DOCSLIB.ORG

Snohomish Basin Protection Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

SNOHOMISH BASIN PROTECTION PLAN December 2015 Prepared by Snohomish County Surface Water Management King County Snoqualmie Watershed Forum Staff Tulalip Tribes Natural Resources Department ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Steering Committee Tulalip Tribes – Terry Williams Snohomish County – Debbie Terwilleger, Gregg Farris King County – Joan Lee Wild Fish Conservancy – Jamie Glasgow Trout Unlimited – Kate Miller Puget Sound Partnership – Susan O’Neil, Heather Cole Washington State University Extension – Kevin Zobrist U.S. Forest Service – Joe Neal Forterra – Skip Swenson Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife – Kirk Lakey Washington Department of Natural Resources – Doug McClelland City of Snohomish – Ann Stanton Project Team Snohomish County Surface Water Management staff (Ann Bylin, Mike Rustay, Denise DiSanto, Karen Stewart, Beth Liddell, and Paul Marczin), Tulalip Tribes Natural Resources staff (Daryl Williams, Morgan Ruff, and Josh Kubo), and Snoqualmie Watershed Forum staff (Beth leDoux, Janne Kaje, and Perry Falcone) with consultant assistance from Hook Environmental, Parametrix, and Anchor QEA. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under assistance agreement PO 00J09701 to Snohomish County Public Works. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. Additional match funding was provided by Snohomish County, King County, and Tulalip Tribes. Recommended Citation Snohomish County Surface Water Management, King County Snoqualmie Watershed Forum Staff, and Tulalip Tribes Natural Resources Department, 2015. Snohomish Basin Protection Plan. Snohomish Basin Salmon Recovery Forum. Everett, WA. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The primary goal of this 2015 Snohomish Basin Protection Plan (SBPP) is to identify protection strategies that prevent the degradation of hydrologic processes that support salmon or salmon habitat. In 2005, the Snohomish Basin Salmon Recovery Forum members approved the Snohomish Basin Salmon Conservation Plan and laid out a 50-year road map for multi- species recovery. The 2005 Plan was based on historical records, the best available science, and social and economic conditions. The Plan recognized that it was critical to use adaptive management to increase the chance of success by incorporating new data, information about successes and failures, and new opportunities provided by changing context in the Snohomish River Basin. Since 2005, there have been many site-scale successes on restoration projects in the mainstems, estuaries and tributaries. However, many environmental indicators continue to decline, according to local data and the 2009 State of the Sound report (Puget Sound Partnership 2010). The continued decline is likely due to little-understood cumulative effects that need to be addressed through protection at the landscape-scale. Snohomish Basin Hydrology—Supporting People, Wildlife, and Fish The Snohomish River Basin contains diverse aquatic resources, a variety of fish and wildlife populations of local and regional significance, and a diverse portfolio of land uses. The Basin and its many natural resources and human communities are inextricably linked to how water moves through space and time, from the smallest headwater streams to mainstem rivers and the groundwater beneath the surface. December 2015 Snohomish Basin Protection Plan ES-1 Hydrology in the Snohomish, Snoqualmie, and Skykomish rivers and associated tributaries is changing. Historical flow patterns and volumes are shifting as a result of changing land uses and climate change. Human activities—such as impervious surface installation, tree cover removal, traditional stormwater conveyance systems, and water withdrawals—are contributing to altered watershed processes, degraded water quality, loss of wetlands and riparian forests, and degraded shoreline conditions. Investigating Protection of Snohomish Basin Hydrology The continued degradation of hydrology in the Basin, rapid urbanization, and threats from climate change motivated a new effort focused on the protection of the water resources in the Basin and the watershed processes that support them. This SBPP identifies areas that are important to the goal of protecting hydrology, and examines new and existing tools to help support that goal. Through the protection of hydrology, the SBPP aims to ultimately protect habitat quality, quantity, and heterogeneity for fish and wildlife. The protection of hydrology will also support a continued high quality of life for those who live and work in the Basin, help ameliorate flood risks, and ensure the availability of water for multiple uses into the future. To best characterize the different challenges, hydrological importance, and opportunities in each area, an approach was developed that incorporates information on land use, expected climate change impacts, services provided by hydrology, salmon use, existing protection measures, and possible improvements to policies, programs, and projects. The Puget Sound Watershed Characterization model was used to understand the importance of different components of hydrology at various scales and to Photo credit: Greg Dunlap describe the level of hydrological degradation. Assessment of the components of hydrology resulted in the development of ES-2 Snohomish Basin Protection Plan December 2015 basic protection strategies and aided in the assessment of tools to The consequences of not achieve protective actions. implementing protective measures for hydrology in the Snohomish Basin The Snohomish Basin Protection Plan include the following: • Loss of habitat for salmon The intent of the SBPP is to set a framework for a more and other aquatic species complete implementation and accounting of protection efforts • Continued degradation of water quality by all Basin partners. Section 1 of the SBPP provides the Basin • Decreased ability to protection context and more details on the intended purposes of mitigate drought this document. Section 2 describes the technical assessment conditions • Negative impacts on in- approach and Section 3 summarizes the results of the technical stream flows assessment (with additional details provided in Appendix A). • Risk of loss of life and infrastructure during flood events Section 4 of the SBPP provides an overview of protection tools • Lost opportunity to protect ecosystem that can be a starting point for planners and others to consider function in combination with local hydrology concerns, land use types, • High future costs of fish use, and implementation opportunities. The tools include a restoration range of existing programs in their current form, existing Although a lot of good work programs with suggestions for improvements, and entirely new is being done through existing policy and tools. Section 5 presents an assessment of current and potential programs, water quality has future funding strategies to support SBPP objectives. continued to degrade and with the challenges of drought and extreme flow Section 6 presents a summary example of how the SBPP can events, the Basin’s natural hydrologic regime has been guide the development of protection strategies towards a significantly altered. It is specific program goal—in this case, salmon recovery—and more cost effective to provides updates on information developed since the 2005 protect hydrology now than to pay later for restoration Snohomish Basin Salmon Conservation Plan. Appendix B actions and projects. provides more detailed recommendations for updated salmon recovery protection strategies relative to specific land uses in the Basin. In December 2015, the Snohomish Basin Salmon Recovery Forum adopted Appendix B as the first formal adaptive management action for the 2005 Plan. This protection update does not change existing restoration recommendations and habitat goals from the 2005 Plan. December 2015 Snohomish Basin Protection Plan ES-3 It has been 10 years since the 2005 Plan was adopted by the Forum, with broad support of jurisdictions operating in the Basin. Much has been accomplished in the realm of habitat restoration, yet landscape-scale indicators—such as total forest cover and water temperature—continue to show degradation. The intent of this SBPP is to provide an update to the 2005 Plan, and to serve as planning guidance to achieve greater protection of hydrology and, in turn, salmon habitat. This SBPP was developed at a time when there is recognition for the need to create watershed and ecosystem resilience in the face of growing populations and changing climatic conditions. Just as restoration relies on partnerships and collaboration, protection of hydrology and habitat cannot be undertaken in isolation, or by one entity, group, or agency. As stated by the original chairs Photo credit: flickr user brewbooks of the Forum, “we know that to recover salmon in Puget Sound, we must succeed in the Snohomish Basin.” ES-4 Snohomish Basin Protection Plan December 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... ES-1 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................... vii SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND BASIN PROTECTION CONTEXT ........................ 1-1 1.1 The Importance of Hydrology in the Basin ...............................................................
Recommended publications
  • An Overview of the Geology and Geomorphology of the Snoqualmie River Watershed

    An Overview of the Geology and Geomorphology of the Snoqualmie River Watershed

    AN OVERVIEW OF THE GEOLOGY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY OF THE SNOQUALMIE RIVER WATERSHED Prepared by: John Bethel, Geologist Ecological Services Unit Prepared for: Fran Solomon, Ph.D., Senior Ecologist Watershed and Ecological Assessment Team April 2004 Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division Capital Projects and Open Space Acquisitions Section 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104-3855 An Overview of the Geology and Geomorphology of the Snoqualmie River Watershed Prepared by John Bethel, Geologist Ecological Services Unit Prepared for King County Water and Land Resources Division Snoqualmie Watershed Team September 2004 Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division Capital Projects and Open Space Acquisitions Section 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 600 Seattle, Washington 98104-3855 King County Executive Ron Sims King County Council Carolyn Edmonds, District 1 Bob Ferguson, District 2 Kathy Lambert, District 3 Larry Phillips, District 4 Dwight Pelz, District 5 Rob McKenna, District 6 Pete von Reichbauer, District 7 Dow Constantine, District 8 Steve Hammond, District 9 Larry Gossett, District 10 Jane Hague, District 11 David Irons, District 12 Julia Patterson, District 13 Department of Natural Resources and Parks Pam Bissonnette, Director Water and Land Resources Division Daryl Grigsby, Division Director Contributing Staff John Bethel, Geologist Supporting Staff Fran Solomon, Ph.D., Senior Ecologist Terry Butler, Geologist Gino Lucchetti, Senior Ecologist Wendy Gable Collins, Graphic Designer and Cartographer Bob Gilland, Technical Information Processing Specialist AN OVERVIEW OF THE GEOLOGY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY OF THE SNOQUALMIE RIVER WATERSHED Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction..................................................................................................................1 1.1. Purpose and Scope of this Report .......................................................................1 1.2.
  • CHAPTER 8: PARKS and OPEN SPACE ELEMENT Table of Contents

    CHAPTER 8: PARKS and OPEN SPACE ELEMENT Table of Contents

    CHAPTER 8: PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT Table of Contents A. INTRODUCTION: A.1 Overview A.2 Purpose of the Parks and Open Space Element A.3 Relationship to Comprehensive Plan and Regulatory Role B. DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANNING AREA: B.1 Service Area B.2 Population Trends Table 1: Population Projections Table 2: North Bend Age Distribution - 2010 B.3 Wildlife Habitat C. EXISTING AREAS AND FACILITIES: C.1 Overview C.2 City of North Bend Areas and Facilities C.3 School District Facilities C.4 City of Seattle Cedar River Watershed C.5 Si View Metropolitan Park District Facilities C.6 King County Areas and Facilities C.7 Joint Agencies Areas and Facilities C.8 Washington State Areas and Facilities C.9 Federal Lands C.10 Other Regional Areas and Facilities D. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: D.1 Introduction D.2 2012 Si View Metropolitan Parks District Survey D.3 2015 North Bend Parks Survey D.4 2015 Parks Workshop E. DEMAND AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT: E.1 Introduction E.2 Outdoor Recreation Trends E.3 Park and Recreation Needs Assessment Table 3 : Park Facility Inventory Table 4 : Park and Recreation Level of Service Standards E.4 Trail System Needs Assessment E.5 Wildlife Habitat Needs Assessment E.6 Open Space Needs Assessment F. GOALS AND POLICIES G. IMPLEMENTATION METHODS H. 20-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PROGRAM: H.1 Overview H.2 Project Descriptions I. 6-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN MAPS: Figure 8.1: Parks, Open Space and Public Facilities Map Figure 8.2: Trail Plan Map Figure 8.3: Protected Areas Map Chapter 8 – Parks and Open Space Element Page 1 CHAPTER 8: PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT A.
  • I-90 Geotour

    I-90 Geotour

    “Excellent” –Washington Trails magazine, Geology Hikes cover story, 9/07 PHILIP FENNER 2 A Geo-Tour of the I-90 Corridor From Seattle to Vantage, WA The Mountains to Sound Greenway Text and photos by Philip Fenner V57 February 13, 2008 This document is frequently updated and expanded. The latest release is available at: http://www.seanet.com/~pfitech/I-90GeoTour.pdf ©2006 - 2008 Philip Fenner Cover photo: Mt. Si (L center) and the valley of the South Fork Snoqualmie River (R center) which I-90 follows to Snoqualmie Pass, reflected in the Mill Pond in the Snoqualmie River Valley near Snoqualmie, WA . 3 “Most men pursue pleasure with such breathless haste that they hurry past it.” Soren Kierkegaard (1813 - 1855) “Thanks to the Interstate Highway System, it is now possible to travel from coast to coast without seeing anything.” Charles Kuralt (1934 – 1997) “High-speed expressways… are noisy and frenetic, and they attract urban development like a pied piper. Unless we plan carefully, the scenic beauty, the working farms and forests, and the distinctive communities along this route could be smothered piece by piece under the next wave of urban growth.” James R. Ellis (1921 - ) “Certainly, travel is more than the seeing of sights; it is a change that goes on, deep and permanent, in the ideas of living.” Miriam Beard (1901 - 1983) “Today is your day! Your mountain is waiting. So. get on your way.” Dr. Seuss (1904 - 1991) 4 Contents Introduction................................................................................................................... 5 About the Author and This Project ............................................................................... 7 THE PUGET LOWLAND: SEATTLE TO NORTH BEND........................................ 9 The Downtown Seattle Waterfront ..............................................................................
  • Chapter 8: Parks, Recreation, Wildlife Habitat and Openspace Element

    Chapter 8: Parks, Recreation, Wildlife Habitat and Openspace Element

    CHAPTER 8: PARKS, RECREATION, WILDLIFE HABITAT AND OPENSPACE ELEMENT Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION: Purpose of the Plan Relationship to Comprehensive Plan and Regulatory Role II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANNING AREA: Service Area Population Trends Table 1: Population Projections Table 2: North Bend Age Distribution - 2000 Wildlife Habitat III. EXISTING AREAS AND FACILITIES: Overview City of North Bend Areas and Facilities School District Facilities City of Seattle Cedar River Watershed Si View Metropolitan Park District Facilities King County Areas and Facilities Joint Agencies Areas and Facilities Washington State Areas and Facilities Federal Lands Other Regional Areas and Facilities IV. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Introduction 1999/2000 Survey 2002 Wildlife Habitat Survey 2008 Si View Metropolitan Parks District Survey 2009 Parks Commission Open House V. DEMAND AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT: Introduction Outdoor Recreation Trends Park and Recreation Needs Assessment Table 3 : Park Facility Inventory Table 4 : Park and Recreation Level of Service Standards Trail System Needs Assessment Wildlife Habitat Needs Assessment Chapter 8 – Parks, Recreation, Wildlife Habitat and Open Space Element Page 1 Adopted January 19, 2010, with updates adopted May 6, 2014, Ordinance 1526. Open Space Needs Assessment VI. GOALS AND POLICIES: Overview Goals and policies VII. IMPLEMENTATION METHODS: Methods VIII. CAPITAL FACILITIES PROGRAM: Overview Project Descriptions Table 5: 2010-2015 Park Capital Facilities Plan MAPS: Figure 8-1: 2002 Parks, Open Space and Public Facilities Map Figure 8-2: Trail Plan Map Figure 8-3: Protected Areas Map I. INTRODUCTION The Parks, Recreation, Wildlife Habitat and Open Space Plan ("the Plan") is a six-year plan that is an element of the City of North Bend's Comprehensive Plan.
  • CHAPTER 8: PARKS and OPEN SPACE ELEMENT Table of Contents

    CHAPTER 8: PARKS and OPEN SPACE ELEMENT Table of Contents

    CHAPTER 8: PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT Table of Contents A. INTRODUCTION: A.1 Overview A.2 Purpose of the Parks and Open Space Element A.3 Relationship to Comprehensive Plan and Regulatory Role B. DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANNING AREA: B.1 Service Area B.2 Population Trends Table 1: Population Projections Table 2: North Bend Age Distribution - 2010 B.3 Wildlife Habitat C. EXISTING AREAS AND FACILITIES: C.1 Overview C.2 City of North Bend Areas and Facilities C.3 School District Facilities C.4 City of Seattle Cedar River Watershed C.5 Si View Metropolitan Park District Facilities C.6 King County Areas and Facilities C.7 Joint Agencies Areas and Facilities C.8 Washington State Areas and Facilities C.9 Federal Lands C.10 Other Regional Areas and Facilities D. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: D.1 Introduction D.2 2012 Si View Metropolitan Parks District Survey D.3 2015 North Bend Parks Survey D.4 2015 Parks Workshop E. DEMAND AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT: E.1 Introduction E.2 Outdoor Recreation Trends E.3 Park and Recreation Needs Assessment Table 3 : Park Facility Inventory Table 4 : Park and Recreation Level of Service Standards E.4 Trail System Needs Assessment E.5 Wildlife Habitat Needs Assessment E.6 Open Space Needs Assessment F. GOALS AND POLICIES G. IMPLEMENTATION METHODS H. 20-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PROGRAM: H.1 Overview H.2 Project Descriptions I. 6-YEAR CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN MAPS: Figure 8.1: Parks, Open Space and Public Facilities Map Figure 8.2: Trail Plan Map Figure 8.3: Protected Areas Map Chapter 8 – Parks and Open Space Element Page 1 CHAPTER 8: PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT A.
  • OLALLIE STATE PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN November

    OLALLIE STATE PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN November

    OLALLIE STATE PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN November, 2011 22 Washington State Parks Mission The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission acquires, operates, enhances, and protects a diverse system of recreational, cultural, and natural sites. The Commission fosters outdoor recreation and education statewide to provide enjoyment and enrichment for all and a valued legacy to future generations. - 1 - ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND CONTACTS The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission gratefully acknowledges the many stakeholders and the staff of Olallie and Lake Sammamish State Parks who participated in public meetings, reviewed voluminous materials, and made this a better plan because of it. NW Region Director Eric Watilo Plan Author Steven A. Starlund, Northwest Region Steward Olallie State Park Area Management Planning Team Steven Starlund, CAMP Project Lead Rick Oakley, Olallie Park Manager Derek Gustafson, NW Region Park Planner Daniel Farber, NW Region Capital Program Manager Rich Benson, Lake Sammamish Area Park Manager Kira Furman, Environmental Specialist Washington State Park and Recreation Commission Commissioners: Joe Taller, Chair Roger Schmitt Lucinda S.Whaley Mark O. Brown Patricia T. Lantz Steve S. Milner State Parks Director Don Hoch - 2 - TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE……………………………………………………….………..……………. 5 PURPOSE………………………………………………………………..…….………. 6 SECTION 1: PARK DESCRIPTION……………………………………..…………… 7 SECTION 2: PLANNING PROCESS & INTRODUCTION…………..…………… 10 SECTION 3: MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES…………………………………......... 13 SECTION 4: SUMMARY
  • Travel the Historic Trail and Visit State Parks Along The

    Travel the Historic Trail and Visit State Parks Along The

    Washington State Parks Through the Iron Horse Travel the historic trail and Snoqualmie Tunnel State Park Trail Look for the speck of light at the end of this 2.3-mile tunnel under Snoqualmie Pass — the nation’s longest tunnel open to visit state parks along the way nonmotorized traffic. The Milwaukee Road built this tunnel in 1914 to improve the grade over the pass. Tunnel gear — The tunnel is dark, cold and damp. Bring a Iron Horse State Park is a 1,613-acre park that jacket with hood to keep warm and dry, and a flashlight or head- follows more than 100 miles of the John Wayne Pioneer lamp to see and be seen. West tunnel entrance — The Homestead Valley Trailhead (I-90 exit 38) is the first trailhead on the Iron Horse Trail from Cedar Falls in the Cascade Mountains to the State Park Trail west of the tunnel (Discover Pass required). The US Forest Services’ McClellan Butte Trail (exit 42) and the Columbia River in central Washington. The Trail is Annette Lake Trail (exit 47) both intersect with the Iron Horse Day-use parks Trail approximately 1 mile from their respective trailheads perfect for long or short trips and extends to Idaho. offer fun adventures (Northwest Forest Pass required). East tunnel entrance — From I-90 in either direction, The trail leads travelers over high trestles with spectacular take exit 54 (Hyak/Gold Creek). Head south off the freeway to Olallie State Park (Exit 38) the stop sign. Turn left (east) on Route 906, which parallels the views of the valley below, mountainous Five miles southeast of North Bend.
  • 2019 Pl. A. Schedule Copy

    2019 Pl. A. Schedule Copy

    PLEIN AIR SCHEDULE 2019. We meet at 9:00, lunch at 12:00 Date LOCATION May Snoqualmie - Northwest Railroad Museum, 38625 SE King St, 21 Snoqualmie, Quaint buildings, old trains; river views; Facilities: Restrooms in the station (after 10 am), street parking, nearby restaurants, shelter in case of rain. Directions: Drive I-90 east and take Exit 25 (Snoqualmie Parkway/Highway 18). Turn left under the freeway onto Snoqualmie Parkway and go about three miles, then turn right onto Railroad Avenue SE (WA-202). Drive into the main part of Snoqualmie. At SE King St, either park on the street near the RR station, or park in the lot on the left, where there is access to the river. Meet for lunch at the Gazebo or near the river. May Bassetti's Crooked Arbor Garden, 18512 NE 165th, Woodinville. Woodland 28 garden with crooked arbor, a Japanese garden, a perennial garden, interesting sculpture, and a vegetable garden with fruit trees. Directions: Take Avondale Road either from NE Woodinville-Duvall Road or WA-520, then turn west on NE 165th st. at the light and drive about 1⁄2 mile. Turn right into driveway and drive to the large barn with green roof. Gardens are to the east of the barns. ! June Washington Park Arboretum, 2300 Arboretum Dr E, Seattle. Situated south 4 of WA-520 at the north end of the Arboretum, this area offers views of Duck Bay and Foster and Marsh Islands as well as access to the full array of Arboretum flora and fauna. Facilities: Parking, restrooms at the Graham Visitors Center.
  • Golf Courses

    Golf Courses

    MileByMile.com Personal Road Trip Guide Washington Byway Highway # "Mountains to Sound Greenway - I-90" Miles ITEM SUMMARY 0.0 Ellensburg, Washington. Ellensburg, Washington, This is where the Mountains to Sound Starting Place of Mountains Greenway Byway starts. Ellensburg, Washington is located in Kittitas to sound Greenway County, Washington. The surrounding Kittitas valley is internationally popular for its product of Timothy-Hay. 1.6 Goodwin Road, Thorp Goodwin Road, Sisters Road, Thorp Depot Road, Thorp, Washington is Depot Road located in Kittitas County, Washington. Old Thorp Mill 4.2 West Taneum Road, Thorp West Taneum Canyon, Thorp Prairie Road, Prairie Road 7.4 Junction Junction Elk Heights Road, sunlight Drive, 11.2 Intersection Upper Peoh Point Road 15.2 Sunrise Highway Sunrise Highway, this road connects Interstate Highway #90 to state Highway #970, Teanaway, Washington, Teanaway Valley, Swak Prairie, 16.8 Junction of North Oakes Junction of North Oakes Avenue, State Highway #903, at Cle Elum, Avenue Washington which is located in Kittitas County, Washington by the Yakima River. Cle Elum Lake along the Yakima River is used as a storage reservoir for the Yakima Project. 17.5 South Cle Elum, South Cle Elum, Washington is a town located in Kittitas county, Washington Washington. Attractions in and around South Cle Elum, Washington : Former Milwaukee Road depot, Iron Horse State Park and Milwaukee Road Bunkhouse. 18.0 West 1st Street, Ranger West 1st Street, Ranger Station Road, Horse Park, Horse Park Forest Station Road 20.7 Suncadia, Washington Junction Bullfrog Road, Community of Roslyn, Washington, Community of Ronald, Washington, Suncadia, Washington located in Kittitas county, Washington on the Mountains to Sound Greenway part of the I-90.
  • Twin Falls Project No

    Twin Falls Project No

    COMM-OPINION-ORDER, 31 FERC ¶61,151, South Fork Resources, Inc., Project No. 4885-003, Puget Sound Power & Light Co. and, Project No. 5681-000, City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Project No. 5683-000, (May 06, 1985) South Fork Resources, Inc., Project No. 4885-003, Puget Sound Power & Light Co. and, Project No. 5681-000, City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Project No. 5683-000 [61,288] [¶61,151] South Fork Resources, Inc., Project No. 4885-003 Puget Sound Power & Light Co. and, Project No. 5681-000 City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Project No. 5683-000 Order Issuing Major License, Denying Competing Preliminary Permit Applications, Granting Motions to Intervene, Denying Motions for Coordination of Proceedings and for Hearing, and Granting Waiver (Issued May 6, 1985) Before Commissioners: Raymond J. O’Connor, Chairman; Georgiana Sheldon, A. G. Sousa, Oliver G. Richard III and Charles G. Stalon. On July 13, 1982, South Fork Resources, Inc. (South Fork) filed an application for a license under Part I of the Federal Power Act (Act) to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed Twin Falls Project No. 4885. The project would be located on the South Fork Snoqualmie River in the Snohomish River Basin in King County, Washington, would occupy lands of the United %wE2es, and would affect the interests of interstate and foreign commerce. Previously, on November 24, 1981, Puget Sound Power & Light Company, and the City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, had each filed separate applications for preliminary permit for the same site to study the feasibility of Project Nos.
  • Snoqualmie River Game Fish Enhancement Plan Final Report of Researc H

    Snoqualmie River Game Fish Enhancement Plan Final Report of Researc H

    Snoqualmie River Game Fish Enhancement Plan FINAL REPORT OF RESEARCH Jamie N. Thompson, Jennifer L. Whitney, Robert E. Lamb Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife November 2011 Snoqualmie River Game Fish Enhancement Plan FINAL REPORT OF RESEARCH Jamie N. Thompson1, Jennifer L. Whitney2, Robert E. Lamb3 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife http://wdfw.wa.gov 1 School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington (current) 2, 3 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 4, Mill Creek i Snoqualmie River Game Fish Enhancement Plan Snoqualmie River Game Fish Enhancement Plan: Final Report of Research Submitted to Puget Sound Energy in partial fulfillment of the Snoqualmie River Game Fish Enhancement Plan SNOQUALMIE FALLS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC No. 2493 License Article 413 Prepared by Jamie N. Thompson Jennifer L. Whitney Robert E. Lamb Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4, Mill Creek, Washington November 2011 All photos throughout this document Courtesy of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Front Cover: Upper Middle Fork Snoqualmie River near Goldmyer Hot Springs Back Cover: Coastal cutthroat trout, Upper Middle Fork Snoqualmie River ii Contents List of Figures v List of Tables viii Acknowledgments x 1. Introduction 1 2. Research OBJECTIVes 2 Phase 1: Literature Review and Study Plan 2 Phase 2: Field Studies 2 Phase 3: Programmatic Implementation 2 3. Study Area 3 Upper Snoqualmie River Watershed 3 Natural history 4 Fish species 4 Study design 5 North Fork Snoqualmie River 7 Middle Fork Snoqualmie River 11 South Fork Snoqualmie River 12 Mainstem Snoqualmie River 13 4.
  • Historic and Scenic Corridors Project

    Historic and Scenic Corridors Project

    Historic and Scenic Corridors Project Final Report Front cover image: West side road along Snoqualmie Valley near Vincent (now West Snoqualmie Valley Road), looking north, n.d. Courtesy of King County Archives Back cover image: West Snoqualmie Valley Road near Vincent, looking north, 2009. Photo by Ned Ahrens, King County Historic and Scenic Corridors Project Final Report Prepared for King County in collaboration with 4Culture For more information, please call King County Road Services Division at 206-296-6590 or visit our Web site at www.kingcounty.gov/roads printed on recycled paper Acknowledgements Department of Transportation Harold S. Taniguchi, Director Road Services Division Linda Dougherty, Division Director Jennifer Lindwall, Capital Improvement Program and Planning Section Manager Jay Osborne, Acting Capital Improvement Program and Planning Section Manager This project is a collaboration between the King County Road Services Divison, King County Historic Preservation Program and 4Culture. Funding is provided by a grant from the Federal Transportation Enhancement Program. Project Team Margo Christianson, Road Services Division Ruth Harvey, Road Services Division Julie Koler, Historic Preservation Program Flo Lentz, 4Culture Brandi Link, 4Culture Fennelle Miller, FDM Consultants Tom Minichillo, Road Services Division Charlie Sundberg, Historic Preservation Program Katelyn Wright, University of Washington Intern Thank you to ENTRIX for contributions to Chapter IV. Photos by Brandi Link unless otherwise noted. Alternative Formats