Current Status and Dam Operation Effects for Mainstem Spawning Fall

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Current Status and Dam Operation Effects for Mainstem Spawning Fall Current status and dam operation effects for mainstem spawning fall Chinook salmon in the lower McNary Dam tailwaters, upper John Day reservoir, and John Day Dam tailwaters. Annual Report (October 1, 2010 – September 30, 2011) Joseph J. Skalicky Donald R. Anglin U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Columbia River Fisheries Program Office 1211 SE Cardinal Court, Suite 100 Vancouver WA, 98683 Prepared for: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Walla Walla District 201 North 3rd Avenue Walla Walla, WA 99362 MIPR Contract Number: W66QKZ03083705 Study Code ADS - 10 - 1 April 30, 2012 Summary The purpose of the study was to assess current levels of fall Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) spawning below both John Day and McNary dams and to make preliminary assessments of spawning habitat below McNary Dam. The construction of John Day Dam created a reservoir 122 kilometers long and inundated one of the most prolific spawning sites for fall Chinook salmon in the Columbia Basin. However, tailrace habitats in the Columbia and Snake rivers can provide some level of suitable spawning habitat as evidenced by redd surveys. Documented spawning of fall Chinook salmon has occurred below both John Day and McNary dams. From 2002 to 2005, four years of Bonneville Power Administration research funding resulted in an average estimate of 1,133 redds below John Day Dam. In 2004, a reconnaissance survey conducted below McNary Dam identified six redds even though less than three percent of the area was surveyed. In FY2011, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) funded deep-water fall Chinook redd surveys below John Day and McNary dams resulting in counts of 221 and four redds, respectively. Expanded estimates were only possible for the John Day study site where 1,891 redds were estimated to have been constructed. Redds mapped below John Day Dam were distributed in clusters in locations similar to redds surveyed from 2002 to 2005. The four redds mapped below McNary Dam were located in cobble patches just upstream of the Highway 395 bridge, and no redds were observed downstream from the bridge. The redd count and total redd estimates below John Day Dam are the highest on record while the count below McNary should be considered a minimum given the large survey area. Neither dam’s boat restricted zone was accessible during the survey period. Throughout the McNary tailrace study site substrates were assessed, and large patches of bedrock not suitable for spawning were present over approximately 40% of the survey area. With the work competed in fall 2010, future surveys can now focus on areas where there is some potential for spawning to occur based on suitable depth and substrates, and these surveys may result in the first quantitative redd counts and estimates of spawning below McNary Dam. U.S. v. Oregon (302 F. Supp. 899) legally upheld the Columbia River treaty tribes reserved fishing rights. The parties to the settlement (Parties) have recently proposed a new mitigation level to the USACE relative to the long-term restructured John Day and The Dalles mitigation. The Parties concluded that the appropriate level of mitigation responsibility from both projects is the adult production level equivalent of a minimum of 65,000 natural spawners, whereas the current level of mitigation is only 30,000 adult fall Chinook. The identification and enumeration of existing fall Chinook redds and assessment of current and drawdown spawning habitats below both projects will be integral to future mitigation discussions. ii Acknowledgements The authors thank staff from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbia River Fisheries Program Office who assisted with field work and data analysis. David Hines and Ryan Koch specifically, assisted with field work and David Hines assisted with GIS analysis. Chris Pinney from the USACE Walla Walla District provided technical and administrative project support. iii Table of Contents Summary ......................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ iii Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Area ...................................................................................................................................... 1 John Day Dam Study Area ......................................................................................................... 2 McNary Dam Study Area ........................................................................................................... 3 Methods........................................................................................................................................... 4 Redd Surveys .............................................................................................................................. 4 Redd Population Estimates ......................................................................................................... 5 Results ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Redd Surveys .............................................................................................................................. 6 Redd Population Estimates. ........................................................................................................ 9 Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 10 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................. 12 iv List of Figures Figure 1. Overview and locations of The Dalles, John Day, and McNary dams and their respective impoundments. .............................................................................................. 2 Figure 2. Aerial view of John Day Dam and the downstream study site....................................... 3 Figure 3. Aerial view of McNary Dam and the downstream study site. ....................................... 3 Figure 4. Map depicting 221 fall Chinook salmon redds identified in the Columbia River below John Day Dam during fall 2010. Note that the transects extending into the BRZ could not be searched in 2010 due to the presence of avian deterrent lines. Transect spacing is 15 m. ...................................................................................... 7 Figure 5. Map depicting four fall Chinook salmon redds identified below McNary Dam in fall 2010. Transect spacing is 45 m. .............................................................................. 7 Figure 6. Distribution of suitable fall Chinook spawning substrates (cobbles and gravels) and unsuitable bedrock substrate mapped with side-scan sonar below McNary Dam. ............................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 7. Survey locations of 614 substrate point measurement sites assessed with underwater videography below McNary Dam. The distance between each point is approximately 50 m. ................................................................................................... 8 Figure 8. Proportions of dominant substrate types mapped in the McNary Dam tailrace study site for 614 point measurements. These measurements are outside of the large bedrock patches depicted in Figure 7 and do not include areas less than 1 m in depth. ...................................................................................................................... 9 List of Tables Table 1. Substrate classes and size ranges used for classification during spawning surveys. ....... 5 Table 2. Percent fine codes and descriptions. ................................................................................ 5 Table 3. Data used to calculate total redd estimates for the 2010 fall Chinook redd surveys in two distinct redd clusters mapped below John Day Dam. ......................................... 10 v Introduction This report describes work contracted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Walla Walla District as part of a three-year study to assess fall Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) spawning levels and available habitat below John Day and McNary dams. Project funding was only available for the first year of the study. The upriver bright stock of fall Chinook salmon in the Columbia Basin predominantly spawns and rears in mainstem corridors and habitats. The majority spawn in the last significant unimpounded section of the Columbia River known as the Hanford Reach which is located immediately upstream of McNary Dam and its reservoir. The construction of the Columbia River hydrosystem unquestionably removed some of the most valuable mainstem spawning grounds for fall Chinook (Fulton 1968). The Columbia River, under what is now John Day Reservoir, was one of these historically used sites. The construction of John Day Dam in 1968 created a reservoir 122 river kilometers (rkm) long and effectively eliminated the vast majority of fall Chinook spawning habitat in this river section. However, spawning habitat is still present for a short distance downstream from most of the mainstem Columbia River dams. Documented fall Chinook
Recommended publications
  • INDC TR-2018-02, "Exterior Lighting for Navigation Locks and Dams
    03 - 2018 - INDC TR Standardization and Sustainability Initiative Renewable Energy Applications for Locks and Dams Standardization and Sustainability Charlie Allen, Nicholas M. Josefik, Edith Martinez-Guerra, March 2018 and Stefan Miller Center McNary Dam, Oregon Inland Navigation Design Design Navigation Inland Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. The Inland Navigation Design Center (INDC) develops solutions to complex en- gineering problems for the nation’s inland waterways to serve the Army, the Depart- ment of Defense, Federal Agencies and the Nation. To find out more about the Inland Navigation Design Center please visit: https://apps.usace.army.mil/sites/TEN/IND/Pages/default.aspx Standardization and Sustainability Initiative INDC TR-2018-03 March 2018 Renewable Energy Applications for Locks and Dams Standardization and Sustainability Gerald C. Allen Hydroelectric Design Center U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Portland District 333 SW 1st Ave Portland, OR 97204-1290 Nicholas M. Josefik U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL) 72 Lyme Road Hanover, NH 03755-1290 Edith Martinez-Guerra U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) Environmental Laboratory (EL) Waterways Experiment Station, 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199 Stefan M. Miller U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Mississippi Valley Division New Orleans District 7400 Leake Ave. New Orleans, LA 70118-3651 Final Report Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Washington, DC 20314-1000 Monitored by USACE Inland Navigation Design Center INDC TR-2018-03 ii Abstract This report provides a standardized approach for gauging the feasibility of potential solar, wind, and hydropower projects for application at U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Received Apr 13 1992
    RECEIVED APR 13 1992 ederal Communi~s Commission Office of the Secr'etafy ventura County's News Station KVEN Broadcasting Corp. P.O. Box 699, Ventura, CA 93002 R'ECE!VED April 9, 1992 APR 13 1992 FCC MAIL BRANCH / Secretary Federal Communications Commission / 1919 H St., N.H. Washington, D.C. 20554 RE : Rf·1- 7 9 3 2 _RH-7933, Attached you will find our formal comments with re- spect to the above mentioned petitions. There is in- eluded an original plus five copies and an additional six copies in order to provide the Chairman and each Commissioner with a copy. ~(). of CorJes 'et'd atI/ L,st ABe (j E Ventura • Oxnard • Southern California • FAX (805) 642-8595 (805) 485-2123 1-800-367-5429 (805) 656-5838 RECEIVED APR 13 1992 Federal Communications Commission Office of the Secretary Ventura County's News Station KVEN Broadcasting Corp. P.O. Box 699, Ventura, CA 93002 April 9, 1992 Secretary Federal Communications Commission 1919 M st., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 Re: RM-7932 RM-7933 In these comments it is our desire to support the National Association of Broadcasters' Petition, RM- 7932, "To Suspend Temporarily New Commercial PM Sta- tion Allotment and Application Processing," and RM- 7933, "The Petition for Comprehensive Rule Making." The Commission should also be informed that I, Robert L. Fox, have been a broadcaster for over 36 years. Further, for 26 years I have been an owner and ope- rator of KVEN Broadcasting Corp, the licensee of KVEN and KHAY, Ventura, Ca. I serve as Chairman/CEO of the corporation.
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Department of Forestry Equipment & Personnel Rate Guide 2019
    Oregon Department of Forestry Equipment & Personnel Rate Guide 2019 Finance i Table of Contents Page Definitions 1 General Provisions 2 - 4 Payment Provisions 5 - 8 Responsibilities and Procedures 9 - 10 Forms, Filing System, and Supply 10 - 11 Emergency Personnel Rates 12 - 19 Heavy Equipment Rates 20 - 25 Water Handling Rates 26 - 27 Support Equipment Rates 27 - 28 Mileage and Hours Chart 29 - 32 Finance ii Definitions Administratively Determined (AD)/Emergency Hire Employee: An individual who is hired at the AD Wage Rate and paid directly by the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) when extra capacity is required to meet the objectives of an incident. Check-In Form: Required documentation that records resource information such as: resource order number, contact information, equipment type, and rate of pay. Required for contract crews, equipment, and overhead personnel. Must be signed by vendor/operator. District Business Manager (DBM): The ODF staff person responsible for all incident business related matters in each district. Previously titled Office Manager or OM. Guarantee: For each calendar day that heavy equipment is under hire, the amount earned for that day will be no less than 2.5 hours. OF 286: Summarized emergency equipment invoice. All time recorded on equipment shift tickets will be posted on this form. Signature is required for payment. OF 288: Summarized emergency personnel invoice. All time recorded on shift tickets will be posted on this form. Signature is required for payment. On Shift (Compensable) Time: Employees are compensated for on shift time. On shift time includes travel to and from the point of hire and/or other travel necessary for the performance of work (such as from base camp to fire line), actual hours worked, and time when an individual is held, by direction or ordered, to a specific location fully outfitted, and ready for assignment.
    [Show full text]
  • WCRO-2020-02918 June 16, 2021 Christopher Page Chief
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE West Coast Region 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard, Suite 1100 PORTLAND, OR 97232-1274 Refer to NMFS No: WCRO-2020-02918 June 16, 2021 Christopher Page Chief, Environmental Resources Branch United States Army Corps of Engineers Portland District 333 SW 1st Ave. Portland, Oregon 97204 Re: Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Biological Opinion and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Response for the Operations and Maintenance Dredging of the Federal Navigation Channel at Tongue Point, Clatsop County, Oregon; Elochoman Slough, Wahkiakum County, Washington; Lake River, Clark County, Washington; and Oregon Slough, Multnomah County, Oregon. Dear Mr. Page: Thank you for your letter of October 16, 2020, requesting initiation of consultation with NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) for the operations and maintenance dredging of the four Federal navigation channels referenced above. This consultation was conducted in accordance with the 2019 revised regulations that implement section 7 of the ESA (50 CFR 402, 84 FR 45016). Thank you, also, for your request for consultation pursuant to the essential fish habitat (EFH) provisions in Section 305(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(b)) for this action. In the attached biological opinion, NMFS concludes that the proposed action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of: • Oncorhynchus tshawytscha: Lower Columbia River (LCR) Chinook salmon, Upper Columbia River (UCR) spring-run Chinook salmon, SR (SR) spring/summer Chinook salmon, Upper Willamette River (UWR) Chinook salmon, Snake River fall Chinook salmon; • O.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Coast Steelhead Management Meeting
    SUMMARY OF THE TWELFTH PACIFIC COAST STEELHEAD MANAGEMENT MEETING March 9-11, 2010 Eagle Crest Resort - Redmond, Oregon Sponsored by: Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission & U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SUMMARY……..…………………………………………………………………………...1 II. STEELHEAD STOCK STATUS REVIEW AND ESA……………………………….....3 A. California....................................................................................................................................... 3 B. Oregon ........................................................................................................................................... 4 C. Idaho .............................................................................................................................................. 4 D. Washington ................................................................................................................................... 5 E. Alaska ............................................................................................................................................ 6 F. Progress Report on Developing Viability Criteria for Threatened Puget Sound Steelhead -- Jeff Hard, NOAA Fisheries ....................................................................................... 7 III. REINTRODUCTION OF STEELHEAD ........................................................................8 A. Documenting Onchorhynchus mykiss Life Histories in Rattlesnake Creek and White Salmon River Prior to the Reintroduction of Anadromous Fish Above Condit
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Blade-Strike Modelsfor Estimating the Biological Performance Large Ofkaplan Hydro Turbines 3.3
    DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by BATTELLE for the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Printed in the United States of America Available to DOE and DOE contactors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062; ph: (865) 576-8401 fax: (865) 576-5728 email: [email protected] Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161 ph: (800) 553-6847 fax: (703) 605-6900 email: [email protected] online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm This document was printed on recycled paper. (9/2003) PNNL-15370 Evaluation of Blade-Strike Models for Estimating the Biological Performance of Large Kaplan Hydro Turbines Z.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Passage Structures at Bonneville and John Day Dams by Pacific Lamprey, 2013 and 2014
    Technical Report 2015-11-DRAFT USE OF PASSAGE STRUCTURES AT BONNEVILLE AND JOHN DAY DAMS BY PACIFIC LAMPREY, 2013 AND 2014 by M.A. Kirk, C.C. Caudill, C.J. Noyes, E.L. Johnson, S.R. Lee, and M.L. Keefer Department of Fish and Wildlife Sciences University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844-1136 and H. Zobott, J.C. Syms, R. Budwig, and D. Tonina Center for Ecohydraulics Research University of Idaho Boise, ID 83702 for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Portland District 2015 Technical Report 2015-11-DRAFT USE OF PASSAGE STRUCTURES AT BONNEVILLE AND JOHN DAY DAMS BY PACIFIC LAMPREY, 2013 AND 2014 by M.A. Kirk, C.C. Caudill, C.J. Noyes, E.L. Johnson, S.R. Lee, and M.L. Keefer Department of Fish and Wildlife Sciences University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844-1136 and H. Zobott, J.C. Syms, R. Budwig, and D. Tonina Center for Ecohydraulics Research University of Idaho Boise, ID 83702 for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Portland District 2015 i Acknowledgements This project was financed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District and was facilitated by Sean Tackley. We would like to thank Andy Traylor, Brian Bissell, Ida Royer, Ben Hausman, Miro Zyndol, Dale Klindt and the additional project biologists at Bonneville and John Day dams who provided on-site support. We would like to thank Dan Joosten, Kaan Oral, Inga Aprans, Noah Hubbard, Mike Turner, Robert Escobar, Kate Abbott, Matt Dunkle, Chuck Boggs, Les Layng, and Jeff Garnett from the University of Idaho for assisting with the construction, maintenance, and field sampling associated with both Lamprey Passage Structures (LPSs).
    [Show full text]
  • Hydropower Technologies Program — Harnessing America’S Abundant Natural Resources for Clean Power Generation
    U.S. Department of Energy — Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Wind & Hydropower Technologies Program — Harnessing America’s abundant natural resources for clean power generation. Contents Hydropower Today ......................................... 1 Enhancing Generation and Environmental Performance ......... 6 Large Turbine Field-Testing ............................... 9 Providing Safe Passage for Fish ........................... 9 Improving Mitigation Practices .......................... 11 From the Laboratories to the Hydropower Communities ..... 12 Hydropower Tomorrow .................................... 14 Developing the Next Generation of Hydropower ............ 15 Integrating Wind and Hydropower Technologies ............ 16 Optimizing Project Operations ........................... 17 The Federal Wind and Hydropower Technologies Program ..... 19 Mission and Goals ...................................... 20 2003 Hydropower Research Highlights Alden Research Center completes prototype turbine tests at their facility in Holden, MA . 9 Laboratories form partnerships to develop and test new sensor arrays and computer models . 10 DOE hosts Workshop on Turbulence at Hydroelectric Power Plants in Atlanta . 11 New retrofit aeration system designed to increase the dissolved oxygen content of water discharged from the turbines of the Osage Project in Missouri . 11 Low head/low power resource assessments completed for conventional turbines, unconventional systems, and micro hydropower . 15 Wind and hydropower integration activities in 2003 aim to identify potential sites and partners . 17 Cover photo: To harness undeveloped hydropower resources without using a dam as part of the system that produces electricity, researchers are developing technologies that extract energy from free flowing water sources like this stream in West Virginia. ii HYDROPOWER TODAY Water power — it can cut deep canyons, chisel majestic mountains, quench parched lands, and transport tons — and it can generate enough electricity to light up millions of homes and businesses around the world.
    [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]
  • Dams and Hydroelectricity in the Columbia
    COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN: DAMS AND HYDROELECTRICITY The power of falling water can be converted to hydroelectricity A Powerful River Major mountain ranges and large volumes of river flows into the Pacific—make the Columbia precipitation are the foundation for the Columbia one of the most powerful rivers in North America. River Basin. The large volumes of annual runoff, The entire Columbia River on both sides of combined with changes in elevation—from the the border is one of the most hydroelectrically river’s headwaters at Canal Flats in BC’s Rocky developed river systems in the world, with more Mountain Trench, to Astoria, Oregon, where the than 470 dams on the main stem and tributaries. Two Countries: One River Changing Water Levels Most dams on the Columbia River system were built between Deciding how to release and store water in the Canadian the 1940s and 1980s. They are part of a coordinated water Columbia River system is a complex process. Decision-makers management system guided by the 1964 Columbia River Treaty must balance obligations under the CRT (flood control and (CRT) between Canada and the United States. The CRT: power generation) with regional and provincial concerns such as ecosystems, recreation and cultural values. 1. coordinates flood control 2. optimizes hydroelectricity generation on both sides of the STORING AND RELEASING WATER border. The ability to store water in reservoirs behind dams means water can be released when it’s needed for fisheries, flood control, hydroelectricity, irrigation, recreation and transportation. Managing the River Releasing water to meet these needs influences water levels throughout the year and explains why water levels The Columbia River system includes creeks, glaciers, lakes, change frequently.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 22 Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit—Mainstem Upper Columbia River Critical Habitat Unit
    Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification: Rationale for Why Habitat is Essential, and Documentation of Occupancy Chapter 22 Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit—Mainstem Upper Columbia River Critical Habitat Unit 575 Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification Chapter 22 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service September 2010 Chapter 22. Mainstem Upper Columbia River Critical Habitat Unit The Mainstem Upper Columbia River CHU is essential for maintaining bull trout distribution within this unique geographic region of the Mid-Columbia RU and conserving the fluvial migratory life history types exhibited by many of the populations from adjacent core areas. It is essential for conservation by maintaining broad distribution within the Mid-Columbia RU across Washington, Idaho, and Oregon. Its location between Chief Joseph Dam in the most northern geographical area and John Day Dam in the most southern area provides key connectivity for the Mid-Columbia River RU. It is essential for maintaining distribution and genetic contributions to the Lower Columbia and Snake River Mainstems and 13 CHUs. Bull trout are known to reside year-round as sub-adults and adults, but spawning adults may utilize the mainstem Columbia River for up to at least 9 months as well. Several studies in the upper Columbia and lower Snake Rivers indicate migration between the Mainstem Upper Columbia River CHU and core areas, generally during periods of cooler water temperatures. FMO habitat provided by the mainstem Columbia River is essential for conservation because it supports the expression of the fluvial migratory life history forms for multiple core areas. In addition, there are several accounts of amphidromous life history forms present between Yakima and John Day Rivers that may still have the potential to express anadromy (see Appendix 1 for more detailed information).
    [Show full text]
  • Cover Black White
    r.'Z"r.1 ~ Teacher’s Guide to US Army Corps of Engineers® Bonneville Dam Portland District Teacher’s Guide To Bonneville Dam Packet #2 Initial Concepts and Pre-Draft: Patrick Barry Becky Bernson Deanne Converse Katie Kinney Kathy Peck Jim Runkles Dan Troglin Bill Wiley 1984 Summer Visitor Center Staff. Thanks to: George Wilson, Stevenson High School Bev McKinnon, Carson Elementary Final Edition Writers and Editors: Anna Bates and Shelley Gimbal Final Edition Review Team: Patrick Barry Jim Runkles 1988 Summer Visitor Center Staff i Table of Contents Page Goals of the Teacher’s Guide To Bonneville Dam ................................................................................................. v Objectives of the Teacher’s Guide To Bonneville Dam.......................................................................................... v Introduction To Teachers Guide: How this Guide is organized ................................................................................................................................1 Planning a visit to Bonneville Dam. .....................................................................................................................1 Facilities at Bonneville Dam................................................................................................................................ 2 Project Map......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Teacher’s Checklist ...............................................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]