DOCSLIB.ORG

North Rainier Elk Herd Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
North Rainier Elk Herd Management Plan WASHINGTON STATE ELK HERD PLAN North Rainier Elk Herd MAY 2020 STATE OF WASHINGTON JAY INSLEE, GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE KELLY SUSEWIND, DIRECTOR WILDLIFE PROGRAM ERIC GARDNER, DIRECTOR GAME DIVISION Anis Aoude, MANAGER This Program Receives Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration funds. Project W-96-R, Category A, Project 1 This report should be cited as: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2020. North Rainier Elk Herd. Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia. 102 pp. This program receives Federal financial assistance from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The U.S. Department of the Interior and its bureaus prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability or sex. If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity or facility, please write to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of External Programs, 4040 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 130, Arlington, VA 22203 *Six of the photos for the front and back covers were provided by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe May 2020 i Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Washington State Elk Herd Plan NORTH RAINIER ELK HERD Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 Prepared by Michelle Tirhi, Wildlife Biologist, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife David Vales, Wildlife Biologist, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Mike Smith, Wildlife Biologist, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife May 2020 May 2020 li Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................................. III LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................................................... IV LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................................................... V ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................................................................... VI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ VIII INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 THE PLAN ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1 THE HERD ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 HERD AREA DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................................................... 4 LOCATION ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 OWNERSHIP AND LAND USE ............................................................................................................................................. 4 TOPOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................................................ 8 NATIVE VEGETATION ....................................................................................................................................................... 8 HUMAN INFLUENCES ..................................................................................................................................................... 10 OTHER PROMINENT WILDLIFE SPECIES .............................................................................................................................. 11 HERD DISTRIBUTION ............................................................................................................................................ 13 HISTORICAL DISTRIBUTION ............................................................................................................................................. 13 CURRENT DISTRIBUTION................................................................................................................................................. 13 POTENTIAL FUTURE DISTRIBUTION ................................................................................................................................... 15 MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE ELK POPULATION STUDIES ............................................................. 16 STUDY AREAS............................................................................................................................................................... 16 METHODS ................................................................................................................................................................... 16 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 19 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................................................. 24 HERD MANAGEMENT ..................................................................................................................................... 26 ESTIMATED POPULATION SIZE AND OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................................... 26 POPULATION HISTORY AND STATUS BY UNIT ...................................................................................................................... 26 HERD COMPOSITION ..................................................................................................................................................... 36 HARVEST ..................................................................................................................................................................... 38 ILLEGAL ELK HARVEST ..................................................................................................................................................... 51 PREDATORS ................................................................................................................................................................. 52 VEHICLE-ELK COLLISIONS ............................................................................................................................................... 52 PARASITES, DISEASE AND ILLNESS .................................................................................................................................... 53 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC VALUES ...................................................................................................................................... 55 ELK-RELATED AGRICULTURAL CONFLICTS ........................................................................................................................... 57 NUTRITION .................................................................................................................................................................. 59 HABITAT MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................................................................ 61 HERD MANAGEMENT GOALS ............................................................................................................................... 70 MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES ..................................................................................................... 70 SPENDING PRIORITIES .......................................................................................................................................... 75 PLAN REVIEW AND MAINTENANCE ...................................................................................................................... 75 May 2020 iii Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................................................................... 76 APPENDICES......................................................................................................................................................... 83 APPENDIX A: GREEN RIVER GMU 485 ELK AUGMENTATION – 2002 FINAL REPORT ................................................................ 83 APPENDIX B: ELK HUNTING SEASONS IN THE NORTH RAINIER ELK HERD AREA 2002-2017A ...................................................... 95 List of Figures Figure 1. Ownership within the North Rainier Elk Herd Area, 2017 ........................................................................... 5 Figure 2. Land use within the North Rainier Elk Herd Use Area, 2017 ....................................................................... 7 Figure 3. Modeled potential
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fall City Natural Area Site Management Guidelines June 2003
    Fall City Natural Area Site Management Guidelines June 2003 Fall City Natural Area Site Management Guidelines CONTENTS Acknowledgements ...........................................................................................................................iii Executive Summary………………………………………………………………………………….iv Introduction .....................................................................................................................................1 Part 1. General Property Information ..........................................................................................1 Part 2. Acquisition Purpose and Funding Source ........................................................................2 Part 3. Ecological Resources ...........................................................................................................3 Topography and Climate ...................................................................................................................3 Soils ...................................................................................................................................................4 Snoqualmie River Basin Hydrology ..................................................................................................4 River Morphology within the Fall City Reach ..................................................................................5 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................................5 Vegetation
    [Show full text]
  • A Synthesis of Existing Data for Resident Fishes in the Snoqualmie River Above Snoqualmie Falls
    A SYNTHESIS OF EXISTING DATA FOR RESIDENT FISHES IN THE SNOQUALMIE RIVER ABOVE SNOQUALMIE FALLS PREPARED FOR PUGET SOUND ENERGY AS PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE SNOQUALMIE RIVER GAME FISH ENHANCEMENT PLAN LICENSE ARTICLE 413 Prepared by Nathanael C. Overman Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4, Mill Creek, Washington June 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ ii LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... ..4 STUDY AREA................................................................................................................... 7 Snoqualmie River Basin ................................................................................................. 7 North Fork Snoqualmie River......................................................................................... 7 Middle Fork Snoqualmie River ...................................................................................... 8 South Fork Snoqualmie River......................................................................................... 8 Mainstem Snoqualmie River above Snoqualmie Falls ................................................... 9
    [Show full text]
  • The Summer of 2015 in the Snoqualmie River Watershed
    Hot Water and Low Flow: The Summer of 2015 in the Snoqualmie River Watershed Photo by Jason Walker May 2016 Department of Natural Resources and Parks Water and Land Resources Division Science and Technical Section King Street Center, KSC-NR-0600 Seattle, WA 98104 204-477-4800 TTY Relay: 711 www.kingcounty.gov Hot Water and Low Flow: The Summer of 2015 in the Snoqualmie River Watershed Prepared for: Snoqualmie Watershed Forum Submitted by: Josh Kubo [email protected] King County Water and Land Resources Division Department of Natural Resources and Parks Snoqualmie River Watershed 2015 Water Temperature Technical Memorandum Acknowledgements First and foremost, the author would like to thank the Snoqualmie Watershed Forum for funding and supporting this study. The author would like to thank Beth Ledoux and Dan Smith for help with project management and thermistor deployment as well as Janne Kaje, Kollin Higgins, Aimee Fullerton, and Ashley Steel for thorough comments on this draft and previous drafts of this report. A special thanks goes out to Jim Haack, Erick and Wendy Haakenson, Wayne Gullstad, Jessica Price, Sarah Dublin, and Andrew Stout whom granted access to private properties throughout the Snoqualmie River watershed and helped to support the study efforts. Additional thanks to the staff from Oxbow Farm and Conservation Center for assisting in project engagement and public outreach. Citation King County. 2016. Hot Water and Low Flow: The Summer of 2015 in the Snoqualmie River Watershed. Prepared by Josh Kubo, Water and Land Resources Division. Seattle, Washington. i Snoqualmie River Watershed 2015 Water Temperature Technical Memorandum Table of Contents Executive Summary............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Fork Snoqualmie River Watershed Access and Travel
    United States Department Revised Environmental of Agriculture Assessment Forest Service January Middle Fork Snoqualmie River Watershed 2005 Access and Travel Management Plan and Forest Plan Amendment #20 Snoqualmie Ranger District, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest For Information Contact: Team Leader: Doug Schrenk Snoqualmie Ranger District 42404 SE North Bend Way North Bend, WA 98045 (425) 888-1421, extension 233 [email protected] The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (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 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Page i Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 - PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION................................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION -- BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................... 1 CHANGED CONDITIONS
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring Riverine Thermal Regimes on Stream Networks Insights Into
    Ecological Indicators 84 (2018) 11–26 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecological Indicators journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolind Original Articles Monitoring riverine thermal regimes on stream networks: Insights into MARK spatial sampling designs from the Snoqualmie River, WA ⁎ Amy Marshaa,b, , E. Ashley Steelb, Aimee H. Fullertonc, Colin Sowderd,b a School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195 USA b Statistics, PNW Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 400 N 34th Street, Suite 201, Seattle, WA, 98103, USA c Northwest Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Fisheries Service,2725 Montlake Blvd. East, Seattle, WA, 98112 USA d Department of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195 USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Understanding, predicting, and managing the spatiotemporal complexity of stream thermal regimes requires Water temperature monitoring strategies designed specifically to make inference about spatiotemporal variability on the whole SSNM stream network. Moreover, monitoring can be tailored to capture particular facets of this complex thermal Streams landscape that may be important indicators for species and life stages of management concern. We applied Rivers spatial stream network models (SSNMs) to an empirical dataset of water temperature from the Snoqualmie River Spatial autocorrelation watershed, WA, and use results to provide guidance with respect to necessary sample size, location of new sites, Monitoring and selection of a modeling approach. As expected, increasing the number of monitoring stations improved both predictive precision and the ability to estimate covariates of stream temperature; however, even relatively small numbers of monitoring stations, n = 20, did an adequate job when well-distributed and when used to build models with only a few covariates.
    [Show full text]
  • A G~Ographic Dictionary of Washington
    ' ' ., • I ,•,, ... I II•''• -. .. ' . '' . ... .; - . .II. • ~ ~ ,..,..\f •• ... • - WASHINGTON GEOLOGICAL SURVEY HENRY LANDES, State Geologist BULLETIN No. 17 A G~ographic Dictionary of Washington By HENRY LANDES OLYMPIA FRAN K M, LAMBORN ~PUBLIC PRINTER 1917 BOARD OF GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. Governor ERNEST LISTER, Chairman. Lieutenant Governor Louis F. HART. State Treasurer W.W. SHERMAN, Secretary. President HENRY SuzzALLO. President ERNEST 0. HOLLAND. HENRY LANDES, State Geologist. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. Go,:ernor Ernest Lister, Chairman, and Members of the Board of Geological Survey: GENTLEMEN : I have the honor to submit herewith a report entitled "A Geographic Dictionary of Washington," with the recommendation that it be printed as Bulletin No. 17 of the Sun-ey reports. Very respectfully, HENRY LAKDES, State Geologist. University Station, Seattle, December 1, 1917. TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page CHAPTER I. GENERAL INFORMATION............................. 7 I Location and Area................................... .. ... .. 7 Topography ... .... : . 8 Olympic Mountains . 8 Willapa Hills . • . 9 Puget Sound Basin. 10 Cascade Mountains . 11 Okanogan Highlands ................................ : ....' . 13 Columbia Plateau . 13 Blue Mountains ..................................... , . 15 Selkirk Mountains ......... : . : ... : .. : . 15 Clhnate . 16 Temperature ......... .' . .. 16 Rainfall . 19 United States Weather Bureau Stations....................... 38 Drainage . 38 Stream Gaging Stations. 42 Gradient of Columbia River. 44 Summary of Discharge
    [Show full text]
  • A Good Turn for the Tolt
    A GGoodood TurnTurn forfor thethe TTolt:olt: LLeveeevee SSetback/Salmonetback/Salmon HHabitatabitat PProjectroject Frequently Asked Questions Question: Why restore salmon habitat? Answer: Salmon are an enduring symbol of the Pacifi c Northwest, providing direct and indirect benefi ts to our culture, economy, and environment. Healthy salmon populations mean that our region is a healthy place to live and work. Salmon have been integral to Native American culture for centuries, and federal treaties assure the tribes continued access to healthy salmon stocks. The federal government lists Puget Sound Chinook salmon, as well as bull trout, as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This means they are likely to become endangered, or at a high risk of extinction, if steps to protect them are not taken soon. Science indicates that land uses affecting the salmon’s freshwater habitat are among the primary causes for the species’ decline. Although the federal government administers the ESA, everyone shares the responsibility to protect these animals, because everyone depends on healthy land and water resources. Local governments throughout Puget Sound are implementing projects to protect and restore salmon habitat. Question: Can the Tolt River really be restored? Answer: To prevent the river from fl ooding adjacent lands, levees were constructed along the lower Tolt in the 1940s. While partially successful, the levees dramatically changed the river’s behavior and fi sh habitat. In a more natural condition, the river is connected to its fl oodplain, has more room to move back and forth, and creates meander bends and split channels. A natural river also captures large pieces of wood from trees along the bank.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Puget Sound Rivers and Salmon Recovery
    1. Puget Sound Rivers and Salmon Recovery David R. Montgomery, Derek B. Booth, and Susan Bolton A symposium on Restoration of Puget Sound Rivers at the spring 2000 meeting of the Society for Ecological Restoration’s Northwest chapter pre- sented an opportunity to synthesize regional expertise on river and stream restoration into a single volume. Largely drawn from presentations at the conference, the chapters of this book span a wide range of backgrounds and interests, including public policy, riparian forestry, stream ecology, hydrol- ogy, geomorphology, geology, and civil engineering. Chapters of the book proceed from geological and geomorphological controls on river and stream characteristics and dynamics, to the biological aspects of river systems in the region, to chapters that address social constraints and the application of flu- vial geomorphology, civil engineering, riparian ecology, and aquatic ecol- ogy to regional river restoration projects and programs. While we recognize that the material presented herein could not be comprehensive given the broad scope of the subject, these chapters have been selected to provide a com- pilation of state-of-the-art considerations and approaches for developing river restoration programs. The recent listing of various runs and stocks of Pacific salmon under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) has focused national attention on the condi- tion of rivers and streams of the Pacific Northwest (PNW). In the Puget Sound region, recent ESA listings triggered statewide efforts to improve channel habitat involving ongoing expenditure of many millions of dollars annually and resulted in preparation of a “Statewide Strategy to Recover Salmon” by the Governor’s Salmon Recovery Office (GSRO 1999).
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie River Valley Interpretive Plan
    Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie River Valley Interpretive Plan University of Washington Department of Landscape Architecture March 2004 F O R E W O R D An interpretive plan is a map for future action. It is a framework for making decisions about which and how stories about a place are best told, to achieve desired goals. It serves as a basis for creating materials, facilities and programs that deliver messages aimed at revealing relationships, provoking investigation, and inspiring action. A good interpretive plan answers the standard interrogative questions: who will it serve, what are the themes and stories important to convey, and why—for which goals—should it be created? Drawing upon the strength of real places to stimulate imagination and congeal memories, where should the stories be told? Finally, how—through which methods—are the messages about a particular place most effectively revealed, related to the individual’s experience, and used to enlarge one’s relationship with that place? This Interpretive Plan for the Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie River Valley was developed as part of an undergraduate landscape architecture studio working on two park sites along the river. The purpose of the plan was to create a preliminary document to guide development of interpretive facilities in the valley, while also informing the park conceptual design work. It was accomplished primarily through student research, and in a workshop at the University of Washington where individuals most familiar with the valley’s stories shared their expertises. This plan is only a beginning, providing a framework that requires substantial fleshing out, further development and creative application.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Summer Temperatures and Feasibility and Design of Improved Adult Chinook Salmon Thermal Refuge Habitat in the Sammamish River
    Assessment of Summer Temperatures and Feasibility and Design of Improved Adult Chinook Salmon Thermal Refuge Habitat in the Sammamish River Prepared for: Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Auburn WA Prepared by: R2 Resource Consultants 15250 NE 95th St 1998 Photo by Roger Tabor, USFWS Adult Chinook Holding in Pool Near Marymoor Park Redmond WA 98052 December 30, 2010 Assessment of Summer Temperatures and Feasibility and Design of Improved Adult Chinook Salmon Thermal Refuge Habitat in the Sammamish River Prepared for: Holly Coccoli, Project Manager Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Auburn WA Prepared by: Paul DeVries PhD, PE Clair Yoder PE Chiming Huang PhD, PE Glen Anderson PE Karee Oliver Mike Cooksey R2 Resource Consultants Inc. 15250 NE 95th St Redmond WA 98052 December 30, 2010 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Sammamish River Thermal Refuge Habitat CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ XIII 1. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................1 1.1 OVERVIEW OF FLOW AND TEMPERATURE CONDITIONS AFFECTING ADULT CHINOOK SALMON IN THE SAMMAMISH RIVER ...................................................................................3 1.1.1 Review of Flow and Temperature Gage Data .........................................................3 1.1.2 Synopsis of Other Relevant Water Quality Studies ..............................................14
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3: the Affected Environment
    Chapter 3: The Affected Environment 3.0 THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.0.1 Introduction Chapter 3 – The Affected Environment describes the physical and biological environment (e.g., water resources, wildlife, etc.) as well as the human environment (e.g., social and economic factors, recreation, etc.), which may be affected by the range of alternatives, as described in Chapter 2 - Alternatives. Much of the information on the affected environment is compiled from detailed technical reports and other analyses prepared by the USFS and consultants. Some of these reports are attached to this FEIS as appendices. All reports are available for review as part of the Analysis File maintained for this project at the MBSNF Supervisor’s Office. References cited in this FEIS are provided in Chapter 5 - References. 3.0.2 Analysis Area The “analysis area” (referred to as the “Study Area” throughout this document) varies by resource area. The Study Area includes all public (USFS) lands as well as private land owned by Ski Lifts, Inc. and other land holders. When discussing individual projects within the Study Area, the following terms are used to distinguish the different locations within the SUP: Summit East, Summit Central, and Summit West, are collectively referred to as “The Summit.” Alpental, when discussed individually, is referred to as “Alpental.” All four ski areas are collectively referred to as “The Summit-at-Snoqualmie.” Figure 3.0-1, Study Area illustrates the boundaries of the Study Area, including The Summit and Alpental. Figure 3.0-2, 5th Field Watersheds illustrates the boundaries of the two 5th field watersheds used in this FEIS analysis: the South Fork Snoqualmie River Watershed (S.F.
    [Show full text]
  • Snohomish River Confluence Reach Analysis
    Snohomish River Confluence Reach Analysis Phase 1 Feasibility Study Final Report Snohomish County Department of Public Works Surface Water Management July 16, 2003 Snohomish River Confluence Analysis CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................VIII 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ..............................................................................1 1.1 NEED FOR CHANNEL, FLOODPLAIN, AND HABITAT RESTORATION IN THE CONFLUENCE REACH...........................................................................................................7 1.2 OVERVIEW OF CONFLUENCE REACH ANALYSIS ........................................................8 2. SNOHOMISH RIVER WATERSHED AND STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION ....................10 2.1 FISHERIES RESOURCES .......................................................................................................12 3. METHODS ..............................................................................................................................15 3.1 SURVEYING, MAPPING, DATA COLLECTION .......................................................................16 3.1.1 Topography/Photogrammetry................................................................................17 3.1.2 Bathymetry ............................................................................................................17 3.1.3 Fish Habitat and Riparian Mapping ......................................................................19 3.2 GEOMORPHIC
    [Show full text]