DOCSLIB.ORG

Statewide Groundwater Quality Monitoring Program: Harney County DEQ21-LAB-0021-TR (Rev

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Statewide Groundwater Quality Monitoring Program: Harney County DEQ21-LAB-0021-TR (Rev Statewide Groundwater Quality Monitoring Program: Harney County DEQ21-LAB-0021-TR (Rev. 1.1) May 2021 DEQ21-LAB-0012-TR, Rev. 1.1 i This report prepared by: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Laboratory and Environmental Assessment Division 7202 NE Evergreen Parkway Hillsboro, OR 97124 www.oregon.gov/DEQ Authors: Paige Haxton-Evans, Natural Resource Specialist Dan Brown, Natural Resource Specialist Contact: Laboratory and Environmental Assessment Division 503-693-5700 Pictures on cover page from top left to bottom right: Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Fence Removal Panorama by Lloyd Irwin (onda.org); DEQ monitoring specialist Michael Mulvey sampling a domestic well; View of Steens Mountain by Jeff Sorn - Oregon Department of Transportation - Buena Vista Overlook (https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=24374910); Field sampling picture of stock watering well; DEQ monitoring specialist Nicholas Haxton-Evans sampling a monitoring well in Virginia Valley. DEQ can provide documents in an alternate format or in a language other than English upon request. Call DEQ at 800-452-4011 or email [email protected] DEQ21-LAB-0012-TR, Rev. 1.1 ii Table of Contents Executive Summary..................................................................................................................................... 1 1. Background ............................................................................................................................................. 4 1.1 Statewide Groundwater Quality Monitoring Program ...................................................................................... 4 1.2 Study Area Description ..................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2.1 Study Area Boundary................................................................................................................. 4 1.2.2 Geology ...................................................................................................................................... 5 1.2.3 Hydrogeology ............................................................................................................................ 5 1.2.4 Land use ..................................................................................................................................... 6 1.2.5 Climate ....................................................................................................................................... 6 1.2.6 Previous DEQ Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 6 1.2.7 Other DEQ monitoring in the area ............................................................................................. 6 1.2.8 Real Estate Transaction Domestic Well Testing ....................................................................... 7 1.2.9 Public Drinking Water Systems ................................................................................................. 7 1.2.10 Harney County Watershed Council Monitoring ...................................................................... 8 1.2.11 Other Continued Monitoring ................................................................................................... 8 1.3 Study Objectives ............................................................................................................................................... 8 2. Study Design and Methods ...................................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Study Design ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 2.1.1 Study Area Selection ................................................................................................................. 9 2.1.2 Sample Selection........................................................................................................................ 9 2.1.3 Analyte Selection ..................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Methods .......................................................................................................................................................... 10 2.2.1 Sampling Methods ................................................................................................................... 10 2.2.2 Context for Data Interpretation ................................................................................................ 11 3. Results and Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Well Characteristics ........................................................................................................................................ 12 3.1.1 Well Log Availability .............................................................................................................. 12 3.1.2 Characteristics of Wells Sampled ............................................................................................ 14 3.1.3 Well Log Bias .......................................................................................................................... 14 3.2 Water Quality .................................................................................................................................................. 16 3.2.1 Nitrate ...................................................................................................................................... 18 3.2.2 Arsenic ..................................................................................................................................... 20 3.2.3 Coliform Bacteria and E. coli .................................................................................................. 20 3.2.4 Pesticides ................................................................................................................................. 22 3.2.5 Consumer Product Constituents ............................................................................................... 24 DEQ21-LAB-0012-TR, Rev. 1.1 iii 3.2.6 Volatile Organic Compounds .................................................................................................. 25 3.2.7 Boron ....................................................................................................................................... 27 3.2.8 Manganese ............................................................................................................................... 28 3.2.9 Uranium ................................................................................................................................... 29 3.2.10 Vanadium ............................................................................................................................... 29 3.2.11 Lead ....................................................................................................................................... 30 3.2.12 Aluminum .............................................................................................................................. 30 3.2.13 Selenium ................................................................................................................................ 30 3.3 Seasonal differences ........................................................................................................................................ 30 3.4 Effects of Well Characteristics on Water Quality ........................................................................................... 32 4. Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 32 5. Recommendations ................................................................................................................................. 33 6.References .............................................................................................................................................. 34 Appendix A Complete Site List ............................................................................................................. 37 Appendix B Full Analyte List ................................................................................................................ 42 Appendix C Methodology for Sampling Isotopes .................................................................................. 46 Appendix D Example of Results Letter and Laboratory Report ............................................................ 48 Appendix E Example of a Well Drilling Report (Water Well Report) .................................................. 66 DEQ21-LAB-0012-TR, Rev. 1.1 iv Executive Summary Oregon stated objective groundwater Groundwater Monitoring Program received funding to begin collecting water quality data in 2015.1 The goals of the program are to establish the status of ambient groundwater conditions, identify emerging groundwater quality problems and inform groundwater users of potential risks from contamination. Groundwater studies are conducted aquifers over a 10-year period. Regional study areas are selected based on previously identified groundwater vulnerabilities, environmental justice concerns, nitrate data collected during
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hydrology of Malheur Lake, Harney County, Southeastern Oregon J, ./J V
    (200) WRi 7.3>-- ;:). , 3 1818 00029855 Hydrology of Malheur Lake, Harney County, southeastern Oregon J, ./J v- . S. GEOLOGI AL SURV EY / Water esOi:ifceTn vest iga tlo ns 2 1-75 • EP 2 3 1975 Prepared in cooperation with U. S. ARMY CORPS OF E GT EERS, Wall a Wall a Distri ct BI6LIOGR.I.PHIC DATA 11. Report No. 3. Re cipient' Accession No. SHEET 4. Title a nd Subtitle 5. Report Date HYDROLOG Y OF MALHEUR LAKE, HARNEY COUNTY, SOUTHEASTERN August 1975 OREGON 6. 7. Au thor(s ) 8. Performing Organization Rept. Larr y L. Hubbard o. USGS/WRI -21-7 5 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/ Task/ Work Unit No. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division 830 NE. Holladay Street 11. Contra ct/ Grant No . Portland, Oregon 97232 12. Sponsoring Organization Name a nd Address 13. Type of Report & Period U.S . Geological Survey, Water Resources Division Covered 830 NE . Holladay Street Final Portland, Oregon 97232 14. 15. Supplementary orcs Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla Distr ict 16. Ab rracrs The various components of inflow and outf low to and from the lake and their relative magnitudes were identified. In 1972 water year the total inf low to the lake was 200,000 acre - feet, but it was only 75 ,000 acre-feet in 1973 water year. In 1972 wa ter year the Donner und Blitzen River contr ibuted 55 percent of the inflow, with Silvies River , direct prec i pitation, and Sodhous e Spring contributing 28, 13, and 4 percent respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • South End Complex Basque Wells & Craters Fires C
    SSSOOOUUUTTTHHH EEENNNDDD CCCOOOMMMPPPLLLEEEXXX & BASQUE WELLS & CRATERS FIRES BURNED AREA EMERGENCY STABILIZATION PLAN Bureau of Land Management Burns District Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Malheur National Wildlife Refuge August – September 2006 Prepared1 by U.S. Department of the Interior Burned Area Emergency Response Team BURNED AREA EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN South End Complex & Basque Wells & Craters Fires EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This plan addresses emergency stabilization of fire effects resulting from the South End Complex and Basque Wells and Craters Fires that occurred on the Bureau of Land Management, Burns District and Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. The South End Complex includes the Krumbo Butte, Grandad, Pueblo, Trout Creek, and Black Point Fires. The plan has been prepared in accordance with the U.S. Department of the Interior, Department Manual, Part 620: Wildland Fire Management, Chapter 3: Burned Area Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation (September, 2003) the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Emergency Stabilization and Rehabilitation, H-1742-1, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Fire Management Handbook, Chapter 11. The plan also includes recommendations for inter mixed private lands within the burned area. The primary objectives of this Burned Area Emergency Response Plan are: Human Life and Safety • To prescribe post-fire mitigation measures necessary to protect human life and property Soil/Water Stabilization • To promptly stabilize and prevent further degradation to affected watersheds and soils Threatened
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Malheur National Wildlife Refuge
    Implementation Progress Update 2021 This document is an implementation summary of the Collaborative Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) between January 2013 and September of 2018. During this period significant effort was directed towards improving ecological function of aquatic systems, the highest CCP priority. Efforts were focused on Malheur Lake based on collaborative conversations and intercontinental importance to migratory birds. Resulting from extensive interactions it became clear Malheur Lake is both unique and a poorly understood ecosystem. With this as the bases to start from and through testing possible monitoring/ management techniques, it became clear a strategic ecological system approach was required. This resulted in beginning the development of a Malheur Lake systems model that would enable transfer of knowledge through time and test/inform future management decisions. Resources were also directed towards social and economic analysis to strengthen future management decisions and develop implementation resources. The other major component of improving Refuge aquatic health was development of an integrated wetland/river plan. Advancing efforts on Malheur Lake required significant commitments of resources from the Refuge and partners. This necessary commitment of resources prevented work on integrated wetland/river planning and testing. The Ecology Work Group (established in the CCP) focused on obtaining data in wet meadow habitats related to the grazing and haying program through independent third party monitoring. This collaborative effort recognized the need for developing a state and transition model. Due to habitat configurations it was found not possible to fully develop needed science on Refuge lands alone. The scientific effort was then expanded to other parts of the Basin with support from Refuge permittee resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Stinking Lake Research Natural Area Is a Part Threatens Significant Impairment of Scientific Or of the Federal System of Such Tracts Established Educational Values
    2. The Research Natural Area described in this The total Federal system is outlined in "A supplement is administered by the Fish and Directory of the Research Natural Areas on Wildlife Service of the U.S. Department of the Federal Lands of the United States of America."3 Interior as part of the Malheur National Wildlife Of the 68 Federal Research Natural Areas that Refuge. Fish and Wildlife Service Research have been established in Oregon and Natural Areas are administered through Area Washington, 45 are described in "Federal Offices; scientists wishing to use the Stinking Research Natural Areas in Oregon and Wash- Lake Research Natural Area should contact both ington: A Guidebook for Scientists and Educa- the Area Manager (U.S. Fish and Wildlife tors," (see footnote 1) along with details on Service, 4620 Overland Road, Boise, ID 83705), management and use of such tracts; 11 have and the Refuge Manager (Malheur National been described in supplements to the guidebook; Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box 113, Burns, OR this is the twelfth supplement to that guidebook. 97720). The Refuge Manager supervises The guiding principle in management of management activities at the Refuge and Research Natural Areas is to prevent unnatural coordinates scientific work on the Research encroachments, activities which directly or Natural Area. For brief observational visits, indirectly modify ecological processes on the permission may be obtained from the Refuge tracts. Neither logging nor uncontrolled grazing Manager. is allowed, for example, nor is public use which Stinking Lake Research Natural Area is a part threatens significant impairment of scientific or of the Federal system of such tracts established educational values.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Interior Draft
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT PROPOSED MALHEUR WILDERNESS AREA HARNEY COUNTY, OREGON PREPARED BY .DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE WASHINGTON, D. C. SUMMARY (X) Draft ( ) Final Environmental Statement Department of the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife 1. TYPE OF ACTION: Legislative. 2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION IMDICATTNG WHAT STATES AND COUNTIES PARTICULARLY AFFECTED: Proposal recommends that approximately 30,000 acres within the 180,851-acre Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Harney County, Oregon, be designated as wilderness within the National Wilderness Preservation System. ~~~ 3. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: No immediate or long-range environmental change would occur on the refuge as a result of the proposed action. Since designation as a wilderness is designed to protect and preserve natural environ- mentafqualities, no significant adverse environmental effects are anticipated. " ™ h. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: (a) Continue under present management; (b) designate a wilderness area with boundaries other than those established in the proposal. ~ —— —— —— ___, 5. FEDERAL AGENCIES FROM WHICH COMMENTS HAVE BEEN REQUESTED: Department of Commerce Department of Transportation Department of Defense Environmental Protection Agency Department of the Interior Bureau of Outdoor Recreation National Park Service U. S. Geological Survey Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of land Management Oregon State Clearinghouse Oregon State Game Commission 6. DATE DRAFT STATEMENT MADE AVAILABLE TO COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY TO THE PUBLIC SENT TO FEDERAL REGISTER: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT .PROPOSED MALHEUR WILDERNESS AREA I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, U. S. Department of the Interior, proposes that approximately 30,000 acres of the 180,851-acre Malheur National Wildlife Refuge be designated as wilderness within the National Wilderness Preservation System.
    [Show full text]
  • Harney Lake Research Natural Area
    3. The Research Natural Area described in this described in supplements to the guidebook; this supplement is administered by the Fish and is the ninth supplement. Wildlife Service of the U.S. Department of the The guiding principle in management of Interior as part of the Malheur National Wildlife Research Natural Areas is to prevent unnatural Refuge. Fish and Wildlife Service Research encroachments, activities which directly or Natural Areas are administered through Area indirectly modify ecological processes on the Offices; scientists wishing to use the Harney tracts. Neither logging nor uncontrolled grazing Lake Research Natural Area should contact both is allowed, for example, nor is public use which the Area Manager (U.S. Fish and Wildlife threatens significant impairment of scientific or Service, 4620 Overland Road, Boise, Idaho 83705) educational values. Management practices and the Refuge Manager (Malheur National necessary for maintenance of the ecosystem may Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box 113, Burns, Oregon be allowed. 97720); the Refuge Manager supervises Federal Research Natural Areas provide a management activities at the Refuge and uniquely valuable system of publicly owned and coordinates scientific work on the Research protected examples of undisturbed ecosystems Natural Area. For brief observational visits, which are available to the scientific community. permission may be obtained from the Refuge Research can be conducted with minimal Manager. interference and reasonable assurance that Harney Lake Research Natural Area is a part investments in long-term studies will not be lost of a Federal system of such tracts established for to logging, land development, or similar research and educational purposes. Each activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 Physical Environment Chapter 4 Biological Environment Chapter 5 Human Environment Maps Appendices Chapter 3 Physical Environment
    ©Maren Murphy Ponds Vista Buena Chapter 3 Physical Environment Chapter 5 Chapter 4 Chapter 3 Chapter 2 Chapter 1 Human Biological Physical Management Introduction and Appendices Maps Environment Environment Environment Direction Background Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan Chapter 3. Physical Environment 3.1 Major Landforms Situated in the wide open spaces of the Harney Basin physiographic area, on the northern edge of the Great Basin, the Refuge centers on three shallow playa lakes, Malheur, Mud, and Harney. These lakes are located in the lowest portion of the Harney Basin and receive life-producing water from the surrounding hills and mountains. Most of the water reaching the lakes arrives in the spring as snow melts and flows southward down the Silvies River, northward in the Donner und Blitzen River (Blitzen River), and through the Silver Creek drainage from the northwest. With an average annual rain/snow fall of only 9 inches, a drought year can result in extremely dry conditions; the lakes can be reduced to a mere fraction of their former size or become alkali-covered playas. The area surrounding the lakes is relatively flat, so a 1-inch rise in the water level will put almost 3 square miles of adjacent land underwater. A year of extremely abundant rain and snow can force water to rise beyond the boundaries of the Refuge to cover surrounding lands, doubling or tripling the size of the marsh. In the mid-1980s three years of above-normal snow forced Malheur Lake beyond the refuge boundary; the lake grew from 67 square miles to more than 160 square miles.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ecology of Malheur Lake and Management Implications
    the ecology of malheur lake And Management Implications - | •.. a - • Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Harney County, Oregon Malheur National Wildlife Refuge MALHEUR LAKE THE ECOLOGY OF MALHEUR LAKE and management implications By Harold F. Duebbert, Wildlife Biologist Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service The high biological productivity of the Malheur Lake marshes led to the establishment of Mal- heur and Harney Lakes as one of the first Na- tional Wildlife Refuges in 1908. The primary management objective for the lake when it was established as a refuge was preservation and propagation of migratory waterfowl, and the same is true today. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 4 GEOLOGY 5 GEOGRAPHY AND TOPOGRAPHY 6 ECOLOGICAL UNITS 7 PLANT ECOLOGY 11 BIRDS AND MAMMALS 14 MALHEUR LAKE AS AN AQUATIC HABITAT 20 APPENDIX 22 TABLES TABLE 1. Species composition of submerged aquatic vegetation, Malheur Lake, Oregon. 1956-58, 1964-65 (5-year average) 12 TABLE 2. Acreage of sago pondweed in Malheur Lake, 1956-65 .13 TABLE 3. Duck breeding pairs and broods observed on three 640-acre blocks within different ecological types in Malheur Lake, 1966 15 TABLE 4. Amount of use made of Malheur Lake by waterfowl during the period 1957-65 (includes ducks, coots, geese and swans) .16 TABLE 5. Birds observed on three 640-acre blocks within different ecological types at Malheur Lake, Oregon, June, 1966 17 TABLE 6. Habitat types in three 640-acre census blocks at Malheur Lake, Oregon, August 1, 1966 18 FIGURES FIGURE 1. Location of ecological units in Malheur Lake 7 FIGURE 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Malheur Blitzen Valley Auto Tour Route
    Malheur National Wildlife Refuge U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service ABOUT THE AUTHOR 36391 Sodhouse Lane Princeton, OR 97721 This interpretive tour was written by Alice 541/493-2612 Malheur Elshoff who has been visiting the Refuge since Malheur National Wildlife Refuge the 1960s, first birding and then volunteering. www.fws.gov/malheur National Wildlife She is a retired teacher who enjoys sharing July 2019 her love of wildlife with visitors of all ages. She Refuge believes deeply in the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, which sets wildlife conservation as its primary purpose and preser- vation and restoration of biological diversity and Blitzen Valley environmental health as its main goal. Auto Tour Route Alice plays a large role with the Friends of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge (FOMR), a Self-Guided non-profit group whose purpose is to support the goals of the Refuge. With the help of the FOMR, Interpretive Tour this interpretive tour and the numbered signs for the auto tour were made possible. FRIENDS OF MALHEUR NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Friends of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge was formed in 1999 and is an independent non- profit 501(c)(3) corporation. FOMR promotes conservation and appreciation of natural and cultural resources at the Refuge through education, outreach, advocacy and on- the-ground stewardship. To learn more about FOMR, please visit malheurfriends.org. INTRODUCTION This 42-mile self-guided auto tour showcases the scenic Blitzen Valley, from the Refuge headquar- ters of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge south to Wright’s historic P Ranch. The full tour requires at least two Point hours to complete, depending on the frequency and Lawen Lane length of any stops you make.
    [Show full text]
  • The Recreation Resources of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF JAMES CONRAD ALBRECHT for the MS in NATURAL RESOURCES (Name) (Degree) (Major) Date thesis is presented May 13 , 1965 Title THE RECREATION RESOURCES OF THE MALHEUR NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Abstract approved (Major professor) j Heavy use of outdoor recreation areas in the United States since World War II is endangering their quality. Demand made by a rapidly growing population with rising personal incomes and increasing leisure time is expected to grow 50 percent nationally and 146 per- cent in Oregon by 1975. In Oregon, population, incomes, and amount of leisure time per person are all increasing more rapidly than nationally. A large influx of out -of -state visitors accelerates the demand. Eighty -five percent of outdoor recreation land in the United States and 95 percent in Oregon is owned by the Federal government. Recreation on Federal land is in general resource -based, that is, it depends upon some natural feature. The role of the Federal government is therefore pre- eminent in developing sites for resource -based rec- reation activities. Of the agencies involved in meeting the Federal responsibil- ity, the possible role of the Fish and Wildlife Service is least known. Controlling approximately four percent of outdoor recreation land, the 300 refuges had only 13 million of the more than 500 million visitor -days to outdoor recreation areas in 1960. Recreation visits to refuges are increasing rapidly but apparently the quality and quantity of the remarkable wildlife resources of the National Wildlife Refuge System is little understood. As the mission of the Branch of Wildlife Refuges developed, its role involves the provision of habitat for every species of native wildlife somewhere in the System.
    [Show full text]
  • Bios from 1902 History
    JOHH D. DALY. BIOGRAPHICAL. JOHN D. DALY.—It is with pleasure that clothing, furnishings, boots and shoes, crock- we are permitted to write concerning the tal- ery, groceries, and feed to lumber, hardware, ented and enterprising" business man whose and machinery and implements. In addition name appears above, since he is one of those to this fine business, Mr. Daly and his partner men of honor and stability who form the real are among the leading financiers of the sec- strength of any community, and since he is tion, being largely interested in the First Na- numbered as one of the leading business men tional Bank of Ontario, and the First National of the county of Harney, and has here and else- Bank at Burns, Oregon. Our subject is the where achieved a success which is very grati- president of both of these institutions and they fying both in the results to him individually are in a flourishing condition and well estab- and in the general business world of eastern lished. The firm also handles a sawmill, Oregon, where he has operated. twenty-two miles north from Drewsey, and Mr. Daly was born in Canyon City, Ore- Mr. Daly has about one-half dozen ranches of gon, on May 13, 1866, being the son of Eugene value in various parts of the country, and he and Mary A. (Donohoe) Daly. His parents manages this large amount of business with were natives of County Cork, Ireland, and marked wisdom and discretion, putting into came to the United States in 1862, locating in the entire lines energy and vigor which are Boston, whence in 1863 they came via Pana- characteristic of his own personality.
    [Show full text]
  • Currens Redband Diversity Final
    REDBAND TROUT RESILIENCE AND CHALLENGE IN A CHANGING LANDSCAPE REDBAND TROUT RESILIENCE AND CHALLENGE IN A CHANGING LANDSCAPE Proceedings of a Workshop Malheur Field Station, Princeton, Oregon September 23–25, 1996 Edited by R. Kirk Schroeder and James D. Hall Published by Oregon Chapter of the American Fisheries Society Corvallis, Oregon 2007 Suggested citation formats: Entire book Schroeder, R.K., and J.D. Hall, editors. 2007. Redband trout: resilience and challenge in a changing landscape. Oregon Chapter, American Fisheries Society, Corvallis. Article within the book Behnke, R.J. 2007. Redband trout of the Northern Great Basin. Pages 1–9 in R. K. Schroeder and J.D. Hall, editors. Redband trout: resilience and challenge in a changing landscape. Oregon Chapter, American Fisheries Society, Corvallis. Cover illustration © by Joseph R. Tomelleri, 1991 Address orders to Oregon Chapter American Fisheries Society CONTENTS Preface ................................................................................................................................................................................. vii Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................... ix Group photo ........................................................................................................................................................................ xii Redband Trout of the Northern Great Basin R.J. Behnke....................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]