DOCSLIB.ORG

Lakeshore News

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lakeshore News Spring/Summer 2019 Lakeshore News In This Issue • Big Wakes Pg 1 • Adjudication Update Pg 2 • Lake Cda Hydrology Pg 4 • Boat Garage Pg 5 • Frederick Post Pg 6 Be there to help us celebrate 55 years of BIG WAKES CAUSE BIG PROBLEMS service dedicated to We live here because we love the lakes and rivers north Idaho has in abundance. We enjoy these treasures in different ways. Some enjoy quiet protecting our beautiful time like fishing, kayaking, paddle boarding or a fun boat ride. Others Lake CDA and the rights want more action and take to the water on personal water craft or fire up of property owners who the ski boat to ride waves of different degrees. To each his own, as they love it so much. say. That said, we all need to be aware and respectful of others on the water PLEASE JOIN US and along the its shores. Property owners are used to a certain amount of shore erosion from weather and responsible recreational use of the water- ways. In the last several years the popularity of ski boats with the ability Annual Meeting to create a larger and more challenging waves for riders to enjoy have also created problems for other boaters and property owners. Coeur d’Alene Resort th This problem is occurring on waterways all over our area. The following Wed., July 17 , 2019 is a letter written by Spokane River property owners trying to bring the 6:30 Check-in Social problems to the forefront and search for solutions. Coeur d’Alene Lake- shore property owners are looking for a solution also and look forward 7:00 Meeting to working with folks along the Spokane River and the powers that be to Continued on page 2 Website: cdalakepoa.com Email: [email protected] 2 Excessive Wakes - Continued from Page 1 or safety issues like the wake boats that are surfing. develop a plan and deal with the problem. One thing is for sure — the RiverFriends2019 do not RiverFriends2019 is a group that has been formed to want the river to be a total no wake zone. What we want alleviate the safety and erosion issues on the Spokane is for the wake boats to wait until they get to the lake River in Coeur d’Alene and Post Falls. The group was to turn on the ballast and do wake boarding and wake formed to arrive at consensus regarding the causes and surfing. When they get to the lake, they need to con- to find a solution to decrease these two major issues. tinue to follow the rules. Some states are working on banning wake boats entirely on all of their waterways. A letter was sent out to river dwellers requesting input Will Idaho do that? We will see? to find out what they thought. The answer was over- What can you do? Email or write a letter to the county whelming: Make the wake boats stop wake surfing on commissioners asking them to help us solve this prob- the river. lem. Join RiverFriends2019 by emailing us at River- The river is very narrow and shallow, making the [email protected]. wakes incredibly dangerous for a child standing on a dock, a kayaker, a paddle boarder or even a boat trying The safety and erosion issues have to be addressed and to pass. One RiverFriend told us, “My 18-month-old solved ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. WE DON’T WANT granddaughter was swept up off the dock caused by a TO WAIT UNTIL A TRAGEDY occurs; we want to wake boat surfing.” A wake boat can wash a 60-plus solve the problem in 2019. pound item off the dock (a typical 9-year-old weighs 62 • • • pounds). The wakes are so strong, it causes tremendous erosion on the banks of the river, causing some to lose 4 to 6 feet of their bank. With the river being so narrow UPDATE ON THE COEUR D’ ALENE and shallow, even if the wake boats surf in the middle of the river, the force of the wake causes safety and SPOKANE RIVER BASIN ADJUDICATION erosion issues beyond belief. From our water rights Attorney Currently there is a no-wake zone of 100 feet on the The trial for the Forest Service claims is set for Au- river, which is not sufficient. The majority of the mem- gust, 2020, with motion deadlines during 2019. Any bers of RiverFriends2019 want something done, and appeals to the Idaho Supreme Court would likely be done quickly. They think that wake boats should wait heard during 2020 or 2021. Of course, it is possible until they get to the lake to fill their ballast, so people that we could reach a settlement on the Forest Service can surf behind the boats. claims prior to that date. If you read the ads for new wake boats, they promise The Tribal claims process will be dictated largely by to make wakes “as big as the ocean.” We do not want the Idaho Supreme Court ruling (yet to be issued), in- or need that. There has been a steady increase of wake cluding scheduling of any remand proceedings, and a boats each year. The Kootenai County Sheriff’s Ma- trial date and motion deadlines on the quantification of rine Division’s charter is to make sure all boats are any Tribal claims that survive the entitlement phase. 100 feet away from the shore, but that does not solve The CSRBA Court’s decisions will be subject to ad- the problem. ditional appeals. Even on the lake, the 200-foot wake zone is not suf- My best guess is the CSRBA could carry into 2020 or ficient to solve the safety and erosion concerns. Many 2021. Settlement for the Tribal claims looks less likely bays on the lake are having the same problem as we are right now, but that could change depending on the Su- on the river. Like any sport, wake surfing needs to be preme Court’s upcoming decision. managed in a way that benefits the surfer, but doesn’t injure the environment and the people who live here. Norman Semanko Regular ski boats and the like do not cause the erosion Website: cdalakepoa.com Email: [email protected] 3 Wakeboat Etiquette What You Can Do • Stay at least 150 ft. away from shore or structures. • Ride the core, avoid the shore. If you have rule violaters causing issues in front • Minimize repetitive passes. of your property you can report it to the Sheriff’s • Drive a predicted path. • Avoid close pass to other boats. Dept. however, for them to take action they need • Don’t follow another boat too closely. evidence and specific information. • Don’t impede traffic. • Avoid fairways and busy areas. 1. Get photo or video of violation action. • Look before you turn. 2. Record the hull number of the vessel. • Refrain from tricks when near other boats. 3. Note date, time and location. • Early morning times usually have less traffic. • Know and obey all local boating laws and navigation Kootenai County Sheriff - 208-446-1300 Over 35 years of experience in Marina Design & Construction. Cedar Log Docks* Steel Truss Docks* Steel Pier Docks * Aluminum Docks * Marina Development * Boat Lifts Aluminum Gangways * Slip Covers * Marine Repairs * Wave Attenuators * Dock Accessories * Permitting www.hdbmarine.com 208.689.3248 4 THE NATURAL HYDROLOGY OF LAKE COEUR D’ ALENE By Peg Carver Coeur d’Alene Lake is the second largest lake in there is an effect similar to what happens with Coeur northern Idaho, caught in a beautiful mountain set- d’Alene Lake. Flows increase and the water can’t escape ting created when great lobes of the continental ice so the rivers’ elevations increase upstream are higher cap receded during the last Ice Age. The lake is over than they are downstream. As water downstream has 26 miles long with some 135 miles of shoreline, dot- nowhere to go, it gets backed up in the upstream drain- ted with numerous parks, campgrounds, beaches, age of the St. Joe River, the Coeur d’Alene River and the trails, and recreational facilities. The lake is fed pri- St. Maries River, along with the many smaller streams. marily by two rivers, the Coeur d’Alene River and St. Joe River, and its outlet forms the Spokane River. Reservoirs, some of which are called lakes, have a dam right at the outlet and in those instances the res- ervoirs are created solely by the dam. This is not the case with Coeur d’Alene Lake. Coeur d’Alene Lake is a natural lake created by a natural restriction lo- cated nine miles upstream from Post Falls Dam at the outlet of Coeur d’Alene Lake. During the winter and early spring, that restriction on the north end of the lake limits how much water can flow out of the lake. While Avista controls the elevation of the lake dur- ing summer and fall, you may be surprised to learn “YOUR TRUSTED WATERFRONT ADVISOR” during this time of year (spring), they do not. For about six months every year, in the winter and early spring (usually from January through June) Coeur GREG DELAVAN d’Alene Lake is at natural levels. When the lake REALTOR® is on natural restriction, whatever water flows out 208.661.5900 of the lake passes through Post Falls Dam. Dur- [email protected] ing this time, they have all available spill gates open and don’t control the level of Coeur d’Alene Lake. There are three large tributaries (the Coeur d’Alene, St.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mussel Currents ~
    4th Annual Freshwater Mussels Of the Pacific Northwest Symposium ~ Mussel Currents ~ April 17th, 2007 Water Resources Education Center, Vancouver, WA Hosted by: the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup “Dedicated to conservation of Pacific Northwest drainage mussel populations and promoting restoration, protection, education, and identification of further research needs.” Special Thanks To Our Sponsors Bureau of Land Management Interagency Status/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sensitive Species Program City of Vancouver Clark County Washington Water Resources Education Center Solid Waste Program Environmental Information Cooperative American Fisheries Society Clark County, Washington Oregon Chapter Washington Department Society for Ecological Restoration of Fish and Wildlife Northwest Chapter Table of Contents About the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup…………………..... 2 Symposium Agenda ………………………..……………………………………………... 3 About the Keynote Speakers ……………………………………………………………… 5 Speaker Abstracts …..…………………………………………………………………….. 6 List of Technical Posters & Poster Abstracts….………………………………….…….... 13 Presenter Contact Information ……………………….………………………………… 16 Attendee Contact Information .…………………………………………………...……… 18 Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup Members.................................. 20 About the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup History The status of the seven species of freshwater mussels native to the Pacific Northwest has received very little attention, despite the fact that freshwater mussels in general are considered the most endangered group of animals in North America. On February 19, 2003, a workshop on freshwater mussels was held in Vancouver, Washington that consisted of presented papers and a panel discussion. The purpose of the workshop was to initiate discussion on the regional population status of freshwater mussels. The workshop was attended by 91 participants of very diverse backgrounds. From this meeting, the Pacific Northwest Native Freshwater Mussel Workgroup was founded.
    [Show full text]
  • SECTION 1: Pend Oreille COUNTY
    SECTION 1: Pend Oreille COUNTY DESCRIPTION OF PEND OREILLE COUNTY Just as the Rocky Mountains plunge into the United States on their majestic march from British Columbia, a western range called the Selkirk Mountains, runs in close parallel down into Idaho and Washington. This rugged spur offers exposed segments of the North American Continent and the Kootenay Arc, tectonic plates that began colliding over a billion years ago, and provides exceptional year-round settings for a variety of recreational opportunities. This lesser range is home to bighorn sheep, elk, moose, deer, bear, cougar, bobcats, mountain caribou, and several large predatory birds such as bald eagles and osprey. Not far from where these Selkirk Mountains end, Pend Oreille County begins its association with the Pend Oreille River. Pend Oreille County is a relatively small county that looks like the number “1” set in the northeast corner of the State of Washington. Pend Oreille County is 66 miles long and 22 miles wide. British Columbia is across the international border to the north. Spokane County and the regional trade center, the City of Spokane, lie to the south. Idaho’s Bonner and Boundary counties form the eastern border, and Stevens County, Washington forms the western border. (For a map of Pend Oreille County, see Appendix A) Encompassing more than 1400 square miles, most of Pend Oreille County takes the form of a long, forested river valley. This area, known as the Okanogan Highlands, is unique since it is the only area in the country where plant and animal species from both the Rocky Mountain Region and the Cascade Mountain region can be found.
    [Show full text]
  • Westslope Cutthroat Trout
    This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; Chapter 1 however, some errors may remain. Westslope Cutthroat Trout John D. IVIclntyre and Bruce E. Rieman, USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, 316 E. iViyrtle Street, Boise, Idaho 83702 Introduction Westslope cutthroat trout begin to mature at age 3 but usually spawn first at age 4 or 5 (table 2). Sexu­ The westslope cutthroat trout inhabits streams on ally maturing adfluvial fish move into the vicinity of both sides of the Continental Divide. On the east side tributaries in fall and winter where they remain un­ of the divide, they are distributed mostly in Mon­ til they begin to migrate upstream in the spring tana but also occur in some headwaters in Wyoming (Liknes 1984). They spawn from March to July at and southern Alberta (Behnke 1992). They are in the water temperatures near 10°C (Roscoe 1974; Liknes Missouri Basin downstream to about 60 km below 1984; Shepard et al. 1984). A population of adult fish Great Falls and in the headwaters of the Judith, Milk, in the St. Joe River, Idaho, included 1.6 females for and Marias rivers. On the west side of the Continen­ each male (Thurow and Bjornn 1978). Average length tal Divide the subspecies occurs in the upper was 334 mm for females and 366 mm for males. A Kootenai River; the Clark Fork drainage in Montana similar population in Big Creek, Montana, included and Idaho downstream to the falls on the Fend Oreille 4.1 females for each male (Huston et al.
    [Show full text]
  • MEMORANDUM Project No.: 140129 January 12, 2015
    MEMORANDUM Project No.: 140129 January 12, 2015 To: Mike Hermanson, Rob Lindsay – Spokane County Utilities cc: Todd Mielke, Spokane County Wes McCart, Stevens County Karen Skoog, Pend Oreille County Keith Stoffel, Department of Ecology Rusty Post, Department of Ecology Ty Wick, Spokane County Water District #3 Dick Price, Stevens PUD Susan McGeorge, Whitworth Water District John Pederson, Spokane County Mike Lithgow, Pend Oreille County Community Development Erik Johansen, Stevens County Land Services Kevin Cooke, Spokane County Steve Davenport, Spokane County Randy Vissia, Spokane County Linda Kiefer, Avista From: Dan Haller, Carl Einberger, Jason McCormick of Aspect Consulting, LLC and Cynthia Carlstad of Carlstad Consulting Re: Little Spokane Water Banking Demand Evaluation, Supply Assessment, and Water Transfer Framework Considerations Introduction Spokane County (the County), in conjunction with Stevens and Pend Oreille County, is considering setting up a water bank to address existing and potential regulatory constraints on existing and new water use in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 55, the Little Spokane Watershed. As part of this process, the County has convened a Policy Advisory Group (PAG) to allow interagency and stakeholder coordination and evaluation of alternatives for water banking in the watershed. Aspect Consulting LLC (Aspect) has been engaged by the County to provide consulting services for the Little Spokane Water Banking Feasibility Study. Prior to this memorandum, a previous memorandum entitled Legal, Regulatory, and Policy Framework for Water Banking in Washington was submitted to the PAG on September 30, 2014 (Aspect, 2014), followed by the first PAG meeting on October 15, 2014. This memorandum follows that initial memorandum and focuses on evaluations of future water demand in WRIA 55, potential existing water rights that could seed the water bank, and water transfer framework considerations.
    [Show full text]
  • SECTION 21 – Table of Contents
    SECTION 21 – Table of Contents 21 Spokane Subbasin Overview........................................................................2 21.1 Regional Context ........................................................................................................ 2 21.2 Spokane Subbasin Description ................................................................................... 3 21.3 Logic Path ................................................................................................................. 24 21-1 21 Spokane Subbasin Overview 21.1 Regional Context The Spokane Subbasin shares a border with the Upper Columbia Subbasin to the north, the Pend Oreille Subbasin to the northeast, and the Coeur d’ Alene Subbasin to the east (Figure 21.1). The outlet of Coeur d’ Alene Lake forms the headwaters of the Spokane River, which flows westerly to its confluence with the Columbia River (Lake Roosevelt). The major river in the Subbasin is the Spokane River, which runs 111 miles from the outlet of Coeur d’ Alene Lake to its confluence with the Columbia River. The major tributaries of the Spokane River listed from upstream to downstream include Hangman Creek (also known as Latah Creek), Little Spokane River, and Chamokane Creek (also known as Tshimikain Creek). In eastern Washington and northern Idaho there are seven dams on the Spokane River. The city of Spokane Water Department owns, operates, and maintains Upriver Dam and is licensed for fifty years (FERC license 3074-WA, 1981-2031). Avista Corporation owns and operates the other six hydroelectric facilities. The six dams (from upstream to downstream) include Post Falls in Idaho, Upper Falls, Monroe Street, Nine Mile, Long Lake, and Little Falls located in Washington. Five of the six dams owned by Avista were constructed and were operating between 1906 and 1922. Monroe Street Dam was initially built in 1890 (Avista 2002; Scholz et al. 1985) and then reconstructed in 1973.
    [Show full text]
  • Amended Spokane River and Post Falls Hydroelectric
    AVISTA CORPORATION Amended SPOKANE RIVER AND POST FALLS HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENTS RECREATION PLAN FERC LICENSE ARTICLES 416 & 417 SPOKANE RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 2545 Prepared by: REC Resources Amended by: Avista May 19, 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................1 1.1 Plan Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Area Description .................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Plan Consultation and Review ......................................................................................... 2 1.4 Plan Organization ............................................................................................................. 3 2.0 POST FALLS HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT .......................................................4 2.1 Q’emiln Park .................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.1 Trail Enhancements .................................................................................................. 4 2.1.2 Post Falls South Channel Dam Spillway Gate Replacement Project - South Channel Dam Overlook .......................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Falls Park .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Spokane River, WA Metro Redbands by Steve Maeder
    ALL PHOTOS BY JON LUKE Spokane River, WA Metro Redbands By Steve Maeder n the descent from our 14th-floor hotel room to meet our guide for the day, I had to remind myself of the reality of the situation. We had spent the night in a hotel overlooking the second largest city in To Deer Park To Chattaroy Interstate Highway Newman O To Reardan 90 Lake 2 Washington state and were still just a couple of hundred yards from a river with 2 US Highway 395 To Plese 27 Rathdrum, ID a wild trout population. It wasn’t miles from the hotel to the launch site but Flats State Route Idaho Boat Launch blocks. I’d barely settled into the truck before we were pulling into the launch. 291 Plantes Harvard I hadn’t even had time to drink enough coffee to reap the benefits of caffeine. Ferry Park Barker TJ Menach Upriver Road Bridge Road Dam 290 We descended into the river canyon to get there and it seemed we’d left 2 ne To ka Coeur d’Alene, ID the city behind. Once everyone had rigged up their gear, I headed to the o 290 Spokane Valley p Washington S River river’s edge through the bankside trees to take a peek at the water. Upriver Spokane 90 To Reardan was a bridge towering so high overhead, I couldn’t hear the traffic. Under 27 Liberty 2 90 Water Street Lake another bridge not far upstream, the downtown skyline was no more than Miles 195 Area of a half mile away.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Spokane Dissolved Oxygen Water Quality Attainment Plan Five Year Report
    AVISTA CORPORATION LAKE SPOKANE DISSOLVED OXYGEN WATER QUALITY ATTAINMENT PLAN FIVE YEAR REPORT WASHINGTON 401 CERTIFICATION FERC LICENSE APPENDIX B, SECTION 5.6 SPOKANE RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 2545 Prepared By: March 24, 2017 [Page intentionally left blank] TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 2.0 BASELINE MONITORING ........................................................................................ 3 2.1 2016 Monitoring Results .............................................................................................. 3 2.2 Assessment of Lake Spokane Water Quality (2010 – 2016) ........................................ 7 2.3 Monitoring Recommendations ..................................................................................... 8 3.0 IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES ........................................................................... 9 3.1 Studies .......................................................................................................................... 9 3.1.1 Carp Population Reduction Program ...................................................................... 10 3.1.2 Aquatic Weed Management .................................................................................... 10 3.2 2016 Implementation Measures .................................................................................. 11 3.2.1 Carp ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Information on Synthetic Organic Compounds and Trace
    U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Summary of Information on Synthetic Organic Compounds and Trace Elements in Tissue of Aquatic Biota, Clark Fork-Pend Oreille and Spokane River Basins, Montana, Idaho, and Washington, 1974–96 Water-Resources Investigations Report 98–4254 Northern Rockies Intermontane Basins National Water-Quality Assessment Study Unit National Water-Quality Assessment Program U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Summary of Information on Synthetic Organic Compounds and Trace Elements in Tissue of Aquatic Biota, Clark Fork-Pend Oreille and Spokane River Basins, Montana, Idaho, and Washington, 1974–96 By Terry R. Maret and DeAnn M. Dutton Water-Resources Investigations Report 98–4254 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Boise, Idaho 1999 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director Any use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Government. Additional information can be obtained from: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Information Services 230 Collins Road Box 25286 Boise, ID 83702-4520 Federal Center http://idaho.usgs.gov Denver, CO 80225 e-mail: [email protected] Information regarding the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program is available on the Internet via the World Wide Web. You may connect to the NAWQA Home Pages using the Universal Resource Locator (URL) at: http://wwwrvares.er.usgs.gov/nawqa/nawqa_home.html or http://montana.usgs.gov/www/public/nrokfsht.html FOREWORD The mission of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Returning Salmon to the Upper Columbia
    Returning Salmon to the Upper Columbia Sheri Sears Colville Confederated Tribes Map of Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) Chronology of Dam Construction and the loss of Fish Passage ● Rock Island – 1933 with fish passage ● Grand Coulee – 1942 without fish passage ● Brilliant – 1944 without fish passage ● Waneta – 1954 without fish passage ● Chief Joseph – 1955 without fish passage ● Under Columbia River Treaty – 1964 ● Hugh Keenleyside – 1968 without fish passage ● Mica – 1973 without fish passage The Loss of Salmon The Loss of Culture, Religion, Health, and Identity Adverse Results ● Lost over 1,100 miles of primary stream habitat for salmon, steelhead and resident species ~ 45% of historic habitat. ! ● Lost important nursery lakes (i.e. Arrow, Slocan) ! ● Lost annual aboriginal harvest of about 3 million salmon and steelhead. ! ● Lost cultural connection to salmon ! ● Previously active fishing sites eliminated: ● Celilo Falls; Kettle Falls; Spokane Falls Eco-System Impacts of Dams ● Altered the seasonal flow of the river ● By 1980, the summer proportion of flow was about 50 percent or the original flow ● Eliminating the seasonal pattern and normal hydrograph ● Altered the landscape and ecosystem of the river ● Blocked fish passage above Chief Joseph Dam ● Slack water pools between each dam ● increased migration time from weeks to months ● elevated water temperatures ● Both leading to increased mortality in fish Fish Passage at Lower Dams ● Many of the lower dams have problems with ladders and juvenile fish passageways ● Ladders used to pass adults some very lethal ● Juvenile passed through turbines in early years ● 1969 COE developed bypass systems and installed them on all dams except at the Dalles ● PH2 at Bonneville caused high mortality in the 1990 ● In early 2000’s a single day descaling rate exceeded 257K ● Juvenile fish collectors installed in 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeology of the Little Spokane River Basin, Spokane, Stevens, and Pend Oreille Counties, Washington
    Prepared in cooperation with Spokane County Hydrogeology of the Little Spokane River Basin, Spokane, Stevens, and Pend Oreille Counties, Washington Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5124 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Photograph of area north of Spokane near Chattaroy, Washington, looking approximately northeast, autumn 2011. Photograph taken by Karen Payne, U.S. Geological Survey. Hydrogeology of the Little Spokane River Basin, Spokane, Stevens, and Pend Oreille Counties, Washington By Sue C. Kahle, Theresa D. Olsen, and Elisabeth T. Fasser Prepared in cooperation with Spokane County Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5124 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2013 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. Suggested citation: Kahle, S.C., Olsen, T.D., and Fasser, E.T., 2013, Hydrogeology of the Little Spokane River Basin, Spokane, Stevens, and Pend Oreille Counties, Washington: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Spokane Dissolved Oxygen Water Quality Attainment Plan 2018 Annual Summary Report
    AVISTA CORPORATION LAKE SPOKANE DISSOLVED OXYGEN WATER QUALITY ATTAINMENT PLAN 2018 ANNUAL SUMMARY REPORT WASHINGTON 401 CERTIFICATION FERC LICENSE APPENDIX B, SECTION 5.6 SPOKANE RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO. 2545 Prepared By: March 29, 2019 [Page intentionally left blank] TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 BASELINE MONITORING ................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 2018 Monitoring Results .......................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Monitoring Recommendations ................................................................................................................. 6 3.0 IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES ....................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Studies ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 3.1.1 Carp Population Reduction Program ................................................................................................... 7 3.1.2 Aquatic Weed Management ................................................................................................................ 8 3.2 2018 Implementation Measures ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]