аЯрЁБс>ўџ  ўџџџvџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ§џџџ  ўџџџўџџџ>+ўџџџ !"#$%&'()*L=-./0123456789:;i?ўџџџўџџџ@ABCDEFGHIJKTMNOPQўџџџSVUXWYZk[\]^_`abcdefghjўџџџўџџџlmnopўџџџrstuw§џџџxyz{|}~€Root Entryџџџџџџџџ ŸЗЈы”Ч €ITEM000џџџџ  РF0ЉxDЙФЦ ŸЗЈы”Ч1TableџџџџRCompObjџџџџџџџџџџџџjўџеЭеœ.“—+,љЎ0ш hp|„Œ” œЄЌД М Щф @N#A  Titleўџџџўџџџўџџџўџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџўџ џџџџ РFMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8є9Вq%РF\Object РF4dMicrosoft Word DocumentD:\Youngs Bay final data\Stream reports\Lewis and Clark Tribs\Barrett Creek Report.docWordDocumentџџџџџџџџџџџџ"6SummaryInformation(џџџџ DocumentSummaryInformation8џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџўџџџўџр…ŸђљOhЋ‘+'Гй0h˜ЄАМШи №ќ  $ 0 <HPX`фssBenenNormal Todd Boswello2ddMicrosoft Word 10.0@">@Ш_DЉ}Х@Jћт”Ч@l 9ы”ЧGьЅС5@ №П`+bjbjЯ2Я2 "6­X­X`#џџџџџџˆ6666666К^ ^ ^ ^ j КФЖ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ CEEEEEE$zRЬHi6х ’ ’ х х i66’ ’ ~х 66’ 6’ Cх CЂ#66#’ † №п—Nы”Ч^ #C”0Ф#1F#JDŽ,66666# ’ є† Ў4 ŒР %’ ’ ’ iiККЄ^ w КК^  Upper Nehalem Watershed Habitat Assessment Stream Report STREAM: North Fork Lousignont Creek SUBBASIN: Upper Nehalem River DATES: March 28, 2006 SURVEY CREW: Todd Boswell, Mark McLaughlin REPORT PREPARED BY: Ben Walczak GENE CONSERVATION GROUP: 1-NC UTM COORDINATES: Start – 0476372 E & 5065546 N End – 0474102 E & 5065720 N USGS MAPS: Timber GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The North Fork Louisgnont Creek winter habitat survey begins at its confluence with Louisgnont Creek and extends 2,962 meters. Four reaches were designated based on: Land Form. In the first reach Scour pools (67%) and Riffles (29%) dominated the habitat, while Silt/organics (18%), Sand (42%), and Gravel (33%) were the dominant substrate types. In the second reach Scour Pools (61%) and Riffles (39%) dominated the habitat, while Silt/organics (17%), Sand (45%), and Gravel (35%) were the dominant substrate types. Scour pools (51%) and Riffles (46%) dominated the habitat in the third reach, while Silt/organics (19%), Sand (47%), and Gravel (31%) were the dominant substrate types. In the fourth reach Dammed and backwater pools (60%), Scour pools (15%), and Riffles (23%) dominated the habitat, while Silt/organics (26%), Sand (45%), and Gravel (26%) were the dominant substrate types. REACH DESCRIPTIONS: REACH 1: Length – 878 meters. The channel is constrained by terraces in a broad valley. The average valley width index is 10. Land use for the reach is large timber. The average unit gradient is 0.4%. The channel characteristics include: primary 878m and secondary 31m. Thirteen pools were greater than 1 meter deep, which averages to 14.8 pools per kilometer of primary channel length. There were six key pieces of LWD, which averages to 0.7 pieces per 100m of primary channel. The vegetation is based on 2 riparian transects. The trees found most frequently in the riparian zone were mostly mixed sizes of deciduous ranging from 15 – 30 cm dbh, with some deciduous 30 – 50 cm dbh. This survey begins at the confluence with Lousignont Creek. An ODFW Spawning Survey sign was noted at the start point. The survey is on Longview Fibre timberland. There is an abundance of pools throughout the reach, with some pockets of good spawning gravel. A number of old, blown out beaver dams were observed in the reach. About halfway through the reach the stream crosses under an ODF bridge crossing on South Lousignont Road. Above the bridge, the stream follows the North Fork Louisgnont Road on the right stream bank for the remainder of the survey. Reach 1 ends at a small tributary junction on the left, which is not coho bearing, in conjunction with an ODFW Spawning Survey sign end point for segment 1, and the start point for segment 2. There is good LWD project potential in this reach with good access for industrial equipment. The reach had plenty of deep pools, but did not have much off-channel habitat. The riparian is in excellent condition with a nice mix of medium sized conifers and alders. So, a planting project is not necessary. REACH 2: Length – 744 meters. The channel is constrained by alternating terraces and hillslopes in a broad valley. The average valley width index is 3.5. Land use for the reach is large timber. The average unit gradient is 0.5%. The channel characteristics include: primary 744m and secondary 4m. Four pools were greater than 1 meter deep, which averages to 5.4 pools per kilometer of primary stream length. There were eight key pieces of LWD, which averages to 1.1 pieces per 100m of primary channel. The vegetation is based on 1 riparian transect. The trees found most frequently in the riparian zone were mostly mixed sizes of deciduous ranging from 30 – 50 cm dbh, with some mixed conifers 30 – 50 cm dbh and deciduous 3 – 15 cm dbh. Reach 2 begins at the confluence of an unnamed tributary on the left. The high frequency of pools continues in this reach, as well as the pockets of good spawning gravel. The amount of good spawning gravel increases when compared to reach 1. Coho fry were observed throughout the reach. The North Fork Louisgnont Road parallels the stream on the right and at some points constrains the creek. No secondary channels were present in this reach, some of the backwaters observed had excessive brown algae growth, and apparent eutrophic conditions. The road disappears from sight for a small section but reappears at the end of the reach. Reach 2 ends as the hillslope on the left, and the road on the right begin to encroach in on the creek. In the first half of the reach, the stream leaves Longview Fibre property and enters Tillamook State Forest. There is good LWD project potential in this reach with good access for industrial equipment. The reach had plenty of deep pools, but did not have much off-channel habitat. The increase in spawning habitat in this reach should be a good indicator of the importance to improve juvenile rearing with a future LWD placement project. The riparian is in excellent condition with a nice mix of medium sized conifers and alders. So, a planting project is not necessary. REACH 3: Length – 436 meters. The channel is constrained by hillslopes in a moderate v-shaped valley. The average width index is 2.3. Land use for the reach is large timber. The average unit gradient is 0.6%. The channel characteristics include: primary 436m and secondary 9m. Zero pools were greater than 1 meter deep. There were seven key pieces of LWD in the reach, which averages to 1.6 pieces per 100m of primary channel. The vegetation is based on 1 riparian transect. The trees found most frequently in the riparian zone were mostly mixed sizes of conifers ranging from 30 – 50 cm dbh. Reach 3 begins as hillslopes encroach on the creek. The road is very close to the stream in this reach and is starting to erode. Tires and garbage were observed in the creek in this reach as people are dumping their trash in close proximity to the road. There are still a good number of deep pools, but there was an overall reduction in the amount of spawning gravel. Coho fry were still observed during the time of the survey, but fewer than in reach 2. Reach 3 ends as the valley begins to open back up. There is good LWD project potential in this reach with good access for industrial equipment. The major limiting factor for a future project would be the narrower valley width than surrounding reaches, which may reduce opportunities. The riparian continues to have a mix of conifers and future LWD recruitment. So, a planting project is not necessary. Another low effort future project would be to place informative signs describing how dumping here is bad for the watershed and our fish friends. REACH 4: Length – 904 meters. The channel is constrained by terraces in a broad valley. The average width index is 4.4. Land use for the reach is large timber. A sub dominant land use of second growth timber was also noted. The average unit gradient is 0.9%. The channel characteristics include: primary 904m and secondary 85m. Seven pools were greater than 1 meter deep, which averages to 7.7 pools per kilometer of primary stream length. There were nine key pieces of LWD in this reach, which averages to 1.0 key piece per 100m of primary stream length. The vegetation is based on 2 riparian transects. The trees found most frequently in the riparian zone were mostly mixed sizes of conifers ranging from 30 – 50 cm dbh, with some small conifers. Reach 4 begins at a change in VWI, as the road moves further away from the creek on the right. There continues to be an abundance of pools, but the quality of spawning gravel diminishes in this reach. Near the start of the reach, the terrace on the right becomes open with some sections lacking trees close to the stream, resulting in a lack of adequate shade cover. Beaver activity begins about halfway through the reach, with a very large 1.5m high, partially blown dam and a very large beaver pool, which has significant algae cover. Two tributaries enter the stream in this region of the reach, and both pass under the North Fork Louisgnont Road on the right through culverts. Both tributaries need pools and LWD. A few hundred meters upstream, there was an ODFW Habitat/snorkel site end point sign. A number of blown out beaver dams were observed in the last part of the reach. The survey ended at a tributary junction on the right, in conjunction with an ODFW Spawning Survey sign end point for segment 2. At this point, there were a couple of partially blown out beaver dams and beaver pools which contained severe algae growth, and potential eutrophic conditions. There is good LWD project potential with good access for industrial equipment. The beaver activity observed in this reach helps to increase the complexity. There are several large beaver dams that have formed some excellent pools good for juvenile rearing. The nice mix of conifers continues. So, a riparian planting project is not necessary. Ole џџџџџџџџџџџџ5OlePres000џџџџ, !ITEM000ODS џџџџITEM000FMTџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџˆ;lXШ  d”  №.ћМ"System8$rэЦ0јE -ћœџ@Times New Roman-  2 Zу -- 2 пу , 2 п,у , 2 пXу ,ћ‹џМ@Times New Roman-J2 п„*уUpper Nehalem Watershed Habitat AssessmentTAA44T4A:!4`u;'44.A3A[;@!&;'T--4..`4A' 2 пЩ у > 2 eу , 2 e,у , 2 eXу , 2 e„у , 2 eАу ,2 eм уStream ReportA'44;`T4A;4' 2 eУу > 2 ыу ?-A2 _$уSTREAM: North Fork Lousignont Creek8=C=HYH2!272!2=22'1222C!,,3 2 _‹у } 2 _у - 2 ву -2 E уSUBBASIN: 8HBBH9 H2 E< уUpper NehaleH22,!H,3,,2 Ejуm River:NC2,! 2 EЏу . 2 Иу -,2 +уDATES: March 28, 2006HH==8Y,!,2222232 2 + у - 2 žу -L2 +уSURVEY CREW: Todd Boswell, Mark McLaughlin 8HCH=HCC=_=221B2'H,Y,!2Z-<,3222 2 ^у - 2 „у -;2 ї уREPORT PREPARED BY: Ben WalczakC=8HC=8C<8HC=HBHB,2_,,-,2 2 ї у . 2 jу -"2 нуGENE CONSERVATIH=H=CHH8=CHH> 2 нœ уON GROUP:EIHHCHH8 2 нЕу ' 2 нму12 2 ну-!2 н/уNCHC 2 нКу - 2 Pу - 2 УуUH"2 УHуTM COORDINATES:=YCHHCI HH==8 2 Уеу л2 УАуStart 8,! 2 У†у–2,2 УИу 0476372 E & 5065546 N2222222=M2232222H 2 УФ у - 2 6у , 2 6,у , 2 6Xу , 2 6„у ,2 6АуEnd =22 2 6jу–2,2 6œу 0474102 E & 5065720 N2222222=M2232222H 2 6Ј у - 2 Љу -&2  уUSGS MAPS: TimberH8H8YH88=N2,! 2  žу , 2  у -)2  уGENERAL DESCRIPTION:H=H=CI<H=8CD8>!HH 2  ‘у - 2 u у - 2 ш у ,‚2 ш ,OуThe North Fork Louisgnont Creek winter habitat survey begins at its confluence =2,H2!273!2<22(1322C!,,2H2,!2,2,'2!2.02-12',',22!2,2,,D2 [ &уwith Louisgnont Creek and extends 2,96H2;22(1222C!,,2-22,3,22'222P2 [ W.у2 meters. Four reaches were designated based 2N,,!'722!",,,3,'H-!,2,'22,,22,',2‹2 Ю Uуon: Land Form. In the first reach Scour pools (67%) and Riffles (29%) dominated the 22;,2272!N 22,!!'!,,,28,23!222'!23S!,22C!!,'!22S!23N2,,22,ˆ2 A Sуhabitat, while Silt/organics (18%), Sand (42%), and Gravel (33%) were the dominant e2,2,H2,82!1,2,'!22S!8,22!22S!-22H!,2,!23S!I,!,3,22N2,2J2 Д *уsubstrate types. In the second reach Scour'22'!,,03,' 22,'-,222!,-,28,22!O2 Д ‰-у Pools (61%) and Riffles (39%) dominated the 822'"22S!,22C!!,'!22S!22N2,,22,ˆ2 ' Sуhabitat, while Silt/organics (17%), Sand (45%), and Gravel (35%) were the dominant e2,2,H2,82!1,2,'!22S!8,22!22S!-22H!,2,!23S!I,!,3,22N2,22 š Xуsubstrate types. Scour pools (51%) and Riffles (46%) dominated the habitat in the third '22'!,,03,'8,22!232'!22S!,22C!!,'!23S!22N2,,22,2,2,22,2!2G2 (уreach, while Silt/organics (19%), Sand (!,,,2H2,82!1,2,(!22S!8,22!I2 A)у47%), and Gravel (31%) were the dominant t23S!,22H!,2,!23S!I,!,2-32N2,2ˆ2 €Sуsubstrate types. In the fourth reach Dammed and backwater pools (60%), Scour pools h'22'!,,03,' 22,!32!2!,-,2H,NN,2,222,,2H,,!222'!22T!8,22!222'Ž2 ѓWу(15%), and Riffles (23%) dominated the habitat, while Silt/organics (26%), Sand (45%), !22S!,22C!!,'!22S"22N2,,22,2,2,I2,82!1,2,'!22S!8,22!22S!O2 f-уand Gravel (26%) were the dominant substrate ,22H!,3,!22S!H,",2,22N2,2'22'!,,2 fcуtypes. :12,' 2 fhу - 2 йу - 2 Lу -(2 ПуREACH DESCRIPTIONS::C=HCHH=8CD8> HI8 2 ПJу , 2 2у -2 ЅуREACH 1:C=HCH2 2 ЅКу - 2 у - 2 ‹у ,2 ‹,уLength :<,312 2 ‹_у–2y2 ‹‘Iу 878 meters. The channel is constrained by terraces in a broad valley. u222N,,!'=3,,2,23,',22'!,2,230,"!-,,'2,2!3,22,-0”2 ў[уThe average valley width index is 10. Land use for the reach is large timber. The average =2,,2-!-1,3,.0H2322,3'22;,222(,!3!2,!-,,2',"2,N2,!=2,,3,!-2,J2 q*уunit gradient is 0.4%. The channel charac221!,2,2'22S=3,,2,23,,2,",,P2 q”.уteristics include: primary 878m and secondary -!','2,22,2!N,#0222N-22',,222,#0Œ2 фVу31m. Thirteen pools were greater than 1 meter deep, which averages to 14.8 pools per 22N=2!,,2222'H,",2!,,,!2,22N,-!2-,2H2,2,3,!-2,'2222222'2,!Œ2 WVуkilometer of primary channel length. There were six key pieces of LWD, which averages 22N,,!2!2!N,#0,2-22,,212=3,!,H,",(32-/2-,,'2!<_HI2,2,2,"-1,'D2 Ъ&уto 0.7 pieces per 100m of primary chan2H@{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f35\fswiss\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 020b0604030504040204}Tahoma;} {\f36\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}{\f37\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f39\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f40\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;} {\f41\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New ITEM000FMT#3џџџџ РF НђІы”Ч НђІы”ЧITEM000FMTRich Text Format8џџџџџџџџџџџџ<L@Ole џџџџџџџџ OlePres000џџџџџџџџџџџџq !#3Rich Text Formatatˆ;lXp!„Roman (Hebrew);}{\f42\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f43\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f44\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);} {\f386\fswiss\fcharset238\fprq2 Tahoma CE;}{\f387\fswiss\fcharset204\fprq2 Tahoma Cyr;}{\f389\fswiss\fcharset161\fprq2 Tahoma Greek;}{\f390\fswiss\fcharset162\fprq2 Tahoma Tur;}{\f391\fswiss\fcharset177\fprq2 Tahoma (Hebrew);} {\f392\fswiss\fcharset178\fprq2 Tahoma (Arabic);}{\f393\fswiss\fcharset186\fprq2 Tahoma Baltic;}{\f394\fswiss\fcharset163\fprq2 Tahoma (Vietnamese);}{\f395\fswiss\fcharset222\fprq2 Tahoma (Thai);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255; \red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0; \red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\trcbpat1\trcfpat1\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\s15\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f35\fs16\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext15 \ssemihidden \styrsid6099826 Balloon Text;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid414775\rsid2648452\rsid6099826\rsid11482691} \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1800\dgvorigin1440\dghshow1\dgvshow1 \jexpand\viewkind1\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\rsidroot414775 \fet0\sectd \linex0\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sftnbj {\*\pnseclvl1 \pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl5 \pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid414775 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \tab \tab \tab }{\b\fs28\insrsid414775 Upper Nehalem Watershed Habitat Assessment \par \tab \tab \tab \tab \tab Stream Report \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 STREAM: North Fork Lousignont Creek\tab \par \par SUBBASIN: }{\insrsid2648452 Upper Nehale}{\insrsid414775 m River \par \par DATES: March 28, 2006 \par \par SURVEY CREW: Todd Boswell, Mark McLaughlin \par \par REPORT PREPARED BY: Ben Walczak \par \par GENE CONSERVATION GROUP:\tab 1-NC \par \par U}{\insrsid2648452 TM COORDINATES:\tab Start \endash 0476372 E & 5065546 N}{\insrsid414775 \par }{\insrsid2648452 \tab \tab \tab \tab End \endash 0474102 E & 5065720 N}{\insrsid414775 \par \par USGS MAPS: Timber \par \par GENERAL DESCRIPTION: \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \tab The North Fork Louisgnont Creek winter habitat survey begins at its confluence with Louisgnont Creek and extends 2,96 2 meters. Four reaches were designated based on: Land Form. In the first reach Scour pools (67%) and Riffles (29%) dominated the habitat, while Silt/organics (18%), Sand (42%), and Gravel (33%) were the dominant substrate types. In the second reach Scou r Pools (61%) and Riffles (39%) dominated the habitat, while Silt/organics (17%), Sand (45%), and Gravel (35%) were the dominant substrate types. Scour pools (51%) and Riffles (46%) dominated the habitat in the third reach, while Silt/organics (19%), Sand ( 47%), and Gravel (31%) were the dominant substrate types. In the fourth reach Dammed and backwater pools (60%), Scour pools (15%), and Riffles (23%) dominated the habitat, while Silt/organics (26%), Sand (45%), and Gravel (26%) were the dominant substrate types. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par \par REACH DESCRIPTIONS: \par \par REACH 1: \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \tab Length \endash 878 meters. The channel is constrained by terraces in a broad valley. The average valley width index is 10. Land use for the reach is large timber. The average unit gradient is 0.4%. The channel charac teristics include: primary 878m and secondary 31m. Thirteen pools were greater than 1 meter deep, which averages to 14.8 pools per kilometer of primary channel length. There were six key pieces of LWD, which averages to 0.7 pieces per 100m of primary cha nnel. The vegetation is based on 2 riparian transects. The trees found most frequently in the riparian zone were mostly mixed sizes of deciduous ranging from 15 \endash 30 cm dbh, with some deciduous 30 \endash 50 cm dbh. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 This survey begins at the confluence with Lo usignont Creek. An ODFW Spawning Survey sign was noted at the start point. The survey is on Longview Fibre timberland. There is an abundance of pools throughout the reach, with some pockets of good spawning gravel. A number of old, blown out beaver da m s were observed in the reach. About halfway through the reach the stream crosses under an ODF bridge crossing on South Lousignont Road. Above the bridge, the stream follows the North Fork LouiCu > ? ^ ЬЭю !!! !E!H!a!Ё$Ђ$з&й&5*_+`+ќѓќяќяќяќшќяќяќяќяќшќяќяќ h7Th7Th„i(h7T5CJ\h7T/BCij‰ŠЁЂЮЯ№ё  ? _ ` s t ‰ Š    ( §Р!Ќ§Р!Ѕ§Р!Ѕ§Р!Ѕ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§ Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ`+§( ) гдЩЪўџ ыэDE!"uvu v k"l"u"v"d%e%и&§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§ Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§ Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§ Р!Ќ§Р!ЌјР!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§ Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќgd7Tи&й&**`+§Р!Ќ§ Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ§Р!Ќ 1hАа/ Ар=!А"А# $ %А€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€Z" ZZWaтщ•ŸкфЄЇШЫ§‰шэљ  ? I Я г œ@@ёџ@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA@ђџЁD Default Paragraph FontVi@ѓџГV  Table Normal :V і4ж4ж laі (k@єџС(No List `#6џџџџ џџ z™ џџ z™ џџ z™ џџ z™,•й`#Ї‚+/BCij‰ŠЁЂЮЯ№ё?_`st‰Š  ()гдЩ Ъ ў џ  ыэDE!"uvuvkluvdeий""b#˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€p˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€sgnont Road on the right stream bank for the remainder of the survey. Reach 1 ends at a small tributary junction on the left, which is not coho bearing, in conjunction with an ODFW Spawning Survey sign end point for segment 1, and the start point for segment 2. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 There is good LWD project potential in this reach with good access for industrial equipment. The reach had plenty of deep pools, but did not have much off-channel habitat. The riparian is in excellent condition with a nice mix of medium sized conifers and alders. So, a planting project is not necessary. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par REACH 2: \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \tab Length˜0€€ˆ˜0€€ €˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€ €˜0€€€˜0€€ €˜0€€€˜0€€ €˜0€€˜0€€ˆ˜0€€ €˜0€€€˜0€€ €˜0€€€˜0€€ €˜0€€ €˜0€€ €˜0€€p˜0€€˜0€€p˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€p˜0€€˜0€€ˆ˜0€€˜0€€ˆ˜0€€˜0€€˜0€ \endash 744 meters. The channel is constrained by alternating terraces and hillslopes in a broad valley. The average valley width index is 3.5. Land use for the reach is large timber. The average unit gradient is 0.5%. The channel characteri stics include: primary 744m and secondary 4m. Four pools were greater than 1 meter deep, which averages to 5.4 pools per kilometer of primary stream length. There were eight key pieces of LWD, which averages to 1.1 pieces per 100m of primary channel. T he v€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€ €˜0€€˜0€€ˆ˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€p˜0€€ `+( и&`+`+џџЫяЄ ЬяŒ Эя\љЮяд<vыд wы,Гxы4Ђyыegetation is based on 1 riparian transect. The trees found most frequently in the riparian zone were mostly mixed sizes of deciduous ranging from 30 \endash 50 cm dbh, with some mixed conifers 30 \endash 50 cm dbh and deciduous 3 \endash 15 cm dbh. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 Reach 2 begins at t he confluence of an unnamed tributary on the left. The high frequency of pools continues in this reach, as well as the pockets of good spawning gravel. The amount of good spawning gravel increases when compared to reach 1. Coho fry were observed throug h out the reach. The North Fork Louisgnont Road parallels the stream on the right and at some points constrains the creek. No secondary channels were present in this reach, some of the backwaters observed had excessive brown algae growth, and apparent eut r ophic conditions. The road disappears from sight for a small section but reappears at the end of the reach. Reach 2 ends as the hillslope on the left, and the road on the right begin to encroach in on the creek. In the first half of the reach, the stre am leaves Longview Fibre property and enters Tillamook State Forest. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid414775 {\insrsid414775 There is good LWD project potential in this reach with good access for industrial equipment. The reach had plenty of deep pools, but did not have much off-channel habitat. The increase in spawning habitat in this reach should be a good indicator of the importance to improve juvenile rearing with a future LWD placement project. The riparian is in excellent condition with a nice mix of medium sized conifers and alders. So, a planting pr oject is not necessary. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par REACH 3: \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \tab Length \endash 436 meters. The channel is constrained by hillslopes in a moderate v-shaped valley. The average width index is 2.3. Land use for the reach is large timber. The average unit gradient is 0.6%. The channel char acteristics include: primary 436m and secondary 9m. Zero pools were greater than 1 meter deep. There were seven key pieces of LWD in the reach, which averages to 1.6 pieces per 100m of primary channel.}{\insrsid414775\charrsid414775 }{\insrsid414775 The vegetation is based on 1 riparian transect. The trees found most frequently in the riparian zone were mostly mixed sizes of conifers ranging from 30 \endash 50 cm dbh. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 Reach 3 begins as hillslopes encroach on the creek. The road is very close to the stream in this reach and is starting to erode. Tires a nd garbage were observed in the creek in this reach as people are dumping their trash in close proximity to the road. There are still a good number of deep pools, but there was an overall reduction in the amount of spawning gravel. Coho fry were still o bserved during the time of the survey, but fewer than in reach 2. Reach 3 ends as the valley begins to open back up. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 There is good LWD project potential in this reach with good access for industrial equipment. The major limiting factor }{\insrsid2648452 for a future proje ct would be}{\insrsid414775 the narrow}{\insrsid2648452 er}{\insrsid414775 valley }{\insrsid2648452 width than surrounding reaches, which}{\insrsid414775 ma}{\insrsid2648452 y reduce opportunities. }{\insrsid414775 The riparian continues to have a mix of conifers and future LWD recruitment. So, a planting project is not necessary. Another low effort future project would be to place informative signs describing how dumping here is bad for the watershed and our fish friends. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par REACH 4: \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \tab Length \endash 904 meters. The channel is constrained by terraces in a broad valley. The average width index is 4.4. Land use for the reach is large timber. A sub dominant land use of second growth timber was also noted. The average unit gradient is 0.9%. The channel characteristics include: primary 904m and secondary 85m. Seven pools were greater than 1 meter deep, which averages to 7.7 pools per kilometer of primary stream length. There were nine key pieces of LWD in this reach, which averages to 1.0 key piece per 100m of primary stream length.}{\insrsid414775\charrsid414775 }{\insrsid414775 The vegetation is based on 2 riparian transects. The trees found most frequently in the riparian zone were mostly mixed sizes of conifers ranging from 30 \endash 50 cm dbh, with some small conifers. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 Reach 4 begins at a change in VWI, as the road moves further away from the creek on the right. There continues to be an abundance of pools, but the qualit y of spawning gravel diminishes in this reach. Near the start of the reach, the terrace on the right becomes open with some sections lacking trees close to the stream, resulting in a lack of adequate shade cover. }{\insrsid2648452 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid2648452 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 Beaver activity begins about halfway th rough the reach, with a very large 1.5m high, partially blown dam and a very large beaver pool, which has significant algae cover. Two tributaries enter the stream in this region of the reach, and both pass under the North Fork Louisgnont Road on the rig h t through culverts. Both tributaries need pools and LWD. A few hundred meters upstream, there was an ODFW Habitat/snorkel site end point sign. A number of blown out beaver dams were observed in the last part of the reach. The survey ended at a tributa r y junction on the right, in conjunction with an ODFW Spawning Survey sign end point for segment 2. At this point, there were a couple of partially blown out beaver dams and beaver pools which contained severe algae growth, and potential eutrophic conditi ons. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid414775 There is good LWD project potential with good ac}{\insrsid2648452 cess for industrial equipment. The beaver activity observed in this reach helps to increase the complexity. There are several large beaver dams that have formed some excellent pools good for juvenile r earing. The nice mix 222,,,'2,!222N2"2!N,#0,2,2M2 Ъ",уnel. The vegetation is based on 2 riparian 3,=2,3,2,,22'2,',2222!2,!,2-NANINANIof conifers continues. So, a riparian planting project is not necessary.}}r C 2 †0r C 2 Рr C 2 љr C(2 3r REACH DESCRIPTIONS::!#!$ $!!$$ 2 3%r C 2 lr C2 Іr REACH 1:!#!$  2 Імr C 2 пr C 2  r C–2  –r LeDЎzы<В{ыЈ|ы|Ќчь”›шьl5щь<œъь”Ÿы$Ѕ‚ыФІuu{ƒ’r r Г Г ,,6<ккb#     z‚ˆˆ ‡ ‡ Э Э ..5;BBєєb#   :*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€Street€;*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€address€8*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€date€=*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags €PlaceType€=*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags €PlaceName€9*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€place€ €2006€28€3€Day€Month€YearWaшяšЄпщЊ­Юбўglx ‚ О Ш N R W a ЁЄЪЭцщ)ќ‚‹Waorˆ’EHхяю!ї!b#ІЌb#:jŠ`е џ #.#_#b#b#џџTodd Landon BoswellTodd Landon BoswellTodd Landon BoswellTodd Landon BoswellTodd Landon BoswellTodd Landon BoswellTodd Landon BoswellTodd Landon BoswellTodd Landon BoswellMark McLaughlinх7T„i(џ@€<<Иг’ЦЦ<<`#P@џџUnknownџџџџџџџџџџџџG‡z €џTimes New Roman5€Symbol3& ‡z €џArial"qˆ№аhЯcЕЦdЕЦ;G@G@!№ ДД>4dN#N#ˆ 3ƒ№мH(№џ?фџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ7TџџBen Todd Boswell  *  *  $ I2 †)r (39%) were the dominant substrate types. t* $  %    2 †џџџџџџџџˆ;lXШ  d”  №.ћМ"System8$rэЦ0јE -ћœџ@Times New Roman-  2 Zу -- 2 пу , 2 п,у , 2 пXу ,ћ‹џМ@Times New Roman-J2 п„*уUpper Nehalem Watershed Habitat AssessmentTAA44T4A:!4`u;'44.A3A[;@!&;'T--4..`4A' 2 пЩ у > 2 eу , 2 e,у , 2 eXу , 2 e„у , 2 eАу ,2 eм уStream ReportA'44;`T4A;4' 2 eУу > 2 ыу ?-A2 _$уSTREAM: North Fork Lousignont Creek8=C=HYH2!272!2=22'1222C!,,3 2 _‹у } 2 _у - 2 ву -2 E уSUBBASIN: 8HBBH9 H2 E< уUpper NehaleH22,!H,3,,2 Ejуm River:NC2,! 2 EЏу . 2 Иу -,2 +уDATES: March 28, 2006HH==8Y,!,2222232 2 + у - 2 žу -L2 +уSURVEY CREW: Todd Boswell, Mark McLaughlin 8HCH=HCC=_=221B2'H,Y,!2Z-<,3222 2 ^у - 2 „у -;2 ї уREPORT PREPARED BY: Ben WalczakC=8HC=8C<8HC=HBHB,2_,,-,2 2 ї у . 2 jу -"2 нуGENE CONSERVATIH=H=CHH8=CHH> 2 нœ уON GROUP:EIHHCHH8 2 нЕу ' 2 нму12 2 ну-!2 н/уNCHC 2 нКу - 2 Pу - 2 УуUH"2 УHуTM COORDINATES:=YCHHCI HH==8 2 Уеу л2 УАуStart 8,! 2 У†у–2,2 УИу 0476372 E & 5065546 N2222222=M2232222H 2 УФ у - 2 6у , 2 6,у , 2 6Xу‚ўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџ , 2 6„у ,2 6АуEnd =22 2 6jу–2,2 6œу 0474102 E & 5065720 N2222222=M2232222H 2 6Ј у - 2 Љу -&2  уUSGS MAPS: TimberH8H8YH88=N2,! 2  žу , 2  у -)2  уGENERAL DESCRIPTION:H=H=CI<H=8CD8>!HH 2  ‘у - 2 u у - 2 ш у ,‚2 ш ,OуThe North Fork Louisgnont Creek winter habitat survey begins at its confluence =2,H2!273!2<22(1322C!,,2H2,!2,2,'2!2.02-12',',22!2,2,,D2 [ &уwith Louisgnont Creek and extends 2,96H2;22(1222C!,,2-22,3,22'222P2 [ W.у2 meters. Four reaches were designated based 2N,,!'722!",,,3,'H-!,2,'22,,22,',2‹2 Ю Uуon: Land Form. In the first reach Scour pools (67%) and Riffles (29%) dominated the 22;,2272!N 22,!!'!,,,28,23!222'!23S!,22C!!,'!22S!23N2,,22,ˆ2 A Sуhabitat, while Silt/organics (18%), Sand (42%), and Gravel (33%) were the dominant e2,2,H2,82!1,2,'!22S!8,22!22S!-22H!,2,!23S!I,!,3,22N2,2J2 Д *уsubstrate types. In the second reach Scour'22'!,,03,' 22,'-,222!,-,28,22!O2 Д ‰-у Pools (61%) and Riffles (39%) dominated the 822'"22S!,22C!!,'!22S!22N2,,22,ˆ2 ' Sуhabitat, while Silt/organics (17%), Sand (45%), and Gravel (35%) were the dominant e2,2,H2,82!1,2,'!22S!8,22!22S!-22H!,2,!23S!I,!,3,22N2,22 š Xуsubstrate types. Scour pools (51%) and Riffles (46%) dominated the habitat in the third '22'!,,03,'8,22!232'!22S!,22C!!,'!23S!22N2,,22,2,2,22,2!2G2 (уreach, while Silt/organics (19%), Sand (!,,,2H2,82!1,2,(!22S!8,22!I2 A)у47%), and Gravel (31%) were the dominant t23S!,22H!,2,!23S!I,!,2-32N2,2ˆ2 €Sуsubstrate types. In the fourth reach Dammed and backwater pools (60%), Scour pools h'22'!,,03,' 22,!32!2!,-,2H,NN,2,222,,2H,,!222'!22T!8,22!222'Ž2 ѓWу(15%), and Riffles (23%) dominated the habitat, while Silt/organics (26%), Sand (45%), !22S!,22C!!,'!22S"22N2,,22,2,2,I2,82!1,2,'!22S!8,22!22S!O2 f-уand Gravel (26%) were the dominant substrate ,22H!,3,!22S!H,",2,22N2,2'22'!,,2 fcуtypes. :12,' 2 fhу - 2 йу - 2 Lу -(2 ПуREACH DESCRIPTIONS::C=HCHH=8CD8> HI8 2 ПJу , 2 2у -2 ЅуREACH 1:C=HCH2 2 ЅКу - 2 у - 2 ‹у ,2 ‹,уLength :<,312 2 ‹_у–2y2 ‹‘Iу 878 meters. The channel is constrained by terraces in a broad valley. u222N,,!'=3,,2,23,',22'!,2,230,"!-,,'2,2!3,22,-0”2 ў[уThe average valley width index is 10. Land use for the reach is large timber. The average =2,,2-!-1,3,.0H2322,3'22;,222(,!3!2,!-,,2',"2,N2,!=2,,3,!-2,J2 q*уunit gradient is 0.4%. The channel charac221!,2,2'22S=3,,2,23,,2,",,P2 q”.уteristics include: primary 878m and secondary -!','2,22,2!N,#0222N-22',,222,#0Œ2 фVу31m. Thirteen pools were greater than 1 meter deep, which averages to 14.8 pools per 22N=2!,,2222'H,",2!,,,!2,22N,-!2-,2H2,2,3,!-2,'2222222'2,!Œ2 WVуkilometer of primary channel length. There were six key pieces of LWD, which averages 22N,,!2!2!N,#0,2-22,,212=3,!,H,",(32-/2-,,'2!<_HI2,2,2,"-1,'D2 Ъ&уto 0.7 pieces per 100m of primary chan2222,,,'2,!222N2"2!N,#0,2,2M2 Ъ",уnel. The vegetation is based on 2 riparian 3,=2,3,2,,22'2,',2222!2,!,2-NANI