Search

Search Results

• 761. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Coos County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county, and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Coos ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Coos County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county, and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Coos County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with average annual growth rates of nearly zero between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more population growth during the 2000s. Lakeside and Bandon, for example, posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.2 and 0.6 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Coos County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of sporadic net in-migration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While periods of net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population decline from 2009 to 2013. Total population in Coos County as a whole, as well as within its sub-areas, will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period, and more slowly in the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend already yielding natural decrease (births minus deaths). As natural decrease persists and becomes more pronounced over time, population growth in Coos County is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Coos County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 1,200 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 2,500 over the entire 50 year forecast period. Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s will likely experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Some sub-areas that experienced population loss in the 2000s are expected to show population gains throughout the forecast period, although these gains will likely be small. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Coos County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county, and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Coos County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with average annual growth rates of nearly zero between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more population growth during the 2000s. Lakeside and Bandon, for example, posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.2 and 0.6 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Coos County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of sporadic net in-migration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While periods of net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population decline from 2009 to 2013. Total population in Coos County as a whole, as well as within its sub-areas, will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period, and more slowly in the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend already yielding natural decrease (births minus deaths). As natural decrease persists and becomes more pronounced over time, population growth in Coos County is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Coos County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 1,200 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 2,500 over the entire 50 year forecast period. Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s will likely experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Some sub-areas that experienced population loss in the 2000s are expected to show population gains throughout the forecast period, although these gains will likely be small. Close

• 762. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Curry County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Curry ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Curry County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Curry County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Gold Beach posted the highest average annual growth rate at one percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Curry County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of sporadic net in-migration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While periods of net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population decline from 2009 to 2012. Total population in Curry County as a whole will likely grow at a faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to exacerbate natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. For the area outside UGBs this will likely lead to population decline during the last 30 years of the forecast period. The remaining sub-areas are expected to see population increase over this same time period. Even so, Curry County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 3,900 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 4,700 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Curry County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Curry County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000; with an average annual growth rate of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Gold Beach posted the highest average annual growth rate at one percent during the 2000 to 2010 period. Curry County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of sporadic net in-migration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While periods of net in-migration outweighed natural decrease during the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population decline from 2009 to 2012. Total population in Curry County as a whole will likely grow at a faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to exacerbate natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. For the area outside UGBs this will likely lead to population decline during the last 30 years of the forecast period. The remaining sub-areas are expected to see population increase over this same time period. Even so, Curry County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 3,900 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 4,700 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2015-2065). Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 763. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Douglas County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Douglas ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Douglas County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Douglas County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Sutherlin, the second most populous UGB, and Canyonville posted the highest average annual growth rates at 1.7 and 3.0 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Douglas County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of substantial net inmigration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population growth nearly to a halt by 2010. In more recent years (2010 to 2014) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it population growth Total population in Douglas County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2015 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration Even so, Douglas County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 20,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 43,000 over the entire 50 year forecast period (2015-2065). Subareas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Douglas County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Gorecki, Carson, Tetrick, David Year: 2015 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Douglas County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Sutherlin, the second most populous UGB, and Canyonville posted the highest average annual growth rates at 1.7 and 3.0 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Douglas County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the direct result of substantial net inmigration. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years. This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to fewer births in recent years. The larger number of deaths relative to births caused natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2014. While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade, the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—bringing population growth nearly to a halt by 2010. In more recent years (2010 to 2014) net in-migration has increased, bringing with it population growth Total population in Douglas County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2015 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration Even so, Douglas County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 20,000 over the next 20 years (2015-2035) and by more than 43,000 over the entire 50 year forecast period (2015-2065). Subareas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 764. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Umatilla County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Umatilla County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with average annual growth rates near one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Umatilla County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Umatilla County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with average annual growth rates near one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Hermiston, the most populous UGB, and Umatilla UGB posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.1 and 2.8 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Umatilla County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of a steady natural increase and periods of substantial net in-migration. A larger number of births relative to deaths led to a natural increase (more births than deaths) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, contributing to a population increase. Even so the natural increase continues to account for most of the population growth. Total population in Umatilla County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (2035-2066) (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to an increase in deaths. Even so, natural increase is expected to persist, combining with steady in-migration for continued strong population growth. Umatilla County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 13,300 over the next 19 years (2016- 2035) and by close to 36,800 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). All sub-areas are expected to experience population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Umatilla County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Umatilla County’s total population has grown steadily since 2000, with average annual growth rates near one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1); however, some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Hermiston, the most populous UGB, and Umatilla UGB posted the highest average annual growth rates at 2.1 and 2.8 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Umatilla County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of a steady natural increase and periods of substantial net in-migration. A larger number of births relative to deaths led to a natural increase (more births than deaths) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, contributing to a population increase. Even so the natural increase continues to account for most of the population growth. Total population in Umatilla County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (2035-2066) (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to an increase in deaths. Even so, natural increase is expected to persist, combining with steady in-migration for continued strong population growth. Umatilla County’s total population is forecast to increase by nearly 13,300 over the next 19 years (2016- 2035) and by close to 36,800 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). All sub-areas are expected to experience population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 765. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Lake County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Lake County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). While the county, as a whole, experienced a population ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Lake County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Lake County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). While the county, as a whole, experienced a population increase, the two UGB areas both recorded population decline. At the same time the area outside UGBs posted substantial population growth during the 2000s, adding an average of nearly 90 new persons per year. Lake County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of periods of substantial net in-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, continuing to account for all of Lake County’s population increase. Total population in Lake County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Lake County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 600 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by more than 1,400 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). Sub-areas that showed some population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience slower rates of population growth during the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Lake County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Lake County’s total population has grown slowly since 2000, with average annual growth rates of less than one percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). While the county, as a whole, experienced a population increase, the two UGB areas both recorded population decline. At the same time the area outside UGBs posted substantial population growth during the 2000s, adding an average of nearly 90 new persons per year. Lake County’s positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of periods of substantial net in-migration. The larger number of deaths relative to births has led to a natural decrease (more deaths than births) in every year from 2000 to 2015 (Figure 12). While net in-migration fluctuated dramatically during the early and middle years of the last decade, the number of in-migrants has been slightly more stable during recent years, continuing to account for all of Lake County’s population increase. Total population in Lake County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so, Lake County’s total population is forecast to increase by more than 600 over the next 19 years (2016-2035) and by more than 1,400 over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066). Sub-areas that showed some population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience slower rates of population growth during the forecast period. Close

• 766. [Article] Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066

  Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Harney ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Harney County’s total population has slowly declined since 2000, with an average annual rate of negative 0.2 percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). Burns is accountable for the county’s overall declining population. All other sub-areas experienced very slight population growths during the 2000 to 2010 period, increasing by a total of 32 persons. Harney County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of frequent net out-migration. The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, however, a larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase for 8 out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015 (Figure 12). Even so, net out-migration outweighed these slight natural increases, causing a slow decrease in the Harney County’s population since 2000. Total population in Harney County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas are forecast to all decrease at a slightly faster rate in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Harney County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 500 persons over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066), a loss in population mostly happening in areas outside the UGBs. Sub-areas are expected to generally follow historical patterns of population decrease over the forecast period. Title: Coordinated Population Forecast for Harney County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2016-2066 Author: Portland State University. Population Research Center, Ruan, Xiaomin, Proehl, Risa, Jurjevich, Jason R., Rancik, Kevin, Kessi, Janai, Tetrick, David, Michel, Julia Year: 2016 Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the County and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Harney County’s total population has slowly declined since 2000, with an average annual rate of negative 0.2 percent between 2000 and 2010 (Figure 1). Burns is accountable for the county’s overall declining population. All other sub-areas experienced very slight population growths during the 2000 to 2010 period, increasing by a total of 32 persons. Harney County’s population decline in the 2000s was the direct result of frequent net out-migration. The county’s aging population has contributed to an increase in deaths, however, a larger number of births relative to deaths caused a natural increase for 8 out of the 15 years between 2000 and 2015 (Figure 12). Even so, net out-migration outweighed these slight natural increases, causing a slow decrease in the Harney County’s population since 2000. Total population in Harney County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas are forecast to all decrease at a slightly faster rate in the near-term (2016 to 2035) compared to the long-term (Figure 1). The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to contribute to a natural decrease (more deaths than births). As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Harney County’s total population is forecast to decrease by more than 500 persons over the entire 50-year forecast period (2016-2066), a loss in population mostly happening in areas outside the UGBs. Sub-areas are expected to generally follow historical patterns of population decrease over the forecast period. Close

• 767. [Article] Post-Breeding Season Migrations of a Top Predator, the Harbor Seal (Phoca vitulina richardii), from a Marine Protected Area in Alaska

  To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work. This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by Public ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Post-Breeding Season Migrations of a Top Predator, the Harbor Seal (Phoca vitulina richardii), from a Marine Protected Area in Alaska Author: Gende, Scott M., Womble, Jamie N. To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work. This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by Public Library of Science and can be found at: http://www.plos.org/. Title: Post-Breeding Season Migrations of a Top Predator, the Harbor Seal (Phoca vitulina richardii), from a Marine Protected Area in Alaska Author: Gende, Scott M., Womble, Jamie N. To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work. This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by Public Library of Science and can be found at: http://www.plos.org/. Close

• 768. [Article] Ectomycorrhizal communities of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine in the south-central Oregon pumice zone

  To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work. This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by Springer ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Ectomycorrhizal communities of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine in the south-central Oregon pumice zone Author: Luoma, Daniel L., Garcia, Maria O., Jones, Melanie D., Smith, Jane E. To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work. This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by Springer and can be found at: http://link.springer.com/journal/572 Title: Ectomycorrhizal communities of ponderosa pine and lodgepole pine in the south-central Oregon pumice zone Author: Luoma, Daniel L., Garcia, Maria O., Jones, Melanie D., Smith, Jane E. To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work. This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by Springer and can be found at: http://link.springer.com/journal/572 Close

• 769. [Article] Year-class regulation of mid-upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha : the role of juvenile size, growth, and migratory behavior

  Early ocean residence is assumed to be a critical period for juvenile Pacific salmon Oncorhynchus spp. However, the specific mechanisms influencing growth and survival in the ocean have not been identified ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Year-class regulation of mid-upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha : the role of juvenile size, growth, and migratory behavior Author: Tomaro, Londi M. Early ocean residence is assumed to be a critical period for juvenile Pacific salmon Oncorhynchus spp. However, the specific mechanisms influencing growth and survival in the ocean have not been identified for most populations. Therefore, three hypotheses regarding the relationship between early marine residence and subsequent survival of mid-upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon were evaluated: the 'bigger is better', 'stage duration', and 'match-mistmatch' hypotheses. Six metrics describing juvenile migration history and condition were developed, including 1) size at freshwater exit; 2) size at ocean capture; 3) initial ocean growth rates; 4) timing of ocean entrance; 5) duration of ocean residence; and 6) marine migration rates. Retrospective estimates of size and growth using otolith analyses rely on the assumption that otolith and somatic size are related. Therefore, I verified this assumption for mid-upper Columbia River Chinook salmon and determined that a body-proportional back-calculation method was the best approach for this population. Fish length and otolith width were positively correlated (r > 0.92) and growth rates estimated from back-calculated sizes were positively correlated with observed growth rates (r = 0.96). I also evaluated the utility of using the otolith Sr:Ca pattern as a marker of hatchery-origin and investigated potential mechanisms for the observed Sr:Ca pattern. Visual and quantitative criteria were developed using otoliths of hatchery fish and were used to correctly classify 85% and 78%, respectively, of a sample of known hatchery-origin fish (n = 114) that were collected in coastal waters. Although Sr:Ca in water and hatchery food did not fully account for the observed pattern in otolith Sr:Ca, the pattern can be used to identify mid-upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon of hatchery-origin with relatively high accuracy (>75%). The six juvenile metrics were used to evaluate mechanisms potentially regulating establishment of year-class abundance. The only metrics found to be significantly related to future adult abundance were size at freshwater exit (r² = 0.56) and capture (r² = 0.60). These data support the 'bigger is better' hypothesis and indicate that factors influencing size and growth during freshwater residence should be investigated further. Juveniles resided in the brackish/ocean for one to two months prior to capture in May and June; therefore, ocean conditions after this period may be related to the 40% of variation in adult abundance unexplained by interannual variation in body size. Title: Year-class regulation of mid-upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha : the role of juvenile size, growth, and migratory behavior Author: Tomaro, Londi M. Early ocean residence is assumed to be a critical period for juvenile Pacific salmon Oncorhynchus spp. However, the specific mechanisms influencing growth and survival in the ocean have not been identified for most populations. Therefore, three hypotheses regarding the relationship between early marine residence and subsequent survival of mid-upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon were evaluated: the 'bigger is better', 'stage duration', and 'match-mistmatch' hypotheses. Six metrics describing juvenile migration history and condition were developed, including 1) size at freshwater exit; 2) size at ocean capture; 3) initial ocean growth rates; 4) timing of ocean entrance; 5) duration of ocean residence; and 6) marine migration rates. Retrospective estimates of size and growth using otolith analyses rely on the assumption that otolith and somatic size are related. Therefore, I verified this assumption for mid-upper Columbia River Chinook salmon and determined that a body-proportional back-calculation method was the best approach for this population. Fish length and otolith width were positively correlated (r > 0.92) and growth rates estimated from back-calculated sizes were positively correlated with observed growth rates (r = 0.96). I also evaluated the utility of using the otolith Sr:Ca pattern as a marker of hatchery-origin and investigated potential mechanisms for the observed Sr:Ca pattern. Visual and quantitative criteria were developed using otoliths of hatchery fish and were used to correctly classify 85% and 78%, respectively, of a sample of known hatchery-origin fish (n = 114) that were collected in coastal waters. Although Sr:Ca in water and hatchery food did not fully account for the observed pattern in otolith Sr:Ca, the pattern can be used to identify mid-upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon of hatchery-origin with relatively high accuracy (>75%). The six juvenile metrics were used to evaluate mechanisms potentially regulating establishment of year-class abundance. The only metrics found to be significantly related to future adult abundance were size at freshwater exit (r² = 0.56) and capture (r² = 0.60). These data support the 'bigger is better' hypothesis and indicate that factors influencing size and growth during freshwater residence should be investigated further. Juveniles resided in the brackish/ocean for one to two months prior to capture in May and June; therefore, ocean conditions after this period may be related to the 40% of variation in adult abundance unexplained by interannual variation in body size. Close

• 770. [Article] Body size affects individual winter foraging strategies of thick-billed murres in the Bering Sea

  To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work. This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by the author(s) ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Body size affects individual winter foraging strategies of thick-billed murres in the Bering Sea Author: Paredes, Rosana, Roby, Daniel D., Shaffer, Scott A., Orben, Rachael A., Irons, David B. To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work. This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by the author(s) and published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. on behalf of the British Ecological Society. The published article can be found at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/%28ISSN%291365-2656/ Title: Body size affects individual winter foraging strategies of thick-billed murres in the Bering Sea Author: Paredes, Rosana, Roby, Daniel D., Shaffer, Scott A., Orben, Rachael A., Irons, David B. To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work. This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by the author(s) and published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. on behalf of the British Ecological Society. The published article can be found at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/%28ISSN%291365-2656/ Close