DOCSLIB.ORG

Late Pleistocene Sediments and Fossils Near the Mouth of Mad River, Humboldt County, California: Facies Analysis, Sequence Development, and Possible Age Correlation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Late Pleistocene Sediments and Fossils Near the Mouth of Mad River, Humboldt County, California: Facies Analysis, Sequence Development, and Possible Age Correlation LATE PLEISTOCENE SEDIMENTS AND FOSSILS NEAR THE MOUTH OF MAD RIVER, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, CALIFORNIA: FACIES ANALYSIS, SEQUENCE DEVELOPMENT, AND POSSIBLE AGE CORRELATION by Erik W. Harvey A Thesis Presented to The faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Master of Science July, 1994 LATE PLEISTOCENE SEDIMENTS AND FOSSILS NEAR THE MOUTH OF MAD RIVER, HUMBOLDT COUNTY, CALIFORNIA: FACIES ANALYSIS, SEQUENCE DEVELOPMENT, AND POSSIBLE AGE CORRELATION by Erik W. Harvey APPROVED BY THE MASTER'S THESIS COMMITTEE William C. Miller, III Raymond M. Burke Kenneth R. Aalto APPROVED BY THE DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES iii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF ILLUSTRATIONS v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS viii ABSTRACT ix INTRODUCTION 1 General 1 Purpose of Study 1 Previous Work 4 Geologic Setting 8 Area of Study 9 SEDIMENTOLOGY 10 Facies Names 10 Methods 10 Field 10 Laboratory 12 PALEONTOLOGY 15 Methods 15 Field 15 Laboratory 15 STRATIGRAPHY 20 General 20 Underlying Unit 20 Overlying Unit 22 Mouth of Mad unit 22 Estuarine Mud 22 Nearshore Sand 22 Nearshore Sand and Gravel 25 Strand-Plain Sand 27 Bay fades 27 Bioturbated Sand 31 Lower Tidal Flat Mud 31 Mixed Sand and Mud 31 Bay Mud 33 Upper Tidal Flat Mud 36 iv DISCUSSION 38 Depositional Environments 38 Estuarine Mud 38 Nearshore Sand 39 Nearshore Sand and Gravel 40 Strand-Plain Sand 42 Bay 43 Bioturbated Sand 43 Lower Tidal Flat Mud 43 Mixed Sand and Mud 44 Bay Mud 44 Upper Tidal Flat Mud 45 Summary 45 Depositional Sequence 46 Age of Pleistocene Deposits 50 Elk Head 50 Trinidad Head 52 Moonstone Beach 53 Crannell Junction 54 Falor Formation 55 Mouth of Mad unit 55 Correlation 56 CONCLUSIONS 58 APPENDIX A: Sediment Sample Data 60 APPENDIX B: Fossil Sample Data 67 REFRENCES CITED 71 V TABLE OF ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURES Figure 1. Map showing location of studied Pleistocene fossil deposits (EH=Elk Head, TH=Trinidad Head, MB=Moonstone Beach, CJ=Crannell Junction, MOM= Mouth of Mad unit, SRG=School Road gravel, F=Outcrops of Falor Formation). 2 Figure 2. Map showing location of Mouth of Mad unit (MOM) and the School Road gravel (SRG) 3 Figure 3. Composite stratigraphic column for the sediments exposed at the Mouth of Mad river, showing the Mouth of Mad unit and portions of overlying marine terrace and underlying unit. Also shown is variation of Bay facies between northern (N) and southern (S) areas of the exposure. Lower unit contact used as datum because it provides a stable reference level for measurement. Column is incomplete because thickness of overlying and underlying units could not be measured completely (UTFM=Upper Tidal Flat Mud, LTFM= Lower Tidal Flat Mud). 11 Figure 4. In situ tree roots in paleosol below lower unconformity. Hand lens in photograph is 32 mm long. 21 Figure 5. Tresus sp. in living position in the Estuarine Mud fades, just above lower unconfomity. 23 Figure 6. Trough cross-beds in the Nearshore Sand facies. Pebble stringer marks lower boundary of one set. Approximately 10 m above top of Estuarine Mud facies. 24 Figure 7. Fossiliferous sand lens in the Nearshore Sand fades conaining the clam Macoma nasuta and the gastropod Nassarius mendicus. Approximately 6 m above top of Estuarine Mud facies. 26 Figure 8. Gravel lenses in the Nearshore Sand and Gravel facies (A). Marine terrace deposits are also visible (B). Upper surface is top of bluff. Lenses are approximately 3 m above top of Nearshore Sand facies. 28 vi Figure 9. Tabular gravel beds in the Nearshore Sand and Gravel facies. Also visible is the Strand-Plain Sand facies. Lowest bed is approximately 2 m above top of Nearshore Sand facies. 29 Figure 10. Lower boundary of gravel bed in Nearshore Sand and Gravel facies indicating scour-and-fill processes. The bedding in the underlying sand is truncated. Large pebbles above the boundary suggest reworking by a later storm event. Approximately 3 m above lower contact of unit. 30 Figure 11. Abrupt contact between the Bioturbated Sand and Lower Tidal Flat Mud subfacies. 32 Figure 12. Mixed Sand and Mud subfacies, showing mixture of sandy and muddy sediments. Fossils include Tresus sp. and Ostrea lurida. 34 Figure 13. Tresus sp. in living position near the upper contact of the Bay Mud subfacies with the Upper Tidal Flat Mud subfacies. Smaller fossils in the surrounding matrix include Ostrea lurida and Balanus sp. 35 Figure 14. Upper Tidal Flat Mud subfacies showing contact with subjacent Bay Mud subfacies. Contact is just below handlens 37 Figure 15. Paleogegraphic reconstruction of depositonal environments at the mouth of Mad River locality at the time of deposition of the Bay facies. Size of the bay and location of the inlet are arbitrary. 47 Figure 16. Correlation chart of pre-terrace Pleistocene units and marine terrace deposits in northern coastal Humboldt County, California. Age estimates for lightly stipled units are very tentative. Isotope stages are based on Chappel and Shackelton (1986). (Age data mostly from: Wehmiller et al., 1977; Wehmiller, Lajoie et al., 1977; Kennedy, 1978; Carver, 1987; Carver and Burke, 1992). 51 TABLES Table 1. Summary descriptions of facies within the Mouth of Mad unit (Fig. 3). 13 Table 2. Fossils from the Bioturbated Sand subfacies 17 Table 3. Fossils from the Mixed Sand and Mud subfacies 18 Table 4. Fossils from the Bay Mud subfacies 19 vii PLATES Plate 1. Panel diagram of the exposure of Pleistocene beds at the mouth of the Mad River as it apperaed in April, 1993. View is from sand spit 15 m west of bluffs. (In Pocket) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. William C. Miller, III, for his help and guidance in the research and preparation of this thesis. I would also like to thank the other members of my committee, Dr. Raymond M. "Bud" Burke and Dr. Kenneth R. Aalto, for their helpful suggestions and for reviewing this thesis. Dr. Gary A. Carver was also of great assistance with sea level curve interpretations. The library of Humboldt State University provided the reference materials so necessary in the research of this thesis. The Department of Geology provided the necessary materials and laboratory space. I also wish to thank my fellow graduate students, and the faculty and staff of the Department of Geology for their support. I especially extend thanks to Eileen M. Weppner for her willingness to listen and her understanding. I would like to sincerely thank my family for their constant encouragement, especially my parents Michael and Margo Harvey, to whom this thesis is dedicated. Finally a special thanks goes to my wife Kelly Decker, without whose support this thesis would not have been possible. To all -- many thanks. viii ABSTRACT Study of late Pleistocene sediments near the mouth of the Mad River revealed a sequence of nearshore marine and shallow bay deposits. This sequence, bounded by unconformities, is informally named the Mouth of Mad unit. The Mouth of Mad unit can be divided into four distinct depositional facies at the study site. The lowest facies are the Nearshore Sand and Estuarine Mud, which lie unconformably on a paleosol. The sand facies grades upward into a high-energy, interbedded Nearshore Sand and Gravel facies containing storm and rip-channel deposits. Above the sand and gravel is a Strand- Plain Sand facies. This sand is overlain by a laterally variable sequence of shell-rich Bay facies. The bay deposits can be further divided into five subfacies: 1) a Bioturbated Sand; 2) a Lower Tidal Flat Mud; 3) a Mixed Sand and Mud; 4) an oyster-rich Bay Mud; and 5) an Upper Tidal Flat Mud. The bay sequence is overlain unconformably by younger late Pleistocene marine terrace deposits. The depositional environments represented by these facies progress from a shoreline estuary to nearshore deposits, above storm wave base, and slowly back to shoreline, and finally to shallow bay conditions. The Mouth of Mad unit represents a transgressive-regressive sequence, involving the development of a protective spit. The uppermost mud within the Mouth of Mad unit has been dated, using thermoluminesence age estimation, at 176 ± 33 ka, placing it in the late Pleistocene. Amino acid racemization dating, fossil evidence, and the thermoluminesence date can be used to establish a tentative correlation between the Mouth of Mad unit and other nearby Pleistocene fossil-bearing deposits. The Mouth of Mad unit appears to be younger than the fossiliferous deposits at Elk Head, Crannell Junction, Trinidad Head, Moonstone Beach, and the Falor Formation near Maple Creek, and possibly time equivalent with gravel deposits exposed at the western end of School Road in McKinleyville. ix INTRODUCTION General Northward migration of the Mouth of the Mad River has produced extensive exposure of marine sediments along the western margin of Dows Prairie, coastal Humboldt County (Figs. 1 and 2). Included in this exposure is an unconformity- bounded unit consisting of Pleistocene marine and estuarine deposits. Since it was first described by Miller and Morrison (1988), the exposure of these deposits has improved revealing a complex sequence of depositional facies. This unit was informally named the Mouth of Mad unit (Harvey and Weppner, 1992a). An informal name was used because the Mouth of Mad unit is known only from this exposure. Five distinct depositional facies can be delineated within the Mouth of Mad unit based on sedimentologic and paleontologic properties. These facies represent nearshore marine and shallow bay environments. Abundant fossils, primarily mollusks, are present only in the upper and lower facies. Continued erosion by the Mad River threatens to eliminate this exposure, making the documentation and interpretation of the unit important. Exposure reduction and destruction of important deposits have already occurred.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Birds of the Mad River Ranger District, Six Rivers National Forest, California
    WESTEt BIRDS Volume 29, Number 2, 1998 BIRDS OF THE MAD RIVER RANGER DISTRICT, SIX RIVERS NATIONAL FOREST, CALIFORNIA JOHN E. HUNTER, USDA Forest Service, Six Rivers National Forest, 1330 BayshoreWay, Eureka,California 95501 GJON C. HAZARD, Department of Wildlife, HumboldtState University,Arcata, California 95521 The Mad River RangerDistrict (MRRD) of the Six RiversNational Forest (SRNF)is locatedin northwesternCalifornia (Figure 1). We compileddata on the statusand distribution of the birdsof thisarea for threeprimary reasons. First,except for collectingtrips to SouthFork Mountain and nearby areas in the 1930s (Grinnelland Miller 1944), thisarea hasbeen littlestudied (Harris 1996). Whilethe MRRD wasincluded by Harris(1991, 1996), we soughtto providemore detailed information for a uniquearea. Second, we hopedto provideresource managers and otherswith localstatus and distribution data. Much of our data has been gleanedfrom obscuresources not generally accessibleto mostworkers. While more detailed distribution and life history dataare neededfor mostspecies, this report can serve as a startingpoint for furthermanagement considerations and research.Third, while the MRRD containsseveral noteworthy birding areas in Humboldt(e.g., Mount Lassic and BlakeMountain) and Trinity(e.g., RuthLake, HettenshawValley, and Ant Point)counties, the isolationof thisarea relativeto populationcenters hasresulted in relativelylittle recreational birdwatching to date.We hopethis report will stimulateothers to explorethe MRRD and other portionsof interior northwestern
    [Show full text]
  • The Legacy of the Log Boom Humboldt County Logging from 1945 to 1955 Logging in Humboldt County in Northwestern California Began in 1850
    Paul G. Wilson The Legacy of the Log Boom Humboldt County Logging from 1945 to 1955 Logging in Humboldt County in northwestern California began in 1850. When settlers first saw the giant old growth coast redwoods in Humboldt County they were in awe of them. These trees had diameters up to 30 feet and heights up to almost 400 feet. Old growth redwood trees are the oldest living things on earth; they can live about two thousand years. The settlers of Humboldt County had a respect for the redwoods; however, the settlers saw an immediate profit to be made. Old growth redwood lumber was used to build houses, railroad ties, shingle bolts, fence posts, and grape stakes.1 Redwood timberland in Humboldt County was located near the coast and extended twenty-five miles inland. The mills that cut the redwood logs into dimension sized lumber were located on the shores of Humbolt Bay. Humboldt Bay was a safe place for ocean vessels to pick up loads of redwood lumber to be sent to San Francisco Bay. Lumber vessels were often overloaded with redwood lumber. Because the vessels were piled with lumber, the vessels were believed to be unsinkable.2 Redwood lumber was sent all over the world for its preference in woodworking. In 1878 the United States government passed the Timber and Stone Act which allowed loggers to buy 160 acres of timberland for $2.50 per acre as long as the loggers "improved" the land through logging and ranching. Loggers acquired thousands of acres of redwood land and often formed partnerships to begin lumber companies.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Status Review of Eulachon and Pacific Lamprey in the Klamath River Basin
    A preliminary status review of eulachon and Pacific lamprey in the Klamath River Basin Yurok Tribal Fisheries Program 159OO Hwy 101 N Klamath CA 95548 Zachary S. Larson Michael R. Belchik April I998 INTRODUCTION Eulachon (Thaleicthys pacificus) and Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) are two species of anadromous fish found throughout the northwestern United States and western Canada that have received little attention relative to salmonid species. Consequently, with few exceptions, very little is known of their status or population trends. Eulachon are one of several species of smelts (Osmeridae) that occur off the coast of California. Their spawning migration takes them further into freshwater inlets than any other smelt within their range. They are prized by many tribes of the Pacific Northwest for their taste, and have been tied to tribal culture for centuries. Pacific lamprey are also harvested and considered a delicacy by tribes of the Pacific Northwest; however, lamprey migrate further up rivers and tributaries to spawn than do eulachon, often utilizing habitat hundreds of miles inland from the ocean (Scott and Crossman 1973). On the Klamath River of northwest California (Fig. l), eulachon and Pacific lamprey are of great importance to the Yurok Tribe but runs have diminished in the past few decades and no efforts have been made to determine factors contributing to apparent declines. Eulachon have apparently disappeared in the Klamath River and other nearby coastal drainages -- only a handful of fish have been witnessed since 1988 (CDFG unpublished data 1988-89, YTFP 1998). Pacific lamprey have exhibited a more gradual decline but little quantitative evidence is available.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 Cultural Resources
    6 Cultural Resources Cultural resources are remains and sites associated with human activities, including Native American archaeological sites (both prehistoric remains and sites occupied after European arrival), historic buildings and archaeological sites, and natural landscape elements with traditional cultural significance (including areas of economic and religious significance).1 This chapter provides background on Native American settlements in Humboldt County and summarizes both historic and prehistoric cultural resources in the county. It also includes a summary of existing General Plan policies. Because no planning issues for cultural resources were identified in Phase I, no policy options are presented; however, as part of the Phase II community workshops, suggestions for modifications of existing policies may emerge. 6.1 NATIVE AMERICAN AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES Before European settlement, the Humboldt County area was one of the most culturally diverse regions of California, being home to nearly a dozen distinct peoples. In large part, Native American tribes occupied distinct areas conforming largely to the natural watershed basins (see Table 6-1). The majority of tribes were Athabascan speakers and hill people who built permanent homes along rivers; the Yurok and Wiyot spoke Algonquian languages and settled along both coasts and rivers; the Karok were Hokan-speaking and lived in mountainous territory. Table 6-1: Native American Tribes and Areas of Settlement in Humboldt County Population at First Tribe Linguistic Affiliation Watershed and Principal Settlements European Contact Yurok Algonquian Lower Redwood, lower Klamath 3,100 Karok Hokan Upper Klamath 2,700 Hoopa Athabascan Trinity (including Hoopa Valley) 1,000 Chilula Athabascan Middle Redwood 600 Whilkut Athabascan Upper Redwood, lower Mad 2,600 Wiyot Algonquian Humboldt Bay coast 3,200 Nongatl Athabascan Van Duzen, upper Mad No data Lassik Athabascan Eel No data Sinkyone Athabascan South Fork Eel 2,100 Mattole Athabascan Mattole 1,200 Sources: Sonia Tamez, 1978; Winzler and Kelly, 1977.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Right-Of-Way Analysis – Part 1 (Streamline Planning 2014)
    PRELIMINARY SURVEYING ANALYSIS OF RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY Arcata & Mad River Railroad Co. Arcata to Blue Lake January 28, 2014 Prepared for Humboldt County Association of Governments and Humboldt County Public Works Department Prepared by Streamline Planning Consultants 1062 G Street, Suite I Arcata, CA 95521 Tel: (707) 822-5785 Fax: (707) 822-5786 Preliminary Right-of-Way Surveying Analysis Page 2 Arcata & Mad River Railroad Co. January 28, 2014 Arcata to Blue Lake CONTENTS 1.0 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE .................................................................................... 3 2.0 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Deed Inventory................................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Mapping Methodology....................................................................................................5 2.3 History of Deed Acquisition ........................................................................................... 5 2.4 Annotated Timeline of Major Events ............................................................................. 7 2.5 Detailed Discussion........................................................................................................ 8 3.0 NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS..................................................................................... 12 4.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Korbel Sawmill Report Susie Van Kirk
    Humboldt State University Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University Susie Van Kirk Papers Special Collections 11-2015 Korbel Sawmill Report Susie Van Kirk Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/svk Part of the Forest Management Commons, Historic Preservation and Conservation Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Van Kirk, Susie, "Korbel Sawmill Report" (2015). Susie Van Kirk Papers. 4. https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/svk/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Special Collections at Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Susie Van Kirk Papers by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Humboldt State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. KORBEL SAWMILL Historic Resources Report Humboldt State University Library photo coll. 2636. Photo c. 1950. Prepared for: Roscoe and Associates Cultural Resources Consultants 2781 Brookwood Drive Bayside, CA 95524 Prepared by: Susie Van Kirk Historic Resources Consultant PO Box 568 Bayside, CA 95524 707-822-6066 [email protected] November 2015 Table of Contents Introduction Findings Methods Setting Early History Introduction The California Redwood Company (Green Diamond Resource Company/Simpson Timber Company) closed its Korbel mill February 2015. Decommissioning plans include removal of equipment for auction which requires partial dismantling of the sawmill. At some later date, the sawmill will be totally demolished. To comply with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15064.5, “Determining the Significance of Impacts to Archaeological and Historical Resources,” a Historic Resources Report was prepared. The report includes historic background information on the mill site, assessment of the sawmill using CEQA criteria, and a determination of significance.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern California Steelhead
    Northern California steelhead Overall vulnerability—Moderate (94% Moderate, 6% High) Biological sensitivity—Moderate (94% Moderate, 6% High) Climate exposure—High (100% High) Adaptive capacity—High (2.4) Data quality—58% of scores ≥ 2 Life History Synopsis Northern California Coast steelhead adults exhibit both summer- and winter-run migration timing. In larger watersheds such as the Mad and Eel River, freshwater entry for winter-run fish can occur as early as September or October, whereas in smaller watersheds (some subject to bar formation), entry typically begins in December and continues into April or May (Busby et al. 1996). Neither flow nor temperature is generally problematic for winter-run adults. Summer-run populations migrate primarily from April to June or July (Moyle et al. 2008). Migration distances range from a few kilometers in systems such as Redwood Creek to more than 250 km in the Middle Fork Eel River, and distances were even longer prior to dam S3-117 construction. Summer-run adults depend on cold-water refuges that often occur at tributary junctions or in thermally stratified pools (Nielsen et al. 1994, Moyle et al. 2008). Age at maturity varies considerably within and among populations of Northern California steelhead. The predominate life history of winter-run spawners includes 2 years in fresh water and 1-2 years at sea; however, fish may spend anywhere from 1-3 years in fresh water and up to 3 years at sea (Busby et al. 1996). Additionally, adults may survive to spawn a second or third time. Progeny of summer-run adults remain in fresh water 1-3 years, with 2 years being most common, and spend 1-3 years at sea, with 1-2 years being most common.
    [Show full text]
  • Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District Habitat Conservation Plan for Its
    Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District Habitat Conservation Plan For Its Mad River Operations Final Approved HCP – April 2004 Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District Habitat Conservation Plan for its Mad River Activities Prepared By: Trinity Associates and the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District Final Approved HCP – April 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………..i List of Tables………..…………………………………………………………..ii List of Figures……..…………………………………………………………….ii Executive Summary ……………………………………………………………………iii 1. Introduction …………………………………………………………………………..1 2. The HCP Boundaries………………………………………………………………….4 3. The Environmental Setting……………………………………………………………7 4. Species Covered in this HCP…………………………………………………………10 5. The District’s Covered Activities…………………………………………....………12 6. Impacts from the District’s Covered Activities……………….……………………..13 7. Quantifying Impacts from the District’s Covered Activities..….……………………20 8. Mitigation Measures and Monitoring……………….……………………………..... 23 8.1 Mitigation for Operation of Direct Diversion Facility………………………29 8.2 Monitoring Program ………………………………………………………..31 8.2.a) Monitoring associated with Flow Release and Bypass Activities…...31 8.2.b) Monitoring associated with Direct Diversion Facility, Station 6..…..32 Phase 1 Monitoring ..……………………………………………35 Phase 2 Monitoring…..………………………………………….42 Phase 3 Monitoring..…………………………………………….44 9. Annual Reporting …………………………………………………………………….46 10. Analysis of Alternatives to the District’s Activities………………………..…….…46 11. Adaptive Management and
    [Show full text]
  • Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex Planning Update #1—Winter 2007
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex Planning Update #1—Winter 2007 Humboldt Bay NWR Greetings from the Refuge Manager Complex Overview The Humboldt Bay National Wildlife the beginning of the planning process and Refuge Complex is about to embark information about attending our public Humboldt Bay National Wildlife on an important two-year process to scoping meetings. Refuge (NWR) Complex, develop a Comprehensive Conservation which includes Plan (CCP) for the Refuge Complex. We will Humboldt Bay This CCP will help guide overall refuge frequently National management for the next 15 years. refer to Wildlife Your ideas and comments will be an aspects Refuge important part of the process, so I’d like of the (HBNWR) to invite you to participate by providing background and Castle your suggestions for refuge complex materials Rock National management. provided Wildlife Refuge Aleutian in this Photo © Jamie Bettaso (CRNWR), is located cackling goose Before we begin the process, I’d like to planning Red-legged frog on the northwest provide background information about update California coast. In 1971 the HBNWR was the Refuges’ history, operation, and goals. throughout the CCP process. established to conserve coastal habitats You’ll also find some information about Understanding the planning process will for a great diversity of animals and plants, the National Wildlife Refuge System help all of us start on the same page when especially migratory birds. In later years and how comprehensive conservation we begin our public scoping meetings. the refuge added the Lanphere and Ma- planning fits le’l Dunes Units, to help conserve the most into the overall Please contact me or David Bergendorf pristine remaining dune ecosystem on the picture of refuge if you have any questions.
    [Show full text]
  • THE EEL RIVER ACTION PLAN Beneficial Uses
    Eel River Forum The mission of the Eel River Forum is to coordinate and integrate conservation and recovery efforts in the Eel River watershed to conserve its ecological resilience, restore its native fish populations, and protect other watershed THE EEL RIVER ACTION PLAN beneficial uses. These actions are also intended to enhance the economic vitality and A COMPILATION OF INFORMATION sustainability of human communities in the Eel River AND RECOMMENDED ACTIONS basin. PREPARED FOR Charter Members THE EEL RIVER FORUM California Trout CA Department of Fish and Wildlife PREPARED BY CA State Parks Coastal Conservancy EEL RIVER FORUM MEMBERS Eel River Recovery Project Eel River Watershed Improvement Group FINAL REPORT Environmental Protection Information Center MAY 2016 Friends of the Eel River Friends of the Van Duzen River Humboldt County Resource Conservation District Mendocino County Resource Conservation District National Marine Fisheries Service North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Pacific Gas and Electric Company Potter Valley Irrigation District Round Valley Indian Tribe Salmonid Restoration Federation Sonoma County Water Agency US Bureau of Land Management US Fish and Wildlife Service US Forest Service Wiyot Tribe Some Text Here. EEL RIVER ACTION PLAN FINAL REPORT 2016 2 | P a g e EEL RIVER ACTION PLAN FINAL REPORT 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 6 1: INTRODUCTION: THE EEL RIVER AND THE EEL RIVER
    [Show full text]
  • Wiyot Tribe Pacific Lamprey Adaptive Management Plan Framework
    ◦ FEBRUARY 2016 Wiyot Tribe Pacific Lamprey Adaptive Management Plan Framework PREPARED FOR PREPARED BY U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wiyot Tribe Natural Resources Tribal Wildlife Grant Program Department and Stillwater Sciences Wiyot Tribe Pacific Lamprey Adaptive Management Plan Suggested citation: Wiyot Tribe Natural Resources Department and Stillwater Sciences. 2016. Wiyot Tribe Pacific Lamprey adaptive management plan framework. Prepared by Wiyot Tribe Natural Resources Department, Table Bluff Reservation, Loleta, California and Stillwater Sciences, Arcata, California for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, California. Cover photo: Gou’daw (Pacific lamprey) prepared in traditional Wiyot manner on redwood stake (photo by Vincent DiMarzo) February 2016 Wiyot Tribe with Stillwater Sciences i Wiyot Tribe Pacific Lamprey Adaptive Management Plan Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background .................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Purpose and overview of plan ...................................................................................... 2 1.3 Management and Population Goals ............................................................................. 2 1.4 Geographical reach of plan .......................................................................................... 3 2 POPULATION STRUCTURE AND GENETICS ..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Taylor, S. N. 1978
    THE STATUS OF SALMON POPULATIONS IN CALIFORNIA COASTAL RIVERS Steven N. Taylor 1/ INTRODUCTION This report presents a discussion of salmon populations in California coastal rivers. The primary source of information for this discussion is the "California Fish and Wildlife Plan", (the"Plan") published in 1965 by the California Department of Fish and Game. King salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)---- and silver salmon (0. kisutch) are the only salmons which enter California rivers in significant numbers. The coastal rivers in 1965 supported estimated spawning populations of 256,200 king salmon and 99,400 silver salmon. HISTORY OF SALMON SPAWNING ESCAPEMENTS Klamath River System ______General The Klamath River is the largest coastal California river, the discharge near the mouth (near Klamath , California) averaging 12.9 million acre-feet/year. Approximately 10% of the runoff results from the part of the drainage in Oregon. The Klamath system supports approximately 66% of the king salmon, and 15% of the silver salmon spawning in California coastal rivers (Table 1). Most of the Klamath River drainage is in National Forest holdings. Tour major tributaries contribute to the system: the Shasta, Trinity, Scott, and Salmon Rivers. Considerations or problems unique to each of these major tributaries or to the upper main stem of the upper Klamath are discussed under the respective separate headings. _____________________ 1/ Associate Fishery Biologist Salmon/Steelhead Program, Anadromous Fisheries Branch. April 1978 TABLE 1. AVERAGE ANNUAL SALMON AND
    [Show full text]