DOCSLIB.ORG

Potlatch River Addendum Implementation Plan for Agriculture (17060306)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Potlatch River Addendum Implementation Plan for Agriculture (17060306) Potlatch River Addendum Implementation Plan for Agriculture (17060306) Prepared by the Idaho Soil and Water Conservation Commission In cooperation with the Latah Soil and Water Conservation District March 2018 Original Plan: Idaho Soil and Water Conservation Commission (ISWCC). 2010. Potlatch River Subbasin Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan for Agriculture. Moscow, ID. 1 Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Project Setting ............................................................................................................................................... 4 Land Use and Land Ownership ..................................................................................................................... 6 Accomplishments .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Resource Concerns...................................................................................................................................... 11 E. coli Bacteria ......................................................................................................................................... 11 Nutrients ................................................................................................................................................. 12 Sediment ............................................................................................................................................... 12 Agricultural Inventory and Evaluation ........................................................................................................ 15 Treatment ................................................................................................................................................... 16 Funding ....................................................................................................................................................... 17 Maintenance, Monitoring, Evaluation ........................................................................................................ 19 References .................................................................................................................................................. 20 2 List of Tables and Figures: Figure 1. Potlatch River Subbasin and Location (ISWCC, 2010). ................................................................. 5 Table 1. Summary of BMP Projects from Potlatch River TMDL 5-Year Review (DEQ, 2017) ..................... 6 Table 2. The Latah Soil and Water Conservation District worked with cooperators to install the following BMP projects. ............................................................................................................................... 7 Table 3: NRCS Installations 2010 – 2016.................................................................................................... 10 Table 4. AU’s Recommended to move from category 4a to category 2. .................................................. 11 Table 5. Seasonal E. Coli loads (cfu/100mL). (DEQ. 2017) ........................................................................ 12 Table 6. Assessment unit pollutant loads for TP (DEQ,2017). .................................................................. 12 Table 7. Daily TSS load for Potlatch River – 6th Order (ID17060306CL044_06) (DEQ, 2017) ................... 13 Table 8. Daily TSS load for Cedar Creek – 4th Order (ID17060306CL046_04) (DEQ, 2017) ....................... 13 Table 9. Daily TSS load for Pine Creek – Headwaters (ID17060306CL055_02) (DEQ, 2017) .................... 14 Table 10. Daily TSS load for Pine Creek – 3rd Order (ID17060306CL055_03) (DEQ, 2017) ....................... 14 Table 11. Daily TSS load for West Fork Little Bear Creek – 1st and 2nd Order (ID17060306CL061_02) (DEQ, 2017) ................................................................................................................................................. 14 Table 12. Daily TSS load for West Fork Little Bear Creek – 3rd Order (ID17060306CL061_03) (DEQ, 2017) ........................................................................................................................................................... 15 Table 13. Daily TSS load for Middle Potlatch Creek – Headwaters (ID17060306CL062_02) (DEQ, 2017) .................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Table 14. Daily TSS load for Middle Potlatch Creek – 3rd Order (ID17060306CL062_03) (DEQ, 2017) .... 15 Table 15. LSWCD Future Potlatch Restoration Projects ............................................................................ 16 Table 16. ID F&G Future Potlatch Restoration Projects ............................................................................ 17 3 Introduction The purpose of this plan is to address the TMDL addendums and the 5-Year Review for the Potlatch River Subbasin with the goal to help restore designated beneficial uses. “Pursuant to section 39-3601 et seq., Idaho Code, and IDAPA 58.01.02, Water Quality Standards, the Idaho Soil & Water Conservation Commission (SWCC) is the designated agency for management of nonpoint source pollution on grazing and agricultural land in Idaho and is therefore responsible to lead TMDL implementation activities on grazing and agricultural land in the State.” The objective of the plan is to outline a process of potential site-specific agricultural best management practices (BMP’s) that can be used to help restore the designated beneficial uses by reducing pollutant loads in the Potlatch River subbasin. Project Setting The Potlatch River is the largest tributary to the lower Clearwater River, and drains a subwatershed of the Columbia River Basin. The Potlatch River watershed, comprised of approximately 381,000 acres (594 square miles), is characterized by steep basaltic canyons rimmed by rolling cropland in the lower reaches, and by timbered hills and high meadow terrain in the upper reaches. The Potlatch River originates north of Bovill (Figure 1). The basin ranges in elevation from almost 5,000 feet on Beals Butte to 800 feet at the confluence with the Clearwater River. The Clearwater joins the Snake River, and then the Columbia River. The communities of Bovill, Helmer, Deary, Troy, Juliaetta, and Kendrick are the principal towns within the watershed. The upper reaches of the Potlatch River basin contains the largest contiguous area of forested land cover in the Lower Clearwater River Basin. The Potlatch River enters the Clearwater River several miles southwest of Juliaetta. The Potlatch River is approximately 56 miles long and traverses the southern and eastern portions of Latah County in a southwesterly direction with roughly 1,900 miles of tributary streams. (ISWCC, 2010) 4 Figure 1. Potlatch River Subbasin and Location (ISWCC, 2010). 5 Land Use and Land Ownership The main land uses in the Potlatch River Subbasin are forestry and agriculture (farming and grazing). There is also a very limited amount of mining activity; increased industrial mineral production is expected in the near future. Outdoor recreation is popular throughout the area, particularly on public lands and commercial timber holdings. (ISWCC, 2010) Most (78%) of the Idaho portion of the Potlatch River Subbasin are private lands, split largely between cropland, hayland, pasture and forestlands. The Clearwater National Forest (CNF) administers federal forestlands (14%). The State of Idaho manages seven percent of mostly forested subbasin lands. Tribal lands total about 1,000 acres (<0.5%); Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands comprise roughly the same percentage. Most (85%) of the subbasin is located in Latah County. The southeastern edge of the subbasin (8%) is located in Clearwater County and the southwestern edge of the watershed (7%) is located in Nez Perce County. Towns located within the subbasin are Troy, Deary, Bovill, Juliaetta, Kendrick and Helmer; less than 1,000 people reside in each town. The towns support a sometimes-thriving timber industry in addition to the agricultural community and local residents. (ISWCC, 2010) Accomplishments The “Potlatch River TMDL 5-Year Review” summarizes the implementation work that was done in the Subbasin between 2007 and present (DEQ, 2017). Table 1 below summarizes the BMP projects from the review. Table 2-3 detail additional implementation projects that have been completed in the Potlatch River watershed. Table 1. Summary of BMP Projects from Potlatch River TMDL 5-Year Review (DEQ, 2017) Project Name Amount Units ID F&G Corral Creek - Habitat Improvement 5 miles ID F&G Bloom Meadows - Habitat Improvement 1 miles ID F&G Pine Creek - Habitat Improvement 9 miles ID F&G Trout-Fry Meadows - Habitat Improvement 0.56 miles ID F&G Bloom Creek - Habitat Improvement 0.25 miles USFS Road Decommissioing 16.8 miles IDL Strream Channel Alteration Projects 43 projects ITD Culvert Replacement Projects 5 projects Table 2 details the projects that have been completed by landowners cooperating with the Latah Soil and Water Conservation District. 6 Table 2. The Latah Soil and Water Conservation District worked with cooperators to install the following BMP projects. # PROJECT SITE Units Amount Units Amount 1 City of Troy Dutch Flat Dam Removal, Habitat
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Draft Clearwater Assessment: 8. Fishery Resources
    8 Fishery Resources 8.1 Fish Status Currently more than 30 species of fish inhabit the Clearwater subbasin, including 19 native species, two of which have been reintroduced (Table 43). Salmonids and cyprinids are most numerous, representing 10 and 6 species, respectively. Exotic species within the subbasin are generally introduced sport or forage species, and include primarily centrarchids, ictalurids, and salmonids. Five fish species have been chosen as aquatic focal species in this assessment: chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss subspecies), westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi), bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). Aquatic focal species may serve as indicators of larger communities, and are listed by federal and/or state agencies as species of concern or, in the case of brook trout, have the potential to negatively impact other selected species. In addition, aquatic focal species had adequate data available for species status, distribution, and habitat use to aid future decision making. Information is also provided for additional species of interest for which only limited data exists, redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss subspecies), Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) and coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Although species status is discussed, data limitations for these species prohibits substantial consideration of limiting factors and distribution or condition of existing habitat areas. The resident fishery in Dworshak Reservoir is also considered a substantial fishery resource in the Clearwater subbasin. The Dworshak Reservoir fishery involves multiple species, and is addressed as a single fishery rather than as a large number of individual species. Distribution and status information was compiled for the five aquatic focal species using 23 data sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Lathyrus Bijugatus
    Fire Effects Information System (FEIS) FEIS Home Page Lathyrus bijugatus Table of Contents SUMMARY INTRODUCTION DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS FIRE ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS APPENDIX REFERENCES Figure 1—Drypark pea in flower. Photo by Tara Luna, used with permission. SUMMARY This Species Review summarizes the scientific information that was available on drypark pea as of February 2021. Drypark pea is a rare, leguminous forb that occurs in eastern Washington and Oregon, northern Idaho, and northwestern Montana. Within that distribution, it grows in a broad range of biogeoclimatic zones and elevations. As its common name "drypark pea" suggests, it prefers dry soils and open sites. Drypark pea grows in sagebrush-conifer and sagebrush-grassland transition zones; in ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, and subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce woodlands and forests; and subalpine fir parklands. In conifer communities, it is most common in open stands. Drypark pea has rhizomes that grow out from its taproot. Its roots host nitrogen-fixing Rhizobium bacteria. Drypark pea regenerates from seed and has a soil-stored seed bank; however, information on seed dispersal, viability, and seedling establishment of drypark pea was not available in the literature. Fire probably top-kills drypark pea, and it likely sprouts from its rhizomes and/or caudex after top-kill; however, these responses are undocumented. Only one study provided information on the response of drypark pea to fire. In ponderosa pine forest in northern Idaho, cover and frequency of drypark pea were similar on unburned plots and plots burned under low or high intensity, when 1 averaged across 3 postfire years.
    [Show full text]
  • Potlatch River Steelhead Monitoring and Evaluation Project
    POTLATCH RIVER STEELHEAD MONITORING AND EVALUATION PROJECT 2017 AND 2018 BIENNIAL REPORT Prepared by: Brian A. Knoth, Fisheries Biologist Brett J. Bowersox, Fishery Staff Biologist Jason T. Fortier, Fisheries Technician 2 IDFG Report Number 20-15 March 2021 POTLATCH RIVER STEELHEAD MONITORING AND EVALUATION PROJECT 2017 AND 2018 BIENNIAL REPORT By: Brian A. Knoth Brett J. Bowersox Jason T. Fortier Idaho Department of Fish and Game 600 South Walnut Street P.O. Box 25 Boise, ID 83707 IDFG Report Number 20-15 March 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS .........................................................................................1 FOREWORD ..............................................................................................................................2 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...............................................................................................................2 PROJECT DESIGN AND OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................... 3 PROJECT TIMELINE ..................................................................................................................4 REPORT STRUCTURE ..............................................................................................................4 LITERATURE CITED ...............................................................................................................5 FIGURES ....................................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • THE PRAIRIE OWL PALOUSE AUDUBON SOCIETY Volume 29, Issue 4, March 2001
    THE PRAIRIE OWL PALOUSE AUDUBON SOCIETY Volume 29, Issue 4, March 2001 PROGRAMS CALENDAR MOSCOW COMMUNITY CENTER MARCH MARCH 21, 2001 - 7:30 P.M. 5 PAS Board Meeting - 7:30pm Bighorn Sheep in Hell's Canyon - Frances 6 Army Corps of Engineers Open House – Cassirer, Wildlife Biologist, Idaho Department 2:00 – 8:00pm, Dworshak of Fish and Game, Clearwater Region. Through also Yukon to Yellowstone Initiative – 7:30pm, a cooperative project between the states of Idaho, University of Idaho Law School Court Rm Oregon, and Washington, the BLM, Forest Service, 13 National ORV Coalition – 7:00pm and the Foundation for North American Wild 21 PAS Membership Meeting - 7:30pm Sheep, researchers are working to restore bighorn Bighorn Sheep in Hell's Canyon sheep to Hells Canyon. Frances’ slide presentation 23-25 Othello Sandhill Crane Festival will provide information about bighorn sheep and 29 Palouse Science Center Meeting – 7:00pm what is being done to restore their populations in 31 Lewiston-Clarkston Field Trip this area. APRIL APRIL 18, 2001 - 7:30 P.M. 2 PAS Board Meeting - 7:30pm Chasing Pronghorn in Yellowstone: an Effort in 18 PAS Membership Meeting - 7:30pm Futility? - Kevin Pullen, Science Instructor and Chasing Pronghorn in Yellowstone: an Asst. Curator of the Conner Museum at WSU. Effort in Futility? 21 Turnbull National Refuge Field Trip Kevin will talk about the research being done on 28 Potlatch River Hike – Bill Warren pronghorn antelope in Yellowstone National Park. He will discuss some of the concerns for the population as well as his experience capturing MAY fawns for tagging and monitoring.
    [Show full text]
  • 2009/2010 Yakama Nation Pacific Lamprey Entosphenus Tridentatus
    Document ID #P120281 Yakama Nation Pacific Lamprey Entosphenus tridentatus Restoration Project 2009 Annual Progress Report Performance Period March 1, 2009 – February 28, 2010 Project No. 2008-470-00 Contract No. 46830 CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND BANDS OF THE YAKAMA NATION Prepared for: U. S. Department of Energy Bonneville Power Administration Environment, Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208 Prepared by: Patrick Luke, Fisheries Biologist Yakama Nation Fisheries Resource Management Program 4 Bickleton Hwy. Goldendale, Washington 98620, USA 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS ………………………………………………………………………………………………………Page Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………........................2 Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………….………...3 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................5 Section I: Phase I - Initiating cooperative relationships to gather historical, implemention- Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), current status of lamprey in the South-central, Washington……………………………………………………………...………….……….6 Cultural Significance…………………………………………………………….………….8 Methods…………………………………………………………………………….……….10 Results and Recommendations…………………………………………………….……....11 Discussion…………………………………………………………………………………...12 Section II: Distribution and status of the Pacific lampreys (Entosphenus tridentatus), River lamprey (Lampetra ayresi) and Western brook lamprey (Lampetra richardsoni) in the Klickitat River sub-basin…..................................................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • Lesson 1 the Columbia River, a River of Power
    Lesson 1 The Columbia River, a River of Power Overview RIVER OF POWER BIG IDEA: The Columbia River System was initially changed and engineered for human benefit Disciplinary Core Ideas in the 20th Century, but now balance is being sought between human needs and restoration of habitat. Science 4-ESS3-1 – Obtain and combine Lesson 1 introduces students to the River of Power information to describe that energy curriculum unit and the main ideas that they will investigate and fuels are derived from natural resources and their uses affect the during the eleven lessons that make up the unit. This lesson environment. (Clarification Statement: focuses students on the topics of the Columbia River, dams, Examples of renewable energy and stakeholders. Through an initial brain storming session resources could include wind energy, students record and share their current understanding of the water behind dams, and sunlight; main ideas of the unit. This serves as a pre-unit assessment nonrenewable energy resources are fossil fuels and fissile materials. of their understanding and an opportunity to identify student Examples of environmental effects misconceptions. Students are also introduced to the main could include loss of habitat to dams, ideas of the unit by viewing the DVD selection Rivers to loss of habitat from surface mining, Power. Their understanding of the Columbia River and the and air pollution from burning of fossil fuels.) stakeholders who depend on the river is deepened through the initial reading selection in the student book Voyage to the Social Studies Pacific. Economics 2.4.1 Understands how geography, natural resources, Students set up their science notebook, which they will climate, and available labor use to record ideas and observations throughout the unit.
    [Show full text]
  • Snake River 1157 Wildlife Habitat Information to Inform the Plan- Ton, and Northeast Oregon
    Snake River 1157 wildlife habitat information to inform the plan- ton, and northeast Oregon. +roughout its long ning decisions for renewable energy. history, volcanoes, flooding, and glaciers have Climate change impacts may be felt in the arid shaped the river and its shores. region; nitrogen deposits, atmospheric carbon +e Snake River plain was created by a volca- dioxide, and other changes will impact the grass- nic hotspot beneath Yellowstone National Park, lands. Climate change may impact the size of the which holds the headwaters and origin of the river. sagebrush areas, for example, which in turn con- Flooding as the glaciers retreated after the ice age stricts grouse and other birds and mammals liv- created the current landscape, including eroded ing in these habitats. canyons and valleys. Mountains and plains are typical terrain along the river. +e Snake River has P J. C more than 20 major tributaries, most of them in the mountains; Hells Canyon is the deepest river Further Reading gorge in North America. Cutright, Paul Russell. Lewis and Clark: Pioneering +e Snake River is home to salmon and steel- Naturalists . Lincoln: University of Nebraska head, which were central to the lives of the Nez Press, 2003. Perce and Shoshone, the dominant tribal nations Petersen, Keith C. River of Life, Channel of Death: before the Europeans came. People have lived Fish and Dams on the Lower Snake . Corvallis: along the Snake River for over 15,000 years. +e Oregon State University Press, 2001. Snake River may have been given its name by the Waring, Gwendolyn. L. A Natural History of Shoshones, as a hand signal made by the Shosho- the Intermountain West: Its Ecological and nes representing fish was misinterpreted by Euro- Evolutionary Story.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Snake River Canyon Indicated by Revised Stratigraphy of Snake River Group Near Hagerman and King Hill, Idaho
    History of Snake River Canyon Indicated by Revised Stratigraphy of Snake River Group Near Hagerman and King Hill, Idaho GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 644-F History of Snake River Canyon Indicated by Revised Stratigraphy of Snake River Group Near Hagerman and King Hill, Idaho By HAROLD E. MALDE With a section on PALEOMAGNETISM By ALLAN COX SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 644-F Lavaflows and river deposits contemporaneous with entrenchment of the Snake River canyon indicate drainage changes that provide a basis for improved understanding of the late Pleistocene history UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1971 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. A. Radlinski, Acting Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 72-171031 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 40 cents (paper cover) Stock Number 2401-1128 CONTENTS Page page Abstract ___________________________________________ Fl Late Pleistocene history of Snake River_ _ F9 Introduction.______________________________________ 2 Predecessors of Sand Springs Basalt. 13 Acknowledgments --..______-__-____--__-_---__-_____ 2 Wendell Grade Basalt-________ 14 Age of the McKinney and Wendell Grade Basalts. _____ 2 McKinney Basalt. ____---__---__ 16 Correlation of lava previously called Bancroft Springs Bonneville Flood.________________ 18 Basalt_________________________________________ Conclusion___________________________ 19 Equivalence of pillow lava near Bliss to McKinney Paleomagnetism, by Allan Cox_________ 19 Basalt.._________________________ References cited._____________________ 20 ILLUSTRATIONS Page FIGURE 1. Index map of Idaho showing area discussed.______________________________________________________ F2 2. Chart showing stratigraphy of Snake River Group..____________________________._____--___-_-_-_-.
    [Show full text]
  • Clearwater Rapid Watershed Assessment
    Clearwater - 17060306 Idaho 8 Digit Hydrologic Unit Profile December 2006 Tensed Farmington Clearwater - 17060306 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit LATAHLATAH Location Map Potlatch Bovill WHITMAN WHITMAN Deary (Washington) (Washington) Elk River Troy Moscow CLEARWATERCLEARWATER Kendrick Juliaetta Genesee Pierce Clearwater Peck Orofino Clarkston 17060306 Lapwai Culdesac Weippe Lewiston Asotin Reubens LEWISLEWIS Kamiah Craigmont Winchester Nezperce Kooskia Ferdinand NEZNEZ Stites PERCEPERCE Cottonwood !COEUR d ALENE MOSCOW! IDAHOIDAHO Grangeville LEWISTON! !REXBURG CALDWELL! !BOISE NAMPA! !IDAHO FALLS : BLACKFOOT ! !POCATELLO 0 5 10 15 20 25 TWIN! FALLS Miles The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and 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 326W, Whitten Building, 14 th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 1 Clearwater - 17060306 Idaho 8 Digit Hydrologic Unit Profile December 2006 Introduction The Clearwater 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) subbasin is 1,503,992 acres. Clearwater and Nez Perce counties each account for approximately 24 percent of the subbasin. Twenty two percent of the subbasin is in Latah County, 18 percent in Lewis County, 13 percent in Idaho County and less than 0.5% in Whitman County, Washington.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Plan Amendment No. 30 Clearwater National Forest Latah
    Forest Plan AmendmentNo. 30 Clearwater National Forest Latah County, Idaho The purpose of Amendment No. 30 is to changethe water quality objectives in Appendix K of the Clearwater National Forest Plan for Little Boulder Creek, East Fork Potlatch River, and Ruby Creek, plus, add the Potlatch River. Currently the water quality objective for Little Boulder, East Fork Potlatch and Ruby Creek is "Minimum viable" and the fish speciesis listed as rainbow. Minimum Viable does not support the requirements of the Clean Water Act to provide fishable streams. It only provides a minimal population and does not reflect the listing of the species or importance of the area for spawning. Surveys have documented steelhead in Little Boulder, East Fork Potlatph Riyer, and Ruby Creek. Steelheadwas listed as a Threatened Species within the Snake River in 1997. The Potlatch River, a migratory channel for steelhead,had only been listed in Appendix K as a placeholder to indicate the watershed geography. Stream surveys have shown the river to have a C channel and steelheadas the fish species. Spawning occurs in the East Fork Potlatch, and rearing occurs in most of the tributaries of the Potlatch River. Since the Potlatch River is proposed as critical habitat for steelhead,the water quality objective is being changed from "Minimum Viable" to "High Fish" to follow the direction of the Clean Water Act and Endangered SpeciesAct. Also, as part of the high fish standard, threshold levels of sediment for the Potlatch River should not exceed 10 out of 30 years. Since the proposed changes are not significant, adoption of this amendmentwould not significantly change the forest-wide environmental impacts disclosed in the Clearwater National Forest Plan EIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Tribal Pacific Lamprey Restoration Plan
    Tribal Pacific Lamprey Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Restorationfor the Columbia River Plan Basin Commission December 19, 2011 Nez Perce · Umatilla · Yakama · Warm Springs Acknowledgements This Tribal Pacific Lamprey Restoration Plan for the Columbia River Basin (Plan) is a product of the efforts of many tribal and non-tribal biologists, policy representatives, and independent scientists throughout the Pacific Northwest. The tribes acknowledge the collective contributions of many that offered their time and expertise to improve this tribal plan. In particular, we thank Casey Justice and Starla Roels for their extensive review of the Plan. The Plan addresses many regional comments on the draft tribal lamprey restoration plan from tribes, public utilities, federal, state and county agencies, independent scientists and the general public. These comments have greatly improved this Plan. This Plan is a living document that will be periodically updated as new information becomes available through adaptive management practices. Figure 1. Pacific lamprey spawning in an Idaho tributary. Tribal Pacific Lamprey Restoration Plan for the Columbia River Basin i Executive Summary The Creator told the people that the eels would always return as long as the people took care of them, but if the people failed to take care of them, they would disappear. —Ron Suppah, Vice Chair, Warm Springs Tribes Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) Pacific lamprey are just as important to abundance and distribution in the tribal peoples as salmon. For over 10,000 Columbia River basin and throughout years the people of the Nez Perce, the Pacific Northwest is declining Umatilla, Yakama and Warm Springs precipitously, bringing the species tribes depended on lamprey (commonly dangerously close to regional extinction.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Snake River Dams Stakeholder Engagement Report
    Lower Snake River Dams Stakeholder Engagement Report FINAL DRAFT March 6, 2020 Prepared by: Kramer Consulting Ross Strategic White Bluffs Consulting Contents Executive Summary .......................................................... 1 Opportunities to Increase Understanding .................................... 52 Background and Context ............................................................... 2 Public Comments Related to Agriculture ..................................... 52 Major Findings and Perspectives ................................................... 3 Section 7: Transportation .............................................. 53 Opportunities to Increase Understanding .................................... 12 Context ........................................................................................ 53 Moving Forward ........................................................................... 13 Perspectives ................................................................................ 60 Section 1: Purpose and Scope of Report ..................... 15 Opportunities to Increase Understanding .................................... 62 Background .................................................................................. 15 Public Comments Related to Transportation............................... 62 The Intent of the Report and Engagement Process .................... 15 Section 8: Recreation ..................................................... 64 Methodology................................................................................
    [Show full text]