RCW 43.58.060: Oregon-Washington Columbia River boundary compact—Terms and provisions. Oregon-Washington Columbia River boundary compact—Terms and provisions. The terms and provisions of the compact referred to in RCW 43.58.050 are as follows: INTERSTATE COMPACT DETERMINING COLUMBIA RIVER ARTICLE I. PURPOSE The boundary between the states of Oregon and Washington along the course of the Columbia River has not been easy to ascertain because of changes in the main channel of the river with a result that a state of confusion and dispute exists and the enforcement and administration of the laws of the two states has been rendered difficult. The purpose of this compact is to fix with precision by reference to stations of longitude and latitude the boundary between the states of Oregon and Washington from one marine league due west of the mouth of the Columbia River to the most easterly point at which the 46th parallel of North latitude crosses said river, at which point the river ceases to form the boundary between the two states. ARTICLE II.

DESCRIPTION The boundary between the states of Oregon and Washington from one marine league due west of the mouth of the Columbia River to the point at which the last described point number (# 191) of the boundary as herein determined meets the 46th parallel of North latitude at 118° 59'10".12 of West longitude shall be as follows: Beginning one marine league at sea off the mouth of the Columbia river at north latitude 46° 15'00".00; running thence due east to point number 1 of this description, which point is at north latitude 46° 15'00".00, west longitude 124° 05'00".00; thence from point number 1 continuing upstream in the channel of the Columbia river by a series of straight lines connecting the following numbered and described points in consecutive order.

Point Chapter 43.58 RCW: WASHINGTON-OREGON BOUNDARY COMMISSION WASHINGTON-OREGON BOUNDARY COMMISSION Oregon-Washington Columbia River boundary compact—Repeal of RCW 43.58.010 through 43.58.040 , when. 43.58.050 Oregon-Washington Columbia River boundary compact—Ratification. The interstate compact determining the Oregon-Washington boundary on the Columbia River which was executed on the 21st day of December, 1956 by the Oregon commission on interstate cooperation for the state of Oregon and the Washington-Oregon boundary commission for the state of Washington is hereby ratified and approved. [ 1965 c 8 § 43.58.050. Prior: 1957 c 90 § 1. ] NOTES: Reviser's note: The effective date of RCW 43.58.050 was March 13, 1957.

State Constitution, Amendment 33, recognizing the modification of the state's boundaries through appropriate compact procedure, was approved by the voters on November 4th, 1958, and the governor's proclamation relating thereto was issued on December 4th, 1958. The Oregon legislature has ratified the compact, see Oregon Revised Statutes §§ 186.510 and 186.520, effective April 4, 1957. See also, Article XVI of the Oregon Constitution relating to state boundaries which was adopted by the people November 4, 1958, effective December 3, 1958. Congressional ratification is contained in Public Law 85-575, dated July 31, 1958. 43.58.060 Oregon-Washington Columbia River boundary compact—Terms and provisions. The terms and provisions of the compact referred to in RCW 43.58.050 are as follows: INTERSTATE COMPACT DETERMINING COLUMBIA RIVER ARTICLE I.

PURPOSE The boundary between the states of Oregon and Washington along the course of the Columbia River has not been easy to ascertain because of changes in the main channel of the river with a result that a state of confusion and dispute exists and the enforcement and administration of the laws of the two states has been rendered difficult. The purpose of this compact is to fix with precision by reference to stations of longitude and latitude the boundary between the states of Oregon and Washington from one marine league due west of the mouth of the Columbia River to the most easterly point at which the 46th parallel of North latitude crosses said river, at which point the river ceases to form the boundary between the two states. ARTICLE II.

DESCRIPTION The boundary between the states of Oregon and Washington from one marine league due west of the mouth of the Columbia River to the point at which the last described point number (# 191) of the boundary as herein determined meets the 46th parallel of North latitude at 118° 59'10".12 of West longitude shall be as follows: Beginning one marine league at sea off the mouth of the Columbia river at north latitude 46° 15'00".00; running thence due east to point number 1 of this description, which point is at north latitude 46° 15'00".00, west longitude 124° 05'00".00; thence from point number 1 continuing upstream in the channel of the Columbia river by a series of straight lines connecting the following numbered and described points in consecutive order. Point ARTICLE III.

RATIFICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE This compact shall become operative when it has been ratified by the legislatures of the states of Oregon and Washington and approved by the Congress of the United States and the Constitutions of the states of Oregon and Washington have been amended to authorize the establishment of the boundary as herein provided. 43.58.070 Oregon-Washington Columbia River boundary compact—Transfer of records, etc., to division of archives. Upon ratification by the state of Oregon and approval by the Congress of the United States of the compact set forth in RCW 43.58.060 , the secretary of the Washington-Oregon boundary commission is hereby directed to transmit all records, work sheets, maps, minutes and other papers of said commission to the division of archives and records management of the office of the secretary of state. Daily Geography Week 13 - 16 Flashcards What city, located on the Congaree River is the capital of South Carolina? Definition Columbia Term Unlike lands near warm ocean currents, lands near cold currents may be cool and dry. The cold Peru Current passes near the earth's driest desert. What is its name?

Definition Atacama Desert Term You leave the Miami port in your new yacht to travel to San Juan, Puerto Rico. In which direction should you be heading? Definition Washington: Geography Washington Geography The state comprises three major geographic zones. In the east, most of interior Washington is made up of the Columbia Plateau and the valleys of the Columbia River and its tributaries. Central Washington is dominated, and the state is divided, by the north-south Cascade Range. To the west of the Cascades lie coastal lowlands in the Puget Trough, Puget Sound and its many arms, and to their west the Coast Ranges, which in part form the backbone of the Olympic Peninsula. The Interior Washington's interior is a region of hard volcanic substructure, in many places scoured by glacial and river action, that is left largely dry by the shield the Cascades form against the Pacific winds; in some areas, as in the southeastern Palouse hills, loess deposits provide a basis for irrigated agriculture. The Blue Mts., an offshoot of the Rockies in the state's southeast corner, are one of the interior's few forested sections. The Columbia River enters the state from British Columbia in the northeast.

After receiving the Spokane River from the east, it turns westward across the state and swings south at the foot of the Cascades, enclosing the Big Bend country. Near Washington's southern border, it receives the Yakima (from the west) and Snake (from the east), then bends westward again, forming the boundary with Oregon as it cuts through the Cascades on its way to the sea. The Cascades Washington's boldest physiographic feature is the lofty Cascade Range , rising to 14,410 ft (4,392 m) at Mt. Rainier. The Cascades block the eastward movement of warm ocean air from the Alaska Current, causing abundant rainfall to the west and semiarid conditions to the east. The valleys of the Wenatchee, Yakima, and other rivers flowing eastward from the mountains are important irrigated farming areas, while the Cascades themselves are the site of North Cascades and Mount Rainier national parks, Mount St. Helens National Volcanic Monument, several national forests, and noted ski resorts. Their scenery is a major tourist attraction. Mount St.

Helens, on the west slope near the Oregon boundary, is the most recent (1980) Cascade peak to erupt. The West and the Pacific Coast Washington's coastal region is one of the wettest areas in the United States, receiving up to 150 in. (381 cm) of rain per year at high elevations; it is correspondingly heavily forested, especially with spruce, fir, cedar, and hemlock. Between the Cascades and the much lower Coast Ranges to the west lies the Puget Trough, a lowland heavily indented by Puget Sound , the site of Seattle, Tacoma, Everett, and most of the state's population and industry. The Coast Ranges rise to 7,965 ft (2,428 m) at Mt. Olympus in the Olympic Mts., within Olympic National Park. Along the Pacific coast, in the southwest, they are breached by two substantial bays, Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay.

Puget Sound is filled with more than 300 islands, including the San Juan Archipelago and Whidbey Island; it is entered from the northwest through the Juan de Fuca Strait, from the north through the Strait of Georgia. Point Roberts, the northwesternmost portion of Washington on the latter strait, is the southern end of a peninsula that begins in Canada, and the area is not connected by land with the rest of the state. Places of Interest and Cities Visitors are attracted to Mount Rainier National Park , Olympic National Park, North Cascades National Park , Fort Vancouver and Whitman Mission national historic sites, and Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area (see National Parks and Monuments , table). Mt. Saint Helens , which erupted in 1980, is now a national monument. Miles of apple and cherry orchards in the irrigated area just east of the Cascades create the spring landscape for which the state is famous. The rugged mountain slopes and grandeur of the Cascades draw climbers during the summer months, and in winter excellent snowfields near Seattle and Tacoma attract skiers. Olympia is the capital; Seattle , Spokane , and Tacoma are the largest cities.

Sections in this article: Columbia River Gorge Things To Do | Skamania Lodge - Explore The Gorge Explore the Gorge Explore the Gorge The Columbia River Gorge Offers An Endless Array of Things to Do Skamania Lodge is nestled on 175 wooded acres within the spectacular Columbia River Gorge, a canyon that stretches for over 90 miles as the river winds westward through the Cascade Mountain Range, forming the boundary between Washington and Oregon. The Columbia River Gorge holds federally protected status as the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area and is managed by the United States Forest Service. Centrally located in the city of Stevenson, Washington, Skamania Lodge is convenient to the neighboring towns of White Salmon, Washington, and Cascade Locks, Hood River and The Dalles on the Oregon side. The largest cities in the region, Portland, Oregon, and Vancouver, Washington, are each just a beautiful 45-minute drive westward along the Columbia River. With an endless array of things to do, the Columbia River Gorge is the perfect destination for adventurers of all levels.

Center for the Study of the Pacific Northwest British and American Activities in the Pacific Northwest, 1818-1848 The Convention of 1818, resolving territorial disputes following the War of 1812, authorized a "joint occupancy" of the Pacific Northwest whereby the rights of both British subjects and American citizens to "occupy" and trade in the region were recognized. The British North West Company of fur traders remained the best established colonizing power in the region. The merger of the Hudson's Bay Company and the North West Company, in 1821, brought the American Northwest and Canadian West into the domain of the HBC, a successful fur-trading company that, over time, also developed other extractive resources in the region. The well-capitalized and shrewdly managed HBC dominated non-native society in the region between 1821 and 1840, mainly through the designs of George Simpson. American interest in the Pacific Northwest was sustained by a variety of individuals visiting the region in the 1820s and 1830s. Mountain man Jedediah Smith traveled to the area in 1829.

Booster Hall Jackson Kelly came in 1832, although he did not require a visit before promoting the Oregon country to U.S. citizens. American missionaries arriving during the mid- and later 1830s included Jason Lee (1834), Marcus and Narcissa Whitman (1836), and Henry and Eliza Spalding (1836). These individuals did not represent substantial institutional power, but their labors kept alive the idea of an American Northwest. The overland migration of Americans to Oregon began in earnest in the early 1840s. In 1840 there were about 150 Americans residing in the Oregon Country. By 1845 there were 5,000 or more U.S. settlers, most of them clustered in the Willamette Valley (see illustration below). Most had arrived by way of the overland trail, and thus ushered in a new and epic means of cross-country travel. The sudden growth of a resident U.S. population, and of settlers rather than fur traders, altered the balance of power in the area that would become U.S. territory.

In 1842, anticipating the possible loss of much of the Oregon Country to the U.S., Simpson consolidated HBC operations northward by shifting the Columbia Department's base from Fort Vancouver on the Columbia River to Fort Victoria on Vancouver Island. In 1843-45, American settlers established the Oregon Provisional Government in order to provide an American system of laws and principles for their growing society. In 1846 Britain and the United States signed the Oregon Treaty, extending the international border between the U.S. and what would become Canada along the 49th parallel to the Strait of Georgia, and then out the Strait of Juan de Fuca. This agreement resolved one "contest" for the region by dividing it between the British and the Americans. Thereafter, such questions as Indian and land policies on either side of the border would be determined by different systems of government. The HBC long remained influential in British Columbia. To establish itself as a nation and assert its borders and control over territory, the United States had to accomplish two things. First, it needed to dispossess and displace native peoples, and extinguish their claims to land.

The last lesson offers examples of that process beginning to work (albeit under British rather than American influence) among Indians of the Pacific Northwest. Second, it needed to interact with other non-native powers, particularly the nations of Europe, to define and defend American claims to territory. Some times this interaction was peaceful, and some times it was not. Most American territory came into the nation's possession via wars or purchases. Thus the Revolutionary War produced most of the territory east of the Mississippi River and the war with Mexico between 1846 and 1848 incorporated the Southwest, while the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 brought most of the lands between the Mississippi and the Rockies into the nation, and a deal with Russia in 1867 procured Alaska. Oregon City, sketched as the "American Village" by Captain Henry J. Warre. (Reproduced in Henry James Warre, Sketches in North America and the Oregon Territory. London, 1848. Plate 9.) Courtesy University of Washington Special Collections. The territory that became the American Northwest was appended to the nation in somewhat unusual fashion, by comparison.

First it passed through a phase during which the main two non-native claimants, Britain and the U.S., agreed to share it for an indefinite time—the so-called joint occupation. Second, national ownership of the area was resolved not by war or purchase but by treaty, as the two sides negotiated a boundary dispute. The dispute on the Pacific coast, settled in 1846, was complemented by one on the Atlantic coast, resolved in 1842, between Maine and Canada. Both sets of negotiations were part of the process whereby Britain and the United States reached a more substantial accommodation with one another, after the conflicts of the American Revolution and War of 1812. The Pacific coast area in dispute , called the Oregon country, stretched from the crest of the Rockies in the east to the ocean in the west, and from the 42nd parallel in the south (today's California-Oregon border) to the parallel of 54 degrees, 40 minutes in the north (today's Alaska-British Columbia border). This territory was claimed by the various explorers who arrived first by sea and then by land.

At different times, then, Spain and Russia were among those contesting the region, but between 1818 and 1824 the Spanish and Russians relinquished their claims to the territory south of Alaska and north of California. Thereafter, only Great Britain and the United States, among the developed nations, competed for the Oregon Country. It should be noted that while Great Britain and the United States both had claims to the entire Oregon country, the two sides mostly expected to divide the territory between themselves; neither could realistically expect to acquire the entire Oregon Country. East of the continental divide, the U.S. and Britain had agreed upon a border running west from the Great Lakes at the 49th parallel. Virtually from the start of discussions over Oregon, the British expected this border to continue west to the Columbia River, and then to follow that river to the ocean. They were willing, in other words, to concede everything south of the 49th parallel, and then south and east of the Columbia River, to the United States.

But they wanted to maintain access to the river itself, which after all was the key artery of travel within HBC holdings, and they wanted control over Puget Sound, which they rightly regarded as a superior harbor. At the same time, the Americans generally did not expect to gain anything north of the 49th parallel, but they coveted Puget Sound and access to the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Keep in mind that during the 1820s and 1830s the United States had no good harbor on the Pacific coast. San Diego and San Francisco were first Spanish and then Mexican ports. The shoreline of Oregon offered no great harbor for ships, and the bar at the mouth of the Columbia was notorious for interfering with transportation between ocean and river. Until the conclusion of war with Mexico, 1846-48, the U.S. regarded Puget Sound as the best place for it to acquire a protected, deep-water harbor on the Pacific coast. Michael T. Simmons, one of the first settlers of Oregon Territory north of the Columbia River. (University of Washington Libraries Special Collections, Portrait Files.) Basically, then, the boundary dispute between Britain and the U.S.

revolved around which side would get the Puget Sound country and the remainder of Washington state west and north of the Columbia River. In this competition, the British initially had by far the strongest hand. The Englishman George Vancouver, after all, had been the first non-native to discover and explore Puget Sound. And British fur traders, particularly in the employ of the HBC, had in the course of organizing the entire region into an economy of extractive resources, set up permanent bases in western Washington. By the 1830s the HBC had established posts at Fort Vancouver and Fort Nisqually and along the Cowlitz Rover, and they had also developed cordial relations with Indians. Many of George Simpson's designs for the Columbia Department between 1824 and 1840 had been based on the assumption that the British would retain western Washington and lose eastern Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. Thus Simpson had, for example, encouraged American missionaries to set up operations south and east of the Columbia; accepted settlement by American citizens in the Willamette Valley; and tried to extinguish fur supplies in the lands he expected the British would not retain.

He believed until the early 1840s that the British would hold on to western Washington, which he regarded as integral to HBC operations on the west coast, and thus did not expect to have to modify activities there in response to an American takeover. Simpson's decision to relocate the Department's headquarters in 1842 from Fort Vancouver to Victoria, however, signaled a change in his thinking. By that time, the balance of power between the British and Americans in regard to the boundary dispute was shifting. When the U.S. initially agreed to the idea of joint occupation in 1818, it did not really have the resources to make a strong imprint on the Pacific Northwest. It had neither a navy as powerful as Britain's nor a colonizing agent as well-organized and focused as the Hudson's Bay Company. The great majority of its population resided far to the east of the Mississippi River. Its fur traders and trappers had not, until the 1820s, penetrated the Rockies successfully or found ways through the mountains to the west coast. Some Americans nurtured the idea of a Pacific-coast harbor, but most did not envision the United States expanding its holdings beyond the continental divide.

Champoeg in 1851, (right) looking south. This situation began to change during the 1830s and 1840s. Mountain men and missionaries began to link the Pacific Northwest to the eastern states through their travels to, working in, and descriptions of the region. Moreover, a few parties of settlers began to make their way into the area. Then, during the 1840s, the United States became keenly interested in westward expansion—so interested that national politicians took up the West as a key campaign issue and the U.S. annexed Texas and went to war with Mexico for the remainder of its northern holdings (what became the American Southwest). Simultaneously, thousands more Americans decided to migrate overland toward the coast, including especially the Willamette Valley . American interest in the Pacific Northwest, after about two decades of stagnation, suddenly climbed dramatically, taking the form of both settlers arriving to reside in the region and politicians and statesmen willing to confront the British in order to resolve the boundary dispute in the Americans’ favor. By contrast, British interest in the Northwest remained limited, largely because the HBC monopoly in the area had precluded much attention by others from Great Britain.

American citizens were taking a keen interest in the far corner of the continent, while British subjects most likely knew little about it, or else resented the fact of that the HBC was a monopoly. The arrival of American settlers cast into bold relief the different approaches adopted by the British and Americans for colonizing the region. British colonization proceeded through the Hudson's Bay Company, whose corporate operations focused on extraction of natural resources. The HBC generally discouraged settlement in the lands it expected to retain, and discouraged private ownership of lands; it aimed to minimize any disruption to the fur trade and any dislocation of its Indian trading partners. It also worked to control non-native society in the area so that the company, and not individuals, dominated the local economy and governed the region. Americans, by contrast, expected to bring to the Northwest the more individualistic and democratic attitudes of their society. They insisted upon acquiring privately owned parcels of land and having a voice in government. And they did not wish to be subordinate to such a powerful firm as the HBC.

One HBC official summarized the differences nicely: farms in the Willamette Valley, he explained, could flourish "only through the protection of equal laws [the antithesis of monopoly], the influence of free trade [again, the antithesis of monopoly], the accession of respectable inhabitants [meaning the arrival of families of settlers, as opposed to unattached, male fur traders]...while the fur trade much suffer by each innovation." Map of International Rivalries , (left). The arriving American settlers were aware of these differences. Although they did a good deal of business with the HBC, and actually benefited from HBC assistance and trade, they also resented the power of the Company. One way to assert their own interests, and try to limit the influence of the company in the region, was for them to organize their own government—an action that reiterated their faith in American values of self-government and republicanism. Borrowing from the Iowa Territory code of laws, Oregon settlers formed the Provisional Government between 1843 and 1845. The first laws provided for the acquisition and secure ownership of land, the holding of elections, and the formation of a militia.

Later legislation provided for an executive and judicial branch of government and divided the territory into counties for local administration. Importantly, the Provisional Government outlawed the migration and residence of African Americans—both free and enslaved—to Oregon. In short order, between about 1838 and 1845, the American presence had gone from being minimal to being substantial. This change was an important factor in strengthening the American claim to the territory.At the national level, too, there existed a desire to stake a stronger claim to the Pacific Northwest. Britain and the U.S. had remained in communication about the Northwest boundary , with both sides generally unyielding in their desire to control Puget Sound. Some Americans grew impatient with the dispute, so much so that James K. Polk, when running for president in 1844, declared that he wanted the U.S. to acquire "all" of Oregon, i.e., the entire region between California and Alaska, including present-day British Columbia.

Another campaign slogan to the same effect, "Fifty-four Forty or Fight" (which meant that if the British did not yield the entire Oregon Country, up to the parallel at 54 degrees, 40 minutes, the Americans would go to war for it), summarized the aggressiveness of some Americans in this era of "Manifest Destiny." This belligerence came exactly as Britain was growing more inclined to concede western Washington to the U.S., and it actually may have stalled resolution of the dispute. By 1846, nonetheless, the two nations came to an agreement and signed the Oregon Treaty. The United States, patient since 1818, finally secured the Pacific port they had coveted for so long, a port to which they surely had less claim than the British. The British lost western Washington, but retained the interior coastline of the Strait of Georgia and Vancouver Island. The HBC retained the right of navigation on the Columbia and its substantial holdings in what was now American territory. Yet the transfer to U.S. control did not bode well for further operations south of the 49th parallel, and the HBC would eventually sell its interests in the American Northwest and retrench to British Columbia.

Few Americans today pay much attention to the Oregon Treaty of 1846 .The nation's acquisitions by war have seemed more dramatic, and even its acquisitions by purchase have seemed more memorable. The diplomatic negotiations that produced the treaty perhaps appear dull, as if the two sides finally just arrived at a fair compromise. Maybe there is a sense, too, that the U.S. did not take the far corner of the Pacific Northwest so much from another nation or people as it did from a company, the HBC, whose own operations were inhibiting American-style "development" of the region. It would be best, however, to keep in mind that in Canada, across the border that the Oregon Treaty extended in 1849, feelings are different. There, the Oregon Treaty is often remembered vividly as a loss, and one of many examples of American disrespect for Canadian borders and national integrity. Thus James R.

Gibson, a Canadian geographer, writes in Farming the Frontier: The Agricultural Opening of the Oregon Country 1786-1846 (1985): The Oregon Treaty was not a fair compromise; there was no division of the 'Oregon triangle' [the disputed lands in Washington state], all of which went to the United States....Canadians have valid reasons for regretting and even resenting the Oregon settlement, since the British claim to the territory north of the Columbia-Snake-Clearwater river system was at least as good as, if not better than, that of the United States on the grounds of discovery, exploration, and settlement, and since the future Canadian Dominion was deprived of any harbour on Puget Sound....Canadians should not forget that they were dispossessed of part of their rightful Columbia heritage, a heritage whose economic potential in general and agricultural possibilities in particular were initially and successfully demonstrated by the Hudson's Bay Company.

They should also remember that whenever it is tritely declared that Canada and the United States share the longest undefended border in the world, it is so mainly because the stronger American republic won its northern boundary disputes at the expense of its weaker neighbour, just as it southern boundary was gained at the expense of a weaker Mexico. Map of the San Juan Islands International Boundary Dispute, (right). Gibson's interpretation reflects a longstanding and pervasive Canadian concern about the sheer power of the United States as well as an accurate memory of the many threats that Americans have posed to the integrity of Canadian borders and Canadian national identity. I would, however, add one caveat to Gibson's formulation. When the Oregon Treaty was signed, the Confederation of Canada did not exist; America's northern neighbor was not a nation, but rather several British colonies. When the U.S. negotiated the Oregon Treaty, it did so with Great Britain, not Canada, so it is logical to keep Britain's participation in the treaty in mind (there was as of yet no official Canadian participation in diplomacy). Canadian views of this British participation hint at different kinds of weakness in the face of American strength.

Gibson, for example, refers to a British mood of "appeasement" in yielding western Washington to the U.S., while another Canadian scholar (John Saywell, Canada: Pathways to the Present [1994]), recalls not only American aggression but also British carelessness in giving "what is now Washington and Oregon to the United States." American interpretations, by contrast, do not portray Britain as weak, and thus do not tend to see the Oregon Treaty as a deal struck with a "weaker neighbour." Quite the contrary, in fact. In explaining President Polk's decision to accept the 49th parallel as the boundary, Robert H. Ferrell, in American Diplomacy: A History (1975), writes that Polk "had given in to Great Britain [rather than standing up for more territory]. It was one thing to press territorial claims against a nation such as Mexico, and quite another to stand up to the most powerful nation in the world, as Britain was during the nineteenth century." Canadians and Americans tend to recall the Oregon Treaty in distinctly different ways. In this case and in virtually every other, how one interprets the past depends in large part upon where one is viewing it from.

Columbia River: Description, Creation, and Discovery Columbia River: Description, Creation, and Discovery Oct 31, 2008 John Harrison Description The Columbia River, fourth-largest by volume in North America (annual average of 192 million acre-feet at the mouth) begins at Columbia Lake in the Rocky Mountain Trench of southeastern British Columbia at about 2,656 feet above sea level. The geographic coordinates at the head of the lake are 50°13’ north latitude, 115°51 west longitude. The river flows north for some 200 miles (322 kilometers) and then turns south and flows for about 270 miles (434 kilometers) before crossing the border into Washington at River Mile 749, that is, 749 miles (1,205 kilometers) inland from the Pacific Ocean. More precisely, according to the BC Freshwater Atlas , the Columbia River in British Columbia is 760.356 kilometers long (472.463 miles).

For its first approximately 150 miles (241 kilometers) in the United States, the Columbia forms the reservoir behind Grand Coulee Dam . The river then bends west, south and east through central Washington, turns south and then west, and forms the border between Oregon and Washington to the Pacific Ocean. The mouth of the river is about 10 miles (16 kilometers) west of Astoria , Oregon. The geographic coordinates at the mouth (near Cape Disappointment, Washington) are 124.093440 west longtitude, 46.246922 north latitude (these are the coordinates the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers cites as River Mile Zero). The total length of the river is about 1,243 miles (about 2,000 kilometers). The drainage basin covers 259,000 square miles (670,810 square kilometers), approximately the size of France, drains portions of seven states and British Columbia, and covers three degrees of latitude and nine degrees of longitude.

Because of its unique situation close to the ocean and laced with tall mountain ranges, the Columbia evolved as one of the great rivers of the world in terms of its runoff and the diversity of its habitat. From its headwaters to its mouth, the river drops steadily at a rate of about two feet per mile, and most of its course is through rock-walled canyons. Down these rocky canyons the Columbia pours prodigious volumes of water, emptying an annual average of 192 million acre-feet into the Pacific; much of its volume originates in its middle and upper reaches. The Canadian portion of the basin, for example, contributes about 20 percent of the river’s total volume (this includes the water from rivers that begin or pass through the United States before entering the Columbia in Canada, such as the Clark Fork/Pend Oreille system and the Kootenay, which is spelled Kootenai in the United States). The combination of high volume and stable canyons made the Columbia an ideal hydropower river.

Today there are 14 dams on the mainstem Columbia, beginning with Bonneville at river mile 146 and ending with Mica at river mile 1,018, and more than 450 dams throughout the basin. Dams on the Columbia and its major tributaries, primarily the Snake River, at approximately 1,005 miles its longest feeder stream, produce half of the electricity consumed in the Pacific Northwest. The Columbia River dams inundated many of the river's dangerous rapids, well-described and named by early settlers and travelers on the river for their often treacherous passage -- Dalles des Morts (Death Rapids), Hell Gate, White Cap, Rock Slide, Boulder, Surprise. The huge volume of water pouring to the ocean, most of it during the spring and early summer when the snowpack melts, also produced ideal environmental conditions for cold-water fish, particularly anadromous fish like salmon and steelhead . Other anadromous species in the Columbia include lamprey, sturgeon and shad. But salmon and steelhead are the river’s legacy fish.

Between 10 million and 16 million salmon and steelhead are believed to have returned to the river to spawn annually prior to the 1840s, when immigration to the Northwest began to accelerate and pressures on fish, through harvest and habitat destruction, for example, began to take a toll on the runs. Through the 20th century, the number declined to less than 1 million, but the returns began to rebound in the late 1990s, a time when CONSERVATION efforts were increasing in freshwater habitat and ocean feeding conditions were improving. Creation There was a beginning of the Columbia, just as there is a beginning of all things. In one tradition, the beginning is told in myth. In another tradition, the story is one of geology. The mythic could be said to inform the geologic. They are not so different. According to a Yakama legend, the mythical Columbia began, as does the creation story in Genesis, with water. In Genesis, the Earth was formless and empty, and the Spirit of God, the creative force of the Universe, hovered over the water.

In the Yakama legend, the hovering spirit, Whee-me-me-ow-ah, the Great Chief Above the Water, reached down from the sky where he lived and scooped handfuls of mud from the shallow places and made the land. Some of the mud he piled high to make mountains, and some of it he made into rocks. He made trees and roots and berries grow on the land, and he made man from a ball of mud. He gave the man instructions about hunting and fishing, and when the man became lonely the Great Chief Above made woman and taught her how to gather and prepare berries, and cook the salmon and game the man brought to her. He blew his breath upon her and made her skilled in these things so that she could teach her daughters and granddaughters. Coteeakun, an associate of Smohalla, the great Yakama prophet, told this version of the creation to Major J.W. MacMurray of the U.S. Army when he was stationed among the Yakama in 1884-85, according to author Ella Clark.

It may be an accurate retelling of a story handed down through generations, or with its distinctly Biblical tone it may be influenced by the work of Christian missionaries of the time. Other Northwest tribes have similar oral traditions about the creation of the world, usually involving a benevolent Chief Above and the creation of distinct levels -- underworld, earth and sky -- linked through the middle in some way, as by a pole, a tree or a waterfall. Humans also were divinely created by the Chief Above or, in some traditions, by his agent Coyote. The Columbia itself was the work of Coyote in most oral traditions. Realizing that salmon were in the ocean and that people in the interior needed food, Coyote fought a battle with the giant beaver god Wishpoosh, backing him through the Cascade Mountains to the ocean and then killing him. It was the back-and-forth slashing action of the great beaver’s tale that scraped out the Columbia River Gorge and opened the channel to the sea. This made salmon available to the people. Coyote cut the beaver to pieces and distributed the pieces on the land, and they became humans.

Later, Coyote tricked the five swallow sisters, who had built a dam across the river to block salmon, into leaving him alone there. While the sisters were away, he destroyed the dam, again freeing the way for salmon. The rocks of Celilo Falls were the remnants of the dam. Thus we have the Columbia River and salmon. There are other legends about the origin of the river and its people, legends that also coincide with the geology and ecology of the river as we know it today. There were cataclysms of volcanism, floods and earthquakes. Humans migrated over great distances around the northern rim of the Pacific Ocean and from the continental Northeast to settle here, along the Columbia. The geologic history of the modern Columbia River Basin could be said to have its origin in the Yakima Basalt of the Columbia River Basalt Group, the greatest outpouring of lava in the history of North America, which spread across western Idaho and eastern Washington and flowed to the Pacific Ocean between 6 million and 16 million years ago. The repeated basalt flows formed the area we know today as the Columbia Plateau of central Washington and Oregon.

The ancient Columbia, which once entered the ocean near present-day Coos Bay, Oregon, was forced north and west by the repeated flows. The sheer weight of some 90,000 cubic miles of basalt, layered in more than 200 separate flows, gradually depressed the Earth’s crust and shaped the Columbia Basin, sloping inward from perimeter elevations of 2,000 to 4,000 feet above sea level to less than 500 feet in the Pasco Basin of south central Washington. Beginning about 12 million years ago, the pressure began to warp the basin into the characteristic east-west folds that are the modern-day tributary river basins. It is something of an irony that the rich farmland of the Columbia Plateau, known as the Palouse Formation, resulted from extremely arid conditions between the advance and retreat of glaciers during the last Ice Age. During the interglacial warm periods, winds deposited glacial dust and silt up to 150 feet deep in some places. Geology and mythology need not be mutually exclusive. Neither tradition needs to be more right than the other.

What is important is the river had a beginning, and that in the beginning, before everything else, there was water. Discovery of the Columbia In the 16th century, somewhere in the north of New Spain, in the mists of imagination and the heat of the desert, lay seven cities of legendary wealth. These were unimaginably rich with turquoise, silver, gold, and furs, or so the Spanish conquistadors believed as they plundered, proselytized and steadily pushed deeper into the wilderness. By land and by sea, Spaniards pushed west and north across the land they called New Spain — present-day Mexico — searching for the fabulous wealth. Some 60 years after the first Spanish colonies were established in New Spain, Sir Francis Drake sailed from Plymouth, England, on Dec. 13, 1577, with 100 men and three ships: the Pelican, Elizabeth, and Marigold. Officially, he planned to explore “Terra Australis Incognita,” the Unknown Land of Australia, as a possible site for colonization. He also planned to search for the western entrance to the Northwest Passage. Privately, he had Queen Elizabeth’s permission to loot any Spanish ships he might encounter.

Storms in the Strait of Magellan sank the Marigold and forced the Elizabeth to turn for home. Drake continued in the Pelican, which he renamed the Golden Hind. In 1579, having traveled half way around the world, and after robbing a number of Spanish ships to the point that his own Golden Hind was heavily burdened with stolen gold and silver, precious gems and jewelry, Drake sailed north along the Pacific coast. On June 3, the Golden Hindis believed to have reached at least 42 degrees north latitude (northern California) and perhaps as far as 48-50 degrees (northern Washington or Vancouver Island). He turned back and found a harbor, probably just north of San Francisco Bay, where he landed to repair his ship and take on water and food before sailing west across the Pacific and home. Meanwhile, Spain’s quest for gold and territory in the Northwest continued, with the next explorers reaching the present-day Oregon coast in January 1603. Through these early explorations, the Pacific Northwest began to emerge from the mists of imagination.

The Northwest was becoming a known place on crude maps, but despite the lure of the imagined Northwest Passage more than 100 years would pass before Spain or any other nation would attempt such an exploring voyage again. On July 11, 1775, Bruno Heceta in the Sanitago and Juan Francisco de la Bodega y Quadra in the Sonora, exploring north from San Blas, a Spanish port on the Pacific Coast a short distance north of present-day Puerto Vallarta, reached 48° 26’ north, on the west coast of Vancouver Island, then turned back south. On August 15th, Heceta and Quadra arrived at the mouth of Columbia after having lost part of their crew in a skirmish with Indians on the Olympic peninsula. Many of the remaining crewmen were weak with scurvy. Heceta supposed the Columbia was the passage discovered, or at least attributed, to Juan de Fuca’s 1592 voyage. De Fuca’s strait was said to exist between latitudes 47° and 48°, but Heceta wrote that he had been there and seen no such strait.

Heceta decided he also should not risk exploring the bay with his long boat, the only such boat he had left as the result of the disaster on the Olympic coast. As well, it was late in the day. So he put out to sea a short distance -- three leagues -- and waited for the morning. Later, he wrote: In the course of that night, I experienced heavy currents to the south-west, which made it impossible to enter the bay on the following morning, as I was far to leeward. These currents, however, convinced me that a great quantity of water rushed from this bay on the ebb tide. The two capes which I name in my plan, Cape San Roque and Cape Frondoso, lie in the angle of 10 degrees of the third quadrant. They are both faced with red earth and are of little elevation. Today, those capes are Disappointment (San Roque) and Adams, and they mark the mouth of the Columbia. “And so,” historian Murray Morgan writes, “the entrance to the River of the West was discovered.” In 1778, Captain James Cook, the famed British explorer who made three voyages to the Pacific, missed the mouth of the Columbia altogether.

Arriving on the Pacific coast after having discovered the Hawaiian Islands, which he named in honor of his friend the Earl of Sandwich, Cook first sighted land in the vicinity of Newport, Oregon, on the present-day central Oregon coast. He described the land and named Cape Foulweather, a few miles north of Newport, and then, having accurately described the weather in the naming of the rocky headland, was blown out to sea and did not see land again for about two weeks. [We were] “unprofitably tossed about for the last fortnight” he wrote in his journal for March 21, 1778. Cook followed the coasts of present-day British Columbia and Alaska to the Aleutian Islands and the northern Bering Sea, where he was stopped by ice. He was searching for a Northwest Passage to the Atlantic and did not fit one, but his crew traded for sea otter pelts on the Alaskan coast and later sold the furs at Canton for a huge profit. Word of the value of sea otter pelts — they were softer and finer than any other fur at the time — spread fast, and the huge profits were confirmed in the official report of Cook’s voyage.

Soon British traders in India and Canton were outfitting ships for trading expeditions to the Pacific coast, as were other entrepreneurs in the United States and Europe. All of these explorers missed the mouth of the Columbia until John Meares sighted it in July 1788 while on a fur-trading voyage from Nootka Sound. Meares sighted and named Mount Olympus and then coasted south to take a look at the big bay and surge of fresh water discovered by the Spaniard Heceta in 1775. Meares was a former British naval officer who first visited the Northwest coast two years earlier on a voyage in search of sea otter pelts. He arrived off the mouth of Heceta’s bay on July 5. He attempted to cross the bar, but encountered huge and dangerous breakers. Then he stood off, waiting for the sea to calm and eventually decided there was no river. On July 6, 1788, he named the northern cape Disappointment, a name that stands to this day. He named the bay Deception. He wrote in his journal, “We can now assert that there is no such river.” He arrived back at Nootka on July 26.

Four years later, he would be proven wrong. At 4 a.m., April 29, 1792, just inside the entrance of the Strait of Juan de Fuca off the Northwest coast of present-day Washington, two great sea captains had a brief encounter that literally changed the course of Columbia River history. One was an American, fur trader Robert Gray of Boston, and the other was British, Captain George Vancouver. It was common practice when two ships met in remote corners of the world for the captains to exchange notes, observations and sea charts. Gray and Vancouver had arrived at this point having sailed up the west coast, and both had noticed the mouth of the Columbia River. But neither had investigated it. Vancouver noted in his log for April 27, two days earlier: On the south side of the promontory was the appearance of an inlet or a small river, the land behind not indicating it to be of any great extent; nor did it seem accessible for vessels of our burthen, as the breakers extended from the above point, two or three miles into the ocean, until they joined those on the beach nearly four leagues further south.

The Sea had now changed from its natural, to river-coloured water; the probable consequences of some streams falling into the bay, or into the ocean to the north of it, through the low land. Not considering this opening worthy of more attention, I continued our pursuit to the N .W., being desirous of embracing the prevailing breeze. A seaman on the Chatham, a tender to Vancouver’s ship, the Discovery, also saw the mouth of the Columbia and later wrote in his own journal: The Discovery made signal we were standing into danger and we hauled out; this situation is off Cape Disappointment from whence a very extensive shoal stretches out and there was every appearance of an opening actually seen, but it was passed without appreciating the importance of the place. It may not have been so much that Vancouver did not appreciate the importance of the place but that he considered the opening too small or dangerous, and to investigate would have violated his specific orders. He had two primary tasks. One was to receive restitution from Spain for the land and buildings at Nootka on what is now Vancouver Island. British possessions there had been seized by Spain in 1789.

The other, and more important task, was to search the Pacific coast as far north as 60 degrees for the opening of a Northwest Passage, and he was advised against pursuing “any inlet or river further than it shall appear to be navigable by vessels of such burden as might safely navigate the Pacific Ocean.” Vancouver considered the Discovery too large for what he perceived as a shallow and dangerous opening to a supposed river. Off Cape Flattery, Vancouver sent Lt. Peter Puget and the ship’s botanist, Archibald Menzies, to interview Gray. After they brought back their report, Vancouver wrote: The river Mr. Gray mentioned should from the latitude he assigned to it, have existence in the bay south of Cape Disappointment. This we passed on the forenoon of the 27th; and as I then observed, if any inlet should be found, it will be a very intricate one, and inaccessible to vessels of our burthen, owing to the reefs and broken water which appeared in its neighborhood. Mr. Gray stated that he had been several days attempting to enter it, which he at length was unable to effect in consequence of a very strong outset ...

I was thoroughly convinced, as were also most persons on board that we could not possibly have passed any safe navigable opening, harbor or place of security for shipping on the coast, from Cape Mendocino to Classet ... nor had we any reason to alter our opinions. Vancouver went on to the east to investigate the extent of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, following in the path of Spanish explorers who had been in the area for the past two years. Vancouver would go farther, however, and be the first to explore Puget Sound, which he would name for one of his lieutenants. Gray went west and south along the coast to have another look at the openings he had observed earlier, including the one that now bears his name, Gray’s Harbor, and the Columbia. On May 11, Gray discovered the Columbia, noting in his ship’s log for that day: At four A.M. saw the entrance of our desired port. … When we were over the bar, we found this to be a large river of fresh water, up which we steered. At one, P.M., came to with the small bower, in ten fathoms, black and white sand.

… Vast numbers of natives came alongside. … So ends. Indians came to meet Robert Gray’s Columbia Rediviva in the estuary. Illustration: Joan Barbour. Gray anchored one-half mile off the north shore of the estuary between modern-day Point Ellice and McGowan’s Station. Thus the Columbia became — and remains — an American river. The American government was well aware of Gray’s expedition. He carried an official letter of introduction from the president, George Washington. Just as easily, the Columbia could have been British, but first Meares and then Vancouver insisted it was either nonexistent or insignificant. These were well-accomplished explorers, Vancouver particularly so. Why were they so adamant in spite of intriguing evidence of a great river? The answer might be, in a word, arrogance. Meares simply was convinced he was right. As for Vancouver, Historian Richard Speck suggests that while brilliant and well-experienced as an explorer, Vancouver was a victim of his own “towering pride.” Despite the information he gleaned from Gray, Vancouver believed, by his own observations, that there were no ports or rivers of significance between Mendocino and Cape Flattery.

Speck suggests that Vancouver, as a British naval officer, also probably was quite right to disregard the information of a “Yankee tramp trader” about the mouth of the Columbia. If Vancouver can be criticized, Speck suggests, it would be for his refusal to heed the obvious signs of a great river -- discolored ocean water, floating debris, a strong current pushing out to sea. Regardless, he effectively threw away the discovery by which Great Britain could have claimed all of Old Oregon. If not for this, the state of Washington north of the Columbia River might be part of Canada today. A more sympathetic explanation of why Vancouver dismissed the mouth of the Columbia is provided by British Columbia historian Barry Gough, who believes that the Admiralty urged Vancouver to use his judgment and be cautious in order to save time and to devote the voyage to the task of discovering the western opening of a Northwest Passage connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Gough writes that in order to be commercially and strategically useful, the passage had to be large, and to Vancouver the opening of the Columbia did not appear large. As well, Gough suggests, Vancouver may have placed too much confidence in Meares’ earlier conclusions.

Gough also notes that Vancouver was “distressed” that Gray had discovered the river, and that Vancouver later had Lieutenant Broughton of the Chatham survey the river about 120 miles inland in the hope of extending British claims. That was in October 1792, when Vancouver, having been presented a copy of Gray’s chart of the Columbia by the Spanish commander at Nootka, decided that on his way to the Sandwich Islands, where he planned to spend the winter, he would investigate the river. For two days he looked for a channel safe enough for the Discovery. Finding none, he ordered Broughton, commanding the smaller Chatham, to investigate the river. Broughton crossed bar on October 19, 1792. Historian Bernard DeVoto writes that while Gray’s chart showed he had gone upriver 36 miles: … by triangulation, computation and divination Broughton scaled this down to fifteen miles and decided that up to here the river had not narrowed enough to be called anything but a sound. A freshwater sound that opened on the ocean would be unusually interesting geography but it would do to peg down an imperial claim.

Broughton anchored the Chatham in the estuary and went on upriver with a crew in the ship’s longboat, naming sites including Puget Island and Mount Hood (Vice Admiral Samuel Lord Hood signed the orders for Vancouver’s expedition). Along the way, he and his crew traded with Indians for salmon. These included three fish acquired at a Chinook village on the 21st. On October 30 on the shore probably near present-day Corbett, Oregon, Broughton claimed the river, its watershed and the coast for Great Britain. In short, he claimed for Great Britain the river Gray had named. Vancouver accepted Broughton’s claim, “having every reason to believe that the subjects of no other civilized nation or state had ever entered this river before.” Vancouver also wrote, “It does not appear that Gray either saw or was ever within five leagues of its [Columbia] entrance.” Some authorities suggest the latter quotation was fabricated for diplomatic purposes because Great Britain later used it in boundary negotiations with the United States.

Speck writes: “[Vancouver] had unhesitatingly laid absurd claims to Spanish lands far south of any reasonable boundary, and now his lieutenant baldly claimed for England a river which had been discovered by another nation.” Broughton’s deceit was the basis of Great Britain’s tenuous claim to the Columbia until the boundary matter finally was addressed, first in the Convention of 1818 that established joint possession of the Northwest and ultimately in the Treaty of Oregon , which the two countries signed in June 1846. The treaty fixed the border at the 49th parallel. According Gough, “Vancouver’s failure to discover the river plagued British diplomats, who in discussions with their American counterparts were obliged to base their priority of claims on the basis of the earlier, more cursory discoveries of Drake and Cook.” Historian Glyn Williams writes that the “one serious blemish” on Vancouver’s 1792 expedition to the Pacific Northwest coast was that he failed to understand the significance of several major rivers, including the Fraser and Columbia. Nonetheless, Vancouver conducted such a thorough survey of the coastline from the Strait of Juan de Fuca to southeastern Alaska that 100 years later his maps were still in use.

“He proved there was no Northwest Passage in these latitudes, but he inadvertently left the Columbia River for others,” Williams writes. There can be no doubt about who discovered the Columbia. A record remains intact, notably including Gray’s log and the journal of John Boit, Gray’s fifth mate on the Columbia Rediviva, who wrote extensively about the river. In his journal for May 15, 1792, four days after the Columbia Rediviva crossed the bar, Boit wrote: Sent the cutter and found the main Channel was on the South side, and that there was a sand bank in the middle, as we did not expect to procure any Otter furs at any distance from the Sea, we contented ourselves in our present situation, which was a very pleasant one. I landed abreast the Ship with Captain Gray to view the Country and take possession, leaving charge with the 2nd Officer. Found much clear ground, fit for Cultivation, and the woods mostly clear from Underbrush. Boit also wrote glowingly about the abundance of salmon, beavers, nuts, elk and deer in the estuary, and the level, fertile ground.

He envisioned a settlement there, and another in the present-day Queen Charlotte Islands that “... wou’d engross the whole trade of the NW coast (with the help a few small coasting vessels).” To this day there is a remnant of the British and American explorations in the names of the two capes at the mouth of the river. Cape Disappointment on the north side was named in 1788 by John Meares, the British explorer (Gray’s “Cape Hancock” did not stick); Point Adams on the south side was named in 1792 by the American, Robert Gray. Aerial view of the mouth of the Columbia River. Photo: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. [another photo here?] [Photo/illustration 6 (map of the Columbia River Basin): Map copyright 2004 by Evelyn Hicks, Portland.] Snake River, Idaho, Oregon Snake River, Idaho, Oregon U.S. Forest Service, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest Designated Reach: December 1, 1975.

The segment from Hells Canyon Dam downstream to an eastward extension of the north boundary of section 1, T5N, R47E, Willamette meridian. Classification/Mileage: Wild — 32.5 miles; Scenic — 34.4 miles; Total — 66.9 miles. RELATED LINKS Photo Credit: Tim Palmer Is Hells Canyon The Deepest? It's often claimed that Hells Canyon is the deepest canyon in the United States. But is it? It all depends on how you define a canyon and where you measure it. The highest point above the Snake River is He Devil Mountain in Idaho, a bit less than 7,900 feet above the water and 6 miles away. The other side of the Snake River is Bear Mountain in Oregon, which is only around 5,400 feet. By comparison, Spanish Mountain rises 8,240 feet above the Kings River in California and is only 4 miles away. The highest point on the other side of the river, coincidentally, is also around 5,400 feet.

And again, depending on where you measure and how you define a canyon, several sections of the Middle and South Forks of the Kings River have an average rise of 6,500 to 7,700 feet. So why is there a dispute over whether Kings Canyon or Hells Canyon is deeper? Kings Canyon is a much more open landscape; Hells Canyon 'feels' like a canyon. But as someone pointed out, hey, the National Park Service calls it Kings Canyon National Park for a reason. By the way, the Grand Canyon—which no one would dispute as a canyon—"only" reaches a depth of 6,093 feet from the river to the North Rim. Snake River The Snake River likely got its name from the first European explorers who misinterpreted the sign made by the Shoshone people who identified themselves in sign language by moving the hand in a swimming motion which appeared to these explorers to be a "snake." It actually signified that they lived near the river with many fish. In the 1950's, the name "Hells Canyon" was borrowed from Hells Canyon Creek, which enters the river near what is now Hells Canyon Dam.

The Hells Canyon area was once home to Shoshone and Nez Perce tribes. According to the Nez Perce tribe, Coyote dug the Snake River Canyon in a day to protect the people on the west side of the river from the Seven Devils, a band of evil spirits living in the mountain range to the east. In the late nineteenth century, the military drove the Native Americans out and settlers began ranching and mining in the canyon. Today, boaters can explore archaeological sites and old homesteads, all part of the canyon's rich, colorful history. Hells Canyon is one of the most imposing river gorges in the West. Until a million years ago, the Owyhee Mountains acted as a dam between the Snake River and its current confluence with the Columbia River, creating a vast lake in what is now southwestern Idaho. When the mountains were finally breached, the Snake roared northward, cutting a giant chasm through the volcanic rock. The resulting canyon, roughly ten miles across, is not as dramatic as the Grand Canyon. However, when the surrounding peaks are visible from the river, the sense of depth is tremendous. The adjacent ridges average 5,500' above the river.

He Devil Mountain, tallest of the Seven Devils (9,393') towers almost 8,000' above the river, creating the deepest gorge in the United States. The river is as big as the landscape. Below Hells Canyon Dam, the Snake usually carries more water than the Colorado River through the Grand Canyon. Below the confluence with the Salmon River, flows average 35,000 cfs and often peak over 100,000 when the Salmon is high. Further downstream, the Clearwater and other rivers dump their flows into the Snake River, creating the Columbia River's largest tributary. (The total drainage area is approximately the size of Oregon.) The outstandingly remarkable values of the Wild and Scenic Snake River are scenery, recreation, geology, wildlife, fisheries, cultural resources, vegetation/botany and ecology. River recreational use is limited for all user groups (private float and power boat; commercial float and power boats) for each segment of river and within primary and secondary use seasons.

Permits are required yearlong for use on the river by float or power boats and are available through Choose a river Choose a river Seen as barren by the first explorers to today's first-time visitors, the rivers of the high desert simply hide their treasures well.

Question: Which river forms most of the boundary between the US states of Oregon and Washington?
Answer: COLUMBIA