DOCSLIB.ORG

Cultural Resources Report Cover Sheet

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cultural Resources Report Cover Sheet CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT COVER SHEET DAHP Project Number: 2020-04-02572 Author: David Sheldon, M.S. Title of Report: Cultural Survey Report for the Proposed Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory STEM Exploration Center at Hanford near Richland, Benton County, Washington (HCRC#2020-600-004) Date of Report: May 2020 County(ies): Benton Section: 10, 11, 14 Township: 11 North Range: 27 East Quad: Horn Rapids Dam, WA 7.5’ Acres: 25.5 PDF of report submitted (REQUIRED) Yes Historic Property Inventory Forms to be Approved Online? Yes No Archaeological Site(s)/Isolate(s) Found or Amended? Yes No TCP(s) found? Yes No Replace a draft? Yes No Satisfy a DAHP Archaeological Excavation Permit requirement? Yes # No Were Human Remains Found? Yes DAHP Case # No DAHP Archaeological Site #: 45BN2067 • Submission of PDFs is required. • Please be sure that any PDF submitted to DAHP has its cover sheet, figures, graphics, appendices, attachments, correspondence, etc., compiled into one single PDF file. • Please check that the PDF displays correctly when opened. Revised 9-26-2018 Proposed Laser Interferometer Gravitational- Wave Observatory STEM Exploration Center at Hanford near Richland, Benton County, Washington Cultural Survey Report HCRC#2020-600-004 Final May 7, 2020 Prepared for: National Science Foundation Document No. (JETT) Cultural Survey Report HCRC#2020-600-004 Executive Summary The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) is a national facility for gravitational- wave research. LIGO is funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and operated by the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The interferometer in Hanford, Washington (LIGO Hanford) is located on land owned by the United States and administered by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Per its 1993 Memorandum of Understanding with DOE, NSF has a permit to use the site for LIGO. The LIGO Hanford facility is approximately 13 miles northwest of the city of Richland in Benton County. The Observatory is adjacent to Hanford Site Route 10, which connects to State Highway 240 approximately 5 miles to the south. In 2019, Caltech received a grant from the State of Washington to construct a LIGO Science Technology, Engineering and Math Exploration Center (LExC) (the Proposed Action) near Richland, Washington, adjacent to the interferometer. LExC would complement and enhance existing education and public outreach by improving STEM opportunities at LIGO Hanford and by accommodating up to 10,000 visitors per year. Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), NSF has conducted a review of potential environmental impacts of the Proposed Action. NSF is the lead federal agency and will coordinate with DOE in the environmental review process. In accordance with Section 106 of the NHPA, NSF initiated consultation with the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and Area Tribes and provided an Area of Potential Effects (APE) notification. On March 17, 2020, a pedestrian survey was completed to identify historic properties within the APE. Tribal representatives were offered the opportunity to participate in the survey. The pedestrian survey used linear transects spaced at 15-meter intervals across the majority of the APE. Paved areas and one area of steep slope obscured by piled vegetation were not formally surveyed. A single historic site consisting of six fragments of cement irrigation pipe was recorded as historic archaeological site 45BN2067 (temporary site number LIGO20-S-01). While the site is likely to be associated with pre- Hanford-era agriculture, the fragments appear to have been dumped from a nearby roadway. The site was evaluated for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) (54 United States Code Sections 302101–302108) and recommended as ineligible for listing on the NRHP. Pending concurrence from the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation on the eligibility recommendations for site 45BN2067 (temporary site number LIGO20-S-01), Jacobs recommends that the Proposed Action would result in a finding of “No Historic Properties Affected.” FES0414201511TPA ES-1 Cultural Survey Report HCRC#2020-600-004 Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. ES-1 Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... iii 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Credits and Acknowledgements ...................................................................................... 1-1 2. Project Description ..................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 The National Science Foundation ....................................................................... 2-1 2.1.2 Proposed LExC ................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Project Activities and Elements ........................................................................................ 2-1 2.2.1 Vertical and Horizontal Depth of Disturbance ..................................................... 2-2 2.2.2 Borrow and Staging Areas, Cut and Fill, and Excavation for Utilities ................. 2-2 3. Project Background .................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Location and Size of the Survey Area.............................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Project Proponent, Property Owner, Agency, or Compliance Action .............................. 3-1 3.3 Regulatory Background ................................................................................................... 3-1 3.4 Survey Personnel ............................................................................................................. 3-1 3.5 Other Personnel ............................................................................................................... 3-1 3.6 Chain of Circumstances or Events Prompting the Survey ............................................... 3-1 3.7 Location of Inventory Forms and Report ......................................................................... 3-1 3.8 USGS 7.5 Minute Quad Map ........................................................................................... 3-1 4. Environmental Setting ................................................................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Geomorphology ................................................................................................................ 4-2 4.2 Cultural Setting ................................................................................................................. 4-3 4.2.1 Columbia Plateau/Mid-Columbia Basin Pre-Contact Cultural Sequence ........... 4-3 4.2.2 Ethnographic Period ........................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.3 Euro-American Period ......................................................................................... 4-5 4.2.4 Manhattan Project/Cold War Era ........................................................................ 4-6 5. Literature Review ........................................................................................................................ 5-1 5.1 Existing and Background Data ......................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Cultural Resources Reports in the Study Area ................................................................ 5-1 5.3 Previously Documented Sites within the Study Area ....................................................... 5-1 5.4 Historic Map Review ........................................................................................................ 5-1 5.4.1 Built Environment ................................................................................................ 5-2 5.5 Aerial Imagery Review ..................................................................................................... 5-2 6. Research Design ......................................................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Objectives and Expectations ............................................................................................ 6-1 6.1.1 Research Goals and Questions .......................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Field and Laboratory Methodology .................................................................................. 6-2 6.2.1 Proposed Archaeological Survey Methods ......................................................... 6-2 6.2.2 Standing Structure Inventory Method ................................................................. 6-2 6.2.3 Geoarchaeological Techniques for Assessing the Depositional Environment ... 6-2 6.2.4 Methods for Identifying Traditional Cultural Properties ......................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Open File Report
    RECONNAISSANCE SURFICIAL GEOLOGIC MAPPING OF THE LATE CENOZOIC SEDIMENTS OF THE COLUMBIA BASIN, WASHINGTON by James G. Rigby and Kurt Othberg with contributions from Newell Campbell Larry Hanson Eugene Kiver Dale Stradling Gary Webster Open File Report 79-3 September 1979 State of Washington Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources Olympia, Washington CONTENTS Introduction Objectives Study Area Regional Setting 1 Mapping Procedure 4 Sample Collection 8 Description of Map Units 8 Pre-Miocene Rocks 8 Columbia River Basalt, Yakima Basalt Subgroup 9 Ellensburg Formation 9 Gravels of the Ancestral Columbia River 13 Ringold Formation 15 Thorp Gravel 17 Gravel of Terrace Remnants 19 Tieton Andesite 23 Palouse Formation and Other Loess Deposits 23 Glacial Deposits 25 Catastrophic Flood Deposits 28 Background and previous work 30 Description and interpretation of flood deposits 35 Distinctive geomorphic features 38 Terraces and other features of undetermined origin 40 Post-Pleistocene Deposits 43 Landslide Deposits 44 Alluvium 45 Alluvial Fan Deposits 45 Older Alluvial Fan Deposits 45 Colluvium 46 Sand Dunes 46 Mirna Mounds and Other Periglacial(?) Patterned Ground 47 Structural Geology 48 Southwest Quadrant 48 Toppenish Ridge 49 Ah tanum Ridge 52 Horse Heaven Hills 52 East Selah Fault 53 Northern Saddle Mountains and Smyrna Bench 54 Selah Butte Area 57 Miscellaneous Areas 58 Northwest Quadrant 58 Kittitas Valley 58 Beebe Terrace Disturbance 59 Winesap Lineament 60 Northeast Quadrant 60 Southeast Quadrant 61 Recommendations 62 Stratigraphy 62 Structure 63 Summary 64 References Cited 66 Appendix A - Tephrochronology and identification of collected datable materials 82 Appendix B - Description of field mapping units 88 Northeast Quadrant 89 Northwest Quadrant 90 Southwest Quadrant 91 Southeast Quadrant 92 ii ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Horse Heaven Hills, OR135-02
    Year 2009 Inventory Unit Number/Name: Horse Heaven Hills, OR135-02 FORM I DOCUMENTATION OF BLM WILDERNESS INVENTORY FINDINGS ON RECORD: 1. Is there existing BLM wilderness inventory information on all or part of this area? No X (Go to Form 2) Yes (if more than one unit is within the area, list the names/numbers ofthose units.): a) Inventory Source:--------­ b) Inventory Unit Name(s)INumber(s): _________ c) Map Name(s)INumber(s):_________ d) BLM District(s)/Field Office(s): ________ 2. BLM Inventory Findings on Record: Existing inventory information regarding wilderness characteristics (if more than one BLM inventory unit is associated with the area, list each unit and answer each question individually for each inventory unit): 1 Existing inventory information regarding wilderness characteristics : Inventory Source: ______________ Unit#/ Size Natural Outstanding Outstanding Supplemental Name (historic Condition? Solitude? Primitive & Values? acres) YIN YIN Unconfined YIN Recreation? YIN FORM2 Use additional pages as necessary DOCUMENTATION OF CURRENT WILDERNESS INVENTORY CONDITIONS a. Unit Number/Name: Horse Heaven Hills, OR135-02 (1) Is the unit of sufficient size? Yes ____ No_~x~-- The lands are approximately 6,557 acres of public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management, Spokane District, Border Field Office. The lands are located in Benton County, Washington and are approximately 1 mile south ofthe community of Benton City. The public lands are adjacent to several small parcels of lands owned by the State of Washington. The remainder of the boundary is private land parcels. There are no private lands in-holdings. The lands are broken in smaller subunits by the roads and the powerline.
    [Show full text]
  • Periodically Spaced Anticlines of the Columbia Plateau
    Geological Society of America Special Paper 239 1989 Periodically spaced anticlines of the Columbia Plateau Thomas R. Watters Center for Earth and Planetary Studies, National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. 20560 ABSTRACT Deformation of the continental flood-basalt in the westernmost portion of the Columbia Plateau has resulted in regularly spaced anticlinal ridges. The periodic nature of the anticlines is characterized by dividing the Yakima fold belt into three domains on the basis of spacings and orientations: (1) the northern domain, made up of the eastern segments of Umtanum Ridge, the Saddle Mountains, and the Frenchman Hills; (2) the central domain, made up of segments of Rattlesnake Ridge, the eastern segments of Horse Heaven Hills, Yakima Ridge, the western segments of Umtanum Ridge, Cleman Mountain, Bethel Ridge, and Manastash Ridge; and (3) the southern domain, made up of Gordon Ridge, the Columbia Hills, the western segment of Horse Heaven Hills, Toppenish Ridge, and Ahtanum Ridge. The northern, central, and southern domains have mean spacings of 19.6,11.6, and 27.6 km, respectively, with a total range of 4 to 36 km and a mean of 20.4 km (n = 203). The basalts are modeled as a multilayer of thin linear elastic plates with frictionless contacts, resting on a mechanically weak elastic substrate of finite thickness, that has buckled at a critical wavelength of folding. Free slip between layers is assumed, based on the presence of thin sedimentary interbeds in the Grande Ronde Basalt separating groups of flows with an average thickness of roughly 280 m.
    [Show full text]
  • Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I
    Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I November 4 - 7, 2002 Richland, WA FINAL REPORT A Collaborative Workshop: United States Fish & Wildlife Service The Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (SSC/IUCN) Hanford Reach National Monument 1 Planning Workshop I, November 2002 A contribution of the IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group in collaboration with the United States Fish & Wildlife Service. CBSG. 2002. Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I. FINAL REPORT. IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group: Apple Valley, MN. 2 Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I, November 2002 Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I November 4-7, 2002 Richland, WA TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1. Executive Summary 1 A. Introduction and Workshop Process B. Draft Vision C. Draft Goals 2. Understanding the Past 11 A. Personal, Local and National Timelines B. Timeline Summary Reports 3. Focus on the Present 31 A. Prouds and Sorries 4. Exploring the Future 39 A. An Ideal Future for Hanford Reach National Monument B. Goals Appendix I: Plenary Notes 67 Appendix II: Participant Introduction questions 79 Appendix III: List of Participants 87 Appendix IV: Workshop Invitation and Invitation List 93 Appendix V: About CBSG 103 Hanford Reach National Monument 3 Planning Workshop I, November 2002 4 Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I, November 2002 Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I November 4-7, 2002 Richland, WA Section 1 Executive Summary Hanford Reach National Monument 5 Planning Workshop I, November 2002 6 Hanford Reach National Monument Planning Workshop I, November 2002 Executive Summary A. Introduction and Workshop Process Introduction to Comprehensive Conservation Planning This workshop is the first of three designed to contribute to the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) of Hanford Reach National Monument.
    [Show full text]
  • Excerpt from the Yakima Nation/Cleanup of Hanford
    DOE Indian Policy and Treaty Obligations Excerpt from The Yakama Nation and the Cleanup of Hanford: Contested Meanings of Environmental Remediation written by Daniel A. Bush (2014) http://nativecases.evergreen.edu/collection/cases/the-yakama-nation-and-the-cleanup- of-hanford-contested-meanings-of-environmental-remediation Map: Yakama Reservation and lands ceded by the Yakama in the 1855 treaty (Klickitat Library Images, 2014) According to the DOE’s Tribal Program, “the involvement [of] Native American Tribes at Hanford is guided by DOE's American Indian Policy [which] states that it is the trust responsibility of the United States to protect tribal sovereignty and self-determination, tribal lands, assets, resources, and treaty and other federal recognized and reserved rights” (Department of Energy (DOE) Tribal Program, 2014). Therefore, where Native Americans are concerned it would seem that the DOE has a legal obligation to restore the Hanford site to its pre-nuclear state. It could also be argued that Native tribes have their own trust responsibility for preservation of natural resources on both tribal lands and those areas of traditional use. Moreover, the web of responsibilities associated with the Hanford cleanup are complicated by potential liabilities, as Native peoples have a right to “damages for injuries which occur to natural resources as a result of hazardous waste release” (Bauer, 1994). Thus, Native Americans who traditionally used the affected area have also been involved in the cleanup of Hanford. CERCLA itself named Native tribes as having a vested interest in Superfund sites such as Hanford. The DOE agrees that the Nez Perce Tribe, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Indian Nation, and Wanapum native peoples be regularly consulted throughout the cleanup process and that all have rights to resources in the 1 Hanford region.
    [Show full text]
  • HHH Appraisal Study Phasei
    PHASE 1 REPORT: HORSE HEAVEN WATER STORAGE APPRAISAL ASSESSMENT WRIA 31 Prepared for: WRIA 31 Planning and Advisory Committee Project No. 090045-009-01 August 15, 2012 Final Funded by Ecology Grant No. G1100215 + Prepared in collaboration with e a r t h w a t e r pect CONSULTING e a r t h + w a t e r Aspect Consulting, LLC 401 2nd Avenue S. Suite 201 Seattle, WA 98104 206.328.7443 www.aspectconsulting.com ASPECT CONSULTING Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................... ES-1 1 Introduction .............................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Phased Appraisal Approach .......................................................................1-2 1.2 Organization of Phase 1 Report .................................................................1-3 2 Assessment of Pumped Storage Potential (Alder and Switzler Reservoirs) ................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Description of Pumped Storage .................................................................2-1 2.2 Hydroelectric Potential ................................................................................2-2 2.2.1 Alder Reservoir .................................................................................. 2-3 2.2.2 Switzler Reservoir .............................................................................. 2-3 2.2.3 Potential Annual Power Production ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Yakima Valley Sr Appellation 823 Exit 26 Selah
    A B C D E F G H I J 1 1 SR WINERIES AND VINEYARDS OF THE 821 WASHINGTON Seattle Harrison 150 miles YAKIMA VALLEY SR APPELLATION 823 EXIT 26 SELAH N. Wenas YAKIMA VALLEY 82 YAKIMA Yakima Valley Wineries & Vineyards: Wilridge Selah Rd WINE COMMUNITY Vineyard, US EXIT Ackley Rd Gilbert EXIT 30 Yakima Wine Community Wineries Winery 12 Cellars WINERY LOCATION KEY 2 & Distillery W Powerhouse Rd EXIT 31 2 Zillah Wine Community Wineries 14 Hands Winery...........................G6 Dineen Vineyards............................ C4 Maison de Padgett Winery ............. C4 Tapteil Vineyard Winery...................I5 Naches Heights Rd AntoLin Wine Yakima Valley N 40th N Cellars Mon–Fri, 8:30a–5:00p Prosser Wine Community Wineries Airfield Estates.................................F6 Domanico Cellars .................. G6 & F6 Masset Winery.................................B3 Terra Blanca Winery.........................I5 2nd St 2nd Ehler Rd Ehler AntoLin Cellars............................... A2 Fortuity Cellars ................................F6 Milbrandt Vineyards.........................F6 Thurston Wolfe Winery..................F6 EXIT 33 Wilridge Summitview Yakima Red Mountain & Vicinity Wine Community Wineries Barrel Springs Winery.....................F5 Gilbert Cellars........................A2 & A3 Owen Roe .......................................B3 Treveri Sparkling Cellars..................B3 Vineyard Southard 9th St 9th 2nd Ave 2nd Chandler Reach Vineyards..............H6 Hightower Cellars.............................I5 Paradisos del Sol............................
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis, "Structure and Evolution of the Horse Heaven Hills in South
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Michael Curtis Hagood for the Master of Science in Geology presented February 21, 1985. Title: Structure-and Evolution of the Horse Heaven Hills in South-Central Washington. APPROVED BY MEMBERS OF THE THESIS COMMITTEE: Marvin H. Beeson, Chairman Michael L. Cummings Gilbert T. Benson Stephen P. Reidel The Horse Heaven Hills uplift in south-central Washington con- sists of distinct northwest and northeast trends which merge in the lower Yakima Valley. The northwest trend is adjacent to and parallels the Rattlesnake-Wallula alignment (RAW; a part of the Olympic-Wallowa lineament). The northwest trend and northeast trend consist of aligned or en echelon anticlines and monoclines whose axes are gener- ally oriented in the direction of the trend. At the intersection, La 2 folds in the northeast trend plunge onto and are terminated by folds of the northwest trend. The crest of the Horse Heaven Hills uplift within both trends is composed of a series of asymmetric, north vergent, eroded, usually double-hinged anticlines or monoclines. Some of these "major" anti- clines and monoclines are paralleled to the immediate north by lower- relief anticlines or monoclines. All anticlines approach monoclines in geometry and often change to a monoclinal geometry along their length. In both trends, reverse faults commonly parallel the axes of folds within the tightly folded hinge zones. Tear faults cut across the northern limbs of the anticlines and monoclines and are coincident with marked changes in the wavelength of a fold or a change in the trend of a fold. Layer-parallel faults commonly exist along steeply- dipping stratigraphic contacts or zones of preferred weakness in intraflow structures.
    [Show full text]
  • Splay-Fault Origin for the Yakima Fold-And-Thrust Belt, Washington State 2 3 Thomas L
    1 Splay-fault origin for the Yakima fold-and-thrust belt, Washington State 2 3 Thomas L. Pratt, United States Geological Survey, School of Oceanography, Box 357940, 4 University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98115 5 6 ABSTRACT 7 The Yakima fold-and-thrust belt (YFTB) is a set of anticlines above reverse faults in the 8 Miocene Columbia River Basalt (CRB) flows of Washington State. The YFTB is bisected by the 9 ~1100-km-long Olympic-Wallowa geomorphic lineament (OWL). There is considerable debate 10 about the origin and earthquake potential of the YFTB and OWL, which lie near six major dams 11 and a large nuclear waste storage site. Here I show that the trends of the YFTB anticlines relative 12 to the OWL match remarkably well the trends of the principal stresses determined from Linear 13 Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM) modeling of the end of a vertical strike-slip fault. From this 14 comparison and the termination of some YFTB anticlines at the OWL, I argue that the YFTB 15 formed as splay faults caused by an abrupt decrease in the amount of strike-slip motion along the 16 OWL. If this hypothesis is correct, the OWL and YFTB are likely interconnected, deeply-rooted 17 structures capable of large earthquakes. 18 19 20 INTRODUCTION 21 The Yakima fold and thrust belt (YFTB) of central Washington State is a set of 22 prominent anticlines in the Miocene Columbia River Basalt flows (CRB; figure 1). The YFTB 23 anticlines form three distinct sets (Riedel et al., 1989 and 1994; Watters, 1989).
    [Show full text]
  • Em3966 1975.Pdf (889.3Kb)
    EM 3966 October 1975 The Vegetahle and Specialty Crop Regions of Eastern Washington CONTENTS Introduction . .3 Physical Features of Eastern Washington .4 Climate of Eastern Washington . 5 Soils and Water of Eastern Washington .6 The Vegetable and Specialty Crop Industries of Eastern Washington .7 Location of Research and Extension Centers . 8 Description of Vegetable and Specialty Crop Regions .9 The Palouse Hills . , . 10 Columbia Basin Region 10 Kittitas Valley . 11 Klickitat-Horse Heaven Hills 11 Touchet-Walla Walla Valleys 12 Spokane Valley 12 Yakima Valley 13 Appendix 14 Prepared by Robert E. Thornton, Extension horticulturist, and Arthur L. Antonelli, Extension entomology assistant, Washington State University, Pullman. COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE • COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE • WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY • PULLMAN In cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture luued in furtherance of the Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, by the Washington State University Cooperative Extension Service, J. 0. Young, Director INTRODUCTION apples, sweet cherries, hops, spearmint, and dry peas. It ranked second in fall potatoes, pears, The state of Washington is located in the most green peas, asparagus, peppermint, and alfalfa northwest comer of the United States. It is seed, and third in strawberries, grapes, and bounded by the Pacific Ocean on the west, the Merion Kentucky bluegrass. Washington's rank Canadian province of British Columbia on the in the production of many other crops was north, the state of Idaho on the east, and the nearly as high. state of Oregon on the south. The Columbia River makes much of this southern boundary. The city of Spokane, near the Idaho border, is the major center of commerce in eastern Washington is one of the smallest states west of Washington.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3: Page 1
    ASPECT CONSULTING Chapter 3. Water Quantity Assessment Surface water and groundwater contribute to the total amount of water within each subbasin of WRIA 31. This section provides an overview of what is currently known, for each subbasin, regarding the quantity of water: · Entering, leaving, and distributed within the hydrologic system; · Appropriated (allocated) and applied for in water rights; · Currently being used, and projected future demand, by major use category. Section 3.1 discusses the quantity of surface water flow in streams across the watershed. Section 3.2 provides an overview of streamflow data for the Columbia River adjacent to WRIA 31. Section 3.3 covers groundwater quantity, including hydrogeologic conditions and interactions between surface water and groundwater. Section 3.4 presents an overview of recorded water right appropriations and applications for new water rights in each subbasin, based on Ecology’s water rights database information. Section 3.5 presents estimates of current actual water use, and projected future water use, by subbasin. Section 3.6 presents the water balance, and preliminary discussion of water availability, by subbasin. Section 3.7 presents future water use projections. 3.1 Surface Water Quantity As discussed in Chapter 2, WRIA 31 was divided into four subbasins for the purposes of this Level 1 assessment. From west to east those subbasins are Rock Creek, Wood/Alder Creeks, Glade/Fourmile Creeks and Kennewick. Both topography and precipitation decrease from west to east. The Rock Creek subbasin has an average elevation of 2,162 feet and receives the highest average annual precipitation of approximately16 inches. The Kennewick subbasin at an average elevation of 870 feet and receives the lowest average annual precipitation of approximately 8 inches.
    [Show full text]
  • Influence of Yakima Fold Belt Structures on Columbia Basin Terroir
    INFLUENCE OF YAKIMA FOLD BELT STRUCTURES ON COLUMBIA BASIN TERROIR POGUE, Kevin, Geology, Whitman College, Whitman College, Walla Walla, WA 99362, [email protected] The boundaries of many of the American Viticultural Areas (AVAs) in the Columbia basin are based largely on topography that is a consequence of Yakima Fold Belt (YFB) structures. The Rattlesnake Hills, Red Mountain, Wahluke Slope, and Horse Heaven Hills AVAs are situated on dip slopes on the south- facing limbs of YFB anticlines, the Walla Walla Valley and Yakima Valley AVAs encompass synclinal valleys, and the boundaries of the Snipes Mountain AVA are formed by topographic contours that encircle an anticlinal ridge. Topographic variables such as slope and aspect influence viticulture primarily through their affects on solar radiation and cold air drainage. For example, the gently inclined (5°-10°) south-facing dip slopes of YFB anticlines receive 3% – 5% more solar energy per unit area than the relatively flat floors of the synclinal basins. In 2008, vineyard sites on the northeast-facing slopes of Snipes Mountain, an anticlinal ridge in the Yakima Valley, accumulated 210 fewer growing degree-days (GDD) (10°C) relative to sites at the same elevation on southwest-facing slopes. Due to clear skies and low humidity, air temperatures typically decline rapidly after sunset in the Columbia basin. The cold air drains from the flanks of the YFB anticlines into adjacent synclinal basins where it pools behind narrow water gaps. For this reason, the vineyards with the greatest risk of frost and freeze damage are located on the floors of synclinal basins at relatively low elevations.
    [Show full text]