DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report Willamette Basin Annual Water Quality Report for 2015 Detroit Reservoir at Low Elevation (1202 feet) on November 6, due to 2015 Drought, North Santiam River, Oregon Final Report Page intentionally left blank Final Report, July 2016 i Table Of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 10 2.0 Introduction and Purpose ........................................................................................................ 12 3.0 Water Quality related Achievements ...................................................................................... 14 3.1 Corps Achievements in Meeting CWA-TMDL and EPA-BiOp Recommendations: ............. 14 4.0 Willamette Project Background .............................................................................................. 15 5.0 Description of the 2015 Water Year ....................................................................................... 19 5.1 Willamette Basin Hydrology .................................................................................................. 19 5.2 Willamette Mainstem Conditions ........................................................................................... 21 6.0 North Santiam Subbasin.......................................................................................................... 25 6.1 Water Quality Improvement Measures Conducted in 2015 .................................................... 25 6.2 Water Quality Monitoring and Results ................................................................................... 26 6.2.1 Water Quality Monitoring .............................................................................................. 26 6.2.2 Water Temperature Results ............................................................................................ 27 6.2.3 Total Dissolved Gas Saturation Results ......................................................................... 32 6.3 Biological Monitoring and Results ......................................................................................... 34 7.0 South Santiam Subbasin.......................................................................................................... 37 7.1 Water Quality Improvement Measures Conducted in 2015 .................................................... 37 7.2 Water Quality Monitoring And Results .................................................................................. 37 7.2.1 Water Quality Monitoring .............................................................................................. 37 7.2.2 Water Temperature Results ............................................................................................ 38 7.2.3 Total Dissolved Gas Saturation Results ......................................................................... 47 7.3 Biological Monitoring And Results ........................................................................................ 48 8.0 McKenzie Subbasin ................................................................................................................ 50 8.1 Water Quality Improvement Measures Conducted in 2015 .................................................... 50 8.2 Water Quality Monitoring and Results ................................................................................... 52 8.2.1 Water Quality Monitoring .............................................................................................. 52 8.2.2 Water Temperature Results ............................................................................................ 53 8.2.3 Total Dissolved Gas Saturation Results ......................................................................... 60 8.3 Biological Monitoring And Results ........................................................................................ 61 9.0 Middle Fork Willamette Subbasin .......................................................................................... 63 9.1 Water Quality Improvement Measures Conducted in 2015 .................................................... 63 9.2 Water Quality Monitoring and Results ................................................................................... 64 9.2.1 Water Quality Monitoring .............................................................................................. 64 9.2.2 Water Temperature Results ............................................................................................ 66 9.2.3 Total Dissolved Gas Saturation Results ......................................................................... 82 9.3 Biological Monitoring and Results ......................................................................................... 83 10.0 Coast Fork Willamette and Long Tom Subbasins .................................................................. 86 10.1 Water Quality Improvement Measures Conducted in 2015 ............................................... 86 10.2 Water Quality Monitoring and Results ............................................................................... 86 10.2.1 Water Quality Monitoring .......................................................................................... 86 10.2.2 Water Temperature Results ........................................................................................ 87 11.0 Willamette Basin annual interim TMDL water quality Plan .................................................. 92 11.1 Introduction and Purpose .................................................................................................... 92 11.2 TMDL Targets Compared to Downstream Temperatures .................................................. 93 11.2.1 North Santiam Subbasin – Detroit / Big Cliff Reservoirs .......................................... 93 11.2.2 South Santiam Subbasin – Green Peter / Foster Reservoirs ...................................... 95 11.2.3 McKenzie Subbasin – Cougar / Blue River Reservoirs ............................................. 98 11.2.4 Middle Fork Willamette Subbasin – Hills Creek / Lookout Point / Dexter / Fall Creek Reservoirs 101 Final Report, July 2016 i 11.2.5 Coast Fork Willamette and Long Tom Subbasins – Cottage Grove / Dorena / Fern Ridge Reservoirs ........................................................................................................................ 106 11.3 Water Quality Considerations - Present and Future ......................................................... 109 12.0 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 109 12.1 Water Quality Considerations........................................................................................... 109 12.2 Recommendations and Future Goals ................................................................................ 111 12.2.1 North Santiam Subbasin .......................................................................................... 112 12.2.2 South Santiam Subbasin .......................................................................................... 113 12.2.3 McKenzie Subbasin ................................................................................................. 113 12.2.4 Middle Fork Willamette Subbasin ........................................................................... 113 13.0 Literature Cited ..................................................................................................................... 115 14.0 Appendix A ........................................................................................................................... 119 14.1 Corps Funded USGS Gaging Program and Sites.............................................................. 119 15.0 Appendix B ........................................................................................................................... 124 15.1 Project Descriptions and Drawings .................................................................................. 124 15.1.1 North Santiam Subbasin .......................................................................................... 124 15.1.2 Detroit and Big Cliff Project Description ................................................................ 124 15.1.3 South Santiam Subbasin .......................................................................................... 127 15.1.4 Green Peter and Foster Project Descriptions ........................................................... 128 15.1.5 McKenzie Subbasin ................................................................................................. 131 15.1.6 Cougar ...................................................................................................................... 132 15.1.7 Blue River ................................................................................................................ 134 15.1.8 Middle Fork Willamette Subbasin ........................................................................... 135 15.1.9 Hills Creek ............................................................................................................... 136 15.1.10 Lookout Point and Dexter ........................................................................................ 139 15.1.11 Fall Creek ................................................................................................................. 141 15.1.12 Coast Fork Willamette and Long Tom Subbasins ..................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In Partial Fulfillment Of
    WATER UTILI AT'ION AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE 11ILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN by CAST" IR OLISZE "SKI A THESIS submitted to OREGON STATE COLLEGE in partialfulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE June 1954 School Graduate Committee Data thesis is presented_____________ Typed by Kate D. Humeston TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION Statement and History of the Problem........ 1 Historical Data............................. 3 Procedure Used to Explore the Data.......... 4 Organization of the Data.................... 8 II. THE WILLAMETTE RIVER WATERSHED Orientation................................. 10 Orography................................... 10 Geology................................. 11 Soil Types................................. 19 Climate ..................................... 20 Precipitation..*.,,,,,,,................... 21 Storms............'......................... 26 Physical Characteristics of the River....... 31 Physical Characteristics of the Major Tributaries............................ 32 Surface Water Supply ........................ 33 Run-off Characteristics..................... 38 Discharge Records........ 38 Ground Water Supply......................... 39 CHAPTER PAGE III. ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL UTILIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT.. .... .................... 44 Flood Characteristics ........................ 44 Flood History......... ....................... 45 Provisional Standard Project: Flood......... 45 Flood Plain......... ........................ 47 Flood Control................................ 48 Drainage............
    [Show full text]
  • A History of the Kokanee in Detroit Reservoir J. J
    A HISTORY OF THE KOKANEE IN DETROIT RESERVOIR By J. J. Wetherbee, District Fishery Biologist Data on trapping and spawning by: W. C. Wingfield, Superintendent, Roaring River Hatchery Scale analysis by: F. H. Sumner, Scale analyst, Oregon Game Commission 1965 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction 1 II. Environment and Food Habits 1 III. Stocking 4 IV. Sport Fishery 5 V. Spawning Runs 7 VI. Egg-Take Operation 10 VII. Spawning Habits and Propagation 16 VIII. Age and Growth 19 IX. Future Outlook for Kokanee Populations in Detroit Reservoir 21 X. Considerations for Future Management of Kokanee 22 I INTRODUCTION Kokanee were originally stocked in Detroit Reservoir in 11959. This species was introduced in hopes that it would utilize pelagiczoo plankton and provide a more varied sport fishery. The trout fishery in the reservoir depends primarily on heavy plants of legal-sized rainbow trout, supplemented by stocking fingerling rainbow. As the introduction of the kokanee has been somewhat successful in this fluctuating impoundment, a compilation of all known biologi- cal data would be of interest and aid in the future management of this species. II ENVIRONMENT AND FOOD HABITS Detroit is a multi-purpose reservoir maintained by the Corps of Engineers and contains 3,580 surfaceacres at full pool and 1,250 acres at minimum pool. Elevation is 1,569 feet at full pool. An annual drawdown of about 1)40 feet is usually accomplished by December 1. The reservoir is normally maintained at full pool from May to SepteMber. As Detroit is subjected to extreme fluctuations and is character- ized by a steeply sloping shoreline, it cannot be classedas a productive water.
    [Show full text]
  • An Evaluation of Spring Chinook Salmon Reintroductions Above Detroit Dam, North Santiam River, Using Genetic Pedigree Analysis P
    AN EVALUATION OF SPRING CHINOOK SALMON REINTRODUCTIONS ABOVE DETROIT DAM, NORTH SANTIAM RIVER, USING GENETIC PEDIGREE ANALYSIS Prepared for: U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PORTLAND DISTRICT – WILLAMETTE VALLEY PROJECT 333 SW First Ave. Portland, Oregon 97204 Prepared by: Kathleen G. O’Malley1, Melissa L. Evans1, Marc A. Johnson1,2, Dave Jacobson1, and Michael Hogansen2 1Oregon State University Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Coastal Oregon Marine Experiment Station Hatfield Marine Science Center 2030 SE Marine Science Drive Newport, Oregon 97365 2Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Upper Willamette Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Corvallis Research Laboratory 28655 Highway 34 Corvallis, Oregon 97333 SUMMARY For approximately two decades, hatchery-origin (HOR) spring Chinook salmon have been released (“outplanted”) above Detroit Dam on the North Santiam River. Here we used genetic parentage analysis to evaluate the contribution of salmon outplants to subsequent natural-origin (NOR) salmon recruitment to the river. Despite sampling limitations encountered during several years of the study, we were able to determine that most NOR salmon sampled in 2013 (59%) and 2014 (66%) were progeny of outplanted salmon. We were also able to estimate fitness, a cohort replacement rate (CRR), and the effective number of breeders (Nb) for salmon outplanted above Detroit Dam in 2009. On average, female fitness was ~5× (2.72:0.52 progeny) that of males and fitness was highly variable among individuals (range: 0-20 progeny). It is likely that the highly skewed male:female sex ratio (~6:1) among outplanted salmon limited reproductive opportunities for males in 2009. The CRR was 1.07, as estimated from female replacement.
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses Spring 6-8-2017 Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed Alexander Cameron Nagel Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Geography Commons, Hydrology Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Nagel, Alexander Cameron, "Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed" (2017). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4012. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.5896 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Analyzing Dam Feasibility in the Willamette River Watershed by Alexander Cameron Nagel A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geography Thesis Committee: Heejun Chang, Chair Geoffrey Duh Paul Loikith Portland State University 2017 i Abstract This study conducts a dam-scale cost versus benefit analysis in order to explore the feasibility of each the 13 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) commissioned dams in Oregon’s Willamette River network. Constructed between 1941 and 1969, these structures function in collaboration to comprise the Willamette River Basin Reservoir System (WRBRS). The motivation for this project derives from a growing awareness of the biophysical impacts that dam structures can have on riparian habitats. This project compares each of the 13 dams being assessed, to prioritize their level of utility within the system.
    [Show full text]
  • Response to Watershed Analysis Amendment Request
    Upper Middle Fork Watershed Analysis Update Response to the Watershed Analysis Amendment Request Listed below are analysis and responses provided by the Middle Fork District to issues/concerns listed in the U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service November, 1996. In this portion of the analysis amendment, the original issue is listed, as stated by the Fish and Wildlife Service. Following this, the key question and issue from the 1996 Watershed Analysis is stated. Below each key question is the scientific, analytical, and professional response to these issues. In some cases the issue presented by the Fish and Wildlife Service do not related to the key issues presented in the original watershed analysis. In these situations a new key question is developed. For the most part, the original key questions are still valid with minor changes. Listed below are the eleven aquatic habitat condition concerns. Eleven Listed Aquatic Concerns 1. Identify and map important bull trout rearing and spawning habitat, as well as current and future re-introduction sites, and potential future distribution down to Hills Creek Reservoir – if this information is known or available. Functional Relationship – Bull Trout Habitat Historical references indicate that bull trout Salvelinus confluentus in Oregon were once distributed throughout 12 basins in the Klamath River and Columbia River systems. Bull trout were probably found throughout the Willamette Basin, however available documentation is limited (Buchanan et al. 1997). Bull trout in the upper Middle Fork Willamette Watershed likely ranged throughout the mainstem Middle Fork Willamette and associated larger tributaries (Figure 1-1, Historic Bull Trout Distribution Map).
    [Show full text]
  • Hills Creek-Lookout Point Final EA
    In cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service Hills Creek-Lookout Point Transmission Line Rebuild Project Final Environmental Assessment DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Bonneville Power Administration DOE/EA-1967 June 2017 __________________________________________________________________________________ This document is the final environmental assessment (EA) for the proposed Hills Creek-Lookout Point Transmission Line Rebuild Project (Project). Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) prepared this document as an abbreviated final EA because there have been no substantial changes to the Proposed Action, alternatives, or environmental analysis presented in the draft EA. This abbreviated final EA provides changes made to the text of the draft EA, as well as comments received on the draft EA and BPA’s responses to those comments. This final EA should be used as a companion document to the draft EA (DOE/EA-1967, dated August 2016), which contains the full text describing the project, its potential environmental impacts, and mitigation measures to reduce impacts. The draft EA is available on the project webpage at http://www.bpa.gov/goto/HillsCreekLookoutPoint. Summary BPA proposes to rebuild its Hills Creek-Lookout Point transmission line, which runs from Oakridge to Lowell in Lane County, Oregon. The existing 26-mile-long 115-kilovolt (kV) transmission line is aging, and BPA proposes to replace its wood-pole structures and other line components and improve its road system that provides access to the line. BPA released the draft EA for public comment on August 10, 2016; the comment period ran until September 19, 2016. The draft EA describes the Project, its potential environmental impacts, and mitigation measures to reduce those impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study
    US Army Corps of Engineers Portland District Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study DRAFT Integrated Feasibility Report and Environmental Assessment November 2017 Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study Executive Summary The Willamette River basin is located entirely within the state of Oregon, beginning south of Cottage Grove, and extending approximately 187 miles to the north where the Willamette River flows into the Columbia River. The basin is more than 11,200 square miles, averages 75 miles in width, and encompasses approximately 12 percent of the total area of the state (Figure ES-1). Within the watershed are most of the state’s population (nearly 70 percent), larger cities, and major industries. The basin also contains some of Oregon’s most productive agricultural lands and supports nationally and regionally important fish and wildlife species. Thirteen of Oregon’s thirty-six counties intersect or lie within the boundary of the Willamette River basin. Through a series of Flood Control Acts the U.S. Congress authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to construct, operate, and maintain thirteen major dams1 in the Willamette River basin. Collectively, these dams, reservoirs and associated infrastructure are known as the Willamette Valley Project (WVP). With a combined conservation storage capacity of approximately 1,590,000 acre-feet, the WVP is capable of providing important benefits for flood damage reduction, navigation, hydropower, irrigation, municipal and industrial water supply, flow augmentation for pollution abatement and improved conditions for fish and wildlife, and recreation. Feasibility Study History The Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study began in 1996 to investigate future Willamette River basin water demand.
    [Show full text]
  • Simulations of a Hypothetical Temperature Control Structure at Detroit Dam on the North Santiam River, Northwestern Oregon
    Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Simulations of a Hypothetical Temperature Control Structure at Detroit Dam on the North Santiam River, Northwestern Oregon Open-File Report 2015–1012 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Simulations of a Hypothetical Temperature Control Structure at Detroit Dam on the North Santiam River, Northwestern Oregon By Norman L. Buccola, Adam J. Stonewall, and Stewart A. Rounds Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Open-File Report 2015–1012 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2015 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. Suggested citation: Buccola, N.L., Stonewall, A.J., and Rounds, S.A., 2015, Simulations of a hypothetical temperature control structure at Detroit Dam on the North Santiam River, northwestern Oregon: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling Hydrodynamics, Water Temperature, and Suspended Sediment in Detroit Lake, Oregon
    Prepared in cooperation with the City of Salem, Oregon Modeling Hydrodynamics, Water Temperature, and Suspended Sediment in Detroit Lake, Oregon Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5008 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Front Cover: Photograph of Detroit Lake and Piety Island, looking east. (Photograph by Mark Uhrich, U.S. Geological Survey, September 29, 2004.) Insets from left to right: Inset 1: Photograph showing aerial view of Detroit Dam, taken from just west of the dam. (Photograph from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, July 11, 1990.) Inset 2: Photograph showing Breitenbush River storm inflow to Detroit Lake, looking west. (Photograph by Heather Bragg, U.S. Geological Survey, April 14, 2002.) Inset 3: Photograph showing Breitenbush River inflow to Detroit Lake, looking west. (Photograph by Heather Bragg, U.S. Geological Survey, November 7, 2006.) Back Cover: View of Mt. Jefferson over Detroit Lake, looking east. (Photograph by David Piatt, U.S. Geological Survey, July 4, 2004.) Modeling Hydrodynamics, Water Temperature, and Suspended Sediment in Detroit Lake, Oregon By Annett B. Sullivan, Stewart A. Rounds, Steven Sobieszczyk, and Heather M. Bragg Prepared in cooperation with the City of Salem, Oregon Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5008 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Mark D. Myers, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 State(S): Oregon Recovery Unit Name: Willamette River
    Chapter 5 State(s): Oregon Recovery Unit Name: Willamette River Recovery Unit Region 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed necessary to recover and protect listed species. Plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and, in this case, with the assistance of recovery unit teams, contractors, State and Tribal agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views or the official positions or indicate the approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Recovery plans represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Director or Regional Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature Cited: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Chapter 5, Willamette River Recovery Unit, Oregon. 96 p. In: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Draft Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Two working groups are active in the Willamette River Recovery Unit: the Upper Willamette (since 1989) and Clackamas Bull Trout Working Groups. In 1999, these groups were combined, and, along with representation from the Santiam subbasin, comprise the Willamette River Recovery Unit Team.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring and Evaluation Report Willamette National Forest Fiscal Year 2011
    AUGUST 2011 United States Department of Agriculture Monitoring and Forest Service Evaluation Report Pacific Northwest Region Willamette National Forest Fiscal Year 2011 Ames Creek, Sweet Home, Oregon i AUGUST 2011 ii AUGUST 2011 Welcome to the 2011 Willamette National Forest annual Monitoring and Evaluation report. This is our 23th year implementing the 1990 Willamette National Forest Plan, and this report is intended to give you an update on the services and products we provide. Our professionals monitor a wide variety of forest resources and have summarized their findings for your review. As I reviewed the Forest Plan Monitoring Report I got an opportunity to see the work our specialists are doing in one place and I can’t help but share my appreciation with what the Willamette’s resource specialists are accomplishing. I am overwhelmed by the effort our professionals are doing to get the work done and complete necessary monitoring under declining budgets. Our specialists have entered into partnerships, written grants, and managed volunteers in addition to working with numerous local and federal agencies. We are in the community and hope you enjoying the forests. I invite you to read this year’s report and contact myself or my staff with any questions, ideas, or concerns you may have. I appreciate your continued interest in the Willamette National Forest. Sincerely, MEG MITCHELL Forest Supervisor Willamette National Forest r6-will-009-11 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program.
    [Show full text]
  • Lookout Point Watershed Analysis Update
    Lookout Point Watershed Analysis Update August, 2012 Introduction The Lookout Point Watershed Analysis was prepared by personnel of the old Lowell Ranger District in 1997, so this analysis is now about 15 years old. In that time considerable new information has come to light and some conditions have changed. Additionally, the original WA contained some misinformation, or the watershed conditions are better understood now. There is also a new land management project proposed in this watershed (the Outlook Landscape Diversity Project) the analysis of which would be facilitated by this watershed update. In addition to updating current conditions, this reanalysis updates the list of recommendations. Specific conditions or occurrences creating the need for this update include: • vegetation growth which has changed the conditions of the 28% of the watershed consisting of young stands created by past regeneration harvest, • a better understanding of the fire history of the area, • the presence of a new invasive plant species, false brome, • reintroduction of Chinook salmon and bull trout into upstream watersheds, • construction of additional infrastructure elements such as cell phone towers and fiber optic lines, and • continuing deterioration of road conditions. The 1997 “Lookout Pont Watershed Analysis Area” document covered only the 49,638 acres of federally owned lands within the 100,000+ acre Lookout Point Reservoir Fifth Field watershed, which is one of nine within the Fourth-Field Middle Fork of the Willamette River watershed. This update will also address only the National Forest portion of this watershed. Some 60,000 acres of BLM and privately owned lands occur in the lower portions of the full 5th Field watershed, which include the Lookout Point dam and the lower half of the associated reservoir, the Dexter dam and reservoir, the Lost Creek drainage, and the communities of Dexter and Lowell.
    [Show full text]