iir. Dalby discussed the relationship between fresh ailuviuifi and cottonv/oou 

 stands. The literature points out that riparian cottonv,/ood forests borderinQ i.iajor 

 rivers are an ii.iportant habitat very closely tied to dynaraic fluvial systems 

 (Beidlenian 1970; see also Johnson ana Jones 1977; Johnson and iicCormick 1970). 



The goal was to develop a iriethod to icentify areas where fresh alluviuhi is 

 actively renewed over the long term. Literature indicates that new cottonwood stands 

 initially aevelop on fresh alluviur.i (Everitt 196b, Sigafoos 19G4, Silveri.ian and 

 Tomlinson 1984, Hoar and Erwin 1905). 



Mr. Dalby discussed the proposed method of studying river channels in map 

 sections 3 miles long and extending 1/2 inile on each side of the river to identify 

 active channels with island complexes. He felt this method might work in the lower 

 reaches of large rivers but probably would not be useful in identifying active 

 channels on the upper reaches of rivers where tiie channels and islanas are smaller. 



Further investigation showed aaditional problems with the proposed method. The 

 method would only identify segments with islands indicated on the .naps. Active 

 channels without islanas would not be detected. 



According to l-ir. Dalby, a more logical way to identify river reaches where fresh 

 elluviuiii is likely to accumulate would be to carefully examine aerial photos. 

 Agriculture Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS) aerial photography with a 

 scale of at least 1:24,000 is readily. Aerial photo interpretation could identify 

 fresh gravel bars and areas with recent channel movement. Further, aerial photos 

 could show cottonwood stands and v/here land-use practices, such as cropland and 

 subdivision growth, have climinatea these cottonwood communities. Topographic inaps 

 do not show the most up-to-date land-use information which is needed to show the 

 location of remaining cottonwood stands. 



The suggested additional work on riparian cottonwood/ i si and complexes could not 

 be done during the present study, but is recoi.unended as a high-priority item for 

 future work (see the section of this report entitled, "Data Gaps and Recommendations 

 for Future Work") . 



The Nature Conservancy Subcontract 



The Nature Conservancy conducted inventory of botanical features under contract 

 to DNRC. The scope of work of that contract is included in this report as Appendix 

 N. Peter Lesica was the principal investigator for The Nature Conservancy. The 

 Conservancy's final report is included as Appendix 0. 



The National Park Service Inventory of Undeveloped Segments 



Duane Holmes of the National Park Service provided 1:250,000 maps showing 

 "undeveloped segments" as determined by standard Park Service methodology. These are 

 on file at DNRC. 



Rev lew t-ieeti ni.,s 



On August 20, 1905, Larry Thompson mat with senior resource experts from 

 'Washington, Oregon, and Idaho to discuss the natural features inventory approach. 

 The minutes of this meeting are included as Appendix G to this report. 



