DOCSLIB.ORG

Methow Headwaters Minneral Withdrawal Environmental

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Methow Headwaters Minneral Withdrawal Environmental United States Department of Agriculture United States Department of the Interior 2017 Methow Headwaters Mineral Withdrawal Environmental Assessment Forest Service Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest August 2018 For More Information Contact: Jason Peterson Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest Wenatchee, WA 97504 Phone: 509-664-9395 Email: jnpeterson.fs.fed.us In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at Filing a Program Discrimination Complaint with USDA and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: [email protected]. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender. We make every effort to create documents that are accessible to individuals of all abilities; however, limitations with our word processing programs may prevent some parts of this document from being readable by computer- assisted reading devices. If you need assistance with this document, please contact the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest at 509-664-9395. 2017 Methow Headwaters Mineral Withdrawal Environmental Assessment Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Background .................................................................................................................................. 1 Project Location and Description of the Area .............................................................................. 2 Decision Framework .................................................................................................................... 6 Public Comment, Scoping, and Objection ................................................................................... 7 Proposed Action and Alternatives ................................................................................................... 8 Proposed Action: 20-year Withdrawal ......................................................................................... 9 Alternative Action: 5-year Withdrawal ........................................................................................ 9 No Action: No Withdrawal ........................................................................................................ 10 Alternatives Considered But Eliminated from Detailed Study: ................................................. 10 Key Issues and Analysis Framework ......................................................................................... 10 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and the No-Action Alternative .......................... 13 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions ....................................................... 13 The Mining Process ................................................................................................................... 13 Minerals ..................................................................................................................................... 14 Hydrology .................................................................................................................................. 16 Fisheries ..................................................................................................................................... 17 Wildlife ...................................................................................................................................... 18 Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................................... 19 Invasive Plants ........................................................................................................................... 20 Rare Plants ................................................................................................................................. 21 Recreation .................................................................................................................................. 21 Roadless ..................................................................................................................................... 24 Agencies and Persons Consulted ................................................................................................... 26 Tribal Consultation .................................................................................................................... 26 References ..................................................................................................................................... 27 Appendix A. Federal Register Notice ........................................................................................... 35 Agency ....................................................................................................................................... 35 Action ......................................................................................................................................... 35 Summary .................................................................................................................................... 35 Dates .......................................................................................................................................... 35 Addresses ................................................................................................................................... 35 For Further Information, Contact ............................................................................................... 35 Supplementary Information ....................................................................................................... 36 Appendix B. Project Location ....................................................................................................... 37 Okanogan National Forest ......................................................................................................... 37 i 2017 Methow Headwaters Mineral Withdrawal Environmental Assessment List of Tables Table 1. Comparison of alternatives by resource .......................................................................... 12 Table 2. Potential effects to recreation and visual resources if mining activity (from discovery to production) occurs ................................................................................................................. 23 List of Figures Figure 1. Vicinity map ..................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2. Methow Headwaters proposed withdrawal area watersheds and mining areas ............... 4 Figure 3. Methow Headwaters proposed withdrawal area showing the five mining claims ........... 5 Figure 4. Methow Headwaters proposed withdrawal area with Mazama Inc. forfeited claims ...... 6 Figure 5. Methow Headwater proposed mineral withdrawal and roadless boundaries ................. 25 ii 2017 Methow Headwaters Mineral Withdrawal Environmental Assessment Introduction In May 2016, the Methow Headwaters Protection Act of 2016 (S. 2991) was introduced in the U.S. Senate by Senator Murray. This bill was reintroduced as S. 566 in March 2017. Under section 204 of Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and Bureau of Land Management regulations under 43 CFR 2310.3 - 4(a), the Secretary may withdraw over 5,000 acres for a period not to exceed 20 years. Subject to section 204(c) of FLPMA, a proposed withdrawal over 5,000 acres is subject to Congressional review. The U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management, as a cooperating agency, have submitted a petition and application for a 20-year proposed withdrawal from settlement, sale, location, and entry under the public land laws; location and entry under the United States mining laws; and operation of the mineral and geothermal leasing laws, subject to valid existing rights, on 340,079 acres of Federal land. The proposed withdrawal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment
    The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment Evaluating Washington’s Future in a Changing Climate ........................................................................................................ A report by The Climate Impacts Group University of Washington Climate Science June 2009 in the Public Interest Recommended citation: Climate Impacts Group, 2009. The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment, M. McGuire Elsner, J. Littell, and L Whitely Binder (eds). Center for Science in the Earth System, Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Oceans, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Available at: http://www.cses.washington.edu/db/pdf/wacciareport681.pdf Front cover satellite image credit: http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec.php?vev1id=4786 NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration Visible Earth: A catalog of NASA images and animations of our home planet Provided by the SeaWiFS Project, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, and ORBIMAGE The Pacific Northwest is cloud-free in this SeaWiFS image. Multihued phytoplankton blooms are visible off of Washington's Olympic coast. Also visible in this image are: Fraser River outflow, snowcapped peaks of Mt. Olympus, Mt. Rainier, Mt. Adams, Mt. Hood, Mt. Jefferson, the Three Sisters, the North Cascades, and the Columbia and Snake River watersheds. Metadata * Sensor OrbView-2/SeaWiFS * Visualization Date 2000-09-26 * The Visible Earth is part of the EOS Project Science Office located at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. Small images credits: Wheat: © 2009 www.photos.com Coast; Seattle skyline: © J. Martin Grassley McNary Dam: courtesy Bonneville Power Administration Salmon: courtesy University of Washington News and Information Forest: courtesy Climate Impacts Group, University of Washington Report design: Beth Tully, Edit-Design Center, University of Washington The Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment Evaluating Washington’s Future in a Changing Climate ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Proposal to Purchase Land Along the Methow River Would Protect Fish
    Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Fact Sheet BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION Fact Sheet Fact Sheet Habitat ConseRvation – PubliC NotiCe february 2011 Conservancy will own and manage the land. A conservation Proposal to purchase land easement will be placed on the property to permanently along the Methow River protect the land for conservation values. BPA would have Fact Sheet rights of enforcement to the easement. would protect fish habitat Land management: The Methow Conservancy in Okanogan County will lead the development of a baseline assessment and management plan to guide the protection of the land and Location: Winthrop, Okanogan County, Wash. enhancement of the riparian habitat for fish. The management plan will be updated periodically to account 1 Acres: for changes on the property and consider the best Fact Sheet available science. Partners: The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation and the Methow Conservancy For more information Purpose: The Bonneville Power Administration is Bonneville Power AdministrAtion: proposing to fund the purchase of land in the Methow Jay Marcotte, project manager, 800-622-4519 or River watershed in north-central Washington to protect 503-230-3943, [email protected] fish habitat. This property was chosen to ensure the ongoingFact success of existing riparianSheet protection projects in ConfederAted triBes And BAnds of the Cedarosa area. The Methow Conservancy already has the YAkAmA Nation: conservation easements on 20 nearby properties. The Brandon Rogers, tribal biologist, 509-949-4109, Methow River watershed is important for fish conservation [email protected] because it supports populations of Upper Columbia spring the methow ConservAncy: chinook salmon, Upper Columbia steelhead, and Jeanne White, conservation project manager, Columbia River bull trout, which are all listed as threatened 1-509-996-2870, [email protected] or endangeredFact under the Endangered Sheet Species Act.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wild Cascades
    THE WILD CASCADES Fall, 1984 2 The Wild Cascades PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE ONCE THE LINES ARE DRAWN, THE BATTLE IS NOT OVER The North Cascades Conservation Council has developed a reputation for consistent, hard-hitting, responsible action to protect wildland resources in the Washington Cascades. It is perhaps best known for leading the fight to preserve and protect the North Cascades in the North Cascades National Park, the Pasayten and Glacier Peak Wilderness Areas, and the Ross Lake and Lake Chelan National Recreation Areas. Despite the recent passage of the Washington Wilderness Act, many areas which deserve and require wilderness designation remain unprotected. One of the goals of the N3C must be to assure protection for these areas. In this issue of the Wild Cascades we have analyzed the Washington Wilderness Act to see what we won and what still hangs in the balance (page ). The N3C will continue to fight to establish new wilderness areas, but there is also a new challenge. Our expertise is increasingly being sought by government agencies to assist in developing appropriate management plans and to support them against attempts to undermine such plans. The invitation to participate more fully in management activities will require considerable effort, but it represents a challenge and an opportunity that cannot be ignored. If we are to meet this challenge we will need members who are either knowledgable or willing to learn about an issue and to guide the Board in its actions. The Spring issue of the Wild Cascades carried a center section with two requests: 1) volunteers to assist and guide the organization on various issues; and 2) payment of dues.
    [Show full text]
  • Okanagan Ecoregional Assessment  Volume 1  Report
    VOLUME Okanagan 1 Ecoregional Assessment REPORT October 2006 OKANAGAN ECOREGIONAL ASSESSMENT VOLUME 1 REPORT Okanagan Ecoregional Assessment October 2006 Prepared by Nature Conservancy of Canada The Nature Conservancy of Washington and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife OKANAGAN ECOREGIONAL ASSESSMENT VOLUME 1 REPORT Okanagan Ecoregional Assessment Volume 1 – Report Citation: Pryce, B., P. Iachetti, G. Wilhere, K. Ciruna, J. Floberg, R. Crawford, R. Dye, M. Fairbarns, S. Farone, S. Ford, M. Goering, M. Heiner, G. Kittel, J. Lewis, D. Nicolson, and N. Warner. 2006. Okanagan Ecoregional Assessment, Volume 1 – Report. Prepared by Nature Conservancy of Canada, The Nature Conservancy of Washington, and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife with support from the British Columbia Conservation Data Centre, Washington Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program, and NatureServe. Nature Conservancy of Canada, Victoria, British Columbia. Cover Design: Paul Mazzucca Copyright © 2006 Nature Conservancy of Canada Vancouver, British Columbia Issued by: The Nature Conservancy of Canada Cover Photo Credits: #300 – 1205 Broad Street Methow Valley, Robin Dye; Western screech owl, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada V8W 2A4 A.M. Bezener/One Wild Earth Photography; Great Email: [email protected] basin spadefoot toad, A.M. Bezener/One Wild Earth Photography; Seton Lake, Ian Routley; Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data: Townsends big-eared bat, Harry van Oort; Mormon metalmark, Orville Dyer; East Chopaka, ISBN 1-897386-00-1 Barbara Pryce; Mountain bluebird, Ian Routley; 1. Biological inventory and assessment – Sockeye salmon, Kristy Ciruna; Badgers, Philippe Okanagan. Verkerk; Lynx, Grant Merrill; Mountain lady’s I. Nature Conservancy of Canada. slipper, George Thornton; Long-billed curlew, Ian II.
    [Show full text]
  • Chelan and Methow River Basins Washington
    Wm. A. l $. DEPABTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DiBECTOB WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 376 PROFILE SURVEYS IN CHELAN AND METHOW RIVER BASINS WASHINGTON PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF R. B. MARSHALL, CHIEF GEOGEAPHEE Prepared In cooperation with THE STATE OF WASHINGTON WASHINGTON GOVEENMENT FEINTING OFFICE 1915 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIRECTOR WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 376 PROFILE SURVEYS IN CHELAN AND METHOW RIVER BASINS WASHINGTON PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF R. B. MARSHALL, CHIEF GEOGRAPHER c!> Prepared in cooperation with O^4>^ THE STATE OP WASHINGTON *& " WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1915 CONTENTS. Introduction.............................................................. 5 Chelan River basin, Washington............................................. 5 General features....................................................... 5 Gaging stations......................................................... 6 Methow River basin, Washington........................................... 6 General features..................................^.................... 6 Gaging stations........................................................ 7 Publications.............................................................. 7 ILLUSTRATIONS. PLATES I-III. Plan and profile of Stehekin River below Bridge Creek, Rail­ road Creek near Lucerne, and Chelan River from lake to mouth, Wash. (3 sheets, A-C)................. At end of volume. IV-V. Plan and profile of Methow River from Pateros
    [Show full text]
  • Washington State's Scenic Byways & Road Trips
    waShington State’S Scenic BywayS & Road tRipS inSide: Road Maps & Scenic drives planning tips points of interest 2 taBLe of contentS waShington State’S Scenic BywayS & Road tRipS introduction 3 Washington State’s Scenic Byways & Road Trips guide has been made possible State Map overview of Scenic Byways 4 through funding from the Federal Highway Administration’s National Scenic Byways Program, Washington State Department of Transportation and aLL aMeRican RoadS Washington State Tourism. waShington State depaRtMent of coMMeRce Chinook Pass Scenic Byway 9 director, Rogers Weed International Selkirk Loop 15 waShington State touRiSM executive director, Marsha Massey nationaL Scenic BywayS Marketing Manager, Betsy Gabel product development Manager, Michelle Campbell Coulee Corridor 21 waShington State depaRtMent of tRanSpoRtation Mountains to Sound Greenway 25 Secretary of transportation, Paula Hammond director, highways and Local programs, Kathleen Davis Stevens Pass Greenway 29 Scenic Byways coordinator, Ed Spilker Strait of Juan de Fuca - Highway 112 33 Byway leaders and an interagency advisory group with representatives from the White Pass Scenic Byway 37 Washington State Department of Transportation, Washington State Department of Agriculture, Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife, Washington State Tourism, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission and State Scenic BywayS Audubon Washington were also instrumental in the creation of this guide. Cape Flattery Tribal Scenic Byway 40 puBLiShing SeRviceS pRovided By deStination
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Methow River Reach Assessment December 2015 UPPER METHOW RIVER REACH ASSESSMENT
    Appendix D Historical Conditions and Human Disturbance History Upper Methow River Reach Assessment December 2015 UPPER METHOW RIVER REACH ASSESSMENT Contents 1 Native Americans .................................................................................................................................. 1 2 Explorers, Fur Trappers, Traders and Miners ....................................................................................... 2 3 Timber Harvest, Livestock Grazing, and Other Land Use .................................................................... 12 4 References .......................................................................................................................................... 19 D‐i UPPER METHOW RIVER REACH ASSESSMENT 1 Native Americans Native Americans first arrived in the region 8,000 – 10,000 years ago, and originally stayed in the Methow Valley year‐round. Early documents reveal inhabitants were members of three major bands of the Sinkaietk people (or Northern Okanagans). The territory of the Methow encompassed most of the drainage of the Methow River, though they moved throughout the valley during the seasons as they hunted, fished, and gathered (USBR 2008). During the extreme winters, they sheltered in large pit houses dug down several feet into the ground. Figure 1. Dwellings made of poles, rush mats and canvas were used by members of the Methow tribe. A photograph taken near Lake Wenatchee shows an example of similar styles of houses. Photo courtesy of Richard Hart and the Confederated Colville
    [Show full text]
  • Forest and Water Climate Adaptation: a Plan for Whatcom County
    Forest and Water Climate Adaptation: A Plan for Whatcom County, WA Nooksack Salmon Enhancement Association Model Forest Policy Program Cumberland River Compact FOREWORD In 2010, the Model Forest Policy Program (MFPP), the Cumberland River Compact, and the Nooksack Salmon Enhancement Association (NSEA) came together to create a climate adaptation plan for the community of Whatcom County, Washington. It came about because MFPP recognized the critical need for local community resilience against the impacts of climate change by protecting forest and water resources. This climate adap- tation plan for Whatcom County, WA presents the results of a year of community team effort, deep and broad information gathering, critical analysis and thoughtful planning. NSEA took the local leadership role to engage with the Climate Solutions University: Forest and Water Strategies program (CSU) and lead their community toward climate resilience with an adaptation plan that addresses their local climate risks and fi ts their local conditions and culture. This achievement was made possible by the guidance and coaching of the Climate Solutions University: Forest and Water Strategies program (CSU) created by the Model Forest Policy Program in partnership with the Cumberland River Compact. The goal of CSU is to empower rural, underserved com- munities to become leaders in climate resilience using a cost effective distance learning program. The result of this collaborative effort is a powerful climate adaptation plan that the community can support and implement in coming years. The outcome will be a community that can better withstand impacts of climate upon their natural resources, economy and social structure in the decades to come.
    [Show full text]
  • Catch Record Cards & Codes
    Catch Record Cards Catch Record Card Codes The Catch Record Card is an important management tool for estimating the recreational catch of PUGET SOUND REGION sturgeon, steelhead, salmon, halibut, and Puget Sound Dungeness crab. A catch record card must be REMINDER! 824 Baker River 724 Dakota Creek (Whatcom Co.) 770 McAllister Creek (Thurston Co.) 814 Salt Creek (Clallam Co.) 874 Stillaguamish River, South Fork in your possession to fish for these species. Washington Administrative Code (WAC 220-56-175, WAC 825 Baker Lake 726 Deep Creek (Clallam Co.) 778 Minter Creek (Pierce/Kitsap Co.) 816 Samish River 832 Suiattle River 220-69-236) requires all kept sturgeon, steelhead, salmon, halibut, and Puget Sound Dungeness Return your Catch Record Cards 784 Berry Creek 728 Deschutes River 782 Morse Creek (Clallam Co.) 828 Sauk River 854 Sultan River crab to be recorded on your Catch Record Card, and requires all anglers to return their fish Catch by the date printed on the card 812 Big Quilcene River 732 Dewatto River 786 Nisqually River 818 Sekiu River 878 Tahuya River Record Card by April 30, or for Dungeness crab by the date indicated on the card, even if nothing “With or Without Catch” 748 Big Soos Creek 734 Dosewallips River 794 Nooksack River (below North Fork) 830 Skagit River 856 Tokul Creek is caught or you did not fish. Please use the instruction sheet issued with your card. Please return 708 Burley Creek (Kitsap Co.) 736 Duckabush River 790 Nooksack River, North Fork 834 Skokomish River (Mason Co.) 858 Tolt River Catch Record Cards to: WDFW CRC Unit, PO Box 43142, Olympia WA 98504-3142.
    [Show full text]
  • Memorandum of Agreement Between Trout Unlimited’S Washington Water Project and Methow Valley Irrigation District
    MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN TROUT UNLIMITED’S WASHINGTON WATER PROJECT AND METHOW VALLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT I. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT AND STATEMENT OF INTENT The purpose of this MOA is to set forth the terms, obligations, and responsibilities by which TROUT UNLIMITED’S WASHINGTON WATER PROJECT (TU) and METHOW VALLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT (MVID) will work together to accomplish planning, design, and construction of an alternative delivery system for it’s members on the West Canal and lay the ground work for future upgrades to the East Canal. TU has applied for funding for the West Canal project. If for some reason that funding is not available then this agreement is void. II. PARTIES TO THIS AGREEMENT This MOA is between the Trout Unlimited’s Washington Water Project, a non-profit corporation at 103 Palouse, Suite 14, WA 98801 and the Methow Valley Irrigation District, formed pursuant to chapter 87.03 RCW at PO Box 860, Twisp, WA 98856. The laws of the State of Washington govern the MOA. In consideration of the promises and mutual agreements herein, TU and MVID agree as stated in this document. III. RECITALS 1. MVID is an irrigation district operating an irrigation system including a West Canal with a diversion from the Twisp River and an East Canal with a diversion from the Methow River. 2. MVID holds Surface Water Right Claim No. 003935, filed with Ecology on April 1, 1971. This claim has a priority date preceding the enactment of the surface water code in 1917. The claim is for the right to divert 120 cubic feet per second (cfs) from the Twisp River, for the irrigation of 705 acres of land within the MVID, lying west of the Methow River.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges, Assets, and Opportunities in the Columbia River Basin
    Challenges, Assets, and Opportunities in the Columbia River Basin Stephen M. Waste, Director Columbia River Research Laboratory Western Fisheries Research Center U.S. Geological Survey Part I. Challenges Still the Balkans, after all these years! ► Legacy – Fragmentation, stove piping, turf battles, litigation and treaties ► Today – complex, societal scale issues, will affect multiple species and habitats ► Tomorrow – How do we address scientific uncertainty? . End the battle of the “experts” in protracted litigation . Break circularity perpetuated by lack of agreement on facts . By determining the facts, fundamental science can shrink the uncertainty surrounding management options Key driver in Columbia River Basin: Endangered Species Act ►Basinwide Salmon Recovery Strategy (All H Approach) – Federal Caucus ►ESA Recovery Plans and FCRPS BiOp Implementation Plans – NMFS ►Large scale monitoring for forest health (AREMP, PiBo) – USFS Is the CR Federal Caucus addressing landscape scale issues? ►Action Agencies = ACOE, BOR, and the Bonneville Power Administration ►Regulatory Agencies = National Marine Fisheries Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service ►Unaligned agencies = USGS, EPA, NPS, NRCS Regional dynamics ► Money – Status Quo Maintenance, Washington a beneficiary of differential tariff rates ► Politics – Neighbors but not friends, Oregon v. Washington, divergent politics/economics ► Planning – BPA Fish Accords with CRITFC, why did this happen? NPCC ► Science – Loss of state agency research capacities in Oregon, Washington, and California
    [Show full text]
  • Methow Beaver Project Accomplishments 2015
    Methow Beaver Project Accomplishments 2015 March 2016 by Kent Woodruff, Project Coordinator We believe that the improvement of the landscape we are responsible for is an obligation to the generations to come. Given the changes we expect are in our future, this project demonstrates one way to sustain this valley. Water is essential for everything we do in the Methow. The electricity we use, the snow we ski, the firewood we burn, the rivers we float, everything we eat, all our manufactured goods, the animals, plants, and fish we are trying to conserve, even the air we breathe all have a water component. The Methow Beaver Project is pleased to be in the stream improvement, water quality, and water conservation business. Methow Beaver Project Page 1 of 27 2015 Goals The goals of the Methow Beaver Project partnership include enhancing water quality and storing water; collecting, evaluating, and sharing information about beavers and the critical role they play in the watershed; developing and sharing methods for working with beavers; and engaging a community of biologists, students, and volunteers in beaver restoration so we can all learn and grow. The project is one example of adapting to climate change to offset snowpack loss by storing water in beaver wetland ‘sponges’. We hope to encourage other natural resource professionals to expand conservation actions, which strengthen our natural communities’ resistance to oncoming change. Purpose This project re-establishes active beaver colonies to streams in the Methow River sub-basin and thereby restores key watershed processes that have been missing for as long as 200 years.
    [Show full text]