DOCSLIB.ORG

Inventory of Dams Report for Selected Washington Counties and Selected Dam Hazard Categories

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Inventory of Dams Report for Selected Washington Counties and Selected Dam Hazard Categories Inventory of Dams Report for Selected Washington Counties and Selected Dam Hazard Categories Report data current to: 6/11/2019 Revised Edition June 2018 Publication #94-16 DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY State of Washington Department of Ecology - Water Resources Program - Dam Safety Office Report Run: 2019-06-11 13:37 i Document Information Copies of this document may be obtained from: Publications Distribution Department of Ecology P.O Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 (360) 407-6624 Cover Photos: Top - Sylvia Lake Dam in Grays Harbor County in the Sylvia Creek drainage basin about 1 mile North of Montesano. The property is owned by Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission (State Parks) and was built for recreational purposes. This timber and concrete structure has dam buttresses or piers with concrete infills between each buttress. This dam has a concrete cut-off wall with a downstream grouted rock buttress on the right side of the dam. The principal spillway is located in the center concrete portion of the dam and is made up of five bays. It was originally constructed in 1901 with the most recent modifications occurring in 1995. Bottom - Tumwater Falls Dam on the Deschutes River at flood stage. Located in Tumwater, Washington and built in 1900, the Tumwater Falls Dam is very picturesque seen from either side of the river. The Department of Ecology is an Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action employer and shall not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, age, religion, or disability as defined by applicable state and/or federal regulations or statutes. Report Run: 2019-06-11 13:37 ii Dam Inventory Report Table of Contents Section: Page: Inventory Selection Criteria 4 Introduction and Background 5 Dam Safety Office Background 6 Water Resources Background 6 Characteristics of Dams in WA 7 Characteristic Charts of Dams 8 Terminology Definitions 12 The Inventory by County 16 Dam Classification and Code Tables * Index by Dam Name * Index by Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) * WRIA Map by WRIA Number * * Due to the dynamic nature of this report, it is not possible to pre-calculate the page numbers for these sections of the report Report Run: 2019-06-11 13:37 iii This Inventory is Based on the Following Selected Counties and Dam Hazard Categories: County: Hazard Categories: Dam Count: Adams (all) 28 dams Asotin (all) 2 dams All 39 counties are listed. The results from your selection are highlighted in gray. Benton (all) 37 dams Chelan (all) 45 dams Clallam (all) 19 dams You have selected 39 of 39 Counties and 7 of 7 Hazard Categories. Applying Clark (all) 31 dams these two filters, this inventory now contains 1233 dams from 39 counties out of Columbia (all) 10 dams Cowlitz (all) 17 dams 1233 regulated dams in Washington State. Douglas (all) 23 dams Ferry (all) 11 dams Some counties may show a dam count of zero depending on the hazard category Franklin (all) 33 dams Garfield (all) 1 dams filters chosen. If this is the case, those counties will be highlighted in dark gray in Grant (all) 75 dams the list to the right and their statistics will be excluded from the text and charts Grays Harbor (all) 18 dams found in this report. Island (all) 13 dams Jefferson (all) 6 dams King (all) 127 dams (See Figure 1 on page 7 for a sorted distribution.) Kitsap (all) 25 dams Kittitas (all) 20 dams Klickitat (all) 15 dams Lewis (all) 53 dams Lincoln (all) 19 dams Mason (all) 23 dams Okanogan (all) 45 dams Pacific (all) 11 dams Pend Oreille (all) 42 dams Pierce (all) 58 dams San Juan (all) 55 dams Skagit (all) 30 dams Skamania (all) 10 dams Snohomish (all) 66 dams Spokane (all) 38 dams Stevens (all) 42 dams Thurston (all) 39 dams Wahkiakum (all) 1 dams Walla Walla (all) 17 dams Whatcom (all) 45 dams Whitman (all) 12 dams Yakima (all) 71 dams Report Run: 2019-06-11 13:37 1 Counties: 39/39, Hazard Categories: all, Dams: 1233/1233 Dam Inventory - Introduction and Background Introduction Background This Inventory of Dams is now an electronic report based on a series of In 1972, the U.S. Congress passed Public Law 92-367 which authorized the publications describing the physical characteristics of regulated dams in development of a National Inventory of Dams. Subsequently in 1975, the Washington State. It represents a compilation of information that was first Department of Ecology assembled the first dam inventory. This initial inventory assembled in 1975 and has been maintained and updated since that time. was published May 1976 in WRIS Information Bulletin No. 28. The full inventory contains 1233 regulated dams. These dams are defined as In the following years, this original inventory was updated with the assistance structures that can impound 10 acre-feet or more of watery material at the dam from the Seattle District office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In December crest elevation. Past publications had also listed dams that had been removed or 1981, the second Inventory of Dams in Washington State was published in a joint breached. This report only lists existing dams that are being operated that match effort by the Department of Ecology and the State Energy Office. your selection criteria. Figure 1 represents the number of inventoried dams by In 1986, the U.S. Congress passed the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, county. Public Law 99-662, which reauthorized the fiscal support for the National As with any database, this inventory represents current conditions to the best of Inventory of Dams. Monies provided by this source and administered by the our knowledge. No warranty for the correctness, accuracy, or usefulness of this Association of State Dam Safety Officials (ASDSO) have augmented ongoing data is expressed or implied. If errors or inaccuracies are discovered, or if you efforts to maintain and update the Washington inventory. have special accommodation needs, please contact the Dam Safety Office of This inventory is now available electronically. The Dam Inventory Report can be Ecology at (360) 407-7122 (voice) or (360) 407-6006 (TDD). requested from Gus Ordonez, Dam Safety Lead Engineer at [email protected]. Report Run: 2019-06-11 13:37 2 Ecology - Water Resources - Dam Safety Background Counties: 39/39, Hazard Categories: all, Dams: 1233/1233 Water Resources Program - Dam Safety Office Water Resources Historical Background Under state law, the Department of Ecology (Ecology) is responsible for In Washington State, dam safety concerns were part of the normal water-rights regulating dams that capture and store at least 10 acre-feet (about 3.2 million duties in the state departments of Conservation and Development and Water gallons) of water or watery materials such as mine tailings, sewage and manure Resources. In 1970, dam safety regulations were transferred to the newly created waste. Ecology's Dam Safety Office currently oversees 1088 of 1233 dams across Department of Ecology. In the early 1980s, a separate Dam Safety Office was the state. Through plan reviews and construction inspections, the agency helps formed to concentrate on dam issues, primarily in response to the National Dam ensure these facilities are properly designed and constructed. To reasonably Safety Act in 1977. In 1990, Ecology's Dam Safety Office was reorganized and secure the safety of human life and property, Ecology also conducts inspections initiated its first long-range planning for improving dam safety in Washington. of existing dams to assure proper operation and maintenance. The 145 Federal dams not overseen by Ecology are exempted by Washington State regulation WAC 173-175-020, but they will be included in this report if they meet your search criteria. Report Run: 2019-06-11 13:37 3 Characteristics of Dams in Washington Counties: 39/39, Hazard Categories: all, Dams: 1233/1233 Reservoir Purposes Dam Ownership Dams and reservoirs in Washington are constructed for a variety of purposes. As there are a wide variety of dam and reservoir purposes, there is a From the Washington counties and hazard categories selected for this report, correspondingly wide category of dam owners. To help delineate the types of about 6% of the dams are constructed for domestic water supply, 24% for owners, they have been separated into five categories: private, local government, irrigation, and another 23% of the dams are built for recreation. The remaining public utilities, federal, and state. From the Washington counties and hazard 47% of the dams provide a wide variety of functions including: water quality, categories selected for this report, 58% of the dams are privately owned and hydropower, flood control, and mine tailings storage. In addition, the larger many of these are for recreational purposes. Another 29% are owned by local reservoirs are commonly multi-purpose and serve a number of functions. See Bar governments and public utilities or irrigation districts for water supply, flood Chart 3 in the Characteristic Charts of Dams in Washington section for more control, or hydropower purposes. See Bar Chart 4 in the Characteristic Charts of details. Dams in Washington section for more details. Dam Height Downstream Hazard Classification The height of the dams also varies widely. Dams in Washington are categorized The Downstream Hazard Classification system used in Washington (Table 1.) is as small, intermediate, or large for purposes of setting design criteria, identifying similar to the types of classification systems used throughout the United States. acceptable construction methods and scheduling periodic inspections. From the The purpose of the system is to provide a simple characterization of the setting Washington counties and hazard categories selected for this report, 588 dams are downstream of a dam to reflect the general nature of consequences if the dam classified as Small, 530 are classified as Intermediate, and 111 are classified as were to fail and release the reservoir into the downstream valley.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Flooding the Border: Development, Politics, and Environmental Controversy in the Canadian-U.S
    FLOODING THE BORDER: DEVELOPMENT, POLITICS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROVERSY IN THE CANADIAN-U.S. SKAGIT VALLEY by Philip Van Huizen A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in The Faculty of Graduate Studies (History) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) June 2013 © Philip Van Huizen, 2013 Abstract This dissertation is a case study of the 1926 to 1984 High Ross Dam Controversy, one of the longest cross-border disputes between Canada and the United States. The controversy can be divided into two parts. The first, which lasted until the early 1960s, revolved around Seattle’s attempts to build the High Ross Dam and flood nearly twenty kilometres into British Columbia’s Skagit River Valley. British Columbia favoured Seattle’s plan but competing priorities repeatedly delayed the province’s agreement. The city was forced to build a lower, 540-foot version of the Ross Dam instead, to the immense frustration of Seattle officials. British Columbia eventually agreed to let Seattle raise the Ross Dam by 122.5 feet in 1967. Following the agreement, however, activists from Vancouver and Seattle, joined later by the Upper Skagit, Sauk-Suiattle, and Swinomish Tribal Communities in Washington, organized a massive environmental protest against the plan, causing a second phase of controversy that lasted into the 1980s. Canadian and U.S. diplomats and politicians finally resolved the dispute with the 1984 Skagit River Treaty. British Columbia agreed to sell Seattle power produced in other areas of the province, which, ironically, required raising a different dam on the Pend d’Oreille River in exchange for not raising the Ross Dam.
    [Show full text]
  • African Americans Have Been a Part of the Diverse Population of South Sound Since American Settlers Arrived in 1845. However
    African Americans have been a part the Frost Family Plot. “Henrietta,” of the diverse population of South domestic servant for Elisha Ferry Sound since American settlers who later became governor of arrived in 1845. However, records Washington, only appears once in regarding early African Americans Olympia’s census. Leander Bushon’s in the Olympia area are scant. The apparent business success beyond fragments of stories that survive Olympia after apprenticing in offer a window into the daily life Samuel Stork’s mercantile remains of Washington’s Capital City and to be researched. The women of environs. Most came of their own color identified as prostitutes in accord, looking for a place to improve the census disappear as abruptly as their chances for a better life. They they appear in local records. Yet worked as laborers, domestic all of their stories show the South servants, or as stewards on Puget Sound’s population is more complex Sound’s “Mosquito Fleet” steamboats. and interconnected than many early Others became business owners, histories indicate. worked as restaurateurs, barbers or bootblacks. Despite their struggles While few structures associated against discrimination, they made with their lives survive, the stories their homes here and were an connected to these sites reflect integral part of the social fabric. the diversity of experiences that This brochure will introduce you to make up African American history in some of these people. Olympia and the Pacific Northwest. Thomas Park, a brick mason by In some cases first names are used trade, was a lifelong associate of the to avoid confusion with relatives of Robert Frost Family and is buried in the same last name.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Washington Department of Fish And
    WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE FINAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE December 16, 2004 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Mailing Address: 600 Capitol Way N – Olympia, Washington 98501-1091 – (360) 902-2200, TDD (360) 902-2207 Main Office Location: Natural Resources Building – 1111 Washington Street SE – Olympia, WA MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Name of Proposal: DESCHUTES WATERSHED CENTER Description of Proposal: The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) proposes to relocate Chinook salmon and steelhead trout production currently occurring in Percival Cove and Capitol Lake to a new facility at Pioneer Park (the Deschutes Watershed Center) and to an upgraded facility at the Tumwater Falls Park (upgrade adult holding, juvenile rearing capacity and install pollution control system). Relocation of this production is expected to have the following benefits: · Transfer of fish between basins could be halted, thereby complying with the Co-Managers Fish Health Policy · Water quality in Percival Cove and Capitol Lake would be improved, thereby satisfying a request by the Department of Ecology that WDFW cease fish rearing operations in Percival Cove by May 30, 2007 Pioneer Park Site The Pioneer Park site is located on the north side of the Deschutes River downstream of the Henderson Boulevard Bridge. The Pioneer Park site, to the south of the sports fields, is approximately 44 acres; the proposed project would utilize approximately 8.5 acres. Pioneer Park has existing City water and sewer hookups, access roads and public parking. Preliminary conversations with the City of Tumwater have taken place to discuss the use of potable water and sewer for public and staff bathroom facilities associated with this proposed project.
    [Show full text]
  • The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement
    Volume 26 Issue 2 U.S. - Canada Transboundary Resource Issues Spring 1986 The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement Jackie Krolopp Kirn Marion E. Marts Recommended Citation Jackie K. Kirn & Marion E. Marts, The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement, 26 Nat. Resources J. 261 (1986). Available at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nrj/vol26/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Natural Resources Journal by an authorized editor of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. JACKIE KROLOPP KIRN* and MARION E. MARTS** The Skagit-High Ross Controversy: Negotiation and Settlement SETTING AND BACKGROUND The Skagit River is a short but powerful stream which rises in the mountains of southwestern British Columbia, cuts through the northern Cascades in a spectacular and once-remote mountain gorge, and empties into Puget Sound approximately sixty miles north of Seattle. The beautiful mountain scenery of the heavily glaciated north Cascades was formally recognized in the United States by the creation of the North Cascades National Park and the Ross Lake National Recreation Area in 1968, and earlier in British Columbia by creation of the E.C. Manning Provincial Park. The Ross Lake Recreation Area covers the narrow valley of the upper Skagit River in Washington and portions of several tributary valleys. It was created as a political and, to environmentalists who wanted national park status for the entire area, controversial, compromise which accom- modated the city of Seattle's Skagit River Project and the then-planned North Cascades Highway.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017-2018 Fishing in Washington Sport Fishing Rules Pamphlet
    Sport Fishing Rules Pamphlet Corrections and Updates July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018 Last updated June 28, 2017. Marine Area Rules Page 98, LANDING A FISH - A club or dipnet (landing net) may be used to assist landing a legal fish taken by legal gear. A gaff may only be used to land a legally hooked LINGCOD (in Marine Areas 1-3 and 4 West of Bonilla-Tatoosh line), HALIBUT, TUNA, or DOGFISH SHARK that will be retained. HALIBUT may be shot or harpooned while landing. Photo By Scott Mayfield General Information Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) Dr. Jim Unsworth, Director Ron Warren, Assistant Director, Fish Program Contents General Information General Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission GENERAL RULES & INFORMATION Dr. Bradley Smith, Chair, Bellingham Jay Kehne, Omak Contact Information ..................................2 Larry Carpenter, Vice Chair, Mount Vernon Miranda Wecker, Naselle Update From WDFW ................................3 Barbara Baker, Olympia Kim Thorburn, Spokane Statewide General Rules .........................4 Jay Holzmiller, Anatone David Graybill, Leavenworth Salmon and Trout Handling Rules ............5 Rules Robert “Bob” Kehoe, Seattle License Information ...............................6-7 Catch Record Cards .................................8 Freshwater Catch Record Card Codes .......................9 How to Use This Pamphlet Definitions ..........................................10-11 FRESHWATER GENERAL RULES This pamphlet is effective July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018 Statewide Freshwater Rules..............13-15 and contains information you need to legally fish throughout RIVERS .............................................17-73 Washington State (see WAC summary information below). Special Rules Introduction ..................17 Puget Sound Puget Puget Sound and Coast Rivers - Rivers & Coast 1 Read the General Information Pages. Special Rules ...................................18-46 Read the Licensing and Catch Record Card information.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Hydroeiectirc Projects Continuation Sheet
    NPS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-O018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service skagit ^VQT & Newhalem Creek National Register of Historic Places Hydroeiectirc Projects Continuation Sheet Section number ___ Page ___ SUPPLEMENTARY LISTING RECORD NRIS Reference Number: 96000416 Date Listed: 4/26/96 Skagit River & Newhalem Creek Hvdroelectirc Projects Whatcom WA Property Name County State Hydroelectric Power Plant MPS Multiple Name This property is listed in the National Register of Historic Places in accordance with the attached nomination documentation subject to the following exceptions, exclusions, or amendments, notwithstanding the National Park Service certification included in the nomination documentation. Signature of tty^Keejifer Date of Action Amended Items in Nomination: Photographs: The SHPO has verified that the 1989 photographs accurately document the current condition and integrity of the nominated resources. Historic Photos #1-26 are provided as photocopy duplications. Resource Count: The resource count is revised to read: Contributing Noncontributing 21 6 buildings 2 - sites 5 6 structures 1 - objects 29 12 total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register 16 . A revised inventory list is appended to clarify the resource count and contributing status of properties in the district, particularly at the powerplant/dam sites. (See attached) This information was confirmed with Lauren McCroskey of the WA SHPO. DISTRIBUTION: National Register property file Nominating Authority (without nomination attachment) NFS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Skagit River & Newhalem Creek National Register of Historic Places Hydroelectirc Projects Continuation Sheet Section number The following is a list of the contributing and noncontributing resources within the district, beginning at its westernmost—downstream—end, organized according to geographic location.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report
    Final Draft THURSTON COUNTY SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE Inventory and Characterization Report SMA Grant Agreements: G0800104 and G1300026 June 30, 2013 Prepared By: Thurston County Planning Department Building # 1, 2nd Floor 2000 Lakeridge Drive SW Olympia, WA 98502-6045 This page left intentionally blank. Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 1 REPORT PURPOSE .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATES FOR CITIES WITHIN THURSTON COUNTY ...................................................................... 2 REGULATORY OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................. 2 SHORELINE JURISDICTION AND DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................................ 3 REPORT ORGANIZATION .................................................................................................................................................. 5 2 METHODS ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 DETERMINING SHORELINE JURISDICTION LIMITS ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Damnation of a Dam : the High Ross Dam Controversy
    THE DAMYIATION OF A DAM: TIIE HIGH ROSS DAM CONTROVERSY TERRY ALLAN SIblMONS A. B., University of California, Santa Cruz, 1968 A THESIS SUBIUTTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of Geography SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY May 1974 All rights reserved. This thesis may not b? reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. APPROVAL Name: Terry Allan Simmons Degree: Master of Arts Title of Thesis: The Damnation of a Dam: The High Ross Dam Controversy Examining Committee: Chairman: F. F. Cunningham 4 E.. Gibson Seni Supervisor / /( L. J. Evendon / I. K. Fox ernal Examiner Professor School of Community and Regional Planning University of British Columbia PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE I hereby grant to Simon Fraser University rhe righc to lcnd my thesis or dissertation (the title of which is shown below) to users of the Simon Fraser University Library, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or other educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users. I further agree that permission for multiple copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by me or the Dean of Graduate Studies. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed ' without my written permission. Title of' ~hesis /mqqmkm: The Damnation nf a nam. ~m -Author: / " (signature ) Terrv A. S.imrnonze (name ) July 22, 1974 (date) ABSTRACT In 1967, after nearly fifty years of preparation, inter- national negotiations concerning the construction of the High Ross Dan1 on the Skagit River were concluded between the Province of British Columbia and the City of Seattle.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter-2011-Fall.Pdf
    NEWSLETTER FREE FALL EDITION Inside... Sept-Oct-Nov 2011 Henderson Inlet Tour | 3 A River Runs Through It: Pacific Pond Turtle | 12 Thurston County’s Deschutes River | 8–9 Return of the Salmon | 4–5 Kid’s Page | 14 The First Flush: Fall Rain | 10 Fall is Ideal Planting Time | 6 Calendar of Events | 15 The Elusive but Delectable Chanterelle | 11 Ask a Volunteer | 7 ON THE COVER: Stream Team volunteer, Andrew Davis peers into a shellfish while visiting STREAM TEAM MISSION Henderson Inlet. Photo taken by Rhonda Davis. To protect and enhance the water resources and associated habitats and wildlife in Thurston County through citizen action and education. Steam Team is funded and jointly managed by the stormwater utilities of the Cities of Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater and Thurston County. Stream Team programs meet the requirements for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for stormwater. STREAM TEAM INQUIRIES IN LACEY: City of Lacey Water Resources Program P.O. Box 3400, Lacey, WA 98509-3400 Attn: Erin Keith Tel: 360-438-2687 TDD: 1-800-833-6388 Get Involved IN OLYMPIA: WITH STREAM TEAM City of Olympia Water Resources Program ! P.O. Box 1967, Olympia, WA 98507-1967 Attn: Patricia Pyle to receive weekly Tel: 360-570-5841 s Get on our email list TDD: 360-753-8270 emails with upcoming events and the electronic IN TUMWATER: version of this newsletter! Send an email request City of Tumwater Water Resources Program 555 Israel Road SW, Tumwater, WA 98501 to [email protected] and we will add Attn: Debbie Smith you today! (Your email will not be shared with Tel: 360-754-4148 anyone outside of Stream Team).
    [Show full text]
  • The Wild Cascades
    THE WILD CASCADES December 1969-January 1970 2 THE WILD CASCADES JXTOR/rH CASCADE3S TJTSTDIEiR. AT1 T_As.C> Je^ BATTLE LINES DRAWN by The Kerosene Kid duty it should have been to protect the park. Each such campaign has been accompanied by barrages of propaganda that the resources of the park were essential to the continued growth of the surrounding area or that new roads were needed along the wilderness beach or across the park's wilderness core "to open it up for the peepul. " Each time the friends of Olympic have rallied, mounted counter-attacks and saved the park. We have no reason to believe the history of the North Cascades over the next third of a century will be any different. But, to para­ phrase Mr. Churchill, the North Cascades Conservation Council (N3C) was not organized to preside over the dissolution of the North Cascades. We expect attacks and we confi­ dently expect to win. To prevent Seattle City Light from imple­ menting its destructive proposals in the Ross Lake National Recreation Area will require as If any conservationist felt he was honor­ tough a fight as conservationists ever have ably discharged from the wars upon passage waged. The nature of the adversary contrib­ of the 1968 North Cascades Act, he lacked utes to the difficulty of the battle. Seattle City knowledge of the history of the American Light is no ordinary despoiler of wilderness. National Park system. He may have said to In fact, it's hard to say just what Seattle City himself, "Whew! I'm glad that's over.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Manual for Small Rcc Dams
    DESIGN MANUAL FOR SMALL RCC DAMS Prepared by Schnabel Engineering Associates, Inc. Design Manual for Portland Cement Association ("PCA") is a not- Small RCC Gravity Dams for-profit organization and provides this publi- cation solely for the continuing education of Published by: qualified professionals. THIS PUBLICATION Portland Cement Association SHOULD ONLY BE USED BY QUALIFIED 5420 Old Orchard Road PROFESSIONALS who possess all required Skokie, Illinois, 60077-1083 license(s), who are competent to evaluate the significance and limitations of the information provided herein, and who accept total respon- Phone: 847.966.6200 sibility for the application of this information. Fax: 847.966.9781 OTHER READERS SHOULD OBTAIN ASSIS- Internet: www.cement.org TANCE FROM A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL BEFORE PROCEEDING. PCAAND ITS MEMBERS MAKE NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTY WITH RESPECT TO THIS PUBLICATION OR ANY INFORMA- TION CONTAINED HEREIN. IN PARTICU- LAR, NO WARRANTY IS MADE OF MER- CHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTIC- ULAR PURPOSE. PCA AND ITS MEMBERS DISCLAIM ANY PRODUCT LIABILITY (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY STRICT LIABILITY IN TORT) IN CONNEC- TION WITH THIS PUBLICATION OR ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN. Warning: Contact with wet (unhardened) concrete, mortar, cement, or cement mixtures can cause SKIN IRRITATION, SEVERE CHEMICAL BURNS (THIRD DEGREE), OR SERIOUS EYE DAMAGE. Frequent exposure may be associated with irritant and /or aller- gic contact dermatitis. Wear waterproof gloves, a long-sleeved shirt, full-length trousers, and proper eye protection when working with these materials. If you have to stand in wet concrete, use waterproof boots that are high enough to keep concrete from flowing into them.
    [Show full text]
  • Narrative and Graphic Source Material
    Source descriptions for features in a geodatabase of Puget Sound’s pre-settlement river valley, estuary and nearshore habitats (September 14, 2008 version) Introduction This is a supplement to a Geographic Information System (GIS) geodatabase of the Puget Sound area’s riverine and nearshore environments as reconstructed for the pre- settlement (mid-19th century) era. It consists of descriptions of mapped features. The descriptions include source materials that were used, and discussion on how they were used. Features are primarily wetlands, channels, and landforms. Features are indexed by an identifying code that is linked to the geodatabase. The code consists of three letters that identify the river or oceanographic basin, followed by the township and range (all townships are North, and ranges are identified as East or West, by “E” or “W”) and a number given to features sequentially within each township. Some nearshore features are identified by a separate coding system consisting of a WRIA (Washington Water Resource Inventory Area) number and a unique number within the WRIA. Numerous excerpts from Public Land Survey (PLS) field notes are included; generally the notes’ idiosyncratic usage, grammar, and punctuation are preserved. At present this document contains source descriptions for aquatic habitats. With time descriptions will be added of additional features, or more information will be added for features already in the narrative (e.g., on the seasonal inundation characteristics of wetlands). Source descriptions will also be added for different types of features not included at this time (e.g., forest composition). How to cite this document: Collins, B. D. 2008. Source descriptions for features in a geodatabase of Puget Sound’s pre-settlement river valley, estuary and nearshore habitats (September 14, 2008 version).
    [Show full text]