DOCSLIB.ORG

Baseline Assessment of Salmonids in Tributaries of the Snake and Grande Ronde Rivers in Southeast Washington

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Baseline Assessment of Salmonids in Tributaries of the Snake and Grande Ronde Rivers in Southeast Washington Baseline Assessment of Salmonids in Tributaries of the Snake and Grande Ronde Rivers in Southeast Washington 2006-2007 Final Report By Glen Mendel, Jeremy Trump, Michael Gembala, and Chris Fulton Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Program - Fish Management Division 529 West Main Street, Dayton, WA 99328 For Asotin County Conservation District United States Fish and Wildlife Service Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife December 2008 Baseline Assessment of Salmonids in Tributaries of the Snake and Grande Ronde Rivers in Southeast Washington 2006-2007 Final Report By Glen Mendel, Jeremy Trump, Michael Gembala, and Chris Fulton Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Program - Fish Management Division 529 West Main Street, Dayton, WA 99328 For Asotin County Conservation District United States Fish and Wildlife Service Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife December 2008 Acknowledgments Funding for this study was provided by multiple sources. Jim Uehara, (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife) provided some funding available from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Scott Deeds (U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USFWS) provided some funding for genetic sampling and analysis of native bull trout populations in the Tucannon Subbasin. The Asotin County Conservation District provided funding from BPA for surveys in Asotin County; special thanks to Megan Stewart. In 2006, Michael Faler (USFWS) provided personnel and field accommodations for Tucannon River bull trout sampling and PIT tagging with U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) funding (for USFWS activities). The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife provided additional funding and assistance. We would like to extend thanks to the following individuals with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife who contributed their efforts in collecting, entering, and summarizing data: Derek Gloyn, Steve Jeffers, and Larabee Miller. We would also like to thank Carrie Bretz and the other USFWS personnel for their assistance with Tucannon River sampling in 2006. Thanks to Bill Dowdy and the USFS for assistance with logistics and field sampling in the Wenaha and Grande Ronde River drainages. Dave and Sas Waldron of Western Life Outfitters provided outfitter services for a portion of the bull trout sampling in the upper Tucannon River subbasin in 2006. We would also like to thank all of the private landowners for granting access to perform fieldwork on their properties. Without access to the streams on private property, significant portions of these efforts would not have been possible. Baseline Assessment of Salmonids in Tributaries of the Snake and i Grande Ronde Rivers in Southeast Washington. Table of Contents List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................v List of Figures............................................................................................................................... vii List of Photos ................................................................................................................................. ix Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................2 Study Purpose and Objectives .............................................................................................3 Methods............................................................................................................................................4 Study Area...........................................................................................................................4 Stream Reach...........................................................................................................5 Individual Site Selection..........................................................................................5 Habitat Assessment..............................................................................................................5 Stream Flow.............................................................................................................5 Stream Temperatures ...............................................................................................5 Limiting Factor Identification..................................................................................5 Fish Stock Assessment.........................................................................................................6 Distribution, Relative Abundance and Species Composition..................................6 Electrofishing Surveys.................................................................................6 Quantitative......................................................................................6 Qualitative........................................................................................7 Spawning Surveys........................................................................................8 Tissue Sampling...........................................................................................8 Genetic Sampling Protocol for the upper Tucannon Subbasin..........................................................................8 Results and Discussion ..................................................................................................................10 Habitat Assessment............................................................................................................11 Stream Flow...........................................................................................................11 Stream Temperatures .............................................................................................11 Fish Stock Assessment.......................................................................................................11 Distribution and Abundance..................................................................................11 1. Lower Grande Ronde Tributaries, Couse Creek, Tenmile Creek, the Asotin Creek Drainage, and Alpowa Creek .............................12 Electrofishing Survey.....................................................................12 Steelhead Spawning Surveys.........................................................25 Bull Trout Spawning Surveys........................................................28 Tissue Sampling.............................................................................29 Stream Profiles of Lower Grande Ronde Tributaries......................................................................................30 Baseline Assessment of Salmonids in Tributaries of the Snake and ii Grande Ronde Rivers in Southeast Washington. Wenatchee Creek...............................................................30 Indian Tom Creek..............................................................36 Shumaker Creek.................................................................37 Joseph Creek......................................................................40 Stream Profiles of Lower Snake and Asotin Creek Tributaries......................................................................................45 Couse Creek (Lower Snake River Tributary)....................45 Tenmile Creek (Lower Snake River Tributary) ...........................................................................47 North Fork Asotin Creek...................................................48 Cougar Canyon..................................................................51 Middle Branch of North Fork Asotin Creek......................52 South Fork of North Fork Asotin Creek ............................54 George Creek.....................................................................55 Pintler Creek......................................................................58 Alpowa Creek....................................................................60 2. Wenaha River Tributaries in Washington State....................................68 Electrofishing Surveys...................................................................68 Bull Trout Spawning Surveys........................................................74 Spring Chinook Spawning Survey.................................................75 Tissue Sampling.............................................................................75 Stream Profiles of Upper Wenaha River Tributaries.....................76 North Fork Wenaha River..................................................76 West Fork Butte Creek.......................................................84 Preacher Creek...................................................................87 Rainbow Creek...................................................................88 East Fork Butte Creek........................................................90 Butte Creek........................................................................92 3. Tucannon River Drainage.....................................................................93 Electrofishing Survey.....................................................................93 Bull Trout Spawning Surveys......................................................104 Tissue Sampling...........................................................................106 Stream Profiles of the Tucannon River Subbasin........................107
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Synthesis Document
    1114 J Ave. October 1, 2018 La Grande, Oregon 97850 (541) 663-0570 Independent Scientific Review Panel Fax: (541) 962-1585 Northwest Power and Conservation Council http://www.grmw.org 851 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 Portland, Oregon 97204 Board of Directors Chair: Dear Panel Members, Susan Roberts Vice-Chair: Donna Beverage We are pleased to submit the 25-year synthesis of the Grande Ronde Model Watershed (GRMW) and hope you find it satisfactory. Although this assignment Allen Childs Norm Cimon might have been accepted begrudgingly, we have found value in taking the time Larry Cribbs to look at the road behind us, if for no other reason than to see if the dust has Jed Hassinger Joe McCormack settled. Nick Myatt Larry Nall Jim Webster It is the nature of organizations like ours to engage in an endless cycle of plan, Dave Yost prioritize, plan, prioritize, and plan some more, often failing to review past actions with a critical eye. This shortcoming might not be as commonplace as I suspect, but having been engaged in the politics and science of this relatively Staff: Mary Estes new ‘industry’ for more than 20 years, I sense that it is not unique to GRMW. I Coby Menton am reminded that this synthesis encapsulates all my career with GRMW and so Kayla Morinaga Jeff Oveson it is a personal reminder of some, but surely not all, of my own shortcomings. Jesse Steele Connar Stone Alexandra Towne If I may be presumptuous, I anticipate that other Umbrella organizations in the Columbia Basin will be tasked with a similar undertaking, and while I hope that our synthesis is not only what the Panel expected, but also can serve as a guide to those who will be preparing their own.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Snake River Hatcheries Draft Environmental Assessment
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE West Coast Region 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard, Suite 1100 PORTLAND, OREGON 97232 May 21, 2019 Dear Recipient: In accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), we announce the availability for review of the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for Snake River Basin Hatcheries. The proposed action is to make Endangered Species Act (ESA) section 4(d) determinations for the 15 hatchery programs for spring and summer Chinook salmon, summer steelhead, and coho salmon to operate in the Snake River Basin. These programs are operated by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, the Nez Perce Tribe, and the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes and are funded by the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan, the Idaho Power Company, and the Bonneville Power Administration. The document is accessible electronically through the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) West Coast Region website at: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/hatcheries/SRHatcheries/snake16_hatch_rvw.html. Hard copies or CD copies of the document may be obtained from the NMFS Comment Coordinator for this action, Emi Kondo, at the contact information provided below. Written comments may be submitted to NMFS via electronic mail, physical mail, or fax to the Comment Coordinator during the public comment period (the closing date for the public comment period is noted at the above website). When submitting comments, please include the identifier “Snake River Hatcheries DEA comments” in the subject line or fax cover page. Comment Coordinator: Emi Kondo, Fish Biologist National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd., Suite 1100 Portland, OR 97232 Phone: 503-736-4739 Fax: 503-872-2737 [email protected] Thank you in advance for your input and assistance in finalizing the Environmental Assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • Stand Density Conditions for Umatilla National Forest: a Range of Variation Analysis
    WHITE PAPER F14-SO-WP-SILV-50 Stand Density Conditions for Umatilla National Forest: A Range of Variation Analysis David C. Powell; Forest Silviculturist Supervisor’s Office; Pendleton, OR Initial Version: FEBRUARY 20131 Most Recent Revision: JUNE 2013 INTRODUCTION Umatilla National Forest adopted a program-of-work (POW) process in February 2013 involving three criteria: 1. Values at risk, including human infrastructure (Johnson 2013). 2. Subwatersheds where existing stand density exceeds a range of variation for stand density. 3. Unique habitats such as old-growth forests, aspen clones, riparian habitat conserva- tion areas, and meadows (Archuleta 2013). This white paper describes a process used to assess stand density conditions for Umatilla National Forest. A Forest-wide, stand-density assessment was completed to meet project planning needs associated with criterion #2 of a POW process. This assessment uses an analytical technique called the range of variation (RV), de- fined as a range of conditions likely to have occurred in the Blue Mountains prior to Euro-American settlement in mid-1800s. A white paper (WP Silv-3) provides concepts, principles, and methods relating to range of variation (Powell 2019) – that white paper provides more information about RV. Briefly, a stand-density assessment involved 4 steps: (1) compiling a dataset charac- terizing stand density conditions for Umatilla NF, (2) stratifying density data by biophysi- cal environment, (3) completing an RV analysis by using subwatersheds as landscape units, and (4) summarizing results while also accounting for land-use restrictions. 1 White papers are internal reports; they receive only limited review. Viewpoints expressed in this paper are those of the author – they may not represent positions of USDA Forest Service.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief History of the Umatilla National Forest
    A BRIEFHISTORYOFTHE UMATILLA NATIONAL FOREST1 Compiled By David C. Powell June 2008 1804-1806 The Lewis and Clark Expedition ventured close to the north and west sides of the Umatilla National Forest as they traveled along the Snake and Columbia rivers. As the Lewis & Clark party drew closer to the Walla Walla River on their return trip in 1806, their journal entries note the absence of firewood, Indian use of shrubs for fuel, abundant roots for human consumption, and good availability of grass for horses. Writing some dis- tance up the Walla Walla River, William Clark noted that “great portions of these bottoms has been latterly burnt which has entirely destroyed the timbered growth” (Robbins 1997). 1810-1840 This 3-decade period was a period of exploration and use by trappers, missionaries, natu- ralists, and government scientists or explorers. William Price Hunt (fur trader), John Kirk Townsend (naturalist), Peter Skene Ogden (trap- per and guide), Thomas Nuttall (botanist), Reverend Samuel Parker (missionary), Marcus and Narcissa Whitman (missionaries), Henry and Eliza Spaulding (missionaries), Captain Benjamin Bonneville (military explorer), Captain John Charles Fremont (military scientist), Nathaniel J. Wyeth (fur trader), and Jason Lee (missionary) are just a few of the people who visited and described the Blue Mountains during this era. 1840-1859 During the 1840s and 1850s – the Oregon Trail era – much overland migration occurred as settlers passed through the Blue Mountains on their way to the Willamette Valley (the Oregon Trail continued to receive fairly heavy use until well into the late 1870s). The Ore- gon Trail traversed the Umatilla National Forest.
    [Show full text]
  • Heaven in Hell's Canyon
    Northwest Explorer ONDAL ONDAL M M EN EN K K Left: Hiker at the boundary of Hell’s Canyon Wilderness. Right: Approaching Horse Heaven, elevation 8,100 feet on the Seven Devils Loop Trail in Hell’s Canyon Wilderness. June and July are good times to explore Washington’s southeast corner in the Wenaha-Tucannon area and in the nearby Hells Canyon area of Oregon and Idaho. Heaven in Hell’s Canyon Hiking two wilderness areas near Washington’s southeast corner By Ken Mondal finding places to backpack when the high jaw-dropping views. This hike can be country is snowed in. The Imnaha River done comfortably in 3-4 days. Seven Devils Loop in Hell’s is hikable virtually year round. An excellent description of hiking the Canyon is Heavenly On the Idaho side of the recreation Seven Devils Loop can be found in Hik- There is no question that the Grand area is a 215,000-acre wilderness area, ing Idaho by Maughan and Maughan, Canyon is one of the natural wonders which includes the Seven Devils Moun- published by Falcon. For the other hikes of the world. However, if one measures tains. The premier hike within this I would recommend Rich Landers’ 100 from the Snake River to the summit of wilderness is the Seven Devils Loop, a Hikes in the Inland Northwest. 9,393 foot He Devil Peak in the Seven rugged 29-mile round trip offering mag- Devils Mountains, this makes Hells nificent views into Hells Canyon many Choose Forgotten Wenaha- Canyon the deepest canyon in North thousands of feet below and equally Tucannon for Solitude America.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Status and Trends of Spring Chinook Habitat in the Upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek: Annual Report 2018 Publication Date: April 30, 2019
    Assessing the Status and Trends of Spring Chinook Habitat in the Upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek: Annual Report 2018 publication date: April 30, 2019 Authors: Seth White, Casey Justice, Lauren Burns, David Graves, Denise Kelsey, and Matthew Kaylor Technical Report 19-04 Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 700 NE Multnomah St, Ste 1200, Portland OR 97232 · (503)238-0667 · www.critfc.org Funding for this work came from the Columbia Basin Fish Accords (2008-2018), a ten-year tribal/federal partnership between the Bonneville Power Administration, Bureau of Reclamation, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon, US Army Corps of Engineers, and The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation. Assessing the Status and Trends of Spring Chinook Habitat in the Upper Grande Ronde River and Catherine Creek BPA Project # 2009-004-00 Report covers work performed under BPA contract #(s) 75586, 73354 REL 2 Report was completed under BPA contract #(s) 73354 REL 2 Report covers work performed from: January – December 2018 Seth White1,2, Casey Justice1, Lauren Burns1, David Graves1, Denise Kelsey1, and Matthew Kaylor2 1Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, OR 97232 2Department of Fisheries & Wildlife, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331 April 2019 This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of BPA's program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Grande Ronde Basin Spring Chinook Salmon Hatchery Review: Introduction and the Early Years
    Grande Ronde Basin Spring Chinook Salmon Hatchery Review: Introduction and The Early Years Richard W. Carmichael Tim Hoffnagle Joseph Feldhaus Debra Eddy Nick Albrecht Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 203 Badgley Hall, EOU One University Blvd La Grande, OR 97850 This program is a cooperative effort of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Nez Perce Tribe and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. The program is funded by the Bonneville Power Administration and administered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service under the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND This paper provides background information, program development history, and assessment of early program performance of the Grande Ronde basin spring Chinook salmon Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) hatchery program. We cover the period from initiation of the program in the late 1970s through the late 1990s, when significant hatchery reform measures were implemented in response to ESA listing and other policy influences. Separate papers are presented that review the recent performance of the Upper Grande Ronde River, Catherine Creek and the Lostine River Spring Chinook hatchery programs. The Grande Ronde basin historically supported diverse and robust populations of Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha. Abundant runs supported tribal and recreational fisheries throughout the basin. The recreational fisheries closed in the mid-1970s due to the depressed status of the populations and limited tribal fishing occurred from the mid-1970s - 1990s. The Grande Ronde basin is located in Northeast Oregon, originating in the Wallowa and Blue mountains. The river flows 340 km from the headwaters to the confluence with the Snake River at rkm 271.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Hunting Prospects: District 3
    2020 PAUL WIK, District Wildlife Biologist MARK VEKASY, Assistant District Wildlife Biologist DISTRICT 3 HUNTING PROSPECTS Asotin, Garfield, Columbia, and Walla Walla counties 38 | Page TABLE OF CONTENTS BE AWARE OF FIRE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................................... 5 DISTRICT 3 GENERAL OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................ 5 ELK ............................................................................................................................................................................... 8 General Information, Management Goals, and Population Status ........................................................................ 8 Which GMU Should Elk Hunters Hunt? ............................................................................................................ 11 A Brief Description of Each GMU ..................................................................................................................... 11 What to Expect During the 2019 Season ............................................................................................................ 15 How to Find Elk .................................................................................................................................................. 15 Elk Areas ...........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Touchet Endemic Summer Steelhead HGMP to NOAA Fisheries in 2010 for a Section 10(A)(1)(A) Permit
    WDFW Touchet River Endemic Stock Summer Steelhead - Touchet River Release HATCHERY AND GENETIC MANAGEMENT PLAN (HGMP) Hatchery Program: Mid-Columbia Summer Steelhead –Touchet River Stock: Lyons Ferry Hatchery Complex Species or Touchet River Endemic Summer Steelhead Hatchery Stock: Agency/Operator: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Watershed and Region: Touchet River / Walla Walla River / Mid- Columbia Basin, Washington State Date Submitted: April 20, 2002; November 29, 2010 Date Last Updated: November 6, 2015 WDFW - Touchet River Endemic Stock HGMP 1 Executive Summary ESA Permit Status: In 2010 the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) submitted a Hatchery Genetic Management Plan (HGMP) for the Lyons Ferry Hatchery (LFH) Touchet River Endemic Summer Steelhead 50,000 release of yearling smolts into the Touchet River program. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) are now re-submitting an HGMP for this yearling program to update the description of the current program. Both the Touchet River Endemic Summer Steelhead (O. Mykiss), Mid-Columbia ESU summer steelhead population, listed as threatened under the ESA as part of the Mid-Columbia River ESU (March 25, 1999; FR 64 No. 57: 14517-14528) and Wallowa Stock summer steelhead (O. Mykiss), (not ESA-listed) are currently produced at WDFW’s LFH and released into the Touchet River. This document covers only the Tucannon Endemic Steelhead program. The proposed hatchery program may slowly phase out the Wallowa stock from the Touchet River in the future. This will depend on the performance of the Touchet River endemic steelhead stock, and decisions reached with the co-managers for full implementation.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 16. Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit—Grande Ronde River Critical Habitat Unit
    Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification: Rationale for Why Habitat is Essential, and Documentation of Occupancy Chapter 16. Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit—Grande Ronde River Critical Habitat Unit 447 Bull Trout Final Critical Habitat Justification Chapter 16 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service September 2010 Chapter 16. Grande Ronde River Critical Habitat Unit The Grande Ronde River CHU is essential to the conservation of bull trout because is supports strong bull trout populations and provides high-quality habitat to potentially expand bull trout distribution and is considered to be essential for bull trout recovery in the Mid-Columbia RU. The eleven populations in this CHU are spread over a large geographical area with multiple age classes, containing both resident and fluvial fish. This bull trout stronghold also has a prey base; connectivity with the Snake River; general distribution of bull trout throughout the habitat; and varying habitat conditions. But in several of the populations, including the Wenaha River, Lostine River, Lookingglass Creek, and Little Minam River populations, excellent habitat conditions exist; many streams and rivers are designated as Wild and Scenic Rivers and/or located within or near Wilderness areas. Two wilderness areas are designated within the Grande Ronde River basin. The Eagle Cap Wilderness is located in the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, encompasses 146,272 (ha) (361,446 ac), and includes most of the Minam, upper Wallowa and Lostine river drainages as well as Bear Creek and Hurricane Creek and a small portion of Catherine Creek. Federal Wild and Scenic River status is designated for the Lostine and Minam Rivers and Oregon State Scenic Waterway status is designated to the Minam and Wallowa Rivers.
    [Show full text]