DOCSLIB.ORG

Lost River Subbasin Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lost River Subbasin Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan Oregon Department of Agriculture Lost River Subbasin Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan May 2017 Developed by the: Lost River Local Agricultural Water Quality Advisory Committee Oregon Department of Agriculture With support from the: Klamath Soil and Water Conservation District Oregon Department of Agriculture Klamath SWCD Water Quality Program 2316 South 6th Street, Suite C 635 Capitol Street NE Klamath Falls, Oregon 97601 Salem, Oregon 97301 Phone: (541) 883-6932 x 101 Phone: (503) 986-4700 Table of Contents Acronyms and Terms Used in this Document .............................................................................. i Foreword ................................................................................................................................................. ii Applicability ........................................................................................................................................... ii Required Elements of Area Plans .................................................................................................... ii Plan Content ......................................................................................................................................... iii Chapter 1: Agricultural Water Quality Management Program Purpose and Background ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose of Agricultural Water Quality Management Program and Applicability of Area Plans .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 History of the Ag Water Quality Program .................................................................................... 2 1.3 Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................................................ 3 1.3.1 Oregon Department of Agriculture .......................................................................................................... 3 1.3.3 Local Advisory Committee ........................................................................................................................... 5 1.3.4 Agricultural Landowners ............................................................................................................................. 5 1.3.5 Public Participation ........................................................................................................................................ 6 1.4 Agricultural Water Quality ............................................................................................................... 6 1.4.1 Point and Nonpoint Sources of Water Pollution ................................................................................ 6 1.4.2 Beneficial Uses and Parameters of Concern ......................................................................................... 6 1.4.3 Impaired Water Bodies and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) ......................................... 7 1.4.4 Oregon Water Pollution Control Law – ORS 468B.025 and ORS 468B.050 ........................... 7 1.4.5 Streamside Vegetation and Agricultural Water Quality ................................................................. 8 1.5 Other Water Quality Programs ........................................................................................................ 9 1.5.1 Confined Animal Feeding Operation Program .................................................................................... 9 1.5.2 Groundwater Management Areas (GWMAs) .................................................................................... 10 1.5.3 The Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds ................................................................................. 10 1.5.4 Pesticide Management and Stewardship ........................................................................................... 10 1.5.5 Drinking Water Source Protection ........................................................................................................ 11 1.6 Partner Agencies and Organizations ........................................................................................... 11 1.6.1 Oregon Department of Environmental Quality ............................................................................... 11 1.6.2 Other Partners ............................................................................................................................................... 12 1.7 Measuring Progress .......................................................................................................................... 12 1.7.1 Measurable Objectives ............................................................................................................................... 12 1.7.2 Land Condition and Water Quality ........................................................................................................ 13 1.7.3 Focused Implementation in Small Geographic Areas ................................................................... 13 1.8 Monitoring, Evaluation, and Adaptive Management .............................................................. 14 1.8.1 Agricultural Water Quality Monitoring ............................................................................................... 14 1.8.2 Statewide Aerial Photo Monitoring of Streamside Vegetation ................................................. 14 1.8.3 Biennial Reviews and Adaptive Management .................................................................................. 15 Chapter 2: Local Background ..................................................................................................... 17 2.1 Local Roles and Responsibilities .................................................................................................. 17 2.1.1 Local Advisory Committee ........................................................................................................................ 17 2.1.2 Local Management Agency ....................................................................................................................... 17 2.2 Area Plan and Rules: Development and History ..................................................................... 17 2.3 Geographical and Physical Setting ............................................................................................... 18 2.3.1 Location, Water Resources, Land Use, Land Ownership, Agriculture, Geographic and Programmatic Scope ................................................................................................................................................... 18 2.4 Agricultural Water Quality ............................................................................................................. 26 2.4.1 Water Quality Standards & 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies ........................................ 26 2.4.2 Basin TMDLs and Agricultural Load Allocations ............................................................................ 29 2.4.3 Beneficial Uses and Parameters of Concern ...................................................................................... 29 2.4.4 Sources of Impairment ............................................................................................................................... 29 2.5 Voluntary and Regulatory Measures ........................................................................................... 29 2.5.1 Area Rules as Implementation Strategy ............................................................................................. 29 Chapter 3: Goals, Objectives, and Strategies ......................................................................... 37 3.1 Mission ................................................................................................................................................... 37 3.2 Goal ......................................................................................................................................................... 37 3.3 Objectives ............................................................................................................................................. 38 3.4 Strategic Inititiatives ........................................................................................................................ 38 3.4.1 Measurable Objectives ............................................................................................................................... 38 3.4.2 Focus Areas ..................................................................................................................................................... 38 3.4.3 Focus Area Description: Poe Valley & Langell Valley .................................................................. 38 3.4.4 Focus Area Milestones ................................................................................................................................ 39 3.5 Strategies for Area Plan Implementation .................................................................................. 40 3.6 Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................................................. 41 3.6.1 Existing Water Quality ...............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Effects of Chiloquin Dam on Spawning Distribution and Larval Emigration of Lost River, Shortnose, and Klamath Largescale Sucke
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Publications of the US Geological Survey US Geological Survey 2013 Effects of Chiloquin Dam on Spawning Distribution and Larval Emigration of Lost River, Shortnose, and Klamath Largescale Suckers in the Williamson and Sprague Rivers, Oregon Barbara A. Martin U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] David A. Hewitt U.S. Geological Survey Craig M. Ellsworth U.S. Geological Survey Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgspubs Part of the Geochemistry Commons, Geology Commons, Geomorphology Commons, Hydrology Commons, and the Other Earth Sciences Commons Martin, Barbara A.; Hewitt, David A.; and Ellsworth, Craig M., "Effects of Chiloquin Dam on Spawning Distribution and Larval Emigration of Lost River, Shortnose, and Klamath Largescale Suckers in the Williamson and Sprague Rivers, Oregon" (2013). Publications of the US Geological Survey. 117. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgspubs/117 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Publications of the US Geological Survey by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Prepared in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation Effects of Chiloquin Dam on Spawning Distribution and Larval Emigration of Lost River, Shortnose, and Klamath Largescale Suckers in the Williamson and Sprague Rivers, Oregon Open-File Report 2013–1039 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Effects of Chiloquin Dam on Spawning Distribution and Larval Emigration of Lost River, Shortnose, and Klamath Largescale Suckers in the Williamson and Sprague Rivers, Oregon By Barbara A.
    [Show full text]
  • Yurok Final Brief
    Case 3:16-cv-06863-WHO Document 107 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 22 JEFFREY H. WOOD, Acting Assistant Attorney General 1 Environment & Natural Resources Division 2 SETH M. BARSKY, Chief S. JAY GOVINDAN, Assistant Chief 3 ROBERT P. WILLIAMS, Sr. Trial Attorney KAITLYN POIRIER, Trial Attorney 4 U.S. Department of Justice 5 Environment & Natural Resources Division Wildlife & Marine Resources Section 6 Ben Franklin Station, P.O. Box 7611 7 Washington, D.C. 20044-7611 Tel: 202-307-6623; Fax: 202-305-0275 8 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] 9 10 Attorneys for Federal Defendants 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 14 YUROK TRIBE, et al., ) 15 Case No. 3:16-cv-06863-WHO ) 16 Plaintiff, ) ) 17 FEDERAL DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE v. ) TO DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS’ 18 ) MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, et al., ) JUDGMENT AND/OR STAY OF 19 ) ENFORCEMENT (ECF No. 101) Defendants, ) 20 ) 21 and ) ) 22 KLAMATH WATER USERS ) ASSOCIATION, et al., ) 23 ) 24 Defendant-Intervenors. ) 25 26 27 28 1 Federal Defendants’ Response to Intervenors’ Motion for Relief 3:16-cv-6863-WHO Case 3:16-cv-06863-WHO Document 107 Filed 03/23/18 Page 2 of 22 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 I. INTRODUCTION 3 3 II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 5 4 A. Hydrologic Conditions In Water Year 2018 5 5 B. 2013 Biological Opinion Requirements for Suckers 5 6 III. DISCUSSION 7 7 A. Given Hydrologic Conditions, Guidance Measures 1 8 and 4 Cannot Both Be Implemented As They Were Designed Without Impermissibly Interfering With 9 Conditions Necessary to Protect Endangered Suckers 7 10 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Klamath and Lost River Subbasins TMDL and Water Quality Management Plan
    Upper Klamath and Lost River Subbasins TMDL and Water Quality Management Plan April 2017 TMDL Program 700 NE Multnomah St. Suite 600 Portland, OR 97232 Phone: 541-273-7002 Contact: Mike Hiatt www.oregon.gov/DEQ DEQ is a leader in restoring, maintaining and enhancing the quality of Oregon’s air, land and water. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality This report prepared by: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 700 NE Multnomah St, Suite 600 Portland, OR 97232 541-273-7002 www.oregon.gov/deq Contact: Mike Hiatt [email protected] Documents can be provided upon request in an alternate format for individuals with disabilities or in a language other than English for people with limited English skills. To request a document in another format or language, call DEQ in Portland at 503-229-5696, or toll-free in Oregon at 1-800-452-4011, ext. 5696; or email [email protected]. State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality ii Table of Contents Executive Summary................................................................................................................................... 1 Klamath River TMDLs................................................................................................................................ 2 Lost River TMDLs ...................................................................................................................................... 2 TMDL Summaries .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Kintpuash (Captain Jack) (C
    Kintpuash (Captain Jack) (c. 1837-1873) By Boyd Cothran Kintpuash (Strikes the Water Brashly), also known as Captain Jack and Kientpoos, was a principal headman of the Modoc tribe during the 1860s and early 1870s. He rose to national prominence during the Modoc War of 1872-1873. Leading a coalition of Modoc bands in a war of resistance against U.S. Army forces and local militia, he held off a numerically superior force for several months. Kintpuash was hanged by the army at Fort Klamath in southeastern Oregon with three other Modoc leaders on October 3, 1873. He was the only Native American leader to be tried and convicted as a war criminal. And his life highlights many of the central conflicts over emerging federal reservation policies, the continuing practice of forced removals, and the war aims of the federal government, local citizens, and Native groups in the post-Civil War era. Born in about 1837 in a village along the Lost River in the Modocs' ancestral territory in what is today Oregon, Kintpuash was among the Modoc signatories to the 1864 treaty with the Klamath, the Modoc, the Yahooskin Paiute, and the United States. Under the terms of the treaty, the Modoc people were to relocate to the Klamath Reservation. Kintpuash initially complied with the terms of the treaty, but he later repudiated it when he found conditions on the reservation intolerable and the government unwilling to address the Modocs’ grievances. In April 1870, Kintpuash and his followers returned to their villages along the Lost River. Back in his homeland, Kintpuash lived near his white neighbors.
    [Show full text]
  • OREGON LAWS 2019 SCR 12 SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 12 Whereas Kintpuash
    OREGON LAWS 2019 SCR 12 SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 12 Whereas hostilities resumed and the Modocs were decisively defeated in the Battle of Dry Lake on May 10, 1873, scattering the surviving Modocs Whereas Kintpuash (“Strikes the Water into small groups; and Brashly”) was born in about 1837 along the Lost Whereas Kintpuash was captured with his family River in the ancestral territory of the Modoc tribe on June 4, 1873, effectively ending Modoc resistance; in southern Oregon; and and Whereas Kintpuash, also known as Captain Jack Whereas Kintpuash and five other Modoc warri- and Kientpoos, became a principal headman of the ors were tried by a federal military court, convicted Modocs by the early 1860s; and and sentenced to death; and Whereas Kintpuash was among the Modoc Whereas two of the Modocs had their sentences signatories to the 1864 treaty between the United reduced to life imprisonment, but Kintpuash, States and the Modoc, Klamath and Yahooskin Schonchin John, Black Jim and Boston Charley tribes; and were hanged at Fort Klamath on October 3, 1873, Whereas the 1864 treaty terms required the the first Indians to be tried and executed by the Modocs to relocate from their ancestral lands to the federal government for war crimes; and Whereas the remaining members of the Modoc Klamath Reservation; and tribe, numbering approximately 150, were herded Whereas Kintpuash and the Modocs initially into rail cars and sent as prisoners of war to the complied with the 1864 treaty but became disillu- Indian Territory (Oklahoma); and sioned with
    [Show full text]
  • KLAMATH /\MATII INI)IANJRE,Setht Y C: Et I
    ranlinr - 4. Ii.(fI4O1 cl r9\ 5s C ' ETHNOGRAPHIC s'..L- tcH p' )T\' r SKETCH :sci41J OF THE f: Pr5T1 -11E1 L 1 ttc!f\\ \AKLAMATH /\MATII INI)IANJRE,SEThT y C: Et I. L/"° kt, INDIANS ckt1IPK / 41(chat,rc F % A" .. OF SOUTHWESTERN OREGON N 'I S j bli C' ''U OX] by ALBERT SAMUELGATSCHET 4 I'VYA - I) S. C Cm DIP. TIMPEN '4?. .1 4f.thrth' DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U. 8. GEOGRAPHICAL AND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION J. W. POWELL IN CHARGE Ethnographic Sketch of THE KLAMATH I.XDIAKS op SOUTHWESTERN OREGON ALBERT SAMUEL GATSCHET An Extract from CONTRIBUTIONS TO NORTH AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY, Vol.II, part I. WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1890 FACSIMILE REPRODUCTION 1966 THE SHOREY BOOK STORE 815 Third Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 SJS # 118 ETHNOGRAPHIC SKETCH OF THE KALAMATH INDIANS FOURTH PRINTING Of Facsimile Reprint Limited to 150 Copies November 1973 ISBN # 0-8466-0118-4 (InPaper Covers) ISBN # 0-8466-2118-5 (InPublisher's LibraryBindings) CONTENTS Page Letter of Transmittal Vii Ethnographic sketch ix Introduction to the texts 1 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. SMiTHSONIAN INSTITUTION, BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY, Washington, D. C., June 25, 1890. SIR: I have the honor to transmit toyou my report upon the Kiamath Indians of Southwestern Oregon, the result of long and patient study.It deals with their beliefs, legends, and traditions, theirgovernment and social life, their racial and somatic peculiarities, and,more extensively, with their language.To this the reader is introduced bynumerous ethnographic "Texts," suggested or dictated
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Lost River Sucker and Shortnose Sucker
    Western North American Naturalist Volume 71 Number 4 Article 2 1-25-2012 Status of Lost River sucker and shortnose sucker Josh E. Rasmussen U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Falls, OR, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan Part of the Anatomy Commons, Botany Commons, Physiology Commons, and the Zoology Commons Recommended Citation Rasmussen, Josh E. (2012) "Status of Lost River sucker and shortnose sucker," Western North American Naturalist: Vol. 71 : No. 4 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan/vol71/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Western North American Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Western North American Naturalist 71(4), © 2011, pp. 442–455 STATUS OF LOST RIVER SUCKER AND SHORTNOSE SUCKER Josh E. Rasmussen ABSTRACT.—The endangered Lost River sucker (Deltistes luxatus) and shortnose sucker (Chasmistes brevirostris) are endemic to the Upper Klamath Basin, Oregon and California. The once very abundant populations have declined drastically due to a combination of habitat loss and impairment, disruption of reproduction and gene flow, intensive harvest, and loss of entire populations. Spawning populations within Upper Klamath Lake are declining and have not had significant recruit- ment for over a decade. In addition to habitat loss, these populations are threatened by periodic harmful water conditions resulting from massive algal blooms and entrainment of larvae and juveniles into water delivery systems or hydroelectric structures.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface-Water Hydrology of Coastal Basins of Northern California
    Surface-Water Hydrology of Coastal Basins of Northern California By S. E. RANTZ GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1758 Prepared in cooperation with the Cali­ fornia Department of Water Resources UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1964 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Page Abstract__ _____________________________________________________ 1 Introduction._____________________________________________________ 3 Purpose and scope of the report.________________________________ 3 Other investigations___________________________________________ 5 Acknowledgments _____________________________________________ 5 Description of region_____________________________________________ 6 Geology._____________________________________________________ 10 Climate-____________________________________ 11 Description of individual basins.________________________________ 12 Eel River basin._______________________________-_-_.-_ 12 Elk River basin________________________-______ 12 Jacoby Creek basin._______________________________________ 13 Mad River basin._________________________________________ 13 Little River basin.________________________________________ 13 Redwood Creek basin._____________________________________ 14 Klamath River basin and adjacent closed basins_____________ 14 Smith River basin.._____________________.__.__ 20 Precipitation .___________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Lost River Decree
    STATE OF OREGON ) 1 ss . County of Marion ) I, William H . Young, Water Resources Director of the State of Oregon, d o hereby certify that the foregoing copy of the Findings of Fact and Order o f Determination in the Matter of the Supplemental Determination of the Relat!v e Rights to the Use of the Waters of Lost River and its tributaries has bee n compared with the original and that it is a correct copy as the same appear s of record in my office and custody . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day o f August, 1989 . N. , WILLIAM . if . YOUNG, D v-Y o r Water Resources Depa en t 0334j LOST R•I VF R Tributary of Tale Lak e Klamath County e Order Recor d Vol . Pag e Findings of State Water Board, May 1, 1917 . 3- 32 8 Supplemental Findings of Board, August 2, 1918 . 5 5 3 Decree of Circuit Court, September 12, 1918• . 5 9 4 Supplemental Findings on Inchoate Rights, October 23, 1922 • • • 7 , 72 Supplemental Decree of Court, February 23, 1 9 23• • • • . • • • • • 7- 147 Order affirming Stipulations ;; . April 2, 1979 . 18 369 Note : The Circuit Court Decree of September 12, 1918, confirm s the Findings and Supplemental Findings of the State Wate r Board, and contains a complete tabulation of the wate r rights . The Supplemental 3!`indings of the Water Board o n Inchoate rights was confirmed by Decree of the Circui t Court dated February 23, 1923 . o Note : Numbering machine numbers appearing on lower right han d corner of the Findings and Decrees herein, indicate cor - responding page numbers in recorded volumes .
    [Show full text]
  • Medicine Show ______
    MEDICINE SHOW __________________________ A tragedy in five acts By Stephen Most Contact: [email protected] ii. CAST OF CHARACTERS MODOCS MILITARY TRIBUNAL Captain Jack (Kintpuash) Judge-Advocate (a major) Rock Dave Captain Hasbrouck Scarface Charley Lost River Lizzie OTHER MILITARY Hooker Jim Colonel Green Bogus Charley General E. R. S. Canby Queen Mary Lieutenant Boutelle Old Woman Private MacFarland Curly Headed Doctor Private Swenson Private Smiley CIVILIANS Miller Alfred B. Meacham Ivan Applegate Reverend Thomas Chaplain The play begins at a military tribunal at Fort Klamath, Oregon in July, 1873. This tribunal and the subsequent execution of CAPTAIN JACK bring the Modoc War to a conclusion. Fought in and near the lavabeds of northeastern California, the Modoc War was a decisive moment in the conquest of the West. After the full might of the U.S. Army——comprising five troops of calvary, five companies of infantry, and four batteries of artillerymen——failed to dislodge a band of Indians from their lava stronghold, a "peace council" aimed at making the MODOCS surrender led to the assassination of GENERAL E. R. S. CANBY by Modoc leader CAPTAIN JACK. Both men had favored a negotiated settlement; both believed that a reservation on Modoc land was the best way to resolve the conflict between the Indians and settlers who occupied their country, turning hunting grounds into ranch land. Yet General Canby's superiors insisted on terms of surrender that were unacceptable to the victorious Indians, while Captain Jack's warriors pressured their leader to kill the general during negotiations. Their tragedy was a cause celebre at the time.
    [Show full text]
  • Occurrences of the Lost River Sucker, Deltistes Luxatus (Cope), and Shortnose Sucker, Chasmistes Brevirostris Cope, in Northern California'
    • REPRINT FROM Calif. Fish and Game, 51 (2 ) : 68-73. 1965. OCCURRENCES OF THE LOST RIVER SUCKER, DELTISTES LUXATUS (COPE), AND SHORTNOSE SUCKER, CHASMISTES BREVIROSTRIS COPE, IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA' MILLARD COOTS Inland Fisheries, Region 1 California Department of Fish and Game The Lost River sucker and the shortnose sucker are added to the fresh- water fish fauna of California. Their distribution, a brief discussion of habits, and meristic data are included. Recent captures of the Lost River sucker and the shortnose sucker represent additions to the freshwater fish fauna of California (Shapo- valov, Dill, and Cordone, 1959). The ranges of these suckers (family Catostomidae) previously were given as the Klamath Lakes drainage in Oregon (Schultz, 1936; Eddy, 1957). Gilbert (1898) stated that Del- tistes apparently were resident during most of the year in the deeper waters of Upper Klamath Lake and Tule Lakes (Figure 1). On May 15, 1955, Ned Dollahite, California Department of Fish and Game, collected a mature shortnose sucker from Boles Creek, Modoc County, near Steele Swamp Ranch. I saw additional specimens in the same vicinity on May 10, 1960, which were swimming upstream in an apparent spawning migration. Boles Creek is an intermittent tribu- tary of Willow Creek, the principal stream entering Clear Lake Reser- voir. Lost River originates from Clear Lake Reservoir, flows northward into Oregon, eventually re-enters California, and discharges into Tule Lake, its natural terminus. Lost River is now connected to the Klamath River by the Lost River Diversion Canal. Specimens of the shortnose and Lost River suckers were first collected from Copco Lake, Siskiyou County, on November 20, 1956.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case for Dam Removal on the Klamath
    BRING THE SALMON HOME The Karuk Tribe’s effort to remove Klamath Dams Introduction The aptly named 173-foot-high Iron Gate Dam was Fed by snowmelt from the Cascade Mountains, the constructed in 1962 to re-regulate the wildly varying Klamath River begins as a series of wetlands, marshes, flows from the upstream Copco dams and run a 20 and lakes in the high mountain desert of Southeastern megawatt power plant. With the construction of Iron Oregon. Often called the “Everglades of the West”, this Gate, an additional seven miles of spawning habitat in area once hosted an incredible diversity of wildlife, from the main stem as well as important tributaries such as the millions of migratory fowl that winter in the marshes Jenny Creek were blocked. to unique species of fish that inhabit the lakes and river. With up to 1.1 million adult fish spawning annually, including chinook, coho, pinks and chum salmon as well as abundant steelhead, the Klamath was once the third most productive salmon river in America. For thousands of years Native People, including the Klamath, Karuk, Hoopa and Yurok Tribes, sustained themselves on the bounty of the river. As white settlers came to the area, a sustainable commercial fishery developed. Today all of this has changed. Currently, Klamath River fall chinook runs are less than 8 percent of their historical abundance. For coho salmon the numbers are J.C. Boyle Dam diverts the majority of the river’s flow through a less than 1 percent. Chum and pink salmon, once mile of flume (photo courtesy of Steve Pedery) abundant in the Klamath, are extinct.
    [Show full text]