DOCSLIB.ORG

Wiser Lake Creek-Nooksack River Watershed

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wiser Lake Creek-Nooksack River Watershed NRCS National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI) Watershed Assessment: Wiser Lake Creek-Nooksack River Watershed Prepared By: Whatcom Conservation District Lynden, WA December 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 2 Tables and Figures .......................................................................................................................... 4 Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 6 1. Background and Purpose ..................................................................................................... 7 Background ...................................................................................................................... 7 Location of Watershed Assessment Area ......................................................................... 8 Sub-basins of Wiser Watershed ............................................................................................... 9 Special Districts ....................................................................................................................... 9 Water Quality Resource Concerns ................................................................................. 11 Washington State Surface Water Quality Criteria ................................................................. 11 303d Assessed Waters ........................................................................................................... 11 Lower Nooksack River Basin Bacteria TMDL ..................................................................... 12 Opportunities and Goals for Water Quality ................................................................... 12 NRCS’s Partnership in Reaching Goals ......................................................................... 13 2. Watershed Characterization ............................................................................................... 14 Watershed Location ........................................................................................................ 14 Local Climate Overview ................................................................................................ 14 Physical Characterization of Watershed Area ................................................................ 15 Hydrologic Features .............................................................................................................. 15 FEMA Flood Zones ............................................................................................................... 17 Soils ....................................................................................................................................... 17 Digital Elevation Model ........................................................................................................ 17 Land Cover and Use ....................................................................................................... 20 Land Use Characterization .................................................................................................... 20 Septic System Locations and Compliance Classification ...................................................... 23 Livestock Surveys.................................................................................................................. 23 Socioeconomic and Demographic Characterization of Watershed ................................ 25 3. Hydrologic and water quality characterization .................................................................. 27 Available Water Quality Data and Resources ................................................................ 27 Watershed Hydrology .................................................................................................... 27 Gauging Stations.................................................................................................................... 27 Stream Flow Analysis ............................................................................................................ 28 Relative contribution of the Wiser Watershed to the Lower Nooksack River ...................... 28 Seasonality of Water Quantity ............................................................................................... 28 2 Precipitation-Runoff Budget.................................................................................................. 29 Groundwater Recharge Potential ........................................................................................... 29 Irrigation in the Wiser Watershed .................................................................................. 30 Current Water Quality Conditions ................................................................................. 30 Pathogen Monitoring (Whatcom Clean Water Program) ...................................................... 30 Nitrogen and Phosphorus ...................................................................................................... 35 Sediment ................................................................................................................................ 35 4. Resource Analysis Assessment .......................................................................................... 36 Overview of Watershed Assessment Model .................................................................. 36 Objective ................................................................................................................................ 36 Spatial Modeling Approach ................................................................................................... 37 Critical Source Areas Identified ..................................................................................... 38 Treatments and Opportunities ........................................................................................ 42 Conservation Management Practices ..................................................................................... 42 Assessment of Management Scenarios .................................................................................. 42 5. Summary and Recommendations ...................................................................................... 44 Watershed Assessment Summary .................................................................................. 44 Practice Implementation Recommendations .................................................................. 44 Effectiveness Monitoring ............................................................................................... 44 Effectiveness Monitoring of Watershed Plan ........................................................................ 44 Conservation Practice Implementation Monitoring .............................................................. 45 Conservation Practice Monitoring ......................................................................................... 45 Conservation Planning ........................................................................................................... 46 Water Quality Monitoring ..................................................................................................... 46 Tracking Data Metrics and Trends over Time ....................................................................... 47 NEPA Concerns ............................................................................................................. 47 6. Outreach ............................................................................................................................. 49 Outreach Plan Goals and Objectives .............................................................................. 49 Background Analysis for Audience Selection ............................................................... 49 Primary Livestock Types in Watershed................................................................................. 49 Primary Land Use Types in Watershed ................................................................................. 49 Target Audience Prioritization ....................................................................................... 50 Outreach Strategy by Audience Type ............................................................................ 52 NRCS Outreach Barriers and Recommendations .......................................................... 55 Evaluation of NRCS Program Impact and Adaptive Management ................................ 56 Partners in Outreach ....................................................................................................... 57 3 Agricultural Audience Focus ................................................................................................. 57 Non-Agricultural or General Audience Focus ....................................................................... 58 7. References .......................................................................................................................... 60 8. Local Contacts ................................................................................................................... 62 9. Appendix ............................................................................................................................ 63 TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. Sub-basins of Wiser Watershed by area. .........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Nooksack River: Floodplains That Work Phase 1
    The Nooksack River: Floodplains That Work Phase 1 PROJECT BENEFITS Protect critical infrastructure: 2 water treatment plants 2 wastewater treatment plants 1 elementary school Reduce risk of loss of life & property: Building a resilient floodplain Mitigate debris flows Restore alluvial fan functions A community-driven approach to floodplain management Protect rural communities The Nooksack River: Floodplains That Work project uses an integrated approach to Protect valuable agricultural reduce flood hazards, improve habitat, and increase the resiliency of our rural lands communities and agriculture. The Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District is leading this effort, bringing diverse interests together to find solutions that work for Improve critical habitat: the community and achieve project goals. This project builds on improved relationships and trust built among multiple interests through the Lower Nooksack Restore riparian vegetation River Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan update process. Improve fish passage Project Components: Support salmon &Puget Ferndale Levee Improvement – Preliminary Design: reduce flood hazards Sound recovery for the City of Ferndale water and wastewater treatment plants and the Public Utility District No. 1 of Whatcom County water treatment facility; re-establish PROJECT PARTNERS riparian vegetation; improve recreational opportunities City of Ferndale Lynden Levee Improvement – Final Design and Construction: reduce flood hazards for the City of Lynden wastewater treatment plant, 500
    [Show full text]
  • The Lummi Nation -- WRIA 1 (Mountains to the Sea)
    The Lummi Nation -- WRIA 1 (Mountains to the Sea) WRIA 1 is 1410 square miles in area: 832 square miles of WRIA 1 is in the Nooksack River watershed, the largest single watershed in the WRIA. Forty-nine square miles of the Nooksack watershed is in Canada. It has three main forks: the North, Middle, and South that Bellingham originate in the steep high-elevation headwaters of the North Cascades and flow westerly descending into flats of the Puget lowlands.The North and Middle Forks are glacial rivers and originate from Mount Baker. The South Fork is a snow/rain fed river and Watersheds of originates from the non-glaciated slope of theTwin Sisters peaks. The WRIA 01 Middle Fork flows into the North Fork upstream of where the North Fork confluences with the South Fork to form the mainstem Nooksack River. The mainstem then flows as a low-gradient, low-elevation river until discharging through the Lummi Nation and into Bellingham Bay. Historically, the Nooksack River alternated between discharging into Bellingham Bay, and flowing through the Lummi River and discharging into Lummi Bay (Collins and Sheikh 2002). The Nooksack River has five anadromous salmon species: pink, chum , Chinook , coho, sockeye; and three anadromous trout: steelhead, cutthroat and bull trout (Williams et al. 1975; Cutler et al. 2003). Drayton Blaine Harbor Whatcom County Lynden Land Zoning Everson Birch Bay Nooksack R. Urban Growth Area 4% of total land use NF Nooksack R. Agriculture Ferndale 8% of total land use Rural Residential Bellingham Deming 12% of total land use Lummi Lummi R.
    [Show full text]
  • Nooksack Basin
    NOOKSACK BASIN Water Resource Inventory Area 01 The Nooksack River system has three principal forks, Dakota and California creeks drain into Drayton Harbor at each originating in the high slopes of the Cascade Moun­ Blaine, Washington, while Terrell Creek enters Birch Bay at tains. Flowing westward through mostly steep, heavily for­ the community of Birch Bay. ested terrain, the North and Middle forks converge on a re­ Five relatively small drainages flow directly into Bel­ latively broad valley floor about 5 miles upstream from the lingham Bay. From north to south these include Silver, community of Deming, forming the mainstem Nooksack Squalicum, Whatcom, Padden, and Chuckanut creeks, all River. Much of the South Fork drainage is through moun­ flowing in a generally westerly direction. Silver and Chuck­ tainous and moderately forested terrain; however, in its anut are predominantly surface runoff streams, while Squali­ lower reaches the stream flows through a broad, gently cum, Whatcom, and Padden have their headwaters in lakes. sloping valley to its confluence with the mainstem Nooksack Each of these streams have slight to moderate gradients and about 1.5 miles above Deming. Below this point the main­ each travels some distance through semi-residential or resi­ stem meanders northwest, west, and then south where it dential areas. Squalicum, Whatcom, and Padden creeks enter enters Bellingham Bay about 4 miles northwest of Bel­ the bay after passing through industrial areas within the city lingham. There are 654 rivers and streams in the Nooksack limits of Bellingham. drainage which provide 1,325 linear miles of stream in the Oyster Creek, the southernmost of the basin's smaller independent drainages, mainstem Nooksack, and its tribu­ drainages, originates in Lost Lake on Chuckanut Mountain.
    [Show full text]
  • Mitigating Total Flood Impacts Through Intentional Flooding in Agricultural Land Along the Lower Nooksack River
    Mitigating Total Flood Impacts through Intentional Flooding in Agricultural Land along the Lower Nooksack River Alex Sundell, Sam Ripley, Zhuoran Duan, & Francesca White Association of State Floodplain Managers Conference 2014 Abstract: The purpose of this study is to examine the flooding patterns within the Nooksack River Basin in Whatcom County, Washington, in order to design and recommend changes to flood management strategies. Focusing on Reach 2 and Reach 3, defined by the Lower Nooksack River Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan, flooding occurs predominantly in agricultural land, as well as urban land within portions of Ferndale. In order to mitigate this flooding, the proposed strategy consists of intentionally flooding designated areas and storing floodwaters. By analyzing the example hydrograph of the November 30th, 1995 flood event, we observe approximately 9,200 cfs exceeded the flood flow corresponding to Ferndale’s levee gauge height of 19 feet. In order to accommodate and redistribute these flows to prevent damage downstream, a conceptual storage layout is presented as an example of how storage areas could be chosen. Approximately 4,670 acre-feet of land could be used to store floodwaters in the conceptual storage scenario. This study recognizes that peak flow reduction depends on the capacity of chosen storage areas, and a more detailed study would be required to determine the most feasible layout. This strategy offers benefits such as relief of levee breaching, stored water that could be used during drier seasons, reduced risk of crop loss, and replenishment of nutrients and groundwater to surrounding aquifers. Funding for infrastructure modifications can come from shifting City of Ferndale flood capital investment upstream, which will still mitigate downstream by reducing total flow.
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2020 Update
    LUMMI NATION MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2020 UPDATE Prepared For: Lummi Indian Business Council (LIBC) Funded By: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Performance Partnership Grant (Grant No. BG-01J57901-0) Prepared By: Water Resources Division Lummi Natural Resources Department Contributors: Kara Kuhlman CFM, Water Resources Manager Andy Ross, LG, LHg, CFM, Water Resources Specialist III/Hydrologist Gerald Gabrisch GISP, GIS Manager Adopted by the Lummi Indian Business Council: September 15, 2020 Approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency: October 1, 2020 This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under Assistance Agreement BG-01J57901-0 to the Lummi Nation. 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. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 9 1.1. Goals and Objectives .....................................................................................................10 1.2. Sections .........................................................................................................................11 2. Planning Process ...............................................................................................................13 2.1. Plan Preparation ............................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • Nooksack River Estuary Habitat Assessment
    Nooksack River Estuary Habitat Assessment Report for: Salmon Recovery Funding Board Office of the Interagency Committee 111 Washington Street SE P.O. Box 40917 Olympia, Washington 98504-0917 Report by: Melissa Brown, Michael Maudlin, and Jim Hansen Lummi Nation Natural Resources Department 2616 Kwina Road Bellingham, Washington 98226 IAC #01-1340N April 30, 2005 Acknowledgments This research and report were funded by a grant from the Washington State Salmon Recovery Board (SRFB). The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) supplemented grant monies for the completion of the report. Lummi Indian Nation’s Natural Resources Department (LNR) staff provided technical assistance and oversight. Field technicians Mike Williams, William Revey Jr., Frank Lawrence III, Lisa Phair, Anthony DeCoteau, Dewey Solomon Jr., Alphonso Washington, Jeremy Miller, and Terry Green, with fisheries biologists Mike MacKay, Adam Pfundt, and Gregg Dunphy, collected water quality and fish use data from estuarine and nearshore sites. Wetland scientist Lee First conducted vegetation surveys in the Lummi and Bellingham Bay deltas. GIS technician Victor Johnson orthorectified historic aerial photography for interpretation and GIS analysis. GIS coordinator Ann Stark provided guidance in the creation of geodatabases resulting from GIS analysis. Together, Victor and Ann assisted the authors in producing many of the GIS layers used for habitat mapping. Alan Chapman, ESA coordinator, and Randy Kinley Sr., ESA policy analyst, assisted the final editing of the report. Local historian Tim Wahl provided valuable assistance in compiling maps, photos, and reports detailing the function of the Nooksack estuary over time. Local consultant Chris Fairbanks provided peer review for editing. Huxley College of the Environment at Western Washington University and the Northwest Indian College provided intern assistance collecting macroinvertebrates in the field, sorting them in the lab, and describing their statistics.
    [Show full text]
  • Whatcom County Resources Nooksack River Basin, Water
    Washington Native Plant Society, Native Plant Stewardship Program Whatcom County Resources Nooksack River Basin, Water Resources Inventory Area (WRIA) 1 The Nooksack River Basin, WRIA1, encompasses nearly all of western Whatcom County and extends into neighboring British Columbia (a small proportion of WRIA1 is in Skagit County). North Cascades Audubon Society. 2017. Whatcom Land Trust Bird Survey Summary: 2017. http://www.northcascadesaudubon.org/whatcom-land-trust-bird-survey-summary-2017/ Smith, C.J. 2002. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors in WRIA 1, the Nooksack Subbasin. WRIA 1 Technical Advisory Group for Habitat Limiting Factors. http://www.whatcomcounty.us/DocumentCenter/View/4765 Water Resources Inventory Area 1 Watershed Management Board. 2005. WRIA 1 Salmonid Recovery Plan. http://salmonwria1.org/webfm_send/23 Water Resources Inventory Area 1. 2017. Restoring the River: Building Salmon Habitat on the Nooksack River. Video (00:06: 16). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T57IpeWcPz0 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Nooksack River Delta Tentatively Selected Plan. http://www.pugetsoundnearshore.org/factsheets/Nooksack_TSP.pdf Stimpson Reserve Whatcom Land Trust. No date. Stimpson Family Nature Reserve. http://www.whatcomlandtrust.org/land-trust/stimpson-family-nature-preserve/ Rich, R. 2015. Stimpson Family Nature Reserve. This short article describes observations of the Preserve’s 15th anniversary, a community appreciation. http://www.whatcomlandtrust.org/where-we-work/stimpson-family-reserve/ Washington Native Plant Society, Native Plant Stewardship Program Whatcom County Resources Nooksack & Lummi Rivers Carraba, E. 2014. Encouraging resiliency on the South Fork. The Steward 22. Whatcom Land trust. http://www.whatcomlandtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/46019-WLT- STEWARDJune_WEB.pdf Lummi Nation.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Lynden Nooksack River Managed Aquifer Recharge
    City of Lynden Nooksack River Managed Aquifer Recharge Jay Chennault, L.Hg., P.E. Chris Allen, L.Hg. Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. [email protected] [email protected] Senior Associate Hydrogeologist/ Engineer Associate Hydrogeologist Dale Buys, P.E. Chuck Lindsay L.Hg. Reichhardt & Ebe Engineering, Inc. Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. [email protected] [email protected] Principal Engineer Senior Principal Hydrogeologist City of Lynden Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) in Washington City of Lynden Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) in Washington Walla Walla Area – Johnson Creek Ecology Ecology City of Lynden Project Objective Divert water to MAR facility Identify (through feasibility studies), permit, construct, and operate managed aquifer recharge (MAR) facilities that will re-time winter peak flows, when minimum instream flows are exceeded, to increase summer and fall baseflow in the Nooksack River for habitat enhancement, stream flow augmentation, and water right Diverted water returns mitigation purposes. to river near MAR facility City of Lynden Project General Concept The MAR sites will be located where infiltrated water will have a groundwater time of travel back to the river of approximately 5 to 6 months. INTAKE FACILITY STATIC GROUNDWATER CONDITION City of Lynden Project General Concept INTAKE FACILITY STATIC GROUNDWATER CONDITION City of Lynden Project General Concept The groundwater volume produced by infiltration at the MAR facility will re-enter, and fully benefit, the river until a portion of the water is diverted to the City of Lynden at RM 17.5 INTAKE FACILITY STATIC GROUNDWATER CONDITION City of Lynden Project General Concept : Facility Options River Intake Structure Horizontal/Radial Collector Well Horizontal Well Credit: theconstructor.org Credit: Hydro Group, Ranney Division Credit: Turfdogs City of Lynden Project General Concept : Facility Options • South Fork Nooksack • Flow Limited • Habitat • Temperature TMDL • Project Construction • Tree/Vegetation Removal • Compatibility with Land Use (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • NOOKSACK RIVER Geographic Response Plan (NOOR-GRP) NOOKSACK RIVER GRP JUNE 2017
    Northwest Area Committee JUNE 2017 NOOKSACK RIVER Geographic Response Plan (NOOR-GRP) NOOKSACK RIVER GRP JUNE 2017 NOOKSACK RIVER Geographic Response Plan (NOOR-GRP) June 2017 2 NOOKSACK RIVER GRP JUNE 2017 Spill Response Contact Sheet Required Notifications for Oil Spills & Hazardous Substance Releases Federal Notification - National Response Center (800) 424-8802* State Notification - Washington Emergency Management Division (800) 258-5990* - Other Contact Numbers - U.S. Coast Guard Washington State Sector Puget Sound (206) 217-6200 Dept Archaeology & Historic Preservation (360) 586-3065 - Emergency / Watchstander (206) 217-6001* Dept of Ecology - Command Center (206) 217-6002* - Headquarters (Lacey) (360) 407-6000 - Incident Management (206) 217-6214 - Northwest Regional Office (Bellevue) (425) 649-7000 Station Bellingham (360) 734-1692 - Bellingham Field Office (360) 715-5200 13th Coast Guard District (800) 982-8813 Dept of Fish and Wildlife (360) 902-2200 National Strike Force (252) 331-6000 - Emergency HPA Assistance (360) 902-2537* - Pacific Strike Team (415) 883-3311 - Oil Spill Team (360) 534-8233* Dept of Health (800) 525-0127 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Drinking Water (800) 521-0323 Region 10 – Spill Response (206) 553-1263* - Shellfish Growing Areas (360) 789-8962 - Washington Ops Office (360) 753-9437 Dept of Natural Resources (360) 902-1064 - RCRA / CERCLA Hotline (800) 424-9346 - After normal business hours (360) 556-3921 - Public Affairs (206) 553-1203 Dept of Transportation (360) 705-7000 State Parks & Recreation Commission (360) 902-8613 National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration State Patrol - District 7 (360) 654-1204* Scientific Support Coordinator (206) 526-6829 Weather (NWS Seattle) (206) 526-6087 Tribal Contacts Lummi Nation (360) 312-2000 Other Federal Agencies Nooksack Indian Tribe (360) 592-5176 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Nooksack River Transboundary Collaboration Group: 2018-2019
    Nooksack River Transboundary Technical Collaboration Group 2018-2019 Annual Report Final Draft July 2019 Executive Summary The Nooksack River watershed spans part of the border between British Columbia (BC) and the State of Washington (WA). In August 2018, the international, multi-agency Nooksack River Transboundary Technical Collaboration Group (TCG) was established to implement a three-year work plan to reduce fecal bacteria concentrations in the Nooksack River watershed. As a work plan deliverable, the TCG produced this annual report summarizing first year project activities. During the past year, BC and WA sampled surface water throughout the Nooksack watershed, including sites located at the international border. Analysis of BC E. coli data shows that the 2018 wet season geometric means met the BC Primary Recreation guideline throughout the BC portion of the watershed. For four waterways spanning the international border, BC and WA data analysis noted higher fecal coliform concentrations in Cave and Bertrand Creeks as compared to Pepin and Fishtrap Creeks. Higher fecal coliform and E. coli concentrations typically take place during the wet season when soils are saturated or following significant rainfall events. While the Bertrand Creek’s annual fecal coliform geometric mean increased due to high bacteria counts captured in winter 2018-2019, data trends in WA’s lower Fishtrap and Bertrand Creeks and in the Nooksack River mainstem show a decline in longer term fecal coliform concentrations since 2015. The Nooksack River is the largest freshwater source to Portage Bay and to the Lummi Nation’s Portage Bay shellfish growing area. From 2014-2016, portions of the Portage Bay growing area experienced a series of harvest restrictions due to poor water quality conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Structure of the Western and Southern Margins of Twin Sisters Mountain, North Cascades, Washington
    Western Washington University Western CEDAR WWU Graduate School Collection WWU Graduate and Undergraduate Scholarship Spring 1981 Geology and Structure of the Western and Southern Margins of Twin Sisters Mountain, North Cascades, Washington Frederic I. Frasse Western Washington University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet Part of the Geology Commons Recommended Citation Frasse, Frederic I., "Geology and Structure of the Western and Southern Margins of Twin Sisters Mountain, North Cascades, Washington" (1981). WWU Graduate School Collection. 639. https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet/639 This Masters Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the WWU Graduate and Undergraduate Scholarship at Western CEDAR. It has been accepted for inclusion in WWU Graduate School Collection by an authorized administrator of Western CEDAR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GEOLOGY AND STRUCTURE OF THE WESTERN AND SOUTHERN MARGINS OF TWIN SISTERS MOUNTAIN, NORTH CASCADES, WASHINGTON A Thesis Presented to The Faculty o£ Western Washington University In Partial Fulfillment ^ Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science by Frederic I. Frasse June, 1981 GEOLOGY AND STRUCTURE OF THE WESTERN AND SOUTHERN MARGINS OF TWIN SISTERS MOUNTAIN, NORTH CASCADES, WASHINGTON by Frederic I. Frasse Accepted in Partial Completion of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science June, 1981 Dean of Graduate School Advisory Committee ABSTRACT Detailed mapping of the Goat Mountain dunite and the western and southern margins of the Twin Sisters dunite indicates that the structural setting of these bodies is dominated by high-angle northwest-trending fault zones. The Goat Mountain dunite overlies rocks of the Chilliwack Group and Yellow Aster Complex as a low- angle, west-dipping slab approximately 2500 feet thick.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Nooksack River Geomorphic Assessment APPENDIX a Geologic
    February 11, 2019 Lower Nooksack River Geomorphic Assessment APPENDIX A Geologic and Geomorphic History Submitted by: Prepared for: Element Solutions Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District 909 Squalicum Way, Ste 111 322 N Commercial Street, Suite 120 Bellingham WA 98225 Bellingham, WA 98225 REPORT SUBMISSION: Element Solutions Paul Pittman LG Appendix A: Geologic and Geomorphic History Executive Summary A late Holocene avulsion of the Nooksack River abandoned the connection between the Nooksack and Fraser Rivers and established a new course down a former glacial outwash channel. The avulsion was a significant disturbance and the residual effects from this event are apparent in today’s geomorphic conditions. The avulsion has influenced modern-day channel morphology, floodplain morphology, and sediment transport processes. As the river continues to evolve post-avulsion, geologic context should be considered in the development of river management strategies so that continued evolutionary trends are incorporated as natural processes uniquely present on the Nooksack River. Geologic Background The North Cascade Range creates the geologic backdrop of the Nooksack River watershed. The watershed covers over 800 square miles, with more than half the drainage area in the steep Cascade Mountains and foothills. The Nooksack River is a gravel bed river throughout most of its total length. Three primary forks of the Nooksack River exit the Cascades Mountains and converge near the western edge of the Cascade foothills near Deming. The North and Middle Fork Nooksack drainages are fed by the glaciers of the west and north flanks of Mount Baker and adjacent peaks. The South Fork Nooksack drains the foothills of the Twin Sisters Mountains and the southwest foothills of Mount Baker.
    [Show full text]