DOCSLIB.ORG

Coastal Lakes Strategic Action Plan for Coho Salmon Recovery

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Coastal Lakes Strategic Action Plan for Coho Salmon Recovery The Coastal Lakes Strategic Action Plan for Coho Salmon Recovery FIP Draft Copy June 28 2018 Note: This SAP is still under development, and is near final draft version at the time of the FIP application deadline. Coastal Lakes Strategic Action Plan for Coho Recovery Page 0 Contents Contributors and Acknowledgements ............................................................................................ 3 Acronyms ........................................................................................................................................ 5 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 6 1. Introduction: Why Coho? ........................................................................................................ 9 1.1 A Keystone Species ......................................................................................................... 10 1.2 An Indicator Watershed Function .................................................................................. 11 1.3 A Threatened Species ..................................................................................................... 12 1.4 A Unique Opportunity for Recovery .............................................................................. 12 1.5 A Locally Led Partnership ............................................................................................... 12 1. An Overview of the Siuslaw Coho Partnership and the Coastal Lakes Plan ......................... 13 2.1 Our Vision of Recovery ................................................................................................... 17 2.2 SAP Implementation: Long-Term Outcomes & Short-Term Goals ................................ 17 2.3 Scope of this Strategic Action Plan ................................................................................. 18 2.4 Guiding Principles for Plan Development ...................................................................... 19 3. The Coastal Lakes Watershed ............................................................................................... 22 3.1 Physical Geography ........................................................................................................ 23 3.2 Hydrology and Water Resources .................................................................................... 23 3.3 Biotic Systems ................................................................................................................ 27 3.4 Indigenous Communities of the Coastal Lakes .............................................................. 27 3.5 European Settlement and the Rise of a Resource Extraction Economy ........................ 28 3.6 The Coastal Lakes Economy today ................................................................................. 29 3.7 Advancing the Restoration Economy ............................................................................. 31 Restoration investments benefit the local economy ........................................................... 31 Restoration investments create local jobs ........................................................................... 32 Restoration investments are Investments in Our Community ............................................. 33 4. Coastal Lakes coho and their habitat needs ......................................................................... 33 4.1 The coho lifecycle ........................................................................................................... 34 4.2 Watershed Components and Coho Habitat Types ......................................................... 36 4.3 Wild Coho Distribution, Abundance, and Productivity .................................................. 38 5. Impaired Watershed Processes and Stresses on Coho Habitats .......................................... 43 Coastal Lakes Strategic Action Plan for Coho Recovery Page 1 5.1 Modified Watershed Processes in the Uplands, Tributaries, and Off-channel Habitats 43 5.2 Modified Watershed Processes in Mainstem, Estuary, and Off-channel Habitats........ 47 6. Development of the Coastal Lakes River Strategic Action Plan ......................................... 48 6.1 Visioning ......................................................................................................................... 48 6.2 Creating the Coastal Lakes Common Framework .......................................................... 48 6.3 Evaluating Habitat Stresses ............................................................................................ 49 6.5 Locating and Prioritizing Projects ................................................................................... 49 6.6 Monitoring and Indicators ............................................................................................. 52 6.7 Estimating Costs ............................................................................................................. 52 6.8 Community Outreach ..................................................................................................... 52 7. The Strategic Framework: Restoration Strategies and Key Geographies ............................. 53 7.1 The High Ranked Sub Watersheds ................................................................................. 53 7.2 Habitat Stresses, Limiting Factors, and the Anchor Habitat Approach ........................... 0 7.3 Strategies to Conserve Critical Coho Habitats in the Coastal Lake Watersheds .............. 0 8. SCP Implementation Plan: Goals & Actions (2019-2025) ....................................................... 3 9. Funding Needs: Estimated Costs .......................................................................................... 12 10. Evaluation and Adaptive Management ............................................................................... 0 10.1 The Monitoring Framework ............................................................................................. 0 10.2 Data Gaps and Priorities for Data Collection ................................................................... 0 10.4 Sustainability ..................................................................................................................... 0 11. References ........................................................................................................................... 0 Coastal Lakes Strategic Action Plan for Coho Recovery Page 2 Contributors and Acknowledgements The Siuslaw Coho Partnership is a committed group of public and private partners dedicated to the broad sense recovery of Siuslaw Coho salmon. This Strategic Action Plan (SAP) was developed by a “core planning team” of these partners, which included: Siuslaw Watershed Council (SWC) – Mizu Burruss, Eli Tome, Liz Vollmer-Buhl, Dan Carpenter Siuslaw Soil and Water Conservation District (Siuslaw SWCD) – Seth Mead Siuslaw National Forest (SNF) – Paul Burns, Ana Hernandez Natural Resource and Conservation Service (NRCS) – Kate Danks Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians – Ashley Russell, Margaret Corvi Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians, Stan van de Wetering National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries / National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) - Jeff Young Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) – Dan Avery, Renee Coxen, John Spangler The Wild Salmon Center – Mark Trenholm Most importantly, the SCP wants to especially thank Mark Trenholm who is responsible for writing the bulk of this plan and guiding partners through the process. Without Mark, we wouldn’t have these Strategic Action Plans and the SCP is extremely grateful for his writing, facilitation and guidance in the creation of both the Siuslaw and Coastal Lakes Strategic Action Plans. Furthermore, the SCP thanks Mark and the Coho Business Planning team for their creation of the common framework and coordination among the many organizations engaged in coho restoration efforts across Oregon. The team has been invaluable in knowledge, as well as in attracting and marketing to funders for our restoration efforts. This core planning team would like to thank the Business Plan Steering Committee for their support of the planning process. Special thanks to the NOAA Restoration Center for providing extensive GIS support to locate and prioritize the projects contained within this plan, and to the Wild Salmon Center for its role in facilitating the process, producing the plan, and working so diligently to get the initial work on the ground funded. We’d also like to acknowledge the critical contributions of several project consultants, including: PC Trask for producing the literature review and bibliography; TerrainWorks for generating the Netmap layers and conducting the initial spatial analyses and; Barbara Taylor for the editorial support. Coastal Lakes Strategic Action Plan for Coho Recovery Page 3 The Siuslaw Coho Partnership would also like to thank the funders of both the planning effort – the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB) and Oregon Community Foundation – and the first partners that stepped up to support implementation – the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) and the NOAA Restoration Center. This plan represents a cooperative effort on behalf of all of these partners to assimilate, focus, and build on the vast body of knowledge available on the Siuslaw watershed to accelerate the strategic protection and restoration of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Water-Resources of Western Douglas County, Oregon
    WATER-RESOURCES OF WESTERN DOUGLAS COUNTY, OREGON By D.A. Curtiss, C. A. Collins, and E.A. Oster U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS REPORT 83-4017 Prepared in cooperation with DOUGLAS COUNTY PORTLAND,OREGON 1984 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas Peck, Director For additional information write to: U.S. Geological Survey 847 N.E. 19th Ave., Suite 300 Portland, Oregon 97232 i i CONTENTS Page Abstract 1 Introduction 2 Previous Investigations 2 Geographic features 2 Geolog ic setti ng 8 Tertiary marine sedimentary rocks 8 Quaternary sediments 8 Coastal deposits 9 Fluvial deposits 10 Ground-water resources 10 Recharge 11 Movement 11 Di scharge 12 Water-level fluctuations 13 Potential well yields 13 Water quality 16 General characteristics 16 Area I variations 17 Surface water 20 Mean annual flow 20 Peak flows 20 Low flows 23 Water quality 25 Umpqua River near Elkton 25 Small streams 25 Extent of saltwater intrusion in the Umpqua River estuary 27 Selected lakes 30 Summary of water-resources conditions 36 SeIected references 38 Supp I ementa I data 43 ILLUSTRATIONS [Plate is in pocket] Plate 1. Map of generalized geologic map of western Douglas County, Oregon, showing wells and springs, and stiff diagrams for water sampled for chemical ana Iysi s Page Figure 1. Index map of study area 3 2. Map showing the average annual precipitation in the study area 4 3. Graph showing maximum, average, and minimum precipitation at Reedsport, 1938-79 5 4. Graph showing cumulative departure from average annual precipitation at Astoria, Gardiner, and Reedsport 6 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Siltcoos Lake Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant: Water Quality Conditions and Nutrient Sources
    Portland State University PDXScholar Center for Lakes and Reservoirs Publications and Presentations Center for Lakes and Reservoirs 3-2010 Siltcoos Lake Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant: Water Quality Conditions and Nutrient Sources Mark D. Sytsma Portland State University, [email protected] Rich Miller Portland State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/centerforlakes_pub Part of the Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons, Environmental Monitoring Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Sytsma, Mark D. and Miller, Rich, "Siltcoos Lake Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant: Water Quality Conditions and Nutrient Sources" (2010). Center for Lakes and Reservoirs Publications and Presentations. 52. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/centerforlakes_pub/52 This Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Center for Lakes and Reservoirs Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY, CENTER FOR LAKES AND RESERVOIRS Siltcoos Lake Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant Water quality conditions and nutrient sources Mark Sytsma and Rich Miller, Portland State University, Center for Lakes and Reservoirs 3/18/2010 Final report to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality for project number W08714 Siltcoos Lake
    [Show full text]
  • Volume II Appendix F
    Volume II –Appendix F - Fisheries Appendix F – Fisheries Table of Contents 1. FISHERIES...................................................................................................... 1 2. FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE FISHERIES ................................................... 1 2.A. Water Quality..................................................................................................................................... 2 2.B. Water Quantity and Physical Habitat.............................................................................................. 2 3. ENHANCEMENT PROGRAMS....................................................................... 3 4. ASSESSMENT OF FISH RESOURCES............................................................ 4 5. BASIN OVERVIEW......................................................................................... 5 6. SUB-BASIN DISCUSSION ............................................................................... 6 6.A. Coastal / Umpqua River Sub-basins................................................................................................. 7 6.A.1. Minimum Flows ................................................................................................................................. 7 6.A.2. Distribution and Abundance............................................................................................................... 7 6.A.3. Recreation........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-118. Scientific
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-118 Scientific Conclusions of the Status Review for Oregon Coast Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) June 2012 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Fisheries Science Center NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC Series The Northwest Fisheries Science Center of the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, uses the NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC series to issue scientific and technical publications. Manuscripts have been peer reviewed and edited. Documents published in this series may be cited in the scientific and technical literature. The NMFS-NWFSC Technical Memorandum series of the Northwest Fisheries Science Center continues the NMFS- F/NWC series established in 1970 by the Northwest & Alaska Fisheries Science Center, which has since been split into the Northwest Fisheries Science Center and the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. The NMFS-AFSC Technical Memorandum series is now used by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. Reference throughout this document to trade names does not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. This document should be referenced as follows: Stout, H.A., P.W. Lawson, D.L. Bottom, T.D. Cooney, M.J. Ford, C.E. Jordan, R.G. Kope, L.M. Kruzic, G.R. Pess, G.H. Reeves, M.D. Scheuerell, T.C. Wainwright, R.S. Waples, E. Ward, L.A. Weitkamp, J.G. Williams, and T.H. Williams. 2012. Scientific conclusions of the status review for Oregon coast coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-118, 242 p. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-118 Scientific Conclusions of the Status Review for Oregon Coast Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) Heather A.
    [Show full text]
  • MID COASTBASIN Ri
    7frL'J1Mt MID COASTBASIN ri c g1 1,11 £ ,_,.A, : 1?* State Water Resources Board May 1965 MID-COASTBASIN U STATE WATER RESOURCES BOARD SALEM, OREGON 1 May 1965 V.'w M1 I i A i BOARD MEMBERS I JOHN D. DAVIS, CHAIRMAN - Stayton R RUTH HAGENSTEIN, VICE CHAIRMAN - Portland EMERY N. CASTLE - Corvallis LaSELLE E. COLES - Prineville LOUIS H. FOOTE - Forest Grove WILLIAM L. JESS - Eagle Point I KARL W. ONTHANK - Eugene IDONEL J. LANE, Executive Secretary I I I I I I I I I, I I I I I COVER PICTURE I Coastal scene at Depoe Bay, Price $2.50 Oregon. Oregon State Highway Department photo. n H I L TABLEOF CONTENTS PAGE LISTOFTABLES ........ vi LISTOFFIGURES ................viii PURPOSE AND INTRODUCTION ...... ix FINDINGSANDCONCLUSIONS ................ x PART I THE BASIN PHYSICAL FEATURES Geographic Setting .............. I I Counties and Basin Areas . ....... 2 StreamSystem ............... 4 Climate ......... ....... ECONOMIC FACTORS History of Settlement ......... 6 7 Population . ................... Transportation ................... 9 Land Use and Ownership ........... 10 EconomicBase .................. 13 Agriculture .................... 14 Forestry...................... 17 Mining....................... 19 Manufacturing ................... 20 Recreation ................. 22 PART II WATER SUPPLY SURFACE WATER Annual Yield .................... 26 Seasonal Distribution ............... 28 Extreme Discharges ................. 30 WaterRights .................... 33 Legal Restrictions ................. 36 Maximum Legal Depletions .............. 37 GROUND
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Received , Inventory—Nomination
    NFS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-OO18 (3-82) Exp. 10-31-84 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service For NFS use only National Register of Historic Places received , Inventory—Nomination Form dateentered ^ 28 See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms "~" *"" Type ali entries—complete applicable sections ________________________ ___ 1. Name historic Honeyman, Jessie M., Memorial State Park Historic District and or common 2. Location street & number U. $. Highway 101___________________________W/A not for publication city, town_____Florence_______ _x_ vicinity of Fourth Congressional District____ state_________Oregon____code 41______county____Lane____________code 039 3. Classification Category Ownership Status Present Use _X_- district _X_ public _ )4 occupied agriculture museum building(s) private unoccupied commercial X park structure both work in progress educational private residence site Public Acquisition Accessible entertainment religious object N/A in process yes: restricted government scientific |\|//\ being considered X yes: unrestricted industrial transportation no military Other: 4. Owner of Property name_______Oregon State Parks and Recreation Division street & number 525 Trade Street SE city, town_____ Salem_________ W/A vicinity of___________ state Oregon 97310___ 5. Location of Legal Description ______________ courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. ______Oregon State Parks and Recreati on Division _______ street & number________________ 525 Trade Street SE ______________________ city, town ____________________ Salem __________________ state Oregon 97310 6. Representation in Existing Surveys__________ Statewide Inventory of title__________ Historic Properties ______has this property been determined eligible? __ yes -X_ no date__________ August 1 , 1974 __________________ —— federal _ X- state __ county —— local depository for survey records ____State Historic Preservation Office, 525 Trade St. SE ___ city, town Salem state Oregon 97310 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Cascadia Subduction Zone) Tsunami Inundation Map Tsunami Inundation Maps for Gardiner, W
    STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES Tsunami Inundation Map Doug-03 www.OregonGeology.org Local Source (Cascadia Subduction Zone) Tsunami Inundation Map Tsunami Inundation Maps for Gardiner, W. Lawrence Givens, Governing Board Chair Douglas County, Oregon Vicki S. McConnell, Director and State Geologist Andree V. Pollock, Assistant Director, Geologic Survey and Services Gardiner, Oregon Plate 1 Rachel L. Smith, Project Operations Manager Ian P. Madin, Chief Scientist 2013 124°12'0"W 124°10'0"W 124°8'0"W 124°6'0"W 100 200 rm 200 100 25 A Introduction y 100 r D r I L E R he I V E M C 200 F The Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) Oregon. DOGAMI has also incorporated physical evidence that suggests rm has been identifying and mapping the tsunami inundation hazard along that portions of the coast may drop 4 to 10 feet during the earthquake; s A Bas 100 the Oregon coast since 1994. In Oregon, DOGAMI manages the National this effect is known as subsidence. Detailed information on fault 25 Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program, which has been administered by geometries, subsidence, computer models, and the methodology used to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) since create the tsunami scenarios presented on this map can be found in Tahkenitch 1995. DOGAMI’s work is designed to help cities, counties, and other sites DOGAMI Special Papers 41 (Priest and others, 2009) and 43 (Witter and Lake 200 25 25 in coastal areas reduce the potential for disastrous tsunami-related others, 2011).
    [Show full text]
  • LANE COUNTY OREGON MULTI-JURISDICTION HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN Page | 46
    3. RISK ASSESSMENT 44 CFR Requirement §201.6(c) (2) [The plan shall include] A risk assessment that provides the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy to reduce losses from identified hazards. Local risk assessments must provide sufficient information to enable the jurisdiction to identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from identified hazards The purpose of risk assessment is to identify and describe hazards that affect Lane County and analyze potential losses for human life and material assets. Through better understanding of potential hazards and the degree of risk they pose, more successful mitigation strategies can be developed and implemented. This risk assessment follows the four-step process described in the FEMA publication 386-2, Understanding Your Risks: Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses, listed as follows: Step 1: Identify Hazards Step 2: Profile Hazard Events Step 3: Inventory Assets Step 4: Estimate Losses This section is organized into three subsections that address the four steps of the risk assessment process. 3.1 Identifying Hazards. This subsection addresses Step 1 and lists the hazards considered during the planning process and those ultimately profiled in the plan. It also describes methods, definitions and data sources used for the hazard identification and profile process. 3.2 Hazard Profile. This subsection addresses Step 2 and presents a detailed outline for each identified hazard. Each hazard profile is addressed as a plan subsection and includes a general description, affected geographic area, and discussion of previous occurrences, probability of future occurrence, magnitude and severity and an assessment of overall vulnerability to each hazard.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Coastal Lakes Aquatic Plant Survey Report
    Portland State University PDXScholar Center for Lakes and Reservoirs Publications and Presentations Center for Lakes and Reservoirs 1-1-2013 Final Coastal Lakes Aquatic Plant Survey Report Mary Pfauth Portland State University Mark Sytsma Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/centerforlakes_pub Part of the Fresh Water Studies Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Pfauth, Mary and Sytsma, Mark, "Final Coastal Lakes Aquatic Plant Survey Report" (2013). Center for Lakes and Reservoirs Publications and Presentations. 22. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/centerforlakes_pub/22 This Technical Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Center for Lakes and Reservoirs Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Final Coastal Lakes Aquatic Plant Survey Report Prepared for: USDA Forest Service Prepared by Mary Pfauth and Mark Sytsma Center for Lakes and Reservoirs Portland State University Portland, OR 97207-0751 www.clr.pdx.edu March, 2005 v. 03.09.05 Coastal Lakes Aquatic Plant Survey Report Contents Section 1.01 Introduction ..............................................................................1 Section 1.02 Methods ...................................................................................2 Section 1.03 Results .....................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Coast Trail, Central Coast NORTH SEE ADJOINING MAP Trail “OCT, N
    www.visittheoregoncoast.com NOTE: Content specified is from time of PDF creation. Please check website for up-to-date information or for changes. Maps are illustrative in nature and should be used for reference only. LAST UPDATED: 16.07.2018 MAPS DEVELOPED BY: 0 5.0 mi. 10.0 mi. Oregon Coast Trail, Central Coast NORTH SEE ADJOINING MAP Trail “OCT, N. CENTRAL COAST” TO NEWPORT Alsea Bay Trail (bushwacking) Alsea River Primary Hwy Alsea Hwy Secondary Hwy/Rd 101 20 SEGMENT 16 Forest Rd (major) SEE DETAIL MAP: Beachside Wakonda Beach Forest Rd (minor) ALSEA BAY TO YACHATS Campground Airport Featured Route Tillicum Beach Campground TO CORVALLIS Alternate Route SAN MARINE STATE PARK YACHATS ENLARGE Cape Perpetua Trailhead Highest point on the Oregon coast – EL 803’ Giant Spruce SEGMENT 17 CAPE PERPETUA Cape Perpetua Parking SEE DETAIL MAP: MARINE RESERVE Campground YACHATS TO ROCK CREEK Searose Beach Restrooms Stonefield Beach Vault Toilet Rocky Creek Campground Hobbit Beach Picnic Area ENLARGE Picnic Shelter SEGMENT 18 WASHBURNE STATE PARK Washburne SP Campground ENLARGE SEE DETAIL MAP: Heceta Head ROCK CREEK TO Lighthouse Lighthouse SUTTON CREEK Sea Lion Caves Historic Landmark Alder Dune Baker Beach Campground TO EUGENE Vista / Viewpoint Sutton Campground 126 Heceta Beach Marina Darlingtonia SEGMENT 19 State Natural Site Boat Ramp SEE DETAIL MAP: SUTTON CREEK TO PACIFIC OCEAN South Jetty FLORENCE Sand Dunes Beaches GOOSE PASTURE Florence S. Jetty Municipal Airport Campground Rd OREGON DUNES NATIONAL HONEYMAN STATE PARK Backcountry Campsite
    [Show full text]
  • Central Coast 43
    CENTRAL COAST 43 44 45 18 To Salem 46 idal estuaries, long sandy beaches, and active sand dunes accented by a few 48 47 49 rocky outcroppings and coastal islands comprise the heart of the Coast. In- Lincoln City T 101 land the Siuslaw National Forest’s 630,000 acres, in the Coast Range, have four 52 major rivers flowing through on their way to the Pacific Ocean. Explore Lincoln 50 51 City’s seven miles of beach and two large estuaries, scope the roiling waters of Siletz Bay 53 55 Boiler Bay for pelagic birds, or ascend Cape Foulweather for expansive ocean 54 views. At Newport’s Yaquina Head Outstanding Natural Area, feel the frenzy of 56 one of the largest Common Murre nesting colonies on the coast. Drive the scenic 57 r 58 Yaquina Bay Road in winter to see all six species of grebes occurring in Oregon in Siletz Rive one location. Continue south to Seal Rock for Pigeon Guillemot and Harlequin 59 Depoe Bay Cape Foulweather Duck floating on the waves and Western Gull lining the coastal islands, and to 60 229 the south jetty of the Siuslaw River in Florence to glimpse flocks of Semipalmat- 61 ed Plover and Least and Western Sandpiper on migration. 62 Yaquina Head Lighthouse 63 Newport 20 43. Knight Park 44. Salmon River Estuary Yaquina Bay Lighthouse From Hwy 101 in Lincoln City, drive From Hwy 101 in Lincoln City, drive 68-74 64 To ledo 66 N, cross the Salmon River Bridge and N 0.4 mi past the Hwy 18 overpass, 65 67 turn W (L) on Three Rocks Rd, drive cross the Salmon River Bridge, and r Yaq ve To Corvallis 2.4 mi, turn L into Knight Park.
    [Show full text]
  • On Reconciling Lake Classification with the Evolution of Four Oligotrophic Lakes in Oregon
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF DOUGLAS WILLIAM LARSON for the DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Name) (Degree) inFISHERIES presented on 7)_ (Major) (Date)1 Title: ON RECONCILING LAKE CLASSIFICATION WITH THE EVOLU- TION OF FOUR OLIOT Abstract approved: Redacted for privacy A John R. Donaldson Limnological data were collected from studies of four Oregon lakes that are classified as oligotrophic--Crater, Odell, Waldo, and Woahink.Phytoplankton primary production was estimated periodi- cally using a standard carbon-14 in situ method. Bioassay experi- ments were conducted to determine whether water samples, treated with various kinds and concentrations of inorganic nutrients, might stimulate carbon uptake by phytoplankton.Chlorophyll a measure- ments complemented production estimates made with carbon-14. In comparing the lakes, differences were noted concerning lake origin, watershed features, basin morphometry, surface elevation, optical and thermal properties, and water chemistry. More notable, however, was the significant difference in phytoplankton primary production and biomass among the four lakes.During July and August, 1969, productivity averaged 253. 1 (Crater), 1533. 2 (Odell), 35.5 (Waldo), and 301. 1 (Woahink)mgC/m2dar.For the same period, concentrations of chlorophyll a averaged 34. 4 (Crater), 99. 03 (Odell), 4. 7 (Waldo), and 24. 7 (Woahink)mg/rn2.This resulted from the dif- ferent uses each lake received.It is suggested that, on the basis of productivity, lakes are unique environments and are evolving at dif- ferent rates in response to natural and artificial (cultural use) enrich- ment. The need for an adaptable classification system that would take into account the continuous process of lake evolution was emphasized.
    [Show full text]