EPA 910-R-98-012
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE REVISED
OREGON WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR
DISSOLVED OXYGEN, TEMPERATURE, and PH
For the
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
and the
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
PREPARED BY:
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1200 SIXTH A VENUE
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
SEPTEMBER 15, 1998
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Section 303 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires States to adopt Water Quality Standards
(WQS) to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation's waters.
WQS consist of beneficial uses (i.e. salmonid fish spawning, resident fish and aquatic life)
designated for specific waterbodies and water quality criteria to protect the uses. States have primary
responsibility for developing appropriate beneficial uses for waterbodies in their State. States review,
and if appropriate, revise their water quality standards on a triennial basis in accordance with CWA
§303(c). Also under CWA §303(c), EPA must review and approve or disapprove any revised or new
standards. If EPA disapproves any portion of the state standards the state has 90 days to adopt the
changes specified by EPA, after which time EPA must propose and promulgate such standards.
Oregon completed the Triennial Review with the adoption of revised water quality standards
for Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and pH on January, 1996. In July, 1996 Oregon submitted
their adopted standards to EPA for review and approval. EPA is proposing to approve Oregon water
quality standards for these three parameters with the exception of the numeric criteria for
temperature for the Willamette River (mouth to river mile 50) following conclusion of this
consultation.
The purpose of this Biological Assessment is to assess the potential effects of EPA's
proposed approval of Oregon's revised dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature and pH criteria on
species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This assessment will be provided to the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under
section 2© and 7(a)(2) of the ESA.
After assessing the impacts of Oregon's standards for dissolved oxygen, temperature, and
pH, EPA has determined that Oregon's temperature criterion for rearing salmonids will likely
adversely affect anadromous salmonids covered by this assessment. EPA also determined that
Oregon's temperature criterion for bull trout will likely adversely affect bull trout. EPA has
determined that the other standards will not be likely to adversely affect the species covered by this
assessment.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ii
I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1
A. CONSULTATION HISTORY 1
B. ERA'S ACTION 2
C. OVERVIEW OF WATER QUALITY STANDARDS 3
D. OVERVIEW OF THE REVISIONS TO OREGON'S WATER QUALITY
STANDARDS 4
E. OVERVIEW OF OREGON'S WATER QUALITY PROGRAM 7
F. OVERVIEW OF WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS IN OREGON 9
G. SCOPE OF ANALYSIS 10
H. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION AREA 14
II. HABITAT AND LIFE HISTORY OF SPECIES OF CONCERN 15
III. PROPOSED ACTIONS 61
A. Dissolved Oxygen 61
B. Temperature 71
C. pH 99
IV. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS 107
V. SUMMARY 108
REFERENCES: 110
VII. LIST OF APPENDICES 131
iii
-------
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF
ERA'S 1998 APPROVAL OF REVISIONS TO OREGON'S
DISSOLVED OXYGEN, TEMPERATURE AND pH STANDARDS
I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. CONSULTATION HISTORY
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) completed a Triennial Review
of their water quality standards (standards, WQS) in January 1996 and submitted their revised
standards to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 (EPA) in July 1996. Three of
the key areas revised were the criteria for dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature (T) and pH. Because
of the significance of Oregon's water quality standards and their potential for affecting threatened
and endangered species, in particular salmonids, and because of the requirements of Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA), EPA and the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) and U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) (jointly referred to as the Services) determined that consultation was
important to complete prior to EPA's approval of Oregon's water quality standards.
EPA commenced the consultation process and review of the standards in January 1997. EPA
submitted a request to the Services for a species list on January 15,1997. On February 10, 1997,
EPA received from NMFS a species list for Oregon. A species list for species under the jurisdiction
of the FWS was received on March 19, 1997. These lists were updated in 1998 as this analysis was
completed. The 1998 lists (NMFS, June 18, 1998; FWS, July 1, 1998) are included as Appendix
A and are the lists governing the species to be considered in this consultation. On March 25, 1997,
EPA staff conducted a conference call with NMFS and FWS staff to scope the species and issues
of concern for this consultation. Decisions were made regarding listed species most likely to be
affected by the changes in DO, temperature and pH levels in surface waters. EPA has since been
in frequent communications with the Services on the content and structure of this Biological
Assessment.
The following is a chronology of key steps relevant to this consultation:
• Oregon initiated triennial review -- request for comments 5/22/92 - 6/24/92
• Letters from Oregon to Services requesting early involvement 10/19/92
in process
• Letter from ODEQ to Services requesting input on whether extension 11/1/93
of pH criteria to 9.0 would be fully protective of uses for life stages
of salmonids and anadromous fish
-------
Public comment period on draft WQS --
Hearings held 9/5/95 - 9/12/95
Public comment period extended to 1/9/96
Oregon adoption of water quality standards
(effectivedate March 1,1996 for DO, pH July 1,1996 for!)
Oregon submittal of revised water quality standards to EPA
EPA request for list of ESA - listed species from Services-
Service list of species:
-- NMFS list provided 2/10/97; updated 6/22/98
-- FWS list provided 3/19/97; updated 7/1/98
Meeting with Services to discuss integrating consultation
procedures for states in Region 10
Teleconference with Services to scope ESA issues for BA
Teleconference with Services to discuss CWA & ESA review
Meeting with Services' Directors, Director ODEQ, EPA RA
to discuss consultation process and schedule
Letter to ODEQ Director confirming consultation schedule
and inviting state participation
Meeting with Services to discuss progress/issues on consultation
7/28/95-9/19/95
1/11/96
7/11/96
1/15/97
2/21/97
4/23/97
4/8/98
5/10/98
6/16/98
7/16/98
B.
ERA'S ACTION
Pursuant to Section 303© of the Clean Water Act (CWA). states are required to adopt water
quality standards to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the
Nation's waters. These standards must be submitted to EPA for review and subsequent approval or
disapproval. States are further required to review and revise (if appropriate) their standards every
three years. This process is known as the triennial review.
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality submitted revised water quality standards
for dissolved oxygen, temperature and pH to HPA for review and approval on July 11. 1996 (see
Appendix B). Subsequently. ODEQ submitted a Policy Letter to EPA (Llewelyn. 1998) on June 22.
1998 clarifying how some of the provisions of their new standards would be implemented (see
-------
Appendix C). EPA is proposing to approve the DO, temperature, and pH standards as submitted
with the exception of the temperature criterion for the Willamette River, mouth to river mile 50.
Therefore, for purposes of this consultation, EPA's action is the proposed approval of Oregon's
water quality standards for DO, temperature, and pH. EPA is deferring consultation on the
temperature criteria for the Willamette River, mouth to river mile 50, until a final action (approval
of revised State criterion or EPA promulgation of new criterion) is proposed.
C. OVERVIEW OF WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
A water quality standard defines the water quality goals of a waterbody by designating the
use or uses to be made of the water, by setting criteria necessary to protect the uses and by
preventing or limiting degradation of water quality through antidegradation provisions. The CWA
provides the statutory basis for the water quality standards program and defines broad water quality
goals. For example, Section 101 (a) states, in part, that wherever attainable, waters achieve a level
of quality that provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and
recreation in and on the water ("fishable/swimmable").
Section 303© of the CWA requires that all states adopt water quality standards and that EPA
review and approve these standards. In addition to adopting water quality standards, states are
required to review and revise standards every three years. This public process, commonly referred
to as the triennial review, allows for new technical and scientific data to be incorporated into the
standards. The regulatory requirements governing water quality standards are established at 40 CFR
131.
The minimum requirements that must be included in the state standards are designated uses,
criteria to protect the uses, and an antidegradation policy to protect existing uses, high quality waters,
waters designated as Outstanding National Resource Waters. In addition to these elements, the
regulations allow for states to adopt discretionary policies such as allowances for mixing zones and
water quality standards variances. These policies are also subject to EPA review and approval.
Section 303(c)(2)(B) of the CWA requires the State to adopt numeric criteria for all toxic
pollutants for which criteria have been published under Section 304(a). EPA publishes criteria
documents as guidance to states. States consider these criteria documents, along with the most
recent scientific information, when adopting regulatory criteria.
All standards officially adopted by the State are submitted to EPA for review and approval
or disapproval. EPA reviews the standards to determine whether the analyses performed are
adequate and evaluates whether the designated uses are appropriate and the criteria are protective
of those uses. EPA makes a determination whether the standards meet the requirements of the CWA
and EPA's water quality standards regulations. EPA then formally notifies the state of these results.
If EPA determines that any such revised or new water quality standard is not consistent with the
applicable requirements of the CWA. EPA is required to specify the disapproved portions and the
changes needed to meet the requirements. The State is then given an opportunity to make
appropriate changes. If the State does not adopt the required changes. EPA must promulgate federal
-------
regulations to replace those disapproved portions.
Water quality standards are important for several environmental, programmatic and legal
reasons. Control of pollutants in surface waters is necessary to achieve the CWA's goals and
objectives, including the protection of all species dependent upon the aquatic environment. Water
quality standards provide the framework necessary to identify, protect and restore the water quality
in Oregon's surface waters.
Water quality standards are important to State and EPA efforts to address water quality
problems. Clearly articulated water quality goals established by the water quality standards enhance
the effectiveness of many of the state, local and federal water quality programs including point
source permit programs, nonpoint source control programs, development of total maximum daily
load limitations (TMDLs) and ecological protection efforts.
D. OVERVIEW OF THE REVISIONS TO OREGON'S WATER QUALITY
STANDARDS
The new standards that Oregon adopted for dissolved oxygen, temperature, and pH replaced
existing standards for all three parameters. In many respects the changes that were made to the
standards were significant. In certain aspects there was little or no change in the standards. The new
standards are applied in the context of basins, which have been the basis for how all or most of
Oregon's standards have been described. The changes made to the standards range from changes
in unit of measurement, addition of classes or life stages to be protected to new limits for a criterion.
The most important changes stem from Oregon's recognition of the importance of these
conventional standard5 in the protection of aquatic species, particularly threatened and endangered
species such as salmonids. As a result of this recognition, Oregon stepped out in front of other
northwest states and took a lead in review the technical literature released since EPA's Criteria
Document in order to develop a sound basis for establishing criteria that are supportive of not only
specific critical species but also sensitive life stages. Below is a description of the differences
between the old and new standards by parameter. In addition. Table of Oregon Standard, Appendix
D, contains a comparison of the new and old standards.
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
Old Standard:
The previous standard for DO had been in effect since 1972. It identified eight criteria for
DO for the eight basins in Oregon. The standard was expressed as absolute minimums and measured
as percent saturation, although a few basins had criteria described in terms of milligrams per liter.
The old standard recognized two classes: salmonid spawning waters and non-salmonid spawning
waters. The criteria were 95% saturation for salmonid spawning waters and 90% saturation for non-
spawning waters tor all of the westside basins except for the Willamette, and for the Hood and
Deschutes basins. [ or the Willamette, the basin was divided into three segments with a standard for
each segment: 5mg L for the lower reaches (mouth to Newburg): 7mg/L for the mid- reaches; and
95% 90% saturation for the upper reaches and other basin waters. For most eastside basins the
4
-------
criteria were 95% saturation for salmonid spawning waters and 75% saturation for non-salmonid
spawning waters. However, a criterion of 7mg/L was established for Goose Lake and several criteria
were applied to the KJamath Basin. The Klamath basin was divided into three segments: the Lake
and upper reaches of the River were set at 5mg/L; 7mg/L for the mid- reaches of the River; and for
the rest of the basin - 90% saturation for salmonid spawning waters and 6 mg/L for non-salmonid
spawning waters. The criterion for the Columbia River was 90% saturation.
According to the Final Issue Paper for Dissolved Oxygen (ODEQ, 1995 (a)) "the 75%
saturation criterion was assumed to be similar to the 6.0mg/L criterion'1 and 90% saturation is
slightly greater than 8mg/L. There is not a linear relationship between percent saturation and
milligram per liter measurement units, therefore there is not a direct way to compare the old standard
unit of measurement with the new unit of measurement.
New Standard:
The new DO standard consists of four classes -- salmonid spawning, cold water, cool water,
and warm water, with different criteria for each class. The unit of measurement is expressed in
milligrams per liter, and measurement periods for these criteria are 30 day mean minimum, 7 day
mean minimum, 7 day minimum mean, and absolute minimum. In addition, the new standard also
includes intergravel DO criteria for saJmonid spawning waters. In general, the westside basins,
excluding the central Willamette basin, are designated as cold water and have a water column
criterion of 11 mg/L and an intergravel DO criterion of 6mg/L for salmonid spawning waters during
periods of spawning and a water column criterion of 8mg/L for all other waters/times of year (non-
spawning times). The central Willamette basin is designated cool water and has a DO criterion of
6.5mg/L. The eastside basins are designated cool and warm water, except for where there are
salmonid spawning waters — mostly the upper portions of the basins, which are designated cold
water for the times of the year when spawning is not occurring. For those waters designated cool
water, the DO criterion is 6.5mg/L. For those waters designated warm waters, the DO criterion is
5.5mg/L. The criteria applicable to salmonid spawning waters are the same as above.
In summary, the differences between the old and new DO standard include different
measurement units (from percent saturation to mg/L) and measurement periods (from
absolute minimum to 30 day mean minimum, 7 day mean minimum, 7 day minimum mean
and absolute minimum), different number of classes (from salmonid spawning and non-
salmonid spawning classes to four classes — salmonid spawning, cold, cool, and warm water
classes); and the addition of an intergravel criterion for salmonid spawning waters.
TEMPERATURE
Old Standard
Oregon's previous temperature criteria had been in effect since 1967 although they were last
modified in 1979. The criterion was written as an amount of increase in water temperature allowed
due to anthropogenic activity When temperatures were at or above a specified value, no
measurable increase in temperature due to human activity was allowed. The temperature above
which no increase was allowed varied bv basin and ranued from 58° F to 72° F. The criterion for
-------
most westside basins and the Hood, and Deschutes basins was 58° F. The Mid Coast and South
Coast criterion was 64 °F. For the Willamette Basin the criteria were 70° F for the mouth, 64°F for
the mid-reaches and 58° F for headwaters and all other waters. The criterion for eastside basins was
68° F. For Klamath Basin the criterion was 58° F for salmonid waters and 72° F for non-salmonid
waters. The unit of measurement was expressed as an absolute—"no measurable increase above
58°F". (Final Issue Paper for Temperature, ODEQ, 1995 (b)).
New Standard
The new temperature standard is significantly different from the previous standard. The new
standard created four categories - salmonid spawning times and areas, salmonid rearing times and
areas, bull trout areas, and designated warm water areas. A temperature criterion was established for
all but warm water areas: 55° F for salmonid spawning, 64°F for salmonid rearing, and 50° F bull
trout. Through an oversight the State did not establish a numeric criterion for warm waters. The
State has clarified its intent to protect these waters with the following provisions: "no measurable
temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities..In stream segments containing federally
listed Threatened and Endangered populations" and/or "no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities..In natural lakes." (Llewelyn, 1998). The
temperature criteria for the lower Willamette was lowered to
68° F. Finally, the new standard adopted a new form of measurement — seven day rolling average
of the daily maximum. The new criteria apply by basin as did the criteria in the previous standard.
In summary the changes made to Oregon's temperature standard include creating four
categories —salmonid spawning and rearing waters (55 °F and 64 °F respectively), bull trout
waters (50 °F), and warm waters (narrative criteria that may lead to no measurable
temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities) and changing the temperature
for the lower Willamette to 68°F. These changes result in lower temperatures in the lower
Willamette, lower temperatures for eastside basins where salmonids are present (from 68°F
to 55° F/ 64° F), and higher temperatures for the west side basins outside of spawning periods
(from 58°F to 64°F). In addition, the new standard adopted a new way of measuring
temperature values by expressing the criteria as the 7 day rolling average of the daily
maximum, rather than the previous standard's use of absolute values.
pH
Old Standard
The previous pH standard had been in effect since 1976. The standard varied by basin, but
the basic criterion for most waters of the state, including estuarine waters, was the range of 6.5 - 8.5
pH units. All marine waters and waters of the Columbia River were to be within the range of 7.0 -
9.0 pH units. The Snake River criterion was for the range of 7.0 - 9.0 pH units and Goose Lake
waters were to be maintained within the range of 7.5 - 9.5 pH units. (Final Issue Paper for Hydrogen
Ion Concentration. ODhQ. 1995 (cl).
New Standard
The nev> standard is similar to the old in that the new standard vanes by basin as did the old
-------
standard. The criteria for most basins, marine waters, and the Columbia and Snake Rivers remained
unchanged. There are four significant changes in the new standard. The first is the addition of a
new subcategory of waterbody. Cascade Lakes, to the following basins: Umpqua, Rogue,
Willamette, Sandy, Hood River, Deschutes, and Klamath. The criteria, which apply to Cascade
Lakes above 3,000 ft and 5,000 ft for Klamath basin lakes, is a range of 6.0 - 8.5 pH units. The
second change, is raising the pH range for eastside basins ~ John Day, Umatilla/Walla Walla,
Grande Ronde, and Powder to 6.5 - 9.0 pH units (from 6.5 - 8.5). The third change is lowering the
Klamath Basin criteria to the range of 6.5 - 9.0, (from 7.0 -9.0). Finally the fourth change is the
addition of an exceptions provision for dams. The provision, which applies to all basins, is: "waters
impounded by dams existing on January 1, 1996, which have pHs that exceed the criteria shall not
be considered in violation of the standard if the Department determines that the exceedance would
not occur without the impoundment and that all practicable measures have been taken to bring the
pH in the impounded waters into compliance with the criteria"
In summary the changes made by the new pH standard are to add a new sub- category
with its own criterion the standard (Cascade Lakes above 3,000 ft with 6.0 - 8.5 pH), allow for
more alkalinity in certain eastside basins, to allow for more acidity in the Klamath basin, and
provided an exception for dams. Other than those four changes, the new standard is the same
as the old standard (marine waters, Columbia and Snake Rivers, and westside basins).
E. OVERVIEW OF OREGON'S WATER QUALITY PROGRAM
In Oregon, ODEQ has responsibility for protecting the quality of the state's waters. The
mission of ODEQ is to protect and enhance the quality of Oregon's rivers, streams, lakes, estuaries,
and groundwaters and to maintain the beneficial uses for each drainage basin. ODEQ's primary
method for achieving this mission is through development, adoption, and application of the State's
water quality standards and criteria.
Both federal and state regulations are utilized to protect Oregon's water quality. State
programs are based on the Oregon Revised Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR).
ODEQ carries out these rules and regulations under the guidance of the Environmental Quality
Commission (EQC). Under the federal Clean Water Act the state develops and/or implements:
Standards to protect beneficial uses of the state's waters.
A listing of impaired waterbodies (303(d) list) and total maximum daily loads
(TMDLs) to restore those impaired waterbodies.
A Clean Lakes Program.
Permits, monitoring, and loans for wastewater discharge facilities.
Programs to control nonpoint sources of pollution.
Water quality certification of federal activities that could threaten beneficial uses of
the State's waters
Since 1984. the emphasis of Oregon's program has gradually shifted from technology-based
controls, i.e.. predetermined wastewater quality achievable through application of treatment
7
-------
technology, to water quality-based controls, wherein individual point and nonpoint source discharges
are managed based on how they affect the receiving waters. This shift in emphasis is supported by
making specific evaluations and assessments of water quality and designating those waters not
meeting standards or protecting beneficial uses.
ODEQ has established a statewide ambient river monitoring network of 142 sites which are
sampled to provide conventional pollutant data for trend analysis, standard compliance, and problem
identification. Sites were selected to represent all major rivers in the state and provide statewide
geographical representation. (ODEQ, July 1998, Draft Oregon 1998 Water Quality Status
Assessment Report) The locations of these sites reflect the integrated water quality impacts from
point and nonpoint source activities as well as the natural geological, hydrological and biological
impacts on water quality for the watershed that they represent. In addition, biological and habitat
monitoring are conducted to determine the degree to which habitat and biological impairments occur.
Water quality conditions are also assessed in association with the issuance of wastewater discharge
permits, watershed assessments conducted for TMDLs or site/watershed specific actions, special
monitoring initiatives and complaint investigations.
Data acquired during chemical, physical and biological monitoring studies is utilized in
evaluating the quality of the State's waters and designing appropriate water quality controls. Waters
identified as "water quality limited" are included on the 303(d) list and reported in the 305(b) report,
both submitted to EPA biennially.
For each "water quality limited" water on the 303(d) list, ODEQ develops a TMDL. That
is, ODEQ determines the total amount of a pollutant (load) that the receiving waters can assimilate
while maintaining water quality standards and allocates these loads to the various sources. The
CWA requires that all contributing sources, both point and nonpoint, be identified and addressed in
this assessment, that seasonal variations be taken into account, that a margin of safety be established
to account for uncertainties and that the attainment of the TMDL lead to the attainment of applicable
water quality standards.
Water quality controls for point sources are contained within permits issued based on both
federal regulations and state rules. In accordance with the CWA, EPA has delegated authority to
ODEQ to issue National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits. NPDES
permits are issued to sources discharging to surface waters. State Water Pollution Control Facilities
(WPCF) permits are issued to those not discharging to surface waters, e.g., treatment lagoons with
land irrigation, or subsurface disposal. If a TMDL has been established for a waterbody, the
wasteload allocations established in the TMDL are incorporated into discharge permits.
Additionally, effluent limitations in permits for all waters are required to be written such that
discharges do not result in a violation of water quality standards in the receiving water.
Control of nonpoint sources of pollution occurs through several mechanisms. ODEQ has
recently developed memoranda of agreement (MO As) with the Oregon Department of Agriculture
(ODA) and the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) to address the implementation of TMDLs on
state and private forest and agricultural lands in Oregon. ODA. in consultation with ODEQ and local
advisory committees, will develop agricultural water quality management plans to address
-------
agricultural sources of pollution to "water quality limited waters". ODF and ODEQ will work
together to ensure that current forest practice rules will either lead to the attainment of water quality
standards or be revised to do so. ODEQ is also working with federal agencies to develop and
implement water quality management plans on federal lands in the state. Additional efforts under
the Oregon Plan, Coastal Zone Management Plan, National Estuary Program and numerous other
federal and state programs are utilized to minimize inputs from nonpoint source pollution to waters
of the State of Oregon.
EPA provides funding and assistance for implementing nonpoint source controls through
the Nonpoint Source (Section 319), National Estuary and Coastal Zone Management programs.
Assistance in water quality management plan development, funding and implementation is also
available through programs of numerous state and federal natural resource agencies including the
Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), the Soil and Water Conservation Districts, Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODF&W) and ODEQ. Significant funding is expected to become
available for nonpoint source controls in the near future through the Clear, Water Action Plan
(CWAP) and several NRCS Programs including the Riparian Enhancement Initiative under the
Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program.
F. OVERVIEW OF WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS IN OREGON
Oregon has a diversity of surface waterbodies that are regulated by the State's water quality
standards. The State has over 1 00,000 miles of rivers, over 6,000 lakes greater than one acre in size,
nine major estuaries, and over 360 coastal miles. The State's monitoring program routinely monitors
approximately 3,500 miles of streams. (ODEQ, Oregon's 1994 Water Quality Status Assessment
Report, April 1994).
To assess the current condition of Oregon waterbodies, EPA relies on the biennial water
quality monitoring reports provided by ODEQ. As noted above, the 303(d) list provides a listing
of assessed waters which are not in attainment of water quality standards. ODEQ is currently
finalizing the 1998 303(d) list. The following table, based on the draft 1998 list (March 1998),
summarizes the number of waterbodies and streams miles found to be in non-attainment of the DO,
temperature and pH standards. For the 1998 list 2,365 streams were reviewed.
draft 1998 list total DO Temperature
stream miles 13.796 1.130 12.146 1.117
# streams 1.066 61 862 49
Slakes/ 32 40 15
reservoirs
Maps illustrating the stream segments identified on the draft 1998 303(d) list and their
relationship to the locations of Hvolutionanly Significant Units (ESU) identified for listed species
-------
are attached in Appendix E.
The summary below is taken from Forest Ecosystem Management: An Ecological, Economic, and
Social Assessment, Report of the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team, July 1993
(USDA, et al, 1993) and the Integrated Scientific Assessment for Ecosystem Management In the
Interior Columbia Basin and Portions of the KJamath and Great Basins (Quigley, et al, 1996).
Key physical components of a fully functioning aquatic ecosystem include complex habitats
consisting of floodplains, banks, channel structure, water column and subsurface waters. These are
created and maintained by rocks, sediment, large wood, and favorable conditions of water quantity
and quality. Spatial and temporal connectivity within and between watersheds is necessary for
maintaining aquatic and riparian ecosystem functions. Lateral, vertical, and drainage network
linkages are critical to aquatic system function. Unobstructed physical and chemical paths to areas
critical for fulfilling life history requirements of aquatic and riparian-dependent species must also
be maintained. Connections among basins must allow for movement between refugia.
Human activities, such as timber harvesting, road building, stream channelization, farming,
grazing, and urbanization have resulted in the simplication of habitat and a reduction in aquatic
system quality in the majority of river basins within the Pacific Northwest. These activities have
caused or contributed to the lose of large woody debris, sedimentation, loss of riparian vegetation,
loss of frequency and depth of pools, increase in temperature, and other effects all of which have
reduce the habitat quality. On federal lands in Oregon, 55 percent of the streams are moderately or
severely impaired. The system of dams in the Columbia Basin has altered water flows in the larger
water systems resulting in changes in water temperatures, timing and level of peak flows, barriers
to fish migration, reductions in riparian areas, and changes in the physical attributes. Habitat
simplification and decreased quality leads to a decrease in the health and diversity of the anadromous
salmonid populations. The composition, distribution, and status offish within the Basin are different
than they were historically. Habitat loss, fragmentation and isolation may place remaining
populations at risk.
G. SCOPE OF ANALYSIS
On February 10. 1997. EPA received from NMFS a species list for Oregon. A species list
for species under the jurisdiction of FWS was received on March 19. 1997. These lists were
updated in 1998 as this analysis was completed. The 1998 lists (NMFS list received June 22, 1998,
FWS list received July 1. 1998.) are included as Appendix A and are the lists governing the species
to be considered in this consultation. On March 25. 1997. EPA staff conducted a conference call
with NMFS and FWS staff to scope the species and issues that shpuld be the central focus of this
ESA consultation. Decisions were made regarding species most likely to be affected by the changes
in DO. temperature, and pH. levels in surface uaters. There are many species at nsk in Oregon, that
are either proposed tor listing or candidate species. Conferencing is required for proposed species;
there is no requirement to consult on candidate species Because candidate species may be listed
10
-------
before the next triennial review is completed, and because EPA shares a concern with FWS and
NMFS that it is critical to conserve these species, and if at all possible avoid the need to list, the
consultation is covering selected species from the candidate list. Further scoping discussions were
conducted in June 1998.
Pursuant to advice provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine
Fisheries Service , the following threatened and endangered species will be considered in this
assessment. This list contains all species currently listed and proposed for listing under the
Endangered Species Act which are known or suspected to occur in the State of Oregon. In addition,
two species of candidate frogs were added to the list for consultation as amphibians may represent
a sensitivity different than that of fish.
Species of Concern for ESA Consultation
Sockeye Salmon Onocorhynchus nerka
Snake River
Chinook Salmon O. tshawytscha
Snake River Fall
Snake River Spring/Summer
Upper Columbia River Spring Run
Upper Willamette River
Lower Columbia River
S. Oregon/N.Califomia Coastal
Coho Salmon O. kisutch
Lower Columbia River/SW Washington Coast
Oregon Coast
S.Oregon/N. California Coastal
Chum Salmon O keta
Columbia River
Steelhead Omykiss
Snake River Basin
Upper Columbia River
Middle Columbia River
Lower Columbia River
Upper Willamette River
Oregon Coast
Klamath Mountains Province
Bull Trout Salve Units confluentus
Columbia River Basin
Klamath River Basin
Cutthroat Trout O. clarki clarki
Lahontan River
Umpqua River
Sea-run (all populations except tor I'mpqua R)
Huuon Spring tui Chub (jila hicolor ssp.
II
-------
Borax Lake Chub
Oregon Chub
Warner Sucker
Shortnose Sucker
Lost River Sucker
Foskett speckled dace
Columbia Spotted Frog
Oregon Spotted Frog
Vernal Pool fairy shrimp
Gila boraxobius
Oregonichthys crameri
Catostomus \varnerensis
Chasmistes brevirostris
Deltistes luxatus
Rhinichthys osculus ssp.
Rana luteiventris
Ranapretiosa
Branchinecta lynchi
All of these species reside either all or part of their lives in the fresh waters of the State of Oregon
and therefore have the potential to be directly affected by the surface water quality standards.
Anadromous salmonids are also exposed to estuarine and marine waters of the state.
Discussion Species
The listed and/or proposed species that will not be the focus of this consultation, based on
the scoping meetings with the Services, are mammals, birds and plants. It was determined that these
species would not be directly impacted by changes to the DO, temperature, and pH criteria and thus
the approval of the changes to these criteria would not be likely to have an adverse effect on these
species. The following is a list of species.
Marine Mammals
Humpback Whale
Blue Whale
Fin Whale
Sei Whale
Sperm Whale
Stellar Sea Lion
Marine Turtles
Leatherback sea turtle
Mammals and Birds
Columbian white-tailed deer
Marbled murrelet
Aleutian Canada goose
Western snowy plover
Bald Eagle
Brown Pelican
Plants
Macdonald s rockcress
Applegate's milk-vetch
Golden Indian paintbrush
Megaptera novaeangliae
Balaenoptera musculus
Balaenoptera physalus
Balaenoptera borealis
Physeter macrocephalus
Eumetopias jubatus
Dermochelys coriacea
Odocoileus virginianus leucurus
Brachyramptws marmoratus
Branta canadensis leucopareia
Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus
Haliaeetus leucocephalm
Pelecanus occidentalis
A rub is macdonaldiana
Astragalus applegatei
('usttlleju It'vtsecia
-------
Howellia Howellia aquatilis
Bradshaw's lomatium Lomalium bradshawii
MacFarlane's four o'clock Mirabilis macfarlanei
Western lily Lilium occidentale
Nelson's checker-mallow Sidalcea nelsoniana
Willamette daisy Erigeron decumbens va.decumbens
Rough popcorn flower Plagiobothrys hirtus
Howell's spectacular thelypody Thelypodium howellii ssp. Spectabilis
Bald eagle, brown pelican, marbled murrelet, western snowy plover are not likely to be directly
affected by EPA's proposed approval of the changes to Oregon's DO, temperature, and pH criteria.
However, because they prey on fish and invertebrates and some of these may live a portion of their
lives in waters affected by these changes, there is some potential for indirect effects on these species.
However, because these species rely on a varied prey base, there is only limited possible indirect
effects, and it has been determined that EPA's proposed approval of the changes to Oregon's DO,
temperature, and pH criteria would not be likely to adversely affect the bald eagle, brown pelican,
marbled murrelet, and western snowy plover.
The Aleutian Canada Goose is not likely to be directly affected by EPA's approval of the changes
to Oregon's DO, temperature, and pH criteria. The Canada goose relies on water for drinking and
floating. These criteria will not affect the ability of the Canada goose to float or drink the water.
Therefore, EPA's proposed approval of the changes to Oregon's DO, temperature, and pH criteria
would not be likely to adversely affect the Aleutian Canada goose.
Listed Marine Mammals are not likely to be directly affected by Oregon's criteria for DO,
temperature, and pH. With the exception of the stellar sea lion, these species may be present along
Oregon's coast and may venture into estuarine waters, but they are not permanent residents of the
Oregon coast. Stellar sea lions may spend more time on Oregon's coast and estuaries.
However, because they prey on fish and invertebrates and some of these species may live a portion
of their lives in waters affected by these changes, there is some potential for indirect effects on the
stellar sea lion. However, due to the limited nature and extent of these possible indirect effects, it
has been determined that EPA's proposed approval of the changes to Oregon's DO, temperature, and
pH criteria would not be likely to adversely affect the listed marine mammals.
Columbian white tailed deer and listed plants are not likely to be directly affected by Oregon's
criteria for DO. temperature. pH criteria. The primary exposure of these species to water quality
impacts is through either drinking water exposure or habitat degradation. Neither of these exposure
routes is likely to be significantly affected by the changes to the DO. temperature, and pH criteria.
Therefore, EPA's proposed approval of the changes to Oregon's DO. temperature, and pH criteria
would not be likely to adversely affect Columbian white tailed deer and listed plants.
Leatherback sea turtles are rarely found offshore of Oregon's coast and does not nest on Oregon's
beaches. They prey on jellyfish, which would not be directly affected by Oregon's DO. temperature,
and pH criteria. Therefore. 1-PA's proposed approval of the changes to Oregon's DO. temperature.
and pH criteria would not he likely to adversely affect the leatherhack sea turtle.
13
-------
No Effect Determination
At the time Oregon adopted revised standards for DO, temperature, pH it also adopted a
revised water quality standard for bacteria. The adopted criterion for freshwater and estuarine waters
other than shellfish growing waters are (I) A 30 day log mean of 126 E.coli organisms per 100 ml
based on a minimum of 5 samples. (II) No single sample shall exceed 406 E. coli organisms per
100ml. For marine and estuarine shellfish growing waters the criterion is: A fecal coliform median
concentration of 14 organisms per 100 milliliters, with not more than 10% of the samples exceeding
43 organisms per 100 ml. This criterion is set to protect human health, and as such, the levels used
in the criteria are below that which we expect would affect aquatic species. Based on this reasoning
it was determined that EPA would not consult on Oregon's revised bacteria standard.
Assumptions
The analysis of effects under Section III, Proposed Actions, assumes that the organisms are
exposed to waters meeting the water quality standards. As described under Overview of Water
Quality Conditions in Oregon, there are many waters that currently are not meeting these standards
for dissolved oxygen, temperature, and pH. Implementation of the standards is key to changing the
current condition. However, the only action under consideration at this time is whether the standards
themselves and EPA's approval of them will have an adverse effect on species of concern. As the
State of completes TMDLs designed to meet the revised standards, issues/reissues permits in
conjunction with those TMDLs, and incorporates nonpoint source controls to meet water quality
standards the condition of impaired waters, and thus the environmental baseline, will improve.
H. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION AREA
The action area of this consultation consists of all surface waters of the state of Oregon for
which revised DO, temperature and pH criteria have been adopted. The application of these
standards are further refined by temporal, spatial, and species specific provisions to the standards.
The standards and provisions are discussed in detail in Section III. The waterbodies to which each
criterion is applicable are identified later in this assessment. Water quality standards apply to all
surface waters of the state, defined as all lakes, bays, ponds, impounding reservoirs, springs, rivers.
streams, creeks, estuaries, marshes, inlets, canals, the Pacific Ocean within the territorial limits of
the State of Oregon, and all other bodies of surface waters, natural or artificial, inland or coastal,
fresh or salt, public or private (except those private waters which do not combine or effect a junction
with natural surface or underground waters), which are wholly or partially within or bordering the
state or within its jurisdiction [OAR 340-41-006 (14)]. EPA's approval action does not apply to.
and thus the action area does not include, any waters within Indian Country (reservations).
14
-------
II. HABITAT AND LIFE HISTORY OF SPECIES OF CONCERN
(Anadromous fish that are considered under ESA pertain to wild stocks only.)
Snake River sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka): (the following summary information is from
NOAA, 1993). Endangered status Idaho 11/20/91, 56FR58519.
Adult Migration and Spawning. Snake River sockeye salmon enter the Columbia River
primarily during June and July. Arrival at Redfish Lake, which now supports the only remaining
run of Snake River sockeye salmon, peaks in August and spawning occurs primarily in October
(Bjomn et al., 1968). Eggs hatch in the spring between 80 and 140 days after spawning. Fry remain
in the gravel for three to five weeks, emerge in April through May, and move immediately into the
lake where juveniles feed on plankton for one to three years before migrating to the ocean. Migrants
leave Redfish Lake from late April through May (Bjomn et al., 1968), and smolts migrate almost
900 miles to the Pacific Ocean. For detailed information on the Snake River sockeye salmon, see
Wapels et al. (1991 a) and November 20, 1991, 56 FR 58619.
The critical habitat for the Snake River sockeye salmon was listed on December 28, 1993
(58FR68543). The designated habitat consists of river reaches of the Columbia, Snake, and Salmon
Rivers, Alturas Lake Creek, Valley Creek, and Stanley, Redfish, Yellow Belly, Pettit, and Alturas
Lakes (including their inlet and outlet creeks).
Juvenile Outmigration/Smolts. Passage at Lower Granite Dam (the first dam on the
Snake River downstream from the Salmon River) ranges from late April to July, with peak passage
from May to late June. Once in the ocean, the smolts remain inshore or within the Columbia River
influence during the early summer months. Later, they migrate through the northeast Pacific Ocean
(Hart, 1973, Hart and Dell, 1986). Snake River sockeye salmon usually spend two to three years in
the Pacific Ocean and return in their fourth or fifth year of life. Historically, the largest numbers of
Snake River sockeye salmon returned to headwaters of the Payerte River, where 75,000 were taken
one year by a single fishing operation in Big Payerte Lake. During the early 1880s, returns of Snake
River sockeye salmon to the headwaters of the Grande Ronde river in Oregon (Walleye Lake) were
estimated between 24,000 and 30,000 at a minimum (Cramer, 1990 ). During the 1950s and 1960s,
adult returns to Redfish Lake numbered more than 4,000 fish.
Snake River sockeye salmon returns to Redfish Lake since at least 1985, when the Idaho
Department of Fish and Game began operating a temporary weir below the lake, have been
extremely small (one to 29 adults counted per year). Snake River sockeye salmon have a very limited
distribution relative to critical spawning and rearing habitat. Redfish Lake represents only one of
the five Stanley Basin lakes historically occupied by Snake River sockeye salmon and is designated
as critical habitat for the species.
Habitat Physical/Chemical Characteristics (note the differences compared to the table on page 21):
Normal spawning temperatures range from 3-7 degrees C (Ricker. 1966. Foerster. 1968).
Adult migration 72-156 degrees C. (Reiser and Bjornn. 1979).
Recommended incubation guidelines (intergravel vs water column, not specified) are: dissolved
15
-------
oxygen at or near saturation (minimum of 5.0 mg/1); water temperatures of 4-14 degrees C. (Reiser
andBjornn, 1979).
The upper lethal water temperature is 24.4 degrees C. (Brett, 1952), but growth ceases at
temperatures above 20.3 degrees C. (Bell, 1984).
pH - low pH can affect the viability of embryos and alevins, and nitrogen supersaturation can
adversely affect out migrating smolts (no values cited) (Ebel et al., 1971).
Threats:
Factors for the decline include: The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species habitat or range such as loss, damage or change to the species' natural
environment through water diversions, forestry, agriculture, mining, and urbanization; over-
utilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific or educational purposes -
particularly over fishing; predation, introduction of non-native species, and habitat loss or
impairment resulting in increase stress on surviving individuals and thus, increase susceptibility of
the species to numerous bacterial, protozoan, viral, and parasitic diseases; the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms to prevent the decline of the species; and other natural and manmade factors
such as the 1977 drought and the extremely low flow water years through 1990 may have
contributed to reduced Snake River sockeye salmon production. The NMFS concludes there is no
direct evidence that artificially propagated fish have compromised the genetic integrity of Stanley
Basin sockeye salmon. Refer to 53FR58622 for a detailed generic discussion of factors affecting
this sockeye salmon ESU.
Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) - general life history and ecology:
(The following summary is taken from 63 FR11481, 3/9/98).
Chinook salmon are easily distinguished from other Oncorhynchus species by their large
size. Adults weighing over 120 pounds have been caught in North American waters. Chinook
salmon are very similar to coho salmon in appearance while at sea (blue-green back with silver
flanks), except for their large size, small black spots on both lobes of the tail, and black pigment
along the base of the teeth. Chinook salmon are anadromous and semelparous. This means that as
adults, they migrate from a marine environment into the freshwater streams and rivers of their birth
(anadromous) where they spawn and die (semelparous). Adult female chinook will prepare a
spawning bed, called a redd, in a stream area with suitable gravel composition, water depth and
velocity. Redds will vary widely in size and in location within the stream or river. The adult female
chinook may deposit eggs in four to five "nesting pockets" within a single redd. After laying eggs
in a redd, adult chinook will guard the redd from four to 25 days before dying. Chinook salmon eggs
will hatch, depending upon water temperatures, between 90 to 150 days after deposition. Stream
flow, gravel quality, and silt load all significantly influence the survival of developing chinook
salmon eggs. Juvenile chinook may spend from three months to two years in freshwater after
emergence and before migrating to estuarine areas as smolts, and then into the ocean to feed and
mature.
Among chinook salmon two distinct races have evolved. One race, described as a "stream-
type" chinook. is found most commonly m headwater streams. Steam-type chinook salmon have
a longer freshwater residency, and perform extensive offshore migrations before returning to their
16
-------
natal streams in the spring or summer months. The second race is called the "ocean-type" chinook,
which is commonly found in coastal steams in North America. Ocean-type chinook typically
migrate to sea within the first three months of emergence, but they may spend up to a year in
freshwater prior to emigration. They also spend their ocean life in coastal waters. Ocean-type
chinook salmon return to their natal streams or rivers as spring, winter, fall, summer, and late-fall
runs, but summer and fall runs predominate. The difference between these life history types is also
physical, with both genetic and morphological foundations.
Juvenile steam- and ocean-type chinook salmon have adapted to different ecological niches.
Ocean-type chinook salmon tend to utilize estuaries and coastal areas more extensively for juvenile
rearing. The brackish water areas in estuaries also moderate physiological stress during parr-smolt
transition. The development of the ocean-type life history strategy may have been a response to the
limited carrying capacity of smaller stream systems and glacially scoured, unproductive, watersheds,
or a means of avoiding the impact of seasonal floods in the lower portion of may watersheds.
Stream-type juveniles are much more dependent on freshwater stream ecosystems because
of their extended residence in these areas. A stream-type life history may be adapted to those
watersheds, or parts of watersheds, that are more consistently productive and less susceptible to
dramatic changes in water flow, or which have environmental conditions that would severely limit
the success of subyearling smolts. At the time of saltwater entry, stream-type (yearling) smolts are
much larger, averaging 73-134 mm depending on the river system, than their ocean-type
(subyearling) counterparts and are, therefore, able to move offshore relatively quickly.
Coast wide, chinook salmon remain at sea for one to six years (more common, two to four
years), with the exception of a small proportion of yearling males, called jack salmon, which mature
in freshwater or return after two or three months in salt water. Ocean- and steam-type chinook
salmon are recovered differentially in coastal and mid-ocean fisheries, indicating divergent migratory
routes. Ocean-type chinook salmon tend to migrate along the coast, while stream-type chinook
salmon are found far from the coast in the central North Pacific. Differences in the ocean
distribution of specific stocks may be indicative of resource partitioning and may be important to
the success of the species as a whole.
There is a significant genetic influence to the freshwater component of the returning adult
migratory process. A number of studies show that chinook salmon return to their natal streams with
a high degree of fidelity. Salmon may have evolved this trait as a method of ensuring an adequate
incubation and rearing habitat. It also provides a mechanism for reproductive isolation and local
adaptation. Conversely, returning to a stream other than that of one's origin is important in
colonizing new areas and responding to unfavorable or perturbed conditions at the natal steam.
Chinook salmon stocks exhibit considerable variability in size and age of maturation, and
at least some portion of this variation is genetically determined. The relationship between size and
length of migration may also reflect the earlier timing of river entry and the cessation of feeding for
chinook salmon stocks that migrate to the upper reaches of river systems. Body size, which is
correlated with age. may he an important factor in migration and redd construction success. Under
high density conditions on the spawning ground, natural selection may produce stocks with
17
-------
exceptionally large-sized returning adults.
Early researchers recorded the existence of different temporal "runs" or modes in the
migration of chinook salmon from the ocean to freshwater. Freshwater entry and spawning timing
are believed to be related to local temperature and water flow regimes. Seasonal "runs" (i.e., spring,
summer, fall, or winter) have been identified on the basis of when adult chinook salmon enter
freshwater to begin their spawning migration. However, distinct runs also differ in the degree of
maturation at the time of river entry, the thermal regime and flow characteristics of their spawning
site, and their actual time of spawning. Egg deposition must occur at a time to ensure that fry
emerge during the following spring when the river or estuary productivity is sufficient for juvenile
survival and growth.
Pathogen resistance is another locally adapted trait. Chinook salmon from the Columbia
River drainage were less susceptible to Ceratomyxa shasta, an endemic pathogen, then stocks from
coastal rivers where the disease is not know to occur. Alaskan and Columbia River stocks of
chinook salmon exhibit different levels of susceptibility to the infectious hematopoietic necrosis
virus (IHNV). Variability in temperature tolerance between populations is likely due to selection
for local conditions; however, there is little information on the genetic basis of this trait.
Snake River fall chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha): (The following summary is taken
from information from NOAA, 1993 and NOAA, 1991 b). Listed threatened status OR, WA, ID
4/22/92, 59FR66786.
This ESU was listed as threatened on 4/22/92. The 11/2/94 Emergency Rule (59FR54840),
reclassifying Snake River chinook from threatened to endangered, expired on 5/26/95. The critical
habitat for the Snake River fall chinook salmon was listed on December 28. 1993 (58FR68543) and
modified on 3/9/98 (63FR11515) to include the Deschutes River.
A 1995 status review found that the Deschutes River fall-run chinook salmon population
should be considered part of the Snake River fall-run ESU. Populations from Deschutes River and
the Marion Drain (tributary of the Yakima River) show a greater genetic affinity to Snake River ESU
fall chinook than to the Upper Columbia River summer/fall-run chinook (3/9/98, 63FR11490). The
designated critical habitat (63FR11515 , 3/9/98) includes all river reaches assessable to chinook
salmon in the Columbia River from The Dalles Dam upstream to the confluence with the Snake
River in Washington (inclusive). Critical habitat in the Snake River includes its tributaries in Idaho.
Oregon, and Washington (exclusive of the upper Grande Ronde River and the Wallowa River in
Oregon, the Clearwater River above its confluence with Lolo Creek in Idaho, and the Salmon River
upstream of its confluence with French Creek in Idaho). Also included are river reaches and
estuarine areas in the Columbia River from a straight line connecting the west end of the Clatsop
jetty (south jetty. Oregon side) and the west end of the Peacock jetty (north jetty, Washington side)
upstream to The Dalles Dam. Excluded are areas above specific dams identified in Table 17 (see
3''9-'98. 63FR11519) or above longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e.. natural waterfalls in
existence for at least several hundred years).
ESU Status: Almost all historical Snake River tall-run chinook salmon spawning habitat in the
18
-------
Snake River Basin was blocked by the Hells Canyon Dam complex; other habitat blockages have
also occurred in Columbia River tributaries. The ESU's range has also been affected by agricultural
water withdrawals, grazing, and vegetation management. The continued straying by non-native
hatchery fish into natural production areas is an additional source of risk. Assessing extinction risk
to the newly-configured ESU is difficult because of the geographic discontinuity and the disparity
in the status of the two remaining populations. The relatively recent extirpation of fall-run chinook
in the John Day, Umatilla, and Walla Walla Rivers is also a factor in assessing the risk to the overall
ESU. Long term trends in abundance for specific tributary systems are mixed. NMFS concluded
that the ESU as a whole is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future, in
spite of the relative health of the Deschutes River population.
See the second paragraph under Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon for life history
comparisons between fall and spring/summer chinook salmon. Adult Snake River fall chinook
salmon enter the Columbia River in July and migrate into the Snake River from August through
October. Fall chinook salmon natural spawning is primarily limited to the Snake River below Hells
Canyon Dam, and the lower reaches of the Clearwater, Grand Ronde, Imnaha, Salmon and Tucannon
Rivers. Fall chinook salmon generally spawn from October through November and fry emerge from
March through April.
Downstream migration generally begins within several weeks of emergence (Becker, 1970;
Allen and Meekin, 1973) with juveniles rearing in backwaters and shallow water areas through mid-
summer prior to smoking and migration. Bell (1959, 1961) found that peak migration in the
Brownlee-Oxbow Dam reach of the Snake River occurred from April through the middle of May.
Juveniles will spend one to four years in the Pacific Ocean before beginning their spawning
migration. Van Hyning (1968) reported that chinook salmon fry tend to linger in the lower
Columbia River and may spend a considerable portion of their first year in the estuary. For detailed
information on the Snake River fall chinook salmon see Waples et al. (1991b), NMFS (1992b) and
June 27, 1991,56 FR 29542.
Elevated water temperatures are thought to preclude returning of fall chinook salmon in the
Snake River after early to mid-July (Chapman et al., 1991). The preferred temperature range for
chinook salmon has been variously described as 12.2-13.9 degrees C. (Brett, 1952), 10-15.6 degrees
C. (Burrows, 1963), or 13-18 degrees C. (Theurer et al., 1985). Summer temperatures in the Snake
River substantially exceed the upper limits of this range.
No reliable historic estimates of abundance are available for Snake River fall chinook
salmon. Estimated returns of Snake River fall chinook salmon declined from 72,000 annually
between 1938 and 1949. to 29.000 from 1950 through 1959 (Bjornn and Homer. 1980. cited in
Bevan et al.. 1994). Estimated returns of naturally produced adults form 1985 through 1993 range
from 114 to 742 fish.
Threats:
Factors influencing the decline include: the present or threatened destruction, modification.
or curtailment of the species habitat or range such as loss, damage or change to the species' natural
environment through water diversions, forestry, agriculture, mining, and urbanization;
19
-------
overutilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific or educational purposes -
particularly over fishing; predation, introduction of non-native species, and habitat loss or
impairment increasing stress on any surviving individuals and thus increasing susceptibility of the
species to numerous bacterial, protozoan, viral, and parasitic diseases; the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanism to prevent the decline of the species. Refer to 63FR11498 for a detailed
generic discussion of factors affecting this chinook salmon ESU.
Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha): (The following
summary information is from NOAA, 1993 and NOAA, 1991 a). Listd threatened status OR, WA,
ID 12/28/94, 59FR66786.
This Evolutionaryly Significant Unit (ESU) was listed as threatened on 4/22/92 and was
"downgraded" to a proposed endangered status on 12/28/94. The 11/2/94 Emergency Rule
(59FR54840), reclassifing Snake River chinook from threatened to endangered, expired on 5/26/95.
The critical habitat for the Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon was listed on December 28,
1993 (58FR68543). The designated habitat consists of river reaches of the Columbia, Snake, and
Salmon Rivers, and all tributaries of the Snake and Salmon Rivers (except the Clearwater River)
presently or historically accessible to Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon (except reaches
above impassable natural falls and Hells Canyon Dam).
ESU status. (From 56FR29544) Historically, it is estimated that 44 percent of the combined
Columbia River spring/summer chinook salmon returning adults entered the Salmon River. Since
the 1960s, counts at Snake River dams have declined considerably. Snake River redd counts in
index areas provide the best indicator of trends and status of the wild spring/summer chinook
population. The abundance of wild Snake River spring/summer chinook has declined more at the
mouth of the Columbia River than the redd trends indicate. Although pre-1991 data suggest several
thousand wild spring/summer chinook salmon return to the Snake River each year, these fish are
thinly spread over a large and complex river system.
In general, the habitats utilized for spawning and early juvenile rearing are different among
the three chinook salmon forms (spring, summer, and fall) (Chapman, et al., 1991). In both the
Columbia and Snake Rivers, spring chinook salmon tend to use small, higher elevation streams
(headwaters), and fall chinook salmon tend to use large, lower elevation streams or mainstem areas.
Summer chinook are more variable in their spawning habitats; in the Snake river, they inhabit small,
high elevation tributaries typical of spring chinook salmon habitat, whereas in the upper Columbia
River they spawn in the larger lower elevation streams characteristic of fall chinook salmon habitat.
Differences are also evident in juvenile out-migration behavior. In both rivers, spring chinook
salmon migrate swiftly to sea as yearling smolts, and fall chinook salmon move seaward slowly as
subyearlings. Summer chinook salmon in the Snake River resemble spring-run fish in migrating as
yearlings, but migrate as subyearlings in the upper Columbia River. Early researchers categorized
the two behavioral types as "ocean-type" chinook for seaward migrating subyearlings and as
"stream-type" chinook tor the yearling migrants (Gilbert. 1912).
Lite history information clearly indicates a strong affinity between summer- and fall-run fish
20
-------
in the upper Columbia River, and between spring- and summer-run fish in the Snake River. Genetic
data support the hypothesis that these affinities correspond to ancestral relationships. The
relationship between Snake River spring and summer chinook salmon is more complex and is not
discussed here.
The present range of spawning and rearing habitat for naturally-spawned Snake River
spring/summer chinook salmon is primarily limited to the Salmon, Grande Ronde, Imnaha, and
Tucannon sub-basins. Most Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon enter individual sub-basins
from May through September. Juvenile Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon emerge from
spawning gravels from February through June (Perry and Bjornn, 1991). Typically, after rearing in
their nursery streams for about one year, smolts begin migrating seaward in April through May
(Bugert et al., 1990; Cannamela, 1992). After reaching the mouth of the Columbia River,
spring/summer chinook salmon probably inhabit near shore areas before beginning their northeast
Pacific Ocean migration, which lasts two to three years. For detailed information on the life history
and stock status of Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon, see Matthews and Waples (1991),
NMFS (1991a), and 56 FR 29542 (June 27, 1991).
The number of wild adult Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon in the late 1800s was
estimated to be more than 1.5 million fish annually. By the 1950s, the population had declined to
an estimated 125,000 adults. Escapement estimates indicate that the population continued to decline
through the 1970s. Redd count data also show that the populations continued to decline through
about 1980.
The Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon ESU, the distinct population segment listed
for ESA protection, consists of 39 local spawning populations (sub-populations) spread over a large
geographic area. The number offish returning to a given subpopulation would, therefore, be much
less than the total run size.
Based on recent trends in redd counts in major tributaries of the Snake River, many sub-
populations could be at critically low levels. Sub-populations in the Grande Ronde River, Middle
Fork Salmon River, and Upper Salmon River basins are at particularly high risk. Both demographic
and genetic risks would be of concern for such sub-populations, and in some cases, habitat may be
so sparsely populated that adults have difficulty finding mates.
Threats:
Factors influencing the decline include: the present or threatened destruction, modification,
or curtailment of its habitat or range such as loss, damage or change to the species' natural
environment through water diversions, forestry, agriculture, mining, and urbanization; over-
utilization for commercial, recreational, scientific or educational purposes - particularly over-
fishing; predation. introduction of non-native species, and habitat loss or impairment increasing
stress on any surviving individuals and thus increasing susceptibility to numerous bacterial,
protozoan, viral, and parasitic diseases. Refer to 63FR11498 for a detailed generic discussion of
factors affecting this chinook salmon F.SUs.
Habitat Physical Chemical Characteristics for chinook salmon, in general:
21
-------
Temperatures for optimal egg incubation are 5.0-14.4 degrees C. (Bell, 1984).
Upper lethal limit is 25.1 degrees C. (Brett, 1952), but may be lower depending on other water
quality factors (Ebel et al., 1971).
Dissolved oxygen for successful egg development in redds is ^ 5.0 mg/1, and water temperatures of
4-14 degrees C. (Reiser and Bjornn, 1979). (Again, for DO, intergravel vs water column is not
specified, however, although the implication seems to be intergravel DO.)
Freshwater juveniles avoid water with s 4.5 mg/1 dissolved oxygen at 20 degrees C. (Whitmore et
al., 1960).
Migrating adults will pass through water with dissolved oxygen levels as low as 3.5-4.0 mg/1
(Fujioka, 1970; Alabaster 1988, 1989). Excessive silt loads (>4000 mg/1) may halt chinook salmon
movements or migrations (Reiser and Bjomn, 1979). Silt can also hinder fry emergence, and limit
benthic invertebrate production (Reiser and Bjornn, 1979). Low pH decreases egg and alevin
survival (no values given).
Upoer Columbia River spring-run chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha): Proposed
endangered status WA, 3/9/98, 63FR11481. (The following life history information is taken from
63FR11489.)
The NMFS on 3/9/98, proposed several chinook salmon ESUs for listing under the ESA
(63FR11481). The Upper Columbia River spring-run chinook ESU is proposed-endangered. This
ESU includes stream-type chinook salmon spawning above Rock Island Dam - that is, those in the
Wenatchee, Entiat, and Methow Rivers. All chinook salmon in the Okanogan River are apparently
ocean-type and are considered part of the Upper Columbia River summer- and fall-run ESU. Critical
habitat designation is found on page 11515 of 63FR (3/9/98). Designated habitat includes all river
reaches accessible to chinook salmon in Columbia River tributaries upstream of the Rock Island
Dam and downstream of Chief Joseph Dam in Washington, excluding the Okanogan River. Also
included are river reaches and estuarine areas in the Columbia River from a straight line connecting
the west end of the Clatsop jetty (south jetty. Oregon side) and the west end of the Peacock jetty
(north jetty, Washington side) upstream to Chief Joseph Dam in Washington. Excluded are areas
above specific dams identified in Table 16 of 63FR11481 or above longstanding, naturally
impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence for at least several hundred years).
This ESU was first identified as the Mid-Columbia River summer/fall chinook salmon ESU
but a later determinations concluded this ESU's boundaries do not extend downstream from the
Snake River. The ESU status of the Marion Drain population from the Yakima River is still
unresolved.
ESL' status. Access to a substantial portion of historical habitat was blocked by Chief Joseph
and Grand Coulee Dams. There are local habitat problems related to irrigation diversions and
hydroelectric development, as well as degraded ripanan and instream habitat from urbanization and
livestock grazing. Mamstem Columbia River hydroelectric development has resulted in a major
disruption of migration comdors and affected flow regimes and estuanne habitat. Some populations
in this ESU must migrate through nine mamstem dams.
Artificial propagation efforts have had a significant impact on spring-run populations in this
22
-------
ESU, either through hatchery-based enhancement or the extensive trapping and transportation.
Harvest rates are low for this ESU, with very low ocean and moderate instream harvest. Previous
assessments of stocks within this ESU have identified several as being at risk or of concern. Due
to lack of information on chinook salmon stocks that are presumed to be extinct, the relationship of
these stocks to existing ESUs is uncertain. Recent total abundance of this ESU is quite low, and
escapements in 21994-1996 were the lowest in at least 60 years. At least six populations of spring
chinook salmon in this ESU have become extinct, and almost all remaining naturally-spawning
populations have fewer than 100 spawners. In addition to extremely small population sizes, both
recent and long-term trends in abundance are downward, some extremely so. NMFS concluded that
chinook salmon in this ESU are in danger of extinction.
Chinook salmon from this ESU primarily emigrate to the ocean as subyearlings but mature
at an older age than ocean-type chinook salmon in the Lower Columbia and Snake Rivers.
Furthermore, a greater proportion of tag recoveries for this ESU occur in the Alaskan coastal fishery
than is the case for Snake River fish. The status review for Snake River fall chinook salmon also
identified genetic and environmental differences between the Columbia and Snake rivers.
Substantial life history and genetic differences distinguish fish in this ESU from stream-type spring
chinook salmon from the upper-Columbia River.
The ESU boundaries fall within part of the Columbia Basin Ecoregion. The areas is
generally dry and relies on Cascade Range snowmelt for peak spring flows. Historically, this ESU
likely extended farther upstream; spawning habitat was compressed down-river following
construction of Grand Coulee Dam.
Threats:
Factors influencing the decline include: the present or threatened destruction, modification,
or curtailment of the species habitat or range such as loss, damage or change to the species' natural
environment through water diversions, forestry, agriculture, mining, and urbanization; over-
utilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific or educational purposes -
particularly over-fishing; predation, introduction of non-native species, and habitat loss or
impairment increasing stress on any surviving individuals and thus increasing susceptibility of the
species to numerous bacterial, protozoan, viral, and parasitic diseases; the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanism to prevent the decline of the species. Refer to 63FR11498 for a detailed
generic discussion of factors affecting this chinook salmon ESUs.
Lower Columbia River chinook salmon, all runs (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha): Proposed
threatened status WA. 3/9/98. 63FR11481. (The following life history information is taken from
63FR11488.)
The NMFS on 3/9/98. proposed several chinook salmon ESUs for listing under the ESA
(63FR11481) The Lower Columbia River spring-run chinook ESU is proposed-threatened. This
ESU includes all naturally spawned chinook populations form the mouth of the Columbia river to
the crest of the Cascade Range, excluding populations above Willamette Falls. Designated critical
habitat can be found in 63FR. page 1 1515 The designation is designed to include all river reaches
accessible to chinook salmon in Columbia River tributaries between the Gravs and White Salmon
23
-------
Rivers in Washington and the Willamette and Hood Rivers in Oregon, inclusive. Also included are
river reaches and estuarine areas in the Columbia River from a straight line connecting the west end
of the Clatsop jetty (south jetty, Oregon side) and the west end of the Peacock jetty (north jetty,
Washington side) upstream to The Dalles Dam; with the usual exclusions.
ESU status. Apart form the relatively large and apparently healthy fall-run population in the
Lewis River, production in this ESU appears to be predominantly hatchery-driven with few
identifiable naturally spawned populations. All basins are affected (to varying degrees) by habitat
degradation. Hatchery programs have had a negative effect on the native ESU. Efforts to enhance
chinook salmon fisheries abundance in the lower Columbia River began in the 1870s. Available
evidence indicates a pervasive influence of hatchery fish on natural populations throughout this ESU,
including both spring- and fall-run populations. The large number of hatchery fish in this ESU make
it difficult to determine the proportion of naturally produced fish. The loss of fitness and diversity
within the ESU is an important concern.
Harvest rates on fall-run stocks are moderately high, with an average total exploitation rate
of 65 percent. Harvest rates are somewhat lower for spring-run stocks, with estimates for the Lewis
River totaling 50 percent. Previous assessments of stocks within this ESU have identified several
stocks as being at risk or of concern. There have been at least six documented extinctions of
populations in the ESU, and it is possible that extirpation of other native population has occurred but
has been masked by the presence of naturally spawning hatchery fish. NMFS concludes that
chinook salmon in this ESU are not presently in danger of extinction but are likely to become
endangered in the foreseeable future.
Threats:
Factors influencing the decline include: the present or threatened destruction, modification,
or curtailment of the species habitat or range such as loss, damage or change to the species' natural
environment through water diversions, forestry, agriculture, mining, and urbanization; over-
utilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific or educational purposes,
particularly over-fishing; predation, introduction of non-native species, and habitat loss or
impairment increasing stress on any surviving individuals and thus increasing susceptibility of the
species to numerous bacterial, protozoan, viral, and parasitic diseases; the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanism to prevent the decline of the species. Refer to 63FR11498 for a detailed
generic discussion of factors affecting this chinook salmon ESUs.
Upper Willamette River spring-run chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha): Proposed
threatened status WA. 3/9/98. 63FR11481. (The following life history information is taken from
63FR11489.)
The NMFS on 3/9/98. proposed several chinook salmon ESUs for listing under the ESA
(63FR11481). The Upper Willamette River spring-run chinook ESU is proposed-threatened. This
ESU includes naturally spawned spring-run chinook salmon populations above Willamette Falls.
Fall chinook above the Falls are introduced and although they are naturally spawning, they are not
considered a population for purposes of defining this HSU Critical habitat is designated in 63FR.
page 11515. In addition to the area ot the Willamette River and its tributaries above the Falls, also
24
-------
included are river reaches and estuarine areas in the Columbia River from a straight line connecting
the west end of the Clatsop jetty (south jetty, Oregon side) and the west end of the Peacock jetty
(north jetty, Washington side) upstream to and including the Willamette River in Oregon, with the
usual exclusions regarding specific dams and longstanding natural barriers.
ESU status. While the abundance of Willamette River spring chinook salmon has been
relatively stable over the long term, and there is evidence of some natural production, it is apparent
that at present natural production and harvest levels the natural population is not replacing itself.
With natural production accounting for only one-third of the natural spawning escapement, it is
questionable whether natural spawners would be capable of replacing themselves even in the absence
of fisheries. The introduction of fall-run chinook into the basin and laddering of Willamette Falls
have increased the potential for genetic introgression between wild spring- and hatchery fall-run
chinook. Habitat blockage and degradation are significant problems in this ESU. Another concern
for this ESU is that commercial and recreational harvests are high relative to the apparent
productivity of natural populations. Recent escapement is less than 5,000 fish and been declining
sharply. NMFS concludes that chinook salmon in this ESU are not presently in danger of extinction
but are likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future.
Historic, naturally spawned populations in this ESU have an unusual life history that shares
features of both the stream and ocean types. Scale analysis of returning fish indicate a
predominantly yearling smolt life-history and maturity at four years of age, but these data are
primarily from hatchery fish and may not accurately reflect patterns for the natural fish. Young-of-
year smolts have been found to contribute to the returning three year-old year class. The ocean
distribution is consistent with an ocean-type life history, and tag recoveries occur in considerable
numbers in the Alaskan and British Columbian coastal fisheries. Intra-basin transfers have
contributed to the homogenization of Willamette River spring chinook stocks; however, Willamette
River spring chinook remain one of the most genetically distinctive groups of chinook salmon in the
Columbia River Basin.
The geography and ecology of the Willamette valley is considerably different from
surrounding areas. Historically, the Willamette Falls offered a narrow temporal window for upriver
migration, which may have promoted isolation from other Columbia River stocks.
Threats:
Factors influencing the decline include: the present or threatened destruction, modification.
or curtailment of the species habitat or range such as loss, damage or change to the species' natural
environment through water diversions, forestry, agriculture, mining, and urbanization; over-
utilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific or educational purposes.
particularly over-fishing; predation. introduction of non-native species, and habitat loss or
impairment increasing stress on any surviving individuals and thus increasing susceptibility of the
species to numerous bacterial, protozoan, viral, and parasitic diseases; the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanism to prevent the decline of the species. Refer to 63FR11498 for a detailed
generic discussion of factors affecting this chinook salmon ESUs.
Southern Oregon and California Coastal spring and fall chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus
25
-------
tshawytscha): Proposed threatened status WA, 3/9/98, 63FR11481. (The following life history
information is taken from 63FR11487).
The NMFS on 3/9/98, proposed several chinook salmon ESUs for listing under the ESA
(63FR11481). The Southern Oregon and California Coastal spring- and fall-run chinook ESU is
proposed-threatened. This portion of concern for Oregon in this ESU are the very southern coastal
watersheds. Critical habitat is designated in 63FR, page 1515 and includes all river reaches and
estuarine areas accessible to chinook salmon from the southern Oregon border to Cape Blanco (Elk
River). Excluded are the Klamath and Trinity Rivers upstream of their confluence; these stocks are
genetically and ecologically distinguishable from those in this ESU.
ESU status. Chinook salmon spawning abundance in this ESU is highly variable among
populations. There is a general pattern of downward trends in abundance in most populations for
which data are available, with declines being especially pronounced in spring-run populations.
Habitat loss and/or degradation is widespread throughout the range of the ESU. The Rouge River
Basin in particular has been affected by mining activities and unscreened irrigation diversions in
addition to the problems resulting from logging and dam construction. Artificial propagation
program contribution to overall abundance is relatively low except for the Rouge River spring run.
NMFS concludes that the extremely depressed status of almost all coastal populations south of the
KJamath River is an important source of risk to the ESU and that chinook salmon in this ESU are
likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future.
Chinook salmon in this ESU exhibit an ocean-type life history; ocean distribution (based on
tag recoveries) is predominantly off of the California and Oregon coasts. Life history information
on smaller populations, especially in the southern portion of the ESU, is extremely limited. Data
show some divergence between chinook populations north and south of the KJamath River, but the
available information is incomplete to describe chinook salmon south of the Klamath River as a
separate ESU. Life history differences also exist between spring- and fall-run fish in the ESU, but
not to the same extent as is observed in larger inland basins.
Ecologically, the majority of the river systems in this ESU are relatively small and heavily
influenced by a maritime climate. Low summer flow and high temperature in many rivers result in
seasonal physical and thermal barrier bars that block movement by anadromous fish. The Rouge
River is the largest river basin in this ESU and extends inland into the Sierra Nevada and Cascades
Ecoregions.
Threats:
Factors influencing the decline include: the present or threatened destruction, modification,
or curtailment of the species habitat or range such as loss, damage or change to the species' natural
environment through water diversions, forestry, agriculture, mining, and urbanization; over-
utilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific or educational purposes.
particularly over-fishing: predation. introduction of non-native species, and habitat loss or
impairment increasing stress on any surviving individuals and thus increasing susceptibility of the
species to numerous bacterial, proto/oan. \iral. and parasitic diseases: the inadequacy of existine
regulatory mechanism to prevent the decline of the species. Refer to 63FR1 1498 for a detailed
26
-------
generic discussion of factors affecting this chinook salmon ESUs.
Oregon Coast coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch): (The following life history information is
taken from NMFS, 1996; and 60FR38011, 63FR42587). Threatened OR status 8/10/98,
63FR42587.
The Oregon coast coho ESU was listed as "proposed threatened" on 7/25/95 (60FR38011);
the listing was finalized on 8/10/98 (63FR42587). This ESU represents naturally spawning coho
inhabiting coastal streams draining the coast Range Mountains between Cape Blanco and the
Columbia River. Critical habitat has not been designated.
ESU status. Within the Oregon coast ESU, hatchery populations from the north Oregon coast
form a distinctive subgroup. Adult run- and spawn-timing are similar to those along the Washington
coast and in the Columbia River, but less variable. While marine conditions off the Oregon and
Washington coasts are similar, the Columbia River has greater influence north of its mouth, and the
continental shelf becomes broader off the Washington coast. Upwelling off the Oregon coast is
much more variable and generally weaker than areas south of Cape Blanco.
Estimated escapement of coho salmon in coastal Oregon was about 1.4 million fish in the
early 1900s, with harvest of nearly 400,000 fish. Abundance of wild Oregon coast coho salmon
declined during the period from about 1965 to 1975 and has fluctuated at a low level since that time
(Nickelson et al., 1992a). Production potential (based on stock-recruit models) shows a reduction
of nearly 50 percent in habitat capacity. Recent spawning escapement estimates indicate an average
spawning escapement of less than 30,000 adults. Current abundance of coho on the Oregon coast
may be less than five percent of that in the early part of this century. The Oregon coast coho salmon
ESU is not at immediate danger of extinction but may become endangered in the future if present
trends continue (Weitkamp et al., 1995).
For more information on of coho salmon life history, and factors contributing to the decline
of the species (threats), refer to the discussion under southern Oregon/northern California coast ESU.
Spawn timing. Most OC coho salmon enter rivers from late September to mid-October with
the onset of autumn freshets. Thus, a delay in fall rains will retard river entry and perhaps spawn
timing. Peak spawning occurs from mid-November to early February.
Spawning habitat and temperature. Although each native stock appears to have a unique time
and temperature for spawning that theoretically maximizes offspring survival, coho salmon generally
spawn at water temperatures within the range of 10-12.8 degrees C. (Bell. 1991). Predominant
spawning streams are low gradient fourth- and fifth-order, with clean gravel of pea to orange size.
Hatching and emergence. The favorable range for coho salmon egg incubation is 10-12.8
degrees C. (Bell. 1991). Depending on water temperature, eggs incubate for 35 to 50 days and start
emerging from the gravel two to three weeks after hatching (Nickelson et al.. 1992a).
Parr movement and smoltitication. hollowing emergence, fry move into shallow areas near
27
-------
the stream banks. Their territory seems to be related not only to slack water, but to objects which
provide points of reference to which the fry can return (Hoar, 1951 ). Juvenile rearing usually occurs
in low gradient tributary streams, although they may move up to streams of 4 or 5 percent gradient.
Juveniles have been found in streams as small as one to two meters wide. When the fry are
approximately 4 cm in length, they migrate upstream considerable distances to reach lakes or other
rearing areas. Rearing requires temperatures of 20 degrees C. or less, preferably 1 1 .7-14.4 degrees
C. (Bell 1991). Coho salmon fry prefer backwater pools during spring. In the summer, juveniles
are more abundant in pools than in glides or riffles. During winter, the fishes predominate in off-
channel pools of any type. The ideal food channel for maximum coho smolt production is shallow,
fairly swift mid-stream flows with numerous back-eddies, narrow width, copious overhanging mixed
vegetation (for stream temperature control and insect habitat), and banks permitting hiding places.
Rearing in freshwater may be up to 15 months followed by moving to the sea as smolts between
February and June (Weitkamp et al, 1995).
and ocean migration. Little is known about residence time or habitat use in estuaries
during seaward migration, although the assumption is that coho salmon spend only a short time in
the estuary before entering the ocean (Nickelson et al., 1992a). Growth is very rapid once the smolts
reach the estuary (Fisher et al., 1984). While living in the ocean, coho salmon remain closer to their
river of origin than do chinook salmon. After about 12 months at sea, coho salmon gradually
migrate south and along the coast, but some appear to follow a counter-clockwise circuit in the Gulf
of Alaska (Sandercock, 1991). Coho typically spend two growing seasons in the ocean before
returning to their natal streams to spawn as three year-olds. Some precocious males ("jacks"), return
to spawn after only six months at sea.
Food. The early diets of emerging fry include chironomid larvae and pupae. Juveniles are
carnivorous opportunists, eating insects. These fish do not appear to pick stationary items off the
substratum.
S. Oregon/N. California Coast (SONC) coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch): (The following
life history summary is taken form NMFS, 1996; and 62FR24588, 62FR6274). Threatened OR
status 5/6/97, 62FR24588.
The SONC ESU coho and the Oregon coast coho ESU were both listed as "proposed
threatened" on 7/25 '95 (60FR3801 1 ). On 6 May 1997 (62FR24588), the SONC coho salmon was
listed as threatened. On 25 November 1997 the NMFS proposed to designate critical habitat for the
SONC coho salmon ESU (62FR6274) as: accessible reaches of all rivers (including estuarine areas
and tributaries) between the Mattole River in California and the Elk River (Cape Blanco area) in
Oregon, inclusive. NMFS is not proposing to designate critical habitat in marine areas at this time.
Excluded areas are above certain dams (Lost Creek Dam on the Rogue River. Applegate Dam on the
Applegate. and Iron Gate Dam [in California) on the upper Klamath River) and longstanding,
impassable bamers.
HSl ' status In the 1940s, estimated abundance of coho salmon in this F.SU ranged from
150.000 10 400.000 naturally spawning fish. Today, coho populations in this ESU are very
depressed, currently numbering approximately 10.000 naturally produced adults. Although the
28
-------
Oregon portion of the coho salmon SONC ESU has declined drastically, the Rogue River Basin
increased substantially from 1974-1997. The bulk of current coho salmon production in this ESU
consists of stocks from the Rogue River, Klamath River, Trinity River, and Eel River in Oregon.
In contrast to the life history patterns of other anadromous salmonids, coho salmon exhibit
a relatively simple three-year life cycle.
In migration and spawning. Most SONC coho salmon enter rivers between September and
February and spawn from November to January (occasionally into early spring). In migration is
influenced by river flow, especially for many small California stream systems that have sandbars at
their mouths for much of the year except winter (Weitcamp et al., 1995).
Incubation and rearing. Coho salmon eggs incubate for 35 to 50 days between November
and March, and start emerging from the gravel two to three weeks after hatching (Hassler, 1987).
Following emergence, fry move into shallow areas near the stream banks. As the fry grow larger,
they disperse up- and downstream to establish and defend a territory (Hassler, 1987). During the
summer, fry prefer pools and riffles with adequate cover. Juveniles over-winter in large mainstem
pools, backwater areas, and secondary pools with large woody debris, and undercut bank areas.
Juveniles primarily eat aquatic and terrestrial insects (Sandercock, 1991). After rearing in
freshwater for up to 15 months, the smolts enter the ocean between March and June (Weitcamp et
al., 1995).
Estuary and ocean migration. Although coho salmon have been captured several thousand
kilometers away from their natal stream, this species usually remains closer to its river of origin than
chinook salmon. Coho typically spend two growing seasons in the ocean before returning to spawn
as three year-olds; precocious males ("jacks") may return after only six months at sea.
Population trends. In Oregon south of Cape Blanco, Nehlsen et al. (1991) considered all but
one coho salmon stock at "high risk of extinction". South of Cape Blanco, Nickelson et al. (1992a)
rated all Oregon coho salmon stocks as "depressed".
Threats:
Threats to naturally-reproducing coho salmon throughout its range ar? numerous and varied.
Habitat factors include: Channel morphology changes, substrate changes, loss of in stream
roughness, loss of estuarine habitat, loss of wetlands, loss/degradation of riparian areas, declines in
water quality (e.g.. elevated water temperatures, reduced dissolved oxygen, altered biological
communities, toxics, elevated pH. and altered stream fertility), altered stream flows, fish passage
impediments, elimination of habitat, and direct take. The major activities responsible for the decline
of coho salmon in Oregon are logging, road building, grazing and mining activities, urbanization,
stream channelization, dams, wetland loss, beaver trapping, water withdrawals, and unscreened
diversions for irrigation.
Agricultural practices have also contributed to the degradation of salmonid habitat on the
west coast through irrigation diversions, overgra/ing in riparian areas, and compaction of soils in
29
-------
upland areas from livestock. Urbanization has degraded coho salmon habitat through steam
channelization, floodplain drainage, and riparian damage. Forestry has degraded coho habitat
through removal and disturbance of natural vegetation, disturbance and compaction of soils,
construction of roads, and installation of culverts. Timber harvest activities and erosion from
logging roads can result in sediment delivered to streams through mass wasting and surface erosion
that can elevate the level of fine sediments in spawning gravels and fill the substrate interstices
inhabited by invertebrates.
Depletion of storage of natural flows have drastically altered natural hydrological cycles.
Alteration of stream flows has increased juvenile salmonid mortality for a variety of reasons:
Migration delay resulting from insufficient flows or habitat blockages; loss of usable habitat due to
de-waiering and blockage; stranding of fish resulting from rapid flow fluctuations; entrainment of
juveniles into unscreened or poorly screened diversion; and increased juvenile mortality resulting
from increased water temperatures. In addition, reduced flows degrade or diminish fish habitats via
increased deposition of fine sediments in spawning gravels, decreased recruitment of new spawning
gravels, and encroachment of riparian and nonendemic vegetation into spawning and rearing areas.
Considering over utilization for commercial recreational, scientific, or education purposes:
Harvest management practiced by the tribes is conservative and has resulted in limited impact on
the coho stock in the Klamath and Trinity Rivers; overfishing in on-tribal fisheries is believed to
have been a significant factor in the decline of coho salmon; marked hatchery coho are allowed to
be harvested in the Rogue River, all other recreational coho salmon fisheries in the Oregon portion
of this ESU are closed; collection for scientific research and educational programs is believed to
have had little or no impact on coho populations in the ESU.
Relative to other effects, disease and predation are not believed to be major factors
contributing to the overall decline of coho salmon in this ESU. However, disease and predation may
have substantial impacts in local areas.
Lower Columbia River/Southwest Washington Coast (LCSW) coho salmon (Oncorhynchus
kisutch): (The following life history summary is taken fromNMFS, 1996; and 60FR38011).
Candidate status OR, WA 7/250/95, 66FR38011.
The LCSW coho salmon was proposed as a candidate ESA species in 7/25/95 (60FR38011).
NMFS concludes that historically this ESU included coho salmon from all tributaries of the
Columbia River below approximately the Klickitat and Deschutes Rivers, as well as coastal
drainages in southwest Washington between the Columbia River and Point Grenville. The Columbia
River estuary and Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor in southwest Washington all have extensive
intertidal mud and sand flats and differ substantially from estuaries to the north and south.
HSU status At least one ESU of coho salmon probably occurred in the lower Columbia
River Basin, but NMFS was unable to identify any remaining natural populations that warranted
protection under the F.SA. Coho salmon stocks above Bonneville Dam (except Hood River) are
classified as extinct. The Clackamas River stock uas classified as at moderate risk of extinction.
30
-------
. While the number of naturally-reproducing fish within the LCSW coast ESU is fairly large,
evaluating the risk to this ESU is difficult because of the uncertainty about the relationship of the
present natural populations to the historic ESU. The LCSW coho salmon ESU is on the Candidate
List until the distribution and status of the native populations can be resolved.
Threats
Refer to the preceding discussions for other coho salmon ESUs for life history information
and factors contributing to the decline of the species.
Chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta): Columbia River ESU and [Hood Canal summer-run ESU*]
(The following life history information is taken from 63FR11773.) Proposed Threatened status
OR, WA3/10/98. 63FR11773.
On 10 March 1998 the NMFS issued a proposed rule and request for comments to list two
west coast chum salmon ESUs as threatened. The proposed listings and critical habitat designations
are in 63FR16955 (4/7/98). [The Hood Canal summer-run ESU chum salmon spawn in tributaries
to Hood Canal, Discovery Bay, and Sequim Bay, WA*], and the Columbia River ESU chum
salmon spawn in tributaries to the lower Columbia River (WA and OR).
Designated critical habitat consists of the water, substrate, and adjacent riparian zone of
estuarine and riverine reaches in specific hydrologic units and counties. Accessible reaches are those
within the historical range of the ESUs that can still be occupied by any life stage of chum salmon.
Columbia River chum salmon critical habitat designation includes all accessible reaches in the
Columbia River downstream from Bonneville Dam, excluding Oregon tributaries upstream of Milton
Creek at river km 144 near the town of St. Helens.
ESU status. Information on the condition of these chum salmon ESUs is not included in
63FR11773.
Life history information specific to the two above ESUs is not available. The chum salmon
or dog salmon is the third most abundant salmon species in the Pacific Northwest. Spawning for
chum salmon adults may take place just at the head of tide waters similar to pink salmon, however
unlike pinks, chum also migrate upriver to spawn. Spawning occurs from October through
December. Most adult females construct their redds near saltwater and are territorially aggressive;
therefore, females may "miss out" on male spawners. Because of the location of most redds in lower
rivers, an embryo mortality of 70 to 90 percent is possible - due to siltation and decreased dissolved
oxygen transfer. Chum salmon benefit from high quality habitat conditions in lower rivers and
estuaries.
After emergence, fry do not rear in freshwater. Chum salmon fry migrate immediately (at
night) to the estuary for rearing. Out-migration is March through June. Juveniles remain near the
seashore during July and August. Juveniles spend from just half a year to tour years at sea.
Threats
31
-------
Factors for the decline in condition of these chum salmon ESUs were not included in the
listing document. Similar habitat, harvest, and water quality factors as previously discussed for other
threatened or endangered salmon species have affected the listed chum salmon ESUs' integrity.
Steelhead - (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Generic Information: (The following information is taken
from NOAA, NMFS - 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227; 63FR11797).
A notice of public hearings on proposed ESA listings and critical habitat is found in
63FR16955 (4/7/98).
Steelhead exhibit one of the most complex life histories of any salmonid species. Steelhead
may exhibit anadromy or freshwater residency. Resident forms are usually referred to as "rainbow"
or "redband" trout, while anadromous life forms are termed "steelhead".
Steelhead typically migrate to marine waters after spending 2 years in freshwater. They then
reside in marine waters for 2 ro 3 years prior to returning to their natal stream to spawn as 4- or 5-
year-olds. Depending on water temperature, steelhead eggs may incubate in redds for 1.5 to 4
months before hatching as alevins (larval stage dependent on yolk sac as food). Following yolk sac
absorption, alevins emerge from the gravel as young juveniles (fry) and begin actively feeding.
Juveniles rear in freshwater from 1 to 4 years, then migrate to the ocean as smolts.
Biologically, steelhead can be divided into two reproductive ecotypes, based on their state
of sexual maturity at the time of river entry and the duration of their spawning migration. These two
ecotypes are termed "stream maturing" and "ocean maturing". Stream maturing steelhead return
to freshwater in a sexually immature condition and require several months to mature and spawn.
Ocean maturing steelhead enter freshwater with well-developed gonads and spawn shortly after river
entry. These two reproductive ecotypes are more commonly referred to by their season of freshwater
entry (i.e., summer and winter steelhead).
Two major genetic groups or "subspecies" of steelhead occur on the west coast of the United
States: a coastal group and an inland group, separated on the Fraser and Columbia River Basins by
the Cascade crest. Historically, steelhead likely inhabited most coastal streams in Washington,
Oregon, and California, as well as many inland streams in these states and Idaho. However, during
this century, over 23 indigenous, naturally-reproducing stocks of steelhead are believed to have been
extirpated, and many more are thought to be in decline in numerous coastal and inland streams.
Threats
Factors contributing to the decline of specific steelhead ESUs are discussed under each ESU.
General information for west coast steelhead is summarized here. Forestry, agriculture, mining, and
urbanization have degraded, simplified, and fragmented habitat. Water diversions for agriculture.
flood control, domestic, and hydropower purposes have greatly reduced or eliminated historically
accessible habitat. Washington and Oregon's wetlands are estimated to have diminished by one-
third. Loss of habitat complexity as seen in the decrease of abundance of large, deep pools due to
sedimentation and loss of pool-forming structures has also adversely affected west coast steelhead
(an 80 percent loss for Oregon).
32
-------
Steelhead are not generally targeted in commercial fisheries but do support an important
recreational fishery throughout their range. A particular problem occurs in the main stem of the
Columbia River where listed steelhead from the Middle Columbia River ESU are subject to the same
fisheries as unlisted, hatchery-produced steelhead, chinook and coho salmon. Infectious disease and
predation also take their toll on steelhead. Introductions of non-native species and habitat
modifications have resulted in increased predator populations in numerous river systems. Federal
and state land management practices have not been effective in stemming the decline in west coast
steelhead.
Snake River Basin Steelhead (SRB) (Oncorhynchus mykiss): (The following information is taken
from NOAA, NMFS - 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227; and 62FR43937). Threatened status ID, OR,
WA 8/18/97, 62FR43937.
This inland steelhead ESU occupies the Snake River Basin of southeast Washington,
northeast Oregon and Idaho. A final listing status of threatened was issued on 18 August 1997
(62FR43937) for the spawning range upstream from the confluence with the Columbia River. No
official critical habitat is designated. The Snake River flows through terrain that is warmer and drier
on an annual basis than the upper Columbia Basin or other drainages to the north. Geologically, the
land forms are older and much more eroded than most other steelhead habitat. Collectively, the
environmental factors of the Snake River Basin result in a river that is warmer and more turbid, with
higher pH and alkalinity, than is found elsewhere in the range of inland steelhead.
ESU status. SRB steelhead all defined as "B-run" steelhead. Prior to Ice Harbor Dam
completion in 1962, there were no counts of Snake River basin naturally spawned steelhead. From
1949 to 1971 counts averaged about 40,000 steelhead for the Clearwater River. At Ice Harbor Dam,
counts averaged approximately 70,000 until 1970. The natural component for steelhead escapements
above Lower Granite Dam was about 9400 (2400 B-run) from 1990-1994. SRB steelhead recently
suffered severe declines in abundance relative to historical levels. Low run sizes over the last 10
years are most pronounced for naturally produced steelhead. The drop in parr densities characterizes
many river basins in this region as being underseeded relative to the carrying capacity of streams.
Declines in abundance have been particularly serious for B-run steelhead, increasing the risk that
some of the life history diversity may be lost from steelhead in this ESU.
Hatchery/natural interactions that occur for SRB steelhead are of concern because many of
the hatcheries use composite stocks that have been domesticated over a long period of time. The
primary indicator of risk to the ESU is declining abundance throughout the region.
SRB steelhead are summer steelhead. as are most inland steelhead, and comprise two groups,
A-run and B-run. based on migration timing, ocean-age, and adult size. SRB steelhead enter
freshwater from June to October and spawn in the following spring from March to May. A-run
steelhead are thought to be predominately 1-ocean (one year at sea), while B-run steelhead are
thought to be 2-ocean (IDFG 1994 IN: 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227). SRB steelhead usually smolt
at age 2- or 3-years (Whitt. 1954: BPA. 1992: Hassemer. 1992 IN: 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227).
The steelhead population from Duorshak National Fish Hatchery is the most divergent single
33
-------
population of inland steelhead based on genetic traits determined by protein electrophoresis; these
fish are consistently referred to as B-run.
Threats
Similar factors to those affecting other salmonids are contributing to the decline of SRB
steelhead. Widespread habitat blockage from hydrosystem management and potentially deleterious
genetic effects from straying and introgression from hatchery fish. The reduction in habitat capacity
resulting from large dams such as the Hells Canyon dam complex and Dworshak Dam is somewhat
mitigated by several river basins with fairly good production of natural steelhead runs.
Upper Columbia River Basin Steelhead (UCRB) (Oncorhynchus mykiss): (The following life
history information is taken from NOAA, NMFS - 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227; and 62FR43937).
Endangered WA 8/18/97, 62FR43937.
This inland steelhead ESU occupies the Columbia River Basin upstream from the Yakima
River, Washington, to the U.S./Canada border. The geographic area occupied by the ESU forms part
of the larger Columbia Basin Ecoregion. This ESU received an endangered listing on 18 August
1997 (62FR43937). Official critical habitat is not designated. Mullan et al. (1992) (IN: 50 CFR
Parts 222 and 227) described this area as a harsh environment for fish and stated that "it should not
be confused with more studied, benign, coastal streams of the Pacific Northwest.
ESU status. NMFS cites a pre-fishery run size estimate in excess of 5000 adults for
tributaries above Rock Island Dam. Runs may have already been depressed by lower Columbia
River fisheries at the time of the early estimates (1933-1959). Most of the escapement to naturally
spawning habitat within the range of this ESU is to the Wenatchee River, and the Methow and
Okanogan Rivers. The Entiat River also has a small spawning run. Steelhead in the Upper
Columbia river ESU continue to exhibit low abundances, both in absolute numbers and in relation
to numbers of hatchery fish throughout the region. Estimates of natural production of steelhead in
the ESU are will below replacement (approximately 0.3:1 adult replacement ratios estimated in the
Wenatchee and Entiat Rivers). The proportion of hatchery fish is high in these rivers (65-80 percent)
with extensive mixing of hatchery and natural stocks.
Life history characteristics for UCRB steelhead are similar to those of other inland steelhead
ESUs. However, some of the oldest smolt ages for steelhead, up to 7 years, are reported from this
ESU; this may be associated with the cold stream temperatures (Mullan et al., 1992 IN: 50 CFR
Parts 222 and 227). Based on limited data available from adult fish, smolt age in this ESU is
dominated by 2-year-olds. Steelhead from the Wenatchee and Entiat Rivers return to freshwater
after 1 year in salt water, whereas Methow River steelhead are primarily 2-ocean resident (i.e., 2
years in salt water) (Howell et al.. 1985 IN: 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227).
In an effort to preserve fish runs affected by Grand Coulee Dam (blocked fish passage in
1939). all anadromous fish migrating upstream were trapped at Rock Island Dam (Rkm 729) from
1939 through 1943 and cither released to spawn in tributaries between Rock Island and Grand
Coulee Dams or spawned in hatcheries and the offspring released in that area (Mullan et al.. 1992;
Chapman et al.. 1994 IN: 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227). Through this process, stocks of all
34
-------
anadromous salmonids, including steelhead, which historically were native to several separate sub-
basins above Rock Island Dam. were randomly redistributed among tributaries in the Rock Island-
Grand Coulee reach. Exactly how this has affected stock composition of steelhead is unknown.
Threats
Habitat degradation, juvenile and adult mortality in the hydrosystem, and unfavorable
environmental conditions in both marine and freshwater habitats have contributed to the declines and
represent risk factor for the future. Harvest in lower river fisheries and genetic homogenization from
composite broodstock collection are other factors that may contribute significant risk to the Upper
Columbia ESU.
Middle Columbia Basin Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss): Proposed threatened status WA,
OR 3/10/98, 63FR11797. (The following life history information is taken from 63FR11797.)
After a comprehensive status review of West Coast steelhead populations in Washington and
Oregon, the NMFS identified 15 ESUs. On 3/10/98 the Middle Columbia River steelhead ESU was
proposed as threatened (63FR11797). The middle Columbia area includes tributaries from above
(and excluding) the Wind River in Washington and the Hood River in Oregon, upstream to, and
including the Yakima River, in Washington. Steelhead of the Snake River Basin are excluded.
There is no official critical habitat designation.
ESU status. Current population sizes are substantially lower than historic levels, especially
in the rivers with the largest steelhead runs in the ESU, the John Day, Deschutes, and Yakima
Rivers. At least two extinctions of native steelhead runs in the ESU have occurred (the Crooked and
Metolius Rivers, both in the Deschutes River Basin). In addition, NMFS remains concerned about
the widespread long- and short-term downward trends in population abundance throughout the ESU.
Genetic differences between inland and coastal steelhead are well established, although some
uncertainty remains about the exact geographic boundaries of the two forms in the Columbia River
(63FR11801). All steelhead in the Columbia River Basin upstream from The Dalles Dam are
summer-run, inland steelhead. Life history information for steelhead of this ESU indicates that most
middle Columbia River steelhead smolt at two years and spend one to two years in salt water (i.e.,
1-ocean and 2-ocean fish, respectively) prior to re-entering freshwater, where they may remain up
to a year before spawning. Within this ESU, the Klickitat River is unusual in that it produces both
summer and winter steelhead. and the summer steelhead are dominated by 2-ocean steelhead,
whereas most other rivers in this region produce about equal number of both 1- and 2-ocean
steelhead.
Threats
The recent and dramatic increase in the percentage of hatchery fish in natural escapement in
the Deschutes River Basin is a significant risk to natural steelhead in this ESU. Coincident with this
increase in the percentage of strays has been a decline in the abundance of native steelhead in the
Deschutes River.
Lower Columbia Basin Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss): (The following life history information
35
-------
is taken from NOAA, NMFS - 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227). Threatened WA, OR 3/19/98,
63FR13347 and 7/17/98, 63FR32996.
This coastal steelhead ESU occupies tributaries to the Columbia River between the Cowlitz
and Wind Rivers in Washington and the Willamette and Hood Rivers in Oregon. Excluded are
steelhead in the upper Willamette River Basin above Willamette Falls, and steelhead from the Little
and Big White Salmon Rivers in Washington. The Lower Columbia River steelhead ESU is listed
as threatened (63FR13347,3/19/98). Official critical habitat is not designated. The lower Columbia
River has extensive intertidal mud and sand flats and differs substantially from estuaries to the north
and south. Rivers draining into the Columbia River have their headwaters in increasingly drier areas,
moving from west to east. Columbia River tributaries that drain the Cascade mountains have
proportionally higher flows in late summer and early fall than rivers on the Oregon coast.
ESU status. Steelhead populations are at low abundance relative to historical levels, placing
this ESU at risk due to random fluctuations in genetic and demographic parameters that are
characteristic of small populations. There have been almost universal, and in many cases dramatic,
declines in steelhead abundance since the mid-1980s in both winter- and summer-runs. Genetic
mixing with hatchery stocks have greatly diluted the integrity of native steelhead in the ESU.
NMFS is unable to identify any natural populations of steelhead in the ESU that could be considered
"healthy".
Steelhead populations in this ESU are of the coastal genetic group (Schreck et al. 1986,
Chapman et al., 1994 IN: 50CFR Parts 222 and 227), and a number of genetic studies have shown
that they are part of a different ancestral lineage than inland steelhead from the Columbia River
Basin. Genetic data also show steelhead in this ESU to be distinct from steelhead in the upper
Willamette River and coastal streams in Oregon and Washington. WDFW data show genetic affinity
between the Kalama, Wind, and Washougal River steelhead. These data show differentiation
between the Lower Columbia River ESU and the Southwest Washington and Middle Columbia
River Basin ESUs. The Lower Columbia ESU is composed of winter steelhead and summer
steelhead.
Threats
Habitat loss, hatchery steelhead introgression, and harvest are major contributors to the
decline the steelhead in this ESU. Details on factors contributing to the decline of west coast
steelhead are discussed above.
Upper Willamette River Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss): Proposed threatened status WA.
OR 3/10/98. 63FR11797. (The following life history information is taken from 63FR11797.)
After a comprehensive status review of West Coast steelhead populations Washington and
Oregon, the NMFS identified 15 ESUs. On 3/10/98 the Upper Willamette River steelhead ESU was
proposed as threatened (63FR11797). Official critical habitat has not been proposed. This coastal
F.SU occupies the Willamette River and its tributaries, upstream from Willamette Falls. The
Willamette River Basin is /oogeographically complex In addition to its connection to the Columbia
River, the Willamette River historical!v has had connections with coastal basins through stream
36
-------
capture and headwater transfer events.
Steelhead from the upper Willamette River are genetically distinct from those in the lower
river. Reproductive isolation from lower river populations may have been facilitated by Willamette
Falls, which is known to be a migration barrier to some anadromous salmonids. For example, winter
steelhead and spring chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha) occurred historically above the falls, but
summer steelhead, fall chinook salmon, and coho salmon did not.
ESU status. Steelhead in the Upper Willamette ESU are distributed in a few, relatively small,
natural populations. Over the past several decades, total abundance of natural late-migrating winter
steelhead ascending the Willamette Falls fish ladder has fluctuated several times over a range of
approximately 5,000-20,000 spawners. However, the last peak occurred in 1988, and this peak has
been followed by a steep and continuing decline. Abundance in each of the last five years (to 1998)
has been below 4,300 fish, and the run in 1995 was the lowest in 30 years. The low abundance,
coupled with potential risks associated with interactions between naturally spawned steelhead and
hatchery stocks is of great concern to NMFS.
The native steelhead of this basin are late-migrating winter steelhead, entering freshwater
primarily in March and April, whereas most other populations of west coast winter steelhead enter
freshwater beginning in November or December. As early as 1885, fish ladders were constructed
at Willamette Falls to aid the passage of anadromous fish. As technology improved, the ladders
were modified and rebuilt, most recently in 1971. These fishways facilitated successful introduction
of Skamania stock summer steelhead and early-migrating Big Creek stock winter steelhead to the
upper basin. Another effort to expand the steelhead production in the upper Willamette River was
the stocking of native steelhead in tributaries not historically used by that species. Native steelhead
primarily used tributaries on the east side of the basin, with cutthroat trout predominating in streams
draining the west side of the basin.
Nonanadroumous O mydiss are known to occupy the Upper Willamette River Basin;
however, most of these nonanadromous populations occur above natural and man-made barriers.
Historically, spawning by Upper Willamette River steelhead was concentrated in the North and
Middle Santiam River Basins. These areas are now largely blocked to fish passage by dams, and
steelhead spawning is distributed throughout more of the Upper Willamette River Basin than in the
past. Due to introductions of non-native steelhead stocks and transplantation of native stocks within
the basin, it is difficult to formulate a clear picture of the present distribution of native Upper
Willamette River steelhead. and their relationship to nonanadromous and possibly residualized O.
mykiss withing the basin.
Threats
Habitat loss, hatchery steelhead introgression. and harvest are major contributors to the
decline the steelhead in this ESU. Details on factors contributing to the decline of west coast
steelhead are discussed above.
Oregon Coast (OC) Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss): (The following life history information
is taken from NMFS 1996 and NOAA. NMFS - 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227. and 63FR13347).
37
-------
Proposed threatened OR 8/18/97, 62FR43974. Listing Not Warranted; Candidate status OR
3/19/98, 63FR13347.
This coastal steelhead ESU occupies river basins on the Oregon coast north of Cape Blanco,
excluding rivers and streams that are tributaries of the Columbia River. Oregon Coast steelhead are
under a proposed listing as threatened (8/9/97 61FR41541 with a six month extension invoked on
8/18/97 62FR43937 - under West Coast Steelhead). On 3/19/98 (63FR13347) the NMFS
determined that the Oregon Coast, KJamath Mountains Province (KMP), and Northern California
ESUs did not warrant listing at that time. This ESU warrants classification as candidate species and
NMFS will reevaluate the status of the ESU within four years to determine whether listing is
warranted. Official critical habitat designation has not been made. Most rivers in this area drain
the Coast Range mountains, have a single peak in flow in December or January, and have relatively
low flow during summer and early fall. The coastal region receives fairly high precipitation levels,
and the vegetation is dominated by Sitka spruce and western hemlock. Upwelling off the Oregon
coast is much more variable and generally weaker than areas south of Cape Blanco. While marine
conditions off the Oregon and Washington coasts are similar, the Columbia River has greater
influence north of its mouth, and the continental shelf becomes broader off the Washington coast.
Compared with other areas, populations of nonanadromous O. mykiss are relatively
uncommon on the Oregon coast, occurring primarily above migration barriers and in the Umpqua
River Basin (Kostow 1995 IN: 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227).
ESU status. See below under "Population trends."
Little information is available regarding migration and spawn timing of natural steelhead
populations within this ESU. Age structure appears to be similar to other west coast steelhead,
dominated by 4-year-old spawners. Iteroparity (capable of spawning more than once before death)
is more common among Oregon coast steelhead than populations to the north.
Spawn timing. The OC steelhead ESU is primarily composed of winter steelhead. There are
only two native stocks of summer steelhead in this ESU (one of which is in the Umpqua River basin
stock) (Busby et al. 1996). Limited areas have introduced hatchery runs. Iteroparity is more
common among OC steelhead than populations to the north.
Spawning habitat and temperature. Steelhead enter streams and arrive at the spawning
ground weeks or even months before they spawn and are vulnerable to disturbance and predation;
therefore, in stream and riparian cover is required. It appears that summer steelhead occur where
habitat is not fully utilized by winter steelhead (often in upstream areas impassable to winter-run
steelhead); consequentially, summer steelhead usually spawn farther upstream than winter steelhead
(Wither. 1966; Behnke 1992). Typically, spawning and initial rearing takes place in small.
moderate-gradient (3-5 percent) tributary stream (Nickelson et al.. 1992a). Steelhead spawn in 3.9-
9.4 degree C. water.
Hatching and emergence. Steelhead eggs incubate for 1.5 to 4 months depending on water
temperature (61 FR 41 542 8/9'%). Bjomn and Reiser (1 Wh observed a 50 percent hatch rate after
38
-------
only 26 days at 12 degrees C. After two to three weeks, in late spring, and following yolk sac
absorption, alevins emerge from the gravel as fry and begin actively feeding along stream margins
(Nickelson et al., 1992a). Productive steelhead habitat is characterized by complexity, primarily in
the form of large and small wood. Some older juveniles move downstream to rear in larger
tributaries and mainstem rivers (Nickelson et al., 1992a).
Parr movement and smoltification. Steelhead prefer water temperatures from 12 to 15
degrees C. (Reeves et al., 1987). Juveniles rear in freshwater from one to four years, then in the
spring, migrate to the ocean as smolts (61 FR 41542 8/9/96). OC winter steelhead populations smolt
after two years in freshwater (Busby et al., 1996).
Estuary and ocean migration. Steelhead typically reside in marine waters for two or three
years prior to returning to their natal stream to spawn as four- or five-year olds (61 FR 41542
8/9/96). Juvenile steelhead tend to migrate offshore during their first summer rather than moving
along the coast belt as salmon do. During the fall and winter, juveniles move southward and
eastward (Ham and Dell 1986). OC steelhead tend to be north-migrating (Nicholas and Hankin,
1988; Pearcy et al., 1990,;Pearcy 1992).
Food. Juvenile steelhead feed on a diversity of aquatic and terrestrial insects (Chapman and
Bjornn, 1969). These fish hold territories close to the substratum where flows are low and
sometimes counter to the main stream. From these localities, juveniles can foray up into surface
currents to take drifting food (Kalleberg, 1958).
Population trends. Production of steelhead in nine Oregon coastal river basins (Coquille
River north) was probably about 100,000 wild adults annually from 1930-1939. Contemporary
(1980s) production in the same basins is about half the previous figure (Nickelson et al. 1992a). The
OC steelhead ESU, although not presently in danger of extinction, is likely to become endangered
in the foreseeable future (Busby et al., 1996).
Threats
Factors contributing to the decline of steelhead in this ESU include those discussed above.
Substantial contribution of non-native hatchery fish to natural escapements in most basins has been
a particularly negative influence on native populations.
Klamath Mountain Province (KMP) Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss): (The following life
history information is taken from NMFS 1996 and NOAA, NMFS - 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227; and
from61FR41541 and 63FR13347). Proposed threatened OR 8/18/97. 62FR43974. Listing Not
Warranted; Candidate status OR 3/19/98. 63FR13347.
This coastal steelhead ESU occupies river basins form the Elk River in Oregon to the
Klamath and Trinity Rivers in California, inclusive. The KMP ESU steelhead is proposed-
threatened (61FR41541. 8.9 96; six month extension invoked on 8/18/97. 62FR43937 - under West
Coast Steelhead). On 3 19 l)8 (63FR13347) the NMFS determined that the Klamath Mountain
Province F.SU did not warrant listing at that time. This FSLJ warrants classification as candidate
species and NMFS will ree\aluate the status of the ESl.: within four years to determine whether
39
-------
listing is warranted. No official critical habitat has been designated. Geologically, the KMP is not
as erosive as the Franciscan formation terrain south of the Klamath River Basin. Dominant
vegetation along the coast is redwood forest, while some interior basins are much drier than
surrounding areas and are characterized by many endemic species. Elevated stream temperatures
are a factor affecting steelhead and other species in some of the larger river basins. With the
exception of major river basins such as the Rogue and Klamath, most rivers in this region have a
short duration of peak flows. Strong and consistent coastal upwelling begins at about Cape Blanco
and continues south into central California, resulting in a relatively productive nearshore marine
environment.
ESU status. See below under "Population trends."
In migration. Variations in migration timing exist between populations. Summer steelhead
spawn in January and February and winter steelhead generally spawn in April and May (Bamhart,
1986). The Klamath River has both winter- and summer-run steelhead.
Spawning and rearing. Steelhead spawn in cool, clear streams featuring suitable gravel size,
depth, and current velocity. Steelhead are iteroparous, however, spawning more than twice before
death is rare. Intermittent streams may be used for spawning (Barnhart, 1986; Everest, 1973).
Steelhead eggs incubate between February and June (Bell, 1991), and typically emerge from the
gravel two to three weeks after hatching (Bamhart, 1986). After emerging from the gravel, steelhead
fry usually inhabit shallow water along perennial stream banks. Older fry establish and defend
territories. Juvenile steelhead migrate little during their first summer and occupy a range of habitats
featuring moderate to high velocity and variable depths (Bisson et al., 1988). The young fish feed
on a wide variety of aquatic and terrestrial insects; the emerging fry are potential prey for older
juvenile steelhead. Juveniles spend one to four years in freshwater before smolting and migrating
to sea in March and April (Barnhart, 1986). Apparently, most steelhead migrate north and south in
the ocean along the continental shelf (Barnhart, 1986).
Steelhead inhabit the ocean for one to four years. Variations in this pattern include the
unusual "half-pounder". These steelhead return to freshwater after only a few months at sea, spend
the winter in freshwater and then return to sea for several months before returning to freshwater to
spawn. Half-pounders occur over a relatively small geographic area of southern Oregon and
northern California. (Barnhart. 1986).
Population trends. Historical information on KMP steelhead abundance is scarce. The
ODFW description of steelhead runs list only the Winchuck River as "healthy" (Nickelson et al..
1992a). For other rivers, the health of the steelhead runs varies from "low but stable" to "depressed"
(for most rivers) to "near extinction". Barnhart (1994) noted that wild stocks of Klamath River
steelhead may he at all time low levels.
Threats
Factors contributing to the decline ot steelhead in this HSU include those discussed above.
Additionally, most natural populations ot" steelhead within the area of this ESU experience a
substantial infusion ot'naturally spawning hatchery fish each year.
40
-------
Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) - Columbia River Basin stock: Threatened OR, WA, ID
6/10/98, 62FR32268. (The following life history information from 62FR32268, 63FR31693 and
63FR31647; and from various USFWS "News Releases").
At the time of the USFWS threatened listing (6/10/98, 63FR 31647) of this bull trout ESU,
official critical habitat was not designated. The Columbia River population segment is from the
northwestern United States and British Columbia, Canada. This population segment, comprised of
386 bull trout populations in Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington with additional populations
in British Columbia is threatened by habitat degradation, passage restrictions at dams, and
competition form non-native lake and brook trout. The Columbia River population segment includes
the entire Columbia River basin and all its tributaries, excluding the isolated bull trout populations
found in the Jarbridge River in Nevada. Bull trout populations within the Columbia River
population segment have declined from historic levels and are generally considered to be isolated
and remnant. See the following section on bull trout, Klamath Basin stock, for life history
information on bull trout.
ESU status. Bull trout are estimated to have occupied about 60 percent of the Columbia
River Basin, and presently occur in 45 percent of the estimated historical range. The Columbia
River population segment is composed of 141 sub-populations.
Threats
Threats to bull trout include habitat degradation and fragmentation, blockage of migratory
corridor, poor water quality, past fisheries management practices, and the introduction of non-native
species such as brown, lake, and brook trout.
Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) - Klamath Basin stock. Threatened status OR 6/10/98,
63FR31647. (The following life history information is taken from 62FR32268, 63FR3I693 and
63FR31647; and from various USFWS "News Releases").
The Klamath River population segment from south-central Oregon is now listed as
threatened. This population segment, comprised of seven bull trout populations is threatened by
habitat degradation, irrigation diversions, and the presence of non-native brook trout. Bull trout in
the Klamath River drainage are discrete because of physical isolation due to the Pacific Ocean and
several small mountain ranges in central Oregon. Perhaps the most significant threat to the
remaining bull trout populations in the Klamath Basin is hybridization with introduced brook trout.
The USFWS finds that designation of critical habitat (as per section 3 of the ESA) for this species
is not determinable at this time.
ESU status. Limited historical references indicate that bull trout in Oregon were once widely
spread in 12 basins in the Klamath and Columbia river systems. No bull trout have been historically
observed in Oregon's coastal systems. Bull trout occurred in I 5 separate drainages between 1948
and 1^79. By 1989. the distribution of the species had been restricted to 10 streams in the basin.
The most recent data provided in the 1994 record suggested that in 1991. only seven segregated
41
-------
resident populations still occurred in the basin and were confined to headwater streams in the
Sprague, Sycan, and Upper Klamath Lake sub-basins. The largest areas occupied by any of the
seven populations is 2.5 stream miles, and basinwide. only 12.5 miles of stream is inhabited by bull
trout. Populations in the Upper KJamath Lake subbasin are at precarious abundance levels, and at
a high risk of extinction. The remaining populations are disconnected from each other, and are
considered to be isolated, remnant groups from a historically larger, more diverse metapopulation;
the populations are at a moderate or high risk of extinction.
Although anadromy is not found in Oregon, Bond (1992) believed that it was an important
part of the life history and historical distribution patterns, and acted as a mechanism for coastal
distribution. The bull trout in Oregon have three life-history patterns represented by resident, fluvial,
and adfluvial fish. Resident bull trout are believed to spend their entire lives in the same stream in
which they hatched. Resident juvenile bull trout are thought to generally confine their migrations
to and within their natal stream. Fluvial populations generally migrate between smaller steams used
for spawning and early juvenile rearing and larger rivers used for adult rearing. Fluvial populations
can switch to adfluvial under some circumstances. Adfluvial populations generally migrate between
smaller streams used for spawning and juvenile rearing and lakes or reservoirs used for adult rearing.
Adfluvial individuals can attain sizes over 9 kg in Oregon.
Bull trout display a high degree of sensitivity at all life stages to environmental disturbance
and have more specific habitat requirements than many other salmonids. Bull trout growth, survival,
and long-term population persistence appear to be particularly dependent upon five habitat
characteristics: (1) cover, (2) channel stability, (3) substrate composition, (4) temperature, and (5)
migratory corridors.
Spawning/Temperatures. Bull trout, being a resident species means that both adults and
juveniles are present in the steams throughout the year. Bull trout adults may begin to migrate from
feeding to spawning ground in the spring and migrate slowly throughout the summer (Pratt IN
ODEQ, 1994). They spawn in later summer through fall (August-November). Summer
temperatures are, therefore, a concern for migration and for spawning in the late summer and early
fall. These trout are stenothermal, requiring a narrow range of temperature conditions to reproduce
and survive. Bull trout densities are highest at water temperatures of 12 degrees C. or less; no bull
trout were found during surveys when water temperatures were above 18 degrees C. (Shepard et al.
1984; ODEQ, 1994). Ratliff (1992) found in the Metolius River, Oregon, that bull trout spawning
and the initial 1-year juvenile rearing is limited to streams with temperatures of about 4.5 degrees
C. Optimum incubation temperatures are 2-4 degrees C. Such strict temperature tolerances
predispose bull trout to declines from any activity occurring in a watershed that leads to increased
stream temperatures. From a study of the distribution of juvenile bull trout in a thermal gradient of
a plunge pool in Granite Creek. Idaho, these fish chose the coldest water available (8-9 degrees C.).
Bonneau.
Hatching and Rearing. Hatching is completed after 100-145 days usually in winter (Pratt.
1992). Bull trout alevins require at least 65-90 days after hatching to absorb their yolk sacs (Pratt.
19Q2). They remain uithm the interstices of the streambed as fry for up to three weeks before filling
their air bladder, reaching lengths of 25-28 mm. and emerging from the streambed in late April
42
-------
(McPhail and Murray 1979, Pratt 1992). An extremely long period of residency in the gravel (200)
or more days makes bull trout especially vulnerable to fine sediments and water quality degradation.
Juvenile bull trout are closely associated with the streambed and are found immediately
above, on, or within the streambed (Pratt 1984, 1992). Goetz (1991) and Pratt (1984, 1992) reported
that young bull trout most frequently used woody debris as cover. As fish mature they seek out deep
water habitat types such as pools and deep runs (Pratt, 1984; Shepard et al., 1984).
Bull trout less than 110 mm feed on aquatic insects while larger bull trout are primarily
piscivorous (Shepard et al., 1984). Juvenile bull trout may migrate from natal areas during spring,
summer or fall; almost all migration is nocturnal (Pratt 1992).
Adult Migration. Adfluvial bull trout feed primarily on fish and can exhibit extraordinary
growth rates (Shepard et al., 1984; Pratt, 1992). Resident bull trout have much slower growth rates.
Adult bull trout rearing and migration patterns are not well documented in Oregon except for the
Metolius River and Lake Billy Chinook system. Bull trout migration typically starts in mid-July;
fish move quickly upriver and reside near the mouth of the intended spawning tributary. Migration
into the spawning tributary, spawning, and migration back to the mainstem usually takes one month.
Surveys in Oregon document bull trout spawning from late July through at least October; this pattern
is typical of Metolius River bull trout. Most spawning occurs in cold headwaters or spring-fed
streams. Spawning adults and initial juvenile rearing is limited to very cold (approximately 4.5
degrees C.) spring-fed tributaries to the Metolius River (Ratliff 1992). Annual and alternate year
spawning is documented for bull trout (Shepard et al. 1984).
Habitat. The habitat requirements of bull trout vary by age and season of the year (Rieman
and Mclntyre, 1993). Young-of-the-year fish initially seek stream margins with heterogenous
habitat structure. Bull trout appear to have more specific habitat requirements than other salmonids.
Although bull trout may be present throughout large river basins, spawning and rearing fish are often
found only in a portion of available stream reaches (Fraley and Shepard, 1989; Shepard et al., 1984,
Mullan et al., 1992). Where this habitat is not present or has been lost, juvenile bull trout
populations are virtually eliminated.
Seven habitat variables were found to be significant (P < 0.0001) descriptors of the presence
of juvenile bull trout: (1) high levels of shade, (2) high levels of undercut banks, (3) large woody
debris volume, (4) relatively large pieces of woody debris, (5) high levels of gravel in riffles, (6) low
levels of fine sediment in riffles, and (7) low levels of bank erosion. Migratory corridors are needed
to tie wintering, summering, or rearing areas to spawning areas as well as allowing the movement
for interactions of local populations within possible metapopulations.
Threats
Threats to bull trout include habitat degradation and fragmentation, blockage of migratory
corridors, poor water quality, past fisheries management practices, and the introduction of non-native
species such as brown, lake, and brook trout. Sec also. "FSIJ status".
Lahontan cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki henshawf): (The following life history
43
-------
information is taken from ODFW (1996), Species at Risk; and 40FR29863 ). Threatened status OR
7/16/75,40FR29863.
The Lahontan cutthroat trout is listed as threatened under ESA (35FR16047 10/13/70,
40FR29863 7/16/75). Critical habitat has not been designated.
The range of Lahontan cutthroat trout is primarily in streams of the Lahontan and Coyote
Lake basins in southeast Oregon. These fish inhabit isolated desert streams. Some populations of
this subspecies inhabited lakes where they attained large size. This subspecies has been reintroduced
into several stream systems throughtout the Lahontan Basin, Pyramid and Walker Lakaes.
Restoration of habitat and reintroduction in several stream systems allowed USFWS to change the
ESA listing from endangered to threatened.
The following information is from Jones, et al. (1998): The Coyote Lake basin has the only
native population of Lahontan cutthroat trout in Oregon that is without threat of hybridization and
is broadly disributed throughtout a drainage. In October 1994, the number of Lahontan cutthroat in
the basin was estimated at 39,500 fish, and fish were limited to 56km of stream habitat available
(approximately 25,000 in the Whitehorse Creek drainage and about 15,000 cutthroat occupied the
Willow Creek drainage). Distribution was limited by dry channels and thermal and physical barriers
to movement, which created two disconnected populations in the Willow Creek and Whitehorse
Creek drainages and influenced population density, structure, and life history.
The overall status of Lahontan cutthroat trout is unknown. Riparian and upland habitats have
been degraded by intensive grazing by cattle and sheep during the past 130 years. Drought and cold
periods during the past decade have further affected the quantity and quality of the aquatic haabitat.
The ability of local populations to interact is :rnportant to the long-term viability of a
metapopulation. The population of Lahontan cutthroat in the Whitehorse Creek subbasin has been
fragmented by numerous barriers into four discreet local populations. The Willow Creek subbasin
is largely free of migration barriers. Seasonally, all streams in the drainages have disjunct
populations because of high summer temperatures (>26°C) or dry channels.
Threats
Lahontan cutthroat trout are listed as threatened under the ESA because of poor habitat
conditions including channel modifications, dewatering, passage barriers and loss of riparian
vegetation. Introgression with rainbow trout and displacement by introduced brown trout and brook
trout have extripated Lahontan cutthroat in several stream systems. Brook trout are a strong
competitor for food and space with the Lahontan cutthroat.
Refer to the following discussion for more information about cutthroat trout life histories.
L'mpqua River (l;R) Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarki clarki ): (The following life history
information is taken from NMFS 1996: 61 FR41514 and 63FR1388). Endangered status OR 8/9/96,
61FR41514.
44
-------
UR cutthroat trout were listed as an endangered species on 9 August 1996 (61FR41514).
Critical habitat designation was finalized on 9 January 1998 (63FR1388).and includes all river
reaches accessible to listed Umpqua River cutthroat trout from a straight line connecting the west
end of the North Jetty and including all Umpqua River estuarine areas (including the Smith River)
and tributaries proceeding upstream from the Pacific Ocean to the confluence of the North and South
Umpqua Rivers; the North Umpqua River, including all tributaries, from its confluence with the
mainstem Umpqua River to Soda Springs dam; the South Umpqua River, including all tributaries,
from its confluence with the mainstem Umpqua River to its headwater (including Cow Creek,
tributary to the South Umpqua River). Critical habitat includes aJl waterways below longstanding,
naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural water falls in existence for over several hundred years).
Critical habitat includes the bottom and water of the waterways and adjacent riparian zone. The
riparian zone includes those areas within 300 feet (91.4m) of the normal line of the high water mark
of the stream channel or from the shoreline of a standing body of water. NMFS recognized that the
Umpqua River estuary is an essential rearing area and migration corridor for listed Umpqua River
cutthroat trout, and maintained the designation of the estuary as critical habitat in the final rule.
ESU status. See population trends, below.
Cutthroat trout evolved to exploit habitats least preferred by other salmonid species (Johnston
1981). The life history of UR cutthroat trout is probably the most complex and flexible of any
Pacific salmonid. Three life history forms are in the Umpqua River basin. The current freshwater
distribution of anadromous and potamodromous life forms is thought to be limited primarily to the
mainstem, Smith, and North Umpqua Rivers. Resident cutthroat trout appear to remain broadly
distributed throughout the Umpqua River basin. Unlike other anadromous salmonids, sea-run forms
of the coastal cutthroat trout do not overwinter in the ocean and only rarely make long extended
migrations across large bodies of water. They migrate in the nearshore marine habitat and usually
remain within 10 km of land.
Anadromous cutthroat trout. Unlike other anadromous salmonids, anadromous cutthroat
trout do not over-winter in the ocean and only rarely make long extended migrations across large
bodies of water. They migrate in the near shore marine habitat and usually remain within 10 km of
land (Sumner, 1972; Giger ,1972, Jones, 1976; Johnston, 1981). While most anadromous cutthroat
trout enter seawater as two- or three-year-old fish, some may remain in fresh water for up to five
years before entering the ocean (Sumner, 1972; Giger, 1972).
Potamodromous cutthroat trout. The potamodromous life form undertakes freshwater
migrations of varying length without entering the ocean, and are sometimes referred to as "fluvial".
Potamodromous cutthroat trout migrate only into rivers and lakes (Nicholas, 1978; Tomasson. 1978;
Moring et al.. 1986: Trotter. 1989). even when they have access to the ocean (Tomasson 1978). The
potamodromous life form is most common in rivers with physical barriers to anadromous fish
(Johnson et al.. 1994). but have also been documented below barriers in the Rogue River (Tomasson
.1978) and the Umpqua River (Johnson et al.. 1994).
Resident cutthroat trout. The resident lite form does not migrate long distances: instead.
the fish remain in upper tributaries near spawning and rearing areas and maintain small home
45
-------
territories throughout their life cycle (Trotter, 1989). Resident cutthroat trout have been observed
in the upper Umpqua River drainage (Roth 1937; ECO and OSGC, 1946; ODFW, 1993). During
a radio tagging study in three tributaries of Rock Creek (North Umpqua River drainage), Waters
(1993) found that fish smaller than 180 mm moved about an average total distance of 27 meters of
stream length during the study. Larger fish explored an average total distance of about 166 meters.
Spawning and rearing. Cutthroat trout generally spawn in the tails of pools located in small
tributaries at the upper limit of coho salmon and steelhead spawning and rearing sites. Stream
conditions are typically low stream gradient. December to May encompasses most spawning times
with a peak in February (Trotter, 1989).
Cutthroat trout are iteroparous and may spawn every year for at least five years (Giger, 1972)
and some remain in freshwater for at least a year before returning to seawater (Giger, 1972;
Tomasson, 1978). Post-spawning mortality is possible. Eggs begin to hatch after one-and-a-half
to two months. Alevins remain in the redds for a few more weeks and emerge as fry between March
ar.J June.
Parr movements. After emergence from redds, cutthroat trout juveniles generally remain in
upper tributaries until they are one year of age, then extensive movements in the stream begin.
Directed downstream movement by parr can happen during any month but usually begins with the
first spring rains. Some parr from the Alsea River drainage entered the estuary and remained there
over the summer; these fish did not smolt. Upstream movement of juveniles from estuaries and
mainstem to tributaries begins with the onset of winter freshets during November, December, and
January; these one year and older fish averaged less than 200 mm in length.
Smoltification. Time of initial seawater entry of ocean-bound Umpqua River smolts begins
as early as March, peaks in May and June, tappers-off by July, with a few stragglers through
October. For other "less protected" Oregon coastal areas, cutthroat trout tend to migrate at an older
age (age three and four). It is unlikely that Umpqua River cutthroat trout migrate from the upper
basin areas to the estuary considering the distance and warm water temperatures (average - mid 20s
C. at Winchester Dam).
Estuary and ocean migration. Migratory patterns of sea-run cutthroat trout differ from
Pacific salmon in two major ways: few, if any. cutthroat overwinter in the ocean, and; the fish do
not usually make long open-ocean migrations. Cutthroat trout, whether initial or seasoned migrants
average approximately 90 days at sea.
Adult freshwater migrations. For the Lmpqua River, cutthroat trout begin upstream
migrations in late June and continue through January (ODFW. 1993).
Food. In streams, drifting terrestrial and aquatic insects are the cutthroat trouts' food source.
Small fish and invertebrates constitute the diet in the marine environment: forage areas are around
gravel beaches, off the mouths of small creeks and beach trickles, around oyster beds, and patches
of eel iirass.
46
-------
Populations. Numbers of returning anadromous UR cutthroat adults passing Winchester
Dam on the North Umpqua River varied between a few score to nearly 2000 in the 1940s-1950s.
The numbers jumped up a bit during the 1960s-1970s with the artificial release of smolts to augment
the population. By the late 1980s to the present, annual adult counts ranged only between a few to
some dozens of fish.
Threats
Factors for the decline of this subspecies include: habitat degradation as a result of logging;
recreational fishing; predation by marine mammals, birds, and native and non-native fish species;
adverse environmental conditions resulting from natural factors such as droughts, floods, and poor
ocean conditions; non-point and point pollution source pollution caused by agriculture and urban
development; disease outbreaks caused by hatchery introductions and warm water temperatures;
mortality resulting from unscreened irrigation inlets; competition in estuaries between native and
hatchery cutthroat trout; cumulative loss and alteration of estuarine areas; and loss of habitat caused
by the construction of dams.
Sea-run Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarki clarki): (The following life history information
is taken from 59FR46808 and 63FR13832). Petition to List status OR 3/23/98, 63FR13832.
Very little information about this subspecies' characteristics has been published in the
Federal Register. Sea-run cutthroat trout (called Coastal cutthroat trout by ODFW; Mary Hansen,
ODFW, pers. com., 8/25/98). Another subspecies that has a petition to list under the ESA is O. c.
lewisi, the West Slope cutthroat trout. This latter subspecies is not "coastal"; in Oregon, it is
restricted to the John Day Basin (Mary Hansen, ODFW, pers. com., 8/25/98). A general habitat
definition for the Oregon segment of west coast sea-run cutthroat trout is the stream systems on the
west slope of the Coast Range mountains, exclusive of the Umpqua River system.
On September 12, 1994, NMFS issued a Notice of finding; initiation of status reviews, and
request for comments on several salmonid species including sea-run (anadromous) cutthroat trout.
NMFS elected to complete the status review for sea-run cutthroat trout last (after the other six
salmonids in the notice). In the March 23, 1998 notice of finding and request for information about
critical habitat for sea-run cutthroat throughout its range in California, Oregon, and Washington
(63FR13832), NMFS stated that the west coast sea-run cutthroat was currently under status review.
No life history or general habitat information was provided. Refer to the above discussion
on anadromous cutthroat trout for general life history information. It is reasonable to assume that
the ESU for this subspecies has experienced similar negative influences as other west coast
salmonids. Specific information on the health of the subspecies, or its rate of decline was not
included in the notices.
Hutton Spring tui chub (Gila bicolor ssp.): (The following life history information is taken from
Fed. Regis. 50:60. 28 March 1985; and USFWS Recovery Plan. 1998). Threatened status OR
3 2885. 50FR12302.
47
-------
There is very little information regarding the ecology of the Hutton mi chub. A small to
medium sized minnow, the Hutton Spring tui chub inhabits this spring and one nearby spring (part
of the Hutton spring system) in Lake County, south-central Oregon; critical habitat is not designated
under the ESA for this species.
Preferred habitat conditions for tui chub may be inferred from research on the tui chub from
the Upper Klamath basin which showed a thermal mean maximum of 32.2 +/- 0.2 degrees C. and
a DO mean minimum of 0.59 +/- 0.04 mg/1 (Castleberry & Cech, 1993). DO levels as low as 0.3
mg/1 have been measured in Upper Klamath Lake (Scoppetone, 1986). These figures should be
considered only as guidance since the most sensitive life stage may not have been tested and the
relative sensitivity of tui chub stocks from these geographically separate areas is unknown.
Examination of gut contents from Hutton tui chub showed this fish to be omnivorous with
a majority of food eaten being filamentous algae. It appears that dense aquatic algae are needed for
spawning and rearing of young.
Threats
Although the habitat quality of the primary spring is well maintained, the extremely limited
distribution in a water sparse area, naturally low population numbers (450, estimate), vulnerability
to introductions of exotic species, and threat of contamination from a toxic waste dump along the
southwest shore of Alkali Lake, are reasons for listing under the ESA as threatened (50FR12302,
3/28/85). Hutton Spring is fenced from livestock, however, the second spring is vulnerable to
damage by livestock and human activities. Occurring on private land, the Hutton tui chub is
threatened by actual or potential modification of its habitat.
Borax Lake chub (Gila boraxobius): (The following life history information is taken fromerpts
from USFWS (1987) Borax Lake chub recovery plan, and NBS Borax Lake and Borax Lake Chub
Study). Emergency endangered listing status on 5/28/80 (45FR35821), final endangered listing OR
10/5/82 (47FR43957).
The Borax Lake chub was listed as endangered under an emergency rule (45FR35821
5/28/80). The Borax Lake chub is endemic to Borax Lake and adjacent wetlands in the Alvord
Basin, Harney County, Oregon; this waterbody is officially designated as critical habitat under ESA.
The Borax Lake area is a part of the Great Basin physiographic province, and as such, is
characterized by an endorheic (i.e., internal) water drainage pattern. Critical habitat is officially
presented in 47FR43960 part 19.95(e). The lake is naturally fed from waters of several thermal
springs and is perched atop large sodium-berate deposits in the Alvord Desert. The temperature of
the springs is 35-40 degrees C.; lake temperatures vary from 17 to 35 degrees C. but are often 29 to
32 degrees C. Borax Lake has br6ad temperature fluctuations due to its large surface to volume ratio
(Scoppettone. 1995). The lake is less than one meter deep, 4.1 ha in size, with a pH of 7.3.
Borax Lake chubs appear to have a broad thermal tolerance. The fish avoid lake temperatures
above 343C In laboratory experiments. Borax Lake chub lose equilibrium in water above about
34.5° C. If adequate water levels in Borax Lake are not maintained, chubs are forced into potentially
lethal hot spring inflows at the bottom of the lake. Fish kills occurred when lake temperatures have
48
-------
locally exceeded 38° C. If adequate water levels in Borax Lake are not maintained, chubs are forced
into potentially lethal hot spring inflows at the bottom of the lake.
The Borax Lake chub is also recorded from Lower Borax Lake, the marsh area between
Borax and Lower Borax Lake, the smaller southern marsh, and adjacent ponds, as well as the
southwest outflow creek. In a survey of lake conditions from 1991-1993, DO measurements ranged
form 4.98 to 8.66 mg/1 and pH ranged from 7.3 to 7.9 (Scoppettone, 1995).
Early investigators considered the Borax Lake chub so distinct that the fish might be set apart
in a new genus. Because of the striking differentiation of these chubs, they were considered to be
geographically isolated from their nearest relatives in adjacent basins, since the Pliocene. The Borax
Lake chub was described as a dwarf (33-50 mm length, for typical adults) relative of the Alvord chub
endemic to Borax Lake. The Alvord chub is widespread in the basin. Given the relatively constant
thermal environment of Borax Lake, the Borax Lake chub spawns throughout the year (most
spawning occurs in March and April). Individual females may spawn twice annually.
Young-of-the-year are prominent in Borax Lake during May and June. They are most often
found in the very shallow coves around the margin of the lake. No young-of-the-year (YOY) have
been collected from Lower Borax Lake and are seldom observed in adjacent marshes, which
indicates that most if not all spawning occurs in Borax Lake. Most Borax Lake chub live
approximately one year. Adults are fairly evenly distributed throughout the lake, although their
primary foraging area appears to be the flocculent layer on the bottom of the lake (Scoppetone,
1995).
Borax Lake chubs are opportunistic omnivorcs following seasonal fluctuations. The
importance of diatoms and microcrustaceans in the diet increases substantially during winter, while
the consumption of terrestrial insects decreases dramatically. Chubs often pick foods from soft
bottom sediments, but also are observed feeding throughout the water columr. and at the surface.
Within the relatively simple food web in Borax Lake, the Borax Lake chub may function as a
"keystone" species controlling the structure in the invertebrate community of Borax Lake by feeding
on the most abundant species encountered.
Threats
Borax Lake is located above salt deposits on the valley floor which is quite fragile.
Modification of the lake perimeter due to the digging of irrigation channels, and the threat of
modified spring flows because of geothermal development, prompted action by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service under the ESA. The lake is now owned by the Nature Conservancy, so water
diversion for agriculture has ceased. There is interest in geothermal development within two
kilometers of Borax Lake, and the possibility that this development could reduce thermal spring
inflows to the lake, cooling lake temperatures and making them more conducive for the survival of
non-native fish that would out-compete the Borax Lake Chub. The Nature Conservancy, USFWS,
ODFW. and BLM have been working since 1983 to protect, maintain, and enhance habitat for Borax
Lake chub.
Oregon chub (Oregonichthys cramert): (The following life history information is taken from Fed.
Regis. 58:199. Oct. 18. 1993: and l.'SFWS draft recover, plan. 1998.). Endangered status OR
49
-------
10/18/93, 58FR53800.
The genus Oregonichthys is endemic to the Umpqua and Willamette Rivers. The Oregon
chub was formerly distributed throughout the lower elevation backwaters of the Willamette River
drainage. Known established populations are now primarily restricted to an 18.6 mile stretch of the
Middle Fork Willamette river.
The endangered-status ruling was issued on 10/18/93 (58FR53800). Official critical habitat
designation has not been made. The petitioners recommended for critical habitat all water and
tributaries of the Middle Fork of the Willamette River from the base of Dexter Dam upstream to its
confluence with the North Fork of the Middle Fork. In the early 1990s, two additional populations
were located, one downstream of the Dexter Dam within Elijah Bristow State Park and another in
a tributary of Lake Creek, Linn County. Surveys of other potential habitat areas were conducted.
Population estimates conducted in 1993-1994 ranged from 45 fish in Lower Dell Creek to 7500 in
East Fork Minnow Creek.
Habitat at the remaining population sites of the Oregon chub is typified by low- or zero-
velocity water flow conditions, depositional substrates, and abundant aquatic or overhanging riparian
vegetation. Spawning occurs from the end of April through early August when water temperatures
range from 16 to 28 degrees C. In the spring, larger males feed most heavily on copepods,
cladocerans, and chironomid larvae.
Threats
Decline of the Oregon chub is attributed to changes in, and elimination of, its backwater
habitats. The decline coincides with construction of flood control structures which have altered
historical flooding patterns and eliminated much of the river's braided channel pattern. Introduction
of non-indigenous species have also contributed to the Oregon chub's decline
Warner sucker (Catostomus warnerensis): (The following life history intoromation is taken, from
ODFW (1996), Species at Risk; and USFWS Recover Plan, 1998). Threatened status OR 9/27/85.
50FR39117.
The threatened status for the Warner sucker was published on 27 September 1985
(50FR39117). Critical habitat is designated (50FR39122-39123) and includes: sections of
Twelvemile and Twentymile Creeks; Spillway Canal north of Hart Lake; Snyder and Honey Creeks.
The Warner basin provides two generally continuous aquatic habitat types; a temporally more
stable stream environment, and a temporally less stable lake environment. A common phenomenon
among fishes is phenotypic plasticity induced by changes in environmental factors. Life history for
the Warner sucker is evidently plastic. The lake and stream morphs of the Warner sucker probably
evolved with frequent migration and gene exchange between them. The larger, presumably longer-
lived, lake morphs are capable of surviving thorough several continuous years of isolation from
stream spawning habitats due to drought or other factors. Stream morphs probably serve as sources
for recolonization of lake habitats in wet years following droughts, such as the refilling of Warner
Lakes in 1993 following their desiccation in 1992. Lake morph Warner suckers occupy the lakes
50
-------
and, possibly, deep areas in the low elevation creeks, reservoirs, sloughs and canals. The loss of
either lake or stream morphs to drought, winter kill, excessive flows and a flushing of the fish in a
stream, in conjunction with the lack of safe migration routes and the presence of predaceous game
fishes (such as croppie), may strain the ability of the species to rebound. Irrigation diversions have
also reduced available habitat and blocked migration (A. Munhall, BLM, pers. com., 5/20/98).
Detailed information of population estimates in specific waters of the Warner basin can be
found in the USFWS recovery plan, page 32.
Age and Growth. Lake morph suckers are generally much larger than steam morphs,
however, growth rates in either habitat have not been studied. Sexual maturity is believed to usually
occur at an age of 3-4 years.
Feeding. The feeding habits of the Warner sucker depend to a large degree on habitat and
life history stage, with adult suckers becoming less specialized than juveniles and YOY. Larvae
have terminal mouths and short digestive tracts, enabling them to feed selectively in mid-water or
on the surface. Invertebrates, particularly planktonic crustaceans, make up most of their diet. As
the suckers grow, they gradually become generalized benthic feeders. Adult stream morph suckers
forage noctumally over a wide variety of substrates. Adult lake morphs are thought to have a similar
diet, though food is taken over predominantly muddy substrates.
Spawning Habitat. Spawning usually occurs in April and May. Temperature and flow cues
appear to trigger spawning, with most spawning taking place at 14-20 degrees C. when stream flows
are relatively high. Warner suckers spawn in sand, or gravel beds in pools. Possible important
spawning habitats and a source of recruitment for lake recolonization are in the upper Honey Creek
drainage and the tributary Snyder Creek where the warm, constant temperatures of Source Springs
are located. In years when access to stream spawning areas is limited by low flow or by physical
in-stream blockages (such as beaver dams), suckers may attempt to spawn on gravel beds along the
lake shorelines.
Larval and YOY Habitat. Larvae generally occupy shallow backwater pools or stream
margins with abundant macrophytes, where there is little or no current. Larvae venture near higher
flows during the daytime to feed on planktonic organisms but avoid the mid-channel water current
at night. Spawning habitat may also be used for rearing during the first few months of life because
when young eventually become immersed in high stream flows they do not appear to drift large
distances downstream; i.e.. the YOY remain in spawning habitat areas. YOY are often found over
deep, still water from mid-water to the surface, but also move into faster flowing areas near the heads
of pools. For both runs and pools. YOY usually occupy quiet water close to shore.
Juvenile and Adult Habitat. Both juveniles and adults prefer areas of the streams which are
protected from the main flow, seeking out deep pools. Beaver ponds may offer important refugia.
Preferred pools tend to have: undercut banks: large beds of aquatic macrophytes; root wads or
boulders; a surface to bottom temperature differential of at least 2 degrees C. (at low flows);
maximum depth greater than 1.5 meters; and overhanging vegetation (often Salix ssp). Although
suckers mav be found almost anvvvhcre in calmer sections of streams, the fish will not be tar from
51
-------
larger pools (approximately 1/4 mile up- or down- steam).
When submersed and floating vascular macrophytes are present, they often form a major
component of sucker-inhabited pools, providing cover and harboring planktonic crustaceans which
make up most of the YOY sucker diet. Rock substrates are important in providing surfaces for
epilitihic organisms upon which adult stream morph suckers feed, and finer gravel or sand are used
for spawning. Embeddedness (e.g., from silt) has been negatively correlated with total sucker
density.
Habitat use by lake morph suckers appears similar to that of stream morph suckers in that
adult suckers are generally found in the deepest available water where food and cover are plentiful.
Deep water also provides refuge from aerial predators.
By day, juveniles and adult suckers take shelter in the deepest available water and/or
undercut banks. Deep pools also allow suckers to mitigate temperature extremes by moving
vertically in the water column. With the absence of aquatic macrophytes, suckers can be seen
schooling near the bottoms of these deep pools during the day. At night they disperse thorough
various habitat types and water depths to forage for food.
Exact temperature, dissolved oxygen, or pH requirements for the Warner sucker are lacking.
These fish co-occur with redband trout and, therefore, require cooler water temperatures. When
water temperatures rise, dissolved oxygen concentrations may become an additional stressor.
Ambient DO data will be collected in some sucker habitats during the summer of 1997. (A.
Munhall, BLM, pers. com., 5/20/98)
Threats
The loss of either lake or stream morphs to drought, winter kili, excessive flows and a
flushing of the fish in a stream, in conjunction with the lack of safe migration routes and the presence
of predaceous game fishes (such as croppie), may strain the ability of the species to rebound.
Irrigation diversions have also reduced available habitat and blocked migration (A. Munhall, BLM,
pers. com., 5/20/98).
Lost River sucker (Deltistes luxatus) and Shortnose sucker (Chasmistes brevirostris): (The
following life history information is taken from USFWS 1993). Endangered status OR 7/18/88.
53FR27130.
Lost River (LR) and shortnose (SN) suckers were listed as endangered under the ESA in
1988 (FR 50:27). Because the LR sucker is the only species in the genus Deltistes, this entire genus
is endangered as well. Both species are endemic to the upper Klamath Basin (particularly. Upper
Klamath Lake and its tributaries): these fish are large and long-lived.
Poor habitat quality threatens the LR and SN suckers. Monda and Saiki (1993) performed
tolerance tests on these fish in the laboratory; compared to field measurements of pH. ammonia.
temperature, and DO. the laboratory data indicate that ambient summertime water quality conditions
52
-------
in the Upper Klamath Basin can be acutely toxic to juvenile suckers. Further research to determine
acute toxicity due to unionized ammonia. pH, DO, and temperature (96 hour LC-50s bioassays) is
presented in the Klamath Tribes (1996) report (IN USBR April, 1997) and is summarized here:
NH3-N(mg/l) pH DO(mg/l) Temp.(C.)
LR sucker larvae 0.43 9.77 2.0 30.5
juveniles 0.34 10.1 2.0 29.9
SN sucker larvae 0.73 10.01 2.4 31.2
juveniles 0.14 9.76 2.4 27.8
Using adult LR suckers, the LC-50 for DO was determined at 2.8 mg/1. Mortality of large numbers
of LR suckers and some SN suckers coincided with high water temperatures, low DO, and high pH
during 1986 in Upper Klamath Lake (Scoppettone, 1986). In other research, the critical thermal
maximum (where fish could no longer maintain equilibrium) determined for SN sucker adults was
32.7 +/- 0.1 degrees C. (Castleberry and Cech, 1993).
The LR suckers are one of the largest sucker species and may grow to one meter in total
length. SN suckers are usually less than 50 cm long. Variations in the morphology of the SN
suckers appears related to the two distinct morphologies of the fish associated with Upper Klamath
Lake and the Lost River.
LR and SN suckers are large, long-lived and omnivorous suckers that generally spawn in
rivers or streams and then return to the lake. However, both species have separate populations that
spawn near springs in Upper Klamath Lake. Relatively little information is available on habitat
requirements for all life stages. Not much is known about the life history traits of the LR and SN
suckers during the winter months.
Age and Growth. Lost River suckers: Lost River suckers from Upper Klamath Lake have
been aged up to 43 years old, and are one of the largest sucker species. Sexual maturity occurs
between the ages of 6 to 14 years (most mature by age 9). Shortnose suckers: Shortnose suckers
of up to 33 years of age have been found. Sexual maturity appears to be between 5 and 8 years with
most maturing between age 6 and 7.
Spawning Habitat. Both species of suckers are lake dwelling but spawn in tributary' streams
or springs. For stream spawning populations, depending on the waterbody in question and the peak
flow for any given year, LR and SN suckers begin their spawning migration from February to early
March. Water temperatures range from 5.5 to 19 degrees C. LR and SN suckers spawn near the
bottom and when gravel is available, eggs are dispersed within the top several centimeters. When
spawning occurs over cobble and armored substrate, eggs fall between crevices or are swept
downstream. Observations indicate there may be a preference for spawning over gravel: however.
the preference may be more flow related.
53
-------
Larval and Juvenile Habitat. LR and SN suckers usually spend relatively little time in
tributary streams and migrate back to the lake shortly after swim-up stage. The majority of suckers
emigrate during a six-week period starting in early May. It appears that most larval emigration for
both species occurs during the night and twilight hours. During the day, the larvae typically move
to shallow shoreline areas in the river. Higher densities of larval suckers seem to occur in pockets
of open water surrounded by emergent vegetation. After emigrating from the parental spawning sites
in late spring, larval and juvenile LR and SN suckers inhabit near shore waters (mostly under 50 cm
depth) throughout the summer months. Larvae seem to avoid area devoid of emergent vegetation.
With the strong shoreline orientation displayed by sucker larvae, they use areas such as marsh edges
for nursery habitat. In Upper Klamath Lake, juvenile suckers have only been found in sections of
the lake where dissolved oxygen concentrations were 4.5 to 12.9 mg/1. Few sites in the lake had
juvenile suckers where pH values were 9.0 or higher.
Adult Habitat. Adult LR suckers in Upper Klamath Lake during the warmer seasons
apparently seek areas near springs and inflows, with relatively low densities of algae, and consistent
viter quality. Much of the lake can be stressful or lethal due to dissolved oxygen and pH conditions.
LR suckers were found in waters of dissolved oxygen concentrations of at least 6 mg/1.
Threats
Habitat degradation from agricultural practices and grazing can cause loss of critical riparian
areas and increases in nutrient input to the lake. Increased nutrients leads to increased primary
production and consequent increases in pH. (J.Kann, personal communication) The Bureau of
Reclamation operates the lake and has initiated some riparian restoration and associated research
projects, although restoration work is in early stages. Water depth is a key factor in separating
surface-dwelling sucker larvae from benthic fathead minnows that would prey on them (draft
Biological Report for Klamath Project, 1997).
Foskett speckled dace (Rhinkhthys osculus ssp): (The following life history information is taken
from ODFW (1996), Species at Risk; and USFWS Recovery Plan, 1998). Threatened status OR
3/28/85, 50FR12302.
The Foskett speckled dace occurs in Foskett Spring, a small spring system found in the
Coleman Basin on the west side of the Warner Valley, Lake County, south-central Oregon; this is
an arid region with approximately eight inches of annual precipitation. Numbers of this species are
estimated at 1500.
Nothing is known about the biology/ecology of the Foskett speckled dace. The only habitat
information available regards plant species found around the springs which include rushes, sedges,
Mimulus, Kentucky bluegrass, thistle and saltgrass. Foskett Spring is a cool water spring with a
constant temperature regime of 18 degrees C (Alan Mundall BLM. pers. com. 5/20/98). BLM
monitoring of spring water during the mid-1980s revealed a pH range of 7.2-8.1 and a hardness
range of 32 6-48.7 mg 1 as CaCO; (Alan Mundall BLM. pers. com. 5.'20.'98). No information is
available on growth rates, age of reproduction or behavioral patterns.
54
-------
For speckled dace (not from Foskett spring; life stage/age unknown), the thermal mean
maximum was experimentally determined to be 32.4 +/- 0.6 degrees C., and the mean minimum DO
to be 0.8 +/- 0.06 mg/1 (Castleberry and Cech, 1993).
Threats
Occurring on private land at the time of ESA listing, this dace species was threatened by
actual or potential modification of its habitat. These fish have extremely limited distributions, occur
in low numbers naturally, and inhabit springs that are susceptible to human disturbance. Factors that
may jeopardize the species include: groundwater pumping for irrigation, excessive trampling of the
habitats by livestock, channeling of the springs for agricultural purposes, and other mechanical
manipulation of the spring habitats. Through a land exchange, the BLM acquired Foskett Spring in
1986 and has since fenced the spring from livestock; water flow and indirect pollution/runoff is still
a concern (Alan Munhall BLM, pers. com. 5/20/98).
Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana pretiosa) and Columbia Spotted Frog (Rana luteiventris): (The
following life history information is taken from ODFW/USFWS (1994 & 1997 [Hayes]), ODFW
(1996), Richter(1995), Richter and Azous (1995), and WDFW (1997)). Under a proposed rule on
9/19/97, 62FR49397, the USFWS issued a "warranted but precluded" status in Oregon - from a 12-
month petition finding that was recycled by the above notice.
After specific information on each species, general life history information is presented; most
research has been on the Oregon spotted frog. Available water quality and habitat information
follows.
Distribution (Hayes. 1994). As currently understood, the spotted frog has a relatively broad
geographic range from northeastern California northward through most of Oregon, Washington, and
British Columbia, into the Alaskan panhandle, and eastward through northern Nevada, northern
Utah, most of Idaho, western Wyoming, western Montana, and the western edge of Alberta. This
view of the geographic distribution ignores unrecognized taxonomic units "within" the spotted frog.
The Oregon spotted and Columbia spotted frogs are currently (1997) listed as candidate species
under ESA. For the few specimens for which color data are available, individuals of the spotted frog
from western Oregon are consistently the red/red-orange-ventered color variant; however, the species
name for the Columbia spotted frog. R. luteiventris, means yellow-bellied (M. Hayes, pers. com.,
1/7/97).
Critical habitat for the Oregon spotted frog is at elevations below about 5,300 feet. This
distribution is latitude dependent with the frog found below 600 meters in southern Washington and
below about 1.500-1,600 meters in southern Oregon. The Oregon spotted frog has a warmer water
requirement than other spotted frogs. The water temperature must be greater than 20 degrees C. for
three months. This species is not found in streams and probably requires a freshwater spring for
overwintering.
The Columbia spotted frog's habitat in Oregon is at elevations of approximately 4.000 feet
or higher; generally m the drier, east-side Cascades and higher plateau inland habitats. Unlike the
55
-------
Oregon spotted frog, the Columbia spotted frog is not a warm water specialist. The Columbia
spotted frog is marsh dwelling and, at times, is also found in streams. There may be a dependancy
on a nearby spring.
Spotted frogs inhabit marshy pond or lake edges, or algae-covered overflow pools of streams.
Food consists of insects, mollusks, crustaceans, and arachnids.
No verifiable records for either of these spotted frogs, or any other spotted frog, exist for
coastal or near coastal areas in western Oregon, the higher Cascade mountains, and the Umpqua
drainage basin. The few records for spotted frogs from the Rogue River system are not verified. The
lack of coastal and high elevation records for the Oregon spotted frog in western Oregon may be
related to a warmer water requirement for postmetamorphic stages (>= 20 degrees C.).
Oregon spotted frogs disappeared from the Willamette valley in the 1950s. The Oregon
spotted frog is extant in two protected but vulnerable areas in the Willamette hydrographic basin,
Penn Lake and Gold Lake Bog. Although confusing, the historical records for spotted frogs imply
their presence (or at least, past presence) in the Warner Lakes Basin, and the Klamath and Deschutes
hydrographic basins.
Overwintering (Hayes. 1994). The spotted frog is generally inactive during the winter
season, although some individuals may be observed at the water surface on the few relatively warmer
days. The spotted frog is characterized as a highly aquatic species as a consequence, the bodies of
water that serve as overwintering sites may be the same ones which the spotted frog uses,for
breeding and in which it spends the summer season, but there are no data to verify this supposition.
(Hayes, 1994.)
Reproduction (Hayes. 1994). Emergence from overwintering sites begins as early in the year
as the winter thaw allows. In southwestern British Columbia and the Puget Sound region,
emergence takes place from late February to mid-March. Emergence dates are lacking for Oregon,
but historical records indicate that Oregon spotted frogs were detected on the Willamette valley floor
as early as 8 February. These frogs were seen moving on wet nights during February and March,
during the interval when the Willamette River experiences its freshets which flood shallow wetland
areas. A night-time water temperature measurement of 10.6 degrees C. suggests that even early in
the active season, the Oregon spotted frog has been found in relatively "warm" water. (Hayes,
1994.)
Male Oregon spotted frogs arrive at breeding sites several days before the first females
appear. Breeding sites are located in the shallow (5-15cm) portions of marshes or ponds or the
overflow areas of streams, typically disconnected from the main body of water. Adult males
aggregate in small calling groups, which presumably represent leks, and call while floating with their
heads at the water surface or while sitting above water on mats of vegetation. Females appear at
breeding sites from a few days to over a week after the males. When receptive, females approach
male calling groups, gam amplexus with a male, and then deposit eggs in a few inches of water
(typically during March-April). The globular egg masses contain several hundred to several
thousand eggs. It's likely that the dates of opposition vary considerably between years because
56
-------
local climatic conditions may affect when water temperatures reach the range suitable for egg laying.
Oregon spotted frog embryos have lethal thermal limits of 6 degrees C. and 28 degrees C.; with an
average water temperature near the egg masses of 20.7 degrees C. over the interval before hatching.
Spotted frogs exhibit "communal" laying. Masses are deposited unattached, often in water
so shallow that only the lower half of each egg mass is submerged, the upper portion being exposed
directly to the air. This pattern of oviposition makes mortality of embryos from desiccation
(fluctuating water levels) or freezing, relatively frequent; up to 30 percent is not unusual.
Ovipositing sites may be reused in successive years, indicating unique characteristics, limited sites,
limited flexibility of adults to switch sites, or combinations thereof. This site-dependancy makes
the spotted frog particularly vulnerable to oviposition-site modification.
In British Columbia, larvae can hatch in ca. 5-10 days, require ca. 5-7 months to develop to
metamorphosis, and after metamorphosis, can reach sexual maturity in two (males) to three (females)
years. Data on the developmental schedule in Oregon are lacking, but it is anticipated to be
somewhat faster at the lower latitude, given a roughly equivalent elevation, than that observed in
British Columbia.
Active Season Habitat Requirements (Hayes 1994). Postmetamorphic stages of the Oregon
spotted frog seem to be daytime active. However, observations of spotted frogs made at night, early
in the season and during the summer, suggest that frogs may remain active in the evening because
warm water conditions are maintained into the night. Observations in Oregon over the past two
years strongly suggest that postmetamorphic Oregon spotted frogs are somehow tied to wanner
water (20-35 degrees C.; average 28.6 degrees C./83 degrees F.) during the late spring and summer
season when frogs are active; this may be the habitat requirement that ties the Oregon spotted frog
to warm water marsh habitats. Less than 5 percent of temperatures taken next to active frogs were
<68 degrees F. The single feature that united all verifiable spotted frog localities in western Oregon
for which habitat data could be retrieved was that each site had a marsh or bog. Moreover, these
marshes frequently represented overflow areas of a nearby river or stream. This warm water habitat
need for Oregon spotted frogs probably makes this species significantly more vulnerable to potential
predation by warm water-loving exotic species (e.g., bullfrogs, southern crayfish, and various
catfishes and sunfishes).
Factors affecting amphibian distribution and habitat (Richter and Azous. 1995; Richter. 1995).
Research for King County, Washington showed that wetland size and the number of vegetation
classes were unrelated to total number of species and thus poor indicators of amphibian richness.
Small and structurally simple wetlands often have high value amphibian habitat. Although a greater
number of vegetation classes is not proportional to amphibian richness, aquatic bed vegetation and
open water vegetation is directly proportional to amphibian richness. Land use impacts are directly
related to quality of amphibian habitat. The researchers also found that in terms of hydraulic
loading, low amphibian richness is found in wetlands where water level fluctuation (WLF) exceeds
0.2 meters.
Criteria for uetland habitats for lenthic-breeding amphibians (this is not spotted frog specific)
(Richter. 1995).
57
-------
Field and literature research showed that overall, amphibians prefer cool, wet conditions,
with northwest species reaching their highest abundance in relatively cool, flat forest stands that are
not extremely wet. There is a strong correlation to amphibian distribution with large woody debris,
dead and decaying wood and organic matter, and other habitat conditions favorable to
thermoregulation, foraging, resting, and aestivating. Also, a clear correlation exists between stand
age and downed wood, older stands are ideal habitat patches.
To provide the full range of biological functions of consequence to amphibians, wetland
should be located within a watershed basin or sub-basin characterized by land use in which
imperviousness (i.e., with urban-like impervious surfaces) does not exceed 10-15 percent.
Contiguous wetland habitat patches to provide for passive colonization and self-sustainable
occupation, along with migration corridors to terrestrial feeding and overwintering habitats, is
important in amphibian success; small wetlands can serve this need.
Given that all other habitat features are equal, wetland size is unrelated to amphibian
richness. Hence, there is no minimum wetland size required by breeding amphibians. Smaller
wetlands may exhibit greater usage than larger ones by some species because larger, and
consequently often permanent wetlands are suitable for predators requiring permanent water.
Seasonal availability, interspersion of open water, vegetation, and specific vegetation structure are
important breeding criteria; coexistence of these attributes must be reflected over any predetermined
wetland size.
Buffers are an essential wetland component for amphibian habitat. Buffers provide:
important cover to females and metamorphs, staging habitat for breeding adults, upland terrestrial
foraging areas and hibernation sites, and access to migration corridors. Wetland buffer widths of 30
meters are considered minimally prudent.
Most amphibian species avoid both open water and densely vegetated sites. Quantitative
comparisons of vegetation cover suggests dense (95-100%) and light (0-5%) cover is avoided.
Interspersion of open water and vegetation is selected for oviposition by most species.
Ovipositioning amphibians prefer small diameter emergent vegetation stems (l-8mm; average 3-
4mm diameter).
Water quality: Amphibians are found in water of widely varying chemical composition.
Researchers have generally found water chemistry to not directly limit amphibian distribution and
spawning. However, a significant negative correlation exists between amphibian richness and water
column conductivity (Azous, 1991 IN Richter, 1995). Moreover, Platin (1994) and Platin and
Richter (1995) [IN Rjchter(1995)] found R. aurora (a frog) embryo mortality positively correlated
to a principal water quality component comprised of conductivity, Ca, Mg, and pH. and negatively
correlated to a second principal component including total P, total suspended solids, Pb, Zn, Al, total
organic content, and dissolved oxygen. Interestingly, A. gracile (a salamander) egg mortality under
similar conditions was uncorrelated to either of these two principal components but rather correlated
to total petroleum hydrocarbons and focal colitbrms.
Various research reports suggest that some species distribution and breeding success may
58
-------
locally be predicted by water quality, most notably conductivity, pH Al, total cations, NO2, chemical
oxygen demand, and dissolved organic carbon. Other than outright death form toxic spills and
sediment flushes (with adsorbed metals, etc.), direct relationships between water quality and
amphibian distribution and egg survivorship remains complex, and may be a reason for the absence
of water quality criteria for amphibians.
Amphibian egg development is a function of water temperature, and orientation of a wetland
in respect to the sun affects solar-induced water temperatures. Consequently, clutch numbers
increase with temperature; warmer northern shores exhibit the highest numbers of eggs among
spring-breeding species. From Hayes (1997): Water temperature is also affected by beaver. Beaver
create small step dams that can provide habitat with decreased water velocities and increased
summer water temperatures. Beaver create these aquatic environments favorable to spotted frogs
especially where riparian corridors tend to be narrow. Additional information on water temperature
characteristics for Oregon spotted frog is found in WDFW (1997) - although Hayes (see above)
documented a warm water preference for Oregon spotted frogs, Oregon spotted frogs in western
Washington were found active in water consistently <50 degrees F. (10 degrees C.) and frogs were
found active under ice (including a pair in amplexus) where the water temperature was 31 degrees
F. (-0.5 degrees C.).
Threats
Extirpation from much of the former range for both species coincides with introduction and
spread of the highly carnivorous bullfrogs and exotic predatory fish such as carp. Brook trout, the
only exotic macropredator present in Penn Lake has had a significant impact on Oregon spotted frog
populations. Substantially greater areas and habitat complexity at Gold Lake Bog may allow the
relatively large Oregon spotted frog population to co-exist with brook trout. However, during
drought conditions, Oregon spotted frog life stages may be placed in closer proximity to brook trout.
The opportunity for recolonization is nil due to the isolated nature of these Oregon spotted frog
populations. (Hayes 1997.)
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi): in 59FR48135 (9/19/94), listed as threatened
for California, OR. (The following life history information is taken from 59FR48135 and the EPA
Region 9 BA for the State of California's water quality standards ESA ccnsultation.)
The USFWS on 19 September 1994. published a final rule listing the vernal pool fairy
shrimp as threatened in its known habitats (all in California). Region 10 EPA received a FWS letter
dated 8 April 1998 noting the discovery of the threatened fairy shrimp in vernal pools in
southwestern Oregon. Although specific critical habitat in Oregon is not yet designated, the shrimp
inhabit several vernal pools in an area known as the Agate Desert, near Medford and White City,
Oregon. The shrimp are threatened principally as the result of urban development, conversion of
native habitats to agriculture, and stochastic (random) threat of extinction by virtue of the small
isolated nature of many of the remaining populations.
The vernal pool fairy shrimp arc members of the aquatic crustacean order Anostraca. These
branchiopods which range up to an inch in length, are endemic to vernal pools, an ephemeral
59
-------
freshwater habitat. The shrimp are not known to occur in riverine waters, marine waters, or other
permanent bodies of water. They are ecologically dependent on seasonal fluctuations in their
habitat, such as absence or presence of water during specific times of the year, duration of
inundation, and other environmental factors that include specific salinity, conductivity, dissolved
solids, and pH levels. Water chemistry is one of the most important factors in determining the
distribution of fairy shrimp. The shrimp are sporadic in their distribution, often inhabiting only one
or a few pools in otherwise more widespread vernal pool complexes. Populations of these animals
are defined by pool complexes rather than by individual vernal pools. In California, the majority of
known populations inhabit vernal pools with clear to tea-colored water, most commonly in grass or
mud bottomed swales, or basalt flow depression pools in unplowed grasslands. The water in pools
inhabited by this species has low TDS, conductivity, alkalinity, and chloride.
Fairy shrimp feed on algae, bacteria, protozoa, rotifers, and bits of detritus. Females carry
fertilized eggs that are either dropped to the pool bottom or remain in the brood sac until the female
dies and sinks. The "resting" or "summer" eggs are capable of withstanding heat, cold, and
prolonged desiccation. When the pools refill in the same or subsequent seasons some, but not all,
of the eggs may hatch. The egg bank in the soil may be comprised of the eggs from several years
of breeding. The eggs hatch when the vernal pools fill with rainwater. The early stages of the fairy
shrimp develop rapidly into adults. These non-dormant populations often disappear early in the
season long before the vernal pools dry up. The primary historical dispersal method for the fairy
shrimp likely was large-scale flooding resulting form winter and spring rains which allowed the
animals to colonize different individual vernal pools and other vernal pool complexes. Waterfowl
and shorebirds likely are now the primary dispersal agents for fairy shrimp. Vernal pools formdn
regions with Mediterranean climates where shallow depressions fill with water during fall and winter
rains and then evaporate in the spring. In the Agate Desert area of Oregon, vernal pools form on a
hardpan surface during the spring.
Threats
The main treat to the species is habitat loss due to development (Judy Jacobs USFWS,
Portland, OR; pers. com. 4/98).
60
-------
III. PROPOSED ACTIONS
A. Dissolved Oxygen
1. Background
Oregon DO Standards Revisions
Oregon's DO standard revisions include:
• setting up the criteria under four use classes: salmonid spawning, cold water, cool water, and
warm water (found in OAR 340-4 l(2)(a), pages A-l - A-4 of Appendix B);
• addition of numeric criteria in place of percent saturation (found in OAR 340-41 (2Xa), pages
A-l - A-4 of Appendix B);;
• addition of a criterion for intergravel DO (found in OAR 340-4 l(2)(a), page A-2 of
Appendix B); and
• addition often definitions (#44 Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen (IGDO), #45 Spatial Median,
#46 Daily Mean, #47 Monthly (30day) Mean Minimum, #48 Weekly (seven-day) Mean
Minimum, #49 Weekly (seven-day) Minimum Mean, #50 Minimum, #51 Cold-Water
Aquatic Life, #52 Cool-Water Aquatic Life, #53 Warm-Water Aquatic Life (found in OAR
340-41-006, page A-7 of Appendix B).
The standards revisions are found in Appendix B. Table 21 in Appendix B summarizes the numeric
criteria. The State has clarified (Llewelyn, 1998) where and when salmonid spawning is to be
protected in a table attached to the policy letter found in Appendix C. When there are site-specific
differences in these spawning periods the State will provide protection via implementation of the
antidegradation policy (to protect existing uses that weren't designated) and will make adjustments
to their standards as necessary to refine the use designations. These adjustments would be water
quality standards revisions that would be submitted for EPA review and approval as well as
consultation under Section 7 of ESA. Waters are classified as cool water on an ecoregion basis (see
Appendix G for the ecoregion map) as follows:
West side:
Cold Water: Coast Range Ecoregion - all. Sierra Nevada Ecoregion -all. Cascade -
all. Willamette Valley - "generally typical" including Willamette River above
Corvallis, Santiam (including the North and South), Clackamas. McKenzie, Mid
Fork and Coast Fork mainstems.
Cool Water: Willamette Valley Ecoregion - "most typical"
East side (with exception of waters listed under warm water criteria):
Cold Water: Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills - "most typical". Blue Mountain -
"most typical"
Cool \Vaier: Remainder ot Eastern Oregon Ecoregions
("most typical" and "generally typical" refer to subecoregion designations)
61
-------
The numeric temperature criteria for cold water, cool water, and warm water contain a provision that
allows that, "At the discretion of the Department, when the Department determines that adequate
information exists," lower criteria values may be applied. ODEQ has clarified that in making this
determination the beneficial uses of the water body (including species present, listing status of those
species, locations, time periods and presence of sensitive early life stages) will be considered. Based
on the presence of early life stages or threatened and endangered species this provision for lower DO
criteria would not be applied. (Llewelyn, 1998).
Objective of Oregon's Revisions
Because of concerns that the previous criteria were perhaps overly stringent in some cases and not
protective enough in others, the State embarked on reexamining the oxygen requirements of the
protected uses in the waterbodies (including life-stage specific requirements), and the level of risk
that would be appropriate in setting protective dissolved oxygen criteria. The form of the criterion
was also examined, statistical criteria allowing for more flexibility in permitting, although not
allowing for as great a margin of safety.
How Do the Revisions Compare with Previous Standards
The previous standards were established by basin and were expressed as an absolute minimum in
the form of percent saturation, and occasionally a specific numeric concentration. The new criteria
are expressed primarily as statistical numeric criteria There are more categories of use protection,
and more attention to salmonid spawning protection by creating a criterion based on intergravel DO,
which indirectly measures the effect of sediment accumulation in spawning redds, a major cause of
spawning mortality.
2. EPA Proposed Action
Under Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act EPA proposes to approve all of the DO revisions
adopted by the State of Oregon.
3. Effect of Action on Listed Species
Dissolved oxygen water quality criteria have been established to protect communities and
populations offish and aquatic life against mortalities as well as prevent adverse effects on eggs,
larvae, and population growth. While many adult stages of fish can survive at relatively low
dissolved oxygen concentrations, the survival of embryos and larvae often requires much higher
levels (Welch 1980). For most aquatic species, the time to hatching increases, growth and survival
decrease as dissolved oxygen decreases, with the greatest reduction in survival observed at
approximately 5.0 mg/L (Carlson and Siefert 1974; Carlson and Herman 1974). In addition.
reductions in dissolved oxygen decrease swimming performance in both adult and larval fish (Davis
et al. 1963) affecting a species' ability to migrate, forage and avoid predators.
As reported in the Final Issue Paper on Dissolved Oxygen (ODHQ. 1995(a)) low DO levels increase
the acute toxicity of various toxicants such as metals (e.g.. /.me) and ammonia. At low intergravel
62
-------
dissolved oxygen (IGDO) and water velocity, ammonia exposure can cause problems with eggs in
redds, such as inadequate IGDO to nitrify ammonia and depressed IGDO after nitrification. Carson
(1985) reports that rainbow trout eggs excrete most of their nitrogenous wastes as ammonia.
Ammonia is also a common pollutant. Adverse impacts of other toxicants may be compounded by
low levels of DO or may increase sensitivity to low levels of DO. For example, any toxicant which
damages the gill epithelium can decrease the efficiency of oxygen uptake. Fish can detect and avoid
reduced levels of DO. For instance, brook trout preferentially selected environments with DO levels
ranging from 7 to 8 mg/1 and avoided those with DO levels below 5 to 6 mg/1. Juvenile coho
exhibited erratic behavior at 6.0 mg/1. Laboratory studies show that the blood is not fully saturated
with oxygen at levels near 6.5 mg/1, because at that level, changes in oxygen transfer efficiency
occur. Productive streams, either natural systems or nutrient enriched, exhibit diurnal cycles in DO
due to photosynthesis and respiration. Average measures of DO do not reflect the damage that can
occur during diurnal minimums. Other important factors include the length and frequency offish
exposure to the low DO level. Delayed emergence, reduced alevin growth rates and increased
susceptibility to disease and predation are discussed in the following sections. Three mechanisms
by which low DO and a toxicant in combination cause effects are apparent:
• Increased ventilation of the gill associated with low DO can increase uptake of
waterbome toxics;
• Any toxic which damages the gill epithelium and decreases efficiency of oxygen
uptake will increase sensitivity to low DO; and
A number of toxics, such as pentachlorophenol (a common wood preservative for in-
water structures), increase oxygen consumption due to interference with oxidative
phosphorylation.
Any agent with the modes of action just discussed can increase sensitivity to low DO.
A. Chinook Salmon (Snake River fall- and spring-/summer- run, spring run Upper Willamette
River, spring run Upper Columbia River, all runs of Lower Columbia River, spring and fall
runs of Southern Oregon/California Coastal), Coho Salmon (Lower Columbia River and
Southwest Washington, Coastal, and Southern Oregon/Northern California), Columbia River
Chum Salmon, Steelhead Trout (Snake River Basin, Upper, Middle, and Lower Columbia,
Upper Willamette, Oregon Coast, and Ktamath Mountains Province), Bull Trout (Columbia
and Klamath Basins), and Cutthroat Trout (Lahontan, Umpqua River, and West Slope).
1. The Oregon water quality standards applicable to salmonid spawning are: dissolved oxygen not
less than 11 mg/1. However, if the minimum IGDO, measured as a spatial median, is 8.0 mg/1 or
greater, then the DO criterion is 9.0 mg/1. Where conditions of barometric pressure, altitude, and
temperature preclude attainment of the 11.0 mg/1 or 9.0 mg/1 criteria, DO levels shall not be less than
95% saturation. From spawning until fry emergence from the gravels, the spatial median IGDO shall
not fall below 6.0 mg 1. A spatial median IGDO of 8.0 mg'l is to he used to identify where the
beneficial uses may he impaired and require action by the Department. The Department may. in
accordance with established priorities, then evaluate the water quality and initiate pollution control
63
-------
strategies.
The early life stages offish are recognized as being the most sensitive and requiring relatively high
DO concentrations. The oxygen demand by embryos depends on temperature and on the stage of
development with the greatest DO required just prior to hatching. At near 15°C, IGDO requirements
for steelhead will exceed 10 mg/1 (Rombough, 1986; Carlson, 1980). Rombough (1986) and other
researchers have shown that critical oxygen concentration increases with temperature and with the
stage of development of the fish. At 15°C, the critical level of DO (where ambient levels meet
metabolic needs) for steelhead increases from 1.0 mg/1 shortly after fertilization to greater than 9.7
mg/1 prior to hatching (implies an IGDO of at least 6.7 mg/1). The crucial timing of IGDO, stream
temperature, and flow rate varies with each salmonid ESU's specific characteristics. Sowed and
Power (1985) observed that survival in field studies is negligible when IGDO falls below 5 mg/1.
This is consistent with other studies. Phillips and Campbell (1962) observed no survival in a field
study where IGDO fell below 8.0 mg/1. They suggest that embryos of newly-produced fry at
moderately reduced oxygen levels may not survive well in nature.
In field testing of brown trout spawning habit in Idaho, Maret et al. (1993) found a significant
relationship between IGDO and survival. Survival was negligible when mean IGDO fell below 8.0
mg/1. Maret et al. (1993) suggest that growth and survival relate to IGDO above 8.0 mg/1 when
seepage velocities exceed 100 cm/hr. Survival also inversely relates to the amount of fines present.
The research suggests that sediment in excess of 15 percent fines may reduce IGDO to unacceptable
levels for survival and incubation. EPA (1986) recommendations for DO criteria in the water
column assume a loss of at least 3 mg/1 from surface water to the intergravels. Skaugset (1980) and
others report that IGDO is inversely related to the percent organic fines, thus, the estimated loss of
3 mg/1 may underestimate the loss in degraded systems.
Field studies in Oregon showed similar results as the work by Maret et al. (1993) in Idaho. Survival
was negligible for juvenile salmonids when IGDO fell below 6 mg 1. especially at relatively low
intergravel velocities (ODEQ, 1995(a)). Hollender (1981) studying wild brook trout, observed that
IGDO was usually above 6.0 mg/1, and found survival of embryos directly related to mean IGDO
up to 8.0 to 9.0 mg/1 in natural redds. The artificial redds used in this study produced much lower
survival, but also indicated negligible survival below about 8.0 mg/1. Phillips and Campbell (1962)
biudied steelhead in stream-bed gravels and recovered few or no sac fry from containers placed
where the mean oxygen concentrations recorded were below about 8 mg/1. In studying juvenile
trout. Turnpenny and Williams (1980) found only about 35 percent survival at IGDOs of 6 mg/1 and
approximately 95 percent survival when IGDO was 8 mg/1. Results from Sowden and Power (1985).
Phillips and Campbell (1962). and Turnpenny and Williams (1980) suggest IGDO concentrations
less than 5 mg/1 are lethal.
Apparent velocity and observed DO are also related, making separation of the influence of these
parameters on observed survival difficult (Coble. 1961). From field work with rainbow trout.
Sowden and Power (1985) concluded that water in contact with the eggs with a DO of 8 mg/1 and
seepage velocities exceeding 100 cm/hr resulted in 50 percent survival of embryos. The study also
indicates that survival is negligible below velocities of 20 cm/hr.
64
-------
Any reduction in IGDO from saturation appears to reduce the likelihood of survival to emergence
or post-emergent survival for embryos (ODEQ, 1995(a)). Turnpenny and Williams (1980) also
observed that alevin size was positively correlated with IGDO. Maret et al. (1993) reported
relatively lower growth, measured as alevin length and corrected for thermal units, at moderate
IGDO levels near 6 to 7 mg/1, as compared to those alevins incubated at 9 to 10 mg/1. Brannon
(1965) found that alevins raised at low DO concentrations were smaller, however, the fish eventually
reached nearly the same weight as fish exposed to higher concentrations of DO. Reiser and White
(1983) also observed compensatory growth after about two months, for chinook salmon and
steelhead. The ability of fry to survive in their natural environment may be related to the size of fry
at hatch (ODEQ, 1995(a)). Results from several researchers [Mason (1969); and Chapman and
McLeod (1987)] with coho salmon show that late emerging alevins and small sized fry are poor
competitors and face almost certain death from predation, disease, starvation or, most likely, a
combination of these.
The State of Oregon's salmonid spawning water column DO criteria meet or exceed EPA's
guidance (U.S.EPA, 1986). During the time that waters support salmon e.nbryo and larval stages,
EPA recommends a water column DO of 11 mg/1 for no production impairment, 9 mg/1 for slight
production impairment, and 8 mg/1 for moderate production impairment. Assuming the 3 mg/1
surface to gravel differential (as described above), the IGDO levels are 8 mg/1, 6 mg/1. and 5 mg/1
respectively. EPA (1986) gives 6.5 mg/1 as an IGDO 7-day mean criterion. The extra 0.5 mg/1 is
meant as a safety factor, however, the large variation of IGDO within a spawning bed is a
consideration. An IGDO of 5 mg/1 is recommended as a 1-day minimum for early life stages. EPA
(1986) goes on to state that for embryonic, larval, and early life stages (ELSs) in general, the
averaging period for DO should not exceed 7-days. This short time is needed to adequately protect
these often short duration, most sensitive life stages. Thirty-day averages can probably adequately
protect other life stages. The studies summarized here indicate that adverse effects occur about 8
mg/1 for IGDO and that 5 mg/1 is in the lethal zone.
Studies reviewed for this determination, where adverse effects may begin to occur at IGDOs of less
than 8 mg/1 or, as applicable to the discussion below on water column DO, below 10 mg/1 (water
column), generally have controlled conditions with minor variations in either IGDO or DO. This
contrasts with the natural environment where IGDO varies within a redd and where DO levels cycle
diurnally. Oregon's criteria are more protective than the EPA(1986) criteria since the 9 mg/1 for
water column DO, the 8 mg/1 IGDO action level, and the 6 mg/1 IGDO absolute minimum are not
week-long averages but apply any time.
Based on the studies summarized above, EPA concludes that Oregon's intergravel dissolved
oxygen criterion of a spatial median of 6 mg/1 is likely to adversely affect Chinook Salmon
(Snake River fall- and spring-/summer- run, spring run Upper Willamette River, spring run
Upper Columbia River, all runs of Lower Columbia River, spring and fall runs of Southern
Oregon/California Coastal), Coho Salmon (Lower Columbia River and Southwest
Washington, Coastal, and Southern Oregon/Northern California), Columbia River Chum
Salmon, Steelhead Trout (Snake River Basin, Upper, Middle, and Lower Columbia, Upper
Willamette, Oregon Coast, and Klamath Mountains Province), Bull Trout (Columbia and
Klamath Basins), and C'utthroat Trout (Lahontan, I mpqua River, and West Slope),
65
-------
particularly since a spatial median allows for other values lower than 6 mg/1 within the redd.
The 8 mg/1 IGDO action level is a more appropriate target for protection of ESA-listed salmonids.
However, the language in the Oregon rules does not mandate follow up on this action level.
2. As discussed above for IGDO, water column DO concentrations below about 9 mg/1 will
adversely affect habitat designated for salmonid spawning, and water column DO levels averaging
above 10 mg/1 are required to avoid adverse effects. Oregon's criteria for salmonid spawning water
column DO are more protective at 11 mg/1 as a 7-day average and 9 mg/1 minimum (at any time).
The 11 mg/1 DO concentration corresponds to EPA's highest defined level of protection where even
slight production impairment would not occur.
Based on available information, EPA has determined that Oregon's water column DO criteria
for salmonid spawning are not likely to adversely affect Chinook Salmon (Snake River fall-
and spring-/sumnier- run, spring run Upper Willamette River, spring run Upper Columbia
River, all runs of Lower Columbia River, spring and fall runs of Southern Oregon/California
Coastal), Coho Salmon (Lower Columbia River and Southwest Washington, Coastal, and
Southern Oregon/Northern California), Columbia River Chum Salmon, Steelhead Trout
(Snake River Basin, Upper, Middle, and Lower Columbia, Upper Willamette, Oregon Coast,
and Klamath Mountains Province), Bull Trout (Columbia and Klamath Basins), and
Cutthroat Trout (Lahontan, Umpqua River, and West Slope).
3. At times when spawning, incubation, and emergence do not occur, the coldwater criteria apply
to the waters listed above, by ecoregion, that are designated for cold water aquatic life use. EPA
(1986) recommends a 30-day mean of 6.5 mg/1, a 7-day mean minimum at 5 mg/1, and a 1-day
minimum of 4 mg/1. The information presented here indicates that at water column DO
concentrations near the levels presented in EPA's criteria, stress, avoidance, behaviorial effects, and
possibly more severe effects are expected in salmonids. Invertebrates, the salmonid food base, are
also sensitive to low DO levels. Although acutely lethal concentrations of DO appear to be higher
for invertebrates than for fish, chronic effects occur near 6 to 8 mg/1 (ODEQ, 1995(a)). Oregon's
coldwater criterion of an absolute minimum of 8 mg/1 corresponds with EPA's recommendation of
a 1-day minimum to protect early life stages of coldwater biota (EPA, 1986). It is also equivalent
to "no production impairment" for other than early life stages of salmonids. As clarified by the State
(Llewelyn, 1998), the lower DO criteria for the seven-day minimum mean and absolute minimum
(6.5 mg/1 and 6 mg/1 respectively), will not be applied where threatened and endangered species are
present.
Therefore, EPA has determined that Oregon's water column DO criteria for cold water
aquatic life are not likely to adversely affect Chinook Salmon (Snake River fall- and spring-
Summer- run, spring run Upper Willamette River, spring run Upper Columbia River, all runs
of Lower Columbia River, spring and fall runs of Southern Oregon/California Coastal), Cobo
Salmon (Lower Columbia River and Southwest Washington, Coastal, and Southern
Oregon/Northern California), Columbia River Chum Salmon, Steelhead Trout (Snake River
Basin, Upper, Middle, and Lower Columbia, Upper Willamette, Oregon Coast, and Klamath
Mountains Province), Bull Trout (Columbia and Klamath Basins), and Cutthroat Trout
(Lahontan, Umpqua River, and West Slope).
66
-------
4. The cool water classification is not designed for all possible salmonid uses. Oregon's cool-water
criteria classification was created to protect cool-water species where coldwater biota may be present
during part or all of the year but would not form the dominant component of the community
structure (ODEQ, 1995(a)). When salmonid spawning occurs, these waters would be protected by
the salmonid spawning DO criteria (Llewelyn, 1998). The coolwater criterion of 6.5 mg/1, as an
absolute minimum, is higher than the EPA 1 -day coldwater criterion for other than early life stages,
of 4.0 mg/1. Oregon acknowledges that at the coolwater DO criterion concentration, there is a
potential for a slight risk to coldwater species present (the criterion is 0.5 mg/1 higher than an EPA
criterion that represents "slight production impairment" for other than early life stages of salmonids).
Per Llewelyn (1998) the lower criteria applicable to "when the Department determines that adequate
information exists" (5.0 mg/1 as a seven-day minimum and 4.0 as an absolute minimum) will not be
applied when a threatened or endangered species is in that water body.
Therefore, EPA has determined that the coolwater biota DO criteria are not likely to adversely
affect Chinook Salmon (Snake River fall- and spring-/summer- run, spring run Upper
Willamette River, spring run Upper Columbia River, all runs of Lower Columbia River,
spring and fall runs of Southern Oregon/California Coastal), Coho Salmon (Lower Columbia
River and Southwest Washington, Coastal, and Southern Oregon/Northern California),
Columbia River Chum Salmon, Steelhead Trout (Snake River Basin, Upper, Middle, and
Lower Columbia, Upper Willamette, Oregon Coast, and Klamath Mountains Province), Bull
Trout (Columbia and Klamath Basins), and Cutthroat Trout (Lahontan, Umpqua River, and
West Slope).
B. Oregon chub, Mutton Spring tui chub, Borax Lake chub
The Oregon chub is endemic to the Umpqua and Willamette Rivers. Habitat where the remaining
populations reside is typified by low- or zero-velocity water flow conditions. The Oregon cool water
dissolved oxygen criteria apply to the habitat of the Oregon chub in the Willamette and require that
dissolved oxygen concentrations not be less than 6.5 mg/L at an absolute minimum. The Oregon
cold water dissolved oxygen criteria apply to the habitat of the Oregon chub in the Umpqua River
and require that dissolved oxygen concentrations not be less than 8.0 mg/L.
The Hutton Spring tui chub inhabits the Hutton Spring and a nearby spring that is part of the Hutton
Spring system in the Goose and Summer Lakes basin. The Borax Lake chub is endemic to Borax
Lake and adjacent wetlands in the Malheur Lake basin. The warm water dissolved oxygen criteria
apply to these basins and require dissolved oxygen concentrations not less than 5.5 mg/L as an
absolute minimum. As clarified by ODEQ (Llewelyn, 1998), the lower DO criteria that might be
applied "When the Department determines that adequate information exists," will not be applied
where threatened or endangered species are present.
The dissolved oxygen requirements of the Oregon chub are unknown. Reconnaissance
investigations in the Middle Fork Willamette and Santiam River drainages (Scheere and Apke. 1997)
observed Oregon chub at sites with dissolved oxygen concentrations ranging from 3.0 mg/L to 9.9
mg'L. Information about the dissolved oxvgen requirements of the Hutton Spring tui chub may be
67
-------
inferred from research on the tui chub from the Upper KJamath basin. Castleberry and Cech (1993)
reported mean minimum dissolved oxygen concentrations for the tui chub to be 0.59 ±0.04 mg/L.
Dissolved oxygen levels in Upper Klamath Lake have been reported to be as low as 0.3 mg/L
(Scoppettone 1986). These dissolved oxygen values should be considered as guidance, as the most
sensitive life stage may not have been tested and the relative sensitivity of tui chub stocks from these
geographically separate areas is unknown. In a survey of Borax Lake conditions from 1991 to 1993,
dissolved oxygen measurements ranged from 4.98 to 8.66 mg/L (Scoppettone et al, 1995). These
species currently reside in habitats with dissolved oxygen concentrations that are less than those
required under the Oregon rules. Research on related species has demonstrated that the chub are able
to withstand extremely low concentrations of dissolved oxygen (<1.0 mg/L).
Therefore, EPA has determined that the Oregon cold water and cool water dissolved oxygen
criteria are not likely to adversely affect the Oregon chub, and that the warm water criterion
is not likely to adversely affect the Hutton Spring tui chub and the Borax Lake chub or the
Borax Lake chub critical habitat.
C. Lost River sucker, Shortnose sucker, Warner sucker
The Lost River sucker and the Shortnose sucker reside in the upper Klamath basin. Oregon's cool
water dissolved oxygen criteria apply to the critical habitat of these species and require that the
dissolved oxygen concentrations not fall below 6.5 mg/L as an absolute minimum. The Warner
sucker's critical habitat includes sections of Twelvemile and Twentymile Creeks, the spillway Canal
north of Hart lake and Snyder and Honey Creeks. This critical habitat is within the Goose and
Summer Lakes basin where the Oregon warm water dissolved oxygen criteria apply, requiring that
dissolved oxygen concentrations maintain 5.5 mg/L as an absolute minimum.
Studies by Monda and Saiki (1993), the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (1997) and Scoppettone (1986)
indicate that the lethal dissolved oxygen concentrations for Lost River and Shortnose suckers are
approximately 2.0 to 2.4 mg/L for larval and juvenile life stages and 2.8 mg/L for adults. Adult and
juvenile Lost River and Shortnose suckers have been found in Upper Klamath and Agency lakes
(critical habitat for these species) in waters where the dissolved oxygen ranges from 4 to 13 mg/L
(Simon 1998) with the largest frequency of suckers observed in waters with concentrations of
dissolved oxygen approximately 9 mg/L.
Adult and larval forms of these sucker species have been found in waters where the dissolved oxygen
concentrations were less than those in the Oregon water quality standards. In addition, laboratory
studies demonstrate that lethal dissolved oxygen concentrations for larval and juvenile life stages
of these species are significantly less than those required under the Oregon rules.
Therefore, EPA finds that the Oregon cool water criteria for dissolved oxygen in the Klamath
basin are not likely to adversely affect the Shortnose Sucker and Lost River Sucker.
The dissolved o\>gen requirements of the Warner sucker are unknown. The Warner sucker resides
in the Goose and Summer Lakes basin in south central Oregon, an area known tor its hot springs.
summer maximum air temperatures average 80°F and an 80% to 90% chance of sunshine during
68
-------
July (ODEQ 1995(a)). Larval Warner suckers are found in shallow backwater pools or on stream
margins in still water, often among or near macrophytes (USFWS, 1998). Juvenile suckers are
usually found at the bottom of deep pools or in other relatively cool and permanent habitats such as
near springs. Adult suckers use stretches of stream where low gradients allow formation of long
pools (50 meters or longer) that tend to have undercut banks, large beds of aquatic macrophytes, root
wads or boulder, a maximum depth of 1.5 meters, and overhanging vegetation. While Warner
suckers have been found in smaller or shallower pools, they were only found in the smaller pools
when larger pools were within approximately 0.4 kilometers upstream or downstream of the site
(USFWS, 1998).
Reports (Monda and Saiki 1993; U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 1997; Scoppettone 1986) indicate that
the lethal dissolved oxygen concentrations of the Lost River and Shortnose suckers' are
approximately 2.0 to 2.8 mg/L. While one must be cautious when applying a test species'
requirements to a surrogate species, in this case, the surrogate species (the Warner sucker) resides
in a habitat that is naturally subjected to lower dissolved oxygen concentrations (warm, slow moving
stream margins and pools) than that of the test species (the Shortnose and Lost River sucker).
Consequently, one can be more confident that the test species' dissolved oxygen requirements are
applicable to the surrogate species. In this case, the minimum dissolved oxygen requirements of the
test species (the Shortnose and Lost River sucker) are almost two times lower than the absolute
minimum required under the Oregon rules for the Warner sucker.
Therefore, EPA has determined that the Oregon warm water dissolved oxygen criteria are not
likely to adversely affect the Warner, sucker.
D. Foskett speckled dace
The Foskett speckled dace occurs in Foskett Spring on the west side of the Warner Valley in the
Goose and Summer Lakes basin. The warm water dissolved oxygen criteria apply and require that
concentrations of dissolved oxygen not fall below 5.5 mg/L as an absolute minimum.
Foskett Spring has the only known native population of Foskett speckled dace and consists of a pool
that is about 5 meters across and a shallow channel that flows toward Coleman Lake. The outflow
channel eventually turns into a marsh and finally dries up before reaching the bed of Coleman Lake.
Castle and Cech (1993) have reported that the mean minimum dissolved oxygen requirements for
speckled dace in general are 0.8 ± 0.06 mg/L. However, these values should be considered as
guidance as the most sensitive life stage may not have been tested and the relative sensitivity of
speckled dace stocks from various geographic areas is unknown. Despite the lack of specific
information on the dissolved oxygen requirements for the Foskett speckled dace, the Oregon
dissolved oxygen criteria are greater than four times the minimum requirements for speckled dace
in general.
Therefore, EPA has determined that the warm water dissolved oxygen criteria are not likely
to adversely affect the Foskett speckled dace.
E. Oregon spotted frog, Columbia spotted frog
69
-------
Critical habitat for the Oregon spotted frog is at elevations below about 5,300 feet. This distribution
is latitude dependent with the frog found below 600 meters (1,970 feet) in southern Washington and
below 1,500-1,600 meters (4,920 - 5,248 feet) in southern Oregon. The Columbia spotted frog's
critical habitat in Oregon is at elevations of approximately 400 feet or higher, generally drier east-
side Cascades and higher plateau inland habitats. Of notable importance is that there are no records
of either of these frogs existing in coastal or near coastal areas in western Oregon, the higher
Cascade mountains, and the Umpqua drainage basin, possibly due to a warmer water requirement
for the frog's postmetamorphic states (^20°C). The Oregon spotted frog is nearly always found in,
or near, a perennial water body such as a spring, pond, lake or sluggish stream (Leonard et al. 1993).
These spotted frogs inhabit waterbodies that would be regulated by Oregon's cold, cool and warm
water dissolved oxygen criteria. The exact dissolved oxygen requirements of the Oregon and
Columbia spotted frogs, are unknown. Hayes (1998) noted some evidence that concentrations of
dissolved oxygen of 5.0 mg/L and less could detrimentally affect spotted frogs, in general. It is
believed that the immune system of spotted frogs is compromised under these low dissolved oxygen
Conditions.
As the lowest dissolved oxygen concentrations that would be allowed under the Oregon rules
for areas inhabited by spotted frogs would be 5.5 mg/L, EPA has determined that the Oregon
dissolved oxygen criteria are not likely to adversely affect the Oregon and Columbia spotted
frogs.
F. Vernal Pool fairy shrimp
The Vernal Pool fairy shrimp is listed as threatened in California. On 8 April 1998, EPA Region
10 received a letter from the USFWS noting the discovery of the threatened species in vernal pools
that form on hardpan surfaces during the spring in the Agate Desert, in southwestern Oregon. The
Agate Desert is located in the Rogue Basin where the cold water dissolved oxygen criteria apply,
requiring an absolute minimum, 8.0 mg/L dissolved oxygen concentration.
The Vernal Pool fairy shrimp is a branchiopod, not known to occur in riverine, marine, or other
permanent water bodies. Ecologically the shrimp depend on seasonal fluctuations in their habitat,
such as absence or presence of water during specific times of the year, duration of inundation, and
other environmental factors that include specific salinity, conductivity, and dissolved solids. Eggs
of this species are capable of withstanding heat, cold, and prolonged periods of desiccation. When
the pools refill, some, but not all, of the eggs may hatch. The egg bank in the soil may be comprised
of eggs from several years of breeding. Once hatched, the larval stages of the fairy shrimp develop
rapidly into adults.
Vernal Pool fairy shrimp inhabit waters with low total dissolved solids, conductivity, alkalinity and
chloride. While the dissolved oxygen requirements of this species are unknown, all of the larger
branchiopods can regulate their oxygen consumption and live at low oxygen concentrations (Thorp
and Covich 1991 ) Home (1971) reported that a related species (Branchinecta mackini) was able
to tolerate dissolved oxvgen concentrations as low as 1.3 mg L. As the fertilized eggs from this
species can withstanding desiccation and remain viable, we may presume that the eggs do not have
70
-------
any minimum dissolved oxygen requirements. While the dissolved oxygen requirements for larval
and adult Vernal Pool fairy shrimp are unknown, by nature, these shrimp are able to survive in harsh,
temporary habitats. Despite the lack of definitive information on the dissolved oxygen requirements
of the fairy shrimp, the EPA believes the life history of these shrimp demonstrates that they are able
to withstand extremely low concentrations of dissolved oxygen.
Therefore, EPA has determined that the Oregon cold water dissolved oxygen criteria are not
likely to adversely affect the Vernal Pool fairy shrimp.
B. Temperature
1. Background
Oregon Temperature Standards Revisions
Oregon's temperature standard revisions include:
• the addition of four definitions (# 54 Numeric Temperature Criteria, #55 Measurable
Temperature Increase, #56 Anthropogenic, and # 57 Ecologically Significant Cold-Water
Refuge on page A-25 of Appendix B);
• changes to numeric and narrative criteria applicable to each basin ( found under OAR 340-
41(2)(b), pages A-10 - A-13 of Appendix B);
• the addition of some policies and guidelines applicable to all basins (OAR 340-41 -026, pages
A-14 - A-19 of Appendix B); and
• an implementation program applicable to all basins (OAR 340-41-120, pages A-20- A-24
of Appendix B).
The numeric criteria amendments replace a single basin or sub-basin-specific numeric temperature
criterion with new criteria applicable to specific species and life stages. The tables in Appendix D
show the applicable criteria for each species, by basin, compared with the previous numeric criteria.
The numeric criteria provide that "unless specifically allowed under a Department-approved surface
water temperature management plan ..., no measurable surface water temperature increase resulting
from anthropogenic activities is allowed:
(I) In a basin for which salmonid fish rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in which surface
water temperatures exceed 64.0° F(17.8C);
(ii) In the Columbia River or its associated sloughs and channels from the mouth to river mile
309 when surface water temperatures exceed 68.0F (20.0C):
(iii) In the Willamette River or its associated sloughs and channels from the mouth to river mile
50 when surface water temperatures exceed 68.0F(20.0C);
(iv) In waters and periods of the year determined by the Department to support native salmonid
spawning, egg incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and from the gravels in a basin
which exceeds 55.0F(12.8C);
(v) In waters determined by the Department to support or to be necessary to maintain the
viability of native Oregon bull trout, when surface water temperatures exceed 50.0F (10.0C)"
These provisions apply to both existing acti\ ities as \.sell as any proposed new or expanded activities.
71
-------
The State has not identified adult salmonid migration, adult holding, smoltification, or juvenile
salmonid emigration as distinct use designations. The State includes these aspects of salmonid life
history under the salmonid rearing designated use. The State has clarified where and when salmonid
spawning is to be protected in a table attached to the policy letter (Llewelyn, 1998) found in
Appendix C. Waters to be protected for bull trout, as a special category of salmonids with more
stringent criteria, are also described in the policy letter and illustrated on an accompanying map from
the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife publication, "Status of Oregon Bull Trout"(1997)
(Appendix F).
Narrative criteria state verbally what conditions or limits will apply, but need to be determined on
a case-by-case basis. The narrative criteria, which follow the numeric criteria quoted above in the
rules, allow "no measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities...
(vi) In waters determined by the Department to be ecologically significant cold-water refugia;
(vii) In stream segments containing federally listed Threatened and Endangered species if the
increase would impair the biological integrity of the Threatened and Endangered population;
(viii) In Oregon waters when the dissolved oxygen (DO) levels are within 0.5 mg/L or 10 percent
saturation of the water column or intergravel DO criterion for a given stream reach or
subbasin;
(ix) In natural lakes."
Provision (vi) above will be applied by the Department utilizing definition # 57 (Ecologically
Significant Cold-Water Refuge). The Department will be applying provision (vii) when they have
specific temperature information for a listed species. Application of provision (viii) resulted in the
placement of several waters on the draft 1998 303(d) listing of water quality limited water bodies.
In those cases the dissolved oxygen measurements were the trigger for the listing for temperature.
Waterbodies that in the previous standards had criteria to protect warm-water biota, inadvertently
had the numeric criteria removed, with no replacement numeric criteria adopted in this triennial
leview. The State has clarified its intent to protect these waters with provisions vii - ix, as
appropriate, and to develop and adopt site-specific numeric temperature criteria to protect these
waters during the upcoming triennial review (1998 - 2000) (Llewelyn, 1998). These site-specific
criteria will be submitted to EPA for review and approval, and consultation under Section 7 of ESA.
Not all policies, guidelines and implementation program elements fall under the purview of the
CWA Section 303(c) water quality standards review. Within each basin's standards in OAR 340-41
there is a provision to not count an exceedance of surface water temperature criteria an exceedance
if it occurs "when the air temperature during the warmest seven-day period of the year exceeds the
90th percentile of the seven-day average daily maximum air temperature calculated in a yearly series
over the historic record." This is enforcement/compliance discretion allowed the State. To assure
that this provision does not allow extensive periods of water temperature violation EPA conferred
with the State regarding hou this provision would he implemented. The State noted that no
72
-------
waterbodies were removed from the 1998 303(d) list of impaired waters because of this provision
(Schaedel, personal communication, 1998).
The temperature standards also contain a provision to allow a source an exception from the numeric
and narrative criteria if "designated beneficial uses would not be adversely impacted; or a source is
implementing all reasonable management practices or measures; its activity will not signficantly
affect the beneficial uses; and the environmental cost of treating the parameter to the level necessary
to assure full protection would outweigh the risk to the resource." The State has clarified in its
policy letter (Llewelyn, 1998), that this will be handled as a variance for that source until a TMDL
is developed or a site-specific criterion will be developed for the water body. In the former case, the
documentation to support a variance must meet the requirements of the federal regulations found at
40CFR131.10(g), which require a demonstration of why the criteria to support the use cannot be met.
For a site-specific criterion, the documentation must follow one of EPA's approved methods for site-
specific criteria development or some other scientifically defensible method (40CFR131.11 (b)). In
either case a public review process would be required, as well as submittal of the site-specific
criterion to EPA for review, approval, and consultation under Section 7 of ESA.
The narrative temperature criterion for marine and estuarine waters was not changed and therefore
is not part of this EPA action.
f
In a section of the Oregon water quality standards entitled "Policies and Guidelines Generally
Applicable to all Basins" there are provisions pertaining to the development of TMDLs and the
permitting of sources in waters that have been identified as water-quality limited. These provisions
are only reviewable under Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act where they create or result in a
change to the water quality standards. The provisions direct that the anthropogenic sources "develop
and implement a surface water temperature management plan describing the best management
practices, measures and/or other control technologies which will be used to reverse the warming
trend of the basin, watershed, or stream segment" (OAR 340-41-026 (3)(a)(DXO). These sources
are to "continue to maintain and improve" the plan in order to maintain the cooling trend until the
criterion is achieved or the Department has determined that "all feasible steps have been taken to
meet the criterion and that the designated beneficial uses are not being adversely impacted." The
"temperature achieved" will then be the temperature criterion for the surface waters covered by the
plan. In the policy letter (Llewelyn, 1998) the State has clarified that in this circumstance the
Department will develop a site-specific criterion (which is a change in the water quality standards)
that will be submitted to EPA for review, approval and consultation under Section 7 of ESA.
The Policies and Guidelines section also contains provisions F. G and H that allow a source (or
sources cumulatively) to increase the waterbody temperature by a set amount while a TMDL is
developed, as long as the increase will not "conflict with or impair the ability of a surface water
temperature management plan to achieve the temperature criteria" ultimately and will not "result in
a measurable impact on beneficial uses" or "beneficial uses would not be adversely impacted." The
policy letter (Llewelyn. 1998) clarifies that provision H will be handled as a variance which will be
submitted to EPA for review, approval, and consultation under Section 7 of ESA each time it is
applied to a particular permit. The policy letter indicates that provisions F and G will result in
permits written to meet the criteria.
73
-------
The provisions in OAR 340-41-120, Implementation Program Applicable to all Basins, include
statements of policy (e.g. regarding minimizing risk to cold-water aquatic ecosystems) and
implementation, particularly for waters exceeding the applicable numeric criterion. These provisions
do not fall under the purview of the CWA Section 303(c) review as they do not explicitly pertain to
designation of uses, criteria, antidegradation policy, or other aspects of the water quality standards
program that are specified for review under the EPA water quality standards regulations at 40CFR
131. Provision (11 )(c) in this Section of the Oregon regulations allows the natural surface water
temperature to become the numeric criterion. While this does pertain to a criterion change, it is not
a change from previous provisions in Oregon's water quality standards and therefore is not being
reviewed in this action. The concluding provision (g) of this Section addresses maintaining "low
stream temperatures to the maximum extent practicable" and emphasizes that any measureable
increase in surface water temperature resulting from anthropogenic activities "shall be in accordance
with the antidegradation policy contained in OAR 340-41-026."
Objective of Oregon's Revisions
Setting the stage for DEQ's revisions to its temperature criteria, the Final Issue Paper for
Temperature (ODEQ 1995 (b)) notes that, "The objective of the temperature standard is to achieve
the objective of the Clean Water Act and to "fully protect" the beneficial use. DEQ interprets this
to mean that a viable, sustainable population should be maintained at levels that fully utilize the
habitat potential of a basin or ecoregion. A sustainable population possesses the ability to survive
natural fluctuations in environmental conditions and localized natural events that may impact or
eliminate local sub-populations." (page 1-4) The Endangered Species Act (Section 2) sets forth the
purpose of the Act as providing "a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species
and threatened species depend may be conserved, to provide a program for the conservation of such
endangered species and threatened species." The Act goes on to define "conservation" as "use of
all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened
species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this Act are no longer necessary."
Oregon's objective appears to be fully in line with the Endangered Species Act purposes. The terms
"viable" and "sustainable" are important. To achieve a viable and sustainable population requires
restoration of populations (and habitats) to a level where there is a sufficient gene pool and habitat
linkages to maintain the population in the face of natural disturbance regimes as well as unavoidable
human impacts. Listed populations generally do not have that resilience, and are therefore declining.
In sum, the objectives of the Clean Water Act. Oregon's program and ESA can be interpreted as not
just to protect the remnant of the beneficial use or listed species that is there now. but to restore it
to viable and sustainable levels.
According to Oregon's Final Issue Paper for Temperature (ODEQ 1995 (b)), many streams in
Oregon have high temperatures that are impacting beneficial uses (page 1-5). The temperature
exceedances documented on Table 1-2 (ODEQ 1995. pi-7). include a daily maximum in the Grande
Ronde River of 82 F. Oregon's draft 1998 303(d) list includes 862 streams (12,146 stream miles)
as exceeding the temperature criteria. There is an acknowledgement in ODEQ 1995 (b) that the
Department of hnvironmental Quality was not implementing or enforcing the existing (pre-1996)
temperature standards to any extent (p 1-5).
74
-------
The previous Oregon temperature standard (which was adopted in 1967) provided a maximum
temperature above which no measureable increase due to human activity was allowed. This varied
by basin with 58 F (14.4C) or 64 F (17.8C) as the maximum in salmonid producing streams in
western Oregon and the Cascades, and 68 F (20C) for salmonid producing streams in eastern
Oregon, the exception being the Willamette with a maximum of 70 F (21C). The standard was felt
to be unnecessarily stringent is some cases, difficult to interpret (no measurement units were
specified) and hard to apply to nonpoint sources. A 1967 document (discussed in ODEQ 1995 (b)
but not specifically referenced) is said to have stated, "An upper temperature limit must be set for
the benefit of anadromous fishes; they show definite signs of physiological insult at temperatures
above 68 F (20 C)." Considerably more studies have been conducted since that time relative to
temperature requirements as well as the interaction of temperature and other habitat features.
Oregon reviewed this literature, as well as EPA's criteria guidance, in its Temperature Technical
Advisory Committee before making recommendations to the DEQ for revisions to the standards.
How Do the Revisions Compare with Previous Standards
The revisions to the temperature standards provide more protection for salmonid spawning and bull
trout through adoption of colder temperatures than previously applied. For salmonid rearing the
temperatures are cooler than before under the new criteria for the eastside basins and warmer than
before for some portions of the westside. However, with implementation of antidegradation, the
westside basins that were meeting the previous criteria should receive protection from degradation
under the High Quality Waters Policy (OAR340-41 -026{ 1 X&XA). There are new provisions in the
revised standards that allow exceedances of, or exceptions to, the numeric criteria under certain
circumstances requiring a technical determination by the Department, including "designated
beneficial uses would not be adversely impacted." DEQ recognized that water quality standards
have their real effect on the environment when they are implemented, therefore there is a far more
detailed approach to implementation, particularly where a waterbody is water quality limited for
temperature. DEQ with other Designated Management Agencies (DMA's) from the State is
responsible for seeing that a temperature management plan is developed for each water-quality
limited stream (or basin) to address how the temperature will be brought down to meet the criteria.
The anthropogenic sources in the effected waterbody or basin are required to develop and implement
the plan (OAR 340-41-026(3)(D)(i).
2. EPA Proposed Action
EPA proposes under Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act to approve all of Oregon's temperature
revisions with the exception of the numeric criteria for the Willamette River (mouth to river mile
50). The warmer temperature adopted for the Willamette (68° F. 20°C). even though it is cooler
than what previously applied (70F). is not consistent with the temperature criterion adopted
elsewhere to protect salmonid rearing (64° F. 17.8°C). a use designated for the Willamette. This
difference is not technically supported either by a site-specific criterion or an adjustment to the uses
designated for the Willamette, therefore EPA determined that this provision would be disapproved
as not fully protecting the designated uses. The Willamette is water-quality limited for temperature
and the State intends to revisit the temperature criterion for that waterbody as it develops the TMDL
(Llewelyn. 1W8). In making the 303(c) draft determination HP.A had concerns about the adequacy
75
-------
of the 64° F rearing criterion in light of the some of the technical information in the ODEQ Final
Issue Paper on Temperature (1995 (b)) and the exacerbating factor that salmonids are already
stressed by numerous factors such as loss of habitat. Because of this, EPA commissioned a more
extensive technical review of the temperature criteria (see Berman, 1998 and Coutant (1998) in
Appendix H).
3. Effect of Action on Listed Species
The ODEQ Final Issue Paper on Temperature (1995) notes that aquatic life uses are the uses most
sensitive to water temperature, and further, that salmonid fish and amphibians appear to be the most
temperature-sensitive aquatic life uses (p2-l). The following overview discussion regarding
temperature (drawn from Berman, 1998) is therefore couched in terms of salmonids.
Overview of Temperature and its Effects on Biota
Please refer to Berman (1998) and Coutant (1998), Appendix H, for an in-depth analysis of
temperature. That analysis is only briefly summarized here.
Temperature directly governs the metabolic rate of fish and directly influences the life history traits
of Pacific salmon. Natural or anthropogenic fluctuations in water temperature can induce a wide
array of behavioral and physiological responses in salmonids. Mechanisms nave evolved to
synchronize the timing of salmonid life history events with their physical environment, and are
believed to have been a major factor in the development of specific populations or stocks.
Previous research on temperature sensitivity of fishes emphasized lethal limits and temperature
preferences. However, current concerns have centered on the effects of sublethal temperatures and
ecological context. Holtby (1988) reported that virtually all effects of an altered thermal regime on
Carnation Creek coho salmon were associated with relatively small temperature increases.
Alteration of tissue and blood chemistry as well as behavioral changes may occur in association with
exposure to sublethal elevated temperatures. These alterations may lead to impaired functioning of
the individual and decreased viability at the organism, population, and species levels. Feeding,
growth, resistance to disease, successful reproduction, and sufficient activity for competition and
predator avoidance are all necessary for survival. Inability to maintain any of these activities at
moderately extreme temperatures may be as decisive to continued survival as more extreme
temperatures are to immediate survival. Duration and intensity of exposure is related to unique
species characteristics and environmental context. Maximized species distribution and diverse life
history strategies in combination with broadly distributed and interconnected habitat elements are
critical in defining the response and effect of altered thermal regimes on native salmon and charr.
Water temperature vanes both spatially and temporally. Ambient water temperatures may
periodically or annually approach cold-water biota thresholds for chronic or acute species response.
However, system heterogeneity provides alternatives in the form of refugia. In these instances, the
abundance, distribution, and accessability of cold water refugia play a critical role in population and
species level persistence. Where annual temperatures approach thermal thresholds, species
variability in the form of unique life history- strategies allows individuals to utilize these systems
76
-------
during periods when suitable conditions exist. Shifts in annual thermal regimes and loss of thermal
refugia would expose these populations to sublethal or lethal temperatures thereby negatively
affecting population viability.
Processes controlling air temperature, channel morphology, riparian structure, hyporheic zones and
ground water, wetland complexes, and flow volume shape stream temperature. Alteration of one or
more of these parameters leads to thermal alteration through the following mechanisms: increased
solar radiation intensity per unit surface area; increased stream surface area; increased energy
imparted to the stream per unit volume; and decreased cold water inflow.
There are numerous threats to the remaining populations of native salmon and charr (Quigley 1997,
Ratliff and Howell 1992). However, the present or threatened destructibn, modification, or
curtailment of habitat or range has been cited by numerous authors as the single most important
factor in the decline as well as recovery of these species (Quigley 1997, NehJsen et al. 1991).
Critical to defining species range and habitat suitability is temperature. Historical distribution of
native salmon and charr has been significantly reduced. In the process, population extinctions with
concomitant loss in genetic and life history variability have occurred. Nehlsen et al. (1991) provide
a partial list of extinct native salmonid stocks in Oregon including spring/summer chinook salmon
in the Sprague River, Williamson River, Wood River, Klamath River, Umatilla River, Metolius
River, Priest Rapids, Walla Walla River, Malheur River, and Owyhee River; Fall chinook in the
Sprague River, Williamsom River, Wood River, Klamath River, Umatilla River, Willamette River,
Snake River and tributaries above Hells Canyon Dam, and Walla Walla River; echo salmon in the
Grande Ronde River, Wallowa River, Walla Walla River, Snake River, Columbia River small
tributaries from Bonneville Dam to Priest Rapids Dam, Umatilla River, and Euchre Creek; sockeye
salmon from the Metolius River and Wallowa River; chum salmon from the Walla Walla River; and
steelhead from the Owyhee River, Malheur River, Sandy River (summer), Powder River, Burnt
River, and South Umpqua River (summer).
Numeric Temperature Criteria Measurement
There are several new definitions that have been added to the Oregon water quality standards related
to both the temperature and dissolved oxygen criteria. While EPA proposes to approve the
definitions, the real effect of those definitions is dependent on the specific numeric criteria that have
been adopted by the State. Therefore the determination of effects of the definitions is inherently
included in the determinations on each numeric criterion. Included below, however, is a separate
discussion of definition #54 Numeric Temperature Criteria, because it was examined fairly
extensively on its own. This evaluation should then be folded into the effects determinations that
follow.
From OAR 340-41-006:
"(54) Numeric Temperature Criteria are measured as the seven-day moving average of the daily
maximum temperatures. If there is insufficient data to establish a seven-day average of maximum
temperatures, the numeric criteria shall be applied as an instantaneous maximum. The measurements
shall be made using a sampling protocol appropriate to indicate impact to the beneficial uses."
77
-------
The basis of the Oregon temperature standard rests on the assumption that the criteria represent a
"maximum" condition, given diurnal variability. The June 22, 1998, letter from the State (Llewelyn,
1998) provides clarification of the standard. The letter states, "A review of the literature indicates
that it is difficult to establish a temperature criteria for waters that experience diurnal temperature
changes that would assure no effects due to C. columnaris...lhe technical committee has
recommended a temperature range (58-64°F; 14.4-17.8°C) as being protective of salmonid rearing.
While 64°F is the upper end of the range, the key to this recommendation is the temperature unit that
is used in the standard - the seven-day moving average of the daily maximum temperatures." A 64°F
(17.8°C) threshold was selected as it was believed that "the criteria represent a "maximum"
condition, given diurnal variability..." Buchanan and Gregory (1997), in describing the technical
considerations and the process that went into the Oregon water quality standards revisions, note that,
"This 7-day average maximum is usually 0.5° - 2.0° C lower than the highest daily maximum
temperature during the summer."
A hypothetical seven-day period can be constructed to evaluate potential time spent at or above
sublethal thresholds under a criteria measurement framed as the seven-day moving average of the
daily maximum, and that would still meet the criterion of 64°F (17.8°C).
Example: "Stream XYZ" - Rearing Criterion 64°F (17.8°C)
Day 1: daily temperatures:
16.5°C, 17.7°C, 18°C, 18.5°, 18.3°C, 17.7°C, 16.6°C
maximum temperature: 18.5°C
mean temperature: 17.6°C
Day 2: daily temperatures:
15.5°C, 15.8°C, 16.8°C, 17.2°C. 17°C, 16.8°C, 16.2°C
maximum temperature: 17.2°C
mean temperature: 16.5°C
Day 3: daily temperatures:
I5.5°C, 15.8°C, 16.9°C, 17.2°C. 17°C. 16.8°C, 16.3°C
maximum temperature: 17.2°C
mean temperature: 16.5°C
Day 4: daily temperatures:
16°C, 17.2'JC, 17.8°C, 18.3°C, 17.9°C, 17.5°C, 16.9°C
maximum temperature: 18.3°C
mean temperature: 17.4°C
Day 5: daily temperatures:
16.8°C. 17.3"C. 17.9°C. I8°C. 17.8°C. 17.4°C. 16.9°C
maximum temperature: 18°C
mean temperature: 17.4'C
78
-------
Day 6: daily temperatures:
16.2°C, 17.2°C, 17.6°C, 17.8°C, 17.8°C, 17.2°C, 16.9°C
maximum temperature: 17.8°C
mean temperature: 17.2°C
Day 7: daily temperatures:
16.8°C, 17.4°C, 17.7°C, 17.8°C, 17.8°C, 17.5°C, 16.9°C
maximum temperature: 17.8°C
mean temperature: 17.4°C
Seven-Day Moving Average of the Daily Maximum Temperature: 17.8°C
This example demonstrates that the "seven-day moving average" can mask the magnitude of
temperature fluctuation and the duration of exposure to daily maximum temperatures as well as
neglecting mean temperatures and cumulative exposure history. From the example, on five of the
seven days, the daily maximum temperature is at or above the rearing criterion. Although daily
mean temperatures do not exceed the criterion, they are less than 1°C from the criterion on five of
the seven days. Where daily maximum temperatures are 17.8°C or greater, organisms are exposed
to temperatures equal to or greater than the criterion over a potentially significant portion of the day.
The "seven-day moving average of the daily maximum temperature" meets the rearing criterion of
17.8°C even though the cumulative exposure history of an organism in "Stream XYZ" is often at or
above the standard and is within the sublethal to lethal range for the species..
The magnitude of fluctuation and the duration of elevated temperatures is greater in an altered
system. Concomitantly, the abundance and distribution of cold-water refugia is decreased. Based
on Oregon's 303(d) list, which contains many streams limited for temperature, it is likely that the
diel fluctuation in many Oregon streams is reflective of altered systems. Establishing conservative
numeric temperature criteria would lessen concerns surrounding the potential magnitude of
fluctuation and temperature cumulative exposure of salmonids.
A. Snake River Sockeye Salmon:
1. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid spawning, egg
incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which exceeds 55°F (12.8°C).
Snake River sockeye salmon do not spawn in waters of the State of Oregon. They migrate almost
900 miles from the Pacific Ocean to spawn in Redfish Lake, Idaho. Therefore the Oregon spawning
criteria are not applicable to the spawning habitat of this species, or to its migratory
route in the Columbia River.
Therefore, the spawning criterion of 12.8°C is not likely to adversely affect Snake River
sockeye salmon.
2. I he Oregon Water Qualit> Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid rearing: no
79
-------
measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in
a basin for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in which surface waters exceed
64.0 °F (17.8°C). In addition, no measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from
anthropogenic activities is allowed in the Columbia River or its associated sloughs and channels
from the mouth to river mile 309 when surface water temperatures exceed 20°C.
Snake River sockeye salmon migrate up the Columbia River to spawn in Redfish Lake. The
temperature criteria applicable to the Columbia River were not changed during this triennial review
and therefore are not the subject of this evaluation. However, the new rearing criteria do apply to
waters in the Columbia drainage in Oregon. In the eastern part of the State, the new criterion of
17.8°C is colder than the previous criterion of 20°C, therefore this has the potential to decrease
temperatures in the Columbia River, which would reduce the likelihood of adverse effects on Snake
River sockeye salmon in the Columbia River.
The rearing criterion of 17.8°C therefore is not likely to adversely affect Snake River sockeye
salmon.
3. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecologically significant cold-water refugia, stream segments containing Threatened and
Endangered species, waters with low DO, and natural lakes. These provisions provide the State with
the legal authority to provide extra protection beyond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
therefore provide potential additional protection for listed salmonid species.
Therefore EPA has determined that the narrative criteria provisions for temperature are not
likely to adversely affect the Snake River sockeye salmon.
B. Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon, Southern Oregon and California Coastal
Spring Chinook Salmon, Lower Columbia River Spring Chinook Salmon, Upper Willamette
River Spring Chinook Salmon:
1. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid spawning, egg
incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which exceeds 55.0°F (12.8°C).
Spring chinook spawning preferences of 5.6JC to 14.4UC (Olson and Foster 1955), 5.6°C to 13.9°C
( Spence et al. 1996. Bell 1986). and 5.6°C to 12.8 C (ODEQ 1995 (b)) have been recorded.
Temperature preferences for spawning summer chinook have been cited as 5.6°C to 14.4°C (Olson
and Foster 1955). 6.1°C to 18.0°C (Olson and Foster 1955), and 5.6°C to 13.9°C (Spence etal. 1996,
Bjornn and Reiser 1991). A spawning optimum of 10°C with a range of 8.0°C to 13°C has been
reported by the Independent Scientific Group (1996). Stressful conditions begin at temperatures
greater than 15.6'C. lethal effects occur at 21C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
80
-------
The National Marine Fisheries Service's Chinook Habitat Assessment provides a 10°C to 13.9°C
range for "properly functioning" condition and a range of 14°C to 15.5°C as "at risk" with reference
to spawning.
Spring Chinook incubation optimum of 5°C to 14.4°C (Spence et al 1996, Bell 1986) and 4.5°C to
12.8°C (ODEQ 1995(b)) have been cited. The optimum temperature range for summer chinook
incubation is 5.0°C to 14.4°C (Spence et al. 1996, Bjomn and Reiser 1991). The Independent
Scientific Group (1996) cites temperatures of less than 10°C as optimum for incubation with a range
of 8.0°C to 12.0PC. Stressful conditions begin at temperatures greater than 13.3 C, lethal effects
occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). The National
Marine Fisheries Service's Chinook Habitat Assessment cites temperatures of 10°C to 13.9°C as
"properly functioning."
EPA has also considered where the salmonid spawning use is designated as well as the timing
periods specified for application of that criterion (see Llewelyn, 1998, Salmonid SpawningTable).
The Snake River Spring Chinook spawn in higher elevation waters tributary to the Snake and
Salmon rivers. Oregon developed their Salmonid Spawning Table in conjunction with regional
fisheries biologists in the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Based on cited temperature preferences, effects studies for spawning, incubation, and emergence,
and the information on timing and location of spawning for these species EPA has determined that
the 12.8°C spawning criterion is protective of the Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon,
Southern Oregon and California Coastal spring chinook salmon, Lower Columbia River spring
chinook salmon, and Upper Willamette River spring chinook salmon.
The spawning criterion of 12.8° C therefore is not likely to adversely affect Snake River
spring/summer chinook salmon, Southern Oregon and California Coastal spring chinook
salmon, Lower Columbia River spring chinook salmon, and Upper Willamette River spring
chinook salmon.
2. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid rearing: no
measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in
a basin for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in which surface waters exceed
64.0°(17.8°C).
The temperature preference range for migrating adult spring chinook salmon is 3.3°C to 13.?C
(Spence et al. 1996, Bjornn and Reiser 1991, Bell 1986). At temperatures of 21°C. migratory
inhibition occurs (ODEQ 1995(b)). Migrating adult summer chinook temperature preferences have
been cited as 13.9°C to 20°C (Spence etal. 1996. Bjornn and Reiser 1991. Bell 1986).
The Independent Scientific Group (1996) cites 10°C as the optimum temperature for chinook
migration with a range of 8.0°C to 13.0°C. Stressful conditions begin at temperatures greater than
15.6°C and the lethal temperature is021 C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). "Properly
functioning" condition is reported by the National Marine Fisheries Service Chinook Habitat
Assessment to occur at 10"C to 1 .vl)'C uith riverine systems "at risk" tor migrating chinook salmon
81
-------
at temperatures between 14°C and 17.5*0. Spence et al. (1996) cite 26?2 C as the upper lethal
temperature for chinook salmon acclimated to 20°C while Brett (1952) reports an upper lethal
temperature of 25.1°C. At these temperatures 50% mortality occurs.
In addition to migratory preference, spring chinook salmon research has addressed the role of
temperature during adult holding in freshwater. As spring chinook salmon spend extended periods
in freshwater prior to spawning, water temperature during this period is critical to successful
reproduction. The Oregon Water Quality Standards Review (ODEQ 1995(b)) cites temperatures of
8.0°C to 12.5°C as appropriate for adult spring chinook salmon holding. In addition, the ODEQ
1995(b) states that temperatures between 13.0°C and 15.5°C could produce pronounced mortality
in adult spring chinook. Marine (1992) cites information demonstrating that temperatures between
6.0°C and 14.0C provided optimal pre-spawning survival, maturation, and spawning. Marine
(1992) and Berman (1990) identified a sublethal temperature range of 15°C to 17 C. Lethal
temperatures for adult spring chinook holding in freshwater have been reported as 18°C to 21°C
(Marine 1992) and greater than or equal to 17.5°C (Berman 1990).
Rearing preferences for spring chinook salmon of 11.7°C (Coutant 1977, Ferguson 1958, Huntsman
1942), 10°C to 12.SC (Bell 1986), and PO C to 14.8 C (ODEQ 1995(b)) have been recorded.
Optimum production occurs at 10°C, and maximum growth at 14.8°C (ODEQ 1995(b)). Summer
chinook rearing preference is cited as 11.7°C (Coutant 1977, Ferguson 1958, Huntsman 1942) and
10°C to 12.8°C (Bell 1986). Temperatures greater than 15.5°C increase the likelihood of disease-
related mortality in chinook salmon (ODEQ 1995(b)).
The Independent Scientific Group (1996) report an optimum rearing temperature for chinook salmon
of 15°C, with a range of 12 "C to 17 C. Stressful conditions begin at temperatures greater than 18.3 C
and the lethal temperature is 25°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). "Properly functioning"
condition is cited by the National Marine Fisheries Service Chinook Habitat Assessment as 10°C to
13.9°C with riverine systems "at risk" for rearing chinook salmon at temperatures between 14t and
17.5°C.
Simplification and outmigration preference for spring chinook range from 3.3°C to 12.2°C (ODEQ
1995(b)). Lethal loading stress occurs between 18.0°C and 21°C (ODEQ 1995(b), Brett 1952).
Exposing Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon. Southern Oregon and California Coastal
spring chinook salmon. Lower Columbia River spring chinook salmon, and Upper Willamette River
spring chinook salmon to the 17.8°C temperature criterion (measured as a rolling average of the
daily max) during migration, rearing, and smoltification poses a risk to their viability. EPA has
reviewed the literature concerning lethal and sublethal effects of temperature on salmonids as well
as the compounding effect of habitat simplification and loss. Based on this review, there is reason
to believe that mortality from both lethal and sublethal effects (e.g., reproductive failure.
prespawning mortality, residualization and delay of smolts, decreased competitive success, disease
resistance) will occur.
The rearing criterion of 17.8°C is likely to adversely affect Snake River spring/summer
chinook salmon, Southern Oregon and California Coastal spring chinook salmon, Lower
82
-------
Columbia River spring chinook salmon, and Upper Willamette River spring chinook salmon.
3. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecologically significant cold-water refugia, stream segments containing Threatened and
Endangered species, waters with low DO, and natural lakes. These provisions provide the State with
the legal authority to provide extra protection beyond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
therefore provide potential additional protection for listed salmonid species.
Therefore the narrative temperature provisions are not likely to adversely affect Snake River
spring/summer chinook salmon, Southern Oregon and California Coastal spring chinook
salmon, Lower Columbia River spring chinook salmon, and Upper Willamette River spring
chinook salmon.
C. Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon, Southern Oregon and California Coastal Fall Chinook
Salmon, Lower Columbia River Fall Chinook Salmon:
1. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid spawning, egg
incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which exceeds 55 °F (12.8°C).
Fall chinook spawning preferences of 10°C to 12.8°C (Bell 1986), 10°C to 16.7°C (Olson and Foster
1955), and 5.6°C to 13.9°C (Spence et al. 1996) have been recorded. The National Marine Fisheries
Service's document (NMFS, 1995) states that "properly functioning" riverine systems exhibit
temperatures of 10°C to 14 C, between 1°4 C and 15.5 C they are "at risk" with reference to
spawning, and at temperatures greater than 15.5°C they are "not properly functioning" with reference
to spawning. The optimum temperature for spawning is 10°C with a range of°8 C to013 C
(Independent Scientific Group 1996). Stressful conditions occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C
and lethal temperatures occur at 21°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
Incubation optima have been cited as 10°C to 12.8°C (Bell 1986), 10°C to 16.7°C (Olson and Foster
1955), 10°Cto 12°C (Neitzel and Becker 1985, Garling and Masterson 1985. Heming 1982), and 5
-------
and the timing and location of spawning for these species EPA has determined that the criterion is
protective of Snake River fall chinook salmon. Southern Oregon and California Coastal fall chinook
salmon, and Lower Columbia River fall chinook salmon.
The 12.8°C spawning criterion is not likely to adversely affect Snake River fall chinook
salmon, Southern Oregon and California Coastal fall chinook salmon, and Lower Columbia
River fall chinook salmon.
2. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid rearing: no
measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in
a basin for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in which surface waters exceed
64.0°F(17.8°C).
The temperature preference range for migrating adult fall chinook salmon is 10.6°C to \9.fC
(Spence et al. 1996, Bell 1986). The optimum migration temperature is 10°C with a range of 8°C
to 13°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). Stressful conditions occur at temperatures greater than
15.6°C and lethal effects occur at 21 °C. The National Marine Fisheries Service's document (NMFS,
1995) states that "properly functioning" riverine systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 13.9°C-
14°C; between 14t and 17.5t-17.8t they are "at risk" with reference to migratory and rearing life
history stages; and at temperatures greater than 17.5°C-17.8°C they are "not properly functioning"
with reference to migratory and rearing life history stages. The preferred rearing temperature range
is 12°C to 14
-------
chinook salmon.
3. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecologically significant cold-water refugia, stream segments containing Threatened and
Endangered species, waters with low DO, and natural lakes. These provisions provide the State with
the legal authority to provide extra protection beyond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
therefore provide potential additional protection for listed salmonid species.
Therefore the narrative temperature criteria provisions are not likely to adversely affect Snake
River fall chinook salmon, southern Oregon and California coastal fall chinook salmon, and
Lower Columbia River fall chinook salmon.
D. Snake River Basin Steelhead, Middle Columbia River Steelhead, Lower Columbia River
Steelhead, Upper Willamette River Steelhead:
1. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid spawning, egg
incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which exceeds 12.8°C.
Cited preferred spawning temperatures are 3.9°C to 9.4°C (Spence et al. 1996, Bell 1986) and 4.4°C
to 12.8°C (Swift 1976). A general preferred temperature range of ItfC to 13°C was reported by
Bjornn and Reiser (1991). The Independent Scientific Group (19%) provides temperature ranges for
chinook salmon. However, the authors state that, "other salmon species are not markedly different
in their requirements." They cite 10°C as the optimum spawning temperature with a range of 8°C
to 13°C. Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than f5.6 C and lethal
temperature effects occur at 21°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). Few references to optimum
incubation temperatures were located. The Washington State hatchery program reported optimal
Steelhead egg survival from 5.6°C to 11.1°C (Hicks 1998). The Independent Scientific Group's
general criteria (1996) cites temperatures less than 10°C as the optimum for incubation with a range
of8°Cto 12°C. Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than 13.3°C and lethal
effects occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
EPA has also considered where the salmonid spawning use is designated as well as the timing
periods specified for application of that criterion (see Llewelyn, 1998. Salmonid Spawning Table).
Oregon developed their table in conjunction with regional fisheries biologists in the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Based on available information. EPA has determined that the 12.8°C criterion for spawning,
incubation, and emergence adequately protects Snake River Basin Steelhead. Middle Columbia River
Steelhead, Lower Columbia River Steelhead. and Upper Willamette River Steelhead.
The 12.8°C criterion is not likely to adversely affect Snake River Basin Steelhead, Middle
Columbia River Steelhead, Lower Columbia River Steelhead, and Upper Willamette River
85
-------
steelhead.
2. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid rearing: no
measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in
a basin for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in which surface waters exceed
64.0°F(17.8°C).
Migration preference data specific to steelhead were not found. However, Beschta et al. (1987), note
that migratory inhibition occurred at 21 °C. Hicks (1998) reported that the upper incipient lethal limit
for steelhead is between 21 °C and 22°C. Spence et al. (1996) report an upper lethal temperature for
steelhead acclimated to 20°C of 23.9°C. At this temperature, 50% mortality occurs. The National
Marine Fisheries Service document (NMFS, 1995) states that "properly functioning" riverine
systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 14° C to 17.8>C they are "at risk" with
reference to migration, and at temperatures greater than 17.8°C they are "not properly functioning"
with reference to migration. The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides a general
recommendation for salmonid migration with an optimum of 10°C and a range of 8 C to IS C.
Stressful conditions occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur
at 21°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). A general preferred temperature range of 10 C to 13 C
was reported by Bjomn and Reiser (1991).
As summer steelhead enter freshwater in June and spawn the following spring, adult holding
temperatures are likely critical to successful reproduction. Similar sublethal effects as described for
spring chinook salmon are likely. Reproductively mature spring chinook salmon held at
temperatures between 17.5° and 19 C produced a greater number of pre-hatch mortalities and
developmental abnormalities, as well as smaller eggs and alevins than adults held at temperatures
between 14°C to 15.5°C (Berman 1990). Smith et al. (1983) observed that rainbow trout brood fish
must be held at water temperatures below 13.3°C and preferably not above 12.2°C for a period of 2
to 6 months before spawning to produce eggs of good quality. Additionally, Bouck et al. (1977)
determined that adult sockeye salmon held at 10°C lost 7.5% of their body weight and had visible
fat reserves. However, at 16.2°C, they lost 12% of their body weight and visible fat reserves were
essentially depleted. As energy reserves are important to successful reproductive efforts, elevated
temperatures during migration or on the spawning ground can directly affect population and species
viability.
Preferred rearing temperatures were reported by Bell (1986) as 10°C to 12.8°C. Beschta et al. (1987)
reported preferred temperatures of 7.3°C to 14.6°C with 1CPC as the optimum. The Independent
Scientific Group (1996) cites general recommendations for salmonid rearing with 15°C as the
optimum and a range of 12°C to 17°C. Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater
than 18.3°C and lethal effects occur at 25 C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). The National
Marine Fisheries Service document (NMFS. 1995) states that "properly functioning" riverine
systems exhibit temperatures of 10UC to 14°C; between 14 C and 17.8 C they are "at risk" with
reference to rearing, and at temperatures greater than 17.8"C they are "not properly functioning" with
reference to rearing.
Tests conducted on steelhead found that downstream movement could be stopped by placing smolts
86
-------
in temperatures between 11°C and 12.2 C from a starting temperature of 7.2 C (Hicks 1998).
Additionally, temperatures above 12°C were found to be detrimental to the migratory behavior and
saltwater adaptive responses of Toutle River hatchery steelhead. Exposure of smolts to temperatures
of 13°C resulted in migratory delays, decreased emigration behavior, and lower ATPase activity
(Hicks 1998). In an additional study, steelhead smolts were held at 6.5°C 10°C, 15°C, and 20°C.
Smolts from the 6.5°C and 10°C groups exposed to a seawater challenge responded with increased
levels of ATPase activity, whereas, individuals from the 15°C and 20°C groups responded with low
levels of ATPase activity (Hicks 1998). All four of the smolts held at 20°C and three of the four
smolts held at 15°C died within three day of the saltwater challenge. No mortalities occurred at
6.5°C or 10C (Hicks 1998). Given study results, 12 C was recommended as the limit to safe
downstream migration of steelhead smolts.
Exposing Snake River Basin steelhead, Middle Columbia River steelhead. Lower Columbia River
steelhead, and Upper Willamette River steelhead to the 17.8°C temperature criterion (measured as
a rolling average of the daily max) during migration, rearing, and smoltification poses a risk to their
viability. EPA has reviewed the literature concerning lethal and sublethal effects of temperature on
salmonids and the compounding effect of habitat simplification and loss. Based on this review, there
is reason to believe that mortality from both lethal and sublethal effects (e.g., reproductive failure,
prespawning mortality, residuaJization and delay of smolts, decreased competitive success, disease
resistance) will occur.
The rearing criterion of 17.8° C is likely to adversely affect Snake River Basin steelhead,
Middle Columbia River steelhead, Lower Columbia River steelhead, and Upper Willamette
River steelhead.
3. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecologically significant cold-water refugia, stream segments containing Threatened and
Endangered species, waters with low DO, and natural lakes. These provisions provide the State with
the legal authority to provide extra protection beyond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
therefore provide potential additional protection for listed salmonid species.
Therefore the narrative temperature criteria are not likely to adversely affect Snake River
Basin steelhead, Middle Columbia River steelhead, Lower Columbia River steelhead, and
Upper Willamette River steelhead.
E. Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast and Oregon Coastal Coho Salmon:
1. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid spawning, egg
incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which exceeds 55.0°F (12.80)C.
Coho salmon spaumng preferences of 4.4 'C to 9.4 '(.' (Reiser and Bjomn 1973. Brett 1952).10UC to
12.8"C (Bell 1986). and 7.2T to 12.8 C (Hicks 1998) have been recorded. The Independent
87
-------
Scientific Group (1996) provides temperature ranges for chinook salmon. However, the authors state
that, "other salmon species are not markedly different in their requirements." They cite 10°C as the
optimum spawning temperature with a range of 8°C to 13 C. Stressful conditions occur at
temperatures greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur at 21t (Independent Scientific
Group 1996).
Cited optimum incubation temperatures are 4.4°C to 13.3°C (Reiser and Bjornn 1973, Brett 1952),
10°C to 12.8PC (Bell 1986), * C to 9 C (Sakh 1984), 4 C to 65 C (Dong 1981), and°2 C to°8 C
(Tang et al. 1987). The temperature range producing the highest survival rates for eggs and alevins
was 1.3°C to 10.9°C (Tang et al. 1987). Increasing egg mortality has been reported at temperatures
greater than 11°C (Murray and McPhail 1988), greater than 1$ C (Allen 1957 in Murray and
McPhail 1988), and at approximately 14°C (Reiser and Bjomn 1973, Brett 1952). An upper lethal
limit of 12.5°C to 14.5°C for University of Washington coho and 10.9°C to 12.5°C for Dungeness
River, Washington coho was reported by Dong (1981). The lower lethal temperature has been
recorded as 0.6°C to 1.3°C (Dong 1981). The Independent Scientific Group's general criteria (1996)
cites temperatures less than 10°C as the optimum for incubation with a range of 8 C to012 C.
Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than 13.3°C and lethal effects occur at
temperatures greater than 15.6°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
EPA has also considered where the salmonid spawning use is designated as well as the timing
periods specified for application of that criterion (see Llewelyn, 1998, Salmonid Spawning Table).
Oregon developed their table in conjunction with regional fisheries biologists in the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Based on the available information, EPA has determined that the 12.8° C criterion for spawning,
incubation, and emergence adequately protects Southern Oregon and Northern California Coast and
Oregon Coastal coho salmon. Although some optimum temperatures for spawning for this species
are well below the 12.8°C, the species has a peak spawning period of November to February.
Meeting the spawning criterion of 12.8°C in the basins earlier in the fall, as is required for other
salmonid species present, will assure that temperatures are likely lower when the coho spawning
actually occurs.
The 12.8° spawning criterion is not likely to adversely affect Southern Oregon and Northern
California Coast and Oregon Coastal coho salmon.
2. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid rearing: no
measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in
a basin for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use. and in which surface waters exceed
64.0°F(17.8°C).
The temperature preference range for migrating adult coho salmon is 7.2°C to 15.6°C (Reiser and
Bjomn 1973. Brett 1952). A general preferred temperature range of 12°C to 14°C with temperatures
greater than 15"C generally avoided is reported by Brett (1952). The National Marine Fisheries
Service document (NMFS. 1995) states that "properly functioning" riverine systems exhibit
temperatures of 10'C to 14"C: between 14 C to 17.8'C they are "at risk" with reference to migration.
-------
and at temperatures greater than 17.8°C they are "not properly functioning" with reference to
migration. The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides a general recommendation for
salmonid migration with an optimum of 10°C and a range of 8°C to 13t. Stressful conditions occur
at temperatures greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur at 51 C (Independent
Scientific Group 1996). Adult coho final temperature preferences are reported as 11.4°C when
conducted in a laboratory and 16.6°C in Lake Michigan (Coutant 1977). Brett (1952) reports an
incipient upper lethal temperature of 26°C (i.e., 50% mortality in 16.7 hours) while the Oregon
Water Quality Standards Review (ODEQ 1995(b)) reports an upper lethal limit of 25°C.
Sandercock (1991) reports that there appears to be little correlation between the time of entry to a
spawning stream and the spawning data. Early-run fish may spawn early, but many will hold for
weeks or even months before spawning, adult holding temperatures are likely critical to successful
reproduction. Similar sublethal effects as described for spring chinook salmon are likely.
Reproductively mature spring chinook salmon held at elevated temperatures produced a greater
number of pre-hatch mortalities and developmental abnormalities, as well as smaller eggs and
alevins than adults held at preferred temperatures (Berman 1990). Additionally, Bouck et al. (1977)
determined that adult sockeye salmon held at preferred temperatures lost less of their body weight
and maintained visible fat reserves while those held at elevated temperatures lost greater quantities
of body weight and visible fat reserves were essentially depleted. As energy reserves are important
to successful reproductive efforts, elevated temperatures during migration or on the spawning ground
can directly affect population and species viability.
Cited rearing temperature preferences are 11.8°C to 14.6°C (Reiser and Bjornn 1973, Brett 1952),
11.4°C (Coutant 1977), 12°C to 14°C (Bell 1986), and 11.8PC to 14.6°C (Beschta et al. 1987).
Cessation of growth occurs at temperatures greater than 20.3°C (ODEQ 1995(b), Reiser and Bjornn
1973, Brett 1952). Beschta et al. (1987) report an upper lethal temperature of 25.8°C. The
Independent Scientific Group (1996) cites general recommendations for salmonid rearing with 15°C
as the optimum and a range of 12°C to 17°C. Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or
greater than 18.3°C and lethal effects occur at 25° C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). The
National Marine Fisheries Service document (NMFS,1995) states that "properly functioning"
riverine systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 14°C and 17.8°C they are "at risk"
with reference to rearing, and at temperatures greater than 17.8°C they are "not properly functioning"
with reference to rearing.
A preferred smoltification temperature range is 12°C to 15.5°C (Brett et al. 1958). Spence et al.
(1996) report migration temperatures of 2.5°C to 13 JC with most fish migrating before
temperatures reach 11°C to 12°C.
Based on available information, it is likely that exposure of Southern Oregon/Northern California
Coast and Oregon Coast coho salmon to the 17.8° C temperature criterion during migration, rearing.
and smoltification poses a risk to their viability. EPA has reviewed the literature concerning lethal
and sublethal effects of temperature on salmonids and the compounding effect of habitat
simplification and loss. Based on this review, there is reason to believe that mortality from both
lethal and sublethal effects (e.g.. reproductive failure, prespawning mortality, residualization and
delay ot'smolts. decreased competitive success, disease resistance) will occur.
89
-------
The 17.8° C rearing criterion is likely to adversely affect Southern Oregon/Northern
California Coast and Oregon Coast coho salmon.
3. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecologically significant cold-water refugia, stream segments containing Threatened and
Endangered species, waters with low DO, and natural lakes. These provisions provide the State with
the legal authority to provide extra protection beyond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
therefore provide potential additional protection for listed salmonid species.
Therefore the narrative temperature criteria are not likely to adversely affect Southern
Oregon/Northern California Coast and Oregon Coast coho salmon.
F. Columbia River Chum Salmon:
A. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid spawning, egg
incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which exceeds 55.0°F (12.8°C).
A preferred spawning temperature range of 7.2°C to 12.8^0 is reported by Bjomn and Reiser (1991).
The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides temperature ranges for chinook salmon.
However, the authors state that, "other salmon species are not markedly different in their
requirements." They cite 10°C as the optimum spawning temperature with a range of 8°C to 13°C.
Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature
effects occur at 21°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
Cited optimum incubation temperatures are 8°C (Beacham and Murray 1985) and 4.4°C to 13.3°C
(Bjomn and Reiser 1991). The Independent Scientific Group's general criteria (1996) cites
temperatures less than 10°C as the optimum for incubation with a range of 8°C to 12°C. Stressful
conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than 13.3°C and lethal effects occur at
temperatures greater than 15.6°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). The maximum efficiency
for conversion of yolk to tissue is reported as 6°C to 10 C (Beacham and Murray 1985).
Temperatures of 12UC produced alevin mortality one to three days after hatching (Beacham and
Murray 1985).
EPA has also considered where the salmonid spawning use is designated as well as the timing
periods specified for application of that criterion (see Llewelyn, 1998. Salmonid Spawning Table).
Oregon developed their table in conjunction with regional fisheries biologists in the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Based on the available information. EPA has determined that the criterion for spawning, incubation,
and emergence adequately protects Columbia River chum salmon.
90
-------
The 12.8° spawning criterion is not likely to adversely affect Columbia River chum salmon.
2. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid rearing: no
measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in
a basin for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in which surface waters exceed
64.0°F(17.8°C).
Cited preferred migration temperatures are 8.3°C to 15.6°C (Bjornn and Reiser 1991). The National
Marine Fisheries Service document (NMFS, 1995) states that "properly functioning" riverine
systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 14 C to 17.°8 C they are "at risk" with
reference to migration, and at temperatures greater than 17.8°C they are "not properly functioning"
with reference to migration. The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides a general
recommendation for salmonid migration with an optimum of 10°C and a range of 8 C to 15 C.
Stressful conditions occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur
at 21°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
Rearing temperature preferences of 14.1 °C (Coutant 1977, Ferguson 1958, Huntsman 1942), 10°C
to 12.8°C (Bell 1986), 12°C to 14°C (Brett 1952), and 11.2°C to 14.6°C (Beschta et al. 1987) have
been reported. The Independent Scientific Group (1996) cites general recommendations for
salmonid rearing with 15°C as the optimum and a range of 12°C to 17°C. Stressful conditions occur
at temperatures equal to or greater than 18.3°C and lethal effects occur at 25 C (Independent
Scientific Group 19%). The National Marine Fisheries Service document (NMFS, 1995) states that
"properly functioning" riverine systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between \4*C and
17.8°C they are "at risk" with reference to rearing, and at temperatures greater than 17.8°C they are
"not properly functioning" with reference to rearing. The optimum temperature is 13.5°C and the
upper lethal temperature is 25.8°C (Beschta et al. 1987). Brett (1952) reports an upper incipient
lethal temperature of 25.4°C (acclimation 20°C, 50% mortality in 16.7 hours). The final temperature
preference for underyearlings and yearlings is 14.1°C (Coutant 1977, Ferguson 1958, Huntsman
1942). Data related to smoltification were not found.
Based on available information, it is likely that exposure of Columbia River chum salmon to the
temperature criterion during migration, rearing, and smoltification poses a risk to their viability.
EPA has reviewed the literature concerning lethal and sublethal effects of temperature on salmonids
and the compounding effect of habitat simplification and loss. Based on this review, there is reason
to believe that mortality from both lethal and sublethal effects (e.g., reproductive failure,
prespawning mortality, residualization and delay of smolts, decreased competitive success, disease
resistance) will occur.
Therefore the 17.8°C rearing criterion is likely to adversely affect Columbia River Chum
salmon.
3. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecoloeicallv significant cold-uater refueia. stream seements containing Threatened and
91
-------
Endangered species, waters with low DO, and natural lakes. These provisions provide the State with
the legal authority to provide extra protection beyond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
therefore provide potential additional protection for listed salmonid species.
Therefore the narrative temperature criteria are not likely to adversely affect Southern
Oregon/Northern California Coast and Oregon Coast coho salmon.
G. Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout:
1. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid spawning, egg
incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which exceeds 55.0°F (12.8°C).
There is a paucity of temperature preference data for cutthroat trout in general and Umpqua cutthroat
trout specifically. A preferred spawning temperature range for sea-run cutthroat trout of 6.1°C to
17.2°C is reported by Beschta et al. (1987) and Bell (1986). Preferred spawning temperature ranges
of 4.4°C to 12.8°C and 5.5°C to 15.5°C have been reported for resident cutthroat trout (Spence et al.
1996). Taranger and Hansen (1993) and Smith et al. (1983) determined that high water temperatures
during the spawning season inhibit ovulation and are detrimental to gamete quality in cutthroat trout.
The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides temperature ranges for chinook salmon.
However, the authors state that, "other salmon species are not markedly different in their
requirements." They cite 10°C as the optimum spawning temperature with a range of 8°C to 13°C.
Stressful conditions occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur
at 21°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). Jn addition, the Independent Scientific Group's
general criteria (1996) cites temperatures less than 10°C as the optimum for incubation with a range
of 8°C to 12°C. Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than 13.3°C and lethal
effects occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
EPA has also considered where the salmonid spawning use is designated as well as the timing
periods specified for application of that criterion (see Llewelyn, 1998, Salmonid Spawning Table).
Oregon developed their table in conjunction with regional fisheries biologists in the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Based on the available information. EPA has determined that the criterion for spawning, incubation.
and emergence adequately protects Umpqua River cutthroat trout.
The 12.8° C spawning criterion is not likely to adversely affect Umpqua River cutthroat trout.
2. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid rearing: no
measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in
a basin for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in which surface waters exceed
64.0°\- (17.8 C).
Adult migration preference data specific to I mpqua cutthroat trout were not found. A preferred
92
-------
migration temperature for resident cutthroat trout of 5°C has been reported by Spence et al. (1996).
The National Marine Fisheries Service document (NMFS,1995) states that "properly functioning"
riverine systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 14°C to 17.8PC they are "at risk"
with reference to migration, and at temperatures greater than 17.8°C they are "not properly
functioning" with reference to migration. The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides a
general recommendation for salmonid migration with an optimum of 10°C and a range of 8°C to
13°C. Stressful conditions occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects
occur at 21°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
The upper lethal temperature range for cutthroat trout is 18°C to 22.8°C (Kruzic 1998, Spence et al.
1996). Beschta et al. (1987) report an upper lethal temperature of 23°C. Kruzic (1998) observed
Umpqua River cutthroat trout in upper reaches of the Dumont Creek where water temperatures were
13.5°C, but absent in the lower reaches where temperatures approached 18°C. Westslope cutthroat
trout females held in fluctuating temperatures between 2°C and 10°C produced significantly better
quality eggs than females held at a constant 10°C. Elevated temperatures experienced by mature
females adversely affected subsequent viability and survival of embryos (Smith et al. 1983).
Preferred rearing temperatures of 10°C (Bell 1986) and 9.5°C to 12.9°C (Beschta et al. 1987) have
been reported. The Independent Scientific Group (1996) cites general recommendations for
salmonid rearing with 15°C as the optimum and a range of 12°C to 17°C. Stressful conditions occur
at temperatures equal to or greater than 18.3°C and lethal effects occur at 25 C (Independent
Scientific Group 19%). The National Marine Fisheries Service document (NMFS,1995) states that
"properly functioning" riverine systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between l^C and
17.8°C they are "at risk" with reference to rearing, and at temperatures greater than 17.8°C they are
"not properly functioning" with reference to rearing. Data concerning smoltification/juvenile
emigration were not located.
Based on available information, it is likely that exposure of Umpqua River cutthroat trout to the
temperature criterion during migration, rearing, and smoltification poses a risk to their viability.
EPA has reviewed the literature concerning lethal and sublethal effects of temperature on salmonids
and the compounding effect of habitat simplification and loss. Based on this review, there is reason
to believe that mortality from both lethal and sublethal effects (e.g., reproductive failure,
prespawning mortality, residualization and delay of smolts, decreased competitive success, disease
resistance) will occur.
Therefore the rearing criterion of 17.8° C is likely to adversely affect Umpqua River cutthroat
trout.
3. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecologically significant cold-water refugia. stream segments containing Threatened and
Endangered species, waters with low DO. and natural lakes. These provisions provide the State with
the legal authority to provide extra protection beyond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
therefore provide potential additional protection for listed salmonid species.
93
-------
Therefore the narrative temperature criteria are not likely to adversely affect Umpqua River
cutthroat trout.
H. Columbia River Basin Bull Trout, Klamath Basin Bull Trout:
1. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for bull trout: no measurable
surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in waters
determined by the Department to support or to be necessary to maintain the viability of native
Oregon bull trout, when surface water temperatures exceed SOT (10°C). The temperature criterion
applies to waters containing spawning, rearing, or resident adult bull trout. Migration corridors are
not considered.
A preferred migration temperature range of 10°C to 12°C has been reported (Administrative Record,
July 21,1997, ODEQ 1995(b)). Numerous authors have addressed temperature related to successful
bull trout spawning. Temperatures less than 9°C to lOt are required to initiate spawning in Montana
(ODEQ 1995(b)) and less than 9°C in British Columbia (Spence et al. 1996, ODEQ 1995(b), Pratt
1992). Peak spawning activities occur between 5°C and 6.5°C (Administrative Record, July 21,
1997). In the Metolius River, Oregon, a spawning temperature of 4.5°C is cited (Spence et al. 1996,
ODEQ 1995(b)). A spawning range of 4°C to ItfC is reported in the Oregon Water Quality
Standards Review (ODEQ 1995(b)).
The Oregon Water Quality Standards Review (ODEQ,1995(b)) reports an optimum incubation
temperature range of 4°C to 6°C in Montana systems. In a study of temperature effect on embryo
survival in British Columbia, 8°C to 10°C, produced 0-20% survival to hatch, 6
-------
Locations for bull trout spawning, rearing, and resident bull trout were determined by the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife, and published after extensive review by technical staff in ODFW,
the U.S. Forest Service, Oregon Chapter of the American Fisheries Society, Portland General
Electric Company, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Plum Creek Timber Company, Confederated
Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation . Idaho Department of Fish and Game, and the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW, 1997). Based on this broad review and input, EPA
concludes that the locations for spawning, rearing and resident bull trout have been appropriately
determined given the information available.
Based on the above information, the criterion for spawning, rearing, and resident adult bull trout
adequately protects these life history stages. Bull trout spawn in late summer through fall (late
August - November) and have an egg incubation period lasting from early fall until April. Bull trout
require temperatures less than 10°C for successful spawning, incubation, and rearing. The criterion
applied as a summer maximum should be protective of life history stages occurring at other times
of the year when temperatures are cooler.
However, migration corridors must be adequately protected to safeguard remaining populations and
to restore species distribution and integrity. Although the numeric criterion of 10°C adequately
protects migrating bull trout, Oregon has not designated migration corridors for protection. The
temperature technical subcommittee for the Oregon water quality standards review recommended
that "no temperature increase shall be allowed due to anthropogenic activity in present bull trout
habitat, or where historical cold water habitat is needed to allow a present bull trout population to
remain viable and sustainable in the future" (Buchanan and Gregory 1997). In an evaluation of
Oregon's bull trout, Pratt (1992) determined that elevated temperatures had reduced species
distribution with populations becoming largely fragmented and isolated in the upper reaches of
drainages. Population fragmentation has resulted in decreased species fitness and viability. It is
unclear how much the low spawning criteria applied in bull trout spawning and resident areas in
headwaters will help to maintain downstream temperatures to protect migratory corridors for
Columbia River Basin bull trout and Klamath Basin bull trout.
As migratory corridors are omitted from the designation, the bull trout criterion of 10 °C is
likely to adversely affect Columbia River Basin bull trout and Klamath Basin bull trout.
Because other salmonid species co-occur with bull trout in the upper reaches of some basins, the bull
trout criterion, when applied to these waters, will take precedence as the most stringent temperature
criterion and provide even greater protection than the salmonid rearing (17.8° C) and salmonid
spawning (12.8°C) criteria. Therefore the bull trout criteria are not likely to have an adverse
effect on listed coho, chum, chinook, sockeye, and steelhead that reside in the same waters.
2. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecologically significant cold-water refugia. stream segments containing Threatened and
Endangered species, waters with low DO. and natural lakes. These provisions provide the State with
the legal authont> to pro\ide extra protection bevond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
95
-------
therefore provide potential additional protection for listed salmonid species.
Therefore the narrative temperature criteria are not likely to adversely affect the Columbia
River Basin bull trout and Klamath Basin bull trout.
I. Lahontan Cutthroat Trout
1. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid spawning, egg
incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which exceeds 55.0°F (12.8°C).
Lahontan cutthroat trout inhabit isolated desert streams in southeast Oregon which are protected for
salmonid spawning and rearing. Lahontan cutthroat trout are considered to be tolerant of high
temperatures because they evolved in a high desert environment, however there has been little
systematic study of their temperature tolerances to confirm that point (Dickerson and Vinyard, in
press).
From studies based on constant temperature, Lahontan cutthroat trout have a spawning tolerance
range of 41 - 61 °F (5 - 16°C) and a preferred spawning temperature of 55°F (12.8°C) (Coffin,
USFWS, personal communication).
The spawning location of the Lahontan cutthroat trout, as determined from the Oregon Natural
Heritage Program data base and the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project data
base, is protected for salmonid spawning (Salmonid Spawning Table, Llewelyn, 1998).
Based on the available information EPA has determined that the 12.8°C salmonid spawning
criterion is not likely to adversely affect the Lahontan cutthroat trout.
2. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion for salmonid rearing: no
measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in
a basin for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in which surface waters exceed
64.0°F(17.8°C).
In a study of young-of-the-year (3 - 7 months old) Lahontan cutthroat trout (from lake stock)
Dickerson and Vinyard (in press) found that fish acclimated to 13°C suffered no significant
mortality at temperatures of 24 °C and below. There was no difference in growth of fish held at
22°C relative to fish held at cooler temperatures. Fish exposed to fluctuating temperatures similar
to field conditions (20 - 26°C) did not grow as much as fish maintained at a constant temperature
of 1 3°C or 20°C. They concluded from the chronic stress experiments that the upper limit for
growth and survival in Lahontan cutthroat trout is between 22°C and 23 °C, when food availability
is high.
Based on this study of young-of-the-year trout. EPA has detemmed that the rearing criterion for
salmonids is protective ot Lahontan cutthroat trout. While the data is limited, the temperature of the
upper thermal limit is considerably above the criterion.
96
-------
The rearing criterion of 17.8°C is not likely to adversely affect Lahontan cutthroat trout.
3. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecologically significant cold-water refugia, stream segments containing Threatened and
Endangered species, waters with low DO, and natural lakes. These provisions provide the State with
the legal authority to provide extra protection beyond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
therefore provide potential additional protection for listed salmonid species.
Therefore the narrative temperature criteria provisions are not likely to adversely affect the
Lahontan cutthroat trout.
J. Oregon Chub
The Oregon chub is found primarily in the Willamette River. Some populations are in the waters
designated for protection under the 20°C criterion for the Willamette (mouth to river mile 50), the
remainder occur in waters protected for salmonid rearing (17.8° C) and salmonid spawning (12.8°
C).
Spawning occurs from the end of April until early August when water temperatures range from 16
to 28° C. Scheerer and Apke (1997) reported that the maximum lethal water temperature for the
Oregon chub determined through laboratory experimentation were approximately 31 °C (87.8°F).
Spawning of the Oregon chub was monitored in shallow vegetated areas of a pond in the Willamette
river valley at temperatures that ranged from 16.5°C (61.7°F) to 20.5°C (68.9°F) during June, July
and August. There is no information available regarding the sublethal effects of temperature on the
Oregon chub.
Based on the laboratory data reported by Scheereer and Apke (1997), the upper thermal tolerance
of adult Oregon chub is significantly higher than the maximum allowable water temperatures under
the Oregon criteria. The maximum allowable water temperatures under the Oregon criteria for the
Willamette river (mouth to river mile 50), are approximately equal to the maximum observed Oregon
chub spawning temperatures, however EPA is proposing to disapprove the Willamette temperature
criterion of 20°C as too warm to support salmonid uses. This will lead to adoption of a cooler
temperature more protective of the Oregon chub spawning in the same reach.
Therefore the 12.8°C salmonid spawning and 17.8° C salmonid rearing temperatures are not
likely to adversely affect the Oregon chub.
The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecologically significant cold-water refugia. stream segments containing Threatened and
Endangered species, waters with low DO. and natural lakes. ITiese provisions provide the State with
the legal authority to provide extra protection beyond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
97
-------
therefore provide potential additional protection for listed Oregon chub.
Therefore EPA has determined that the narrative temperature criteria are not likely to
adversely affect the Oregon chub.
K. Hutton Spring tui chub, Borax Lake chub, Warner sucker, Shortnose sucker, Lost River
sucker, Foskett speckled dace, Vernal pool fairy shrimp
These species occur in portions of Oregon that ODEQ has designated as warm water habitat. During
the revisions to the standards the numeric criteria, which previously were applied by basin, were
withdrawn. The new numeric temperature criteria that were adopted focused on the urgent need to
protect cold water biota in the face of the warming trend in the State's waters. Inadvertently, new
criteria were not adopted to cover the warm water waterbodies. Instead, the State intends to utilize
its narrative standards for temperature as well as its antidegradation policy to protect these water
bodies until site-specific criteria can be developed. Three provisions under the narrative criteria are
particularly applicable (Llewelyn, 1998):
"no surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed:
- In stream segments containing federally listed Threatened and Endangered species if the
increase would impair the biological integrity of the Threatened and Endangered population;
- In Oregon waters when the dissolved oxygen (DO) levels are within 0.5 mg/L or 10 percent
saturation of the water column or intergravel DO criterion for a given stream reach or subbasin;
- In natural lakes."
The State has committed to developing site-specific temperature criteria during the 1998 - 2000
triennial review for these waters either in the context of a TMDL or as a separate action. Each of
these adoptions of a site-specific criterion will be submitted to EPA for review and approval, and
will be consulted on under Section 7 of ESA. As needed, in the interim, species specific temperature
information will be used to make determinations on biological integrity when an action is proposed.
With implementation of the three narrative temperature criteria, as well as the
antidegradation policy, the temperature criteria revisions are not likely to adversely affect the
Hutton Spring tui chub, Borax Lake chub, Warner sucker, Shortnose sucker, Lost River
sucker, Foskett speckled dace, or Vernal Pool fairy shrimp.
L. Columbia spotted frog, Oregon spotted frog
Habitat for the Oregon spotted frog is at elevations below about 5.300 feet. This distribution is
latitude dependent with the frog found below 600 meters (1.970 feet) in southern Washington and
below 1.500-1.600 meters (4.920 - 5.248 feet) in southern Oregon. The Columbia spotted frog's
habitat in Oregon is at elevations of approximately 400 feet or higher, generally drier east-side
98
-------
Cascades and higher plateau inland habitats. There are no records of either of these frogs existing
in coastal or near coastal areas in western Oregon, the higher Cascade mountains, and the Umpqua
drainage basin, possibly due to a warmer water requirement for the frog's postmetamorphic states
(*20°C). The Oregon spotted frog is nearly always found in, or near, a perennial water body such
as a spring, pond, lake or sluggish stream (Leonard et al. 1993).
The specific thermal tolerances of the Oregon and Columbia spotted frog are unknown. Limited,
generalized information about the spotted frog (Rana pretiosa) does exist and has been summarized
by Hayes (1994). Hayes noted that while there may be minor variations in behavior, seasonal or
otherwise, most of the information that is reported, is applicable to the spotted frogs that inhabit
Oregon. Hayes reports that western spotted frog embryos have lethal thermal limits of 6°C (42.8°F)
and 28°C (82.4°F). Hayes noted that there is evidence that postmetamorphic western spotted frogs
are tied to waters that are 20°C (68°F) to 35 °C (95 °F) during the late spring and summer seasons.
The Oregon and Columbia spotted frogs reside in areas that are regulated by Oregon's salmonid
rearing numeric temperature criteria and narrative criteria to protect lakes and warm waters. The
salmonid rearing temperatures are protective of both the embryo and postmetamorphic stages. The
high upper thermal tolerance of the postmetamorphic frogs indicates that the protection
applied to warm waters is not likely to adversely affect the Oregon spotted frog or the
Columbia spotted frog.
The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain narrative criteria for temperature (provisions "vi"
through "ix" described above) whose application will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Each
of these provisions provides for "no measurable temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities" in ecologically significant cold-water refugia, stream segments containing Threatened and
Endangered species, waters with low DO, and natural lakes. These provisions provide the State with
the legal authority to provide extra protection beyond the numeric criteria where warranted, and
therefore provide potential additional protection for the Oregon and Columbia spotted frog.
Therefore EPA has determined that the narrative temperature criteria are not likely to
adversely affect the Oregon spotted frog or the Columbia spotted frog.
C. pH
1. Background
Oregon pH Standards Revisions
• Addition of a separate criterion for "Cascade Lakes above 3.000 feet altitude" in the
Umpqua. Rogue. Willamette. Sandy, Hood, Deschutes basins, and 5,000 feet in the Klamath
basin, (found under OAR 340-41(2)(d). pages A-27 - A-31 of Appendix B);
"pH values shall not fall outside the range of 6.0 to 8.5"
• The upper limit of the pH range for eastside basins (John Day. Umatilla. Walla Walla.
99
-------
Grande Ronde, and Powder) was raised to 9.0. A value of 8.7 is included as an "action level"
— "when greater than 25 percent of the ambient measurements taken between June and
September are greater than pH 8.7, and as resources are available according to priorities set
by the Department, the Department shall determine whether the values higher than 8.7 are
anthropogenic or natural in origin, (found under OAR 340-4 l(2)(d), pages A-31 - A-33 of
Appendix B);
• An exception was included for dams — "Waters impounded by dams existing on January 1,
1996, which have pHs that exceed the criteria shall not be considered in violation of the
standard if the Department determines that the exceedance would not occur without the
impoundment and that all practicable measures have been taken to bring the pH in the
impounded waters into compliance with the criteria." (found under OAR 340-4 l(2)(d),
pages A-27 - A-35 of Appendix B); and
• Lowering of the lower end of the pH range in the Klamath basin from pH 7.0 to pH 6.5.
(found under OAR 41 -340(2)(d), page A-31 of Appendix B).
Objective of Oregon's Revisions
Oregon's pH criteria were based on the technical guidance issued by EPA in 1976. This guidance
was carried forward into the EPA Gold Book (1986). The EPA recommended a pH range of 6.5-9.0
for chronic exposure of freshwater aquatic life. This range did not appear to bracket the full range
of natural variability in pH within Oregon. During the winter when rain dominates streamflow,
many coastal steams, including those in undisturbed areas, have pHs below 6.5. Conversely, some
interior streams in alkaline basins have pHs in tUie mid-9s. Further, many Cascade lakes in small
basins without thick soils or forest litter can not buffer the lower pHs of rain and runoff, and have
pHs below 6.
A Technical Advisory Committee for pH reviewed ambient pH data as well as biological
requirements of sensitive species to determine if the criteria ranges should be widened to account
for more of the natural variability while still fully protecting beneficial uses. Salmonid and resident
fish have historically been considered the most sensitive beneficial uses (ODEQ, 1995), but this
supposition was also reexmined in the review of available scientific literature.
How Do the Revisions Compare with Previous Standards
The pH standards continue to be expressed as specific to each basin. The lower end of the numeric
criteria for Cascade Lakes was lowered from pH 6.5 to pH 6.0; the upper limit for eastside basins
was raised from pH 8.5 to pH 9.0; the lower end of the Klamath basin range was lowered from pH
7.0 to pH 6.5; and an exception was included for dams. Both the Cascade Lakes and eastside
revisions were analyzed by the State and determined to be adjustments warranted as being more
representative of natural conditions. The pH criteria applicable to the majority of eastside basin
waters are unchanged. Marine criteria are unchanged.
2. EPA Proposed Action
100
-------
Under Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act EPA proposes to approve all of the pH revisions
adopted by the State of Oregon.
3. Effect of Action on Listed Species
The pH is a measure of the concentration (activity) of hydrogen, or hydronium, ions in water.
Specifically, pH is the negative log of the hydrogen ion concentration. The pH of natural waters is
a measure of the acid-base equilibrium achieved by the various dissolved compounds, salts, and
gases, and is an important factor in the chemical and biological systems of natural waters. Changes
in pH affect the degree of dissociation of weak acids and bases, and thus, directly affect the toxicity
of many compounds. In addition pH affects the solubility of metal compounds present in the water
column and sediments of aquatic systems, thereby increasing and decreasing the exposure dose of
metals to aquatic species.
On the pH scale of 0-14, waters with values up to 7 are acidic, and from 7-14, alkaline. Rainwater
without anthropogenic acids has a pH generally between 5.0 and 5.6. The buffering capacity of a
waterbody is related to alkalinity, a trait that varies by location. Waters with high alkalinity are able
to neutralize acidic inputs. For example, a basin with alkaline soils or geology buffers acid rain.
Many basins are poorly buffered (low resistance to a change in pH) and may reflect the effect of
rainwater (lower pH), or the effect of alkaline producing geology such as limestone formations
(higher pH). Buffering capacity in Oregon water increases from west to east across the state.
Discharge of water from reservoirs also impacts downstream waters' alkalinity. Typically, reservoir
water is stored up during spring runoff and has a low alkalinity. Alkalinities are lowest during
periods of high surface runoff (winter and spring) and highest during periods when groundwater
discharge dominates stream flow (summer and fall).
Human activities, such as acid drainage from mines, may cause low pH. Other anthropogenic
influences such as higher salt (e.g., calcium) loads from agricultural runoff or nutrient enrichment
from fertilizers or animal waste may also raise pH levels.. Nutrients in runoff can cause increased
algal growth, reducing the water column CO, concentration, which raises the pH during the day. At
night, plant respiration lowers the pH often causing large diurnal pH swings in productive waters.
Diurnal fluctuations occur seasonally, primarily in the summer and fall.
Oregon's Water Quality Standards Review document (ODEQ, 1995(c^ presents data and analysis
of pH standard exceedances. primarily due to natural variation in Oregon's aquatic systems. In
summary:
• Several eastern Oregon basins have the highest percent violations of the old pH
standards. The primary human activities in these basins include forestry and range
land grazing. Frequent pH criteria exceedances occur in basins which have minimal
nutrient enrichment. Consistent violations in the upper portions of these watersheds
occur in areas of minimal human impacts. Such pH characteristics in low- to non-
impacted aquatic systems indicate that the old pH criteria may be near or below
natural pH ranges in these uatersheds. (OD1:Q. 1995(c))
101
-------
• Low end pH violations in flowing waters exist almost exclusively in the coastal
streams. These violations occur primarily during winter high rainfall events. Field
data show these streams are poorly buffered and groundwater contributions to flow
are minimal. No recognized human activities occur in these watersheds that would
easily account for low pH in the streams. Therefore, it is likely that the previous low
end pH criteria in the coastal basins of 6.5 is above the natural pH conditions in
coastal streams during high rainfall events.
Lake survey data indicate that coastal lakes could occasionally have natural pH
values below 6.5, but above 6.0. Incidences of pH values greater than 8.5 do not
appear to be natural. (ODEQ, 1995(c))
• Many Cascade lake watersheds are poorly buffered. Cascade lake pHs vary naturally
from about 5.5 to 9.5. Alpine lakes are expected to have low pHs due to low
alkalinity (Eugene Welch U. of Wash., pers. comm.). Data from the Western Lakes
Survey showed that 98 percent of the randomly sampled lakes had pHs below
neutrality under natural conditions (Alan Herlily EPA-ORD Corvallis, OR, 3/3/98
teleconference).
Based on the information provided, EPA concurs that waterbodies in many areas of Oregon have
naturally varying pHs above 8.5 or below 6.5. It is also reasonable to conclude that the biota in these
waterbodies have adapted to the conditions.
Although pH itself may have toxic or deleterious effects on aquatic biota, other chemical and
physical factors generally affect the biota first or more directly (e.g., dissolved oxygen, temperature,
sedimentation).
Ammonia toxicity increases with increasing pH. Un-ionized ammonia (NH3), not ammonium
(NH4*), is toxic to aquatic organisms. Salmonids are especially sensitive. The proportion of un-
ionized ammonia to total ammonia is a pH and temperature dependent equilibrium. Although the
toxicity of unionized ammonia decreases somewhat with increasing pH, the unionized ammonia
fraction of total ammonia increases with increasing pH. Thus, there is more of the toxic un-ionized
ammonia present at high pHs. EPA (1986) also states that unionized ammonia is likely to be even
more toxic above pH 9.0.
pH activity has a significant impact on the availability and toxicity of metals. The following is
summarized from ODEQ (1995). Metal-hydroxide complexes tend to precipitate (i.e.. reduced
ability to remain suspended) and are quite insoluble under natural water pH conditions. Because
of this, the metal is not able to exert a toxic effect. However, the solubility of these complexes
increases sharply as pH decreases. pH activity also impacts the sensitivity of organisms to a given
amount of metal. There are two types of metals: type I metals (e.g., cadmium, copper, and zinc), that
are less toxic as the pH decreases: and type II metals (e.g.. lead), that are more toxic at lower pH
values. Liach metal has its own range where pH and site-specific conditions become factors in the
metal's bioavailability. Aluminum is the metal of greatest concern at low pH values. Both the direct
toxicity of pH and that of aluminum result in osmoregulatory failure. The effects of low pH are also
102
-------
more pronounced at low concentrations of calcium. In general, increasing concentrations of calcium
tend to mitigate the toxicity of aluminum (Baker et al. 1990). In summary, reductions in pH below
"natural" levels will tend to increase metal availability and toxicity. No adverse effects to listed
species due to pH-driven changes in metal toxicity (where the metals comply with the respective
metals criteria) would occur in the range of Oregon's pH criteria.
A. Chinook Salmon (Snake River fall- and spring-/summer- run, all runs of Lower Columbia
River, spring run Upper Willamette River, spring and fall runs of Southern Oregon/California
Coastal), Coho Salmon (Lower Columbia River and Southwest Washington, Oregon Coast,
and Southern Oregon/Northern California), Columbia River Chum Salmon, Steelhead Trout
(Snake River Basin, Upper, Middle, and Lower Columbia, Upper Willamette, Oregon Coast,
and Klamath Mountains Province), Bull Trout (Columbia Basins and Klamath), and
Cutthroat Trout (Lahontan, Umpqua River, and West Slope).
Since species-specific information on pH requirements is not available for each salmonid species,
this evaluation covers all listed salmonid species. Many of the listed salmonids migrate and
consequently, may be exposed to different pH criteria depending on which basins they use. Rearing
and feeding areas, and spawning habitat are generally species specific, therefore, the most sensitive
life stage of one salmonid species may be exposed to different conditions than another salmonid
species using the same basin. Therefore, this analysis takes into consideration how each listed
salmonid species may use basins where the pH criteria were revised .
Although most studies have looked at the effects of pH on older fish, the life stages most sensitive
to effects from pH are spawning, egg incubation, and alevin/fry development. Data regarding the
effects of pH on the aquatic biota are limited and dated. Studies on the effects of pH on salmonids
are usually ancillary to other objectives of the research.
In the development of EPA's (1976, 1986) criteria (6.5-9.0, freshwater chronic exposure), two
bioassay references on freshwater fish cited by EPA showed a lower limit of about 6.5 for normal
development (EIFAC, 1969; Mount 1973, IN EPA, 1986). Vulnerable life stages of chinook
salmon are sensitive to pHs below 6.5 and possibly at pHs greater than 9.0 (Marshall et al., 1992).
For chinook salmon, Rombough (1983) reported that low pH decreases egg and alevin survival, but
specific values are lacking. Adult salmonids are at least as sensitive as most other fish to low pH;
these species include rainbow, brook and brown trout, and chinook salmon (ODEQ, 1995(c)). In
studies of biological changes with surface water acidification. Baker et al. (1990) found that
decreased reproductive success may occur for highly acid-sensitive fish species (e.g., fathead
minnow, striped bass) at pH 6.5 to 6.0. At pHs between 6.0 and 5.5. Baker et al. (1990) found
decreased reproductive success in lake trout. The critical value of pH for rainbow trout presence.
at the low end, is about 5.5 (Baker et al.. 1990). Considering the salmonid food base, some insect
larvae including those of the mayflies, stoneflies. and caddis flies are sensitive to low pHs in the
range of 5.5 to 6.0 (ODEQ. 1995(c)).
Based on the EPA criteria documents and Baker et al. (1990). salmonids will be protected in Oregon
basins where the low end of pH criteria are in the range of 6.5-7.5. However, the information
summarized here indicates that, aquatic systems with pHs below 6.0 could affect some species of
103
-------
developing salmonids. Basins where the pH criteria would be less than 6.5 (pH criterion of 6.0) are
Cascade lakes above 3000 feet elevation (5,000 feet in the Klamath basin). This pH criterion applies
to alpine lakes in the Umpqua, Rogue, Willamette, Sandy, Hood, Deschutes, and Klamath Basins.
Although some population segments of ESA-listed cutthroat trout and bull trout could theoretically
be exposed to lakes protected by the 6.0 pH criterion, EPA concludes that biotic systems developed
within naturally acidic alpine lakes would preclude the presence of low pH sensitive trout (bull trout
adfluvial populations migrate to lakes and reservoirs for adult rearing but are unknown for Cascade
alpine lakes) (Mary Hansen, ODFW, pers. com., 8/25/98). No other ESA-listed salmonids have the
potential to be in an area where the low-end pH criterion is 6.0.
At the higher end of the pH scale, even less is known regarding effects on fish. In EPA's review for
water quality criteria development, the upper limit of 9.0 was obtained from only one reference
(EIFAC, 1969). The larvae of aquatic insects were apparently more tolerant than fish. No recent
data exist, but studies conducted earlier in the century show salmonids, including both trout and
salmon species, to be sensitive to pHs in the range of 9.2 to 9.7, depending on the life stage (ODEQ,
1995(c)). Non-salmonid fishes are, with some exceptions, more tolerant of high pH, with sensitivity
appearing at or over pH 10 for most species tested (EIFAC, 1969). Levels of pH greater than 9.0
may adversely affect benthic invertebrate populations, thereby altering the food base for salmonids.
A pH of 9.0 seems to be the cutoff for the start of noticeable adverse effects for some species of
salmonids and invertebrates.
The new high end pH criterion of 9.0 applies to the John Day, Umatilla, Grande Ronde, Walla
Walla, and Powder basins. ESA-listed salmonids, including Snake River and Upper Columbia,
chinook salmon runs; and Snake River, Middle and Upper Columbia steelhead trout use one or more
of these areas. Because bull trout have such a general habitat distribution description, this species
could be in any basin.
Given the lack of information on the effects to salmonids at pHs greater than 9.0, there is no reliable
margin of safety at this end of the criterion. Oregon has included an action limit which triggers a
follow-up study if the pH from enough samples taken during the growing season is greater then 8.7.
This "action limit" in the standards applies to all basins with an upper pH criterion of 9.0. The
Oregon 303(d) listing criteria set 8.7 as the pH criterion for listing for these waters. This will help
to assure that waters that are at this action limit will receive attention to determine if additional
management measures are needed to lower the pH.
The pH criteria exception for waters impounded by dams has been clarified by ODEQ in the policy
letter explaining their standards implementation (Llewelyn, 1998). In the cases where this exception
would be applicable, the state will develop either a TMDL for the watershed, develop a site specific
criterion for the waterbody, or develop a use attainability analysis to modify the uses for portions
of the reservoir. Any exception will therefore be treated as a water quality standards revisions and
require EPA review and approval and consultation under Section 7 of ESA.
Based on the available information, EPA has determined that the pH criteria are not likely
to adversely affect Chinook Salmon (Snake River fall- and spring-/summer- run, spring run
Upper Willamette River, all runs of Lower Columbia River, spring and fall runs of Southern
104
-------
Oregon/California Coastal), Coho Salmon (Lower Columbia and Southwest Washington
Coast, Oregon Coast, and Southern Oregon/Northern California), Columbia River Chum
Salmon, Steelhead Trout (Snake River, Upper, Middle, and Lower Columbia Basins; Upper
Willamette River; and Klamath Mountains Province), Bull Trout (Columbia and Klamath
Basins), and Cutthroat Trout (Lahontan, Umpqua River, and West Slope).
B. Oregon chub, Hutton Spring tui chub, Borax Lake chub, Warner sucker and Foskett
speckled dace
The Oregon chub, Hutton Spring tui chub, Borax Lake chub, Warner sucker, and Foskett speckled
dace are not in basins or waterbodies where the revisions to the pH criteria apply, with the possible
exception of the pH exception for waters impounded by dams. As explained above, this exception
will be handled as a water quality standards revision on a case-by-case basis as these instances occur,
and the EPA decision in each of these cases will involve ESA consultation.
EPA has therefore determined that the revisions to the pH criteria are not likely to adversely
affect the Oregon chub, Hutton Spring tui chub, Borax Lake chub, Warner sucker, and
Foskett speckled dace.
C. Lost River sucker, Shortnose sucker
The Lost River sucker and the Shortnose sucker reside in the upper Klamath basin. The criteria
revisions in the Klamath basin include the lowering of the pH range for Cascade lakes over 5,000
feet to a pH of 6.0 and the lowering of the pH range for the remainder of the freshwaters in the basin
from a pH of 7.0 to 6.5. The Lost River and Shortnose Sucker are not found in Cascade Lakes over
5,000 feet, so the applicable criteria in their habitat are pH 6.5 - 9.0.
Exact pH requirements for the adult forms of the Lost River and Shortnose sucker are unknown. The
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (1997) reported that the 96-Hour LC50 pH value for larvae and juveniles
of the Lost River and Shortnose sucker ranged from 9.76 to 10.1. The Oregon pH water quality
criteria for these species are within the range cited by EPA (1986) to adequately protect for the life
of freshwater fish and bottom dwelling invertebrates.
Based on the available information, EPA has determined that the Oregon water quality
criteria for pH are not likely to adversely affect the Lost River sucker and Shortnose sucker.
D. Columbia spotted frog, Oregon spotted frog
Critical habitat for the Oregon spotted frog is at elevations below about 5.300 feet. This distribution
is latitude dependent, with the frog found below 600 meters (1.970 feet) in southern Washington and
below 1.500-1.600 meters (4,920 - 5,248 feet) in southern Oregon. The Columbia spotted frog's
critical habitat in Oregon is at elevations of approximately 400 feet or higher in the generally drier
east-side Cascades and higher plateau inland habitats. No records report either of these frogs.
existing in coastal or near coastal areas in western Oregon, the higher Cascade mountains, or the
I 'mpqua drainage basin. The Oregon spotted frog's habitat can exceed elevations greater than 3000
105
-------
feet, and it is also found in the Klamath basin, so the criteria revisions pertaining to Cascade Lakes
and to the KJamath basin would pertain, meaning potential exposure to waters with a pH as low as
6.0 and as high as 9.0. The Columbia spotted frog is found in the eastside basins where the criteria
were revised to allow an upper pH of 9.0, therefore it could be exposed to waters with a pH of 6.5 -
9.0.
The upper and lower pH tolerance of the Oregon and Columbia spotted frogs is unknown. Hayes
(1998) noted that waters within the identified range of the Oregon spotted frog had pH values
between 6.5 and 8.1, and that the majority of the populations were observed in more alkaline waters
with pH values ranging from 7.2 to 8.0. It is believed that the observance of the frogs in these
alkaline waters was less a result of a water quality preference and more the result of competition for
food. Fish are believed to be less tolerant to the alkaline waters thereby providing a more favorable
environment for the frogs by reducing the competition for food.
This limited data base does not provide an adequate basis for a thorough analysis. Since the Oregon
spotted frog and the Columbia spotted frog are candidate species, no determination is required at this
time.
E. Vernal Pool fairy shrimp
The Vernal Pool fairy shrimp is found in the vernal pools that form on hardpan surfaces during the
spring in the Agate Desert, in southwestern Oregon. The Agate Desert is located in the Rogue Basin.
None of the pH criteria revisions apply to the habitat of the Vernal Pool fairy shrimp.
Therefore, EPA has determined that the revisions to the pH criteria are not likely to affect the
Vernal Pool fairy shrimp.
106
-------
IV. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
Cumulative effects include the effects of future State, Tribal, local or private actions on
endangered or threatened species or critical habitat that are reasonably certain to occur in the action
area considered in this biological assessment. Future federal actions or actions on federal lands that
are not related to the proposed action are not considered in this section.
Future anticipated non-Federal actions that may occur in or near surface waters in the State
of Oregon include timber harvest, grazing, mining, agricultural practices, urban development,
municipal and industrial wastewater discharges, road building, sand and gravel operations,
introduction of non-native fishes, off-road vehicle use, fishing, hiking, and camping. These non-
Federal actions are likely to continue having adverse effects on the endangered and threatened
species, and their habitat.
There are also non-Federal actions likely to occur in or near surface waters in the State of
Oregon which are likely to have beneficial effects on the endangered and threatened species. These
include implementation of riparian improvement measures, best management practices associated
with timber harvest, grazing, agricultural activities, urban development, road building and
abandonment and recreational activities and other nonpoint source pollution controls.
107
-------
V. SUMMARY
The following is a summary of EPA's determination of affects of Oregon's water quality
standards for DO, temperature, and pH on ESA-listed species.
No Effects Determination
EPA determined that Oregon's standard for Bacteria would not effect ESA-listed species.
Likely to Adversely Affect Determinations
EPA has determined that Oregon's temperature criterion for salmonid rearing (64°)
is likely to adversely affect all the ESA-listed salmonid species except Snake River Sockeye and
Lahontan Cutthroat Trout. The following listed salmonids will likely be adversely affected:
Snake River spring/summer chinook, Southern Oregon and California Coastal spring chinook,
Lower Columbia River spring chinook, and Upper Willamette spring chinook salmon; Snake Fall
chinook, Southern Oregon and California coastal fall chinook , Lower Columbia River fall chinook
salmon; Snake river Basin steelhead, Middle Columbia River steelhead, Lower Columbia River
steelhead, and Upper Willamette River steelhead. Also Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast
and Oregon Coast coho salmon; Columbia River chum salmon. Umpqua River cutthroat trout.
EPA has determined that Oregon's temperature criterion for bull trout (50°) is likely to
adversely affect bull trout.
Not Likely to Adversely Affect Determinations
EPA has determined that Oregon's criterion for Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen (8.0mg/L
action level. IGDO shall not fall below 6.0mg/L) is not likely to adversely affect ESA-listed species.
However, if the trigger level is not acted on, the 6mg/L IGDO is likely to adversely affect ESA-listed
salmonids.
EPA has determined that Oregon's water column Dissolve Oxygen criteria for salmonid
spawning (1 Img/L or 9.0mg/L if IGDO is 8mg/L) is not likely to adversely to affect ESA-listed
salmonids.
EPA has determined that Oregon's Dissolved Oxygen criterion for cold water aquatic life
(8.0mg''L) is not likely to adversely affect ESA-listed salmonids.
EPA has determined that Oregon's Dissolved Oxygen criterion for cool water biota
(6.5mg/L) is not likely to adversely affect ESA-listed salmonids, Oregon chub. Shortnose and Lost
River suckers. Vernal Pool fair, shrimp.
EPA has determined that Oregon's Dissolved Oxygen criterion for warm water biota
i5.5mg 1.) is not likely to adversely affect Hutton Spring tui chub. Borax Lake chub. Warner sucker.
108
-------
Foskett speckled dace.
EPA has determined that Oregon's Dissolved Oxygen criteria will not likely adversely affect
Oregon spotted frog, or Columbia spotted frog.
EPA has determined that Oregon's temperature criterion for salmonid spawning (55°) is not
likely to adversely affect ESA-listed salmonids.
EPA has determined that Oregon's temperature criteria for salmonid rearing and spawning
is not likely to adversely affect Lahontan cutthroat trout, Oregon chub, Columbia spotted frog,
Oregon, and Oregon spotted frog.
EPA has determined that Oregon's three narrative temperature criteria are not likely to
adversely affect Mutton Spring tui chub, Borax Lake chub, Warner sucker, Shortnose sucker, Lost
River sucker, Foskett speckled dace, Vernal Pool fairy shrimp.
EPA has determined that Oregon's criterion for pH will not likely to adversely affect ESA-
listed salmonids, Oregon chub, Hutton Spring tui chub, Borax Lake chub, Warner sucker, Foskett
speckled dace, Lost River sucker, Columbia spotted frog, Oregon spotted frog, and Vernal Pool fairy
shrimp.
109
-------
REFERENCES:
Alabaster, J. S. 1988. The Dissolved Oxygen Requirements of Upstream Migrant Chinook
Salmon, Oncohynchus tshawytscha, in the Lower Willamette River, Oregon. J. Fish Biol.
32:635-636. *
Alabaster, J. S. 1989. The Dissolved Oxygen and Temperature Requirements of King Salmon,
Oncohynchus tshawytscha, in the San Joaquin Delta, California. J. Fish Biol. 34:331-332.
Allen, R. L., and T. K.. Meekin. 1973. An Evaluation of the Priest Rapids Chinook Salmon
Spawning Channel, 1963-1971. Wash. Dep. Fisheries, Tech. Rep. 11:1-52. Available from
Wash. Dep. Of fisheries, 115 General Admin. Bldg., Olympia, WA 98504, cited in NOAA
(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). June 1991. Status Review for Snake
River Fall Chinook Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-201. U.S. Dep.
Commerce, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Baker, J. P., D. P. Bernard, S. W. Christensen, M. J. Sale, J. Freda, K. Heltcher, D. Marmorek, L.
Rowe, P. Scanlon, G. Suter, W. Warren-Hicks, and P. Welbourn. 1990. Biological Effects
of Changes in Surface Water Acid-Base Chemistry. NAPAP rpt. 13. In: National Acid
Precipitation Assessment Program, Acidic Deposition: State of Science and Technology,
Vol. II, cited by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (1995), Standards &
Assessment Section, 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards Review, pH.
Bamhart. R. A. 1986. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of
Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates (Pacific Southwest) - Steelhead. U.S. Fish Wild. Serv.
Biol. Rep. 82(11.60). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL-82-4. 21pp., cited in NMFS
(National Marine Fisheries Service). 1996. Factors for the Decline - A Supplement to the
Notice of Determination for West Coast Steelhead Under the Endangered Species Act.
NMFS, Portland OR and NMFS. Long Beach CA. 83pp.
Barton, B.A. and C.B. Schreck. 1987. Metabolic cost of acute physical stress in juvenile
Steelhead. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 1 16:257-263.
Behnke. R. J. 1992. Native Trout of Western North America. Amor. Fish. Soc. Monograph no.
6. 275pp., cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1996. Factors for the
Decline - A Supplement to the Notice of Determination for West Coast Steelhead Under the
Endangered Species Act. NMFS. Portland OR and NMFS. Long Beach CA. 83pp.
Bell. M. 1986. Fisheries Handbook. Chapter 11.
Bell. M.C. 1971. Water Demands for Enhancement of Fisheries (Food and Growth). State of
Vv'ashmuton Water Research Center.
110
-------
Bell, M. C. 1984. Fisheries Handbook of Engineering Requirements and Biological Criteria.
Fish Passage Development and Evaluation Program, U.S. Army Corps Eng., North Pac. Div.,
Portland. OR. 290pp.(Contract No. DACW57-79-M-1594 and DACW57-80-M-0567). *
Bell, M. C. 1991. Fisheries Handbook of Engineering Requirements and Biological Criteria.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Fish Passage Development
and Evaluation Program, North Pacific Division, Portland, OR, cited in NMFS (National
Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and Status Under
19% Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho Salmon,
Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon, Klamath
Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Bell, R. 1959. Time, Size, and Estimated Numbers of Seaward Migrations of Chinook Salmon
and Steelhead Trout in the Brownlee-Oxbow Section of the Middle Snake River, 36,
Numbered Leaves. Available from Idaho Dep. Of Fish and Game, 600 S. Walnut, Boise, ID
83707, cited in NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). June 1991.
Status Review for Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-
201. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Bell, R. 1961. Middle Snake River Fisheries Studies. Idaho Dep. of Fish and Game, 17
Numbered Leaves. Available from Idaho Dep. Of Fish and Game, 600 S. Walnut, Boise, ID
83707, cited in NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). June 1991.
Status Review for Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-
201. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Beacham, T.D. and C.B. Murray. 1985. Effect of female size, egg size, and water temperature on
developmental biology of chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta)from the Nitinat River, British
Columbia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 42:1755-1765.
Berman, C.H. and T.P. Quinn. 1991. Behavioural thermoregulation and homing by spring
chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (Walbaum). in the Yakima River. J. Fish. Biol.
39:301-312.
Berman, C.H. 1990. Effect of elevated holding temperatures on adult spring chinook salmon
reproductive success. Ms Thesis. University of Washington. Seattle.
Beschta. R.L.. R.E. Bilbv. G.W. Brown. L.B. Holtby. T.D. Hofstra. 1987. Stream Temperature
and aquatic habitat: fisheries and forestry interactions, pgs. 191-232. In: Streamside
Management: Forestry and Fishery Interactions. E.O. Salo and T.W. Cundy (eds.) Institute
of Forest Resources. University of Washington. Contribution No. 57.
Bisson. P. A.. K. Sullivan, and J. L. Nielsen. 1988. Channel Hydraulics. Habitat Use, and Body
1-orm of Juvenile Coho Calmon. Steelhead Trout in Streams. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 117:262-
273. cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological
Requirements and Status I'nder !')% Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat
111
-------
Trout, Oregon Coast Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern
California Coho Salmon, Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon.
Attachment 1.
Bjornn, T. C, D. R. Craddock, and D. R. Corley. 1969. Migration and Survival of Redfish
Lake, Idaho, Sockeye Salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 97:360-373,
cited in NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). April 1991. Status
Review for Snake River Sockeye Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-195. U.S.
Dep. Commerce, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Bjomn, T.C. and D.W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids in streams. : Influences of
Forest and Rangeland Management on Salmonid Fishes and Their Habitats. American Fisheries
Society Spec. Pub. 19:83-138.
Bjomn, T. C. and D. W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat Requirements of Salmonids in Streams. Pages
83-138 in W. R. Meehan (ed.), Influences of Forest and Rangeland Management on
Salmonid Fishes and their Habitats. AM. Fish. Soc. Spec. Pub. 19. Bethesda, MD. 751pp,
cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological
Requirements and Status Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat
Trout, Oregon Coast Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern
California Coho Salmon, KJamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon.
Attachment 1.
Bonneau, J.L. and D.L. Scarnecchia. 1996. Distribution of Juvenile Bull Trout in a Thermal
Gradient of a Plunge Pool in Granite Creek, Idaho. Trans. Amer. Fisheries Soc. 125:628-
630.
Bouck, G.R., G.A. Chapman. P.W. Schneider, and D.G. Stevens. 1975. Effects of holding
temperatures on reproductive development in adult sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka).
In: 26th Annual Northwest Fish Culture Conference. Ed. J.R. Donaldson, pp.24-40.
Brannon. E. L. 1965. The Influence of Physical Factors on The Development nad Weight of
Sockeye Salmon Embryos and Alevins. International Pacific Salmon fisheries commission,
No. 12.. cited by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (1995b), Final Issue Paper,
1992-1994 Water Quality Standards Review, Dissolved Oxygen.
Brett. J.R. 1965. Some principles in the thermal requirements of fishes. Quart. Rev. Biol. 31: 75-
87.
Brett. J. R. 1952. Temperature Tolerance in Young Pacific Salmon. Genus Oncorhynchus. J.
Fish. Res. Board Can. 9:265-323. cited in NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration). June 1991. Status Review for Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon. NOAA
Tech. Memo. NMFS FTMWC-201. U.S. Dep. Commerce. NOAA. National Marine Fisheries
Service.
112
-------
Brett, J. R.. M. Hollands, and D.F. Alderdice. 1958. The effect of temperature on the cruising
speed of young sockeye and coho salmon. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 32: 485-491.
Buchanan, D.V. and S.V. Gregory. 1997. Development of water temperature standards to protect
and restore habitat for bull trout and other cold water species in Oregon. In: W.C. Mackey,
M.K. Brevir, and M. Monita (eds.). Friends of the Bull Trout Conference Proceedings.
Bugert, R. P., LaRiviere, D. Marbach, S. Martin, L. Ross, and D. Geist. 1990. Lower Snake
River Compensation Plan Salmon Hatchery Evaluation Program 1989 Annual report. Report
to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Cooperative Agreement 14-16-0001-89525, 145pp.
Available from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4696 Overland Road, Room 560, Boise, ID
83702, cited in NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). June 1991.
Status Review for Snake River Spring and Summer Chinook Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo.
NMFS F/NWC-200. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Burck, W.A. 1994. Life history of spring chinook salmon in Lookingglass Creek, Oregon.
Information Reports, Number 94-1. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish Division,
149pp.
Burgner, R.L. 1991. Life history of sockeye salmon. In: Pacific Salmon Life Histories ed. C.
Groot and L. Margolis. Pgs.3-117.
Burrows, R. E. 1963. Water Temperature Requirements for Maximum Productivity on Salmon.
In Proceedings of the 12* Pacific Northwest Symposium on Water Pollution Research,
November 7, 1963, Corvallis, OR, p. 29-38. U.S. Public Health Service, Pacific Northwest
Water Laboratory, Corvallis, OR, cited in NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration). June 1991. Status Review for Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon. NOAA
Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-201. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
Busby, P. J., T. C. Wainwright. g. J. Bryant, L. J. Lierheimer, R. S. Waples, F. W. Waknitz, and
I. V. Lagomarsino. 1996. Status review of west coast steelhead form Washington, Idaho,
Oregon, and California. U.S. Dept. Commer.. NOAA Trech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-27.
261pp., cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1996. Factors for the Decline -
A Supplement to the Notice of Determination for West Coast Steelhead Under the
Endangered Species Act. NMFS. Portland OR and NMFS. Long Beach CA. 83pp.
Carlson, A. R. and L.J. Merman. 1974. Effects of Lowered Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations
on Channel Catfish (Icialums punctatus) Embryos and Larvae. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc.
103:623-6. In Welch. E.B. 1980. Ecological Effects of Waste Water. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Carlson. A. R . and R.E. Sietert. W74. Effects of Reduced Oxygen on the Embryos and Larvae
of Lake Trout (Salvclinus narnaycmh) and I.argemouth Bass (Micropterus salmoides). J.
Fish Res Bd. Canada. 31:1 W-fi.
113
-------
Castleberry, D. T. and J. J. Cech Jr. 1993. Critical Thermal Maxima and Oxygen Minima of
Five Fishes from the Upper Klamath Basin. California Fish and Game. 78(4): 145 - 152.
Chapman. D. W. and T. C. Bjomn. 1969. Distribution of Salmonids in Streams, With Special
Refemece to Food and Feeding. Pages 153-176 m Northcote, T.G. (ed.) 1969. Symposium
on Salmon and Trout in Streams. H. R. MacMillan Lectures in Fisheries, Univ. of B.C.,
Institute of Fisheries, Vancouver, B.C. 388pp, cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries
Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and Status Under 1996 Environmental
Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast
Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon, Klamath Mountain Province
Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Chapman, D. W. and K. P. McLeod. 1987. Development of Criteria for Fine Sediment in The
Northern Rockies Ecoregion. Final Report EPA contract No. 68-01-6986. EPA910/9-87-
162. 279pp.
Chapman, D., C. Peven, T. Hillman, A. Giorgi, and F. Utter. 1994. Status of Summer Steelhead
in the Mid-Columbia River.Don Chapman Consultatns, Inc. 235pp + Appedicies., cited in
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1996. Factors for the Decline - A Supplement
to the Notice of Determination for West Coast Steelhead Under the Endangered Species Act.
NMFS, Portland OR and NMFS, Long Beach CA. 83pp.
Childs, Allen. 1998. pers. com., Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla.
Combs, B. D.I965. Effect of temperature on the development of salmon eggs. Prog. Fish-Cult.
27: 134-137.
Claire, E. W. and M. E. Gray. 1993. Bull Trout. John Day Fish District Northeast Region.
Coble, D. W. 1961. Influence of Water Exchange and Dissolved Oxygen in Redds on Survival
of Steelhead Trout Embryos. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 90(4), cited by Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (1995), Final Issue Paper, 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards
Review, Dissolved Oxygen.
Coutant. C. C. 1969. Temperature. Reproduction, and Behavior. Chesapeake Sci 10:261-74. In
Welch, E.B. 1980. Ecological Effects of Waste Water. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Coutant. C.C. 1977. Compilation of temperature preference data. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 34:739-
745.
Cunjak. R.A. 1988. Physiological consequences of overwintering in streams: the cost of
acclimatization. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 45:443-452.
Davis. G E.. J. Foster and C. E. Warren. 1963. The Influence of Oxygen Concentration on the
114
-------
Swimming Performance of Juvenile Pacific Salmon at Various Temperatures. Trans. Amer.
Fish soc. 92:111-24. In Welch. E.B. 1980. Ecological Effects of Waste Water.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dent, L., G. Robison, K. Mills, A. Skaugset, J. Paul. 1997. Oregon Department of Forest 1996
Storm Impacts Monitoring Project Preliminary Report. 53 pp.
Dickerson, B.R. and G. L. Vinyard. In Press. Effects of High Chronic Temperatures and Diel
Temperature Cycles on the Survival and Growth of Lahontan Cutthroat Trout. Trans. Am.
Fish. Soc.
Dong, J.N. 1981. Thermal tolerance and rate of development of coho salmon embryos. Master's
thesis. University of Washington.
Doudoroff, P. and D. L. Shumway. 1970. Dissolved oxygen Requirements of Freshwater Fishes.
Food Agricultural Organization of The United Nations. FAO Technical Paper No. 86,
Rome, Italy. 291pp., cited by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (1995),
Standards & Assessment Section, 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards Review, Dissolved
Oxygen.
Ebel, W. J., E. M. Dawley, and B. H. Eggers. 1971. Thermal Tolerance of Juvenile Pacific
Salmon and Steelhead Trout in Relation to Supersaturation of Nitrogen Gas. Fish. Bull.,
U.S. 69(4):833-843. *
Eddy, R. M. 1972. The Influence of Dissolved Oxygen Concentration and Temperature on The
Survival and Growth of Chinook Salmon Embryos and Fry. M. S. Thesis, Oregon State
Unvi., Dept. of Fisheries and Wildlife, cited by Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (1995), Standards & Assessment Section, 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards
Review, Dissolved Oxygen.
Elder, John F. 1988. Metal Biogeochemistry in Surface-Water Systems - A Review of Principles
and Concepts. U.S.G.S. Circular 1013, cited by Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (1995). Standards & Assessment Section. 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards
Review, pH.
Elliott, J.M. 1981. Some aspects of thermal stress on freshwater teleosts. In: Stress and Fish. J.
Am. Ecol. A.D. Pickering (ed.). Pg 209-245.
Everest. F. H. 1973. Ecology and Management of Summer Steelhead in the Rogue River.
Oregon State Game Comm. Fish. Res. Rep. No. 7. Corvallis, OR. 48pp. cited in NMFS
("National Marine Fisheries Sen ice). 1996. Factors for the Decline - A Supplement to the
Notice of Determination for West Coast Steelhead Under the Endangered Species Act.
NMFS. Portland OR and NMFS. Long Beach CA. 83pp.
European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission. 1969. Vv'ater Quality Criteria for European
115
-------
Freshwater Fish - Extreme pH Values and Inland Fisheries. EIFAC Working Party on Water
Quality Criteria for Freshwater Fish. Water Research 3:593-611, cited by Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality (1995), Standards & Assessment Section, 1992-1994
Water Quality Standards Review, pH.
Ferguson, R.G. 1958. The preferred temperature of fish and their midsummer distribution in
temperate lakes and streams. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 15:607-624.
Foerster, R. E. 1968. The Sockeye Salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka. Fish. Res. Board Can., Bull.
No. 162.422pp.*
Fraley, J.J. and B.B. Shepard. 1989. Life history, ecology and population status of migratory
bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) in the Flathead Lake river system, Montana. Northwest
Science 63: 133-143.
Fujioka, J. F. 1970. Possible Effects of Low Dissolved Oxygen Content in the Duwamish River
Estuary on Migrating Adult Chinook Salmon. M.S. Thesis. Univ. Wash., Seattle, WA.
77pp. *
Garling, D.L. and M. Masterson. 1985. Survival of Lake Michigan chinook salmon eggs and fry
incubated at three temperatures. Prog. Fish-Cult. 47:63-66.
Giger, R. D. 1972. Ecology and Management of Coastal Cutthroat Trout in Oregon. Oregon
State Game Commission, Fishery Research Reg. 6. 61pp, cited in NMFS (National Marine
Fisheries Service). 1996. Factors for the Decline - A Supplement to the Notice of
Determination for West Coast Steelhead Under the Endangered Species Act. NMFS,
Portland OR and NMFS, Long Beach CA. 83pp.
Gilhousen, P. 1990. Prespawning mortalities on sockeye salmon in the Fraser River system and
possible causal factors. International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission, Vancouver, B.C.
Goetz, F. 1991. Bull trout life history and habitat study. Thesis, Oregon State University,
Corvallis, OR. 49pp.
Hansen. M. 8/25/98. Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife. Personal communication.
Hart, J. L. 1973. Pacific Fishes of Canada. Fish. Res. Board Can. Bull. 180. 740pp. In Pauley
et al. 1988, cited in NMFS ^National Marine Fisheries Service). 1996. Factors for the
Decline - A Supplement to the Notice of Determination for West Coast Steelhead Under the
Endangered Species Act. NMFS. Portland OR and NMFS. Long Beach CA. 83pp.
Hartt. A. C. and M. B. Dell. 1986. Early Oceanic Migrations and Growth of Juvenile Pacific
Salmon and Steelhead Trout. International North Pacific Fisheries Commission Bulletin
46:1-105. In Nickelson el al (1992). cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service).
1996. Factors for the Decline - A Supplement to the Notice of Determination for West Coast
116
-------
Steelhead Under the Endangered Species Act. NMFS, Portland OR and NMFS, Long Beach
CA. 83pp.
Hassler, J. J. 1987. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of Coastal
Fishes and Invertebrates (Pacific Southwest) - Coho Salmon. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv.
Biol. Rep. 82(11.70). 19pp , cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1996.
Factors for the Decline - A Supplement to the Notice of Determination for West Coast
Steelhead Under the Endangered Species Act. NMFS, Portland OR and NMFS, Long Beach
CA. 83pp.
Hayes, M. P. 1994. The Spotted Frog in Western Oregon. Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife,
Wildlife Diversity Program, Portland, OR.
Hayes, M. P. 1997. Final Report, Status of the Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana pretiosa sensu
stricto) in the Deschutes Basin and Selected Other Systems in Oregon and Northeastern
California With a Rangewide Wynopsis of the Wpecies' Wtatus. Prepared for The Nature
Conservancy, under contract to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Hayes, M. June 4, 1998. Personal Communication. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Portland,
OR.
Hayes, M. P. 7/1/97. Portland Community College. Personal communication.
Heming, T. A. 1982. Effects of temperature on utilization of yolk by chinook salmon
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)eggs and alevins. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 39:184-190.
Henderson, M.A., D.A. Levy, and J.S. Stockner. 1992. Probable Consequences of climate change
on freshwater production of Adams River sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka). Geo-
Journal28(l): 51-59.
Herlily, A. U.S.EPA-ORD Corvallis, OR. 3/3/98 teleconference.
Hicks, M. 1998. Preliminary Review Draft Discussion Paper: Supplementary Appendix:
Evaluating Standards for Protecting Aquatic Life in Washington's Surface Water Quality
Standards. Washington Department of Ecology, Water Quality Program.
Hoar. W. S. 1951. The Behaviour of Chum, Pink, and Coho Salmon in Relation to their
Seaward Migration. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 8:241-263. In Mundie, J. H. (1969) pages 135-
152 in Northcote. T.G. fed.) 1969. Symposium on Salmon and Trout in Streams. H. R.
MacMillan Lectures in Fisheries. Univ. of B.C., Institute of Fisheries. Vancouver. B.C.
388pp. cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological
Requirements and Status Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat
Trout. Oregon Coast Coho Salmon. Oregon Coast Steelhead. Southern Oregon/Northern
California Coho Salmon. Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon.
Attachment 1.
117
-------
Hollender, B. A. 1981. Embryo Survival, Substrate Composition, and Dissolved Oxygen in
Redds of Wild Brook Trout. M. S. Thesis, Univ. of Wisconsin, cited by Oregon Department
of Environmental Quality (1995), Final Issue Paper, 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards
Review, Dissolved Oxygen.
Holtby, L.B. 1988. Effects of logging on stream temperatures in Carnation Creek, British
Columbia, and associated impacts on the coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Ca. J. Fish.
Aquat. Sci. 45:502-515.
Holtby, L.B., T.E. McMahon, and J.C. Scrivener. 1989. Stream temperatures and inter-annual
variability in the emigration timing of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) smolts and fry
and chum salmon (O. Keta)fry from Carnation Creek, British Columbia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat.
Sci. 46:1989.
Home F. R. 1971. Some Effects of Temperature and Oxygen Concentration on Phyllopod
Ecology. Ecology 52:343 - 347. In Thorp, J. H., and Covich A.P. 1991. Ecology and
Classification of North American Freshwater Invertebrates. San Diego: Academic Press.,
Inc.
Huntsman, A.G. 1942. Death of salmon and trout with high temperatures. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can.
5:485-501.
IDFG. 1995. Saving All The Pieces, The Idaho State Conservation Effort, Spotted Frog (Rana
pretiosa), Habitat Conservation Assessment (HAC) and Conservation Strategy (CS). Idaho
Dept. of Fish and Game, Idaho Dept. of Parks and Recreation, Bureau of Land Mgmt.,
Regions 1 and 4 of U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 33p.
IDHW. 199?. Protocols for Assessment of Dissolved Oxygen Fine Sediment and Salmonid
Embryo Survival in an Artificial Redd. Idaho Dept. of Health and Welfare, Div. of
Environmental Quality, Water Quality Bureau. Water Quality Monitoring Protocols - Rpt.
No. 1.
Independent Scientific Group. 1996. Return to the River: Restoration of Salmonid Fishes in the
Columbia River Ecosystem.
Johnston. J. M. 1981. Life Histories of Anadromous Cutthroat With Emphasis on Migratory'
Behavior. Pages 123-127 In: E. L. Brannon and E. O. Salo [eds.] Salmon and Trout
Migratory' Behavior Symposium. Univ. Wash.. Seattle. WA. cited in NMFS (National
Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and Status Under
1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout. Oregon Coast Coho Salmon,
Oregon Coast Steelhead. Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon, Klamath
Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Jones. D [•'.. 1976 Steelhead and Sea-run Cutthroat I'rout Life History in Southeast Alaska.
118
-------
Alaska Dept. Fish and Game, Sport Fish Div., Annual Performane Rep. 17(42):29-55.
(Available from: Alaska Dept. Fish and Game, P.O. Box 240020, Douglas, AK 99824), cited
in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements
and Status Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon
Coast Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho
Salmon, Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Jones, K. K., J. M. Dambacher, B. G. Lovatt, A. G. Talabere, and W. Bowers. 1998. No. Amer.
J. of Fisheries Mgmt. 18:308-317.
Kallegerg, H. 1958. Observations in a Stream Tank of Territoriality and Competition in
Juvenile Salmon and Trout (Salmo salar L. and Salmo trutta L.). Rep. Instil. Fresw. Res.
Drottningholm, 39:55-98. In Mundie, J. H. (1969) pages 135-152 in Northcote, T.G. fed)
1969. Symposium on Salmon and Trout in Streams. H. R. MacMillan Lectures in Fisheries,
Univ. of B.C., Institute of Fisheries, Vancouver, B.C. 388pp, cited in NMFS (National
Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and Status Under
1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho Salmon,
Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon, Klamath
Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Klamath Tribes. 1996. Cited in U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. April 1997. Biological Report on
the Klamath Project 1997 Operations Plan. USBR, Mid-Pacific Region, Klamath Basin Area
Office.
Kramer, K. 10/20/97. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR. Personal communication.
Krapu, G. L. 1974. Foods of Breeding Pintails in North Dakota. Journal of Wildlife
Management 38(3): 408-417 In Thorp, J. H., and Covich A.P. 1991. Ecology and
Classification of North American Freshwater Invertebrates. San Diego: Academic Press.,
Inc.
Kruzic, L.M. 1998. Ecology of Juvenile Coho Salmon within the Upper South Umpqua River
Basin. Oregon. MS Thesis. University of Idaho.
Leonard. W. P.. H. A. Brown. L. C. Jones. K. R. McAllister. R. M. Storm. 1993. Amphibians of
Washington and Oregon. Seattle: Seattle Audubon Society.
Magnus on. J.J.. L.B. Crowder. and P.A. Medvick. 1979. Temperature as an ecological resource.
Amer.Zool. 19:331-343.
Marct. T. R.. T. A. Burton. G. W. Harvey, and W. H. Clark. 1993. Field Testing of New
Monitoring Protocols to Assess Brown Trout Spawning Habitat in an Idaho Steam. No.
Amer. J. of Fisheries Mgmt. 13(3).
Marine. K R 1992. A background investigation and review of the effects of elevated water
119
-------
temperature on reproductive performance of adult chinook salmon. Department of Wildlife
and Fisheries Biology, University of California, Davis.
Marshall, D. B., M. Chilcote, and H. Weeks. 1992. Sensitive Vertebrates of Oregon. Oregon
Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR, cited by Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (1995), Standards & Assessment Section, 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards
Review, pH.
Marshall, D. B., M. C. Chilcote, and H. Weeks. 1996. Species at Risk - Sensitive, Threatened
and Endangered Vertebrates of Oregon. Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR.
Mason, J. C. 1969. Hypoxial Stress Prior to Emergence and Competition among Coho Salmon
Fry. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 26:63-91, cited by Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (1995), Standards & Assessment Section, 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards
Review, Dissolved Oxygen.
Matthews, G. M., and R. S. Waples, 1991. Status Review for snake River Spring and Summer
Chinook Salmon. U.S. Dep. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-200, 75pp,
cited in NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). June 1991. Status
Review for Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-201.
U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service.
McAllister, K. R. and W. P. Leonard. 1997. Draft Status of the Oregon Spotted Fog in
Washington. Wash. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Mgmt. Pgm. 28pp.
McCullough, D.A. 1997. Draft. A review and synthesis of effects of alterations to the water
temperature regime on freshwater life stages of salmonids. with special reference to chinook
salmon.
Mclntosh. B.A., C.E. Torgersen, D.M. Price, and H.W. Li. 1995. Distribution, habitat utilization,
movement patterns, and the use of thermal refugia by spring chinook in the Grande Ronde,
Imnaha, and John Day Basins. Annual report to the Bonneville Power Administration.
Project Number 93-7000.
Meisner. J D. 1990. Effect of climatic warming on the southern margins of the native range of
the brook trout. Salvelinus fonlinalis. Can. J. Fish. Aq. Sci. 47: 1065-1070.
Meisner. J.D.. J.S. Rosenfeld. and H.A. Regier. 1988. The role of groundwater in the impact of
climate warming on stream salmonids. Fisheries 13(3):2-8.
Monda. D. and M. K. Saiki. 1993. Tolerance of Juvenile Lost River and Shortnose Suckers to
High pH. Ammonia Concentration, and Temperature, and to Low Dissolved Oxygen
Concentration. USFWS Report for US Bureau of Reclamation. July 1995. 90pp.
Mossin. J I486. Ph\siochemical Factors Inducing F.mhr>onic Development and Spring
120
-------
Hatching of the European Fairy Shrimp Siphonophanes grubei (Dybowsky) (Curstacea:
Anostraca). Journal of Crustacean biology 6:693 - 704. In Thorp, J. H., and Covich A.P.
1991. Ecology and Classification of North American Freshwater Invertebrates. San Diego:
Academic Press., Inc.
Mullan, J.W., K. Williams, G. Rhodus, T. Hillman, and J. Mclntyre. 1992. Production and
Habitat of Salmonids in Mid-Columbia River Tributary Streams. Mongr. 1. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 60pp.
Munhall, A. 5/20/98. U.S. BLM. Personal communication.
Murray, C.B. and J.D. McPhail. 1988. Effect of incubation temperature on the development of
five species of Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus) embryos and alevins. Can. J. Zool. 66:266-
273.
Naiman, R.J., T.J. Beechie, L.E. Benda, L.H. MacDonald, M.D. O'Connor, C. Oliver, P. Olson,
and E.A. Steel. 1992. Fundamental elements of ecologically healthy watersheds in the Pacific
Northwest Coastal Ecoregion. pg. 127-188. In: R.J. Naiman (ed.), Watershed Management:
Balancing Sustainability and Environmental Change. Springer-Verlag, New York.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and
Status Under 19% Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast
Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon,
Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1996. Factors for the Decline - A Supplement to
the Notice of Determination for West Coast Steelhead Under the Endangered Species Act.
NMFS, Portland OR and NMFS, Long Beach CA. 83pp.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). September 15, 1996. Coastal
Salmon Conservation: Working Guidance for Comprehensive Salmon Restoration Initiatives
on the Pacific Coast.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). April 1991. Status Review for
Snake River Sockeye Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-195. U.S. Dep.
Commerce. NOAA. National Marine Fisheries Service.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). June 1991. Status Review for
Snake River Spring and Summer Chinook Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-
200. U.S. Dep. Commerce. NOAA. National Marine Fisheries Service.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). June 1991. Status Review for
Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-201. U.S. Dep.
Commerce. NOAA. National Marine Fisheries Service.
121
-------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Dept. of Commerce. March 2,
1993. Holland A. Schmitten letter with attachments to BPA, USCOE, and Bureau of
Reclamation. 166pp.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). August, 9 1996. (Fed. Regis.
Vol.61, No. 155). Endangered and Threatened Species: Proposed Endangered Status for
Five ESUs of Steelhead and Proposed Threatened Status for Five ESUs of Steelhead, in
Washington, Oregon/Idaho, and California. 50 CFR Parts 222 and 227.
Nawa, R.K., C.A. Frissell, J.L. Ebersole, and W.J. Liss. 1991. Life History and Persistence of
Anadromous Fish Stocks in Relation to Stream Habitats and Watershed Characterization.
Annual Progress Report. Prepared by Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State
University for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Nehlsen, W., J. E. Williams, and J. A. Lichatowich. 1991. Pacific Salmon at the Crossroads:
Stocks at Rick From California, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington. Fisheries 16(2):4-21, cited
in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements
and Status Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon
Coast Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho
Salmon, KJamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Neitzel, D.A. and C.D. Becker. 1985. Tolerance of eggs, embryos, and alevins of chinook
salmon to temperature changes and reduced humidity in dewatered redds. Trans. Am. Fish.
Soc. 114:267-273.
Nicholas, J. W. and D. G. Hankin. 1988. Chinook Salmon Populations in Oregon Coastal River
Basins: Description of Life Histories and Assessment of Recent Trends in Run Strengths.
Oregon Dept. Fish Wildlife. Information Report 88-1. 359pp., cited in NMFS (National
Marine Fisheries Service). 1996. Factors for the Decline - A Supplement to the Notice of
Determination for West Coast Steelhead Under the Endangered Species Act. NMFS,
Portland OR and NMFS, Long Beach CA. 83pp.
Nickelson, T. E., J. W. Nicholas. A. M. McGie, R. B. Lindsay, and D. L. Bottom. 1992. Status
of Anadromous Salmonids in Oregon Coastal Basins. Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife.
Dec. 1992. 83p., cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1996. Factors for the
Decline - A Supplement to the Notice of Determination for West Coast Steelhead Under the
Endangered Species Act. NMFS. Portland OR and NMFS, Long Beach CA. 83pp.
Olson. P. A. and R.F. Foster. 1955. Temperature tolerance of eggs and young of Columbia River
chinook salmon. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 85:203-207.
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. 1995. 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards
Review. Kinal Issue Papers Dept. Of Envir. Quality. Standards and Assessment Section.
Portland.
122
-------
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Dec. 1994. Draft Issue Paper: Temperature
1992-1994 Water Quality Standards Review. Standards and Assessment Section.
Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife. 1996. (Marshall et al.) Species at Risk: Sensitive, ThE^nad
and Endangered Vertebrates of Oregon. 2nd. ed. ODFW, Portland OR.
Pearcy, W. G., R. D. Brodeur, and J. P. Fisher. 1990. Distribution and Biology of Juvenile
Cutthroat Oncorhynchus clartd clarki and Steelhead O. mykiss in Coastal Waters off Oregon
and Wahington. Fish. Bull., U.S. 88(4):697-711. In August 9, 1996, 61FR415454, cited in
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and
Status Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast
Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon,
Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Pearcy, W. C. 1992. Ocean Ecology of North Pacific Salmonids. Washington Sea Grant
Program, Seattle, WA. 179pp., cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1996.
Factors for the Decline - A Supplement to the Notice of Determination for West Coast
Steelhead Under the Endangered Species Act. NMFS, Portland OR and NMFS, Long Beach
CA. 83pp.
Phillips, R. W. and H. J. Campbell. 1962. The Embryonic Survival of Coho Salmon and
Steelhead Trout as Influenced by Some Environmental conditions in Gravel Beds. 14*.
Annual Rept. Pac. Mar. fish. Comm., Portland OR. pp60-73, cited by Oregon Department
of Environmental Quality (1995a), Final Issue Paper, 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards
Review, Dissolved Oxygen.
Platin, T.J. 1994. Wetland Amphibians Ambystoma gracile and Rana aurora as Bioindicators of
Stress Associated With Watershed Urbanization. M.S. Thesis, Univ. of Wash., cited in
Richter, K.O. 1995. Criteria for the Restoration and Creation of Wetland Habitats for
Lentic-Breeding Amphibians of the Puget Sound Basin 1: Site Selection Criteria. For: King
County Natural Resource Division, Puget Sound Wetlands and Stormwater Management
Research Program; King County, Washington.
Platin, T.J. and K.O. Richter. 1995. Amphibians as Bioindicators of Stress Associated With
Watershed Development, p. 163-170 cited in E. Robichaud (ed.) Puget Sound Research '95
Proceedings. Vol. 1. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. Olympia, WA, USA. cited in
Richter. K.O. 1995. Criteria for the Restoration and Creation of Wetland Habitats for
Lentic-Breeding Amphibians of the Puget Sound Basin 1: Site Selection Criteria. For: King
County Natural Resource Division. Puget Sound Wetlands and Stormwater Management
Research Program; King County. Washington.
Post. G. 1987. Textbook of Fish Health. T.F.H. Publications. Inc.. N.J.
Pratt. K.L. 1992. A revieu of hull trout lite history. Proceedings of the Gearhart Mountain Bull
Trout Workshop. Oregon Chapter of the American Fisheries Society.
123
-------
Proctor, V. W. 1964. Viability of Crustacean Eggs Recovered from Ducks. Ecology 45:656-
658. In Thorp, J. H., and Covich A.P. 1991. Ecology and Classification of North American
Freshwater Invertebrates. San Diego: Academic Press., Inc.
Quigley, T.M. and S.J. Arbelbide, tech.eds. 1997. An assessment of ecosystem components in
the interior Columbia basin and portions of the Klamath and Great Basins: volume 3. Gen.
Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-405. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Pacific Northwest Research Station. 4 vol. (Quigley, T.M. tech ed.; The Interior Columbia
Basin Ecosystem Management Project: Scientific Assessment).
Quinn, T.P. and D.J. Adams. 1996. Environmental changes affecting the migratory timing of
American shad and sockeye salmon. Ecology. 77(4): 1151 -1162.
Pratt, K.L. 1984. Habitat Use and Species Interactions of Juvenile Cutthroat (Salmo clarki
lewisi) and Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) in the Upper Flathead River Basin, Thesis,
University of Idaho, Moscow, ID. 95pp.
Pratt, K.L. 1992. A Review of Bull Trout Life Listory. 00. 5-9. IN: Howell, P.J. and D.V.
Buchanan, eds. Proceedings of the Gearhart Mountain Bull Trout Workshop; August 1992;
Gearhart Mountain, OR. Corvallis, OR: Oregon Chapter of the American Fisheries Society.
Ratliff, D.E. 1992. Bull Trout Investigations in the Metolius River-Lake Billy Chinook System.
Pages 37-44 IN: Howell, P.J. and D.V. Buchanan, eds. Proceedings of the Gearhart
Mountain Bull Trout Workshop; August 1992; Gearhart Mountain, OR. Corvallis, OR:
Oregon Chapter of the American Fisheries Society.
Ratliff, D.E. and P.J. Howell. 1992. The status of bull trout populations in Oregon. Proceedings
of the Gearhart Mountain Bull Trout Workshop, Oregon Chapter of the American Fisheries
Society.
Reeves, G.H., L.E. Benda, K.M. Burnett, P.A. Bisson, and J.R. Sedell. 1995. A disturbance-
based ecosystem approach to maintaining and restoring freshwater habitats of evolutionarily
significant units of anadromous salmonids in the Pacific Northwest. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp.
17:334-349.
Reeves. G. H. F. H. Everest, and J. D. Hall. 1987. Interactions Between the Redside Shiner
(Richardsomus balteatus) and the Steelhead Trout (Salmo gairdneri) in Western Oregon:
The Influence of Water Temperature, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 44:1603-1613, cited inNMFS
(National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and Status
Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho
Salmon. Oregon Coast Steelhead. Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon.
Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Reiser. [) \V . and V. C. Bjomn. 1979. Habitat Requirements of Anadromous Management on
Anadromous l-'ish Habitat in the Western I 'nited States and Canada. Pacific Northwest Forest
124
-------
and Range Experiment Station, USDA. U.S. Forest Service, Portland. In Nickelson et al.
(1992), cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological
Requirements and Status Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat
Trout. Oregon Coast Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern
California Coho Salmon, Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon.
Attachment 1.
Reiser and White. 1983. Effects of Complete Redd Dewatering on Salmonid Egg-Hatching
Success and Development of Juveniles. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 112:532-540, cited by
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (1995a), Final Issue Paper, 1992-1994 Water
Quality Standards Review, Dissolved Oxygen.
Richter, K.O. 1995. Criteria for the Restoration and Creation of Wetland Habitats for Lentic-
breeding Amphibians of the Puget Sound Basin 1: Site Selection Criteria. For: King County
Natural Resource Division, Puget Sound Wetlands and Stormwater Management Research
Program; King County, Washington.
Richter, K.O. and A.L. Azous. Sep. 1995. Amphibian Occurrence and Wetland Characteristics
in the Puget Sound Basin. Wetlands 15:3. 305-312.
Ricker, W. E. 1976. Review of the Rate of Growth and Mortality of Pacific Salmon in SafcvNati;
and Noncatch Mortality Caused by Fishing. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 33:1483-1524.
Ringler, N.H. and J.D. Hall. 1975. Effects of logging on water temperature and dissolved oxygen
in spawning beds. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 104:111-121.
Rieman. B.E. and J.D. Mclntyre. 1993. Demographic and Habitat Requirements for
Conservation of Bull Trout. U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Report
1NT-302, Boise, Idaho.
Rombough, P. J. 1986. Mathematical Model for Predicting The DO Requirements of Steelhead
(Salmo gairdneri) Embryos and Alevins in Hatchery Incubators. Aquaculture 59:119-137,
cited by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (1995a), Final Issue Paper, 1992-
1994 Water Quality Standards Review. Dissolved Oxygen.
Roth, A. R. 1937. A Survey of the Waters of the south Umpqua Ranger District: Umpqua
National Forest. U.S. Dep. Agric. Forest Service, Portland, OR. cited in NMFS (National
Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and Status Under
1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho Salmon,
Oregon Coast Steelhead. Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon. Klamath
Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Sakh. 1984 lieg incubation in coho salmon as a function of water temperature. Rybn. Khoz.
10:21-22.
125
-------
Sandercock, F.K. 1991. Life histories of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutcH). In: Pacific
Salmon: Life Histories. C. Groot and L. Margolis (eds.)UBC Press, Vancouver, pgs 395-445.
Sandercock, F. K. 1991. Life History of Coho Salmon. Pages 397-445 in Groot and L.Margolis
(eds.). Pacific Salmon Life Histories. Univ. B.C. Press, Vancouver, B.C. 564pp, cited in
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and
Status Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast
Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon,
Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Sauter, S. Unpublished data. Columbia River Research Laboratory, Biological Resources
Division, USGS.
Scheere P. D. and G. D. Apke. 1997. Oregon Chub Research: Middle Fork Willamette and
Santiam River Drainages. Annual Progress Report. Fish Research Project. Oregon.
Scoppettone, G. G. 1986. Upper KJamath Lake, Oregon Catostomid Research. Completion
Report, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Fisheries Research Center, Seattle, WA.
Scoppettone G. G., P. H. Rissler, B. Nielsen and M. Grader. 1995. Life History and Habitat use
of Borax lake Chub (Gila Boraxobius Williams and Bond) with Some Information on the
Borax Lake Ecosystem. National Biological Service, Northwest Biological Science Center,
Reno Field Station.
Scrivener, J.C. and B.C. Andersen. 1984. Logging impacts and some mechanisms that determine
the size of spring and summer populations of coho salmon fry (Oncorhynchus kisutch)'m
Carnation Creek, British Columbia. Can. J. Fish. Aq. Sci. 41:1097-1105.
Shepard, B., K. Pratt, and P. Graham. 1984. Life Histories of Westslope Cutthroat and Bull
Trout in the Upper Flathead River Basin. Montana. Kalispell. MT: Montana Dept. of Fish,
Wildlife, and Parks. 85pp.
Simon D. May 28, 1998. Personal Communication. University of California. Sacramento, CA.
Slaugsett. E. A.. III. 1980. Fine Organic Debris and Dissolved Oxygen in Streambed Gravels in
The Oregon Coast Range. M. S. Thesis. Forest Engineering. Oregon State Univ., Corvallis,
OR. cited by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (1995), Standards & Assessment
Section. 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards Review, Dissolved Oxygen.
Smith. C.E. W.P Dwyer. and R.G. Piper. 1983. Effect of water temperature on egg quality of
cutthroat trout. Prog. Fish Cult. 45:176-178.
Snyder. G.R. and T.H. Blahm. 1971 Effects of increased temperature on cold-water organisms.
J. WPtT 4.M5):8%-89Q
126
-------
Sowden, T. K. and G. Power. 1985. Prediction of Rainbow Trout Embryo Survival in Relation
to Groundwater Seepage and Particle Size of Spawning Substrates. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.
114:804-812, cited by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (1995a), Final Issue
Paper, 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards Review, Dissolved Oxygen.
Spence, B.C. G.A. Lomnicky, R.M. Hughes, R.P. Novitzki. 1996. An ecosystem approach to
salmonid conservation. TR-4501 -96-6057. ManTech Environmental Research Services
Corp., Corvallis, OR. 256pp.
Sumner, F. H. 1972. A Contribution to The Life History of The Cutthroat Trout in Oregon.
Oregon State Game Commission, Corvallis, OR 142pp, cited in NMFS (National Marine
Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and Status Under 1996
Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho Salmon,
Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon, Klamath
Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Swanson, G. A., M. I. Myer and J. R. Serie. 1974. Feeding Ecology of Breeding Blue-winged
Teals. Journal of Wildlife Management. 38:396-407. In Thorp, J. H., and Covich A.P.
1991. Ecology and Classification of North American Freshwater Invertebrates. San Diego:
Academic Press., Inc.
Swift, C.H. III. 1976. Estimation of stream discharges preferred by Steelhead trout for spawning
and rearing in western Washington. 50pp.
Tang, J., M.D. Bryant, and E.L. Brannon. 1987. Effect of temperature extremes on the mortality
and development rates of coho salmon embryos and alevins. Prog. Fish Cult. 49:167-174.
Taranger, G.L. and T. Hansen. 1993. Ovulation and egg survival following exposure of Atlantic
salmon, Salmo salar L, broodstock to different water temperatures. Aq. Fish. Manage.
24:151-156.
Technical Staffs of the Department of Fisheries of Canada and the International Pacific Salmon
Fisheries Commission. 1952. Report on the fisheries problem created by the development
of power in the Nechako-Kemano-Nanika River systems. Supplement #1, Temperature
changes in the Nechako River and their effects on the salmon population. 42pp.
Temperature Subcommittee, Technical Advisory and Policy Advisory Committees. 1995a.
Temperature 1992-1994 Water Quality Standard Review. Final Issue Paper. Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality.
Temperature Subcommittee. Technical Advisory and Policy Advisory Committees. 1995b.
Temperature 1992-1994 Water Quality Standard Review. Final Issue Paper. Oregon
Department of F.nvironmental Quality.
Temperature Subcommittee. lechnieal Advisory and Policy Advisory Committees. I995c.
127
-------
Temperature 1992-1994 Water Quality Standard Review, Final Issue Paper. Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality.
Theurer, F. D., I. Lines, and T. Nelson. 1985. Interaction Between Riparian Vegetation, Water
Temperature, and Salmonid Habitat in the Tucannon River. Water Resources Bulletin
21(l):53-64, cited in NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). June
1991. Status Review for Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS
F/NWC-201. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service.
Thomas, R.E., J.A. Gharrett, M.G. Carls, S.D. Rice, A. Moles, and S. Kom. 1986. Effects of
fluctuating temperatures on mortality, stress, and energy reserves of juvenile coho salmon.
Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 115:52-59.
Thorp, J. H., and Covich A. P. 1991. Ecology and Classification of North American Freshwater
Invertebrates. San Diego: Academic Press., Inc.
Tipping, J. 1986. Effect of release size on return rates of hatchery sea-run cutthroat trout. Prog.
Fish Cult. 48: 195-197.
Todd,L. 7/7/97,12/30/97. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR, Personal
communication.
Tomasson, T. 1978. Age and Growth of Cutthroat Trout, Salmo clarki clarla, in The Rogue
River, Oregon. M.S. Thesis, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR. 75pp, cited in NMFS
(National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 19%. Draft Biological Requirements and Status
Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho
Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon,
Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Trotter, P. C. 1989. Coastal Cutthroat Trout: A Life History Compendium. Trans. Am. Fish.
Soc. 118:463-473, cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft
Biological Requirements and Status Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River
Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern
Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon, Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum
Salmon. Attachment 1.
Turnpenny A. W. H. and Williams. 1980. Effects of Sedimentation on The Gravels of an
Industrial River system. J. Fish. Biol. 17:681-693. cited by Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (1995), Final Issue Paper, 1992-1994 Water Quality Standards
Review. Dissolved Oxygen.
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. April 1997. Biological Report on the Klamath Project 1997
Operations Plan. L'SBR. Mid-Pacific Region. Klamath Basin Area Office.
t'.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1476. Quality Criteria for Water 1976. Office of Water
128
-------
Regulations and Standards, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1986. Quality Criteria for Water 1986.
EPA/440/5-86-001.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. March 1998. Draft Recovery Plan for the Oregon Chub
(Oregonichthys carmeri).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. April 1998. Recovery Plan for the Native Fishes of the Warner
Basin and Alkali Subbasin: Warner sucker (Threatened) Catostomus warnerensis, Hutton
tui chub (Threatened) Gila bicolor ssp., Foskett speckled dace (Threatened) Rhinichthys
osculus ssp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Lost River (Deltistes luxatus) and Shortnose (Chasmistes
brevirostris) Sucker Recovery Plan. USFWS, Portland, Ore. !08pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Recovery plan for the Borax Lake chub (Gila
boraxobius). USFWS, Portland, Ore. 57pp.
U.S. Forest Service. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment
Station. 1979. Influence of Forest and Rangeland Management on Anadromous Fish
Habitat in Western North America - Habitat Requirements of Anadromous Salmonids.
General Technical Report PNW-96, Oct. 1979. 56pp.
Van Hyning, J. M. 1968. Factors Affecting the Abundance of Fall Chinook Salmon in the
Columbia River. Oregon State University, Ph.D. Thesis, 424pp, cited in NOAA (National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). June 1991. Status Review for Snake River Fall
Chinook Salmon. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS F/NWC-201. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
Waples, R. S. 1991. Definition of "Species" Under The Endangered Species Act: Application to
Pacific Salmon. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS F/NWC-194, Northwest Fisheries
Science Center, Seattle, WA. 29pp. cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service).
Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and Status Under 1996 Environmental Baseline:
Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout. Oregon Coast Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead,
Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon. Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead
and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife/K. McAllister and W. Leonard. March 1997. Status of
the Oregon Spotted Frog in Washington. WDFW, Wildlife Mgmt. Pgm. 33pp.
Waters. K. 1993. Winter Habitat Utilization of Radio-tagged Coastal Cutthroat Trout. M. S.
Thesis. North Carolina State Univ.. Raleigh, NC. In Johnson et al. (1994) in NOAA Tech.
Memo. NMFS-NMFSC-15. cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996.
Draft Biological Requirements and Status Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua
129
-------
River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead, Southern
Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon, KJamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum
Salmon. Attachment 1.
Wedemeyer, G.A. and C.P. Goodyear. 1984. Diseases caused by environmental stressors. pp.
424-434. In: O. Kinne (ed.)Diseases of Marine Animals, Hamburg, Germany.
Weitcamp, L. A., T. C. Wainwright, G. J. Bryant, G. B. Milner, D. J. Teel, R. G. Kope, and R.
S. Waples. 1995. Status Review of Coho Salmon From Washington, Oregon, and
California, U.S. Dep. Comm., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-24, Northwest Fisheries
Science Center, Seattle, Washington. 258pp, cited in NMFS (National Marine Fisheries
Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and Status Under 1996 Environmental
Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho Salmon, Oregon Coast
Steelhead, Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon, KJamath Mountain Province
Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
Welch, E.B. 1980. Ecological Effects of Waste Water. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Welch, E. B. Univ. of Wash. Dept. of Civil Engineering, Environmental Engineering and Science
Division. Personal communication.
Whitmore, Cm. M., C. E. Warren, and P. Doudoroff. 1960. Avoidance Reactions of salmonid
and Centrarchid fishes to Low Oxygen Concentrations. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 89(1): 17-26.
Wissmar, R.C., J.E. Smith, B.A. Mclntosh, H.W. Li, G.H. Reeves, and J.R. Sedell. 1994.
Ecological health of river basins in forested regions of eastern Washington and Oregon. Gen.
Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-326. Portland. OR.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Pacific Northwest Research Station. 65 pg.
Withler, I. L. 1966. Variability in Life History Characteristics on Steelhead Trout (Salmo
gairdneri) Along The Pacific Coast of North America. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 23:365-393
in Busby et al. (1994), NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-27. 261pp, cited in NMFS
(National Marine Fisheries Service). Dec. 1996. Draft Biological Requirements and Status
Under 1996 Environmental Baseline: Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout, Oregon Coast Coho
Salmon, Oregon Coast Steelhead. Southern Oregon/Northern California Coho Salmon.
Klamath Mountain Province Steelhead and Chum Salmon. Attachment 1.
. 1988. Growth, aerobic metabolism, and dissolved oxygen requirements of embryos and
alevins of Steelhead. Salmo gairdneri. Can. J. Zool. 66:651-660, cited by Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality (1995). Standards & Assessment Section. 1992-1994
Water Quality Standards Review. Dissolved Oxygen.
130
-------
VII. LIST OF APPENDICES
A. Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate Species Under National Marine
Fisheries Service Jurisdiction That Occur in Oregon, Washington and Idaho
Federally Listed Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, Candidate Species and Species
of Concern Which May Occur in the Area of the Proposed Water Quality Standards
Review, from U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
B. State of Oregon Revised Water Quality Standards for Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature,
and pH as adopted by the Environmental Quality Commission January 11,1996
OAR 340-41 Basin Index Map and Tables 1-19 (Benefical Uses applicable to each
basin)
C. Policy letter from Michael T. Llewelyn, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,
dated June 22, 1998 to Philip Millam, EPA Region 10, clarifying Oregon's water
quality standards revision.
D. Table of Oregon's WQS, by basin, for Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature, pH —Revised
standards and old standards, August 28,1998.
E. Maps of the status of listed salmonids and 303(d) listed waters for DO, T, pH
F. Oregon Bull Trout
G. Ecoregion Map
H. Oregon Temperature Standard Review, by Cara Herman, EPA, Region 10
Charles Coutant, Analysis of temperature requirements for salmonids
131
-------
APPENDIX A
Endangered, Threatened, Proposed, and Candidate Species Under National Marine
Fisheries Service Jurisdiction That Occur in Oregon, Washington and Idaho
Federally Listed Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, Candidate Species and Species of
Concern Which May Occur in the Area of the Proposed Water Quality Standards Review,
from U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
-------
APPENDIX B
State of Oregon Revised Water Quality Standards for Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature,
and pH as adopted by the Environmental Quality Commission January 11,1996
OAR 340-41 Basin Index Map and Tables 1-19 (Beneficial Uses applicable to each basin)
-------
Attachment A
Page A-1
January 11, 1996
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
OAR 340-41-[BASIN](2)(a), 340-41-{BASIN] (3),
340-41-026 and 340-41-006
NOTE: The underlined portions of text represent proposed
additions made to the rules.
The [bracketed] portions of text represent proposed
deletions made to the rules. Because the rules differ
by basin, the bracketed portions are examples only.
The exact reference to be deleted is given in Figure A.
340-41-[Basin](2)(a)
(a) Dissolved oxygen (DO): The changes adopted by the Commission on
January 11. 1996. become effective July 1.1996. Until that time, the
requirements of this rule that were In effect on January 10.1996. apply:
ftA)—Fresh waters; DO concentrations shall net be leas than 90 percent of
saturation at the seasonal lew, w leas than 95 percent of saturation in
spawning areas during spawning, incubation, hatching, and fry stages of
salmonid fishes;
(B) Marine and cstuorinc waters (outside of zones of upwcllcd marine waters
naturally deficient in DO); DO concentrations shall not be leas than 6
mg/1 for catuarinc waters, or leaa than saturation concentrations for
marine waters;
(€) Columbia River: DO concentrations shall not be Ica3 than 00 percent of
saturation.]
(A) For waterbodies identified by the Department as providing salmonid
spawning, during the periods from spawning until fry emergence from
the gravels, the following criteria apply:
(I) The dissolved oxygen shall not be less than 11 mg/1. However.
if the minimum intergravel dissolved oxygen, measured as a
spatial median, is 8.0 mg/1 or greater, then the DO catena is 9.0
mg/1:
-------
Attachment A
Page A-2
January 11, 1996
(H) Where conditions of barometric pressure, altitude, and
temperature preclude attainment of the 1 l.Qmp/L or 9.Q
criteria, dissolved oxygen levels shall not be less than 95 percent
ofsaturation,.
For waterbodies identified by the Department as providing satm^y
spawning during, the period from spawning until fry emergence from fo
gravels, the spatial median intergravel dissolved oxygen
shall not fall below 6.0 mg/L:
(QL
A spatial median of 8.0 mg/L intergravel dissolved oxygen level shall he
used to identify areas where the recognized beneficial use of ^aJmonjd
spawning, egg incubation aftd fry emergence from the egg and from the
gravels mav be impaired and therefore require action bv the
S.O m/L. the Deirtn mav. in accord
with priorities established by the Department for **vajuating water quality
impaired watetfaodies. determine whether to list the watetbodv as water
quality limited under the Section 303ftft of the Clean Water Act, initiate
pollution control strategies as warranted, and where needed cooperate
implement necessary frefl niitfWgfflTCTt practices for nonpoint source
pollution control:
CD)
For waterbodies identified by the Department as providing cold-water
aquatic Hfe. the dissolved oxygen shall not be less than 8.0 mg/L as an
absolute minimum. Where conditions of barometric pressure, altitude,
and temperature preclude attainment of the 8.0 mg/L. dissolved oxygen
shall not be |ess than 90 percent of saturation. At the discretion of the
Department* when the Department determines that adequate information
exists, the dissolved oxygen shall not fall below 8.0 mg/L as a 3May
mean minimum, .$.5 mg/L as a $even-day minimum mean, and shall not
fall be|ow_61p mg/L as an absolute minimum (Tabie 201;
For waterbodies identified by the Department as providing cool-water
aquatic life, the dissolved oxygen shall not be less than 6.5 mg/L as an
absolute minimum. At the discretion of the Department, when the
Department determines that adequate information exists, the dissolved
oxygen shall not fall below 6.5 mg/L as a 30-day mean minimum,
5.0 mg/L as a seven-day minimum mean, and shall not fall below
4.0 mg/L as an absolute minimum (Table BV.
(E)
-------
Attachment A
Page A-3
January 11, 1996
(F) For waterfaodies identified by the Department as providing warm-water
aquatic life, the dissolved oxygen shall not be less than 5.5 mg/L as an
absolute minimum. At the discretion of the Department, when the
Department determines that adequate information exists, the dissolved
oxygen shall not fall below 5.5 mg/L as a 30-d^y m^P minimum, and
shall not fall below 4.0 mg/L as an absolute minimum (Table 20V.
(G) For estuarine water, the dissolved oxygen concentrations shall not be less
than 6.5 tng/L (for coastal waterfaodies):
(H) For marine waters, no measurable reduction in dissolved oxygen
concentratiori shall be allowed.
340-41-[Basin](3)
(3) Where the naturally occurring quality parameters of waters of the [(basin)] are outside
the numerical limits of the above assigned water quality standards, the naturally
occurring water quality shall be the standard. However, in such cases special
restrictions, described in OAR 340-4 l-026Y3Ka>(O(iin. apply to discharges that affect
dissolved oxveen.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-4
January 11, 1996
TABLE 21
DISSOLVED OXYGEN & INTERGRAVEL DISSOLVED OXYGEN CRITERIA
(Applicable to All Basins]
Class
Salmon id
Spawning
Cold Water
Cool Witter
., Warm
Water
No Risk
Concentration and Period-
(AH Units Are mc/L)
30P
8.0s
6.5
-LS
7D
11.0^
•
IBM
6.5
5.0
M«n
9.0?
1=0* J i^
6.0
, 4.0
4.0
No Change from Background
Use/Level of Protection •
Principal use of salmonid snawnint; and incubation of
embryos until emercenc* from the travels. Low risk of
impairment to cold-wa'ter aauatic life, other n^twr f,^
and invenehrates. The 1GDO criteria reore,odies include* estuarieK.
Salmonids and other cold-water t»ioU m&y be presept
durinc pxrt or all of die year hut do oot form a dominant
component of the community structure. No measurable
risk to c«K»l-wstter species, slichf risk to cold-water
soecies present.
Waterlxxlies whose aquatic fife beneficial uses are
characterized hv intriKlticed. or native, warm-water
NiwUrs.
Tlie <«ilv DO criiemm that provides no additional risk is
"no chance IIIHII hackcround."' Waterbodies accorded
tins level of protection include marine waters and waters
in Wilderness stress.
^O-D = 30-day mean minimum as defined in definitions section
7-D = Seven -7 dav mean minimum «s defined in Division 41 . Section 006
Tjni = Seven -7 dav minimum mean as defi icd in Division 41 . Section 006
Min = Absolute minimums for surface, samples when applvin; tlie avera-jins iK'n'id. spatial median of ICDO
^WJieri Intersravel DO levels are 80 ins/L or creater. DO levels m.iv l»e as low .is 9.0 mdL. widuiut iri«t«MsrinB a
violation .
-If conditions of barometric pressure altitude and urmper.iliirc preclude acluevoment »( ihc litotmtied criteria then
95 percent saturation applies
•liiter^r.tvel DO action level vpau.i
1 median minimum
•Intercravel DO criterion spatial median minimum
•If conditions of |>3 ionic m pressure altitude and leoiperatu
— -^M
e i-fi-, !u,V .iclin > OIK in . .1' 8 0 in-^/L llicn 90 ocicenl
Nolr
dated !«C>M<
-------
Attachment A
Page A-5
January 11, 1996
POLICIES AND GUIDELINES GENERALLY APPLICABLE TO ALL BASINS
OAR 340-41-026
(3) The Commission or Department may grant exceptions to sections (2) and (6) of this
rule and approvals to section (5) of this rule for major dischargers and other
dischargers, respectively. Major dischargers include those industrial and domestic
sources that are classified as major sources for permit fee purposes in OAR 340-45-
075(2):
(a) In allowing new or increased discharged loads, the Commission or Department
shall mafce the following findings:
(A) The new or increased discharged load would not cause water quality
standards to be violated:
(B) The new or increased discharge load would not unacceptably threaten or
impair any recognized beneficial uses. In making this determination, the
Commission or Department may rely upon the presumption that if the
numeric criteria established to protect specific uses are met the beneficial
uses they were designed to protect are protected. In making this
determination the Commission or Department may also evaluate other
state and federal agency data that would provide information on potential
impacts to beneficial uses for which the numeric criteria have not been
set;
(C) The new or increased discharged load shall not be granted if the
receiving stream is classified as being water quality limited under OAR
340-4l-006(30)(a), unless:
(i) The pollutant parameters associated with the proposed discharge
are unrelated either directly or indirectly to the parameter(s)
causing the receiving stream to violate water quality standards
and being designated water quality limited; or
(n) Total maximum daiis loads (TMDLs). waste load allocations
(\VLAs). load allocations (LAs), and the reserve capacity have
been established ;or tne uater q;ialit\ limited receivniLi stream;
and compliance plans under which enforcement action can be
taken have been established; and there will be sufficient reserve
capacitv to assimilate the increased load under the established
TMUL at the tune or discharge, or
-------
Attachment A
Page A-6
January 11, 1996
(i\i) Effective July I. 1996,.inwaterbodies designated water-quality;
limited for dissolved oxygen.whenestablishing. WLAs undgr_a
TMDL for waterhodies meeting thej:gnditions defined in this
rule, the Department may at its discretion provide an allowance
for WLAs calculated to result in no measurable reduction of
dissolved oxygen. For this purpose. ''.no measurable reduction''
is defined as no more than 0.10 mg/L for a.single source and no
more than 0.20 mg/L for all anthropogenic activities thar
influence the water quality limited segment. The allowance
applies for surface watexDQjcriteria and for Intergravel DO if a
determination is made that the conditions are natural. The
allowance for WLAs would apply only to surface water 30-day
and j,vyeo-day mean mini mums, and the JGDO action level;
[(iii^fvi) Under extraordinary circumstances to solve an existing,
immediate, and critical environmental problem
-------
Attachment A
Page A-7
January 11, 1996
DEFINITIONS
OAR 340-41-006
(44) "Intergravel Dissolved Oxygen" (1GDCM -- The concentration of oxveen measured in
the stream gravel pore water. For the purposes of compliance with criteria, the
dissolved oxygen concentration should be measured within a redd or artificial redd1
down-gradient of the egg pocket. Measurements should be taken within a limited time
period: for example, prior to emergence of fry during the month of March.
(45) " Spatial Median" — The value which falls in the middle of a data set of multiple
IGDO measurements taken within a spawning area. Half the samples should be greater
than, and half the samples should be less than the spatial median.
(46) "Daily Mean" (dissolved oxygen) -- The numeric average of an adequate number of
data to describe the variation in dissolved oxygen concentration throughout a day.
including daily maxinnims and mininnims. For the purpose of calculating the mean.
concentrations in excess of 100 percent of saturation are valued at the saturation
concentration.
(47^ "Monthly (30-day) Mean Minimum" (dissolved oxygen) -- The minimum of the 30
consecutive day floating averages of the calculated daily mean dissolved oxygen
concentration.
(481 "Weekly (seven-day) Mean Minimum" (dissolved oxygen) -- The minimum of the
seven consecutive day floating: average ot the calculated daily mean dissolved oxygen
concentration.
(49) "Weekly (seven-day) Minimum Mean" (dissolved oxveen) -- The minimum of the
seven consecutive day floating average of the daily minimum concentration. For
purposes of application of the criteria, (his value will be used as the reference for
diurnal miniivuims.
(50) "Minimum" (dissolved oxygen) -- The minimum recorded concentration including
season a 1_ and diurnal niimmums
L5_U ..._liroJd-\Vaier Aquatic l.iie" -- The aquauc communities thai are physiologically
resu Kj_u^l Jo.cold \vaic; , ne_oj -DJAlL'^LSJKlJr'L^^scjisujve to reduced q
leyejs. Including hut no: limned 10 Sdlninnn/dc and cold-water invertebrates.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-8
January 11, 1995
(52) "Cool-Water Aquatic Life" -- The aquatic communities that are physioloEJcally
restricted to cool waters, composed of one or more species having dissolved oxygen
requirements believed similar to the cold-water communities. Including but not limited
to Coilidac. Osnic.ridac, Adpcmer'ulac. and sensitive Ce.ntrarchidae. such as the small-
mouth bass.
(53) "Warm-Water Aquatic Life" -- The aquatic communities that are adapted to warm-
water conditions and do not contain either cold- or cool-water species.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-9
January 11,1996
Figure A. Existing Basin Rules for Dissolved Oxygen:
OAR 340-41-205, 245, 285 325, 365, 445, 485, 525, 565, 605, 645, 685, 725, 765,
805, 845, 885, 925, and 965
CURRENT DISSOLVED OXYGEN STANDARDS
Dissolved oxtfen standard format by basin
All basin criteria are preceded by "(a) Dissolved Oxygen (DO):"
1
(A)
(B)
(C)
2
(A)
(B)
3
EO)
F
«S)
A
B
C
D
4
BO)
A
BOO
5
B
*,
A
6
A
B
7
a
8
A
B
9
CO)
.
coo
A
B
Cooun«-
•Men) l(tro*)|: DO tnatmniiam shall MX be lea
OHM 90 percent of MMratio* « the seasonal low. or lew
OHM 93 perccat of saumtio* • spMnuag area* dortif
tfewtmt. i«KMb«tio«. httchtaf . s*d fry stages of sal*.
OMdfMh.
Mariae *ad atMriac wMcn (o«Md« of the BMC* of op-
odtod MHriM «Mcn MttmUy 4*Tic«MC • DO) DO
Cal»atli Hirer DO ONKwtratioM iMl not be lea
coMMMhtia* dHtt aot be ICM tkM «.0 «j/U
MutaMMMfth ChMHcl end BMIMIMI WiUMMite River
from WMKh 10 the WIlMMBe Ftlte (MaiMiea Kluuth
River frwn Klinirti Like to Keao Dam (river mUa 225
10 232.5)|. the DO cooccatntioa dull not be less than
5.0m*/L.
MaiaJten WUUoMOe River from the WUUmette F«1U to
Ncwberj: The dissolved oxygen cooceatmtoa shall not
be less than 6.0 mf/L.
Mainstem Vfllliarnr River from Newburg to Salem.
River mile S5: (MaiosUai KJamath River from Kcno
Dam to the Orefoa-Califoraia Border (river miles 232.5
to 208.5): The DO concentration shall not be less than
T.Omg/L.
Mainstem Willamette River from Salem to confluence of
Coast to Middle Forks (river mile 1ST), the DO concen-
trates shall not be less than 90 percentof saturation.
All Other (Name) [Except Goose lake) and tributaries:
DO concentrations shall not be less than 75 percent of
saturation at the icatonal low. or less than 95 percent of
saturation in spawning areas during spawning.
incubation, hatching, and fry stage* of salmonid fish.
Goose Lake: DO concentrations shall not be les* than
7 Omg/L
(1) North Coast: (2) Mid Coast. Umpqua. South Coast. Rogue: (3) Willamette: (4) Hood: (5) Dcschutes and Sandy: (6) John Day.
Umaiilla: (7) Walla Walla. Grande Ronde. Powder. Malheur. Owyhcc. Malhcur Lake. (8) Goose &. Summer Lakes: (9) KJamaih
-------
Attachment A
Page A-10
January 11,1996
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
OAR 340-41-[Basin](2)(b),
OAR 340-41-68S(2)(o) and OAR 340-41-026
NOTE: The underlined portions of text represent proposed
additions made to the rules.
The [bracketed] portions of text represent proposed
deletions, made to the rules. Because the rules differ by basin, the
bracketed portions are examples only.
The exact reference to be deleted is given in Figure B.
(b) Temperature: The changes adopted by the Commission on January 11.
19%. become effecthre July 1. 1996. Until that time, the requirements of
this rule that were in effect on January 10. 1996. apply. The method for
e numeric temperature criteria secified in this rule is defined
In OAR 340-41-006^41:
[(A) Columbia River; No measurable increases shall be allowed outside of
-------
Attachment A
Page A-11
January 11, 1996
All other freshwater streams and tributaries thereto: No measurable
increases shall be allowed outside of the assigned mixing zone, as
measured relative to » cenifol point immediately upstream from n
discharge \\hcn stream temperatures arc -SB9 F. or greater; or more than
0.5° F. increase due to n single source discharge when receiving water
temperatures arc 57.5s-Fr-or less; or more thnn 2° F:increase due to ali
sources combined when stream temperatures nrc 56° F. or less, except
for specifically limited duration activities which may be authorized by
DEQ under such conditions as DEQ and-the Department of Fish and
Wildlife may prescribe and which arc necessary to accommodate
legitimate uses or activities where temperatures in excess of this-standard
arc unavoidable and all practical1 preventive techniques have been applied
to minimize temperature rises. The Director Smiii hold a public hcarin0
when n request for an exception to the temperature standard for-a
planned activity or discharge will in nti probability adversely affect the
beneficial uses;
Marine and cstuarinc waters.* No significant increase obovc natural
background temperatures shall be'allowed, and water temperatures shall
not be altered to n degree which creates or can reasonably be expected te
create an adverse effect on fish or other aquatic liferj
(A) To accomplish the goals identified in OAR 340-41-120(1 n. unless
specifically allowed under a Department-approved surface water
temperature management plan as required under OAR 340-41-
OlfifflfaW). no measurable surface water temperature increase resulting
from anthropogenic activities is allowed:
(i) In a basin for which salmonid fish rearinE is a designated
beneficial use, and in which surface water temperatures exceed
64.0°F (17.8QC):
(ii) In the CoUimbja_ River or its associated sloughs and channels
from the mouih 10 river mile 309 when surface water
temperatures exceed 68.0°F (20.0°O:
(ill) In the Willamette River or us associated sloughs and channels
from jhejmniih in river mile ^0 when surface water t.emjjeiajures
-------
Attachment A
Page A-12
January 11, 1995
(iv) In waters and periods of the year determined by the Department
to support native salmonid spawning, egg incubation, and fry
emergence from the egg and from the gravels in a basin which
exceeds 55.0°Fn2.8°C):
(v) In waters determined by the Department to support or to he
necessary to maintain the viability of native Qreeon bull trout.
when surface water temperatures exceed 50.0°F (10.0°Q;
(vi) In waters determined by the Department to be ecologically
significant cold-water refugia:
(vii) In stream segments containing federally listed ThreaTened and
Endangered species if the increase would impair the biological
integrity of the Threatened and Endangered population:
(viii) In Oregon waters when the dissolved oxygen (DQ> levels are
within 0.5 mg/L or 10 percent saturation of the water column or
intergravel DO criterion for a given stream reach or subbasin:
(ix) In natural lakes.
(B) An exceedance of the numeric criteria identified in subparagraph (A)fi)
through (v) of this subsection will not be deemed a temperature standard
violation if it occurs when the air temperature during the warmest seven-
day period of the year exceeds the 90th percentile of the seven-day
average daily maximum air temperature calculated in a yearly series over
the historic record. However, during such periods, the anthropogenic
sources must still continue to comply with their surface water
temperature management plans developed under OAR 340-41-
026G)(a)(DV.
CO Any source may petition the Commission for an exception to
suhparagrapli (A1(i) through (ix) of this subsection for discharge above
the identified criteria it':
(Tj The source provides the necessary scientific information to
describe how ilie designated beneficial uses would not he
.iclverselv imnaciL'd or
-------
Attachment A
Page A-13
January 11, 1996
A source is implementing all reasonable management practices or
measures: its activity will not .significantly affect the beneficial
uses: and the environmental cost of treating the parameter to the
level necessary to assure full protection would outweigh the risk
to the resource.
(D) Marine and estuarine waters: No significant increase above natural
background temperatures shall he allowed, and water temperatures shall
not be altered to a degree which creates or can reasonably be expected to
create an adverse effect on fish or other aquatic life.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-14
January 11. 1995
POLICIES AND GUIDELINES GENERALLY APPLICABLE TO ALL BASINS
OAK 340-41-026
(3) The Commission or Department may grant exceptions to sections (2) and (6) of this
rule and approvals to section (5) of this rule for major dischargers and other
dischargers, respectively. Major dischargers include those industrial and domestic
sources that are classified as major sources for permit fee purposes in OAR 340-45-
075(2):
(a) In allowing new or increased discharged loads, the Commission or Department
shall make the following findings:
•^
(A) The new or increased discharged load would not cause water quality
standards to be violated;
(B) The new or increased discharge load would not unacceptably threaten or
impair any recognized beneficial uses. In making this determination, the
Commission or Department may rely upon the presumption that if the
numeric criteria established to protect specific uses are met the beneficial
uses they were designed to protect are protected. In making this
determination the Commission or Department may also evaluate other
state and federal agency daia that would provide information on potential
impacts to beneficial uses for which the numeric criteria have not been
set;
(C) The new or increased discharged load shall not be granted if the
receiving stream is classified as being water quality limited under OAR
340-41-006(30)(a), unless:
(i) The pollutant parameters associated with the proposed discharge
are unrelated either directly or indirectly to the parameter(s)
causing the receiving stream to violate water quality standards
and being designated water quality limited; or
(n) Total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), waste load allocations
(WLAs). load allocations (LAs), and the reserve capacity have
been established for the water quality limited receiving stream.
and compliance plans under which enforcement action can he
taken have been eMahhshed, and there will lie sufficient reserve
capacity to assimilate me increased load under the established
TMDL at the unii: ol discharge; or
-------
Attachment A
Page A-15
January 11, 1996
fiii) Effective July 1. 1996. in waterbodies designated water-quality
limited for dissolved oxygen, when establishing WLAs under a
TMDL for waterbodies meeting the conditions defined in this
rule, the Department may at its discretion provide an allowance
for WLAs calculated to result in no measurable reduction of
dissolved oxygen. For this purpose, "no measurable reduction"
is defined as no more than 0.10 mg/L for a single source and no
more than 0.20 mg/L for all anthropogenic activities that
influence the water quality limited segment. The allowance
applies for surface water DO criteria and for Intereravel DO if a
determination is made that the conditions are natural. The
allowance for WLAs would apply only to surface water 30-day
and seven-day means, and the IGDO action level:
f(iii)jfiv) Under extraordinary circumstances to solve an existing,
immediate, and critical environmental problem that the
Commission or Department may consider a waste load increase
for an existing source on a receiving stream designated water
quality limited under OAR 340-41 -006(30)(a) during the period
between the establishment of TMDLs, WLAs, and LAs and their
achievement based on the following conditions:
(I) That TMDLs, WLAs, and LAs have been set; and
(II) That a compliance plan under which enforcement actions
can be taken has been established and is being
implemented on schedule; and
(III) That an evaluation of the requested increased load shows
that this increment of load will not have an unacceptable
temporary or permanent adverse effect oh beneficial uses;
and
(IV) That any waste load increase granted under subparagraph
(iv of tins paragraph is temporary and does not extend
beyond the TMDL compliance deadline established for the
waterbodv If this action will result in a permanent load
increase. "'•,• .'.ction lias to compix with subpara«raplis (i)
or (n) o! '',•,:••: paragraph
-------
Attachment A
PageA-16
January 11, 1995
(D) Effective July I. 1996. in any waterbody identified by the Department as
exceeding the relevant numeric temperature criteria specified for each
individual water quality management basin identified in OAR 340-41-
205. OAR-340-41-245. QAR-340-41-285. OAR-340-41-325. QAR-340-
41-365. OAR-340-41-445. QAR-340-41-485. OAR-340-41-525. OAR-
340-41-565. OAR-340-41-605. OAR-340-41-645. OAR-340-41-685
QAR-340-41-725. OAR-34Q-41-765. QAR-34Q-41-805. QAR-34Q-41-
845. OAR-340-41-885. OAR-340-41-925. OAR-340-41-965. and
designated as water quality limited tinder Section 303fd) of the Clean
Water Act, the following requirements shall apply to appropriate
watersheds or stream segments in accordance with priorities established
by the Department. The Department may determine that a^plan is not
'necessary for a particular stream segment or segments within a water-
quality limited basin based on the contribution of the segment(s) to the
temperature problem:
(i) Anthropogenic sources are required to develop and implement a
surface water temperature management plan which describes the
best management practices, measures, and/or control technologies
which will be used to reverse the warming trend of the basin.
watershed, or stream segment identified as water quality limited
for temperature:
(ii) Sources shall continue to maintain and improve, if necessary, the
surface water temperature management plan in order to maintain
the cooling trend until the numeric criterion is achieved or until
the Department, in consultation with (he Designated Management
Agencies (DMAs), has determined that all feasible steps have
been taken to meet (he criterion and that the designated beneficial
uses are not being adversely impacted. In this latter situation, the
temperature achieved after all feasible steps have been taken will
be the temperature criterion for the surface waters covered by the
applicable management plan. The determination that all feasible
steps have been taken will be based on. but not limited to. a site-
specific balance of the following criteria, protection of beneficial
uses, appropriateness 10 local conditions: use of besl treatment
technologies or management practices or measures, and cost of
compliance.
-------
Attachment A
PageA-17
January 11, 1996
(iii) Once the numeric criterion is achieved or the Department has
determined that all feasible steps have been taken, sources shall
continue to implement the practices or measures described in the
surface water temperature management plan in order to
continually achieve the temperature criterion:
(iv) For point sources, the surface water temperature management
plan will be part of their National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System Permit (NPDESV.
(v) For nonpoint sources, the surface water temperature management
plan will be developed by designated management agencies
(DMAs) which will identify the appropriate BMPs 6"r measure;;;
fvi) A source (including hut not limited to permitted point sources.
individual landowners and land managers) in compliance with the
Department or DMA (as appropriate) approved surface water
temperature management plan shall not be deemed to be causing
or contributing to a violation of the numeric criterion if the
surface water temperature exceeds the criterion:
(vih In waters the Department determines to be critical for bull trout
recovery! the goal of a bull trout surface water temperature
management plan is to specifically protect those habitat ranges
necessary to maintain the viability of existing stocks by restoring
stream and riparian conditions or allowing them to revert to
conditions attaining the coolest surface water temperatures
possible under natural background conditions:
(E) Waters of the state exceeding the temperature criteria will be identified
in the Clean Water Act (CWA). Section 303(dl list developed bv the
Department according to the schedule required by the Clean Water Act.
This list will be prioritized in consultation with the DMAs to identify the
order in which those waters will be addressed by the Department and the
DMAs;
-------
Attachment A
PageA-18
January 11, 1995
(F) In basins determined by the Department to be exceeding the numeric
temperature criteria, and which are required to develop surface water
temperature management plans, new or increased discharge loads from
point sources which require an NPDES permit under Section 402 of the
Clean Water Act or hydro-power projects which require certification
under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act are allowed a 1.0°F total
cumulative increase in surface water temperatures as the surface water
temperature management plan is being developed and implemented for
the water quality limited basin if:
(i) In the best professional judgment of the Department, the new or
increased discharge load, even with the resulting 1.0°F
cumulative increase, will not conflict with or impaifthe ability of
a surface water temperature management plan to achieve the
numeric temperature criteria: and
(ii) A new or expanding source must demonstrate that it fits within
the J .0°F increase and that its activities will not result in a
measurable impact on beneficial uses. This latter showing must
be made by demonstrating to the Department that the temperature
change due to its activities will be less than or equal to 0.25°F
under a conservative approach or by demonstratine the same to
the EOC with appropriate modeling.
(G) Any source may petition the Department for an exception to paragraph
(F) of this subsection, provided:
(i) The discharge will result in less than 1.0°F increase at the edge
of the mixing zone, and suhparagraph (ii) or (in) of this
paragraph applies;
(ii) The source provides the necessary scientific information to
describe how the designated beneficial uses would not be
adversely impacted; or
fni) The source demonstrates that: n is implementing all reasonable
management prnj^uresijisjiciivily will not significantly affect the
beneficial us^'s: niid ilie on VJJ_OM i n en la I cost of treating the
parameter to the level necessaryjo_as_sure lull protection would
h tin' ri^k M th:.'_ri'M>ijrcy.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-19
January 11, 1996
(H) Any source or DMA may petition the Commission for an exception to
paragraph (F) of this subsection, provided:
(i) The source or DMA provides the necessary scientific information
to describe how the designated beneficial uses would not he.
adversely impacted: or
Hi) The source or DMA demonstrates that: it is implementinp all
reasonable management practices: its activity will not
significantly affect the beneficial uses: and the environmental cost
of treating the parameter to the level necessary to assure full
protection would outweigh the risk to the resource.
•*•
f(O)3(I) The activity, expansion, or growth necessitating a new or increased
discharge load is..
-------
Attachment A
Page A-20
January 11. 1996
IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM APPLICABLE TO ALL BASINS
OAR 340-41-120
(10) Agricultural water quality management plans to reduce agricultural nonpoint source
pollution shall be developed and implemented by the Oregon Department of Agriculture
(PDA) through a cooperative agreement with the Department of Environmental Quality
(DEO) to implement applicable provisions of QRS 568.900-933 and ORS 561.191. If
DEO has reason to believe that agricultural discharges or activities are contributing to
water quality problems resulting in water quality standards violations. DEO shall hold a
consultation with the PDA. If water quality impacts are likely from agricultural
sources, and DEO determines that a water quality management plan is neqessary. the
Director ~f DEO shall write n letter to the Director of the PDA requesting that such a
management plan he prepared and implemented to reduce pollutant loads and achieve
the water quality criteria.
(11) EOC policy on surface water temperature (as regulated.in (he basin standards found in
OAR 340-41-205: QAR-340-41-245. QAR-340-41-285. QAR-340-41-32S. QAR-34Q-
41-365. OAR-340-41-445. OAR-340-41-485. OAR-340-41-525. OAR-34Q-41-565.
QAR-340-41-605. OAR-340-41-645. OAR-340-41-685. OAR-340-41-725. OAR-340-
41-765. QAR-34Q-41-805. OAR-340-41-845. QAR-340-41-885. OAR-34Q-41-925.
OAR-340-41-965^:
(a) It is the policy of the Environmental Quality Commission (EOC) to protect
aquatic ecosystems from adverse surface water warming caused by
anthropogenic activities. The intent of the EOC is to minimize the risk to cold-
water aquatic ecosystems horn anthropogenic warming of surface waters, to
encourage the restoration of critical aquatic habitat, to reverse surface water
warming trends, to cool the waters of the State, and to control extremes in
temperature fluctuations clue to anthropogenic activities:
(A) The first element of this policy is to encourage the proactive
development and implementation of best management practices or other
measures and available temperature control technologies for nonpoint
and poini source activities 10 prevent thermal pollution of surface waters;
-------
Attachment A
Page A-21
January 11, 1996
(B) The second element of this policy is to require the development and
implementation of surface water temperature management plans for those
basins exceeding the numeric temperature criteria identified in the basin
standards. The surface water temperature management plans will
identify the best management practices (BMPs) or measures and
approaches to he taken by nonpoint sources, and technologies to be
implemented by point sources to limit or eliminate adverse
anthropogenic warming of surface waters.
(b) Surface water temperatures in general are warming throughout the Slate. These
water temperatures are influenced by natural physical factors including, but not
limited to solar radiation, stream-side shade, ambient air temperatures, heated
water discharges, cold-water discharges, channel morphology, and stream flow.
Surface water temperatures may also be affected by anthropogenic activities that
discharge heated water, widen streams, or reduce stream shading, flows, and
depth. These anthropogenic activities, as well as others, increase water
temperatures. Anthropogenic activities may also result in the discharge of cold
water that decreases water temperatures and affects biological cycles of aquatic
species:
(c) The temperature criteria in the basin standards establish numeric and narrative
criteria to protect designated beneficial uses and to initiate actions to control
anthropogenic sources that adversely increase or decrease stream temperatures.
Natural surface water temperatures at times exceed the numeric criteria due to
naturally high ambient air temperatures, naturally heated discharges, naturally
low stream flows or other natural conditions. These exceedances are not water
quality standards violations when the natural conditions themselves cause water
temperatures to exceed the numeric criteria. In these situations, the natural
surface water temperatures become the numeric criteria. In surface waters
where both natural and anthropogenic factors cause exceedances of the numeric
criteria, each anthropogenic source will be responsible for controlling, through
implementation of a management plan, only that portion of the temperature
increase caused by that anthropogenic source:
-------
Attachment A
Page A-22
January 11, 1996
(d) The purpose of the numeric criteria in the basin standards is to protect
designated beneficial uses: this includes specific life cycle stages during the time
periods they are present in a surface water of the state. Surface water
temperature measurements taken to determine compliance with the identified
criteria will be taken using a sampling protocol appropriate to indicate impact to
the beneficial use. The EOC. in establishing these criteria, recognizes that new
information is constantly being developed on water temperatures and how water
temperatures affect different heneficial uses. Therefore, continued reevahiation
of temperature information is needed to refine and revise numeric criteria in the
basin standards over time. The EQC also recognizes that the development and
implementation of control technologies and hest management practices or
measures to reduce anthropogenic warming is evolving and the achievement of
the -vjmeric criteria vvi'.i be an iterative process:
fe.) Surface water temperature management plans will be required according to
OAR 340-41-026 (3)(a)(D) when the relevant numeric temperature criteria are
exceeded and the water body is designated as water-quality limited under
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. The plans will .identify those steps.
measures, technologies, and/or practices to be implemented by those sources
determined by the Department to be contributing to the problem. The plan may
be for an entire basin, a single watershed, a segment of a stream, single or
multiple nonpoint source categories, single or multiple point source^ or any
combination of these, as deemed appropriate by the Department, to address the
identified temperature problem:
(A) In the case of state and private forest lands, the practices identified in
rules adopted pursuant to the State Forest Practices Act (FPA) will
constitute the surface water temperature management plan for the
activities covered by me act. Consequently, in those basins, watersheds
or stream segments exceeding the relevant temperature criterion, and for
those activities covered by the Forest Practices Act, the forestry
component of the temperature management plan will he the practices
required under the FPA. If the mandated practices need to be improved
in specific basins, watersheds or stream segments to fully protect
-------
Attachment A
Page A-23
January 11, 1996
identified beneficial uses, the Departments of Forestry and
Environmental Quality will follow the process described in ORS 527.765
to establish, implement, and improve practices in order to reduce
thermal loads to achieve and maintain the surface water temperature
criteria. Federal forest management agencies are required by the federal
Clean Water Act to meet or exceed the substantive requirements of the
state forestry nonpoint source program. The Department currently has
Memoranda of Understanding with the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau
of Land Management to implement this aspect of the Clean Water Act.
These memoranda will he used to identify the temperature management
plan requirements for federal forest lands:
(B) The temperature management plan for agricultural nonpoinrsources shall
be developed and implemented in the manner described in section (101 of
this rule:
(C) The Department will be responsible for determining the appropriate
surface water temperature management plan for individual and general
NPDES permitted sources. The requirement for a surface water
temperature management plan and the content of the plan will be
appropriate to the contribution the permitted source makes to the
temperature problem, the technologies and practices available to reduce
thermal loads, and the potential for trading or mitigating thermal loads:
(D) In urban areas, the Department will work with appropriate state, county.
municipal, and special district agencies to develop surface water
temperature management plans thai reduce thermal loads in basins.
watersheds, or stream segments associated with the temperature
violations so that the surface water temperature criteria are achieved.
(0 The HOC encourages the release of stored water from reservoirs to cool surface
water in order to achieve the identified numeric criteria in the hasin standards as
long as tliere is no significant adverse impact to downstream designated
heneficial uses from the cooler water temperatures. If the Department
determines that a significant adverse impact is resulting, from the cold-water
release, ihe Department shall. .11 iis discretion, require the development of a
management plan 10 address the adverse impact created by the cold-waier
release
-------
Attachment A
Page A-24
January 11, 1995
(g) Maintaining low stream temperatures to the maximum extent practicable in
basins where surface water temperatures are below (he specific criteria identified
in (his rule shall be accomplished by implementing technology based permits,
best management practices or other measures. Any measurable increase in
surface water temperature resulting from anthropogenic activities in these ha<:mc
shall be in accordance with the antidegradation policy contained in OAR 340-
41-026.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-25
January 11, 1996
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
OAR 340-41 -006
NOTE: The underlined portions of text represent proposed
additions made to the rules.
The [bracketed] portions of text represent proposed
deletions made to the rules. Because the rules differ by basin, the
bracketed portions are examples only.
The exact reference to be deleted is given in Figure B.
£54) "Numeric Temperature Criteria" are measured as the seven-day moving
average of the daily maximum temperatures. If there is insufficient data to
establish a seven-day average of maximum temperatures, the numeric criteria
shall be applied as an instantaneous maximum. The measurements shall be
made using a sampling protocol appropriate to indicate impact to the beneficial
uses: '
(55) "Measurable Temperature Increase" means an increase in stream temperature
of more than 0.25°F:
(56) "Anthropogenic", when used lo describe "sources" or "warming", means
that which results from human activity:
(57) "Ecologically Significant Cold-Water Refuge" exists when all or a portion of a
waterbody supports stenoiypic cold-water species (flora or fauna) not otherwise
widely supported within the subbasin. and either:
(a) Maintains cold-water temperatures throughout the' year relative to other
segments in the suhhasin. providing sum merti me cold-water holding or
rearin habitat that is limited in
Oil .................. Supplies cold waier in a receiving stream or downstream reach lhat
supports cold-waier hioia
-------
Attachment A
Page A-26
January 11. 1995
FIGURE B. RULE SECTIONS TO BE DELETED BY BASEN
Temperature
Basin
North Coast - Lower
Columbia
Mid Coast
South Coast
Umpqua
Rogue
Willamette
Sandy
Hood
Deschutes
John Day
Umatilla
Walla Walla
Grande Ronde
Powder
Malheur
Owyhee
Malheur Lake
Goose & Summer Lakes
Klamath
Section and Subsection:
(340-41-Basin)
205(2)(b)[(A),(B),(C)]
245(2)(b)[(A),(B)J
325(2)(b)[(A),(B)]
285(2)(b)[(A),(B)]
365(2)(b)[(A).(B)]
445(2)(b)[(A),(B),(C),(D)]
485(2)(b)[(A),(B)]
525(2)(b)[(A).(B)]
565(2)(b)[(A).(B)J
605(2)[(b)J
645(2)[(b)J
685(2)[(o)]
725(2)[(b)]
765(2)(b)[(A),(B)]
805(2)[(b)]
845(2)[(b)]
885(2)[(b)J
925(2)[(b)j
965(2)(b)[(A),(B)]
NOTE: The'Columbia River criteria ((A)(n)) in the proposed standard apply only to the
folkv.vino basins' North ("oast 2<)x Sandy 48x Hood 52^, Deschutes .^65,
John Day nOx Umatilla <^> and Willamette 44> The Willamette River criteria
((A Km)) in the proposed siand.ud .ipply only to the \\'ill.tineile Basin 44.^
-------
Attachment A
Page A-27
January 11, 1996
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
OAR 340-41-[Basin](2)(d) and Walla Walla 340-4J-685(2)(c)
NOTE: The underlined portions of text represent proposed
additions made to the rules,
The [bfflekcfed-] portions of text represent proposed
deletions made to the rules.
(pH) Hydrogen Ion Concentration
Basin
Rule
North Coast - Lower Columbia
340-4I-202(2)(cl)
Mid Coast
340-4 !-242(2)(d)
pH (hydrueen ion concentration): pH values shall not tall
outside the following ran«;es:
(A)
Marine waters; 7.0 to 8.5;
(B) • Estuarinc and fresh waters: 6.5 to 8.5. The following
exception applies: Waters impounded by dams
existing on January 1. 1996, which have pHs that
exceed the criteria shaft not he considered in violation
of the standard if ihe Department determines that the
exceedance would not occur without the impoundment
and thai .ill practicable measures Have been taken to
hnri'j the pH in the impounded waters into compliance
with Ihe criteria:
pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
outside the following ranges:
(A) Marine w^iers; 7.0 to 8.5;
(B) Estuanne and Iresh waters: 6.5 to 8.5. The following
exception applies: Waters impounded by dams
rxiMin-,' on January 1 . 1996. which have pHs lhat
cvcecd ihe criteria >HH|| n»l he considered in violation
«il ilic --t.iiu);ird il ilie DepHriinent determines hat ihe
n
-------
Attachment A
Page A-28
January 11, 1995
Basin
Rule
Umpqua
340-4l-285(2)(d)
(d)
pH (hydrogen ion concentration):
(A)
(B)
fCl
Fresh waters (except Cascade lakes) and estuanne
waters: pH values shall not fall outside the range of
6.5 to 8.5fr). The following exception applies:
Waters impounded hv dams existing on January 1.
1996. which have pHs that exceed the criteria shall not
he considered in violation of the standard if the
Department determines lhat the exceedance would not
occur without the impoundment and that all practicable
measures have been taken to bring the pH in the
impounded waters inlo compliance with the criteria:
Marine waters: pH values shall not fall outside the
range of" 7.0 to 8.
Cascade lakes ahcvc 3.000 tect altitude: pH values
shall not fall outside.thf ran'jc* ol 6.0 to 8.5.
South Coast
340-4 l-325(2)(d)
pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
outside the following ranges.
(A) Estuarine and fresh waters: 6.5 to 8.5. The following
exception applies: Waters impounded hy dams
existing on January I. 1996. which have pHs that
exceed the criteria shall not he considered in violation
of the standard if the Department determines that the
exceedance would not occur without the impoundment
and that all practicable measures have heen taken to
hnn'j the pH in the impounded waters into compliance
wilh the criteria:
(B) Marine waters; 7.0 to 8.5.
Ro^ue
340-4l-365(2)(d)
(d) pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
otiiMde the following ranycv
(A) Marine waters. 7.0-8.5;
(B) Esiitanne and fresh waters (except Cascade lakes): 6.5
- 8.5. The (ollowin? exception applies: Waters
nnpnnnded In dam*.
n!.' on January I. 1996.
i
have pHv thai gxceexl the criteria shall not He
considered in violation ot the standard if ihe
Dcp.'ilnicnl determine*- lli.il the exceedance would nol
iu_i_i!i " illuiul ihr. ini|'ciiuuliiic-iil nnd lli^l all practicable
inr.i-iiri."- h:«''c liccii I. tt.cn Id hrm*j the pH in Ihe
nnnivuuled u-atgrs mKi compliance wilh the crilena.
r.m.'iiK- Like-- ^fvne .VOOO I eel altitude: pH values
--hall niil l;ill oiiiside llic lan'.'e of 6.0 to 8.5
-------
Attachment A
Page A-29
January 11. 1996
Basin
Willamette
340-4 l-44S(2)(d)
I
Sandy
34(Ml-4S5(2Xd)
Rule
(cl) pH (hydrocen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
(B). and (Q of this subsection. The following exception
applies: Waters impounded by dams existin? on'January 1
1996. which have pHs that exceed the criteria shall not be
considered in violation of the standard if the Department
determines that the exceedance would not occur without the
impoundment and that all practicable measures have been taken
to brine the r»H in the impounded waters into compliance with
the criteria:;
(A) Columbia River: 7.0 - 8.5;
(B) All other hasin waters i'_..:_*: Cascade lakes): 6.5-
S.5H1
(O Cascade lakex above 3.000 feel altitude: nH values
shall not fall outside the ninsje of 6.0jto 8.5.
(d) pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
outside the ranees identified in paragraphs {A\. (B). and fQ of
this subsection. The followine exception applies: Waters.
impounded hv dams existing on January 1. 1996. which have
pHs that exceed the criteria shall not be considered in violation
of the standard if the Depart men t determines that the
exceedance would not occur without the impoundment and that
all practicable measures have been taken to brine the pH in the
impounded waters into compliance with the criteria:
120 to 147): pH values shall not fall outside the range
of 7.0 to 8. 5;
(B) All other Basin waters (except Cascade lakes): pH
values shall not fall outside the range of 6.5 to 8.5fr}j
(C) Cascade lakes above 3,000 feet altitude: pH values
shall not fall outside the ranee of 6.0 to 8.5.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-30
January 11, 1996
Basin
Hood
340-4 j-525(2)(d)
-
Deschute*
340-4 l-565(2Xd)
-
Rule
(d) pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
outside the ranees identified in paragraphs ( Ak (B), and fC) of
rhis subsection. The followinc exception applies: Wafers
impounded by dams exixtine on Januarv 1 . 1996, which have
pHs that exceed the criteria shall not he considered in violation
of the standard if the Department determines that the
exeeedance would not occur without the impoundment and that
all practicable measures have been taken to brine the pH in the
impounded waters into compliance with the criteria:
147 to 203): pH values shall not fall outside the range
of 7.0 to 8,5;
•*-
(B) Other Hood River Basin streams {except Cascade
lakes): pH value*, shall nor fall outside the range of
6.5 to S.5H;
-------
Attachment A
Page A-31
January 11, 1996
Basin
Rule
Klamath
340-4 l-965(2)(d)
(d)
pH (hydrogen ton concentration): pH values shall not fall
outside the [finite of 7.Q to 9.0;] ranges identified in
paragraphs (A) and (B) of ttm subsection. The following
exception applies: Waters impounded by dams existing on
January I. 1996. which have pHs that exceed the criteria shall
not he considered in violation of the standard if the Department
determines that the exceedance would not occur without the
impoundment and that all practicable measures have been taken
to bring the pH in the impounded waters into compliance wj(h
(he criteria;
(A) Fresh waters except Cascade lakes: pH ya|ues_sh_all
not (nil outside the rantre of 6.5 - 9.0^ When greater
than 25 percent of ainhient measurements taken
between June and September are greater than pH &.T,
and KS resources arc available according to priorities
set hv the Department, the Department shall determine
whether >he values higher than 8.7 are anthropogenic
or natural in origin;
(Bl Cascade lakes ahove 5.000 feel altitude: nH values
shall not fall outside the range of 6.0 to 8.5.
John Day
340-41-605(2X4)
(d) pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
outside the |following] ransesft) identified in paragraphs (A)
and (B) of this subsection. The following exception applies:
Waters impounded hy dams existing on January 1. 1996. which
have r>Hs that exceed the criteria shall not he considered in
violation otthe standard if the Department determines that the
exceedance would nnt occur without the impoundment andjhat
all practicable measures have Iteen taken to bring the pH in the
impounded waters into compliance with the criteria;
(A) Columbia River (river miles 218 to 247); 7.0-8.5;
(B) All other Basin streams: 6.5 - rSr$i 9.0. When
'.'realer than 25 percent of amhient measurements taken
hetween June,and September are greater than pH JL7,
and a*> resource^ are availahle according to prionlies
>.et hv the Depariineni. the Department shall determine
whether !he vxlue^- hi-.'hcr Ih^n 8,7 arc aj]thropo_g_enic
nr iiiiiuriil in err,'in
-------
Attachment A
Page A-32
January 11, 1996
Basin
Uuiatilla
340-4 l-645{2)(d)
Walla .Walla
340-4 l-685(2)(c)
Rule
(d) pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
and (B) ot rhis subsection. The fbllowinc exception applies:
Waters impounded hv dam1- existine on January I,' 1996, which
have pHs thai exceed the criteria shall not be considered in
violation of the standard if the Department determines thai the
exceedance would not occur wifhoul the impoundment and thai
alljiracticahle measures have been taken to brine thepH in the
impounded waters into compliance with the criteria:
(A) Columbia River {river miles 247 to 309): 7.0 - 8.5;
(B) All other Basin streams: 6.5 - H«Sr}9.0. When
"renter than 25 percent of ambient measurements taken
between June and September are sreater than pH 8,7,
and us rcxniiccs arc available according to priorities
sri bv the Dsnartnicri:. (lie Department shall determine
whether the value"- hi<,-hci than 8,7 are anthropogenic
or natural in onvin.
(c) pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not tall
outside the rauiL-e of 6.5 to f&r*r) 9.0. When ereater than 25
. percent of ambient measurements taken between June and
September are sreater than pH 8.7. and us resources are
available according lo priorities set by the Department, the
Department shall determine whether the values hicher than 8.7
are anthropogenic or natural in ori«in. The following
exception applies: Waters impounded hv dams existin« on
j;(iniarv I. 1996. which have pHs that exceed the criteria shall
not he considered in violation of the standard if the Department
determines that the excccdanc; would not occur without (he
impoundment and that all practicable measures have been taken
to brine the pH in the impounded waters into compliance with
the criteria;
-------
Attachment A
Page A-33
January 11, 1996
Basin
Grande Ronde
340-4 l-725(2)(d)
Powder
340-4 l-765(2Xd)
Rule
(d) pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
and (B) ol this subsection. The followine exception applies:
Waters impounded hy dams existing on January 1 , 1996, which
have pHs that exceed the criteria shall not be considered in
violation of the standard if Ihe Department determines that the
exceedance would not^ occur without the impoundment and that ,
all practicable measures have been taken to hrins the pH in the
impounded waters into compliance with the criteria:
(A) fMmrt Stem} Mainstem Snake River (river miles 176 to
260): 7.0 - 9.0;
(B) All other Basin strums: 6.5 - [Sr5] 9.0. When
«reater than 25 percent of 'ambient measurements taken
lictwcen June and September are greater than pH 8.7,
and as resources are available according to priorities
set hv the Department, the Department shall determine
whdher the values hicher than 8.7 are anthropogenic
or natural in origin.
(d) pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
and (B) of this subsection. The following exception applies:
Waters impounded hy dams existing on January I, 19%, which
have pHs that exceed the criteria shall not be considered in
violation of the standard if the Department determines that the
exceedance would not occur without the impoundment and that
all practicable measures have been taken to brins the pH in the
impounded waters into compliance with the criteria:
335): 7.0-9.0;
(B} All othei Basin streams: 6.5 - ISr-S] 9.0. When
erealer than 25 percent of ambient measurements taken
between June and September are "reater than pH 8,7,
and as resources arc available according to priorities
set hy (he Department, the Department shall determine
whether Ihe value*- hii'hcr than 8 7 are anthropogenic
or natural m orr.'in
-------
Attachment A
Page A-34
January 11, 1996
Basin
Rule
Malheur River
340-4 l-805(2)(d)
(d) pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
outside the range of 7.0 to 9.OH When greater than 25 percent
of ambient measurements taken between June and September
are i-realer than pH 8.7. and as resources are available
according to priorities set hv the Department, the Department
shall determine whether Ihe values higher than 8.7 are
anthropogenic or natural in origin. The following exception
applies: Waters impounded hv dams existing on January 1.
1996. which have pHs thai exceed the criteria shall not be
considered in violation of the standard if the Department
determines that the exctiedance would not occur without the
impoundment and that all practicable measures have been taken
to bring the pH in the impounded waters into compliance with
Ihe criteria; *"
Owyhee
340-4|-845(2)(d)
(d) pH (hydrogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
ouKide the range of 7 0 to Q OH When greater than 25
(>crccnt ot ambient measurements taken between June and
September are greater than pH 8.7. and us resources are
available according 10 priorities set hv the Department, the
Department shall determine whether the values higher than S.7
are anthropogenic or natural in origin. The following •
exception applies: Waters impounded by dams existing on
January 1. 1996. which have pHs that exceed the criteria shall
not he considered in violation of the standard if the Department
determines that the exceedance would not occur without the
impoundment and that all practicable nxtasures have been taken
to hriiii.1 the pH in Ihe impounded waters into compliance with
the criteria:
Mallieur Lake
340-4|-885(2)(d)
(d)
pH (hydiogen ion concentration): pH values shall not fall
outside the range ol 7.0 to 9.0fd. When greater than 25
percent ot ambient measurements taken between June and
September are greater than pH 8.7, and as resources are
available according to priorities set hy the Department, the
Department shall determine whether the values higher than 8.7
are anthropogenic or natural in origin. The following
exception applies: Waters impounded f>y dams existing on
January 1 . 1996, which have pHs that exceed the criteria shall
nol he considered in violation ol ihe standard if the Department
delennine- that llic exceed;ince would nol occur without the
iinp' nnuli'iciH Hiid lli.il .ill pi.K'tic.iNe inraMires have hetn taken
i ;
h i linn-.' !iic pH in tlu: iiiipnuiulct)
mlo compliance with
l!u: ^i tin 1.1
-------
Attachment A
Page A-35
January 11, 1996
Basin
Goose and Summer Lakes
340-4 i-925(2)(d)
Rule
(d) pH (hydrogen ion concentration):
(A) Goose Lake: pH values shall not fall outside the range
of 7.5 to 9.5;
(B) All other basin waters: pH values shall not fall
outside the range of 7,0 to 9.0, When greater than 25
percent of ambient measurements taken between June
and September are creater than pH 8.7, and as
resources are available according to priorities set by
the Department, the Department shall determine
whether the values hit'her than 8.7 tre anthronosenic
or natural in orit'in. The following exception applies:
Waters impounded bv cls>«-'' •"'isting on January 1,
1996, which have r»Hs that exceed the criteria shall not
he considered in violation of the standard if the
Department determines that the exceedance would not
occur without the impoundment and that all practicable
measures have been taken to brine the pH in the
impounded waters into compliance with the criteria.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-36
January 11. 1996
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
OAR340-4I-[Basin](2)(e)
NOTE: The underlined portions of text represent proposed
additions made to the rules.
The [bracketed] portions of text represent proposed
deletions made to the rules. Because the rules differ by basin, the
bracketed portions are example only.
The exact reference to be deleted is given in Figure C.
(e) Bd.LU.ria Standards:
(A) [Effective from July 1. 199.*) and through December 31, 1995.]
Numeric Criteria: fQ}organisms of the coliform group (where]
commonly associated with fecal sources (MPN or equivalent membrane
filtration using a representative number of samples) shall not exceed the
criteria described in subparagraphs (i) and (ii) of this paragraph:
{ft) Frcshwatcrs: A log mean of 200 fecal eoliform per 100
miltilitcrs based on n minimum of five samples in a 30 day period
with no more than ten percent of the samples in the 30 day period
exceeding 400 per 100 ml;]
(i) Freshwaters and Estuarine Waters Other than Shellfish Growing
Waters:
(1) A 30-day log, mean of 126 E._coli organisms per 100 ml.
based on a minimum of five (5) samples.
(II) No single sample shall exceed 406 £. colt organisms per
100 ml:
(ii) Marine fw}Waters and fe}Estuarine fs^Shellfish {g]Growing
fw}Waters: A fecal coliform median concentration of 14
organisms per 100 milliliters, with not more than ten percent of
the samples exceeding 43 organisms per 100 mirth i
fftt-i-}—&rht7tftth?-\v nlois oilier than 'jlioHfifrh growing waters:—A log
ol 200 I'cotil colitbim poi 100 miHilitcr;i based on a
of I'ivo Si'i-rivplos in n ^0 diis |>oiiod uitli no more tlian
r-Betn*) execcclii^" 400 i^ef
-------
Attachment A
Page A-37
January 11, 1996
Effective January 1. 1906. Bacteria of the coliforin group associated
with fecal sources nnd bacteria of the cntcrococci group (MPN or
equivalent membrane filtration using a representative number of
samples) shall not exceed the criteria values described in subparagraphs
(2)(c)(D)(i) through (iii) of this rule. However, the Department may
designate site specific bacteria criteria on a case by ease basio to protect
beneficial uses. Site specific values shall be described in and included as
part of a water quality management plan:
&) Frcshwatcrs: A geometric mean of 33 cntcfoeocci per 100
millilitcrs based on no fewer than five samples, representative of
seasonal conditions, collected over a period of at least 30 days-
No single sample should exceed 61 cntcrocoeci per 100 ml;
{«) Marine waters and estiiarinc shellfish growing waters: A fecal
coliform median concentration of 14 organisms per 100
millilitcrs, with not more than ten percent of the samples
exceeding 43 organisms per 100 ml;
(t«) Estuarinc waters other than shellfish growing waters: A
geometric moan of 35 cntcrococei per 100 millilitcrs based on no
fewer than five samples, representative of seasonal conditions,
collected over a period of at leost 30 days. No single sample
should exceed 104 cntcrococei per 100 ml.]
(B1 Raw Sewage Prohibition: No sewage shall be discharged into or in any
other manner be allowed to enter the waters of (he State unless such
sewage has been treated in a manner approved by the Department or
otherwise allowed by these rules;
(O Animal Waste: Runoff contaminated with domesticated animal wastes
shall be minimized and treated to the maximum extent practicable before
it is allowed to enter waters of the State;
(D) Effluent Limitations and Water Quality Limited Waterbodies: Effluent
limitations to implement the criteria in this rule are found in OAR 340-
41-120(12) - (16). Implementation of the criteria in this rule in water
quality limited waterbodies is described in OAR 340-4 l-026(3)(a1(n and
OAR 340-41-120(17)
-------
Attachment A
Page A-38
January 11, 1995
POLICIES AND GUIDELINES GENERALLY APPLICABLE TO ALL BASDS'S
OAR 340-41-026
(H) Any source may petition the Commission for an exception to paragraph
(F) of this subsection, provided:
(I) The source provides the necessary scientific information to
describe how the designated beneficial uses would not be
adversely impacted: or
(ii) The source demonstrates that: it is implementing all reasonable
management practices: its activity will not significantly affect the
beneficial uses: and the environmental cost of treating the
parameter to the level necessary to assure full protection would
outweigh the risk to the beneficial usev
(I) In waterbodies designated by the Department as water-quality limited for
bacteria, and in accordance with priorities established by the
Department, development and implementation of a bacteria management
plan shall be required 'of those sources that the Department determines to
be contributing to the problem. The Department may determine that a
plan is not necessary for a particular stream segment or seements within
a water-quality limited basin based on the contribution of the segmentfs^
to the problem. The bacteria management plans will identify the
technologies. BMPs and/or measures and approaches to be implemented
by point and nonpoint sources to limit bacterial contamination. For
point sources, their National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
permit is their bacteria management plan. For nonpoint sources, the
bacteria management plan will be developed by designated management
agencies (DMAs) which will identify the appropriate BMPs or measures
and approaches.
KB)] CD The activity, expansion, or growth necessitating a new or increased
discharge load is....
-------
Attachment A
Page A-39
January 11, 1996
IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM APPLICABLE TO ALL BASINS
OAR 340-41-120
(12) Effluent Lirnitationifor Bacteria: Except as allowed in subsection (c) of this section,
upon NPDES permit renewal or issuance, or upon request for a permit modification by
the permittee at an earlier date, effluent discharges to freshwaters and estuarine watery
Other than shellfish growing waters shall not exceed a monthly log mean of 126 E, coli
organisms per 100 ml based on a minimum., of five_(5) samples. No single sample shall
exceed 406 E. coli organisms per 100 ml. If a single sample exceeds 406 E. coli per
100 ml. then five consecutive re-samples shall be taken at four-hour intervals beginning
as soon as practicable (preferably within 28 hours) after the original sample was taken.
If the log mean of the five re-samples is less than or equal to 126. a violation shall not
occur. The following conditions apply:
(a) If the Department finds that re-sampling within the timeframe outlined in this
section would pose an.undue hardship on a treatment facility, a more convenient
schedule may be negotiated in the permit, provided that the permittee
demonstrates that the sampling delay will result in no increase in the risk to
water contact recreation in waters affected by the discharge:
(b) The in-stream criterion for chlorine listed in Table 20 shall be met at all times
outside the assigned mixing zone:
(c) For sewage treatment plants that are authorized to use reclaimed water pursuant
to Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 340. Division 55. and which also u$e a
storage pond as a means to dechlorinate their effluent prior to discharge to
public waters, effluent limitations for bacteria shall, upon request by the
permittee, be based upon appropriate total coliform limits as required by
OAR 340. Division 55:
(I) For Level II limitations, if two consecutive samples exceed 240 total
coliform per 100 ml or for Level HI and Level IV limitations, if a single
sample exceeds 23 total coliform per 100 ml. then five consecutive re-
samples shall be taken at four hour intervals beginning as soon as
practicable (preferably within 28 hours) after the original samplefs) were
taken:
01) And, if in the case of Level II effluent, the log mean of the five re-
samples is less than or equal to 23 total coli form per 100 ml or. in the
case of Level 111 and IV effluent, if the log mean of the five re-samples
is less than or equal 10 2.2 lotal coiiform per 100 ml. a violation shall
not be triggered
LL\J__JJgwer Overflows in Winter: Domesjic waste coilecnon andjreatmem facilities are
lirohihited from (l^charging_rjyw sewage to waiers of the Slate during ihe penod of
November 1 tlmnu'h May _2_1 ^j^cepyhiim^.jlM'F.UL^U'LlLSfwicj t h:\n_;he oiu* :n-_f;\ e
2jijiour dinaiinn Morrn_ However, llie following exceptinjis app!\-'
-------
Attachment A
Page A-40
January 11. 1996
(a) The Commission may on a case-hv-case basis approve a bacteria control
management plan to be prepared by the permittee, for a basin or specified
geographic area which describes hydrologic conditions under which the numeric
bacteria criteria would be waived. These plans will identify the specific
hydrologic conditions, identify the public notification and education processes
that will be followed to inform the public about an event and the plan, describe
the water quality assessment conducted to determine bacteria sources and loads
associated with the specified hydrologic conditions, and describe the bacteria
control program that is being implemented in the basin or specified geographic
area for the identified sources:
(b) Facilities with separate sanitary and storm sewers existing on January 10. 1996
and which currently experience sanitary sewer overflows due to inflow and
infiltration problems, shall submit an acceptable plan to the Department at the
first permit renewal, which describes actions that will he taken to assure
compliance with the discharge prohibition bv January 1. 2010. Where
discharges occur to a receiving stream with sensitive beneficial uses, the
Department may negotiate a more aggressive schedule for discharge elimination:
(c) On a case-by-case basis, the beginning of winter may be defined as October 15
if the permittee so requests and demonstrates to the Department's satisfaction
that the risk to beneficial uses, including water contact recreation, will not be
increased due to the date change.
(14) Sewer Overflows in Summer: Domestic waste collection and treatment facilities are
prohibited from discharging raw sewage to waters of the Slate during the period of
May 22 through October 31. except during a storm event greater than the one-in-ten-
year. 24-hour duration storm. The following exceptions apply:
(a) For facilities with combined sanitary and storm sewers, the Commission may on
a case-by-case basis approve a bacteria control management plan such as that
described in subsection (13)(a) of this rule:
(bt On a case-by-case hasis. the beginning of summer may be defined as June 1 if
the permittee so requests and demonstrates to the Department's satisfaction that
the risk to beneficial uses, including water contact recreation, will not be
increased due to the date change:
(c) For discharge sources whose permit identifies the beginning of summer as any
date from May 22 through May 31: If the permittee demonstrates to the
Department's satisfaction thai an exceedance occurred between May 21 and June
1 because of a sewer overflow, and thai no increase in risk to beneficial uses.
including water contact_recreation, occurred because of the exceedance. no
viola_ti£in_sji^|j_h_e in^Qied_ it_ihe_Morrn_yj_tlM'H' overflow was g
than the one-in-live vear. 24-hour diir.inon sionn.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-41
January 11, 1996
(15) Storm Sewers Systems Subject to Municipal NPDES Storm Water Permits: Best
management practices shall be implemented for permitted storm sewers to control
bacteria to the maximum extent practicable. In addition, a collection-system evaluation
shall be performed prior to permit issuance or renewal so that illicit and cross
connections are identified. Such connections shall be removed upon identification. A
collection system evaluation is not required where the Department determines that illicit
and cross connections are unlikely to exist.
(16) Storm Sewers Systems Not Subject to Municipal NPDES Storm Water Permits: A
collection system evaluation shall be performed of non-permitted storm sewers by
January 1. 2005. unless the Department determines that an evaluation is not necessary
because illicit and cross connections are unlikely to exist. Illicit and cross-connections
shall be removed upon identification.
(17) Water Quality Limited for Bacteria: In those waterbodies. or segments ofwaterbodies
identified by the Department as exceeding the relevant numeric criteria for bacteria in
the basin standards and designated as water-quality limited under section 303(d) of the
Clean Water Act, the requirements specified in OAR 34Q-41 -026(3Ka)(n and in section
(101 of this rule shall apply.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-42
January 11, 1996
FIGURE C. RULE SECTIONS TO BE DELETED BY BASIN
Bacteria
Basin
North Coast - Lower
Columbia
Mid Coast
Umpqua
South Coast
Rogue
Willamette
Sandy
Hood
Deschutes
John Day
Umatilla
Walla Walla
Grande Ronde
Powder
Malheur
Owyhee
Malheur Lake
Goose & Summer Lakes
Klamath
Section and Subsection:
(340-41-Basin)
205(2)(e)(A)(i)
245(2)(e)(A)(i)
285(2)(e)(A)(i)
325(2)(e)(A)(i)
365(2)(e)(A)(i)
445(2)(e)(A)
485(2)(ei(A)
525(2)(e)(A)
565(2)(e)(A)
605(2)(e)(A)
645(2)(e)(A)
685(2)(d)(A)
725(2)(e)(A)
765(2)(e)(A)
805(2)(e)(A)
845(2)(e)(A)
885(2)(e)(A)
925(2)(e)(A)
965(2)(e)(A)
NOTE: The portions of the proposed bacteria standard ((A)(n). and part of (A)(i))
specific 10 marine or estiiarme waters npply only to basins in which such waters
occ'ir (the Nonh Coast 2()x Mid-Cons; 24x Soiiili Coast 325, Umpqua 285 and
Ro-j-je 363)
-------
Attachment A
Page A-43
January 11, 1996
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
OAR 340-40-090
NOTE: The underlined portions of text represent proposed
additions made to the rules.
The [brnckclcd] portions of text represent proposed
deletions made to the rules.
340-40-090
[The levclsllnterim standards are contained in Tables 4A, 5, and 6 of this Division [arc the
interim standards] for maximum measurable levels (MMLs) of contaminants in groundwater to
be used in the designation of a groundwater management area. Permanent standards for
MMLs are found in Table 4B. Thefse} permanent or interim levels shall be used in all actions
conducted by the Department where the use of maximum measurable levels for contaminants
in groundwater is required.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-44
January 11, 1995
TABLE 4A
(OAR 340-40-090)
Interim-Standards for Maximum Measurable Levels
1.2.3
of Contaminants in Groundwater: "-
Inorganic
Contaminants
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Fluoride
Lead
Mercury
rVifriifr V
Selenium
Silver
Interim
Standard
(mg/L)
0.05
1.0
0.010
0.05
4.0
0.05
0.002
-KH
0.01
0.05
All reference levels are for total (unfilterecl) concentrations unless otherwise specified
by the Department.
The source of all standards listed is 40 CFR Part 141.
MMLs are used to trigger designation of a groundwater management area when
concentrations are detected on an areawide basis which exceed 70 percent of the nitrate
MML or 50 percent of other MMLs.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-45
January 11, 1996
TABLE4B
(OAR 340-40-090)
Permanent Standards for Maximum Measurable Levels
of Contaminants in Groundwater:-^
Inorganic
Contaminants
Nifrate-N (Nitrate expressed
as Nitro2en)
Standard
(ms/U
IO
All reference levels are for total (unfjllered'i concentrations unless otherwise specified
by the Department.
The source of all standards listed is 40 CFR Part 141.
MMLs are used to trigger designation of a ground water management area when
concentrations are detected on an areawide basis which exceed 70 percent of the nitrate
MML or 50 percent of other MMLs.
-------
Attachment A
Page A-46
January 11, 1996
TABLE 5
(OAR 340-40-090)
Interim Standards for Maximum Measurable Levels
of Contaminants in Groiindwater (Continued): —
Oraanic Contaminants
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
j>-DichIorobenzene
IjZ-Dichloroethane
Jhiiilil-Dichloroethvlene
ftyjl.l.I-Tricliloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Total Trihalomethaues (the sum .of concentrations
bromodichloromethane. dibrornochloromcthanc.
tribromomethanc (hromoform). and
(richloromcthaiic (chloroform))
Vinyl Chloride
2,4-D
Endrin
Lindane
Methoxychlor
Toxaphene
2,4,5-TP Silvex
Interim Standard (ms/L)
0.005
0.005
0.075
0.005
0.007
0.20
0.005
0.10
0.002
0.10
0.0002
0.004
0.10
0.005
O.Oi
All reference levels are for total (unhliered) concentrations unless otherwise specified
by the Department.
The source of all standards listed is 40 CFR Part 141.
MMLs are used to (rigger designation of a groundwater management area when
concentrations are detected on an areawide basis which exceed 70 percent of the nitrate
MML or 50 percent of other MMLs
-------
Attachment A
Page A-47
January 11, 1996
TABLE 6
(OAR 340-40-090)
Interim Standards for Maximum
Measurable Levels of Contaminants in Groundwaler: —
Radioactive Substances, Microbiological and Turbidity
Contaminant Interim Standard
Turbidity
Coliform Bacteria
Radioactive Substances
Gross Alpha2
Combined Radium 226 and 228
Gross Beta
I- 131
Sr-90
Tritium
1 TU
< 1/100 ml
15 pCi/1
5pCi/1
50 pCt/1
5 pCi/1
8 pCi/1
20,000 pCi/1
The source of all standards listed is 40 CFR Part 141.
Including Radium 226 but excluding Radon and Uranium.
MMLs are used to trigger designation of a groundwater management area when
concentrations are detected on an areawide basis which exceed 70 percent of the nitrate
MML or 50 percent of other MMLs.
-------
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
CHAPTER 340, DIVISION 41 - DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
51
^^^R^^^^^Sf^^^K^r^^
&&??^*';!&-$*f?!"T-*^2;~_f-*'>. -w.,^-S'^ii.x-i^K,-,.-,.x»*»'.;-<.. „-V....
r"?-''*.-* t i*™-\?-~*t-!'. \ F ^*^ J—»>:.. ,.v^-*^x«.^..5! '.Sit- S'lr**. ^" N -*• ••'•'•- - ..
:i:WS»\« ••i&.esalto
s
&
<•»
is
ii
'iT
;a
1
i
in^
i
«0
2
(Figures & Tables)
1 —Exhibits
, 199;
-------
co^isr - LOWER COLUMBIA BASIN
(340-41-202)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
fr
s>
o;
a
NORTH COAST
OASIN
i*r MO i »
WATER RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT
LOWER COLUMBIA BASIN
o >
si
o
fe:
-------
a
I
a
TABLE 1
NORTH COAST — LOWER COLUMBIA BASIN
(340-41-202)
1
Beneficial Uses
Public Domctlic Water Supply1
Private Domcilic Water Supply1
IndutUul Water Supply
Irrigation
Livestock Watering
Aotdromoui Pith Paatage
Salmonid Puh Rearing
Salmonid Pub Spawning
Rcildcru Fuh Jt Aquatic Life
Wildlife A. Hunting
Pithing
Dealing
Water Contact Recreation
Acithclio Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation Jt Trantporuiion
Esiuariec and
A4jacent Marine
Waters
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Columbia River
Mouth (o RM 86
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All Other
Streams &
Tributaries Thereto
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
' Wah adequate prclrealment (filtration and disinfection) and natural quality to meet drinking wtier lUndardi.
°M
O
§6
r
O
"I
SA\T.blt\WW7U 5
o
G
£
-------
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
CHAPTER 340. DIVISION 41 - DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
FIGURES
.V//D COAST BASIS
(340-41-242)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
WATER RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT
MID COAST BASIN
- (September, 1992)
4 — Exhibits
(Figures & Tables)
-------
r
a
§!
a
r
TABLE 2
MID COAST BASIN
(340-41-242)
Beneficial Uses
Public DomeiUc Water Supply1
Private Domcalic Water Supply1
Industrial Water Supply
Irrigation
Livestock Watering
Anadromoua Fuh Ptnigc
Salmontd Fuh Rearing
Salmontd Fiah Spawning
Reaidcnl Fuh & Aquatic Life
Wildlife It Hunting
F lining
Boating
Water Contact Recreation
Aedhctic Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation It Traniporution
Ectuariea &
A4Jacent Marine
WaUn
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
Fresh Waters
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
' With adequate prctreaUnent (filtration and diiinfcction) and natural quality to meet drinking water lUndirdi
SA\TibU\WHSll9.J
fs
I 2
O *.
2b
g
O
»,-l
25
-------
FIGURE 4
UMPQUA BASIN
(340-41-282)
i
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown In figure below.)
cr
a
9?
WATER RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT
1*77
UMPQUA BASIN
MAP NO 16 4
L A M A 1 M
oo
o
2:
3
o
-------
fr
g
5"
i
TABLE 3
UMPQUA BASIN
(340-41-282)
Beneficial Ucc«
Public Domctlio Water Supply1
Private Domeatio Water Supply1
Industrial Water Supply
Irrigation
Llvcatock Watering
Anadromoua Pub Puaago
Salmooid Pub Rearing
Salmonid Pub Spawning
Rcaldenl PUh & Aquatic Life
Wildlife & Hunting
Fuhing
Boating
Water Contact Re«reation
Aeilhctio Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation tt Transportation
Umpqua R.
Estuary U> Uead
of Tidewater
and Adjaccot
Marioc WaUn
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Umpqua R. Main
Sum from Head of
Tidewater U>
Confluence of N. &
S. Umpqua Riven
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
North Umpqua
River
Main Stem
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
South Vmpqua
River
Main Stem
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All Other
Tributaries
to Umpqua,
North & South
Umpque Rivers
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
' With adequate prcUealmcnt (filtration and disinfection) and natural quality to meet drinking water iiindtrdi
o
5
w
s
3
o
o '
I
3
o
c
SA\T«ble\WH5790.5
-------
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
CHAPTER 340, DIVISION 41 — DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
FIGURE 5
SOUTH COAST BASIS
(340-41-322)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
N E
WATER RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT
SOUTH COAST
BASIN
MAP NO. 17.2
(Septraber, 1992)
8 — Exhibits
(Figures
-------
TABLE 4
c?
a
I
SOUTH COAST BASIN
(34^41-322)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domealla Water Supply1
Private Domcitio Water Supply1
IndualrUI Wafer Supply •
Irrigation
Liveatock Watering
Anadromoua Fun Panage
Sabnonld Fiih Rearing
Sabnonid PUh Spawning
Rcatdcnl Piih tt Aquatic Life
WUdlifc * Hunting
PUhing
Boating
Water Contact Recreation
Aesthetic Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation it Traniportalion
Estuaries and
A4J*cent Marine
Walen
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All Streams &
Tributaries Thereto
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Wilh adequate pretrcaUncnl (filtration and disinfection) and natural quality to meet drinking wttcr itandtrdi.
3
o
PI
o
c
SA\T.blc\WM579l.5
-------
FIGURE 6
*
ROGUE BASIN
(340-41-362)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown In figure below.)
O[
a
F- U/-v -• -• >^""~
* J*- ill/ r ii. • N i " A
~* .
WATCH HbSOURCES OEPANTMtNT
ROGUK HASIN
MAC NO Ib 2
fcn
a
m
"T3
>
H
R
o
a
q
r
o
c
-------
•Al—
TABLE 5
g
a
a
I
T
.1
ROGUE BASIN
(340-41-362)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domestic Water Supply*
Private Domcilio Water Supply1
Industrial Water Supply
Irrigation
Livestock Watering
Anadromous Fiih Paasage
Satmonid Puh Reahn| .
Satmonid Puh Spawning
Reiidcnt Fiih It Aquatic Life
Wildlife It. Hunting
Pithing
Boating
Water Contact Recrcalion
Aeithciic Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation It TraniporUtion
Rog-\e River
Estt ary and
Adjaciol Marine
Waters
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Rogue River
Mala Stem from
Estiury to
Lost Creek Dam
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Rogue River
Main Stem
above Lost Dam
& Tributaries
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Bear Creek
Main Stem
*
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All Other
Tributaries
to Rogue
River &
Bear Creelt
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
* Dciignation for Ihii uie la prcicnlly under iludy.
With adequate prclrealmcnl (filtration and disinfection) and natural quality to meet drinking wiicr itandtrdi.
oo
o
2
blc\wll5797.5
-------
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
CHAPTER 340. DIVISION 41 - DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
FIGURE 7
WILLAMETTE BASL\
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
WATBinOUKZS
OC7MITMENT
i> .^ (September, 1992)
12 - Exhibits
(Figures
-------
1
i
TABLE 6
WILLAMETTE BASIN
(340-41-442)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domeilio Wilcr Supply1
Private Domcitio Water Supply1
Industrial Water Supply
Irrigation
Livestock Watering
Anadromoui Puh Pauage
Salmonld Puh Rearing
Salmon id Pith Spawning
Rcildcnl Puh XL Aquatic Life
Wildlife A Hunting
Pithing •
Boiling
Water Conuct Recreation
Acilhciio Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation It TnniporUtion
Willamette River Tributaries
1
|
1
c
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
•
MolaDa Rmr
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1!
1
«
4
<
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Main Sum
Willamette River
Mootfa to Wntemette
^
**
t
z
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
' Wuh adequate prclrcalmcnl and natural quality that mcdi drinking water ilandardt.
1 Not to conflict wiih commercial activilici in Portland Harbor.
Wfflamme Fate
to NewbfTg"
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X1
X
X
X
Newberg to Salem
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
i
u.
3
a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
lla
i*
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1
SMT.blt\WH5293.5
00
o
-------
FIGURES
SANDY BASIN
(340-41-482)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
ST.
a
|WA SHINOTON
It SJ - ' - - ' - - '
WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
SANDY BASIN
00
*i
rl
o
G
I
g
o
O
G
g
R
-------
c.
TABLE 7
g
a
or
a
(340-41-482)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domeilio Water Supply1
Private DomeaUo Water Supply1
Induitrial Water Supply
Irrigation
Liveatock Watering
Anadromoui Piih Paiaagc
Salmonid Fiih Rearing
SaUnonki Fiih Spawning
Reatdcnt Fiih *. Aquatic Ufc
Wildlife It Hunting
Piihing
Boating
Wiur Contact Recreation
Aetihctio Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation It Trantporialion
Streams Forming
Waterfalls
Near Columbia
River Highway
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Sandy River
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
• X
Bull Run River
and All
Tributaries
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
AllOther
Tributaries
to San<
-------
«-
I
FIGURE 9
HOOD BASIN
(340-41-522)
k
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
cr
a
2l
o«
o;
a
WAIHINOTOM
WATER RESOURCtS OCKAH IMtri I
HOOD HASIN
MAH NO 4 2
3?
o d
I
-------
TABLE 8
H
8-
a
1
5
I
HOOD BASIN
(340-41-522)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domeitio Water Supply1
Private Domeitio Walcr Supply1
Industrial Walcr Supply
Irrigation
Livestock Watering
Anadromoui FUh Panage
Anadromoui Fish (Shad it Sturgeon)
Spawning It Rearing
Salmonid Piih Rearing
Salmonid Fiih Spawning
Rcaidcnl FUh It Aquatic Life
Wildlife It. Hunting
Putting
Boating
Water Contact Recreation
Aesthetic Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation It Transportation
Columbia Riter
(RM 147 to 203)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Other Hood River
Basin Streams
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
' With adequate prdrcatment (filtration and disinfection) and natural quality to mecl drinking water standards
SA\T.bl«\WH529S 5
00
?!
O
I
O *.
1
o
c
-------
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
CHAPTER 340, DIVISION 41 - DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
FIGURE 10
DESCHUTES BASIN
(340-41-562)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
WATTM AK9OUMCZ3 DCFAWTMCKT
DESCHUTES BASIN
MAP NO. 3. 2
' - (September, 1992)
18 — Exhibits
(Figures & Tables)
-------
c
TABLE 9
g
a
H
a
•if
1
DESCHUTES BASIN
(340-41-562)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domcilic Water Supply1
Private Domestic Water Supply*
Induilritl Water Supply
Irrigation
Livcitock Watering
Anadromoui Pub Paiiagc
Salmonld Pith Rearing
Salmonid Pith Spawning
Rciidcnl Puh A. Aqualio Life
Wildlife IL Hunting
Pithing
Boating
Water Contact Recreation
Aesthetic Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation It. TreniporUllon
Columbia ) iver
(RM 203 u> 218)
\
\
\
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Dtschuics River
Mala SUm from
Mouth to Pckon
Regulating Dam
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Deschules River
Mala Stem from Petton
Regulating Dam to Bend
Diversion Dam and for
the Crooked River
Main Stem
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Deschules River
Main Stem above
iknd Diversion
Diun & for the
Metolius River
Main Stem
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All
Other Basin
Streams
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
' With adequate prctrcatment (AUrmlion and diiinfcclion) and natural quality to meet drinking water lUndtrdi.
«8
a
o
c
SA\TtbU\WHS296.S
-------
•s?
E
FIGURE 11
JOHN DAY BASIN
(340-41-602)
k
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown In figure below.)
I
I
5;
5'
a
JV M ° 5/R ° w
vJH~-^<^' .~-.~
WATER RESOUHCbS
DEPAHTMtrJT
JOHN HAY
BASIN
MAP NO 6 2
00
0
o
c
£
-------
c
fr
a
TABLE 10
JOHN DAY BASIN
(340-41-602)
Beneficial Uses
Publio Domeallo Water Supply1
Private Domuiio Water Supply1
Industrial Water Supply
Irrigation
Livestock Watering
Anadromoui Fiih Paiiage
Salmonld Piih Rearing
Salmonid FUh Spawning
Resident PUh ft. Aquallo Life
Wildlife IL Hunting
Fishing
Boating
Water Contact Recreation
Actthctic Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigtiion & Traniporuiion
Columbia Rifer
(RM 218 to 247)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
John Day Hirer &
AU Tributaries
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
' With adequate prclrealmcnl (AUralion and ditinfcclion) and nalucal quabty to mcci Drinking witcr iiindirdi
o
5
8
i I
SA\T.bU\WHS297.S
• j
£
o
G
£
-------
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
CHAPTER 340, DIVISION 41 - DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
o
E
ii
2
c
a
o
a
5 I
-3
o
o
oa
4>
"3
>£
y .(September. 1991)
22 — Exhibits
(Figures
-------
TABLE 11
UMATILLA BASIN
(340-41-642)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domealic Water Supply1
Private Domeatio Water Supply1
Induilrul Water Supply
Irrigation
Livutock Watering
Anadromoua PUh Ptnagc
Salmonid Fiih Rearing (Trout)
Salmonid Fiih Spawning (Trout)
Reaidenl Fith A Aquatic Life
Wildlife IL Hunting
Fiihing
Boating
Water Contact Recreation
Aeilhdic Quality
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation It Tranaporution
Umatillt Subbasin
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Willow Creek
Subbasin
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(at mouih)
X
X
X
Main Stem
Columbia River
(RM 247 to 309)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
• With adequate prelrtaimcnl (filtration and diiinfcciion) and natural quality to mcci drinking water itandardi.
2:
O
c
SA\T.blc\WH579I.S
-------
I
I
FIGURE 13
WALLA WALLA BASIN
(340-41-682)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
K»
a;
a
\—
COLUMBIA
WALl.OWA
ri
g
8
WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
WALLA WALLA BASIN
O
c
-------
TABLE 12
g;
a
Jf
•c
•
WALJL/i WALLA
(340-41-682)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domestic Water Supply1
Private Domestic Walcr Supply1
Induilrial Water Supply
lrri|«lioa
Livestock Watering
Aiudromoui Fuh Patiagc
Salmonid Fuh Rearing
Salmon id Pith Spawning
RctidciU Fuh It Aquatic Life
Wildlife & Hunting
Fuhing
Boating
Walcr Contact Recreation
Aeilhdio Quality
Hydro Power
WalU Wall* RiTer
Mala Stem from
Confluence of North
and South Forks to
State Line
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All Other Basin Streams
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
With adequate pretrcalmenl (filtration and disinfection) and natural quality to meet drinking wilcr lUmlinli
-
g
o
O
G
SA\TibU\WH5799 S
-------
I
FIGURE 14
GRANDE RONDB BASIN
(340-41-722)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
or
a
o;
a
IB; 7
WATER RtSOUHCtb
DEPARTMENT
GKANDH KONDH
. BASIN
MAP NO ti ^
^^ _
fi
fc en
R S3
r
o
c
-------
TABLE
3
2!
a
J
GRANDE RONDB BASIN
O44M1-722)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domctiio Water Supply1
Private Domcjlio Water Supply1
Indutuial Water Supply
Irrigation
Livestock Watering
Antdrornoui Fiih Paiiage
Saunonid Fuh Rctring
S»lmonld Fuh Sp«wnui|
Rc*id«U Fuh A. Aqualio Life
WUdlifc IL Hunllng
Fuhing
Boiling
Water Contact Recreation
Actthclic Quality
Commercial Navigaiioo It Traniportation
Main SUm
Snake River
(RM 176 to 260)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Main Stem
Grande Rondc River
(RM 39 to US)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All
Other Basin Waters
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
' With adequate prclrealmenl (fikrotion and diiinfcciion) and natural quality to meet drinking water lUndirJi
SA\T«ble\WH5300.5
3
O
o
G
3
-------
FIGURE 15
POWDER BASIN
(340-41-762)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown In figure below.)
a
SI
fr
H
WAIEH fttSOUKCtS OtPAHIMtrJI
POWOI-R HASIN
MAP NO
-------
xf
TABLE 14
POWDER BASIN
(340-41-762)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domestic Water Supply1
Private Domcallo Water Supply1
Industrial Water Supply
Irrigation
Livealock Watering
Salmonld FUh Rearing
Salmonid Fuh Spawning
Rcaident Puh It Aquatic Life
Wildlife * Hunting
FUhing
Boating
Water Contact Recreation
Acithctic Quality
Hydro Power
Main Slera
Snake Rifer
(RM 260 to 335)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All Other Baiin Widen
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1 With adequate prcUealmcnl (filtration and diainfcclion) and natural quality to meet drinking water lUndirdi
l
SA\Ttblt\WU5)OI 5
O
c
-------
I
FIGURE 16
MALHEUR RIVER BASIN
(340-41-802)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
I
i:
a
31
1(77
WATEH RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT
MALIIF.UR BASIN
MAP NO IO 2
oo
o
m
TJ
jo
O
c
3
-------
c
a
TABLE 15
*
MALHEUR RJVER BASIN
(340-41-802)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domeitio Water Supply1
Privile Domcilic Water Supply'
Induilriil Water Supply
Irrigation
Livcilock Watering
Salmonid Piih Rearing (iroul)
Salmonid Fiih Spawning (trout)
Rcaidcnl Piih (Warm Water) 4. Aquatic
Life
Wildlife IL Hunting
Fiihing
Boating
Water Contact Recreation
Acilhctic Quality
Snake River
Main Sum
(RM 335 to
395)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Malhcur River
(Namorf to Mouth)
Willow Creek
(Brogan to Mouth)
Bully Creek
(Reservoir to Mouth)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Willow Creek
(MAlbcur Rcservoir
U> Brogan)
Malheur R. (Beulah
Dam &
Warm Springs Dam
to Namorf)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Hrt£Hflks
Mulbeur
Bully Creek
Beulob
Warm Springs
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Malbeur River
&
Tributaries
Upstream from
Reservoirs
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
With adequate prelreaimenl (filtration and diiinfeclion) and natural quality to meet drinking water itandardi
H
§
o
c
SAVTtbU\WH3301 J
-------
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
CHAPTER 340, DIVISION 41 — DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
FIGURE 17
OWYHEE BASIN
(34Q-41-S42)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
TtH KC3OUHCE3 Ot
OWYHEE BASIN
'(Septtinber, 1992)
32 — Exhibits
(Figures & Tables)
-------
V
TABLE 16
OWYHEE BASIN
(340-41-842)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domestic Water Supply1
Private Domeilic Water Supply1
Industrial Wtier Supply
Irrigation
Livcilock Watering
Stlmonld Puh Rearing (Trout)
Salmonid PUh Spawning (Trout)
Resident Puh (Warm Water) & Aquatic
Life
Wildlife It Hunting
Pithing
Boating
Water ConUcl Recreation
Aeilhelic Quality
Snake River
(RM 295 — 409)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Owyhee River
(RM 0 - 18)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Owyhee River
(RM 18 — Dam)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Reservoirs
Antelope
Cow Creek
Owyhee
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Owyhce River &
Tributaries
Upstream from
Owyhce Reservoir
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Designated
Scenic
Waterway3
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1 With adequate prclrealmenl (nitration and disinfection) and natural quality lo meet drinking water standards.
J The mainitem of the South Fork of the Owyhce River from ihe Oregon — Idaho River border to Three Forks (the confluence of Iho North, Middle «iuJ
South Porks Owyhec River) and the mainslcm Owyhce River from Crooked Creek (river mile 22) lo the mouth of Birch deck (river mile 76) u dciig
naled by statute as • Scenie Waterway.
a
SA\Tiblt\WHSJ03 S
-------
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
CHAPTER 340, DIVISION 41 — DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
FIGURE 18
MALHEUR LAKE BASIN
(340-U-S82)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
~£$^ -A
WATER RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT
MALHEURLAKE
BASIN
1992)
34 —Exhibits
(Figures & Tables)
-------
2!
B
TABLE 17
MALHBUR LAKE BASIN
(340-41-882)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domeilio Water Supply1
Private Domcillo Water Supply1
Industrial Water Supply
Irrigation
Liveilock Watering
Silmonid PUh Re*rinj (Troul)
Stlmonid Fiih Spawning (Trout)
Rctidcnl Fiih & Aquatic Life
Wildlife it Hunting
Fishing
Boiling
Water Contact Recreation
Aesthetic Quality
Natural Lakes
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All Riven
Si
Tributaries
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
With adequate prctreatmenl (filtration and disinfection) and natural quality to mcci drinking water itandaiJi
^^ _.
ss
£ 0
o
•2.
>
3
o
SA\T.ble\W)15304.$
3
-------
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE
CHAPTER 3-tt, DIVISION 41 - DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
FIGURE 19
GOOSE & SUMMER LAKES BASIN
(340-41-922)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
GOOSE & SUMMER
LAKES BASIN
(September, 1992)
36 - Exhibits
(Figures & Tables)
-------
g
a
CT
a
TABLE 18
GOOSE AND SUMMER LAKES BASIN
(340-41-922)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domcalio Water Supply1
Private Domc*iio Water Supply1
Industrial Water Supply
Irrigilioo
Livutock Watering
Salmonld Piih Rearing (Trout)
Silmonid Puh Spawning (Trout)
Reiidenl Pith A Aquatic Life
Wildlife & Hunting
Fuhing
Boating
Water Contact Recreation
Aeithetio QuaUly
Goose Lake
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Fresh Water Lakes
&
Reservoirs
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Highly
Alkaline &
Saline Lakes
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Freshwater
Streams
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X,
' With adequate prelreatmcnl (Ahralion and ditinfcclion) and natural quality to meet drinking water ilandardt. i
SA\TibU\WH5305 5
O
G
-------
I
FIGURE 20
KLAMATH BASIN
(340-41-962)
(Note: Basin Boundaries are as shown in figure below.)
£
WAItH HtbUUHutS ()E»»AH 1 Ml
KLAMA'III UAS1N
MAP NO I 4 2
o
i
So
o *.
"I
> £
gl
o 7
m ^.
§f
r
o
c
-------
B
9
TABLE 19
KLAMATH BASIN
(340-41-962)
Beneficial Uses
Public Domestic Water Supply1
Private Domcalio Water Supply1
Induatrial Water Supply
Irrigation
Livcitock Watering
Salmonld Fuh Rearing1
Satmooid Fuh Spawning1
Rcaident Fuh It Aqualic Life
Wildlife IL Hunting
Fuhing
Boating
Water Contact Recreation
Aetthctic Qua Iky
Hydro Power
Commercial Navigation It TraniporUlion
Ktaraaih Rirer from
Klamalb Lake to
Keno Dam
(KM 255 to 132.5)
X
X
\
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Lost Hirer
(RM 5 to 45) &
Lost Hirer
Direr&ioa Channel
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
All
Oilier Basin Waters
X
X
X
X
\
\
X
\
X
X
X
X
X
Wuh adequate prcircalmcnt (fthreiion and ditinfcciion) and nature! quality to mcc* drinking w*(cr iiinJirdi.
Where nalurel condition* arc auiublc for aabnonid fnh use.
SA\T.blc\WHS306 5
I •
-------
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
CHAPTER 340, DIVISION 41 — DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
(Stjsember, 1991) 40 — Exhibits (Figures & Tables)
-------
APPENDIX C
Policy letter from Michael T. Llewelyn, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,
dated June 22,1998 to Philip Millam, EPA Region 10, clarifying Oregon's water quality
standards revision.
-------
-------
Oregon
June 22, 1998 DEPARTMENT OF
Philip Millam
Director, Office of Water, OW-134
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region X
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
Dear PI
ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY
JUL-6
I .
This letter is to provide policy clarification of the Oregon water quality standards revisions
that were submitted for Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) approval on July 10,
1996. Specifically, this letter addresses how the Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ) is interpreting certain language contained in the Oregon Water Quality Standards
(OAR 340-41) and responds to questions that EPA has raised in its review of the standards
The regulatory clarifications included herein will be incorporated into the water quality
standards, to the extent possible, during the next triennial review. As there are quite a
number of issues that are candidates for review in the next triennial review, we will need to
carefully prioritize these issues working with EPA and the next Policy Advisory Committee.
The following comments are organized in the following manner beneficial use issues,
numeric criteria issues and implementation issues.
BENEFICIAL USE ISSUES:
Bull Trout Waters: The language in the rule (OAR 340-41- basin (2)(b)(A)) reads: "...no
measurable surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is
allowed: ... (v) In waters determined by the Department to support or to be necessary to
maintain the viability of native Oregon bull trout, when surface water temperatures exceed
50.0° F (12.8° C)" [Please note that the specific citation for the temperature criteria for Bull
Trout may vary slightly in its numbering depending on the basin, this example and
subsequent citations are from the standards for the Willamette Basin (OAR 340-41-445)]
The Department has consulted with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) to
make a determination of the current distribution of Bull Trout. Maps have been developed
by ODFW as part of an effort to develop plans to protect and restore Bull Trout populations
These maps can be found in the following publication "Status of Oregon's Bull Trout"
(Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife October 1997. Buchanan David. M Hanson
and R Hooton Portland OR) which is available from ODFW or viewed in the ''StreamNet"
website :'www stream-net crgi « map shewing the most recent Bull Trout distribution
lexpcrt file dated J'jne 199~> nas Deer, sent separately to EPA and a digital version can be ~'*
provided to E^^
'JfV
-------
The Department will use the 1997 Bull Trout distribution maps contained in the 1997 ODFW
publication to clarify the phrase "waters determined by the Department to support or to be
necessary to maintain the viability of native Oregon Bull Trout." The temperature criteria of
50°F applies to the stream reaches which indicate that "Spawning, Rearing, or Resident
Adult Bull Trout" populations are present. These waters are shown by a solid green line on
the maps that are referenced.
The mapping and planning effort is an on-going effort by ODFW. Any changes made to the
mapped distribution will represent a change in the standard which would be submitted to
EPA for approval The Bull Trout portion of the standards will be revised to incorporate a
reference to the 1997 ODFW publication or identify any other means for determining waters
that support or are necessary to support Bull Trout in the next triennial standards review.
Waters supporting spawning, egg incubation and fry emergence: The language in the
rule reads:
Temperature (OAR 340-41- basin (2)(b)(A)): ". . . no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed: . . . (iv) In waters and periods of
the year determined by the Department to support native salmonid spawning, egg
incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and from the gravels in a basin which exceeds
55°F
Dissolved Oxygen (OAR 340-41- basin (2)(a)(A)): "For waterbodies identified by the
Department as providing salmonid spawning, during the periods from spawning until fry
emergence from the gravels, following criteria apply. "
The Beneficial Use Tables (Tables 1-19 in the Oregon water quality standards) indicate the
recognized beneficial uses to generally be protected in the basin In some basins (e.g.
Table 15, Malheur River Basin), the information in the Tables has been refined for particular
water bodies. In general, salmonid spawning and rearing are shown on the tables to be
found in all basins. In order to make the spawning determinations, information on location
and timing in a specific waterbody is further developed through consultation with ODFW as
spawning does not occur at all times of the year or in all locations in the basin. In addition,
timing often varies from year to year depending on seasonal factors such as flow. ODFW,
in cooperation with other federal and tribal fishery agencies has begun to map out this
information on a species by species basis (StreamNet Project) but this work is still several
years from completion
DEQ is submitting the attached table that identifies when the spawning criteria listed under
the dissolved oxygen and temperature standards will be applied to a basin. This table
provides the generally accepted time frame during which spawning occurs. However,
spawning periods for Spring Chinook and Winter Steelhead vary with elevation (e.g Spring
Chinook tend to spawn earlier and fry emergence occurs later in the Spring for Winter
Steelhead in streams at higher elevations) Therefore to address differences in actual
spawning periods the Department will consult directly with the ODFW to determine if
waterbody specific adjustments (which would be changes to the standards) are necessary
-------
Furthermore, the Department will apply the antidegradation policy in specific actions, e.g.
permits, 401 certification and 303(d) listing, to protect spawning that occurs outside the
identified time frames or utilize the narrative temperature criteria that applies to threatened
or endangered species.
Application of the warm-water Dissolved Oxygen Criteria (OAR 340-41- basin (2)(a)(R):
The language in the rule reads: "For waterbodies identified by the Department as providing
warm-water aquatic life, the dissolved oxygen shall not be less than 5.5 mg/l as an absolute
minimum..."
Warm-water criteria is applied in waters where Salmonid Fish Rearing and Salmonid Fish
Spawning are not a listed beneficial use in Tables 1 -19 with the exception of Table 19
(Klamath Basin) in which the cool water dissolved oxygen criteria will be applied (see
Klamath TMDL supporting documentation, (Hammon 1998)). Specifically, the warm water
criteria would be applied to:
Table 15: Malheur River (Namorf to Mouth), Willow Creek (Brogan to Mouth), Bully
Creek (Reservoir to Mouth);
Table 16: OwyheeRiver(RMO-18);
Table 17: Malheur Lake Basin - Natural Lakes;
Table 18: Goose and Summer Lakes Basin - High Alkaline & Saline Lakes.
Application of the cool-water Dissolved Oxygen Criteria (OAR 340-41- basin (2)(a)(E)):
The language in the rule reads: "For waterbodies identified by the Department as providing
cool-water aquatic life, the dissolved oxygen shall not be less than 6.5 mg/l as an absolute
minimum..."
Cool-water aquatic life is a sub-category of cold-water aquatic life and is defined under OAR
340-41-006 (52) as "the aquatic communities that are physiologically restricted to cool
waters, composed of one or more species having dissolved oxygen requirements believed
similar to the cold-water communities Including but not limited to Cottidae, Osmeridae,
Acipenseridae, and sensitive Centrachidae such as the small-mouth bass." This criteria will
be applied on an ecoregional basis' (see attached map) as follows:
West Side:
Cold Water: Coast Range Ecoregion - all, Sierra Nevada Ecoregion -all, Cascade-all,
Willamette Valley - generally typical including Willamette River above Corvallis, Santiam
(including the North and South), Clackamas, McKenzie, Mid Fork and Coast Fork
mainstems
The orgmal Ecoregions described in Ecorgors of the Pacific Northwest":James Onemik and A Gallant 1966 EPA.600/3-86C33)
.we used This wcnx s currently Deirg uocated Cut is •x;! ccmpiete for Oegon The terms "nest rycicai and generally typical are
2ef>ee 'er-.aT.ng rjcrt.ons 5e'-e'3.'v_^picai of each eccregicn. snare ~ics: out not ail of these same
_r-jr3c'€-r-s:;cs '--<>•? 3'o.is j'e 3c-'..-ec ;r. —aEs "c.ucec n 're n,D>r.3'cn 'p'e'OTt-:: aoc'.e arc: -i.e :«*?" i
-------
Cool Water Willamette Valley Ecoregion - most typical.
East Side (with the exception of waters listed under warm water criteria in Tables 15-19):
Cold Water Eastern Cascades Slopes and Foothills - most typical, Blue Mountain -
most typical.
Cool Water Remainder of Eastern Oregon Ecoregions.
NUMERIC CRITERIA ISSUES:
Temperature criteria for waters without a specific numeric criterion: The temperature
criteria of 64°F will be applied to all water bodies that support salmonid fish rearing as
identified in Tables 1 -19 This would include all waters except those listed as warm water
above. Currently, there is no numeric criteria for those waters listed as warm water. This
was an inadvertent oversight for the rivers described under 2 and 3 below which will be
corrected by setting site specific criteria during the next triennial review In the mean time,
these waters will be protected as follows:
1. There is a criteria that covers natural lakes and would cover lakes in the Malheur Lake
Basin (Table 17) and Goose and Summer Lakes Basin (Table 18). This criteria (OAR
340-41-922 (2)(b)(A)) reads: "...no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed:... (vii) In natural lakes".
2. The waters shown in the Klamath Basin (Table 19) are currently listed in Oregon's
1994/96 303(d) list for temperature based on exceedence of the criterion that is linked
to dissolved oxygen. This criterion (OAR 340-41-965 (2)(b)(A)) reads: "...no
measurable surface water temperature increase resulting form anthropogenic activities
is allowed: ... (vi) In Oregon waters when the dissolved oxygen (DO) levels are within
0.5 mg/l or 10 percent saturation of the water column or intergravel DO criterion fora
given stream reach orsubbasin." An additional narrative criterion would apply to these
waters as they contain a federally listed Threatened and Endangered species - Lost
River Sucker and Shortnose Sucker, both of which are listed as endangered (USFWS,
7/88, 53FR27130). This criterion (OAR 340-41-965 (2)(b)(A)) states: "no measurable
surface water temperature increase resulting form anthropogenic activities is allowed: ..
(v) In stream segments containing federally listed Threatened and Endangered species
if the increase would impair the biological integrity of the Threatened and Endangered
population " A Site Specific Criteria is currently being developed as part of a TMDL for
these waters and a new criteria for temperature will be established This criterion will be
adopted by the EQC and submitted to EPA for approval prior the completion of a TMDL
This work should be accomplished during our next triennial standards review (1998 -
2000) The TMDL schedule is currently being negotiated with EPA
3 Warm water streams in the lower Malheur and Owyhee (Table 15 and 16) would be
addressed in a similar manner using temperature criterion that relates to dissolved
oxygen These waters were not listed on the current 303(d) list as the waters were not
within 0 5 rng.-l or 10 percent saturation of the water column DO criterion These waters
-------
are included in beneficial use survey work that the Department is undertaking in the
Snake River Basin/High Desert Ecoregion. This work, which will include the
development of numeric temperature criteria for these waters, will be accomplished
during our next triennial standards review (1998-2000).
Willamette and Columbia River Temperature Criteria: The language in the rule (OAR
340-41-445 (2)(b)(A)) reads: "...no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed: .. (ii) In the Columbia River or its
associated sloughs and channels from the mouth to river mile 309 when surface water
temperatures exceed 68.0°F (20.0°C); (Hi) In the Willamette River or its associated sloughs
and channels from the mouth to river mile 50 when surface water temperatures exceed
68.0°F(200°Q."
For the Columbia River, this is not a change to the previous standard (OAR 340-41-445 (2)
(b) (D). The Columbia River forms the boundary between the states of Oregon and
Washington anc, u ,is criterion is consistent with the current temperature standard for the
State of Washington.
For the Willamette River, this value represents a decrease from the previous temperature
criteria of 70°F and makes it consistent with the Columbia River numeric criteria. The
technical committee had recommended the 68°F criteria for these large, lower river
segments recognizing that temperatures were expected to be higher in these segments as
factors such as the naturally wide channels would minimize the ability to shade these rivers
and reduce the thermal loading.
Both of these rivers are water quality limited for temperature and the temperature criteria
can be revisited as part of the effort to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads. The
Department is currently working with EPA to develop a temperature assessment for the
Columbia River and is participating in a Willamette Basin Reservoir Study with the Corp of
Engineers and other state agencies. The timing of specific TMDLs is currently being
negotiated with EPA
64" F Temperature Criteria: EPA has expressed concern that the 64°F criterion may not
be fully protective The Final Issue Paper on Temperature indicates that "the incidence of
disease from Chondrococcus columnaris increases above 60-62° F and cites various
sources for this statement (page 2-4 and Appendix D of the Final Issue Paper on
Temperature) This is based both on observations from laboratory studies and field studies
A review of this literature indicates that it is difficult to establish a temperature criteria for
waters that experience diurnal temperature changes that would assure no affects due to C
columnans For example. J Fryer and K Pilcher ("Effects of Temperature on Diseases of
Salmomd Fishes EPA-660/3-73-020 1974) conducted in the laboratory studies using
constant terr.oeratures and concluded
-------
"When coho and spring chinook salmon, and rainbow trout are infected with C.
columnans by water contact, the percentage of fatal infections is high at temperatures of
64°F and above, moderate at 59°F and approaches zero at 49°F and below. A
temperature of 54°F is close to the threshold for development of fatal infection of
salmonids by C. columnans."
There is literature that suggests that fish pathogens which affect Oregon's cold-water fishes
become more infective and virulent at temperatures ranging from the lower mid-sixties to
low seventies (Becker and Fujihara, 1978). Ordal and Pacha (1963) found that mortalities
due to C columnans outbreaks are lessened or cease when temperatures are reduced
below 65°F. Bell (1986) suggested that outbreaks of high virulence strains of C. columnans
occur when average water temperatures reach 15.5°C and the low virulence strains
become apparent with average water temperatures over 20°C
A good discussion of field studies is given in the report "Columbia River Thermal Effects
Study" (EPA, 1971).
"Natural outbreaks of columnaris disease in adult salmon have been linked to high water
temperatures in the Fraser River, British Columbia. ...The pathological effects of the
disease became evident when water temperatures along the migration route, and in
spawning areas, exceeded 60°F. Prespawning mortality reached 90 percent in some
tributaries. Columnaris is the infected sockeye spawners was controlled when
temperatures fell below 57-58°F and mortalities were reduced."
"Data collected on antibody levels in the Columbia River fish "...suggest peak yearly
effective infection of at least 70 percent to 80 percent of most adult river fish species"
(Fujihara and Hungate, 1970). Occurrence of the disease was generally associated
with temperatures above 55°F; the authors further suggest that the incidence of
columnans may be increased by extended periods of warm temperatures than by peak
summer temperatures."
"Other factors including the general condition of the fish, nutritional state, size, presence
of toxicants, level of antibody protection, exposure to nitrogen supersaturation, level of
dissolved oxygen, and perhaps other factors interrelate in the infection of fish by
diseases However, the diseases discussed here are of less importance at
temperatures below 60°F; that is, in most instances mortalities due to columaris are
minimized or eliminated below that level"
As indicated in the section on 'Standard Alternatives and Technical Evaluation" in the
Temperature Issue Paper, the technical committee had recommended a temperature range
(58 - 64°F) as being protective for salmonid rearing. While 64°F is at the upper end of the
range, the key to this recommendation is the temperature unit (page 3-2) that is used in the
standard - the seven-day moving average of the daily maximum temperatures.
Exceedence of the criteria is based on the average of the daily maximum temperatures that
a waterfcody experiences over the course of seven consecutive days exceeding 64°F
-------
Streams experience a natural fluctuation of daily temperatures so streams that were just
meeting the temperature standard would be experiencing temperatures over 60°F for only
short periods of time during the day and have lower average temperatures. For example,
the Department has summarized temperature data collected at 6 sites around the state
which are near the 7-day average of the daily maximum of 64°F (see table below). As
shown, the daily average temperatures typically range between 55-60°F. Risks should be
minimized at these average temperatures.
In conclusion, the criteria does not represent an assured no-effect level However, because
the criteria represent a "maximum" condition, given diurnal variability, conditions will be
better that criteria nearly all of the time at most sites.
Grande Ronde Basm
East Fork Grande Ronde River
Beaver Creek (upstream La Grande Res.)
Umpqua Basin
Jim Creek (mouth)
Pass Creek (upper)
Tillamook Basin
Myrtle Creek (mouth)
Sam Downs Creek (mouth)
7-Day
Statistic
64.7
653
62.5
64.4
65.0
639
Average Daily Temperatves
Day 1
578
551
58.2
590
577
558
Doy2
58.1
56.5
595
58.7
591
559
Day 3
574
58
59.9
58.1
58.6
55.5
Oay«
571
582
60.1
58.5
57.9
55.5
Doy5
573
59.7
58.6
59.1
58.0
55.7
Day 6
58.0
60.1
55.7
59.3
57.6
55.6
Doy7
58.1
59.9
56.8
57.7
568
56.1
Minimum Dissolved Oxygen Criteria for Cool Water and Warm Water Species:
Warm Water The Oregon warm water criteria for dissolved oxygen is 5.5 mg/l as a 30 day
mean and 40 mg/l as a minimum. These values meet or exceed the recommended
national criteria for warm water criteria for other life stages (5.5 mg/l as a 30 day mean and
30 as a 1 day minimum as shown in Table 1 of the dissolved oxygen criteria in Quality
Catena for Water. 1986 (EPA 440/5-86-001)) These values are slightly below national
criteria suggested for protection of early life stages (60 mg/l as a 7 day mean and 50 as a
1 day minimum as shown in Table 1 of the dissolved oxygen criteria in Quality Criteria for
Water. 1986) As shown on Table 2 of the dissolved oxygen criteria in Quality Criteria for
Water, 1986. this would represent a slight impairment for early life stages
This criteria would be applied to both native and non-native warm water species Table 2-3
in the Temperature Issue Paper (page 2-14) contains a list of non-salmonid fish species
present in Oregon Warm water species include Borax Chub. Cypnnids (goldfish, carp.
fathead minnows; Centrarchids'Bluegill Crappie Large-mouth Bass), and Catfish The
only known warm-water species tnat •$ native to Cregon >s the Borax Chub which is found
-------
near a hot springs. The others have been introduced and now perpetuate themselves in
some basins. These species are typically Spring spawners (April - June) during which times
dissolved oxygen values are not at the seasonal lows (July - August) and typically have not
been found to be a problem. In addition, salmonid spawning criteria, which are more
protective, typically apply during these time period.
It should be noted that most of the introduced warm water species now compete with the
native cold and cool water species for habitat and food. There are numerous recovery
plans being developed for these native species. A level of protection that may have a slight
production impairment for non-native warm water species is not necesjanly undesirable.
Cool Water: A cool water classification was created to protect cool water species where
cold-water biota may be present during part or all of the year but would not form the
dominate community structure. The cool water criteria match the national coldwater criteria
- other life stages criteria.
Table 2-3 in the Temperature Issue Paper (page 2-14) contains a list of non-salmonid fish
species present in Oregon. Cool water species include: Chub; Suckers, Sandrollen
Sturgeon; Centrarchids (Small-mouth Bass); Striped Bass; and Walleye Small mouth bass,
striped bass and walleye are introduced species. This category was set up to provide more
protection than that afforded by the other life stage criteria for warm water fish and, as
discussed in the Gold Book, we provided these cool water species with the cold water
species protection suggested in the national criteria (Table 1 of the dissolved oxygen criteria
in Qua//fy Criteria for Water. 1986). These species are typically Spring spawners (April -
June) during which times dissolved oxygen values are not at the seasonal lows (July-
August) and typically have not been found to be a problem.
Table 2-2 of the Dissolved Oxygen Issue Paper indicates that salmonids and other cold-
water biota may be present during part or all of the year but may not dominate community
structure. Any salmonid spawning would still be covered by the salmonid spawning
standard. The Oregon standards provide higher protection for salmonid spawning and cold
water rearing than that recommended under the national criteria by choosing the "no
production impairment" levels suggested in Table 2 of the dissolved oxygen criteria in
Quality Catena for Water, 1986.
When adequate information/data exists: The dissolved oxygen standard provides
multiple criteria for cold, cool and warm water aquatic life. For example, OAR 340-41-445
(2) (a) (D) reads "For waterbodies identified by the Department as providing cold-water
aquatic life, the dissolved oxygen shall not be less than 8.0 mg/1 as an absolute minimum
Where conditions of barometric pressure, altitude, and temperature preclude attainment of
the 8.0 mgA, dissolved oxygen shall not be less than 90 percent of saturation. At the
discretion of the Department, when the Department determines that adequate information
exists, the dissolved oxygen shall not fall below 80 mg/l as a 30-day mean minimum. 6 5
mg/1 as a seven-day minimum mean, and shall not fall below 6 Omg/l as an absolute
minimum (Table 27) "
-------
In this example, the Department would routinely compare dissolved oxygen values against
8.0 mg/l criteria (the higher dissolved oxygen criteria). Most dissolved oxygen data is
collected by a grab sample during the day time and would not reflect minimum conditions,
that is why we would use a more restrictive criteria. Adequate information to use the other
criteria would involve the collection of diurnal data over long enough periods of tme (e.g.
multiple days or multiple weeks) during critical time periods (e.g. low flow periods, hottest
water temperature periods, period of maximum waste discharge). Such data would be
collected through continuous monitoring with proper quality assurance Based on this data
collection, sufficient data would be available to calculate means, minimum means and
minimum values and to compare to the appropriate criteria. Models that would provide
these statistics could also be compared to the appropriate criteria.
In addition, for actions such as permitting and developing TMDLs, additional information on
the beneficial uses of the waterbody will be considered such as: species present, listing
status of those species; locations, time periods and presence of sensitive early life stages,
etc. Based on presence of early life stages or T&E species, the more conservative criteria
would be used.
IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES:
Air temperature exemption to the water temperature criteria: OAR 340-41-basin (2)(b)
(B) specifies that "an exceedence of the numeric criteria identified subparagraph (A)... of
this subsection will not be deemed a temperature standard violation if it occurs when the air
temperature during the warmest seven-day period of the year exceeds the 9(f percentile of
the seven-day average daily maximum air temperature calculated in a yearly series over the
historic record. However, during such periods, the anthropogenic sources must still
continue to comply with their surface water temperature management plans developed
under OAR 340-41-026(3)(a)(D) "
This policy identifies criteria to be used in certain limited circumstances to determine
whether a violation of the temperature water quality standard has occurred. This
interpretation would be applied for the purposes of enforcement of standards and the
303(d) listing determinations. Our interpretation of how this air temperature exemption
would be applied has been sent to you separately. In the 1994/96 303(d) list, no water
bodies were excluded from the list for this reason
Exceptions to the policy that prohibits new or increased discharged load to receiving
streams classified as being water quality limited:
OAR 340-41-026 (3) (C) states 'the new or increased discharged load shall not be granted
if the receiving stream is classified as being water quality limited under OAR 340-41-
006(30)(ai unless '
-------
OAR 340-41-026 (3) (a) C (iii) added new language under this policy which defines a
condition under which a new or increased discharged load could be allowed to a water
quality limited waterbody for dissolved oxygen. The language states: "(iii) Effective July 1,
1996, in waterbodies designated water-quality limited for dissolved oxygen, when
establishing WLAs under a TMDL forwaterbodies meeting the conditions defined in this
rule, the Department may at its discretion provide an allowance for WLAs calculated to
result in no measurable reduction of dissolved oxygen. For this purpose, "no measurable
reduction" is defined as no more than 0.10 mg/1 for a single source and no more than 0.20
mg/l for all anthropogenic activities that influence the water quality limited segment. The
allowance applies for surface water DO criteria and for Intergravel DO if a determination is
made that the conditions are natural. The allowance for WLAs would apply only to surface
water 30-day and seven-day means, and the IGDO action level."
This is an implementation policy for OAR 340-41-026 (3) (C) and clarifies that we could
allow for an increase in load in a waterbody that is water quality limited for dissolved oxygen
as long as it did not result in a measurable reduction of dissolved oxygen as defined above
and it was determined that the low DO values were due to a natural condition. A site
specific criteria for the waterbody would need to be developed and submitted to EPA for
review and approval.
All feasible steps: OAR 340-41-026 (3) (D) indicates that: "Sources shall continue to
maintain and improve, if necessary, the surface water temperature management plan in
order to maintain the cooling trend until the numeric criterion is achieved or until the
Department, in consultation with the Designated Management Agencies (DMAs), has
determined that all feasible steps have been taken to meet the criterion and that the
designated beneficial uses are not being adversely impacted. In this latter situation, the
temperature achieved after all feasible steps have been taken will be the temperature
criterion for the surface waters covered by the applicable management plan. The
determination that all feasible steps have been taken will be based on, but not limited to, a
site-specific balance of the following criteria: protection of beneficial uses; appropriateness
to local conditions; use of best treatment technologies or management practices or
measures; and cost of compliance "
As indicated, if the waters do not come into compliance with the standard after all feasible
steps have been taken, the Department would develop a site-specific criteria which would
be submitted to EPA for approval pursuant to EPA policy.
1.0° F increase for new or increased discharge loads from point sources or hydro-
power projects in temperature water quality limited basins: OAR 340-41-026 (3) (F),
(G), (H) state "(F) In basins determined by the Department to be exceeding the numeric
temperature criteria, and which are required to develop surface water temperature
management plans, new or increased discharge loads from point source sources which
require an NPDES permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act or hydro-power
protects which require certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act are allowed a
1 0°F total cumulative increase m surface water temperatures as the surface water
-------
temperature management plan is being developed and implemented for the water quality
limited basin if:
(i) in the best professional judgment of the Department, the new or increased
discharge load, even with the resulting 1.0°F cumulative increase, will not conflict
with or impair the ability of the surface water temperature management plan to
achieve the numeric temperature criteria, and
(ii) A new or expanding source must demonstrate that it fits within the 1 0°F increase
and that its activities will not result in a measurable impact on beneficial uses. This
latter showing must be made by demonstrating to the Department that the
temperature change due to its activities will be less than or equal to 0.25°F under a
conservative approach or by demonstrating the same to the EQC with appropriate
modeling
(G) Any source may petition the Department for an exception to paragraph (F) of this
subsection, provided:
(i) The discharge will result in less than 1.0°F increase at the edge of the mixing zone,
and subparagraph (ii) or (Hi) of this paragraph applies:
(ii) The source provides the necessary scientific information to describe how the
designated beneficial uses would not be adversely impacted; or
(Hi) The source demonstrates that:
(I) It is implementing all reasonable management practices;
(II) Its activity will not significantly affect the beneficial uses; and
(III) The environmental cost of treating the parameter to the level necessary to
assure full protection would outweigh the risk to the resource.
OAR 340-41-026 (3) (F) and (G) reflect an implementation policy for OAR 340-41-026 (3)
(C) They clarify under what conditions the Department could allow for an increase in load
to a waterbody that is water quality limited for temperature as long as the load did not result
in a measurable increase in temperature (less than or equal to 0.25°F) or a cumulative
increase of 1.0°F under (F) but a source could petition for up to the cumulative increase of
1.0°F under (G). The cumulative increase typically addresses the situation where there
may be multiple new or increased discharges. A TMDL would still be developed to bring the
waterbody back into compliance with the temperature criteria. The WLA and the permit for
the new or increased source would target the appropriate temperature criteria using a
-------
conservative approach as shown below (e.g. calculations would be made using 63°F so that
the cumulative increase would not be above the standard of 64°F).1
OAR 340-41-026 (3) (H) states: "Any source or DMA may petition the Commission for an
exception to paragraph (F) of this subsection, provided:
(i) The source or DMA provides the necessary scientific information to describe how
the designated beneficial uses would not be adversely impacted: or
(ii) The source or DMA demonstrates that:
(I) It is implementing all reasonable management practices:
(II) Its activity will not significantly affect the beneficial uses; and
(III) The environmental cost of treating the parameter to the level necessary to
assure full protection would outweigh the risk to the resource. "
This exemption is a variance policy in which a source can petition the Commission to allow
the temperature to increase by a specified amount for a limited period of time in order to
allow for new or increased point source discharges to water quality limited waters until a
TMDL is prepared. The variance would be submitted to EPA for revie" ar"1 approval.
These variances would be reviewed again during the development of a TMDL or at permit
renewal.
Source Petition for an exception to temperature criteria: OAR 340-41-basin (2)(b)(C)
specifies that "Any source may petition the Commission for an exception to subparagraph
(A) ...of this subsection for discharge above the identified criteria if: (i) The source provides
the necessary scientific information to describe how the designated beneficial uses would
not be adversely impacted; or (ii) a source is implementing all reasonable management
practices or measures; its activity will not significantly affect the beneficial uses; and the
environmental cost of treating the parameter to the level necessary to assure full protection
would outweigh the risk to the resource "
Examples of various of discharge scenarios using a conservative mass balance analysis The odd numbered examples snow a
scenario when the stream meets standards The subsequent even numbered example shows the scenario vvtwi the stream is above
standard Examples 1 - 4 would be addressed under OAR 34CM1 -026 (3) (F): examples 5 - 8 would be addressed under OAR 34CM1-
026 (3) (G); and examples 9 -10 would be addressed under OAR 340-41 -026 (3) (H)
Example
1
2
3
4
5
Upstream
Flow
10
10
10
10
10
Temp
63
73
63
73
63
6 10 ! 73
7 ! 10 ; 63
8 10 ' 73
Effluent
Flow
0.4
0.4
0 1
0 1
0 4
04
04
04
Temp
695
69.5
Downstream
Flow
10.4
104
88 10.1
88
795
795
89
89
10.1
104
Temp
6325
72.87
6325
73 15
6363
104 | 7325
10.4
10 4
Change in
Temp
025
-0.13
025
0 15
063
025
64 00 1 00
7362 062
9 10 • 61 5 1 • 89 11 6400
250
10 10 73 1 39 11 . 7445 145
-------
This will be, for most cases, a variance policy which allows the temperature to increase by a
specified amount for a limited period of time in order to allow for an existing point source to
discharge to water quality limited waters until a TMDL is prepared In the case where that
source would be the major cause for the temperature criteria to be exceeded and a TMDL
would not be developed for that waterbody to bring it back into compliance, a site specific
criteria would be developed and submitted to EPA for approval.
pH Standard exception: OAR 340-41 -basin (2) (d) states "The following exception
applies: Waters impounded by dams existing on January 1, 1996, which have pHs that
exceed the criteria shall not be considered in violation of the standard if the Department
determines that the exceedence would not occur without the impoundment and that all
practicable measures have been taken to bring the pH in the impounded waters into
compliance with the criteria "
This language was intended to address the situation where a hydroproject would be
applying for a 401 re-certification and it was found that the action of impounding the waters
caused algal gr^«*h which caused the reservoir to subsequently exceed the pH standard.
This might set up the situation where the only way to re-certify the project would be to
destroy the dam which may not be the preferred option. In the cases where this exception
would be applied, the Department would develop either a TMDL for nutrients in the
upstream watershed, develop a site specific criteria for the waterbody or develop a use
attainability analysis to modify the uses for portions of the reservoir.
Final Note: ODFW has a great deal of knowledge regarding location and timing for
presence, spawning, etc of fish in Oregon streams Much of this information is either in the
files contained in local field offices or is gained from the judgment of the local biologist. Until
recently, it has not been mapped A mapping effort is underway and is furthest along for
Bull Trout and Anadromous fish species. There is a coordinated effort underway entitled
"StreamNet" (www.streamnet.org) This work is focused on a species by species mapping
which would need to be generalized to match cold, cool, warm-water classification and
spawning vs rearing groupings indicated in the standards. Issues such as mapping scales
and coverage would still need to be worked out. This effort, to better categorize aquatic life
uses, could be addressed in subsequent triennial standards reviews but will need additional
funding to complete
There are quite a number of standards related issues that are candidates for consideration
during the next tnennial review DEQ and EPA should get together once DEQ has hired a
new standards coordinator to discuss priorities and approaches for conducting the next
tnennial review process
-------
Please feel to contact Andy Sehaedel (503-229-6121) or Lynne Kennedy (503-229-5371) if
you have further questions
Sincerely,
Michael T. Llte&eiyn '
Administrator, Water Quality Division
cc: Water Quality Managers
-------
Saimonia Spawning
Basin
North Coast
Mid Coast
South Coast
Umpqua
Rogue
Willamette • Other Ecoregwns
Willamette • WHlamette Valley
EcoregKXi most typcal
WiBamefle - Clackamas Santiam
(incluang N & S Pork) McKenoe
Molatta and Mid Font Mamslems
Sandy
Hood • Hood River Drainage
Hood • Miles Creek Drainage
Descnutes R and East Side
Tnoutanes
Oescnutes R and West S4de
Tntxlanes
John Day
UmaWa/Walla Walla
Grande Ronde
Rjwdef
MalheurRrver
Owyne*
MaiheurLake
Goose and Summer Lakes
K la math
Cohjmaa Rrver
Snake River
Salmonids Present within Basin
CO CHF CHS CS CT STW
CO CHC CHS CS CT STS STW
CO CHF CHS CT STW
CO CHF CHS CT STS STW
BT CO CHF CHS CT STS STW
BUT CHF CHS CT RB STW
CHF CHS CT RB STW
BUT CHF CHS CT RB STW
CHF CHS
CHF CHS.CO.STS STW
STW RB
BR BT BUT CHF K 3B RT STS
BR BT BUT CHF K RB RT STS
BUT CHS CT RT STS
BUT CHF CHS CO RT STS
BUT CHF CHS RB RT STS
BUT RB RT
BUT RB. RT
RB. RT.LCT
RB. RT.LCT
BT RT
BT RB RT
CHF CHS CHR CO CS CT SS STS
STW
CHF CHS SS STS
Spawning - Fry
Emergence
September '5 • May 31
September 15 • May 31
October 1 • May 31
September 15 . May 31
Octooer • May 31
October 1 • May 31
Octooer 1 - May 31
September 15 • June 30
September 15 • June 30
September 15- June 30
Octooer 1 . June 30
October 1 - June 30
Septemcer 1 - June 30
October 1 • June 30
October ' • June 30
Octooer • .xjne 30
March i . June 3C
March 1 - june 30
March 1 • June 30
March 1 . June 30
Marcr. 1 - June 30
Marcn 1 _\jv 3C
October 1 - May 31
Octooer 1 - June 30
Comments
No spawning occurs m Llmpqua R estuary to Head of Tidewater and
Adjacent Marine Waters (OAR 340-41-282. Table 3)
No spawning occurs in Rogue River estuary and Actacert Marine
/.'aters (OAR 340-41 -362 Taoe 5)
No spawning in Willamette R from the mouth to NewOerg including
Muftnomah Channel (OAR 340-41.442 Table 6) spawr«ng may not
occur naturally m many ol these streams
spawning is typically 'n upper portions of the basm
spawning is typically m upper portions 0* the basin
spawning is typically m -Cper portions of the basin
spawning is typically m jpper portions of the basin
No spawning occurs m the Maiheuf River (Namorf to Mouthj. Willow
Cr (Brogan to Mouth) Butty Creek (Reservoir to Mouth) and in the
following reservoirs Maiheur. Bully Creek, Beulah and Warm
Springs (OAR 340-41 -602. Table 15). spawning in upper basin
No spawning occurs m the Owyhee River (RM 0-16) and in the
fbtowng reservoir* Antelope. Cow Creek, Owynea (OAR 340-41.
842. Tatta 16). spawning is typicaiy n upper portion* of the basm
No spawnng occurs m the natural lake* «i the basm (OAR 340-41-
662. TaCte 17). spawning is typicaiy m upper portions of the basin
No spawnng occurs m Goose Lake and otner njgnty alkaline and
saline lakes (OAR 340-41-922. Table 18) spawning ts typically in
upper portions of the basm
Spawning occurs where natural conations are suitable for salmonid
fish use and no spawrang occurs m the Klamath River 'rorr. Klamath
Lake to Keno Dam (RM T55 to 232 5) Lost River (Rm 5 'o 65] and
Lost Rrver Diversion Channel (CAR 340-41-962. Table "91
No spawning occurs m cnrtions of the Columbia River iGAR 340-41-
482 (Table 7) -522 .Table 3) -562 (Table 9))
Fisn Species Coovig
BT=orook trout. BUT=bull trout CHx=avxx>K salmon (F=fall R=SL»nmer S=sonng) CO=cono salmon CS=cnum salmon CT=cuttP^oat salmon.
K»Kokanee LCT=Lahontan eulThroat trout RB=rainoow trout RT=redband trout SS^sockeye salmon STK=s1eelhead (S-summer W=wirter)
Notes
Aa a genera* rue tr%s tat>e reflects tne general rime 'rame for ^rwcn the nurvncai
'he tefTipefati/e ano atsso>v«d oxygen stanaaras are genefatfy appucawe
Soaw^ng -imps may vary for 'ncrvidt*ai species cr. aaocuiar streams vwtnm a oasm
OCPW &o'ogists *iil Oe -cnsuJted 'or fir^i seremrji crs
-------
APPENDIX D
Table of Oregon's Water Quality Standards, by basin, for Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature,
pH — Revised standards and old standards, August 28,1998.
-------
August 28, 1998
;•;'..:•-- «-l|c»l9on/Sp«cies . r:
North Coast / Lower Columbia
Basin /•
Coho Salmon
Fall Chinook
Spring Chinook
Chum Salmon
Cutthroat Salmon
Winter Steelhead
Midcoasl
Coho Salmon
Fall Chinook
Spring Chinook
Chum Salmon
Cutthroat Salmon
Winter Steelhead
Summer Steelhead
Commend fr<«i Policy Memo
Spawning -Fry Emergence:
Sept 15 -May 31
Designated Cold Water
Spawning - Fry Emergence:
Sept. 15 -May 31
Designated Cold Water
l^Kiii^iwItw^-r-' ;•*
Sept 15-May31 -55°F
June 1-Sept 14-64 °F
Columbia River up to rm309:
68"F
Freshwaters: no increase above
58°F. For waters 57.5°F, no incr
more than. 5° F. For waters 56' F.
no incr more than 2°F.
Marinf/F.t/unrinf • Nn incr above
background A water temp. , shall
not cause adverse effect to
fish/aquatic life.
Col. River: no incr above 68 °F;
For voters 57. 5° F. no incr more
than .5°F. For waters 56" F, no
incr of more than 2°F.
Sept. 15-May31 -55°F
June l-Sept 14-64°F
Freshwaters: no increase above
-------
Location/Species
Umpqua
Coho Salmon
Kail Chinook
Spring Chinook
Cutthroat Salmon
Summer Steelhead
Winter Steelhead
Oregon Chub
South Coast
Coho Salmon
Fall Chinook
Spring Chinook
Cutthroat Salmon
Winter Steelhead
Comments from Policy Memo
Spawning - Fry Emergence:
October 1 -May 3 1
No spawning occurs in Umpqua
River estuary to head of tidewater
& adjacent marine waters.
Designated Cold Water
Spawning - Fry Emergence:
October 1 -May 31
Designated Cold Water
.';.-. Temperature ..,.:
Octl-May 31:55'K
June 1-Sept. 30: 64T
Freshwater*: no increase above
58 °F. For waters 57. 5° F, no incr
more than. 5" F. For waters 56° F,
no incr more than 2°F.
background & water temp. ; shall
not cause adverse effect to
fish/aquatic life.
Oct l-May31:55°F
June 1 -Sept. 30:64 °F
Freshwaters: no increase above
64°F. For waters 6$.5° F, no incr
more than 5° F. For waters 62° F,
no incr more than 2°F.
Marine/fetuarine: No incr above
background & water temp. ; shall
not cause adverse effect to
fish/aquatic life.
.:...: ... . . . DO .-:••.':;.-- ••
October 1- May 31:
Waters: 1 1 mg/L
Intergravel: 6.0 mg/L
June 1 - Sepl. 30:
8.0 mg/L or w/ data:
8.0 mg/L- 30 day mean
6.5 mg/L- 7 day min. inein
6.0 mg/L- absolute mean
Freshwaters: not less than 90% saturation;
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
Estitarine: not less than 6mg/L
Marine: not less than saturation
October 1- May 31:
Waters: 1 1 mg/L
Intergravel: 6.0 mg/L
June 1 - Sept. 30: 8.0 mg/L
or w/ data: 8.0 mg/L- 30 day mean
6.5 mg/L- 7 day min. mean
6.0 mg/L- absolute mean
Freshwater.*: not tess than 90% xalurati-m.
Salmon spavining areas: 95% saturation
Estuarine: not less than 6mg/L
Marine: not less than saturation
pH
Fresh/F.sluarine: 6.5-8.5
Marine: 7.0-8.5
Cascade Lakes >3K:
6.0-8.5
Fresh waters: 6.5-8.5
Estuarine: 6.5-8.5
Marine 7.0-8.5
Fresh/Estuarine: 6.5-8.5
Marine: 7.0-8.5
Fresh waters: 6.5-8 5
Estuarine: 6.5-8.5
Maane.. 7.0-8.5
-------
Ixwation/Sptfies
Rogue Basin
Brook Trout
Coho
Fall Chinook
Spring Chinook
Cutthroat
Spring Steelhead
Winter Steelhead
Willamette: mouth to Newberg.
Fall Chinook
Spring Chinook
Cutthroat
Rainbow Trout
Winter Steelhead
Comments from Policy Memo
Spawning to Fry Emergence:
October 1- May 31
No spawning occurs in Rogue
River Estuary and adjacent
marine waters
Designated Cold Water
No spawning from mouth to
Newburg, including Multnomah
Channel
Designated Cool Water
• , Temperature
Octl-May31: 55°F
June 1 - Sept 30: 64°F
Freshwater*: no increase above
58°F. For waters 57.5'F. no incr
more than .5° F. For waters 56° F,
no incr more than 2'F.
Marine/Estuajifie: No incr above
background & water temp : shall
not cause adverse effect to
fish/aquatic life.
68°F
Mull. Channel A mouth to RM
26.6: T<70°F.
For waters 69.5° F, no incr more
Ihan.S'F.
For Waters 68° F. no more incr
more than 2'F.
Columbia River RM86-RM 120
T<68'F
DO
Oct 1 - May 31: II mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
June 1 - Sept. 30: 8 Omg/L -
or w/ data: 8.0mg/L 30 day mean
6.5 mg/L 7 day min. mean
6.0 mg/L absolute min.
-
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
Fxtunrinr- not less than 6mg/L
Marine: not less than saturation
6.5 mg/L absolute min.
w/ data: 6.5 mg/L 30 day mean min.
5.0 mg/L 7 day min. mean
4.0 mg/L absolute min.
Mult. Channel & mouth to RM 26.6:
DO<5mg/L.
Main stemfr. W. Falls to Newburg. RM SO:
D(X6mg/L
Columbia River RM86-RM 120:
DCK90%sat.
pH
Marine: 7.0 - 8.5
Fresh/ Estuarinc: 6.5-8.5
Cascade Lakes: > 3000'
6.0 - 8.5
Fresh waters: 6 5-X .5
Estuarine: 6.5-8.5
Marine: 7.0-8.5
Columbia River: 7.0-8.5
Other waters: 6.5-8.5
Columbia River: 7.0-8.5
All Others 6. i-S. 5
-------
Location/Species
Willamette: Newbure to Corvallis
Cutthroat
Rainbow Trout
Winter Steclhcad
Willamette: Corvallis to headwaters
& main tributaries
Bull Trout
Fall Chinook
Spring Chinook
Cutthroat
Winter Steelhead
Comments from Policy Memo
(Geographic area not specifically
i en i i in i y
is a gap between specifically
referenced segments.
Assumptions: mainstem, part of
Valley, spawning salmonids
[above Newberg exclusion], cool
water designation outside of
spawning area (per ecoregion
Spawning to Fry Emergence:
September 1 5 - June 30 (ppm)
Designated Cold Water
.-.. .„•:-: Twnpenrtare ,
Spawning periods: 55°F
on spawning pen
Main stem Jr. Newburg to RM
187: T<64°F
For waters 6}.i°F, no incr more
than.iF
For waters 62* F, no incr more
than 2° F
Waters w/ Bull Trout: 50°F
Other Waters:
Sept 15-June30: 55 °F
July 1-Sept 14: 64 °F
', . DO ... • : •
Spawning periods:
Non-spawning periods:
6.5 mg/L absolute min.
or w/ data:
6.5 mg/L 30 day mean min.
5.0 mg/L 7 day min. mean
4.0 mg/L absolute min.
Main stem fr. Newburg to Salem, RM85:
DO< 7mg/L
Sept 15 - June 1: 1 1 mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
July 1 - Sept. 14: 8.0 mg/L
or w/ data: 8.0 mg/L- 30 day mean
6.5 mg/L- 7 day min. nean
6.0 mg/L- absolute mean
Main stem from Salem to RM 187:
DO<90%sat.
pH
6.5-8.5
All Others : 6.5-8.5
6.5-8.5
Cascade Lakes: >3000"
6.0-8.5
Columbia River: 7.0-8.5
All Others: 6.5-8.5
-------
JUocation/Sptclea .. ,•:
Willamette: Olher Ecoreyion
Bull Trout
Fall Chinook
Spring Chinook
Cutthroat Trout
Rainbow Trout
Winter Steelhead
Sandy.
Fall Chinook
Spring Chinook
Comments from Policy Memo
Spawning to Fry Emergence:
October 1- May 31
Designated Cold Water
Spawning - Fry Emergence:
September IS -June 30
Designated Cold Water
' Temperature
Waters w/ Bull Trout: 50°F
Waters w/out Bull Trout:
Octl-May3l:55°F
June 1 -Sept 30: 64 °F
All other streams:
Salmonid waters: <58 F
Non-salmonid waters: <64°F
SepLl5-June30-55°F
Julyl-Septl4-64°F
Basin waters: no increase above
58'F. For waters 57.5°F, no incr
more than. 5° F. For waters 56° r~,
no incr more than 2°F.
Columbia River RM1 20-147
T<68°F.
DO
October 1- May 31:
Waters: 1 1 mg/L
Intergravel: 6.0 mg/L
June 1 - Sept. 30: 8.0 mg/L
or w/ data: 8.0 mg/L- 30 day mean
6.5 mg/L- 7 day min. mean
6.0 mg/L- absolute mean
All other streams:
Salmonid waters - DO 90% sat
Salmonid spawning - DO 9 5% sat
Non-salmontd waters - DO<6mg/L
Sept 15 -June 30.
1 1 mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
July 1 -Sept. 14: 8.0 mg/L
or w/ data: 8.0 mg/L- 30 day mean
6.5 mg/L- 7 day min. mean
6.0 mg/L- absolute mean
Basin Wa.(frs' not less than 90% saturation •
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
Columbia River: RM 120-147 90%
saturation
PH
6.5-8.5
Cascade Lakes: >3000'
6.0-8.5
Columbia River: 7.0-8. i
All Others: 6. 5-8 5
6.5-8.5
Cascade Lks:>3,000'
6.0-8.5
Col. R: 7.0-8.5
Columbia River: 7.0-8. i
All Others: 6.5-8.5
-------
Location/Specie!
Comments from Policy Memo
Temperature
DO
pH
Hood-Hood River Drainage
Fall Chinook
Spring Chinook
Coho
Summer Steelhead
Winter Steelhead
Spawning - Fry Fmergence:
Sept. ] 5-June 30
Cold Water designation (per
policy memo & ecoregion map)
Sept. 15-June 30 - 55 °F
July 1-Sept 14-64 °F
Columbia River: 68°F
Basin waters: no increase above
5R°F. For waters 57.5°F. no incr
more than .5"F. For waters 56°t',
no incr more than 2°F.
Columbia River: KM 147-RM
203 T<68°F.
Sept 15-June 30:
11 mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
July 1 - Sept. 14: 8.0 mg/L
or w/ data: 8.0 mg/L- 30 day mean
6.5 mg/L- 7 day min. mean
6.0 mg/L- absolute mean
6.5-8.5
Cascade Lks: >3000'
6.0-8.5
Col. R: 7 0-8.5
Columbia River: 70-85
All Others: 6.5-8.5
Basin Waters: not less than 90% saturclion;
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
Non salmonid waters: 6 mg/L
Columbia River: RM120-RM 203: 90% sat
Hood River - Miles Creek Drainage
Winter Steelhead
Rainbow trout
Spawning - Fry Emergence:
Oct. I-June 30
Cool Water designation (per
policy memo & ecoregion map)
Octl-June30:55°F
Jult 1-Sept. 14: 64°F
Columbia River: 68°F
Basin waters: no increase above
58°F. For waters 57.5°F, no incr
more than .5°F. For waters 56°F,
no incr more than 2°F.
Columbia River: RM 147-RM
203 T<68°F.
Oct 1 - June 30:
11 mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
July 1 - Sept. 14:6.5 mg/L absolute min.
or w/ data: 6.5 mg/L- 30 day mean
5.0 mg/L- 7 day min. mean
4.0 mg/L- absolute mean
Basin Waters: not less than 90% saturation:
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
Non salmonid waters: 6 mg/L
Columbia River: RM 120-RM 203: 90% sat
6.5-8.5
Cascade Lks:>3000' "
6.0-8.5
Col. R: 7.0-8.5
Columbia River: 70-8.5
All Others: 6 5-8.5
-------
Location/Specie*
Comments from Policy Memo
Temperature
DO
PH
Deschutes River & Eastside Tribs.
Rainbow Trout
Brook Trout
Bull Trout
Fall Chinook
Kokanee
Brown Trout
Redband Trout
Summer Steelhead
Spawning to Fry F-mergence:
October 1 - June 30
Designated Cold Water and Cool
Water (per policy memo and
ecoregion map)
Bull Trout Waters: 50°F
Other Waters:
Oct. 1 - June 30: 55°F
July 1 - Sept. 30: 64°F
Columbia River: 68°F
Basin waters: no increase above
58°F. For waters 57.5°F, no incr
more than .5°F. For voters 56°F.
no incr more than 2°r'.
Columbia River: RM203-RM
218 T<6S°F.
Salmomd spawning waters:
Oct 1 - June 30: 11 mg/L -waters
6.0mg/L - intergravel
Cold Waters areas:
Julyl -Sept. 30: 8.0mg/I.
or w/data: 8.0mg/L - 30 day mean
6.5 mg/L - 7 day min. mean
6.0mg/L - absolute min.
Cool Waters areas: 6.5mg/L absolute min.
or w/ data: 6.5mg/L 30 day mean min.
5.0 mg/L 7 day min. mean
4.0mg/L absolute min.
Basin Waters not less than 90% saturation:
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
Columbia River: RM203-RM2I8: 90% sal
6.5-8.5
Cascade Lakes: >3()00'
6.0-8.5
Columbia River: 7.0-8.5
Columbia River: 7.0-8.5
All Others: 6 5-^.5
-------
Location/Species
Ueschutes River & Weslsidc Tribs
Bull Trout
Fall Chinook
Summer Steel head
Redband Trout
Rainbow Trout
Kikanee
Brook Trout
Brown Trout
Comments from Policy Memo
Salmonid Spawning to Fry
Emergence: Sept. 1 - June 30
Cool Water and Cold Water
designations (per policy memo
and ecoregion map)
Temptrwtore
Bull Trout waters: 50°F
Other Waters:
Sept 1 -June 30: 55 °F
July 1 -Aug31:64°F
Columbia River: 68°F
ftasin waters: no increase above
58°F. For waters 57. 5° F. no incr
more than .5'F. For waters 56° F.
no incr more than 2*F.
Columbia River: KM 203-RM
218 T<6S°r\
• • •••-• ..-.. • DO ,,' „ ...'.'
Spawning waters:
Sept. 1 - June 30: 1 1 mg/L - waters
6.0mg/L - intergravels
July 1 - Aug 3 1 : 8.0 mg/L absolute min.
or w/ data: 8.0 mg/L -30 day mean min.
6.5 mg/L -7 day min mean
6.0 mg/L absolute min
Cool waters: 6.5mg/L absolute min
or w/ data: 6.5mg/L -30 day mean min
5.0 mg/L -7 day min mean
4.0 mg/L - absolute min
Basin Waters: not less than 9O% salumion;
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
Columbia River: RM 203-RM 2 18: 90% sal
PH
6.5- 8.5
Cascade Lakcs:>30001
6.0-8.5
Columbia River:7.0 - 8.5
Columbia River: 7.0-8.5
All Others: 6.5-8 :5
-------
Location/Species
John Dqy Basjn
Bull Trout
Spring Chinook
Cutthroat
Summer Steelhead
Redband Trout
Comments from Policy Memo
Salmonid spawning to fry
emergence: Oct. 1 - June 30
Spawning is typically occurs in
upper portions of the basin
Cool Water and Cold Water
designation (per policy memo
and ecoregion map)
'•:$qjijjetjMm]---:-
Bull Trout waters: 50°H
Other Waters:
Oct 1 - June 30: 55°F
July 1 -Sept30:64°F
Columbia River: 68°F
Basin waters: no increase above
68° F. For waters 67.}° F. no incr
more than .5° F. For waters 66° F,
no incr more than 2°F.
•i-v: •;.'..:;, : --DO. .: ;vVh. •
Spawning waters:
Oct 1 - June 30: 1 lmg/I, - waters
6.0 mg/1. - intcrgravels
July 1 - Aug 31: 8.0mg/L absolute min
or w/ data: 8.0mg/L - 30day mean min.
6.5mg/L - 7day min meam
6.0mg/L - absolute min.
Cool waters: 6.5mg/L absolute min
or w/ data: 6.5mg/L 30 day mean min
5.0 mg/L 7 day min mean
4.0 mg/L absolute min
Basin Wolffs: nal less than 75% saturalimi;
Salmon spawning areas: 9i% saturation
Columbia River: RM218-RM 247: 90K sal
pH
6.5 - 9.0
Columbia River: 7.0-8.5
Columbia Kiver 7.0-8.5
All Others 6 5-8 5
-------
Umatilla/Walla Walla
Bull Trout
Fall Chinook
Coho Salmon
Redband Trout
Spawning - Fry Emergence:
Oct. 1 -June 30
upper portions of the basin
Cool Water designation (per
policy memo and ecoregion map)
Waters w/ Bull Trout: 50°F
Waters w/out Bull Trout:
Oct I-June30- 55°F
July 1- Sept. 30: 64°F
Basin WQl€r£-' no increase above
68° F. For waters 67.5° F, no incr
more than. 5° F. For waters 66° F.
no incr more than 2°F.
(No temperature standard
given)
Oct. 1 - June 30:
1 1 mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/I. - intergravel
July 1 - Sept. 30:
or w/ data: 6.5 mg/L- 30 day mean
5.0 mg/I.- 7 day min. mean
4.0 mg/L- absolute mean
Bftsin WstSfS- not less than 75% saturation-
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
Columbia River: RM 247- KM 309: 90% sol
6.5-9.0
Col. River: 7.0-8.5
Columbia River 7.0 8. i
Basin watery; 6. 5-8 5
-------
Location/Species
Grande Rondc
Bull Trout
Fall Chinook
Spring Chinook
Summer Steelhcad
Rainbow Trout
Redhand Trout
Powder
Bull Trout
Rainbow Trout
Rcdband Trout
Comments from Policy Memo ;
Spawning - Fry Emergence:
Oct. l-June 30
Spawning typically occurs in
upper portions of the basin
Cool Water and Cold Water
designations (per policy memo
and ecoregion map)
Spawning - Fry Emergence:
March 1 -June 30
Spawning is typically in upper
portion of the basin
Cool water designation (per
policy memo and ecoregion map)
>-'•'' -' : - Temperature ;, ....
Waters w/ Bull Trout: 50°F
Waters w/out Bull Trout:
Oct. l-June 30: 55°F
July 1- Sept. 30: 64°F
Basin W0.(£ CS- no increase above
68'F For waters 67.5°F, no incr
more than .5*F. For waters 66* F.
no incr more than 2°F.
Waters w/ Bull Trout: 50°F
Waters w/out Bull Trout:
Mar. l-June 30: 55°F
July 1- Feb. 29: 64 °F
Snake River: no increase above
68°F
64° F. For waters 63.5* F, no incr
more than .5*F. For waters 62° F,
no incr more than 2"F.
DO •"•;:• •
Oc\. 1 - June 30:
1 1 mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
July 1 - Sept. 30:
Cool Water areas: 6.5 mg/L
w/ data: 6.5mg/L - 30 day mean
5.0 mg/L - 7 day min. mean
4.0mg/L - absolute min.
Cold Water areas: 8.0 mg/L
or w/ data: 8.0mg/L - 30 day mean
6.5mg/L - 7 day min. Mean
6.0 mg/L - absolute mean
Basin Waters: not less than 75% saluralinn
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
Mar. l-June 30:
1 1 mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
July 1 -Feb. 29: 6.5 mg/L
or w/ data: 6.5 mg/L- 30 day mean
5.0 mg/L- 7 day min. mean
4.0 mg/L- absolute min.
Bffiin Wallers: not less than 75% saturation:
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
PH
6.5-9.0
Snake River: 7.0-9.0
Snake Hirer: 7.0-9.0
All Others: 6.5-8.5
6.5-9.0
Snake River: 7.0-9.0
Snake River: 7.0-9.0
All Others: 6 5-85
-------
Location/Species
Comments from Policy Memo
Temperature
DO
pH
Malheur River
Bull Trout
Rainbow Trout
Redband Trout
Salmonid spawning to fry
emergence: Mar. 1 - June 30
No spawning in the Malheur
River (Narmoffto mouth).
Willow Creek (Brogan to mouth),
Bully Creek (reservoir to mouth),
Malheur reservoir. Bully Creek
reservoior Beulah & Warm
Springs reservoir.
Spawning occurs in upper basin
Malheur River (mouth to
Narmofl), will Creek (mouth to
Brogan), and Bully Creek are
designated Warm Waters.
Other waters designated Cool
Waters (per policy memo and
eeoregion map)
Bull Trout Waters: 50°F
Other waters:
Mar. l.-June30:55°F
July 1 - Feb.30: 64°F
Warm Water Areas:
"No measurable surface water
temperature increase resulting
from anthropogenic activities is
allowed in waters when the DO
levels are within .5mg/L or
10% saturation of the water
column or intergravel DO
criterion for a given stream
reach or subbasin".
Basin waters: no increase above
68°F. Forwaters67.5"i-',noincr
more than .5°F. For waters 66°F,
no incr more than 2*F.
Spawning waters:
Mar. 1 - June 30: 1 Img/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
Julyl - Feb 30: 6.5 mg/L absolute min
or w/ data: 6.5mg/L 30 mean min
5 .0 mg/L 7 day min .neon
4.0 mg/L absolute min
Warm Water areas: 5.5 mg/L absolute min
7.0 - 9.0
All Watery. 70-9.0
Basin Waters: not less than 75% saturation:
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
-------
Location/Species
Comments from Policy Memo
Temperature
DO
PH
Owhvee Basin
Lahontan Cutthroat Trout
Rainbow Trout
Redband Trout
Salmonid spawning to fry
emergence: Mar. I - June 30
No spawning occurs in the
Owhyee River (RM 0-18), and
in Antelope, Cow Creek, &
Owhyee reservoirs.
Spawning occurs in upper basin
Owhyee River from mouth to
RM 8 is designated Warm
Waters.
Other waters designated Cool
Waters (per policy memo and
ecoregion map)
Mar. l.-June30:55°F
July 1 - Feb.30: 64 °F
Warm Water Areas:
"No measurable surface water
temperature increase resulting
from anthropogenic activities is
allowed in waters when the DO
levels are within .Smg/L or
10% saturation of the water
column or intergravel DO
criterion for a given stream
reach or subbasin".
Basin waters: no increase above
68°F. For waters 67.5°F, no incr
more than .5'F. For waters 66°F,
no incr more than 2"F.
Spawning waters:
Mar.! - June 30: 1 Img/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
Julyl - Feb 30: 6.5 mg/L absolute min
or w/ data: 6.5mg/L 30 mean min
5 .0 mg/L 7 day min mean
4.0 mg/L absolute min
Warm Water areas: 5.5 mg/L absolute min
7.0 - 9.0
All Waters. 7.0-9.0
Basin Waters: not less than 75% saturation:
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
-------
Location/Species
Malheur Lake Basin
D ^k A T
KeQDano i rout
Rainbow Trout
[.ahontan Cutthroat Trout
Borax Lake Chub
Comments from Policy Memo
No salmonids occurs in the
• I . . .
spawning typically occurs in
upper portions of the basin
Spawning occurs: Mar. 1-June 30
Natural lakes in basin are
designated warm water
Other waters designated cool
water (per policy memo and
ecoregion map)
Temperature
Upper basin salmonid spawning
waters:
Mar 1 -June 30: 55" F
July l-Feb. 29: 64 °F
Other waters:
'Natural Lakes: "no measurable
surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic
activities is allowed in natural
lakes.
• Other Streams: "no measurable
surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic
activities is allowed in waters
when the dissolved oxygen (DO)
levels are w/in .5mg/L or 10%
saturation of the water column or
intergravel DO criterion for a
given stream reach or subbasin.
And/or
* "no measurable surface water
temperature increase resulting
from anthropogenic activities in
stream segments containing
federally listed T&E species if the
increase would impair the
biological integrity of the T&F,
population."
Basin waters: no increase above
68°F. Foritaiers675°i-.noincr
more than .5*F. For waters 66° F.
no incr more than 2°F.
DO
Upper Basin Waters:
Mar 1 - June 30*
1 1 mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
July 1 - Feb. 29: 6.5 mg/L absolute min.
or w/ data: 6.5 mg/L- 30 day mear
5.0 mg/L- 7 day min. mean
4.0 mg/L- absolute mean
Natural Lakes: 5.5 mg/L absolute min
Other Waters:
6.5 mg/L absolute min.
or w/data: 6.5 mg/I,- 30 day mean
5.0 mg/L- 7 day min. mean
4.0 mg/L- absolute meiji
Basin Waters: not less than 75% satwal.or.:
Salmon spawning areas: 95% saturation
PH
7.0-9.0
All Waters 70-9.0
-------
Location/Species
Comments from Policy Memo
Temperature
DO
Goose and Summer Lakes Basin
Brook Troul
Rainbow trout
Warner Sucker
Hutton Spring Tui Chub
Foskett Speckled Dace
•no salmonid spawning occurs in
Goose Lake and other higly
alkaline and saline lakes;
spawning is typically in upper
portion of the basin
•salmonid spawning occurs:
March 1-June 30
"High alkaline & saline lakes are
designated Warm Water
Other waters designated Cool
Water (per policy memo &
ecoregion map)
Upper basin salmonid spawning
waters:
Mar. l-June30:55T
July 1-Feb. 29: 64°F
Other waters:
•Natural Lakes: uno measurable
surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic
activities is allowed in natural lakes.
•Other Streams: "no measurable
surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic
activities b allowed in waters
when the dissolved oxygen (DO)
levels are w/in .Smg/L or 10%
saturation of the water column ex
intergravel DO criterion for a
given stream reach or subbasin.
And/or:
• "no measurable surface water
temperature increase resulting
from anthropogenic activities in
stream segments containing
federally listed T&E species if the
increase would impair the
biological integrity of the T&E
population."
Basin waters: no increase above
68°F. For waters 67.5*F, no incr
more than. 5° F. For waters 66°F.
no incr more than 2°F.
Goose Lake: 70°F
Upper Basin Salmonid Spwaning Waters:
Mar. 1 - June 30:
11 mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
July 1 - Feb. 29: 6.5 mg/L absolute min.
or w/ data: 6.5 mg/L- 30 day mean
5.0 mg/L- 7 day min. mean
4.0 mg/L- absolute mean
Alkaline Lakes: 5.5 mg/L absolute min.
Other waters: 6.5 mg/L absolute min.
or w/ data: 6.5 mg/L- 30 day mean
5.0 mg/L- 7 day min. mean
4.0 mg/L- absolute mean
Basin Waters except G. Lk.: not less than
75% saturation; Salmon spawning areas: It
saturation
Goose Lake: 7 mg/L
Goose Lake. 7.5-9.5
Other Waters: 7.0-9.0
Goose Lake: 7.5-9.0
All Waters 7.0-9.0
-------
Location/Species
Kliimath Basin
Bull Trout
Rainbow Trout
Redband Trout
1 1 D ' C lr
Lost i\.iver oucKer
Shortnose Sucker
Comments from Policy Memo
'Spawning occurs where natural
conditions are suitable for
salmonid fish use. No spawning
occurs in the Klamath River from
Ktamalh Lake to Keno Dam (RM
255-232.5), Lost River (RM 5 to
65) and Lost River Diversion
Channel.
^Spawning occurs March 1 to
June 30.
»Warm Water designation for:
Klamath River from Klamath
Lake to Keno Dam (RM 255-
232.5), Lost River (RM 5 to 65)
and Lost River Diversion
Channel.
Other waters designated Cool
Waters and Cold Water (per
policy memo and ecoregion map)
Temperature
BullI rout Waters: 50°F
Upper basin spawning waterc:
Mar. l-June30:55'F
July 1-Feb. 29:64°F
• Natural Lakes: "no measurable
,. .
resulting from anthropogenic
activities is allowed in natural lakes
•Other Streams: "no measurable
surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic
activities is allowed in waters when
the dissolved oxygen (DO) levels are
w/in .Smg/L or 10% saturation of the
water column or intergravel DO
criterion for a given stream reach or
subbasin. And/or.
» **no measurable surface water
temperature increase resulting from
anthropogenic activities in stream
segments containing federally listed
T&E species if the increase would
impair the biological integriry of the
T&E population."
Salmonid waters: no incr above 58" F.
For waters 57.5 *F. no incr more
than .5*F. For waters 56* F, no incr.
no incr more than 2'F.
Non-salmonid waters: no incr above
72' F For waters 71 5° F, no incr
more than ,5'F. For waters 56° F,
more than 2"F.
DO
Salmonid Spawning Waters:
Mar. 1 - June 30:
1 1 mg/L - waters
6.0 mg/L - intergravel
July 1 - Fcb.29 : 8.0 mg/L
or w/ data: 8.0 mg/L- 30 day mean
6.5 mg/L- 7 day min. me;in
6.0 mg/L- absolute mean
Klamath River (RM 255-232.5), and Lo:4
River (RM 5 to 65) and Lost River
Channel: 5.5 mg/L absolute min.
Other Waters:
6.5 mg/L absolute min.
or w/ data: 6.5 mg/L- 30 day meat
5.0 mg/L- 7 day min. me;in
4.0 mg/L- absolute me;m
Main Stem 255-232. 5 & K. Lake: 5 mg/i.
Main Stem RM 232.5-208.5: 7 mg/L
All oasirt waters.
Salmonid water: 90% sal
Non-salmonid waters: 6 mg/L
pH
6.5-9.0
Cascade Lakes > 5000':
6.0-8.5
All Waters 7.0-90
-------
APPENDIX E
Maps of the status of listed salmonids and 303(d) listed waters for DO, T, pH
(Map transmitted separately to USFWS and NMFS. May be obtained from Dm Keenan, EPA
Region 10)
-------
APPENDIX F
Map of the location of Bull Trout in Oregon
(This map transmitted separately to USFWS and NMFS. May be obtained from Dm Keenan,
EPA Region 10)
-------
APPENDIX G
Ecoregion Map
( May be obtained from Dm Keenan, EPA Region 10)
-------
APPENDIX H
Oregon Temperature Standard Review, by Cara Berman, EPA, Region 10
Analysis of Temperature Requirements for Salmonids, Charles Coutant
-------
Oregon Temperature Standard Review: Cara Berman, EPA, Region 10
September 3, 1998
Note: "Viability" as used in this document is intended to convey the
ecological meaning of "long-term capability of salmonids to live and
develop" rather than the regulatory definition pursuant to the ESA.
I. Oregon Temperature Standard: Numeric Criteria
Salmonid spawning, egg incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and
the gravel: "no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which
exceeds 12.8°C."
Salmonid rearing: "no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin for
which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in which
surface waters exceed 17.8:C."
Bull trout: "no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in waters
determined by the Department to support or to be necessary to maintain
the viability of native Oregon bull trout, when surface water
temperatures exceed 10°C." The temperature criteria applies to waters
containing spawning, rearing, or resident adult bull trout.
In the Columbia River or its associated sloughs and channels from the
mouth to river mile 309: "no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed when
surface water temperatures exceed 20°C."
In the Willamette River or its associated sloughs and channels from
the mouth to river mile 50: "no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed when
surface water temperatures exceed 20°C."
Adult migration, adult holding, smoltification, and juvenile
emigration are not identified as distinct designations. Although the
standard states that, "The temperature criteria of 17.8°C will be
applied to all water bodies that support salmonid fish rearing...." it
is unclear how the standard will address other life history stages.
The following analysis was conducted using 17.8°C as the criterion for
all life history stages with the exception of spawning, incubation,
and fry emergence. A criterion of 20;C was applied to species and life
history stages occupying the mainstem Columbia River to river mile 309
and the Willamette River to river mile SO.
-------
II. Endangered Species Act - Endangered, Threatened, and Proposed
Species:
1. Snake River Soc/.eye Salmon (listed)
2, Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon (listed)
3. Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon (listed)
4. S. Oregon/N. California Coastal Chinook Salmon (proposed)
5. Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon (proposed)
6. Upper Willamette River Chinook Salmon (proposed)
7. Snake River Basin Steelhead (listed)
8. Lower Columbia River Steelhead (listed)
9. Middle Columbia River Steelhead (proposed)
10. Upper Willamette River Steelhead (proposed)
11. S. Oregon/N. California Coast Coho Salmon (listed)
12. Oregon Coastal Coho (listed)
13. Columbia River Chum Salmon (proposed)
14. Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout (listed)
15. Columbia River Basin Bull Trout (listed)
16. Klamath Basin Bull Trout (listed)
III. Introduction:
Temperature directly governs the metabolic rate of fish and'directly
influences the life history traits of Pacific salmon. Natural or
anthropogenic fluctuations in water temperature can induce a wide
array of behavioral and physiological responses in salmonids.
Mechanisms have evolved to synchronize the timing of salmonid life
history events with their physical environment, and are believed to
have been a major factor in the development of specific populations or
-------
stocks. Several authors r..v.-'..- I::-.r:-;-d variation 1:1 temperature
requir-r~.ep.ts to physiological and behavioral differences imposed by a
variecv cf environmental temperature regimes.
Previous research on temperature sensitivity of fishes emphasized
lethal limits and temperature preferences. However, current concerns
have centered on the effects of sublethal temperatures and ecological
context. Holtby (1988) reported that virtually all effects of an
altered thermal regime on Carnation Creek coho salmon were associated
with relatively small temperature increases. Alteration of tissue and
blood chemistry as well as behavioral changes may occur in association
with exposure to sublethal elevated temperatures. These alterations
may lead to impaired functioning of the individual and decreased
viability at the organism, population, and species levels. Feeding,
growth, resistance to disease, successful reproduction, and sufficient
activity for competition and predator avoidance are all necessary for
survival. Inability to maintain any of these activities at moderately
extreme temperatures may be as decisive to continued survival as more
extreme temperatures are to immediate survival. Duration and
intensity of exposure is related to unique species characteristics and
environmental context. Maximized species distribution and diverse
life history strategies in combination with broadly distributed and
interconnected habitat elements are critical in defining the response
and effect of altered thermal regimes on native salmon and charr.
This review of the Oregon Temperature Standard is supported by a broad
body of knowledge- on temperature and its role in defining
distribution, abundance, and long-term persistence of native salmon
and charr species. This assessment provides (1) a review of the
ecological context and critical processes affecting both the stream
network and cold-water biota; (2) a summary of baseline condition
within the State of Oregon; (3) a review of lethal, sublethal, and
intermittent elevated temperature effects on native salmon and charr;
(4) an analysis of the temperature measurement unit, the "7 day moving
average," and implications for its use; (5) a determination of the
effect of Oregon's Temperature Standard on endangered, threatened, and
proposed native salmon and charr species; (6) a summary of findings,-
and (7)a summary of species-specific temperature preferences,
tolerances, and thresholds of effect from the technical literature.
Ecological setting, landscape and evolutionary processes, and the
physiological and behavioral implications of thermal regime alteration
are each important and individually contribute to our understanding of
species response to temperature. However, it is only through the
integration of these individual elements that a complete understanding
of temperature and its role in defining species viability may occur.
-------
IV. Ecological Context and Critical Processes Affecting Stream
Networks and Salmonids:
According to the Endangered Species Act (ESA), "critical habitat
designations include those physical and biological features of the
habitat that are essential to the conservation of the species and that
may require special management or protection." Temperature is not only
a defining element influencing the behavior and physiology of
salmonids, it is an "ecological resource" subjected to competition and
partitioning and that directly contributes to fitness (Magnuson et al.
1979). How this "resource" manifests itself spatially and temporally
reflects both unique ecoregional features as well as degree of
landscape and stream network alteration.
This assessment begins with a discussion of the abiotic environment as
it is as crucial to the evaluation of temperature effects on salmonids
as the direct physiological and behavioral responses of these
organisms to altered thermal regimes. Central to this discussion is
the role that abiotic factors play in species viability and fitness.
Ecosystem heterogeneity, connectivity, and replication within the
landscape provides the template for species flexibility in the face of
natural and anthropogenic disturbance. Without ecosystem-based
options, species flexibility is diminished.
The ratio between dominant and secondary habitat types is telling of
system integrity. Highly diverse systems with well distributed,
contiguous patches of cold water are reflective of intact riverine
environments while systems lacking complexity and containing
relatively small and infrequent patches of cold water are often
associated with altered systems. These two scenarios pose very
different challenges to riverine biota. Mclntosh et al. (1995) using
forward-looking infrared videography, contrast two stream systems, one
impacted by land management activities (i.e., grazing and logging) and
one within a designated wilderness area. The managed system was
characterized as spatially heterogenous with disjunct patches of
relatively cooler water. In contrast, the wilderness reaches were 5-
7°C cooler, spatially uniform in temperature with ambient temperatures
gradually increased in a downstream direction. Although thermal
regimes reflect controlling variables unique to individual landscapes,
it is interesting to note that intact stream networks may provide
larger more contiguous areas of cold water during summer months.
Additionally, unmanaged systems often provide greater habitat
diversity than managed systems. This spatial complexity is seen as an
important factor influencing species diversity and ecosystem stability
(Quigley 1997).
-------
Ecosystem stability is a gage of the diversity, connectivity, and
distribution of ecosystems and habitat. This complexity is important
as it offers organisms habitat alternatives or options to mitigate the
effect of disturbance events. Anthropogenic disturbances often vary
from natural disturbances in magnitude, frequency, and duration of
events. The resultant landscape with relatively smaller, isolated
patches of suitable habitat may differ significantly from a comparable
unmanaged system. Cumulatively, anthropogenic disturbances may
decrease system heterogeneity as well as system connectivity and, in
turn, may reduce the options available to species during disturbance
events. Alternatively, natural disturbance regimes may be required to
maintain system heterogeneity (Reeves et al. 1995). Heterogeneity of
the riverine network supports the development and maintenance of well
distributed and interconnected habitat types necessary for salmonid
persistence.
Water temperature varies both spatially and temporally. Ambient water
temperatures may periodically or annually approach cold-water biota
thresholds for chronic or acute species response. However, system
heterogeneity provides alternatives in the form of refugia. In these
instances, the abundance, distribution, and accessability of cold
water refugia play a critical role in population and species level
persistence. Where annual temperatures approach thermal thresholds,
species variability in the form of unique life history strategies
allow individuals to utilize these systems during periods when
suitable conditions exist. Shifts in annual thermal regimes and loss
of thermal refugia would expose these populations to sublethal or
lethal temperatures thereby negatively affecting population viability.
Refugia are habitats or environmental factors that convey spatial and
temporal resistance and resilience to biotic communities impacted by
biophysical disturbances. Landscape features associated with refugia
operate at various spatial and temporal scales and may include
localized micro-habitats and zones generated by riparian structure,
floodplain development, hyporheic zones, and ground water input as
well as macro-habitat features such as spatially relevant reaches,
tributaries, and subbasins (Sedell et al. 1990, Herman and Quinn
1991). Refugia at various scales may reduce or eliminate exposure to
sublethal and lethal temperatures. Additionally, refugia may serve as
source areas for recolonization subsequent to disturbance events.
Organisms respond to periodic system disturbance both natural and
anthropogenic through behavioral responses such as thermoregulation
that impart flexibility. Physiological adaptations such as thermal
inertia and acclimatization provide additional yet limited protection
from stressful temperatures.
-------
Although salmonids residing in cold-water refugia may be capable of
mitigating chronic and acute temperature effects, these areas must be
available and accessible. Biota may demonstrate complex behaviors
that convey flexibility in the face of perturbations. However, one
cannot assume that the necessary micro- and macro-habitat features are
available in degraded systems. As the stream network loses
complexity, flexibility conferred through behavioral responses also
decreases (Berman and Quinn 1991). Because the thermal structure of
rivers is dynamic and can become more so after anthropogenic
alterations, the duration of stressful conditions and the availability
of suitable refuges may determine population survival (Berman 1990) .
Salmonids historically occupied a broad range and a diverse array of
landscapes. Spatial and temporal distribution reduces the overall
risk to species in dynamic, disturbance driven systems. As species
distribution is reduced and unique population segments are lost, the
genetic diversity that allows species to respond and to adapt to
change is also reduced. As a result of these factors, species
resistance and resilience to disturbance is eroded. Research
conducted on the Umpqua River and the Nehalem River supports earlier
findings pertaining to the role of temperature in the reduction of
areal extent of suitable habitat as well as connectivity between
habitat patches (Nawa et al. 1991, Kruzic 1998). In an evaluation of
Oregon's bull trout, Pratt (1992) determined that elevated
temperatures had reduced species distribution with populations
becoming largely fragmented and isolated in the upper reaches of
drainages. The connection among spatially diverse and temporally
dynamic habitats and populations is a critical factor to persistence
and integrity of aquatic communities (Quigley 1997). The maintenance
and restoration of spatially diverse, high quality habitats that
minimize the risks of extinction is key to beneficial use. support of
cold water species (Quigley 1997) .
The scale of the disturbance and subsequent change in suitable habitat
is also important. At the basin scale, as stream temperature
increases species or populations may reside in smaller patches of
suitable habitat. The result is increased density that exacerbates
negative effects associated with thermal stress. Where temperatures
increase in a longitudinal direction and refugia no longer exist,
organisms may select higher gradient reaches with cooler ambient
temperatures. However, inter-specific competition and disturbance
frequency, intensity, and magnitude may be greater. In addition to
these relatively localized alterations to thermal regimes, global
warming may further increase ambient temperatures, thereby reducing
species range, fragmenting critical habitat, and altering system
productivity (Henderson et al. 1992, Meisner 1990, Meisner et al.
1998). Initial bull trout declines in the southern portion of its
-------
rsr.ce are attributed to a reduction in cold water habitat following
the Late Pleistocene retreat of glaciers and snowfields. However,
anthropogenic factors have aggravated this situation over time through
further loss and fragmentation of suitable habitat (Ratliff and Howell
1992). Biological and landscape diversity will be critical to
sustaining cold water biota in the face of global warming predictions.
Maximized species distribution and diverse life history strategies in
combination with broadly distributed and well connected habitat
elements provides a buffer against dynamic systems and ensures species
persistence in the face of disturbance. This strategy reduces the
risk of regional extirpation in highly variable environments (Quigley
1997). As elevated temperatures reduce species range and are
maintained long after the initial stressor(s) has been removed,
options for long-term species maintenance and recovery are diminished.
To ensure species persistence, cold water systems and remnant patches
should be protected and areas of historic distribution should be
identified and thermal regimes restored. This approach is consistent
with the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program of the
Northwest Power Planning Council, the Oregon Chapter of the American
Fisheries Society's recommendations concerning the use of Aquatic
Diversity Areas, the Bradbury Report, the Oregon Biodiversity Project,
and the Northwest Forest Plan Key Watershed designations.
The preceding discussion has focused on the dynamic nature of Pacific
Northwest rivers and the importance of maximized species distributions
and diverse, well distributed, and interconnected habitat to the long-
term persistence of native salmon and charr. If life history
designations or species distributions are narrowly identified on the
landscape for purposes of implementing Oregon's Temperature Standard,
then we may be imposing additional risks on these species as future
disturbance events move across the landscape. Additionally, we may be
jeopardizing our ability to restore populations to adequate numbers
for long-term persistence. The standard should reflect the ecology of
the riverine environment and should provide the flexibility to
accommodate future change. Beneficial use designation should maximize
species distribution and life history diversity.
There are many factors that affect ambient water temperature as well
as the number, distribution, and accessibility of thermal refugia.
Processes controlling air temperature, channel morphology, riparian
structure, hyporheic zones and ground water, wetland complexes, and
flow volume shape stream temperature. Alteration of one or more of
these parameters leads to thermal alteration through the following
mechanisms: increased solar radiation intensity per unit surface area;
increased stream surface area,- increased energy imparted to the stream
per unit volume,- and decreased cold water inflow. Temperature may be
-------
perceived as a single water qua!icy parameter. However, thermal
regimes are established through the complex interaction of the above
controlling factors.
Anthropogenic alteration may affect one or several of these factors.
Recent restoration activities have highlighted the complexity of these
interactions. In eastern Oregon, the role of ground and surface water
interchange in maintaining stream temperatures was demonstrated.
Restoration of a wet meadow system and stream channel included
redirecting stream flow from a ditched system to an old meander
channel, reconnecting the stream channel to its floodplain, and
providing for the connection of subsurface and surface flows. This
action lead to a significant decrease in surface water temperature.
Ambient temperature decreased by 5°F with a greater than 10°F
decrease in seep generated micro-habitat (Allen Chi Ids, pers. com.) .
In addition, significant modulation of diurnal fluctuation occurred.
Although eastern Oregon summer air temperatures may be relatively
high, restoration of critical controlling factors significantly
decreased ambient stream temperature in a managed system.
The question of summer maximum temperatures often arises. There are
those that contend basins east of the Cascades have always exhibited
high summer water temperatures. There are obvious differences between
east and west-side ecoregions (e.g., physiography, Geology, climate,
soils, potential natural vegetation, land use, and land cover).
However, stream temperature is an integrator of multiple factors and
reflects the integrity of a variety of processes affecting the stream
network at varying scales. In other words, air temperature is not the
sole determinant of ambient water temperature.
Salmonids have adapted to these east-side environments. Modified
migration, spawning, and emergence timing as well as exploitation of
suitable habitat have allowed these species to exist in landscapes
that may at first glance appear inhospitable. Results of a recent
assessment of water temperature extending from the Canadian border to
the Oregon and Nevada border identified areas where conditions have
changed substantially from historical baseline (Quigley et al. 1997).
Geographic regions identified in eastern Oregon as exhibiting
significantly altered thermal regimes include the Blue Mountains,
Southern Cascades, Northern Great Basin, and Upper Klamath. Current
diel and annual temperature ranges extend historical ranges within
these systems with summer temperatures significantly increased over
historical records. Several examples provide evidence that summer
maximum temperatures are 10°C to 15:C warmer than those recorded
historically (Quigley 1997). In addition, phase shifts in annual
thermal regimes and loss of cold-water refugia have occurred.
Restoration programs and historical records provide evidence that
-------
current land use practice? have altered thermal regimes producing both
higher maximum temperatures and greater diel fluctuations.
There are numerous threats to the remaining populations of native
salmon and charr (Quigley 1997, Ratliff and Howell 1992) . However,
the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of
habitat or range has been cited by numerous authors as the single most
important factor in the decline as well as recovery of these species
(Quigley 1997, Nehlsen et al. 1991). Critical to defining species
range and habitat suitability is temperature. Historical distribution
of native salmon and charr has been significantly reduced. In the
process, population extinctions with concomitant loss in genetic and
life history variability have occurred. Nehlsen et al. (1991) provide
a partial list of extinct native salmonid stocks in Oregon including
spring/summer chinook salmon in the Sprague River, Williamson River,
Wood River, Klamath River, Umatilla River, Metolius River, Priest
Rapids, Walla Walla River, Malheur River, and Owyhee River; Fall
chinook in the Sprague River, Williamsom River, Wood River, Klamath
River, Umatilla River, Willamette River, Snake River and tributaries
above Hells Canyon Dam, and Walla Walla River; coho salmon in the
Grande Ronde River, Wallowa River, Walla Walla River, Snake River,
Columbia River small tributaries from Bonneville Dam to Priest Rapids
Dam, Umatilla River, and Euchre Creek; sockeye salmon from the
Metolius River and Wallowa River; chum salmon from the Walla Walla
River; and steelhead from the Owyhee River, Malheur River, Sandy River
(summer), Powder River, Burnt River, and South Umpqua River (summer).
It should be noted that the State of Oregon has designated historical
salmonid habitat as appropriate for "cool water" and "warm water"
uses.
Although temperature preferences and stress response thresholds may
vary across salmonid populations and species, they share a common
range of preferred, sublethal, and lethal temperatures reflective of
cold-water biota requirements. Spence et al. (1996) and Brett (1952)
found that the range of greatest preference by all species of Pacific
salmon was from 12°C to 14:C for acclimation temperatures ranging from
5°C to 24°C. They also noted a definite avoidance of water over 15°C.
Given the importance of temperature to salmonids and other
poikilotherms, it would seem appropriate to use biological data in
conjunction with physical process models to characterize "potential"
temperature regimes. Using this biological information, one can
illustrate predicted annual temperatures within a hypothesized basin
containing listed, proposed, and candidate salmonid species.
Mainstem ambient summer temperatures would be less than 12°C in May and
would increase to less than 16°C to 18°C in August. This portion of
the riverine network would provide adult and smolt migratory habitat.
10
-------
As outmigrating smolts generally require temperatures cf less than
approximately 13:C their needs would be met through emigration timing
and the availability of cold water refugia. As one moves upstream to
areas of fall chinook spawning, ambient temperatures from September to
November would be less than 13°C to 14CC, and from March through May
would be less than 14:)C. Summer chinook spawning and spring chinook
holding habitat would experience temperatures less than 14=C to 15°C
during June through August. Proceeding longitudinally, spring chinook
spawning and rearing habitat temperatures during June through August
would be less than approximately 15°C and less than 13°C during
September and October. Steelhead and coho salmon occupy portions of
the stream network where ambient temperatures during March, April, and
May would be less than 12°C and less than 13°C to 14°C in June, July,
and August. Bull trout habitat would exhibit ambient water
temperatures less than 12°C in June and July and less than 9°C during
spawning periods from August through October. Additionally, refugia
both localized and larger would generally be available and accessible
during all years. This scenario does not preclude larger magnitude or
duration disturbance events where population affects might be
observed. These biologically derived temperatures appear to support
historical water quality assessment data identified in Quigley (1997).
Several issues serve to support an opinion that both west and east-
side ambient temperatures have been altered by land use practices.
Firstly, forward looking infrared videography has illustrated the
decrease in cold-water extent and the increase in discontinuous cold
water patches in systems affected by land use. Secondly, research
efforts have recorded the loss and fragmentation of habitat and the
subsequent decrease in species distribution. Thirdly, restoration
efforts have significantly reduced both maximum temperatures as well
as the magnitude of diel fluctuation. Fourthly, historical thermal
regimes were recorded and differ significantly from current
conditions. Finally, the extinction of salmonids native to both west
and east-side rivers reflects the magnitude of alteration to the
physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of these systems.
To summarized) both the spatial extent of cold-water as well as the
number, distribution, and accessability of cold-water refugia are
critical in modulating the impact of temperature on salmonids; (2)
maximized species distribution and diverse life history strategies in
combination with broadly distributed and well connected habitat
elements provide a buffer against dynamic systems and ensures species
persistence in the face of disturbance; (3) biological data in
conjunction with physical process models may better characterize
"potential" temperature regimes,- (4) loss of landscape complexity
reduces species options in dynamic systems; (5) thermal regimes are
established through the complex interaction of a suite of controlling
-------
factors; and (6) both west and east-side ambient water temperatures
have been altered by land use practices.
V. Summary of Baseline Condition:
Land use practices have altered stream temperature profiles in Oregon.
Major habitat changes include the loss or reduction of the large tree
component in riparian zones and the concomitant decline of large woody
debris in stream channels; loss of deep pools; alteration of upslope
hydrological and erosional processes and the associated reduction in
channel depth and increased fine and course sediment load; and loss of
stream and ground water flow to the channel and associated riparian
and wetland areas. These parameters and the underlying terrestrial
and riverine processes are critical to both thermal regime maintenance
and alteration. Grazing, logging, stream channelization, irrigation,
chemical and nutrient applications, mining, agriculture, road
construction, dam development and operation, urban and rural
development, and recreation all play a role in ecosystem alteration
(Quigley 1997, Wissmar et al. 1994).
The condition of Oregon's rivers reflect both localized and regional-
changes to controlling factors critical to maintaining characteristic
thermal regimes. According to Oregon's 1998 draft 303(d) Stream
Summary Report prepared by the Department of Environmental Quality,
13,796 stream miles are included in the 1998 303(d) list. The
1994/1996 list included 11,899 stream miles. Of that total, 12,146
miles are listed for temperature impairment; 2,172 miles for habitat
modification; 1,426 miles for sediment impairment; and 1,624 miles for
flow modification i.e., impairment associated with water quantity. By
far, temperature is the most ubiquitous parameter associated with
listed stream segments. Of the systems that were reviewed by the
State, 930 waterbody segments have been listed for temperature, 542
require additional data or are of potential concern, and 559 segments
were meeting the temperature standard.
Of concern in this analysis is the representativeness, completeness,
and accuracy of the stream and salmonid use data as well as the
accuracy of the beneficial use designations. Oregon has made much
progress in data collection and information management. However, more
detail is required for waterbodies where limited or no information
exists. Additionally, the extent of our knowledge concerning
distribution and life history requirements of native salmon and charr
should not be overestimated. Presence-absence data alone should not
be used to define species ranges that are dynamic and vary over time
according to natural disturbance regimes and habitat suitability. As
with species range, within range habitat critical to single life
history stages such as spawning and rearing may be "stable" in the
-------
short-term, out may vary significantly over the long-term. Therefore,
beneficial use designations that do not account for the dynamic nature
of ecological systems may not accurately reflect species range or
spawning and rearing habitat. To illustrate potential inaccuracies in
range identification, existing salmonid habitat is designated for
"cool water" uses and historical habitat for "cool water" and "warm
water" uses. As the spawning and rearing designations are also based
on presence-absence data, it is likely that identified spawning and
rearing habitat underestimates the total quantity of available
habitat. Designating only a portion of the overall range exposes
species to additional risks. Those spawning or rearing areas
inappropriately designated may be systematically degraded as a higher
temperature criterion is applied. Further analysis of species
distributions, current temperature profiles, and beneficial use
designations is required.
Based on our analysis, the following conclusions may be drawn: (1)
suitable salmonid habitat and hence distribution has been decreased
due to elevated temperatures, (2) the effect of elevated temperatures
on the physiology and behavior of salmonids poses a significant risk
to these species, (3) the majority of stream reaches are currently
exceeding state water quality standards and attempts to reduce
temperatures will require time, (4) as recovery requires time, areas
currently meeting water quality standards should be protected from
degradation, (5) beneficial use designations may not accurately
reflect species presence or spawning and rearing requirements, (6) the
representativeness, completeness, and accuracy of the stream and
salmonid use data is unknown and should be evaluated, and (7)
juxtaposition of various designations should be reviewed for effect on
water quality attainment and beneficial use support.
VI. Lethal and Sub-Lethal Temperature Effects:
Temperature directly governs the metabolic rate of fish and directly
influences the life history traits of Pacific salmon. Although lethal
temperatures produce obvious deleterious effects (see review by
Elliott 1981), sublethal temperatures have proven to be the more
ecologically relevant parameter in assessing species viability. The
natural or anthropogenic fluctuations in water temperature discussed
in the previous section induce a wide array of behavioral and
physiological responses in salmonids.
Much of the literature focuses on "preferred," "optimum," and "lethal"
temperatures or temperature ranges (see appendix for definitions).
These studies normally occur in laboratories and although they may be
reflective of physiological requirements, they are not reflective of
ecological requirements (Spence et al. 1996). To understand possible
-------
exposure scenarios and species responses, we muse evaluate Che role of
the environment in modulating the duration and magnitude of salmonid
exposure to elevated temperatures. The role that temperature plays in
the aquatic environment is complex as is the suite of behavioral and
physiological responses salmonids display to varied thermal regimes.
As we move to protect and restore threatened and endangered salmonid
species and associated genetic and life history diversity, it is
critical that we move away from discussion of lethal effects and move
toward a focused discussion of exposure history and effects associated
with sublethal temperatures. Chronic stress related to elevated
temperatures directly affects physiological and behavioral parameters
and weakens organism resistance to other stressors both natural and
anthropogenic. To persist in the face of disturbance, sublethal
temperature effects, both physiological as well as behavioral, must be
addressed.
The effect of sublethal temperatures may be observed at all levels of
biological organization. The response of fishes to stress can be
broadly classed as either primary or secondary. Primary responses
include neuro-endocrine and endocrine reactions while secondary
responses include disturbances in osmotic and ionic regulation,
metabolic processes, growth, reproduction, and behavior (Elliott
1981). Beyond the individual organism, responses may affect
demographic and metapopulations dynamics as well as species
persistence. Holtby (1988) demonstrated that elevated temperatures
(1) can have quantifiable effects on salmonid populations; (2) these
effects can influence more than one life stage simultaneously and in
opposite directions; (3) the effects of perturbations at one life
stage can persist throughout the remainder of the life cycle; and (4)
for anadromous species, the effects of habitat perturbations during
freshwater rearing can persist into the marine phase. Therefore,
sublethal temperatures experienced at any one life stage may have
repercussions for individual fitness and ultimately population and
species viability.
Temperature plays a critical role in mediating molecular level
reactions including endocrine-receptor binding efficiency and
enzymatic reactions. The binding efficiency of reproductive hormones
at receptor sites increases as species approach preferred temperature
ranges. Optimal rates for enzymatic reactions also reflect preferred
temperature ranges (Elliott 1981). Gill Na*-K* ATPase activity, an
indicator of smoltification, is important to the maintenance of
electrolyte balance and is related to the ability of smolts to adapt
to saline waters from freshwater. Bjornn and Reiser (1991) observed
that the parr-to-smolt transition is often incomplete when fish begin
to migrate and may fail to develop fully if fish encounter high
temperatures. Sauter (unpublished data), demonstrated the inhibitory
-------
effec; ci elevated watc-r eerr.r.'eracure on gill Na'-K* ATPase activity.
Fall chinook salmon held at B/C and 13;C exhibited increased ATPase
activity over a 6 week period, whereas at 18°C, ATPase activity
decreased over the same time period. In a related study, steelhead
smolts were held at 6.55C, 10:C, 15:C, and 20°C. Smolts from the 6.5°C
and 10:C groups exposed to a seawater challenge responded with
increased levels of ATPase activity, whereas, individuals from the 15SC
and 20:C groups responded with low levels of ATPase activity (Hicks
1998). All four of the smolts held at 20°C and three of the four
smolts held at 15°C died within three days of the saltwater challenge.
No mortalities occurred at 6.5°C or 10°C (Hicks 1998). Adams et al.
(1973) observed the suppression of some parr-to-smolt physiological
processes when fish were held at relatively high water temperatures,
approximately 15°C to 20°C. Decreased ATPase activity may lead
directly or indirectly to increased estuarine and ocean mortality as
well as freshwater residualization. Once temperatures exceed a
threshold level in spring, salmonid smolts will residualize, reverting
to pre-smolt physiology, and remain within freshwater (Spence et al.
1996) .
At the organism, population, and species levels, the effects of
elevated sublethal temperatures are also apparent. The magnitude of
the effect reflects the duration, frequency, and magnitude of the
exposure. Exposure history, in turn, reflects unique landscape
factors including inherent capacity, disturbance history, and
complexity.
Temperature controls key processes critical to successful completion
of salmonid life history stages. Fundamental to juvenile salmonids is
the rate o£ growth and size at emigration. Growth, in turn, is
critical to emigration timing and estuarine and ocean survival (Holtby
et al. 1989). Magnuson et al. (1979) determined that the percentage
of maximum growth achieved by fishes in three different thermal guilds
held 2°C from the center of their fundamental or optimal niches is 98
and 93% on the cool and warm side, respectively. For those 5°C from the
center of their fundamental niche, growth was about 82 and 54% of
maximum. Additionally, growth declines more rapidly at warmer
temperatures as all three growth curves are skewed towards cooler
temperatures (Magnuson et al. 1979). These percentage changes in
maximum growth reflect significant reductions in fitness (Murray and
McPhail 1988). Sea-run cutthroat trout released when they were 21 cm
in fork length or larger averaged 12.8% return compared to 2.3% return
for smolts less than 21 cm (Tipping 1986). Residualization or
nonmigration of smolts may account for a portion of this reduction.
Size-related residualization was also noted for steelhead.
Additionally, differences in mean size of male and female smolts could
explain skewed sex ratios observed at the Cowlitz River, WA hatchery
-------
(Tipping 1566 i .
Temperature effects on emergence timing and growth rate also translate
into altered time of seaward migration. Emigration timing-temperature
relationships and timing of adult salmonid spawning represent
adaptations for synchronizing emigration with windows of opportunity
in the ocean or stream (Holtby et al. 1989). As in Carnation Creek,
changes to smoltification and emigration timing may lead to decreased
smolt survival (Holtby 1988, Scrivener et al. 1984). Virtually all
effects of altered thermal regime on coho production in Carnation
Creek were associated with relatively small temperature increases over
short periods in the late winter and spring (Holtby 1988).
The timing and duration of emigration are determined by the timing and
duration of adult spawning and by the interaction of developmental
rates with local temperature conditions. The consistency of
development rates over large geographic areas suggests that adaptation
to local conditions is mediated by spawner behavior rather then by
variable development rates (Holtby 1988). The time of snawning,
probably on a scale of weeks, or even days, and spawning duration
should therefore be viewed as important adaptations to local
conditions. Quinn and Adams (1996) reported that Columbia Basin
sockeye salmon migrate approximately six days earlier than
historically. This change reflects alteration to thermal and
hydrological regimes. A shift in migration timing may have both
immediate and long-term implications. Failure to recognize the
importance of timing and duration of critical life history events has
compromised stock rebuilding programs (Holtby et al. 1989).
Sublethal effects due to cold water temperatures may also occur.
Although this issue is normally overlooked, periods of declining water
temperature in conjunction with high stream discharge, impose
considerable energy demands. It is suggested that stream-dwelling
fish suffer a metabolic deficit during acclimation to rapidly
declining water temperatures in November and December (Cunjak 1988).
Highly altered stream systems often lack riparian canopy and therefore
may exhibit colder winter temperatures as well as increased formation
of anchor ice. Anchor ice may lead to decreased water interchange in
gravel as well as physical disruption of redds with subsequent loss of
production.
In addition to migration and spawning timing, the abiotic conditions
experienced by reproductively mature salmonids are important to
successful reproduction e.g., the development and survival of gametes,
embryos, and the successful emergence of fry. Taranger and Hansen
(1993) and Smith et al. (1983) determined that high water temperatures
during the spawning season inhibit ovular.ion and are detrimental to
16
-------
qamete qualitv in Atlantic salmon and cutthroat trout. Reproductively
mature spring chinook salmon held at temperatures ranging from 17.5- to
19:C produced a greater number of pre-hatch mortalities and
developmental abnormalities, as well as smaller eggs and alevins than
adults held at 14°C to 15.5CC (Berman 1990). Mortality that occurs
within the redd is not apparent to the observer and therefore may be
considered an undetected or hidden mortality. However, this reduction
in production although undetected can have significant repercussions
for long-term population and species viability. Additionally, alevin
size mediates survival with smaller alevins and subsequent fry being
more vulnerable to predation as well as experiencing reductions in
overwinter survival and deleterious alterations to emigration timing.
Although important to all reproductively mature organisms, energy
conservation is critical to anadromous, fluvial, and adfluvial life
history forms migrating over large distances. Energy conservation
prior to spawning may be critical to reproductive success. Bouck et
al. (1977) observed that adult sockeye salmon held at 10°C lost 7.5% of
their body wei<-ih»; and had visible fat reserves. However, at 16.2°C,
they lost 12% of their body weight and visible fat reserves were
essentially depleted. Females with developing eggs lost more body
weight than males and also exhibited adverse gonadal development
(Bouck et al. 1977). Gilhousen (1980) determined that between 5 and
26% of fat and 40 and 70% of protein remained in post-spawning Fraser
River sockeye salmon, with males retaining more than females. Excess
energy expenditure prior to spawning, especially by females-, may
reduce spawning success (Berman 1991). Behavior during spawning
migration that allows fish to exploit refuge areas of decreased
temperature and flow may decrease energy expenditure, and hence,
increase energy devoted to behavioral and physiological processes such
as gamete production, mate selection, redd construction, spawning, and
redd guarding by females involved in successful reproduction (Berman
1991) .
Using bioenergetic data obtained from sockeye salmon and extrapolated
to spring chinook salmon, Berman and Quinn (1991) demonstrated that a
2.5°C decrease in internal temperature produces a 12 to 20% decrease in
basal metabolic rate or a savings of 17.3 to 29.9 cal/kg/h. At the
maximum or active metabolic rate, a 3.2 to 6.2% decrease in metabolic
rate would result in a savings of 71.5 to 130 cal/kg/h. Energy
savings per day would therefore be 3.2 to 20% of the total daily
energy expenditure, depending on activity level. Quinn and Adams
(1996) have demonstrated that the upriver migration of sockeye salmon
in the Columbia River basin is earlier than in past years owing to
changes in thermal and hydrological regimes. However, the change in
timing lags behind the rate of environmental change, and they are now
experiencing approximately 2.5°C warmer temperatures than in past
-------
years. Additionally, elevated temperatures such as observed near the
confluence of the Snake and Columbia Rivers can create delays in
upstream migration. Beschta et al. (1987) reported the occurrence of
migratory inhibition at 21:C. As energy reserves are important to
successful reproductive efforts, elevated temperatures during
migration or on the spawning ground can directly affect population and
species viability.
In addition to embryo and alevin effects, temperature during migration
and on the spawning ground were significantly related to prespawning
mortality (Gilhousen 1990}. A delay in upstream migration of only 5
days caused significant mortality in Fraser River sockeye salmon; few
of the salmon reached the spawning grounds when subjected to delays of
10 to 12 days (Snyder and Blahm 1971). Although thermal refugia may
mitigate the effects of elevated temperatures, they must be available,
accessible, and well distributed. Managed systems lacking a network
of well distributed refugia may not ameliorate naturally or
anthropogenically derived elevated temperatures; thereby exposing
saltnonids to sublethal temperatures and concomitant physiological
effects.
An important factor related to thermal stress is resistance to disease
and immunological response. Many disease organisms are not only
capable of surviving at elevated temperatures, but are capable of
increased virulence at these temperatures. Additionally, fish exposed
to elevated temperatures undergo compensatory reactions to reduce the
effect of the stressor. However, prolonged exposure to elevated
temperatures and hence long-term compensatory reactions may weaken the
fish's ability to resist infection or infestation (Wedemeyer and
Goodyear 1984). Adult spring chinook salmon held at 17.5°C to 19°C
experienced 88% mortality owing to Flexibacter columnaris {Herman
1990). Although Flexibacter columnaris was present on the gills of
fish held at temperatures ranging from 14°C to 15.5°C, there were no
mortalities among this group. This same trend is evident in other
bacterial and viral diseases as well (Marine 1992, Post 1987). Direct
mortality via disease as well as indirect effects through compensatory
responses may significantly affect population and species viability.
Although disease related mortality may be difficult to observe, one
suspects that the ramifications are great.
Sublethal temperatures also mediate competitive success. Thermal
niche shifts in the face of interspecific competition for areas of
preferred temperature have occurred (Magnus on et al. 1979) . Reeves
et al . (1987) demonstrated that temperature influenced interactions
between redside shiner and juvenile steelhead trout in the field and
laboratory. Steelhead distribution was not influenced by shiner in
cool water, but was influenced at warmer temperatures. A shift in
-------
competitive advantage is also evident between native bull trout and
introduced brook trout. Brook trout pose a serious threat to bull
trout populations (Ratliff and Howell 1992). Temperature, therefore,
not only affects behavioral and physiological processes, but mediates
species distribution as well. Operating within a "realized" niche as
a result of competitive interaction rather than a "fundamental" or
preferred niche may deprive an organism of energy for activities such
as growth, defense, predator avoidance, and osmoregulation. If
temperature is critical to the successful completion of life history
stages then operating outside the "scope for activity or growth" may
reduce species fitness. As is evident from this discussion of sub-
lethal effects, short-term as well as long-term and cumulative
exposure to sublethal temperatures pose a serious threat to population
and species viability.
We began our discussion of sublethal temperature effects with the
understanding that temperature can affect more than one life stage
simultaneously and in opposite directions and that the effects of
perturbations at one life staae can persist throughout the remainder
of the life cycle. As we discussed in section IV, these effects do
not occur in isolation. Other stressors operate within the riverine
system. Biotic factors such as species introductions as well as
abiotic factors including system fragmentation and alteration to the
abundance and distribution of critical habitat elements are equally
important. These factors influence species distribution,
demographics, and metapopulation dynamics and, in turn, genetic and
life history diversity. As biological and ecological options are
reduced, resistance and resilience to disturbance is reduced. The
cumulative and synergistic effects of these stressors have long-term
implications for species viability.
VII. Intermittent Elevated Temperature Exposure:
Because the thermal structure of rivers is dynamic and can become more
so after anthropogenic alterations, the duration of stressful
conditions may determine population and species survival (Berman
1990). Anthropogenic alterations may lead to: (1) higher summer
maximum temperatures; (2) decreased winter temperatures; (3) decreased
areal extent of contiguous cold-water habitat as well as decreased
abundance and distribution of cold-water refugia; (4) phase shifts in
annual thermal regimes with warmer temperatures occurring earlier in
the spring and extending later into the fall; and (5) greater diel
fluctuation and intermittently elevated temperatures.
Previous sections have dealt with changes to maximum and minimum
temperatures and related system alterations. Shifts in the annual
thermal regimes of river systems may generate a cascade of changes
19
-------
affecting the successful completion of life history stages. The phase
shift of riverine temperatures should be evaluated in conjunction with
single maxima. Species are adapted to the abiotic conditions of
riverine systems. Phase shifts may negatively affect egg development
and the timing of emergence, reproduction, and emigration (Naiman et
al. 1992, Holtby 1988). State standards use daily or weekly criteria
to protect perceived sensitive life history stages. However, this
approach may not be fully protective of poikilothermic species such as
salmonids (see Section VI). Modifications to the timing of seasonal
temperature shifts are as important to salmonid viability as daily
maximum, minimum, and averages temperatures. This topic should be the
basis of future discussions related to temperature standard
development.
The term "fluctuation" is typically used to describe diel temperature
patterns. However, in the context of water quality standards,
fluctuation may also pertain to the oscillation of hourly temperature
around a set point, the numeric criteria. This latter definition is
meant to address diel temperature patterns. The assumption is that
some flexibility in the daily maximum temperature is warranted because
the daily minimum and mean temperatures reduce potential thermal
effects to aquatic biota. Oregon employs a "seven-day moving average
of the daily maximum temperature" to assess compliance with numeric
temperature criteria. This measurement unit provides some flexibility
in meeting the temperature standard. However, several questions arise
regarding temperature fluctuation and the use of a seven-day average
to assess biotic condition. The assumption that this measurement unit
a) accurately assesses temperature patterns and b) adequately protects
sensitive species requires further analysis.
Although diel fluctuation is the norm, anthropogenic alteration can
affect the magnitude of this fluctuation. Mean stream temperatures in
a mature, undisturbed, old growth forest and a nearby stream in a
recently harvested forest on Prince of Wales Island, southeastern
Alaska, differed by only 1.2°C in summer. However, the mean daily
temperature range of the stream in the harvested area (9.1°C) was
double that of the forested stream (4.8°C). The response of organisms
to fluctuating temperatures is critical to an evaluation of Oregon's
numeric criteria as well as the selected measurement unit.
Coho presmolts exposed to a 6.5°C to 20°C diel temperature regime
experienced plasma cortisol concentrations 25 to 50% higher than
presmolts experiencing cooler maximums (Thomas et al. 1986).
Presmolts were at a minimum responding to the daily maximum
temperature. Elevated concentrations of plasma cortisol, a primary
response of vertebrates to stress, indicate that fish have been
chronically stressed (Barton and Schreck 1987). In this 19-day test.
-------
presmolr. morrfti.it>' aid not occur. However, the absence of mortality
may be ar. artiraci of the study design. Modifications that would have
allowed the study to more closely mirror natural conditions include:
investigation of long-term results of exposure and inclusion of a
multiple parameter challenge (i.e., diel temperature fluctuation and
smoltification, competition, and/or disease resistance). Juvenile
coho response to fluctuating temperature regimes was also investigated
following the eruption of Mt. St. Helens, Washington. Maximum diel
fluctuation was highly correlated, and the maximum monthly mean
temperature was moderately correlated with population mortality and
out-migration of juvenile coho salmon exposed to the post-eruption
thermal regime (Hicks 1998).
Salmonids respond not only to daily maximum temperatures, but also to
maximum diel fluctuation, maximum mean temperatures, and cumulative
exposure history. Survival tests of 0+ age chinook migrants were
conducted in liveboxes in the Grande Ronde River, Oregon (Burck 1994).
A diel temperature regime of 25.6°C to 16.1°C (mean 20.9°C), resulted in
0% survival over a 24 hour period. In a four-day test where maximum
temperatures were 23 .9°C-25 .6°C and minimum temperatures were ll.l°C to
13.3°C, survival was 20%. Minimally improved survival may be
attributable to lower minimum and lower average temperatures, as well
as less cumulative time spent at temperatures above 20°C. At a second
site where daily maximum temperatures ranged from 19,4*C to. 22.2°C over
a four day period, survival was 100% in most tests with one test at
50% survival. Information on daily minimum temperatures and survival
over all tests was not provided, and therefore, it is difficult to
interpret the results. As with the previous study, use of a multiple
parameter challenge and an investigation of long-term effects would
have increased the utility of the study.
Preference tests provide useful information pertaining to how
organisms experience temperature and the role of behavioral
thermoregulation in maintaining optimum temperatures. Steelhead fry
and yearlings were held in fluctuating {8°C-19°C) and constant
temperatures (8.5:C, 13.5°C, 18.5°C). As many fish remained in
fluctuating as in constant 13.5°C temperatures; twice as many remained
in fluctuating as in constant 18.5°C temperatures; and twice as many
fish remained in constant 8.5°C as in fluctuating temperatures (Hicks
1998). Results indicate that steelhead preferred the lowest
temperature provided whether produced as a constant or a mean
temperature. It appears that individuals responded to the daily
minimum, maximum, and average temperatures depending on the setting
and array of temperatures provided. This evidence is critical to the
establishment of numeric criteria and the selection of an appropriate
temperature measurement unit.
21
-------
These findir.qs compare well Co field studies where individuals
consistently seek the lowest temperature available within a
fluctuating environment. Through behavioral thermoregulation fish are
able to maintain internal body temperatures at or near preferred
temperatures. Resistance to internal temperature fluctuation may
allow salmonids to maintain energy benefits derived from cold-water
refugia for a period of time, the length of which is size dependent
(Berman and Quinn 1991). Thermal inertia provides an approximately
30 minute window before thermal equilibration occurs (Berman 1990).
Therefore, there is an advantage to organisms that are able to locate
cool water. This advantage may reduce the effect of intermittently
elevated temperatures. However, riverine systems have been greatly
altered with ambient temperatures increasing and cold-water refugia
abundance, distribution, and accessability decreasing. Therefore, the
availability of cold-water refugia cannot be relied upon to mitigate
the effect of intermittent elevated temperatures.
Although research on fluctuating or intermittently elevated
temperatures may not be exhaustive, the studies that have been
conducted point to the risks associated with this type of exposure.
Organisms respond to maximum diel fluctuation, maximum daily
temperatures, mean daily temperatures, mean monthly temperatures, and
cumulative thermal history with both physiological and behavioral
changes. Response depends upon the setting and array of temperatures
provided. These results are corroborated by previous studies that
established the ability of freshwater fishes to detect temperature
changes as slight as 0.05°C (Berman and Quinn 1991). Given this
information, numeric temperature criteria should be established below
demonstrated sublethal temperature ranges. Temperature measurement
units that mask or allow excursions above sublethal effects thresholds
or that do not adequately consider cumulative exposure history should
not be used. Exposure to mean or daily maximum temperatures at or
above the threshold for sublethal response may not be offset by daily
minimum temperatures.
The use of a "seven-day moving average of the daily maximum
temperature" allows for some flexibility in daily maximum temperatures
that might occur over time. The daily maximum reportedly can exceed
the maximum weekly average temperature by.approximately 0.5 to 2°C
(Buchanan and Gregory 1997) . As previously discussed, "flexibility"
may not adequately protect salmonids from exposure to sublethal
temperatures. This type of measurement unit masks the magnitude of
temperature fluctuation and the duration of exposure to daily maximum
temperatures. Additionally, daily mean temperatures and cumulative
exposure history are not addressed. The ability of Oregon's
temperature measurement unit to adequately protect native salmon and
charr lies in (1) the protectiveness of the numeric criteria selected.
-------
(2) t.he abilitv to define unacceptable maximum ciei fluctuation, and
(3) the ability to track and respond to cumulative exposure history.
If, as in the current case, the measurement unit in conjunction with
numeric criteria masks salmonid exposure to sublethal and lethal
temperatures then the measurement unit, the criteria, or both must be
modified. Establishment of conservative numeric criteria would lessen
concerns surrounding the magnitude of fluctuation and cumulative
exposure. However, in the long-term these issues should be factored
into the temperature standard.
The basis of the Oregon temperature standard rests on the assumption
that the criteria represent a "maximum" condition, given diurnal
variability...." The June 22, 1998 letter from Michael T. Llewelyn,
Administrator, Water Quality Unit, Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality to Philip Millam, Director, Office of Water, EPA, provides
clarification of the standard. The letter states, "A review of the
literature indicates that it is difficult to establish a temperature
criteria for waters that experience diurnal temperature changes that
would assure no effects due to C. columnaris...the technical committee
has recommended a temperature range (S8-64°F; 14.4-17.8°C) as being
protective of salmonid rearing. While 64°F is the upper end of the
range, the key to this recommendation is the temperature unit that is
used in the standard - the seven-day moving average of the daily
maximum temperatures." A 64°F (17.8°C) threshold was selected as it
was believed that "the criteria represent a "maximum" condition, given
diurnal variability..."
Firstly, we have previously established that sublethal temperatures do
affect organisms in complex ways including a decrease in disease
resistance and increases in disease virulence. Exposure and response
to columnaris is but one outcome in an array of possible stressor-
response scenarios. Section VI provides an overview of physiological
and behavioral responses of organisms to sublethal temperatures. If
we focus on disease resistance, we find that the literature is clear
regarding the connection between temperature and disease virulence as
well as temperature and immune response. Research conducted by Herman
(1990) found that temperatures of 15.5°C or less protected adult spring
Chinook salmon from columnaris related mortality. Other authors have
also commented on a temperature threshold of 15CC related to columnaris
infection and mortality. Given the previous discussion concerning
organism response to daily minimum, maximum, and average temperatures,
the threshold for effect appears to be a daily maximum of 15°C or a
daily mean of 15°C.
Secondly, the June 22, 1998 clarification letter asserts that diurnal
fluctuation is normal. This is of course true. However, the
magnitude of fluctuation and the duration of elevated temperatures is
-------
greater in an altered system. COP.CCT.I tarit ly, the abundance and
distribution of cold-water refugia is decreased. Based on Oregon's
303(d) list, it is likely that the diel fluctuation in many Oregon
streams is reflective of altered systems and is therefore not
"normal." As was illustrated by the Mt St. Helens study, salmonids do
respond to maximum diel fluctuation through increased mortality and,
where possible, migration.
Using a hypothetical seven-day period to evaluate potential time spent
at or above sublethal thresholds, there is compelling evidence to
conclude that the combination of measurement unit and numeric criteria
will lead to a reduction in species fitness and viability.
Example: "Stream XYZ" - Rearing Criterion 64CF (17.8°C)
Day 1: daily temperatures:
16.5°C, 17.7°C, 18°C, 18.5°, 18.3°C, 17.7°C, 16.6°C
maximum temperature: 18.5°C
mean temperature: 17.6°C
Day 2: daily temperatures:
15.5°C, 15.8°C, 16.8:C, 17.2°C. 17°C, 16.8°C, 16.2°C
maximum temperature: 17.2°C
mean temperature: 16.5°C
Day 3: daily temperatures:
15.5°C, 15.8°C, 16.9°C, 17.2°C. 17°C, 16.8°C, 16.3°C
maximum temperature: 17.2°C
mean temperature: 16.5°G
Day 4: daily temperatures:
16°C, 17.2°C, 17.8°C, 18.3°C, 17.9°C, 17.5°C, 16.9°C
maximum temperature: 18.3°C
mean temperature: 17.4°C
Day 5: daily temperatures:
16.8°C, 17.3°C, 17.9°C, 18°C, 17.8°C, 17.4°C, 16.9°C
maximum temperature: 18°C
mean temperature: 17.4°C
Day 6: daily temperatures:
16.2°C, 17.2°C, 17.6:C, 17.8°C, 17.8°C, 17.2°C, 16.9°C
maximum temperature: 17.8°C
mean temperature: 17.2°C
-------
Day 7: daily temperatures:
16-8;C, 17.-;:C, 17.7:C, 17.8;C( 17,8:'C, 17.5°C, 16.9;C
maximum temperature: 17.8°C
mean temperature: 17.4:C
Seven-Day Moving Average of the Daily Maximum Temperature: 17.8°C
This example provides evidence that the "seven-day moving average"
masks the magnitude of temperature fluctuation and the duration of
exposure to daily maximum temperatures as well as neglects mean
temperatures and cumulative exposure history. From the example, we
find that on five of the seven days, the daily maximum temperature is
at or above the rearing criterion. Although daily mean temperatures
do not exceed the criterion, they are less than 1°C from the criterion
on five of the seven days. Where daily maximum temperatures are 17.8°C
or greater, organisms are exposed to temperatures equal to or greater
than the criterion over a potentially significant portion of the day.
Finally, the "seven-day moving average of the daily maximum
temperature" T«»ots the rearing criterion of 17.8°C even though the
cumulative exposure history of an organism in "Stream XYZ" is often at
or above the standard and is well within the sublethal to lethal
range. The assumption that "the criteria represent a "maximum"
condition, given diurnal variability..." appears unfounded. Based on
current numeric criteria, the temperature measurement unit does not
adequately protect native salmon and charr. Establishment of
conservative numeric temperature criteria would lessen concerns
surrounding the magnitude of fluctuation and cumulative exposure.
As most riverine networks currently exceeding temperature standards
exceed other water quality standards as well, the standard may not
adequately address the synergistic effects of multiple stressors.
Additionally, it is important to recognize that these systems do not
contain the system diversity and resilience to provide refuge from
elevated temperatures. Shifts in the thermal regime affect all life
history forms to different degrees and different magnitudes. These
effects are cumulative. Loss of organism integrity due to elevated
temperatures weakens the ability of individuals to respond to
additional stressors.
VIII. Determination of Effects: Effect of Criteria on ESA
Proposed, Threatened and Endangered Salmon and Charr
Oregon Temperature Standard: Numeric Criteria
Salmonid spawning, egg incubation, and fry emergence from the egg and
the gravel; "no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which
-------
exceeds 12.8:C."
Salmonid rearing: "no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin for
which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in which
surface waters exceed 17.8°C."
Bull trout: "no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in waters
determined by the Department to support or to be necessary to maintain
the viability of native Oregon bull trout, when surface water
temperatures exceed 10°C." The temperature criteria applies to waters
containing spawning, rearing, or resident adult bull trout.
In the Columbia River or its associated sloughs and channels from the
mouth to river mile 309: "no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed when
surface water temperatures exceed 20°C."
In the Willamette River or its associated sloughs and channels from
the mouth to river mile 50: "no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed when
surface water temperatures exceed 20°C."
Adult migration, adult holding, smoltification, and juvenile
emigration are not identified as distinct designations. Although the
standard states that, "The temperature criteria of 17.8°C will be
applied to all water bodies that support salmonid fish rearing...." it
is unclear how the standard will address other life history stages.
The following analysis was conducted using 17.8°C as the criterion for
all life history stages with the exception of spawning, incubation,
and fry emergence. A criterion of 20°C was applied to species and life
history stages occupying the mainstem Columbia River to river mile 309
and the Willamette River to river mile 50.
1. Snake River Sockeye Salmon:
A. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for "salmonid spawning, egg incubation, and fry emergence from the egg
and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which
exceeds 12.8°C.
Sockeye salmon spawning preference has been recorded as 10.6°C to
12.2°C (Spence et al. 1996, Bjornn and Reiser 1991, Bell 1986). The
Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides temperature ranges for
26
-------
chinook salmon. However, the authors state that, "other salmon
species are not markedly different in their requirements." They cite
10:C as the optimum spawning temperature with a range of 8°C to 13°C.
Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than
15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur at 21°C (Independent
Scientific Group 1996). Incubation optimum have been cited as 4.4=C to
13.5°C (Combs 1965), 4.4°C to 13.3°C (Spence et al. 1996, Bell 1986),
and 10°C (Department of Fisheries, Canada, 1952). Incubation
temperatures greater than 12.8°C have lead to significant mortality
among developing embryos (Department of Fisheries, Canada, 1965).
Based on cited temperature preferences as well as effects studies for
spawning, incubation, and emergence, EPA has determined that the
criterion is protective of Snake River sockeye salmon. However, we
are concerned that all appropriate habitat and periods of spawning,
incubation, and emergence are correctly identified. If designations
are too narrowly applied they may not be sufficiently protective.
The criterion ^ <= not likely t-o adversely affect Snake River sockeye
salmon.
B. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for salmonid rearing: "no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin
for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in
which surface waters exceed 17.8°C." In addition, "no measurable
surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities is allowed in the Columbia River or its associated sloughs
and channels from the mouth to river mile 309 when surface water
temperatures exceed 20°C."
Adult migration, adult holding, smoltification, and juvenile
emigration are not identified as distinct designations. Therefore, it
is presumed that the salmonid rearing criterion of 17.8°C includes
these additional life history stages. The following analysis will be
conducted with 17.8°C and, where appropriate, 20°C as the criterion for
all life history stages with the exception of spawning, incubation,
and fry emergence.
Temperature preferences for migrating adult sockeye salmon have been
recorded as 7.2:C to 15.6°C (Spence et al. 1996, Bjornn and Reiser
1991, Bell 1986). The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides a
general recommendation for salmonid migration with an optimum of 10°C
and a range of 8.0°C to 13.0°C. Stressful conditions begin at
temperatures greater than 15.6°C and the lethal temperature is 21°C
(Independent Scientific Group 1996). In a study by Bouck et al.
(1977), adult sockeye salmon held at 10CC lost 7.5% of their body
11
-------
weigh! and had visible fat: reserves. Adults held at 16.2°C lost 12% of
their body weight and visible fat reserves were essentially depleted.
Females with developing eggs lost rr.ore body weight than male
counterparts and exhibited abnormal gonadal development. Beschta et
al. (1987) reported the occurrence of migratory inhibition at 21°C. As
energy reserves are important to successful reproductive efforts,
elevated temperatures during migration or on the spawning ground can
directly affect population and species viability (see discussion
Section VI). Additionally, delays in upstream migration of only 5
days caused significant mortality in Fraser River sockeye salmon; few
of the salmon reached the spawning grounds when subjected to delays of
10 to 12 days (Snyder and 31ahm 1971).
Rearing temperature preferences of 10°C to 12.8°C (Bell 1986), 10.6°C
(Burgner 1991, Huntsman 1942), 10.6°C to 12.8°C (Coutant 1977), 14.5°C
(Coutant 1977, Ferguson 1958, Huntsman 1942), 12°C to 14°C (Brett
1952), 11.2°C to 14.6°C (Beschta et al. 1987), and a physiological
optimum of 15°C (Brett et al. 1958) have been reported. The
Independent Scientific Group (1996) cites general recommendations for
salmonid rearing with 15°C as the optimum and a range of 12°C to 17°C.
Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than
18.3°C and lethal effects occur at 25°C (Independent Scientific Group
1996) .
The National Marine Fisheries Service's (NMFS) document entitled,
"Making ESA Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions
at the Watershed Scale" states that "properly functioning" riverine
systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 14°C and 17.8°C
they are "at risk" with reference to migratory and rearing life
history stages; and at greater than 17.8°C they are "not properly
functioning" with reference to migratory and rearing life history
stages. Spence et al. (1996) states that the upper lethal temperature
for sockeye salmon acclimated to 20°C is 25.8°C. At this temperature,
50% mortality occurs.
Smolt temperature preference during emigration was cited by Spence et
al. (1996) as 2°C to 10°C with termination of migration occurring at
12°C to 14°C.
Exposing Snake River sockeye salmon to the temperature criteria during
migration, rearing, and smoltification poses a significant and
unacceptable risk to their viability. EPA has reviewed the literature
concerning lethal and sublethal effects of temperature on salmonids as
well as the compounding effect of habitat simplification and loss.
Based on this review, there is compelling reason to believe that
mortality from both lethal and sublethal effects (e.g., reproductive
failure, prespawning mortality, residualization and delay of smolts,
-------
decreased competitive success, di^-i-ase resistance) will occur.
Additionally, if designated "spawning or rearing habitat"
underestimates available habitat th~r, the designation may not be
sufficiently protective of sockeye salmon.
The rearing criterion is likely to adversely affect Snake River
sockeye salmon. This criterion should be reassessed and a new
temperature criterion protective of Snake River sockeye salmon during
migration, rearing, and smoltification be developed.
2. Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon, Southern Oregon and
California Coastal Spring Chinook Salmon, Lower Columbia River Spring
Chinook Salmon, Upper Willamette River Spring Chinook Salmon:
A. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for "salmonid spawning, egg incubation, and fry emergence from the egg
and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which
exceeds 12.8°C.
Spring Chinook spawning preferences of 5.6°C to 14.4°C (Olson and
Foster 1955), 5.6°C to 13.9°C ( Spence et al. 1996, Bell 1986), and
5.6°C to 12.8°C (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995) have been
recorded. Temperature preferences for spawning summer chinook have
been cited as 5.6°C to 14.4°C (Olson and Foster 1955), 6.1°C to 18.0°C
(Olson and Foster 1955), and 5.6°C to 13.9°C (Spence et al. 1996,
Bjornn and Reiser 1991) . A spawning optimum of 10°C with a range of
8.0°C to 13°C has been reported by the Independent Scientific Group
(1996). Stressful conditions begin at temperatures greater than
15.6°C, lethal effects occur at 21°C (Independent Scientific Group
1996) .
The National Marine Fisheries Service's Chinook Habitat Assessment
provides a 10°C to 13.9°C range for "properly functioning" condition
and a range of 14°C to 15.50C as "at risk" with reference to spawning.
Spring chinook incubation optimum of 5°C to 14.4°C (Spence et al 1996,
Bell 1986) and 4.5°C to 12.8°C (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
have been cited. The optimum temperature range for summer chinook
incubation is 5.0°C to 14.4-C (Spence et al. 1996, Bjornn and Reiser
1991). The Independent Scientific Group (1996) cites temperatures of
less than 10°C as optimum for incubation with a range of 8.0°C to
12.0°C. Stressful conditions begin at temperatures greater than
13.3°C, lethal effects occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C
(Independent Scientific Group 1996). The National Marine Fisheries
Service's Chinook Habitat Assessment cites temperatures of 10°C to
13.9'C as "properly functioning."
-------
Based cr. cited temperature preferences as well as effects studies for
spawning, incubation, and emergence, EPA has determined that the
criterion is protective of Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon.
Southern Oregon and California Coastal spring chinook salmon. Lower
Columbia River spring chinook salmon, and Upper Willamette River
spring chinook salmon. However, we are concerned that all appropriate
habitat and periods of spawning, incubation, and emergence are
correctly identified. If designations are too narrowly applied they
may not be sufficiently protective.
The criterion is not likely to adversely affect Snake River
spring/summer chinook salmon. Southern Oregon and California Coastal
spring chinook salmon, Lower Columbia River spring chinook salmon, and
Upper Willamette River spring chinook salmon.
B. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for salmonid rearing: "no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin
for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in
which surface waters exceed 17.8°C." In addition, "no measurable
surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities is allowed in the Columbia River or its associated sloughs
and channels from the mouth to river mile 309 or in the Willamette
River or its associated sloughs and channels from the mouth to river
mile 50 when surface water temperatures exceed 20°C."
Adult migration, adult holding, smoltification, and juvenile
emigration are not identified as distinct designations. Therefore, it
is presumed that the salmonid rearing criterion of 17.8°C includes
these additional life history stages. The following analysis will be
conducted with 17.8°C and, where appropriate, 20°C as the criterion for
all life history stages with the exception of spawning, incubation,
and fry emergence.
The temperature preference range for migrating adult spring chinook
salmon is 3.3°C to 13.3°C (Spence et al. 1996, Bjornn and Reiser 1991,
Bell 1986). At temperatures of 21°C, migratory inhibition occurs
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995). Migrating adult summer chinook
temperature preferences have been cited as 13.9°C to 20°C (Spence et
al. 1996, Bjornn and Reiser 1991, Bell 1986).
The Independent Scientific Group (1996) cites 10°C as the optimum
temperature for chinook migration with a range of 8.0=C to 13.0°C.
Stressful conditions begin at temperatures greater than 15.6°C and the
lethal temperature is 21°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
"Properly functioning" condition is reported by the National Marine
Fisheries Service Chinook Habitat Assessment to occur at 103C to 13.9'C
30
-------
with riverine systems "ac risk" :or ngrating chinook salmon az
temperatures between 14 C and 17.5 C. Spence et al. (1996) cite 26.2-C
as the upper lethal temperature for chinook salmon acclimated to 20;C
while Brett (1952) reports an upper lethal temperature of 25.1:C. At
these temperatures 50% mortality occurs.
In addition to migratory preference, spring chinook salmon research
has addressed the role of temperature during adult holding in
freshwater. As spring chinook salmon spend extended periods in
freshwater prior to spawning, water temperature during this period is
critical to successful reproduction. The Oregon Water Quality
Standards Review (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995) cites
temperatures of 8.0°C to 12.5°C as appropriate for adult spring chinook
salmon holding. In addition, the Oregon Water Quality Standards Review
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995) states that temperatures between
13.0°C and 15.5°C could produce pronounced mortality in adult spring
chinook. Marine (1992) cites information demonstrating that
temperatures between 6.0°C and 14.0°C provided optimal pre-spawning
survival, maturation, and spawning. Marine (1992) and Berman (1990)
identified a sublethal temperature range of 15°C to 17°C. Lethal
temperatures for adult spring chinook holding in freshwater have been
reported as 18°C to 21°C (Marine 1992) and greater than or equal to
17.5°C (Berman 1990).
Rearing preferences for spring chinook salmon of 11.7°C (Coutant 1977,
Ferguson 1958, Huntsman 1942), 10°C to 12.8°C (Bell 1986), and 10°C to
14.8°C (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995) have been recorded.
Optimum production occurs at 10°C, and maximum growth at 14.8°C
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995). Summer chinook rearing'
preference is cited as 11.7°C (Coutant 1977, Ferguson 1958, Huntsman
1942) and 10°C to 12.8°C (Bell 1986). Temperatures greater than 15.5°C
increase the likelihood of disease-related mortality in chinook salmon
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995).
The Independent Scientific Group (1996) report an optimum rearing
temperature for chinook salmon of 153C, with a range of 12°C to 17°C.
Stressful conditions begin at temperatures greater than 18.3°C and the
lethal temperature is 253C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
"Properly functioning" condition is cited by the National Marine
Fisheries Service Chinook Habitat Assessment as 10°C to 13.9°C with
riverine systems "at risk" for rearing chinook salmon at temperatures
between 14°C and 17.5°C.
Smoltification and outmigration preference for spring chinook range
from 3.3^ to 12.2°C (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995). Lethal
loading stress occurs between 18.0°C and 21°C (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995, 3rett 1952).
-------
Exposing Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon, Southern Oregon and
California Coastal spring chinook salmon, Lower Columbia River spring
chinook salmon, and Upper Willamette River spring chinook salmon to
the temperature criterion during migration, rearing, and
smoltification poses a significant and unacceptable risk to their
viability. EPA has reviewed the literature concerning lethal and
sublethal effects of temperature on salmonids as well as the
compounding effect of habitat simplification and loss. Based on this
review, there is compelling reason to believe that mortality from both
lethal and sublethal effects (e.g., reproductive failure, prespawning
mortality, residualization and delay of smolts, decreased competitive
success, disease resistance) will occur. Additionally, if designated
"spawning or rearing habitat" underestimates available habitat then
the designation may not be sufficiently protective of spring/summer
chinook salmon.
The rearing criterion is likely to adversely affect Snake River
spring/summer chinook salmon. Southern Oregon and California Coastal
spring chinook salmon, Lower Columbia River spring c^'-^ok salmon, and
Upper Willamette River spring chinook salmon. This criterion should
be reassessed and a new temperature criterion protective of
spring/summer chinook salmon during migration, holding, rearing, and
smoltification be developed.
3. Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon, Southern Oregon and California
Coastal Fall Chinook Salmon, Lower Columbia River Fall Chinook Salmon:
A. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for "salmonid spawning, egg incubation, and fry emergence from the egg
and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which
exceeds 12.8°C.
Fall chinook spawning preferences of 10°C to 12.8°C (Bell 1986), 10°C to
16.7°C (Olson and Foster 1955), and 5.6°C to 13.9°C (Spence et al. 1996)
have been recorded. The National Marine Fisheries Service's document
entitled, "Making ESA Determinations of Effect for Individual or
Grouped Actions at the Watershed Scale" states that "properly
functioning" riverine systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C,
between 14:C and 15.5°C they are "at risk" with reference to spawning,
and at temperatures greater than 15.5°C they are "not properly
functioning" with reference to spawning. The optimum temperature for
spawning is 10°C with a range of 8°C to 13°C (Independent Scientific
Group 1996). Stressful conditions occur at temperatures greater than
15.6°C and lethal temperatures occur at 21°C (Independent Scientific
Group 1996).
-------
7:-:r-.: ran en cptin-.um have been cited as lO'-C to 12.8:C (Bell 1986), io'-C
-c io.7-C (Olson and Foster 1955), 10-C to 12CC (Neitzel and Becker
1985, Garling and Masterson 1985, Heming 1982), and 5°C to 14.4"JC
(Spence et al. 1996). Temperatures greater than 12°C may reduce alevin
survival (Ringler and Hall 1975). Smith et al. (1983) found that
temperatures greater than 15.6°C produce significant mortality. The
Independent Scientific Group (1996) cites temperatures less than 10°C
as optimum for incubation with a range of 8°C to 12°C. Stressful
conditions occur at temperatures greater than 13.3°C and lethal
temperatures occur at 15.6°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
Based on cited temperature preferences as well as effects studies for
spawning, incubation, and emergence, EPA has determined that the
criterion is protective of Snake River fall chinook salmon, Southern
Oregon and California Coastal fall chinook salmon, and Lower Columbia
River fall chinook salmon. However, we are concerned that all
appropriate habitat and periods of spawning, incubation, and emergence
are correctly identified. If designations are too narrowly applied
they may not *— sufficiently protective.
The criterion is not likely to adversely affect Snake River fall
chinook salmon, Southern Oregon and California Coastal fall chinook
salmon, and Lower Columbia River fall chinook salmon.
B. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for salmonid rearing: nno measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin
for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in
which surface waters exceed 17.8°C." In addition, "no measurable
surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities is allowed in the Columbia River or its associated sloughs
and channels from the mouth to river mile 309 or in the Willamette
River or its associated sloughs and channels from the mouth to river
mile 50 when surface water temperatures exceed 20°C."
Adult migration, adult holding, smoltification, and juvenile
emigration are not identified as distinct designations. Therefore, it
is presumed that the salmonid rearing criterion of 17.8°C includes
these additional life history stages. The following analysis will be
conducted with 17.8°C and, where appropriate, 20°C as the criterion for
all life history stages with the exception of spawning, incubation,
and fry emergence.
The temperature preference range for migrating adult fall chinook
salmon is 10.6°C to 19.4°C (Spence et al. 1996, Bell 1986). The
optimum migration temperature is 10°C with a range of 8°C to 13°C
(Independent Scientific Group 1996). Stressful conditions occur at
-------
-.-i-mperatures greater than ID.S-C and lethal effects occur at 21CC. The
National Marine Fisheries Service's document entitled, "Making ESA
Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the
Watershed Scale" and Chinook Habitat Assessment state that "properly
functioning" riverine systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 13.9°C-
14 ;C; between 14=C and 17. 5;C-17 . 8;C they are "at risk" with reference
to migratory and rearing life history stages; and at temperatures
greater than 17 . 5°C-17 . 8:C they are "not properly functioning" with
reference to migratory and rearing life history stages. The preferred
rearing temperature range is 12°C to 14°C (Bell 1986). At temperatures
of 15.5°C or greater, disease-related mortality increases (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995).
Fall chinook salmon research on temperature - smoltification
interactions has been conducted. ATPase activity, an indicator of
smoltification, is important to the maintenance of electrolyte balance
and is-related to the ability of smolts to adapt to saline waters from
freshwater. At 8°C and 13°C, ATPase activity over a six week period
increased. However, at 18°C/ ATPase activity decrea^'' ^ver this same
period (Sauter unpublished data). Hicks (1998) reported that smolts
held at 6.5°C and 10°C responded to a seawater challenge with increased
levels of ATPase activity, whereas, individuals held at 15°C and 20°C
responded with low levels of ATPase activity. Results demonstrate the
inhibitory effect of elevated water temperatures on smoltification.
The lethal loading stress occurs between 18°C and 21°C (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995, Brett 1952).
Exposing Snake River fall chinook salmon, southern Oregon and
California coastal fall chinook salmon, and Lower Columbia River fall
chinook salmon to the temperature criterion during migration, rearing,
and smoltification poses a significant and unacceptable risk to their
viability. EPA has reviewed the literature concerning lethal and
sublethal effects of temperature on salmonids as well as the
compounding effect of habitat simplification and loss. Based on this
review, there is compelling reason to believe that mortality from both
lethal and sublethal effects (e.g., reproductive failure, prespawning
mortality, residualization and delay of smolts, decreased competitive
success, disease resistance) will occur. Additionally, if designated
"spawning or rearing habitat" underestimates available habitat then
the designation may not be sufficiently protective of fall chinook
salmon.
The rearing criterion is likely to adversely affect Snake River fall
chinook salmon, southern Oregon and California coastal fall chinook
salmon, and Lower Columbia River fall chinook salmon. This criterion
should be reassessed and a new temperature criterion protective of
fall chinook salmon during migration, rearing, and smoltification be
34
-------
4. Snake River Basin Steelhead, Middle Columbia River Steelhead, Lower
Columbia River Steelhead, Upper Willamette River Steelhead:
A. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for "salmonid spawning, egg incubaticr., and fry emergence from the egg
and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which
exceeds 12.8°C.
Cited preferred spawning temperatures are 3.9°C to 9.4°C (Spence et al.
1996, Bell 1986) and 4.4°C to 12.8°C (Swift 1976). A general preferred
temperature range of 10°C to 13°C was reported by Bjornn and Reiser
(1991). The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides temperature
ranges for chinook salmon. However, the authors state that, "other
salmon species are not markedly different in their requirements."
They cite 10°C as the optimum spawning temperature with a range of 8°C
to 13°C. Streccful conditio~c occur at temperatures equal to or
greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur at 21°C
(Independent Scientific Group 1996). Few references to optimum
incubation temperatures were located. The Washington State hatchery
program reported optimal Steelhead egg survival from .5.6°C to 11.1°C
(Hicks 1998). The Independent Scientific Group's general criteria
(1996) cites temperatures less than 10°C as the optimum for incubation
with a range of 8°C to 12°C. Stressful conditions occur at
temperatures equal to or greater than 13.3°C and lethal effects occur
at temperatures greater than 15.6°C (Independent Scientific Group
1996) .
Based on available information, EPA has determined that the criterion
for spawning, incubation, and emergence adequately protects Snake
River Basin Steelhead, Middle Columbia River Steelhead, Lower Columbia
River Steelhead, and Upper Willamette River Steelhead. However, we
are concerned that all appropriate habitat and periods of spawning,
incubation, and emergence are correctly identified. If designations
are too narrowly applied they may not be sufficiently protective.
As less information exists on Steelhead temperature preferences than
other salmonid species, monitoring to detect thermal stress during
spawning and incubation should be conducted. Collected information
should serve as the basis for decision-making during the next
triennial review.
The criterion is not likely to adversely affect Snake River Basin
Steelhead, Middle Columbia River Steelhead, Lower Columbia River
Steelhead, and Upper Willamette River Steelhead.
-------
E. The Oregon Water Quality -tandaia; contain une following criterion
for salmonid rearing: "no rr.easurabl-3 surface water temperature
increase resulting from antzhropoger. i c activities is allowed in a basin
for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in
which surface waters exceed l~7.83C." In addition, "no measurable
surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities is allowed in the Columbia River or its associated sloughs
and channels from the mouth to river mile 309 or in the Willamette
River or its associated sloughs and channels from the mouth to river
mile 50 when surface water temperatures exceed 20°C."
Adult migration, adult holding, smoltification, and juvenile
emigration are not identified as distinct designations. Therefore, it
is presumed that the salmonid rearing criterion of 17.8°C includes
these additional life history stages. The following analysis will be
conducted with 17.8°C and, where appropriate, 20°C as the criterion for
all life history stages with the exception of spawning, incubation,
and fry emergence.
Migration preference data specific zo steelhead were not found.
However, Beschta et al. (1987), note that migratory inhibition
occurred at 21°C. Hicks (1998) reported that the upper incipient
lethal limit for steelhead is between 21°C and 22°C. Spence et al.
(1996) report an upper lethal temperature for steelhead acclimated to
20°C of 23.9°C. At this temperature, 50% mortality occurs. The
National Marine Fisheries Service document entitled, "Making ESA
Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the
Watershed Scale" states that "properly functioning" riverine systems
exhibit temperatures of 109C to 14°C; between 14°C to 17.8°C they are
"at risk" with reference to migration, and at temperatures greater
than 17.8°C they are "not properly functioning" with reference to
migration. The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides a general
recommendation for salmonid migration with an optimum of 10°C and a
range of 8°C to 13°C. Stressful conditions occur at temperatures
greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur at 21°C
(Independent Scientific Group 1996). A general preferred temperature
range of 10°C to 13°C was reported by Bjornn and Reiser (1991) .
As summer steelhead enter freshwater in June and spawn the following
spring, adult holding temperatures are likely critical to successful
reproduction. Similar sublethal effects as described for spring
chinook salmon are likely. Reproductively mature spring chinook
salmon held at temperatures between 17.5° and 193C produced a greater
number of pre-hatch mortalities and developmental abnormalities, as
well as smaller eggs and alevins than adults held at temperatures
between 14°C to 15.5°C (Berman 1990). Smith et al. (1983) observed
that rainbow trout brood fish must be held at water temperatures below
-------
i3.3;C and preferably not above 12.2 -C for a period of 2 to 6 months
before spawning to produce eggs of good quality. Additionally, Bouck
et al. (1977) determined that adult sockeye salmon held at 10:C lost
7.5% of their body weight and had visible fat reserves. However, at
16.2'C, they lost 12% of their body weight and visible fat reserves
were essentially depleted. As energy reserves are important to
successful reproductive efforts, elevated temperatures during
migration or on the spawning ground can directly affect population and
species viability.
Preferred rearing temperatures were reported by Bell (1986) as 103C to
12.8DC. Beschta et al. (1987) reported preferred temperatures of 7.3°C
to 14.6°C with 10°C as the optimum. The Independent Scientific Group
(1996) cites general recommendations for salmonid rearing with 15°C as
the optimum and a range of 12°C to 173C. Stressful conditions occur at
temperatures equal to or greater than 18.3°C and lethal effects occur
at 25°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). The National Marine
Fisheries Service document entitled, "Making ESA Determinations of
Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Watershed Scale"
states that "properly functioning" riverine systems exhibit
temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 14°C and 17.8°C they are "at risk"
with reference to rearing, and at temperatures greater than 17.8°C they
are "not properly functioning" with reference to rearing.
Tests conducted on steelhead found that downstream movement could be
stopped by placing smolts in temperatures between 11°C and 12.2°C from
a starting temperature of 7.2°C (Hicks 1998). Additionally,
temperatures above 12°C were found to be detrimental to the migratory
behavior and saltwater adaptive responses of Toutle River hatchery
steelhead. Exposure of smolts to temperatures of 13°C resulted in
migratory delays, decreased emigration behavior, and lower ATPase
activity (Hicks 1998). In an additional study, steelhead smolts were
held at 6.5°C, 10°C. 15°C, and 20°C. Smolts from the 6.5°C and 10°C
groups exposed to a seawater challenge responded with increased levels
of ATPase activity, whereas, individuals from the 15°C and 20°C groups
responded with low levels of ATPase activity (Hicks 1998) . All four
of the smolts held at 20°C and three of the four smolts held at 1S°C
died within three day of the saltwater challenge. No mortalities
occurred at 6.5°C or 10°C (Hicks 1998) . Given study results, 12°C was
recommended as the limit to safe downstream migration of steelhead
smolts.
Exposing Snake River Basin steelhead. Middle Columbia River steelhead,
Lower Columbia River steelhead, and Upper Willamette River steelhead
to the temperature criterion during migration, rearing, and
smoltification poses a significant and unacceptable risk to their
viability. EPA has reviewed the literature concerning lethal and
-------
sublethal effects of temperature on salmonids and the compounding
effect of habitat simplification and loss. Based on this review,
there is compelling reason to believe that mortality from both lethal
and sublethal effects (e.g., reproductive failure, prespawning
mortality, residualization and delay of smolts, decreased competitive
success, disease resistance) will occur. Additionally, if designated
"spawning or rearing habitat" underestimates available habitat then
the designation may not be sufficiently protective of steelhead.
The rearing criterion is likely to adversely affect Snake River Basin
steelhead. Middle Columbia River steelhead, Lower Columbia River
steelhead, and Upper Willamette River steelhead. This criterion
should be reassessed and a new temperature criterion protective of
steelhead during migration, rearing, and smoltification be developed.
5. Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast and Oregon Coastal Coho
SaImon:
A. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain thf» following criterion
for "salmonid spawning, egg incubation, and fry emergence from the egg
and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which
exceeds 12.8°C.
Coho salmon spawning preferences of 4.4°C to 9.4°C (Reiser and Bjornn
1973, Brett 1952),10°C to 12.8°C (Bell 1986), and 7.2°C to 12.8°C (Hicks
1998) have been recorded. The Independent Scientific Group (1996)
provides temperature ranges for chinook salmon. However, the authors
state that, "other salmon species are not markedly different in their
requirements." They cite 10°C as the optimum spawning temperature with
a range of 8°C to 13°C. Stressful conditions occur at temperatures
greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur at 21°C
(Independent Scientific Group 1996) .
Cited optimum incubation temperatures are 4.4°C to 13.3°C (Reiser and
Bjornn 1973, Brett 1952), 10°C to 12.8°C (Bell 1986), 8°C to 9°C (Sakh
1984), 4°C to 6.5°C (Dong 1981), and 2°C to 8°C (Tang et al. 1987. The
temperature range producing the highest survival rates for eggs and
alevins was 1.3°C to 10.9°C (Tang et al. 1987) . Increasing egg
mortality has been reported at temperatures greater than 11°C (Murray
and McPhail 1988), greater than 12°C (Allen 1957 in Murray and McPhail
1988), and at approximately 14°C (Reiser and Bjornn 1973, Brett 1952).
An upper lethal limit of 12.5°C to 14.5°C for University of Washington
coho and 10.9°C to 12.5°C for Dungeness River, Washington coho was
reported by Dong (1981). The lower lethal temperature has been
recorded as 0.6°C to 1.3CC (Dong 1981). The Independent Scientific
Group's general criteria (1996) cites temperatures less than lO-'C as
-------
the optimum for incubation with a range of 8;C to 12:C. Stressful
conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than 13.3^ and
lethal effects occur at temperatures greater than 15.6CC (Independent
Scientific Group 1996).
Based on the available information, EPA has determined that the
criterion for spawning, incubation, and emergence adequately protects
Southern Oregon and Northern California Coast and Oregon Coastal coho
salmon. However, we are concerned that all appropriate habitat and
periods of spawning, incubation, and emergence are correctly
identified. If designations are too narrowly applied they may not be
sufficiently protective.
Owing to the susceptibility of coho embryos to elevated temperatures,
incubation temperatures and embryo viability should be monitored.
Collected information should serve as the basis for decision-making
during the next triennial review.
The criterion is not likely to adversely affect Southern Oregon and
Northern California Coast and Oregon Coastal coho salmon.
B. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for salmonid rearing: "no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin
for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in
which surface waters exceed 17.8°C."
Adult migration, adult holding, smoltification, and juvenile
emigration are not identified as distinct designations. Therefore, it
is presumed that the salmonid rearing criterion of 17.8°C includes
these additional life history stages. The following analysis will be
conducted with 17.8°C as the criterion for all life history stages with
the exception of spawning, incubation, and fry emergence.
The temperature preference range for migrating adult coho salmon is
7.2°C to 15.6°C (Reiser and Bjornn 1973, Brett 1952). A general
preferred temperature range of 12°C to 14°C with temperatures greater
than 15°C generally avoided is reported by Brett (1952). The National
Marine Fisheries Service document entitled, "Making ESA Determinations
of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Watershed Scale"
states that "properly functioning" riverine systems exhibit
temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 14°C to 17.8°C they are "at risk"
with reference to migration, and at temperatures greater than 17.8°C
they are "not properly functioning" with reference to migration. The
Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides a general recommendation
for salmonid migration with an optimum of 10°C and a range of 8°C to
13 :C. Stressful conditions occur at, temperatures greater than 15.6°C
-------
and lethal temperature effects occur at 21:C (Independent Scientific
Group 1996). Adult coho final temperature preferendum are reported as
11.4:C when conducted in a laboratory and 16.6"C in Lake Michigan
(Coutant 1977). Brett (1952) reports an incipient upper lethal
temperature of 26CC (i.e., 50% mortality in 16.7 hours) while the
Oregon Water Quality Standards Review (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ
1995) reports an upper lethal limit of 25°C.
Sandercock (1991) reports that there appears to be little correlation
between the time of entry to a spawning stream and the spawning data.
Early-run fish may spawn early, but many will hold for weeks or even
months before spawning, adult holding temperatures are likely critical
to successful reproduction. Similar sublethal effects as described
for spring chinook salmon are likely. Reproductively mature spring
chinook salmon held at elevated temperatures produced a greater number
of pre-hatch mortalities and developmental abnormalities, as well as
smaller eggs and alevins than adults held at preferred temperatures
(Berman 1990). Additionally, Bouck et al. (1977) determined that
adult sockeye salmon held at preferred temperatures """i less of their
body weight and maintained visible fat reserves while those held at
elevated temperatures lost greater quantities of body weight and
visible fat reserves were essentially depleted. As energy reserves
are important to successful reproductive efforts, elevated
temperatures during migration or on the spawning ground can directly
affect population and species viability.
Cited rearing temperature preferences are 11.8°C to 14.6°C (Reiser and
Bjornn 1973, Brett 1952), 11.4°G (Coutant 1977), 12°C to 14°C (Bell
1986), and 11.8°C to 14.6°C (Beschta et al. 1987). Cessation of growth
occurs at temperatures greater than 20.3°C (Temperature Subcommittee,
DEQ 1995, Reiser and Bjornn 1973, Brett 1952). Beschta et al. (1987)
report an upper lethal temperature of 25.8°C. The Independent
Scientific Group (1996) cites general recommendations for salmonid
rearing with 15°C as the optimum and a range of 12°C to 17°C. Stressful
conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than 18.3°C and
lethal effects occur at 25°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). The
National Marine Fisheries Service document entitled, "Making ESA
Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the
Watershed Scale" states that "properly functioning" riverine systems
exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 14°C and 17.8°C they are
"at risk" with reference to rearing, and at temperatures greater than
17.8°C they are "not properly functioning" with reference to rearing.
A preferred smoltification temperature range is 12°C to 15.5°C (Brett
et al. 1958). Spence et al. (1996) report observed migration
temperatures of 2 .5:C to 13.3°C with most fish migrating before
temperatures reach 11°C to 12JC.
40
-------
Based on available inror~.;;r i on, it is likely that exposure of Southern
Oregon/Northern California Coast and Oregon Coast coho salmon to the
temperature criterion during migration, rearing, and smoltification
poses a significant and unacceptable risk to their viability. EPA has
reviewed the literature concerning lethal and sublethal effects of
temperature on salmonids ar.d the compounding effect of habitat
simplification and loss. Based on this review, there is compelling
reason to believe that mortality from both lethal and sublethal
effects (e.g., reproductive failure, prespawning mortality,
residualization and delay of smolts, decreased competitive success,
disease resistance) will occur. Additionally, if designated "spawning
or rearing habitat" underestimates available habitat then the
designation may not be sufficiently protective of coho salmon.
The rearing criterion is likely to adversely affect Southern
Oregon/Northern California Coast and Oregon Coast coho salmon. This
criterion should be reassessed and a new temperature criterion
protective of coho salmon during migration, rearing, and
smolti f icati:r. be developed.
6. Columbia River Chum Salmon:
A. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for "salmonid spawning, egg incubation, and fry emergence from the egg
and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which
exceeds 12.8°C.
A preferred spawning temperature range of 7.2°C to 12.8°C is reported
by Bjornn and Reiser (1991). The Independent Scientific Group (1996)
provides temperature ranges for chinook salmon. However, the authors
state that, "other salmon species are not markedly different in their
requirements." They cite 10°C as the optimum spawning temperature with
a range of 8°C to 13°C. Stressful conditions occur at temperatures
equal to or greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur at
21°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
Cited optimum incubation temperatures are 8°C (Beacham and Murray 1985)
and 4.4°C to 13.3°C (Bjornn and Reiser 1991). The Independent
Scientific Group's general criteria (1996) cites temperatures less
than 10°C as the optimum for incubation with a range of 8°C to 12°C.
Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than
13.3'C and lethal effects occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C
(Independent Scientific Group 1996). The maximum efficiency for
conversion of yolk to issue is reported as 6°C to 10°C (Beacham and
Murray 1985). Temperatures of 12CC produced alevin mortality one to
three days after hatching 'Beacham and Murray 1985).
41
-------
Based on the available I:M" : r~ at ion, EPA has determined that the
criterion for spawning, :r.c~cat ion, and emergence adequately protects
Columbia River chum salir.cr.. However, we are concerned that all
appropriate habitat and periods of spawning, incubation, and emergence
are correctly identified. If designations are too narrowly applied
they may not be suff icier.. Iv protective.
Owing to the susceptibility of chum salmon alevins to elevated
temperatures, incubation and emergence temperatures and embryo/alevin
viability should be monitored. Collected information should serve as
the basis for decision-making during the next triennial review.
The criterion is not likely to adversely affect Columbia River chum
salmon.
B. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for salmonid rearing: "no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin
for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial v.ro, and in
which surface waters exceed 17.8°C." In addition, "no measurable
surface water temperature increase resulting from anthropogenic
activities is allowed in the Columbia River or its associated sloughs
and channels from the mouth to river mile 309 when surface water
temperatures exceed 20°C."
Adult migration, adult holding, smoltification, and juvenile
emigration are. not identified as distinct designations. Therefore, it
is presumed that the salmonid rearing criterion of 17.8°C includes
these additional life history stages. The following analysis will be
conducted with 17.8°C and, where appropriate, 20°C as the criterion for
all life history stages with the exception of spawning, incubation,
and fry emergence.
Cited preferred migration temperatures are 8.3°C to 15.6°C (Bjornn and
Reiser 1991). The National Marine Fisheries Service document
entitled, "Making ESA Determinations of Effect for Individual or
Grouped Actions at the Watershed Scale" states that "properly
functioning" riverine systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C;
between 14°C to 17.8°C they are "at risk" with reference to migration,
and at temperatures greater than 17.8°C they are "not properly
functioning" with reference to migration. The Independent Scientific
Group (1996) provides a general recommendation for salmonid migration
with an optimum of 10°C and a range of 8°C to 13°C. Stressful
conditions occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C and lethal
temperature effects occur at 21°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996).
Rearing temperature preferences of 14 . 1°C (Coutant 1977, Ferguson 1958,
42
-------
Huntsman 19-42), 10:C Co 12.8 C (Bell 1936), 12 C to 14C 'Brett 1952),
and 11.2:C to 14.6;C (Beschta et al. 1967) have been reported. The
Independent Scientific Group (1996) cites general recommendations for
salmonid rearing with 15CC as the optimum and a range of 12:C to 17°C.
Stressful conditions occur at temperatures equal to or greater than
18.3:C and lethal effects occur at 25;C (Independent Scientific Group
1996). The National Marine Fisheries Service document entitled,
"Making ESA Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions
at the Watershed Scale" states that "properly functioning" riverine
systems exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 143C and 17.8°C
they are "at risk" with reference to rearing, and at temperatures
greater than 17.8°C they are "not properly functioning" with reference
to rearing. The optimum temperature is 13.5°C and the upper lethal
temperature is 25.8°C (Beschta et al. 1987). Brett (1952) reports an
upper incipient lethal temperature of 25.4°C (acclimation 20°C, 50%
mortality in 16.7 hours). The final temperature preferendum for
underyearlings and yearlings is 14.1°C (Coutant 1977, Ferguson 1958,
Huntsman 1942). Data related to smoltification were not found.
Based on available information, it is likely that exposure of Columbia
River chum salmon to the temperature criterion during migration,
rearing, and smoltification poses a significant and unacceptable risk
to their viability. EPA has reviewed the literature concerning lethal
and sublethal effects of temperature on salmonids and the compounding
effect of habitat simplification and loss. Based on this review,
there is compelling reason to believe that mortality from both lethal
and sublethal effects (e.g., reproductive failure, prespawning
mortality, residualization and delay of smolts, decreased competitive
success, disease resistance) will occur. Additionally, if designated
"spawning or rearing habitat" underestimates available habitat then
the designation may not be sufficiently protective of chum salmon.
The rearing criterion is likely to adversely affect Columbia River
chum salmon. This criterion should be reassessed and a new
temperature criterion protective of chum salmon during migration,
rearing, and smoltification be developed.
7. Umpqua River Cutthroat Trout:
A. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for "salmonid spawning, egg incubation, and fry emergence from the egg
and the gravel: no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin which
exceeds 12.8°C.
There is a paucity of temperature preference data for cutthroat trout
in general and Umpqua cutthroat trout specifically. A preferred
43
-------
spawning temperature rar.ce for sea-run cutthroat trout of 6 . l:C to
17.2-C is reported by Beschta et al. (1987) and Bell (1586). Preferred
spawning temperature ranges of 4.4:C to 12.8CC and 5.5°C to 15.5°C have
been reported for resident cutthroat trout (Spence et al. 1996).
Taranger and Hansen (19S3) and Smith et al. (1983) determined that
high water temperatures during the spawning season inhibit ovulation
and are detrimental to gamete quality in cutthroat trout.
The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides temperature ranges
for chinook salmon. However, the authors state that, "other salmon
species are not markedly different in their requirements." They cite
10°C as the optimum spawning temperature with a range of 8°C to 13°C.
Stressful conditions occur at temperatures greater than 15.6°C and
lethal temperature effects occur at 21°C (Independent Scientific Group
1996). In addition, the Independent Scientific Group's general
criteria (1996) cites temperatures less than 10°C as the optimum for
incubation with a range of 8°C to 12°C. Stressful conditions occur at
temperatures equal to or greater than 13.3°C and lethal effects occur
at temperatures greater than 15.6CC (Independent Scientific Group
1996).
Based on the available information, EPA has determined that the
criterion for spawning, incubation, and emergence adequately protects
Umpqua River cutthroat trout. However/ we are concerned that all
appropriate habitat and periods of spawning, incubation, and emergence
are correctly identified. If designations are too narrowly applied
they may not be sufficiently protective.
Owing to the limited availability of information, monitoring to detect
thermal stress during spawning, incubation, and emergence should be
conducted. Collected information should serve as the basis for
decision-making during the next triennial review.
The criterion is not likely to adversely affect Umpqua River cutthroat
trout.
B. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for salmonid rearing: "no measurable surface water temperature
increase resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in a basin
for which salmonid rearing is a designated beneficial use, and in
which surface waters exceed 17.8°C."
Adult migration, adult holding, smoltification, and juvenile
emigration are not identified as distinct designations. Therefore, it
is presumed that the salmonid rearing criterion of 17.8°C includes
these additional life history stages. The following analysis will be
conducted with 17.8;C as the criterion for all life history stages with
44
-------
che exception ot spawning, incubation, and fry emergence.
Adulc migration preference data specific to Umpqua cutthroat trout
were not found. A preferred migration temperature for resident
cutthroat trout of 5°C has been reported by Spence et al. (1996). The
National Marine Fisheries Service document entitled, "Making ESA
Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the
Watershed Scale" states that "properly functioning" riverine systems
exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 14°C to 17.8CC they are
"at risk" with reference to migration, and at temperatures greater
than 17.8DC they are "not properly functioning" with reference to
migration. The Independent Scientific Group (1996) provides a general
recommendation for salmonid migration with an optimum of 10°C and a
range of 8°C to 13°C. Stressful conditions occur at temperatures
greater than 15.6°C and lethal temperature effects occur at 21°C
(Independent Scientific Group 1996).
The upper lethal temperature range for cutthroat trout is 18°C to
22.8°C (Kruzic 1998, Spence et al. 1996). Beschta et al. (1987) report
an upper lethal temperature of 23°C. Kruzic (1998) observed Umpqua
River cutthroat trout in upper reaches of the Dumont Creek where water
temperatures were 13.5°C, but absent in the lower reaches where
temperatures approached 18°C. Westslope cutthroat trout females held
in fluctuating temperatures between 2°C and 10°C produced significantly
better quality eggs than females held at a constant 10°C. Elevated
temperatures experienced by mature females adversely affected
subsequent viability and survival of embryos (Smith et al. 1983).
Preferred rearing temperatures of 10°C (Bell 1986) and 9.5°C to 12.9°C
(Beschta et al. 1987) have been reported. The Independent Scientific
Group (1996) cites general recommendations for salmonid rearing with
15°C as the optimum and a range of 12°C to 17°C. Stressful conditions
occur at temperatures equal to or greater than 18.3°C and lethal
effects occur at 25°C (Independent Scientific Group 1996). The
National Marine Fisheries Service document entitled, "Making ESA
Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the
Watershed Scale" states that "properly functioning" riverine systems
exhibit temperatures of 10°C to 14°C; between 14°C and 17.8°C they are
"at risk" with reference to rearing, and at temperatures greater than
17.8°C they are "not properly functioning" with reference to rearing.
Data concerning smoltification/juvenile emigration were not located.
Based on available information, it is likely that exposure of Umpqua
River cutthroat trout to the temperature criterion during migration,
rearing, and smoltification poses a significant and unacceptable risk
to their viability. EPA has reviewed the literature concerning lethal
and sublethal effects of temperature on salmonids and the compounding
45
-------
effect o: habitat simplification and loss. Based on this review,
there is compelling reason to believe that mortality from both lethal
and sublethal effects (e.g., reproductive failure, prespawning
mortality, residual izat ion and delay of srr.olts, decreased competitive
success, disease resistance) will occur. Additionally, if designated
"spawning or rearing habitat" underestimates available habitat then
the designation may not be sufficiently protective of cutthroat trout.
The rearing criterion is likely to adversely affect Umpqua River
cutthroat trout. However, it is obvious from the paucity of
information on this species that additional monitoring should occur.
This criterion should be reassessed and a new temperature criterion
protective of Umpqua River cutthroat trout during migration, rearing,
and smoltification be developed.
8. Columbia River Basin Bull Trout, Klamath Basin Bull Trout:
A. The Oregon Water Quality Standards contain the following criterion
for bull trout: "no measurable surface water temperature increase
resulting from anthropogenic activities is allowed in waters
determined by the Department to support or to be necessary to maintain
the viability of native Oregon bull trout, when surface water
temperatures exceed 10°C." The temperature criteria applies to waters
containing spawning, rearing, or resident adult bull trout. Migration
corridors are not considered.
A preferred migration temperature range of 10°C to 12°C has been
reported (Administrative Record, July 21, 1997, Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995). Numerous authors have addressed temperature
related to successful bull trout spawning. Temperatures less than 9°C
to 10°C are required to initiate spawning in Montana (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995) and less than 9°C in British Columbia (Spence
et al. 1996, Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995, Pratt 1992). Peak
spawning activities occur between 5°C and 6.5°C (Administrative Record,
July 21, 1997). In the Metolius River, Oregon a spawning temperature
of 4.5°C is cited (Spence et al. 1996, Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ
1995). A spawning range of 4°C to 10°C is reported in the Oregon Water
Quality Standards Review (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995).
The Oregon Water Quality Standards Review (Temperature Subcommittee,
DEQ 1995) report an optimum incubation temperature range of 4°C to 6°C
in Montana systems. In a study of temperature effect on embryo
survival in British Columbia, 8°C to 10°C, produced 0-20% survival to
hatch, 6°C, produced 60-90% survival to hatch, and 2DC to 4°C, produced
80-95% survival to hatch (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995). Based
on individual studies, Spence et al. (1996) report an optimum
46
-------
-_-i--oerature range or 2 -C ro 6'-C and the Oregon Water Quality Standards
Review (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995) report an optimum
temperature range of 1*C to 6:C.
The optimal temperature for juvenile growth has been reported as 4°C in
British Columbia and 4.5-C in the Metolius River, Oregon (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995). The temperature range for optimum fry growth
is reported as 4°C to 4.5°C (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995).
Observed rearing temperatures less than 10°C are reported for the
Metolius River, Oregon (Administrative Record, July 21, 1997). The
Oregon Water Quality Standards Review (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ
1995) reports a final optimum juvenile growth range of 43C to 10-C.
Temperatures equal to or greater than 14°C are a barrier in the closely
related Arctic charr (Pratt 1992).
Adult resident bull trout in Montana were assessed to determine
temperature preferences. At 19°C no bull trout were present; between
15:C and 18°C bull trout were present; and at temperatures less than
12:C the highest densities of bull trout were located (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995). In the John Day Basin, bull trout occurred
at temperatures less than 16°C (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995).
The adult temperature preference range is 9°C to 13°C with the highest
number of individuals at temperatures less that or equal to 12°C
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995). In addition, investigators
found that reaches in the Metolius River system are susceptible to
brook trout invasion at temperatures equal to or greater than 12°C
(Administrative Record, July 21, 1997).
Based on the available information, the criterion for spawning,
rearing, and resident adult bull trout adequately protects these life
history stages. However, migration corridors must be adequately
protected to safeguard remaining populations and to restore species
distribution and integrity. Although the numeric criterion of 10°C
adequately protects migrating bull trout, Oregon has not designated
for protection migration corridors. The temperature technical
subcommittee for the Oregon water quality standards review recommended
that "no temperature increase shall be allowed due to anthropogenic
activity in present bull trout habitat, or where historical cold water
habitat is needed to allow a present bull trout population to remain
viable and sustainable in the future" (Buchanan and Gregory 1997). In
an evaluation of Oregon's bull trout, Pratt (1992) determined that
elevated temperatures had reduced species distribution with
populations becoming largely fragmented and isolated in the upper
reaches of drainages. Population fragmentation has resulted in
decreased species fitness and viability. Therefore, to adequately
protect Columbia River Basin bull trout and Klamath Basin bull trout,
migratory corridors should be afforded protection.
47
-------
Additionally. IL is clear that bull trout require temperatures less
than 10-C icr successful spawning, incubation, and rearing. The
criterion applied as a summer rnaxirr.um should be protective of life
history stages occurring at other times of the year when temperatures
are cooler. However, data on both annual thermal regimes and bull
trout temperature preferences and effect thresholds should continue to
be collected and analyzed. Collected information should serve as the
basis for decision-making during the next triennial review.
As migratory corridors are omitted from the designation, the criterion
is likely to adversely affect Columbia River Basin bull trout and
Klamath Basin bull trout.
IX. Summary of Findings:
* The temperature criterion for spawning, incubation, and emergence
is not likely to adversely affect threatened and endangered
salmon:
(A) The 12.8°C criterion is at the upper limit for successful
spawning, incubation, and emergence. Therefore, a more
protective strategy would be to establish the criterion as a
daily maximum rather than a 7-day moving average of the
daily maximum.
(B) It is critical that all appropriate habitat and periods of
spawning, incubation, and emergence be correctly identified.
If designations are too narrowly or incorrectly applied then
they may not be sufficiently protective of native salmon.
(C) Owing to the limited information on steelhead temperature
preferences, monitoring to detect thermal stress during
spawning and incubation periods should be conducted.
(D) Owing to the susceptibility of coho embryos to elevated
temperatures, incubation temperatures and embryo viability
should be monitored.
(E) Owing to the susceptibility of chum salmon alevins to
elevated temperatures, incubation and emergence temperatures
and embryo/alevin viability should be monitored.
(F) Owing to the limited availability of information on Umpqua
cutthroat trout, monitoring to detect thermal stress during
spawning, incubation, and emergence should be conducted.
Collected information should serve as the basis for decision-
4S
-------
making curing the nexr r.r ienr.: r.'. review.
The temperature criterion for cull trout is likely to adversely
affect Columbia River Basin bull trout and Klamath Basin bull
trout.
(A) Migration corridors must be adequately protected to
safeguard remaining populations and to restore species
distribution and integrity. Although the numeric criterion
of 10°C adequately protects migrating bull trout, Oregon has
not designated for protection migration corridors. Elevated
temperatures have reduced species distribution with
populations becoming largely fragmented and isolated in the
upper reaches of drainages. Population fragmentation has
resulted in decreased species fitness and viability. To
adequately protect Columbia River Basin bull tifout and
Klamath Basin bull trout, migratory corridors should be
afforded protection.
(B) It is clear that bull trout require temperatures less than
10°C for successful spawning, incubation, and rearing. The
criterion applied as a summer maximum should be protective
of life history stages occurring at other times of the year
when temperatures are cooler. However, data on both annual
thermal regimes and bull trout temperature preferences and
effect thresholds should continue to be collected and
analyzed. Collected information should serve as the basis
for decision-making during the next triennial review.
The temperature criterion for rearing is likely to adversely
affect threatened and endangered salmon.
Adult migration, adult holding, smoltification, juvenile
emigration as well as rearing were analyzed for exposure effects
at 17.8°C and where species utilized the Columbia or Willamette
mainstem at 20°C.
(A) The rearing criterion is likely to adversely affect
threatened and endangered Snake River sockeye salmon, Snake
River spring/summer Chinook salmon, Southern Oregon and
California Coastal spring chinook salmon, Lower Columbia
River spring chinook salmon, Upper Willamette River spring
chinook salmon, Snake River fall chinook salmon, southern
Oregon and California coastal fall chinook salmon. Lower
Columbia River fall chinook salmon. Southern Oregon/Northern
California Coast and Oregon Coast coho salmon, Columbia
River chum salmon, and Umpqua River cutthroat trout.
-------
:his criterion should be reassessed and a new temperature
criterion protective of these species during migration,
adult holding, residence, rearing, and smoltification be
developed.
(B) If designated "spawning and rearing habitat" underestimates
available habitat then the designation may not be
sufficiently protective of native salmon.
Essentially the standard establishes a de facto exception to the
rearing criterion. The standard specifies criteria of 20°C for
the Columbia River to river mile 309 and the Willamette River to
river mile 50. This criteria is not protective of salmonid
rearing, smoltification, emigration, adult migration, or adult
holding.
These large river systems have been highly altered through
various land use practices. Depletion of ground water and
subsurface storage, and loss of surface water/9 -n<^ water/
hyporheic zone interaction, loss of sloughs and side channels,
and the construction of dams have altered the natural thermal
regime of large river systems. Shifts in the annual thermal
regime as well as increased maximum temperatures negatively
affect all salmonid life stages.
Although research on fluctuating or intermittently elevated
temperatures may not be exhaustive, the studies that have been
conducted point to the risks associated with this type of
exposure. Organisms respond to maximum diel fluctuation, maximum
daily temperatures, mean daily temperatures, mean monthly
temperatures, and cumulative thermal history with both
physiological and behavioral changes. Response depends upon the
setting and array of temperatures provided. These results are
corroborated by previous studies that established the ability of
freshwater fishes to detect temperature changes as slight as
0.05°C (Berman and Quinn 1991).
Given this information, numeric temperature criteria should be
established below demonstrated sublethal temperature ranges.
Temperature measurement units that mask or allow excursions above
sublethal effects thresholds or that do not adequately consider
cumulative exposure history should not be used. Exposure to mean
or daily maximum temperatures at or above the threshold for
sublethal response may not be offset by daily minimum
temperatures.
The use of a "seven-day moving average of the daily maximum
50
-------
temperature" allows for some flexibility in daily maximum
temperatures that might occur over time. The daily maximum
reportedly can exceed the maximum weekly average temperature by
approximately 0.5 to 2°C (Buchanan and Gregory 1997). As
previously discussed, "flexibility" may not adequately protect
salmonids from exposure to sublethal temperatures. This type of
measurement unit masks the magnitude of temperature fluctuation
and the duration of exposure to daily maximum temperatures.
Additionally, daily mean temperatures and cumulative exposure
history are not addressed.
The ability of Oregon's temperature measurement unit to
adequately protect native salmon and charr lies in (1) the
protectiveness of the numeric criteria selected, (2) the ability
to define unacceptable maximum diel fluctuation, and (3) the
ability to track and respond to cumulative exposure history. If,
as in the current case, the measurement unit in conjunction with
numeric criteria masks salmonid exposure to sublethal and lethal
temperatures then the -.sasurement unit, the criteria, or both
must be modified. Establishment of conservative numeric criteria
would lessen concerns surrounding the magnitude of fluctuation
and cumulative exposure. However, in the long-term these issues
should be factored into the temperature standard.
Using a hypothetical stream reach as our example, it becomes
evident that the "seven-day moving average" masks the magnitude
of temperature fluctuation and the duration of exposure to daily
maximum temperatures as well as neglects cumulative exposure
history. From the example, we find that on five of the seven
days, the daily maximum temperature is at or above the rearing
criterion. Although daily mean temperatures do not exceed the
criterion, they are less than 1°C from the criterion on five of
the seven days. Where daily maximum temperatures are 17.8°C or
greater, organisms are exposed to temperatures equal to or
greater than the criterion over a potentially significant portion
of the day. Finally, the "seven-day moving average of the daily
maximum temperature" meets the rearing criterion of 17.8°C even
though the cumulative exposure history of an organism in "Stream
XYZ" is often at or above the standard and is well within the
sublethal to lethal range. The assumption that "the criteria
represent a "maximum" condition, given diurnal variability..."
appears unfounded. Based on current numeric criteria, the
temperature measurement unit does not adequately protect native
salmon and charr. Establishment of conservative numeric
temperature criteria would lessen concerns surrounding the
magnitude of fluctuation and cumulative exposure.
51
-------
As most riverine networks currently exceeding temperature
standards exceed other water quality standards as well, the
standard may not adequately address the synergistic effects of
multiple stressors. Additionally, it is important to recognize
that these systems do not contain the system diversity and
resilience to provide refuge from elevated temperatures. Shifts
in the thermal regime affect all life history forms to different
degrees and different magnitudes. These effects are cumulative.
Loss of organism integrity due to elevated temperatures weakens
the ability of individuals to respond to additional stressors.
The maintenance and restoration of spatially diverse, high
quality habitats that minimizes the risk of extinction is key to
beneficial use support of cold water species (Quigley 1997).
Therefore, areas of historical species distribution should be
identified and restored to ensure long-term species survival.
Identified areas should be reflected in beneficial use
designations.
The June 22, 1998 letter clarifying application of Oregon's
standards states that, "The temperature criteria of 64°F will be
applied to all water bodies that support salmonid fish
rearing...This would include all waters except those listed as
warm water above."
Portions of systems identified for "warm water" uses historically
supported salmonids. Extinct populations include spring/summer
chinook salmon in the Klamath River, Malheur River, and Owyhee
River; fall chinook in the Klamath River; and steelhead from the
Owyhee River and Malheur River (Nehlsen et al. 1991). In
addition, systems currently supporting salmon or charr such as
the Willamette River are identified for "cool water" use.
To fully protect beneficial uses and to restore endangered and
threatened species, it may not be adequate to solely address
current conditions and distributions. To ensure species
persistence, cold water systems and remnant patches should be
protected and areas of historical distribution should be
identified and thermal regimes restored.
Shifts in the annual thermal regimes of river systems may
generate a cascade of changes affecting the successful completion
of life history stages. The phase shift of riverine temperatures
should be evaluated in conjunction with single maxima. Species
are adapted to the abiotic conditions of riverine systems. Phase
shifts may negatively affect egg development and the timing of
emergence, reproduction, and emigration (Naiman et al. 1992,
-------
Hoirbv 1968). State standards use daily or weekly criteria to
protect perceived sensitive life history stages. However, this
approach may not be fully protective of poikilothermic species
such as salmonids (see Section VI). Modifications to the timing
of seasonal temperature shifts are as important to salmonid
viability as daily maximum, minimum, and averages temperatures.
This topic should be the basis of future discussions related to
temperature standard development.
Issues related to the scale of applicable designated beneficial
use categories should be clarified. For example, the salmonid
rearing criterion states that, "...In a basin for which rearing
is a designated beneficial use, and in which surface water
temperatures exceed 17.8°C." To reduce possible confusion, the
hydrologic unit code or other methods to accurately depict
locations should be employed.
The standard is based on the Department's ability to accurately
locate spawning, incubation, and rearing locations for native
salmon, charr, and trout. Of concern in this analysis is the
representativeness, completeness, and accuracy of the stream and
salmonid use data as well as the accuracy of the beneficial use
designations. Oregon has made much progress in data collection
and information management. However, more detail is required for
waterbodies where limited or no information exists.
Additionally, the extent of our knowledge concerning distribution
and life history requirements of native salmon and charr should
not be overestimated. For example, Washington State did not
collect data in small or ephemeral streams based on the belief
that salmonids did not exploit these systems. Later
investigations found this assumption to be false. However, in
the interim, habitat important to native species was adversely
affected. Additionally, management based on perceived
understanding of run timings has skewed migration timing,
reducing species fitness and variability.
Finally, standards based solely on presence-absence of species
and single life history stages exclude historical habitat that
may be critical to population and species survival. Presence-
absence data alone should not be used to define species ranges
that are dynamic and vary over time according to natural
disturbance regimes and habitat suitability. As with species
range, within range habitat critical to single life history
stages such as spawning and rearing may be "stable" in the short-
term, but may vary significantly over the long-term. Therefore,
beneficial use designations that do not account for the dynamic
-------
nature of ecological systems nay not accurately reflect species
rar.ce or spawning and rearing habitat. Designating only a
portion of the overall range exposes species to additional risks.
Those spawning or rearing areas inappropriately designated may be
systematically degraded as a higher temperature criterion is
applied. Further analysis of species distributions, current
temperature profiles, and beneficial use designations is
requi red.
The issue of identifying and protecting cold-water refugia is
complex. Several questions arise such as the scale at which
refugia occur, identification criteria and methods, and the
effect of system alteration on refugia abundance, distribution,
and accessability.
The Standard states that, ecologically significant cold-water
refugia exists "when all or a portion of a waterbody supports
stenotypic cold-water species not otherwise widely supported
within the subbasin...." Firstly, refugia may occur at various
scales and may expand and contract depending on controlling
factors. Refugia include micro-habitat features within stream
reaches, as well as macro-habitat features such as stream
reaches, tributaries, watersheds, subbasins, as well as basins.
Secondly, refugia are areas available to species during
disturbance events - they do not necessarily "support cold-water
species not otherwise widely supported within the subbasin" at
all times of the year. As natural or anthropogenic disturbances
affect the system, species distribution shrinks, and refugia are
utilized. The definition provided in the standard is more akin
to a "source" area subsequent to disturbance.
Thirdly, intact stream networks may provide larger more
contiguous areas of cold water during summer months than degraded
systems. Therefore, refugia in intact and disturbed systems may
not be comparable in abundance, distribution, or accessability.
Issues related to delineation of refugia should be clarified.
Fourthly, the definition states that the refuge, "maintains cold-
water temperatures throughout the year...." Refugia develop
through many different mechanisms. However, often ground water
or subsurface flow plays a role. In these instances, winter
temperatures may actually be greater than ambient temperatures.
Finally, a protocol outlining_an approach for_ refugia
\ I id.ent_ifica_t_ion should be developed. Lack of standardization may
• lead co the loss of critical refugia.
54
-------
The statement:, "In stream segments containing federally listed
Threatened and Endangered species, if the increase would impair
the biological integrity of the ... population" requires
clarification. Again the issue of scale must be discussed.
Assessment of species integrity requires analysis of scales
greater than single reaches. Information related to condition
across the species' range as well as risks to these areas is
important to decision-making. Data and spatial and temporal
scale of effective areas necessary to define impairment of
biological integrity should be specified.
The standard specifies that, "An exceedence of the numeric
criteria...will not be deemed a temperature standard violation if
it occurs when the air temperature during the warmest seven-day
period of the year exceeds the 90th percentile of the seven-day
daily maximum air temperature " Although additional language
indicates that approved surface water temperature management
plans will remain in affect during these periods, this
specification ignores both the complex array of underlying
factors controlling ambient stream temperature as well as the
differences in response to air temperature oscillation between
intact and altered systems.
There are many factors that affect ambient water temperature as
well as the number, distribution, and accessibility of thermal
refugia. Processes controlling air temperature, channel
morphology, riparian structure, hyporheic zones and ground water,
wetland complexes, and flow volume shape stream temperature.
Alteration of one or more of these parameters leads to thermal
alteration. Temperature may be perceived as a single water
quality parameter. However, thermal regimes are established
through the complex interaction of the above controlling factors.
Therefore, stream segments exceeding temperature criteria during
warm periods may actually be in violation of state standards if
alteration affecting the controlling factors has occurred. This
alteration would lead to higher maximum temperatures as well as
greater magnitude of fluctuation than in an intact system.
Additionally, the altered system would contain fewer cold water
refugia. This statement should be rewritten to accurately
reflect the ecology of the riverine system.
The statement, "Any source may petition the Commission for
exception to ...for discharge above the identified criteria if:
the source provides the necessary scientific information to
describe how the designated beneficial use would not be adversely
impacted" requires clarification. Species integrity requires
analysis of scales greater than single sources or reaches. This
-------
should not be a "piecerreal" process. Necessary data and spatial
and temporal scale of effective areas should be specified.
The majority of discussion regarding lethal and sublethal
temperature effects addresses elevated temperatures. However,
the effect of sublethal low temperatures should also be reviewed
in the next triennium.
56
-------
References:
Barton, B.A. and C.B. Schreck. 1987. Metabolic cose of acute physical
stress in juvenile steelhead. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 116:257-263.
Bell, M. 19886. Fisheries Handbook. Chapter 11.
Beacham, T.D. and C.B. Murray. 1985. Effect of female size, egg size,
and water temperature on developmental biology of chum salmon
(Oncorhynchus keta)from the Nitinat River, British Columbia. Can. J.
Fish. Aquat. Sci. 42:1755-1765.
Berman, C.H. and T.P. Quinn. 1991. Behavioural thermoregulation and
homing by spring chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (Walbaum),
in the Yakima River. J. Fish. Biol. 39: 301-312.
Berman, C.H. 1990. Effect of elevated holding temperatures on adult
spring chinook salmon reproductive success. Ms Thesis. University of
Washington, .I^attle.
Beschta, R.L., R.E. Bilby, G.W. Brown, L.B. Holtby, T.D. Hofstra.
1987. Stream Temperature and aquatic habitat: fisheries and forestry
interactions, pgs. 191-232. In: Streamside Management: Forestry and
Fishery Interactions, E.G. Salo and T.W. Cundy (eds.) Institute of
Forest Resources, University of Washington. Contribution No. 57.
Bouck, G.R., G.A. Chapman, P.W. Schneider, and D.G. Stevens. 1975.
Effects of holding temperatures on reproductive development in adult
sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka). In: 26th Annual Northwest Fish
Culture Conference. Ed. J.R. Donaldson, pp.24-40.
Bjornn, T.C. and D.W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmonids
in streams. In: Influences of Forest and Rangeland Management on
Salmonid Fishes and Their Habitats. American Fisheries Society Spec.
Pub. 19:83-138.
Brett, J.R. 1965. Some principles in the thermal requirements of
fishes. Quart. Rev. Biol. 31: 75-87.
Brett, J.R. 1952. Temperature tolerance in young Pacific salmon, Genus
Oncorhynchus. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 9:265-323.
Brett, J. R., M. Hollands, and D.F. Alderdice. 1958. The effect of
temperature on the cruising speed of young sockeye and coho salmon. J.
Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 32: 485-491.
57
-------
Buchanan, D.V. and S.V. Gregory. 1997. Development of water
temperature standards to protect and restore habitat for bull trout
and other cold water species in Oregon. In: W.C. Mackey, M.K. Brevir,
and M. Monita (eds.), Friends of the Bull Trout Conference
Proceedings.
Burck, W.A. 1994. Life history of spring chinook salmon in
Lookingglass Creek, Oregon. Information Reports, Number 94-1. Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Fish Division, 149 pg.
Burgner, R.L. 1991. Life history of sockeye salmon. In: Pacific Salmon
Life Histories ed. C. Groot and L. Margolis. Pgs.3-117.
Childs, Allen. 1998. pers. com.. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla.
Combs, B. D.1965. Effect of temperature on the development of salmon
eggs. Prog. Fish-Cult. 27: 134-137.
Coutant, C.C. 19.77. Compilation of temperature preference data. J.
Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 34:739-745.
Cunjak, R.A. 1988. Physiological consequences of overwintering in
streams: the cost of acclimatization. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.
45:443-452.
Dent, L., G. Robison, K. Mills, A. Skaugset, J. Paul. 1997. Oregon
Department of Forest 1996 Storm Impacts Monitoring Project Preliminary
Report. 53 pgs.
Dong, J.N. 1981. Thermal tolerance and rate of development of coho
salmon embryos. Master's thesis. University of Washington.
Elliott, J.M. 1981. Some aspects of thermal stress on freshwater
teleosts. In: Stress and Fish. J. Am. Ecol. A.D. Pickering (ed.). Pg
209-245.
Ferguson, R.G. 1958. The preferred temperature of fish and their
midsummer distribution in temperate lakes and streams. J. Fish. Res.
Bd. Can. 15:607-624.
Garling, D.L. and M. Masterson. 1985. Survival of Lake Michigan
chinook salmon eggs and fry incubated at three temperatures. Prog.
Fish-Cult. 47:63-66.
Gilhousen, P. 1990. Prespawning mortalities on sockeye salmon in the
Fraser River system and possible causal factors. International Pacific
Salmon Fisheries Commission, Vancouver, B.C.
58
-------
Kerning, T. A.1982. Effects of temperature on utilization of yolk by
chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawyrscha)eggs and alevins. Can. J.
Fish. Aquat. Sci. 39:184-190.
Henderson, M.A., D.A. Levy, and J.S. Stockner. 1992. Probable
Consequences of climate change on freshwater production of Adams River
sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) . Geo-Journal 28(1): 51-59.
Hicks, M. 1998. Preliminary Review Draft Discussion Paper.-
Supplementary Appendix: Evaluating Standards for Protecting Aquatic
Life in Washington's Surface Water Quality Standards. Washington
Department of Ecology, Water Quality Program.
Holtby, L.B. 1988. Effects of logging on stream temperatures in
Carnation Creek, British Columbia, and associated impacts on the coho
salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Ca. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 45:502-515.
Holtby, L.B., T.E. McMahon, and J.C. Scrivener. 1989. Stream
temperatures ^iid inter-annual variability in the emigration timing of
coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) smolts and fry and chum salmon (O.
Keta)fry from Carnation Creek, British Columbia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat.
Sci. 46:1989.
Huntsman, A.G. 1942. Death of salmon and trout with high temperatures.
J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 5:485-501.
Independent Scientific Group. 1996. Return to the River: Restoration
of Salmonid Fishes in the Columbia River Ecosystem.
Kruzic, L.M. 1998. Ecology of Juvenile Coho Salmon within the Upper
South Umpqua River Basin, Oregon. MS Thesis. University of Idaho.
Magnus on, J.J., L.B. Crowder, and P.A, Medvick. 1979. Temperature as
an ecological resource. Amer.Zool. 19:331-343.
Marine, K. R. 1992. A background investigation and review of the
effects of elevated water temperature on reproductive performance of
adult chinook salmon. Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Biology,
University of California, Davis.
McCullough, D.A. 1997. Draft. A review and synthesis of effects of
alterations to the water temperature regime on freshwater life stages
of salmonids, with special reference to chinook salmon.
-------
Xclr.tosh, B.A., C.E. Torgersen, D.M. Price, and H.W. Li. 1995.
Distribution, habitat utilization, movement patterns, and the use of
thermal refugia by spring chinook in the Grande Ronde, Imnaha, and
John Day Basins. Annual report to the Bonneville Power
Administration. Project Number 93-7000.
Meisner, J.D. 1990. Effect of climatic warming on the southern margins
of the native range of the brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis. Can.
J. Fish. Aq. Sci. 47: 1065-1070.
Meisner, J.D., J.S. Rosenfeld, and H.A. Regier. 1988. The role of
groundwater in the impact of climate warming on stream salmonids.
Fisheries 13 (3) :2-8.
Murray, C.B. and J.D. McPhail. 1988. Effect of incubation temperature
on the development of five species of Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus)
embryos and alevins. Can. J. Zool. 66:266-273.
Naiman, R.J., T.J. Beechie, L.E. Benda, L.H. MacDonald, M.D. O'Connor,
C. Oliver, P. Olson, and E.A. Steel. 1992. Fundamental elements of
ecologically healthy watersheds in the Pacific Northwest Coastal
Ecoregion. pg. 127-188. In: R.J. Naiman (ed.), Watershed Management:
Balancing Sustainability and Environmental Change. Springer-Verlag,
New York.
Nawa, R.K., C.A. Frissell, J.L. Ebersole, and W.J. Liss. 1991. Life
History and Persistence of Anadromous Fish Stocks in Relation to
Stream Habitats and Watershed Characterization. Annual Progress
Report. Prepared by Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State
University for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Nehlsen, W., J.E. Williams, and J.A. Lichatowich. 1991. Pacific salmon
at the crossroads: stocks at risk from California, Oregon,.Idaho, and
Washington. Fisheries 16(2):4-21.
Neitzel, D.A. and C.D. Becker. 1985. Tolerance of eggs, embryos, and
alevins of chinook salmon to temperature changes and reduced humidity
in dewatered redds. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 114:267-273.
Olson, P.A. and R.F. Foster. 1955. Temperature tolerance of eggs and
young of Columbia River chinook salmon. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 85:203-
207.
Post, G. 1987. Textbook of Fish Health. T.F.H. Publications, Inc.,
N. J.
60
-------
Prate, K.L. 19-32. A review of bull trout life history. Proceedings of
the Gearhart Mountain Bull Trout Workshop, Oregon Chapter of the
American Fisheries Society.
Quigley, T.M. and S.J. Arbelbide, tech.eds. 1997. An assessment of
ecosystem components in the interior Columbia basin and portions of
the Klamath and Great Basins: volume 3. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-405.
Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
Northwest Research Station. 4 vol. (Quigley, T.M. tech ed.; The
Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: Scientific
Assessment).
Quinn, T.P. and D.J. Adams. 1996. Environmental changes affecting the
migratory timing of American shad and sockeye salmon. Ecology.
77(4) :1151-1162.
Ratliff. D.E. and P.J. Howell. 1992. The status of bull trout
populations in Oregon. Proceedings of the Gearhart Mountain Bull Trout
Workshop, Oregon Chapter of the American Fisheries Society.
Reeves, G.H., L.E. Benda, K.M. Burnett, P.A. Bisson, and J.R. Sedell.
1995. A disturbance-based ecosystem approach to maintaining and
restoring freshwater habitats of evolutionarily significant units of
anadromous salmonids in the Pacific Northwest. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp.
17:334-349.
Reeves, G.H., F.H. Everest, and J.D. Hall. 1987. Interaction between
the redside shiner (Richardsonius balteatus) and the steelhead trout
(Salmo gairdneri) in western Oregon: the influence of water
temperature. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 44:1603-1613.
Ringler, N.H. and J.D. Hall. 1975. Effects of logging on water
temperature and dissolved oxygen in spawning beds. Trans. Am. Fish.
Soc. 104:111-121.
Sakh. 1984. Egg incubation in coho salmon as a function of water
temperature. Rybn. Khoz. 10:21-22.
Sandercock, F.K. 1991. Life histories of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus
kisutch) . In: Pacific Salmon.- Life Histories. C. Groot and L. Margolis
(eds.)UBC Press, Vancouver, pgs 395-445.
Sauter, S. Unpublished data. Columbia River Research Laboratory,
Biological Resources Division, USGS.
-------
Scrivener, J.C. and B.C. Andersen. 1934. Logging impacts and seme
mechanisms that determine the size of spring and summer populations of
coho salmon fry (Oncorhynchus kisuzch) in Carnation Creek, British
Columbia. Can. J. Fish. Aq . Sci. 41:1097-1105.
Smith, C.E, W.P. Dwyer, and R.G. Piper. 1983. Effect of water
temperature on egg quality of cutthroat trout. Prog. Fish Cult.
45: 176-178.
Snyder, G.R. and T.H. Blahm. 1971. Effects of increased temperature on
cold-water organisms. J. WPCF. 43 (5) :890-899.
Spence, B.C. G..A. Lomnicky, R.M. Hughes, R.P. Novitzki. 1996. An
ecosystem approach to salmonid conservation. TR-4501-96-6057. ManTech
Environmental Research Services Corp., Corvallis, OR.
Swift, C.H. III. 1976. Estimation of stream discharges preferred by
steelhead trout for spawning and rearing in western Washington. 50pp.
Tang, J., M.D. Bryant, and E.L. Brannon. 1987. Effect of temperature
extremes on the mortality and development rates of coho salmon embryos
and alevins. Prog. Fish Cult. 49:167-174.
Taranger, G.L. and T. Hansen. 1993. Ovulation and egg survival
following exposure of Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., broodstock to
different water temperatures. Aq. Fish. Manage. 24:151-156.
Technical Staffs of the Department of Fisheries of Canada and the
International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission. 1952. Report on the
fisheries problem created by the development of power in the Nechako-
Kemano-Nanika River systems, Supplement #1, Temperature changes in the
Nechako River and their effects on the salmon population. 42pp.
Temperature Subcommittee, Technical Advisory and Policy Advisory
Committees. 1995. Temperature 1992-1994 Water Quality Standard Review,
Final Issue Paper. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.
Thomas, R.E., J.A. Gharrett, M.G. Carls, S.D. Rice, A. Moles, and S.
Korn. 1986. Effects of fluctuating temperatures on mortality, stress,
and energy reserves of juvenile coho salmon. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.
115:52-59.
Tipping, J. 1986. Effect of release size on return rates of hatchery
sea-run cutthroat trout. Prog. Fish Cult. 48: 195-197.
-------
Wedemeyer, G.A. and C.P. Goodyear. 1984. Diseases caused by
environmental stressors. pp. 424-434. In: O. Kinne (ed.)Diseases of
Marine Animals, Hamburg, Germany.
Wissmar, R.C., J.E. Smith, 3.A. Mclntosh, H.W. Li, G.H. Reeves, and
J.R. Sedell. 1994. Ecological health of river basins in forested
regions of eastern Washington and Oregon. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-326.
Portland, OR.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific
Northwest Research Station. 65 pg.
6.1
-------
Appendix - A Summary of Temperature Preference and Effects from the
Technical Literature:
Definitions (from McCullough 1997):
Optimum: The optimum temperature range provides for feeding activity,
normal physiological response, and normal behavior. The optimum range
is slightly wider than the growth range.
Preferred: The preferred temperature range is that which the organism
most frequently inhabits when allowed to freely select temperatures in
a thermal gradient. The final temperature preferendum is a preference
made within 24 hours in a thermal gradient and is independent of
acclimation temperature.
Lethal loading: Increased burden on metabolism that controls growth
and activity. Lethal loading stress occurs over long periods (Brett
1958) .
Upper incipient lethal temperature: An exposure temperature, given a
previous acclimation to a constant temperature, that 50% of the fish
can tolerate for 7 days. The ultimate upper incipient lethal
temperature is the point where further increases in acclimation
temperature results in no increase in temperature tolerated.
Upper lethal temperature: The temperature at which survival of a test
group is 50% in a 10 minute exposure, given a prior acclimation
temperatures within the tolerance zone.
I. Sockeye;
Adult migration: 7.2-15.6°C (Bell 1986, Spence et al.
1996)
10CC adult sockeye lost 7.5% body
weight and had visible fat reserves,
at 16.2°C they lost 12% of their body
weight and visible fat reserves were
essentially depleted. Females with
developing eggs lost more body weight
than males. Also adverse gonadal
development of females (Bouck et al.
1977)
21"-C migration inhibition (Beschta et
al . 1987 from Major and Mighell 1967).
64
-------
Spawning:
Incubation:
Rearing:
Physiological optimum:
Smelt ouEmigration:
Termination of smolt
outmigration:
II. Spring Chinook Salmon;
Adult migration:
Spawning:
Above 21:C rising or stable
temperatures blocked entry of fish
from the Columbia River into the
Okanagan River, WA; falling
temperatures allowed migration to
resume
10.6-12.2CC (Bell 1986, Spence et al .
1996)
4.4-13.5°C (Combs 1965)
4.4-13.3°C (Bell 1986, Spence et al.
1996)
10CC (Dept of Fisheries, Canada;
International Pacific Salmon Fisheries
Commission 1952)
> 12.8°C severe mortality (Dept.
Fisheries, Canada; Combs 1965)
10-12.8°C (Bell 1986)
10.6:C (Huntsman 1942, Burgner, 1991)
10.6-12.8°C (Coutant 1977)
14.5°C (Coutant 1977; Ferguson 1958;
Huntsman 1942)
12-14°C (Brett 1952)
11.2-14.6°C preferred (Beschta et al.
1987)
15°C optimum (Beschta et al. 1987)
15°C (Brett et al. 1958)
2-10;C (Spence et al. 1996)
12-14°C (Brett et al. 1958)
3.3-13.3°C (Bell 1986, Bjornn and
Reiser 1991, Spence et al. 1996)
21CC migration block (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
5.6-14.4°C (Olson and Foster 1955)
5.6-13.9°C (Bell 1986, Spence et al
199S)
-------
Incubation:
5.6-12.8:C (Temperature Subcommittee,
DEQ 1995)
5-14.4°C (Bell 1986, Spence et al .
1996)
4.5-12.8°C (Temperature Subcommittee,
DEQ 1995)
.Rearing:
Adult holding:
Smoltification and
Outmigration:
Optimum production:
11.7°C (Coutant 1977, Ferguson 1958,
Huntsman 1942)
10-12.8°C {Bell 1986)
10-14.8°C {Temperature Subcommittee,
DEQ 1995)
8-12.5°C (Temperature Subcommittee,
DEQ 1995)
13-15.5°C pronounced mortality
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
6-14°C - optimal pi<=-Dawning
broodstock survival, maturation, and
spawning {Marine 1992)
3.3-12.2°C (Temperature Subcommittee,
DEQ 1995)
18.3°C smolt lethal loading stress
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
10°C {Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ
1995)
Maximum growth:
Lethal:
Sublethal:
III. Summer Chinook Salmon:
14.8°C {Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ
1995)
18-21°C {Marine 1992)
17.5°C - upper sub-lethal to lethal
range (Berman 1990)
15-17°C {Marine 1992, Berman 1990)
Adult Migration:
13.9-20°C (Bell 1986, Spence et al
1996)
Spawning:
5.6-14.4:C (Olson and Foster 1955)
66
-------
Incubation.-
Rearing:
6.I-18.0-C (Olson and Foster 1955)
5.6-13.9;C (Spence et al. 1996)
5.0-14.4=0 (Spence et al. 1996)
11.7-C (Coutant 197V,- Ferguson 1958,
Huntsman 1942)
10.0-12.8°C (Bell 1986)
IV. Fall Chinook Salmon:
Adult migration:
Spawning:
IncubaLl^n:
Rearing:
Smoltification:
V. Chinook Salmon (general):
10.6-19.4°C (Bell 1986, Spence et al.
1996)
10-12.8°C (Bell 1986)
10-16.7°C (Olson and Foster 1955)
5.6-13.9°C (Spence et al. 1996)
10-12.8°C (Bell 1986)
10-16.7°C (Olson and Foster 1955)
10-12°C (Heming 1982, Neitzel and
Becker 1985, Garling and Masterson
1985)
5-14.4°C (Spence et al. 1996)
> 12°C alevins substantial reduction
in survival (Ringler and Hall 1975)
> 15.6°C mortality (Smith et al.1983)
12-14°C (Bell 1986)
4.5-15.5°C typical migration (Spence
et al. 1996)
ATPase Activity - 8°C and 13°C allow
increased activity over a 6 week
period, at 18°C ATPase activity
decreases over the same time period -
inhibitory effect of water temperature
on gill Na-K ATPase activity (Sauter
unpublished data)
Final Temperature Preferendiun:
aduJ t:
Yearling:
17.3°C (Coutant 1977)
11.7°C (Ferguson 1958; Huntsman 1942)
67
-------
Spawning:
Incubation:
f .•:-:?. 9 C (Bjo::ir. and Reiser)
5.1•10.6 C (Bell 1586)
r.6-12.8:C (Temperature Subcommittee,
DEQ 1995)
spawning inhibition 15.5°C
5-14.4:C (Bjornn and Reiser)
13-C (Bell 1986)
> 12.5°C increases egg mortality and
inhibits alevin development - produces
only 50% egg survival (Calif Dept
Water Res)
Rearing:
Smoltiflcation:
10-15.6°C maximum productivity (Brett
1952)
12-14°C preferred range (Brett 1952)
7 . 30C-14.6°C preferred range (Beschta
et al. 1987)
12.2°C optimum (Beschta et al. 1987)
> 12.8°C first feeding fry do not
develop normally
> 15.5°C disease increases mortality
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
< 12.2°C (Calif Dept Water Resources,
all salmonids)
18-21°C sub-lethal and lethal loading
stress (Brett 1952)
Return to the River Report: Independent Scientific Group (1996)
pp.171
Chinook salmon - Other salmon species are not markedly different
in their requirements.
Adult migration and spawning: optimum- 10°C, with a range of
about 8- 13°C; stressful->15.6°C; lethal- 21°C
Incubation: optimum-<10°C, with a range of about 8- 12°C;
stressful->13 . 3°C; lethal->15.63C
juvenile rearing: optimum- 15:C, with a range of about 12- 17°C;
stressful->18.3°C; lethal 25;C
National Marine Fisheries Service:
Chinook habitat assessment: 10-13.9:C properly functioning; 14-15.5°C
at risk for spawning; and 14-17.5 C at r.isk for rearing and migration.
-------
VI. Steelhead:
Adult migration: X
21CC migration inhibition (Beschta et
al. 1987)
10-13"C general preferred (Bjornn and
Reiser 1991)
Upper incipient
lethal temperature: 21-22°C (Hicks 1998)
Spawning: 3.9-9.4° C (Bell 1986, Spence et al.
1996)
4.4-12.8°C (Swift 1976)
Rainbow trout brood fish must be held
at water temperatures below 13.3°C and
preferably not above 12.2°C for a
period of 2 to 6 months before
spawning to produce eggs of good
quality (Smith et al. 1983)
Incubation: 5.6-ll.l°C (Hicks 1998)
Preferred Temperatures Rearing:
summer run 10-12.8°C (Bell 1986)
winter run 10-12.8°C (Bell 1986)
fall run 10-14.4°C (Bell 1986)
spring run 10-12.8°C (Bell 1986)
7. 3-14 . 6°C preferred (Beschta et al.
1987)
10°C optimum (Beschta et al. 1987)
Smoltification: 11-12.2°C from 7.2°C resulted in
cessation of downstream movement
(Hicks 1998)
<12°C (Hicks 1998)
See: Return to the River Report: Independent Scientific Group chinook
comments for migration and incubation temperatures.
VII. Coho
Adult migration: 7.2-15.6:C (Reiser and Bjornn 1973, Brett
1952)
-------
Spawning:
Incubation:
Lower lethal:
Upper lethal:
Rearing:
Smoltification:
4.4-9.4:C ;Reiser and Bjornn 1973, Brett
1952)
10-12.8:C (Bell 1986)
7.2-12.8°C (Hicks 1998)
4.4-13.3;C (Reiser and Bjornn 1973, Brett
1952)
10-12.8°C (Bell 1986)
8-9°C (Sakh 1984)
4-6.5°C (Dong 1981)
Egg mortality approx. 14°C (Reiser and
Bjornn 1973, Brett 1952)
>12°C increased mortality (Allen 1957 in
Murray and McPhail 1988)
>11°C increased mortality (Murray and
McPhail 1988)
1.3-10.9CC produced best survival rates of
eggs and alevins (Tang et al. 1987)
2-8°C optimum range (Tang et al. 1987)
0.6-1.3°C (Dong 1981)
12.5-14.5°C (Dong 1981), University of
Washington
10.9-12.5°C (Dong 1981), Dungeness River, WA
11.8-14.6°C (Reiser and Bjornn 1973, Brett
1952)
11.4°C (Coutant 1977)
12-14°C (Bell 1986)
Cessation of growth >20.3°C (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995, Reiser and Bjornn
1973, Brett 1952)
11.8-14.6°C, preferred (Beschta et al. 1987)
25.8°C, upper lethal (Beschta et al. 1987)
12-15.53C (Brett et al. 1958)
2.5-13.3:C observed migration - most fish
migrate before temperatures reach 11-12°C
(Spence et al. 1996)
70
-------
Optimum Cruising
Speed:
20;C Underyearl ing arid yearling approach
velocities above dams exceeding 1.0
foot/second creates a problem in
safeguarding underyearlings. Capacity to
stem such a current for greater than one
hour is limited to 18.5-21.5CC (Brett et al
1958)
Final Temperature Preferendum:
Adult:
Adult:
Upper lethal:
Preferred
temperature:
11.4°C (Coutant 1977) Laboratory
16.6°C (Coutant 1977) L. Michigan
26°C, incipient lethal temperature (Brett
1952)
Acclimation was 20°C, 50% mortality in 1,000
min.
25°C (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
12-14°C, temperatures >15°C were avoided
(Brett 1952)
VIII. Chum
Adult migration:
Spawning:
Incubation:
Rearing:
8.3-15.6°C (Bjornn and Reiser 1991)
7.2-12.8°C (Bjornn and Reiser 1991)
8°C (Beacham and Murray 1985)
4.4-13.3°C (Bjornn and Reiser 1991)
6-10°C, maximum efficiency for conversion of
yolk to tissue (Beacham and Murray 1985)
12°C, alevin mortality occurred 1-3 days
after hatch (Beacham and Murray 1985)
14.1°C (Coutant 1977, Ferguson 1958,
Huntsman 1942)
10-12.8°C (Bell 1986)
11.2-14.6°C, preferred (Beschta et al. 1987)
12-14°C, preferred (Brett 1952)
13.5°C, optimum (Beschta et al. 1987)
25.8°C, upper lethal (Beschta et al. 1987)
71
-------
Final temperature preferendum:
l/nderyearl ing:
Yearling:
14.1:C (Coutant 1977) Laboratory
14.1°C (Ferguson 1958) Laboratory
14.1CC (Huntsman 1942) Laboratory
Smoltification:
Upper lethal:
X
25.4°C, incipient lethal temperature (Brett
1952)
Acclimation was 20°C, 50% mortality in 1,000
min.
IX. Umpqua cutthroat
Jeff Dose, Forest Fisheries Biologist, Umpqua National Forest
(7/13/98). Few or no cutthroat occur where thermographs are
located. Temperatures may be too warm, distribution and
abundance has decreased from 1937 survey data. i_,ance Kruzic MS
thesis (NMFS, Portland) - 15.5:C to 21°C no cutthroat present,
upstream approx 4.5°C cooler begin to find cutthroat, defining
distribution. Loss of spatial distribution, fragmentation, upper
reaches where competition and disturbance regimes are a concern.
Sea-run cutthroat
Adult migration
Adult Holding:
Spawning:
Incubation:
18-22.8°C upper lethal temperature range
(Kruzic 1998)
Smith, C.E., W.P. Dwyer, and R.G. Piper.
1983. Effect of water temperature on egg
survival of cutthroat trout. Prog. Fish-
Cult. 43:176-178. West-slope cutthroat
trout: Females held in fluctuating
temperatures (2-10°C) had significantly
better eggs than those held at a constant
10°C. Elevated temps experienced by mature
females affected subsequent viability and
survival of embryos.
6.1-17.2:C (Beschta et al. 1987, Bell 1986)
X
Rearing:
10°C (Bell 1986)
9.5 12. 9 C, preferred (Beschta et al. 1987)
-------
Smoltif ication:
X. Bull trout
23:C, upper lethal (Beschta et al. 1987;
22.8:C, upper lethal (Bell 1986)
Mi grra t i on :
Spawning:
10-12°C (Administrative Record, July 21,
1997, Bull Trout -Specific Temperature
Criteria for Idaho Streams: Technical
Basis, Notes, and Issues, Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
MT (Temperature
<9-lO°C, initiate spawning,
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
<9°C, initiate spawning, B.C. (Spence et al
1996, Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995,
Pratt 1992)
4.5°C, Metolius River, Oregon {Spence et al
1996, Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
4-10°C (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
5-6.5°C, peak spawning activities
(Administrative Record, July 21, 1997, Bull
Trout -Specific Temperature Criteria for
Idaho Streams: Technical Basis, Notes, and
Issues)
Incubation:
Rearing:
8-10°C, 0-20% survived to hatch, B.C.
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
6°C, 60-90% survived to hatch, B.C.
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
2-4°C, 80-95% survived to hatch, B.C.
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
4-6°C, MT (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ
1995)
1-6°C (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
2-6°C (Spence et al. 1996)
4:C optimal temperature for growth, B.C.
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
4.5°C, Metolius River, Oregon (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
-------
4-4.5C, optimum fry growth (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
4-10 C, optimum juvenile growth (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
<10°C, Metolius River (Administrative
Record, July 21, 1997, Bull Trout -Specific
Temperature Criteria for Idaho Streams:
Technical Basis, Notes, and Issues)
>14°C is a thermal barrier in closely
related arctic charr (Pratt 1992)
Adult resident:
Competition:
19°C, no bull trout were observed, MT
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
15-18°C, bull trout were present, MT
(Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
<16°C, bull trout present, John Day Basin,
OR (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
<12°C, highest densities of bull trout, MT
(Temperature Subcommittee, uEQ 1995)
9-13°C, adult preference (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
Less than or equal to 12°C, highest adult
density (Temperature Subcommittee, DEQ
1995)
4-18°C, adults present (Temperature
Subcommittee, DEQ 1995)
<15°C vertical distribution in lakes (Pratt
1992)
12°C, Metolius River, reach susceptible to
brook trout invasion (Administrative
Record, July 21, 1997, Bull Trout -Specific
Temperature Criteria for Idaho Streams:
Technical Basis, Notes, and Issues)
-------
Additional Sources:
Upper lethal: Acclimation temperature was 20°C, 50% mortality occurred
in 1,000 minutes (16.7 hours) (Spence et al. 1996):
Chinook: 26.2°C Sockeye: 25.8°C Steelhead: 23.9°C
Upper lethal temperature (chinook): 25.1°C (Brett 1952)
The Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program of the Northwest
Power Planning Council recommends that habitat restoration efforts in
tributaries maintain temperatures in historically useable spawning and
rearing habitat at less than 60'F (15.5°C), not to exceed 68°F (20°C).pg
168 Return to the River.
National Marine Fisheries Service:
Making ESA Determinations of Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions
at the Watershed Scale:
Properly functioning: 10-14C
At risk:
Spawning: 14-15.5C
Migration and rearing: 14-17.8C
Not properly functioning:
Spawning: >15.5C
Migration and rearing: >17.8C
Brett (1952) found that the range of greatest preference by all
species of Pacific salmon was from 12 to 14°C for acclimation
temperatures ranging from 5 to 24°C. Brett (1952) also noted a
definite avoidance of water over 15°C (Beschta et al. 1987).
75
-------
|