Search

Search Results

• 3101. [Article] Yachats River Basin Fish Management Plan 1997

  Abstract -- The Yachats River Basin is one in a series of similar watersheds in the Oregon coastal mountain range extending from the Nehalem to the Coquille. Rivers and streams in these watersheds generally ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Yachats River Basin Fish Management Plan 1997 Abstract -- The Yachats River Basin is one in a series of similar watersheds in the Oregon coastal mountain range extending from the Nehalem to the Coquille. Rivers and streams in these watersheds generally occur in a forest dominated landscape, have moderate gradients, and medium to large estuaries. There are few dams that substantially affect anadromous fish runs. Water withdrawals impact only a small portion of the total miles of stream habitat. Water quality and temperatures are suitable for salmonids for the entire year in most areas. Rainfall throughout the area is heavy, resulting in a high density of streams relative to watershed area. The Yachats River system has about 69 contiguous miles of stream suitable for salmonids. Some of these stream reaches are highly productive. The Yachats River Basin has traditionally been managed for production of wild salmonids. Few hatchery fish have been released in the Yachats River Basin historically and none has been released in the past several decades. All salmonid species in the Yachats River Basin are at depressed levels with the exception of resident cutthroat trout. The depressed status of Yachats River Basin fish stocks has resulted from human induced factors including habitat degradation, excessive harvest, and hatchery influence (from adjacent streams) in combination with natural events such as droughts, floods and El Nino ocean conditions. As human induced factors are controlled and corrected, it is expected that fish abundance will increase substantially, but it is not possible to accurately forecast the shape recovery will take. In addition to the confounding effects of natural environmental variation, the recovery of individual fish species due to reduction in human impacts can only be loosely surmised. For this reason, this management plan will treat specific management targets for individual species as secondary to recovery of the entire basin and assemblage of fish species. Title: Yachats River Basin Fish Management Plan 1997 Abstract -- The Yachats River Basin is one in a series of similar watersheds in the Oregon coastal mountain range extending from the Nehalem to the Coquille. Rivers and streams in these watersheds generally occur in a forest dominated landscape, have moderate gradients, and medium to large estuaries. There are few dams that substantially affect anadromous fish runs. Water withdrawals impact only a small portion of the total miles of stream habitat. Water quality and temperatures are suitable for salmonids for the entire year in most areas. Rainfall throughout the area is heavy, resulting in a high density of streams relative to watershed area. The Yachats River system has about 69 contiguous miles of stream suitable for salmonids. Some of these stream reaches are highly productive. The Yachats River Basin has traditionally been managed for production of wild salmonids. Few hatchery fish have been released in the Yachats River Basin historically and none has been released in the past several decades. All salmonid species in the Yachats River Basin are at depressed levels with the exception of resident cutthroat trout. The depressed status of Yachats River Basin fish stocks has resulted from human induced factors including habitat degradation, excessive harvest, and hatchery influence (from adjacent streams) in combination with natural events such as droughts, floods and El Nino ocean conditions. As human induced factors are controlled and corrected, it is expected that fish abundance will increase substantially, but it is not possible to accurately forecast the shape recovery will take. In addition to the confounding effects of natural environmental variation, the recovery of individual fish species due to reduction in human impacts can only be loosely surmised. For this reason, this management plan will treat specific management targets for individual species as secondary to recovery of the entire basin and assemblage of fish species. Close

• 3102. [Article] Coastal Salmon Spawning Survey Procedure Manuel 1996

  Abstract -- The Ocean Salmon Management Stream Inventory Project is the branch of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife with the primary task of monitoring the status of naturally produced coastal ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coastal Salmon Spawning Survey Procedure Manuel 1996 Abstract -- The Ocean Salmon Management Stream Inventory Project is the branch of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife with the primary task of monitoring the status of naturally produced coastal salmon stocks. Stock status is monitored through spawning fish surveys conducted throughout coastal watersheds. Spawning fish surveys are conducted in conjunction with coastal district biologists located in seven different fish management districts. Data generated by the Ocean Salmon Management Stream Inventory Project is used by ocean and freshwater fishery managers in the Department and other agencies in the management of Oregon's salmon resource. Title: Coastal Salmon Spawning Survey Procedure Manuel 1996 Abstract -- The Ocean Salmon Management Stream Inventory Project is the branch of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife with the primary task of monitoring the status of naturally produced coastal salmon stocks. Stock status is monitored through spawning fish surveys conducted throughout coastal watersheds. Spawning fish surveys are conducted in conjunction with coastal district biologists located in seven different fish management districts. Data generated by the Ocean Salmon Management Stream Inventory Project is used by ocean and freshwater fishery managers in the Department and other agencies in the management of Oregon's salmon resource. Close

• 3103. [Article] A Plan for Reintroduction of Anadromous Fish in the Upper Klamath Basin 2008

  Abstract -- The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission (OFWC) has adopted statewide species plans for Chinook and coho salmon, steelhead, trout, and warmwater gamefish. These plans guide the development of ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: A Plan for Reintroduction of Anadromous Fish in the Upper Klamath Basin 2008 Abstract -- The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission (OFWC) has adopted statewide species plans for Chinook and coho salmon, steelhead, trout, and warmwater gamefish. These plans guide the development of localized plans for species management units, and individual river basins. A fish management plan was adopted by the OFWC in 1997 for the Klamath River Basin. Basin fish management plans serve several functions. They present a logical, systematic approach to conserving our aquatic resources; establish management priorities, and direct attention to the most critical problems affecting our fisheries. In November 2002, the OFWC adopted the Native Fish Conservation Policy (NFCP) that calls for development of conservation plans for each species management unit to ensure conservation and recovery of native fishes in Oregon. Intent of the NFCP is to provide a basis for managing hatcheries, fisheries, habitat, predators, competitors, and pathogens in balance with sustainable production of naturally produced native fish. The policy has three areas of emphasis. The first is defensive, to ensure avoidance of serious depletion of native fish. The second is more proactive, to restore and maintain native fish at levels providing ecological and societal benefits. The third area of emphasis ensures that, consist with native fish conservation, opportunities for fisheries and other societal resource uses are not unnecessarily constrained. The NFCP acknowledges that basin fish management plans will provide fish management guidance until conservation plans can be completed. Title: A Plan for Reintroduction of Anadromous Fish in the Upper Klamath Basin 2008 Abstract -- The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission (OFWC) has adopted statewide species plans for Chinook and coho salmon, steelhead, trout, and warmwater gamefish. These plans guide the development of localized plans for species management units, and individual river basins. A fish management plan was adopted by the OFWC in 1997 for the Klamath River Basin. Basin fish management plans serve several functions. They present a logical, systematic approach to conserving our aquatic resources; establish management priorities, and direct attention to the most critical problems affecting our fisheries. In November 2002, the OFWC adopted the Native Fish Conservation Policy (NFCP) that calls for development of conservation plans for each species management unit to ensure conservation and recovery of native fishes in Oregon. Intent of the NFCP is to provide a basis for managing hatcheries, fisheries, habitat, predators, competitors, and pathogens in balance with sustainable production of naturally produced native fish. The policy has three areas of emphasis. The first is defensive, to ensure avoidance of serious depletion of native fish. The second is more proactive, to restore and maintain native fish at levels providing ecological and societal benefits. The third area of emphasis ensures that, consist with native fish conservation, opportunities for fisheries and other societal resource uses are not unnecessarily constrained. The NFCP acknowledges that basin fish management plans will provide fish management guidance until conservation plans can be completed. Close

• 3104. [Article] Fish Propagation Annual Report 2007

  Abstract -- The mission of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) is to protect and enhance Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats for use and enjoyment by present and future generations. ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Fish Propagation Annual Report 2007 Abstract -- The mission of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) is to protect and enhance Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats for use and enjoyment by present and future generations. The Department is charged by statute (ORS 506.036) to protect and propagate fish in the state. This includes direct responsibility for regulating harvest of fish, protection of fish, enhancement of fish populations tlu·ough habitat improvement, and the rearing and release offish into public waters. ODFW maintains hatcheries throughout the state to provide fish for program needs. Operation of these facilities is governed by the following: The Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds, a comprehensive plan for the conservation of salmon and the protection of their habitat which coordinates the actions of all state agencies that affect aquatic resources. The Native Fish Conservation Policy, which provides a basis for managing hatcheries in balance with sustainable production of naturally produced native fish. The Fish Hatchery Management Policy, which provides general fish culture and facility guidelines and measures to maintain genetic resources of native fish populations spawned or reared in captivity. The Fish Health Management Policy, which describes measures that minimize the impact of fish diseases on the state's fish resources. Information about the Oregon Plan can be viewed at http://www.oregon-plan.org. The complete texts of the Fish Hatchery Management Policy, the Native Fish Conservation Policy, and the Fish Health Management Policy may be viewed at http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/nfcp/. In addition to these salmon and hatchery specific state policy and plan guidelines, ODFW's hatchery program works with and responds to local watershed interests; other federal, tribal, and state comanagers; federal and state Endangered Species Act (ESA) guidelines; and all other applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Title: Fish Propagation Annual Report 2007 Abstract -- The mission of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) is to protect and enhance Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats for use and enjoyment by present and future generations. The Department is charged by statute (ORS 506.036) to protect and propagate fish in the state. This includes direct responsibility for regulating harvest of fish, protection of fish, enhancement of fish populations tlu·ough habitat improvement, and the rearing and release offish into public waters. ODFW maintains hatcheries throughout the state to provide fish for program needs. Operation of these facilities is governed by the following: The Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds, a comprehensive plan for the conservation of salmon and the protection of their habitat which coordinates the actions of all state agencies that affect aquatic resources. The Native Fish Conservation Policy, which provides a basis for managing hatcheries in balance with sustainable production of naturally produced native fish. The Fish Hatchery Management Policy, which provides general fish culture and facility guidelines and measures to maintain genetic resources of native fish populations spawned or reared in captivity. The Fish Health Management Policy, which describes measures that minimize the impact of fish diseases on the state's fish resources. Information about the Oregon Plan can be viewed at http://www.oregon-plan.org. The complete texts of the Fish Hatchery Management Policy, the Native Fish Conservation Policy, and the Fish Health Management Policy may be viewed at http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/nfcp/. In addition to these salmon and hatchery specific state policy and plan guidelines, ODFW's hatchery program works with and responds to local watershed interests; other federal, tribal, and state comanagers; federal and state Endangered Species Act (ESA) guidelines; and all other applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Close

• 3105. [Article] McKenzie River Plan Summary, Mailing

  Abstract -- The McKenzie River subbasin is an area rich in natural beauty and resources. The tradition of fishing the McKenzie runs deep, and its notoriety reaches far and wide. The McKenzie River is one ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: McKenzie River Plan Summary, Mailing Abstract -- The McKenzie River subbasin is an area rich in natural beauty and resources. The tradition of fishing the McKenzie runs deep, and its notoriety reaches far and wide. The McKenzie River is one of the most popular rivers for fishing in Oregon. During the 1983 trout season, an estimated 54,000 anglers fished from Blue River to Armitage Park. The most sought after species include native rainbow and cutthroat trout, spring chinook, and in recent years, an introduced run of summer steelhead. To meet angling demand, hatchery rainbow trout are stocked in portions of the mainstem, Blue River, and the South Fork. During the past year, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife biologists and a public advisory team from the McKenzie River/Eugene-Springfield area, jointly developed a draft plan to guide the management of the fisheries in the McKenzie subbasin. The draft plan includes management guidelines, objectives, priorities, and recommended actions to solve the principal fisheries' problems concerning: • Habitat • Management of major fish species or groups of species • Angling access This summary covers some of the key elements of the draft plan. Title: McKenzie River Plan Summary, Mailing Abstract -- The McKenzie River subbasin is an area rich in natural beauty and resources. The tradition of fishing the McKenzie runs deep, and its notoriety reaches far and wide. The McKenzie River is one of the most popular rivers for fishing in Oregon. During the 1983 trout season, an estimated 54,000 anglers fished from Blue River to Armitage Park. The most sought after species include native rainbow and cutthroat trout, spring chinook, and in recent years, an introduced run of summer steelhead. To meet angling demand, hatchery rainbow trout are stocked in portions of the mainstem, Blue River, and the South Fork. During the past year, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife biologists and a public advisory team from the McKenzie River/Eugene-Springfield area, jointly developed a draft plan to guide the management of the fisheries in the McKenzie subbasin. The draft plan includes management guidelines, objectives, priorities, and recommended actions to solve the principal fisheries' problems concerning: • Habitat • Management of major fish species or groups of species • Angling access This summary covers some of the key elements of the draft plan. Close

• 3106. [Article] Natural Resource Conflict Management 1982

  Abstract -- This Handbook was used for a series of workshops on Natural Resource Conflict Management held jointly by the USDA, Forest Service and USDI9 Bureau of Land Management in 1982. It was written ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Natural Resource Conflict Management 1982 Abstract -- This Handbook was used for a series of workshops on Natural Resource Conflict Management held jointly by the USDA, Forest Service and USDI9 Bureau of Land Management in 1982. It was written by Romcoe, Center for Environmental Problem Solving, Boulder, Colorado. It is intended for people who are new to the field of conflict management as well as for experienced practitioners. The field of natural resource conflict management is comparatively new, so the insight, procedures, techniques and theory have been gathered from many disciplines and areas where dispute resolution has been more highly developed. This includes international peacemaking experience, organizational development processes and skills, labor-management relations, community dispute settlement procedures and academic research in social psychology. Although the literature in the field is limited, the experience and practice of natural resource conflict management have been extensive. This workbook draws together some of the theory and techniques that have been successful in environmental conflicts and may be helpful to the person who handles natural resource disputes on a day-to-day basis. Title: Natural Resource Conflict Management 1982 Abstract -- This Handbook was used for a series of workshops on Natural Resource Conflict Management held jointly by the USDA, Forest Service and USDI9 Bureau of Land Management in 1982. It was written by Romcoe, Center for Environmental Problem Solving, Boulder, Colorado. It is intended for people who are new to the field of conflict management as well as for experienced practitioners. The field of natural resource conflict management is comparatively new, so the insight, procedures, techniques and theory have been gathered from many disciplines and areas where dispute resolution has been more highly developed. This includes international peacemaking experience, organizational development processes and skills, labor-management relations, community dispute settlement procedures and academic research in social psychology. Although the literature in the field is limited, the experience and practice of natural resource conflict management have been extensive. This workbook draws together some of the theory and techniques that have been successful in environmental conflicts and may be helpful to the person who handles natural resource disputes on a day-to-day basis. Close

• 3107. [Article] Public Response Analysis and Evaluation, Public Participation Handbook Volume 2

  Abstract -- Resource managers and citizens have discussed for a long time the pros and cons of public participation in the planning and management of natural resources. Today, the question is not whether ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Public Response Analysis and Evaluation, Public Participation Handbook Volume 2 Abstract -- Resource managers and citizens have discussed for a long time the pros and cons of public participation in the planning and management of natural resources. Today, the question is not whether citizens should participate, but how they can participate most effectively. This shift in focus is probably due to several factors: growing demands from a broader range of people, litigation which has started and defeated projects, support from elected officials, and an increasing number of regulatory and legislative mandates. Recently, there has been more emphasis on devising the most effective methods for making public response a more meaningful part of the agency decision making process. Resource managers must consider questions concerning which alternative techniques should be used not only to involve people in different stages of the resource planning and management process, but to fairly present public response on agency issues to decision makers. Underlying these questions is an even thornier issue that has concerned both agencies and the public since public participation efforts began - how should decision makers use the information collected as a result of these efforts? So far there is no magic formula, only the experienced judgment of decision makers. Public response is only one of the factors in making a final decision. Other factors are legal, political, economic, technological, and resource capability factors. (See Figure I.l) The analyst has the special role of ombudsman in the public participation process. Its meaning is taken from the original use of the term. The first ombudsman specifically so identified was a representative and servant of a Scandinavian ruler. His responsibility was to mingle with the people and report their concerns, complaints and attitudes from their point of view. In short, the ombudsman took the people's position and made sure it was heard and understood by the monarch. Title: Public Response Analysis and Evaluation, Public Participation Handbook Volume 2 Abstract -- Resource managers and citizens have discussed for a long time the pros and cons of public participation in the planning and management of natural resources. Today, the question is not whether citizens should participate, but how they can participate most effectively. This shift in focus is probably due to several factors: growing demands from a broader range of people, litigation which has started and defeated projects, support from elected officials, and an increasing number of regulatory and legislative mandates. Recently, there has been more emphasis on devising the most effective methods for making public response a more meaningful part of the agency decision making process. Resource managers must consider questions concerning which alternative techniques should be used not only to involve people in different stages of the resource planning and management process, but to fairly present public response on agency issues to decision makers. Underlying these questions is an even thornier issue that has concerned both agencies and the public since public participation efforts began - how should decision makers use the information collected as a result of these efforts? So far there is no magic formula, only the experienced judgment of decision makers. Public response is only one of the factors in making a final decision. Other factors are legal, political, economic, technological, and resource capability factors. (See Figure I.l) The analyst has the special role of ombudsman in the public participation process. Its meaning is taken from the original use of the term. The first ombudsman specifically so identified was a representative and servant of a Scandinavian ruler. His responsibility was to mingle with the people and report their concerns, complaints and attitudes from their point of view. In short, the ombudsman took the people's position and made sure it was heard and understood by the monarch. Close