DOCSLIB.ORG

Little Lost River Subbasin TMDL

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Little Lost River Subbasin TMDL Little Lost River Subbasin TMDL August 2000 An Allocation of Nonpoint Source Pollutants in the Water Quality Limited Watersheds of the Little Lost River Valley Idaho Department of Environmental Quality 1410 North Hilton Boise, ID 83706 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................3 Total Maximum Daily Load ........................................................................................3 History .........................................................................................................................4 Issues of Concern.........................................................................................................5 2.0 WATERSHED ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................6 2.1 WATERSHED DESCRIPTION..........................................................................6 Climate................................................................................................................6 Hydrology ...........................................................................................................6 Geology...............................................................................................................8 Soils ....................................................................................................................8 Geomorphic Description.....................................................................................9 Biological Characteristics .................................................................................10 Cultural Description..........................................................................................12 Watershed Characteristics.................................................................................12 2.2 WATER QUALITY CONCERNS AND STATUS ..........................................13 Water Quality Criteria.......................................................................................13 Target Selection ................................................................................................15 3.0 LITTLE LOST RIVER SUBBASIN TMDL.............................................................17 3.1 LITTLE LOST RIVER TMDL..........................................................................17 Watershed Description......................................................................................17 Existing Conditions...........................................................................................19 Riparian Condition............................................................................................19 Water Quality Concerns....................................................................................22 Load Capacities and Targets.............................................................................22 Loading Summary.............................................................................................24 Margin of Safety ...............................................................................................26 Seasonal Variation and Critical Time Periods of Sediment Loading ...............26 3.2 SAWMILL CREEK TMDL ..............................................................................28 Watershed Description......................................................................................28 Existing Conditions...........................................................................................29 Riparian Condition............................................................................................29 Water Quality Concerns....................................................................................31 Load Capacities and Targets.............................................................................33 Loading Summary.............................................................................................34 ii Table of Contents (Continued) Margin of Safety ................................................................................................37 Seasonal Variation and Critical Time Periods of Sediment Loading ................38 3.3 WET CREEK TMDL ........................................................................................39 Watershed Description......................................................................................39 Existing Conditions...........................................................................................40 Riparian Condition............................................................................................40 Water Quality Concerns....................................................................................44 Load Capacities and Targets.............................................................................45 Loading Summary.............................................................................................46 Margin of Safety ...............................................................................................48 Seasonal Variation and Critical Time Periods of Sediment Loading ...............49 4.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ......................................................................................51 Comments and Responses.................................................................................51 LITERATURE CITED ......................................................................................................59 GLOSSARY ......................................................................................................................62 APPENDIX A. SEDIMENT TMDL METHODS AND RESULTS.............................. 72 Introduction...............................................................................................................72 Streambank Erosion Inventory .................................................................................72 Site Selection ............................................................................................................74 Field Methods ...........................................................................................................75 Bank Erosion Calculations........................................................................................75 Subsurface Fine Sediment Sampling ........................................................................77 Surface Erosion from Roads .....................................................................................78 iii List of Figures Figure 1 Little Lost River Subbasin.................................................................................18 Figure 2 Cumulative Percent Depth Fines on Sawmill Creek and Little Lost River.......20 Figure 3 Cumulative Percent Depth Fines on Wet Creek at three locations ...................41 Acknowledgements A TMDL is a huge undertaking and would not be possible without the help of numerous people. DEQ would like to specifically thank Bart Gamett from the USFS Salmon-Challis National Forest, Mackay Ranger District and Dan Kotansky and Pat Koelsch of the BLM Upper Snake River District, as well as Bob Martin from the Idaho Department of Fish and Game Upper Snake River Region for providing data and technical review. Don Essig, Don Zaroban and Cynthia Grafe prepared the Little Lost River Subbasin Assessment which is the foundation to the TMDL. Additionally, field work assistance was provided by Dinah Reaney and Bill Clark of the DEQ State Office, without which the TMDL would not have been possible. Members of the general public were invaluable through the development and public comment period, including the Little Lost River Citizens Advisory Group and the Upper Snake River Basin Advisory Group. Of course no document would be possible without the time and effort of the Idaho Falls DEQ Regional Office surface water and clerical staff, particularly Troy Saffle and Caryn Meyer and Lisa Cawley respectively. Special thanks are extended to Russ Mitchell for assistance with technical editing and formatting. iv List of Tables Table 1 Little Lost River TMDL load reduction summary for §303(d) streams...............2 Table 2 Physical Attributes of the 5th field HUCs in the Little Lost River subbasin......13 Table 3 Summary of current stream temperature water quality standards in Idaho .......14 Table 4 Little Lost River PFC grazing allotment trends since 1993...............................20 Table 5 Existing erosion rates and total erosion on the Little Lost River.......................21 Table 6 Little Lost River streambank erosion load allocations ......................................25 Table 7 Little Lost River temperature loading analysis and allocation ..........................26 Table 8 Sawmill Creek grazing allotment trends since 1993 .........................................30 Table 9 Existing erosion rates and total erosion on Sawmill Creek ...............................31 Table 10 Water temperature summary for Sawmill Creek ..............................................32 Table 11 Sawmill Creek streambank erosion load allocations .......................................36 Table 12 Sawmill Creek temperature loading analysis and allocation...........................37 Table 13 Wet Creek grazing allotment trends since 1993 ...............................................41 Table 14 Existing erosion rates
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Idaho Roadless Areas FEIS
    United States Roadless Area Conservation Department of Agriculture National Forest System Lands in Idaho Forest Service Final Environmental Impact Statement Idaho National Forests August 2008 Appendix C—Idaho Roadless Areas Volume 5: Caribou, Challis, Salmon, and Targhee National Forests The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Roadless Area Conservation; National Forest System Lands in Idaho FEIS Idaho Roadless Areas TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDIX C. IDAHO ROADLESS AREAS............ C5-1 Diamond Peak #601..................................... C5-155 Greylock #007............................................... C5-161 CARIBOU NATIONAL FOREST Grouse Peak #010 ........................................ C5-165 Bear Creek #615 ............................................... C5-3 Hanson Lakes #915 see Sawtooth National Bonneville
    [Show full text]
  • Idaho Mountain Goat Management Plan (2019-2024)
    Idaho Mountain Goat Management Plan 2019-2024 Prepared by IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME June 2019 Recommended Citation: Idaho Mountain Goat Management Plan 2019-2024. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, USA. Team Members: Paul Atwood – Regional Wildlife Biologist Nathan Borg – Regional Wildlife Biologist Clay Hickey – Regional Wildlife Manager Michelle Kemner – Regional Wildlife Biologist Hollie Miyasaki– Wildlife Staff Biologist Morgan Pfander – Regional Wildlife Biologist Jake Powell – Regional Wildlife Biologist Bret Stansberry – Regional Wildlife Biologist Leona Svancara – GIS Analyst Laura Wolf – Team Leader & Regional Wildlife Biologist Contributors: Frances Cassirer – Wildlife Research Biologist Mark Drew – Wildlife Veterinarian Jon Rachael – Wildlife Game Manager Additional copies: Additional copies can be downloaded from the Idaho Department of Fish and Game website at fishandgame.idaho.gov Front Cover Photo: ©Hollie Miyasaki, IDFG Back Cover Photo: ©Laura Wolf, IDFG Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) adheres to all applicable state and federal laws and regulations related to discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, gender, disability or veteran’s status. If you feel you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility of IDFG, or if you desire further information, please write to: Idaho Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 25, Boise, ID 83707 or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Federal Assistance, Mailstop: MBSP-4020, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203, Telephone: (703) 358-2156. This publication will be made available in alternative formats upon request. Please contact IDFG for assistance. Costs associated with this publication are available from IDFG in accordance with Section 60-202, Idaho Code.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Lemhi Pass Quadrangle, Lemhi County, Idaho
    IDAHO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY IDAHOGEOLOGY.ORG IGS DIGITAL WEB MAP 183 MONTANA BUREAU OF MINES AND GEOLOGY MBMG.MTECH.EDU MBMG OPEN FILE 701 Tuff, undivided (Eocene)—Mixed unit of tuffs interbedded with, and directly Jahnke Lake member, Apple Creek Formation (Mesoproterozoic)—Feldspathic this Cambrian intrusive event introduced the magnetite and REEs. CORRELATION OF MAP UNITS Tt Yajl below, the mafic lava flow unit (Tlm). Equivalent to rhyolitic tuff beds (Tct) quartzite, minor siltite, and argillite. Poorly exposed and only in the Whole-rock geochemical analysis of the syenite indicates enrichment in Y of Staatz (1972), who noted characteristic recessive weathering and a wide northeast corner of the map. Description based mostly on that of Yqpi on (54-89 ppm), Nb (192-218 ppm), Nd (90-119 ppm), La (131-180 ppm), and GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE LEMHI PASS QUADRANGLE, LEMHI COUNTY, IDAHO, AND Artificial Alluvial Deposits Mass-Movement Glacial Deposits and range of crystal, lithic, and vitric fragment (pumice) proportions. Tuffs lower the Kitty Creek map (Lewis and others, 2009) to the north. Fine- to Ce (234-325 ppm) relative to other intrusive rocks in the region (data from Deposits Deposits Periglacial Deposits in the sequence commonly contain conspicuous biotite phenocrysts. Most medium-grained, moderately well-sorted feldspathic quartzite. Typically Gillerman, 2008). Mineralization ages are complex, but some are clearly or all are probably rhyolitic. A quartzite-bearing tuff interbedded with mafic flat-laminated m to dm beds with little siltite or argillite. Plagioclase content m Paleozoic (Gillerman, 2008; Gillerman and others, 2008, 2010, and 2013) Qaf Qas Qgty Qalc Holocene lava flows north of Trail Creek yielded a U-Pb zircon age of 47.0 ± 0.2 Ma (12-28 percent) is greater than or sub-equal to potassium feldspar (5-16 as summarized below.
    [Show full text]
  • Representativeness Assessment of Research Natural Areas on National Forest System Lands in Idaho
    USDA United States Department of Representativeness Assessment of Agriculture Forest Service Research Natural Areas on Rocky Mountain Research Station National Forest System Lands General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-45 in Idaho March 2000 Steven K. Rust Abstract Rust, Steven K. 2000. Representativeness assessment of research natural areas on National Forest System lands in Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-45. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 129 p. A representativeness assessment of National Forest System (N FS) Research Natural Areas in ldaho summarizes information on the status of the natural area network and priorities for identification of new Research Natural Areas. Natural distribution and abundance of plant associations is compared to the representation of plant associations within natural areas. Natural distribution and abundance is estimated using modeled potential natural vegetation, published classification and inventory data, and Heritage plant community element occur- rence data. Minimum criteria are applied to select only viable, high quality plant association occurrences. In assigning natural area selection priorities, decision rules are applied to encompass consideration of the adequacy and viability of representation. Selected for analysis were 1,024 plant association occurrences within 21 4 natural areas (including 115 NFS Research Natural Areas). Of the 1,566 combinations of association within ecological sections, 28 percent require additional data for further analysis; 8, 40, and 12 percent, respectively, are ranked from high to low conservation priority; 13 percent are fully represented. Patterns in natural area needs vary between ecological section. The result provides an operational prioritization of Research Natural Area needs at landscape and subregional scales.
    [Show full text]
  • Lemhi County, Idaho
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIRECTOR BUIJLETIN 528 GEOLOGY AND ORE DEPOSITS 1 OF LEMHI COUNTY, IDAHO BY JOSEPH B. UMPLEBY WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1913 CONTENTS. Page. Outline of report.......................................................... 11 Introduction.............................................................. 15 Scope of report......................................................... 15 Field work and acknowledgments...................................... 15 Early work............................................................ 16 Geography. .........> ....................................................... 17 Situation and access.........................--.-----------.-..--...-.. 17 Climate, vegetation, and animal life....................----.-----.....- 19 Mining................................................................ 20 General conditions.......... 1..................................... 20 History..............................-..............-..........:... 20 Production.................................,.........'.............. 21 Physiography.............................................................. 22 Existing topography.................................................... 22 Physiographic development............................................. 23 General features...............................................'.... 23 Erosion surface.................................................... 25 Correlation............. 1..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Quality Assessment of the Upper Snake River Basin, Idaho and Western Wyoming Summary of Aquatic Biological Data for Surface Water Through 1992
    WATER-QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF THE UPPER SNAKE RIVER BASIN, IDAHO AND WESTERN WYOMING SUMMARY OF AQUATIC BIOLOGICAL DATA FOR SURFACE WATER THROUGH 1992 By TERRY R.MARET U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4006 Boise, Idaho 1995 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bruce Babbitt, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center 230 Collins Road Open-File Reports Section Boise, ID 83702-4520 Box 25286, MS 517 Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 FOREWORD The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey Describe how water quality is changing over time. (USGS) is to assess the quantity and quality of the Improve understanding of the primary natural and earth resources of the Nation and to provide informa­ human factors that affect water-quality conditions. tion that will assist resource managers and policymak- This information will help support the develop­ ers at Federal, State, and local levels in making sound ment and evaluation of management, regulatory, and decisions. Assessment of water-quality conditions and monitoring decisions by other Federal, State, and local trends is an important part of this overall mission. agencies to protect, use, and enhance water resources. One of the greatest challenges faced by water- The goals of the NAWQA Program are being resources scientists is acquiring reliable information achieved through ongoing and proposed investigations that will guide the use and protection of the Nation's of 60 of the Nation's most important river basins and water resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Idaho: Lewis Clark Byway Guide.Pdf
    The Lewis and Clark Backcountry Byway AND ADVENTURE ROAD Tendoy, Idaho Meriwether Lewis’s journal entry on August 18, 1805 —American Philosophical Society The Lewis and Clark Back Country Byway AND ADVENTURE ROAD Tendoy, Idaho The Lewis and Clark Back Country Byway and Adventure Road is a 36 mile loop drive through a beautiful and historic landscape on the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail and the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail. The mountains, evergreen forests, high desert canyons, and grassy foothills look much the same today as when the Lewis and Clark Expedition passed through in 1805. THE PUBLIC LANDS CENTER Salmon-Challis National Forest and BLM Salmon Field Office 1206 S. Challis Street / Salmon, ID 83467 / (208)756-5400 BLM/ID/GI-15/006+1220 Getting There The portal to the Byway is Tendoy, Idaho, which is nineteen miles south of Salmon on Idaho Highway 28. From Montana, exit from I-15 at Clark Canyon Reservoir south of Dillon onto Montana Highway 324. Drive west past Grant to an intersection at the Shoshone Ridge Overlook. If you’re pulling a trailer or driving an RV with a passenger vehicle in tow, it would be a good idea to leave your trailer or RV at the overlook, which has plenty of parking, a vault toilet, and interpretive signs. Travel road 3909 west 12 miles to Lemhi Pass. Please respect private property along the road and obey posted speed signs. Salmon, Idaho, and Dillon, Montana, are full- service communities. Limited services are available in Tendoy, Lemhi, and Leadore, Idaho and Grant, Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • DE-EE0002848 E Snake River Geothermal Drilling Project
    DE-EE0002848 e Snake River Geothermal Drilling Project – Innovative Approaches to Geothermal Exploration Phase 1 Report Prepared by John W. Shervais Department of Geology Utah State University Logan, Utah 84322-4505 1 September 2010 Phase 1: e Snake River Geothermal Drilling Project DE-EE0002848 Phase 1 Report DE-EE0002848 e Snake River Geothermal Drilling Project – Innovative Approaches to Geothermal Exploration INTRODUCTION e Yellowstone-Snake River Plain (YSRP) volcanic province, which began ≈17 Ma under eastern Oregon and northern Nevada and is currently under the Yellowstone Plateau, is the world’s best modern example of a time-transgressive hotspot track beneath continental crust (Figure 1). Recently, a 100 km wide thermal anomaly has been imaged by seismic tomography to depths of over 1000 km beneath the Yellowstone Plateau (Waite et al 2006; Yuan and Dueker 2005; Xue and Allen, 2010; James et al 2009). e Yellowstone Plateau volcanic field consists largely of rhyolite lavas and ignimbrites, with few mantle-derived basalts (Christiansen 2001). In contrast, the Snake River Plain (SRP), which represents the track of the Yellowstone hotspot, consists of rhyolite caldera complexes that herald the onset of plume-related volcanism and basalts that are compositionally similar to ocean island basalts like Hawaii (Pierce et al 2002). e SRP preserves a record of volcanic activity that spans over 16 Ma and is still active today, with basalts as young as 200 ka in the west and 2 ka in the east. us, the Snake River volcanic province represents the world-class example of active time- transgressive intra-continental plume volcanism. e SRP is unique because it is young and relatively undisturbed tectonically, and because it contains a complete record of volcanic activity associated with passage of the hotspot (Shervais et al, 2006a).
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Geology Sand Mineral Deposits in and Mear the Oentral
    Regional Geology sand Mineral Deposits In and Mear the Oentral Part of the Lemhl Range, Lemhi County, Itlaho tJ.S, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER Regional Geology and Mineral Deposits In and Near the Central Part of the Lemhi Range, Lemhi County, Idaho By EDWARD T. RUPPEL and DAVID A. LOPEZ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1480 A descriptive summary of the rocks and structure in part of east-central Idaho UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1988 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL HODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Any use of trade names in this report is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorse­ ment by the U.S. Geological Survey. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Ruppel, Edward Thompson, 1925- Regional geology and mineral deposits in and near the central part of the Lemhi Range, Lemhi County, Idaho. (U.S. Geological Survey professional paper ; 1480) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.16:1480 1. Geology Idaho Lemhi Range. 2. Ore-deposits Idaho Lemhi Range. I. Lopez, David A. II. Title. III. Series. QE104.L43R86 1988 557.9678 87-600492 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section, U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract ........................................... 1 Granitic intrusive rocks Continued Introduction ....................................... 2 Petrography Continued Topography and drainage ......................... 2 Early Paleozoic granite in the Beaverhead Mountains 59 Present work and acknowledgments ................ 4 Eocene granitic rocks in the Lemhi Range ....... 62 Summary of earlier geologic studies ................ 7 Descriptions of intrusive masses ..................
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of NEVADA-RENO Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology Un~Vrrsiryof Nevada-8.Eno Reno, Nevada 89557-0088 (702) 784-6691 FAX: (7G2j 784-1709
    UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA-RENO Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology Un~vrrsiryof Nevada-8.eno Reno, Nevada 89557-0088 (702) 784-6691 FAX: (7G2j 784-1709 NBMG OPEN-FILE REPORT 90-1 MINERAL RESOURCE INVENTORY BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, CARSON CITY DISTRICT, NEVADA Joseph V. Tingley This information should be considered preliminary. It has not been edited or checked for completeness or accuracy. Mineral Resource Inventory Bureau of Land Management, Carson City District, Nevada Prepared by: Joseph V. Tingley Prepared for: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF E INTERIOR '\\ !\ BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Carson City Office Carson City, Nevada Under Cooperative Agreement 14-08-0001-A-0586 with the U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY NEVADA BUREAU OF MINES AND GEOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, RENO January 1990 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................ 3 LOCATION .......................... 4 MINERAL RESOURCES ...................... 4 MINING DISTRICTS AND AREAS .................. 6 ALLEN HOT SPRINGS AREA ................. 6 ALPINE DISTRICT .................... 7 AURORA DISTRICT .................... 10 BELL DISTRICT ..................... 13 BELLMOUNTAIN DISTRICT ................. 16 BENWAY DISTRICT .................... 19 BERNICE DISTRICT .................... 21 BOVARDDISTRICT .............23 BROKENHILLS DISTRICT ................. 27 BRUNERDISTRICT .................. 30 BUCKLEYDISTRICT ................. 32 BUCKSKINDISTRICT ............... 35 CALICO HILLS AREA ................... 39 CANDELARIA DISTRICT ................. 41 CARSON CITY DISTRICT .................. 44
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Field Office OHV Designation
    ek k Burns Gulch re e Camel Gulch C e ill r m C Deadwater Gulch aw S k La k e Buster Gulch e le tl tt C k e i e ree L Maxwell Gulch r -m Fan Gulch Magpie Canyon amp C a w Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) Designations- Salmon Field Office - D g u S m la g p S i Cre ek B Napoleon Ridge Bobcat Gulch BLM-Administered Routes 100 101 Napoleon Stormy Peak Gulch 100 100 M oo Bear Gulch s e Cre e 102 k Napoleon Hill 103 Road Brushy Gulch Virginia Sawmill Gulch Tower Creek k Gulch Pirimids Day Gold Star ee k Gulch Cr ek e Use Area e re lle r Arrastra Point of Rock Comet C ve C Gulch ra ine r k G M Pine Creek e 110 111 Ajax Peak e Ridge r k 107 C ee ATV/Motorcycle Trail r Diamond Gulch r C e we Pine Creek s To o k 212 o e re 107 M Bird C 108 e tl 109 112 it L Sims Mine Tower Rock 333 Bea Campground 114 113 v Public Access Easement e r Copperhead C Ho Peak r rn e e 333 e t eek k Haystack C r 112 115 k 116 ree Mountain Badger ut C W ond o Jackass Ridge iam Cr Spring m D ee S e k OHV Designation Gulch b Allen f o C o 340 Ore Cash Mine t 117 r 331 93 ee Davis Canyon k C 150 re Sierra e 149 k Gulch ly Da C k Freeman Peak r e e re Golway Gulch k e e C 190 Closed to OHV Wallace C Freeman Cre k re ek 113 n me 138 148 Car 143 144 Monument Peak 329 147 pias Cre k 331 Na e 142 143 145 Cr eek 146 by 330 Morgan Bar 138 Ham D 141 139 J e Campground 138 e r Sacajawea f Queen of the ia R f 140 Seasonal Closure (12/16 - 4/30) e r r 152 Haidee Mine rs Hills Mine C e Peaks a o e k p n 137 153 p Carmen Geertson Cr 327 s Smith Gulch e Oregon Gulch 121 Shelter k C e 133 e k
    [Show full text]
  • Idaho Botanical Foray 2016: Salmon-Challis National Forests, Little Lost River Drainage by Dr
    Vol. 38 No. 4 December 2016 Newsletter of the Idaho Native Plant Society ● Promoting Interest in Idaho’s Native Flora Idaho Botanical Foray 2016: Salmon-Challis National Forests, Little Lost River Drainage By Dr. Rick Williams, Janet Bala, and Pam Reschke Each year herbarium staff, students, Idaho ing the site, making camping arrangements, Native Plant Society members, and friends come providing the plant pressing materials, and then together for a long weekend to survey and collect identifying and processing the plants after return- plant specimens representing different regions of ing from the foray. In 2016, the 9th annual Idaho Idaho at the Idaho Botanical Foray. This is an op- Botanical Foray was hosted by Dr. Rick Williams portunity for amateur and professional botanists and Janet Bala of the Ray J. Davis Herbarium in to work together and enjoy the company of other the Idaho Museum of Natural History at Idaho native plant enthusiasts. This year, the Foray was State University. held June 16–19. The Mill Creek Campground in The site of this year’s foray was chosen to the Little Lost River Valley, north of the small complement and expand on recent floristic work town of Howe, and a short distance off the Sawmill conducted by Jessica Irwin for her Master’s thesis Canyon Road, served as base camp for the 2016 at the University of Wyoming. Her knowledge of Foray. The Little Lost River basin is located in the unique geology and plant communities of the east-central Idaho on the northern margin of the area helped us choose interesting sites and diverse Snake River Plain and flanked by the Lost River habitats where we would find good botanizing.
    [Show full text]