@mastersthesis {37206,
	title = {Factors Affecting Coho Salmon Production in Oregon},
	year = {1978},
	note = {M.S. Thesis. In the first chapter, the author investigated whether it was possible to use scale analysis to tell whether or not a coho salmon was of wild or hatchery origin.  It was.  {\textquotedblleft}Eighty-two percent of the hatchery and 89\% of the wild fish were correctly identified.{\textquotedblright} (from the Abstract)  The author discussed the ratio of wild to hatchery salmon found and proper scale analysis techniques.  In the second chapter, the author addressed  the relationship of streamflow and the abundance of coho salmon.  {\textquotedblleft}I found that for catch in the Siletz River and Tillamook Bay, and for the troll fishery, total flows in the stream during the period of residency of the juveniles correlated significantly with number of adults resulting from these smolts; annual flows also correlated significantly.  There was no indication that summer flows determined production of adult fish 2 years later, except for a significant relationship for the Siletz River.{\textquotedblright} (p.68)},
	pages = {100 p.},
	school = {Oregon State University},
	type = {Masters Thesis},
	edition = {M. S.},
	chapter = {Dept. of Fisheries and Wildlife, Fisheries Science},
	address = {Corvallis, Or.},
	keywords = {Alsea River, Coho salmon = Oncorhynchus kisutch, Columbia River, Coquille River, Depoe Bay, flooding, hatcheries, hatchery salmonids, hydrography, hydrology, juvenile fish, life history information, Nehalem River, Port of Bandon, Port of Garibaldi, Port of Gold Beach, Port of Hammond, Port of Newport, Rogue River estuary, Siletz River, streamflow, theses, Tillamook Bay, Umpqua River, Umpqua River estuary, wild salmonids, Wilson River, Winchester Bay, Yaquina Bay},
	url = {https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/fq977x13n},
	author = {Scarnecchia, Dennis Leslie}
}
@article {37846,
	title = {Transcript of Public Hearing Held at Gleneden Beach, Oregon, on Improvement of Siletz River, Bar, and Entrance, Oregon, for Navigation, 29 July 1968},
	year = {1968},
	note = {In 1968, the Port of Newport succeeded in bringing its plan to improve the port at Siletz Bay to the attention of Federal authorities. The Port prepared a proposal for development of Siletz Bay to enable shipping out of the Bay. The project included jetties, a dredged channel , a dredged turning basin and constructed breakwaters to protect moored vessels.  This is a transcript of a hearing about the Port{\textquoteright}s plan, which was not implemented.  This document includes the plan and supporting documents, exhibits from interested parties (not all of whom favored the plan), maps, and a list of participants.},
	institution = {U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Portland District},
	address = {Portland, Or.},
	keywords = {dredging, economics, environmental policy and law, harbors, human impacts, industrial development, jetties, logging, navigation, Port of Newport, ports, Siletz Bay},
	author = {United States. Army. Corps of Engineers. Portland District,}
}
@article {37401,
	title = {Re: Improvement of Siletz River Bar and Entrance and Drift Creek, Oregon},
	year = {1948},
	note = {After the Second World War, the pace of logging in Oregon picked up.  A number of timber companies were logging in the Siletz watershed and wanted to be able to ship their logs out of Siletz Bay.  Siletz Bay seems to have still been in the Port of Newport{\textquoteright}s district, so the request to dredge and maintain an 18-foot channel came from the Port of Newport.  Once again, the request went nowhere.  The subject line of the letter of transmittal is, "Report on additional information on improvements of Siletz River Bar and entrance, Oregon." It was submitted to the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors. "31 August 1948."},
	pages = {23 p.},
	institution = {Port of Newport},
	address = {Newport, Or.},
	keywords = {dredging, harbors, historical, human impacts, industrial development, logging, navigation, Port of Newport, ports, Siletz Bay, Siletz River},
	url = {https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/technical_reports/2v23vt87j},
	author = {Darr, Allen L. and Port of Newport (Or.),}
}
@article {37866,
	title = {Siletz River, bar, and entrance, Oregon.  Letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting, with a letter from the Chief of Engineers, report on preliminary examination of Siletz River, bar, and entrance, Oregon},
	volume = {no.478, 68th Congress, 2nd session},
	year = {1924},
	note = {It was hard luck for the future development of Siletz Bay to be in a port district that had been formed for the improvement of the Yaquina River, but in 1924 that was the case, and these improvements had left the district {\textquotedblleft}bonded almost to the legal limit.{\textquotedblright} (p.2)  There was precious little room for Siletz.  In the early 1920s, the Multnomah Lumber \& Box Co. was pressing for improvements to the Siletz harbor to allow shipping of timber out of the harbor, but the request, which would have meant expensive jetties, went nowhere.  {\textquotedblleft}While the large amount of timber tributary to Siletz River is of considerable value, the local conditions are such as to justify the belief that it can be more economically handled overland through the port of Yaquina Bay{\textellipsis}{\textquotedblright}  (p.4) The report gives a brief physical description of the area, the state of the bar, and economic development. A table gives shipments at Siletz Bay for 1923. In Google Books.},
	pages = {9 p.},
	institution = {G.P.O.},
	address = {Washington, D.C.},
	keywords = {economics, harbors, logging, navigation, Port of Newport, Port of Toledo, Siletz Bay, Siletz River},
	url = {https://tinyurl.com/yyfnp4f2},
	author = {United States. Congress. House of Representatives,}
}
