DOCSLIB.ORG

V77 P357 Rickard and Tiller.PDF

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
V77 P357 Rickard and Tiller.PDF NorthwestScience Notes Thepurpose oJ Notesis to pubLishpupers typicalll les.;thanJive pages Long No speciJic.form(tot' ctnlent is retluireclJbr articlesltublished as Notes,but ctll will be peer'teviewed dnd must he scientiJicall cretlible. Authorsnay ctntacl the Editor about the suitabili6 of xt ruscriptsfor this section. W H. Rickard,Washington State tlnverstyTri Cltles,2Tl0UniverstyDrve Rchland Washngton 99352 ano BrettTiller,l Pac f c NorthwestNat ona Laboratory,PO. Box999, R ch and,Washington 99352 Observationson the NestingDistribution of GreatBlue Herons on the HanfordReach of the ColumbiaRiver lntroduction Methods The Hanford Reachis an 80-km segmentof the Information concerningthe distributionof heron ColumbiaRiver extending downstream from Priest nests along the Reach was obtaincd fuom pub- RapidsDam to near Richlandin southcentral li.hcdliterature rnd per.onillohser\ ation. .in. c Washington(Figure l). This segmentdiffers fiom the 1970s.In thc years1994 to 2001 counts()1' the rest 0f the river upstreamfrom tidewaterbe- activenests were madeby visitingcolonies all causeit is notimpounded by a dam(Geist 1995). along the reach in July and August when the ac- Heremost ofthe riverflows throughfederalprop tive nestswere identified by the prescnceof pre- eny (Hanford Site) but the easternshore down- flight nestlings.Becausc road access to the shore- streamfrom SavageIsland is private (Figure 1). line is limited the colonieswere accessed by boat. Land use on the Hanford Site dilltrs from sur- rounding landscapesbecause towns and irrigated Results fields have been abandonedsince 194'1.Public (Ardeaherorlia.s), accessto the river shorehas been restrictedbe- In 1950twelve greatbl:uehercr. (Morr.! causeof the presenceof nine plutonium produc- nestswere placedin two mulberry trees tion reactorsat six separatelocations along the nlla), on Locke Island (Figure l). At that time westernrivershore (Figure l). Since 194'1,thc thesewere the only greatblue heron nestson the Hanford Site has servedas a refugium tbr native Reach(Hanson 1968). plantsand wildlife in a larger surroundingregion Most of the heron nestson the Reach since devotedto cultivation agriculture and urbaniza- 1950have been placed in lreesplanted a1 now don (Gray and Rickard 1989). The purposeof abandonedf'armhouses near the dver shorein the this note is to summarizeobseruations concem- early1900s (Figure 1). These trces, mostly black ing the distribution of great blue herons (AnCea locust(Robinia pse udo-atacla), and Siberianelnr herodias) dong the Hantbrd Reach.This is im- (lJlmuspunila),havc survivedin this dry climate portantbecause it providessome insight asto the t l6 Lm rnnualllt in theab.ence ,'l irrigrtionu a- ability of great blue heronsto adapt to an envi- ter becausethey haveroot accassto a watertable ronment changingin responseto the activitiesof <10 m below the ground surl'ace(fuckard and people. Price 1989).These trees are senescent and vul- nerablc to wildfire, windfall and insect infesta- 'Au|hor to \lhom cofiesponderceshould be addrcssed tion. Their future is limited. Many recently E mail: [email protected] selfestablishednative and alien trees now grow No hwestScience, Vol. 77, No.4,2003 357 O lirol b) rhe\onhtr.n S.ieniiii.Arni.ri!on Allri-hr' re.entd A HeronColonies f-r'l HanfordReactors 4 -_--- 0 4 8 12 Kilometers Figurc 1. Map ofthe Hanlbrd Reachofthe Colunbia River. showing lhe distribution ofheron colonics. 358 NonhwestScience. Vol.77, No. 4, 2003 on riverine beachesthat historically were devoid summerof 1994.Heron nests at the islandcolony of trees (Snodgrass1904). The spreadof these 1I were locatedin a tall, steel transmissionline selfestablishedtrees is apparentlyencouraged by louer(Tablel) In lq94rhere\\erel6acrirenests the diumally fluctuating fiver flow regulatedby in the towerand 12in 1995(Table 1). In 1996a upiver hydroelectric dams (Rickard and Poole rcd-tailed hawk (8,.,teo jqm(ric ensis')rrcsted. in lhe 1989). These newly establishedtrees may pro towerandthere were no activehercn nests in 1998, vide heron nest sites in the future but observa- 1999.and 2001.Colony 6 was useduntil 1998 tions show that only self-establishedtrees on is- when a pair of bald eagles (Haliueetus land shoreshave been selectedas nesting sites. leu<'ocephalus) began nesting there. Since then, No hercnnests have been placed in shorelinetrees there havebeen no activeheron nestsat this site. plantedon privateland. A nest tree at heron colony 8 that historically The number of active great blue heron nests containedmore than 20 neststoppled after 1990. alongthe Reachhas declined from 75 to 34 since To date no herons have nestedin the surviving 1994 (Table I ). The decline has occuned at 6 of fees therc.The number of greatblue herons nesting the l1 coloniesmonitored between 199,1and2001. at colonies2 and 9 appearto haveincreased be- The greatestnumber ofnesting greatblue herons tween1994 and 2001 . Publicaccess to thesecolony occurred at Colony 7. howevet total nests ob- sitesis limited to boat traftic only. servedthcrc each year also steadilydeclined throughoutthe 1990s.The cause(s) ofthe decline Discussion at colony 7 arenot known, but they arenot likely general related to a decline in fledging success(Marco The declinein greatblue heron nests found i 997).Interspecific competition for suitablenesting along the Hanfbrd Reachof the Columbia River siteswas also notlikely relatedto greatblue heron is not likely ftom reducedfledging successat the nestdeclines at colony 7 becauseno otherpis- coloniesthere. The generaldecline in largetrees civorousavian species such as the black-crowned fbund along the Columbia dver wherepublic ac- night heron (N).dcofar rlctlc'orar), double crested cessis restrictedduring the breedingperiod may cormorxnt (P halu(rocorax auritus) , or gteat egret be the most Jimiting physical characteristicsfbr (Casmerodius.tlbus), have nested there. Vehicle, great blue heron nesting habitat there. The two pedestrian,and boat tratfic occur regularly dur coloniesthat havebeen established on telephone ing the nestingseason near colony 7. Greatblue line towerssupport the premise that natural colony heronnests at colony 10 declinedfiom 16 pairs tlees were limiting resources.The obseNahons in 199,1to 6 in 1995and 1996,and 7 in 1999. alsosuggest these man-made structures can supple This declinecoincided with the lossofa f'ewtrees ment nesting habitat for great blue herons,but at this colony causedby a wild fire during the competitionfor nestingsites with raptorsmay be an issue. Low sub-adult or adult survival and Table L Number of activc grcal blue heron nestsat colonies immigration rates may also be limiting factors :rlong the Hanford Reachofthc Columbia River for nestinggreat blue heronsalong the Hanford 199.1.1995, 1998. 1999, and 2001 Reach of the Columbia River During the mid- 1990smany tagsfrom juveniles and adults were Colonl'. 199,1 1995 1998 1999 t00l retumedto PNNL researchersby staffof theWild- I life ServicesDivision of the Udted StatesDe- 2 partment of Agriculture. Legal shooting of the 3 sub-adultand adult grcat blue herons atthe nearby .l Ringold hatcherysupports the premise that this 5 5 2 sourceof mortality may have contributedto the 6 9 6 6 observedpopulation decline ofgreat herons 1 3l l0 25 2I blue along the Hanlbrd Reachofthe Columbia River. l 7 2 l0 6'/ Acknowledgements t2 performed Tolal 75 69 15 3',7 Work under Contract DE-AC06- 76RL01830with the U.S. DepartmentofEnergy. Great Blue Herons 359 LiteratureCited Ntarco,J. D. 1997.Factors atTecting great blue heron repro- duction in soulhccnlralWashington. M.S. Thcsis. Geist. D. R. 1995.The Hanford Reach:Wh.rt do lre sland to University of Idaho. Moscow, Idaho. lose?lllahe I l:ll0- l4l. Rickard,W H. and L. D. Poole. 1989.Terestrial wildlile of Cray. R. H. and w H. Rickard. 1989.The protectedarea of the Hanford Site: Pastand future. Nofh$,est Science Hanlbd as a rclugium ibr nalivc planls and animals. 63r183193. EnvironmentalConservation 16:251-260. Rickard. W H. and K. R. Price. 1989.Tritiun uptake froln Hanson. W C. 1968. Rcccnt history of double-crestedcoF groundrvaterby black locusttrees.Northwest Science morant cok ies in southeastemWashingron. Thc 63:87-89. Murrclct,l9rl5 26. Snodgrass.R. E. 190,1.A list of land birds fron central and souihcancm \\'ashington.The Auk 2l:223-233. Receircd4 Mq' 2002 AccepredJbrpublicqtiott ll Jub- 2003 360 Northwest Science,Vol. 77, No. ,1,2003 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mainstem Columbia River (Columbia Plateau Province)
    Draft Mainstem Columbia River Subbasin Summary March 2, 2001 Prepared for the Northwest Power Planning Council Subbasin Team Leader and Lead Writer David L. Ward, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Contributors Susan Barnes and Greg Rimbach, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Ken Bevis, Jeff Feen, Paul Hoffarth, John Jacobson, Don Larsen, Jim Tabor, Matt Vander Hagen, and Rod Woodin, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Melissa Gildersleeve, Washington Department of Ecology Heidi Brunkal and Greg Hughes, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ken Tiffan, U.S. Geological Survey David Geist and Brett Tiller, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Joe Lukas, Utility District No. 2 of Grant County Catherine Macdonald and Mike Powelson, The Nature Conservancy DRAFT: This document has not yet been reviewed or approved by the Northwest Power Planning Council Columbia River Mainstem Subbasin Summary Table of Contents INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................... 1 SUBBASIN DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................................................1 Major Land Uses ......................................................................................................................... 6 Water Quality .............................................................................................................................. 9 FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES.........................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I
    Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I November 4 - 7, 2002 Richland, WA FINAL REPORT A Collaborative Workshop: United States Fish & Wildlife Service The Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (SSC/IUCN) Hanford Reach National Monument 1 Planning Workshop I, November 2002 A contribution of the IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group in collaboration with the United States Fish & Wildlife Service. CBSG. 2002. Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I. FINAL REPORT. IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group: Apple Valley, MN. 2 Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I, November 2002 Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I November 4-7, 2002 Richland, WA TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1. Executive Summary 1 A. Introduction and Workshop Process B. Draft Vision C. Draft Goals 2. Understanding the Past 11 A. Personal, Local and National Timelines B. Timeline Summary Reports 3. Focus on the Present 31 A. Prouds and Sorries 4. Exploring the Future 39 A. An Ideal Future for Hanford Reach National Monument B. Goals Appendix I: Plenary Notes 67 Appendix II: Participant Introduction questions 79 Appendix III: List of Participants 87 Appendix IV: Workshop Invitation and Invitation List 93 Appendix V: About CBSG 103 Hanford Reach National Monument 3 Planning Workshop I, November 2002 4 Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I, November 2002 Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I November 4-7, 2002 Richland, WA Section 1 Executive Summary Hanford Reach National Monument 5 Planning Workshop I, November 2002 6 Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I, November 2002 Executive Summary A. Introduction and Workshop Process Introduction to Comprehensive Conservation Planning This workshop is the first of three designed to contribute to the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) of Hanford Reach National Monument.
    [Show full text]
  • Ringold For111ation and Associated Deposits
    LI.I u The Miocene to Pliocene Ringold For111ation and Associated Deposits 0 of the Ancestral Columbia River System, South-central Washington and North-central Oregon by Kevin A. Lindsey WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY I- AND EARTH RESOURCES Open File Report 96-8 c( November 1996 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF Natural Resources Jennifer M. Belcher· Commissioner of Public Lands Kaleen Cottingham· Supervisor CONTENTS 1 Introduction 3 Setting 3 Structural geology 4 Late Neogene depositional framework 6 The Ringold Formation 6 Previous studies 8 Age 8 Stratigraphy 10 Methods 10 Sediment facies associations 14 Facies association I 21 Facies association II 22 Facies association Ill 26 Facies association IV 26 Facies association V 26 Facies association distribution 27 Informal member of Wooded Island 33 Informal member of Taylor Flat 34 Informal member of Savage Island 35 Top of the Ringold Formation 37 Ringold correlatives outside the Pasco Basin 38 Conclusions 40 Acknowledgments 41 References cited Appendices A-D: Measured sections, core geologic logs, cross sections, and isopach and structure contour data, respectively ILLUSTRATIONS 2 Figure 1. Map showing regional geographic setting of the Columbia Basin and Hanford Site, south-central Washington, and north-central Oregon. 4 Figure 2. Map showing geographic setting of the Pasco Basin and Hanford Site, Washington. 5 Figure 3. Maps showing geologic structures in and near the Pasco Basin, and . Hanford Site. 7 Figure 4. Generalized surficial geologic map of the Pasco Basin. 9 Figure 5. Diagram showing late Neogene stratigraphy of the Pasco Basin emphasizing the Ringold Formation. 15 Figure 6. Outcrop photo of facies association I.
    [Show full text]
  • The Non-Fisheries Biological Resources of the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River'
    W. H. Rickard W. C. Hanson and R. E. Fitzner Baitelle Pacific Northwest Laboraoles Richland, N/ashington 99352 The Non-Fisheries Biological Resources of the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River' Abslract The Hanford Reach is the only undammed segment of the Columbia River in tie United States upstrea,'n from Bonneville Dam. Thc non-agricultural and non-recreirtional land-use policies im- posed by the Department of Encrgy have permittc.d the Harford Sjte to fuoction as a refugirLm for wildlife for It years. The prorection offered by the Hanford Site has b€en espffially imF)rtant for the Bald F.asl,e (Lldliaeetur leulocefhahs), m:dre deer lOdocoilea: hetnianu:), coyate (Ca17;! latwns), aad resident Great Basin Canada Goose (Branta canddeftrb naffitti) . Islard habitats arc especinlly importnnt {or nesting gecse and for mule dc'cr fawning. Coyotes are important predators upon nesting geese and mule deer fawns. Salmon carcassesare an important winter food for Bald Iaglcs. Riparian plant communities aiong the Columbia River have been changing in response to changing watef level fluctuations largely rcgulated by power generatron schedules at upsfteam hy droelectric dams. There are no studies Drese.tlv established to record'c'els. the resoonse of Columbia R;vFrsh.re.ine planr comnrnitic. ro rh,'r kindi of t u,ruatingwarcr The existing irformation is summarized on birds and memmals closely allied with the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River. High rrophic level wild animals are discussedas indicators o{ chemical conraminarion of {ood chains. lnlroduclion The Hanford Reach of the Columbia River extends upstream from the city of Richland, Va.shington, ro Priest Rapids Dan.r,a distanceof about 90 km (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Inventory and Analysis of the Hanford Site
    BIODIVERSITY INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS OF THE HANFORD SITE 1995 Annual Report P REPARED BY THE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF WASHINGTON FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERG Y JUNE 1996 BIODIVERSITY INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS OF THE HANFORD SITE 1995 Annual Report Editor Jonathan A. Soll Curt Soper Associate Editor/Designer Jan K. Lorey Contributors Kathryn Beck Florence Caplow Richard Easterly Patti A. Ensor Tony Greager Lisa A. Hallock Rob Pabst Deborah Salstrom Andrew M. Stepniewski Richard S. Zack Prepared by The Nature Conservancy of Washington in partial fulfillment of U.S. Department of Energy Grant Award Number DE-FG06-94RL 12858. Additional funding provided by The Nature Conservancy of Washington, The Bullitt Foundation, and The Northwest Fund for the Environment. NJh~-conservancy. OF WA S HINCTO/1: 217 Pine Street, Suite 1100 Seattle, WA 98101 Printed on recycled paper • CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... vii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background I 1.1.1 History of the Hanford Site 1 1.1.2 The Shrub-Steppe Ecosystem 1 1.1.3 Climate 2 1.1.4 Physiography 2 1.1.5 Management Areas 2 1.2 The Need for a Biodiversity Inventory 5 1.3 Ownership and Use of Data 5 1.4 Biodiversity Inventory Personnel 6 2.0 PLANT COMMUNITY ECOLOGY ................................................................... 7 2.1 Purpose and Scope 7 2.2 Methods 7 2.2.1 Site Description 7 2.2.2 Field Inventory 8 2.3 Findings 8 2.3. 1 Plant Communities 8 2.3.2 Riparian Communities JO 2.3.3 Island Upland Communities 11 2.6 Conclusions and Management Considerations 11 3.0 RARE PLANT BOTANY ...............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1999 Evaluation of Juvenile Fall Chinook Salmon Stranding on the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River
    1999 Evaluation of Juvenile Fall Chinook Salmon Stranding on the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River DRAFT Prepared for The Bonneville Power Administration The Public Utility District Number 2 of Grant County John Nugent Todd Newsome Wendy Brock Mike Nugent Paul Hoffarth Paul Wagner Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife December 7, 2001 BPA Contract Number 9701400 GCPUD Contracts Document 97BI30417 Executive Summary The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) in cooperation with the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Grant County Public Utility District (GCPUD), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), University of Idaho (U of I), Streamside Programs Consultation (SPC), United States Geological Survey Biological Resources Division (USGS/BRD), and Yakama Nation (YN) performed the 1999 Evaluation of Juvenile Fall Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Stranding on the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River. The 1999 evaluation was the third year of a multi-year study to assess the impacts of water fluctuations from Priest Rapids Dam on rearing juvenile fall chinook salmon, other fish species, and benthic macroinvertebrates. The field effort was performed from March 5 through September 29. The objectives of the 1999 evaluation were to collect basic information on the physical parameters of the Hanford Reach, evaluate the extent of stranding and entrapment of juvenile fall chinook salmon and other fish species, and identify critical habitat zones. The information will be used to develop a model for determining susceptibility of juvenile fall chinook salmon to stranding and entrapment due to flow fluctuations. WDFW subcontracted U of I and SPC to assess the effects of flow fluctuations on the benthic macroinvertebrate communities and USGS/BRD to study the effects of heat stress on the survival, predator avoidance ability, and physiology of juvenile fall chinook salmon.
    [Show full text]
  • HNF-65646 Revision 0 Approved for Public Release Further
    HNF-65646 Revision 0 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management Contractor for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC06-09RL14728 P.O. Box 650 Richland, Washington 99352 Approved for Public Release Further Dissemination Unlimited HNF-65646 Revision 0 HNF-65646 Revision 0 J. J. Nugent Mission Support Alliance Date Published October 2020 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management Contractor for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC06-09RL14728 P.O. Box 550 Richland, Washington 99352 By Sarah Harrison at 1:34 pm, Nov 05, 2020 Release Approval Date Approved for Public Release Further Dissemination Unlimited HNF-65646 Revision 0 1.0 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 METHODS.................................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 RESULTS...................................................................................................................................... 6 4.0 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................... 7 5.0 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................ 11 Figure 1. Aerial Survey Areas for Fall Chinook Salmon Redds Used Historically and in
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution of Juvenile Fall Chinook Salmon
    2001 Evaluation of Juvenile Fall Chinook Salmon Stranding on the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River Prepared for The Bonneville Power Administration The Public Utility District Number 2 of Grant County John Nugent Todd Newsome Paul Hoffarth Michael Nugent Wendy Brock Michael Kuklinski, Jr. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife May 29, 2002 BPA Contract Number 9701400 GCPUD Contracts Document 97BI30417 Executive Summary The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) in cooperation with the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Grant County Public Utility District (GCPUD), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), performed the 2001 Evaluation of Juvenile Fall Chinook Salmon Stranding on the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River. The 2001 evaluation was the fifth year of a multi-year study to assess the impacts of water fluctuations from Priest Rapids Dam on rearing juvenile fall chinook salmon. The field effort was performed from March 14 through June 28. The objectives of the 2001 evaluation were to collect basic information on the physical parameters of the Hanford Reach, evaluate the extent of stranding and entrapment of juvenile fall chinook salmon and other fish species, and identify critical habitat zones. PNNL will use this information to develop a model for determining susceptibility of juvenile fall chinook salmon to stranding and entrapment due to flow fluctuations. The overall goal will be to develop a long term agreement for the protection of juvenile fall chinook during emergence and rearing. River and meteorological conditions on the Hanford Reach during the 2001 juvenile fall chinook salmon emergence and rearing period (March–July) were marked by below average river flows, above normal river temperatures, near normal ambient air temperatures, and below average solar radiation levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Hanford Seismic Network Review Page Ii Integrated Science Solutions, Inc
    HANFORD SITE SEISMOLOGICAL NETWORK REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NETWORK RECONFIGURATION Prepared by: Integrated Science Solutions, Inc. 1777 N. California Blvd, Suite 305 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 April 30, 2014 Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 2 2 Assessment of Existing Seismograph Stations and Monitoring Capabilities .......................... 4 3 Final Assessment and Recommendation Strategy ................................................................... 9 3.1 Suggested Network Reconfiguration ............................................................................. 10 3.2 Reviewers Recommendations on Potential Station Upgrades ....................................... 13 3.3 Rough Capital Cost Estimates (not a Quotation) for Information Purposes .................. 13 4 Evaluation of Site Notification Procedures for Significant Earthquakes .............................. 14 5 Maps of Existing and Proposed Station Configurations ........................................................ 14 6 References ............................................................................................................................. 20 List of Figures Figure 1: Existing MSA Supported Onsite Stations ..................................................................... 15 Figure
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Annual HRFCPPA Report
    2014-15 Hanford Reach Fall Chinook Protection Program Report for the 2014 – 2015 Protection Season Prepared for: Priest Rapids Coordinating Committee Hanford Reach Working Group and Signatories to the Hanford Reach Fall Chinook Protection Program Agreement To fulfill the requirements of: Section 401(a)(5) of the Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, Washington’s FERC Operating License Section 6.2(1) of Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, Washington Water Quality Certification Section C.6(c) of the Hanford Reach Fall Chinook Protection Program Agreement Prepared by Peter Graf and Todd Pearsons Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant County, Washington Ephrata, Washington Paul Hoffarth Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Pasco, Washington October 2015 Table of Contents 1.0 Background ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Hanford Reach Fall Chinook Protection Program .............................................................. 3 3.0 Hanford Reach Up River Bright Fish Population Status .................................................... 5 3.1 2008-2017 United States v. Oregon Management Agreement ............................... 6 3.2 Hanford Reach Escapement Estimates ................................................................... 8 3.3 Fall Chinook Salmon Egg Production Estimate ..................................................... 9 4.0 2014-2015 Monitoring and Operations under the HRFCPPA .........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hanford Site
    Summary ofthe Hanford Site Environmental Phhll.-l 3230-SUM summary of the Hanford Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 1999 Wxxmn33 (ICI-31mm CN3TI Editors R. W. Hanf L. F. Morasch T. M. Poston G. P. O’Connor September 2000 This report was prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory under contract DE-AC06-76RL0 1830, with contributions from F1uor Hanford, Inc. and its affiliate companies, Bechtel Hanford, Inc. and its subcontractors, CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., and MACTEC-ERS Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352 ... , .-. .._ .- ,+.,f - , ‘- ---- ,.., .’ .“” . .. .. ,- ,.’ 1 ‘- -- ./ : .~., ~ ,-~-~’: .,:, - -.. ,. ,, ->. - ... ,’ -’ .- ,’ This report’was prepared as~anaccj5iuntof,worR spoys$$d~$yan~a gen$y ofJhelJ~ted ‘States G.ov- ,. ~ ernment: Reference .herei’m to a<j”spec@ commercial :,pro~uct;- proces>,:o[: ~e@ce, by’ trade murk; ~,’; - “ trademark, manufacture~ or o~h,erwj+e’does not necessarilyjconstitute @rimply & endorsement, recom~ “ i mendat~on, o;, &“votifig- by. the Uqited States’?Go~ernrn.ent or-an~pgency thereof{ or Battelle”Me.rnorial -., ? I ––... L– .’; .r J\,/..., ,,. , 2 msmure. ,, .,. a ,>, ‘,.~. “. .,, A, .-. , ,, . f-t.,”.’, 7 Available to DOE and DOE contractors h’om the Office of ‘sc~eniificand Technical Info.rrnation, P.0~ ““’- - ! i’~~,; Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 3783 1’; prices available ft’orn (815) 576.840-1=-Available to the public from the National Technical: Information $er~ce,.- ..>- .U&Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd.,
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Impact Statement Priest Rapids Hydroelectric Project Washington (FERC Project No
    Federal Office of Energy Energy Projects Regulatory Commission November 2006 _ FERC/FEIS – 0190F Final Environmental Impact Statement Priest Rapids Hydroelectric Project Washington (FERC Project No. 2114) Wanapum Dam Priest Rapids Dam ________________________________________________________________________ 888 First Street, Washington, DC 20426 FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, DC 20426 OFFICE OF ENERGY PROJECTS To the Agency or Individual Addressed: Reference: Final Environmental Impact Statement Attached is the final environmental impact statement (final EIS) for the Priest Rapids Hydroelectric Project No. 2114-116, located on the Columbia River in Grant, Yakima, Kittitas, Douglas, Benton, and Chelan Counties, Washington. This final EIS documents the views of governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations, affected Indian tribes, the public, the license applicant, and Commission staff. It contains staff evaluations on the applicant’s proposal and the alternatives for relicensing the Priest Rapids Hydroelectric Project. Before the Commission makes a licensing decision, it will take into account all concerns relevant to the public interest. The final EIS will be part of the record from which the Commission will make its decision. The final EIS was sent to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and made available to the public on or about. Copies of the final EIS are available for review in the Commission’s Public Reference Branch, Room 2A, located at 888 First Street NE, Washington, D.C. 20426. An electronic copy of the final EIS may be viewed on FERC’s website at http://www.ferc.gov using the “eLibrary” link. Please call 866-208-3676 or TTY (202) 208-1659 for assistance. Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Statement i COVER SHEET a.
    [Show full text]