PB92-180348
Oregon, USA, Ecological Regions and Subregions for
Water Quality Management
Oregon State Univ., Corvallis
Prepared for:
Corvallis Environmental Research Lab., OR
L
-------
//<>'•
_ TECHNICAL RETORT D
(Kenr »w4 /•urwnoiu on tht nvmi be,
I.MI'OMTMO.
EPA/600/J-927169
a.
P392-18P3U8
4. TITLI ANDSUSriTLl
Oregon Ecological Regions and Subregions
for Water Quality Management
OATI
». rlftPONMINO OMBANI2ATION CODI
7. AVTMOMIS)
S. Clarke, D. White and A. Schaedel
I. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION RtPOMT NO.
I. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAMt AMD ADORUS
1st & 2nd authors, ManTech, ERL-Corvallis, OR
Last, Oregon Dept. of Bnv. Quality, Portland
10. PROGRAM tLIMINT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT MO.
ia. SPONSORING AOINCT NAMI AND ADORISS
US Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 SW 35th Street
CorvalUs, OR 97333
14. C'OMSONIMa AOIMCV CODI
1t.SWPPk.iMtN.TAMY MOTI*
1991. Environmental
15 (6) :847-856.
. AUTMACT
To aid the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in producing a State Clean
Water Strategy and in managing water resources, scientists working with the O. S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have defined an initial set of regions and
subregipns of the state with potentially different water quality issues: We
delineated and mapped these subregions using existing maps of ecological regions, maps
of selected environmental characteristics, remote sensing imagery, and descriptive
literature. To help in interpreting the map, we describe the relative widths of
regional boundaries and we rank the components used in determining them. The DEQ
intends to apply these subregions as an organizational framework for data display and
reporting, prioritizing monitoring and pollution control strategies, developing
biological criteria for water quality standards, and developing other regional water
quality management approaches.
•IV WORM AND DOCUMINT ANALYSIS
DtscHtrroMS
k.lDINTIPIIRt/OMN IMDIDTIRMS C. COSATl F*ld.'GfOllp
ecoregions, ecological regions,
water quality management
I. BlSTNlSUTlON STATtWIMT
Release to Public
•.MCpR'TTCkASt
IfncTasslTiea
21. MO. OF rAGI*
10
M BICWtlTv ClAS»77Mt*«fr;
Unclassified
aa.
-------
wrmucriONs
t.
i Ik* EPA report Mtor a* « appoan oo Uw aotw of dw pobUeatioiL
ft IIICI*1INTtAOCUSIOI«NUM»tN
fteowvod for oat by aocfc i
4, rm.1 AND tutnn.1
that tftoutd todtatt cktarty •»< briefly Ik* •biact ceinft of tht report, and to dupbyed promtoentfy. Set MbtiUt. If uwd. in tmilltr
ttypt or otherwiw •bordmau ti to mato titk. Wbta t »crd> or Ita) ttttmt •mmuy of tht man ^ntfimi toTenntiCTi coaufc»d IB fl» ftycrt. If tW itpon coouim •
bibl*
' -- pt e( Uw iMMKb tad wt •tflkicBUy ^tetfk and prtcu* to to utd u Indtt ntrwt for
(b) IPENTinERS AND OfEN-EXDED TERMS • Vn Mtntinm fot pojwi Minn, eodt MAM. •qutpmtki «n«niton. etc. U« open-
—' i«w »T Fwld/Croup auicnriwnu thai • fll foUo»
te primary poattoKO.
«L OtSTNltUTION rrATIMtWT
Peaote nlaaaibilityUi Ow pobbc or Haliathii for reaaooa otto *•» aMotrt lot tsaaaple lUMur ttoHnUMd." Ota an> a*ailabibt>- to
1ft »». BtCUftlTV O.AMir»CATION
PO MOT aatoaii ctoaaifia* umant ^ ato ItoMunl Tot»ttat Uf
tl. IMMt* Of MOU
kaan Uw woJ aMatot of aa
-------
EPA/600/J-92/169
Oregon, USA, Ecological Regions and Subregions
for Water Quality Management1
SHARON E. CLARKE*
Department of Forest Science
Oregon Slate University
Corvaliis. Oregon 97331-5705. USA
DENIS WHITE
NSI Technology Services Corporal on
US. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 SW 35th Street
Corvalhs, Ortgon 97333, USA
ANDREW L. SCHAEDEL
Oregon Department ol Environmental QuaMy
1712 SW 11th Avenue
Portland. Oregon 97201 USA
ABSTRACT To aid in produeng a protection and manage-
ment strategy lor the freshwater resources ol Oregon. USA
we have deimed an init'ai sei of ecoiog cat regions and sub-
regions of the state tha! organize the spatia! similarities and
differences >n water qua«y We have delineated and
mapped these subregions using existing maps of ecological
regions maps ot selected environmental characteristics re
mote sensing imagery and descr pt.ve '.(erasure To help m
interpreting the resulting map. a unique approach to map-
ping reg.ons s used We hav« descriDed the relative widths
o) reg-ona: boundar es. and we ranked the craracter'St.cs
used n de:erm>n'rg tnem Water qua. !y managers n Oregon
rtend io appy trese subregons as an organza! ona frame-
work tor data d sp'ay and report'ng ppor't z.ng rronitofrg
and poi-u'O'1 controi stra:eges deve.op'pg bo'ogca crtera
for water qua ty standards and deveop ng otner regona1
water qua"> rraragemen; approaches
In June I'.WX. the Ore)?>n (I'SA) Department <>1 Kn-
virotimental (jualitx (UHQ) initiated .1 State C.U-.in Wa-
ter Stratej;\ (S(AVS| to set priorities aim nit; riu-r
reaches, lakes. aquifers, and estuaries lor management
attention. DKQ managers were interested in usin^ e«t>-
b>Xical region* (erorexioiis) as a possible Ir.iinfui.iL lor
water qualii) management. Twoetoregion s\ K.nlrx
(I'M)) and In Oniernik (M'HTi. Oniernik and (..ill.ini
(I98*i) deKQ was
generally intereMed in the orixinal < hnernik
a* a possible tranifwork lor water >|ualiu
the rewrfiitiiin at whkh these ecoregHins were I )n« 'fc" imwm lia« turn |>rr|uir>l
M ihr I. PA f.nvtKtnnvtiial KrsfMKh l.ilnirAt«>r\ m (.4it\Hllt«. < iK-Ktin.
rn |unihriMi|(hi'iTiii.»l niirnlri M-(.M-tii«»iii> NSI IdhinJcui Vr-
\» r* (^»rpiwjtiori It h*t« IMI'II «u)r|ii lf«l In thr rfi{i-fH i'« fNct ,IIN| .nl-
minivrjli\r rr>M-» 4ml 4i>|>r>niil I"! |in!J».iti'>M Minium >>l li.nlr
namr* iif mmmrnul }>n«lmi^ ifcir* n« nmMHiilr viKloto'iwtit iti
•.Aiithiir In whom nirrr*pnn«lrn. r iirjxise. This issue tould mil rx- ret tilled siin-
plv li\ cnl.uv;iiiy; llu-(iiiyiii.il I :'J.rilKI.(KI(l-M.ili' tii.i|>. !*•-
( tttse the disior'ions inheieni in inn h.inu.il cnl.u^c-
ineitl anil the low resolution ol ihe original l>.ise in.ips
wotilil II.IM- taiiset litlelilv lo ^niund irtiih. A
mote suit.ilile a|>|>roa< h w.is lo if tine the origin,il lines
u\iim nifiliiiiii-Malf (I :'.'.">I».(MII») in.11is. In addnion. the
totild lie turiher divided lo ideniit\ more
oiis stn.iller mills tailed subrexions. 'I hese
stibre^ions represent areas mote stiitalile lor .ipphiny
pratlites In l)t.Q. Ihe tlelinealion ol
was ;uiomplished l>% working at a larger
s«ale |hi>>her resoluii'iiil anil in smaller areas.
I his artk le destrilK's the process ol (tcaiinn ens in %uhse<|ueni set lions.
Background
The t ). Baite\ (l'.m:M. .ititl
Kowe and Sheartl (I'.IM 11. In Kailex and <.lhers (I'lTHi.
ret(ionali/alion is (onsitlercd .is a protcss lor
lantlsta|ws usinx a suhdixisional. or top-
dtiwn. melhfid(ilox\. Ihe protess used in the work re-
Envi'wnieniai Marjqi>"«n> vo 15 No 8 DO 84 7
-------
848
S E Clarke and others
|xii lit I here (MX- the Methodology .set lion below) fol-
lows this general paradigm, although it is I used explic-
illy upon specific physical anil cnluiral lactm^. .such as
soil, vegetation. I-""' use/land cover, and topographv,
thai are considered to most stronglv influence regional
[Kitterns of water qualiiy. In this sen.se. the methodol-
ogy is :iLsosvnlhetk: however, thesvnthesis i.s not striulv
(orni.il as might occur in a map overlay protess using a
geographic information svsleni (see Kiirrough I98t> tor
a genera) discussion of methods and issues and Bailo
1988 for a cautionarv evaluation). Kather. the conuili-
uting factor* are weighed inialilalivelv anil svnthesi/cd
mentally, prior to sulxlividing into (suh)re-gions.
The validitv and usefulness ol regions developed us-
ing this synthetic process tan he evaluated with site-
s peri Ik data. Although the Oregon suhregions re-
ported here have not heen <|uaniilali\elv evaliiateil.
ecoregions at the coarser level of resolution h.ive lieen
evaluated. Hughes and others (1987) and \\liiliicr and
others (11*88) evaluated the rohuslness ol Otnernik's
eight Oregon ecoregions lor river lusins and small
streams, respectively.
Methodology
Source Data
Initially, maps of environmental characteristics.
aerial photography, satellite imagery, and descriptive
documents were obtained. Multis|>eciral scanner false
color composites, at a scale of approximatelv
1:1.000.000, ami various scales ol aerial photographv-
were available for consultation through the Knx iron-
mental Remote Sensing Applications l-ibonitorv at Or-
egon State University (NASA Ames 1972-1978. USGS
EROS 1972-197!*). Thematic maps were obtained from
the L'S Ideological Sur\ev. Oregon state agencies, the
Oregon State University Map Ijhrarv. and the Atlas of
Oregon (Loy and others I97b). 'I'he prelerre-
logkal Survey's 1:250.1 XX)- and l:IOO,000-scale land
use/land cover maps (USGS I97()a). based on the clas-
sification of Anderson ami others (I97t>). helped to dif-
ferentiate between agriculture, forest, and range. I .and-
sat imagery (NASA Ames 1972-1978) and drainage Iw-
sin maps of land use (Oregon Water Resources
Department 1978-1980) aided in discriminating be-
tween irrigated and nonirrigated agriculture. The
Anderson second level division of forest land into de-
ciduous and evergreen classes was not an important dis-
tintlion lor s'.ihic-gion.ili/.ilion in Otc-gon. wlie-ie- toni-
fcis arc dominant, Howc'ver. MIMIC suhrt'gio",s were
[Miti.ilK distinguished hv dille-reiue-s in live specie.s.
For example, the1 mesic environment of the high Cas-
cades, tvpitied In the high-c'lc-vation fits and hemlock.
contrasts sharplv with the xcric |>onderos.i pine, char-
acteristic ol die >lo|K's and looihillsol the- eastern Cas-
cade's. Several ty|>es ol vcgc-l.nio:i m.ips we-re1 helpful in
assessing the' importameol S|H-UCS (litlcicrut-s lor sul>-
regionaliAition.
The available' inteiinc'dialr-valc- vcgftatiiin maps
I<>]lowed (lillcicnl classiliiaiitiii v hemc's. I he most usc'-
lul vegelalion map available' was a I'.CMi map ol tote-si
iv|M's In II. | Andrews and K. W. Cowlin (map stale
I:2.V1.-I-IO) (I'.Oli). I his m.ip shows tort-sis as ihe-v c-x-
istcd iti \'l'M>. jut hiding an rMiiii.iiton ol the inaiiinu ol
some ot the- st.uuK I nloiliiii.ilcK. the- toicst tV|K-s for
rcteiil (at the time ol the mapping) tut-over and
binned lands lould not IK' .ixeil.lined Irom the' map
and the vegetation for the vast are'.is ol nonloic'stc'tl
Lintls was ui!inap|K'd. Maps ol |x>leiilul naliiral.vc'gf-
talion orilimatk tlimax are not intliiciued hv transient
impail-siothi' hiii8.IHMI). it had enough tie-tail to IK- ol
use lo this project. Krenkel anil Kol.it's (l!>7f>> map of
natural vegetation (map sc.ile I:'J.(H),IHH» and
de-sxriptions of /ones of vc-getalion. base-d on climax
vegc-tation. were also helpful.
Topographic information was available from the US
C>eolognal Survey's l:2.")0.(MK)-stale to|>ographii maps
(US(>S I97()b). The spacing ol contour lines anil the
texture of the landsca|>e interpreted from the juxtapo-
sition of the contour lines were used to determine the
land surface form. Omernik used a national map of
land surface form (Hammond 1970) for his etoregion
delineation, but interpreted larger-scale maps of land
surface form for Orc'gon were not available.
We used two soil maps: (General Soil Map: Stale of
Oregon (map scale 1:750.000) (USDA SCS and others
1985) and Soils (map scale |:2.000.) from the Alias
of Oregon (Simonson and USDA SCS I97l>). The Gen-
eral Soil Map was available in digital lonn.it. and we
were able lo plot the lines at our working vale of
l:2*>0.000. for qualitative comparisons with other maps.
Analysis and Mapping
Once the data were gathered, the maps were ana-
Iv/ed separately to identify potential suhregions—areas
distinctly different from the surrounding area and
large enough lo warrant l>eingdisiinguishc-d as separate
-------
Oregon Ecological Regions and Subregions
849
units. The intruded n.se of (lie map lo lie produced
helped establish (founds for the definition. \Ve evalu-
ated homogeneity in types of water Ixxlies. |x>teniial
water qualiiv stressors. and (lie el lifts ol these siressors
to determine the soundness <>l creating lac h suhregion.
liilbrmution provided by the potential DEQ users of
ihc map enabled us to estimate the unit si/e at the lowest
management level of interest. In general, each subre-
gion is at least 150 square km, although discontinuous
units of a subregion may be smaller.
L'SGS (Ht'Ob) r/J-MMMKI-scale to|x.gntphic maps
served as the base for defining final subiegicm Ixmnd-
aries. because the ijualitv of these maps was judged to
he the best of all the available maps or map series. B\
quality we mean to include the concepts of the com-
pleteness of coxerage. ihecomjurahiliiv ol the map se-
ries across the stale, the representativeness of the maps'
portrayal of surface lopographv. the amiracy of thr
topographic information presented, and the precision
or resolution of Ixilb the hori/ontal locations (i.e.. the
map scale) as well as the vertical elevation data. For
referente. Omernik's etoregion lines were transferred
lo the topographic maps. In addition, a sheet ol dear
acetate was overlaid on r.ii h lo|iographi< map and reg-
istered lo it. Color-coded soil and land use/land (over
lines were transferred to this sheet. Situ e the vegetation
information was symhesi/etl from several maps, these
lines were not drawn on ibc a< etaie. However, the clear
acetate sheets lould lie registered to the Andrews and
Cowlin vegetation map (I'.CMi), A second acetate sheet
alv> was registered to llie lopographi( map and used to
sketch the refined etoregion lines and (xilenti.il subre-
gion lines. '1'he process ol erl> to verilv our dec isions ,MIC! im-
prove the results on both (he distinguishing < b.u.ic lei -
istics ot the regions and s.ibregions as well as on the
definition ol the Ixiundarics belwec'ti regions and sul>-
regions.
Results and Discussion
I he resulting map ol ccoregions and suhregions is
shown in Figure 1. Twenlv-three subiegions were de-
veloped from the initial eight regions ot Omernik
OW7). See the Appendix lor detailed descriptions ol
eac h subregion. including information on soil, land use-
land cover, vegetation, and topographv
Coast Range
In w estern Oregon, t he ('.oast K.inge contains a num-
ber ol small, relalivelv Hal coastal lowlands (siihregion
2) distinguished from the largely mounl.iinoiis areas
(subregion I) in the rest ol the range.
Willamette and Umpqua Valleys .
\\\f Willamette and l'm|N|iia Vallev region is di-
vided into the flat, agm tiltural plains (subregion ''I. the
surrounding foothills thai merge into the ('.oast Range
to the west and the Cascades to the east (subregion -I).
and the more xeric hills and vallevsot the imd-l'ni|x|ii.i
Vallev (subregion .">!.
Kiamath Mountains
I he Kiamath Mountain region, the ()rc-gon |x>ition
o| Omernik's (I'.MT) Sierra Nevada ecoregion. is di-
-------
CMttO U.lllll
iui...ii. IIM.J
liHimlK Illtof fl.tl.tW
••MM »i:nii
fUlitl ••••II II
fillin Cncilii
•i|« ClIIMtl
liti linn
flltirl CtlClltl i«/lk«t
M "I* *>••" «»I«HI
ig >i|i Cnifl O'f Itrrw In ii
• l<|l tnifl III n lilk frtil lilii
ff CllMtil NllHl Illlll
n CtiMtu n«i«i c iini.i «imi
M • i> I ii iinii n
[0J I I. iMllllM •ll-ll(ill FlIMtl
;U tin linn n u,mi mi (IMI/I
|J 1141 •lllll'll III II
00
en
o
CO
m
O
CD
1 - $
IS • SI km
Figure 1. < >:< KIMI im|i>tv- •' ' •«»•:.• ••IN) Milili i(l >ll> lol u.:ii i i|ii.i|iu ii i.n 1.1^1 1111 111 ' ll\ Sli.iniii ( l.uki .11 ii I 1*1 IH> \\lillri
-------
Oregon Ecological Regions and Subregions
851
!•!•*••
l> ttln
lt<
tk lttl4lM, •' »«lll«t tl kll<. lk' •> V«|ini'f>. »|>ili»l? Ik* 'tliliM imfntitt* »l
n«i<»rt< »r It* lit) it "|»t if»««it« «l !<•»•!>. »H» «••» i««tt»nif Hull §1
A lff»tf(«f <•••« iifailifl *«»«r cttfltfftcl I* Ikt lirtl itl it ckiriclf rillic*
Tfeff
ri ctfriltlct
f.l.i.
\\lul. r.il St-arou CLitk>-).
vkird into ihcr niouni.iini (siilirr^ion ft) ami the rrla-
livflv llat. jj.inlv a^rtt iiliur.il \iilU-\sol die Kii^ur Kiver
iiml ii.i irihtuarit^ (tuhregion 7).
Western Cascades
The mdin |xin of iht* C.^vHile Mmintain
dhkled into the hi((li-elc\ali<>i). kmtrr-rrlirl
with recent volcarik peaks Uiilwegiiin '.>). ami ihr hinh-
relief twmiuaim on ttie western wle <>( the range
region H).
Eastern Cascades
. the eastern
b dtvkled into a n (lutninatrti In |j»npun-
Uiin. and the Trout ('.reek Mountain* (stiorrKion I :i). In
the largeM *ubre|(ion, sagehrtish and juniper iiplancN of
moderate relief predominate (sunreKion H). A third
Mihrejfkm im ludvs ilie«lrirr Iwsins
-------
852
S. E. Clarke and others
and Hamey lakes; and the third is Dear the loinimini-
ties of Ontario and Vale.
Columbia Plateau
The Columbia Plateau is divided into the dry. Hat
basins of Umatilla and Walla Walla (subregion 17). the
relatively flat-topped tablelands (subregion 18). and the
dissected upbtuls that surround the major drainages of
the Columbia Kiver (suhregion 19).
Blue Mountains
In the Blue Mountains, the high elevation alpine sec-
tions of the Waliowa Mountains and'Klkhorn Ridge
(suhifgion iiO) are divided from the rest of the forested
mountain areas (subregion 21). The Hal basins around
the communities of K.r.ierprise. Baker, and UiCrande
(subregion 'Jll) are distinguished from the rolling, non-
forested uplands and vallevs in the rest of the region
(.subregion 22).
While the regions and their subregions reported
here were general!) agreed upon b* our expert advis-
ers, further development of subregions in some of the
mounuinotis regions such as the Coast Range inav he
appropriate. Incorporation of more detailed i'lf'irma-
tion on geologv and soil differentes and examinaiion of
chemMal and biologMal data from water <|u,ilii\ moni-
toring and related rex-arch would be an ini|>oit.ii\t ad-
ditional input into such lurtlier development.
Applications
The I)F.O_ intends to apply (he ecoregioiw ami sub-
regions COIK ept as an org.mi/.nioiuil framework in four
areas: (I) data display and reporting. (2) prioriii/aiion
of monitoring anriing. For example, it con-
tains separate sections tor the north coast, mid-coast,
and south coast tusiiiv Together these basins comprise
the (.oast Range ecoregion and thus are quite similar.
'["he biggest differences within these Iwsins are between
the Coastal Lowlands and the Coastal Mountains su>>-
regtons. A basin reporting svsiem also can lead to dis-
jointed at'.'i misleading reporting. Such is the case with
the Willamette Basin, which comprises three ecoregicns
and five subregions. The iin|Kict,s. issues, and concerns
are very different for the agriiultural. >.irlKini/ed
Willamette Valley Plains lulnegion and (he loresled.
remote High Cascades subregion.
The etoregion and subregion data layers lx>il) art-
available in digital leu in.il so that they tan IK- used in (he
DKQ's geographic information system (CIS), whuh
contains digiti/ed information on water quaint and
nonpoin:->ounc polluiion ol Oregon's waters (I'S FI'A
I1W.I). Sources ol information for thisilata iKise .include
I)KQ data ami the I'S KPA River Reach Kile, a digital
representation of rivers .'iicl stream- prepared from
lifWMM^Ki-scale ni.i)>s. The data file contains inlorma-
lH»r on the location, tv pe. and severity of water qu.ililv
problems; the iK-nelicial uses impacted by eath prolv
lem: the management activity causing the problem; and
the categories and siilxalegories of non|xiinl-S'>une
pollution associated with the .utivilv utusing (he prolv
lem. Approximate!* 27.7IX) mi of Oregon's !H).I MM) river
miles have lieen assessttl using diis method. The HKQ
h;>« coin luded that the ecoregion and subrt-gion frame-
work will serve to improve the organi/ation ol these
data.
Pnoritization ol Monitoring and Pollution
Control Strategies
Although Oregon (oniains a large number and va-
riety of walerlxMlies that are heavilv uvd for recreation
and agriculture, i ompared loot her states, the DK.O, has
» relative)* small stall of field vicniMs and planners.
(iiven the si/e and iloTsit* of the w;«ter resources and
of the stale itself, onlv a small |tei(eniage ol potenli.illy
impac'ted waters can be examined thorough!*. For this
reason, the DF.Q neetls a means for prioriti/ing field
work and analy/ing its extensive nonpoini-sotirce data
base. The Oregon SCWS was initiated to .ucomplish
this.
The first step in (he preparation of a strategic man-
agement plan was 10 evaluate waierhodies bavd on the
nonpoint-«iuriiu-soiii(eand water supplv data and
information on resuune values (fishery, habitat, and
rnrealioiDioniained in the Noiihwesi Power l'l.
-------
Oregon Ecological Regions and Subregions
853
partmem o( Energy 1987). A waterbody score was de-
veloped according to three sets of criteria: (I) health
(drinking water, shellfish), (2) recreation, and (3)
aquatic life (water quality and habitat). Rating tables
and maps then could be generated based on stale,
ccoregion, subregion, river basin, subbasin. county,
waterbody, or water quality program element (non-
point-source, toxics, or lakes). Theoretically, ecoreginns
and subregiom provide the most effective means of de-
termining relative priority for monitoring and pollution
control activities and for assessing common trends in
point- and nonpoint-source impacts. For example, one
can assume that results from assessing a small number
of sites can be extrapolated with considerable confi-
dence to sites elsewhere in ihe same ecoregion or .sub-
region.
[Developing Regional Management Approaches
Oregon DEQ views the concept of ecoregions and
subregions as extremely useful for filling management
approaches to regi< inally c lif lereni stressors and ly pes 01
water bodies. For example, the DEQ is currently initi-
ating efforts to assess statewide lake qualitv and develop
regional management approaches. Ecoregions and sub-
regions will be used lo develop management strategies
based on the strong regional differences in lake water
quality. For example, lakes contained in (lie High Cas-
cades subregion are typically low in algal and weed pro-
ductivity (ranging from ultraoligotrophk to me-
sntrophic conditions) and have short growing seav>m
(0.5-3 months). Programs that stress prevention of nu-
trient enrichment and acidification are important in dm
subregion. t^ikes in the Coast Range Coastal l-owlandf
subregion are higher in productivity (ranging I mm oli-
gotrnphic to eulrophk conditions), with long growing
seasons (4-4> months). Programs thai address mitigatioii
of existing problems of macrophvte and algal growth
are more important in this subrrgion.
Development of Numeric Bocrtteria in Oregon
Water Quality Standards
Recently, Oregon DKQ (I9W) has propped devel-
oping biological criteria bated partly on conditions at
reference sites. The agency is recommending the fol-
lowing process for developing and implementing bio-
logical criteria: (I) develop standard biologkal assesv
men! protocols for all types of Oregon waterhodies, (2)
conduct surveys of resident biological assemblages at
minimally impaired reference sites in ecorrgions or spe-
cific basins. (3) establish numerical biologkal criteria
based on the results of the reference site surveys, and
(4) adopt numerical criteria as standards'for biologkal
assemblages and evaluate int|>airmeni M other sites
based on these standards. Our subrcgions map oilers a
framework for stratifying the tremendous biological
variability of Oregon surface waters and for irovidlng
relevant and environmentally appropriate expectations
for water quality in a cost-effective manner.
Conclusions
We believe the ecoregions and subregions map is
preferable' to ihe river basin framework for water qual-
ity management because it spatially oigani/.es water re-
sources by the natural phenomena thai contribute most
to water quality rather than by river basins across whkh
quality can vary considerably. Although potential appli-
cations are numerous and pteliminary examinations of
the map «l-ow good correlation with water quality data.
the best test of ihe map's validity will lie in its usefulness
for interpreting natural and anthropogenic differences
in water quality, its usefulness for prioriii/ing manage-
ment activities, its value for asse* ing and reporting
monitoring results, and its effectiveness in protecting
aquatk lite. We believe that ihe added information pro-
vided by quantifying ihe boundarv munition widths
and identitving and prioriti/ing the boundan charm-
leriMK s u ill im rease the m;ip°s value as .in analytical and
management tool.
Appendix
Ecoregion and SuDregion Descriptions
The defining characteristics of land use/land rover,
vegetation, soil, and topography (or each stihregion are
limed Mow. Vegetalion terminology is taken from
Frenkel and Kolar (l'.>7fi) and v>il terminology from
LSDA SCS and others (I<»H5).
COM! Range
I. Mountains
I .a ml use/cover: Mostly forest
Vegetation: Western hemlcx k /one and Siika-
spruce /one
Soil: Mostly udic mesk with some udk
frigid and cryk.
Topography: Rugged hills to mountains
2. Onstal Ixiwlands
(.and use/cover: Mixture of agriculture, forest.
and u r I >an
Vegetation: Silka-spruce /one
Soil: Predominantly udk isomesic
Topography. Relatively Hat. CO;IM.I! plain
Willamette Valley
S. Plains
-------
854
S. E. Clarke and others
Land use/cover: Mostly agriculture with some lor-
esi and urban
Vegetation: Forest-prairie /ones
Soil: Xerk- mesic
Topography: Relatively flat valley
4. Foothills
Land use/cover: Mostly forest with some agricul-
ture
Vegetation: Western hemlock, /tine and some
forest-prairie /ones
Soil: Xerk: inesic
Topography: Mills
5. L'rnptjua \'a..eys
Land use/cover: Mosaic of agriculture and forest
VeKetation: Forest-shrub /ones
Soil: Xerk: niesic
Topography: Mills and valleis inters|>ersed
Klamath Mountains
6. Mountains
Land use/co\er: Forest
Vegetation: Mixed needleleaf-l>roadlea!' lor-
est /ones
Soil: Mostly xerk mesk: with some
frigid
To|x>graphy: High mountains
7. Rogue Valleys
Land usc/to\er: Mostly agrkulture with some ur-
ban „
Vegetaikm: Forest-shrub /ones
Soil: Predominantly xvric mesk
Topography: Kelatively Hal vallevs
Cascade*
8. Western C..iv ades
l^and use/imer. Mmtly forest
Vegetation:
Soil:
Topography:
9. High Cascades
1-aml use/cover:
VegetaiMin:
Soil:
Topography:
Wesiern hemlock /one
Mixture of udk mesk, frigid, and
cryir
Highly divseited. sleep east-west
ridges
Mostly forest
Pacific silver fir /one
Mostly udk- cryk with tome f'rigkl
High elevation, gentler slopes
punctuated with sleep voUaitk
peaks
Soil:
Topographv:
II. Ixikc Basins
l^ind use/cover:
Vegetation:
Sdl:
'i'opography:
12. Marshes
Ixiiul use/tover:
Vegetation:
Soil:
Mnsilx xerk' iryii. vime (rigid
Varied: tablelands \\itli inodri.i'c
to high relict, plains with lim
mountains, open low moimlaiiis.
high mountains
Agriculiure. some shrul) and
brush range, and some torest
Desert—shrub /ones
Xerk niesic
KelameK Hat basins
Mixture ot agriculture and range
(herlKueous; shrub aiul l)nisl\)
Hi^ sagebrush /one and |>onder-
osa pine /one
A(|Mi< Irigkl and i r\i<
Flat basins
High Desert
\'.\. Mountain Ranges
Line I use/ oxer: Mosllx range with some (OI--M
Vegetation: Western i mi|H'i /one
Soil: MostK xciic tixic: some aridi( \e-
rk (rigid
Topography: Kelati\el\ steep, medium to high
mountains
II
I'plaints
I-nut use/io\ei:
Vegetation:
Castern Cascades Slopes and Foothills
10. Slopes and Foothills
(.and use/cover: Mostly loresi
Vegetation: Ponderosa pine /'me
Range
Mostlv big sagebrush /one.
|>auhes ot desert shrub /ones
Soil: Mostly aridk/xerk (rigid: v.me
aridk/xerk mesk
To|iography: Plateaus with moderate relief
15. Dry Barren Basins
Land use/cover: Barren I,rid. some irrigaled agri-
culture and range
Vegetation: Desert—>ln ub /ones and some big
sagebrush /one
Soil: Mosllv aridk/xerk mesic and
(rigid: S4ime atjiik (rigid and < r\k
Topography: Kelatively Hat basins
16. Basins with Fresh Water
Land use/tover: Irrigated agriculture
Vegetation: Western juniix-r /one. big sage-
brush /one. and desert-shrub
/ones
Soil: Aridu/xeiic mesk; a<|tik (rigid
and < rvk
Topography: Kel:itively II.u lusins
Columbia Plateau
17. Basins
kind use/cover: Irrigaled agrkulliire
-------
Oregon Ecological Regions and Subregions
855
Vegetation: Steppe /ones and big sagebrush
zone
Soil: Aridic/xeric mesk
Topography: Slight to moderate irregular
plains
18. Tablelands
Land use/cover: Dryland agrinilture
Vegetation: Mostly steppe /ones, patt h of big
sagebrush zone
Soil: Xeric/aridic mesic
Topography: Tablelands with moderate ID high
relief
19. Dissected Uplands
Land use/cover: Herbaceous; shrub and brush
range
Vegetation: Steppe /.ones
Soil: Xeric/aridic mesic
Topography: Uplands and steeply incised v;il-
leys
Blue Mountains
20. Alpine and Subalpine /ones
Land use/cover: Mostly forest, some tundra
Vegetation: . Mostly Pacific silver fir /ones
Soil: Udic cryir
. Topography: Mountains
21. Nonalpine Forested Mountains
Land use/cover: Mostly forest
Vegetation: Partly ponderosa pine /one.
partly grand fir /one
Soil: Mixture of udic cryk and xerk
frigid
Topography: Rugged hills and mountains
22. Uplands and Valleys
Land use'cover: Herbaceous; shrub and brush
Vegetation:
Soil:
Topography:
23. Basins
Land use/cover:
Vegetation:
Soil:
Topography:
Mostr; big sagebrush zone and
western juniper /one with some
steppe /ones
Xf rk/arklk mesic and frigid
Moderately to very sleep uplands
and valleys
Agriculture
Mixture of big sagebrush zone
and steppe zones
Xeric/aridic mesir and xerk frigid
Relatively flat basins
Acknowledgments
We would like to acknowledge the helpful advice
and guidance of James Omernik and Rotert Hughes in
the identification and delineation of the Oregon ecore-
gions. Jeff Irish and Sandi A/evedo provided excellent
technical assistance in the digiii/alion and pirt>.u ition
of our maps. John Jackson and others at DF.Q helped
sharpen our understanding of water tjuality issues in
Oregon. Doug Terra ol DF.Q and John Charrard of
the Oregon Department of Knergy provided assistance
in obtaining data bases for our project. Rob Frenkel.
George King, Thorn Whittier, Susan Christie, and Lisa
Filings* >n have provided helpful reviews. This research
was supported by t'.hrisliiia Grootne of the US F.I'A
Office of Policy. Planning, and (evaluation through con-
tract h'H-CH-(M)(M> with NSI Technology Services Corpo-
ration ami by PN\V Grant IMMHI.
Literature Cited
Anderson. J. R.. K. K. llardv. |. T. Roaih. ,in. I'.180. DeMriptionof ilieecorrgionsiil the I'nitrd
States. Map male 1:7.:?I)0.0(H). I'SDA Kortsl Sc-nkc MiMi-l-
Lirifiius I'uhliialiom I .'V.I I, Washington. IX!, 77 pp.
B.nU'v. R. (t. I'.IH:). IVIinealion ol ecK\Mem regi»n<>. Kwinm-
mrnliil Maiuigrmrnt 7(-l):3li">-S7.1.
B.iilcv. R. (t. I'.INN. Prol>leni.« with \\m\y, overlay mapping lor
planning and their implk'atiom lor Kfographk' inlorniation
syuerm. Knrtrnnmfnlnl Mniuigrmrtit I'2( I): 11-17.
Bailet. R. (;.. K. I). Plistrr.and |. A. Mendrrvin. I'I7N. Nature
of land and rrsmm e (hwilValion—a review. Jinirniil .
Bailrv. R. (.. S. C. /.oltai. and K. H. Wiken. 19X5. Ktoloxk.il
rrKionalt/alion in (lanada and thf I'nitrd States, (iro/imrri
lfi0):2»i.V-27r>.
Burroagh. P. A. I'.JWi. Prim-iplvs of ncoxr.iplm.il intornvanon
svMeins lor land resources avvsMiicnt. Clarendon Prex.
Oxford, I'K. 193 pp.
Franklin.). F.. and C. T. Dyrnesv UINN. Natural vegetation of
Oregon and Washington. Oregon Slate University 1'ies*.
(^>rvallu, OrcKon, •!'>'.' pp.
Frenkel. R., and S. Kolar. I'.l76. Natural vegeiation. Map vale
I:2.IMM).OIN». Pages )43-U'./n Atlas of Oregon. W.d. Ixiy.
S. Allan, C. P. Palion. and R. 1). Plank (rds.). University of
Oregon. F.ugene. Oregon.
Gallant. A. I... T. R. Whillier. I). P. l*irvn, |. M. Omernik.
and K. M. Hughes. I'.tH'.l. Krgionali/.ition as a tool lor man-
a)(iitg environmental revmrcev K.P;V(i(K)/:(-N!l/IW)<). I'S F.n-
vironmental Proietlion Agenrv, Kiiviionnienl.il Keseanh
Laboratory, Qirvallis. Oregon. I.VJ pp.
HamnHiml. F.H. I'.I7(). Classes of land-surf.ue lorm. Map
Male 1:7..r>(KMXH). Pages filMM in The National Alias of the
I'niled States of America. I'S (k'tilogHal Survey, Washing-
ton. IX .
Hughes, R. M., K. RexM.id. and C. F.. Bond !'.»". ! he rc-U-
tionship t>f ai|iiatk' e
-------
856
S E Clarke and others
graphic pioviiues ID (lie uhtluo^iigiaphie regions nl ()|.
egon. <:«prui l'.m7(ai:4'.'.V !:«'.»
Kllihlrr. A. U I '.Hi I Piitcnli.il ii.itin.il \cge-lalion ol ilic ton-
terininous I'niteii Stall's. Map Malv l-.S.IliK.IHHI Xpeual
Publication No. Sri. AIIX-IK.III (k-ogtapliK ,il Soiiel*. \r*\
York, New York.
Lm. W. G.. S. Allan. (.. P. Pailon. ami R. 1). Plank. I't7»i. Atlas
ol 'Oregon. University of Oregon. Kugene. < )rcgon. '1 l« pp.
NASA Ames Rewan h Center. 1 972-1978. L'-'J aerial pin-tog-
rjph* 9 x 9-imh color infrared posit i\e transpamicirs Im
Oremm. Plioto scales ap"'oximaiel\ l:ti0.iKM) and
):1'J().(X)<). Airborne Missionn and AppliiatHins Illusion.
Mullet Held. California.
Oniernik. |. M. 1987. Kroregions of theiontcrniinons I'nited
Slates. Map siipplenienl. vale 1 :7.~>. .\nnalt "/ the .-»<•
\iMuitwn it/ Amrntnn (rfti^taphfn 77( 1 K I
Oniernik. J. M.. and A. 1.. (..ill.int. I'.Wti. Kcorrgions of the
PacitK Nortlmesl. Map stale I:'J..V»(».IHK>. b.l'.-Vti( V".nevj{\. I'.'H". Orvgini fin.il Miinitiarv
report lor the Paiilii Norilmest River Studv. M'.t pp.
Oregon DV\) I '.''.Hi. \Vater (|iialil\ >landaid> issue p.i|M-i IS.
I" May I'.C.HI. Oregon OK). Portland. Oregon. !» pp.
Oregon Water Re« nines Department. 1978-198(1. Uind use
inventory bv major drainage liasins. Map scales Ironi
I IXO.IHHIlo l::<7l'.IMNM)ieM<>iiSt.ilev«i. Salfin. (>tt^iin
KIIUC. ) S . ami | A. She.iid I'.'M rinlnKii.il l.ind d.isMlit.i
thin; A Miive\ appi<>tuh. h.ni'intiinu'ntitl .Mtituigriiiftit
."H.".). l.'iI-H'd.
Situiiiioon. (1. II., and I'SHA SCS. I'.lTli. Siils Map vaie
I:'.».(NHI.IKHI. Pagi> IL'I- ILTun Atlas of Oigeon. \V'.(;. bn.
S. Allan. (. P. Palton. and R I). Plank (eds.), I'lmcisiu ol
Oregon. Kiigene. Otrgon.
I'S KPA. 1989. Otrgon'sc lear «ater siralrgv A pilot pro|efess.igf KPA-OIS. -J(i Ma* I'.W".
I'SOA M.S. Oiegon Ay;iuultui,il t-'.xprrmicnt Station. L'S
Bl.M. and I'S Koteil V'tvne. I'.W.'i. <>enetal viil map. Stale
ol Oiegon. Map stale approxiniatelv 1:7."iO,(MKI.
I S(.S I'.CO.i. l^ind use and land ui*et d|uaili,ingles lot Oi-
I'gonl. IJIK! useseties Map sealers I.J.'iO.INNIand I illO.lHMI.
National Mapping Division
L'StiS. I'.l7(tli. liipogtaplu Mitli vegelationovetpiint and tul-
tuie (iiuadiaiixle's lor Orc-g'tn). Metliinn stale lo|>igi.iphu
setie's. Map scale I :'.':"i(l,IKH) National Mapping Division.
I'SCS I.ROS Data Ceniet. I97L'-I979. '.I x <.l ,,iloi mfiaiid
liositive* ti.insiMte'iuic's lot (Jic'gon l^mdsal scenes. Photo
scales approMiiiJIe-lv 1:1.IHMI.IMMI, Sioux Falls. Snilh Da
k
Whitticr. I. R.. R. M. Hughes, and I). P. l-aren. I'.WH. Cor-
responctrnir l*'t»»eeii iioregions and sp.itial patterns in
strc'atn cHosvstenis in Oiegon. (Miuulttin Jtninuit nf
iitul Aytuitu Sfiriifr* •l")(7):H>('>-l-rj7M.
-------
-------
------- |