Oct 232014
 

EPA and the Corps of Engineers have announced the release of the final peer review of EPA's "connectivity" report -- literally, Connectivity of Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters: A Review and Synthesis of the Scientific Evidence.

Here is the final peer review, posted on Endangered Species & Wetlands Report's website.

Here's part of the letter from SAB Chair David T. Allen and Amanda D. Rodewald, chair of the panel that reviewed the report. (The full letter is at the beginning of the "final peer review" link in the preceding paragraph.)

The EPA Report is a thorough and technically accurate review of the literature on the connectivity of streams and wetlands to downstream waters. The SAB agrees with two of the three major conclusions in the Report. The SAB finds that the review of the scientific literature strongly supports the conclusions that streams and “bidirectional” floodplain wetlands are physically, chemically, and/or biologically connected to downstream navigable waters; however, these connections should be considered in terms of a connectivity gradient. The SAB recommends revisions to improve the clarity of the Report, better reflect the scientific evidence, expand the discussion of approaches to quantifying connectivity, and make the document more useful to decision-makers. The SAB disagrees with the conclusion that there is insufficient information available to generalize about the connectivity of wetlands in “unidirectional,” non-floodplain settings. In that case, the SAB finds that the scientific literature supports a more definitive statement that reflects how numerous functions of non-floodplain wetlands sustain the physical, chemical, and/or biological integrity of downstream waters, although the degree of connectivity can vary widely. The SAB’s major comments and recommendations are provided below.

  • The Report often refers to connectivity as though it is a binary property (connected versus not connected) rather than as a gradient. In order to make the Report more technically accurate, the SAB recommends that the interpretation of connectivity be revised to reflect a gradient approach that recognizes variation in the frequency, duration, magnitude, predictability, and consequences of those connections. The SAB notes that relatively low levels of connectivity can be meaningful in terms of impacts on the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of downstream waters.
  • The SAB recommends that the EPA consider expanding the brief overview of approaches to measuring connectivity. This expansion would be most useful if it provided examples of the dimensions of connectivity that could most appropriately be quantified, ways to construct connectivity metrics, and the methodological and technical advances that are most needed.
  • The Report presents a conceptual framework that describes the hydrologic elements of a watershed and the types of connections that link them. The literature review supporting the framework is technically accurate and clearly presented. However, to strengthen and improve its usefulness, the SAB recommends that the framework be expressed as spatially continuous physical, hydrological (surface and subsurface), chemical, and biological flowpaths that connect watersheds. Layers of complexity should be included in the conceptual framework to represent important aspects of connectivity such as spatial and temporal scale. The water body classification system used in the Report (i.e., classification of waters according to landscape settings) should be integrated into the flowpath framework to show that continuous phenomena interact across landscape settings. In addition, the SAB recommends that each section of the Report be clearly linked to the conceptual framework.
  •  The SAB recommends that the Report more explicitly address the scientific literature on cumulative and aggregate effects of streams, groundwater systems, and wetlands on downstream waters. In particular, the Report should contain a discussion of the spatial and temporal scales at which streams, groundwater systems, and wetlands are functionally aggregated. The SAB also recommends that, throughout the Report, the EPA further discuss several important issues including the role of biological connectivity, biogeochemical transformation processes, and the effects of human alteration of connectivity.
  • In the Report, the EPA has classified waters and wetlands as having the potential for either “bidirectional” or “unidirectional” hydrologic flows with rivers and lakes. The SAB finds that these terms do not adequately describe the four-dimensional (longitudinal, lateral, vertical, and temporal) nature of connectivity, and the SAB recommends that the Report use more commonly understood terms that are grounded in the peer-reviewed literature.
  • The SAB commends the EPA for the comprehensive literature review in the Report, although additional citations have been suggested to strengthen it. To make the review process more transparent, the EPA should more clearly describe the approach used to screen, compile, and synthesize the information. The Report should also clearly indicate that the definitions used for rivers, streams, and wetlands are scientific, rather than legal or regulatory definitions, and may differ from those used in the Clean Water Act and associated regulations.
  • The SAB finds that the review and synthesis of the literature describing connectivity of streams to downstream waters reflects the pertinent literature and is well grounded in current science. The literature review provides strong scientific support for the conclusion that ephemeral, intermittent, and perennial streams exert a strong influence on the character and functioning of downstream waters and that tributary streams are connected to downstream waters. However, the EPA should recognize that there is a gradient of connectivity. The SAB also recommends that the literature review more thoroughly address hydrologic exchange flows between main channels and off-channel areas, the influence of stream connectivity on downstream water temperature, and the movement of organisms throughout stream systems to use critical habitats.
  • The SAB finds that the review and synthesis of the literature on the connectivity of waters and wetlands in floodplain settings is somewhat limited in scope (i.e., focused largely on headwater riparian wetlands) and should be expanded. However, the literature review does substantiate the conclusion that floodplains and waters and wetlands in floodplain settings support the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of downstream waters. The SAB recommends that the Report be reorganized to clarify the functional role of floodplain systems in maintaining the ecological integrity of streams and rivers and that the Report more fully reflect the literature on lateral exchange between floodplains and rivers.
  • The SAB finds that, in general, the review and synthesis of the literature on the connectivity of non-floodplain (“unidirectional”) waters and wetlands is technically accurate. However, additional information on biological connections should be included. The SAB has provided numerous additional literature citations addressing the roles of multiple biological taxa in this regard, such as transporting propagules and nutrients and providing critical habitat.
  • The SAB disagrees with the EPA’s conclusion that the literature reviewed did not provide sufficient information to evaluate or generalize about the degree of connectivity (absolute or relative) or the downstream effects of wetlands in “unidirectional” non-floodplain landscape settings. The SAB finds that the scientific literature supports a more definitive statement about the functions of “unidirectional” non-floodplain wetlands that sustain the physical, chemical and/or biological integrity of downstream waters. In this regard, the SAB recommends that the EPA revise the conclusion to better articulate: (1) what is supported by the scientific literature and (2) the issues that still need to be resolved.
Oct 152014
 

As the headline says, Leo Begay, a member of the Navajo nation, got four months' prison time and agreed to pay a $1,000 fine after pleading guilty to selling feather fans made up of feathers from bald and golden eagles and two species of hawk, the rough-legged hawk and the red-tailed hawk.

Begay was the "last defendant to be sentenced following a nationwide investigation – Operation Silent Wilderness – by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Navajo Nation Department of Fish and Wildlife into the illegal killing and commercialization of protected eagles and other migratory birds," according to a Justice Department release.

Indictment (5/22/13)

Indian Country coverage of indictment

Judgment (10/8/2014)

Oct 152014
 

A Nevada congressman has questioned the Fish and Wildlife Service's knowledge of sage-grouse habitat in his state and threatened to hold hearings if he doesn't get answers to questions posed in an Oct. 10 letter to Pacific Southwest regional director Ren Lohoefener.

Lohoefener sent a letter to the Sagebrush Ecosystem Council in Carson City, Nev., on Oct. 1, offering comments on the state's greater sage-grouse conservation plan.

Rep. Mark Amodei's letter to Lohoefener is here. Greenwire had an extensive report on the matter Oct. 14.

The photo below is a link to the briefing document presented by DOI congressional affairs staff to Amodei, featuring Rubik's Cube and Wee Willie Keeler. It seems to be missing a few pages, but Amodei spokesman Brian Baluta says all you need to know is on page 14, which appears to show that the state/local ownership of Nevada lands in GSG Priority Areas for Conservation (PACs) totals about 19 million acres. The only problem with that is the federal government owns all but about 13 million acres in the state, which means the 19-million estimate is off by about 50 percent. (Scroll down for the chart.)

Said Amodei:

"The amount of acreage composing the 14 percent of the state that is not federally owned is approximately 13 million acres, not 19 million. I am not encouraged by the factual foundation, attention to detail or scientific basis of the Capitol Hill briefing when we are nearly a decade down the road with the Service keeping an eye on Sage Hen habitat. If credibility plays any role in statements, letters and briefings and in your ultimate decision;  unilateral unsubstantiated conclusions, conflicting analysis, advice and outright ignorance of basic facts have got to end."

sage-grouse-presentation-cover

U-Nevada Cooperative Extension report (data as of 1999, showing federal government with 82.9% ownership of land in Nevada)

Nevada Statewide Policy Plan for Public Lands, 1985 (says 60.3 million of 70.7 million acres in state are owned by federal government)

Congressional Research Service report on federal land ownership in the West (2012)

Federal lands are the public's lands (Sierra Club; includes brief history of how Nevada came to own its lands)

Chart from DOI congressional briefing materials on sage grouse

Oct 132014
 

Environmental groups announced a couple of new lawsuits Monday, one against the Fish and Wildlife Service for withdrawing its proposal to lst the wolverine, and another against the Army Corps of Engineers for its use of nationwide permit 13.

The first was filed today in Montana (Center for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, no # or judge assigned yet), the second on Friday in Washington, D.C. (National Wildlife Federation v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 14-1701, no judge assigned yet).

Press releases from the groups are pasted below

Conservation Groups Sue Federal Agency to Protect Wolverine

Climate change has led to loss of spring snowpack, endangering feisty predator

October 13, 2014

Missoula, MT — Eight conservation groups joined forces today in a legal challenge of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision to abandon proposed protections for the wolverine, a rare and elusive mountain-dwelling species with fewer than 300 individuals remaining in the lower 48.

In February 2013, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to list the wolverine as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act after the agency’s biologists concluded global warming was reducing the deep spring snowpack pregnant females require for denning.

But after state wildlife managers in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming objected, arguing that computer models about climate change impact are too uncertain to justify the proposed listing, in May 2014 the Service’s Regional Director Noreen Walsh ordered her agency to withdraw the listing, ignoring the recommendations of her own scientists. The reversal came despite confirmation by a panel of outside experts that deep snow is crucial to the ability of wolverines to reproduce successfully. The agency formalized that withdrawal in a final decision issued Aug. 13.

The coalition of eight conservation groups, represented by Earthjustice, is suing to overturn that decision filed the lawsuit today in federal district court in Missoula, Mont.

“The wolverine is a famously tough creature that doesn’t back down from anything, but even the wolverine can’t overcome a changing climate by itself,” said Earthjustice attorney Adrienne Maxwell. “To survive, the wolverine needs the protections that only the Endangered Species Act can provide.”

The groups bringing the lawsuit are the Center for Biological Diversity, Conservation Northwest, Friends of the Clearwater, Greater Yellowstone Coalition, Idaho Conservation League, Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance, Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, and Rocky Mountain Wild.

“The denial of protection for the wolverine is yet another unfortunate example of politics entering into what should be a purely scientific decision,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “All of the science and the agency’s own scientists say the wolverine is severely endangered by loss of spring snowpack caused by climate change, yet the agency denied protection anyway.”

"The best available science shows climate change will significantly reduce available wolverine habitat over the next century, and imperil the species,” said Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance’s Siva Sundaresan. “As an agency responsible for protecting our wildlife, FWS should not ignore science and should make their decisions based on facts and data.”

“Wolverines in the Clearwater region are particularly vulnerable because the elevations here are less than those elsewhere in the Northern Rockies,” said Gary Macfarlane of Friends of the Clearwater. “It would be a great loss if this fearless critter were to disappear from the wild Clearwater country.”.

“One of the most important things that we can do to get wolverines on the road to recovery in the face of a warming climate is to get them back on the ground in mountain ranges where they once lived,” said Megan Mueller, senior conservation biologist with Rocky Mountain Wild. “We are disappointed by the Service’s decision not to list wolverines under the Endangered Species Act as protections would have helped to facilitate such efforts in Colorado and beyond.”

“The remote, rugged, and snowy North Cascades are ideal wolverine habitat,” said Dave Werntz, Science and Conservation Director with Conservation Northwest. “Protection under the Endangered Species Act will help wolverine survive a warming climate, shrinking snowpack, and increasingly fragmented habitat.”

Background

The wolverine, the largest land-dwelling member of the weasel family, once roamed across the northern tier of the United States and as far south as New Mexico in the Rockies and Southern California in the Sierra Nevada range. After more than a century of trapping and habitat loss, wolverines in the lower 48 have been reduced to small, fragmented populations in Idaho, Montana, Washington, Wyoming and northeast Oregon.

With no more than 300 wolverines remaining in these regions, the species is at direct risk from climate change because wolverines depend on areas that maintain deep snow through late spring, when pregnant females dig their dens into the snowpack to birth and raise their young. Snowpack is already in decline in the western mountains, a trend that is predicted to worsen. Wolverine populations also are threatened by trapping, human disturbance, extremely low population numbers resulting in low genetic diversity, and fragmentation of habitat.

The groups challenging the Service’s determination pointed out that the agency disregarded well-established scientific evidence, including the recommendations of its own scientists, in speculating that the wolverine might be capable of withstanding the projected loss of 63 percent of its snowy habitat in the lower 48 by the year 2085. Contrary to the Service’s speculation, every one of the 562 verified wolverine den sites in North America and Scandinavia occurred in snow; 95 percent of worldwide summer wolverine observations and 89 percent of year-round wolverine observations fell within areas characterized by persistent spring snowpack. Elimination of this snowy habitat due to warming temperatures presents a direct threat to the wolverine’s survival — a danger compounded by the increasing isolation and fragmentation of wolverine habitats that threatens remaining populations with localized extinctions and inbreeding.

On May 17, the assistant director for the Fish and Wildlife Service’s Rocky Mountain region recommended protection for the wolverine, concluding that the agency's scientists had not found “any other peer-reviewed literature or other bodies of evidence that would lead us to a different conclusion. While we recognize there is uncertainty associated with when population effects may manifest themselves, any conclusion that there will not be population effects appears to be based on opinion and speculation. In our opinion that would not represent the best available scientific or commercial data available.” Despite these strong conclusions, the Fish and Wildlife Service reversed course and withdrew proposed protection for the wolverine.

-30-


Press Release from the Southern Environmental Law Center and other groups

For Release: October 13, 2014

Contacts:

Nate Hunt, SELC, 404-521-9900 nhunt@selcga.org
Jan Goldman-Carter, National Wildlife Federation, 202-797-6894
Emily Markesteyn, Ogeechee Riverkeeper, 866-942-6222
Tonya Bonitatibus, Savannah Riverkeeper, 706-826-8991

Conservation Groups Challenge Unlawful Permit to Prevent Further Shoreline Damage

Washington, DC—Conservation groups have filed suit in federal court challenging the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers’ use of a permit that allows construction of bulkheads, seawalls, and other hardened structures to be built in waters of the United States without adequately assessing their environmental impact.

Nationwide Permit 13 authorizes the construction of bank stabilization structures along shorelines with little environmental review and without public notice and review. Unlike individual permits issued by the Corps, Nationwide Permit 13 allows structures to be built close to two football fields in length without requiring prior approval from the Corps. Nationwide Permit 13 is currently being used by the Corps to authorize approximately 17,500 structures between 2012 and 2017.

“Although these projects are designed to reduce erosion at specific sites, there is a lot science showing that bulkheads and other structures accelerate erosion in our waters and destroy important shoreline habitat,” said Nate Hunt, attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. “The negative effects are especially acute on our coasts as more cities, developers, and landowners are constructing bulkheads and sea walls to armor the shoreline in response to sea level rise.”

On behalf of the National Wildlife Federation, Ogeechee Riverkeeper, and Savannah Riverkeeper, the Southern Environmental Law Center has filed a lawsuit against the Corps in United States District Court in Washington, D.C, charging that the agency has violated federal law in failing to demonstrate that the projects authorized over the five-year period of the permit will only have minimal environmental effects as required by the Clean Water Act.

“The Corps’ use of Nationwide Permit 13 to rubber stamp the coastal armoring of our shorelines threatens important fish and wildlife habitat, including the nesting habitat of threatened and endangered sea turtles and shorebirds,” said Jan Goldman-Carter, senior manager and counsel with the National Wildlife Federation. “By requiring the Corps to carefully review the cumulative impacts of hardening shorelines and alternatives to these hard structures, we aim to encourage the use of living shorelines and other more natural approaches to decreasing erosion on our coastlines.”

As sea level rises, more coastlines are being armored by bank stabilization projects. Coastlines fixed by hard structures prohibit wetlands, marshlands, various aquatic ecosystems, and beaches from migrating inland in response to sea level rise.

Rather than inhibiting erosion, these structures redirect the wave energy downward and cause the ground at the base of the structures to wear away. As the area in front of the structures disappears, important habitat is lost to species that depend on this land and water interface to survive.

“The cumulative effect of hardened structures on our coast is causing irreversible damage to the natural ecosystem, its processes and functions, such as fish nursery habitat and pollution control, and the recreational use of waterways,” said Ogeechee Riverkeeper Emily Markesteyn. “While we are not against any and all bank stabilization projects, we must ensure the Corps follows due diligence when assessing environmental impacts of these structures.”

Federal and state agencies, the conservation groups, and others filed extensive comments on the proposed permit, highlighting the scientific evidence on the significant environmental impact of shoreline armoring. The groups contend that the Corps failed to justify the use of Nationwide Permit 13 in the face of this scientific evidence.

“Our coastal regions are changing due to sea level rise, and development choices we make today can either help buffer us from the impacts, or worsen the impacts on ourselves and our neighbors,” said Savannah Riverkeeper Tonya Bonitatibus. “The Corps must be diligent in ensuring the solutions it permits do not cause or allow undue harm on surrounding coastal properties.”

About the Southern Environmental Law Center:

The Southern Environmental Law Center is a regional nonprofit using the power of the law to protect the health and environment of the Southeast (Virginia, Tennessee, North and South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama). Founded in 1986, SELC's team of nearly 60 legal and policy experts represent more than 100 partner groups on issues of climate change and energy, air and water quality, forests, the coast and wetlands, transportation, and land use. www.SouthernEnvironment.org

About the National Wildlife Federation:

National Wildlife Federation is America's largest conservation organization inspiring Americans to protect wildlife for our children's future. Learn more at www.nwf.org.

About Ogeechee Riverkeeper:

Ogeechee RIVERKEEPER® exists for the Ogeechee, Canoochee, and coastal rivers, not the other way around. Accordingly, we measure our success not by totals of dues-paying members, dollars raised, or awards and recognitions, but by the quality of the water in the basin and the commitment of its citizens to protecting, preserving, and improving it. A hard-working, effective organization for the waters and people of the Ogeechee River basin: that is the vision for Ogeechee RIVERKEEPER®. www.ogeecheeriverkeeper.org

About Savannah Riverkeeper:

The Savannah Riverkeeper serves as the primary guardian of the Savannah River striving to respect, protect, and improve the entire river basin through education, advocacy, and action. We are a 501 c (3) non-profit organization funded by individuals and foundations that share our commitment to creating a clean and healthy river that sustains life and is cherished by its people.

Oct 102014
 

Apparently, 217,156 comments were not enough. EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers have decided to extend the comment period on their controversial proposal to define "waters of the United States." Interested parties will have until Nov. 14 to let the agencies know what they think, and how they feel, about the proposed definition.

The agencies said they "expect additional relevant materials from the Science Advisory Board before Oct. 20, and will immediately place those materials in the docket when they become available."

ESWR sent out a couple of tweets this morning. Here's one:

More links

EPA's proposal page

Farm Bureau "Ditch the Rule" page and EPA's "Ditch the Myth"

Natl. Assn. of Home Builders: Wetlands links

Natl. Wildlife Federation resources

Oct 092014
 

The Bureau of Reclamation has increased flows at Iron Gate Dam "to reduce the impacts of a parasite outbreak in coho and Chinook salmon in the upper Klamath River," the agency said last week (press release, reprinted below).

The increased flows come on the heels of a judge's decision Oct. 1 that rejected most of the claims brought by California irrigators against the 2013 FARS -- Flow Augmentation Releases.

The judge's decision was welcomed both the environmental intervenors and the irrigation districts who brought it, the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority and Westlands Water District. The latter released a statement taking issue with the characterization of the ruling by Earthjustice.

That statement, made by General Manager Thomas Birmingham, noted that the Hoopa Valley Tribe called O'Neill's decision "a tragic outcome." (Hoopa Valley release)

Coverage from the Eureka Times-Standard

Here's Westlands' statement by General Manager Thomas Birmingham

District Court Decision on the Merits of Trinity River Litigation

It is generally not my practice to issue statements regarding decisions in litigation in which Westlands Water District is involved. However, recent press reports concerning the October 1, 2014, District Court decision on the merits of the Trinity River litigation have been so inaccurate
that I am compelled to let you know the District’s perspective on this ruling. In this litigation,

Westlands Water District and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority challenged “flow augmentation releases” from the Trinity River Division for the benefit of salmon migrating up the lower Klamath River in the late summer and early fall of 2012 and 2013.

Under the Court’s ruling, Westlands prevailed on the most important issue. The Court found that the only statute cited by the Bureau of Reclamation for taking these actions, the 1955 Act authorizing construction of the Trinity River Division, does not authorize Reclamation to make
releases for the benefit of fish in the lower Klamath River. It is correct that the Court ruled against the District on other claims: on an ESA claim, the Court ruled that the District lacks standing; on the District’s NEPA claim, the Court ruled that the claim was moot because the challenged actions were already completed; and on the District’s claim that the releases were inconsistent with the CVP’s water rights because the lower Klamath River is outside of the permitted place of use, the Court ruled that under California water law, an appropriator is free to abandon water previously diverted to storage. Had the District won on these other claims, Reclamation would be required to do further environmental review and seek amendments to its water appropriation permits before making such releases in the future. There is some benefit in requiring such review. But it is likely that despite such review, Reclamation could ultimately proceed with similar releases in the future, if it desired. By contrast, Reclamation cannot cure the claim on which the District prevailed, that Reclamation lacks authority under the 1955 Act to make the releases at all.

Therefore, unless Reclamation can cite some other statutory authority, which in the District’s view does not exist, to make releases from the Trinity River Division for the benefit of salmon in the lower Klamath River, the judgment in this case would preclude such releases in the future. It is for this reason that the Hoopa Valley Tribe described the Court’s ruling as a “tragic outcome” in its press release on this decision.

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at your convenience.

Thomas Birmingham
General Manager


 

BUREC RELEASE

Mid-Pacific Region, Sacramento, Calif.

Media Contact: Erin Curtis 916 978 5100

Released On: October 03, 2014

Reclamation to Increase Flows at Iron Gate Dam to Address Fish Health Concerns

KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. – The Bureau of Reclamation will release additional water from PacifiCorp’s Iron Gate Dam beginning Saturday, Oct. 4, at 7 a.m. in an effort to reduce the impacts of a parasite outbreak in coho and Chinook salmon in the upper Klamath River. Flows at Iron Gate Dam will increase from 1,000 cubic feet per second to 1,750 cfs for approximately 10 days.
Recent fish sampling in the Klamath River indicate that a fish disease outbreak is occurring. Findings of Ichtypthirius multifilis, or Ich, have been observed in fish collected from the mainstem Klamath River over the past several weeks. Significant additional sampling of fish has occurred since Ich was first identified in mid-September. Recent sampling shows that the majority of fish collected in the mainstem Klamath River, upstream of the confluence with the Trinity River, are infected with Ich, with most of the cases classified as severe.
Many agency and tribal fisheries biologists believe that a fish die-off is imminent and could occur at any time due to the excessively high disease loads that the fish are carrying.The releases will come from water stored in PacifiCorp’s Klamath River Hydroelectric Reservoirs, based on an agreement between Reclamation and PacifiCorp. In the agreement, PacifiCorp agreed to draw down storage within its hydroelectric reservoirs to provide additional water to assist Reclamation in meeting competing demands for water in the Klamath Basin.“
Reclamation understands the severity of the Klamath River Ich disease outbreak and the large-scale impacts that could occur to our valuable in-stream resources and the local communities if a fish die off were to occur. We are continuing to work closely with our federal partners and tribal leaders to ensure that the volume of water we are making available below Iron Gate Dam is used as effectively as possible.” said Reclamation’s Mid-Pacific Regional Director, David Murillo.A technical team made up of experts from federal agencies and tribes will monitor and evaluate the impacts on in-stream resources. Overall, it is anticipated that this flow event will use about 16,000 acre-feet from PacifiCorp’s reservoirs and will have no effect on Upper Klamath Lake elevations. The public is urged to take all necessary precautions on or near the river while flows are high during this period.For additional information, please contact Tara Jane Campbell Miranda, Acting Public Affairs Specialist, at 541-880-2540 (TTY 800-877-8339) or tcampbellmiranda@usbr.gov.

# # #