Recommendations Report

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Recommendations Report Vancouver Lake Partnership Planning Process and Recommendations Report Prepared by: The Vancouver Lake Watershed Partnership December 2013 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................... 1 Glossary ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 7 Why is Vancouver Lake Important? .................................................................................................... 7 What are cyanobacteria and why is it a problem? ............................................................................ 7 What has the Partnership accomplished? ........................................................................................... 7 What are the Partnership’s major findings? ....................................................................................... 8 What happens next? .............................................................................................................................. 8 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 9 Partnership Organization and Vision ............................................................................................... 11 Partnership’s Approach ...................................................................................................................... 11 Partnership Status and This Report ................................................................................................... 14 2. Vancouver Lake Existing Conditions & Research ........................................................................... 15 General Lake Background .................................................................................................................. 15 Existing Conditions.............................................................................................................................. 21 Technical Findings ............................................................................................................................... 23 Technical Summary ............................................................................................................................. 30 3. Management Objectives and Actions ................................................................................................ 31 Lake Management Objectives ............................................................................................................ 31 Management Actions ........................................................................................................................... 34 Potential Actions to Address Lake River Nutrients and Internal Loading ................................. 35 Management Objectives and Actions Summary ............................................................................. 39 4. 2013 Partnership Recommendations ................................................................................................. 40 Recommendations Context ................................................................................................................. 40 Recommendations for Vancouver Lake ............................................................................................ 41 Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 45 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................................. 47 Acknowledgements Dedicated individuals, agency staff, and organizations made important contributions to make this report possible. The following entities and individuals, in particular, offered input and advice at key points during development of the Vancouver Lake Recommendations Report. Their assistance is greatly appreciated. Partnership Members & Alternates Allen Lebovitz Washington Department of Natural Resources Andrew Ness Port of Vancouver Anne Friesz Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Annette Griffy City of Vancouver Brett Raunig Washington Department of Ecology Brian Carlson City of Vancouver Brian Potter Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Bruce Wiseman Port of Ridgefield Carol Record Fruit Valley Neighborhood Chris Hathaway Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership Clark Martin Citizen David Judd Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation David Page Citizen - Vancouver Resident, Salmon Creek Watershed Assn. Debrah Marriot Lower Columbia Estuary Partnership Don Jacobs Citizen - Vancouver Resident Doug Quinn Clark Public Utilities Eric LaBrant Fruit Valley Neighborhood Gary Kokstis Citizen - West Vancouver Resident, Sailing Club Member George Medina US Army Corps of Engineers Iloba Odum Washington Department of Ecology Jacquelin Edwards Citizen - Felida Moorage Resident James Meyer Citizen - Ridgefield Resident Jane Kleiner Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Jane Van Dyke Citizen - Northeast Vancouver Resident Jean Akers Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Jennie Ju Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Jeroen Kok Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Joe Laxson Clark County Public Health Jordan Larner Port of Ridgefield Joy Polston-Barnes Washington Department of Natural Resources Katy Brooks Port of Vancouver Kevin Gray Clark County Environmental Sciences Lee McCallister Fruit Valley Neighborhood Lehman Holder Citizen – Vancouver Resident, Sierra Club 1 Member Nancy Ellifrit Citizen - Ridgefield Resident Nancy Lopez Washington Department of Natural Resources Patty Boyden Port of Vancouver Pete Capell Clark County Public Works Pete Mayer Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Ralph Dannenberg Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Randy Mueller Port of Ridgefield Randy Phillips Clark County Public Health Ron Wierenga Clark County Environmental Services Scott Robinson Washington Dept. of Natural Resources Shane Cothern Washington Dept. of Natural Resources Steve Prather Clark Public Utilities Steve West Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Thom McConathy Citizen- Northeast Hazel Dell Resident Tim Rymer Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Tom Gonzales Clark County Public Health Tonnie Cummings Washington Department of Ecology Vernon V. Veysey Citizen - Ridgefield Resident Victor Ehrlich City of Vancouver Steering Group Members Brian Carlson City of Vancouver David Judd Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Eric LaBrant Fruit Valley Neighborhood Kevin Gray Clark County Public Works Lee McCallister Fruit Valley Neighborhood LeeAnn Graff Fruit Valley Neighborhood Patty Boyden Port of Vancouver Pete Capell Clark County Public Works Ralph Dannenberg Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Ron Wierenga Clark County Environmental Services Technical Group Members Allen Lebovitz Washington Department of Natural Resources Anne Friesz Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Brett Raunig Washington Department of Ecology Chris Hathaway Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership Dorie Sutton City of Vancouver Water Resources Gretchen Rollwagen Bollens WSU Vancouver Harvey Claussen Vancouver Lake Sailing Club Jeff Schnabel Clark County Environmental Services Joe Laxson Clark County Public Health 2 Jeroen Kok Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Julius Dalzell Vancouver Lake Sailing Club Lisa Willis Port of Vancouver Marty McGinn Clark County Public Health Phillip Martello Port of Vancouver Steve Bollens WSU - Vancouver Steve West Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Thom McConathy Citizen Tonnie Cummings Washington Department of Ecology Public Involvement and Outreach Andrew Ness Port of Vancouver Brooke Porter City of Vancouver Jeff Mize Clark County Jim Gladson Clark County Loretta Callahan City of Vancouver Rob Guttridge Clark County Project Management Team Alex McManus PC Trask & Associates, Inc. Corie Peters PC Trask & Associates, Inc. Eileen Stone PC Trask & Associates, Inc. Jeanne Lawson Jeanne Lawson Associates Mardy Tremblay Lower Columbia River Estuary Partnership Sabrina Litton PC Trask & Associates, Inc. Phil Trask PC Trask & Associates, Inc. Rob Zisette Herrera Environmental Services Other Agency Staff Curt Loop US Army Corps of Engineers Dennis Schwartz US Army Corps of Engineers Jonnie Hyde Clark County Sharon Shultz US Army Corps of Engineers 3 Glossary Analytes: A substance or chemical Eutrophic: A eutrophic body of water, constituent that is of interest in an analytical commonly a lake or pond, has high procedure. Experiments always seek to biological productivity. Due to excessive measure properties of analytes—analytes nutrients, especially nitrogen and themselves can never be measured. phosphorus, these water bodies are able to support an abundance of aquatic plants. Bathymetry: The science of measuring the Usually the water body will be dominated depths of oceans, seas, or other large bodies either by aquatic plants or algae. of water. Fetch: The length of water over which a Chrysene: A polycyclic aromatic given wind has blown. hydrocarbon (PAH) that is a natural constituent of coal tar. It is also found in Fluoranthene: A polycyclic aromatic creosote, a chemical used to preserve wood. hydrocarbon (PAH)
Recommended publications
  • Synthesis of Biological Research On
    DRAFT FINAL November 2007 Review of Biological Research on Juvenile and Adult Salmonid use of Vancouver Lake Prepared by: Portland District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Resources Review of Biological Research on Juvenile and Adult Salmonids and Survival at Vancouver Lake Abstract This document provides a synthesis of known biological research on juvenile and adult salmonids at Vancouver Lake, Vancouver Washington. This review of literature was prepared to support the Portland District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers involvement with the Vancouver Lake Watershed Partnership under the Corps Section 536 program. This specialized Corps program authority promotes the improvement of tidally influenced off-channel habitat in the Lower Columbia River. The goal of this report is to provide the Corps of Engineers the best information available to make management decisions on whether or not to move forward with improving habitat for salmonids at Vancouver Lake. Background and Lake History Vancouver Lake (approximately 2,600 acres) provides a variety of functions to the surrounding community including wildlife habitat, flood control, boating, bird watching, hiking, hunting and other recreational activities as well as environmental education and stewardship opportunities. The Lower Columbia River has been impacted over the past 100 years by the implementation of navigation features associated with the Columbia and Lower Willamette Rivers Navigation Channel, urban and rural development, federally funded flood control projects, and flow fluctuations attributable to the Federal Columbia River Power System. The cumulative effect of these actions has contributed to the degradation of the quality and quantity of the off-channel habitat in the Columbia River Basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Eutrophication: Vancouver Lake, WA, USA As a Model System for Assessing Multiple, Interacting Biotic and Abiotic Drivers of Harmful Cyanobacterial Blooms
    water Article Beyond Eutrophication: Vancouver Lake, WA, USA as a Model System for Assessing Multiple, Interacting Biotic and Abiotic Drivers of Harmful Cyanobacterial Blooms Gretchen Rollwagen-Bollens 1,2,*, Tammy Lee 1, Vanessa Rose 1 and Stephen M. Bollens 1,2 1 School of the Environment, Washington State University, Vancouver, WA, 98686, USA; [email protected] (T.L.); [email protected] (V.R.); [email protected] (S.M.B.) 2 School of Biological Sciences, Washington State University, Vancouver, WA 98686, USA * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-360-546-9115 Received: 16 April 2018; Accepted: 8 June 2018; Published: 10 June 2018 Abstract: Eutrophication of lakes and reservoirs has contributed to an increase in the magnitude and frequency of harmful cyanobacterial blooms; however, the interactive effects of nutrient availability (eutrophication) and other abiotic and biotic drivers have rarely been comprehensively studied in the field. We undertook an eight-year (2005–2013) research program that assessed the interaction of multiple factors driving cyanobacterial blooms in Vancouver Lake, a large, shallow eutrophic lake in Washington, USA. Our program consisted of nearly continuous monthly or weekly monitoring of water quality and plankton community composition over eight years, as well as multiple zooplankton grazing experiments over three years. We found a relatively consistent seasonal succession of phytoplankton and zooplankton assemblages, and a pattern of interacting factors influencing cyanobacterial bloom dynamics. Typically, a combined effect of decreased dissolved inorganic nitrogen (N), a sudden increase of dissolved inorganic phosphorus (P), and a cascading effect of zooplankton grazing created a ‘perfect storm’ of conditions that promoted the rapid proliferation of cyanobacteria over the two to three weeks before a bloom.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Scientific Assessment Report Vancouver Watershed Health
    INTEGRATED SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT VANCOUVER WATERSHED HEALTH ASSESSMENT Prepared for City of Vancouver, Washington Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. and Pacific Groundwater Group Note: Some pages in this document have been purposely skipped or blank pages inserted so this document will copy correctly when duplexed. INTEGRATED SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT VANCOUVER WATERSHED HEALTH ASSESSMENT Prepared for City of Vancouver Surface Water Management 4500 Southeast Columbia Way Vancouver, Washington 98661 Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 1001 Southeast Water Avenue, Suite 290 Portland, Oregon 97214 Telephone: 503-228-4301 and Pacific Groundwater Group 2377 Eastlake Avenue East Suite #200 Seattle, Washington 98102 Telephone: 206-329-0141 February 20, 2019 CONTENTS Abbreviations and Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................... v Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... vii 1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Overview ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Study Area and Vicinity ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Clark County, Washington: a Preliminary Report
    Portland State University PDXScholar Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations Anthropology 1999 Archaeological Investigations at 45CL1 Cathlapotle (1991-1996) , Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Clark County, Washington: a Preliminary Report Kenneth M. Ames Portland State University, [email protected] Cameron M. Smith Portland State University William L. Cornett Portland State University Elizabeth A. Sobel Portland State University Stephen C. Hamilton Portland State University SeeFollow next this page and for additional additional works authors at: https:/ /pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Ames, K. M., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service., & Portland State University. (1999). Archaeological investigations at 45CL1 Cathlapotle (1991-1996), Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, Clark County, Washington: A preliminary report. Portland, Or: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This Technical Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Authors Kenneth M. Ames; Cameron M. Smith; William L. Cornett; Elizabeth A. Sobel; Stephen C. Hamilton; John Wolf; Doria Raetz; United States. Department of the Interior; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1; and Portland State University. Department of Anthropology This technical report is available at PDXScholar: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac/61 Archaeological Investigations at 45CL1 Cathlapotle (1991-1996) , Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Clark County, Washington A Preliminary Report by Kenneth M. Ames, Cameron M. Smith, William L.
    [Show full text]
  • Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed
    Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed • The Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed is the area of land in Clark County where all of the water drains into Burnt Bridge Creek. • It is a mostly flat area and it covers about 28 square miles. About two-thirds of this area is in the City of Vancouver. • It starts in large wetland area, then forms ditches and channels. Eventually it flows as a creek on its way into Vancouver Lake. • This watershed is a highly developed area with a lot of paved surfaces. • Only 4% of the watershed is left as a forest. • Coho salmon are only found in the very lowest segments of the creek, west of Interstate 5. • Clark County hopes to improve the health of this creek by making greenspaces along the creek. • All of the trees and vegetation will help absorb stormwater and any non-point source pollution that it has picked up while flowing over the watershed. Cedar Creek Watershed • The Cedar Creek watershed is the area of land in Clark County where all of the water drains into Cedar Creek. • This creek is a major tributary of the North Fork Lewis River which starts on Mount Adams. • Cedar Creek drains about 56 square miles of land and is mostly privately owned. • The watershed contains about 8% developed land and 55% forested land. • The upper watershed is in good to excellent health. • The lower part of the watershedis impacted by forestry and agricultural practices. • Cedar Creek supports populations of coho salmon, Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, Pacific lamprey, and freshwater mussels.
    [Show full text]
  • Shillapoo Wildlife Area Fish Passage Barrier and Fish Screen Scoping Report
    SHILLAPOO WILDLIFE AREA FISH PASSAGE AND DIVERSION SCREENING SCOPING REPORT HABITAT PROGRAM TECHNICAL APPLICATIONS DIVISION (TAPPS) BY TOM BURNS May 2007 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wished to acknowledge the assistance of Brian Calkins, John Wienheimer and Jason Kunz in developing this report. Eva Wilder created the maps and tables for this report. Mike Barber provided guidance and editing. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………….……………… 1 SITE DESCRIPTION……………………………………………….………………... 2 METHODS…………………………………………………………………………… 3 RESULTS…………………………………………………………………………….. 4 North Unit Field Evaluations…………………………………………………. 4 South Unit Field Evaluations…………………………………………………. 6 Vancouver Lake Unit Field Evaluations……………………………………… 8 DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………… 8 LITERATURE CITED……………………………………………………………….. 12 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Shillapoo Wildlife Area………………………………………………….…. 2 Figure 2. Shillapoo Wildlife Area, North Unit………………………….…………….. 5 Figure 3. Shillapoo Wildlife Area, South Unit………………………………………... 7 Figure 4. Shillapoo Wildlife Area, Vancouver Lake Unit…………………………….. 9 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. A two-year investigative summary of sites initially inventoried by WDFW In 2003…………………………………………………………………........ 11 WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE SHILLAPOO WILDLIFE AREA FISH PASSAGE AND DIVERSION SCREENING SCOPING REPORT TECHNICAL APPLICATIONS DIVISION (TAPPS) – HABITAT PROGRAM MAY 2007 Introduction This report summarizes the results of WDFW’s scoping efforts on the Shillapoo Wildlife Area to correct fish passage barriers
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Creek and Lakeshore
    VancouverVancouver LakeLake andand LakeLake RiverRiver WatershedsWatersheds SalmonSalmon CreekCreek andand LakeshoreLakeshore RonRon WierengaWierenga ClarkClark CountyCounty PublicPublic WorksWorks WaterWater ResourcesResources ProgramProgram PresentationPresentation OutlineOutline ¾¾ VancouverVancouver LakeLake andand LakeLake RiverRiver WatershedsWatersheds ¾¾ SalmonSalmon CreekCreek WatershedWatershed andand WaterWater QualityQuality ¾¾ LakeshoreLakeshore WatershedWatershed andand WaterWater QualityQuality ¾¾ DiscussionDiscussion ofof SignificanceSignificance ofof InputsInputs toto VancouverVancouver LakeLake GeneralGeneral DepictionDepiction ofof WaterWater QualityQuality ProblemsProblems Washington Department of Ecology 303d Listed Waterways in Lake River System ¾ Vancouver Lake z Phosphorus, fecal coliform, PCB’s ¾ Lake River z Temperature, fecal coliform ¾ Salmon Creek z Oxygen, pH, temperature, fecal coliform, turbidity ¾ Whipple Creek z Fecal coliform ¾ Burnt Bridge Creek z Oxygen, fecal coliform, temperature Area of 90 square miles Mixed land use Five major tributaries and many smaller streams Extensive storm water infrastructure in lower watershed Impervious surfaces greater than 50% in lower watershed Annual Volume 105,000 acre-ft per year Average flow = 145 cfs Range = 15 to 1,510 cfs SalmonSalmon CreekCreek InputsInputs toto LakeLake RiverRiver Parameter Median Value Range Comment Typically higher 80 bac-t per Fecal Coliform 2 to 500 concentration at low 100mL flow Total 0.034 to Higher concentration 0.055 mg/L Phosphorus
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Algal Control Techniques with Implications for Vancouver Lake
    Lake Algal Control Techniques with Implications for Vancouver Lake Vancouver Lake Watershed Partnership December 9, 2009 — Version 1 Table of Contents Purpose .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Background ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Techniques Explored in this Document: ............................................................................................. 2 Best Management Practices .................................................................................................................. 2 Water Level Drawdown ........................................................................................................................ 4 Lake Sediment Removal ........................................................................................................................ 5 Recruit/Plant Rooted Plants ................................................................................................................. 6 Modify Lake Footprint .......................................................................................................................... 7 Dilution and Flushing ........................................................................................................................... 8 Biomanipulation ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • RAPTOR ROAD TRIP Count Birds Anywhere for at Least 15 Minutes on One Or More of the 4 Count Days
    Spring & Summer Camp Registration AUDUBON SOCIETY of PORTLAND begins Jan 14 at 8am — Page 7 JANUARY/ Black-throated FEBRUARY 2016 Gray Warbler Volume 80 Numbers 1&2 Warbler Bringing Outdoor LED Streetlights: Wildlife Care Center’s Summer School to All Good News or Bad? Online Auction: Feb 14 – Mar 7 Camp insert Page 2 Page 4 Page 5 included Rough- Northern Harrier legged Hawk Scoping out Bald Eagles, immature (top) the raptors and adult Pileated Woodpecker. Photo by Jim Griffis 19th Annual Sharp- Great Backyard shinned Hawk Bird Count February 12–15 he Great Backyard Bird Count is a 4-day count Merlin held each February with the goal of getting a Tsnapshot of bird numbers and distribution Come Celebrate Birds of Prey across the globe. As a participant, you commit to at the 11th Annual RAPTOR ROAD TRIP count birds anywhere for at least 15 minutes on one or more of the 4 count days. Tally the number of Saturday, February 6th • 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. individuals of each species you see and enter your totals xploreSauvie Island in search of the magnificent Bald have to be an ‘early bird’ and at birdsource.org/gbbc. Eagles, hawks, and falcons that spend the winter on get up at the crack of dawn Ethe island. On this special day devoted to raptors, to see these birds of prey, you Last year Great Backyard experienced naturalists and hawk experts will host activities should allow approximately Bird Count participants and answer your questions at four locations around the three hours to visit all four counted birds all over the Black-capped Chickadee.
    [Show full text]
  • Freshwater Algae Control Program
    Freshwater Algae Control Program Report to the Washington State Legislature (2008-2009) December 2009 Publication No. 09-10-082 Publication and Contact Information This report is available on the Department of Ecology’s website at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0910082.html For more information contact: Water Quality Program P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Phone: 360-407-6600 Washington State Department of Ecology - www.ecy.wa.gov o Headquarters, Olympia 360-407-6000 o Northwest Regional Office, Bellevue 425-649-7000 o Southwest Regional Office, Olympia 360-407-6300 o Central Regional Office, Yakima 509-575-2490 o Eastern Regional Office, Spokane 509-329-3400 Cover Photo: Blue-green algae bloom on Waughop Lake, a popular dog-walking venue located in Fort Steilacoom Park. Photograph by Don Russell To ask about the availability of this document in a format for the visually impaired, call the Water Quality Program at 360-407-6600. Persons with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. Persons with a speech disability can call 877-833-6341. Freshwater Algae Control Program Report to the Washington State Legislature (2008-2009) by Kathy Hamel Blue-green algae bloom on Lake Steilacoom, Pierce County. Photo Don Russell Water Quality Program Washington State Department of Ecology Olympia, Washington This page is purposely left blank Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... iii List of Figures ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf (Accessed Mankiewicz-Boczek, 2012)
    Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 114 (2015) 318–325 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoenv Environmental influence on cyanobacteria abundance and microcystin toxin production in a shallow temperate lake Tammy A. Lee n, Gretchen Rollwagen-Bollens, Stephen M. Bollens, Joshua J. Faber-Hammond 1 School of the Environment, Washington State University, 14204 NE Salmon Creek Avenue, Vancouver, WA 98686, USA article info abstract Article history: The increasing frequency of harmful cyanobacterial blooms in freshwater systems is a commonly Received 7 May 2014 recognized problem due to detrimental effects on water quality. Vancouver Lake, a shallow, tidally Accepted 8 May 2014 influenced lake in the flood plain of the Columbia River within the city of Vancouver, WA, USA, Available online 22 July 2014 has experienced numerous summertime cyanobacterial blooms, dominated by Aphanizomenon sp. and Keywords: Anabaena sp. Cyanobacteria abundance and toxin (microcystin) levels have been monitored in this qPCR popular urban lake for several years; however, no previous studies have identified which cyanobacteria Cyanobacteria species produce toxins, nor analyzed how changes in environmental variables contribute to the ELISA fluctuations in toxic cyanobacteria populations. We used a suite of molecular techniques to analyze NMDS water samples from Vancouver Lake over two summer bloom cycles (2009 and 2010). Both intracellular MIC 16S and extracellular microcystin concentrations were measured using an ELISA kit. Intracellular microcystin mcyE concentrations exceeded WHO guidelines for recreational waters several times throughout the sampling period. PCR results demonstrated that Microcystis sp. was the sole microcystin-producing cyanobacteria species present in Vancouver Lake, although Microcystis sp.
    [Show full text]
  • Explore Your Watershed Activity Sheet
    Explore Your Watershed Chapter 1 - Clark County Watersheds Greetings and welcome to a new virtual adventure! Did you know that you can learn about and explore so much of our county’s nature from your device? What a great way to get to know our watersheds before heading out to explore! Here’s what we are going to do – first, follow this link: https://arcg.is/iGXrq Next, explore the Clark County Watersheds chapter to learn the basics of watersheds, how land and water work together to create important habitat, and ways that YOU can help protect Clark County’s watersheds! 1. What is a watershed? Hint: Watch the video in the ‘What is a watershed?’ section. a. An area of land that drains to a common stream, river or lake. b. A shed that holds water. c. A place in the forest where water comes from. 2. How many miles of streams are in Clark County? Hint: Look in the ‘Our streams’ section. a. 1,000 miles b. 2,000 miles c. More than 2,400 miles 3. What is the largest watershed that is entirely in Clark County? Hint: Watersheds along the border of Clark County also encompass other counties. a. Burnt Bridge Creek b. Salmon Creek c. East Fork Lewis River 4. Which watershed is Fifth Plain Creek a part of? Hint: This watershed drains into the Washougal River just before meeting with the Columbia River. a. West Slope b. Gibbons Creek c. Lacamas Watershed 5. What river flows southwest through Clark County for its final 12 miles? Hint: Most of this 33-mile river is in Skamania County.
    [Show full text]