, movement, trap sediments, and power plants, fish ladders, and navigation locks and dam operations. All and plant species thrive. impede boat navigation. significantly disrupt the native ecosystem. American Shad is a non-native game Preventing unwanted invasive species introduction is possible. Each fish intentionally released into the Latest Columbia River person, organization, and business must do their part. Never release pets, plants, or aquarium animals or plants into the wild, if traveling between lower Columbia River in the late Invasive Species Data water bodies clean recreational equipment of weeds or other accidental 1800’s. The population remained Between 2002 and 2003, Portland hitchhikers, and report any invasive species sighting to local fish and fairly stable until construction of the State University’s Center for Lakes wildlife offices. Columbia River dams, when its and Reservoirs conducted an exten- population began to rapidly increase. sive survey of aquatic species in the

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 4 Are pollutant levels in the lower Columbia River increasing or decreasing?

We can’t conclusively say because no sustained long term monitoring has taken place.

Throughout the summer, each day thousands of people take to the lower Columbia River to swim, fish, water ski, sail, or just picnic along its banks. Good water quality is imperative to their enjoyment of the river. It’s even more important for fish and wildlife that live and eat from the river.

ood water quality is essential Columbia River. Additionally, a PCBs: PCBs, or polychlorinated to a healthy river, one that number of emerging contaminants, biphenyls, were widely used as G can support all the biological such as the flame retardant PBDE, coolants and lubricants in trans- communities that depend on it—fish, are being discovered in the lower formers, capacitors and other electri- bugs, birds and people. In the lower Columbia River. cal equipment until being banned in Columbia River, pollutants from various 1976. Thirty years later, they remain There are a variety of different toxic sources have affected water quality. in the lower Columbia River. PCBs contaminants in the lower Columbia move up the food chain and accumu- Common problems include high River ranging from pharmaceuticals, late in higher concentrations in the water temperatures and elevated to insecticides, to trace metals. Some fatty tissue of predator animals. levels of total dissolved gas. Bacteria, of the most prevalent and important are: dissolved oxygen, and pH levels are also occasionally higher than stan- dards permit. Toxic contaminants are also a problem. They’ve been found in sediment and fish tissue and levels of PCBs, DDE, and dioxin are high enough that they’ve been linked to reproductive failure in bald eagles, mink, and river otter. In this report we are focusing on toxics, and two water quality indicators— temperature and dissolved oxygen.

Are toxics in the lower Columbia River being reduced? While the use and discharge of pollutants such as DDT, Dieldrin, Peamouth sucker spend their life in slow moving backwater areas of the lower Columbia River and PCBs is now illegal, these where toxic sediments tend to accumulate. As bigger fish eat small fish, and large birds eat big pollutants remain in the lower fish, toxics accumulate up the food chain.

5 www.lcrep.org Contaminated Sediments DDT and Associated By-Products Locations and Concentrations Lower Columbia River Estuary

Potential Adverse Impacts to Estuarine Species Large Medium Small City Limits Study Area

Contaminants of potential environmental concern are present in the lower Columbia River at concentrations that may result in acute or chronic impacts to sensitive estuarine species. One of those contaminants, DDT and its associated byproducts, has been found in lower Columbia River sediments in studies ranging from the Bi-State Reports to the Sediment Quality Information System, data from which forms the source for this map. The Estuary Partnership has initiated a toxics monitoring program that will provide newer and more detailed contaminant information in the near future.

DDT/DDE: Pesticides such as DDT been found above guidance levels The temperature standard for the and maximum summer temperature and its derivative DDE were designed in fish tissue and sediment. lower Columbia River is 68 degrees at Bonneville Dam have increased by around four degrees. The average to repel, kill, or prevent the growth of • They accumulate up the food for the average daily maximum increased from approximately 66 to fungi, weeds, insects, plant diseases, chain. Small fish eat contaminated temperature over a seven-day period. 70 degrees and the maximum from and small animals such as rats and sediment, bigger fish eat lots of During low flow months such as near 69 to above 72. mice. These toxics continue to cause small fish, and predator birds eat August and September, the water problems. Fish tissue samples have lots of big fish. Each step up the temperature in the lower Columbia The negative impacts of high water shown high enough concentrations for food chain, toxics accumulate at River regularly rises above this limit. temperatures are numerous. High state health administrators to issue higher levels. The problem is Lower Columbia River water tem- temperatures: fish consumption recommendations. serious enough that in 1996 the peratures have been slowing climb- • Increase fish and other aquatic PBDEs: Also known as brominated Oregon and Washington health ing over the last 65 years. Since 1938, animals’ susceptibility to disease by flame retardants, PBDEs are widely departments each issued health both the August-September average weakening their immune systems. used as an additive to prevent or deter advisories regarding the fires in electronic devices, furniture, consumption of certain bottom and textiles. PBDEs have been found dwelling fish species (carp, Historical Changes in Summer Water in the body fat of many wildlife species peamouth, and sucker). The Temperatures at Bonneville Dam and evidence suggests that low-level advisories remain in effect. 76 exposure may produce detrimental • They can cause cancer as well as 74 health effects in humans and animals. impact the immune, Maximum Toxic substances are of significant reproductive, nervous and 72 endocrine systems in animals. concern for several reasons: 70 Their impact on humans has not • They persist in the environment been adequately researched. 68 for decades. Although banned in the United States in the early Are water temperatures in the Temperature (°F) 66 August–September Average 1970’s, DDT and its derivatives are lower Columbia River increas- still found at elevated levels in 64 ing or decreasing and do they 4°F increase in average and maximum summer temperature since juvenile salmonids. PCBs and a support native aquatic species? 62 1938. Average annual increase has been 0.7°F per year. Temperature variety of organochlorines and variability between years has been reduced by 63% since 1970. Water temperatures continue to toxic metals such as mercury, 60 increase putting native aquatic 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 cyanide, and arsenic also have species at risk. Source: National Marine Fisheries Service (2000)

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 6 Mainstem Columbia River dams, like Bonneville Dam, have greatly changed the lower Columbia River’s natural flow and temperature regime. Large reservoirs behind the Columbia’s dams absorb the heat of the summer sun, raising water temperatures above the 68 degree standard set to protect aquatic species. When temperatures rise above 68 degrees, salmon and other native species become stressed and much more sus- ceptible to disease.

• Lead to less dissolved oxygen in the the Columbia’s dams absorb the sun’s Yes, according to state standards. know. Sampling locations might have water which can stress fish health. heat during the summer and water In 2002, 95% of the lower changed, water temperatures might temperatures rise. Dam operations have been lower—cold water tends to • Slow or even stop fish migrations. Columbia River met Oregon’s and also play a part—depending on hold more oxygen—or any of a number Fish may seek cooler water off their Washington’s dissolved oxygen whether a dam is spilling water—and of other factors might have led to migration route to avoid high standard. thereby flushing the top, warmer improved dissolved oxygen levels. temperatures. layer of water, or pulling cooler water Between 1995 and 2002, the lower Oxygen is a necessary element to all • Make getting through fish ladders, from the bottom of the reservoirs and Columbia River was classified by forms of life, whether on land or in where temperatures can be higher running it through turbines. Oregon and Washington as an “im- water. Dissolved oxygen measures the than the river, even more paired” water body with regard to amount of oxygen in water. Fish, problematic. Other factors that may be impacting dissolved oxygen. That meant at aquatic invertebrates, and aquatic lower Columbia River temperatures certain times of the year in certain Historically, the lower Columbia River plants all require dissolved oxygen include warmer tributary flows, due reaches of the lower Columbia, was full of clean, cold water. Summer for respiration. When dissolved to tributary dams and the loss of dissolved oxygen levels fell below 8 time temperatures may have in- oxygen levels drop below 5 milli- shoreline vegetation that shades milligrams per liter, each state’s creased, but as snow in the Cascades grams per liter, aquatic life feels streams, the cumulative impacts of minimum standard for dissolved melted over the course of the summer, stress—the lower the level, the greater warm stormwater runoff from imper- oxygen. When the 303d list (the name clean cold water would find its way the stress. Oxygen levels below 1–2 vious surfaces, and the effects of of each state’s list of impaired water down to the lower Columbia River. milligrams per liter for more than a global warming. bodies) was updated in 2002, new Salmon, steelhead, and most of the few hours can result in large fish kills. river’s other fish and wildlife adapted monitoring data showed the lower over generations to that system. Columbia meeting state standards Do current dissolved oxygen and it was removed from the list. Today, the Columbia River’s flow is levels in the lower Columbia governed by dams rather than River support native aquatic Whether dissolved oxygen levels in the snowmelt. Large reservoirs behind species? river actually changed is difficult to

Trending Unknown The lack of information and data collected over time on lower Columbia River water quality makes it difficult to accurately assess the river’s water quality. A long-term monitoring strategy is a critical part of the Estuary Partnership’s Management Plan. In 2003, with three-year funding from the Bonneville Power Administration, the Estuary Partnership initiated aspects of its water quality monitoring program. As additional funds are secured, we will expand this monitoring. The US Environmental Protection Agency is also targeting Columbia River toxics as a major work element. Over time, using a collaborative approach to monitoring that maximizes resources, we will have the data necessary to answer questions about the types of pollutants, where they are, and their impact on the health of humans, fish and wildlife. The Columbia is a large and complex system. Even with good monitoring data, there are many factors at play that make finding answers to lower Columbia River water quality questions a challenging task. Yet, the impor- tance of monitoring can not be over emphasized. It’s critically important to our ability to assess the river’s water quality, identify problem areas, and Water quality monitoring devices similar to this automatically record temperature, dissolved gauge the effectiveness of management actions. Without it, we’re operating oxygen, turbidity, specific conductivity, and chlorophyll content. USGS technicians are using in the dark. the devices at six lower Columbia River sites as part of the Estuary Partnership water quality monitoring program.

7 www.lcrep.org Tidally influenced floodplain wetlands provide important habitat for a wide range of species. Hogan Ranch in the Scappoose Bay Watershed is the site of a major ongoing restoration and protection project that the Estuary Partner- ship has helped fund. As part of the project, a grazing management plan has been developed for the area and approximately 300 acres of wetlands connected to the tidal influence of the Multnomah Channel have been permanently protected for the benefit of fish and wildlife.

Are We Gaining or Losing Habitat?

The pace and scale of habitat restoration projects continue to grow and regulations and greater environmental awareness have slowed the pace of habitat loss.

ncreases in habitat restoration Other organizations also are actively and protection since 2000 have involved in habitat restoration. Since Ibeen significant. The Estuary 1999, the Columbia Land Trust, Lower Partnership has funded 18 habitat Columbia Fish Recovery Board, protection projects that are restoring Ducks Unlimited, local watershed 3,289 acres of habitat and 24.1 miles councils, and others have protected of shoreline, removing seven culverts and restored more than 6,000 acres that are opening up 28.5 miles of of additional habitat. Including those stream habitat, and breaching dikes funded by the Estuary Partnership, Why is habitat important? and removing tidegates at five sites. 74 major projects are completed, Habitat loss and modification have been a major Funding for much of this work has underway, or ready to start. issue in the lower Columbia River for over 125 years. come from public agencies. EPA, the Certain habitat types have been drastically reduced. Bonneville Power Administration, the Habitat loss is more difficult to Tidal swamps have declined by an estimated 77 Northwest Power and Conservation quantify. We know that laws, regula- percent. Marsh habitat acreage is only 43 percent Council, NOAA’s Community Based tions and extensive permitting of historic levels. Meanwhile, developed acres and Restoration program and the Army processes instituted in the last few acres of open water have significantly increased. Corps of Engineers have invested decades have slowed the loss of wet- Sustainable fish and wildlife populations depend on millions to support these projects. lands and other habitats. But develop- accessible, abundant, high quality habitat. Species such as salmon use a wide range of different habitats throughout their life, each critically important. Chang- es in habitat may directly affect a species’ ability to find food or reproduce, increase stress, or change predator-prey relationships. A small drop in water level may dry out a formerly wet area. In the short term, amphibians, shorebirds, and other animals dependent on wet conditions will be affected. Over time, plants adapted to the formerly wet area will die and a new plant community, with its attendant bugs and wildlife will establish.

Hundreds of old tidegates similar to this one were once installed throughout the lower Columbia River region. They served a dual purpose, draining fields for agriculture while keeping the tidally influenced river out. They also cut off thousands of acres of fish and wildlife habitat. Today, many tidegates are being removed or in some cases replaced with “fish friendly” ones that allow much better fish passage.

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 8 Nearly 80 major habitat restoration projects have been undertaken in the lower Columbia River floodplain over the past six years. Almost all projects are the result of the collaborative ef- forts of multiple partners, including the Estuary Partnership which has helped fund 18 projects.

One of those projects was at Devils Elbow on the Grays River, where the Columbia Land Trust, the Estuary Partnership, and other partners col- laborated on a project that reconnected 80 acres of formerly dry land to the Columbia River’s tidal influence through a series of dike breaches. The project will benefit threatened and endangered salmon as well as other Columbia River species.

ment continues. Urban areas continue Yes. Substantial progress has been Each habitat restoration or protection management program that protects to encroach on sensitive areas, and made protecting and restoring project has taken place within the sensitive areas. while much harder to get permitted, habitats critical to native species. historic lower Columbia River wetlands and shorelines continue to The Estuary Partnerhip has floodplain. While most projects Are restoration efforts be dredged, filled, and rip-rapped. identified 74 projects—completed, target threatened or endangered increasing opportunities for underway, or ready to start—that salmon, they often benefit macroin- Agencies that oversee wetland and aquatic life to use previously when finished, will protect and/or vertebrates, other fish species, birds, shoreline permitting are in the inaccessible habitat? restore 10,674 acres of habitat wildlife, even humans by providing process of improving data manage- within the historic Columbia River food, shelter, recreation, and other Yes. Of the 74 projects identified, 28 ment and information sharing floodplain. Of the 74 projects, 32 functions important to society. For projects (24 completed and 4 capabilities which will make tracking completed projects have protected example, in Stella, Washington, a underway) have or will open up net habitat gains more feasible in the and/or restored 3,841 acres, regional partnership conserved previously inaccessible habitat to near future. Being able to measure another 23 projects are underway forested streamside habitat along aqutic life by re-establishing a tidal habitat loss on a watershed basis is that will protect and restore 4,803 Germany Creek to benefit multiple connection to the lower Columbia critical to fully understanding acres, and 19 projects are ready to salmon species, including an impor- River. The 28 projects established 33 whether we are achieving a net start that will protect and restore tant population of Chum salmon. In new tidal connections, primarily habitat gain. 2,030 acres of habitat. addition, streamside vegetation was through dike breaches and tidegate removals, and culvert There are two factors that the Estuary enhanced and 2.5 acres of salmonid replacements. Partnership looks at in assessing Habitat restoration may involve rearing habitat and 250 feet of Chum habitat: habitat restoration and removing invasive species such as salmon spawning habitat restored. At Historically, lower Columbia River habitat accessibility. Himalayan blackberry and English Hogan Ranch in Scappoose Bay, fish and wildlife could access a wide ivy, planting native trees and shrubs, Oregon, the Scappoose Bay Watershed variety of habitat types that provided sculpting stream banks to reconnect Council and others completed a shelter, food, rearing areas, and other Are important fish and a tributary stream to its floodplain, or multi-phase project that conserved functions they needed at various life wildlife habitats being breaching a dike to allow the river’s 173 acres of land, involved volunteers stages. However, in the last 100 years protected and restored in the tidal influence to re-establish a in streamside planting, and imple- as many as 84,000 acres of lower lower Columbia River? wetland. mented a cattle fencing and grazing Columbia River floodplain was

The Malarkey Ranch in the Scappoose Bay Watershed has been the site of a major restoration The culvert in the left photo was replaced with a bridge that allows for full fish passage and and protection project that includes a variety of different project elements, including replacing creates more natural stream conditions that will help maintain lower temperatures, and this undersized, non-performing culvert on a section of Malarkey Creek. decrease sedimentation and erosion. Bridges such as this often provide the best long term solution to fish passage problems.

9 www.lcrep.org converted to agricultural, urban, or influence to an area improves water miles where the ocean’s tidal influ- tidal fluctuations, by removing four some other use. Evidence indicates quality and allows a wide variety of ence is more significant. When all 28 tidegates, two culverts, and breach- that more than 50% of estuarine species to access a broad range of projects are completed, they will have ing four dikes. In Brownsmead, wetlands have been lost. Dikes, habitat types formerly inaccessible. reopened over 2,300 acres to fish and Oregon, the Columbia River Estuary tidegates, and small dams kept the In particular, these areas often wildlife and the river’s tides. Study Task Force (CREST), in the first Columbia’s daily tides out, radically provide important resting and phase of a larger project, has restored For example, in Grays River Wash- changed the landscape, and restrict- rearing areas for juvenile salmon. fish access to 10 miles of previously ington, the Columbia Land Trust ed fish and wildlife access to once inaccessible streams by replacing Most of the 28 tidal reconnection worked with several property owners important habitats. undersized culverts with larger fish projects undertaken since 2000 are across a number of sites to reconnect friendly ones. Over time, these Reconnecting the river’s tidal located within the River’s lower 32 555 acres of habitat to the river’s daily

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 10 Prioritizing Restoration In addition to funding projects, and tracking major projects within the floodplain, the Habitat Restoration, Enhancement and Protection Estuary Partnership is working hard to make sure that new projects are getting the Projects Lower Columbia River Estuary most environmental bang for the buck. 1999–2005 Quality can mean more than quantity on habitat restoration projects. A 50 acre project that re-connects fish access to a pristine forested wetland in the lower 20 Estuary Partnership Funded miles of the estuary may be more beneficial to certain species than a 200 acre project elsewhere that will require years of restoration. To address this issue, the Estuary Complete Partnership has developed a strategy to prioritize conservation opportunities. The strategy will allow the Estuary Partnership to fund projects that deliver the greatest Initiated environmental benefits to the largest number of species, and thus be more efficient and targeted with restoration dollars. Planned

Continual Restoration Restoration Acres by Year Study Area

City Limits 5000 4500

4000

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 (Projects planned, initiated, or completed)

A multi-partner project in Germany Creek near Stella, Washington has acquired 150 acres of sensitive habitat, restored Chum salmon spawning and rearing habitat, and enhanced riparian habitat. Almost every project on the map at left represents the collaborative efforts of organizations and individuals committed to protecting and restoring the lower Columbia River.

Trending Positive The pace and scale of habitat protection, restoration, and access projects has grown significantly. In the last five years more acres of lower Columbia River floodplain habitat have been protected or improved for native species than in the last few decades. And these efforts will continue. As a first step, the Estuary Partnership Management Plan calls for 16,000 acres to be reconnected streams and acres will through thousands of road culverts. protected and/or restored by 2010. With help from our partners, we expect once again provide a wide range of Hundreds of these culverts are to be 10,000 acres toward that goal in 2006. Working collaboratively with our public and private partners, we’ll continue to protect and restore important habitat types to fish and wildlife. barriers to either juvenile or adult fish lower Columbia River habitats. passage—or both. Watershed groups Outside of the Columbia’s tidal from around the study area have been The unknown part of the assessment is that we don’t have a clear under- influence, dozens of culvert removal replacing or repairing the most standing of how much habitat is still being lost, much less the type of habitat or replacement projects have taken problematic culverts in their water- and what species depend on it. We need to understand the rate and type of place that have opened up over a shed. Doing so has allowed fish access habitat still being lost in the lower Columbia River in order to fully and hundred miles of fish habitat. As accurately assess restoration and protection efforts, and ultimately, the to over miles of high quality stream tributary streams flow from their health of the lower Columbia River. habitat previously inaccessible. headwaters to the Columbia, they pass

11 www.lcrep.org Aerial photos from 1976 and 1996 at right show a stretch of I-5 roughly between Burnt Bridge Creek and Salmon Creek in Clark County Washington. Though at a slightly different scale, the photos show the type of growth that has occurred throughout the Portland Vancouver metro area and in other lower Columbia River area communities such as Longview and Camas in the last 30 years. Farms and fields have been replaced with housing developments, strip malls, and roads.

A host of environmental impacts usually ac- company development. Wetlands are lost or negatively impacted, impervious surfaces create stormwater that carries pollutants to local streams, habitat connectivity and species migra- tion routes are disrupted and native trees and shrubs are often removed.

Cities in the lower Columbia River area have done a better job than many communities across the nation at minimizing some of development’s environmental impacts.

1976 aerial photo – Interstate 5 between approximately 63rd Street and 117th Street in Vancouver, Washington. Photo courtesy of the US Army Corps of Engineers. Do our land use decisions protect lower Columbia River water quality?

Some research into impervious surface and tree cover has been done that points to improvements in these areas. However, land use changes and their impact on the environment have not been consistently or comprehensively tracked. Hence, we lack the information needed to properly answer the question.

wo hundred years ago, the ment, however, plays a critical role in land use laws, as well as a growing confluence of the Willamette the long term health of the lower use of innovative stormwater T and Columbia River was a Columbia River’s water quality and practices that utilize on-site mish-mash of islands and wetlands. habitat. To determine whether land infiltration help lessen water Large forests covered the hillside and use decisions are protecting surrounding upland. Lewis and Clark water quality the Estuary Relationship Between Impervious missed the Willamette River, the lower Partnership looked at Columbia’s largest tributary, twice. impervious surface levels Cover and Stream Quality and tree cover in the lower What are Today, the Willamette’s mouth is Columbia River region. impervious surfaces? unmistakable. North Portland is a

Roads, roofs, parking areas, bustling community; the Ports of Non-supporting (>25%) sidewalks and other hard or Vancouver and Portland dot Colum- Is There More or Less compacted surfaces that do bia and Willamette riverbanks, and Impervious Surface? not absorb rainwater. Kelly Point Park marks the conflu- We can say with some ence of the Willamette and Columbia. certainty that there has Impacted (11 to 25%) Development has radically changed been a significant increase Watershed Impervious Cover Watershed the landscape. Yet development is not in impervious surface Sensative (0 to 10%) inherently bad. Development creates within the lower Columbia our businesses, homes, driveways, River watershed between Level of Stream Quality shops, schools, and streets. 2000 and 2005. However, Measuring the impervious cover in each subwatershed is an important part of watershed planning because of its direct The where, type, and how of develop- Oregon and Washington link to water quality. Source: Center for Watershed Protection

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 12 Aerial photo comparisons between years can also graphically illustrate new impervious surfaces. When viewed from the air, many sites in the lower Columbia River region show the sub- divisions and roads associated with new development. The photos above illustrate development that’s taken place in Clark County between 1976 and 1996 along a stretch of Interstate 5. While farmland still exists in many places, miles of new roads and hundreds of new houses were con- structed during the 20 year period.

Innovative Stormwater Solutions Certain areas, particularly Portland and Vancouver, are working hard to develop projects that help counteract new impervious surface. Portland’s Bureau of Environmental Services instituted a number of stormwater code changes in 2002 that encour- aged innovative stormwater projects. Many new parking lots are being built with techniques that capture and infiltrate stormwater runoff, dozens of ecoroofs dot the city, and thou- sands of residents and businesses have disconnected their downspouts. Portland is also scientifically testing the durability and permeability of different paving options on neigh- borhood streets. Meanwhile, Vancou- ver continues to test permeable 1996 aerial photo – Interstate 5 between approximately 63rd Street and 117th Street in Vancouver, Washington. Photo courtesy of the US Army Corps of Engineers. pavement on some city sidewalks, and a number of Vancouver area sites feature grass pavers for parking and Another source is impervious surface quality impacts and provide a surface in a watershed increased, so fire lanes. small measure of positive news. did annual runoff, peak discharge, mapping. In 2003, the Estuary and bankfull frequency. Another Partnership worked with the cities of Whether by limiting impervious Impervious surfaces matter because survey of 68 studies found that Longview and Oregon City on a surfaces or “disconnecting” them, they prevent rain from naturally impervious surface in a watershed project that included an impervious stormwater management practices infiltrating into the ground. Instead, above a threshold level decreases fish surface mapping component. Two such as ecoroofs, permeable pavers, rain “runs off” the surface and spawning, aquatic insect and salmo- maps were created in each commu- and infiltration swales can signifi- washes into creeks, streams and nid numbers, and fish, wetland and nity—one depicting current impervi- cantly decrease stormwater impacts. rivers, collecting solid objects, heavy amphibian diversity. ous surface levels, and another By infiltrating stormwater at the metals like mercury, nutrients, litter, projecting future impervious surface source, these practices recreate the oils and greases, and other manmade Impervious Surfaces in the levels based on current zoning and natural hydrologic cycle, allow plants chemical compounds that have Lower Columbia River development patterns. The maps, to uptake and filter pollutants, and accumulated on parking lots, streets, which are available on the Estuary keep stormwater out of local creeks. driveways, roofs and other impervi- The lower Columbia River region Partnership web site, project large Slightly shifting parking lot designs ous surfaces. encompasses two states, nine coun- increases in impervious surface in so that the vegetative areas infiltrate ties, 28 cities and lots of buildings in This polluted stormwater runoff each community. stormwater can dramatically lessen between. Tracking impervious (often referred to as nonpoint source surface changes between 2000 and pollution because it rarely come from 2005 across this diverse landscape a single source) decreases water has been infeasible. However we can quality and can endanger or kill the draw some conclusions from a variety aquatic life that forms the building of sources. blocks of stream ecology. Stormwater runoff can also significantly increase One source is daily experience. stream flow, leading to erosion and Inherently, it makes sense that channelized streams. impervious surface coverage in- creased between 2000 and 2005. Impervious surfaces are a good Everyone knows many examples of indicator of stream health because new subdivisions, businesses, and research shows that as the amount of roads that have been constructed as impervious surface in a watershed more than 100,000 people have increases, stream health and stream moved to the region in the last five species decline. The Center for years. On the other hand, very few Watershed Protection looked at 35 people can pinpoint locations where a studies that dealt with impervious parking lot was destroyed to create a cover and aquatic quality relation- Planting strips like this one in SE Portland in front of the New Seasons Marketplace at 19th forest. and Division may be the wave of the future. Instead of being built to keep road generated ships, and found that as impervious stormwater runoff out, they have been built to capture and infiltrate the runoff.

13 www.lcrep.org 1972 Landsat MSS 80 Meter 2000 Landsat TM 30 Meter Pixel Resolution, Photo from Pixel Resolution, Photo from American Forests. American Forests.

Satellite images from American Forests show changes in land cover over a 28-year period from 1972 to 2000. Heavy tree cover (greater than or equal to 50%) is indicated in green. Black areas include several land use categories including areas with light tree canopy (less than 20%), urban areas, cleared forests, and agriculture. The images show a sharp decrease in heavy tree canopy. The downward trend actually started to reverse in 1986, but the increase has been gradual and the acres in heavy tree cover remains almost 2,000,000 acres below 1972 levels.

the parking area’s stormwater sprawled like Charlotte, North impacts. In addition, stormwater Carolina, over the decade, for exam- projects that use infiltration and ple, it would have lost an additional natural drainage ways often cost less 279 square miles of farmland and than traditional pipe systems. open space—an area more than twice as large as the city of Portland itself” (The Portland Exception, Northwest Land Conservation Environmental Watch, 2004). Another way to limit impervious Lower Columbia River water quality surface growth is by using less land depends in part on reducing imper- through compact development. vious surfaces and minimizing their Person for person, low-density impact through stormwater practices suburbs create more impervious that maximize on-site infiltration. surface than compact urban neigh- Whether this takes place depends in borhoods. An October 2004 report by large extent on the cumulative Northwest Environmental Watch, an actions of local governments, build- organization that tracks environ- ers and developers, and citizens to Ecoroofs such as this one at a NE Portland Fire Station are being used with greater frequency as mental trends, compared sprawl, require, build, encourage, and a way to reduce the impervious surface associated with development. Most ecoroofs can ab- smart growth, and rural land loss in implement stormwater practices that sorb close to 100% of the rain that falls on them, significantly lessening the stormwater impacts associated with a traditional roof. Ecoroofs can also reduce heating and cooling costs. 15 US cities between 1990 and 2000. protect lower Columbia River water The report, which lumped seven quality. Oregon counties—Multnomah, In urban areas, trees prevent erosion, noise pollution, increase residential Washington, Clackamas, Marion, reduce and delay stormwater runoff, property values, and stimulate Is There More or Less Tree and Polk, Yamhill, and Columbia—as well promote infiltration and groundwater downtown businesses. Forest Cover? recharge, absorb airborne pollutants as Clark County, Washington, found In natural areas, trees shade Since 1972, tree cover has declined like carbon dioxide and sulfur that new development in greater streams and help keep water tem- significantly. The trend is reversing dioxide, decrease heating and cooling Portland consumed less than half as peratures down, absorb carbon as we recognize the importance of costs, reduce urban temperatures, much land as the average city in the dioxide and other greenhouse study. “If greater Portland had tree cover to ecosystem health. buffer pedestrians and traffic, absorb

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 14 Urban trees, like these creating a canopy over this NE Portland street, play an important role in healthy watersheds, decreasing stormwater run- off, absorbing airborne pollutants, and promot- ing infiltration and groundwater recharge. More communities are recognizing the importance of urban trees and working hard to protect and restore the urban forest.

generating pollutants, contribute • Areas with thick dense canopy Tree Cover Growing large wood to streams which in- decreased by 60% while areas with Fortunately, the trend of thick canopy crease channel complexity and fish light and moderate canopies losses and light canopy increases habitat, provide critical habitat for increased. started to reverse in 1986 and contin- birds and wildlife, often filter and • Average tree cover in the region’s ued through 2000. This may be the protect drinking water supplies, urban areas dropped from nearly result of Urban Growth Boundaries decrease erosion, help prevent 21% in 1972 to 12% in 2000. working, improved forest manage- landslides, and provide recreation ment practices, increased awareness opportunities and aesthetic value. In and attention to the importance of short, trees are a good indicator of Economic and Ecological tree canopies, more municipal tree local ecological health. The more Implications planting and preservation programs, trees there are in the lower Columbia • Lost tree canopy would have and the work of Friends of Trees, River region the better off we’ll be— removed about 138 million pounds watershed councils, and other groups environmentally and economically. of sulfur dioxide, carbon that have made riparian and urban monoxide, ozone, nitrogen dioxide In October 2001, the organization tree planting a priority. Friends of and particulate matter from the American Forests published the Trees for example, planted 17,000 atmosphere annually, at a value of study “Regional Ecosystem Analysis native trees and shrubs in urban $322 million per year. for Willamette/Lower Columbia natural areas during their 2004– Region of Northwestern Oregon and • Vegetation lost over this 28-year 2005 planting season and 1,700 trees Southwestern Washington State.” period would have stored 58 in urban neighborhoods in Portland The study looked specifically at tree million tons of carbon and and Vancouver. cover changes in the Willamette/ sequestered carbon at a rate of If aggressive tree planting campaigns Lower Columbia Region* between 157,000 tons per year. persist, cities continue to encourage 1972 and 2000 and released a num- • Tree loss between 1972 and 2000 and enforce tree planting and ber of major findings that can be resulted in an estimated increase protection ordinances, and private used to help answer the question of of 963 million cubic feet of and state forest management contin- whether land use patterns are stormwater flow during peak ues to evolve, tree cover in the lower protecting water quality. storm events. Using cost estimates Columbia River region may continue of $6/cubic foot to build to increase, to the benefit of the Tree Cover stormwater systems in urban region’s residents, fish and wildlife. areas, and $2/cubic foot in rural The American Forests study reports areas, this vegetation loss that tree cover declined significantly approximates a $2.4 billion system. between 1972 and 2000 in the portion of the lower Columbia River water- • The value of the total stormwater Trending Positive retention capacity of the region’s tree shed looked at in the study. While Positive trends are emerging with regard to stormwater management and this trend may not be particularly cover declined from $22.6 billion in tree cover in the lower Columbia River region. Tree cover is increasing and surprising—the study notes a funda- 1972 to $20.2 billion in 2000. should continue to increase in the coming years as thousands of urban and mental regional trend: As population • In 2000, the Willamette/Lower natural area trees are being planted each year. In addition, the Portland/ and development expanded, tree Columbia region’s direct summer Vancouver area is one of the country’s leaders with regard to implementing cover declined sharply. energy savings as a result of tree innovative stormwater management projects. And each new project leads to another as more developers, architects, and engineers realize the environ- • Average tree cover in the region shade is estimated at $1.8 million mental, aesthetic, and economic benefits. shrank from 46% to 24%. annually. While we believe the trend is positive, we still lack the information to fully determine the impacts of land use on water quality. We need to find a better * The American Forests study did not look at the entire Estuary Partnership study area way to quantify development’s impact on lower Columbia River water from Bonneville Dam to the Pacific Ocean. Forest cover west of Longview, Washington quality, as well as the efforts being made to minimize those impacts. is not included in the study results.

15 www.lcrep.org Has the Estuary Partnership provided children with more science- based programs about the lower Columbia River?

Estuary Partnership education programs have reached over 46,545 students in five years with classroom programs, field trips, and on-river trips. Another 3,100 students have participated in 79 service learning projects. The program has worked with more than 550 teachers in 32 school districts and developed more than 50 different field-based Columbia River curricula.

he Estuary Partnership has students in their communities. the lower Columbia River. focused its education efforts Programs include projects on We work with students from first on students to maximize its estuaries, mapping, soil science, T grade through high school but focus impact and respond to the greatest human impact, and native plants on fourth, fifth, and sixth graders. At need. Our education programs among others. these grades, Oregon and Washington provide experiential learning oppor- state standards related to ecosystems, • Increasing the number of students tunities that augment existing class animal adaptations, watersheds, and reached each year from 1,260 in activities, help students develop their streams and rivers make Estuary 2000 to 10,834 in 2005. A slight analytical thinking skills, and engage Partnership education programs par- drop occurred during the 2004– ticularly compelling. 2005 school year as the Estuary Partnership focused more on The Estuary Partnership works service learning projects. These closely with teachers to make sure all take more staff and preparation, elements of the education program but provide students with integrate into each teacher’s on-going opportunities to engage in lesson plans and classroom environ- stewardship projects with real ment, as well as state science and environment benefits, reinforce education standards. In addition, the concepts learned in the classroom, Estuary Partnership conducts teacher and empower students to continue workshops each summer to provide to engage in restoration projects. teachers with the framework and tools that help them integrate the lower Columbia River into their lesson plans. Is the Estuary Partnership reaching students from Response to the Estuary Partnership throughout the study area? education program has been over- Fourth graders from John Wetten Elementary in Gladstone, Oregon sample water quality as part of an whelmingly positive among teachers, Since 2000, the Estuary Estuary Partnership field trip. Water quality monitoring projects are a great way to get students into the parents, and students and demand for Partnership has worked with 32 field to learn about the importance of temperature and dissolved oxygen to native species. the programs has greatly increased. study area school districts. In the Today requests exceed the Partner- last three years we have reached ship’s ability to provide programs. To approximately 100 new teachers narrow this gap as much as possible, and 3,000 new students each year. and to continue to build on the The Estuary Partnership works hard program’s success, the Estuary to maintain a geographic balance with Partnership makes fundraising for its education program. Our study area education a top priority. stretches from Bonneville Dam to the Highlights of the Estuary Partner- Pacific Ocean in both Oregon and ship education program include: Washington. It is a large geography that encompasses highly urban areas • Reaching over 32,545 students with extremely large school districts, through classroom programs that as well as rural areas with only one apply concepts to the lower high school. In some places, students Columbia River. This has been the may rarely see the lower Columbia Estuary Partnership’s largest River, while in others, the school education program, accounting for overlooks it. The program’s flexibility approximately 75% of the students and ability to address teachers’ reached per year. The Estuary Partnership developed an on-river program to help students experience and learn specific needs makes the program about the lower Columbia River. Canoe and kayak trips give students an intimate river experience. • Developing 50 distinct curricula sought after from Corbett, Oregon to programs that focus specifically on Cathlamet, Washington.

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 16 Lower Columbia River Partnership School Programs 2000–2005

Estuary Partnership School Programs Study Area City Limits

Since the Estuary Partnership’s Education Program began in 2000, the Estuary Partnership has worked with 32 school districts within the Estuary Partnership’s study area. The Education Program works hard to reach students from throughout the study area.

Are children gaining direct Field Trips: 7,200 students have service learning projects during the in service projects, and they are experiences as a result of participated in Estuary Partnership 2003-2004 school year. They have popular with teachers and students as Estuary Partnership educational field trips. Field trips take been a popular and growing compo- well. Students remove invasive programs? place throughout the Estuary Part- nent of the Estuary Partnership’s in- species, plant native species, or nership study area, generally using the-field offerings. Students who maintain plantings from previous More than 14,000 students have natural areas close to schools as to participate in multi-class visit pro- projects. When possible, service participated in Estuary keep transportation costs low and grams or year long programs under- learning project sites are close to Partnership field trips, service engage students in their local area by take an on-the-ground service schools, giving the students an learning projects, on-river trips, or building a sense of place and connec- learning restoration project as part of opportunity to re-visit the site and summer camps. tion to nearby natural areas. Field the program. A growing number of establish a strong connection. The Estuary Partnership has devel- trips have taken place at Whitaker schools require students to participate oped education programs that include Ponds in Portland, Sea Resources both classroom learning and applied Watershed Learning Center in in-the-field learning. The Estuary Chinook, Washington, Lacamas Partnership uniquely provides Creek Park in Camas, Washington Trending Positive programs in a regional context that and the Ridgefield Wildlife Refuge in The Estuary Partnership education program fills a gap in the educational take students from principles to actual Ridgefield Washington, among more process for schools in the lower Columbia River corridor. The Estuary physical involvement in the solution. than two dozen locations. Partnership provides science-based classroom visits, and applied learning through field projects, service learning projects, and on-river trips. The Creating an outdoor environmental On-River Trips: Over the years, the Partnership works closely with teachers to offer programs that meet their experience for students adds an Estuary Partnership has provided more needs and state standards, and build their capacity to integrate lower invaluable learning tool that cannot than 3,700 students and adults with on- Columbia River lessons and environmental field work into their classrooms. be matched in the classroom. Studies river trips designed to give participants The Estuary Partnership provides programs that engage students in in the classroom, such as watershed the most direct connection with the learning and environmental stewardship without telling them what to think. models, river history, and salmon lower Columbia River possible. The Through these activities, the Estuary Partnership’s education program is lifecycles, are enhanced by placing river’s size, feel, and look always making a difference in students’ education and hopefully in the future students in the field. Firsthand changes when you’re on the water. health of the lower Columbia River. knowledge leads to a greater under- Student on-river trips included an Children are the future. Today’s fourth graders are tomorrow’s legislators. standing of the lower Columbia River education component ranging from Today’s middle school students are future commuters. Today’s kindergar- that students will eventually protect water quality monitoring, to native teners are developers of the decades to come. It is important that students and manage for future generations. species identification, to water safety. are exposed to a broad cross section of lower Columbia River studies that In almost all projects, the Estuary integrate all aspects of the river—environmental, economic, historic, social Partnership provides funds that Service Learning Projects and cultural. Giving over 46,000 students an experience in their community cover transportation costs to and is a good start. from the field site. The Estuary Partnership first offered

17 www.lcrep.org Has the Estuary Partnership provided citizens more hands-on opportunities to experience or protect the lower Columbia River?

More than 8,200 citizens have volunteered to help monitor or restore the lower Columbia River since 2000, planting over 11,000 native trees and shrubs at 18 restoration sites.

Volunteers can participate in regular Parks, more than 25 people have water quality training and monitor- paddled to Washington’s Reed ing or the Partnership’s two-week Island State Park to clean up the water quality monitoring event that site at the start and close of the takes place each September. Volun- camping season. teers can also participate in restora- tion projects, ranging from site preparation, to invasive plant remov- Do hands-on experience and als, to native tree and shrub plant- involvement compel citizens to ings. Volunteers also regularly build stewardship through participate in maintenance projects, volunteering? helping weed or water new or existing Absolutely. Many volunteers plantings. Recognizing that different participate in Estuary Partnership activities appeal to different people, projects repeatedly. the Estuary Partnership continues to Anyone who has ever planted a tree develop new volunteer opportunities. knows that a special connection forms Each year the Estuary Partnership’s Volunteer Monitoring Event engages hundreds of students Highlights of the volunteer program during the planting. There’s a height- and volunteers in water quality monitoring along the lower Columbia River and its tributaries. include: ened sense of stewardship. If you Participants typically measure temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, and turbidity. Data plant it you’re more likely to care for from each event can be found on the Estuary Partnership web site: www.lcrep.org. • More than 8,200 people have volunteered on Estuary the tree and enjoy the growth, habitat, Partnership projects. and shade it provides. We believe that he Estuary Partnership when volunteers spend time in the believes that with experience • More than 3,200 of them have been field monitoring water quality, T comes respect, and that involved in water quality planting trees and shrubs, or pulling respect fosters stewardship. People monitoring. invasive species, they are establishing who experience the Columbia River • More than 3,800 volunteers have a similar connection to the lower first hand are inevitably impressed participated in Water Trail with its size, beauty, fragility and restoration projects importance. We believe once that at 18 sites. Enhances Access connection is established, people are • Project Another way the Estuary Partnership more likely to factor the river’s health participants have provides hands-on experiences is by into their daily decision-making. facilitating access to the river through ranged in age from When the Estuary Partnership the Lower Columbia River Water Trail, a 5 to 70. started its volunteer program in 146 mile trail designed to help non- 2000, volunteer opportunities in the • Upwards of 3,100 motorized boaters access the water and lower Columbia River, especially students have connect with the ecology, people, participated in businesses, and history of the river. outside of the Portland/Vancouver service learning Through the water trail effort, the area were few. Today, the Estuary projects at 79 sites. Estuary Partnership is working to Partnership coordinates approxi- identify and improve new and existing mately 75 volunteer events a year in • The number of launch and landing sites, campsites, and communities from Corbett to volunteers has others sites of interest that will make it Cathlamet, from Washougal to grown each year easier and more enjoyable for people to Warrenton. The volunteer ans service from 175 in 2000 to access and learn about the river. learning programs have worked at 18 3,484 in 2005. restoration sites within the study • Two projects have area. Each site gives citizens the combined Lower opportunity to experience diverse Columbia River habitats and geography along the Water Trail lower Columbia River, whether close paddling and to home or off their beaten path. stewardship. In The Estuary Partnership provides a two projects with The Estuary Partnership Volunteer Program engages hundreds of volunteers each year in projects that benefit the environment, often variety of volunteer opportunities. Washington State by removing invasive species and planting native trees and shrubs.

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 18 Lower Columbia River Partnership Service Learning and Volunteer Restoration Sites 2000–2005

Service Learning Sites Volunteer Restorations Sites Study Area City Limits

Locating sites appropriate for volunteer and service learning projects can be difficult. Sites need to be safe, reasonably close to the volunteer base or school, and in need of restoration work. Estuary Partnership volunteers and students in the service learning program have worked at 18 restoration sites throughout the lower Columbia River area, planting nearly 11,500 native trees.

Columbia River—one that fosters Is citizen involvement in • Engaging more than 80 people in • Monitoring water quality at over 240 continued efforts to protect and stewardship projects providing the Estuary Partnership’s habitat sites along the lower Columbia River restore the river. That connection, environmental benefits? mapping project. Volunteers and its tributaries during the Estuary and the organization and legwork ground truthed data at dozens of Partnership’s annual volunteer water Estuary Partnership volunteers done by the Estuary Partnership, keep sites to improve the accuracy of quality monitoring event. create long-lasting positive changes people and organizations coming back high resolution habitat maps. in the environment. to work on stewardship projects. There are two purposes to the Estuary • More than 900 citizens have been Partnership’s Volunteer Program: To involved in more than one Estuary build stewardship and connections to Partnership volunteer project. the river through experience and to Trending Positive • The Estuary Partnership works improve ecological conditions For most of us, establishing a close connection with the river takes some- with dozens of schools and through native plantings and inva- thing above and beyond our normal routine. One hundred years ago, a organizations on an ongoing basis, sive species removals. person living in the lower Columbia River region most likely interacted with many over a period of years. While the river on a daily basis. Transportation was either by river or on trails Since 2000, the Estuary Partnership individual volunteers may change, bordering it. Food and commerce came from the lower Columbia River, as and its volunteers have accomplished the organizational partnerships well as stories and myths about the seasons, geography, and community a great deal of on-the-ground work. have grown over time. history. Some highlights include: Organizations include: Friends of Today, many people go weeks without seeing the river, much less interact- • Planting 11,459 native trees and Ridgefield Wildlife Refuge, Ridge- ing with it in some way. At times, even accessing the river can be difficult. shrubs at sites throughout the field National Wildlife Refuge, Girl Without that close connection, it’s much harder to understand how daily Estuary Partnership study area lifestyle choices impact the river’s health. Stormwater carries fertilizers Scouts Columbia River Council, including the Sandy River Delta, spread on lawns and heavy metals from parking lots to the river, but to Retree International, Columbia Land Scappoose Bay, and the Ridgefield most of us, it’s “out of sight-out of mind.” Trust, the Columbia Slough Water- National Wildlife Refuge. shed Council, and others. Yet the lower Columbia River remains the lifeblood of the region in many • Removing more than 34 truckloads ways, economically, environmentally, aesthetically, and recreationally. We Schools include: Fisher’s Landing of invasive plants from various sites. depend on its health—and to a large extent—its health depends on us. Elementary, Elmonica Elementary, Experiencing the river directly affects how we think about it and care for it. Columbia River High School, Corbett • Providing long term maintenance By providing a broad range of volunteer opportunities, the Estuary Partner- Middle School, York Elementary, and monitoring at nearly a dozen ship has helped over 8,000 people care for, connect with, and experience Whitford Middle School, Ridgefield sites where restoration efforts have the lower Columbia River. We believe their stewardship makes a differ- taken place. High School, and others. ence, both in the field, and in their daily decision making.

19 www.lcrep.org • How can we continue to focus In 1998, the Lower Columbia Fish From the efforts to make greater gains in Recovery Board was created. With species recovery? significant investment by the State of Washington, the Fish Recovery Board • How do we re-tool our education Executive Director has produced a strong species programs so students can apply recovery plan that not only provides classroom concepts in their his first Report on the Estuary mental gains from our actions. On- the framework for the Washington communities and the field? is a great starting point. We the-ground results are occurring and State portion of the lower river and have made significant prog- many parties are actively engaged. We • What opportunities can we provide estuary, but it stands as the model for T for citizens to safely experience the ress in key areas: can say with some certainty that other areas. investments made by the EPA and the river and help protect it? • Thousands of acres of habitat have Together, the three of us now work to States of Washington and Oregon in been restored and protected not • What toxics are where in our lower provide the binding that quilts the National Estuary Program are just by the Estuary Partnership but river and how do we reduce and together efforts by watershed coun- improving the river and its environs. many other entities. eliminate them at the source? The cils, water resource inventory areas, They have been substantially expanded data and research is essential for local governments, federal agencies, • We are wiser about land use and with investments by Bonneville Power many reasons, certainly protecting conservation organizations, and land development and many Administration and the Northwest human and species health is number trusts, so we have a regional, agreed communities now implement land Power and Conservation Council, US one, helping us even more strate- upon plan of action, that is giving us use codes and ordinances that Army Corp of Engineers, and NOAA, gically invest our on-the-ground on-the-ground results and moving protect water quality by limiting as well as through corporate, founda- restoration activities is a close second. us forward. the amount of polluted runoff that tion and individual contributions to All our activities need more sus- reaches streams. the Estuary Partnership. But there Without the efforts of many individu- tained effort and many partners. • We have instituted water quality are still unanswered questions. als and corporations, organizations In 1995, the Estuary Partnership was and agencies of government, the monitoring and stepped up our The report identified some weak- just beginning its planning phase. Report on the Estuary in 2005 would focus on toxics in the river. nesses in our efforts that will help have far fewer successes to report. • Volunteers are planting thousands direct our next steps. The work ahead In 1998, the Oregon Watershed of native trees and shrubs and is clearer: Enhancement Board’s watershed The power of collaboration and protection programs gained signifi- supporting each other combined with removing acres of invasive species. • What is the net gain in habitat cant momentum when voters autho- a comprehensive regional approach is • Students are gaining outdoor restored? We need to measure how rized funding for Oregon salmon giving us environmental results. applied learning about the much habitat are we losing. protection and watershed protection. Most important, it is setting the stage Columbia River. • Can we reduce impervious surfaces Originally formed in 1987 as part of for us to hand our children a more For the most part the trends are and their impacts with more the Governor’s office, OWEB became improved lower Columbia River. positive: we are achieving environ- innovative techniques? an independent agency in 1999.

Board of Directors Estuary Partnership Staff Glenn Akins, Friends of Ridgefield Wildlife Refuge Debrah Marriott, Executive Director Tom Byler, Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board Vanessa Bird, Development Assistant Troy Clark, Friends of Smith & Bybee Lakes Jennie Boyd, Volunteer Coordinator Steve Harvey, Cowlitz-Wahkiakum Council of Governments Matt Burlin, Habitat Restoration Coordinator Bill Hutchison, Foster Pepper Tooze LLP Susan Elshire, Finance Officer In 1999, the Estuary Partnership began implementing its David Judd, Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Chris Hathaway, Programs Coordinator Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan, developed Margaret Magruder, Lower Columbia River Watershed Council Jill Leary, Monitoring Coordinator over a three-year period through an inclusive process that Dean Marriott, Portland Bureau of Environmental Services Carolyn Myers Lindberg, Development and involved many citizens from many sectors of Columbia River Bob Nichols, Office of Washington Governor Christine Gregoire Communications Director communities. Our overall mission is to preserve and enhance Iloba Odum, Washington Department of Ecology Scott McEwen, Director of Technical Programs the water quality of the estuary to support its biological and Mike Soderberg, Educator Tammy Sanders, Director of Education Programs human communities. Louise Solliday, Office of Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski Jody Schmidt, Education Assistant Holly Van Fleet, REI The Estuary Partnership is one of 28 estuaries in the nation Kathryn Van Natta, NW Pulp and Paper Association For More Information Contact designated an “Estuary of National Significance.” The National Brad Witt, Oregon AFL-CIO, OR Legislator Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership Estuary Program was authorized in the 1987 Clean Water Act 811 SW Naito Parkway, Suite 120 and is administered by the US Environmental Protection Ex Officio Members Portland, Oregon 97204 Agency. Its purpose is to protect nationally significant estuaries Patty Dornbusch, NOAA Fisheries 503-226-1565 that have been degraded by human activity. The Estuary Debrah Marriott, Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership fax 503-226-1580 Partnership does this by bringing together diverse parties to Davis Moriuchi, US Army Corps of Engineers [email protected] identify problems, defining a course of actions to address Mary Lou Soscia, US Environmental Protection Agency www.lcrep.org problems, and working collaboratively to implement actions Cathy Tortorici, NOAA Fisheries through a regional framework. Yvonne Vallette, US Environmental Protection Agency

Presorted First Class Mail US Postage PAID 811 SW Naito Parkway, Suite 120 Portland OR Portland, Oregon 97204 Permit No. 3142 503-226-1565 www.lcrep.org

Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership 20