DOCSLIB.ORG

Opening Brief of NRDC, Et Al. (PDF)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Opening Brief of NRDC, Et Al. (PDF) Case: 15-3751 Document: 130 Filed: 11/01/2016 Page: 1 Case Nos. 15-3751, 15-3817, 15-3820, 15-3839 & 15-3948 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT IN RE: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY FINAL RULE: CLEAN WATER RULE: DEFINITION OF “WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES,” 80 Fed. Reg. 37,054 (June 29, 2015) On Petitions for Review of a Final Rule of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Brief of Petitioners National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, One Hundred Miles, Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, Sierra Club, and the South Carolina Coastal Conservation League Jennifer A. Sorenson Janette K. Brimmer Natural Resources Defense Council Earthjustice 111 Sutter Street, 21st Floor 705 2nd Avenue, Suite 203 San Francisco, CA 94104 Seattle, WA 98104 (415) 875-6164 (206) 343-7340 Counsel for National Wildlife Federation and Natural Resources Defense Council Jennifer C. Chavez Earthjustice Catherine Wannamaker 1625 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Southern Environmental Law Center Suite 702 463 King Street, Suite B Washington, D.C. 20036-2243 Charleston, SC 29403 (202) 667-4500 (843) 720-5270 Counsel for Puget Soundkeeper Counsel for One Hundred Miles Alliance and Sierra Club and South Carolina Coastal Conservation League Case: 15-3751 Document: 130 Filed: 11/01/2016 Page: 2 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Disclosure of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interest Sixth Circuit Case Number: 15-3751 Case Name: Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA et al. Name of counsel: Jennifer A. Sorenson Pursuant to 6th Cir. R. 26.1, National Wildlife Federation Name of Party makes the following disclosure: 1. Is said party a subsidiary or affiliate of a publicly owned corporation? If Yes, list below the identity of the parent corporation or affiliate and the relationship between it and the named party: No. 2. Is there a publicly owned corporation, not a party to the appeal, that has a financial interest in the outcome? If yes, list the identity of such corporation and the nature of the financial interest: No. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on _____________________________________November 1, 2016 the foregoing document was served on all parties or their counsel of record through the CM/ECF system if they are registered users or, if they are not, by placing a true and correct copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, to their address of record. s/ Jennifer A. Sorenson Counsel for Petitioner National Wildlife Federation This statement is filed twice: when the appeal is initially opened and later, in the principal briefs, immediately preceding the table of contents. See 6th Cir. R. 26.1 on page 2 of this form. 6CA-1 8/08 Page 1 of 2 Case: 15-3751 Document: 130 Filed: 11/01/2016 Page: 3 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Disclosure of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interest Sixth Circuit Case Number: 15-3751 Case Name: Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA et al. Name of counsel: Jennifer A. Sorenson Pursuant to 6th Cir. R. 26.1, Natural Resources Defense Council Name of Party makes the following disclosure: 1. Is said party a subsidiary or affiliate of a publicly owned corporation? If Yes, list below the identity of the parent corporation or affiliate and the relationship between it and the named party: No. 2. Is there a publicly owned corporation, not a party to the appeal, that has a financial interest in the outcome? If yes, list the identity of such corporation and the nature of the financial interest: No. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on _____________________________________November 1, 2016 the foregoing document was served on all parties or their counsel of record through the CM/ECF system if they are registered users or, if they are not, by placing a true and correct copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, to their address of record. s/ Jennifer A. Sorenson Counsel for Petitioner Natural Resources Defense Council This statement is filed twice: when the appeal is initially opened and later, in the principal briefs, immediately preceding the table of contents. See 6th Cir. R. 26.1 on page 2 of this form. 6CA-1 8/08 Page 1 of 2 Case: 15-3751 Document: 130 Filed: 11/01/2016 Page: 4 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Disclosure of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interest Sixth Circuit Case Number: 15-3751 Case Name: Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA et al. Name of counsel: Megan L. Hinkle Pursuant to 6th Cir. R. 26.1, One Hundred Miles Name of Party makes the following disclosure: 1. Is said party a subsidiary or affiliate of a publicly owned corporation? If Yes, list below the identity of the parent corporation or affiliate and the relationship between it and the named party: No. 2. Is there a publicly owned corporation, not a party to the appeal, that has a financial interest in the outcome? If yes, list the identity of such corporation and the nature of the financial interest: No. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on _____________________________________November 1, 2016 the foregoing document was served on all parties or their counsel of record through the CM/ECF system if they are registered users or, if they are not, by placing a true and correct copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, to their address of record. s/ Megan L. Hinkle Counsel for Petitioner One Hundred Miles This statement is filed twice: when the appeal is initially opened and later, in the principal briefs, immediately preceding the table of contents. See 6th Cir. R. 26.1 on page 2 of this form. 6CA-1 8/08 Page 1 of 2 Case: 15-3751 Document: 130 Filed: 11/01/2016 Page: 5 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Disclosure of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interest Sixth Circuit Case Number: 15-3751 Case Name: In re: Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA et al. Name of counsel: Jennifer C. Chavez, Janette K. Brimmer Pursuant to 6th Cir. R. 26.1, Puget Soundkeeper Alliance Name of Party makes the following disclosure: 1. Is said party a subsidiary or affiliate of a publicly owned corporation? If Yes, list below the identity of the parent corporation or affiliate and the relationship between it and the named party: No 2. Is there a publicly owned corporation, not a party to the appeal, that has a financial interest in the outcome? If yes, list the identity of such corporation and the nature of the financial interest: No CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on _____________________________________November 1, 2016 the foregoing document was served on all parties or their counsel of record through the CM/ECF system if they are registered users or, if they are not, by placing a true and correct copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, to their address of record. s/ Jennifer C. Chavez /s/ Janette K. Brimmer This statement is filed twice: when the appeal is initially opened and later, in the principal briefs, immediately preceding the table of contents. See 6th Cir. R. 26.1 on page 2 of this form. 6CA-1 8/08 Page 1 of 2 Case: 15-3751 Document: 130 Filed: 11/01/2016 Page: 6 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Disclosure of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interest Sixth Circuit Case Number: 15-3751 Case Name: In re: Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA et al. Name of counsel: Jennifer C. Chavez, Janette K. Brimmer Pursuant to 6th Cir. R. 26.1, Sierra Club Name of Party makes the following disclosure: 1. Is said party a subsidiary or affiliate of a publicly owned corporation? If Yes, list below the identity of the parent corporation or affiliate and the relationship between it and the named party: No 2. Is there a publicly owned corporation, not a party to the appeal, that has a financial interest in the outcome? If yes, list the identity of such corporation and the nature of the financial interest: No CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on _____________________________________November 1, 2016 the foregoing document was served on all parties or their counsel of record through the CM/ECF system if they are registered users or, if they are not, by placing a true and correct copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, to their address of record. s/ Jennifer C. Chavez /s/ Janette K. Brimmer This statement is filed twice: when the appeal is initially opened and later, in the principal briefs, immediately preceding the table of contents. See 6th Cir. R. 26.1 on page 2 of this form. 6CA-1 8/08 Page 1 of 2 Case: 15-3751 Document: 130 Filed: 11/01/2016 Page: 7 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Disclosure of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interest Sixth Circuit Case Number: 15-3751 Case Name: Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA et al. Name of counsel: Megan L. Hinkle Pursuant to 6th Cir. R. 26.1, South Carolina Coastal Conservation League Name of Party makes the following disclosure: 1. Is said party a subsidiary or affiliate of a publicly owned corporation? If Yes, list below the identity of the parent corporation or affiliate and the relationship between it and the named party: No. 2. Is there a publicly owned corporation, not a party to the appeal, that has a financial interest in the outcome? If yes, list the identity of such corporation and the nature of the financial interest: No. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on _____________________________________November 1, 2016 the foregoing document was served on all parties or their counsel of record through the CM/ECF system if they are registered users or, if they are not, by placing a true and correct copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, to their address of record.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal
    Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal October 2017 Alternative Formats Available Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal Prepared for: King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Wastewater Treatment Division Submitted by: Timothy Clark, Wendy Eash-Loucks, and Dean Wilson King County Water and Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank for following people for their contributions to this report: Staff at the King County Environmental Laboratory for field and analytical support. Dawn Duddleson (King County) for her help in completing the literature review. The King County Water Quality and Quantity Group for their insights, especially Sally Abella for her thorough and thoughtful review. Lauran Warner, Frederick Goetz, and Kent Easthouse of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Judy Pickar (project manager), Dean Wilson (science lead), and King County project team members (Bob Bernhard, Mark Buscher, Timothy Clark, Betsy Cooper, Wendy Eash‐Loucks, Elizabeth Gaskill, Martin Grassley, Erica Jacobs, Susan Kaufman‐Una, Lester, Deborah, Kate Macneale, Chris Magan, Bruce Nairn, Sarah Ogier, Erika Peterson, John Phillips, Cathie Scott, Jim Simmonds, Jeff Stern, Dave White, Mary Wohleb, and Olivia Wright). The project’s Science and Technical Review Team members—Virgil Adderley, Mike Brett, Jay Davis, Ken Schiff, and John Stark—for guidance and review of this report. Citation King County. 2017. Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Study: Analysis of Existing Data on Lake Union/Ship Canal.
    [Show full text]
  • 8 Chittenden Locks 47
    Seattle’s Aquatic Environments: Hiram M. Chittenden Locks Hiram M. Chittenden Locks The following write-up relies heavily on the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks/Salmon Bay Subarea Chapter by Fred Goetz in the Draft Reconnaissance Assessment – Habitat Factors that Contribute to the Decline of Salmonids by the Greater Lake Washington Technical Committee (2001). Overview The Hiram M. Chittenden Locks (Locks) were Operation of the navigational locks involves constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers raising or lowering the water level within either (the Corps) in 1916 and commissioned in 1917. the large or small lock chamber so that vessels may The Locks were built as a navigation project to pass between the two waterbodies. The filling and allow boats to travel from the marine waters of emptying of the large lock chamber is achieved by Puget Sound to the protected freshwaters of Lake use of a system of two large conduits that can Union and Lake Washington. The Locks are either fill the entire lock or half of the lock. This comprised of two navigational lock chambers: a is achieved by using a miter gate that divides the large lock that accommodates both large and small large lock chamber into two sections. Water is vessels and a small lock used by smaller vessels. In taken into the conduits via two culvert intakes addition to the lock chambers, the Locks include a located immediately upstream of the structure. dam, 6 spillway bays, and a fish ladder. Water is conveyed through each conduit and is The Locks form a dam at the outlet of the Lake discharged into the lock chamber through outlet Washington and Lake Union/Ship Canal system culverts on each side of the chamber.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Washington Ship Canal and Lake Washington NOAA Chart 18447
    BookletChart™ Lake Washington Ship Canal and Lake Washington NOAA Chart 18447 A reduced-scale NOAA nautical chart for small boaters When possible, use the full-size NOAA chart for navigation. Included Area Published by the Magnolia Bluff and Duwamish Head, has a width of about 2 miles and extends SE for nearly the same distance. The bay is deep throughout National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration most of its area. National Ocean Service A speed limit of 4 knots is enforced within the guide piers of the Hiram Office of Coast Survey M. Chittenden Locks. A speed limit of 7 knots is enforced elsewhere in the Lake Washington Ship Canal, except in an area marked by four www.NauticalCharts.NOAA.gov private buoys in the N part of Lake Union. 888-990-NOAA The Hiram M. Chittenden Locks, a double lock, and a fixed dam are at the narrows of the entrance to Salmon Bay, 1.2 miles in from the sound. What are Nautical Charts? The large lock, a two-chamber structure, has a clear length of 760 feet, width of 80 feet, lift of 26 feet, and depth over the lower miter sill of 29 Nautical charts are a fundamental tool of marine navigation. They show feet. The small lock has a clear length of 123 feet, width of 28 feet, lift of water depths, obstructions, buoys, other aids to navigation, and much 26 feet, and depth over the lower sill of 16 feet. Passage time is less more. The information is shown in a way that promotes safe and than 30 minutes for large vessels and 5 to 10 minutes for small vessels.
    [Show full text]
  • Shilshole Bay Marina
    GUEST MOORAGE MARINA AMENITIES SERVICES • Fuel dock with store including ice, beer and wine • Garbage and recycling centers SHILSHOLE BAY MARINA • Shuttle van into Ballard • Free sewage pumpouts • Boating clubs and groups welcome 7001 Seaview Ave NW #100, Seattle, WA 98117 • Large plaza and garden area with BBQ and picnic • Free bike rentals tables available Tel: (206) 787-3006 | After hours: (206) 601-4089 • Free cable TV (only on guest docks) • Overnight parking Fax: (206) 787-3391 • VHF CH 17 • Gas grills and tents available • Wide fairways for groups E-Mail: [email protected] • www.portseattle.org • Restaurants on site and nearby • Restrooms and laundry facilities MARINA EVENTS • Pet friendly - dog park nearby NORTH • June National Marina Day • Next to Golden Gardens Park, Burke-Gilman trail • August Movies at the Marina • Bike lockers available • Boat hoists UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BREAKWATER • Electric vehicle charging stations CONTROLLING DEPTH 15’ MLLW=0 • Superyachts welcome • Boatyard on site NAVIGATION LIGHT • Bocce ball D 50’ 46’ E 50’ • Kayak storage available 46’ 50’ F 60’ • Mail services available C 42’ UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BREAKWATER A 42’ Slips 17-25 48’ 50’ 62’ G 50’ 62’ NAVIGATION LIGHT Slips50’ 17-25 CONTROLLING DEPTH EL 15’ MLLW=0 HENRY L. KOTKINS PIER40’ 46’ PUBLIC FISHING16 PIER FAIRWAY 74’ 83’ FAIRWAY 83’ H W X 15B PORTAPOTTY PUBLIC FISHING PIER 100’ B DUMP J K L M N O P Q R S T U V RESERVED 54’ FAIRWAY 68’ 50’ 42’ 42’ 40’40’ 40’40’ 40’38’ 38’38’ 36’ 36’ 36’36’ 34’34’ 30’30’ 30’30’ 30’30’ 30’30’ 40’ 15A
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Potential Impacts of Atlantic Salmon Culture on Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Hood Canal Summer-Run Chum Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Units
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-53 Review of Potential Impacts of Atlantic Salmon Culture on Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Hood Canal Summer-Run Chum Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Units June 2002 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS Series The Northwest Fisheries Science Center of the Na­ tional Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, uses the NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS series to issue informal scientific and technical publications when complete formal review and editorial processing are not appropriate or feasible due to time constraints. Documents published in this series may be referenced in the scientific and technical literature. The NMFS-NWFSC Technical Memorandum series of the Northwest Fisheries Science Center continues the NMFS-F/NWC series established in 1970 by the Northwest & Alaska Fisheries Science Center, which has since been split into the Northwest Fisheries Science Center and the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. The NMFS-AFSC Technical Memorandum series is now being used by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center. Reference throughout this document to trade names does not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. This document should be cited as follows: Waknitz, F.W., T.J. Tynan, C.E. Nash, R.N. Iwamoto, and L.G. Rutter. 2002. Review of potential impacts of Atlantic salmon culture on Puget Sound chinook salmon and Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon evolutionarily significant units. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-53, 83 p. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-53 Review of Potential Impacts of Atlantic Salmon Culture on Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Hood Canal Summer-Run Chum Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Units F.
    [Show full text]
  • Bookletchart™ Puget Sound – Shilshole Bay to Commencement Bay NOAA Chart 18474
    BookletChart™ Puget Sound – Shilshole Bay to Commencement Bay NOAA Chart 18474 A reduced-scale NOAA nautical chart for small boaters When possible, use the full-size NOAA chart for navigation. Included Area Published by the depths were 14 feet in the S entrances, and 15 feet in the N entrance. There are berths at the concrete floats for 1,400 craft to 250 feet long, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration including a guest pier and transient berths. The marina can provide National Ocean Service electricity, gasoline, bio-diesel (#1 and #2), diesel fuel, water, ice, marine Office of Coast Survey supplies, and a pump-out station at the 600-foot pier at the midpoint of the basin. Two 3-ton hoists are at the S end, and one 3-ton and one 4- www.NauticalCharts.NOAA.gov ton hoists are at the N end of the basin. A 55-ton marine travel lift, for 888-990-NOAA haul-out, is available at the boatyard at the S end of the basin. Dry storage is available for 82 boats on movable trailers at the N end of the What are Nautical Charts? marina. A boat launching ramp is located N of the marina in Golden Gardens Park. The marina can be contacted on VHF-FM channel 17. Nautical charts are a fundamental tool of marine navigation. They show West Point, at the N entrance to Elliott Bay, is a low, sandy point which water depths, obstructions, buoys, other aids to navigation, and much rises abruptly to an elevation of over 300 feet 0.5 mile from its tip.
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Beaches 2004 (PDF)
    National List of Beaches March 2004 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20460 EPA-823-R-04-004 i Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 States Alabama ............................................................................................................... 3 Alaska................................................................................................................... 6 California .............................................................................................................. 9 Connecticut .......................................................................................................... 17 Delaware .............................................................................................................. 21 Florida .................................................................................................................. 22 Georgia................................................................................................................. 36 Hawaii................................................................................................................... 38 Illinois ................................................................................................................... 45 Indiana.................................................................................................................. 47 Louisiana
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes-Of-The-Salish-Sea-Pp18.Pdf
    NOAA Professional Paper NMFS 18 Fishes of the Salish Sea: a compilation and distributional analysis Theodore W. Pietsch James W. Orr September 2015 U.S. Department of Commerce NOAA Professional Penny Pritzker Secretary of Commerce Papers NMFS National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Kathryn D. Sullivan Scientifi c Editor Administrator Richard Langton National Marine Fisheries Service National Marine Northeast Fisheries Science Center Fisheries Service Maine Field Station Eileen Sobeck 17 Godfrey Drive, Suite 1 Assistant Administrator Orono, Maine 04473 for Fisheries Associate Editor Kathryn Dennis National Marine Fisheries Service Offi ce of Science and Technology Fisheries Research and Monitoring Division 1845 Wasp Blvd., Bldg. 178 Honolulu, Hawaii 96818 Managing Editor Shelley Arenas National Marine Fisheries Service Scientifi c Publications Offi ce 7600 Sand Point Way NE Seattle, Washington 98115 Editorial Committee Ann C. Matarese National Marine Fisheries Service James W. Orr National Marine Fisheries Service - The NOAA Professional Paper NMFS (ISSN 1931-4590) series is published by the Scientifi c Publications Offi ce, National Marine Fisheries Service, The NOAA Professional Paper NMFS series carries peer-reviewed, lengthy original NOAA, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, research reports, taxonomic keys, species synopses, fl ora and fauna studies, and data- Seattle, WA 98115. intensive reports on investigations in fi shery science, engineering, and economics. The Secretary of Commerce has Copies of the NOAA Professional Paper NMFS series are available free in limited determined that the publication of numbers to government agencies, both federal and state. They are also available in this series is necessary in the transac- exchange for other scientifi c and technical publications in the marine sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • Synthesis of Salmon Research and Monitoring: Investigations
    Synthesis of Salmon Research and Monitoring 1 Acknowledgements Contributors The following persons contributed to the production of this report: Mike Cooksey Peter N. Johnson Paul DeVries Michele Koehler Charles J. Ebel Lynne Melder Frederick A. Goetz Jim Muck Julie Hall Eva Weaver Funding Sources of Lake Washington General Investigation study funding and personnel: • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District • Seattle Public Utilities • King Conservation District • King County/Metro • National Marine Fisheries Service • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Participants The following persons and organizations participated substantively in the research projects that contributed to this report: • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Linda Smith, Chuck Ebel, Fred Goetz, Lynne Melder, Rebecca Jahns, Marian Valentine, Amy Reese, Jeff Dillon, David VanRijn, Bill Nagy, Larry Lawrence, Jim Sadler, John Post, Bill Livermore, and most of the other Hiram M. Chittenden Locks staff • Seattle Public Utilities: Melinda Jones, Jean White, Keith Kurko, Julie Hall, Gail Arnold, Bruce Bachen, Alan Chinn, Rand Little • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Roger Tabor, Mark Celedonia, Howard Gearns, Charles McCoy, Sergio Camacho, and other USFWS staff • King County: Doug Houck, Hans Berge, Francis Sweeney, Gary Yoshida, • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: Dave Seiler (retired), Lindsey Fleischer, Chris Waldbillig, Mark Carr, Mike Mizell, Hwa Kim, Clayton Kinsel, Pete Topping, Kelly Kiyohara, Issaquah Creek Hatchery Staff • National Marine Fisheries
    [Show full text]
  • Foreword Chapter I'j Seattle and the Lake Washington Region
    HISTORY OF THE LAKE WASHINGTON CANAL Foreword with the inauguration of the great work of harbor im­ provement which, under the contract, is to begin March 1, a brighter era will dawn, not only for Seattle, but for the neighboring cities and for the whole Puget Sound country, for its good effects cannot but extend over a wider area than the immediate scene of operation. Its completion will provide our hilly city with an ideal area for man­ ufacturies, warehouses, and other enterprises which need a large space, adjacent to means of transportation by rail and water; it will open to ocean-going ships the Duwamish Waterways and the great fresh-water harbor of Lake Washington, and will conduct along the whole existing line of wharves a stream of fresh water which will check the ravages of the teredo; it will furnish abundant room for railroad terminals, so that all roads, present and future, can have all the facilities they require; it will put Seattle in the front rank among the great ports of the United States, and among manufac­ turing cities."* Chapter I' J Seattle and the Lake Washington Region The geographic situation of Puget Sound in relation to Lake Union, Lake Washington, and Lake Samamish suggested to the very earliest settlers the idea of a ship canal connecting these three bodies of water. Coal fields of considerable extent lie within two miles of the eastern shore of Lake Washington. The coal was for­ merly lightered to the Portage from the mines, carried across by tram cars to Lake Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishermen's Terminal
    Fishermen’s Terminal: Million-Dollar Industry By Sam L. Sutherland Preface Seattle’s Fishermen’s Terminal has occupied the northeastern edge of the Magnolia commu- nity for nearly 100 years. This facility serves as a homeport for hundreds of boats and a multi-million-dollar fishing industry, and its resources have been part of Magnolia’s history from early on. Discovering and researching the history, growth and present-day challenges affecting the fishing industry and the Terminal sent me on many paths. I began with the Terminal. I spoke with fishermen, skippers, suppliers, safety experts, government experts and regulators to learn about what goes on at the Terminal. Conversations with the fishermen occurred in the Bay Restaurant at Fishermen’s Center, or on their fishing boats. Family stories came easily from the men who talked about their grandfathers and fathers who fished and in turn taught them. These three generations represent 50 to 95 years of fishing in the Northwest. One of the most interesting men turned out to be deaf. He’d worked 40 years on family- owned fishing boats and on his own boat. I spent a lot of time walking on the docks and fingers (smaller docks projecting at 90 degrees) to look at and to photograph many of the boats. I pondered the differences in their configurations, sizes, rigging and visible gear. Opportunities occurred for visits with individ- uals who owned boats, worked on them or supported them. My photography was influenced by the physical size of the Terminal, its many buildings and their arrangement, as well as the daily activities of boats coming and going.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Marine Nearshore 81-92.P65
    Seattle’s Aquatic Environments: Marine Nearshore Marine Nearshore The following write-up relies heavily on the Review Draft of the State of the Nearshore Ecosys- tem: Eastern Shore of Central Puget Sound, Including Vashon and Maury Islands (WRIAs 8 and 9). January 2001 (Review Draft) for the WRIA 8 and 9 Nearshore Technical Committee. Overview The city of Seattle’s marine nearshore area extends cumulative impacts of urban development have from North 145th Street south to Brace Point in resulted in major changes to the shoreline environ- West Seattle and includes approximately 30 miles ment and the marine nearshore ecosystem. Rela- of Puget Sound shoreline. The nearshore environ- tively little is known about the direct effects of ment in the city of Seattle includes areas within urban development and other human impacts on both WRIA 8 and WRIA 9. Approximately 8 the migration, growth, survival, and habitat of miles of shoreline is within Elliott Bay and 2.5 Chinook salmon in the marine nearshore areas of miles of shoreline is within Shilshole Bay. Seattle. However, we do know that bulkheading, bank armoring, and other human activities within The nearshore environment in Puget Sound shoreline areas have affected many physical possesses an extremely productive and dynamic processes including sediment production and ecosystem. Tides, currents, wave action, and transport, and that these processes are important intermixing of salt with freshwater create a com- for forming and maintaining habitat for juvenile plex physical environment situated at the juncture Chinook salmon in the marine nearshore and between land and water. The marine nearshore estuary areas.
    [Show full text]