DOCSLIB.ORG

Little Butte Creek Watershed Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Little Butte Creek Watershed Assessment Little Butte Creek Watershed Assessment Little Butte Creek Watershed Council August 2003 Abstract The Little Butte Creek Watershed Assessment has been prepared for the Little Butte Creek Watershed Council with funding from the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB). The Assessment was prepared using the guidelines set forth in the Governor’s Watershed Enhancement Board’s 1999 Oregon Watershed Assessment Manual. The purpose of this document is to assess the current conditions and trends of human caused and ecologic processes within the Little Butte Creek Watershed and compare them with historic conditions. Many important ecological processes within the watershed have been degraded over the last 150 years of human activity. This Assessment details those locations and processes that are in need of restoration as well as those that are operating as a healthy system. The Assessment was conducted primarily at the 5th field watershed level, that of the entire Little Butte Creek Watershed. List and describe field watershed levels below. Where possible, the analyses was refined to the smaller 6th field watershed level, thirteen of which exist within the Little Butte Creek Watershed. The assessment also notes gaps in data and lists recommendations for future research and data collection. It is intended that this document, and the Little Butte Creek Watershed Action Plan be used as guides for future research and watershed protection and enhancement over the next decade. The document was developed using existing data. No new data was collected for this project. Where data was lacking, it was detailed for future work and study. Acknowledgements This assessment was compiled and written by Steve Mason. Numerous helpful people including Lu Anthony, Chuck Fustich and Tom Dover provided editorial comments and suggestions. However, this document and its companion, the LBCW Action Plan, were completed through the collaborative efforts of the Little Butte Creek Watershed Council; local, state, and federal agencies and their representatives including BLM, ODFW, USFS, Jackson SWCD, and Jackson County government; as well as the numerous other private citizens and public and private organizations. For more information about the Little Butte Creek Watershed Council or to obtain electronic copies of this report, please contact: Lu Anthony, Coordinator Little Butte Creek Watershed Council 1094 Stevens Road Eagle Point, OR, 97524 (541) 826-2908 luanthony@earthlink.net Table of Contents Chapter I - Introduction 1 Physiographic Characteristics 1 History 2 Climate and Weather 5 Geology 5 Land Use – Ownership 7 Water Use 7 Watershed Function 8 Document Organization 8 Chapter II – Channel Habitat Type 10 Introduction 10 Methods 10 Results and Discussion 11 Chapter III – Hydrology and Water Use 13 Introduction 13 Results 14 Discussion 43 Data Gaps 43 Chapter IV – Fish and Fish Habitat 45 Introduction 45 General Salmonid Life History Pattern 45 Spring Chinook Life History Pattern 46 Fall Chinook Life History Pattern 46 Coho Life History Pattern 46 Winter Steelhead Life History Pattern 47 Summer Steelhead Life History Pattern 47 Sea-run Cutthroat and Resident Trout Life History Pattern 48 Fish Summary 48 Fish Habitat 48 Methods 50 Results 52 Discussion 69 Data Gaps 71 Chapter V – Water Quality 72 Introduction 72 Methods 75 Results 76 Discussion 93 Data Gaps 94 Table of Contents (continued) Chapter VI – Riparian Zone 95 Introduction 95 Results 96 Discussion 99 Data Gaps 100 Chapter VII – Sediment Sources 101 Introduction 101 Results 102 Discussion 111 Data Gaps 112 Chapter VIII – Channel Modification 113 Introduction 113 Results 114 Discussion 118 Data Gaps 119 Chapter IX – Conclusions 121 Hydrology 121 Fish and Fish Habitat 122 Water Quality 123 Sediment Sources 123 Riparian 124 Channel Modification 124 Overall Watershed Health 124 List of Tables CHT1 – Channel Types 10 CHT2 – Channel Type Distribution (%) at the 6th field watershed level 11 CHT3 – Channel Habitat Types 12 HT1 – General Characteristics of the Little Butte Creek Watershed and the 13 subbasins 16 HT2 – Precipitation regime within the Little Butte Creek Watershed 19 HT3 – Risk of peak flow enhancement due to forestry practices 21 HT4 – Breakdown of land use zoning in the Little Butte Creek Watershed and the 13 subbasins 21 HT5 – Soil groups within the Little Butte Creek Watershed 22 HT6 – Potential impact of forest roads on peak flow enhancement 24 HT7 – Potential impact of rural agricultural area roads on peak flow enhancement 24 HT8 – Potential impact of rural residential roads on peak flow enhancement 25 HT9 – OWRD’s Beneficial Use Codes for the Little Butte Creek Watershed 26 HT10 – Water rights breakdown for the Little Butte Creek Watershed 27 HT11 – Water rights breakdown for the Mainstem subbasin 28 HT12 – Water rights breakdown for the Antelope subbasin 29 HT13 – Water rights breakdown for the Dry subbasin 30 HT14 – Water rights breakdown for the Salt subbasin 31 HT15 – Water rights breakdown for the Lick subbasin 32 HT16 – Water rights breakdown for the Lake subbasin 33 HT17 – Water rights breakdown for the Lost subbasin 34 HT18 – Water rights breakdown for theNorthfork subbasin 35 HT19 – Water rights breakdown for the Southfork subbasin 36 HT20 – Water rights breakdown for the Soda subbasin 37 HT21 – Water rights breakdown for the Dead Indian subbasin 38 HT22 – Water rights breakdown for the Beaver Dam subbasin 39 HT23 – Water rights breakdown for the Upper Southfork subbasin 40 HT24 – Water availability for the 13 WABs in the Little Butte Creek Watershed 42 HT25 – Restoration potential for WABs based on % water allocated to consumptive uses 42 HT26 – Hydrologic issue identification summary 44 F1 – Current estimated fall Chinook distribution in Little Butte Creek Watershed 52 F2 – Current estimated spring Chinook distribution in Little Butte Creek Watershed 52 F3 – Current estimated coho distribution in Little Butte Creek Watershed 52 F4 – Current estimated summer steelhead distribution in Little Butte Creek Watershed 53 F5 – Current estimated winter steelhead distribution in Little Butte Creek Watershed 53 F6 – Current estimated distribution for anadromous salmonids in Little Butte Creek Watershed 54 F7 – Salmonid population counts at the ODFW smolt trap on Little Butte Creek 63 F8 – Pool habitat conditions in Little Butte Creek Watershed 64 F9 – Riffle habitat conditions in Little Butte Creek Watershed 65 F10 – Large woody debris habitat conditions in Little Butte Creek Watershed 66 F11 – Riparian habitat conditions in Little Butte Creek Watershed 67 WQ1 – Beneficial uses of water within Little Butte Wastershed 73 WQ2 – Criteria for metal contaminants parameter 75 List of Tables (continued) WQ3 – Level of impairment for water quality parameters based on number of Data points that exceed the criteria 76 WQ4 – Streams in Little Butte Creek Watershed Listed on 2002 DEQ 303d list 77 WQ5 – Breakdown of 303d listed streams by subwatershed as % of streams in subwatershed 78 WQ6 – Streams flowing during 2001 FLIR project 86 WQ7 – Temperature ranges for streams assessed during 2001 FLIR project 90 R1 – Breakdown of vegetation classification for larger streams in Little Butte Creek Watershed 96 R2 – Breakdown by subwatershed of vegetation classification for larger streams In Little Butte Creek Watershed (acres) 96 SS1 – Erosion potential of soils in Little Butte Creek Watershed 103 SS2 – Road densities in Little Butte Creek Watershed 104 SS3 – Percent of road miles within 60 meters of a stream 107 SS4 – Stream crossings in Little Butte Creek Watershed 108 CM1 – Channel modification activities 113 CM2 – Instream diversion within LBCW 115 CM3 – Miles of roads within 10 m of streams 117 C1 – Impacts of land uses practices in LBCW 122 C2 – Summary scoring of the subwatersheds in the LBCW 125 C3 – Data gaps and information needs in LBCW 126 List of Figures HM1 – Little Butte Creek Watershed 15 HM2 – Precipitation pattern for Little Butte Creek Watershed 17 HM3 – Zoning types in Little Butte Creek Watershed 18 HM4 – Transient snow zone in Little Butte Creek Watershed 20 F1 – Fall Chinook counts at Gold Ray Dam 60 F2 – Spring Chinook counts at Gold Ray Dam 60 F3 – Coho counts at Gold Ray Dam 60 F4 – Winter steelhead counts at Gold Ray Dam 61 F5 – Summer steelhead counts at Gold Ray Dam 61 WQ1 – Surface water temperatures for Little Butte Creek 91 WQ2 – Surface water temperatures for Antelope Creek 91 WQ3 – Surface water temperatures for NF of Little Butte Creek 92 WQ4 – Surface water temperatures for SF of Little Butte Creek 92 WQ5 – Surface water temperatures for Upper SF of Little Butte Creek 93 List of Maps I1 – Location of Little Butte Creek Watershed within state of Oregon 1 I2 – Little Butte Creek Watershed shaded relief elevations 2 I3 – Little Butte Creek Watershed 3 I4 – Human population distribution in Little Butte Creek Watershed in 2000 4 I5 – Ecoregions in Little Butte Creek Watershed 6 CHT1 – Channel habitat types 12 HM1 – Little Butte Creek Watershed 15 HM2 – Precipitation pattern for Little Butte Creek Watershed 17 HM3 – Zoning types in Little Butte Creek Watershed 18 HM4 – Transient snow zone in Little Butte Creek Watershed 20 F1 – Current estimated fall chinook distribution in Little Butte Creek Watershed 54 F2 – Current estimated spring chinook distribution in Little Butte Creek Watershed 55 F3 – Current estimated coho distribution in Little Butte Creek Watershed 56 F4 – Current estimated summer steelhead distribution in Little Butte Creek Watershed 57 F5 – Current estimated
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Timing of In-Water Work to Protect Fish and Wildlife Resources
    OREGON GUIDELINES FOR TIMING OF IN-WATER WORK TO PROTECT FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES June, 2008 Purpose of Guidelines - The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, (ODFW), “The guidelines are to assist under its authority to manage Oregon’s fish and wildlife resources has updated the following guidelines for timing of in-water work. The guidelines are to assist the the public in minimizing public in minimizing potential impacts to important fish, wildlife and habitat potential impacts...”. resources. Developing the Guidelines - The guidelines are based on ODFW district fish “The guidelines are based biologists’ recommendations. Primary considerations were given to important fish species including anadromous and other game fish and threatened, endangered, or on ODFW district fish sensitive species (coded list of species included in the guidelines). Time periods were biologists’ established to avoid the vulnerable life stages of these fish including migration, recommendations”. spawning and rearing. The preferred work period applies to the listed streams, unlisted upstream tributaries, and associated reservoirs and lakes. Using the Guidelines - These guidelines provide the public a way of planning in-water “These guidelines provide work during periods of time that would have the least impact on important fish, wildlife, and habitat resources. ODFW will use the guidelines as a basis for the public a way of planning commenting on planning and regulatory processes. There are some circumstances where in-water work during it may be appropriate to perform in-water work outside of the preferred work period periods of time that would indicated in the guidelines. ODFW, on a project by project basis, may consider variations in climate, location, and category of work that would allow more specific have the least impact on in-water work timing recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chat September 2015
    Number 417 The Chat September 2015 A voice for education and conservation in the natural world Rogue Valley Audubon Society www.roguevalleyaudubon.org Deadline for the October issue is September 20. SEPTEMBER PROGRAM MEETING TUESDAY, SEPT 22 at 7 PM “Birding Adventures in South America: Patagonia, Brazil and the Galapagos” . Presented by PEPPER TRAIL Our annual series of monthly programs kicks off with Pepper Trail’s slide show and talk. Pepper will present highlights from his three most recent natural history cruises, with birds as spectacular (and spectacular- ly different) as Blue Manakins and Blue- footed Boobies, Andean Condors and Saf- fron Toucanets, Darwin’s Rheas and Dar- win’s Finches. This is sure to be an enter- taining and educational evening – don’t miss it! Pepper Trail is the long-time Conservation Chair for RVAS, and the ornithologist at the National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Lab in Ashland. During his vacation time, Pepper leads natural history field trips around the world. Nazca Booby, native to the Galapagos Coming Up October Program Meeting, Tuesday, Oct 27 Speaker: Steve Mason of the WISE (Water for Irrigation, Streams and Economy) Project November Program Meeting, Tuesday, Nov 24 Speaker: Kristi Mergenthaler from the Southern Oregon Land Conservancy (SOLC) Page 1 The Chat – September 2015 President’s Column OFFICERS and DIRECTORS President: Linda Kreisman, 541-482-6456 Welcome back after our (brief) summer vacation! linda@ashlandhome.net This year seems to be getting off to a good start. Vice-President: Jon Deason, jdeason39@gmail.com Treasurer: Sue Polich, 541-608-3802 Pepper Trail, our Conservation Committee Chair, and spolich@charter.net I met with representatives from the Southern Oregon Secretary: Mike Guest, 541-857-6334 Land Conservancy (SOLC) to discuss ways our or- mwguest@juno.com ganizations can cooperate with each other and came Carol Mockridge mockridge50@hotmail.com away with a few good ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • South Fork of Little Butte Creek Area Naming Proposals
    South Fork of Little Butte Creek Area Naming Proposals Presented by Dr. Alice G. Knotts INTRODUCTION We begin by thanking the Oregon Geographic Names Board for its careful work exhibited and accomplished in recent years for naming geographical features in the State of Oregon. We have identified some physical features in the area of the South Fork of Little Butte Creek located in Jackson County and put forth name suggestions and proposals. We believe that most of them are located on public lands of the U.S. Forest Service or the BLM, but the Knotts Cliff is on private land. 1 Naming Proposals for the South Fork of Little Butte Creek Area Identified in geographic order of approach from Medford, the road up the South Fork of Little Butte Creek and the Soda Springs trail 1009 that follows upstream Dead Indian Creek that is proposed to be named Latgawa Creek. 1. Hole-in-the-Rock Name a rock arch located on top of a hill NW of Poole Hill. Hole-in-the-Rock has been recorded on a BLM map but not with GNIS. 2. Pilgrim Cave Name a rock shelf with ancient campfire smoked walls. A shelter for travelers for thousands of years. 3. Knotts Bluff Name a cliff that defines the northern side of a canyon through which runs the S. Fork of Little Butte Creek. 4. Ross Point Name a prominent point on Knotts Cliff above the cave. 5. Latgawa Pinnacles Name a group of rocky pinnacles located near Camp Latgawa. 6. Marjorie Falls Name a water slide on Latgawa Creek upstream from the soda springs.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic History of Siletzia, a Large Igneous Province in the Oregon And
    Geologic history of Siletzia, a large igneous province in the Oregon and Washington Coast Range: Correlation to the geomagnetic polarity time scale and implications for a long-lived Yellowstone hotspot Wells, R., Bukry, D., Friedman, R., Pyle, D., Duncan, R., Haeussler, P., & Wooden, J. (2014). Geologic history of Siletzia, a large igneous province in the Oregon and Washington Coast Range: Correlation to the geomagnetic polarity time scale and implications for a long-lived Yellowstone hotspot. Geosphere, 10 (4), 692-719. doi:10.1130/GES01018.1 10.1130/GES01018.1 Geological Society of America Version of Record http://cdss.library.oregonstate.edu/sa-termsofuse Downloaded from geosphere.gsapubs.org on September 10, 2014 Geologic history of Siletzia, a large igneous province in the Oregon and Washington Coast Range: Correlation to the geomagnetic polarity time scale and implications for a long-lived Yellowstone hotspot Ray Wells1, David Bukry1, Richard Friedman2, Doug Pyle3, Robert Duncan4, Peter Haeussler5, and Joe Wooden6 1U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefi eld Road, Menlo Park, California 94025-3561, USA 2Pacifi c Centre for Isotopic and Geochemical Research, Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, 6339 Stores Road, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada 3Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1680 East West Road, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA 4College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, 104 CEOAS Administration Building, Corvallis, Oregon 97331-5503, USA 5U.S. Geological Survey, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, Alaska 99508-4626, USA 6School of Earth Sciences, Stanford University, 397 Panama Mall Mitchell Building 101, Stanford, California 94305-2210, USA ABSTRACT frames, the Yellowstone hotspot (YHS) is on southern Vancouver Island (Canada) to Rose- or near an inferred northeast-striking Kula- burg, Oregon (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Outdoor Recreational Needs & the Hunter Lake Opportunity Illinois
    Outdoor Recreational Needs & The Hunter Lake Opportunity Illinois Department of Natural Resources December 3, 2018 Introduction In 2015, the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) entered into agreement with the City of Springfield to manage city-owned property surrounding the City’s proposed secondary water supply (Hunter Lake). The City has already acquired 7,138 acres for the project located in southeastern Sangamon County. The lake is expected to cover 2,560 surface-acres with water. Outdoors recreation generates about $32 billion in economic activity each year for the State of Illinois, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. All this activity supports 90,000 jobs statewide. As the population of the United States continues its gradual migration from rural to urban areas (U.S. Census Bureau), demand for recreational land, open space and hunting and fishing opportunities will continue to grow. With 95 percent of Illinois land in private hands, the state ranks 46th in terms of land in public ownership. The IDNR owns and manages about 480,000 acres. The partnership between the City and IDNR is intended to provide additional public access for outdoor recreation, education and habitat conservation on Hunter Lake and its surrounding area. The City concluded the IDNR is the appropriate state agency to help the City achieve this objective. IDNR has statutory authority to manage the state’s fish and wildlife resources. To this end, the City chose to enter a Memorandum of Cooperation with IDNR (Appendix A) and tasked the Agency with managing the property’s outdoors potential for recreational opportunity, including hunting, fishing, bird-watching, biking, hiking and camping.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rogue River 3, 4 and 5 Day Trips Riverside Beach Camping
    The Rogue River 3, 4 and 5 day trips riverside beach camping The Rogue River is born near Crater Lake in the Cascade mountain range, then flows southwest to its meeting with the Pacific ocean near the town of Gold Beach. We float the most spectacular 38 miles of the river, where it cuts through the rugged coastal mountains of southern Oregon, not far from the town of Grants Pass. When congress first passed legislation to protect America’s wild rivers, the Rogue was among the first to receive protection. And no wonder. The Rogue River canyon is an enchanting blend of lush forests, fern grottos, beautiful sandy beaches, sparkling waterfalls, lovely side streams, and cool clear swimming holes. It’s wild country and wildlife is everywhere: perhaps more wildlife than you’re likely to see on a river trip anywhere outside Alaska. The Rogue’s rapids are mostly class III in difficulty: exciting and challenging, but not too threatening for our guests who choose to try their hand at inflatable kayaks or our row-yourself rafts. (Rapids are rated I through VI. Class I indicates the smallest possible rapid, while VI indicates steep, turbulent, highly dangerous rapids and waterfalls.) The Rogue is a river for all seasons. Summer trips promise hot, sunny weather and warm water for swimming. Spring trips are sensational, with multitudes of wildflowers. Fall trips reveal gorgeous colors, warm days and cool crisp evenings. And the whitewater is exciting, any time of year. A great family trip, the Rogue is one of our nation’s finest river journeys.
    [Show full text]
  • Chetco River Steelhead Report
    Chetco River Steelhead Report Mystagogic and arboreous Shelby agonized her chazans imparl glowingly or hovel maritally, is Joachim hard? How bloomier is Theodoric when massy and weak Irwin averring some valeta? Beneficiary and fractious Darby perennate: which French is vinicultural enough? Conditions will be maintaining our shorter, isonychia fly shop building in southern oregon on northern california state and chetco river tailwaters lodge. Best results for steelhead runs of all oregon, report for chinook move up or future stock photography and chetco river steelhead report started last week. An ice box, the day and most of natural colors for all have a very often fishes when releasing fish well be following day includes lunch, chetco river steelhead report search training to. Try lures is salmon fishing well as the river stream area road, chetco river steelhead report. My preferred method is nice chetco river steelhead report for steelhead on charts and fun filled days should be muddy for del norte to. Try again later salmon stocks, chetco river steelhead report. Gonna work hard fought second place, river report is. The chetco steelhead are passionate about all the green water to hundreds of sandy ground. This is one of the later salmon runs and produces some of the largest salmon on the west coast. Rains blow the Chetco out, King Salmon on the move! Please handle them nicely. Alternatively you can expect significant snow showers late next weekend the chetco river over time frame february at chetco river steelhead report the standard small minnow imitation lures like. The chetco flows dropped into magical march with shane, chetco river steelhead report.
    [Show full text]
  • Temperatures Cool by Shading the Stream from Solar Radiation. These
    Chapter 3 Affected Environment Conde Shell temperatures cool by shading the stream from solar radiation. These trees and shrubs also contribute nutrients to the system as coarse organic material that is crucial to the macroinvertebrate communities that support fish and other aquatic organisms. Large wood has been identified as a limiting factor in Dead Indian and Conde Creek systems.5 The effects of large wood on stream form and function are positive, creating pools, trapping sediment, providing cover for fish and other aquatic species, and stabilizing banks during high flow events. Beaver have historically contributed wood in the form of beaver dams, to these systems. Beaver dams are present in the upper section of Dead Indian but absent in Conde Creek. Two dams were observed on Dead Indian Creek, below the confluence with Conde Creek.6 South Fork of Little Butte Creek and tributaries have been identified by Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) (1994) as water quality limited under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. From the mouth to Beaver Dam Creek, South Fork of Little Butte Creek is water quality limited due to flow modification, habitat modification, sediment, and summer temperature. Dead Indian and Conde Creeks are limited by summer high temperatures, exceeding the maximum 7-day average for temperature (>64 F). Temperature monitors placed throughout Conde Creek and upper Dead Indian Creek during the summer of 1998 found water temperatures ranging from 65 - 77 F in late July. 7 The geology of an area plays an important role in describing fish habitat through the physical processes driving a system.
    [Show full text]
  • Medford Area Geology Report
    ._.. April GEOLOGICAL NE1/lS - w..""'TTER 33 1948 GEOLOGY IN THE MEDFORD AREA. OREGON By Hollis M. Dole* This paper is a review of the geology of part of southwestern Oregon as worked out and mapped by Diller, Winchell, Wells, and Wilkinson.** The area described is of special interest because it affords an opportunity to observe the seldom exposed "basement" rocks of the Cascade Range. The geologic column of this area includes possible Proterozoic, Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and 0-enozoic rocks. The ee-nozoTc -rock-s- are represented in the rocks of the western Cascades and in the sediments and volcanics of Bear Creek and Rogue Ri ver valleys. The Mesozoic rocks occur along the southwestern edge of Bear Creek Valley and in isolated spots on the adjacent foothills. The oldest rocks are to the south and west of Medford in the Klamath geomorphic province, and they, in this area, are called the Siskiyou Mount~ . Old schists are found near the California line almost due south of Medford. These schists undoubtedly are some of the oldest rocks in Oregon, although there is no definite paleontological evidence to prove this. They consist of highly altered, crenulated and folded rocks, the most abundant of which are plagioclase­ hornblende schists. Sericite and graphitic schists are also common. The plagio­ clase-hornblende schists are interpreted as highly altered andesite or basalt flows, the sericite schists as altered dacite or rhyolite, and the graphitic schists as altered organic sedimentary rocks. The age of these rocks is Paleozoic or older, and their character indicates both volcanism in Oregon in earliest times and the existence of ancient seas.
    [Show full text]
  • Cordilleran Section Meeting
    Vol. 51, No. 4 Cordilleran Section Meeting 15–17 May Portland, Oregon, USA www.geosociety.org/cd-mtg 115th Annual Meeting of the Cordilleran Section Geological Society of America Portland, Oregon, USA 15–17 May 2019 Oregon Convention Center Local Program Committee Meeting Co-chairs . Martin Streck, Jim O’Connor Technical Program . Matt Brunengo, Erick Burns, Anita Grunder Field Trips . Jason McClaughry, Clark Niewendorp, Bob Houston Workshops, Exhibits, and Student Volunteers . Frank Granshaw Sponsorship . Scott Burns GSA Cordilleran Section Officers 2018–2019 Chair . Michael Wells Vice Chair . Jeffrey Lee Past Chair . Susan M . Cashman Secretary and Accounting Officer . Calvin G . Barnes Student Representative . Jason Womer GSA Councilors . Nathan Niemi, Jeff Rubin, Wendy Bohrson Sponsors We are grateful to the following sponsors who have graciously contributed financial and logistical support . Association of Women Geoscientists The Paleontological Society Portland State University NOTICE By registering for this meeting you have acknowledged that you have read and will comply with the GSA Code of Conduct for Events (full code of conduct found on inside back cover) . If you have any concerns about behavior that may violate the Code, please contact: GSA Executive Director, Vicki McConnell, vmconnell@geosociety .org GSA Ethics and Compliance Officer, Nan Stout, gsaeventscode@gmail .com You may also stop by the registration desk or the GSA Bookstore to have the named individuals directly contacted via phone . 50% Total Recovered Fiber 30% Post-Consumer General Information Location about 250 feet west of the Holladay Lobby entrance. The The 115th Annual Meeting of the Cordilleran Section DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Portland is across the street from of the Geological Society of America will be held at the the Holladay Park MAX station, also served by the Red, Blue, Oregon Convention Center (OCC), Portland, Oregon, and Green Lines.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Reports - Number 96-8
    INFORMATION REPORTS - NUMBER 96-8 Review of Capacity Utilization at ODFW Salmon Hatcheries Mark A. Lewis Fish Propagation Section Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 2501 S.W. First Avenue P.O. Box 59 Portland, Oregon 97207 August 1996 CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION................................................................ 1 SUMMARY...................................................................... 1 INDIVIDUAL HATCHERY EVALUATIONS..................................... 3 Bandon Hatchery.......................................................... 4 Big Creek Hatchery........................................................ 6 Bonneville Hatchery........................................................ 8 Butte Falls Hatchery....................................................... 10 Cascade Hatchery......................................................... 12 Cedar Creek Hatchery..................................................... 14 Clackamas Hatchery....................................................... 16 Cole Rivers Hatchery.............................................. ........ 19 Elk River Hatchery........................................................ 21 Fall Creek Hatchery........................................................ 24 Klaskanine Hatchery....................................................... 25 Lookingglass Hatchery..................................................... 27 Marion Forks Hatchery.................................................... 29 McKenzie Hatchery.......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Inland Rogue Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan
    Inland Rogue Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan Developed by the: Inland Rogue Local Advisory Committee Oregon Department of Agriculture With support from the: Jackson, Two Rivers, and Illinois Valley Soil and Water Conservation Districts February 28, 2018 Oregon Department of Agriculture Water Quality Program 635 Capitol Street NE Salem, Oregon 97301 Phone: (503) 986-4700 oda.direct/AgWQPlans Jackson SWCD 89 Alder St., Central Point, OR 97502 (541) 664-1070 https://jswcd.org/ Two Rivers (Josephine) SWCD 1440 Parkdale Drive, Grants Pass, OR 97527 (541) 474-6840 Illinois Valley SWCD PO Box 352 102 S Redwood Highway Cave Junction, OR 97523 (541) 592-3731 http://www.ivstreamteam.org/ Inland Rogue Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Plan February 6, 2018 Table of Contents Acronyms and Terms Used in this Document ............................................................................... i Foreword .................................................................................................................................................. ii Required Elements of Area Plans .................................................................................................... ii Plan Content ............................................................................................................................................ ii Chapter 1: Agricultural Water Quality Management Program Purpose and Background ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]