DOCSLIB.ORG

Spokane River Watershed Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Reduction Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Spokane River Watershed Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Reduction Plan spokane river watershed nonpoint source phosphorus reduction plan December 2011 2011 Table of Contents List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................x Using this Plan ................................................................................................................. xii Executive Summary .................................................................................................... ES-1 Chapter 1 Spokane River Watershed Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Background and Issues ...................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Background .......................................................................................................... 1-3 1.2.1 Spokane Watershed Water Quality Considerations ................................. 1-3 1.2.2 Spokane River DO TMDL Development ................................................. 1-4 1.3 Purpose ................................................................................................................. 1-5 1.4 Phosphorus Control Approach ............................................................................. 1-5 1.5 Watershed Description ......................................................................................... 1-7 1.5.1 Study Area ................................................................................................ 1-7 Chapter 2 Spokane River DO TMDL Identification of Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Loads ................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Summary of Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Sources ............................................ 2-2 2.3 Summary of Phosphorus Wasteload and Load Allocations ................................. 2-2 2.3.1 Point Source Phosphorus Wasteload Allocations ..................................... 2-2 2.3.2 Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Load Allocations ....................................... 2-3 Chapter 3 Subbasin Assessment Nonpoint Source Phosphorus ................................ 3-1 3.1 Watershed Nonpoint Source Phosphorus ............................................................. 3-1 3.2 Lower Spokane River Subbasin ........................................................................... 3-4 3.2.1 Lower Spokane River Subbasin Characteristics ....................................... 3-4 3.2.2 Lower Spokane River Subbasin Land Use ............................................... 3-5 3.2.3 Lower Spokane River Subbasin Pollution Sources .................................. 3-7 3.3 Upper Spokane River WA Subbasin - Nonpoint Source Phosphorus ................. 3-7 3.3.1 Upper Spokane River WA Subbasin Characteristics ............................... 3-7 3.3.2 Upper Spokane River WA Subbasin Land Use ........................................ 3-8 3.3.3 Upper Spokane River WA Subbasin Pollution Sources ......................... 3-10 3.4 Little Spokane River Subbasin - Nonpoint Source Phosphorus ........................ 3-10 3.4.1 Little Spokane River Subbasin Characteristics ...................................... 3-10 3.4.2 Little Spokane River Subbasin Land Use ............................................... 3-11 3.5 Hangman Creek Subbasin - Nonpoint Source Phosphorus ................................ 3-13 3.5.1 Hangman Creek Subbasin Characteristics .............................................. 3-13 3.5.2 Hangman Creek Subbasin Land Use ...................................................... 3-14 3.5.3 Hangman Creek Subbasin Pollution Sources ......................................... 3-16 3.6 Upper Spokane River ID Subbasin - Nonpoint Source Phosphorus .................. 3-16 3.6.1 Upper Spokane River ID Subbasin Characteristics ................................ 3-16 3.6.2 Upper Spokane River ID Subbasin Land Use ........................................ 3-18 3.6.3 Upper Spokane River ID Subbasin Pollution Sources ........................... 3-19 Spokane River Watershed Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Reduction Plan Page i 3.7 Coeur d’Alene Lake Subbasin - Nonpoint Source Phosphorus ......................... 3-19 3.7.1 Coeur d’Alene Lake Subbasin Characteristics ....................................... 3-19 3.7.2 Coeur d’Alene Lake Subbasin Land Use ............................................... 3-21 3.7.3 Coeur d’Alene Lake Subbasin Pollution Sources .................................. 3-22 3.8 Upper Coeur d’Alene River Subbasin - Nonpoint Source Phosphorus ............. 3-22 3.8.1 Upper Coeur d’Alene River Subbasin Characteristics ........................... 3-23 3.8.2 Upper Coeur d’Alene River Subbasin Land Use ................................... 3-23 3.8.3 Upper Coeur d’Alene River Subbasin Pollution Sources ....................... 3-24 3.9 South Fork Coeur d’Alene River Subbasin - Nonpoint Source Phosphorus ..... 3-25 3.9.1 South Fork Coeur d’Alene River Subbasin Characteristics ................... 3-25 3.9.2 South Fork Coeur d’Alene River Subbasin Land Use ............................ 3-26 3.9.3 South Fork Coeur d’Alene River Subbasin Pollution Sources ............... 3-27 3.10 St. Joe River Subbasin - Nonpoint Source Phosphorus ................................... 3-27 3.10.1 St. Joe River Subbasin Characteristics ................................................. 3-27 3.10.2 St. Joe River Subbasin Land Use ......................................................... 3-29 3.10.3 St. Joe River Subbasin Pollution Sources ............................................. 3-30 3.11 Pend Oreille Lake Subbasin - Nonpoint Source Phosphorus ........................... 3-30 3.11.1 Pend Oreille Lake Subbasin Characteristics ......................................... 3-30 3.11.2 Pend Oreille Lake Subbasin Land Use ................................................. 3-30 3.11.3 Pend Oreille Lake Subbasin Pollution Sources .................................... 3-31 3.12 Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 3-31 Chapter 4 Spokane River Watershed – Nonpoint Source Phosphorus .................... 4-1 4.1 Water Quality Report Screening .......................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Report and Data Credibility Assessment ............................................................. 4-1 4.3 Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Database ............................................................... 4-2 4.4 Summary of Phosphorus Dataset ......................................................................... 4-2 4.4.1 Data Count ................................................................................................ 4-2 4.4.2 Average Total Phosphorus Concentration ................................................ 4-5 4.4.3 Total Phosphorus Loading ................................................................................ 4-8 4.4.4 Septic System Density ............................................................................ 4-10 4.5 Groundwater Total Phosphorus Data Analysis .................................................. 4-12 4.6 Groundwater Orthophosphorus Data Analysis .................................................. 4-14 4.7 Surface Water Total Phosphorus Data Analysis ................................................ 4-17 4.8 Surface Water Orthophosphorus Data Analysis ................................................ 4-18 4.9 Prioritization of Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Sources and Subbasins ............. 4-19 4.10 Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Data Gaps ......................................................... 4-20 4.10.1 Groundwater ......................................................................................... 4-20 4.10.2 Surface Water ....................................................................................... 4-21 4.10.3 Data and Analysis Gap Prioritization ................................................... 4-22 4.11 Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Recommended Studies ..................................... 4-22 Chapter 5 Watershed Conditions and Supplemental Data ........................................ 5-1 5.1 Screening-Level Field Reconnaissance ............................................................... 5-1 5.2 Field Data Collection ........................................................................................... 5-3 5.2.1 Deep Creek Field Data Collection and Phosphorus Loading Summary .. 5-3 5.2.2 Eaglewood Field Data Collection and Phosphorus Loading Summary ... 5-6 Spokane River Watershed Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Reduction Plan Page ii Chapter 6 Spokane River Watershed – Groundwater Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Advanced Analysis ........................................................................ 6-1 6.1 Groundwater Analytical Methods and Tools for Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Assessment ..................................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Applicability and Feasibility of Groundwater Techniques for Spokane River Watershed ...................................................................................................... 6-1 6.3 Selection of Groundwater Analysis Techniques for Application to Spokane River Watershed .....................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mussel Currents ~
    4th Annual Freshwater Mussels Of the Pacific Northwest Symposium ~ Mussel Currents ~ April 17th, 2007 Water Resources Education Center, Vancouver, WA Hosted by: the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup “Dedicated to conservation of Pacific Northwest drainage mussel populations and promoting restoration, protection, education, and identification of further research needs.” Special Thanks To Our Sponsors Bureau of Land Management Interagency Status/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sensitive Species Program City of Vancouver Clark County Washington Water Resources Education Center Solid Waste Program Environmental Information Cooperative American Fisheries Society Clark County, Washington Oregon Chapter Washington Department Society for Ecological Restoration of Fish and Wildlife Northwest Chapter Table of Contents About the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup…………………..... 2 Symposium Agenda ………………………..……………………………………………... 3 About the Keynote Speakers ……………………………………………………………… 5 Speaker Abstracts …..…………………………………………………………………….. 6 List of Technical Posters & Poster Abstracts….………………………………….…….... 13 Presenter Contact Information ……………………….………………………………… 16 Attendee Contact Information .…………………………………………………...……… 18 Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup Members.................................. 20 About the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup History The status of the seven species of freshwater mussels native to the Pacific Northwest has received very little attention, despite the fact that freshwater mussels in general are considered the most endangered group of animals in North America. On February 19, 2003, a workshop on freshwater mussels was held in Vancouver, Washington that consisted of presented papers and a panel discussion. The purpose of the workshop was to initiate discussion on the regional population status of freshwater mussels. The workshop was attended by 91 participants of very diverse backgrounds. From this meeting, the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup was founded.
    [Show full text]
  • SECTION 1: Pend Oreille COUNTY
    SECTION 1: Pend Oreille COUNTY DESCRIPTION OF PEND OREILLE COUNTY Just as the Rocky Mountains plunge into the United States on their majestic march from British Columbia, a western range called the Selkirk Mountains, runs in close parallel down into Idaho and Washington. This rugged spur offers exposed segments of the North American Continent and the Kootenay Arc, tectonic plates that began colliding over a billion years ago, and provides exceptional year-round settings for a variety of recreational opportunities. This lesser range is home to bighorn sheep, elk, moose, deer, bear, cougar, bobcats, mountain caribou, and several large predatory birds such as bald eagles and osprey. Not far from where these Selkirk Mountains end, Pend Oreille County begins its association with the Pend Oreille River. Pend Oreille County is a relatively small county that looks like the number “1” set in the northeast corner of the State of Washington. Pend Oreille County is 66 miles long and 22 miles wide. British Columbia is across the international border to the north. Spokane County and the regional trade center, the City of Spokane, lie to the south. Idaho’s Bonner and Boundary counties form the eastern border, and Stevens County, Washington forms the western border. (For a map of Pend Oreille County, see Appendix A) Encompassing more than 1400 square miles, most of Pend Oreille County takes the form of a long, forested river valley. This area, known as the Okanogan Highlands, is unique since it is the only area in the country where plant and animal species from both the Rocky Mountain Region and the Cascade Mountain region can be found.
    [Show full text]
  • Westslope Cutthroat Trout
    This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; Chapter 1 however, some errors may remain. Westslope Cutthroat Trout John D. IVIclntyre and Bruce E. Rieman, USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, 316 E. iViyrtle Street, Boise, Idaho 83702 Introduction Westslope cutthroat trout begin to mature at age 3 but usually spawn first at age 4 or 5 (table 2). Sexu­ The westslope cutthroat trout inhabits streams on ally maturing adfluvial fish move into the vicinity of both sides of the Continental Divide. On the east side tributaries in fall and winter where they remain un­ of the divide, they are distributed mostly in Mon­ til they begin to migrate upstream in the spring tana but also occur in some headwaters in Wyoming (Liknes 1984). They spawn from March to July at and southern Alberta (Behnke 1992). They are in the water temperatures near 10°C (Roscoe 1974; Liknes Missouri Basin downstream to about 60 km below 1984; Shepard et al. 1984). A population of adult fish Great Falls and in the headwaters of the Judith, Milk, in the St. Joe River, Idaho, included 1.6 females for and Marias rivers. On the west side of the Continen­ each male (Thurow and Bjornn 1978). Average length tal Divide the subspecies occurs in the upper was 334 mm for females and 366 mm for males. A Kootenai River; the Clark Fork drainage in Montana similar population in Big Creek, Montana, included and Idaho downstream to the falls on the Fend Oreille 4.1 females for each male (Huston et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Lakeshore News
    Spring/Summer 2019 Lakeshore News In This Issue • Big Wakes Pg 1 • Adjudication Update Pg 2 • Lake Cda Hydrology Pg 4 • Boat Garage Pg 5 • Frederick Post Pg 6 Be there to help us celebrate 55 years of BIG WAKES CAUSE BIG PROBLEMS service dedicated to We live here because we love the lakes and rivers north Idaho has in abundance. We enjoy these treasures in different ways. Some enjoy quiet protecting our beautiful time like fishing, kayaking, paddle boarding or a fun boat ride. Others Lake CDA and the rights want more action and take to the water on personal water craft or fire up of property owners who the ski boat to ride waves of different degrees. To each his own, as they love it so much. say. That said, we all need to be aware and respectful of others on the water PLEASE JOIN US and along the its shores. Property owners are used to a certain amount of shore erosion from weather and responsible recreational use of the water- ways. In the last several years the popularity of ski boats with the ability Annual Meeting to create a larger and more challenging waves for riders to enjoy have also created problems for other boaters and property owners. Coeur d’Alene Resort th This problem is occurring on waterways all over our area. The following Wed., July 17 , 2019 is a letter written by Spokane River property owners trying to bring the 6:30 Check-in Social problems to the forefront and search for solutions. Coeur d’Alene Lake- shore property owners are looking for a solution also and look forward 7:00 Meeting to working with folks along the Spokane River and the powers that be to Continued on page 2 Website: cdalakepoa.com Email: [email protected] 2 Excessive Wakes - Continued from Page 1 or safety issues like the wake boats that are surfing.
    [Show full text]
  • One Thread That Weaves Throughout Our 125-Year History Is That of Innovation
    ON THE COVER Summer storms hitting 10 days apart caused extensive damage throughout Avista’s Washington/Idaho service area in 2014, knocking out power to nearly 100,000 customers. Crews and office staff worked around the clock, restoring power quickly and safely, keeping customers informed through traditional and social media channels. 1411 EAST MISSION AVENUE | SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99202 | 509.489.0500 | AVISTACORP.COM One thread that weaves throughout our 125-year history is that of innovation. A LANDMARK Dear Fellow Shareholder: It’s been a landmark year at Avista for many reasons — we celebrated our milestone 125th anniversary; we sold Ecova, our home-grown energy and sustainability management business; we acquired Alaska Energy and Resources Company (AERC) and its primary subsidiary Alaska Electric Light and Power Company (AEL&P) in Juneau, Alaska; and we continued to make significant progress in achieving our goals of investing in our infrastructure, upgrading our technology and preparing our utility to effectively and efficiently implement 21st century energy delivery. For the first time in a generation, we can consider ourselves close to being a “pure play” utility. None of this would have been possible without our cadre operations were $1.93 per diluted share, with net income of dedicated and knowledgeable employees. There’s a from continuing operations attributable to Avista Corp. confidence that comes with competence, a steadiness that shareholders of $119.8 million for 2014. builds on itself and makes things happen. It’s not flashy, but Our balance sheet and credit ratings remain healthy. the effects speak for themselves. Avista’s employees embody At year-end, Avista Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • MEMORANDUM Project No.: 140129 January 12, 2015
    MEMORANDUM Project No.: 140129 January 12, 2015 To: Mike Hermanson, Rob Lindsay – Spokane County Utilities cc: Todd Mielke, Spokane County Wes McCart, Stevens County Karen Skoog, Pend Oreille County Keith Stoffel, Department of Ecology Rusty Post, Department of Ecology Ty Wick, Spokane County Water District #3 Dick Price, Stevens PUD Susan McGeorge, Whitworth Water District John Pederson, Spokane County Mike Lithgow, Pend Oreille County Community Development Erik Johansen, Stevens County Land Services Kevin Cooke, Spokane County Steve Davenport, Spokane County Randy Vissia, Spokane County Linda Kiefer, Avista From: Dan Haller, Carl Einberger, Jason McCormick of Aspect Consulting, LLC and Cynthia Carlstad of Carlstad Consulting Re: Little Spokane Water Banking Demand Evaluation, Supply Assessment, and Water Transfer Framework Considerations Introduction Spokane County (the County), in conjunction with Stevens and Pend Oreille County, is considering setting up a water bank to address existing and potential regulatory constraints on existing and new water use in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 55, the Little Spokane Watershed. As part of this process, the County has convened a Policy Advisory Group (PAG) to allow interagency and stakeholder coordination and evaluation of alternatives for water banking in the watershed. Aspect Consulting LLC (Aspect) has been engaged by the County to provide consulting services for the Little Spokane Water Banking Feasibility Study. Prior to this memorandum, a previous memorandum entitled Legal, Regulatory, and Policy Framework for Water Banking in Washington was submitted to the PAG on September 30, 2014 (Aspect, 2014), followed by the first PAG meeting on October 15, 2014. This memorandum follows that initial memorandum and focuses on evaluations of future water demand in WRIA 55, potential existing water rights that could seed the water bank, and water transfer framework considerations.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Water Supply of the United States 1915
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIQK FRANKLIN K. LANE, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY .GEORGE OTIS SMITH,' Director Water-Supply Paper 414 SURFACE WATER SUPPLY OF THE UNITED STATES 1915 PAET XII. NORTH PACIFIC DRAINAGE BASINS C. LOWJEE COLUMBIA EIYEE AND PACIFIC DEAETAGE BATONS IN OEEGON NATHAN C. GROVER, Chief Hydraulic Engineer F. F. HENSHAW and G. L. PARKER, District Engineers Prepared in cooperation with the States of OREGON AND WASHINGTON WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT FEINTING OFFICE 1918 ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION' MAY BE PBOCURED FEOM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS GOVEENMENT FEINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 20 CENTS PER COPY V CONTENTS. Page. Authorization and scope of work........................................... 7 Definition of terms. .........................................*............. 8 Convenient equivalents.................................................. 9 Explanation of data.................................................... 11 Accuracy of field data and computed results................................ 13 Cooperation.............................................................. 14 Division of work........................................................... 15 GagingHStation records. ....... .«....................-.................:... 15 Columbia River at The Dalles, Oreg................................... , 15 Tributaries of Columbia River below mouth of Snake River............ 17 Walla Walla River basin........................................... 17 South Fork of Walla Walla River near Milton, Oreg.............
    [Show full text]
  • Riverside State Park
    Provisonal Report Rare Plant and Vegetation Survey of Riverside State Park Pacific Biodiversity Institute 2 Provisonal Report Rare Plant and Vegetation Survey of Riverside State Park Peter H. Morrison [email protected] George Wooten [email protected] Juliet Rhodes [email protected] Robin O’Quinn, Ph.D. [email protected] Hans M. Smith IV [email protected] January 2009 Pacific Biodiversity Institute P.O. Box 298 Winthrop, Washington 98862 509-996-2490 Recommended Citation Morrison, P.H., G. Wooten, J. Rhodes, R. O’Quinn and H.M. Smith IV, 2008. Provisional Report: Rare Plant and Vegetation Survey of Riverside State Park. Pacific Biodiversity Institute, Winthrop, Washington. 433 p. Acknowledgements Diana Hackenburg and Alexis Monetta assisted with entering and checking the data we collected into databases. The photographs in this report were taken by Peter Morrison, Robin O’Quinn, Geroge Wooten, and Diana Hackenburg. Project Funding This project was funded by the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission. 3 Executive Summary Pacific Biodiversity Institute (PBI) conducted a rare plant and vegetation survey of Riverside State Park (RSP) for the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission (WSPRC). RSP is located in Spokane County, Washington. A large portion of the park is located within the City of Spokane. RSP extends along both sides of the Spokane River and includes upland areas on the basalt plateau above the river terraces. The park also includes the lower portion of the Little Spokane River and adjacent uplands. The park contains numerous trails, campgrounds and other recreational facilities. The park receives a tremendous amount of recreational use from the nearby population.
    [Show full text]
  • 58.01.02, Water Quality Standards
    Table of Contents 58.01.02 - Water Quality Standards 000. Legal Authority. ................................................................................................. 4 001. Title And Scope. ................................................................................................ 4 002. Written Interpretations. ...................................................................................... 4 003. Administrative Provisions. ................................................................................. 4 004. Incorporation By Reference. ............................................................................. 4 005. Office Hours -- Mailing Address And Street Address. ....................................... 4 006. Confidentiality Of Records. ............................................................................... 4 007. -- 009. (Reserved). ............................................................................................. 5 010. Definitions. ........................................................................................................ 5 011. -- 049. (Reserved). ........................................................................................... 14 050. Administrative Policy. ...................................................................................... 14 051. Antidegradation Policy. ................................................................................... 15 052. Implementation. .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Little Spokane River Pcbs: Screening Survey of Water, Sediment, and Fish Tissue
    DRAFT – 12-15-15 Little Spokane River PCBs: Screening Survey of Water, Sediment, and Fish Tissue January 2016 - DRAFT Publication No. 16-03-0xx Publication and contact information This report is available on the Department of Ecology’s website at https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1603001.html Data for this project are available at Ecology’s Environmental Information Management (EIM) website at www.ecy.wa.gov/eim/index.htm. Search Study ID MIFR0002. The Activity Tracker Code for this study is 15-039. Suggested citation: Friese, M. and R. Coots. 2016. Little Spokane River PCBs: Screening Survey of Water, Sediment, and Fish Tissue. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. Publication No. 16-03-001. https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1603001.html For more information contact: Publications Coordinator Environmental Assessment Program P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Phone: (360) 407-6764 Washington State Department of Ecology - www.ecy.wa.gov o Headquarters, Olympia (360) 407-6000 o Northwest Regional Office, Bellevue (425) 649-7000 o Southwest Regional Office, Olympia (360) 407-6300 o Central Regional Office, Union Gap (509) 575-2490 o Eastern Regional Office, Spokane (509) 329-3400 Any use of product or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the author or the Department of Ecology. Accommodation Requests: To request ADA accommodation including materials in a format for the visually impaired, call Ecology at 360-407-6764. Persons with impaired hearing may call Washington Relay Service at 711. Persons with speech disability may call TTY at 877-833-6341.
    [Show full text]
  • Smallmouth Bass Abundance and Diet Composition in the Upper Spokane River Michael Taylor Mccroskey Eastern Washington University
    Eastern Washington University EWU Digital Commons EWU Masters Thesis Collection Student Research and Creative Works 2015 Smallmouth bass abundance and diet composition in the upper Spokane River Michael Taylor McCroskey Eastern Washington University Follow this and additional works at: http://dc.ewu.edu/theses Part of the Biology Commons Recommended Citation McCroskey, Michael Taylor, "Smallmouth bass abundance and diet composition in the upper Spokane River" (2015). EWU Masters Thesis Collection. 326. http://dc.ewu.edu/theses/326 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research and Creative Works at EWU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in EWU Masters Thesis Collection by an authorized administrator of EWU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SMALLMOUTH BASS ABUNDANCE AND DIET COMPOSITION IN THE UPPER SPOKANE RIVER ________________________________________________________________________ A Thesis Presented To Eastern Washington University Cheney, Washington ________________________________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Master of Science _____________________________________________________________ By Michael Taylor McCroskey Fall 2015 THESIS OF TAYLOR McCROSKEY APPROVED BY ______________________________________ _____________ Dr. Paul Spruell, Graduate Study Professor Date ______________________________________ ____________ Dr. Camille McNeely, Graduate Study Committee Date ______________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • SECTION 21 – Table of Contents
    SECTION 21 – Table of Contents 21 Spokane Subbasin Overview........................................................................2 21.1 Regional Context ........................................................................................................ 2 21.2 Spokane Subbasin Description ................................................................................... 3 21.3 Logic Path ................................................................................................................. 24 21-1 21 Spokane Subbasin Overview 21.1 Regional Context The Spokane Subbasin shares a border with the Upper Columbia Subbasin to the north, the Pend Oreille Subbasin to the northeast, and the Coeur d’ Alene Subbasin to the east (Figure 21.1). The outlet of Coeur d’ Alene Lake forms the headwaters of the Spokane River, which flows westerly to its confluence with the Columbia River (Lake Roosevelt). The major river in the Subbasin is the Spokane River, which runs 111 miles from the outlet of Coeur d’ Alene Lake to its confluence with the Columbia River. The major tributaries of the Spokane River listed from upstream to downstream include Hangman Creek (also known as Latah Creek), Little Spokane River, and Chamokane Creek (also known as Tshimikain Creek). In eastern Washington and northern Idaho there are seven dams on the Spokane River. The city of Spokane Water Department owns, operates, and maintains Upriver Dam and is licensed for fifty years (FERC license 3074-WA, 1981-2031). Avista Corporation owns and operates the other six hydroelectric facilities. The six dams (from upstream to downstream) include Post Falls in Idaho, Upper Falls, Monroe Street, Nine Mile, Long Lake, and Little Falls located in Washington. Five of the six dams owned by Avista were constructed and were operating between 1906 and 1922. Monroe Street Dam was initially built in 1890 (Avista 2002; Scholz et al. 1985) and then reconstructed in 1973.
    [Show full text]