DOCSLIB.ORG

Adapting to Climate Change at Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Adapting to Climate Change at Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park United States Department of Agriculture Adapting to Climate Forest Service Pacific Northwest Change at Olympic Research Station General Technical Report National Forest and PNW-GTR-844 August 2011 Olympic National Park The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the national forests and national grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Editors Jessica E. Halofsky is a research ecologist, University of Washington, College of the Environment, School of Forest Resources, Box 352100, Seattle, WA 98195-2100; David L. Peterson is a research biological scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences Laboratory, 400 N 34th St., Suite 201, Seattle, WA 98103; Kathy A. O’Halloran is the natural resources staff officer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Olympic National Forest, 1835 Black Lake Blvd. SW, Olympia, WA 98512-5623; and Catherine Hawkins Hoffman is the Climate Change Adaptation Coordinator, National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center, 1201 Oakridge Dr., Fort Collins, CO 80525 (formerly Chief, Natural Resources Division, Olympic National Park, Port Angeles, WA). This work was performed under cooperative agreement PNW-06-CA-11261987-144. Cover Butterfly photo by Betsy Howell, Forest Service (Olympic NF). River photo by Jessica Halofsky (University of Washington). Fish photo courtesy of the National Park Service (Olympic NP). Forest photo courtesy of the U.S. Forest Service (Olympic NF). Adapting to Climate Change at Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park Jessica E. Halofsky, David L. Peterson, Kathy A. O’Halloran, and Catherine Hawkins Hoffman Editors U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station Portland, Oregon General Technical Report, PNW-GTR-844 August 2011 This page was intentionally left blank. Abstract Halofsky, Jessica E.; Peterson, David L.; O’Halloran, Kathy A.; Hawkins Hoffman, Catherine, eds. 2011. Adapting to climate change at Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-844. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 130 p. Climate change presents a major challenge to natural resource managers both because of the magnitude of potential effects of climate change on ecosystem structure, processes, and function, and because of the uncertainty associated with those potential ecological effects. Concrete ways to adapt to climate change are needed to help natural resource managers take the first steps to incorporate climate change into management and take advantage of opportu- nities to counteract the negative effects of climate change. We began a climate change adapta- tion case study at Olympic National Forest (ONF) in partnership with Olympic National Park (ONP) to determine how to adapt management of federal lands on the Olympic Peninsula, Washington, to climate change. The case study began in the summer of 2008 and continued for 1½ years. The case study process involved science-based sensitivity assessments, review of management activities and constraints, and adaptation workshops in each of four focus areas (hydrology and roads, fish, vegetation, and wildlife). The process produced adaptation options for ONF and ONP, and illustrated the utility of place-based vulnerability assessment and science-management workshops in adapting to climate change. The case study process provides an example for other national forests, national parks, and natural resource agencies of how federal land management units can collaborate in the initial stages of climate change adaptation. Many of the ideas generated through this process can potentially be applied in other locations and in other agencies. Keywords: Adaptation, climate change, fish habitat management, hydrology, road management, science-management partnerships, vegetation management, wildlife habitat management. Summary In this report, we describe results of the Olympic Climate Change Case Study, a science- management collaboration initiated to develop climate change adaptation strategies and actions for Olympic National Forest (ONF) and Olympic National Park (ONP). The case study was one of three parallel climate change adaptation case studies on national forests and adjacent national parks in the Western United States as a part of a larger effort, the WestWide Climate Initiative. This initiative was created by scientists of the U.S. Forest Service to address the urgent need to communicate climate change information to land managers and work with them to develop adaptation options. For the Olympic Climate Change Case Study, we conducted a vulnerability assessment to facilitate development of adaptation strategies and actions for ONF and ONP. The first step in the vulnerability assessment process involved a review of available climate model projections to determine likely levels of exposure to climate change (degree of deviation in temperature and precipitation) on the Olympic Peninsula (chapter 3). In the next step, we reviewed relevant literature on effects of climate change and available projections to identify likely climate change sensitivities in each of four focus areas on the Olympic Peninsula, including hydrology and roads (chapter 4), fish (chapter 5), vegetation (chapter 6), and wildlife (chapter 7). We worked with regional scientists and specialists to interpret available information and apply it more directly to Olympic Peninsula ecosystems. Finally, we reviewed current management activities at ONF and ONP and identified management constraints to evaluate some aspects of institutional capacity to implement adaptive actions. Review of current management activities was done by focus area and is described in the chapter for each focus area. The vulnerability assessment process set the stage for development of adaptation options at the forest and park through science-management workshops (also described in the chapter for each focus area). The workshop format gave managers an open forum to brainstorm, express initial thoughts and ideas, and vet those ideas among peers. Direct engagement of scientists and managers in the workshop format fostered development of science-based adaptation strategies. During workshop discussions, managers identified general priority actions for adaptation, as well as priorities for species protection, habitat protection, and monitoring. Although interagency partnerships exist elsewhere to address specific natural resource issues, the Olympic Climate Change Case Study is an unprecedented example of U.S. For- est Service and National Park Service jointly planning for climate change adaptation. The case study process produced specific and tangible ways for ONF and ONP to incorporate climate change adaptation strategies into management. A key finding of the assessment was that the current general management at both ONF and ONP, with restoration as a primary goal, is consistent with managing for resilience to prepare ecosystems for a changing climate. However, the effort highlighted some potential issues related to climate change that challenge current precepts and management guidelines and helped to identify new potential actions and actions that could be increased and reprioritized. iv Climate change adaptation requires systematic monitoring and evaluation to detect changes and determine the success of adaptive management activities. Staying abreast of available information on potential climate change effects is essential to determine addi- tional ways to incorporate climate change adaptation into management. Although further effort will be required, the case study described in this report was an essential first step for ONF, ONP, and their stakeholders in preparing for climate change on the Olympic Penin- sula. v Contents 1 Chapter 1: Introduction Jessica E. Halofsky, David L. Peterson, Kathy A. O’Halloran, and Catherine Hawkins Hoffman 3 References 5 Chapter 2: Olympic National Forest and Olympic National Park: Biogeographic Setting, Cultural History, and Policy Context Jessica E. Halofsky, Kathy A. O’Halloran, Catherine Hawkins Hoffman, David L. Peterson, and Jacilee Wray 5 The Olympic Peninsula 5 Cultural History of the Olympic Peninsula 7 Olympic National
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities
    NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN THE FIRST 10 YEARS (1994–2003) Socioeconomic Monitoring of the Olympic National Forest and Three Local Communities Lita P. Buttolph, William Kay, Susan Charnley, Cassandra Moseley, and Ellen M. Donoghue General Technical Report United States Forest Pacific Northwest PNW-GTR-679 Department of Service Research Station July 2006 Agriculture The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the National Forests and National Grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all pro- grams.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
    [Show full text]
  • Little Quilcene Final Report
    Little Quilcene-Leland Creek Watershed Rapid Habitat Assessment and Prioritized Restoration Framework Technical Report prepared by Wild Fish Conservancy Northwest 15629 Main Street NE Duvall, WA 98019 www.wildfishconservancy.org for Pacific Ecological Institute 4500 Ninth Avenue NE, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98105 www.peiseattle.org September, 2008 Table of Contents Executive Summary.............................................................................................................07 Part I: Little Quilcene – Leland Creek Watershed Rapid Habitat Assessment Introduction..........................................................................................................................09 Background Watershed Setting ..................................................................................................................10 Hydrology ..............................................................................................................................12 Study Background ..................................................................................................................12 Methods Reach Delineation..................................................................................................................14 In-stream / Riparian Habitat Evaluation...............................................................................15 Spawning Surveys ..................................................................................................................17 Fish Passage Barrier Assessment..........................................................................................19
    [Show full text]
  • Snowmobiles in the Wilderness
    Snowmobiles in the Wilderness: You can help W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e P a r k s A necessary prohibition Join us in safeguarding winter recreation: Each year, more and more people are riding snowmobiles • When riding in a new area, obtain a map. into designated Wilderness areas, which is a concern for • Familiarize yourself with Wilderness land managers, the public and many snowmobile groups. boundaries, and don’t cross them. This may be happening for a variety of reasons: many • Carry the message to clubs, groups and friends. snowmobilers may not know where the Wilderness boundaries are or may not realize the area is closed. For more information about snowmobiling opportunities or Wilderness areas, please contact: Wilderness…a special place Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission (360) 902-8500 Established by Congress through the Wilderness Washington State Snowmobile Association (800) 784-9772 Act of 1964, “Wilderness” is a special land designation North Cascades National Park (360) 854-7245 within national forests and certain other federal lands. Colville National Forest (509) 684-7000 These areas were designated so that an untouched Gifford Pinchot National Forest (360) 891-5000 area of our wild lands could be maintained in a natural Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest (425) 783-6000 state. Also, they were set aside as places where people Mt. Rainier National Park (877) 270-7155 could get away from the sights and sounds of modern Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest (509) 664-9200 civilization and where elements of our cultural history Olympic National Forest (360) 956-2402 could be preserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Hanging on to the Edges Hanging on to the Edges
    DANIEL NETTLE Hanging on to the Edges Hanging on to the Edges Essays on Science, Society and the Academic Life D ANIEL Essays on Science, Society I love this book. I love the essays and I love the overall form. Reading these essays feels like entering into the best kind of intellectual conversati on—it makes me want and the Academic Life to write essays in reply. It makes me want to get everyone else reading it. I almost N never feel this enthusiasti c about a book. ETTLE —Rebecca Saxe, Professor of Cogniti ve Science at MIT What does it mean to be a scien� st working today; specifi cally, a scien� st whose subject ma� er is human life? Scien� sts o� en overstate their claim to certainty, sor� ng the world into categorical dis� nc� ons that obstruct rather than clarify its complexi� es. In this book Daniel Ne� le urges the reader to unpick such DANIEL NETTLE dis� nc� ons—biological versus social sciences, mind versus body, and nature versus nurture—and look instead for the for puzzles and anomalies, the points of Hanging on to the Edges connec� on and overlap. These essays, converted from o� en humorous, some� mes autobiographical blog posts, form an extended medita� on on the possibili� es and frustra� ons of the life scien� fi c. Pragma� cally arguing from the intersec� on between social and biological sciences, Ne� le reappraises the virtues of policy ini� a� ves such as Universal Basic Income and income redistribu� on, highligh� ng the traps researchers and poli� cians are liable to encounter.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Areas of the National Forest System, As of September 30, 2019
    United States Department of Agriculture Land Areas of the National Forest System As of September 30, 2019 Forest Service WO Lands FS-383 November 2019 Metric Equivalents When you know: Multiply by: To fnd: Inches (in) 2.54 Centimeters Feet (ft) 0.305 Meters Miles (mi) 1.609 Kilometers Acres (ac) 0.405 Hectares Square feet (ft2) 0.0929 Square meters Yards (yd) 0.914 Meters Square miles (mi2) 2.59 Square kilometers Pounds (lb) 0.454 Kilograms United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Land Areas of the WO, Lands National Forest FS-383 System November 2019 As of September 30, 2019 Published by: USDA Forest Service 1400 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20250-0003 Website: https://www.fs.fed.us/land/staff/lar-index.shtml Cover Photo: Mt. Hood, Mt. Hood National Forest, Oregon Courtesy of: Susan Ruzicka USDA Forest Service WO Lands and Realty Management Statistics are current as of: 10/17/2019 The National Forest System (NFS) is comprised of: 154 National Forests 58 Purchase Units 20 National Grasslands 7 Land Utilization Projects 17 Research and Experimental Areas 28 Other Areas NFS lands are found in 43 States as well as Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. TOTAL NFS ACRES = 192,994,068 NFS lands are organized into: 9 Forest Service Regions 112 Administrative Forest or Forest-level units 503 Ranger District or District-level units The Forest Service administers 149 Wild and Scenic Rivers in 23 States and 456 National Wilderness Areas in 39 States. The Forest Service also administers several other types of nationally designated
    [Show full text]
  • Jefferson County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessment 2011 2
    Jefferson County Department of Emergency Management 81 Elkins Road, Port Hadlock, Washington 98339 - Phone: (360) 385-9368 Email: [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 I. INTRODUCTION 6 II. GEOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS 6 III. DEMOGRAPHIC ASPECTS 7 IV. SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL DISASTER EVENTS 9 V. NATURAL HAZARDS 12 • AVALANCHE 13 • DROUGHT 14 • EARTHQUAKES 17 • FLOOD 24 • LANDSLIDE 32 • SEVERE LOCAL STORM 34 • TSUNAMI / SEICHE 38 • VOLCANO 42 • WILDLAND / FOREST / INTERFACE FIRES 45 VI. TECHNOLOGICAL (HUMAN MADE) HAZARDS 48 • CIVIL DISTURBANCE 49 • DAM FAILURE 51 • ENERGY EMERGENCY 53 • FOOD AND WATER CONTAMINATION 56 • HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 58 • MARINE OIL SPILL – MAJOR POLLUTION EVENT 60 • SHELTER / REFUGE SITE 62 • TERRORISM 64 • URBAN FIRE 67 RESOURCES / REFERENCES 69 Jefferson County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessment 2011 2 PURPOSE This Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessment (HIVA) document describes known natural and technological (human-made) hazards that could potentially impact the lives, economy, environment, and property of residents of Jefferson County. It provides a foundation for further planning to ensure that County leadership, agencies, and citizens are aware and prepared to meet the effects of disasters and emergencies. Incident management cannot be event driven. Through increased awareness and preventive measures, the ultimate goal is to help ensure a unified approach that will lesson vulnerability to hazards over time. The HIVA is not a detailed study, but a general overview of known hazards that can affect Jefferson County. Jefferson County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessment 2011 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY An integrated emergency management approach involves hazard identification, risk assessment, and vulnerability analysis. This document, the Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessment (HIVA) describes the hazard identification and assessment of both natural hazards and technological, or human caused hazards, which exist for the people of Jefferson County.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017-18 Olympic Peninsula Travel Planner
    Welcome! Photo: John Gussman Photo: Explore Olympic National Park, hiking trails & scenic drives Connect Wildlife, local cuisine, art & native culture Relax Ocean beaches, waterfalls, hot springs & spas Play Kayak, hike, bicycle, fish, surf & beachcomb Learn Interpretive programs & museums Enjoy Local festivals, wine & cider tasting, Twilight BRITISH COLUMBIA VANCOUVER ISLAND BRITISH COLUMBIA IDAHO 5 Discover Olympic Peninsula magic 101 WASHINGTON from lush Olympic rain forests, wild ocean beaches, snow-capped 101 mountains, pristine lakes, salmon-spawning rivers and friendly 90 towns along the way. Explore this magical area and all it has to offer! 5 82 This planner contains highlights of the region. E R PACIFIC OCEAN PACIFIC I V A R U M B I Go to OlympicPeninsula.org to find more O L C OREGON details and to plan your itinerary. 84 1 Table of Contents Welcome .........................................................1 Table of Contents .............................................2 This is Olympic National Park ............................2 Olympic National Park ......................................4 Olympic National Forest ...................................5 Quinault Rain Forest & Kalaloch Beaches ...........6 Forks, La Push & Hoh Rain Forest .......................8 Twilight ..........................................................9 Strait of Juan de Fuca Nat’l Scenic Byway ........ 10 Joyce, Clallam Bay/Sekiu ................................ 10 Neah Bay/Cape Flattery .................................. 11 Port Angeles, Lake Crescent
    [Show full text]
  • Pygmy Whitefish Fact Sheet
    Sensitive Species ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Pygmy Whitefish (Prosopium coulteri) State Status: Sensitive, 1998 Federal Status: Species of concern Recovery Plans: None State Management Plan: None The pygmy whitefish, a small (usually < 20 cm) Figure 1. Pygmy whitefish (photo from Wydoski and member of the family Salmonidae, is distributed Whitney 2003). across the northern tier of the United States, throughout western Canada and north into southeast Alaska, and in one lake in Russia (Hallock and Mongillo 1998). Their widely scattered distribution, primarily in deep lakes, suggests they are relics of a wider distribution prior to the last ice age (Wydoski and Whitney 2003). Washington is at the extreme southern edge of their native range in North America. Pygmy whitefish are most commonly found in cool oligotrophic lakes and streams of mountainous regions. However, they have been collected from smaller, shallow, more productive lakes in British Columbia and Washington. Pygmy whitefish eat crustaceans, aquatic insect larvae and pupae, fish eggs, and small mollusks. Pygmy whitefish are important forage fish for larger predatory species including bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Historically, pygmy whitefish resided in at least 16 lakes in Washington (Figure 2; Hallock and Mongillo 1998). Currently they inhabit only nine. Their demise in six lakes is attributed to piscicides, introduction of exotic fish species and/or declining water *# quality. Because of the very limited range of the *# pygmy whitefish in Washington, they are *# vulnerable to additional extirpations without *# *#*# *# *# *# *# cooperative management. *# Pygmy whitefish surveys require specialized *# *# *#*#*# techniques because of the fish's small size and tendency to inhabit the deeper portions of lakes; their presence in lakes heavily sampled for other species sometimes goes undetected.
    [Show full text]
  • Keeping It Wild in the National Park Service
    Wilderness Stewardship Division National Park Service Wilderness Stewardship Program U.S. Department of the Interior Keeping It Wild in the National Park Service A USER GUIDE TO INTEGRATING WILDERNESS CHARACTER INTO PARK PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, AND MONITORING Keeping it Wild in the National Park Service A User Guide to Integrating Wilderness Character into Park Planning, Management, and Monitoring National Park Service | U.S. Department of the Interior Wilderness Stewardship Division | Wilderness Stewardship Program January 2014 Cover photos: (Top) NPS/Suzy Stutzman, Great Sand Dunes Wilderness, Great Sand Dunes National Park (Left) NPS/Peter Landres, recommended wilderness, Canyonlands National Park (Right) NPS/Peter Landres, recommended wilderness, Cedar Breaks National Monument KEEPING IT WILD IN THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE A USER GUIDE TO INTEGRATING WILDERNESS CHARACTER INTO PARK PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, AND MONITORING Developed by the National Park Service Wilderness Character Integration Team with funding and support from the NPS Office of Park Planning and Special Studies and the Wilderness Stewardship Division A Companion Document to the 2014 Wilderness Stewardship Plan Handbook: Planning to Preserve Wilderness Character WASO 909/121797; January 2014 EXECUTIVE SummARY This User Guide was developed to help National Park Service (NPS) staff effectively and efficiently fulfill the mandate from the 1964 Wilderness Act and NPS policy to “preserve wilderness character” now and into the future. This mandate applies to all congressionally designated wilderness and other park lands that are, by policy, managed as wilderness, including eligible, potential, proposed, or recommended wilderness. This User Guide builds on the ideas in Keeping It Wild: An Interagency Strategy to Monitor Trends in Wilderness Character Across the National Wilderness Preservation System (Landres and others 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Final Integrated
    PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION APPENDIX B ENGINEERING APPENDIX Integrated Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement This page was intentionally left blank to facilitate double sided copying. Contents Section 1 – Duckabush River Estuary Section 2 – Nooksack River Delta Section 3 – North Fork Skagit River Delta Attachment A ‐ Cost Annex Attachment B – Geomorphology Guidelines and Hierarchy of Openings (For Reference Only) This page was intentionally left blank to facilitate double sided copying. Section 1 – Duckabush River Estuary This page was intentionally left blank to facilitate double sided copying. Section 1: Duckabush River Estuary Table of Contents 1-1 General – Duckabush River Estuary ........................................................................ 1 1-2 Hydrology and Hydraulics ........................................................................................ 2 1-3 Surveying, Mapping, and Other Geospatial Data Requirements ........................... 20 1-4 Geotechnical ............................................................................................................ 22 1-5 Environmental Engineering.................................................................................... 27 1-6 Civil Design ............................................................................................................. 29 1-7 Structural Requirements ......................................................................................... 35 1-8 Electrical and Mechanical Requirements ..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • COMMON MAMMALS of OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK Roosevelt Elk the Largest and Most Majestic of All the Animals to Be Found in Olympic Na
    COMMON MAMMALS OF OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK Roosevelt Elk The largest and most majestic of all the animals to be found in Olympic National Park is the Roosevelt or Olympic elk. They were given the name Roosevelt elk in honor of President Theodore Roosevelt who did much to help preserve them from extinction. They are also known by the name "wapiti" which was given to them by the Shawnee Indians. Of the two kinds of elk in the Pacific Northwest, the Roosevelt elk are the largest. Next to the moose, the elk is the largest member of the deer family. The male sometimes measures 5 feet high at the shoulder and often weighs 800 pounds or more. Their coats are a tawny color except for the neck which is dark brown. It is easy to tell elk from deer because of the large size and the large buff colored rump patch. When the calves are born in May or June, they weigh between 30 and 40 pounds and are tawny colored splashed with many light spots and a conspicuous rump patch. Only the bull elk has antlers. They may measure as much as 5 feet across. Each year they shed the old set of antlers after mating season in the fall and almost immediately begin to grow a new set. During the summer months, some of the elk herds can be found in the high mountains; the elk move down into the rain forest valleys on the western side of the park during the winter months. About 5,000 elk live in Olympic National Park where they, like all of the animals are protected in their natural environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic History of Siletzia, a Large Igneous Province in the Oregon And
    Geologic history of Siletzia, a large igneous province in the Oregon and Washington Coast Range: Correlation to the geomagnetic polarity time scale and implications for a long-lived Yellowstone hotspot Wells, R., Bukry, D., Friedman, R., Pyle, D., Duncan, R., Haeussler, P., & Wooden, J. (2014). Geologic history of Siletzia, a large igneous province in the Oregon and Washington Coast Range: Correlation to the geomagnetic polarity time scale and implications for a long-lived Yellowstone hotspot. Geosphere, 10 (4), 692-719. doi:10.1130/GES01018.1 10.1130/GES01018.1 Geological Society of America Version of Record http://cdss.library.oregonstate.edu/sa-termsofuse Downloaded from geosphere.gsapubs.org on September 10, 2014 Geologic history of Siletzia, a large igneous province in the Oregon and Washington Coast Range: Correlation to the geomagnetic polarity time scale and implications for a long-lived Yellowstone hotspot Ray Wells1, David Bukry1, Richard Friedman2, Doug Pyle3, Robert Duncan4, Peter Haeussler5, and Joe Wooden6 1U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefi eld Road, Menlo Park, California 94025-3561, USA 2Pacifi c Centre for Isotopic and Geochemical Research, Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, 6339 Stores Road, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada 3Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1680 East West Road, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA 4College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, 104 CEOAS Administration Building, Corvallis, Oregon 97331-5503, USA 5U.S. Geological Survey, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, Alaska 99508-4626, USA 6School of Earth Sciences, Stanford University, 397 Panama Mall Mitchell Building 101, Stanford, California 94305-2210, USA ABSTRACT frames, the Yellowstone hotspot (YHS) is on southern Vancouver Island (Canada) to Rose- or near an inferred northeast-striking Kula- burg, Oregon (Fig.
    [Show full text]