DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment Yaquina Bay and River Maintenance Dredging

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessment Yaquina Bay and River Maintenance Dredging ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT YAQUINA BAY AND RIVER MAINTENANCE DREDGING Prepared For US Army Corps of Engineers Portland District PO Box 2946 Portland, OR 97208 Prepared By 600 University Street, Suite 610 Seattle, WA 98101 June 30, 2015 Yaquina Bay and River Maintenance Dredging Environmental Assessment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Yaquina Bay and River Federal Navigation Project was authorized by the Rivers and Harbors Acts of: June 14, 1880, March 2, 1919, August 26, 1937, March 2, 1945, July 24, 1946, July 3, 1958, and a RHA section 107 Project from July 14, 1960. Dredging Yaquina River (including Depot Slough) was authorized by Congress under the RHA of March 4, 1913 and a RHA section 107 Project in 1960. These authorizations include the construction, operation and maintenance of two jetty structures and other navigation-related features, and maintenance of the navigation channels through the mouth of Yaquina Bay up the Yaquina River to about RM 14. The purpose of the Yaquina Bay and River Federal Navigation Project (the “Project”) is for the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District (Corps) to maintain the federal navigation channels, which also includes the South Beach Marina Federal Access Channel and the Depot Slough Access Channel, at their authorized depths and widths by periodically removing restricting shoals of naturally occurring sediment material. These ongoing maintenance dredging activities provide adequate channel dimensions for vessel access and use upstream to approximately river mile (RM) 14. By maintaining adequate navigational dimensions, the Project further serves to decrease waiting times and increase navigability for vessels crossing the entrance bar. Periodic shoals develop within the Yaquina Bay and River navigation channels due to the buildup of materials from fluvial and marine origins. Shoals and sedimentation can restrict or prohibit vessel navigation and dredging to authorized depths and widths is critical to keeping the river and harbor open and to sustaining important navigation components of the local and state economy, as well as maintaining a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) “critical harbor of refuge” for vessels in need. While authorized up to RM 14, most of the Yaquina River Channel does not currently require regular maintenance dredging and future plans to dredge the entire River Channel are not proposed. Three areas are proposed for continued maintenance dredging as part of the Project: (1) Yaquina Bay Entrance Channel (up to 450,000 cubic yards annually); (2) 25,000 cubic yards from the South Beach Marina Access Channel once every five to eight years; (3) 100,000 cubic yards from Depot Slough once every five to eight years. Dredging and placement activities occur between about June 15 or July 1 to October 31 depending on the specific location (of any given year) with an additional 6 days of dredging/placement completed in April or May. Ocean conditions, potential storm surges, inclement weather, and difficulty in crossing the bar to reach one of two authorized Offshore Dredged Material Disposal Sites (ODMDS) all preclude safe and effective operations of necessary dredging activities during the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) preferred in-water work period. Most dredging operations work 24-hours per day depending upon weather, staffing, and other factors. Multiple environmental effects from dredging and placement activities on resources in the Project vicinity were considered in this Environmental Assessment (EA), which updates prior environmental June 30, 2015 i Yaquina Bay and River Maintenance Dredging Environmental Assessment assessments completed for the Project. The analysis finds that the Preferred Alternative would not substantially affect the quality of the environment. June 30, 2015 ii Yaquina Bay and River Maintenance Dredging Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................... I ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ........................................................................................................ IV 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose and Need ......................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Authority ......................................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Funding .......................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Project Area ................................................................................................................................... 3 1.5 Background and History ................................................................................................................ 8 1.5.1 Jetty Construction and Repair .............................................................................................. 8 1.5.2 Maintenance Dredging and Improvements .......................................................................... 9 1.5.3 Dredged Material Placement .............................................................................................. 10 2. ALTERNATIVES .......................................................................................................................... 11 2.1 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................................... 11 2.2 Preferred Alternative .................................................................................................................... 11 2.2.1 Proposed Dredging Activities ............................................................................................. 12 2.2.2 Proposed Dredge Material Placement ............................................................................... 13 2.2.3 Proposed Dredging and Placement Methods ..................................................................... 14 2.2.4 Channel/River Management ............................................................................................... 17 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ....................................................................................................... 18 3.1 Physical Environment .................................................................................................................. 18 3.1.1 Geology .............................................................................................................................. 18 3.1.2 Coastal Processes .............................................................................................................. 19 3.1.3 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................ 23 3.1.4 Sediment Quality ................................................................................................................ 24 3.1.5 Water Quality ...................................................................................................................... 26 3.1.6 Sound ................................................................................................................................. 28 3.1.7 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................... 29 3.2 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................... 30 3.2.1 Aquatic Plants, Animals and Habitat .................................................................................. 30 3.2.2 Shoreline and Terrestrial Plants, Animals and Habitat ....................................................... 33 3.2.3 Threatened and Endangered Species ................................................................................ 34 3.3 Other Resources .......................................................................................................................... 41 3.3.1 Cultural and Historic ........................................................................................................... 41 3.3.2 Socioeconomic ................................................................................................................... 42 3.3.3 Recreation .......................................................................................................................... 44 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...................................................................................... 46 4.1 Physical Environment .................................................................................................................. 46 4.1.1 Geology .............................................................................................................................. 46 4.1.2 Coastal Processes .............................................................................................................. 46 4.1.3 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................ 48 4.1.4 Sediment Quality ................................................................................................................ 49 4.1.5 Water Quality .....................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Physical and Chemical Characteristics of the Yaquina Estuary, Oregon
    PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE YAQUINA ESTUARY, OREGON Richard J. Callaway MarPoiSol P.O. Box 57 Corvallis, OR 97339 David T. Specht, Project Officer Coastal Ecology Branch U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2111 S.E. Marine Science Drive Newport, Oregon 97365-5260 2 (Purchase Order #8B06~NTT A) Submitted August 9, 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 Area of Study .................................................................................................................. 1 Estuary Classification.............................................. .......................................... 1 Local Communities ............................................................................................... 7 Physical Setting .................................................................................................... 7 Climate ................................................................................................................. ? Winds ................................................................................................................... 8 Tides .................................................................................................................... 8 Currents .............................................................................................................. 9 Estuarine Dynamics and the Hansen-Rattray Classification Scheme ...............................
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Parks & Recreation Department
    Case File: 4-CP-1$ Date Filed: December 17, 2018 Hearing Date: February 25, 2019/Planning Commission PLANNING STAFF REPORT File No. 4-CP-18 A. APPLICANT: Oregon Parks & Recreation Department (OPRD) (Ian Matthews, Authorized Representative) B. REQUEST: The request is to amend the Parks and Recreation Section of the Newport Comprehensive Plan to approve and adopt the master plans for the Agate Beach State Recreation Site, Yaquina Bay State Recreation Site, and South Beach State Park, as outlined in the OPRD South Beach and Beverly Beach Management Units Plan, dated January 201$. C. LOCATION: 3040 NW Oceanview Drive (Agate Beach State Recreation Site), $42 and $46 SW Government Street (Yaquina Bay State Recreation Site), and 5400 South Coast Highway (South Beach State Park). A list of tax lots associated with each park is included in the application materials. D. LOT SIZE: 1 8.5 acres (Agate Beach State Recreation Site), 32.0 acres (Yaquina Bay State Recreation Site), and 498.3 acres (South Beach State Park). E. STAFF REPORT: 1. Report of Fact a. Plan Designations: Public and Shoreland b. Zone Designations: P-2/”Public Parks” c. Surrounding Land Uses: The Agate Beach State Recreation Site is bordered on the north by a condominium development, on the south by the Best Western Agate Beach Inn, to the east by US 101, and by the ocean on the west. It is bisected by Big Creek and Oceanview Drive. The Yaquina Bay State Recreation Site is located on the bluff at the north end of the Yaquina Bay Bridge. It is bordered by single-family residential and commercial development to the north, US 101 to the east, Yaquina Bay to the south and the ocean to the west.
    [Show full text]
  • Drainage Basin Morphology in the Central Coast Range of Oregon
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF WENDY ADAMS NIEM for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in GEOGRAPHY presented on July 21, 1976 Title: DRAINAGE BASIN MORPHOLOGY IN THE CENTRAL COAST RANGE OF OREGON Abstract approved: Redacted for privacy Dr. James F. Lahey / The four major streams of the central Coast Range of Oregon are: the westward-flowing Siletz and Yaquina Rivers and the eastward-flowing Luckiamute and Marys Rivers. These fifth- and sixth-order streams conform to the laws of drain- age composition of R. E. Horton. The drainage densities and texture ratios calculated for these streams indicate coarse to medium texture compa- rable to basins in the Carboniferous sandstones of the Appalachian Plateau in Pennsylvania. Little variation in the values of these parameters occurs between basins on igneous rook and basins on sedimentary rock. The length of overland flow ranges from approximately i mile to i mile. Two thousand eight hundred twenty-five to 6,140 square feet are necessary to support one foot of channel in the central Coast Range. Maximum elevation in the area is 4,097 feet at Marys Peak which is the highest point in the Oregon Coast Range. The average elevation of summits in the thesis area is ap- proximately 1500 feet. The calculated relief ratios for the Siletz, Yaquina, Marys, and Luckiamute Rivers are compara- ble to relief ratios of streams on the Gulf and Atlantic coastal plains and on the Appalachian Piedmont. Coast Range streams respond quickly to increased rain- fall, and runoff is rapid. The Siletz has the largest an- nual discharge and the highest sustained discharge during the dry summer months.
    [Show full text]
  • OREGON ESTUARINE INVERTEBRATES an Illustrated Guide to the Common and Important Invertebrate Animals
    OREGON ESTUARINE INVERTEBRATES An Illustrated Guide to the Common and Important Invertebrate Animals By Paul Rudy, Jr. Lynn Hay Rudy Oregon Institute of Marine Biology University of Oregon Charleston, Oregon 97420 Contract No. 79-111 Project Officer Jay F. Watson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 500 N.E. Multnomah Street Portland, Oregon 97232 Performed for National Coastal Ecosystems Team Office of Biological Services Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Department of Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 Table of Contents Introduction CNIDARIA Hydrozoa Aequorea aequorea ................................................................ 6 Obelia longissima .................................................................. 8 Polyorchis penicillatus 10 Tubularia crocea ................................................................. 12 Anthozoa Anthopleura artemisia ................................. 14 Anthopleura elegantissima .................................................. 16 Haliplanella luciae .................................................................. 18 Nematostella vectensis ......................................................... 20 Metridium senile .................................................................... 22 NEMERTEA Amphiporus imparispinosus ................................................ 24 Carinoma mutabilis ................................................................ 26 Cerebratulus californiensis .................................................. 28 Lineus ruber .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • PHYTOPLANKTON Grass of The
    S. G. No. 9 Oregon State University Extension Service Rev. December 1973 FIGURE 6: Oregon State Univer- sity's Marine Science Center in MARINE ADVISORY PROGRAM Newport, Oregon, is engaged in re- search, teaching, marine extension, and related activities under the Sea Grant Program of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- tration. Located on Yaquina Bay, the center attracts thousands of visitors yearly to view the exhibits PHYTOPLANKTON of oceanographic phenomena and the aquaria of most of Oregon's marine fishes and invertebrates. Scientists studying the charac- grass of the sea teristics of life in the ocean (in- cluding phytoplankton) and in estu- aries work in various laboratories at the center. The Marine Science Center is home port for OSU School of Ocea- nography vessels, ranging in size from 180 to 33 feet (the 180-foot BY HERBERT CURL, JR. Yaquina and the 80-foot Cayuse PROFESSOR OF OCEANOGRAPHY are shown at the right). OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY Anyone taking a trip at sea or walking on the beach Want to Know More About Phytoplankton? Press, 1943—out of print; reprinted Ann Arbor: notices that nearshore water along coasts is frequently University Microfilms, Inc., University of Michigan). For the student or teacher who wishes to learn green or brown and sometimes even red. Often these more about phytoplankton, the following publications colors signify the presence of mud or silt carried into offer detailed information about phytoplankton and Want Other Marine Information? the sea by rivers or stirred up from the bottom if the their relationship to the ocean and mankind. Oregon State University's Extension Marine Advis- water is sufficiently shallow.
    [Show full text]
  • NORTH AMERICAN GREEN STURGEON (Acipenser Medirostris) AS an ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES UNDER the ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
    PETITION TO LIST THE NORTH AMERICAN GREEN STURGEON (Acipenser medirostris) AS AN ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION INFORMATION CENTER CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY WATERKEEPERS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PETITIONERS JUNE 2001 NOTICE OF PETITION Environmental Protection Information Center P.O. Box 397 Garberville, CA 95542 (707) 923-2931 Contact: Cynthia Elkins Center for Biological Diversity P.O. Box 40090 Berkeley, CA 94704 (510) 841-0812 Contact: Jeff Miller WaterKeepers Northern California Presidio Building 1004 San Francisco, CA 94129 (415) 561.2299 ext. 14 Contact: Jonathan Kaplan Petitioners Environmental Protection Information Center (“EPIC”), Center for Biological Diversity (“CBD”), and WaterKeepers Northern California (“WaterKeepers”) formally request that the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) list the North American green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) as an endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544. In the alternative, petitioners formally request that NMFS list the North American green sturgeon as a threatened species under the ESA. In either case, petitioners request that green sturgeon critical habitat be designated concurrent with the listing designation. This petition is filed under §553(e) of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA” - 5 U.S.C. §§ 551-559), §1533(b)(3) of the ESA, and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(b). This petition sets in motion a specific administrative process as defined by §1533(b)(3) and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(b), placing mandatory response requirements on NMFS. Because A. medirostris is an anadromous fish, NMFS has jurisdiction over this petition. A Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between NMFS and the U.
    [Show full text]
  • A Nutrient-Phytoplankton-Zooplankton Model for Classifying Estuaries Based on Susceptibility to Nitrogen Loads
    A NUTRIENT-PHYTOPLANKTON-ZOOPLANKTON MODEL FOR CLASSIFYING ESTUARIES BASED ON SUSCEPTIBILITY TO NITROGEN LOADS By Yuntao Zhou A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Natural Resources and Environment) in the University of Michigan April 18, 2006 Thesis Committee: Professor Donald Scavia, Chair Professor J. David Allan Abstract Estuarine responses to nutrient loads can be remarkably different. Many driving variables including light, water residence time, physical stratification, and temperature are responsible for the diversity of the response. To classify estuaries based on their susceptibility to nutrient loads, a nutrient- phytoplankton- zooplankton (NPZ) model was developed and applied to river-dominated, well-mixed estuaries. Estuaries are classified as having low, medium, high and hyper eutrophic conditions by the model. The result of the model suggests that water residence time is an important controlling variable in the process of achieving a steady-state response to nutrient loads. Although phytoplankton responses to residence time vary under different loads, they have the same positive trend. Phytoplankton responses are almost linear with water residence time initially, then decrease, and eventually plateau. i Table of Contents Part1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………1 Light availability………………………………………………………………………………..2 Water residence time……………………………………………………………………………3 Physical Stratification…………………………………………………………………………..3 Temperature…………………………………………………………………………………….4 Part 2. Modeling Approaches…………………………………………………………5 A simple plankton model (Steele and Henderson, 1981)……………………………………...7 Coastal ecosystem sensitivity to light and nutrient enrichment (Cloern 1999)……………..8 A model for partially mixed estuary (Peterson and Festa, 1984)………………………….....9 CSTT (Comprehensive Studies Task Team) model (Tett, 2003)…………………………….10 ASSETS (Assessment of Estuarine Trophic Status) model (Bricker, 2003) ………………..11 Part 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Column Primary Production in the Columbia River Estuary
    WATER COLUMN PRIMARY PRODUCTION IN THE COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY I a.~ ~~~~~~~~ 9 Final Report on the Water Column Primary Production Work Unit of the Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program WATER COLUMNNPRIMARY PRODUCTION IN THE COLUMBIA RIVER ESTUARY Contractor: Oregon State University College of Oceanography Principal Investigators: Lawrence F. Small and Bruce E. Frey College of Oceanography Oregon State University Corvallis, Oregon 97331 February 1984 OSU PROJECT TEAM PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS Dr. Bruce E. Frey Dr. Lawrence F. Small GRADUATE RESEARCH ASSISTANT Dr. Ruben Lara-Lara TECHNICAL STAFF Ms. RaeDeane Leatham Mr. Stanley Moore Final Report Prepared by Bruce E. Frey, Ruben Lara-Lara and Lawrence F. Small PREFACE The Columbia River Estuarv Data Development Program This document is one of a set of publications and other materials produced by the Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program (CREDDP). CREDDP has two purposes: to increase understanding of the ecology of the Columbia River Estuary and to provide information useful in making land and water use decisions. The program was initiated by local governments and citizens who saw a need for a better information base for use in managing natural resources and in planning for development. In response to these concerns, the Governors of the states of Oregon and Washington requested in 1974 that the Pacific Northwest River Basins Commission (PNRBC) undertake an interdisciplinary ecological study of the estuary. At approximately the same time, local governments and port districts formed the Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce (CREST) to develop a regional management plan for the estuary. PNRBC produced a Plan of Study for a six-year, $6.2 million program which was authorized by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • PROGRESS REPORTS 2005 FISH DIVISION Oregon
    PROGRESS REPORTS 2005 FISH DIVISION Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Final Summary Report: Green Sturgeon Population Characteristics in Oregon This program receives federal financial assistance in Sport Fish and/or Wildlife Restoration and prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex or disability. If you believe that you have been discriminated against as described above in any program, activity, or facility, or if you desire further information, please contact ADA Coordinator, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 3406 Cherry Avenue NE, Salem, OR, 97303, 503-947-6000, or write Office for Human Resources, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240. This material will be furnished in alternate format for people with disabilities if needed. Please call (503) 657-2000 ext. 406 to request. FINAL PROGRESS REPORT FISH RESEARCH PROJECT OREGON PROJECT TITLE: Green Sturgeon Population Characteristics In Oregon PROJECT NUMBER: F-178-R JOB NUMBER: 1 JOB TITLE: Green Sturgeon Population Characteristics In Oregon PROJECT PERIOD: 1 October 1999 – 30 September 2004 Prepared by: Ruth A. Farr J. Chris Kern Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 17330 Southeast Evelyn Street Clackamas, OR 97015 This project was financed in part with the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (Wallop- Breaux) funds through the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. CONTENTS SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................................... i INTRODUCTION
    [Show full text]
  • Structure and Productivity of Marine Benthic Diatom Communities in a Laboratory Model Ecosystem
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF BARRY LEE WULFF for the DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Name) (Degree) Botany in (Physiological-ecology) presented on /970 (Major) Q1ArrDae) Title: STRUCTURE AND PRODUCTIVITY OF MARINE BENTHIC DIATOM COMMUNITIES IN A LABORATORY MODEL ECO- SYSTEM Redacted for privacy Abstract approved: Dr. C. David McIntire Effects of light intensity, exposure to desiccation, reduced salinity, and thermal elevation on the functional and structural char- acteristics of marine benthic diatom communities were investigated in a laboratory model ecosystem and a respirometer chamber. Measurements of biomass (dry weight and ash-free dry weight) and chlorophyll a were made for each of the communities.Population studies were performed to determine community structure.Finally, photosynthetic rates of the communities at selected light intensities were determined in the respirometer for communities developed in experiments designed to test the effects ofexposure to desiccation and variations in light intensity. Biomass accumulated most rapidly on substrates subjected to high light intensities, without exposure to desiccation. Under inter- tidal conditions, biomass accumulation was progressively greater with less exposure to desiccation.Organic material (ash-free dry weight) was greater on substrates from summer than winter experi- ments. Both reduced salinity and thermal elevation interacted with light to stimulate algal production, and mats of Melosira nummuloides developed rapidly and floated to the surface. Communities acclimated to different light intensities and periods of desiccation responded differently to various light intensities in the respirometer chamber.Substrates receiving little atmospheric ex- posure developed thicker layers of biomass permitting significantly higher rates of photosynthesis as light intensity increased.Generally, substrates developed at low light intensities attained a maximum photosynthetic rate at the lower light intensities in the respirometer, presumably because of an acclimation phenomenon.
    [Show full text]
  • The Yaquina Estuary and Its Inhabitants a Trail Guide
    The Yaquina Estuary &Its Inhabitants HATFIELD MARINE SCIENCE CENTER n the end, we will conserve “ only what we love, we will love only what we under- stand, and we will understand only what we are taught. —Baba Dioum, Senegalese philosopher” Published by Oregon Sea Grant, Oregon State University, 1600 SW Western Blvd., Suite 350, Corvallis, OR 97333. Phone: 541-737-2714. Web: seagrant.oregonstate.edu Facebook: www.facebook.com/OregonSeaGrant Twitter: twitter.com/OregonSeaGrant © 1999 by Oregon State University. Revised 2019. All rights reserved. All illustrations copyrighted 1999 by Barbara Gleason. This report was prepared by Oregon Sea Grant under award number NA18OAR4170072 (project number M/A-21) from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce, and by appropria- tions made by the Oregon State Legislature. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of these funders. ORESU-H-19-001 The Yaquina Estuary and Its Inhabitants A Trail Guide he Hatfield Marine Science Center (HMSC) invites you to take a one-mile walk along our nature trail. This Ttrail follows the bay side of the Marine Science Center along the Yaquina Estuary and ends near the Oregon Coast Aquarium. The trailhead is located in the northeast corner of the HMSC public parking lot. Marine Science Center Campus THE YAQUINA ESTUARY AND ITS INHABITANTS -~1 What is an estuary? A place where freshwater and saltwater meet Here in Yaquina Bay, high tide brings saltwater from the ocean to mix with freshwa- ter flowing down the Yaquina River.
    [Show full text]
  • State Waterway Navigability Determination
    BODY OF WATER & LOCATION NAV CG NON-NAV CG REMARKS yellow highlight = apply to USCG for permit up to RM stipulated Alsea Bay, OR X Estuary of Pacific Ocean. Alsea River, OR X Flows into Alsea Bay, Waldport, OR. Navigable to mile 13. Ash Creek, OR X Tributary of Willamette River at Independence, OR. Barrett Slough, OR X Tributary of Lewis and Clark River. Bayou St. John, OR X Court decision, 1935 AMC 594, 10 Mile Lake, Coos County, OR. Bear Creek (Coos County), OR X Tributary of Coquille River (tidal at mile 0.5) Beaver Creek, OR X Tributary of Nestucca River. Beaver Slough, OR X See Clatskanie River. Big Creek (Lane County), OR X At U.S. 101 bridge (tidal). Big Creek (Lincoln County), OR X Flows into Pacific Ocean. Big Creek Slough, OR X Upstream end at Knappa, OR (tidal). At site of Birch Creek (Sparks) Bridge on Canyon Road near Birch Creek, OR X Pendleton, OR. Side channel of Yaquina River. 3 mi. downstream from Toledo, Blind Slough, OR X OR (tidal). Tributary of Knappa Slough. 10 mi. upstream from Astoria, OR Blind Slough/ Gnat Creek, OR X (tidal at mile 2.0). Boone Slough, OR X Tributary of Yaquina River between Newport and Toledo, OR. Side channel of Willamette River. 3 miles upstream from Booneville Channel, OR X Corvallis, OR. Boulder Creek, OR X 7 miles N of Lake Quinalt. Side channel of Columbia River. 5 miles N of Clatskanie, OR Bradbury Slough, OR X (tidal). Brownlee Reservoir, ID /OR X See Snake River. Also known as South Channel.
    [Show full text]