DOCSLIB.ORG

A Guide to the Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

TECHNICAL REVIEW DRAFT A Guide to the Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration Program Prepared by the Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership TECHNICAL REVIEW DRAFT December 14, 2012 TECHNICAL REVIEW DRAFT Recommended citation for the report: Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership, 2012. A Guide to the Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration Program, Second Technical Review Draft, Prepared by the Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership, Portland, OR, December 14, 2012. i | Page TECHNICAL REVIEW DRAFT Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration Guide Preface This guide to the Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration Program provides a description of the Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership’s Restoration Prioritization Strategy and ways to apply the Restoration Prioritization Strategy to enhance restoration in the lower river. Like the Restoration Prioritization Strategy, this guide includes goals and objectives of key partners within the Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership (Estuary Partnership) umbrella. The Estuary Partnership includes local, state, federal and tribal government agencies; private sector interests; not-for-profit organizations and academia, as well as the general public. The Restoration Prioritization Strategy was developed within the framework of the Estuary Partnership Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (Management Plan).1 Like the Management Plan, this guide is a living document and will be updated as new information, research and results of monitoring emerge. The guide focuses on the mainstem and historic floodplain as well as tidally influenced portions of the tributaries from Bonneville Dam to the plume. The Estuary Partnership was created in 1995 by the governors of Washington and Oregon and the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) when USEPA designated the lower Columbia River ‘an estuary of national significance.’ The National Estuary Program (NEP) was created by the US Congress in 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act to create collaborative, locally driven programs to address the physical, chemical, social, biological, economic and cultural considerations for conserving and restoring our nation’s estuaries. The Estuary Partnership is scientifically based to ensure we make decisions with the best available information; we use an ecosystem-based approach to transcend political or human imposed boundaries; we provide a regional focus to unify, collaborate and build on existing efforts, create partnerships and fill gaps on this shared waterway. The Estuary Partnership is accountable to the US Congress, USEPA and the States. The governing board of directors and our work groups represents the diverse public and private interests and geography of the lower river and include government, private sector and academia partners to ensure comprehensive assessment of issues, leverage resources and target local priorities. The Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership is one of 28 NEPs. A NEP facilitates and coordinates the collaborative network of partners to implement the actions and meet the goals within the Management Plan, and each NEP relies very heavily on its partners for Management Plan implementation. The major roles of the NEP staff are to ensure coordination, use of best available science, provide a central clearinghouse of information on the estuary, to identify gaps 1 The Estuary Partnership Management Plan was developed from 1996 to 1999 using results of an extensive review of scientific research and analysis. The Management Committee that developed the Management Plan was composed of 34 representatives of various river interests and incorporated broad constituent and public input to ensure that the Management Plan met local needs, represented local and regional values, and was supported by local communities and citizens. The 1999 Management Plan identified 43 actions, including environmental goals and objectives, to address seven priority issues: biological integrity; habitat loss and modification; impacts from human activity; conventional pollutants; toxic contaminants; institutional constraints; and public awareness and stewardship. The Estuary Partnership Board of Directors updated the actions in 2011 to present progress since 1999, add climate change issues, set new targets and streamline actions, resulting in 17 actions that give concise direction for the region. The Management Plan is a long range regional plan, and many actions need to be sustained for years to ensure the long term health of the ecosystem. ii | Page TECHNICAL REVIEW DRAFT Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration Guide in implementation and work to find ways to fill them. In referring to the Estuary Partnership, this guide makes no attempt to separate accomplishments or roles of the Estuary Partnership staff versus those of the regional partners. In general, when referring to the Estuary Partnership, this guide assumes the broader regional partnership. iii | Page TECHNICAL REVIEW DRAFT Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration Guide Acknowledgements This guide and the Restoration Prioritization Strategy were funded by the US Environmental Protection Agency. The Northwest Power Conservation Council/Bonneville Power Administration funded databases and landscape tools used within or in combination with the Restoration Prioritization Strategy. Without their continued funding, participation and other assistance, this work could not have been accomplished. Section 2, Line of Evidence 1 – Historical Habitat Changes 1870-2010, we would like to thank the following, for their roles: Jennifer Burke, formerly of the University of Washington School of Aquatic and Fisheries Sciences, Wetlands Ecosystem Team, for developing a geodatabase of historical lower Columbia River land cover data derived from georeferenced versions of late 1800’s Office of Coast Survey topographic sheets. This data constituted the primary source of historical data for this analysis. Jen also provided extensive background information, communicated personally about how this data was derived and how the information may be applied. Amy Borde, Heida Diefenderfer and Chaeli Judd of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, for valuable assistance in interpreting vegetation types and selecting a set of aggregated land cover classes with which to perform the analysis. Members of the Estuary Partnership Science Work Group, for refinement of the methods and review of the results. In particular, thanks to Jim Brick, Steve Caicco, Bernadette Graham Hudson, Paul Meyers, Tom Murtagh, Kathy Roberts, Dan Roix, Dan Shively, Cindy Studebaker, Ron Thom, and Yvonne Vallette. Section 3, Line of Evidence 2 – Habitat Suitability Index Model Members of the Estuary Partnership Science Work Group, for refinement of the methods and review and application of the results. In particular, thanks to Alex Uber, Jim Brick, Bernadette Graham Hudson, Regan McNatt, Tom Murtagh, Kathy Roberts, Cindy Studebaker, Ron Thom, Yvonne Vallette and Steve Vigg. Section 6 Members of the Estuary Partnership Science Work Group. In particular, thanks to Alex Uber, Jim Brick, Bernadette Graham Hudson, Regan McNatt, Tom Murtagh, Cindy Studebaker and Ron Thom. iv | Page TECHNICAL REVIEW DRAFT Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration Guide Executive Summary Background The study area of the Lower Columbia River Ecosystem Restoration Program encompasses the study area of the Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership (Estuary Partnership) and includes all tidally influenced areas of the mainstem and tributaries from Bonneville Dam to the plume. The Columbia River historically supported diverse and abundant populations of fish and wildlife and is thought to have been one of the largest historical producers of Pacific salmonids in the world. Additionally, the lower Columbia River is one of the most important areas in the Pacific Flyway providing migrating, overwintering and/or breeding habitats for shorebirds, waterfowl and neotropical bird species. Anthropogenic changes since the 1860s have significantly reduced the quantity and quality of habitat available to fish and wildlife species. Contributing factors include altered timing, magnitude, duration, frequency, and rate of change in river flows; degraded water quality and increased toxic, chemical contaminants; introduction of invasive exotic species and altered food web dynamics. Ecosystem-based restoration of the lower Columbia River and estuary has become a regional priority in order to recover its historic productivity and diversity of fish and wildlife. In 1995 the Estuary Partnership was established by the governors of Washington and Oregon and the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) when USEPA designated the lower Columbia River ‘an estuary of national significance.’ The National Estuary Program (NEP) was established by the US Congress in 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act to create collaborative, locally driven programs to conserve and restore the nation’s estuaries. The Estuary Partnership is one of the 28 NEPs, and each NEP facilitates and coordinates a collaborative network of partners to implement the actions and meet the goals within its Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (Management Plan). Each NEP relies very heavily on its collaborative network of partners for implementation of the Management Plan. The lower Columbia River region identified biological integrity and habitat loss and modification as two significant issues to be addressed through the Estuary Partnership’s Management Plan. The vision or goals for these are as follows:
Recommended publications
  • Role of the Estuary in the Recovery of Columbia River Basin Salmon and Steelhead: an Evaluation of the Effects of Selected Factors on Salmonid Population Viability

    Role of the Estuary in the Recovery of Columbia River Basin Salmon and Steelhead: an Evaluation of the Effects of Selected Factors on Salmonid Population Viability

    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-69 Role of the Estuary in the Recovery of Columbia River Basin Salmon and Steelhead: An Evaluation of the Effects of Selected Factors on Salmonid Population Viability September 2005 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS Series The Northwest Fisheries Science Center of the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, uses the NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS series to issue infor- mal scientific and technical publications when com- plete formal review and editorial processing are not appropriate or feasible due to time constraints. Docu- ments published in this series may be referenced in the scientific and technical literature. The NMFS-NWFSC Technical Memorandum series of the Northwest Fisheries Science Center continues the NMFS-F/NWC series established in 1970 by the Northwest & Alaska Fisheries Science Center, which has since been split into the Northwest Fisheries Science Center and the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. The NMFS-AFSC Technical Memorandum series is now being used by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. Reference throughout this document to trade names does not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. This document should be cited as follows: Fresh, K.L., E. Casillas, L.L. Johnson, and D.L. Bottom. 2005. Role of the estuary in the recovery of Columbia River basin salmon and steelhead: an evaluation of the effects of selected factors on salmo- nid population viability. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-69, 105 p. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-69 Role of the Estuary in the Recovery of Columbia River Basin Salmon and Steelhead: An Evaluation of the Effects of Selected Factors on Salmonid Population Viability Kurt L.
  • BIG RIVER ECOSYSTEM: Program 2

    BIG RIVER ECOSYSTEM: Program 2

    BIG RIVER ECOSYSTEM: A Question of Net Worth PURPOSE To explore biodiversity at the ecosystem level. KERA CONNECTIONS to Life Science Program 2 Core Content: Structure and Function in Living Systems Academic Expectations: 2.2 Patterns, 2.3 Systems, 2.4 Models & Scale ANSWERS TO Process Skills: Observation, Modeling aFIELD NOTES OBJECTIVES 1. In a hot and hostile environment, Students should be able to: the evaporated water cannot be 1.identify five “big river” organisms incorporated into living cells (as 2.construct a diagram showing interactions between living and we know them). nonliving parts of an ecosystem 2. An extremely cold environment, 3. discuss factors that affect the level of biodiversity in their river basin. or frozen desert, does not allow cells to utilize water. VOCABULARY 3. Answers will vary but should Teachers may wish to discuss the following terms: display logical flow of water and aquatic, commercial, ecosystem, water cycle and watershed. allow for recirculation in a loop. 4. Arteries and veins. aFIELD NOTEBOOK 5. A pumping heart. Ideas for Teachers 6. Diagram A shows many different A. Develop a concept map for the water cycle. Include these items in types of ecosystems in close the concept map: clouds, groundwater, apple tree, stream, precipita- proximity. tion, condensation, evaporation, harvest mouse, snowflakes, sun and 7. Add a watering hole, plant a humans. What other cycles are needed to maintain an ecosystem? miniature forest, create a B. Biospheres, containing algae, brine shrimp and water, are often meadow of wildflowers. Most shown in advertisements. Analyze how the biosphere is self-main- importantly, break up a monocul- taining.
  • Effects of Eutrophication on Stream Ecosystems

    Effects of Eutrophication on Stream Ecosystems

    EFFECTS OF EUTROPHICATION ON STREAM ECOSYSTEMS Lei Zheng, PhD and Michael J. Paul, PhD Tetra Tech, Inc. Abstract This paper describes the effects of nutrient enrichment on the structure and function of stream ecosystems. It starts with the currently well documented direct effects of nutrient enrichment on algal biomass and the resulting impacts on stream chemistry. The paper continues with an explanation of the less well documented indirect ecological effects of nutrient enrichment on stream structure and function, including effects of excess growth on physical habitat, and alterations to aquatic life community structure from the microbial assemblage to fish and mammals. The paper also dicusses effects on the ecosystem level including changes to productivity, respiration, decomposition, carbon and other geochemical cycles. The paper ends by discussing the significance of these direct and indirect effects of nutrient enrichment on designated uses - especially recreational, aquatic life, and drinking water. 2 1. Introduction 1.1 Stream processes Streams are all flowing natural waters, regardless of size. To understand the processes that influence the pattern and character of streams and reduce natural variation of different streams, several stream classification systems (including ecoregional, fluvial geomorphological, and stream order classification) have been adopted by state and national programs. Ecoregional classification is based on geology, soils, geomorphology, dominant land uses, and natural vegetation (Omernik 1987). Fluvial geomorphological classification explains stream and slope processes through the application of physical principles. Rosgen (1994) classified stream channels in the United States into seven major stream types based on morphological characteristics, including entrenchment, gradient, width/depth ratio, and sinuosity in various land forms.
  • Ecosystem Services Generated by Fish Populations

    Ecosystem Services Generated by Fish Populations

    AR-211 Ecological Economics 29 (1999) 253 –268 ANALYSIS Ecosystem services generated by fish populations Cecilia M. Holmlund *, Monica Hammer Natural Resources Management, Department of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, S-106 91, Stockholm, Sweden Abstract In this paper, we review the role of fish populations in generating ecosystem services based on documented ecological functions and human demands of fish. The ongoing overexploitation of global fish resources concerns our societies, not only in terms of decreasing fish populations important for consumption and recreational activities. Rather, a number of ecosystem services generated by fish populations are also at risk, with consequences for biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, and ultimately human welfare. Examples are provided from marine and freshwater ecosystems, in various parts of the world, and include all life-stages of fish. Ecosystem services are here defined as fundamental services for maintaining ecosystem functioning and resilience, or demand-derived services based on human values. To secure the generation of ecosystem services from fish populations, management approaches need to address the fact that fish are embedded in ecosystems and that substitutions for declining populations and habitat losses, such as fish stocking and nature reserves, rarely replace losses of all services. © 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Ecosystem services; Fish populations; Fisheries management; Biodiversity 1. Introduction 15 000 are marine and nearly 10 000 are freshwa­ ter (Nelson, 1994). Global capture fisheries har­ Fish constitute one of the major protein sources vested 101 million tonnes of fish including 27 for humans around the world. There are to date million tonnes of bycatch in 1995, and 11 million some 25 000 different known fish species of which tonnes were produced in aquaculture the same year (FAO, 1997).
  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Estuary Program

    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Estuary Program

    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s National Estuary Program Story Map Text-only File 1) Introduction Welcome to the National Estuary Program story map. Since 1987, the EPA National Estuary Program (NEP) has made a unique and lasting contribution to protecting and restoring our nation's estuaries, delivering environmental and public health benefits to the American people. This story map describes the 28 National Estuary Programs, the issues they face, and how place-based partnerships coordinate local actions. To use this tool, click through the four tabs at the top and scroll around to learn about our National Estuary Programs. Want to learn more about a specific NEP? 1. Click on the "Get to Know the NEPs" tab. 2. Click on the map or scroll through the list to find the NEP you are interested in. 3. Click the link in the NEP description to explore a story map created just for that NEP. Program Overview Our 28 NEPs are located along the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific coasts and in Puerto Rico. The NEPs employ a watershed approach, extensive public participation, and collaborative science-based problem- solving to address watershed challenges. To address these challenges, the NEPs develop and implement long-term plans (called Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans (link opens in new tab)) to coordinate local actions. The NEPs and their partners have protected and restored approximately 2 million acres of habitat. On average, NEPs leverage $19 for every $1 provided by the EPA, demonstrating the value of federal government support for locally-driven efforts. View the NEPmap. What is an estuary? An estuary is a partially-enclosed, coastal water body where freshwater from rivers and streams mixes with salt water from the ocean.
  • Do Sturgeon Limit Burrowing Shrimp Populations in Pacific Northwest Estuaries?

    Do Sturgeon Limit Burrowing Shrimp Populations in Pacific Northwest Estuaries?

    Environ Biol Fish (2008) 83:283–296 DOI 10.1007/s10641-008-9333-y Do sturgeon limit burrowing shrimp populations in Pacific Northwest Estuaries? Brett R. Dumbauld & David L. Holden & Olaf P. Langness Received: 22 January 2007 /Accepted: 28 January 2008 /Published online: 4 March 2008 # Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008 Abstract Green sturgeon, Acipenser medirostris, and we present evidence from exclusion studies and field white sturgeon, Acipenser transmontanus, are fre- observation that the predator making the pits can have quent inhabitants of coastal estuaries from northern a significant cumulative negative effect on burrowing California, USA to British Columbia, Canada. An shrimp density. These burrowing shrimp present a analysis of stomach contents from 95 green stur- threat to the aquaculture industry in Washington State geon and six white sturgeon commercially landed in due to their ability to de-stabilize the substrate on Willapa Bay, Grays Harbor, and the Columbia River which shellfish are grown. Despite an active burrowing estuary during 2000–2005 revealed that 17–97% had shrimp control program in these estuaries, it seems empty stomachs, but those fish with items in their unlikely that current burrowing shrimp abundance and guts fed predominantly on benthic prey items and availability as food is a limiting factor for threatened fish. Burrowing thalassinid shrimp (mostly Neo- green sturgeon stocks. However, these large predators trypaea californiensis) were important food items for may have performed an important top down control both white and especially for green sturgeon taken in function on shrimp populations in the past when they Willapa Bay, Washington during summer 2003, where were more abundant.
  • Linking Biological Toxicity and the Spectral Characteristics Of

    Linking Biological Toxicity and the Spectral Characteristics Of

    Chen et al. Environ Sci Eur (2019) 31:84 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-019-0269-y RESEARCH Open Access Linking biological toxicity and the spectral characteristics of contamination in seriously polluted urban rivers Zhongli Chen1, Zihan Zhu1, Jiyu Song1, Ruiyan Liao1, Yufan Wang1, Xi Luo1, Dongya Nie1, Yumeng Lei1, Ying Shao1* and Wei Yang2,3 Abstract Background: Urban river pollution risks to environments and human health are emerging as a serious concern worldwide. With the aim to achieve the health of urban river ecosystem, numerous monitoring programs have been implemented to investigate the spectral characteristics of contamination. While due to the complexity of aquatic pollutants, the linkages between harmful efects and the spectral characteristics of contamination are still a major challenge for capturing main threats to urban aquatic environments. To establish these linkages, surface water (SW), sediment pore water (SDPW), and riparian soil pore water (SPW) were collected from fve sites of the seriously pol- luted Qingshui Stream, China. The water-dissolved organic carbon (DOC), total nitrogen (TN), total phosphate (TP), fuorescence excitation–emission matrix, and specifc ultraviolet absorbance were applied to analyze the spectral characteristics of urban river contamination. The Photobacterium phosphorem 502 was used to test the acute toxicity of the samples. Finally, the correlations between acute toxicity and concentrations of DOC, TN, TP, and the spectral characteristics were explored. Results: The concentrations of DOC, TN, and TP in various samples amounted from 11.41 2.31 to 3844.67 87.80 mg/L, from 1.96 0.06 to 906.23 26.01 mg/L and from 0.06 0.01 to 101.00± 8.29 mg/L, respec- tively.
  • Volume II, Chapter 2 Columbia River Estuary and Lower Mainstem Subbasins

    Volume II, Chapter 2 Columbia River Estuary and Lower Mainstem Subbasins

    Volume II, Chapter 2 Columbia River Estuary and Lower Mainstem Subbasins TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.0 COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY AND LOWER MAINSTEM ................................ 2-1 2.1 Subbasin Description.................................................................................................. 2-5 2.1.1 Purpose................................................................................................................. 2-5 2.1.2 History ................................................................................................................. 2-5 2.1.3 Physical Setting.................................................................................................... 2-7 2.1.4 Fish and Wildlife Resources ................................................................................ 2-8 2.1.5 Habitat Classification......................................................................................... 2-20 2.1.6 Estuary and Lower Mainstem Zones ................................................................. 2-27 2.1.7 Major Land Uses................................................................................................ 2-29 2.1.8 Areas of Biological Significance ....................................................................... 2-29 2.2 Focal Species............................................................................................................. 2-31 2.2.1 Selection Process............................................................................................... 2-31 2.2.2 Ocean-type Salmonids
  • Spatial Heterogeneity and Controls of Ecosystem Metabolism in a Great Plains River Network

    Spatial Heterogeneity and Controls of Ecosystem Metabolism in a Great Plains River Network

    Spatial heterogeneity and controls of ecosystem metabolism in a Great Plains river network Walter K. Dodds, Sophie A. Higgs, Margaret J. Spangler, James Guinnip, Jeffrey D. Scott, Skyler C. Hedden, Bryan D. Frenette, et al. Hydrobiologia The International Journal of Aquatic Sciences ISSN 0018-8158 Volume 813 Number 1 Hydrobiologia (2018) 813:85-102 DOI 10.1007/s10750-018-3516-0 1 23 Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be self-archived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com”. 1 23 Author's personal copy Hydrobiologia (2018) 813:85–102 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-018-3516-0 PRIMARY RESEARCH PAPER Spatial heterogeneity and controls of ecosystem metabolism in a Great Plains river network Walter K. Dodds . Sophie A. Higgs . Margaret J. Spangler . James Guinnip . Jeffrey D. Scott . Skyler C. Hedden . Bryan D. Frenette . Ryland Taylor . Anne E. Schechner . David J. Hoeinghaus . Michelle A. Evans-White Received: 17 June 2017 / Revised: 14 December 2017 / Accepted: 11 January 2018 / Published online: 20 January 2018 Ó Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 Abstract Gross primary production and ecosystem limitation, and was positively related to nutrients.
  • Key Restoration Methods of a Polluted River Ecosystem

    Key Restoration Methods of a Polluted River Ecosystem

    Key Restoration Methods of a Polluted River Chalachew Yenew* Ecosystem: A Systematic Review Environmental Health Science, Social and Population Health (SPH) Unit, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Debre Tabor University, Ethiopia Abstract Background: River is one of a freshwater ecosystem that plays an important role in people's living, aquatic and terrestrial living organisms, and agricultural production. Compared to other ecosystems, rivers support a disproportionately large number of *Corresponding author: plant and animal species. However, excessive human activities have busted the original Chalachew Yenew ecological balance by polluting the river ecosystem. As a result, partial or total affected the structure and functions of the river ecosystem. This review aimed to investigate the major ecological restoration methods of the polluted river ecosystem. [email protected] Methods: We have adopted the procedures from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The required data were Environmental Health Science, Social and collected via a literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, Population Health (SPH) Unit, College of EMBASE, HINARI, and Cochrane Library from the 9th of September, 2019 to the 5th Medicine and Health Sciences, Debre Tabor of March, 2020 using combined terms. Articles were included in our review; only if University, Ethiopia it assessed empirically and comparison and contrast between two or more different restoration methods. This review; it is mainly included published research articles, national reports, and annual reports and excluded opinion essays. Citation: Yenew C (2021) Key Restoration Results: Commonly used methods for restoration of polluted rivers around the Methods of a Polluted River Ecosystem: A globe could be categorized depending on the physical, chemical, and biological Systematic Review.
  • Demographics of Piscivorous Colonial Waterbirds and Management Implications for ESA-Listed Salmonids on the Columbia Plateau

    Demographics of Piscivorous Colonial Waterbirds and Management Implications for ESA-Listed Salmonids on the Columbia Plateau

    Jessica Y. Adkins, Donald E. Lyons, Peter J. Loschl, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, 104 Nash Hall, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331 Daniel D. Roby, U.S. Geological Survey-Oregon Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit1, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, 104 Nash Hall, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331 Ken Collis2, Allen F. Evans, Nathan J. Hostetter, Real Time Research, Inc., 52 S.W. Roosevelt Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97702 Demographics of Piscivorous Colonial Waterbirds and Management Implications for ESA-listed Salmonids on the Columbia Plateau Abstract We investigated colony size, productivity, and limiting factors for five piscivorous waterbird species nesting at 18 loca- tions on the Columbia Plateau (Washington) during 2004–2010 with emphasis on species with a history of salmonid (Oncorhynchus spp.) depredation. Numbers of nesting Caspian terns (Hydroprogne caspia) and double-crested cormorants (Phalacrocorax auritus) were stable at about 700–1,000 breeding pairs at five colonies and about 1,200–1,500 breed- ing pairs at four colonies, respectively. Numbers of American white pelicans (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos) increased at Badger Island, the sole breeding colony for the species on the Columbia Plateau, from about 900 individuals in 2007 to over 2,000 individuals in 2010. Overall numbers of breeding California gulls (Larus californicus) and ring-billed gulls (L. delawarensis) declined during the study, mostly because of the abandonment of a large colony in the mid-Columbia River. Three gull colonies below the confluence of the Snake and Columbia rivers increased substantially, however. Factors that may limit colony size and productivity for piscivorous waterbirds nesting on the Columbia Plateau included availability of suitable nesting habitat, interspecific competition for nest sites, predation, gull kleptoparasitism, food availability, and human disturbance.
  • CRC Biological Assessment

    CRC Biological Assessment

    COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 1 5. ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE 2 This section presents an analysis of the effects of past and ongoing human and natural factors 3 leading to the current status of listed species and their habitat (including designated critical 4 habitat) within the action area. 5 The action area is located within the Lower Columbia River subbasin. The Columbia River and 6 its tributaries are the dominant aquatic system in the Pacific Northwest. The Columbia River 7 originates on the west slope of the Rocky Mountains in Canada and flows approximately 1,200 8 miles to the Pacific Ocean, draining an area of approximately 219,000 square miles in 9 Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Nevada, and Utah. Within the U.S., there are 10 11 major dams along the main reach of the river. In addition, there are 162 smaller dams that 11 form reservoirs with capacities greater than 5,000 acre-feet in the Canadian and United States’ 12 portions of the basin (Fuhrer et al. 1996). Saltwater intrusion from the Pacific Ocean extends 13 approximately 23 miles upstream from the river mouth at Astoria. Coastal tides influence the 14 flow rate and river level up to Bonneville Dam at RM 146.1 (RKm 235) (USACE 1989). 15 5.1 HISTORICAL CONDITIONS 16 Within the Lower Columbia River subbasin, including the action area, flooding was historically 17 a frequent occurrence, contributing to habitat diversity via flow to side channels and deposition 18 of woody debris. The Lower Columbia River estuary is estimated to have once had 75 percent 19 more tidal swamps than the current estuary because tidal waters could reach floodplain areas that 20 are now diked.