Long Range Plan For The Klamath River Basin ... - KrisWeb

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE 1-1 -- The Klamath Basin. Size of Subbasins (in acres).Sub-Basin NameArea inOregonArea inCaliforniaTotalAreaLower Klamath - 320,200 320,200Middle Klamath 23,700 1,061,600 1,085,300Salmon River - 475,200 475,200Scott Valley - 423,500 423,500Shasta River - 507,400 507,400Upper Klamath 339,300 238,400 577,700Butte Valley 16,000 387,800 403,800Lost River 846,200 1,089,700 1,935,900Upper Klamath Lake 458,200 - 458,200Sprague River 980,900 - 980,900Williamson River - 945,200 945,200Subtotals 3,609,500 4,503,800 8,113,300Trinity River - 1,896,500 1,896,500TOTALS, KLAMATH RIVERBASIN 3,609,500 6,400,300 10,009,800From: California Department of Water Resources (1960). Klamath River BasinInvestigation. Bulletin No. 83, Sacramento.TABLE 1-2 Areas of Counties Within the Klamath Basin.OregonCaliforniaState and CountyAcresLake............................................ 332,700Klamath...................................... 3,113,100Jackson...................................... 160,100Josephine................................... 3,600Subtotal..................................... 3,609,500Modoc......................................... 752,600Siskiyou...................................... 3,270,400Trinity.......................................... 1,635,600Humboldt.................................... 600,200Del Norte.................................... 141,500Subtotal..................................... 6,400,300TOTAL 10,009,800
Restoration Program. The firm of William M. Kier Associates, specialists in naturalresources planning, management, and policy analysis, was selected in summer, 1989and the Task Force launched its long-range plan effort immediately.SB-2261 -- CALIFORNIA'S NEW ANADROMOUS FISHERIES PROGRAMIn 1988 the California Legislature adopted, and the Governor signed as anurgency measure, Senate Bill 2261, the "Salmon, Steelhead and Anadromous FisheriesProgram Act." The Legislature found that California's anadromous fish resources havedeclined dramatically statewide within the past four decades, primarily as a result ofstream habitat degradation. SB-2261 directs the California Department of Fish andGame to develop a statewide plan and program with the objective of doubling the State'sanadromous fish production by the end of the century. (SB-2261 defines "production" asthe survival of fish to adulthood as measured by the recreational, commercial, and Indianfishery harvests together with the return of fish to their freshwater spawning grounds.)SB-2261 finds that California's increasing reliance on hatchery production ofsalmon and steelhead is "at or near the maximum percentage that it should occupy inthe mix of natural and artificial hatchery production" and that the conservation andrestoration of the State's anadromous fish resources "must be accomplished primarilythrough the improvement of stream habitat."The policy directions of the 1986 Klamath River Basin Act and the 1988California Anadromous Fisheries Program Act are highly compatible. Where the KlamathAct strives to restore the fish resources of the Basin to "optimal levels" by 2006, theState statute urges that a statewide doubling of these resources be achieved by the endof the century. Both acts recognize that the underlying reason for the decline of theanadromous fish resources has been the loss of habitat to the construction andoperation of dams and stream diversions and to adverse land use practices. Both actsclearly state that their purposes are to be accomplished primarily through the restorationand protection of stream habitat and the increase of natural, instream fish production.It is the position of the Task Force that the Restoration Program not onlyimplements the 1986 Klamath Act but represents, as well, the Klamath River Basincomponent of the statewide anadromous fish conservation and restoration programcontemplated in State Senate Bill 2261.WHO USES THE ANADROMOUS FISH OF THE KLAMATH RIVER BASIN?In approving the Klamath River Basin Act, Congress declared that the region'sstreams "provide fishery resources necessary for Indian subsistence and ceremonialpurposes, ocean commercial harvest, recreational fishing, and the economic health ofmany local communities." These user groups were the driving force behindCongressional approval of the Klamath River Basin Restoration Program and today theyrepresent active voices on both the Task Force and the Council. Since a gooddescription of these fisheries is provided in the 1985 plan, only a brief summary isoffered here. More discussion of the users is also found in Chapter 4 (PopulationProtection) and Chapter 6 (Education and Communication).
Page 1 and 2: Long Range Plan For The Klamath Riv
Page 4: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYTHE KLAMATH ACTPub
Page 7 and 8: With the help of an inventory of fi
Page 9 and 10: WHERE TO FIND SUBJECTS IN THIS PLAN
Page 11 and 12: CONTENTS (Continued)The Restoration
Page 13 and 14: Figure TitleLIST OF ILLUSTRATIONSPa
Page 15 and 16: LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (continued)Fi
Page 17 and 18: CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTIONFOREWARDThe su
Page 19: KLAMATH RIVER BASIN FISHERIES TASK
Page 23 and 24: Figure 1-1 - Karuk tribal fisherman
Page 25 and 26: Salmonid Enhancement Program (SEP)
Page 27 and 28: Developing Goals and ObjectivesReca
Page 29 and 30: CHAPTER 2HABITAT PROTECTION AND MAN
Page 31 and 32: At the end of each subsection is a
Page 35 and 36: occurred around 1600 and again abou
Page 39 and 40: LAND MANAGEMENTAs Congress stated i
Page 41 and 42: Glen to Pecwan Creek), Salmon, Scot
Page 43 and 44: Forest Management PracticesTypes of
Page 45 and 46: (landslides and debris slides) indu
Page 47 and 48: Figure 2-8 - Effects of various per
Page 49 and 50: Riparian CoverRiparian vegetation i
Page 51 and 52: Stream contamination from herbicide
Page 53 and 54: Aquatic organismsStream invertebrat
Page 55 and 56: One of the most obvious improvement
Page 57 and 58: issued on a case-by-case basis when
Page 59 and 60: The California Department of Forest
Page 61 and 62: identifying the sensitivity of the
Page 63 and 64: MININGIssues* Habitat damage from p
Page 65 and 66: illustrated in Figure 2-10, while a
Page 67 and 68: Figure 2-11a - Gold Mining on the K
Page 69 and 70: through a small-diameter pressure h
Page 71 and 72:
cumulatively, the annual extraction
Page 73 and 74:
locking tributary access. This was
Page 75 and 76:
In addition, large boulders were mo
Page 77 and 78:
On federal lands, the U.S. Forest S
Page 79 and 80:
POLICIES FOR MINING ACTIVITIESObjec
Page 81 and 82:
The County Farm Advisor's Office (U
Page 83 and 84:
Rearing habitatAs depicted in Figur
Page 85 and 86:
Figure 2-14 -- Impact of loss of sn
Page 87 and 88:
Conservation easements are either d
Page 89 and 90:
POLICIES FOR AGRICULTUREObjective 2
Page 91 and 92:
For many reasons, large dams were n
Page 93 and 94:
or other artificial obstruction is
Page 95 and 96:
were localized in the Trinity Basin
Page 97 and 98:
Figure 2-15 - Present Klamath River
Page 99 and 100:
demands) (U.S.A.C.E. 1979). Since 1
Page 102 and 103:
Figure 2-18 - Iron Gate Fish Flow R
Page 104 and 105:
ownership. These rights survived te
Page 106 and 107:
2) the construction and operation o
Page 108 and 109:
2.E.3. Promote adequate fish protec
Page 110 and 111:
Another opportunity for improved ir
Page 112 and 113:
ecaptured and used on lower pasture
Page 115 and 116:
diversions. The fish impacts relate
Page 117 and 118:
Rearing habitat requires sufficient
Page 119 and 120:
in the bottom of deep pools, but se
Page 121 and 122:
Another opportunity to save water c
Page 123 and 124:
o Significant reductions of ditch l
Page 126 and 127:
eneficial use ("use it or lose it")
Page 128 and 129:
In summary, instream flow problems
Page 130 and 131:
CHAPTER 3HABITAT RESTORATIONISSUES*
Page 132 and 133:
help to determine the stage of reco
Page 134 and 135:
Figure 3-2 - Fish screens, such as
Page 136 and 137:
Figure 3-3 - Riparian restoration i
Page 138 and 139:
the segments themselves. He suggest
Page 140 and 141:
expanded the U.S. Forest Service's
Page 142 and 143:
Figure 3-5 -- These boulder weirs o
Page 144 and 145:
channels have been evaluated and al
Page 146 and 147:
to produce fish, together with its
Page 148 and 149:
West (1984) noted that spawning and
Page 150 and 151:
widths changed dramatically after t
Page 152 and 153:
Scott RiverFish habitat in the Scot
Page 154 and 155:
edload movement or substrate condit
Page 156 and 157:
may be difficult to detect with per
Page 158 and 159:
Community Support and Involvement:
Page 160 and 161:
The problems which have led to the
Page 162 and 163:
3.7 The Scott River and its tributa
Page 164 and 165:
CHAPTER 4FISH POPULATION PROTECTION
Page 166 and 167:
correct. Klamath stocks reached an
Page 168 and 169:
Junction City in the Trinity River
Page 170 and 171:
Recent electrophoretic analysis of
Page 172 and 173:
little intermixing with Iron Gate H
Page 174 and 175:
TABLE 4-1 (Continued)Salmon RiverWo
Page 176 and 177:
(R. Pierce personal communication).
Page 178 and 179:
Creek, Clear Creek, South Fork Trin
Page 180 and 181:
Young lamprey are known as "ammocoe
Page 182:
lack of separation of these fish fr
Page 186 and 187:
chinook released at Trinity River H
Page 188 and 189:
0.020 by 1987 (Hopelain unpublished
Page 190 and 191:
Table 4-2 -- Summer Steelhead Popul
Page 192 and 193:
Table 4-3 -- Habitat Problems Imped
Page 194 and 195:
The potential impacts of harvest an
Page 196 and 197:
the Yurok Tribe to regulate when th
Page 198 and 199:
THE IMPACTS OF POACHING ON DEPRESSE
Page 200 and 201:
along the continental shelf well wi
Page 202 and 203:
points is well documented. Smaller
Page 204 and 205:
monitor coho and steelhead is pract
Page 206 and 207:
The monitoring of escapements and t
Page 208 and 209:
4.4 The Task Force will work with t
Page 210 and 211:
Klamath River Basin Fall Chinook Sa
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
The move to use hatcheries to offse
Page 218 and 219:
Fall chinook yearlings have stayed
Page 220 and 221:
From the 1,000,000 eggs collected a
Page 222 and 223:
Trinity River HatcheryTrinity River
Page 224 and 225:
Birk personal communication). Some
Page 226 and 227:
SIDE EFFECTS OF LARGE SCALE HATCHER
Page 228 and 229:
oth native and hatchery chinook. Ni
Page 230 and 231:
ainbow trout in the areas above Iro
Page 232 and 233:
Oregon instituted a program of coho
Page 234 and 235:
Given the ecological problems of th
Page 236 and 237:
were higher than any recorded in re
Page 238 and 239:
communication). As we expand this s
Page 240 and 241:
have different outmigration and spa
Page 242 and 243:
e handling threatened stock groups.
Page 244 and 245:
c. Requirements that an appropriate
Page 246 and 247:
APPROACHThe education and communica
Page 248 and 249:
COMMUNICATION COMPONENTThe communic
Page 250 and 251:
achieve the objectives of the Resto
Page 252 and 253:
POLICIES FOR EDUCATION AND COMMUNIC
Page 254 and 255:
commercial salmon fishing industry,
Page 256 and 257:
STAFFINGAccording to the Klamath Ac
Page 258 and 259:
Klamath River Basin Proposals, awar
Page 260 and 261:
TABLE 7-1Klamath Basin Fishery Rest
Page 262 and 263:
TABLE 7-3 — Potential Funding Sou
Page 264 and 265:
Specific fisheries software, such a
Page 266 and 267:
Table 7-4 -- A List of Agencies and
Page 268 and 269:
Department of CommerceThe Departmen
Page 270 and 271:
Gate) and will be making the final
Page 272 and 273:
Upper Klamath Lake were converted d
Page 274 and 275:
Coastal Conservancy (CC). The Conse
Page 276 and 277:
Each county also has a Fish and Gam
Page 278 and 279:
Communication Barriers. Since commu
Page 280 and 281:
Joint Management PlansTwo or more a
Page 282 and 283:
PROJECT SELECTION PROCESSProject pr
Page 284 and 285:
Figure 7-3 -- Klamath Fishery Resto
Page 286 and 287:
. An Annual Progress Report appropr
Page 288 and 289:
d. Cooperative Agreements with trib
Page 290 and 291:
o Addresses the need for improving
Page 292 and 293:
Habitat Restoration16. The Task For
Page 294 and 295:
35. The Task Force will schedule le
Page 296 and 297:
2.A.4. Anticipate potential stream
Page 298 and 299:
2.C.2. Monitor and assess stream qu
Page 300 and 301:
2.F.3. In the year 1995, if adequat
Page 302 and 303:
. Funding a study using aerial phot
Page 304 and 305:
h. Get the information suggested in
Page 306 and 307:
. Broodstock management rules that
Page 308 and 309:
. As an option, use the "abstention
Page 310 and 311:
d. Committees of the Task Force, Co
Page 312 and 313:
GLOSSARYAFS: American Fisheries Soc
Page 314 and 315:
counting weir: fence or series of p
Page 316 and 317:
gabion: a wire basket filled with r
Page 318 and 319:
longitudinal profile: measurement t
Page 320 and 321:
iffle: fast shallow waters of a str
Page 322 and 323:
BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCESAllendorf,
Page 324 and 325:
Borodin, A.M., A.G. Bannikov, and V
Page 326 and 327:
California Dept. of Transportation.
Page 328 and 329:
Coats, R.N., T.O. Miller, and D.W.
Page 330 and 331:
Fletcher, J.E. and M. King. 1988. A
Page 332 and 333:
Hall, J.D. 1984. Evaluating fish re
Page 334 and 335:
Hubbell, P.M. 1979. Fisheries Inves
Page 336 and 337:
Kroeber, A.L. and S.A. Barrett. 196
Page 338 and 339:
Mattole Restoration Council. 1989.
Page 340 and 341:
National Council on Gene Resources.
Page 342 and 343:
Platts, W.S. 1981. Effects of lives
Page 344 and 345:
Rosgen, D.L. 1985. A stream classif
Page 346 and 347:
Sommarstrom, S. 1981. Local-State c
Page 348 and 349:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 198
Page 350 and 351:
Wagner, H. 1979. Why Wild Coho? Ore
Page 352 and 353:
PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONSBaker, Phil:
Page 354 and 355:
Orcutt, Mike: Head fisheries biolog
Page 356:
APPENDIX A:PUBLIC LAW 99-552KLAMATH
Page 365 and 366:
1989 Klamath Field Review CommentsT
Page 367 and 368:
Pecwan Creek (11021, 11036, 11028-$
Page 369 and 370:
Clear Creek (6010, 6068, 69-$66,400
Page 371 and 372:
West Branch Creek (6007-$5,000): Th
Page 373 and 374:
Scott River (4405-06, 4012-15-$94,8
Page 375 and 376:
A Financial Feasibility Envelope fo
Page 377 and 378:
For this analysis, we took the two-
Page 379 and 380:
Bonneville Power Administration's e
Page 381 and 382:
Table 4Maximum Feasible Annual Inve
Page 383 and 384:
APPENDIX D
Page 385 and 386:
KLAMATH RIVER BASIN CONSERVATION AR
Page 387 and 388:
o Harvest Managementoo Population m
Page 389 and 390:
III. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENTProject Ar
Page 391 and 392:
Both aquatic and terrestrial types
Page 393 and 394:
Table 2Threatened, Endangered, and
Page 395 and 396:
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCESWhile
Page 397 and 398:
Farmlands and TimberlandsNo farmlan
Page 399 and 400:
Comparison of AlternativesTable 3 o
Page 401 and 402:
Agencies Consulted for the Environm
Page 403:
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTLON
show all

Long Range Plan For The Klamath River Basin ... - KrisWeb

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?