DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Environmental Impact Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Final Environmental Impact Statement Elwha River Ecosystem Restoration Implementation Purpose and Need: The Elwha River ecosystem and native anadromous fisheries are severely degraded as a result of two hydroelectric dams (projects) and their reservoirs built in the early 1900s. Congress has mandated the full restoration of this ecosystem and its native anadromous fisheries through the Elwha River Ecosystem and Fisheries Restoration Act (Public Law 102-495). The Department of the Interior has found there is a need to return this river and the ecosystem to its natural, self-regulating state, and proposes to implement the Congressional mandate by removing both dams in a safe, environmentally sound and cost effective manner and implementing fisheries and ecosystem restoration planning. Only dam removal would fully restore the ecosystem or its native anadromous fisheries. Proposed Action: The U.S. Department of the Interior proposes to fully restore the Elwha River ecosystem and native anadromous fisheries through the removal of Elwha Dam and Glines Canyon Dam and implementing fish restoration and revegetation. Dam removal would occur over a 2-year period. Elwha Dam would be removed by blasting, and Glines Canyon Dam by a combination of blasting and diamond wire saw cutting. Lake Aldwell would be drained by a diversion channel, and Lake Mills by notching down Glines Canyon Dam. Stored sediment would be eroded naturally by the Elwha River. The proposed action is located in Clallam County, on the Olympic Peninsula, in Washington State. Lead/Cooperating agencies: The National Park Service is the lead agency. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe are cooperating agencies/governments on this EIS. Type of statement: This is a final environmental impact statement (EIS). Because public and agency comments did not substantially modify any of the alternatives or the environmental analysis in the draft EIS, the full text of the draft has not been reprinted. Rather, the attached material includes a summary of responses to comments, factual corrections and text changes in the form of errata sheets, and copies of letters received from agencies and organizations. Substantive comments from all written and oral comments on the draft EIS were summarized and responded to in the attached Responses to Comment section. The complete final EIS includes the draft EIS and the material attached to this abstract. This final EIS is tiered, or procedurally connected, to Interior's June 1995 final Elwha River Ecosystem Restoration EIS, which determined dam removal was required to fully restore the Elwha River ecosystem and anadromous fisheries. Abstract: In addition to the proposed action, two other alternatives are examined. They are: removing fine-grained sediment prior to dam removal by using suction dredges, and sending the slurry to the Strait of Juan de Fuca in a pipeline, and No Action (i.e., dams are retained as is, without fish passage measures). The Proposed Action is also the Department of the Interior's "preferred alternative." Short-term adverse impacts from removing both dams would result from the release of sediment now trapped in the reservoirs. The finer grained particles would temporarily but significantly impact fish or other aquatic organisms. Impacts on water quality, river morphology, flooding, native anadromous and resident (i.e., trout and char) fisheries, living marine resources, wildlife, threatened and endangered species, vegetation, cultural resources, land use, recreation, aesthetic resources, and socioeconomics are also examined in this environmental impact statement. Both of the other alternatives would also have significant impacts on resources examined in this document. Public Involvement: Oral comments were taken on the draft EIS in Washington State in three public workshops on May 21-22, 1996. Written comments were taken for a 60-day period which ended June 27, 1996. Substantive comments were responded to in a question/answer format, and by making appropriate text changes to the draft. Those text changes are attached as errata sheets, and should be used in conjunction with Interior's April 1996 draft Elwha River Ecosystem Restoration Implementation EIS. To obtain a draft or the location of the nearest agency or library which has a copy of the draft, contact Olympic National Park at (360) 452-4501 x264. Copies will be sent to those who request them until the current supply is exhausted. All who received a draft EIS in the initial April 1996 mailing will also receive the attached material. Guide to Using This Document The attached document includes the following: A series of "errata sheets" or changes to the text of Interior's draft Elwha River Ecosystem Restoration Implementation environmental impact statement (Implementation EIS) Responses to Comments received on the Implementation EIS, indexed by subject and by author A new and revised Consultation and Coordination chapter A new appendix (appendix 7), the US Fish and Wildlife Service's Biological Opinion, and Copies of substantive comment letters received on the draft Implementation EIS from all agencies and organizations The combination of these materials and Interior's draft Implementation EIS serves as an "abbreviated" final EIS. The reasoning behind an abbreviated EIS, and the contents of errata sheets and the Responses to Comments section is explained in further detail below. The regulations which determine how the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) will be carried out include an option for responding to public comments on a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) when few changes result from those comments. The relevant section of these regulations (CFR 1503.4) states that if changes in response to public comments are minor and confined to factual corrections or explanations of why comments do not warrant further agency response, they may be written on errata sheets and attached to the draft EIS, instead of rewriting, printing and mailing the entire revised draft. The National Park Service (NPS) has opted to follow this "abbreviated" EIS procedure for the Elwha River Ecosystem Restoration Implementation EIS (Implementation EIS). NPS received 374 letters on the draft Implementation EIS. The number of separate comments in these letters and those taken at three workshops May 21-22, 1996 totaled nearly 500. Many of these comments were very similar or identical to those received on Interior's programmatic EIS on how best to restore the Elwha River ecosystem and native anadromous fisheries. This document, Elwha River Ecosystem Restoration EIS, was finalized in June 1995 (copies are available from Olympic National Park). Although NPS received a large number of comments, few resulted in even minor factual corrections to the draft Implementation EIS. When they did, or when the EIS team elaborated and explained material which may have been unclear in the draft, text changes in the form of errata sheets were made. These sheets must be used in conjunction with the draft EIS. Copies of the Implementation EIS are available by calling Olympic National Park at (360) 452-4501 x264 or by going to regional libraries that are listed in the Consultation and Coordination section of this document. In addition to the text changes, specialists from the EIS team responded directly to each substantive comment received. The NEPA regulations described above also allow agencies to summarize public comments and respond to those summaries when appropriate. In an effort to reduce paperwork, streamline the planning process and reduce printing costs, all substantive comments have been summarized and combined where there is overlap in this final Implementation EIS. The responses to these combined and summarized comments are contained in the attached Responses to Comments section. This section includes indices to help each commentor locate the response to his or her particular comment. Finally, NPS has included copies of substantive comment letters received from all agencies and organizations (e.g., special interest groups, businesses, and academic institutions). Contents Corrections and Revisions to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement 1 Summary 1 Introduction 1 Purpose and Need 1 Alternatives 1 Summary of Impacts 2 Fluvial Process and Sediment Transport2 Groundwater 3 Species of Special Concern 4 Cultural Resources 4 Socioeconomics 5 Recreation 5 Aesthetics 5 Purpose and Need 6 Introduction 6 Purpose and Need for Action 8 Relationship to Other Planning Documents 8 Issues and Concerns 8 Planning Goals and Objectives 14 Alternatives 14 No Action Alternative14 Fisheries Recovery 14 Costs 14 Proposed Action - River Erosion Alternative 14 Dam Removal 18 Water Quality Protection 18 Costs 19 Dredge and Slurry Alternative 21 Summary of Actions 21 Pipeline 21 Water Quality Protection 21 Costs 21 Alternatives Considered but Rejected 26 Dam Removal 26 Affected Environment 44 Fluvial Processes and Sediment Transport 44 River Morphology 44 Flooding 44 Flooding Frequency 44 Groundwater 47 Regional Hydrological Setting 47 Groundwater Quantity and Use 49 Groundwater Quality 49 Wildlife 49 Birds 49 Species of Special Concern 49 Federal Candidate Species 50 Living Marine Resources 50 Cultural Resources 50 Affected Resources 50 Socioeconomics 52 Public Infrastructure, Services, and Utilities 52 Social Values 52 Traffic 52 Waste Disposal Areas 52 Indian Trust Resources 52 Recreation
Recommended publications
  • US 101 Elwha River Bridge Environmental Assessment With

    US 101 Elwha River Bridge Environmental Assessment With

    US 101 Elwha River Bridge Replacement Environmental Assessment Washington State Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration – Washington Division June 30, 2021 Title VI Notice to Public It is the Washington State Department of Transportation’s (WSDOT) policy to assure that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin or sex, as provided by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise discriminated against under any of its programs and activities. Any person who believes his/her Title VI protection has been violated, may file a complaint with WSDOT’s Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO). For additional information regarding Title VI complaint procedures and/or information regarding our non-discrimination obligations, please contact OEO’s Title VI Coordinator at (360) 705-7090. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information This material can be made available in an alternate format by emailing the Office of Equal Opportunity at [email protected] or by calling toll free, 855-362-4ADA (4232). Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may make a request by calling the Washington State Relay at 711. US 101 Elwha River Bridge Replacement –Environmental Assessment ii US 101 Elwha River Bridge Replacement –Environmental Assessment iii Table of Contents Chapter 1: Background and Purpose and Need ............................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................................
  • 8.6 Bull Trout 8.6.1 Status of the Species

    8.6 Bull Trout 8.6.1 Status of the Species

    8.6 BULL TROUT 8.6.1 STATUS OF THE SPECIES (Note that terminology related to bull trout population groupings are further defined in Appendix E) 8.6.1.1 Listing Status The coterminous United States population of the bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) was listed as threatened on November 1, 1999 (64 FR 58910). The threatened bull trout occurs in the Klamath River Basin of south-central Oregon and in the Jarbidge River in Nevada, in the Willamette River Basin in Oregon, in the Pacific Coast drainages of Washington, including the Puget Sound; throughout major rivers in Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Montana within the Columbia River Basin, and in the St. Mary- Belly River, east of the Continental Divide in northwestern Montana (Cavender 1978; Bond 1992; Brewin and Brewin 1997; Leary and Allendorf 1997). Throughout its range, the bull trout is threatened by the combined effects of habitat degradation, fragmentation and alterations associated with: dewatering, road construction and maintenance, mining, and grazing; the blockage of migratory corridors by dams or other diversion structures; poor water quality; entrainment (a process by which aquatic organisms are pulled through a diversion or other device) into diversion channels; and introduced non-native species (64 FR 58910). Poaching and incidental mortality of bull trout during other targeted fisheries are additional threats. The bull trout was initially listed as three separate Distinct Population Units (DPSs) (63 FR 31647, 64 FR 17110). The preamble to the final listing rule for the United
  • Daytime Summer Microclimate Influence of Large Woody Debris on Dewatered Sediments in Lake Mills, WA Following Dam Removal

    Daytime Summer Microclimate Influence of Large Woody Debris on Dewatered Sediments in Lake Mills, WA Following Dam Removal

    Western Washington University Western CEDAR WWU Graduate School Collection WWU Graduate and Undergraduate Scholarship Summer 2018 Daytime Summer Microclimate Influence of Large Woody Debris on Dewatered Sediments in Lake Mills, WA Following Dam Removal Mariah J. Colton Western Washington University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Colton, Mariah J., "Daytime Summer Microclimate Influence of Large Woody Debris on Dewatered Sediments in Lake Mills, WA Following Dam Removal" (2018). WWU Graduate School Collection. 712. https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet/712 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]. Daytime Summer Microclimate Influence of Large Woody Debris on Dewatered Sediments in Lake Mills, WA Following Dam Removal By Mariah J. Colton Accepted in Partial Completion of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science ADVISORY COMMITTEE Chair, Dr. Peter S. Homann Dr. Andy Bach Dr. James Helfield GRADUATE SCHOOL Gautam Pillay, Dean Master's Thesis In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master's degree at Western Washington University, I grant to Western Washington Univer- sity the non-exclusive royalty-free right to archive, reproduce, distribute, and display the thesis in any and all forms, including electronic format, via any digital library mechanisms maintained by WWU. I represent and warrant this is my original work, and does not infringe or violate any rights of others.
  • Elwha River Revegetation 2013: a Plant Performance Study

    Elwha River Revegetation 2013: a Plant Performance Study

    ELWHA RIVER REVEGETATION 2013: A PLANT PERFORMANCE STUDY by Crescent Calimpong A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Environmental Horticulture University of Washington 2014 Program Authorized to Offer Degree: School of Environmental and Forest Sciences Table of Contents List of Figures .................................................................................................................................................. iii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................... iii Appendix ........................................................................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................................. v ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 KEYWORDS ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................................
  • Age Structure and Hatchery Fraction of Elwha River Chinook Salmon: 2015 Carcass Survey Report

    Age Structure and Hatchery Fraction of Elwha River Chinook Salmon: 2015 Carcass Survey Report

    STATE OF WASHINGTON June 2016 Age Structure and Hatchery Fraction of Elwha River Chinook Salmon: 2015 Carcass Survey Report by Josh Weinheimer1, Joseph Anderson1, Randy Cooper1, Scott Williams1, Mike McHenry2, Patrick Crain3, Sam Brenkman3 and Heidi Hugunin3 1 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 2 Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe 3 Olympic National Park Washington Department of FISH AND WILDLIFE Fish Program Fish Science Division FPA 16-04 Age structure and hatchery fraction of Elwha River Chinook Salmon: 2015 Carcass Survey Report Prepared by: Josh Weinheimer1, Joseph Anderson1, Randy Cooper1, Scott Williams1, Mike McHenry2, Patrick Crain3, Sam Brenkman3 and Heidi Hugunin3 1 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 2 Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe 3 Olympic National Park June 2016 Acknowledgements Collecting carcasses from a large system like the Elwha River watershed involves a tremendous amount of work and dedication. We would like to thank the following individuals from various agencies that assisted with the surveys: Matthew Choowong, Henry Kei, Andrew Simmons, Chris O’Connell and Pete Topping from WDFW; Anna Geffre with Olympic National Park; Sonny Sampson, Gabe Youngman, Wilson Wells and Randall McCoy from Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe. We would also like to thank Troy Tisdale, Vern Madison, and Jeff Gufler from WDFW for their assistance with samples collected at the Elwha Rearing Channel and fecundity measurements at the Hurd Creek Hatchery. Thanks to the WDFW Ageing, Thermal Otolith, and CWT laboratories for sample analysis. Funding for this project was provided by the National Park Service under contract P15PX02717. Executive Summary Monitoring the recolonization of Pacific salmon and steelhead following the removal of two dams is a critical component of the Elwha Restoration Project.
  • Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal

    Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal

    A Research Paper by Dam Removal: Case Studies on the Fiscal, Economic, Social, and Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal October 2016 <Year> Dam Removal: Case Studies on the Fiscal, Economic, Social, and Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal October 2016 PUBLISHED ONLINE: http://headwaterseconomics.org/economic-development/local-studies/dam-removal-case-studies ABOUT HEADWATERS ECONOMICS Headwaters Economics is an independent, nonprofit research group whose mission is to improve community development and land management decisions in the West. CONTACT INFORMATION Megan Lawson, Ph.D.| [email protected] | 406-570-7475 P.O. Box 7059 Bozeman, MT 59771 http://headwaterseconomics.org Cover Photo: Whittenton Pond Dam, Mill River, Massachusetts. American Rivers. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 MEASURING THE BENEFITS OF DAM REMOVAL ........................................................................................... 2 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................. 5 CASE STUDIES WHITTENTON POND DAM, MILL RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS ........................................................................ 11 ELWHA AND GLINES CANYON DAMS, ELWHA RIVER, WASHINGTON ........................................................ 14 EDWARDS DAM, KENNEBEC RIVER, MAINE ...............................................................................................
  • Shoreline Master Program.Doc

    Shoreline Master Program.Doc

    CLALLAM COUNTY SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM Prepared by The CLALLAM COUNTY SHORELINE ADVISORY COMMITTEE With Assistance from the CLALLAM COUNTY DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION ADOPTED: By Clallam County Board of Commissioners: June 30, 1976 By Washington State Department of Ecology: August 5, 1976 REVISED: By Washington State Department of Ecology: November 16, 1976 August 10, 1979 January 4, 1983 March 27, 1984 January 27, 1986 June 3, 1986 March 1, 1988 October 31, 1989 June 16, 1992 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Title Page 1 Preamble and Purpose 1 2 Goals and General Policies 2 3 Environments and Use-Element Policies 3 4 Natural Systems Regulations 12 4.01 Marine Beaches 13 4.02 Spits and Bars 15 4.03 Dunes 16 4.04 Islands 17 4.05 Estuaries 18 4.06 Reefs 19 4.07 Bays, Coves, and Headlands 20 4.08 Marshes, Bogs, and Swamps 22 4.09 Lakes 24 4.10 Rivers, Streams, and Creeks 26 4.11 Flood Plains 28 4.12 Subtidal Shorelines 30 4.13 Shoreline Cliffs 31 5 Use Activity Regulations 33 5.01 Agricultural Practices 34 5.02 Aquaculture 35 5.03 Forest Management Practices 39 5.04 Commercial Development 41 5.05 Marinas and Boat Launching Facilities 43 5.06 Mining 45 5.07 Outdoor Advertising (Signs and Billboards) 47 5.08 Residential Development 49 5.09 Utilities 53 5.10 Ports and Water-Related Industries 54 5.11 Bulkheads 56 5.12 Breakwaters 58 5.13 Jetties and Groins 60 5.14 Landfill and Solid Waste Disposal 62 5.15 Dredging 64 5.16 Shoreline Protection 66 5.17 Roads and Railroad Design and Construction 68 5.18 Piers, Docks, Floats, Mooring
  • Some Dam – Hydro News

    Some Dam – Hydro News

    SSoommee DDaamm –– HHyyddrroo NNeewwss and Other Stuff i 5/01/2009 Quote of Note: Thoughts on the economy: “If you’re in a traffic jam quit whining, it means you have a job” - - Paula Smith “If you have a job it’s a recession, if you’re laid off it’s a depression” - - Common “No nation was ever drunk when wine was cheap.” - - Thomas Jefferson Ron’s wine pick of the week: Maipe Bonarda Mendoza, Argentina 2008 OOtthheerr SSttuuffffff::: (Oops, a funny thing happened on the way to the office, they forgot about or don’t know about pumped storage hydro, the ideal backup solution. They got it right on the other points though.) Getting real on wind and solar By James Schlesinger and Robert L. Hirsch, Washington Post, 04/24/2009 Why are we ignoring things we know? We know that the sun doesn't always shine and that the wind doesn't always blow. That means that solar cells and wind energy systems don't always provide electric power. Nevertheless, solar and wind energy seem to have captured the public's support as potentially being the primary or total answer to our electric power needs. Solar cells and wind turbines are appealing because they are "renewables" with promising implications and because they emit no carbon dioxide during operation, which is certainly a plus. But because both are intermittent electric power generators, they cannot produce electricity "on demand," something that the public requires. We expect the lights to go on when we flip a switch, and we do not expect our computers to shut down as nature dictates.
  • 2016 State of Our Watersheds Report West WRIA 18 – Morse Creek to Elwha River

    2016 State of Our Watersheds Report West WRIA 18 – Morse Creek to Elwha River

    2016 State of Our Watersheds Report West WRIA 18 – Morse Creek to Elwha River am removal seemed like an elusive Dtarget over the years and many citizens were skeptical of the benefits. However in just four years the river has transported over 60% of the stored sediment, resulting in a rebirth of the estuary and the floodplain. Salmon are ascending to historic habitats and the recovery of the ecosystem is about to blossom. -MIkE MCHENrY FIsHErIEs HABItAt MANAGEr Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe The Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe is part of the Klal- lam Band of Indians that have resided throughout the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Hood Canal and Port Gamble Bay for generations. They are party to the Point No Point Treaty of 1855, when tribes ceded most their traditional lands to the U.S. government. The Dunge- ness-Elwha Basin (WRIA 18) has remained largely Seattle rural and forested with a natural resources-based economy focused on shellfish harvesting, commercial forestry, commercial fisheries, tourism, and agricul- ture. Major land-use impacts on salmon habitat have occurred from floodplain and shoreline development, road construction and past logging practices. This report will focus on the northwest portion of WRIA 18 basin and surrounding marine waters, which is only a portion of the area that the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe co-manages. 58 Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Elwha Basin The Area of Concern for the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe (Elwha shoreline habitat conditions. Both internal and outside reviews Tribe) is the western portion of WRIA 18, from the Elwha River have concluded that recovery efforts are behind the expected pace watershed to Morse Creek, east of Port Angeles.
  • Steelhead Response to the Removal of the Elwha River Dams

    Steelhead Response to the Removal of the Elwha River Dams

    Steelhead response to the removal of the Elwha River Dams Photo by John McMillan Pacific Coast Steelhead Management Conference March 22 2018 Walla Walla, WA Acknowledgements Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Mike McHenry, Ray Moses, Larry Ward, Mel Elofson, Sonny Sampson, Wilson Wells, John Mahan, Doug Morill, Robert Dohrn, Randall McCoy, Matt Beirne National Park Service Brian Winter, Anna Geffre, Josh Geffre, Heidi Hugunin, Phil Kennedy, Sam Brenkman, Pat Crain, Kathryn Sutton NOAA Fisheries George Pess, Martin Liermann, Todd Bennett, Steve Corbett, Oleksandr Stefankiv, Amilee Wilson, Zach Hughes, Tim Tynan, Eric Ward USGS Jeff Duda, Andy Ritchie, Chris Curran, Amy East, Jon Warrick Trout Unlimited WDFW US Fish and Wildlife Service John McMillan Joe Anderson, Chris O’Connell, Randy Roger Peters US Bureau of Reclamation Cooper, Mike Gross, Andrew Claiborne & K Denton & Associates Jennifer Bountry, Tim Randle WDFW Fish Ageing Laboratory Keith Denton Elwha River 833 km2 watershed Elwha Dam • built 1913 • 32 m tall • River km 8 Glines Canyon Dam • Built 1927 • 64 m tall • River km 21 Pess et al. 2008 NW Science 115 km of habitat upstream of Elwha Dam site Photo montage compiled by George Pess Photos from NPS time lapse camera Photo montage compiled by George Pess Photos from NPS time lapse camera Sediment release • 21 million m3 of sediment stored in former reservoirs • 16 million m3 in Lake Mills (upstream of Glines) • 5 million m3 in Lake Aldwell (upstream of Elwha) • Approximately two-thirds evacuated from former reservoirs • 90% delivered to
  • Coastal Recovery Unit Implementation Plan for Bull Trout (Salvelinus Confluentus)

    Coastal Recovery Unit Implementation Plan for Bull Trout (Salvelinus Confluentus)

    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Coastal Recovery Unit Implementation Plan for Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Top left: Clackamas bull trout reintroduction, Clackamas River, Oregon. David Herasimtschuk, Freshwaters Illustrated; Top, right: Glines Canyon Dam removal, Elwha River, Washington. John Gussman, Doubleclick Productions; Center: South Fork Skagit River and Skagit Bay, Washington. City of Seattle; Bottom: Riverscape surveys, East Fork Quinault River, Washington. National Park Service, Olympic National Park Coastal Recovery Unit Implementation Plan for Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) September 2015 Prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Washington Fish and Wildlife Office Lacey, Washington and Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office Portland, Oregon Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................. A-1 Current Status of Bull Trout in the Coastal Recovery Unit ........................................................ A-6 Factors Affecting Bull Trout in the Coastal Recovery Unit ....................................................... A-8 Ongoing Coastal Recovery Unit Conservation Measures (Summary) ..................................... A-33 Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation ..................................................................................... A-38 Recovery Measures Narrative ................................................................................................... A-39 Implementation Schedule for
  • Seattle a Digital Community Still in Transition Jessica Durkin, Tom Glaisyer, and Kara Hadge, Media Policy Initiative June 2010, Release 2.0

    Seattle a Digital Community Still in Transition Jessica Durkin, Tom Glaisyer, and Kara Hadge, Media Policy Initiative June 2010, Release 2.0

    New America Foundation An Information Community Case Study: Seattle A digital community still in transition Jessica Durkin, Tom Glaisyer, and Kara Hadge, Media Policy Initiative June 2010, Release 2.0 Seattle, Washington, could be considered a city singularly suited to develop a healthy democracy in the digital age. The city government, citizens and business have created a productive environment for the next generation of information-sharing and community engagement. Years of economic growth and relative prosperity have fostered new, superior practices in news and information. Yet, losing a major print newspaper, as Seattle did when The Seattle Post-Intelligencer closed, adversely affects a community, by leaving it with one less place to provide public service journalism, stories about people and general community updates. In parallel, Seattle has been at the center of an explosion of alternative news outlets, especially online, which has created a critical mass of information portals for geographic and social communities. As the Knight Report, Informing Communities: Sustaining Democracy in a Digital Age, highlights, it is important to understand that there are three important elements to be considered as we analyze media and democracy in the 21st century: • availability of relevant and credible information to all Americans and their communities; • capacity of individuals to engage with information; and • individual engagement with information and the public life of the community. However, despite the relative vibrancy of the media scene, and even with all its demographic and other advantages, it is unclear how much of this innovation is sustainable. The local web is littered with websites that are no longer updated, and few of the startups boast anything like the journalistic firepower or profitability of the papers of the past.