DOCSLIB.ORG

Grande Ronde Subbasin Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Grande Ronde Subbasin Plan Grande Ronde Subbasin Plan May 28, 2004 Prepared for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council Lead Writer M. Cathy Nowak, Cat Tracks Wildlife Consulting Subbasin Team Leader Lyle Kuchenbecker, Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program Grande Ronde Subbasin Plan Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary...............................................................................................................12 2. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 12 2.1 Description of Planning Entity ...................................................................................... 12 2.2. List of Participants......................................................................................................... 13 2.3. Stakeholder Involvement Process.................................................................................. 14 2.4. Overall Approach to the Planning Activity ................................................................... 14 2.5. Process and Schedule for Revising/Updating the Plan.................................................. 15 3. Subbasin Assessment ............................................................................................................ 15 3.1. Subbasin Overview........................................................................................................ 15 3.1.1. General Description............................................................................................... 15 3.1.2. Subbasin Water Resources .................................................................................... 23 3.1.3. Hydrologic and Ecologic Trends in the Subbasin ................................................. 32 3.1.4. Regional Context................................................................................................... 34 3.2. Focal Species Characterization and Status .................................................................... 36 3.2.1 Native/non-native Wildlife, Plant and Resident/anadromous Fish of Ecological Importance............................................................................................................................. 36 3.2.2 Focal Species Selection ......................................................................................... 47 3.2.3. Aquatic Focal Species Population Delineation and Characterization ................... 48 3.2.4. Terrestrial Focal Species Population Delineation and Characterization ............... 97 3.2.5 Plant Focal Species..................................................................................................... 126 3.3. Out-of Subbasin Effects .............................................................................................. 128 3.3.1. Aquatic ................................................................................................................ 128 3.3.2. Terrestrial ............................................................................................................ 131 3.4 Environment/Population Relationships ....................................................................... 133 3.4.1 Aquatic ................................................................................................................ 133 3.4.2 Terrestrial ............................................................................................................ 133 3.4.3 Interspecies Relationships ................................................................................... 190 3.5. Identification and Analysis of Limiting Factors/Conditions ....................................... 191 3.5.1. Description of Historic Factors Leading to Decline of Focal Species/Ecological Function-Process – Aquatic................................................................................................. 191 3.5.2. Description of Historic Factors Leading to Decline of Focal Species/Ecological Function-Process – Terrestrial............................................................................................. 203 3.6. Synthesis/Interpretation............................................................................................... 204 3.6.1. Subbasin-wide Working Hypothesis – Aquatic................................................... 204 3.6.2. Terrestrial Assessment Synthesis ........................................................................ 206 3.6.3. Desired Future Conditions – Aquatic .................................................................. 222 3.6.4. Desired Future Conditions – Terrestrial .............................................................. 222 3.6.5. Opportunities ....................................................................................................... 222 4. Inventory of Existing Activities (Private, Local, State, Federal) ........................................ 222 4.1. Existing Legal Protection ............................................................................................ 223 4.2. Existing Plans .............................................................................................................. 226 4.3. Existing Management Programs.................................................................................. 230 4.4. Existing Restoration and Conservation Projects ......................................................... 231 5/26/04 9:17 AM 2 4.5. Gap Assessment of Existing Protections, Plans, Programs and Projects..................... 255 5. Management Plan ................................................................................................................ 257 5.1. Vision for the Subbasin ............................................................................................... 258 5.2 Aquatic Species and Habitats ...................................................................................... 258 5.2.1 Habitats................................................................................................................ 258 5.2.2 Fish Production/Population Strategies................................................................ 264 5.3. Terrestrial Species and Habitats .................................................................................. 267 5.4 Consistency with ESA/CWA Requirements ............................................................... 269 5.5 Research, Monitoring and Evaluation ......................................................................... 269 5.5.1 Aquatic Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation.......................................................... 269 5.5.2 Terrestrial Research Monitoring and Evaluation................................................. 290 6. Appendices .......................................................................................................................... 290 6.1 Appendix 1: References .............................................................................................. 290 6.2 Appendix 2: Species Tables ........................................................................................ 317 6.3 Appendix 3: Comprehensive Focal Species Accounts ................................................ 351 6.3.1 Columbia Spotted Frog........................................................................................ 351 6.3.2 Great Blue Heron................................................................................................. 366 6.3.3 Bald Eagle ........................................................................................................... 376 6.3.4 White-headed Woodpecker ................................................................................. 386 6.3.5 American Marten................................................................................................. 393 6.3.6 Olive-sided Flycatcher......................................................................................... 396 6.3.7 Mountain Goat..................................................................................................... 401 6.3.8 Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep ......................................................................... 411 6.3.9 Western Meadowlark........................................................................................... 422 6.3.10 Sage Sparrow....................................................................................................... 429 6.3.11 Rocky Mountain Elk............................................................................................ 440 6.3.12 Yellow Warbler ................................................................................................... 444 6.3.13 American Beaver................................................................................................. 449 6.4 Appendix 4: Data Sources ........................................................................................... 452 6.5 Appendix 5: Mangement Plans and Programs Relevant to Activities in the Grande Ronde Subbasin....................................................................................................................... 454 6.6 Appendix 6: Complete Grande Ronde Subbasin Project Inventory by Salmonid Population Units...................................................................................................................... 462 6.7 Appendix 7: Species of Interest to the Tribes of the Grande Ronde Subbasin............ 463 6.7.1 Species Recognized by Tribes – Submitted by the Nez Perce Tribe................... 463
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Botany, Invasive Plants, Native Plants, Genetics
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest FY-16 Region Program Accomplishments Calochortus umpquaensis, Umpqua mariposa lily, is found only in the Umpqua River watershed of Botany southwestern OR. A big "anthophorid" bee is tucked into the flower. Invasive Plants Native Plants Genetics U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form.
    [Show full text]
  • Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny
    Outline of angiosperm phylogeny: orders, families, and representative genera with emphasis on Oregon native plants Priscilla Spears December 2013 The following listing gives an introduction to the phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants that has emerged in recent decades, and which is based on nucleic acid sequences as well as morphological and developmental data. This listing emphasizes temperate families of the Northern Hemisphere and is meant as an overview with examples of Oregon native plants. It includes many exotic genera that are grown in Oregon as ornamentals plus other plants of interest worldwide. The genera that are Oregon natives are printed in a blue font. Genera that are exotics are shown in black, however genera in blue may also contain non-native species. Names separated by a slash are alternatives or else the nomenclature is in flux. When several genera have the same common name, the names are separated by commas. The order of the family names is from the linear listing of families in the APG III report. For further information, see the references on the last page. Basal Angiosperms (ANITA grade) Amborellales Amborellaceae, sole family, the earliest branch of flowering plants, a shrub native to New Caledonia – Amborella Nymphaeales Hydatellaceae – aquatics from Australasia, previously classified as a grass Cabombaceae (water shield – Brasenia, fanwort – Cabomba) Nymphaeaceae (water lilies – Nymphaea; pond lilies – Nuphar) Austrobaileyales Schisandraceae (wild sarsaparilla, star vine – Schisandra; Japanese
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Chloroplast Genomes Shed Light on Phylogenetic
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Complete chloroplast genomes shed light on phylogenetic relationships, divergence time, and biogeography of Allioideae (Amaryllidaceae) Ju Namgung1,4, Hoang Dang Khoa Do1,2,4, Changkyun Kim1, Hyeok Jae Choi3 & Joo‑Hwan Kim1* Allioideae includes economically important bulb crops such as garlic, onion, leeks, and some ornamental plants in Amaryllidaceae. Here, we reported the complete chloroplast genome (cpDNA) sequences of 17 species of Allioideae, fve of Amaryllidoideae, and one of Agapanthoideae. These cpDNA sequences represent 80 protein‑coding, 30 tRNA, and four rRNA genes, and range from 151,808 to 159,998 bp in length. Loss and pseudogenization of multiple genes (i.e., rps2, infA, and rpl22) appear to have occurred multiple times during the evolution of Alloideae. Additionally, eight mutation hotspots, including rps15-ycf1, rps16-trnQ-UUG, petG-trnW-CCA , psbA upstream, rpl32- trnL-UAG , ycf1, rpl22, matK, and ndhF, were identifed in the studied Allium species. Additionally, we present the frst phylogenomic analysis among the four tribes of Allioideae based on 74 cpDNA coding regions of 21 species of Allioideae, fve species of Amaryllidoideae, one species of Agapanthoideae, and fve species representing selected members of Asparagales. Our molecular phylogenomic results strongly support the monophyly of Allioideae, which is sister to Amaryllioideae. Within Allioideae, Tulbaghieae was sister to Gilliesieae‑Leucocoryneae whereas Allieae was sister to the clade of Tulbaghieae‑ Gilliesieae‑Leucocoryneae. Molecular dating analyses revealed the crown age of Allioideae in the Eocene (40.1 mya) followed by diferentiation of Allieae in the early Miocene (21.3 mya). The split of Gilliesieae from Leucocoryneae was estimated at 16.5 mya.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017… Program of Work
    2017… PROGRAM OF WORK. Umatilla National Foresttt View from Oregon Butte - Pomeroy Ranger District United States Department of Agriculture FOREST SERVICE 1 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Umatilla National Forest 2017 Program of Work 2016 Forest Staff and Accomplishments………………....…….. Page 5 South Zone Program of Work: Heppner Ranger District.………..…………………………..……….….. Page 7 North Fork John Day Ranger District………………………….…..….… Page 21 North Zone Program of Work: Pomeroy Ranger District …………………………..…………………… Page 33 Walla Walla Ranger District…………….……………………………..... Page 41 Forest-Wide Program of Work: Forest-wide projects…………………………………….…………….…
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Washington Game Status and Trend Report
    S T A T E O F W A S H I N G T O N 20092009 GameGame StatusStatus andand TrendTrend ReportReport AN OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON 2009 GAME STATUS AND TREND REPORT July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 STATE OF WASHINGTON Chris Gregoire Governor WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Phil Anderson Interim Director WILDLIFE PROGRAM Dave Brittell Assistant Director GAME DIVISION Dave Ware Game Division Manager This Program Receives Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration, Project W-96-R, Statewide Wildlife Management. This report should be cited as: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2009. 2009 Game status and trend report. Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington, USA. TABLE OF CONTENTS Deer .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Statewide Summary .................................................................................................................. 3 Region 1, PMUs 11, 13, GMUs 101-124 ................................................................................. 6 Region 1, PMUs 14, 15, GMUs 127-142 ............................................................................... 11 Region 1, PMUs 16, 17, GMUs 145-186 ............................................................................... 15 Region 2, PMUs 21, 22, GMUs 203-243 ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife-Habitat Relationships of the Grande Ronde River
    Wildlife-Habitat Relationships of the Grande Ronde River by Aryn E. Hayden ABSTRACT In selecting habitat animal species require food, water and adequate cover. When these criteria are taken into account it appears that habitats utilized by terrestrial wildlife along the Grande Ronde River change longitudinally from mixed conifer forests to ponderosa pine forests in the headwaters and middle reaches to grassland and shrub-steppe in the lower reaches. Species diversity of mammals, birds and reptiles within these habitats will also decrease towards the lower reaches to some degree as habitat changes along the Grande Ronde River. A potential decrease in species diversity as habitat changes may indicate that habitat specialist species are more likely to be found in the headwaters of and middle reaches while habitat generalists are likely to be found in the middle and lower reaches of the Grande Ronde River. This concept of decreasing species diversity in a downstream gradient indicates that the River Continuum Concept, traditionally an aquatic hypothesis, may have some applicability to distributions of terrestrial wildlife in the context of riverine ecosystems. Species diversity of terrestrial wildlife is also heavily influenced by the presence of riparian vegetation along the river. Riparian vegetation is likely to be found within the headwaters and middle reaches of the Grande Ronde River and in patches pertaining to locations of physical complexity along the river such as confluences with tributaries. Riparian vegetation provides complex habitat for mammals and birds that live along the river and those that utilize riparian habitat for foraging, water requirements, migration or other activities necessary for survival.
    [Show full text]
  • Allium Dictuon H
    Allium dictuon H. St. John Blue Mountain onion Liliaceae - lily family status: State Threatened, Federal Species of Concern, USFS sensitive rank: G2 / S2 General Description: Bulb-bearing perennial up to 4 dm tall. Bulbs ovoid, solitary, forming rhizomes; 1-3 new bulbs develop at ends of rhizomes, outside parent bulb coat. Parent bulb disappearing when flowering, except for roots and shrivelled bulb coats. O uter bulb coat membranous, pale brown with irregular, oblong to rhomboidal, sinuous cellular patterning (use 20x magnification). Leaves 2-3, linear, withering from tip when flowering, 10-28 cm x 1-2 mm. Floral Characteristics: Flowering stalk persistent, solitary, round in cross section, 2-4 dm x 1-3 mm. Umbel persistent, many-flowered, erect; subtending bracts 2, persistent, 3-veined, lanceolate to lance-ovate, broader and shorter than the leaves, with a slender, pointed tip. Flowers 11-16 mm, bell-shaped. Tepals 6, bright pink to rose purple, lanceolate, outer ones longer and wider than the inner, becoming rigid and keeled in Illustration by Jeanne R. Janish, fruit, margins finely toothed, becoming rolled inward, tips long-pointed. ©1959 University of Washington Press Fruits: Seeds black, shining. Generally identifiable June to July, depending on snowpack and time of snowmelt. Identif ication Tips: Allium acuminatum differs in having bulbs that don't form rhizomes; new bulbs are formed within coats of parent bulbs. Range: Local endemic of the Blue Mts. of southeastern WA . Habitat/Ecology: Steep, open, rocky slopes, sparsely vegetated grass steppe, lithosols, and rock outcrops. Soils are derived from surface basalts and interflow material; surfaces are rocky and dominated by loose gravel.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 1996 / Proposed Rules
    7596 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 1996 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR appointment in the Regional Offices SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: listed below. Fish and Wildlife Service Information relating to particular taxa Background in this notice may be obtained from the The Endangered Species Act (Act) of 50 CFR Part 17 Service's Endangered Species 1973, as amended, (16 U.S.C. 1531 et Coordinator in the lead Regional Office seq.) requires the Service to identify Endangered and Threatened Wildlife identified for each taxon and listed species of wildlife and plants that are and Plants; Review of Plant and below: endangered or threatened, based on the Animal Taxa That Are Candidates for Region 1. California, Commonwealth best available scientific and commercial Listing as Endangered or Threatened of the Northern Mariana Islands, information. As part of the program to Species Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Pacific accomplish this, the Service has AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Territories of the United States, and maintained a list of species regarded as Interior. Washington. candidates for listing. The Service maintains this list for a variety of ACTION: Notice of review. Regional Director (TE), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Eastside Federal reasons, includingÐto provide advance SUMMARY: In this notice the Fish and Complex, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue, knowledge of potential listings that Wildlife Service (Service) presents an Portland, Oregon 97232±4181 (503± could affect decisions of environmental updated list of plant and animal taxa 231±6131). planners and developers; to solicit input native to the United States that are Region 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Identification of the 50 Most Common Plant Families in Temperate Regions
    Field identification of the 50 most common plant families in temperate regions (including agricultural, horticultural, and wild species) by Lena Struwe [email protected] © 2016, All rights reserved. Note: Listed characteristics are the most common characteristics; there might be exceptions in rare or tropical species. This compendium is available for free download without cost for non- commercial uses at http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~struwe/. The author welcomes updates and corrections. 1 Overall phylogeny – living land plants Bryophytes Mosses, liverworts, hornworts Lycophytes Clubmosses, etc. Ferns and Fern Allies Ferns, horsetails, moonworts, etc. Gymnosperms Conifers, pines, cycads and cedars, etc. Magnoliids Monocots Fabids Ranunculales Rosids Malvids Caryophyllales Ericales Lamiids The treatment for flowering plants follows the APG IV (2016) Campanulids classification. Not all branches are shown. © Lena Struwe 2016, All rights reserved. 2 Included families (alphabetical list): Amaranthaceae Geraniaceae Amaryllidaceae Iridaceae Anacardiaceae Juglandaceae Apiaceae Juncaceae Apocynaceae Lamiaceae Araceae Lauraceae Araliaceae Liliaceae Asphodelaceae Magnoliaceae Asteraceae Malvaceae Betulaceae Moraceae Boraginaceae Myrtaceae Brassicaceae Oleaceae Bromeliaceae Orchidaceae Cactaceae Orobanchaceae Campanulaceae Pinaceae Caprifoliaceae Plantaginaceae Caryophyllaceae Poaceae Convolvulaceae Polygonaceae Cucurbitaceae Ranunculaceae Cupressaceae Rosaceae Cyperaceae Rubiaceae Equisetaceae Rutaceae Ericaceae Salicaceae Euphorbiaceae Scrophulariaceae
    [Show full text]
  • Final Shoreline Master Program Southeast Washington Coalition Shoreline Master Program Update
    Planning Commission Review Draft: June 2016 BOCC Review: July 2016 Adopted: August 2016 Approved: February 28, 2017 Effective: March 9, 2017 March 2017 PREPARED FOR: ASOTIN, COLUMBIA, AND GARFIELD COUNTIES, THE CITY OF CLARKSTON, AND THE TOWN OF STARBUCK Final Shoreline Master Program Southeast Washington Coalition Shoreline Master Program Update Prepared by: Prepared with assistance from: Oneza & Associates Pineo Ecological Services, LLC 8033 W. Grandridge Boulevard, Suite A Kennewick, Washington 99336 This report was funded through a grant from the Washington State Department of Ecology March 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I: Shoreline Goals and Policies (RCW 90.58.100) ...................................................... 1 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2 Relationship between the Growth Management Act and Shoreline Management Act ....................................................................................................................................... 1 3 Profile of the Shoreline Jurisdiction within the SE WA Region ................................ 2 3.1 Shoreline Jurisdiction Rivers ..................................................................... 2 3.2 Shorelines of Statewide Significance ........................................................ 3 4 Goals and Policies .......................................................................................................... 4 4.1 Economic Development Element ............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species of Oregon
    Portland State University PDXScholar Institute for Natural Resources Publications Institute for Natural Resources - Portland 8-2016 Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species of Oregon James S. Kagan Portland State University Sue Vrilakas Portland State University, [email protected] John A. Christy Portland State University Eleanor P. Gaines Portland State University Lindsey Wise Portland State University See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/naturalresources_pub Part of the Biodiversity Commons, Biology Commons, and the Zoology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Oregon Biodiversity Information Center. 2016. Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species of Oregon. Institute for Natural Resources, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon. 130 pp. This Book is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Institute for Natural Resources Publications by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Authors James S. Kagan, Sue Vrilakas, John A. Christy, Eleanor P. Gaines, Lindsey Wise, Cameron Pahl, and Kathy Howell This book is available at PDXScholar: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/naturalresources_pub/25 RARE, THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES OF OREGON OREGON BIODIVERSITY INFORMATION CENTER August 2016 Oregon Biodiversity Information Center Institute for Natural Resources Portland State University P.O. Box 751,
    [Show full text]
  • Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
    Attachment 2 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE ARCHIVES DIVISION BEV CLARNO STEPHANIE CLARK SECRETARY OF STATE INTERIM DIRECTOR A. RICHARD VIAL 800 SUMMER STREET NE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE SALEM, OR 97310 503-373-0701 NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING INCLUDING STATEMENT OF NEED & FISCAL IMPACT FILED 07/19/2019 2:56 PM CHAPTER 635 ARCHIVES DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE SECRETARY OF STATE FILING CAPTION: 2020 Big Game Controlled Hunt Tag Numbers, Season Dates and Regulations LAST DAY AND TIME TO OFFER COMMENT TO AGENCY: 09/13/2019 5:00 PM The Agency requests public comment on whether other options should be considered for achieving the rule's substantive goals while reducing negative economic impact of the rule on business. CONTACT: Roxann Borisch 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive SE Filed By: 503-947-6314 Salem,OR 97302 Roxann Borisch [email protected] Rules Coordinator HEARING(S) Auxilary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon advance request. Notify the contact listed above. DATE: 09/13/2019 TIME: 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM OFFICER: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Commissioners ADDRESS: The Event Center 29392 Ellensburg Ave Gold Beach, OR 97444 NEED FOR THE RULE(S): This action is necessary to set 2020 hunting season regulations and controlled hunt tag numbers for game mammals. DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON, AND WHERE THEY ARE AVAILABLE: A copy of the rules and the other documents relied upon for this rulemaking are available from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Division, 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive SE, Salem, Oregon 97302-1142, between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
    [Show full text]