DOCSLIB.ORG

Geologic Map of Washington- Southwest Quadrant

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Geologic Map of Washington- Southwest Quadrant GEOLOGIC MAP OF WASHINGTON­ SOUTHWEST QUADRANT by TIMOTHY J. WALSH, MICHAEL A. KOROSEC, WILLIAM M. PHILLIPS, ROBERT L. LOGAN, and HENRY W. SCHASSE WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES GEOLOGIC MAP GM-34 1987 WASHJNGl'ON STATE DEPARTMENT OP , • Natural Resources llr1an Boyle • Commwloner ot Publlc Landt Alt Sl8arnl • Sllpervlsor OivlSlon ot Geo!~ and Earth Reso\llCeS Raymond Lasmanls. Stale Geologlsl WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Raymond Lasmanis, State Geologist GEOLOGIC MAP OF WASHINGTON­ SOUTHWEST QUADRANT by TIMOTHY J. WALSH, MICHAEL A. KOROSEC, WILLIAM M. PHILLIPS, ROBERT L. LOGAN, and HENRY W. SCHASSE WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES GEOLOGIC MAP GM-34 1987 Bnan Boyle Comm1ss1oner ol Public Lands Art Stearns Supervisor Photograph on envelope: Mount St. Helens, March 25, 1987. View from the north; Mount Hood (Oregon) in the background. Washington Department of Transportation photo. This report is for sale by: Publications Washington Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources Mail Stop PY-12 Olympia, WA 98504 Price $5.53 (folded) Tax _£ (Washington residents only) Total $6.00 Mail orders must be prepaid; please add $1.00 to each order for postage and handling. Make checks payable to the Department of Natural Resources. A limited number of flat sheets is available. Contact the Division for price information. Printed in the United States of America. ii CONTENTS Page Preface ..................................................................................................................................................... V Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Map design .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Map compilation .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Supporting data ..................................................................................................................... 1 Acknowledgments . ........... 2 Descriptions of map units .......................................................................................................................... 3 Correlation diagram .................................................................................................................................... 3 List of named units................................... .. .................... .. .. .. ........... .. .................. 4 Sources of map data ................................................................................................................................. 5 Stratigraphic columns ... ....... .... .. ....... .. ................................................................................................ 5 References cited ........... 22 Errata ..................................................................................................................... 28 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Map showing counties in southwestern Washington. ............................................... 5 figure 2. Index to sources of map data, scales 1: 1,200 through 1:24,000 and source references without maps................................................ .. .............. .. 6 figure 3. Index to sources of map data, scales 1:31,680 through 1:60,500..... .................... 7 Figure 4. Index to sources of map data, scales 1:62,500 through 1 :90,000 ... .. .... .. ......... ... ..... 8 figure 5. Index to sources of map data, scale 1: 100,000 . ..... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ............. .. .. 9 figure 6. Index to sources of map data, scales 1:125,000 through 1:540,000... ................. 10 TABLE Table 1. Compiler, quadrangle, and Division open-file report number···········-················· ···········---· 2 iii Preface PREFACE State geologic maps are a valuable resource for educa­ Considerable new detailed and reconnaissance geologic tion, planning, mineral and energy exploration, and evaluation mapping, was done by the staff of the Division of Geology and of geologic hazards. Providing up-to-date statewide geologic Earth Resources in areas where no adequate geologic map­ mapping to the public is one of the most important functions ping existed. These areas are shown on Figure 5, and the of our state geological survey. geology is presented in more detail in the 1: 100,000-scale Previous geologic maps of Washington were published in open-file reports. 1936 by the Division of Geology (Culver, 1936) and in 1961 We have attempted to make this geologic map useful at by the Division of Mines and Geology (Huntting and others, several levels of detail and to a variety of users in the 1961), both at a scale of 1 :500,000. When we began planning following ways: (1) by publishing the map at a larger scale for the new state geologic map in 1982, the first of these than previous state geologic maps of Washington; (2) by maps was no longer available and the second was soon to be employing time-lithologic units on the map rather than forma­ out of print. Not only were state geologic maps becoming tions; (3) by portraying unconsolidated deposits in as much unavailable, but, since the last map was compiled, the plate detail as bedrock units; (4) by using a multiple-level scheme of tectonic theory had caused a revolution in geologic thinking. colors, patterns, and symbols to portray the geologic units; The fact that more than 60 percent of all Washington geologic and (5) by providing a fuller range of supporting materials maps had been published after 1960 further emphasized the than is commonly found on state geologic maps. need for a new state map. Now (September 1987) 71 percent The organization of colors, patterns, and symbols empha­ of the 927 published and thesis maps on Washington postdate sizes the time and lithologic divisions and provides map users the 1961 state map. The wealth of new geologic data was also with increasingly detailed levels of geologic information. The an important factor in our decision to publish the new state first level of detail is expressed by broad color ranges that geologic map at the expanded scale of 1:250,000. distinguish five basic rock types-Quaternary sediments, sedi­ This map is the first of four quadrant maps which, mentary rocks, metamorphic rocks, extrusive igneous rocks, together, will present the geology of the entire state of Wash­ and intrusive igneous rocks. On the second level, variations of ington. Work on the northeast quadrant is under way. The color within each broad color range indicate age. At the third southeast and northwest quadrants will follow in that order. level of detail, small groups of lithologic units are distinguished We plan to have all the quadrants available by 1993. by changes in types of pattern-for example, acidic, interme­ As noted in the section titled Map Compilation, the diate, and basic intrusive igneous rocks. The most detailed geology portrayed on this map was first compiled at a scale of lithologic distinctions are made by changes in symbol. This 1: 100,000. We chose to compile at that scale in order to scheme will enable map users to see, at a glance, broad establish a statewide map base that could preserve most of lithologic relationships, and, on closer inspection, correlate the detail of 1 :24,000- and 1 :62,500-scale source maps while, units, make tectonic interpretations, or discern the broad at the same time, consolidating the source maps to achieve a aspects of geologic history across the quadrant and ultimately more regional view. across the entire state. In order to acquire geologic mapping in unmapped or We have tried to accommodate a variety of map users in inadequately mapped areas and to substantiate geologic inter­ several ways. First, where surficial units are predominant, we pretations, the Division instituted a program to fund geologic show the surficial geology in as much detail as the bedrock, so mapping by graduate students and professors and established engineering geologists, for example, should find the map budgets for age dating and geochemistry. Since the 1984 field useful in more than a cursory way. Second, we used time­ season we have supported 36 graduate students and profes­ lithologic units rather than formations on the map to make the sors statewide, and in the southwest quadrant we have ac­ map easier to interpret and to allow those· who are not quired 32 potassium-argon (K-Ar) dates, 2 radiocarbon dates, familiar with Washington geologic names to understand and and 253 whole-rock geochemical analyses. Many of the K-Ar use the geologic data with a minimum of effort. Third, those dates were supported by Rockwell Hanford Operations (now who are accustomed to dealing with formational map units Westinghouse Hanford Co.) through S. P. Reidel. These data instead of time-lithologic units will be aided by the supporting are reported, in detail, in the 1: 100,000-scale open-file re­ material on Sheet 2: the Descriptions of Map Units lists ports. In addition, we have entered into a COGEOMAP named geologic units that are included in each of the time­ (COoperative GEOiogic MAPping) agreement with the U.S. lithologic units; the Correlation Diagram shows the age Geological Survey to map the geology of the Mount Baker, ranges of named units as well as time-lithologic units; and the Robinson Mountain,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Planetary Geologic Mappers Annual Meeting
    Program Lunar and Planetary Institute 3600 Bay Area Boulevard Houston TX 77058-1113 Planetary Geologic Mappers Annual Meeting June 12–14, 2018 • Knoxville, Tennessee Institutional Support Lunar and Planetary Institute Universities Space Research Association Convener Devon Burr Earth and Planetary Sciences Department, University of Tennessee Knoxville Science Organizing Committee David Williams, Chair Arizona State University Devon Burr Earth and Planetary Sciences Department, University of Tennessee Knoxville Robert Jacobsen Earth and Planetary Sciences Department, University of Tennessee Knoxville Bradley Thomson Earth and Planetary Sciences Department, University of Tennessee Knoxville Abstracts for this meeting are available via the meeting website at https://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/pgm2018/ Abstracts can be cited as Author A. B. and Author C. D. (2018) Title of abstract. In Planetary Geologic Mappers Annual Meeting, Abstract #XXXX. LPI Contribution No. 2066, Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston. Guide to Sessions Tuesday, June 12, 2018 9:00 a.m. Strong Hall Meeting Room Introduction and Mercury and Venus Maps 1:00 p.m. Strong Hall Meeting Room Mars Maps 5:30 p.m. Strong Hall Poster Area Poster Session: 2018 Planetary Geologic Mappers Meeting Wednesday, June 13, 2018 8:30 a.m. Strong Hall Meeting Room GIS and Planetary Mapping Techniques and Lunar Maps 1:15 p.m. Strong Hall Meeting Room Asteroid, Dwarf Planet, and Outer Planet Satellite Maps Thursday, June 14, 2018 8:30 a.m. Strong Hall Optional Field Trip to Appalachian Mountains Program Tuesday, June 12, 2018 INTRODUCTION AND MERCURY AND VENUS MAPS 9:00 a.m. Strong Hall Meeting Room Chairs: David Williams Devon Burr 9:00 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Feature 05-05
    Families Go Hiking ORGAN Like many of us, my first memories M of hiking were less than positive. AVE Something about that trail above But Why? , D Ross Dam was just too steep, and IEKEMA D my father was so darn cheery even OUG though it was hot and we didn’t 10 great things about hiking , D have much water. Here were all AULSON The smell of fir trees Cooling your feet P these amazing mountains of the ON North Cascades before us and all I Hiking is a way to experience the On a hot day in August, there’s : D sights, sounds and nothing like dipping your could think about was getting back OTTOM smells of the out- toes in an ice-cold B TO to the car and the grape sodas in doors. And whether stream. OP the cooler. , T it’s the taste of alpine But despite that early stumble, I HOTOS snow or the smell of P stuck with hiking and camping, Douglas fir, hiking is Yodeling and now it’s an important part of a treat for all the Hey, when you’re high my life, and my own family’s. I first senses! above a valley, there’s took my daughter on a trail when nothing like letting out a she was an infant and now at 2 big yell or a yodel to hear she’s starting to lead the way. You M & Ms the echoes. Or try just go much slower than you did Okay, we’ll admit singing something when you were 22 and trying to get it—the main from the “Sound to the summit of Granite Mountain reason we like of Music.” in record time.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Maps of Washington
    GEOLOGIC MAPS OF WASHINGTON DGER GM-53 124° 117° 123° 122° 121° 120° CANADA 119° 118° 49° 49° WASHINGTON STATE PEND DGER OFR 2000-5 WHATCOM DGER OFR 90-5 USA FERRY (scale 1:500,000) OREILLE Roche Mount Bellingham Robinson Oroville Republic Colville Harbor Baker Mtn 125° OKANOGAN DGER OFR 2003-17 48°30 USGS Map I-2660 DGER OFR 90-10 DGER OFR 90-13 48°30 CANADA DGER OFR 90-11 SAN USA Port JUAN SKAGIT DGER DGER OFR 90-12 ISLAND OFR 90-9 Cape Angeles Port Sauk Nespelem Chewelah Flattery Townsend River Twisp Omak USGS Map I-1198F DGER OFR 2003-5 DGER OFR 2003-6 DGER DGER OFR 90-14 48° USGS Map I-1198G USGS Map I -2592 OFR 95-3 DGER OFR 90-16 48° CLALLAM USGS OFR 93-233 STEVENS IDAHO SNOHOMISH DOUGLAS JEFFERSON USGS OFR 91-147 CHELAN Mount Coulee Forks Seattle Skykomish Banks Spokane Olympus River Chelan Lake Dam DGER OFR 2000-4 DGER OFR 2003-4 DGER OFR 90-17 47°30 KITSAP USGS Map I-1963 USGS Map I-1661 DGER OFR 90-6 DGER OFR 90-15 47°30 GRAYS GIS data only KING LINCOLN SPOKANE Copalis HARBOR GRANT Snoqualmie Moses Beach Shelton Tacoma Wenatchee Ritzville Rosalia MASON Pass Lake DGER OFR 2003-16 KITTITAS DGER OFR 2003-15 47° DGER OFR 87-3 USGS Map I-2538 USGS Map I-1311 DGER OFR 90-1 DGER OFR 90-2 DGER OFR 90-7 47° WHITMAN PIERCE ADAMS THURSTON Westport Chehalis Mount Priest Pullman River Centralia Yakima Connell LEWIS Rainier Rapids FRANKLIN DGER DGER OFR 87-8 DGER OFR 87-8 DGER 46°30 DGER OFR 87-11 DGER OFR 87-16 OFR 86-4 OFR 94-12 DGER OFR 94-13 DGER OFR 94-14 DGER OFR 94-6 46°30 PACIFIC GARFIELD YAKIMA DGER COLUMBIA OFR 86-3 BENTON Ilwaco WAHKIAKUM Mount Clarkston Mount Richland Walla Walla Astoria St.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of the Simcoe Mountains Volcanic Field, Main Central Segment, Yakama Nation, Washington by Wes Hildreth and Judy Fierstein
    Prepared in Cooperation with the Water Resources Program of the Yakama Nation Geologic Map of the Simcoe Mountains Volcanic Field, Main Central Segment, Yakama Nation, Washington By Wes Hildreth and Judy Fierstein Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 3315 Photograph showing Mount Adams andesitic stratovolcano and Signal Peak mafic shield volcano viewed westward from near Mill Creek Guard Station. Low-relief rocky meadows and modest forested ridges marked by scattered cinder cones and shields are common landforms in Simcoe Mountains volcanic field. Mount Adams (elevation: 12,276 ft; 3,742 m) is centered 50 km west and 2.8 km higher than foreground meadow (elevation: 2,950 ft.; 900 m); its eruptions began ~520 ka, its upper cone was built in late Pleistocene, and several eruptions have taken place in the Holocene. Signal Peak (elevation: 5,100 ft; 1,555 m), 20 km west of camera, is one of largest and highest eruptive centers in Simcoe Mountains volcanic field; short-lived shield, built around 3.7 Ma, is seven times older than Mount Adams. 2015 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Contents Introductory Overview for Non-Geologists ...............................................................................................1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................2 Physiography, Environment, Boundary Surveys, and Access ......................................................6 Previous Geologic
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Basalts and Glacier Floods—Roadside Geology
    u 0 by Robert J. Carson and Kevin R. Pogue WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Information Circular 90 January 1996 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF Natural Resources Jennifer M. Belcher - Commissioner of Public Lands Kaleen Cottingham - Supervisor FLOOD BASALTS AND GLACIER FLOODS: Roadside Geology of Parts of Walla Walla, Franklin, and Columbia Counties, Washington by Robert J. Carson and Kevin R. Pogue WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Information Circular 90 January 1996 Kaleen Cottingham - Supervisor Division of Geology and Earth Resources WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Jennifer M. Belcher-Commissio11er of Public Lands Kaleeo Cottingham-Supervisor DMSION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Raymond Lasmanis-State Geologist J. Eric Schuster-Assistant State Geologist William S. Lingley, Jr.-Assistant State Geologist This report is available from: Publications Washington Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources P.O. Box 47007 Olympia, WA 98504-7007 Price $ 3.24 Tax (WA residents only) ~ Total $ 3.50 Mail orders must be prepaid: please add $1.00 to each order for postage and handling. Make checks payable to the Department of Natural Resources. Front Cover: Palouse Falls (56 m high) in the canyon of the Palouse River. Printed oo recycled paper Printed io the United States of America Contents 1 General geology of southeastern Washington 1 Magnetic polarity 2 Geologic time 2 Columbia River Basalt Group 2 Tectonic features 5 Quaternary sedimentation 6 Road log 7 Further reading 7 Acknowledgments 8 Part 1 - Walla Walla to Palouse Falls (69.0 miles) 21 Part 2 - Palouse Falls to Lower Monumental Dam (27.0 miles) 26 Part 3 - Lower Monumental Dam to Ice Harbor Dam (38.7 miles) 33 Part 4 - Ice Harbor Dam to Wallula Gap (26.7 mi les) 38 Part 5 - Wallula Gap to Walla Walla (42.0 miles) 44 References cited ILLUSTRATIONS I Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project NEPA Environmental Impact Statement
    Appendix C References Cited in the Environmental Impact Statement September 2020 Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project NEPA Environmental Impact Statement APPENDIX C: REFERENCES CITED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Chapter 1, Introduction CEQ (Council on Environmental Quality), 1999. Memorandum from: George T. Frampton, Jr., Acting Chair, to: Heads of Federal Agencies. Regarding: Designation of Non-Federal Agencies to be Cooperating Agencies in Implementing the Procedural Requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. July 28, 1999. Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), 2018. Memorandum for the Record. Regarding: Determination of the Requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Chehalis River Basin Dam Proposal. January 31, 2018. Corps, 2019. Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction NEPA EIS Scoping Summary Report. January 2019. CRBFA (Chehalis River Basin Flood Authority), 2019. Flood Authority Master Contact List 5-15-2019. Last modified May 15, 2019. Accessed July 27, 2020. Accessed at: https://www.ezview.wa.gov/Portals/_1492/images/Updated%20-- %20Flood%20Authority%20Contact%20Sheet%20--%205-15-2019.pdf. Work Group (Governor’s Chehalis Basin Work Group), 2018. Letter to: Jay Inslee, Office of the Governor. Regarding: Chehalis Basin Board’s Capital Budget Recommendation for 2019-2021. November 26, 2018. Chapter 2, Purpose and Need CBP (Chehalis Basin Partnership), 2004. Chehalis Basin Watershed Management Plan. Accessed at: http://chehalisbasinpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/cbp_wmp.pdf. NFIP (National Flood Insurance Program), 2015. Loss Statistics from January 1, 1978 to July 31, 2015. Updated July 2015; accessed October 2, 2015. Accessed at: http://bsa.nfipstat.fema.gov/reports/1040.htm.
    [Show full text]
  • GEOLOGIC MAP of the Mccoy PEAK QUADRANGLE, SOUTHERN CASCADE RANGE, WASHINGTON
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Geologic map of the McCoy Peak quadrangle, southern Cascade Range, Washington by Donald A. Swanson1 Open-File Report 92-336 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 'U.S. Geological Survey, Department of Geological Sciences AJ-20, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................ 1 5. Locations of samples collected in McCoy Peak ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................... 1 {quadrangle ......................... 6 ROCK TERMINOLOGY AND CHEMICAL 6. Alkali-lime classification diagram for Tertiary CLASSIFICATION .................... 2 rocks in McCoy Peak quadrangle .......... 7 GENERAL GEOLOGY .................... 6 7. Plot of FeO*/MgO vs. SiO2 for rocks from TERTIARY ROCKS OLDER THAN INTRUSIVE McCoy Peak quadrangle ................ 7 SUITE OF KIDD CREEK ............... 7 8. Plot of total alkalis vs. SiO2 for rocks in McCoy Volcaniclastic rocks ................... 7 Peak quadrangle ..................... 8 Chaotic volcanic breccia ................ 8 9. Plot of K2O vs. SiO2 for rocks from McCoy Vitroclastic dacite and andesite breccia ...... 9 Peak quadrangle ..................... 8 Volcanic centers ...................... 10 10. Distrbution of pyroxene andesite and basaltic Regional dike swarm .................. 11 andesite dikes in French Butte, Greenhorn Age .............................. 13 Buttes, Tower Rock, and McCoy Peak INTRUSIVE SUITE OF KIDD CREEK ......... 13 quadrangles ........................ 12 Dikes ............................. 14 11. Rose diagrams of strikes of dikes and beds in Sills .............................. 16 McCoy Peak and other quadrangles ....... 13 Relation of dikes and sills ............... 16 12. Plcts of TiO2, FeO*, and MnO vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthropological Study of Yakama Tribe
    1 Anthropological Study of Yakama Tribe: Traditional Resource Harvest Sites West of the Crest of the Cascades Mountains in Washington State and below the Cascades of the Columbia River Eugene Hunn Department of Anthropology Box 353100 University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195-3100 [email protected] for State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife WDFW contract # 38030449 preliminary draft October 11, 2003 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary 5 Map 1 5f 1. Goals and scope of this report 6 2. Defining the relevant Indian groups 7 2.1. How Sahaptin names for Indian groups are formed 7 2.2. The Yakama Nation 8 Table 1: Yakama signatory tribes and bands 8 Table 2: Yakama headmen and chiefs 8-9 2.3. Who are the ―Klickitat‖? 10 2.4. Who are the ―Cascade Indians‖? 11 2.5. Who are the ―Cowlitz‖/Taitnapam? 11 2.6. The Plateau/Northwest Coast cultural divide: Treaty lines versus cultural 12 divides 2.6.1. The Handbook of North American Indians: Northwest Coast versus 13 Plateau 2.7. Conclusions 14 3. Historical questions 15 3.1. A brief summary of early Euroamerican influences in the region 15 3.2. How did Sahaptin-speakers end up west of the Cascade crest? 17 Map 2 18f 3.3. James Teit‘s hypothesis 18 3.4. Melville Jacobs‘s counter argument 19 4. The Taitnapam 21 4.1. Taitnapam sources 21 4.2. Taitnapam affiliations 22 4.3. Taitnapam territory 23 4.3.1. Jim Yoke and Lewy Costima on Taitnapam territory 24 4.4.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Ecoregions of Idaho
    1 0 . C o l u m b i a P l a t e a u 1 3 . C e n t r a l B a s i n a n d R a n g e Ecoregion 10 is an arid grassland and sagebrush steppe that is surrounded by moister, predominantly forested, mountainous ecoregions. It is Ecoregion 13 is internally-drained and composed of north-trending, fault-block ranges and intervening, drier basins. It is vast and includes parts underlain by thick basalt. In the east, where precipitation is greater, deep loess soils have been extensively cultivated for wheat. of Nevada, Utah, California, and Idaho. In Idaho, sagebrush grassland, saltbush–greasewood, mountain brush, and woodland occur; forests are absent unlike in the cooler, wetter, more rugged Ecoregion 19. Grazing is widespread. Cropland is less common than in Ecoregions 12 and 80. Ecoregions of Idaho The unforested hills and plateaus of the Dissected Loess Uplands ecoregion are cut by the canyons of Ecoregion 10l and are disjunct. 10f Pure grasslands dominate lower elevations. Mountain brush grows on higher, moister sites. Grazing and farming have eliminated The arid Shadscale-Dominated Saline Basins ecoregion is nearly flat, internally-drained, and has light-colored alkaline soils that are Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 52 regions Literature Cited: much of the original plant cover. Nevertheless, Ecoregion 10f is not as suited to farming as Ecoregions 10h and 10j because it has thinner soils.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical and Current Forest and Range Landscapes in the Interior
    United States Department of Historical and Current Forest Agriculture Forest Service and Range Landscapes in the Pacific Northwest Research Station United States Interior Columbia River Basin Department of the Interior and Portions of the Klamath Bureau of Land Management General Technical and Great Basins Report PNW-GTR-458 September 1999 Part 1: Linking Vegetation Patterns and Landscape Vulnerability to Potential Insect and Pathogen Disturbances Authors PAUL F. HESSBURG is a research plant pathologist and R. BRION SALTER is a GIS analyst, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 1133 N. Western Avenue, Wenatchee, WA 98801; BRADLEY G. SMITH is a quantitative ecologist, Pacific Northwest Region, Deschutes National Forest, 1645 Highway 20 E., Bend, OR 97701; SCOTT D. KREITER is a GIS analyst, Wenatchee, WA; CRAIG A. MILLER is a geographer, Wenatchee, WA; CECILIA H. McNICOLL was a plant ecol- ogist, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, and is currently at Pike and San Isabel National Forests, Leadville Ranger District, Leadville, CO 80461; and WENDEL J. HANN was the regional ecologist, Northern Region, Intermountain Fire Sciences Laboratory, and is currently the National Landscape Ecologist stationed at White River National Forest, Dillon Ranger District, Silverthorne, CO 80498. Historical and Current Forest and Range Landscapes in the Interior Columbia River Basin and Portions of the Klamath and Great Basins Part 1: Linking Vegetation Patterns and Landscape Vulnerability to Potential Insect and Pathogen Disturbances Paul F. Hessburg, Bradley G. Smith, Scott D. Kreiter, Craig A. Miller, R. Brion Salter, Cecilia H. McNicoll, and Wendel J. Hann Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: Scientific Assessment Thomas M.
    [Show full text]
  • South Rainier Elk Herd
    Washington State Elk Herd Plan SOUTH RAINIER ELK HERD Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 Prepared by Min T. Huang Patrick J. Miller Frederick C. Dobler January 2002 Director, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Date January 2002 i Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife STATE OF WASHINGTON GARY LOCKE, GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE JEFF KOENINGS, PH. D., DIRECTOR WILDLIFE PROGRAM DAVE BRITTELL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GAME DIVISION DAVE WARE, MANAGER This Program Receives Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration funds. Project W-96-R-10, Category A, Project 1, Job 4 This report should be cited as: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2002. South Rainier Elk Herd Plan. Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia. 32 pp. This program receives Federal financial assistance from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The U.S. Department of the Interior and its bureaus prohibit discrimination on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability and sex. If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity or facility, please write to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of External Programs, 4040 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 130, Arlington, VA 22203 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………….. iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY…………………………………………………………………. v INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………. 1 The Plan…………………………………………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • ELK ECOLOGY and MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES at MOUNT RAINIER NATIONAL PARK
    ELK ECOLOGY and MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES at MOUNT RAINIER NATIONAL PARK William P. Bradley Chas. H. Driver National Park Service Cooperative Park Studies Unit College of Forest Resources University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 ELK ECOLOGY and MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES at MOUNT RAINIER NATIONAL PARK William P. Bradley1 Chas. H. Driver2 National Park Service Cooperative Park Studies Unit College of Forest Resources University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 CPSU/UW 81-2 Winter 1981 'formerly Research Associate, College of Forest Resources 2Professor, College of Forest Resources The research in this publication was supported by National Park Service contract CX-9000-6-0093. INTRODUCTION Elk management in the western states has often been subject to heated and emotional controversies, both among different public agencies responsible for elk management and between these agencies and the public at large. The National Park Service (NPS) is extremely susceptible to adverse criticism and negative public opinion resulting from elk management decisions, because they do not have at their disposal the accepted managerial tool of sport hunting to control and regulate problem populations. The NPS's direct reduction-by-shooting program in Yellowstone Park has become a classic example of a managerial solution resulting in inflammatory inter-agency conflict and public relations problems. (See Pengelly 1963 and Woolf 1971 for excellent discussions of the Yellowstone situation.) The intent of this paper is to summarize the elk management problems at Mount Rainier National Park in the State of Washington and the actions taken to mitigate them. The seat of this controversy revolves around a large summering elk population's impact on the sub-alpine meadow system con­ tained within the park.
    [Show full text]