DOCSLIB.ORG

Columbia River Salmon and Steelhead Endorsement Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

How successful has the Columbia River Endorsement Program been? Salmon and Steelhead From 2010 to 2017, more than 1.6 million Endorsement Program endorsements have been sold generating over $12.1 million in revenue. The CRSSE funds a variety of salmon and steelhead fisheries related projects including: • Annual creel surveys for spring, summer, fall Chinook, sockeye, coho, and steelhead in the Columbia and Snake rivers and several tributaries - Expanded spring and summer Chinook fishing in the Wenatchee River - Expanded steelhead fishing in the Hanford For more information see: Reach Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife - Expanded spring Chinook fishing in the http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/crss_endorsement/ Snake River • Annual enforcement of salmon and steelhead fisheries in the Columbia and Snake rivers and their tributaries • Cowlitz and Yakima rivers hooking mortality studies • Development of a real-time summer steelhead escapement estimator using PIT tags in the Produced by the upper Columbia River Columbia River Salmon and Steelhead • Genetic analysis of summer steelhead in the Endorsement Program Snake River Providing support for continued and expanded • Funding partner for the Cowlitz River adult management weirs recreational salmon and steelhead fishing opportunities in the Columbia River Basin • Public access enhancement in the lower Columbia River Administered by the • Purchase of a public access on the Methow Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife River in collaboration with the Columbia River Recreational Salmon and Steelhead Anglers Board July 2018 Columbia River Salmon and Steelhead Endorsement (CRSSE) Waters where Endorsement is required: Mainstem Columbia River from the Rocky Point/Tongue WHAT: monitoring, salmon and steelhead research, Endangered The CRSSE is an annual requirement, in addition Point line to Chief Joseph Dam to a fishing license, for Washington recreational anglers Species Act permitting and reporting, access enhancement, age 15 and older who fish for salmon and steelhead in the and enforcement. Without CRSSE, many popular salmon Mainstem Snake River from mouth in Walla Walla County to Oregon state line in Asotin County Columbia River and its tributaries. and steelhead fisheries would be very limited or not possible at all. Asotin County Klickitat County HOW MUCH: The cost of the CRSSE (without dealer fees) Grande Ronde River Klickitat River WHERE: is $8.75 for resident and non-resident adults 16 years and The CRSSE is required when fishing for salmon White Salmon River older and $7.10 for 15-year-olds and resident seniors (70 and steelhead on more than 50 rivers, lakes and other Benton, Yakima, Kittitas Counties Lewis County waters in the Columbia River Basin (see list). Like fishing years and older). Yakima River Blue Creek licenses, the endorsement can be purchased at more than Cispus River WHEN: Chelan County The CRSSE was authorized by Senate Bill 5421 600 WDFW license dealers throughout the state (locations Cowlitz River Chelan River during the 2009 Legislative session and officially took effect Mayfield Lake available at http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/index.html) or Entiat River Mill Creek April, 2010. The idea of CRSSE was a grassroots effort by online at https://fishhunt.dfw.wa.gov/. Icicle River Lacamas Creek upper Columbia River salmon and steelhead anglers. Loss Lake Wenatchee Lake Scanewa of federal funding to monitor salmon and steelhead fisheries WHO: The Washington Department of Fish and Wenatchee River Olequa Creek threatened WDFW’s ability to keep these popular fisheries Wildlife (WDFW) administers the CRSSSE program Clark County Tilton River open. in collaboration with the Columbia River Salmon and Camas Slough Tilton River, East Fork Steelhead Recreational Angler Board, made up of six to Cedar Creek Tilton River, North Fork WHY: Funds generated from the endorsement fee are ten volunteer advisors. These advisors are appointed by Lewis River, East Fork Tilton River, South Fork needed to maintain and improve recreational salmon and the WDFW Director, representing the four WDFW Little Washougal Tilton River, West Fork Salmon Creek steelhead fisheries in the Columbia River and its tributaries. jurisdictional regions – Eastern (1), Northcentral (2), Okanogan County Washougal River It supports management activities required to allow Lake Osoyoos Southcentral (3), and Southwest (5) – which make up the Washougal River West (North) Methow River some fisheries where impacts to protected fish are strictly Columbia River Basin. Fork Okanogan River regulated. These activities include recreational fishery Lewis River Similkameen River Lewis River, North Fork Skamania County Columbia County Drano Lake Tucannon River Hamilton Creek Touchet River Rock Creek Cowlitz County Wind River Abernathy Creek White Salmon River Coal Creek Wahkiakum County Coweeman River Deep River Cowlitz River Elochoman River Germany Creek Grays River Gobar Creek Grays River, East Fork Green River Grays River, West Fork Kalama River Skamokawa Creek Toutle River Toutle River, North Fork Walla Walla County Toutle River, South Fork Mill Creek Lewis River Touchet River Lewis River, North Fork Walla Walla River Garfield County Whitman County Tucannon River Palouse River (below the falls).
Recommended publications
  • Riggins & Salmon River Canyon

    Riggins & Salmon River Canyon

    RRiiggggiinnss && SSaallmmoonn RRiivveerr CCaannyyoonn EEccoonnoommiicc DDeevveellooppmmeenntt SSttrraatteeggyy (FINAL DRAFT) Prepared for the City of Riggins February 2006 by James A. Birdsall & Associates The Hingston Roach Group, Inc. Bootstrap Solutions FINAL DRAFT [Inside cover.] RIGGINS AREA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FEBRUARY 2006 FINAL DRAFT CONTENTS 1. Introduction......................................................................................1 Planning Process and Project Phases ..............................................................1 Riggins History and Assets. ..............................................................................2 2. Socio-Economic Trends....................................................................4 Population. ..........................................................................................................4 Age Composition................................................................................................5 Education & Enrollment...................................................................................5 Industry Trends..................................................................................................6 Employment, Wages & Income.......................................................................7 Business Inventory.............................................................................................9 Retail Trends.......................................................................................................9 Tourism
  • The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment

    The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment

    The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment Evaluating Washington’s Future in a Changing Climate ........................................................................................................ A report by The Climate Impacts Group University of Washington Climate Science June 2009 in the Public Interest Recommended citation: Climate Impacts Group, 2009. The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment, M. McGuire Elsner, J. Littell, and L Whitely Binder (eds). Center for Science in the Earth System, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Oceans, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Available at: http://www.cses.washington.edu/db/pdf/wacciareport681.pdf Front cover satellite image credit: http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec.php?vev1id=4786 NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration Visible Earth: A catalog of NASA images and animations of our home planet Provided by the SeaWiFS Project, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, and ORBIMAGE The Pacific Northwest is cloud-free in this SeaWiFS image. Multihued phytoplankton blooms are visible off of Washington's Olympic coast. Also visible in this image are: Fraser River outflow, snowcapped peaks of Mt. Olympus, Mt. Rainier, Mt. Adams, Mt. Hood, Mt. Jefferson, the Three Sisters, the North Cascades, and the Columbia and Snake River watersheds. Metadata * Sensor OrbView-2/SeaWiFS * Visualization Date 2000-09-26 * The Visible Earth is part of the EOS Project Science Office located at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. Small images credits: Wheat: © 2009 www.photos.com Coast; Seattle skyline: © J. Martin Grassley McNary Dam: courtesy Bonneville Power Administration Salmon: courtesy University of Washington News and Information Forest: courtesy Climate Impacts Group, University of Washington Report design: Beth Tully, Edit-Design Center, University of Washington The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment Evaluating Washington’s Future in a Changing Climate ........................................................................................
  • Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Open File Report

    Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Open File Report

    RECONNAISSANCE SURFICIAL GEOLOGIC MAPPING OF THE LATE CENOZOIC SEDIMENTS OF THE COLUMBIA BASIN, WASHINGTON by James G. Rigby and Kurt Othberg with contributions from Newell Campbell Larry Hanson Eugene Kiver Dale Stradling Gary Webster Open File Report 79-3 September 1979 State of Washington Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources Olympia, Washington CONTENTS Introduction Objectives Study Area Regional Setting 1 Mapping Procedure 4 Sample Collection 8 Description of Map Units 8 Pre-Miocene Rocks 8 Columbia River Basalt, Yakima Basalt Subgroup 9 Ellensburg Formation 9 Gravels of the Ancestral Columbia River 13 Ringold Formation 15 Thorp Gravel 17 Gravel of Terrace Remnants 19 Tieton Andesite 23 Palouse Formation and Other Loess Deposits 23 Glacial Deposits 25 Catastrophic Flood Deposits 28 Background and previous work 30 Description and interpretation of flood deposits 35 Distinctive geomorphic features 38 Terraces and other features of undetermined origin 40 Post-Pleistocene Deposits 43 Landslide Deposits 44 Alluvium 45 Alluvial Fan Deposits 45 Older Alluvial Fan Deposits 45 Colluvium 46 Sand Dunes 46 Mirna Mounds and Other Periglacial(?) Patterned Ground 47 Structural Geology 48 Southwest Quadrant 48 Toppenish Ridge 49 Ah tanum Ridge 52 Horse Heaven Hills 52 East Selah Fault 53 Northern Saddle Mountains and Smyrna Bench 54 Selah Butte Area 57 Miscellaneous Areas 58 Northwest Quadrant 58 Kittitas Valley 58 Beebe Terrace Disturbance 59 Winesap Lineament 60 Northeast Quadrant 60 Southeast Quadrant 61 Recommendations 62 Stratigraphy 62 Structure 63 Summary 64 References Cited 66 Appendix A - Tephrochronology and identification of collected datable materials 82 Appendix B - Description of field mapping units 88 Northeast Quadrant 89 Northwest Quadrant 90 Southwest Quadrant 91 Southeast Quadrant 92 ii ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1.
  • Tucannon River Watershed Initial Assessment

    Tucannon River Watershed Initial Assessment

    DRAFT INITIAL WATERSHED ASSESSMENT TUCANNON RIVER WATERSHED Part of Water Resources Inventory Area 35 Open file Report 95-04 Prepared by: John Covert, Jim Lyerla, and Mark Ader Washington Department of Ecology, Eastern Regional Office Water Resources Program N. 4601 Monroe Street, Suite 202 Spokane, Washington 99205-1295 and edited by: Montgomery Water Group, Inc. 620 Kirkland Way, Suite 202 Kirkland, Washington 98083-2517 Adolfson Associates, Inc. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW Seattle, Washington 98107 Hong West & Associates, Inc. 19730 64th Avenue West Lynnwood, Washington 98036-0106 R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. 15250 NE 95th Redmond, Washington 98052 February 10, 1995 Table of Contents Tucannon River Watershed Assessment Initial Watershed Assessment Tucannon River Watershed ............................................................ 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 Watershed Description ................................................................................................................ 1 Area Description ..................................................................................................................... 1 Land Use ................................................................................................................................. 2 Climate and Precipitation Trends............................................................................................ 2 Hydrogeology.............................................................................................................................
  • 4.0 Tucannon Subbasin Aquatic Assessment

    4.0 Tucannon Subbasin Aquatic Assessment

    4.0 Tucannon Subbasin Aquatic Assessment 4.1 Selection of Focal Species Four aquatic species were chosen as focal for Tucannon Subbasin Planning: steelhead/rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss; spring and fall Chinook Onchorynchus tshawytcha; bull trout Salvelinus confluentus. The criteria used to select focal species were the aspects of the Tucannon Subbasin ecosystem that the life histories represent; the Endangered Species Act (ESA) status; the cultural importance of the species and whether or not there was enough knowledge of the life history of the species to do an effective assessment. Those species of which too little was known to be included as focal at this time could be included as “species of interest” (see section 4.7). The WDFW suggested the above species as focal for the subbasin. These were then presented to the Nez Perce Tribe (NPT), the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR), The Columbia County Conservation District Board, the citizens advisory group, subbasin planning team and other interested agencies and entities. Consensus was achieved on their selection. Tucannon summer steelhead, spring/fall chinook and bull trout life histories intersect a broad range of the aquatic ecosystem. Spatially, the life histories of these four species cover the entire subbasin from the mouth to the headwaters. These species also occupy all levels of the water column including slack water, swift water and the hyporheic zone. Not only are they present but also the ability of these species to thrive is dependent on being able to successfully occupy these areas. Temporally, these species are present (or were assumed to be present in the past) at one lifestage or another throughout much of the watershed in all seasons.
  • A Decision Framework for Managing the Spirit Lake and Toutle River System at Mount St

    A Decision Framework for Managing the Spirit Lake and Toutle River System at Mount St

    THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS This PDF is available at http://nap.edu/24874 SHARE A Decision Framework for Managing the Spirit Lake and Toutle River System at Mount St. Helens (2018) DETAILS 336 pages | 6 x 9 | PAPERBACK ISBN 978-0-309-46444-4 | DOI 10.17226/24874 CONTRIBUTORS GET THIS BOOK Committee on Long-Term Management of the Spirit Lake/Toutle River System in Southwest Washington; Committee on Geological and Geotechnical Engineering; Board on Earth Sciences and Resources; Water Science and Technology Board; Division on Earth and Life Studies; Board on Environmental Change and Society; FIND RELATED TITLES Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine SUGGESTED CITATION National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2018. A Decision Framework for Managing the Spirit Lake and Toutle River System at Mount St. Helens. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24874. Visit the National Academies Press at NAP.edu and login or register to get: – Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of scientific reports – 10% off the price of print titles – Email or social media notifications of new titles related to your interests – Special offers and discounts Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the National Academies Press. (Request Permission) Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences. Copyright © National Academy
  • Palouse River Tributaries Subbasin Assessment and TMDL

    Palouse River Tributaries Subbasin Assessment and TMDL

    Palouse River Tributaries Subbasin Assessment and TMDL Idaho Department of Environmental Quality January 2005 This Page Intentionally Left Blank. Palouse River Tributaries Subbasin Assessment and TMDL January 2005 Prepared by: Robert D. Henderson Lewiston Regional Office Idaho Department of Environmental Quality 1118 F. Street Lewiston, ID 83501 This Page Intentionally Left Blank. Palouse River Tributaries Subbasin Assessment and TMDL January 2005 Acknowledgments Completing this Subbasin Assessment and TMDL would not have been possible without the support of the following individuals and organizations: • Mark Shumar • Alan Monek • Brock Morgan • Barbara Anderson • Dennis Meier • Palouse River Watershed Advisory Group • Tom Dechert • Cary Myler • Jason Fales • William Kelly • John Cardwell • Ken Clark • Bill Dansart • Richard Lee • John Gravelle • Marti Bridges • Daniel Stewart Thank you! Cover photo by Robert D. Henderson i Palouse River Tributaries Subbasin Assessment and TMDL January 2005 This Page Intentionally Left Blank. ii Palouse River Tributaries Subbasin Assessment and TMDL January 2005 Table of Contents Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Symbols .......................................................xiii Executive Summary........................................................................................xvii Subbasin at a Glance .................................................................................................xvii Key Findings .............................................................................................................
  • Instream Flow Characterization of Upper Salmon River Basin Streams, Central Idaho, 2004

    Instream Flow Characterization of Upper Salmon River Basin Streams, Central Idaho, 2004

    Prepared in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation Instream Flow Characterization of Upper Salmon River Basin Streams, Central Idaho, 2004 Ellis River Challis Fork Salmon Yankee Squaw T h o m Valley p s o n Creek Creek Creek Creek Elk Salmon River Stanley Iron Creek Salmon River Redfish Lake Obsidian July Salmon of Creek Fourth Champion Creek River Alturas Fork Lake Pole Creek Creek East Creek Beaver Smiley Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5212 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Instream Flow Characterization of Upper Salmon River Basin Streams, Central Idaho, 2004 By Terry R. Maret, Jon E. Hortness, and Douglas S. Ott Prepared in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5212 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2005 For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Maret, T.R., Hortness, J.E., and Ott, D.S., 2005, Instream flow characterization of upper Salmon River Basin streams, Central Idaho, 2004: U.S.
  • 2015 Idaho Wolf Monitoring Progress Report

    2015 Idaho Wolf Monitoring Progress Report

    2015 IDAHO WOLF MONITORING PROGRESS REPORT Photo by IDFG Prepared By: Jason Husseman, Idaho Department of Fish and Game Jennifer Struthers, Idaho Department of Fish and Game Edited By: Jim Hayden, Idaho Department of Fish and Game March 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the end of 2015, Idaho’s wolf population remained well-distributed and well above population minimums required under Idaho’s 2002 Wolf Conservation and Management Plan. Wolves range in Idaho from the Canadian border south to the Snake River Plain, and from the Washington and Oregon borders east to the Montana and Wyoming borders. Dispersing wolves are reported in previously unoccupied areas. The year-end population for documented packs, other documented groups not qualifying as packs and lone wolves was estimated at 786 wolves. Biologists documented 108 packs within the state at the end of 2015. In addition, there were 20 documented border packs counted by Montana, Wyoming, and Washington that had established territories overlapping the Idaho state boundary. Additional packs are suspected but not included due to lack of documentation. Mean pack size was 6.4 wolves, nearly identical to the 2014 average of 6.5. Reproduction (production of at least 1 pup) was documented in 69 packs, representing the minimum number of reproductive packs extant in the state. Determination of breeding pair status was made for 53 packs at year’s end. Of these, 33 packs (62%) met breeding pair criteria, and 20 packs did not. No determination of breeding pair status was made for the remaining 55 packs. Mortalities of 358 wolves were documented in Idaho in 2015, and remained essentially unchanged from 2014 (n = 360).
  • Proposal to Purchase Land Along the Methow River Would Protect Fish

    Proposal to Purchase Land Along the Methow River Would Protect Fish

    Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Habitat ConseRvation – PubliC NotiCe february 2011 Conservancy will own and manage the land. A conservation Proposal to purchase land easement will be placed on the property to permanently along the Methow River protect the land for conservation values. BPA would have Fact Sheet rights of enforcement to the easement. would protect fish habitat Land management: The Methow Conservancy in Okanogan County will lead the development of a baseline assessment and management plan to guide the protection of the land and Location: Winthrop, Okanogan County, Wash. enhancement of the riparian habitat for fish. The management plan will be updated periodically to account 1 Acres: for changes on the property and consider the best Fact Sheet available science. Partners: The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation and the Methow Conservancy For more information Purpose: The Bonneville Power Administration is Bonneville Power AdministrAtion: proposing to fund the purchase of land in the Methow Jay Marcotte, project manager, 800-622-4519 or River watershed in north-central Washington to protect 503-230-3943, [email protected] fish habitat. This property was chosen to ensure the ongoingFact success of existing riparianSheet protection projects in ConfederAted triBes And BAnds of the Cedarosa area. The Methow Conservancy already has the YAkAmA Nation: conservation easements on 20 nearby properties. The Brandon Rogers, tribal biologist, 509-949-4109, Methow River watershed is important for fish conservation [email protected] because it supports populations of Upper Columbia spring the methow ConservAncy: chinook salmon, Upper Columbia steelhead, and Jeanne White, conservation project manager, Columbia River bull trout, which are all listed as threatened 1-509-996-2870, [email protected] or endangeredFact under the Endangered Sheet Species Act.
  • Palouse River and Coulee City Rail Line

    Palouse River and Coulee City Rail Line

    Palouse River and Coulee City Rail Line Palouse River and Coulee City Rail Line For More Information: Mike Rowswell WSDOT State Rail and Marine Office [email protected] 360-705-7900 360-705-7930 www.wsdot.wa.gov/rail www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/rail/PCC_Acquisition/ WSDOT State Rail and Marine Office The Palouse River and Coulee PO Box 47407 City (PCC) rail line is the state’s Olympia, WA 98504-7407 longest short-line freight rail system and spans four counties in eastern Washington. In 2007, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) completed the purchase of this rail line to save it from abandonment. January 2008 Palouse River and Coulee City Rail Line What is the Palouse River and Coulee City deteriorated over time. After attempting to develop Who is going to operate these lines? (PCC) Rail Line? business for a number of years, Watco finally WSDOT is working with local governments to discuss considered abandoning the lines because they As part of the purchase agreement, Watco will formation of an intergovernmental entity to govern were not profitable. In making that determination, the three branches. When such an entity is formed, it The former Palouse River and Coulee City (PCC) continue to operate the PV Hooper Branch under a Watco cited the expensive maintenance conditions will assume responsibility for the former PCC system. rail line is a 300-mile short-line freight rail system lease signed with the state in November 2004 and mentioned above, increased competition from the WSDOT will continue to oversee rehabilitation work that provides direct rail service to shippers, modified in 2007.
  • The Wild Cascades

    The Wild Cascades

    THE WILD CASCADES Fall, 1984 2 The Wild Cascades PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE ONCE THE LINES ARE DRAWN, THE BATTLE IS NOT OVER The North Cascades Conservation Council has developed a reputation for consistent, hard-hitting, responsible action to protect wildland resources in the Washington Cascades. It is perhaps best known for leading the fight to preserve and protect the North Cascades in the North Cascades National Park, the Pasayten and Glacier Peak Wilderness Areas, and the Ross Lake and Lake Chelan National Recreation Areas. Despite the recent passage of the Washington Wilderness Act, many areas which deserve and require wilderness designation remain unprotected. One of the goals of the N3C must be to assure protection for these areas. In this issue of the Wild Cascades we have analyzed the Washington Wilderness Act to see what we won and what still hangs in the balance (page ). The N3C will continue to fight to establish new wilderness areas, but there is also a new challenge. Our expertise is increasingly being sought by government agencies to assist in developing appropriate management plans and to support them against attempts to undermine such plans. The invitation to participate more fully in management activities will require considerable effort, but it represents a challenge and an opportunity that cannot be ignored. If we are to meet this challenge we will need members who are either knowledgable or willing to learn about an issue and to guide the Board in its actions. The Spring issue of the Wild Cascades carried a center section with two requests: 1) volunteers to assist and guide the organization on various issues; and 2) payment of dues.