DOCSLIB.ORG

Skipanon River Watershed Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Skipanon River Watershed Assessment Skipanon Watershed Assessment Neacoxie Creek N Skipanon River 2 0 2 4 Miles E&S Environmental Chemistry, Inc. and Skipanon Watershed Council August, 2000 Skipanon River Watershed Assessment Final Report August, 2000 A report by: E&S Environmental Chemistry, Inc. and Skipanon River Watershed Council Joseph M. Bischoff Richard B. Raymond Kai U. Snyder Lisa Heigh and Susan K. Binder Skipanon River Watershed Assessment August, 2000 Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................ vi LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................... viii ADKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................... ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................... 1-1 1.1 Purpose and Scope ............................................... 1-1 1.1.1 The Decision Making Framework ............................. 1-1 1.1.2 Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Data Used in this Assessment ............................................... 1-2 1.1.3 Data Confidence ........................................... 1-7 1.2 Setting ........................................................ 1-8 1.3 Ecoregions .................................................... 1-11 1.4 Population .................................................... 1-11 1.5 Climate and Topography ......................................... 1-13 1.6 Geology ...................................................... 1-13 1.7 Vegetation .................................................... 1-13 1.7.1 Large Conifers ........................................... 1-14 1.8 Land Use ..................................................... 1-16 1.9 Channel Habitat Types ........................................... 1-20 1.10 History ....................................................... 1-23 CHAPTER 2 FISHERIES ................................................... 2-1 2.1 Introduction .................................................... 2-1 2.2 Fish Presence ................................................... 2-1 2.3 Species of Concern .............................................. 2-1 2.4 Coho .......................................................... 2-3 2.4.1 Life History .............................................. 2-3 2.4.2 Listing Status ............................................. 2-3 2.4.3 Population Status .......................................... 2-4 2.4.4 Species Distribution ........................................ 2-4 2.4.5 Hatcheries ............................................... 2-5 2.5 Chinook ....................................................... 2-5 2.5.1 Life History .............................................. 2-5 2.5.2 Listing Status ............................................. 2-7 2.5.3 Population Status .......................................... 2-7 2.5.4 Species Distribution ........................................ 2-8 2.5.5 Hatcheries ............................................... 2-8 2.6 Coastal Cutthroat ................................................ 2-9 2.6.1 Life History .............................................. 2-9 2.6.2 Listing Status ............................................. 2-9 2.6.3 Population Status ......................................... 2-10 2.6.4 Species Distribution ....................................... 2-10 2.6.5 Hatcheries .............................................. 2-10 Skipanon River Watershed Assessment August, 2000 Page iii 2.6.6 Species Interactions ....................................... 2-11 2.7 Steelhead ..................................................... 2-11 2.7.1 Life History ............................................. 2-11 2.7.2 Listing Status ............................................ 2-12 2.7.3 Population Status ......................................... 2-12 2.7.4 Species Distribution ....... 2-12 2.7.5 Hatcheries .............................................. 2-12 2.8 Conclusions ................................................... 2-13 CHAPTER 3 AQUATIC AND RIPARIAN HABITATS ............................ 3-1 3.1 Introduction .................................................... 3-1 3.2 Aquatic Habitat Inventory Data ..................................... 3-1 3.3 Riparian Conditions ............................................. 3-2 3.3.1 Large Woody Debris Recruitment Potential ..................... 3-3 3.3.2 Stream Shading ........................................... 3-4 3.4 Fish Passage Barriers ............................................. 3-7 3.4.1 Culverts ................................................. 3-7 3.4.2 Tidegates ................................................ 3-8 3.4.3 Other Barriers ............................................. 3-8 3.5 Channel Modifications ........................................... 3-10 3.5.1 Channelization and Dredging ................................ 3-10 3.5.2 Diking ................................................. 3-10 3.5.3 Log Storage ............................................ 3-11 3.5.4 Splash Damming ......................................... 3-11 3.5.5 Railroads ............................................... 3-11 3.6 Wetlands ..................................................... 3-11 3.6.1 National Wetlands Inventory ................................ 3-13 3.6.2 Wetland Extent and Types .................................. 3-13 3.6.3 Wetlands and Salmonids ................................... 3-15 3.6.4 Filling and Diking of Wetlands .............................. 3-17 3.6.5 Wetlands and Future Development ........................... 3-18 3.7 Conclusions ................................................... 3-18 CHAPTER 4 HYDROLOGY ................................................. 4-1 4.1 Introduction .................................................... 4-1 4.2 General Watershed Characteristics and Peak Flow Processes .............. 4-1 4.3 Hydrologic Characterization ....................................... 4-2 4.4 Potential Land Use Impacts on Peak Flows ............................ 4-2 4.4.1 Forestry Practices .......................................... 4-3 4.4.2 Agriculture and Rangeland .................................. 4-3 4.4.3 Forest and Rural Roads ..................................... 4-4 4.4.4 Urban and Rural Residential Areas ............................ 4-5 4.5 Conclusions .................................................... 4-5 CHAPTER 5 WATER USE .................................................. 5-1 5.1 Instream Water Rights ............................................ 5-1 5.2 Consumptive Water Use .......................................... 5-2 Skipanon River Watershed Assessment August, 2000 Page iv 5.2.1 Agriculture .............................................. 5-2 5.2.2 Irrigation ................................................. 5-2 5.3 Non-Consumptive Water Use ...................................... 5-2 5.3.1 Fish and Wildlife .......................................... 5-2 5.4 Water Availability ............................................... 5-4 5.5 Conclusions .................................................... 5-4 CHAPTER 6 SEDIMENT SOURCES .......................................... 6-1 6.1 Introduction .................................................... 6-1 6.2 Screening for Potential Sediment Sources ............................ 6-1 6.3 Slope Instability ................................................. 6-2 6.4 Road Instability ................................................. 6-4 6.4.1 Willamette Industries, Inc. 10-year Legacy Road Improvement/Decommissioning Plan .......................... 6-4 6.4.2 Landslide Data ...................................... 6-6 6.4.3 Culverts ................................................. 6-6 6.5 Road Runoff .................................................... 6-6 6.6 Conclusions .................................................... 6-7 CHAPTER 7 WATER QUALITY .............................................. 7-1 7.1 Introduction .................................................... 7-1 7.1.1 Assessment Overview ...................................... 7-1 7.1.2 Components of Water Quality ................................ 7-1 7.2 Beneficial Uses ................................................. 7-3 7.2.1 Water Uses Sensitive to Water Quality ......................... 7-4 7.3 Pollutant Sources ................................................ 7-4 7.3.1 Point Sources ............................................. 7-4 7.3.2 Non-point Sources ......................................... 7-5 7.3.3 Water Quality Limited Water Bodies .......................... 7-5 7.4 Evaluation Criteria ............................................... 7-7 7.5 Water Quality Data .............................................. 7-7 7.5.1 STORET ................................................ 7-7 7.5.2 ODEQ Sites .............................................. 7-9 7.5.3 Other Data Sources ....................................... 7-11 7.6 Water Quality Constituents ....................................... 7-12 7.6.1 Temperature ............................................. 7-12 7.6.2 Dissolved Oxygen ........................................ 7-15 7.6.3 pH ..................................................... 7-15 7.6.4 Nutrients ................................................ 7-16 7.6.5 Bacteria ................................................ 7-17 7.6.6 Turbidity ................................................ 7-19 7.6.7 Contaminants ............................................ 7-20 7.7 Water Quality Conditions ........................................ 7-20 CHAPTER
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CLATSOP COUNTY Scale in Mlles
    CLATSOP COUNTY Scale In Mlles 81 8 I A 0,6 O 6 Secmide 0 10 6 7 WASV INGTON T I L LAMOOK COUNTY CO Clatsop County Knappa Prairie U. S. Army Fort Stevens, Ruth C. Bishop Dean H. Byrd (1992) Janice M. Healy (1952) Oregon Burial Site Guide Clatsop County Area: 873 square miles Population (1998): 35,424 County seat: Astoria, Population: 10,130 County established: 22 June 1844 Located on the south bank of the lower Columbia River where it enters the Pacific Ocean. Clatsop County was the site of the first white trading post in Oregon and therefore the earliest established cemetery. This was Fort Astoria founded in the spring of 1811 for the fur trade. It was occupied by the British in the fall of I 813 during the War of 1812 and was renamed Fort George. Returned to the Americans in 1818 and once again called Fort Astoria, the name was gradually transferred to a small civilian settlement as Astoria. The earliest burials after 1811 and those dating from the 1850's to about 1878 are now built over. Eventually most of Astoria's known burials were transferred to Ocean View which was established in 1872. The Clatsop Plains Pioneer Cemetery was begun in 1846 and is the earliest organized cemetery outside of Astoria. By the 1870's there were at least four other organized cemeteries. There were many family burial sites and still some Indian burials sites and a United States Military cemetery begun as early as 1868 at Fort Stevens. The most prominent ethnic nationalities from Europe were Finns and Swedes who are scattered through many cemeteries and family burial sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Source Water Assessment Report
    Source Water Assessment Report Youngs River-Lewis & Clarl( Water District, Oregon PWS #4100062 December 11, 2000 Prepared for Youngs River-Lewis & Clark Water District Prepared by � rt: I •1 =<•1 Stale of Oregon Departmentof Environmental Quality Water Quality Division Drinking Water Protection Program Department of Human Services Oregon Health Division Drinking Water Program Department of Environmental Quality regon 811 SW Sixth Avenue Portland, OR 97204-1390 John A. Kitzhaber, ivf.D.,Governor (503) 229-5696 TDD (503) 229-6993 December 11, 2000 Mr. Ric Saavedra - Superintendent Youngs River-Lewis & Clark Water District 810 US Highway IOI Astoria, OR 97013 RE: Source Water Assessment Report Youngs River-Lewis & Clark Water District PWS # 4100062 Dear Mr. Saavedra: Enclosed is Youngs River-Lewis & Clark Water District's Water Assessment Report. The assessment was prepared under the requirements and guidance of the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act and the US Environmental Protection Agency, as well as a detailed Source Water Assessment Plan developed by a statewide citizen's advisory committee here in Oregon over the past two years. The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Oregon Health Division (OHD) are conducting the assessments for all public water systems in Oregon. The purpose is to provide information so that the public water system staff/operator, consumers, and community citizens can begin developing strategies to protect your source of drinking water. As you know, the 1996 Amendments to the SafeDrinking Water Act requires Consumer ConfidenceReports (CCR) by community water systems. CCRs include information about the quality of the drinking water, the source of the drinking water, and a summary of the source water assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • ASTORIA PARKS & RECREATION Comprehensive Master Plan 2016
    ASTORIA PARKS & RECREATION Comprehensive Master Plan 2016 - 2026 Adopted July 18, 2016 by Ordinance 16-04 Acknowledgments Parks & Recreation Staff City Council Angela Cosby.......... Director Arline LaMear.......... Mayor Jonah Dart-Mclean... Maintenance Supervisor Zetty Nemlowill....... Ward 1 Randy Bohrer........... Grounds Coordinator Drew Herzig............ Ward 2 Mark Montgomery... Facilities Coordinator Cindy Price............. Ward 3 Terra Patterson........ Recreation Coordinator Russ Warr................ Ward 4 Erin Reding............. Recreation Coordinator Parks Advisory Board City Staff Norma Hernandez... Chair Brett Estes............... City Manager Tammy Loughran..... Vice Chair Kevin Cronin........... Community Josey Ballenger Development Director Aaron Crockett Rosemary Johnson... Special Projects Planner Andrew Fick John Goodenberger Historic Buildings Eric Halverson Consultant Jim Holen Howard Rub Citizen Advisory Committee Jessica Schleif Michelle Bisek......... Astoria Parks, Recreation, and Community Foundation Community Members Melissa Gardner...... Clatsop Community Kenny Hageman...... Lower Columbia Youth College Drafting and Baseball Historic Preservation Jim Holen................. Parks Advisory Board Program Craig Hoppes.......... Astoria School District Workshop attendees, survey respondents, Zetty Nemlowill....... Astoria City Council focus group participants, and volunteers. Jan Nybakke............ Volunteer Kassia Nye............... MOMS Club RARE AmeriCorps Ed Overbay............. Former Parks Advisory Ian
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Clatsop, Lewis and Clark's 1805-1806 Winter Establishment "Living History" Demonstrations Feature for Visitors to National Park Facility
    T HE OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE LEWIS & CLARK T RAIL H ERITAGE FOUNDATION, INC. VOL. 12, NO. 3 AUGUST 1986 Fort Clatsop, Lewis and Clark's 1805-1806 Winter Establishment "Living History" Demonstrations Feature for Visitors to National Park Facility Photograph by Andrew E. Cier, Astoria, Oregon Replica of Fort Clatsop, Near Astoria, Oregon - See Story on Page 3 - President Wang's THE LEWIS AND CLARK TRAIL Message HERITAGE FOUNDATION, INC. Thank you's are due at least four Incorporated 1969 under Missouri General Not-For-Profit Corporation Act IRS Exemption different groups of Foundation Certificate No. 501(C)(3) - I dentification No. 51-0187715 members for the efforts put forth by them these past twelve months. OFFICERS - EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE First, I am most thankful for the President 1st Vice President 2nd Vice President excellent support that has been L. Edw in Wang John E. Foote H. John Montague provided by Foundation officers, 6013 St . Johns Ave. 1205 Rimhaven Way 2864 Sudbury Ct. directors, past presidents, and all M inneapolis. MN 55424 Billings. MT 591 02 Marietta. GA'30062 other committee members. Second, I am much indebted to the 1986 Edrie Lee Vinson. Secretary John E. Walker. Treasurer P.O. Box 1651 200 Market St .. Suite 1177 Program Committee, headed by Red Lodge. MT 59068 Portland. OR 97201 Malcolm Buffum, for the tre­ mendous effort they have put forth Ruth E. Lange, Membership Secretary. 5054 S.W. 26th Place. Port land. OR 97201 to arrange one of the finest-ever annual meeting programs. Third, I DIRECTORS am so grateful for all that is ac­ Harold Billian Winifred C.
    [Show full text]
  • Skipaon River Restoration
    Skipanon River Restoration Action Plan Adopted May, 2006 Background of Project The Skipanon Watershed Council formed in 1997 as a community-based organization to identify and proactively address watershed restoration. In 2004, the council was given funds from a civil penalty suit against a local fish processing plant. The funds are to be used for restoration in the Skipanon Watershed. Before using funds for any restoration projects, the council felt it was important to revise its Action Plan to identify the most ecological significant restoration projects within the watershed. Goal of Project The goals of this document are to identify, analyze and priotizes, to the extent possible, potential site-specific conservation projects within the Skipanon Watershed. The Council hopes to create a document based in sound ecological principles, yet understandable by the lay reader. Additionally, the Council hopes to highlight partnership opportunities, monitoring efforts and educational opportunities. Ultimately, the Council and other watershed related organizations can utilize this document to help guide restoration, conservation and acquisition activities, monitoring and education within watershed. Lastly, the Council hopes the numerical prioritization methodology is transferable to the estuarine portions of the Youngs Bay and Nicolai-Wickiup Watersheds. Methods Summary of Methods The methods to achieve the goals of the project were to 1) involve the public and 2) review and utilize other prioritization criteria. As a community-based organization, it was imperative to involve as many community members, landowners, interested citizens, municipalities and agencies in the process of identifying restoration activities as possible. To identify potential restoration projects, the Council relied on the expertise of local community members, landowners, interested citizens, representatives from local municipalities and agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Geophysical and Geochemical Analyses of Selected Miocene Coastal Basalt Features, Clatsop County, Oregon
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 1980 Geophysical and geochemical analyses of selected Miocene coastal basalt features, Clatsop County, Oregon Virginia Josette Pfaff Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Geochemistry Commons, Geophysics and Seismology Commons, and the Stratigraphy Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Pfaff, Virginia Josette, "Geophysical and geochemical analyses of selected Miocene coastal basalt features, Clatsop County, Oregon" (1980). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 3184. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.3175 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]. AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Virginia Josette Pfaff for the Master of Science in Geology presented December 16, 1980. Title: Geophysical and Geochemical Analyses of Selected Miocene Coastal Basalt Features, Clatsop County, Oregon. APPROVED BY MEMBERS OF THE THESIS COMMITTEE: Chairman Gi lTfiert-T. Benson The proximity of Miocene Columbia River basalt flows to "locally erupted" coastal Miocene basalts in northwestern Oregon, and the compelling similarities between the two groups, suggest that the coastal basalts, rather than being locally erupted, may be the westward extension of plateau
    [Show full text]
  • Appendices Appendix A
    APPENDICES APPENDIX A HISTORY OF SKIPANON RIVER WATERSHED Prepared by Lisa Heigh and the Skipanon River Watershed Council Appendix A - Skipanon River Watershed History 2 APPENDIX A HISTORY Skipanon River Watershed Natural History TIMELINE · 45 million years ago - North American Continent begins collision with Pacific Ocean Seamounts (now the Coast Range) · 25 million years ago Oregon Coast began to emerge from the sea · 20 million years ago Coast Range becomes a firm part of the continent · 15 million years ago Columbia River Basalt lava flows stream down an ancestral Columbia River · 12,000 years ago last Ice Age floods scour the Columbia River · 10,000 years ago Native Americans inhabit the region (earliest documentation) - Clatsop Indians used three areas within the Skipanon drainage as main living, fishing and hunting sites: Clatsop Plains, Hammond and a site near the Skipanon River mouth, where later D.K. Warren (Warrenton founder) built a home. · 4,500 years ago Pacific Ocean shoreline at the eastern shore of what is now Cullaby Lake · 1700’s early part of the century last major earthquake · 1780 estimates of the Chinook population in the lower Columbia Region: 2,000 total – 300 of which were Clatsops who lived primarily in the Skipanon basin. · 1770’s-1790’s Robert Gray and other Europeans explore and settle Oregon and region, bringing with them disease/epidemic (smallpox, malaria, measles, etc.) to native populations · 1805-1806 Lewis and Clark Expedition, camp at Fort Clatsop and travel frequently through the Skipanon Watershed
    [Show full text]
  • Plate 5. Flood Hazard Map of Clatsop County, Oregon, Appendix E Map
    Natural Hazard Risk Report for Clatsop County, Oregon G E O L O G Y F A N O D T N M I E N M E T R R A A L PLATE 5 P I E N Flood Hazard Map of D D U N S O T G R E I R E S O Clatsop County, Oregon WASHINGTON 1937 Flood Hazard Zone 100-Year Flood (1% annual chance) Columbia River sourcesThe �lood include hazard riverine. data show Areas areas are consistentexpected to with be inundated during a 100-year �lood event. Flooding Counties Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps. the regulatory �lood zones depicted in Clatsop Astoria ¤£101 30 Warrenton «¬104 ¤£ Skipanon River Svensen-Knappa Disclaimer: This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for or be suitable for John Day River Westport legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary Wallooskee River Ra�o of Es�mated Loss to Flooding data and information sources to ascertain the usability Flood Scenarios of the information. This publication cannot substitute 10-Year 50-Year 100-Year 500-Year ¤£101 for site-speci�ic investigations by quali�ied Exposure Ratio differ from the results shown in the publication. See thepractitioners. accompanying Site-speci�ic text report data for may more give details results on that the ~ ~ «¬202 0% 0.5% 1% 4.5% limitations of the methods and data used to prepare Clatsop County this publication. (rural)* Y o Arch Cape* Gearhart u ng s Ri Svensen-Knappa* ver Seaside Lewis a This map is an overview map and not intended to nd Westport* C er provide details at the community scale.
    [Show full text]
  • Wallooskee-Youngs Confluence Restoration Project
    B O N N E V I L L E P O W E R A D M I N I S T R A T I O N Wallooskee-Youngs Confluence Restoration Project Draft Environmental Assessment December 2014 DOE/EA-1974 This page left intentionally blank � Contents Contents .............................................................................................................................................................. i � Tables v � Figures ............................................................................................................................................................... vi � Appendices ....................................................................................................................................................... vi � Chapter 1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 � Purpose of and Need for Action ............................................................................................................. 1-1 � 1.1 Need for Action .................................................................................................................................. 1-3 ­ 1.2 Purposes ............................................................................................................................................... 1-3 ­ 1.3 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 1-4 ­ 1.3.1 Statutory Context .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • State Waterway Navigability Determination
    BODY OF WATER & LOCATION NAV CG NON-NAV CG REMARKS yellow highlight = apply to USCG for permit up to RM stipulated Alsea Bay, OR X Estuary of Pacific Ocean. Alsea River, OR X Flows into Alsea Bay, Waldport, OR. Navigable to mile 13. Ash Creek, OR X Tributary of Willamette River at Independence, OR. Barrett Slough, OR X Tributary of Lewis and Clark River. Bayou St. John, OR X Court decision, 1935 AMC 594, 10 Mile Lake, Coos County, OR. Bear Creek (Coos County), OR X Tributary of Coquille River (tidal at mile 0.5) Beaver Creek, OR X Tributary of Nestucca River. Beaver Slough, OR X See Clatskanie River. Big Creek (Lane County), OR X At U.S. 101 bridge (tidal). Big Creek (Lincoln County), OR X Flows into Pacific Ocean. Big Creek Slough, OR X Upstream end at Knappa, OR (tidal). At site of Birch Creek (Sparks) Bridge on Canyon Road near Birch Creek, OR X Pendleton, OR. Side channel of Yaquina River. 3 mi. downstream from Toledo, Blind Slough, OR X OR (tidal). Tributary of Knappa Slough. 10 mi. upstream from Astoria, OR Blind Slough/ Gnat Creek, OR X (tidal at mile 2.0). Boone Slough, OR X Tributary of Yaquina River between Newport and Toledo, OR. Side channel of Willamette River. 3 miles upstream from Booneville Channel, OR X Corvallis, OR. Boulder Creek, OR X 7 miles N of Lake Quinalt. Side channel of Columbia River. 5 miles N of Clatskanie, OR Bradbury Slough, OR X (tidal). Brownlee Reservoir, ID /OR X See Snake River. Also known as South Channel.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Coastal Water Resources and Watershed Conditions at Lewis and Clark National Historical Park, Oregon and Washington
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resources Program Center Assessment of Coastal Water Resources and Watershed Conditions at Lewis and Clark National Historical Park, Oregon and Washington Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRTR—2007/055 ON THE COVER Upper left, Fort Clatsop, NPS Photograph Upper right, Cape Disappointment, Photograph by Kristen Keteles Center left, Ecola, NPS Photograph Lower left, Corps at Ecola, NPS Photograph Lower right, Young’s Bay, Photograph by Kristen Keteles Assessment of Coastal Water Resources and Watershed Conditions at Lewis and Clark National Historical Park, Oregon and Washington Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRTR—2007/055 Dr. Terrie Klinger School of Marine Affairs University of Washington Seattle, WA 98105-6715 Rachel M. Gregg School of Marine Affairs University of Washington Seattle, WA 98105-6715 Jessi Kershner School of Marine Affairs University of Washington Seattle, WA 98105-6715 Jill Coyle School of Marine Affairs University of Washington Seattle, WA 98105-6715 Dr. David Fluharty School of Marine Affairs University of Washington Seattle, WA 98105-6715 This report was prepared under Task Order J9W88040014 of the Pacific Northwest Cooperative Ecosystems Studies Unit (agreement CA9088A0008) September 2007 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resources Program Center Fort Collins, CO i The Natural Resource Publication series addresses natural resource topics that are of interest and applicability to a broad readership in the National Park Service and to others in the management of natural resources, including the scientific community, the public, and the NPS conservation and environmental constituencies. Manuscripts are peer-reviewed to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and is designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Skipanon Watershed Assessment
    Skipanon Watershed Assessment Neacoxie Creek N Skipanon River 2 0 2 4 Miles E&S Environmental Chemistry, Inc. and Skipanon Watershed Council August, 2000 Skipanon River Watershed Assessment Final Report August, 2000 A report by: E&S Environmental Chemistry, Inc. and Skipanon River Watershed Council Joseph M. Bischoff Richard B. Raymond Kai U. Snyder Lisa Heigh and Susan K. Binder Skipanon River Watershed Assessment August, 2000 Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................ vi LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................... viii ADKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................... ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................... 1-1 1.1 Purpose and Scope ............................................... 1-1 1.1.1 The Decision Making Framework ............................. 1-1 1.1.2 Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Data Used in this Assessment ............................................... 1-2 1.1.3 Data Confidence ........................................... 1-7 1.2 Setting ........................................................ 1-8 1.3 Ecoregions .................................................... 1-11 1.4 Population .................................................... 1-11 1.5 Climate and Topography ......................................... 1-13 1.6 Geology ...................................................... 1-13 1.7 Vegetation .................................................... 1-13 1.7.1 Large Conifers
    [Show full text]