DOCSLIB.ORG

ESA Recovery Plan for Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus Tshawytscha) & Snake River Basin Steelhead (Oncorhynchus Mykiss)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ESA Recovery Plan for Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus Tshawytscha) & Snake River Basin Steelhead (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) ESA Recovery Plan for Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) & Snake River Basin Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) November 2017 WEST COAST REGION Chinook salmon at Dagger Falls, Idaho. Photo: Enrique Patino, NOAA U.S. Department of Commerce | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | National Marine Fisheries Service ESA Recovery Plan: Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon and Snake River Basin Steelhead| 1 DISCLAIMER Endangered Species Act (ESA) recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that the best available information indicates are necessary for the conservation and survival of listed species. Plans are published by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), usually with the assistance of recovery teams, state agencies, tribes, local governments, salmon recovery boards, non-governmental organizations, interested citizens of the affected area, contractors, and others. ESA recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views, official positions, or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than NMFS. They represent the official position of NMFS only after they have been signed by the West Coast Regional Administrator. ESA recovery plans are guidance and planning documents only; identification of an action to be implemented by any public or private party does not create a legal obligation beyond existing legal requirements. Nothing in this plan should be construed as a commitment or requirement that any Federal agency obligate or pay funds in any one fiscal year in excess of appropriations made by Congress for that fiscal year in contravention of the Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. 1341, or any other law or regulation. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new information, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery actions. ESA recovery plans provide important context for NMFS determinations pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act. However, recovery plans do not place any additional legal burden on NMFS or the action agency when determining whether an action would jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or adversely modify critical habitat. The procedures for the section 7 consultation process are described in 50 CFR 402 and are applicable regardless of whether or not the actions are described in a recovery plan. Additional copies of this plan can be obtained from: NOAA NMFS West Coast Region 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd. Suite 1100 Portland, OR 97232 503-230-5400 November 2017 NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service ESA Recovery Plan: Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon and Snake River Basin Steelhead| 2 This page intentionally left blank. November 2017 NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service ESA Recovery Plan: Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon and Snake River Basin Steelhead| 3 Acknowledgements The ESA Recovery Plan for Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon and Steelhead represents the dedicated effort of numerous individuals over many years. The National Marine Fisheries Service would like to thank the individuals, agency and tribal representatives listed below (alphabetically) for their contributions to this plan. Recovery Plan Contributors and Reviewers Adrienne Averett – Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Laurie Beale – NOAA Office of the General Counsel Blane Bellerud – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Daniel Bertram – Upper Salmon Basin Watershed Program Therese Conant – National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Protected Resources Thomas Cooney – NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science Center Tim Copeland – Idaho Department of Fish and Game David Crouse – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Patty Dornbusch – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Peter Dygert – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Mike Edmondson – Idaho Governor’s Office of Species Conservation Brett Farman – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Chad Fealko – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Sarah Fesenmyer – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Kurt Fresh – Northwest Fisheries Science Center Rosemary Furfey – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Elizabeth Gaar – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Ritchie Graves – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Pete Hassemer – Idaho Department of Fish and Game Lance Hebdon – Idaho Department of Fish and Game Jay Hesse – Nez Perce Tribe Tracy Hillman – BioAnalysts, Inc. Janet Hohle – Clearwater Technical Group Charlene Hurst – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Becky Johnson – Nez Perce Tribe David Johnson – Nez Perce Tribe Lyndal Johnson – Northwest Fisheries Science Center Jeromy Jording – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Vince Kozakiewicz – U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Gary James – Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation Kristen Jule – Bonneville Power Administration Lynne Krasnow – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region David Mabe – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Steve Martin – Snake River Salmon Recovery Board November 2017 NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service ESA Recovery Plan: Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon and Snake River Basin Steelhead| 4 Heidi McRoberts – Nez Perce Tribe Kimberley Murphy – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Enrique Patino – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Rock Peters – U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Allyson Purcell – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Bob Ries – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Scott Rumsey – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Gina Schroeder – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Alix Smith – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Doug Taki – Shoshone Bannock Tribes Barbara Taylor – BioAnalysts, Inc. and NMFS contractor Emmit Taylor – Nez Perce Tribe Michael Tehan – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Chris Toole – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Ken Troyer – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Paul Wagner – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Brian Zimmerman – Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation Snake River Coordination Group Brian Abbott – Washington State Recreation and Conservation Bob Austin – Upper Snake River Tribes Foundation Adrienne Averett – Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Mark Bagdovitz – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Dale Bambrick – National Marine Fisheries Service Bert Bowler – Interested Party Claudeo Broncho – Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Craig Busack – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Julie Carter – National Marine Fisheries Service John Chatel – U.S. Forest Service Greg Clark – U.S. Geological Service Thomas Cooney – NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science Center Bob Dach – Bureau of Indian Affairs Patty Dornbusch – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Bruce Eddy – Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Mike Edmondson – Idaho Governor’s Office of Species Conservation Rick Edwards – Shoshone-Paiute Tribes Sarah Fesenmyer – National Marine Fisheries Service Rosemary Furfey – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Elizabeth Gaar – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Chris Golightly – Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission Ritchie Graves – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Robert Griswold – Contractor for Shoshone-Bannock Tribes November 2017 NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service ESA Recovery Plan: Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon and Snake River Basin Steelhead| 5 Lydia Grimm – Bonneville Power Administration Delbert Groat – U.S. Forest Service Tony Grover – Northwest Power Conservation Council Brent Hall – Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Pete Hassemer – Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Idaho Governor’s Office Lance Hebdon – Idaho Department of Fish and Game Jay Hesse – Nez Perce Tribe Scott Hoefer – Bureau of Land Management Brad Houslet – Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation Gary James – Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation David Johnson – Nez Perce Tribe Kristen Jule – Bonneville Power Administration Jason Kesling – Burns Paiute Tribe Paul Kline – Idaho Department of Fish and Game Bill Lind – National Marine Fisheries Service Rob Lothrop – Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission David Mabe – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Erica Maltz – Burns Paiute Tribe Steve Martin – Snake River Salmon Recovery Board Rosy Mazaika – Bonneville Power Administration Bruce McIntosh – Oregon Governor’s Office Chris Mebane – U.S. Geological Service Glen Mendel – Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Brenda Mitchell – U.S. Forest Service Ed Murrell – Shoshone-Paiute Tribes Ryan Newman – U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Carol Perugini – Shoshone-Paiute Tribes Rock Peters – U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Steve Pozzenghera – Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Kate Puckett – U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Kathy Ramsey – U.S. Forest Service Heather Ray – Upper Snake River Tribes Laura Robinson – Northwest Power Conservation Council Scott Rumsey – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Larry Sandoval – U.S. Forest Service Marvin Shutters – U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Gary Sims – National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region Tom Skiles – Columbia River Inter-Tribal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Synthesis Document
    1114 J Ave. October 1, 2018 La Grande, Oregon 97850 (541) 663-0570 Independent Scientific Review Panel Fax: (541) 962-1585 Northwest Power and Conservation Council http://www.grmw.org 851 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Portland, Oregon 97204 Board of Directors Chair: Dear Panel Members, Susan Roberts Vice-Chair: Donna Beverage We are pleased to submit the 25-year synthesis of the Grande Ronde Model Watershed (GRMW) and hope you find it satisfactory. Although this assignment Allen Childs Norm Cimon might have been accepted begrudgingly, we have found value in taking the time Larry Cribbs to look at the road behind us, if for no other reason than to see if the dust has Jed Hassinger Joe McCormack settled. Nick Myatt Larry Nall Jim Webster It is the nature of organizations like ours to engage in an endless cycle of plan, Dave Yost prioritize, plan, prioritize, and plan some more, often failing to review past actions with a critical eye. This shortcoming might not be as commonplace as I suspect, but having been engaged in the politics and science of this relatively Staff: Mary Estes new ‘industry’ for more than 20 years, I sense that it is not unique to GRMW. I Coby Menton am reminded that this synthesis encapsulates all my career with GRMW and so Kayla Morinaga Jeff Oveson it is a personal reminder of some, but surely not all, of my own shortcomings. Jesse Steele Connar Stone Alexandra Towne If I may be presumptuous, I anticipate that other Umbrella organizations in the Columbia Basin will be tasked with a similar undertaking, and while I hope that our synthesis is not only what the Panel expected, but also can serve as a guide to those who will be preparing their own.
    [Show full text]
  • Riggins & Salmon River Canyon
    RRiiggggiinnss && SSaallmmoonn RRiivveerr CCaannyyoonn EEccoonnoommiicc DDeevveellooppmmeenntt SSttrraatteeggyy (FINAL DRAFT) Prepared for the City of Riggins February 2006 by James A. Birdsall & Associates The Hingston Roach Group, Inc. Bootstrap Solutions FINAL DRAFT [Inside cover.] RIGGINS AREA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FEBRUARY 2006 FINAL DRAFT CONTENTS 1. Introduction......................................................................................1 Planning Process and Project Phases ..............................................................1 Riggins History and Assets. ..............................................................................2 2. Socio-Economic Trends....................................................................4 Population. ..........................................................................................................4 Age Composition................................................................................................5 Education & Enrollment...................................................................................5 Industry Trends..................................................................................................6 Employment, Wages & Income.......................................................................7 Business Inventory.............................................................................................9 Retail Trends.......................................................................................................9 Tourism
    [Show full text]
  • Characterizing Migration and Survival Between the Upper Salmon River Basin and Lower Granite Dam for Juvenile Snake River Sockeye Salmon, 2011-2014
    Characterizing migration and survival between the Upper Salmon River Basin and Lower Granite Dam for juvenile Snake River sockeye salmon, 2011-2014 Gordon A. Axel, Christine C. Kozfkay,† Benjamin P. Sandford, Mike Peterson,† Matthew G. Nesbit, Brian J. Burke, Kinsey E. Frick, and Jesse J. Lamb Report of research by Fish Ecology Division, Northwest Fisheries Science Center National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2725 Montlake Boulevard East, Seattle, Washington 98112 and †Idaho Department of Fish and Game 1800 Trout Road, Eagle, Idaho 83616 for Division of Fish and Wildlife, Bonneville Power Administration U.S. Department of Energy P.O. Box 3621, Portland, Oregon 97208-3621 Project 2010-076-00; covers work performed and completed under contract 46273 REL 78 from March 2010 to March 2016 May 2017 This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of its program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. Views in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA. ii Executive Summary During spring 2011-2014, we tagged and released groups of juvenile hatchery Snake River sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka to Redfish Lake Creek in the upper Salmon River Basin. These releases were part of a coordinated study to characterize migration and survival of juvenile sockeye to Lower Granite Dam. We estimated detection probability, survival, and travel time based on detections of fish tagged with either a passive integrated transponder (PIT) or radio transmitter and PIT tag.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Clearwater Assessment: 8. Fishery Resources
    8 Fishery Resources 8.1 Fish Status Currently more than 30 species of fish inhabit the Clearwater subbasin, including 19 native species, two of which have been reintroduced (Table 43). Salmonids and cyprinids are most numerous, representing 10 and 6 species, respectively. Exotic species within the subbasin are generally introduced sport or forage species, and include primarily centrarchids, ictalurids, and salmonids. Five fish species have been chosen as aquatic focal species in this assessment: chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss subspecies), westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi), bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). Aquatic focal species may serve as indicators of larger communities, and are listed by federal and/or state agencies as species of concern or, in the case of brook trout, have the potential to negatively impact other selected species. In addition, aquatic focal species had adequate data available for species status, distribution, and habitat use to aid future decision making. Information is also provided for additional species of interest for which only limited data exists, redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss subspecies), Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) and coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Although species status is discussed, data limitations for these species prohibits substantial consideration of limiting factors and distribution or condition of existing habitat areas. The resident fishery in Dworshak Reservoir is also considered a substantial fishery resource in the Clearwater subbasin. The Dworshak Reservoir fishery involves multiple species, and is addressed as a single fishery rather than as a large number of individual species. Distribution and status information was compiled for the five aquatic focal species using 23 data sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Snake River Hatcheries Draft Environmental Assessment
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE West Coast Region 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard, Suite 1100 PORTLAND, OREGON 97232 May 21, 2019 Dear Recipient: In accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), we announce the availability for review of the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for Snake River Basin Hatcheries. The proposed action is to make Endangered Species Act (ESA) section 4(d) determinations for the 15 hatchery programs for spring and summer Chinook salmon, summer steelhead, and coho salmon to operate in the Snake River Basin. These programs are operated by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, the Nez Perce Tribe, and the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes and are funded by the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan, the Idaho Power Company, and the Bonneville Power Administration. The document is accessible electronically through the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) West Coast Region website at: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/hatcheries/SRHatcheries/snake16_hatch_rvw.html. Hard copies or CD copies of the document may be obtained from the NMFS Comment Coordinator for this action, Emi Kondo, at the contact information provided below. Written comments may be submitted to NMFS via electronic mail, physical mail, or fax to the Comment Coordinator during the public comment period (the closing date for the public comment period is noted at the above website). When submitting comments, please include the identifier “Snake River Hatcheries DEA comments” in the subject line or fax cover page. Comment Coordinator: Emi Kondo, Fish Biologist National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd., Suite 1100 Portland, OR 97232 Phone: 503-736-4739 Fax: 503-872-2737 [email protected] Thank you in advance for your input and assistance in finalizing the Environmental Assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • Idaho LSRCP Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Report – March 2011
    4U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - Pacific Region Columbia River Basin Hatchery Review Team Columbia River Basin, Mountain Snake Province Snake, Salmon, and Clearwater River Watersheds Idaho Lower Snake River Compensation Plan State Operated Hatcheries Clearwater, Magic Valley, McCall, and Sawtooth Fish Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Final Report, Summary March 2011 Please cite as: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2011. Review of Idaho Lower Snake River Compensation Plan State-Operated Hatcheries, Clearwater, Magic Valley, McCall, and Sawtooth Fish Hatcheries: Assessments and Recommendations. Final Report, Summary, March 2011. Hatchery Review Team, Pacific Region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/Pacific/fisheries/ hatcheryreview/reports.html. USFWS COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN HATCHERY REVIEW TEAM Idaho LSRCP Hatcheries Assessments and Recommendations Report – March 2011 Preface The assessments and recommendations presented in this report represent the independent evaluations of the Hatchery Review Team and do not necessarily represent the conclusions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). The Review Team used the most current scientific information available and the collective knowledge of its members to develop the recommendations presented in this report. The Service will respect existing agreements with comanagers when considering the recommendations presented in this report. The Review Team and Service acknowledge that the U.S. v Oregon process is the appropriate
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief History of the Umatilla National Forest
    A BRIEFHISTORYOFTHE UMATILLA NATIONAL FOREST1 Compiled By David C. Powell June 2008 1804-1806 The Lewis and Clark Expedition ventured close to the north and west sides of the Umatilla National Forest as they traveled along the Snake and Columbia rivers. As the Lewis & Clark party drew closer to the Walla Walla River on their return trip in 1806, their journal entries note the absence of firewood, Indian use of shrubs for fuel, abundant roots for human consumption, and good availability of grass for horses. Writing some dis- tance up the Walla Walla River, William Clark noted that “great portions of these bottoms has been latterly burnt which has entirely destroyed the timbered growth” (Robbins 1997). 1810-1840 This 3-decade period was a period of exploration and use by trappers, missionaries, natu- ralists, and government scientists or explorers. William Price Hunt (fur trader), John Kirk Townsend (naturalist), Peter Skene Ogden (trap- per and guide), Thomas Nuttall (botanist), Reverend Samuel Parker (missionary), Marcus and Narcissa Whitman (missionaries), Henry and Eliza Spaulding (missionaries), Captain Benjamin Bonneville (military explorer), Captain John Charles Fremont (military scientist), Nathaniel J. Wyeth (fur trader), and Jason Lee (missionary) are just a few of the people who visited and described the Blue Mountains during this era. 1840-1859 During the 1840s and 1850s – the Oregon Trail era – much overland migration occurred as settlers passed through the Blue Mountains on their way to the Willamette Valley (the Oregon Trail continued to receive fairly heavy use until well into the late 1870s). The Ore- gon Trail traversed the Umatilla National Forest.
    [Show full text]
  • Lathyrus Bijugatus
    Fire Effects Information System (FEIS) FEIS Home Page Lathyrus bijugatus Table of Contents SUMMARY INTRODUCTION DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS FIRE ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS APPENDIX REFERENCES Figure 1—Drypark pea in flower. Photo by Tara Luna, used with permission. SUMMARY This Species Review summarizes the scientific information that was available on drypark pea as of February 2021. Drypark pea is a rare, leguminous forb that occurs in eastern Washington and Oregon, northern Idaho, and northwestern Montana. Within that distribution, it grows in a broad range of biogeoclimatic zones and elevations. As its common name "drypark pea" suggests, it prefers dry soils and open sites. Drypark pea grows in sagebrush-conifer and sagebrush-grassland transition zones; in ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce woodlands and forests; and subalpine fir parklands. In conifer communities, it is most common in open stands. Drypark pea has rhizomes that grow out from its taproot. Its roots host nitrogen-fixing Rhizobium bacteria. Drypark pea regenerates from seed and has a soil-stored seed bank; however, information on seed dispersal, viability, and seedling establishment of drypark pea was not available in the literature. Fire probably top-kills drypark pea, and it likely sprouts from its rhizomes and/or caudex after top-kill; however, these responses are undocumented. Only one study provided information on the response of drypark pea to fire. In ponderosa pine forest in northern Idaho, cover and frequency of drypark pea were similar on unburned plots and plots burned under low or high intensity, when 1 averaged across 3 postfire years.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Ecoregions of Idaho
    1 0 . C o l u m b i a P l a t e a u 1 3 . C e n t r a l B a s i n a n d R a n g e Ecoregion 10 is an arid grassland and sagebrush steppe that is surrounded by moister, predominantly forested, mountainous ecoregions. It is Ecoregion 13 is internally-drained and composed of north-trending, fault-block ranges and intervening, drier basins. It is vast and includes parts underlain by thick basalt. In the east, where precipitation is greater, deep loess soils have been extensively cultivated for wheat. of Nevada, Utah, California, and Idaho. In Idaho, sagebrush grassland, saltbush–greasewood, mountain brush, and woodland occur; forests are absent unlike in the cooler, wetter, more rugged Ecoregion 19. Grazing is widespread. Cropland is less common than in Ecoregions 12 and 80. Ecoregions of Idaho The unforested hills and plateaus of the Dissected Loess Uplands ecoregion are cut by the canyons of Ecoregion 10l and are disjunct. 10f Pure grasslands dominate lower elevations. Mountain brush grows on higher, moister sites. Grazing and farming have eliminated The arid Shadscale-Dominated Saline Basins ecoregion is nearly flat, internally-drained, and has light-colored alkaline soils that are Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 52 regions Literature Cited: much of the original plant cover. Nevertheless, Ecoregion 10f is not as suited to farming as Ecoregions 10h and 10j because it has thinner soils.
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Subbasin Management Plan May 2004
    Salmon Subbasin Management Plan May 2004 Coeur d'Alene #S LEWIS WASHINGTON #SMoscow MONTANA NEZ Lewiston #S #S PERCE #S #S OREGON Boise Sun Valley # #S #S Grangeville #S Idaho Falls WYOMING S IDAHO #S a #S Pocatello l m Twin Falls o IDAHO n R i v e r r e v # i . Dixie R k F Salmon River n . Riggins o # N Towns # m l n a erlai S Counties r mb e ha Sa C lmon R v ek iver i re Major streams R C d i p Watershed (HUC) boundaries a L i Salmon R t t r l # e e Big LEMHI . v Cre S i e k k r e a F R k v New l . e i m n e S o r R L o m C e n l r n o m a Meadows R e # S h h t m i l v i n a e a R ADAMS r S P i VALLEY v # e Mid Fk r Yellow Lodge # Pine r e # iv R P n a Leadore o hs lm im a Challis e S ro k # i F R i id ve M r iver on R Stanley Salm # S r a e l v m i R o n n o R lm iv e a S r . k F . E CUSTER 100 1020304050Miles Galena # BLAINE Compiled by IDFG, CDC, 2001 Written by Ecovista Contracted by Nez Perce Tribe Watershed Division and Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................6 1.1 Contract Entities and Plan Participants.............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Little Salmon River SBA and TMDL Addendum Implementation Plan for Agriculture (HUC 17060210)
    Little Salmon River SBA and TMDL Addendum Implementation Plan for Agriculture (HUC 17060210) Prepared by the Idaho Soil and Water Conservation Commission in cooperation with the Adams Soil and Water Conservation District April 2016 Original Plans: Little Salmon River Subbasin Assessment and TMDL (IDEQ February 2006) and Little Salmon River Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan for Agriculture, Forestry, and Urban/Suburban Activities (November 2008) Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Project Setting ............................................................................................................................................... 2 Land Use and Land Ownership ..................................................................................................................... 4 Conservation Accomplishments ................................................................................................................... 4 Resource Concerns........................................................................................................................................ 4 Sediment ..................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Heaven in Hell's Canyon
    Northwest Explorer ONDAL ONDAL M M EN EN K K Left: Hiker at the boundary of Hell’s Canyon Wilderness. Right: Approaching Horse Heaven, elevation 8,100 feet on the Seven Devils Loop Trail in Hell’s Canyon Wilderness. June and July are good times to explore Washington’s southeast corner in the Wenaha-Tucannon area and in the nearby Hells Canyon area of Oregon and Idaho. Heaven in Hell’s Canyon Hiking two wilderness areas near Washington’s southeast corner By Ken Mondal finding places to backpack when the high jaw-dropping views. This hike can be country is snowed in. The Imnaha River done comfortably in 3-4 days. Seven Devils Loop in Hell’s is hikable virtually year round. An excellent description of hiking the Canyon is Heavenly On the Idaho side of the recreation Seven Devils Loop can be found in Hik- There is no question that the Grand area is a 215,000-acre wilderness area, ing Idaho by Maughan and Maughan, Canyon is one of the natural wonders which includes the Seven Devils Moun- published by Falcon. For the other hikes of the world. However, if one measures tains. The premier hike within this I would recommend Rich Landers’ 100 from the Snake River to the summit of wilderness is the Seven Devils Loop, a Hikes in the Inland Northwest. 9,393 foot He Devil Peak in the Seven rugged 29-mile round trip offering mag- Devils Mountains, this makes Hells nificent views into Hells Canyon many Choose Forgotten Wenaha- Canyon the deepest canyon in North thousands of feet below and equally Tucannon for Solitude America.
    [Show full text]